Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIALUSEONLY ReportNo: 38692 - AFR PROJECTAPPRAISAL DOCUMENT ONTHREE PROPOSEDCREDITS INTHEAMOUNT OF SDRl0.10 MILLION (US$15 MILLIONEQUIVALENT) TO THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA OF SDRl0.10 MILLION (USSl5 MILLIONEQUIVALENT) TO THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MALI OF SDRl0.10 MILLION (US$15 MILLIONEQUIVALENT) TO THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL FOR A WEST AFRICA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY PROGRAM (WAAPP) SUPPORT PROJECT INSUPPORTOFTHEFIRSTPHASEOFTHE WEST AFRICA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY (APL)PROGRAM March 2,2007 Rural IV Country DepartmentAFCRI Africa Region This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosedwithout World Bank authorization. CURRENCYEQUIVALENTS (ExchangeRateEffectiveMarch1,2007) CurrencyUnit = US$ US$1.48945 = SDR 1 FISCALYEAR January 1 - December31 ABBREVIATIONSAND ACRONYMS AAP The Africa Action Plan AAPP Africa Agricultural Productivity Program AfDB African DevelopmentBank AGRA Alliance for a Green RevolutioninAfrica AgSSIP Agricultural Services SubsectorInvestment ProjectiProgram A K I S Agriculture Knowledge Information System APL Adaptable ProgramLoan AU African Union CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture DevelopmentProgram CAS Country Assistance Strategy CERAAS Centre d'Etude Re'gionalpour 1'Arne'lioration de 1'Adaptation h la Se'cheresse (Regional Center for the Study of Drought-Adaptation Improvement) CGIAR Consultative Group on InternationalAgricultural Research CESS Comite'Inter-Etatpour la Lutte contre la Se'cheresseau Sahel (Permanent Inter-State Committee on Drought Control) C W Centre de Coope'ration Internationale en Recherche Agronornique pour le De'veloppernent(French Agricultural ResearchCentre for International Development) CNRA Comite'National de la RechercheAgricole (National Committee on Agricultural Research) CPP Crop Protection Products CR&DGF Competitive Researchand Development Grant Fund CSIR Council for Scientific and IndustrialResearch DAF Direction Administrative et FinanciBre (Administrative and Financial Directorate) DFID UnitedKingdom's Department for InternationalDevelopment ECOWAP ECOWAS Agricultural Policy ECOWAS Economic Community o f West African States EIA EnvironmentalImpact Assessment EMP Environment Management Plans ESIA Environmentaland Social Impact Assessment ESMF Environmentaland Social Management Framework EU European Union FAAP Framework for Africa Agricultural Productivity FA0 Food and Agriculture Organization 11 FOR OFFICIAL USEONLY FARA Forum for Agricultural Research in Afnca FEIA FullEnvironmental ImpactAssessment FMR Financial MonitoringReport FNRAA Fonds National de Recherches Agricoles et Agro-alimentaires (National Agricultural and Agro-processing ResearchFund) GDP Gross Domestic Product GEF Global EnvironmentFacility GI Geographic Indication GPN General Procurement Notice HIPC Heavily IndebtedPoor Countries I C Individual Consultant I C B International Competitive Bidding IDA International Development Association IDF Institutionnel Development Fund IDRC International Development Research Center IFAC International Federation o f Accountants IFAD International Fundfor Agricultural Development IFDC International Center for Soil Fertility and Agricultural Development IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute IITA International Institute o f Tropical Agriculture I N S A H Insitut du Sahel (Sahel Institute) IPR Intellectual Property Rights IPSAS International Accounting Standards ISA International Standards ofAuditing IFR Interim Financial Reports KPI Key Performance Indicator LCS Least Cost Selection; LEIA Limited Environmental Impact Assessment LIB Limited Competitive Bidding M&E Monitoringand Evaluation MAPP Multi-Country Agricultural Productivity Program MDGs MillenniumDevelopment Goals MOFA MinistryofFoodandAgriculture MWRD Multi-purpose Water Resources Development Project NARS National Agricultural Research System NCB National Competitive Bidding NCOS National Centers o f Specialization NEPAD New Partnership for Africa's Development NGO Non-Governmental Organizations PASAOP Programme d 'Appui aux Services Agricoles et aux Organisations de Producteurs (Agricultural Services and Producer Organizations Support Program) PCN Project Concept Note PEFA Public Expenditure and FinancialAccountability PIM Project Implementation Manual PPM Pest Management Plan PPR Public Procurement Reform PSAOP Programme des Services Agricoles et Organisations des Producteurs (Agricultural Services and Producer Organizations Program) QCBS Quality and Cost-Based Selection R&D Research and Development 111 ... This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not be otherwise disclosed without World Bank authorization. R A I S RegionalAgricultural Information System RAP Resettlement Action Plan RCOE Regional Center o f Excellence REC Regional Economic Community RIAS Regional Integration Assistance Strategy SBD StandardBiddingDocuments S I L Specific InvestmentLoan SOE Statement of Expenses SPAAR ss Special Programfor African Agricultural Research Singlesource SYSCOHADA SystBme Comptable de 1'Organisation pour I'Harmonisation enAfrique du Droit des Affaires (Accounting Systemof the Organization for the Harmonizationof Business Laws inAfrica) TGD Technology Generation and Dissemination TOR Terms o fReference UN UnitedNations UNDB UnitedNations DevelopmentBusiness USAID UnitedStates Agency for InternationalDevelopment WAAPP West Africa Agricultural Productivity Program WAEMURJEMOA West Africa Economic and MonetaryUnion WCA West and Central Africa WCATS West and Central Africa Air Transport Safety and Security Project WECARDLORAF West and Central African Council for Agricultural Researchand DevelopmentlConseilOuest et Centre Africain pour la Recherche et le DiveloppementAgricoles Acting Vice President: HartwigSchafer Country Director: MarkD.Tomlinson Sector Manager: Mary Barton-Dock Task Team Leader: Ismael Ouedraogo iv AFRICA West Africa AgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) SupportProject CONTENTS Page I STRATEGICCONTEXTANDRATIONALE . ................................................................. 1 A . Country and sector issues .................................................................................................... 1 B . Rationale for Bank involvement ......................................................................................... 2 C. Higherlevel objectives to which the project contributes .................................................... 3 I1. PROJECTDESCRIPTION ............................................................................................. 3 A. Lendinginstrument ............................................................................................................. 3 B. Programobjective andPhases ............................................................................................ 4 C . Project development objective and key indicators .............................................................. 6 D . Project components ............................................................................................................. 6 E. Lessons learned andreflected inthe project design .......................................................... 11 F. Alternatives considered and reasons for rejection............................................................ 12 I11. IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................................................... 13 A . Partnership arrangements (ifapplicable) .......................................................................... 13 B. Institutional and implementationarrangements................................................................ 14 C . Monitoring and evaluation o f outcomeshesults ................................................................ 15 D. Sustainability., . . . ................................................................................................................... 16 E . Critical risks andpossible controversial aspects............................................................... 16 F. Loadcredit conditions and covenants. .............................................................................. 17 I V . APPRAISAL SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 17 A. Economic and financial analyses...................................................................................... 17 B . Technical.. ......................................................................................................................... 18 C . Fiduciary ........................................................................................................................... 18 D Social................................................................................................................................. . 18 E. Environment...................................................................................................................... 19 F. Safeguard policies ............................................................................................................. 19 V G. PolicyExceptionsandReadiness ...................................................................................... 19 Annex 1: CountryandSector or ProgramBackground ......................................................... 20 Annex 2: Major RelatedProjectsFinancedby the Bank and/or other Agencies .................27 Annex 3: ResultsFrameworkandMonitoring ........................................................................ 29 Annex 4: DetailedProjectDescription ...................................................................................... 35 Annex 5: ProjectCosts ............................................................................................................... 44 Annex 6: ImplementationArrangements ................................................................................. 45 Annex 7: FinancialManagementandDisbursementArrangements ..................................... 48 Annex 8: ProcurementArrangements ...................................................................................... 63 Annex 9: EconomicandFinancialAnalysis ............................................................................. 77 Annex 10: SafeguardPolicyIssues ............................................................................................ 78 Annex 11:ProjectPreparationandSupervision ..................................................................... 82 Annex 12: Documentsinthe ProjectFile ................................................................................. 84 Annex 13: Statementof LoansandCredits .............................................................................. 85 APPENDIX I :GHANA ......................................................................................................... 85 APPENDIX I1 :MALI ......................................................................................................... 87 APPENDIX I11 :SENEGAL ................................................................................................. 88 Annex 14: Countryat a Glance ................................................................................................. 90 Annex 15: Maps ........................................................................................................................... 96 vi AFRICA WEST AFRICA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITYPROGRAM(WAAPP) SUPPORT PROJECT PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT AFRICA AFTS4 Date: March 2,2007 Team Leader: Ismael S. Ouedraogo Country Director: Mark D.Tomlinson Sectors: Agricultural extension andresearch Sector Manager: Mary A. Barton-Dock (60%); General agriculture, fishingand forestry sector (40%) Themes: Export development and competitiveness (P);Technology diffusion (P);Trade facilitation and market access (P);Land administration andmanagement (S);Biodiversity (S) Project ID: PO94084 Environmental screening category: Partial Assessment Lending Instrument: Adaptable Program Loan ProjectFinancingData [ ]Loan [XI Credit [ ] Grant [ ] Guarantee I[ 3 Other: For Loandcreditdothers: Source Local Foreign Total BorrowerRecipient 3.259 0.000 3.259 International Development Association (IDA) 39.982 5.018 45.000 Local Communities 1.217 0.000 1.217 Total: 44.458 5.018 49.476 FinancingPlan(US$m) Phase2 Source Local Foreign Total BorrowerRecipient 3.259 0.000 3.259 International Development Association (IDA) 39.982 5.018 45.000 Local Communities 1.217 0.000 1.217 Total: 44.458 5.018 49.476 vii Borrowers: Government o fthe Republic o f Ghana; Government o fthe Republic o fMali; and Government o fthe Reuublic o f Senegal ResponsibleAgency: CORAFnllrECARD, 7, Avenue Bourguiba, B.P. 48, Dakar, Senegal, CP 18623 Tel: (221) 8259618 Fax: (221) 8255569 secoraf@coraf.org www.coraf.org Estimateddisbursements(Bank FY/US$m) FY 08 09 10 11 12 Annual 9.90 9.64 9.18 8.42 7.86 Cumulative 9.90 19.54 28.72 37.14 45.00 Does the project depart from the CAS incontent or other significant respects? Re$ PAD A.3 [ No Does the project require any exceptions from Bank policies? [ ]Yes [XINO Re$ PAD D.7 Have these been approvedby Bank management? I s approval for any policy exception sought from the Board? [ ]Yes [ IN0 Does the project include any critical risks rated "substantial" or "high"? Re$ PAD C.5 [X ]Yes [ ] No Does the project meet the Regional criteria for readiness for implementation? Ref: PAD D.7 [XIYes [ ] N o Project development objective Re$ PAD B.2, TechnicalAnnex 3 The development objective o fthe project (first phase o fthe program insupport to the WAAPP) i s to generate and disseminate improved technologies inthe participating countries' top priority areas that are aligned with the region's top priorities, as identifiedby the West and Central Council for Agricultural Research and Development (WECARD/CORAF). These include roots andtubers inGhana; rice inMali; andcereals inSenegal. The region's consumers, particularly those affected by extreme poverty, are the ultimate beneficiaries o f the project. Agricultural producers and agribusinesses, as users o fthe improved technology, are the primary beneficiaries o fthe program. These are also the key participants, along with researchers, extension agencies anduniversities (inadheringto the agricultural knowledge information system ( M I S ) conceptual framework), inthe generation and disseminationo f technology that i s directly supported by the program. Project description Re$ PAD B.3.a, TechnicalAnnex 4 Component 1: Enabling Conditions for Regional Cooperation inTGD (US$5.3 million, IDA: US$5.0million). This aims at strengthening the mechanisms andprocedures for the dissemination o ftechnology, so to allow countries to benefit fully from the regional cooperation intechnology generation that is beingpromoted. ... V l l l Component 2: National Centers o f Specialization(US$22.5 million, IDA: US$20.6 million). This aims at strengthening the alignment o fnational priorities with regional priorities within participant countries' national agricultural research systems (NARS). Component 3: Fundingo f Demand-Driven Technology Generation and Adoption (US$16.8 million; IDA:US$15.0million). This aims at strengthening priority-focused, transparent fundingmechanisms for demand-driven agricultural R&Dwithin participatingcountries. Component 4: Project Coordination, Management, Monitoringand Evaluation (US$4.9 million; IDA:US$4.3 million). This aims at establishing aneffective coordination, management and M&E system at the national andregionallevels. Which safeguard policies are triggered, ifany? Re$ PAD 0.6, Technical Annex 10 Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) Pest Management (OP 4.09) Significant, non-standard conditions, if any, for: Re$ PAD C.7 Boardpresentation: N o non-standard conditions. Credit effectiveness: (a) The Project ImplementationManual (PIM), inform and substance satisfactory to the Association, has been adopted by CORAF andthe PIUfor the purpose o f implementing the regional andnational components o fthe Project. (b) CORAF andthe PIUs have adapted their accountingsoftware to cover the implementationo f the Project. (c) A Subsidiary agreement inform and substance satisfactory to the Association has been duly concludedbetween CORAF and the Recipient. (d) A management service contract, inform and substance satisfactory to IDA,has been entered into betweenthe Recipient and each entity that will be responsible for the implementationo fthe Project at the national level. Legal covenants applicable to project implementation: (a) The mid-term review will be undertaken no later than two years and six months following effectiveness; (b) An independent consultant will be recruitedto undertake the mid-termreview andprovide an exhaustive report on the implementation o fthe project; (c) Annual work plans will be preparedand submitted to the Bank by November 30 o f each year; (d)Not later than six months after the EffectivenessDate, the Recipient and CORAF's Executive Secretariat shall hire an external auditor with qualifications, experience and terms o f reference satisfactory to the Association. The recruitment should be through a body other than the Executing Agency, inorder to avoid conflict o f interest betweenthe Auditor and the Executing Agency. ix x I. STRATEGICCONTEXTANDRATIONALE A.Country andsector issues 1. The Economic Community o f West African States (ECOWAS) is home to some 254 million people in 15 countries'. All member states are low-income countries with low UN Human Development Indices; many count among the world poorest. Agriculture is a dominant force in the region, accounting for 35 percent o f Gross Domestic Product (GDP), over 15 percent o f exports, and 65 percent o f employment. Still, poverty i s highest in rural areas where 60 percent o f the population lives and mostly depends on agriculture for its sustenance. Food insecurity is a major concern overall and a chronic situation inthe north or Sahel. Overall, Africa's intra-regional agricultural trade i s limitedand its share o f total world agricultural trade i s miniscule, as it fell from 8 percent in 1965 to 3 percent in 1996 (FAO, 2000). Another estimate is that Africa's share o f world agricultural exports has fallen from 4.5 percent, about two decades earlier, to 2.5 percent in2003.2 2. For the African Union (AU), Africa (particularly Sub-Saharan Africa) will meet the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs) only when rural development, agriculture and the livelihood constraints o f the rural poor are brought to the top o f the development agenda. The AU's New Partnerships for Africa's Development (NEPAD) has called for three percent annual agricultural total factor productivity growth and six percent growth in agricultural GDP to reach the MDGs by 2015. NEPAD has designed the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP) to that effect. In turn, the regional economic communities have developed policies to implement the CAADP: ECOWAS, with its Agricultural Policy (ECOWAP) and West Africa Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) with its Common Agricultural Policy. CAADP's Pillar IVYwhich covers agricultural research, technology dissemination and adoption (henceforth, technology generation and dissemination-TGD), plays a central role, as it significantly impacts on the other three pillars: (1) extending areas under sustainable land and water management; (2) improving rural infrastructure and trade-related capacities for improved access to markets; and (3) increasing food supply and reducing hunger. At the request o f NEPAD, the Forum for African Agricultural Research ( F a ) has developed the Framework for African Agricultural Productivity (FAAP) to provide the guiding principles for implementing CAADP's Pillar IV. 3. Agricultural productivity has been declining in Sub-Saharan Africa inrecent past, while significantly increasing in other regions. Average cereal yields in the world (2,676 k o a ) was over twice that inAfrica (1,069 k o a ) for the period 1994-2003. Low productivity has seriously eroded the competitiveness o f African agricultural products on world and domestic markets, as food imports keep increasing. Yet, it is not that potential returns on investment in agricultural TGD are not as highinAfrica as elsewhere. Rather, it is inpart that TGD's funding in Africa has been lower than elsewhere. Spending on agricultural research and extension inAfrica has declined inproportion to total government spending, with funding o f IECOWAS comprises Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Cote d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, and Togo. Mauritania withdrew in 1999 U S House of Representatives (June 2003): Subcommittee on Africa o f the Committee on International Relations. 1 regional research activities representing less than two percent o f overall total spending-the same as private funding. It is also that linkages between research systems, extension services, farmers, and agribusinesses are weak in Africa. Even when technologies are generated, dissemination and adoption mechanisms are inefficient or lacking. Inmany cases, farmers do not learn about the innovations; in other cases, farmers are adopting less than 10 percent o f the proposed technologies because these technologies do not suit their circumstances. It is further that the lack o f harmonized regulations on technology use (e.g., common homologation procedures for pesticides, different standards inthe approval o f plant and animal genetic materials, andharmonized intellectualproperty rights) acts as a barrier to the disseminationo ftechnologies across borders. B.Rationale for Bank involvement 4. The Africa Action Plan (`P), designed by the Bank in 2005 as the centerpiece o f its strategy to help Africa reach the MDGs, emphasizes three focus areas-one o f which i s Strengthening the drivers of growth. The proposed project in support to the West Africa Productivity Program (WAAPP), a global program for the ECOWAS region, will be an implementing instrument for achieving two principal objectives o f that focus area: (i) Make agriculture more productive and sustainable, and (ii) Support regional integration. As a pilot regional program o f the newly-established Regional Integration Department within the Africa Region, the project reflects Bank's commitment to Africa's regional cooperation in agriculture. It will be one o f Bank's key contributions to the implementation o f broadly supported agricultural strategies Africa-wide. 5. African countries have committed to a regional approach, coming to the realization that they will achieve little meaningful increase in agricultural productivity and competitiveness ifcountries, operating on weak national systems and limitedresources, continue to work in isolation from one another. However, countries that operate within regional economic units can expect to reach these objectives across the whole region ifthey effectively work together to: (i) rationalize the use o f scarce human and financial resources; (ii)avoid wasteful duplication; and (iii)create economies o f scale and positive regional spillovers, while mitigating cross-border negative impacts. The regional economic communities (ECOWAS and WAEMU) have initiated this regional approach through their common agricultural policies and their support to a regional implementing agency, the West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and DevelopmentlConseil Ouest et Centre Africain pour la Recherche et le Dkveloppement Agricoles (WECARDlCORAF), henceforth referred to as c o w . 6. The Bank's comparative advantage in this operation lies in its recognized leadership in the support to agricultural research and development at both the country level (in Africa, Central Europe, the Middle East, South Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean) and internationally-e.g., in its support to the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) and the former Special Program for African Agricultural Research (SPAAR) that has evolved into the Forum for Agricultural Research inAfrica (FARA). The Bank is uniquely qualified to capitalizeon the lessons learned from its past interventions and to create synergies and value-added across its on-going operations. Other development partners readily look up to the Bank to facilitate high-level policy harmonization between 2 countries and to lead donor coordination at the regional level. As a knowledge institution, notably through the design o f the Agriculture Knowledge Information System (AKIS), the Bank is particularly well equipped to share global knowledge and expertise in technology generation and dissemination. The WAAPP follows the A K I S paradigm and the FAAP guidingprinciples to promote innovative, market-orientedtechnologies that account for both farmers' circumstances and environmental concerns. 7. This support operation to the WAAPPmeets IDA'Sregional project eligibility criteria. It supports (i)three countries; (ii)social and economic benefits that spill over countries' boundaries; (iii) agricultural strategies o f regional economic communities (REC); and (iv) a platform for regional policy harmonization. The WAAPP will provide a regional framework on the basis o f which ECOWAS countries will collaborate to implement national and regional agricultural strategies inthe area o f TGD. The social and economic benefits o fwell- coordinated, improved TGD schemes can be expected to spill over countries' boundaries. C. Higherlevelobjectivesto whichthe projectcontributes 8. Through its support to the WAAPP, the Bank will contribute to the broad objective o f NEPAD's CAADP o f achieving significant growth in agricultural gross domestic product (GDP) to reach the MDGsby 2015. NEPAD recognizes that the road to sustainable increase in agricultural GDP goes through the strengthening of regional and sub-regional systems, along with national ones. The project also contributes to the Country Assistance Strategies (CAS) o f ECOWAS member states, which acknowledge increased agricultural productivity and regional integration as means to foster shared growth and reduce poverty. Specifically, the CAS o f the participants to the first phase (Ghana, Mali and Senegal) look up to the proposed project to complement their Agricultural Services and Producer Organizations projects and contribute to their strategic objectives inrural development. 11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Lendinginstrument 9. The proposed regional project i s the first phase o f a two-phase, 10-year Adaptable Program Loan (APL)concerningthree countries: Ghana, Mali and Senegal. Eachphase is o f five years duration. This instrument suits particularly well the agricultural research and dissemination's long-term development perspective, logical sequencing o f events and phasing o f activities with agreed milestones, and flexibility needed inexecution. 10. This instrument i s the Bank's contribution to a global West Africa Agricultural Productivity being developed by C O W under ECOWAS' mandate. The proposed APL will be the first o f a series o f overlapping similar APLs, with each APL involving different groupings o f countries. Taken together, this series o f APLs is expected to span 12 to 15 years, at the end o f which period it will have covered all ECOWAS countries eligible for regional support. The overlapping design addresses four key considerations: (i) encourage regional integration inagricultural research and development; (ii) allow countries to leverage relative small regular IDA allocations to access much larger regional funds to boost their resources; (iii)offer long-term support (10 years) in agricultural R&D to each participating country; and (iv) give flexibility to groups o f countries to participate in the WAAPP as they 3 become eligible, rather than wait for the end o f the first phase o f the initial APL to participate. B. Programobjective and Phases 11. The development objective o f the 10-year APL i s to contribute to agricultural productivity increase in the participating countries' top priority commodity sub-sectors that are aligned with regional priorities. Aligning national and regional priorities ensures the program's regional spillover. The development objective of the series of overlapping APLs, taken together, i s to contribute to sustained productivity increase in the ECOWAS region's top priority commodity sub-sectors. The region's top priority sub-sectors, as identified inthe IFPRI/CORAF quantitative study (specifically commissioned for this purpose), are as follows: roots and tubers, livestock, rice, cereals, h i t s and vegetables, oil seeds and bulk export crops (cotton, coffee/cocoa). The study indicates that these commodity sub-sectors make the greatest contribution to the region's agricultural growth and to producers' benefits in R&D. The study also indicates that sustained productivity increase inthese commodity sub-sectors will be needed for the region to substantially increase agricultural growth inorder to reduce extreme poverty by 2015. 12. The outcome at the end o f the 10-year program will be 25 percent productivity (yield) achieved in the participating countries top priority commodity sub-sectors that are aligned with the region's top priorities. 13. Phase 1 (the proposedproject) i s an initiationphase that sets up the program's framework in terms of the mechanisms for sharing technology, establishing national centers of specialization, and bding o f technology generation and adoption. It i s the subject of this appraisal document. 14. Phase 2, while building on the first phase's structure and achievements, i s a deepening and expansion phase that will see further strengthening o f the centers of specialization, consolidation o f the technology dissemination system and generation o f an increased number o f technologies. Agricultural technology generation takes time. The technologies generated during phase Iwere improved technologies but not yet released, or technologies already in some advanced stage of maturity inthe pipeline, that needed concerted efforts to be released and disseminated. The second phase provides the resources and the opportunity to nurtureto full maturity technologies that were initiated, or in the earlier stages in development, at the start o f phase I.The second phase will carry out activities to further strengthen the enabling conditions and M&E, but will mostly concentrate resources on strengthening the NCOS initiated inphase I,and eventually establishing another one inthe country's next top priority, andmainstreamingits demand-driven competitive agricultural grant scheme. 15. The total project (phase I) cost i s US$49.5 million over 5 years, including IDA financing o f US$45.0 million, the three Governments' contributions o f US$3.3 million (in terms of value-added taxes (VAT) foregone) and beneficiaries' contributions o f US$1.2 million (mostly in kind). The amount o f IDA credit to each country i s an equal US$15 million, which comprises US$5 million o f the country's regular IDA allocation and US$10 million allocation from the Africa Regional Integration unit, Le., the usual financing breakdown o f IDA regional projects. From their IDA credit proceeds, each o f the three countries will 4 provide a grant o f US$1 million (US$3 million in total) to CORAF, o f which they are members, to assist in harmonization o f procedures, knowledge sharing and dissemination, and coordination o fmonitoring and evaluation activities. Table 1:WAAPP phasing and estimated cost (US$ million) Phases Governments Beneficiaries IDA Total cost (a) (b) (c) (d) Phase I 3.3 1.2 45.0 49.5 Phase I1 3.3 1.2 45.O 49.5 Total APL 6.6 2.4 90.0 99.0 16. For illustrative purposes, the total cost o f the series o f overlapping APLs, covering ECOWAS 15 member countries, would be US$450.0 million in IDA financing, assuming similar cost breakdownper country as inthe initial APL. Country may commit more, or less than US$5 million inIDA allocation to participate in the regional program. The eligibility criteria for a country's participation include (i)available IDA allocation to benefit from the regional allocation, and (ii) hnctioning national agricultural research system (NARS) to a take advantage o f the program. Countries coming out o f conflict (Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Sierra Leone), will need long-term efforts to rebuild their NARS to fully benefit from the program. 17. The triggers from moving from the first to the secondphase will be as follows: (i) threecountrieshaveratifiedthecommonregulationsfortheregistrationofgenetic All materials andpesticides adopted at ECOWAS level (ii) threecountrieshaveestablishedequivalentfunctionalnationalregistrationsystem All for plant materials and pesticides (iii)National Centers o f Specialization (NCOS) have been established and are operating: inGhana, for roots andtubers; inMali, for rice; andinSenegal, for drought-tolerant cereals (iv) EachNational Center o f Specialization(NCOS) has involved at least one researcher inthe region inits researchprogram for at least three (3) months, throughitsprogramo f visiting scientists. 18. These triggers are at the core o f the WAAPP, which is about the harmonization o f procedures, the release o f improved technologies to make them available to domestic and regional markets, and the openness o f the NARS to build synergy and reduce duplication in R&D. These triggers come inaddition to the suspension clause regarding CORAF's inability to perform any o f its obligations under the Project Agreement; possible suspension by countries o f the transfer o f funds to CORAF inthe Subsidiary Agreement; and the countries' commitment under the Financing Agreement to provide to CORAF the negotiated US$3 million in yearly tranches. As i s the essence o f APL, the second phase will adapt to and incorporate lessons learned in the first phase--including the level o f public support to the NCOS (assessed in public expenditure reviews); flow o f funds; and CORAF's governance and financial management. Similarly, the design o f the subsequent APLs will reflect lessons andexperiences learned inthe previous APLs. 5 C. Projectdevelopmentobjectiveandkey indicators 19. The development objective o f the project (first phase o f the program in support to the WAAPP) is to generate and disseminate improved technologies in the participating countries' top priority areas that are aligned with the region's top priorities, as identified by CORAF. These include roots and tubers inGhana; rice inMali; and cereals inSenegal. The region's consumers, particularly those affected by extreme poverty, are the WAAPP's ultimate beneficiaries. Agricultural producers and agribusinesses, as users o f the improved technology, are the program's primary beneficiaries. These are also the key participants, along with researchers, extension agencies and universities (in adhering to the agricultural knowledge information system (AKIS) conceptual framework), in the generation and dissemination o f technology that is directly supported by the program. 20. The key project outcome indicators are as follows: (i)at least three improved technologies in the participating countries' top priority areas have been released by these countries at the end o f the phase; (ii) out o f the three improved technologies released by each country, at least one should show improvement in yield by 15 percent over the control technology. Key intermediate indicators include the following: (i) a web-based information system on agricultural technologies and research skills i s developed and maintained by C O W ; (ii) national Centers o f Specialization (NCOS) in areas o f both national and three regional priorities have been developed by participating countries within their NARS; (iii) at least 85 percent o f completed competitive grant sub-project have been implemented successfully, as assessed by independent review panels o f experts; and (iv) a system for data collection, analysis and reporting on regional agricultural productivity is established and working satisfactorily. 21. Annex 3 (Results Framework and arrangements for results monitoring) identifies the other intermediate outcomes per component and summarizes the tools and techniques for data collection, analysis, and reporting. The project implementation manual will provide detailed information for measuring all key indicators o fproject supported activities. D. Projectcomponents 22. Component 1: Enabling Conditions for Regional Cooperation in Technology Generation and Dissemination (US$5.3 million, IDA: US$4.4 million). This aims at strengthening the mechanisms and procedures for the dissemination o f technology, so to allow countries to benefit fully from the regional cooperation intechnology generation that i s being promoted. These conditions need to be worked out at both national and regional levels, for before technology products can be available at the regional level, they must be available at the national level. Often, unfortunately, the regulations and standards at the national level are either not adequate or not operational, so that improved technologies may have been developed but not officially released. At the regional level, also, ECOWAS has thus far laggedbehind its timetable. 23. This component targets the following key areas: 0 Common regulations related to genetic materials, pesticides and other crop protectionproducts(CPP) at the ECOWASlevel. Work is under way at ECOWAS to 6 recommend to its member states a common framework based on the WAEMU's and CILSS' framework. The WAAPP will contribute to these efforts to speed up this process. The project will also assist ECOWAS inits efforts to find a common framework for intellectual property rights (IPR) and other rights, such as farmers' rights and Geographic Indication(GI). National registration committees for genetic materials and pesticides in the participating countries. Specifically, the project will support (i)the revision, if needed, o f participating countries' procedures to align them with the regional guidelines; (ii) identification o f improved technology that has been developed but not yet officially released; (iii)technology release process, ensuring the participation o f producers and agribusinesses inthis process; (iv) documentation o f the characteristics o f the technology (e.g., agronomic, chemical composition, potential environmental impact, prospective socio-economic benefits, and consumers' appreciation); (v) cataloging o f the released and approved technologies; and (vi) promotion o f these technologies, usingvarious media. 0 Information system on agricultural technologies and research skills at the regional level. The project will support CORAF's on-going efforts to strengthen its web-based information system. CORAF's information system will help amplify to the entire region the promotion o f improved technologies released at the national levels. It will also provide information related to research skills in the region to facilitate networking. CORAF will consolidate the information available in various other databases, such as that o f CILSS andFAO. 24. The project will work with the regional economic organizations (ECOWAS, WAEMU) and institutions (INSAH/CILSS) and other partners. These include IITA, IFDC, FAO, and USAID--all active in seed and PCP networks and alliances. 25. This component will support (i)consultant services to study and assess policies, regulations, and procedures in the sharing o f technology; (ii)workshops and seminars, particularly for the participation o fproducers and agribusinesses inthe drafting o fregulations and assessing the characteristics o f improved technologies; (iii)short-term training to upgrade skills in information technology and communication; and (iv) operating costs associated with the technology release process. 26. Participating countries will manage the activities associated with their technology release procedures. CORAF will assist ECOWAS in the harmonization o f procedures and analysis o f IPR issues. It will assist the participating counties in the implementation o f regional common procedures. Through its website and other media, CORAF will provide exposure to other countries the technologies developed by the participating countries to promote interregional trade. Out o f the US$4.39 million IDA finds allocated for the implementation o f this component, the cost o f CORAF's activities i s US$0.86 million. 27. Component 2: National Centers of Specialization (US$22.5 million, IDA: US$20.5 million). This aims at strengthening the alignment o f national priorities with regional priorities within participant countries' national agricultural research systems (NARS). Countries need to focus on their top R&Dpriorities, rather than attempt to tackle all possible issues with little prospects o f success, in order to make the best use o f scarce resources and achieve meaningful results toward increasing growth and reducing extreme poverty. A country can more readily rationalize this decision if it is ensured to benefit from research efforts inthese other areas where it does no have comparative advantage but inwhich other countries do-just as its own efforts in its areasof comparative advantage will benefit other countries. 28. To help this rationalization, the project supports national centers o f specialization (NCOS) that (i)focus on areas o f national priorities aligned with regional priorities; (ii) demonstrate sustained public support for core programs and staff; (iii)commit to collaboration with regional and international institutions; and (iv) commit to share results with other countries. A recent quantitative study by IFPWCORAF identifies the region's top priority areas, i.e., those that contribute the most to the region's agricultural growth. This serves as the basis for the selected NCOS: in Ghana, R&D program in roots and tubers; in Mali, R&D program in irrigated rice; and in Senegal, R&D program in drought-resistant cereals (CERAAS). 29. This component focuses on the following key areas: 0 Upgrading core facilities and equipment o f the selected NCOS. This will help establishhtrengthen the viability o f the center, making it more operational and attractive to other researchers inthe region. 0 Building the capacity of researchers, through on-the-job-training o f young researchers (including university staff and students) and programs o f visiting scientists. The programs o f visiting scientists are for substantial research work (at the NCOS and other regional and international centers) over a few months to one year-- andnot mere studytours. 0 Supporting R&D programs of NCOS, concerning commissioned as well as adaptive research with effective participation from stakeholders, particularly producers and agribusinesses. Supporting farm surveys and supply chains analysis and benchmarking to identify most important areas o f research, and to monitor and document progress and impact o f transferred technologies over the project life. 30. The project will work with development partners, CGIAR centers, and private agribusinesses to enhance the sustainability o f the NCOS. To support the above activities, the project will fund civil work (if needed), material and equipment, consultant services, workshops and seminars, training, and operating costs related to the implementation o f R&D programs o f the national center o f specialization. The national coordination units (of the national programs) will manage the procurement o f goods and services related to this component. 31. C O W will assist the national center o f specialization inthe development o f their work programs and networking with regional and international centers o f excellence, particularly inthe program of visiting scientists. Out of the US$20.53 million IDA funds allocated for the implementationo f this component, the cost o f CORAF's activities inUS$0.50 million. I 32. Component 3: Funding of Demand-DrivenTechnology Generation and Adoption (US$16.8 million; IDA: US$15.7 million). This aims at strengthening priority-focused, 8 transparent funding mechanisms for demand-driven agricultural R&D within participating countries. The component focuses on areas that have been identified as highpriority at both the national and regional levels. The project will thus ensure that work carried out in the participating countries will have great relevance to the region. Eligible activities will cover all key constraints along the supply chain o f these commodity sub-sectors. Activities may concern new, as well as on-the-shelf agricultural technologies with potential for quick impact . 33. This component will support a competitive agricultural grant system (CARGS) and a limited (non-competitive) core funding with strong buy-in from major stakeholders. It includes a national window supported by regional activities. 0 National window. The project will support provision o f additional resources to complement ongoing and future R&D activities carried out under the country's agricultural policy and to disseminate technology in the country's top priorities, as identified by CORAF. To ensure regional spillover benefits, the country's top priorities will be aligned with the regional's top priorities. To further add value to national programs, the national windows will support cross-border partnerships- both on the supply side (research, extension, universities) and the demand side (farmer organizations, private sector and civil society)-to work on problems on common interest. 0 Regional support activities. The project will support provision o f additional resources to allow CORAF to expand its knowledge sharing activities through the ECOWAS member countries. Thus, through CORAF's work, the IDA'Sinstrument will bebenefiting the entire region inany given phase o fthe series o fAPLs. 34. Funding o f the CARGS will follow clear and transparent guidelines adapted from existing procedures, best practices and lessons learned, as described in the manual o f procedures. The manual will reflect, among others, the following guidelines (i) administration by a competent governance body; (ii)openness to producer groups and agribusinesses to lead the implementation o f R&D activities; (iii) openness to R&D activities to promote technology on-the-shelf for effective adoption; (v) capped overhead o f the R&D's implementing unit in terms o f management fee or supported by operating cost; and (vi) score-card evaluation o fthe program's performance by a panel o f competent and independent experts. To promote the participation o f producer organizations and trade associations inthe demand-driven process, a two-step selection process will be explored, including an eventual first step as a concept note to be reviewed for its relevance to the issue on hand; 35. The national project coordination units will manage the national windows (through the relevant national implementation agencies) with CORAF's assistance. C O W will facilitate the sharing o f information on results and lessons related to the CARGS among the participating countries and throughout the sub-region. This i s to ensure that, through the national window and the regional support activities, the WAAPP will implement activities that will benefit both the participating countries and the region. Out of out o f the US$15.72 million IDA funds allocated for the implementation o f this component, the cost o f CORAF's activities i s US$O.10million. 9 36. Component 4: Project Coordination, Management, Monitoring and Evaluation (US$4.9 million; IDA: US$4.4 million). This aims at establishing an effective coordination, management and M&E system at the national and regional levels. The IDA-supported WAAPP will be implemented at the regional level by CORAF (ECOWAS' mandated implementing agency) and at the national levels by the national coordinating units at the Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MOFA) Projects Coordinating Unit in Ghana; the PASAOP (Programme d 'Appui aux ServicesAgricoles et am Organisations de Producteurs) in Mali and the PSAOP 2 (Programme des Services Agricoles et Organizations des Producteurs) in Senegal. The financial management arrangements o f the project meets IDA'Srequirements and are thus adequate to provide, with reasonable assurance, accurate andtimely information on the status o fthe project requiredby IDA. 37. The project will provide assistance to CORAF and the national implementing units to strengthen their capacities in these areas and further minimize risks. The project will also strengthen CORAF's and the participating countries' M&E systems to assess agricultural productivity and competitiveness inthe region's top priority areas. 38. All donors andpartners want C O W to coordinate, monitor and evaluate effectively the generation and adoption o f technology across West Africa, and also effectively manage the funds it receives. The IDA-supported supported project will contribute to this shared objective o f improving CORAF's performance by strengthening CORAF's capacities in areas contributing to this objective. The IDA-project's key performance indicators (KPI) will serve as a buildingblock to the global WAAPP's monitoring and evaluation system. Specifically, these KPI address CORAF's performance related to its communication strategy andits effectiveness inmanagingthe regional competitive grant system, both o fwhich are of keeninterest to donors. 39. The project will ensure the implementation o f the following key activities: (a) Financial management and procurement systems at C O W ; (b) Reporting on project's activities; (c) Monitoring and evaluation o f regional agricultural productivity; (d) Communication strategy. C O W will commission, rather than undertake, studies to update IFPRVCORAF analysis and assess the impact o f R&D inthe region's agricultural productivity and competitiveness. CORAF will also strive to involve regional experts in these studies so contribute to building analytical capacity within the region. 40. To that effect, this component will support consultant services (surveys and impact studies), vehicles and equipment, office supplies, workshops and short-term training, and operating costs o f CORAF and the national coordinating units. The support to CORAF will complement parallel financing from other partners to C O W . Out o f the US$4.38 million IDA funds allocated for the implementation o f this component, the cost o f CORAF's activities i s US$1.54. This i s inpart because CORAF i s required to upgrade its capacities in terms o f financial management and procurement to comply with IDA' procedures. It will also be tasked to carry out surveys and studies to update the IFPWCORAF's study. It i s also because the national coordinating units are already functional, and thus need relatively little additional support to carrying out the project's activities. The project has allocated funds for such an additional support based on the proposals o f the national coordinating units themselves. 10 E. Lessonslearnedandreflectedinthe projectdesign 41. The World Bank has gained valuable experience over four decades o f support to agricultural research and extension operations world-wide--including interventions in the project's participating countries, such as the Ghana's Agricultural Services Subsector Investment Program (AgSSIP) and the Mali's and Senegal's Agricultural Services and Producer Organizations Programs (PSAOP). Of particular interest are the competitive agricultural grant schemes addressed in the following operations: Peru's Agricultural Research and ExtensionProgram (APL), whose design inspiredthat o f the AgSSIP; Romania Agricultural Support Services Project; Georgia's Agricultural Research, Extension, and Training Project; and India's National Agricultural Technology Project. There are also useful insights inthe Bank's regional projects inother areas, such as the Senegal River Basin Multi-Purpose Water Resources Development Project (MWRD) and the West and Central Africa Air Transport Safety and Security Project (WCATS). Key lessons from Bank experience and interventionsby other development partners include the following: An integrated Agriculture Knowledge Information System (AKIS) model i s needed in lieu o f the linear technology generation-transfer-adoption scheme, which has clearly failed African agriculture. The WAApP's design pays particular attention to the following key elements o f an effective AKIS scheme: (i)partnership o f producer organizations, agribusinesses, and civil society to ensure market-oriented, farmer-focused, and environmentally safe technologies; (ii)participation of empowered producer organizations at an early stage; (iii) involvement o f African agricultural faculties, thus far mostly bypassed; (iv) adoption o f technology by farmers and not just "transfer o f knowledge" to them; and (v) effective monitoring and evaluation system. The competitive Agricultural Research Grant System (CARGS) is an efficient vehicle for financing new research areas, demand-driven adaptive research reflecting user perspectives, and research and development that requires public-private partnerships. Following best practices, the proposed project considers the CARGS as part o f a complement to core funding and incorporates the following elements in its design: (i) independent and competent governance; (ii)clear priorities, with stakeholder involvement in their setting; (iii) rigorous and transparent procedures; (iv) identification o f target farm populations and plans for transfer o f adaptive and applied research results; and (v) effective results-based monitoring and evaluation. Regional centers of excellence are viewed as an important instrument o f the regional approach to agricultural research; their implementation, however, has been disappointing. Most regional centers o f excellence have failed because they were stand alone centers put in place without the countries' clear commitment, including that o f the host country. Without continued support to at least its core function by the host country, these stand alone centers failed after the initial donors' funding ended. With the host country making little effort to support the core function o f the would-be regional center, and research results few and not readily disseminated, other countries have difficulties committing sustained financial resources to a center outside their borders. A more sensible approach to establishing viable regional center of excellence would be for a country willing to: firmly commit resources to a center o f specialization (COS) in areas o f interest to other countries; willing to open the center to regional and international researchers; share results with other countries. As the NCOS achieve meaningful results, it will gain a 11 regional reputation, and other country will be willing to support it as a regional center o f excellence. Bank regional projects must (i) address all national interests and priorities to ensure ownership o f the project and the proposed coordinating mechanisms; (ii)coordinate donors' participation to minimize wasteful overlap and to provide adequate core support to implementing agencies; (iv) emphasize capacity building o f implementingagencies to enhance the program's sustainability; and (iv) comply with the principle o f subsidiarity (Le,, regional bodies should not undertake activities when national entities can do so). 42. The design o f the proposed project reflects these lessons and recommendations. The WAAPP will promote national centers o f specialization; support R&D in areas o f national priorities aligned with regional priorities; rely on existing implementation units at both regional and national levels; and stress public-private partnerships initiatives and donors' collaboration. F. Alternativesconsideredandreasonsfor rejection 43. The individual country by country approach leads to duplication o f efforts; scarce resources spread too thin on too many areas; limited regional collaboration; and thus inexistent regional spillovers. The multi-country approach usually provides a common project format to countries, but it still lacks the integrated regional perspective. Multi- country projects don't qualify as regional projects; thus, they lose the additional regional resources. Multi-country projects also missed out in cost savings as project preparation and supervisionrequire separate cost centers, further reducing any regional synergy. 44. A regional Specific Investment Loan (SIL) instrument alleviates some o f these pitfalls. This approach calls for a series o f SILs grouping at least three countries, but with each SIL lasting a short period. However, development o f agricultural technology adapted to farmer's circumstances and market conditions is a long-term endeavor that a short-lived S I L cannot accommodate. 45. A regionalAdaptable ProgramLoan (APL) instrument fits the long-term approach o f both the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP) and the African Action Plan in the area o f technology generation and dissemination (TGD) within a regional perspective. Its phasing facilitates the prioritization o f investments in alignment with appropriate funding as it becomes available. To maintain the long-term perspective, retain the regional project characteristics, and accommodate countries to participate in the program, IDA'Sinstrument is designed as a series o f overlapping APLs. Each APL is o f 10 years, o ftwo phases o f five years each. Each APL involves a different grouping o f countries, so to cover all ECOWAS countries. 46. The project's design follows the AKIS conceptualframeworkwith key elements from the innovation systems approach. Following the AKIS framework, the project promotes the needed collaboration among research, extension and universities, while putting the primary beneficiaries (producers and agribusinesses) at the center o f the agricultural knowledge information system. However, as the innovation system recommends, the project provides these beneficiaries the opportunity to initiate andimplement R&D sub-projects and engage in 12 participative plant or animal selection programs--and not just receive technology developed by researchers, extension and universities. The innovative approach recommends actions that lie beyond the reach o f the proposedproject, or are better suited for national projects to implement (principle o f subsidiarity), such as: modernization o f curricula, support staff long- term training, and develop distance learning and other facilities; and investments that foster pluralism in service providers and extension organizations. The project, however, contributes to capacity buildingo fresearchers, particularly young researchers. 111. IMPLEMENTATION A. Partnershiparrangements(if applicable) 47. This IDA-funded operation i s in support to the global West Africa Agricultural Productivity Program (WAAPP) being prepared by CORAF--the sub-regional organization (SRO) mandated by ECOWAS to implement Pillar IV o f the CAADP. This operation combines assistance to CORAF with support to countries, to fully integrate national to regional priorities. The project team worked closely with donors and other partners--sharing ideas, concept notes and preliminary drafts o f the project document, and participating in numerous workshops--to highlight the building block nature o f the IDA'Sinstrument and develop a partnership around the global W W P . 48. During preparation, donors developed a consensus on the following key areas o f the global program: (i)the WAAPP's R&D activities will focus on the region's top priority commodity sub-sectors, as identified by C O W based on the IFPRvCORAF's study (funded by USAID); (ii)the global program's key performance indicators will track CAADP's objectives related to agricultural productivity and growth; (iii) the M&E system will provide independent and objective assessments of results and impacts; (iv) donors' contributions to CORAF will be in the form o f parallel, rather than join-financing, to accommodate the funding mechanisms available to donors; (v) donors' contributions, nonetheless, will provide flexibility to CORAF to runan integratedmanagement system. 49. C O W has long-standing relationships with several donors (DFID, USAID, the EU, AfDB, the Canadian IDRC, IFAD, etc.); partners (FARA, FAO, IFPRI, IITA, INSAH/CILSS, CIRAD, AGRYHMET, etc.); and the regional economic communities (ECOWAS and WAEMU). The IDA-project team has also initiated contact with the Bill & Melinda Gates FoundationRockefeller Foundation's Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), and will work for the WAAPP to pursue a close collaboration with this alliance. AGRA focuses on food crops for domestic consumption and value-added transformation, e.g., for animal feed in selected African countries, including the project's participating countries: Ghana, Mali and Senegal. 50. Donor coordination around the global WAAPP has been taking place at the initiative o f one or the other o f the major donors; at CORAF's Board annual meetings; and at CORAF/donors meeting at CORAF's initiation. During implementation, IDA will organize joint supervision mission with donors, about twice a year, to provide an opportunity for donors' collaboration. 13 51. A partnership with the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) is also envisioned. The global environment objective o f the GEF project, which would attached to the WAAPP, i s to contribute to the strategic objectives o f GEF operational programs on biodiversity, climate change and land degradation. This would be achieved by contributing incrementally to the establishment o f regional centers o f excellence and regional cooperation mechanisms inbio- safety and land and water management, and by strengthening the capacities o f national institutionsto join the regional approach. B. Institutionalandimplementationarrangements 52. The IDA-fhded project in support to the WAAPP will be implemented at the regional level by C O W and at the national levels by the national coordination units o f MOFA in Ghana, the PASAOP inMali and the PSAOP 2 in Senegal. InGhana, the project will work closely with the IFAD-funded Root and Tuber Improvement and Marketing Programme, which is jointly implemented by IFAD and IDA, to promote the uptake o f roots and tubers released technologies. During negotiations the three participating countries committed to providing each a grant o f US$1 million to CORAF. The Bank will enter into financing agreements with each o f the three participating countries and into a project agreement with c o w . 53. Regional level. CORAF, through its Dakar-based Executive Secretariat (ES), will assume overall coordination o f the WAAPP, with FARA playing an advisory role (as assigned by the AU/NEPAD). CORAF's Executive Secretariat3 comprises the following staff: Executive Secretary, Scientific Coordinator, Administrative and Financial Manager, Information and Communication Manager, Coordinator o f the Sub-regional Cereal Network, and Impact Assessment Officer on agricultural research. CORAF works region-wide with stakeholders that include national agricultural research systems (NARS), producer organizations, private agribusinesses and civil society (NGOs). The WAAPP will adapt and strengthen CORAF's existing implementation arrangements in the key areas o f financial management, procurement and monitoring & evaluation, so as to remain in compliance with Bank's fiduciary andreporting requirements. 54. A Designated account will be opened in a local bank and project's consolidatedfinancial statements will be prepared by CORAF's Administrative and Financial Manager. The accounting standards applicable will be the SYSCOA standards, very close to the International Accounting Standards (IPSAS) issued by the International Federation o f Accountants (IFAC). An external auditor with experience and qualifications satisfactory to IDA will be recruited prior to Credit's effectiveness. The audit will be conducted in accordance with the International Standards on Auditing (ISA) issued by the International Auditing andAssurance Standards Boardo fthe InternationalFederationo fAccountants. 55. CORAF will monitor the overall implementation o f the project, reporting on progress related to the effectiveness o f the dissemination mechanisms and the increase in agricultural productivity and competitiveness in the program's areas o f interest. C O W will also play the role o f an advisory body for the national window o f the CARGS implemented in each CORAF's governance structure includes a General Assembly (GA), Governing Council (GC), Scientific and Technical Committee (STC), and the Executive Secretariat (ES). 14 country under the project. It will also play a similar role for the national centers o f specialization. CORAF's M&E system will collate and synthesize information generated by the M&E systems o fthe participating countries. 56. National level. Mali's PASAOP and Senegal's PSAOP 2 have similar institutional arrangement, which include: (i)a steering committee, (ii) a national coordination unit, and (iii)one implementing agency for their research anddevelopment component. Inthese countries, the coordination unit is located at the Ministry o f Agriculture with the following key responsibilities: coordination, management o f IDA credit, procurement, and overall project's monitoring and evaluation and reporting. In Ghana, the coordination unit will be MOFA Projects Coordinating Unit, with the understanding that the Projects Coordination Unit within MOFA will be in charge of coordinating all agricultural related projects including AgSSIP and its potential successor. All three countries also operate a CARGS scheme: in Ghana by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR); in Mali by the Comite` National de la Recherche Agricole (CNR4); and in Senegal by the Fonds National de Recherches Agricoles et Agro-alimentaires (FNRAA). These countries have separate extension services but also a framework that brings together producer organizations, research institutions, the private sector and civil society to identify and act on priorities related to agricultural research and development. 57. The project will not create any new implementing units at the country level. The national coordination unit ineach country will manage the WAAPP's national window o f the CARGS (through the implementing agency in this country, according to the Project Implementation Manual adapted from the existing projects' manuals), the establishment o f the COS, and the monitoring and evaluation o f the project at the national level. The mandates o f the national coordination units will be amended to reflect their added duties. 58, The implementing manuals will provide detailed information in the institutional and implementation arrangements, including in the following key areas: priority setting for research and extension activities; procedures for competitive grant system; M&E o f project outcomes and outputs (detailed inAnnex 3). The WAAPP will establish a clear framework for priority setting and updating based on quantitative analysis (updated IFPRI's study) and validation by key stakeholders, including producer organizations at the regional and national levels, and public-private partnerships. The WAAPP also aims at producing an implementation manual for CARGS that would serve as good practice for national competitive systems throughout the region. C. Monitoringand evaluation of outcomes/results 59. IDA and its clients are in agreement that a well-designed monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system is critical for ensuring the successful implementation o f projects, the unambiguous assessment o f their impacts, and a systematic analysis o f lessons learned. Accordingly, the project will establish an effective M&E system to verify progress against the objectively verifiable indicators as described in the results framework (Annex 3). The system will build upon the M&E systems already established in the participating countries' project at the national level, and will strengthen CORAF's M&E system at the regional level. The M&Esystem will collate andprocess information collectedby CORAF, the participating countries, and additional data deriving from special studies. 15 60. In addition, the project will contribute to the funding o f special studies to analyze and report on the evolution o f regional agricultural productivity and competitiveness in the region's top priority areas. The NCOS will carry out baseline studies on the countries' top priority commodity sub-sectors, and CORAF will update IFPRVCORAF's study to allow for later comparison o f results. It will also coordinate and use qualitative participatory and gender-sensitive poverty assessments undertaken in participating countries. The Project Implementation Manual will include a monitoring and evaluation section describing key performance indicators, as well as process indicators, for all program activities, including the safeguard measures. D. Sustainability 61. The project's sustainability critically depends on the following key factors: (i) clear mechanisms for disseminating and sharing technologies across countries; (ii) establishment o f effective national centers o f specialization (NCOS); (iii) regular funding o f the core operations o f the national centers and CORAF. To secure the project long term sustainability, these factors are reflected in the program's outcome indicators and triggers, and the legal covenants (Annex 3 and Section 6.4). E. Criticalrisksandpossiblecontroversialaspects 62. As a pilot regional project, the project faces many risks to its development objective and component's results. However, the overall risk o f the project i s moderate, provided the project implements the suggested mitigation measures, as shown inthe table below. Risks I RiskMitigation Measures 1RiskRating with (a) CooperationbetweenCORAF andnational IDA anddonors monitor collaborationbetween N coordinationunitsbreaksdown. CORAF and nationalcoordinationunits. (b) Core fundingofCORAF is inadequate IDA monitorstimely and adequate transfer of IDA M duringimplementation. funds from countries to CORAF during implementation. (c) CORAF is unableto maintainacoherent IDA and other donorsmonitorCORAF's overall S programacross ECOWAScountries. performanceandrequests revisedprogramifneeded. (d) DonorsinterventionsinTGD lack a IDA coordinatesdonors' collaborationthroughjoint M coordinatedapproach. supervisionofproject. To componentResults 1. EnablingConditions (e) Regionalconsensus on mechanismsfor The Bank and other donors engageECOWASto M sharingtechnologyknowledgeandproductsis facilitateestablishmentof sharingmechanisms. not developed. 2. Centers of specialization (0Countriescommitment for fundingCenters Projectcollaboratesinpublic expenditurereviews M of specializationis weak (PER) exercisesto reportonthe evolutionof public expenditure allocated to centers of specialization. 3. TechnologyGeneration (g) Rigorousstandards andreviewmechanism Projectmonitors andreports onprocess andresults M of CARGSare not applied. of CARGS. (h)Linkagesbetweendevelopmentprojectsto Projectworkswith nationaldevelopmentprojects. M promoteadoptionoftechnologiesare weak. andregionalpublic-privatepartnershipsto promote technology adoption 16 I 4. ProjectAdministration (i)Useoffundsisinefficientorinappropriate IDA closely follows-upfinancial andAudit Reports. N due to poor governanceat CORAF and nationalcoordinationunits. (j) specifics internalcontrolweakness maynot An internalauditorwith experience and N be identified andaddressedinatimely manner qualificationssatisfactory to IDA will be recruitedby at the overallproject level CORAF (k)LinkagesbetweenCORAF's andnational Projectorganizesworkshopsandtraining to M projects' M&E systems are weak. OverallRating M H=High S = Substantial M=Moderate N=Lowhegligible F. Loadcreditconditions and covenants 63. Conditions for BoardApproval: None 64. Conditions for effectiveness: (a) The Project Implementation Manual (PIM), in form and substance satisfactory to the Association, has been adopted by CORAF and the PIU for the purpose o f implementingthe regional and nationalcomponents o fthe Project. (b) CORAF and the PlUs have adapted their accounting software to cover the implementationo f the Project. (c) A Subsidiary agreement inform and substance satisfactory to the Association has been duly concludedbetween CORAF andthe Recipient. (d) A management service contract, in form and substance satisfactory to IDA, has been entered into between the Recipient and each entity that will be responsible for the implementationo f the Project at the national level. 65. Legal covenants. (a) The mid-termreview will be undertaken no later than two years and six months following effectiveness; (b) An independent consultant will berecruited to undertake the mid-term review and provide an exhaustive report on the implementationo f the project; (c) Annual work plans will be prepared and submitted to the Bank by November 30 o f each year; (d) Not later than six months after the Effectiveness Date, the Recipient and CORAF's Executive Secretariat shall hire an external auditor with qualifications, experience and terms o f reference satisfactory to the Association. The recruitment should be through a body other than the Executing Agency, in order to avoid conflict o f interest betweenthe Auditor and the Executing Agency. IV. APPRAISAL SUMMARY A. Economic and financial analyses 66. Bank standard practice recommends an illustrative ex-post, rather than an ex-ante quantification o f benefits and costs o f research and extension investments. Predicting and quantifying ex-ante economic costs and benefits o f research and extension activities is 17 problematic because it is nearly impossible to anticipate with satisfaction the outcome of these activities. The required data for an ex-ante analysis is either unavailable or unreliable. For example, there are difficulties inestimating farmer adoption rates o f technologies not yet available, and in linking cause (costs) and effect (outcomes) o f research and extension interventions. For these reasons, indicators relatedto adoption rates may prove unreliable. 67. Ex-post analysis o f agricultural research and extension in most countries, however, reveals high returns to these investments, ranging between 40-75 percent. An IFPRI's review4 o f 294 benefit-cost studies, reporting 1,858 estimates o f rates o f return to research and extension investments, shows average returns to research investments alone o f 88 percent, extension alone averaging 79 percent, and research and extension combined averaging 45 percent. Similar rates would likely apply to the WAApP's efforts in agricultural research and adoption. B. Technical 68. Stakeholders' validation o f the region's top priority areas, based on quantitative analysis, will ensure the technical soundness and relevance o f the project. Proposals for funding in these priority areas will follow clear guidelines to ensure responsiveness to the concerns o f producers andprivate agribusinesses. C. Fiduciary 69. IDA has carried a fiduciary assessment o f CORAF, the regional implementation agency, in terms of its capacities in financial management and procurement. The assessment recommended measures for CORAF to implement, as indicated in the conditions o f effectiveness and legal covenants. The financial management arrangements will be strengthened with the implementation o fthe action planinattachment 1o f Annex 7. USAID has also undertaken a formal assessment o f CORAF's management and financial procedures and is expected to subsequently certify CORAF as a direct grantee. The fiduciary arrangements o f the national implementing agencies, which operate under on-going part o f on-going IDA-financed operations, fully meet IDA'Srules and regulations. D. Social 70. Small-scale farmers dominate African agriculture--with women playing a critical role--in both local food production and production for regional and international markets. The project will work to ensure that the circumstances o f small-scale farmers are accounted for in the priority setting and implementation o f the researchproposal. It will require, for example, that bids under the competitive grant system clearly identify the farm population that would benefit from the research. Adaptive research will be conducted on farmer field. Also, the competitive grant system will be open to producer organizations and agribusiness associations to implement R&D activities. The project will work with development operations andpublic-private partnershipto promote the use o f technologies byproducers. 4A Meta-Analysisof Ratesof Returnto AgriculturalR&D" by Alston, Marra, Pardey,andWyatt (1999) 18 E. Environment 71. The proposed support project to the WAAPP expects to contribute to the use o f environmentally safe agricultural technologies. The project will support environmentally- friendly and socially sensitive agricultural practices. It will not approve funding o f research projects with any documented adverse environmental and social impact at the regional and national levels. It will encourage proposals involving Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and soil conservation, which promote cost effectiveness and sustainable use o f chemicals in farming. To that effect, it will screen all research proposals before their hnding. The project will also work with the regional economic communities to promote the homologation and harmonizationo f the use o fpesticides inthe region. F. Safeguardpolicies 72. The environmental screening category is B. The followingtable presents the Safeguard policies triggered by the project. Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project Yes No Environmental Assessment (OPBP 4.01) [XI [I Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) [ I [XI Pest Management (OP 4.09) [XI [I Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) [ I [XI Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) [ I [XI Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) [ I [XI Forests (OP/BP 4.36) [ I [XI Safety o f Dams (OP/BP 4.37) [I [XI Projects inDisputedAreas (OP/BP 7.60)* [I [XI Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) [I [XI 73. Ghana, Mali and Senegal have already prepared and disclosed safeguard documents pertaining to the Ghana's AgSSIP, Mali's PASAOP and Senegal's PSAOP 2. C O W has prepared anddisclosed an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and Pest Management Plan (PMP) at C O W , inthe three participating countries and at Infoshop. G. Policy ExceptionsandReadiness 74. The Project complies with all the World Bank policies andno specific policy exceptions are sought. A procurementplan for the first 18 months o fproject activities has been prepared duringappraisal and finalized at negotiations. All the nationalimplementing agencies (CSIR, CNRA, and FNR4A) andthe regional implementing agency, C O W , are established entities, andjust created for the purpose o f this project. The institutional arrangements within countries are the same usedunder Bank-supported projects. The project implementationmanual in preparationwill be adapted from existing manuals, rather than created from scratch and will be ready by project effectiveness. * By supporting theproposedproject,the Bank does not intend toprejudice thefinal determination of theparties` claims on the disputed areas 19 Annex 1: Country andSector or ProgramBackground AFRICA: West Africa AgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) SupportProject 1. The Economic Community o f West African States (ECOWAS) is home to 250 million people in 15 countries5. All member states are low-income countries with low UN Human Development Indices; many are among the world poorest. Agriculture i s a dominant force inthe region, accounting for 35 percent o f GDP, over 15 percent o f exports, and 65 percent o f employment. Still, poverty is highest in rural areas hosting 60 percent o f a population, which depends on agriculture for its livelihood. Food insecurity i s a major concern overall and a chronic situation in the north or Sahel. Overall, Africa's intra-regional agricultural trade i s limited and its share o f total world agricultural trade is miniscule, as it fell from 8 percent in 1965 to 3 percent in,1996 (FAO, 2000). 2. Agricultural productivity has been declining in Africa over the past four decades, while significantly increasing in other regions. Average cereal yields in the world (2,676 k o a ) was over twice that inAfrica (1,069 k o a ) in 1994-2003. Low productivity has seriously eroded the competitiveness o f African agricultural products on world and domestic markets, as food imports keep increasing. 3. Yet, it i s not that potential returns on investment in agricultural technology generation and dissemination are not as highinAfrica (37 percent on average) as elsewhere; rather, it i s that its funding in Africa has been lower than elsewhere. Spending on agricultural TGD in Africa has declined inproportion to total government spending, with funding o f regional research activities representing less than two percent o f overall total spending-the same as private funding. It i s also that linkages between research systems, extension services, farmers, and agribusinesses are weak inAfrica. Evenwhen technologies are generated, dissemination and adoption mechanisms are inefficient or lacking. Inmany cases, farmers do not learn about the innovations; in others, farmers are adopting less than 10 percent o f the proposed technologies because these do not suit their circumstances. It is also that the lack o f harmonized regulations on technology use (e.g., homologation o f pesticides) at ECOWAS level acts as a barriers to the dissemination of technologies across borders. ECOWAS comprises Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Cote d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, and Togo. Mauritania withdrew in 1999 20 Table 1 Agriculture technology and productivity,by developingregion Average Contribution annual of crop Average growth in genetic Cereal annual food improvement yield(kg growth in production Share of areaplanted to modem to yield Per cereal yield per capita varieties (percent)' growth hectare) (percent) (percent) 1970 1980 1990 1998 1960-98 2000 1980-2000 1980-2000 Asia 13 43 63 82 0.88 3.662 2.3 2.30 Latin America 8 23 39 52 0.66 2.09 1.9 0.90 MiddleEast and NorthAfrica 13 29 58 0.69 2.660 1.2 1.oo Sub-Saharan Africa 1 4 13 27 0.28 1.112 0.7 .0.01 Source: FARA(2006); Frameworkfor African Agricultural Productivity (FAAP) Strategic responses 4. For the African Union (AU), Africa will meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) only when rural development, agriculture and the livelihood constraints o f the rural poor are brought to the top o f the development agenda. The AU's New Partnerships for Africa's Development (NEPAD) has called for three percent annual agricultural productivity growth and six percent growth in agricultural GDP to reach the MDGs by 2015. NEPAD has designed the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP) to that effect. In turn, the regional economic communities have developed policies to implement CAADP: ECOWAS,with its Agricultural Policy (ECOWAP) and WAEMU (West Africa Economic andMonetary Union), with its Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). CAADP's Pillar IVYwhich covers agricultural research, technology dissemination and adoption (henceforth, technology generation and dissemination-TGD), plays a central role, as it significantly impacts on the other three pillars: land andwater management; rural infrastructure and trade-related capacities for improved access to markets; and increasing food supply and reducing hunger. At the request o f NEPAD, the Forum for African Agricultural Research (FARA) has developed the Framework for African Agricultural Productivity (FAAP) to provide the guiding principles for implementing CAADP Pillar IV. 5. At the late Africa Fertilizer Summit (June 2006), African Heads o f State decided to lift all cross-border taxes and tariffs on fertilizer, designating mineral and organic fertilizer as a "strategic commodity." The measure provides incentives to producers to restore soil fertility and realize the potential o f high-yieldingvarieties. The Heads o f State also agreed to establish an African fertilizer financing mechanism within the African Development Bank (AfDB) to significantly increase the availability and access to fertilizer on the continent. 21 6. Initiatives are also underway to facilitate regional trade in seeds, pesticides and crop protectionproducts. As part o f its agricultural strategy and with the support o f the Sahel Institute o f the Permanent Interstate Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel (INSAH/CILSS), WAEMU has initiated a process o f harmonization o f national o f its members' seed regulations. It has initiated a regional catalog o f species and varieties and drafted regional laws and supporting regulations to govern seed trade. Similarly, it is laying down common rules for the approval o f sale and use o f pesticides (in crop and livestock production), and procedures for the registration and homologation o f active ingredient and formulations in accordance with FA0 directives for homologation and control o f pesticides. ECOWAS i s working with WAEMU and INSAH/CILLS to come up with similar harmonized rules and procedures for all its member states. Several international institutions and projects are assisting the regional organizations in these efforts, including FAO, the West Africa Seed and Planting Material network (WASP), F D C , andUSDA. USAID i s also launching a Seed Alliance. Work is under way for ECOWAS to adapt WAEMU's common rules andregulations to ECOWAS Figure2. PublicAgriculturalResearch (millionsof 2000 internationaldollars) I 12000 , I 10000 Millions of 8000 2000 International dollars 0 1 1981 1991 2000 Asia & Pacific Sub-SaharanAfrica +LatinAmerica&Caribbean High-incomeCountries Source: FARA (2006)ic 7. The agricultural research and development strategies o f the participating countries inthe first phase o f the program (Ghana, Mali, and Senegal) are articulated in the Country Assistance Strategies and hrther developed in the "anchor" projects in the countries: the Ghana's Agricultural Services Subsector Investment Project (AgSSIP), Mali's agricultural services and producer organizations support program (PASAOP - Programme d 'Appui am Services Agricoles et am Organisations de Producteurs), and Senegal's second phase o f the agricultural services and producer organizations program (PSAOP 2 - Programme des Services Agricoles et Organisations des Producteurs, Phase 2 ). The key elements o f these strategies are summarized below. 8. Ghana's agricultural and research strategy is to: (i) increase the production o f both cash and food crops; and (ii) promote the production o f commodities in which Ghana has a clear comparative advantage. This strategy emphasizes the strengthening o f agricultural support 22 services including research and extension, marketing and storage, fertilizer and seed supply and intersectoral links inprocessing, and feeder roads improvement. The strategy for the promotion o f growth o f crops i s based on increasing productivity, using improved technology through the use o f improved varieties o f crops and pest control measures, while maintaining soil fertility through composting, manure and fertilizer use and soil conserving cultural practices. In the livestock sector, the strategy i s based on increasingproductivity through improved animal health, nutrition andwater supplies and, inthe longer term, breedimprovement. 9. The objectives o f the agricultural research component under AgSSIP are to: (i) increase agricultural productivity and reduce poverty at an accelerated pace through the release and uptake o f new technologies; (ii) promote intensification o f farming systems to conserve and enhance the natural resources base; (iii)increase participation o f farmers and other key stakeholders in the governance and financing o f the NARS to make agricultural research more relevant to farmers' andthe country's needs as well as financially sustainable, and (iv) improving the cost-effectiveness o f research by increasing the efficiency o f research organizations in the NARS via strengthening their technical, administrative, planning, monitoring, and financial management capabilities. Phase Io f AgSSIP initiated a Competitive Agricultural Research Grant System (CARGS), a demand-driven research to complement the priority research programs. 10. The project will collaborate with the FAD-funded "Root and Tuber Improvement and Marketing Programme," to promote producers' adoption o f improved technologies in roots and tubers. Its objective i s to build up competitive, market-based and inclusive commodity chains for roots and tubers. It builds on lessons learned from the "Root and Tuber Improvement Promamme," a predecessor project that focused primarily on cassavaresearch and development. The on-going FAD program extends its focus to other roots and tubers. The WAAPP should work well with such the FAD-supported program since it i s implementedjointly by IFAD and the World Bank. 11.Mali's agricultural and research strategy is to (i)strengthen the efficiency and sustainability o f agricultural services by promoting pluralism and competition among service providers (public and private) and the participation of beneficiaries in the design, implementation, monitoring and gradually the financing o f research and extension programs; (ii) strengthen the capacity o f producer organizations to be the main partners o f government in the design and management o f rural development policies and programs, in particular at the local and regional level, and to be the key instrument for improving fanner's access to the inputs and services they need. Benchmarks are to increase cotton grain production, evolution o f producer prices, improvement o f fiber production and livestock production. 12.The fist phase o f the PASAOP promoted strategic research sub-projects selected and financed on a scientific-merit basis. It also established a Competitive Research and Development Grant Fund (CR&DGF) to finance adaptive research or research and development research (R&D) sub-projects on a producer demand-driven basis. It supported a revamped CNRA to manage research financing (through the CR&DGF) independently from the implementing institutes. The revamped C N R 4 currently functions as a fully autonomous body with a majority representation o fresearch users, as intended. Producer organizations are play an active inthe identification o fresearch programs. 23 13. Senegal's agriculturaland researchstrategy i s to: promote agricultural development; raise livestock production; and ensure sustainable management o f fishery resources. Benchmark set for this strategy i s successful implementation o f agriculture services and Agriculture export programs (increasing research output, diversity output, lower costs o f knowledge transfer to producers, increase knowledge on soil fertility). 14. The first phase o f the PSAOP supported the establishment o f the National Fund for Agricultural Research (FNRAA), a competitive funding mechanism for agricultural and ago- processing research programs. The FNRAA has increased the transparency o f resource allocation to research projects. The FNRAA has made funds available to a range o f competencies beyond the traditional and dominant research institutes. It has contributed to forging partnerships between research institutions, institutions and private operators, such as ago-processors. Producers take part in the decision-making process and are involved in the implementation o f research programs at field level. The PSAOP has also helped strengthen the scientific and managerial capacities and competitiveness o f the two major research institutions ( I S M and ITA). 15. The West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and DevelopmentIConseil Ouest et Centre Africain pour la Recherche et le Dbveloppement Agricoles (WECARDICORAF),createdin 1987, was giventhe hission by ECOWAS member states to improve the efficiency and effectiveness o f agricultural research in West Africa by contributing to the construction and the consolidation o f the capacities o f the National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS), through co-operation between its members, development partners, regional and international organizations, private sector, non-governmental organizations, users o fresearch results. CORAF has set the following objectives: (i) promote co- operation, consultation and information exchange between member institutions on one hand and the partners on the other; (ii) joint sub-regional and regional research objectives and define priorities; (iii) as a consultative body for research carried out by regional and international serve organizations operating at the sub-regional level; (iv) develop joint research programmes inorder to strengthen complementary activities o f CORAF/WECARD and its partners; (v) harmonize the activities o f the existing research networks, and facilitate the creation o f new regional networks or other operational research units with a regional character. 16. Specifically, ECOWAS has given mandate to CORAF to implement its agricultural policy (ECOWAP) in areas related to agricultural policy. To that effect, CORAF i s developing the West Africa Agricultural Productivity Program (WAAPP) for the ECOWAS sub-region. As part o f the preparation o f the global WAAPP (supported by grants from donors such as DFID, USAID, and the World Bank), CORAF has reviewed its Strategic Plan for Agricultural Research and Development Co-operation for West and Central Africa. The plancalls for a more focus and clearer framework to guide the development o f a Five Year Program. In essence, this program comprises the WAAPP for the ECOWAS sub-region and the Central Africa Agricultural ProductivityProgram (CAAPP) for the central African sub-region. 17. CORAF has been at the center o f both the global WAAPP and the proposed project in support to this global WAAPP. C O W has proven to be the right body to bring together countries together, whether at the global sub-regional region or insmaller groupings o f countries inthe sub-region, such as the three participating countries inthis first ofaseries ofAPLs. 24 18. The Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA), in its Framework for African Agricultural Productivity (FAAP), recommends that Africa's agricultural productivity efforts reflect the following principles inorder to be successful: Empowermentof end-users to ensure their meaningful participation insettingpriorities andwork programs for research, extension, andtraining to ensure their relevance; Planned subsidiarity to give responsibility and control over resources for agricultural research, extension, and training activities at the lowest appropriate level o f aggregation (local, national and regional); Pluralism in the delivery o f agricultural research, extension, and training services so that diverse skills and strengths o f a broad range o f service providers (e.g. universities, NGOs, public and the private sectors); Evidence-basedapproaches with emphasis on data analysis, including economic factors and market orientation in policy development, priority setting and strategic planning for agricultural research, extension, andtraining; Integration of agricultural research with extension services, the private sector, training, capacity building, and education programs to respond ina holistic manner to the needs and opportunities for innovation inthe sector; Explicit incorporationof sustainability criteria in evaluation o f public investments in agricultural productivity and innovation program (fiscal, economic, social and environmental) ; Systematic utilization of improved management information systems, in particular for planning, financial management, reporting, andmonitoring and evaluation; Introduction of cost sharing with end users, according to their capacity to pay, to increase their stake in the efficiency o f service provision and to improve financial sustainability; and Integration of gender considerations at all levels, including farmers and farmer organizations, the private sector, public institutions, researchers and extension staff, 19. The FAAPprinciples are captured inthe inthe Agricultural Knowledge and Information System (AKIS) diagrammedbelow: 25 21. The ~ A A P Pwill also work to facilitafe the oAen lacking c o ~ ~ a ~a~~r o researchers, a ~n ~~ ~ n e ~ ~ sewices and agrico ~ ~ ~ ~ n arch grant system an^^^ 4) provides Is0 provides an o ~ p o ~to~ n j ~ ~ ia, Guinea, Guinea- 25 Annex 2: Major RelatedProjectsFinancedby the Bankand/or other Agencies AFRICA: WestAfrica AgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) Support Project Latest supervision (ISR) ratings Sector Project (Bank-financed projects only) Implementat Objective (DO) ionProgress (W Regional West and Central Africa Air Transport E Safety & Security Project (approved on April 27,2006)t West Africa Power Pool ProgramAPL SenegalRiverBasin Multipurpose Water ResourcesDevelopment Project APL Senegal Agricultural Markets and Agribusiness Development (approved on February 28, 2006, notyet efective) Agricultural Export Promotion Project S S Mali Ghana 2247 GH) (closed) _y I I Local Area Development Program (NORAD, Swiss Cooperation, CIDA Dutch/F&nch/KfW Dutch/French/KfW funded projects at Office duNiger- ongoing FrencWAFD fundedproject: Support to cotton-based farming systems (PASE) 8'hFED funded project: Support to the Rice 27 Senegal AfDB Small Scale Irrigation Support Project (Tambacounda,Fatick and Kolda regions)( ongoing) EU Revitalization of theagroundnut Industry (Programme de relance de la filitre Arachide, ongoing) CIDA Agroprocessing Micro-entreprises Support Project (PAOA-Projet d'appui aux opkrateurs de l'agro-alimentaire, on-going) Ghana I IFAD II Roots and Tuber Improvement and MarketingProgramme .anking IPDO: HS (Highly satisfactory), S (satisfactory), I(unsatisfactory), HI(highly unsatisfactory) 28 Annex 3: Results Frameworkand Monitoring AFRICA: West Africa AgriculturalProductivityProgram(WMPP) Support Project Results Framework PDO Use of ProjectOutcome Information Generate and disseminate improved At least three improved technologies Measures productivity gains in technologies inthe participating inthe participating countries' top priority areas countries' top priority areas that are priority areas have been released by aligned with the region's top these countries at the end o f the priorities, as identified by CORAF phase. Out o f the three improved technologies releasedby each Measures relevance and country, at least one should show effectiveness o f technology improvement inyieldby 15 percent generation and transfer over the control technology. IntermediateOutcomes IntermediateOutcome Use of IntermediateOutcome Indicators Monitoring Enablingconditionsfor regionalcooperationinTGD Strengthened enabling conditions for Commonregulations for the Gaugesprospects for cross-border disseminating technology within registration o f genetic materials and exchange and trade intechnology participating countries and at pesticides are adopted at ECOWAS regional level level Three national registration Measures improvement innational committees for genetic materials and procedures for disseminating pesticides inthe participating are improved technologies operational A web-based information systemon Measures effectiveness of agricultural technologies and disseminating technology research skills is developed and maintainedby CORAF Centers of Specialization Strengthened alignment o f national Three national Centers o f Gauge how countries are positioning priorities withregional priorities Specialization(NCOS) inareas o f and aligning NARS on regional within participant countries National bothnational andregional priorities agricultural research priorities Agricultural Research Systems have been developed by (NARS) participating countries within their NARS A total ofat least 30 scientists with Gauge openness o fNCOS to other interest inthe established NCOS researchers inthe region and abroad have been supported by programs o f visiting scientists to open NCOS to the region and bevond Technology Generation Strengthened priority-focused and All project-funded R&D sub- Ensures relevance o fproject-funded transparent agricultural research projects have addressednational and R&Dactivities funding mechanisms within regionalpriorities participant countries and at regional level At least 85 percent o f completed Gaugesperfonnance o fproject- 29 competitive grant sub-project have fundedR&Dactivities been implemented successfully, as assessedby independent review panels o f experts. Managementand Coordination Established effective project At least 80% o f Annual Activity Gaugesconformity with fiduciary coordination and management Implementation Planand related requirements and efficiency o f system budget andprocurementplan implementation. (PTBA) are executed and in conformity with the implementation manual, and IDA procurement and financial management procedures. All project reports are presented Gaugesefficiency o f coordination within 45days o fthe end o f the and monitoring system. relevant period. A systemfor data collection, Gauges capability o f documenting analysis andreporting onregional productivity increase over time agricultural productivity is established and working satisfactorily. All subproject granted with Gauges funded CARGS related sub- environmental management plan project compliance with Bank have implemented adequately the triggered safeguard policies. plan effectively. 30 I ..ee ..+i Pi C P 0 Ii 48 m e ri L i P 0 b P 2 W 48 m e aC - E : CCL. B8 M m * 4 m e m -?L 0 9 z m e m 0 q z e e N 38 38 gz s 00 v) n s UY g p N M E! VI 00 n s v) g E! s In 00 4 z 2 -0 Arranpementsfor resultsmonitoring 1. The M&E system will be designed to document the project outcomes and intermediary results. CORAF will have the primary responsibility for the project's M&E. In this capacity, CORAF will define standard methodology for data collection and processing techniques as well as for the measurement o f impacts and both at the national and regional levels to allow comparability across countries. Measurement and reporting of project outcomes and impact 2. At the regional, CORAF will subcontract with appropriate regional and international agencies to update studies on the region's agricultural productivity each other year, base on the study done with IFPRI support in2006, which also served as a baseline for monitoring progress in agricultural productivity inthe region. These studies are not relatedto participating countries only but will report on agricultural productivity in the entire ECOWAS region., and will be carried out twice over the project life : before the project medium term review (Year 3 following effectiveness) and by the closing date for the purpose o f the project Implementation and Results Completionreport.. 3. At country level, NCOS inparticipating countries will be responsible for the measurement o f impact o f technology released and transferred with the project support. To that aim, NCOS will carry farm surveys for the purpose o f measuring the indicators on productivity improvement and technology adoption. Such panel surveys will be conducted over the project life cycle and will include both control and adopters o f released technologies. This center will also perform supply chain analysis and benchmarking to identify on a regular basis knowledge gap and key areas o f for future research programs, as well as to update on country progress andperformance along the chains o f commodities in their particular areas o f specialization. The project will support such analyses as well as farm surveys as part o f NCOS core hnded program and for which annual report will be issued starting on the end o f Year 2 following project effectiveness. Monitoring of project implementation progress and intermediate achievements 4. CORAF and the national research grant agencies will be responsible for maintaining web- based databases on grant administration and results. Such databases will be accessible to the public and will disclose information on the following: request for proposals, selection process and procedures, grantees, and results. In addition, C O W will develop and maintain agricultural research resources database in terms o f publications, research skills available in the region. An independent evaluation o f completed sub-projects funded under the regional and national windows will be performed annually starting at the end o f Year 2 following project effectiveness. This evaluation will capture through a score-card approach, all relevant dimensions o f SP, including alignment with the region top priorities, beneficiary participations and intake, quality o f financial management, compliance with Bank safeguards policies, scientific achievements and efficacy for transfer to end users, quality on documenting results and communication to public, etc. 5. Based on the M&E system, each participating country will produce semi-annual reports along with dashboard on the national priority sector and information on research grants and results. CORAF will produce an annual consolidated report based on the countries' reports and 33 their specific studies to be shared with all ECOWAS countries. CORAF will also inform participating countries on a yearly basis on activity implementation progress andthe use o f finds transferred from country proceeds, with all relevant documents (financial statements, financial audit, implementation progress report etc) as approved by its Oversight Committee. 6. The anchor projects inthe participating countries have developed M&E systems, which will serve CORAF's regional M&E system. In addition, CORAF i s also developing a web-based information system on agricultural technology. The basic structure o f the project's M&E is thus inplace. This system willbefurther strengthened andimprovedbothat the nationalandregional levels, as reflected inthe cost tables. 34 Annex 4: DetailedProjectDescription AFRICA: West Africa AgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) Support Project 1. This project is designed as a buildingblock for the global WAAPP for the ECOWAS region, inpreparationbyCORAF, clients, partners anddonors--including IDA. The region's consumers, particularly those affected by extreme poverty, are the ultimate beneficiaries o f the WAAPP. Agricultural producers and agribusinesses, as users o f the improved technology, are the primary beneficiaries o f the program. These are also the key participants, along with researchers, extension agencies, and universities (in adhering to the agricultural knowledge information system (AKIS) conceptual framework), inthe generation and dissemination o f technology that i s directly supported by the WAAPP. Annex 6 (institutional arrangements) describes the nature androles o fthe project's various implementingagencies. 2. The Bank has worked with donors (in closed and participative meetings), CORAF, clients and partners to provide shape to a shared vision o f the WAAPP. The design o f the proposed IDA project supporting the WAAPP incorporates the key elements o f this shared vision thus developed. The consensus includes the need for CORAF to: assist ECOWAS in setting up common regulations and procedures in technology generation and dissemination; develop an effective communication system, including an effective dissemination system; implement effectively the regional competitive grant system supported by donors; and strengthen its financial and procurement management system for the finds it received. Adding to this, the proposed project has designed activities that integrate the regional and national level to provide benefit to both the participating countries (Le., with proposed IDA credit) and the region as a whole. 3. Through the sharing o f information and discussions with C O W , clients, and donors, the structure o f the proposed project evolved over the course o f the project's preparation to clarify and further strengthenits complementary nature to the WAAPP. The detailed project descriptipn is reflective o f this design. 4. Component1: EnablingConditions for RegionalCooperationin TGD (US$5.3 million, IDA: US$4.4 million). This aims at strengthening the mechanisms and procedures governing the registration and release o f technology products (genetic materials, pesticides and other crop protection products--CPP) to make them available for domestic and cross-border trade and distribution. These conditions are concerned with allowing countries to benefit fully from the potential o f the regional cooperation in TGD being promoted. Such conditions need to be worked out at both national and regional levels, for before technology products can be available at the regional level, they must be available at the national level. Often, unfortunately, the regulations and standards at the national level are either not adequate or not operational, so that improved technologies may have been developed but not officially released. Also, within the region, the larger ECOWAS has lagged behindthe CILSS (Permanent Inter-State Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel) and WAEMU countries in adopting common procedures for the release o f genetic materials andpesticides. - 35 - 5. This component will focus on the followingkey areas: (a) Common regulations related to genetic materials, pesticides and other crop protection products (CPP) at the ECOWAS level. The WAEMU and CILSS countries, with support from various donors, already have in place common rules and regulations regarding seeds and pesticides. Work i s under way at ECOWAS to recommend to its member states a common regulation adapted from the WAEMU's and CILSS' framework. The WAAPP will contribute to these efforts to speed up this process. The project will also assist ECOWAS in its efforts to find a common framework in intellectual property rights (IPR) and others, such as farmers' rights and Geographic Indication (GI). The ECOWAS region straddles two different African IPR organizations: the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI)7 covers mostly Francophone countries, while the African Regional Industrial Property Organization (ARIPO)* covers Anglophone countries. CORAF will coordinate the activities described above. (b) National registration committees for genetic materials and pesticides in the participating countries. Specifically, the WAAPP will support (i) revision, ifneeded, o f the national procedures to align them with the regional guidelines; (ii) identification o f improved technology that has been developed but not yet officially released; (iii) operations o f the technology release process, ensuring the participation o f producers and agribusinesses inthis process; (iv) documentation o f the characteristics o f the technology (e.g., agronomic, chemical composition, potential environmental impact, economic benefits, and consumers' appreciation); (v) the cataloging o f the released and approved technologies; and (vi) the promotion o f these technologies, using traditional media and information technology and communication (ITC). With registration procedures recognized across borders, countries will not needto repeat unnecessary field tests before allowing inmaterials for use. (c) Information system on agricultural technologies and research skills at the regional level. The project will support CORAF's on-going efforts to strengthen its web-based information system. CORAF's information system will help amplifyto the entire region the promotion o f improved technologies released at the national levels. It will also provide information related to research skills in the region to facilitate networking. CORAF will consolidate the information available in various other databases, such as that o f CILSS and FAO. 6. To carry out these activities, the project will collaborate with the regional economic organizations (ECOWAS, WAEMU) and- institutions (INSAH/CILSS), and other partners. These include IITA, which i s coordinating the West Africa Seed and PlantingMaterial Network (WASNET); IFDC, which is working in the area o f a regulatory framework for the registration o f crop protection products in West Africa; FAO; and USAID, which has initiated a Global Development Alliance and i s working to launch a SeedAlliance. 7. To that effect, this component will support (i)consultant services to study and assess policies, regulations, and procedures inthe sharingo f technology; (ii) workshops and seminars to 'OAPI's member countries comprise: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea Equatorial, Guinea, Mali, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, and Togo. * ARIPO's member countries comprise: Botswana, the Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Sw.aziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Nigeria and Liberia are observers and potential future members. - 36 - promote the participation o f regional producers organizations (e.g., ROPPA') and agribusinesses associations (e.g. INTERFACE) inthe drafting o f regulations and assessing the characteristics o f improved technologies; (iii)short-term training to upgrade skills in ITC; and (iv) limited operating costs associated with the technology release process (e.g., field trials, culinary tests, promotional materials, etc.). 8. Participating countries will manage the activities associated with their technology release procedures. C O W will assist ECOWAS in the harmonization o f procedures and analysis o f IPR issues. It will assist the participating counties in the implementation o f regional common procedures. Through its website and other media, CORAF will provide exposure to other countries the technologies developed by the participating countries to promote interregional trade. 9. Out o f the US$4.39 million IDA funds allocated for the implementation o f this component, the cost o f CORAF's activities is US$0.86 million. 10. Component 2: National Centers of Specialization (US$22.5 million, IDA: US$20.5 million). This aims at strengthening the alignment o f national priorities with regional priorities within participant countries' national agricultural research systems (NARS). Countries need to focus on their top R&D priorities-rather than attempt to tackle all possible issues with little prospect for success-if they want to make the best use o f scarce resources and achieve meaningfulresults toward increasinggrowth and reducing extreme poverty. A country can more readily rationalize this decision if it is ensured to benefit from research efforts in these other ' areas where it does no have comparative advantage but inwhich other countries do-just as its own efforts in its areas o f comparative advantage will benefit the other countries. The Bank's support to the WAAPP provides for this rationalization by initiating the strengthening or establishment o f national centers o f specialization (NCOS) in the participating countries. The project will support NCOS that (i) focus on areas o f national priority aligned with a regional priority; (ii)demonstrate sustained public support for core programs and staff; (iii) commit to collaboration with regional and international institutions; and (iv) commit to share results with other countries. 11.Well-performing NCOS will undoubtedly attract regional recognition and support, and may thus evolve into regional center o f excellence (RC0E)--if they satisfy the criteria for RCOEs being developed by FAR4 under the CAADP. The WAAPP shares the notion that sustainable regional centers o f excellence may develop only when a host country commits itself to strengthening a NCOS, inan area o f national priority aligned with regional priorities, and opens it up to other collaborating countries. In the past, stand alone regional centers that had been entirely built, staffed and supported at high cost by donors have failed when that support ended. As a coordinating sub-regional organization, CORAF simply does not have the financial means to sponsor or support a regional center. With the host country making little effort to support the core hnction o f the would-be regional center, other countries have difficulties committing sustained financial resources to a center outside their borders. However, countries could contribute to the research program o f a regional center o f interest with high-caliber scientists, when the host country shows commitment to provide good working conditions in such centers. The level of government's support to such centers will be appreciated inthe public expenditures reviews(PER). Reseaudes organisations paysannes et des producteursde 1'Afiique de 1'Ouest. - 37 - 12. The WAAPP will support NCOS at a physical location serving as the focal point o f a network o f contributing institutions. A recent study by CORAF/IFPU'o provides a quantitative basis for the alignment o fnational andregional priorities (table 1). The study indicates that roots and tubers contribute the most to agricultural growth inWest and Central Africa and the most to Ghana's agricultural growth as well. Rice ranks second in the region in terms o f overall agricultural growth, but first in terms o f producer benefits from R&D investment, and i s key to Mali's agricultural growth. The livestock sector ranks second for the region and first for the Sahelian counties (Mali and Senegal). Cereals (maize, sorghum and millet) ranks 6th in the region and play an important role in Mali and Senegal. This provides a strong rationale for Ghana to strengthen a NCOS on roots and tubers; Mali on rice; and Senegal on drought-resistant cereals (at its CERAAS center). 13. Under this project, CERAAS i s considered a NCOS, not a CORAF "base center," purported to be a regional center o f excellence. The WAAPP shares the notion that sustainable regional centers o f excellence (RCOE) may develop only when a host country commits itself to strengthening a NCOS inareas o f national priorities aligned with regional priorities, and opens it up to other collaborating countries. CORAF lacks the human capacity and sustained financial means to manage so regional centers. Table 1: Sumn: Commodities Contributionto total Contributionto share in Researchbenefitsand I subsectors - agriculturalgrowth and country's AgGDP growth ranking ranking Roots and Rank 1St inWCA (17% of Togo (34.1%); Benin Cassavaranks 2"din tubers contribution) (28.1%); Ghana (22.1%); WCA; lst 2nd inCentral, Ranks lst inCoast(20%) Nigeria (21-1%) inCoast, and 1"in and 2ndin Central (17%) Ghana Yam ranks 7th inWCA Livestock Rank 2ndinWCA (15.5% of contribution) Ranks lSt inSahel(35%) and Central region (19.9%). Rice Rank 3rdinWCA (15.2% of Sierra Leone (35.5%); Ranks 1"in WCA contribution) Guinea (32.9%); Mali Rank lst and inSahel Rank 2"d inCoastal (17%) (21.8%); Guinea Bissau Coast and Sahel(l6%) (19.5%); Nigeria (12.8%); Senegal(12.0%); Cote d'Ivoire (9.9%) Fruitsand Rank4' inWCA (10.5% of Not calculated Not calculated vegetables contribution) Rank 31dinCentral (17.3%) and 4' inCoast (10.4%) Pulsesand Rank 5thinWCA (8.7% of Gambia (37.3%); Niger Beansrank 12' inWCA oilseeds contribution) (16.4%); Senegal(14.7%); Groundnuts rank 3Tdin Rank 4thin Sahel (11.6%) BurkinaFaso(13.6%); WCA, 2ndinSahel, 3rdin Guinea (13.O%); Sierra Coast, 4' inCentral 1" loIFPRI (October 2006) Regional Strategy Alternatives for Agricultural Growth andPoverty ReductioninWest Africa. - 3 8 - Leone (9.6%); Nigeria inSenegaland2"din (9.5%) Niger andNigeria Cereals Rank 6'h: (5.8% of Gambia (19.2%); Burkina Maize ranks 4" in (maize, contribution) Faso(17:8%); Mali WCA; and sorghum millet, Rank3'dinSahel(l2%) (11.7?40);Senegal(11.7Y0); ranks 5" Milletranks 8' sorghum) Niger (11.3%); Nigeria inWCA, 3d inSahel, 1'' (7.1%); Togo (5.4%) inGambia, 2"dinMali, and Senegal Bulk Cocoa contributes 2.8% to Cocoa total producer traditional WCA's growth (2% to benefitsrank 6"' and export Central and Coastal cotton benefits rank 10* (cocoa, regions') inWCA. cotton) Cotton contributes 2.1% to Cocoa ranks 1st inCote WCA's growth (4.8% to d'Ivoire. Sahel's) Cottonranks2"din BurkinaFasoand Guinea, 3rdMali, Cote d'Ivoire and Benin. Source: IFPRI/C( RAF (2006) 14.The component will focus on the following: (a) Upgrading core facilities and equipment o f the selected NCOS. This will help establishhtrengthen the viability o f the center, making it more operational and attractive to other researchers inthe region. (b) Buildingthe capacity of researchers,through on-the-job-training o f young researchers (including university staff and students) and programs o f visiting scientists. Through the program o f visiting scientists, the NCOS will offer the opportunity to its researchers to carry out work at other regional and international centers o f excellence. Similarly, the NCOS will have the opportunity to invite and accommodate high-caliber researchers from other regional and international centers o f excellence to work at the NCOS. The program o f visiting sciefitists i s for substantial work over a few months to one year, and not mere study tours. The program will support living expenses (travel, lodging, per-diem, and limited business expenses) o f outgoing and incoming researchers, who will retain their salaries from their institutions. The WAAPP should prove key to strengthening researchers' capacities, their motivation and building up a network around the NCOS, while opening up to the region's researchers. This program could be linked with the Third World Academy o f Sciences (TWAS) that provides opportunities for young and mid-career agriculture professionals to undertake programs at centers o f excellence inBrazil, China, and India. (c) Supporting NCOS' R&D programs. These programs will concern core, or commissioned, research and adaptive research. A strong consensus has developed among stakeholders indicating the need for commissioned or strategic research at NCOS focused on the country's main priority, in addition to competitive grants. Bothresearch programs need to be developed with the participation o f key stakeholders (e.g., through participative breeding program) to ensure their relevance. The R&D activities will cover the development o f plant materiel, but also the alleviation o f other constraints (e.g., post-harvest losses) along the supply chain to promote technology adoption. - 3 9 - (d) Supporting farm surveys and supply chains analysis and benchmarkingto identify most important areas o f research, and to monitor and document progress and impact o f transferred technologies along the project life. The NCOS is to become the country's prime information center o f key scientific and socio-economic information regarding the commodity sector. This will include explore links with appropriate agencies to advice farmers on `on-time' weather forecasts and interpretations as an integral component o f improving productivity. 15. The project will work with development partners, CGIAR centers, andprivate agribusinesses to enhance the sustainability o f the NCOS. It will put an emphasis on public-private partnerships, which are shown to offer great prospects in emerging areas o f science and technology that are critical to increasingcompetitiveness o f the agricultural sector. 16. The project will fund civil work (if needed to upgrade facilities), material and equipment, consultant services, workshops and seminars, training, and operating costs related to the implementation o f R&D programs o f the national center of specialization. The national coordination units (of the national programs) will manage the procurement o f goods and services related to this component. CORAF will assist the NCOS in the development o f their work programs and networking with regional and international centers o f excellence. 17. Out o f the US$20.53 million IDA funds allocated for the implementation o f this component, the cost o fCORAF's activities inUS$0.50 million. 18. Component 3: Funding of Demand-Driven Technology Generation and Adoption (US$16.8 million; IDA: US$15.7 million). This aims at strengthening priority-focused, transparent finding mechanisms for demand-driven agricultural R&D within participating countries and at regional level. The component focuses on areas that have been identified as highpriority at boththe national and regionallevels. Bythis focus on the region's top priorities, as identified by C O W (table `1 above), the project will ensure that work carried out in the participating countries will have great relevance to the region. Cross-sectoral research (e.g., sustainable land management) i s clearly important, but such research must ultimately focus on the region's top priority commodity subsectors, which contribute directly to the region's agricultural growth. Within these parameters, eligible activities will cover all key constraints along the supply chain o f these commodity sub-sectors. Activities may concern new, as well as on-the-shelf agricultural technologies with potential for quick impact. 19. This component will support a competitive agricultural grant system (CARGS) and a limited (non-competitive) core funding with strong buy-in from major stakeholders. The CARGS provides an effective mechanism to involve key stakeholders (particularly producers and agribusinesses) in targeted adaptive research. As indicated earlier, non-competitive research fundingis also needed to ensure that no key constraint is overlook inthe competitive process. In such cases, however, it behooves researchers to clearly identify the need o f such research to major stakeholders to get their buy-in. It includes a national window supported by regional support activities. (a) National window. The project will support provision o f additional resources to complement ongoing and future R&D activities carried out under the country's agricultural policy and to disseminate technology inthe country's top priorities, as identifiedby C O W . - 40 - To ensure regional spillover benefits, the country's top priorities will be aligned with the regional's top priorities. To further add value to national programs, the national windows will support cross-border partnerships-both on the supply side (research, extension, universities) and the demand side (farmer organizations, private sector and civil society)-to work on problems on common interest. When a compelling business case can be made to this effect, the national window will fund the participation o f members o f producers groups or agribusiness associations in R&D activity carried out in another country. Similarly, it will also fund the participation of another country's producers and entrepreneurs in a R&D carried out in the country. In the animal feed mix, for example, this may be a way to establish early contacts between potential manufacturers, suppliers and end users to broaden the market size. (b) Regional support activities. The project will support provision o f additional resources to allow CORAF to expand its knowledge sharing activities through the ECOWAS member countries. Thus, through CORAF's work, the IDA'Sinstrument will be benefiting the entire region inany given phase o fthe series o fAPLs. 20. The national project coordination units will manage the national windows (through the relevantnational implementation agencies) with COR4F's assistance. CORAF will facilitate the sharing o f information on results and lessons related to the CARGS among the participating countries and through the sub-region.. This ensures that, through the national window and the regional support activities, the WAAPP will implement activities that will benefit both the participating countries and the region. 21. Out o f out o f the US$15.72 million IDA finds allocated for the implementation o f this component, the cost o f CORAF's activities i s US$O.lO million. 22. Funding o f the CARGS will follow clear and transparent guidelines adapted from existing procedures, best practices and lessons learned, as described in the manual o f procedures. The manualwill reflect the following guidelines: Administration by a competent and independent governance body; Openness to producer groups and agribusinesses to lead the implementation o f R&D activities, and not always researchers; Openness to R&D activities to promote o f technology on-the-shelf for effective adoption; Assistance to proposal writing to help non-researchers finalize the concept into a complete R&Dproposal; Grant to cover field trials, monitoring, write-up o f results, seminars, and stakeholders' participation; Account for contributions o f R&D's implementing unit as well as contribution o f participatingproducers; Capped overhead of the R&D's implementing unit in terms o f management fee or supported by operating cost, as the practice may be inthe participating countries; Evaluation o f R&D's performance by a panel o f competent and independent experts removed for the initial selection. 23. The review o f existing CARGS at the level o f CORAF and the participating countries has indicated that these systems can be strengthened by following these guidelines. For example, to - 4 1 - promote the participation o f producer organizations and trade associations inthe demand-driven process, a two-step selection process will be explored, including an eventual first step as a concept note to be reviewed for its relevance to the issue on hand; In following with the A K I S model, the project will encourage researchers to team with extension services and universities (faculty members and students) to respond to demand from farmers and agribusinesses. 24. Component 4: Project Coordination, Management, Monitoring and Evaluation (US$4.9 million; IDA: US$4.4 million). This aims at establishing an effective coordination, management and M&E system at the national and regional levels. At the regional level, all donors are concerned about helping CORAF better coordinate, monitor and evaluate the generation and adoption o f technology across West Africa. They are also concerned about helpingCORAF effectively manage the funds it receives. The Bank supported project will thus help CORAF improve its performance to the satisfaction o f all. In addition, the WAAPP will work to establish an effective coordination between the regional level and the participating countries (Ghana, Mali and Senegal). 25. The IDA-supported project will help C O W improve its performance to the satisfaction o f all. In addition, the WAAPP will work to establish an effective coordination between the regional level and the participating countries (Ghana, Mali and Senegal). The project's key performance indicators (KPI) will serve as a buildingblock to the global WAAPP's monitoring and evaluation system. Specifically, the KPI addresses COR4F's performance in terms o f its communication strategy and its effectiveness inmanaging the regional competitive grant system, botho f which are o fkeen interest to all donors. 26. The WAAPP support project will be implemented at the regional level by CORAF (ECOWAS' mandated implementing agency) and at the national levels by the national coordinating units at the Ministry o f Food and Agriculture (MOFA) Projects Coordinating Unit in Ghana; the PASAOP (Programme d'Appui aux Services Agricoles et aux Organisations de Producteurs) in Mali and the PSAOP 2 (Programme des Services et Organisations des Producteurs) in Senegal. As part o f the preparation phase o f the IDA'Ssupport to the WAAPP, Bank staff carried out a financial management assessment in accordance with IDA'SFinancial Management Practices Manual issued by the Financial Management Board on November 3, 2005. The fiduciary arrangements o f the national implementing agencies, which operate under on-going part o f on-going IDA-financed operations, fully meet IDA'Sminimum requirement under OPBP 10.02 Financial Management. The assessment also identified key actions to further strengthen the financial management system o f C O W as well as the countries implementing agencies, as detailed inAnnex 7. 27. The proposed operation will also contribute to strengthen C O W ' S capacities in its coordination role with national and regional institutions (e.g., ECOWAS, WAEMU, INSAH/CILSS and CGIAR centers), and in monitoring and evaluation. It will also support the implementing agencies at the national levels to establish and strengthen their collaboration with CORAF. 28. The project will ensure the implementation o fthe following key activities: (a) Financialmanagementandprocurementsystems at CORAF. This i s to help CORAF implement activities in conformity with the procurement plan, the implementation manual, - 42 - and IDA procedures. These procedures include annual audits. As IDA'Sprocedures meet or exceed those o f other donors, it is expected that CORAF's improved management system will likely satisfy other donors as well. (b) Reporting on project's activities. C O W ' Sreporting system must provide all periodic project reports on time. (c) Monitoring and evaluation of regional agricultural productivity. CORAF will establish a system for data collection, analysis and reporting on regional agricultural productivity. In particular, the project will strengthen CORAF's and the national coordination units' M&E systems to assess increases in agricultural productivity and competitiveness in the region's priority areas. C O W will not undertake, but rather commission studies to update and deepen the analysis related to the contribution o f various commodity sub-sectors to agricultural growth and producers' benefits. CORAF will implement theses activities in such a way that they contribute to build an effective analytical capacity within the region. (d) Communication strategy. This component will also support CORAF's implementation o f an effective communication strategy, covering the global WAAPP, as well as this project. 29. This component will support consultant services (surveys and impact studies), vehicles and equipment, office supplies, workshops and short-term training, and operating costs. The support to CORAF will complement parallel financing from other partners (USAID, DFID, etc.) inorder to help CORAF provide a comprehensive view o f the region's progress inimproving agricultural productivity. 30. Out o f the US$4.36 million IDA funds allocated for the implementation o f this component, the cost o f CORAF's activities is US$1.54. This is in part because C O W is required to upgrade its capacities in terms o f financial management and procurement to comply with IDA' procedures. It i s also that CORAF i s tasked for carrying surveys and studies to update the IFPWCORAF's study. It is fbther because the national coordinating units are already functional and thus need relatively little additional support to carrying out the project's activities. The project has allocated funds for this additional support based on the proposals o f the national coordinating units themselves. - 43 - Annex 5: ProjectCosts AFRICA: West AfricaAgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) SupportProject Project Cost By Component and/or Activity Local Foreign Total US$ 000 US$ 000 US$ 000 ~~ Component 1: Enabling Conditions 3,433.6 1,560.7 4,994.3 Component 2: NationalCenters o Specialization 18,365.2 2,367.0 20,732.2 Component 3: Technology Generation 16,177.0 282.9 16,459.8 Component 4: Coordination, ManagementandM&E 3,945.4 473.3 4,418.7 Total Baseline Cost 41,921.2 4,683.8 46,605.0 Physical Contingencies 391.4 230.1 621.5 Price Contingencies 2,145.5 104.0 2,249.5 TotalProjectCosts' 44,458.1 5,018.0 49,476.1 Interest during construction Front-end Fee TotalFinancingRequired 44,458.1 5,018.0 49,476.1 'Identifiable taxes and duties are US$m3,259 andthe total project cost, net o ftaxes, i s US$m46,216. Therefore, the share o fproject cost net o f taxes i s 93.4%. IDA FinancingBy Componentandby Country/CORAF Components Enabling Conditions for Regional Cooperation Centers o f 6,461.00 I 7,082.00 6,489.00 20,032.00 500.00 20,532.00 Specialization I Technology Generation Coordination, Management 7 andM&E CORAF- 1,000.00 1,000.00 Subsidiary Financing Agreement TOTAL - 44 - Annex 6: ImplementationArrangements AFRICA: West Africa AgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) SupportProject 1. This IDA-funded operation is insupport to the global West Africa Agricultural Productivity Program (WAAPP) being prepared by CORAF--the sub-regional organization (SRO) mandated by ECOWAS to implement Pillar IV o f the CAADP. This operation combines assistance to CORAF (as other donors) with support to countries, to fully integrate national to regional priorities. The project team worked closely with donors and other partners--sharing ideas, concept notes and preliminary drafts o f the project document, and participating in numerous workshops--to highlight the building block nature o f the IDA'S instrument and develop a partnership around the global WAAPP. 2. CORAF has a long-standing relationship with several donors (DFID, USAID, the EU, AfDB, the Canadian IDRC, IFAD, etc.), partners (FARA, FAO, IFPRI, IITA, INSAWCILSS, CIRAD, AGRYHMET, etc.), and the regional economic communities (ECOWAS and WAEMU). DFID and USAID have indicated their intention to provide funding to C O W for the implementation o f the program. DFIDhas provided funding for the series o f workshops to support the process o f drafting CORAF's strategic plan. USAID supported the IFPRI's study, on the basis o f which C O W identified the region's top priority commodity sub-sectors for R&D. USAID also supports public-private partnerships in the development o f promising supply chains, which can be expected to play major roles inthe adoption o f improved technologies. 3. The IDA-project team has also initiated contact with the Bill & Melinda Gates FoundationRockefeller Foundation's Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA). AGRA's goals over the next decade are to introduce 400 new andimproved crop varieties, focus on selected countries (including Ghana, Mali and Senegal) to eliminate hunger among 30 million people and move 15 million more out o f poverty, through activities addressing soil fertility and irrigation, farm-management practices and access to markets and financing. AGRA focuses on food crops for domestic consumption and value-added transformation, for animal feed for example. IDA will work with the global WAAPP to pursuea close collaborationwith AGRA in the generation and adoption o f technologies to improve the region's agricultural productivity and growth. 4. Donor coordination around the global WAAPP has been taking place at the initiative o f one or the other major donor--in Africa, Europe and the US--to accommodate donors' timetables. Representatives o f donors and major stakeholders also meet at CORAF's Board annual meeting. Inaddition to this annual meeting, CORAF has initiated several donors' meetings to discuss its program. Resources provided by the IDA-funded operation added to the assistance o f other donors will help CORAF to continue carrying on such meetings during implementation. IDA will provide an opportunity for donors' collaboration by inviting donors to participate in project's supervision about twice a year. 5. The IDA-fundedproject in support to the WAAPP will be implemented at the regional level by CORAF (ECOWAS' mandated implementing agency) and at the national levels by the national coordination units o f MOFA in Ghana, the PASAOP in Mali and the PSAOP 2 in Senegal. In Ghana, the project will rely on the IFAD-funded roots and tubers, which is - 45 - implemented with IDA'Sassistance, to promote the uptake o f released technologies inroots and tubers. 6. Duringnegotiations the three participating countries committed to providing each a grant of US$1 million to C O W . The Bank will enter into financing agreements with each o f the three participating countries and into a project agreement with CORAF. The proceeds o f the IDA financing (Le., US$1 million per country for a total o f US$3 million) will be made available to C O W under subsidiary project agreements between each o f the countries and CORAF. The balance o f IDA financing will support the establishment o f Centers o f specialization (COS) with regional focus, a national window o f CARGS, and other activities in support o f research- extension-farmer linkages to encourage technology adoption. 7. Regional level. CORAF, through its Dakar-based Executive Secretariat (ES), will assume overall coordination o f the WAAPP, with FARA laying an advisory role (as assigned by the AU/NEPAD). CORAF's Executive Secretariat" comprises the following staff: Executive Secretary, Scientific Coordinator, Administrative and Financial Manager, Information and Communication Manager, Coordinator o f the Sub-regional Cereal Network, and Impact Assessment Officer on agricultural research. The WAAPP will adapt and strengthen CORAF's existing implementation arrangements in the key areas o f financial management, procurement and monitoring & evaluation (so as to remain in compliance with Bank's fiduciary and reporting requirements) and governance o fthe competitive grant system. 8. A Designated account will be opened in a local Bank and project's consolidated financial statements will be prepared by C O W ' S Administrative and Financial Manager. The accounting standards applicable will be the SYSCOA standards, which i s very close to the International Accounting Standards (IPSAS) issued by the International Federation o f Accountants (IFAC). An external auditor with experience and qualifications satisfactory to the Bankwill be recruitedprior to Credit's effectiveness. The audit will be conducted inaccordance with the International Standards on Auditing (ISA) issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board o f the International Federationo f Accountants. 9. The subsidiary agreements between the participating countries and CORAF will spell out the conditions under which CORAF receives the transfer o f fbnds, including a suspension clause. These will include, among others, obligations for CORAF to make available M&E reviews, annual reports, audit reports; to hold regular Board's meetings; and to submit to Board's inquiry related to a country's complaint related to CORAF's management, which could result in the suspension o f the transfer o f fbnds untilCORAF puts inplace the remedial measures. 10. C O W will monitor the overall implementation o f the project, reporting on progress related to the effectiveness o f the dissemination mechanisms and the increase in agricultural productivity and competitiveness in the program's areas o f interest. CORAF will also play the role o f an advisory body for the national window o f the CARGS implemented in each country under the project. It will also play a similar role for the national centers o f specialization. l1CORAF's governance structure includesa GeneralAssembly (GA), Governing Council(GC), Scientificand Technical Committee (STC), andthe Executive Secretariat(ES). - 46 - CORAF's M&E system will collate and synthesize information generated by the M&E systems o f the participating countries. 11. National level. Mali's PASAOP and Senegal's PSAOP 2 have similar institutional arrangement, which include: (i) a steering committee, (ii)national coordination unit, and (iii) a one implementing agency for their research and development component. Inthese countries, the coordination unit is located at the Ministry o f Agriculture with the following key responsibilities: coordination, management of IDA credit, procurement, and overall project's monitoring and evaluation and reporting. In Ghana, the coordination unit, also located in the Ministry of Agriculture, will be M O F A Projects Coordinating Unit,with the understanding that the Projects Coordination Unit within MOFA will be in charge o f coordinating all agricultural related projects including AgSSP and its potential successor. All three countries also operate a CARGS scheme: in Ghana by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR); in Mali by the Comite`National de la RechercheAgricole (CNRA); and in Senegal by the Institut Se'ne'galaisde Recherches Agricoles ( I S M ) . These countries have separate extension services but also a framework that brings together producer organizations, research institutions, the private sector and civil society to identify andact on priorities related to agricultural research and development. 12. The proposed project will not create new implementing units at the country level. The national coordination unit in each country will manage the WAAPP's national window o f the CARGS (through the implementing agency inthis country, according to guidelines adapted from the projects' manuals), the establishment o f the COS, and the monitoring and evaluation o f the project at the national level. The mandates o f the national coordination units will be amended to reflect their added duties. The project will make provisions to support their coordinating agencies for the time it will take for anticipated successor operations to the Ghana's AgSSIP and Mali's PASAOP to be inplace. 13. The implementing manuals will provide detailed information in the institutional and implementation arrangements, including in the following key areas: priority setting for research and extension activities; procedures for competitive grant system; M&Eofproject outcomes and outputs (detailed inAnnex 3). The WAAPP will establish a clear framework for priority setting and updating .based on quantitative analysis (as being developed by IFPRI) and validation by key stakeholders, including producer organizations at the regional and national levels, and public-private partnerships. The WAAPP also aims to produce an implementation manual for CARGS that would serve as good practice for national competitive systems throughout the region. 14. The manual for CARGS, in particular, will follow the guidelines discussed in the detail project description (Component 3: Funding o f Demand-Driven Technology Generation and Adoption). - 47 - 1. As part o f the ~ ~ , ~ ~ ahase ~o fttheoWAAPP, ~ i In as \vas out in accordance cti l i thc ial Management Board on November 3, 2005. The objective o f the assessment was to ine tvhether the i ~ p l e ~ eentities ~have~ acceptable fina n ~ ~ 2, ary 2. The tDA-su na1 level by C 0 M F t the national levels by the natio itz Chatia, the PASAOP in Mali and the PSAOP 2 in Sene .~ RegionalLevel Implementingagency and overview of Status implementationarrangements COWF 1sthe s u ~ ~ r e ~ ibodyafor scienttfic ~ n l Already inplace. However c o - o p e ~ ~ tand~coordinat~on,with a vocation i o ~ COMF has notexperience mthe to stren~thennationalresearchcapacittes for ~anagen~entd i s b ~ r s e ~ e n ~ s of the ~ c o n o ~andi csocial d e ~ ~ ~of~ ~ n ~ fromnthe~ World Bank, 'The Staff ~ e c ~ ~ ~ ~innthe isub-region, ~ e s ., need to be trained accordmrlv. c . L Country Level i Implementingagency and overview of I implementationarrangements The Project will bc i ~ ~ i ~ ~ e mbynFNRM e ~ e d Already tn place and meet ehc (Research ~undin~) ISR4 (Research and Bank n ~ i n ~ ~euqm~ r e ~under r ~ e n t institute d e ~ ~ c ~ o pundernthe~c, o ~ ~ ~ d ~ OPJBP o ~ ~ ~ t n ~ t ~10.02, unit of the PSs"lOP2. Already inplace. Ghana Already in piace - 48 - 3. A financial management assessment o f COR4.F and the implementing agencies was carried out in accordance with the Financial Management Practices Manual. The assessment found that the financial management arrangements o f the project meets the Bank's minimumrequirements under OPh3P10.02 and is then adequate to provide, with reasonable assurance, accurate and timely information on the status o f the project required by IDA. However, some key actions to strengthenthe financial management system o f C O W as well as the countries implementing agencies were identified. These actions include the following: (i) recruitment by each entity, o f an external auditor with experience and qualifications satisfactory to the Association; (ii) adoption o f the Project Implementation Manual (PIM) in form and substance satisfactory to the Association, for the purpose o f implementing the regional and national windows o f the scheme; (iii) opening a DesignatedAccount by C O M F and each country in a local Bank satisfactory to the Association and under terms and conditions satisfactory to IDA; (iv) duly approval of subsidiary agreements in form and substance satisfactory to IDA between COR4.F and each participating country to provide 20 percent o fIDA credit to C O W . 3. SummaryProjectDescription 4. The development objective o f the project (first phase o f the support program to the WA4PP) i s to generate and disseminate improved technologies in the participating countries' top priority areas, as identified by C O W . The project will be implemented through four operational components: (i) Component 1: EnablingConditionsfor Regional Cooperation in TGD (US$5.3 million, IDA: US$4.4 million). This aims at strengthening the mechanisms and procedures governing the registration and release o f technology products (genetic materials, pesticides and other crop protection products--CPP) to make them available for domestic and cross-border trade and distribution. (ii)Component 2: National Centers of Specialization (US$22.5 million, IDA: US$20.5 million). This aims at strengthening the alignment o f national priorities with regional priorities within participant countries' national agricultural research systems (NARS). (iii)Component 3: Funding of Demand-DrivenTechnology Generation and Adoption (US$16.8 million; IDA: US$15.7 million). This aims at strengthening priority-focused, transparent hnding mechanisms for demand-driven agricultural R&D withinparticipatingcountries and at regional level. (iv) Component4: Project Coordination,Management,Monitoringand Evaluation (US$4.9 million; IDA: US$4.4 million). This aims at establishing an effective coordination, management andM&E system at the national and regional levels. 4. Countryissues,RiskAssessment andMitigation 4.1 Ghana 5. A Country Financial Accountability Assessment (CFAA) for Ghana was carried out in 2001 and updated in 2004. In response to the findings and recommendations of the CFAA, the Government o f Ghana has initiated, and in some cases already implemented, several reforms. These include the promulgation o f the following pieces o f legislation: - 49 - 0 Financial Administration Act 2003, to bring together all aspects of public financial management; 0 The Internal Audit Agency Act 2003 to set up modem internal audit in all government departments; 0 The Public Procurement Act, to improve the efficiency of public procurement systems and practices. 6. The passing ofthe legislationis but the first step; successful implementation thereof typically takes more time, and requires strong and committed leadership. To date, Ghana has beenblessed with the necessary commitment, and implementationprogress is impressiveto date. 7. The summaryrisk analysis is based onthe existingAgSSIP andCSIR structures. Risk Risk RiskMitigating Conditions of Remarks Rating Measures incorporated Negotiations, into the Project Design Board or Effectiveness (Yes or No) Inherent Risk Country Level No significant risk identified. EntityLevel M I II N N N o significant risk identified. ProgramLevel While AgSSIP may be closing inits present format, a follow on project i s underpreparation, and the managing structure i s already mainstreamed. Control Risk Budgeting Managing unit already successfully concluding an existingbank project. Accounting M N Ditto Internal Control M N Ditto FundsFlow M N Ditto Financial ReDorting M I IN Ditto Auditing M I IN Ditto 8. In view of the general country financial management issues and the issues peculiar to the WAAPP, the overall financial management risk rating for the Ghana window of this project is Modest. - 50 - 4.1 Senegal 9. The Country Financial Accountability Assessment (CFAA) o f Senegal was conducted in 2003. The overall risk rating o f the public financial management system was high. Since that exercise, the Government has created an Executive Secretariat under the Ministry o f Economy and Finance to monitor the implementation o f the CFAA action plan. The recent HIPC Country Assessment and Action Plan by the Bank and the IMF in November 2004 showed significant improvements in the areas o f public expenditure tracking notably in the priority area defined in the PRSP, internal control and budget preparation. However, significant progress i s still needed ininternaland externalcontrols o fbudgetexecution and state-owned enterprises. 10. The government has given priority to improvements in these areas as well as local governance finance reforms. A Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) was set up to follow up on implementation o f the reforms. An IDF Grant to strengthen the capacity o f the Cow des Comptes (State Audit Office) i s also under implementation. A new Procurement Code has been finalized and is expected to be adopted by June 2007. Indialogue with external partners, the Government will conduct an assessment o f country fiduciary systems based on the Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) framework to track progress in strengthening public financial management and identify areas where country fiduciary systems are not yet in line with international standards. 11.The use o f the country system, notably the Treasury Department and the Cow des Comptes, will be implemented progressively. In the meantime, implementation of project will be coordinated by a Project Coordination Unit. In the WAAPP Framework the project will be coordinated bythe coordination unit o fthe PSAOP 2. Risk Risk RiskMitigating Measures Conditions of Remarks Rating incorporated into the Project Negotiations, Design Board or Effectiveness (Yes or No) Inherent Risk Country Level M The CFAA actionplan is under No A MDTFhas implementationand the beenset out for government has createdan the reforms Executive Secretariatto follow implementation purpose. EntityLevel M No The organizational structure i s appropriate. ProgramLevel S A PIMwill be adopted for the Yes This Manual will purpose o f implementingthe betailored to the regional and nationalwindows circumstances in o f the scheme. each country without lowering the overall standard. Control Risk Budgeting M Annual work plans will be N o - 51 - prepared and submitted to the Bank by November 30 o f each year. Accounting M The existing accounting Yes The WAAPP will software will be customized to rely on existing handle the implementation o f accounting the WAAPP. system and manual Internal M An Internal Auditor willbe No The Bank will Control recruited at CORAF's level. pay attention to the internal control system during supervision mission. Funds Flow S - Subsidiary agreements in Training o f staff form and substance satisfactory Yes on Bank's FM, to IDA will be duly conclude procurement and between CORAF and each disbursement participating country to procedures, will provide a percentage o f their be provided. -creditto CORAF. A DesignatedAccount will be opened by CORAF and each country ina local Bank satisfactory to the Association Yes and under terms and conditions satisfactory to IDA. Financial L The Bank will assist the PCU No Reporting and C O W indefining the format o fthe quarterly reports FinancialMonitoringReport (FMR), Auditing M An external Auditor with Yes experience and qualifications satisfactory to the Bank will be recruited. 12. Inview o f the general country financial management issues and the issues peculiar to the WAAPP, the overall financial management risk rating for C O W and the Senegal window of this project is Modest. 4.2 Mali 13. The overall conclusion o f the Mali Country Financial Accountability Assessment (CFAA) carried out in 2002 and completed in 2003 is that public finance management i s fairly coherent with relatively strong budget procedures implemented within a clear institutional setting with improved and strengthened control measures. It stresses that this reality should not hide malfunctions for which appropriate action should be taken. In essence, the CFAA shows that - 52 - significant progress has been made in the areas o f financial management. The country's own control systems are operatingmore efficiently despite a few weaknesses inproject supervision. 14.Various measures to mitigate these risks have been agreed upon thus, the project risk from a financial management perspective is considered moderate provided risk mitigating measures are properly addressed. Option has been made for financial management by the CNRA to ensure that timely information i s produced for the project management and government oversight, and facilitate compliance with IDA fiduciary requirement. RiskMitigating Rating Measures Negotiations, Board incorporated into or Effectiveness the Project Design Countrv Level I M EntityLevel IM Prom-amLevel ControlRisk I Budgeting I M Accounting M Internal Control Provisionhas been Lack o fresources for made under WAAPP to financing the internal finance the internal auditor function after M auditor after PASAOP the closing of closing date. PASAOP. FundsFlow H No counterpart No cash contribution is Delays inthe fundis required. requiredbut the mobilization o f Government counterpart funds contribution will consist P intaxes exemption. Financial Reporting CNRA is familiar with FMR. Under PASAOP CNRA has submitted L and acceptable FMR and inJune 2006, disbursement was based on this FMR. Therefore Report based disbursement will be used at the beginning o f the woiect. Auditing H Audit will be Yes The quality of the carried out by an audit performedby external private the S A I may be weak audit firm and reports may not be receivedon time. - 53 - 15. Inview o f the general country financial management issues and the issues peculiar to the In view o f the general country financial management issues and the issues peculiar to the project, the overall financial management riskrating for the Mali window of the WAAPP i s Modest. 16. Overall, due to the measurestaken andbased on the experiences of the implementing agency, the fiduciary riskfor the projectis Modest 5. Strengths 17. As part o f the project implementation manual, the financial procedures will ensure a robust internal control arrangement for the Project, and to facilitate the harmonization o f financial reporting by each implementing agency. If necessary, this manual will be tailored to the circumstances in each country without lowering the overall standard. Also, a provision has been made under the WAAPP to finance the PIUs additional cost related to WAAPP implementation workload. 6. Weakness andAction Plan SignificantWeaknesses Action Responsible Completion Body Date CORAF Strengthen the FMstaff Recruitment of . C O W March2007 capacity a chief accountant, Recruitment of an Internal February 2008 Auditor, Recruitment of July 2007 a temporary procurement consultant (A detailedactionplanfor C O W is set out inAppendix 1 7. ImplementingEntity 18. The IDA-supported WAAPP will be implemented at the regional level by CORAF (ECOWAS' mandated implementing agency) and at the national levels by the national coordination units o f MOFA in Ghana, the PASAOP inMali and the PSAOP 2 in Senegal. The fiduciary arrangements of the national implementing agencies, which operate under on-going part o f on-going IDA-financed operations, hlly meet IDA'Sminimumrequirement under OPBP 10.02 Financial Management. 8. Budgeting 19. The Project Implementation Manual will describe the budgeting process for the overall project. However this process will be adapted so as to rely on the existing budget procedure in each participating country. - 54 - f -- Country BudgetingArrangements Senegal Thc TC'FU ot'thc I'SXOf'2 w i l l consolidate the project budget aticr thc submission 20. The current ~ c c o u n t ~standards in use in each p a ~ ~ c i p a tcountr~for o n - ~ o j nBank- n ~ i n ~ ~ ~ n a ~ ~project will be a p ~ ~ ~ c a Sl e~. c e d ~ ~ ~ isUthe~assigned acco~iti~igsystem in GVest A ~ A Arrican F r a ~ ~ ~ u ~ h~uun~r~es.is already applica~Iein Senegal and Mali. The accepted o n c It national acco~ntings t ~ d a ~ dinsGhana will also by a ~ ~ ~ i c a bIDA ~ e .Credit will be accounted for by the project.on a cash or accrual basis. This will be doc~men~edwith a~propriat~records and pro~e~ure5 track conim~~~ieand~sto safe~uardassets. account in^ records will be to n ~ ~ a i ~in~local~c ~~r r~e ni ce~The Chart of a c c o ~ ~wilts facil~tatethe p r e ~ ~ aof~r eo ~~~ ~ a n t ~ .d i ~ t ~ ~ aand~ ~ nea n~~~i lat ~a~~ ~ incIuding ti n ~ o ~ i a tono ~ n ~ e ~ i the total projcct exp~nd~t~ire5, the ~ n a n c i acont~ibutionfrom IDA and ~ ~ ~ e n d i t byr ec o ~ p o n e ~ ~ c a t e gAnnual Fi~ancial ~ u o ~ . statements will Be prepared in accordance with I ~ ~ e ~ a t ~Ao n c acl ~ ~Sta~dardsissuedby the ~ t ~ n ~ I n t ~ ~ ~ a t ~ eo dn ea ~ a of~Accoun~a~i~s ~ o n (IFAC). 21. The existing a c c o ~ n t ~~n o ~ ~ willa beea ~ a ~ t cind order to allow prod~ctionof all ~ ~ r a c c u u n ~ ~and~~nancia1data ~ e ~ u i ~Financial ~t~~ement, reconcilia~~on n : e d Bank sta~e~ents, all the books of accounts and aft ~ n a ~ i c reports ~ ~ i c l thed ~nt~rimn - a ~ d ~~t ei nd a ~ c ~ a l ~ a l ~ ~ n ~ ~ Repotts ~ I ~ ~ ~ . A c c procedures~will be d o c ~ m ~ ~ int thed ina an cia^ and Acco~nting o u n t ~ ~ ~ e manualofeach PIU. IO, Internal Cantrol and ~ ~ t e A~djting ~ n a ~ 22. As pari of tho:projcct ~ ~ p ~ e m e n t amanual, the ~ n a n c ~naila n a g c ~ e ~ ~ ~ i o n proc~d~~rese ~ t i ~ ~ ~ up a h a ~ o n ~ f~r ea ~ e ~ ~willkbe used a5 a robust internal control tool for the Project. The d o r PIUSare staffed with ~ducjaryteams who are fani~liarwith Bank proced~re~. p r o ~ ~ i has ~ nA 5 ~ been made under tho: WA4APP to ~nancethe PTUs a d d ~ ~ ~ ocost~related to GVAAP n a ~ ~ ~ p ~ e ~ ~workload.t ~ u n c ~ i t a 23. ~ p c c i ~ c a lCORAF's FMstaff will be trainedon Bank FM, d j s b u r ~ e and~ ~ ~ y , ~ e procedures. Also, the r e c ~ j ~o~f an ~ t e Internal Auditor at the r e ~ j o ~entity level a l meetthe overall project ~ n lcontrol~o b j~~ ci~ i ~~e s~. ~ 11. FundsFlaw and ~ j A ~ r sa ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ s ~ ~ 24. The Bank \vi11 enter into ~ ~ ia ~~r ~ ~e m~e each onf the~three ~ a ~ ~ c~ jop~a~~t ~~ ~~ ~ s with ~j~ ~ e ent with CURAF. ~ ~ c e ofdthe IDA ~ n a n (Le., ~ 5 c ~ tlS$f.O~ ~ ~ r a total of ZrS53.Q m will bo: made available to CURAF under ~ ~ ~ ~project a~~ rae ermye nbetween each o f the c o u n t ~ ~and~COMF. The balance o f IDA ~ d ~ ~ e - 55 ." financing will support the establishment o f Centers o f specialization (COS) with regional focus, a national window o f CARGS (Competitive Agricultural Research Grant System), and other activities insupport o fresearch-extension-farmer linkages to encourage technology take up. 25. The transfer o f funds to CORAF will be made annually by the three countries using report based disbursements and annual work programs. After the initial advance to the designated account, CORAF will submit to IDA a consolidated IFR for the entire year for the deposit o f subsequent advances. Meanwhile, CORAF will submit IFRs for FMreview on a quarterly basis for monitoring purposes. FMS would thus help ensure that : (i) CORAF's financial situation i s on track and (ii) consolidated report i s acceptable to the Bank at year end, for disbursement the purposes. CORAF will provide the participating countries with a reporting package including annual activity report, financial statement and audit report, all approved by the General Assembly o f CORAF (Appendix 2). A provision will be included in the subsidiary project agreement, so that each participating country could suspend its contribution in case CORAF doesn't fulfill its duties. 26. The implementingagency with satisfactory capacity will manage their funds directly through a Management Services Contract. This contract will be signed between the Coordination Unit and each implementing agency. Funds will be withdrawn from the Designated Account following the disbursement and financial management provisions o f the management service's contract. The submission o f satisfactory IFRs may be used as payment triggers under the contract. 11.2. DesignatedAccounts 27. To facilitate project implementation and reduce the volume o f withdrawal applications, it was agreed during negotiations that two designated accounts will be authorized under each financing agreement, one in the country and the second at CORAF. Senegal's Designated Account will be opened at PSAOP 2, which will sign a "Convention Cadre" with the implementingagency, FNRAA, under the arrangements reached under the PSAOP 2, which is that FNRAA receives quarterly allocations. In following with the current arrangements under the current PASAOP, Mali will open its Designated Account at CNRA, which will sign contract services' contracts with research institutes. Ghana selected to open its Designated Account at MOFA, which will sign a Memorandum o f Understanding with the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), the implementing agency. 28. The CORAF designated account will be established in a Commercial Bank acceptable to IDA. CORAF will manage a Pooled Account in which the countries' initial advance will be transferred, based on CORAF's work plan. For subsequent yearly advances, a consolidated Financial Report in a format agreed with the Bank will be submitted, together with the withdrawal applications, to the Bank and to each participating country's coordination unit. This will allow CORAF to have sufficient funds to carry out activities. CORAF will produce quarterlyprogress reports to the participating countries' coordination units andthe Association. 29. The list o f categories o f expenditures in each country will indicate "support to CORAF" against which disbursement will be made. All others categories o f expenditures will finance goods, works and services under designated accounts managed by PASAOP inMali and Senegal and MOFA in Ghana. A list o f the category o f expenditure for CORAF's activities will be included in each financing agreement for CORAF expenditures for the three countries combine, andnot by country. - 56 - Accounts Advance CeiIing ____ funds Flow of A Dcsigr~ated Account in FCFA nts under the three separate A ~ e s ~ ~ ~ a ~ e d A c c ~ u n ~USD in disbur~em~n~beusedp ~ ~ ~ a ~ j ~ y will will beopened in becauseof the ~ a n nar~re~ ~ a of the an accept~bl~ acc*untin~system. F~~~rision for ~ o ~ m e r Bankl c j ~ c o n ~ f ~ rto~reponbasedcanbe i o ~ in Accra and atl~~ed,basedon c~n~pu~er~zat~on mana~~d by progress andability to ~ c n e r ~ ~ c MOFA. seliabie forecasts and i ~ ~ e ~ m Senegat FCFA 700 miliions Inretally, ~ a n s a c ~ ~ ~ n - ~ ~ ~ c d di~bur~e~en~s will bemade. Once the rcyuzredca~act~}r bccn has certified, the ~oordina~~onunit wilt submit intcnrn~nanci~l reports to IDA. - Mali FCFA 700 rnillioris Reportbaseddisburs d. Fundwtll flow from t account on the project 32. ~ ~ s b ~ ~ s e ~underethet $threc Financing A ~ ~ ~ ~wifl e nmades on thc basis of sta~dard ~ i n ~ be t ~ ~ ~ h d categories ~(goods, works and services). ~ a ~ ~ a l For ~ ~ o n ~ z apurposeso the ~ ~ n ~ i s b ~ i r $~~e ~ncie~n~t a~~ e s will be set at 100%~ e x c ~ v~~d~ ~ e~-~a tax).e dFor o ~ e r a t costs, ~g d ~ n ~ 100% of e~pendi~uresinclusive of taxes will be ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~a ~o~~en e e~i forndthes ,~ e~ ~e three countries (Le. same ~ ~ ~ pcrccntages and category d e ~ c ~ p wilt oaciIitate the ~ n c ~ ~ g t ~ ~ ~ overall process. 33. The o l ~ o ~tables gsets out, for each p ~ ~ ~ c i pcountry,~ the c ~ ~ e ~ oof~items to be v ~ ~ a ~ i g r e s financed out of the proceeds of the credit, the a ~ ~ o ~ofa the i a~ ~~ oi ~of~ creditttos each ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ e ~ and ythe, perc~n~age c ~ p e n ~ ~foruitemss to bc ~nanccdin each category. A11 o ~ of ~ r ~ .- CategoriesI IDA CreditAllocated in000 LSis % ofexpenditureto befinanced iGhana I .Mali I Senegal 1L4, Use of SOEs - 58 - 36. All s ~ p ~ odoc i n n~~ a ~ ifar ~ o ~ ei ~ ~ e n d ~ tc~lrae is~ eunder corttrstets below the above ~ rn \vi11 bc retained at the project c o o r ~ i n a ~ ~ o ~ will bc made available for ~ e Bank~ reviews, supe ~ o ~ ~ s and project external ~ 37. The ~ o ~ ~ c~o n ~~ imu ~eofoeach~~ ~ r t i ccountry~wilt~benmobil t ~ i n ~ p ~ ~ in form of fiscal re~'e~iue~, consistsof tax e x ~ ~ p ~onothe overall cred This i n 12, F ~ ~~~~~~t~~~ ~ a ~ j ~ ~ F as viFeflas each c ~ ~ n&~~ or r~~ i~n s project ~ ~ ~ i a ~ oc n~~at~o rReport (F n i n ~ 1 in the acix of finance, procurc~~enti n c l ~ ~ d ~ n ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ i afromtb~dders,and project physical progress. These FMR should be s ~ b ~ totthe~ ~ i n s i t Bank within 45 days ~ o l ~ o wthe ~ ~ nendso f the quarter. 13. A ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ g 39. d dependent ~ x ~ Auditors awith~~ualificatio~and exper~encesa~isfaeto~to the Bank will e ~ conduct an annual audit of the project's financial state~entsprepared by 6 0 M F and each c o ~ n coordi~~a~ion t ~ unit. This audit s~iouldbe carried out in accordance with ~ n t ~ ~ a t j o n a ~ S ~ a onnA ~~d ~~ (ISA) iissued by the Inte~ational~ e d ~ r a tof vA~ctc a ~ ~ i(IFAC),t sand t i~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ will include suchtests and controls as the auditor eonsidcrs necessary underthe c ~ r c u m s ~ ~ c e s . 40. In addition to the audit report, the auditors will be expected to prepare reports on internal controls ~ ~ i a n ~ ~ letters)egiving o b ~ e ~ a ~ i oarid e o n t ~ e ~ t ~ass "welt as providing e ~ n ~ t n s r c c ~ r n ~ ~ ~ ~i ~diipxr o~~i r~~in a~coun~ingrecords, systems, controls and cornplianc~with for ~ c~n t Enancial co~~nants the ~ ~ n a n cA~ a~le ~ ~ iof nthe Bank. The auditor reports should be in e t ~ u ~ ~ sto e dBank within six ~ ~ n tafter the closing of each fiscal year. h the h s 41, Terns o f Reference (TOR) wilt be pre~aredfor the a p p o ~ ~ ~oft the~external auditor tvho ~ n t meets the Bank's criteria for selection o f cons~lt~ng fimi. The selection process of the auditor ducted by a ~ e ~ e ~ t~j o n o acceptable to the~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e - 59 .. 14. Conditionality Effectivenessconditions e The Project Implementation Manual (PIM), in form and substance satisfactory to the Association, has been adopted by CORAF and the PIU for the purpose o f implementing the regional andnationalcomponents ofthe Project. e CORAF and the PIUs have adapted their accounting software to cover the implementation o f the Project. e A Subsidiary agreement in form and substance satisfactory to the Association has been duly concludedbetweenCORAF andeach participating country to provide US$l million o f IDAcredit to CORAF. e A management service contract, in form and substance satisfactory to IDA, has been entered into between the Recipient and each entity that will be responsible for the implementation o f the Project at the national level.. 15. SupervisionPlan 42. CORAF and the national coordination units will be subject to periodic supervision missions (at least once per year). Supervision activities will include review o f quarterlyFMRs; review o f annual audited financial statements as well as timely follow-up of issues arising; transaction review; participation inproject supervision missions as appropriate; and updating the FM rating inthe ImplementationStatusReport(ISR). - 60 - Appendix 1:Action Planfor CORAF Action Tasks Entity Target CompletionDate 1. Recruitment of an external . Recruitment o f an external auditor CORAF March, 2008 auditor 2. Staffing Recruitment of a chief accountant CORAF March2007 0 Recruitment of an internal auditor (WithBank February 2008 Review and No objection) 3. Accounting Training o f the FM Team for an optimal CORAF July 2007 software use of the existing accounting software (TOMPRO) 4. Updating of the Updating o f procedures manual CORAF March2007 existing administrative, accounting and financial manual 5. Procurement 0 Recruitment of a consultant CORAF July 2007 satisfactory to IDA (With Bank Review and No objection) - 61 - ;.........: .................................. ..::Iii .i. ...................................... 'Ee M i g : @ f ....... \ . C . ........ . ......... ..........: i Y ..*.*. '".; zE a2.5 : M i L i ; ......: ..... i . . I '%. ;i g8 if Y ; pi I : w : s : :: M :.Y : .-e ii g i P .-E 2 .i;sg .i . 1 d ; v : V I s.....: .... 43 ........ a*.. b ....... I... ............. ...... :;s* ........... Annex 8: ProcurementArrangements AFRICA: West AfricaAgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) Support Project A. General Background-Nationalprocurementsystemand ongoing reforms 1. The last version o f Senegal's Procurement Code refers to the decree No2002-550 and is dated 2002. A new public procurement code was prepared a on the basis a national action plan prepared in the context o f the Country Procurement Assessment Review (CPAR) carried out from September 2002 to March 2003. This new code has been prepared with the assistance of the Bank and was adopted by the Government in March 16, 2006. The Bank reviewedthe code and found that the existing procurement rules include appropriate provisions. But no standard bidding documents are available. The action plan put in place is under implementation and includes the following: (i)decentralization o f procurement responsibilities to line ministries, local government and public entities; and (ii) setting up a legal framework for delegation of project management to private firms. So far, no special exceptions, permits, or licenses need to be specified in the Financial Agreement for International Competitive Bidding (ICB), since Senegal's procurement practices allow the Bank procedures to take precedence over any contrary provisions inlocal regulations. 2. Ingeneral, Senegal's procurement laws and regulations do not importantly conflict with IDA guidelines because it contains only a few special exceptions and Senegal's procurement practices allow IDA procedures to take precedent over any contrary provisions in local regulations. The said exceptions (clauses not partially or entirely applicable for a contract in a Bank financed project) which are annexed to this document will be specified inthe credit documents. 3. The Malian Procurement Code i s regulated by the Decree no95-401P-RM o f November loth, 1995. This code was reviewedin 1999 with IDA assistance, and an amendment was made under the Decree no 99-292P-RM o f September 21, 1999. In general, the country's procurement procedures do not conflict with the Bank guidelines. N o special permits or licenses need to be specified in the credit documents, since Mali procurement practices allow IDA procedures to take precedence over any contrary local regulation or practice. 4. A Country Procurement Assessment Review (CPAR) carried out inMali in December 1998 has been updated in 2004, and the final report have been delivered to the government o f Mali in January 2006: the recommendations and action plan o f this exercise (capacity building, institutional reinforcement through a regulatory body, an appeal body, strengthening o f the private sector, judiciary reinforcement, etc.) will be taken into consideration during project implementation, andthe project executionwill benefit from these recommendations. 5. Procurement for the proposed project would be carried out in accordance with the World Bank's "Guidelines: Procurement Under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits" dated M a y 2004; and "Guidelines: Selection and Employment o f Consultants by World Bank Borrowers" dated May 2004, (additionally, in Ghana, the provisions o f the Ghana Public Procurement Act 663 Of2003) and the provisions stipulated in the Legal Agreement. All contracts will be procured in accordance with the legal agreement, the Bank's procurement guidelines and the procurement - 63 - plans. The local procurement acts apply to the extent provided in and subject to the above documents. 6. The various items under different expenditure categories are described in general below. For each contract to be financed by the Credit, the different procurement methods or consultant selection methods, the need for pre-qualification, estimated costs, prior review requirements, and time frame are agreed between the Borrower and the Bank in the Procurement Plan. The Procurement Plan will be updated at least annually or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements ininstitutional capacity. Advertising 7. A General Procurement Notice (GPN) will be prepared and published in United Nations Development Business (UNDB), in Development Gateway (dgMarket) and in at least one national newspaper after the project i s approved by the Bank Board, and/or before effectiveness. The GPN would show all International Competitive Bidding for works and goods contracts and all consulting services involving international firms. Specific Procurement Notices for all goods and works to be procured under ICB and Expressions o f Interest for all consulting services to cost the equivalent o f US$200,000 and above would also be published in the UNDB, dgMarket as well as inthe national press. (a) Procurementof Works 8. Works procured under this project would include: 9. Procurement will be conducted usingthe Bank's Standard BiddingDocuments (SBD) for all ICB andNational SBD agreed with or satisfactory to the Bank for National Competitive Bidding (NCB) and contracts advertised locally. Civil works contracts costing: US$500,000 equivalent or more per contract will be procured through International Competitive Bidding (ICB). Civil works contracts costing less than US$500,000 equivalent per contract will be procured through N C B procedures acceptable to IDA and ensuring the following: (i) the bidding documents shall provide clear instructions on how bids should be submitted, how prices should be offered, and the place and time for submission o f bids (ii) bids are advertised in national news paper with wide circulation; (iii) proceduresshallprovideforadequatecompetitioninordertoensurereasonable The prices, and methods used in the evaluation o f bids and the award o f contracts shall be objective and made known to all bidders in the bidding documents and not be applied arbitrarily: the contract i s awarded to the lowest evaluated bidder provided this one is qualified (iv) bidders are given adequate response time (minimumfour weeks) to prepare and submit bids; (v) if foreign bidders wish to participate, they are not precluded from participating; (vi) no preference margin i s granted to domestic contractors; and (vii) the procedures shall also include public opening o f bids, publication o f results o f evaluation and o f the award o f contract and provisions for bidders to protest; US$50,000 may be awarded based on Shopping procedures, obtained from at least three qualified local contractors inresponse to a written invitation stating description o f works, includingbasic specifications and the required completion time. - 64 - (b) Procurementof Goods: 10.Procurement will be conducted usingthe Bank's SBD for all ICB and National SBD agreed with or satisfactory to the Bank. Goods contracts costing 0 US$250,000 equivalent or more per contract will be procured under ICB. Contracts which meet the requirement o f paragraph 3.2 o f the Procurement Guidelines, may be procured through LimitedCompetitive Bidding. Contracts costing less than US$250,000 equivalent will be procured through N C B procedures acceptable to IDA and ensuring the following: (i) bidding documents shall provide clear instructions on how bids should the be submitted, how prices should be offered, and the place andtime for submission o fbids (ii) areadvertisedinnationalnewspaperwithwidecirculation;(iii) procedures bids The shall provide for adequate competition in order to ensure reasonable prices, and methods used in the evaluation o f bids and the award o f contracts shall be objective and made knownto all bidders inthe biddingdocuments and not be applied arbitrarily: the contract i s awarded to the lowest evaluated bidder provided this one i s qualified (iv) bidders are given adequate response time (minimum four weeks) to prepare and submit bids; (v) if foreign bidders wish to participate, they are not precluded from participating; (vi) no preference margin i s granted to domestic contractors; and (vii) the procedures shall also include public opening o f bids, publication o f results o f evaluation and o f the award o f contract andprovisions for bidders to protest; 0 Procurement for readily available off-the-shelf goods that cannot be grouped, or standard specification commodities may be procured under Shopping procedures as detailed in paragraph 3.5 and 3.6 o f the "Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits," dated May 2004, and the June 9, 2000 Memorandum "Guidance on Shopping" issued by the Bank. (c) Procurement of non-consultingservices under this project will includeservices such as transport, insurance,operationandmaintenance,etc. 11,Given the small amount o f such contracts, procurement will follow Shopping procedures when they are estimated at less than the equivalent value o f US$50,000; all contracts above this amount will follow N C B procedures, when applicable, usingacceptable SBDs. (d) Selectionandemploymentof Consultants 12.Consultancy services and training will include various advisory services, studies including engineering and design studies, construction supervision, training and technical assistance in financial management, procurement, 13. The procurement plan will indicate for each contract the most adequate selection method to be used. Ineach ofthe three countries, short lists ofconsultants for services estimated to cost less than US$lOO,OOO equivalent per contract may be composed entirely o f national consultants in accordance with the provisions o f paragraph 2.7 o f the Consultant Guidelines. - 65 - 0 Consultant services estimated to cost less than the equivalent o f US$50,000 may be contracted through Selection Based on Consultants' Qualifications (CQS) provided the assignment meets the requirements o fparagraph 3-7 of the Consultants' Guidelines. 0 Consulting services o f individual consultants (IC) will be procured under individual contracts inaccordance with the provisions o fparagraphs 5.1 to 5.3 o fthe Guidelines. (e) Operating Costs 14. The type o f operating cost that shall be financed by the project have been defined and agreed during appraisal and reflected inthe final version o f the Cost tables. The procurement methods to be followed are similar to those described inthe section onprocurement o f goods. B. Assessment of the agency's capacity to implement procurement 15. The IDA-funded project in support to the WAAPP will be implemented at the regional level by CORAF (ECOWAS' mandated implementing agency) and at the national levels by the national coordination units o f the AgSSIP in Ghana, the PASAOP in Mali and the PSAOP 2 in Senegal. 16. In each country, the coordination unit is located at the Ministry o f Agriculture with the following key responsibilities: coordination, management o f IDA credit, procurement, and overall project's monitoring and evaluation and reporting. All three countries also operate a CARGS scheme: by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) in Ghana; the Conseil National de la Recherche Agricole (CNRA) in Mali; and the Fonds National de Recherches Agricoles et Agro-alimentaires (FNRAA) in Senegal. These countries have separate extension services but also a framework that brings together producer organizations, research institutions, the private sector and civil society to identify and act on priorities related to agricultural research and development. 17. Procurement activities will be carried out: 0 At the Regional level by CORAF, through its Dakar-based Executive Secretariat (ES) which will assume overall coordination o f the WAAPP, with FARA playing an advisory role (as assigned by the AUNEPAD). CORAF's Executive Secretariat'* comprises the following staff Executive Secretary, Scientific Coordinator, Administrative and Financial Manager, Information and Communication Manager, Coordinator o f the Sub- regional Cereal Network, and Impact Assessment Officer on agricultural research. CORAF's procurement function i s not staffed. The recommends the selection o f a qualified and experienced consultant to assist C O W in the handling o f procurement activities and advise on all procurement matters. 0 At the National level for each of the three countries by Ghana's AgSSIP, Mali's and Senegal's PSAOP, which have similar institutional arrangements that include: (i)a steering committee, (ii) a national coordination unit, and (iii) implementing agency one for their research and development component. Under Senegal's PSAOP, procurement i s handledby one procurement specialist inPSAOP's coordination unit and one assistant at each o f the implementing agencies o f the research and development component: FNRAA ''CORAF's governanceincludes a GeneralAssembly (GA), Governing Council(EC), Scientific andTechnical Committee (STC), andthe ExecutiveSecretariat(ES). - 66 - and the Senegalese Institute o f Agronomic Research (ISM). In Ghana, procurement under the AgSSlP is managed by a team o f three qualified procurement specialists and supporting staff with experience in IDA financed procurement. This same staff i s in place to process procurement under this program. Capacity assessment 18. An assessment o f the capacity o f the Implementing Agency to implement procurement actions for the project has been carried out by Bourama Diaite, Sr Procurement Specialist in Dakar Country Office on February 2nd,2007; in Accra, Ghana, by Tsri Apronti, Procurement Specialist on February 07, 2007; and in Mali by Cheick TraorC, Sr. Procurement Specialist on February 7, 2007. The assessment indicates that there should be no major procurement problems, since there i s no standardbiddingdocument or request for proposals. CORAF and the national teams will always use the World Bank procurement procedures regardless o f the type of contract or its amount. The assessment reviewed the organizational structure for implementing the project; the finding and recommendations are summarized below. (a) At Regionallevel(CORAF) 19. The recruitment o f a qualified and experienced consultant for procurement activities will be needed before the project becomes effective; a competitive recruitment process will be finalized and a simplifiedcapacity evaluationwill be conducted to determine whether all conditions are in place for procurement in compliance with World Bank procedures. These conditions will be an important part o fthe TOR before beginningthe selection process and the contracts signature. 20. The Procurement Specialist role will include all procurement matters andparticularly: (a) the preparation and updating o f the procurement plan for the project; (b) the monitoring o f the progress inthe implementation o f the procurement plan; (c) the assistance to the team inthe bid opening and evaluation process, to avoid delays and ensure compliance with the guidelines; and (d) providing advisory services inall procurement matters. (b) At the nationallevel 21. The core staff in each country will include a Procurement Specialist familiar with World Bank procurement procedures. This specialist should not report to the person in charge of payments or implementing the contracts. 22. In Ghana, procurement under the Agricultural Sub-sector Investment Program (AgSSIP) i s managed by a team o f three qualified procurement specialists and supporting staff with experience in IDA financed procurement. This same staff i s in place to process procurement under thisprogram. 23. Regarding Senegal, past experience from Public Procurement Reforms (PPRs) and supervision missions have shown that the Procurement Specialist in place in PSAOP2 and the procurement assistants in I S M and FNR4A have had significant experience with World Bank procedures and i s comfortable applying them. The primary recommendations to reinforce and improve the situation are the following: - 67 - 0 The procurement specialist should be timely informed on all procurement matters so as to react quickly whenever needed; he will be associated in drafting o f all procurement documents which are to be sent to the Bank; 0 The procurement specialist will provide quality control on all procurement issues, including those who are not subject to prior approval by the Bank. 24. This means, therefore, that the TOR and technical specifications are prepared by the component responsible for its implementation. This should be done in a timely manner and, in fact, needs to bepart o fthe annual procurement plan. 25. InMali, the implementing agency o f the project is an existing one which i s implementing the PASAOP (Agricultural Services and Producers' Organizations Project) under an IDA Credit of US$43.5 million. The Credit for the PASAOP may be closed at the end o f 2007, but a supplemental i s intended to be negotiated before the closing date, so that the credit would be extended. The execution agency o f the PASAOP includes a procurement unit staffed with a Procurement Specialist which i s familiar with the World Bank Procedures and he has followed procurement workshops in Mali and in Senegal (CESAG and ISADE Institutes). The procurement unit i s under the authority o f the Agency Coordinator, but it works closely with the Administrative and Financial Directorate (DAF) o f the Ministry o f Agriculture at the central level. The DAF is on an administrative point o f view, the responsible o f the procurement function on behalf o f the Ministry, according to the Malian Procurement Code. In general, the country's procurement procedures do not conflict with the Bank guidelines. No special permits or licenses need to be specified inthe credit documents, since Mali procurement practices allow IDAprocedures to take precedence over any contrary localregulationor practice Riskassessment 26. Most o f the issueshsks concerning the procurement activities for the project have been identified and include: 0 Insufficient responsibility o fthe procurement specialist on procurement matters; 0 Delays inpreparinghpdating procurement plans Delays in the submission o f technical specifications and terms o f reference from the beneficiaries; Insufficient procurement planning; Lack o f confidence o fthe private sector inthe procurement system; Insufficient coordination o f activities between the C O W andthe national teams; 27. The corrective measures that havebeen agreed upon are the following. Agree on clear terms o f reference for the procurement specialist (contract signature); grant h i d e r full responsibility for the quality o fprocurement documents andthe delays o f the process; and provide hider with office equipments and information technology tools inorder to modernize the filing system; Define and update regularly the procurement plan and follow it adequately so as to identify bottlenecks quickly and solve problems; Better coordination o f the project on the procurement side to avoid delaying procurement decisions and submission o f technical specifications andterms o f reference; - 68 - Strengthen capacity o f procurement unit through training, specifically on the Bank's procedures, within country and abroad; 0 Put focus on the capacity o f implementing agency not to be influenced at central level, in order to handle efficiently the procurement b c t i o n and ensuring full transparency and reliance; 0 Make CORAF's and country's procurement units share plan and provide them opportunity to interact, particularly inSenegal; 28. Inaddition, some recommendations to reinforce and improve this situation are listedbelow: The capacity of the procurement specialist inprocurement planningwill be reinforced so as to better survey the progress o f procurement activities and speed up the contract signature; Sub-project's beneficiaries will do their best to finalize on time the technical specifications for procurement o f goods and works and the terms o f reference for selection o f consultants so as to avoid delaying procurement; In addition to the prior review carried out according to threshold levels, focus during supervision missions on potential issues related to the procurement capacity o f the Implementing Agency. 29. The overall project risk for procurement is medium. C. ProcurementPlan 30. At appraisal, the Borrowers (Ghana, Mali and Senegal) and the regional organization (CORAF) developed procurement plans for project implementation, which provide the basis for the procurement methods. The final planshave been agreed betweenthe Borrowers and CORAF and the Project Team on February 22 and were made available at MOFNAgSSIP coordination unit in Accra, Ghana, the PASAOP's coordination unit in Bamako, Mali; the PSAOP 2's coordination unit in Dakar, Senegal; and CORAF's Executive Secretariat, in Dakar, Senegal. They will also be available inthe project's databases andinthe Bank's external website. D. Frequencyof ProcurementSupervision 31. In addition to the prior review supervision to be carried out from Bank offices, the capacity assessment o f the Implementing Agency has recommended two supervision missions annually to visit the field to carry out post review o fprocurement actions. 32. The Borrower, at appraisal, developed a procurement plan for project implementation which provides the basis for the procurement methods. This plan has been agreed between the Borrower and the Project Team on February 22, 2007 and i s available at World Bank Ghana Office, Accra. It will also be available in the project's database and in the Bank's external website. The Procurement Plan will be updated inagreement with the Project Team annually or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in institutional capacity. - 69 - E. Detailsof the ProcurementArrangementsInvolvingInternationalCompetition For Ghana 1. Goods,Works, andNonConsultingServices (a) List of contract packages to be procured following ICB, N C B and direct contracting: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ref. Contract Estimated Procureme P-Q Domestic Review Expected Comments No. (Description) cost nt Preference by Bank Bid- Method (yedno) (Prior / Opening Post) Date 1 Vehicles 204,000 ICB No No Prior 05/08/08 (Various TDB) 2 Computersand 786,500 ICB No No Prior 05/18/08 other IT equipment 3 Laboratory 900,000 ICB No No Prior 06/01/08 Equipment 4 Office 70,000 Shopping No No Post To Be Furniture Determined (Various P D ) contracts) 5 Constr./Rehab. 606,000 NCB No No Post 02/08/08 (Various contracts) (b) ICB contracts estimated to cost above US$250,000 per contract and all direct contracting will be subject to prior review bythe Bank. 2. ConsultingServices (a) List of consulting assignments. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ref. Descriptionof Estimated Selection Review Expected Comments No. Assignment cost Method byBank Proposals (Prior / Submission Post) Date 1 ExternalAuditor 40,000 LCS Post 08/30/07 2 Civil Works 60,000 QCBS Post 05131/08 Supervision (Pre- and Post-Contract) 3 Studies 30,000 IC Post 05131/08 4 M&E 10,000 IC Post 11/01/07 (b) Consultancy services estimated to cost above US$lOO,OOO per contract and single source selection o f consultants (firms) for assignments estimated to cost above US$50,000 will be subject to prior review by the Bank. - 70 - (c) Short lists composed entirely o f national consultants: Short lists of consultants for services estimated to cost less than US$lOO,OOO equivalent per contract may be composed entirely of national consultants in accordance with the provisions o f paragraph 2.7 o f the Consultant Guidelines. - 71 - For Mali 1. Goods, Works, and NonConsulting Services Works 1 2 3 4 5 6 I 8 9 Ref. Contract Estimated Procure- P-Q Domesti Review Expected Comments No Description cost ment C by Bank submission (`000 US$) Method Preferen (prior/p date ce ost) (yedno) 1 Rehabilitation 820 ICB No Yes Prior 12/19/2007 of Research Centers 1 2 3 4 5 6 I 8 9 Ref. Contract Estimated Procure- P-Q Domestic Review Expected Comments No Description cost ment Preferenc by submission (`000 US$) Method e Bank date (yedno) (prior/p ost) 1 Vehicles 202 ICB No No Prior 08130107 2 Laboratory 410 ICBLIB No Yes Prior 10131107 equipment 3 Desktops, 400 ICB No Yes Prior 09/30/07 laptops 4 Other ITC 30 Shopping No No Post 08/01/07 equipment 5 Office 40 Shopping No No Post 07/10/07 furniture first step 6 Office 120 NCB No No Post 09/05/07 furniture second step 7 Office 20 Shopping No No Post 07117/07 equipments ICB: InternationalCompetitive Bidding Bidding- N/A: - LIB: Limited Competitive Bidding NCB: National Competitive - not applicable. Note: ICB contractsestimatedto cost the equivalent value of US$500,000 andUS$250,000 and above for works and goods contractrespectiveand all direct contractingwill be subject to prior review by the Bank.. - 72 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 I 8 9 Ref. Contract Estimated Procure- Preq Domestic Review Expected Comments No Description cost ment uali- Preferenc by subm. date (`000 US$) Method ficati e Bank on (yedno) (prior/p (Yes/ ost) no) 1 Repairs, 515 Shopping No No No 08101/07 maintenance, comm. supplies, others* -73 - 2. ConsultingServices (a) List of consulting assignments with short-list of international firms NationalRegistration EvaluationSystem 4 Others studies 50 IC Prior (Date*) 5 ExternalAudit 40 LCS Prior 12/12/07 6 Internal Auditor 10 IC Prior (Date*) LCS: Least Cost Selection; SS: Single source; IC: Selection of Individual Consultants (Date*): Annual programfor the coming year to be submitted on November of the current year (b) Consultancyservices estimated to cost equal or above US$lOO,OOO andUS$50,000 equivalent per contract for firms and individuals, and all Single Source selection of consultants will be subject to prior review by the Bank. (c) Short lists composed entirely o fnational consultants: Short lists of consultants for services estimated to cost less than US$lOO,OOO equivalent per contract may be composed entirely of national consultants inaccordance with the provisions ofparagraph 2.7 of the Consultant Guidelines. (d) Training abroad andin-country, workshops andstudy tours will be carried out on thebasis of approved annual programs that would identifythe nature of trainingstudy tours/workshops, institutions where trainingstudy tours/workshops would be conducted (selection of institutions andjustification thereof), duration of the trainingstudy toudworkshops, cost estimates and contents of the trainingstudy tours/workshops. - 74 - For Senegal 1. Goods, Works, and Non Consulting Services (a) List o f contract packages to be procured following I C B and direct contracting: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ref. Contract Estimated Procure Prequali Domestic Review Expected Comment No. (Description) cost ment fication Preferenc by Bank Bid- S (US$) Method (yeslno) e (Prior / Opening (yes/no) Post) Date 1 Laboratory 71.200 NCB No No Post 01/20/08 equipment review 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ref. Contract Estimated Procure Prequali Domestic No. (Description) cost ment fication Preferenc by Bank Bid- (US%) Method (yedno) e (yes/no) Post) Date 1 I Rehab. o f I 113.600 I NCB I No IINo Post II03/20/08 laboratory I I 2 Rehab (guest 126.200 NCB No No house) and construction (test areas) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ref. No. Descriptionof Estimated Selection Review Expected Comments Assignment cost Method by Bank Proposals (Prior / Submission Post) Date 1 External Audit 20.000 LCS Post 07/30/08 - 75 - For CORAF (Thresholdsfor Bank revieware similar to those for Senegal) 1. Goods, Works, andNonConsultingServices Goods 2. ConsultingServices - 76 - Annex 9: EconomicandFinancialAnalysis AFRICA: West Africa AgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) SupportProject 1. The agricultural research and development project is expected to generate many benefits, economic, social and environmental by providing market-driven improved technologies and knowledge that meets producers' needs, particularly smallholders who make up the bulk o f food producers in the region. The increased productivity increase in the region's top priority commodity sub-sectors will lead to agricultural and economic growth and inproducers' benefits inparticular, andwill contributeto poverty reduction. 2. A Bank Good Practice Note indicated that given the large share o f research and extension project resources allocated to institutional development, economic analysis o f the whole project is not be warranted and therefore economic analysis o f individual investments and their possible combinations within the project may be more appropriate. Bank standard practice also recommends an illustrative ex-post, rather than ex-ante quantification o f benefits and costs o f research and extension investments. Predicting and quantifying ex-ante economic costs and benefits o f research and extension activities i s problematic because it i s nearly impossible to anticipate with satisfaction the outcome o f these activities. The required data for an ex-ante analysis is either unavailable or unreliable. For example, there are difficulties in estimating farmer adoption rates o f technologies not yet available, and in linking cause (costs) and effect (outcomes) o f research and extension interventions. 3. The Good Practice Note recommended that during project preparation, economic analysis should focus on (a) retrospective technology adoption and impact studies to demonstrate that the current technology system has been productive in some areas, and (b) prospective technology case studies to demonstrate the potential for research and extension investments to produce good economic returns. Duringproject implementation, emphasis should be placed on establishing a system to incorporate economic analysis methods as a tool in research and extension evaluation, planning, and priority setting on anongoing basis. This requires the development o fcapacity for improved research and extension management and more attention to the collection o f baseline information andperformance indicators. 4. Ex-post analysis o f agricultural research and extension inmost countries reveals highreturns to these investments, ranging between 40-75 percent. An IFPRI's review13 o f 294 benefit-cost studies, reporting 1,858 estimates o f rates o f return to research and extension investments, shows average returns to research investments alone o f 88 percent, extension alone averaging 79 percent, and research and extension combined averaging 45 percent. In Sub-Saharan Africa, high rates o f returns on R&E are reported in Mali (maize), Zambia (maize); Kenya (maize); Uganda (maize, groundnuts, sesame, maize, beans, cassava, cooking bananas), and in Senegal (cotton). 5. Researchers in Ghana, Mali and Senegal have used the economic surplus method, a Best- Practice approach, to analyze the economic rate o f returns on R&E investment. The project will contribute to the building o f capacity, particularly among young researchers at universities and researchinstitutes, to conduct ex-post analysis o fR&D investments under the project. l3A Meta-Analysisof Rates of Returnto AgriculturalR&D"byAlston, Marra, Pardey,andWyatt (1999) - 77 - Annex 10: SafeguardPolicyIssues AFRICA: West Africa AgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) SupportProject Environmental and Social Considerations 1. From an environmental and social safeguard point o f view, the West Africa Agricultural Productivity Project (WAAPP) is a Category B project. That is, the environmental and social impacts o f the project, for the most part, are expected to be minimal, site specific and manageable to an accepted level. There are two Bank Safeguard policies applicable to the project. These include: Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01) and Pest Management (OP 4.09). At the PCN review meeting, it was agreed that this project would not trigger the Involuntary Resettlement Policy (OP 4.12), as no potential land acquisition or loss o f economic activity issues on the part of individuals or group o f individuals in project intervention zones were foreseen. 2. At the time o f the environmental and social assessment o f the project, the range, scale, locations and number o f technology generation and transfer sub-projects, as part o f the WAAPP initiatives were unknown. The difficulty inherent in defining what the real environmental and social impacts o f envisioned sub-projects are and determining what mitigation measures to put in place, requires the development o f an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF). In addition, it was determined, based on project envisioned activities leading, in particular, to diversification and intensification o f agriculture, that the Pest Management Policy (OP 4.09) i s triggered. This requiredthe development o fPest ManagementPlan (PMP). Potential Impacts 3. At the time o f the environmental and social assessment o f the project, the range, scale, locations and number o f technology generation and transfer sub-projects, as part of the WAAPP initiatives were unknown. The difficulty inherent in defining what the real environmental and social impacts o f envisioned sub-projects are and determining what mitigation measures to put in place, requires the development o f an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF). In addition, it was determined, based on project envisioned activities leading, in particular, to diversification and intensification o f agriculture, that the Pest Management Policy (OP 4.09) is triggered. This requiredthe development o fPest ManagementPlan (PMP). 4. The project's potential impacts include, but are not limitedto the following: Potential Environment & Health Impacts Soil erosion, loss o fbiodiversity both fauna and flora, due inpart to project activities and inpartto poachingand landconversioninresources areas, as aresult ofaccess. Extensive agriculture leading to deforestation o f ecosystems; Pesticidehorganic fertilizer residues resulting from agricultural intensification and diversification; Sedimentation o fwater bodies due to landclearing and poor rehabilitation o fborrow pits; Improper waste management; Elimination o f the natural enemies o f crop pests and consequent alteration o f biological pest control methods; - 78 - e Development o f pest resistance to pesticides, encouraging further increases in and reliance on chemical pesticides use; e Contamination o fthe soil and water bodies; e Uncontrolled import, sale anddistribution o fpesticides; and e Weak institutional capacity for pesticides management; e Lack o f integrated fight against crops enemies e Significant destruction o fnatural habitat e Soils salinisation, alkalisation and acidification e Undergroundwater pollution (fertilizers; pesticides, etc.) e Cattle contamination (by drenching) e Unsafe management o fpesticides containers e Nontargeted species destruction (by pesticides) e Increase o f water borne diseases increase e Soil trampling and compaction by cattle e Plants selective browsing (by cattle) e Wells and water points pollution (by the cattle) e Risks relatedto capacity deficiencies inbiotechnology andbio security 5. The ESMF formulated standards methods and procedures specifying how technological subprojects, whose location, number and scale are currently unknown, will systematically address environmental and social issues in the screening and categorization, sitting, design, implementation and monitoring phases. It includes: (i) systematization o f environmental and social impact assessment for all identified sub-projects before investment; and (ii)procedures for conducting sub-project-specific Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), be they Limited Environmental Impact Assessment (LEIA) or FullEnvironmental Impact Assessment (FEIA) as applicable. 6. The proposed PMP, on the other hand, addressed the concerns relating to the risks associated with potential increases in the use o f pesticides for agricultural production, intensification and diversification, increases in disease vector populations which would arise from irrigation schemes and made propositions to strengthen national capacities to implement mitigation measures designed to minimize the risks. The PMP, as part o f the implementation arrangements, also identifies national agencies and other partners that could play a vital role in the success o f the project. 7. Both the ESMF and FWF include institutional arrangements, outlining the roles and responsibilities for the various stakeholder groups involved ineach of the participating countries and at the national and regional levels, for screening, review and approval o f sub-projects, as well as implementation and monitoring o f their mitigation measures. Inview o f the somewhat limited institutional capacity to addressing project safeguard aspects adequately, the two safeguard instruments, together, include provisions to strengthening the capacity o f the various institutions and actors involved, as well as promoting coordination and synergy among the various sectors in attending to the potential environmental impacts. Together, these safeguard instruments,are considered both as a planningtool and a means for a harmonious integration of the project in its bio-physical and social environment and as a way to maximize positive effects on the same environment inthe sub-region. - 79 - 8. Both the ESMF and the PMP were submitted to ASPEN, the regional Safeguard Unit, and cleared for disclosure inthe three countries involved and at Bank InfoShop, prior to appraisal. Publicconsultationanddisclosure 9. The ESMF and PMP were prepared by Mbaye Mbengue Faye and Djibril Doucourk respectively, in fbll compliance with Bank and national safeguard policies, following a broad consultation framework, involving all relevant stakeholder groups, consistent with the approach adopted at project inception. This participatory approach will be carried on throughout implementation, supervision and evaluation o f the project. 10.Prior to disclosure in-country and at Bank InfoShop, a stakeholder workshop was organized by CORAF, the project implementationunit (PIU), involving relevant project stakeholder groups in public agencies in three countries involved, such as representatives from: Mali-PASAOP, Senegal-PSAOP and Ghana -AgSSIP and representatives o f national research institutes and extension services, professional organizations, farming organizations; civil society; and NGOs. This approach was utilized with the intention o f presenting the results o f the studies, fostering ownership and garnering input from these stakeholders in order to improve quality and soundness o f the o f the instruments. Recommendations from both ASPEN and stakeholders' workshop have been reflected in the final safeguard reports, prior to disclosure. These recommendations and relevant provisions from the two set o f safeguard instruments will be reflected inProject Implementation Manual (PIM). MonitoringandSupervisionof SafeguardPerformance 11. Successfbl implementation o f the project safeguard requirements and performance measurement requires regular monitoring and evaluation o f activities undertaken by the project to comply with national and Bank safeguard policies. This will also help ensure that implementation o f project safeguard measures are systematically carried out all through project lifespan. 12. To do so, the following indicators need to be measured, as part o f the project global monitoring plan: 0 Numbero fsub-projects screened on environmental and social safeguard grounds; 0 Numbero f subproject needingspecific ESIAS; 0 Numbero fEnvironment and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs) conducted; 0 Numbero f sub-projects with costed Environment Management Plans (EMPs); Number o f EMPs and/or Resettlement Action Plans (RAPS)implemented according to schedule; 0 Number/Frequencyo f Safeguard supervisionand annual project reviews undertaken; 0 Numbertraining programs carriedout for safeguard capacity strengthening; and Number o f institutions/organizations trained inaccording to specified measures identified inthe instruments. 13. In addition, bio-physical and social changes (both negative and positive) from the baseline - such as changes in quality ground and surface water; changes in biodiversity both flora and fauna; land resource management, improvements in agricultural activities - in the natural - 80 - environment in project intervention area should be measured, as part of the project global monitoringsystem. Safeguard Policies Triggered Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP/GP 4.01) [XI [I Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) [I [XI PestManagement (OP 4.09) [XI [I Cultural Property (OPN 11.03, being revised as OP 4.11) [I [XI Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) [I [XI Indigenous Peoples(OP 4.10) [I [XI Forests (OP/BP 4.36) [I [XI Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) [I [XI Projects inDisputedAreas (OP/BP/GP 7.60)* [I [XI Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP/GP 7.50) [I [XI - 81 - Annex 11: ProjectPreparationand Supervision AFRICA: West AfricaAgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) SupportProject Planned Actual PCNreview 07/28/2005 07/28/2005 Initial PID to PIC 10/30/2005 05/30/2006 InitialISDS to PIC 08/12/2005 05/22/2006 Appraisal 02/12/2007 02/12/2007 Negotiations 02/16/2007 02/16/2007 BoardiRVP approval 03/27/2007 Planneddate of effectiveness 06/26/2007 Planneddate o fmid-term review 12/15/2009 Plannedclosing:date 06/30/2012 Keyinstitutions responsiblefor preparation oftheproject: C O W (Conseil Ouest et CentreAfricain pour la Recherche et le Dbveloppement Agricoles), Dakar, Senegal Ministries of Agriculture inGhana, Mali and Senegal Bankstaff andconsultantswho worked ontheproject included: Name Title Unit Ismael Ouedraogo Sr. Agric. Economist (TTL) AFTS4 Yves-Coffi Prudencio Sr. Agricultural Specialist AFTS2 Agadiou Dama Ag. Services Sp. AFTS4 Manievel Sene RuralDev. Sp. AFTS4 Gayatri Acharya Sr. Economist AFTS4 PatienceMensah Sr. Agric. Economist AFTS4 ElHadj Amada Toure Sr. Agric. Economist AFTS4 Arnadou Konare Sr. Environmental Sp. AFTS2 Per Ryden Consultant ENV Desire Coquillat Consultant AFTS4 RosemaryCubbage Consultant AFTS4 Sossena Tassew LanguageProgram Assistant AFTS4 Virginie Vaselopulos LanguageProgram Assistant AFTS4 Marie-JeanneNdiaye LanguageProgram Assistant AFTS4 FilySissoko Sr. Financial Mgt. Sp. LCSFM Diop Saidou Consultant AFTFM Bourama Diaite Sr. Procurement Sp. AFTPC Eric Jean Yoboue Sr. Procurement Sp. AFTPC Tsri Apronti Procurement Sp. AFTPC Cheick Traore Sr. Procurement Sp. AFTPC Marie-Louise Ah-Keh ProcurementAnalyst AFTS3 Irene Xenakis Operations Adviser AFRVP BrightonMusungwa Sr. Financial Mgt. Sp. AFTFM Chiyo Kanda Sr. Operations Officer OPCIL Sidi MohamedBoubacar Lead Counsel LEGAF - 82 - Patrice Talla Takoukam Counsel LEGEN RenCeDesclaux Finance Officer LOAG2 Peerreviewers and advisers Marie-Helene Collion LeadAg. Services Specialist MNSSD Moctar Toure Consultant GEF EijaPehu Adviser ARD Subramaniam Janakiram Consultant SASAR ErikE.Fernandes Adviser ARD Jean-Paul Chausse Lead Specialist AFTS1 DavidNielson Senior Economist AFTS2 RenatoNardello Sr. Operations Officer AFTS4 Patrick Labaste LeadAgric. Economist AFTS4 PeterKristensen Sr. Environmental Sp. AFTS4 Christophe Crepin LeadEnvironmental Sp. AFTS4 Bank funds expendedto date on project preparation: 1. Bank resources: US$286,000 2. Trust funds: US$750,000 (PHRD Grant) 3. Total: US$1,036,000 EstimatedApproval and Supervision costs: 75. Remaining costs to approval: US$16,000 76. Estimated annual supervision cost: US$150,000 -83- Annex 12: Documentsinthe ProjectFile AFRICA: West Africa AgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) SupportProject Bonkoungou, Robert (January 2007), Rapport Prkliminaire de Mission (vulgarisation agricole et communication pour le dkveloppement), Programme de productivitk agricole en Afrique de l'Ouest, Rome :FAO/CP Eklu,Danielet Yamar Mbodj (June 2006), Etat de mise en euvre de 1'ECOWAP et perspectives pour l'annee 2007. IFPRI (November 2006). Regional Strategic Alternatives for Agricultural Led Growth and Poverty Reduction (Main text and Statistical Tables, Preliminary Report), Washington D.C.: IFPRI Simpson, Brent M. and Amadou Moustapha Beye, (October 2006), Project Preparation Support Mission: Report, Rome, FAO/CP. Xinshen Diao et al. (September 2006), Agricultural Growth Options in West Africa - A West Africa Multi-marketModel Analysis, Washington, D.C: FPRI - 84 - Annex 13: Statementof LoansandCredits AFRICA: West Africa AgriculturalProductivityProgram(WAAPP) SupportProject APPENDIX I: GHANA Differencebetween expectedand actual Original Amount inUS$ Millions disbursements ProjectID FY Purpose IBRD IDA SF GEF Cancel. Undisb. Orig. Frm. Rev'd PO93610 2007 YGH-eGhana SIL (FY07) 0.00 40.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.57 0.00 0.00 PO92986 2006 GH-EconomicManagementCB 0.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.24 1.48 0.00 GH-Multi-SectorHIV/AIDS M- - 0.00 20.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.10 2.67 0.00 PO88797 2006 SHAP (FY06) PO85006 2006 MSME Initiative 0.00 45.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.66 1.67 0.00 GH-ComBasedRuralDev 0.00 60.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.82 4.24 0.00 I I I I I I I I I I I - 85 - STATEMENT OF IFC's Held and DisbursedPortfolio InMillions ofUS Dollars GHANA Committed I I Approvals PendingCommitment Loan 1 Equity I Quasi I 1 Partic. I - 8 6 - APPENDIX I1 :MALI Difference between expected and actual Original Amount in US$ Millions disbursements I I I I I I I I I I STATEMENT OF IFC's HeldandDisbursedPortfolio InMillionsofUS Dollars MALI I I I Committed I Disbursed I IFC IFC FY Approval Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic. Loan Equity Quasi Partic. 1980 BHS 1.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 1999 Ciments du Sahel 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 1991 GTIDakar 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 Approvals PendingCommitment FY Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic. Approval Total pendingcommitment: - 87 - l l APPENDIX I11 SENEGAL Difference between expected and actual Original Amount in US$Millions disbursements I I I I - 88 - STATEMENT OF IFC's HeldandDisbursedPortfolio InMillionsofUS Dollars SENEGAL Committed Disbursed IFC IFC FY Approval Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic. Loan Equity Quasi Partic. 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 ApprovalsPendingCommitment FY Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic. Approval Total pendingcommitment: - 89 - Annex 14: Country at a Glance APPENDIX I: GHANA Sub- POVERTYand SOCIAL Saharan Low. ,$ Ghana Africa Income Developmentdiamond' 2005 Population,mid-year (millions) 22.1 741 2,353 GNI percapita (Atlas method, US$) 450 745 580 Lifeexpectancy GNI (Atlas method, US$billions) 10.0 552 1,364 Average annual growth, 199945 Population(%) 2.2 2.3 1.9 Laborforce (%) 2.5 2.3 2.3 GNI Gross per primar) Most recent estimate (latest year available, 199945) capita enrollmen1 PoveW (% ofpopulationbelownationalpovertyline) 40 Urbanpopulation(% of totalpopulation) 48 35 30 Lifeexpectancyat birth (years) 57 46 59 1 Infantmortality(par 1,000live bi!ths) 68 100 80 Child malnutriiion(% ofchildrenunder5) 22 29 39 Access to improvedwater source Accessto an improvedwater source (% ofpopulation) 75 56 75 Lneracy (% ofpopulation age 75+) 58 62 Gross primaryenrollment (% ofSChWl-aQepopulation) 08 93 104 - Male 90 99 110 Ghana Lowincome group Female 87 87 99 KEY ECONOMIC RATIOS and LONG-TERMTRENDS 1985 1995 2004 2005 GDP (US$ billions) 4.5 6.5 8.9 10.7 Gross capitalfonationiGDP 9.6 20.0 27.9 29.6 Exportsof goods and servicedGDP 10.7 24.5 34.5 30.4 Gross domestic savings/GDP 6.6 11.6 8.0 10.5 Gross nationalsavings/GDP 5.4 17.6 26.4 27.1 Currentaccount balanceiGDP -5.8 -2.4 -2.7 -7.1 InterestpaymentdGDP 0.7 0.9 0.7 Total debffGDP 49.8 85.1 79.3 Total debt sewlcdexports 23.6 23.9 6.7 Presentvalue of debffGDP 27.0 Presentvalue of debffexports 67.4 1985-95 199545 2004 2005 200549 (average annualgrowth) GDP 4.5 4.6 5.8 5.0 5.8 1 GDP per capha 1.7 2.3 3.6 3.7 4.2 -Ghana Low-incomegroup I Exportsof goods and services 8.2 4.8 3.5 4.0 3.7 STRUCTURE of the ECONOMY 1985 1995 (% of GDP) Agriculture 44.9 38.8 Industry 16.7 24.3 Manufacturing 11.5 9.3 8.5 8.6 Services 38.4 38.9 37.4 36.6 Householdfinal consumption expenditure 84.0 76.3 76.0 74.1 Generalgov't final consumptionexpenditure 9.4 12.1 16.0 15.4 Importsof goods and services 13.6 32.9 54.4 49.5 -GCF -GDP 1985.95 199545 2004 2005 (average annualgrowth) Growth of exports and Imports (K) Agriculture 2.0 4.4 7.5 6.1 ''T Industry 3.6 4.6 5.1 6.7 i o Manufacturing -3.0 4.0 6.5 7.0 Services 7.8 4.7 4.5 5.4 O Householdfinal consumptionexpenditure 4.1 4.3 2.7 8.2 Generalgov't final consumptionexpenditure 5.4 5.6 15.9 -2.1 .20 Gross capitalformation 3.9 3.7 12.5 13.1 -Exports +Imports importsof goods and services 6.8 4.7 4.5 7.3 I Note:2005 data are preliminaryestimates. This table was producedfrom the Development EconomicsLDB database. *The diamonds show four key Indicatorsinthe country (in bold)compared with its incomegroup average. Ifdata are missing,the diamondwill be incomplete. - 90 - MENTFfNANCE 1885 $8%5 2004 2005 103 59 5 I 2 6 15 1 20 5 43 O I 4 I I 4 8 113 22 7 30 I 29 3 0 1 5 3 92 $0 7 4 1 4 8 -3 1 -1 8 $885 1495 2604 2505 f 633 1.431 2,639 2,774 412 390 838 875 28 191 290 298 58 128 24s 261 738 1,853 4.378 4.737 t i l 278 582 623 230 207 852 862 207 891 1,211 1,399 65 75 98 99 94 110 123 124 69 68 80 80 1885 1995 2004 2505 672 1.598 3 487 3 663 857 2.140 5,356 5,2w -185 -544 -1,888 -2,538 -217 -133 -198 -158 33 523 2,831 2,938 -263 -154 -236 -356 248 366 416 8%1 115 -21i -18Q -105 0 1,825 2,992 76 2 1,200 4 9,004 6 9,072 5 f 685 1895 2004 2005 2,243 5.495 7.035 I18 59 3 a 258 2.375 4$309 4,234 Totaldebt sewice 159 386 240 l5RD 18 21 2 2 IDA 3 25 39 89 75 238 1827 86 306 255 35 38 32 a6 1OT 139 0 0 191 299 352 70 242 230 305 10 23 13 57 60 219 217 239 11 23 28 35 49 197 288 204 Note Thtstable was producedfrjm the D e ~ a ~ o pEconomicsLDB database ~ n t 8/1306 -91 - APPENDIX 11: MALI Sub- POVERTYand SOCIAL Saharan Low- ,+ Mali Africa Income >evelopmentdlamond' 2005 Population, mid-year (miilions) 13.5 741 2,353 GNI percapita (Atlas method, US$) 380 745 580 Lifeexpectancy GNI (At/as method, US$billions) 5.1 552 1,364 7- Average annual growth, 1999.05 Population(%) 3.0 2.3 1.9 Labor force (%) 2.5 2.3 2.3 GNI I , Gross per primary Most recent estimate (latest year available, 199945) capita enrollment Povelty (% ofpopulationbelownationalpoverty/he) Urbanpopulation(% of totalpopulation) 31 35 30 Lifeexpectancy at birth(years) 48 46 59 1 Infant mortality(perj,OOO live births) 121 100 80 Child malnutrition(% ofchiidmn under5) 33 29 39 Access to improvedwater source Access to an improvedwater source (% ofpopulation) 50 56 75 Literacy(% ofpopulationage 15+) I 9 62 Gross primaryenrollment (% OfSChOOhge population) 64 93 104 Male 71 99 110 -Mali Low-income group Female 56 87 99 KEY ECONOMIC RATIOSand LONG-TERMTRENDS 1985 1995 2004 2005 Economlc ratlos. GDP (US$ billions) 1.3 2.5 4.9 5.1 Gross capitalforrnatiorVGDP 15.8 22.9 19.0 23.8 Exports of goods and services/GDP 16.8 21.1 27.5 25.7 Trade Grossdomestic savingslGDP -11.4 7.8 10.7 10.4 GrossnationalSavingslGDP -1.o 13.7 10.9 11.1 T Current account balancelGDP -16.8 -9.2 -4.9 -9.9 Interestpayments/GDP 1.o 0.9 0.5 Domestic Capital Total debffGDP 110.8 119.9 87.9 savings fonation Total debt service/exports 19.9 13.9 7.2 Presentvalue of debffGDP 26.5 Presentvalue of debffexports 91.2 Indebtedness - 1985-95 199545 2004 2005 200509 (average annualgrowth) GDP 3.0 6.0 2.2 5.4 5.5 GDP per capita 0.5 3.0 -0.8 2.3 4.0 Mali Low-income group Exports of goods and services 8.1 10.7 0 . 2 8.7 5.1 lgg52004 2005 (% of GDP) Growth of capltaland GDP(%) Agriculture 40.3 49.5 38.4 36.0 looT I Industry 15.5 18.7 23.9 24.2 A I Manufacturing 7.3 8.0 3.4 3.3 Services 44.2 31.8 39.8 39.8 v I Householdfinal consumotionexoenditure 100.1 82.6 79.3 79.1 03 05 -50 General govr final consumptionexpenditure 11.4 9,7 10.0 10.4 -GCF -GDP 1985-g5 1ss505 2004 2005 (average annualgrowth) Growth of exports and Imports (%) Agriculture 4.5 3.0 -4.7 3.0 40 Industry 3.3 7.7 -0.3 8.6 Manufacturing 4.6 -2.2 20.9 2.9 2o Services 0.9 5.3 9.1 7.1 Householdfinal consumptionexpenditure 2.2 2.8 8.9 -0.4 Generalgov'tfinal consumptionexpenditure 2.1 8.9 18.6 -5.6 -20 Gross capitalformation 1.5 10.3 -26.1 27.4 -Exports -0-Imports importsof goods and services 1.6 6.6 -2.8 3.7 7 L Note: 2005 data are preliminaryestimates. This table was producedfrom the Development EconomicsLDB database. The diamonds show four key indicatorsinthe country (in bold) comparedwith its incomegroup average. Ifdata are missing,the diamond will be incomplete. - 92 - 1985 $895 2004 2005 134 -3 1 6 4 162 18 4 -35 -1 i 124 165 27 3 185 2 7 5 6 3 7 4 4 -I1 3 -7 0 5 3 -7 Q lgs5 1895 2004 2005 I 176 442 1,146 1,204 78 259 399 301 35 71 583 660 *m* 469 751 141 111 wo 80 85 105 246 0 BO i 22 113 114 67 99 98 99 f 35 124 114 114 1985 1885 2004 2005 Currentaccount balanceto OOP 4%) 220 521 i ,421 1,388 578 894 Z ,674 7,924 -358 -373 .253 -536 -26 -47 -118 -f87 163 193 189 219 "221 -228 -241 -504 I97 295 456 869 24 8 8 -215 -365 6 332 989 929 449 3 499 1 528 3 527 5 f 885 fSQ5 2004 2005 1,456 2,958 3 316 # a 0 a 224 883 t ,441 1,424 Total debt aelliice 53 81 103 IBRD (i 0 0 0 IDA 3 12 i s 33 I57 208 48I 87 138 109 -2 0 i 3 111 2 80 0 0 1 21 5.6 6s 29 86 77 111 i 6 8 22 28 8# 69 89 2 6 10 11 27 73 59 77 - 93 - APPENDIX 111: SENEGAL Sub- 1 POVERTYand SOCIAL Saharan Low. Senegal Africa Income >evelopmantdlamond' 2005 Population, mid-year(millions) 11.7 741 2,353 GNI percapita (Atlas method, US$) 710 745 580 Life expectancy -@- GNI (Atlas method, US$billionsj 8.3 552 1,364 - Average annual growth, 199945 Population(%) 2.4 2.3 1.9 Laborforce (%j 2.4 2.3 2.3 ''1capita enro;:: primary Most recent estimate (latest year available, 199945) Poverty (% ofpopulationbelownationalpovertyline) Urbanpopulation(% oftotalpopuletionj 42 35 30 Lifeexpectancyat birth (years) 56 46 59 1 Infantmortality(per 1,000livebirths) 78 100 80 Childmalnutrition(% ofchildrenunder 5) 23 29 39 Access to improvedwater source Access to an improvedwater source (% ofpopulation) 76 56 75 Literacy(% ofpopulationage 15+) 39 62 - Gross primaryenrollment (% ofschool-agepopulation) 76 93 104 Senegal Male 78 99 110 Low-income group Female 74 87 99 KEY ECONOMICRATIOS and LONG-TERMTRENDS 1985 1995 2004 2005 Economicratios' GDP (US$ billions) 2.6 4.5 7.6 8.3 Gross capitalformation/GDP 10.5 16.7 23.4 Exportsof goods and services/GDP 28.6 34.5 27.8 Trade Gross domesticsavingdGDP -2.9 11.1 9.8 Gross nationalsavingdGDP -8.1 11.5 16.7 T Current account balance/GDP -17.3 -5.2 -6.7 -7.5 InterestpaymentdGDP 2.0 1.6 0.9 Total debffGDP 99.5 87.0 51.6 Total debt service/exports 20.7 16.7 11.4 Presentvalue of debffGDP 19.0 I Presentvalue of debffexports 49.0 Indebtedness 1985-95 199545 2004 2005 200549 (averageannualgrowth) - GDP 1.9 4.5 6.2 6.2 4.8 Senegal GDP percapita -1.0 1.9 3.7 3.7 3.6 ~ Low-income arow Exports of goodsand services 3.0 6.4 3.6 3.3 STRUCTUREof the ECONOMY 1985 1995 2004 2005 (% of GDPj Growthof capitaland GDP(%) Agriculture 18.7 20.2 17.0 17.7 40 Industry 17.7 19.8 19.7 Manufacturing 12.8 13.4 11.5 Services 63.6 60.0 63.3 Householdfinal consumptionexpenditure 86.2 76.6 76.4 General gov't final consumptionexpenditure 16.8 12.4 13.9 13.4 - Imports of goods and services 42.0 40.1 41.5 41.3 GCF *GDP 1985-95 199545 2004 2005 (averageannualgrowthj /Growthof exports and imports(%) I Agriculture 1.1 2.9 4.3 7.5 Industry 2.9 5.5 7.5 Manufacturing 2.6 4.1 6.5 Services 1.8 4.4 6.3 Householdfinal consumptionexpenditure 0.8 2.6 0.8 Generalgov'tfinal consumptionexpenditure 0.2 7.7 11.2 3.7 01 02 03 M 05 Gross capitalformation 4.8 9.7 22.2 I - &ports *Imports I imports of goods and services 0.3 6.9 5.9 1.9 Note:2005 data are preliminaryestimates. This table was producedfrom the DevelopmentEconomics LDB database. The diamonds show four key indicators in the country (in bold)comparedwith its income-groupaverage. If data are missing,the diamond will be incomplete. - 94 - 1M5 1986 2004 200s 13 0 7 9 a5 1 7 9 3 5 0 i 9 2 5 16 2 1%3 29 B 20 3 -07 4 2 5 % 5 3 -3 7 -f 3 -5 0 -8 0 lWS 4895 20114 25115 515 568 i,467 i,693 63 102 33 60 58 i 52 203 i 93 id4 254 335 333 434 i,369 2 7B2 2,946 197 364 4&t 452 133 138 413 405 83 160 371 382 Eis i14 99 88 54 i14 io5 io3 128 i00 68 56 18115 1895 2Q114 2005 ..................... .......................................................................................... j Current account haifsnca to GDP (%.I ~ 851 1,544 2,124 2 24% 1,165 1796 3,163 3 429 -314 -252 -1,036 -1,181 -227 -155 -i -129 55 -5 172 685 655 -447 -235 -506 -525 345 172 455 440 f 03 63 53 188 15 283 912 i,070 449 3 499 I 528 3 527 5 II lf#S IS95 2004 2009 .......................................................... .................."............"........................... " & ~ ~ of 2504 debt{US$mill.) ~ i t i ~ ~ 2 566 3,895 3.930 89 35 0 0 232 i,m 2,040 2,060 190 283 335 10 i 5 0 0 4 i d 31 46 B 2.040 96 373 757 132 39 197 -5 -25 92 vi6 32 70 0 4 4 G zed 25 218 95 33 107 $73 f 82 6 $8 I 5 28 27 89 P 58 153 8 12 15 i 6 29 78 143 i33 - 85 - WEST AFRICA WEST AFRICAN AGRICULTURE PRODUCTIVITY PROGRAM PHASE I MALI PROJECT COUNTRIES MAJOR RAILROADS ECOWAS MEMBER COUNTRIES NATIONAL CAPITALS MAJOR PORTS INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES MAJOR ROADS 20° 10° 0° 10° 20° FORMER A L G E R I A L I B Y A SPANISH SAHARA Nouâdhibou 20° 20° M A U R I T A N I A Nouakchott M A L I N I G E R CAPE VERDE Praia Dakar C H A D SENEGAL Lake THE Banjul Niamey Chad GAMBIA BURKINA FASO SUDAN Bissau Bamako GUINEA- Ouagadougou BISSAU G U I N E A N'Djamena N I G E R I A 10° Conakry 10° TOGO BENIN A T L A N T I C SIERRA Abuja Freetown LEONE C Ô T E GHANA D ' I V O I R E O C E A N Yamoussoukro C E N T R A L LIBERIA Monrovia Lagos A F R I C A N Abidjan AccraLomé Port Novo Warri R E P U B L I C Calabar C A M E R O O N Sekondi- Port Harcourt Takoradi Douala 0 250 500 750 KILOMETERS Bangui Malaba Yaoundé This map was produced by the Map Design Unit of The World Bank. EQUATORIAL GUINEA MARCH The boundaries, colors, denominations and any other information shown IBRD on this map do not imply, on the part of The World Bank Group, any SÃO TOME AND D E M . R E P. judgment on the legal status of any territory, or any endorsement or PRINCIPE Libreville O F 0° acceptance of such boundaries. São Tome CONGO 0° 35343 2007 C O N G O Port Gentil G A B O N 20° 10° 0° 10° 20°