Document of The International Development Association Acting as Administrator of the Interim Trust Fund FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No. P 7085-IVC MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION ON A PROPOSED INTERIM TRUST FUND CREDIT IN AN AMOUNT OF SDR 29.6 MILLION TO THE REPUBLIC OF C(TE D'lVOIRE FOR A RURAL LAND MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT April 28, 1997 This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (April 1996) Currency Unit = CFA franc US$ 1.00 = CFA franc 505 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES metric system ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ARPP Annual Review of Project Portfolio Performance ANADER National Rural Development Agency (Agence Nationale d'Appui au Dveloppement Rural) CAS Country Assistance Strategy CBNRM Community-Based Natural Resources Management CFD French Development Agency (Caisse Franqaise de D6veloppement) BNETD Study Bureau of the President of C6te d'Ivoire; formerly DCGTx (Bureau National d'Etudes Techniques et de D6veloppement) EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return EU European Union FRAR Regional Rural Equipment Funds (Fonds Rdgionaux d'Am6nagement Rural) GDP Gross Domestic Product ha hectare IDA International Development Association ITF Interim Trust Fund LDP Local Development Plan MDPDI Ministry of Planning and Industry (Ministre du Plan et du Dveloppement Industriel) MEF Ministry of Economy and Finance MINAGRA Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (Minist&re de I'Agriculture et des Ressources Animales) MIIN Ministry of Interior and National Integration (Ministre de l'Intirieur et de l'Intigration Nationale) MST Multi-disciplinary Support Team NEAP National Environmental Action Plan NRM Natural Resources Management PFR Rural Land Plan (Plan Foncier Rural) PNAGER Programme National de Gestion de L'Espace Rural PNGTER Rural Land Management and Community Infrastructure Development Project (Projet National de Gestion des Terroirs et d'Equipement Rural) PPF Project Preparation Facility RLTC Rural Land Tenure Commissions SDR Special Drawing Rights UNDP United Nations Development Program GOVERNMENT FISCAL YEAR January 1 = December 31 Vice President - Jean-Louis Sarbib Country Director - Shigeo Katsu Technical Manager - Jean-Paul Chausse Task Team Leader - Giuseppe Topa FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY REPUBLIC OF COTE D'IVOIRE RURAL LAND MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PNGTER) CREDIT AND PROJECT SUMMARY Borrower: Republic of C6te d'Ivoire Implementing Office of the Prime Minister Agencies: Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources Ministry of Planning and Industry Beneficiaries: The Borrower and Rural Communities (1.3 million rural dwellers of whom 70 percent are poor) Poverty: Program of Targeted Interventions Amount: SDR 29.6 million (US$41.0 million equivalent) Terms: Standard, with 40 years maturity Commitment Fee: 0.50 percent on undisbursed credit balances, beginning 60 days after signing, less any waiver Onlending Terms: NA Financing Plan: See Schedule A Net Present Value Net present value of revenue generating components US$91.7 million. Net present value of all project components US$43.0 million. Staff Appraisal Report No. 16378-IVC Map IBRD No. 28668 Project Identification Number: 1194 This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION ON A PROPOSED INTERIM TRUST FUND CREDIT TO THE REPUBLIC OF C(TE D'IVOIRE FOR A RURAL LAND MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 1. I submit for your approval the following memorandum and recommendation on a proposed credit to the Republic of C6te d'Ivoire for SDR 29.6 million, the equivalent of (US$41.0 million), on standard IDA terms, with a maturity of 40 years, to help finance a project aimed at reversing the current process of natural resource and environmental degradation, in order to secure sustainable agricultural production and growth, alleviate poverty, and improve the living conditions of C6te d'Ivoire's rural communities. Country/Sector Background 2. With a population of approximately 14 million and a 1995 GDP of US$9.8 billion, C6te d'Ivoire is one of the principal countries in the CFA franc zone. In the early 1980s, per capita GNP was well over US$1,000. Having fallen to US$510 by 1994, GNP was US$610 in 1995. The deterioration in the terms of trade, inadequate economic management and the over-valuation of the CFA franc were the main contributors to this economic decline which has been accompanied by a steady fall in living standards. 3. Following the devaluation of the CFA franc in January 1994, C6te d'Ivoire successfully launched an adjustment program that reigned in inflation, and stimulated growth and external flows. The increase in consumer prices was contained to 32.5 percent and inflationary pressure subsided. Economic growth accelerated from 1.7 percent in 1994 to 7.0 percent in 1995. C6te d'Ivoire is heading for a period of political and economic stability. In October 1995, the incumbent President was re-elected. In November 1995, parliamentary elections led to re- appointment of the Prime Minister. 4. Rural Poverty. In 1985, 11 percent of C6te d'Ivoire's population was poor, with an annual per capita income of less than 144,800 CFA franc (about US$290). Between 1989 and 1993, household consumption decreased by 24 percent. The proportion of households living in poverty rose to 31 percent in 1993 and reached 36 percent in 1995. Deteriorating standards of living are reflected in the country's social indicators as well. C6te d'Ivoire ranks 136th of 173 countries according to the UNDP Human Development Index, 23 places lower than its ranking on a GDP per capita basis; this indicates that the country lags in promoting social development. Poverty is primarily rural. The 1995, poverty assessment indicates that 75 percent of all poor and 69 percent of extremely poor are concentrated in rural areas, where more than 50 percent of the total population lives in poverty. The poverty assessment identifies the improvement of agricultural production systems and local infrastructure as high priorities for the poor and other vulnerable groups. 5. Agriculture. Agriculture is the largest private sector enterprise in the country, and the one with the greatest potential to decrease poverty and generate economic growth at lowest financial risk and investment cost. Agriculture provides 64 percent of employment, and contributes about 2 33 percent of total GDP and 66 percent of total export revenue. It is estimated that the potential for annual agriculture sector growth between 1995 and 2000 is 5 to 6 percent. The Bank- supported Government strategy is to use the agricultural sector as the primary vehicle for rural poverty alleviation and sustainable economic development. The Project 6. Project Rationale. Fundamental demographic and ecological changes have characterized the last forty years in rural C6te d'Ivoire. In 1955, the country had a population of 2.5 million, mostly indigenous citizens. Today, 30 percent of the 14 million residents are from neighboring countries. Since the 1960s, over 80 percent of the closed forests have been converted to low input/low yield agricultural land and plantations of perennial commercial crops, or have become unproductive wastelands. 7. The strength of traditional village regimes of control has declined as immigration and population growth have increased. Inadequate incentives for sustainable land management, limited human capacity to manage resources and infrastructure, and weak local governance have hampered efforts to improve agricultural practices, manage natural resources, meet infrastructure needs and decentralize administration. New instruments are needed to facilitate community self- governance and to regulate access to and management of land. 8. The actions and investments required for fostering community development and sustainable management of natural resources and community development are too site-specific, vast and diffuse to be centralized, organized, implemented, funded and maintained by the Government. Decentralized management, and investment in local infrastructure and land management are necessary. 9. The Government has created the instruments to enable local governance and appropriate management of infrastructure and natural resources. A new rural land tenure law is being prepared. The Bank-supported Rural Land Plan (Plan Foncier Rural-PFR) has responded to requests from 360 villages, and assisted 270,000 people to identify and map land rights and village boundaries on 495,000 hectares (ha). The Government has also decentralized local administration and provision of services. One hundred thirty-five urban communes have been created, giving 50 percent of the country's population the power to select representatives and benefit from some degree of administrative and financial autonomy. In 1995, legislation was passed authorizing decentralization in rural areas. Rural districts (pays ruraux, which usually include 5-7 villages) will gradually be transformed into rural communes. At the same time, instruments for channeling local investments in agriculture, and rural and social infrastructure have been successfully tested. The Regional Rural Equipment Fund (FRAR- Fonds Rfgionaux d'Am9nagement Rural), initiated in the early 1970s, has now become the primary instrument by which the Government and donor community have agreed to channel resources to promote local initiatives, and foster decentralization and community empowerment. 10. The proposed project will be a vehicle for implementing new government policies and programs related to land tenure, decentralization, natural resources management and rural infrastructure development. Beginning with the clarification of local land tenure, the proposed project will help rural communities assume responsibility for planning, financing and managing local development plans (LDPs) that will improve the use of natural resources, accelerate diversification, intensification and growth of agriculture, facilitate access to markets, and upgrade 3 basic living conditions. The project responds to the Government's request for support at the 1995 meeting of the Consultative Group, and consolidates previous Government efforts supported by the Bank, the European Union (EU) and France. 11. Project Objectives. The project will help create the enabling conditions necessary for raising the standard of living of C6te d'Ivoire's rural population by empowering communities, stimulating local investment, and facilitating sustainable management of natural resources and rural infrastructure. Its immediate objectives are to: (a) facilitate land tenure security on over 2 million hectares of rural land by introducing legislation, instruments and procedures to help communities clarify land rights; (b) strengthen local capacity to plan, make decisions, govern and manage affairs and resources at the local level; and (c) support small-scale investments for sustainable natural resources management, and agricultural and rural infrastructure. 12. Project Description. The project consists of an interlocking set of components that are organized to systematically facilitate sustainable community-based management of resources. The project will help consolidate the incentive framework and strengthen the human and institutional capacity to manage local resources. This will be combined with assistance to create LDPs. Financing and long-term incentives will be made available to ensure that development plans are implemented. The project will include the following components: (a) Clarification of Land Tenure (US$30.8 million). The project will help create the legal instruments, the administrative procedures and technical capacity at the institutional and community levels to undertake land rights surveying over 2 million hectares and ensure that information is updated. Land tenure information and mapping will facilitate conflict resolution, and help identify land management constraints and development options. Surveying will cover traditional, customary and collective land rights claims. The prime output will be the production of maps in paper and digital formats, and of land tenure documents certifying local land tenure status. Current land uses, and demographic and land-related information will be recorded to help guide community and government decision-making regarding land management, access roads, transhumance corridors, forest boundaries, small irrigation works, and other physical infrastructure. (b) Enhancement of Local Management Capacity (US$6.6 million). Based upon the maps and information obtained through the Clarification of Land Tenure component, communities will be assisted to prepare their own Local Development Plans (LDPs) outlining what is needed to sustainably manage agricultural, pasture, forest and water resources, and develop and maintain village and inter-village infrastructure. Support will be provided to strengthen community capacity to identify and address problems, work collaboratively with the State and engage in the decentralization process. A specific effort will be made to help communities design, and implement activities and management solutions that will enhance the position of women. (c) Financing of Local Investments (US$26.6 million). Financing will be provided to enhance community investment capacity and implement LDPs. Specifically, the project will help finance the introduction of integrated agricultural production systems, improved agricultural production, forestry and agroforestry interventions (e.g., bottomland development and erosion control) and small-scale infrastructure 4 (i.e., access roads, social infrastructure, and solar and other power generation and transmission equipment). Project support will be demand-driven, and subject to the satisfaction of a set of predetermined criteria. Prerequisites for obtaining financing will include: (i) community financial contributions to activities; and (ii) the existence of local governing bodies or organizations capable of helping manage and maintain investments. (d) Support to Decentralization, Coordination and Implementation of Environmental Mitigation Measures (US$7.5 million). The project will support and facilitate decentralization. It will provide targeted material support and training to the locally-elected governing bodies created in the process of decentralization. The project will also facilitate inter-institutional coordination, strengthening of the Cadaster, and monitoring of overall implementation to ensure consistency, inter- agency cooperation and adherence to inter-sectoral policies. 13. Project Implementation. No new structures will be created to implement project-financed activities. Implementation will be undertaken by existing national institutions and other organizations the project will strengthen. The project will be implemented through: (a) the Rural Land Tenure Service of Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRA) for the Clarification of Land Tenure Component; (b) the National Agency for Rural Development Agency (ANADER) of MINAGRA for the Enhancement of Local Management Capacity Component; and (c) the FRAR program of Ministry of Planning and Industry (MDPDI) for the Financing of Local Investments Component. Local investments, and most work and services under the project, will be implemented through local small-scale private enterprises. The Office of the Prime Minister will facilitate inter-agency coordination and overall project support. 14. Lessons Learned from Previous Bank and Other Donors Involvement. The proposed project capitalizes on the experience of twelve past projects in C6te d'Ivoire, the findings of the Africa Region FY95 Annual Review of Project Portfolio Performance (ARPP), the Bank's sector work on land tenure, and the results of on-going community-based natural resources management projects in the West Africa Region. Bank experience indicates that natural resource management projects should be developed as part of a long-term multi-sectoral strategy for development. That strategy should incorporate activities that emphasize sustainable use, and generate income and employment so that they provide incentives for involving local people in the long-term. Additionally, a participatory, demand-driven process for project design, and for the selection of specific interventions and activities, is crucial for long-term success. 15. In West Africa, 18 donors are currently financing over 80 initiatives, a total of about US$450 million, that are demonstrating that sustainable natural resources management and rural development can only be undertaken using local-level, broad-based community development plans and partnerships with local groups. The foundation for success and long-term sustainability lies in appropriate land tenure, decentralization and community empowerment policies. 16. Rationale for Bank Involvement. The proposed project is critical to the implementation of the Government's development strategy in those areas that were selected for Bank support in the June 28, 1994 Country Assistance Strategy (CAS), in the June 27, 1996 CAS Progress Report and in the CAS currently under preparation. It has been designed to create a framework for long-term development by providing investments and services that will promote private sector development, improve infrastructure, and alleviate poverty. The project is central in the implementation of 5 National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) C6te d'lvoire's Government adopted in October 1995. 17. The project is consistent with and a critical part of the Bank's portfolio in support of decentralization, and agriculture and forestry development. It supports land tenure clarification, improved environmental management, rural development, decentralization and poverty alleviation, all long-term endeavors for which strong and continued Bank and donor resources are needed. Each of these areas of activity was highlighted in the assistance C6te d'Ivoire sought during the 1995 Paris Consultative Group Meeting. The Bank has a comparative advantage in supporting the types of activities supported by the project. The Bank pioneered support for land tenure operations in C6te d'Ivoire in 1989. It supports comparable village land management programs throughout the region (e.g., Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, Benin, Guinea and Ghana). 18. Agreed Actions. Agreements that have been reached at negotiations include standard assurances on counterpart funding, procurement, disbursement, accounting, auditing, reporting and monitoring. In addition, agreements have been reached on the project management and coordination as follows: (a) key project staff shall have, at all times, qualifications, experience, terms of reference, conditions of employment, and performance indicators satisfactory to IDA (acting as ITF Administrator); (b) the Borrower will setup a system that would enable the project to track its performance in relation to a formally agreed set of indicators; (c) the Borrower shall establish and maintain, for the duration of the Project, a Steering Committee with a composition and functions acceptable to IDA; (d) each year, the Borrower will convene a project implementation review meeting with IDA, co-financiers and regional and local authorities to review the Project Steering Committee deliberations; and (e) the Borrower and IDA shall conduct, not later than June 30, 2000, a mid-term project implementation review. 19. Actions Taken: The Borrower has: (a) issued a policy note signed by the MDPDI and the MINAGRA stating the role of the project in support of inter-sectoral policies and related institutional mechanisms; (b) submitted to IDA signed copies of the PNGTER Framework Agreement and related inter-institutional collaborative agreements outlining the modalities for MINAGRA/ANADER/FRAR, MINAGRA/BNETD and MINAGRA/ANADER collaboration; and (c) submitted to IDA a copy of an Interministerial Arr6ti signed by the Ministries of MINAGRA, MIIN, and MEF regarding the establishment, composition and functioning of the Rural Land Tenure Commissions (RLTC); (d) submitted a copy of a joint instruction (circulaire) signed by the MEF, and MINAGRA regarding the validation of the rural land tenure data produced by the PFR; (e) appointed six project staff as agreed upon at negotiations; and (f) appointed, with IDA approval, a firm specializing in the selection and recruitment of personnel for preparing short lists of qualified candidates to fill five positions of financial controllers and one position of training coordinator/ monitoring specialist. Conditions of Effectiveness 20. The Borrower has: (a) opened three Project Accounts and made initial deposits totaling CFA francs 175,000,000; (b) finalized bid documents and launched the bidding process for works, goods and services costing more than US$200,000 each to be procured to support the program of activities for the first 12 months of Project operations; (c) adopted an Implementation Manual satisfactory to IDA; (d) established an accounting and financial management system, and appointed an auditing firm satisfactory to IDA; (e) presented a Project work program and corresponding budget for the first twelve months after the Effective Date, satisfactory to IDA; (f) 6 ensured that all key project personnel, appointed with IDA approval, are in place; and (g) published in the Journal Officiel the interministerial arrt mentioned in point (c) of paragraph 19. 21. Poverty Cateory. Program of targeted interventions. Based upon the current poverty assessment, 50 percent of the total rural population is poor. In view of the criteria for selection of project districts and the self-targeting nature of proposed investments, it is estimated that 70 percent of the project beneficiaries will be poor. 22. Environmental Impact. A category "A" environmental assessment study for the project was completed in two stages: the first in early 1995 and the second in October 1996. The study involved an analysis of all environmentally sensitive project components, and was complemented by an overall project social assessment and specific case studies on the Project's land tenure operations. The conclusions of the environmental assessment, which were endorsed by the Government and found acceptable by IDA, were that the Project will have a highly positive overall impact and no meaningful adverse effects. The design of the Project minimizes potentially negative environmental impacts by facilitating consideration of social, environmental, economic and cultural factors in community planning and decision making. The holistic planning process fostered by PNGTER is intended to lead to creation of sustainable development plans; most of the potentially negative project-related impacts will be avoided or mitigated in the planning process. Since the environmental impact assessment of the Project was developed as part of project preparation, most of its results were integrated into the project design and budget. An additional mitigation plan for measures that were unsuitable for integration into existing project components will be implemented and financed under the Project to avert potentially undesirable effects. 23. Pro-g-ram Objective Categories. The project is in line with the Bank's environmentally sustainable development, poverty reduction and women in development strategies. 24. Participatory Approach. The proposed project was prepared by an inter-ministerial task force headed by the Office of the Prime Minister, based upon two proposals originally prepared by MINAGRA and MDPDI. Project preparation involved working with over 35,000 households associated with the demographic studies and land tenure surveys undertaken with Project Preparation Facility (PPF) financing. The preparation team worked particularly closely with a smaller number of households to identify local priorities and local development potential. The last phase of project design involved rapid rural appraisals in four villages and three residential seminars with Government officials, farmers and entrepreneurs. A final retreat was held during which representatives from the Prime Minister's Office and the offices of concerned Ministries discussed detailed project design and implementation issues with representatives of the rural communities most involved in design. Finally, a social assessment was carried out in May 1996 which focused on the project's impact on women and vulnerable groups. 25. Two major donors, the EU and France, were closely associated with the project preparation process, and participated in all key project preparation events and meetings with Government. A major thrust of these donors' programs in C8te d'Ivoire supports the objectives of the present project. The EU is supporting the decentralization process and improvement of the FRAR. France recently started financing two initiatives parallel to the proposed PNGTER. Both French-supported projects benefited from the preparation process set-up for PNGTER. The first project (PNAGER Nord, US$6.6 million equivalent over five years) is located in the northern districts. The second project (Equipment and Rural Management, US$20 million equivalent over four years) is less area-specific and provides funding for FRAR-channeled investments. 7 26. Economic Analysis. The design of the Project was based on the examination of alternatives to ensure that the approach and technologies used, and the institutional arrangements selected, would be the most likely to succeed at the lowest cost and level of external support. Four different solutions were considered. The selected scenario was chosen as the most suitable for reducing the administrative burden and ensuring that the greatest possible share of project resources would flow efficiently to intended beneficiaries, achieving tangible, durable results. 27. The data made available through the economic analysis helped shape project design, and define project implementation principles and monitoring parameters. One of the key lessons of the economic analysis was that the Project should only support packages of interventions that incorporate a variety of different investments, at least 45 percent of which are agriculture-related productive activities and 10 percent of which are non-agricultural productive activities. The potential profitability to farmers of investments was assessed in terms of the return on labor and the financial return on investments (both individual investments and packages of investments). In terms of the return on labor, given an average CFA francs 342 in salary (economic), the proposed Project demonstrated the potential to increase the average rate of return on labor several times. In financial terms, packages of interventions that included the recommended percentages of productive and non-productive activities had financial rates of return between 20 percent and 38 percent. 28. In economic terms, all packages of interventions had positive net present values. The estimated internal rate of return (EIRR) for project-supported packages, excluding the costs of capacity building, land tenure clarification and project management, was 38.1 percent. With the addition of these components, the EIRR was 13 percent, still above the assumed opportunity cost of capital (12 percent). Since environmental benefits were not accounted for, it can be assumed that the economic rates of return will actually be higher. When other non-quantifiable benefits, such as institution building, are added, the project can be expected to have a high economic rate of return. 29. Benefits. The Project will substantially improve the quality of life of about 1,300,000 people living in I10 rural districts, including 660 villages selected on the basis of willingness to collaborate with the Project, and relative level of poverty and local infrastructure. The primary benefits of the Project will be: (a) improved land tenure security in the project area, established mechanisms, and enabled institutions and legal instruments to enhance rural land tenure security nationally; (b) empowered local communities and governing bodies, improved local management capabilities, increased responsibility and ownership of local initiatives, more effective use of community resources and matching resources available through state and donor programs; (c) investments in agricultural production and natural resources management that increase outputs and introduce more sustainable production systems; established sustainable land-use systems that balance production against resource consumption and promote the restoration of ecological stability; (d) investments in rural infrastructure that improve basic living conditions, including access to schools, health services, and clean water; (e) opportunities for private sector development through over 1500 small contracts to be awarded on a competitive basis to local enterprises, and through the creation of new consulting firms (multi-disciplinary support teams (MSTs)) and a market for their services in support of the decentralization process. 8 30. In the longer term, through the Clarification of Land Tenure component, the Project will reduce conflict over land, and create a basis for loan guarantees and a land-based taxation system that will facilitate, and make more effective and equitable revenue collection in rural areas. 31. Project Sustainability. Community ownership is the first guarantee of sustainability. Local development plans will be prepared with external assistance, but decision-making authority will rest with communities which will cofinance and manage implementation. Long-term local sustainability will become possible as improved decision-making processes, land use systems and technologies are fully accepted and routinized. On the national level, sustainability will depend upon Government commitment to decentralization and land tenure clarification. 32. From the Government's perspective, the Project was designed to emphasize investment and minimize recurrent costs. Project assistance will terminate once targeted communities have been organized and trained, their management plans designed and approved, and the main investments completed. It is estimated that post-project annual recurrent costs for communities will be 10 percent of the initial investments per village, i.e., US$2,400 per village, or US$1.20 per capita. The maintenance of land tenure surveys will not be costly (on a per-ha basis) and should be highly valued by beneficiaries; once implementing capacity and standard procedures are fully developed, land tenure operations will be able to be maintained and expanded on a fee-for-service basis. 33. Risks. The principal project risks relate to: (a) the capacity of the Government to implement the proposed program; (b) the willingness and ability of communities to collaborate in planning, implementing and funding development plans; and (c) potential social problems associated with implementing land tenure clarification. 34. The inter-sectoral nature of the Project, and the decision to use existing institutions and financing mechanisms are- key to project success but entail risks. The Project requires the cooperation of the Ministries in charge of agriculture, planning, interior and finance. While this is a risky proposition, the activities supported by the Project address the needs of a single target population. By being supported through one funding instrument, these activities will benefit from greater internal consistency, and reduced cost and risk of duplication. All institutions involved have participated actively in project preparation. This is expected to continue during project implementation. Project concept, design, documentation and implementation arrangements were developed by an inter-ministerial task force. Formal, detailed inter-ministerial collaborative agreements satisfactory to IDA were signed by the concerned agencies as a condition for Board presentation. The fact that project coordination will be undertaken through the Office of the Prime Minister should help ensure that inter-ministerial cooperation will benefit from the required high- level attention. 35. Communities may be reluctant to accept the planning methods and the financing arrangements proposed by the project. Village reluctance to collaborate was identified as a problem in the past implementation of the FRAR. The legacy of the past may hinder on-going efforts to make FRAR more responsive to expressed community needs, more transparent and more appreciated by communities. This risk is addressed by devoting resources to support enhancement of community capacity to articulate needs, and manage decision-making and financing. This is further addressed by separating responsibility for helping communities identify their needs and formulate LDPs (role played by specialized private firms servicing ANADER) from responsibility for helping them obtain and utilize financial resources (role played by the FRAR). 9 36. The risk that (i) technological packages in the field of agriculture and rural infrastructure may not be readily accepted and (ii) community financing may be lacking, are high. The Project addresses these risks by (iii) using packages consistent with those tested and adopted by ANADER and other national services, (iv) working only with interested groups, (v) involving farmers in planning and selecting activities; and (vi) systematically monitoring the contributing capacity of communities. 37. Other risks stem from social perceptions and reactions to project support for clarification of land tenure. After seven years of pilot operations involving over 270,000 people in the areas of the country most affected by land tenure conflicts, and several studies on specific issues and target groups, this risk appears manageable. The Project will nevertheless monitor social perceptions of land tenure work and introduce necessary corrective measures as problems arise. Annual reviews will systematically focus on land tenure, its impact on women and emerging social conflicts for consideration by the Government, IDA and other donors. 38. The Project involves a significant level of risk, but is worthy of implementation. It will yield significant environmental and economic returns, channel resources where they are most needed, and leverage and focus local resources on rural development and environmental conservation. Recommendation 39. I am satisfied that the proposed Interim Trust Fund Credit would comply with Resolution No. 184, of the Board of Governors of the Association, adopted on June 26, 1996, establishing the Interim Trust Fund, and I recommend that the President approve it. Gautam S. Kaji Managing Director Washington, DC. April 28, 1997 10 SCHEDULE A Page 1 of 1 PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING 1. Project Costs and Financing PROJECT COMPONENTS US$ million percent percent Foreign Total Exch. Costs Local Foreign Total CLARIFICATION OF LAND TENURE (a) Land Rights Surveying (b) Data maintenance and 13.3 6.4 19.7 33 36 Management 2.2 1.3 3.5 38 7 ENHANCEMENT OF LOCAL MANAGEMENT CAPACITY 4.0 1.2 5.2 24 10 LOCAL INVESTMENTS 16.2 3.2 19.4 16 36 SUPPORT TO DECENTRALIZATION, COORDINATION AND ENV. 3.0 1.4 4.4 33 7 MITIGATION PLAN REFUNDING OF PPF - 2 2.0 100 4 TOTAL BASE COSTS 38.7 15.5 54.2 100 Physical Contingencies 3.1 1.4 4.5 32 8 Price Contingencies 2.0 0.8 2.8 30 5 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS (net of taxes and duties) 43.8 17.7 61.5 34 113 FINANCING PLAN CONTRIBUTORS CONTRIBUTION (US$M) PERCENTAGE (percent) Government 11.7 16 Local Communities 7.0 10 ITF 41.0 57 FRANCE (CFD) 11.8 17 TOTAL 71.5 100 11 SCHEDULE B Page 1 of 2 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS TABLES Key Performance Indicators 1. Project Benefits and Costs (1996 US$ million) Aggregate Values Present Values Economic Analysis* Present Values Financial Analysis** All Project Zones Revenue-generating All project Revenue-generation All project field interventions components field interventions components Benefits 264.2 264.2 204.5 204.5 Costs 172.5 221.3 176.7 229.2 Net Present Values 91.7 43.0 28.1 -24.7 Internal Rate of Return 37.5% 23.7% 46.3% 5.2% *Assumptions of the economic analysis: discount rate=12%; real exchange rate 500 CFAF=US$1; taxes not included. **Assumptions of the financial analysis: discount rate=30% (reflecting farmer aversion to risk); values incorporate 15% tax; economic feasibility of investment packages is a prerequisite to economic feasibility of project as a whole. Sensitivity Analysis The estimated internal rate of return remains above the 12% opportunity cost of capital if key variables do not vary by more than the following: Key Variable Sensitivity Prices of crops and/or wood can tolerate more than 20% decrease Labor cost can tolerate more than 30% increase Capitalization cost (initial investment can tolerate more than 30% increase Crop and/or wood yields can tolerate more than 20% decrease Real appreciation in costs can tolerate more than 3% real increase Real appreciation in prices can tolerate more than 3% real decrease Nature of Benefits: Social and productive infrastructure installed and operating at the pays ruraux level, crop yields increased substantially. More than 1.2 million people will benefit directly and indirectly from greater productivity, improved social services and higher income. Main Beneficiaries: Farm households will benefit from substantially higher crop yields and hence, higher incomes. Pays ruraux will benefit from improved social infrastructure such as schools and health centers. Consumers will benefit from increased supplies of commodities in the local and regional markets. Private sector investments in rural infrastructure that improve basic living conditions, including access to schools, health services, and clean water. Private entrepreneurs will benefit from at least 1500 small and medium-sized contracts to be awarded locally. Level of Risk: Significant 2. Financial Summary and Fiscal Impact (Million US$ equivalent) Implementation Period Operational Period 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 PROJECT COSTS Investment Costs 3.4 6.8 11.0 14.2 14.3 14.0 4.6 Recurrent Costs 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 Total 3.7 7.2 11.6 14.7 14.8 14.5 5.0 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 Percentages (%) Percentages (%) FINANCING SOURCES ITF 62 58 56 56 56 55 55 France (CFD) 22 20 18 18 16 15 15 Government 16 17 16 16 16 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 Beneficiaries - 5 10 10 12 15 25 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 t~j Iti 13 SCHEDULE C Page 1 of 2 PROCUREMENT METHODS AND DISBURSEMENTS 1. Procurement Arrangements Procurement Method A'( US$ million) TOTAL COST- PROJECT ELEMENTS ICB-Y NCB S OTHER NIF-' _ Civil Works buildings 0.9 0.8 0.8 2.5 (0.8) (0.6) (1.4) community micro-projects 3.4 21.2 24.6 (3.0) (14.1) (17.1) Service Contracts 1.4 6.8 2.6 10.8 (1.1) (5.4) (6.5) Vehicles and Equipment Vehicles 4.0 1.9 0.5 1.7 8.1 (2.5) (0.7) (0.3) (3.5) Equipment c/ 3.0 1.1 2.7 2.5 9.3 (1.6) (0.6) (1.0) (3.2) Consultants & Training 7.3 3.8 11.1 (6.1) (6.1) Incremental Operating Costs d/ 2.7 0.4 3.1 (1.2) (1.2) Refunding of PPF 2.0 2.0 (2.0) (2.0) TOTAL 8.4 7.3 44.0 11.8 71.5 if (5.2) (5.1) (30.7) (41.0) al Values include taxes and duties. Figures in parentheses show amounts financed by ITF and are net of taxes. b/ Includes contracted works as well as materials, equipment and labor. c/ Includes computers and GIS equipment as well as office equipment. Includes expenditures for office telephone and other communication expenses, staff travel and subsistence allowances, office supplies and maintenance, and fuel, and maintenance for vehicles. e/ Difference between total costs and ITF contribution under ICB, NCB, NIF and OTHER to be financed by Government and project beneficiaries. fl NIF=Non ITF financed (financed by CFD) 14 SCHEDULE C Page 2 of 2 2. IDA Allocation and Disbursement Categories ITF Percent of Expenditures to be Category of Expenditure Allocation Financed by ITF (US$ million) Foreign Exp. Local Exp. (percent) (percent) 1. Civil Works 1.2 100 80 2. Grants for Community Microprojects 14.7 100 100 3. Vehicles & Equipment 5.8 100 80 4. Consultant Services, Training and Service Contracts 11.8 100 100 5. Operating Costs 1.1 NA 80 6. Refunding of PPF 2.0 NA NA 7. Unallocated 4.4 NA NA TOTAL 41.0 3. Estimated Disbursements Estimated IDA Disbursements (US$ million) IDA FISCAL YEAR 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Annual 2.0 3.2 5.5 8.8 8.7 8.3 2.5 Cumulative 2.0 5.2 10.7 19.5 28.2 36.5 41.0 15 SCHEDULE D Page 1 of 1 TIMETABLE OF KEY PROCESSING EVENTS (a) Time taken to prepare: IEPS: March 1995; 2 years (b) Prepared by: Government and Bank staff with earlier support by FAO/CP (c) First IDA mission: April 1995 (d) Appraisal mission departure: April 1996 (e) Negotiations: March 1997 (f) Planned Date of Effectiveness: August 1997 (g) List of Relevant PCRs and PARs: Ivory Coast Second Grand-Bereby Rubber Project (LOAN 1575-IVC) June 28, 1995; Ivory Coast Fourth Rubber Project (Loan 2323-IVC) March 23, 1995; Ivory Coast Fifth Rubber Development Project (LOAN 2874-IVC), August 24, 1995; C6te d'lvoire Second Highway Sector Project (LOANS 2581-IVC and 2581-1-IVC), February 4, 1992; C6te dIvoire Agricultural Extension Project ( LOAN 2765-IVC), June 7, 1995; C6te d'Ivoire Agricultural Sector Aaj-.stment Loan (LOAN 3127- IVC), July 1, 1994; C6te d'lvoire Second Forestry Project (loan 2496-IVC), August 1993; C6te d'ivoire Center West Agricultural Development Project (LOAN 2167-IVC); C6te d'Ivoire Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Adjustment Loan (LOAN 3240-IVC), December 22, 1993; Northeast Savannah Rural Development Project (LOAN 1827-IVC), December 23, 1992; (h) Bank Preparation/Appraisal Team. This Project is based on the findings of an appraisal mission that visited C6te d'Ivoire in April 1996. The appraisal mission was led by Giuseppe Topa, Senior Environmental Specialist, Task Team Leader of the operation (AFTA3). The team included Mrs. C. Morin, senior counsel (LEGAF), Mr. F. Rantrua, geographic information and monitoring and evaluation specialist (AFTEI), Mr. M. Bekhechi, environmental legislation specialist (LEGEN), Mr. C. Fisiy, sociologist (AFTEI), Mr. K. Christophersen, consultant economist, Mr. E. J. Yoboue, national, expert in rural infrastructure development, Mr. A. Tourd, agronomist (AFMCI), Mrs. A Ayoung, procurement specialist (AF4CI), Mr. S. Fofana, disbursement specialist (AF4CI), M. Leandre Gbeli, consultant, financial analyst, and Mr. N. Ehoue Bleoue, agricultural economist. The present report was prepared by Giuseppe Topa. Jean Paul Chausse is the AFTA3 Technical Manager; Shigeo Katsu is Country Director for C6te d'Ivoire, Chantal Dejou is the Country Coordinator for C6te d'lvoire; Cynthia Cook and Franz Kaps advised during project preparation in their former AF4AE Division Chief and AF4 Operation Advisor capacities respectively. Lead Advisor for the Operation was David Steeds (AGRPW); Brigitte Kerby-Dia, Task Assistant provided support in the final phase of preparation of project documentation, communications with the Government, and organization for negotiations and Board presentation. 16 SCHEDULE E Page 1 of 3 Status of Bank Group Operations In Cote d'Ivoire IBRD Loans and IDA Credits in the Operations Portfolio Difference Oriinal amount in USS millions between expected Project Loan or Fiscal and actual ID CreditNo. Year Borrower Purpose IBRD IDA Cancellations Undisbursed disbursements Number of Closed Loans/Credits: 80 Active Loans Cl-PE-1207 C23630 1992 OOVT OF RCI PRIVATIZATION SUPPOR 15.00 731 6.87 CI-PE-1209 C25050 1993 GOVT OFRCI HRDMANAGEMENTSUPPO 6.70 2.30 2.25 CI-PE-1187 C25030 1993 GOVTOFRCI ECNMGMTTA 17.00 4.05 0.74 CI-PE-1186 C26370 1994 GOVTOFRCI LABORFORCETRAINING 17.00 14.51 7.58 CI-PE-1193 C26360 1994 GOVTOFRCI NATLAGRICUL1U.RALS 21.80 6.15 5.02 CI-PE-1210 C25970 1994 GOVOFRCI RURAL SAVINGS 2.20 1.51 0.07 CI-PE-1184 C27540 1995 GOVTOF RCI PRIVATE ELECTRICITY 79.66 48.74 22.99 CI-PE-37581 C27490 1995 GOVTOF RCI EXPORT PROMOTION AND 5.83 4.32 0.64 CI-PE-37575 C27040 1995 GOVT OF RCI MUNICIPAL SUPPORT 40.00 32.72 11.60 CI-PE-1214 C28930 1996 GOVT OF RCI POP. HEALTH AND NUTR 40.00 37.39 0.73 Cl-PE-1212 C28430 1996 GOVT OF RCI PRIVATE SECTOR DEVEL 180.00 75.94 7.36 CI-PE-40115 C27860 1996 GOVT OF RCI RAILWAYS REHAB 20.00 14.05 10.53 CI.PE-35603 C27790 1996 GOV7 OF RCI AGRIC SECTORAL ADJUS 150.00 39.84 124.89 CI-PE-1212 C23431 1997 GOV0r OF RCI PRIVATE SECTOR DEVEL 54.60 -54.44 TOTAL 0.00 649.79 0.00 288.82 146.90 Active Loans Closed Loans Total Total disbursed (IBRD and IDA) 33237 3152.12 3484.49 ofwhichrepaid 0.00 1339.63 1339.63 Total now held by IBRD and IDA 649.79 1790.64 2440.43 Amount sold 0.00 5.10 5.10 Ofwhich repaid 0.00 5.10 5.10 Total undisbursed 288.82 0.00 288.82 a. Intended disbursements to date minus actual disbursements to date as projected at appraisal. Note: Disbursement data are updated at the end of the first week ofthe month. 17 SCHEDULE E Page 2 of 3 Cote d'Ivoire - Statement of IFC Investments Committed and Disbursed Portfolio As of 2/28/97 (In US Dollar Millions) Committed Disbursed IFC IFC I II FYApproval Company Loan Equity Quasi Paric Loan Equity Quasi Partic 1977/86 Gonfreville 0.00 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.67 0.00 0.00 1987/93/96 COSMIVOIRE 4.09 0.17 2.21 0.00 4.09 0.17 0.00 0.00 1987/90 SIALIM 1.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 1988 IPS (VC) 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.00 1989/93 AEF Pechazur 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 1991 AEF Plantivoire 1.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 1992 AEF Interagri 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 1993/95 BlockCI-1l 0.00 38.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.20 0.00 0.00 1994 AEF Multiproduit 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 1994 BACI 4.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 1994 FILTISAC 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 1995 CIPREL 15.19 0.96 0.00 0.00 15.19 0.96 0.00 0.00 1995 FTG 1.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 1995 Laborex 1.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 1995 Texicodi 1.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1996 AEF CARP 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1996 AEF Petro Ivoire 0.00 0.00 1.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 1996 Bereby Finances 0.00 3.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.05 0.00 0.00 1996 Multi-Produits 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1996 UA-IARD 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 TotalPortfolio: 33.13 46.24 3.22 0.00 33.13 41.19 0.80 0.00 Approvals Pending Commitment Loan Equity Quasi Partic 1995 SAFBAIL 4.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 1996 AEFSAPB 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 1996 BACI-II 4.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 1996 BOA-CI 2.90 0.14 0.11 0.00 1996 COSMIVOIRE III 4.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Pending Commitment: 16.90 0.14 0.11 0.00 SCHEDULE E Page 3 of 3 STATUS OF BANK GROUP OPERATIONS IN COTE D'IVOIRE IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES The C6te d'Ivoire portfolio of Bank Group operations consists of fourteen projects, three of which are adjustment operations, for a total IDA commitment of US$650 million. All projects in the portfolio are one to five years old. The current undisbursed balance amounts to US$289 million. The disbursement ratio for investment projects has been improving steadily from 13.4% in FY94, to 15.8% in FY96, and 21.1% in FY97 (three quarters). There are no major implementation issues to report. Disbursement Lags: Seven projects had a disbursement lag of over 50 percent at the last ARPP (July 1996). In most cases, lags were due to late declaration of project effectiveness. The disbursement schedules of these projects were recently officially revised. The concerned projects include: Private Electricity, Labor Force Training, Privatization Support, HRD Management Support, Integrated Health Service, Municipal Support and Railways Rehabilitation projects Unsatisfactory Ratings: One of the above projects (Railways Rehabilitation) and the Economic Management TA project (PAGE) are currently rated unsatisfactory for implementation. The first project was rated unsatisfactory because of late effectiveness but once it became effective, it showed good progress. The second project is being more closely supervised by a task team leader who is located at the World Bank Abidjan office. 19 SCHEDULE F Page 1 of 2 C8te d'Ivoire at a glance Sub- POVERTY and SOCIAL C6te Saharan Low- d'ivoire Africa income Development diamond Population mid-1995 (millions) 14.2 589 3,188 GNP ver capita 1995 (US$) 610 490 460 Life expectancy GNP 1995 (billions USS) 8.7 289 1.468 Average annual growth, 1990-95 Population (%) 3.4 2.8 1.8 Labor force (%) 2.9 2.8 1.9 IGNP Gross per Iprimary Most recent estimate (latest year available since 1989) capita enrollment Poverty: headcount index (% of population) Urban population (% of total population) 44 31 29 L:fe expectancy at birth (years) 55 52 63 Infant mortality (per 1,000 live births) 89 92 58 Access to safe water Child malnutrition (% of children under5) .. .. 38 Access to safe water (% ofpopulation) 82 47 75 Illiteracy [% of population age 15+) 80 43 - Cote dlvoke Gross primary enrollment (% of school-age population) 69 71 105 Male 80 77 112 Low-income group Female 58 64 98 KEY ECONOMIC RATIOS and LONG-TERM TRENDS 1975 1986 1994 1995 GOP (billions USS) 3.9 7.0 7.4 9.8 EconomIc ratios Gross domestic investmentGDP 22.4 12.6 11.0 12.5 Exporis of goods and non-factor services!GDP 36.7 45.6 45.2 44.5 Openness of economy Gross domestic savings/GDP 22.6 25.8 23.5 23.1 Gross national savings/GOP 14.2 12.9 6.8 8.1 Current account balance/GOP -10.8 0.6 -4.4 -4.6 Interest payments/GDP 1.5 9.2 5.9 4.1 Savings Investment Total debt!GDP 37.5 138.3 233.5 194.5 Total debt service!exports 9.5 34.8 39.2 24.3 Present value of debtVGDP .. . 206.0 .. Present value of debtexports .. .. 483.2 " Indebtedness 1975-84 1986-95 1994 1996 1996-04 (average annual growth) 1 - Cote dIvore GDP 1.4 -0.5 1.7 7.0 5.2 L group GNP per capita .1.0 -4.4 -2.0 3.2 1.6 - Low-income group Exports of goods and nfs 9.4 0.7 -3.1 12.2 5.4 STRUCTURE of the ECONOMY 1975 1986 1994 1995 (% of GDP) Growth rates of output and Investment (%) Agriculture 34.4 29.8 36.0 35.0 G. Industry 20.8 23.4 23.0 25.0 2s Manufacturing 11.5 15.2 15.0 16.0 Services 44.8 46.8 41.0 40.0 91 2 - as -25 Private consumption 60.4 60.3 61.5 63.3 -so General government consumption 17.0 13.9 15.1 13.7 -GDI GDP Imports of goods and non-factor services 36.6 32.5 32.7 34.0 1975-84 1985-95 1994 1996 (average annual growth) Growth rates of exports and Imports (%) Agriculture 2.2 1.9 2.1 5.5 30 Industry 5.3 -0.3 6.7 8.5 Manufacturing .. .. 64.2 7.0 Services 2.5 -2.1 -1.7 6.0 i0 Private consumption 0.3 -1.1 1.3 12.4 o General government consumption 0.8 -3.0 -10.1 -0.6 10 Gross domestic investment -8.7 -6.1 19.3 32.8 -so Imports of goods and non-factor services 1.9 -3.8 -10.2 29.5 - Exports Imports Gross national product 2.9 -0.8 -3.3 14.5 Note: 1995 data are preliminary estimates. The diamonds show four key indicators in the country (in bold) compared with its income-group average. If data are missing, the diamond will be incomplete. 20 SCHEDULE F Page 2 of 2 C6te d'Ivoire PRICES and GOVERNMENT FINANCE 1976 1986 1994 1996 Domestic prices Inflation (%) (% change) 40 Consumer prices 11.4 1.8 25.9 11.0 30 Implicit GDP deflator 3.9 4.1 38.1 14.0 20 Government finance 1 (% of GOP) 0 2 3 94 5 Current revenue .. 32.9 20.5 21.7 1 .e 92 93 94 9s Current budget balance .. 8.9 -5.6 -0.3 - GDP def. CPI Overall surplus/deficit .. 3.2 -9.5 -5.1 TRADE 1975 1986 1994 1996 (millions USS) Export and Import levels (mill. US$) Total exports (fob) 1,239 2,761 2,867 3,890 4oo0 Cocoa 887 951 1,320 Fuel .. 618 325 400 30 Manufactures .. 728 645 900 Total imports (cif) 1,160 1,721 1,903 2.808 2 Food .. 273 317 514 Fuel and energy .. 379 396 492 Capital goods .. 446 423 614 Export price index (1987=100) 42 145 80 96 89 ga 91 92 93 94 95 Import price index (1987=100) 42 116 112 122 DExports Mimports Terms of trade (1967=100) 102 125 71 78 BALANCE of PAYMENTS 1976 1986 1994 1996 (milions US$) Current account balance to GDP ratio (%) Exports of goods and non-factor services 1,465 3.160 3,366 4.483 o Imports of goods and non-factor services 1,561 2,173 2,438 3,424 8 90 91 82 93 Resource balance -96 987 929 1,059 Net factor income -141 -866 -1,022 -1,094 Net current transfers -184 -279 -238 -408 -10 Current account balance, before official transfers -421 42 -330 -444 -1 Financing items (net) 328 -8 760 826 Changes in net reserves 92 -34 -430 -383 -20 Memo: Reserves including gold (mill. US$) 103 19 221 695 Conversion rate (localVUS$) 214.3 449.3 557.4 499.7 EXTERNAL DEBT and RESOURCE FLOWS 1976 1985 1994 1996 (nillions US$) Composition of total debt, 1995 (mill. US$) Total debt outstanding and disbursed 1,460 9,654 17.394 19,010 IBRD 73 965 1,691 1,573 A IDA 1 7 576 813 G 1573 813 3966 1 C Total debt service 142 1,114 1,244 1,046 427 IBRD 6 126 340 334 D IDA 0 0 2 5 1569 Composition of net resource flows Official grants 17 16 683 730 Official creditors 78 92 563 247 E Private creditors 231 -1 -39 15 F 5317 Foreign direct investment 69 29 17 45 5345 Portfolio equity 0 0 7 4 World Bank program Commitments 134 215 554 369 A - IBRD E - Bilateral Disbursements 26 70 469 245 B-IDA D - Other multilateral F - Private Principal repayments 1 44 196 199 C - IMF G - Short-term Net flows 25 26 273 46 1 Interest payments 5 82 146 140 Net transfers 20 -57 127 -94 International Economics Department 8/20/96 MAP SECTION BRID 28668 MALI COTE DIVOIRE SURKINA FASO RURAL LAND MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNTIY INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 0'o' PROJET NATIONAL DE GESTION DES TERROIRS ET pORHOGO A D'EQUIPEMENT RURAL (PNGTER) dn PROJECT AREAS ZONES DU PROJET Seguelo AREAS ALREADY COVERED BY NATURAL VEGETATION LAND TENURE SECURITY OPERATIONS VEGETAT7ON NATURELLE 10NYV DJA CGVJERTES PAR GUINEA E c FONCIER RURAL SUDANIAN SAVANNA (GRASSLAND G IN A----- & UIGHT BUSH/TREE SAVANNA) &I IE N0 D O U K . ¯3PNGTER PROJECE AREAS SAVANE SOUDANENNE (PRAIRIES IEN NJ E/ ON OU OY ZONES DU PNGTER ET SA VANE LEGEREMENT B Wo J0 SOHYETS, RAINFALL IN - ---- SUBR-SUDANIAN SAVANNA iSHYETES PLVIMETRIOUES - -- - (BS AND TEE SAVANNA) G=øu 0S A VANE SUB-S5UDANIENNE ..E RVERS (SAVANE 3OISEE) Dok.l.o FEVES - 1NTERMEDIATE ZONE '" 0 B UAKE NAINAIAPTLZONE INTERMEDIAIRE CAPITALED'ETAT -- S DECDO US FOREST - Bc' --------J- FORET SEMI-DECIDUS E EJ *E - , REGIONAL BORDER5 '8 LIMITE DR REGiON ~'RAIN FOREST FOETOMBROPHILE r .," ~ .-" 1 - INTERNATIONAL BOUNDAR(ES LIMLTES DES ETATS UTTORAL ZONE ZONE UTORALE Sokassc N D L O 0 20 o 0 8 1I0 120 so YAMOUSS UKRO o A GLOMETERS ABENGóLU U ) Doloo YAMOUSSOUKRO -- GHANA 2" 5 --MAURITANIA \ RO- 5 SENEGAL -So bré TH ENIGER ABIDJ N 80 GAMA- GUINEA. LIBERIA i GUNEA BURKINA FASO AW0 C0- -7 ~~" å ~5ERRA' COTE~ \1 5 i DRO ONDVORE D R NIGER[A -~ < Arx ® GHANA~ UBERIA-i, Y 5' Gulf of Guinea ATLANTIC OCEAN APRIL 1 997 s IMAGING Report No.: P 7085 IVC Type: MOMD