The impact of UK overseas aid on environmental protection and climate change adaptation and mitigation

Written evidence submitted by DfID office Tanzania

Question 1 - Please outline the specific developmental challenges Tanzania faces (both environmental and non-environmental) and DFID’s country office approach and priorities.

Response 1 - Tanzania is the 22nd poorest country in the world. Despite good economic growth over the last ten years (between 5-8% since 2000), but this period has seen little reduction in income poverty. 35.6% of the population lived below the national poverty line in 2000 and 33.3% in 2007, which means a third of Tanzanians live on less than £7 a month and cannot provide themselves with adequate food or household goods. In 2009/10 the government’s budget was £5.4 billion, less than £125 of spending per citizen.

Progress on millennium development goals (MDGs) such as Universal primary education has been achieved and since the removal of primary school fees in 2001 there are 4 million more children in primary school and 1.2 million more in secondary. This puts Tanzania on track to meet the MDG on universal primary education and gender parity in primary schooling. The coverage of infant vaccinations is more than 85%. Malaria prevalence and deaths from malaria has halved during the past decade. Child mortality has fallen by 45%.

However pHowevrogress on income poverty and hunger has been too slow. Tanzania also continues to be off track in meeting its MDG on environmental sustainability particularly in relation to forest cover, water access and the predominant use of wood fuels/biomass. See table below for detailed progress against MDGs.

MDG Progress in Tanzania

MDG 1:

Poverty and Hunger [RED]

Very slow decline in poverty rates, 34% live below national poverty line, an increase in numbers of people in poverty during this decade.

42% of children stunted from chronic malnutrition

MDG 2: Universal Primary Education

[GREEN]

More than 95% of children enrolled in primary school. Numbers in primary school increased by 4 million since 2000.

Primary school completion rates at 63%, representing a slight decline in recent years. Exam pass rates have also declined in recent years.

MDG 3: Gender Parity

[GREEN]

Gender parity in primary schooling achieved, although boys still outnumber girls in secondary and higher education. Special seats for women mean that there are increasing levels of women in parliament.

MDG 4: Reduce Child Mortality

[GREEN]

Child mortality has fallen by 45% in 10 years. Coverage of essential childhood vaccines is high (more than 85%).

MDG 5: Improve Maternal Health

[GREEN]

Only half of births take place in health institutions, and a similar level are attended by skilled personnel, this has not changed in the past decade. However there has been a slight fall in maternal mortality.

MDG 6: Combat key diseases

[GREEN]

Malaria prevalence and deaths from malaria has halved during the past decade. HIV prevalence has fallen slightly from 2003/04 (7%) to 6% in 2007/08, the number of people living with HIV/AIDS remains around 1 million

MDG 7: Environmental Stability

[RED]

Forest cover is declining rapidly. 96% of people use solid fuels for cooking. Access to improved water much higher in urban (79%) than rural areas (40%), and has declined slightly in both over the past decade. Only one third of people have access to improved sanitation.

The Tanzanian government has developed a new five-year Poverty Reduction Strategy Plan (PRSP) (2010/11 to 2014/15) and is planning to develop a new long term growth strategy, focusing on agriculture, to help the poor benefit more from growth. C limate change, environmental and natural resource management have been identified as priorities as part of the PRSP, particularly where they can play a key part in supporting more sustainable growth.

UK aid to Tanzania supports the country’s ambitious target to be a middle income country by 2025. UK support will boost trade and private sector development as the sustainable path from poverty and aid dependency, as well as delivering a range of targeted direct interventions to tackle acute poverty, health and nutrition needs.

Tanzania is DFID’s third largest country programme, with a budget of £150m in 2010/11. After the US DFID is the largest bilateral donor. In 09/10, £103.5m was given as general budget support to fund the Government of Tanzania’s own poverty reduction plan. DFID also has programmes that complement budget support and make it as effective as possible. These focus on improving governance, strengthening public financial management and helping civil society hold government to account. In addition, DFID has a growing programme of work supporting Tanzania’s underdeveloped private sector. DFID leads other donors in policy engagement with the government on governance, private sector development, education, public financial management and climate change. DFID’s programme in Tanzania is currently under review as part of the Bilateral Aid Review initiated by the Secretary of State for International Development.

Climate change has the potential to set back development in Tanzania , and early effects are arguably already visible (including both severe drought and f looding). Over the past year DFID Tanzania has carried out a Strategic Climate Programme Review to consider how best to incorporate clim ate change into its programmes. DFID is considering these issues and the best way to deliver results in Tanzania as part of the Bilateral Aid Review.

Question 2 - Has DFID Tanzania undergone the Strategic Climate Programme Review yet? If so, what were the outcomes? If not, when is your Strategic Programme Review scheduled?

Response 2 - Over the past year DFID Tanzania has carried out a Strategic Climate Programme Review (SPR) to consider how best to incorporate clim ate change into its programmes and to build an evidence base for new programming options . As part of the SPR DFID Tanzania reviewed it s portfolio to ensure it is climate smart and look at risk s and opportunities of both current and pipeline programmes. The SPR also included the following pieces of work i) poverty and vulnerability analysis on climate change to look at who m and where is most likely to be affected; ii) a political economy analysis to understand the key drivers in the climate change agenda in Tanzania and iii) a economics of climate change study for the Government of Tanzania to consider the economic impact and costs of climate change both now and in the future. It also identified opportunities to promote low carbon long term growth. DFID has considered these issues and the best way to deliver results on climate change in Tanzania as p art of the Bilateral Aid Review, Operational Plan and in the development of new areas of programming. It has also planning to increase its advisory capacity on climate change and environment from 50% to 100% from April 2011.

Question 3 - How does DFID Tanzania manage the tensions between development and environmental protection?

Response 3 – As is clearly outlined in the Government of Tanzania’s Poverty Reduction Strategies (Mkukuta/Mkukuta2), the poor in Tanzania are heavily dependent on the environment both for income generation and consumption. The primary issues thus relate to Tanzania’s high dependence on its renewable natural resources, the close linkages between poverty and environment. Key poverty and environment links in Tanzania include:

Livelihoods - Majority of people (rural & urban) depend upon environment and natural resources for their livelihoods.

Economic growth - Main economic sectors, agriculture, tourism and mining, depend upon environment and natural resources.

Vulnerability - Poor are most at risk from environmental related disasters: floods, drought; pollution; and, land degradation.

Health - People’s health is dependent upon a good and clean environment: safe water; sanitation; solid waste management; water borne diseases; and indoor air pollution is a factor in child < 5 yr mortality.

Water – Essential for domestic use, agriculture, energy and environmental services.

Energy – Essential for growth – main source is wood and charcoal, which is key driver of deforestation. Hydro power provides significant proportion of electricity needs but is dependent upon management of water catchments to maintain supplies.

Governance - Access and control over environment and natural resources impacts on peoples’ livelihoods

Conflict - Abundance and scarcity of natural resources as triggers/fuels for conflict e.g. gold - commercial mines and artisanal mines; land/water - agriculturalists vs pastoralists.

Issues of natural resource management, climate change and environment are currently both discussed in the donor and government policy dialogue under the economic and basic services pillars of our budget support discussions (see general budget support project details 6(i)). There is still however considerable scope to i) improve progress on the Millennium Development Goal 7 on environmental sustainability which is off track and to ii) ensure that the economic growth is sustainable i.e. uses its natural resource base sustainably and maximises the synergies between growth and environmental protection i.e. promoting green growth. There are still significant challenges particularly in terms of deforestation and energy reliance on biomass and wood fuels such as charcoal.

There is a division of labour amongst the development partners on who leads which area of the dialogue with government. In Tanzania DFID leads on education, governance and private sector development. As part of our DFID Tanzania Country Assistance Plan 2006- 2010 we delegated the lead to other partners in areas such as health and environment.

DFID is a member of the Development Partners Group (DPG) on Environment and Climate Change which is led by Denmark and Finland. The DPG works closely with the Government and other stakeholders (civil society and private sector) to ensure environment and climate change are taken into account in the Government of Tanzania’s planning and budgeting processes. DFID has funded an economics of climate change study the outcomes of which will feed in the development of the Government of Tanzania’s National Climate Change Strategy, which is to be developed in 2011.

The DFID funded study on the economics of climate change has also supported our understanding and that of the Tanzanian government of how to ensure that the development path and economic growth is both climate resilient and low carbon. This work has been discussed with the Ministry of Finance and key line ministries such as agriculture, energy and water.

Question 4 - What is DFID’s environmental impact in Tanzania? How do you ensure DFID Tanzania does not have a detrimental environmental impact?

Response 4 – DFID Tanzania is committed to achieving "Climate and Environment Smart" development. To achieve this, we have assessed the relevance and impact of climate change and environment both in terms of our Operational Plan and all our programmes in country. DFID procedures require that all Aid Programmes over £1m undertake an environmental screening and be developed in accordance with the DFID How to Note on Climate and Environmental Assessment. The approach is to both ensure our programmes "do no harm" and also seek opportunities to positively impact on climate change and environment outcomes. As stated in the response to question 2, we have also proactively undertaken a screening of our portfolio to identify the areas that at risk and where there are opportunities to address the climate change (and environment) as part of programming. For example in developing our Coastal Rural Support Programme, we have funded an action research component to look at the likely impacts of climate change on agricultural practices in the geographic areas of the programme. Under our proposed water resources management support we are looking at building in a component that will consider the impact of climate change on the river basin and current and future water demands.

DFID Tanzania has been part of an independent Country Programme Evaluation, under the section on cross cutting issues, environment and climate change, it was recognised that DFID is taking " a lead role, both technical and strategic" however it identifies the challenge posed of working on cross cutting issues in a largely budget support environment.

DFID Tanzania office is also committed to reducing its carbon footprint and achieving the DFID target of being carbon neutral by 2012. The office has taken steps to develop a Greening Action Plan with British High Commission and this has fed into our Operation Plan (2011-15) for the next four years. The measures outlined in our action plan include i) reductions in air travel; ii) reducing office space and iii) improving energy efficiency and recycling.

Question 5 - Please could you provide details of the major projects funded by multilateral donors in Tanzania?

Response 5 – A list of multi-lateral funded activities on environment and climate change are provided below:

Donor

Project activity

ONE UN

(UNDP, FAO, IFAD, UNEP, UNESCO,WFP and UNIDO)

One UN pilot programme. Budget USD 45 million for 2 years months to be completed in June 2011. There is specific strand of work on environment and climate change ( approx USD 7.5m)

The new One UN programme (UNDAP) currently under agreement has a USD 3.4 million programme allocation for environment and climate change.

The programme of work included mainstreaming CC and environment in sectors and LGAs. Building capacity for CDM and for accessing international funding for adaptation. Building capacity for adaptation and mitigation. Demonstration projects on mitigation. With focus on climate change, land degradation/desertification and NRM. Implemented in partnership with a range of government institutions.

UNDP, FAO, UNEP

UN-REDD pilot project for Tanzania for reduction in deforestation and forest degradation. US4.2m over 2 years for Tanzania. Programme for initially 9 countries, in Africa: Tanzania, Congo and Zambia are participating. Programme funded by Norway.

UNDP

Biogas energy in prisons with the Ministry of Energy and NGOs, USD 150,000 over 18 months.

Africa Adaptation Programme USD 2.9 m over 2 years for Tanzania. Programme funded by Japan

Mainstreaming climate change into integrated Water Resources Management in the Pangani River Basin. GEF funding USD 2.5m from 2007 to 2010.

Transformation of the rural market for PV energy in Tanzania in cooperation with GEF, USD 2.25m ongoing.

UNDP/UNEP

Capacity building for CDM, USD 200,000 in the pipeline, 2008-2009 with CEEST and EPMS.

UNEP

NAPA priority projects, implementation in collaboration with the Vice Presidents Office, USD 6.9 million (USD 3.5 million from LDCF/SCCF and USD 3.4 million co-financing to be defined). In the planning phase.

Expedited financing for interim measures for capacity building in priority areas (Phase II), USD 100,000, 2007-2008 (18 months). GEF.

Second National Communication in partnership with Ceest, USD 405,000 for three years ending in 2009.

UNIDO

Best practices in energy management in the industrial sector.

Rural Micro-Hydropower Development. Objective: to identify potential sites for the development of small and micro hydropower schemes in partnership with International Network on Small Hydro Power (INSHP), The Ministry of Energy and Minerals, TANESCO and TaTEDO.

UNESCO

Building knowledge and partnerships for reducing biodiversity loss and adapting to climate change (in five countries), USD 20,000, 2008-2009.

UN-habitat

Promoting Energy Efficiency in Buildings in East Africa, USD 231,000.

FAO

Bioenergy and Food security project, USD 400,000, 2007-2009.

EU

Renewable energy, EUR 8 million.

Global Climate Change Alliance, EUR 2,5 million.

Regional Dryland Research Project in collaboration with IRDC and SADC.

World Bank

Development of a Policy towards Sustainable Charcoal; wood fuel Action Plan (financed under TFCMP) and development of the REDD Readiness plan for submission to the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility.

Proposed support for the National Strategy on Climate Change and lesson learning with Mexico on climate financing and planning USD 500,000

UNDP/World Bank

Sustainable Management of the Miombo Woodland Resources of Western Tanzania (GEF Project, which includes an adaptations to Climate Change component), ~US$7.5 million.

Adapted from the Stocktaking Report on Environment and Climate Change, 2009, funded by Denmark (N.B. currently being updated specifically for climate change with funding from DFID)

PROJECT DETAILS:

Question 6 – Please could you provide details on the projects listed below:

Response 6 (i) - Tanzania Poverty Reduction Budget Support (105373)

a. The project’s rationale and objectives

The goal of Poverty Reduction Budget Support (PRBS) is to reduce poverty in Tanzania. Its purpose is to increase Government of Tanzania’s (GoT) financial and institutional capacity to implement its poverty reduction strategy (MKUKUTA) and reach its poverty reduction and growth goals.

b. The project’s environmental impact

Disbursement of Poverty Reduction Budget Support itself has no direct environmental impact but is a fully fungible contribution to financing the Government of Tanzania budget. It is therefore impossible to distinguish the environment impact of DFID’s PRBS contribution from the impact of GoT expenditure as a whole. Therefore the focus has to be on how Government addresses environmental issues.

Environmental Issues in Tanzania

The poor in Tanzania are heavily dependent on the environment both for income generation and consumption. The primary environmental issues thus relate to Tanzania’s high dependence on its renewable natural resources and the close linkages between poverty and environment. (Refer to response to Question 3)

Tanzania Government and the Environment

The Tanzanian Poverty Reduction Strategy - Mkukuta sets out the Government’s approach to the environment. It has highlighted the important role of natural resources and environment to combat poverty. Environment and natural resources management were mainstreamed in the document, with strong emphasis on the role of natural resources for income generation, reducing vulnerability of the poor to environmental risks, the importance of good governance, and the need to strengthen local involvement and participation. An underlying principle of the Mkukuta was sustainability. A new Mkukuta was approved at the end of 2010. This continues to place a strong emphasis on environment and climate change issues.

The Mkukuta Annual Implementation Report 2009/10 provides a summary of the Government’s progress on environment in line with the Mkukuta. It highlights progress in a number of areas:

"The Government continued to address environmental issues by implementing various policies, laws and strategies and regulations on Safety and Use of Modern Biotechnology of 2009; Management of Solid Waste of 2009: and Management of Poisonous Waste of 2009. Moreover the government played a proactive role in coordinating and implementing various international conventions regarding climatic change; drought and deforestation; conservation of biodiversity; control over transportation and disposal of poisonous waste and importation of such waste to the Africa continent.

In an effort to ensure sustainable management of the environment, the government employed 21 inspectors in order to enhance enforcement and efficiency in managing the environment across the country. Further, 90% of the councils in the country appointed environmental officers in order to bring technical services to the grassroots level. In ensuring effective conservation of water sources and aforestation, the presidential Award on Conservation of Water Sources and Aforestation was also launched. The Government has set a target of for all Local Government Authorities to implement the National Tree planting Campaign which requires each district to plant 1.5 million trees annually.

The Government continues to encourage investors to adhere to Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) requirement before executing their projects. In 2009, more than 90% of the projects were given operational certifcates after meeting EIA requirements and standards. Equally important, in the effort to reduce and destroy solid waste, the Government continues to sensitize industries to use of solid waste as raw materials and recycling."

(Source: Mkukuta Annual Implementation Report 2009/10, Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs)

Environmental Challenges

Although the Government has made some progress and Government policies on the environment are, generally, appropriate, actual implementation remains weak.

There is still considerable scope:

· to improve progress on the Millennium Development Goal 7 on environmental sustainability which is off track (see response to question 1 above); and

· to ensure that the economic growth is sustainable i.e. uses it’s natural resource base sustainably and maximises the synergies between growth and environmental protection i.e. promoting green growth. There are still significant challenges particularly in terms of deforestation and energy reliance on biomass and wood fuels such as charcoal.

c. Whether these environmental impacts were deliberate or unplanned

At the outset of the Poverty Reduction Budget Support, DFID Tanzania outlined how we would engage and monitor progress on environment – see Environmental Screening Note, 2006. This has included the work in the following areas:

· Engagement in the DPG sub group on environment (presently chaired by Denmark) and through our membership of the PRBS and Development Partners Group for a on how environmental management and sustainability issues are being addressed.

· Through the Head of DFID Tanzania, continue to access environmental briefing through DPG meetings and monitor progress such as the proposed road through the Serengeti.

· Monitoring progress on the Joint Assistance Strategy such that under the division of labour a sufficient core group of donors maintains technical competence and expertise on environmental management to work with Government, (predominantly Denmark, Finland, Norway, World Bank and UN).

· Working with the DPG governance group on ensuring links and joint work on environmental governance, particularly on areas such as Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative.

· Working with the British High Commission (BHC) to ensure consistent UK engagement on environmental governance and climate change including development of a joint action plan on climate change.

d. A breakdown of the project’s funding

2006 £ 90.0 Million

2007 £105.0 Million

2008 £103.5 Million

2009 £103.5 Million

2010 £103.5 Million

e. Any requirements placed upon / standards required of the government of Tanzania or other aid recipient agencies.

The Performance Assessment Framework (PAF) for Budget Support used by Development Partners and the Government of Tanzania includes indicators related to the environment. These are revised annually. For the year 2009/10 the PAF included the indicators on:

· Implementation of Natural Resources (forestry, wildlife and fisheries) Accountability and Transparency Action Plans ;

· Finalisation of sectoral Environmental Action Plans ;

· Value of revenues from environmental management;

· Access to clean and safe water

· Annual review of progress in environment related sectors.

f. Who is implementing the project

The Government of Tanzania. This programme provides support to the Government of Tanzania’s budget and so provides a contribution to all of the Government of Tanzania’s programmes including environment. There are eleven Development Partners providing General Budget Support contributions.

g. The environmental screening notes for the respective projects

Attached Annex 1: Document: (1659653) Environmental Screening Note -Tanzania PRBS February 2006.

Response 6 (ii) - Private Sector Competitiveness Programme (105426)

a. The project’s rationale and objectives

Project objective is to increase rural incomes through increasing the competitiveness of strategic subsectors of the Tanzanian economy. Key results are:

(i) Enhanced competitiveness of clusters of firms operating in six sub-sectors (Clusters already identified include food processing, horticulture, tourism and the dairy sector)

(ii) Support for entrepreneurs, through a nationwide Business Plan competition and mentoring programme (which will reach over 4500 micro and small enterprises)

(iii) Targeted policy advice to private and public institutions to improve public policy on enterprise competitiveness and entrepreneurship.

b. The project’s environmental impact

Overall the project is judged to have a beneficial environmental impact as adherence to both national and international environmental legislation and regulations and supply chain standards (eg Eurogap and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points standards) is a key element of building competitiveness in export sectors.

c. Whether these environmental impacts were deliberate or unplanned

Promotion of adherence to environmental regulations is not an explicit objective of the programme, however is promoted as part of business expansion and improving competitiveness. It is too early to evaluate the environmental impacts, which will be carried out as part of the final impact evaluation.

d. A breakdown of the project’s funding

Total programme budget is £14.6m, broken down as follows:

· Consultancy services: Technical assistance to firms and to Government to enhance competitiveness and entrepreneurship: £6.3m

· Business Plan grant awards for entrepreneurs: £5.3m

· Small grants programme for firm clusters: £1.7m

· Local Training and Mentoring programme for entrepreneurs: £1.3m

e. Any requirements placed upon / standards required of the government of Tanzania or other aid recipient agencies.

DFID funding is channelled through a Multi-donor Trust Fund managed by the World Bank. World Bank guidelines and environmental safeguards therefore apply.

f. Who is implementing the project?

Project is implemented by the Tanzanian Private Sector Foundation who in turn has undertaken an international tender to secure the services of consultancy firms to manage specific project components.

g. The environmental screening notes for the respective projects

No specific DFID Environmental Screening undertaken. The Programme is a sub-component of a larger IDA-funded, World Bank programme (The Private Sector Competitiveness Project). Reliance placed on World Bank environment safeguards.

Response 6 (iii) - Climate Change (200711)

a. The project’s rationale and objectives

Climate change is a major threat to poverty reduction and growth in Tanzania. UK government (FCO/DFID) have developed an action plan to support Tanzania’ efforts to respond to this challenge and DFID Tanzania are developing a Strategic Climate Programme Review. The Climate Change technical assistance fund will support the implementation of prioritised activities under this action plan. Our support for Tanzania on climate change is consistent with the commitments outlined in the DFID policies.

The Climate Change technical assistance support fund will allow DFID to respond effectively, efficiently and be flexible to calls for technical assistance in the following areas:

i. Support for Copenhagen and Negotiations.

ii. CC Strategy and Policy Work

iii. Donor Co-ordination with Government of Tanzania on CC.

iv. Voice and Accountability.

b. The project’s environmental impact

The technical assistance fund has been very effective and strategic. The fund has supported the development of the following:

i. An assessment of the economic impact of climate change in Tanzania, which will be used to underpin Tanzania’s National Climate Change strategy and also initiated greater engagement from the Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs and line Ministries in climate change issues. (For example the Minister of Finance has agreed to launch the study on the 27th January 2011). A better understanding of the economics of climate change will support government prioritisation and mainstreaming of climate change.

ii. The establishment of the development partner’s secretariat has been key in developing a more co-ordinated framework for donor engagement on climate change. It will have significant impact on the effectiveness of development partner support to government, civil society and private sector. For example it has been agreed to establish a basket fund for support for civil society to avoid duplication.

iii. Support to Vice President’s Office and the Minister of Environment in there engagement in Copenhagen and through the AU. This fund has been key in supporting Tanzania’s voice in the negotiations as part of the Africa group and ensuring they get an ambitious but fair and equitable deal.

iv. Support for national civil society platform for Climate Change to increase national debate on CC in the run up to Copenhagen and Cancun has been critical in raising public awareness, civic action and advocacy on climate change. For example Climate Change Forum has played a critical role in holding government to account through climate hearings. The Climate Change Forum now has over 50 civil society organisations as members and has identified long term support for their strategic plan through DFID Accountability fund. Opportunities for long term support for CSOs will also be explored as part of the Accountability fund and/or jointly with other donors.

v. Finally we have also provided support jointly with the British Council and British High Commission to media and photo journalists to document the impact of climate change in Tanzania to raise awareness and understanding of the issues.

c. Whether these environmental impacts were deliberate or unplanned

These outputs and their impacts were planned as part of the climate change technical assistance fund.

d. A breakdown of the project’s funding

The total cost of the project was £600,000 over eighteen months (October 2009 to March 2011).

Area of Support

Budget

1. Tanzania Economics of Climate Change study

(Dewpoint/SEI)

£340,000

2. DPG-E Secretariat

(Co-financed with DANIDA)

£50,000

3. Establishment of a Climate Change Civil Society platform

(hosted by Tanzanian Natural Resource Forum (TNRF))

£108,080

(additional £78,000 from DFID HQ

for an advocacy officer)

4. Copenhagen Support to Government of Tanzania

(jointly funded by UNDP)

£40,000

5. Tanzania Voices on Climate Change

(Reel to Reel – as part of poverty monitoring)

£668

(Majority of costs for this activity charged to Poverty Monitoring)

6. AU Environment Ministers

(through WWF)

£15,750

7. Photojournalism training and book

(British Council and BHC)

£10,000

Total Funding

£564,498

e. Any requirements placed upon / standards required of the government of Tanzania or other aid recipient agencies.

None over and above meeting the objectives and goals of the climate change technical assistance fund and the UK action plan, which look at strategic engagement with a range of actors in addressing climate change.

f. Who is implementing the project?

A range of stakeholders have been involved in implementation of different aspects of the project. Government, civil society, media and academics both local and international have been involved in the implementation of the activities.

g. The environmental screening notes for the respective projects

No environmental screening was required as the project was below £1m, however environmental and climate and change considerations were central to the work.

Response 6 (iv) - Transport Policy Support Programme (105409)

a. The project’s rationale and objectives

The poor state of transport infrastructure in Tanzania is a major constraint to economic growth and poverty reduction. Its improvement is a key budget priority of the Government of Tanzania. The purpose of the project is to reduce the costs of doing business and providing essential services in Tanzania through more effective transport infrastructure. Emphasis is placed on support and capacity building in Ministry of Infrastructure Development (MoID) and sub-sector agencies.

The anticipated project output is the improved effectiveness of public policy and expenditure on transport infrastructure by provision of support for:

· an updated national transport policy (in accordance with good international practice)

· a new national strategic transport master plan

· high quality transport sector analysis and research informing transport policy and programming

· co-ordinate institutional development and capacity in MoID for transport policy, strategy, planning and monitoring

· significant improvements in communication with stakeholders

· support to some sub-sector agencies that lack adequate capacity in reporting to MoID

b. The project’s environmental impact

There is no direct environmental impact from the project, either in terms of the appointment of a Specialist or in terms of the studies that might be commissioned, since these will involve collecting data, information and evidence. However, the investment programme resulting from the updated transport policy, and described in the new strategic transport master plan, could have environmental impacts. These will be dealt with in the normal way through strategic environmental assessments, environmental impact assessments and public consultation following the requirements of Tanzania’s environmental legislation and, where donor financed, following environmental regulations and guidelines laid down by the financing donor.

c. Whether these environmental impacts were deliberate or unplanned

The environmental impacts were considered during the project development stage. Further opportunities for addressing climate change have been considered subsequently as part of the climate change portfolio screening.

d. A breakdown of the project’s funding

£2.75 million over 5 years (2008-2012) comprised of £675,000 for the provision of a Transport Specialist, plus support from a part-time Contract Manager, £1.95 million for the policy development-support fund, and £125,000 for monitoring and review.

e. Any requirements placed upon / standards required of the government of Tanzania or other aid recipient agencies.

None in addition to those already outlined in b).

f. Who is implementing the project?

The project used to be under the Government of Tanzania’s Ministry of Infrastructure Development (MOID) but after recent elections and government restructuring this project will now fall under the Ministry of Transport who will be responsible for day to day implementation.

DFID’s role in implementation will be funding the project, monitoring and through the six-month review missions, offering suggestions and advice for improvement, and enhancing linkages to other reform efforts.

The Government’s role will be exercised through MoID and MoF (Ministry of Finance), and they will have the responsibility for procuring the Specialist through a Consulting Firm, and then managing the Specialist on a day-to-day basis. MoID will provide biannual reports on the use of project resources and requests for new disbursement. Ministry of Finance will handle disbursements from DFID and provide audited reports of the projects accounts within 9 months of the close of each financial year.

g. The environmental screening notes for the respective projects

Attached: Document: (1766254) Environmental Screening Note: Tanzania Transport Policy Support Programme


Response 6 (v) - 2010 FAO Emergency Seed Distribution Project (201640)

a. The project’s rationale and objectives

Overall objective: To provide seed emergency support to farm families in 30 districts affected by the drought in 2008. Specific Objectives: Proposed seeds interventions covered the needs of 159.000 food insecure households. A total of 1,592 tonnes of seeds have been distributed.

b. The project’s environmental impact

Moving farmers from less to more drought-resistant crop varieties is a potential positive impact for the project.

c. Whether these environmental impacts were deliberate or unplanned

Environmental impacts were not the priority in responding to the UN’s emergency appeal.

d. A breakdown of the project’s funding

Total programme budget is £2.3m, of which £2.1m is for the purchase of maize seed for distribution to drought affected farmers.

e. Any requirements placed upon / standards required of the government of Tanzania or other aid recipient agencies.

DFID funding is channelled through the UN – Food and Agriculture Organisation as is governed by a Memorandum of Understanding and detailed project document.

f. Who is implementing the project?

FAO oversee the project. Implementing partners include local government authorities, international seed suppliers (responsible for delivery of seed to districts) and local NGOs (contracted to undertake seed distribution).

g. The environmental screening notes for the respective projects

Environmental Screening Note not required for Humanitarian Relief programmes of such short duration. However in discussions with the FAO we emphasised the importance of linking this emergency response to other longer term measures that can address the root causes of poverty and vulnerability in the affected districts, whether through the development of social protection schemes that can reach the chronically poor, or through initiatives that can make markets work better for the poor (e.g. voucher schemes to incentivise use of inputs to boost agricultural productivity, micro- finance/drought insurance to help poor households cope better with shocks).


Response 6 (vi) - Improving Governance of Forest Resources (114013)

This project is funded and managed through the central DFID Civil Society Challenge Fund rather than the DFID Tanzania budget and therefore monitoring and evaluation sits with the DFID Civil Society Department.

a. The project’s rationale and objectives

The project is designed to build the capacity of civil society groups and rural communities across Tanzania to have an increased influence on decision-making processes relating to the governance of forestry resources.

The project is designed to build the capacity of civil society groups and rural communities across Tanzania to have an increased influence on decision-making processes relating to the governance of forestry resources. Tanzania is enduring unsustainable logging and severe revenue losses through illegal forestry activities. The major causal factors of these problems are weak governance and corruption. A vital way in which these factors can be effectively addressed is through increased participation of civil society and rural communities in forestry policy decisions.

b. The project’s environmental impact

The project aims to equip civil society groups and rural communities across Tanzania with the capacity to have increased influence in the decision making-processes that directly affect their rights, especially in relation to the exploitation of forests and other natural resources.  This project focuses largely on training civil society groups but one key outcome reported in the last year was that one workshop brought 56 individuals from across Tanzania together to share their experiences on visual documentation and campaigning.  This was the first time most individuals had met and all made a commitment to work together as a coalition to tackle the use of charcoal as a fuel in Tanzania – the predominant cause of deforestation in the country.

The main results of the project will be the creation of a network of civil society and community groups better able to document exploitative forestry activities and associated trade, capable of using the information gathered to advocate for improvements in forestry governance, and to share information and experiences both within the network and beyond. The ultimate likely environmental impact is likely to be curbing of illegal and exploitative forestry activities.

c. Whether these environmental impacts were deliberate or unplanned

These environmental impacts were considered in the project proposal from the outset.

d. A breakdown of the project’s funding

£484,967 over 3 years

e. Any requirements placed upon / standards required of the government of Tanzania or other aid recipient agencies.

None over and above those outlined in the project document and guidance for the Civil Society Challenge Fund

f. Who is implementing the project?

Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) and the Wildlife and Conservation Society of Tanzania will be the main implementing partners.

g. The environmental screening notes for the respective projects

No specific DFID Environmental Screening undertaken as the project is under £1m and managed by the Civil Society Challenge Fund.

Response 6 (vii) - Zanzibar emergency power (201641)

a. The project’s rationale and objectives

On 10 December 2009, Unguja Island, Zanzibar, experienced a power outage, when the main electricity station in Fumba receiving power from Tanzania Mainland through a submarine cable (45 MW) failed. On 21 December a South African company was commissioned by ZECO to repair the cable after close investigation they estimated it would take up to 2 months to repair. The power outage resulted in a outbreak of cholera in Zanzibar due to the lack of electricity critical to providing the clean water supply. As Zanzibar had no centralised backup electricity supply system DFID with other donors agreed to co-finance the procurement of an emergency power and backup electricity generation system to keep the economy and critical social services such as water supply, hospitals and schools running during current and future power outages from the mainland.

b. The project’s environmental impact

As a condition for receiving support co-financing donors required that the contractors Mantrac and Government of Zanzibar (ZECO) ensure that;

a) an Environmental Management Plan for both the civil works and generators installation is put in place and followed both during installation and thereafter by ZECO until such time as a decision is taken to either decommission or relocate the generators to social services such as schools and hospitals in 2013.

b) That necessary national environmental regulations and safety safeguards are adhered to on the site which the generators will be located on during the full duration of the project.

c. Whether these environmental impacts were deliberate or unplanned

The environmental impacts were considered as part of the support provided.

d. A breakdown of the project’s funding

The total cost of the project is US$ 13 million. The bulk of the funding (US$11.7 million) covered the cost of supplying, installing and commissioning the 25 MW diesel power plant. The remaining costs covered installation material, sea freight and insurance, local transport and civil works. The donor contribution was US$ 11.5 million, UK/DFID ($3m), Sweden/Sida ($4.5m) Norway ($4m) and the outstanding amount of approximately US$1.5 million was covered by the Government of Zanzibar.

e. Any requirements placed upon / standards required of the government of Tanzania or other aid recipient agencies.

The Norwegian Project Management Unit with the contractors Mantrac and Government of Zanzibar (ZECO) will ensure that the build, operation and maintenance of the generators comply with National environmental regulations and safeguards.

Once transferred to ZECO, they are responsible for ensuring that the generator plant and site it stands on applies necessary environmental regulations and safeguards during the full duration of the project.

f. Who is implementing the project?

The project is co-financed by SIDA and Norway.The funds were channelled through and managed by the Government of Norway’s Project Management Unit. This has both the capacity and capability to oversee the work and will minimise the fiduciary risk which would be associated with a transfer to the Zanzibar Government. As the contractor Mantrac have complete responsibility for the delivery and installation of the project. Thereafter the Ministry of Water, Construction, Energy and Lands (MWCEL) is responsible for the daily running of the project, through the Project Management Unit (PMU) in the Zanzibar Electricity Corporation (ZECO).

g. The environmental screening notes for the respective projects

Attached: Document: (2550316) Annex G Environmental Screening Note

Response 6 (viii) - Land and Livelihood Rights for Pastoralists (105564)

This project is funded and managed through the central DFID Civil Society Challenge Fund rather than the DFID Tanzania budget and therefore monitoring and evaluation sits with the DFID Civil Society Department.

a. The project’s rationale and objectives

The programme will, through the mobile outreach approach, address the land and livelihood rights of the Barabaig through the implementation of two closely related and mutually supporting approaches – participatory land use planning and community-based animal health systems – supported by both research and advocacy and participatory monitoring and evaluation. Land rights are fundamental to the livelihoods of the Barabaig - land use planning offers a vehicle to achieve these and identify key livelihood development constraints and options, whilst community-based animal health acts as an entry point, a means of addressing immediate livestock concerns and a way of promoting Community based development that can in turn enhance the process of reducing natural resource-based conflicts of interest and enhancing land rights. Both approaches rely on each other and are therefore mutually supportive to a high degree, both contain a large degree of innovation around pastoralist issues but are based on methodologies that have been extensively and successfully practiced in other FARM-Africa programmes in Tanzania, Kenya, Ethiopia and South Africa.

b. The project’s environmental impact

The programme aims to both strengthen the capacity of a poor margina lised group to understand and demand their rights (research & advocacy) and to enable them to do this by improving their economic and social well-being (animal health, access to markets). In terms of the main activities, impact will be primarily in raising awareness of entitlements and rights and in engaging in local decision-making processes, but this will feed into medium-term impacts in national decision-making processes (especially through research activities). The programme will seek to provide innovative approaches to service delivery and the programme area meets the definition of a difficult environment .

The project addresses land and livelihood rights issues of the Barabaig pastoralists through the implementation of participatory land use planning, household income security associations (HISA) and community-based animal health systems.  One of the key outcomes to date has been increased village revenue and reduction of environmental degradation through Village Participatory Land use Plans.  More specifically, demarcated community forestry areas have started to attract investments with 3 new camping sites in Babati district and a hunting block in Hanang district established; in Gendabi village, the zoned reserve area attracted government investment through the PADEP programme worth Tsh. 33,000,000 (£19,411). The revenue generated from these initiatives will contribute towards the monthly village governments’ revenue to fund priority village development projects; gazetting cattle corridors and grazing areas is reported to help reduce overcrowding of cattle along water points, resulting to reduced environmental degradation and land use conflicts. The programme also facilitated 17 participatory land use plans in the 3 Districts.

c. Whether these environmental impacts were deliberate or unplanned

These environmental impacts were considered in the project proposal from the outset.

d. A breakdown of the project’s funding

£500,000 over 4 years.

e. Any requirements placed upon / standards required of the government of Tanzania or other aid recipient agencies.

None over and above those outlined in the project document and guidance for the Civil Society Challenge Fund

f. Who is implementing the project?

Food and Agricultural Research Management (Farm-Africa) is the main implementer. The primary stakeholders are the Barabaig communities in Hanang, Babati and Mbulu District, as identified in the planning process. Local partners in implementation will be the following organisations: TAPHGO (rights-based and advocacy issues), Kipoc Barabaig (land rights and land use planning, advocacy); CHAWABA (animal health, legal recognition of CBAHWs).

g. The environmental screening notes for the respective projects

No specific DFID Environmental Screening undertaken as the project is under £1m and managed by the Civil Society Challenge Fund.


Response 6 (ix) - Support to Water Aid Tanzania (105472)

a. The project’s rationale and objectives

The rationale of the project was for every Tanzanian to access safe water and sanitation through co-funding of the Water Aid strategic plan.

The objectives of the project were

-to promote rights and accountability

-provision of water infrastructure facilities in rural and peri-urban areas,

-piloting of simple and innovative sanitation facilities for urban settings

-strengthen of national monitoring systems

b. The project’s environmental impact

No specific assessment on the environment impact of this project has been made as of yet since the project is still under implementation. The project completion date is March 2011.

However, in 2006, Water Aid commissioned a study to understand the links between water resource management and the provision of safe water supply and improved sanitation in Tanzania – the findings of which informed the design of the current project.

The study looked at the environment impact of the Water Aid activities in Tanzania. The key finding of the study was that the system used for project sustainability appraisal did not pay sufficient protection against mining of groundwater, reduction of water levels and imposition of negative impacts on other water users and environment. It found out that, in some places people’s livelihood were affected as a result of a borehole abstraction which led to interference of water levels hence reduced water availability.

c. Whether these environmental impacts were deliberate or unplanned

The environmental impacts noted in the past Water Aid projects were not deliberate. Because of the size of water infrastructure, detailed environmental impact assessment was not mandatory before 2004.

d. A breakdown of the project’s funding

Project Cost: £ 480,000 (current extension 2008-2011)

Project cost £500,000 (initial 2005-2007)

Total cost £ 980,000

e. Any requirements placed upon / standards required of the government of Tanzania or other aid recipient agencies.

The Environmental Management Act of 2004 requires all water resource development projects in Tanzania to go through a formal environmental impact assessment approval process. Awareness of this requirement is low and there is weak enforcement for adherence.

The 2009 Water Resource Management Act mandates the registration of Water User Associations at Basin level. In line with the provisions of this Act, WaterAid is working to ensure that each user group established has a water use permit.

f. Who is implementing the projects?

WaterAid in collaboration with its partner NGOs

g. The environmental screening notes for the respective projects

Document: (1679033) Environmental Screening Note-WaterAid SGA

ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING NOTES:

Annex 1: Document: (1659653) Environmental Screening Note -Tanzania PRBS February 2006

Annex 2: Document: (1766254) Environmental Screening Note-Tanzania Transport Policy Support Programme

Annex 3: Document: (2550316) Environmental Screening Note – Zanzibar Power

Annex 4: Document: (1679033) Environmental Screening Note-WaterAid SGA

31 January 2011