1. travel
2. tourist destinations
3. africa

Document of
The World Bank
For Official Use Only
Report No: 57899-GW
PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT
FOR
A PROPOSED IDA GRANT
IN AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO SDR 3.9 MILLION (US$6 MILLION EQUIVALENT)
AND A PROPOSED GRANT FROM THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY TRUST
FUND
IN THE AMOUNT OF US$2 MILLION
TO THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA-BISSAU
FOR THE GUINEA-BISSAU PROJECT UNDER
THE FIRST PHASE OF APL-B IN SUPPORT OF THE US$161 MILLION
WEST AFRICA REGIONAL FISHERIES PROGRAM (WARFP)
March 7, 2011
Sustainable Development Department
Environment and Natural Resources
Management Unit
Country Department AFCF1, AFCRI
Africa Region
This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the
performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World
Bank authorization.
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
Exchange Rate Effective January 31, 2011
Currency Unit
FCFA 493.35
SDR 1
=
=
=
Franc CFA
US$1
US$1.5385
FISCAL YEAR
January 1
–
December 31
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AAP
AMAE
ANAPA
ANEP
APL
CEM
CPAR
CSRP
DGCP
ECOWAS
EITI
ESMF
ESW
EU
FAO
FISCAP
FMP
FY
GDP
GEF
IBAP
IBRD
ICB
IDA
IRR
ISN
LME
MCS
M&E
NCB
NPV
PAD
PDO
PEMFAR
PPO
RCU
RIAS
SBD
TAC
TURF
US
African Action Plan
National Association of Women Fish Traders
National Association of Artisanal Fishermen
National Association of Fish Processors
Adaptable Program Loan
Country Economic Memorandum
Country Procurement Assessment Review
Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission (Commission Sous-Régionale des Pêches)
Procurement Department (Direcção General dos Concursos Públicos)
Economic Community of West African States
Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
Environmental and Social Management Framework
Economic and Sector Work
European Union
Food and Agriculture Organization
Fisheries Surveillance Unit
Fisheries Management Plan
Fiscal Year
Gross Domestic Product
Global Environment Facility
Institute for Biodiversity and Protected Areas
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
International Competitive Bidding
International Development Association
Internal Rate of Return
Interim Strategy Note
Large Marine Ecosystem
Monitoring, Control, and Surveillance
Monitoring & Evaluation
National Competitive Bidding
Net Present Value
Project Appraisal Document
Project Development Objective
Public Expenditure Management and Financial Accountability Review
Policy and Planning Office
Regional Coordination Unit
Regional Integration Assistance Strategy for Sub-Saharan Africa
Standard Bidding Documents
Total Allowance Catch
Territorial Use Rights Fisheries
United States
VMS
WARFP
WSSD
Vessel Monitoring System
West Africa Regional Fisheries Program
World Summit on Sustainable Development
Vice President:
Sector Director:
Regional Integration Director:
Acting Country Director:
Sector Manager:
Task Team Leader:
Obiageli K. Ezekwesili
Jamal Saghir
Yusupha Crookes
McDonald Benjamin
Idah Pswarayi-Riddihough
John Virdin
WEST AFRICA
West Africa Regional Fisheries Program APL B1
CONTENTS
Page
I.
STRATEGIC CONTEXT ............................................................................................1
A.
Regional Context ...........................................................................................................1
B.
Country Context ............................................................................................................1
C.
Sectoral and Institutional Context ...................................................................................2
D.
Higher Level Objectives to which the Program Contributes ............................................4
II.
A.
III.
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ..........................................................6
PDO ..............................................................................................................................6
PROJECT DESCRIPTION .........................................................................................7
B.
Program Financing and Phases .......................................................................................9
C.
Lessons learned and reflected in the program design ..................................................... 11
IV.
IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................... 12
A.
Institutional and implementation arrangements ............................................................. 12
B.
Results monitoring and evaluation................................................................................ 13
C.
Sustainability ............................................................................................................... 14
V.
KEY RISKS ............................................................................................................... 14
VI.
APPRAISAL SUMMARY ......................................................................................... 15
Annex 1. Results Framework and Monitoring………………………………………….…….23
Annex 2. Project Description…………………………………………………………………..26
Annex 3. Implementation Arrangements……………………………………………………..35
Annex 4. Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF)……………………………….54
Annex 5. Implementation Support Plan………………………………………………………57
Annex 6. Team Composition…………………………………………………………………...59
Annex 7. Economic and Financial Analysis…………………………………………………..60
Annex 8. Incremental Cost Analysis…………………………………………………………..68
PAD DATA SHEET
WEST AFRICA
Regional Fisheries Program APL B1
PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT
AFTEN
Date: March 7, 2011
Sectors: Agriculture, fishing and forestry
Country Director: Yusupha Crookes
(100%)
Sector Director: Jamal Saghir
Themes: Other environment and natural
Sector Manager: Idah Z. Pswarayi-Riddihough resources management (67%); Environmental
Team Leader: John Virdin
policies and institutions (33%)
Project ID: P119380 and P122182
EA Category: B- Partial Assessment
Lending Instrument: Adaptable Program Loan
Project Financing Data
Proposed terms: IDA Grant in the amount of US$6.0 million
[ ] Loan
[ ] Credit
[ X ] Grant
[ ] Guarantee
[ ] Other:
Financing Plan (US$m)
Source
Local
BORROWER/RECIPIENT
0.00
IDA Grant
6.00
GEF Grant
2.00
Total:
8.00
Borrower: Republic of Guinea-Bissau
Foreign
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total
0.00
6.00
2.00
8.00
Responsible Agency:
Secretariat of State for Fisheries
Contact Person: Mario Dias Sami, Secretary of State
Telephone No.: (245) 320-7106
Email: [email protected]
IDA Estimated Disbursements (Bank FY/US$m)
FY
Annual
Cumulative
FY
Annual
Cumulative
11
12
13
14
0.5
1.0
1.5
1.5
0.5
1.5
3.0
4.5
GEF Estimated Disbursements (Bank FY/US$m)
11
0.2
0.2
12
0.2
0.4
13
0.5
0.9
14
0.5
1.4
15
1.0
5.5
16
0.5
6.0
15
0.3
1.7
16
0.3
2.0
Project implementation period: 5 years
Expected approval by the Board of Executive Directors: March 31, 2011
Expected closing date: June 30, 2016
Does the project depart from the CAS in content or other significant
respects? Ref. PAD I.C.
Does the project require any exceptions from Bank policies?
Ref. PAD IV.G.
Have these been approved by Bank management?
Is approval for any policy exception sought from the Board?
Does the project include any critical risks rated “substantial” or “high”?
Ref. PAD III.E.
Does the project meet the Regional criteria for readiness for
implementation? Ref. PAD IV.G.
[ ]Yes [X] No
[ ]Yes [X] No
[ ]Yes [ ] No
[ ]Yes [X] No
[X]Yes [ ] No
[X]Yes [ ] No
Project Development objective Ref. PAD II.C., Technical Annex 3
The Project Development Objective is to strengthen the country‟s capacity to govern and
manage targeted fisheries, reduce illegal fishing and increase local value added to fish products.
Project description Ref. PAD II.D., Technical Annex 4. The program will have four
components:
Component 1: Good Governance and Sustainable Management of the Fisheries. This
component aims to build the capacity of the Government and stakeholders to develop and
implement policies through a shared approach that would ensure that the fish resources are used
in a manner that is environmentally sustainable, socially equitable and economically profitable.
Component 2: Reduction of Illegal Fishing. The component aims to reduce the illegal fishing
activities threatening the sustainable management of the marine fish resources and the wealth
they can generate for the region. More specifically, this component aims to improve the
fisheries monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) systems of participating countries and
adapt them to the needs of fisheries management, within the framework of a coordinated
approach between the participating countries.
Component 3: Increasing the Contribution of the Fish Resources to the Local Economy.
The component aims to increase the benefits to West Africa from the marine fish resources, by
increasing the share of the value-added captured in the region.
Component 4: Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation and Project Management. This
component aims to support countries to implement the Program in the context of the CSRP
Strategic Action Plan, and to monitor and evaluate results.
Safeguard policies triggered?
Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01)
Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04)
Forests (OP/BP 4.36)
Pest Management (OP 4.09)
Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11)
Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10)
Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12)
Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37)
Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50)
Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60)
X Yes
○ Yes
○ Yes
○ Yes
○ Yes
○ Yes
○ Yes
○ Yes
○ Yes
○ Yes
○
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Conditions and Legal Covenants:
Financing Agreement Description of Condition/Covenant
Date Due
Reference
Article V, paragraph The Subsidiary Agreement, in form and substance By effectiveness
5.01 (a)
satisfactory to the Association, has been executed date
on behalf of the Recipient and CSRP.
Article V, paragraph
5.01 (b)
Schedule 2, Section
IV, paragraph B.1 (b)
Article IV, paragraph
4.02
The Recipient shall have established the Policy
and Planning Office with: (i) the Project
Coordinator; and (ii) a financial management
specialist and a procurement specialist, both
under terms of reference and with qualifications
and experience satisfactory to the Association.
No disbursements will be made for the purchase of
fisheries patrol vessels, until and unless the
Association shall have been satisfied, based on an
exchange of views with the Recipient, with the
cost-efficiency, technical specifications and fiscal
sustainability of the proposed expenditures.
The Co-financing Deadline for the effectiveness of
the GEF Trust Fund Grant Agreement is July 1,
2011.
By effectiveness
date
Disbursement
condition
July 1, 2011
Schedule 2, Section I,
paragraph A.1 (a)
Schedule 2, Section I,
paragraph E.1
Schedule 2, Section I,
paragraph E.4
The Recipient, through the Fisheries Secretariat,
shall maintain throughout Project implementation
the Policy and Planning Office within its structure,
under terms of reference satisfactory to the
Association. The PPO shall be headed by the
Project Coordinator and shall be composed of: (i)
a fisheries monitoring, control and surveillance
(MCS) specialist specially assigned to the
implementation of component 2 of the Project; (ii)
a financial management specialist; (iii) a
procurement specialist; (iv) an administrative
assistant, all under terms of reference and with
experience and qualifications satisfactory to the
Association, and shall comprise any additional
staff that may be necessary, particularly in the
accounting and procurement areas, for the
successful implementation of the Project.
The Recipient shall ensure that the Project is
implemented in accordance with the provisions of
the Environmental and Social Management
Framework and each of the Environmental and
Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) or the
Environmental and Social Management Plan
(ESMP), as the case may be, in a manner
satisfactory to the Association, and the Recipient
shall not amend or waive any provision of the
aforementioned documents without the prior
written agreement of the Association.
The Recipient shall: (i) not later than September
30, 2012, undertake a social assessment of the
impact of the Project on the management of its
fisheries resources upon terms of reference
satisfactory to the Association; (ii) on the basis
thereon, implement measures satisfactory to the
Association to minimize and mitigate adverse
social impacts, if any, especially those affecting
poor and vulnerable groups, (iii) adequately
monitor and evaluate the carrying out of said
measures in the implementation of the Project and
maintain the Association suitably and timely
informed of the progress thereon, including by
means of information to be included in the
quarterly Project reports.
Covenant
Covenant
September 30,
2012
Schedule 2, Section I,
paragraph F.1, F.2
Schedule 2, Section I,
paragraph F.4
In order to ensure the proper implementation of Covenant
component 2 of the Project and more generally the
monitoring, control and surveillance of its coastal
fisheries in a manner designed to achieve the
objective of the Program, the Recipient shall
ensure at all times that:
 All monitoring, control and surveillance
activities carried out by the Recipient shall be
under the control of FISCAP and shall be
carried out by civilian authorities under terms
of reference limited to fisheries surveillance.
 that all goods, works, services and Operating
Costs financed out of the proceeds of the
Financing are used exclusively by civilian
authorities for the purposes of the Project, and
not for any military purpose, or for any
criminal
investigation,
prosecution
or
proceedings, or for any other purposes
unrelated to the objectives of the Project.
The Recipient shall ensure that all monitoring, Covenant
control and surveillance activities carried out
under the Project are audited periodically by the
Independent Panel of Experts to be established
under component 2.3 of the Project and whose
qualifications, experience and terms of reference
are satisfactory to the Association. To this end,
the Recipient shall take all measures required on
its part, including provision of all information
required and access to all relevant sites, to enable
the said Independent Panel of Experts to conduct
the audits required of them under and in the
manner required pursuant to the Project
Agreement with CSRP.
WEST AFRICA
WEST AFRICA REGIONAL FISHERIES PROGRAM APL B1
I.
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
A. Regional Context
1. Coastal West Africa, from Mauritania to Nigeria, is the westernmost region of the continent
and home to a growing population of almost 300 million. With the exception of Mauritania, all
of these countries are members of the Economic Community of West African States
(ECOWAS). The region includes a wide range of countries at varying stages of economic
development, five of whom have a per capita GDP below US$1,000 (Gambia, Guinea, GuineaBissau, Liberia and Sierra Leone), and several of whom are emerging from conflicts within the
last ten years. Poverty is widespread throughout this coastal region, and the economy in almost
every country is heavily dependent on natural resources.
B. Country Context
2. Guinea-Bissau is one of the poorest countries within this region, and indeed the world,
ranking 173 out of 182 countries on the United Nations Human Development Index 2009. It has
a population of roughly 1.6 million, and its economy is based primarily on farming and fishing
activities, which represent some 55 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). Agriculture
generates 80 percent of employment and 90 percent of exports (primarily through cashew nuts,
the main export), while fisheries represent some 7 to 10 percent of GDP and up to 25 to 40
percent of public revenues. The country has poor infrastructure and weak social indicators; life
expectancy is 48 years, more than two out of every three people live below the poverty line
(US$2/day), and one out of every five lives in extreme poverty.
3. The country is also extremely fragile. It has experienced periodic unrest since independence,
including an 11 month civil war in 1998-99 and a series of military coups. Although the 2008
general election and the 2009 presidential elections (required following assassination of the
Army chief of Staff and President in March 2009) were considered free and fair, there continue
to be destabilizing forces as evidenced most recently by the April 2010 military overthrow of the
Army Chief of Staff and temporary imprisonment of the Prime Minister. The fragility of the
political process is further exacerbated by the influence of drug traffickers, using the country – as
well as its West African neighbors – as a drug transshipment point on route to Europe. These
forces have, and continue to undermine the development of the country‟s economic and social
infrastructure and contribute to the intensification of the already widespread poverty.
4. Despite the country‟s extreme poverty and political fragility, it has the natural resources and
the geography to grow at a reasonable rate. It has an abundance of high quality land and
favorable rainfall. Its rich mineral deposits; exotic bio-diversity; and fishing and tourism
potential, particularly in the coastal zone where approximately 80 percent of the population lives;
could provide diverse sources of income.
1
C. Sectoral and Institutional Context
5. Sector Importance. Due to exceptional climatic and ecological conditions, the coastal
countries of West Africa are endowed with some of the richest fishing grounds in the world. The
marine fish stocks in these waters constitute a significant natural asset for the countries of West
Africa, which is transboundary in nature (as both fish stocks and fishing fleets routinely migrate
across national borders). More specifically, more than 1.6 million tons of fish are legally
captured in West African waters each year, with an estimated wholesale value of US$2.5 billion.
6. Despite having only a relatively small coastline within West Africa, Guinea-Bissau is
endowed with one of region‟s largest continental shelves, covering roughly 45,000 square
kilometers of largely shallow water that is supplied by numerous flows of nutrients from rivers
as well as coldwater (upwelling) currents from the sea. These natural conditions converge to
create a favorable environment for supporting significant and highly valuable marine fish
resources within the waters of Guinea-Bissau. Because the country‟s waters provide breeding
grounds for a number of commercially important fish stocks, it has even been speculated that
Guinea-Bissau is the region‟s „nursery ground‟ for these fish. The benefit of having such natural
renewable capital is that unlike minerals or petroleum, if managed sustainably fish resources will
regenerate to previous levels and therefore provide a country with a constant stream of economic
benefits over the long-term.
7. As with the rest of West Africa, this valuable natural asset is likely to remain over the near to
medium term as one of the main components of economic growth in the country. The sector
contributes some 7 to 10 percent of GDP and as much as 40 percent of the Government‟s annual
budget in some years, due to access fees or rents paid by foreign vessels. However, l ocal value
added to fish products, and fish exports (and therefore contributions to foreign exchange) are
practically nil. Local employment in the sector is estimated to be relatively low, around 15,000
persons.
8. Key Sector Issues and Institutional Constraints. Guinea-Bissau currently realizes far smaller
economic benefits from its marine fish resources than could be the case, due largely to two
overarching challenges that are common throughout West Africa: (i) weak governance of the
sector, and particularly an inability to prevent illegal fishing (essentially the theft of the
resources), and (ii) a lack of infrastructure and services (as well as overall investment climate)
needed to add value locally to the fish captured in the country‟s waters.
9. Firstly, Guinea-Bissau has in the past pursued a strategy of „renting‟ out its fisheries resources
to foreign users, in exchange for public revenues. However, this strategy, and the public revenues
generated by the sector, is unlikely to remain viable under the status quo. The country has never
put in place the basic sector governance and management measures needed to ensure that the
resources are used sustainably, or that the revenues generated from fishing are sustainable. The
Fisheries Secretariat (formerly the Ministry of Fisheries), has been chronically underfunded,
receiving only a small portion of the revenues the sector generates. At the same time, the need to
generate as much rent as possible from the resources has encouraged the Government to sell
more licenses than estimated available resources, essentially selling access to the same fish
2
several times over, or printing fishing licenses like money. As a result, despite the lack of any
reliable data (since few fish catches from Guinea-Bissau‟s waters are actually reported to the
country), anecdotal evidence from fishing companies indicates that the fish catch per unit of
fishing effort is declining, reflecting a diminishing resource base. Furthermore, the country has
insufficient means to patrol its waters or enforce fishing regulations, and as a result widespread
illegal fishing is also reported, essentially the theft of economic resources. On the basis of these
challenges, the European Union reduced the value of its foreign fisheries agreement during the
last negotiations (2007), and is unlikely to continue paying at the current rate after this agreement
concludes in 2012.
10. Secondly, even if the level of fishing effort was managed to sustainable and profitable
levels, Guinea-Bissau does not have adequate infrastructure or services for vessels to land and
process fish exports in the country (nor does it have a large local market ). No sufficient port
exists for industrial fishing vessels, constituting a major constraint to greater processing and local
value added to fish products. However, equally challenging is the significant red tape, fees and
taxes that confront potential foreign investors, as well as the lack of an internationallyrecognized quality control system for exports to the European Union (one of the major markets
for some of the high-value fish in the country‟s waters).
11. These issues facing Guinea-Bissau‟s fisheries are common throughout West Africa, where
the marine fish resources constitute a natural asset that is heavily underperforming and could
make a much greater contribution to economic growth and poverty alleviation if better managed.
The underperformance of marine fisheries throughout the region is due to: (i) the dwindling size
of the asset, resulting from (a) insufficient capacity in the countries to govern and manage the
use of the resources to sustainable levels and to prevent their overexploitation, and more
specifically (b) the inability of countries to prevent illegal fishing; and (ii) the fact that the
resources are largely taken in an offshore economy by foreign or industrial vessels who rarely
land their fish catch in the region or participate in the local economy, so that the countries only
capture a fraction of the value.
12. To help address these constraints, the West Africa Regional Fisheries Program was designed
to support the countries to collaborate: (i) to strengthen the governance of the use of the marine
fish resources so that they recover to much more environmentally sustainable and economically
profitable levels, while at the same time; (ii) to invest where needed to increase the portion of the
value of these resources that is captured locally within the region.
13. Regional and Government Responses to Key Sector Issues and Constraints. The
Government of Guinea-Bissau has prepared a draft National Fisheries Strategy recognizing that
the current model of fisheries development is exhausted, whereby access to the resources is
rented to any and all foreign interested parties to generate as much short -term public revenue as
possible. The draft National Fisheries Strategy notes that the current regime of fisheries
exploitation will not provide the financial resources desired by the public sector, will generate
few benefits for the private sector, and will inevitably lead to the decline of the fish resources.
14.
The Government‟s draft Strategy therefore places an emphasis on the sustainable
management of the marine fish resources, and achieving an optimal contribution of the sector to
3
economic growth and poverty reduction, by building the capacity for governance of the fisheries,
combating and reducing illegal fishing and increasing local landings and value added of fish
products. The Government also recognizes that due to the shared nature of the resources and/or
fishing fleets, collaboration at the regional level is needed in order to reach these objectives.
Together with six other coastal countries from Mauritania to Sierra Leone, the Government of
Guinea-Bissau has clearly expressed an interest in such a regional approach through its
participation in and commitment to the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission (Commission SousRégionale des Pêches - CSRP), and the adoption of its Strategic Action Plan (Plan d’Action
Stratégique 2002-2010). The Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission is an intergovernmental
organization created on March 29, 1985 by means of a convention. The CSRP Strategic Action
Plan for fisheries focuses in particular on strengthening resource management and increased
monitoring, control, and surveillance (MCS) activities to reduce illegal fishing.
D. Higher Level Objectives to which the Program Contributes
15. The West Africa Regional Fisheries Program is a $161 million facility that contributes to the
higher level objectives set for the world‟s marine fisheries by the WSSD. The WSSD felt overfishing represented a serious crisis meriting a concerted effort by the international community
over the proceeding 10 to 12 years, in order to restore the world‟s fisheries to health by the year
2015 (including the coastal ecosystems that support these fisheries). The WSSD further called on
donor agencies and stakeholders to create new and flexible partnerships to be able to respond to
this growing crisis in world fisheries and implement the target for 2015.
16. Contribution to the CSRP Strategic Action Plan 2002 - 2010. Guinea-Bissau and the other
six member countries of the CSRP have clearly expressed their interest to collaborate to manage
the region‟s fisheries and help achieve the objectives set by the WSSD, through participation in
the CSRP and adoption of a Strategic Action Plan 2002 – 2010. The Strategic Action Plan calls
for strengthened fish resource management among the member countries, and increased
monitoring, control and surveillance activities to reduce illegal fishing. To date, implementation
of the Strategic Action Plan has been slow, largely due to financing needs of the countries. The
West Africa Regional Fisheries Program helps member countries such as Guinea-Bissau to
respond to this need.
17. Contribution to the Interim Strategy Note (ISN) for Guinea-Bissau. The World Bank‟s
Interim Strategy Note for Guinea-Bissau (approved by the Board of Executive Directors in 2009
until a new Country Assistance Strategy is prepared), identifies agriculture, forestry and fisheries
as key sources of current and future economic growth for the country, which are endangered by
deforestation, soil degradation and fisheries depletion. The first pillar of the ISN is
„Strengthening Economic Management and Laying the Foundations Improvements in the
Productive Sectors.‟ As part of achieving this pillar, the ISN specifies that „Guinea-Bissau will
also be included in the West Africa Regional Fisheries Project,‟ IDA funds permitting. This is
further described in the proposed portfolio matrix for the country, where this operation is
scheduled for fiscal year 2011 (FY11). Additionally, the fisheries sector is one of the key sectors
described in the upcoming Country Economic Memorandum (CEM) under preparation for
Guinea-Bissau, as a basis for the Country Assistance Strategy.
4
18. Contribution to the Africa Regional Strategy. The willingness of Guinea-Bissau to
collaborate together with its neighbors in West Africa to increase the value of the country‟s
marine fisheries asset, and in particular to implement the needed governance and management
reforms, fits squarely within the World Bank‟s objective to promote governance of natural
resources through the implementation of the Africa Regional Strategy, “Africa‟s Future and the
World Bank‟s support to it”. More specifically, regional integration is a core element of the
Africa Regional Strategy, which notes in particular the need for countries to work together on a
regional basis, including on regional public goods such as fisheries.
19. Contribution to the Regional Integration Assistance Strategy for Sub-Saharan Africa (RIAS).
In 2008, the World Bank completed a Regional Integration Assistance Strategy for Sub -Saharan
Africa in order to help leverage increased benefits for the region through investments in crossborder integration and collaboration. The RIAS notes that one of the main rationales for World
Bank support to regional integration in Africa is the need for assistance with the management of
shared natural resources, such as fisheries. The RIAS highlights the fact that fisheries lie across
borders and require regional collaboration to ensure sustainable harvesting and to prevent
conflicts. As such, one of the three pillars of the RIAS is to support coordinated interventions to
provide regional public goods, focusing on regional water resources, forestry and fisheries. For
this reason, the West Africa Regional Fisheries Program was listed in the RIAS in the indicative
lending program for the World Bank (Table 3, page 47).
20. Consistency with IDA’s regional project eligibility criteria. The investments of the West
Africa Regional Fisheries Program (WARFP) meet IDA‟s regional project eligibility criteria.
The WARFP supports: (i) at least three countries, all of whom need to participate in order to
manage the fisheries and reduce illegal fishing; (ii) a platform for regional policy harmonization
with a high degree of country and regional ownership, as evidenced by the region‟s strategy for
the fisheries, the Strategic Action Plan 2002 – 2010 of the CSRP; and (iii) social and economic
benefits that spill over countries‟ boundaries, as a result of both fish stocks and fishers that
migrate across national borders.
21. Contribution to Relevant GEF Operational Program Goals. The GEF co-financing will
assist Guinea-Bissau to carry out regulatory and institutional reforms to better collaborate with
its neighbors to implement ecosystem-based approaches to fisheries resource management in the
Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem. More specifically, the proposed investment will
support the Objective 2 of the international waters focal area under GEF-5, which aims at multistate cooperation to rebuild marine fisheries and reduce pollution of coasts and Large Marine
Ecosystems while considering climate variability and change. Lastly, this investment supports
the development of sustainable fisheries in Guinea-Bissau as part of the Strategic Partnership for
Fisheries in Africa, approved in November 2005. The Strategic Partnership aims to promote the
sustainable management of fisheries resources in the large marine ecosystems (LMEs) of SubSaharan Africa in order to assist coastal countries to make concrete progress towards achieving
the fisheries and poverty reduction targets set by the WSSD.
22. Compliance with the Eligibility Criteria of the GEF Strategic Partnership for Fisheries in
Africa. This second APL of the Program is in line with the Strategic Partnership‟s eligibility
criteria:
5
(i) Sectoral strategies will include a long-term approach to ensure the sustainability of the
fishery sector, poverty alleviation measures and activities designed to achieve those aims.
(ii) The proposed investment does not overlap with on-going activities, and is
complementary to the Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem Program.
(iii) GEF funding will cover the additional cost of activities providing environmental benefits
extending beyond the countries‟ borders.
(iv) The funding meets the minimum co-financing ratio of three donor dollars to one GEF
dollar. The proposed sum of US$2 million from the Partnership Investment Fund would
complement the US$6 million in IDA funding (see Annex 5).
(v) The proposed investment is consistent with the Partnership‟s 10 operating principles.
II.
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES
A. PDO
23. The development objective of the West Africa Regional Fisheries Program (WARFP) is to
sustainably increase the overall wealth generated by the exploitation of the marine fisheries
resources of West Africa, and the proportion of that wealth captured by West African countries.
The WARFP will achieve this objective by: (i) strengthening the countries‟ capacity to
sustainably govern and manage their fisheries; (ii) reducing illegal fishing; and (iii) increasing
the value and profitability generated by fish resources and the proportion of that value captured
by the countries.
24. The cumulative outcome of the WARFP will be: (i) the initial recovery of the resource base
of at least 7 overexploited fisheries in the region, as measured by an increase in total landings per
unit of fishing capacity (e.g. number of fishing vessels); and (ii) at least a 25 percent increase in
net economic benefits to the region from the fisheries targeted by the Program.
25. The development objective of this WARFP investment in Guinea-Bissau (i.e. „the project‟)
is to strengthen the country‟s capacity to govern and manage targeted fisheries, reduce illegal
fishing and increase local value added to fish products. The targeted fisheries for this first phase
include, among others: coastal demersal fish species (e.g. croakers, groupers, snappers, etc.),
coastal shrimp and cephalopods (e.g. octopus and cuttlefish). These coastal fisheries are
currently utilized largely by foreign industrial and small-scale fishers, and to a lesser extent by
local small-scale fishers from the Bijagos Archipelago and coastal communities along the
estuaries of the Buba, Cacheu and Cacine rivers, among others. The fishing grounds include all
of the continental shelf area, most notably the Bijagos Archipelago and other sensit ive fishing
habitats within 12 nautical miles of the coast, where industrial trawl fishing is currently
prohibited by law.
26. Project Beneficiaries. The project aims to benefit the country as a whole, with a population
of approximately 1.6 million people, by supporting governance reforms to sustainably increase
the contribution of the sector to economic growth, in particular the economic rents accrued to the
Government from access to the resources. The increased public revenues generated by the
investment would be available for reinvestment by the Government where most effective for
6
implementation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. These increased revenues would accrue
as a result of reduced illegal fishing by foreign industrial vessels as well as foreign small-scale
vessels from neighboring countries such as Guinea and Senegal, which, combined with policy
reforms to current licensing and access arrangements, would increase the value of fishing rights
and the returns to Government and the economy. Thus, local small-scale fishers as well as
foreign fishers and companies willing to invest within the legal framework for the long -term
would be direct beneficiaries, as would the country and population as a whole due to increased
public revenues sustainably generated by the sector.
27. PDO Level Results Indicators. In order to meet the development objective of this WARFP
investment in Guinea-Bissau, the first phase of APL-B will focus on achieving several key
outcomes, including (see Annex 1: Results Framework and Monitoring):
(i) Environmental indicator: Two overexploited fisheries show signs of a recovery, as
measured by an increase in total catch per unit of fishing effort; and
(ii) Economic indicator: 5 percent increase in annual net economic benefits from
targeted fisheries.
III.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Project Components
28. The West Africa Regional Fisheries Program („the Program‟) includes a menu of activities
that could be financed in each participating country, per a shared regional approach. The
„project‟ is the specific set of activities that will be implemented in Guinea-Bissau, and is the
subject of this document.
29.
The project will have a total investment cost estimated at US$8.0 million, of which IDA
will finance US$6.0 million; the remaining US$2.0 million is being financed by the GEF. The
project will comprise the following four components (see Annex 2 for a detailed project
description):
30. Component 1: Good Governance and Sustainable Management of the Fisheries
(US$0.3 M IDA, US$1.7 M GEF). The objective of this component is to build the capacity of
the Government and stakeholders to implement a shared approach that would ensure that the
marine fish resources are used in a manner that is environmentally sustainable, socially fair and
economically profitable. This component includes technical assistance, training, goods and
equipment and operating costs for the following activities: (a) a strengthened policy and
regulatory framework for the use of the fish resources; (b) assessment of the biol ogical and
economic status of key fish stocks, as the basis for management; (c) development of tools at the
community, national and regional level to ensure transparency and accessibility of basic fisheries
management information for controlling access to the resources; and (d) a feasibility study for
scaling up collaborative, or co-management partnerships between fishing communities and the
Government.
7
31. Component 2: Reduction of Illegal Fishing (US$4.7 M IDA). The objective of this
component is to reduce the illegal fishing activities threatening the sustainable management of
the marine fish resources and the wealth they can generate for the region. More specifically, this
component aims to improve the fisheries monitoring, control and surveillance (M CS) systems of
participating countries and adapt them to the needs of fisheries management, within the
framework of a coordinated approach between the participating countries. This component will
support the following sub-components:
32. Monitoring, Control and Surveillance (MCS) Systems ($4.5 m IDA). This sub-component
includes goods, works, operating costs and technical assistance for: (a) implementation of
sustainable fisheries surveillance systems (including monitoring centers and stations, sea patro ls
and satellite-based vessel monitoring systems); and (b) the implementation of adequate financing
mechanisms for fisheries surveillance.
33. Strengthened Regional Collaboration for MCS ($0.2 m IDA). This sub-component includes
technical assistance to enable the CSRP to monitor and support the network of MCS systems
among the countries.
34. Component 3: Increasing the Contribution of the Marine Fish Resources to the Local
Economies (US$0.4 M IDA). The objective of this component is to increase the benefits to West
Africa from the marine fish resources, by increasing the share of the value-added captured in the
region. This component includes training, goods and technical assistance for the following
activities: (i) the establishment of the Fish Inspection and Quality Control Department in GuineaBissau, and (ii) training to local fishers to improve product handling, processing/marketing,
transport practices and sanitary measures, maintenance of landing site equipment and knowledge
concerning access to local commercial micro-finance opportunities.
35. Component 4: Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation and Program Management
(US$0.6 M IDA, US$0.3 M GEF). The objective of this component is to support the countries
to implement the Program in the context of the CSRP Strategic Action Plan, and to monitor and
evaluate results. This component will support the following sub-components:
36. National Implementation ($0.3 m IDA, $0.3 m GEF). This sub-component includes goods,
works, technical assistance, training and operating costs for the Policy and Planning Office
(PPO), embedded within the Fisheries Secretariat and staffed by external and local project
management specialists. The PPO will conduct the day-to-day management and implementation
of the activities in components one through three of the project, as well as ongoing monitoring
and evaluation of outcomes.
37. Regional Coordination ($0.3 m IDA). This sub-component includes technical assistance and
consultations for the Regional Coordination Unit at the CSRP, in order to: (a) support the
harmonization of fisheries policy within the region; (b) conduct monitoring and evaluation of
Program investments and share information and results throughout the region; (c) implement
ongoing communication activities to raise awareness about the Program and implementation
progress; and (d) provide implementation support to the country, including the coordination of
regional procurement.
8
B. Program Financing and Phases
38. Lending instrument: Adaptable Program Loan (co-financed by a GEF grant).
39. The West Africa Regional Fisheries Program (WARFP) is a series of at least 3 overlapping
Adaptable Program Loans (APLs) under a $161 million facility, each of which has two phases of
five years. As such, the WARFP utilizes the World Bank‟s APL instrument: (i) horizontally, on
a regional basis to support 9 countries through a series of overlapping APLs (i.e. APL -A for
Cape Verde, Liberia, Senegal and Sierra Leone; APL-B for Guinea-Bissau, and APL-C for
Mauritania and the other remaining countries of the 9 eligible); and (ii) vertically, in that each
country can receive support from two phases or installments over the APL Program, in order to
deepen and expand the reforms supported in the first phase. The APL instrument is pa rticularly
well-suited to support the long-term reforms needed in the management and use of the region‟s
fisheries, with logical sequencing of events and phasing of activities with agreed milestones, and
flexibility needed in execution.
40. The first of the overlapping APLs in the series, APL-A, was approved by the Board of
Executive Directors on October 20, 2009 for US$55 million in IDA and GEF investments in the
four countries of Cape Verde, Liberia, Senegal and Sierra Leone. This Appraisal document
describes the second APL proposed in the series, APL-B, for the country of Guinea-Bissau. The
third APL, APL-C, is scheduled to be delivered in FY12, for Mauritania and potentially the other
remaining eligible countries. Taken together, the series of APLs (i.e., the West Africa Regional
Fisheries Program) is expected to span 10 years, at the end of which period it will have covered
all nine eligible countries: i.e. the seven member countries of the CSRP (Cape Verde, the
Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mauritania, Senegal and Sierra Leone) plus Liberia and Ghana.
41. The West Africa Regional Fisheries Program has a shared objective and approach, meaning
that each APL in the series has the same framework, i.e. the same components and subcomponents, but is applied to different countries (with some different specifics for each country).
This overlapping design addresses three key considerations: (i) encourage regional collaboration
in the management and development of the region‟s marine fish resources; (ii) offer long-term
support (10 years) to progressively implement actions aimed at strengthening collaborative
efforts to manage shared fisheries and fish resources; and (iii) give flexibility to groups of
countries to participate in the WARFP as they become eligible, rather than wait for the end of the
first phase of the initial APL to participate. Subsequent to APL-B, Phase 1 of APL-C (APL-C1)
and subsequent APLs will be described in a Project Appraisal Document (PAD), but in line with
approval procedures for Adaptable Program Loans, would be approved in principle by the
Regional Vice President and then circulated to the Board for information, with the approval
becoming effective after the end of a ten-day period during which a Board discussion could be
scheduled if at least three Executive Directors so requested.
42. In order to implement the shared objective and approach, each APL in the West Africa
Regional Fisheries Program will finance activities that would be implemented nationally in each
participating country, as well as some activities better implemented at the regional level. Each
APL would include investments for both „physical‟ goods, works and services, as well as „soft‟
activities such as technical assistance. Most of the physical investments would be made at the
9
national level, while „soft‟ activities would be implemented at both the national and regional
level. On the basis of capacity created in each of the participating countries over the first years of
implementation, the Program would aim to gradually transfer implementation of more and more
fisheries governance and surveillance activities to the regional level. Initial investments during
Phase I in each of the countries will provide significant spillover benefits to neighbors,
representing investments in both shared fish resources and fishing fleets.
43. The triggers for Guinea-Bissau to move vertically within the APL from the first to the
second phase will be as follows:
 a publicly available electronic dashboard of key fisheries statistics is established and
operational,
 a satellite-based industrial fishing vessel monitoring system is in place and functioning,
as a basis for a regional system,
 total fisheries surveillance patrol days at sea in the targeted fisheries increase at least 25
percent, and
 a regional fishing vessel registry is operating at the Sub-Regional Fisheries
Commission.
44. Guinea-Bissau has complied with the eligibility criteria for a country to join the West Africa
Regional Fisheries Program through participation in an APL, which include:
 identification of a series of policy reforms for improved governance of the fisheries and
definition of a framework for investment to achieve these reforms (including actionable
milestones); and
 a minimum legal and judicial framework for fisheries surveillance that is acceptable to
the World Bank.
45. The total cost of APL-B1 is US$8.0 million over 5 years, including IDA financing of US$6
million and GEF funding of US$2 million. From the IDA grant proceeds, Guinea-Bissau will
provide a grant of equivalent to at least 5 percent of the total budget (US$0.4 million in total) to
the CSRP, to assist in regional surveillance and marketing, knowledge sharing and
dissemination, and coordination of monitoring and evaluation activities. The total estimated costs
of Phase 1 of APLs A, B and C are given in the table below, estimated at roughly US$100
million. The total financing envelope of the West Africa Regional Fisheries Program, i.e. both
phases of the series of overlapping APLs, would not exceed US$183 million (of which US$161
IDA), as that the total costs of Phase 2 would be slightly reduced, since many of the activities
would be implemented at the regional level and capture economies of scale.
Table 1: West Africa Regional Fisheries Program APL total financing envelope (US$ M)
Gov.‟s GEF IDA Total cost
APL-A1 (Cape Verde, Liberia, Senegal and Sierra Leone)
1.3
10
45
56.3
APL-A2
1
0
40
41.0
APL-B1 (Guinea-Bissau)*
0
2
6
8.0
APL-B2
1
0
10
11.0
APL-C1, D1, etc. (Mauritania, Guinea and the Gambia)** 1
5
35
41.0
APL-C2, D2, etc.
1
0
25
26.0
Total APLs
5.3
17.0 161.0 183.3
10
* Ghana will also participate in the West Africa Regional Fisheries Program at this stage, financed from its
national IDA allocation only, as a specific investment loa n.
** Composition of countries in APLs C and D to be confirmed based on country readiness.
46. The below table summarizes Project Financing:
Component and/or Activity
1. Good governance and sustainable management of the
fisheries
2. Reduction of illegal fishing
3. Increasing the contribution of the fish resources to the local
economy
4. Coordination, monitoring and evaluation and project
management
TOTAL
Total (US
$million)
2.0
4.7
0.4
0.9
8.0
C. Lessons learned and reflected in the program design
47. This Program design directly reflects the lessons learned from global good practices
summarized in the World Bank Fisheries Approach Paper Saving Fish and Fishers (2004), as
well as experiences to date with the first phase of APL-A of the Program, and the Bank‟s large
body of analytic work on the sector in the region.
48. Global experiences and lessons learned. Global experiences have shown three key lessons
for the design of this Program. Firstly, in the absence of a strong governance framework that
empowers users to take a long-term stake in the fisheries, underexploited fisheries will follow a
typical pattern of boom and bust resulting in too many fishers chasing too few fish, causing both
environmental degradation and economic losses. At the same time, countries with overexploited
fisheries will never realize the full economic potential of these resources until they are
rehabilitated. For this reason, investments in both underdeveloped and overdeveloped fisheries
must begin with the governance framework for the sector, to ensure that the sector can either
grow sustainably, or for fisheries that are already overexploited, can be rehabilitated to more
profitable levels. As such, the Program includes a strong governance component that would
accompany any investments in sector development and local value added, in order to ensure a
sustainable supply of fish to local industry.
49. Secondly, on the basis of global experiences, fisheries have only been governed and
managed at levels that were both environmentally sustainable and economically profitable when
users have been given secure and enforceable rights to the access or output from the resources, as
long-term incentives in their health. The form these rights take must be tailored to the specific
context of countries with respect to the fish resources in question and the uses of those resources,
including the social setting and culture. Fishing rights must also be complete, so that all
commercial fishers targeting the specific resources are included, and limited enough to provide
long-term incentives. Otherwise, if fishing rights are too diffuse to provide users with the
11
appropriate incentives, it may still be economically rational to „mine‟ the fishery for short-term
gains (but larger long-term losses). Thus, the key to fishing rights is that fishers/users have the
ability to exclude others from fishing, so that they bear both the costs of conservation and the
benefits. This ensures that those who use the fisheries bear the costs of overexploitation.
50. Thirdly, while investments in surveillance and enforcement are essential for reducing illegal
fishing and the associated economic losses, experiences in Guinea-Bissau and Indonesia have
shown that such investments should be as low-cost and pragmatic as possible, in order for the
operating costs of surveillance to be kept to sustainable levels after completion of Bank
financing. For this reason, the Program focuses on incremental investments to show immediate
results in reducing illegal fishing, such as leasing patrol vessels rather than procuring new boats.
However, without such investments, continued illegal fishing can erode much of the value of the
fish resources. Thus, investments in improved fisheries surveillance have a clear economic
rationale for the Bank and for the countries.
51. Experiences and lessons learned in APL-A1. Recent experiences with the implementation
of APL-A1 have shown that countries‟ capacity for implementation of fisheries governance
reforms is generally weak, and requires significant technical assistance, training and
implementation support. However, even in this context governance reforms are achievable, and
the Program has already supported both Liberia and Sierra Leone to prepare and implement new
fisheries regulations strengthening the framework for addressing illegal fishing. At the same
time, experiences in Sierra Leone have provided empirical evidence that increased fisheries
surveillance efforts can reduce illegal fishing activities in the targeted coastal fisheries, and that
scarce resources among various agencies can and should be pooled in collective agreements to
help reduce costs. This investment is designed to incorporate a similar institutional structure for
fisheries surveillance in Guinea-Bissau, whereby multiple agencies collaborate under a common
agreement in order to pool scarce resources and skills towards reducing illegal fishing, while at
the same time investing in governance reforms to increase the contribution of the sector to
economic growth.
IV.
IMPLEMENTATION
A. Institutional and implementation arrangements
52. Overall project implementation capacity in Guinea Bissau is weak and is generally
supplemented by project implementation units embedded in the responsible agencies, with
oversight provided by multi-stakeholder national steering committees. The Fisheries Secretariat
is no exception, facing chronic underfunding, resource constraints and a number of st aff whose
salaries are often paid only after long delays. To address these challenges, implementation will
be ensured through the establishment of a Policy and Planning Office (PPO) within the Fisheries
Secretariat, staffed by external and local project management specialists working to support and
train Government counterparts designated as responsible for implem enting each of the project
components. The PPO will invest significantly in training and support to the Secretariat, and will
report to the Director of Fisheries, as well as every six months to a multi-stakeholder National
Steering Committee. The PPO will prepare an annual work program, budget, update of the
12
monitoring and evaluation indicators and procurement plan that would be reviewed with the
National Steering Committee and transmitted to the Regional Coordination Unit at the Sub Regional Fisheries Commission. Overall responsibility for project implementation will therefore
rest with the PPO. The Guidelines on Preventing and Combating Fraud and Corruption in
Projects Financed by IBRD Loans and IDA Credits and Grants", dated October 15, 2006 and
updated January 2011, shall apply to the project.
53. At the regional level, APL-B1 will be coordinated by a Regional Coordination Unit (RCU),
housed at the CSRP in Dakar and reporting to a Regional Steering Committee of the Fisheries
Directors from each of the participating countries. As Guinea-Bissau joins the WARFP through
this project, it would join the Regional Steering Committee at that time. The role of the RCU will
be to: (i) support the harmonization of fisheries policy within the region (including conve ning
regional technical committees of national experts to periodically review recurring policy issues);
(ii) conduct monitoring and evaluation of Program investments and share information and results
throughout the region; (iii) implement ongoing communication activities to raise awareness
about the Program and implementation progress; and (iv) provide implementation support to
each of the countries, including the coordination of regional procurement. The role of the
Regional Steering Committee will be to oversee the activities of the RCU and to further
coordination and communication between decision-makers in the countries. The RCU will
provide constant implementation support to the PPO and Fisheries Secretariat, both in terms of
fiduciary management as well as technical assistance and training in monitoring and evaluation.
B. Results monitoring and evaluation
54. Currently, the sector monitoring system within the Fisheries Secretariat in Guinea-Bissau
lacks the resources and coordination to adequately report on progress according to the Results
Framework (see Annex 1). For this reason, Component 4 of the Program will support capacity
building in monitoring and evaluation in PPO, through the support of the full time M&E expert
in the Regional Coordination Unit (RCU).
55. Furthermore, in addition to providing training and ongoing implementation support in the
form of a full-time M&E specialist at the RCU, the Program will provide direct support to the
country in the actual data collection and analysis. Through the establishment of a national node
of the „dashboard‟ of key fisheries statistics, linked to a regional node at the RCU, the Program
will institutionalize the data collection and analysis needed to fill the key indicators of the
dashboard. Through this activity, by the end of the Program, not only would the implementation
of this Program be managed based on publicly available data on key sector indicators and
statistics, but overall decision-making would be linked to this M&E as well. The „dashboard‟
will serve as the final repository for all key performance indicators data, as well as other key
statistics for the sector, and the information will be presented regularly to the national steering
committees, as well as the Regional Steering Committee, and form the basis of an annual M&E
report submitted to the World Bank by each country (using a standard format). The RCU will be
responsible for monitoring and evaluation of the regional activities.
13
56. In terms of the Program‟s key outcome indicators, baselines for APL-B1 have been
established on the best available data, but will in some cases be re-measured/refined over the first
two years of implementation.
C. Sustainability
57. The project will invest significantly in building the capacity of the Fisheries Secretariat to
sustainably govern and manage the country‟s fisheries. Emphasis will be placed on supporting
the Secretariat to become a demand-based agency, which would enable fisheries users and
stakeholders to take a greater responsibility in managing the sector. The Regional Coordination
Unit of the WARFP will support the Fisheries Secretariat in this effort.
58. In terms of fisheries surveillance, the Program will support a pragmatic approach based on
low-cost methods and technologies (e.g. leasing surveillance vessels instead of purchase), with a
minimum of recurrent costs. In parallel, the Program will support the country to develop
sustainable financing mechanisms for surveillance operations, through public expenditure
reviews that demonstrate the economic benefits of these operations and the public revenues they
generate. Furthermore, over the two phases of the Program, Guinea-Bissau will be supported to
work with the other countries participating in the WARFP to develop a low -cost regional
surveillance network that can capture economies of scale, and pool scarce resources. World Bank
financing for recurrent costs of fisheries surveillance activities would gradually decline over the
second phase of the Program.
59. In terms of phasing, Phase 1 of each APL will be designed to concentrate on investments,
which would be deepened and expanded in Phase 2. However, the economic analysis conducted
for the Program shows that the investment in APL-A1 would be economically justified even
without the second phase. Similarly, the investments of Phase 1 are designed to empower local
institutions and stakeholders to take a larger role in the fisheries, as these institutions would
therefore be more sustainable after the end of Phase 1, and certainly after Phase 2.
V.
KEY RISKS
60. The overall risk rating for this project is „high‟, based on risks with potentially substantial
impacts to the achievement of the development objective. The three key risks that have been
considered during preparation and design, and will be monitored closely during implementation,
are: (i) the risk that stakeholders who currently benefit from illegal fishing activities could exert
significant influence over decision-makers to reduce prosecutions resulting from surveillance
operations in Component 2, (ii) the risk that illicit drug trafficking could impact the fisheries
sector and compromise the ability of the Government to conduct fisheries surveillance activities
and enforce compliance with sector regulations; and (iii) the risk posed by low implementation
capacity in the Fisheries Secretariat.
61. The first risk is that a lack of political will to prosecute fisheries infractions could undermine
the success of surveillance activities supported in Component 2 of the project, and hence
compliance with governance reforms needed to restore environmental sustainability and
14
economic profitability to the sector. As mentioned previously, the majority of illegal fishing
activities occurring in the coastal fisheries targeted by the project are conducted by foreign
industrial and small-scale vessels, whose owners could exert political pressure on decisionmakers not to prosecute infractions. To mitigate this risk, the project will support the transparent
publication of information on infractions and prosecutions, as well as wider public monitoring,
both at the national level and at the regional level through the use of peer review mechanisms . In
addition, the project will institutionalize monitoring of these activities by the multi-stakeholder
Steering Committee.
62. The second key risk is posed by the growing influence of drug trafficking in the region, and
in particular in Guinea-Bissau. More specifically, there is a risk that this trafficking could impact
the fisheries sector, if local fishing vessels in the region are increasingly used in carrying drug
shipments, and result in confrontations between project-supported Government fisheries
surveillance patrols and drug traffickers. Such confrontations could overstep the World Bank‟s
mandate to only finance economic development activities. To mitigate this risk, all project financed activities in Component 2 will be required to follow the World Bank guidelines for
investments in fisheries surveillance. These guidelines ensure that project-financed surveillance
patrols are conducted only for the purpose of monitoring compliance with fisheries law s and
regulations, and that clauses to this effect are included in the legal agreement.
63. The third risk arising from weak implementation capacity, will be mitigated through
significant technical assistance to the Fisheries Secretariat via a Policy and Planning Office
(PPO) of local and international experts established by the project, as well as training to
Government counterparts designated to work from the PPO. In the medium term, Component 1
of the project includes a review of the institutional arrangements needed to implement the
National Strategic Plan and its medium-term goals, with a definition of the statutes and
organigram of all the fisheries public administrations such as the Fisheries Secretariat, including
revised staff regulations and a human resource development plan (including job descriptions for
needed positions in the department, career paths, a feasible incentive framework, etc.).
Furthermore, the Regional Coordination Unit (RCU) of the WARFP, based in Dakar, will
provide ongoing training and support to the Fisheries Secretariat via the Regional Coordinator,
fiduciary management specialists and Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist based within the
RCU.
VI.
APPRAISAL SUMMARY
A. Economic and Financial Analysis
64. An economic and financial analysis of the project was conducted, based on a quantitative
economic model developed for the country‟s fisheries and the proposed investments. The model
uses the most recent sector statistics available to calculate: (i) the current net economic benefits
from the fisheries, (ii) the expected net economic benefits from the fisheries over the next 30
years under a business-as-usual scenario, without the project, and (iii) the projected net economic
benefits over that same time period as a result of the project investment. The net economic
benefits for the fisheries include the return to owners, to Government and to participants
15
(including skippers/crew), after all variable and fixed costs as well as depreciation costs, capital
cost, and the opportunity cost of labor are accounted. On the basis of the results of the analysis,
the net economic benefits generated by the project investment accrue slowl y and modestly over
the first five years after the beginning of implementation. However, by year 8 after the start of
implementation the investments made by the project are estimated to generate an additional
US$11 million per year in net economic benefits from the targeted fisheries for the country. By
year 10, the project investment will have resulted in an additional US$14 million in net economic
benefits being generated from the targeted fisheries (of which almost US$11million would be
public revenues to the Government of Guinea-Bissau). The net present value of these benefits
generated from the sector by year 10 is estimated to be roughly US$65 million, with an internal
rate of return of 48 percent. Over 30 years, the net present value using a 10 percent discount rate
will be over US$82 million, with an internal rate of return of over 50 percent. In terms of the
distribution of the benefits, the Government will capture over 80 percent of the increased
economic benefits from the use of the country‟s marine fish resources as a result of this project,
while foreign small-scale and industrial fishing operations currently fishing illegally in the
country would be reduced and therefore see the biggest negative impacts.
B. Technical
65. The project has been developed based on recent biological and economic research clearly
demonstrating that levels of fishing exploitation that are environmentally friendly (i.e. at levels
below the maximum amount that can be harvested and still allow the stocks to regenerate to their
previous size) are also much more economically profitable – providing higher levels of wealth
for the country. In order to help Guinea-Bissau capitalize on these findings and achieve levels of
fishing exploitation that are both more environmentally friendly and economically profitable, the
project‟s approach builds upon global experiences with the promotion of fishing rights to control
access to the fish resources, implemented through collaborative (or co-management) partnerships
between resource users and the Government. These partnerships would be legally recognized
and codified by the appropriate regulatory agency, clearly specifying the rights and management
responsibilities of users. Results to date in both developed and developing countries have
confirmed that this model is technically sound, and has generated both increased wealth from the
resources, and helped reduce exploitation to more environmentally sustainable levels.
C. Financial Management
66. The financial management assessment of the capacity of the Fisheries Secretariat has been
carried out on December 2010, and found that the agency does not have the financial
management systems in place to meet the World Bank‟s minimum requirements under OP/BP
10.02. The Ministry does not have the sufficient trained staff, nor the financial information
systems needed to prepare basic financial monitoring reports. However, with the implementation
of the following actions included in the financial management action plan presented in Annex 3,
the financial management arrangements for the project will be acceptable: (i) development of an
administrative and accounting manual of procedures; (ii) establishment of a sound computerized
information system; and (iii) recruitment of an experienced accountant. The residual risk rating
for Fisheries Secretariat is Medium-I.
16
D. Procurement
67. An assessment of the capacity of the Fisheries Secretariat to implement procurement actions
for the project has been carried out on November, 2010, and the overall procurement risk for the
project rated as High. This risk will be mitigated by: (i) maintaining low prior review thresholds
by the World Bank; (ii) recruitment of a procurement specialist full-time to the PPO and
financing extensive training of staff in procurement; and (iii) oversight by a recently-established
Government procurement agency, the Direcção General dos Concursos Públicos (DGCP).
Given that most of the contracts to be financed by the project are relatively small, with the
implementation of these mitigation measures the overall procurement risk is expected to be
Moderate. Procurement will be carried out in accordance with the World Bank‟s “Guidelines:
Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits” published by the Bank in January 2011; and
“Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers” published by
the Bank in January 2011, and the provisions stipulated in the Financing Agreement. For each
contract to be financed by the project, the different procurement methods or consultant selection
methods, the need for prequalification, estimated costs, prior review requirements, and time
frame are agreed in the Procurement Plan. The Procurement Plan will be updated at least
annually or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in
institutional capacity.
E. Social
68. By culture and tradition, Guinea-Bissau is not a fishing nation. Even in areas in close
proximity to fishing grounds, such as the Bijagos Archipelago, local residents are generally
farmers first, and fishers second. For this reason, local employment in the sector has always been
relatively low, estimated at roughly 15,000 people. To date, the Government has pursued a
strategy of essentially „renting‟ the resources to foreign users in exchange for public revenues,
who constitute the vast majority of fishing operations. Eventually, with investments in local
infrastructure (particularly a functioning port) and an improved investment climate, Guinea Bissau could also aim to move this offshore economy onshore, by providing incentives to vessels
and companies to land their catch in the country and export from Bissau, and thereby create more
local fish processing jobs. However, in the near to medium term, the first priority of the
country‟s 2008 Strategy is to put in place the basic sector governance and management measures
needed to ensure that the resources are used sustainably, and can provide the financial resources
desired by the public sector. As such, the project is not expected to have significant social
impacts, but rather supports the Government to more sustainably and profitably „rent‟ out the
fisheries to foreign operators, increasing public revenues available for investment in the
implementation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. The Regional Process Framework,
which has been developed, reviewed and cleared by the World Bank for the first phase of the
APL, has been provided to the Government of Guinea-Bissau for guidance on consultations and
addressing any potential issues arising from restriction of access and impacts on livelihoods. In
addition, the Government of Guinea-Bissau has committed itself to undertake, not later than
September 30, 2012, a social assessment of the impact of the Project on the management of its
fisheries resources upon terms of reference satisfactory to the Association and, on the basis
thereon, implement measures satisfactory to the Association to minimize and mitigate adverse
social impacts, if any, especially those affecting poor and vulnerable groups.
17
F. Environmental
69. Because this project aims to implement governance reforms to more sustainably manage
Guinea-Bissau‟s fish resources, and to help restore the fish stocks where needed, most of the
activities are expected to have positive impacts on the environment. The project is designed to
help implement policies and institutional frameworks for fisheries resource manag ement.
However, the Government of Guinea-Bissau has adopted, on January 28, 2011, an
Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) setting forth the procedures to be
used during Project implementation for the preparation and approval of a site-specific
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment and/or Environmental and Social Management
Plan for any site where there exists environmental and/or social issues of a type and scale
sufficient to trigger the Association‟s safeguard policies, specifically in the case of small works
supported by the project to support fisheries surveillance activities.
18
Annex 1: Results Framework and Monitoring
WEST AFRICA: West Africa Regional Fisheries Program APL B1
Results Framework
Core
Project Development Objective (PDO): To strengthen the Guinea-Bissau’s capacity to govern and manage targeted fisheries, reduce illegal fishing and increase local value added to
fish products.
Description
Cumulative Target Values1
Responsibility
PDO Level Results
Unit of
Data Source/
(indicator
Baseline
Frequency
for Data
Indicators*
Measure
Methodology
definition
MTR
YR5
Collection
etc.)
Number of
Indicator One:
- Coastal
- Coastal demersal
- Coastal demersal fish Annual
Fish landings
Fisheries
Measures
tons of fish
Two overexploited
demersal fish =
fish = 283 tons
= 310 tons
data
Secretariat
total landings
caught per
fisheries showing signs
270 tons
- Coastal shrimp =
- Coastal shrimp = 401
of fish caught
fishing vessel
of recovery, as
- Coastal
366 tons
tons
legally in
per year
measured by an
shrimp = 348
- Cephalopods =
- Cephalopods = 566
Guineaincrease in total catch
tons
517 tons
tons
Bissau‟s
per unit of fishing
- Cephalopods
waters
effort2
= 492 tons
Percentage
Indicator Two:
US$16.45 M3
0
5
Annual
Fish catch and
Fisheries
Economic
Increase in annual net
first sale
Secretariat
model, based
economic benefits from
revenue data
on fish
targeted fisheries
landings,
price, effort
CORE INDICATORS
Total number of
beneficiaries (of which
female)
Number
(Percentage)
1.6 million
(51.5%)
1.6 million
(51.5%)
1.6 million
(51.5%)
1
Annual
Census
National
Statistics Unit
The project
aims to benefit
the country as a
whole, by
supporting
governance
reforms to
sustainably
increase the
sector‟s
contribution to
Cumulative target values are set to Mid-Term Review (MTR), estimated to take place in June 2013, and Year 5 of the project, based on the nature of the indicators.
There are a number of ways to measure fishing effort for different types of fishing vessels. One measure that is readily available in Guinea-Bissau to provide baseline data is a
measure of capacity, i.e. in this case the number of different types of fishing vessels. Other dimensions of fishing capacity such as vessel horsepower and types of fishing will also
be considered and incorporated into project monitoring during the course of implementation. Thus, based on available data, this indicator measures tons of fish caught per
industrial fishing vessel, per year.
3
Baseline net annual economic benefits of US$16.45 million equals the sum of US$0.78 million from the non-motorized artisanal sector, US$1.29 million from the motorized
artisanal sector, and $14.38 million in license fees from the industrial sector.
2
19
economic
growth.
INTERMEDIATE RESULTS
Intermediate Result (Component One):
Clear principles and policies are established to increase the wealth from the fisheries through strengthened rights and equitable allocation of these rights, which balances economic efficiency
and social benefits.
Yes/No
No
Yes
Yes
Intermediate Result
Annual
M&E Reports
PPO, Fisheries
indicator One:
Secretariat
Fisheries Management
Plans prepared and
adopted for targeted
fisheries
Yes/No
No
Yes
Yes
Intermediate Result
Bi-annual
Fish catch and
Fisheries
indicator Two:
effort
Secretariat
A biological and
monitoring
economic assessment of
the health of targeted
fish stocks is conducted
Yes/No
No
Yes
Yes
Intermediate Result
Bi-annual
M&E Reports
Fisheries
Dashboard
indicator Three:
Secretariat
will be linked
An electronic
to regional
„dashboard‟ of key
database
environmental, social
housed at the
and economic fisheries
CSRP
statistics established at
the Fisheries Secretariat
Intermediate Result (Component Two): Illegal fishing is reduced and compliance with fisheries governance framework is increased.
Intermediate Result
indicator One:
Fishing vessels
observed by
aerial/surface patrol or
by radar and satellite
monitoring, that are
committing a serious
infraction
Percentage of
vessels
boarded, that
are found to
be committing
a serious
infraction
Small-scale = 20%
Industrial = 25%
Small-scale = 15%
Industrial = 17.5%
Small-scale = 10%
Industrial = 10%
20
Monthly
reports from
FISCAP
Surveillance
patrol logbooks
and reports from
Vessel
Monitoring
System,
summarized in
project M&E
Reports
Fisheries
Secretariat
% of total
number of
vessels
boarded
during routine
surveillance
patrols, that
are found to
be
committing a
serious
infraction
Intermediate Result
indicator Two:
Total patrol days at sea
per month in targeted
fisheries
Intermediate Result
indicator Three:
A fisheries monitoring
center is equipped and
functional
Number
11 days
18 days
22 days
Annual
M&E Reports
based on patrol
vessel log books
Fisheries
Secretariat
Yes/No
No
Yes
Yes
Annual
M&E Reports
Fisheries
Secretariat
Intermediate Result (Component Three): An enabling environment established to help increase the value added locally to fish landed in Guinea-Bissau
Intermediate Result
indicator One:
A competent sanitary
authority (with
laboratories equipped
by the Project) is
accredited for
certification of fisheries
products exports to the
EU (Yes/No)
Yes/No
No
No
Yes
21
Annual
M&E Reports
Fisheries
Secretariat
serious
infraction =
any fishing
infraction
punishable by
arrest
according to
current
legislation,
e.g. fishing
w/o a license
(the indicator
will measure
both arrests,
and
prosecution of
penalties)
Number of
total patrol
days/year
Center should
be staffed 24
hours per day,
with
electricity and
communicatio
n access to
bases and
vessels
Intermediate Result (Component Four): Project is implemented according to monitoring and evaluation of results, in complement with other countries participating in the WARFP
Yes/No
No
Yes
Yes
Regional database and
Annual
M&E Reports
Regional
„dashboard‟ of key
Coordination
environmental,
Unit, CSRP
economic and social
fisheries statistics
established at the CSRP
22
Annex II: Project Description
1. The project’s development objective is to strengthen the country‟s capacity to govern and
manage targeted fisheries, reduce illegal fishing and increase local value added to fish products .
The targeted fisheries include, among others: coastal demersal fish species (e.g. croakers,
groupers, snappers, etc.), coastal shrimp and cephalopods (e.g. octopus and cuttlefish). These
coastal fisheries are currently utilized largely by foreign industrial and small -scale fishers, and to
a lesser extent by local small-scale fishers from the Bijagos Archipelago and coastal
communities along the estuaries of the Buba, Cacheu and Cacine rivers, among others. The
fishing grounds include all of the continental shelf area, most notably the Bijagos Archipelago
and other sensitive fishing habitats within 12 nautical miles of the coast, where industrial trawl
fishing is currently prohibited by law.
2. The rationale for this objective begins with the presence of significant and highly valuable
marine fish resources in Guinea-Bissau, due to the country‟s unique geographic conditions which
include a large continental shelf and numerous flows of nutrients from rivers as well as cold
water (upwelling) currents from the sea. Because the country‟s waters favor breeding grounds for
commercially important fish stocks, it has even been speculated that Guinea-Bissau is the
region‟s „nursery ground‟ for many fish stocks. The total annual fish production from the
country‟s waters is estimated to be as much as 250,000 tons, although reliable data and
assessments are scarce. Similarly, a 2003 World Bank Economic and Sector Work (ESW)
estimated that the gross value of this fish production is between US$60 to $90 million annually,
although very little of this value is captured domestically. Nonetheless, the sector contributes
some 7 to 10 percent of GDP and as much as 40 percent of the Government‟s annual budget
(largely due to a foreign fishing agreement with the European Union that provides roughly EU 7
million per year to the Government in exchange for access to the fish resources for Eu ropean
vessels).
3. The benefits to the country from the sector are however, far smaller than they could be. By
culture and tradition, Guinea-Bissau is not a fishing nation. Even in areas in close proximity to
fishing grounds, such as the Bijagos Archipelago, local residents are generally farmers first, and
fishers second. Thus, local employment in the sector is estimated to be relatively low, around
15,000. However, even if the country‟s tremendous resources do not provide a significant source
of livelihoods, they could provide a large source of public sector revenues, as the Government
essentially „rents‟ the resources to foreign users. Eventually, with investments in local
infrastructure (particularly a functioning port) and an improved investment climate, GuineaBissau could also aim to move this offshore economy onshore, by providing incentives to vessels
and companies to land their catch in the country and export from Bissau, and thereby create more
local fish processing jobs.
4. In the past, Guinea-Bissau has pursued a strategy of „renting‟ out its fisheries resources to
foreign users, in exchange for public revenues. However, this strategy, and the public revenues
generated by the sector, is unlikely to remain viable under the status quo. The country has never
put in place the basic sector governance and management measures needed to ensure that the
resources are used sustainably, or that the revenues generated from fishing are sustainable. As a
result, despite the lack of any reliable data (since few fish catches from Guinea-Bissau‟s waters
are actually reported to the country), anecdotal evidence from fishing companies indicates that
23
the fish catch per unit of fishing effort is declining, as the resources dwindle. The country has
insufficient means to patrol its waters or enforce fishing regulations, and as a result widespread
illegal fishing is also reported, essentially the theft of economic resources. On the basis of these
challenges, the European Union reduced the value of its foreign fisheries agreement during the
last negotiations (2007), and is unlikely to continue paying at the current rate after this agreement
concludes in 2012.
5. In summary, according to the draft National Fisheries Strategy of the Government, there is
consensus that the current model of fisheries development is exhausted. Effectively, and if it
continues as in the past, the current regime of fisheries exploitation will not provide the financial
resources desired by the public sector, will generate few benefits for the private sector, and will
inevitably lead to the decline of the fish resources.
6. In a scenario for success in Guinea-Bissau’s fisheries, the sector could provide fish catches
with an annual gross value of production of some US$191 million, yielding annual public
revenues of almost US$30 million. Generating such benefits from the fisheries in Guinea-Bissau
would require: (a) a fisheries administration structured according to its essential functions,
present throughout the country, directed at the creation of a regulatory framework and business
environment favorable to the development of industrial fisheries, of commercial artisanal
fisheries and other complementary fishing activities; (b) a fisheries management system where
decisions are increasingly based on knowledge of the state of exploitation of fish resources and
of the economic and social conditions of the fisheries; (c) a fish inspection service recognized as
the competent authority for certifying produce exported; (d) infrastructure established and
operating normally in Bissau, supporting the integration of the industrial and artisanal fleets into
the national economy; and (e) some fishing companies installed or being installed in the country,
not merely as a base for fishing operations, but also for processing and export of fishing produce,
provision of maintenance and supplies services, etc., associated or not with nationals.
7. Given limited implementation capacity, the project will be selective from the menu of options
within the WARFP, and focus on the near-term priorities to help Guinea-Bissau sustainably
increase the rents the fisheries can generate for the public sector, while laying the foundation for
a gradual transition onshore of the „offshore‟ economy in the future. As such, the project will
focus on reforms to the regulatory, legal, administrative and institutional framework governing
the sector, to provide a sound and transparent foundation for increased rents from the fi sheries.
At the same time, the project will support hard investments in fisheries surveillance, in order to
allow the Government to exercise the minimum control over the resources necessary to
implement legal and regulatory reforms and to extract higher and more sustainable rents, through
reducing illegal fishing and „free-riders‟ on the system. The project will also provide technical
assistance to the Government for the coordination of development aid and international
agreements supporting the fisheries sector. Lastly, the project will provide support to reform the
investment climate for companies to invest in onshore processing in the future.
8. More specifically, the project includes the following components, sub-components and
activities:
24
9. Component 1: Good Governance and Sustainable Management of the Fisheries. ($0.3
M IDA, $1.7 M GEF). This component aims to build the capacity of the Government and
stakeholders to develop and implement policies through a shared approach that would ensure that
the fish resources are used in a manner that is environmentally sustainable, socially equitable and
economically profitable. It will comprise the following two sub-components: (i) developing the
capacity, rules, practices and procedures for good governance of the fisheries; and (ii)
introducing fishing rights.
10. Activity 1.1 Strengthened policy and regulatory framework for the use of the fish resources.
This activity will support the technical assistance and consultations needed to review and adapt
the policy and regulatory framework for more sustainable and profitable use of the fish
resources. More specifically, this activity would include: (i) a review of the institutional
arrangements needed to implement the draft National Fisheries Strategy and its medium-term
goals, with a definition of the statutes and organigram of all the fisheries public administrations,
creation of a policy and planning unit within the Fisheries Secretariat, revised staff regulations
and a human resource development plan (including job descriptions for needed positions in the
department, career paths, a feasible incentive framework, etc.), among others; (ii) a study to
determine which policy/regulatory frameworks need to be put in place to provide incentives for
industrial fishing companies to invest in locally-based operations (nationally) in exchange for
secured extended fishing rights (access); (iii) a revision of aspects of the general fisheries law
necessary for implementing the National Fisheries Strategy, incorporating updated regulations
concerning industrial fisheries and artisanal fisheries, as well as including the special regimes for
conservation areas, co-management arrangements, vessel monitoring systems, and fish
inspection and quality control; (iv) the development of revised regulations for the industrial
fisheries as needed to implement the National Fisheries Strategy, MCS and Fish Inspection
systems, including rules supporting the development and implementation of future fisheries
management plans, the production of revised licensing arrangements that favor longer-term
commitments and access rights 4 (including allocation mechanisms and criteria, rules of transfer
of licenses where applicable, and a timetable and schedule of license fees), and the establishment
of catch and reporting requirements for vessels; and (v) the preparation of annual fisheries
management plans (FMPs) for the coastal shrimp, cephalopod and demersal fish species, which
define total allowable catches (TACs) and longer-term access rights, including an update of the
existing FMPs (created in 2010 by GoGB) for the industrial fisheries, and the production of new
FMPs for the artisanal fisheries.5. The activity would be implemented by one consulting firm in a
long-term technical assistance contract to the Fisheries Secretariat, with the related objective of
4
Current short-term (3 and 6 months for example) licenses would transition to longer -term access rights. This
transition could potentially begin with the issuance of longer-term licenses similar to concessions (for a period of 5
to 10 years for example), linked to purchasing companies‟ agreements to invest in local landing and processing
(together with broader Bank support for reforms to the investment climate as well as support from Component 3 for
sanitary quality control). On the basis of this arrangement, the licenses would eventually transition to full access
rights, secured for a longer period and transferable.
5
Together with the RCU, the project will work with the Governments and any user groups representing many of the
foreign, small-scale fishers operating in Guinea-Bissau, for example from Senegal or Guinea. Where possible, the
project will support the Government of Guinea-Bissau to work directly with user groups representing these foreign
fishers, to help establish limited and secure access rights, and facilitate exports of products landed in Guinea -Bissau
waters.
25
training counterparts within the Secretariat to continue to implement the revised policy and
regulatory framework after the close of the project.
11. Activity 1.2 Assessment of the biological and economic status of key fish stocks.
Management of fish resources is knowledge intensive and requires some fundamental
information about the size of the resources and how they are being used (and by whom), as a
sound and transparent basis for decision-making by all users. As such, this activity would
support: (i) an assessment of coastal shrimp, cephalopod and demersal fish stocks (through initial
and periodic research cruises for stock assessments in partnership with neighbors and regional
organizations), with a special focus on the Common Management Zone shared by Guinea-Bissau
and Senegal; (ii) training staff of the Fisheries Secretariat in fish catch and effort data collection
techniques at landing sites and as observers on offshore fishing vessels (including foreign
operators), in order to provide continuous monitoring of the exploitation status of the main fish
stocks, to inform management decisions and the development of industrial and artisanal fisheries
management plans; (iii) development of a statistical sampling system for the small-scale
fisheries; (iv) a study of the projected impacts of climate change on the key fish stocks and on
coastal communities, including potential adaptation and mitigation measures; (v) an evaluation
of the status of the health of the coastal ecosystems underpinning the fish stocks, covering
physical, chemical and biological aspects (qualitative and quantitative) and including the
common management zone shared with Senegal; (vi) preparation and maintenance of a
bioeconomic model analysis for the coastal shrimp, cephalopod and demersal fisheries; and (vii)
a modeling exercise to test different management measures and determine which one would
sustainably maximize the benefits in the fishery. This activity will also include financing for
goods for research and monitoring and evaluation, as well as services, training of local
researchers and initial operating costs.
12. Activity 1.3 Development of tools at the community, national and regional level to ensure
transparency and accessibility of basic fisheries management information for controlling access
to the resources. In each country, the WARFP is supporting increased transparency and
accessibility to all stakeholders of key information for the governance and management of the
use of the marine fish resources, following the model of the Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (EITI). This transparency is to be achieved through the development, installation and
operation in each country of a „dashboard‟ of fisheries management indicators, comprising
social, biological and economic statistics, which would be linked to a regional information
technology platform. This activity would include support firstly for the development of the
fundamental building blocks of the dashboard, i.e. a national: (i) fishing vessel/license registry,
(ii) fish catch and effort database, and (iii) surveillance and infractions database. Information in
this dashboard, i.e. an information system of these national databases, linked to a website, will
include: (i) the fishing vessel/license registry (including both the industrial and artisanal
fisheries); (ii) the number of licenses issued per fishery, per species and per access regime, as
well as the total number of vessels licensed (including total number of months licensed, per gross
ton); (iii) the total number of licensed gross tons of fishing vessels per fishery; (iv) the total fish
catch per fishery (target species, by-catch and as far as possible discards); (v) the total fishing
effort (in fishing days) per fishery; (vi) the number of fish surveillance patrol days; (vii) the total
number of fishing vessels sited by surveillance patrols, as well as vessels boarded; (viii) the
number of fishing vessels charged with an infraction (by type of infraction; (ix) the number of
26
infraction cases presented (i.e. the number processed or going to court, the number of penalties
administered and the effectiveness of the application of the penalties; and (x) the volume of fish
products sold on the local markets or for export (including their price and their origins). In each
country, the Program will finance the development and implementation of the rules and
procedures for all relevant institutions to follow to ensure that the needed information is
collected and transmitted to the „dashboard‟, and that it is regularly maintained and updated, and
shared publicly. Funds will be available for information/data collection and input (on the basis of
research campaigns, local monitoring and evaluation described above), establishment of the
database and software interface with the database (i.e. website) for the „dashboard‟, and
maintenance and monitoring of the dashboard (including support for local operators). The
Program will also support periodic dissemination of key „dashboard‟ information to key
stakeholders including targeted fishing communities, translated into a user-friendly format. In
each country, the national node of the „dashboard‟ will be linked to the regional information
platform established at the Regional Coordination Unit in the CSRP.
13. Activity 1.4 Feasibility study for the nation-wide extension of pilot co-management
partnerships for the small-scale fisheries. This activity builds on the lessons learned from the
Coastal and Biodiversity Management Project, which established a reserved fishing zone in
Buba, and identified Cacheu and Cacine as additional potential sites. The study would include a
social assessment of fishing communities, and propose additional co-management partnerships
such as the Reserved Fishing Zone in Buba, for the remainder of the coast al fisheries, based on
specific conditions and regions of the country. This work will inform both fishing communities
and the Government of the possibilities to establish and manage additional reserved fishing
zones, with the potential to evolve into Territorial Use Rights in Fisheries (TURFs).
14. Component 2: Reduction of Illegal Fishing ($4.7 m IDA). The objective of this
component is to reduce the illegal fishing activities threatening the sustainable management of
the marine fish resources and the wealth they can generate for the region. More specifically, this
component aims to improve the fisheries monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) systems of
participating countries and adapt them to the needs of fisheries management, within the
framework of a coordinated approach between the participating countries. In implementing
Component 2, the project will complement existing Government investments financed by the
foreign fishing agreement with the European Union, in particular by supporting the procurement
and operation of surveillance equipment and systems needed to reduce illegal fishing and
implement the country‟s national fisheries surveillance strategy (2006). The project will favor
low-cost, practical solutions wherever possible (including regional cooperation).
Sub-Component 2.1 Monitoring, Control and Surveillance Systems ($4.5 m IDA) will
entail:
15. Activity 2.1.1 Implementation of sustainable fisheries surveillance systems. This activity
includes goods, works, technical assistance and operating costs for: (i) equipping the fisheries
monitoring center to be managed by the autonomous Fisheries Surveillance Unit (FISCAP) that
is linked to the Fisheries Secretariat, located in Bissau (adjacent to the current FISCAP
headquarters); (ii) equipping/operation of coastal surveillance stations (in Cacheu, Bubaque,
Caravelha and Cacine); (iii) sea patrols (through the rehabilitation and/or operation of FISCAP‟s
27
12 rapid response vessels for the inshore areas and the leasing of a larger surveillance vessel for
offshore operations) and a satellite-based vessel monitoring system; and (iv) technical assistance
and training of FISCAP staff to operate the systems, including harmonization and development
of curriculum and training for fisheries inspectors and observers, as well as other personnel
directly involved in fisheries surveillance operations. The fisheries monitoring center will be
equipped to access the „dashboard‟ (see Component 1.1) with information on registered and
licensed vessels, and will coordinate activities between the coastal surveillance stations. The
center and the four coastal surveillance stations will be equipped with communications systems,
a simple satellite-based vessel monitoring system (VMS) data reception platform, complete
computer systems and office materials and vehicles. Based on a cost-efficiency analysis, the
project will support the development of patrol capacity at sea, through the leasing of a sea patrol
vessel to conduct surveillance of the coastal fisheries (up to 30 nautical miles of the coast). This
vessel would be leased on a yearly basis for the first two years of the project, with operating
costs (including maintenance, crew and fuel) included in the leasing agreement. Officers from
FISCAP will be on board the vessel at all times while in the country‟s waters. Based on a review
of the results of the efficiency of leased patrols after the first two years of implementation, the
project could subsequently finance FISCAP, via the Fisheries Secretariat, to purchase a coastal
surveillance patrol vessel. As mentioned previously, the project will also provide support for the
rehabilitation, maintenance and operation of 12 smaller patrol vessels already owned by FISCAP
and operated out of Cacheu, Bubaque, Cacine, Caravelha and Bissau. These vessels will be used
for surveillance activities in the inshore areas (Bijagos Islands) and be equipped with updated
communications systems.
16. Activity 2.1.2 Study to determine options for sustaining the operating costs of the MCS
system over time, including government mechanisms. The study will focus on determining which
government mechanisms will be used to fund the surveillance activities. More specifically, the
work will propose a series of financing options, based at first on retaining a percentage of the
revenue generated from catching/prosecuting illegal canoes/vessels, and subsequently receiving a
percentage of the funds from increased license fees and fishing agreements. The assumption is
that as MCS operations reduce illegal fishing, public revenues from fines on infractions will also
decrease. However, effective MCS is also expected to lead to increased license fees and fishing
agreements, from which future MCS operating costs would be drawn.
Sub-Component 2.2 Strengthened Regional Collaboration for MCS ($0.2 m IDA)
17. This sub-component will include technical assistance to enable the CSRP to monitor and
support the network of MCS systems among the countries. More specifically, the Project will
provide technical assistance and training for the competent authority for surveillance in each
country to implement the package of measures that have been adopted internationally as
standards for port states. In addition, the program will support periodic reviews and audits of the
fisheries surveillance activities by an independent panel of experts, financed in the participating
countries by the World Bank.
18. Component 3: Increasing the Contribution of the Marine Fish Resources to the Local
Economies ($0.4 m IDA). The objective of this component is to increase the benefits to West
28
Africa from the marine fish resources, by increasing the share of the value-added captured in the
region. This component will support the following sub-components:
19. Activity 3.1 Support to the establishment of the Fish Inspection and Quality Control
Department. The program will complement the efforts from the European Union (EU) to assist
the sector on the creation of the capacity required for certifying fisheries‟ products exp orts
through: (i) the provision of the goods, laboratory equipment (and other), technical assistance
and long-term training needed to establish a certified competent sanitary authority for the export
of fish products to the European market, as well as more broadly the development of relevant
protocols and standards for quality and traceability. This effort will build on (complement) prior
European Union investments in the sector; (ii) assistance to the Fish Inspection and Quality
Control Department in developing annual work plans and budgets.
20.
Activity 3.2 Enabling environment in order to obtain higher values from local fish
products. The program will provide training (including education materials) to fishers to: (i)
improve product handling, processing/marketing, transport practices and sanitary measures, as
well as maintenance of landing site equipment; and (ii) understand how to access local
commercial micro-finance opportunities in order to purchase fish preservation equipment (ice
boxes, freezers) and maintain their boats and fishing gear in good working order.
21. Component 4: Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation and Program Management
($0.6 m IDA, $0.3 m GEF). The objective of this component is to support the countries to
implement the Program in the context of the CSRP Strategic Action Plan, and to monitor and
evaluate results. This component will support the following sub-components:
Sub-Component 4.1 National Implementation ($0.3 m IDA, $0.3 m GEF):
23. This sub-component includes goods, works, technical assistance, training and operating
costs for a Policy and Planning Office (PPO), embedded within the Fisheries Secretariat and
staffed by external and local project management specialists. The PPO will report each six
months to a multi-stakeholder National Steering Committee. The PPO will prepare an annual
work program, budget, update of the monitoring and evaluation indicators and procurement plan
that would be reviewed with the National Steering Committee and transmitted to the Regional
Coordination Unit. Activities within this sub-component will include: (i) technical assistance for
national implementation, and (ii) operating costs for national implementation.
Sub-Component 4.2 Regional Coordination ($0.3 m IDA):
24. This sub-component includes technical assistance and consultations for the Regional
Coordination Unit at the CSRP, in order to: (a) support the harmonization of fisheries policy
within the region; (b) conduct monitoring and evaluation of Program investments and share
information and results throughout the region, including via the GEF‟s IW:LEARN program,
which may include participation of project and governmental representative staff to relevant
regional IW:LEARN conferences as well as the biennial International Waters Conferences that
will be hosted during the projects implementation and creation of a website following the
IW:LEARN toolkit guidance; (c) implement ongoing communication activities to raise
29
awareness about the Program and implementation progress; and (d) provide implementatio n
support to the country, including the coordination of regional procurement.
Component 1. Good Governance & Sustainable Management of the Fisheries ($0.3 M IDA, $1.7 M GEF)
(Part 1 of the IDA Financing Agreement and GEF Grant Agreement)
1.1 Technical assistance
Review and revise institutional arrangements for sector
$0.6 M
GEF
and consultations for the
governance
development of the
Revision of aspects of the general fisheries law and regulations
capacity, rules,
Development of revised regulations for industrial fisheries,
procedures and practices
including licensing arrangements and fish catch and effort
for good governance of
reporting
the fisheries
Preparation of annual fisheries management plans for the
industrial coastal shrimp, cephalopod and demersal fisheries and
production of FMPs for the artisanal (artisanal) fisheries
Study to determine which policy/regulatory frameworks need to
be put in place to incentivize industrial fishing companies to
invest on land (nationally) in exchange for secured extended
fishing rights (access)
Technical assistance to the Government for the coordination of
development aid and international/private sector agreements
supporting the fisheries sector.
1.2 Technical assistance,
Research cruises in collaboration with regional partners to assess $1.0 M
GEF
training, goods, services
key fish stocks
and operating costs for
Support for continuous monitoring of the exploitation status of
assessments of key fish
the main fish stocks
stocks
Building a statistical sampling system for the artisanal fisheries
Evaluation of the status of the ecosystem in the coastal areas
Bioeconomic model analysis for the coastal shrimp, cephalopod
and demersal fisheries
Modeling exercise to test different manage ment measures and
determine which one would sustainably maximize the benefits in
the fishery
1.3 Fisheries information Installation and operation of fisheries „dashboard‟ database and
$0.3 M
IDA
systems
information collection
1.4 Feasibility study on
Study of how successful co-management arrangements started
$0.1 M
GEF
extending the artisanal
under the Coastal and Biodiversity Management Project can be
fisheries co-management
adapted to the different regions/communities of the country,
arrangements to the
particularly concerning the potential for reserved fishing zones to
whole country
evolve into TURFs.
Component 2. Reduction of Illegal Fishing ($4.7 M IDA)
(Part 2 of the IDA Financing Agreement and GEF Grant Agreement)
Sub-Component 2.1 Monitoring, Control and Surveillance (MCS) Systems ($4.5 M IDA)
(a) Leasing or purchasing naval and airborne equipment/time
$4.5 M
IDA
(b) Procuring MCS equipment to coastal surveillance stations (including
VMS equipment to track vessels)
(c) Establishing the fisheries monitoring center, which will coordinate
activities between coastal surveillance stations at the National and
Regional level (facility dedicated to fisheries surveillance)
(d) Training and technical assistance to operators of fisheries monitoring
center, and MCS systems
Sub-Component 2.2 Strengthened Regional Collaboration for MCS ($0.2 M IDA)
Support to the CSRP to monitor MCS activities and provide regional
$0.2 M
IDA
coordination
30
Component 3. Increasing the Contribution of Marine Fish Resources to Local Economies ($0.4 M IDA)
(Part 3 of the IDA Financing Agreement and GEF Grant Agreement)
3.1 Complement the
Provision of the goods, laboratory
$0.3 M
IDA
efforts from the EU to
equipment (and other), technical assistance
assist the sector on the
and long-term training needed to establish a
creation of the capacity
certified competent sanitary authority for
required for certifying
the export of fish products to the European
fisheries‟ products
market, as well as more broadly the
exports
development of relevant protocols and
standards for quality and traceability.
Assistance to the Fish Inspection and
Quality Control Department in developing
annual work plans and budgets
3.2 Enabling
Training in fish handling and conservation
$0.1 M
IDA
environment for
practices, as well as in accessing local
obtaining higher values
commercial micro-finance
for local fish products
Component 4. Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation and Program Management ($0.6 M IDA, $0.3 M
GEF)
(Part 4 of the IDA Financing Agreement and GEF Grant Agreement)
Sub-Component 4.1 National Implementation ($0.6 M IDA)
Technical assistance for PPO to implement the Project
$0.3 M
IDA
Operating costs for national implementation
$0.3 M
GEF
Sub-Component 4.2 Regional Coordination ($0.3 M IDA)
Technical assistance for Regional Coordination Unit at the CSRP,
$0.3 M
IDA
Fisheries Information Systems („dashboard‟)
31
Annex 3: Implementation Arrangements
1. Project institutional and implementation arrangements. Overall project implementation
capacity in Guinea Bissau is weak and is generally supplemented by project implementation
units embedded in the responsible agencies, with oversight provided by multi -stakeholder
national steering committees. The Fisheries Secretariat is no exception, facing chronic
underfunding, resource constraints and a number of staff whose salaries are often paid only after
long delays. To address these challenges, implementation will be ensured through the
establishment of a Policy and Planning Office (PPO) located within the Fisheries Secretariat,
staffed by external and local project management specialists working to support and train
Government counterparts designated as focal points from each of the relevant departments and
collaborating autonomous agencies. The PPO will be located within the Fisheries Secretariat and
composed of: (i) a Project Coordinator; (ii) a fisheries monitoring, control and surveillance
(MCS) specialist responsible for implementation of Component 2; (iii) an Accountant, (iv) a
Procurement Specialist, and (v) an Administrative Assistant, who will perform auxiliary work for
the accountant and eventually second the procurement specialist. A significant amount of time
and effort will be invested by the PPO in training and support to the wider Secretariat as part of
its terms of reference. In the medium term, through Component 1 of the project the PPO will
support a review of the institutional arrangements needed to implement the National Strategic
Plan and its medium-term goals, with a definition of the statutes and organigram of all the
fisheries public administrations such as the Fisheries Secretariat, including revised staff
regulations and a human resource development plan (including job descriptions for need ed
positions in the department, career paths, a feasible incentive framework, etc.).
2. The PPO will report to the Director of Fisheries, and will report every six months to a multistakeholder National Steering Committee. The National Steering Committee was created on
September 13, 2010 by Despacho N° 35/GSEP/2010, and will be chaired by the Director of
Fisheries. The National Steering Committee includes the following members: Secretariat of
Fisheries; Ministry of Finance; Ministry of the Economy, Planning and Regional Integration;
Ministry of Infrastructure; Ministry of Commerce, Tourism and the Industry; Secretariat of
Transport; Secretariat of the Environment; Navy; Institute for Biodiversity and Protected Areas
(IBAP); National Association of Artisanal Fishermen (ANAPA); National Association of Fish
Processors (ANEP); and National Association of Women Fish Traders (AMAE). The PPO will
prepare an annual work program, budget, update of the monitoring and evaluation indicators and
procurement plan that would be reviewed with the National Steering Committee and transmitted
to the Regional Coordination Unit at the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission.
3. At the regional level, APL-B1 will be coordinated by a Regional Coordination Unit (RCU),
housed at the CSRP in Dakar and composed of a Regional Coordinator, a Monitoring and
Evaluation Specialist, and fiduciary management specialists. The RCU reports to a Regional
Steering Committee of the Fisheries Directors from each of the participating countries. As
Guinea-Bissau joins the WARFP through this project, it would join the Regional Steering
Committee at that time. The role of the RCU will be to: (i) support the harmonization of fisheries
policy within the region (including convening regional technical committees of national experts
to periodically review recurring policy issues); (ii) conduct monitoring and evaluation of
32
Program investments and share information and results throughout the region; (iii) implement
ongoing communication activities to raise awareness about the Program and implementation
progress; and (iv) provide implementation support to each of the countries, including the
coordination of regional procurement. The role of the Regional Steering Committee will be to
oversee the activities of the RCU and to further coordination and communication between
decision-makers in the countries. The RCU will provide constant implementation support to the
PPO and Fisheries Secretariat, both in terms of fiduciary management as well as technical
assistance and training in monitoring and evaluation.
4. Financial Management. A financial management assessment of the Fisheries Secretariat
implementing the project was conducted, in compliance with the Financial Management Manual
for World Bank-Financed Investment Operations that became effective on March 1, 2010 and
AFTFM Financial Management Assessment and Risk Rating Principles. The assessment found
that the Fisheries Secretariat‟s financial management systems are not in place, noting the
following capacity constraints: (i) lack of an accounting information system to prepare the
accounts and financial report of the project; (ii) lack of administrative and accounting manual of
procedures; (iii) possibility of mingling funds; (iv) lack of capacity of Supreme Audit Institution
to conduct audit in conformity with internal audit standard (IAS); (v) weakness and credibility in
the elaboration of annual budget and (vi) lapses in the internal control systems. In addition, the
Fisheries Secretariat does not have the financial staff trained to prepare the accounts of the
project. The assessment concluded that the financial management arrangements do not meet the
Bank‟s minimum requirements under OP/BP 10.02. However, with the implementation of the
financial management action plan presented in this annex, the financial management
arrangements for the project will be acceptable. The residual risk rating for Fisheries Secretariat
is Medium-I.
5. Country Issues. Due to the social and political conflict situation in the country, the Country
Financial Accountability Assessment (CFAA) carried out by the World Bank in March 2006 has
not yet been implemented. However some studies conducted by donors suggest that the
Government has made considerable progress in the area of financial management since 2006.
However, a few aspects have been identified for further strengthening, including the need to
improve the budget classification system; increase the computerization of financial management
systems; improve accounting that will eventually move towards an accrual basis; and improve
the quality of expenditure reporting through Interim Financial Reports. As such, the Bank has
taken special measures to ensure adequate financial management of the projects. Project
management units are often established to manage IDA-financed projects and Bank funding is
following special mechanisms to mitigate fiduciary risks.
33
6. Summary of Risk Analysis and mitigation measures.
Risk
Risk
Rating
I. Inherent Risks:
1. Country Level
Poor Governance and corruption
and great constraints in the budget
cycle.
2. Entity Level
Fisheries Secretariat does not have
the capacity to implement and
monitor a project financed by
World Bank
3. Project Level
The project will involve two
sources of financing (IDA and
GEF) and while technical design
may be complex, the financial
management and procurement
arrangements are not.
Risk Mitigation Measure
Condi
tionality
S
The risk arising from weak
implementation capacity will be
mitigated through significant
technical assistance to the Fisheries
Secretariat via a Policy and Planning
Office established by the project, as
well as training. The PPO will
assume the overall responsibility for
accounting for the project funds.
M-I
FM risks under each of the FM
arrangements have been identified
and mitigated. In addition, the
supervision strategy for this project
will monitor the risks arising out of
the design complexity of the project
to timely address issues arising.
M-L
II. Control Risks:
1. Budgeting
Budget credibility in Guinea Bissau
is a major challenge in view of
falling revenues and expenditures.
Budget for SSF is prepared
manually in Excel.
Residual
Risk Rating
M-I
Medium
Impact
Annual budgets and work plans will
be prepared by the PPO according
the calendar of preparation of budget
and submitted to the Bank by
December 10 of each year. The new
accounting software has a budget
module and will prepare and monitor
the project‟s budget.
2. Accounting
Due to the lack of a comprehensive, The PPO will install appropriate
integrated
budgeting
and accounting software and will
accounting system and manual of elaborate an administrative and
procedures, the maintenance of accounting manual of procedures.
books of accounts, correctness and The activities to be financed by the
reliability of data may be hampered project are clearly identified.
if systems are not well developed
and structured.
3. Internal Control & Internal Audit
Lapses in Internal Controls in the The Bank will pay a particular
Secretariat of fish could be source attention to the implementation by
34
Yes.
Financial
Convenants.
M-I
No.
M-I
No.
of potential challenges.
4. Flow of Funds
The possibility of mingling funds is
high and the tracking of project
expenditures is not evident.
5. Reporting
The reporting system of Secretariat
of fishing is not consistent and the
periodicity is not regular.
6. Auditing Reporting
The system of external control of
Supreme Audit Institution is not
exhaustive and periodic in Guinea
Bissau and this institution doesn‟t
conduct an external audit in
conformity with the World Bank
standards.
the PPO of an efficient internal
control system based on the
instruction of the administrative and
accounting manual of procedure to
be developed.
M-I
Segregated designated accounts will
be opened in the commercial bank in
terms acceptable to the Bank, to track
the project expenditures. Those
designated accounts will be managed
by the Treasury Department of the
Ministry of Finance and the PPO.
M-L
The PPO will prepare quarterly
Interim Financial Reports (IFRs) and
Annual Financial Statements of the
project in format and substance
acceptable to the Bank and agreed
during negotiations.
The IFR
format was
agreed
during
negotiations
M-L
External auditor with qualification
and experience satisfactory to the
World Bank will conduct an annual
audit of the project‟s financial
statements. The external audit firm
will be selected under a competitive
basis and acceptable terms of
reference.
No
M-I
Overall Risk
H – High
M-I – Medium-I
M-I
M-L – Medium-L
L – Low
7. For purposes of comparing the new (ORAF) and current FM risk rating scales used for
PRIMA, the table below is referred too.
New FM Risk scale
Low
Medium Likelihood
Medium Impact
High
Risk Rating scale
Current FM Risk scale
Low
Moderate
Substantial
High
8. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements. With respect to the proposed project, it will
be implemented by a Policy and Planning Office (PPO) within the Fisheries Secretariat, staffed
by external and local project management specialists. The PPO will report each six months to a
multi-stakeholder National Steering Committee. The PPO will prepare an annual work program,
budget, update of the monitoring and evaluation indicators and procurement plan that would be
reviewed with the National Steering Committee and transmitted to the Regional Coordination
35
Unit at the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission. The PPO will be the “Accounting Officer” for
the project, assuming the overall responsibility for accounting for the project funds.
9. Budgeting Arrangements. The PPO will prepare annual budgets. This budget will be based on
an agreed annual work program, annual procurement plan and closely monitored during
implementation. The beneficiaries will draw up a detailed budget for activities to be carried out.
This budget will be consolidated by the PPO and after its validation by the Fisheries Secretariat,
and the national Program Steering Committee and will be submitted to the World Bank for
review, copied to the RCU.
10. Accounting Arrangements. The West African Accounting System (SYSCOA), the approved
accounting standards in use in the West Africa Economic Monetary Union (WAEMU) will be
applied. The grants account will be accounted by the Project on a cash basis. This will be
documented with appropriate records and procedures to track commitments and to safeguard
assets. Accounting records will be maintained in local currency (FCFA). The Chart of accounts
will facilitate the preparation of relevant quarterly and financial statements including information
on the total project expenditures, the financial contribution from IDA and GEF, and expenditures
by component.
11. An Administrative and Accounting manual of procedures will be developed and will provide
all the required details on accounting and financial procedures. It will set out in particular the
flow of accounting and financial information between the PPO, the Treasury Department, the
World Bank and the beneficiaries as well as the modalities and formats of periodic reports.
12. The PPO will establish a sound computerized information system that provides for adequate
segregation of functions, capable of recording all accounting transactions, and reporting correctly
all assets and liabilities of the project. This system will provide the following data: un -Audited
Interim Financial Report (IFR), financial statements, withdrawal applications, Bank
reconciliations and all financial reports needed. The books of accounts will also be maintained
electronically in this software.
13. Internal control and internal auditing arrangements. The Accountant in the PPO will be
responsible for ensuring that the control environment for implementation is adequate and
satisfactory. The duties and responsibilities of the Accountant will be documented in the
Administrative and Accounting Manual and include reviewing the internal control systems of all
projects manage by PPO. The Accountant also prepares quarterly work plan and audit programs
to facilitate review of the individual project. Quarterly report will be prepared and submitted to
the steering committee and the World Bank.
14. Disbursements. Two separate designated accounts (IDA and GEF) in FCFA will be opened
in the commercial bank on terms and conditions acceptable to the Bank. Those Accounts will be
managed by the director of Treasury in coordination with the Directorate of Fisheries. The DA
will be used for all payments financed by the Grants as indicated in the specific terms and
condition of the Financing Agreements. Transaction-supporting documentation for Statement of
Expenditures (SOE) will be retained and kept in a safe place by the PIU, which has the primary
responsibility for maintaining all documentation. The Disbursement Letter, which will form an
integral part of the Credit and the Grant Agreements, will provide details of the disbursement
methods, required documentation, DA ceiling and minimum application size. These will also be
discussed and agreed during negotiations of the Agreements.
36
Funds Flow Arrangements. Funds flow arrangements for the project (through the bank
accounts above) are as follows:
15.




PPO will prepare a four-month cash flow forecast based on agreed work plans then submit
the first withdrawal application request to the Bank (IDA).
IDA will process the withdrawal application and disburse funds to the Designated Account in
FCFA.
All project expenditures can be paid from the Designated Account, while the Disbursement
letter will have provisions for direct payments, reimbursements and special commitments.
Every month, the PPO will prepare withdrawal application request regarding the Account to
submit to IDA.
37
Flow of Funds and Information Diagram
World Bank
Credit Account
(Washington)
W. A.
PPO
IFR
Designated Account
(Commercial Bank)
Report/Invoices
Consultants & Suppliers
Legend
Payments to suppliers and consultants
Transfers of Funds
Direct Payments
IFR, Withdrawal Applications
Signature of Convention
Transmission of invoices, Implementation
Reports
38
16. Allocation of Financing Proceeds.
Finance Category
Project Component
Works, goods, nonconsulting services,
consultants‟ services,
training, , and
Operating Costs under
Sub-Components
2.2 and 4.2
Amount of IDA Grant Amount of GEF Grant
Allocated (US$ M)
Allocated (US$ M)
0.5
Parts 2.3 and 4.2 of
the Project
Works, goods, nonconsulting services,
consultants‟ services,
training, Lease
Payments and
Operating Costs:
Component 1, Sub- 4.6
Component
2.1
(except purchase of
a patrol vessel),
Component 3 and
Sub-Component 4.1
2.0
Parts 1, (except 2.1.1
(c)(iii)), 2.2, 3 and 4.1
of the Project
Goods under
2.1.1 (c)(iii)
TOTAL
Part Sub-Component 2.1 0.9
(purchase
of a
patrol vessel only)
6.0
2.0
17. Advance to the Designated Account. This method will be the main disbursement method for
the project. All replenishment or reimbursement applications will be submitted monthly or when
the Designated Account is reduced by one-third, whichever comes first. All replenishment or
reimbursement applications will be fully documented except for contracts under the prior review
threshold to be determined during the procurement assessment. SOE documentation will be
retained at the PPO for review by Bank staff and auditors.
18. Special Commitments and Direct Payments. Special Commitments using irrevocable letters
of credit can be used as disbursement method for the project. Direct payments to suppliers for
works, goods and services upon the borrower‟s request, may also be used for the project. Hence
challenges faced with disbursing through the designated account at country level will be
minimized.
19. Report-based Disbursements. The Project will initially use the transaction-based
disbursement method and may switch to IFR based disbursements once the PPO has become
fully familiar with the latter method. IDA will make the initial disbursement to the project after
receiving a withdrawal application with a six months cash flow forecast. This withdrawal
application should be prepared within one month after project effectiveness. Thereafter, IDA
will disburse into the respective Designated Account based on quarterly IFRs, which would
39
provide actual expenditure for the preceding quarter (3 months) and cash flow projections for the
next 2 quarters (6 months). The IFR together with the Withdrawal Application (WA) will be
reviewed by the Bank‟s Financial Management Specialist (FMS) and approved by the Task
Team Leader (TTL) before the request for disbursement is processed by the Bank‟s Loan
Department. The ceiling of the Designated Account will be flexible, and will be based on four
months of expenditures under transaction-based disbursements.
20. The IDA Disbursement Letter will provide details about each of the above disbursement
arrangements.
21. Financial Reporting Arrangements. The PPO will prepare and provide to the World Bank a
quarterly un-audited Interim Financial Report (IFR) and an Annual Financial Statements in form
and substance satisfactory to the World Bank. The IFR report will:
(a) Set forth sources and uses of funds for the Project, both cumulatively and for the
period covered by said report, showing separately funds provided under the Credit,
and explain variances between the actual and planned uses of such funds;
(b) Describe use of funds by activity/components, both cumulatively and for the period
covered by said report, and explain variances between the actual and planned Project
implementation.
22. Each IFR shall be furnished to the Association not later than 45 days after each subsequent
calendar quarter, and shall cover such calendar quarter. Formats for the IFR and financial
statements will be defined before negotiations and will be attached to the disbursement letter.
23. The IFRs submitted to the Bank will have a section on Financial Reporting and Disbursement
containing the following:
24. Reporting Section includes:
 Statement of Sources and Uses of Funds; and
 Statement of Uses of Funds by Project Activity/Component.
25. Disbursement Section includes:
 Designated Account (DA) Activity Statement;
 Bank Statements for both the Designated and Project Account;
 Summary Statement of DA Expenditures for Contracts subject to Prior Review; and
 Summary Statement of DA Expenditures not subject to Prior Review.
26. The Annual Financial Statements will be prepare in comply with International Accounting
Standards (IAS) and World Bank requirements. The Financial Statements will comprise of:
(a) A Statement of Sources and Uses of Funds;
(b) A statement of Commitments;
(c) The Accounting Policies Adopted and Explanatory Notes;
(d) A Management Assertion that Program funds have been expended for the intended
purposes as specified in the relevant Grant agreements.
40
27. The PPO will be required to produce, no later than June 30 of the following fiscal year,
audited annual financial statements. These financial statements will be subject to periodic audits
(see paragraph on audits).
28. Auditing Arrangements. External auditors with experience and qualifications satisfactory to
the Bank will be appointed to conduct an annual audit of the Project‟s financial statements. This
audit will be carried out in accordance with the International Standards on Auditing (ISA), and
will include such tests and controls, as the auditor considers necessary under the circumstances.
Besides expressing an opinion on the Project‟s financial statements in accordance with ISA, the
auditors will be expected to prepare report on internal controls, management letters giving
observations and comments, and providing recommendations for improvements in accounting
records, systems, controls and compliance with financial covenants in the Financing Agreement
of the Bank. The audit report and opinions on the financial statements including the management
letter and management response shall be submitted to IDA within six months of the end of the
Recipients fiscal year (June 30 of the close of the fiscal year). The audit TORs will be prepared
and agreed during negotiations. The auditors shall be appointed within 4 months after
effectiveness.
29. Financial Management Action Plan. The following actions need to be taken in order to
enhance the financial management arrangements for the Project:
Actions to be followed up during implementation
Develop an administrative and accounting manual of procedures
Establish a sound computerized information system
Hire an experienced accountant
Prepare the audit TOR
Deadline
1.
April 15, 2011
2.
June 30, 2011
3.
April 15, 2011
4.
Four months by
effectiveness
30. Financial Covenants. Financial covenants are the standard ones as stated in the Financing
Agreement Schedule 2, Section II (B) on Financial Management, Financial Reports and Audits
and Section 4.09 of the General Conditions.
31. Financial Management Supervision Plan. Supervision of the financial management
arrangements will be risk based. In this regard, in view of the overall financial management
residual risk rated for this project, the financial system will be reviewed and assessed at the
country level. Given the medium impact (3) risk rating associated with existing Financial
Management Arrangements one on-site supervision visit will be conducted each year by the
Bank Central Office Financial Management System to commensurate with the risk levels. This
on-site supervision will be complemented by desk review of the quarterly IFRs submitted to IDA
at the end of each calendar quarter and a sample physical verification progress. In addition, the
FM team will annually also review the audited project annual financial statements and the
auditor‟s report and management letter thereon.
32. Conclusion of the financial management assessment. The conclusion of the assessment is that
the financial management arrangements meet the Bank‟s minimum requirements unde r
OP/BP10.02. The overall residual risk rating for SSF is Medium-I hence the project will have an
on-field supervision at least twice a year. The financial management action plan outlines the
mitigating measures, which, if implemented, would strengthen the financial management
arrangements.
41
33. Procurement. Procurement will be carried out in accordance with the World Bank‟s
“Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits” published by the Bank in
January 2011; and “Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank
Borrowers” published by the Bank in January 2011, and the provisions sti pulated in the Legal
Agreement. The general description of various items under different expenditure category is
described below. For each contract to be financed by the Grants, the different procurement
methods or consultant selection methods, the need for prequalification, estimated costs, prior
review requirements, and time frame are agreed between the Borrower and the Bank project
team in the Procurement Plan. The Procurement Plan will be updated at least annually or as
required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in institutional
capacity.
34. National procurement regulatory framework. The regulatory framework in Guinea-Bissau is
governed by the national procurement Code which has been tested in five line Ministries; it was
agreed to extend its application to additional key line ministries and train the main users during a
short period before its generalization. However, this action has not been completed because there
were no means to do it and in addition to this, there was a political and military conflict at the
same period. No Country Procurement Assessment and Review (CPAR) has been conducted
recently in the country, but a PEMFAR exercise has been conducted in FY09. Following this
PEMFAR, the Government and the Bank agreed on a short and medium terms action plan that
will improve the efficiency and transparency of the national system, by reducing political
interference and strengthening internal and external controls. The new procurement institutional
framework will be strengthened with (i) a new Regulatory Body (ORCP) managed by
representatives from the private and public sectors and the civil society, and responsible for
policy, handling of complaints and audits; (ii) a strengthened procurement Directorate (DGCP)
for internal controls; and (iii) a new Central Procurement Agency responsible for all procurement
transactions. While waiting for the new procurement institutional framework to be fully
operational, the Government has issued a procurement notice to enforce the DGCP‟s controls.
35. While waiting for the new procurement institutional framework to be fully operational, the
Bank and the Government agreed on: (i) not increasing the prior review thresholds; and (ii)
enforcing the DGCP‟s internal controls of procurement transactions.
36. The political environment of the country is still fragile. However, there is a strong
commitment from the Government to: (i) set up a new procurement institutional framework, and
strengthen/enforce ex-ante reviews by the DGCP, and (ii) maintain and strengthen the capacities
of the MIRP‟s PIU as a mitigation measure at the level of the project.
37. The above-mentioned Code describes National Competitive Bidding (NCB) as the "open
competitive bidding" method (reference to the provision 12 of the procurement Code, which
mentions this method as the "Concurso Público Aperto"), i.e. “the open competitive bidding”.
38. In reference to the Code, under the provisions which provide the description of this method,
some limitations are not acceptable to the Bank. These are, among others: the decision that the
Code does not apply to small contracts defined as those under US$10,600 (equivalent to CFA 5
42
million at the rate of 1 US$ for CFA 470) for goods and services (services are generally
consulting services), and US$21,200 (equivalent to CFA 10 million) for works (Provision 8.1 of
the Code); the absence of review of those small contracts by DGCP (Direcção Geral dos
Concursos Publicos - General Directorate for Public Procurement) which is the procurement
control body in Guinea-Bissau (Provision 9 of the code); the use of domestic preference without
any indication of a possible limitation (Provision 11 of the code); the possible restriction of the
competition process in reference to the provision 25 of the Code which indicates that bidders
must satisfy the fiscal and para-fiscal obligations of the country; the absence of a clear obligation
that the award criteria must be listed among the minimum information required to be inserted in
the bidding documents (Provision 20 of the code); there is no clear definition of the contract
award criteria (Provision 33.1 of the code mentions only that the contract will be awarded to the
bidder who offers the best bid ("melhor proposta" as mentioned in Portuguese)); the absence of
indications on the obligation to assess the bidder's qualification prior to the contract award
(Provision 33.1 of the code); the minimum time frame for bid submission is very low (Provision
27 of the code indicates that minimum time frame is 15 days); the possibility for the contracting
authority to request that bids be presented in two internal envelopes while the Code indicate s no
distinction between works/goods and consulting services (Provision 30.7 of the code).
39. With regard to those provisions, in order that the NCB procedure becomes acceptable to
IDA to be used for NCB, the following special requirements will be taken into account : (i) four
weeks will be provided for preparation and submission of bids, after the issuance of the
Invitation for Bids or availability of the bidding documents, whichever is later; (ii) for all
procurement of goods and works, the Bank‟s Standard Bidding Documents (SBD) and bidding
documents if any, acceptable to the Bank will be used and modified in order to meet the
exceptions authorized under NCB; (iii) bids will be advertised in national newspapers with wide
circulation; (iv) bids will be presented and submitted only in one internal envelope (no system
with two envelopes will be used); (v) bid evaluation and bidder qualifications criteria will be
clearly specified in the bidding documents; (vi) no preference margin will be granted to domest ic
bidders; (vii) eligible firms, including foreign firms, will not be excluded from the competition;
(viii) the procedures will include the publication of the results of evaluation and of the award of
the contract, and provisions for bidders to protest; (ix) the project implementation agency will
work with borrower's relevant authority in order to require that procurement audit will be
included in the terms of reference of financial audits of the project; and (x) even though the Code
doesn't apply to small contracts, the procedures will require that for such contracts, a competitive
method be used (reference to other methods described in the paragraphs 8 and 9 of this annex. In
addition, any other adjustment will be taken into account when the Bank determin es during the
project execution as necessary in order to assure economy, efficiency, transparency, and broad
consistency with the provision included in the Section I of the Guidelines, will be amended.
40. Procurement of Works: No civil works are foreseen for this project.
41. Procurement of Goods: Goods procured under this project would include: under
Component 1, (i) equipments for institutional strengthening; and (ii) IT platform for Dashboard
under Component 2 (i) the supply of equipment for surveillance of vessels including VMS
technology; under Component 3 (i) office laboratory equipments and under Component 4 (i)
office vehicles; (ii) office furniture, fuel and other miscellaneous for the management of the
43
project. While the increased thresholds for ICB are not yet applied in Guinea-Bissau, ICB
procedures for goods will be used for all contracts equivalent to or above US$150,000. For
contracts less than US$150,000, NCB procedures may be used. The procurement will be done
using Bank‟s SBD for all ICB. For NCB contracts, there are no national SBD acceptable to the
Bank, the Borrower may use the Bank‟s SBDs and modify them while maintaining the
requirements in order to meet the exceptions authorized under NCB and National SBD agreed
with (or satisfactory to) the Bank as previously mentioned.
42. Procurement of non-consulting services: Non consulting services will include services for
the maintenance of vehicles and services related to the organization of training sessions. For such
service contracts less than US$50,000, the shopping process may be used.
43. Selection of Consultants: Consulting services will include contract management services,
services, the review of the National fisheries law, study on the policy regulatory frameworks,
services to sustain the capacity building program and services for financial audit, etc. While the
increased threshold for short-list composed of national consultants is not yet applied in GuineaBissau, short lists of consultants for services estimated to cost less than $100,000 equivalent per
contract may be composed entirely of national consultants in accordance with the provisions of
paragraph 2.7 of the Consultant Guidelines.
44. Operational Costs: Operating costs financed by the Project are incremental expenses,
including office supplies, vehicle operation and maintenance, maintenance of equipment,
communication costs, rental expenses, utilities expenses, consumable, transport and
accommodation, per diem, supervision costs and salaries of eligible consultants, provided that
these salaries are eligible to the World Bank financing. They will be procured using the
implementing unit's administrative and financial procedures, which were detailed in the project
administrative and financial manuals, reviewed and found acceptable to the Bank.
45. Assessment of the agency’s capacity to implement procurement. Procurement activities
will be carried out at a national level by a Policy and Planning Office (PPO) within the Fisheries
Secretariat. The overall regional coordination activities will be carried out by a Regional
Coordination Unit within the CRSP in Senegal. The PPO will be responsible for overall
procurement supervision, control of the compliance with the agreed procedures and of the time frame. PPO will also be acting as the Bank‟s counterpart and directly responsible for reporting to
the Bank. The Policy and Planning Office will be equipped with satisfactory number of qualified,
seasoned fiduciary staff.
46. An assessment of the capacity of the Implementing Agency to implement procurement
actions for the project has been carried out by Aissata Zerbo, Procurement Analyst (The World
Bank) in November 2010. The assessment reviewed the organizational structure for
implementing the project and the interaction between the project‟s staff responsible for
procurement and the Ministry‟s relevant central unit for administration and finance.
47. The staff of the technical entities in charge of the implementation of the project lack of
sufficient qualification in procurement and this situation may be a constraint in the project
implementation. In addition, the procurement control body, i.e. the DGCP (Direcção General dos
44
Concursos Públicos), while in place with new texts which should empower its function, has not
the relevant resources and capacities to fulfill its mandate.
48. There are some risks concerning the procurement component for implementation of the
project that have been identified; they include:

Lack of control from the procurement control body at the national level, i.e. the
DGCP, due to insufficient staff resources;

Insufficient capacity in procurement processing, procurement plans and contract
management (including possible delay in contract payments)

Possible deficiencies in record keeping, in particular in the case of many
intervenient and many contracts; and

Political interference at the national level which may be susceptible to corrupt
practices.
49. The corrective measures which have been agreed are:

The Government has issued an official notice to enforce ex-ante controls by the
DGCP. In addition, the DGCP will establish and implement a supervision
program for procurement transactions to be financed under the project. The Bank
will maintain low prior review thresholds in order to ensure fiduciary compliance
of procurement financed under the project;

Awareness-raising and training sessions to be held in procurement processing, in
drafting and updating procurement plans and in contract management (including
celerity in contract payments) at the benefit of all parties and stakeholders
involved in the procurement implementation. The technical structures of
specialized Ministries will be involved as technical support for drafting technical
specifications, TORs, supervising contract execution and controlling delivery of
goods. In addition, the Policy and Planning Office (PPO) may plan to hire
qualified procurement consultants for technical assistance in procurement.

The PPO will have to pay attention to the periodical update of procurement plans
and to record keeping and filing systems. The manual of procedures should reflect
these requirements and furthermore, the procurement control body and the
Regulatory body will have to supervise such requirements when they become
functional;

DGCP to perform its control and ensure that the procurement decisions are
consistent with the procedures and not affected by any political interferences. The
Bank will support the setting up of the new procurement institutional framework
for controls and oversight of procurement transactions. In addition, the project
may benefit from the new framework in public procurement, which includes a
new Regulatory Body (ORCP) managed by representatives from the private and
public sectors and the civil society, and responsible for policy, handli ng of
complaints and audits: this may reduce political interference and improve
governance in the procurement process.
45
50. The overall project risk for procurement is high. However, because most of the contracts
under this project are small contracts, the implementation of the mitigation measures as stated
above may bring the risk from high to moderate.
51. Procurement Plans. The Borrower has developed a Procurement Plan for the project
implementation which take into account the initial activities and which provide the basis for the
procurement methods. This plan will be reviewed and agreed between the Bank and the Project
Team. The agreed plan will be available at the office of the Policy and Planning Office in Bissau.
It will also be available in the Project‟s database and in the Bank‟s external website. The
Procurement Plan will be updated by the Project Team annually or as required to reflect the
actual project implementation needs and improvements in institutional capacity.
52. Frequency of Procurement Supervision. In addition to the prior review supervision to be
carried out from Bank offices, the capacity assessment of the Implementing Agency has
recommended two supervision missions per year to visit the field and to carry out post review of
procurement actions during one of these missions.
53. Procurement Packages with Methods and Time Schedule:
Re
f
No
Contract (Description)
Estimated
Cost (US$)
Procurement
Method
P-Q
Domestic
Preference
Review
by Bank
Expected
Bid
Opening
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1. Goods and Works
(a) List of contract Packages which would be procured following ICB or NCB
COMPONENT 1: GOOD GOVERNANCE AND SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF THE FISHERIES
1 Equipment for institutional strengthening
75,000
NCB
NO
NO
POST
4/5/11
COMPONENT 2: REDUCTION OF ILLEGAL FISHING
2
3
4
Leasing surveillance vessel for EEZ
operations
MCS/office equipment and maintenance
for surveillance stations (5), including setup of VMS technology to track vessels
Equipment of the MCS command center,
including set-up of VMS technology to
track vessels
2 000,000
ICB
NO
NO
PRIOR
10/6/11
500,000
ICB
NO
NO
PRIOR
13/4/11
250,000
NCB
NO
NO
PRIOR
30/4/11
COMPONENT 3: INCREASING THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE MARINE FISH
RESOURCES TO THE LOCAL ECONOMIES
5
Office and laboratory equipment
250,000
NCB
NO
NO
1. Consultancy Assignments with Selection Methods and Time Schedule
46
PRIOR
30/4/11
2 - Consulting Services
List of Consulting Assignments
Re
f.
N
o.
Description of Assignment
1
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Estimated
Cost
(US$)
3
Selection
Method
Review
by the
Bank
Expected
Proposal
Submission
Comments
4
5
6
7
COMPONENT 1: GOOD GOVERNANCE AND SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF THE FISHERIES
Selection of consultant for the review of the
(i) institutional arrangements for the
National Strategic Plan (ii) aspects of the
279,000
QCBS
PRIOR
8/7/11
future fisheries law and
integration/coordination with other national
efforts - workshop facilitation
Consultant for research cruises for fish stock
assessments- stock assessments of the main
546,000
SINGLE SOURCE
PRIOR
24/6/11
three fisheries (coastal shrimp, cephalopods,
demersal fish )Selection of consultant for Study of the
24,000
IC
PRIOR
23/3/11
climate change impacts on the main fish
stocks and dependent coastal communities
Selection of consultant Study on the status of
60,000
IC
PRIOR
23/3/11
the ecosystem in the coastal areas covering
physical, chemical and biological aspects
Selection of Consultant for (i) building a
statistical sampling system for the artisanal
132,000
IC
PRIOR
20/2/11
fisheries- (ii) training of researchers in
statistics, database, and stock assessments
Selection of Consultant for (i) Modeling
exercise to test different management
measures and determine which one would
Quality based
60,000
PRIOR
8/7/11
sustainably maximize the benefits in the
selection QBS
fishery (ii) Bioeconomic model analysis for
the coastal shrimp, cephalopod and demersal
fisheries
Selection of Consultant to determine the
current regulatory status of Co-management
180,000
QCBS
POST
27/5/11
arrangements and policy framework needed
to evolve towards TURFs + assist with
evolution towards TURFs.
Selection of Permanent technical assistant to
312,000
QCBS
PRIOR
10/3/11
MCS effort
Selection of trainer for training (i) of fiscap
observers for EEZ patrols (ii) of staff for rapid
250,000
QCBS
PRIOR
10/3/11
response and MCS stations (iii) of staff for
control center
COMPONENT 3: INCREASING THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE MARINE FISH RESOURCES TO THE LOCAL ECONOMIES
Selection of Technical assistant to the
84,000
QCBS
POST
9/2/11
department (including development of
annual work plans and budgets)
47
54. Environmental and Social (including safeguards). Unlike many of the other countries
participating in the West Africa Regional Fisheries Program, Guinea-Bissau does not have a
tradition or culture of fishing. Many coastal communities engage in farming foremost, rather
than fishing. For this reason, the country has always employed a strategy of essentially „renting
out‟ its fish resources, by selling access to the fisheries to foreign and/or industrial fleets in the
form of licenses. This is unlikely to change in the near to medium term, and the focus of this
investment is on helping the Government better manage these largely foreign fisherie s, reduce
the high volume of illegal fishing that is occurring in these waters right now (again largely from
foreign and/or industrial vessels). Therefore, unlike in many of the other countries in the
WARFP, the project is not expected to have significant social impacts as it supports a transition
to greater management over access to the resources. The majority of the project‟s activities will
concentrate on fisheries resource management at the national scale, rather than specific
interventions or access restrictions at the local or community scale.
55. However, given the program‟s long-term objective of strengthening management of the fish
resources, the potential for involuntary restrictions on traditional access to the fish resources as a
result of World Bank investments must be considered. Throughout the region the marine fish
resources are utilized through a system of open access that has allowed essentially more fishers
and fishing pressure than the resources can sustain. The program addresses this constraint by
supporting governments like Guinea-Bissau to transition away from open access to more
regulated fisheries, where access to specific areas or types of fisheries would be controlled or
restricted. The Regional Process Framework, which has been developed, reviewed and cleared
by the World Bank for the first phase of the APL, has been provided to the Government of
Guinea-Bissau for guidance on consultations and addressing any potential issues arising from
restriction of access and impacts on livelihoods. In addition, the Government of Guinea-Bissau
has committed itself to undertake, not later than September 30, 2012, a social assessment of the
impact of the Project on the management of its fisheries resources upon terms of reference
satisfactory to the Association and, on the basis thereon, implement measures satisfactory to the
Association to minimize and mitigate adverse social impacts, if any, especially those affecting
poor and vulnerable groups.
56. The project will support small works and goods for strengthened surveillance of the fisheries
under component 2, but these are expected to have relatively minor impacts on the environment.
These small works include rehabilitation to coastal surveillance stations and landing sites, as well
as to coastal patrol vessels. Potential impacts may result from physical rehabilitation to
surveillance stations, as well as fuel discharge from patrol vessels. Because the specific
rehabilitations and patrols may shift during the course of implementation to respon d to evolving
illegal fishing activities and challenges, the Government has prepared an Environmental and
Social Management Framework (ESMF), with appropriate budget and resources included in the
project to ensure implementation of the Framework. The ESMF includes the biophysical and
soci-economic environment, legal, policy and institutional framework including the role of sub national institutional. The ESMF identifies the impacts and outlines mitigation measures to
address them. The Framework also outlines the capacity issues, and monitoring and Evaluation,
timetable and a budget and public consultations. The Fisheries Secretariat has weak capacity on
safeguards issues and associated World Bank procedures. Nonetheless, the Regional
48
Coordinating Unit (RCU) for the project will be working with the country teams on the
safeguards and with the support of reputable and knowledgeable consultants in country. In order
to enable Government play its role of monitoring and evaluating the safeguards activities and do
proper reviews, the in country team will be trained on the policies and their responsibilities on
safeguards as is relevant to their total performance.
57. The project does not trigger the OP 4.12, based on footnote 8 of the policy6, which indicates
that the operational policy does not apply to regulations of natural resources on a regional,
national and/or sub-national level (such as watershed management, ground water management,
fisheries management, coastal zone management, etc.) unless such activities or regulation
involve Bank-assisted investments that require the taking of land – which is not the case with this
project. As part of due diligence, a number of measures have been put in place to ensure that the
project focuses on activities agreed upon at project preparation stage, and does not involve land
acquisition/involuntary resettlement. The project‟s consultations indicate the communities‟
commitment to ensuring sustainability of the natural resources-fisheries. As good practice, the
government will conduct the aforementioned (paragraph 55 above) social assessment and
include actions that will ensure that there are no negative impacts on vulnerable groups as a
result of project activities but rather that such groups tend to benefit.
58. Monitoring & Evaluation. The monitoring and evaluation (M&E) plan of the project is
based the key indicators detailed in the results monitoring section in Annex 1. Overall
achievement of the PDO will be measured through a combination of measures of the triple
bottom line for Guinea-Bissau‟s fisheries: (i) environmental health, (ii) economic profitability
and (iii) social equitability. Key indicators have been chosen taking into account the information
they provide, as well as the costs and feasibility for any additional data gathering.
59. The key indicator for the environmental health of the fish stocks is a practical measure based
simply on the trend in local landings of target species per unit of fishing capacity (which would
represent a larger basket of species targeted by the fishery, such as one or two species
representing the broader group of coastal demersal species). Landings are certainly a rough
measure of the health of the resources underpinning a fishery, but one that is easily collected.
Similarly, in terms of a measure of units of fishing capacity, those that are currently available in
the country are the number of different types of fishing vessels that are operating. This is not the
ideal indicator, and does not include other dimensions of fishing capacity such as vessel
horsepower and types of fishing, but it does provide a proxy of landings per unit of fishing
capacity, based on readily available information that can be used as a baseline. Furthermore, a
stabilization or increase in local landings per vessel of targeted fish, in conjunction with a
reduction of fishing capacity and the introduction of secure fishing rights, can provide a good
indication of the health of the resources. A stabilization or increase in landings per fishing vesse l
in fully or overexploited fisheries is meant to track an increase in the actual biomass of the stock,
so long as fishing effort remains relatively constant. This information and indicator can be easily
fed back into community monitoring efforts as well, to influence local management decisions.
Further complementary work has been conducted by FAO on the state of the fish stocks in the
6
Management informed the Executive Directors in April 2010 of a “Clarification of OP 4.12, Footnote 8 regarding
Application of Land Use Planning Projects” (SecM2010 -0199).
49
region over a much longer time horizon, that will also provide information to monitor the health
of the resource base.7
60. In terms of the economic indicator on the increase in wealth generated by targeted fisheries,
the project has prepared a bio-economic model of the targeted fisheries, based on the best data
available. The model provides a measurement of the net economic benefits to Ghana from the
fisheries, based on the sum of: (i) the profits to vessel owners, (ii) the net income of the crew (i.e.
returns to labor), and (iii) the net transfers to Government. The key data inputs needed for the
model for the targeted fisheries are: (i) fishing effort in the fishery (number and type of vessels),
(ii) fish landed, (iii) capital and operating costs of vessels, and (iv) local fish product price data.
This information has been collected for the baseline, and will be collected by the Fisheries
Department to be entered into the fisheries statistics „Dashboard‟ supported by the project in
Component 1.1.
61. In terms of the social indicator, the project will monitor for an increase in the average
household wealth status for fishing households in targeted communities (including comparisons
with non-target community households). Data will be collected for household wealth based on a
repeat of the social surveys (i.e. Citizen Report Cards) at mid-term and before the end of project.
62. Role of Partners. The project will be carried out in close cooperation with the European
Union (EU), who provides direct support to the fisheries sector via its foreign fisheries
agreement with the Government of Guinea-Bissau. Similarly, the RCU will ensure that the SubRegional Fisheries Commission supports project implementation, including collaboration with
regional donor initiatives housed at the Commission, such as the EU‟s regional fisheries
surveillance project. Lastly, the project will coordinate closely with other stakeholders in
maritime surveillance, including ECOWAS, the United Nations and the United States, in order to
develop potential partnerships.
7
Garcia, S. (2009) Rising to Depletion? Measuring the Progress of Countries towards the WSSD Objective for
Fisheries Resources.
50
Annex 4: Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF)
Project Development Objective(s)
To strengthen the Guinea-Bissau’s capacity to govern and manage targeted fisheries, reduce illegal fishing and increase local value added to
fish products
PDO Level Results
Indicators:
Risk Category
Project
Stakeholder
Risks
Stakeholder
Risks
Implementing
Agency Risks
Summary
1. Overexploited fisheries show signs of a recovery, as measured by an increase in total landings per unit of
fishing effort (e.g. number of fishing vessels)
2. Increase in annual net economic benefits to Guinea Bissau from targeted fisheries
Risk Rating
Risk Description
High
The success of investments to reduce illegal
fishing and therefore strengthened
sustainability of the fisheries depends on the
willingness of the Borrower to prosecute
illegal fishing activities.
The Program provides for transparent
publication of information on infractions
and prosecutions, to encourage public
monitoring, as well as monitoring by
multi-stakeholder national steering
committees. The Program also supports
communications and involvement by
journalists and NGOs, to help ensure that a
multiple number of stakeholders monitor
these activities. This risk is most prevalent
early in implementation, so the Program
will need to ensure transparency and
multi-stakeholder involvement from an
early stage.
High
Weak capacity of the Fisheries Secretariat is a
high risk.
The project is designed based on
integrating technical assistance into the
Proposed Mitigation Measure
51
implementing agency, as well as training
budgets. Furthermore, the RCU will
provide ongoing capacity building from
Dakar. Over the medium term, the project
will support an institutional review to
implement new human resource policies
and incentives and identify clear revenue
streams to strengthen the capacity of the
Fisheries Secretariat.
Governance of the sector is extremely weak,
as license provisions are often ignored by
users or not enforced.
Risk of corruption in the Implementing
Agency may impact project implementation,
with regards to fiduciary matters as well as
effective governance of the sector to meet the
project development objectives
The project is designed with a component
focused specifically on strengthening
governance, and on building capacity in
the implementing agency. There will be
high levels of investment to address this
risk. This risk is explicitly addressed in
project design.
Bank assistance and dialogue are designed
to give strong support to the anticorruption agenda, strengthening the
institutions at local and central levels
charged with the responsibility of ensuring
transparency and accountability in the
sector.
Annual audit by professionally qualified
auditors, with terms of reference
acceptable to IDA, will be undertaken.
Close project supervision and expenditure
monitoring through the periodic financial
52
reporting arrangements will highlight
issues impacting potential fraud and
corruption and thus support remedial
measures
Project Risks
Design Risk
Medium Impact
Social and
Environmental
Risk
Medium Impact
Delivery Quality
Risk
Medium - I
Risk that design is too complex
The project is designed to try to reduce
complexity to every extent possible, and to
pilot new approaches, so that a „learningby-doing‟ model is adopted. This risk will
be prevalent throughout design and
implementation.
Risk that fisheries surveillance will result in
The project aims to support the
the enforcement of management measures on Government to conduct fisheries
coastal communities, causing negative social surveillance activities targeted largely to
impacts
the industrial fisheries, which should
provide benefits to coastal communities,
whose fishers may compete with such
vessels. The Regional Process
Framework, which has been developed,
reviewed and cleared by the World Bank
for the first phase of the APL, has been
provided to the Government of GuineaBissau for guidance on consultations and
addressing any potential issues arising
from restriction of access and impacts on
livelihoods. In terms of any potential
environmental risks from equipping
surveillance stations and conducting
patrols, the project has prepared an
Environmental and Social Management
Framework.
Risk of project teams unavailable to monitor
The project team has been organized
and provide implementation support to project around the use of external „implementation
53
Other Risks
Medium - I
Reputational risk in successful fisheries
surveillance activities that overstep the
Bank‟s mandate.
Overall Risk Rating at
Preparation
Overall Risk Rating During
Implementation
High
High
8
support‟ consultants, who are contracted
by the Bank with the sole task of
providing implementation support to the
Borrower, and reporting frequently to the
task team.
The project will follow the new Guidance
Note on IDA/IBRD financing for fisheries
enforcement operations, and accordingly
only finance fisheries surveillance
operations, to implement fisheries laws
aimed at increasing the economic benefits
from the use of these resources. Projectfinanced goods under component 2 will
only be used for fisheries surveillance,
according to specific clauses in the legal
agreements drafted on the basis of the
Guidance Note. This risk should be
monitored throughout implementation.8
Comments
Ratings reflect the significant overarching countrylevel risks associated with the unstable political and
weak macro-economic environments that exist.
Per instructions in the Guidance Note, the Legal Agreement for the project will specify that patrol vessels leased with funds from the project will only be used
for fisheries surveillance missions.
54
Annex 5: Implementation Support Plan
1. The strategy for implementation support (IS) has been developed based on the nature of the
project and its risk profile. It will aim at making implementation support to the client flexible and
efficient, and will focus on implementation of the risk mitigation measures defined in the ORAF.
2. Most Bank team members will be in the Senegal country office, with support from technical and
operational staff in Washington, to ensure timely, efficient and effective implementation support
to the client. Formal supervision and field visits will be carried out semi-annually. Detailed
inputs from the Bank team are outlined below.

Technical Input. Supervision will ensure sufficient technical oversight is provided to
liaise closely with the PPO to: (a) monitor progress of implementation towards
achievement of project objectives; (b) review Terms of References and other project
implementation documentation; (c) provide guidance on sector specific issues as well as
project specific issues as they arise through implementation; and (d) conduct missions as
necessary to assess project implementation and provide detailed guidance and support to
PPO. Technical support is expected to include a Fisheries Specialist and other technical
skills that may be needed as issues arise throughout implementation supervision. The
Fisheries Specialist will be based in Dakar, and likely to spend as much as 3 to 4 months
in Bissau over the first year of implementation.

Procurement. Implementation support will include: (a) providing supervision/training to
members of the procurement unit supporting the implementation of the project, as well as
to the Program Coordinator and PPO; (b) reviewing procurement documents; (c)
providing detailed guidance on the Bank‟s Procurement Guidelines; and (d) monitoring
procurement progress against the detailed Procurement Plan.

Financial Management. Supervision will focus on the review of the project‟s financial
management system, including accounting, reporting and internal controls. The Bank
team will also work with the Program Coordinator and PPO to assist in coordination
among different departments and units for financial management and reporting.

Environmental and Social Safeguards. The Bank team will support the Government in
the implementation of the agreed Environmental Management Plan and provide guidance
to the client to address any issues.

Implementation Support. Following the model of other investments of the West Africa
Regional Fisheries Program, the team will recruit an „implementation support‟ consultant,
whose terms of reference will concentrate on providing direct technical and
implementation support to the PPO, as well as to the Bank team. This will be a senior
specialist, particularly with knowledge of fisheries surveillance systems, who would
spend as much as four to six months per year in Bissau over the first two years of project
implementation.

Regional Coordination. The project will benefit from ongoing support from the
Regional Coordination Unit of the West Africa Regional Fisheries Program, based in the
Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission in Dakar. Experts in this unit will provide M&E
and fiduciary support, as well as sharing lessons learned from investments in neighboring
countries, and facilitating opportunities for regional collaboration.
55
I. Summary of implementation support
Time
Focus
Project
Project implementation
Year 1
Project
Years
2-5
Resource
Procurement Specialist
Fisheries Specialist (Dakar)
Implementation Support Sp.
Time
3 SWs
10 SWs
15 SW
Financial management
supervision
Financial management
specialist
2 SWs
Task team leadership,
Institutional arrangements
and project supervision
coordination
TTL
5 SWs
Project implementation
Environment and Social
monitoring and reporting
Procurement Specialist
Fisheries Specialist (Dakar)
Implementation Support Sp.
Environmental Specialist
Social Specialist
Financial management
monitoring and reporting
Financial Management
Specialist
2 SWs
Task team leadership
TTL
5 SWs
II. Required skills mix
Skills Needed
Fisheries Specialist
Implementation Support
Specialist
Task Team Leader
Environmental Specialist
Procurement
Financial Management
Operations
III. Partners
Name
CSRP
Number of Staff Weeks
12+ SW per year during first
two years
20 SW per year during first
two years
5 SWs annually
3 SWs annually
4 SWs annually
3 SWs annually
2 SWs annually
Country
Senegal
4 SWs
10 SWs
15 SW
2 SWs
2 SWs
Number of Trips
Multiple
Comments
Dakar-based
Multiple
Focused on
fisheries surv.
Field based
Field trips as required
Two
Field trip as required
Field trip as required
As needed
Field based
Field based
Role
Providing ongoing implementation
support, guidance on lessons learned
from neighboring countries,
facilitating regional collaboration
56
Annex 6: Team Composition
World Bank staff and consultants who worked on the project:
Name
Oleg Martens
Joaquim Tenreiro
Carolyn Winter
Beatrix AllahMensah
Ellyn Tynan
Jingjie Chu
Claudia Ocana
Rajiv Sondhi
Osval Romao
Aissata Zerbo
Carmen Pereira
Eric Dacosta
Virginie Vaselopulos
Alyson Kleine
John Virdin
Title
Unit
Fisheries Specialist, Consultant
Sr. Fisheries Specialist, Consultant
Sr. Social Development Specialist
Social Development Specialist
ARD
AFTEN/ARD
AFTCS
AFTCS
Sr. Environmental Specialist
Young Professional
Sr. Counsel
Sr. Finance Officer
Sr. Financial Management Specialist
Procurement Specialist
Liaison Officer
Team Assistant
Program Assistant
Operations Analyst
Task Team Leader
AFTEN
AFTEN/ARD
LEGAF
CTRFC
AFTFM
AFTU2
AFMGW
AFMGW
AFTEN
WBICC
AFTEN
57
Annex 7: Economic & Financial Analysis
A.
Program Overview
1.
An economic and financial analysis of the project was conducted, based on a quantitative
economic model developed for the country‟s fisheries and the proposed investment. The
calculation cannot capture the benefit of all the diverse activities of the project due to time and
resources constrains, such as the value of public and community capacity strengthening and
stakeholder technical and managerial support. This annex summarizes the findings of these
analyses.
B.
Overview of Program Cost and Benefits
2.
The proposed investment is divided into four components, totalling US$8 million (see
Annex II for details):
 Component 1: good governance and sustainable management of the fisheries ($2 m GEF)
 Component 2: reduction of illegal fishing ($4.8 m IDA)
 Component 3: increasing the contribution of the fish resources to the local economy ($0.5 m
IDA)
 Component 4: coordination, monitoring and evaluation and project management ($0.7 m
IDA).
3.
There are a range of benefits that will be generated from these four classes of
investments, including:
 Increased profitability of fisheries and higher economic returns from the sector;
 Improved marine and fisheries conservation outcomes;
 Poverty reduction for coastal and inland fishing communities; and
 Increased food security.
4.
Some of these are monetary benefits that can be quantified (e.g., revenue, profits, rents)
and some are non-monetary benefits that are less easily quantified (e.g., increased food security
and conservation of fisheries and marine resources). Many of the non-monetary benefits,
however, will also support economic development through their effects on improving fishery
stocks and harvests. Furthermore, because of the transboundary nature of the fisheries resources
in the region, significant externalities exist, with interventions and activities in the sector in
Guinea-Bissau likely to have significant positive effects on neighboring countries. Therefore, the
overall benefits from this program are therefore likely to be greater than the estimated monetary
value of the benefits given below.
5.
Because a number of components and subcomponents are being simultaneously
implemented and have overlapping relationships, expected benefits cannot be isolated as a
function of each investment but can be analyzed with respect to their total expected effects on the
fishery sectors and subsectors. General expected benefits include:
58













C.
Improved management capacity and efficiency
Rebuilt overfished coastal fish stocks and increased harvests
Improved negotiation power due to better resource management
Reduction in excess (illegal) fishing effort and increase (legal) catch and catch per unit
effort
Increased (legal) ex-vessel revenues
Reduction in fishing costs
Increased profits and rents
Improved marine and freshwater habitats and biodiversity
Increased amount and quality of fisheries data
Increased stakeholder self governance and rational management incentives
Redistribution of existing wealth from foreign companies to local businesses
Improved access to foreign markets due to improved sanitary conditions during
processing and cold storage
Increased coordination of fisheries management, surveillance, monitoring, and sector
development activities
Valuation of Project Benefits
6.
A model was developed to estimate the quantifiable direct benefits generated by the
project. Information on historical license fee, landing values, and number of employment were
collected from published sources or from previous studies, as well as from preparation missions.
Due to the limited data, various reasonable assumptions had to be made in order to estimate
potential economic benefits of the projects. The following sections briefly describe the current
economic performance of the fishery sector in Guinea-Bissau. From this baseline, two scenarios
were then modelled to estimate future benefits over 30 years, one being a “business as usual”
without-project scenario, and the other with-project scenario incorporating assumptions based on
the investments and associated reforms implemented through various project components.
Current economic performance of Guinea-Bissau’s fisheries
7.
Despite a coastline of about 280 km, the continental shelf of Guinea-Bissau covers
approximately 45,000 of the 150,000 square kilometers of the country‟s waters, with shallow
depths, making it one of the largest among the countries of West Africa. However, due to the
predominance of an agricultural tradition in Guinea-Bissau, it is foreign artisanal and industrial
fishermen who have traditionally caught most of the fish in the country‟s coastal waters, in many
cases outside the control and regulation of the Government.
8.
In the artisanal fishery, the total number of national and foreign artisanal fishermen has
been estimated between 3,362 and 10,000. They are using between 656 and 1,200 canoes, of
which about 14 to 20 percent are motorized. In the 1991-93 period, the artisanal catches were
estimated at 26,000 to 30,000 tonnes (with a total value of US$17 to 19 million) and in 1995 at
59
50,000 tonnes, mostly sold in neighbouring Senegal and Guinea-Conakry. In 1997, FAO
estimated the domestic artisanal catches at 5,400 tonnes, about 10 percent of the total catch. In
2000, IUCN survey data estimated there were 107 domestic canoes, of which 29 have motors.
9.
Industrial fishing is permitted only in waters beyond 12 nautical miles from the coast,
according to the regulations in Guinea-Bissau. In the 2004-06 period, between 215 and 237
fishing licenses were granted to industrial vessels for periods that varied between 3 and 12
months. However, the average month presence of these vessels declined from 103 to 83 vessels
as well as the catch per unit of effort, particularly in the prawn and cephalopod trawling fleets.
As shown in Figure 1, the total number of licenses, indicated by the total gross registered tonnes
(GRT) has been declining in during 2004 to 2006. The total revenues from fishing license fees,
including vessel fees, foreign fishing agreement vessel fees and foreign fishing agreement
compensations (including the foreign fishing agreement with the European Union), has dropped
from US$19.1 million in 2003 to US$14.4 million in 2006. Meanwhile, a significant number of
vessels are operating illegally in the waters under Guinea-Bissau‟s jurisdiction. In 2006, 99
fishing boats were intercepted, 13 of which were fined for fishing without a license.
Figure 1 Licensed Gross Registered Tonnes (GRT) for Trawl Fisheries
10.
Post-catch activities are very limited in Guinea-Bissau. Generally all of the industrial
fishing vessels are unloading their catch in Dakar, Abidjan and Las Palmas, which is then sent on
to the regional and European markets. Artisanal processing currently reaches the equivalent of
30,000 to 40,000 tonnes/year of fresh fishing produce, of which about 5,400 tonnes comes from
national operators, an important part of which is processed by artisanal methods. This reflects the
small size of the local market (and hence local demand), as well as the lack of adequate
infrastructures and services, fiscal regime and the investment climate in general.
Model Outputs
11.
The model outputs presented in the analysis are as follows:
60

Net Economic Benefits (NEB) for each sector. This is sometimes referred to as economic
rent, which is the return to owners and participants including skippers/crew after all variable
and fixed costs as well as depreciation costs, capital cost, 9 and opportunity cost of labor are
accounted. This measure appropriately in economic terms treats labor as a cost. However,
the cost of labor, which is a share of the net revenue (estimated as total revenue minus
operational costs10), is not subtracted directly. Instead, the opportunity cost of labor, as the
maximum alternative employment, is used in the calculation. 11

Resource Rents (RR) for each sector. The concept of Resource Rents should not be confused
with Net Economic Benefits. Resource Rents further assume there is an allowance for normal
profit. In this analysis, a margin of 20 percent was adopted based on the Namibian hake
fishery study done by Lange and Motinga (1997).

Distribution among three groups, including (i) net benefits to crew/workers, (ii) net income
to vessel or company owner, and (iii) net transfers to government. The model did not
consider taxes on sector profits.

Net Present Value (NPV). This is the sum of the annual values for each benefit category
discounted over a 30-year period.
Scenario 1: Business-as-Usual
12.
The baseline scenario assumes no change in the legal, institutional or policy framework
for the fisheries sector in Guinea-Bissau. For the artisanal fishery, the model assumes a 5 percent
annual declining rate of the harvest and number of fishing fleet for the first 10 years and then a
stabilization for the next 20 years in both the motorized and non-motorized canoe sectors, due to
the secondary nature of the fishery and unhealthy status of the fishery. There is no cost data
available to get a precise idea of the situation, such as net economic benefit. Given the similar
characteristics of this sector with the neighbouring country, the cost data of Senegal, including
the cost of hull, engine, fuel, crew provision, landing cost, etc. were applied to conduct the
analysis for Guinea-Bissau.
13.
As shown in Table 1, the non-motorized canoe sector will generate approximately US$1
million revenue12, leading to $603,595 net economic benefit and $395,008 resource rent (subtract
20 percent of normal profit on the base of net economic benefit) on Year 5. The crew members
will share $761,624 returns and the owners of the boats will make $222,783 net profit. The net
9
Depreciation and capital costs are separately estimated as annual costs for each canoe power category in the
economic model. Assumptions were made about hull, motor, gear, and other equipment lifespan and salvage value
to calculate straight-line depreciation; and, other assumptions were promulgated for loan terms to determine
opportunity cost of capital.
10
Operational costs include trip variable costs (fuel, bait, expendable gear, etc.) and non -trip fixed costs (moorage,
etc.)
11
The additional assumption is that the labor market works smoothly in the region. We have little information on
the set of skills of fishers' families and alternative employment possibilities, thus we simply assume there is a 50
percent probability that alternative labor opportunities exist for same or higher wages.
12
The exchange rate is 1USD=528 XOF (average of monthly exchange rate in 2006).
61
present value (NPV) over 30 years under 10 percent discount rate for net economic benefit is
over $5.3 million. The government does not get any returns because there is no license system.
Table 1 Baseline Situation for Artisanal Non-Motorized Canoe Sector
Basecase (non-motorized canoe)
0
5
78
Average number of vessels operating
10
60
47
15
47
20
47
25
47
30
NPV (10%)
47
2,160
1,671
1,293
1,293
1,293
1,293
1,293
1,347,840
1,042,933
807,002
807,002
807,002
807,002
807,002
$9,214,664
Net Economic Benefit (USD)
780,059
603,595
467,050
467,050
467,050
467,050
467,050
$5,332,964
Resource Rent (USD)
510,491
395,008
305,650
305,650
305,650
305,650
305,650
$3,490,031
Returns to labor (USD)
984,289
761,624
589,330
589,330
589,330
589,330
589,330
$6,729,206
Returns to owners (USD)
Returns to government (license fee) (USD)
287,915
222,783
172,385
172,385
172,385
172,385
172,385
$1,968,361
Total Harvest (ton)
Total Reveune (USD)
Distribution of benefit
14.
The motorized canoe sector will generate about $1.5 million in annual revenue in Year 5,
leading to $991,190 net economic benefit and $678,310 resource rent (Table 2). The returns to
labor are nearly $800,000 and returns to owner are approximately $500,000. The net present
value (NPV) over 30 years under 10 percent discount rate for net economic benefit is $8.8
million. Again, the government does not get any returns because of no license system.
Table 2 Baseline Situation for Artisanal Motorized Canoe Sector
Basecase (motorized canoe)
Average number of vessels operating
Total Harvest (ton)
Total Reveune (USD)
Net Economic Benefit (USD)
Resource Rent (USD)
Distribution of benefit
Returns to labor (USD)
Returns to owners (USD)
Returns to government (license fee) (USD)
0
5
10
15
20
25
29
3,240
2,021,760
1,289,582
885,230
22
2,507
1,564,399
991,190
678,310
17
1,940
1,210,502
766,964
524,863
17
1,940
1,210,502
766,964
524,863
17
1,940
1,210,502
767,359
525,258
17
1,940
1,210,502
767,359
525,258
1,327,617
625,773
1,020,621
480,880
789,737
372,095
789,737
372,095
789,737
372,490
789,737
372,490
30
NPV (10%)
17
1,940
1,210,502 $13,821,996
767,359 $8,775,788
525,258 $6,011,389
789,737
372,490
$9,034,435
$4,258,571
15.
For the industrial fishery sector, because most of the vessels are from foreign countries,
the benefit to Guinea-Bissau mainly comes from three sources. One is the license fee charged by
the Government of Guinea-Bissau as their revenue; one is the wages received from the domestic
crew working in foreign fleet as a compulsory condition of agreements; and the last one is the
income of fines of illegal fishing activities. In the base scenario, the model assumes the license
revenue will continue falling by 5 percent annually until Year 10 due to the declining catch rates
and increasing harvest cost. Fewer and thus loss of interests of foreign vessels. By Year 5, the
total license fee will drop to $11 million and by Year 10, it will stabilize at roughly $8.6 million.
The lost interest of foreign vessels in Guinea-Bissau water will automatically affect the returns to
domestic crew. The total wages will be less than $1 million annually by Year 5. It will have an
increasing trend after Year 10 because of the assumption of monthly wages, which will have a 5
percent adjustment for every 5 years. For the fine of illegal activities, the model assumes the fine
will be about 25 percent of the license fees based on the 2006 data and also considering the
probability of catching illegal fishing activities, monitoring capacity of the country and potential
improvement of MCS.
62
Table 3 Baseline Situation for Industrial Fishery Sector
Baseline (Industrial)
License fee
0
14,384,000
5
11,130,065
10
8,612,232
15
8,612,232
20
8,612,232
25
8,612,232
30
8,612,232
NPV (10%)
98,337,878
Wages of domestic crew
1,003,840
776,752
631,088
662,642
695,774
730,563
767,091
7,249,313
Fine of illegal activities
3,700,000
2,782,516
2,153,058
2,153,058
2,153,058
2,153,058
2,153,058
24,584,470
Scenario 2: Investment
16.
In the investment scenario (i.e. the „with project‟ scenario), a series of activities will be
implemented to strengthen the governance of fisheries. However, rebuilding over-exploited fish
stocks would require an initial stock assessment and possibly a temporary reduction in current
actual fishing effort. Such an approach would enable the country in the future to keep foreign
fishermen attracted to fishing in the country‟s waters.
17.
Despite the modest role of local artisanal fisheries, and the major cultural constraints that
hamper development, the Government has repeatedly given high priority to development of local
artisanal fisheries based on their potential to create employment, and the potential local valueadded that can be generated by domestic artisanal fisheries. The development of artisanal
fisheries will face substantial cultural and technical constraints. Therefore, the model will not
expect a significant growth from this sector. The model assumes the number of fishing fleet in
non-motorized canoe sector will reduce by 4 for the first 2 years and then start increa sing by 5
annually for the next 8 years (Table 4). Afterwards, it will keep stable number of fleet in the
sector. The total harvest will reach 2,069 tons on Year 5, nearly 25 percent increase compared to
the baseline. The net economic benefit will increase 22.5 percent on Year 5 and over 70 percent
on Year 10 than the baseline. This will generate $4.7 million NPV of resource rent over 30 years
and over $9 million returns to labor, $2.6 million returns to boat owners. The project will not
implement a license system in the artisanal fisheries, therefore, the returns to government from
license fee will still be zero.
Table 4 Investment Scenario for Non-Motorized Canoe Sector
Investment (non-motorized canoe)
Average number of vessels operating
Total Harvest (ton)
Total Reveune (USD)
Net Economic Benefit (USD)
Resource Rent (USD)
Distribution of benefit
Returns to labor (USD)
Returns to owners (USD)
Returns to government (license fee) (USD)
0
78
2,160
1,347,840
780,059
510,491
5
82
2,069
1,290,881
741,262
483,086
10
102
2,284
1,425,236
809,250
524,203
15
102
2,284
1,425,236
809,250
524,203
20
102
2,284
1,425,236
809,250
524,203
25
102
2,284
1,425,236
809,250
524,203
30 NPV (10%)
102
2,284
1,425,236 $12,659,181
809,250 $7,240,947
524,203 $4,709,111
984,289
287,915
940,206
271,160
1,034,155
292,173
1,034,155
292,173
1,034,155
292,173
1,034,155
292,173
1,034,155
292,173
$9,208,160
$2,636,867
18.
For the motorized canoe sector, the number of fishing fleet will reduce by 2 for the first 2
years and then increase by 2 annually for the next 8 years (Table 5). Since Year 10, the number
of fleet will be stabilized. Similar increase of net economic benefit, resource rent, returns to labor
and boat owners occur to motorized canoe sector as non-motorized canoe sector. Both of them
benefit from the improved fishery management and better stocks of fishery. More wealth is
generated.
63
Table 5 Investment Scenario for Motorized Canoe Sector
Investment (motorized canoe)
0
Average number of vessels operating
5
29
Total Harvest (ton)
10
31
15
40
20
40
25
40
30
40
NPV (10%)
40
3,240
3,103
3,426
3,426
3,426
3,426
Total Reveune (USD)
2,021,760
1,936,321
2,137,855
2,137,855
2,137,855
2,137,855
2,137,855 $18,988,771
Net Economic Benefit (USD)
1,289,582
1,219,399
1,335,640
1,335,627
1,335,613
1,335,600
1,335,587 $11,951,939
885,230
832,134
908,069
908,056
908,042
908,029
1,327,617
1,260,057
1,385,464
1,385,464
1,385,464
1,385,464
625,773
589,370
642,908
642,895
642,881
642,868
Resource Rent (USD)
3,426
908,016
$8,154,184
Distribution of benefit
Returns to labor (USD)
Returns to owners (USD)
Returns to government (license fee) (USD)
1,385,464 $12,357,789
642,855
$5,773,044
19.
Currently, no vessels in the industrial fleet are considered as domestic vessels, so the net
economic benefit and resource rent as well as returns to owners will not be calculated in the
investment scenario. The only way Guinea-Bissau can capture some of the net economic benefit
and resource rent will continue to come from license fees, wages of domestic crew and fines on
illegal fishing activities (which will decrease over time as a result of more effective fisheries
surveillance supported through the investment). Most of the growth of industrial sector will
come from increased license fees because of improved fish stocks and more interests of foreign
vessels. The model assumes the good governance and capacity building will take some time. The
first two years will still have a decreasing trend. The license fee will reduce by 5 percent on Year
1 and 2, and then increase by 5 percent from Year 3 (Table 6). With better surveillance, the
illegal fishing will also be reduced. From Year 1 to 10, the total revenues from fines are
equivalent to roughly 25 percent of the license fee. Beginning in Year 10, it will reduce to 20
percent and then by Year 15, it will reduce to 15 percent. Given the relative weak fisheries
surveillance system, the model does not assume illegal fishing will completely disappear.
Table 6 Investment Scenario for Industrial Fishery Sector
Investment (Industrial)
License fee
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
NPV (10%)
14,384,000
15,027,778
19,179,676
19,179,676
19,179,676
19,179,676
19,179,676
156,118,763
Wages of domestic crew
1,003,840
1,048,768
1,405,450
1,475,722
1,549,509
1,626,984
1,708,333
11,721,130
Fine of illegal activities
3,700,000
3,756,945
3,835,935
3,835,935
2,876,951
2,876,951
2,876,951
37,858,357
20.
The project will provide support to reform the investment climate for companies to invest
in onshore processing in the future, for example by providing training in fish handling and
conservation practices, as well as in accessing local commercial micro-finance certifying
fisheries‟ products exports. However, there is no data available to estimate the potential benefits
and returns to each stakeholder groups. The only data available is the total value of fish export
in 2005: US$200,000, which is equivalent to less than 1 percent of the total fish exports. Hence,
an increase of the share of domestic processing for fish export is expected in the future, but this
is difficult to quantify presently.
21.
Table 7 summarizes the differences between the baseline scenario and the investment
scenario. Assuming all the investment occurs in the first 2 years, the IRR on Year 5 (end of the
project) is 12.5 percent and the NPV of the total net economic benefit over 5 years under 10
percent discount rate is $11.2 million, larger than the project cost ($8 million). The annual
benefit by Year 10 will exceed $13 million, generating over $82 million NPV over 30 years,
64
significantly higher than the project cost. The IRR will be nearly 50 percent by Year 10.
Considering the long-term goal and special characteristics of fishery sector (the fish stock will
take some time to recover), this result will justify the investment of the project.
Table 7 Summary of the Economic Analysis Results: Difference due to Project Investment
Category
Average number of vessels operating
Total Harvest (ton)
Total Reveune (USD)
Net Economic Benefit (USD)
Resource Rent (USD)
Distribution of benefit
Returns to labor (USD)
Returns to owners (USD)
Returns to government (license fee) (USD)
Returns to Government (License fee)
Returns to Government (Fine of illegal activities)
Returns to Labor (Wages of domestic crew)
Total Net Economic Benefit
IRR
0
5
10
15
Differences of Artisanal Fishery Sector
27
69
69
993
2,477
2,477
619,869
1,545,587
1,545,587
321,189
801,815
801,805
212,852
531,689
531,678
369,100
919,863
919,863
136,639
341,883
341,873
20
25
30
NPV (10%)
69
2,477
1,545,587
801,400
531,274
69
2,477
1,545,587
801,390
531,263
69
2,477
1,545,587
801,380
531,253
$8,611,293
$4,467,648
$2,962,629
919,863
341,469
919,863
341,458
919,863
341,448
$5,126,045
$1,904,625
Differences in Industrial Fishery Sector
3,897,713 10,567,444 10,567,444 10,567,444 10,567,444 10,567,444 $57,780,885
974,428
1,682,877
1,682,877
723,893
723,893
723,893 13,273,888
272,016
774,362
813,080
853,734
896,421
941,242 $4,471,817
5,465,346 13,826,499 13,865,207 12,946,472 12,989,149 13,033,960 $82,557,260
12.5%
48.2%
51.3%
51.7%
51.7%
51.7%
65
Annex 8: Incremental Cost Analysis
Project Objective
1. The development objective of APL-B is to sustainably increase the overall wealth generated
by the exploitation of the targeted marine fish resources in Guinea Bissau, and the proportion of
that wealth captured by the country. This objective would be achieved by: (i) strengthening the
country‟s capacity to sustainably govern and manage its fisheries, (ii) reducing illegal fishing,
and (iii) increasing the value and profitability generated by fish resources and the proportion of
that value captured by the country.
Status Quo
2. Scope and Costs. In the absence of GEF assistance under the baseline scenario, the project
will be implemented without particular attention to strengthened governance and in order to help
restore globally significant fish stocks in the Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem. Rather
the project would be implemented with an emphasis on economic growth and reduction of illegal
fishing in the targeted areas, without incorporating reformed governance of the sector that
includes ecosystem-based approaches to resource management.
(i) Component 1: Good Governance and Sustainable Management of the Fisheries. This
component will focus on building the capacity of the Government and stakeholders to
develop and implement policies through a shared approach that would ensure that the fish
resources are used in a manner that is environmentally sustainable, socially equitable and
economically profitable. The baseline costs for this component are US$ 0.3 million.
Without GEF funds, this component would only fund increased transparency in the
governance of the fisheries, but not fundamental reforms in the way the fisheries are
governed and the resources managed.
(ii) Component 2: Reduction of Illegal Fishing. This component will focus on investments
necessary to build the capacity of Guinea Bissau to reduce illegal fishing in its waters,
particularly through greater monitoring, control and surveillance of the fisheries. The
baseline costs for this component are estimated at approximately US$4.7 million, which
would be financed by IDA. No GEF resources will be applied as co-financing to this
component.
(iii) Component 3: Increasing the Contribution of the Marine Fish Resources to the Local
Economies. This component will focus on helping to move the „offshore economy‟ onshore
in Guinea Bissau, by investing in fish landing infrastructure in order to increase the value
added locally to fish products, as well as to support the development of local entrepreneurs
and services. The baseline costs for this component are estimated at approximately US$0.4
million, which would be financed by IDA. No GEF resources will be applied as co-financing
to this component.
(iv) Component 4: Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation and Program Management. This
component will focus on supporting the Secretariat of Fisheries in Guinea Bissau to manage
66
and implement the Project‟s activities, including monitoring and evaluation of results, as
well as information-sharing and replication. The baseline costs for this component are
estimated at approximately US$0.6 million, which would be financed by IDA. GEF
resources would support the additional costs associated with management of fundamental
governance reforms (see Component 1).
3. Benefits. Implementation of the baseline scenario investment program described above will
be expected to generate national benefits as a result of reduced illegal fishing in Guinea
Bissau, and subsequent short-term benefits in reduced fishing pressure. The country has very
little capacity to conduct fisheries surveillance in its waters to enforce the rule of law and
resource management measures, so that the value of the fisheries is steadily decreasing, as a
result of „free-riding‟ by illegal vessels. As a result, investors are less willing to pay for
access to the resources, steadily eroding the rents collected by the Government and the
benefits generated for the economy in Guinea-Bissau.
4. The baseline scenario would, however, be insufficient to produce the global benefits arising
from reducing the overexploitation of the fish stocks supporting the targeted fisheries in
Guinea Bissau, by failing to strengthen the capacity of the country to govern the use the
fisheries and to sustainably manage the resources. The country would be investing in the
assets and infrastructure to reduce illegal fishing, without ensuring that the management
infrastructure is in place to protect the resource base underpinning the sector. Thus, se veral
potential global benefits of more sustainably managing the fisheries resources would be
overlooked, including:
 The development of the rules, capacity and procedures necessary for sustainably
managing the resources (such as registration of fishing vessels, monitoring and
evaluation of the health of the resources and development of fisheries management
plans);
 The introduction of rights to targeted fisheries in order to give stakeholders long -term
incentives to sustainably manage the fish resources; and
 The importance of strong communication programs with stakeholders to exchange
information about the management of the fisheries and the status of the resources, as
well as experiences and benefits of restoration efforts.
GEF Alternative
5. Scope and Costs. With support from the GEF, an expanded project could be undertaken
comprising activities focused on strengthening the capacity of the Government in Guinea
Bissau to reduce overexploitation of the targeted fish stocks, and to introduce long-term
rights to ensure that stakeholders and communities work in partnership to sustainably co manage the use of the resources. Essentially, the GEF alternative would build sustainable
governance efforts into the local economic development activities of the project, incl uding
the following incremental activities:
(i)
Development of the capacity of the Governments of Guinea Bissau to sustainably
manage the use of globally significant fisheries. Approximately US$0.6 million in
GEF resources would be applied to build the capacity of the Government to
67
strengthen the policy and regulatory framework for good governance of the use of
fish resources, including the introduction of international good practices for
sustainable fisheries management, drawing upon the lessons of the Canary Current
Large Marine Ecosystem Project. This would include registering all fishing vessels
for management, installing national and transparent fisheries information systems,
and the development of sustainable fisheries management plans.
(ii)
Support for the assessment of the biological and economic status of key fish stocks in
targeted fisheries, which would provide sound and transparent basis for decision
making by all users. Approximately US$1.0 million in GEF resources would be
applied to the targeted fisheries in Guinea Bissau in order to: carry out assessments of
coastal shrimp, cephalopod and demersal fish stocks, with special focus on the
Common Management Zones shared by Guinea Bissau and Senegal; train staff of the
Fisheries Secretariat in data collection techniques at land sites and as observers on
offshore fishing vessels in order to provide continuous monitoring of the exploitation
status of the main fish stocks, to inform management decisions and the development
of industrial and artisanal fisheries management plans; develop a statistical sampling
system for small-scale fisheries; study the projected impacts of climate change on the
key fish stocks and coastal communities; evaluate the status of the health of the
coastal ecosystems underpinning the fish stocks, covering physical, chemical and
biological aspects; prepare and maintain a bioeconomic model analysis for the coastal
shrimp, cephalopod and demersal fisheries; and carry out a modeling exercise to test
different management measures and determine which one would sustainably
maximize the benefits in the fisheries.
(iii)
Feasibility study for the nation-wide extension of pilot co-management partnerships
for small-scale fisheries. US$0.1 million in GEF resources would be allocated to
carry out the study, which will build on the lessons learned from the Coastal and
Biodiversity Management Project, which established a reserved fishing zone in Buba,
and identified Cacheu and Cacine as additional potential sites. The study would
include a social assessment of fishing communities and propose additional comanagement partnerships such as the Reserved Fishing Zone in Buba, for the
remainder of the coasted fisheries, based on specific conditions and regions of the
country. This work will inform both fishing communities and the Government of the
possibilities to establish and manage additional reserved fishing zones, with the
potential to evolve into Territorial Use Rights in Fisheries (TURFs).
6. Benefits. In addition to the national benefits associated with the baseline scenario, global
benefits of the GEF alternative include: (i) building capacity in the Government of
Guinea Bissau to sustainably manage the fish resources and to reduce overexploitation of
the fish stocks, as part of the country‟s broader economic development efforts in the
fisheries sector, and (ii) ensuring that the sustainable management of the fish resources
underpins any fisheries development efforts in Guinea Bissau.
68
Incremental Cost Matrix
7. The total cost of the baseline scenario is estimated to be US$6.0 million. The GEF
alternative is estimated at US$8.0 million. The incremental cost of the GEF alternative is
therefore estimated at US$2.0 million.
Component Cost
US$
Domestic Benefit
Category
Million
1. Strengthened Governance of the Fisheries
Baseline
0.3
Increased transparency
in the management of
the fish resources.
With GEF 2.0
Capacity established in
Alternative
Guinea
Bissau
to
implement global good
practices for sustainable
fisheries management.
Incremental 1.7
2. Reduction of Illegal Fishing
Baseline
4.7
Global Benefit
Reductions
in
fishing
pressure
on
globally
significant but overexploited
fish stocks, as well as
capacity established for longterm sustainable management
of these resources.
Reduced illegal fishing Short-term
reduction
in
in Guinea Bissau
fishing effort on globally
significant fish stocks.
With GEF 4.7
Alternative
Incremental 0
3. Increased Contribution to Local Economies from the Fisheries
Baseline
0.4
Increased local landing
and processing of fish
products.
With GEF 0.4
Alternative
Incremental 0
4. Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation and Program Management
Baseline
0.6
Management of the
implementation of the
Project. Implementation
of
a
results-based
monitoring
and
evaluation
system,
project management
With GEF 0.9
Incremental costs of Efficient implementation of
Alternative
management of fisheries Project activities to reduce
governance reforms.
fishing pressure on globally
significant
fish
stocks.
69
Transmission of information
on fish stock recovery and
management, replication of
lessons learned
Incremental
0.3
Totals
Baseline
6.0
With GEF 8.0
Alternative
Incremental 2.0
70