INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET ADDITIONAL FINANCING Report No.: 83922 Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 06~Jan.-20 14 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: Africa Project ID: Pl47508 Parent Project ID: Pl21908 Project Name: CAADP MDTF: CAADP MDTP: African Union Commission (AU C) Child Trust Fund Additional Financing Parent Project Name: CAADP MDTF: CAADP MDTF: Ati"ican Union Commission Child Trust Fund Task Team Leader: David Nielson Estimated Board Date: 31-Jan.-20 14 Managing Unit: AFTA2 Sector(s): Agricultural extension and research (20%), Crops (20%), Animal production (20%), Forestry (20%), Gen. agriculture, fishing, and forestry (20%) Thcme(s): Analysis of economic growth (20%), Rural markets (20%), Rural policies and institutions (20%), Climate change (20%), Environmental policies and institutions (20%) Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 No (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)? Project Financing Data (in USD Million) Total Project Cost: 2.00 Total Bank Financing: 12 00 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount Borrower 0.00 CAADP MDTF 2.00 Total 2.00 Environmental Catcgm-y: C- Not Required Is this a Repeater project? Yes Is this a Transferred No project'! 2. Project Development Objective(s) A. Current Project Development Objectives- Parent The CTF's current PDO is to improve alignment of agricultural policies and increased political commitment to CAADP in Member States through support ofAUC-DREA. B. Proposed Project Development Objectives -Additional Financing (AF) The proposed revised PDO is improved enabling environment for Afhcan agricultural programs and policies at national, regional and continental level. 3. Project Description The proposed additional financing (AF) will cover the costs associated with AU C-OREA's mandate, outlined in the African Union Commission Strategic Plan 2014-2017, to support the implementation ofCAADP. This will include generating policy briefs and statements that will inform and influence the policy debates on the key challenges facing African agriculture, supporting events and processes that raise political profile of these challenges, ensuring there are systems in place that allow a robust monitoring of CAADP impacts and finally investing in strategies that will enable African partners to communicate the policy positions and results of CAADP across Africa and internationally. The expected outcomes of the additional financing will be an improved and more inclusive policy design and implementation at cotmtry level; strengthened capacity of African member states and institutions in delivery of agricultural services; support to more efficient and stronger institutions; more inclusive evidence~based agricultural planning; stronger political engagement in support of CAADP implementation; a strengthened CAADP analytical system with AU support including supporting ReSAKSS and Country Joint Sector Reviews etc. The outcomes generated through AUC-DREA's leadership will be especially critical in catalyzing CAADP implementation in pre-CAADP countries, galvanizing stalled CAADP processes and, generally, ensuring countries remain focused on achieving their specific goals under CAADP The proposed AF will support the following: • Support to CAADP 's new agenda. As a framework CAADP has evolved over time and in 2012 stakeholders launched the Sustaining CAADP momentum initiative which presents the new policy vision for CAADP over the coming decade. The initiative has been formally endorsed by the political processes within AU. The initiative expands CAADP's scope by encouraging stronger engagement in key areas such as policy reform, private sector investment, and results. AF to CTFs will ensure CTF recipients are able to play a central role in effectively delivering this new initiative. • Consolidating on going refOrm processes. Over the past year CAADP has established a number of strategic initiatives, including establishing a results framework for lhe entire CAADP process, establishing processes that will lead regional investment plans, and a new structure for delivering African-led approaches to knowledge information and skills into the CAADP process. All these processes are enabling CAADP to become more effective and sustainable. The AF would allow the organizations to continue to mainstream these initiatives into CAADP. • Strengthening the deliverv o( current CAADP commitments. CAADP represents an ambitious agenda. Building the capacity of organizations to take on this agenda has taken time. AF would enable these organizations to further expand the number of countries going through the basic elements of CAADP planning processes. It would enable the strengthening of processes seeking to strengthen regional integration 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) The proposed AF will fund activities implemented at AUC Secretariat, based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia and continent-wide 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists on the Team NIA 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01 No Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 No Forests OP/BP 4.36 No Pest Management OP 4.09 No Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11 No [ndigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 No Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 No Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 No Projects on International Waterways OP/BP 7.50 No Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60 No II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary ofKey Safeguard Lfsues I. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project IdentifY and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: No new World Bank Safeguard policies are triggered by the proposed additional financing (AF). The proposed AF is rated category C (not required) which is in line with the ratings of the original CTF (Pl2!908). The activities funded by the CTF will be limited the above areas and the CTF cannot and will not fund any on the ground agricultural activities or civil works, their engineering design (either detailed or schematic) or their feasibility study either at AUC level or in Member States. There will therefore be no adverse environmental or social impacts associated with the CTF implementation. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: N/A 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. NJA 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. AUC has complied with World Bank safeguard policies since the CTF became effective in 2011; however as a category C no safeguards policies were triggered. The Bank Task Team will continue to work closely with AUC as it has been doing during CTF implementation to ensure that the processes that the proposed AF will support includes evaluating member countries envirorunental and social management systems .. 5. Identify the l. N/A If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: N/A C. Comp!imtce Monitoring Indicators at the Corpomte Level The World Bank Policy on Disclosure oflnfonnation Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Ye' [ l No [ l NA [X] Bank's Infoshop? I-I ave relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place Yes [ l No [ l NA [X] in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project~affected gl"Oups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes [ l No [ l NA [X] responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ X] project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [X ] the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with Yes [ ] No [ J NA [X J the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? Ill. APPROVALS Task Team Leader: Name: David Nielson Approved IJy: Regional Safeguards Adv isor: Sector Manager: