Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: 60301-BJ EMERGENCY PROJECT PAPER ON A PROPOSED CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 31.6 MILLION (US$ 50 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE REPUBLIC OF BENIN FOR THE EMERGENCY URBAN ENVIRONMENT PROJECT APRIL 26, 2011 Africa Environment and Natural Resources Management Unit (AFTEN) Sustainable Development Department Africa Region 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 (Exchange Rate Effective March 31, 2011) Currency Unit = CFA Franc US$ 1 = CFAF 480 SDR 1 = US$ 1.5885 FISCAL YEAR January 1 ­ December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ABE Benin Environmental Protection Agency (Agence Béninoise pour l'Environnement) AFD French Development Agency/Agence française de Développement AGETUR Public Works Executing Agency (Agence d'Exécution des Travaux Urbains) CAS Country Assistance Strategy CCP Communal Contingency Plan CEA Country Environmental Analysis CIDA Canadian International Development Agency CISU Community Initiative Support Unit COSUCO Steering Committee (Comité de Suivi, de Coordination et d'Orientation) CPS Country Partnership Strategy DGEau General Directorate for Water ­ Direction Générale de l'Eau DMN National Meteorological Department (Département de la Métrologie Nationale) DPPC Directorate for Prevention and Civil Protection (Direction de la Prévention et de la Protection Civile) DST Technical Services Department/Direction de Service Technique ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States EHAP Emergency Humanitarian Action Plan EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ERR Economic Rate of Return ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework EPP Emergency Project Paper ESSAF Environmental and Social Screening Assessment Framework EU European Union FCFA Franc CFA FEWS Flood Early Warning System GDP Gross Domestic Product GFDRR Global Fund for Disaster Relief and Recovery GIS Geographic Information System GPS Global Positioning System GOB Government of Benin IDA International Development Association ICB International Competitive Bidding IEG Independent Evaluation Group IFR Interim Financial Report IRR Internal Rate of Return ISC Inter-ministerial Steering Committee KfW German Bank for Cooperation (Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau) MDG Millennium Development Goal MEPN Ministry of Environment and Protection of Nature MEW Ministry of Energy and Water MSWM Municipal Solid Waste Management MUPHLRCEP Ministry of Urban Planning, Housing, Land Reform, and Coastal Erosion Protection NAPA National Action Program for Climate Change Adaptation (NAPA); Programme d'Action National d'Adaptation aux Changements Climatiques du Bénin (PANA-Bénin) NCB National Competitive Bidding NCP National Contingency Plan NDC Neighborhood Development Committee NPV Net Present Value NSWMS National Solid Waste Management Strategy NUWS National Urban Wastewater Strategy OP 8.00 Operational Policy 8.00 Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies ORAF Operational Risk Assessment Framework PAACO Cotonou Agglomeration Support Program (Programme d'Appui à l'Agglomération de Cotonou) PDNA Post Disaster Needs Assessment PDO Project Development Objective PIM Project Implementation Manual PMU Project Management Unit PPR Post Procurement Review PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy RAP Resettlement Action Plan RPF Resettlement Policy Framework SDR Special Drawing Rights SONEB Water Company of Benin (Société Nationale des Eaux du Bénin) SSS Single Source Selection SWM Solid Waste Management UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Program WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Vice President: Obiageli Katryn Ezekwesili Country Director: Madani. M. Tall Sector Director: Jamal Saghir Sector Manager: Idah Pswarayi-Riddihough Country Manager: Olivier Fremond Task Team Leader: Africa Eshogba Olojoba REPUBLIC OF BENIN EMERGENCY URBAN ENVIRONMENT PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 B. Emergency Challenge: Country Context, Recovery Strategy and Rationale for Proposed Bank Emergency Project.................................................................................................... 1 C. Bank Response: The Project .............................................................................................. 7 D. Appraisal of Project Activities ......................................................................................... 11 E. Implementation Arrangements and Financing Plan ......................................................... 14 F. Project Risks and Mitigating Measures ............................................................................ 17 G. Terms and Conditions for Project Financing ................................................................... 17 Annex 1: Detailed Description of Project Components ............................................................. 18 Annex 2: Results Framework and Monitoring .......................................................................... 28 Annex 3: Summary of Estimated Project Costs ......................................................................... 31 Annex 4: Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF) .................................................. 32 Annex 5: Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements ....................................... 34 Annex 6: Procurement Arrangements ........................................................................................ 41 Annex 7: Implementation and Monitoring Arrangements ....................................................... 45 Annex 8: Environmental and Social Screening and Assessment Framework......................... 48 Annex 9: Project Preparation and Appraisal Team Members ................................................. 72 Annex 10: Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework ................................................ 73 Annex 11: Economic and Financial Analysis ............................................................................. 75 Annex 12: Documents in Project Files ........................................................................................ 82 Annex 13: Country at a Glance ................................................................................................... 83 EMERGENCY OPERATION PROJECT PAPER DATA SHEET Republic of Benin BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project Africa Region Basic Information Date: April 8, 2011 Sectors: General water, sanitation and flood Country Director: Madani M. Tall protection (55%); Solid waste management Sector Manager: Idah Pswarayi-Riddihough (25%), Sub-national government (20%) Team Leader: Africa Eshogba Olojoba Themes: Other Urban Development (P); Project ID: P113145 Disaster Risk Management (S); Municipal Expected Effectiveness Date: June 15, 2011 Governance (S) Environmental category: B Partial Assessment Project Financing Data [ ] Loan [ X ] Credit [ ] Grant [ ] Guarantee [ ] Other: Standard IDA Terms. Financing Plan (US$ million) Source Total Amount (US$ million) Total Project Cost: 55.0 Borrower: 5.0 IDA 50.0 Client Information Recipient: Republic of Benin Responsible Agency: Ministry of Urban Planning, Housing, Land Reform and Coastal Erosion Protection (MUPHLRCEP) 01 BP: 3502 Cotonou, Benin. Tel : +229 21 31 77 71 +229 21 31 77 71 Fax: +229 21 31 51 09 web: www.muh.bj.org Estimated disbursements (Bank FY/US$ million) FY 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Annual 1.46 12.26 14.15 14.30 7.33 .50 Cumulative 1.46 13.72 27.87 42.17 49.50 50.00 Project Development Objective and Description Project development objective: To improve infrastructure and mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in Cotonou Agglomeration and to increase Benin's level of preparedness for future flooding. There are five components in the project: 1. Drainage improvement and rehabilitation (IDA US$23.56 million equivalent): To rehabilitate and improve three (3) main drainage networks in key areas of Cotonou Agglomeration, composed of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi and Seme-Podji, affected by the 2010 flood by calibrating, grading and expanding drains and channels, and rehabilitating a bridge. 2. Municipal solid waste management (IDA US$ 13.82 million equivalent): To enable Cotonou and affected neighboring municipalities to mitigate environmental and health impacts resulting from the obstruction of drainage systems caused mainly by the indiscriminate dumping of solid waste in the open that was exacerbated by the floods of October 2010. This will be achieved by substantially improving: (i) collection, transport and disposal of solid wastes through construction of collection points, transfer stations, controlled dumpsites, and one additional cell at an existing landfill site; and (ii) capacity development support to Government, municipalities, communities and NGOs. 3. Improved wastewater management and sanitation (IDA US$ 4.70 million equivalent): To reduce the negative environmental and health impacts associated with the mix of floods and untreated wastewater due to the poor nature of sanitation system in Cotonou Agglomeration. This will be achieved by the development of an appropriate institutional framework for the effective and sustainable management of urban wastewater in Benin, preparation of a wastewater master plan for Cotonou Agglomeration and Porto Novo, and the implementation of a small-scale decentralized sanitary drainage and wastewater treatment pilot project. 4. Flooding and disaster risk preparedness and management (IDA US$ 5.03 million equivalent): To increase the level of preparedness and develop a system for flood risk management including an early warning system, information and awareness program, and strengthen the capacity of the institutions involved in flood and disaster risk management. 5. Project management (IDA US$ 2.89 million equivalent): This component is designed to provide effective and efficient management support for the implementation (including monitoring and evaluation) of the project. Safeguard and Exception to Policies Safeguard policies triggered: Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) [X]Yes [ ] No Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) [ ]Yes [X] No Forests (OP/BP 4.36) [ ]Yes [X] No Pest Management (OP 4.09) [ ]Yes [X] No Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) [ ]Yes [X] No Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) [ ]Yes [X] No Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) [X]Yes [ ] No Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) [ ]Yes [X] No Projects on International Waters (OP/BP 7.50) [ ]Yes [X] No Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) [ ]Yes [X] No Does the project require any exceptions from Bank policies? [ ]Yes [ ] No Have these been approved by Bank management? [ ]Yes [ ] No Conditions and Legal Covenants: Financing Agreement Reference Description of Date Due Condition/Covenant Section 4.01(a) Each Delegated Contract Prior to effectiveness (see Section I.B.1 of Schedule 2) Management Agreement has been executed and delivered by the parties thereto and all conditions precedent to its effectiveness (other than the effectiveness of this Agreement) have been fulfilled Section 4.01(b) the Recipient has adopted the Prior to effectiveness Project Implementation Manual Section 4.01(c) the Recipient has established: (i) Prior to effectiveness the Steering Committee; and (ii) the Project Management Unit Section 4.01(d) Each Memorandum of Prior to effectiveness (see Section I.A(4) of Schedule 2) Understanding has been executed and delivered by the parties thereto and all conditions precedent to its effectiveness (other than the effectiveness of this Agreement) have been fulfilled. Section I.A.3(c) of Schedule 2 The Recipient shall recruit for No later than three (3) the PMU (x) an environment and months after the social safeguards specialist and Effective Date. (y) a flood and disaster risk management specialist. Section I.E.1 of Schedule 2 The Recipient shall adopt and No later than six (6) publicly disclose the ESMF and months after the RPF. Effective Date. Section II.B.4 of Schedule 2 The Recipient shall, and shall No later than four (4) cause each of the Technical months after the Operator and the Service Effective Date Operator, to appoint an external auditor Section IV.B.1 (b) of Schedule 2 No withdrawals under Category Disbursement (1) until the Association has Condition for Category received evidence satisfactory to (1), re: works it that each of the ESMF and the RFP (and any other Safeguard Document that may be relevant at such time) has been adopted and publicly disclosed by the Recipient, all in form and substance acceptable to the Association A. Introduction 1. This Emergency Project Paper (EPP) seeks the approval of the Executive Directors to provide an International Development Association (IDA) Credit in the amount of SDR 31.6 million (US$ 50 million equivalent) to the Republic of Benin for the Emergency Urban Environment Project. 2. The proposed Credit will support the Government and people of Benin to address the consequences of the 2010 flooding disaster and mitigate impacts of future floods. The proposed project will assist in protecting residents and their environment from the effects of future flooding thereby enhancing the evacuation of flood waters from some of the poorest neighborhoods of the capital Cotonou. It will also contribute towards the mitigation of the negative environmental and health impacts resulting from poor drainage, solid waste and wastewater system management that was exacerbated by the flood as well as from the lack of flood preparedness. The proposed support will therefore respond to the emergency situation by providing, under Operational Policy (OP) 8.00, funds to improve and rehabilitate selected drainage networks, improve solid waste management (SWM), and prepare wastewater master plans. The project will also finance institutional and technical assistance activities to help strengthen Government's capacity in flood disaster preparedness, mitigation and response at the national, municipal and local levels. 3. The proposed project has been prepared in close collaboration with several local and international partners. The project, which is co-financed by the Government of Benin (GOB) and the municipalities of Cotonou, Porto Novo, Ouidah, Abomey-Calavi and Seme-Podji in the amount of US$ 5.0 million, was closely prepared with notably the Ministry of Urban Planning, Housing, Land Reform and Coastal Erosion Protection (MUPHLRCEP), the Ministry of Environment and Protection of Nature (MEPN) and the five municipalities. The project concept and design have been closely coordinated with several development partners in the context of the recently completed Post Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA). The PDNA was prepared in the aftermath of the flood disaster by the GOB and a team composed of the World Bank, UN System, and European Commission, with support from the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR). The PDNA: (i) assessed the causes, losses and damages of the 2010 flood; (ii) determined its impact at the macroeconomic and poverty levels; (iii) estimated the short and long term needs by sector; and (iv) suggested a strategy to mitigate future floods. B. Emergency Challenge: Country Context, Recovery Strategy and Rationale for Proposed Bank Emergency Project 4. Benin is a coastal country with a population of 9 million people and a per capita annual income of US$750 (Atlas method, 2009). The agricultural sector accounts for 32% of the GDP and provides employment to about 70% of the workforce. Annual GDP growth averaged 4.3 % between 1996 and 2006, peaked at about 5% in 2008 but retracted to 2.3% in 2009 due to the global recession. Poverty is high with one third of Beninese living below the poverty line. In terms of human development indicators, Benin ranks low and is placed 161 out of 182 countries according to the 2009 UNDP Human Development Report. Compared to other African countries of similar size and development, Benin's urbanization rate is rapidly increasing with nearly 45% 1 of the population living in urban areas and half of the urban population residing in the three major cities of Cotonou, Porto Novo, and Parakou. The Environment Performance Index (EPI) benchmarks environmental sustainability performance of a country relative to other countries and ranks Benin 154 among 163 countries (Yale University, 2010) reflecting the country's weak capacity to preserve the quality of its natural resources and ensure the well being of the population. 5. Benin is considered to be among the countries with rapidly growing cities with a 5% rate of growth per year. With many of these people moving from the rural areas in response to difficult living conditions, search for jobs and need for basic services, the majority of these migrants are ending up in the already crowded and poorly serviced parts of the city, further straining the already poor services in these areas. This rapid growth is being accompanied by significant problems with respect to the disposal of solid waste; degradation of water quality; urban air pollution; building in ecologically sensitive areas that are prone to seasonal flooding and an overall degradation of environmental quality. This is the backdrop with which the initial Urban Environment Project was conceived and preparatory activities begun. The project intended to support the strengthening of the government's capacity to mitigate and manage these problems while also ensuring that the solutions developed and implemented were environmentally compatible - essentially building a platform for sustainable urban development. 6. The flooding of October, 2010 required a change in the objectives, preparation schedule and some content of the Urban Environment Project which needed to be refocused to meet the request of the GOB and to address: the rehabilitation of damaged infrastructure; the cleaning of clogged drains; the upgrading of certain infrastructure to better withstand floods that are likely to occur in the future; the improvement of SWM, etc. The results of the PDNA clearly showed that it would not be enough to simply fix what was broken but it was critical that adequate preventive measures also be designed and implemented to mitigate the devastating effects of future floods. Despite this emergency and preventive focus, the issues of poor environmental quality remain, and it is critical that the MEPN and its agencies be strengthened to address the long term negative environmental and health effects especially in urban areas. 7. Disasters in Benin and elsewhere are not random events but arise from convergence of hazards and vulnerable conditions. Disasters not only reveal underlying social, economic, political and environmental problems, but unfortunately contribute to worsening them. Environmental degradation, settlement patterns, livelihood choices and behavior all influence disaster risk, which in turn adversely affects human development and contributes to further environmental degradation. The poorest are the most vulnerable to disasters because they are often pushed to settle on the most marginal lands and have least access to prevention, preparedness and early warning. 8. Floods are the most important and recurring disaster in Benin. Indeed, floods are increasing on an alarming trend throughout West Africa (Figure 1). In Benin, some municipalities are regularly inundated for many months in the year, and some villages are constantly under water. However, the frequency and severity of these floods are increasing. Beginning in the middle of September 2010, unseasonably heavy rains struck the entire country. Whereas 136 mm of rain fell in September 2009, in 2010 128 mm was recorded on September 10 2 alone and the monthly total was 344 mm. The gravity of the 2010 flooding was unparalleled by anything the country has experienced during the last century. The rising water levels exceeded the thresholds of human settlements adapted to past flood events, taking populations by surprise and surpassing their traditional preventive, response and resilience mechanisms. Damage was severe throughout the country, affecting individuals living in both urban and rural areas where water levels rose to engulf houses and destroyed assets, food stocks, crops, and fields. There was also disruption to important social and political processes, such as the preparation of the computerized permanent electoral list in view of the 2010 presidential elections and the start of the academic school year, as many schools were used as temporary shelters. 9. In Benin, flooding affects the whole country. While the influences of other natural disasters are usually localized (drought in the north, fire in forest areas, etc), floods in Benin have a quasi-national geographic range, directly impacting on rural and urban populations and across primary, secondary and tertiary sectors. The 2010 flood disaster affected more than 680,000 people and caused the death of 46 persons. Fifty-five out of 77 municipalities were affected in varying degrees. More than 50,000 houses were destroyed and 150,000 people were left without shelter. In addition, 278 schools were flooded, 128,000 hectares of crops and farmland were ruined, and an estimated 12,000 metric tons of food stocks were lost due to destroyed storage facilities. 10. The overall damages and losses from the 2010 flood disaster are estimated to amount to 2% of Benin's GDP in 2010, as the preliminary figures of the 2010 flood damages and losses stand at US$ 157 and 100 million respectively. These figures do not however account for the opportunity loss, cost of illness and psycho-physical conditions associated with the morbidity and mortality resulting from the flood and the aftermath of the flood. For example, the burden of cholera (800 cases reported of which 60 died) was calculated and estimated at US$ 8.1 million. The total effects of this disaster (damages to infrastructure, agriculture and physical assets and the ensuing economic losses) were estimated in the PDNA at CFAF 124 billion (US$ 257 million). The impact on agriculture was particularly devastating; about 49,318 hectares of crops were destroyed and 17,300 square meters of fishing areas ruined. Public and private irrigation infrastructures also sustained significant damage. Some 81,000 head of livestock and 73,428 poultry were lost (see Table 1). 11. The most densely populated areas of Benin were particularly hard hit. In cities and Cotonou in particular, uncontrolled urban growth and poor environmental management were responsible for much of the damage. Occupation of low-lying areas and zones historically known to be liable to flooding have in most cases obstructed the natural channels for storm water. This problem is compounded by the fact that most of the existing drains and channels are non- functional and clogged with solid wastes, vegetation and mud. During the recent floods, areas like Fifadji, Sainte-Rita, Vossa, Fidjrosse and Vedoko in Cotonou were inundated as the carrying capacity of the drainage systems was exceeded (Figure 1). Pre-collection of municipal wastes was also suspended due to limited access to collection points and the fact that 60 percent of the collection points were under water. Cotonou's flat topography and high water table resulted in the mix of runoff from rain with latrine and septic tanks contents during the floods, resulting in the increase of waterborne diseases in the aftermath of the floods (Figure 2). Access to sanitation is very low and the lack of a sewage system has adverse impacts on the environment and health. Given the lack of wastewater treatment facilities, wastewater effluents from industrial activities 3 are directly discharged into the open. With respect to solid wastes, the absence of a comprehensive management system of household waste to final treatment results in illegal dumping, creating serious risks of harm to the health of surrounding populations. The collection and final disposal of solid waste remains a major challenge. The rate of evacuation, although amounting to more than 750 tons of solid waste per day in urban areas of Benin (Cotonou, Parakou, Porto Novo), remains low. Of a total of 39% collected, only 8% is transported and processed. Figure 1: Floods and Droughts in West Africa, 1970-2010 (Source: The OFDA/CRED, UCL, Belgium) 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1970 1972 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Drought Flood Figure 2: Flood affected zones in southern Benin (source GFDRR) 4 12. A major concern in sub-Saharan Africa, in particular countries with sub-optimal liquid and Solid Waste Management (SWM) systems like Benin is that floods exacerbate the living conditions of the poorest that live in vulnerable areas and degrade the environment. In the absence of proper sanitation, floods contaminate surface and underground waters with untreated feces, which put the entire population affected by the flood as well as downstream populations at risk of waterborne diseases notably cholera although the 800 cases reported after the 2010 flood could be much higher due to underreporting. Similarly, poor SWM practice, exacerbate the clogging of drainage facilities with waste that reduces the carrying capacity of the drainage systems. Disposal of solid waste to drains also increases maintenance costs. Cleaning and maintenance of drainage facilities is essential to the operational reliability of such drainage systems; thus, appropriate and effective waste management and disposal systems become an essential part of a flood risk management strategy. Table 1: Estimates of Damages and Losses, US$ million (Source: PDNA 2010) Sector Sub-sector Damages Losses Total Social 31.0 3.0 34.0 Housing 17.0 NA 17.0 Health NA NA NA Education 14.0 3.0 17.0 Productive 14.6 96.0 110.6 Agriculture 1.0 59.3 60.3 Industry NA NA NA Commerce 11.0 23.4 34.4 Tourism 2.7 13.3 15.9 Infrastructure 110.9 1.1 112.1 Transport 3.9 0.4 4.3 Energy 0.0 NA NA Water/sanitation 0.8 0.8 1.6 Other Infrastructure 106.2 NA 106.2 Total 156.5 100.1 256.7 Burden of Cholera - 8.1 8.1 Note: The Burden of Cholera (morbidity = 740; and mortality = 60 ) was calculated by using an average value of statistical life adjusted for Benin (US$ 220,000 to reduce the risk of premature death) for mortality and the cost of illness estimated at 12 days per case costed at US$ 120 per case for morbidity. The opportunity loss was based on the daily income loss of US$ 2.1 per day. 13. The 2010 floods in Benin had a significant macroeconomic impact, in a country still suffering from the effects of the global economic crisis. Without taking into account ecological damages, the productive sector, infrastructure sector and social sector are the hardest hit by the floods. Their aggregate damages and losses reached US$ 257 million in 2010 prices or about 3.2 % of the 2009 GDP (Table 1). Most of this was damage to infrastructure and crop losses. This is almost equivalent to the 2008 government investment from domestic sources and 126% of investments from foreign sources. Still, the GDP growth fell from a projected 2.8% in 2010 before the floods to 1.8% after the floods with the largest economic activity hit being the 5 primary and tertiary sectors. The 2011 GDP growth will therefore depend on the effectiveness of reconstruction by targeting the drivers of the economy, i.e., agriculture, commerce and tourism. The budget deficit was little affected by the floods as the fiscal system is disconnected between government tiers, and most of the agriculture sector is informal in Benin. Nevertheless, the inelasticity of government revenues will necessitate an effort to mobilize internal and external funding to bridge the reconstruction needs in the medium term. The floods were also responsible for some inflationary pressures illustrated by the Consumer Price Index reaching 1.5% in November 2010 against 0.4% in June 2010 due to the agricultural losses and the disruption of the chain of transport. In addition, the floods negatively affected the balance of payments as emergency imports grew, exports shrunk, and the tourists stayed away (Table 2). Table 2: Macroeconomic indicators projections before and after 2010's Benin Floods (Source, PDNA) Indicator Projection before Projection after Change the 2010 Floods the 2010 Floods GDP growth ±% of which 2.8 1.8 -1.0 Primary 2.3 1.0 -1.3 Secondary 3.2 2.8 -0.4 Tertiary 3.0 1.6 -1.4 Inflation +1.0 Balance of Payment: % Current account/GDP -7.0 -7.4 -0.4 Poverty % 33.8 34.9 +1.0 Urban 29.0 29.8 +0.8 Rural 37.3 38.6 +1.3 14. Flooding also increased poverty and vulnerability. Aside from loss of assets, poverty incidence was affected by the floods through two channels that reduced the purchasing power of a number of households: loss of income and rise in prices. More acute in rural areas, the poverty rate increased by 1.1 points equivalent to 96,514 individuals or 19,303 households. The flood severity, which was unequal across the 55 affected communes, was acute in 13 communes, which affected 71% of the population after the floods and could further increase their vulnerability should rapid measures not be taken (Table 2). 15. Given the gravity of the situation, the Government declared a state of emergency and called for international assistance to support the flood victims. The Government pledged a US$ 1 million and food and non-food items. The UN system, together with the Red Cross and non-governmental organizations, identified two areas of priority: (i) ensuring adequate care for affected vulnerable groups; and (ii) providing nutritional care to children and food assistance to their households to save lives. Under Government leadership, the UN system and NGOs activated emergency management and response mechanisms, and initiated operational assistance to populations in the flood-affected areas. However, given the severity of the floods and the large number of affected people, this was not enough. The United Nations system and other partners also put in place an Emergency Humanitarian Action Plan (EHAP). The plan which serves the purpose of a flash appeal is planned to be executed with the sum of about US$ 47 million, with the following key intervention areas: food security, education, emergency preparedness, health, shelter and WASH (Water, Sanitation and Hygiene). 16. The institutional framework for disaster risk management/reduction in Benin needs strengthening. It is characterized by the existence of multiple players with diverse 6 responsibilities, but who are unable to coordinate and combine their efforts because of lack of clear organizational and sustainable mechanisms for the implementation of emergency efforts. There is also ineffective implementation of the national contingency plan due to limited capacity. The 1999 Decentralization Law has given cities responsibility for the preparation and implementation of local development plans and the provision of basic social services and infrastructure. There is a need to have greater involvement at the municipal level in disaster risk management and reduction to align with Benin's decentralization policy and ensure that plans and policies are formulated at the level that is closest to the communities and thus with a higher chance of success. C. Bank Response: The Project 17. The President of Benin wrote to the President of the World Bank on September 30, 2010 to request support to help the affected population, and this request was reiterated by the Beninese delegation during the Bank's Annual Meetings in Washington. In response, the Bank sent a multi-sectoral (SD/HD/PREM) team in early October to make a preliminary assessment of the damage and plan next steps. The mission comprised site visits, a fly-over, and meetings with UN agencies, NGOs, and the inter-ministerial Crisis Committee. The scoping mission arrived at a time when priority needs and attention were focused on rescue and relief, rather than recovery in the post-disaster period. The mission emphasized to Government and UN partners that the Bank's comparative advantage was not immediate support for food, housing, and medical services, but rather assistance in the medium-term and long-term to address structural problems related to food insecurity, infrastructure, and climate change/disaster risk management. 18. The key finding of the scoping mission was to immediately undertake a PDNA. The Bank was able to leverage US$ 150,000 from the Global Fund for Disaster Relief and Recovery (GFDRR) to support the Government in carrying out the PDNA. In November 2011, a large multi-sectoral mission from the Bank, representatives of the UN system, the European Commission and the GFDRR, worked jointly with GOB to prepare the PDNA. The report was completed in January 2011 and since been published. 19. The proposed emergency project is a direct output of the PDNA findings. In light of the disaster, Bank management realigned the Urban Environment Project already under preparation to address key issues raised in PDNA. The 2010 flood damages and losses as assessed required interventions on urban drainage systems, SWM, wastewater and flood risk management while building the badly needed capacity of the MEPN and Ministry of Interior (MOI) Directorate for Prevention and Civil Protection (DPPC). Indeed, improving urban environmental management is meant to prevent future flooding, which will particularly avert urban damages and losses in terms of human, social, physical, capital, and natural assets (Table 1). Bank management added a special allocation of US$ 20 million IDA funds to the initial US$ 30 million allocation, and gave permission to prepare an emergency operation under OP 8.00. The project is considered as one of the three pillars of Bank support to Benin in response to the severe 2010 floods. The other two are: (i) the Agriculture Productivity and Diversification Project that has recently been approved by the Bank's Board. The Project which is financed with US$ 31 million of IDA and US$ 15 million from the Multi-Donor Trust Fund for Food Price Crisis Response aims to restore and improve productivity and value addition for selected value chains, in part to respond to flood damage and losses in the sector and (ii) The sixth Poverty 7 Reduction Support Credit (PRSC), in the amount of US$ 22 million, which will provide direct budget support to the Government of Benin to augment their resources as a result of increased budgetary demands arising from the flood disaster; and thus will allow GOB to flexibly allocate resources for remaining relief efforts as well as recovery and rehabilitation. 20. The Bank has been supporting urban environmental management for almost two decades. While previous Bank support for urban services focused on much needed infrastructure and capacity building, the support during the current CAS period (2009-2012) was re-oriented towards improving urban environmental management including SWM, controlling urban transport pollution, increasing access to urban sanitation, and drainage services, and strengthening the institutional capacity for environmental management. The first Bank urban project (1993-1997) focused on infrastructure rehabilitation and environmental sanitation in Cotonou and Porto-Novo. This project was followed by the first Decentralized City Management Project (PGUD-1, 2000-04) in Cotonou, Porto-Novo and Parakou and the second Decentralized City Management Project (PGUD-2, 2006-10), which was granted an additional envelope in 2008 to cover secondary cities. These urban projects laid the foundation for municipal capacity building in the planning, implementation and monitoring of municipal services and improvements in urban infrastructure such as support to drainage, roads, construction of landfills in key cities. The PGUD-2 placed emphasis on the SWM component in Porto Novo by helping the city to develop a long term vision for integrated SWM and implementing a priority action plan with studies, technical support, and construction of a landfill. Thus, the proposed emergency project builds on the Porto Novo experience to replicate parts of the collection experience to other cities. However, issues such as improved collection of solid waste in Cotonou and neighboring municipalities, wastewater treatment, and preparedness and adaptation to the natural disaster-climate change continuum in urban planning have hardly been addressed by Bank lending and other donor interventions in Benin. Through the new project, the Bank seeks to address some of these challenges by notably factoring in climate-proofing as projections of mean annual rainfall over the country from different models tend to suggest an increase of rainfall during the rainy season (July to December) and a decrease during the dry season (January to June), and the proportion of total annual rainfall that falls in `heavy' events tends towards increases in the ensemble projections. Project Development Objectives 21. The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to improve infrastructure and mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in Cotonou Agglomeration 1 and to increase Benin's level of preparedness for future flooding. Brief Description of Project Components 22. Component 1: Drainage improvement and rehabilitation (IDA US$ 23.56 million equivalent). Lead Agency: Ministry of Urban Planning, Housing, Land Reform, and Coastal Erosion Protection (with the participation of the municipalities). The objective of this component is to rehabilitate and improve drainage networks in key areas of Cotonou Agglomeration, composed of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi and Seme-Podji, affected by the 2010 flooding. This will 1 Cotonou Agglomeration is composed of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi and Seme-Podji, 8 be achieved by calibrating, grading, cleaning, scouring and expanding drains and channels. The interventions will occur in three collectors (AA, P and W); and the Fifadji Bridge will be elevated and rehabilitated to complement civil works to be undertaken on the P collector. It will also include capacity building, training, and strengthening the system for repair and maintenance of drains and channels. 23. Component 2: Municipal solid waste management (IDA US$ 13.82 equivalent). Lead Agency: Ministry of Environment and Protection of Nature (with the participation of the municipalities). The objective of this component is to enable Cotonou Agglomeration and neighboring municipalities of Porto-Novo and Ouidah to mitigate the negative environmental impacts resulting from the obstruction of the drainage canals with waste, and also from the mix of flood waters with poorly managed and disposed-off municipal wastes. This will be achieved by substantially improving the collection, transport and disposal of solid wastes in the project's targeted areas and by strengthening the institutional and legal frameworks for SWM, as per the National Solid Waste Management Strategy (NSWMS). The following activities will be financed: (i) strengthening the institutional and regulatory framework for SWM, including capacity building of the MEPN, and support and capacity building to the municipalities and NGOs involved in pre-collection of municipal wastes in the five municipalities; (ii) construction of municipal solid waste collection points and transfer stations in the 5 municipalities of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi, Porto Novo, Ouidah and Seme-Podji; (iii) construction of a controlled dumpsite at Abomey-Calavi; and (iv) the construction of an additional cell at the Ouesse landfill site. 24. Component 3: Improved Municipal Wastewater Management and Sanitation (IDA US$ 4.70 million equivalent). Lead Agency: SONEB, Ministry of Energy and Water (with participation of the Cotonou municipality, MEPN and MEE). The objective of this component is to develop an appropriate institutional and regulatory framework for the effective and sustainable management of municipal wastewater in Benin in view of mitigating the negative environmental impacts and health hazards resulting from the mix of runoffs from rains with latrine and septic tank contents during the floods and leading to waterborne diseases in the aftermath of the floods. The following activities will be financed: (i) capacity building and provision of technical assistance for establishing appropriate norms, standards, guidelines and regulations for more effective management of wastewater; (ii) development of urban wastewater master plans for the Cotonou Agglomeration (composed of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi and Seme-Podji) and Porto Novo; and (iii) implementation of a small-scale decentralized sanitary drainage and wastewater treatment pilot project. 25. Component 4: Flooding and disaster risk preparedness and management (IDA US$ 5.03 million equivalent). Lead Agency: Ministry of Interior through the DPPC in conjunction with MEPN and MEW. The objective of this component is to increase the level of preparedness in Benin for addressing future flooding and to strengthen the capacity of the institutions involved in Flood and Disaster Risk Management. Activities financed under this component include: (i) the development of an early warning system; (ii) the implementation of an information dissemination and awareness raising program on floods; and (iii) the institutional strengthening of key institutions and other principal actors on management of crisis and risks associated with flooding to increase the efficiency of the National Flood Emergency Plan. 9 26. Component 5: Project management (IDA US$ 2.89 million equivalent). This component is designed to provide effective and efficient management support for the implementation of the project, including the development and operationalization of an effective and efficient Monitoring and Evaluation System, and all fiduciary requirements (safeguards, procurement and financial management). Eligibility for Processing under OP/BP 8.00 27. The proposed project is eligible for processing as an emergency operation. Under OP/BP 8.00, Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies; emergency support can be provided in response to a request by the Government for urgent assistance in response to an event that has caused, or is likely to cause, a major adverse economic and social impact. Specific objectives that may be supported through emergency assistance under OP/BP 8.00 include restoration of economic activities and physical and productive assets. 28. Consistent with these objectives, the activities planned under the project are designed to help stabilize the situation facing Benin in the post-disaster period and thus assist the country in the post-disaster recovery and reconstruction efforts. Success of the activities to be financed under the project requires urgent actions in the coming months in particular before the onset of the 2011 rainy season. This in turn depends on the use of flexible and accelerated procedures as allowed under OP/BP 8.00, particularly in the processing of project preparation, safeguards compliance, procurement, and disbursement arrangements. Without such provisions, project processing cannot be mobilized consistent with the level of urgency the country is now experiencing. Consistency with Country Assistance Strategy 29. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the 2009 Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Benin. The Project is aligned directly with pillars 2, 3 and 5 of the CAS (infrastructure development; human capital development to improve basic services; and promoting equitable and sustainable development), and indirectly with 1 and 4, (acceleration of growth; and improvement of governance and transparency and fighting corruption). In addition, the project supports GOB's national strategy for implementation of the UN climate change convention and NAPA and is aligned with the Bank's 2009 Africa Region climate change strategy (2009-2012). Expected Outcomes 30. Key outcome/impact indicators include: (i) number of alerts on flood risk issued per year using the Flood Early Warning System; and (ii) percentage reduction of households vulnerable to flooding in the targeted municipalities as a result of improved infrastructure. 31. Improved infrastructure is an aggregation of improvements made to the drainage and sanitation networks and the municipal solid waste infrastructure 32. Key output indicators include: (i) length of drainage network rehabilitated; (ii) rehabilitation of the Fifadji Bridge; (iii) number of municipal solid waste collection points and/or transfer stations constructed and operational; (iv) number of direct project beneficiaries, of which 10 number of females (CORE); (iv) wastewater master plan developed for Cotonou Agglomeration (composed of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi and Seme-Podji) and Porto Novo; (v) pilot low-cost small scale sanitation project implemented and operational; (vi) installation of Flood Early Warning System; and (vii) targeted municipalities with Communal Flood Contingency Plans. D. Appraisal of Project Activities 33. Economic and Financial Analysis. The analysis covers not only the 2010 devastating flooding but also the recurrent annual flooding during the high season (April-July) and the low season (September-October) as the intervention benefits will accrue over the lifetime of the proposed component investments. The intervention benefits were partly determined as the flood forgone damages and losses on private and public human, social, physical, capital and natural assets as mostly reported in Table 1: health burden, ecological system disruption, inhabitable housing, infrastructure damages, opportunity losses, etc. A cost-benefit analysis was performed to determine the economic viability of the combined preventive and adaptive components (drainage, bridge and solid waste) investments as well as the financial viability of the solid waste component. The former analysis was performed to derive the social benefits accruing to society whereas the latter analysis was performed to determine the profitability and sustainability of the solid waste service system. The economic analysis for the preventive and adaptive investments, which is meant to reduce the number of the flood/days and opportunity losses in Cotonou, is viable as it yields a net present value (NPV) of US$ 77 million over 24 years, a benefit/cost ratio of 11 while the economic internal rate of return (IRR) is also positive with 31%. Similarly, the financial analysis for the SWM is also profitable and yields a NPV of US$ 3 million with 10% IRR and a 1.5 benefit/cost ratio (Table 3). 34. The sensitivity economic analysis is conducted to test the viability of the preventive and adaptive subcomponents with a reduction of the number of disruptive severe-flood-days from 10 to 2 and the reduction of the annual incremental land value to 5%. In both cases, the components remain viable. Also, a sensitivity financial analysis was performed to test the profitability of the SWM by increasing the annual cost by 5% and reducing the annual revenues to 2% over the project lifetime. Yet, the solid waste subcomponents remain profitable. Moreover, a dynamic waste fee analysis was performed and reveals that the recalibration of pre-collection, transfer and controlled dumping fees could result in both waste management efficiency gains and lower consumer waste fees that could benefit the poor. Table 3: Economic and Financial Analysis Summary (Source: Annex 11) Items Flood Prevention and Adaptation Solid Waste Economic Analysis Financial Analysis Discount rate: 12% Discount rate: 5% Cost/Benefit Analysis NPV/24 years US$ 77.4 US$ 3 IRR/24 years 31% 10% Benefit/Cost Ratio/24 years 11 1.6 Sensitivity Analysis Reduction of the number of flood-day to 2 Viable Reduction of the incremental land value to 5% Viable Annual increase of 5% of the operating cost Profitable Annual decrease of revenues to 2% Profitable 11 35. Technical. The project components have been identified and prepared in close collaboration with the relevant stakeholders in the ministries, municipalities and NGOs; and they respond to urgent needs on the ground. The technical solutions and designs are simple and within the reach of the Beninese counterparts (see Annex 1 for details). For each component, the activities have been identified and selected on the basis of the availability of analytical studies and quality technical studies. The project has benefited from reports produced under the PGUD-2 currently under implementation, including but not limited to the NSSWM; the National Strategy for Treatment of Wastewater in Benin and the Business Plan for the operationalization of the Strategy; and the most recent PDNA report of January 2010. In some of the cases, the bidding documents are available, and just need to be revised and updated. Given the emergency nature of the project, pre-feasibility studies, followed by feasibility studies and detailed engineering designs, which were not undertaken at the time of preparation of the project will be prepared during the first 6 months of the project for the solid waste investment component (opening of the new cell at the landfill site, construction of municipal solid waste collection points and transfer stations in the 5 municipalities of Cotonou, Porto Novo, Abomey-Calavi, Seme-Podji and Ouidah) and the decentralized wastewater drainage and treatment pilot project. To ensure sustainability of the investments, in particular the components on drainage systems, SWM, arrangements for operation and maintenance have been put in place by the participating municipalities. The budget needed for the operation and maintenance will be integrated in their annual budgets. 36. Institutional. As requested by the Government, the project will be implemented by the same Project management unit (PMU) and executing agencies that are currently implementing the PGUD-2. The PMU will have overall day to day implementation responsibilities including managerial, liaison and coordination, evaluation, supervision and dissemination functions. As with PGUD-2, the GOB will contract through delegated contract management arrangements 2, the AGETUR and SERHAU executing agencies that have over ten year experience and a proven track record in implementing IDA-financed projects and are familiar with the nature of the proposed works and have the best capacity in terms of procurement, financial management and supervision of comparable activities. The contracting of the AGETUR and SERHAU through delegated contract management arrangements satisfactory to the Bank is a condition of effectiveness. 37. Fiduciary. All fiduciary aspects have been reviewed during project appraisal. In accordance with OP 8.00, procurement and financial management capacity assessment has been carried out on the two executing agencies: AGETUR and SERHAU. The two entities will fulfill all fiduciary requirements including proper financial and procurement management systems; proper reporting process and audits. Details on fiduciary aspects are in Annexes 5 and 6. 38. Safeguards. The project is classified as Environmental Category B since potential adverse environmental and social impacts are generally small-scale and site specific with known mitigation measures to be put in place. Most of the project activities are intended to mitigate the negative environmental impacts and health hazards resulting from the current flooding situation. Correspondingly, the project triggers two safeguards policies: OP/BP 4.01 on Environmental Assessment and OP/BP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement. The two safeguards instruments: the 2 Procured using single-sourcing. See procurement section. 12 Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) prepared and disclosed for the Urban Environment Project will be revised and updated to address the change in project components and activities to be financed under the project. These instruments shall be consulted upon and re-disclosed for this emergency operation within six months of effectiveness and before commencement of the civil works. Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs), Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMPs) and/or Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs) will be prepared as and when necessary once sites and plans for civil works are finalized. 39. In accordance with OP 8.00 and to guide the environmental assessment and mitigation process, an Environmental and Social Screening and Assessment Framework (ESSAF) has been developed (see Annex 8). The ESSAF provides guidance on the approach to be taken during project implementation for the screening and design of sub-projects and planning of mitigation measures. The PMU and the implementing agencies of PGUD-2 are very experienced in the Bank's environmental and social safeguards compliance, including implementing a highly satisfactory Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) that involved payment of compensation and provision of a range of amenities and services, and community development activities. Lessons learned and reflected in the project design 40. The proposed project design takes into account lessons learned from previous operations in Benin as well as from global disaster risk management and emergency recovery/reconstruction operational experience. 41. Selectivity is required on priority areas. The post-disaster reconstruction and recovery needs comes close to US$ 500 million, distributed over many productive, infrastructure and social sectors that extend beyond flood protection and drainage system improvement. The reality is that complex multi-sectoral projects are difficult to implement in an environment with limited capacity such as Benin, particularly under emergency conditions. Therefore the proposed project focuses on priority areas of reconstruction needs in Cotonou (as the worst hit urban infrastructure sector) and improving the conditions for flood risk management and preparedness nationally. 42. The proposed project builds on previous experiences, in particular those accumulated during the design and implementation of PGUD-1 and PGUD-2. One of the valuable lessons learned from these projects is that attention needs to be paid to the sustainability of investments at the municipal level. In addition, the ongoing studies in the South Asia and North Africa on climate change adaptation were considered in the design of the flood and disaster risk management component that helps set up an early warning system, and engaging the population to become more aware and prepared to face natural disasters. 43. Public participation and communication are key to success. Experience clearly demonstrates that without strong public participation and communication to address public concerns, projects that depend on changes in public behavior are likely to fail. The Project took into consideration the CIDA experience in SWM, the formulation of Bank supported draft NSWMS and the Bank's experience in Porto Novo (PGUD-2) on public information campaigns and media-coverage of activities. 13 44. The use of existing implementing agencies is critical to successfully implementing emergency operations. In view of the significant capacity limitations, the option of setting up a new PMU and executing entities was not deemed practical, especially in the context of an emergency operation where implementation efficiency is critical. The proposed project is using an existing well performing PMU and executing entities with over ten years of experience managing Bank-financed projects, and which have maintained a satisfactory implementation rating over the past 24 months; and are knowledgeable of World Bank fiduciary processes and guidelines. E. Implementation Arrangements and Financing Plan 45. Main counterpart and oversight. The MUPHLRCEP is the designated Ministry responsible for the project and will be the Bank's main counterpart. It has the responsibility of ensuring that the project is implemented in a timely fashion, and that the development objectives are achieved. At the national level, the project will be coordinated by the Inter-ministerial Steering Committee (ISC) headed by the Minister of MUPHLRCEP. The ISC will provide overall guidance and review of project implementation progress and will facilitate the coordination and collaboration between ministries, municipal authorities, and other government agencies involved in the project implementation. The ISC will be composed of MUPHLRCEP, Ministries of Environment and Protection of Nature, Water and Energy, Interior, Decentralization, Health, Development and Planning, Finance; and the Mayors of the participating municipalities (Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi, Porto Novo, Seme-Podji and Ouidah). The ISC will meet twice a year to review activity reports and progress on implementation of work plans and provide recommendations to advance project implementation and ensure that project objectives are met. 46. Project management. As agreed with Government, the PMU of the PGUD-2 established under the supervision of MUPHLRCEP will be in charge of the day-to-day implementation of the project, which will include the following functions: (i) follow-up and evaluation of work performed by the two implementing agencies; (ii) liaise with the focal points in the other ministries/agencies working on project activities; (iii) act as technical secretariat of the ISC in charge of the project's global supervision; (iv) prepare consolidated technical and financial project reports for the Bank; and (v) ensure dissemination of learning from the project to the Government. The PMU shall be headed by a Project Director, who shall be assisted by a team comprising of: (i) civil works specialist; (ii) monitoring and evaluation specialist; (iii) studies specialist; (iv) environmental and social safeguards specialist; and (v) flood and disaster risk management specialist. 47. Executing agencies. As with PGUD-2, the Government will delegate contract management to SERHAU and AGETUR executing agencies, who have a proven track record in delegated contract management in the implementation of the Bank's as well as other donor- funded projects; and operate finance and accounting systems acceptable to the Bank. These entities shall be responsible for the technical and fiduciary aspects (financial management and procurement) of the implementation of the components. AGETUR will be responsible for major infrastructure works and accompanying technical studies and works supervision (components 1, 2 and 3); while SERHAU will undertake studies, provide technical assistance, advice, and carry out training, sensitization, and equipment purchase for components 4, 5 and part of 2. 14 48. Memorandum of Cooperation and Focal points. The MUPHLRCEP will have one-to- one working relationships and sign an MOU with the following entities to ease the component implementation: MEPN, MEE, and the five Municipalities of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi, Seme- Podji, Ouidah, and Porto Novo. In addition, the participating entities will each nominate a Focal Point, at the ministry and agency level, for the daily management of their respective components and for coordination with the PCU. Monitoring and evaluation of outcomes/results 49. The monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system will be based on the agreed results framework and monitoring arrangements. Annex 2 provides the list of PDO indicators, as well as the detailed list of result indicators for each of the four components of the project. The PMU and executing agencies (AGETUR and SERHAU) will be responsible for collecting the data needed to report on the results indicators and for conducting necessary surveys. AGETUR will be responsible for following up on indicators for components 1, 2, and 3, while SERHAU will follow-up on parts of component 2 and component 4. The result indicator responsibilities follow the division of labor between the two agencies for the executing arrangements. The PMU will have the responsibility to produce an overall Monitoring and Evaluation Report every 6 months. Financial management and disbursement arrangements 50. The project team has assessed the financial management capacity of PGUD-2 PMU which has been retained by the Government for a quick implementation of this emergency operation. The overall performance of the PGUD-2 in financial management is Satisfactory. The fiduciary responsibility of PGUD-2 is handled by two well experienced executing agencies (AGETUR and SERHAU) under the oversight of the MUPHLRCEP. Staffing has remained adequate and proper books of accounts and supporting documents have been kept in respect of all expenditures. The audit for the year ending December 2009 for PGUD-2 has been completed and the report was submitted on time. The interim un-audited financial reports have also been submitted on time. The FM arrangements for the Benin Emergency Urban Environment Project will be based on the existing arrangements. Both agencies have the same multi-projects accounting software which could be extended to the new project with SERHAU as responsible for the consolidation of the financial statements to be submitted to the PCU for finalization. The FM manual of the PGUD-2 is being customized to take into account activities of the new project, proposed amendments and lessons learned from experience implementing the PGUD-2. 51. The assessment concluded that financial management arrangements for the Project satisfy the World Bank's minimum requirements under OP/BP10.02 Financial Management, and are adequate to provide, with reasonable assurance, accurate and timely information on the status of the Project as required by the Bank. The overall fiduciary risk ratings for the project and the two executing agencies (AGETUR and SERHAU) are assessed as Low. 15 Procurement arrangements 52. The GOB has proposed to build the institutional procurement arrangements on the basis of the use of the Agencies: AGETUR and SERHAU, which are also the entities responsible for procurement implementation under the ongoing PGUD-2 project. Justification for the Sole Source Selection (SSS) of these agencies is based on the following: (i) a competitive process at this stage and in this case would be at odds with the emergency nature of this operation, as some activities will have to be done or be in place before the onset of 2011 rainy season; (ii) these agencies have demonstrated satisfactory performance in the implementation of procurement activities for PGUD-2; and (iii) the agencies have qualified staff with good knowledge of Bank procurement procedures and standard bidding documents. The Bank's procurement specialists have carried out at various times, assessments of the capacities of these agencies to implement procurement actions including procurement post reviews. The latest of such assessments was done during the preparation and appraisal mission of the current operation in February 2011, and the results of the assessment were satisfactory. The procurement risk of the project is rated ''Low''. The Bank and the Government have agreed that the MUPHLRCEP will delegate all procurement responsibilities to these agencies and will not be directly involved in procurement activities. An agreement will be signed between the MUPHLRCEP and each of AGETUR and SERHAU. SERHAU will be responsible for the coordination of procurement activities under the project, including the consolidation of procurement plans and the reporting to the PCU for finalization. 53. At appraisal, the Borrower through the implementing entities developed a six month simplified procurement plan. This plan has been agreed upon between the borrower and IDA during negotiations. It will be made available in the project database and in the Bank's external website upon Board approval. The procurement plan will be updated after 6 months following project effectiveness to incorporate revisions/updates as a result of the feasibility studies and technical designs to be prepared during the first 6 months of the project. The Procurement Plan will then be annually updated or as required by the implementing agencies in agreement with IDA to reflect the actual project implementation needs. Detailed procurement arrangements and a Simplified Procurement Plan as required by OP 8.00 are presented in Annex 5. Supervision, Monitoring and Evaluation 54. Three supervision missions per year will be conducted by the Bank in the first two years of project implementation due to the emergency nature of the project, followed by two supervision missions annually for the reminder of the project implementation period. The missions are to review project implementation activities including but not limited to procurement, financial management and disbursement, and compliance with environmental and social safeguards issues in line with the Environmental and Social Screening and Assessment Framework (ESSAF); the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF); and the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF). Further, technical and fiduciary staff based in the Bank's Benin country office and the West Africa region will also regularly follow up on implementation of project activities and provide support to the Borrower for any assistance needed. Concerning M&E, the PMU and the executing agencies will monitor project performance and progress on the outcome and output indicators; and an M&E section will be part of the Borrower's monthly progress reports. 16 55. Emergency operations are prepared over a short time period, and as a result many details are left to be defined during project implementation, which will require close supervision in the first year. Flexibility will be required to deal with the changing post-disaster conditions. The presence of most team members in the region will allow for short missions in between the normal bi-annual supervision. Finally, the results framework under the proposed project will focus on measurable results and outcomes tied to the short implementation timeframe. Closing date and implementation schedule 56. The implementation period of the proposed project is four years from April 26, 2011 to December 31, 2015. F. Project Risks and Mitigating Measures The overall project risk rating is Medium-I, low likelihood-high impact (see Annex 4 for details) G. Terms and Conditions for Project Financing 57. The proposed project will be financed through a US$ 50 million equivalent IDA credit. US$ 20 million of this amount was allocated from the special IDA allocation for the Benin floods to support flood disaster reconstruction and recovery, following GOB's request for assistance and financial support. 17 Annex 1: Detailed Description of Project Components BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project Component 1: Drainage Improvement and Rehabilitation (IDA US$ 23.56 million equivalent) 1. The objective of this component is to rehabilitate and improve the old drainage networks in keys areas of Cotonou usually affected by the 2010 floods. The drainage networks are saturated and cannot withstand the diluvian rain and flood loads because of lack of investment, inadequate maintenance and weak institutional capacity. As a result, many of the existing drains and channels are non-functional and clogged with solid wastes, vegetation and mud that are exacerbating the effects of flooding. This in turn is leading to environmental risks that trigger health problems notably affecting the poor who usually reside in less developed areas where the drainage system is limited or overloaded. 2. The lead agency responsible for the execution of Component 1 is the MUPHLRCEP and will be: managed by the PMU; and implemented by AGETUR, which will perform the procurement and supervision of the prefeasibility studies, detailed engineering design, other studies (EIA, etc.) and works. 3. The proposed component will: (i) increase the retention areas for storm water and calibrate the water flow to the outlets (Nokoue Lake, the lagoon and the ocean) by rehabilitating and improving the drainage (3 main and other smaller) networks through calibrating, grading, cleaning and expanding existing canals and drains; and (ii) elevate and rehabilitate a bridge with reinforced concrete deck resting on concrete piles in Fifadji that is prone to increased flooding. 4. In total, the component accounts for three major watersheds in the city of Cotonou accumulating about 8.6 km of drains with primary impacts expected to be the protection of over 43,600 residents from cyclical floods and their impact such as vector-borne (malaria) and water- borne diseases. Moreover, the bridge will ensure the continuity of traffic throughout the year on the Fifadji critical axis that supports traffic of nearly 20,000 vehicles per day. 5. Four main sub-components are to be financed under this component with a total envelope of US$ 23.56 million as illustrated in Table A1.1.1. Details of the areas of interventions and civil works to be done are: a. P Collector: The P basin is one of the most important in Cotonou and covers an area of more than 800 hectares and including the following densely populated areas; Vedoko, Sainte-Rita, Fifadji, Gbedjromede and Vossa. The drainage collector extends over a length of more than 7 km oriented south-north with Lake Nokoue as an outlet. It consists of a primary channel with three secondary ones. These have been clogged over the years and during the 2010 floods, many areas were inundated for over five weeks. The civil works envisaged are mainly opening and calibrating the channels floor by removal and disposal of vegetation, solid wastes and mud; and to ensure flow to the outlet. 18 b. AA Collector (Fidjrosse Kpota arm and the airport): This basin is located south-west of Cotonou and covers an area of over 600 hectares including various densely populated quarters such as Fidjrosse-Kpota, Aibatin, Fiyegnon and Vodje-Kpota. The collector consists of several secondary channels that discharge into a lagoon south-west of Cotonou. This collector has been the subject of several studies but has never benefited from a sustainable intervention with the exception of weeding at critical points. The basin is regularly flooded during the rainy season and in 2010 this was unprecedented. In calibrating the channels, the proposed civil works will permit the evacuation of stagnant water and vegetation from the habited areas into a retention basin located in the center of Fidjrosse and Fiyegnon. c. W Collector ­ Avotrou area (zone affected by cholera during and after the floods): This area is located in the southern part of Lake Nokoue. Situated downstream of several primary drainage channels, the Avotrou area also receives runoff from upstream areas. During the 2010 floods, over 90% of the area was under water displacing large numbers of persons. The planned works are opening, cleaning and calibrating of outlets (which are areas of water retention) permitting flow of run-off to the Lake. d. Fifadji Bridge: The Bridge links Sainte-Rita and Fifadji quarters: Upgrading and raising the bridge is critical for the success of the investments planned on collector P. This bridge was raised in 2003 and in 2010 it was completely submerged for about four weeks by flood waters. The civil works planned will ensure smooth flow of runoff to Lake Nokoue and will complement works to be done on Collector P. The intervention on this bridge is critical in order to ensure continuity of traffic throughout the year as the bridge supports traffic of 20,000 vehicles per day and was completely cut-off for about six weeks during the 2010 floods because it was submerged by the flood water. Table A1.1.1: Drainage Component Cost, CFAF million and US$ million Component/Activity Works Environmental Implementation Lab Delegated Total Total and Project (CFAF (US$ Social Impact Mgt. million) million) Calibrating and unclogging the P collector (primary 3 250 259 195 32 186 3 922 8.18 and secondary drainage) Calibrating and unclogging the AA collector (Fidjrossê 1 496 120 90 15 86 1 807 3.76 Kpota and Fiyégnon) Calibrating and unclogging the W2 and Wbis (in 1 397 112 84 14 80 1 687 3.51 Akpakpa) collector Construction of the Fifadji 3 196 256 192 64 185 3 893 8.11 Bridge Total 9 339 747 561 125 537 11 309 23.56 19 Component 2: Municipal Solid Waste Management (IDA US$ 13.82 equivalent) 6. The objective of this component is to enable Cotonou and affected neighboring municipalities to mitigate the negative environmental impacts and health hazards resulting from the obstruction of drainage systems by waste that was exacerbated by floods. This would result in preventing the waste-related drainage clogging during the rainy season in Cotonou, Porto Novo, Abomey-Calvi, Seme-Podji and Ouidah while improving the regulatory capacity of the MEPN. The progressive deterioration of the environmental situation in the targeted cities is much due to weak or inadequate institutional and regulatory frameworks and insufficient control of SWM chain: pre-collection, collection, transfer and final disposal. Concomitantly, the poor management of the entire solid waste chain is increasing the waste-related drainage clogging during the rainy season and compounding the flood effects in urban areas. 7. Cotonou and Porto Novo are the only cities making efforts in terms of reforms and organization that are in conjunction with SWM national reform. Hence, Cotonou, which generates 423 tonnes 3 of waste per day, has a SWM master plan based on a dynamic of privatization of the entire solid waste chain with: (i) 77 NGOs active in 6 pre-collection zones; (ii) four companies in charge of transferring wastes from the collection points to the landfill; and (iii) an operator to manage the landfill at Ouèssè ­ that also receives wastes from Abomey- Calavi and Ouidah. Currently, the rate of pre-collection is about 50%, with only 10% are transferred to the discharge of Ouessè. Pre-collection fee paid to NGOs range between CFAF 1,000 to 6,000 per month per subscriber, with a very low cost recovery rate. 8. A similar organization is adopted by Porto-Novo as well as other cities such Sèmè-Podji, Ouidah and Abomey-Calavi although it remains at an embryonic stage. The situation in Porto- Novo is being improved with the support of PGUD-2 which provides for the construction of a landfill in Takon, intended to also serve Sèmè-Podji. Efforts are underway in Ouidah with support of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) but this assistance is coming to an end while the capacity created deserves to be consolidated. Abomey-Calavi faces special challenges for its SWM due to its under-equipped and rapid population growth. 9. The lead agency responsible for the execution of Component 2 is the MEPN and the Department of Technical Services at each of the beneficiary's 5 municipalities. Implementation will be managed by AGETUR and SERHAU, which will perform the procurement and supervision of prefeasibility studies, detailed engineering design, other studies (EIA, etc.), works, capacity building, supervision of the sensitization studies, awareness studies and training. 10. The expected output are to: (i) enhance the capacity of the MEPN on municipal SWM (MSWM) regulatory and institutional aspects; (ii) build two transfer stations; (iii) provide the municipality of Abomey-Calavi with a controlled dumpsite; (iv) limit the negative impacts of solid waste on the environment in the cities of Cotonou, Porto Novo, Abomey-Calvi, Seme-Podji and Ouidah; (v) improve the technical capabilities and NGO management of pre-collection activities; (vi) build and strengthen the capacity of technical services in the five municipalities; (vii) build a new cell at the Ouessè landfill and rehabilitation by paving the access road to the 3 Data for project are from the National Solid Waste Strategy - 2008; containers are available for transfer companies at the municipalities. 20 landfill; and (viii) enhance the capacity of the MEPN on SWM regulatory and institutional aspects. 11. Four main sub-components are to be financed under this component with a total envelope of US$ 13.82 million as illustrated in Table A1.2.1. Details of the activities to be implemented include the: a. Strengthening the institutional and regulatory framework for municipal SWM, including capacity building of the MEPN, and provision of technical assistance and capacity building to the municipalities and NGOs involved in pre-collection of municipal wastes in the five municipalities. This component will include activities such as: (i) Development of MSWM norms and guidelines for municipalities, private sector and NGO operators; (ii) Establishment of a data management system for MEPN for the collection, recording and manipulation of information about the key environmental issues identified in the CEA, with a focus on MSWM as a first priority; (iii) Technical assistance and capacity development to the municipalities for procurement, supervision, payment, and monitoring of municipal solid waste contracts; and the design of an overall plan for the maintenance of the collection points, transfer stations and all vehicles and equipment used for the pre-collection and transportation of waste; (iv) Conduct of an organization study of the pre-collection in Abomey-Calavi and Seme-Podji respectively, including the design of pre-collection modalities, identifying suitable sites and support for the pre-collection contracting of NGOs and implementation of a pre-collection system in these cities; (v) Support and capacity building of local NGOs involved in pre-collection of municipal wastes in the five municipalities. This will essentially involve the: purchase of equipment including motorized carts; training in administrative, financial management, as well as professionalized service delivery; and assisting NGOs review and revise their agreements on fee structure arrangements for household waste collection; (vi) Organization of public awareness campaigns targeting the impacted population in the areas of intervention of the project on their roles and responsibilities in the MSWM system. b. Improved pre-collection and transportation of waste in the municipalities of Cotonou, Porto Novo; Abomey-Calavi; Sèmè-Podji and Ouidah. Activities would include: (i) Construction of municipal solid waste collection points and transfer stations and rehabilitation of access roads to CPs in the municipalities of Cotonou, Porto Novo; Abomey-Calavi; Sèmè-Podji and Ouidah. A pre-feasibility study, followed by feasibility studies and detailed engineering designs, which were not undertaken at the time of preparation of the project will be prepared during the first 6 months of the project to determine the optimum scheme (from the technical, economic, environmental and financial view points) of collection points and transfer stations needed for each of the 3 municipalities. The study will more specifically determine the number of collection points versus transfer stations, the necessary basic equipment for 21 these sites, the locations and distance between such points and stations, the number of trips to be made to transport waste from the collection points and transfer stations to the dumpsites. (ii) Rehabilitation of 7 km of access roads to CPs : 2 km in Cotonou, 1.5 km in Porto-Novo, 1.5 km in Abomey-Calavi; 1 km in Sèmè-Podji and 1 km in Ouidah. (iii) Acquisition of small high tipping trucks which are cost effective for primary collection systems in areas with short haul distances and narrow streets. c. Construction of a controlled dumpsite in Abomey-Calavi: This will involve feasibility study and preparation of detailed engineering design. d. Ouesse landfill site: This will entail the construction of an additional cell at the Ouesse landfill and rehabilitating the landfill's access road with an option to pave the road. There are existing feasibility and detailed technical designs for opening of the additional cell. These will have to be revised and updated. The rehabilitation of the access road will have to be preceeded by detailed technical and engineering designs studies including EIAs. Table A1.2.1: Solid Waste Component Cost, CFAF million and US$ 000' Component/Activity Total Total CFAF million US$ 000' Construction of collection points and transfer stations 3016.1 6283.5 Controlled Dumpsite Construction in Ab-Calavi 391.4 815.4 New Cell at the Ouessè dump and access road construction (paving option) 1 344.6 2 801.3 Institutional Support 1 525.0 3 177.1 Miscellaneous 360.0 750.0 Total 6 637.1 13 827.3 Component 3: Improved Municipal Wastewater Treatment Support (IDA US$ 4.70 million equivalent) 12. The objective of this component is to develop an appropriate institutional and regulatory framework for the effective and sustainable management of municipal wastewater in Benin in view of mitigating the negative environmental impacts and health hazards resulting from the mix of runoffs from rains with latrine and septic tank contents during the floods and leading to waterborne diseases in the aftermath of the floods. In the absence of public municipal wastewater drainage and treatment system, the individual on-site sanitation systems consist mainly of latrines or septic tanks for modern houses. Despite the relatively high coverage rate in household latrines (66%) 4 in urban areas, municipal wastewater disposal (sewage) is inefficient, unsanitary and constitutes major environmental and health risks as domestic sewage is disposed of in the open: neighborhoods, streets and possibly cesspools. Moreover, the septage collected from onsite sanitation is also discharged in nature. 4 Demographic and Health Survey III (2006). 22 Table A1.3.1: Evolution of coverage rates and volumes of sludge and gray water Indicators 1990 2007 2015 Urban population (million inhabitants) 1.8 3.1 4.1 Latrine coverage (%) 32 61 81 Sludge generation (m3) 25,230 82,825 145,460 Domestic grey water volume released (million of m3) - 20 38 Source: Stratégie national de l'Assainissement des eaux usées en milieu urbain Bénin, Business Plan en vue de la mise en oeuvre du plan d'action à court terme (2010-2012). 13. In order to improve the living and sanitary conditions of the urban population, the GOB has initiated with the support of the World Bank Water and Sanitation Program which has resulted in the development of a National Wastewater Strategy in urban areas (2007) and a business plan for the implementation of the short-term urban strategy action plan (2010). The key pillars of this strategic business plan are: (i) the development of an appropriate institutional framework for efficient and sustainable management of wastewater in urban areas in Benin; (ii) the preparation of a master plan for sanitation in large cities; and (iii) the launching of pilot projects to operationalize the institutional framework. 14. From the perspective of evaluating the current situation at the institutional and regulatory framework, the sector of municipal wastewater treatment in Benin has a fairly comprehensive legal and regulatory framework. However non-compliance with existing regulations and lack of coordination and synergy between different institutions involved in the field of wastewater treatment in urban areas do not allow the sector to implement the strategies formulated by the GOB. There is therefore the need to build capacity and to harmonize the functions and tasks of the different wastewater sector stakeholders. This will help support the implementation of the institutional framework of the national strategy by distinguishing between different operators and operational decision-making levels, and in the control and regulation as proposed in the business plan adopted in March 2010. The decision level refers to the setting of policies and guidelines adopted by the GOB and included in its development programs. The operational level refers to the main operator in the sanitation sector and other stakeholders responsible for the implementation of individual or collective sanitation schemes. The level of control and regulation concerns the compliance and monitoring of sector performance. 15. The lead agency responsible for the execution of Component 3 is the MEE through mainly the SONEB, and will be: managed by the PMU; and implemented by AGETUR, which will perform the procurement and supervision of the technical assistance consultancy, training, pilots and studies. 16. Thus, the expected output of the wastewater component are: (i) improving the technical capabilities of the SONEB and Municipalities at the operational level, the Directorate of Hygiene and Basic Sanitation (DHAB) and the (ABE) for the monitoring, and the Ministry responsible for water regulation as proposed in the business plan; and (ii) provide the city of Cotonou and the commune of Porto-Novo with general guidelines and programming investments aimed at developing an integrated approach considering both individual and collective sanitation alternatives hence preventing environmental degradation. 23 17. Three main sub-components are to be financed under this component with a total envelope of US$ 3.55 million as illustrated in Table A1.3.2. The sub-components and activities are the following: a. Development of Master Plans for Municipal Wastewater Drainage and Treatment. The master plans, which will be prepared for Cotonou Agglomeration (composed of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi and Seme-Podji) and the city of Porto-Novo, will help define: (i) the general guidelines on sanitation; and (ii) programming of investment needs till 2025. b. Institutional Strengthening and Technical Assistance for improved Municipal Wastewater Management. The deployment of technical assistance will be beneficial for structuring the sub-sector and the development of the municipal wastewater sector and the implementation of the Business Plan. This sub-component will: (i) Review and set-up SONEB's technical, administrative and organizational management structures within the Sanitation Directorate; (ii) Define the guidelines and municipal wastewater discharge standards; (iii) Establish an effective regulatory structure of municipal wastewater treatment services; (iv) Develop a Monitoring and Evaluation System to the implementation of master plans for municipal sanitation; (v) Acquire computers and office equipments for SONEB's Unit for coordination and monitoring and evaluation activities in the subsector of municipal wastewater; (vi) Acquire equipments and test kits for the sanitary control for the Laboratory of DHAB. Monitoring effort capacity building will be provided by specialized technical assistance that will be established within the SONEB's Directorate of Wastewater Treatment; (vii) Train and build capacity for: (i) SONEB's administrative and technical staff; (ii) administrative and technical staff of the Ministries in charge of regulation (MEPN and MWE); (iii) officers of Technical Services of the Municipalities (agglomeration of Cotonou, Porto-Novo and Parakou); (iv) officers of the ABE and the Environmental Police; (v) officers of DHAB and the sanitary police but also operators. Targeted training on technical (including options for wastewater treatment), financial, regulatory and control aspects will be organized (12 topics for 81 beneficiaries from various stakeholders in the sector have already been identified by SONEB and other concerned parties). Training will also include other-forms of on-the-job training and study tours abroad. c. Implementation of a small-scale decentralized sanitary drainage and waste water treatment pilot project. The proposed pilot project will be implemented in 1 or 2 locations to be identified in light of the feasibility study to be implemented during the first 6 months of project implementation. This will entail: (i) The Project will test among others the feasibility of municipal waste water treatment options for the overall Master Plans of Cotonou Agglomeration and other cities and help revise them in light of the technical, economic and financial results of the proposed pilot project. It will also help establish maintenance, cost recovery, and service fees to be scaled and refined in the context of Sub-component 3.1 above. 24 (ii) The number of sites to be chosen for the implementation of the pilot project (1 or 2 sites) will depend on whether or not there is a need to test more than one scheme with different living and environmental conditions, and will also depend on budget availability. (iii) The following guiding principles will be used for the design of the pilot project: · The pilot project is intended for settlements with between 500 and 1,500 inhabitants, i.e., an approximate number of 100 to 300 households. · The proposed schemes will incorporate local collection systems and discharging to simple low-cost and low-tech treatment units. · Collection systems could comprise whenever possible low-cost gravity feed sanitary drainage systems, following ground levels, and minimizing excavation depths for pipes and manholes. · The installation of oriental, floor type toilets in the households. · The proposed schemes will build on the existing scheme whereby latrines and septic tanks are available in some of the households. Table A1.3.2. Wastewater Support Cost, CFAF million and US$ 000' Component/Activity Total Total CFAF million US$ 000' Institutional Capacity: Training, Technical Assistance and Equipment 800.0 1,600 Sanitation Master Plans 956.5 1,913 Small-scale pilot project 600.0 1,200 Total 2,356.5 4,713 Component 4: Flooding and Disaster Risk Preparedness and Management (IDA US$ 5.03 million equivalent) 18. The objective of this component is to improve the operational capabilities and management of flood risks in Cotonou and the surrounding municipalities. Floods inflict a heavy toll on societies resulting in victims (injuries, death, drowning and post-flooding water-borne and vector-borne diseases), damages (public and private asset destruction) disruption of the socioeconomic activity (interruption of services, forgone revenues, social dislocation, migration, etc.) and alteration of ecologic systems with sometimes irreversible damages. Benin and its population are ill prepared to face floods notably significant ones. There is therefore an urgent need at addressing these shortcomings in the future. 19. The lead agency responsible for the execution of Component 4 is the Ministry of Interior through the DPPC in conjunction with MEPN and MEW, and will be: managed by the PMU; and implemented by SERHAU, which will perform the procurement and supervision of the training, studies and equipments. 20. Four main activities are to be financed under this component with a total envelope of US$ 5.03 million as illustrated in Table A1.4.1. This will be achieved through: 21. Component 4a: National coordination structures and local community capacity building and institutional strengthening for management of floods (IDA US$1.10 million). Component 4a will: 25 (i) Support to the establishment of a flood early warning system (FEWS) in the Ouémé basin by improving the DGEau capacity to provide reliable information to stakeholders (municipalities, DPPC, Prefecture), timely anticipate floods and implement contingency plans to reduce the risks and impacts. The FEWS includes a study to implement the FEWS, rehabilitate and create new hydrometric stations, acquire FEWS necessary software and equipment, the FEWS operationalization of the information sharing, and training. (ii) Strengthen the coordination capacity at the national level through: the operationalization of the National Contingency Plan (NCP) to address the 2010 food shortcomings through the: · Establishment of communal contingency plan (CCP) by defining functions and responsibilities, improving coordination among the various stakeholders (DPPC, National Committee for Civil Protection (NCCP) and increasing effectiveness. · Update of the ORSEC Plan being implemented by the NCCP and DPPC, validate it with the relevant stakeholders and perform outreach. · Providing training support and equipment to the DPPC to better define its responsibilities, functions, managerial skills and coordination arrangements. 22. Component 4b: Education and awareness among all stakeholders concerned with floods (IDA US$1.42 million). Component 4b, which will increase the flood sensitivity and preparedness of vulnerable communities and stakeholders (DPPC, DMN, DGEau, ORSEC, CCP), will: (i) Build public sensitization, self reflex and awareness on flooding issues targeting stakeholders (from Parliamentarians to communities) by adjusting the channels of communications. (ii) Establish peer educators and community first responders in the municipalities by recruiting local volunteers and developing training kits/awareness to minimize health risks. 23. Component 4c: Integration of prevention of flood risk in urban planning (IDA US$0.83 million). Component 4c, which will bring the municipalities concerned to develop in in conjunction with Organization of Commune Law and the 2011 Master Plan of Urbanism (PDU) in Cotonou the instruments and territorial management practices regarding preventive risk management and flood situations, will: (i) Map areas which are unsuitable for construction with validation and a dissemination of the results to public services and communities at risk. (ii) Adopt, extend, validate and disseminate land use by Mayors by internalizing it in the code of urban planning and operational strategy paper (OSR). (iii) Adopt, validate and disseminate building codes in areas of flood risk and guides to be executing by Directorate General of Urban Planning and Housing (DGUH). 24. Component 4d: Support the establishment of operational contingency plan in vulnerable communes (IDA US$1.68 million). Component 4d will finance the construction and extension of CCP for the most vulnerable, training, development of municipal profile risks 5, validation and 5 Classified 'Category A communes highly affected during the floods of 2010. 26 dissemination of the results, i.e., those where flooding is recurrent even in normal rainfall conditions, which include Cotonou, Sô-Ava, Athiémé, Grand-Popo, Lokossa Bopa, Sèmè Podji, Aguégués, Dangbo, Adjohoun, Bonou Karimama, Malanville Glazoué, Zogbodomc, Cobly, Ouinhi, Abomey, Tchaourou, Zagnanado, Boukoumbé, Grand Popo and Athiémé (the latter two have been jointly implemented with UNDP). Table A1.4.1. Flood and natural disaster risk prevention and management support, CFAF million and US$ 000' Component/Activity Total Total CFAF US$ 000' million Flood Management 540.5 1,081 Education and Awareness 790.3 1,581 Integration of prevention of flood risk in urban planning 399.0 798 Support for the establishment of operational contingency plan in vulnerable communes 784.1 1,568 Total 2,513.9 5,028 Component 5: Project Management (IDA US$2.89million equivalent) 25. This component is designed to provide effective and efficient management support for the implementation of the project, including the development and operationalization of an effective and efficient Monitoring and Evaluation System, and all fiduciary requirements (safeguards, procurement and financial management). The PGUD-2 PMU will manage the 4 components with SERHAU and AGETUR performing the procurement and supervision of the prefeasibility studies, detailed engineering design, other studies (EIA, etc.), training, technical assistance, workshops, works etc. 26. The PMU will have the following functions: (i) follow-up and evaluation of work performed by the two implementing agencies; (ii) liaise with the focal points in the other ministries/agencies working on project activities; (iii) act as technical secretariat of the Inter- ministerial Committee in charge of the project's global supervision; (iv) prepare consolidated technical and financial project reports for the Bank; and (v) ensure dissemination of learning from the project to Government (see Annex 7 for details). 27 Annex 2: Results Framework and Monitoring BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project Project Development Objective (PDO): To improve infrastructure and mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in Cotonou Agglomeration and to increase Benin's level of preparedness for future flooding. PDO Level Cumulative Target Values Responsibility Description Unit of Baseline Data Source/ Core Results Frequency for Data (indicator Measure 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Methodology Indicators* Collection definition etc.) Indicator One: Number 0 0 3 10 15 20 Annual Progress SERHAU and Number of report DGEau alerts on flood risks issued per year using the Flood Early Warning System Indicator Two: % 70% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% Annual Progress AGETUR and Percentage reports technical reduction of services of the households municipalities vulnerable to flooding in the targeted municipalities as a result of improved infrastructure 28 INTERMEDIATE RESULTS Intermediate Result (Component One): Drainage improvement and rehabilitation Intermediate Kilometer 0 0.5 3 8.6 8.6. 8.6 Annu Progress AGETUR Rehabilitation Result indicator al reports and works will be One: Length of regular undertaken drainage construction/ concurrently in network rehabilitation the three rehabilitated reports collectors Intermediate Yes/No No No No Yes Yes Yes Annu Progress AGETUR Result indicator al reports and Two: regular Rehabilitation of construction/ the Fifadji rehabilitation bridge reports Intermediate Result (Component Two): Solid waste management Intermediate Number 13 15 25 35 40 40 Annua Progress AGETUR Collection points Result indicator l reports and or transfer One: Number of regular stations with municipal solid construction necessary waste collection reports accessories in points and/or place. transfer stations constructed and operational Intermediate Number 695 000 802 000 931 000 1 066 000 1 225 000 1 401 000 Annua Census/annua PMU and Core indicator Result Indicator / 417 000 185 729 000 l l estimates SERHAU for IDA Two: Number of % 361 400 484 000 554 000 637 000 ,000 and progress direct project (Female (Female (Female: (Female: reports beneficiaries : 52%) :52%) (Female (Female:52 52%) 52%) (number), of :52%) %) which females (%) (CORE) Intermediate Result (Component Three): Wastewater management and sanitation Intermediate Yes/N0 No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Annual Progress AGETUR and Result indicator report SONEB One: Waste water master plan developed for Cotonou 29 Agglomeration (composed of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi and Seme- Podji) and Porto Novo Intermediate Yes/No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Annual Progress AGETUR and Result indicator report SONEB Two: Pilot low- cost small scale sanitation project implemented and operational Intermediate Result (Component Four): Flooding and disaster risk preparedness and management Intermediate Yes/No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Annual Progress SERHAU and Result indicator report DG-Eau One: Installation of Flood Early Warning System (FEWS). Intermediate Number 2 2 6 10 15 22 Annual Progress SERHAU Result indicator report Three: Targeted municipalities with Communal Flood Contingency Plans 30 Annex 3: Summary of Estimated Project Costs BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project Table A3.1 Components Project Cost Summary (US$ million) Exclusive of Government in-kind contribution Project costs by component and/or activity Local Foreign Total Component 1: Drainage Improvement and Rehabilitation 11.78 11.78 23.56 Component 2: Municipal Solid Management 8.34 5.48 13.82 Component 3: Improved Wastewater Treatment and Sanitation 3.85 0.85 4.70 Component 4: Flooding and Disaster Risk Preparedness and Management 4a: National coordination structures and local community capacity building 0.82 0.28 1.10 & institutional strengthening for management of floods 4b: Education and awareness among all stakeholders concerned with floods 1.26 0.16 1.42 4c: Integration of prevention of flood risk in urban planning 0.75 0.08 0.83 4d: Support the establishment of operational contingency plan in vulnerable 1.55 0.13 1.68 communes Sub-total 4.38 0.65 5.03 Component 5: Project Management 2.37 0.52 2.89 Total Project Cost 30.97 19.03 50.00 Table A3.2 Project Costs by Component and Source of Financing (US$ million) Inclusive of Government in-kind contribution IDA GoB (in-kind) Total Project costs by component and/or activity Amount % Amount % Amount % Component 1- Drainage Improv. and Rehab 23.56 100.00 0.00 0.00 23.56 42.80 Component 2: Municipal Solid Waste Managt. 13.82 73.40 5.00 26.60 18.82 34.20 Component 3: Improved Wastewater Managt. 4.70 100.00 0.00 0.00 4.70 8.50 Component 4: Flooding and DRPM Component 4.a 1.10 100.00 0.00 0.00 1.10 2.00 Component 4.b 1.42 100.00 0.00 0.00 1.42 2.60 Component 4.c 0.83 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.83 1.50 Component 4.d 1.68 100.00 0.00 0.00 1.68 3.00 Sub-total 5.03 100.00 0.00 0.00 5.03 9.10 Component 5 2.89 100.00 0.00 0.00 2.89 5.30 Total Project Cost 50.00 90.90 5.00 9.10 55.00 100.0 31 Annex 4: Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF) BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project Negotiations to Board Package Version Project Development Objective(s) To improve infrastructure and mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in Cotonou Agglomeration and to increase Benin's level of preparedness for future flooding. PDO Level Results 1. Number of alerts on flood risks issued per year using the Flood Early Warning System Indicators: 2. Percentage reduction of households vulnerable to flooding in the targeted municipalities as a result of improved infrastructure Risk Category Risk Rating Risk Description Proposed Mitigation Measures Project Stakeholder Risks M-I Risks of key stakeholders' unwillingness to follow The project will fund institutional strengthening up maintenance of key infrastructures rehabilitated efforts in project planning and maintenance in the and improved upon by the project ministry of environment and urban planning; as well as in participating municipalities Implementing Agency Risks L The risks that the Project Management Unit will not PMU is used to working with multi-ministries, be able to coordinate project activities with six agencies and municipalities as exemplified in the ministries and five municipalities, in addition to implementation of the PGUD-2 project using the executing agencies of AGETUR and SERHAU. five solid waste pre-collection NGOs. There could Further, the fact that the proposed project will have be delays due to inter-ministry bureaucracy and this focal points in all the ministries will tend to facilitate might eventually lead to delays in project the coordination mechanism with the PMU implementation Project Risks 32 · Design M-I Risk that project will not achieve its sustainability Government has shown interest during the preparation objectives of the project and there are strong commitment from the municipalities to provide land for construction of the collection points and transfer stations as well as Social and L counterpart fund Environmental · Risk of significant social and environmental The appropriate safeguards instruments will be negative impacts prepared and disclosed prior to the commencement of civil works. Further, the project will fund the recruitment of an environmental and social specialist that will follow the implementation of the prepared instruments and ensure that potential social and Program and Donor M-L environmental impacts are adequately mitigated · Risk associated with low donor interest. The Key donors were consulted during the appraisal wastewater sector has never been addressed by any mission. Continuous coordination with donors will be donor. Some donors like Canadian International ensured during project implementation especially Development Agency (CIDA) worked on solid those active in the urban and sanitation sectors such as waste management, but at a very limited scale. AFD and EU · Delivery Quality M-I There is the risk of poor financing for operations During the appraisal mission the Bank team discussed and maintenance (O&M) of the drainage and SWM the O&M concerns with the municipalities, who civil works useless they happen within a short agreed to put aside some funds for O&M. The project period of time will also build strong operational capacity for the maintenance of the investments. Overall Risk Rating at Overall Risk Rating During Comments Preparation Implementation M-I The overall risk associated with the project is Medium-Impact. Although the likelihood for the realization of the risk is low, if materialized, the risk will have significant impact on the achievement of the M-I project outcomes. The team is of the opinion that many of the identified risks are manageable through rigorous implementation support, monitoring and supervision of the project activities. 33 Annex 5: Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project 1. Benin Emergency Urban Environment Project intends to mitigate the effects of the 2010 floods through: (i) improvement and rehabilitation of drainage systems, as well as solid waste management and sanitation; and (ii) strengthen institutional capacity to respond to future disasters. As an emergency project, the GOB decided that it will be implemented through the PMU of the PGUD-2, an ongoing IDA financed project. The overall performance of the PGUD-2 in financial management is Satisfactory. The fiduciary responsibility of PGUD-2 is handled by two well experienced executing agencies (AGETUR and SERHAU) under the oversight of the MUPHLRCEP. Staffing has remained adequate and proper books of accounts and supporting documents have been kept in respect of all expenditures. The audit report of PGUD-2 for the year (ended December 2009) was submitted on time, and was unqualified. The interim un- audited financial reports are also submitted on time. The FM arrangements for the proposed project will be based on the existing arrangements. The two agencies have the same multi- projects accounting software which could be extended to the new project, with SERHAU as responsible for the consolidation of the financial statements. The FM manual of the PGUD-2 is being customized to take into account activities of the new project and improvement points resulted from the implementation of the PGUD-2. 2. The conclusion of the financial management assessment is that financial management arrangements for the Project satisfy the World Bank's minimum requirements under OP/BP10.02, and are adequate to provide, with reasonable assurance, accurate and timely information on the status of the Project as required by the Bank. 3. The overall fiduciary risk ratings for the project and the two executing agencies (AGETUR and SERHAU) are assessed as Low. The Bank anti-corruption guidelines dated October 15, 2006 and revised in January 2011 will apply in this project. Country Issues 4. The Overall Inherent Risk of the public financial management system in Benin is rated as Substantial. The 2008 PEFA (Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability) assessment noted that key PFM risks remain in the following areas, namely: weak accounting recording and reporting system. Public accounts are generally incomplete and delayed; inadequate control mechanism, ex-post controls are uncoordinated and include several units working independently, external audits are delayed and surge in the use of expenses following exceptional procedures. However, since 2009, the Government with assistance from the Bank has corrected most of the risks. 5. The government is implementing an actions plan to address the main weaknesses identified by the PEFA assessment. A decree regulating internal audit has been adopted and the use of exceptional procedures has been strictly limited. The issue regarding delay in production of accounts is being resolved. Additional staff has been recruited and the accounting software deployed to the sub national level. Concerning external audits, discussions are in progress with the Government to improve the capacity of the Chamber of Account. 34 Fiduciary Risks and Mitigation Measures 6. The FM risk assessment is summarized in the tables below regarding the AGETUR and SERHAU. AGETUR FM risk Table Risk Risk Risk mitigation measures Conditionality Residual Inherent Risks: M M Country: PFM actions plan in implementation to Poor governance and slow S address the weaknesses resulted from PEFA M space of implementation of assessment PFM reforms ; weak But the country issues would not impact the accounting system, delay project as it is being implemented through a in reporting PCU Entity Level M M Project level Previous experience in similar operations. L This project will build under an ongoing L project financed by IDA Control Risks: M L Budgeting L L Accounting A multi-projects software is in place and L L accounting policies and procedures are documented Internal Audit M Internal controls will be clearly documented Customizing of the M No significant risk has in the FM manual Project Financial been identified in the and Accounting existing arrangements procedures before negotiation ( ongoing) External Audit Lack of capacity of Benin An independent qualified external auditor Appointment of the Supreme Audit institution will be recruited and will audit the external auditor not (chamber of Account). M consolidated Financial statements for the later than 4 L Project audit reports might project months after be submitted with delay effectiveness and inacceptable quality. Funds Flow No previous disbursement issues with the PGUD-2 project for which report based L disbursement method is being used. L AGETUR is well experienced in World Bank disbursement procedures Reporting AGETUR FM staff is familiar with IDA L L procedures Overall Risk M L H: High S: Substantial M: Moderate L: Low 35 SERHAU FM risk Table Risk Risk Risk Mitigation Measures Conditionality Residual Rating Inherent Risks: M M Country: PFM actions plan in implementation to Poor governance and slow S address the weaknesses resulted from PEFA M space of implementation assessment of PFM reforms ; weak But the country issues would not impact the accounting system, delay project as it is being implemented through a in reporting PCU Entity Level M M Project level Previous experience in similar operations L under IDA financed projects L Control Risks: M L Budgeting L L Accounting A multi-projects software is in place and L L accounting policies and procedures are documented Internal Audit M Internal controls will be clearly Customizing of M No significant risk has documented in the FM manual the Project been identified in the Financial and existing arrangements Accounting procedures before negotiation ( ongoing) External Audit Lack of capacity of Benin An independent qualified external auditor Appointment of Supreme Audit institution will be recruited and will audit the the external (chamber of Account). M consolidated Financial statements for the auditor not later L Project audit reports project than 4 months might be submitted with after delay and inacceptable effectiveness quality. Funds Flow No previous disbursement issues with the PGUD-2 project for which report based L disbursement method is being used. L AGETUR is well experienced in World Bank disbursement procedures Reporting SERHAU FM staff is familiar with IDA L L procedures Overall Risk M L H: High S: Substantial M: Moderate L: Low Strengths and Weaknesses; and Time Bound Action Plan to Address the Weaknesses 7. The main strengths of the PMU especially the executing agencies (AGETUR and SERHAU) are their relevant experience in the management of IDA financed projects and the 36 availability of qualified accounting staff and adequate FM system and procedures. The existing FM procedures will be updated before negotiation taking into account activities of the new project and improvement points resulted from the implementation of the PGUD-2. The actions plan below indicates the actions to be taken by the Ministry to strengthen the internal controls environment and maintain the continuous security and reliability of information produced. No. Activity/Action Target Completion Responsibility 1. Prepare Project Implementation Manual (PIM) Prior to negotiation Project preparation including acceptable Financial and Accounting committee procedures 2 Prepare TOR for the external auditor that is During appraisal and Project Coordination Unit / satisfactory to IDA. agreed on at Chambre des comptes Negotiations 3 Appointment of the external auditor acceptable Not later than 4 Project Coordination Unit / to IDA months after Chambre des comptes effectiveness Detail of Financial Management Arrangements 8. The FM arrangements for the project would be handled by AGETUR and SERHAU, each agency on its respective components. These entities would be responsible for implementing and monitoring day-to-day project activities, including budgeting, disbursement, financial management, reporting, supervision, management of the designated account, and auditing. AGETUR will be responsible for the consolidation of financial statements and IFRs. Funds Flow and Disbursement Arrangements Flow of funds 9. The Caisse Autonome d'Amortissement (CAA) is the assigned representative of the Recipient for the mobilization of IDA funds. Withdrawal Application requests will be prepared by AGETUR `s Director of finance or SERHAU `s Director of finance, signed by a designated signatory or signatories (the signature authorization letter is signed by the Minister of Finance), and sent to the Bank for processing. This procedure applies to all Bank financed projects in Benin. 10. Funds will flow from the IDA Account through two Designated Accounts A and B to be opened at the Central Bank of Benin (BCEAO). The funds would be released to Operational Accounts (A and B) to be opened in a reputable commercial bank. The Operational Account A would be managed by AGETUR and the Operational Account B by SERHAU as delegated contract management agencies. Cash withdrawal transactions from the operational Accounts would be authorized respectively by the Managing Director and Finance Director of each executing agency. The accounts are set up to fund eligible expenditures based on the approved annual activity plans. The ceilings of the designated accounts would be equivalent to cash forecast for two (2) quarters as specified in the quarterly unaudited Interim Financial Reports (IFR) and the related templates that have been agreed during negotiations for AGETUR and SERHAU. 37 11. The table below sets out the expenditure components to be financed out of the credit. Disbursement Table Amount of the Credit Percentage of Expenditures to Category Allocated (expressed in US$) be Financed (inclusive of Taxes) (1) Civil Works, including social and environmental 31.20 100 mitigation measures (2) Goods, consulting services, trainings, operating costs 18.80 100 Total Amount 50 Disbursement methods and processes 12. AGETUR and SERHAU will use report-based disbursement mechanism each quarter as they are doing for the PGUD-2 project. Not later than 45 days following the end the quarter, they will elaborate and transmit to the World Bank Interim Unaudited Report (IFR) that will serve as basis for disbursement. IFR will be supplemented by (i) Bank reconciliation statements of the designated account; (ii) cash flow forecast for the following semester; and (iii) the list of payments against contracts that are subject to Bank prior review. Figure 1: Flow of Funds IDA Account (Funds) DP WA (Washington) at the World Bank Designated Accounts (BCEAO) Managed by CAA WA / DP Operational Account A Suppliers / Consultants (managed by Account CAA Operational AGETUR ) Account B (managed by SERHAU) Beneficiaries / Suppliers / Consultants Funds CAA: Caisse Autonome d'Amortissement DP: Direct Payment Reports, Goods, etc. WA: Withdrawal Application BCEAO: Central Bank 38 13. The DA will be replenished through IFRs on quarterly basis after an initial advance up to the ceiling of the DA is made. Various other disbursement methods will be available for use under the project, i.e., direct payment, reimbursement and special commitment methods. Further instructions on disbursement and details on the operation of the DA will be outlined in the disbursement letter and in the Financial Management Manual Reporting and Monitoring 14. Quarterly Interim Un-audited Financial Reports (IFRs) would be prepared by the Finance Director of each executing agency. AGETUR and SERHAU will submit copies of the IFRs to the Bank within 45 days following the end the quarter. Copies of IFRs related to each agency and consolidated IFRs will also be transmitted to the CPSP (Cellule de Pilotage et de Suivi du Projet). 15. Financial Statements for the project will comply with the accounting standards (SYSCOHADA). SYSCOHADA is the assigned accounting system in West African Francophone countries. Project accounts will be maintained on a cash basis, supported with appropriate records and procedures to track commitments and to safeguard assets. AGETUR will be responsible for the consolidation of the project financial statements. Audit arrangements 16. The supreme audit institution SAI (Chambre des Comptes) which is supposed to audit all public funds has a limited capacity in terms of staffing and experience of auditing project financial statements. In view of this, it was agreed that external independent and qualified private sector auditor will be recruited to carry out the audit of the project's financial statements under the supervision of the supreme audit institution. Therefore, annual audits will be conducted based on Terms of References (TOR) agreed with the SAI and that are satisfactory to the Bank. 17. The Auditor will express an opinion on the Annual Financial Statements, and perform his audit in compliance with International Standards on Auditing (ISAs). He will be required to prepare a Management Letter detailing observations and comments, providing recommendations for improvements in the accounting system and the internal control environment. The audit report on the annual project financial statements and activities of the DA will be submitted to IDA within six months after the end of each project fiscal year. 18. In addition to the project audit report, AGETUR and SERHAU shall continue, as they are doing with the PGUD-2, to submit their audited financial statements to IDA within six months after the end of the project fiscal year. There are no overdue audit reports and interim financial reports from these entities. Implementation Support plan 19. Supervision activities will include: (i) on-site mission (once a year); (ii) review the financial management aspects of quarterly IFRs; (iii) review of annual audited financial statements and management letter as well as timely follow up of issues arising; (iv) and 39 participation in project supervision missions, as appropriate. The intensity of supervision will be reassessed upon the evolution of the rating for the overall control risk. To the extent possible, mixed on-site supervision missions will be undertaken with procurement monitoring and evaluation and disbursement colleagues. 40 Annex 6: Procurement Arrangements BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project 1. Generality: The proposed project is under Operational Policy/Bank Procedures (OP/BP) 8.00 relative to Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies. The project will address the emergency needs during up-coming rainy seasons which are usually followed by floods, as well as longer term improvements. The choice to delegate contract management to two existing agencies is in line with OP/BP 8.00. 2. Capacity assessment, risks and mitigation measures: the Government has proposed to delegate contract management to agencies AGETUR and SERHAU, who have similar experience under the ongoing Second Decentralized City Management Project (P109209) financed by the Bank. The post procurement review conducted in May 2010 shows that the procurement activities were implemented satisfactorily by these agencies. The procurement capacity assessment of AGETUR and SERHAU has been updated during the project preparation in February 2011. The agencies are very experienced and skilled with the Bank's procurement procedures. The procurement manuals of these agencies are already approved by the Bank and used in a satisfactory manner. The agencies will be updating the preliminary procurement plans that have already been submitted for the first six (6) months of project implementation. The MUPHLRCEP will delegate the project management (including the fiduciary role of procurement) to AGETUR and SERHAU on basis of an agreement that will be signed, with prior review of the Bank, between the Ministry and each of these agencies. The overall project procurement risk is rated low 3. Guidelines: The procurement for the proposed project will be carried out in accordance with: (i) the World Bank's "Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits" dated January 2011; (ii) "Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers" dated January 2011; and (iii) the provisions of the Financial Agreement. Furthermore the Guidance Note to World Bank Staff entitled Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies ­ Streamlined Procurement Procedures (June 2009) will also guide procurement. 4. Procurement Documents: Procurement transactions will be carried out using the Bank's Standard Bidding Documents or Standard Request for Proposal (RFP) respectively for all ICB, for goods and for selection of consultants. For National Competition Bidding (NCB), the Borrower could submit a sample form of bidding documents to the Bank for prior review and will use this type of document throughout the project once agreed upon. The Sample Form of Evaluation Reports published by the Bank will be used. For certain procurement activities that need rapid responses, especially in case of emergency situations, the very simple sample documents in the annexes of the Note to World Bank Staff entitled Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies ­ Streamlined Procurement Procedures (June 2009) will be used. 5. Frequency of procurement reviews and supervision: Bank's prior and post reviews will be carried out on the basis of thresholds indicated in the following table. The Bank will conduct six-monthly supervision missions and annual Post Procurement Reviews (PPR); with the ratio of post review at least 1 to 5 contracts. The Bank may also conduct an Independent Procurement Review (IPR) at any time until two years after the closing date of the project. 41 Table A6.1: Procurement and selection review thresholds Prior review Procurement/selection threshold Comments methods (US$) 1. Works and Goods ICB · Works 3,000,000 Method can be applied for any amount, but is mandatory · Goods 500,000 above these amounts LIB 500,000 NCB N/A Shopping 100,000 Communities Participation N/A Direct Contracting All contracts All contracts 2. Consulting services QCBS 200,000 LCS 200,000 CQS 200,000 Method for contracts US$500,000 Individual Consultants (IC) 100,000 Single Source Selection (SSS) All contracts Review of all contracts 3. Trainings and workshops On basis of detailed and approved annual plan (with indication of venue, number of participants, duration and Training and workshops 10,000 exhaustive budget, etc.) and No objection by the Task Team Leader 6. All trainings, terms of reference of contracts estimated to more than US$10,000, and all amendments of contracts raising the initial contract value by more than 15% of original amount or above the prior review thresholds will be subject to IDA prior review. All contracts not submitted to the prior review, will be submitted to IDA for post review in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 5 of Annex 1 of the Bank's Consultant Selection Guidelines and Bank's Procurement Guidelines. 7. Procurement Plan: all procurement activities will be carried out in accordance with approved original or updated procurement plans. The Procurement Plans will be updated at least annually or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and capacity improvements. All procurement plans should be published at national level and on the Bank website according to the Guidelines. The six month Simplified Procurement Plan (SPP) following the guidelines of OP 8.00 is portrayed on table 2 below: 42 Table 2.0: Simplified Procurement Plan (with methods and time schedule) (a) Goods 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Expected Pre- Domestic Start Estimated Procurem Prior Bid- Ref. Contract qualifica Preferenc Date Comme Amount ent Review Opening No. (Description) tion e nts ( 000'US$) Method (yes/no) Date (yes/no) (yes/no) Acquisition of computer 1 equipments for 220.94 Shopping No No Yes 6/1/2011 7/16/2011 the DST and SONEB, DHAB. Equipments for 25 hydrometric stations and pluviographic equipment (25 2 ADCP, 200 192.71 Shopping No No Yes 6/1/2011 7/16/2011 MIRE MIST, 25 Limnigraph, Complete system and one pluviograph Acquisition of 3 vehicles for the 346.88 Shopping No No Yes 6/1/2011 7/16/2011 DST. (b) Works 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Expected Domestic Start Estimated Procure Prequal Prior Bid- Com Contract Preferen Date Ref. No. Amount ment ification Review Opening ment (Description) ce (US$ 000') Method (yes/no) (yes/no) Date s (yes/no) No civil works foreseen during the first six months (c) Consultancy Assignments with Selection Methods and Time Schedule 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Expected Estimated Prior Com Ref. No. Description of Assignment Selection Proposals Cost Review men Method Submission (US$ 000') (yes/no) ts Date Technical study and work construction control for the 1 opening and calibration of 895.83 QCBS Yes 9/1/2011 collectors P, AA et Wbis in Cotonou 43 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Expected Estimated Prior Com Ref. No. Description of Assignment Selection Proposals Cost Review men Method Submission (US$ 000') (yes/no) ts Date Technical study and work 2 construction control of the 533.33 QCBS Yes 9/1/2011 Fifadji Bridge in Cotonou Technical study mission and work construction control for an 3 additional cell and the 125.00 CQS No 9/1/2011 construction of an access road to the Ouessè dumpsite Organizational and financial study for the pre-collection of the 4 208.33 CQS Yes 9/1/2011 towns of Abomey-Calavi and Sèmè-Podji Study on the implementation of early warning system for floods 5 in Ouémé basin (study and 270.83 CQS Yes 9/1/2011 validation workshops including the charter) Study of the functionality of 6 national contingency plan (plan, 175.00 CQS Yes 9/1/2011 guidelines, etc.) Study on the flood risk profile of 21 communes (study on the vulnerability analysis, maps, 7 525.00 QCBS Yes 9/1/2011 floods, other risks) including the organization of workshops in communes Elaboration of communal 8 contingency plan (including the 532.44 QCBS Yes 9/1/2011 organization of workshops) 7. Procurement Filing: procurement documents must be maintained in the project files and archived in the safe place until at least two years after the closing date of the project. The ICF through the Procurement Specialist and Officers will be responsible for the filing of procurement documents. 44 Annex 7: Implementation and Monitoring Arrangements BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project 1. In its letter dated February 18, 2011, the GOB re-affirmed that this emergency operation will be under the supervision of the Minister of Urban Planning Development, Housing, Land Reform and Coastal Erosion Protection (MUPHLRCEP). The project will be overseen by the existing Inter-ministerial Steering Committee (ISC) headed by the Minister of MUPHLRCEP that will be expanded to include the Ministries of Environment and Protection of Nature; Water and Energy, Decentralization, Interior, Development and Planning, Health, Finance; and the Mayors of the participating municipalities (Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi, Porto Novo, Seme-Podji and Ouidah). The ISC will provide overall guidance and review of project implementation progress and will support the MUPHLRCEP in the coordination between other ministries, municipal authorities, and other government agencies involved with project implementation. The ISC will meet twice a year to review activity and progress report of the project. The Project Management Unit (PMU ­see below) will act as ISC permanent and technical secretariat. The main functions of the permanent secretariat will consist in: (i) analyzing the activity reports from the executing agencies; and (ii) summarizing recommendations coming from financing institutions. The task of technical secretariat will be performed by the PMU. Figure A7.1: Implementing Arrangements Note: MOF= Ministry of Finance; MDP = Ministry of Development and Planning; MWE = Ministry of Watr and Energy; MOI: Ministry of Interior; 5 Mun = 5 Municipalities of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi, Porto Novo, Seme-Podji and Ouidah; DGSan = Directorate General for Sanitation; DST = Directorate of Technical Services. 45 2. The project will be implemented by the same PGUD-2's PMU under the supervision of MUPHLRCEP. The PMU will be in charge of the day-to-day implementation of the project. Its functions would include: (i) follow up and evaluation of work to be performed by the delegated executing agencies; (ii) act as the technical secretariat of the ISC; (iii) prepare consolidated technical and financial project reports for the Bank; and (iv) ensure dissemination of learning from the project to MUPHLRCEP and MEPN. To be able to cater for an extended mandate and responsibilities, the PMU will have the complement of an additional staff (environment and social specialist, civil works specialist, M&E specialist, flood and disaster risk management specialist, secretary, and a driver) that will be competitively hired locally; to ensure that it will be able to maintain at a satisfactory level its current tasks and the new activities it is being entrusted with. The MUPHLRCEP will have one-to-one working relationships and sign an MOU with the following entities to ease the component implementation: MEPN, MEE, and the five Municipalities of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi, Seme-Podji, Ouidah, and Porto Novo. In addition, the participating entities will each nominate a Focal Point, at the ministry and agency level, for the daily management of their respective components and for coordination with the PMU. The PMU will report directly to the Minister of MUPHLRCEP and will be overseen by the existing and expanded ISC (see Figure 1). 3. Like in PGUD-2, the PMU will delegate contract management 6 to two executing agencies, SERHAU and AGETUR. This will be specified in agreements (accords cadres) between the State and the agencies and conventions between the participating municipalities and agencies. The execution and delivery of these agreements are part of the conditions of effectiveness SERHAU and AGETUR has a proven track record in delegated contract management in the implementation of the Bank's as well as other donor-funded projects; and operate finance and accounting systems acceptable to the Bank. These entities shall be responsible for the technical and fiduciary aspects (financial management and procurement) of the implementation of the components. AGETUR will be responsible for tendering technical studies, major infrastructure works and works supervision (components 1, 2 and 3); while SERHAU will cover studies and technical assistance under components 2 and 4; and would entirely be responsible for component 5. IDA funding for project components will be made available to AGETUR and SERHAU by the GOB with conditions of delegation specified in project agreements to be signed before effectiveness. 4. The PMU and the executing agencies (AGETUR and SERHAU) will develop annual activities programs in close consultation with the focal points. The annual programs specify activity, target costs, financing (IDA credit and counterpart funding), terms of reference, agency fees, procurement plan, draft implementation timetable and respective roles and responsibilities of the parties. 5. The monitoring and evaluation system will be based on the agreed results framework and monitoring (see Annex 2). Most of the indicators selected can be directly monitored, and the ones that cannot be directly monitored can be collected via simple surveys. The PMU and the executing agencies (AGETUR and SERHAU) will be responsible for monitoring the result indicators and conducting surveys. SERHAU will be responsible for 6 These contracts will be procured using the single-source selection method. See procurement section for rationale. 46 following up on indicators for performance of components 2 and 4, while AGETUR will be responsible for following up on indicators for components 1, 2 and 3. This monitoring and evaluation responsibilities follow the division of labor between the two agencies for the executing arrangements. Special attention will be given to Monitoring and Evaluation right from the beginning of the project, and an in-depth evaluation of project results will be undertaken at the Mid Term Review. 47 Annex 8: Environmental and Social Screening and Assessment Framework BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project I. Objectives 1. The Environmental and Social Screening and Assessment Framework (ESSAF) is consistent with Bank operational policies and procedures, investment operations subject to OP/BP 8.00, Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies, and the guidance note for crises and emergency operations for application of Bank safeguard and disclosure policies. This ESSAF provides general policies, guidelines, codes of practice and procedures to be integrated into the implementation of World Bank-supported Benin Emergency Urban Project. This Framework has been developed to ensure compliance with the World Bank's safeguard policies during the implementation of the emergency project. The objective of the ESSAF is to ensure that activities under the proposed reconstruction operations will address the following issues: Minimize environmental degradation as a result of either individual subprojects or their cumulative effects; Protect human health Enhance positive environmental and social outcomes; and Prevent or compensate any loss of livelihood II. General Principles 2. Recognizing the emergency nature of the proposed emergency operation and the related need for providing immediate assistance, while at the same time ensuring due diligence in managing potential environmental and social risks, the ESSAF is based on the following principles: The proposed operation will support multiple subprojects, the detailed designs of which were not known during the combined preparation and appraisal mission. To ensure effective application of the World Bank's safeguard policies, the ESSAF provides guidance on the approach to be taken during Project implementation for the selection and design of subprojects and the planning of mitigation measures; No resettlement issues are expected in any of the proposed sub-projects under the emergency Project. If any do occur, Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs), for the specific subprojects will be prepared following the guidelines of the project's revised Resettlement Policy Framework. The proposed emergency operation will finance feasibility and detailed design studies for these subsequent investments, which will include environmental assessments and social studies as required by World Bank safeguard policies; 48 Employment opportunities within the sub-project areas will be targeted to the extent possible at the affected communities and households that lost their livelihoods due to the disaster. In all sub-projects which require consultations with local communities or beneficiaries, consultations will be conducted to elicit the views of the male and female population; and Consultation and disclosure requirements will be simplified to meet the special needs of these operations. This ESSAF will be disclosed in the concerned sector ministries and other public places in Benin and in the World Bank InfoShop. III. Environmental and Social Screening and Assessment Framework (ESSAF) 3. This ESSAF has been developed specifically for these proposed operations to ensure due diligence, to avoid causing harm, and to ensure consistent treatment of social and environmental issues by all donors and the Government of Benin. The purpose of this Framework is also to assist the Project Implementing Unit in screening all the subprojects for their likely social and environmental impacts, identifying documentation and preparation requirements and prioritizing the investments. 4. OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment. Most of the proposed subprojects will focus on the rehabilitation, improve and upgrading of clogged and non-functional drains and channels; rehabilitation of access roads; construction and rehabilitation of municipal solid waste collection points and transfer stations; and the up-grading of a key bridge linking one the drains to be improved upon. The work in these areas will be done under OP 4.01 and it is not anticipated that OP 4.04, OP 4.10, OPN 4.37 and OP 7.50 would be triggered. 5. Considering the nature and magnitude of potential environmental impacts from relatively limited scale and magnitude of rehabilitation and improvement works, the proposed operations are likely to be classified as category `B'. The requirement to carry out an Environmental Analysis as part of project preparation can be waived but, for subprojects with potential adverse impacts, a limited Environmental Analysis will be done during project implementation. At the same time, prior to sub-project appraisal the implementing agency will agree to apply the following minimum standards during implementation: inclusion of standard environmental codes of practice (ECOP) in the rehabilitation, improvement and construction bid documents of all subprojects; review and oversight of any major reconstruction works by specialists; implementation of environmentally and socially sound options for disposal of debris or drain spoils; and provisions for adequate budget and satisfactory institutional arrangements for monitoring effective implementation. 6. OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement. The need for involuntary resettlement or land acquisition in specific subproject areas will only be known during project implementation, when site-specific plans are available. Therefore subprojects will be screened for applicability of the resettlement policy and any subprojects involving involuntary resettlement or land acquisition will only be approved after preparation of a resettlement plan acceptable to the Bank. Several issues will increase the complexity of land acquisition - the lack of reliable land record systems, and the inability of people losing land to either document ownership or be physically present to 49 make their claims for eligibility. The safeguards framework will therefore include procedures for identifying eligible project-affected people, calculating and delivering compensation, and mechanisms for land dispute grievance redress. 7. Although land disputes between private parties and refugees from the 2010 flood disaster are not covered by OP 4.12, the policy does cover those displaced by the project's activities. Even for those not covered by the policy, and to ensure effective poverty reduction, it is good practice for the borrower to undertake a social assessment and implement measures to minimize and mitigate adverse social impacts, particularly on poor and vulnerable groups. Well documented consultation mechanisms will be required to establish eligibility for compensation. Absent refugees who later claim compensation will require clear legal remedies to resolve or adjudicate disputes. 8. OD 4.20 Indigenous Peoples. The proposed sub-projects are not anticipated to trigger this safeguard policy. 9. OP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources. The proposed operations are not expected to pose risks of damaging cultural property. Nevertheless, proposed subprojects will be reviewed for their potential impact on cultural property and clear procedures will be required for identification, protection of cultural property from theft, and treatment of discovered artifacts, and will be included in standard bidding documents. While not damaging cultural property, subproject preparation may later identify and include assistance for preservation of historic or archeological sites. If these opportunities occur, cultural property management plans would be prepared for those subprojects. 10. OP 4.37 Safety of Dams. The proposed project does not include construction of any dams and therefore this OP would not be triggered. 11. OP 7.50 Projects on International Waterways. The proposed project does not include any subprojects that would trigger this OP. IV. Safeguard Screening and Mitigation 12. The selection, design, contracting, monitoring and evaluation of subprojects will be consistent with the following guidelines, codes of practice and requirements. The safeguard screening and mitigation process will include: A list of negative characteristics rendering a proposed subproject ineligible for support, Attachment 1; A proposed checklist of likely environment and social impacts to be filled out for each subproject or group of subprojects, Attachment 2; Guidelines for land and asset acquisition, entitlements and compensation, Attachment 3; 50 Procedures for the protection of cultural property, including the chance discovery of archaeological artifacts, unrecorded graveyards and burial sites, Attachment 4; Relevant elements of the codes of practice for the prevention and mitigation of potential environmental impacts, Attachment 5; and A sample Environmental Safeguards procedures for Inclusion in the Technical Specifications of Contracts, Attachment 6. 51 V. Responsibilities for Safeguard Screening and Mitigation 13. A number of Ministries including the Ministry of Environment and Protection of Nature (MEPN) will participate in the implementing of subprojects within their jurisdiction under the oversight of a Project Management Unit (PMU) housed in the Ministry of Urban Planning, Housing, Land Reform, and Coastal Erosion Protection (MUPHLRCEP). The PMU and the executing agencies of AGETUR and SERHAU will, however, be responsible for applying the safeguard screening and mitigation requirements to each subproject. VI. Capacity-Building and Monitoring of Safeguard Framework Implementation 14. As part of the capacity-building to be provided for implementation of the proposed operations, the PMU will be staffed with qualified professional as a focal person to apply the ESSAF provisions and who will also receive training in ESSAF's application. The PMU will recruit an environmental and social specialist that will be responsible for following safeguards issues and concerns. 15. To assist in this capacity-building, and to provide subsequent guidance and review of the ESSAF's application, the World Bank environmental and social safeguard specialists in the project task team will provide guidance to the PMU. During supervision of these operations, the World Bank will assess the implementation of the ESSAF, and recommend additional strengthening, if required. VII. Consultation and Disclosure 16. This ESSAF will be shared with the GOB, concerned nongovernmental organizations and development partners of Benin involved in the floods Emergency Humanitarian Action Plan. It will be disclosed in country and at the World Bank's InfoShop. The revised and up-dated RPF and ESMF of the former urban environment project will also be disclosed. 17. The proposed operations will support a number of feasibility and detailed design studies for future infrastructure investments for which World Bank safeguard policies relating to consultation and disclosure will apply. In particular, the implementing agency will consult project-affected groups and local nongovernmental organizations on the project's environmental and social aspects, and will take their views into account. The implementing agency will initiate these consultations as early as possible, and for meaningful consultations, will provide relevant material in a timely manner prior to consultation, in a form and language(s) that are understandable and accessible to the groups being consulted. 52 Attachment 1 List of Negative Subproject Attributes Subprojects with any of the attributes listed below will be ineligible for support under the proposed emergency urban environment project. Attributes of Ineligible Subprojects GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS · Concerning significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats. Damages cultural property, including but not limited to, any activities that affect the following sites: · Archaeological and historical sites; and · Religious monuments, structures and cemeteries. Requiring pesticides that fall in WHO classes IA, IB, or II. Drinking Water Supply New or expanded of piped water schemes to serve 10,000 or more households. Sanitation New wastewater treatment plants to serve 10,000 or more households. Solid Waste New disposal site or significant expansion of an existing disposal site. Irrigation New irrigation and drainage schemes. Dams Construction of dams more than 5 meters high. Rehabilitation of dams more than 15 meters high. Power New power generating capacity of more than 10 MW. Income Generating Activities Activities involving the use of fuelwood, including trees and bush. Activities involving the use of hazardous substances. 53 Attachment 2 Checklist of Possible Environmental and Social Impacts of Projects I. Subproject Related Issues S No ISSUES YES NO Comments A. Zoning and Land Use Planning 1. Will the subproject affect land use zoning and planning or conflict with prevalent land use patterns? 2. Will the subproject involve significant land disturbance or site clearance? 3. Will the subproject land be subject to potential encroachment by urban or industrial use or located in an area intended for urban or industrial development? B. Utilities and Facilities 4. Will the subproject require the setting up of ancillary production facilities? 5. Will the subproject require significant levels of accommodation or service amenities to support the workforce during construction (e.g., contractor will need more than 20 workers)? C Water and Soil Contamination 6. Will the subproject require large amounts of raw materials or construction materials? 7. Will the subproject generate large amounts of residual wastes, construction material waste or cause soil erosion? 8. Will the subproject result in potential soil or water contamination (e.g., from oil, grease and fuel from equipment yards)? 9. Will the subproject lead to contamination of ground and surface waters by herbicides for vegetation control and chemicals (e.g., calcium chloride) for dust control? 10. Will the subproject lead to an increase in suspended sediments in streams affected by road cut erosion, decline in water quality and increased sedimentation downstream? 11. Will the subproject involve the use of chemicals or solvents? 12. Will the subproject lead to the destruction of vegetation and soil in the right-of-way, borrow pits, waste dumps, and equipment yards? 13. Will the subproject lead to the creation of stagnant water bodies in borrow pits, quarries, etc., encouraging for mosquito breeding and other disease vectors? D. Noise and Air Pollution Hazardous Substances 54 14. Will the subproject increase the levels of harmful air emissions? 15. Will the subproject increase ambient noise levels? 16. Will the subproject involve the storage, handling or transport of hazardous substances? E. Fauna and Flora 18. Will the subproject involve the disturbance or modification of existing drainage channels (rivers, canals) or surface water bodies (wetlands, marshes)? 19. Will the subproject lead to the destruction or damage of terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems or endangered species directly or by induced development? 20. Will the subproject lead to the disruption/destruction of wildlife through interruption of migratory routes, disturbance of wildlife habitats, and noise-related problems? F. Destruction/Disruption of Land and Vegetation 21. Will the subproject lead to unplanned use of the infrastructure being developed? 22. Will the subproject lead to long-term or semi-permanent destruction of soils in cleared areas not suited for agriculture? 23. Will the subproject lead to the interruption of subsoil and overland drainage patterns (in areas of cuts and fills)? 24. Will the subproject lead to landslides, slumps, slips and other mass movements in road cuts? 25. Will the subproject lead to erosion of lands below the roadbed receiving concentrated outflow carried by covered or open drains? 26. Will the subproject lead to long-term or semi-permanent destruction of soils in cleared areas not suited for agriculture? 27. Will the subproject lead to health hazards and interference of plant growth adjacent to roads by dust raised and blown by vehicles? G. Cultural Property 28. Will the subproject have an impact on archaeological or historical sites, including historic urban areas? 29. Will the subproject have an impact on religious monuments, structures and/or cemeteries? 30. Have Chance Finds procedures been prepared for use in the subproject? H. Expropriation and Social Disturbance 31. Will the subproject involve land expropriation or demolition of existing structures? 32. Will the subproject lead to induced settlements by workers and others causing social and economic disruption? 33. Will the subproject lead to environmental and social disturbance by construction camps? 55 II. Site Characteristics S.No YES NO Comments ISSUES 1. Is the subproject located in an area with designated natural reserves? 2. Is the subproject located in an area with unique natural features? 3. Is the subproject located in an area with endangered or conservation-worthy ecosystems, fauna or flora? 4. Is the subproject located in an area falling within 500 meters of national forests, protected areas, wilderness areas, wetlands, biodiversity, critical habitats, or sites of historical or cultural importance? 5. Is the subproject located in an area which would create a barrier for the movement of conservation-worthy wildlife or livestock? 6. Is the subproject located close to groundwater sources, surface water bodies, water courses or wetlands? 7. Is the subproject located in an area with designated cultural properties such as archaeological, historical and/or religious sites? 8. Is the subproject in an area with religious monuments, structures and/or cemeteries? 9. Is the subproject in a polluted or contaminated area? 10. Is the subproject located in an area of high visual and landscape quality? 11. Is the subproject located in an area susceptible to landslides or erosion? 12. Is the subproject located in an area of seismic faults? 13. Is the subproject located in a densely populated area? 14. Is the subproject located on prime agricultural land? 15. Is the subproject located in an area of tourist importance? 16. Is the subproject located near a waste dump? 17. Does the subproject have access to potable water? 18. Is the subproject located far (1-2 kms ) from accessible roads? 19. Is the subproject located in an area with a wastewater network? 20. Is the subproject located in the urban plan of the city? 21. Is the subproject located outside the land use plan? 56 Signed by Environment Specialist: Name: _______________________________ Title: _______________________________ Date: _______________________________ Signed by Project Manager: Name: _______________________________ Title: _______________________________ Date: _______________________________ 57 Attachment 3 Guidelines for Land and Asset Acquisition, Entitlements and Compensation I. Objectives 1. Resettlement and land acquisition will be kept to a minimum, and will be carried out in accordance with these guidelines. Subproject proposals that would require demolishing houses or acquiring productive land should be carefully reviewed to minimize or avoid their impacts through alternative alignments. Proposals that require more than minor expansion along rights of way should be carefully reviewed. No land or asset acquisition may take place outside of these guidelines. A format for Land Acquisition Assessment Data Sheet is attached as Attachment 3(i). 2. These guidelines provide principles and instructions to compensate negatively affected persons to ensure that they will be assisted to improve, or at least to restore, their living standards, income earning or production capacity to pre-project levels regardless of their land tenure status. II. Categorization 3. Based on the number of persons that may be affected by the project, Project Affected People (PAPs) and the magnitude of impacts, projects will be categorized as follows: (a) Projects that will affect more than 200 PAPs due to land acquisition and/or physical relocation and where a full Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) must be produced. If the RAP cannot be prepared prior to project appraisal, a waiver can be provided by the World Bank Managing Director (MD) in consultation with the Resettlement Committee. In such cases, the TT should agree with the Borrower on a timetable for preparation of the RAP. (b) Projects that will affect less than 200 persons require the following documentation: (i) a land acquisition assessment, (ii) the minutes or record of consultations which assess the compensation claimed and agreement reached, and (iii) a record of the receipt of the compensation, or voluntary donation, by those affected (see below). (c) Projects that are not expected to have any land acquisition or any other significant adverse social impacts; on the contrary, significant positive social impact and improved livelihoods are expected from such interventions. III. Eligibility 4. PAPs are identified as persons whose livelihood is directly affected by the project due to acquisition of the land owned or used by them. PAPs deemed eligible for compensation are: 58 (a) those who have formal legal rights to land, water resources or structures/buildings, including recognized customary and traditional rights; (b) those who do not have such formal legal rights but have a claim to usufruct rights rooted in customary law; and (c) those whose claim to land and water resources or building/structures do not fall within (a) and (b) above, are eligible to resettlement assistance to restore their livelihood. IV. Compensation Principles 7. The project implementation agencies will ensure timely provision of the following means of compensation to affected peoples: (a) Project affected peoples losing access to a portion of their land or other productive assets with the remaining assets being economically viable are entitled to compensation at a replacement cost for that portion of land or assets lost to them. Compensation for the lost assets will be made according to the following principles: (i) replacement land with an equally productive plot, cash or other equivalent productive assets; (ii) materials and assistance to fully replace solid structures that will be demolished; (iii) replacement of damaged or lost crops and trees, at market value; (iv) other acceptable in-kind compensation; (v) in case of cash compensation, the delivery of compensation should be made in public, i.e., at the Community Meeting; and (vi) in case of physical relocation, provision of civic infrastructure at the resettlement sites. (b) Project affected peoples losing access to a portion of their land or other economic assets rendering the remainder economically non-viable will have the options of compensation for the entire asset by provision of alternative land, cash or equivalent productive asset, according to the principles in (a) i-iv above. V. Consultation Process 8. The PMU will ensure that all occupants of land and owners of assets located in a proposed subproject area are consulted. Community meetings will be held in each affected district and village to inform the local population of their rights to compensation and options available in accordance with these Guidelines. The Minutes of the community meetings shall reflect the discussions held; agreements reached, and include details of the agreement, based on the format provided in Attachment 3(ii). 59 9. The PMU shall provide a copy of the Minutes to affected people and confirm in discussions with each of them, their requests and preferences for compensation, agreements reached, and any eventual complaint. Copies will be recorded in the posted project documentation and be available for inspection during supervision. VI. Subproject Approval 10. In the event that a subproject involves acquisition against compensation, the PMU shall: (a) not approve the subproject unless satisfactory compensation has been agreed between the affected person and the local community; and (b) not allow works to start until the compensation has been delivered in a satisfactory manner to the affected persons. VII. Complaints and Grievances 11. Initially, all complaints should be registered by the PMU, which shall establish a register of resettlement/compensation related grievances and disputes mechanism. The existence and conditions of access to this register (where, when, how) shall be widely disseminated within the community/town as part of the consultation undertaken for the sub-project in general. A committee of knowledgeable persons, experienced in the subject area, shall be constituted at a local level as a Committee to handle first instance dispute/grievances. This group of mediators attempting amicable mediation/litigation in first instance will consist of the following members: (i) Head of District; (ii) Legal advisor; (iii) Local Representative within the elected Council; (iv) Head of Community Based Organization; and (v) Community leaders. This mediation committee will be set up at local level by the implementation agency on an "as-needed" (i.e. it will be established when a dispute arises in a given community). 12. When a grievance/dispute is recorded as per above-mentioned registration procedures, the mediation committee will be established, and mediation meetings will be organized with interested parties. Minutes of meetings will be recorded. The existence of this first instance mechanism will be widely disseminated to the affected people as part of the consultation undertaken for the sub-project in general. It is important that these mediation committees be set up as soon as RAP preparation starts. Disputes documented e.g. through socio-economic surveys should be dealt with by appropriate mediation mechanisms which must be available to cater for claims, disputes and grievances at this early stage. A template form for claims should be developed and these forms be collated on a quarterly basis into a database held at project level. VIII. Verification 12. The Mediation Meeting Minutes, including agreements of compensation and evidence of compensation made shall be provided to the Municipality/district, to the supervising engineers, who will maintain a record hereof, and to auditors and socio-economic monitors when they undertake reviews and post-project assessment. This process shall be specified in all relevant project documents, including details of the relevant authority for complaints at the municipal/district or implementing agency level. 60 Attachment 3(i) Land Acquisition Assessment Data Sheet (To be used to record information on all land to be acquired) 1. Quantities of land/structures/other assets required: 2. Date to be acquired: 3. Locations: 4. Owners: 5. Current uses: 6. Users: · Number of Customary Claimants: · Number of Squatters: · Number of Encroachers: · Number of Owners: · Number of Tenants: · Others (specify): ______________________ Number: ___________________ 7. How land/structures/other assets will be acquired (identify one): · Donation · Purchase 8. Transfer of Title: · Ensure these lands/structures/other assets are free of claims or encumbrances. · Written proof must be obtained (notarized or witnessed statements) for the voluntary donation, or acceptance of the prices paid from those affected, together with proof of title being vested in the community, or guarantee of public access, by the title-holder. 9. Describe grievance mechanisms available: 61 Schedule of Compensation of Asset Requisition Summary of Units to be Compensated Agreed Compensation Affected Unit/Item a. Urban/agricultural land (m2): _____________________ ___________________ b. Houses/structures to be demolished (units/m2): _____________________ ___________________ c. Type of structure to be demolished (e.g. mud, brick, cement block, etc.,) _____________________ Not Applicable. d. Trees or crops affected: _____________________ ___________________ e. Water sources affected: _____________________ ___________________ Signatures of local community representatives, Sheikh/Head of Tribe: Include record of any complaints raised by affected persons: Map attached (showing affected areas and replacement areas): 62 Attachment 4 Protection of Cultural Property 1. Cultural property include monuments, structures, works of art, or sites of significance points of view, and are defined as sites and structures having archaeological, historical, architectural, or religious significance, and natural sites with cultural values. This includes cemeteries, graveyards and graves. 2. The initial phase of the proposed emergency reconstruction operations pose limited risks of damaging cultural property since subprojects will largely consist of rehabilitation of existing roads across and along wadis, and minor public works for rehabilitation of irrigation systems and provision of flood protection and erosion prevention of embankments near populated and agricultural areas. Further, the list of negative subproject attributes, which would make a subproject ineligible for support (Attachment 1), includes any activity that would adversely impact cultural property. Nevertheless, the following procedures for identification, protection from theft, and treatment of discovered artifacts should be followed and included in standard bidding documents as provided in Attachment 6. Chance Find Procedures 3. Chance find procedures will be used as follows: (a) Stop the construction activities in the area of the chance find; (b) Delineate the discovered site or area; (c) Secure the site to prevent any damage or loss of removable objects. In cases of removable antiquities or sensitive remains, a night guard shall be present until the responsible local authorities and the Ministry of Culture take over; (d) Notify the supervisory Engineer who in turn will notify the responsible local authorities and the Ministry of Culture immediately (within 24 hours or less); (e) Responsible local authorities and the Ministry of Culture would be in charge of protecting and preserving the site before deciding on subsequent appropriate procedures. This would require a preliminary evaluation of the findings to be performed by the archeologists of the Ministry of Culture (within 72 hours). The significance and importance of the findings should be assessed according to the various criteria relevant to cultural heritage; those include the aesthetic, historic, scientific or research, social and economic values; (f) Decisions on how to handle the finding shall be taken by the responsible authorities and the Ministry of Culture. This could include changes in the layout (such as when finding an irremovable remain of cultural or archeological importance) conservation, preservation, restoration and salvage; (g) Implementation for the authority decision concerning the management of the finding shall be communicated in writing by the Ministry of Culture; and (h) Construction work could resume only after permission is given from the responsible local authorities and the Ministry of Culture concerning safeguard of the heritage. 63 4. These procedures must be referred to as standard provisions in construction contracts, when applicable, and as proposed in section 1.5 of Attachment 6. During project supervision, the Site Engineer shall monitor the above regulations relating to the treatment of any chance find encountered are observed. 5. Relevant findings will be recorded in World Bank Project Supervision Reports (PSRs), and Implementation Completion Reports (ICRs) will assess the overall effectiveness of the project's cultural property mitigation, management, and activities, as appropriate. 64 Attachment 5 Codes of Practice for Prevention and Mitigation of Environmental Impacts Potential Impacts Prevention and Mitigation Measures Roads · Rehabilitation of access road to collection points/transfer stations. · Rehabilitation/improvement of access road to landfill site Disruption of drainage: · Hampers free drainage, causes · Design to provide adequate drainage and to minimize changes stagnant pools of water. in flows, not limited to the road reserve. · Increased sediments into ponds, · Provision of energy dissipaters, cascades, steps, and checks streams and rivers due to erosion dams. from road tops and sides. · Provision of sufficient number of cross drains. · Increased run-off and flooding. · Balancing of cut and fill. · Revegetation to protect susceptible soil surfaces. · Rehabilitation of borrow areas. Erosion: · Erosion of land downhill from · Design to prevent soil erosion and maintain slope stability. the road bed, or in borrow areas. · Construction in the dry season. · Protection of soil surfaces during construction. · Landslides, slips or slumps. · Physical stabilization of erodible surfaces through turfing, planting a wide range of vegetation, and creating slope breaks. · Bank failure of the borrow pit. · Rehabilitation and re-grading of borrow pits and material collection sites. Loss of vegetation. · Balancing of cut and fill. · Revegetation to protect susceptible soil surfaces. · Minimize loss of natural vegetation during construction. · Revegetation and replanting to compensate any loss of plant cover or tree felling. 65 Potential Impacts Prevention and Mitigation Measures Loss of access. · Design to include accessibility to road sides in case roadbed is raised. · Alternative alignments to avoid bisecting villages by road widening. Impacts during construction: · Fuelwood collection. · Provision of fuel at work camps to prevent cutting of firewood. · Disease due to lack of sanitation. · Provision of sanitation at work camps. · Introduction of hazardous · Removal of work camp waste, proper disposal of oil, bitumen wastes. and other hazardous wastes. · Groundwater contamination (oil, grease). · Accidents during construction. · Management of construction period worker health and safety. · Potential impacts to cultural property. · Use archaeological chance find procedures and coordinate with appropriate agencies. · Increased migration from nearby · Provide comprehensive community participation in planning, cities. and Migration issue to be resolved through local conflict resolution system. 66 Attachment 6 Safeguards Procedures for Inclusion in the Technical Specifications of Contracts I. General 1. The Contractor and his employees shall adhere to the mitigation measures set down and take all other measures required by the Engineer to prevent harm, and to minimize the impact of his operations on the environment. 2. The Contractor shall not be permitted to unnecessarily strip clear the right of way. The Contractor shall only clear the minimum width for construction and diversion roads should not be constructed alongside the existing road. 3. Remedial actions which cannot be effectively carried out during construction should be carried out on completion of each Section of the road (earthworks, pavement and drainage) and before issuance of the Taking Over Certificate: (a) these sections should be landscaped and any necessary remedial works should be undertaken without delay, including grassing and reforestation; (b) water courses should be cleared of debris and drains and culverts checked for clear flow paths; and (c) borrow pits should be dressed as fish ponds, or drained and made safe, as agreed with the land owner. 4. The Contractor shall limit construction works to between 6 am and 7 pm if it is to be carried out in or near residential areas. 5. The Contractor shall avoid the use of heavy or noisy equipment in specified areas at night, or in sensitive areas such as near a hospital. 6. To prevent dust pollution during dry periods, the Contractor shall carry out regular watering of earth and gravel haul roads and shall cover material haulage trucks with tarpaulins to prevent spillage. II. Transport 7. The Contractor shall use selected routes to the project site, as agreed with the Engineer, and appropriately sized vehicles suitable to the class of road, and shall restrict loads to prevent damage to roads and bridges used for transportation purposes. The Contractor shall be held responsible for any damage caused to the roads and bridges due to the transportation of excessive loads, and shall be required to repair such damage to the approval of the Engineer. 67 8. The Contractor shall not use any vehicles, either on or off road with grossly excessive, exhaust or noise emissions. In any built up areas, noise mufflers shall be installed and maintained in good condition on all motorized equipment under the control of the Contractor. 9. Adequate traffic control measures shall be maintained by the Contractor throughout the duration of the Contract and such measures shall be subject to prior approval of the Engineer. III. Workforce 10. The Contractor should whenever possible locally recruit the majority of the workforce and shall provide appropriate training as necessary. 11. The Contractor shall install and maintain a temporary septic tank system for any residential labor camp and without causing pollution of nearby watercourses. 12. The Contractor shall establish a method and system for storing and disposing of all solid wastes generated by the labor camp and/or base camp. 13. The Contractor shall not allow the use of fuel wood for cooking or heating in any labor camp or base camp and provide alternate facilities using other fuels. 14. The Contractor shall ensure that site offices, depots, asphalt plants and workshops are located in appropriate areas as approved by the Engineer and not within 500 meters of existing residential settlements and not within 1,000 meters for asphalt plants. 15. The Contractor shall ensure that site offices, depots and particularly storage areas for diesel fuel and bitumen and asphalt plants are not located within 500 meters of watercourses, and are operated so that no pollutants enter watercourses, either overland or through groundwater seepage, especially during periods of rain. This will require lubricants to be recycled and a ditch to be constructed around the area with an approved settling pond/oil trap at the outlet. 16. The contractor shall not use fuel wood as a means of heating during the processing or preparation of any materials forming part of the Works. IV. Quarries and Borrow Pits 17. Operation of a new borrow area, on land, in a river, or in an existing area, shall be subject to prior approval of the Engineer, and the operation shall cease if so instructed by the Engineer. Borrow pits shall be prohibited where they might interfere with the natural or designed drainage patterns. River locations shall be prohibited if they might undermine or damage the river banks, or carry too much fine material downstream. 18. The Contractor shall ensure that all borrow pits used are left in a trim and tidy condition with stable side slopes, and are drained ensuring that no stagnant water bodies are created which could breed mosquitoes. 68 19. Rock or gravel taken from a river shall be far enough removed to limit the depth of material removed to one-tenth of the width of the river at any one location, and not to disrupt the river flow, or damage or undermine the river banks. 20. The location of crushing plants shall be subject to the approval of the Engineer, and not be close to environmentally sensitive areas or to existing residential settlements, and shall be operated with approved fitted dust control devices. V. Earthworks 21. Earthworks shall be properly controlled, especially during the rainy season. 22. The Contractor shall maintain stable cut and fill slopes at all times and cause the least possible disturbance to areas outside the prescribed limits of the work. 23. The Contractor shall complete cut and fill operations to final cross-sections at any one location as soon as possible and preferably in one continuous operation to avoid partially completed earthworks, especially during the rainy season. 24. In order to protect any cut or fill slopes from erosion, in accordance with the drawings, cut off drains and toe-drains shall be provided at the top and bottom of slopes and be planted with grass or other plant cover. Cut off drains should be provided above high cuts to minimize water runoff and slope erosion. 25. Any excavated cut or unsuitable material shall be disposed of in designated tipping areas as agreed to by the Engineer. 2. Tips should not be located where they can cause future slides, interfere with agricultural land or any other properties, or cause soil from the dump to be washed into any watercourse. Drains may need to be dug within and around the tips, as directed by the Engineer. VI. Historical and Archeological Sites 27. If the Contractor discovers archeological sites, historical sites, remains and objects, including graveyards and/or individual graves during excavation or construction, the Contractor shall: a. Stop the construction activities in the area of the chance find. b. Delineate the discovered site or area. c. Secure the site to prevent any damage or loss of removable objects. In cases of removable antiquities or sensitive remains, a night guard shall be present until the responsible local authorities and the Ministry of Culture take over. d. Notify the supervisory Engineer who in turn will notify the responsible local authorities and the Ministry of Culture immediately (less than 24 hours). e. Contact the responsible local authorities and the Ministry of Culture who would be in charge of protecting and preserving the site before deciding on the proper 69 procedures to be carried out. This would require a preliminary evaluation of the findings to be performed by the archeologists of the Ministry of Culture (within 72 hours). The significance and importance of the findings should be assessed according to the various criteria relevant to cultural heritage, including the aesthetic, historic, scientific or research, social and economic values. f. Ensure that decisions on how to handle the finding be taken by the responsible authorities and the Ministry of Culture. This could include changes in the layout (such as when the finding is an irremovable remain of cultural or archeological importance) conservation, preservation, restoration and salvage. g. Implementation for the authority decision concerning the management of the finding shall be communicated in writing by the Ministry of Culture; and h. Construction work will resume only after authorization is given by the responsible local authorities and the Ministry of Culture concerning the safeguard of the heritage. VII. Disposal of Construction and Vehicle Waste 28. Debris generated due to the dismantling of the existing structures shall be suitably reused, to the extent feasible, in the proposed construction (e.g. as fill materials for embankments). The disposal of remaining debris shall be carried out only at sites identified and approved by the project engineer. The contractor should ensure that these sites (a) are not located within designated forest areas; (b) do not impact natural drainage courses; and (c) do not impact endangered/rare flora. Under no circumstances shall the contractor dispose of any material in environmentally sensitive areas. 29. In the event any debris or silt from the sites is deposited on adjacent land, the Contractor shall immediately remove such, debris or silt and restore the affected area to its original state to the satisfaction of the Supervisor/Engineer. 30. Bentonite slurry or similar debris generated from pile driving or other construction activities shall be disposed of to avoid overflow into the surface water bodies or form mud puddles in the area. 31. All arrangements for transportation during construction including provision, maintenance, dismantling and clearing debris, where necessary, will be considered incidental to the work and should be planned and implemented by the contractor as approved and directed by the Engineer. 32. Vehicle/machinery and equipment operations, maintenance and refueling shall be carried out to avoid spillage of fuels and lubricants and ground contamination. An oil interceptor will be provided for wash down and refueling areas. Fuel storage shall be located in proper bounded areas. 33. All spills and collected petroleum products shall be disposed of in accordance with standard environmental procedures/guidelines. Fuel storage and refilling areas shall be located at least 300m from all cross drainage structures and important water bodies or as directed by the Engineer. 70 71 Annex 9: Project Preparation and Appraisal Team Members BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project Name Role Unit Africa Eshogba Olojoba Sr. Environment Specialist & TTL AFTEN Abdoul-Wahab Seyni Sr. Social Development Specialist AFTCS Daniel Sellen Sector Leader SDN Dahlia Lotayef Program Coordinator AFTEN Franck Bousquet Program Coordinator AFTUW Kwabena Amankwah-Ayeh Sr. Urban Specialist AFTUW Poonam Pillai Sr. Environmental Specialist SASDI Zie Coulibaly Sr. Infrastructure Specialist AFTUW Aissatou Diallo Sr. Finance Officer CTRFC Alain Hinkati Financial Management Spec. AFTFM Itchi Gnon Ayindo Sr. Procurement Specialist AFTPC Anthony Molle Counsel LEGAF Mathias Gogohounga Procurement Specialist AFMBF Andrew Asibey Sr. M&E Specialist AFTDE Sylvain Migan Adopko Water & Sanitation Specialist ETWAF Bolormaa Amgaabazar Sr. Operations Officer AFTDE Issa Mamman-Sani Sr. Environment Specialist AFTEN Salimata Follea Operations Analyst AFTEN Akpo Lesissan Augustine Team Assistant AFMBF Chita Oje Team Assistant AFCW2 Ernestine Ngobo-Njocke Program Assistant AFTEN Fadi Doumani Consultant AFTEN Petrus Dahou Consultant AFTEN Djibril Doucoure Consultant AFTEN Fadhel Ghariani Consultant AFTEN Sandra Cointreau Consultant AFTEN Jeffrey Racki Consultant AFTEN 72 Annex 10: Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project Introduction 1. The project is classified as Category B as the potential environmental and social impacts are not likely to be significant or adverse. They are likely to be small-scale, site-specific and thus easily remediable. Two safeguards policies were triggered: Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) and Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12). The triggered policies are applicable to the four technical components and the safeguards instruments appropriate at this time project preparation and appraisal are the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF). The ESMF and RPF that were prepared and disclosed under the regular Benin Urban Environment Project will be updated and re-disclosed within six months of credit effectiveness. Potential Environmental Impacts 2. The proposed emergency operation will finance the rehabilitation of drains and channels; and undertake construction of SWM infrastructures like transfer stations, controlled dumpsites, paving of access roads and opening of an additional cell in a landfill site. The expected environmental impacts are those typically associated with construction and infrastructure rehabilitation. These are not limited to: · Temporary site disturbance associated with demolition of damaged infrastructure; · Temporary erosion and sedimentation in rivers/streams from rehabilitation of drainage networks and associated increases in sediment loads and turbidity during scouring or calibration of channels sides; · Dust and noise from operation of heavy equipment during construction; · Handling, storage and disposal of waste materials; and · Traffic congestion or temporary re-routing and interruption of traffic around the construction zones. 58. 3. All the above impacts can be managed during construction with known mitigation measures included in the contracts and capacity building of supervising organizations. Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs) and/or Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMPs) will be prepared once sites and plans for civil works are finalized. It should be noted that each construction or rehabilitation site will be located at confined sites so as to limit and avoid incremental damage. In this way, the potential impacts will be much localized. None of the sub-projects therefore will have large scale or regional environmental impacts. Approach to Environmental and Social Assessment 4. To guide the environmental assessment and mitigation process, an ESSAF has been developed for the project (see Annex 8). Recognizing the emergency nature of the proposed operation and the need for providing immediate assistance, while at the same time ensuring due 73 diligence in managing potential environmental and social risks, the ESSAF is based on the following principles: · The proposed operation will support many sub-projects, the detailed designs of which were not completed or available at appraisal. To ensure effective application of the Bank's safeguards policies, the ESSAF provides guidance on the approach to be taken during project implementation for the screening for selection and design of sub-projects and the planning of mitigation measures; · No resettlement or land-take issues are expected in any of the proposed sub-projects under the emergency project. If they do occur, Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs) or Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plans (ARAPs), as may be applicable, will be prepared for specific sub-projects in accordance with the project's updated Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF); · The proposed emergency operation will finance feasibility and detailed design studies for these subsequent investments, which will include environmental assessments and social studies as requested by World Bank safeguards policies; · Project design and sub-project selection with an aim of maintaining regional balance and equity among the different social groups, considering variations in population density. Employment opportunities within the sub-project areas will be available on an equal basis to all, on the basis of professional competence, irrespective of gender or ethnic or religious group. The use of labor-intensive flood rehabilitation/protection measures will be relied upon, where feasible, to enable the creation of temporary job opportunities, which will be targeted at the affected communities and households that lost their livelihoods as a result of the 2010 floods disaster. Further, in all sub-projects which require consultations with local communities or beneficiaries, consultations will be conducted to elicit the views of both gender; and · Consultation and disclosure requirements will be simplified to meet the special needs of these operations. Institutional Responsibilities 5. The Benin Environmental Agency (ABE) is the Environmental Protection Authority in Benin. It is well known in the sub-region and will be responsible for monitoring the implementation of the safeguards instruments of the proposed operation. The environmental mitigation and monitoring plans will also be carried out by the PMU and executing agencies; that are already are familiar with Bank safeguards guidelines and processes under the PGUD-2 project. The PMU will recruit an environmental and social specialist (within 3 months of effectiveness) that will work with the environmental and social consultants of the executing agencies to implement social safeguards issues and environmental aspects included in the Project's Operations Manual. 74 Annex 11: Economic and Financial Analysis BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project Background 1. Financial analysis (i.e., commercial profitability analysis) and economic analysis (i.e., national profitability analysis) differ in several ways. The objective of commercial profitability analysis is to assess the net financial results of a project from the investor point of view, while the national profitability analysis aims to identify and measure the net economic benefits of the project from the society point of view. Moreover, commercial profitability analysis is based on prevailing market prices, while national profitability analysis is determined with the help of adjusted prices (i.e., shadow prices) that are deemed to be an approximation of true economic prices (reflecting the social opportunity cost). Similarly, for commercial profitability analysis, the time value of money is tackled by application of the private discount rate based on the prevailing interest rate of the capital market, while in the case of national profitability analysis, the social discount rate is applied, i.e., the rate at which Benin can borrow money taking into consideration the country risk. Economic Analysis of the proposed flood prevention and infrastructure adaptation subcomponent 2. The economic analysis was performed for the prevention and adaptation infrastructure investments in terms of three drainage improvement area in Cotonou (prevention) and the elevation of a bridge (adaptation) in Cotonou as well as the solid waste (prevention) subcomponent. The waste management subcomponent reduces the risks of clogging drains and increasing the sedimentation of drainage marshes, hence reducing their natural function of absorbing the floods. 3. The analysis covers the recurrent annual flooding during the high season (April-July) and the low season (September-October) and will not cover the 2010 devastating flooding per se: the "cinquantenale" or an event occurring every 50 years or so. The subcomponents are: · Improvement of the AA drainage area in Cotonou; · Improvement of the P drainage area in Cotonou; · Improvement of the W drainage area in Cotonou; · Elevation of the Fifadji Bridge in Cotonou; · Construction of 40 collection points in Cotonou Agglomeration; · Construction of a transfer/segregation site for Cotonou Agglomeration; and · Construction of a controlled dumpsite for Cotonou Agglomeration. 4. A number of socioeconomic and environmental benefits could accrue with the implementation of the project but could not be valued due to time constraints and readily available data. A "without project" scenario could notably have the following negative direct and indirect effects: · Health: averted in terms of premature death, drowning, injuries, water-related diseases, vector-borne diseases, etc.; 75 · Environmental: ecological system disruption, water resource pollution, air pollution, land degradation; · Global externalities: carbon emission (e.g., due to additional traffic jams, animal putrefaction, vegetal decomposition, etc.); · Damages: infrastructure (transport, energy, water, etc.), land, household, business, private property including vehicles, etc.; · Economic opportunity: loss of economic opportunities and increase poverty incidence and therefore vulnerability (loss of wages, loss of time, yield, sales, commerce, tourism, etc.); and · Social: disruption of health services, schools, universities, etc. 5. The economic analysis only covers the disruption days from severe floods accruing to the population in the targeted drainage, bridge and solid waste improvement subcomponents. The project will provide social benefits in terms of better waste management to avoid future clogging, the value added of land in the drainage area over the next 21 years should disruptive flooding be averted as well as the avoided idle time spent in alternative traffic routes associated with the elevation of the Fifadji Bridge. A vehicle operating cost approach to justify the building of the bridge was not performed due to time constraint and a lack of robust data. 6. The retained methods to derive the social benefits for the economic analysis are: (i) the averted loss of opportunities by the reduction of 10 disruptive severe-flood-days; and (ii) a hedonic pricing for the incremental value of land associated with the reduction of 10 disruptive severe-flood-days; and regular revenue flows from solid waste. 7. A number of key conservative assumptions have been considered for the economic analysis. · The economic analysis is carried out over a period of 24 years (from 2011 to 2034). · A real discount rate of 12 percent per annum is used. · Priority investments are disbursed over the first 0.5 to 2.5 years of the implementation of the project. · Operations and maintenance (OMEX) cost increase at an average 3.0% annually in real terms. · The lost opportunity (monetized by the GDP) of 10 disruptive severe-flood-days are considered although an improved drainage, bridge and waste management should help Cotonou Agglomeration avoid any major disruptive floods in the future. Actually, floods have been lasting several weeks notably due to the missing link between these drainage areas and Lake Nokoué, which will be tackled by the project. · A crude hedonic method is suggested to derive the incremental cost of land with the reduction or containment of annual floods. Current average land cost is CFAF 23,000 per m2 whereas the incremental land cost due to the reduction of floods is assumed to be a net increase of 10% of the value of the land located within a distance of 75 m from each side of the public setback drainage area (150 m in total) with a total length of 8.6 km. · The flooding of the bridge affects 40,000 people (average 2 people per vehicle, bus, truck and motorcycle) with a loss of one hour per day over 10 days. 76 · The GDP per capita per year adopted for the calculation is CFAF 346,500 with an annual growth of 3% and a distribution of 50% for the under 14 years of age, 100% for the 15 to 64 years age bracket and 30% for more than 64 years of age. · There are no major infrastructure, mechanical and equipment investments that could not be covered by OMEX over the lifetime of the subcomponents. · Only revenues perceived from the waste pre-collection were used in the analysis. · All benefits are assumed to begin to accrue in 2014. Table A11.1. Drainage and Waste Improvement Dataset Total Length Number of GDP/ Number Targeted GDP/ Vehicle Drainage from days of capita/ Input Area of Area Pop in capita day length drainage averted year Subcomponent travelers 2015 /day area floods 2010 setback Ha #/day # m m m2 # # US$ CFAF 1- Drainage AA 800 4,910 75x2=150 736,500 28,583 10 2- Drainage P 600 2,000 75x2=150 300,000 14,703 10 3- Drainage W 1,660 75x2=150 249,000 7,999 10 4- Elevation of the Fifadji Bridge 20,000 40,000 10 Waste pre-collection 33,184 Transfer 1,333,973 Controlled Dump Total 1,400 20,000 40,000 8,570 75x2=150 1,285,500 1,377,573 10 770 949 Economic Analysis Results Determination of NPV, IRR and Benefit/Cost Ratio 8. The drainage, bridge and solid waste subcomponent aggregate economic net present value (NPV) discounted at 12% is positive with US$ 77 million over 24 years. The benefit/cost ratio reaches 11 while the economic internal rate of return (IRR) is also positive with 31% (Table A11.2). Despite the conservative stance and the few benefits considered in the economic analysis, the drainage, bridge elevation and solid waste subcomponents are economically viable. Table A11.2. Key Economic Indicators with 12% Discount Rate Key Economic Indicator Results Interpretation NPV/24 years US$ 77.4 Net benefit exceed cost IRR/24 years 31% Positive Benefit/Cost Ratio/24 years 11 Discounted benefit > discounted cost Result: The above three criteria indicate that the project is economically viable Economic sensitivity analysis 9. The sensitivity analysis is conducted to test the viability of the subcomponents with a reduction of the number of flood day from 10 to 2 days. The project is still viable with an NPV of US$ 71 million with a 31% IRR and a benefit/cost ratio is 11 (Table A11.3) and results are 77 similar to Table A11.2 results as the reduction of the number of days forgoes the domestic product of the population at risk, which is relatively minute as compared to other benefits. Table A11.3. Key Economic Indicator Sensitivity Scenario: 2 Day Flood Reduction Key Economic Indicator Results Interpretation NPV/24 years US$ 71.4 Net benefit exceed cost IRR/24 years 31% Positive Benefit/Cost Ratio/24 years 11 Discounted benefit > discounted cost Result: The above three criteria indicate that the project is economically viable 10. The sensitivity analysis is also conducted to test the viability of the subcomponents when the yearly land increment is 5% instead of 10%. The subcomponents are economically viable with an NPV of US$ 5 million with a 14% IRR and a benefit/cost ratio of 3 (Table A11.4). Table A11.4. Key Economic Indicator Sensitivity Scenario: 5% Land Value Increment Key Economic Indicator Results Interpretation NPV/24 years US$ 5.2 Net benefit exceed cost IRR/24 years 14% Positive Benefit/Cost Ratio/24 years 3 Discounted benefit > discounted cost Result: The above three criteria indicate that the project is economically viable 11. The drainage, bridge and waste subcomponents are not sensitive to a decrease by two flood-days and moderately sensitive to a decrease of the incremental land value to 5% along the drainage area. Financial Analysis of the proposed waste management subcomponent 12. The prevention and adaptation infrastructure investments in terms of 3 drainage improvement area in Cotonou (prevention) and bridge (adaptation) are considered a public good whereas the waste management subcomponent could also benefit from a financial analysis to determine charges that could help recoup the CAPEX and OMEX costs to sustain the service of the waste chain over 24 years in the cities of Cotonou, Porto Novo, Abomey-Calavi, Ouidah and Seme Podji. The hardware subcomponents are: · Construction of 40 collection points; · Construction of a transfer and segregation site; and · Construction of a controlled dumpsite. 13. Several conservative assumptions have been considered for the financial analysis: · The financial analysis is carried out over a period of 24 years (from 2011 to 2034). · A real discount rate of 5 percent per annum is used. · Priority investments are disbursed over the first 2.5 years of the implementation of the project. · Operations and maintenance (OMEX) cost increase at an average 3.0% annually in real terms. The physical and financial contingencies for the project represent 10% on average of CAPEX. · The incremental targeted population that will be covered by waste pre-collection, transfer and controlled dumping is 55% for Cotonou, 44% for Porto Novo, 18% for Abomey- 78 Calavi, 26% for Ouidah and 26% for Seme Podji. By 2014, the total and incremental pre- collection coverage of these cities will be 63% and 39% respectively. Transfer and controlled dumping coverage will be equal to the total pre-collection of 63%. · The transfer and controlled dump revenues are assumed to be the pre-collection revenues are based on the weighted cost charged by NGO for pre-collection with the weighted average amounts to CFAF 23,467 per ton. The full hypothetical taxe d'enlèvement des ordures ménagères (TEOM) is assigned for the transfer and controlled dumping payment in the absence of real costs incurred by the municipalities. Table A11.5. Solid Waste Dataset Pre-collection Collection Waste Chain Pre- Total collection TEOM Waste Waste Waste Pre- NGO (mun. TEOM TEOM Waste Coverage/ Estimated Total City Total collection Revenues estate Hypothet. Hypothet. Generation year by Total Recycling Population Fee/year Total Livable Lots Tax) attribution attribution /cap/ day 2014 Recycling revenues 2010 CFAF CFAF M (#) CFAF (%) CFAF M Kg Ton Ton CFAF M Cotonou 819,749 25,000 423 46,800 6,000 100% 6,000 0.5 121,113 6,056 303 Porto Novo 291,363 12,000 36 19,000 3,000 100% 3,000 0.4 26,974 1,349 67 Abomey Calavi 428,956 9,600 26 76,000 3,000 100% 3,000 0.4 25,968 1,298 65 Ouidah 106,704 9,600 6 8,000 3,000 100% 3,000 0.4 7,851 393 20 Seme Podji 150,184 8,400 5 8,000 3,000 100% 3,000 0.4 5,856 293 15 Total 1,796,956 497 157,800 180 187,762 9,388 469 Source: INSAE website; and World Bank staff estimates. Estimation of Potential Waste Revenues 14. The potential revenues from the solid waste subcomponent are illustrated in Table A11.6, and estimated to generate a flow of CFAF 17.5 billion over 24 years. Revenues will start accruing at the beginning of Year 3 or 2014. The pre-collection revenues are based on the actual fee (weighted for all the cities) paid by dwellers per year whereas the transfer and controlled dumping revenues are derived from the TEOM. Table A11.6. Waste Fee Considered in the Financial Analysis, CFAF/ton Waste Type 2011 2012 2013 2014 Pre-collection 24,171 24,896 25,643 26,412 Transfer 1,170 Controlled Dumping 1,102 Determination of NPV, IRR and Benefit/Cost Ratio 15. The financial NPV discounted at 5% for the solid waste subcomponent (Table A11.7) is positive with US$ 3 million over 24 years. The benefit/cost ratio reaches 1.6 and is greater than zero while the financial IRR is positive reaching 10%. Therefore, the project is financially viable under the considered assumptions. 79 Table A11.7. Key Financial Analysis Indicators with a 5% Discount Rate Key Financial Indicator Results Interpretation NPV/24 years US$ 3 Net benefits exceed cost IRR/24 years 10% Positive Benefit/Cost Ratio/24 years 1.6 Discounted benefit > discounted cost Result: The above three criteria indicate that the project is financially viable Financial Sensitivity Analysis 16. The financial sensitivity analysis is conducted to test the viability of the subcomponents with a reduction of the yearly increase of collected revenues to 2% and an increase of OMEX to 5%. The project is still viable with an NPV of US$ 2 million with an 8% IRR and a benefit/cost ratio is 1.5 for the reduction in revenues (Table A11.8). The project is also barely viable with an NPV of US$ 1 million with a 7% IRR and a benefit/cost ratio is 1.3 for the increase of OMEX (Table A11.9). Table A11.8. Key Financial Analysis Indicators with a Reduction of Revenues Key Financial Indicator Results Interpretation NPV/24 years US$ 2 Net benefit exceed cost IRR/24 years 8% Positive Benefit/Cost Ratio/24 years 1.5 Discounted benefit > discounted cost Result: The above three criteria indicate that the project is financially viable Table A11.9. Key Financial Analysis Indicators with an Increase in OMEX Key Financial Indicator Results Interpretation NPV/24 years US$ 1 Net benefit exceed cost IRR/24 years 7% Positive Benefit/Cost Ratio/24 years 1.3 Discounted benefit > discounted cost Result: The above three criteria indicate that the project is financially viable Dynamic Financial Analysis to Increase Efficiencies 17. Further to the preceding financial analysis, a rapid dynamic financial analysis has been performed to suggest possible waste fee for collection, transfer and controlled dumping. Typically, the dynamic financial analysis associates CAPEX and OMEX costs with waste volume handled. It gives an order of magnitude for partially and totally recouping the investment. Table A11.10. Solid Waste Dynamic Waste Fees at 5% Discount Rate Treated Waste Volume Controlled Cost Recovery Pre-collection Transfer Dumping (CFAF/Ton) (CFAF/Ton) (CFAF/Ton) Dynamic Waste Fee Needed to Recoup Total Cost 7,052 1,104 1,015 Dynamic Waste Fee Needed to Recoup CAPEX 3,939 617 797 Dynamic Waste Fee Needed to Recoup OMEX 3,114 487 218 18. An interesting result of the dynamic analysis reveals that the actual pre-collection fee is about three times as much as the dynamic fee whereas the transfer and controlled dump fees used in the financial analysis seem inflated (A11.10). A reduction of the actual pre-collection fee and 80 hypothetical transfer and controlled dump fees by up to one half could increase both efficiencies and consumer surplus. 81 Annex 12: Documents in Project Files BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project 1. Concept Note 2. Letter from President of Bénin requesting Bank support 3. Post-Disaster Needs Assessment 4. The Benin Solid Waste Management Strategy 5. Report of Sandra Cointreau's Mission 6. Report of Djibril Doucoure's Mission 7. Report of Fadhel Ghariani's Mission 82 Annex 13: Country at a Glance BENIN: Emergency Urban Environment Project 83 84