Inception Report

Document Sample
Inception Report Powered By Docstoc
					Asian Development Bank Regional Technical Assistance (No. 5771)

POVERTY REDUCTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN REMOTE
GREATER MEKONG SUBREGION WATERSHEDS

PHASE II


INCEPTION REPORT



Draft




17 March 2000




in association with
ANZDEC Limited, New Zealand and GFA-Agrar, Germany


Table of Contents
                     Page No.

Executive Summary (also translated to Lao/Thai/Khmer/Vietnamese)   1

Background 3
ADB’s Objective for the GMS and Policies on Poverty
      and Environment       3
2.2   Broad Project Objectives    4
2.3   Expected Impacts and Benefits        5
2.4   Project scope 6
2.5   Executing Responsibilities   7

Mobilisation 8
3.1    International Implementation Specialists  8
3.2    Specialist Personnel and Personnel Schedule     8
3.3    Domestic Specialists         10

Implementation Status       11
4.1   Achievements and Shortcomings of Phase I 11
Change in Scope of Work since Technical Proposal 12
Administrative Arrangements and Equipment        13

Approach, Problems and Work Programmes14
5.1     Priorities      14
Project Specialists Approach to the Work Programme –
        Defining Priority Areas       14
5.2.1 Defining Priority Areas         14
5.2.2 Mapping and GIS          17
5.2.3 Additional Tasks         18
Project Specialists Approach to the Work Programme –
        Identifying Bankable Project Interventions 19
5.3.1 Participatory Rural Appraisal 19
5.3.2 Upland Agriculture       21
Rural Infrastructure 22
Environment/Watershed Management             22
Project Specialists Approach to the Work Programme –
        Preliminary Technical/Social/Environmental/Financial/
        Economic Analysis 23
Community Development          23
Upland Agriculture      23
Rural Infrastructure 23
Economics        23
Mapping and GIS         24
Reporting        24
        5.6      Workshops     24


Appendix 1    Work Program and Allocation of Responsibilities
Appendix 2    Terms of Reference for Implementation Specialists
Appendix 3    Personnel Schedule
Appendix 4    Travel Plan for First Field Visits
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

ADB    Asian Development Bank

GIS    Geographical Information System

GMS Greater Mekong Subregion

HCG    Helsinki Consulting Group

IUCN World Conservation Union

MRC Mekong River Commission

NGO Non-Government Organisation

NPA    National Partner Agency

PRA    Participatory Rural Appraisal

RETA Regional Technical Assistance

RUG    Resource User Group

STEA Science, Technology and Environmental Agency

TA     Technical Assistance

TOR    Terms of Reference

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

WGE Working Group for Environment
1.
Executive Summary

The purpose of this Inception Report is to provide a framework for the implementation of
the second phase of the ADB-RETA 5771 project Poverty Reduction and Environmental
Management in Remote Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) Watersheds. The GMS
Working Group on Environment (WGE) is the implementing agency.

The ultimate objective of the GMS Program is to facilitate sustainable economic growth
and to improve the standard of living of the people in the sub-region. Most of the region’s
poor live in rural areas and their quality of life lag behind that in urban areas. Despite
increasing urbanisation and a wide range of poverty reduction programmes, the number
of rural poor in most countries continues to grow.

The objectives of the project are to contribute to the social sector goal of reducing
poverty in remote communities and to the environment sector goal of sustainable
managing renewable natural resources, especially timber and other forest resources.
The project involves:
assisting the GMS governments in developing a framework of mutually consistent
policies, strategies, standards, and
guidelines to stabilise and ultimately reverse the current trends in deforestation and
environmental degradation; and
preparing investment projects to address the interrelated issues of poverty reduction,
economic growth and environmental protection in communities in the three remote
watersheds of the GMS.

The first phase funded by the Finnish Government was implemented from June 1998 to
July 1999. Phase I involved the analysis of GMS country strategies and policies related
to watershed management. During the first phase priority watersheds were identified and
ranked, Phase II will define the actual area for which investment project proposals will be
in Phase II.

The primary beneficiaries of the projects designed under Phase II will ultimately be the
communities in the selected watershed areas. The projects identified are expected to
contribute to sustainable development in remote watershed areas. Likely interventions
would encourage the adoption of sustainable farming systems through the
demonstration of appropriate technology. The projects will provide improved
infrastructure, giving both better access to markets, as well as improved access to
essential services such as health and education.

Through the use of PRA tools and training in village demand based planning, local
service agencies will be able to identify what services are required by communities in
order to address specific issues and problems. Village interventions that include village
water supply and latrine construction programmes would impact upon health and quality
of life indicators.

The following watersheds have been selected for further studies: Luishahe in Yunnan
Province of China, Nam Ou in Laos, and Se San in both Cambodia and Viet Nam. Given
the scale of the watersheds it will be necessary to first select priority areas consisting of
one or more sub-watersheds where a range of project activities can be demonstrated.
These areas will be selected on the basis of indicators or criteria linking poverty,
environmental degradation, capacity to implement investment projects, and overall
situation from a logistic point of view providing the opportunity to demonstrate a range of
interventions. The priority site selection criteria will be finalised in consultation with
affected stakeholders and the site selection process carried out in consultation with local
government.

Once priority areas have been agreed upon the next step will be to conduct PRA in order
to identify likely interventions to be supported by the project taking into account lessons
learned from similar projects in the sub-region. This will be made in consultation with
stakeholders including the affected communities, private sector, and concerned local
government agencies.

Finally, preliminary technical/environmental and financial/economic analysis of the
proposed interventions will be made. As appropriate, tasks here may include studies of
shifting cultivation, reforestation, livestock development, social services, feeder roads,
irrigation, electrification and water supply, small and medium enterprise development,
marketing and credit, financial and economic analysis.

The purpose of this Inception Report is to provide a framework for the implementation of
the RETA Project: Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management in Remote GMS
Watersheds - Phase II.

This Inception Report describes:
The project background.
A brief statement of the project status at the start of implementation phase II.
A statement of the effects of the change of the outputs of this phase.
Mobilisation activities of the Consultant.
The project’s Specialists approach to the work programme for implementation.
A program of activities to provide for the identification of bankable project interventions
that will lead to poverty reduction and protection of the environment in priority areas of
the watersheds chosen.

This report outlines the project implementation along three points:
The sequence of activities that are required to carry out the project according to the
Terms of Reference.
Defines who will be required to do these activities.
Provides a time schedule when those activities are to be implemented so as to ensure a
co-ordinated and timely result.

Phase II implementation was started on 1 February 2000 by the mobilisation of the
Team Leader. The implementation is scheduled through January 2001. It comprises of
27 person months of international specialists and 17 person months of domestic
specialists. The Team Leader spent one month alone to re-establish the office
operations and travelling to the four countries of the three watersheds to initiate Phase II.
He was joined by three more specialists on 1 and 2 March 2000.

Following the arrival of the specialists the initial period has been used for reviewing
documents and other information, to make financial and administrative arrangements for
the consultancy, to devise a project operation schedule and approach to implementation,
resulting in this report.
The Work Plan and Terms of Reference for the Implementation Specialists appear as
Appendices 1 and 2 respectively of this report.
2.
Background

Implementation of the first Phase of this project was funded by the Government of
Finland, and was awarded to a consortium of three Finnish consultancy companies with
Helsinki Consulting Group (HCG) as the lead Consultant. Phase I started in June 1998
and was completed in July 1999. Project offices were established in the Science,
Technology and Environment Agency (STEA) within the Prime Minister’s Office in
Vientiane, Laos. The GMS Working Group on Environment (WGE) is the implementing
agency and as such, provided regional coordination between the project and partner
agencies in each country. The World Conservation Union (IUCN) played an important
role in facilitating this coordination process across the region. The active involvement
also of the Mekong River Commission (MRC) was crucial to this phase. During this
phase reviews were carried out of historical and current experiences of watershed
management in the six participating countries. Aspects included an assessment of
policy, institutional and legislative capacity related to watershed management and
poverty, an analysis of the technical and social dimensions of watershed practices in the
Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS) and a study of wood trade within the region. Specific
studies related to gender issues and the role of Non-Government Organisations (NGOs)
were also carried out.

2.1
ADB’s Objective for the GMS and Policies on Poverty and Environment

The ultimate objective of the GMS Program is to facilitate sustainable economic growth
and to improve the standard of living of the people in the sub-region. More specifically,
the Program seeks to achieve the following results: realise and enhance development
opportunities; encourage trade and investment among GMS countries; resolve or
mitigate cross-border problems; and meet common resource and policy needs.

The GMS countries share the resources of three major river systems (the Mekong,
Salween, and Red rivers), and the coastal zones of two seas (South China Sea and
Andaman Sea) into which those and other rivers flow. The watershed of each river
generally is a separate and distinct hydrological system, and often supports endemic
populations of flora and fauna, and is thus an appropriate natural planning unit for
development.

The GMS countries face common socio-economic issues, such as population control,
reducing widespread poverty, protecting the rights of ethnic minorities, and achieving
economic development without depleting or damaging much of their natural resource
base. Environmental degradation due to deforestation and widespread pollution are
common to all, as is the need to further develop their manpower and institutions and to
develop appropriate technological advances to improve efficiency in resource utilisation.

Most of the region's poor live in rural areas and their quality of life lags far behind that in
urban areas. Despite increasing urbanisation and a wide range of poverty reduction
programs, the number of rural poor in most countries continues to grow. However,
sustained economic growth in rural areas is likely to have a much higher impact on job
creation than equivalent urban growth. This fact, along with the generally low levels of
investment in rural development, provides a compelling reason for ADB to reverse its
recent drift away from the rural sector. In particular, ADB will give greater emphasis to
development of agro-climatic areas that have been bypassed by green revolution
technology. ADB will also give greater attention to the social, environmental, and
institutional factors necessary to enhance efficiency and productivity in all areas of
agricultural production, and associated non-farm activities. Likewise, ADB will vigorously
seek new ways to promote private sector activity in rural areas.

2.2
Broad Project Objectives

The objectives of the project are to contribute to the social sector goal of reducing
poverty in remote communities and to the environment sector goal of sustainably
managing renewable natural resources, especially timber and other forest resources.
The project involves:

assisting the GMS governments in developing a framework of mutually consistent
policies, strategies, standards;

guidelines to stabilise and ultimately reverse the current trends in deforestation and
environmental degradation; and

preparing investment projects to address the interrelated issues of poverty reduction and
environmental protection in communities in three remote watershed areas of the GMS.

The project is implemented in two phases. Phase I involved the analysis of GMS country
strategies and policies related to watershed management. A subregional policy
framework for sustainable watershed management was drafted, with special emphasis
on the nexus of rural poverty and watershed degradation, including deforestation. During
the first phase, priority watersheds were identified and ranked, Phase II will define the
actual area for which investment project proposals will be prepared in Phase II.

The Phase II study will focus on the identification of (bankable) investment projects
which will address this interrelated objective of poverty reduction and environmental
management in three priority watersheds of the GMS that were selected as a result of
Phase I.

It is understood that the preparation of these studies will be based on the regional
strategies and policy recommendations presented in Phase I. The Phase I Report
recommends a strategy for remote watersheds development based on a three level
stratification where:
pressure on resources is sufficiently low to permit continued traditional use of resources
with improvements to ensure secure and sustainable management;
unsustainable traditional agricultural methods can be gradually converted to sustainable
agricultural systems through intensification of land use and improved technology; and
in areas of intensive population pressure, agricultural systems can no longer sustain the
rural population and off-farm employment alternatives need to be created.

This strategy was endorsed at the sub-regional workshop that considered the Phase I
consultant’s findings.

It is expected that in each priority watershed, the range of appropriate project
interventions may include activities belonging to each element of the strategy.
2.3
Expected Impact and Benefits

The primary beneficiaries of the projects designed under RETA Phase II will ultimately
be the communities in the selected watershed areas. However, as this phase of RETA is
to provide preliminary designs for "bankable" projects, focusing on reduction of poverty
and environmental degradation, the main beneficiaries at this stage are the ADB and the
concerned governments in GMS countries.

The projects identified are expected to contribute to sustainable development in remote
watershed areas. Likely interventions would encourage the adoption of sustainable
farming systems through the demonstration of appropriate technology. The adoption of
improved farming systems will lead to the stabilisation of slash and burn agriculture and
provide the basis from which to begin a process of reduction and the eventual removal of
slash and burn as a local farming system option. In some cases improved irrigation
facilities will enable communities to grow both wet and dry season crops, reducing the
pressure of land use in marginal uplands.

The projects will promote sustainable upland farming technology that improve the
management of natural resources through the improvement and rehabilitation of upland
soils, improved practices adopted will reduce and control soil erosion. Benefiting
communities through improved and sustainable yields on permanent upland fields.

The agriculture production base would be diversified and intensified, allowing for better
economic efficiencies as well as providing more access and entry into local and regional
markets. Farming communities would receive extension training in improved practices as
well as the identification and exploitation of market opportunities in order to increase
household disposable incomes.

The projects will provide improved infrastructure, giving both better access to markets,
as well as improved access to essential services such as health and education. It is
expected that improved market access would positively enhance livelihood systems
through increased earnings from the sale of farm and non-farm products. Communities
would also be able to choose from a greater range of agricultural activities according to
market opportunities.

An important part of expected impact of the proposed watershed projects will be the
instigation of sustainable rural credit and savings schemes. The linking of these in the
development strategy enhances the development of a savings discipline, as well as
providing training in financial management and responsibility. The introduction of
informal credit modalities will prepare communities for entry into the formal credit market
in the future, should they so desire. Credit would be available for both agricultural and
non-agricultural activities.

Community based organisations are to be strengthened through training in management
and planning. Village producer and interest group members will receive training to
improve technical skills as well as how to analyse and prioritise development initiatives
and needs, and take a lead role in village development planning. The participation of
women would be a main focus in village development planning and implementation.
Community structures would be strengthened to ensure that there is gender equity in the
identification and planning process.
Through the use of PRA tools and training in village demand based planning, local
service agencies will be able to identify what services are required by communities in
order to address specific issues and problems. The use of the demand based planning
would also provide an indication of the type of subject areas that are required for
training, for both staff and community. Staff training and development programs would
be formulated to address the needs of local communities as indicated.

Village level interventions that include village water supply and latrine construction
programs would impact upon health and quality of life indicators. Clean water will reduce
the incidence of diahhoreal disease, the biggest killer of children under five years of age.
The time taken to collect water by family members would also be reduced providing time
for other activities. Both improved family health and reduced water collection time would
make obvious impacts on household productivity.

Interventions in the educational sector would focus on providing appropriate vocational
skills in order to assist increasing off-farm employment opportunities.

The projects proposed under RETA Phase II would also prepare community and farmer
networks in order to provide a structure and mechanism whereby district agencies in
remote areas could attempt to implement government policies regarding natural
resource management and resource conservation.

2.4
Project Scope

The following watersheds have been selected for further studies: Luishahe in Yunnan
Province of China, Nam Ou in Laos, and Sesan in both Cambodia and Viet Nam. Given
the scale of the watersheds it will be necessary to first select priority areas consisting of
one or more sub-watersheds (in Sesan it will be two priority areas, one on each side of
the border between Cambodia and Viet Nam) where a range of project activities can be
demonstrated. These areas will be selected on the basis of indicators linking poverty,
environmental degradation, capacity to implement investment projects, and overall
situation from a logistics point of view providing the opportunity to demonstrate a range
of interventions. The priority site selection criteria will be finalised in consultation with
affected stakeholders and the site selection process carried out in consultation with local
government (see section 5.2).

Once priority areas have been agreed upon the next step will be to determine
interventions to be supported by the project taking into account the problems and needs
of local communities and the lessons learned from similar projects in the sub-region.
This will be made in consultation with stakeholders including the affected communities
through a PRA process, the private sector, and concerned local government agencies.

Finally, preliminary technical/environmental/social/financial/economic analysis of the
proposed interventions will be made. As appropriate, tasks here may include studies of
upland agriculture and sustainable farming systems, reforestation, livestock
development, social services, feeder roads, irrigation, electrification and water supply,
small and medium enterprise development, marketing and credit, financial and economic
analysis.
2.5
Executing Responsibilities

ADB is the Executing Agency. The Sub-regional Working Group on the Environment
(WGE) as the implementing agency has designated a RETA Coordinator and an
alternate from among its members. The role of the Coordinator is to:
liaise with the GMS national governments to select National Partner Agencies (NPAs) for
the RETA;
provide interagency coordination;
monitor RETA implementation and provide technical advice when needed; and
assist with arrangements for the subregional workshops.

During Phase I the RETA Coordinator was assisted by The World Conservation Union
(IUCN) to carry out these responsibilities.

The NPAs provide counterpart staff support as required by the level of RETA activity in
each country. The RETA Implementation Office is established at facilities provided by
the Science, Technology and Environment Office in Vientiane, Lao PDR. A Steering
Committee, composed of one representative each from the Bank and the IUCN, plus two
representatives from each country, has been established. Where the national
environmental agency is not also the NPA, one country representative is the senior
WGE member, and the other is a senior government official from the NPA.

The Bank, the WGE, and the NPAs jointly monitor and have periodically reviewed
progress through missions and sub-regional workshops. The United Nations
International Drug Control Programme has expressed strong interest in the RETA, and
offered additional support to control poppy cultivation and drug addiction.

The Government of Laos shall provide and make available to the Consultants, free of
charge, the following facilities and services as they are required:
office accommodation (suitable furnished and air-conditioned) as provided for the Phase
I Consultants;
at least three professional/technical staff as counterparts for the duration of the TA;
equipment, materials and supplies at the disposal of the Government.

In addition each NPA will provide as required:
coordination and liaison support with national agencies, NGOs and regional counterpart
agencies; and
documents, data, statistics, information and maps at the disposal of the Government.

STEA has provided modern and fully adequate office facilities in Vientiane.
3.
Mobilisation

3.1
International Implementation Specialists

During the Inception period the following Team members have been mobilised and the
following activities carried out since:

Team Leader arrived in Vientiane on 1 February and re-established the Project’s office
and communications, recruited office personnel. From 13 to 29 February visited
Kunming, Bangkok, Phnom Penh and Hanoi to introduce Phase II and start up.
Discussed with National Participating Agencies and other concerned government
agencies, donors and NGO’s. Provided overall project management encompassing
administration, financial control, and technical oversight. Prepared a detailed workplan
with activities, milestones and deadlines for intended outputs. Co-ordinated and finalised
the preparation of this draft Inception Report.

Community Development Specialist commenced his assignment on 1 March. Initial tasks
included the review of Phase I literature and documentation, and familiarisation with the
issues and scope of work for Phase II. The consultant then prepared a work plan to
cover the duration of the input. CVs were requested from individuals and organisations
in each of the 4 countries in order to recruit local consultants and enumerators to carry
out the Participatory Rural Appraisals (PRA) in the selected areas. Data collection
formats for use at District, Village and Household level have been prepared as well as
procedures for the PRA methodology that will be used. Project area selection site criteria
have been reviewed and a revised, priority list of criteria proposed. Introductory
meetings have been held with central level ministries and agencies that are likely
stakeholders, as well as visits to institutions and individuals holding data relevant to the
RETA.

GIS specialist met with Team Leader in Phnom Penh on 20 February. Team Leader
handed over laptop computer from Phase I with GIS data backup. Decision was made
that GIS specialist should stay in Phnom Penh for about one more week to meet with
GIS specialist from Phase I, who arrived in Phnom Penh on 28 February. GIS specialist
from Phase I was met for a briefing on 28 February. During the one-week delay in
Phnom Penh, GIS specialist inspected the available parts of the Phase I GIS data base
and started data collection in Cambodia. GIS specialist arrived in Vientiane on 1 March.
Available maps and documentation from Phase I related to GIS were inspected and put
in order. Contacts with GIS offices that had cooperated with the project during Phase I
were re-established. Satellite images were purchased. Scanning of topographic maps
was started. Data collection was started in Laos. GIS data base structure and
documentation were prepared. Overview maps for the first round of field trips were
prepared according to discussions with the subject specialists.

3.2
Specialist Personnel and Personnel Schedule

The project specialist implementation team fielded by Margules Pöyry, ANZDEC and
GFA-Agrar consultancy consortium comprises at the moment of six people with one or
two more to be determined. Their combined consultancy is allocated a total of 27 person
months.

In addition there are 17 person month of local consultants.

The international specialists are:

Ulf G Hägglund                 Team Leader
Ian Hancock            Upland Agriculture Specialist
Anthony Bott           Community Development Specialist/Sociologist
Christoph Feldkötter   GIS Specialist
Geoffrey Anderson      Rural Infrastructure Specialist
John Graham            Economist

Of the unallocated 4 person months it is strongly felt that part of these (3 person months)
should be used to engage an Environmental/Watershed Management Specialist.

The following is the Specialist Team’s proposed timing schedule for the project.


Specialist
Start Date
Finish Date
Total Months   Ulf G. Hägglund 1 February 14 April 2.5   15 May 14
July 2.0     18 September 17 November 2.0       11 December 13 January
2001 0.5 Ian Hancock 2 March 14 April 1.5         15 May 14 July 2.0     18
September 3 November 1.5      Anthony Bott 1 March 16 May 2.5      3 July 17
July 0.5     18 September 17 October 1.0 Christoph Feldkötter 1 March 14
April 1.5    15 May 30 May 0.5       18 September 17 October 1.0 Geoffrey
Anderson 15 May 14 July 2.0       18 September 17 October 1.0 To be
determined 15 May 14 July 2.0      18 September 17 October 1.0 To be
determined     1.0

A detailed Personnel Schedule for the implementation is contained in Appendix 3.


3.3
Domestic Specialists

As in Phase I National Consultants are to be recruited to support also Phase II. Three
categories are provided for in the Consultants TOR for a total of 17 person months, they
are:

Community Development Specialist

Rural Credit and Marketing Specialist

Lawyer

Of these one Community Development Specialist is to be recruited in each country.
They are expected to be mobilised over the period April to July. Preparations for the
recruitment of them are well advanced in each country. Recruitment of the latter two
categories will take place when needed.
4.
Implementation Status

4.1
Achievements and Shortcomings of Phase I
  tc \l1 "Agriculture analysis
The lack of critical analysis of the farming systems in the selected watersheds during
Phase I has impacted on the activities of Phase II. The net effect of this is that the team
now has to spend a significant amount of time collecting basic data sets for the three
watershed areas (four project sites), prior to the final selection of potential project
locations.

Analysis of the relationship between poverty and environmental degradation needs
further review as claims made in Phase I were sometimes incorrect and unsubstantiated.
Linkages between poverty and degradation are not always negative, especially where
population pressure is not a problem. Conversely wealthier sectors of society and the
more intensive farming/livelihood systems which they practice, can be equally or even
more damaging to the environment, than those of people on the poverty line.

With particular reference to the reports on Upland Agriculture the country reports give
insufficient analysis of the various farming systems present in the GMS countries and in
particular of the selected priority watersheds. Farming systems analysis was not holistic,
with little account taken of all components, which contribute to the livelihoods systems
present in the isolated watersheds of concern to RETA. Furthermore, comprehensive
data was not presented for even the priority watersheds, placing this burden on Phase II.

It appears that Phase I did not progress far with its socio-economic analysis. There is
very little that can be used for Phase II planning other than the name of the selected
watersheds or catchment areas. The watersheds identified are, in the case of Nam Ou,
350-km long and constitute a relatively large area that crosses several geo-political
borders.

The RRA and Watershed Field Assessments carried out under Phase I were very
general and in many instances lack quantitative data. For example, in the case of Laos,
no study was made in the Oudomsai or Luangprabang sections of the Nam Ou
watershed. In addition, no data was collected to indicate the local staff capability and
capacity. This in itself was a major oversight given the critical nature of this issue.

The reports from other countries, similarly, lack the desired level of detail. In general, the
socio-economic and watershed field assessments lacked sufficient penetration into the
causes of problems and constraints and do not provide adequate focus for a smooth
transition into Phase II.

The main criticism's on the various sector reports from Phase I are therefore as follows:
(a) their collective lack of comparative analysis within sectors between the GMS
countries, (b) a lack of integrated analysis between sectors , both on a country and sub-
regional level, (c) a clear identifications of lessons learnt, and (d) in many cases an
analysis of issues and constraints based on old data sets and incorrect information.
These shortcomings have impacted on Phase II by not providing the new consultants
with detailed analysis and incomplete background data. This will now have to be
undertaken during this phase.
GIS – Achievements and Shortcomings of Phase I

In Phase I, the GIS specialist traveled extensively to the six project countries and
collected GIS data. Some of these GIS data were copied from existing data bases;
others were prepared by the national counterpart agencies according to specifications
made by the project.

The GIS data collected are predominantly at small scales (1:250,000 and smaller). Their
usefulness is limited to planning exercises at the macro level.

The GIS data had been scattered across a number of offices/agencies at the end of
Phase I. HCG mailed back one CD with GIS data backups. The laptop computer that
had been used for GIS during Phase I had been stored at the AIT in Bangkok. It contains
the same data collection as the CD mailed by HCG. In addition, there are about 10 CDs
(including the GIS software CD purchased during Phase I), the whereabouts of which
are so far unknown. Allegedly a representative of HCG has handed them over to the
ADB library, from where they could not be obtained yet.

However, judging from the correspondence that the GIS specialist left in the project
office in Vientiane at the end of Phase I, these CDs do not contain any additional useful
information.

There are two shortcomings of Phase I that further limit the usefulness of the collected
GIS data:
No comprehensive GIS data base structure has been established.
No comprehensive GIS data documentation/meta data set has been prepared.

In the documentation mailed with the CD by HCG the GIS specialist even states: “There
are no systematic data catalogues of data. Some countries provided information of
attribute data. They are in a file in the project office. … Otherwise a GIS user can
manage the data.”

Phase II is hence left with a partly unordered, so far incomplete collection of GIS data
sets of limited usefulness. They are not sufficient to satisfy the data requirements of
Phase II. It will not be possible to build the GIS activities of Phase II on the data
collected during Phase I.

4.2
Change in Scope of Work since Technical Proposal

The Consultants for Phase I had recommended the following for Phase II:
That a regional feasibility study be prepared for Nam Ou watershed in Laos, Luishahe
watershed in Yunnan Province of China, and Lo Gam watershed in Viet Nam.
That pre-feasibility studies be prepared for Stung Pursat watershed in Cambodia, and
the Se San watershed in Viet Nam; and
That a preliminary field assessment be undertaken in the Mae Kok watershed, which is
shared, by Thailand and Myanmar.

The ADB in a letter dated 22 July 1999, explained to the Governments the difficulty of
implementing the above recommendations under Phase II due to lack of resources. It
further proposed that Phase II Consultants concentrate their initial efforts on the rapid
watershed appraisals for Nam Ou in the Lao PDR, Luishahe in Yunnan, and Se San in
both Viet Nam and Cambodia. With regard to Stung Pursat in Cambodia, the Bank
proposed that this watershed could be studied under RETA 5822: Critical Wetlands
Project since this watershed is within the Tonle Sap basin. With regard to Lo Gam in Viet
Nam, the Bank proposed that this watershed be dropped, but the Se San watershed
would be studied covering both Viet Nam and Cambodia. Further, since Myanmar had
not supported the inclusion of the Myanmar portion of Mae Kok in the preliminary field
assessment, resources would be earmarked for a preliminary field assessment in a
watershed to be decided later.

In view of the difficulties in conducting a second rural appraisal, the Bank felt that it might
be preferable to undertake similar studies in all the three basins, namely, Nam Ou,
Luishahe, and Se San. These could be upgraded to investment projects through follow-
on project preparatory technical assistance (PPTAs) depending on the investment
priorities accorded by the countries concerned.

These proposals were again explained in detail at a WGE meeting in Vientiane on 8
October 1999 and subsequently agreed upon.

4.3
Administrative Arrangements and Equipment

Phase II is based in the same offices at STEA as was Phase I. The equipment used
during Phase I is available during Phase II, although not all are in working condition. The
principle items of equipment used during Phase I were:

1 Toyota Landcruiser
1 desktop PC with UPS and external modem
5 notebook computers
5 printers (1 laser, 1 bubble jet, 1 colour, and two portable)
1 photocopier with stabiliser
1 fax machine
1 mobile phone
1 GPS Garmin 12 XL system
6 telephones

At the time of take over by Phase II the colour printer and two laptops were not in
operational condition and it was unfeasible to repair them in Vientiane due to the high
cost. The power adapter for the bubble jet printer was not available. Of the remaining
computers, the PC and three laptops, one of the latter was purchased second hand and
is now too obsolete to be of any use. In addition the PC is also of an obsolete (clone)
model and vintage making it virtually useless unless investments are made in upgrading.
For example its internal memory is only 8 MB RAM (a normal standard in 1993-94 but
certainly not in the year 2000). However, buying a new one is more cost-effective.

In addition a set of 10 (or more) CD-ROMs containing GIS data collected during Phase I
have not been made available to Phase II.
5.
Approach, Problems and Work Programmes

5.1
Priorities

During planning at the inception stage of Phase II it has become apparent that there will
be insufficient resources, particularly temporal and financial, to undertake any field work
(including reviews) in Myanmar. In view of constraints of access, limited useful data from
Phase I and the need to redo data collection we recommend that all resources be
applied to the task in hand i.e. three watersheds. To allocate some of this input to other
to a fourth watershed would seriously affect the quality of the work that can be
completed in the areas already identified.

As a result of short-comings of Phase I, outlined earlier in this inception report, a high
priority has been placed on the collection of basic natural resource and socio-economic
data for the provinces and districts of the three watersheds. The timely completion of this
data collection exercise is totally reliant on the four GMS countries (Cambodia, China,
Lao and Viet Nam) cooperating fully and providing uninhibited access to current data
sets, GIS and maps where available. It is expected that complete data sets will be made
available to the RETA team latest by mid-April 2000.

Top priority must be given to the selection of project sites within the three watersheds in
order that the necessary PRA's and subsequent technical studies and project
preparation activities can proceed according to the workplan. Any delay in this respect,
could serious delay the completion of this phase of RETA.

Another important priority for speedy implementation of Phase II is the selection and
recruitment of national consultants to carry out the PRA's, special surveys, reviews and
data collection, and technical studies.

5.2
Project Specialists Approach to the Work Programme – Defining Priority Areas


Defining Priority Areas

This is the first output of Phase II where the Team works mostly together. Each
watershed and each of the four countries will be visited. These visits start immediately
after submission of this report. In order to select the priority areas preliminary selection
criteria has been formulated and will be discussed with the stakeholders for possible
modification and approval. To aid the selection maps and GIS data have and will be
collected.

General Development Objectives

In developing selection criteria, the Phase I team examined local rural development
policies and incumbent priorities. All GMS countries policies would include the following
objectives:

Poverty alleviation
Food security
Sustainable management of natural resources
Participation and inclusion of local ethnic, indigenous communities

Programmes aimed at addressing these objectives will include the following strategies:

Reduction of slash and burn agriculture
Development of rural infrastructure
Promotion of focal area approach to rural development
Emphasis on community participation and gender issues in development

Phase I Watershed Selection Criteria
  tc \l1 "Phase I Watershed Selection Criteria
Pre-requisite criteria were applied by the Phase I team in short listing and selecting the
three target watersheds in the four host countries:

Must be within MRC Watershed Classification (Class 1 to 3)
Adequate infrastructure existing or planned before project start-up
Interest and consent of local population
Government commitment to provide adequate institutional support
Security

These were augmented by the following additional criteria:

Environmental fragility
Significance of biodiversity at national and regional level
Socio-economic status of local populations
lack of current external donor support
Need for intervention in regional perspective
Poverty
Social Structure

Phase II Priority Area Selection Criteria
  tc \l1 "Phase II Project Area Selection Criteria
The original Project Document prepared for Phase I envisaged that this phase would
reach the point of identifying project areas, and supplied some “General Criteria for
Selection of Possible Pilot Project Sites to be Considered During Project
Implementation” Annex 3.

Geographical scope for priority project areas
 tc \l2 "Geographical scope for pilot project areas
Four priority project areas for investment proposals will be identified, and no more than
one per any one country.

Technical scope for priority area selection
  tc \l2 "Technical scope for pilot project site selection
Projects will be identified to improve resource and environmental management through
poverty reduction mechanisms, with full participation of local communities. It is expected
that each site plan will need to be integrated and holistic in its approach if it is to effect
both poverty reduction and environmental improvement.
General criteria for priority area selection

Considered to be accessible by road or foot trail.
Within sub-basins with relatively low population density (<30p/sq.km).
Within watershed MRC classes 1 to 3.
Not located in areas of security risk.
Located in areas where watershed mismanagement will have an actual or potential
impact on infrastructure investments.
Located where community is willing to participate in the project and form Resource User
Groups (RUGs).
Located where NGOs or other social engineering infrastructure exists in order to
spearhead community participation processes.
Located in areas where community conflicts over resource use are not currently evident.
Located within communities that are willing to adopt a process of participatory land use
planning with local officials, RUGs and other stakeholders.
Areas where there are clearly defined opportunities for developing alternative livelihood
projects which aim to increase household income levels well above the poverty line
indicated for that specific region.
Defined based upon watersheds or contiguous groups of micro-watersheds linked
through either a common hydrological system or common bio-geographical zone.

After a careful and extensive review of the proposed selection criteria contained in the
Phase I and project design documentation, and in terms of the progress made to date in
the screening process, some additional criteria will be applied and considered in the
selection of project area:

The area must demonstrate a need for development. Need can be demonstrated by
poverty, natural resource depletion, drug production or dependence, disease incidence.
Demand for development intervention. This can be demonstrated by local community
willingness to participate, measured by local attempts to develop or improve.
Local absorptive capacity must be adequate, both in respect of the implementing
agencies and target communities. There must be counterpart government agencies in
the area who can service the communities and provide an adequate level and frequency
of service. This is also related to point number 15 below.
Presence of other donors in area. If other donors are in the same area, there must be
sufficient counterpart resource and capacity to accommodate a new project. Activities
then proposed a low level of other donor activity could be tolerated but no presence is
obviously more desirable.

Final Selection Criteria in Order of Priority

The selection criteria to be used for Phase II site selection have now been reviewed and
are re-presented in priority order. It should be noted that some of the earlier criteria used
in the initial screening process to identify and select each watershed, are no longer
required for the final selection of the specific project sites:

Not located in areas of security risk.
Local agency capability and absorptive capacity – there must be counterpart government
agencies in the area who can service the communities in the project area. Sufficient
trained staff must be in place.
Defined based upon watersheds or contiguous groups of micro-watersheds, catchment
basin and sub basins, linked through either a common hydrological system or common
bio-geographical zone.
Areas where there are clearly defined opportunities for developing alternative livelihood
projects which aim to increase household income levels well above the poverty line
indicated for that specific region.
Located in areas where watershed mis-management will have an actual or potential
impact on infrastructure investments
Need – the area must demonstrate a need for development. Need can be demonstrated
by poverty, natural resource depletion, drug production or dependence, disease
incidence.
Demand for development intervention. This can be demonstrated by local community
willingness to participate, measured by local attempts to develop or improve.
Considered to be accessible by road or foot trail.
Located within communities that are willing to adopt a process of participatory land use
planning with local officials, RUGs and other stakeholders.
Presence of other donors in area. If other donors are in the same area, there must be
sufficient counterpart resource and capacity to accommodate a new project, as well as a
continued high level of demand being demonstrated by local communities. The activities
being implemented by other organisations would be seen as preparatory or
complimentary to any investments made by the Bank.

5.2.2
Mapping and GIS

Phase II can be separated into a reconnaissance stage and an in-depth-study stage.

During the reconnaissance stage, only overview maps will be needed. These maps can
be produced based on:
Archived satellite images (such as Landsat TM). Satellite images have already been
purchased for Cambodia, Laos, and China. A satellite image for Viet Nam has been
ordered.
Data sets obtainable from government institutions and regional agencies (such as the
MRCS). Requests have been sent to various institutions to provide such information.
Some data sets have already been made available.
Data sets collected during Phase I (to a very limited extent).

During the in-depth-study stage, the project will have to rely on GIS information at larger
scales. This information will mainly be based on:
Available topographic maps (at scales of 1:100,000 and larger)
High resolution satellite images.
Data sets at larger scales obtainable from government institutions (e.g. in Laos: village
positions produced by the Ministry of Education combined with the statistical village
survey data produced by the National Statistical Center).

Most topographic maps available for the GMS region, especially in rural areas, are
based on information compiled before 1975. They are largely outdated as far as
settlements and infrastructure are concerned. Most GIS data sets that are publicly
available in the GMS countries are based on these topographic maps.

Recent topographic maps at larger scales are either not available or are classified and
may not be used outside the respective countries. In a number of cases, maps not
available from national institutions can be purchased through Internet-based companies.
However, the project should not opt for this solution until all other possibilities of getting
access to maps have been explored.

There is neither time nor budget to comprehensively vectorise (digitise) the information
from the topographic maps. The approach the project should take is to scan and geo-
reference them and to vectorise (digitise) only selected features to be specified by the
subject specialists on the project team. Scanning of 1:50,000 scale topographic maps
has already been started in Cambodia and Laos.

Given the restrictions of quality and availability of topographic maps, recent remote
sensing data become even more important for Phase II. The budget allocated for
procurement of GIS data (US$ 15,000) does not allow for the purchase of digital aerial
photos, as would be required in a GIS. Phase II will therefore have to rely on high
resolution satellite images, e.g. from the Indian IRS satellite. These images have a
ground resolution of about 6 * 6 meters and cover 70 * 70 kilometers. They can be
enlarged up to print scales of 1:25,000, depending on image quality. The cost per image
is US$ 2,500 (individual license) or US$ 3,500 (corporate license). Thus, the budget
allows for the purchase of 6 individual or 4 corporate licenses. Thought should be given
to the purchase of corporate licenses, since they can be shared with other government
agencies, which in turn might facilitate the exchange of other GIS data produced by
these agencies.

The IRS images, which are only black and white, might be combined with recent images
from the new American Landsat 7 satellite, if the need for detailed land cover
classification arises. They have a coarser resolution (30 * 30 meters), but offer color data
covering the entire visible and the infrared spectrum. The cost per image is only US$
700.
The recent satellite images, especially IRS, should only be purchased once a final and
definite decision has been reached on the location of the field sites. Given the budget
constraints, the project can hardly afford to purchase images for potential field sites that
are dismissed at a later point during Phase II.

In addition to the processing of maps and satellite images, the GIS activities of the
project will need to focus right from the start on the establishment of a comprehensive
GIS data base structure
GIS data documentation/meta data preparation
This is to ensure the usability of the results of Phase II beyond its duration.

It should be considered to establish and maintain close contact with the ADB RETA
5622 – Subregional Environmental Monitoring and Information Systems (SEMIS).
SEMIS, focusing on selected hotspots within the GMS, will eventually face problems
very similar to those outlined above and might want to access the same data sets.

The Lao National counterpart expressed a strong request that GIS training should be
conducted or that at least GIS staff in national counterpart institutions should be kept
informed about the project’s GIS activities. Although the time budget does definitely not
allow for training, the consultant will have to closely cooperate with GIS staff in national
counterpart institutions and to give technical support and advice where required.
Additional tasks

In addition to this the following activities have been carried out: a review of project
documentation, initiation of background data collection, initiation of selection of local
consultants, and meetings with government officials.
5.3
Project Specialists Approach to the Work Programme - Identifying Bankable Project
Interventions


Participatory Rural Appraisal

Mission 1 of Community Development Specialist/Sociologist (1 March – 31 May)

Detailed PRA work will be conducted in the selected project site areas in order to identify
and prioritise local target community needs, constraints and opportunities. This will
provide an entry point for further technical analysis and formulation of project
interventions.

The PRA will include an assessment of local government service agency capability and
capacity. The process that will be used as the basic PRA methodology is outlined below:

Initial Social Assessment – Participatory Rural Appraisal

Data collection methodology

The PRA study will focus on and obtain data from three levels. Three different data
collection instruments have been developed for use at district, village and household
levels (Provincial level data has been collected on an RRA basis and upon data
collected from Phase I). These data collection formats will be translated into the host
language in each country as part of the orientation training for the domestic consultants
hired to implement the PRA work.

District Level study: This will focus on assessing capacity and capability of district
service agencies, as well as identifying local development plans and priorities. General
demographic statistics, infrastructure and facilities and details of other donors working in
the area will be obtained. District level investment needs will be identified.

Village Level Study: At this level, the data being collected focuses more on identifying
the issues, problems and constraints, needs and opportunities in the target communities,
and in getting community consensus as to what activities or interventions should be a
priority. Of course village specific data is collected in terms of populations, sub-groups,
education, land holdings, infrastructure and services needed. The community will also
examine the causes of problems and a community structure will be provided in order to
enhance further in-depth technical analysis of problems and solutions. Three
representative communities will be studied in detail. They will be representative in terms
of local ethnicity and land/farming system types.

Household Level: At least three case studies, representing the low, middle and upper
wealth groups of the village, will be conducted. Basic and detailed socio-economic data
will be obtained covering basic poverty and quality of life indicators such as land,
production, income, health, skill levels, needs. It is at this level that a detailed gender
analysis is prepared.

PRA Implementation Procedure:
Basic data collection forms prepared for village meetings and group meetings.
Forms translated and field tested. Necessary revisions made.
Visit host province, explain objectives of RETA Phase II and current PRA work..
Visit host district(s), explain RETA Phase II objectives and PRA work. Recruit local
district level assistant.
Provide on location briefing and training to PRA specialist and local assistant on the
PRA methodology to be followed.

Community level procedure:
Arrange meeting times with target village head and administrative committee.
Conduct initial orientation meeting with head and committee. Explain objectives of the
PRA work. Explain the type of data required and how it will be obtained. Arrange a time
when the first village meeting can be held.
Before leaving, obtain general overall data from the head and committee. This general
data can be used for population and demographics, health problems, disadvantaged
families, land allocation, general socio-economic conditions, gender analysis, education
and literacy. A group interview form has been prepared. The select group should also be
asked to rank what they see s the top five development issues or constraints/problems
facing the community, the cause of these and possible solutions or opportunities. This
can be used to verify data obtained from village meetings. Provide basic training to this
group in order that they may act as facilitators during village meetings.
Return to village on nominated day to commence village meetings.
Commence meeting by explaining objectives of the PRA work and how the information
will be used. Explain the process which will be used for the village meetings and the use
of discussion groups. Some explanation as to how to hold group discussion and how to
record results is provided.
 Break the audience into discussion groups. Groups should be limited to be no larger
than eight members, with five being optimum group size. There should be no more than
ten groups formed, and one of these groups must be an all female group as well as the
female member of the PRA team (this is in recognition of the reluctance and often taboo
nature of women from certain ethnic groups talking to strangers, particularly men).
Each group is given a large piece of butcher’s paper and a marker pen. The sheet is
divided into three columns headed:
1) Problem/Issue, 2) Cause of Problem, 3) Opportunity/Solution. The groups will be used
to reach consensus on the problems and issues that they see as a developmental
priority. Each group will prepare a list of the five main problems/issues in priority order in
the first column. The group must then discuss what are the reasons or causes of the
problem or issue, these are indicated in the second column. The group must the discuss
what could be seen as solutions or opportunities to intervene and resolve these
problems. These are indicated in the third column.
The group results are then quickly presented and a master list is compiled using the
group data. The priority order of the master list is then discussed and agreed upon, as
are the causes and opportunities. This is done in an open meeting.
Based upon the problems and issues presented, community members will be asked to
volunteer to form a discussion group specific to the issues identified. These groups can
be much larger as they will be used in technical follow-up meetings. Again, it will be
necessary to ensure that there is at least one all female group. Once people have
agreed upon this, appointments must then be made for a follow-up meeting with each of
the thematic groups.
On the appointed day, the PRA team visit the village and commence more detailed
discussion on the group issue/problem. At this level it should be possible to delve into
issues in a much more detailed manner. Similarly, the thematic group will further explore
the opportunities/solutions previously identified. Again, much more detail can be
extracted here. These discussion groups will also be used by the RETA team later on in
the year when conducting more detailed feasibility and design.
Inspection must be made of resources offered as potential solutions; eg, water for
irrigation, gravity VWS source, expandable paddy land etc. These will be studied in more
detail by the pre-feasibility technical team.
Three households from each village surveyed will be selected for the purpose of
preparing case studies, representative of the target community. The team will interview
both husband and wife, with other family members present.
Upon finalisation of work in a district, the team will hold a debriefing with the district
administration and similarly, provide a debriefing at the provincial level. It may be
possible to combine the exit meetings.

5.3.2
Upland Agriculture

Mission 2 (mid May – mid July)

The second mission will consist of reviewing preliminary data from the socio-economic
PRA's and other fact finding activities, design, implementation and reporting of technical
field studies, completion of two review documents on regional lessons learn and
environmental degradation and poverty, and begin preliminary analysis of proposed
project sites at pre-feasibility level. The main activities for the Mission 2 will be as
follows:

Review preliminary data from the Community Development Specialist/ Sociologist's PRA
of selected project watershed areas.
Design with counterparts technical field studies including themes such as alternative
land use practices, development of models for processing and marketing of agricultural
output, and farming systems that conserve soil and water in upland locations.
Prepare TOR and recruit staff (one in each of the four countries) to implement technical
field studies.
Visit the four countries to initiate technical field studies and confer with counterpart staff
at national and provincial levels.
Prepare Regional Review and Environmental Degradation and Poverty Review reports,
and compile document of "best bet" technologies.
With other consultants define the following: (i) appropriate land use models such as agro
forestry and community based forest wood lots, and (ii) community based land and
resource tenure which can be adopted in the selected areas.
With other consultants liaise with NGOs and other community based organisations to
ensure their participation in project identification and planning process.
Initiate preliminary analysis of proposed project sites at pre-feasibility level.
Attend mid-term RETA workshop.
Prepare mission report.
5.3.3
Rural Infrastructure

Mission 1 (mid May to mid July)

On this mission, the Rural Infrastructure Specialist will work in close cooperation with
staff of the NPA in each country, and visit all target villages/communities to assess in
detail the status of existing infrastructure, with particular attention to:

access – foot and vehicular in both wet season and dry season;
water supply – drinking and domestic;
electrification;
health clinics;
schools;
markets;
grain storage facilities; and
irrigation.

The mission will consider:

the type and suitability of facilities presently in use;
the present condition of the facilities;
the standard of maintenance undertaken;
whether the facilities are managed by a local committee, outsiders, or individuals; and
funding arrangements and adequacy for routine O&M, and arrangements for the
payment of major recurrent costs.

Based on the findings of Mission 1 in terms of the needs and wishes of the communities,
and taking to account the perceived ability of the community to maintain and operate the
infrastructure in a sustainable fashion, the Rural Infrastructure Specialist will make
recommendations for Project intervention in the construction, rehabilitation or
replacement of local infrastructure.

A draft program of work will be prepared, together with preliminary cost estimates for
inclusion in the Mid-Term Report.

5.3.4
Environment/Watershed Management

It is strongly felt that also a specialist on environmental and watershed management
should be added to the team from the yet unallocated four persom months. He or she
should look into issues such as if the pressure on resources is sufficiently low to permit
continued traditional use of resources that with improvements can ensure sustainable
management; where traditional agricultural methods are unsustainable and/or together
with intensive population pressure can no longer sustain the rural population and
therefore off-farm employment alternatives needs to be created.

An environmental analysis of the proposed project interventions also needs to be
undertaken when the activities discussed under section 5.4 below are carried out.
5.4
Project Specialists Approach to the Work Programme - Preliminary Technical/Social/
Environmental/Financial/Economic Analysis

5.4.1
Community Development

Mission 2 (mid September – mid October)

The final one month input will be supplied mid September until mid October. The main
tasks during this input will be to review data collected from the PRA studies from each
country, to ensure that all has been collected and that there are no outstanding matters.
This will then be collated and the Community Development (CD) specialist will prepare
analytical reports from each country based upon the PRA data. These reports prepared
based upon the PRA data, and the PRA data itself, will be made available to the other
team members for more detailed technical study, and for more detailed investigation with
affected community groups. The CD specialist will also assist the other team members in
preparing recommendations for inclusion in the final report.

5.4.2
Upland Agriculture

Mission 3 (mid September to end October)

This final mission will focus on finalising the technical studies and completing the Upland
Agriculturist's contribution to design of watershed projects. The main activities for the
Mission 3 will be as follows:
Visit the four countries to finalise technical field studies and confer with counterpart staff
at national and provincial levels.
Complete technical field studies reports with national consultants.
Complete Upland Agriculturist's contribution to the pre-feasibility studies of the three
watersheds (four project sites).
Prepare mission report.

5.4.3
Rural Infrastructure

Mission 2 (mid September to mid October)

The Rural Infrastructure Specialist will provide an input of one month during the final
period. During this input the Specialist will liaise closely with staff of all NPAs and other
team members and prepare detailed cost estimates, implementation schedules and
indicative designs for the recommended Project intervention in rural infrastructure.
These outputs will be for inclusion in the Draft Final Report.

5.4.4
Economics

Mission 1 (mid September to mid November)

During this one mission the Economist will work in close cooperation with the “technical”
specialists and conduct a preliminary financial and economic analysis of each selected
project.
The analysis will be carried out at two levels:
Individual farmer/community/enterprise level which shall provide rough financial returns
yielded by the main economic activities the project intends to support. This should also
include an assessment as to what extent project costs may be recovered from these
economic activities.
National/social level which shall provide an analysis of also indirect benefits and costs.
Relevant technical inputs for the identification of these shall be provided by the other
specialists. These indirect benefits and costs shall be preliminary assessed in order to
arrive at a rough estimate of the net benefits generated by each selected project.

5.4.5
Mapping and GIS

Mission 3 (mid September – mid October)

At the end of Phase II, input from the GIS specialist will be required to:
Assemble the information collected during the field studies.
Complete GIS data documentation/meta data preparation.
Prepare maps for the final reports.

The input at the end of Phase II needs to center around the GIS data
documentation/meta data preparation in order to ensure the usability of the results of
Phase II beyond its duration.


Reporting

The Consultant has undertaken to prepare the following reports and their timing is
planned as follows:

Inception Report                      March 2000

Report on Priority Areas                      April 2000

Mid-Term Report                       July 2000

Draft Final Report                    November 2000

Final Report                          January 2001


Workshops

Towards the end of the Technical Assistance and after completion of a Draft Final
Report a sub-regional workshop will be arranged. This will be used as a forum to present
the findings of the Consultant. The workshop will be attended by representatives from
the GMS countries.

During the course of the work small workshops involving relevant government agencies
and other stakeholders will be conducted as part of the communication process. These
will be rather informal but nevertheless important. In particular consultation will be
sought upon completion if the draft Inception Report and draft Mid-Term Report.
Appendix 1

WORK PROGRAM AND ALLOCATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES
Appendix 2

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION SPECIALISTS

A.     International Consultants

1.     Team Leader (7 person months)

Provide overall project management encompassing administration, financial control,
technical oversight and human resources development.
Establish and maintain workable contact with national partners, the Working Group on
Environment (WGE),4 research institutes, projects and other institutions working in the
same sectors.
Identify and recruit national consultants in accordance with the requirements specified in
the terms of reference and ensure their full and effective involvement in the project
activities.
Prepare a detailed workplan with activities, milestones and deadlines for intended
outputs.
Provide technical direction to the consultants and facilitate planning and execution of the
workplan.
Co-ordinate and finalise the preparation of inception, progress, mid term and final
reports.
Liase with the Asian Development Bank and other potential donors regarding the
content, scale and cost of projects that emerge from the feasibility studies.
Ensure the full participation of all stakeholders in project planning and preparation
especially local communities and NGOs.
Ensure that the outputs of Phase II are made available in a timely fashion thus providing
continuity.

2.     Upland Agriculturist (5 person months)

Review regional project experience to establish an inventory of lessons learned.
Investigate upland agriculture practices in the chosen watersheds and define the key
issues that relate to environmental degradation and poverty.
In cooperation with other consultants establish guidelines for selection of priority
locations for projects and select those locations.
Undertake technical field studies at the selected locations. These field studies should
consider especially the following:
a)      alternative land use practices related to agricultural production. In particular
explore models for the encouragement of settled agriculture through the provision of
agricultural technical extension, improved varieties and improved agronomic practices;
b)      workable models for processing and marketing of agricultural output;
c)      farming systems that conserve soil and water in upland locations.
In cooperation with other consultants define appropriate land use models such as agro
forestry and community based forest woodlots.
In cooperation with the social anthropologist attempt to define a model for community
based land and resource tenure which can be adopted in the selected projects.
In cooperation with the other consultants liaise with NGOs and other community based
organisations to ensure their participation in the project identification and planning
process.
Participate with the other consultants in the preliminary analysis of the proposed
projects.
Work together with other core team members in the preparation of the study reports.
Community Development Specialist/Sociologist (4 person months)

In collaboration with national consultant counterparts prepare a workplan to explore the
social dimensions to poverty and environmental degradation.
Identify project ideas that address the social dimensions to poverty alleviation and test
these ideas at village level through participatory village meetings and seminars.
Conduct participatory rural appraisal in selected pilot project communities and hold
workshops to ensure full participation in project planning.
Investigate institutional capacity to implement pilot projects, at community level, and
recommend institutional capacity strengthening necessary to ensure community based
resource management. Prepare training sessions to ensure the creation of an enabling
environment.
Explore a range of community based land and resource tenure models and discuss
these with communities. Attempt to define a workable model for adoption in the pilot
projects.
Identify sectoral issues of importance and prepare reports on these.
Incorporate gender, ethnic minority, migration and other issues into the project planning
process.
Liaise with NGOs and other community based organisations to ensure their participation
in the project identification and planning process.
Work together with other core team members in the preparation of detailed feasibility
and prefeasibility reports.

4.     Mapping and GIS Specialist (3 person months)

Preparation of base maps of selected watersheds (topography).
Preparation of land use maps of the selected watersheds showing forest cover areas of
shifting cultivation, agricultural production, protected areas and other environment data.
Prepare socioeconomic data of the watershed areas.
Prepare GIS of the watershed areas.
Provide aerial-photography coverage of the project sites.

5.     Rural Infrastructure Specialist (3 person months)

Collect information regarding existing and proposed infrastructure development plans
roads, dams etc, within the target watersheds.
Assess needs, constraints and opportunities in improving infrastructure in remote
watershed areas focussing upon poverty reduction and environmental mitigation.
Prepare a workplan that investigates the infrastructural requirements in support of
planned project interventions in selected watersheds.
Provide detailed and costed plans for feeder roads, small-scale irrigation schemes
aquaculture ponds, rural electrification schemes, health clinics, village market structures,
small-scale drinking water systems etc in support of proposed pilot project interventions.

6.     Economist (2 person months)

Conduct a preliminary financial and economic analysis of each selected (potential)
project separately. Hence this analysis will be carried out at two levels:
(a) Individual farmer/community/enterprise level
A financial analysis based on estimated financial projections including cash flow analysis
and sources of funds. This shall provide rough financial returns yielded by the main
economic activities the project intends to support, e.g. farming models so as to give an
indication of their financial viability. Relevant technical inputs to be provided by the other
consultants. An assessment should also be made as to what extent project costs may
be recovered from these economic activities.

(b) National/social level
An economic analysis by identifying direct as well as indirect benefits and costs, i.e.
benefits and costs arising within the project as well as outside the project itself (off-site).
Intangible benefits should also be identified as far as is practicable. Relevant technical
inputs for this identification to be provided by the other consultants. These benefits and
costs should be preliminary assessed in order to arrive at a rough estimate of the net
benefits generated for each selected project.
To the extent possible benefits and costs, for e.g. carbon sequestration or biodiversity
conservation, may be taken from generalised models and the data adjusted to the
specific situation at the proposed site. If or when no reliable data is available for indirect
benefits and costs these may be considered by establishing a range for their potential
impact on economic returns.
The analysis should be presented in a format compatible with ADB reporting
requirements.

B.      Domestic Consultants

Community Development Specialists

Assist the international consultant responsible for community development and social
issues in data acquisition, design and implementation of social surveys and other duties
in support of the social analysis component to the project feasibility and project design.
Collect information on ethnic groups and gender roles and assist with the integration of
this data into the feasibility analysis.
Assistance with analysis of the institutional capacity at village level to implement
proposed project interventions.

Rural Credit and Marketing Specialists

Collection of data related to current market practices and future market opportunities.
Assist the international economist consultant with analysis of the potential for marketing
agricultural and other products produced by communities within proposed project areas.
Development of recommendations for innovative yet workable market structures. In
collaboration with the upland agriculturist, suggest new crops for which markets may
exist or can be developed.
Analysis of the effectiveness of current rural credit facilities available to rural
communities with recommendations for system improvements.
Design of effective rural credit systems that would augment proposed project
interventions.

3.      Lawyer

Analysis of current land and resource tenure structures evident within the project areas.
Development of and recommendations for the implementation of workable land and
resource tenure systems that would safeguard the rights and interests (of rural based
communities) to the sustainable use of goods and services that may be provided from
land and water resources within the proposed project areas.
Incorporate such land and usufruct rights into proposed project interventions.
Provide a forum for the dissemination of recommendations for the reform of land and
resource systems to all stakeholders, and lobby for reformation of land/resource tenure
at government level.
Appendix 3

PERSONNEL SCHEDULE
Appendix 4

TRAVEL PLAN FOR FIRST FIELD VISITS
   Reference is made to a letter from the Bank dated 21 October 1999 following the
WGE meeting in Vientiane on 8 October 1999 to which the designated Team Leader for
Phase II was invited.
   As a comparative figure: JICA has allocated US$ 8,000,000 to vectorise the 1:100,000
scale maps of Laos using local staff.
4       The WGE comprises the ministry of Environment of Cambodia; National
Environment, Protection Agency of PRC: Science, Technology and Environment Agency
of Lao PDR; National Committee for Environmental Affairs of Myanmar Ministry of
Science, Technology and Environment of Thailand; and National Environment Agency of
Viet Nam.




                PAGE     i



                PAGE     25

                PAGE     1

                PAGE     3

                PAGE     1

         PAGE     1




Appendix 1    Work Program and Allocation of Responsibilities

Appendix 2    Terms of Reference for Implementation Specialists

Appendix 3    Personnel Schedule

Appendix 4    Travel Plan for First Field Visits




MARGULES PÖYRY
MARGULES PÖYRY


MARGULES PÖYRY




MARGULES PÖYRY

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:9
posted:9/4/2011
language:English
pages:38