Project Identification Form (PIF)
Project Type:
the GEF Trust Fund
Resubmission Date: 08/24/09
Indicative Calendar*Milestones / Expected Dates
mm/dd/yyyy
Work Program (for FSP) / 09/20/2009
CEO Endorsement/Approval / 12/15/2009
Agency Approval Date / 04/15/2010
Implementation Start / 09/15/2010
Mid-term Evaluation (if planned) / 09/15/2012
Project Closing Date / 09/30/2014
* See guidelines for definition of milestones.
part i: project IDentification
GEF Project ID[1]: Project duration:48months
gef agency Project ID:
Country(ies): Tunisia
Project Title: Ecotourism and Conservation of Desert Biodiversity
GEF Agency(ies): , ,
Other Executing partner(s):
GEF Focal Area (s)[2]: and Land Degradation
GEF-4 Strategic program(s): BD1 and BD2; LD-SP1 and LD-SP3 (see preparation guidelines section on exactly what to write)
Name of parent program/umbrella project (if applicable):
A. Project framework
Project Objective: The overall goal of the Project is to help develop sustainable nature-based tourism (or ecotourism) as a means to promote environmental, financial, and social sustainabiltiy in Tunisia. It aims to reduce and reverse the degradation of Tunisia’s natural capital by integrating conservation of desert biodiversity and desert lands at all levels of ecotourism development. A secondary aim is to generate local employment and revenue streams that would serve as an incentive for community and private sector engagement; this will indirectly contribute to the conservation objective. Also, as the natural resource base is strengthened, this is expected to produce side-benefits in terms of sustainability and higher resilience to effects of climate change.More specifically the Project will support ecotourism development and conservation of desert biodiversity by:
(i) Creating an incentive framework for ecotourism at the central government, provincial, and local levels, including promotion, provision of training, sensitization, inter-ministerial coordination, changes in laws and regulations, creation of a soft loan window for community-based and other private sector investments, etc. [institutional development component];
(ii) Supporting the preparation and implementation of Management Plans for selected protected areas/reserves, while leveraging general support to strengthen management in new and existing protected areas and reserves. [protected area management component];
(iii) Supporting integrated natural resources management (INRM) including sustainable land management (SLM) best practices in the productive agricultural and rangeland management systems in the main arid Provinces to achieve inceased sustainability, resilience, and agro-biodiversity [INRM Component];
(iv) Investing in public infrastructure improvements, including access roads, visitor centers, lodges, signage, vista points, educational materials, etc., in order to make nature more accessible to visitors at selected protected areas/agro-biodiversity sites, while at the same time keeping the ecological footprint to a minimum [public nature tourism investment component]; and
(v) Establishing joint ventures between local communities, NGOs, and the public/private sector at the selected sites/protected areas, and encouraging such ventures nation-wide [community and private sector development component]; and
(vi) Effectively managing the Project, including monitoring and evaluation.
Project Components
/Indicate whether Investment, TA, or STAb
/ Expected Outcomes /Expected Outputs
/Indicative GEF Financinga
/ Indicative Co-Financinga / Total ($)c =a + b
($) a
/%
/($) b
/%
1. Development and implementation of institutional and legal frameworks at the Federal Government and provincial levels. / TA, Inv. / 1. Appropriate incentive framework for ecotourism created.2. Policy and regulatory frameworks governing the environment and related sectors incorporate measures to conserve and sustainably use desert biodiversity.. / 1. Inter-Ministerial Commission for Ecotourism created and MOUs signed between key Ministries;
2. Focal point for promotion of ecotourism created;
3. Focal point for environmental and financial assessments of specific ecotourism projects created;
4. Laws and regulations appropriately adjusted, e.g. to facilitate lodging and other activities in agricultural areas;
5. Public awareness campaign carried out;
6. Low-interest credit line (FOSDEC) created for ecotourism; and
7. Certification procedure agreed and adopted. / 400,000 / 80.0 / 100,000 / 20.0 / 500,000
2. Development and/or upgrading of management of selected protected areas within ecotourism circuits that contain key sites with desert biodiversity. / STA, TA, Inv. / Ecotourism development is taking place within environmentally and ecologically sound, adaptable management of parks and reserves in arid lands (see Annex 2). / 1. Key sites selected, using criteria as defined in Annex 3.
2. Assessments carried out of existing Management Plans (PMPs) in desert ecosystems, and PMPs updated or upgraded as necessary (in terms of zoning, inventories of flora and fauna, institutional management capacity, training, carrying capacity for ecotourism, etc.).
3. PMPs prepared for selected desert biodiversity sites without such plans.
4. The role of communities in co-management of the protected areas (PAs) and in nature-based tourism will be assessed, and framework agreements developed (see Annex 1).
5. Feasibility analysis undertaken and business case developed for main PAs supported under Project.
6. Demand for visitation assessed, timing, accessibility, transportation, accommodation, provision of key services to tourists (restaurants, lodges, toilets), scenarios of user charges, etc.
7. Innovative financing measures assessed that would generate revenue streams (e.g. entrance fees, product sales, tour guiding, lodges, etc.) against cost streams.
/ 500,000 / 26.3 / 1,400,000 / 73.7 / 1,900,000
3. Supporting Integrated Natural Resources Management (INRM) in main arid Provinces. / TA; Inv. / An increased number of land and water users adopt sustainable land and water management practices that provide long term biodiversity and livelihood benefits. / 1. Training provided to agricultural extension staff incl. visits to sites with best practices;
2. Public awareness and sensitization meetings held in key communities;
3. Selected Agro-Ecosystem Action Plans developed in a participatory manner and revised plans adopted.
4. Twenty percent more farmers use best INRM/SLM practices;
5. Selected physical and/or management investments identified in Integrated Water Resources Management Studies carried out to achieve higher efficiency of water usage in selected oases. / 1,800,000 / 81.8 / 400,000 / 18.2 / 2,200,000
4. Public investments related to ecotourism in and around protected areas / Inv., TA / Ecotourism facilitated while the ecological footprint is kept at a minimum. / 1. Public infrastructure needs assessment undertaken (e.g. visitor centers, lodges, access roads, camps, trails, etc.) within and outside protected areas.
2. Infrastructure needs prioritized using simple ranking system that combines impacts on: (a) desert biodiversity conservation; (b) local employment; (d) public revenue generation; and (e) expected ecotourism volume. / 600,000 / 42.9 / 800,000 / 57.1 / 1,400,000
5. Community outreach and private sector development / Inv.,TA / 1.Financially viable and sustainable ecotourism ventures established.
2. Incentives generated for local communities to support and participate in maintenance of desert biodiversity. / 1. Local and regional stakeholder meetings held twice a year.
2. Feasibility explored for the establishment of joint ventures between key partners (public sector, private sector, municipalities, communities, NGOs) with clearly elaborated roles, responsibilities and beneficiary arrangements. The management framework model will draw from best practices in other countries in the region and elsewhere (see Annex 1).
3. Business models for ecotourism development assessed and implemented. This would include private sector development and related community development measures incl. income generating activities, which could be in the form of tour guiding, rangers, and handicraft sales. / 400,000 / 57.1 / 300,000 / 42.9 / 700,000
6. Project management including monitoring and evaluation / Project managed effectively. / 1. Simple project management structure adopted and filled with highly motivated, and fully qualified staff.
2. Participatory monitoring program developed both for the biodiversity and socio-economic aspects, which will allow for feedback into (adaptive) Management Plans, and ensure that nature tourism is financially sustainable.
3. Standard evaluations undertaken in objective and timely fashion. / 572,300 / 65.6 / 300,000 / 34.4 / 872,300
Total project costs / 4,272,300 / 56.4 / 3,300,000 / 43.6 / 7,572,300
a List the $ by project components. The percentage is the share of GEF and Co-financing respectively of the total amount for the component.
b TA = Technical Assistance; STA = Scientific & Technical Analysis.
B. Indicative Co-financing for the project by source and by NAME (in parenthesis) if available, ($)
Government Contribution / Cash / 1,500,000
Government Contribution / In-kind / 500,000
GEF Agency(ies) / (select)GrantSoft LoanHard LoanGuaranteeIn-kindcashUnknown at this stage
French Development Agency (AFD) / (select)GrantSoft LoanHard LoanGuaranteeIn-kindcashUnknown at this stage / 1,300,000
Private Sector / (select)GrantSoft LoanHard LoanGuaranteeIn-kindcashUnknown at this stage
NGO / (select)GrantSoft LoanHard LoanGuaranteeIn-kindcashUnknown at this stage
Others / (select)GrantSoft LoanHard LoanGuaranteeIn-kindcashUnknown at this stage
Total Co-financing / 3,300,000
C. Indicative Financing Plan Summary For The Project ($)
Previous Project Preparation Amount (a)[3] / Project (b) / Totalc = a + b / Agency Fee / Total
GEF financing / 0 / 4,272,300[4] / 4,272,300 / 427,230 / 4,699,530
Co-financing / 0 / 3,300,000 / 3,300,000 / 3,300,000
Total / 0 / 7,572,300 / 7,572,300 / 427,230 / 7,999,530
D. GEF Resources Requested by agency (ies), Focal Area(s) and country(ies)1
GEF Agency / Focal Areas / Country Name/Global / (in $)
Project (a) / Agency Fee (b)2 / Total c=a+b
World Bank / BD1 and BD2 / Tunisia / 2,922,300 / 292,230 / 3,214,530
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone Depletion SubstancesPersistent Organic Pollutants / Tunisia / 1,350,000[5] / 135,000 / 1,485,000
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone Depletion SubstancesPersistent Organic Pollutants
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone Depletion SubstancesPersistent Organic Pollutants
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone Depletion SubstancesPersistent Organic Pollutants
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone Depletion SubstancesPersistent Organic Pollutants
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone Depletion SubstancesPersistent Organic Pollutants
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone Depletion SubstancesPersistent Organic Pollutants
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone Depletion SubstancesPersistent Organic Pollutants
Total GEF Resources / 4,272,300 / 427,230 / 4,699,530
1 No need to provide information for this table if it is a single focal area, single country and single GEF Agency project.
2 Relates to the project and any previous project preparation funding that have been provided and for which no Agency fee has been requested from Trustee.
part ii: project JustiFication
A. State the issue, how the project seeks to address it, and the expected global environmental benefits to be delivered:
Preparatory studies by the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, in partnership with German Technical Assistance, have identified five MAIN ISSUES/CONSTRAINTS to ecotourism and conservation of desert lands and biodiversity: (1) Envionmental: continued land degradation and neglect of ecologically sensitive sites with significant biodiversity values; (2) climate change: Impact on natural ecosystems, and disruptions of community livelihoods; (3) Institutional: there are numerous issues related to the instutional set-up, laws, regulations, etc., that hinder the private sector from developing the ecotourism sub-sector; (4) Protected area management: with some exceptions, protected areas are lacking or have weak Management Plans, or have difficulties effectively implementing them; a sub-issue is the financial sustainability of protected area management; (5) Involvement of local communities, private sector, and NGOs: these stakeholders are often not adequately involved and/or lack capacities for effective participation.
THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL ADDRESS THESE CONSTRAINTS BY: (i) Creating an incentive framework for ecotourism at the Central Government, provincial, and local levels, including promotion, provision of training, sensitization, inter-ministerial coordination, changes in laws and regulations, creation of a soft loan window for community-based and other private sector investments to support nature-based tourism development; (ii) Supporting the preparation and implementation of Management Plans for selected protected areas/reserves with desert biodiversity, while leveraging general support to strengthen management of all new and existing protected areas and reserves; (iii) Supporting integrated natural resources management (INRM) in productive agricultural lands in arid provinces, complementing the work on selected protected areas. The proposed Project will work with agricultural research centers and extension services to support innovation and the adoption of sustainable land management practices along with measures for higher water efficiency. The Project will also work with centers of excellence such as the Institute of Arid regions based in Medenine, Tunisia, which conducts research on mitigation of desertification and the conservation of genetic resources of crops in arid zones; (iv) Investing in public infrastructure improvements, including access roads, visitor centers, lodges, signage, vista points, educational materials, etc., in order to make nature more accessible to visitors at selected sites/protected areas, while at the same time keeping the ecological footprint to a minimum; and (v) Establishing joint ventures between local communities, NGOs, and the public and private sectors at the selected sites/protected areas, and encouraging such ventures nation-wide.
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS EXPECTED: Desert lands and desert biodiversity are unique, since plants and animals have shown tremendous resilience to water scarcity, moisture stress, and temperature variations over time. The Project's aims are to conserve this unique and globally significant biodiversity with science-based technologies that will be used/pioneered to help arrest the deterioration of the desert ecosystems at selected protected areas or in agricultural lands, in part to help retain their resiliency and continued provision of environmental and economic services to the communities. It is also expected that the coping and adaptive capacities of the desert populatons and their ecosystems will be strengthened in view of the expected increase in climate change variability. In and around the specific sites to be selected and the agricultural and rangelands benefitting from the Project, the following are expected: (a) restoration and maintenance of land resources and functions, and ecosystem integrity and services; (b) restoration and conservation of soil and water resources and functions, leading to higher net primary productivity (nutrient recycling) and increased carbon sequestration (soil and biomass carbon stocks); (c) enhanced critical ecosystem resilience to climate change and drought; (d) improved adaptation to climate change by human populations and natural systems, as a result of adaptation responses adopted; and (e) improved conservation of biodiversity and reduced fragmentation/loss of natural habitats. The lessons of experience will be shared with other countries in MNA, several of which also have large desert ecosystems that are under threat. Such sharing will be facilitated by MENARID and in particular with the recently approved MSP supporting cross-cutting M&E functions and knowledge management within the MENARID program framework.