CRITICAL ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT PROJECT NATIONAL FADAMA COORDINATION OFFICE, ABUJA, NIGERIA. IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REVIEW (ICR) REPORT By Omobowale Oni, Ajewole Opeyemi Isaac and P. M. Dontsop Nguezet University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria Final report submitted to PRIME GOLD PROJECTS LIMITED 42 Durban Street, Off Adetokunbo Ademola Crescent, Wuse II, Abuja. JUNE 2011 1 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY ACRONYMS ADP - Agricultural Development Project AfDB - Africa Development Bank CDD - Community Driven Development CEMP - Critical Ecosystem Management Project ESMP - Environmental and Social Management Plan FCA - Fadama Community Associations FGN - Federal Government of Nigeria FUG - Fadama Users Group GEF - Global Environment Fund GPS - Global Positioning System IDA - International Development Association LDP - Local Development Plan LFDC - Local Fadama Development Committee LFDO - Local Fadama Desk Office LFDO - Local Fadama Desk Office LGA - Local Government Area M&E - Monitoring and Evaluation MIS - Management information Systems MTR - Mid Term Review NGO - Non Govdernmental Organization 2 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY PAD - Project Appraisal Document PDO - Project Development Objective SLM - Sustainable Land Management SLWMP - Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices SWS - State Watershed Subcommittee 3 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Table of Contents Content Page Title 1 Acronyms 2 Table of Contents 4 List of Tables 5 List of Figures 6 Acknowledgement 10 Executive Summary 11 INTRODUCTION 23 1.2. Circumstances/Justification for the Project ............................................................................. 24 1.3. Objectives of CEMP................................................................................................................ 26 1.4 Description of Project Components ......................................................................................... 27 1.5. Implementation and Institutional Arrangements for Fadama II GEF ..................................... 30 1.7 CEMP Implementation Progress Report .................................................................................. 34 METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 49 The Study Area............................................................................................................................... 49 Results ............................................................................................................................................ 53 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 13429 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................. 131 4 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY List of tables Table 1: 1. Sustainable Land Management Activities at the Watershed Level in Bauchi State .... 34 Table 1.2:Economic Analysis of Selected subprojects of CEMP 37 Table 2.1: Land area, site and coordinates of Intervention states and sites ................................... 53 Table1.3: Estimation of the total impact on selected outcomes ..................................................... 38 5 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY List of Figures Fig 3.1: Existence of Watershed Management Coordination capacity in state. ............................. 49 Fig 3.2: Mainstreaming of sustainable land and water management practice into LDP. ............... 50 Fig 3.3: Area under sustainable land and water management practice in pilot site ....................... 51 Fig 3.4: ‘Yes’ response on extent of achievement of project targets with respect to capacity building ........................................................................................................................................... 52 Fig 3.5: Lessons learnt with respect to activities within Capacity Building Component .............. 54 Fig 3.6: Challenges faced with respect to activities within Capacity Building Component .......... 55 Fig 3.7: Recommendation on activities within Capacity Building Component ............................. 56 Fig 3.8; Yes response on the extent of achievement of project target with respect to Integrated Ecosystem Management at Watershed Level ................................................................................. 58 Fig 3.9: Lessons learnt on activities within Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level ........................................................................................................................................................ 60 Fig 3.10: Challenges of activities within Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level 61 Fig 3.11: Recommendations on activities within Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level ................................................................................................................................................ 62 Fig 3.12: Yes response on extent of achievement of project on community sustainable land Management. .................................................................................................................................. 63 Fig 3.13: Lessons learnt on embarking on SLM component of the project ................................... 65 Fig 3.14: Challenges faced on embarking on SLM component of the project............................... 65 Fig 3.15: Recommendation on embarking on SLM component of the project .............................. 66 Fig 3.16: Yes response on achievement of Project Management and Monitoring evaluation ....... 67 6 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.17: Lessons learnt on Project management and monitoring component ............................. 69 Fig 3.18: Yes response as regards state government support in the area of Institutional arrangement. ................................................................................................................................... 71 Fig 3.19: Yes response as regards state government support in the area of Institutional support. 72 Fig 3.20: Yes response as regards local government support in the area of Institutional arrangement. ................................................................................................................................... 73 Fig 3.21: Yes response as regards local government support in the area of Institutional support. 74 Fig 3.22: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of Decision making. ........................................................................................................................................... 76 Fig 3.23; Lesson learnt in terms of getting empowered in decision making by the project .......... 78 Fig 3.24: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in decision making ........................... 79 Fig 3.25; Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in decision making ....... 80 Fig 3.26: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of fund transfer. ........................................................................................................................................................ 81 Fg3.27: Lesson learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of funds tranfer by the project 81 Fig 3.28: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the arae of funds transfer by the project ............................................................................................................................................. 82 Fig 3.29: Recommendation to enhance empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of fund transfer ........................................................................................................................................................ 82 Fig 3.30: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of awareness on sustainable land and water Management practices......................................................................... 83 Fig 3.31: Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of awareness of SLWMP .... 83 Fig 3.32: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the area of awareness of SLWMP 84 7 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.33: Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of awareness on SLWMP ..................................................................................................................................... 85 Fig 3.34: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of adoption of sustainable land and water management practices. ........................................................................ 85 Fig 3.35: Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in adoption of SLWMP ......................... 86 Fig 3.36: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the area of adoption of SLWMP 87 Fig 3.37: Recommendation to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of adoption of SLWMP .......................................................................................................................................... 88 Fig 3.38: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of sustainability and up scaling SLWMP. ................................................................................................................. 89 Fig 3.39: Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of sustainability and up- scaling SLWMP ............................................................................................................................. 90 Fig 3.40: Challenges faced to get empowered in the area of sustanability and up-scaling SLWMP ........................................................................................................................................................ 90 Fig 3.41: Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of sustainability and up –scaling SLWMP ......................................................................................... 91 Fig 3.42: Yes response as regards whether CEMP Project affected beneficiaries livelihood. ..... 92 Fig 3.43: Lessons learnt in terms of how the project can impact on beneficiaries’ livelihood ...... 93 Fig 3.44: Challenges faced in terms of how project can impact on beneficiaries livelihood......... 94 Fig 3.45: Recommendations to promote the impact of project on beneficiaries’ livelihood. ........ 94 Fig 3.46: Yes response as regards whether CEMP Project affected non-beneficiaries livelihood. ........................................................................................................................................................ 95 Fig 3.47: Lessons learnt in terms on how the project can impact on non—beneficiariea’ livelihood ........................................................................................................................................ 96 8 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.48: Challenges Faced in terms of how project can impact on non-beneficiaries’ livelihood. ........................................................................................................................................................ 97 Fig 3.49: Recommendations on how to promote impact of project on non-beneficiaries’ livelihood. ....................................................................................................................................... 98 Fig 3.50: ‘Yes ‘response with respect to compliance with World Bank Environmental safeguards. ........................................................................................................................................................ 99 Fig 3.51: lessons learnt on how environmental laws/ safeguards can be implemented. .............. 101 Fig 3.52: Challenges faced in enforcing environmental laws ...................................................... 102 Fig 3.53: Recommendation on how to promote enforcement of environmental laws ................. 103 Fig 3.54: Yes response with respect to project complying with clauses of the grant agreement . 104 Fig 4.55: Lessons learnt in complying with grant agreement ...................................................... 106 Fig 4.56: Challenges faced in complying with grant agreement .................................................. 107 Fig 4.57: Recommendations for complying with grant agreement .............................................. 108 9 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY List of tables Table 1: 1. Sustainable Land Management Activities at the Watershed Level in Bauchi State .... 34 Table 1.2:Economic Analysis of Selected subprojects of CEMP 37 Table 2.1: Land area, site and coordinates of Intervention states and sites ................................... 53 Table1.3: Estimation of the total impact on selected outcomes ..................................................... 38 10 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY List of Figures Fig 3.1: Existence of Watershed Management Coordination capacity in state. ............................. 49 Fig 3.2: Mainstreaming of sustainable land and water management practice into LDP. ............... 50 Fig 3.3: Area under sustainable land and water management practice in pilot site ....................... 51 Fig 3.4: ‘Yes’ response on extent of achievement of project targets with respect to capacity building ........................................................................................................................................... 52 Fig 3.5: Lessons learnt with respect to activities within Capacity Building Component .............. 54 Fig 3.6: Challenges faced with respect to activities within Capacity Building Component .......... 55 Fig 3.7: Recommendation on activities within Capacity Building Component ............................. 56 Fig 3.8; Yes response on the extent of achievement of project target with respect to Integrated Ecosystem Management at Watershed Level ................................................................................. 58 Fig 3.9: Lessons learnt on activities within Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level ........................................................................................................................................................ 60 Fig 3.10: Challenges of activities within Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level 61 Fig 3.11: Recommendations on activities within Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level ................................................................................................................................................ 62 Fig 3.12: Yes response on extent of achievement of project on community sustainable land Management. .................................................................................................................................. 63 Fig 3.13: Lessons learnt on embarking on SLM component of the project ................................... 65 Fig 3.14: Challenges faced on embarking on SLM component of the project............................... 65 Fig 3.15: Recommendation on embarking on SLM component of the project .............................. 66 Fig 3.16: Yes response on achievement of Project Management and Monitoring evaluation ....... 67 11 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.17: Lessons learnt on Project management and monitoring component ............................. 69 Fig 3.18: Yes response as regards state government support in the area of Institutional arrangement. ................................................................................................................................... 71 Fig 3.19: Yes response as regards state government support in the area of Institutional support. 72 Fig 3.20: Yes response as regards local government support in the area of Institutional arrangement. ................................................................................................................................... 73 Fig 3.21: Yes response as regards local government support in the area of Institutional support. 74 Fig 3.22: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of Decision making. ........................................................................................................................................... 76 Fig 3.23; Lesson learnt in terms of getting empowered in decision making by the project .......... 78 Fig 3.24: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in decision making ........................... 79 Fig 3.25; Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in decision making ....... 80 Fig 3.26: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of fund transfer. ........................................................................................................................................................ 81 Fg3.27: Lesson learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of funds tranfer by the project 81 Fig 3.28: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the arae of funds transfer by the project ............................................................................................................................................. 82 Fig 3.29: Recommendation to enhance empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of fund transfer ........................................................................................................................................................ 82 Fig 3.30: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of awareness on sustainable land and water Management practices......................................................................... 83 Fig 3.31: Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of awareness of SLWMP .... 83 Fig 3.32: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the area of awareness of SLWMP 84 12 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.33: Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of awareness on SLWMP ..................................................................................................................................... 85 Fig 3.34: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of adoption of sustainable land and water management practices. ........................................................................ 85 Fig 3.35: Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in adoption of SLWMP ......................... 86 Fig 3.36: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the area of adoption of SLWMP 87 Fig 3.37: Recommendation to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of adoption of SLWMP .......................................................................................................................................... 88 Fig 3.38: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of sustainability and up scaling SLWMP. ................................................................................................................. 89 Fig 3.39: Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of sustainability and up- scaling SLWMP ............................................................................................................................. 90 Fig 3.40: Challenges faced to get empowered in the area of sustanability and up-scaling SLWMP ........................................................................................................................................................ 90 Fig 3.41: Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of sustainability and up –scaling SLWMP ......................................................................................... 91 Fig 3.42: Yes response as regards whether CEMP Project affected beneficiaries livelihood. ..... 92 Fig 3.43: Lessons learnt in terms of how the project can impact on beneficiaries’ livelihood ...... 93 Fig 3.44: Challenges faced in terms of how project can impact on beneficiaries livelihood......... 94 Fig 3.45: Recommendations to promote the impact of project on beneficiaries’ livelihood. ........ 94 Fig 3.46: Yes response as regards whether CEMP Project affected non-beneficiaries livelihood. ........................................................................................................................................................ 95 Fig 3.47: Lessons learnt in terms on how the project can impact on non—beneficiariea’ livelihood ........................................................................................................................................ 96 13 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.48: Challenges Faced in terms of how project can impact on non-beneficiaries’ livelihood. ........................................................................................................................................................ 97 Fig 3.49: Recommendations on how to promote impact of project on non-beneficiaries’ livelihood. ....................................................................................................................................... 98 Fig 3.50: ‘Yes ‘response with respect to compliance with World Bank Environmental safeguards. ........................................................................................................................................................ 99 Fig 3.51: lessons learnt on how environmental laws/ safeguards can be implemented. .............. 101 Fig 3.52: Challenges faced in enforcing environmental laws ...................................................... 102 Fig 3.53: Recommendation on how to promote enforcement of environmental laws ................. 103 Fig 3.54: Yes response with respect to project complying with clauses of the grant agreement . 104 Fig 4.55: Lessons learnt in complying with grant agreement ...................................................... 106 Fig 4.56: Challenges faced in complying with grant agreement .................................................. 107 Fig 4.57: Recommendations for complying with grant agreement .............................................. 108 14 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT A work of this magnitude and importance could not have been successfully carried out without the excellent collaboration and support from project officials, beneficiaries and other stakeholders. We thank the household survey respondents for their time and valuable information made available for putting this report together. We are also indebted to the local government leaders and the State Project Coordinators of Fadama Project in Bauchi, Imo, Kebbi, Kogi, Kwara and Ogun for their support during the field work. We thank all the state officers - the Environmental Officers, Desk officers and facilitators covering the six intervention sites implementing GEF/CEMP projects- who worked tirelessly to facilitate timely data collection for the study. We are also grateful to the support from National Fadama Coordinating Office for their assistance in planning this study and their guidance in conducting this study. This study could not have been possible without the crucial support and efficient coordination of the National Project Coordinator, Mallam Bukar Tijani, Third National Fadama Development Project, CEMP desk officer, Mr I. A. Nnachi, Mr. Samuel Alabi, Mr. U. C. Nwagbara and the Senior Monitoring and Evaluation specialist, Mr Peter Ajibaiye. Their administrative and resource support was crucial in carrying out this study in a very short time. We also thank all other staff members of the National Fadama Coordination Office, Abuja for their cordial and efficient support. 15 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Executive Summary The Critical Ecosystem Management Project (CEMP) is a pilot project that supports Fadama users to carry out incremental activities that address regional and global environmental issues within the Fadama catchment areas. The Project was disbursement effective on 26th July 2006 and implementation period is from 2006 to 2011. It has four components, which are (i) Capacity Building; (ii) Integrated Ecosystem Management at Watershed Level; (iii) Community Sustainable Land Management and (iv) Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation. The project covers one intervention site in each of the six implementing states of Bauchi (Andiwa Lake Watershed), Imo (Oguta Lake Watershed), Kebbi (Jega-Dumbegu Watershed), Kogi (Koton Karfe Watershed), Kwara (Ajaise Ipo Watershed) and Ogun (Eriti Watershed). The Project is in the final year of implementation. The Key Project Development Objective (PDO) is to enhance the sustained productivity of Fadama areas and the livelihood system they support through sustainable land use and water management. The last five years of project implementation has witnessed significant strides especially with the achievements of the three (3) project outcome indicators. Despite the early challenges, the second half of the project i.e post MTR has seen disbursement greatly improved from about 52% to about 99% as at the end of May 2011 (including firm commitments). Sub-projects implementations (mostly the 2nd batch) are being completed, all statutory studies completed and recommendations implemented. This study was conducted to provide information about the status of Critical Ecosystem Management Project, a CDD project at its completion stage. The Fadama II Critical Ecosystem Management project is a six year project whose specific objective include making sure that by project end, sustainable watershed management coordination capacity is established in at least 60 percent of the participating states; it also aim at attaining by project end, sustainable land and water management practices mainstreamed in Local Development Plans in at least 35 percent of the participating communities; while the third PDO is interested in making sure that area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites must also have increased by at least 80 percent at the end of the project. The broad objective of this study is to assess the overall performance of the project with special reference to its impact on the ecosystem 16 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY and the beneficiaries as well as its compliance to environmental safeguards and standard procurement guidelines of the sponsors. In addition to the detailed review of progree reports from the National and state offices, this study used household data collected from six states benefitting from CEMP project. The sampling procedure involved selection of 30 respondents from the total list of GEF beneficiaries in each of the six States thereby arriving at a total of 180 respondents. The sampling frame was stratified to ensure that all the FCAs and female respondents were represented in the study. The survey made use of two stage sampling techniques with the first stage of sampling carried out at the FCA level, i.e. selection of FUGs from FCAs, the second involve random selection of CEMP project beneficiaries and also making sure that proportionate to size sampling methodology was taking into consideration at this stage. Project staffs at the state and federal levels were also interviewed in order to access information needed to resolve the terms of reference of this study. In all, six each of M&E, environmental officers and procurement officers in the six participating states were interviewed for the study, while the M&E and the procurement officers at the federal level were also interviewed. Result revealed that there exist a 100% ‘yes’ answer from all states beneficiaries and SWS members as regards whether there exist watershed management coordination capacity in state. As at the period of beneficiary assessment, 83% of the six participating states’ respondents attested to the fact that there exist watershed management coordination capacities in the states. The 100% ‘yes’ response from all the participating stakeholders in the states clearly shows that the project exceed the minimum key performance indicator of having at least at the end of project, sustainable watershed management coordination capacity established in at least 60 percent of participating states . Since implementation of this PDO surpasses the specified bench-mark in the project’s PAD, it is rated highly Satisfactory. The 100% ‘yes’ response from these two key participating stakeholders in the states clearly shows that the project exceed the minimum key performance indicator of having exceeded the 35 percent cut off point that sustainable land and water management practices must have been mainstreamed into LDP of participating states. Given the fact that the implementation of this section of CEMP exceeds the original plan stipulated in its PAD, it is rated highly Satisfactory. 17 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY The average achievements in the three pilot sites of Bauchi, Imo and Ogun states stood at about 55.3%, while the average achievement of the six states was about 92.9% during the Mid- Term Review in 2009. By the time of ICR in May, 2011, the achievements in the three pilot sites of Bauchi, Imo and Ogun states stood at about 58% as compared with the target of 80%. However, when the combined areas in the six participating states are considered, the project achieved 121.9% of the target for the six states. Going by this result, this third PDO is rated highly Satisfactory. Based on the evidence provided by responses of GEF project staff at both federal and state levels, as well as from progress reports, it appears that one area of activity of capacity building which has not been properly implemented is the promotion of sustainable harvest techniques for forest products and fishing. However, since four out of the five activities of the component can be adjudged well implemented, this component of the project is rated Satisfactory. Based on the evidence provided by responses of GEF project staff at both federal and state levels, it appears that all activities of the Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level have been properly implemented. Since responses on the four activities of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level are far above average in terms of proper implementation, this component of the project is rated Satisfactory. Also, given the fact that responses on implementation of the two activities in the SLM project is fairly above average, the component is rated moderately satisfactory. The main issue under Project management and monitoring component is that not more than half of project staff believed that regular monitoring is properly carried out. However based on the fact that the performance of this component of the project in terms of implementation can be implied as substantial through available evidences, this component of the project is rated Satisfactory. Findings revealed that all state project staff agreed that states are providing the right support in the area of institutional arrangement and support. However, only half of state project staff agreed that local government councils are providing the right support in the area of institutional arrangement, while all agreed that they provide the robust institutional support for the project. CEMP, from findings has also been able to successfully empower beneficiaries in the area of decision making, funds transfer, awareness on Sustainable Land and Water Management 18 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Practices (SLWMP), adoption of SLWMP and sustainability and up-scaling of SLWMP. The CEMP project therefore can be said to have performed satisfactorily in the area of empowering beneficiaries on decision making, funds transfer, adoption/ sustainability of sustainable land and water management practices Results also revealed that most beneficiaries confirmed that CEMP project affected the way beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries make money to pay for food, place to live, clothing and how much assistance they had been able to give to their children and relatives. The project is therefore rated to have performed satisfactorily with respect to its impact on beneficiaries’ and non-beneficiaries’ livelihood. Results from the sixth term of reference revealed that 75percent of responses also agreed to the fact that the project considered environmental safeguards/ laws to ensure sustainable utilization of natural resources and preserving the ecosystem. The rest of the result also revealed that 75percent and about 67 percent of respondent attested to the fact that the project considered environmental safeguards/ laws to ensure waste management and environmental monitoring and auditing plans respectively. Based on the weight of ‘Yes’ responses on the part of respondents, this project is scored satisfactory in ensuring that World Bank Environmental safeguards and Nigeria Environmental Laws are observed while implementing CEMP Projects Results on the project complying with International agencies grant agreement revealed that half or more than half of the states’ project procurement staffs agreed to the fact that the project follows grant agreements set out by international agencies while implementing projects except in the area of financial management agreement set out by partnering international agencies. However the federal procurement officers’ response affirmed that all the six guidelines were complied with while implementing project. Investigations revealed that some of the state staffs are relatively new while about a third of the procurement staff are operating the AfDB project and may not be quite familiar with the World Bank procedures. In addition there are limited procurement activities at the state level as all procurements were carried out at the federal level. Only community based procurement for sub-project activities were carried out at the state level. The foregoing reasons can be adduced to be responsible for the discrepancy in the views of the state and federal officials with regards to compliance with the international agencies grant agreement. Since one of the six issues considered seems to be in dispute, the project drive in complying with grant agreement of International agencies is rated moderately satisfactory. 19 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY With respect to lessons learnt and challenges as it relates to the first seven terms of reference of this study, the following are the findings of this study, Lessons learnt and challenges for Implementing PDOs Lessons learnt for Watershed Management Coordination  Methods of reduction of duplication of effort in watershed management.  Knowledge sharing amongst members provided the needed complementarity amongst stakeholders.  Involvement of members in awareness, training and technical assistance to the FUGs/FCAs helped in promoting and capturing the priorities of the various watershed management stakeholders Challenges for Watershed Management Coordination  Irregularity of meeting  Members not readily available because of other state’s assignments. This is especially so when the members of SWS are senior officers Lessons learnt for Sustainable land and water management practices mainstreamed into LDP  Beneficiaries are quite aware of the various forms of degradation; they have also noticed an increasing trend in land degradation but have not been able to do anything substantial because their immediate source of livelihood could not be easily traded for any future benefits.  Adequate sensitization and provision of alternative livelihood is imperative to achieve this PDO  SLM practices with short to medium term of returns to investment are more preffered Challenges for Sustainable land and water management practices mainstreamed into LDP 20 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  Inadequate training of beneficiaries before committing resources.  Gestation period of most SLM activity is too long.  Benefit of most SLM activities is of public nature  Land tenure system remain a big challenge Lessons learnt on area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites must have increased by at least 80 percent  The need for recognition and documentation of indigenous SLM activities.  The need for documentation of the actual size of the intervention site in digital map with the coordinates of the communities within the area.  The need to use the GPS to get a more accurate data on land size and for mapping Challenges on area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites must have increased by at least 80 percent  The main challenge was the estimation of land degradation more accurately, especially on individual farm holding  Beneficiaries are not readily disposed to adopting tree planting activities but rather interested in activities with shorter gestation period. Lessons learnt and Challenges implementing Project Components Lessons learnt for activities of Capacity building.  Need for more awareness programme and workshops in order to understand better activities of the component.  Need for more fund for activities of the component  Need for direct involvement of stakeholders in the activities of the component to guarantee positive results 21 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  Need to resolve various conflicting activities of groups particularly during peak farming period.  Implementation of activities of components of capacity building requires a lot of supervision. Challenges for activities of Capacity building.  Late and/or non release of funds for specific technical trainings of activities of the component  Low literacy level  Beneficiary access to some vital input is limited for proper implementation of activities of capacity building.  Inadequate capacity building of staff in the use of GIS tool.  Inadequate /lack of access to service providers that will help implement activities of capacity building  Slow understanding on the part of beneficiaries on the benefits of sustainable agric practices. Lessons learnt for activities of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level  Consultancies on activities of Component of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level should be decentralized.  Capacity of SWS members should be properly built on this component since they have helped tremendously in achieving activities in the component.  Robust success of this component of the project requires more funds to engage service providers.  Stakeholders workshop for each of the consultancies not only helped the stakeholders to identify with the outputs of the study, but also enriched the final report 22 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Challenges faced on activities of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level  Logistics and transportation  Inadequate fund for monitoring and capacity building on activities in the component.  Initial mistrust by communities over ownership of subprojects/activities of the Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level component. Lessons learnt for activities of Sustainable Land Management component  SWS alone cannot handle activities of SLM efficiently.  SLM activities reduce erosion and other form of land degradation tremendously.  Consultancies on SLM should be decentralized. Challenges of activities of Sustainable Land Management component  Documents on SLM are not properly circulated among stakeholders of CEMP project.  There is always a lot of delay in report rendition on SLM.  States do not have the capacity to assess SLM components.  Funds are not released as at when due for SLM activities Lessons learnt for activities of Project management and monitoring component  The role of MIS officer in Project management and monitoring component is important.  MIS tool is not adequate for Project management and monitoring component  Constant updating of performance indicators makes report writing easy.  Engagement of external auditors such as NGOs is important to improve Project management and monitoring component performance. Challenges faced for activities of Project management and monitoring component 23 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  Untimely rendition of report  Time too short in each state to cover all sub-projects during supervision and monitoring.  Logistic challenge in some states because of their difficult terrain Lesson learnt by project as a result of state support both in terms of institutional arrangement and support  Community needs enlightenment on the benefit for the activity  Untimely release of Counterpart funds.  Bureaucracy, with most Senior Officers made SWS members and that better definition of relationship between state government official and project staff will help the project. The key challenges faced as a result of state support both in terms of institutional arrangement and support  Inadequate fund for SWS committee action,  Logistic problem in the area of transportation,  Untimely release of Counterpart fund with little or no fund released for advisory services Lessons learnt in the process of local government providing institutional support and arrangement  Inadequate fund to support the institution  Robust data collection and monitoring activities at local government level needs well educated personnel  Inadequate fund support from the local government institution. Challenges faced in the process of local government providing institutional support and arrangement  Lack of exposure on monitoring methodologies 24 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  Inadequate Staff at the local government level to collect data and carry out proper monitoring Lessons learnt as regards empowering beneficiaries on decision making, funds transfer, adoption/ sustainability of sustainable land and water management practices  Sense of ownership, group formation and team work, bottom up decision making, accountability and developing saving culture.  Abstaining from bush burning, need for planting of trees, making compost manure and awareness on environmental benefits. The main challenges faced by beneficiaries while being empowered on decision making, funds transfer, adoption/ sustainability of sustainable land and water management practices  Conflict of interest and cultural challenges,  Long time spent in meetings when being empowered,  Mobility difficulty,  Delay in monthly contribution by group members,  Inadequate training/training facilities in area beneficiaries are being empowered and difficulties in meeting bank requirement.  Long gestation of some subprojects and land tenure problem can impact negatively on adoption of sustainable land and water management practices  The lesson learnt in terms of how project can impact on beneficiary livelihood  Subproject of CEMP encourages diversification and multiplicative effects on respondents’ livelihood,  Benefits are short and long-term in nature,  Allows for learning of new agricultural practices 25 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  Encourage creation of new job opportunities. Challenges faced in terms of how project can impact on beneficiary livelihood.  High cost of maintaining subprojects,  Problem of attitude and cultural challenges on the part of beneficiaries,  Problem of accepting and sustaining sub-projects and inadequate training about sub- projects. Lesson learnt in terms of how project can impact on non-beneficiary livelihood  Non-beneficiaries are eager to adopt modern techniques used in CEMP sub-projects,  Multiplier/spillover effect of project is guaranteed in all intervention sites,  More non-beneficiaries of CEMP project are clamoring to be part of CEMP projects  Projects encourage creation of new job opportunities. Challenges faced in terms of how project can impact on beneficiary livelihood  Problem of group formation among non -beneficiaries,  low sensitization/ enlightenment of non-beneficiaries  Inadequate project funds that cannot accommodate inclusion of non-beneficiaries in CEMP project The lessons learnt by project staff on ensuring that Environmental laws are put in place while implementing peojects like CEMP  it is desirable for screening projects.  It is imperative for government to enforce Environmental law  The importance of Environmental laws can only be appreciated by people residing in the intervention sites if well sensitized. 26 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Challenges faced in ensuring that Environmental laws were observed  Environmental laws was not properly enforced by government,  Initial unwillingness on the part of those residing in the intervention sites to appreciate environmental laws  Inadequate funding to ensure proper implentation of environmental laws. Lessons learnt in from the project complying with International agencies grant agreement  Constant supervision and review of activities by oversight bodies can actually keep operators on their toes.  Complying with International agencies grant agreements promotes transparency.  Interest of states was not properly taken care of when agreements on grants were being put in place. Challenges faced complying with International agencies grant agreement  Bank charges on project funds affects project costs negatively.  Long distances of Bank facilities to beneficiaries.  Delay in disbursement of funds. 27 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY INTRODUCTION Fadama is the Hausa name for irrigable lands or flood plains and low-lying areas underlined by shallow aquifers. The Fadama concept is an age-old tradition in Hausa land where land that floods on seasonal basis allows for the growth of a variety of crops under small scale irrigation farming system (Kudi et al, 2008). Small-scale irrigation "Fadama" plays a key role in the economics of Nigeria as a basic source of food, income, and employment, especially for women in the "slack" period of rainfed agriculture (Ogunjimi and Adekalu, 2002). Fadama or floodplains which are a category of riparian zones or systems can support particularly rich ecosystems, both in quantity and diversity. Wetting of the floodplain soil releases an immediate surge of nutrients: those left over from the last flood, and those that result from the rapid decomposition of organic matter that has accumulated since then. Microscopic organisms thrive and larger species enter a rapid breeding cycle. The production of nutrients peaks and falls away quickly; however the surge of new growth endures for some time and this makes floodplains particularly valuable for agriculture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floodplain, 2011) Fadama plays an important role in the recharge of the shallow groundwater system though infiltration supports highly productive natural vegetation and large and diverse resident or transient wildlife, including herbivores, carnivores and migratory birds. Furthermore, Fadama lands provide water and forage for pastoral livestock during dry seasons. Fadama II GEF which is the Critical Ecosystem Management Project (CEMP) component of Fadama II, funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) but administered by the World Bank is a pilot project that supports Fadama users to carry out incremental activities that address regional and global environmental issues within the Fadama catchment areas. The project which targeted four hundred and sixty thousand (460,000) beneficiaries has a global objective of enhancing the productivity of Fadama areas and the livelihood systems they support through sustainable land use and water management. This objective is expected to be achieved through sustainable watershed management, river basin and forest/woodland management, capacity enhancement at the national, state and local government levels, and support to Fadama communities for sustainable land management. 28 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY 1.2. Circumstances/Justification for the Project The impact of the increasing pressure from farmers, pastoralists and fishermen, on the ecology of fadama areas over the years has been dramatic. The main challenges to sustainable fadama land management in Nigeria include: (i) the conversion and open access to fadama resources without coherent land use and land management plans at the productive landscape level; (ii) the lack of awareness of local communities, and the weak capacity of extension advisors (through Agricultural Development Projects (ADPs)), whose training and mandate do not incorporate sustainability considerations; (iii) the lack of adequate coordination and integration of Natural Resource Management policy and strategy at all levels of government, and the gaps in technical planning at the state and local government levels, particularly, in terms of the wider watershed management issues where fadama lands are situated; (iv) the institutional barriers, driven by limited capacity of human, technical, and financial resources; and (v) fundamentally, the lack of overall understanding of the interdependence between land use and water management, both within and outside of fadama areas, and the impact of land degradation on ecosystem integrity throughout the larger productive landscape-made up of land, water, vegetative cover-upon which the rural poor depend. To address the rural poverty problem, the Government of Nigeria adopted a strategy for raising rural productivity and incomes. The strategy rests on five pillars: (a) increasing yields; (b) producing higher-value crops and livestock; (c) reducing losses of crops, livestock, fish and other fadama products and reducing costs of producer inputs; (d) strengthening the forward and backward linkages in the rural economy that stimulate investment, employment, and incomes in rural non-farm enterprises; and (e) reducing conflict between various fadama user groups. To achieve these goals, the government focused on several key activities: investing in infrastructure, reforming agricultural and rural research and advisory services, enhancing access to rural financial services, and improving mechanisms to avoid and resolve conflicts among resource users. The World Bank supported the implementation of this five-pillar strategy through the Second National Fadama Development Project (Fadama II) which includes support from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) to address land degradation issues in the Fadama ecosystems, with implications and potential benefits both within Nigeria, regionally, and beyond. The Fadama 29 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY II GEF support addressed the continual provision of ecological services for improved fadama production in the six states of Bauchi, Imo, Kebbi, Kogi, Kwara, and Ogun. The GEF Project supported: (i) strengthening institutional capacity at national, local, and community levels for fadama-related sustainable watershed basin management; (ii) piloting a fadama ecosystem management approach in at least two watersheds; and (iii) the adoption of livelihood activities that restore or maintain ecosystem functions as well as promoting the adoption of indigenous sustainable land management practices (as part of fadama users’ local development plans) that enhance the sustainability of fadama productivity. Thus, while Fadama I1 was aimed at poverty reduction, GEF assistance would be instrumental in enabling Nigeria to maintain the productivity and ecological health of the fadama resource base, with potential significant impact on the regional and global environment, including enhanced capacity for managing fadama resources within a river basin and watershed planning context; monitoring, and evaluation; information exchange; improved skills to identify and manage ecologically threatened areas; and support for community investments in ecological services. While the country and fadama users would no doubt benefit from an enhanced resource base, in the absence of GEF support, the land and water resources and biological diversity of regional and global significance would not be addressed strategically and coherently, and therefore, opportunity to have significant global and regional benefits from an incremental investment would be lost. Fadama II GEF Project was financed through an IDA Credit of US$38.67 million, a GEF grant of US$10.03 million, government counterpart funds of about US$7.61 million, and $6.91million co financing from AfDB, for a total project of US$63.22 million. The incremental or catalytic funding channeled through the GEF Project was expected to assist primarily in removing constraints which in turn would result in a coherent strategy and strengthened institutional arrangements to arrest degradation patterns in fadama areas and restore or maintain their ecosystem services, thereby contributing to the sustainability of the Niger and Benue river basins and beyond. 30 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY 1.3. Objectives of CEMP The broad objective of the GEF Component of Fadama II - Critical Ecosystem Management Project (CEMP) is to maintain the productive and ecological health of the Fadama resources base, in order to enhance the productivity of the Fadama areas and the livelihood systems they support, through sustainable land-use and water management. CEMP is expected to address sustainable land management practices by restoring watershed functions, stabilizing soil loss, encouraging riverbank protection, reducing resource use conflicts and protecting biological diversity in Fadama ecosystem. It will expectedly also assist the Federal Government of Nigeria in her effort to improve capacity to manage and improve the productivity of Fadama resources by ensuring the integrity of the ecosystem. The stated objective of CEMP is being achieved through:  Capacity development for sustainable Fadama natural resources management at National, State, LGA and Community levels, including strengthening institutional capacity for integrated watershed management, and strengthening community capacity for development planning.  Integrated Ecosystem Management in selected watersheds through management of key forest areas, buffer zones and wetlands and improved water management; and  Community sustainable land use management through support for alternative land and/or water use activities and adoption of indigenous sustainable land management practices.  Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation. The specific objectives of CEMP include:  Providing the ecological framework for addressing the root causes of reduced Fadama agricultural productivity and the negative impact of un-sustainable land use practice;  Ensuring ecosystem stability, functions and services;  Reducing land degradation;  Improving institutional capacity to manage Fadama resources; and 31 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  Improving productivity by ensuring that ecological balance in the Fadama are maintained and protected from threats from land use for agriculture and water management in the watershed. 1.4 Description of Project Components Component 1: Capacity Building This component aims to (i) build the capacity of Fadama User Associations (FUAs) to enable them access project advisory services and finance investment in productivity and income enhancement activities and (ii) enhance the capacity of different stakeholder groups, including relevant federal, state and local government, NGOs, community based organizations, and Fadama users in the six priority states (Bauchi, Imo, Kebbi, Kogi, Kwara and Ogun) for sustainable land and watershed management. Major activities supported (financed) under this component include:  Support for land use and water management capacity to enhance the productivity of Fadama area and the livelihood they support;  Support for sustainable agricultural practices and harvest techniques for timber and non-timber forest products and fishing for community members;  Support for the review of federal and state policies and regulations on environmental, land forest and water resources;  Support for the development of framework for state-level coordination, monitoring and evaluation of watershed management activities among state agencies involved in environmental, agriculture, forest, water resources management activities; and  Support baseline and strategic studies related to Fadama critical ecosystem issues. Component 2: Integrated Ecosystem Management at Watershed Level This component addresses the technical, social and location specific activities to improve the management of critical watersheds that ensure Fadama productivity and sustainability, in a few areas with high potential for up-scaling and replication. Major activities include 32 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  strengthening existing watershed planning and coordination mechanism among the relevant state agencies;  sustainable management of forest resources for the protection of Fadama areas, especially the establishment and/or management of community forest reserves in highly degraded and conflict-ridden rainforest and savannah areas;  studying and monitoring activities to understand the impact of upstream reservoir management and river flow regime in Fadama areas; and  Monitoring plans to improve the management of ground water and shallow aquifers in selected Fadama areas. Component 3: Community Sustainable Land Management This component supports a range of advisory services, training, information sharing, awareness programmes, and adoption of land use practices that will enable Fadama users to adopt productivity enhancing techniques and more profitable marketing, and at the same time ensure the sustainability of the Fadama resource base. While IDA financing (68% of the component cost) covers traditional advisory services, including environmentally friendly practices (particularly, the promotion of Integrated Pest Management, and irrigation efficiency), the GEF financing (32% of the component cost) supports Fadama users, through FCAs, community groups, and NGOs, to adopt sustainable land use and agricultural practices that enhance the structural and functional integrity of Fadama ecosystems, and improve rural livelihoods. This component provides:  Support for a range of advisory services; training, information sharing and awareness programmes;  Support for the adoption of productivity enhancing land use practices to ensure the sustainability of the Fadama resource base; 33 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  Support for Fadama users through FCAs and NGOs to adopt sustainable land use and agricultural practices that enhance the integrity of Fadama ecosystem and improve rural livelihoods;  Support through grant financing, using a demand-driven approaches for two types of alternative land practices namely; land use changes in critical areas, such as river banks, flood-prone or ground water recharge and forest or natural habitats of significant biodiversity value, and sustainable agricultural practices in Fadama areas added to IDA-financed LDPs. Activities that may also be supported in this component include:  Biodiversity conservation;  Alternative livelihoods in highly degraded Fadama areas;  Energy-efficient use of solid fuels for watershed protection;  Community woodlots on river banks and other degraded areas;  Sustainable indigenous farming practices. Component 4: Project Management and Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) This component focuses on project management mechanisms; including monitoring and evaluation (M&E) plans to implement NFDP-II. GEF supports the full integration of CEMP activities into the following two main NFDP-II subcomponents under this component: Project Management Subcomponent This supports new or existing institutional entities and mechanisms at the federal, state and local government levels for overall project coordination and supervision and helps to strengthen the effectiveness and quality of project operations. It supports, at the federal level, the National Fadama Development Office (NFDO) (now NFCO) attached to the Project Coordinating Unit (PCU) (now NFRA) of the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (FMARD) which is responsible for overall project coordination. The subcomponent also supports the State Fadama Development Offices (SFDOs) (now SFCO) housed at the Agricultural Development Projects (ADPs) in the states. At the local government level, the project supports Local Fadama 34 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Desks (LFDs) and a multi-stakeholder committee which is responsible for, respectively, screening and approving LDPs and subproject proposals submitted by the FCAs. Finally, the subcomponent finances specialized technical assistance and training at federal, state, and local levels aimed at developing capacity for coordination of sub-project implementation. Monitoring and Evaluation Subcomponent This will measure performance at various project milestones, and includes three main elements:  Management Information System (MIS) integrating NFCO and SFCO levels with data generated by FCAs and;  Impact evaluation and beneficiary assessments to enhance project implementation performance; monitoring of the project’s environmental management plans (EMPs), which include mitigation measures related to agricultural production, processing, and marketing, to be incorporated into LDPs, and institutional capacity strengthening in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Integrated Pest Management (IPM); and,  Monitoring CEMP activities. 1.5. Implementation and Institutional Arrangements for Fadama II GEF The Critical Ecosystem Management Project (CEMP) was implemented as a component of the Fadama project, under the overall guidance of the National Project Coordinator (NPC). The participating stakeholders include:- i. National Fadama Coordination Office ii. Federal Ministry of Environment iii. Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources iv. State Fadama Coordination Offices v. State Watershed Subcommittee vi. Local Fadama Desks at the local government level vii. State agencies responsible for Watershed Management, including River Basin Development Authorities viii. Facilitators ix. Fadama Community Associations 35 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY x. Fadama Users Group xi. Non-Governmental Organizations The implementation arrangement of the CEMP was guided by the needs to: i. Mainstream CEMP activities at the field level with IDA financed activities and empower local communities. ii. fully integrate project management and M&E within the Fadama project iii. take into account the role of the Federal Ministry of Environment in overall coordination and quality assurance, and iv. Ensure ownership and create a workable partnership between the two main Ministries involved in the project implementation (FMEnv and FMAWR). Based on the above considerations and lessons learnt from on-going related projects, the following implementation arrangements were put in place. a. Federal Ministry of Environment (FMEnv) The Federal Ministry of Environment is responsible for environmental policies in the country. The responsibility of the FMEnv with regards to the project implementation is to play a coordinating and supervisory role. The actual implementation is done at the State and lower levels, with the State driving the process. However, since CEMP is wholly mainstreamed into Fadama-II, and fully integrated with the day-to-day operation of Fadama-II, the physical location of CEMP at the Federal level was tied to Fadama-II. In consequence therefore, the FMEnv provided the technical implementation support for CEMP by deploying an officer, who was competitively recruited in the Ministry, to the National Fadama Coordination Office (NFCO) to serve as the Desk Officer for the implementation of the CEMP. This arrangement created room for proper linkages between Fadama-II and the GEF supported component. To strengthen the implementation of the GEF component, the membership of the National Fadama Technical Committee (NFTC) was expanded to include the Director, Planning, Research and Statistics (DPRS) of the FMEnv, who is also the GEF operational Focal Point for Nigeria. The responsibility of the NFTC was also expanded to include approval of the annual work programme and budget, and provision of policy guidance for the 36 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY implementation of the CEMP as well as ensuring inter-ministerial coordination in watershed management. b. National Fadama Coordination Office (NFCO) The NFCO oversees the implementation of the Fadama project at programme level. The National Project Coordinator (NPC) heads the NFCO and is responsible for the coordination of project implementation at the National level. c. The Fadama GEF Desk Office (FGDO) The FGDO is an integral part of the NFCO. It is the implementing unit for the GEF funded component (CEMP) at the national level. The Fadama GEF Desk Officer heads the GEF Desk Office. The Fadama GEF Desk Office manages and coordinates all consultancies, trainings, workshops and project activities at the national level under the guidance and supervision of the NPC. The office also provides guidance for the implementation of the GEF component at the State level. The Monitoring and Evaluation Officer, GIS Analyst and an Account Supervisor complement the activity of the Desk Office. d. State Fadama Coordination Office The mainstreaming of CEMP into Fadama-II is most pronounced at the State level, which is responsible for the field level implementation of the project. The Environmental Officer (EO) in the SFCO was charged with the added responsibility of CEMP implementation at the State level. The responsibilities of the EO were carried under the overall guidance and supervision of the SPC in the SFCO. e. State Watershed Sub-Committee The relevant ministries/agencies in the implementing States, with responsibility for Watershed management, have been constituted into a State Watershed Sub-committee (SWS) through the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) among the various State agencies. The SWS, which is a sub-committee of the State Fadama Development Committee (SFDC) now known as the State Fadama Technical Committee (SFTC), is a coordination mechanism for Watershed management in the State. The sub- 37 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY committee will, among other activities, be responsible for monitoring field level activities of the project f. Local Fadama Development Committee (LFDC) As in Fadama-II, decision-making on sub-project proposals emanating from the communities was delegated to the LFDC. The recommendations of the LFDCs would thereafter be reviewed at the State level by the SFCO, for consistency with Fadama-II objectives and activities; and by the Environmental Officer, in collaboration with the SWS, for consistency with the GEF component activities and objectives. g. Fadama Community Associations (FCAs) The Fadama Community Association (FCA) is the apex organization of Fadama Users Groups (FUGs) which derive their livelihood from the shared natural resources of the Fadama. FCAs are entities created by the Project and are registered according as cooperatives. A minimum of 10 FUGs make up one socially inclusive FCA. FCAs receive Project funds based on priorities in the LDP, disburse funds to their constituent FUGs and ensure implementation according to Project Guidelines. Fadama users, therefore, play very important roles in the project implementation through the FCAs, other community groups and NGOs. h. Fadama Users Groups A Fadama User Group (FUG) is a beneficiary group of 10 - 25 households organized by economic interest and registered as cooperatives. For instance, a FUG may be made up of Crop farmers, pastoralists (sedentary or nomadic), hunters, fishermen, gatherers of edible and non-edible plants, food and crop processors, traders, vulnerable/marginalized groups (women) and other related economic interest groups i. Community Facilitators Facilitators are front line workers who work directly with the beneficiary groups, ensuring that communities have access to information and resources, the planning process is truly 38 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY participatory; small-scale projects are implemented in accordance with guidelines and safeguard policies, and capacity of the FCA is built for collective action and quality control. 1.6. CEMP Implementation Progress Report Component 1: Capacity Building The objective of Capacity Building component is to strengthen the capacity of stakeholders at both institutional and watershed level. Specifically, this component is expected to equip stakeholders with skills and knowledge to carry out their respective activities under the project. For this component, the project targets that at the end of year one, a framework for watershed management would have been prepared and at the end of the project, sustainable watershed management coordination capacity would have been established in at least three states and sustainable land use planning practices would have been adopted by at least 50% of FCA members implementing LDPs in GEF co-financed project areas. Before the commencement of the project, there was no framework or effective coordinating mechanism for watershed management in the intervening states, while the FCAs were not adopting any framework for watershed management. There was also a weak data sharing mechanism and ineffective coordination between various government agencies responsible for integrated watershed management and there was no data on the number of government representatives responsible for sustainable land management in watershed level in the targeted sites. By MTR, State Watershed Subcommittees (SWS) with membership drawn from about 8-10 sectors, have been established in the six participating States, and they have held 60 Quarterly Technical Meetings. The SWS members involved in 60 awareness creation /sensitization programmes, 30 training programmes for project beneficiaries, 36 Technical assistance to FCA/FUG on SLM, and 40 Supervision of sub-project execution. Nine (9) trainings and fourteen (14) national workshops were carried out for SWS members and beneficiaries, while 90% of participating FCAs were already sensitized on planned approach to watershed management, 70% of the FCAs were already implementing prepared framework for watershed management. Furthermore, 38 CEMP LDPs have been produced and at various level of implementation by all 39 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY the FCAs. Study on the review of watershed policies and regulation was already completed, while that on the Establishment of Watershed Planning and Coordination Capacity was already in progress. By the ICR, strategic and baseline studies (including ecological assessment) of intervention sites in the six states were already completed. The project established Geographic Information System (GIS) and Remote sensing Facilities. Fifteen (15) national workshops and twelve (12) trainings were conducted to enhance the capacity of various stakeholders. The project conducted fourteen (14) consultancy studies, including the preparatory studies for Fadama III GEF supplement. At the state level, Sustainable Watershed Sub-committee (SWS) and various institutional organizations required for effective implementation are in place and functioning. Not less than sixty quarterly meetings of the SWS have been held across the six participating states since inception Fig1.1 : SWS members meeting in Kebbi State. Present in the meeting are the Fed.Cont of Environment, Dir. Rural Water Supply, Dir. Lands, PM SRRBDA and Comm. Officer Other capacity building interventions include those for Fadama Community Associations (FCAs) and their constituent groups (FUGs), Local Fadama Development Committees (LFDC), Local Government Council Officials, Facilitators, State Fadama Coordination Office (SFCO) and Service Providers. 40 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Key Project Staff and some FCAs executives attended several Capacity Building workshops organized by NFCO. The SFCO also organized series of sensitization training workshops for project beneficiaries on the project concept and implementation procedures. They were also trained on record keeping and documentation. In Kogi State, a total of 25 different training workshops were organized by the State Office for the various FCAs/FUGs and Service Providers, while Desk Officers and Facilitators also received 24 trainings. The SWS met four times and went for training once (Kogi State Internal ICR Report, 2011) In Ogun State, ten (10) trainings/sensitizations were organized by the SFCO for FCAs/FUGs , while, 11 National and one international workshops/meetings were attended by Fadama CEMP officials at the State and Local Government levels. The State Watershed Sub-Committee held 12 quarterly meetings to review project progress and challenges and more importantly sub-projects’ technicalities (Annexure 9a Ogun State Internal ICR Report 2011). In Kwara state, various Capacity Building activities were undertaken which include six training workshops organized by the SFCO for the FCAs and FUGs, nine and three training workshops at the national and international levels respectively were attended by the SFCO staff , while various other activities such as production and distribution of hand bills and posters promoting CEMP (500 copies each), drama presentation , Radio programmes blended into Fadama II programmes and various newspapers on GEF-CEMP were carried out. The SWS members held seven meetings and participated as resource persons in five sensitization and awareness workshops and two stakeholder review workshops conducted at watershed level (Kwara State Internal ICR Report, 2011). In Imo State, the FUGs received technical assistance five times in the areas of grass cutter farming, snailry, record keeping, apiary and woodlots. Also, a total of four trainings were conducted for the facilitators while seven trainings were conducted for the environmental officers. Furthermore, 20 enlightenment campaigns and 27 community mobilizations were carried out while 28 FUGs were trained on record keeping, book keeping and grass cutter 41 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY farming. The SWS held 17 meetings and made 10 oversight visits to the intervention sites (Imo State Internal ICR, 2011). In Bauchi State, Fadama II CEMP officials attended a total of nine national and two international workshops/trainings, while the number of SWS meetings conducted is nine (Bauchi State Internal ICR Report, 2011). In Kebbi State, four different trainings were conducted to build the capacity of the user groups in the area of accounts administration and subproject financing for all the treasurers of the User groups, general upkeep and maintenance of nursery for all the Women groups that are into community nursery in addition to hands-on demonstrations at subprojects sites provided by the LFDO, SFDO and SWS teams during visits that are taken to sites regularly. Component 2: Integrated Ecosystem Management at Watershed Level The objective of this component is to improve the management of critical watersheds through technical, social and location-specific activities such as a range of advisory services, training, capacity building and awareness campaign programmes on watershed management in order to ensure fadama productivity and sustainability. The objective of this component is being achieved through: (a) protection of critical watershed and (b) improvement of water management. For this component, the project targets that by the end of the project, a management plan for Oguta Lake would have been put in place and implemented, 50% of implemented targeted area LDPs would have been using improved groundwater management strategy and a number of community forest reserves would have been established in two-thirds of the targeted areas. At baseline, there was no adequate data on the level, extraction and recharge of groundwater and no management plan for the management of Oguta Lake. There was also no adequate data on community forests in the intervening states. At MTR, six (6) community forests have been identified, beaconed and digital maps have been prepared for each of them. Five Studies to provide basis for the sustainable management of the identified community forest have been completed with management plans and ready for 42 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY implementation. Three (3) other studies: - the impact of reservoir management on water regime in fadama areas; development of management plan for Lake Oguta; and improved groundwater management were at various stages of procurement (selection of consultants). About 400 Sub- projects out of a total of 958 sub projects have started utilizing improved groundwater management strategy through tree planting and other related sub-projects, while a total of 54 awareness campaigns were conducted. At ICR, the project had conducted and completed studies on sustainable management of six community forest reserves which also included preparation of forest management plans for the six intervention sites. Forest Management Committees for the community forests have been inaugurated and are functional in all the intervention states. Fire tracing is being carried out in the dry season in the community forests while sign posts with environmental conservation messages are strategically placed around the vicinity of the forests to continously sensitise the populace of the adjoining communities. The project identified and is supporting the management of over 18,800.97 ha of forest reserves in the six intervention sites, while a total of 14,530 ha of beneficiaries farm holdings are under Sustainable Land Management (SLM) practices. Furthermore, in the three selected pilot sites (Andiwa lake, lake oguta and Eriti watersheds), the combined area under SLM was about 7,421.4 ha at baseline. As at ICR, an additional 7,428.94 had been achieved. Furthermore, preparation of management plan for Lake Oguta and studies on improved groundwater management in the six intervention sites, and the impact of reservoir management on the water flow regime in Fadama areas have also been completed, while three (3) ground water monitoring wells were established in each of the six intervention sites (Progress Report For The 7th Join FGN/World Bank Supervision Mission, 2011). A total of 54 awareness campaigns were successfully carried out across the six intervention sites with the FGN team flagging it off in the six sites Component 3: Community Sustainable Land Management The objective of this component is to enhance the productivity of fadama areas and the livelihood system they support through sustainable land use and water management. It is sub-divided into 43 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY (a) support for the adoption of best SLM practices and (b) increase income generation of the fadama communities. For this component, the project targets that by the end of the project, 50 percent of participating communities would have implemented alternative livelihood activities in at least 50% of participating states and 60% of management plans for highly degraded areas would have been prepared and implemented. At baseline in 2006, local benefiting communities had minimum or no Sustainable Land and Water Management (SLM) subprojects in the Local Development Plans (LDPs) (approximately 2% of subproject mainly on advisory services under Fadama-II). There was inadequate data on the participating communities, types of suitable alternative livelihood activities and the total land area (ha) of the identified intervention sites. However, at mid-term, 48 LDPs and 958 subprojects on SLM were mainstreamed into development plans by the communities and were funded by GEF. A total land area of 514.4 ha was planted with different tree species across the six participating states. Over 60 participating communities across the six states implemented 10 different alternative livelihood activities that resulted to establishment of 532 sub-projects capable of discouraging bush burning, preventing soil erosion and increasing farmers’ incomes. Fifty four (54) awareness / sensitization programme were implemented, while 680 sub-projects proposals out of a total of 958(71%) (Management Plan/ Local Development Plan) directly addressed water and land degradation By ICR, CEMP has implemented a total of 958 SLM subprojects valued at about N420 million, mainstreamed into 42 LDPs which are all at about 90% average level of completion in the six participating states. In the three selected pilot sites (Andiwa lake, lake Oguta and Eriti watersheds), the combined area under SLM was about 7,421.4ha at baseline. As at May 2011, an additional 7,428.94ha has been added. Also, the project has identified and is supporting the management of over 18,800.97 Ha of forest reserves in the six intervention sites while a total of 14,530 Ha of beneficiaries’ farm holdings is under SLM practices 44 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY In Bauchi, all the 5 FCAs are involved in alternative livelihood support activities such as Orchards establishment, woodlots, and small ruminants rearing with a view to conserving those in the wild. The summary of such activities is as listed in Table 1.1 Table 1: 1. Sustainable Land Management Activities at the Watershed Level in Bauchi State ACTIVITY No. of Subprojects Area in Hectares Woodlot 13 41.63 Scattered Planting 8 48 Border Planting 10 80.5 Alley 7 45.8 Buffer 1 0.9 Roadside Planting 5 11.5 Orchard establishment 23 149.9 Nursery 1 1 Total 70 379.23 Source: Bauchi State Internal ICR Report, 2011 The implementation of the alternative livelihood activities such as the rearing of ruminants by the beneficiaries has resulted in considerable reduction in bush burning and soil erosion and has also served as windbreaks as well as source of organic matters for the soil. In Imo State, a total of 115 SLM sub projects/alternative livelihood activities were mainstreamed into 3 LDPs to discourage bush burning, prevent soil erosion and increase farmers’ income. Commendable efforts were also made to stabilize eroded river banks that are causing serious problems of siltation at Ogwuta Lake. A total land area of 48 ha was planted with different tree species across the intervention sites of Ohaji and Ogwuta Activities executed in Kebbi State under Sustainable Land Management (SLM) include among others the establishment of windbreak/shelterbelts, roadside planting totaling 19.7 kms and the stabilization of river banks to reduce siltation of river beds. All these activities are geared towards the maintenance of the integrity of the ecosystem. 45 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 1.2: Fenced 3 kms roadside planting by Illela Galbi Community, Kebbi State. In Kogi State, at mid-term, 10 LDPs and 234 subprojects on SLM were already mainstreamed into development plans by the communities and were funded by GEF. The livelihood support and SLM activities demanded for by the 127 FUGs in the State included: grass cutter rearing, bee keeping, community nursery, woodlot establishment and orchard establishment (Mango and Orange). In Kwara State, a total number of 158 alternative livelihood sub projects were embarked on by the FUGs. These sub projects include grass cutter rearing, snailry, apiculture, woodlot establishment, orchards, composting, river bank tree planting, community tree planting, borderline tree planting, nursery and rabbitary. In Ogun State, 10 LDPs and 178 subprojects on SLM were mainstreamed into development plans by the communities and were funded by GEF. A total land area of 47 ha was planted with different tree species across the intervention sites. 46 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY The widespread annual bush burning observed at the baseline study in the six intervention sites has been reduced by at least 40%. This was due to intensive sensitization and awareness creation right from the onset of the project and also because of the farmers’ keen involvement in alternative livelihood activities such as grasscutter rearing, honey production, rabittry, small ruminants and snailery, and tree planting in general. Furthermore, it has been observed that the art of tree planting particularly the economic trees has over the years gained popularity than at baseline, ostensibly because the farmers have become more aware of the advantages of the practice. Moreover, fishing through the use of chemicals (water poisoning) in some areas of the intervention sites in Kwara and Kogi at baseline has been reduced by 100% due to increased sensitizations on the dangers of fishing with chemicals. The project progress report also noted that the livelihood activities across the six states has generated about N2.5 million as contained in Table 1.2 below: Table 1.2: Revenue from Livelihood Activities in the Six Project Intervention States State Amount Generated (N) BAUCHI 900,000.00 IMO 868,000.00 KEBBI 264,000.00 KOGI 355,000.00 KWARA 193,000.00 OGUN 2,100,00.00 Total 2,580,000.00 47 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Component 4: Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation This component is sub-divided into Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation as well as Procurement and Financial Management. The Project Management sub-component is designed to support, coordinate, supervise and strengthen effectiveness and quality of project operations and most importantly ensure the mainstreaming of GEF funded Critical Ecosystem Management Project (CEMP) into Fadama II at all levels of implementation (Federal, State and Local Government). The Monitoring and Evaluation sub component is designed to take charge of measuring performance at various project implementation mile stones through physical monitoring activities, establishment of a robust and functional management information system, rendition of timely reports, data collection, analysis and studies. For this component, the project targets that by the end of year one, project coordination and management system would have been established in collabortation with Fadama II and implemented with due diligence and that by the end of the project, M&E plan for the project would have been fully implemented. At Mid Term, Fadama GEF Desk Office had been established within NFCO, 6 SWS had also been established and integrated into SFDC, while SFCO, 6 LFDO and 16 Project Facilitators in the six states were already in place. M&E manual and monitoring format have been prepared and were being utilized. At the Federal level, GEF funded projects were fully mainstreamed into the Fadama II project management arrangement. This has been done with the recruitment of a Fadama GEF Desk officer who is supported by an operations/GIS analyst, M&E officer and an Accounting Supervisor. Equipments (Computer lap tops, mapping and survey equipment, cameras, GIS software etc) were procured and given to staff for use at all levels. In addition to the established SWS in the states, the State Project Coordinator (SPC) and all relevant staff were in place. At the Local Government levels, FUGs/FCAs identified sub projects and prepared their Local 48 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Development Plans (LDPs) in a participatory and socially inclusive manner. The LFDCs were fully on ground to receive, screen and approve proposals drawn for these plans. At ICR, the project has received six (6) FGN/World Bank supervision missions. The project has achieved 99% disbursement performance comprising disbursement to the six participating states on awareness campaign/sensitization, SWS meeting, field visits, etc and about N420 million to the benefiting 42 FCAs for 958 SLM sub-projects implementation. CEMP has also provided secretarial support for the National Sustainable Land Management Committee domiciled in the FMAWR. The sustainability of sub-projects is already guaranteed with the establishment and fruiting of the tree based sub-projects, colonization of the bee hives, reproduction replication of grass cutter, snailery and rabbitry sub-projects, income generating capacity of the sub-projects, capacity building given to beneficiaries etc and most importantly the enthusiasm showed by the beneficiaries to continue from where the project stopped. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF SOME ALTERNATIVE LIVELIHOOD SUBPROJECTS The MTR identified the need for economic analysis of sub projects as to help provide information on the costs and benefits of the intended subprojects. Thus the eeconomic analyses of selected alternative livelihood activities are presented in Table 1.3 below. The analysis was based on 16% prime lending rate, the average lending rate for 2010 (www.cenbank.org; site visited on 30 November, 2010). Table 1.3: Economic Analysis Indicators Showing Feasibility of Selected CEMP projects Subproject Cost (N) Returns Production Net Present Benefit (N) Period Value (N) Cost Ratio (Years) Apiary for Honey production 451880 1128000 5 382,531 2.12 Teak Woodlot for Pole 1492711 4533340 12 78,317.74 1.08 Production Establishment of Grass cutter 2090770 2895000 4 296,870.3 1.20 Farm with Start Up Size of 49 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Two Families Rearing of 30 Males and 10 1490720 1800000 5 141,371.4 1.12 Females of Balami Sheep Source: Adapted from Oni et al (2010): Beneficiary Assessment/Impact Evaluation of the Fadama II Critical Ecosystem Management Project (CEMP). The feasibility analysis of other subprojects could not be estimated due to inadequate data. The feasibility analysis of four subprojects were carried out. These are Apiary for honey production, Teak Woodlot for pole production, Establishment of Grasscutter farm with start up size of Two families and rearing of 30 males and 10 females of Balami sheep. The Economic(feasibility) analysis was carried out over a five year period . Two feasibility indicators were used, these were Net Present Value and the Benefit cost ratio, while a 16% discount factor was used as proxy for average opporunity cost of capital in Nigeria (i.e going by the average bank lending rate in Nigeria). Results revealed that the Net present value of Apiary,Teak woodlot,Grasscutter farm and the sheeep enterprise were estimated to be N382,531, N78, 317.74, N296, 870.3 and N141, 371.4 respectively. The Benefit cost ratio of Apiary,Teak woodlot,Grasscutter farm and the sheeep enterprise were estimated as 2.12, 1.08, 1.20 and 1.12. The decision criterion used for Net present value is that estimated figures from the enterprise must be positive for such enterprises to be feasible. The decision criterion for the Benefit-cost ratio is that estimate figures must be greater than one. Results from table 1.3 clearly shows that the Net Present Values and Benefit cost ratios of the four subprojects met the criteria of being feasible with the Apiary subproject being the most promising in terms of being feasible in terms of remuneration over a five year analysis framework. Impact/beneficiary assessment was also carried out at the national level on October 2010. The estimation of the total impact of the GEF project on some selected outcomes is presented in Table 1.4. The Double difference was used to control for the unobservable bias and the bootstrap test was used to estimate robust standard error for the average treatment effect on the treated (ATT). The table shows a large impact of GEF project on the change in the level of expenditure of beneficiaries when compare to the non beneficiaries. The expenditure of a randomly selected beneficiary would averagely change by N4863. In terms of total impact the difference between 50 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY the ATT of beneficiaries and that of non beneficiaries give a net impact of N8667. Table1.4: Estimation of the total impact on selected outcomes Mean before Mean after Average Treatment on the Treated (ATT) Total expenditure 131044.4 82695.24 (11846.45) (7059.67) Fadam GEF 86056.85 79968.18 4863.63 beneficiaries (13587.38) (9693.75) (15493.37) Non fadama non GEF 180981.6 105610.1 -3804.19 Befeneficiaries (25266.94) (17817.72) (21566.98) Study Term of Reference The objective of the Internal Implementation Completion Review (ICR) is to provide a final evaluation report of the project story, extent of PDO achievements, lessons learned, challenges and recommendations. Specific tasks to be carried out in the study include: i. Assess project performance and implementation progress relative to plan; especially the review and documentation of the progress made towards the three outcomes indicators;  By project end, sustainable watershed management coordination capacity established in at least 60 percent of the participating states;  By project end, sustainable land and water management practices are mainstreamed in local development plans in at least 35 percent of the participating communities; and  By project end, the area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites has increased by at least 80 percent. 51 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY ii. Assess the extent of achievement of project targets respect to the execution of component activities iii. Assess the performance of the participating states Governments and Local Government Councils in the areas of; a. Institutional arrangement b. Institutional support – technical, financial etc iv. Assess level of beneficiaries’ empowerment in the areas of; a. Decision making b. Funds transfer c. Awareness on Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices d. Adoption of Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices e. Sustainability and up-scaling Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices v. Assess project demonstration of impact (including multiplier /spillover effect) on beneficiaries especially their livelihood vi. Assess compliance with World Bank Environmental safeguards and Nigeria Environmental Laws (i.e evaluation of the beneficiaries’ adoption, institutionalization and implementation of activities and programs that will ensure sustainable utilisation of natural resources and preserve the eco-system integrity/ functions such as waste management strategy, monitoring & auditing plans, ESMP e.t.c). vii. Assess compliance with clauses of the Grant Agreement, especially with regards to financial management and disbursement related issues, including procurement issues. viii. Document implementation challenges and lessons learnt that would be useful for future projects ix. Provide the stakeholders i.e Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN), World Bank, participating states, etc with a review of the performance of the project. 52 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY METHODOLOGY The Study Area Based on the sociological survey of Fadama critical ecosystem carried out by the Federal Ministry of Environment to identify and prioritize critical Fadama ecosystems in the 18 World Bank supported Fadama II project States, CEMP was implemented in the following states and critical ecosystem sites These six sites were selected according to ecological zones, thus Jega/Dumbegu in Kebbi State and Andiwa Lake in Bauchi were selected as representative sites for savanna zone; Ajasse-Ipo in Kwara and Lokoja/Koton Karfe in Kogi for the transitional zone and Eriti in Ogun State and Oguta Lake/Ohaji Egbena in Imo State from the rainforest zone. Table 2.1: Land area, site and coordinates of Intervention states and sites S/ State Site Ecological land Longitude Latitude N Zone area (km2 ) 1. Bauchi Andiwa Lake Savanna 176.15 09o 58’ 14.19’E 11o 38’ 30.70’N 2 Imo Ohaji/Egbena Rainforest 410.00 06o 47’ 15.69’E 05o 41’ 27.1’N 3 Kebbi Jega/Dumbegu Savanna 354.00 04o 22’ 18.29’E 12o 13’ 04.66’N 4 Kogi Lokoja/Koton Transitional 374.55 06o 42’ - 6.57’E 07o 51’ -8o17’N Karfe 5 Kwara Ajasse-Ipo Transitional 92.94 04o 41’ -4.56’E 08o 12’ -8o21’N 6 Ogun Eriti Rainforest 156.00 3.15o & 3.24’E 06o 50’ -7o60’N This study was conducted in all the six GEF/CEMP benefiting states. Fig 2.1 is a map showing the six GEF/CEMP states. 53 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 2.1 CEMP INTERVENTION SITES IN NIGERIA ® SOKOTO Sokoto Katsina Birnin-Kebbi KATSINA JIGAWA YOBE ZAMFARA Kano Dutse Damaturu BORNO KANO KEBBI Kaduna KADUNA BAUCHI GOMBE NIGER Jos Minna PLATEAU ADAMAWA KWAR A FCT Jalingo Ilorin OYO NASSARRAWA Oshogbo Lokoja Makurdi TARABA EKITI Ibadan OSUN KOGI Ak ure BENUE OGUN ONDO LAGOS Benin-City EDO E NUGU Abakaliki ANAMBRA EBONYI CROSS RIVER DELTA IMO ABIA Yene goa BAYELSA RIVERS AKWA-IBOM Legend State capitals States Andiwa Lake Int Site (Bauchi) BAUCHI_STATE Ajasse Ipo Int Site (Kwara) IMO_STATE Koton Karfe Int Site (Kogi) KEBBI_STATE Eriti Int Site (Ogun State) KOGI_STATE (ADB) 1 cm = 94 km Oguta lake Int. Site (Imo) KWARA_STATE (ADB) Kebbi State Int Site (B/Kebbi) OGUN_STATE 150 75 0 150 300 450 Kilometers In terms of crops cultivated and livelihood of communities in project site area in kwara state, the Major crops cultivated include, pepper, tomatoes, maize, cassava, yam, water melon, guinea- corn, potatoes, beans and rice. Maize, yam, cassava and vegetables are predominately cultivated in Ajasse-Ipo, Buari, Esie, Okeya and Sanmora communities. While melon and guinea corn are cultivated in Eggi, Buari and Iludun-Oro. Most of the crops are produced for household consumption and the excess sold to generate income. There are small scale enterprises especially for garri or fufu processing (cassava product) (Kwara GEF baseline report 2008). In Bauchi, the major occupation and economic activities of the study area is crop farming. The main crop types grown include Rice, Millet, Sorghum, Cowpeas, Vegetables, Groundnut and Cassava. Other economic engagements include Livestock husbandry/domestic animal keeping, Hunting, Fishing, Bee-keeping, Blacksmithing, Agro forestry, Trading, Water Vending (Yangaruwa), Transportation business such as Motorcycle taxi/Motor park touting (Bauchi state 54 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY GEF baseline report 2008). According to the baseline report of Ogun state 2008, arable crop farming is the most important agricultural activity in the watershed accounting for 72 per cent, few are engaged in trading in Non Timber Forest Products (8%) and occasional artisanal fishing and hunting activities were the minor occupation, craft artisan’s employment in the location is also popular. Other livelihood activities reported for the state include Trading, Processing, Sand mining and Craft artisans fishing and Hunting. In kebbi state, the main agricultural activities engaged in include onions, tomatoes, pepper, cocoyam, beans and short type maize. Others include sweet potato, sugar cane, water melon, and cucumber. (Kebbi state GEF baseline report 2008). Crop farming, fishing, forest products exploitation and other forms of economic activities related to environmental and natural resource usage are the main economic activities engaged in by project site communities in Kogi state (Kogi state GEF baseline Report 2008). The Imo state GEF baseline report 2008 showed that the two main occupations of the inhabitants of the Oguta lake watershed catchment area are farming and fishing. Agriculture is at both commercial and subsistence level. On account of the enormous land available coupled with appreciable long fallow periods which ensure the recovery/restoration of cropped lands, farming is a remunerative occupation in the watershed area. There are farmers who produce rice, yams, cassava, plantain/banana, maize and vegetables in commercial quantities and are dependent on their produce for sustenance. Because of the low-lying nature of some parts of the watershed, farmers plant their yams around February and early March each year and harvest about July and August before the flooding period, which starts around September. Commercial farmers are also at Tombise, Enigbo Abatu, OrsuObodo, Ezi-Orsu, Opuoma, Ekeugba, Obokofia, Mgbara, Umuorji, Nnebukwu, and Oforola. They cultivate yam, cassava, rice, maize, cocoyam, and plantain/banana. Around Nnebukwu, OrsuObodo, Nkwesi, Opuoma, Obokofia and Oforola, Tombise, Enigbo Abatu, Ezi Orsu and Afiafor are oil palm plantations owned and managed by farmers. The rubber plantations are located at OrsuObodo, Opuoma, and EziOrsu. Sampling Technique The sampling procedure involved selection of 30 respondents from the total list of GEF beneficiaries in each of the six States thereby arriving at a total of 180 respondents. The sampling frame was stratified to ensure that all the FCAs and female respondents were represented in the study. The survey made use of two stage sampling techniques with the first stage of sampling 55 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY carried out at the FCA level, i.e. selection of FUGs from FCAs, the second involve random selection of CEMP project beneficiaries and also making sure that proportionate to size sampling methodology was taking into consideration at this stage. Project staff at the state and federal levels was also interviewed in order to access information needed to resolve the terms of reference of this study. In all six M&E, Six environmental officers, six procurement officers at the state were interviewed for this study, while the M&E and the procurement officers at the federal level were also interviewed. Survey Instrument and Data Collection Both primary and secondary data were collected for the review. Draft questionnaire prepared by the consultants were presented for the inputs of project staff of the NFCO and SFCO in NFCO office in Abuja on 18th April, 2011. The structured questionnaires were administered on three set of respondents: the beneficiaries, the project staff and the SWS members. The personnel involved in the administration of questionnaires on the beneficiaries were the MEO, EO, and GEF facilitators in the project intervention sites. The GEF facilitators and desk officers were trained by the MEOs and EOs who had earlier participated in the final preparation of the questionnaires. The questionnaires for the project staff and SWS members were self administered.All necessary project documents such as the PAD, internal ICR reports, the MTR, Beneficiaries impact assessment, and various studies carried out in the course of project implementation from 2006 and 2011 were reviewed. Data Analysis The data were subjected to descriptive statistics such as frequency and percentage distribution, bar and pie charts for analysis.The criteria adopted by the study for assessing project implementation performance and progress towards the achievement of Project Development Objectives (PDOs), components and overall performances are as follows: (a) Highly satisfactory (HS) - where implementation surpasses original plan or formally revised plans. (b) Satisfactory (S) - where implementation of original or formally revised plan is substantial. 56 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY (c) Moderately Satisfactory (MS) - where implementation of original or formally revised plan is on course but delayed by good reason and has recovery plans. (d) Unsatisfactory (U) - where implementation is not substantial with the original or formally revised plan. (e) Highly Unsatisfactory - where implementation is unsatisfactory and with no recovery plans. 57 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY RESULTS This section of the report presents findings on the term of references for the CEMP Implementation Completion Report project. Results from figures 3.1 to 3.3 showcase the performance of the CEMP project with respect to its Project Development Objectives. The results of each of the Project Development Objectives are presented as follows: Watershed Management Coordination Findings revealed that there exist a 100% ‘yes’ answer from all states beneficiaries and SWS members as regards whether there exist watershed management coordination capacity in state . As at the period of Beneficiary assessment, 83% of the six states respondents attested to the fact that there exist watershed management coordination capacities in state. The 100% ‘yes’ response from all the participating stakeholders in the states clearly shows that the project exceed the minimum key performance indicator of having at least at the end of project, sustainable watershed management coordination capacity established in at least 60 percent of participating states . Since implementation of this PDO surpasses original benchmark specified in the CEMP PAD, it is rated highly Satisfactory. Sustainable land and water management practices mainstreamed into LDP As for the target of sustainable land and water management practices mainstreamed into LDP in at least 35 percent of participating communities, findings shows through proportion of participating state beneficiary and SWS responses that said ‘yes’ was 100%.. The 100% ‘yes’ response from these two key participating stakeholders in the states clearly shows that the project exceed the minimum key performance indicator of having exceeded the 35 percent cut off point that sustainable land and water management practices must have been mainstreamed into LDP of participating states. Given the fact that the implementation of this section of CEMP exceeds the benchmark stipulated in the project PAD, it is rated highly Satisfactory. The area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites must have increased by at least 80 percent The third key performance indicator of the project which states that by project end, the area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites must have increased by at least 80 percent was also achieved going by the result in figure 3.3. The ‘data provided on this PDO were not useful to carry out quantitative analysis. Thus this report relied on the findings on 58 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY this PDO in the beneficiary assessment report and information from project officials and documents relating to the projects. The average achievements in the three pilot sites of Bauchi, Imo and Ogun states stood at about 55.3%, while the average achievement of the six states was about 92.9% during the Mid- Term Review in 2009. By the time of ICR in May, 2011, the achievements in the three pilot sites of Bauchi, Imo and Ogun states stood at about 58% as compared with the target of 80%. However, when the combined areas in the six participating states are considered, the project achieved 121.9% of the target for the six states. Going by this result, this third PDO is rated highly Satisfactory. Lesson learnt, Challenges and recommendations by PDOs are presented as follows. Lessons learnt for Watershed Management Coordination  Reduction of duplication of effort in watershed management.  Knowledge sharing amongst members provided the needed complementarily amongst stakeholders.  Involvement of SWS members in awareness, training and technical assistance to the FUGs/FCAs helped in promoting and capturing the priorities of the various stakeholders Challenges for Watershed Management Coordination  Irregularity of meeting  SWS Members not readily available because of other state assignment. Recommendation for Watershed Management Coordination  Highly interested and dedicated expert on watershed issues should be recommended into the committee.  Continuous training to enhance coordination capacity 59 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Lessons learnt for Sustainable land and water management practices mainstreamed into LDP  Beneficiaries are quite aware of the various forms of degradation; they have also noticed an increasing trend in land degradation but have not been able to do anything because their immediate source of livelihood could not be easily traded for any future benefits.  Adequate sensitization and provision of alternative livelihood is imperative to achieve this PDO Challenges for Sustainable land and water management practices mainstreamed into LDP  Inadequate training of beneficiaries before committing resources for implementation of sub-projects.  Gestation period of most SLM activity is too long.  Benefit of most SLM activities is of public nature  Land tenure system remain a big challenge Recommendation for Sustainable land and water management practices mainstreamed into LDP  Projects should not be rushed into with adequate time provided to build the capacity of the potential beneficiaries.  Adequate resources should be provided for monitoring activities at all levels of implementation. Lessons learnt on area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites must have increased by at least 80 percent  The need for recognition and documentation of indigenous SLM activities.  The need for documentation of the actual size of the intervention site in digital map with the coordinates of the communities within the area. 60 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  The need for Use the GPS to get a more accurate data on land size and for mapping Challenges on area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites must have increased by at least 80 percent  The main challenge was the estimation of land degradation more accurately, especially on individual farm holding  Beneficiaries are not readily disposed to adopting tree planting activities but rather interested in activities with shorter gestation period. Recommendation on area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites must have increased by at least 80 percent  There is a need for continuous awareness on the importance of SLM  Provide alternative funding mechanism for SLM activities  Empowering the local communities in recognizing and taking decisions to arrest land degradation The rest of the results are discussed under the four components of the project and sometimes discussed together where they exist as crosscutting issues in the term of reference. 61 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.1: Existence of Watershed Management Coordination capacity in state. Existence of watershed management coordination capacity in state (%) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 60 Cut of for Proportion of Bauchi Imo Kebbi Kogi Kwara Ogun PDOs the participating state Note: Blue are responses at ICR while yellow is response at the period of beneficiary assessment Fig 3.2: Mainstreaming of sustainable land and water management practice into LDP. Mainstreaming of sustainable land and water management practice into LDP(%) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 35 Cut of for Proportion of Bauchi Imo Kebbi Kogi Kwara Ogun PDOs the participating state Note: Blue are responses at ICR while yellow is response at the period of beneficiary assessment 62 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig3.3: Area under sustainable land and water management practice in pilot site Area under sustainable land and water management practice in the pilot state (Ogun, Imo and Bauchi) 80 77.53 60.21 59.99 52.59 37.57 Bauchi Imo Ogun Cut off of PDOs proportion of the Achievement for participating state all states The second term of reference of this study seeks to assess the extent of achievement of project targets with respect to the execution of component activities. There exist four project components of CEMP according to its PAD. These are the Capacity building component, Integrated Ecosystem Management at Watershed Level component, Community Sustainable Land Management component and the Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation component. The performances of each of these components as it’s relates to activities within each components is assessed in this section of the report. Also, the challenges, lessons learnt and recommendations for each component by activities are also presented in relevant figures displayed below. 63 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig3.4: ‘Yes’ response on extent of achievement of project targets with respect to capacity building 64 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY The Capacity building component of CEMP include organizing awareness training, developing use of GIS for Watershed planning and information sharing among government officials in Key Natural resource Management positions and developing sustainable harvest techniques for forest products and fishing. Others include reviewing of policies and legislations related to watershed management at federal level and promotion of Agricultural practices such as tillage, crop mix/rotations, riverbank protection amongst others. Findings from fig3.4 revealed that there was an 100 percent ‘Yes’ response from state officers in terms of the component organizing awareness training, developing use of GIS for Watershed planning and information sharing among government officials in Key Natural resource Management positions and promotion of Agricultural practices such as tillage, crop mix/rotations, riverbank protection. However, two - third of total responses acceded to the fact that capacity building component of CEMP did not do much in the area of reviewing of policies and legislations related to watershed management and promotion of sustainable harvest techniques for forest products and fishing. It should however be noted that the project’s federal official response in terms of commissioning a project on reviewing of policies and legislations related to watershed management contradicted what most response of states officials reported. The federal official response confirmed that the review of policies and legislation related to watershed planning was actually commissioned and carried out with stakeholders workshop conducted to ensure ownership on the part of all stakeholders. Possible reason for the discrepancy in the response of the National and State project officials on the issue might be due to the fact that many of the current state officials were not yet with the project when the policy reviews were carried out. Based on the evidence provided by responses of GEF project staff at both federal and state level, it appears that one area of activity of Capacity building which has not been properly implemented is the promotion of sustainable harvest techniques for forest products and fishing. However, since four out of the five activities of the component can be adjudged well implemented, this Component of the project is rated Satisfactory. 65 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.5: Lessons learnt with respect to activities within Capacity Building Component 66 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.6: Challenges faced with respect to activities within Capacity Building Component 67 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.7: Recommendation on activities within Capacity Building Component 68 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY The lessons, challenges and recommendations on how to better manage activities within the capacity building component as highlighted in figures 3.5-3.7 is presented as follows Lessons learnt for activities of Capacity building.  Need for more awareness programme and Workshop to understand better activities of the component.  Need for more fund for activities of the component  Need for direct involvement of stakeholders in the activities of the component to guarantee positive results  Need to resolve various conflicting activities of groups particularly during peak farming period  GIS is desirable for geo-referencing, area calculation and locating subprojects  Implementation of activities of components of capacity building requires a lot of supervision. Challenges for activities of Capacity building.  Non release of funds for specific technical trainings of activities of the component  Low literacy level  Beneficiary access to some vital input is limited for proper implementation of activities of capacity building.  Inadequate capacity building of staff in the use of GIS tool.  Inadequate /lack of access to service providers that will help implement activities of capacity building  Slow understanding on the part of beneficiaries on the benefits of sustainable agric practices. 69 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Recommendation on how to improve implementation of activities of Capacity building.  There is a need to mount more awareness training and enlightenment on activities of capacity building of the project.  More funds should be provided for activities of capacity building components of similar project.  There is a need to involve all stakeholders in all stages of activities of capacity building component.  Adequate funding and training should precede sub-projects implementation. 70 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.8; Yes response on the extent of achievement of project target with respect to Integrated Ecosystem Management at Watershed Level The Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level component of CEMP has activities such as embarking on strengthening watershed planning and coordination mechanism among relevant state, embarking on sustainable management of forest resources for protection of Fadama areas, embarking on study and monitoring activities to understand input of upstream reservoir management and river flow regime on Fadama areas and finally, embarking on monitoring plan devised to improve management of groundwater and shallow aquifers in selected Fadama areas. Results from fig 3.8 shows that all the respondents agreed that the target of activity of embarking on strengthening watershed planning and coordination mechanism among relevant state has been met. More than 80percent of respondents also agreed that activity of embarking on monitoring plan devised to improve management of groundwater and shallow 71 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY aquifers in selected Fadama areas has been met, while about 67percents and 60 percents of respondents provided a ‘Yes’ answer to whether the project’s component of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level did embark on sustainable management of forest resources for protection of Fadama areas and study /monitoring activities to understand input of upstream reservoir management and river flow regime on Fadama areas respectively. Based on the evidence provided by responses of GEF project staff at both federal and state level, it appears that all activities of the Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level has been properly implemented. Since responses on the four activities of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level are far above average in terms of proper implementation, this Component of the project is rated Satisfactory. 72 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.9: Lessons learnt on activities within Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level 73 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.10: Challenges of activities within Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level 74 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.11: Recommendations on activities within Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level 75 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY The lessons, challenges and recommendations on how to better manage activities within Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level component as highlighted in figures 3.9- 3.11 is presented as follows Lessons learnt for activities of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level  Consultancies on activities of Component of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level should be decentralized.  Capacity of SWS members should be properly built on this component since they have helped tremendously in achieving activities in the component.  Robust success of this component of the project requires more funds to engage service providers. Challenges faced on activities of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level  Logistics and transportation  Inadequate fund for monitoring and capacity building on activities in the component.  Initial mistrust by communities over ownership of subprojects/activities of the Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level component. Recommendation for activities of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level  There is a need to provide adequate funding to cater for vehicles for monitoring activities of the component. 76 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  NGOs should be made to drive the activity of watershed planning.  Funding of activities of this component of the project should be timely.  NFCO should provide money for activities of this component as at when due. 77 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.12: Yes response on extent of achievement of project on community sustainable land Management. The Sustainable land Management component of CEMP has two main activities as contained in its PAD. These are project embarking on advisory service to achieve land use changes in critical areas and also using advisory service to achieve on sustainable agricultural practices in Fadama areas added to IDA –supported local Development plans. Findings revealed that approximately half of respondents agreed that CEMP had implemented the activity of use of advisory service to achieve land use changes in critical areas well, while about 83 percent also consented to the fact that the project made good use of advisory service to achieve on sustainable agricultural practices in Fadama areas added to IDA –supported local Development plans. Given the fact responses on implementation of these two activities in the SLM project is fairly above average, the component is rated moderately satisfactory. 78 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.13: Lessons learnt on embarking on SLM component of the project Fig 3.14: Challenges faced on embarking on SLM component of the project 79 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.15: Recommendation on embarking on SLM component of the project The lessons, challenges and recommendations on how to better manage activities within Sustainable land Management component as highlighted in figures 3.13-3.15 is presented as follows Lessons learnt for activities of Sustainable land Management component  SWS alone cannot handle activities of SLM efficiently.  SLM activities reduce erosion and other form of land degradation tremendously.  Consultancies on SLM should be decentralized. Challenges of activities of Sustainable land Management component  Documents on SLM are not properly circulated among stakeholders of CEMP project.  There is always a lot of delay in report rendition on SLM.  States do not have the capacity to assess SLM components.  Funds are not released as at when due for SLM activities. Recommendations of Sustainable land Management component 80 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  Need for continuous sensitization and awareness of stakeholders on SLM  Need for adequate funding of SLM component is desirable for optimal result. 81 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.16: Yes response on achievement of Project Management and Monitoring evaluation The Project management and monitoring component of CEMP has four main activities as contained in its PAD. These are embarking on management information system integrating NFDO and SFDO levels with data generated by FCAs, embarking on impact evaluations and beneficiary assessment to enhance project implementation performance, embarking on environmental management plan and finally embarking on routine monitoring of the performance of CEMP project. Results from figure 3.16 shows that all respondents attested to the fact that the project had achieved activities in the area of embarking on management information system integrating NFDO and SFDO levels with data generated by FCAs and embarking on environmental management plan. About 83 percent were sure that beneficiary assessment for the 82 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY project had been carried out while 50 percent of respondents agreed to the fact that regular routine monitoring of the project was well done. The main issue under Project management and monitoring component is that not more than half of project staff believed that regular monitoring is properly carried out. However based on the fact that the performance of this component of the project in term of implementation can be implied as substantial by respondents responses , this component of the project is rated Satisfactory. 83 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Table 3.17: Lessons learnt on Project management and monitoring component 84 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY The lessons, challenges and recommendations on how to better manage activities within Project management and monitoring component are presented below while lessons learnt by activities are presented in figure 3.17 Lessons learnt for activities of Project management and monitoring component  The role of MIS officer in Project management and monitoring component is important.  MIS tool is not adequate for Project management and monitoring component  Constant updating of performance indicators makes report writing easy.  Engagement of external auditors such as NGOs is important to improve Project management and monitoring component performance. Challenges faced for activities of Project management and monitoring component  Untimely rendition of report  Time too short in each state to cover all sub-projects.  Logistic challenge in some states because of their terrain Recommendations for activities of Project management and monitoring component  Need for more funding for monitoring visit and provision of adequate infrastructure support for the Monitoring officers  Report based disbursement. i.e disbursement to any state should be tied to timely report rendition The third term of reference of this study seeks to assess the performance of the participating states Governments and Local Government Councils in the areas of Institutional arrangement and Institutional support – technical, financial 85 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.18: Yes response as regards state government support in the area of Institutional arrangement. Yes response 100 Did t he state government support this project in terms of Institutional arrangement? Lessons learned 1. B ureaucracy ,with most Senior Officers made SWS members 2. Better definition of relationship between state government official and p roject staff will help the project Challeng es 1. Dearth of fund for SWS committee action 2. Logistic problem in the area of transportation Recomm endations 1. Make more funds available for SWS committee. 2. M iddle level officials should be made members of SWS because they have less busy schedule 86 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.19: Yes response as regards state government support in the area of Institutional support. Yes response 100 Did the state government support this project in terms of Institutional support (Technical/, financial)? Lessons learned 1. Community need to be enlighten on the benefit for the activity 2. Untimely release of Counterpart funds, Challenges 1. Initial mis-trust by community over ownership of project 2. Untimely release of Counterpart fund 3. No fund released for advisory services. Recommendations 1. Timely release of Counterpart funds by Government. 2. Committee members of the project must be properly informed about the kind of support Government can provide for the project. 87 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Findings from figures 3.18 and 3.19 revealed that all state project staff agreed that states are providing the right support in the area of Institutional arrangement and support. However key lesson learnt in state support both in terms of institutional arrangement and support include (i) Community needing enlightenment on the benefit for the activity (ii) Untimely release of Counterpart funds. Others include bureaucracy, with most Senior Officers made SWS members and that better definition of relationship between state government official and project staff will help the project. The key challenges faced are dearth of fund for SWS committee action, Logistic problem in the area of transportation, Untimely release of Counterpart fund with little or no fund released for advisory services. 88 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.20: Yes response as regards local government support in the area of Institutional arrangement. Yes response 50.0 Did the Local government support this project in terms of Institutional arrangement? Lessons learned 1. Inadequate fund support from the institution Challenges 1. Political and career Officials are not well trained in the area of institutional support to projects. 2. Project committees should be better sensitized on type of institutional arrangement to expect from government. 89 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.21: Yes response as regards local government support in the area of Institutional support. Yes response 100 Did the Local government support this project in terms of Institutional support (Technical/, financial)? Lessons learned 1. Inadequate fund to support the institution 2. Robust data collection and monitoring activities needs well educated personnel Challenges 1. Lack of exposure on monitoring methodologies. 2. Inadequate Staff at the local government level to collect data and carry out proper monitoring activities. 3. Training of project stakeholders on funds management yet to be properly done. Recommendations 1. Political and career Official should be trained & better sensitized on how government is supposed to provide technical and financial support to projects. 2. More training/awareness creation for the farmers on what to expect from government in the area of technical and financial support. 3. All Stakeholders (farmers and Project staff) should be trained and retrained especially on what to expect from government in the area of technical and financial support. 90 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Findings from figures 3.20 and 3.21 revealed that half of state project staff agreed that local government are providing the right support in the area of Institutional arrangement ,while all agreed that they provide the robust institutional support for the project. The key lessons learnt in the process of local government providing institutional support and arrangement are (1) Inadequate fund to support the institution (ii) Robust data collection and monitoring activities at local government level needs well educated personnel(iii) Inadequate fund support from the local government institution. In terms of Challenges, Lack of exposure on monitoring methodologies and Inadequate Staff at the local government level to collect data and carry out proper monitoring activities serves as impediments to robust Institutional support from local government institutions to the project. 91 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.22: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of Decision making. Yes response 98.8 Were you empowered by the project in the area of Decision making? The fourth term of reference of this study seeks to assess level of beneficiaries’ empowerment in the areas of; decision making, funds transfer, awareness on Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices, adoption of Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices and Sustainability and up-scaling Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices. Findings on whether the project had achieved robust empowerment of beneficiaries in these five areas (see Fig 3.22, Fig 3.26., Fig 3.30, Fig 3.34 and Fig 3.38) revealed an average ‘Yes Response of about 98percent of respondents. The implication of this finding is that the project has been able to successfully empower beneficiaries in the area of decision making, funds transfer, awareness on Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices, adoption of Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices and Sustainability and up-scaling Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices. The CEMP project therefore can be said to have performed satisfactorily in the area of empowering beneficiaries on decision making, funds transfer, adoption/ sustainability of sustainable land and water management practices. Lessons learnt as regards empowering beneficiaries on decision making, funds transfer, adoption/ sustainability of sustainable land and water management practices, results revealed (see Fig 3.23, Fig 3.27, Fig 3.31, Fig 3.35 and Fig 3.39) include sense of ownership, group formation 92 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY and team work, bottom up decision making, accountability and developing saving culture. Other lessons include abstaining from bush burning, need for planting of trees, making compost manure and awareness on environmental benefits. The main challenges faced by beneficiaries(see Fig 3.24, Fig 3.28, Fig 3.32, Fig 3.36 and Fig 3.40) while being empowered on decision making, funds transfer, adoption/ sustainability of sustainable land and water management practices are Conflict of interest and cultural challenges, long time spent in meetings when being empowered, mobility difficulty, doubt about project result, delay in monthly contribution by group members, Inadequate training/training facilities in area beneficiaries are being empowered and difficulties in meeting bank requirement. Other challenges include the fact that long gestation of some subprojects bring about fear of adoption of empowerments and land tenure problem. In terms on recommendation on how to improve empowerment of beneficiaries in decision making, funds transfer, adoption/ sustainability of sustainable land and water management practices, beneficiaries were of the opinion that there is need for more training and re-training, creation of awareness/sensitization on areas of empowerment using traditional institutions, timely implementation of project and cordial relationship among farmers. Other recommendations include removal / reduction of bank charges, relaxing stringent bank regulations and suspension of counterpart funding until harvesting of long gestation sub projects. 93 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.23; Lesson learnt in terms of getting empowered in decision making by the project Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in decision making by the project Sense of ownership/belonging 23.2 Inclusive 17.4 Democratic process 14.8 No response 13.5 Ability to control people 10.3 Group formation 8.4 Ability to work with people 8.4 Need for consensus 3.2 Bottom up decision 0.6 94 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.24: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in decision making Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in decision making by the project Conflict of interest 26.9 Illiteracy 15.2 Long time of meeting 14.6 Difficulty in mobilisation 12.3 No response 7.6 Finacial constraints 6.4 Doubt about project result 6.4 Delay in monthly contribution 4.1 Land tenure system 2.3 Water shortage 1.8 Insect pest infestation 1.8 Inadequate training 0.6 95 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.25; Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in decision making Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in decision making Training, retraining, and capacity building 30.4 Creation of awareness, sensitization 15.2 Ignoring farmers not interested in project 10.5 Need for regular meetings 9.9 Cordial relationship among farmers 8.8 Provision of fund 8.8 Community participation in planning 7.6 No response 5.3 Need to empower women 2.3 Timely implementation of projects 1.2 96 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.26: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of fund transfer. Yes response 96.5 Were you empowered by the project in the area of funds transfer? Fg3.27: Lesson learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of funds tranfer by the project Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of funds transfer by the project Knowledge of Financial Transaction 35.1 Accountability 15.8 Access to Credit 15.2 Control over Resources 14.0 No response 13.5 Developed Savings Culture 4.7 Delay in banking transactions 1.8 97 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.28: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the arae of funds transfer by the project Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the area of funds transfer by the project Bank Charges 41.5 Difficulty in meeting banking requirement/processes 23.4 Delay in funds transfer/release of funds 12.3 Lack of knowledge on banking transaction 9.4 Long distance of bank/security risk 8.2 No response 2.9 Difficulty in mobilizing beneficiary contribution 2.3 Fig 3.29: Recommendation to enhance empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of fund transfer Recommendations to enhance empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of funds transfer Remove/Reduce Bank Charges 21.4 Establish Banks in Rural Areas 20.2 Capacity Training on Fund Management 18.5 Timely Approval/Release of funds 10.7 Relax some banking procedures 9.5 Compel Banks to accept comfort letter 5.4 Follow Regulations of cooperatives 4.8 Ensure Accountability/Transparency 3.6 No response 2.4 Trust Beneficiaries with Fund Management 2.4 Enhance Security in Banking Transaction 0.6 Suspend counterpart Funding till after harvest 0.6 98 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.30: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of awareness on sustainable land and water Management practices. Yes response 98.8 Were you empowered by the project in the area of awareness of Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices Fig 3.31: Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of awareness of SLWMP Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of awareness of SLWMP Abstain from bush burning/planting of tree 40.4 Knowledge on new agricultural practices 18.1 Erosion control and land management 15.2 Group formation 14.6 No response 11.7 99 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.32: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the area of awareness of SLWMP Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the area of awareness of SLWMP Conflicts amongmembers/difference in needs of members 19.9 Environmental problems 14.6 Illiteracy 14.0 Problems of hunters 13.5 Long gestation period of the project 13.5 Fear of take-over by the government 5.3 Poor training 4.7 No response 4.1 Problems of group formation 4.1 Technical problems 3.5 Land tenure problem 2.9 100 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.33: Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of awareness on SLWMP Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of awareness on SLWMP Creation of awareness, sensitization and visitation 40.4 More training and retraining 20.5 Training on use and production of organic manure 18.1 Mobilisation through traditional institution 7.6 Domestication of wild animals 4.7 Technical support 3.5 Resolution of conflict 3.5 No response 1.8 Fig 3.34: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of adoption of sustainable land and water management practices. Yes response 96.5 Were you empowered by the project in the area of adoption of Sustainable Land and Water Management Practices? 101 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.35: Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in adoption of SLWMP Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in adoption of SLWMP new knowledges and techniques of modern agriculture 31.0 awareness on environmental benefits 17.5 increase in food production and income 16.4 benefits not limited to beneficiary 12.3 awareness on best practices 7.0 No response 5.3 increase in job opportunities 5.3 making of compost manure 4.1 increase in land acquisition 1.2 102 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.36: Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the area of adoption of SLWMP Challenges faced while trying to get empowered in the area of adoption of SLWMP land tenure system 19.9 delay in release of fund 18.1 delay in implementation 11.7 conflict of interest and cultural challenges 11.1 inadequate training 9.9 illiteracy 9.4 No response 7.0 poor group formation 5.3 difficulty with trasportation 3.5 high cost of maintenance 1.8 invasion of insect pest 1.2 fear of government take-over 1.2 103 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.37: Recommendation to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of adoption of SLWMP Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of adoption of SLWMP Mobilisation and implementation through traditional leaders 33.3 Diversification and provision of more fund 17.5 Training and Retraining 16.4 Technical support/expansion of project 14.6 Individual ownership 10.5 No Response 5.8 Illiteracy/Low level of education 1.8 104 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.38: Yes response on whether project empowered beneficiaries in the area of sustainability and up scaling SLWMP. Yes response 99.4 Were you empowered by the project in the area of Sustainability and up-scaling SLWMP 105 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.39: Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of sustainability and up- scaling SLWMP Lessons learnt in terms of getting empowered in the area of Sustainability and up-scaling SLWMP Adoption of agricultural practices is profitable 23.4 Development of ownership and management of project fund 19.3 Development of maintenance in land and water management 13.5 No Response 12.9 Improves beneficiary knowledge 7.6 Expansion and increased agricultural production is possible 7.6 Improves soil fertility 4.7 Improves savings culture 4.7 Endurance 2.9 Development of team work 1.8 Inadequate training facilities can pose problem 1.2 Need to maintain healthy living 0.6 Fig 3.40: Challenges faced to get empowered in the area of sustanability and up-scaling SLWMP 106 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Challenges faced to get empowered in the area of Sustainability and up-scaling SLWMP No Response 8.8 Logistics 2.3 High cost of maintenance 8.8 Poor savings and contribution 5.3 Indiscriminate bank charges 6.4 Inadequate training and training facilities 9.4 Inadequate input 9.4 Difficulty in accepting idea 1.2 Difficulty in acquring land/land tenure system 14.6 Invasion by cattle rearer/conflict 18.1 Difficulty in acessing credit 15.8 107 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.41: Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of sustainability and up –scaling SLWMP Recommendations to promote empowerment of beneficiaries in the area of Sustainability and up-scaling SLWMP 19.9 Capacity Building/Training 18.1 11.7 Conflict Management 11.7 11.1 Increased funding 6.4 6.4 Involve traditional rulers in mobilization and awareness 5.8 2.3 Provide improved seedlings/early maturing varieties 1.8 1.2 Set up of maintenace and sustainability measures 1.2 1.2 Timely disbursement of funds 1.2 108 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY The fifth terms of reference seek to assess project demonstration of impact (including multiplier /spillover effect) on beneficiaries especially their livelihood. Two important issues were addressed under this term of reference. The first seek to assess whether CEMP project affected the way beneficiaries make money to pay for food, place to live, clothing and how much assistance they had been able to give to their children and relatives. The second also seek to assess whether CEMP project affected the way non-beneficiaries make money to pay for food, place to live, clothing and how much assistance they had been able to give to their children and relatives. Results from Fig 3.42 revealed that about 87 percent of beneficiaries confirmed that CEMP project affected the way beneficiaries make money to pay for food, place to live, clothing and how much assistance they had been able to give to their children and relatives. The project is therefore rated to have performed satisfactorily with respect to its impact on beneficiaries’ livelihood. The lesson learnt in terms of how project can impact on beneficiary livelihood include subproject of CEMP encourages diversification and multiplicative effects on respondents livelihood, benefits are short and long-term in nature, allowing for learning of new agricultural practices and encourages creation of new job opportunities. In terms of challenges faced, the key ones as it relate to the project impacting on beneficiaries’ livelihood include high cost of maintaining subprojects, problem of attitude and cultural challenges on the part of beneficiaries, problem of accepting and sustaining sub-projects and inadequate training about sub-projects. The recommendations put forward in terms of how to improve projects impact on beneficiaries’ livelihood include provision of more awareness and sensitization about sub-projects, adoption of modern farming methods for sub-projects, creation of more sub-projects accompanied with well planned methods of sustainability and adequate and timely release of resources. 109 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.42: Yes response as regards whether CEMP Project affected beneficiaries livelihood. Yes response 87.1 Has the GEF Fadama Project affected the way you make money to pay for food, place to live, clothing and how much assistance you give to your children and relatives? Fig 4.43: Lessons learnt in terms of how the project can impact on beneficiaries’ livelihood Lessons learnt in terms of how the project can impact on beneficiaries' livelihood Diversification and Multiplicative effects of projects 24.0 Benefits are in both long and short terms 18.7 Improved welfare and management capability 17.5 Domestication of wild animals 14.0 Creation of Job opportunities 11.1 Economic progress and environmental protection 6.4 No Response 5.3 Intercropping and other farming techniques 2.9 110 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.44: Challenges faced in terms of how project can impact on beneficiaries livelihood. Challenges faced in terms of how project can impact on beneficiaries' livelihood Low level of training and sensitization 21.6 High cost of maintenance/long maturity period of projects 18.1 Acceptability/sustainability of the project 15.8 Delay of/Inadequate fund 12.3 Difficulty in accepting new ideas 8.8 Attitudinal and cultural challenges 8.2 No Response 7.6 Poor management of project 2.9 Health and unemployment challenges 1.8 iInfrastructural inadequacies 1.8 Insect pest attack 1.2 Fig 3.45: Recommendations to promote the impact of project on beneficiaries’ livelihood. Recommendations to promote the impact of project on beneficiaries' livelihood More awareness, sensitization and Capacity building 26.9 Adoption of modern farming methods 22.8 Creation of more subproject/continuity 20.5 No response 11.1 Adequate, increase and timely release of fund 8.2 Attitudinal change 7.0 Technical support 3.5 111 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.46: Yes response as regards whether CEMP Project affected non-beneficiaries livelihood. Yes response 78.4 Has the GEF Fadama Project affected the way non beneficiaries adopting GEF practices in your communities make money to pay for food, place to live, clothing and how much assistance you give to your children and relatives? Results from Fig 3.46 revealed that about 78 percent of beneficiaries confirmed that CEMP project affected the way non-beneficiaries make money to pay for food, place to live, clothing and how much assistance they had been able to give to their children and relatives. The project is therefore rated to have performed satisfactorily with respect to its impact on non-beneficiaries’ livelihood. The lesson learnt in terms of how project can impact on non-beneficiary livelihood include non-beneficiaries are eager to adopt modern techniques used in CEMP sub-projects, multiplier/spillover effect of project is guaranteed in all intervention sites, more non-beneficiaries of CEMP project are clamoring to be part of CEMP projects and projects encourages creation of new job opportunities. In terms of challenges faced, the key ones as it relate to the project impacting on beneficiaries’ livelihood include problem of group formation among non - beneficiaries, low sensitization/ enlightenment of non-beneficiaries and inadequate project funds that cannot accommodate inclusion of non-beneficiaries in CEMP project. The recommendations put forward in terms of how to improve projects impact on beneficiaries’ livelihood include 112 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY provision of more awareness and sensitization about sub-projects and expansion of GEf project in terms of no of beneficiaries to be covered 113 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.47: Lessons learnt in terms on how the project can impact on non—beneficiariea’ livelihood. Lessons learnt in terms of how the project can impact on non- benficiaries ‘livelihood creation of job opportunities 27.5 No Response 24.0 Non beneficiaries are eager to adopt modern techniques 12.9 Need for capacity building/training 11.7 Increase in income and savings 10.5 Chain reaction that affects entire area 8.2 Increase in conservation management practices 2.9 Encourage community driven development 1.2 Need for truthfulness and sustainability 0.6 increased harvest 0.6 114 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.48: Challenges Faced in terms of how project can impact on non-beneficiaries’ livelihood. Challenges faced in terms of how project can impact on non-beneficiaries’livelihood Inadequate fund/Capital 29.2 No Response 17.0 Difficulty in accepting idea 17.0 Time consuming 8.8 Small scale/irregular operation 7.6 Inadequate training 7.0 Lack of continuity 4.7 Irregular planting and non sustainability 2.3 problem with group formation 2.3 Non conformity with norms and beliefs of non beneficiaries 1.8 Sabotage 1.2 More people want to join 0.6 Low sensitization /enlightenement 0.6 115 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.49: Recommendations on how to promote impact of project on non-beneficiaries’ livelihood. Recommendations can you suggest that will promote impact of project on non-beneficiaries livelihood Expansion of the GEF project 18.1 Increased funding/provision of inputs 18.1 Increased training and capacity building 12.9 No Response 12.3 Increase awareness/Information 10.5 Diversification of sub projects 9.9 Interactive visits between beneficiaries and non beneficiaries to sub project 7.6 Continuation/Extension of the GEF projects 7.6 Formation of groups within the community 1.8 Project produce should be made available to non beneficiaries 0.6 Improve logistics 0.6 116 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY The sixth term of reference of this study seeks to assess compliance with World Bank Environmental safeguards and Nigeria Environmental Laws (i.e evaluation of the beneficiaries’ adoption, institutionalization and implementation of activities and programs that will ensure sustainable utilization of natural resources and preserve the eco-system integrity/ functions such as waste management strategy, monitoring & auditing plans, ESMP e.t.c. The key issues considered under this term of reference were four. First, was whether environmental safeguards/ laws were considered when evaluating beneficiaries’ adoption of projects activities? Second was whether environmental safeguards/ laws were considered to ensure sustainable utilization of natural resources and preserving the ecosystem. Third, it also seek to know whether environmental safeguards/ laws to ensure waste management and fourth, whether environmental safeguards/ laws were considered to ensure environmental monitoring and auditing plans. Findings revealed that 80percent of responses of state procurement officers revealed that the project considered environmental safeguards/ laws when evaluating beneficiaries’ adoption of projects activities. Results from figure 3.50 also revealed that 75percent of responses also agreed to the fact that the project considered environmental safeguards/ laws to ensure sustainable utilization of natural resources and preserving the ecosystem. The rest of the result in figure 3.50 also revealed that 75percent and about 67 percent of respondent attested to the fact that the project considered environmental safeguards/ laws to ensure waste management and environmental monitoring and auditing plans respectively. Based on the weight of ‘Yes’ responses on the part of respondents, this project is scored satisfactory in ensuring that World Bank Environmental safeguards and Nigeria Environmental Laws are observed while implementing CEMP Projects. The lessons learnt by project staff on ensuring that Environmental laws are put in place while implementing projects like CEMP are that it is desirable for screening projects. It is imperative for government to enforce Environmental law and that the importance of Environmental laws can only be appreciated by people residing in the intervention sites if well sensitized. In terms of challenges faced in ensuring that Environmental laws were observed while implementing this present project include issues such as environmental laws was not properly enforced by government, Initial unwillingness on the part of those residing in the intervention sites to appreciate environmental laws and inadequate funding to ensure proper implentation of 117 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY environmental laws. Recommendations put forward by project staff as it affect ensuring environmental laws are observed when implementing projects include issues such as government ensuring enforcement of environmental laws, need for continous sensitization and awareness about environmental laws and states project offices should be made to carry out Environmental audits. Fig 3.50: Yes response with respect to compliance with World Bank Environmental safeguards. 118 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.51: lessons learnt on how environmental laws/ safeguards can be implemented. 119 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.52: Challenges faced in enforcing environmental laws 120 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.53: Recommendation on how to promote enforcement of environmental laws 121 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY The seventh term of reference of this study seek to assess compliance of project with clauses of the Grant Agreement, especially with regards to financial management and disbursement related issues, including procurement issues. There are essentially six issues being discussed under these terms of reference as guided by the projects PAD. These are project complying with grant agreement set out by partnering international agencies, project complying with financial management agreement set out by partnering international agencies, project complying with disbursement related management agreement set out by partnering international agencies and project complying with procurement agreement set out by international agencies. Others include benefiting communities following World Bank procurement guideline and communities disbursing funds in line with IDA guidelines. Results from figure 3.54 revealed that half or more than half of state project procurement staff agreed to the fact that the project follows grant agreements set out by international agencies while implementing projects except in complying with financial management agreement set out by partnering international agencies. However the federal procurement officers’ response affirmed that all the six guidelines were complied with while implementing project. Since one of the six issues considered seems to be in dispute the project drive in complying with grant agreement of International agencies is rated moderately satisfactory. Fig 3.54: Yes response with respect to project complying with clauses of the grant 122 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.55: Lessons learnt in complying with grant agreement 123 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.56: Challenges faced in complying with grant agreement 124 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Fig 3.57: Recommendations for complying with grant agreement 125 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY In terms of lessons learnt, challenges faced and recommendations that will promote project complying with International agencies grant agreement, the following were findings of this report Lessons learnt and challenges for Implementing PDOs Lessons learnt for Watershed Management Coordination  Methods of reduction of duplication of effort in watershed management.  Knowledge sharing amongst members provided the needed complementarily amongst stakeholders.  Involvement of members in awareness, training and technical assistance to the FUGs/FCAs helped in promoting and capturing the priorities of the various stakeholders Challenges for Watershed Management Coordination  Irregularity of meeting  Members not readily available because of other state assignment. Lessons learnt for Sustainable land and water management practices mainstreamed into LDP  Beneficiaries are quite aware of the various forms of degradation; they have also noticed an increasing trend in land degradation but have not been able to do anything substantial because their immediate source of livelihood could not be easily traded for any future benefits.  Adequate sensitization and provision of alternative livelihood is imperative to achieve this PDO Challenges for Sustainable land and water management practices mainstreamed into LDP  Inadequate training of beneficiaries before committing resources.  Gestation period of most SLM activity is too long.  Benefit of most SLM activities is of public nature 126 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  Land tenure system remain a big challenge Lessons learnt on area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites must have increased by at least 80 percent  The need for recognition and documentation of indigenous SLM activities.  The need for documentation of the actual size of the intervention site in digital map with the coordinates of the communities within the area.  The need for Use the GPS top get a more accurate data on land size and for mapping Challenges on area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites must have increased by at least 80 percent  The main challenge was the estimation of land degradation more accurately, especially on individual farm holding  Beneficiaries are not readily disposed to adopting tree planting activities but rather interested in activities with shorter gestation period. Lessons learnt and Challenges implementing Project Components Lessons learnt for activities of Capacity building.  Need for more awareness programme and Workshop in order to understand better activities of the component.  Need for more fund for activities of the component  Need for direct involvement of stakeholders in the activities of the component to guarantee positive results  Need to resolve various conflicting activities of groups particularly during peak farming period.  Implementation of activities of components of capacity building requires a lot of supervision. 127 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Challenges for activities of Capacity building.  Non release of funds for specific technical trainings of activities of the component  Low literacy level  Beneficiary access to some vital input is limited for proper implementation of activities of capacity building.  Inadequate capacity building of staff in the use of GIS tool.  Inadequate /lack of access to service providers that will help implement activities of capacity building  Slow understanding on the part of beneficiaries on the benefits of sustainable agric practices. Lessons learnt for activities of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level  Consultancies on activities of Component of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level should be decentralized.  Capacity of SWS members should be properly built on this component since they have helped tremendously in achieving activities in the component.  Robust success of this component of the project requires more funds to engage service providers. Challenges faced on activities of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level  Logistics and transportation  Inadequate fund for monitoring and capacity building on activities in the component.  Initial mistrust by communities over ownership of subprojects/activities of the Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level component. 128 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Lessons learnt for activities of Sustainable land Management component  SWS alone cannot handle activities of SLM efficiently.  SLM activities reduce erosion and other form of land degradation tremendously.  Consultancies on SLM should be decentralized. Challenges of activities of Sustainable land Management component  Documents on SLM are not properly circulated among stakeholders of CEMP project.  There is always a lot of delay in report rendition on SLM.  States do not have the capacity to assess SLM components.  Funds are not released as at when due for SLM activities Lessons learnt for activities of Project management and monitoring component  The role of MIS officer in Project management and monitoring component is important.  MIS tool is not adequate for Project management and monitoring component  Constant updating of performance indicators makes report writing easy.  Engagement of external auditors such as NGOs is important to improve Project management and monitoring component performance. Challenges faced for activities of Project management and monitoring component  Untimely rendition of report  Time too short in each state to cover all sub-projects.  Logistic challenge in some states because of their terrain 129 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Lesson learnt by project as a result of state support both in terms of institutional arrangement and support  Community needs enlightenment on the benefit for the activity  Untimely release of Counterpart funds.  Bureaucracy, with most Senior Officers made SWS members and that better definition of relationship between state government official and project staff will help the project. The key challenges faced as a result of state support both in terms of institutional arrangement and support  Dearth of fund for SWS committee action,  Logistic problem in the area of transportation,  Untimely release of Counterpart fund with little or no fund released for advisory services Lessons learnt in the process of local government providing institutional support and arrangement  Inadequate fund to support the institution  Robust data collection and monitoring activities at local government level needs well educated personnel  Inadequate fund support from the local government institution. Challenges faced in the process of local government providing institutional support and arrangement  Lack of exposure on monitoring methodologies  Inadequate Staff at the local government level to collect data and carry out proper monitoring Lessons learnt as regards empowering beneficiaries on decision making, funds transfer, adoption/ sustainability of sustainable land and water management practices 130 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  Sense of ownership, group formation and team work, bottom up decision making, accountability and developing saving culture.  Abstaining from bush burning, need for planting of trees, making compost manure and awareness on environmental benefits. The main challenges faced by beneficiaries while being empowered on decision making, funds transfer, adoption/ sustainability of sustainable land and water management practices  Conflict of interest and cultural challenges,  Long time spent in meetings when being empowered,  Mobility difficulty,  Doubt about project result,  Delay in monthly contribution by group members,  Inadequate training/training facilities in area beneficiaries are being empowered and difficulties in meeting bank requirement.  Long gestation of some subprojects brings about fear of adoption of empowerments and land tenure problem. The lesson learnt in terms of how project can impact on beneficiary livelihood  Subproject of CEMP encourages diversification and multiplicative effects on respondents’ livelihood,  Benefits are short and long-term in nature,  Allows for learning of new agricultural practices  Encourage creation of new job opportunities. Challenges faced in terms of how project can impact on beneficiary livelihood. 131 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  High cost of maintaining subprojects,  Problem of attitude and cultural challenges on the part of beneficiaries,  Problem of accepting and sustaining sub-projects and inadequate training about sub- projects. Lesson learnt in terms of how project can impact on non-beneficiary livelihood  Non-beneficiaries are eager to adopt modern techniques used in CEMP sub-projects,  Multiplier/spillover effect of project is guaranteed in all intervention sites,  More non-beneficiaries of CEMP project are clamoring to be part of CEMP projects  Projects encourage creation of new job opportunities. Challenges faced in terms of how project can impact on beneficiary livelihood  Problem of group formation among non -beneficiaries,  low sensitization/ enlightenment of non-beneficiaries  Inadequate project funds that cannot accommodate inclusion of non-beneficiaries in CEMP project The lessons learnt by project staff on ensuring that Environmental laws are put in place while implementing projects like CEMP  it is desirable for screening projects.  It is imperative for government to enforce Environmental law  The importance of Environmental laws can only be appreciated by people residing in the intervention sites if well sensitized. Challenges faced in ensuring that Environmental laws were observed  Environmental laws was not properly enforced by government, 132 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  Initial unwillingness on the part of those residing in the intervention sites to appreciate environmental laws  Inadequate funding to ensure proper implentation of environmental laws. Lessons learnt in promote project complying with International agencies grant agreement  Constant supervision and review of activities by oversight bodies can actually keep operators on their toes.  Complying with International agencies grant agreements promotes transparency.  Interest of states was not properly taken care of when agreements on grants were being put in place. Challenges faced complying with International agencies grant agreement  Bank charges on project funds affects project costs negatively.  Long distances of Bank facilities to beneficiaries.  Delay in disbursement of funds. 133 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Conclusion The findings from this study made it to conclude that Fadama GEF project has been satisfactorily implemented. In specific terms, the following conlusins were arrived at with respect to the CEMP project.  The PDO of having at least at the end of project, sustainable watershed management coordination capacity established in at least 60 percent of participating states is rated highly Satisfactory.  The PDO of having the project the 35 percent cut off point that sustainable land and water management practices must have been mainstreamed into LDP of participating states is rated highly Satisfactory.  The PDO of the area under sustainable land and water management practices in the three pilot sites must have increased by at least 80 percent is rated Highly Satisfactory  Since four out of the five activities of the Capacity building component can be adjudged well implemented, this Component of the project is rated Satisfactory.  Since responses on the four activities of Integrated Ecosystem Management at watershed level are far above average in terms of proper implementation, this Component of the project is rated Satisfactory.  Given the fact responses on implementation of these two activities in the SLM project is fairly average in terms of responses, the component is rated moderately satisfactory.  Based on the fact that the performance of this component of the project in term of implementation can be implied as substantial by respondents’ responses, this component of the project is rated Satisfactory.  The project was rated to have performed satisfactorily with respect to its impact on beneficiaries’ livelihood. 134 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY  The CEMP project therefore can be said to have performed satisfactorily in the area of empowering beneficiaries on decision making, funds transfer, adoption/ sustainability of sustainable land and water management practices  Based on the weight of ‘Yes’ responses on the part of respondents, this project is scored satisfactory in ensuring that World Bank Environmental safeguards and Nigeria Environmental Laws are observed while implementing CEMP Projects.  Since one of the six issues considered seems to be in dispute the project drive in complying with grant agreement of International agencies is rated moderately satisfactory. 135 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Bibliography Andiwa lake watersheds Strategic and baseline studies/survey(2008),. Final report submitted to the National Fadama Development Office, No 2 Sakono Crescent, Wuse11, Abuja. Cedar Grove Management Consultants (2008). Final report on the Strategic and Baseline Studies / Survey of Eriti Watersheds, Ogun State, Nigeria. Submitted to National Fadama Development Office Second National Fadama Development Project, No 2 Sakono Crescent, Wuse11, Abuja. Clarke, P. and Jupiter, S. (2010): Principles and practice of ecosystem-based management: A guide for conservation practitioners in the tropical western pacific. Critical Ecosystem Management Project: Final Mid-Term –Review 2009. De Commission on Ecosystem Management: www.icn.org/about/union/commission/cem (8th November 2010). Ecosystem Management: http://www.unep.org/ecosystemmanagement/Introduction/tabid/293/Default.aspx ( 9th of November 2010). Geodata and Environmental Options Limited (2008). Final Report on ‘Strategic and Baseline Studies/Survey of Koton-Karfe Watersheds’. Submitted To National Fadama Development Office- Critical Ecosystem Management Project (NFDO-CEMP). Heckman, J., H. Ichimura, J. Smith, and P. Todd. (1998). “Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator.” Review of Economics and Statistics 86(1): 4-29. Midterm Report on GEF/CEMP (2009); Submitted To National Fadama Development Office- Critical Ecosystem Management Project (NFDO-CEMP) Nkonya, E.; Dayo, P.; Tewodaj, M.; Kuta Yahaya, M., Adewale, G.; Pender, J.; Arokoyo, T. and Kato, E. (2007). Beneficiary Assessment/Impact Evaluation of the Second National fadama Development Project. PCU-NFDO, National Fadama Development Office, Project coordinating Unit. Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development). 136 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Review of policies and Regulations at the Federal Level on Watershed Management in Nigeria (2008). Final Report Submitted By Environquest Nigeria Limited Resort House to National Fadama Development Office Second National Fadama Bdevelopment Project, No 2 Sakono Crescent, Wuse11, Abuja. SAFRRED Consultancy Services (Nig) Ltd, (2008). The Strategic And Baseline Study/Survey Of Oguta Lake Watershed. Final Report Submitted To the National Project Coordinator National Fadama Development Office No. 2 Sokona Street, Opposite Ap Plaza, Wuse 11 Abuja, Fct Nigeria Second National Fadama Development (2009). Critical Ecosystem Management Project (GEF Grant No. Tf 056616 UNI). Final Report of Mid-Term Review, Abuja, Nigeria. Smith, J. and P. Todd. (2001). “Does matching overcome Lalonde’s critique of nonexperimental estimators?”. Journal of Econometrics, 125(1-2): 305-353. States Quarterly Report for September – November 2010. Prepared by GEF/CEMP M&E. Strategic and Baseline Studies/Survey of Jega/Dumbegu Watershed Catchments for the Fadama II: Critical Ecosystem Management Project (CEMP) in Kebbi State, Nigeria (2008). Final report submitted to the National Fadama Development Office, Projects Coordinating Unit Federal Ministry of Agriculture And Rural Development, #2, Sakono Street, Wuse II, Abuja. Strategic Baseline Study of Ajasse Ipo Watershed Catchment Area (2008). Final Report Submitted By Environquest Nigeria Limited Resort House to National Fadama Development Office Second National Fadama Bdevelopment Project, No 2 Sakono Crescent, Wuse11, Abuja. World Bank (2006). Project appraisal document on a proposed grant from the global environment facility trust fund to the federal republic of Nigeria for the second national Fadama development critical ecosystem management project 137 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Kudi,T. M., Usman, I., Akpoko, J.G and A.L.Banta (2008): Analysis of the Impact of National Fadama Development Project II (NFDP II) in Alleviating Poverty Among Farmers in Giwa Local Government Area of Kaduna State, Nigeria. Ozean Journal of Applied Sciences 1(1): 1-7 Ogunjimi L.A.O and K.O Adekalu (2002): Problems and constraints of small-scale irrigation (Fadama) in Nigeria. Food Reviews International 18 (4): 295-304 Wikipedia (2011): Floodplain. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floodplain, Web page visited on 26th May, 2011 Kwara State Fadama Development Project (2010): Highlights of Fadama III. http://www.kwarafadama.org/index. Web page visited on 26th May, 2011 Oni, O., O.I. Ajewole, A.B.D. Tarfa, G. Oko-Ibom, J. J. Musa and P. M Dontsop Nguezet (2011): Beneficiary Assessment/Impact Evaluation of Fadama II Critical Ecosystem Management Project (CEMP). Final Report Submitted to National Fadama Coordination Office (NFCO), Abuja, Nigeria. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA (2009): Second National Fadama Development Critical Ecosystem Management Project. Final Report of Mid-Term Review (GEF GRANT No. TF 056616 UNI). National Fadama Coordination Office (2011): Progress Report for The 7th Joint FGN/World Bank Supervision Mission Bauchi State Fadama Coordination Office (2011): State Internal ICR Report Imo State Fadama Coordination Office (2011): State Internal ICR Report Kebbi State Fadama Coordination Office (2011): State Internal ICR Report Kogi State Fadama Coordination Office (2011): State Internal ICR Report Kwara State Fadama Coordination Office (2011): State Internal ICR Report Ogun State Fadama Coordination Office (2011): State Internal ICR Report 138 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY