00034145 Wetlands
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME Global Environment Facility Project of the Government of Lithuania Project information Summary of UNDP and cost-sharing inputs [as per attached budgets] Project number: LIT/03/G31/A/1G/99 Project title: Conservation of Inland Wetland UNDP/GEF: $ 3,261,000 Biodiversity in Lithuania PDF B stage $180,000 PIMS number: 1761 Cost-sharing: Estimated start date: November 2003 Government (MoE): $ 2,239,400 cash/in kind Estimated duration: 5 years Municipalities: $ 829,400 cash/in kind Executing agent: Ministry of Environment ISPA: $ 4,443,300 cash Implementing agent: Nature Heritage Fund SAPARD: $ 815,000 cash Project site: Lithuania‟s Inland Wetlands Other: $ 2,097,300 cash/in kind Beneficiary countries: Lithuania Co- fin. subtotal $ 10,424,4001 ACC sector and subsector: Environment / Environment Enhancement and TOTAL: $ 13,865,400 Management DCAS sector and subsector Natural Resources / Environmental Preservation and Rehabilitation Government sector and G3: Environment subsector: LPAC review date: Primary areas of focus/sub- Promoting Environment and Natural Resources focus: Sustainability Programme officer: Lina Jankauskiene Primary target beneficiaries: Target Place (Environmental Habitats) Brief description: The project objectives are to a) demonstrate improved wetland management in-situ at five globally significant sites, and b) with the lessons learned from these experiences, institutionalize best practices through a formal intersectoral mechanism for replication to other wetland sites throughout Lithuania. The project has six main outputs. Five will deliver biodiversity conservation at the top five priority wetlands in Lithuania (Cepkeliai, Kamanos, Viesvile, Zuvintas and Girutiskis). These five demonstration sites will provide lessons learned and best practices to inform institutionalization, policy dialogue and reform regarding biodiversity conservation and economic and social benefits. The sixth output will result in a formal intersectoral mechanism for institutionalization and replication of best lessons learned in conservation of inland wetland biodiversity. Main activities include the establishment of a system of tradable collection permits for cranberries, the reconversion of farming lands to wetland- friendly agricultural activities, the adoption of biodiversity-friendly forestry protocols, the establishment of a biosphere reserve, strengthening enforcement of reserve regulations and boundaries, restoration of selected wetland habitats, public awareness and public support activities, the gathering and codification of lessons and best practices and the elaboration of a strategy for replication to other wetlands. On behalf of: Signature Date Name & Title Ministry of Environment Mr. Arūnas Kundrotas, Minister Implementing agent Mr. Gediminas Raščius, Director UNDP Ms. Cihan Sultanoglu, Resident Representative 1 The total co-financing for the project document is higher than the amount reflected in the proposal, which was $8,958,400. Additional 1,466,400 is contribution from MoE, which originally was not included into co-financing, as this was contribution to the baseline. After the May Council Meeting, when new rules for co-financing were put in place (see GEF/C.20/6 Rev), the contribution to the baseline was considered as co-financing, and thus its total gives the amount of $10,424,400. 1 INDEX OF CONTENTS 1. COUNTRY OWNERSHIP ............................................................................................................. 5 1.A. COUNTRY ELIGIBILITY ............................................................................................................... 5 1.B. COUNTRY DRIVEN-NESS ............................................................................................................ 5 1.C. ENDORSEMENT ........................................................................................................................... 5 2. PROGRAM & POLICY CONFORMITY .................................................................................... 5 2.A. PROGRAM DESIGNATION & CONFORMITY ................................................................................. 5 2.B. PROJECT DESIGN ........................................................................................................................ 6 2.b.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 6 2.b.2. Description of project sites ................................................................................................. 7 2.b.3. Threats affecting the project sites ....................................................................................... 9 2.b.4. Description of proposed project strategy .......................................................................... 12 2.b.5. Institutional Context: a general description ..................................................................... 19 2.b.6. Institutional Context for project implementation .............................................................. 20 2.b.7. Project Implementation Arrangements ............................................................................. 21 2.b.8. Incremental Cost Estimation (see Annex 2F for a full description of the incremental cost analysis) ...................................................................................................................................... 24 2.C. RISKS AND SUSTAINABILITY (INCLUDING FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY) ................................ 25 2.c.1. Risks .................................................................................................................................. 25 2.c.2. Sustainability ..................................................................................................................... 25 2.D. REPLICABILITY ........................................................................................................................ 28 2.E. STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT ................................................................................................ 28 2.F. MONITORING & EVALUATION .................................................................................................. 29 2.f.1. Indicate how the project design has incorporated lessons from similar projects in the past ..................................................................................................................................................... 29 2.f.2. Describe approach for project M&E system...................................................................... 32 2.f.3. Outline organizational arrangement for implementing M&E ........................................... 36 3. FINANCING .................................................................................................................................. 36 4. INSTITUTIONAL COORDINATION & SUPPORT ............................................................... 39 4.A. CORE COMMITMENTS & LINKAGES.......................................................................................... 39 4.a.1. Describe how the proposed project is located within the IA’s Country/regional/global/sector programs. ................................................................................. 39 4.a.2. GEF activities with potential influence on the proposed project (design and implementation)........................................................................................................................... 40 4.B. CONSULTATION, COORDINATION AND COLLABORATION BETWEEN IAS, AND IAS AND EAS, IF APPROPRIATE. .................................................................................................................................. 40 5. LEGAL CONTEXT ...................................................................................................................... 40 6. RESPONSE TO REVIEWS ......................................................................................................... 41 6.A. COUNCIL .................................................................................................................................. 41 6.B. CONVENTION SECRETARIAT .................................................................................................... 41 6.C. GEF SECRETARIAT ................................................................................................................... 41 NO FURTHER COMMENTS AFTER MAY 2003 COUNCIL MEETING. .................................................. 41 6.D. OTHER IAS AND RELEVANT EAS ............................................................................................. 41 6.E. STAP ........................................................................................................................................ 41 ANNEX 2A: LOG FRAME MATRIX ............................................................................................ 43 ANNEX 2B: ENDORSEMENT LETTER ...................................................................................... 46 ANNEX 2CI: STAP REVIEW ......................................................................................................... 48 2 ANNEX 2CII: RESPONSE TO STAP REVIEW........................................................................... 57 ANNEX 2D: MAPS OF PROJECT SITES..................................................................................... 64 Map 1: Selected five Strict Nature Reserves ..............................................................................