GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY ROMANIA DANUBE DELTA BIODIVERSITY PROJECT LOCAL BENEFITS CASE STUDY REPORT WORKING DOCUMENT DO NOT QUOTE OR CITE March 2005 Mirela Apostol (National Consultant) Michael M Cernea (GEF/WB) Alexandra Clemett (SEI) Nicoleta Damian (National Consultant) Dirk R Frans (SEI) Veronica Mitroi (National Consultant) Emil Pîslaru (National Consultant) Cosima Rughinis (SEI) STOCKHOLM ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE Global Environment Facility Romania DDBP Local Benefits Case Study Report (Draft) Page i of vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................................................................................III EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................................................IV ABBREVIATIONS AND GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................................................VI 1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Background to the GEF and the study ............................................................................... 1 1.2 The Danube Delta and its global importance ...................................................................... 2 1.3 The Romania Danube Delta Biodiversity Project ............................................................... 2 1.3.1 Project components.................................................................................................. 3 1.3.2 Implementation modalities ....................................................................................... 3 1.4 Study Terms of Reference .................................................................................................. 3 1.5 Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 4 1.5.1 Overall methodology ................................................................................................ 4 1.5.2 Broad study.............................................................................................................. 4 1.5.3 Follow-up study ....................................................................................................... 5 1.6 Scope and limitations......................................................................................................... 5 1.7 Lay-out of the report .......................................................................................................... 6 2 MAIN FINDINGS ON PROJECT IMPACTS.................................................................................................................7 2.1 Overview of findings........................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Local benefits in project preparation ................................................................................. 7 Project preparation and project concept ............................................................................... 7 Design and Implementation................................................................................................. 9 Operation/follow -up.......................................................................................................... 11 2.3 Capacity building of DDBRA and DDNI .......................................................................... 12 2.4 Component 1: strengthening of the Warden’s department............................................... 13 2.5 Component 2: capacity to monitor and manage natural resources................................... 16 2.6 Component 3: restoration of polders ................................................................................ 17 2.7 Component 4: ecosystems restoration and pilot activities ................................................. 19 2.8 Component 5: public awareness and community involvement.......................................... 21 2.9 Natural resources management systems and local benefits............................................... 23 2.10 Long term impact of concession system on fish stocks...................................................... 23 3 IMPACTS OF THE CONCESSION SYSTEM .............................................................................................................25 3.1 Key characteristics of the concession system .................................................................... 25 3.2 Nature of the concessions system...................................................................................... 26 3.3 Current regulation of professional fishing........................................................................ 26 3.4 Concessions and fishermen incomes ................................................................................. 27 3.5 Concessions and labor relations....................................................................................... 29 3.6 Concessions and family fishing......................................................................................... 30 3.7 Concessions and sport fishing........................................................................................... 30 3.8 Concessions and poaching ................................................................................................ 31 3.9 Concessions, reported captures and the black market...................................................... 33 4 ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................................................................35 4.1 The Danube Delta population and their livelihoods .......................................................... 35 4.2 Livelihoods, gender and local needs .................................................................................. 37 4.2.1 Fishing.................................................................................................................. 37 4.2.2 Agriculture ............................................................................................................ 38 4.2.3 Tourism ................................................................................................................. 39 4.2.4 The socio-economic position of women................................................................... 41 4.2.5 Local needs ............................................................................................................ 41 4.3 Livelihood analysis........................................................................................................... 43 Global Environment Facility Romania DDBP Local Benefits Case Study Report (Draft) Page ii of vi 4.3.1 Impacts on livelihood capitals................................................................................. 43 4.3.2 Impacts on livelihood opportunities ........................................................................ 43 4.3.3 Impact on gender equity ......................................................................................... 47 4.3.4 Impacts on stakeholder vulnerability....................................................................... 47 4.4 Missed opportunities........................................................................................................ 47 4.4.1 Opportunities for project design and implementation .............................................. 47 4.4.2 Opportunities for further intervention ..................................................................... 48 4.5 Conclusions...................................................................................................................... 49 5 LESSONS LEARNED........................................................................................................................................................51 APPENDIX A: TERMS OF REFERENCE..............................................................................................................................I APPENDIX B: METHODOLOGY OF FOLLOW-UP STUDY........................................................................................XI APPENDIX C: ACTIVITIES AND PEOPLE ME..............................................................................................................XIV APPENDIX D: INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE ......................................................................................................... XVI APPENDIX E: NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT IN THE DANUBE DELTA FROM 1877-1994XVIII APPENDIX E: SOCIO-POLITICAL TIMELINE.............................................................................................................XXIV APPENDIX F: ALTERNATIVE PERSPECTIVE ON THE PROJECT PROVIDED BY Dr. GONZALO CASTRO……………………………………………………………………………………………………………XXVII Global Environment Facility Romania DDBP Local Benefits Case Study Report (Draft) Page iii of vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report has been made possible by the input from many individuals, which the study team gratefully acknowledges. The first people we would like to thank are from the World Bank – Romania office, through which the Danube Delta Biodiversity Project was managed. Mrs. Ana Maria Ihora (Program Assistant, World Bank, Romania) went out of her way to make all the logistical arrangements for the field work