World Bank Document

E1119

-. ~~^ -- Public Disclosure Authorized

-41~~~~- Public Disclosure Authorized

Public Disclosure Authorized Preparation of Natural Resources Development Project (NRDP), Albania

Grant number TF 053121

Environmental Assessment

FINAL

28 Febriuary 2005 Public Disclosure Authorized

RM i

I CONTENTS

LIST OFACRONYMS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 OBJECTIVES 1 1.2 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION PROCESS 2 1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK 2 1.4 LAYOUT OF THIS REPORT 4

2 PROJECTDESCRIPTION 5

2.1 BACKGROUND 5 2.2 PROJECTDEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE 5 2.3 PROJECTAREA AND SCOPE 5 2.4 PROJECTIMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS 8 2.5 PROPOSEDBUDGET 9

3 SAFEGUARD SCREENING PROCEDURES 10

3.1 WORLD BANK SAFEGUARD POLICIES 10 3.2 ALBANIAN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 10 3.3 ALBANIAN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS 15 3.4 INSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS 17

4 KEY BASELINE INFORMATION 21

4.1 COUNTRY PROFILE 21 4.2 WATER RESOURCES 22 4.3 FOREST RESOURCES 23 4.4 LAND DEGRADATION 26 4.5 BIODIVERSITY 27

5 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 32

5.1 BACKGROUND GUIDANCE 32 5.2 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 32 5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES FOR EMF 39

6 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 43

6.1 'WITHOUTPROJECT'ALTERNATIVE 43 6.2 DIRECTINTERVENTIONS BYFORESTRY SERVICE 43 6.3 STRENGTHENING OF PROTECTEDAREAS MANAGEMENT 44

7 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK 45

7.1 EMFACTIVITIES 45 7.2 EMF REPORTING AND RESPONSIBILITIES 49 7.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING AND REPORTING 50 7.4 CAPACITY BUILDING AND TRAINING 53 7.5 ESTIMATED INCREMENTAL COSTS FOR EMF 54

ANNEXA LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTED ANNEX B LIST OF REFERENCES ANNEX C BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON RELEVANT EU DIRECTIVES ANNEX D LIST OFALBANIAN ENVIRONMENTAL NGOs ANNEX E MAIN WATERSHEDS IN ALBANIA ANNEX F SCOPING OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE NRDP LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AFP Albania Forestry Project CAS Country Assistance Strategy CZM Coastal Zone Management DFS District Forestry Service DGFP General Directorate of Forests and Pastures EA Environmental Assessment EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMF Environmental Management Framework EU European Union FPDS Forest and Pasture Strategy FPUA Forest and Pasture User Associations GDP Gross Domestic Product GEF Global Environment Facility GoA Government of Albania LEAP Local Environmental Action Plan MAF Ministry of Agriculture and Food M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MC Micro-Catchment NEAP National Environmental Action Plan NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NRDP Natural Resources Development Project PMT Project Management Team PIOC Project Implementation Oversight Committee PIM Project Implementation Manual PTC Project Technical Committee REC Regional Environment Center RC Regional Coordinator REA Regional Environment Agency RM Regional Manager RWST Regional Watershed Support Team SA Social Assessment Sida Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency SNV Netherlands Development Organization UNDP United Nations Development Program USDA United States Department of Agriculture WFP World Food Program WRM Water Resources Management i

i I

i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Govemment of Albania (GoA) has requested financial assistance (US$20m) from the World Bank and other donors for the preparation and implementation of the Natural Resources Development Project (NRDP). The proposed project will be financed through a US$7 million IDA credit, a US$5 million Global Environment Facility (GEF) grant, and a SEK40 million grant from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida).

The following is a summary of the Environmental Assessment (EA) of the NRDP, carried out as part of project preparation. The primary task of the EA was to develop an Environmental Management Framework (EMF) that establishes methodologies for identification and mitigation of environmental impacts during project implementation.

PROJECTDESCRIPTION

The project development objective is to establish or maintain sustainable, community-based natural resource management in about 218 communes in upland and mountainous erosion-prone lands. This will lead to enhanced productivity and incomes derived from sustainable resource management, reduced soil degradation, improved water management, conservation of biodiversity, and strengthened public sector management of these resources.

Project objectives will be achieved through implementing two main components. The first component will strengthen the community-based approach to forest and pasture management developed for 138 communes under the Albania Forestry Project (AFP), as well as scale up coverage to include about 80 additional communes. The second component will pilot integrated management of natural resources in three of Albania's seven watersheds, focusing on five regions located the northern areas of the country'. The component will introduce a multi-sectoral approach to planning and management of natural resources at the level of micro- catchments (MCs).

STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION PROCESS

The consultation process has included both formal and informal consultation with a wide range of key informants and government and civil society stakeholders at the national, regional and local level; the latter including three districts of upland Albania (Tropoje, Hasi and Kukes districts in north-east Albania). Environmental and natural resources management issues were discussed at all of these meetings, usually within the context of overall project development, but in several cases specifically.

(1) 1 The three watersheds include Drini, Nlati, and Shkumbini, while the five regions include Dibra, Korce, Kukes, Lezha, Elbasan and Korce.

ENVIRONMENTALRESOURCES NIANAGENIENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA In broad terms, given the underlying objective of the project to address land degradation as one of the key priorities for the environment in Albania, those consulted viewed the project in very positive terms from an environmental perspective. Few, if any, negative opinions were addressed in relation to environmental issues surrounding the project. However, some specific concerns were raised about arrangements for environmental monitoring, largely focusing on the need to draw upon, nurture and support the existing system of environmental controls and monitoring that exists at the regional level, rather than bypass it, and to involve to local NGOs in the process of building awareness and sensitisation to environmental issues within participating communities, and in monitoring and evaluating the success of the project. These issues were subsequently addressed within the EMF.

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK (EMF)

The successful implementation of the NRDP will clearly have a major positive impact on environmental and natural resources in upland areas of Albania, and, importantly, on downstream resources in the watersheds in which the project operates. Environmental benefits are an integral part of the NRDP, owing to its objective to reverse land and watershed degradation through a mixture of direct physical interventions and support to policy and institutional strengthening and reform. However, this does not preclude the risks of localised negative environmental impacts of community-level interventions, or cumulative impacts of these interventions.

Table I summarises the key localised environmental issues that have been identified by the EA, along with the various environmental protection activities that are to be mainstreamed within the NRDP. It includes project stakeholder roles and responsibilities in relation to these activities, and their relative timing in relation to the overall project activities.

EMF Reporting and Responsibilities

Table I assigns a range of roles and responsibilities in relation to implementation and monitoring of the various environmental protection activities envisaged under the NRDP. These responsibilities have been assigned taking into account the overall implementation arrangements for the project, and are designed to take place within the EMF reporting and responsibility framework shown in Figure 1, and described in the following sections.

Environmental Screening at the Plan Level

The Regional Manager, supported by their Regional Coordinator/RWST (for Component B) or DFS (for Component A), will assist communities to develop their management plans in a way to avoid or minimise adverse environmental impacts.

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES NIANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 11 Table I Environmental Managemtent FrameworkActivities

Activity/Key Issue Mainstreaming or mitigation measures Responsibility for action Timing

A. On-farm interventions on rain-fed and irrigated land Enhance overall benefits of activities to reduce * Promotion and implementation of basic good Regional Watershed Support Team As part of individual MC planning process land and watershed degradation in upland areas practices in soil and water conservation (RWST), with support from Regional of Albania. wherever possible within the micro-catchment Coordinator (RC) (MC) plans. Support for fertiliser application to establish . Provision of effective extension services to RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process newly planted crops may lead to inappropriate demonstrate best practices in fertiliser application methods and increased nutrient application. runoff. * Promotion of Integrated Pest Management RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process (IPM) approaches where appropriate, including biological controls, cultural practices, and use of resistant crop varieties. * Periodic consultation with water supply Audit contractor, with intervention by As part of annual environmental authorities to ensure key water bodies are not RWST/RC as necessary performance (EP) audit being degraded in medium to long term Small-scale rehabilitation of agricultural ponds * Possible localised water supply conflicts RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process and tertiary-level irrigation systems could identified at the sub-project level and suitable potentially lead to localised water supply consultation carried out to identify and conflicts. arbitrate solutions as necessary. * Ongoing observation, consultation and RWST (ongoing) with support from RC, Observation by RWSTs as part of MC plan mediation between affected communities or plus audit contractor (annual) implementation, plus sample monitoring individuals as necessary. as part of annual EP audit

B. On-farm interventions concerning marginal lands As for A above. As for A above. As for A above. As for A above.

Abandoned and sloping (> 150) land that has * Careful planning and management of all RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process acquired protective vegetative cover is turned marginal land activities over to annual crops that require regular soil disturbance.

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOFALBANIA III Activity/Key Issue Mainstreaming or mitigation measures Responsibility for action Timing Introduction of forage crops in marginal lands * Establish agreements on livestock carrying RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process could produce an increase in livestock numbers capacities and grazing patterns with and hence an increased risk of erosion of unstable participating communities soils. * Periodically monitor numbers and intervene RWST (ongoing) with support from RC, Monitoring by RWSTs as part of MC plan as necessary. plus audit contractor (annual) implementation, plus sample monitoring as part of annual EP audit

C. Support to livestock, apiculture and aquaculture Introduction of more productive breeds of * Enhance benefits by using livestock breeds RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process livestock could result in more rather than less that have already been successfully pressure on land, since more productive animals introduced elsewhere in Albania. will consume more to produce the increased * Establish agreements to limit stock numbers RWST (ongoing) with support from RC, Monitoring by RWSTs as part of MC plan quantities of milk. to carrying capacities with project plus audit contractor (annual) implementation, plus sample monitoring beneficiaries, and monitor headcounts during as part of annual EP audit implementation. Provision of veterinary medicines could lead to * Provision of best environmental practices RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process water pollution and related public health advice through project-related extension problems unless the disposal of used chemicals is services, to include practical measures to carefully handled. avoid uncontrolled waste product disposal, contact with water bodies upstream of water abstraction points etc. * Periodic monitoring of effectiveness of RWST (ongoing) with support from RC, Monitoring by RWSTs as part of MC plan implementation plus audit contractor (annual) implementation, plus sample monitoring as part of annual EP audit High nutrient concentrations and pond * Careful siting, planning and management of RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process management chemicals that generally ponds to minimise disruption to other water characterize farm discharges could pollute users, dilution of pond effluents, shorter downstream water bodies. retention times for pond water etc * Site-specific environmental assessments if Specialist study (under contract to PMT). Case-by-case basis (RC to consult REA) required by MoE (very unlikely). * Periodic monitoring of effectiveness of RWST (ongoing) with support from RC Monitoring by RWSTs as part of MC plan implementation plus audit contractor (annual) implementation, plus sample monitoring as part of annual EP audit

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCESNIANACEMIENT GOVERNMENTOFALBANIA IV Activity/Key Issue Mainstreaming or mitigation measures Responsibility for action Timing D. Off-farm management of communal forests and pastures Installation of fencing could lead to the * Form agreement on herd sizes and grazing Regional Manager (RM) with support As part of individual FMP or MC planning intensification of grazing on adjacent and nearby patterns with participating communities in all from District Forestry Service (DFS) (and process land, leading to loss of vegetation and soil cover project areas where re-fencing carried out. RC for Component B only) and increased erosion. * Periodically monitor livestock numbers as RM/DFS (ongoing) plus audit contractor Monitoring by RWST or DFSs as part of part of project implementation. (annual) implementation, plus sample monitoring as part of annual EP audit Excessive use of the black locust tree (Robinia * Introduction of Robinia to be carried out in a RM with support from DFS (and RC for Starting immediately, and continuing pseudoaccacia) in the reforestation process could controlled manner, favouring succession and Component B only) through NRDP implementation lead to reduced diversity of native species in enhancement of natural regeneration of specific areas. existing species. * Periodically monitor effectiveness of Robinia Audit contractor As part of Annual EP audit (year 2 controls through site inspections across range onwards) of sample of sites. Localised erosion problems and/or habitat * Implement (via checklists) standardised RM with support from DFS (and RC for As part of individual FMP or MC planning disturbance could occur during the construction environmental protection measures during Component B only) and implementation process of small erosion control structures (check dams) in construction and repair, such as erosion, noise the upper watershed, or the repair and and dust control, habitat avoidance etc. maintenance of roads, tracks and bridges. * Monitoring of design and construction District Forestry Officer (e.g. RM) As part of individual FMP or MC planning process by suitably qualified engineer. and implementation process * Monitoring implementation effectiveness Audit contractor Sample monitoring as part of annual EP audit Downstream impacts on water quality, and * Location of the watering points should be RM with support from DFS (and RC for As part of individual FMP or MC planning possibly health, from pollution at new livestock assessed during project planning process to Component B only) process watering points. take into account the proximity of downstream water users.

E. Off-farm support to state forest and pasture management As for D above. As for D above. As for D above. As for D above. Promotion of recreation in the conservation areas * Careful planning and siting of access RM with support from DFS (and RC for Throughout NRDP implementation may lead to secondary and indirect impacts improvements during forestry and pasture Component B only) through increased access that will be provided. management planning process * Monitor for secondary and indirect impacts Audit contractor As part of annual EP audit on protected areas (sample inspections, consultation with MoE officials etc)

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES NIANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA

V Figure I EMF reportingand responsibilityframework

Project Implementation _ Ministry of| Oversight Committee Feedback Environment

Project Management Project Technical Committee Team (PMT| (PTC)

Approval of management plans ,+medto \ RmnaAnnual Env. Regional Managers (RM) Performance Audit Submission of Support/advice for management management plan plan development/screening Independent proosls, ------plan - contractor in proposals ------Regional Coordinators I collaboration Regional Watershed (CnoetBol)with Regional I ~~~~~~~ CnpnetBol)Environiment Support Teams (RWSTs) | -- _ __ - _ _ _- _ _ _- _ _ _- _ ____Agencies- I Development of management + | Support/advice for management plan proposals I plan development/screening

Local stakeholders: Forestry and Pasture User Associations MC Planning and Management Committees

Following identification of detailed plan activities, the proposed plan will be initially screened against a standard checklist by the Regional Coordinator (or in the case of Component A the DFS) in consultation with the local project stakeholders, and the results of this screening will be presented to the Regional Manager (RM) for review. This initial screening will culminate in a decision by the RM as to whether specific environmental mitigation measures will need to be adopted within the plan, and/or whether further information is required in order to complete the screening process. When the screening process has been completed, the results will be submitted by the RM to the PMT for final approval, with a recommendation as to what environmental mitigation measures (if any) need to be integrated within the plan, and how they will be implemented, including assigned responsibilities, timings and details of any further training or guidance that is required for the local project stakeholders.

The screening checklists will be developed in detail as part of the Project Irmplementation Maniual (PIM). The checklists themselves will follow a simple yes/no format covering questions on the location of the project and the anticipated impacts; if there are 'yes' answers to any of these then the plan developers will be required to develop a course of action (i.e. mitigation measure) and in some cases to complete a more detailed checklist on a specific subject. Actions can be for the community itself to manage or avoid impacts, the RM or RC/DFS to provide specific advice, or if necessary the provision of technical advice from elsewhere e.g. the PTC.

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOLURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA VI Screeningfor PotentialCumulative Impacts

As part of the screening process, the PMT/RM will also be responsible for maintaining an overview of the potential cumulative environmental impacts of the management plans, as discussed in Table I. In order to do this, a series of triggers and corresponding actions will need to be developed and incorporated within the overall project screening process. As for the screening checklists, these cumulative triggers will be developed in detail in the PIM.

Annual Environmental PerformanceAudit

An annual environmental performance audit will be conducted by an independent organisation, in order to assess compliance with EMF procedures, learn lessons, and improve future EMF performance. A suggested audit scope is provided in Box I. Terms of reference for the audit will be developed and incorporated within the Project Inplementation Manual.

The annual audits will be an important and authoritative source of information for the GoA to help determine whether the perceived environmental benefits of the project are being fully realised, and whether there is scope for refining and/or improving environmental performance. However, it is not intended that the audit will in any way circumvent the roles and responsibilities of the various environmental and natural resources protection agencies in this regard. On the contrary, it is recommended that regional representatives from these authorities, and in particular the Regional Environment Agencies (REA), actively participate in the audits and local training and awareness raising activities in order to gain first-hand experience of the identification and management of key issues in relation to a project of this nature. It is hoped that in this way, the awareness and capacity of the REA staff and other agencies will be developed throughout the course of the project such that a sustainable system of environmental monitoring and oversight will be established before the project finishes.

Capacity Building and Training

In order to ensure proper implementation of environmental screening and mitigation measures, as well as effective natural resource management, the NRDP will integrate environmental management training within its overall programme of capacity building. This will build on previous efforts made during the Albanian Forestry Project.

Tables II and III provide a suggested scope and level of training for each of these audiences. More detailed terms of reference for this training will be incorporated within the Project Imlplemzentation Manual (PIM).

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA VII Box I Proposedscope of annual environmental performance audit

Objective To review the performance of the NRDP in integrating natural resources and environmental management and mitigation measures into the operation of the project, and make practical recommendations for improving and strengthening the EMF moving forwards.

Tasks * Review of the paper trail of screening checklists and reports, and review of reports on wider issues of natural resources and environmental management; * On the basis of this review, select a number of sub-projects for field visits to investigate compliance with proposed mitigation measures, and identification of potential impacts that are not being adequately identified or dealt with by RWSTs, communities or Regional Coordinators; * Recommend practical improvements to the EMF screening checklists in order to fine-tune the operation of the EMF based on practical experience; * Discuss NRDP activities in with the PMT, PTAC and Regional Coordinators; * Assess the needs for further training and capacity building; * Recommend additional assessment studies to be carried out to complement development of the project's approach to natural resources and environmental management.

Outputs A report of the annual performance audit delivered to the PMT, PTAC and the Ministry of Environment, setting out: * Numbers of sub-projects (i) carried out, (ii) screened for environmental impacts, (iii) provided with technical advice from Regional Coordinators, (iv) further assessed, etc; * Description of the actual operation of the EMF as it has occurred in practice; * Identification of environmental risks that are not being fully addressed or mitigated, including potential cumulative impacts; • Conclusions on whether the project is maximising its positive contribution to natural resources and environmental management; * Areas for improvement and practical recommendations for the strengthening and improved performance of the EMF.

Table H Outline training requirements

Training Requirement PMT Specialist, RMs, Regional Environment Communities* RCs and RWSTs Agencies Sustainable forest, pasture and T T A watershed management issues Potential localised impacts/ T T S risks of plan interventions and mitigation measures Potential cumulative impacts T T A Use of the EMF T S Oversight, monitoring and A T evaluation of plan implementation Annual project performance A T auditing EIA law, relevant S T A environmental policies Inter-region lesson-learning S S and review Key: T = In-depth Knowledge; S = Sensitisation; A = Awareness-raising *Forest and Pasture User Associations & MC Planning and Management Committees

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCE NIANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOFALBANIA Vill Table 0.1 Outline trainingprogramme

Audience Training elements Duration and Frequency format PMT Technical * Knowledge of natural resources 4 day workshop at Years 1,3 Specialist, Regional management and environmental project outset in and 5 Managers, Regional issues in NRDP areas year 1, 2 day Coordinators and RWSTs * Operation of the EMF: use of refreshers in years 3 screening checklists, knowledge and 5 of mitigation measures and cumulative assessment triggers; (Training events * Good soil and water will be split into two conservation practices and sessions: one each mitigation measures for Component A and B staff) Community stakeholders * Use of the screening checklist Ongoing during Throughout * Mitigation measures for micro- participatory the project projects planning of MC plans Regional Environment . Sensitisation of the operation of On-the-job training Annual Agencies the EMF: screening, mitigation with Audit Team (1 and environmental assessment week per year) triggers; . Monitoring and evaluation at sub-project and project level * Conducting annual project environmental performance audits

ESTIMATED INCREMENTAL COSTS FOR EMF

The majority of environmental protection measures described in Table I will form part of the day-to-day activities of project staff, and so should not involve any incremental costs to the project. Those activities that are likely to require additional funds are as follows:

* The Annual Environmental Performance Audit would need to be contracted to an independent local expert organisation, at an estimated cost of approximately US$5000 per year to cover professional fees and survey expenses (including data collection where necessary). Terms of reference for this audit will be incorporated within the PIM.

* The environmental training described in Table III would require the involvement of a local expert organisation (with possible inputs from international experts), at an estimated cost of around US$15,000 for the first workshop (split into two sessions, one for Component A staff, and one for Component B), and US$7,500 for subsequent workshops. Terms of reference for this training will be incorporated within the PIM.

* Finally, it is envisaged that independent expert advice and support will be required from time to time in support of EMF implementation and review. A conservative estimate would be that this advice would cost around US$5,000 per year in professional fees and expenses.

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MIANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA IX ENVIRONNIENTALRE50URCES5 MANAGENIENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA x INTRODUCTION

The Government of Albania (GoA) has requested financial assistance (US$20m) from the World Bank and other donors for the preparation and implementation of the Natural Resources Development Project (NRDP). The proposed project will be financed through a US$7 million IDA credit, a US$5 million Global Environment Facility (GEF) grant, and a SEK40 million grant from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida).

The NRDP is a response to deepening poverty in rural areas of Albania, associated with increasing land degradation and unsustainable land use practices. Rural areas of Albania are typically of steep terrain, forested, and prone to land degradation due to overgrazing by livestock. However, livestock contributes over half of Albania's agricultural GDP, indicating the significance of commonly grazed pastoral areas to the rural economy.

The following report describes the outcome of an Environmental Assessment (EA) of the NRDP, carried out as part of project preparation.

1.1 OBJECTIVES

By its very design, the successful implementation of the NRDP will clearly have a major positive impact on environmental and natural resources in upland areas of Albania, and, importantly, on downstream resources in the watersheds in which the project operates. However, this does not preclude the risks of localised environmental impacts of community-level interventions, or cumulative impacts of these interventions. Within this context, the objectives of the EA are to:

* Assess the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project, and where negative to propose mitigation measures which will effectively address them;

* Inform the project preparation process of the potential impact of different alternatives, and relevant mitigation measures;

* Establish clear directives and methodologies for the environmental screening of sub-projects to be financed under the proposed Project.

The primary task of the EA is to develop an environmental management framework that establishes methodologies for identification and mitigation of environmental impacts during project implementation.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 1 1.2 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION PROCESS

Annex A presents a consolidated list of the various institutional and individual stakeholders that were consulted during the course of project and draft EA preparation, and Annex B lists some key references that were collected and reviewed. As shown, the consultation process has included both formal and informal consultation with a wide range of key informants and government and civil society stakeholders at the national, regional and local level; the latter including three districts of upland Albania (Tropoje, Hasi and Kukes districts in north-east Albania). Environmental and natural resources management issues were discussed at all of these meetings, usually within the context of overall project development but in several cases specifically.

A summary of some of the key issues that emerged for consideration within the EA and wider project design are presented in Box 1.1. Many of these issues are generic to the project design, and have been taken on board during the detailed preparation process, however some (e.g. those relating to environmental monitoring) have been specifically addressed within the framework of the EA and EMF. It should be noted that, in broad terms, given the underlying objective of the project to address land degradation as one of the key priorities for the environment in Albania, those consulted viewed the project in very positive terms from an environmental perspective. Few, if any, negative opinions were addressed in relation to environmental issues surrounding the project.

1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

The study has been charged with the development of an Environmental Management Frame7vork (EMF), rather than an Environmental Management Plan, since the precise details of the sub-projects within micro-catchment and communal forest and pasture plans- in terms of exact location, materials used etc - will not be known at the outset of the project.

The EMF will screen for and manage the impacts of NRDP, and help to maximise the environmental benefits that are anticipated from the project. It is being designed to fully comply with national environmental codes and legislation in Albania and with the World Bank's operational policies and safeguards.

The EMF has been prepared on the basis of the following principles.

Firstly, we have sought to avoid considering environmental sustainability of NRDP in isolation. Instead we have considered:

(i) Ho70 can sustainabilihy (i.e. environmental, social, economic and institutional sustainabilihy) be ensured at community, and regional levels? (ii) Howv can NRDP's contribution to this sustaitnabilihybe mnximitized?

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENT OF ALBANIA 2 Box 1.1 Key Environmental Issues Raised During Consultation

Some key issues raised in relation to the wider project design were as follows:

* Representatives from DGFP and several communities were keen to ensure that the achievements of the AFP in communal forest and pasture management are sustained in the longer term. Owing to the close of the AFP, the support of local communities for forest and pasture management in some areas has lessened. It was suggested that one important way to achieve this would be the further documentation and formalising of land-use rights. * When prompted for views on the micro-catchment planning process, there was wide agreement that the approach is challenging, but achievable in the Albanian context. However, it was stressed by DGFP and regional authorities that MC planning will require the real engagement of staff in the field, which will be a challenge since most local government officers have wide ranging responsibilities and are poorly paid. * Throughout the consultation process, local stakeholders were generally very supportive of the micro-catchment (MC) planning approach and welcomed the project focus on erosion control since it was an overriding concern for their communities. However, it was frequently cited that training and capacity building of individuals who will be directly responsible for implementation of the management plans will be essential. * MAF representatives noted that the NRDP corresponds well with national policies for rural development, but suggested that the NRDP should explicitly support the implementation of EU policies related to sustainable rural development, in relation to Albania's long-term aim to accede to the EU. MAF also emphasised that livestock and pasture are closely interlinked, and that livestock development was left aside in the AFP. The MC planning approach is a good opportunity to address and achieve multi-sectoral goals. * The water resources authorities acknowledged that NRDP activities in the Drini and Mati watersheds will be very important, as these watersheds are heavily affected by erosion and siltation. They also drew attention to the importance of check dams and water points. * Participants at the November workshop on protected areas management expressed that the current PA administration and management system in Albania is fairly weak, while they were optimistic that the new cooperation and collaboration between MoE and DGFP (MoAF) would yield positive results in the near future in strengthening PA management. However, there remains some concern that without an explicit PA management component, the project's aim of mainstreaming biodiversity conservation within the NRM process may not address all of the problems that exist

Some specific issues raised and addressed within the EMF were as follows:

* Environmental monitoring efforts need to draw upon, nurture and support the existing system of controls and monitoring that exists at the regional level, rather than bypass it. It is therefore essential to involve the regional environment agencies (REAs) in the monitoring and evaluation process, but at the same time there is a need to recognize the very limited resources that they have and to support them in this role. * It will be important to involve the NGO community in the process of building awareness and sensitisation to environmental issues at the local level, and in monitoring and evaluating the success of the project. However, it would be far better to identify and involve locally-rooted NGOs that can add value, rather than national bodies that are distant from the project activities. At the same time, it must be recognised that many local NGOs are not sufficiently developed to really get involved in practical implementation, and so may need support in this respect.

For example, through working with regional environment and natural resources protection authorities, NRDP has the opportunity to facilitate the development of

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMI ENT GOVERNMENT OF ALBANIA 3 a coherent vision of environmental sustainability in each region, and then work with NGO and governmental partners to achieve this. Investment in this area of activity would yield significant longer-term benefits.

Secondly, the EMF is based on the aim of fully mainstreaming environmental considerations into the participatory process for identifying, planning, implementing and monitoring activities or sub-projects. The checklists and procedures described in Section 7 have been designed to be merged fully with the Project Implementation Manual, and the overall system of project management.

Thirdly, institutional sustainability of the NRDP will be a central challenge. Environmental sustainability in each region will depend as much on this institutional sustainability as on specific environmental measures.

1.4 LAYOUT OF THIS REPORT

The remainder of this EA report is structured as follows.

* Section 2 - Project description * Section 3 - Safeguard screening procedures * Section 4 - Key baseline information * Section 5 - Guidance on potential impacts and mitigation measures * Section 6 - Analysis of alternatives * Section 7- Environmental Management Framework

ENVIRONMIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNMIENTOF ALBANIA 4 2 PROJECTDESCRIPTION

The following sections provide an outline description of the project, as taken from the most recent draft of the Project Appraisal Document (PAD).

2.1 BACKGROUND

The GoA is working with the World Bank on natural resource management in three complementary areas, all of which also include emphasis on improved public sector management, enhanced governance, decentralization and a better institutional framework for sustainable private sector led development. The first of these is the Water Resources Management (WRM) project, which aims to improve irrigation, drainage and flood management institutions, mostly in low- lying but also in some hilly areas. The second is the Coastal Zone Management (CZM) project, under preparation, which aims to support establishment of an improved framework for sustainable development and protection of Albania's valuable, but highly threatened, coastline. The third is the proposed Natural Resources Development Project (NRDP), which focuses on hilly and mountainous areas.

There is particular complementarity between the NRDP and WRM project, most notably in that where irrigation needs are identified as part of the micro- catchment planning process within the NRDP (see below), then these will be addressed by detailed design and investments within the WRM project.

2.2 PROJECTDEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE

2.3 PROJECTAREA AND SCOPE

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MIANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 5 sustainable management of forests and pastures in most of the commune lands of upland areas of Albania that are experiencing resource degradation and erosion. This area includes approximately 490,000 ha of forest lands, and 186,000 ha of pastures in upland areas of all 12 regions in Albania, and will reach a rural population of more than one million people. The component will continue to document user rights and prepare of management plans as a condition for the transfer of user-rights to forest and pasture resources to communes, implement a series of small-scale investments in communal forests and pastures, and implement capacity-building measures and priority actions to improve the governance of forest and pasture resources.

Based on successful Bank experiences in other countries, the second component will pilot integrated management of natural resources in three of Albania's seven watersheds, focusing on five regions located the northern areas of the country'. The component will introduce a multi-sectoral approach to planning and management of natural resources at the level of micro-catchments (MCs)2. This will include the integration of forest and pasture management with crop and livestock production, as well as soil and water conservation, in a mutually reinforcing manner. The project will pilot this approach at the level of MCs in 30 of the communes where the first project component will be supporting sustainable management of forest and pasture resources. The project will apply a participatory approach to assisting communities living in micro-catchments to plan and manage their resources. This component of the project will also build the capacity of Government, Drainage Boards and commune staff, at district, regional and national levels in the context of MC management. Last, it will inform ongoing legal developments regarding land administration and tenure.

Further details of each component are given in the following sections.

2.3.1 Component A: Improved Management of Forestand Pastures

In the 138 communes already supported under the AFP, the project will continue and complete the process of assisting communes to document different individual and user group rights over commune forest and pasture lands to better secure users' tenure rights. The project will also continue to support implementation of existing forest and pasture management plans established under the AFP (covering an area of about 450,000 ha). The project will provide support to management plan implementation through provision of small-scale investments within a fixed budget ceiling of $30,000 per commune, supported by in-kind

(2)1 The three watersheds include Drini (570,945 ha), Mati (246,870 ha), and Shkumbini (246,003 ha), while the five regions include Dibra, Korce, Kukes, Lezha, Elbasan and Korce.

(3) 2 Watersheds are defined by the topographical limits of their water catchment. Microcatchments (MCs) are smaller catchment areas within a watershed, also defined by hydrological boundaries. In the Albanian context, the average size of an MC is approximately 7,000 ha, with an average population of about 4,000. Each MC includes only one commune.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENT OF ALBANIA 6 community contributions equivalent to at least 20% of the value of the investments. Implementing the forest and pasture communal management plans may entail: (i) land stabilization: construction of check dams, maintenance or protection of existing infrastructure, and planting of trees and shrubs in order to reduce flooding, landslides and sedimentation, (ii) resource re11abilitation: controlling grazing, and assisted natural regeneration of forests and pastures, (ui) sustainable resource use: pre-commercial thinning and coppicing, and pasture development and management and (iv) conservation of biodiversihy: identifying conservation priorities and mainstreaming conservation remedies in the planning and management of communal forests and pastures.

The BioCarbon Fund has expressed interest in purchasing emission reductions from Albania, resulting from a proposed "Assisted Natural Regeneration of Degraded Lands" Biocarbon Fund project, which will be included in the NRDP. Additional project resources will therefore be allocated to 30 of the communes that earlier received support under the AFP - and where areas of severely degraded lands still prevail - to make investments needed to sequester carbon through assisted natural regeneration in about 6,000 ha.

The project will initiate and complete documentation of usufruct rights and participatory preparation of forest and pasture management plans in about 80 communes where transfer of usufruct rights has not yet taken place. The project will support implementation of the forest and pasture management plans, covering an area of about 226,000 ha, through provision of small-scale investments. The investments will be within a fixed budget ceiling of USD 40,000 per commune, supported by in-kind community contributions equivalent to at least 20% of their value. Activities will fall under the same categories as listed under A.1.

The project will strengthen governance for forest and pasture management through training of DGFP and DFS in participatory provision of extension advice; and building the capacity of existing and new Forest and Pasture User Associations (FPUAs) as well as the growing network of non-governmental FPUAs, with focus on technical effectiveness, financial and social sustainability. It will also implement priority actions in the National Strategy for the Development of Forests and Pasture. This will entail: (i) clarifying roles and responsibilities within DGFP and DFS in the framework of the on-going institutional and regulatory development, (ii) introducing performance-related budgeting within DGFP and DFS, (iii) building awareness of the strategy within DGFP and DFS, (iv) strengthening and improving the legal and regulatory framework for forest and pasture management, (v) developing the forest Cadastre, (vi) further developing the inter-sectoral action plan to address illegal logging, and implementing elements of the action plan in project areas and (vii) enhancing forest fire management at local levels.

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 7 2.3.2 Component B: Improved Watershed Management

The project will pilot integrated resource management in 30 micro-catchments selected in a participatory and transparent manner (overlapping with the 218 communes targeted by component A). The MCs will encompass an approximate area of 190,000 ha, with a population of about 125,000 people. The project will prepare 30 MCs plans through a participatory process and provide small-scale investments and/or technical support for activities identified in the planning process. The range of supported activities will involve investments in rehabilitation of State forests and investments in agricultural developments selected from a menu of activities. This would entail: (i) rehabilitation of State forests, (ii) rehabilitationof agriculturalland: protection and improvement of poor, degraded bare agricultural land; fallow reduction; appropriate use of marginal lands and (iii) sustainable use of agriculturalland and livestock production so as to reduce the need to cultivate or graze on mnrginal and erosion prone areas: establishment of shelterbelts around fields; wild tree grafting; demonstration of improved practices; improving rain-fed agriculture and irrigated agriculture; irrigated fodder crop production; development of vegetable production. The project will support implementation of the MC management plans up to a budget ceiling of USD 80,000. All interventions will be supported by in-kind community contributions equivalent to at least 20% of their value.

The Project will train Regional Agricultural Directorates, Drainage Boards, DFS and commune staff, at district, regional and national levels in the provision of extension advice in the context of MC management. The Land Administration and Protection Offices (LAPs) within the Ministry of Local Governance play an important role in land information, administration, planning and protection and in administering land transactions (except for forest lands). In areas addressed by the MC planning approach, the project will specifically enhance the capacity of these offices. Last, the project will draw on its experience in forest and pasture management, and on its experience in MC management, in order to inform ongoing legal developments regarding land administration and tenure.

2.4 PROJECTIMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS

The project will be implemented over a period of 5 years. The Ministry of Agriculture and Food (MAF) will have overall responsibility for the project, and the lead agency with responsibility to deliver project implementation will be the General Directorate for Forests and Pastures (DGFP) and its regional and district directorates. Inter-ministerial coordination and oversight will be provided through a Project Implementation Oversight Committee (PIOC). A Project Technical Committee (PTC) will provide technical oversight and guidance and ensure coordination within the MAF.

ENVIRONNMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENMENT GOVERNNIENTOFALBANIA 8 A Project Management Team (PMT) consisting of staff assigned from within the DGFP, assisted by six contracted specialist staff, will manage the project at the national level. The PMT will report to the General Director of DGFP. At the regional level, one senior staff member at each of the 12 District Forestry Services (DFS) will be assigned as Regional Manager (RM) with responsibility for project management at the regional/ district level. In the five regions where component B will be implemented (Dibra, Elbasan, Korce, Kukes, Lezha), the RMs will be supported by a contracted Regional Coordinator (RC) and, together, they will establish and participate in Regional Watershed Support Teams (RWSTs), comprised of assigned staff from the DFS and the Regional Agricultural Directorates. At the level of communes, commune heads, assisted by FPUAs, and Micro-catchment Planning and Management Committees, will oversee implementation, for components A and B respectively.

2.5 PROPOSED BUDGET

The table below outlines the current draft budget for all project components, although this may be subject to change as the project is finalized.

Project Cost By Component and/or Activity Local Foreign Total US $million US $million US $million A. Improved Management and Governance of 13.10 0.33 13.43 Forests and Pastures B. Improved Management and Governance of 3.22 0.07 3.29 Watershed C. Project Management and Monitoring 1.48 0.24 1.72

Total Baseline Cost 17.80 0.64 18.44 Physical Contingencies 0.00 0.00 0.00 Price Contingencies 1.13 0.06 1.19 Total Project Costs' 18.94 0.70 19.64 Interest during construction Front-end Fee Total Financing Required 17.94 0.70 19.64

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 9 3 SAFEGUARD SCREENING PROCEDURES

This section sets out the key safeguard policies that provide the policy context to the EMF discussed in Section 7, including World Bank policies and Albanian legal requirements on environmental assessment.

3.1 WORLD BANK SAFEGUARD POLICIES

As part of the EMF process, proposed micro-activities under the NRDP will be designed at the local level to ensure that they are screened for potential impacts and that they comply with the requirements set out under appropriate World Bank safeguard policies.

The NRDP will by design have mostly beneficial impacts on the environment, however, some safeguard policies have been triggered by the project, as discussed in Table 3.1.

The screening criteria provided in the EMF includes relevant questions on natural habitats/ protected areas, introduction of pesticides, impacts to forestry resources and impacts to cultural property. This will ensure that all concerns related to the Bank's safeguard policies are taken into account during the screening of micro- projects for potential impacts, and that the appropriate mitigation measures can be adopted to address them.

3.2 ALBANIAN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

Albania is making progress with adopting and enforcing a legal framework harmonized with the European Union acquis in the field of the environment. The Albanian Government is becoming increasingly aware of the important role of the environment in the economic development of the country. Completion of the environmental legal framework and approximation with EU directives is considered to be one of the priorities of the country's obligations towards the environment, and as an important step towards European integration.

The environmental principles are introduced in the new Constitution promulgated in November 1998, recognizing a '"ealthyand ecologically suitable environmentfor the present andfittutre generations" and "rational exploitation offorests, iaters,pastures based on the principle of sustainable development", as well as "the right of the public to have access to information on the state of the environment".

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 10 Table 3.1 Coinmpliance with World Bank Safeguard Policies

Policy Applicability Discussion Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01, BP Yes OP 4.01 has been triggered and the project has been rated Category B, requiring a partial EA. The potential impacts 4.01, GP 4.01) arising from the project will be addressed through implementation of the environmental management framework (EMF) described in this report.

Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP No OP 4.04 is not triggered since the project is focused largely on the sustainable management of natural and semi-natural 4.04) habitats, and overall it is likely to have a significant positive impact on natural habitats, through the participatory planning of natural resources management that is the central component of the project. Any specific localized risks (e.g. from changing grazing patterns) will be avoided or mitigated through the application of the EMF, and the project will be carefully managed to ensure it meets it aims of the reversal of degradation in upland areas. The EMF will also pay particular regard to areas of natural habitats with high biodiversity value, providing additional incentives to communities for sustainable management of these areas.

Forestry (OP4.36, GP 4.36) Yes The project is consistent with OP 4.36; specifically, it assists borrowers to harness the potential of forests to reduce poverty in a sustainable manner, integrate forests effectively into sustainable economic development and protect the vital local and global environmental services and values of forests, by supporting community based approaches to forest pasture and watershed management. The potential forestry related environmental impacts such as introduction of invasive species, reforestation of critical non-forest habitats and alterations to hydrological regimes are addressed by the current EA and/or will be addressed through implementation of the EMF described in this report..

Pest Management (OP 4.09) No OP 4.09 is not triggered because the project will not finance the purchase of pesticides, and will not lead to substantially increased pesticide use and subsequent environmental problems. Support for agricultural intensification through provision of seed and fruit trees will be limited to 5-10 ha (or less) in each of the 30 micro-catchments, distributed in three of Albania's major watersheds, that are supported in component B (1) .In the event that MC planning will be scaled up by Government, approaches to Integrated Pest Management would be promoted by Government extension services as necessary.

Cultural Property (OPN 11.03) No OPN 11.03 is not triggered since the project will not be implemented in areas where there are cultural property sites, nor does it involve any large-scale construction, excavation or mechanical cultivation. As a safeguard, a provision to screen for existence of cultural property will be included in the EMF, which will exclude from financing by the project any small-scale investment significantly damaging or endangering non-replicable cultural property.

(1) For comparison, the total areas of each of the three watersheds are 570,945 ha (Drini), 246,870 ha (Mati), and 246,003 ha (Shkumbini).

ENVPIRONNIENTALRESOURCES NMANAGENtENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 11 Policy Applicability Discussion Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20) No In upland and mountainous areas of Albania, some rural communities have a distinct cultural identity as orthodox christians, of Greek or Serbian origin, which is distinct from the muslim, Albanian majority. However, consideration of these communities during the social assessment confirms that their distinct cultural identify does not affect their vulnerability, and so this safeguard is not triggered.

Involuntary Resettlement (OP4.12, BP 4.12) No Issues of dependency on forests and rangelands, and arrangements for securing more equitable access to planning and to project benefits are addressed in the planning process and in the Project Implementation Manual (PIM). O.P. 4.12 on involuntary resettlement would be triggered if restrictions were imposed by authorities and communities would have little or no discretionary power to make land use decisions. However, the social assessment confirmed that while according to Albanian law land owners and users cannot make changes to their land without governmental permission, in practice villages exercise full autonomy in land use decisions on communal areas. More importantly, in the case of this proposed project, both project design and implementation arrangements as specified in the PIM ensure that decisions about rights of access to land and livelihood affected by the project will be made at the level of the community in villages and up to commune levels, rather than by governmental officials. Transparent and effective mechanisms to ensure broad consultation and participation into the decision-making process are built into the project's management plans for both components A and B. Therefore, O.P. 4.12 is not triggered.

Safety of Dams (OP 4.37, BP 4.37) No The safeguard on dam safety is not triggered since the project does not involve the construction or rehabilitation of any large dams (i.e. over 15 m). There may be some works relating to small silt retention dams in the upper watersheds, although these are unlikely to involve the construction of retention structures in excess of about lm in height. Moreover, all such works will be supervised by District Forestry Officers, who are fully qualified to design and oversee the construction of silt retention dams up to 6m in height.

Projects in International Waters (OP 7.50, No Albania has two international rivers, the Vjose and the Drini, and international lakes that include the Ohrid and Prespa. BP 7.50, GP 7.50) Although the project may touch on some of these, OP 7.50 is not triggered since the project will mainly involve small- scale rehabilitation and improvement of existing schemes, such as repairs to canal lining, re-sectioning, replacement of non-functioning gates and pumps etc. While works may include the construction of small concrete tanks, their relative size and significance is very small and will not change the overall extraction of water or command area. All subprojects would be subject to the Bank's prior review under the aforementioned Water Resources Management project, and careful attention will be paid to ensure this point.

Projects in Disputed Areas (OP 7.60, BP No This safeguard is not triggered since project activities are not envisaged to take place within any disputed areas. 7.60, GP 7.60)

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCESMANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOFALBANIA 12 3.2.1 Albanian Laws Relevant to the NRDP

The screening criteria for NRDP sub-projects presented in the EMF incorporate the relevant Albanian legal requirements relating to environmental assessment. In particular, these include the Law on Environmental Protection and the Law on EIA. It should be noted that under the present law, it is unlikely that any sub- project activities will fall into a category that requires full, or even partial environmental assessment, since by their nature they are relatively small-scale rural interventions that are designed to prevent land degradation.

3.2.1.1 Lan7 on Environmental Protection

The Law on Environmental Protection, approved in 1993, and amended in 1998 and then in 2002, is the basic law, which defines general principles and procedures of environmental management. The amendments have improved and increased the competencies of the environmental protection institutions.

The law on environmental protection provides for the:

* Rational use of the environment, reduction of discharges into and pollution of the environment, and the prevention of and where necessary rehabilitation and restoration of environmental damage; * Improvement of environmental conditions related to quality of life and protection of public health; * Preservation and maintenance of natural resources, both renewable and non- renewable, and rational and efficient management to ensure regeneration; * Coordination of state activities to meet environmental protection requirements; * International cooperation in the field of environmental protection; * Promotion of public participation in environmental protection activities; * Coordination of the economic and social development of the country with the requirements of environmental protection and sustainable development; * Establishment and strengthening of the institutional system of environmental protection at the national and local level.

According to the basic law, all activities that affect the environment should be subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment and licensing system, which are developed in more detail in the specific law "On Impact Assessment on Environment" (the Law on EIA) approved on 2003.

3.2.1.2 Lawv on EIA

This law provides for the assessment of environmental impacts of future projects or activities, thereby preventing negative impacts on the environment through the participation of central and local institutions, civil society, NGOs, etc. The law on EIA defines the rules, procedures, deadlines, rights and duties on the process of

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNNMENT OF ALBANIA 13 the assessment of the potential direct/indirect impacts of the activity on the environment.

Based on the type of the activity, projects are required to undergo two levels of review to assess environmental impact: (a) profound process of impact assessment on environment; (b) summary process of impact assessment on environment. As the law currently stands, none of the project activities envisaged under the NRDP would require a full (i.e. profound) EIA, and the implementation of the EMF designed as part of this report should be sufficient to satisfy the requirements in relation to category (b), should this apply.

In addition to the above laws, the Decisions of the Council of Ministers "On Certification of Experts for Compilation of the Impact Assessment Report on Environment and Environmental Auditing", "On Activities with Impact on Environment that must be provided with Environmental Permit", "On Rules and Procedures of Environmental Permit Issuance", etc. complete the group of laws that regulate the processes of environmental impact assessment and the issuing of environmental permits in Albania.

Other laws relating to the environment are listed in Box 3.1.

Box 3.1 List of Albanian laws relating to environmental protection

* Law "On the Land" (1991) * Law "On Seeds and Seedlings" (1992) * Law "On Forests and Forestry Police" (1992) * Law "On the Service of Plants Protection" (1993) * Law "On Protection of Natural Medical, Ether Oil and Tanifer Plants" (1993) * Law "On Protection of Wild Fauna and Hunting" (1994) * Law "Mining Law of Albania" (1994) * Law "On Protection of Horticulture Trees" (1995) * Law "On Fishing and Aquatic Life" (1995) * Law "On Pastures and Meadows" (1995) * Law "On Protection from Ionizing Radiations" (1995) * Law "On Water Reserves" (1996) * Law "On Public Disposal of Waste" (1996) * Law "On the Regulatory Framework of the Water Supply Sector and of Disposal and Treatment of Waste Water (1996) * Law "On Environment Protection" (2002) * Law "On Protection of Air from pollution" (2002) * Law "On Protected Areas" (2002) * Law "On Protection of Marine Environment from Pollution and Damage" (2002) * Law "On Impact Assessment on Environment" (2003) * Law "On Environmental Treatment of Waste Waters" (2003) * Law "On Environmental Administration of Solid Waste" (2003) * Law "On Protection of Trans-border Lakes" (2003) * Law "On Chemical Substances and Preparations" (2003)

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENT OF ALBANIA 14 3.3 ALBANIAN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS

3.3.1 InternationalConventions

Albania has signed and ratified a number of international environmental conventions, protocols and agreements. The international agreements are reflected in national legislation through the adoption of laws, for example: the Law on adherence to the Basel Convention, the Law on the Vienna Convention and Montreal Protocol, the Law on the UN Convention to Combat Desertification and the Law on the Aarhus Convention.

Box 3.2 Environmental conventions adopted by Albania

1. Convention on environmental impact assessment in the trans-border context (Espoo, Finland) ratified in 1991 2. Convention on protection and use of water streams and international lakes (Helsinki 1992) ratified in 1994 3. Convention on climate changes (UNFCCC) ratified in 1994 4. Convention on biological diversity (Rio de Janeiro 1992) ratified in 1996 5. Convention of wetlands of international importance, in particular as habitats of water poultries (The Ramsar Convention) ratified inl996 6. Convention of trans-border impact of industrial accidents ratified in 1997 7. Convention on control of trans-border transportation of hazardous waste and their disposal (The Basel Convention) ratified in 1997. 8. Convention on preservation of wildlife and natural European habitats in 1998 9. Convention on fight against desertification in those countries that suffer severely from dryness and desertification, in particular in Africa ratified in 1999. 10. Convention on access to information, public participation in environmental decision- making and access to justice in environmental matters (The Aarhus Convention) ratified in 2000. 11. Convention on protection of marine environment and coastal area of Mediterranean Sea (The Barcelona Convention) ratified in 2000 12. Convention on protection of ozone layer 13. Convention of preservation of wild animals' migrant species ratified in 2000. 14. Kyoto Protocol on UNFCCC ratified in 2004

3.3.2 Key National Environmental Policies

The development of contemporary environmental policy in Albania has been largely driven, either directly or indirectly, by the process of Albanian adherence to international agreements. The National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP), which was prepared in 1994 and updated in 2001, assisted by the EU PHARE Programme and the World Bank, is the basic document that presents the governmental policy in the area of environmental protection.

Ten priorities have been identified within the NEAP:

1. Improving cooperation among ministries, departments and local authorities; 2. Developing suitable environmental policies; 3. Promoting the sustainable use of natural resources;

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOFALBANIA 15 4. Improving the country's environmental inspection structure; 5. Establishing an information system; 6. Improving environmental information available to NGOs and the public; 7. Developing an adequate strategy with business on the environmental issues; 8. Strengthening the environmental impact assessment system; 9. Completing the country's environmental legal framework; and 10. Drafting local environmental action plans (LEAPs).

Among the NEAPs objectives is the creation of conditions for future membership of the European Union (EU).

The Government has also elected to prepare local environmtental action plans (LEAPs). The development of LEAPs is in conformity with the strategy of decentralizing power to local governments. The LEAPs will provide for environmental assessment at the local level, the identification of priorities, the establishment of training programmes and the development of partnerships with NGOs. They will also set up local inter-sectoral coordination structures. The process has begun with the LEAPs for Tirana, Fieri, Dibra, Pogradec, Lezha and Korca with support from the Regional Environmental Center (REC).

In 1999, the Council of Ministers approved the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, prepared under the Global Environment Facility (GEF). The main goal was to fulfil the requirements of the Convention on Biological Diversity, signed by Albania in 1994, and the provisions of the Pan-European Strategy on Biological and Landscape Diversity. The document defines national priorities and necessary institutional changes for the implementation of the Convention.

In 2001 the Albanian Government, in collaboration with the World Bank, prepared its Strategy on Growvthi and Poverty Reduction, which is the country's first comprehensive economic development strategy with a focus on sustainable development. The Strategy should help the Government improve the effectiveness of its policies by identifying priorities and the measures needed to address poverty. It also serves as a framework for identifying projects for international funding.

The Strategic Plan of the Government of Albaniafor European Integration identifies as a medium-term objective the intensification of efforts to protect the environment and natural resources through: further harmonization of the legislation with EU norms; development of urban and regional plans for the orientation of physical investment; creation of capacities to monitor and operate with the data, according to the model of the European Environmental Agency; further strengthening of the Ministry of Environment; development of the national network for implementation of the aforementioned NEAP; and an increased role for NGOs in environment protection.

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENT OF ALBANIA 16 Other important documents which support the environmental policy in Albania are as follows:

* National Waste Management Plan * National Water Strategy * Coastal Zone Management Plan * National Environmental Health Action Plan; * Strategy for Development and Protection of Forestry; * Strategy for Sustainable Tourism; * Strategy and Action Plan for Protection of Land from Erosion; and * Strategy for Sustainable Agriculture.

3.3.3 EU Directives and Regulations

As mentioned above, one of the key aims of the Government of Albania's Strategic Plan for European Integration is further harmonisation with the EU's environmental aquis. From the perspective of the NRDP, the most relevant pieces of EU legislation are as follows:

* Habitats Directive; Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora. * Birds Directive; Directive 79/409/EEC on the Conservation of Wild Birds. * Water Framte7vork Directizve; Directive 2000/60/ EC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. * Draft Rutral Development Regulation; on support for Rural Development from the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD).

The main aims and requirements relating to each of the above directives and an overview of the steps that must be undertaken by Member States, and ultimately by Albania if it joins the EU, in order to meet the various legislative requirements is outlined in Annex C.

3.4 INSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

3.4.1 Institutional Frameworkfor Environmental Protection

The Ministry of Environment was established in September 2001. The tasks and responsibilities of MoE are both political and technical and deal with the development of environmental policies, environmental legislation and enforcement control. The MoE coordinates environmental monitoring procedures, determines the main policies and investment priorities for environmental protection, and represents the national focal point for many environmental programs and international agreements.

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENMENT GOVERNMIENT OF ALBANIA 17 The Regional Environmental Agencies (REA), established at prefecture level, control and ensure the implementation of the environmental legal framework, supervise and apply the preliminary environmental licensing, collect and process the data on the environmental situation at municipal and prefecture level.

Land, forestry and fisheries management is the responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food (MAF) through respectively the General Directorate of Forests and Pastures (DGFP), and the Departments of Land and Fishing. The Territorial Planning Council of the Republic and the Territorial Planning Councils of municipalities and prefectures manage territorial planning.

At the national level, a number of high level inter-ministerial structures with a permanent or temporary mandate for decision-making or advising are in existence, including: the Inter-Ministerial Task Force on Illegal Logging (which will be an important project partner), the Territorial Planning Council of the Republic, the National Water Council, the Committee of Energy Policy, the Council of Tourism Policy, the Steering Committee of National Environmental Health Action Plan, the Steering Committee of National Environmental Action Plan, and the National Council for Nature and Biodiversity. An important role is also played by other inspectorates such as the Sanitation Inspectorate, Forest Police and Construction Police.

Finally, the network of NGOs in Albania is also an essential element of the institutional framework with regards to environmental protection (see Annex D for details of a range of existing organisations).

3.4.2 Monitoring and Enforcement

3.4.2.1 Regulatonj enforcement

Albania's environmental laws are implemented through by-laws, decisions and regulations. Decisions of the Council of Ministers significantly assist the implementation process, such as Decisions "On monitoring of environment in the Republic of Albania", "On emission norms in the air", "On procedures of declaration of protected areas", "On certification of experts", etc.

Responsibility for implementation does not always only lie with the MoE, but also with other ministries or authorities with environmental protection responsibilities. Several ministries have developed regulations affecting the environment, such as the regulation on cooperation amongst environmental inspectors, forestry inspectors and the police, as well as regulations concerning sanitary conditions and urban planning.

A leading concept in Albanian environmental legislation is the 'prevention principle'. It states that the best strategy in the successful management of environmental resources and biodiversity protection is to prevent any harm or

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOFALBANIA 18 damage from occurring in the first place. The 'polluter pays principle' also plays a role in Albanian legislation, whereby a system of fines is imposed on the polluters in the case of any environmental damage or harm. This principle can be further elaborated by charging the polluters the costs of combating pollution that they cause.

3.4.2.2 Environtmental Monitoring

In 2002, the Government approved a Decision on Environmental Monitoring to set up a National Environment Monitoring Programme. According to this Decision, all physical and legal persons subject to an environmental permit monitor their pollution at their own expense.

The environmental monitoring system is managed by the Ministry of Environment (MoE), whose main objective is to provide information and collaborate with national scientific institutions. There are no monitoring facilities within the Ministry of Environment, nor within the Regional Environmental Agencies. Instead, in order to manage this task the Ministry contracts a number of institutions, including the:

* Geological Survey; * Institute of Hydrometeorology; * Institute of Public Health; * Institute of Nuclear Physics; * Institute of Biological Research; * Institute of Forests and Pastures, * Research Institute on Fishing, * Museum of Natural Science, and * Soil Science Institute.

The MoE then requests these institutions to provide data both on monitoring issues, such as groundwater, surface water, air, noise and urban waste, and on nature conservation, such as soil, arable lands, ecosystems, green areas and biodiversity. The responsibility for monitoring is spread across several institutions. For instance, air quality is monitored by the Institute of Public Health (in urban areas) and the Institute of Hydrometeorology (in urban and suburban areas). Additional monitoring is carried out by other ministries and institutes.

In general, monitoring activities lacks co-ordination, a standard methodology and sufficient monitoring equipment. The monitoring standards are applied and selected according to those provided by the Directorate of Standardization of Albania. Although efforts have been made by the MoE to collect and systematise the information available in the country, the information from scientific research institutes is not yet systematically organised. Environmental information generated by each sector is directed to the specific ministry, i.e. health data to the

ENVIRONMIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENT OF ALBANIA 19 Ministry of Health and soil data to the Ministry of Agriculture and Food. Within the MoE, monitoring data are collected according to the above-mentioned contracts with scientific institutions, and through projects that are financed by the Ministry.

The Regional Environmental Agencies are very small. Some agencies only have office space for one person, and many are equipped with only a typewriter and telephones. This lack of resources severely hinders their ability to participate in any systematic environmental monitoring activities.

ENVIRONNMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMIENT GOVERNMENTOFALBANIA 20 4 KEY BASELINE INFORMATION

This section presents key baseline information on environmental resources in the project areas, starting with an overall country profile and thereafter focussing on the following areas:

* Water resources; * Forest resources; * Land degradation; and * Biodiversity (species, habitats and protected areas).

The key data sources used to compile this section are listed in Annex B.

As discussed in Section 2, the NRDP micro-catchment activities envisaged under Component B of the project will take place in the Drini, Mati and Shkumbini watersheds, and will impact on the following districts: Tropoje (partially), Has, Kukes, Dibra, Buloize (partially), Librazho, Pogradec, Mat, Mirdite, Lezhe and Puke. Forest and pasture management activities under Component A of the project will take place in 218 communes in mountainous and upland erosion prone lands in all of Albania's twelve regions (1).

4.1 COUNTRY PROFILE

Albania is situated in South Eastern Europe, in the western part of the Balkan Peninsula, along the coast of the Adriatic and Ionic Sea. Its territory covers 28,748 km2 with a population of over 3 million (INSTAT 2001). Administratively, Albania is divided into 12 regions, which are further divided into 65 municipalities and 309 communes.

Albania borders north and northeast with Montenegro and Kosovo, east with the FYR of Macedonia, and southeast and south with Greece. The overall length of Albanian border is 1094 km, of which 657 km is a land border, 316 km sea coast, 48 km is river border and 73 km is lake border. The coastal line is 427 km long, 273 km is the sandy Adriatic coast (70% of the coast - sandy) and 154 km of the rocky Ionian Coast (30% of the coast - rocky).

Despite its relatively small size, Albania is endowed with an important natural heritage. It is one of the richest countries of Europe in respect of water resources, although the availability of water for consumption per capita is still very low.

(1) For presentational purposes, several of the figures included in this section only delineate the Component B project areas, although it should be recognised that Component A activities will take place over a wider geographical area.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENr GOVERNNMENT OF ALBANIA 21 Most of today's environmental degradation in rural areas is closely tied to poverty. With little wealth, infrastructure or modern standards of living, natural resources are over-exploited (e.g. forest destruction, over-grazing, over-fishing), thus seriously threatening wildlife and the natural environment. The uncontrolled growth of urban centres, boosted by the massive migration from the country's more economically depressed and rural regions is putting substantial pressure on the already derelict urban infrastructure, exacerbating old problems such as water supply and solid waste treatment. This is having a negative impact on public health, the extent of which is still largely unknown.

The climate of Albania varies with its topography. The coastal plains have a Mediterranean climate with hot and dry summers, and frequent thunderstorms. Winters are wet and mild; freezing temperatures are rare. In the mountains the summer precipitation is higher than on the lowlands; daytime temperatures in the mountains soar but nights are much cooler. The winters can be quite severe in the mountains with heavy snowfall, thunderstorms and snow cover lasting for long periods of time. December, the wettest month, has an average rainfall of 211 mm, while the driest months, July and August, receive only 32 mm of rain. On the coast, annual rainfall averages 1,000 mm, but in the mountains it can be as high as 3,000 mm. The average temperatures in August, the hottest month, range from 170 to 31°C. In January, the coldest month, they range from 20 to 12°C.

Most of the precipitation drains into the rivers and flows into the Adriatic Sea. Since the topographical water divide is east of Albania, a considerable amount of water from neighbouring countries drains through Albania.

4.2 WATER RESOURCES

Albania is rich in water resources, including rivers, groundwater, lakes, lagoons and seas. The hydrographic basin of which Albania forms a part covers 43,305 kM2, of which 28,748 km2 lie within its boundaries. Albania shares Shkodra Lake and Buna River with Montenegro, Drini River (the largest river of Albania) with Kosovo, the Black Drini River and the lake of Big Prespa with Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and Vjosa River and Prespa lakes with Greece.

The territory of Albania encompasses seven river watersheds, as shown in Figure 4.1 and described in Annex E. These are Drini, the Mati, the Ishmi, the Erzeni, the Shkumbini, the Semani and the Vjosa. The rivers are generally mountainous with steep slopes and an average flow ratio between the wettest and the driest months of around ten. Their regime is torrential. In general, river flows are the highest in winter or early spring during the wet season. The rivers carry large quantities of solid matter: an estimated 1,650 kg/sec on average. Three of the aforementioned rivers - the Drini, the Mati and the Semani - form the focus of the micro- catchment planning activities planned under the project. However, the project's forest and pasture management activities will also be taking place in the other four watersheds.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENMENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 22 Figure 4.1 Main Watersheds of Albania

IMIAP OF M\1AIN WVATERSHEDtS OF ALBANIA

LI* 4

Prepart-,tr, r -ege ,E,C A.To4 . :tttit.Wlh

i ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I I _. . _

4.3 FOREST RESOURCES

An important part of the country's biodiversity is linked with forests and pastures, therefore the implementation of sustainable forestry policies and

ENVIRONMIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOFALBANIA 23 practices is a priority issue for Albania. Figure 4.2 shows the extensive forest coverage across the country (with the Component B watersheds marked).

The areas to be included in the project are primarily communal forest lands where the usufruct rights have been transferred to the communes, but also include some state-owned forests and pastures. Both consist of degraded broadleaf forest lands of either coppice or high forest origin. The land is mountainous and the soils fragile and susceptible to erosion in the absence of vegetative cover. The main species are oaks (Quercus spp.), hornbeam, hazel and some shrub species e.g. Rosa canina as well as Juniper.

Forestry as a sector is faced with both deforestation and management problems. Deforestation is one of the major environmental problems in Albania. Rural poverty, especially during the economic collapse in 1997, caused severe forest damage by illegal logging. Overexploitation reached a peak in 1997, when more than 550,000 m3 of wood was cut for timber.

The forests around villages are generally the most damaged and degraded. The majority of these are oak forests that are known for their rich biological diversity. Due to poor economic conditions and village traditions, the villagers continue to over-exploit the forest through unmanaged cutting in order to secure wood for heating and cooking. Over-grazing by animals, mainly goats, is another related phenomenon, in addition to which considerable damage to forests and grasslands in recent years has been caused by fire; often intentional.

In general, the lack of investment in silviculture, reforestation, pest and disease control, maintenance of forest roads, fire protection, etc., has caused the loss and degradation of the habitats of many forest flora and fauna species in recent years. To address this issue, in 2004 the DGFP issued the Strategyjfor the Development of the Forestny and Pasture Sector in Albania: Action Plan, in which there are six main forest policy goals, which are to:

* Maintain the integrity of the forests and pastures; * Promote sustainable natural resource management; * Promote the transition to a market-driven economy; * Transfer management responsibility for selected State forests and pastures to the local government; * Improve State management of production forests and the summer pasture resource base; and * Develop recreation and tourism opportunities in forests and protected areas.

The Albania Forestry Project (AFP) (1996-2004) - financed by the World Bank - has supported the transfer of user rights and management of forest and pastures from the State to local communities. Under the communal forestry component of the AFP some 1,284 ha were successfully afforested, 10,378 ha received cleaning

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 24 and/or pre commercial thinning and vegetative cutting was carried out on a further 1,578 ha. In addition some 36 km of fence was constructed to protect natural regeneration and re-growth. The NRDP will build on the work of the AFP by the continued strengthening of FPUAs created under the AFP through better documentation of user rights and support to the phased-in registration of sub-communa in-use rights.

Figure4.2 Existing Land-Use Types in Albania

MAP OF LAND USE

SERBIA AND CROATIA MONTENEGRO SERB'AAND :., MONTE NEGRO

'. .N t . <_

S.0, A .j, D4,i \

ALBANIA tsr

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT . ' k>'.t6

Sfv - i t !st F Y P IA . 'Vs> MACEDONIA Adriatic Sea MACEDONIA

-7' t

Watershed _ ,. . .

ELMati- i Shkumbini ~r , f Mati 0 v ~~~~~~~~~,,,, J \ '; * ~~~~~~~~~~-* I iC,

10 0 10 20 Kilometers 4 t* ' -.'

- __j -, . '.~~~~~~~GREECE ' Ionian Sea ~

Basemnap courtesy of the Albanian Watershied Project (USDA fiunded)

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENMENT GOVERNNMENT OF ALBANIA 25 4.4 LAND DEGRADATION

Land degradation has been identified as one of the most important environmental issues in Albania. Currently, already highly degraded land in rural areas is subject to uncontrolled grazing which prevents the development of a protective vegetative cover. These lands are eroding rapidly and in many places the landscape looks devastated.

Figure4.3 Typically degraded lands with little or no vegetative cover

!r.. >, e . .*.--j5SP__~~~~~~w 4r

Source: World Bank Carbon Finance Documentfor LULUCF Projects in Albania, January2005

Figure 4.4 shows the significant extent of the land erosion problem that exists in the country today, with the Component B watersheds marked. Research data suggest that the losses caused by erosion across the country amount to about 20- 30 tonnes/ha/year, and in some areas reach 150 tonnes/ha/year.

The causes of land degradation are clear. According to the most recent State of the Environment Report, almost 30 per cent of the country's forest and about half of its pasture were turned into cultivated land as a result of the socialist drive to intensify agricultural production between 1960 and 1980. Since this time, urbanization, unmanaged industrial pollution and uncontrolled land use has exacerbated the situation. General poverty has caused a significant migration of the population from rural areas into urban centres, and has resulted in an increase of illegal building throughout the country, but particularly in the coastal zone. In many cases the illegal construction has taken place on forest, pasture and agricultural lands, changing their characteristics irreversibly.

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 26 Figure 4.4 Land erosion acrossAlbania

LEGEND

LANDNONAWrECTEDBY ERh(OJ F.a aream (s.ow up to 3IS {z, -., ,5,;<->; ~~~Afe4SDOr4r3eri. by ftil veWrlSt- I Atti AFFFCIFO BY F[-OSIGF

{ * _-di S 5 \ GiGitahi -S tz

-'. .' d? ~~~~~~~Stafon,w etrite

sf $ 3 \ t~~~~~~--F%terinra erM;dS

rs 9''f1 ''2 '> 0\ CWASha O AfAA CCANC7t'h, a Ai J ^ )-; < ,. _ ~~~~~~~Abras or,ateas Accumulalto- areas

~ )

Waters'-,S_ illilil Drn-i Z 9at E C AMaT Shkurnbmri EC A.

Basenmap colurtesy of the Albanian Watershed Project (USDA funded)

4.5 BIODIVERSITY

4.5.1 HabitatDiversity

Albania is known for its high diversity of ecosystems and habitats. Within its territory there are maritime ecosystems, coastal zones, lakes, rivers, evergreen and broadleaf bushes, broadleaf forests, pine forests, alpine and sub-alpine

ENVIRONNMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENT OF ALBANIA 27 pastures and meadows, and high mountain ecosystems. Figure 4.5 shows the distribution of general habitat types across the country, including those within the Component B watersheds.

The main types of most endangered ecosystems and habitats in Albania include marine ecosystems (the medium and infralitoral levels), coastal ecosystems (sand dunes, river deltas, alluvial and very humid rivers, coastal lagoons and lakes), as well as alpine grasslands, continental and glacial lakes, oak and coniferous forests.

Along the Mediterranean coastline there are many ecosystems of significance, including lagoons, wetlands, sand dunes, river deltas, hydrophilic and hygrophilous forests. Littoral and infra-littoral communities of Mediterranean origin along the rocky coast are quite diverse and well preserved. The lakes and rivers are also important for the biological and landscape diversity of the country.

4.5.2 Species Diversity

As shown in Figure4.5, a number of habitats within Albania contain rare and endemic species. Even though Albania is one of the smallest countries in Europe, the climatic features, geographic position, its relief and geological, hydrological and pedological factors favour a very high diversity of natural habitats and sub- ecosystems. They offer conditions for the existence of about 3,200 kinds of higher plants (in an area of only 0.27% of Europe, approximately 30% of the European flora is represented) and 756 kinds of vertebrates, in which many relict, endemic and sub-endemic species can be distinguished.

About 91 fauna species are assessed as globally threatened, of which 21 are mammal, 18 bird, 4 reptile, 2 amphibian, 28 fish, and 18 invertebrate species. Deer (Cervus elapl2us) is extinct, while bear (Ursus arctos), wolf (Canis lupus), lynx (Lynx lynx), jackal (Canis aureus), chamois (Rupicapra rupicapra), roe deer (Capreolus capeoulus), and wild boar (Sus scrofa) are particularly endangered by poaching. Five bird species are categorized as vulnerable, such as the curly pelican and the king quail. Some species of other terrestrial taxonomic groups (amphibians, reptiles, insects), as well as marine ones (fish species, mollusces, coral), are also endangered.

There are 27 plant species with 150 subspecies that are endemic to Albania, and another 160 plant species that are endemic to Albania, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Greece and Yugoslavia. The flora is mainly endangered by the reduction in habitat areas (particularly wetlands and forests due to agriculture), and by direct damage to or removal of particular species. Illegal logging, mostly for fuel, poses a serious threat to some forest species. The collecting of spice and medicinal plants - laurel leaves, mountain tea, common sage, wild marjoram, rockweed - is widespread.

ENVIRONNMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOFALBANIA 28 The Red Books on endangered, rare and endemic plant and animal species were completed and published prior to 1997. The number of animal species included in the Red Book for Fauna is around 573, including 273 species of vertebrates or 36 per cent of the country's total. The Red Book for Flora lists 320 species of flowering plants, 45 of mushrooms and 25 of marine plants.

Figure4.5 Habitatsand Ecosystems of Albania

MAP OF HABIATAT

SERBIA AND /- CROATIA MONTENEGRO SERBIAAND O;..r:-.;.'- MONTENEGRO

-- A ,- ..... '-,# ;F;;;S*-aL.

ALBANIA NATURAL RESOURCE - :.z's J DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Adriatic Sea

F Y.R.

-. S p^EOj bMACEDONIA

ib.lE . . D St.8 \ vS .E C A T f

Shk-rbikv

10 0 10 Kilometers

4GREECE lonian Sea 4~~~j~Prepared~~0 by

Basernap couirtesy of thte Albanian Watershted Project (USDA ftinded)

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMIENT GOVERNMIENT OF ALB3ANIA 29 Economic development and the difficult transition towards the market economy have put a strong pressure on the environment, impacting it in a negative way. The loss of bio-diversity and over-exploitation of natural resources have characterized these years, most notably resulting in the loss and fragmentation of habitats and impoverishment and degradation of ecosystems. For example, the forests of laurel, birch and oak have suffered considerable damage and different species of the families Orchiis and Flcus virciodes (algae) are under threat.

4.5.3 ProtectedAreas

The network of protected areas in Albania includes forests, lakes, lagoons and nature reserves, which are famous for their diversity of land and marine flora and fauna, and abundance of endemic species. As such, they constitute one of the largest and most important economic and ecological resources for the country.

The development of a protected areas network in Albania started in 1940. The first protected areas were the Kune-Vain-Tale Hunting Reserve and the "Tomorri Mountain" National Park, which by 1970 were joined by a further 4 national parks and 15 hunting reserves in forest and lagoon areas. In 1994, the protected area network was harmonized with the IUCN classification system, and enlarged further still to a total surface area of 183,749 ha, which is over 6% of the territory of Albania. At present, protected areas are managed by the DGFP.

Figure 4.6 shows the current distribution of protection areas (by type) in Albania, and Table 4.2 describes their extent. As shown in the figure, there are several protected areas that border (and to a small extent overlap) with the Component B watersheds. Whilst there is no intention to carry out sub-project activities within such areas, the screening process adopted within the EMF described in Section 7 will need to pay close attention to this issue to ensure that this is not the case.

Table 4.1 Existing ProtectedAreas in Albania N PA categories Number of PA Surface % ha 1 Strictly protected area 4 14,500 7.89 2 National parks 13 53,940 29.36 3 Monuments of nature (special forest wood, woodland areas) 115 4,600 2,50 68 4 Managed areas 26 42,898 23.35 5 Protected landscape/seascape 4 49,611 27.00 6 Protected resource area 4 18,200 9.90 7 Total 384 183,749 100,00

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENTOFALBANIA 30 Figure4.5 Protected Areas in Albania

PROPOSAL PROTECTED AREAS

CROATIABERBIA AND f , CROATIA MONTENEGRO ,t SERBIAAND MONTENEGRO

ALBANIA NATURAL RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT .

F.Y.R. .MACEDONIA Adriatic Sea i

Red- Strict Nature ReseAdrv t Se Violet -Nature Monument Pink -Landscape Protected Area

Yellow - Managed Nature Reserve Orange -Multiple Use Area ,C

Wateished

D-ni

Shk-tbini -- -.-1, -

10 0 10 20 Kilometers -

GREECE lonian Sea Prepared by

< CATE ,

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNMENTOFALBANIA 31 5 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

This section provides guidance on the potential environmental impacts of the NRDP, and potential mitigation and/or enhancement measures that should be adopted in response. The analysis forms the basis for the EMF presented in Section 7.

5.1 BACKGROUND GUIDANCE

5.1.1 Environment

'Environment' within the context of the Albanian NRDP includes issues of land degradation, human health, water resources, water quality, people's access to the benefits of natural resource use, natural habitats, protected areas, and biological diversity. In order to achieve effective environmental protection, those responsible for implementation will need to recognize that a particular activity or development can have positive impacts on one aspect of 'environment' while having negative impacts on another aspect.

5.1.2 Indirect and Cumulative Impacts

To predict the environmental impact of a sub-project, those responsible for implementation should understand beneficiaries' livelihood strategies. There may be induced environmental impacts that occur as a result of the project impact on local economies and society.

In addition, the impacts of some of the sub-projects may 'add-up' to have a significant cumulative impact. Project officers will therefore need to be aware of the issue of potential cumulative impacts when implementing the EMF.

5.2 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

5.2.1 Introduction

As discussed in Section 1.2, the process of scoping the environmental impacts of the NRDP has included consultation with a range of key informants and government and civil society stakeholders at the national level, and in three districts of upland Albania (Tropoje, Hasi and Kukes districts in north-east Albania), and the collection and review of a range of background information and data. Details of individuals and organisations consulted are provided in Annex A, and a list of reference materials is provided in Annex B.

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENT OF ALBANIA 32 5.2.2 Overall Assessment

The successful implementation of the NRDP will clearly have a major positive impact on environmental and natural resources in upland areas of Albania, and, importantly, on downstream resources in the watersheds in which the project operates. Environmental benefits are an integral part of the NRDP, owing to its objective to reverse land and watershed degradation through a mixture of direct physical interventions and support to policy and institutional strengthening and reform (for example in relation to illegal logging and forest fire management).

Factors promoting an overall positive environmental impact include the following:

* NRDP will reverse the decline in livelihoods and environment in upland areas, and reduce the downstream risks to hydroelectricity dam operation, fisheries, agricultural productivity, and wetland and coastal resources; * NRDP will continue to build on the positive experience of community-based rehabilitation of forests during the AFP; * Key policy constraints will be tackled, providing a more appropriate policy and tenure context for upland areas; * A broader range of livelihood options for people in rural upland communities will enable them to manage their forest and pastoral resources with longer time horizons.

In short, the NRDP has been identified, designed, and will be managed in order to achieve positive environmental benefits.

The NRDP will also have a positive impact on combating climate change through the sequestration of carbon, and the prevention of habitat and resource degradation leading to decreased carbon losses. Significant incentives for this will be provided to communities to sequester carbon in forests, based on a contribution from the World Bank Bio-carbon Fund.

However, the above does not preclude the risks of localized negative environmental impacts of community-level interventions, or cumulative impacts of these interventions. To address these risks, the NRDP will include the implementation of an overall Environmental Management Framework (EMF) based on the 2004 World Bank EMF toolkit. This is discussed in Section 7.

5.2.3 Analysis of PotentialImpacts

The potential environmental impacts (both positive and negative) of the various physical interventions envisaged under the NRDP are summarised in Table 5.1, and discussed in more detail in Annex F. Proposed environmental mitigation, and in some cases enhancement measures, to be incorporated within the EMF are discussed in the next section.

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES MANAGENIENT GOVERNMENT OF ALBANIA 33 Table 5.1 Potential environmental imnpacts of forest, pasture and micro-ca tchment management activities under the NRDP

Activity Area of impact Potential positive impacts Potential negative impacts Significance/ (//x) +ve/-ve; ()insignificant or none Risk

0 - 0~~~~

A. On-farm interventions on rain-fed and irrigated land

1. Extension of seeds, seedlings and X x x - Reduced erosion due to * Small risk that fertiliser Positive - high materials with accompanying advice enhanced soil cover; support may lead to Negative - low and training, and (where appropriate) * Increased soil moisture increased nutrient runoff Cumulative - low fertilizers: retention leading to and/or infiltration to * Food crops: wheat, barley, lentil reduced runoff, erosion groundwater and and chickpea and flood risk; consequent risk to human * Forage crops: vetch, sainfoin * Rdcdpesrontehealth from contamination * Fruit tree seedlings and rangelands due to forage of water supplies (e.g. Phylloxera-resistant rootstocks cmroved siprdcvty eutrophication of reser-voirs * Grafting material for vineyards and stability from legume or nitrate contamination of cultivation; groundwater) * Increased rotation will halt * Introduction of crops that depletion of soil moisture are relatively agro-chemical and nutrients and the dependent (e.g. fruits, vines build-up of weeds, pests etc) may lead to the future and diseases; utk n osbemss * Cereal yields will be uptakesan possibales iss increased on flat land,ofteecmias reducing pressure on marg.inal and fragile lands.

2. Uitilisation -/ of small water sources - - - Increased water will * Although unlikely, small- Positive - high (springs) and/or rehabilitation of x increase crop scale rehabilitation of Negative - low existing earth ponds and tertiary-level diversification and agricultural ponds and Cumulative - low irrigation systems. productivity of agricultural tertiary irrigation systems land, and reduce pressure cudla ovr oaie on marginallands.adto er loalse on marginallands.water supply conflicts. * Small risk of cumulative Activity Area of impact Potential positive impacts Potential negative impacts Significance/ (V/x) +ve/-ve; (-) insignificant or none Risk

0 - 0~~~~~~

effect on water resources availability if large number of schemes carried out in single watershed

B. On-farm interventions concerning marginal lands

1. Extension of seeds and seedlings, x x x -- * Reduced soil erosion due * Small risk that fertiliser Positive - high with accompanying advice and to cover with perennial support may lead to Negative - low training, and (where appropriate) crops and improved soil increased nutrient runoff Cumulative - low fertilizers, targeted at rehabilitation of conservation practices and/or infiltration to marginal lands: * Increased soil moisture groundwater and * Food and forage crops (vetch, retention leading to consequent risk to human sainfoin, wheat); reduced runoff, erosion health from contamination and flood risk;ofwtrsple(.g * Perennial crops; * Reduced pressure on theofwtrsple(.g * Fruit trees; rangelands due to forage eutrophication of reservoirs * Medicinal and aromatic plants; crops; or nitrate contamination of * Fruit bearing bushes (eg. * Improved soil productivity groundwater). blackberries, rosehip) and stability from legume * Small risk of induced cultivation; erosion if marginal lands are * Perennial herbs on slopes turned over to annual crops will reduce soil erosion that require regular soil and pressure on wild disturbance. sources'

C. Support to livestock, apiculture and aquaculture

1. With accompanying advice and x - x -- * New productive breeds * More productive livestock Positive - high training, and in coordination with X and support to apiculture could increase pressure on Negative - low to pasture management plans, extension and aquaculture will land unless numbers are medium of: reduce pressure on forests carefully managed (possible Cumulative - low * New and more productive breeds and rangelands; for cumulative impact to medium of milking cows, and of sheep * Forage crops will create within watershed); and goats; additional land for * Provision of veterinary Activity Area of impact Potential positive impacts Potential negative impacts Significance/ (,//x) +ve/-ve; (-)insignificant or none Risk

* Veterinary support (service and livestock needs and reduce medicines could lead to medicines); pressure on rangelands. water pollution and related * Beehives and promotion of public health problems apiculture; unless the disposal of used * Fishfarming (trout farming) chemicals is controlled; where appropriate. * High nutrient concentrations and pond management chemicals that generally characterize fish- farm discharges could pollute water bodies and water supplies.

D. Off-farm management of communal forests and pastures 1. Fencing of most heavily degraded - V - * Rehabilitation of most * Small risk of disruption of Positive - high areas and newly planted trees and x x degraded forest and wildlife migratory routes or Negative - low bushes pastures; breeding areas. * Reduction of erosion. * Intensification of grazing on adjacent and nearby land, leading to increased erosion. 2. Planting trees: - - - / * Rehabilitation of most * Excessive use of Robinia in Positive - high * to stabilize the land and control x x degraded forest and the reforestation process Negative - low erosion; pastures, and reduction in could lead to reduced Cumulative - low * for forage; soil erosion; diversity of native species in * fruit-trees and medicinal trees * Planting fruit-trees, specific areas. and bushes medicinals plants and * Traditional method of fire to bushes will help land promote shoot growth could stabilisation and protection spread to re-forested areas against erosion and as livestock is moved off increase habitat diversity; onto new pastures; * Global environmental Activity Area of impact Potential positive impacts Potential negative impacts Significance/ (V/x) +ve/-ve; (-) insignificant or none Risk

u ~ *u .

benefits arising from carbon sequestration

3. Coppicing and thinning of forests - - - - * Improved quality, health -Positive - high and productivity of communal forests;

4. Soil erosion protection and land V - - x I/* Land stabilisation and *Possible induced erosion, Positive - high stabilization measures (i.e. check- X protection against erosion, landslips etc due to poorly Negative - low to dams and gully rehabilitation, landslides, flooding and managed or designed medium maintenance and/or protection of downstream sedimentation road/bridge repair, check existing infrustructure such as roads, of water bodies and dam constr-uction etc tracks or bridges, planting of trees structures *Possible habitat disturbance and shrubs) during road/ bridge repair, check dam construction etc Small risk of impacts on aquatic habitats by changing water levels and flow characteristics in streams.

5. Pasture improvement and - x v Stabilisation and protection *Potential for faecal Positive - high management (planting, fencing, and x against erosion, contamination of Negative - low to construction and/or rehabilitation of * Increased availability of watercourses upstream of medium water points for livestock). water resources both for local users (drinking, livestock and wild animals. bathing, washing).

E. Off-f arm support to state forest and pasture management 1. Planting of wild fruit-trees in high - - - / - - * Support to habitat and -Positive - high forests landscape restoration * Increased habitat diversity * Decreased damage to farmers caused by large mammals Activity Area of impact Potential positive impacts Potential negative impacts Significance/ (Vlx) +ve/-ve; -)insignificant or none Risk

co ~~~~0

08.- z

2. Soil erosion protection and land - - x V - . Land stabilisation and * Possible induced erosion, Positive - high stabilization measures (i.e. check- protection against erosion, landslips etc due to poorly Negative - low to dams and gully rehabilitation, landslides, flooding and managed or designed medium maintenance and/or protection of downstream sedimentation road/bridge repair, check existing infr-ustructure such as roads, of water bodies and dam construction etc tracks or bridges, planting of trees structures * Possible habitat disturbance and shrubs) during road/ bridge repair, check dam construction etc . Small risk of impacts on aquatic habitats by changing water levels and flow characteristics in streams.

3. Pasture improvement and - / x / ' - . Stabilisation and protection * Potential for faecal Positive - high management (planting, fencing, and x against erosion; contamination of Negative - low to construction and/or rehabilitation of * Increased availability of watercourses upstream of medium water points for livestock). water resources both for local users (drinking, livestock and wild animals, bathing, washing).-

4. Support to recreational functions - - - - of $ - * Increased access, *Secondary and indirect Positive - high high mountain ecosystems (for x awareness and enjoyment impacts through increased Negative - low to example improved tracks and trails of nature and biodiversity; access may lead to further medium for recreation) * Changed attitudes and degradation of the habitats, behaviour towards wildlife e.g. by commercial hunters or loggers 5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES FOR EMF

The following are the proposed measures to mitigate the potential negative impacts and/or enhance the environmental benefits of the NRDP activities. These measures are incorporated within the EMF described in Section 7.

5.3.1.1 A. On-fann interventions on rain-fed and irrigatedland

The anticipated benefits under this component will be enhanced by the promotion and implementation of good soil and water conservation measures wherever possible within the micro-catchment (MC) plans, such as those described in Box 5.1.

Box 5.1 Some best practices in reducing soil erosion

* Conservation cropping - using a sequence of crops designed to provide adequate organic residues to maintain topsoil qualities * Conservation tillage - a reduced tilling approach which ensures that at least 30% of the soil surface is covered by organic residues after planting. Crop residues may also be used to protect cultivated fields during critical erosion periods. * Contour farming - which means carrying out ploughing, planting and other land management practices along the contours of the land to reduce erosion and run-off. * Field borders and filter strips - such as a strip of perennial herbaceous vegetation along the edge of all fields to slow run-off and trap coarser sediments (this is not usually effective for finer sediments and associated pollutants). * Grassed waterways. Natural or constructed channels that are vegetated and graded so as to inhibit channel erosion. * Sediment basins to collect and store sediment during heavy rainfall events. This is one of the highest cost techniques. Strip cropping, which is a relatively low cost option. * Terracing, which can be high cost in terns of labour and material inputs.

* Although the project will not lead to substantially increased pesticide support for agricultural intensification will be limited to 5-10 ha (or less) in each of the 30 micro-catchments, the potential risk of nutrient and/or pesticide pollution from agro-chemicals can be addressed through the provision of effective extension services to demonstrate best practices in fertiliser management and application, such as those described in Box 5.2. Where appropriate these services would include the promotion of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approaches such as biological controls, cultural practices, and the use of crop varieties that are resistant or tolerant to the pest. Specific attention would be given to these issues in the event that MC planning is scaled up by Government. In addition, it is also recommended that periodic consultation is held with water supply authorities, to assess whether there is any trend towards key water bodies being adversely affected by agro-chemical pollution, and whether any remedial action is therefore required under the project.

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOUPCES NIANAGENIENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 39 Box 5.2 Some best practices infertiliserhandling and application

* Implement effective fertiliser planning, i.e. match application rates to crop requirements * Apply nitrogeneous fertilisers at time when crop can utilise the nitrogen * Store away from watercourses, and protected from elements * Implement effective soil conservation practices (see Box 5.1) * Time application to match antecedent conditions, i.e. to minimise runoff * Prevent direct entry to surface waters during application * Leave uncultivated buffer strips adjacent to watercourses

* The potential for localised water supply conflicts would need to be identified during the micro-catchment planning process and suitable consultation carried out to identify and arbitrate solutions between communities or individuals as necessary. Subsequent monitoring could thereafter take the form of simple consultation and mediation between affected communities or individuals, rather than detailed and expensive hydrological monitoring, since the resource impacts at the catchment-scale will be negligible.

B. On-farm interventions concerning marginal lands

As discussed for A above, in addition to which the project should periodically monitor livestock numbers and grazing patterns against land carrying capacity as part of overall project implementation. In addition, the micro- catchment planning process will include screening to ensure that no marginal lands (to be defined within the Project Implementation Manual) are converted to annual crops.

5.3.1.2 C. Support to livestock, apicculture and aquacultutre

* The anticipated benefits under this group of activities will be enhanced by using livestock breeds that have already been successfully introduced elsewhere in Albania, therefore maximising the benefits of existing knowledge and experience.

* The risk of inducing land degradation by introducing more productive breeds of livestock will be mitigated where appropriate by forming agreements to limit stock numbers with project beneficiaries as part of the MC planning process, and monitoring of headcounts during implementation.

* The risk of water pollution and related public health problems from the potential mismanagement of veterinary medicines would be mitigated through the provision of best practice advice through project-related extension services, to include simple measures such as the avoidance of waste (e.g. sheep dip) disposal and/or animal contact with water bodies immediately upstream of water abstraction points.

* Mitigation measures for the potential impacts of fish-farms could include the careful siting, planning and management of ponds to minimise

ENVIRONMENTALRESOURCEs MIANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 40 disruption to other water users, and the dilution of pond effluent before disposal. Shorter retention times for pond water can also mitigate the pollution risk to some extent. All of these considerations should be incorporated within the MC planning process. Finally, although it is very unlikely that fish-farms would be developed on a scale that would warrant it, there is a possibility that under Albanian legislation such developments would require site-specific environmental assessments to be carried out. The law does not presently define a threshold where this is the case, and so it is recommended that the guidance of the Regional Environmental Agency is sought during the MC planning process on a case-by-case basis.

5.3.1.3 D. Off-farm management of conimunalforests and pastures

* Whilst the risk of exacerbating soil erosion by diverting livestock from fenced off areas is low, the situation would need to be monitored during the course of NRDP implementation, and the process of reaching agreement on herd sizes and grazing patterns with participating communities extended to all project areas.

* Introduction of Robinia pseudoaccaciawill be carried out in a controlled manner favoring succession and enhancement of natural regeneration of existing species, and recurring to monoculture in very limited cases with due justification. Due account will be taken of experience gained through the introduction of Robinia during the AFP.

* The potential impacts of check dam construction and/or road, track and bridge maintenance should be mitigated through the implementation of standard environmental protection measures for construction activities, such as erosion, noise and dust control, habitat avoidance etc. These would be detailed in checklist form in the Project Implementation Manual, and would be rolled out to participating communities as part of the implementation process. Monitoring of the design and construction process should be carried out by the responsible District Forestry Officer (1), who would also be responsible for overseeing environmental aspects.

* The potential impacts of the construction or rehabilitation of livestock watering points should be mitigated during project design, when the location of the watering points should be assessed to take into account the proximity of downstream water users.

5.3.1.4 E. Off-fanr support to stateforest and pasture management

As discussed in D above.

In addition, whilst this risk of secondary habitat disturbance or degradation due to the improved access to conservation areas is considered to be minimal, it should be addressed by the careful planning of any new trails or tracks

(1) DFOs are qualified to supervise the design and construction of check dams up to 6m m height.

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNhtENTOFALBANIA 41 during the preparation of the communal forestry and pasture management plans. The specific risks of illegal logging, forest fires etc are themselves addressed by activities under Component A3 of the NRDP to implement priority actions of the National Strategy for the Development of Forests and Pasture.

5.3.2 Impacts of Institutionaland Policy Measures

As described in Section 2, in addition to the physical interventions discussed in detail in the previous sections, Component A3 of the NRDP will also include a range of activities to strengthen governance for forest and pasture management and the implementation of micro-catchment planning approaches in Albania.

These activities will include training of DGFP and DFS in participatory provision of extension advice, and building the capacity of existing and new Forest and Pasture User Associations (FPUAs) as well as the growing network of non-governmental associations in this area, with a focus on technical effectiveness, financial and social sustainability. Of particular environmental significance is that Component A.3.3 will also support the implementation of priority actions in the National Strategijfor tlhe Development of Forests and Pasture, including strengthening and improving the legal and regulatory framework for forest and pasture management, developing the forest Cadastre, further developing the inter-sectoral action plan to address illegal logging, and implementing elements of the action plan in project areas and enhancing forest fire management at local levels.

The successful implementation of these policy and institutional support measures will be fundamental to the effectiveness and sustainability of the environmental benefits to be achieved by the NRDP, namely the reversal of land and watershed degradation in upland areas of Albania. Their implementation will provide a more appropriate policy context for the implementation of the project by ensuring that key institutional and policy constraints to the sustainable management of natural resources in Albania will be addressed.

ENVIRONMENTALRESOURCES IANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOFALBANIA 42 6 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES

The following is a short discussion of the various project alternatives that were considered during the course of NRDP preparation, including their relative environmental benefits in broad terms. They include the 'without project' scenario.

6.1 'WITHOUTPROJECT'ALTERNATIVE

In broad terms, the 'without project' alternative would have the affect of negating the environmental benefits that the project is designed to deliver.

In summary:

* Without the NRDP livelihoods and environment in upland areas will continue to decline as a result of land degradation;

* Without the NRDP land degradation will continue to pose risks downstream including risks to hydroelectricity dam operation, fisheries, agricultural productivity, and wetland and coastal resources.

6.2 DIRECTINTERVENTIONS BYFORESTRY SERVICE

An alternative to community-based planning and management, is for the DGFP and district forestry services to directly control the planning of forest rehabilitation and direct all tree planting and erosion control measures. However, very few stakeholders in GoA or Albanian civil society are in favour of this approach, owing to the successful demonstration of community-based action during the AFP and associated measures to reform DGFP and decentralization in Albania.

In summary, the community-based approach adopted under the NRDP will enable:

* The NRDP to continue to build on the positive experience of community- based rehabilitation of forests during the AFP;

* Key policy constraints to be tackled, providing a more appropriate policy and tenure context for upland areas;

* A broader range of livelihood options for people in rural upland communities, which will enable them to manage their forest and pastoral resources with longer time horizons.

ENVIRONMENTALRESOURCES MIANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 43 6.3 STRENGTHENING OF PROTECTEDAREAS MANAGEMENT

A component to develop and implement management plans for Albania's protected areas was considered during project design.

Protected areas in Albania have suffered a high degree of degradation in the past, and given rural poverty levels and dependence on natural resources, it is not clear that protected area management would be effective or have local support. Protection of upland ecosystems is more likely to be achieved over the coming years through community-based natural resource management projects such as the design proposed for this operation, where biodiversity conservation is integrated into land use management in the production landscape. The project, by focusing on vegetation recovery and erosion control in upland areas, will also help restore natural ecosystems in lower watersheds.

ENVIRONNMENTALRESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 44 7 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

This section sets out the Environmental Management Framework (EMF) for the project and provides details of the reporting system and responsibilities of the various project stakeholders in respect to EMF implementation.

7.1 EMFACTIVITIES

Table 7.1 summarises the various environmental protection activities that are to be mainstreamed within the NRDP, as identified and discussed in Section 5, and includes project stakeholder roles and responsibilities in relation to these activities and their relative timing in relation to the overall project activities.

The remainder of this section describes the framework via which these activities will be implemented, and includes:

* The EMF reporting system and responsibilities; * Environmental screening and reporting guidelines; * An associated capacity-building and training programme; * Estimated incremental costs for EMF implementation.

Each of these elements will be incorporated and where necessary (e.g. in the case of the environmental screening procedures) elaborated in more detail within the Project Implementation Manual, which is currently under development.

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES NMANAGENIENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 45 Table 7.1 Environmental ManagemnentFrameworkActivities

Activity/Key Issue Mainstreaming or mitigation measures Responsibility for action Timing

A. On-farm interventions on rain-fed and irrigated land Enhance overall benefits of activities to reduce * Promotion and implementation of basic good Regional Watershed Support Team As part of individual MC planning process land and watershed degradation in upland areas practices in soil and water conservation (RWST), with support from Regional of Albania. wherever possible within the micro-catchment Coordinator (RC) (MC) plans (see Box 5. Z). Support for fertiliser application to establish * Provision of effective extension services to RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process newly planted crops may lead to inappropriate demonstrate best practices in fertiliser application methods and increased nutrient application (see Box 5.2). runoff. * Promotion of Integrated Pest Management RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process (IPM) approaches where appropriate, including biological controls, cultural practices, and use of resistant crop varieties. * Periodic consultation with water supply Audit contractor, with intervention by As part of annual environmental authorities to ensure key water bodies are not RWST/RC as necessary performance (EP) audit being degraded in medium to long term Small-scale rehabilitation of agricultural ponds * Possible localised water supply conflicts RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process and tertiary-level irrigation systems could identified at the sub-project level and suitable potentially lead to localised water supply consultation carried out to identify and conflicts. arbitrate solutions as necessary. * Ongoing observation, consultation and RWST (ongoing) with support from RC, Observation by RWSTs as part of MC plan mediation between affected communities or plus audit contractor (annual) implementation, plus sample monitoring individuals as necessary. as part of annual EP audit

B. On-farm interventions concerning marginal lands As for A above. As for A above. As for A above. As for A above.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCESNIANACEMNENT GOVERNNIENTOFALBANIA 46 Activity/Key Issue Mainstreaming or mitigation measures Responsibility for action Timing Introduction of forage crops in marginal lands * Establish agreements on livestock carrying RWST with support from RC As part of individual MC planning process could produce an increase in livestock numbers capacities and grazing patterns with and hence an increased risk of erosion of unstable participating communities soils. * Periodically monitor numbers and intervene RWST (ongoing) with support from RC, Monitoring by RWSTs as part of MC plan as necessary. plus audit contractor (annual) implementation, plus sample monitoring as part of annual EP audit

D. Off-farm management of communal forests and pastures

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCESMIANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOFALBANIA 47 Activity/Key Issue Mainstreaming or mitigation measures Responsibility for action Timing Installation of fencing could lead to the * Form agreement on herd sizes and grazing Regional Manager (RM) with support As part of individual FMP or MC planning intensification of grazing on adjacent and nearby patterns with participating communities in all from District Forestry Service (DFS) (and process land, leading to loss of vegetation and soil cover project areas where re-fencing carried out. RC for Component B only) and increased erosion. * Periodically monitor livestock numbers as RM/DFS (ongoing) plus audit contractor Monitoring by RWST or DFSs as part of part of project implementation. (annual) implementation, plus sample monitoring as part of annual EP audit Excessive use of the black locust tree (Robinia * Introduction of Robinia to be carried out in a RM with support from DFS (and RC for Starting immediately, and continuing pseuidoaccacia)in the reforestation process could controlled manner, favouring succession and Component B only) through NRDP implementation lead to reduced diversity of native species in enhancement of natural regeneration of specific areas. existing species. * Periodically monitor effectiveness of Robinia Audit contractor As part of Annual EP audit (year 2 controls through site inspections across range onwards) of sample of sites. Localised erosion problems and/or habitat w Implement (via checklists) standardised RM with support from DFS (and RC for As part of individual FMP or MC planning disturbance could occur during the construction environmental protection measures during Component B only) and implementation process of small erosion control structures (check dams) in construction and repair, such as erosion, noise the upper watershed, or the repair and and dust control habitat avoidance etc. maintenance of roads, tracks and bridges. * Monitoring of design and construction District Forestry Officer (e.g. RM) As part of individual FMP or MC planning process by suitably qualified engineer. and implementation process * Monitoring implementation effectiveness Audit contractor Sample monitoring as part of annual EP audit Downstream impacts on water quality, and * Location of the watering points should be RM with support from DFS (and RC for As part of individual FMP or MC planning possibly health, from pollution at new livestock assessed during project planning process to Component B only) process watering points. take into account the proximity of downstream water users.

E. Off-farm support to state forest and pasture management As for D above. As for D above. As for D above. As for D above. Promotion of recreation in the conservation areas . Careful planning and siting of access RM with support from DFS (and RC for Throughout NRDP implementation may lead to secondary and indirect impacts improvements during forestry and pasture Component B only) through increased access that will be provided. management planning process * Monitor for secondary and indirect impacts Audit contractor As part of annual EP audit on protected areas (sample inspections, consultation with MoE officials etc)

ENVIRONWENTALRESOUECESM ANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOFALBANIA 48 7.2 EMF REPORTING AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Table 7.1 assigns a range of roles and responsibilities in relation to implementation and monitoring of the various environmental protection activities envisaged under the NRDP. These responsibilities have been assigned taking into account the overall implementation arrangements for the project, as described in Section 2.2, and are designed to take place within the EMF reporting and responsibility framework shown in Figure 7.1.

Figure 7.1 EMF reportingand responsibilityframework

Project Implementation | Ministry of Oversight Committee Feedback Environment

Project Management Project Technical Committee Team (PMT) (FTC)

Approval of management plans tAI$omme ns Annual Fnv. Regional Managers (RM) Performance Audit

Submission of t . Support/advice for management Independent management plan plan development/screening contractor in proposals c------Regional Coordinators collaboration Regional Watershed (Component B only) with Regional

Support Teams (RWSTs) I Environment ------A gencies Development of management + | Support/advice for management plan proposals I + plan development/screening

Local stakeholders: Forestry and Pasture User Associations MC Planning and Management Committees

In summary:

* In relation to MC planning activities (Component B), the Regional Coordinator (in an advisory capacity) and Regional Watershed Support Teams (day-to-day) will have overall responsibility for working with the beneficiaries to mainstream environmental considerations into the planning and implementation process, and for screening all plan activities accordingly. For FMP activities under Component A of the project, these responsibilities will fall to the Regional Managers (overall), with the support of the District Forestry Services (day-to-day).

* The Project Management Team (PMT) at the central level will be responsible for approval of the management plans, based upon the advice of the Regional Managers, and final determination of the Technical Specialist within the PMT. This stage of the process will include

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCESIANAGENMENT GOVERNNMENTOF ALBANIA 49 consideration and screening of cumulative impacts of the sub-projects, as discussed in Section 7.3.2.

* On an annual basis, an environmental performance audit will be conducted in all regions (either individually, or as one single contract) by a team of independent experts (the Audit Contractor(s)) and will comprise an analysis of the screening process and a visual inspection of a sample of project sites as discussed in Section 7.3 below;

* An audit report will then be submitted to the Project Technical Committee (PTC), and in parallel the Ministry of Environment. On reviewing the report, the PTC (and the MoE should it decide) will provide guidance to the PMT/ Regional Managers in how the project should address report recommendations in going forwards. The Regional Managers will then work with the RC/RWST or DFS (in the case of Component A activities) and project beneficiaries to integrate any required measures into the plan development, screening and/or implementation processes.

7.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING AND REPORTING

7.3.1 Screening at the management plan level

As discussed above, the Regional Manager, supported by their Regional Coordinator/ RWST (for Component B) or DFS (for Component A), will assist communities to develop their management plans in a way to avoid or minimise adverse environmental impacts. Figure 7.2 outlines a simple process that will help to achieve this.

Figure 7.2 Process of environmentalscreening

Suib-project No acti application and nzeeded andrt Initial screening screening process identificati.oit by RC/D)FS _ Regionalb/ Regional _ RM to provide advice to Manna,r RC/DFS/comnmn1ity on mitigation

In summary, following identification of detailed plan activities, the proposed plan will be initially screened against a standard checklist by the Regional Coordinator (or in the case of Component A the DFS) in consultation with the local project stakeholders, and the results of this screening will be presented to the Regional Manager for review. This initial screening will culminate in a

ENVIRONNIENTAL RESOURCES NIANAGENlENT GOVERNNMENTOF ALBANIA 50 decision by the RM as to whether specific environmental mitigation measures will need to be adopted within the plan, and/or whether further information is required in order to complete the screening process. In the latter case, further more detailed screening checklists (e.g. relating to specific activities) may be requested from the plan proponents.

When the screening process has been completed, the results will be submitted by the RM to the PMT for final approval, with a recommendation as to what environmental mitigation measures (if any) need to be integrated within the plan, and how they will be implemented, including assigned responsibilities, timings and details of any further training or guidance that is required for the local project stakeholders.

The screening checklists will be developed in detail as part of the Project Implementation Manual (PIM). The checklists themselves will follow a simple yes/no format covering questions on the location of the project and the anticipated impacts (see Box 7.1 for some typical questions, although more specific and quantified questions would need to be developed for the PIM); if there are 'yes' answers to any of these then the plan developers will be required to develop a course of action (i.e. mitigation measure) and in some cases to complete a more detailed checklist on a specific subject. Actions can be for the community itself to manage or avoid impacts, the RM or RC/ DFS to provide specific advice, or if necessary the provision of technical advice from elsewhere e.g. the PTC.

Box 7.1 Outline of some possible environnzental screening questions

Questions regarding location mnight include: Is the project sited within a strictly protected area, national park, nature reserve or natural/historical monument? Does the project reduce people's access (due to roads, location etc) to the pasture, water, public services or other resources that they depend on?

Questions regarding potential impacts might incluide: Will the project involve any construction activities or will it require large volumes of construction materials (eg gravel, stone, water, timber, firewood)? Will the project involve the provision/use of fertilisers or other agricultural chemicals? Could the project result in conflict or disputes among communities or pastoralists, for example in relation to water supply issues? Could the project lead to changes in the distribution and/or numbers of people or of livestock in the area? Could the project lead to any disturbance or disruption to wildlife habitats?

7.3.2 Screeningforpotentialcumiulative impacts

As part of the screening process, the PMT/RM will also be responsible for maintaining an overview of the potential cumulative environmental impacts of the management plans, as discussed in Table 7.1. In order to do this, a series of triggers and corresponding actions will need to be developed and incorporated within the overall project screening process.

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES NIANAGENMENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 51 As for the screening checklists, these cumulative triggers will be developed in detail as part of the ProjectImplementation Manual. Box 7.2 illustrates some possible triggers that could be used to develop such a checklist.

Box 7.2 Possible triggersfor screening potential cumulative impacts

Pastoralresources: * Trigger: Where the NRDP induces an increase of in grazing livestock numbers of more than 50% above existing levels in any one region or district * Potential impact: Depleted and/ or eroded pasture land and vegetation * Action: PMT/RMs to engage government and NGOs within the district in an assessment of the cumulative impact of all grazing animals on pasture land in the region or district.

Depletion of biodiversity: * Trigger: Where the NRDP finances supplemental planting with more than 30% non-native species (e.g. Robinia) within a district or region * Potential impact: reduced diversity of native species in specific areas * Action: PMT/RMs to engage government and NGOs across the district in an assessment of the cumulative impact of all supplemental planting across the district or region.

Sources of conistruction materials: * Trigger: Where the NRDP finances more than 10 sub-projects using timber, sand, gravel, or any other construction material from the same source, whether in the project area or outside it. * Potential impact: Depletion in material resources. * Action: PMT/RMs to engage government and NGOs across the project area to carry out a cumulative impact assessment to determine the significance of the extraction, and to make recommendations on an alternative course of action.

7.3.3 Annual EnvironmentalPerfornance Audit

As discussed earlier, an annual environmental performance audit will be conducted by an independent organisation, in order to:

* Assess compliance with EMF procedures, learn lessons, and improve future EMF performance; and

* Assess the occurrence of, and potential for, cumulative impacts due to project-funded activities.

A suggested audit scope is provided in Box 7.2. Terms of reference for the audit will be developed and incorporated within the Project Implementation Manital.

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MIANAGENIENT GOVERNMIENTOF ALBANIA 52 Environment Agencies (REA), actively participate in the audits and local training and awareness raising activities in order to gain first-hand experience of the identification and management of key issues in relation to a project of this nature (see next section).

Box 7.2 Proposedscope of annual environmental performance audit

Tasks * Review of the paper trail of screening checklists and reports, and review of reports on wider issues of natural resources and environmental management; * On the basis of this review, select a number of sub-projects for field visits to investigate compliance with proposed mitigation measures, and identification of potential impacts that are not being adequately identified or dealt with by RWSTs, communities or Regional Coordinators; * Recommend practical improvements to the EMF screening checklists in order to fine-tune the operation of the EMF based on practical experience; * Discuss NRDP activities in with the PMT, PTAC and Regional Coordinators; * Assess the needs for further training and capacity building; . Recommend additional assessment studies to be carried out to complement development of the project's approach to natural resources and environmental management.

Outputs A report of the annual performance audit delivered to the PMT, PTAC and the Ministry of Environment, setting out: * Numbers of sub-projects (i) carried out, (ii) screened for environmental impacts, (iii) provided with technical advice from Regional Coordinators, (iv) further assessed, etc; * Description of the actual operation of the EMF as it has occurred in practice; * Identification of environmental risks that are not being fully addressed or mitigated, including potential cumulative impacts; * Conclusions on whether the project is maximising its positive contribution to natural resources and environmental management; * Areas for improvement and practical recommendations for the strengthening and improved performance of the EMF.

It is hoped that in this way, the awareness and capacity of the REA staff and other agencies will be developed throughout the course of the project such that a sustainable system of environmental monitoring and oversight will be established before the project finishes.

7.4 CAPACITY BUILDING AND TRAINING

The environmental sustainability of the NRDP in the long term will to a large extent be dependent on the capacity of communities and local and national authorities to carry out the associated design, planning, approval and implementation of the management plans. In order to ensure proper implementation of environmental screening and mitigation measures, as well as effective natural resource management, the NRDP will integrate environmental management training within its overall programme of capacity building. This will build on previous efforts made during the Albanian Forestry Project.

ENVIRONMENTALRESOURCES NIANAGENMENT GOVErNM1ENTOF ALBANIA 53 7.4.1 Environmental Training and Sensitisation

Training and sensitisation will be required for the PMT Technical Specialist, Regional Managers, Regional Coordinators, Regional Watershed Support Teams, Regional Environmental Agencies and the communities themselves.

Tables 7.2 and 7.3 provide a suggested scope and level of training for each of these audiences. More detailed terms of reference for this training will be incorporated within the ProjectImplementationz Manual.

Table 7.2 Outline trainingrequirements

As shown in Table 7.1, training will be provided to bring each audience to a different level of expertise in each area, as follows:

(i) In -depth training, to a level that allows trainees to go on to train others, including technical procedures where relevant; (ii) Sensitisation, in which the trainees become familiar with the issues to a sufficient extent that it allows them to demand their precise requirements for further technical assistance; and (iii) Awareness-raising in which the participants acknowledge the significance or relevance of the issues, but are not required to have technical or in- depth knowledge.

7.5 ESTIMATED INCREMENTAL COSTS FOR EMF

The majority of environmental protection measures described in Table 7.1 will form part of the day-to-day activities of project staff, and so should not involve any incremental costs to the project. Those activities that are likely to require additional funds are as follows:

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMIENTOF ALBANIA 54 Table 7.2 Outline trailling programmne

Audience Training elements Duration and Frequency format PMT Technical * Knowledge of natural resources 4 day workshop at Year 1,3 and Specialist, Regional management and environmental project outset in 5 Managers, Regional issues in NRDP areas year 1, 2 day Coordinators and RWSTs . Operation of the EMF: use of refreshers in years 3 screening checklists, knowledge and 5 of mitigation measures and cumulative assessment triggers; (Training events * Good soil and water will be split into two conservation practices and sessions: one each mitigation measures for Component A and B staff) Community stakeholders * Use of the screening checklist Ongoing during Throughout * Mitigation measures for micro- participatory the project projects planning of MC plans Regional Environment . Sensitisation of the operation of On-the-job training Annual Agencies the EMF: screening, mitigation with Audit Team and environmental assessment (1 week per year) triggers; * Monitoring and evaluation at sub-project and project level * Conducting annual project environmental performance audits

* The Annual Environmental Performance Audit would need to be contracted to an independent local expert organisation, at an estimated cost of approximately US$5000 per year to cover professional fees and survey expenses (including data collection where necessary). Over five years this would represent a total incremental cost of around US$25,000. Terms of reference for this audit will be incorporated within the Project Implemitentation Manual.

* The environmental training described in Table 7.3 would require the involvement of a local expert organisation (with possible inputs from international experts), at an estimated cost of around US$15,000 for the first workshop (split into two sessions, one for Component A staff, and one for Component B), and US$7,500 for subsequent workshops. Over the course of the project, this would represent a total incremental cost of around US$30,000. Terms of reference for this training will be incorporated within the Project Implementation Manual.

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MIANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 55 i

I Annex A

List of Stakeholders Consulted During Project and EA Preparation

l~ ~ ~~~~~~ Al LIST OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS

The following is a consolidated list of the various institutional and individual stakeholders that were consulted during the course of project and EA preparation. Environmental and natural resources management issues were discussed at all of these meetings, usually within the context of overall project development but in several cases specifically. A summary of some of the key issues that emerged for consideration within the EA is discussed in the main EA report.

A1.l PARTICIPANTS AT NRDP WORKSHOP ON PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT, NOVEMBER 2004

Maxhun Dida, Director General, DGFP Genti Kromid ha, DGFP Agron Gaxho, DGFP Vasillaq Mine, DGFP Harold Lemel, NRDP Nihat Dragoti, DGFP Roland Kristo, MAF Albert Dubali, MAF Arben Molla, MAF Arian Avrazi, MKRS Zamir Dedej, MoE Genc Metohu, MRrTT Arsen Proko, FFS Nihat Collaku, FFS Abdulla Diku, DIAVA. Sh.P.K Idriz Haxhiu, MNS Stavri Pllaha, Transborder Wildlife Spase Shumka, PPNEA Jani Vangjeli, IBR Perikli Qirjazi, AS&DS Drita Dade , World Bank Batkhyag Baldangombo, UNDP NevretJahollari, DFS-Tirana Zigur Sulaj, DFS-Vlora Qemal Mehja, DFS-Shkodra

A1.2 PARTICIPANTS AT REGIONAL MEETINGS

A1.2.1 Lezha Prefectur, 24 December 2004

Gjergj Rakaj, Lezha Prefect Shtjefen Haberi, Head of Kallmeti Commune Jashar Cejku, Watershed Mat Agency Jak Gjini, Regional Environmental Agency Zef Gjoi, Director of Agriculture and Food, Lezha Zef Ymeri, Lezha Ecological Club Shota Monku, Forestry Service Preng Vorfi, Head of Lezha Forestry Police

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MIANAGENMENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 1 A1.2.2 Elbasan Prefectur, 10 January2005

Kujtim Kadzadej, Drejtor NRDP Vasillaq Mine, DPPK Drejtor Tirane Fatmir Ozuni, Inspektor Veterinar Librazhd Kostandin Cakalli, Keshilli Qarkut Elbasan Besnik Shaqirasi, Koordinator PMU Vangjel Tollumi, Inspektor Veterinar DBU Elbasan Firdus Kurti, Inspektor Veterinar Librazhd Sotir Panxhi, Pergjegjes i sektorit Veterinar Nazmi Hoxha, Promotor PMU Qerim Kaca, Pergjegjes i Bujqesise Librazhd Mitat Bicaku, Shefi Manaxhimit ne D .Pyjeve Enver Koci, Drejtor i DSHP Kostandin Ciko, Drejtori Drejtorise Rajonale te Pyjeve Gjergji Kreka, Spcialist ne Drejtorine Rajonale Elbasan Hajdar Nogu, Kryetar i Komunes Hotolisht Shkelqim Elezi, Drejtor DBU Elbasan Ymer Tola, Zv. Minister I Bujqesise Ferdinand Bego, NRDP deputy team leader Tim Smith, ERM Douglas Smith, ERM

A1.2.3 Korce Prefectur, 10 January 2005

Kujtim Kadzadej, Drejtor NRDP Muhamer Hoxhallari, Pergjegjes DBU Pogradec Nexhmi Torra, Kryetar SHPPK Komuna Velcan, Haxhi Kuqo Mjek Veteriner, ZBU Pogradec Adriatik skenderasi Mjek Veteriner ZBU Pogradec Dhimitraq Veshi, Mjek Veteriner ZBU Pogradec Verxhi Cinari, Inxhinjer Pyjesh DSHP Pogradec Flamur Cema, Drejtor i DSHP Pogradec Vasillaq Mine, DPPK Tirane Guri Tala, Inspektor i Zooteknise ZBU Pogradec Ylli Galo, Drejtor i Nd. Te Ujrave Ilir Agastra, Inspektor I Farave dhe Fidanave Pogradec Bexhet Sheri, Inxhinjer ne DBU Pogradec Pellumb Abeshi, Inspektor, Agr. Mbrojtjes Bimeve Festim Killo, Inspektor i Mb. Bimeve Ilirjan Kromoll ari, Inspektor Peshkimi Albert Mara, Agronom Perparim Halla, Pergjegjes i Zyres Veterinare Ruzhdi Hyqmetllari, Shoqata "Pylli i Blerte" Nexhmi Dokollari, Kryetar i Komunes Hudenisht Naum Gegprifti, Kryetar i Forumit Lokal te OJFve Hysni Elezaj, Shef i Seksionit te Admin/Manaxhimit,DSHP Pogradec Dashamir Caushi, Specialist Agronom ne DBU Pogradec Ilmi Hidri, Komuna Proptisht Ferdinand Bego, NRDP deputy team leader Tim Smith, ERM Douglas Smith, ERM

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOUPCES NIANACENIENT GOVEENNIENTOF ALBANIA 2 A1.2.4 Dibra Prefecthr, 12 January 2005

Emer Mbiemer, Detyra qe Kryen Jovan Popi, Specj.bujqesie Skender Cani, Inxh.sek.menaxh.DSHPMat Ylli Meta, Kryetar komune Suc Luan Prekola, Pergj. Sek ujrave Bulqize Jahje Ashiku, Drejt.drej.R.bujqesis Diber Aranit Skepi, K.Kom.Fushe-Cidher Sheza Tomcini, Keshillt.Burim.Ntyror.SNV Vullnet Tafa, Drejtor D.SH.P Diber Skender Lata, Drejtor D.SH.P. Mat Hysen Kocollari, Pergj. Ujrave Diber Zihni Metallari, Kryetar Komune Kastriot Diber Rexhep Ndreu, Koord.Pyjeve Komun. Qarku Diber Mentor Xheka, Pergj Bujq Ushq. Bulqize Sali Tershalla, Kryetar Kom. Arrez Diber Dritan Preci, Pergj Zyres Bujqes Mat Basir Salaj, Pergj. Sek. Ujrave Mat Dik Spata, I.Sh. Komunes Fushe-Cidher Kapllan Skenderi, Kryetar Shoq. Bashkia Klos Mazllum Celiku, Kryetar Shoq. Kutari Ramadan Koci, Teknik Komuna Gurre Rexhep Neli, Kryetar Shoqates Kom. Baze Munir Lleshi, Specjalist Bujqesise Kom. Muhur Shkelzen Qoku, Kryetar komunes Muhur

A1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING IN KUKES REGION

Dragobiavillage, Tropoje com nmune, 29 November 2004 Impromptu focus group discussion with villagers

Key informant discussion, Bayram Curi, 29 November 2004 Head of commune (former Forest engineer), Tropoje Commune, 29 November 2004

Consultationmeeting, Bayram Curi, 29 November 2004 Nazim Gonari, Agriculture Directorate Rakijs Demiraj, Agriculture Directorate Astrit Metaliaj, Chairman of NGO Forum / 'Alpin' Environmental NGO Riza Lata, Head of NGO Forum Hassan Halili, Farmers' Union Lulzim Logu, Shoqata per Kulture Demokratike

Informal discussion, Kukes, 30 November 2004 Dulejman Nela, Head of Shistavec Commune Rexhep Parllaku, Secretary of the Shistavec Commune Council Shefki Nika, Private forestry contractor

Informal discussioni, Kukes, 1 December 2004 Sefedim Mata, MADA Naim Pacara, Agricultural and livestock consultant

Formal meetinig at Kuikes Prefectur, 1 December 2004

EN\'IRONNIENTALRESOURCES NMANAGENIENT GOVERNNMENTOF ALBANIA 3 Besnik Hallaci, General Secretary of the Prefectur (Previously at the Regional Environmental Agency) Zylfi Noka, Head of the Regional Federation of Forest User Associations Nuri Visha, Member of the Shistavec Forest User Association Jan Kaloshi, Head of Zapote Commune Xhelal Shuti, Head of Regional Agricultural Directorate Iljaz Fejza, Head of the District Forest Service in M commune

A1.4 OTHER AD-Hoc CONSULTATION

A series of meetings and discussions were held with government and other experts during the course of project and EA preparation, many of which addressed environmental issues. These include the following:

A1.4.1 DGFP

Maxhun Dida (General Director, DGFP), Kozma Kocani (Forest engineer / afforestation), Selim Dini (Pasture management), Sami Cenko (Agronomist / chief of pasture), Muliz Mullaraj (CFP management), Nevret Jahollari and Genci Kacorri (Forest Engineers / Marketing), Genti Kromidha (Pas Director), Vasillaq Mine (FP Director), Kostandin Dano (Forest Management Sector).

A1.4.2 MoE

Pellumb Abeshi, General Secretary Zamir Dedej, Director for Biodiversity and Nature Conservation Alma Bako, Director of Environmental Impact Assessment

A1.4.3 MAF

Director of fisheries department, Director of rural development policy (Alberto Bolli), Director of livestock department, Director of water resources management, Director of budgets / finance (Ramsi Zula)

A1.4.4 Ministry of Decentralisationand Local Government

Zyher Beci, Head of Cabinet

A1.4.5 Other

Mitat Sanxhaku, Director of Hydrometeorology Institute Jak Gjini, Inspector at Regional Environmental Agency, Lezha Zef Ymeri, Lezha Ecological Club Mihallaq Qirjo, Director of REC, Tirana Vera Baktashe, Environmental Officer for the Albania Development Fund Julia LLangu, Agricultural Services Project

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MIANAGENIENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 4 i

I Annex B

List of References Key Reference Materials

The following is a list of the key reference documents used during the preparation of the EA for the NRDP:

* National Environmental Action Plan for the Republic of Albabia, Ministry of Environment, 1993 and 2002 (updated and approved) * Compendium of Environment Legislation, Republic of Albania, Ministry of Environment, March 2004 * Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Republic of Albania, Ministry of Environment, 2000 * National Strategy on Socio Economic Development, GoA, 2002 * Albanian Watershed Assessment Project, US Department of Agriculture (USDA), May 2003 * Environmental Diagnosis of Coastal Zone, Republic of Albania, UNEP/ Map, Ministry of Environment, April 2004 * Environmental Performance Review, Albania, United Nations Development Programme, 2002 * State of Environment Report, Republic of Albania, Ministry of Environment, 2000 - 2002 • Albanian Forestry Project, World Bank 1996 - 2003 * National Assessment Report for the World Summit on the Sustainable Development, Johannesburg, Ministry of Environment, 2002 * The Handbook on the Implementation of EC Environmental Legislation, European Commission 2003

* Environmental and Social Management Framework for World Bank Projects with Multiple Small-Scale Subprojects: A Toolkit, World Bank, 2004

* Final Country Report, Albania (Strategic Environmental Analysis), Regional Environment Center for Central & Eastern Europe (REC), June 2000 Annex C

Background Information on Relevant EU Directives C1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON RELEVANT EU DIRECTIVES

C1.l HABITATS DIRECTIVE (92/43/EEC)

The main aim of the Directive is to promote the maintenance of biodiversity through conservation of the natural habitats of wild flora and fauna throughout the EU. It seeks to establish a European ecological network of sites of Community interest (Special Areas of Conservation), known as the 'Natura 2000' network. The purpose of the Natura 2000 network is to ensure that selected habitats and species are maintained at a 'favourable conservation status'.

Key requirements of the Member States by the Directive are to:

* Identify and designate Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), and to implement a number of measures to protect habitats and species within and beyond them. The measures are to correspond to the ecological requirements of the natural habitat types in Annex I of the Directive and the species listed in Annex II that are contained within the sites (Article 6.1). * Implement a series of measures to establish a system of strict protection for the species listed in Annex IV (a) of the Directive. * Take the appropriate measures to establish a system of strict protection for the plant species listed in Annex IV (b) of the Directive. * Carry out a number of monitoring activities relating to the implementation of the Directive.

The key tasks required to implement this directive are summarised below.

Table 1.1 HabitatsDirective - Key Implementation Tasks

Phase Tasks Planning 1. Establish or delegate a competent authority to be responsible for implementing the requirements of the directive. 2. On the basis of the criteria set out in Annex III, the competent authority should identify a suite of sites. 3. In agreement with the Commission, Member States must designate the SACs and establish priorities for the management of these sites. 4. The SACs to be selected are to include the full range of indigenous species, in particular habitat types listed in Annex I and habitats of the species listed in Annex II. Regulation 1. For the designated sites, establish the necessary conservation measures which will meet the ecological requirements of the natural habitat types in Annex I and the species in Annex II. 2. Maintain the wildlife population at appropriate levels, taking into account scientific and cultural requirements. 3. Take the necessary measures to establish a system of strict protection for the animal species listed in Annex IV (a) in their natural range. In particular, prohibit the deliberate capture or killing of specimens of these species in the wild. 4. For the listed species, prohibit the keeping, transport and sale or exchange, and offering for sale or exchange, of specimens taken from the wild, except for those taken legally before this directive is implemented. 5. Establish a system of strict protection for the plant species listed in Annex IV (b). 6. Where deemed necessary ensure that the taking and exploitation of certain species of wild

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES N ANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 1 plants and animals (listed in Annex V) is controlled to ensure that they are maintained at a 'favourable conservation status' (Art. 14). 7. Prohibit the use of specified means of capture and killing certain animal species (listed in Annexes IV and V) (Art. 15 and Annex VI). 8. Regulate the deliberate introduction of non-native wildlife species, so as to protect the native populations. 9. Take steps to prevent deterioration of SACs and the disturbance of species for which they were created. 10. Assess any plans or projects that is likely to have a significant effect on the SAC network and prohibit plans or projects that would adversely affect the integrity of the sites (Art. 6). Moniitorinig 1. Establish a system to monitor the incidental capture and killing of the animal species listed and Research in Annex IV (a) and ensure that capture or killing activities do not have a significant effect on the species concerned. 2. Establish a monitoring system covering all of the monitoring activities required in the directive. 3. Encourage the necessary research and information exchange necessary to achieve the objectives of the Directive. 4. Where necessary, continue monitoring and surveillance after control of the taking and exploitation of certain species of wild plants and animals to ensure that they are maintained at a 'favourable conservation status'. 5. Study the desirability of re-introducing native species where this might contribute to their conservation. Informiiation 1. Report to the Commission, as appropriate on the following: anid Reporting * Sites that host natural habitat types and species listed in Annexes I and II; * Nomination of sites and designation of SACs; * Cases of derogations from specified requirements of the Directive (every two years); * Results of scientific investigations and research (Art. 18); Estimates relating to possible co-financing by the Community (Art. 8); Implementation of the Directive (Art. 17); * The implementation of measures taken under the Directive (every six years) (Art. 23); * Transposition, adopted in the field covered by the Directive (Art. 23). 2. Consult the public before: agreeing to a plan or project that is likely to have a significant effect on an SAC (Art. 6); and re-introducing native species (Art. 22). 3. Promote education and general information on species protection and conservation (Art. 22). Source: Handbook on the Implementation of EC Environmental Legislation (2003)

C1.2 BIRDS DIRECTIVE (79/409/EEC)

The overarching aim of the Directive is to provide for the protection, management and control of wild birds and their nests, eggs and habitats within the EU. This entails the designation and management of Special Protection Areas (SPAs) (SPAs together with SACs designated under the Habitats Directive, form the Natura 2000 network) and the prohibition of a number of harmful activities. Member states are required to take special conservation measures to ensure that wild birds and their habitats are protected and that populations of wild birds remain at levels that correspond to ecological, scientific and cultural requirements.

Key provisions of the Directive include:

* The maintenance of the favourable conservation status of all wild bird species across their distributional range (Article 2). * The identification and classification of SPAs for rare or vulnerable species listed in Annex I of the Directive, as well as for all regularly occurring

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 2 migratory species, paying particular attention to the protection of wetlands of international importance (Article 4). * The establishment of a general scheme of protection for all wild birds (Article 5). * Restrictions on the sale and housing of wild birds (Article 6). * Conditions under which hunting and falconry can be undertaken (Article 7). * Prohibition of large-scale non-selective means of bird killing (Article 8). * Encouragement of certain forms of relevant research (Article 10). * Requirements to ensure that the introduction of non-native birds does not threaten other biodiversity (Article 11).

The key tasks required to implement this directive are summarised below.

Table 1.2 Birds Directive - Key Irnplementation Tasks

Phase Tasks Planning 1. Establish or delegate a competent authority to be responsible for implementation of the requirements of the directive. 2. The competent authority should develop a system to protect all birds in the wild state. 3. The competent authority should identify and designate SPAs - areas that are important to rare or vulnerable bird species listed in Annex I of the directive and those used by migrating species, with particular reference to wetlands (either inland or coastal, such as estuaries) and especially wetlands of international importance, according to the criteria in the directive. 4. Ensure that the competent authority is consulted under the EIA Directive (85/337.EEC) for proposals significantly affecting SPAs. Regulation 1. Take the necessary measures to maintain bird populations at appropriate levels, taking into account scientific and cultural requirements. 2. Take special conservation measures for the species listed in Annex I and for regularly occurring migratory species, especially those dependent on wetlands of international importance. 3. For each SPA, take actions to ensure appropriate management and to avoid deterioration of sites and their habitats and disturbance of species. 4. Establish a general system to protect all listed bird species referred to in Article 1, including protection from disturbance, keeping, killing and capture and, protection of their habitat in accordance with the requirements of the directive. 5. Prohibit any activities relating to sale except those species listed in Annex III. This protection also extends to eggs and nests. 6. Ensure that hunting of species listed in Annex II is carried out in accordance with the provisions of Articles 7 and 8 and ensure the management of bird populations. 7. Ensure that any derogations from Art. 5-8 allowed under Art. 9 are specified in accordance with the Directive are subject to an annual review by the Commission. 8. Ensure that the introduction of non native species of birds does not adversely affect local flora and fauna. 9. Assess any plan or project that either by itself or in combination with other plans or projects is likely to have a significant effect on an SPA. 10. Carry out remedial measures to maintain or enhance the ecological value of SPAs, should monitoring indicate that there has been any deterioration in habitat quality and/ or value to bird species listed in Annex 1. Monitoring 1. Encourage specific research and scientific study to support the protection of designated sites and Research and bird species. Particular attention should be paid to the subjects listed in Annex V. 2. Establish a monitoring system covering the spectrum of activities within the directive. The monitoring should include: assessment of population levels of Annex I species; ecological value and integrity of SPAs; and effectiveness of mechanisms to prevent undue harmful activities to bird species listed in Annex II. 3. Monitor comphance with the conditions relating to the marketing of wild birds, the effect of hunting on conservation efforts and the effect of introducing non-native species.

ENVIRONMENTALRESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 3 Consultation 1. Consult with the public before agreeing to a plan or project that is likely to have a significant and Reporting effect on an SPA. 2. Consult with the Commission about the introduction of non-native species of birds. 3. Report to the Commission, as appropriate on the following: * Transposition and implementation of the Directive; Designation of Special Protection Areas (SPAs); * The practical application of hunting regulations; * Derogations from the provisions of the Directive; Measures taken to comply with the directive; * Research activities; * Compensatory measures adopted according to Article 6 habitats Directive; and . Transpositions of national law adopted in the field covered by the Directive. Source: Handbook on the Implementation of EC Environmental Legislation (2003)

C1.3 WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE (2000/60/EC)

The principal objective of the WFD is for all water bodies to be of "good ecological and good chemical status" by 2015, unless there are appreciable grounds for derogation. This is classified through analysis of both biological and physico-chemical elements.

This involves:

* Preventing further deterioration and protecting and enhancing the status of aquatic ecosystems and associated wetlands; * Promoting the sustainable consumption of water; * Specific controls for high risk pollutants, so called Priority Hazardous Substances; * Contributing to the mitigating effects of floods and droughts.

In relation to groundwater quality the directive takes a precautionary approach and states that no deterioration in status should occur. Groundwaters are classified dependent on quantity and chemical quality as either being of "good" status or "poor" status. In the case of the latter the directive specifies that bodies should be restored to "good" status where technically feasible and without entailing disproportionate costs. The WFD states that the entry of pollutants to groundwater must be either prevented or in certain cases limited.

In relation to quantity of groundwater the WFD stipulates that abstractions from groundwater must not exceed a sustainable level. Of the annual groundwater recharge a certain level is needed to support connected ecosystems essential functions. To be sustainable, abstractions from groundwater must not infringe on the groundwater recharge used for this ecosystem maintenance. The WFD is innovative in providing a framework for integrated management of groundwater and surface water.

The key tasks required to implement this directive are summarised below.

Table 1.3 Water FrameworkDirective - Key Imtplemrtentation Tasks

ENVIRON MENTALRESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 4 Phase Tasks Planninig 1. Identify river basins and assign them to individual river basin districts. 2. Assign groundwater bodies to river basin districts. 3. Assign coastal waters to river basin districts. 4. Establish competent authorities, using either existing structures or creating new ones, and establish administrative arrangements to ensure that the directive is implemented effectively within River Basin Districts. 5. The competent authority should make institutional arrangements to enable it to fulfil its implementation tasks, such as planning, monitoring and enforcing the requirements of the directive. 6. The competent authority should undertake a review of the characteristics of the river basin using methods set out in the WFD. 7. The competent authority should assess the impact of human activity in the river basin. 8. Assess all relevant and available information on industrial discharges, dangerous substances and wastewater discharges and plants. 9. Collect information on the extent and location of diffuse sources of pollution, in particular from agriculture. 10. Using data already available, identify waters that are affected by pollution. 11. Assemble data on water abstracted for drinking water, agricultural, industrial and other uses. 12. In collaboration with water suppliers, the competent authority should identify all existing and potential surface waters and groundwaters which are used or intended to be used as drinking water abstractions in each river basin. 13. The competent authority should undertake an economic analysis of water use including abstraction for drinking water, waste water discharges, forecasts of supply and demand and trends, and assessment of infrastructure needs. 14. Set up a register of protected areas in each river basin district., protected areas all being specified in the Directive, including those under EU nature protection legislation. Co- operation and co-ordination must be arranged between competent authorities, particularly those responsible for managing the protected areas. 15. Put in place arrangements to update the review of the river basin characteristics at 6 yearly intervals and other reviews. 16. Having gathered the relevant data, establish environmental objectives to apply in the river basin. 17. Within the defined river basins, establish the four basic types of surface water systems as rivers, lakes, estuaries and coastal, and assess the ecological status of each according to the range of physico-chemical, biological and hydromorphological characteristics as defined in the directive. 18. Place each body of water into one of three classes high quality, good quality and poor quality by comparing the data with historical information for the site concerned or for a similar site. 19. As there are few sites in Europe which are unaffected by anthropogenic activity, the Directive sets out criteria for establishing similar eco-types based on a number of natural parameters. 20. For groundwater, the quantitative status must be assessed by comparing variations in groundwater levels with associated rates of recharge and abstraction (both natural and artificial) in order to ascertain that the rate of abstraction does not exceed the long-term available resource. In addition, the chemical status of groundwater should be monitored. 21. Identify waters that, due to their natural condition will not achieve good water quality although all measures to improve them as identified in the river basin plan have been taken. 22. Identify specific bodies of water for which less stringent environmental objectives must be set. Include these objectives in the river basin plan. 23. Establish a programme of measures, as part of river basin plans containing information as set out in Annex VII to achieve the environmental objectives of the directive and other measures decided as necessary by the competent authority. 24. River basin plans may be supplemented by more detailed local action plans for particular aspects or for parts of the river network. 25. Establish a system of public consultation on river basin management plans which allows public access to draft copies of the plan at least one year prior to the start date, allowing 6

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 5 months for public comments to be received in writing. 26. Once public comments have been taken into account, a final plan must be published. Monitoringand 1. The competent authority must establish a monitoring programme to determine water Enforcement status. Annex V specifies the detailed monitoring and assessment criteria. 2. Designate monitoring sites according to Annex V, and monitor identified sites for parameters listed in Annex V. * The results of monitoring must be presented as: * Biological: a numerical value representing departure from the reference conditions of the site; * Chemical: a quality classification as "good quality " or "ailing to achieve good quality"; * Ecological: high quality, good quality, fair quality, poor quality or bad quality. These results must be presented on a map. 3. The competent authority / national agency will have to ensure that there is an exchange of biological data between the Member States to build up a set of data representing a selection of ecotype sites to be known as the intercalibration network. 4. Prepare emergency plans to respond to incidents and take restorative actions after pollution has occurred. Preventative measures should be identified. Risk assessment should be an integral part of the plans. Selection and 1. The competent authority should prepare a financial plan to provide water pricing policies Implemientationt for cost recovery for services provided for water users. of Economic 2. The cost recovery system adopted must, however, allow for an affordable domestic water Instrlmentts supply. Exemptions for payments may be granted within the river basin plan. Investigations should be undertaken to assess what is affordable for water consumers in the Candidate Country. 3. Exemptions from application of such water pricing policies may be granted provided this does not compromise the purpose and achievement of the objectives of the Directive, but the reasons for the same must be explained in the river basin plan.

Consultation 1. The Government should establish contact with other countries whose river basins cross and Reporting international boundaries. A jointly-run international River Basin Authority should be sought to be set up where necessary, if this is feasible. 2. The competent authority must organise suitable consultation mechanisms in order for the public to see and comment upon the river basin plans. 3. A reporting and recording system should be established on both a river basin and a national level with the associateddata bases to enable reports to be made to the public and to the Commission. 4. The competent authority must send copies of plans and programmes to the Commission. 5. Report to the Commission on: * River basin districts, including assigned groundwaters and coastal waters * Assignment details of the competent authorities; * Issues which fall outside the competence of the competent authorities but which affect water * management; * River basin plans for whole river basins; * Programmes and plans dealing with sub-basins, particular water issues or particular water classes or ecosystems; * Plans covering parts of international river basins. Source: Handbook on the Implementation of EC Environmental Legislation (2003)

C1.4 DRAFT RURAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATION (RDR)

The new draft EU Rural Development Regulation (RDR) was published by the European Commission in July 2004. The regulation forms the second pillar of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and will replace the current Council Regulation 1257/1999. It is proposed that it will provide almost £14 billion per year throughout the EU for rural development between 2007 and 2013. The

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 6 aim of the regulation is to encourage and sustain development in the rural areas of EU Member States.

The RDR requires that each Member State produce a rural development programme that implements certain measures of the RDR (with the agri- environment measure being compulsory, but all others optional).

The draft Regulation, together with a proposal on CAP financing, includes:

* The establishment of a special fund (EAFRD), separate from the normal CAP mechanisms, with simpler financial rules; * A requirement for European and national strategy documents; • Three priority axes for spending (see below), with detailed measures under each axis; * The requirement that a minimum of 25% of community support for each rural development programme is spent on land management, and a minimum of 15% is committed to each of the other two axes; * A significant strengthening of the role of LEADER (funding for local action groups in rural communities) within national rural development programmes; * A presumption that such local action groups should have the main role in implementing "wider rural" spending; * A process for revising the designation of less favoured areas; * The creation of a 'European Observatory of Rural Territories' to collect and disseminate information and best practice.

Thze priority axes and rural development measuires

The draft regulation proposes that the Member States' rural development programmes will implement national rural development strategies by taking a number of measures. These measures are grouped under the three priority axes:

* Improving the competitiveness of the agricultural and forestry sector; * Land management (including animal welfare); and * Diversification of the rural economy and improving the quality of life (in rural areas).

There are a range of measures (34 in total) outlined under each of the priority axes that are similar to the measures in the current RDR, but further streamlined and simplified.

For Axis I, the Commission proposes that the restructuring strategy would be built on measures relating to human and physical capital and quality aspects.

The Axis II strategy includes agri-environment schemes as a compulsory component and supports the sustainable use of agricultural and forestry land.

ENVIRONMENTALRESOURCES NIANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENTOFALBANIA 7 The draft regulation proposes that Member States redefine the existing Less Favoured Areas (LFA) delimitation of intermediate zones. The new delimitation is to be based on;

* Significant natural handicaps, in particular low soil productivity and climatic conditions and where maintaining extensive farming activity for land management is important; or * Low soil productivities and poor climatic conditions giving an indication of the difficulty of maintaining agricultural activity.

The proposed implementation method for Axis III is through local development strategies, either developed in close collaboration between national, regional and local authorities or implemented by using a bottom-up approach.

ENVIRONMENTALRESOURCES NIANAGEMENT GOVERNMIENTOF ALBANIA 8 ---- Annex D

List of Albanian Environmental NGOs

~~~~~~M~~~~ ALBANIAN ENVIRONMENTAL NGOs

(Source: Website of REC, Tirana)

1. Klubi Ekologjik, Lushnje Lgj. "Kongresi i Lushnjes", Pall.60, Ap.18, Lushnje Tel: (+355-35) 22 696 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Kujtim Isufi 2. Shoqata "Egnatia", Librazhd Lgj. 2, Pall.19, Librazhd Tel: (+355-514) 24 74 / 37 07 Faks: (+355-514) 24 09 Drejtues: Agim Blloshmi

3. Shoqata "Rruzulli i Gjelber", Durres Rr."Skenderbej", prane Shkolles se Muzikes "Jan Kukuzeli", Durres Tel/Faks: (+355-52) 24 959 Drejtues: Pellumb Hoxha

4. "Klubi i Ambjentalisteve Pogradecare" Rr."Reshit Collaku", Lgj.2, Pogradec Tel: (+355-83) 227 26 Drejtues: Vullnet Mullaj

5. Agjencia e Zhvillimit Ekonomik te Qendrueshem, Tirane Rr."Vaso Pasha", Pall.13/1, Ap.3, Tirane Tel: (+355) 38 20 20 319 Faks: (+355-4) 257 623 E-mail: [email protected] www.seda.org.al Drejtues: Genc Myftiu

6. Edukimi mjedisor "Eko Grup", Tirane Rr."M.Mara", Lgj. 1, Blloku "M. Grameno", nr. 37, Tirand Tel: (+355-4) 223 930 /372 792 Faks: (+355-4) 223 930 Drejtues: Erida Luka

7. Shoqata "Eko Integrim Retina", Lezhe Shkolla e mesme "H. Lezha", Lezhe Tel: (+355-215) 22 94 Drejtues: Ali Brahimi 8. Shoqata "Ekologu i Ri", Tirane Rr. "Asim Vokshi", Pall.141/1, Ap.14, Tirane Tel: (+355-4) 226 276 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Ama Mino

9. Instituti i Studimeve Ambjentale, Tirane Rr. "Qemal Stafa", nr. 130, Tirane Tel: (+355-4) 223 935 / 0692311018 Faks: (+355-4) 235 301 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Agron Deliu

10. Instituti Per Studimin e Natyres dhe Edukimin Ambjental ne Shqiperi Rr. "Myslym Shyri", Pall. 130/1 Ap. 8, Tirane Tel: (+355-4) 242 635 Faks: (+355-4) 242 635 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Nasip Me,aj

11. Shoqata "Juristet per Mbrojtjen e Mjedisit", Tirane Rr. "Maliq Mugo", Pall.46, Shk.1, Ap.4, Tirane Tel/Faks: (+355-4) 238 853 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Enio Haxhimihali

12. Klubi Ambjentalist, Kurbin Shkolla e mesme e p&rgjithshme "20 Ndntori", Milot Tel: (+355-62) 430/361 Drejtues: Ndue Pre,i

13. Klubi Ekologjik, Elbasan Lgj. "Aqif Pasha", Pall.494/1, Hyrja 2, nr. 1 5, Elbasan Tel: (+355-545) 86 98 / 0692295883 Drejtues: Ahmet Mehmeti

14. Klubi Ekologjik, Kruje Lagjia 2, KrujU Tel: (+355-511) 23 46 / 0682554422 Faks: (+355-511) 20 34 Drejtues: Muharrem Goci

15. Klubi Ekologjik, Lezhe Lgj. "Beselidhja", Pall.152, LezhE Tel/Faks: (+355-215) 28 62 Drejtues: Zef Ymeri

16. Klubi Ekologjik Shqiptar, Maliq Blloku 1, Pall. 9, Maliq, Korqc Tel: (+355-824) 29 54 Drejtues:Myzafer Gjiriti

17. Klubi Ekologjik, Fier Lgj. "Liri Gero", Pall. Parafabrikat, nr.2, Fier Tel: (+355-34) 22 806 /20 486 Drejtues: Adem Latifi

18. Klubi Femienor i Mjedisit, Tirane Rr."Asim Vokshi", Shkolla 8-vje,are "Lidhja e Prizrenit", TiranE Drejtues: Diana Veliaj

19. Klubi Rinor Mjedisor "PNL", Tirane Rr "Sami Frasheri", Shkolla "Petro Nini Luarasi", TiranE Tel: (+355-4) 224 447 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Margarita Krantja 20. Klubi Studentor Ambjentalist Shqiptar, Tirane Rr. "Myslym Shyri", Pall.55/2, Ap.2, Lgj. 5, Tirane Tel/Faks: (+355-4) 242 598 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Genti Beqo

21. Klubi Ekologjik, Mirdite Pall. 8/135, Reshen Drejtues: Bibe Dodaj 22. Klubi Rinor Mjedisor "Perla", Korse Rr."Ilo Trebicka", nr.4, Kor,ce Tel: (+355-824) 24 23 Faks: (+355-824) 33 34 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Ko,o Josifi

23. Mjedisi Natyror Jugor i Shqiperise, Gjirokaster Lagjia "18 Shtatori", prand Universitetit "E. Cabej", Gjirokastdr Tel: (+355-84) 65 685 Faks: (+355-84) 63 776 Drejtues: Lulzim Shuka

24. Natyra Nderkufitare, Kor;e Rr. "Pandeli Cale" nr. 26, Korcd Tel: (+355-824) 43 46 Faks: (+355-824) 30 37 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Stavri Pllaha

25. Progresi Pyjor, Kukes Lgj. 5, Pall. 5/2/5, Kukes Tel: (+355-242) 31 84 Drejtues: Isuf Omuri

26. Qendra per Eko-keshillime, Tirane Universiteti i Tirands, Fakulteti i Shkencave Natyrore, Blvd. "Zogu i Pard", Tirand P.O.Box 71 Tel: (+355-4) 226 961/ 068 20 36 084 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Kliti Ceca

27. Qendra per Eko-keshillime, Vlore Lgj. "24 Maji", nr. 28, Vlord Tel: (+355-33) 222 838 E-mail: eco [email protected] Drejtues: Dritan Arapi

28. Qendra Shqiptare per Studime dhe Zhvillime Mjedisore, Tirane Rr. "Kavajds", Nr.132, Muzeu i Shkencave Natyrore, Tirane Tel/Faks:(+355-4) 229 028 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Eltion Halimi

29. Klubi Ekologjik, Librazhd Shkolla e mesme e pErgjithshme, Librazhd Tel: (+355-514) 21 45 Drejtues: Sherif Prrenja 30. Shoqata "Divjaka-Ekoturizem", Divjake, Lushnje Tel: (+355-35) 22 650 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Enea Janko

31. Shoqata "Gruaja, higjena dhe mjedisi", Pogradec Tushemisht, Bucimas Drejtues: Liliana Llakmani

32. Klubi Ekologjik Diber Blv. "Elez Isufi", Pall.27, Peshkopi Tel/Faks: (+355-218) 36 11 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Luan Leka

33. Shoqata "Mbrojtesit e natyres" te Shqiperise Rr. Reshit Petrela, P. EDIKOM, Seksioni D8, Tirand Tel/Faks: (+355-4) 236 399 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Spiro Karadumi

34. Shoqata "Mjedisi dhe Minierat", Tirane I.T.N.P. Miniera, Blloku "Vasil Shanto", Tirand Tel: (+355-4) 258 829 Faks: (+355-4) 235 834 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Bardhyl Shushku

35. Shoqata "Per nje mjedis te dobishem", Reshen Blloku 1, Pall. 8/5, Rreshen Tel: (+355-216) 35 06 Drejtues: Ndue Tusha

36. Shoqata "Ruajtja e Pyjeve dhe Mjedisi Gjelber", Shkoder Rr. "Isuf Sokoli", Pall. 1209, Shkod&r Tel: (+355-22) 43 227 / 068 21 96 220 Faks: (+355-224) 39 04 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Petrit Imeraj

37. Shoqata "Turizmi dhe Mjedisi" Pogradec Blv. "Reshit Qollaku", Pogradec Tel: (+355-83) 223 09 /068 25 19 111 Drejtues: Naum Gegprifti

38. Shoqata Ambjentaliste "Gjinari",Elbasan Gjinar, Elbasan Tel: (+355-545) 98 44 Drejtues: Avram Binjaku

39. Shoqata Ambjentaliste "Kristal", LaS Lgj. 2, Pall. 41, Ap. 5, Lac Tel: (+355-536) 20 42 Drejtues: Fatbardha Pojani

40 Shoqata Ambjentaliste "Lilium albanicum", Librazhd Prand KUshillit te Rrethit, Librazhd Tel: (+355-514) 22 72 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Ferit Hysa 41. Shoqata Didaktike Shkencore Speleologjike Shqiptare, Tirane Rr. e Elbasanit, Universiteti i Tiranes, Dep. i Gjeografise, Tirane Tel: (+355-4) 224 109 / 362 266 Faks: (+355-4) 224 109 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Perikli Qiriazi 42. Shoqata e Ambjentalisteve "Gramshi", Gramsh Lgj. "Xhile Lici", Gramsh Drejtues: Harun Sulmina

43. Shoqata e Bujqesise Organike, Tirane Rr. "Sami Frasheri", Sheshi Wilson, Pallati i ri prane FEFAD Bank, Kati i 8, TiranE Tel/ Faks: (+355-4) 250 575 E-mail: lavdoshgicc-al.org www.organic.org.al Drejtues: Lavdosh Ferruni

44. Shoqata e Gjuetareve Sportive, Diber Blv. "Elez Isufi", Peshkopi Tel: (+355-218) 21 74 Drejtues: Dilaver Nela

45. Shoqata e Higjienisteve te Shqiperise, Tirane Rr."Mine Peza", Pall.248, Ap.9, Tirane Tel/Faks: (+355-4) 229 322 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Lumturi Shehati

46. Shoqata e Inxhinierise Ekologjike Shqiptare, Tirane Rr. "Shyqyri Berxolli" Vila 78/1, Tirane Tel/Faks: (+355-4) 239 526 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Fatos Tusha

47. Shoqata e Mbrojtjes se Gjallesave Ujore te Shqiperise, Tirane Rruga e Kavajds, nr.132, Muzeu i Shkencave te Natyr6s, Tirand Tel/Faks: (+355-4) 229 028 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Saimir Beqiraj

48. Shoqata e Menaxhimit te Shelgut Shqiperi, Koplik Drejtoria e Sherbirnit Pyjor, Malesi e Madhe Tel/Faks: (+355-211) 26 27 /068 23 83 000 Drejtues: Islam Lacaj

49. Shoqata e Ruajtjes dhe Zhvillimit Mjedisor, Mat Rr."Keshilltaret", Lgj. "Drita", Burrel Tel: (+355-217) 34 23 Drejtues: Ismail Hoxha

50. Shoqata e Ruajtjes dhe Mbrojtjes se Mjedisit Natyror, Berat Prand Zyres se Punds, Berat Kutia Postare 2 Tel: (+355-32) 32 001 Drejtues: Lu,iana Heqimi

51. Shoqata e Ruajtjes dhe Mbrojtjes se Mjedisit Natyror ne Shqiperi Blv "Zogu I", Pall.97, Shk.1, Ap.5, Tirand Tel/Faks: (+355-4) 249 571 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Dhurata Frasheri

52. Shoqata e Ruajtjes dhe Mbrojtjes se Mjedisit Natyror, Shkoder Lgj. "Vojo Kushi", Rr. "Qlirimi", nr. 67, Shkoder Tel/Faks: (+355-224) 43 688 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Fatbardh Sokoli

53. Shoqata per Mbrojtjen e Mjedisit, Kuqove Instituti i Kimi - Perpunimit te Naftes, Ku,ovd Tel: (+355-311) 29 53 /22 62 Drejtues: Vasil Mistrovica

54. Shoqata per Ruajtjen dhe Mbrojtjen e Mjediseve Natyrore ne Shqiperi, Lushnje Gorre, Lushnj6 Tel: (+355-35) 22 495 /27 570 Drejtues: Vera Bitri

55. Shoqata per Ruajtjen e Shpendeve dhe Kafsheve te Egra te Shqiperise, Tirane Rruga e Kavajes, Muzeu i Shkencave te Natyres, Tirane Tel/Faks: (+355-4) 229 028 / 367 579 Drejtues: Nikolla Peja

56. Shoqata Shqiptare e Biologeve, Tirane Universiteti i Tiranes, Fakulteti i Shkencave Natyrore, Tirand Tel: (+355-4) 225 454 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Kastriot Misja

57. Shoqata Shqiptare e Ekologjise Industriale, Tirane Rr. "Maliq Mu,o", Pall.46, Shk.1, Ap. 4, Tirand Tel/Faks: (+355-4) 238 853 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Dhimiter Haxhimihali

58. Shoqata Shqiptare e Gjeologeve Inxhinierike dhe e Gjeomjedisit, Tirane Rr. "Sami Frasheri", nr. 31, Tirand Tel: (+355-4) 222 259 Faks: (+355-4) 227 360 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Defrim Shkupi

59. Shoqata Shqiptare e Mbrojtjes nga Rrezatimet, Tirane Instituti i Fizikes Berthamore, Kutia postare 85, Tirane Tel/Faks: (+355-4) 362 596 Drejtues: Kostandin Dollani

60. Shoqata e Mjedisit "Morava", KorVe Lgj. 12, Rr. "Gjergj Kastrioti", Pall.2 Ap.3, Korce Tel: (+355-824) 41 81 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Bardhyl Panolli 61. Shoqata "Kadmi dhe Harmonia", Pogradec Rr. "Gani Homcani", Lgj. 3, Pall. 87, Pogradec Tel: (+355-83) 22 221 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Arben Zace 62. Shoqata "Masmedia dhe Mjedisi", Tirane Rr. Gani Domi, P11.2, Shk. 2 Ap. 21, Tirane Tel/Faks:(+355-4) 364 100 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Xhemal Mato

63. Shoqata Kombetare e Flores dhe Faunes Dekorative, Tirane Prapa kafe "Evropa", Godina 1 kateshe, Tirane Tel: (+355-4) 368 812 Drejtues: Ndini Bardhi

64. Shoqata "Mjedisi dhe Shendeti", Lezhe Lgj. "Beslidhja", Lezhe Tel: (+355-215) 22 02 Drejtues: Gjergj Elezi

65. Shoqata per Mbrojtjen e Parqeve dhe Burimeve Natyrore, Las Lgj.3, Pall. 83/3, Lac Tel: (+355-53) 63 805 Drejtues: Petrit Bushi

66. Shoqata Mjedisore "Kelmendi", Malesi e Madhe Vermosh, Malesi e Madhe Tel: (+355-224) 23 36 / 81 68 Drejtues: Ilir Nacaj

67. Shoqata "ALBAFOREST", Tirane Rr. 4 Shkurti, nr. 36, Tirane Tel: (+355-4) 369 712 Drejtues: Mehmet Meta

68. Fondacioni "Agrinas" Shqiperi, Erseke Blloku 6, Erseke Tel: (+355-812) 24 01/24 15 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Paskal Vogli

69. Shoqata "Komuniteti dhe Pyjet", Tirane Tel: (+355-4) 253 753 Drejtues: Maxhun Dida

70. Shoqata Shkencore e Studenteve Pylltare, Tirane Tel: (+355-4) 353 872 Drejtues: Mirvjena Kellezi

71. Shoqata "Mjedisi ne Fokus", Tirane Rr."Mine Peza", Pall.135, Shk.2, Ap.22, Tirane Tel: (+355-4) 258 112 / 069 22 61 868 Faks: (+355-4) 222 963/259 653 E-mail: [email protected] / [email protected] Drejtues: Perparim Laze

72. Shoqata Kombetare e Gjuetareve Sportive te Shqiperis, Tirane Rr. "Fadil Rada", nr. 44, Tirand Tel: (+355-4) 222 769 Drejtues: Themi Perri

73. Shoqata mjedisore "ALPIN", Tropoje Lgj. "Dardania", Pll. 3, Ap. 4, Tropoje Tel/Faks: (+355-213) 20 40 Drejtues: Riza Lataj

74. Lidhja Shkodrane per Mbrojtjen e Burimeve Peshkore, Shkoder Kongresi i Permetit, Oso Kuka 97, Shkoder Tel: (+355-22) 43 930 / 068 21 51 930 Drejtues: Rasim Suma

75. Shoqata Shqipetare e Speleologjise, Qendra Kombetare, Shkoder Daut Borigi, Shkoder Tel: (+355-22) 41 137 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Gezim Uruci

76. Shoqata Ekologjike "Labeat", Shkoder Kiras, Shkoder Tel: (+355-22) 43 248 Drejtues: Ahmet Osja

77. Shoqata Rinore Mjedisore "Ylber", Shkoder Universiteti i Shkodres, Shkoder Tel: (+355) 68 21 92297 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Enton Kashta

78. Shoqata e Mbrojtjes se Trashegimise Natyrore, Malesi e Madhe Drejtoria Arsimore, Koplik Tel: (+355-22) 72 047 E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Marash Rakaj

79. Shoqata Shqiptare per Edukim Mjedisor, Shkoder Bahcallek, Alqi Kondi, 257, Shkoder Tel: (+355-22) 40 327/068 21 97 571 / 069 22 19 986 Faks: (+355-22) 40 327 Drejtues: Sashenka Muca

80. Shoqata "Perdoruesit e pyjeve dhe kullotave komunale", Has Lagjia 2, Krume, Has E-mail: [email protected] Drejtues: Gazmend Peka 81. Shoqata "Erzeni", Shijak Lagjia Popullore, Shijak Tel: (+355-52) 223 52 Drejtues: Artin Demiri 82. Shoqata e Higjenisteve te Shkodres, Shkoder Tel: (+355-22) 24111 Drejtues: Merzuk Hoxha

83. Shoqata "Erzeni" Lagja Popullore, Shijak, Durres Tel: (+355-52) 22352 Drejtues: Artin Demiri

84. Mbrojtja e Mjedisit Alpin Lagja Dardania, Pll. Rinia, Shk. 2, Tropoje Tel: (+355-213) 2616 Drejtues: Ahmet Metaliaj

85. Shoqata Eko-turistike Puke Fushe Arrez, Puke Tel: (+355-271) 3185 Drejtues: Gjovalin Alia

86. Qendra per Komunikimin Elektronik (QKE) Rr. Durresit, Pll. 102/3, Ap. 21, Tirane Tel: (+355-4) 226200 E-mail: [email protected] www.qke-al.org Drejtues: Ladi Balla Annex E

Main Watersheds in Albania Main Watersheds of Albania

MAP OF MAIN WVATERSHEDS OF ALBANIA mcSrale1 1 0nnnnn

Prepar~- .1 , Leen EC AT - ;;at.

1. The Drini watershed, which includes that part of Drini Zi catchment which is inside the Albanian territory, the catchment of main Drini (downstream of the confluence of Drini Zi and Drini Bardhe), the Albanian part of Buna catchment and the minor part of the Danube catchment which is in Albania: It is the largest watershed area in Albania. It covers about of 19,354 km2, and with an average annual water flow of about 700 m3/second, its average discharge ranks second (after the Po River - Italy) in the Adriatic Sea. In addition, a major tributary flows from Kosovo and another portion of the main stem flows through Macedonia. There are several power generating stations, with reservoirs, on the river, making the watershed, and the attendant sedimentation problems, extremely important to the nation's economy and energy supply. The watershed is largely forested and subjected to illegal timber harvest, a factor that can contribute to increased erosion, sedimentation, and possibly flooding.

2. The Mati watershed, covering the Mati catchment: The Mati River, adjacent to the Drini on the south, has many of the same attributes. It is a moderate sized watershed with significant flooding and sedimenta-tion problems in the lower reaches. Water quality is also a concern, especially with respect to loss of fishery. Economically, the area is very poor and the need to improve economic sustainability is a factor. Lezha is the largest population centre near the watershed.

3. The Shkumbini watershed, covering the Shkumbini catchment: The Shkumbini River watershed is moderate sized, totally contained within Albania, readily accessible, and a short distance from Tirana. The watershed contains high forest as well as coppice forest and brushland. Agricultural activity includes cropping, grazing, and orchard production. Industrial pollution exists from past ore activity and municipal wastes degrade water quality. Like most other river basins, gravel mining occurs in numerous places throughout the watershed and is a significant factor in river stability. The population of the watershed is growing and future expansion is inevitable with the development of the East-West Corridor 8 that passes through the watershed connecting Lake Ohrid and Macedonia with Tirana and the seaport at Durres. Those factors responsible for current watershed degradation are most likely to increase in the Shkumbini watershed.

4. The Semani watershed, which covers the Semani catchment (including both main tributaries Devolli and Osumi) and the small area that drains into the lakes Ohrid, Large Prespa and Small Prespa: The Semani River drains an accessible watershed with significant sedimentation, flooding, and water quality issues. It contains forestry, agricultural, and industrial activities. The lower portion of the watershed is severely impacted by petroleum contamination from abandoned oil wells in the vicinity of Fier. The oil field pollution represents a point source for which technology exists to correct or mitigate the problem. The fact the problem exists, however, limits the evaluation that can be made of other physical and biological impacts on the aquatics of the watershed.

5. The Ishmi and Erzeni watershed, covering the Ishmi and Erzeni catchment: The Ishmi and Erzini rivers drain from two small watersheds with significant urbanization related problems. Because of their proximity to the Tirana - Durres corridor they are heavily populated and economically very important. Although gravel mining is quite extensive in both drainages, they lack the forest expanse of the larger, higher watersheds and they have a declining agriculture base, thus limiting the suite of resource related activities that are relevant to the defined problems and the Assessment. 6. The Vjosa watershed, which includes that part of Vjosa catchment that is inside the Albanian territory, the catchment of Kalasa, Bistrica and Pavlla rivers and the southern coastal zone: Although the Vjosa River is the closest to being the only one (at that scale) draining a "pristine" watershed in Albania it is one of the greatest sediment producers and subject to flooding in the coastal plain. Although the watershed contains several population centers, it is perceived to be the least impacted of the six watersheds. Unfortunately, an uncontrolled portion of the watershed lies outside Albania. Annex F

Scoping of Potential Environmental Impacts of the NRDP

~~I I I II Fl SCOPING OF PoTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE NRDP

The potential environmental impacts (both positive and negative) of the various physical interventions envisaged under the NRDP are discussed below, and summarised (along with recommended mitigation measures) in the main EA report.

A. On-farm interventions on rain-fed and irrigatedland

Positive Impacts

As discussed earlier, the NRDP should primarily lead to environmental benefits owing to it objective of reversing land and watershed degradation in the upland areas of Albania. More specifically, a range of benefits should arise as a result of the on-farm interventions planned under the project, as follows:

* Soil erosion will be reduced since soil that is exposed to water and wind erosion during the fallow period will be covered with vegetation; * Increased vegetative cover will increase the moisture retention capacity of the land, thereby reducing surface runoff, soil erosion and flood risk downstream during storm events; * Producing forage crops on the fallow land will reduce the pressure on the rangelands; * Introducing legumes will improve soil productivity by adding nitrogen to the soil and increasing organic matter content and will increase resistance to erosion through increased soil stability; * Increased practice of crop rotations will halt the depletion of soil moisture and nutrients and the build-up of weeds, pests and diseases; * Cereal yields will be increased on flat land. This will reduce the need for additional plots for cereal production that are mostly marginal and fragile; * Pocket terrraces made under trees will improve moisture holding capacity and prevent erosion; * Increased production of vegeta bles, fruit and forage products on expanded irrigated land will reduce the need for additional plots for cereal production on marginal and fragile lands.

Negative Impacts

Despite the overall positive impact of the scheme, there are a number of potentially negative impacts that may arise from the proposed on-farm interventions and that will consequently need to be monitored and if necessary addressed by the EMF.

The current usage of fertilizers, herbicides and insecticides is negligible to non-existent in the proposed project areas. The risk that support for fertilizer application to establish newly planted crops may lead to inappropriate application methods and increased nutrient runoff into downstream watercourses and/or groundwater (with accumulation of nutrients at the watershed level) to the extent that it would become an environmental risk is

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCEsNMANAGEMENT GOVERNNIENTOFALBANIA 1 considered to be very low, particularly since only limited fertilization support will be provided during the first year of planting and farmers do not currently have the financial resources to continue application thereafter. Similarly, the risk that the successful introduction of crops that are relatively agro-chemical dependent (e.g. fruits, vines etc) would lead to the future uptake of such chemicals as it became financially viable for farmers to do so is considered very low.(l) However, these risks will be managed through provision of effective and appropriate advice and training when providing support to establish newly planted crops.

Finally, the small-scale rehabilitation of agricultural ponds and tertiary-level irrigation systems, although relatively insignificant at the watershed level, could potentially lead to localised water supply conflicts, e.g. where water from small upland streams with limited baseflows are utilised for agricultural or other purposes by more than one riparian community or individual. These would need to be identified and managed within the confines of the MC planning process, as discussed below.

B. On-farn interventions concerning marginal lands

Positive Impacts

A range of environmental benefits should arise as a result of the on-farm interventions planned in marginal areas, as follows:

* Soil erosion will be reduced since soil that is more exposed to water and wind erosion during the annual crop cycle will be covered with a perennial crop; * Reducing cultivated agriculture on slopes that frequently involves soil tillage parallel to the slope (rather than along contours) will stop the creation of small furrows in the land that cause significant soil erosion and soil productivity loss; * Producing forage crops on slopes will create additional land for livestock needs and reduce the pressure on the rangelands; * Increased vegetative cover will increase the moisture retention capacity of the land, thereby reducing surface runoff, soil erosion and flood risk downstream during storm events; * introducing legumes will improve soil productivity by adding nitrogen to the soil and increasing organic matter content and will increase resistance to erosion through increased soil stability; * Producing perennial herbs such as thyme on slopes will reduce soil erosion, and reduce pressure on wild sources.

Negative Impacts

As for A above, there are a number of potentially negative impacts that may arise from the proposed interventions on marginal land that will consequently need to be monitored and if necessary addressed by the EMF. These would

(1) Support for agricultural intensification through provision of seed and fruit trees will be limited to 5-10 ha (or less) in each of the 30 micro-catchments, distributed in three of Albania's major watersheds (Drini, 570,945 ha, Ntati 246,870 ha, and Shkumbini, 246,003 ha).

ENVIRONNhENTALRESOURCES NIANAGENhENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 2 include the issues surrounding potential fertiliser and pesticide runoff, which would be low risk and similar to those discussed above for on-farm interventions on rain-fed and irrigated land. In addition, whilst the interventions are designed to reduce soil erosion, there is a small risk that in some instances they may actually induce erosion, for example if previously abandoned and sloping land that has since acquired protective vegetative cover is turned over to annual crops that require regular soil disturbance. Another example would be if the introduction of forage crops to an area produced an increase in livestock numbers and hence an increased risk of erosion of unstable soils. Both of these situations would be fairly straightforward to mitigate through the careful planning and management of all marginal land activities within the MC planning process.

C. Support to livestock, apiculture and aquacultiure

Positive Impacts

Environmental benefits that should arise as a result of the project activities relating to this group are as follows:

* Introduction of new and more productive breeds of milking cows and sheep and support to apiculture and aquaculture/trout farming would result in reduced pressure on forests from grazing goats; * Producing forage crops for cows and sheep on slopes will create additional land for livestock needs and reduce pressure on the rangelands.

Negative Impacts

As for previous groups of activities, there are a number of potentially negative impacts that may arise from the proposed interventions that would need to be addressed by the EMF. For instance, the introduction of more productive breeds of livestock could result in more rather than less pressure on land unless numbers are carefully managed, since more productive animals will consume more to produce the increased quantities of milk. This could result in increased land degradation and erosion if numbers are not limited to below existing headcounts to counterbalance the increased milk production rates. In order to mitigate this risk, agreements to limit stock numbers will be made with project beneficiaries as part of the micro-catchment planning process, and monitored by headcounts during implementation.

Another potentially negative, although relatively low risk, impact from the livestock related interventions is that the provision of veterinary medicines could lead to water pollution and related public health problems unless the disposal of used chemicals is carefully handled. Simple control measures would include the avoidance of uncontrolled dumping of used sheep dip upstream of water abstraction points or preventing animals under treatment from defecating in or around water bodies.

Finally, the introduction of fish-farming could also have potentially negative consequences for water resources, in that the high nutrient concentrations and

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCEs NMANAGENIENT GO'ERNPNENTOF ALBANIA 3 pond management chemicals that generally characterize farm discharges could pollute downstream water bodies. This is particularly the case when ponds are periodically flushed, releasing highly concentrated slugs of pollution over short periods of time. Moreover, offline ponds can also disrupt local water users as filling or emptying takes place.

D. Off-fann mnianagement of comniunnalforests and pastures

Positive Impacts

As discussed earlier, the NRDP should primarily lead to environmental benefits owing to its objective of reversing land and watershed degradation in the upland areas of Albania. More specifically, a range of benefits should arise from the improved management of communal forests and pastures as follows:

* Planting, fencing, and erosion control measures will protect and support rehabilitation of most degraded forest and pastures transfered to communes; * Coppicing and thinning will improve quality, health and productivity of communal forests; * Construction and/or rehabilitation of water points will increase availability of water resources both for livestock and wild animals; * Planting fruit-trees, medicinals plants and bushes will help land stabilisation and protection against erosion; * Reforestation of forests areas damaged by fires and subject of soil erosion and land degradation will help their regeneration, and will stabilise and protect the land; * Planting forage crops and trees will cover the soil and protect the surface from erosion and runoff.

In addition to the above, there are also anticipated global environmental benefits from the project arising from carbon sequestration as a result of the planned reforestation activities. Project resources (about US$ 1.8 million) would be allocated to 30 of the 138 communes, which previously received support under the Albania Forestry Project (AFP), to help them assist natural regeneration in about 6,200 ha. This US$ 1.8 million would be additional to the planned support for implementation of forest and pasture management plans in the 138 communes which previously received support under the AFP, and to the planned support for implementation of such management plans in another 80 additional communes (with a budget ceiling of US$30,000 and US$40,000 respectively) under the NRDP. Carbon credits (up to about US$ 2 million) could derive from trade in Kyoto Protocol compliant carbon associated with sequestration in this context, subject to successful negotiation of an Emissions Reductions Purchase Agreement between Albania and the BioCarbon Fund by December 2005.

Finally, and importantly, it should also be mentioned that evidence from the previous AFP appears to suggest that the shift towards sustainable land-use

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES NIANAGENIENT GOV'ERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 4 practices induced by the project is likely to be sustainable, in that project interventions were welcomed, protected and augmented by communities that participated in the AFP.

Negative Impacts

As for previous groups of activities, although the overall environmental impacts of the project are judged to be positive, there are a number of potentially negative impacts that may arise from the proposed interventions and that will need to be addressed by the EMF. These are discussed below.

Since there are no mechanized activities envisaged under the project, and all forestry interventions will be carried out in a traditional and basic manner using hand tools and manual labour, there is unlikely to be any significant risk of soil compaction of disturbance, or natural habitat disruption as a result of the works. Moreover, there are no chemical applications (e.g. herbicides or pesticides) or biological control measures planned or likely to take place under the project, since the financing for such measures is simply not available (as was the experience during the AFP). Pest outbreaks, for example from the Gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar) which is indigenous to broadleaf forests in Europe, will, if they occur, most likely be left to run their course.

The installation of fencing around newly planted areas could theoretically impact on local wildlife, for example by disrupting migratory routes or breeding areas. However, the fencing will only be temporary and constructed from local brush, and so is unlikely to provide any significant disturbance to wildlife or their habitats. The installation of fencing around areas that are presently grazed could also lead to the intensification of grazing on adjacent and nearby land, leading to loss of vegetation and soil cover and increased erosion. However, it is understood that the communes that have committed to the aforementioned carbon sequestration project have all agreed to reduce their herd sizes and/or alter patterns of grazing in order to mitigate this risk. In addition, there is no evidence from the AFP that the 1,200 hectares of afforestation that took place under that project has led to overgrazing in adjacent areas.

Another source of environmental risk is that local shepherds use fire as a traditional method to promote shoot growth prior to grazing, which could spread to re-forested areas as livestock is moved off onto new pastures. However, this is thought to be less of risk now that user rights have been transferred to communes and consequently the sense of ownership of and responsibility for the land has increased. Also, the project areas are themselves spread over a wide geographic area, so the risk of the occurrence of extensive fire damage in this way is small.

Another potential threat to the environment is where Robinia pseludoaccacia is used excessively in the reforestation process which could consequently lead to competition with local species in areas where this species is planted. Robinia is favoured by many communes since it is rapidly established and, in addition

ENVIRONMENTALRESOURCES' ANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 5 to its erosion control function, provides an excellent source of firewood, fence poles, honey and fodder. As a result, it is widely found in Albania (indeed it is fairly common throughout Europe, where it has existed for several hundred years) and was used fairly extensively during the AFP. Whilst Robinia is documented as an intolerant species, in practical terms its introduction to project areas is unlikely to represent a significant threat to biodiversity, particularly since planting will mainly be used to enhance succession and regeneration of existing species, and not in monoculture, and will be supplemented by native broadleaf (oak, chestnut, maple, birch and walnut) grown from local seeds. However, whilst the risk is low it is recommended as discussed below that the introduction of Robinia is carried out in a relatively controlled manner.

In relation to other activities being carried out under this group of activities, the construction of small erosion control structures and maintenance and/or protection of existing infrustructure such as roads, tracks or bridges could, if not properly designed and carried out, exacerbate erosion problems and also lead to habitat disturbance. Suitable engineering supervision is therefore required (see below). In addition, the construction of check dams could potentially have an impact on aquatic habitats by changing water levels and flow characteristics in streams. However, since the dams are relatively small these impacts will be highly localised and are unlikely to have much of a consequence. Finally, the siting and rehabilitation of livestock watering points should take account of any water users immediately downstream that may be affected, for example households that use the watercourse for drinking, washing or bathing.

E. Off-farm support to stateforest and pastutre managemnent

Positive Impacts

A range of benefits should arise from the improved management of state forests and pastures as follows:

* Support to habitat and landscape restoration; * Increased habitat diversity and productivity; * Decreased damages caused by large mammals to farmers; * Decreased competition between wild and domesticated ungulates; * Increased access, awareness and enjoyment of nature and biodiversity; * Reduced landslides, sedimentation and flooding; * Reduced risk of avalanches during winter time to upland mountainous areas.

In addition, improved access to nature (e.g. through improved tracks and trails) will help awareness raising and change local people behaviour towards the natural environment.

Negative Impacts

ENVIRONNIENTALRESOURCES MIANAGENIENT GOVERNNIENTOF ALBANIA 6 The potential negative environmental impacts of this group of activities are similar in nature to those discussed under D above.

With regards to the additional activity of promoting recreation in conservation areas, there is a small risk that this may lead to secondary and indirect impacts through the increased access that will be provided. A basic example would be that tracks established for recreational purposes could be used by commercial hunters, loggers or suchlike and thereby stimulate the further degradation of the habitats that the project is designed to protect. Another example would be the increased risk of forest fires that enhanced public access would bring.

ENVIRONMENTALRESOURCES MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOF ALBANIA 7