Fao/Global Environment Facility
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FAO/GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY PROJECT DOCUMENT PROJECT TITLE: Sustainable management of agro‐bFAO/GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY iodiversity and vulnerable ecosystems recuperation in Peruvian Andean regions through Globally ImportPROJECT DOCUMENT ant Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) approach. PROJECT CODE: GCP/PER/045/GFF COUNTRY: Peru FINANCING PARTNER: GEF FAO Project ID: 635627 GEF/LDCF/SCCF Project ID: 9092 EXECUTING PARTNERS: Ministry of Environment (MINAM) and Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation (MINAGRI) Expected EOD (Starting Date): Expected NTE (End Date): CONTRIBUTION TO a. Strategic Objective/Organizational Result: FAO’s STRATEGIC SO1: Contribute to the eradication of hunger and food insecurity FRAMEWORK: SO2: Sustainably increase the provision of goods and services from agriculture, livestock, forestry and fishing b. Regional Result/Priority Areas: 2. Family farming and territorial development in rural zones c. Country Programming Framework Outcome: SO2: Making agriculture, forestry and fisheries more productive and sustainable GEF/LDCF/SCCF Focal Area: Biodiversity, Land Degradation, Sustainable Forest Management GEF/LDCF/SCCF Strategic objectives: BD‐3 Programme 7, BD‐4 Programme 9, LD‐3 Programme 4, SFM‐3 Programme 8 Environmental and social risk classification (insert √): Low risk √Moderate risk High risk GEF allocation 9,369,864 Co‐financing Cash In kind Total MINAGRI 5,739,771 1,165,339 6,905,110 MINAM 6,723,680 6,723,680 GORE Huancavelica 9,154,633 114,840 9,269,473 GORE Apurímac 18,019,753 18,019,753 GORE Puno 20,636,554 600,714 21,237,267 GORE Cusco 11,508,266 4,029,972 15,538,239 GORE Arequipa 100,608 100,608 GOLO Atiquipa 23,335 23,335 ANPE 70,000 120,000 190,000 Consorcio Agro‐ecológico Peruano 276,400 277,840 554,240 PROFO‐NANPE 500,000 500,000 FAO 370,170 370,170 Sub‐total cofinancing 65,775,548 13,656,327 79,431,874 Total project financing 88,801,130 Executive Summary The objective of the project is to conserve in‐situ and to sustainably use globally‐important agro‐ biodiversity (ABD) through the preservation of traditional agricultural systems, the integrated management of forests, water, and land resources, and the maintenance of ecosystem services. Currently, this ABD and the ecosystems on which it depends are threatened by a combination of factors including the introduction of intensified agriculture and new crop varieties, demographic change, environmental degradation, pests and diseases and climate change. The project will work directly in five target localities in Peru, covering 13 districts, and will create conditions for the replication of results throughout the Peruvian Andes and beyond. This project will promote a landscape approach to conservation, which will ensure that not only the ABD crops themselves but also the landscape‐wide traditional systems in which they are dynamically managed by local people are maintained, and that threats operating at landscape scale are addressed. This is in accordance with the model of ABD zones provided for in Peruvian legislation, which corresponds in general to the principles of the GIAHS and NIAHS model. The project will deliver benefits in an integrated manner in the biodiversity, land degradation and sustainable forest management focal areas, contributing to the conservation status of globally important ABD through its active management in sustainably managed production landscapes, as well as restoring the forests and other ecosystems that generate ecosystem services on which the ABD depends. Component 1 focuses on strengthening farmers’ capacities for managing and conserving ABD in response to evolving pressures, and on restoring the landscapes that provide ecosystems services on which the ABD management systems depend; Component 2 focuses on promoting the marketing of ABD crops and products in such a way as to increase the economic attractiveness of their maintenance by farmers; and Component 3 focuses on ensuring an enabling environment of interinstitutional coordination, institutional capacities and public awareness to support the proposed model of ABD conservation. 2 Acronyms and abbreviations 6 SECTION 1 – PROJECT RATIONALE 9 1.1 PROJECT CONTEXT ................................................................................................................ 9 1.2 THE CURRENT SITUATION ................................................................................................... 34 1.3 THE GEF ALTERNATIVE ........................................................................................................ 51 1.4 LESSONS LEARNED .............................................................................................................. 82 1.5 STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT ...................................................................................................... 8 4 SECTION 2 – FEASIBILITY 88 2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT EVALUATION ................................................... 88 2.2 RISK MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................... 88 SECTION 3 – IMPLEMENTATION AND MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS 89 3.1 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS ....................................................................................... 89 3.2 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS ................................................................................. 91 3.3 PLANNING AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT .................................................................... 103 3.4 MONITORING AND REPORTING ........................................................................................ 107 3.5 EVALUATION PROVISIONS ................................................................................................ 113 3.7 COMMUNICATION AND VISIBILITY ................................................................................... 114 SECTION 4 – SUSTAINABILITY OF RESULTS 115 4.1 SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY .................................................................................................... 115 4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY .................................................................................. 115 4.3 FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY .................................................................. 116 4.4 SUSTAINABILITY OF CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT ................................................................ 116 4.5 APPROPRIATENESS OF TECHNOLOGIES INTRODUCED and COST/EFFECTIVENESS .......... 117 4.6 INNOVATIVENESS, REPLICATION and SCALE‐UP .............................................................. 117 APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................................... 118 APPENDIX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................ 119 APPENDIX 2. WORK PLAN ............................................................................................................. 133 APPENDIX 3. PROJECT BUDGET ..................................................................................................... 141 APPENDIX 4. RISK MATRIX ............................................................................................................. 142 APPENDIX 5. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT ......................................................... 144 APPENDIX 6. Environmental and social impact mitigation plan ................................................... 146 APPENDIX 7. draft TERMS OF REFERENCE .................................................................................... 153 APPENDIX 8. ALTITUDE RANGES, CROPS, FAUNA AND FLORA IN THE TARGET LOCALITIES ......... 168 APPENDIX 9. LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES AND/OR ECOSYSTEMS ............................................ 170 APPENDIX 10. Traditional management practices of wild flora and fauna..................................... 175 APPENDIX 11. market studies ......................................................................................................... 181 APPENDIX 12. QUANTIFYING CARBON BENEFITS ........................................................................... 212 APPENDIX 13. Baseline Initiatives in the Target Localities .............................................................. 216 APPENDIX 14. EXAMPLE OF Payment for environmental service (PES) SCHEME IN pERU ............. 224 APPENDIX 15. Analysis of fiduciary risks and mitigation measures .................................................... 1 4 5 Acronyms and abbreviations ABD Agrobiodiversity ANFFS National Authority for Flora and Wildlife (Autoridad Nacional de Flora y Fauna Silvestre) ANPE Peruvian National Association of Ecologic Producers ARFFS Regional Authority for Flora and Wildlife (Autoridad Regional de Flora y Fauna Silvestre) AWP/B Annual Work Plan and Budget BD Biodiversity BH Budget Holder CAP Peruvian Agro‐ecological Consortium CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CCTA CCTA – Science and Technology Andean Coordinator CDP Concerted Development Plan CEO Chief Executive Officer (GEF) CESA Centro de Servicios Agropecuarios CMES Compensation Mechanisms for Ecosystem Services CO2eq Carbon dioxide equivalent CONADIB National Commission for Biological Diversity CONCYTEC National Council for Science, Technology and Innovation COSUDE Swiss Development Cooperation CSA Community‐supported agriculture CSO Civil Society Organisation CWR Crop Wild Relatives DGOTA Generate Directorate of Environmental Territorial Land Use Planning (Dirección General de Ordenamiento