Document of The World Bank

Public Disclosure Authorized Report No: 23339-TUN

PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT

ONA

Public Disclosure Authorized PROPOSED GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL FACILITY GRANT

IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 4.2 MILLION (US$5.3 M1LLION EQUIVALENT)

TO THE

REPUBLIC OF TUNISIA

FOR A

PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT

June 4, 2002 Public Disclosure Authorized

Rural Development, Water and Environment Department Middle East and North Africa Region Public Disclosure Authorized CURRENCY EUQIVALENTS

(Exchange Rate Effective May 17, 2002)

Currency Unit = Tunisian Dinar (TND) TND I = US$0.69 US$1 = TND 1.45

FISCAL YEAR January I - December 31

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ANPE National Environment Protection Agency APAL Agency for the Protection of the Water Front ASIL Agncultural Sector Investment Loan ASIL2 Second Agncultural Sector Investment Loan BCT Central Bank of Tunisia CAS Country Assistance Strategy CG Coordination Group CP Contract Programs CRDA Regional Agncultural Development Council DC Development Committees DG Development Groups DGETH Direction of Barrages and Technical Studies DGF Directorate General of Forestry DGFE Directorate General of Finance and DGLP Directorate General of Land Use Plannmng FARAH Financial Accounting Reporting and Auditing Handbook FDP Forestry Development Project FMR Financial Monitonng Report FMS Financial Management System GFIC Forestry Groups of Local Interest GIC Local Interest Groups GOT Government of Tunisia IA Implementing Agencies ISC Inter-Ministerial Steenng Committee JBIC Japanese Bank for International Cooperation LCD Local Council for Development LDC Local Development Committee M&E Monitonng and Evaluation MELP Ministry of Environment and Landuse Planning METAP Mediterranean Technical Assistance Program MOA Ministry of Agnculture NEAP National Environmental Action Plan ONTT National Tounsm Office OPDI Pilot Operations of Integrated Development OPDI Pilot Integrated Development Operations PCU Project Coordination Unit PIP Project Implementation Plan PMT Park Management Team PMU Project Management Unit QAG Quality Assessment Group RSCN Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature SIPF Information System for Forestry Planning SOE Statement of Expenditure SSEPN Monitoring and Evaluation System of National Parks STDP Second Forestry Development Project TFDP Third Forestry Development Project TG General Treasury TOR Terms of Reference UNDP United Nations Development Program WSIL Water Sector Investment Loan

Vice President: Jean Louis Sarbib Country Director: Chnstian Delvoie Sector Director: Letitia Obeng Task Team Leader: Shobha Shetty TUNISIA PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT

CONTENTS

A. Project Development Objective Page 1. Project development objective 2 2. Key perfornance indicators 2

B. Strategic Context

1. Sector-related Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) goal supported by the project 2 2. Main sector issues and Government strategy 3 3. Sector issues to be addressed by the project and strategic choices 5

C. Project Description Summary 1. Project components 6 2. Key policy and institutional reforms supported by the project 7 3. Benefits and target population 8 4. Institutional and implementation arrangements 10

D. Project Rationale

1. Project altemnatives considered and reasons for rejection 12 2. Major related projects financed by the Bank and other development agencies 13 3. Lessons learned and reflected in the project design 14 4. Indications of borrower commitment and ownership 16 5. Value added of Bank support in this project 17

E. Summary Project Analysis

1. Economic 17 2. Financial 18 3. Technical 18 4. Institutional 19 5. Environmental 20 6. Social 21 7. Safeguard Policies 23 F. Sustainability and Risks 1. Sustainability 24 2. Critical risks 24 3. Possible controversial aspects 27

G. Main Conditions 1. Effectiveness Condition 28 2. Other 28 H. Readiness for Implementation 29

L. Compliance with Bank Policies 29

Annexes Annex 1: Project Design Summary 30 Annex 2: Detailed Project Description 37 Annex 3: Estimated Project Costs 43 Annex 4: Cost Benefit Analysis Summary, or Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Summary 44 Annex 5: Financial Summary for Revenue-Earning Project Entities, or Financial Summary 47 Annex 6: Procurement and Disbursement Arrangements 48 Annex 7: Project Processing Schedule 58 Annex 8: Documents in the Project File 59 Annex 9: Statement of Loans and Credits 60 Annex 10: Country at a Glance 62 Annex 11: STAP Review and Response 64 Annex 12: Social Assessment 70

MAP(S) EBRD 31835 TUNISIA PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT Project Appraisal Document Middle East and North Africa Region MNSRE Date: June 4, 2002 Team Leader: Shobha Shetty Country Manager/Director: Christian Delvoie Sector Manager/Director: Letitia A. Obeng Project ID: P048315 Sector(s): VM - Natural Resources Management Theme(s): Environment Focal Area: B - Biodiversity Poverty Targeted Intervention: N -Proj6ct FInancing Data 1] Loan [ I Credit pX] Grant ( Guarantee 1 1 Other: For LoanslCreditslOthers: Amount (US$m): Fliatijpg Plan (US$m): Source Local. Forelg'n* Tbtal BORROWER/RECIPIENT 4.24 0.00 4.24 LOCAL COMMUNITIES 0.16 0.00 0.16 GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY 3.59 1.74 5.33 FOREIGN MULTILATERAL INSTITUTIONS 0.15 0.00 0.15 (UNIDENTIFIED) Total: 8.14 1.74 9.88 Borrower/Reciplent: GOVERNMENT OF TUNISIA Responsible agency: MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE Ministry of Agriculture Address: 30 rue Alain Savary, 1002 Tunis Contact Person: Mr. Ahrned Ridha Fekih Salem, Director General, DGF Tel: (216-1) 842 687 Fax: (216-1) 801 922 Email: Other Agency(ies): Ministry of Environment and Land Use Planning Address: Centre Urbain Nord, Cedex 1080, Tunis Contact Person: Mr. Najib Trabelsi, Director-General, Enviromnent Tel: (216-1) 702 779 Fax: (216-1)238411 Email: [email protected] Address: Ministry of International Cooperation and Foreign Investment Contact Person: Mr. Kamel Ben Rejeb, Director-General Tel: 216-1-798-522 Fax: 216-1-799-069 Email: Multilateralenmci.gov.tn Estimated Disbursements l Bank FY/US$m): ,320v03 2004 1 ,2005 V 2006 1 290°06 1-2008 * l Q Annual 0.50 1.20 1.30 1.50 0.50 0.33 Cumulative 0.50 1.70 3.00 4.50 5.00 5.33 Project Implementation period: September 2002- August 2008

= w0F- r bO amc A. Project Development Objective

1. Project development objective: (see Annex 1) The projectes main development objective is improved management and protection of selected national parks for the purposes of conserving biodiversity of global importance and contributing to the overall improvement in welfare of local populations.

2. Key performance Indicators: (see Annex 1) Two categories of performance indicators have been identified. The first category would pertain to those with direct impact on the global environment (technical bioindicators) and the second would include those pertaining to improvement in the socio-economic conditions of local populations. The first category would include: (i) stabilization or improvement of demographic status of key bio-indicators specific to each national park (vegetative cover and distribution; local animal/bird populations; water management program for Ichkeul) - see annex I for key species in each park The second category would include: (ii) % of activities of the Annual Work Program that are entrusted to local communities; (iii) the participatory process for the management plans and annual work programs through the Local Council for Development (CLD) and the Project Management Team (PMT) is functional; (iv) number of tourism concessions in each of the three parks; (v) overall improvement in management effectiveness as defined by the IUCN scorecard; and (vi) creation of permanent deputy conservators in the three parks in charge of community and public relations.

B. Strategic Context 1. Sector-related Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) goal supported by the project: (see Annex 1) Document number: R 2000-46 Date of latest CAS discussion: 04/27/2000 The proposed project direcfly supports the CAS objective of consolidating long-term development in the environment and natural resources management sector through the protection of Tunisia's natural resources. The project would assist the Government of Tunisia in improving the conservation of biodiversity within the protected areas through implementation of management plans at three national parks together with local communities and capacity building at the regional and local levels to assure sustainable ecosystems management and monitoring. la. Global Operational strategy/Program objective addressed by the project: The proposed project complies with GEF operational strategy in the area of biodiversity conservation. It primarily addresses the GEF Operational Program in the Biodiversity Focal Area OP 1 (Arid and Semi-Arid Ecosystems). It also addresses, to a limited extent, OP 2 (Coastal, Marine, and Freshwater Ecosystems) in one of the project sites (Lake Ichkeul National Park). Tunisia has ratified the following major intemational environmental conventions and agreements dealing with the protection of natural habitats and related species - CITES (1974); UNESCO World Heritage (1974); Ramsar Convention (1979); Bonn Convention (1986); Desertification Convention (1979); Beme. Convention (1995), and the Biological Diversity Convention (1993). Tunisia is also one of 6 countries participating in the regional UNDP/GEF Conservation of Wetland and Coastal Ecosystems in the Mediterranean Region Project to conserve biodiversity in the coastal ecosystems. The proposed project will not include coastal ecosystems but the activities in the latter would strongly complement the proposed project's interventions. The project is designed to support, through its relevant outputs, the following articles of the Convention on Biological Diversity:

-2 - * Article 6 - General measures for conservation and sustainable use (conservation management plans for selected sites of biological and ecological interest); * Article 7 - Identification and Monitoring * Article 8 - In-situ conservation (strengthened protected areas and environmentally sustainable development in areas adjacent to protected areas, rehabilitation and restoration of fraile ecosystems); * Article 11 - Incentive measures (Participatory programs implemented with local populations); * Article 13 - Public education and awareness (improved public awareness on nature protection).

2. Main sector Issues and Government strategy: Sector importance: Of the 870 species of plants that are rare, threatened, or endemic in North Africa, about 150 occur in Tunisia. There are an estimated 2200 species of plants in Tunisia, but less than 2 percent represent globally threatened vascular plants (IUCN, 1997). At the national level, there are 239 rare and 101 very rare species. Tunisia's rare flora include 6 species endemic to the country, and about 80 species endemic to North Africa and the northem Sahara. Many of the plants are valuable as a genetic resource. Important forage plants (medicago, hedysarum), medicinal plants (Myrtus communis, Urginea maritima, daphne gnidium), fiber plants (Stipa tenacissima) and plants of food value occur (Olea, Capparis). There has been a decline in forest cover - from 3.3 million hectares in the Roman era to 841,000 hectares at present, but several activities through Bank-supported projects have addressed this issue and forest cover is improving again, albeit slowly. Tunisian fauna is relatively less well studied, and has been in a substantive decline over the past century. At present, all large mammals (except the wild boar, Sus scrofa barbarus) are considered threatened. About 80 species of mammals, 362 species of birds, and more than 500 species of reptiles and fish can still be found. Several mammal species are endemic to North Africa. Rare and endangered mammals (IUCN Red Book, 1985) include the barbary hyena (Hyaena hyaena berbera), barbary deer (Cervus elaphus berberus), dorcas gazelle (Gazelle dorcas massaesyla), cuvier's gazelle (G. cuvien), and the slender-homed gazelle (G.leptoceros). Rare and endangered birds listed in the IUCN Red Book that occur in Tunisia include, inter alia, the white stork, marbled teal, white-headed duck, red kite, peregrine falcon, bearded vulture, and the Houbara bustard. Globally threatened species (all) number 110. Root causes of biodiversity loss: Forest and vegetation degradation still continues due to burgeoning population pressures with overgrazing,fuelwood andfodder collection being the primary culpnts. This has exacerbated erosion and significantly contributes to the soils that are lost annually to desertification. Inappropriate cultivation techniques in the steppes have resulted in wind erosion and dune formation. Enforcement of protective measures is weak due to the absence of multi-disciplinary management plans, low awareness, and weak institutional capacity. Absence ofparticipatoryapproaches to protected area management: While the intent of the protected area system is well-founded and is of great importance for the preservation and enhancement of biological diversity, there is a clear need for the management systems currently in place to go beyond the traditional approach to conservation. Hunting, overgrazing, and inappropriate agricultural practices of local communities continue to pose a threat to the integrity of many of the protected areas. Since about 10 percent of the Tunisian population (- 1 million) live within forest areas and/or in the vicinity of protected areas, it is essential that the management of the protected areas integrate the needs of the local communities while conserving naturl resources. Designing management plans that incorporate greater stakeholder participation with the objective of linking conservation of biological diversity in protected areas with improved local social and economic development will be essential to ensure long-term conservation. Inadequate institutionalcapacity: The Ministry of Environment and Landuse Planning (MELP) is in charge of policy formulation, planning and regulation, with the Directorate General of Forestry (DGF) in the

-3- Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) being responsible for management of the protected areas through on the ground daily surveillance, protection and management activities. There is no substantial overlap in the two mandates, but coordination between the two Ministries is weak, and better integrative mechanisms especially for data management are required. Habitat loss and poaching are seriously threatening much of the national fauna. Fauna are in need of protection through improvement of law enforcement capabilities. Budgetary constraints, lack of equipment and trained staff have reduced national park protection to the minimum. Land tenure issues: Some of the national parks have local communities living within the park boundaries. In the Ichkeul N.P, there are about 65 families living within the park. It is GOT policy not to evict anyone already living in the park, although no new families are allowed to settle within park boundaries hereafter. In Jbil, the park is apparently still used seasonally by the adjacent tribes, including the Mrazig, the Sabria, and the Adhar and Ghrib. In the Spring months there are many families that go from Douz to spend time in the desert and there is still hunting (although forbidden), in part because of foreigners that come specifically for this purpose. There is lack of clarity on whether the tribes that previously used this area still consider that they have rights of access to the park area and its resources, primarily as a passage way to other grazing areas. The land tenure status of the former collective lands is also ambiguous. Government strategy: Tunisia accords a high significance to biodiversity conservation and suswtainable uses in its development effort. There is a strong political commitment towards enhanced conservation efforts and its successful integration into a wider economic, social and cultural context. There is a growing realization that earlier natural resources management interventions have sometimes failed to fully achieve their objectives because community participation and insight into the planning, prioritization, and management process were limited. There is now a high-level commitment to participatory natural resources management in the Ministry of Agriculture which is moving to a reorientation from top-down planning in favor of a collaborative approach with resource user groups such as the Development Committees (CDs) in the Bank-financed Natural Resources Management Project (Ln - 4162) and the Northwest Mountainous Development Project (Ln - 3691), and Groupements Forestiers d'Interet Collectif (GFICs; some of which were formerly Associations Forestieres dInteret Collectif, AFICs) as in the Second Forestry Development Project (Ln - 3601). User groups have been promoted first with rural potable water and tubewell irrigation perimeters, but are still at their infancy among forest users and soil conservation groups, and are yet to be extended to rangeland users. The Ninth Development Plan (1997-2001) identifies protection of forests, national parks, and improved and rationalized management systems as a key element of a sustainable natural resources management strategy. A National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan were developed in a very participatory manner under a Biodiversity Enabling Activity (GEF-funded; the World Bank being the Implementing Agency) and were adopted by the Govemment in 1998. University academics, research institutes, and environmental NGOs (local and intemnational) provided useful inputs into the preparation of the Biodiversity Strategy. The strategy also benefited from bilateral assistance from Germany and Sweden. The key priorities of the national strategy are strengthening the biodiversity knowledge base, prevention of the erosion of genetic resources, improved protection and management of critical ecosystems, integration of biodiversity conservation in relevant sectoral strategies, and strengthening of the institutional and regulatory framework. GoT is actively looking to GEF and other donors to finance the main elements of its Action Plan and meet its obligations under the Biodiversity Convention. GoT officially requested the Bank for assistance in obtaining GEF funds for a protected areas management project in July 1998. The proposed project is in line with the national priorities as articulated in the "Strategie Nationale de Conservation et de Developpement de la Flore et de la Faune Sauvages et des Aires Protegees" (July 2001) prepared under the recently closed Second Forestry Development Project

-4 - 3. Sector issues to be addressed by the project and strategic choices: The proposed project wij be the first to give concrete content to the Biodiversity Strategy adopted in June 1998. It will assist the Government of Tunisia in the implementation of integrated management plans with increased community participation that would provide a basis for replicability for management of other protected areas important for both national and global biodiversity. The proposed project would strengthen the capacity of the Directorate General of Forestry (DGF) to plan, implement, and coordinate biodiversity conservation at the local and national levels. The project preparation efforts will take a close look at complementarity and leveraging issues with other Bank-financed projects (Natural Resources Management Project (ongoing) and the Northwest Mountainous Areas and Forestry Development Project (under preparation) and a number of community-based and environmental education projects sponsored by UNDP, the EU, and GTZ. At the initial stage of preparation, this project was conceived of as an imnportant element in the National Forest and Pasture Development Strategy, and as part of a potential follow on project after the Second Forestry Development Project (SFDP) which closed in May 2001. However, the National Forest and Pasture Development Strategy was delayed in its preparation and it is only now that it has been received. The Government of Tunisia (GoT) and the Bank are keen on reviewing the Strategy in depth before proceeding with any follow on project In March 2000, the Japanese Bank for Intenational Cooperation (JBIC) and GoT began implementation of a 5-year Integrated Forest Management Project in the north of the country. In the meantime, however, the experience under the SFDP with the pilot operations incorporating local participation in forest management has impaited many useful lessons to the design of this project the key ones being the importance of capacity building (of both the implementing agency as well as the beneficiary populations) and a phased implementation to permit a "learning by doing" approach. Overall, the results of this component were instrumental in ensuring the inclusion, for the first time, of funding for the socio-economic development of forest populations into GoTs 5-year Econonic Development Plan (2002-2006). The project is thus fully in line with GoTs strategy in the forestry sector, and more broadly, natural resource management Although it would have been preferable to mainstream this project with a follow on forestry project, it was agreed with GoT that this project would proceed in order not to lose the momentum of the extensive preparation work already completed. The project would also liaise closely with the Northwest Mountainous Areas and Forestry Development Project which will also adopt similar participatory approaches to natural resources management.

The project design and implementation will also involve the Office National du Tourisme Tunisien (ONTT) under the Ministry of Tourism who are part of the technical working group (along with the Ministry of Environment and the DGF, Ministry of Agriculture) constituted under the Steering Committee. The GoT has recently completed an action plan for promotion of cultural tourism and ecological tourism (PATC, Plan d'Action de Promotion de Tourisme Culturel et de l'Environnement, 2000-2004) on tourism management and development. The Government is aware of the positive linkages between cultural/natural heritage and the tourism industry, and the strong impacts on local employment from cultural tourism and nature conservation. International competition for tourism earnings have impelled GoT to acknowledge the need to adjust its tourism policies. As part of its wider objective to expand high-value and niche tourism, GoT is interested in developing the potential for ecotourism in the countrys national parks. The seven sites selected under the Banks Cultural Heritage Project (ongoing) do not specifically include the three national parks under the proposed project. However, they form part of the larger sample of 31 sites of intervention developed by GoT which includes 5 national parks/reserves, of which two are included in the proposed project (Bouhedma and Ichkeul). The Ministry of Tourism expects to use the proposed project as a vehicle to promote ecotourism initiatives. The proposed biodiversity project will build on the momentum generated by recent planning initiatives, and establish clear links with ongoing donor-financed projects and other national projects.

-5- Selection of project sites: The three project sites were selected primarily on the basis of their importance to global biodiversity. Since this is Tunisia's first major protected area management project, it was also deemed important to include representativeness as a criterion in the selection in order to develop ecosystem-specific management plans that could be replicated elsewhere in the country. Each of the ecosystems represented by the three sites is distinct and will present different challenges to its sustainable management It was decided to limit the number of parks to three in order to keep the project size manageable by the existing institutional capacity.

C. Project Description Summary 1. Project components (see Annex 2 for a detailed description and Annex 3 for a detailed cost breakdown): The project includes the following three components: (all $ amounts are indicative only) Component 1: Institutional Strengthening ($2.02 M): The objective of this component will be to reinforce the institutional capacity of the Directorate General of Forestry (Ministry of Agriculture) and the Ministry of Environment in the sustainable protected areas management. This component will support the following: (i) strengthening of the Project Management Unit; (ii) training; (iii) technical and scientific studies; and (iv) establishment of a scientific monitoring system for the protected areas. The training programs would have a strong regional focus with modules targeting park management personnel, local governments at the regional Commissariats Regionaux de Developpement Agricole (CRDA) level, and other potential partners (including the private sector and NGOs) in participatory approaches to protected areas management. It will also include training programs for the Directorate General of Forestry (Ministry of Agriculture), Ministry of Tourism, and the Ministry of Environment and Landuse Planning at the central level (where justified).

Component 2: Protected Areas Management ($U.S 7.18 M): The objectives of this component are to: (i) manage and restore the ecosystems in the three national parks to protect the globally inportant flora and fauna; (ii) assist in the development of ecotourism activities; and (iii) establish, with the local populations, community development plans compatible with the objectives of sustainable biodiversity conservation. The three parks (out of 8) chosen include Ichkeul, Bouhedma, and Jbil. These three parks cover unique and distinctly different ecosystems - wetland, arid-mountain/pseudo savanna, and desert respectively (see Annex 2 for a brief description of each park). The project will develop detailed management plans, provide equipment, training and small infrastructural facilities in all three sites. In addition, it will establish mechanisms to reduce the unsustainable use of natural resources, particularly those resources that in the past were shared common resources such as grazing lands and forests. The project will develop strategies for ecotourism that will demonstrate the links between conservation and economic benefits for the local communities. The management plans will emphasize not only the technical aspects (inventory, infrastructure, surveillance), but also strategic and sustainability issues (participatory review and assessment of existing management plans and practices by local communities, negotiations with communities on priority activities to reduce pressures on the protected areas, support for alternative livelihoods consistent with biodiversity conservation and sustainable use of natural resources, scientific monitoring), and would be implemented during the project period. This component would also include the (parallel) cofinancing by the French GEF for the Bouhedma and Jbil national parks. Under the ecotourism component, the following activities are envisaged. (i) global study on the potential for, and modalities to develop ecotourism around national parks and reserves including tourism concessions with a focus on the three project sites; (ii) creation and infrastructural equipment for recreation areas, parking, entry gates, botanical garden, animal enclosures within the park; (iii) equipment and material for the welcome centers

-6 - and ecomuseums (including construction of a new ecomuseum at Douz for Jbil); (iv) purchase of horse-drawn carriages and other modes of eco-friendly internal transport; (v) support for the creation of local community homestays in Ichkeul; (vi) information campaign and production of documents to promote ecotourism (posters, maps, guides, postcards etc.) and (vii) taining of ecoguides and the staff of the welcome centers and ecomuseums in protected area management/conservation in accordance vith the training component under component 1. These activities will be complemented by the baseline activities to promote ecotourism by GOT in the parks of Ichkeul and Bouhedma under the PATC. This envisages the development of supporting infastructure outside the park environs including improvements in electrification, rural water supply, and communication facilities, improvement of access roads, planting of trees, signage and directions, construction of toilets and waste disposal areas, and construction of a geological museum at Ichkeul.

Component 3: Public Awareness ($US 0.68 M): This component would aim to build public support for biodiversity conservation at the local/park level and regional/governorate level. Action plans will target priority groups such as local governments, site visitors, and local school children for raising the awareness of specific stakeholder groups about the importance of, and opportunities for, biodiversity conservation within the three parks. Possible delivery mechanisms include mass media, formal and informal education, and development of linkages with local NGOs, schools, tourism agencies, and other organizations to promote public understanding about biodiversity resources. For each of the parks, flagship species/themes (espece phare) have been identified that will form the nucleus of all public awareness campaigns as well as research, monitoring and conservation activities. These would be the accacia raddiana, and the sand gazelle (gazelle leptoceros) for the parks of Bouhedma and Jbil respectively and the theme of water resources management for the case of Ichkeul. Activities will be developed at the local/community level around these key species/themes in order to develop the grassroots awareness necessary to sustain long-term biodiversity conservation.

,Coiilponeft .ZSector Cobsts, iiRanci8 ';.Rn B,ank. andIf ______(US$M) XTtilUA fnJiI 4V$) ___ 1. Capacity Building and Institutional 2.02 20.4 0.00 0.0 1.55 29.1 Institutional Strengthening: Development 2. Protected Areas Natural Resources 7.18 72.7 0.00 0.0 3.25 61.0 Management: Management 3. Public Awareness and Other Education 0.68 6.9 0.00 0.0 0.53 9.9 Education: I I Total Project Costs 9.88 100.0 0.00 0.0 5.33 100.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 Total Financing Required 9.88 100.0 0.00 0.0 5.33 100.0

2. Key poUcy and institutional reforms supported by the project: This project is the first major initiative in Tunisia dedicated to improving the management of the national parks. It is also the Bank's first GEF operation in Tunisia in national parks management. The Government considers this to be a pilot project specifically pertaining to the following aspects:

(i) involvement of local communities in the development and management of the parks; (ii) introduction of ecotourism activities; and (iii) improving financial sustainability of the parks.

-7- The project will support the development of a truly participatory approach to protectd areas management in the three project sites. Participatory approaches used in other Bank projects (CDs, AFICs) will be adapted to suit local conditions. The project will support the introduction of ecotourism action plans at each site. Insofar as the financial sustainability is concerned, the project will support the introduction of new recurrent cost financing mechanisms for the three parks (including, but not limited to increased ecotourism revenues and private concessions) with a view to transferring greater management responsibilities to the local community groups. The government has agreed to test these new approaches by year 4 of project implementation. These new financial mechanisms as well as the participatory management approaches implemented during this project will provide the basis for replication in other national parks and reserves within the broader government strategy for national parks management with a view to promoting greater involvement of local communities and increased financial sustainability.

3. Benefits and target population: Global and regional benefits: The project will result in global and regional benefits by contributing to sustainable conservation management in three of Tunisia's well-known national parks covering about 180,000 ha. representing diverse ecosystems with biodiversity of global and regional importance. The project will also establish linkages and collaboration to support and benefit from conservation initiatives in neighboring countries. The global benefits include: (a) conservation of critical Saharan and Mediterranean wetland habitats and enhancing the probability of their long-term conservation; (b) development of incentives to maintain protected areas in the long-term; (c) established capacity to ensure adequate management of protected areas sustainably; and (d) new knowledge concerning the feasibility of community-based natural resource conservation approaches and the factors associated with success.

Two of the sites (Bouhedma and Jbil) are important priorities under the Bonn Convention for the conservation of Sahelo-saharan antelopes. The Ichkeul lake and marshes have long been recognized (together with Dofiana in Spain, the Camargue in France and the El Kala region in Algeria) as one of the four major wetland areas in the western basin of the Mediterranean. The Ichkeul National Park is a very high-profile site in Tunisia (covering an area of some 12,000 hectares) being one of the few sites listed under three intemational agreements: (a) Biosphere Reserve (1977); (b) World Heritage Convention (1979); and (c) Ramsar Convention (1980). However, the development activities upstream of the lake have resulted in a cut-off from freshwater sources that has posed a serious threat to the health of the Lake Ichkeul ecosystem. As a result, the park was included in the Ramsar's Convention Montreux Record ("Record of Ramsar sites where changes in ecological character have occurred, are occurring, or are likely to occur") thus indicating the great threat to which the wetland is exposed. The project would support the updating and calibration of the mathematical model (financed as part of an extensive study on the park by KfW during 1993-95) for the management of the lake using test releases of freshwater in order to establish a scientific basis and calendar for the releases of freshwater necessary for maintaining the health of the lake's ecosystem. The lake and marshes of the park provide habitat for hundreds of thousands of migratory birds (in particular ducks, geese, storks and flamingos). Improving the management of the park would help increase the numbers of wintering ducks and coots have decreased from an average of 200,000 individuals to a level situated around 50,000 at present. Other important species include the wintering geese, herons, egrets, the globally threatened Marbled Teal (Anas angustirostris),Purple Gallinule (Porphyrioporphyrio ), and the White-headed Duck (Oxyura leucocephala) (also globally threatened). The national park of Bou Hedma is home to the extremely rare gazelle dorcas, and the oryx antelope. Other fauna of importance are the striped hyena, golden jackal and crested porcupine. The park houses 8 of the 14 species recognized as endemic in the National Biodiversity Study such as the Acacia raddiana, Juniperus phoenicea, Pistacia atlantica, Thymelea sempervirens, Tetrapon villosus, Tricholena teneriffe, and

- 8 - Cenchrus ciliaris, and Digitaria communtata. In addition, the park has potential for the re-introduction of fauna, relatives of species that once roamed but have since disappeared, such as the gazelle dorcas, oryx - the straight homed antelope, addax (desert antelope), and red-neck ostriches. Some of these have already been re-introduced in the park in limited numbers. The national park of Jbil is a relatively new park and consists of very unique Saharien ecosystems that have not been very well studied thus far. The park contains internationally important biodiversity, some of which is found only in Tunisia. Globally important species include the sand gazelle (gazella leptoceros), gazella abiod, and remarkable flora like caligonum that attain several meters in height in the sand dunes of the grand erg. National benefits: Investments, training, and decentralized institutional arrangements would address priority conservation planning and management problems common to many important and threatened biodiversity sites throughout Tunisia and elsewhere in the region and would, therefore, provide models for replication in priority conservation sites in other parts of the country and region. The improved management of the protected areas and buffer zones will help in the conservation of important plant and animal species within their native habitats. The project would contribute to broadening the livelihood strategies of participating comnunities and contribute to the long-term stability of the ecosystems through improving the welfare of the local populations. National-level beneficiaries include GoT (MELP, MA/DGF, MT) whose institutional capacity will be strengthened to address biodiversity conservation needs. The project will improve Tunisia's institutional arrangements and strengthen its capacity for biodiversity conservation while raising public awareness and providing improved opportunities for environmental and conservation education.

At the local level, the project would build mechanisms and capacity to assist local stakeholders, specifically, the local communities dependent on the resources of the protected areas, local governments, and NGOs to participate in the preparation and implementation of conservation management plans. Results from the social assessment carried out at the three parks during project preparation have indicated that the project will contribute to poverty alleviation objectives (See Annex 12 for details). In Ichkeul, income inequalities are stark, with more than 500/o of the families in the park earnng less than 1000 DT/year (- $U.S715) and less than 5% possessing annual average incomes of more than 45,000 DT/year (-U.S$32,000). In Bouhedma, as in Ichkeul, there is a wide variation in income distribution, from 3,000 DT per household a year (an average per capita income of 253 DT or USD $177) to about 5,000 DT a year. This means that half of the population is below the poverty line. In fact, the majority of the households in the park are considered officially indigent, which gives them access to subsidized medical services with a payment of lODT a year, but there are households so poor in Bou Hedma that they cannot afford even this. In spite of the material economic poverty of the people of Bou Hedma, the traditional culture remains vibrant. Women produce traditional artisan work such as carpets, fly (tent strips), cereal bags, all woven on traditional looms. The project will support the development of the traditional knowledge and capacity of the artists and artisans to make this a potentially important source for income improvement and for the provision of altemative livelihoods. Sustainable management of the project sites will benefit poor rumral communities and local economies adjacent to the sites through stimulation of socio-economic development including ecotourism as well as activities based on the sustainable management of natural resources of protected areas. The project is also expected to have a positive gender impact because most (if not all) of the traditional artisanal work is produced by women, and women are also involved in gathering fuel to feed their families, agriculture, grazing etc. The public awareness component will be focussed on the local communities (especially on women) in and around the protected areas and at the local govemments in order to develop the grassroots awareness necessary to sustain a participatory approach to protected areas management.

-9- 4. Insttutional and Implementation arrangements: Implementation period: 6 years

As with the project preparation process, an Inter-Ministedal Project Steering Committee (PSC) comprising representatives from the Ministry of Agdculture, Ministry of Environment and Landuse Planning, Ministry of Tourism, Leisure, and Artisanat, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Economic Development, and Ministry of International Cooperation wiUl be retained during project implementation. The PSC wiU be chaired by the Ministry of Environment and Landuse Planning. It wil be responsible for providing overaU strategic guidance, project oversight, and assistance in resolving issues associated with project implementation.

Project Coordination at the National Level: Currently, the Ministry of Environment and Landuse Planning (MELP) has overal responsibility for managing the project preparation grant and overaU project preparation. However, during appraisal it was agreed that the project management unit would be located in the Directorate General of Forests (DGF) within the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) due to the fact that the bulk of the activities under the project fall under the purview of the MOA. The transfer of responsibility from MELP to MOA during project implementation has been discussed with and fuUy supported by aU the concerned Ministries.

The Project Management Unit (PMU) (Unite de Gestion du Projet). The Project Management Unit wil be the central unit responsible for the coordination of project activities and wiUl ensure the soundness of the technical, scientific, and financial aspects of project implementation. The PMU wiU coordinate and ensure the coherence of proposed actions proposed by the Park Management Teams (see below). The proposed actions wiU be discussed at the Local Development Committee (LDC) (ConseilLocal de D6veloppement). The PMU wiU submit the annual work programs and budgets to the ISC for validation. The PMU wiU also ensure that the technical, human, and financial means wiU be made available to the implementing agencies and that the latter wil work in accordance with agreed-on procedures.

The Local Development Council (LDC) (Conseil Local de Developpement). At the level of each Delegation, this Council has the functions of (i) participating in the formulation and implementation of the environmental protection plans, programs of nature conservation, and natural resources management plans; (ii) advising on programs of local development and proposing priorities and progamming as wel as participating in the formulation of regional development plans. Within the project, the Council wil be the focal point and forum for the discussion of the proposed park management plans as weUl as the annual work programs.

The Park Management Team (P) (Equipe de Gestion du Projet). A Park Management Team wiUl be formed at each park, and will be responsible for the action planning and programming. The Park Conservator wiU lead it. The team will include representatives of the Ministries of Environment and Tourism, and will work in close collaboration with the representatives of the local population through the intermediation of the selected members of the Development Committees (see below) (Comites de Developpement). Technical staff will be available to assist these teams. The Conservator is responsible for the day-to-day organization and execution of activities in the park by the authority vested in him by the Regional Agncultural Development Council (CRDA).

- 10- The Development Committees (DC) (Comits de Developpement). These committees will be the base level institutions for the representation of the population, in order to ensure (i) participation of the communities in the identification of local development measures within a social-economic space (terroir), (ii) the provision of all relevant information on the needs of the populations they represent, (iii) mobilization and organization of the population to facilitate their participation in the development of the park management plans. As they become more experienced, the Development Committees will have the option of becoming legally recognized development entities such as Local Interest Groups (Groupements d'Inte^t Collectifs, GIC), Development Groups (Groupements de Developpement, GD), cooperatives, etc.

The DCs will be organized at the outset of the project with the necessary accompanying measures including awareness and training programs, so that the participation of the local communities in the formulation of the park management and development plans will be ensured from the beginning. These plans, with their economic and social objectives, will take into account the actions necessary for the conservation of biodiversity and will be based on an improved use of potential and available natural resources. They will include activities that will permit the local population's development of, and rational management of the natural resources in the protected areas. These community development plans will be an integral part of the park management plans. Local communities would thus participate in project implementation in several ways. First, they would participate in the formulation of sustainable management plans which directly affect them. Second, they will have a financial interest in the park's management since they will be primary sources of local knowledge as well as labor. Third, they would also participate through the establishment of contractual arrangements, Contrat Programmes (CP), with the implementing agency, NGOs or other agencies with whom they may be involved. The DC approach has been tested in the ongoing projects (Natural Resources Management; North-West Mountainous Areas Development) and has proven to be successful.

2. Institutional and implementation arrangements:

Financida management The financial management arrangements are detailed in annex 6 and summarized below.

Accounting and Financial framework The Financial Management System (FMS) in place in the MOA and MELP, is based on principles and procedures defined by the legal framework applicable to the pubic sector and more specifically to governmental institutions. MA implementing agency for the project is maintaining an accounting system based on the cash basis and the outline of budget components according to the provisions of the Public Accounting Law. Execution of the public expenditures is decentralized at the level of the CRDA. Technical Directorates at the central level, as is the case for DGF, are playing a strategic and overseeing roles according to the agreed five year plan and the annual budget. Projects with financing from external donors, are managed at the central level through a unit which is officially designated, to coordinate and oversee the project implementation. A team of specialist is nominated to control eligibility of expenditures, compliance with legal documents and donors requirements, at the stages of budgeting, procurement, and disbursement as well as accounting and reporting duties. The Central Bank of Tunisia (CBT) is the authorized institution to proceed with all payments from special accounts (SA) and to issue SOEs for replenishment. Direct payments are handled directly by DGF. In addition, the DGF also handles the transmission of eligible payments to the CBT which has overall responsibility for the management of the Special Account.

- 1- Accounting and financial reporting for the project. Accounting and financial reporting will be assured centrally by the Project Management Unit (PMU) within DGF. DGF and MELP would be responsible for financial management and accounting duties for activities managed under their responsibility. CRDAs and the regional directorates of MELP involved in the project implementation at the regional level, would maintain simplified accounts and analysis of the activities managed under their responsibility. Such reports would be sent respectively to the DGF and MELP every three months for accounting and monitoring purposes. DGF and MELP would maintain accounting records for components under their responsibility, prepare and disseminate sub-project accounts and financial reports. MELP would also ensure timely transmission of these accounts and reports to DGF. DOF would be responsible for aggregating the financial data and the issuing of the Financial Monitoring Report to the Bank every six months. DGFE will assist DGF during the first to improve the financial management capacity of the accounting and financial team.

Audit. The General Controller of Finance (CGF), as auditor acceptable to the Bank, will be appointed to carry on an annual audit according to the International Standards of Auditing as issued by the International Federation of Accountants and the Bank's Guidelines and specific Terms of Reference (TORs) acceptable to the Bank. The auditor will express a professional opinion on the annual project financial statements. An annual audit report will be made available to the Bank within six months of the close of each fiscal year.

Monitoring and Evaluation Arrangements. The PMU would be responsible, with inputs from all implementing units, for monitoring of financial and physical progress on investment implementation, for progress reporting on the execution of policy measures and development impact, for coordinating disbursement. On these basis, the PMU will prepare agreed reports.

The above arrangements were detailed during appraisal and reconfirmed at negotiations.

D. Project Rationale 1. Project alternatives considered and reasons for rejection: Project preparation considered and rejected the following alternatives:

* Focus on all 8 National Parks and 4 of 16 Reserves. This scenario was not selected due to the limited resources available to implement a project of this size. Sites were selected so as to include: (a) representation of different ecosystems; (b) examples of the major challenges to biodiversity conservation in Tunisia, and (c) biodiversity of national and global significance. In addition, the feasibility of implementing conservation management given the limited institutional capacity within the DGF towards a more participatory approach to protected area management was taken into consideration in selecting the location and number of sites. Experience gained at these three sites will allow for a phased "learning by doing" approach. * Creation of a separate protected area management agency. There is no substantial overlap between the MELP, in charge of policy formulation, planning, and regulation, and the DGF which manages the protected areas. Joint managemnent of the Ichkeul N.P is a good example of collaboration between the MELP and DGF. It was agreed with GoT that while efficiency gains would be sought through the project with specific emphasis on capacity and institution building, no major revamping through the creation of a separate agency would be required at this time. * Privatization of the protected areas: While this suggestion has merit in its potential for reducing Government costs associated with protected area management, the Government currently lacks adequate regulatory and monitoring mechanisms to ensure that biodiversity conservation concerns

- 12 - would not take second place to the drive for profit in areas where concessions are possible. Further, given the question of limited profitability, it is not clear that there would be sufficient demand from the pnvate sector to take over the complete management of the parks. However, the project preparation will examine the possibility of partal concessionmng of activities to the private sector in order to increase revenues and improve efficiency.The project will help strengthen the Government's capacity to regulate and monitor biodiversity conservation, while exploring a range of options for future financing and decentralized management of protected areas.

2. Major related projects financed by the Bank and/or other development agendes (completed, ongoing and planned). Latest Supervision Sector Issue Project (PSR) Ratngs (Bank-flnanced proJects only) ImplBmentation Development Bank-financed Progress (IP) obe {DO) Participatory natural resources Natural Resource Management S S management; poverty alleviation Project (Ln 4162, $26.5 m, ongoing)

Improved forestry management Second Forestry Development S S Project (Ln 3601; $65m, closed May 2001) Rural development; sustainable range, Northwest Mountainous Areas S S forest, and farming activities Development Project (Ln 3691; $26.0 m, closed June 2001) Coastal Zone Management (World Gulf of Gabes Marine and Bank/GEF) Coastal Resources Protection Project (under preparation) Participatory natural resources Northwest Mountainous Areas management; poverty alleviation and Forestry Development Project (under preparation) Other development agencies European Union/EC: Conservation of natural Conservation of natal resources resources in the humid zones of the Mediterranean (Regional MEDWET Project: Tunisia Project Site: Sebkhat El Kelbia)-ongoing UNDP/GEF: Conservation of Wetland and Biodiversity conservation Coastal Ecosystems in the Mediterranean Region (Tunisia project sites -Dar Chichou, Korba Kelibia, and El Haouaria)- ongoing UNDP/GEF/FFEM: Marine Protected Areas (under Biodiversity conservation preparation) UNDP-GOT: Development of alternative Alternative livelihoods livelihoods for populations in

- 13 - and around the N.P of El Feidja (ongoing) GTZ - environmental management Ongoing technical assistance projects JBIC - Forestry Management Integrated Forestry Management Project Gernany - Resource conservation Promotion of Resource Conservation and Game Management (1992-95) IP/DO Ratings: HS (Highly Satisfactory), S (Satisfactory), U (Unsatisfactory), HU (Highly Unsatisfactory) 3. Lessons learned and reflected in the project design: This is the first Bank-supported GEF project in Tunisia and the first GEF/Bank project focusing on protected areas management in Tunisia. Lessons leamned have been drawn to a large extent from the Bank's experience in the forestry sector in Tunisia and other Bank/GEF projects in the region and elsewhere. The preparation process is also focussing on lessons learned from other community-based natural resources management initiatives.

From OAG review of GEF-supported biodiversity projects in Africa: (i) Integration of the biodiversity conservation agenda into the broader national development agenda is essential; (ii) Biodiversity projects need to focus more on methods for dealing with socio-economic pressures in perimeter zones where populations may be dependent on forest exploitation; (iii) Project design should take into account technical and stakeholder reviews in the final design; and (iv) Clearly defined goals and objectives are essential to focus on project efforts, monitor progress, and demonstrate impact. On a broad level, the QAG's recommendation to include more environmental expertise in developing the CAS has been implemented in the Tunisia case. The new Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) has had a substantial input from the environment/rural development sectors with a special mission that prepared the Environmental Input to the Tunisia CAS report. The CAS includes the proposed Bank/GEF projects in its focus on consolidating long-term development in environment and natural resources management.

The proposed project would also seek to identify complementarities with ongoing environment/natual resource management projects in order to better mainstream biodiversity conservation. The biodiversity conservation efforts in the proposed project will seek to emphasize the underlying causes of biodiversity loss (overgrazing, fuelwood overexploitation etc.). The proposed project design supports detailed social analyses of the park populations and would define options and mitigation strategies to endangered livelihoods if there is to be a limitation in the use of resources.

From Bank-wide Portfolio Review of Biodiversitv Projects: The portfolio review identified 9 criteria to assess the strengths and weaknesses of biodiversity projects in quality at entry: borrower ownership; stakeholder participation; clarity of objectives and components; application of lessons learned; identification of critical risks; integration of biodiversity into project design; detail of implementation planning; analysis of institutional capacity; use and adequacy of indicators. In the proposed project, borrower ownership is high. Since it is a free-standing biodiversity project, integration of biodiversity into project design is a given. The proposed project supports preparatory studies that will address the other criteria in detail.

From Bank Review of Issues in Ecotourism and Conservation: In a review of 23 protected areas with projects designed to generate local economic development found that while many projects promoted

- 14 - ecotourism, few generated substantial benefits for either parks or local people. In most countries, ecotourism alone will not promote conservation - rather, it is one component with other elements like improved education, improved access to information, improvements in park management, and increased economic opportunities other than just ecotourisnL The review also recommends zoning as a management tool to ensure controlled tourism does not degrade the park's biodiversity resources as was the case with the Tangkoko DuaSaudara Nature Reserve in Indonesia where "ecotourists control Tangkoko, probably to the detriment of wildlife", and the Royal Chitwan Park in Nepal where despite well organized education programs, "disturbances to the ecology have become obvious features".

The proposed project will explore the potential for ecotourism in each park and zoning will be an essential feature in defining how visitation will take place. In Tunisia, the disturbances due to increased tourism is a negligible risk. Indeed, the challenge would be how best to develop this potential while mitigating any negative effects. Baseline surveys will be carried out on the seasonality of tourism interest, activities of tourism in the park including the type of tourist attracted, type of visitor experience desired by the tourist and the associated infrastructure expected, in addition to strong baseline data on the ecosystem characteristics. Any promotion of ecotourism in the project sites will be strictly managed. Public awareness and environmental education are important components of the proposed project.

Tunisia Forestry Development Project (Ln 2870-TUN: closed) and Second Forestry Development Project (Ln 3601-TUN: closed): As the first forestry operation financed by the Bank in Tunisia, the Forestry Development Project (FDP) was the testing ground to provide the technical and institutional basis for the follow-on Second Forestry Development Project (SFDP). The FDP eliminated price distortions and monopolistic situations in the sector, and the implementation agencies and population developed a new awareness of the need for environmentally sound exploitation of forest resources. The FDP and SFDP have underlined the need for participation by the local populations in forest and pasture management The ongoing experience with OPDIs (Pilot Operations of Integrated Development) has indicated that where the utilization of a participatory methodology is new for the implementing agency and communities, a phased approach should be used to allow a "learning by doing" approach. This is particularly important for activities such as the OPDI, where rapid implementation would most likely not permit enough time to carry out training activities, thereby leaving the local community groups in a weak position to adequately participate. The SFDP has also shown that investments linked to participatory activities should be carried out after an initial phase of consultations and training of beneficiaries. These activities will allow time for communities to adjust to working as a group, be cohesive and develop participatory mechanisms; capacity-building of NGOs as well as user groups is critical to ensure successful implementation. In the proposed project, the local communities have already begun the process of organizing themselves. Trust fumds have been identified to support capacity-building of these nascent groups in the interim period before the project becomes effective.

Jordan: Conservation of the Dana and Azraq Protected Areas Project (GEF/World Bank/UNDP): The key factor behind the success of Dana was the involvement of the local population (Bedouins inside the reserve and villagers around it) in the forefront of the project from the very start Building on local skills and initiatives, mixed with a new vision and new ideas, opportunities were created for local people to gain a livelihood from the nature reserve without destroying it. Carefully-regulated ecotourism gives local people a fair share of the action and dividends while "putting nature first". The institutional strengthening component of the Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature (RSCN) produced a revitalized RSCN with a clear vision, with a truined and motivated staff and, most importantly, with the will to make the protection of Jordan's natural heritage succeed in.practice.

-15 - The proposed project has also identified similar issues and has included in the project design a detailed participatory process involving local communities and local/regional institutions, NGOs to develop and implement management plans for the protected areas that will balance the need for protecting the parks and meeting the needs of the local people. Institutional strengthening of the DGF is also an important component of the project The project preparation phase includes a study tour to Dana for the park conservators, and other DGF and MELP personnel to learn from the Jordanian experience and work with RSCN to set up customized training programs for Tunisian staff. Morocco: Protected Areas Management Project: Although this project is still in an early implementation phase, the key aspects in project design were a decentralized implementation structure and the involvement of the local populations in the preparation of the six Douar Development Plans to be implemented in the first year as part of the conservation management plans.

The proposed project will also bring together the local communities, and NGOs, with the local forestry arrondissements in the respective govemorates in a participatory fashion to gain the commitment of the local people.

4. Indications of borrower and recipient commitment and ownership: The Government of Tunisia has established a proper strategic framework for biodiversity protection and environmental management: (i) A National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) and the State of the Environment were completed in 1997; (ii) a number of intemational conventions (Biodiversity, Bonn, Ramsar, etc.) have been ratified, and (iu) A National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan were developed in a very participatory manner under a biodiversity Enabling Activity (GEF-funded; the World Bank being the Implementing Agency) which were adopted by the Government in 1998. University academics, research institutes, and environmental NGOs (local and international) provided useful inputs into the preparation of the Biodiversity Strategy. The strategy also benefited from bilateral assistance from Germany and Sweden. Tunisia accords a high significance to biodiversity conservation and sustainable uses in its development effort There is a strong political commitment towards enhanced conservation efforts and its successful integration into a wider economic, social and cultural context There is a high-level commitment to participatory natural resources management Ongoing World-Bank financed natural resources management/forestry projects have involved local communities in a participatory approach to project implementation. The recent Tunisia CAS (FYOO-FY03) includes the proposed project in the lending/grant operations.

The Government requested assistance from the World Bank to prpare a possible GEF project for protected areas/biodiversity in July 1998. The preparation grant is being executed by the Ministry of Environment and Landuse Planning (MELP). An Interministerial Steering Committee was formed in 1999 to oversee preparation and implementation of the project. This committee comprises representatives from the Ministry of Environment and Land Use Planning (MELP), Ministry of Agriculture (DGF), Office National de Tourisme Tunisien (ONTT), Ministry of Tourism, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Economic Development, Ministry of Education, Agence Nationale de la Protection de l'Environnement (ANPE), Agence de Protection et d'Amenagement du littoral (APAL), Ministry of International Cooperation, and ATLAS (NGO). The technical working group (with representatives from MELP, DGF, and ONTT) has been closely involved in the formulation of the terms of reference for the preparatory study which was approved by the Steering Committee in April 2000. This group was also responsible for the preparation of the bidding documents, and the bid evaluation which were completed in December 2000. The French-Tunisian consortium which was awarded the contract for the preparation study commenced work in mid-February 2001.

- 16 - 5. Value added of Bank and Global support In this project: The Bank has had a long-standing dialogue with Tunisia in the forestry sector and, more broadly, natural resource management through the two Forestry Development Projects, Natural Resource Management Project, Northwest Mountainous Area Development Project In the environment sector, the Bank has been involved in technical assistance through the Meditemnean Technical Assistance Program (METAP) mainly in the area of Environmental Impact Assessment, and policy support in the integration of the environment into specific sectors of waste management, water, tourism, transport, and trade. The proposed project will be the Bank's first GEF operation in Tunisia. Despite existing bilateral support for the environment sector in Tunisia, the Government has requested that the Bank continue to be engaged in order to continue the policy dialogue, secure donor coordination, and bring international best practices to bear on the design and implementation of the country's first GEF protected areas management project.

The GEF value added comes from its global experience in the design, implementation, and financing of biodiversity projects. The GEF support is justified by the regional and global value of the project sites' biodiversity. GEF funding will help raise visibility and global support for the management of Tunisia's protected areas and reserves. It wil also enable the project to target globally valued and threatened plants and habitats. Other GEF/Bank biodiversity projects in the region (notably, Morocco, Jordan) will provide opportunities for promotion of exchange of ideas, cross-fertilization with other GEF projects, and strengthened biodiversity monitoring and evaluation, review, and scientific oversight

Consultation. Collaboration and Coordination between Implementing Agencies (As'): The project has been developed in close consultation with UNDP who are currently working with the Govemment in an alternative livelihoods project in the national park if El Feidja. Lessons learned from this project are included in the project design. In addition, UNDP is also preparing a GEF project on marine protected areas which has been coordinated with this project as well as the Bank's Gulf of Gabes project also under preparation. The local UNDP representative has participated in several wrap-up meetings after Bank missions. GTZ which has a strong presence in the Ministry of Environment has assured the Bank of support during project implementation

E. Summary Project Analysis (Detailed assessments are in the project file, see Annex 8) 1. Economic (see Annex 4): O Cost benefit NPV=US$ million; ERR = % (see Annex 4) O Cost effectiveness * Incremental Cost O Other (specify) A standard cost-benefit analysis is not usuaUy conducted for GEF biodiversity projects. Instead, an incremental cost analysis has been carried out as part of project preparation. The project design seeks to emphasize cost-effectiveness through minirnizing budget impact, maximizing involvement of the local communities, using existing institutions, and building on existing studies and experience.

Incremental costs: The incremental costs are expected to cover project expenditures on components that have global benefits. Project activities that have global benefits are eligible for GEF-financing. The baseline expenditure scenario has been calculated to establish current and planned funding amounts for biodiversity conservation and protected area management at the three project sites and for national-level

- 17 - planning dunng the life of the project. The estimated difference between the cost of the baseline scenano and the cost of the GEF alternative represent the incremental costs. This represents the incremental cost of achieving global environmental benefits through strengthening policy and institutional frameworks for protected areas management and biodiversity conservation, developing mechanisms for sustainable resource use in the buffer zones, strengthening local and national capacity for conservmng globaly significant biodiversity, and enhancing public awareness of global enviromnental issues pertaining to biodiversity conservation. It is expected that the GEF contribution towards the incremental costs would be of the order of $5.33 miDion (with a French GEF contribution of about $0.1 million). (See Annex 4 for IC analysis) 2. Financial (see Annex 4 and Annex 5): NPV=US$ million; FRR = % (see Annex 4) Conventional financial rate of return analysis is usually not carried out for GEF biodiversity projects. Total government financing during the project implementation period is estimated to be about U.S$ 4.24 milion equivalent. This wiDl mainly go towards meeting baseline costs that result in primarily national benefits. The incremental costs, which generate the global environmental benefits, will be financed through the GEF grant and the French GEF (parallel cofinancing) and will be of the order of $5.43 million equivalent

During the first year of project implementation, a study wil be launched to examine options for ensuring financial sustainability of the park management in the long-term, inter alia, revolving funds, private concessions, share of ecotourism revenues etc. Agreement was reached with the Government that the outcome of this study wil be implemented on a pilot basis towards the final years of project implementation. It is expected that these new financial mechanisms as well as the management approaches identified during this project will provide the basis for mainstreaming these aspects in the broader government strategy for national parks management with a view to promoting increased financial autonomy. Fiscal Impact: The project is not expected to have a significant fiscal impact on the GoT budget. Recurrent costs of the project are estimated at about $200,000 annualy on average which is about 0.3% of the total recurrent budget of the MA. 3. Technical: Moving away from top-down "technician" input, the project will implement an approach to protected area management that is inclusive of stakeholders and integrated into the rural landscape. The choice for such an approach implies technical solutions that are diffue, often based on traditional knowledge, and adapted to participatory plamning and decision-making processes. Fortunately, Tunisia has already acquired experience in this domain with the implementation of the UNDP project in El Feija National Park with WWF assistance and several other (Bank and non-Bank financed) natual resources management projects.

Two of the project parks, Jbil and Bou Hedmna, are nested in terrestrial arid ecosystems where the threat to vegetation and wildlife is best addressed with a significant decrease of consumptive activities. Still, several families traditionally use the parks' rangeland and a grazing or browsing ban is not socially acceptable. The project will thus rely heavily on dialogue to organize a different utilization of the rangeland. The participatory dialogue will be the opportunity for current users to draw upon their indigenous knowledge and traditional range use techniques. Park managers will present range users with scientifically tested "natural succession enhancement techniques" such as zoning, rotations, consideration of plant-rest period, avoidance of most fragile areas, temporary fencing, etc. as well as and for extreme cases, assisted

- 18 - regeneration such as scarification of crusted areas, seeding, revegetation of dunes etc. The objective is to define, and agree on, a resource-use approach that is both acceptable to the communities and favorable to the vegetation and wildlife. Drastic technical solutions of the past, such as permanent fencing, will be avoided as much as possible.

The Ichkeul National Park, which is a very ecologically sensitive wetland, will require much more technical input than those of the arid land parks. The operation of the mathematical model, the monitoring and analysis of the physico-chemical parameters of the lake, as well as the decision on water release and sluice-gate operation, require equipment and scientific skills that are currently beyond both the communities and park managers. This would inherently imply a less participatory process. The National Environment Agency (ANPE) will ensure technical management of the lake water supported by the General Directorate of Dams and Major Hydraulic Works (Direction G6n6rale des Barrages et des Grands Travaux Hydrauliques (DGBGTH)). Local knowledge and participatory decision-making will still be relevant to Ichkeul but is likely to be limited to the management and use of the mountain resources (jebel) as well as to other activities such as ecotourism development.

In all cases, technical input will be required for the final design of Park Management Plans as well as to conduct ecological monitoring (e.g. line transect or aerial survey of wildlife) and, generally for all research activities whose scientific protocols will be defined and implemented by universities.

Replicability: Because the approach is new and based on dialogue as well as because the ecosystems at stake have high recovery inertia, results may be slow and it may take time before robust lessons are available. Still, if early success can be demonstrated, the Government of Tunisia intends to replicate this approach in the other national parks in the country. The community participation aspects in particular are expected to be utilized in the management plans of the other national parks and reserves, as well as in natural resource management projects. This project is viewed as an opportunity for "learning-by-doing" and the choice of the three sites offers a variety of ecosystems and management styles that can be useful elsewhere in the country. Multi stakeholder dialogue and partnership is gradually reaching national strategies and decision-makers. It is likely to be registered as one of the main thrust of the envisioned changes to the sections dealing with park and wildlife management in the existing legislation. It should be noted that the approach tested in the desert park of Jbil could be used in the proposed Morocco Bas Draa National Parck, which protects a similar ecosystem, and vice-versa. The latter is currently in the World Bank/GEF pipeline for preparation.

4. Institutional: 4.1 Executing agencies: Currently, MELP is responsible for project preparation with oversight by the multi-disciplinary steering committee. However, during project implementation, DGF (Ministry of Agriculture) will take the lead for overall project coordination. This is due to the fact that most of the field-level activities will fall directly under the domain of the MOA and hence, would be better placed than MELP to carry out project coordination and implementation. 4.2 Project management: The proposed project will have a project management design that is synonymous with the Ministry of Agriculture's (MOA's) management of its overall investment budget Project accounts and financial management will be an extracted sub-set of the MOA's detailed accounts for its investment budget. The decentralization of the investment and recurrent cost budgets to the CRDAs initiated in the Second Forestry Development Project (SFDP) will continue with overall guidance and M&E being undertaken by DGF at

-19- the central level.

4.3 Financial Management The financial management system relating to this project was reviewed with the objective to determine whether the project has in place an adequate financial management system as required by the Bank under OP/BP 10.02. The assessment, which included visits to MOA (DGF and DGFIOP), MELP, Ministry of Finance (MF), and Ministry of Economic Development (MED), was focused on the accounting system, internal control, planning, budgetng and financial reporting system to be used during project implementation, as well as the fonrat and contents of the project Financial Monitoring Report (FMR) to be submitted by the Bank. The financial management arrangements suggested for the project satisfies the Bank's minimum financial management requirements. The reporting system used for the WSIL and Agriculture Services Project, will be extended to cover the proposed project.

The identified risk area assessed as medium, is related to implementation of the project by two independent entities and their regional structures. This risk would be mitigate by the issuing of defined rules and procedures in the Project Implementation Plan (PIP) and a close supervision by Bank's staff during the first year. 4.3 Procurement issues: The CRDAs have gained considerable experience in procurement matters through the implementation of ongoing Bank-financed projects. The decentralization of procurement will continue under the proposed project The experience gained under ASIL, ASIL2 and the SFDP will prove useful in the implementation phase of the proposed project in the CRDAs of Bizerte (Ichkeul N.P), Kebili (Jbil N.P), and Sidi Bouzid (Bouhedma N.P).

Disbursement Issues: Disbursements from the GEF grant would be made on the traditional system (reimbursements with full documentation and against Statements of Expenditure - SOEs, and direct payments). As with other operations, all efforts would be made to ensure better coordination between physical and financial implementation aspects. 4.4 Financial management issues: The DGF will provide, with effective and efficient staff input, the essentials of a Project Management Unit. This unit will be strengthened under the project in terms of M&E capacity, equipment and necessary software. It will maintain computerized project accounts and supporting documentation and records so as to pernit a comprehensive itemized trace of all transactions. Copies will be forwarded to the Central Bank of Tunisia which will manage paymnents out of a Special Account These accounts and procurement documentation processes have already been tested under the ongoing Bank projects and have proven fully satisfactory. The DGF will also implement a reporting system acceptable to the Bank. 5. Environmental: Environmental Category: C (Not Required) 5.1 Summarize the steps undertaken for enviromnental assessment and EMP preparation (including consultation and disclosure) and the significant issues and their treatment emerging from this analysis. The project is not expected to have any negative environmental impacts of any kind. It is expected to generate significant positive environmental benefits through the establishunent of effective management systems to conserve the natural integrity and biodiversity of Tunisia's ecosystems in three national parks. Infiastructure-related activities are expected to be small-scale involving mainly the refurbishment of visitor

-20- centers, marked trails, and signage. They will be carried out in a manner that minimizes negative environmental inpacts. This will be done through ensuring that the relevant environmental provisions in accordance with Bank guidelines are specified in the terms of reference (TORs) and all construction contracts. The protected area management plans to be developed under the project will involve definition of land and resource use zones within the parks and define specific measures to be undertaken to ensure sustainable management of the biodiversity resources. Key stakeholders will include the local communities, CRDAs, and NGOs. The development of the management plans will include all the key stakeholders and constitutes an environmental management plan per se. No resettlement is envisaged. The Bank will ensure that all the three management plans are designed in accordance with the standards set out by the safeguard policies, specifically those pertaining to OD 4.01 and the new guidelines (O.P 4.12) pertaining to impacts on local populations in legally designated parks and protected areas. 5.2 What are the main features of the EMP and are they adequate? n.a 5.3 For Category A and B projects, timeline and status of EA: Date of receipt of final draft: n.a

5.4 How have stakeholders been consulted at the stage of (a) environmental screening and (b) draft EA report on the environmental impacts and proposed environment management plan? Describe mechanisms of consultation that were used and which groups were consulted? n.a 5.5 What mechanisms have been established to monitor and evaluate the impact of the project on the environment? Do the indicators reflect the objectives and results of the EMP? Monitoring indicators include biodiversity indicators as well as indicators of public participation. 6. Social: 6.1 Summarize key social issues relevant to the project objectives, and specify the project's social development outcomes. Social analyses have been carried out at each of the project sites as part of project preparation. These have included a thorough analysis of previously existing documents (including legal documents) and studies as well as field consultations with a broad range of stakeholders, including government, institutional, local tourist and commercial organizations, and direct beneficiaries. Annex 12 provides a detailed discussion of the common key points and conclusions of these assessments. These analyses show the specific problems in each of the parks that contribute to biodiversity degradation. One of the root causes lies in the deep poverty of the inhabitants, and their use of some of the parks' resources in view of a lack of other livelihood opportunities. Thus, technical measures to support biodiversity conservation must include accompanying social measures developed jointly with the inhabitants in or adjacent to the parks in order to stand a chance of success. The preparation studies document clearly that the populations living either within the parks' boundaries (minimal) or adjacent to them, have a great interest in participating in the project. They see the project as an opportunity to contribute to the conservation of the biodiversity resources which they recognize as precious, and at the same time derive income from employment in conservation and park management activities. The assessments have also identified the environmental, social, economic, and cultural opportunities and constraints that must be addressed in each of the park management plans to be developed and implemented with the direct participation of beneficiaries, NGOs and government agencies adhering to the guidelines prescribed in Guidelines for Using Social Assessment to Support Public Involvement in World Bank-GEFProjects. 6.2 Participatory Approach: How are key stakeholders participating in the project?

- 21 - Participation in project identification and preparation: The basic concept and objectives of the proposed project were identified as top priorities in the National Biodiversity Study and Action Plan. This plan was developed under a Biodiversity Enabling Activity (GEF-funded; the World Bank being the Implementing Agency) and was adopted by the Government in 1998. University academics, research institutes, and enviromnental NGOs (local and international) provided useful inputs into the preparation of the Biodiversity Strategy. The project preparation has been guided by an Interministerial Steering Committee which has representatives from all the key Ministries as well as NGO representation, and in consultation with local level governments and stakeholder/beneficiaries. These consultations have led to the awareness-raising of the population about biodiversity conservation and their role in its management, and have led to the formation of development committees at the community level that will eventually be formalized as Groupements dfnteret Collectif The process of project preparation has also bridged an important gap between the administration and the local populations. 6.3 How does the project involve consultations or collaboration with NGOs or other civil society organizations? The NGO, Atlas, is a member of the project's national steering committee. In the past, other NGOs have been involved with DGF in the pilot integrated development operations component (OPDIs) of the SFDP. Experience under the SFDP has shown that many of the NGOs are new and do not have sufficient capacity to carry out the training and awareness-raising that were foreseen under the OPDI component. The project preparation team has examined the obstacles previously faced by the OPDIs and plans to address these inefficiencies within the project. One of these problems is the legitimacy of representation of the communities in these associations and groupements. The project would address these issues by the formalization of the naturally existing community groups in creation of Comites de Developpement and subsequently into other associational forms. These groupings (either AFICS or others) could serve as potential collaborators in the planning and development of the protected area management plans. It is planned that NGOs which are sufficiently mature will be tapped where possible for information exchange and collaboration. The project will also work with other conservation NGOs such as the WWF Alliance in North Africa to ensure complementarity of activities and benefit from any possible synergies. 6.4 What institutional arrangements have been provided to ensure the project achieves its social development outcomes? The project envisages the creation of protected area management plans that are based in the regional CRDA. These area management plans will be developed jointly with the concerned population in and around the protected areas. These plans will include a definition of the roles of the communities and local organizations in park management, the ways in which the communities will develop alternative livelihoods and reduce or eliminate the use of any park resources, and will also define the processes of participation that will be an intrinsic part of the overall set of management plans. The institutional arrangements needed at each of the proposed sites will be different in each case, but the broad principles will be that the management functions will be shared between the CRDA-DGF and the groups of primary beneficiaries organized at the local levels specifically for this project. The stakeholders' own reaction has been that the best guarantee of success, and achievement of the planned social development outcomes, is the genuine participation of all stakeholders. 6.5 How will the project monitor performance in terms of social development outcomes? The creation of associations of benficiaries and their participation in the formulation of the management plans, will be the first steps in raising the awareness of the population of beneficiaries and other interested stakeholders about the objectives of the project and the expected social outcomes, among others the key one of poverty alleviation. These plans will establish mechanisms for appropriate local participatory monitoring

- 22 - and evaluation by the concerned stakeholders and beneficiaries. The indicators to monitor performance will focus on the social benefits derived by the population in and around the parks, including their employment opportunities, access to alternative sources of livelihood and revenue, and the benefits derived from direct participation in the management of the parks and their resources.

7. Safeguard Policies: 7.1 Do any of the following safeguard policies apply to the project?_ Policy A0JkiIcllit Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01) * Yes 0 No Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04) 0CYes No Forestry (OP 4.36, GP 4.36) 0 Yes * No Pest Management (OP 4.09) 0 Yes * No Cultural Property (OPN 11.03) 0 Yes * No Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20) 0 Yes * No Involuntary Resettlement (OPIBP 4.12) * Yes 0 No Safety of Dams (OP 4.37, BP 4.37) 0 Yes * No Projects in Internatlonal Waters (OP 7.50, BP 7.50, GP 7.50) 0 Yes * No Projects In Disputed Areas (OP 7.60, BP 7.60, GP 7.60)* 0 Yes * No

7.2 Describe provisions made by the project to ensure compliance with applicable safeguard policies. The proposed project is in its entirety devoted to solve the questions of biodiversity conservation with a participatory approach. Infrastructure-related activities are expected to be small-scale involving mainly the refurbishment of visitor centers, marked trails, and signage. They will be carried out in a manner that minimizes negative environmental impacts. This will be done through ensuring that the relevant environmental provisions in accordance with Bank guidelines (OD 4.01) are specified in the terns of reference (TORs) and all construction contracts. The management plan will thereby constitute an environmental management plan and the Bank will ensure that this conforms to the standards of OD 4.01 as a condition for financing. The project has also ensured that the activities are in accordance with the guidelines specified in O.P 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement. In order to guarantee this, a Process Framework (conforming to para 7 of OP4.12) acceptable to the Bank has been submitted as a condition of appraisal. This includes, inter alia, provisions to ensure that local people will not be evicted from the parks or restricted in habitual access to them without their consent (except for restrictions on commercial hunting), and that participatory plans with full and informed prior consent will be developed to reduce pressure on resources within the protected areas. This Process Framework will be referred to in the legal documents. The formation of Development Committees (DCs) will provide the means by which they can jointly and voluntarily undertake protection of park resources and find alternatives to the use of any resources to which they currently have access. There is no anticipated action that will result in resettlement or in any further restriction of access to the resources in the existing parks. The management plans to be developed under the project will be in accordance with Bank safeguard policies and will not conitravene any policy requirements. These same plans will define land and resource use zones within the parks and identify the specific measures to be undertaken to ensure sustainable management of the biodiversity resources. Key stakeholders in the formulation of the management plans will include the local communities, CRDAs (park conservators in particular), and NGOs. The development of the management plans will include all the key stakeholders and will constitute an environmental management plan per se. The project team as well as the team responsible for the preparation studies have taken into account all appropriate safeguard policy issues. The key issue in the project is that of legalizing or otherwise recognizing the current occupants of the parks, and in the case of lbil, of recognizing the legitimate users of the park

- 23 - spaces. The Administration is receptive to the idea of inclusion of the park occupants in the process of developing park management plans, but is constrained on the legal front regarding regularizing their status. The challenge of the project wiU be to ensure that participation is truly inclusive and meaningful to the local communities including the current occupants of the park. The Process Framework provides a basis for ensuring this while meeting the requirements under O.P 4.12.

F. Sustalnability and Risks 1. Sustainabillty: Social sustainability: The project design envisages the participation of local communities and other stakeholders in the development and implementation of the park management plans which should ensure . social sustainability. Active participation of NGOs and the potential participation of CDs and GFICs (where applicable) are also envisaged. The Govemment's continuing commitmnent to decentralization wil also contribute to the social sustainability of the project. Financial sustalnability: The continued recurrent cost funding of the park management after the project closes has been assured by the Govemment of Tunisia. The government recognizes that an effective system of protected areas is an essential element of sustainable forest management and have committed to contribute to the baseline costs of the project. The track record of the Government in earlier Bank-financed projects, specifically in the area of natural resources management in this regard has been good. Examples include the Northwest Mountainous Area Development Project, First and Second Forestry Development Projects, the Natural Resources Management Project, and the Agricultural Sector Investment Project However, it is also recognized that current public expenditures on management of the other five national parks wiU be insufficient to develop and maintain the necessary management plans for effective conservation of biodiversity. Discussions during project preparation and pre-appraisal have indicated that the Govemment is wiUing to explore new options to ensure financial sustainability. A detailed study is to be undertaken in this regard to examine options such as allocating a share of the ecotourism revenues to support the management of the three parks in the project, setting up of trust funds for each park with the sponsorship of large public and private sector enterprises etc. Other mechanisms under consideration include a earmarked share of sales revenue of a line of special products from the national parks and earmarking special taxes on lodging and transport in the national parks. The capitalization of the specific financing mechanisms for the thee parks inthe project as well as the other five parks wil be tested in the final years of the project based on the results of the study. The government has carried out a study of ecotourism potential in five national parks (of which two are included in this project) as part of its PATC. The project wiU also finance a more detailed feasibility study on ecotourism in this project to address the issue of financing long-term recurrent costs.

2. Critical Risks (reflecting the failure of critical assumptions found in the fourth column of Annex 1): Risk Risk Rating Risk Mitigation Measure From Outputs to Objective The current institutional framework does M The institutional framework for park not provide the necessary incentives and management is imperfect, centralized, and work environment for park staff and bureaucratic and based on outdated concepts of partners to apply their newly acquired exclusion and control. Institutional reform of skills and use technical/management tools. national parks management is envisioned and will be supported by the project The Tunisian administration can provide, under the right guidance, an environment for adequate

-24 - perfornance and opportunities. The project will provide advisory services and training to facilitate change. The administrations of parks and dams M The Bank is confident that the water cannot agree on a reasonable five -year management authority in the Ministry of rule and calendar for water release; Agriculture, the National Environment Protection Agency (ANPE) and the parks are committed to finding a solution to the fresh water needs of Ichkeul. The project will finance the calibration and fine-tuning of the mathematical model/technical solutions in order to provide a solid scientific basis for the calendar for water releases. The current drought experienced by S Tunisia has expenenced four consecutive years Tunisia continues during the five-year of drought. Beyond the serious impact on project period; agriculture, it also dininishes the water storage of the dams upstream of Lake Ichkeul. If the drought lasts longer, and with the increasing urban needs for water, it may be difficult to justify substantial release into the lake. The drought is also affecting the quality of grazing areas in and around Bou-Hedma & Jbil. Communities who are already poor may find it even more difficult to engage in the project activities and bear its constraints. Should the drought continue, the project will refocus some activities from park management to drought mitigation to ensure that this event does not lead to additional resource off-take in the selected parks. Tourism concessions are not granted on a N The involvement of tourist operators will be competitive and transparent basis that gradual and kept to a relatively low scale. maximizes involvement of communities Concessions that are granted will concem and benefits the communities and the limited activities and will be closely monitored parks. in order to fulfill professional and ethical requirements. Park management activities including new tourism activities are designed to include specific benefits for the parks'populations. Because of important subsistence needs M From social assessments and discussions with that are met by the natural resources of communities, the Bank is reasonably confident the park, local populations do not react that communities are willing to account for positively to the conservation awareness conservation needs. However, many are messages. extremely poor and uneducated and may not be able to either give the attention required to the messages or to modify behavior to account for them. The project will attempt to identify the most vulnerable groups and help them, as a

-25 - priority, with alternative livelihood activities and training. Constraints induced by better management M The project's Process Framework has been and surveillance of the parks which cannot formulated to ensure that populations do not be solved by the project, are not addressed suffer from the added constraint of better park by other development programs. surveillance. However, because the parks are in areas of relatively high poverty, a participatory approach will seek to define mechanisms that can both alleviate poverty and conserve biodiversity Nevertheless, the areas surrounding the parks will need much more development attention than the project can provide. The Bank is confident that the Govemment and other projects (e.g. IFAD) are now increasing their support to these areas to promote overall socio-economic development From Components to Outputs The DGF lacks financial management and M The assessment of the financial and procurement procurement capacity to enable timely management in the project management unit in availability of project services, goods or DGF has identified shortcomings and proposed work and monitoring of expenditures; a plan for capacity building. The Bank will closely supervise this unit to ensure that its performance meets Bank standards. Staff appointed to the UCP, SSEPN and S The Bank's assessment of staff capacity is parks do not possess sufficient time and ambivalent. Among the people likely to be key expertise to fulfill the mission that is project players, many have a solid capacity and requested from them. commitment both to the new park management approach and to plannig for their implementation. Unfortunately, staff quality appears to be highly variable, and appointments often are not based on capacity or past performance records nor congruent with the work load. The Bank has required that a system for monitoring of staff redeployment and performance be set-up. Annual Government budget enables the M The Administration possesses sufficient staff to proposed redeployment of staff; redeploy them to the identified key positions in parks. The Bank will closely supervise these appointments and has required that the DGF present a time-bound plan to fulfill the human resource requirements as defined by the project The park administration and its partners S Poaching by outsiders in desert areas is a succeed in stopping poaching in ibil; serious issue in the Sahara, Sahel and Asian deserts. While the Tunisian administration, park management authorities and local communities are adamant that this practice must be stopped, it may not be easy to achieve. The Bank will ensure that such events are

-26- documented and highlighted in the media through component 3. Current changes being proposed in the Forestry Code may be more effective in controlling these practices in the future. Sociocultural and tenure constraint are not M Land and resources tenure in arid pastoral areas obstacles to the modification of the Jbil are always diffuse and difficult to understand. Park limits. The project will fund aU necessary work to increase this understanding among all stakeholders, including the govemment, and establish bases of mutual understanding. Because the proposed management of the park is participatory and designed to improve the use of pastoral resources and other resource use practices, the Bank is confident that the community wiUl endorse the proposal to re-define the park's boundaries. The initial steps may be taken but not completed during the life of the project because of the time required to redesignate boundaries. Schoolteachers agree to the additional N Past experiences with school teachers in Tunisia workload required to implement the have shown that they are usuaUy very interested conservation awareness program in in broadening the scope of their teaching primary schools. particularly when the subject is related to the environment and when new didactic material is provided. The Bank rates this risk as very low. Overall Risk Rating S Despite the above analysis that ranks most risks as being Low or Moderate, the Bank assessment of implementation capacity (procurement, financial management) and staff performance leads to an overaU risk ranking as substantial. The potential for the continuation of the current drought contributes to this ranking. Still, because this project is viewed by the Govermment as a pilot to a new approach to park management and because the park administration is committed to a legal and institutional reform, it is important that the Bank and GEF remain parlners and help with an instrument that can assist these reforms and test them in the field. Risk Rating - H (High Risk), S (Substantial Risk), M (Modest Risk), N(Negligible or Low Risk) 3. Possible Controversial Aspects: None.

- 27- G. Main Conditions 1. Effectiveness Condition None.

2. Other [classify according to covenant types used in the Legal Agreements.] Covenants

The Recipient shall no later than March 31, 2003, establish and thereafter maintain for each Project National Park in a form and with functions, membership, staffing and resources satisfactory to the Bank a Park Management Team. Each PMT shall be responsible for the planning and programmning of Project activities to the Project National Park

The Recipient shall no later than June 30, 2003, establish and thereafter maintain for each Project National Park in a form and with functions, membership, staffing and resources satisfactory to the Bank a Development Committee.

Accounts and Audits The Government will assure that the annual audit reports, with an opinion on the statements of expenditure used for certain disbursements and on the special account, are sent to the Bank within six months of the end of the fiscal year of the Borrower.

The Recipient will open and manage a Special Account in dollars.

Management Aspects

The Recipient will take all necessary steps to assure that the Project Steering Committee for ovemall management of the project is established and functional no later than October 31, 2002.

The Recipient will take all necessary steps to assure that the Project Management Unit (PMU) is established and functional with the necessary technical and human resources acceptable to the Bank no later than December 31, 2002.

Monitoring, Review and Reporting

The Recipient will prepare and furnish for the Bank's review and comments not later than March 31 and Septemnber 30 in each fiscal year, a report, in a form satisfactory to the Bank, on the progress achieved during the preceding six months in the financial and physical implementation of the project, and on performance and impact indicators.

A mid-term review would take place by June 30, 2005.

- 28- H. Readiness for Implementation

0 1. a) The engineering design documents for the first year's activities are complete and ready for the start of project implementation. Z 1. b) Not applicable.

1 2. The procurement documents for the first year's activities are complete and ready for the start of project implementation. 1 3. The Project Implementation Plan has been appraised and found to be realistic and of satisfactory quality. O 4. The following items are lacking and are discussed under loan conditions (Section G):

A draft for Item 3 has been received and will be finalized at appraisal.

1. Compliance with Bank Policies 3 1. This project complies with all applicable Bank policies. El 2. The following exceptions to Bank policies are recommended for approval. The project complies with all other applicable Bank policies.

Shobha Shetty Team Leader Letitia A. Obeng stian Delvoie ' Sector Manager/Director . untry Manag rlDirector

- 29 - Annex 1: Project Design Summary TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT = Key P1lformance Data ,C4(Wo S-- HI r.hyW,,ObJ9ectIves Indicators . x .- Sector-related CAS Goal:. Sector Indicators: Sectorl country reports: (from Goal to Bank Mission) Consolidating long-term Successful protected area Biodiversity monitoring Continued political support at development through management approaches system all levels for sustainable protection of the environment replicated in other national protected area management and sustainable use of natural parks and reserves in Tunisia and biodiversity conservation; resources. with a resulting improvement in biodiversity conservation. Protecting biodiversity contributes positively to local communities and the national economy. GEF Operational Program: OP 1: Arid and Semi-Arid Zone Ecosysteas (Primary); oP2: Coastal, Marine, and Freshwater Ecosystems Global Objective: Outcome I Impact Project reports: (from Objective to Goal) Indicators: Management and protection GoT continues to implement of biodiversity in three Ichkel policies/programs aimed at selected protected areas (PAs) - 2 stands of Potamogeton are Scientific monitoring; wildlife promoting sustainable in Tunisia results in reestablished in Y5 inventory; vegetation transect; management of protected arresting/reversing trends in - index of land-cover of sirpaies satellite images areas; arretin/reersig tend in increaes by 50% in Y5 aes biodiversity degradation. - average frequency index of Annual reports of conservators geese increases by 20%0 and partner research institutions Public support for biodiversity (comparison of ref. average of (IRA, ANE, etc.) conservation may develop Yrs -1, 0, I to average of Y2, 3 more slowly than the rate that 4) Survey reports consolidated in would have been required to lSou-Hedma the SSEPN (French acronym for support government actions in - Pop. of gazelles dorcas 150 National Park Monitoring and time to avoid permanent ind., mhoor 40 & oryx 150 Evaluation System) damage to Tunisia's distributed in al protected zones of the park by Y6 Progress and supervision biodiversity. - Abundance index of Acacia reports. radiana > 2m increases in Bou-Hedma and its surrounding by Y6 Ibil - Abundance index of sand gazelles and dorcas gazelles increases by 15% in Tbil and its surrounding by Y6

Improved management of the % of population (disaggregated Surveys carried out by a Other partners (Government or three parks contributes to the by gender) convinced of the specialized firm to assess other donors) provide additional improved welfare of the direct and indirect economic public opinion at the support towards economic populations within and interest of the three parks: beginning, middle and end of dalevelPtint and POverty Y3 Y6 alleviation in the vicinity of the

- 30 - around the parks. Direct 10 20 project. three parks since the projecfs Indirect 10 20 potential for poverty alleviation is limited. 15% of park budget is allocated to services rendered by local communities in Y6. Annual reports of park Monetary benefits (DT) conservators (detailing local captured by the local expenditures and receipts of populations (disaggregated by revenues notably from gender) ecotourism) Park Employment Revenues Ichkeul a b Bouhedma c d Jebil e f Percentage of women who: a) belong to the Development Committees; b) play active leadership roles in their organization;

-31 - Key Performance ' Data C4(! I, . ' ' t, r' ' ,1ffle'J chy of QWectlves Indicators ______; ______Output from each Output Indicators: Project reports: (from Outputs to Objective) Component: 1. Institutional 1.I At least 80%/o of the Annual Annual reports; Annual Work The current institutional Strengthening: Work Programs are implemented Programs; Supervision Aide framework provides the necessary Capacity of the administration every year; memoire; Audits incentives and work environment (forestry, environment, for park staff and partners to tourism) and their partners 1.2 Equipment and works are apply their newly acquired skills acquired or contracted according and technical/management tools. (scientific community and to procurement planning in 80%a e local populations) for of cases; biodiversity conservation and protected area management is 1.3 Planning, monitoring and improved at the central, budget control are considered regional,and local levels. satisfactory from Y2 on. 1.4 From Y2 on, the Annual Work Programs and Annual Reports are satisfactory

1.5. High-level park staff, chiefs Monitoring and evaluation of forests "arrondissemenf', reports of training results and conservators of the three parks follow up of trainees; Annual and their deputies master and use report of PMU community planning and communication tools in Y6. 1.6. 500h of members of local communities who have benefited from training are involved in a park management related activity in Y6 1.7. 100% of permanent staff of Research activity reports; the three parks have received publications; Annual reports of training to upgrade their skills partner research institutions; and adapt them to their position. cross verification of above documents with Management Plans, Annual work Programs.

1.8. Results from monitoring and research are used in the Management Plans and in the Annual Work Program design from Y2 on at Bou-Hedma, Ichkeul and Y3 on at Jbil.

1.9. The SSEPN is used in daily Cross verification of SSEPN management of the three parks database with Annual Work from Y3 on. Programs and Annual reports; field supervision; Mission reports from SSEPN cental staff.

2. Protected Areas Management: 2.1. The three parks have Regional plans; Management Before the end of YI, the The national parks of Bou influenced the regional plans for Plan of each park; Minutes of administrations of parks and Hedma, Ichkeul, and Jbil are water, livestock, agriculture, regional consultation meetings. dams agree on a reasonable Hedtermanagched andtably are forestry and tourism. six-year rule and calendar for better managed, suitably water release.

- 32 - integrated in the rural economy Minutes of LDC meetings; cross and contribute to local verification of minutes with The current drought does not development Annual Work Programs. extend over the six-year project period. 22. The participatory process for the Management Plans and Annual Work Programs input by the Local Council for Development LCD (consultation) and Park Management Team (design) are functional from Y2 on. 2.3. % implementation of the Tableaux de bords of planning Project action plan in the three and monitoring of activities; parks: Y3 (50°h) & Y6 (100%) Conservator's annual reports. 2.4. Reduction of illegal activity Reports and datasheet of index in the three parks and monitoring of illegal activities; periphery between Yl and Y6. Conservator's annual reports. Brac .Graz. Circul .Cut - Ichlkeul na 2 na 2 - Bou-H. na 2 na 2 - Tbil 2 na 2 2 2.5. In Y6, at least one tourism Concession contracts; Records of Tourism concessions are granted concession operates satisfactory tour operators, concessionaires; on a competitive and transparent to the CLD and CD on each of independent evaluation of basis that maximizes involvement the three parks. concession in Y6. of communities and benefits the communities and the parks. 2.6. Socio cultural and ecological Sociocultural and ecologic study information required to modify report; minutes of meeting with the limits of the Jbil National stakeholders; "enquete park are available in Y3. commodo-incomnmodo".

2.7. The water management Datasheet; Annual reports of lake program leads to expected results monitoring, minutes of meetings on the physico-chemical with dam authority. parameters of the waters of Lake Ichkeul. 2.8. The IUCN scorecard notation Expert report from scoring in Yl, indicates that all three parks have 3 and 6. improved management -by 5% in Y3 and 10% in Y6.

3. Public Awareness: 3.1. In each of the three parks Terms of Reference and job In spite of important needs for Attitudes and behavioral pattems administration has created descrption; Annual report of P ark resources, peripheral of the administration, local positions of permanent deputies and Conservators; Supervision. populations react positively to the authorities as well as their private onservators in charge of relations conservation awareness messages. and community partners and communication with demonstrate a comrmitment communities and the private towards protecting the countts operators. natural heritage in the three parks. 3.2. % of activities of the Annual Annual reports of CD as annexed Constraints induced by better mgt Work Programs that is entrusted to to the Conservators' Annual and surveillance of the parks, communities: Reports. which cannot be solved by the Y3 Y6 roject, are addressed by other -Ichkeul 10 15 Opinion survey of targeted development programs; -Bou-Hedma 10 15 pulation. -Jbil 5 10

- 33- 3.3. % of the population of parks Summary of scores achieved each Teachers may be reluctant to add and surrounding who is sensitive yea. to their pedagogic to the flagship themes of the three responsibilities;

Jbil Gazelle blanche 25 Bou-L Acacia radiana 25 Ichkeul Water release 25 3A. % of pupils of targeted classes in primary school of the tr parks having achieved a 700 score to a test on the park and its value: Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 40 50 60 65 70 70

-34 - .Key*pbrfofmance k)*wo,= HierarChy of ObJectIivs Indicators - __ , .,.. r_____ Project Components / Inputs: (budget for each Project reports: (from Components to Sub-components: component) Outputs) 1. Capacity building and U.S $ 2.02 million 5-year budget plan updated on a The DGF financial _mgement institutional strengthening (GEF: $1.55 million) yearly basis; Annual Work and procurement capacity is 1.1 Organizational Program of the PMU; Financial sufficiently conpetent to enable development reports; Audit report timely availbility of project 1.2 Interpretive and education servces, goods or work and capacity monitoring of expenditur 1.3 Training Annual report of the PMU; Staff appointed to the UCP and 1.4 Research and monitoring TORs; Contract monitoring, SSEPN posses sufficient time programs Monitoring of conventions and and expertdse to fulfill the 1.5 Institutional strengthening MoU; Training modules, scornng mission that is demanded of equipment and reports; publications; them. 1.6 Policy studies monitornng manuals. 1.7 Project Coordination Unit 2. National parks: U.S $ 7.18 million Annual reports of the The proposed redeployment of management of the three (GEF: $3.25 million) Conservator, Management Plans; personnel to meet project needs parks Field visit (supervision); Contract is effected. 2.1 Park management monitoring, Minutes of important planning meetings; Minutes of work Staff appointed to the parks 2.2 Equipment and small civil reception. possess sufficient time and worksEquipment and smaHworks civfexpertise ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~thatis mresteedto fulfill from the them.mission 2.3 Ecological, socioeconomic surveys The park administration and its partners succeed in stopping poaching by people originating outside the lbil region. Sociocultural and tenure constraints are not obstacles to the modification of the lbil Park boundaries. 3. Public awareness and U.S $ 0.68 million Annual reports of the PMU; Annual Govemment budget education (GEF: 0.53 million) Supeavision; Contract enable the proposed recruitment 3.1 Development of monitoring; Education material or affectation. educational packages (posters, etc.) Minutes of work 3.2 Development of media achievement (e.g. eco museum in Staff appointed to the UCP programs promoting Douz). possess sufficient time and p.ograms promoting expertise to fulfill the mission biodiversity conservation that is demanded of them. 3.3 Outreach and education programs for local Schoolteachers agree to the communities additional workload required to implement the conservation awareness progranm in primary schools.

-35 - Monitoring and Evaluation Plan:

Monitoring of the project will be divided into two: (a) scientific monitoring and evaluation, based on the agreed-on biological indicators and the analysis of the effects of management measures used by the project on the biodiversity; and (b) monitoring of project physical and financial implementation taking into account project progress.

M&E will be carried out by the PMU with technical backstopping provided by the deputy coordinator from MEAT. In line with guidance received from the STAP reviewer, a specific and simple monitoring mechanism would be prepared in order to allow the personnel to know when and what to measure, to take maximum advantage of patrols, and to guarantee a systematic data collection. The design will include the selection of indicators to evaluate communities, animal and plant populations and other processes identified as priority within the national parks. The design would consider the evaluation of monitoring activities and the suitability of indicators, in order to make improvements in the mechanism. Guidelines suggested by the STAP review will be followed.

At the local level, because of the diverse nature of the stakeholders, clauses will be introduced in the contracts/conventions with the local Development Committees (CDs). The CDs will be responsible for updating the PMTs on the progress of their community development plans in order to receive necessary funds. The community development facilitators (animateurs) will assist in the collection and validation of the data. The CRDAs will furnish quarterly progress reports to the PMU which will then consolidate the individual reports. The reports will be prepared every six months and would include the physical and financial progress. The outcome and impact indicators will furnished on an annual basis. The project will have an in-depth mid-term review. The review would assess progress and redesign project elements as necessary.

- 36 - Annex 2: Detailed Project Description TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT By Component: Project Component 1 - US$2.02 million Instituffonal strengthening: The objective of this component will be to reinforce the institutional capacity of the Directorate General of Forestry (Ministry of Agriculture), the CRDAs, the Ministry of Enviromnent and Landuse Planning (MELP) and their regional directorate, and other partners in sustainable protected areas management This component will support the following: (i) support for the Project Management Unit; (ii) training; (iii) research studies; and (iv) establishment of a scientific monitoring and evaluation (M&E) information system for the national parks. (i) Project management: The project will support the strengthening of the Project Management Unit in the DGF through technical assistance for assuring the monitoring and supervision of the project. This will include recruitment of specialized M&E consultants, and eq!upment and software necessary for financial management This sub-component would also include support for the mid-term review in the third year of project implementation. (ii) laigggL.The traing programs would focus on the personnel responsible for the day-to-day management of the park as well as staff in the relevant Ministries and their partners who are involved in the administron of the parks. This sub-component would be critical in assuring the smooth implementation of the project since the current staff do not possess the necessary capacities in order to carry out all the functions pertaining to protected areas management. Specifically, the emphasis on the participatory approach in this project demands relatively new skills of the DGF personnel who have been used to a more classic "command and control" approach. The program also envisages the training of people outside the admunistration who are, nevertheless, closely involved in the management of protected areas in the country such as local associations, tourism operators etc. It is estimated that around 100 persons will be trained in this regard. The program would also support the recruitment of a specialized training consultant who will provide the necessary trainers (national and international) to carry out the proposed program. The program will include the following: (a) on-the-job training This would include 5 modules, each module organized around several thematic sessions including management of a GEF/World Bank project; conservation management; environmental education; improving public awareness of the importance of the environment/biodiversity centered around the flagship species/themes identified in each park (Gazelle blanche for Jbil; Acacia radiana for Bouhedma, and the theme of water resources management in Ichkeul); (b) training of trainers: It is proposed to create a "pole" of 5 students specializing in conservation management who would benefit from more detailed instruction through 13 weeks of in-depth training abroad and in Tunisia. This will be done through a contract with an appropriate training institution; (c) Diploma training- Currently, Tunisia lacks specialists trained in the scientific domains related to biodiversity conservation and management The project would support scholarships for graduate students desiring to specialize in disciplines pertaining to ecology and biodiversity conservation. Four scholarships are envisaged: Mediternanean ecology, flora and fauna of ecosystems, Tunisian biodiversity, and socio-economic community development (iii) Research Studies: The project will support four baseline studies common to all three parks pertaining to: (i) monitoring the dynamics of vegetation in the parks and the establishment of phytoecological maps; (ii) preparation of an inventory and monitoring of reptile populations; (iii) Inventory and monitoring of bird populations; and (iv) inventory and monitoring of the mammal populations. In addition, this sub-component will support specific research studies in each park. For Ichkeul, the project will support the research into

-37 - the mathematical modelling governing the water resources management aspects of the lake. The long-term viability of the lake depends entirely on the execution of a well-conceived, scientifically justified plan for the releases of water into the lake that takes into account existing (old and new) dams upstream of the lake. The mathematical model developed in 1995 by BCEOM needs to be updated and improved to take into account current physical realities and needs to be calibrated (with experimental releases of water) to be able to serve as a genuine management tool. The project would support this research modeling exercise so that the park management would thus have a convincing protocol (based on solid scientific data that have been tested) to present to the authorities managing the dams upstream (DGBGTH) in the Ministry of Agriculture who can then integrate the ecological needs of the lake in the overall plan for water resources management in northem Tunisia (Plan Directeur de l'Eau du Nord). The project would also support the research activities on the biological and physical parameters of the lake to strengthen the capacity of the National Environmental Protection Agency (ANPE) to carry out its scientific monitoring and surveillance activities. For Bouhedma, the project envisages two research studies - the first on the ecology and dynamics of the acacia radiana and the second on the ecology of the parasitic insects that prey on the acacia. In Jbil, the research studies will focus on the biology and ecology of the sand gazelle, and the ecology and behavior of the houbara bustard. (iv) M&E Information System: The project will support the establishment of a system of M&E of National Parks (Systeme de Suivi Evaluation des Parcs Nationaux - SSEPN). This will be lodged in the department of national parks in the Director General of Forestry (DGF). The SSEPN will build on the existing results and data from the database for forestry planning (Systeme dInfornation pour la Planification Forestiere - SIPF) which is currently in operation in the DGF. A team of three technicians will be assigned to the SSEPN and will be trained to serve the project's M&E needs, benefitting from the experience of the existing SIPF team and some of its equipment A node will also be established in each park and in the Ministry of Environment. The training of the technicians and the park conservators will focus on using the SSEPN as a management tool. The basic spatial data are already available for Bouhedma and Jbil at the Directorate General of Land Use Planming (DGLP) prepared by the National Center of Tele-detection and the data from the project SAIDE using the "Corinne" nomenclature. Ichkeul will benefit from the acquisition of orthophotos (1/25,000) under the SIPF. Additional data will be obtained as required during project implementation. A specialized consulting firm will be recruited for the design and implementation of the system as well as the training of the ultimate users. The SSEPN will utilize the Corinne nomenclature (project SAIDE) which is in the process of being adopted at the national level in the framework of the GEONAT project (updating of the national maps project).

Project Component 2 - US$7.18 million Protected Areas Management: The objective of this component would be: (i) manage and restore the ecosystems in the three national parks to protect the globally important flora and fauna; (ii) assist in the development of ecotourism activities; and (iii) establish, with the local populations, community development plans compatible with the objectives of sustainable biodiversity conservation. The tree parks (out of 8) chosen include Ichkeul, Bouhedma, and lbil. These three parks cover unique and distinctly different ecosystems - wetland, arid-mountain/pseudo savanna, and desert respectively. Overall, there exists no management plan for any of the three parks. The management is ad hoc and does not systematically take into account the needs and input of the local communities who live in and around the parks. In all the three parks, the key professional manager is the park conservator with the majority of the remaining personnel being workers and/or temporary labor. The project envisages strengthening the technical and management capacity in the parks with a view to efficient implementation of the eventual management plans. For the park of Ichkeul, the management plan would be based on the extensive work already carried out under a KfW financed study (1993-95) which came up with several recommendations for the management of the park, especially the water resources management

-38 - aspects. The components under the community development for each of the parks are detailed in the social assessment are presented in Annex 12. Ichkeul NJP: The Ichkeul N.P is divided into three physiographic units - the lake (89 sq. km), the wetlands/marshes (30 sq. kIn), and the mountain (14 sq. kIn). The existing zonation comprises two foci reflecting the different natural milieux - the mountain and the wetlands forming one zone and the lake the other. The management objective in the first zone is the conservation of natural resources. In the second zone, the objective is the sustainable management of the lake especially the fisheries resources. Currently, the fishery is the lake is under the exclusive operation of a private firm under a 30-year concession. The zonation proposed has been adopted from the recommendations of the KfW-financed study. Currently, the park is under the responsability of a park conservator at the engineer-level who is under the supervision of the head of the Forestry Section of the CRDA (Chef d'Arrondissement Forestier). The conservator is assisted by seven workers (ouvriers) who have a very basic level of education. The park also has a cellule managed by the ANPE which is located in the welcome center. The ANPE team is multidisciplinary comprising three professional staff and one technician. This team will be reinforced by a two engineers (one from ANPE and one from DGBGTH) who will be responsible for the calibrating and updating of the mathematical model that was financed under the KfW study in 1993-95. The rest of the team is concerned with the monitoring of the quality of the lake. The current management of the park is ad hoc and draws on some recommendations of the Kfw-financed study but are restricted to purely technical aspects. There is no significant, coherent management plan that takes integrates the socio-economic development of the local communities in the management of the park. The park has a manned entry gate, a welcome center, and an ecomuseum. The park also has running water and electricity in the administrative buildings. There is a paved road that leads to the ecomuseum but visitors are not permitted to use this. The Tinja sluice regulates the flow of water between the lake Ichkeul and lake Bizerte and controls the salinity. Mechanization of this sluice is envisaged under the project There are two 4X4 vehicles one of which is equipped with a radio unit. The workers also have 4 motorcycles and 7 horses. The park however does not have a telephone, the material in the ecomuseum is outdated, and the laboratory is under-equipped. Ichkeul is Tunisia's best-known national park and has about 50,000 visitors per year, mainly due to its proximity to the capital, Tunis. However, the socioeconomic development upstream has posed a serious threat to the health of the Lake Ichkeul ecosystem. As a result, the park was included in the Ramsar's Convention Montreux Record ("Record of Ramsar sites where changes in ecological character have occurred, are occurring, or are likely to occur") thus indicating the great threat to which the wetland is exposed The project would support the updating and calibration of the Kfw-financed mathematical model for the management of the lake using test releases of freshwater in order to establish a scientific basis and calendar for the releases of freshwater necessary for maintaining the health of the lake's ecosystem. This component would support the park management with the necessary infrastructural improvements (buildings, improvements in trails/routes in the park), equipment, vehicles, and the development of a participatory approach to include the local populations in the management plan of the park. A local PMT which would include the local authorities, the park administration and representatives of the communities would be established. The project also envisages the recruitment of an "animateur" to facilitate and strengthen all community development activities. Under the management and restoration of ecosystems. four programs will be financed: the first involves technical assistance for the direct management of the park including the training and equipment of 10 eco-guards, elaboration of a program of internal planning and regulation, with zoning and sector aspects. The latter would be carried out in the field with the participation of the population living in and around the park. A preliminary public awareness campaign is envisaged in order to sensitize the local populations. The process of formalization of the development committee into a legally recognized AFIC has already started with the majority of the residents of the park already being members. It is expected that it will be legalized by early 2002 (Details in Annex 12). The second program

-39 - pertains to the rehabilitation of the lake's ecosystem. This would include establishment of a permanent monitoring system to monitor the additional flows of fresh water into the lake; mechanization of the existing sluice which governs the flow of water between the lakes of Ichkeul and Bizerte; maps and bathymetric control, dredging; and an observatory for monitoring fish production. The third program would address the rehabilitation of the marshes, and the fourth program would address the vegetation of the mountain (jebel) ecosystem. Based on the KfW study, the following activities under the rehabilitation of the marshes over the course of the project implementation period. closures around the areas of Ghezala and El Melah and a review of the closure option for Joumine; completion of the "tabia" on the Joumine; evaluate the potential surface and groundwater resources that can be mobilized for the inundation of the wetlands and establishment of a hydraulic management plan specifically for the wetlands; decontamination of the effluents of the wastewater which get dumped into the watershed of the lake; substitution of the practice of "elevage sauvage" by providing alternative sources of revenue for the park habitants; and carrying out scientific monitoring of the reconstitution of the habitats and the resulting changes in frequentation by the bird populations. Bouhedma N.P: This park covers the govemorates of Sidi Bouzid (11,000 ha) and Gafsa (5500 ha). The northern boundary of the park is the mountain (jebel) of Bouhedma and there are several zones: 3 core protected areas, 3 buffer zones, and 2 zones of "temporary occupation". Officially, there are about 2500 habitants in the park who live in the latter two zones. Insofar as the existing human resource capacity is concerned, the only professional staff is the conservator, the majority of the other personnel (between 60-120 people) being daily labor recruited from the park population or the area surrounding the park.

Current infrastructure in the park (Bordj Bouhedma) includes a depot, an administrative office, lodging for the conservator, the ecomuseum, and basic accommodation for about 12 persons. The Bordj is not equipped with communication facilities or electricity but has running water. Several enclosures have been constructed between 1984-90 to house the animals introduced in this habitat There is one 4x4 and three (ancient) tractors as well as four motorcycles. A project in the 1980s with GTZ assistance resulted in a plan in 1986 which however, is far from a management plan per se. The focus of the plan is essentially on soil and water conservation measures, and does not take into account the complete boundaries of the park, the conservation objectives in the short, medium, and long-term, a coherent strategy for the utilization of the park spaces, the expected outcomes and the identification of suitable monitoring and evaluation mechanisms and indicators. As in Ichkeul, this component would support necessary infirasructural improvements (buildings, improvements in trails/routes in the park), equipment, vehicles, and the development of a participatory approach to include the local populations in the management plan of the park. The project would also finance the construction of lodgings for the park agents, an entry post with a deep well; improvement in the capacities of the CRDA (Sidi Bouzid) that would house the local GIS. As with Ichkeul, a local PMT which would include the local authorities, the park administration and representatives of the communities would be established. Under the management and restoration of ecosystems four programs will be financed the first will include support for the direct management of the park including the financing of a motorized corps of ecoguards (6), and elaboration of a program of internal planning and regulation, with zoning and sectoral aspects. The second program would address the rehabilitation of the Acacia raddiana pseudo-savanah. The third would focus on the improvement of the protection of the wild animals in the park and lastly, this component would support the potential for reintroduction of large animals in close collaboration with the proposed French GEF regional project on the reintroduction of the sahelo-saharien antelopes in accordance with the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS/Bonn Convention). The project would also support the transfer of addax to a more suitable park (like Jbil) and the sale of the ostriches which are not currently in their natural milieu.

-40- Jbil N.P: This is the largest and most recent of the three national parks. Very little has been done to actually "manage" the park thus far. There is one conservator who is based in the CRDA of Kebili but who does not have regular access to means of transport that would enable him to carry out his functions, in however limited a manner. There are also five guards who are also limited in their capacity to carry out any control due to lack of communication facilities with the exterior. Unlike the other two parks, there is no ecomuseum or welcome center in this park. The sole infrastrcture that exists is an entry gate at one of the boundaries of the park In order to accomodate the transhumance and right of passage for the nomad population, the project envisages the eventual revision of the existing boundaries of the park. This component would support the CRDA of Kebili with necessary infrastructure, vehicles, and equipment for managing the work at the field level, and the development of a participatory approach to include the local populations that are customary users of the park space, and other stakeholders in the management plan of the park. For improved logistics, a base would be established at the port of entry in the north of the park with the necessary lodgings, offices, deep wells, and fuelling station. As with the other two parks, a local PMT which would include the local authorities, the park administration and representatives of the communities would be established. In addition to the programs for the direct support for the management of the park per se, this component would also include a program for the protection of the Gazella leptocero and Gazella dorcas, protection of the vegetative cover of the Grand Erg, and the reintroduction of large animals in close collaboration with the proposed FFEM regional project on the reintroduction of the sahelian antelopes. The project also envisages the revision of the boundaries of the park with a view to extending its limits. The project will work in close coordination with other relevant development activities planned for the region. The Action Plan for the park has identified illegal hunting (by the habitants of the nearby towns like Douz as well as foreigners) as one of the root causes for the loss of animal biodiversity in the park- Thanks to the recent political commitment at the highest levels, measures will be taken by the CRDA and the DGF to enforce the ban on illegal hunting. With a view to improve public awareness and change behavioral patterns among the local communities, the project would also support the construction of an eco-museum at Douz that will focus on the intertwined concepts of the local culture and the desert as a unique environment

Project Component 3 - US$ 0.68 mililon Public Awareness: This component would aim to build public support for biodiversity conservation at the local/park level and governorate level. Action plans will target priority groups including local communities, local/regional governments, site visitors, and local school children to raise the awareness of specific stakeholder groups about the importance of, and opportunities for, biodiversity conservation within the three parks. Possible delivery mechanisms include mass media, formal and informal education, and development of linkages with local NGOs, schools, tourism agencies, and other organizations to promote public understanding about biodiversity resources. For each of the parks, flagship species/themes (espece phare) have been identified that will form the nucleus of all public awareness campaigns as well as research, monitoring and conservation activities. These would be the Accacia raddiana,and the white gazelle (Gazelle leptoceros) for the parks of Bouhedma and Jbil respectively and the theme of water resources management for the case of Ichkeul. Activities will be developed at the local/community level around these key species/themes in order to develop the grassroots awareness necessary to sustain long-term biodiversity conservation. Activities will be developed at the local/community level in order to develop the grassroots awareness necessary to sustain long-term biodiversity conservation.

-41 - Annex 3: Estimated Project Costs TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT

Projeot 'Q(tBy Coi1p.oiet .E l $hiIiBb UQS'$llion Institutional Strengthening 1.24 0.57 1.81 Protected Areas Mnagement 5.59 0.80 6.39 Public awareness and education 0.37 0.23 0.60 Total Baseline Cost 7.20 1.60 8.80 Physical Contingencies 0.35 0.07 0.42 Price ContingencIes 0.59 0.07 0.66 Total Project Costs1 8.14 1.74 9.88 Total Financing Required 8.14 1.74 9.88

ProJect,Cos4By Category u I 'J1£j I) l ol. 2 ust$,m4ikw) Goods 0.86 0.59 1.45 Works 1.95 0.00 1.95 Servlces 1.31 0.75 2.06 Training 0.46 0.26 0.72 Community works 0.80 0.00 0.80 Incremental operating costs 1.82 0.00 1.82 Contingencies 0.94 0.14 1.08 Total Project Costs1 8.14 1.74 9.88 Total Financing Required 8.14 1.74 9.88

Identfiable taxea and dutie are 0 (USSrm) and e total projed coa n of taxes, Is 9.88 (USSm). Thebacf the project cost sharing ratio is 53.96% of total prject coost net ofte

-42 - Annex 4 Incremental Costs and Global Environment Benefits

TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT Overview

1. The objective of the GEF Altemative is to strengthen the national system of protected areas in Tunisia and promote sustainable conservation management, with increased participation of local populations, within the ecosystems of the project-supported areas. The project supports, thmugh relevant project outputs, Articles 6, 8, 11, and 13 of the Convention on Biological Diversity, ratified by Tunisia on May 3, 1995. Article 6: General Measures for Conservation and Sustainable Use; Article 8: In-situ Conservation; Article 11: Incentive Measures; Article 13: Public Education and Awareness. Specific project components include: (a) capacity building and institutional strengthening; (b) development of management plans in three national parks; and (c) public awareness and education. The GEF Altemative intends to achieve these outputs at a total incremental cost of US$ 5.49 miUion. The proposed project should be viewed as complementary to existing activities in Tunisia.

Baseline Scenario

2. Tunisia accords a high significance to biodiversity conservation and sustainable uses in its development effort There is a strong political commitment towards enhanced conservation efforts and its successful integration into a wider economic, social and cultural context The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan were developed in a very participatory manner under a Biodiversity Enabling Activity (GEF-funded, the World Bank being the Implementing Agency) and were adopted by the Government in 1998. However, thus far, the recommendations and priorities outlined in the Action Plan have not yet been concretized. Management plans for the national parks are either non-existent, minimal, or ad hoc. The management activities that do exist in some parks tend to be top-down, with the exception of the plans recently developed for the parks of Chaambi and Feidja. The Government is also in the process of diversifying its tourism strategy to include nature and cultural tourism. In this regard, two of the three national parks in this project (Ichkeul and Bouhedma) wil benefit from improvements in nfisucure around and within the parks, equipment for the ecomuseums, training etc. The hunman resource capacity to manage the parks will continue to remain linited. Protected area management initiatives will continue to be ad hoc and sporadic, lacking an overaU coherent strategy and vision. The recommendations of the recent Presidential Commission on National Parks Management represent a significant advance, but in the absence of their operationalization, wil remain in the realm of theory. The regional French GEF project on the reintroduction of the Sahelian antelopes will target the parks of Bouhedma and Jbil, but will be restricted to the specific technical activities related to the reintroduction of the species. In the absence of the GEF funding, it is unlikely that the protection of biodiversity of global importance can be achieved. The estimated costs of the baseline are: (i) GOT funding of salaries and routine management activities ($2.lm) in the three parks; (ii) UNDP funding of public awareness and institutional strengthening in relation to the Feidja National Park project ($280,000); (iii) the regional project (French GEF/GOT) on reintroduction of sahelian antelopes in Bou Hedma and Jbil National Parks ($148,000); (iv) GOT's development of tourism-related activities in 2 of the 3 national parks ($2.1 million), Bouhedma and Ichkeul; and (v) limited number of training, capacity building, and environmental education activities ($43,100). The total estimated baseline is $4,671,100.

3. Implementation of the Baseline Scenario will result in limited protection of biodiversity, increased domestic environmental benefits related to forest and natural resource management as well as soil conservation, increased participation in conservation, and some improvement in protecting coastal areas in

-43 - Tunisia's protected areas. Development of ecotourism will result in improved infrastructure facilities but in the absence of clear management plans, there is also the risk of increased destruction of existing biodiversity. Progress will be made in achieving broader development goals related to strengthening environmental management and improved social and rural development As a consequence of the current course of action, Tunisia's protected areas will likely continue to be managed in an ad hoc manner, without the participation of the local populations in a systematic and meaningful manner. Poorly-managed recreational uses may degrade the biodiversity in the national parks and reserves. The long-term implications of these activities includes the steady loss of globally significant biodiversity over the next two decades.

GEF Alternative

4. The GEF Alternative would build on the Baseline Scenario by protecting three representative major ecosystems; conserving threatened remnant ecosystems and species; providing opportunities for local populations in and around protected areas; increasing public awareness about biodiversity conservation; and supporting participatory approaches to sustainable natural resource conservation. Implementation of the GEF Alternative would make possible activities and programs that would not have been possible under the Baseline Scenario. For instance, the proposed project will fill one of the key gaps in protected areas management in Tunisia through the introduction of management plans that are technically sound and have the buy-in of local populations. Scientific research activities promoting biodiversity conservation through monitoring and evaluating the status and distribution of species and of ecosystems will be supported under the GEF Alternative. While both the Baseline Scenario and the GEF Alternative support biodiversity conservation in Tunisia's national parks, with both domestic and international benefits, only the latter option would ensure long-term conservation and sustainable utilization through strengthened on-site management, outrewh to and involvement of local communities and local govemments, and development of viable approaches to sustainable natural resource use in national and natural parks. One of the three project sites, Ichkeul National Park was, in 1990 included in the Ramnsar's Convention Montreux Record ("Record of Ramsar sites where changes in ecological character have occurred, are occurring, or are likely to occur") thus indicating the great threat to which the wetland is exposed. The GEF alternative would support the updating and calibration of the mathematical model for the management of the lake (financed by KfW, 1993-95) using test releases of freshwater in order to establish a scientific basis and calendar for the releases of freshwater necessary for maintaining the health of the lake's ecosystem. With management and conservation measures based on a long-term plan, greater public commitment to conserving the areas and the creation of institutional and participatory mechanisms supported under the project, the GEF Alternative would produce the institutional, social, and economic framework required to restore and conserve over the long-run, the biodiversity in the three pilot areas, thereby generating significant biodiversity benefits within these three globally significant ecosystems.

- 44 - 5. The total cost of the GEF Alternative is estimated at US$ 9.88 million, as presented in the summary table. The difference between the cost of the Baseline Scenario (US$ 4.67 million) and the cost of the GEF Alternative (US$ 9.88 million) is estimated at US$ 5.49 million of which the GEF contribution is US$5.33 million.

Table 1:NCREMENTAL COST SUMTMARY (2002-2008) N $US

Component Baseline Alternativ Incremental Cost e GEF Other Sources Total 1. Institutional 616,900 2,021,000 1,540,000 1,540,000 strengthening 2. Protected 3,768,400 7,179,500 3,250,000 155,200 3,405,200 Areas Management 3. Public 285,800 677,500 540,000 540,000 awareness Total 4,671,100 9,878,000 5,330,000 155,200 5,485,200

-45- Annex 5: Financial Summary TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT Years Ending In US$'000

|Year I I Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 1 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Total Financing Required ProJect Costs Investment Costs 1163.9 3202.2 1427.6 792.7 720.5 461.4 0.0 Recurrent Costs 231.6 270.4 352.2 381.9 430.3 443.3 Total Project Costs 1395.5 3472.6 1779.8 1174.6 1150.8 904.7 0.0 .Total Financing 1395.5 3472.6 1779.8 1174.6 1150.8 904.7 0.0 Financing IBRDIIDA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Govemment 925.5 1946.1 165.4 308.4 583.4 480.7 0.0 Central 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Provincial 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Co-flnanclersGEF 452.3 1470.0 1547.9 820.6 512.2 526.6 User Fees/Beneflciarles 0.0 20.5 41.6 32.7 23.6 36.8 Other 17.8 36.0 24.9 12.9 31.5 25.3 0.0 Total Project Financing 1395.6 3472.6 1779.8 1174.6 1150.7 1069.4 0.0 Other 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Main assumptions:

- 46 - Annex 6: Procurement and Disbursement Arrangements TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT

Procurement

Procurenent responsibilities: To ensure smooth implemnentation, the Project Management Unit (PMU) at the DGF in the Ministry of Agriculture will have overall responsibilities for coordination of procurement activities under the project. The PMU has acquired experience in dealing with Bank-financed procurement under the previous Forestry projects but this capacity will be reinforced under this project. The National Project Coordinator will coordinate procurement activities through the PMTs and the Regional Comninssariats for Agricultural Development (CRDAs) who will be responsible for launching their own bids and supervising their projects. The DGF and the Ministry of Environment and Landuse Planning will be responsible for preparing the bidding documents at the national level.

Overall, the Bank is satisfied that the local procurement procedures are acceptable. Although the Tunisian legislation is in line with Bank Guidelines, certain rules and procedures however, are not acceptable to the Bank. These issues mainly concem the use of two envelopes in bidding for works and goods, and open competitive bidding for huing consultants. Under tis project, the Bank's procurement procedures will take precedence and this will be specified in the grant agreement The Bank carried out an assessment of the procurement capacity of the implementing agency and has judged that the overall risk is low.

Procurement methods (Table A)

Procurement of goods and works will be done in accordance with the World Bank's guidelines: Procurement under EBRD Loans and IDA Credits, issued in January 1995 and revised in September 1997 and January 1999. Consulting services, technical assistance and tuining financed under the grant will be procured in accordance with the Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers, issues in January 1997 and revised in January 1999. The draft procurement plan for the first year is attached as an Excel file below:

-47 - Table A: Project Costs by Procurement Arrangements (US$ million equivalent)

'Procuremerit. MOtUd Expenditu'rie Category ICB NCB O"Or 411.F. ' oit'

1. Works 0.00 1.40' 0.00 0.79 2.19 (0.00) (0.76) (0.00) (0.00) (0.76) 2. Goods 0.32 1.15 0.09 0.00 1.56 (0.22) (0.87) (0.07) (0.00) (1.16) 3. Services 0.00 0.00 2.29 0.00 2.29 Consultants (0.00) (0.00) (2.05) (0.00) (2.05) 4. Training 0.00. 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.74) (0.74) 5. Community works 0.00 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.92 (0.00) (0.00) (0.62) (0.00) (0.62) 6. Recurrent costs 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.11 2.11 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) Total 0.32 2.55 3.30 3.71 9.88 (0.22) (1.63) (2.74) (0.74) (5.33) "Figures in parenthesis are the amounts to be financed by the Bank Grant All costs include contingencies. 2 1Includes civil works and goods to be procured through national shopping, consulting services, services of contracted staff of the project management office, training, technical assistance services, and incremental operating costs related to (i) managing the project, and (ii) re-lending project funds to local government units. 3/ Direct contracting for community works only.

-48 - -Tableau procurement lere annee.xis Table Al: Consultant Selection Arrangements (optional) (US$ million equivalent)

Consultant Servlces .6 E*peiidftureCateUaW , QCBS ; 0 SF5 ____ . A. FIrms 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) B. Individuals 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) 1\ Including contingencies

Note: QCBS = Quality- and Cost-Based Selection QBS = Quality-based Selection SFB = Selection under a Fixed Budget LCS = Least-Cost Selection CQ = Selecton Based on Consultants' Qualificatons Other = Selection of individual consultants (per Section V of Consultants Guidelines), Commercial Practices, etc. N.B.F. = Not Bank-financed Figures In parenthesis are the amounts to be financed by the Bank Grant.

-49 - Prilor revlew thresholds (Table B) Works contracts equal or above a threshold of $500,000 equivalent, contracts for goods equal to or US$400,000, and consultant contracts equal to or above the equivalent of US$100,000 for firms and US$50,000 for individuals would be subject to the Banles prior review. However, no civil works above the $500,000 tbreshold are expected to be financed under the project. The review process would cover about 20 percent of the total contract amounts. This percentage is low essentially due to the small number of small civil works contracts, and is deemed acceptable given the satisfactoxy procurement of the same implementing agencies under other Bank projects and the acceptability to the Bank of National competitive Bidding procedures. For other procurement, the Borrower shall furnish all information and documentation that the Bank may reasonably request, prior to the submission of the related withdrawal application. Table B: Thresholds for Procurement Methods and Prior Review'

ContradtVaiue :, Threshold. . , ; openditum,CCategory (US$thousands) i " iM*to., ., (O*# i.1 . 1. Works >-30,000 NCB n.a <30,000 Local Shopping n.a 2. Goods >-400 ICB All contracts <400 and >=30,000 NCB No prior review <30,000 Local Shopping n.a 3. ServicesFimis >=100 QCBS All contracts <100 QCBS None (post-review)

Individuals >50 Consultant Guidelines TORs, SL, TORs contract <50 Consultant Guidelines TORs only 4. Miscellaneous _ 5. Miscellaneous 6. Miscellaneous

Total value of contracts subject to prior review: $2.0 million

Overall Procurement Risk Assessment

Low

Frequency of procurement supervision missions proposed: One every 12 months (includes special procurement supavision for post-review/audits)

Thresholds generally differ by country and project. Consult OD 11.04 "Review of Procurement Documentation" and contact the Regional Procurement Adviser for guidance.

-50- Disbursement

Allocation of grant proceeds (Table C) Allocation of Grant proceeds by disbursement category and percentages financed by the Grant are presented in Table C below: Table C: Allocation of Grant Proceeds

Expenditure Category Amou-nt.lnIvsS$htllI^.v} f h8s 1.Works 1.38 600% 2. Goods 1.16 1000/%of foreign expenditures; 100% of local expenditures (ex-factory), and 80% of local expenditures for items prcued locally 3. Consultant services and ttuining 2.79 Local 960% International 88% Total Project Costs 5.33 Total 5.33

-51 - Flnanclal Management

General Framework The Financial Management System (FMS) in place at the MOA, implementing agency for the project, is based on principles and procedures defined by the legal framework applicable to the pubic sector and more specifically to governmental institutions. The main characteristics of this system are the following:

Accounting svste' An accounting system based on the cash basis and the outline of budget components is operational and reflected on legal books according to the regulation described in the Code of Public Accounting. The public accounting system is computerized The application called ADAB allows to reflect the initial budget allocation by line Ministry and budget components as well as amounts committed and disbursed as the implementation is going forward during the fiscal year.

Budgeting system. Based on the programs and actions to be undertaken, the MOA issues an annual budget for commitments. The annual budget is submitted for approval to the Ministry of Finance (MF), structure in charge of a close control through its specialized units. In terms of sources of funds, the general budget includes the GOT's contribution as well as funds allocated by different donors for the implementation of specific projects. The accounting system ADAB is used by all the technical Ministries at the central level to commit expenditures and to ensure that all the expenditures are done according to the agreed allocations as reflected in the annual "loi de finances".

National Disbursements Procedures. These are the following:

At the central level. The budget execution is subject to authorization for payment on a transaction level. This specific authorization process aims at ensuring that the expense to be paid has been budgeted, and to issue the official instruction to release the funds by the 'Tr6sorerie Generale".

At the regional level. The payments are still made through the governmental budget however the procedures of payments are decentralized 'and executed by the regional entities. Based on the authorization of paymnents, the Tr6sorerie G6n&rale (TG) transfers the needed funds to the regional entities on a quarterly basis. The funds are released subject to the presentation of detailed reports on the use of funds and forecasts. Project financed by International donors. With regards to projects that are financed through the Ministry of International Cooperation, payments for foreign exchange are for the most part, centralized for the eligible portion. The mechanism in place involves four parties with the following specific roles: (i) the regional entities, such as CRDA are responsible for implementation and issuing of the applications for withdrawal, (ii) technical departments such as DGF, at the central level are responsible for reviewing the technical aspects, compliance with law and procedures, and consistency of the supporting documentation, (iii) the project coordinator, through the designated financial unit, is responsible for the review of the eligibility of the expenditures and submission of request to the Bank (e.g. direct payments) or to the Central Bank of Tunisia (e.g. SOEs), for the release of the funds; and (iv) the Central Bank of Tunisia (BCT) which plays the role of manager of the special account, is acting as MOF representative, and play an important role of control of eligibility and compliance with legal and project documents. BCT is responsible for the replenishment of the Special account.

Control of the budget expenditures. A fiduciary responsibility of control of public expenditures is assigned to MOF through a specialized audit department "Contr6le General des Finances" (CGF) and to the Audit Court (Cour des Comptes) that has a judiciary role of supervision of public finance and the authority to

-52 - deliver final approval ("quitus") of the management and accounts of public funds. For managing the external debt, MOF has implemented in 1996 a new computerized system called "SIADE".

Project Monitoring. The DGF acquired through implementation of several projects including those financed by the Bank (e.g. Forestry Development Project and Second Forestry Development Project) an experience in accounting and financial monitoring. A specialized unit is responsible for issuing periodical reports combining physical implementation data as well as financial information related to commitments, payments from the budget and disbursement from loans. This unit is playing a role of aggregation of data, for transactions executed by the CRDAs and has the responsibility of preparation of the disbursement' documents as well as issuing of project financial statements.

Specific arrangements for the projects. Based on the institutional arrangements agreed for the project implementation, two groups of entities are involved. The first is consisted of regional entities (CRDA, and Regional Directorates of Environment). The second is the technical departments of both MOA and MELP. The MOA through the DGF, would be the general coordinator of the project and where the PMU will be located and headed by a National Project Coordinator. The PMU will be responsible for a close monitoring of the project and evaluation of physical performance, including procurement, finance, budgeting, and accounting duties. The PMU is responsible for the establishment and maintenance of an acceptable financial management system. The DGF has gained considerable experience in financial management though the implementation of previous Bank-financed projects and hence is expected to demonstrate a reasonable knowledge and understanding of World Bank procurement, disbursement, project accounting, and financial reporting. DGF should play a role of official vis a vis for the project implementation and thus is responsible of producing consolidated financial data and progress reports.

Staffing and duties at the central level. The Project Management Unit (PMU), is consisting of: (i) the National Project Coordinator from DGF; (ii) the Deputy Coordinator nominated from MELP; (iii) a financial and accounting specialist; and (iv) a procurement specialist The project team at the central level will coordinate all the project activities to be implemented at the regional level and report to the steering committee. The experience gained under previous projects has been assessed as adequate for the implementation of the proposed project.

Staffing and duties at the regional level. In each park, a PMT will be established which will be headed by the park conservator (who belongs to the Forestry Arrondissement of the CRDA) and the representatives of the regional environment directorates (DREs), and the Ministry of Tourism as well as the DCs. The CRDAs and the DREs would be responsible for the implementation of the project components within the govemorate, according to the defined institutional framework. The accounting specialist in each CRDAs will serve as the regional focal point in accounting and disbursement fields including periodic transmission of analytical sheets (transactions related to commitmnents and disbursements ) and copy of supporting documents to the PMU.

Accounting and reporting. The DGF has acquired experience in accounting and reporting for project with financing from extemnal donors through previous projects (mainly SFDP). The Financial and Accounting Unit (FAU) within DGF consists of five accounting and financial staff. DGFIOP is expected to provide an assistance in project accounting and reporting during the first year of implementation in order to help DGF to acquire the needed expertise in project financial management mainly through the use of the accounting and reporting software installed for WSEL and Agricultures Services Projects. To establish a sound financial management system, and an acceptable system for the accounting, monitoring and evaluation, each agency/technical department involved in the project will designate officially a coordinator responsible

- 53 - for issuing sub-project accounts and sub-Financial Monitoring Reports.

Financial and accountine policies. These are reflected in the PIP and aim at ensuring transparency, providing clarity regarding financial aspects to the various stakeholders and finance staff, ensuring uniformity, and enforcing accountability. These policies inter-alia cover the following aspects: (i) expenditures which, would be treated as project expenditures including their classification; (ii) expenditures, which would be eligible for reimbursement from the grant funds; and (iii) accounting rules and procedures.

Project Accountine System. The overall principles for project accounting are the following:

(i) Project accounting would cover all sources of project funds, and all utilization of project funds including paymnents made and expenditures incurred. All project-related transactions (whether involving cash or not) would be taken into accounts in the accounting and reporting system. Disbursements made by the World Bank and the transaction proceeded through the Special Account maintained by BCT would also be included in the project accounting system. Counter part funds will be shown separately.

(ii) Project-related transactions and activities would be distinguished from other activities. This distinction would be reflected at the data-capture stage. An identifiable Trial Balance for the project capturing all projects receipts, expenditures, and other payments under the project would be prepared. CRDA would be held to transmit on a trimestriel basis, separate progress statements (spread sheets summarizing transactions committed and /or disbursed) with copy of all supporting documents to the PMU. Aggregation of data would be the responsibility of PMU. (iii) The Chart of Accounts for the project should conform to the classification of expenditures and sources of funds as indicated in the project documents (Project Implementation Plan, Project Appraisal Document, COSTAB) and the budget breakdown. The Chart of Accounts should allow data to be captured in a manner to facilitate financial reporting of project expenditures by: (i) project components; (ii) expenditure allocation; and (iii) disbursement categories.

(iv) Reconciliation between the Project Financial Statements, Financial Monitoring Reports and the legal accounting records (mainly ADAB, SIADE, approved financial statements for the independent entities) would be done at the level of DGF by the FAU.

The flow of funds will be as follows:

* Payments from state budget would be the responsibility of CRDA and DRE, at the regional level, and DGF and DGEQV at the central level. This consist of disbursement approval and payment through "Tr6sorerie G6n6rale" accounts and sub accounts. * Payments from GEF's funds through SOEs, would be processed exclusively at the central level. DGF would be held to review supporting documents and attest eligibility of expenditures before transmission of the documents to the Central Bank (SOEs and WA) and the Bank when direct payments are requested. Request for replenishment would be the responsibility of BCT. * BCT would be responsible of payments from special accounts and issuing of monthly statements and their transmission to PMU and the Bank

Intemal Controls. The procedures included in the PIP include the following internal control mechanisms:

(i) operation of a budgeting system, and regular monitoring of actual financial performance with

- 54 - budgets and targets;

(ii) adoption and operation of simple, clear and tanwsparent financial and accounting policies which would govem financial management of and accounting for the project (as described earlier).

(iii) at the transaction level, establishment and operation of policies, procedures and systems for ensuring standard internal controls such as checking of expenditures, appropriate documentation, levels of authorization, segregation of duties, periodic reconciliation, physical verification, easy access to supporting documents etc.;

(iv) BCT and MOF will provide the PMU on a monthly basis, with statement of accounts for both Special account and grant account The financial and accounting specialists will do a monthly reconciliation of balances and will ensure to explain any detected difference between accounting records and statements.

(v) establishment and operation of a comprehensive aggregation mechanism, including the issuing of annual project financial statements and bi-annual Financial Monitoring Reports (FMR).

Financdal Management Reports

Financial Monitoring Reports for the project would be generated from the computerized financial management system. These reports would be management-oriented (i.e., summaries rather than transactional details) and would be used for the monitoring and implementation of the project. The FMR includes the following tables:

* Summary of expenditures comnitted and disbursement by component * Summary of expenditures committed and disbursement by category * Summary of the procurement process and procedures * Summary of sources and uses of funds

Project Financial Statements to be submitted to the auditor would include (i) a statement of sources and utilization of funds or Balance Sheet, indicating funds received from GEF and from the state budget, project expenditures, and assets and liabilities of the project; (ii) schedules classifying project expenditures by components and expenditure categories; (iu) a Special Account Reconciliation Statement; and (iv) a Statement of Withdrawals made on the basis of Statements of Expenditure (SOEs).

Audit Afrangements

As an exception to the Bank requirements and guidelines, the accounts and financial statements of the project would be audited by the "Contr8le General des Finances" (CGF), who would be the Project Auditor. The annual project financial statements audited by CGF would be submitted to the Bank within 6 months of the close of GOT's fiscal year.

The audit would be comprehensive and cover all aspects of the project (i.e., all sources and utilization of funds, and expenditures incurred). The audit will be carried out in accordance with International Standards on Auditing. Terms of Reference (TORs) for this assignment should cover an audit of financial transaction,

- 55 - and an assessment of the financial management system, including review of internal control mechanisms. Each CRDA as well as structures at the central level would provide the auditor with access to project-related documents and records, and information required for the purposes of the audit. The Auditor would carry out a concurrent audit dunng the fiscal year, to bring to management's attention any issue, which needs to be addressed. This would strengthen intemal controls, and would also facilitate early completion of the annual audit. The auditor will perform the audit according to: (i) the International Standards of Auditing as issued by the International Federation of Accountants, (ii) Bank's Guidelines and (iii) specific Terms of Reference (TORs) acceptable to the Bank. The auditor will express a professional opinion on the annual project financial statements, SOEs and SA transactions and will submit to the Bank an annual audit report within 6 months after the end of each government fiscal year

Disbursement Arraneements

Withdrawals from the proceeds of the GEF Trust Fund will be based on' the traditional disbursement methods of the Bank, using direct payments , requests for special commitments and reimbursement applications , either fully documented or using Statement of Expenditures (SOEs) as per applicable procedures. As projected by Bank's standard disbursement profiles, disbursements would be completed four months after project closure. Disbursements would be made against standard Bank documentation. i) Special Account (SA): To facilitate disbursement of eligible expenditures for works , goods, services and training the Government will open a special account at the Central Bank to cover eligible project expenditures to be managed and administered by the Central Bank . Authorized allocation of the special account would be US$ 350, 000 covering an estimated 4 months of eligible expenditures financed by the Grant. The Central Bank will be responsible for submitting, on behalf of the Project Management Unit (PMU) monthly replenishment applications with appropriate supporting documentation for expenditures incurred and will retain and make the documents available for review by Bank supervision missions and project auditors. To the extent possible, all eligible project expenditures should be paid through the special account . Specifically all eligible project expenditures of less than US$ 50,000 equivalent shall be paid from the SA.

The Special Account will be replenished through the submission of Withdrawal Applications on a monthly basis and will include reconciled bank statements and other documents as my be required Ii) Use of Statement of Expenditure (SOEs): All applications to withdraw proceeds from the grant will be fully documented, except for: (i) expenditures of contracts with an estimated value of US$ 500,000 each or less for works, iii) expenditures of contracts with an estimated value of US$ 400,000 each or less for goods , iii) US$ 100,000 or less for consulting firms and (iii) US$ 50,000 or less for individual consultants and training , which may be claimed on the basis of Statements of Expenditures (SOEs). Documentation supporting expenditures claimed against SOEs will be retained by the PMU and will be available for review when requested by Bank supervision missions and project auditors. All disbursements will be subject to the conditions of the grant Agreement and the procedures defined in the Disbursement Letter.

- 56 - Annex 7: Project Processing Schedule TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT

iP'roJ. Sdhe6ule Plannd I Time taken to prepare the project (months) 18 32 First Bank mission (identification) 10/01/1998 10/01/1998 Appraisal mission departure 02/18/2002 02/25/2002 Negotiations 04/15/2002 Panned Date of Effectiveness 09/02/2001

Prepared by: M'inistry of Environment and Landuse Planning and M'inistry of Agriculture with input from the World Bank

Preparatlon assistance: GEF Preparation Grant (PDF- Block B)

Bank staff who worked on the project Included: Name Speciality Shobha Shetty, MNSRE Economics/Institutions Concepcion del Casfillo, MNSRE Sociology Jean-Michel Pavy, AFTES Natumal Resources Management Samnia Msadek, MNSRE Financial Management Maurice Gress, MNACS Procurement Nadia Gouhier, MNSRE Procurement Susan Shen, EASES Peer reviewer -Ecology Robert Kirmse, LCSEN Peer reviewer - protected areas mnanagement Hernan Torres, GEF -STAP Peer reviewer - external (GEF) Dominique Bichara, LEGMN Legal Hovsep Melkonian, LOAGI Disbursement Marie-Francoise How Yew Kin, Team Assistant MNSRE Salah Darghouth, MNSRE Sector Manager, Water and Environment Petros Aklilu, MNSRE Sector Manager, Rural Development Rene Cipriani Integrator/Project Management

- 57 - Annex 8: Documents In the Project File* TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT

A. Project Implementation Plan Draft Procurement Plan (1st year) February 2002. PIP.

B. Bank Staff Assessments PCD March 28, 2001 Pre-appraisal mission: BTO dated December 3, 2001 Technical report on ecotourism dated November 27, 2001 Appraisal mission aide-memoire and BTO: March 18, 2002

C. Other Consultant diagnostic reports on the three parks; research; taining; GIS; dossier dexecution. Process Framework (O.P 4.12) *Including electronic files

- 58 - Annex 9: Statement of Loans and Credits TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT 07-Nov-2001 Drmno ben epecned and au Orgnsl Amount In US$ MlkIns disbusements Pmoje ID FY Prposae IBRD IDA GEF Canoel. Undlsb. Orig Ffn Revd P0o40c2 2001 TRANSPORTSECTORDVESTENrPROJECT 37. 00 0o00 0.00 38.11 S73 0.00 P048625 2C01TN-CULTURAL HERITAGE 17.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.11 0.00 0.0 POOS70 2001 TNAGRIC. SUPPORT SVCS 21.33 o0oo 0.00 .00 21.84 0.67 0.00 P050945 20DCT.EAcduanPAQSETI 99.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 97.01 0.18 0.00 P035707 2000 NWATER SECTOR INVESTMENT PROJECT 10o. 0.00 0.00 0.0 10006 -2.08 0.00 Po05814 1999 TN-EXPORT DEVELOPMENT 35.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.58 13.10 0.00 P0437C0 1998 TRANSPORT SECTOR INV 50.00 0.00 0.00 oo 18.81 24M 0.00 POSD418 1998 TNAS0L2 42.00 0.00 0.00 o.o0 5869 9.78 0.00 P00874s 1998 TN-HEALTH SECTOR LOAN 50.00 0.00 0.00 00oo 25.86 23.90 0.00 P005741 1M8 HIGHER EDUCGII 80D.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 50.10 31.04 0.00 PO46832 1997 MUNICIPAL DEV. U 80.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.T7 7.81 0.00 P005731 1997 TN-GREATER TUNIS SEWERAGE 000 00o 0.00 0.0o 39.79 22.32 o.0o P00573s 1997 NATURAL RESOURCE MGM 28.0 o0 0oo 0.00 14.00 14.10 0.00 P006745 1996 2NDEUPL &TRa 60.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.6 21S4 3.54 P04 8 1998 TN4NDUSTRY SUPPORTINSTUTIOnON 38.70 0.0 0.00 6.32 16.80 28.03 0.00 P006749 1995 RURAL ROADS 81.60 0.00 0.oo 0.00 1.01 0.71 0.00 P005743 1995 SECONDARY EDUCATION 98.30 0.0 0.00 0.00 9.92 17.37 17.37 PO05M9 1995 SOLAR WATER HEATNG 00 0.00 4.00 0.00 1.42 -122 0.00 PO68O 1995 TN-WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE 58.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.24 11.91 0.00 P005728 1992 HIGHER EDUCATION 75.00 0.00 00oo 0.00 18.79 22.19 22.19

Total: 1082.l3 0.00 4.00 8.32 542.03 247.41 43.10

-59- TUNISIA STATEMENT OF IFC's Held and Disbursed Portfolio MAY-2001 In Millions US Dollars

Committed Dlsbursed IFC IFC FY Approval Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic Loan Equity _Quasi Partic 1998/00 BLAT 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00 1995 Maghreb IN5 Bank 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 1986/92/98 SrTEX 0.00 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.00 0.00 1973/75 Sousse-Nord 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 1998 Tuninvest 0.00 4.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.59 0.00 0.00 Total Portfolio: 0.00 6.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.57 0.00 0.00

Approvals Pending Commitment FY Approval Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic

Tota Pending Commintment: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

- 60 - Annex 10: Country at a Glance TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT M. East Lower- POVERTY and SOCIAL a North middle- Tunisia Africa Income Development dlamrnd 2000 Population. mid-year (millions) 9.6 296 2,046 Ltfe expectancy GNI per capita (Attas method, US$) 2,090 2,040 1,140 GNI (AMsa method. USS btIlIns) 20 1 602 2.327 Averags annual growth, 1994-00 Population I16) 1.4 2.0 .0 Labor force ( 2.5 2 8 1.3 GNI - Gross stotrecentestimate (latest year available, 199400) cpe , e primary Poverty (IXof population below national poverty line) 8 Urban oopulation (X of total populaton) 66 59 42 Ltfe expectancy at birth (Years) 73 e6 69 Infant mortalitv (Per 1,000 Omvbirths) 24 44 32 Child malnutrition (X of children under S) 9 I,1I Access to Improved water source Access to an Improved water source I(1 ofpopulaton) .. 89 80 lliitracy (1 of population age 15+) 29 35 15 Gross primary enrotment (%of school-age population) 116 95 114 Tunlsla Male 122 102 116 Lower-middle-4ncome group Female 114 88 114 KEY ECONOMIC RATIOS and LONG-TERM TRENDS 1980 1990 1999 2000 Economic ratios' GDP (USS billions) 8.7 12.3 21.0 19.5 Gross domestic lnvestmenttGDP 29.4 32.5 26.8 27.4 Exports of aoods and services/GDP 40.2 43.6 42.2 44.0 Trade Gross domestic sevinas/GDP 24.0 25.5 24.6 23.9 Gross national savinas/GDP 27.1 24.6 23.5 Current account balance/GDP -4.3 -5.5 -2.1 -4.2 Domestic Investment Interest paymentslGDP 2.6 3.2 2.4 3.1 Total debt/GDP 40.3 62.4 56.6 545 savings +aIngs Total debt servicalexports 13.9 24 1 16.1 20 2 Present value of debt/GDP 56.2 Present value of debtexpotts 121.0 Indebtedness 19S0-90 199040 19t9 2000 2000-04 (average annual growth) GDP 3.3 4.7 6.1 4.7 6.2 7unlsis GDP per caglta 0.8 3.0 47 3.4 4.8 Lower-middle-income group Exports of goods and services 5.6 5.1 4.7 6.6 5.7

STRUCTURE of the ECONOMY 1980 1990 1999 2000 Growth of Investment and GDP (%) (IX of GDP) Aariculture 14.1 15.7 12.9 12.33 Industr 31.1 29.8 28.0 28.8 - Manufacturing 11.8 16.9 17.9 18.2 ' Services 54.8 54.5 59.0 58.9 10 5 so 97 e 9a9 00 Private consumption 61.5 58.2 59.9 60.5 ao General govemment consumption 14.5 16.4 15.5 15.7 -Gt i Imports of goods and sorvices 45.6 50.6 44.4 47.66 0

1960-90 1990-00 1999 2000 Growth of exports wnd Imports (I%) (average annual growth) Aaricuiture 2.8 2.4 11.6 -1.0 1s Industry 3.1 4.6 6.1 5.2 lo _ Manufacturina 3.7 5.5 6.2 6.2 I Services 3.5 5.3 5.7 5.3 Private consumption 2.9 4.3 5.8 5.2 Os 97 s 99 00 General government consumption 3.8 4.1 4.3 4.7 4 Gross domestic Investment -1.8 3.6 4.8 1 aE-o-s :Imports Imports of goods and services 1.7 3.8 3.0 96f

Note: 2000 data are preliminary estimates. The diamonds show four key Indicators In the countrV (in bold) compared with Its Income-aroup average, If data are missina, the diamond will be Incomple.

- 61 - Tunisia

PRICES and GOVERNMENT FNANCE 198 1990 1f 2000 Infltoon (%) DomoSdcprke (%change) * Consumer prices . 6.6 2.7 2.9 t ImplicIt GDP deflator 12.8 4.5 3.8 2.4 4 Govemnment flnan (6 ofGDP, lndudtes cutm3ntgrants) O.. | z Current revenue 28.7 26.4 29.2 29.0 a5 es 57 es a9 Current budget balance 8.8 2.3 4.5 4.9 G d SPWlater *CPI Overall surplus/deficit 0 9 -4 6 -2.2 -2.9

TRADE 11980 1990 199 2000 EXPDrt w ndm t level (US$ mlD.) (US$ mlbons) Total exports (fbb) 2,395 3,517 5,873 5,840 0.000 Fuel 1,347 607 420 651 AwriutLbre as 398 667 470 ? .*1 Manufactures 905 1,995 4,058 4,005 Total Imports (cIf) 3.623 5,525 8,481 8,564 *- Food 388 SW 557 538 2^0 Fuel and energy 799 487 541 827 Capital goods 742 1,235 2, 2099 Export proe index (1995=100) .. 77 122 .. Import pife Indtx (1995=100) .. 86 118 .. KExpot *ImpcrtB Terrmsoftrade(1995100) 90 103

BALANCE o PAYMENTS 1980 1i990 19i9 200 Current account balance to GOP %) (US$ -Dons) Exports of goods and services 3,517 5.191 8,793 8,608 0 Imports of goods and seIes 3,986 5.988 8,248 9.311 Resource balance 469 -795 -455 -705 Net income -293 -497 -890 -941 I I 1-1-- 1 Net currnt transtfen 390 613 902 825 Currnt acoount balance -373 -679 -443 -821 FInandng items (net) 438 596 1,132 578 Changes nnetnrserves 45 83 -690 243 Memo: Reserves induding gold (US$ millros) 599 804 2,272 1,760 Conversion rate (DEC, loweIUS$) 0.4 09 1.2 1.4

EXTERNAL DEBT and RESOURCE FLOWS 1980 1990 1999 2000 (US$ millions) CompaistIon of 2000 dabt (US mill.) Total debt outstanding and disbused 3,527 7,690 11.872 10,610 IBRD 269 1,346 1,323 1.211 G0o" A: 1211 IDA 68 59 41 39 -B39 TotEd debt service 544 1,431 1,565 1,921 c: 32 IBRD 37 214 269 229 IDA 1 2 2 2 Compositlon of net resource flons F:3 T D:2,183 Offidal grants 26 174 73 3 Offidal creditors 251 342 121 0 Private creditofs 102 -197 369 214 1' Foreign clrect Investment 236 185 337 731 Portfolio equity 0 0 0 0 E:2,590 World Bank pogram CommItnents 171 29 194 202 A -lRD E -Bsarsl Dlsbwbements 52 213 210 136 B- IDA D Othermiutllateral F -Prvat Prlndpalrepayments 15 112 168 152 C-I10 G-Shctmm Notflows 37 100 42 -17 Interest payments 23 104 103 80 Net transfer 14 -3 42 -96

Development Economics 9117101 -62 - Additional Annex 11

STAP Review and Response:

TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT

Reviewer: Hernin Torres

1. Assessment of the scientific and technical soundness of the project. The scientific value of the proposed project is based on the fact that the three national parks were selected on the basis of their importance to the regional and global biological diversity. Each of the ecological regions represented by the three national parks is distinct and will present different challenges to its effective management

Technically, the project is well structured to achieve the main goal intended, which is: To improve the management and protection of the selected national parks for the purpose of conserving biological diversity of global importance.

To reach this goal the project is organized in three components well articulated among each other. Their contents should allow the achievement of the desired goal if the project is implemented appropriately. From a conceptual point of view, the project proposes an important tool which is the participation of local communities in the management of the national parks by establishing local Development Committees. In addition to this, the project will look for appropriate technical approaches, institutional frameworks and monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.

It was decided to limit the number of national parks to three in order to keep the project size manageable by the existing institutional capacity. This is extremely important, considering that this is the Tunisia's first major protected areas management project. 2. Identification of the global benefits of the project. The important biological diversity protected in the three selected Tunisian national parks is well known. Bouhedma and Jbil National Parks are important priorities under the Bonn Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals. Ichkeul National Park is listed as World Heritage Site under the Convention on World Heritage and as Ramsar Site under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. The UNESCO's Man and the Biosphere Program recognizes Ichkeul National Park and Bouhedam as Biosphere Reserves.

* Bouhedma National Park protects an important habitat for rare artiodactyls such as the Dorcas Gazelle (Gazelle dorcas) and the Oryx (Oryx dammah). The national park also protects 8 of the 14 endemic plant species of the country. * Jbil National Park protects unique Saharan ecosystems and intemationally important biological diversity, some of which is found only in Tunisia. The national park protects a globally important antelope species such as the Slender-Homed Gazelle (Gazella leptoceros) and a unique plant species

- 63 - (Calligonum) which attain several meters in height * Ickeul National Park is recognized as one of the four major wetland areas in the western basin of the Mediterranean. The other three are Dofiana National Park in Spain, the Camargue in Southern France and the El Kala region in Algeria. The national park is a critical habitat for the globally threatened Marbled Duck (Anas angustirostris)and the White-Headed Duck (Oxyura leucocephala).

Both Bouhedma and Jbil national parks also have potential to be re-populated with species from other parts of the Sahelo-Saharan region. An important fact considering that recently the Government of Tunisia has worked to re-introduce extirpated antelope species in the country. This is part of an overaUll action plan which the governments of several Sahelo-Saharan countries, together with specialists from the World Conservation Union (IUCN), World Wild Fund for Nature and local groups have worked out under the Bonn Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals to reestablish viable populations of six antelope species in a large area.

Therefore, the successful implementation of the project in the selected national parks is globally significant and the World Bank/GEF support is justified for the folowing reasons:

* It will strengthen the conservation of critical Saharan and wetland habitats;

* It will develop incentives to naintain these protected areas in the long term;

* It wil establish capacity to ensure adequate management of these protected areas in the long term;

* It will promote community participation in the management of the national parks selected; and

* It wiUl establish links and colaboration with neighboring countries. 3. Evaluation of the project compliance with GEF objectives, operational strategy and guidance in blodiversity focal areas.

The project wilU strengthen the management of key national parks in Tunisia with increased participation of local communities for the purpose of conserving biological diversity of global importance. This coincides with the GEF Operational Strategy in terms of biological diversity conservation and with the operational progrms N° 1: Arid and Semi-Arid Zone Ecosystems and N° 2: Coastal, Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.

4. Assessment of the project's significance and potential benefits.

The project is significant because it will increase and improve the existing protected areas management capacity with new skiUls needed to manage and conserve important biological diversity.

The improvement of the existing management capacity will be achieved by implementing the folowing components:

* Capacitv building and Institutional Strengthening. This component includes training programs, establishment of a national database on biodiversity and strengthening the ability to monitor changes in biodiversity, studies on institutional issues including environmental legislation and additional funding mechanisms for protected areas.

- 64 - * Protected areas management. This component includes the application of new skiUs in planning and management of protected areas, sustainable resource management, alternative livelihood mechanisms and ecotourism strategy. * Public awareness and education. This component includes the development of an awareness and education strategy by using mass media, formal and informal education mechanisms, and by developing links with local non-governmental groups, schools, tourism agencies, and other organizations to promote public understanding about biological diversity resources.

The imnplementation of these components is an adequate way to conserve critical habitats and to enhance the probability of their long term conservation. It will also make possible to establish effective management capacity, develop incentives to maintain protected areas in the long-term and to introduce the community participation as a new protected area management approach.

5. Potential replicability of the project to other sites.

The inclusion of multiple stakeholders participation in the management of protected areas by establishing Development Committees is an experience that can be replicated in other areas of the country and in the region as weUl. At the same time the management approaches to be applied such as protected areas planning and management including site interpretation, awareness raising activities, research and monitoring will certainly serve as models to be replicated in the other five protected areas of Tunisia.

Morocco has proposed the establishment of BasDraa National Park which has a similar ecosystem as that of Jbil National Park The experience gained in Jbil can be replicated in BasDraa, due the fact that they face the same management challenges.

6. Estimation of the project's sustainability in institutional, financial and technical terms. The description of the project indicates that it wiU be institutionaUy, financially and technicaly sustainable. An interministerial Steering Commitee with representatives from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Economic Development, the Ministry of Tourism, the Ministry of Environment and Land Use Planning, the Ministry of Agriculture, and the Ministry of International Cooperation wiUl be formed to provide oversight during project implementation.

The Steering Committee will be retained during project implementation and will be responsible for providing project oversight advice and assistance in resolving issues associated with project implementation. At the national level the Directorate General of Forestry (DGF) wiU assume the responsibility for project's management during its execution phase. A Project Management Unit (PMU) will be established and will have the responsibility for coordination, management, and monitoring and evaluation of the project's development

At the regional level, the PMT wiU coordinate the project activities through local institutions and the national park conservator who wiU be selected in agreement with local institutions will be the coordinator of management activities including guard services, community outreach, and monitoring activities. Local communities wil participate in the project's implementation through the formation of Development Committees and a Forestry Association in the case of Ichkeul National Park.

-65 - The experience gained in this project, in terms of financial mechanisms and management approaches, will provide the basis for mainstreaming these factors in the broader government strategy for national parks management.

7. Extent to which the project will contribute to the improved definition and Implementation of the GEF strategies and policies.

The project is an important attempt in the strengthening of protected areas management as a means to achieve the conservation of biological diversity in Tunisia. This is an important strategy in the implementation of the GEF policies.

The project will be the first World Bank/GEF experience in the country and will certainly contribute to increase awareness and global support for the management of Tunisia's protected areas. In addition to this, the project has been developed in close consultation with the UNDP/GEF, which at present is working with the Government of Tunisia in an alterative livelihood project in Feija National Park. UNDP/GEF is also preparing a project on marine protected areas which has been coordinated with this initiative.

Other World Bank/GEF biodiversity conservation projects in the region (Morocco and Jordan) will offer opportunities to exchange experiences in terms of biodiversity monitoring and evaluation, review, and scientific oversight

8. Linkages to other focal areas.

The proposed project is also linked to the operational programs N° 1: Arid and Semi-Arid Ecosystems and N° 2: Coastal, Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. The project design and implementation is meant to support natural habitat conservation and is aimed at integrating the conservation of natural habitats and the maintenance of ecological function into national and regional development. The project also promotes the restoration of degraded natural habitats.

In addition to this, the project will serve as important tool for Tunisia's response to intemational conventions such as Ramsar Convention, World Heritage Convention, Bonn Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals, and the Convention on Biological Diversity. The National Biodiversity Strategy, already prepared, will be greatly enhanced by this project

9. Degree of Involvement of relevant stakeholders in the project.

The project concept and its components have been prepared with a participatory approach. This active participation of multiple stakeholders will continue during implementation of the proposed activities through the Steering Committee and the formation of Development Committees and a Foreshy Association in the case of Ichkeul National Park.

In addition to this, the project will build mechanisms and capacity to assist local stakeholders -in particular the local communities dependent on the resources of the national parks, local governments, and non-governmental organizations- to participate in the preparation and implementation of management plans. The effective management of the selected national parks will benefit poor rural communities and local economies adjacent to the national parks through stimulation of ecotourism as well as activities based on the sustainable management of natural resources of the national parks.

-66 - 10. Role, potential and importance of capacity building elements and Innovativeness of the project.

The project will establish operating models to improve protected area management and build management capacity at the local level in order to replicate this experience and mainstream biological diversity conservation in other national protected areas and natural resources management projects.

The participation of multiple stakeholders in the management of protected areas by establishing Development Committees is the main innovativeness of the project The public awareness action will be focused on the local communities in and around the national parks and the local govermments in order to develop the grassroots awareness necessary to sustain a participatory approach to national parks management

11. Comments on evaluation and monitoring.

The evaluation of project performance will be based on the following general indicators:

Stabilization or improvement of demographic status of key bio-indicators specific to each national park (vegetative cover and distribution; local aninal/bird populations) * Reduction in adverse impacts of resource use (grazing, forest products, etc.) on the biological diversity of the national parks. * Development and implementation of management plans with the active participation of local communities including additional financing mechanisms, database on biodiversity and number of families participating in alternative livelihood projects.

This evaluation scheme seems appropriate to measure the progress in the implementation of the project on the ground. To take advantage of this approach could be useful to prepare and implement a specific and simple monitoring mechanism in order to allow the personnel to know when and what to measure, to take maximum advantage of patrols, and to guarantee a systematic data collection. The design should include the selection of indicators to evaluate communities, animal and plant populations and other processes identified as priority within the national parks.

The design would consider the evaluation of monitoring activities and the suitability of indicators, in order to make improvements in the mechanism. The following monitoring guidelines may be considered:

* Clima*c monitoring: In certain cases, the lack of climatic information of national parks makes it difficult carry out management activities, therefore there is a need to install meteorological stations and to complement those already existing and the current data processing, if any. * Monitoringoffauna andflora populatons: The objective is to make a record of specific populations important for conservation, based on the abundance and biology of some species. This work should be carried out mainly by the national park personnel and should be concentrated on key species. However, there will be a need for support from specialized personnel. * Monitoring ofhuman actvites: A follow up of human activities including the local communities' use of resources and tourism activities should be carried out to prevent and to control their environmental impact, based on the appropriate indicators.

-67 - Monitoringof ecosystems and sensitive sites: A monitoring of ecosystems and sites defined by zoning, fragility and ecological importance should be designed. This is important considering issues such as the evidence of climatic changes and of the expansion of deserts that are more important in the dry regions. In the case of this project, it seems necessary to carry out monitoring activities to learn the dynamics of water resources and their influence on biological diversity. Response to STAP Review:

It is encouraging to note that the STAP review is, in general, extremely positive. The project team is fully in agreement with the guidance proposed by the STAP reviewer regarding the monitoring aspects. The M&E system presented in Annex 1 has been revised appropriately. Climatic monitoring has also been included in the indicators. The overall M&E will be further strengthened during project appraisal.

-68 - Additional Annex 12

Social Assessment

TUNISIA: PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT PROJECT Introduction

This annex highlights the issues that were raised by the social analyses conducted for the preparation of the Protected Areas project by a joint team of BRL and GEOIDD. Each of the three proposed protected areas presents a unique social configuration as well as an ecological set of problems and challenges. Because of this, the analyses were conducted with the joint participation of a sociologist and technical teams to respond in a holistic manner to the unique challenges posed by each area.

The fimdamental premise underlying the design of this project is that unless communities form an integml part of the protected area management and are committed to the protection of the parks' biodiversity, any initiative that is highly centralized and controlled will be doomed to failure. As such, this project presents a key departure from other protected area projects in two fundamental ways: (i) it recognizes that the proposed areas are not pristine and untouched, but are still highly significant in terms of biodiversity conservation, but (ii) where human habitation has left its mark and will continue to do so while preserving biodiversity. By such recognition and through a participatory approach, this project seeks to successfully mainstream the spirit and procedures of biodiversity conservation while working in partnership with the communities in and around the parks to ensure that the natural resources on which many households depend, are not totally restricted but are used in a sustainable manner. A Process Framework for Community Participation has been prepared by the Tunisian MEAT and accepted by the Bank in compliance with OP 4.12 This framework will be the guide to ensure that the communities of beneficiaries have an active role in the preparation of the Park Management Plans

Common Social Issues in the Three Parks

Root Causes of Biodiversitv Loss. The social assessments identified the root causes of biodiversity loss from the ecosystenic and socio-economic perspectives. The two are linked because the increasing population pressure on the natural resources has exacerbated biodiversity loss and soil erosion primarily through overgrazing, and fuel and fodder collection. There are altematives to the way in which these resources are used, but finding alternatives requires an in-depth understanding of how and why the current populations came to use these areas in the first place.

Human Pressure. In the central and southern part of Tunisia, the population was primarily nomadic until after the Second World War. There had been a gradual process of sedentarization, but by and large, in these sections of the country the population remained mobile, with land use governed by well known customary laws, accompanied by a deep understanding of the links between environment and people, and a cultural tradition that continues to be rooted in the conception of desert and humans as a single entity. Meanwhile, in the North, the population was agrarian and suffered the most because of loss of lands to colonial settlers.

Historically, the process of sedentarization of what was once a nomadic population (Jbil and Bou Hedma) resulted in dramatic changes in land use. Areas which were once used seasonally as nmgeland or grazing land by nomads or trnshumants began to be used year round on a regular basis. This land whose use for

-69 - agriculture is inappropriate and marginal, began to suffer from the encroachment of agriculture to feed a population year round. This process has led not only to a deterioration of the resource base and loss of biodiversity, but also to a disturbing cycle of gradual but deepening impoverishment of the population.

Leeal Frameworks. The Tunisian laws governing land tenure and land use (notably the Forestry Code) which were established after Independence (1956), affect the populations of the parks directly. Once govemed by customary laws, that were themselves rooted in tribal social forms of organization, the population's traditional land use began to fracture under the French Protectorate. In the highly productive agricultural areas of the country (north and Sahel region) where land had always been a prized commodity, the impact of colonial establishment had already been felt, and impoverished segments of tribes had been displaced to m^ore marginal, mountainous, and less favorable resource areas. However, the French maintained and accepted the existence of habous (religious trust lands) as well as the collective lands under tribal customary tenure. Because of this the people's production system and land use continued with relatively few changes. The abolition of the habous and the collective lands after Independence had different effects in various parts of the country. In those areas that had already been touched by colonization, it led to a scramble to privatize what had once been common resources. However, in the central and southem parts of the country, the new legislation had a severe impact because it in fact separated the social organization and mode of production of the people from their land. This gave rise to contentious land claims that still persist today.

The fact is that the legislation is one step removed from the reality of daily life of the people that, to a large extent, still rely on their traditions, organizational forms and beliefs as a way of goveming their lives. National legislation is only felt in case of conflicts with the law.

This reality is one that is central to the project because the main challenge will be to work for biodiversity conservation, with community participation, while the existing legislation still maintains an outdated and controlling approach to the management of natural resources.

Poverty. Finally, the unfortunate pervasive common problem to all three parks is the growing poverty among the residents within and in the areas surrounding the parks. Because of the combination of factors outlined above: restriction of exploitable space, and declining resources in light of a growing population, the main stakeholders of the park space are those that traditionally have received the fewest benefits. The poverty constitutes the main obstacle to the conservation of biodiversity, because without adequate alternatives for livelihoods the people cannot do other than to continue over exploiting the resources within the park boundaries (which have also been for the most part arbitrarily drawn). The approach developed for this project is pragmatic in that it assumes that unless this issue of poverty is addressed, and the implementation of the project recognizes the right of the people to exist and persist apace with the biodiversity that is being conserved, the project will fail in the long term. This pilot is unique in that it is Tunisia's first GEF-funded project, and because it is participatory as well as realistic. Challenges will persist, but the design that has been put in place is the best that can be entertained at this time.

Ichkeul National Park

The area covered by the park has been considered a unique site since the XIII century. In modem times, different areas of the park came under various jurisdictions: the lake under one agency, the mountain and surrounding areas under the Domaine Publique, and later (1974) the marsh area of Ichkeul under the jurisdiction of the Departement General des Forets (DGF). The National Park was formed by decree in 1980 and under the tutelage of the DGF, which continued to pursue the management philosophy of establishing enclosures and forbidding access to the natural resources under their jurisdiction. The park is

- 70 - an extremely high-profile site being on the World Heritage list as well as being a Ramsar site and Man and Biosphere site.

The park currently is subdivided into three distinct areas: the mountain, the marsh, and the lake, each with a different set of rules and development objectives. The mountain and marsh have rules oriented primarily to the conservation of natural resources, while the lake has been the subject of economic exploitation and concomitant protection of the fishing interests. There is intensive farming and livestock raising in the areas immediately outside the park boundaries.

The ancestors of the current inhabitants of Ichkeul came from the surrounding areas of Sejnane and Joumine and were primarily subsistence farmers and livestock raisers. There were also fishermen that subsisted on fishing from the lake with traditional methods. The employment picture changed when the marble quarries opened in the mid-twentieth century, creating an employment growth pole in the midst of the Ichkeul natural region. This encouraged the settlement in the park of the poorest families in the Gouvemorat of Bizerte that came to be employed in the quarries. According to the preparatory studies, in 1991 there were 130 households and 700 inhabitants. Many of these employees were left in Ichkeul when the quarries closed in 1993, but because, inter alia, of the restrictions imposed on the use of park resources, these numbers have declined to about 65 households and about 320 people (in 2001). The majority of these people live in several small settlements at the southern foot of Ichkeul Mountain, and they continue to have rights to live in their traditional homes for the moment, with the tacit understanding that under current rules of the DGF the households will slowly disappear as the population ages and there are no available sources of livelihood.

This situation makes for a very impoverished population of primarily day laborers (42 out of 62) receiving an income from either the fishing (two households under the current concessionaire) or employees of the park (30 positions total of which 15 are generaUy given to the people living within Ichkeul) that are irregular, and opt for the daily wage of 3.5 Dinars a day for an average monthly income of 80 DT a month whereas the minimum salary is 200DT. These '¶hadhira" (The term from the Arabic al haadr means workers on a site, typically associated with a construction site, but the workers are paid under the Regional Programs of Fight Against Poverty as a safety net against total unemployment and destitution, administered by the municipalities. There are three categories: unskilled, Baccalaureat, and Bac + 2 with the highest paid being the latter at minimum salary levels) employees accept this wage because of the lack of alternative employment in the immediate area. The households in Ichkeul self-estimated their revenues by category of employment as follows: the "hadhira" employees have an average annual income of 1,000 DT; the employees of the quarries and other surrounding construction sites have an annual average income of 3,700 DT; the households with high number of livestock have the highest income levels, averaging about 10,000 DT a year including livestock sales and sharecropping. The annual average income of the families within the park is about 5400 DT (- U.S$3900) but this masks important disparities. About half of the families have a total annual income of less than 1000 DT (- U.S$700) and less than 5% of the population have a total annual income more than 45,000 DT (- $U.S32,000).

The social assessment data show that livestock raising is one source of subsistence as well as savings for some of the inhabitants of Ichkeul. However, it should be highlighted that these people are not livestock raisers by tradition as is the case in many other areas of the country. Today, livestock raising for the people of Ichkeul and the immediate surrounding area constitutes a coping device and strategy for survival. The distribution of livestock shows this clearly. Livestock is distributed unevenly. The cattle within the park belongs to an indigenous race, which occupy primarily the mountain zone and run wild. There are only 36 families out of a total of 65 that actually have cattle, most households average about 8.5 head, and only one owner has more than 200. In other words, a single owner can use the resources that 25

- 71 - households could have with 8 head of cattle a piece. This creates a source of pressure for the poor inhabitants to apply the rules of access more equitably since there is currently unequal use and access to resources. Over half of the households in Ichkeul do not own and sheep, and only one household has over 200 head. The average per household is 20 sheep. However, these are used as a source of subsistence, and four households actively raise sheep for the market as well as take in sheep from external households to raise them within the park boundaries which is another source of friction between the households within the park boundaries. Goats are raised almost exclusively for subsistence and not often sold. Almost all the households have some chickens used for subsistence, but there is a high mortality rate since there are no veterinary services available and vaccination is not commonly practiced.

This combination of unequal access and use of available resources, and lack of alternative sources of employment, has been an important issue raised by the inhabitants of Ichkeul who see that their joint effort to participate in the management of the park and its resources will improve their lot and make the rules transparent and applicable to all. The remaining households with the park boundaries reflect that they constitute the "last bastion" of a rapidly dwindling population and way of life, but all recognize that the existing inequalities are the critical problems leading to degradation of resources, in the mountain and marsh areas but also the water quality of the lake.

In spite, or perhaps because of, the impoverished condition of the inhabitants of Ichkeul there is a strong feeling of solidarity among them and this has contributed to many community initiatives and attempts to call the attention of government to improve their quality of life and to regulaize their rights to continue to live within the park boundaries. However, part of the problem arises because the institutional actors involved in Ichkeul have no coordination, and this has resulted in contradictory or piecemeal actions. For the most part, the government agencies have not focused on the human development aspects of park management, but rather the biological and ecological elements. Similarly, the NGOs that have been involved have no clear strategy, and their actions are sporadic and uncoordinated.

The analysis of the constraints posed by the creation of the park without consultation of the affected population and the rapid deterioration of natural resources point to the need to come to a rapid dialogue between the agencies and the concemed population. The perception of the community that they are the guardians of the lake and the mountain and they are at one with their environment is an important element to consider in this dialogue.

There is a need to produce viable solutions including recommendations for negotiations with the population of Ichkeul that will improve and restore the natural resources of the park yet pennit the impoverished inhabitants to improve their economic and social situation. Many solutions have been proposed by the affected people to reduce the charge on grazing and limit the numbers of all livestock. During the community consultations, a Comite de developpement (CD) was created representing different stakeholders. This group is a grass roots organization with virtual universal adherence on the part of the community, that at the time of pre-appraisal was in the last stages of being formalized, and will be subsequently acting as an AFIC. In it, the participants already have a substantial number of issues to be resolved and ideas about training and improving their capacity to assist in the park management The recommendation of the preparation studies is that such groups be legitimized and established as representatives of the local stakeholders under the NGO law of 1988-93 in order to maintain their autonomy conceming the development activities that they can undertake so that they can participate in the management of natural resources while also undertaking other actions external to the park in the surrounding areas to promote altemative livelihoods. The specific areas of intervention of the CD and the AFIC(s) will have to be defined further as the organization evolves, but it is thought that they ought to promote and initiate the management of the high marsh areas. A team of two community development

- 72 - facilitators (animateurs) will be recruited under the project to work with the CD. They will be closely involved in the training of the CD members for park management as well as activities that have been identified, including the rehabilitation of the hammams (public baths), electrification, improvement in the raising of poultry and rabbits, as well as initial ecotourism activities and products. The community consultations also showed that there is a potential role for NGOs like the local WWF and the Association for the development of Ichkeul to be involved closely with the CDs.

The pre-appraisal and appmisal missions made specific suggestions for the continued organizational development of the CD and training assistance to be given in the interin time until the project is initiated. This is planned to be initiated during the month of May 2002.

Bou Hedma National Park

The natural area of the region between Gafsa and Gabes was traditionally a formation of Accacia raddiana. The degradation of this environment began as a result of the sedentarization of the population which was, until the first quarter of the twentieth century, transhunant and nomadic. The information gathered during the social assessment shows is incomplete and somewhat contradictory, hence this is one issue that has to be clarified during project implementation. The existing information shows that the national park was created in order to save this environment in 1936 but it was never delimited. At that time the inhabitants used the lands within the national park "boundaries" on habous lands to which they kept their rights. However, when the Tunisian State abolished collective and habous lands in the 1960s, only some of the people claimed their rights to those lands as individuals, but the recognition of the title was denied by legal intervention in 1961, and continues to this date. Their occupation is precarious and illegal, but nonetheless the local people contest this and thus the clearings within the park boundaries that existed already in 1936 continue to exist now.

The area that is now the park was subject to more pressure when during World War II Libyan tribes related to the local ones in the area settled in Bou Hedma fleeing the Italian occupation. During the period of 1950 through the 1970s different efforts took place to replant the Acacia and to improve the deteriorating natural vegetative cover. Bou Hedma was integrated into the intemational network of Biosphere Reserves in 1977. Finally the park assumed its current configuration in 1980 when it officially was designated a national park by decree and thus placed under the tutelage of the Direction G6nerale des Forets.

The park has two zones of "temporary occupation" localized in the Communes of Bou Hedma and Haddej, with approximately 320 households and a total population of 2,400. This population contests the legal status conferred on the clearing classified as "zones of temporary occupation", which in effect blocks the possibility for regularizing and clearing the titles to occupancy. Many households were displaced from the time of the creation of the park through the early 1990s in order to create the core of the park. Today, young couples have to settle in neighboring communes because there is no possibility of expanding the original plots, or leave, having received a mostly symbolic compensation. Because of this irregularity in the status of the occupants, the park authorities have come to see them as illegally occupying a space that is destined to be closed.

The complicated land tenure issue is accentuated by the total ignorance on the part of the population about the rationale for the park's existence and its objectives. The social assessment found that in general there was no awareness on the part of the population as to what a national park is or why they exist There is universal ignorance of the concept of biodiversity because there has never been any communication. No women or young girls had ever visited the eco-museum or the park. Few external visitors are allowed,

- 73- since the permits have to be acquired in Tunis. Previously some of the past conservators established a rigid and inflexible approach that banned the external population from visiting the park at all. This has begun to gradually change in most recent years, but the conflict remains that until now the population has been ignored and detached from its environment because of a lack of rapprochement between administrators, scientists, and the local population. This situation must change at all costs if there is to be a future in Bou Hedma, taking stock of the social reality in which the inhabitants live.

The population has depended traditionally on the extensive grazing of sheep, and to a lesser extent camels, that were the mainstay of the nomadic economy, even with the dramatic reduction of grazing resources due to closures and drought. The closure of the park automatically restricted access to these formerly used resources and began a cycle of impoverishment as well as economic change for the population. Some of the people turned to rainfed agriculture and there are patches of small irrigated agriculture. However, the efforts are limited by the lack of access of these people to the development programs that exist in the region because of the precarious nature of their occupancy rights.

Given the high level of risks to agriculture and drought together with the limited grazing areas, the only recourse of many households is to try to obtain employment within the park. There is little doubt that there is a need for manpower and workers in the park. In fact, some of them have worked there for decades but all are still considered "temporary workers" because of budgetary considerations within the DGF. The only recourse is to be employed as "adhira" which is the only safety net other than total unemployment with a total annual revenue of 1,555 DT. As in Ichkeul, there is a wide variation in income distribution, from 3,000 DT per household a year (an average per capita income of 253 DT or USD $177) to about 5,000 DT a year. This means that half of the population is below the poverty line. In fact, the majority of the households in the park are considered officially indigent, which gives them access to medical services with a payment of 1ODT a year, and reduction in the costs of medicines. This classification has two consequences. First, only the households where there are no permanent salaried persons can qualify for this classification, which leaves bereft of treatment the very poor that have "hadhira" types of salaries (3.5 DT a day). The access to medical services is equally precarious since the closest dispensaries are at a 4 kilometer distance and the waiting time to see a medical nurse practitioner or doctor is at least 6 hours. Complicating the health situation is a high natality and mortality rate combined. This in spite of the national efforts of family planning that have dramatically reduced the size of families elsewhere. In Bou Hedma there are many families with 6 to 8 children. The preferred marriage pattern continues to be the traditional endogamous cross cousin marriage which also has consequences for a higher incidence of some diseases.

Under conditions of such impoverishment the people do not understand the penalties imposed for trespassing or using some of the resources that they need for survival. They also explain that some of these prohibited resources, including alfa grass for example, are being degraded because they are not being used. That alfa requires periodic cutting for its continued survival, and,, most of all, the women say that they know the alfa requirements, they have never degraded the alfa because it was one of the local products on which their very existence depended.

In spite of the material economic poverty of the people of Bou Hedma, the traditional culture remains vibrant. Women produce traditional artisan work such as carpets, flij (tent strips), cereal bags, all woven on traditional looms. Basket weaving is also well known in the region, but is declining due to restrictions on the use of alfa grass in the park. There is also traditional pottery, as well as physical culture to maintain in the form of petroglyphs, some Berber ruins, and Roman villas all of which are of interest to archaeologists but have not been well studied. There has been no commercialization of the craf-s and local arts, but the strong traditional knowledge and capacity of the artists and artisans make this a potentially

-74- important source for income improvement and for the provision of alternative livelihoods.

The problems of the area, in addition to the relation of the people to the park and their poverty, is the remoteness of the area and the lack of access to social services. There is limited access to running water, roads, health and education facilities, electrification and sanitation, all have rendered the population's existence even more precarious. Currently there are no community associations except for two water users'associations for the existing potable water systems.

However, in the course of the community consultations it became evident that there was total consensus on the urgent needs that have to be met, including the establishment of a local high school and improved public transport In addition, of course, the demand for the clarification of the land tenure situation is primordial. But the community has expressed willingness to work with the park administration to jointly use the park's resources in a sustainable manner (production of honey, aromatic and medicinal plants, ecotourism, etc.). More than anything, these people want recognition that they exist as part of the park; that they have been there for generations, and fought for Tunisian independence with others and who are recognized and not invisible. If there is this recognition, there will be considerable opening for joint efforts to manage the park and its resources because they would have real as well as symbolic ownership and would insist on maintaining its integrity.

The pre-appraisal mission defined the need to produce a detailed map of the occupied zone of the park together with a census of the occupants and distribution of plots and clearings in order to have a clear idea and definition of the problems confronting the management of the Zone 2. During the appraisal mission the visits to the various douars in Zone 2 showed that the location of the douars is still fairly accurate compared to the French base map, but also that there is a poor understanding of park boundaries, zonation, and mapping among the local and national level representatives of DGF. This is without a doubt one of the key issues to be addressed early in implementation. The, next steps will include the necessary measures to begin the process of community organization where the focus will be not on clearing the issues of land titling, but rather a focus on obtaining a community consensus for common action to preserve their environment as well as to regulate the use of space regardless of official park boundaries. This will eventually deal to a reconsideration of core and buffer zones on the basis ofjoint technical and sociological analyzes. The proposed approach would be to establish a local Development Committee (as in Ichkeul, and under the same conditions of autonomy) to bring together representatives of various groups of stakeholders. Three community facilitators would be recruited to assist in the process of group formation. Additionally, there is a need to identify persons that could act as resource persons in the promotion of education and general sensitization of the population to ecological and biodiversity issues. Discussions during project preparation with the key government officials have already assured the programming of certain priority actions to improve the access of the community to the outside world, notably the improvement of the road network; and electrification; during pre-appraisal, more progress was made with the local authorities as to the placement of the "college" in the village of El Bouaa adjacent to the Park and initiating the improvements in potable water supply.

Jbil National Park

The Jbil National Park has recently been created as part of the government's program to attempt to balance the disparities that have always existed between north and south. The Tunisian South is particularly challenging because it has been perceived as a "marginal" area divested of resources and with limited human capital development potential. The emergence of tourism in the southwestern part of the country began to change these perceptions, and with them the focus of government to increase development in these regions. The creation of a national park symbolizes the presence of the state and defines the modalities and

- 75- orientations for its development. It is against this background that the park must be seen.

The park area was identified in 1986-87 but the official decree creating the park was issued in October, 1994. Since then several constructions have begun to delimit the park but the park cannot be said to be "functional". As with other national parks the decree places it under the tutelage of the DGF. The Jbil park includes areas that were considered state domanial lands as well as collective grazing lands. A total of 18,200 hectares of collective grazing land was given to the domain of the state under contractual conditions that have till today, not been accepted by many members of the tribes.

The park covers 150,000 hectares situated at the center of a great natural desert region of the Nefzaoua, an ancient geographic and territorial entity with a mixture of salt soils, rocky outcrops, and sand, dotted by some palm trees and covered in the southernmost point by the Grand Erg. It is of difficult access, a minimum of 2 hours from Douz by trail in the heart of marginal lands of the Nefzaoua. The park limits were defined by general physiographic characteristics and on a map, with only limited consideration of ecological characteristics and distribution of the local fauna by ecosystems. The current park boundaries, thus, are seen as illogical by the local population that can accurately pinpoint where the prized species, such as the white gazelle can normally be found - and protected. It is generally acknowledged that the objectives of the park and the criteria of viability and functionality will require a reconsideration of the existing park limits.

There is no permanent habitation in the park. There have always been temporary users of these spaces, including traditional nomads, some small village agglomerations, and recently, tourism. The four main tribes of the Nefzaoua are the Ouled Yacoub, the Merazigues, the Adharas, and the Ghribs-Sabria. Once all traditional nomads, they have been progressively sedentarized and have increasingly established themselves in adjacent village areas while reducing the area of transhumance progressively. Today, the space of the park continues to be used differently by all the populations of the area, but most distinctively.

(a) The Merazigues sedentarized in Douz, Kebili and Tozeur, who pay shepherds to take care of their flocks of sheep and goats. Many of these flocks make use of areas closer to Douz and not necessarily within the park boundaries except in certain seasons under certain conditions (rainfall, wind and heat).

(b) the transhumant population including Merazigues and Sabria, that circulate between the Saharan oases and the Saharan grazing areas, alternating between temporary occupation close to the oases and movement of flocks. They transit the park in well defined seasonal transhumance patterns.

(c) The local nomads belonging to the Tunisian groups, including Sabria and Adharas.

(d) The grand nomads, above all located in the areas south of the Grand Erg including the Rebaya and the Souf from Algeria that move with large herds without concern for political boundaries, these tend to seasonally exploit the southern and western part of the park.

Even within these categories the social assessment showed that there is a typology of different users and seasons of use that must be understood to ensure the success of any management plan, particularly because the park area is one of the important areas of passage between ecosystems and therefore of strategic inportance for the pastoral groups. Although the statistics stopped counting "nomadic households", in 1966 there were still 3,000 households in the Tunisian south. Unofficial sources indicate that there are still about 200 households in this area that are "mobile in search of grazing".

If there is a feeling of attachment to the land on the part of the inhabitants in Ichkeul and Bou Hedma, in

- 76 - Jbil, there is more than attachment, because nomadic culture is defined in relation to spaces. This identity is shown in myth and in everyday life. Because of this identity, the claim to being a part of the territory that is now within the park boundaries is one that must be understood above and beyond land tenure and rights. Even if this population is sedentarized, their ancestral identity continues to show through their culture, social organization and use of space. This space, so essential for the life of these people, was deconstructed with the establishment of the park. Not only did they lose large areas of grazing land, but they also were de facto recognized as having no rights to these areas by their exclusion from the decisions on the delimitation and use of the space within the park.

The community consultations in Jbil were among the most productive and revealing. Many stakeholders were consulted, including government agencies, travel bureaus, travelers and tourists, hunters' associations, and other clubs. The most pressing recommendation to emerge from these consultations is the need to establish a management plan that will be a joint effort between the local stakeholders and the government agents in charge of the park administration. The consensus emerged that the largest cause of loss of biodiversity in the Jbil park is not the local and seasonal human presence and animal pressure, but is much more attributable to illegal hunting, illegal use of motorcycles and four by four vehicles, a lack of means on the part of the local authorities to actively manage the park and impose sanctions for the transgression of rules, and the total absence of communication between park authorities and the locally affected population.

Thus, the emerging agenda for action makes it clear that the first block to build an effective management structure is the consultation and dialogue with the local populations. These consultations should take into consideration the ecological characteristics and requirements of the local wildlife and vegetation making use of the existing and prevailing local knowledge of the park area by its traditional users, prior to redefining its boundaries. The local culture and population should be given the same consideration and protection as the gazelles and other endangered species. The employment generated by the park should as a priority be given to the "sons of the desert" adapted to this harsh environment and the best insurance for its continued maintenance.

The Development Committee approach that was favored as a medium of action in the other two parks was also favored here by the local population. A separate assessment was also conducted to investigate the potential for ecotourism in the area of Jbil given the high profile of tourism already in the area.

Safeguard Policy Issues

The proposed project is in its entirety devoted to solve the questions of biodiversity conservation with a participatory approach. The Tunisian Government is against resettlement of any of the parks'population, and there is no anticipated action that wi'l result in resettlement or in any further restriction of access to the resources in the existing parks. Nonetheless, the project team as well as the team responsible for the preparation studies have taken into account the safeguard policy issues including physical cultural property as well as resettlement The following general framework will be a guide to community participation and to the approach required to deal with restriction of access to natural resources. It has the endorsement of both the Tunisian Government and the Bank, and constitutes the first such document accepted by both parties.

- 77 - Process Framework for Community Participation in Biodiversity Conservation and Resource Management

Tunisia: Protected Area Management Project

I. Introduction

A. Project Obiectives

The Tunisia Protected Area Management Project seeks to improve the management of three national parks: Ichkeul, Bouhedma, and Jbil so that (i) the improved management contributes to the well being of the populations living in and around the parks, and; (ii) the trends of biodiversity degradation in these parks are arrested and/or reversed. The project will reinforce the capacity of the Tunisian Governnent and its partners to protect and manage biodiversity of national and global importance in a sustainable manner. The implementation of the integrated park management plans with the active participation of the communities would provide a model that can be replicated in other similar areas. The project will also contribute to the execution of the Tunisian National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan adopted in June 1998. The present project design reflects this strategy within its three components: (i) reinforcement of institutional capacity; (ii) protected area management, and; (iii) public awareness and education.

B. Approach

The project's approach to biodiversity conservation is based on community participation that will take into account the needs of the local populations and will associate them in the formulation of the management plans for each park. Each community has its own unique dynamic. The issue of the size of the population living in Ichkeul and its spatial distribution, for example, differ considerably from the situation in Bouhedma and Jbil. Thus, the measures and scenarios for participation and the sustainable management of resources will have to take into account the specific characteristics of each park. The project seeks to establish the bases for a genuinely participatory approach involving the govermment and the local populations. This development will be based on the conviction of both parties of the benefits to be derived from participatory management and will require changes in behavior and attitudes to attain the joint goals of biodiversity conservation and sustainable improvement of living standards for the populations living in and around the parks. The project envisages the participation of the communities through the creation of local development committees (DC) (Comites de Developpement) as described below. The management plans for each park would be executed for a period of five to fifteen years. The plans will focus not only on the technical aspects (inventories, infrastructure, surveillance), but also on the strategic socio-economic and sustainabilify issues (including scientific monitoring and evaluation, negotiations with the local communities on the key priority actions to reduce the pressure on resources, and to enhance sources of revenues and alternative livelihoods) to ensure the conservation of biodiversity and sustainability of resource use.

C. Institutional Framework

The project's participatory approach to biodiversity conservation and natural resource management will be carried out through the coordination with national, govemorate, and local level institutions. The diverse activities entailed by the project will require the involvement of other agencies and branches of govemment

- 78 - (agriculture, education, tourism, scientific research) as well as other actors (construction, tourist operators, consultant offices), socio-professional organizations and NGOs in the field of popular participation and awareness.

The main institutions that will be involved in the implementation of the project and of this process framework will be:

The Project Steering Committee (PSC) (Comite de Pilotage). Is a multidisciplinary body that includes representatives of the following ministries: (i) Environment and Land use Planning, (ii) Agriculture, (iii) International Cooperation and External Investment, (iv) Tourism, (v) Finance, (vi) Economic Development. This committee will define the overall strategy and guidelines to be executed during the project The committee will have oversight of the project's functioning and will evaluate and approve the work programs and annual budgets. In particular, the conmmittee will be responsible for the use and implementation of the Process Framework during the life of the project.

The Project Management Unit (PMU' (Unite de Gestion du Projet). The Project Management Unit will be the central unit responsible for the coordination of project activities and will ensure the soundness of the technical, scientific, and financial aspects of project implementation. The PMU will coordinate and ensure the coherence of proposed actions proposed by the Park Management Teams. The proposed actions will be discussed at the Local Development Committee (LDC) (ConseilLocal de Developpement). The PMU will submit the annual work programs and budgets to the PSC for validation. The PMU will also ensure that the technical, human, and financial means will be made available to the implementing agencies and that the latter will work in accordance with agreed-on procedures.

The Regional Development Council (RDC) (Conseil Regional de Developpement) The Council is located at the level of each Gouvernorat and it is a consultative as well as decision-making body which has, inter alia, the following functions: (i) formulation of the regional development plans that must be integrated into the national social and -economic development plan; (ii) formulation of land-use plans outside of the municipal boundaries and review of the urban planning for the gouvemorat; (iii) advising on matters of programs and projects planned for the gouvemorat by the state and its agencies; and (iv) oversight of the execution of the regional projects approved by various Ministries. In the project's implementation, the RDC will be the instance of last resort for the resolution of conflicts between the Comites de Developpement and the Equipes de Gestion du Projet. (See below section H-D).

The Local Development Council (LDC) (Conseil Local de Developpement). At the level of each Delegation, this Council has the functions of (i) participating in the formulation and implementation of the environmental protection plans, programs of nature conservation, and natural resources management plans; (ii) advising on programs of local development and proposing priorities and programming as well as participating in the formulation of regional development plans. Within the project, the Council will be the focal point and forum for the discussion of the proposed park management plans as well as the annual work programs.

The Park Management Team (PMT) (Equipe de Gestion du Projet). A Park Management Team will be formed at each park, and will be responsible for the action planning and programming. The Park Conservator will lead it. The team will include representatives of the Ministries of Environment and Tourism, and will work in close collaboration with the representatives of the local population through the intermediation of the selected members of the Development Committees (see below) (Comites de D6veloppernent). Technical staff will be available to assist these teams. The Conservator is responsible for the day-to-day organization and execution of activities in the park by the authority vested in him by the

- 79 - Regional Agricultural Development Council (CRDA).

The Development Committees (DC) (Comites de Developpement). These committees will be the base level institutions for the representation of the population, in order to ensure (I) participation of the communities in the identification of local development measures within a social-economic space (terroir), (ii) the provision of all relevant information on the needs of the populations they represent, (iii) mobilization and organization of the population to facilitate their participation in the development of the park management plans. As they become more experienced, the Development Committees will have the option of becoming legally recognized development entities such as Local Interest Groups (Groupements d'Interet Collectifs ,GIC, Development Groups (Groupements de Developpement, GD), cooperatives, etc.

The DCs will be organized at the outset of the project with the necessary accompanying measures including awareness and training programs, so that the participation of the local communities in the formulation of the park management and development plans will be ensured from the beginning. These plans, with their economic and social objectives, will take into account the actions necessary for the conservation of biodiversity and will be based on an improved use of potential and available natural resources. They will include activities that will permit the local population's development of, and rational management of the natural resources in the protected areas. These community development plans will be an integral part of the park management plans.

II. General Principles of the Process Framework

A. The Context: conservation and restriction of access to resources In the Protected Areas

Some of the project components may trigger the Bank's Policy on Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12) which also includes specific provision for the loss of access to natural resources in parks and protected areas. To achieve its objective of biodiversity conservation, the project may require the restriction of access to the resources in the defined core areas that are currently utilized by the population. The protection of biodiversity in the core areas will require the total restriction of access to its resources. In the rest of the parks certain activities will be permitted. The activities planned for the implementation of the project, including those that will result in the formulation of the park management plans, will be negotiated in a participatory manner with the population, based on recognution of their needs and with the objective of reconciling both the social development objectives as well as the biodiversity conservation objective of the project.

According to national legislation, the protected areas are considered the domain of the state as forestry areas, and activities within them are regulated by the Forestry Code administered by the Forestry Department Different activities, including grazing, agriculture, and forestry extraction and other uses are permitted in some areas. Restrictions on the use of these resources can be envisaged where there is a risk of increasingly perturbing the ecosystem's balance, or where human activities pose a direct threat to biodiversity. These limitations of access are currently regulated by the existing legislation. In the event that there is non-conformity with the requiremedts of the Bank's Policy OP 4.12, this process framework will be used.

B. Process Framework for Community Consultation and Particination

Steps for the formulation of a particpatory strategy. The participation strategy will consist of (a) identification and caffying out a census of the people potentially affected by the project; (b) definition of the eligibility criteria for the project affected populations; (c) formulation of the criteria for the

- 80 - identification of vulnerable groups; (d) elaboration of the process for consultation and dialogue; (e) propositions for the inclusion of the population in the implementation of the project

1. Community awareness and mobilization

A PMT will be formed for each protected area. These teams will be the main executors of the process framework when called for through the formulation of action plans that will include: a) Dissemination of information, the mobilization of stakeholders, and the creation and training of DCs. b) Information gathering and analysis concerning the specific use of resources and their social impacts. c) Formulation of a management plan in collaboration with the DCs. d) Adoption of measures aimed towards the protection of biodiversity in specific zones in cooperation with the DCs.

2. Participator Measures a) Participatory Mapping of condition and use of natural resources. Mapping will provide precise information on (a) the spatial and temporal variation of resource use (grazing, collection of fire-wood, medicinal plants, fishing, etc.); (b) methods, location and conditions under which stakeholders and affected populations utilize the specific resources; (c) customary rights and claims. In the project context the households considered as dependent on the protected areas will be those that have a direct impact on such areas. The participatory mapping will be an input to the planning for resource use and for the definition and formulation of the mitigation measures of any negative impacts. b) Participatorv Diagnostics. Are the base tools for a participatory approach, allowing the identification of the populations and their activities including seasonal uses of the protected areas, the means of communicating with the affected people, and the types of resources they use. The diagnostics can also furnish information on the general use of resources in the surrounding areas and they will be used as the baseline from which mitigation measures as well as other accompanying measures can be defined (training, integration into the management plans) and for monitoring and evaluation. c) Participation and Consultation. Consultations with all concerned stakeholders have already taken place during the preparation of the project These consultations have confirmed the validity of the participatory approach as well as underlined the need for compensatory measures required for the people in the parks and surrounding areas that may lose access to resources. The social analysis during project preparation has already proposed the measures that will be required for the diffusion of information to ensure the awareness and involvement of the communities from the onset of the project The information concerning the planned project activities and the participatory mechanisms will be widely disseminated in both Arabic and French so that the local populations are informed and involved from the outset of the project.

3. Creation of the Development Committees and Selection of Representatives for the PMT

The DCs are in the process of being organized and will be operational by the beginning of the project Each

- 81 - committee will be represented in the PMT. In order to ensure the participation of the communities, the project will rely on the creation on the development committees at the level of the douar or settlement (terroir) as appropriate. All the concerned population will be able to participate in these committees and they will select a number of their members to represent them. The modalities will be defined to ensure that the interests of women, in particular, are represented in these committees.

For each protected area, a technical inter disciplinary team that will include different specialists will be available to assist the park conservator. The team will include (among others) a sociologist/anthropologist, community development specialist, and environmental education and awareness specialists. The training of the personnel of the PMT and the assistance for the necessary studies and surveys to be undertaken as well as the activities for community organization will be the responsibility of the technical support team.

4. Key Steps for the Particigatory Strategy

a) Identification of affected people. There will be a distinction made between the people directly affected by the restriction of access to resources in the protected areas and those that claim rights for historical reasons (traditional land occupancy, collective lands with a temporary occupancy status"). b) Eligibility Criteria of project affected people. Eligibility criteria will be defined at the outset of the project. They may include, inter alia, physical presence in the protected areas for a certain number of years, dependency on the resources of the protected area, and benefits or claims of use of the resources, etc. c) Criteria for the identification of vulnerable groups. The most vulnerable groups in a population should be identified early and as a priority because they would be the population with immediate needs that can only be fulfilled through the use of existing resources to secure their survival and food needs. Criteria for the identification of these groups could be based on: inability to fulfill their dietary needs, no livestock or only a small number of livestock and/or poultry, degraded and precarious habitats, inability to ensure the schooling of children, use of small plots for subsistence or having tenancy status, lack of permanent income, lack of access to basic infrastructure, etc. Individuals and/or households meeting these criteria will have a high priority for training in alternative revenue-generating activities and their participation will be essential in the decision-makdng meetings where reduction of access to resources of the protected areas are discussed, and participate with inputs to the management plans.

C. Budnet for the Execution of the Process Framework Provisions

The budget for the execution of this process framework is included in the overall project budget (institutional support, training, education, and alternative livelihoods) and no additional budget is envisaged for its execution.

D. Process of Consultation for Conflict Resolution and Modalities for the Settlement of Clahms.

It is likely that during the project implementation there will be conflicting views and opinions concerning the utilization of resources of the protected areas. Where such conflicts may arise, the DC and the PMT will be the forum for dispute resolution. If they cannot reach an acceptable solution they will present their claims to the LDC that will strive to reach appropriate solutions and measures. Should conflicts not be solved by these means, the chims will be settled by the RDC.

- 82 - E. Monitorine and Evaluation of the Process Framework

The measures taken to execute this process framework will be the responsibility of the PMT and will be monitored by the PMU. The monitoring reports and the measures taken will be submitted to the PSC by the PMU and will be followed closely by the Bank during project supervisions. The performance indicators to ensure that the measures included in this process framework are taken into account are included in the project log-frame (participation of the population in the development committees, implementation of accompanying measures, financial benefits accruing to the affected population, claims and dispute settlement, etc.).

An evaluation of the provisions of this process framework will be undertaken in the third and sixth year of project implementation.

-83 -

MAP SECTION

IBRD 31835 5° 9° 10° 11- 12° 13- M edliterra n ea n Lake Ichkeul National Park izerie Sed,terranean PartNaotionaldeVi*= TUNISIA

C Iforrin'sTUNISIE37

oTU n,.e , PROTECTED AREAS _,-,,Jenou aMANAGEMENT PROJECT z - PROJET GESTION DES

-36'Et jS,w,4j_ r,, t AIRES PROTEGEES -36°'( / f 't 36'

~~~~, Maca~~stir

Molidia PROJECT SITES A L G E R I A ,) , SITES DU PROJET

t v +~o,, %( . _, t ,- , RIVERS

LAKES ANDSALT LAKES 335' 7 J Sidi Bou Zid ET LACSDACS SALTES 35 Bouhedma Nat''i61 Park GOVERNORATE CAPITALS ,-f - Parc,- National e ,ohda SCAP/TALES DES GOUVERNORATS )_ J ,- ~~~~ParcNational ubodieema sFX P iJKerkenohls >st 5.C4INATIONAL # / CAPITAL CAPITALE DU PAYS

0Goafosa INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES 5 - . rl W-FRONTIERES g = INTERNATIONALES

,--- ?I " _ _-5s -- i- OIt 34' _''_ _ Gobes Zeur .' ,,-. *Gabes ______Gabes_3_ ( ~ ~g s{eUr/__ .-\____o,_SCt- >Gobes , ,0 2~~~~~~~~~~~95 5,0 75 10,0 \ ~~~~~~k-_o-t / >_rX ~~~~~~~~~~KILOMETERS< 2 Dlcrbv3 \ __ ,./"hott el Jer,d \S \ 2C-=> te J°

- 7i,? _@-- ModonJneMee Mediterranean

- Jbil National Park , 33° Parc Nationale Jbg 33d s\ * 8 s~~~~~~~~~~~~Tataoutne Z v \

\ 0/ 12- 1,3-

.32' / 32' M0dr' it 0.

SPAIN>S / MediterrJaneon32 Tun E -

\ ~~~~ Alger ~~/ Tuijgr e:-S.AT \ _- ~ ~ ~3/ jTUN151A vo(n

' ,/ . F4Tripoli'>

ALGERIA LIBYA -30-

31 This mpwas produced by the \ ALGERIA Mop Design Unit of The World Bank 31 LIBYA The boundaries, colors, denominations 25O 25 and anyother information shown on * I , thbsmap do not imply, on the port of \ .'.. The World Bank Group, ony judgment / \ " I1 - on the legalstatus of any territory, or any endorsement or acceptance of \ *-20- .? . such boundaries - M AIiALI / NIGER CHAD

B 10°1 MAL 10Mj CsA MARCH 2002

IMAGING

Report No. 23339 TUN Type: PAD