Document of The World Bank
Public Disclosure Authorized Report No: ICR00004171
IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT (IDA-49830)
ON A
CREDIT
IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 1.40 MILLION Public Disclosure Authorized (US$2.25 MILLION EQUIVALENT)
TO THE
ROYAL GOVERNMENT OF BHUTAN
FOR A
SECOND PHASE OF THE ADAPTABLE PROGRAM LOAN (APL) ON STRENGTHENING REGIONAL COOPERATION FOR WILDLIFE PROTECTION IN ASIA
Public Disclosure Authorized
June 28, 2017
Environment and Natural Resources Global Practice Bhutan Country Management Unit South Asia Region
Public Disclosure Authorized CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective March 29, 2017)
Currency Unit = Bhutanese Ngultrum (BTN) BTN 1.00 = US$0.02 US$1.00 = BTN 64.99
FISCAL YEAR
July 1 – June 30
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
APL Adaptable Program Loan ASEAN-WEN Association of South East Asian Nations-Wildlife Enforcement Network BhuFED Bhutan Forest and Wildlife Enforcement Database BTN Bhutanese Ngultrum CPS Country Partnership Strategy DOFPS Department of Forests and Park Services FA Financing Agreement FPSU Forest Protection and Surveillance Unit GECC Gewog Environmental Conservation Committee GEF Global Environment Facility GRF Government Reserve Forest GTI Global Tiger Initiative GTRP Global Tiger Recovery Program HWC Human Wildlife Conflict ICDP Integrated Conservation Development Project ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report IDA International Development Association ISR Implementation Status Report M&E Monitoring and Evaluation METT Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool MOAF Ministry of Agriculture and Forests MOU Memorandum of Understanding MTR Midterm Review OPCS Operations Policy and Country Services OSCRC Operational Steering Committee for Regional Coordination PA Protected Area PAD Project Appraisal Document PDO Project Development Objective PISC Project Implementation Steering Committee PMU Project Management Unit RBP Royal Botanic Park RGoB Royal Government of Bhutan RPSC Regional Policy Steering Committee SAWEN South Asia Wildlife Enforcement Network SMART Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool SRF State Reserve Forest TRC Tiger Range Country VRCE Virtual Regional Center of Excellence WCCB Wildlife Crime Control Bureau WCCC Wildlife Crime Control Coordination Committee WCD Wildlife Conservation Division XDR Special Drawing Rights
Senior Global Practice Director: Karin Kemper Practice Manager: Kseniya Lvovsky Project Team Leader: Nathalie Weier Johnson ICR Team Leader: Anupam Joshi
BHUTAN
Second Phase of the Adaptable Program Loan (APL) on Strengthening Regional Cooperation for Wildlife Protection in Asia
CONTENTS Data Sheet A. Basic Information B. Key Dates C. Ratings Summary D. Sector and Theme Codes E. Bank Staff F. Results Framework Analysis G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs H. Restructuring I. Disbursement Graph
1. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design ...... 1 2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes ...... 7 3. Assessment of Outcomes ...... 14 4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome ...... 19 5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance ...... 20 6. Lessons Learned ...... 23 7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners ...... 24 Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing ...... 25 Annex 2. Outputs by Component ...... 26 Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysi ...... 31 Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes ...... 33 Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results ...... 34 Annex 6. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results ...... 35 Annex 7. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR ...... 36 Annex 8. Comments of Cofinanciers and Other Partners/Stakeholders ...... 37 Annex 9. List of Supporting Documents ...... 38 Annex 10. Changes Made to the Results Framework during Project Restructuring .... 39 MAP……………………………………………………………………………………..43
A. Basic Information
Second Phase of the APL on Strengthening Country: South Asia Project Name: Regional Cooperation for Wildlife Protection in Asia Project ID: P126193 L/C/TF Number(s): IDA-49830 ICR Date: 06/28/2017 ICR Type: Core ICR KINGDOM OF Lending Instrument: Adaptable Program Loan Borrower: BHUTAN Original Total XDR 1.40 million Disbursed Amount: XDR 1.40 million Commitment: Revised Amount: XDR 1.40 million Environmental Category: B Implementing Agencies: Wildlife Conservation Division, Department of Forests and Park Services, Ministry of Agriculture and Forests Cofinanciers and Other External Partners: None
B. Key Dates Revised / Actual Process Date Process Original Date Date(s) Concept Review: 03/29/2011 Effectiveness: 10/19/2011 Appraisal: 05/16/2011 Restructuring(s): 10/19/2015 Approval: 06/17/2011 Mid-term Review: 10/27/2014 10/27/2014 Closing: 08/31/2016 08/31/2016
C. Ratings Summary C.1 Performance Rating by ICR Outcomes: Satisfactory Risk to Development Outcome: Moderate Bank Performance: Moderately Satisfactory Borrower Performance: Moderately Satisfactory
C.2 Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (by ICR) Bank Ratings Borrower Ratings
Quality at Entry: Moderately Unsatisfactory Government: Moderately Satisfactory Implementing Quality of Supervision: Satisfactory Satisfactory Agency/Agencies: Overall Bank Overall Borrower Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Performance: Performance:
i C.3 Quality at Entry and Implementation Performance Indicators Implementation QAG Assessments (if Indicators Rating Performance any) Potential Problem Project Quality at Entry No None at any time (Yes/No): (QEA): Problem Project at any Quality of Supervision Yes None time (Yes/No): (QSA): DO rating before Satisfactory Closing/Inactive status:
D. Sector and Theme Codes Original Actual Major Sector/Sector Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry Other Agriculture, Fishing, and Forestry 94 94 Public Administration - Agriculture, Fishing, and Forestry 6 6
Major Theme/Theme/Sub Theme Environment and Natural Resource Management Environmental policies and institutions 4 4 Renewable Natural Resources Asset Management 96 96 Biodiversity 96 96
E. Bank Staff Positions At ICR At Approval Vice President: Annette Dixon Isabel M. Guerrero Country Director: Qimiao Fan Nicholas J. Krafft Practice Manager/Manager: Kseniya Lvovsky Herbert Acquay Project Team Leader: Nathalie Weier Johnson Sumith Pilapitiya ICR Team Leader: Anupam Joshi ICR Primary Author: Anupam Joshi
F. Results Framework Analysis Project Development Objectives (from Project Appraisal Document) The objective of the Project is to assist the Recipient in building and/or enhancing shared capacity, institutions, knowledge and incentives to tackle illegal wildlife trade and other selected regional conservation threats to habitats in border areas.
ii Revised Project Development Objectives (as approved by original approving authority)
The PDO was not revised
(a) PDO Indicator(s)
Original Target Actual Value Formally Values (from Achieved at Indicator Baseline Value Revised approval Completion or Target Values documents) Target Years A regional mechanism is developed and operational for addressing illegal wildlife trade Indicator 1: and other conservation threats. No regional mechanism is in place for addressing illegal wildlife trade and Establishment of other conservation threats the regional One annual Value at present, but there is coordination forum meeting held Three meetings held (Quantitative or agreement among regional agreed to in Year 4 after statute Qualitative) countries to establish the by the TRCs approval South Asia Wildlife
Enforcement Network (SAWEN) with similar objectives Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Fully achieved and exceeded (300%). The indicator measures the “building and/or enhancing shared capacity, institutions, knowledge and incentives to tackle illegal wildlife trade and other selected regional conservation threats” part of the PDO. The target was revised in the 10/19/2015 restructuring for improved clarity with more explicit targets. Nepal and Bangladesh have formally ratified SAWEN, as participating countries in the wildlife APL. In addition, non-APL countries, such as India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka have also formally endorsed the statute; as a result, SAWEN is now officially an intergovernmental organization. Even though Bhutan is still in the process of ratifying and could not ratify during project implementation, the country has been reaping the benefits of SAWEN. The establishment of SAWEN as a regional instrument for collaborating and cooperating on the sensitive issue of illegal wildlife trade and sharing Comments of intelligence among countries is a significant achievement of the project. This is (incl. % because SAWEN is mandated with working jointly with the South Asian countries on achievement) tracking and monitoring of illegal wildlife trade by: (a) initiatives for bringing harmonization and standardization in laws and policies of member countries concerning conservation of wild fauna and flora; (b) documenting the trend of poaching and illegal wildlife trade, and related threats to the natural biodiversity within and across countries in the region; (c) strengthening institutional responses to combat wildlife crime by promoting partnership with relevant institutions for research and information sharing, training and capacity building, and technical support; and (d) encouraging member countries to prepare and implement their National Action Plans to combat wildlife crime and to collaborate towards effective implementation of such plans. In its initial phase of development, SAWEN collaborated closely with World Customs Organization, International Convention for Trade in Endangered Species, INTERPOL and Lusaka Agreement Task Force and ASEAN-WEN for operation
iii COBRA-II which was conducted from December 30, 2013 to January 26, 2014. The operation resulted in the seizure of 36 rhino horns, over 3 metric tons of elephant ivory, over 10,000 turtles, over 1,000 skins of protected species, over 10,000 European eels, and more than 200 metric tons of rosewood. Over 400 criminals were also arrested in Asia and Africa including trafficking kingpins during the operation. Other potential benefits of SAWEN that will be realized in due course includes sharing of illegal wildlife crime data, joint investigations, capacity building in technical areas, such as, forensics. The data source includes information from the client and www.sawen.org. Number of agreed knowledge products developed and shared among SAWEN Indicator 2: countries on wildlife crime and/or wildlife conservation Value No protocols in the areas At least one 15 47 (Quantitative or identified at present protocol (5 products per
Qualitative) implemented country) Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Fully achieved and exceeded (313%). The indicator measures the “building and/or enhancing shared capacity and knowledge” part of the PDO. The indicator target was revised in the 10/19/2015 restructuring to reflect the decision by India in 2013 not to participate in the APL. With India bordering each APL participating country, agreement on regional protocols would be impossible to achieve without India’s participation. A range of knowledge products, from web-based tools to flagship species survey reports on the one hand to Wildlife Sanctuary Management Plans and strengthening regional cooperation on the other, were developed and shared across SAWEN countries, including India, Bangladesh and Nepal. Some of the knowledge products started the process of integrating scientific monitoring and measurement, for example, in tiger and wildlife censuses, marking a transformation change in the way wildlife management is viewed. The shift from traditional population estimates to use of Comments scientific methods is a significant outcome of the project’s investments. At the regional (incl. % level, several protected area management plans were developed. All these contributed achievement) to strengthening the institutional capacity in the region on wildlife conservation and enforcement. Moreover, the SAWEN website has been very effective in compiling and publicizing wildlife law enforcement activities conducted in the member countries and highlighting the major global efforts in combating wildlife crime. SAWEN regularly upgrades its website to make it more dynamic, use-friendly, interactive, and informative portal for wildlife crime control initiatives in South Asia. As a part of improving communication and sharing knowledge and information, the SAWEN Secretariat has been publishing various promotional materials (brochures, booklets), news bulletins, and reports. The quarterly bulletin, launched in September, 2011, highlights the major wildlife law enforcement activities conducted by the member countries, focusing on trans-boundary cases and covers the important global wildlife crime issues and control initiatives. The data source is review of the knowledge products that were produced and shared by the client. Indicator 3: Wildlife crime control institutions established in the three participating countries Implementation Value No regional protocol is in effectiveness of 3 3 (Quantitative or place at present regional protocols Qualitative) reviewed and
iv revisions made as necessary Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Fully achieved (100%). The indicator measures the “building and/or enhancing institutions” part of the PDO. The indicator target was revised in the 10/19/2015 restructuring to reflect the decision by India in 2013 not to participate in the APL. With India bordering each APL participating country, agreement on regional protocols would be impossible to achieve. Wording was revised for better clarity and explicit targets. While Bangladesh and Nepal have created wildlife crime control institutions, in Bhutan, the already existing 'Forest Protection and Surveillance Unit' (FPSU) was significantly strengthened. In Nepal, the Wildlife Crime Control Coordination Committee (WCCC) and the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB) were established; and in Bangladesh, the Wildlife Crime Control Unit in Dhaka, the Wildlife Comments Conservation Division, and the Wildlife Crime Control Unit were established. This is (incl. % potentially a long-term institutional outcome targeted and achieved through project achievement) investments. The established agencies for addressing the illegal wildlife crime have shown the breadth and reach of project investments in strengthening the regulatory environment operating in a regional perspective. Illegal wildlife crime detection is improving, with establishing of BhuFED and training of staff for detecting, recording and presenting of crimes. While numbers were not available at the time of the ICR, authorities in Bhutan confirmed that these efforts are already resulting in better crime control. It is safe to assume that in the absence of IDA financing, such a robust and long-term outcome could have taken another decade to take shape. The data sources primarily included review of the relevant legal documents regarding these departments, the Government officials, including project implementing division who provided information for assessing the performance. Indicator 4: Number of implemented pilot initiatives that address trans-boundary wildlife issues 21 Bhutan = 3 sub- Progress of Value No such regional pilots or 3 projects; Nepal = 7 regional pilots and (Quantitative or initiatives in place (One per sub-projects; initiatives reviewed Qualitative) country) Bangladesh = 11
sub-projects
Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Fully achieved and exceeded (700%) for the three APL countries. The indicator measures the “to tackle other selected regional conservation threats to habitats in border areas” part of the PDO. The language and target of the indicator were revised in the 10/19/2015 restructuring for clarity and to define targets. Several innovative pilots addressing trans-boundary wildlife issues implemented. For Bhutan, the National Tiger and Snow Leopard Surveys, and interventions on human- Comments wildlife conflict were implemented and completed. The wildlife surveys were the first (incl. % for Bhutan and helped developed and tested a methodology as well preparation and achievement) launch of these survey reports. Some of the pilots have shown a high relevance, efficiency, and efficacy in extending benefits to the people most affected by wildlife, particularly those in undergoing crop losses due to depredation by wildlife. Examples, include crop insurance scheme and about 158 km of electric fence protecting over 3600 Ha of croplands. The project has thus facilitated a marked improvement in the relationship between people and protected area authorities, which is a significant
v outcome by itself. At the regional level, there are several others in Bangladesh and Nepal that collectively contribute to the regional conservation outcomes.
The data source includes the aide memoires that included feedback from beneficiaries and the third party independent End Evaluation Report that was commissioned by the client. Indicator 5: Number of activities contributing to tiger conservation Value 0 0 5 11 (Quantitative or
Qualitative) Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Fully achieved and exceeded (220%). This indicator measures the “to tackle illegal wildlife trade and other selected regional conservation threats to habitats in border area” part of the PDO. This was a new indicator added in the 10/19/2015 restructuring to measure the effectiveness of collaboration on tackling Illegal wildlife trade and conservation. Three activities each completed for Bhutan and Nepal and five for Bangladesh. For Bhutan, the three activities were: (i) Bhutan’s national tiger report completed in June 2015; (ii) Human wildlife conflict management project (interventions contribute to address tiger human conflicts); and (iii) Bhutan Forest and Wildlife Enforcement Database operationalized. The tiger, being a flagship and Comments charismatic species, is perhaps the most affected due to illegal wildlife trade. The focus (incl. % on tiger conservation, prominently brought back by project investments has galvanized achievement) political support at the highest level of the participating governments, which is reflected by: (a) commitment to support the strengthened wildlife crime institutions in the APL countries; (b) formal ratification of SAWEN; and (c) signing of bilateral Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Bangladesh and India and Nepal and India. This activity also supported adoption of new approaches, tools, and innovations, including the establishment of BhuFED, wildlife population survey/census, supporting local institutions, such as, GECC for crop insurance. The data source includes the aide memoires that included feedback from beneficiaries and the third party independent End Evaluation Report that was commissioned by the client.
(b) Intermediate Outcome Indicator(s)
Original Target Actual Value Formally Values (from Achieved at Indicator Baseline Value Revised Target approval Completion or Values documents) Target Years Number of agreed research programs for regional wildlife management developed Indicator 1: among participating countries. Common research and 30% of research Value conservation program is program is 3 5 (Quantitative absent implemented or Qualitative)
Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Comments Fully achieved and exceeded (167%). This indicator measures the overall PDO (including % outcomes. The language and target of the indicator were revised in the 10/19/2015 achievement) restructuring for clarity and to define explicit targets. From a regional perspective, the
vi target was exceeded, particularly when the joint tiger survey by India and Bangladesh and exposure visit between India and Nepal are considered. For Bhutan an agreement is expected to be signed soon between India and Bhutan for initiating joint research on wildlife management. There were two consultative meetings between Bhutan and India in February 2013 and February 2016 for finalizing the MOU. These meetings are also spaced three years apart, indicating both the fact that such efforts require a long time frame and that it requires government commitment to stay engaged. In addition, Bhutan completed two wildlife surveys (for tigers and snow leopard), as part of agreed research programs. However, all the APL countries are implementing agreed research programs. For example, Elephant-human conflict research and elephant corridors between India and Bangladesh and Vulture conservation research between Nepal and India. The data source is the Global Tiger Recovery Program (GTRP) that lists the country- wise research and action program and review of some of the research program documents. Number of thematic meetings on wildlife crime and trans-boundary conservation issues Indicator 2: among participating and other relevant countries Regional knowledge Implementation of Value sharing mechanism is the knowledge 3 3 (Quantitative absent sharing mechanism or Qualitative)
Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Fully achieved (100%). This indicator measures the “to tackle illegal wildlife trade and other selected regional conservation threats to habitats in border areas” part of the PDO. The original indicator was replaced as the subcomponent to which it was linked was dropped during project restructuring in October 2015. The achievement is significant as these meetings now also involve some non-APL Comments countries. The first meeting took place in March 2015 with all the three countries (including % participating and laid the foundation for expediting collaboration on illegal wildlife achievement) trade and work towards establishing SAWEN as a regional mechanism. The third meeting took place October 26-27, 2016 in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Resolutions from that meeting are available here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2T5LaFi5OFAeC11SUN1Ymh2bjA/view. The data source is the experience shared by the client and the October 2016 aide memoire for Bangladesh part of APL1, as also the SAWEN website. Component 1 Strengthened enforcement and effective control of illegal wildlife trade Indicator 1: Institutionalizat ion of the WCD does not have a Institutionalization information/ Bhutan Forests and formalized information/ of the information intelligence Wildlife Value intelligence network to intelligence network as part Enforcement (Quantitative support enforcement and network as part of of DOFPS’s Database (BhuFED) or Qualitative) control of illegal wildlife WCD’s law law established trade at present enforcement system enforcement
system
Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016
vii Fully achieved (100%). The indicator contributes to the “building and/or enhancing shared capacity, institutions and knowledge” part of the PDO. The target of the indicator was revised in the 10/19/2015 restructuring for greater relevance to Bhutan. Bhutan Forests and Wildlife Enforcement Database (BhuFED) is the information/ intelligence network, which is a part of DOFPS’s law enforcement system. The Comments development, installation, commissioning, and use of (BhuFED) was successfully (including % completed. The strengthened FPSU was provided with necessary equipment— achievement) computers and peripherals, thermal imaging and digital cameras, field extension kits, and over 50 handsets for wireless communication. This is a significant advancement for strengthening enforcement and based on reports from the ground, reduced incidence of illegal wildlife poaching, and related cases are being reported. The data source is DOFPS that confirmed operationalization of BhuFED. Component 1 Improved record of trained staff vis-à-vis capacity for enforcement, trans-boundary Indicator 2: coordination and responsiveness to wildlife crimes Evaluation of successful (or non- successful) efforts Inadequate capacity to of transboundary Value respond to wildlife crimes 250 staff coordination in 935 (Quantitative and trans-boundary trained improving or Qualitative) coordination enforcement and
illegal wildlife crime control
Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Fully achieved and exceeded (375%). This indicator contributes to the “illegal wildlife trade” part of the PDO. The indicator was revised in the 10/19/2015 restructuring for more clarity with more explicit targets. Enforcement capacity has improved as a result of training of about 200 enforcement staff and over 700 frontline staff in use of BhuFED and SMART patrolling. Some of Comments the officers who were trained confirmed the effectiveness of the training provided. (including % Trans-boundary coordination has also increased with signed memorandum of achievement) understanding with India. However, no formal assessment has been undertaken for evaluating the effectiveness of trans-boundary coordination in improving enforcement and illegal wildlife crime control. Responsiveness to incidences of human-wildlife conflict has increased too, due to the establishing of wildlife rescue centers. By the time of ICR writing, data on reduction of crime rates was not available. The data source is the July 2016 mission aide memoire and available training records. Component 2 Improved management of PAs through development of better management, Indicator 1: infrastructure, and trained staff Construction of PA Nonexistent or inadequate management Value infrastructure facilities for offices and n.a. n.a. (Quantitative PA management deployment of or Qualitative) trained field staff
Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Comments This indicator was dropped during restructuring, as there was no demand-driven (including % subproject posed under the competitive funding windows that included activities in or achievement) for the PAs. Also, no Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) was used
viii during project implementation. However, another GEF project supported a country wide METT+ that published a ‘Bhutan’s State of Parks Report’ in 2016. Component 2 Better care and management of injured and rescued wildlife Indicator 2: Implementation of wildlife Equipment Value No wildlife rescue centers rehabilitation provided for 2 (Quantitative in place programs at the operationalizing or Qualitative) rescue centers the center(s)
Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Fully achieved (100%). This indicator contributes to the “other selected regional conservation threats to habitats in border areas” part of the PDO. The indicator was revised during project restructuring in October 2015 to better define the annual target. This is fully achieved as the project supported the first ever regional wildlife rescue Comments center in southern Bhutan, which is fully equipped and operational and implementing (including % wildlife rehabilitation programs. Two centers, at Taba and Jigmeling, were upgraded achievement) and have since rescued, treated, and released into the wild over 210 wild animals and are under operation since 2013. Data source for this indicator are review of reports from the is WCD on the numbers of animals rescued, treated and released. Component 2 Improved facilities for environmental education and interpretation Indicator 3: Conducting Value Conducting Visitor Visitor Visitor Satisfaction Zero (Quantitative Satisfaction Survey Satisfaction Survey conducted or Qualitative) Survey
Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Fully achieved (100%). This indicator contributes to the “shared capacity, knowledge and institutions” part of the PDO. The original indicator was replaced as the subcomponent to which it was linked was dropped during project restructuring in October 2015. The facilities for environmental education and interpretation have been improved as planned at the Royal Botanical Park, Lamperi by substantially improving interpretation facilities available to visitors. The visitor satisfaction survey was done in Comments 2016 and long term visitor feedback was also collected from November 2009 to August (including % 2016 through the visitor book maintained at the park. The visitor satisfaction survey achievement) particularly appreciated better signage, trail management, resting places, information booklet, guide service and educational displays at the interpretation center. The outcomes of this investment are already noticeable with significant increase in the number of paid visitors to the RBP that exceeded 9000 visitors in 2015. The data source is WCD that collected information from the records of RBP and visitor satisfaction survey report. Component 2 Measures taken to reduce HWC Indicator 4: Replication strategy Assessment of Value No models have been and master plan effectiveness of 3 (Quantitative tested developed initiatives & or Qualitative) development of
ix models for upscaling
Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Partially achieved. This indicator contributes to the “other selected regional conservation threats to habitats in border areas” part of the PDO. The indicator was revised for more clarity with more explicit targets during the restructuring in October 2015. An evaluation was carried out that was limited to a single site. It reported that electric fence procured locally was as effective in preventing crop depredation by wild animals, as the one imported into Bhutan. It, however, did not take into account the cost of maintenance of the electric wires. A thorough assessment of the effectiveness of the measures implemented was not carried out for all the interventions for reducing Comments HWC. Some models, for example, on crop and livestock insurance and electric wire (including % fence were developed and implemented but no replication strategy and master plan achievement) were developed. A ‘quick response team’ has also been set up to respond to any report on human-wildlife conflict for minimizing the potential losses to life and assets as well as for rescuing the wildlife. Other critical measures undertaken during implementation were identification of hotspots where occurrence of HWC were frequent, raising community awareness in dealing with HWC and monitoring of construction of electric fences. Data source for this is the discussions with the WCD and the End Project Evaluation report. Component 2 30% increase in visitor satisfaction due to improved ecotourism Indicator 5: Value Ecotourism planning is Undertake visitor n.a. n.a. (Quantitative absent satisfaction survey or Qualitative) Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 09/11/2015 12/31/2016 Comments This indicator was dropped during restructuring in October 2015. The team assessed (including % that this may be covered under the five subprojects and hence dropped the indicator. achievement) Component 2 20% increase in the revenue earning opportunities of PAs and affected communities Indicator 6: due to ecotourism Value 2010 revenue data and 20% increase in n.a. n.a. (Quantitative household income revenue or Qualitative) Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 09/11/2015 12/31/2016 This indicator was dropped during restructuring in October 2015. The team assessed Comments that this indicator, or an equivalent measure, is covered under the progress of the five (including % subprojects. However, no explicit effort was made to capture the increase in revenue at achievement) the community level due to ecotourism. Data are available on gate fee collections from paid visitors. Component 2 Development of smart, green and wildlife friendly infrastructure plans Indicator 7: 75% of greening Greening of infrastructure Value infrastructure pilot within and adjacent to PAs n.a. n.a. (Quantitative projects is absent or Qualitative) implemented
x Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 09/11/2015 12/31/2016 This indicator was dropped during restructuring in October 2015. Even though the Comments team records in the restructuring paper that this indicator already covers the indicators (including % for five ongoing subprojects, there has not been a quantitative measurement of achievement) greening of infrastructure nor were any plans developed during project implementation. Component 2 Introduction of a scientific method of surveying snow leopards Indicator 5: Completion of Snow leopard Value survey and survey completed 0 n.a. (Quantitative launching of and report launched or Qualitative) report and published
Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016 Fully achieved (100%). This new indicator was added at project restructuring in October 2015 and contributes to “Institutions and Knowledge” part of the PDO. It was added to capture the progress of a subproject on survey of the snow leopard. A field manual on sign and camera trap survey techniques was published and disseminated to Comments departmental staff. The two-phase survey (first phase of sign survey of prey base and (including % second phase of camera trap survey) has been completed. This was an exhaustive achievement) scientific exercise and an approved methodology was published. This survey has given a boost to the regional cooperation among the snow leopard countries. Data source for this is the review of the published methodology document and the final snow leopard survey report. Component 3 Establishment of Regional Project Steering Committee (RPSC) and of Operational Indicator 1: Steering Committee for Regional Coordination (OSCRC) and made operational Value Regional efforts are absent Fully operational n.a. n.a. (Quantitative or Qualitative) Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 09/11/2015 12/31/2016 Comments This indicator was dropped during restructuring in October 2015, as the regional (including % coordination was envisaged through SAWEN. achievement) Component 3 Area brought under enhanced biodiversity conservation Indicator 2: Value
(Quantitative n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. or Qualitative) Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 09/11/2015 12/31/2016 Comments This indicator was dropped during restructuring in October 2015, as none of the (including % demand-driven subprojects included activities for PAs. This indicator was not included achievement) in the PAD, and was added later when the Bank produced a list of core indicators. Component 3 Effective Project Coordination Indicator 1: Continuity of Value n.a. n.a. Project Continuity of (Quantitative Coordinator project coordinator or Qualitative)
Date achieved 05/20/2011 08/31/2016 08/31/2016 12/31/2016
xi Fully achieved (100%). This indicator measures the effectiveness of project Comments coordination and, therefore, in general supports the PDO. This is a new indicator added (including % at project restructuring in October 2015. Since the adding of this indicator, there was achievement) continuity of project coordinator. Data source for this are the various aide memoires and ISRs
G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs
Date ISR Actual Disbursements No. DO IP Archived (US$, millions) 1 09/21/2011 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.00 2 03/25/2012 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.00 3 11/05/2012 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.00 4 12/31/2012 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.18 5 05/29/2013 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.20 6 07/30/2013 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.21 Moderately 7 01/30/2014 Satisfactory 1.08 Unsatisfactory Moderately 8 05/07/2014 Satisfactory 1.08 Unsatisfactory Moderately 9 10/27/2014 Satisfactory 1.08 Unsatisfactory Moderately 10 12/16/2014 Satisfactory 1.08 Unsatisfactory 11 06/01/2015 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 1.48 12 12/29/2015 Satisfactory Satisfactory 2.05 13 06/08/2016 Satisfactory Satisfactory 2.05 14 09/01/2016 Satisfactory Satisfactory 2.05
H. Restructuring (if any)
ISR Ratings at Amount Board Restructuring Disbursed at Restructuring Approved Reason for Restructuring & Key Restructuring Date(s) PDO Changes Made DO IP in US$, Change millions Decision of India not to be part of the APL required tweaking some of the regional aspects of the project. Revision of Results Framework to reflect the non-participation of 10/19/2015 S S 2.05 India and improve clarity of indicators with more explicit targets. Reallocation of proceeds due to dropping of one subcomponent.
xii No major design changes were made to any of the components with the exception of Subcomponent 2.1: VRCE for wildlife conservation. During the March 2015 regional thematic meeting, the APL countries agreed to drop this subcomponent altogether from their respective projects because little progress was made in its implementation. This entailed a reallocation from Subcomponent (2.1) to another Subcomponent (2.2). In addition, some savings from Component 3 (US$29,290) and price contingencies (US$112,250) were also reallocated to Subcomponent 2.2 for demonstrating better results in wildlife conservation and protected area management in Bhutan.
I. Disbursement Profile
xiii
1. Project Context, Development Objectives, and Design
1.1 Context at Appraisal
1. The rich biodiversity of South Asia was facing unprecedented challenges due to increased poaching and illegal wildlife trade. South Asia is home to 13% – 15% of global biodiversity and hosts some of the most charismatic and endangered species on earth. Apex predators, such as big cats (‘keystone’ species), play a vital role in maintaining healthy ecosystems. Wild tigers, an apex species in South and East Asia, and a global conservation priority, experienced dramatic decline in numbers. Poaching, illegal trade, habitat degradation and loss and Human- Wildlife Conflict were major threats to conservation. Within a century, the range of wild tigers plummeted to 7% of the historic area they occupied. Recognizing the urgency and priority of tiger conservation, the World Bank, in partnership with the Smithsonian Institution and others, established the Global Tiger Initiative (GTI) in 2009. This project became part of the governments’ and the World Bank’s commitment to resource tiger conservation and protection.
2. The project innovatively addresses a global public good (conservation of endangered species) by addressing its inverse, a global public bad (illegal wildlife trade). Given the high species’ density and harboring 5,603 species of vascular plants, 677 species of birds, and nearly 200 species of mammals, Bhutan has equal achievements in environmental stewardship and conservation leadership. The constitution of Bhutan prescribes the maintenance of a minimum of 60% of the country’s total land area under forest cover in perpetuity. Bhutan being the transport corridor of wildlife parts and products across borders, was in a position for bringing countries together on a sensitive issue of illegal trans-boundary trade in wildlife products, stabilize and increase the population and habitats of critically endangered animals, and address other conservation threats such as Human-Wildlife Conflict.
3. The project context, in its assumption that conservation can bring additional economic benefits was well founded. Conservation provides high payoffs to the disadvantaged and poor people who depend on natural resources for their living, as well as national economies in general. Ecotourism is a good example, which has been growing impressively on a yearly basis globally. With some targeted support, the incomes from ecotourism can substantially benefit local poor communities. With 60% Bhutanese living in rural areas, forests serve as a valuable source of subsistence livelihood, helping to supplement inputs of fuel, food, and medicine. The project made provisions to fund subprojects that could bring economic benefits to the poor people in remote areas, particularly through the reduction of crop raiding. Bhutan is a leader in conservation and over 51% of its land area is designated as parks or other protected area (PA) category. In addition, Bhutan has taken several initiatives to augment its efforts to conserve biodiversity, such as linking all PAs through biological corridors, creating conservation areas outside the PA network and implementing programs to conserve flagship species.
4. At appraisal, the project rightly recognized species conservation as a top global priority. Tigers symbolize the plight of biodiversity and their reduction in numbers indicates that the ecosystems are under stress. Today, they occupy only 7% of their historic range. Recognizing the need to bolster commitment to tiger conservation, the World Bank, along with the Smithsonian Institution, established the GTI in 2009. Following the St. Petersburg Summit on Tiger Conservation (2010) and commitments made there, the governments of Tiger Range Countries
1
(TRCs) were seeking ways to boost the technical and institutional capacity to address the key drivers of tiger and other wildlife decline—habitat degradation and poaching/illegal trade in wildlife. While Bhutan’s relatively intact PA system as a whole faced relatively lesser threats, the country's natural assets have become endangered in recent years due to poaching for illegal wildlife trade. Bhutan has a potentially viable population of tigers that can serve as a vital gene pool for future tiger conservation efforts.
5. Lack of consistency in the enforcement of controls was one of this region’s greatest challenges. Bhutan, with porous borders with both India and China, often becomes the transport corridor of wildlife parts and products across borders. At present, there is no legislation in Bhutan to allow law enforcement agencies to check and apprehend foreign traders. The problem is compounded by the lack of trained staff across the entire spectrum of the trade chain from a shortage of effective antipoaching patrolling to a dearth of legal, investigative, and interdiction capacity at borders and within countries. Attempts to plug the gaps and deliver assistance tend to be ad hoc and are often not harmonized or well-structured nor properly evaluated. It is clear that no single country—acting alone—can eliminate the perils to Asia’s wildlife resources. Close collaboration is needed among nations in South and Southeast Asia along the trade route, as well as the centers of consumption (for example, East Asia and North America). This was the first regional project in South Asia bringing countries together on a sensitive issue of illegal trans- boundary trade in wildlife products.
6. Bhutan demonstrated its commitment to the pursuit of collaborative responses and regional cooperation. It played a critical role in the first regional project in South Asia and even took a loan for it. It is also a partner to regional initiatives, such as the South Asia Cooperative Environment Program, the South Asia Wildlife Trade Initiative, and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation Convention on Cooperation on Environment. In May 2010, the countries in South Asia agreed, at the First Meeting on Illegal Wildlife Trade in South Asia held in Kathmandu, to develop institutional mechanisms for harmonizing and collaborating against common threats, including the creation of the South Asia Wildlife Enforcement Network (SAWEN). However, many of these organizations are not resourced adequately to implement activities.
Rationale for World Bank Assistance
7. Investing in global public goods, promoting regional cooperation, and building institutional capacities constituted a strong rationale for the World Bank’s assistance. The project financed activities mitigating regional public ‘bad’, that is, illegal wildlife trade across borders, across South Asia (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, and Nepal), as well as related conservation activities at the national and habitat level. The project was in line with the client governments’ commitments to wild tiger conservation, World Bank Independent Evaluation Group findings, and consistent with the objectives of Country Assistance Strategies (CASs). From the broader development perspective, the project contributed to the long-term vision in the region to stabilize and increase the population and habitats of critically endangered animals in Asia. As an essential component of the national programs and the regional approach to wildlife conservation and protection, the project contributed to these objectives by (a) creating and operationalizing regional institutional mechanism for addressing wildlife trade and other conservation threats; (b) updating national policy and regulatory frameworks for wildlife conservation; (c) building technical and
2
institutional capacity for addressing the illegal transboundary trade; and (d) promoting wildlife conservation through management planning, knowledge products, pilot initiatives, and collaboration.
8. Bhutan’s Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) (FY11-14) recognizes sustainable development, preservation of cultural values, conservation of the environment, and good governance inherent in the country’s Buddhist philosophy and is committed to the overarching Gross National Happiness goals. From a regional perspective, Bhutan’s CPS recognizes the crucial role of knowledge partnerships in developing solutions for issues on global public goods, such as wildlife conservation.
1.2 Original Project Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators
9. The project development objective (PDO) as presented in the Project Appraisal Document1 (PAD) is marginally different from the one included in the Financing Agreement (FA). The ICR uses the one given in the FA, which was “to assist the Recipient in building and/or enhancing shared capacity, institutions, knowledge and incentives to tackle illegal wildlife trade and other selected regional conservation threats to habitats in border areas.”
10. The key indicators for tracking progress toward the development of regional interventions for addressing illegal wildlife trade and other conservation threats adopted by the project were the following:
Progress toward the development of sustainable regional mechanisms for addressing illegal wildlife trade and other conservation threats
Development of at least one protocol each on a common research agenda, knowledge sharing, collaboration, and division of labor
Agreement among the enforcement agencies on at least two regional protocols, including approaches and solutions
Implementation of at least three regional pilots or initiatives in wildlife enforcement and conservation
1.3 Revised PDO (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators, and Reasons/Justification
11. The PDO remain unchanged throughout the project period. The project was restructured through a level 2 restructuring in October 2015, following the request of the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGoB) of June 15, 2015. No changes were made to the PDO, however, the PDO indicators and regional and intermediate indicators were revised and/or dropped and new indicators were added during the restructuring. The changes altogether led to better measurement
1The PDO in PAD was “to assist the participating governments of Bhutan and others to build or enhance shared capacity, institutions, knowledge and incentives to collaborate in tackling illegal wildlife trade and other selected regional conservation threats to habitats in border areas.”
3
of the performance of the project at the regional and country levels and to the achievement of the PDO.
12. The following changes were made to the regional PDO-level and intermediate outcome indicators:
Revised formulation of the PDO indicators 1 and 4 and several of the intermediate outcome indicators for improved clarity with more explicit targets.
Revision of the PDO indicators 2 and 3 to reflect the decision by India in 2013 not to participate in the Adaptable Program Loan (APL). With India bordering each APL participating country, agreement on regional protocols would be impossible to achieve.
Introduction of a new indicator to better measure the effectiveness of collaboration on tackling illegal wildlife trade and conservation threats.
1.4 Main Beneficiaries
13. The project assumed that by improving capacity to tackle illegal wildlife trade and other regional issues, benefits at the regional and local levels would be achieved. At a more granular level, the assumption was that the rural population living in Bhutan would benefit by way of improved natural capital productivity on which their livelihoods are dependent. Presumably, the main beneficiaries are the public; international and national tourists; local communities who derive intrinsic, non-consumptive, and some consumptive values from protected endangered species and their habitats; and officers, frontline staff, and concerned wildlife and enforcement departments/agencies. The project made no effort in disaggregating beneficiary data by gender.
1.5 Original Components (as approved)
Component 1: Capacity Building for Addressing the Illegal Trans-boundary Wildlife Trade (US$0.085 Million; 100% Bank financed)
14. Component 1 aimed to bring about regional harmonization and collaboration in combating wildlife crime through strengthened legislative and regulatory frameworks and well- equipped specialized agencies and systems. This component supported the Forest Protection and Surveillance Unit (FPSU). It had two subcomponents.
Subcomponent 1.1. Institutional strengthening in wildlife conservation and illegal wildlife trade control was to support strengthening of the information/intelligence and enforcement network that will contribute toward improved enforcement and control of illegal wildlife trade. This meant strengthening capacity to document and store reliable data on forests- and wildlife-related offences in the country.
Subcomponent 1.2. Staff capacity building and training toward regional collaboration supported (a) training and workshops in strengthened enforcement for field staff of the Department of Forests and Park Services (DOFPS) and (b) improving transboundary coordination.
4
Component 2: Promoting Wildlife Conservation in Asia (US$2.042 Million; 100% Bank financed)
15. Component 2 focused on building regional capacities in the areas of wildlife research and promoting demand-driven investments in PA and Government reserve forests in Bhutan. It included two subcomponents.
Subcomponent 2.1. Virtual Regional Center of Excellence (VRCE) for wildlife conservation. This subcomponent was designed for the creation of the VRCE, including a network of scientists and practitioners whose mission would be to expand the scope and quality of research in wildlife conservation needed to develop a common response against illegal wildlife trade in and outside the region. This subcomponent sought to fill crucial knowledge and information gaps in addressing regional threats to conservation. The VRCE was envisaged as virtual, with no physical facility. It needed to rely heavily on state-of-the-art information and communication technology to conduct its business and attain its objectives. A Regional Operational Steering Committee was proposed to assist in the development of the VRCE‟s overall program and objectives.
Subcomponent 2.2. PA and GRF management with regional conservation benefits was to invest prudently in PA and GRF through two innovatively designed competitive funding windows for (a) conservation, protection, and management of PAs and GRFs with regional conservation benefits and (b) innovative pilot projects in wildlife conservation with regional dimensions.
16. Two investment windows were designed to allow flexibility and focus. Priority under Window 1 was given to activities, such as the development of PA management offices, wildlife rescue centers, and information/visitor centers. Window 2 supported innovative pilot projects that contributed toward more effective conservation at the national and regional levels. Activities supported under this window included (a) pilot programs in human-wildlife conflict management models with financial and other incentives to encourage human-wildlife coexistence; (b) identification and development of ecotourism opportunities, camping sites, nature trails, canopy walks, and so on; (c) pilot programs in greening infrastructure in and around PAs and GRFs to enhance the conservation status of sensitive ecosystems; and (d) pilot programs in the conservation of endangered flagship species.
17. A competitive, demand-driven approach to reward innovation and efficiency of the managers of the PAs and GRFs was applied in selecting the activities that received support under Windows 1 and 2. A transparent review and approval process for both windows was developed and implemented. The eligibility criteria (including a negative list of activities) were specified in the operational manuals.
Component 3: Project Coordination and Communication (Cost not estimated; 0% Bank financed)
18. Project coordination and implementation was carried out by regular staff of the Wildlife Conservation Division (WCD), with support from the DOFPS and the Ministry of
5
Agriculture and Forests (MOAF); funding of project coordination and operating costs were the RGoB’s contribution to the project. No project funds were to be used for this purpose. However, financial support to Bhutan for regional coordination was required due to the need to closely coordinate regional activities among participating countries.
19. The project proposed to adopt a multipronged approach to communications to meet the regional and local challenges. It relied on the regular communications mechanism within the WCD and DOFPS to meet the project’s communication needs. A wide range of consultations with various stakeholder groups was proposed to be conducted at the national and local levels. It was expected that rolling consultations will continue throughout the project cycle.
1.6 Revised Components
20. No significant changes were made to the project design at restructuring. The following changes to the components took place during the restructuring.
(a) Dropping Subcomponent 2.1 ‘Virtual Regional Center for Excellence (VRCE) for wildlife conservation’ and reallocation of the funds (US$14,250.00) to Subcomponent 2.2: PA and GRF management with regional conservation benefits. This competitive funding to support the management of protected areas, forest reserves or reserve forests and national forests with regional conservation benefits. It was dropped as India decided not to join the regional project and the Wildlife Institute of India could no longer host the VRCE. Due to this there was very little progress in Subcomponent 2.1. Moreover, there was limited understanding among participating countries regarding a virtual knowledge center. This did not have any significant impact on the project design as only about 0.75% of the total IDA credit was affected.
(b) Reallocation of some funds (US$29,290.00) from Component 3 and price contingencies (US$112,250.00) to Subcomponent 2.2.
Table 1. Revised Components and Costs
Proposed Original Cost Revised Cost Component Name Component (US$, (US$, millions) Name millions) Component 1: Capacity Building for Addressing the Illegal Trans-boundary N.A. 0.08 0.08 Wildlife Trade Component 2: Promoting Wildlife N.A. 2.01 2.16 Conservation in Asia Component 3: Project Coordination and N.A. 0.04 0.01 Communication Total 2.25 2.25
1.7 Other Significant Changes
No other significant changes apart from the level 2 restructuring in October 2015 were made.
6
2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes
2.1 Project Preparation, Design, and Quality at Entry
Soundness of Background Analysis
21. The project preparation was fast-tracked given the urgency of the threats to conservation and the World Bank’s commitment to support the Global Tiger Recovery Program (GTRP) and commitments made to the heads of states of TRCs in South Asia before and during the First International Tiger Forum in St. Petersburg, Russia, (November 2010), which could be met only under a fast-track process for appraisals and Board approvals. The project was prepared in just 2.7 months (from concept to Board approval). In addition to the inherent challenges of preparing a regional project, the World Bank team responsible for the APL’s delivery confronted the onus of preparing three operations in less than nine months (APL 1 for Nepal and Bangladesh and APL 2 for Bhutan). This shrunk the preparation time and did not allow the project to undertake adequate background analysis.
22. Despite the short preparation time, the project incorporated lessons learned from the experience of combating wildlife trade in East Asia and the Pacific. This included empirical and experimental economics literature on incentives and performance as well as the limitations of, and the medium-term performance of Integrated Conservation and Development Projects (ICDPs). This reinforced the need for a regional design with policy reform and enhanced institutional support as the focus areas, and approaches that blend regulations with direct incentives for conservation, through competitive, demand-driven funding and a transparent process. Public consolations were held and country-specific Environmental and Social Management Frameworks and Environmental Management Plans were prepared and disclosed publicly in Bhutan in May 2010.
Assessment of Design
23. The PDO and project design responded to the Government priorities of tackling illegal wildlife trade and conservation threats and was consistent with the strategic focus areas of the World Bank’s CPS. It also responded to the RGoB’s global commitment for conserving wild tigers, which the Government declared at several events organized by the GTI and as listed in the GTRP. The PDO was robust in crafting shared regional development objectives focusing on building capacities, institutions, knowledge, and incentives for collaborating on a global public bad, namely tackling illegal wildlife trade and other selected regional conservation threats to habitats in border areas.
24. The project design was innovative given that it is the first regional project in South Asia and targeted building the shared capacity of participating countries, including establishing and institutionalizing systems for addressing a global public bad. The project also took lessons from the experience of previous integrated conservation development projects and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations-Wildlife Enforcement Network approach to enforcement. There are several features that lend strength to the design:
7
Building of shared capacity and bringing together stakeholders (participating countries) to jointly address the emerging global challenge of illegal wildlife trafficking
Flexibility of addressing global/regional issues yet innovatively providing opportunities for local community involvement and improved governance and monitoring by local government agencies
Inherent ability of design for strategic interlinking with complementary investments made under the APL 12 and leveraging complementary interventions under other instruments/activities3
25. The project design also had challenges, which manifested during the implementation phase. The overall design was particularly affected due to the Government of India’s decision not to participate in the APL, due to their decision to finance proposed activities of APL 3 from their own sovereign resources. This meant that while the PDO was regional in nature, the cross-border investments had to happen within countries as with absence of India, Bhutan and Bangladesh and Bangladesh Nepal do not share common borders. This could have been identified as a risk, however, during preparation, the Government of India sent written communication confirming their willingness to join the regional APL leaving no reason to doubt their participation. Other challenges identified in the design are:
Complexity as reflected in multiplicity of government agencies/institutions across participating countries with no dedicated institutions existing at preparation to deal with illegal wildlife crimes and associated cross-border trade;
The only one original indicator with quantitative measurement was dropped at restructuring, further indicating that background analysis was inadequate during preparation;
Inclusion of overambitious activities that did not materialize. For example, Subcomponent 2.1 on Virtual Research Center of Excellence (VRCE) did not take off ; and
A grant mechanism with bulk of project funds (about 89% of loan) under a competitive grant mechanism with no identified investments, which would be operationalized only once implementation begins. This design challenge materialized as there were several delays in inviting proposals, processing, and approving them. The competitiveness of this subcomponent is also questionable, as of the nine proposals funded, seven were implemented by the WCD itself, which also acted as the project coordination unit. This may be due to rather limited human resource
2 The institutional capacity-building support for the SAWEN Secretariat is being provided under the Nepal project but will also benefit Bhutan once it ratifies SAWEN. 3 The project is able to link with the implementation of a common conservation research program under the GTRP and associated National Tiger Recovery Plans across all APL countries. 8
capacity in Bhutan, especially beyond the capital Thimphu and below the mid-level civil servants.
Quality at Entry
26. At preparation, sufficient experience, knowledge and data was available, especially through the Global Tiger Recovery Program (GTRP), to inform the project design. But no particular analytical work was undertaken during preparation and the team largely depended on secondary data and experiences of the Government counterparts, international conservation organizations and the World Bank’s own experts. However, a robust analysis of the implementation and technical capacity at the country level could have helped as an assessment of project design at entry, particularly its complexity and implementation arrangements, indicates that the implementation challenges were underestimated. The project design was inherently dependent on India’s participation (proposed APL 3), which did not materialize. This decision by India was taken only after the APL2 for Bhutan was approved.
27. Implementation readiness for some of the project’s key components was low. Given the short preparation time, the project preparation lacked some important elements for implementation readiness. Considering that the first regional project required some flexibility, a ‘window’ approach was adopted. However, it took a while to generate proposals for funding under the two windows. Other essential project readiness filters, such as the completion of operational manuals, preparation of terms of reference for major consultancies, and so on, could be accomplished only during the early years of implementation. As a result, the project suffered delays in the initial disbursements and implementation during the first 20 months.
Adequacy of Government Commitment
28. The Government was fully committed and took the first ever loan for conservation. The RGoB was a committed partner in the GTI and hosted several key events, including the first meeting for discussing SAWEN. The RGoB also committed itself to a high level of regional collaboration and leadership. They acted on the Bank suggestions and supported its recommendations to boost institutional continuity and functioning. The preparation process was fully owned by the borrowers, reflecting their high commitment.
Assessment of Risks
29. The team’s assessment of risk was accurate for the most part. Both the overall risk rating at preparation and implementation were rated ‘High’. Risk mitigation measures identified during preparation were adequate, though not fully implemented, and affected the pace of implementation. The World Bank received full cooperation from the RGoB during preparation, which helped complete the design within a short period. The project design risk was assessed as ‘High’ due to multiplicity of institutions across countries with a history of low levels of cooperation. The stakeholder risk rating of ‘Medium’ was precise, as there were several changes in personnel responsible for project implementation and coordination, particularly in the first two to three years of implementation.
9
2.2 Implementation
30. The credit was fully disbursed within the original time period but there were initial delays in implementing planned activities. On March 29, 2017 a small amount of XDR 4791.20 was cancelled from the loan amount resulting in actual disbursement of 99.66%. The project became effective on October 19, 2011, without any significant delay (4.1 months since Board approval). No extensions of the project closing date were required for completing the implementation. The initial delays in incurring expenditures and claiming reimbursements were mainly due to delays in appointing a qualified project coordinator by the RGoB and in taking decisions pertaining to procurement. The first disbursement happened almost 20 months after the project started. These challenges were magnified by the rather limited human resource capacity in Bhutan. However, the high level of government commitment was maintained throughout the project period and several new reforms, for example, significant increase in penalties and fines against poaching, were introduced.
31. For most part during implementation, ratings for ‘‘Progress towards achieving PDO’ and ‘Implementation Progress’ remained within the satisfactory range. The total implementation period was 59 months. The PDO was rated Satisfactory throughout the project implementation, whereas, implementation progress was rated Satisfactory for 27 months, Moderately Satisfactory for 14 months, and Moderately Unsatisfactory for 18 months. Other ratings that remained within the satisfactory range included monitoring and evaluation (M&E), financial management, safeguards, and Component 2. None of the ratings went below Moderately Unsatisfactory.
32. Effective coordination was the key to good implementation at the regional level and within Bhutan. The project had both regional and country-specific implementation arrangements. Regional coordination was exercised at two levels: (a) the policy level for which a Regional Policy Steering Committee (RPSC) was established; its mandate was to ensure collaboration and coordination in regional wildlife conservation and wildlife protection policies; and (b) the operational level, an Operational Steering Committee for Regional Coordination (OSCRC) of the project was established. Its main responsibilities were to ensure effective coordination of project activities that have regional implications and foster dialogue on wildlife conservation issues among the participating countries.
33. The Government fully owned the implementation arrangements as the DOFPS’ regular staff implemented the project as part of their routine duties. No dedicated Project Management Unit (PMU) was established. The department had some experience in managing projects financed by other development partners. A Project Implementation Steering Committee (PISC) chaired by the Secretary of the MOAF was established, which (a) reviewed the quarterly and annual progress of the project; (b) guided the WCD on project implementation; (c) reviewed and approved updated procurement plans; and (d) conducted independent field visits to the project areas to assess field implementation.
34. The continuity of the project coordinator and effective use of institutional arrangements helped turn around the project. Since September 2014, implementation progress improved after appointment and continuity of a new project coordinator. The project implementation also suffered in the initial stage, as the PISC did not meet until March 2014 (almost
10
half of the project’s implementation period). Lack of skilled human resources, time constraints, inability to use project funds, and ineffective monitoring through field visits (for example restrictions on air travel within Bhutan for chief of the WCD and project coordinator) further affected coordination. These factors were as a result of decisions of the RGoB. However, strong technical and fiduciary support from the Bank and proactive engagement from the WCD resulted in resolving implementation issues and helped the project pick pace. This resulted in implementation of several innovative and first-time initiatives in Bhutan.
35. The project restructuring led to required changes in institutional arrangements and to help better measure project outputs/outcomes. Given that India did not participate, the identified host institution, Wildlife Institute of India, could not anchor the VRCE. There was neither the capacity nor interest expressed from other participating APL countries in the VRCE. As a result, at the second SAWEN Meeting it was agreed to scale down the VRCE to an alternate mechanism for information and data sharing and place it under the leadership of SAWEN. The institutional modalities for the alternative mechanism are still being worked out and as SAWEN has become a formal organization, it is expected that an alternate mechanism may soon be put in place. The restructuring resulted in effective monitoring and measurement of project outcomes.
2.3 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Design, Implementation, and Utilization
M&E Design
36. The project’s M&E system designed at the beginning was complex. There were PDO- level, regional-level, and country-specific indicators that were not well defined and posed challenges in terms of data collection and measurements during implementation. In the initial implementation phase, the M&E arrangements were inadequate and later stages required repeated efforts by the Project Coordinator to obtain timely data. The need for revision of the Results Framework at midterm review (MTR) was well understood as a priority by both the World Bank task team and the PMU. As a result, it was restructured just 11 months before project closure and entailed dropping of six, adding of two new, and revision of all the remaining 11 indicators. This was a significant effort to revise the list of indicators with only a short implementation period remaining, but it resulted in a better alignment of the indicators with the PDO. The changes to the Results Framework are summarized in annex 10 and were made to better measure the outcomes. Despite the fact that the outcome indicators for subprojects were part of the M&E system, not much, other than physical progress, was reported in the final assessment report prepared by the borrower.
M&E Implementation
37. The data collection on country-specific indicators was simpler but not all indicators were equally tracked. Field visits by the WCD officers and reports from local offices in the field provided data to track progress of intermediate indicators. Prior to revision, the results framework faced challenge of data collection. One visitor satisfaction survey was conducted and data collection on number of visitors and gate fee collection was done effectively, and data were of good quality. Data on fund transfers to local communities for crop insurance was also well collected. The monitoring framework was not used effectively in the initial project period, as there
11
was very little progress due to delays. In addition, a midterm and an end-term evaluation by an independent third party captured some of the social benefits/impacts due to project interventions.
M&E Utilization
38. Subsequent to revision, the M&E framework started reporting effectively and was used for the end-term evaluation carried out by the borrower. Efforts to use the M&E framework were made sincerely. Reports from contractors and consultants were used to track progress in the field, while progress reports formed the basis for stocktaking, recalibrating, and taking corrective action at the project level. Lack of data availability led to decisions on dropping of indicators at restructuring. The data collected from the field helped in deciding on the selection of sub-projects to be funded under the two Windows of Component 2. Data generated from the tiger and snow leopard surveys has contributed to assessing their conservation status at the regional level. Similarly, data (and feedback) from trained officers helped scale up the training activity beyond the project targets. The World Bank team was successful in obtaining actual results from the WCD during implementation support missions or in between missions especially, after the PMU was strengthened. Every mission entailed a detailed discussion of the Results Framework to maintain continuity not just to encourage adequate reporting but also to discuss the substance of the indicators.
2.4 Safeguard and Fiduciary Compliance
Safeguards
39. Safeguards policies triggered were complied with and no significant and/or irreversible adverse impacts were reported during implementation. The project triggered the following safeguard policies: Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01), Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04), Forests (OP/BP 4.36), and Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12). The project’s safeguards category B was justified given the uncertain scope and nature of the subprojects to be supported under the two funding windows of Component 2. Reporting on safeguards was timely and no serious non-compliances were reported. Safeguards were managed adequately and no adverse impacts were observed. This is the primary reason for safeguards consistently rated as Satisfactory during the entire implementation period. The project promoted inclusiveness and equity in accessing project-related benefits, especially through the Gewog Environmental Conservation Committee (GECC) crop insurance schemes and piloting of measures for reducing human-wildlife conflicts. People participation was ensured through consultations and implementation of specific mitigation measures. There was full compliance with the World Bank’s disclosure policy.
Financial Management
40. Despite initial hiccups, the financial management arrangements worked out well during implementation and there were no outstanding issues at project closure. Inadequate staffing of the MOAF and delay in assigning of fiduciary specialist by the Ministry of Finance raised some initial concerns. However, the Bank flagged these concerns with the Ministry of Finance during mission wrap-up meetings, which helped in resolving these. The financial management risk was ‘Substantial’. The financial management ratings ranged from Satisfactory
12
to Moderately Unsatisfactory throughout implementation. The financial management staff were based in Delhi, which proved very useful in providing just-in-time handholding support over phones, e-mails, and visits, and as a result financial management issues were reviewed periodically and solutions were provided.
Procurement
41. The problem of inadequate procurement capacity at project start was adequately addressed as implementation progressed. Procurement under the project was implemented in accordance with the World Bank’s Procurement and Consultant Guidelines and in accordance with the provisions of the Loan Agreement. The procurement risk was assessed as ‘High’ due to the inadequate procurement capacity and lack of familiarity with the World Bank’s procurement procedures. Eventually, by project closure, all procurements were completed to enable execution of project supported activities within the original implementation period. The borrowers’ teams received training on procurement. The World Bank fiduciary staff was based in India and were able to proactively provide interim implementation support during visits on other projects in Bhutan. At the MTR, inadequate procurement capacity was highlighted. With proper guidance and building procurement capacity improvements in procurement were reported which increased the procurement ratings by project close.
2.5 Post-completion Operation/Next Phase
42. Appropriate technical, financial, and institutional transition arrangements are in place indicating strong possibility of post-completion operational continuity. A significant achievement, in the form of establishing a new intergovernmental organization, SAWEN, would ensure post-completion sustainability of key aspects of project support. SAWEN is already endorsed by key regional countries, including non-APL countries (India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka). Support to SAWEN is provided through an Institutional Development Fund grant by the World Bank, which ensured strengthening of this new regional mechanism. The project was successful in getting the region’s governments to work together on illegal wildlife trade issues. In addition, several country-specific outcomes for Bhutan, such as staffing of wildlife rescue centers, maintenance of wildlife crime database, and a crime control unit have been mainstreamed with budget support from the WCD and will be sustained beyond the project period. For a country like Bhutan, these are big achievements, wherein resources are earmarked for sustaining the project gains and boosting regional cooperation in conservation and illegal wildlife control.
43. Follow-on financial and technical support from donors, including the World Bank, is suggested for ensuring sustainability and scaling up of revenue earning activities. The end- term evaluation conducted by an independent third party has raised concerns about the sustainability of assets created under the project. The World Bank also notes the need for continued government support for the sustainability of the programs, infrastructure, and activities that were supported under the project. There are good opportunities to scale up some of the interventions and take them to the next level. There is scope to support interventions in the areas of better PA management, green infrastructure, and planning nature-based tourism. All of these will build on the successes of the regional wildlife project. Component 1 outcomes are clearly sustainable as several bilateral Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) have been signed by all the APL countries with India.
13
3. Assessment of Outcomes
3.1 Relevance of Objectives, Design, and Implementation
44. The relevance of objectives is rated High. For the participating regional countries and for Bhutan, especially in the context of threats from poaching and illegal wildlife trade, the relevance is high at the time of project closure as it was during appraisal. The project remains consistent with the objectives of the World Bank’s CPS (FY11-14) in Bhutan that recognized environmental sustainability as a cross cutting theme, and was designed to help the Government to achieve its objectives. The relevance remains high for the CPS (FY15-19) that has green development as one of its focus areas. The project objectives focus on building the shared capacity of participating countries for addressing the global public bad remains pertinent and is aligned with Bhutan’s current national development plan. The PDO also remains relevant for bringing the focus on threats to habitats in border areas. In 2011 when the project started, no regional mechanism existed for addressing transboundary illegal wildlife trade and other conservation threats. Regional cooperation on wildlife protection and conservation remains a highly relevant issue for countries in South Asia. This is a key area where the project contributed significantly. The project remains relevant to the Governmental objectives in support of the activities under the international conventions, global and regional agreements and programs, including the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992), Convention on International trade in Endangered Species (1981), Convention on Wetlands (1971), and the St. Petersburg Declaration on Tiger Conservation GTRP (2010).
45. The relevance of design is rated Modest. Given that this was the first ever regional project in South Asia, the choice of a horizontal APL, allowing countries to join as and when they are ready was a novel design feature. The project components and investment activities were appropriate to achieve the desired outcomes. The two main components, as designed, were required to foster regional cooperation and build shared capacities. Some country level activities could have been designed differently but were left in the form of a window wherein demand-driven proposals were expected. The indicators chosen to measure the outcomes needed some adjustments, as they did not align well with the expected outputs and outcomes, especially at the regional level. It is commendable that though its focus was on regional capacity and country-specific wildlife conservation, the project invested in activities that would benefit the local population. At the community level the use of competitive and demand-based approach for financing subprojects under the two windows of Component 2 remains an innovative design feature.
3.2 Achievement of Project Development Objectives
46. The achievement of project objectives is rated Substantial. The PDO, as provided in the FA, focused on the outcome for which the supported investments could be held accountable. The PDO was clear and realistic and important for Bhutan. The PDO was ‘to assist the participating governments of Bhutan and others to build or enhance shared capacity, institutions, knowledge and incentives to tackle illegal wildlife trade and other selected regional conservation threats to habitats in border areas’. The achievements are assessed against the sub objectives in the PDO and has resulted in the following main results.
14
47. Sub objective 1. Building and /or enhancing shared capacity, institutions, knowledge and incentives to tackle illegal wildlife trade. The first part of the development objective was substantially achieved. Shared capacity, institutions, knowledge, and incentives were enhanced through a combination of:
Strengthened regulatory and legislative frameworks: The substantial increase in penalties and fines related to poaching and illegal wildlife trade is a result of the strengthened regulatory framework. Training and better tracking of crimes will result in collection of the increased fines. This relates to the enhancing of institutions and incentives part of the sub objective.
Development of well-equipped specialized agencies and systems: Strengthening of the agency — FPSU — for monitoring and regulating wildlife crimes and successfully deploying BhuFED. This relates to the enhancing of institutions and knowledge part of the sub objective.
Training and awareness building of staff engaged in enforcement of wildlife law and regulations: More than 900 staff received new and effective training to build capacity on tackling illegal wildlife trade and they felt empowered and equipped to take on this responsibility. This relates to the enhancing institutions and incentives part of the sub objective.
Creating, institutionalizing, and operationalizing of SAWEN: It is a collaborative platform for addressing illegal wildlife trade in the region; managing transboundary threats to habitats; and jointly building capacity through training; since its endorsement by five South Asia countries, SAWEN has become a formal intergovernmental platform. This relates to the building and enhancing shared capacity part of the sub objective.
48. Sub objective 2. Building and /or enhancing shared capacity, institutions, knowledge and incentives to tackle other selected regional conservation threats to habitats in border areas. The PAD describes the other selected regional conservation threats as threats to habitat protection, HWC and threats to tiger, snow leopard, rhino and elephant, and accordingly, project investments were not confined to the border areas alone. These threats were addressed in a number of ways as part of implementing the second part of the development objective. It saw some innovative subprojects, even though India’s absence in participating in the regional wildlife project limited the potential gains. Although the VRCE had to be dropped, potentially impacting the collaborative research and networking among researchers, experts, and related institutions, establishing and full operationalization of SAWEN will help overcome this. Successful activities in Bhutan that contributed to regional wildlife conservation include:
Scientific approaches and methodologies: The first-ever scientific survey of snow leopards in Bhutan has significantly contributed to the global and regional knowledge and is a major milestone for Bhutan. This involved developing a scientific methodology for surveying wildlife populations, training of officers and collaborative survey with specialized NGOs. Over 900 staff were provided training on SMART patrolling that contributes to better management and protection of habitats directly
15
benefiting conservation of flagship species of global relevance, such as, tigers, snow leopard, rhinoceros and elephants. Validation of tiger survey and launch and completion of Phase 1 snow leopard survey have contributed to data at the regional level and highlighted the need of transboundary cooperation for their protection and management. These outputs relate to the shared capacity and knowledge part of the sub objective.
Building and strengthening infrastructure to address other selected regional conservation threats: Establishing of two wildlife rescue centers—in Taba and Southern Gelephu, which have started functioning and have already rescued and treated 210 wild animals. The enhancement of the visitor center at Royal Botanical Park, Lamperi and facilities is also resulting in raised awareness regarding illegal poaching and wildlife trade. This relates to the shared capacity, institutions and knowledge part of the sub objective.
Investments for addressing human-wildlife conflicts: A key strategy for addressing other regional conservation threats is addressing the critical issue of HWC. The project invested in installing of about 158 KM of electric fence thereby providing protection to over 3500 Ha of croplands. Financial support for crop and livestock insurance was provided to 15 new GECC and top-up funds were given to 13 existing GECC. This relates to the institutions and incentives part of the sub objective.
3.3 Efficiency
49. The efficiency is rated Substantial, as the project was efficient in achieving outcomes in a cost-effective manner. For Bhutan (and regionally), the investment cost of US$2.25 million was minimal in strengthening the formal unit (FPSU) in the WCD, establishing SAWEN, and substantially improving interpretation facilities for visitors at a prominent PA thus resulting in increased visits of paid visitors. Investments on preventing human-wildlife conflicts, especially in reducing crop losses through wildlife induced crop depredation are also likely to result in economic benefits for the local communities. All this was managed without financing the management costs from the IDA credit resulting in very efficient use of the credit. There were no cost overruns for other activities too.
50. Project investments that led to avoided human-wildlife conflicts and saved crops from depredation will positively affect the local and regional economy. At appraisal, a cost-benefit analysis was carried out but revisiting it is a challenge as relevant data on reduction in illegal wildlife trade have not been collected. The calculations of the cost-benefit analysis in the PAD were spread across a 10-year and a 20-year period with identical annual project investments spread over a 5-year period. A sensitivity analysis was also carried out with regard to (a) the discount rate applied for calculating the net present values of project costs and benefits, (b) the estimated rate of elimination of illegal wildlife trade that will be achieved by the project investments, and (c) the estimates of how much of the global illegal wildlife trade can be assigned to South Asia.
51. The actual rate of reduction in illegal wildlife trade has not been measured by the project, despite investments made on strengthening enforcement and regulatory environment for illegal wildlife trade. It is therefore, difficult to confirm what cost-benefit ratio is achieved,
16
according to the analysis presented in the PAD. For a true estimation of the cost-benefit ratio, it would be important to also factor in the reduction in illegal wildlife trade in other countries of South Asia particularly, Bangladesh, Nepal, and India, as the analysis considered the trade estimates for South Asia and not just one country. Moreover, while calculating the cost-benefit ratio at appraisal, the project made a significant assumption that the share of illegal wildlife trade in South Asia is equivalent to its share of global biodiversity at 13% –15%. But efforts made under the project to address other select regional conservation threats that would lead to conservation of globally renown and highly endangered wildlife will have positive effect and added value to the tourism industry as well.
52. Given the challenges with the ex post economic analysis, the Implementation Completion and Results Report (ICR) looked into returns on investments made in two subprojects and concluded that cost-benefit ratios were favorable, as these also contribute to institutional efficiencies. A brief snapshot of returns envisaged is given in the following paragraphs and details can be seen in annex 3.
The first subproject that was analyzed was on developing the interpretation center and visitor facilities in the Royal Botanic Park (RBP). The number of visits and revenue earned from entry tickets and other services, such as boating, showed an impressive increase following its completion. Against a total investment of US$154,017 (approximately BTN 10.03 million), the revenue earned at the RBP already showed an increasing trend. In 2015, BTN 522,210 from entry fee and BTN 95,990 from other services (boating, camping, and so on) were generated. By June 2016, BTN 229,180 from entry fee and BTN 64,180 from other services were reported to be generated. This indicates that in about 10 years, the investment cost will be fully recovered. However, given the increasing trend of visitors, projections show that visitor numbers will significantly increase over the next few years, which will recover the investment costs within the next seven to eight years perhaps. The projected growth in visitor numbers and revenue earned is provided in annex 3. This does not consider the intrinsic value of conservation of biodiversity and/or other ecological services provided through such conservation efforts. This is a good example, where mostly one-time investments will keep increasing the revenue resulting in high institutional efficiency.
The second subproject analyzed was investments made in erecting an electric fence to prevent crop depredation by wildlife. An investment of US$530,000 was made to install about 158 km of electric fence that provided protection to about 3,655 ha of farmland. While the project did not estimate the amount of crops that were prevented from depredation by wildlife, previous studies indicate that as much as 18 % of the total crop produced is vulnerable to depredation by wildlife. This indicates that the returns would be impressive for farmers. During one of the missions, the farmers conveyed confidence that these measures are beneficial and will result in saving their crops from depredation by wildlife.
17
3.4 Justification of Overall Outcome Rating Rating: Satisfactory
53. The overall outcome of the project is rated Satisfactory. The weighted average4 rating derived is presented in table 2 that confirms the assigned outcome rating for the project. This approach has been used as the ‘key associated outcome targets’ 5 were revised at project restructuring, although this did not have an impact on the overall achievement of the objectives. The rating of the PDO before and after the restructuring is ‘Satisfactory’, as shown in table 2. This ICR gives a ‘High’ rating to relevance of objectives, ‘Modest’ to relevance of design and ‘Substantial’ to both efficacy and efficiency according to the OPCS guidelines for rating outcomes. This ICR also notes and commends the good work done under the project at the regional scale, as this was the first regional project for South Asia and dealt with areas that require countries to share intelligence, cooperate on regulation, and build shared capacity. The project did a good job advancing the conservation thinking in Bhutan that built a strong foundation for any related future investments to build up on these. Supporting the establishment of SAWEN, building country- specific wildlife crime-related institutions, and scaling up regional cooperation are significant outcomes of this project.
Table 2. Weighted Average Rating of the Overall Outcome
Before After Overall Restructuring Restructuring Rating Satisfactory Satisfactory Rating value 5 5 Weight of budget disbursed before/after 59 41 100 PDO/Results Framework change (%) Weighted value 2.95 2.05 5 Final Rating (Rounded) Satisfactory
54. The project, which closed at its original time, was solidly owned by the Government who took the first ever loan for conservation and established a new unit dedicated to illegal wildlife trade control. A new national database on wildlife crimes and a range of subprojects addressing several regional and country-specific challenges completed successfully points to significant outcomes.
3.5 Overarching Themes, Other Outcomes, and Impacts
(a) Poverty Impacts, Gender Aspects, and Social Development
55. The project areas are located in poverty-ridden rural areas where most of the local people depend on natural resources for daily living. The project agreed to conduct consultations and undertake a Social Impact Assessment for subprojects to be funded under Component 2. However, based on discussions with the client during the last implementation support mission and
4 The weighted average rating has been used following World Bank Implementation Completion and Results Report Guidelines, OPCS, August 2006 (updated 07/22/2014) 5‘key associated outcome targets’ refers to measurable or observable outcomes expected by completion (in terms of types of benefits or progress expected for primary target groups), as well as any indications of their scale and scope (which are normally captured in key indicators in the PAD) 18
the documents provided by the borrower, it appears that no Social Impact Assessment was conducted. It is, therefore, difficult to assess whether there are any measureable poverty impacts, recognizable gender benefits, and significant social development outcomes. Despite no explicit focus on poverty, gender, and social development impacts, some of the subprojects were designed to also provide community-level benefits. Crop insurance, electric fencing, and ecotourism-related activities will provide better economic benefits and perhaps income opportunities. Increased visitation to some of the protected areas is already resulting in flow of economic benefits to some local communities.
(b) Institutional Change/Strengthening
56. There are significant outcomes with respect to institutional change/strengthening. The project’s institutional strengthening and development activities were designed to set up the institutions for the longer-term impact and address wildlife crime in Bhutan and in the region. During the regional meetings, it was already evident that these investments are leading to enhanced sharing of data/information, participation for building shared capacity and knowledge and willingness to develop joint programs for tacking illegal wildlife trade. It is expected that the national law enforcement and intergovernmental SAWEN institutions will have long-term positive effect. The target of training staff from government agencies has been exceeded and a new database has been established for monitoring the status of wildlife crimes and trades.
(c) Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts (positive or negative)
57. The project catalyzed significant collaboration among the participating countries and between the agencies of the RGoB that resulted in strengthened support to wildlife law enforcement and conservation programs in Bhutan. Encouraged by the success of regional cooperation in illegal wildlife trade during the project implementation, the MOAF significantly increased the fines and penalty for crimes related to tiger poaching and trade, in 2013, up to BTN 1 million for killing, trading, or possessing tiger parts.
3.6 Summary of Findings of Beneficiary Survey and/or Stakeholder Workshops
Not applicable.
4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome Rating: Moderate
58. The risk that the development outcome will not be maintained is Moderate. This risk rating is based on individual risks faced by the development outcomes under each of the two components of the project.
59. The risk to development outcomes, i.e. sustainability of institutions created and strengthened with project support, under Component 1 are rated Moderate, as institutional arrangements under the project are robust and already under implementation. In other words, regional harmonization and collaboration are already in advanced stages. All countries have agreed for SAWEN and Sri Lanka and Nepal have already ratified it in December 2015 and July 2016, respectively and SAWEN has become a formal intergovernmental organization. Bhutan is in the process of ratifying it. Several other bilateral MOUs have also been signed between India and
19
Bangladesh, Nepal, and Bhutan. Within Bhutan, continuation of BhuFED, the FPSU, and the two wildlife rescue centers will be supported from the Government’s budget resources and is therefore, likely to be sustainable.
60. The risk to wildlife conservation development outcomes and related activities under Component 2 are rated Moderate. Most of these investments will accrue benefits to the local communities and are likely to be sustained. However, concerns on lack of attention for maintaining assets created under the project have been raised by independent consultant. The independent end- term evaluation identified handout and dependency syndrome as one of the reasons for lack of maintenance of assets created under the project. Addressing this could take years for the Government and therefore put the operation of these assets at risk. The electric fence to minimize crop depredation and therefore reduce human-wildlife conflict is a good example. It is an important consideration, as 70% or more of Bhutan’s population depend directly on crop and/or livestock production for their livelihood and are exposed to human-wildlife conflicts, which could induce annual crop losses from 0.3% - 18% of total household incomes.6 Until now, there appears to be a fragmented approach in dealing with this issue despite the presence of the Bhutan National Human-Wildlife Conflicts Management Strategy of 2008. Most initiatives, till date, have been small scale and funded with donor support (United Nations Development Programme, World Wildlife Fund, Bhutan Trust Fund for Environmental Conservation). Further, some of the ecotourism subprojects are located in very remote locations that are accessible only for a certain time of the year —making their profitability uncertain.
61. While several activities have contributed to global knowledge, sustainability of field investments have been questioned by the third-party evaluation commissioned by the borrower. The end-term evaluation of the project raises concerns on the issue of maintenance and monitoring of assets. It notes that regular monitoring assessments could have been carried out to ensure continuity of the social, economic, and conservation utility of these assets.
5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance
5.1 Bank Performance (a) Bank Performance in Ensuring Quality at Entry Rating: Moderately Unsatisfactory
62. The Bank proactively supported the borrower in designing activities that would speak to the identified regional conservation threats. As a result, investments on building institutions, knowledge and incentives led to sound outcomes, despite an exceptionally short preparation time of 2.7 months (from concept to Board approval) that limited the scope for conducting background studies specific to the project. The economic analysis had to rely on South Asia’s wide estimates and made assumptions on attributing the share of illegal trade to its share of global biodiversity. Given the urgency of preparation, bulk of the project investments were not designed but placed strategically under the two competitive grant funding windows in Component 2. Even though this was an innovative approach for promoting demand driven activities, this exposed 89% of the loan to risk of delayed implementation. This design challenge materialized as there were several delays in inviting proposals, processing, and approving them. The competitiveness of this subcomponent
6Project Progress Report (January 2012–June 2016). PMU, WCD, DOFPS, and MOAF. July 11, 2016. 20
is also questionable, as of the nine proposals funded, seven were implemented by the WCD itself, which also acted as the Project Coordination Unit. Overall, the Bank carried out its due diligence and fiduciary and environmental and social assessments well, provided good oversight on policy and institutional aspects, assess the risks accurately and ensured strategic and technical inputs to the project design.
63. The project design is considered complex due to multiplicity of government agencies/institutions with an innovative design across participating countries with no dedicated institutions existing at preparation to deal with illegal wildlife crimes and associated cross-border trade. The Bank team mitigated this with adequate consultations with APL countries, including India, as it had committed to join the regional project. As a result, two steering committees were made as part of implementation arrangements with their secretariat rotating to each country. This is the first regional project in South Asia and builds shared capacity of the participating countries, including establishing and institutionalizing systems to address a global public bad. There were some shortcomings in the Monitoring and Evaluation and the Results Framework with the clarity of targets of indicators, which was later on revised to better capture the outcomes. Further, some activities, such as Subcomponent 2.1, were over-ambitious and was dropped during restructuring. Nonetheless, the ICR notes the exceptional job done by the Bank in balancing the challenge of a project around global public good at the institutional level, keeping the interest of each borrowing country to investment at the country level.
(b) Quality of Supervision Rating: Satisfactory
64. The focus of the World Bank team’s supervision was to identify, raise, and help resolve issues that adversely affected progress. The World Bank team produced 14 Implementation Status and Results Reports, 5 of which were based on actual field missions, including the MTR mission. Throughout the implementation phase, the team was in constant touch with the implementing agency and undertook desk-based reviews and also reviewed the progress during face-to-face meetings in other countries. Important issues, such as deputing a proactive project coordinator, were raised and efforts were made to resolve these in a pragmatic manner throughout project implementation. This is particularly true in the initial period when project implementation faced issues that slowed down implementation pace. This included, among others, lack of having a good project coordinator and slow procurement. It is commendable that the fiduciary aspects were managed well during implementation in a scenario where the borrower’s capacity was low and with limited experience of implementing a World Bank project.
65. The project restructuring, though later than would have been desired, helped to address the shortcomings of the Results framework. The MTR and restructuring took place only one year before project closure due to the capacity issues in Bhutan. It was not feasible to restructure when the implementation performance and disbursements were still untried for the WCD, which had no experience in implementing World Bank-supported projects.
66. Regular and adequate technical and fiduciary support was part of the supervision. Almost all missions included support from the fiduciary team members. The Bank was already strong in providing technical inputs and no additional technical experts were required and taken on board. The World Bank team provided support to keep the delivery of project outputs on track,
21
especially for regional cooperation under Component 1. The Bank, mostly, applied sound reasoning and judgment in rating the project performance as well as components and on other aspects of monitoring and project management. The risks were also assessed accurately throughout the implementation period.
(c) Justification of Rating for Overall Bank Performance Rating: Moderately Satisfactory
67. The overall World Bank performance is rated Moderately Satisfactory due to Satisfactory rating for Supervision and Moderately Unsatisfactory rating for Quality at Entry.
5.2 Borrower Performance
(a) Government Performance Rating: Moderately Satisfactory
68. The Government considered the project to be of high regional and national importance and monitored the project implementation at a high level, including the visits and recognition by respective ministers. The MOAF was the key RGoB counterpart. Overall, there was good commitment from the MOAF to the project from preparation through implementation. While not involved in the day-to-day administration, the MOAF kept itself informed about the project’s progress and its key challenges and achievements. Within the MOAF, the DOFPS was responsible for project implementation.
69. Initial implementation delays and inadequate coordination are the main factors that affected project implementation and the borrower’s performance ratings. The Government took a long time in addressing the issue of project coordination (the project coordinator was changed thrice in the first two years of implementation). The Government could have resolved issues relating to procurement and project coordination in a quicker manner. The PISC also only met after a long initial delay of 29 months after project start. Given that the PISC was both a formal legal requirement for project implementation and was supposed to play a major operational guidance and approval role, it should have been convened right from the start of the project. The Operations Manual was not finalized and adopted at appraisal and by Board approval, Therefore, its acceptance was made a condition for disbursement. Low technical and operational capacity, particularly below mid-level civil servants, also contributed to the delays and quality of implementation.
(b) Implementing Agency or Agencies Performance Rating: Satisfactory
70. Strong ownership by the implementing agency was evident from the fact that the core staff of the WCD implemented the project. Therefore, the WCD was the main implementing agency for the project and performed the functions of the PMU. Despite difficult mountain terrain and remote locations of some of the sub-projects, the WCD ensured proper monitoring and follow- up. Even though the initial implementation period saw project management challenges, things improved considerably and the project was able to utilize 100% of credit by way of committing the entire amount about 18 months before project closure. Notwithstanding the initial delays, which were caused by factors out of the control of WCD and as a result of delayed RGoB decisions, 22
the project coordinator established good network with field units that helped undertake and monitor project activities effectively. The WCD was also prompt in providing progress reports and commissioned the mid-term and end-term independent evaluations for the project. These were very proactive and promising step that increased the implementation pace and enhanced monitoring of results in the field.
(c) Justification of Rating for Overall Borrower Performance Rating: Moderately Satisfactory
71. The overall borrower performance is rated Moderately Satisfactory due to overall delays and procurement inefficiencies during the initial stages. The borrower managed to catch up with the planned activities and improve the performance, leading to implementation of all the activities according to the Restructuring Paper (October 2015), on schedule and within the original project costs. The project remained in full compliance with the World Bank’s fiduciary requirements and audit reports did not bring up any major issues. There were no environmental issues.
6. Lessons Learned
72. The Government and the World Bank should be commended for undertaking the first regional project in South Asia, which established shared goals, enhanced national technical capacity, strengthened institutional data management, and catalysed behavioural change with regard to transboundary illegal wildlife trade. There are several lessons that can be learned from this project, that are particularly relevant for continued engagement at the regional level and addressing transboundary issues.
(a) Regionally shared goals with country-specific investment opportunities are strong incentives for enhancing collaboration for addressing transboundary conservation challenges. The project has demonstrated that transboundary challenges of illegal wildlife trade and habitat management could only be addressed with shared goals and agreed approaches. The gains made by developing SAWEN as a regional instrument could help broaden the scope and scale of regional cooperation in South Asia, which is the least integrated region in the world.
(b) Regional cooperation is a strategic approach for resolving transboundary challenges of illegal wildlife trade and habitat management. The project provides empirical evidence of the potential of regional cooperation in addressing cross-border challenges. This is a better mechanism for challenges that overlap multiple countries than that of opportunistic bilateral cooperation as its scope covers a wider range of solutions than a bilateral arrangement that has merit in solving issues specific to two countries.
(c) Regional projects focusing on global public goods are difficult to design and implement and good prior analysis of capacities and respective commitments through adequate preparation time is not optional. The project provides experience that balancing management expectations and commitments require sufficient time, especially when the project has regional scope and content. A hastily
23
prepared regional operation could result in initial implementation delays that have a bearing on the overall progress of the project.
(d) Focusing and supporting institutional strengthening is the key to achieve regional shared goals. The project rightly supported the establishment and strengthening of in-country and regional institutions with shared common goals and objectives. This increased the ownership by the countries, as well as ensured the post project sustainability of the investments made.
(e) Projects trying to pilot novel ideas and cooperation on transboundary issues need to have measureable indicators from the beginning. It is critical to get a good and measureable Results Framework in place right at the beginning. Unless success of regional cooperation is measured and documented reasonably, there is a risk of the participating countries not engaging meaningfully. On the other hand, if regional cooperation is measured well, it could pave the way for scaling up of such actions in future.
(f) A comprehensive organizational capacity building is more effective than providing activity-based training to concerned staff. The project invested in building organizational capacities across participating countries, several of which are likely to draw on these resources. This is an effective strategy to build long-term sustainability of investments made in capacity building rather than training staff resources to provide short-term project-level benefits.
7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners
(a) Borrower/implementing agencies
No issues were raised by the borrower.
(b) Cofinanciers
Not applicable.
(c) Other partners and stakeholders
No issues were raised.
24
Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing
(a) Project Cost by Component (in US$, Million equivalent)
Project Component Original Actual (US$, Percentage of Estimated Cost millions) Appraisal (US$, millions) Component 1: Capacity Building for Addressing the 0.08 0.08 100 Illegal Trans-boundary Wildlife Trade Component 2: Promoting Wildlife Conservation in 2.01 2.16 107 Asia Component 3: Project Coordination and 0.04 0.01 25 Communication Price contingencies 0.12 — — Total project cost 2.25 2.25 100
(b) Financing
Appraisal Type of Actual Percentage of Source of Funds Estimate Cofinancing (US$, millions) Appraisal (US$, millions) Borrower 0.00 0.00 0 International Development Association 2.25 2.25 100 (IDA)
25
Annex 2. Outputs by Component
Component 1: Capacity Building for Addressing the Illegal Trans-boundary Wildlife Trade
1. Component 1 aimed to bring about regional harmonization and collaboration in combating wildlife crime through strengthened legislative and regulatory frameworks, well-equipped specialized agencies and systems, and relevant training and awareness programs for staff across the range of agencies that contributed to the enforcement of wildlife laws and regulations. This component supported the FPSU, which was created with support from the project. The FPSU’s mandate included combating wildlife crime because wildlife crime control (including field-level implementation) was within the jurisdiction of the FPSU, while wildlife crime control policy making continued to be within the WCD’s jurisdiction. Under the APL, strengthening of the FPSU’s information and intelligence network contributed toward improving enforcement and control of wildlife crime. The activities supported under this component have been complemented by other conservation efforts supported by development partners, international conservation nongovernmental organizations, and the RGoB. The implementation of Component 1 is complete. The most critical activity, related to the strengthening of Bhutan’s capacity to document and store reliable data on forest- and wildlife-related offenses in the country, was done successfully through upgrading of BhuFED.
Component 2: Promoting Wildlife Conservation in Asia
2. Post restructuring in 2015, this component comprised only one subcomponent: (a) PA and state reserve forests (SRF) management with regional conservation benefits. As part of restructuring, funds under subcomponent 2.1 were reallocated to Subcomponent 2.2. Investments under this subcomponent targeted improvements in ecosystem protection and management that contribute to regional conservation. To foster ownership, efficiency, and commitment on the part of the field-based managers of the implementing agencies, the project undertook a competitive demand-driven approach to interventions in PAs in selecting subprojects to be funded. The funds were allocated through an annual competitive call for proposals submitted for innovative pilot projects with regional applicability that address endangered species conservation, innovative research in wildlife conservation, human-wildlife conflict management, and ecotourism development.
3. The following six subprojects were approved, amounting to a total commitment of US$2.116 million and all of these are completed.
Table 2.1. Subprojects under the two funding windows S. No. Sub-project Title Implementing Agency Under Funding Window 1 of Subcomponent 2.2 1. Tiger revalidation survey of Bhutan 2014–2015 Carnivore Program, WCD 2. Nationwide Snow Leopard Survey 2014–2016 Snow Leopard Conservation Program, WCD 3. Human-Wildlife Conflict Management: Replicating Human-Wildlife Conflict Management Section, Innovative Pilot Projects 2013–2016 WCD Under Funding Window 2 of Sub-component 2.2 4. Regional Wildlife Rescue Centre establishment Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre, (Western and Eastern) 2013–2016 WCD
26
S. No. Sub-project Title Implementing Agency 5. Piloting of community-based ecotourism in Mongar and Lhuntse Dzongkhags and Nature Dramitse-Aja-Phuning and eco-trial in Bumdeling Recreation and Ecotourism Division Wildlife Sanctuary 2013–2016 6. Formulation of ecotourism activities covering RBP Lamperi and Nature Recreation and different ecological regions of Bhutan 2013–2016 Ecotourism Division 7. Takin Preserve Interpretation Centre Project 2015– Takin Preserve Management, WCD 2016
4. In addition to the subprojects listed in table 2.1, completion and printing of the RBP Management Plan 2016 and final delivery of the end-term evaluation report by independent external consultant have also been completed.
5. Under the human-wildlife conflict management a number of innovative approaches were piloted and scaled up based on previous experience. For example, 15 new conservation committees (GECCs) were established and 13 existing GECCs received top-up seed money for the crop insurance scheme. The details of the subprojects are provided in table 2.2.
Table 2.2. Details of Subprojects (GECC) receiving financial support S. No. New GECC established Existing GECCs that Received Top-up Funds (total support BTN 7 Million) (total support BTN 3 Million) 1. Phunsthopelri Gewog, Samtse Dzongkhag Community Elephant Conservation Committee, Tashocholing Gewog Samtse 2. Shompangkha Elephant Gewog, Sarpang Khatoe Gewog, Gasa Dzongkhag Dzongkhag 3. Gakidling Elephant Conservation Committee, Khamoe Gewog, Gasa Dzongkhag Sarpang Dzongkhag 4. Lunana gewog, Gasa Dzongkhag Tareythang Crop Insurance Scheme 5. Singay Elephant Conservation Committee, Norbugang Crop Insurance Scheme Sarpang Dzongkhag 6. Samtenling Elephant Conservation Committee, Phangkhar Livestock Insurance Scheme Sarpang Dzongkhag 7. Goshing Gewog Zhemgang Dzongkhag Lhamozingkha Gewog, Dagana 8. Ngala Gewog Zhemgang Dzongkhag Nubi Gewog, Trongsa Dzongkhag 9. Bjoka Gewog, Zhemgang Dzongkhag Tsamang Gewog, Mongar Dzongkhag 10. Tsaling Gewog, Mongar Chimung Gewog Pemagastel Dzongkhag 11. Lungo Chiwog, Laya Gewog Gasa Korphu Gewog, Trongsa Dzongkhag 12. Yaksa chiwog, Tsento Gewog, Paro Dhur Chhoker Gewog, Bumthang Dzongkhag 13. Soe Gewog, Paro Dzongkhag Dhur Livestock Insurance Scheme Gewog, Bumthang Dzongkhag 14. Goenshari Gewog, Punakha Dzongkhag — 15. Chumey Gewog, Bumthang Dzongkhag —
6. It is important to understand that wildlife management and habitat conservation efforts undertaken in countries sharing ecological boundaries, including patrolling or interdiction of illegal activity and anti-poaching/trafficking operations, need to be coordinated among countries to ensure that no actions in one country are detrimental to its neighbors. Therefore, a landscape
27
approach to conservation planning would enable regional countries to move beyond focusing only on their national PAs and boundaries.
7. The end-term evaluation has noted that apart from piloting new technology for crop protection from wildlife, the project was not able to be more creative or innovative, as the human- wildlife conflict warrants. The evaluation hints at the Government’s reluctance to move to a marked-based instrument for social conflict resolution, but it does not provide any specific details about it. At the same time, the evaluation does not provide any concrete evidence for this and neither suggests any appropriate market-based instruments with their merits and demerits.
Component 3: Project Coordination and Communication
8. Project management improved considerably after the MTR and continued to be effectively carried out until project closure. Monitoring of project activities and coordination with subcomponent and subproject managers and with the project accountants was done proactively. No specific outputs were planned under this component, as it provided overall support for managing the project.
9. A detailed account of outputs planned and achieved under the components is presented in table 2.3.
Table 2.3. Outputs Planned and Achieved Under the Components Planned Output Number Number Remarks Planned Achieved PDO/Regional Level Regional mechanism 1 1 This is a PDO- and regional-level output but for addressing wildlife efforts to achieve this primarily fall under trade Component 1. SAWEN has been ratified by Nepal and Sri Lanka, which is not a participating country in the APL. It is under the process for ratification in Bhutan. Knowledge products on 15 47 These are PDO-level outputs and shared across wildlife crime and/or SAWEN countries. wildlife conservation Bhutan’s knowledge products, carried out under Component 2, include (a) National Tiger survey, (b) Transboundary human-wildlife conflict, (c) Wildlife rescue, (d) National snow leopard survey, and (e) Bhutan Forest and Wildlife Enforcement Database (BhuFED). There are other knowledge products developed in Nepal and Bangladesh. Wildlife crime control 3 3 All participating countries have established institutions new institutions/institutional arrangements. For Bhutan, it is called the FPSU. For Bhutan, support to this output comes under Components 1 and 2.
28
Planned Output Number Number Remarks Planned Achieved Pilot interventions 3 21 All subprojects falling under Subcomponent addressing 2.2 are counted toward the achievement of this transboundary wildlife PDO-level indicator. issues The key Bhutan-specific interventions are (a) National tiger survey report, (b) National snow leopard survey report, and (c) Human-wildlife conflict project interventions. Activities contributing 5 11 For Bhutan, the specific activities are to tiger conservation (a) Bhutan’s national tiger report completed in June 2015; (b) Human-wildlife conflict management project (interventions contribute to address tiger-human conflicts); and (c) BhuFED. These are important activities with long-term conservation outcomes and short-term collaboration gains. For Bhutan, these activities were supported under Components 1 and 2. Agreed research 3 5 The products envisaged are regional in nature programs for regional and could be difficult to quantify. Only one wildlife management formal activity—tiger census in Sundarbans— was completed between India and Bangladesh in 2015. The agreed research programs for Bhutan are in advanced stages of formalization. Two consultative meetings, with India, have taken place for formalizing an MOU on transboundary biodiversity conservation. Thematic meetings on 3 3 Only two meetings could take place during the wildlife crime and implementation of the project in Bhutan. APL transboundary 1, which was extended, closed in December conservation issues 2016 and the third meeting took place by then. Component 1 Institutionalizing of 1 1 BhuFED has been completed and formally intelligence network launched. It is now operational. Data managers of all PAs and field divisions have been trained in the use of the BhuFED system. The newly established FPSU was provided with necessary equipment—computers and peripherals, thermal imaging and digital cameras, field extension kits, and over 50 handsets for wireless communication. Staff training 250 935 Staff have been provided training on BhuFED and SMART patrolling. Institutional capacity has increased across all the APL countries. Component 2 Wildlife rescue centers 2 2 Two new centers have been built—one each at Taba and Jigmeling. Operations at these rescue centers have started.
29
Planned Output Number Number Remarks Planned Achieved o 81 wild animals rescued, treated, and released in 2013 o 64 wild animals rescued, treated, and released in 2014 o 67 wild animals rescued, treated, and released in 2015 (until June 2016) Visitor satisfaction 1 1 A visitor satisfaction survey was conducted in surveys the last year of project implementation at the RBP. Improved facilities at the RBP resulted in increased visitor flow. In 2015, a total of 14,408 visitors visited and in the first six months of 2016, a total of 10,041 visitors visited the RBP. Improved visitor facilities and interpretation also result in enhanced awareness and knowledge about conservation. Activities that reduce 3 3 Number of interventions were planned and human-wildlife conflict implemented. Measures undertaken to reduce the conflict included the following: o Electric fencing - 158 running kilometer length of electric fence has been installed, resulting in protection of about 3,655 ha of cropland. o Insurance scheme was funded, including topping up the seed money of 13 existing GECCs, o Quick response team has been created, Snow leopard survey 1 1 The first scientific survey of snow leopards in Bhutan was completed and a field manual on sign and camera trap survey techniques was published.
30
Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysis
1. At appraisal, a cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The calculations were spread across a 10-year and a 20-year period with identical annual project investments spread over 5-year period. A sensitivity analysis was also carried out with regard to (a) the discount rate applied for calculating the net present values of project costs and benefits; (b) the estimated rate of elimination of illegal wildlife trade that will be achieved by the project investments; and (c) the estimates of how much of the global illegal wildlife trade can be assigned to South Asia.
2. The actual rate of reduction in illegal wildlife trade has not been measured by the project, despite investments made on strengthening enforcement and regulatory environment for illegal wildlife trade. It is therefore, difficult to confirm what cost-benefit ratio is achieved, according to the analysis presented in the PAD. For a true estimation of the cost-benefit ratio, it would be important to also factor in the reduction in illegal wildlife trade in other countries of South Asia particularly, Bangladesh, Nepal, and India, as the analysis considered the trade estimates for South Asia and not just one country. Moreover, while calculating the cost-benefit ratio at appraisal, the project made a significant assumption that the share of illegal wildlife trade in South Asia is equivalent to its share of global biodiversity at 13% - 15%.
3. However, the project was efficient in achieving outcomes in a cost-effective manner. For Bhutan (and regionally), the investment cost of US$2.25 million was minimal in setting up and strengthening a new formal unit (FPSU) in the WCD, establishing SAWEN, and substantially improving interpretation facilities for visitors at a prominent PA thus resulting in increased visits of paid visitors. Investments on preventing human-wildlife conflicts, especially in reducing crop losses through wildlife induced crop depredation are also likely to result in economic benefits for the local communities.
4. Given the challenges with the ex post economic analysis, the ICR looked into the returns on investments made in two of the subprojects and concluded that the cost-benefit ratio was favorable. The analysis presented here examines the revenue generated at one of the PAs, the RBP, after investing US$154,017 (approximately BTN 10.03 million) on enhancing visitor services and the interpretation center. Since its completion in 2014–2015, the number of paid visitors has significantly increased along with the revenue generated.
Table 3.1. Number of Visitors and Revenue Generated until June 2016 Number of Visitors Year Locals International Revenue Generated (BTN, millions) 2011 4,369 1,511 0.16 2012 4,575 1,545 0.16 2013 4,391 1,634 0.17 2014 4,876 2,774 0.21 2015 9,512 3,877 0.62 2016 a 4,813 2,762 0.29 Total 32,536 14,103 1.62 Note: a. only until June 2016.
5. The revenue earned at the RBP is already showing an increasing trend. In 2015, BTN 522,210 from entry fee and BTN 95,990 from other services (boating, camping, and so on) were
31
generated. Until June 2016, BTN 229,180 from entry fee and BTN 64,180 from other services were reported to be generated. This indicates that in about 10 years, the investment cost will be fully recovered. However, given the increasing trend of visitors, projections show that the visitor numbers will significantly increase over the next few years, which will recover the investment costs within the next seven to eight years perhaps.
Table 3.2. Projection of Number of Visitors and Revenue Generation till 2020 Revenue Generated Year Local Visitors International Visitors Total Visitors (BTN, millions) 2011 4,369 1,511 5,880 0.16 2012 4,575 1,545 6,120 0.16 2013 4,391 1,634 6,025 0.17 2014 4,876 2,774 7,650 0.21 2015 9,512 3,877 13,389 0.62 2016 8,721 4,057 12,777 0.56 2017 9,779 4,653 14,432 0.65 2018 10,838 5,249 16,087 0.75 2019 11,897 5,845 17,742 0.85 2020 12,956 6,441 19,396 0.95 Total 81,914 37,584 119,498 5.08
32
Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes
(a) Task Team members
Name Title Unit Nathalie Weier Johnson Team Leader GENDR Tanvir Hossain Procurement Specialist GGODR Savinay Grover Financial Management GGODR Specialist Farhat Jahan Chowdhury Co Team Leader GENDR Janet Bably Halder Team Member SACBD Sumith Pilapitiya Team Member GENDR Marinella Dado Team Member GENDR (Retired) Mokshana Nerandika Environmental Specialist GEN06 Wijeyeratne Borsboom, Stephanie Johanna Team Member GENDR (Left) Jacquel Darshani De Silva Senior Environmental Specialist GEN06 Valerie Marie Helene Layrol Senior Operations Officer GEN06 Susrutha Pradeep Goonesekera Consultant GSU06 Ramachandran, Eashwary Team Member GENDR Anupam Joshi Senior Environmental Specialist GEN06 Kishore Uprety Team member Priya Chopra Program Assistant GSU06 Suresh Ramalingam Consultant DFIVP Hiran Herat Consultant GFM07 Joseph Daulat Marsangap Senior IT Assistant SECPO Siagian Andrew Zakharenka Natural Resource Management GEN06 Specialist
(b) Staff Time and Cost
Stage of Project Cycle / Year Staff Time and Cost (Bank Budget Only) No. of Staff weeks US$, Thousands (Including travel and consultant costs) Lending 2011 13.00 85,120 Supervision 2012 20.61 89,986 2013 19.75 54,223 2014 16.68 65,471 2015 15.35 64,082 2016 7.31 45,507 2017 6.87 45,617 Total (Lending + 99.57 450,006 Supervision)
33
Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results
Not applicable.
34
Annex 6. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results
Not applicable.
35
Annex 7. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR
The borrower did not prepare and share it’s own ICR. They however, shared an End of Project evaluation report that was prepared by an independent qualified consultant hired by the borrower. The Bank shared the draft ICR with the borrower who, after a review of the draft, provided the following comments:
1. Clarified that the country’s Protected Areas were evaluated through a METT that was supported under the GEF 5 project in the Highlands Altitude Northern Areas (HANAS). This assessment/evaluation led to the publishing of “State of Parks Report for Bhutan” for the first time. An assessment methodology to evaluate the protected areas of Bhutan was also published.
2. Clarified that the wildlife rescue center was already existing and through the project it was upgraded to a better level. The southern one is a new establishment supported under the regional wildlife project. The project’s value addition to what the government was already doing and lacking funding for was also appreciated.
3. Clarified that the agency FPSU was already existing and that the project funds were used effectively to strengthen it.
36
Annex 8. Comments of Cofinanciers and Other Partners/Stakeholders
Not applicable.
37
Annex 9. List of Supporting Documents
1. Implementation Completion and Results Report. Guidelines. OPCS, The World Bank. August 2006 (updated July 2, 2014). 2. Independent End-Term Evaluation Report of IDA Credit 4983-BT: Strengthening Regional Cooperation for Wildlife Protection in Asia Project: Bhutan Program. Prepared by Tobgay Sonam Namgyal, Jordhen Advisors for WCD, DOFPS, MOAF, Royal Government of Bhutan.
3. Project Progress Report (January 2012–June 2016); PMU, WCD, DOFPS, MOAF, Royal Government of Bhutan.
38
Annex 10. Changes Made to the Results Framework during Project Restructuring
The following changes were made at the PDO level:
Revised formulation of the PDO indicators 1 and 4 for improved clarity with more explicit targets.
Revision of the PDO indicators 2 and 3 to reflect the decision by India in 2013 not to participate in the APL (as envisaged during the APL preparation).
Introduction of a new indicator to better measure the effectiveness of collaboration on tackling illegal wildlife trade and conservation threats.
The following changes were made to the country-specific intermediate outcome indicators:
Introduction of an indicator under Component 2 to better reflect the progress of the proposed snow leopard survey subproject
Introduction of an indicator under Component 3 to reflect capacity enhancement process in the project coordination unit
Revised formulation of some indicators under Components 1 and 2 for greater clarity and/or more explicit targets
Dropping of an indicator under Component 1 that is captured under PDO indicator 1
Dropping of three indicators within Component 2 to prevent duplication
Dropping of two indicators under Components 2 and 3 as the demand-driven subprojects do not include any activities in the PAs that can be measured by the target indicator
Indicator Original Indicator Original Target D - Dropped Revised Indicator Revised Target R - Revised N - New PDO Level Indicator 1 Progress towards the Establishment of the regional R A regional mechanism is One annual development of sustainable coordination forum agreed to in developed and operational for meeting held after regional mechanisms for Year 4 by the TRCs. addressing illegal wildlife trade SAWEN statute and other conservation threats ratified by cabinet
39
Indicator Original Indicator Original Target D - Dropped Revised Indicator Revised Target R - Revised N - New addressing illegal wildlife trade and other conservation threats Indicator 2 Development of at least one Protocol on a common research R Number of agreed knowledge 15 protocol each on a common agenda developed products developed and shared research agenda, knowledge among SAWEN countries on sharing, collaboration, and wildlife crime and/or wildlife division of labor conservation Indicator 3 Agreement among the Implementation effectiveness of R Wildlife crime control institutions 3 enforcement agencies on at regional protocols renewed and established in the three least two regional protocols, revisions made as necessary participating countries including approaches and solutions Indicator 4 Implementation of at least Progress of regional pilots and R Number of implemented pilot 3 three regional pilots or initiatives reviewed initiatives that address initiatives in wildlife transboundary wildlife issues enforcement and conservation Indicator 5 — — N Number of activities contributing 5 to tiger conservation Intermediate Outcome - Regional Indicators Regional Development of a common — R Number of agreed research 3 indicator 1 conservation research program programs for regional wildlife for regional wildlife management developed among management with particular participating countries emphasis on tiger conservation Regional Set up a knowledge sharing Implementation of knowledge R Number of thematic meetings on 3 Indicator 2 mechanism among sharing mechanism is under way wildlife crime and transboundary participating countries conservation issues among participating and other relevant countries Intermediate Outcomes - Bhutan Specific Component 1 Indicator 1 Strengthened enforcement and Institutionalization of the R Strengthened enforcement and 1 effective control of illegal information/intelligence network effective control of illegal wildlife wildlife trade as part of the WCD’s law trade enforcement system Indicator 2 Improved feedback or record Evaluations of successful (or R Improved record of trained staff 250 of WCD’s trained staff vis-à- non-successful) efforts of vis-à-vis capacity for enforcement,
40
Indicator Original Indicator Original Target D - Dropped Revised Indicator Revised Target R - Revised N - New vis capacity for enforcement, transboundary coordination in transboundary coordination, and transboundary coordination improving enforcement and responsiveness to wildlife crimes and responsiveness to wildlife illegal wildlife crime control crimes Indicator 1 Improved management of PAs Construction of PA management D — — through development of better offices and deployment of trained management, infrastructure field staff and trained staff Component 2 Indicator 2 Better care and management of Implementation of wildlife R Better care and management of 2 injured and rescued wildlife rehabilitation programs at the injured and rescued wildlife rescue centers Indicator 3 Improved facilities for wildlife Conducting visitor satisfaction R Improved facilities for Conducting visitor education of visitors to PAs surveys environmental education and satisfaction interpretation surveys Indicator 4 Reduction of tiger-human 50% of models implemented and R Measures taken to reduce human- 3 conflict (THC) and human- replication strategy and master wildlife conflict elephant (HEC) conflict by plan developed 50% in pilot sites Indicator 5 30% increase in visitor Undertake visitor satisfaction D — — satisfaction due to improved survey ecotourism Indicator 6 20% increase in the revenue 20% increase in revenue D — — earning opportunities of PAs and affected communities due to ecotourism Indicator 7 Development of smart, green 75% of greening infrastructure D — — and wildlife friendly pilot projects implemented infrastructure plans Indicator 6 — — N Introduction of a scientific method Completion of of surveying snow leopards survey and launching of report Component 3 Indicator 1 Establishment of Regional Fully operational D — — Project Steering Committee (RPSC) and of Operational
41
Indicator Original Indicator Original Target D - Dropped Revised Indicator Revised Target R - Revised N - New Steering Committee for Regional Coordination (OSCRC) and made operational Indicator 2 Area brought under enhanced — D biodiversity conservation (Core) Indicator 1 — — N Effective Project Coordination Continuity of Project Coordinator
42
MAP
43