republic of tajikistan livestock and pasture development ... · republic of tajikistan livestock...

Document Date: 11-May 2015Project No. 2000000977Report No: 3820-TJ

Near East, North Africa and Europe DivisionProgramme Management Department

Republic of Tajikistan

Livestock and Pasture Development Project -II

Detailed design report

Main report and appendices

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design report

i

ContentsCurrency equivalents iv

Weights and measures iv

Abbreviations and acronyms v

Map of the Project area vii

Executive Summary viii

Logical Framework Error! Bookmark not defined.I. Strategic context and rationale 1

A. Country and rural development context 1

B. Rationale 2

II. Project description 4

A. Project area and target group 4

B. Development objective and impact indicators 5

C. Outcomes/Components 5

D. Lessons learned and adherence to IFAD policies 13

III. LPDP-II implementation 15

A. Approach 15

B. Organizational framework 15

C. Planning, M&E, learning and knowledge management 16

D. Financial management, procurement and governance 18

E. Supervision 20

F. Risk identification and mitigation 20

IV. Project costs, financing, benefits and sustainability 21

A. Project costs 21

B. Financing 23

C. Summary benefits and economic analysis 26

D. Sustainability 28


ii

List of Tables

Table 1: Project Costs by Component 22Table 2: Financing Plan by Components (US$) 24Table 3: Financing Plan by Expenditure Accounts (US$) 25Table 4: Livestock number trend in Tajikistan (1992-2013) 30Table 5: Distribution of Livestock by Farm Type (%) 30Table 6: Changes in average annual air temperature between 1940 and 2010 32Table 7: Trend of poverty and extreme poverty in Tajikistan using PPP$2.15/day and

PPP$4.30/day (1993-2010) 35Table 8: Share of population living in poverty and extreme poverty segregated by urban and ruralareas and by regions in 2009 35Table 9: Distribution of livestock by type of farms (2007-2012) 36Table 10: Data on LPDP and LPDP-II target districts: population, livestock, pasture area,

pasture carrying capacity (Statistics Agency of Tajikistan) 40Table 11: Major criteria for selection of the Jamoats to be covered by LPDP-II 40Table 12: Disbursement Accounts and Financing Rules 76Table 13:Summary of FM risks and mitigating measures 79Table 14: Procurement Plan (first 18 months) 85Table 15: Constant Purchasing Power Exchange Rates (TJS/US$) 89Table 18: Expenditure Accounts 90Table 19: Project Costs by Component 91Table 20: Financing Plan by Components (US$) 93Table 21: Financing Plan by Expenditure Accounts (US$) 94Table 22: Production Models Summary (Financial) /a 98Table 23: Key Livestock Parameters 99Table 24: Summary of CLPMP Model 100Table 25: Income Diversification Models Summary a/ 102Table 26: Summary of CLPMP Model (Economic) 103Table 27: Summary of ID Models (Economic) 103Table 28: Sensitivity Analysis 104Table 29: Project Economic Analysis (constant 2015 values) 105


iii

Appendices

Appendix 1: Country and rural context background 29Appendix 2: Poverty, targeting and gender 35Appendix 3: Country performance and lessons learned 43Appendix 4: Detailed project description 47Appendix 5: Institutional aspects and implementation arrangements 61Appendix 6: Planning, M&E and learning and knowledge management 71Appendix 7: Financial management and disbursement arrangements 75Appendix 8: Procurement 83Appendix 9: Project cost and financing 89Appendix 10: Economic and Financial Analysis 95Appendix 11: Draft Project Implementation Manual 107Appendix 12: Compliance with IFAD policies 111Appendix 13: Contents of the Project Life File 123


iv

Currency equivalentsCurrency Unit = Somoni

US$1.0 = 6.0 TJS (March 2015)

Weights and measures1 kilogram = 1000 g

1 000 kg = 2.204 lb.

1 kilometre (km) = 0.62 mile

1 metre = 1.09 yards

1 square metre = 10.76 square feet

1 acre = 0.405 hectare

1 hectare = 2.47 acres


v

Abbreviations and acronyms

ACTED Agency for Technical Cooperation and DevelopmentADBAIDS

Asian Development BankAcquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

AKF Aga Khan FoundationASAP Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture ProgrammeATACAWPBBDSCACILM

Agriculture Training and Advisory CentreAnnual Work Plan and BudgetBusiness Development ServicesCentral Asian Countries’ Initiative on Land Management

CAMPCARITASCCCDS

Central Asia Mountain Partnership ProgrammeCatholic Agency for Overseas Aid and DevelopmentClimate ChangeCommunity Development Specialist

CFCIDACIF

Community FacilitatorCanadian International Development AgencyClimate Investment Funds

CIG Common Interest GroupCIS Commonwealth of Independent StatesCLPMPCODCCDFIDDPO

Community Livestock and Pasture Management PlanCommunity OrganizationDonor Coordination CouncilDepartment for International Development (United Kingdom)District Project Officer

EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and DevelopmentEC European CommissionFAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United NationsFHHFMDGDIGDPGNIGOTHDIHHICARDAIDAIFADIGAILRIINGOIRR

Female Headed HouseholdFoot and Mouth DiseaseGender Development IndexGross Domestic ProductGross National IncomeGovernment of TajikistanHuman Development IndexHouseholdInternational Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry AreasInternational Development AssociationInternational Fund for Agricultural DevelopmentIncome Generating ActivityInternational Livestock Research InstituteInternational Non-Governmental OrganisationInternal Rate of Return

JCJCSSKLSPLPDP

Jamoat CouncilJoint Country Support StrategyKhatlon Livelihoods Support ProjectLivestock and Pasture Development Project

LRPM&EMIS

Land Reform Project (USAID)Monitoring and EvaluationManagement Information System


vi

MOAMOF

Ministry of AgricultureMinistry of Finance

MSDSP Mountain Societies Development Support ProgrammeNAASNARSNDSNGOPIMPMUPPCRPPP

National Academy of Agricultural SciencesNational Agricultural Research SystemNational Development StrategyNon-Governmental OrganisationProject Implementation ManualProject Management UnitPilot Project for Climate ResiliencePurchasing Power Parity

PRS(P)PSCPUUPUUBPYRIMS

Poverty Reduction Strategy (Paper)Project Steering CommitteePasture Users’ UnionPUU BoardProject YearResults and Impact Management System

SCLMGSCFSCISPMSDCSDRSIDASVISSWGSWOTTATAUTLSSTOR

State Committee for Land Management and GeodesyStrategic Climate FundState Committee on Investments and State Property ManagementSwiss Development CooperationSpecial Drawing Right(s)Swedish International Development AgencyState Veterinary Inspection ServicesSelf-help Women GroupStrengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and ThreatsTechnical AssistanceTajik Agrarian UniversityTajikistan Living Standards SurveyTerms of Reference

TTUNDPUSAIDUS$

Technical TeamUnited Nations Development ProgrammeUnited States Agency for International DevelopmentUnited States Dollar

VOWB

Village OrganizationWorld Bank

WFP World Food Programme


vii

Map of the Project areaFigure 1: Tajikistan. Livestock and Pasture Development Project II


viii

Executive SummaryA. Strategic context and rationale

Country and rural development context. Tajikistan is a landlocked country with mountainous areasaccounting for about 93% of the total land area, and a population of 8.2 million. Tajikistan’s economyhas grown by more than 8% per annum since 2000, but growth slowed from 7.4% in 2013 to 6.7% in2014 as remittance inflow, equivalent to almost half of Tajikistan’s GDP, fell by 8.3%. The country’sremoteness, obsolescent Soviet-era infrastructure, deteriorating education and health systems, andlack of Government resources are significant barriers to economic and social development.The agriculture sector accounts for only about 21% of the country’s GDP, but plays a crucial role forthe livelihood and food security of the rural population. The population of Tajikistan was 73.4% rural in2013, with a majority engaged in agriculture, which accounted for 75% of total employment. Thepoverty level has been declining during the last 15 years to 36% in 2013, with extreme povertyreduced to 14%. Poverty is especially high in rural areas, where the population depends mainly onagriculture, livestock and remittances for livelihoods and food security. Tajikistan ranks lowest inEurope and Central Asia on gender equality. Women’s status and position in society has undergone acritical change after independence in 1991 with less education, less formal employment and lowerwages. Agriculture is the largest employment sector for women, with about 50% of women engaged inthe sector in 2010. Women’s participation in agriculture is characterized by seasonal and low-paid orunpaid positions. In the livestock sector women are mainly responsible for the care of animals withinthe homestead and undertake much of the work of feed preparation, milking, and cleaning. Foodinsecurity and malnutrition is high in poor households, especially among children. More than 80percent of interviewed households under the LPDP Baseline Survey suffered from food insecurity andshortage of money for food throughout the year. Chronic malnutrition affects almost 30 percent ofchildren under five.Tajikistan tops the list of 28 countries of Central and Easter Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia onthe Climate Risk Index, being a sensitive country with low adaptation capacity. With limited investmentin infrastructure, lack of appropriate policy and regulatory framework for pasture and forest resourcesand limited institutional capacity, deforestation and over-grazing have deteriorated soil quality andincreased the risk of soil erosion, landslides and flooding. This unpredictability has a major impact onthe livestock sector.

Rationale. Livestock ownership is a key coping strategy for the smallholder farmer in Tajikistan. Thelivestock inventories have grown to levels higher than in the immediate pre-independence period, andrearing livestock is an activity in which nearly the entire rural population engages. The rise ininventories coupled with the fall in feed supplies mean that feed per animal has fallen dramaticallyalong with livestock productivity. There are many constraints to the development of the livestocksector, such as lack of technical knowledge, poor governance arrangements for pastures, inefficientmanagement of community livestock, shortage of feed during the winter months, environmentaldegradation, and lack of access to quality fodder seed and infrastructure - all of this furtherexacerbated by climate change. Investment in measures to overcome the obstacles to increasedlivestock productivity and production will have an immediate impact on smallholders’ nutrition status,food security profile, income and livelihoods and contribute to a greater contribution of livestock inagriculture incomes, employment and productivity. Climate change adaptation needs to addressurgent environmental and poverty issues. The close link between livestock productivity and therational and efficient use of pastures requires a concurrent focus on the pasture/natural resourcemanagement aspects of livestock production. This in turn requires an effort to mainstream climatechange adaptation into livestock and pasture management given the fact that this sector is extremelyvulnerable. LPDP-II is in essence a geographical expansion of LPDP, however, with integration ofthe urgent issue of climate change adaptation in the both phases. Thus, notwithstanding the“sequential” financing, LPDP and LPDPII will be treated as one coherent project in all operationalaspects and both LPDPs will be managed and implemented by the same institutions.


ix

B. Project description

Project area and target group. The project will reach about 38 000 rural households in at least 200communities of five districts of the Khatlon region with high poverty levels and a potential forincreased livestock production. The primary target group of the Project will be: (i) smallholder livestockhouseholds; (ii) private veterinary service providers and small scale entrepreneurs with the potential toprovide services to households and smallholder farmers; and (iii) women headed households andwomen belonging to poor households. Addressing gender in the Project will help build assets at theindividual, household, and community level through reducing vulnerability and increasing theopportunities of men, women, boys, and girls. The Project will use a participatory approach at thevillage level that will ensure the inclusion of eligible households who meet the poverty, capacity andgender criteria, and will continue to emphasize the role of women in agricultural production to enablethem to move beyond production for subsistence and into higher-value, market-oriented production.

Project Goal and Objectives. The development goal of the Project is to contribute to the reduction ofpoverty in Khatlon Oblast. The development objective is to increase the nutritional status and incomesof around 38 000 poor households by enhancing livestock productivity and climate resilience in asustainable manner. Project implementation will be guided by the Project’s results managementframework and its set of key performance indicators.

Outcomes/Components. The Project’s investments and activities will be implemented through threecomponents in addition to project management:

Component 1 – Institutional Development: The key objective of this component is to enhance thecapacity of targeted public sector and community organizations to be more effective and efficient atpro-poor pasture management development. This investment will focus primarily on the institutionsthat support pasture development: PUUs and their Boards, the MOA, SVIS and TAU. The mainoutputs for this component are: PUUs enabled to develop and implement climate risk-mitigationcommunity pasture plans incorporating needs and priorities of poor and women; and (b) publicinstitutions involved in pasture management strengthened. The component will consist of two sub-components:

Sub-Component 1.1: Development of Community Organizations. Using the LPDP’s targetingapproach and indicators, the PMU will select communities that have high levels of poverty, but also aneed and recognized potential for livestock development. Mobilization and strengthening of the PUUswill be conducted by Community Facilitators (CFs) - NGOs experienced in social mobilization of ruralcommunities - backed by the technical expertise and knowledge provided by the project’s technicalteam. The CFs will also facilitate the formation of the Common Interest Groups (CIGs) out of eligiblesmallholder households interested in and capable of participating in livestock development activities,and Self-help Women Groups (SWG) for income diversification activities.

Sub-Component 1.2: Advancement of Policy and Legal Framework and Strengthening NationalInstitutions. To ensure sustainability and advancement of pasture management reforms, the Projectwill support institutions, such as the MOA, given that it is appointed by the Government to act as anauthorized state body in the area of pasture policy. The Project will provide technical guidance to thisfuture PD in developing policy and legislation to advance pasture management transfer, monitoring ofpasture condition, through assessing the quality of pastures and monitoring the performance of PUUs.The Project will continue to provide assistance in formulation of a state policy and strategy formainstreaming climate change adaptation into sustainable pasture management, and elaboration oflegal and regulatory documents to support implementation of the Pasture Law, including thedevelopment of a Strategy for Pasture Management and Improvement for 2015-2020. Internationaland local TA will be mobilized to provide assistance to review and amend the Pasture Law.

Component 2 – Productivity Enhancement and Improved Animal Health. The key objective ofthis component is to increase access to livestock and veterinary services, and fodder supply forsmallholder producers, resulting in decreased mortality and increased productivity of sheep/goatflocks and cattle herds due to a reduced incidence and prevalence of diseases. The main expected


x

outputs of this component are: (a) capacity for sustainable and efficient livestock production built, and(b) private vets provide animal health and production services on a sustainable basis. The componentwill consist of two sub-components:

Sub-Component 2.1: Livestock Productivity Enhancement. Livestock farmers/households will beorganized into groups of 15 to 30 for the provision of training in improved animal husbandry andmanagement practices, feed preparation, and identification of hygiene and health aspects. The CFrecruited under Component 1 will deliver the training programme to the targeted communities. TheProject will promote fodder production and distribution through the establishment of a Seed Fund.In line with Government policy, the Project will continue strengthening private entrepreneurs dealingwith livestock input supply such as poultry feed, animal feed, improved fodder seed, seed cleaningservices. Private sector participants dealing with marketing of dairy, meat and other livestock productswill be provided business and technical assistance. The Project will undertake an assessment ofindividual entrepreneurs and identify their specific needs for business development, equipment, creditand technical training. Business advisers recruited by the Project will undertake a broker role byproviding such services and linking individual entrepreneurs with the required service providers.

Sub-Component 2.2: Improved Animal Health. In line with Government policy the Project willsupport the development of private veterinary services and the establishment of a private veterinarynetwork, which will provide both animal health and artificial insemination services. A small facility willbe established under the Project, to which veterinarians selected to serve the rural communities maysubmit applications for funding of veterinary drugs, training, equipment, veterinary tools and veterinaryclinics/centres. Based on its experience of implementing this activity, the Project will provide policyinput on how the existing policy on the establishment of these services at the village level can befurther refined for more cost effective use and a higher level of impact.

Component 3: Pasture Development and Diversification for Vulnerability Reduction. The keyobjective for this component is to increase access to more productive and climate resilient pastureareas as well as to diversified income-generating opportunities for livestock communities through asustainable, community-led management of natural resources. The component will strengthen theadaptive capacity, governance and management skills of PUUs and their elected Boards (PUUB) andreduce their vulnerability to climatic stress. The main expected outputs for this component are:(a) resilient and sustainable investments prioritized in CLPMPs completed and functioning, and (b)alternative income-generating activities supported to enhance risk-coping .The component will bedivided into 2 sub-components:

Sub-Component 3.1 – Community Resilient Pasture Management and Investments. Thecomponent will support PUUs in developing CLPMPs to address issues of degradation of pastureresources and deterioration of pasture infrastructure, and climate adaptation needs in sustainablepasture management and restoration, improved winter feeding, livestock health and productionissues. Training and capacity building will be provided to the PUU members to carry out assessmentand efficient planning, ensuring the active participation of the more vulnerable households andinvolvement of women in planning and decision making. A bottom-up approach will allow the PUUs todecide on the detailed investment needs demonstrating that the targets and management principles inthe management plans will be achieved. The sub-component will build a monitoring and evaluationsystem through modelling of pasture productivity to determine carrying capacity and identify remotepasture areas that could be accessed. Livestock carrying capacity plans will be based on flexiblecarrying capacity estimates to continuously adapt the stocking rates to the highly variable climaticconditions and biomass availability. These will be done with support of the TA, and will be part of theCLPMPs. To support the initial implementation of the CLPMPs the Project will provide investmentgrants through the PUUs. The exact amount of each grant will be linked to the PUU population andperformance of the PUU, including the collection of pasture use fees.

Sub-component 3.2: Income Diversification. This sub-component will promote alternative sourcesof income to diversify household economies. The Project will explore income-generating optionsbeyond livestock to gradually reduce grazing pressure on pastures and mitigate the impact of climatechange. The Project will provide financing to encourage and nurture new economic activities through


xi

which the most vulnerable of the rural society – mainly women – can build and develop additionalsources of income as a safety net against possible economic losses, to help build socio-economicresilience, enhance their nutritional status and increase their incomes. This will be coupled withtraining and capacity enhancement activities for the identification, development and management ofnew climate-resilient businesses. The Project will provide technical assistance, demand assessment,resource mapping, feasibility study and other related studies by a professional Technical Facilitatorprior to micro-project funding.

C. Implementation

Organizational framework LPDP-II is a geographic expansion of LPDP to five additional districts inthe Khatlon region. It will be implemented in the same modality as LPDP in a partnership betweenstate, civil society organizations, service providers, community organizations, and in coordination withother donors.

Monitoring and evaluation The M&E system for LPDP and LPDP-II is expected to providecomprehensive information for effective and efficient management of the project and contribute tolearning from implementation experience for all stakeholders. The Management Information System(MIS), which has been developed for LPDP will be extended and adjusted for use in LPDP-II. Thesystem has been designed in a manner, which allows gender disaggregation of data, poverty profilingof households, education status, livestock ownership pattern, information on livestock yields, pastureuse and management practices, asset base and employment.

Learning and knowledge management Knowledge generated by the Project will be documented fordissemination to regional and national audiences using a variety of instruments. LPDP already plays akey role in the Pasture Management Knowledge Sharing Platform in Tajikistan facilitated by GIZ,sharing its experience and lessons learned with other practitioners and policy makers. LPDP-II willexplore additional possibilities for sharing successful approaches on issues important for all the CIScountries.

Financial management, procurement and governanceThe Project’s financial management andprocurement arrangements will build on the experience gained by the PMU in fulfilling its responsibilityfor financial management and procurement under LPDP. The PMU’s handling of project accounts,audits, procurement and disbursement is considered satisfactory and fully consistent with the financialmanagement rules and regulations of IFAD.

D. Project costs, financing, benefits and sustainability

Project costs and financing. The total investment and incremental recurrent Project costs, includingphysical and price contingencies, are estimated at about US$ 24 million (TJS 163 million). The mainfinancing will consist in an IFAD loan of US$ 8.7 million and grant of US$ 8,7 million, and an ASAPgrant of US$ 5.0 million. The Government contribution is estimated at US$ 0.5 million that includescontributions from its budget primarily to cover taxes. Approximately US$ 1.4 million will be providedby the beneficiaries as co-financing of the CLPMP and other grants.

Project Benefits. The main project benefits will accrue to households in the 200 PUUs that constitutethe project area in the selected districts of the Khatlon region. Some 38,000 households will benefitdirectly and indirectly from the project’s interventions (80 per cent of those targeted).

Benefits will derive from: (i) increased pasture yields and less vulnerable pastures; (ii) raised feedcrop yields and expanded cultivated feed crop area; (iii) improved resilience and capacity ofsmallholders for livestock and pasture management; (iv) reductions in livestock mortality andimproved livestock performance; (v) opportunities for better breed improvement and selection; and (vi)reducing risk through the access to a monitoring system to determine the flexible carrying capacityestimates and identify remote pasture areas that could be accessed, which will directly benefit pasturecommunities. A number of environmental / adaptation benefits will accrue from vulnerability reductionand restoration of natural assets.


xii

Economic and financial analysis. The financial analysis of the CLPMP shows: (i) an increase inincremental income by 13%; and (ii) a high benefit/cost ratio (1.9) and IRR (92%) due to the very lowstarting point, demonstrating the attractiveness of the investments. The returns from the incomediversification models also give attractive results with incremental annual benefits ranging betweenUS$ 900 to 1 300 per household. The economic analysis of the Project indicates that the Project isrobust in economic terms. The analysis results in an ERR of 20% and a Net Present Value of US$ 8.6million taken over 20 years with the benefit stream (discounted at 12%) based on the quantifiablebenefits that relate directly to the activities undertaken following implementation of the components.

Sustainability. Through its design, the Project adopts a balanced approach between environmentalmanagement, economic growth, and the strengthening of social capital. A key focus of the Project isto promote policy towards sustainable pasture management in the country, and develop the adaptivecapacity in the PUUs to be able to manage their pasture areas in an improved and sustainablemanner, taking into account the predicted impacts of climate change on pastures and pasturecommunities in the country. PUUs with secure land use rights, and empowered with technicalknowledge and organizational skills will continue to manage their pastures. Similarly, the interventionsunder the sub-component 3.2, being business focused, as well as the additional income-generatingactivities, will be sustainable as long as they are profitable.


xiii

Logical framework

Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators BaselineValue(LPDP1results)

Monitoring Mechanismand InformationSources

Assumptions/Risks

A. Project Goal

Contribute to reduction of poverty in Khatlon region(50% of people in Khatlon are estimated as beingbelow the poverty line)

18,000 households (50% of targeted households and40% of total population in the targeted districts) withimprovement in household asset ownership index by15%;3% reduction in the prevalence of chronicmalnutrition (stunting)

NA

40%

Quantitative baseline, mid-term review, projectcompletion survey.Studies to complementindicator based data

(A) Political stability and conducivemacro-economic framework(A) Commitment and cooperationamong all concerned institutionalpartners(R) Influence of overall economicdevelopment concealing projectachievements

B. Project PurposeIncrease the nutritional status, incomes and resilienceof poor households by enhancing livestockproductivity in a sustainable manner

80% of targeted HHs reporting increased incomesfrom livestock by minimum 15%;

38000 of poor smallholder households whose climateresilience has been increased (ASAP).

2932 TJS

NA

Baseline, mid-term,completion surveysFinancial records of projectEnterprise groupsQualitative studies

(A) A sound use of climate changevulnerability assessment informsand drives adaptation work(A) Risk mitigation managementplans are implemented by targetedcommunities(R) Elite capture of adisproportionate amount of thegains from increased production andlocal level conversion of animal,milk and meat surpluses sold on themarket and to processors

COMPONENT 1: Institutional DevelopmentOUTCOME:Targeted public sector and community organizations1(disaggregated by type, i.e: PUUs, VOs, MoA, PastureDepartment, TAU, Jamoats) are more effective andefficient at pro-poor pasture management andlivestock development

Satisfactory levels of governance2 for 75% of PUUsfacilitated by the project

Technical capacity3 of targeted institutions(disaggregated by type4) is increased

NA

NA

Project M&E records,progress reports, specificpublic records,policy documents, laws,strategies

(A) Favourable government policiesand cross-sectoral cooperationbetween state, region and districtauthorities(A) Interest and motivation amongcommunity members(R) Lack of capacity in governmentagencies and communities toeffectively participate in projectactivities and transmit informationand know-how

1 Public sector and community organizations are defined in Appendix 5 and PIM

2 Governance levels of PUUs will be assessed through a specific study. Governance will be measured through levels of (i) democratic accountability (qualitative: if elections of board or head have been democratic), (ii) transparency of financial management (if members are informed of revenues

and expenditures of PUUs); (iii) gender equitability (eg: presence of women’s sub-set organizations / women’s groups within the VO). Source of information will be a annual survey, conducted by community facilitators, and mid-term / end of project HHs survey.

3 Technical capacity has been defined in LPDP, but needs to be further enhanced. Such level will be assessed when the project starts the interactions with the targeted organizations. Once the parameters of technical capacities are agreed, the M&E Consultant will develop a list of aspects

(similarly to what done for Governance levels), with help from the company developing the MIS.

4 MoA, Pasture Department, TAU, Hukumats, Jamoats, VOs, PUUs.


xiv

COMPONENT 2: Productivity Enhancement andImproved Animal HealthOUTCOME:Healthier livestock with lower levels of mortality andincreased supplementary feed available to communitylivestock

70% of livestock households report reduction inanimal mortality15% increase in average milk yields and 10%increase in average weight of cattle, sheep and goatssold in local markets

NA

3.2lt/day;Averageslaughterweights:91kg cattle47kg sheep45kg goat

Baseline, mid-term,completion surveys,project M&E records,progress reports

(A) Livestock farmers will see thebenefits of a collective approach toanimal health and nutrition.(A) Effective cooperation betweenprivate vets and livestock farmerscan be ensured(R) Not enough livestock farmerswilling and able to pay for vetservices make the business unviable

COMPONENT 3: Pasture Development andDiversification for Vulnerability ReductionOUTCOME:Household resilience increased through sustainableuse of pastures and income diversification

Beneficiaries’ household income increased at least by20% from alternative income activities (ASAP)

132,000 ha of accessible pasture managed in a moreclimate-resilient manner (ASAP)

NA

NA

Baseline, mid-term,completion surveys,Project M&E records,progress reports

(A) Effective and timely technicalassistance secured for investment(R) The project fails to capture theinterest of local communities(R) Poor maintenance of CLPMPinvestments results in reducedbenefits to the livestock farmers


1

I. Strategic context and rationale

A. Country and rural development contextTajikistan is a landlocked country with mountainous areas accounting for about 93% of the total1.

land area, and a population of 8.2 million5. Tajikistan’s economy has grown by more than 8% perannum since 2000, but growth slowed from 7.4% in 2013 to 6.7% in 2014 as remittance inflow,equivalent to almost half of Tajikistan’s GDP, fell by 8.3%. Remittances from about one million labourmigrants account for as much as 25% of total household income6, making the country highlyvulnerable to external economic shocks. The economic situation may deteriorate further following theeconomic recession in Russia. The country’s remoteness, obsolescent Soviet-era infrastructure,deteriorating education and health systems, and lack of Government resources are significant barriersto economic and social development. While the Government has taken several measures to improverural livelihoods through land reform, which provided people inheritable usufruct rights, freedom tofarm, writing off the cotton debt and some infrastructure development, many problems in the sectorstill remain.

The agriculture sector accounts for only about 21% of the country’s GDP, but plays a crucial2.role for the livelihood and food security of the rural population. The population of Tajikistan was 73.4%rural in 2013, with a majority engaged in agriculture, which accounted for 75% of total employment. Ofthe total land area of the country (14.3 million ha), agricultural land accounts for about 34% (4.8million ha), of which 82% is pastures and hay meadows. Individual households account for over 50%of the country’s agricultural production, and in some agricultural sub-sectors their contribution reaches80-90%.

The poverty level has been declining during the last 15 years to 36% in 2013, with extreme3.poverty reduced to 14%7. Remittances accounted for 25% of poverty reduction in rural and 18% inurban areas8. Poverty is especially high in rural areas, where the population depends mainly onagriculture, livestock and remittances for livelihoods and food security. In 2009, the poverty level wasat 50.8% and extreme poverty at 15.6% in rural areas, while in urban areas poverty was 36.7% andextreme poverty 9.5%. There are regional differences in poverty level, with the majority of poor peopleliving in Khatlon and Sughd regions, which account for 65% of Tajikistan’s total population9. Accordingto the baseline survey conducted for LPDP in 2014, poverty levels in Khatlon region are ranging from37% to 42%, and extreme poverty from 8% to 14%. Tajikistan’s Government has an ambitious plan toreduce poverty to 20 percent by 2020. However, with the high annual population growth (3.8%), lackof employment, and decreasing remittances, this target presents a challenge and would require astrong commitment and advancement of a wide range of reforms.

Tajikistan ranks lowest in Europe and Central Asia on gender equality, although women are the4.main farmers in the country. Women’s status and position in society has undergone a critical changeafter independence in 1991 with less education, less formal employment and lower wages. Womenhead nearly half of households suffering from a heavy burden of food insecurity. A third of householdsare suffering from moderate food insecurity. Agriculture is the largest employment sector for women,with about 50% of women engaged in the sector in 2010. However, women’s participation inagriculture is characterized by seasonal and low-paid or unpaid positions. In the livestock sectorwomen are mainly responsible for the care of animals within the homestead and undertake much ofthe work of feed preparation, milking, and cleaning.

5 Population data is drawn from the latest information from Official Statistics from the Goskomstat, 2015.6 Report of the International Crisis Group, July 2009.7 Tajikistan’s Household Budget Survey (HBS), 2012. Between 1999 and 2009 the country relied on the Living StandardMeasurement Surveys (LSMS), from 2009 for poverty measurement it conducted HBS. Since methodologies aredifferent, the estimates are not fully comparable.8 Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for Tajikistan for the period FY15-18, World Bank, May 2014.9 Republic of Tajikistan: Poverty Reduction Strategy- Progress Report. International Monetary Fund, February 2012.


2

Women’s participation in agriculture and income from it is determined by access to land, other5.productive resources and knowledge. Access to land, and tenure security, remains limited for women,who have access to less land than men and face challenges in registering land in their name. Genderinequalities limit agricultural productivity and efficiency and in so doing, undermine developmentagendas. Labor, land, and livestock are the key assets of rural families in Tajikistan. In rural areas,according to the LPDP Baseline Survey data estimates, more than 75% of the population is notengaged in salaried work or earning cash income. Ownership of land is a key determinant ofhousehold status and productive potential. Farmers in Khatlon region suffer from poor quality of land.Climate change is affecting agriculture and smallholder farmers, especially poor and vulnerablehouseholds. With a legacy of environmental mismanagement, limited investment in infrastructure, lackof an appropriate policy and regulatory framework for pasture and forest resources and limitedinstitutional capacity, deforestation and over-grazing have deteriorated soil quality and increased therisk of soil erosion, landslides and flooding. This unpredictability has a major impact on the livestocksector.

Food insecurity and malnutrition is high in poor households, especially among children. More6.than 80 percent of interviewed households under the LPDP Baseline Survey suffered from foodinsecurity and shortage of money throughout the year and had to buy food products on a credit basis(86.7%), borrowed money from friends/relatives to purchase food (22.7%), ate smaller, lower qualityor less frequent meals (10.3%), took a loan from a bank to purchase food (3.1%), or even soldhousehold assets (1.7%). As a result, the poorest quintile of the population consumes fewer than2,000 calories per person per day on average. Chronic malnutrition affects almost 30 percent ofchildren under five. The anthropometric survey conducted within the LPDP Baseline Survey followingIFAD methodology reconfirmed that malnutrition of children under 5 years old measured in selecteddistricts of Khalton region is high: 23% were underweight and 8% were severely underweight; 40%stunted and 18% were severely stunted; 14% were wasted and 7% were severely wasted. Thenumber of children who are underweight and who do not reach their optimum heights is high and is aconsequence of acute and chronic malnutrition.

According to the World Bank assessment (2008), Tajikistan tops the list of 28 countries of7.Central and Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia on the Climate Risk Index, being a sensitivecountry with low adaptation capacity. The regional index of CC vulnerability for Tajikistan shows thatthe populated south Khatlon valley is among the four most vulnerable areas: climate change exposureand variability is highest due to the high frequency of extreme temperatures and broad-range of intra-monthly temperature fluctuations; sensitivity is highest in north-east Khatlon hills due to its reliance onagriculture and high sensitivity to climate disasters.

B. RationaleLivestock ownership is a key coping strategy for the smallholder farmer in Tajikistan. The8.

livestock inventories have grown to levels higher than in the immediate pre-independence period.Furthermore, rearing livestock is an activity in which nearly the entire rural population engages.According to a 2011 survey of upland and lowland districts, 85% and 92% of households respectivelyowned one or more cows, 42% and 63% owned poultry, 20% and 59% owed goats, and 32% and54% owned sheep10. The productivity of the livestock sector is very low. Livestock rearing reliesprimarily on grazing supplemented by limited cultivated feed crops and minimal concentrates. The risein inventories coupled with the fall in feed supplies mean that feed per animal has fallen dramaticallyalong with livestock productivity.

There are many constraints in the livestock sector. The ability of livestock farmers in Tajikistan9.to maximize the use of their pastures is constrained by many problems, including the lack of technicalknowledge of small livestock holders, poor governance arrangements on pasture management,inefficient management of community livestock, shortage of feed during the winter months,

10 World Bank (2011), Survey Assessing Development Impacts on Rural Vulnerability and Resilience: Evidence fromLand Reform and Sustainable Agriculture Efforts in Tajikistan, World Bank, Washington, DC.


3

environmental degradation, and lack of access to quality fodder seed and infrastructure - all of thisfurther exacerbated by climate change. The management of the 3.8 million ha of pasture land isinadequate to foster economic growth and preserve these fragile resources. The Project will addressthese constraints in an effort to reduce vulnerability of pasture communities vis-a-vis the increasingthreat posed by changing climate conditions and related vulnerability to the impact of climate change,ensuring livestock producer households maximize their returns while ensuring the sustainablemanagement of pastures. With the growing number of livestock, emergence of commercial livestockfarmers and further deterioration of natural pastures, the focus on pasture management reformsresulted in adoption of the Pasture Law in March 2013. That law serves as a foundation for thebeginning pasture management decentralization reforms occurring on small scale in selected areas.However, experience has shown that it is imperative to facilitate the reform process with furtheradvancement of the policy and legal framework in pasture management.

Improvement in livestock productivity would support poor households in dealing with food10.security issues and enhance their nutrition status. Despite the relative decrease in poverty there is stilla significant number of people suffering from chronic malnutrition and poverty in the country. The mostcritical situation is related to consumption of meat, eggs, milk and dairy products. The ratio of actualconsumption of these products per capita to physiological norms is less than 25%. Investment inmeasures to overcome the obstacles to increased livestock productivity and production will have animmediate impact on smallholders’ nutrition status, food security profile, income and livelihoods andcontribute to a greater contribution of livestock in agriculture incomes, employment and productivityand increase the overall contribution of the livestock sector to agriculture GDP to bring about growthand poverty alleviation in rural areas. IFAD is considered an ideal partner to provide such support tofarmers in Khatlon, given its experience in working with smallholder farmers in Asia and in theCommonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

Climate change adaptation interventions would address urgent environmental and poverty11.issues. The close link between livestock productivity and the rational and efficient use of pasturesrequires a concurrent focus on the pasture/natural resource management aspects of livestockproduction. This in turn requires an effort to mainstream climate change adaptation into livestock andpasture management given the fact that this sector is extremely vulnerable. Despite the fact that theKhatlon region is among the most vulnerable areas to climate change and disaster-related risk, thegrowing impact of climate change has not yet been explicitly taken into account in LPDP, specificallyin terms of development of the Community Livestock and Pasture Management Plans (CLPMP) andsetting priorities for wise long-term investments in improving pastures. Thanks to the availability ofAdaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Programme (ASAP) financing, the urgent issue of climatechange adaptation has been integrated in both phases of LPDP. The fact that the response of theinternational community and climate finance to the threat of CC in Tajikistan has so far been mostlylimited to pilot initiatives is another a strong argument for LPDPII to benefit from the ASAP.

The Project is strongly aligned with, and contributes to the priorities of the Third National12.Communication (TNC) of Tajikistan to UNFCCC, which identifies agriculture and livestock as one ofthe most vulnerable areas to climate change. The Project is also in line with the NAP on CC and theTajikistan SPCR, and will contribute to further integrate CC adaptation considerations in the NDS2006 - 2015 that already includes environmental sustainability targets, the PRS-3 that explicitlymention climate change issues, and the Climate Change Adaptation Strategy for the period 2015-2030, which is being developed under the leadership of the Hydrometeorology State Department.

LPDP-II is in essence a geographical expansion of LPDP, however, with integration of the13.urgent issue of climate change adaptation in the both phases. Thus, notwithstanding the “sequential”financing, LPDP and LPDPII will be treated as one coherent project in all operational aspects. BothLPDPs will be managed and implemented by the same institutions and complement each other,specifically in terms of the “one-project” approach, implementation modalities and project activities.The on-going LPDP is a major intervention in the country in terms of advancement of pasturemanagement reforms and livestock sector development. Based on experience and outcomes of the


4

on-going project, the Government of Tajikistan has decided to upscale its approach to additional areaswith livestock development potential. The established PMU and network of engaged institutions, builtpartnership arrangements, capacity and expertise accumulated in the Project would facilitate smoothexpansion of LPDP-II to the additional areas of the Khatlon region.

In addition to experience gained from LPDP, the project also builds on the past and on-going14.experiences and policies of other international agencies and major stakeholders, including the WB,ADB, WFP, FAO, GIZ, UNDP, Aga Khan Foundation, amongst others. During implementation, theProject will actively seek synergies and complementarities with these and other agencies involved inlivestock/pasture management, climate change, and disaster risk reduction. The Project hasestablished links with the Pilot Project for Climate Resilience (PPCR), funded by the World Bank,ADB, EBRD and DFID, under the Strategic Climate Fund (SCF), which is one of two multi-donor trustfunds within the Climate Investment Funds (CIF). The Project will also work closely with UNDP, GIZ,and other donors who are working in the area of biodiversity and sustainable rangeland managementpractices.

II. Project description

A. Project area and target groupLPDP-II will reach about 38 000 rural households in at least 200 communities of five districts of15.

the Khatlon region with a potential for increased livestock productivity and high poverty level.Together, LPDP and LPDP-II target 35% of the population, 35% of the pastures, 43% of largeruminants, 52% of the small ruminants and 30% of the area under fodder crops in the Khatlon region.The Khatlon region is located in the southwest of the country, with a population of 2.64 million, orapproximately one third of the country’s total population. It is divided into 25 districts that range inpopulation from 19,000 to 175,000. LPDP is covering five districts of Khatlon region: Baljovan,,Hovaling, Muminobod, Shurobod, and Temurmalik, districts. Government of Tajikistan is keen toextend it to five more districts of the Khatlon region: Dangara, Farkhor, Hamodoni, Kulob and Vose.

The primary target group of the Project will be the following: (i) smallholder livestock16.households; (ii) private veterinary service providers and small scale entrepreneurs with the potential toprovide services to households and smallholder farmers; and (iii) women headed households andwomen belonging to poor households. The ultimate Project beneficiaries are all expected to be livingon less than US$ 2 per capita per day, which comprise 50% of the total population of Khatlon.

Addressing gender in the Project will mean identifying and understanding the relevance of, and17.addressing the different livelihood needs, priorities, interests, and constraints of men and womenalong lines of age, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and ability. Addressing gender in the Project willhelp build assets at the individual, household, and community level through reducing vulnerability andincreasing the opportunities of men, women, boys, and girls. Women in Khatlon use the incomegenerated from their gardens on the household plots, dairy production, processing of spices andberries to pay for social goods such as children’s school fees, medical fees and other assets toprovide for their families. This is particularly relevant to protect those in vulnerable situations frombeing forced to take risks to secure food, income, shelter, clothing, and other necessities.

The Project will take the following targeting approach: (i) geographical targeting for selection of18.the Jamoats with the potential for livestock and pasture development; (ii) selection of villages alongthe poverty data profiles; (iii) household targeting for selection of households which meet the Project’spoverty and gender criteria; and (iv) gender targeting for selection of women for specific Projectactivities through fixing special quotas for their inclusion. The initial identification of villages will befurther refined depending upon community willingness to participate in Project activities and abide byits terms and conditions. A participatory approach at the village level would ensure the inclusion ofeligible households who meet the poverty, capacity and the gender criteria. The Project will continueto emphasize the role of women in agricultural production and increase concerted efforts to enablewomen to move beyond production for subsistence and into higher-value, market-oriented production.


5

B. Development objective and impact indicatorsProject Goal and Objectives: The development goal of the Project is to contribute to the19.

reduction of poverty in the Khatlon Oblast. The development objective of the Project is to increase thenutritional status and incomes of around 38 000 poor households by enhancing livestock productivityand climate resilience in a sustainable manner.

Project implementation will be guided by the Project’s results management framework. Key20.performance indicators at Goal level are: (i) 18 000 households (50% of targeted households and40% of total population in the targeted districts) with improvement in household asset ownership indexby 15%; and (ii) 38 000 of poor smallholder households whose climate resilience has been increased(ASAP). Key performance indicators at the Development objective level are: (i) at least 80% oftargeted HHs reporting at least 15% increase in incomes from livestock; (ii) 38 000 of poorhouseholds have improved nutrition and food security from increased consumption of meat and dairyproducts by 15%; and (iii) 200 community groups (including 100 women’s groups), men and womenparticipating in natural resource management or disaster risk reduction efforts (ASAP)

C. Outcomes/ComponentsThe Project’s investments and activities will be implemented through three components in21.

addition to project management:

Component 1 – Institutional DevelopmentThe key objective of this component is to enhance the capacity of targeted public sector and22.

community organizations to be more effective and efficient at pro-poor pasture managementdevelopment. This investment will primarily focus on the following national institutions that supportpasture development: PUUs and their Boards, the MOA and specifically the Pasture Department(once established), the State Veterinary Inspection Services, and the Tajik Agrarian University (TAU).Although the capacity building will be tailored according to the needs and mandate of theseinstitutions, the Project will keep an open and inclusive approach, and will strive to involve otherpartners that may benefit from the exercise, as appropriate.

The main expected outputs, and the associated indicators, for this component are:23.(a) PUU are enabled to develop and implement climate risk-mitigation community pasture plans

incorporating needs and priorities of poor and women: (i) 200 land use rights agreementsobtained by PUUs that reduce disputes regarding access to pastures by 50%; (ii) 75%PUUs acquired planning and technical skills to implement sustainable pasture managementand livestock production and (iii) Increase in pasture fees collected by 20% by the end of theProject;

(b) Public institutions involved in pasture management are strengthened: (i) an improvedPasture Law and related legislation proposed/passed; (ii) a 5-year Pasture ManagementStrategy incorporating climate change adaptation is prepared and passed; and (iii) aSustainable Pasture Management curriculum is taught at the Tajik Agrarian University.

The outputs would enable the component to achieve the following outcome (with the associated24.indicators):

(a) Targeted public sector and community organizations (disaggregated by type, i.e.: PUUs,VOs, MOA, Pasture Department, TAU, Jamoats) are more effective and efficient at pro-poorpasture management and livestock development: (i) Satisfactory levels of governance for75% of PUUs facilitated by the Project; (ii) Technical capacity of targeted institutions(disaggregated by type) is increased; and (iii) Pro-poor policy and legislation with regard tosustainable pasture management.


6

The component will comprise two sub-components:25.

Sub-Component 1.1: Development of Community Organizations.

Using the LPDP’s targeting approach and indicators, the PMU will select communities that have26.high level of poverty, but also a need and recognized potential for livestock development. Mobilizationand strengthening of the PUUs will be conducted by Community Facilitators (CFs) - NGOsexperienced in social mobilization of rural communities - backed by the technical expertise andknowledge provided by the Technical Team. In communities where PUUs have been established, inadditional to technical capacity building, the Project will extend mobilization to strengthen these younginstitutions, empower their Boards, and install and enhance accountability and transparencymechanisms for better governance. The CFs will also facilitate the formation of Common InterestGroups (CIGs) out of eligible smallholder households interested and capable in participating inlivestock development activities, and Self-help Women Groups (SWG) for income diversificationactivities.

LPDP-II will facilitate issuance of primary land user right certificates to the PUUs under overall27.guidance and support from the GOT at the national and local level. The Project will aim at federatingsmall villages’ PUUs to create a formal member based association that represents several PUUs atthe Jamoat level. The federated PUU will be better able to negotiate use rights, coordinate pasturemanagement and apply for funding, and at the same time to minimize operational expenses.

The CFs’ main responsibilities will include: (i) organizing the communities and developing PUUs28.with PUUBs; (ii) collecting all support information on a random sample of the beneficiaries andtracking them over time; (iii) briefing the PUUs and their target groups on Project activities; (iv)strengthening the PUUs through provision of organizational and technical advice and training; (v)assisting the PUUs in the preparation and implementation of CLPMPs and other community activities;(vi) integrating climate adaptation and risk-mitigation measures into CLPMPs and undertaking criticalassessment of the priority activities needed to enhance community resilience; and (vii) assisting thePUUs in the identification of beneficiaries for all Project activities to ensure proper selection of poorand vulnerable households, women headed households, and those candidates and entrepreneursfrom the private sector who can operate on a sustainable basis. The Terms of Reference of the CFsare provided in the Project Implementation Manual.

In addition to financing the work of CFs during the Project period, provisions have been made29.under this sub-component for: (i) five district-level workshops at the rate of two and three per year forProject Year (PY)1 and PY2 reflecting the anticipated phasing-in of the districts to be covered by bothLPDP and LPDPII; (ii) International Community Development TA to refine the targeting and selectionstrategy, development of the capacity building programme for organizational strengthening of PUUsand PUUBs and training of CFs on programme implementation, as well as development of theapproach to federating the PUUs at the Jamoat level; (iii) organizational capacity building forestablished PUUs to be conducted by the CFs, (iv) local study tours in Khatlon region for up to a totalof 200 PUU members, i.e. at least one member from each of the Project’s targeted villages; (iv)international study tours for up to about six members of PUUBs, Hukumat and Jamoat governmentsand the PMU; and (v) issuance of land primary use right certificates and start-up equipment for PUUs.

Sub-Component 1.2: Advancement of Policy and Legal Framework and Strengthening NationalInstitutions.

To ensure sustainability and advancement of pasture management reforms, the Project will30.support institutions, such as the MOA, given that it is appointed by the Government to act as anauthorized state body in the area of pasture policy. The Project would provide technical guidance tothis future PD in developing policy and legislation to advance pasture management transfer,monitoring of pasture resources condition, through assessing the quality of pastures and monitoringthe performance of PUUs. The capacity of the PD to effectively deal with sustainable pasturemanagement, while mainstreaming climate change adaptation, will be enhanced through a specificcapacity building programme with support from national and international experts. The activity would


7

also provide for public awareness campaigns on pasture management, and funding of employment ofthree young professionals to build a cadre of specialists for employment in the PD.

LPDP-II will continue to provide assistance in the formulation of a state policy and strategy for31.mainstreaming climate change adaptation into sustainable pasture management, and the elaborationof legal and regulatory documents to support implementation of the Pasture Law, including thedevelopment of a Strategy for Pasture Management and Improvement for 2015-2020. Internationaland local TA will be mobilized to provide assistance to review and amend the Pasture Law, to developprogrammes for sustainable resource management, pasture monitoring and carrying capacity (withflexible estimates that take into consideration the highly variable climatic conditions and biomassavailability), the role of the private sector, veterinary law, social accountability and governance, as wellas developing capacities relevant to climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction. In addition, theProject will elaborate Pasture Law implementation at the local level through piloting of a Commissionfor Regulating Pasture Use at the district level.

The TAU will be supported in developing curricula and a comprehensive educational32.programme for a degree in natural pasture management, incorporating teaching in the area ofknowledge of climate change mitigation and adaptation. The project will support the refurbishment ofa pasture fodder assessment lab, a GIS and weather forecasting lab, the development of curriculaand training materials, as well as the upgrade and increased knowledge of the TAU teachersparticipating in this educational programme. A functional assessment of the TAU will be carried out atthe Project’s inception stage, to develop specific recommendations to improve the institution’seffectiveness and responsiveness to the needs of the sector, and identify entry points for Projectsupport.

There is a significant need to encourage new graduates to take up positions in the major33.livestock production areas. The Project will include a variety of initiatives to provide incentives forstudents to enter the TAU veterinary and agronomy faculties and ultimately become livestockhusbandry/veterinary specialists.

Component 2 – Productivity Enhancement and Improved Animal HealthThe key objective of this component is to increase access to livestock and veterinary services,34.

and fodder supply for smallholder producers (mainly households), resulting in decreased mortality andincreased productivity of sheep/goat flocks and cattle herds due to the reduced incidence andprevalence of diseases.

The main expected outputs, and the associated indicators, for this component are:35.(a) Capacity for sustainable and efficient livestock production built: (i) At least 5 000 beneficiary

households trained in improved livestock husbandry practices; (ii) 1 020 beneficiary HHsengaged in participatory fodder promotion and production demonstrations; (iii) 50 groups(3 250 HHs) engaged in improved sheep production trials; and (iv) at least 20 businessplans prepared and received financing;

(b) Private vets provide animal health and production services on a sustainable basis: (i) 60veterinarians trained and equipped.

The outputs would enable the component to achieve the following outcome (with the associated36.indicators):

(a) Healthier livestock with lower levels of mortality and increased supplementary feed availableto community livestock: (i) 70% of livestock households have reductions in their animalmortality and (ii) 15% increase in average milk yields and 10% increase in average weight ofcattle, sheep and goats sold in local markets.

The component will be comprised of two sub-components:37.


8

Sub-Component 2.1: Livestock Productivity Enhancement.

Recipients of the livestock extension training will be identified through the PUUs to ensure the38.selection of households that meet the following criteria: poor households; women headed households;households dependent on livestock as a main source of income; own no more than 0.5 Ha of irrigatedland and no more than 1 Ha of rainfed land. Livestock farmers/households will be organized intogroups of 15 to 30 for the provision of improved animal husbandry and management practices, feedpreparation, and identification of hygiene and health aspects. The CF recruited under Component 1will deliver the training programme to the targeted communities.

The Project will promote fodder production and distribution through the establishment of a Seed39.Fund. The Technical Facilitator recruited to support this activity jointly with the PMU PastureManagement Consultant and the Climate Adaptation Consultant (CAC) will carry out the assessmentof needs of local communities for fodder seed species and varieties, - looking for the best suited to theprojected changes in climate conditions - areas to be planted and volume of seed required. This willbe done within the framework of preparation of CLPMPs by the PUUs. The Project will identifysuitable fodder seed producers in Project districts and will strengthen their capacity, through apartnership agreement, to produce and supply high quality seeds to communities. Depending on theresults of the needs assessment, the selected seed farms will be given the selected varieties of fodderseeds for multiplication, fertilizers and some equipment. Farmers will receive packages of fodderseeds from the participating seed farms and fertilizers from the Project. Farmers will be requested toreturn the equivalent of seed received to the Seed Fund to be established within the PUU andmanaged by the PUUB. The seed farms jointly with the Technical Facilitator will provide necessarytraining and advice to smallholder farmers in seed handling – seed sowing techniques, harvesting,cleaning and bagging. The Project will provide: (i) fodder seed and fertilizer sufficient to cultivateabout 1 020 ha; and (ii) households will be contributing at least 10% of the costs.

The Project will distribute rams to the target communities. There will be 50 groups of small40.households Gissar sheep breeders formed in Project villages interested in engaging/improving localbreeds of sheep. The Project will provide one Gissar ram per 26 ewes, a 7-month supply of highenergy animal feed during two years to support rams in critical periods. The group will jointly use ramsto improve the quality of local sheep breeds. The group will identify suitable households/persons fromamongst its members to keep the rams, be responsible for their maintenance. The household/personselected to maintain the rams will retain animals after two years of use by the group members. Thegroups will be given incentives and support to send animals to summer pastures for a period of 5months.

It is extremely important to develop market intermediaries to provide access to improved seeds41.and fertilizers for the smallholder farmers/households to improve their productivity. The GOT is alsodetermined to reduce its role in providing funds for farming and instead encourage private activities inthis area11. In line with the Government policy, the Project will continue strengthening privateentrepreneurs dealing with livestock input supply such as poultry feed, animal feed, improved fodderseed, and seed cleaning services. Private sector participants dealing with marketing of dairy, meatand other animal products will be provided business and technical assistance. The CF in consultationwith the PUU will identify the individual entrepreneurs supplying inputs and buying outputs inaccordance with the following criteria: (i) specialize in supplying inputs for the livestock and foddercrop production; (ii) provide services to smallholder livestock farmers and households; and (iii) dealingwith processing and marketing of livestock products. The Project will undertake an assessment of allindividual entrepreneurs and identify their specific needs for business development, equipment, creditand technical training. Business advisers recruited by the Project will undertake a broker role byproviding such services and linking individual entrepreneurs with the required service providers.

11 National Development Strategy 2015. Government of Tajikistan.


9

Sub-Component 2.2: Improved Animal Health

The poor state of veterinary services in the country provided by the State Veterinary Inspection42.Services (SVIS) has convinced the Government to adopt a more private sector led approach to theprovision of veterinary services. The GOT therefore decided that along with retaining state veterinaryservices, it should support the development of private veterinary services and the establishment of aprivate veterinary network, which will provide both animal health and artificial insemination services.

A small facility will be established under the Project, and the veterinarians selected to serve the43.rural communities will submit applications for funding of veterinary drugs, training, equipment(including AI), veterinary tools and veterinary clinics (vet package). If veterinarians choose to build vetclinics, these will be established in locations where no facilities currently exist. In order to ensure thesustainability of these services, each clinic will be located so as to allow it to operate in a radius fromwhich it can recover its costs from user charges. Based on experience from implementing this activity,the Project will provide the Government policy input on how the existing policy on the establishment ofveterinary centres at the village level can be further refined for more cost effective use and a higherlevel of impact. The Project will use its technical assistance resources to evaluate its experience andinform government policy making regarding both the public and private veterinary services.

The Project will support about 60 private veterinarians in the Project area, who at least must: (i)44.have higher/technical veterinary education; (ii) have at least 5 years of practical experience in theProject area; (iii) sign a tripartite agreement with the Project and local community to provide servicesfor at least 5 years; and (iv) contribute at least 10% of the value of the selected package. The Projectwill encourage women participation in this activity by setting a target that at least 10% should befemale veterinarians. The Project will adopt a holistic approach in dealing with animal health as anintegral part of the production system to include feed, feeding, reproduction and on-farm food safetyas the initial link in the value chain. To support this, a considerable amount of the training andextension related to animal health, feeds and feeding would be provided to the PUUs through theprivate vets. To enable the private vets to provide this support to the PUUs, they will receive technicaland business management training. Project inputs will include essential equipment, AI equipment anda starter package (as demanded by vets wanting to improve such a business), drugs andmedications, and a fixed transportation allowance. On average, such a package would cost aroundUS$5,000 per vet (including a 10% contribution by the vet).

The Project will support the State Veterinary Inspection Services through technical training and45.study tours on food safety and standards, laboratory testing equipment/consumables of livestockproducts and diagnosis of animal diseases. The study tours will be organized for SVIS staff tocountries with advanced food safety standards, laboratory testing of livestock products (dairy, meat,etc.) and diagnosis of livestock diseases.

Component 3: Pasture Development and Diversification for VulnerabilityReductionThe key objective for this component is to increase access to more productive and climate46.

resilient pasture areas as well as to diversified income-generating opportunities for livestockcommunities through a sustainable, community-led management of natural resources. Theparticipatory planning process will incorporate both climate-resilient pasture management and animalproduction/health planning, thus linking the work to be done under both first and second components.The component will strengthen the adaptive capacity, governance and management skills of PUUsand their elected Boards (PUUB) and reduce their vulnerability to climatic stress. This will be done bybuilding understanding within their constituent members of the importance of incorporating climate riskreduction measures within CLPMPs and ensuring the long term sustainability and health of pasturesand the restoration of pasture landscapes, thus improving livestock productivity and contributing toreduced feed shortfall and income loss.


10

The main expected outputs, and the associated indicators, for this component are:47.(a) Resilient and sustainable investments prioritized in CLPMPs completed and functioning: (i)

200 of PUUs implementing CLPMP plans (ASAP); (ii) US$8.5 million of new or existing ruralinfrastructure made climate-resilient (ASAP); (iii) 40012 of approved CLPMP in the Projectareas (including LPDP’s PUUs) effectively integrating climate risk mitigation and adaptationmeasures (ASAP); (iv) 18 000 households (50% of the targeted population) have access toinfrastructure (water points; shelter; storage; pasture connectivity roads) that is climateresilient and environmentally sound (ASAP); and (v) 7 560 ha of pasture are rehabilitatedthrough ecosystem restoration approaches (ASAP);

(b) Alternative income-generating activities supported to enhance risk-coping mechanisms:(i) 100 alternative economic activities women groups established; and (ii) 100 grants foreconomic diversification disbursed to new enterprises established (1 500 women).

The outputs would enable the component to achieve the following outcome (with the associated48.indicators).

Household resilience increased through sustainable use of pastures and income diversification:49.(i) Beneficiaries’ household income increased at least by 20% from alternative income activities(ASAP); and (ii) 132,000 ha of accessible pasture managed in a more climate resilient manner(ASAP).

The component will be divided into 2 sub-components:50.

Sub-Component 3.1 – Community Resilient Pasture Management and Investments

Productivity of the livestock is far below its potential. This unfavourable situation is likely to be51.made worse by climate change, since pasture productivity, hay yields and fodder crops are stronglyinfluenced by climate conditions. The sub-component will build a monitoring and evaluation systemthrough modelling of pasture productivity to determine carrying capacity that is built on flexibleestimates to continuously adapt the stocking rates to the highly variable climatic conditions andbiomass availability, as well as identify remote pasture areas that could be accessed. With thepredicted impacts of climate change, winterfeed production and spring-autumn pasture availability arethe biggest constraints to development of the livestock sector in general. The livestock flexiblecarrying capacity estimate and its spatio-temporal movements in relation to available biomassensures adequate forage for grazing animals, determines the adaptation of the stocking rates to thehighly variable climatic conditions and leaves enough residual forage for re-growth the following year.

The livestock flexible carrying capacity estimates would be done with support of TT, and the52.monitoring system with support of national technical assistance from the Hydrometeorological StateDepartment. This monitoring system will be based in the modelling of pasture productivity todetermine the seasonal carrying capacity estimate of pastureland that will also help identify suitableremote pasture areas to be accessed. It will be a part of the CLPMP performance monitoring systemestablished under LPDP, while the livestock carrying capacity estimates are to be part of the CLPMPs.

The PUUs will develop CLPMPs to address issues of degradation of pasture resources and53.deterioration of pasture infrastructure, and climate adaptation needs in sustainable pasturemanagement and restoration, improved winter feeding, livestock health and production issues. Abottom-up approach will allow the PUUs to decide on the detailed investment needs demonstratingthat the targets and management principles in the management plans will be achieved. The analysisof the critical elements impacted by potential future climate changes on livestock and pasture systemswill provide a combination of different approaches that may include, inter alia:

Restoration of degraded pastures through rotation and fencing, and improvement ofvegetation cover/pasture yield/ha with highly diverse native plant species/genetic varieties(grasses, leguminous plants, small bushes), tolerant to climate constraints (e.g. summerdrought). The livestock production system existing today in Tajikistan relies primarily on

12 Estimated total number of PUUs for both LPDP-I and II


11

grazing of livestock with limited feeding of cultivated feed and concentrates. Winter feed is akey constraint for livestock production and productivity in Tajikistan. In order to address thisconstraint it is of critical importance to rehabilitate the winter pastures.

Infrastructure that allow/facilitate the revival of traditional management (transhumance),which is critical to adapt the seasonal livestock pressure on winter and summer pastures toclimate conditions (road improvement, connectivity bridges, stock watering points, etc);

Water management measures to favour pasture resilience through increased waterretention and regulation and to improve water balance and decrease evapotranspiration inareas (especially at low altitude) where hotter/prolonged summer can increase the threat ofdrought (fences for shade, measures to retain water in soil, drainage, riverine and waterspring restoration, protection and shade through reforestation in water points);

Measures to prevent soil erosion, mudslides and floods, including the plantation of bushesand trees – agroforestry systems - that, besides being effective against soil erosion, can actas a barrier against storms and wind, and serve as a possible source of by-products (fruit,berries, medicinal and edible plants, honey, wood); the natural vegetation in themountainous areas of central and southern Khatlon are characterized by pistachio andalmond woodlands, with high potential to be restored, leading to the improvement of theenvironmental services supporting sustainable pasture management, livestock productionand livelihood diversification;

Infrastructure to enhance the value of spring/autumn pastures in view of the longer grazingseason allowed by increased temperatures and shorter winter season (construction oflivestock shelters and upgrading of facilities for herders);

Agricultural machinery to produce/harvest/store fodder (grass cutters, hay makingmachines, silage choppers, etc.) to increase the availability of fodder and create reserves forthe long winter period;

Restoration of riverine vegetation (better regulation of water, barrier against floods, improvewater quality, source of fodder).

Whenever possible, these measures will be carried out with the use of adapted technology that54.allows energy saving and easy maintenance and replication (i.e. the thermo-isolation of shelters andstabling structures using straw was successfully tested in previous projects). The Project, throughscreening and defined restrictions and safeguards, will make sure that CLPMPs include a balancedmix of investment activities, and that they properly capture the need for specific interventions onclimate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction.

To support the initial implementation of the CLPMPs the Project will provide investment grants55.through the PUUs. The total funding provided to finance the CLPMP investment mini-projects is aboutUS$ 17.4 million, comprising 95% as matching grant and 5% as community contribution in cash (10%in case of machinery). The exact amount of each grant will be linked to the PUU population andperformance of the PUU, including the collection of pasture use fees. PUUs participating in the projectwill need to have a formal certificate to their pasture land before any investment grants are made.

As part of Component 1, training and capacity building will be provided to the PUU members to56.carry out the assessment and the efficient planning of the climate change adaptation and sustainablepasture management needs, ensuring the active participation of the more vulnerable households andinvolvement of women in planning and decision making. PUU groups will be responsible for managingthe CLPMP investment mini-projects. A full time Climate Adaptation Consultant will be hired within theTechnical Team, with a specific responsibility to lead and coordinate the implementation of climateadaptation activities. The Project Implementation Manual developed for LPDP will be modified to theextent required by additional activities introduced by LPDP-II. The development of the CLPMPs will beentrusted to the CFs, supported by a Technical Team (TT) of national and international consultantsworking in close cooperation with local communities. Government staff responsible for pasturemanagement and PUUB members will be provided training to plan and manage pasture on the basisof modern techniques, with a focus on climate change adaptation and climate risk reduction.


12

Sub-component 3.2: Income Diversification

The targeted communities that are largely depended on subsistence agriculture (mainly57.livestock farming and cash crops) are vulnerable to fluctuations in production and climate change;they are also those most likely to put pressure on the natural resources – pastures in particular –contained within the area. By involving these communities in Project activities and creating alternative,sustainable means of income generation, the Project will contribute to increasing local living standardswhile decreasing pressure on critical ecosystems, endangered species, and natural resources ingeneral. This sub-component will promote alternative sources of income to diversify familyeconomies. The Project will explore income-generating options beyond livestock to gradually reducegrazing pressure on pastures and mitigate the impact of climate change. The Project will providefinancing to encourage and nurture new economic activities through which the most vulnerable of therural society – mainly women – can build upon and develop additional sources of income as a safetynet against possible economic losses, to help build socio-economic resilience, enhance theirnutritional status and increase their incomes. This will be coupled with training and capacityenhancement activities for the identification, development and management of new climate-resilientbusinesses.

The Project will undertake demand assessment and feasibility study (including resource58.mapping) of pre-selected products and once viable business lines have been identified andappropriate know-how selected, communities will be able to decide what product cluster they want tojoin. For example, most of PUU members legible for IGA may wish to specialize in cumin (zeera)collection and marketing, while several households owning fruit orchards may invest in bio-climaticcellars to benefit from off-season prices. PUU members will be trained on sustainable managementand climate-adapted production techniques to make sure crops are introduced in suitable areas with apositive impact on soil and water resources.

Groups will be formed based on the methodology of Self Help Groups, which is based on the59.belief that for the poor, particularly women, the best approach is to begin from building their financialassets and skills through savings rather than debt. Through participation in a self-help group,members can plant additional agro-forestry plants/improve existing orchards and gradually movetowards more sophisticated value chains The Self-help Women Groups (SWGs) acting as theparticipatory agro-enterprise principals would be a suitable option to secure IGA to be commerciallyviable and ensure sustainable use of natural resources. PUUs will be the critical intermediary betweensmall households and buyers. Support to farmer organizations – PUU in this case - should be focusedon building their capacity to act as a reliable business partner and providing needed services to thefarmers from design stage to marketing, offsetting the supply risks such as side-selling, andinconsistent quantity and quality of production.

LPDP-II income-generating activities will be run by the SWGs operating within PUU mandate60.and divided into production (consisting in picking and processing) and marketing teams with clearfunctions and therefore training needs. The Climate Adaptation Consultant (CAC) will guide thescreening and assessment process to identify climate-adapted plant and animal species and varieties,and suitable locations and production techniques. A Technical Facilitator (TF) will provide businessdevelopment services to the SWGs on the variety of subjects ranging from self-governance,negotiation skills, financial literacy and bookkeeping to production-specific know-how and marketing.Marketing team will be responsible for market prospecting and buyers (customer) relation.

Based on the rapid demand assessment conducted during the design mission, the following61.business lines with solid market potential are proposed as a starting point in implementation of thissub-component: a) agro-forestry products - wild berries, spice, aromatic and medicinal herbs; and b)storage cellars - for fruits (mainly apples) and tubers. Selection of one or another should be made bythe TF commissioned to do the feasibility study and will depend on resource mapping and prospected(targeted) buyers.

Under this sub-component, the Project will provide technical assistance, demand assessment,62.resource mapping, feasibility study and other related studies by a professional TF prior to micro-


13

project funding. It will also finance information dissemination to eligible communities to facilitate theiraccess to the funding facility, as well as technical support for business planning and micro-projectimplementation support. The activities will include: (a) demand assessment of pre-selected products(by TF and CAC); (b) (based on the above), feasibility study to select the product(s) to be marketed bya given community (=PUU); (c) SWGs formation; and (d) business plan formulation.

D. Lessons learned and adherence to IFAD policies

Lessons learnedIFAD’s overarching objectives in Tajikistan are to improve the livelihoods of poor rural people by63.

strengthening their organizations and enabling them to access productive technologies andresources. IFAD has two major on-going operations in country. The Khatlon Livelihoods SupportProject (KLSP), which was started in 2009 and was restructured in 2013: the coverage was reducedto two districts, Muminobod and Shurobod, and the total IFAD grant financing was reduced toUS$9.3 million. The Livestock and Pasture Development Project (LPDP) became effective inAugust 2011, and constitutes an investment of US$ 15.8 million (the IFAD grant amounts to ca.US$14.6 million). The project is scheduled for completion in August 2017. The implementation of theproject has progressed well and the overall performance is rated as satisfactory by IFAD supervision.Among the main achievements are: (i) substantive input to the drafting of the Pasture Law of 2013; (ii)the development of a model Community Livestock and Pasture Management Plan meeting therequirements of being both simple enough for the use of PUUs with relatively limited capacity, andsophisticated enough to serve as an adequate tool for effective management; (iii) establishment andlegal registration of 187 PUUs; (iv) elaboration, approval and implementation of 90 CLPMPs, with afurther 90 under preparation; (v) elaboration of 55 investment projects under the CLPMPs, with 25under implementation, and: (vi) formation of 132 Common Interest Groups for fodder promotion andproduction and 22 Women’s Common Interest Groups on small ruminants and processing andmarketing.

The LPDP-II design considers and incorporates both general and specific key lessons from the64.on-going IFAD projects’ experience. Among the more important lessons of a general nature fromLPDP are: PUU establishment requires time and effort. LPDP experience, as well as lessonslearned from other similar initiatives in Tajikistan, demonstrates that inclusive community mobilisationis a time and resource consuming process. LPDP experience has shown that the establishment of thelegal, social and organisational structures of the PUU and the PUU Board necessary for accessingpasture lands, preparing mid-term pasture management plans and identifying sub-projects requires atleast one year of intensive social mobilization and empowerment. The social mobilization processdeveloped and implemented by LPDP is greatly appreciated by all stakeholders. However, incommunities, where PUUs have been established it is necessary to extend the mobilization support inorder to strengthen these young institutions, empower their Boards, and install and enhanceaccountability and transparency mechanisms for better governance. CFs require adequate time andresources to undertake a proper social mobilization of PUUs. In order to expand coverage andcompare approaches to social mobilization employed by different organizations the PMU contractedMSDSP, Caritas, and German Agro Action to mobilize pasture users into PUUs in the six targetdistricts of Khatlon. The experience of engaging three CFs with different approaches, targetingdifferent districts has been a learning process for the CFs and for the PMU. All three CFs have theirown sets of comparative advantages, but all were instrumental in setting up PUUs within the first yearof operation. Allocation of primary pasture use rights to PUUs is crucial for sustainingoutcomes. The LPDP has started a process of inventorying rights to pasture lands in participatingcommunities and allocation of the use rights to PUUs. However, the current process to obtain primaryuse right may be lengthy and costly. At the same time, there have been cases in target villages whereit transpired when PUU applied for pasture land use right that individual vested interests had alreadysecured rights to community pastures with primary use certificates. To protect community rights topasture land near villages GOT needs to announce a clear policy and procedures for allocation of use


14

rights, and to demonstrate its commitment to advance the pasture management decentralizationreform. The issue of pasture use rights will be a particular focus of analysis and discussion during theMTR of LPDP scheduled for October 2015, with the support of relevant international technicalexpertise.

Among the specific, operational key lessons learned and adopted from LPDP implementation65.are: (i) the targeting strategy has been found to be successful in reaching poor and vulnerablecommunities and households and should be maintained; (ii) while social cohesion issues of the PUUshave been adequately addressed by the social mobilization process, the building of technical capacityneeds to be more in focus and to be better resourced, something that has been given consideration inthe design (iii) institutional strengthening, including in governance of PUUs needs to be continuedbeyond the first year of establishment; (iv) horizontal learning among local initiatives has proven to beeffective for capacity building; (v) women income generation activities should go beyond livestock todiversify sources of livelihood and avoid non-productive increase of livestock; (vi) exposure tointernational experience in pasture management can be very instrumental in setting the national policyagenda; and (vii) strengthening of the sub-regional office for administrative and procurement functionsspeeds up implementation. A detailed discussion of lessons learned and their incorporation in thedesign is presented in Appendix 3.

The design team has also reviewed lessons learned from the operations of other donors in area66.of natural resources management and livestock development in the country. The experience of otherdonor agencies13 has shown that effective project implementation requires the following: (i) capablelocal management staff; (ii) international consulting assistance to provide international practice intechnical fields and aspects; (iii) effectively functioning procurement and financial managementsystem; (iv) flexibility in implementation to accommodate lessons as they emerge; (v) closesupervision of and implementation support to project management to ensure that projectimplementation capabilities are aligned with the objectives; (vi) recognition that the central and localgovernment administrations have very weak capacity and are under-resourced, and can thereforeprovide only limited support; and (vii) recognition of the vulnerability of project implementation to top-down approaches, because the need to involve all stakeholders, particularly beneficiaries, inimplementation is understood inadequately or resisted. All these identified lessons have beenaddressed to varying degrees in the LPDP-II design and implementation arrangements.

During implementation, the Project will actively seek synergies and complementarities with67.agencies involved in livestock/pasture management, climate change, and disaster risk reduction. TheProject has established links with the PPCR, funded by the WB, ADB, EBRD and DFID, under theStrategic Climate Fund (SCF), which is one of two multi-donor trust funds within the CIF.

Adherence to IFAD policies and guidelinesThe LPDP-II design is fully compliant with IFAD’s policies on: Targeting, Gender Equality and68.

Climate Change, and it is fully aware on the new Social, Environmental and Climate AssessmentProcedures, and will therefore ensure compliance in Project implementation at operational and fieldlevels.

Accordingly, the Project, which is based on community-driven activities and investments, will69.promote a gender-sensitive and enabling implementation environment. IFAD’s targeting requirementsare addressed by ensuring that rural women, women-headed households, the rural unemployed andyoung people, participate in the Project activities.

Environmental and social safeguardsThe Project promotes the “less, but more productive animals” approach, while the CLPMPs are70.

expected to address environmental issues related to climate change adaptation for sustainable

13 Review of Project documents, completion and evaluation reports of the FAO, ADB, WB, projects financed by DFID,UNDP, GIZ, and USAID. Meeting with in country management and visiting mission.


15

pasture management, including pasture monitoring and fodder production. The project will alsopromote diversification activities based on agro-forestry to enhance adaptive capacities of women andwomen-headed households.

Environmental classification. The Project is classified as a Category B operation.71.Investments in improved pasture grazing, forage production, climate adaptation are expected to resultin positive outcomes. The Project is expected to reduce pressure on natural resources by introducingmore environmentally sound natural resource management practices and by diversifying livelihoods.These developments will also enhance the resilience of rural households to climate change andreduce their vulnerability to extreme weather events.

Climate risk category. The project is considered of Moderate Risk. The project has an ASAP72.component aiming to mainstream climate change adaptation into the whole investment (both currentLPDP I and the new project LPDP II). The project design has incorporated all available informationregarding climate change vulnerability, impacts and adaptation needs identified in the NCs to theUNFCCC, the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAP) and the Tajikistan Strategic Programmefor Climate Resilience (SPCR). Moreover, the project has built on the results of the detailed CCvulnerability assessment. This has resulted in the identification of CC adaptation measures (policydevelopment, capacity building, adaptive management and restoration of pastureland, the use ofclimate-adapted species and varieties, climate-proof infrastructure, income-generation anddiversification based on natural resources-based value chain development).

III. LPDP-II implementation

A. ApproachThe LPDP-II approach is based on community–driven development to enhance adaptive73.

capacity, reduce climate-induced risk and reduce poverty. Although LPDP provides opportunities interms of enhancing the way pastures are managed at the community and national level, the growingimpacts of climate change have not yet been explicitly taken into account, specifically in terms ofdevelopment of the CLPMP and setting priorities for wise long-term investments in improvingpastures. LPDP-II will address integration of this urgent issue of climate change adaptation, thanks tothe availability of ASAP financing. LPDP and LPDPII will be treated as one coherent project in alloperational aspects and will complement each other, specifically in terms of the “one-project”approach, implementation modalities and project activities.

B. Organizational frameworkLPDP-II is a geographic expansion of LPDP to three more districts in the Khatlon region. It will74.

be implemented in the same modality as LPDP in a partnership between State, civil societyorganizations, service providers, community organizations, and in coordination with other donors.LPDP-II will foster a stronger role of Government at the national and local level especially in policyand legal framework development and land rights allocation. New stakeholders – the future PastureDepartment, the Tajik Agrarian University and the State Veterinary Inspection Services will beengaged in the LPDP-II implementation.

The MOA will continue to have an overall responsibility for management of the Project on behalf75.of the Government of Tajikistan. A national Project Steering Committee (PSC) will continue providingoverall policy guidance for LPDP and LPDP-II and maintain oversight of the Project’s Annual WorkPlans and Budgets (AWPBs). The MOA’s Deputy Minister responsible for the livestock sector willcontinue to chair the PSC. The PSC reviews Project progress and approves its annual work plan andbudget, and the annual progress reports.

The MOA jointly with the State Committee for Land Management and Geodesy (SCLMG), as76.well as district Hukumats will develop policies and processes for allocation of pasture land use rightsto the PUUs.


16

The State Veterinary Inspection Services (SVIS) is a subdivision of the MOA and is responsible77.for provision of veterinary services to farmers. Under LPDP-II the SVIS will be responsible for theprovision of data to the PMU; assist with the identification of Jamoats, villages and suitableveterinarian-candidates to participate in the strengthening of private veterinary services sub-component; and work closely with the PMU and CFs at the community level, in particular in ensuringthat the private vets are able to develop into an effective and financially sustainable service.

LPDP-II will support the TAU in developing curricula and a comprehensive educational78.programme for a degree in pasture management, support in refurbishing pasture fodder assessmentlab, GIS and weather forecasting lab. The support will be provided in international and local technicalexpertise and financial resources for lab equipment.

The PUU is a key stakeholder for pasture management, it’s functions include: obtaining pasture79.lease rights and ensuring effective and sustainable use of pastures; capacity building for members;and dispute settlement related to the leased land area. PUU members participate in annual andmedium-term pasture management planning, and are obliged to report on pasture conditions. LPDP-IIwill continue to facilitate formation of PUUs and their Boards (PUUB). Smallholder farmers andhouseholds interested in participating in livestock development activities will be organized into CIGsfor the Project interventions in this field. Women’s CIGs will be instrumental for the identification andimplementation of income generating activities for women.

The Project Management Unit (PMU) for LPDP was legally established as a “juridical entity”80.State Enterprise for the on-going LPDP through a Charter issued by the Government in 2012. ThePMU is based in Dushanbe and has a regional sub-office in Kulob in close proximity to the Projectdistricts. The staff of the PMU were selected through a competitive process and have qualificationsand experience commensurate with their duties. In addition to hiring cluster officers for LMDP-II and aClimate Adaptation Consultant, the PMU will employ additional procurement, financial, informationdissemination and knowledge management, and M&E staff to take on the additional work load. Themajor functions of the PMU are to: (i) ensure that the Project is implemented in accordance with itsdesign; (ii) prepare and implement AWPBs; (iii) ensure timely recruitment of service providers, staffand consultants; (iv) ensure effective coordination of all activities and agencies involved; (v) maintainappropriate accounts, including reports on withdrawal applications and disbursements; (vi) manageprocurement in accordance with IFAD and Government guidelines; (vii) ensure compliance withenvironmental requirements and other safeguard measures; (viii) prepare quarterly progress andannual reports in formats agreed with IFAD; (ix) conduct monitoring and evaluation activities includingmaintaining IFAD Results and Impact Management System (RIMS); (x) assist local communities withparticipatory monitoring and evaluation; and (xi) assist IFAD and Government supervision andevaluation missions. The PMU will use the modified Project Implementation Manual (PIM) developedfor LPDP.

The same arrangement as in LPDP will be pursued in contracting the services of NGOs, which81.have experience of organizing communities in rural Tajikistan to act as CF for the Project. Apart fromformation and strengthening of PUUs, CIGs, and SWGs, the CF will assist the communities toundertake the preparation and implementation of the CLPMPs.

C. Planning, M&E, learning and knowledge management

PlanningThe CLPMP developed by the PUUs in an inclusive and participatory manner will be approved82.

by the Jamoat, and submitted to the PMU for review and final approval. Based on the priority areasidentified by the PUUs, the CF and PMU develop a preliminary plan to be fed into the AWPB. ThePMU will ensure that activities proposed are eligible for financing under the Project and that proposedplans take into account the extent to which they are realistic in terms of time frames and availability ofresources.


17

The PMU will be preparing draft AWPBs for each Project year to be submitted to the PSC for83.review and approval and then to the IFAD for comments and clearance, no later than sixty daysbefore the beginning of the relevant PY.

Progress Reports. The PMU will submit both six-monthly and annual progress reports to IFAD84.to provide essential information on the physical and financial progress of Project activities, resultsachieved and regular assessment of Project impact using an agreed format. The annual progressreports will include an analysis by component, clearly indicating planned and achieved targets for keyindicators agreed between the Government, IFAD and ASAP.

Monitoring and evaluationThe M&E system for LPDP and LPDP-II is expected to provide comprehensive information for85.

effective and efficient management of the project and contribute to learning from implementationexperience for all stakeholders. The Project Logframe provides an initial list of indicators to be used totrack progress and assess achievements in terms of outputs and associated outcomes, as well assuccess in achieving the Project’s objectives and development goal. Monitoring will be undertaken atthree stages during the life of the Project – baseline information at start-up, and impact evaluation atmid-term and on Project completion through surveys to measure impact of the Project over time.

The Management Information System (MIS), which has been developed for LPDP will be86.extended and adjusted for use in LPDP-II. The system has been designed in a manner, which allowsgender disaggregation of data, poverty profiling of households, education status, livestock ownershippattern, information on livestock yields, pasture use and management practices, and asset base andemployment.

Within the M&E programme, the Project will finance: (i) annual stakeholder review and planning87.workshops; (ii) information dissemination and planning workshops, financial and procurementseminars and exchange of Project experience; (iii) further development of the MIS; (iv) baselinesurvey including RIMS survey and training, mid-term and completion surveys; (v) genderassessments; (vi) participatory monitoring and evaluation; (vii) impact assessment; (viii) publicationsand printing associated with information dissemination and (ix) knowledge management. The PMUhas overall responsibility for the M&E system.

Baseline Data: The PMU has conducted a baseline survey for LPDP. Based on the same88.methodology, sample size and indicators to be tracked, the PMU will conduct a baseline survey forLPDP-II taking into consideration the baseline related to the climate adaptation activities. The PMUwill supplement this baseline survey with information on each participating village regarding overalllivestock ownership, pasture resources, and pasture and livestock management practices to bereflected in CLPMPs. The mapping and vulnerability assessment undertaken during project design willhelp guide this exercise.

Participatory Monitoring & Evaluation: The PMU will make arrangements for participatory89.monitoring and evaluation of the activities under LPDP-II in coordination with the CFs, local Jamoats,PUUs, CIGs, SWGs. Participatory M&E will be conducted annually and results reported to the PUUmeeting at the end of the calendar year.

Learning and knowledge managementSocial Performance, Gender Indicators and Gender Assessment: LPDP-II will present data90.

disaggregated along gender lines for each sub-component. The Project will make a special effort tomonitor gender and social performance. As part of the Project M&E activities, gender studies will beconducted to assess impact on gender relations and women’s empowerment.

Knowledge generated by the Project will be documented for dissemination to regional and91.national audiences using a variety of instruments, including electronic media, promotional meetings


18

and workshops. LPDP-II will continue producing special policy briefs, case profiles and case studiesfrom its learning in the field.

LPDP plays a key role in the Pasture Management Knowledge Sharing Platform in Tajikistan92.facilitated by GIZ, sharing its experience and lessons learned with other practitioners and policymakers in that field. LPDP-II will further explore such possibilities to share successful approaches onissues that are important for all the CIS countries. LPDP-II intends to learn from the experience ofother Central Asian countries, Mongolia, and China and to share own experience. Opportunities forregional exchange and visits, as well as arranging international conferences in Tajikistan have beenbuilt into the LPDP-II budget.

D. Financial management, procurement and governanceThe Project’s financial management arrangements build on the experience gained by the PMU93.

in fulfilling its responsibility for financial management under LPDP. The PMU’s handling of the projectaccounts, audits, procurement and disbursement is considered satisfactory and fully consistent withthe financial management rules and regulations of IFAD. Financial management staff are well trainedand experienced in carrying out their responsibilities.

Accounts. Responsibility for the Project accounts will rest with the PMU. The Ministry of94.Finance will open and maintain a Designated Account in US$ (DA) in a commercial bank acceptableto IFAD. The PMU Director will be authorised to operate this account. The authorized allocation for theDA, as well as detailed disbursement modalities will be defined in the Letter to the Recipient (LTR).Payments for all Project expenditures, including for community sub-projects, will be centrally managedby the PMU, based on approved CLPMPs. To meet these payments, the PMU will transfer funds fromthe DA to a local currency Project Account. Cash contributions from communities will be deposited toa separate Project bank account.

A separate ledger account will be opened for each financing source (i.e. IFAD Loan, IFAD95.Grant, ASAP, counterpart funds and community beneficiaries). At the time of making payments, eachpayment will be attributed to the relevant financing source and booked in the ledger accordingly,based on the financing plan stated in the financing agreement. A combined Withdrawal Application forall expenditures incurred, separately identifying expenditures from each source, will be generated bythe accounting system.

“Smart” Statements of Expenditure (SOE) with comprehensive audit trails will be utilised to96.justify advances given. The accounting software in use at the PMU is already able to generate bothWithdrawal Applications and Statements of Expenditures electronically.

Flow of Funds Procedures. The flow of funds arrangements, presented in Appendix 7, show97.that the funds will flow from IFAD directly to the PMU, which would have responsibility for managingthe funds and their application as per agreed work programmes and budgets.

Audit Arrangements. The Recipient, through the PMU, shall appoint an independent auditor98.acceptable to IFAD, under terms of reference cleared by IFAD. The costs associated with the auditorswill be financed from the proceeds of the IFAD Grant. The contract for the audit will be awarded duringthe first year of LPDP-II implementation and thereafter, extended from year to year with the sameindependent auditor, subject to satisfactory performance and IFAD clearance. The auditor will give aseparate opinion on each account and provide a ‘Management Letter’ addressing the adequacy of theaccounting and internal control systems. The Recipient, through the PMU, will submit the above-mentioned certified items to IFAD not later than six months after the end of the fiscal year to whichthey relate.

Project Disbursement. Disbursement methods used in LPDP-II will include reimbursement,99.direct payment and replenishment of the DA. Conditions to be met prior to disbursement include thefollowing: (i) preparation of the revised PIM and detailed AWPB for the first year of Projectimplementation and the 18-month Procurement Plan; and (ii) opening of the DA and designation of


19

persons authorized to sign withdrawal applications in the PMU. The financing rules for disbursementof the grant and loan, specified by the disbursement categories, are presented in Appendix 7,Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements.

Procurement. The 2014 Supervision Mission of LPDP assessed that the PMU has adequate100.procurement capacity in terms of qualified staff, who has been trained internationally, and theestablished procedures are in place to undertake procurement of goods and services on a competitivebasis.

In line with the established modalities under LPDP, the recommended procurement methods to101.be further refined in the LTR and thresholds for the procurement of goods and non-consulting servicesare described below:

Contracts estimated to cost more than US$ 200 000 equivalent will be awarded on the basisof National Competitive Bidding (NCB) or International Competitive Bidding (ICB).

Contracts estimated to cost US$ 200 000 equivalent or less will be awarded on the basis ofNational Shopping (NS) or International Shopping (IS) procedures.

As an exception to the above, contracts estimated to cost US$ 50 000 equivalent or lessmay be awarded on the basis of Direct Contracting (DC) procedures, as it may bedetermined in the context of IFAD’s review and no objection to procurement plans.

Indicative procurement methods for the procurement of consulting services would be:102. Contracts estimated to cost US$ 200 000 equivalent or more shall be awarded on the basis

of expressions of interest advertised internationally following Quality and Cost BasedSelection (QCBS) as a default method or Quality Based Selection (QBS) for complex orhighly specialised assignments or those which invite innovations where the best expertiseavailable is required without consideration of price.

Contracts estimated to cost less than US$ 200 000 equivalent will be awarded on the basisof expressions of interests advertised nationally and applying the following selectionmethods: Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS) as a default method; Quality BasedSelection (QBS) for complex or highly specialised assignments or those which inviteinnovations where the best expertise available is required without consideration of price.Selection of SBDU Associates will be carried out following Fixed Budget Selection (FBS)procedures and on the basis of expressions of interests advertised nationally.

As an exception to the above, contracts estimated to cost less than US$ 200 000 equivalentmay be awarded on the basis of short lists prepared by the PMU and comprising three to sixfirms/individual consultants and applying the following selection methods: Quality and CostBased Selection (QCBS); Consultants Qualification (CQ), Quality Based Selection (QBS) forcomplex or highly specialised assignments or those which invite innovations where the bestexpertise available is required without consideration of price, and; Least Cost Selection(LCS) for small value services of a routine nature.

As an exception to the above, contracts estimated to cost less than US$ 50 000 equivalentmay be awarded on the basis of Sole Source Selection (SSS).

The following shall be subject to prior review by the Fund:103. Award of any contract for goods and equipment to cost US$ 50 000 equivalent or more Award of any contract for consulting services estimated to cost US$ 25 000 equivalent or

more Award of any contract through direct contracting or Sole Source Selection.

Governance. LPDP-II design incorporates a number of measures to assure good governance104.as indicated by democratic accountability, transparency of financial management, gender equitabilityand mechanisms for complaints and remedies. These include: (i) consistent stakeholderrepresentation, through the PSC, in the Project’s planning, monitoring, evaluation and impactassessment cycle, affording mechanisms for complaints and remedies; (ii) quotas for womenbeneficiaries; (iii) application of guidelines and procedures for procurement consistent with current


20

IFAD Procurement Guidelines; (iv) direct supervision by IFAD including risk-based financialmanagement supervision; and (v) provision for regular external audit.

E. SupervisionLPDP-II will be directly supervised by IFAD. According to need, one or two supervision and105.

implementation support missions will be organized each year to assess overall progress andperformance, achievements, shortcomings and constraints, and identify needed corrective action andrelevant implementation support required.

F. Risk identification and mitigationThe Project faces several types of risks.106.

Sustainability of the PUU. In terms of institutional development, the major risk is that107.established PUUs will not be sustainable and continue to manage pastures in a sustainable manner.To mitigate this risk, LPDP-II will focus on creating an enabling environment for community basedpasture management through support to development of policy and legislation.

Buy in from CLPMP. Community Livestock and Pasture Management Plans (CLPMP) fail to108.capture and prioritise measures for climate change adaptation and vulnerability reduction, due to lowawareness of PUUs on these topics. The Project will mitigate these factors by supplementing thePMU with climate change expertise and making use of outreach agents. The Project will ensure thatavailable climate adaptation, disaster risk management and other related relevant information andknowledge, is used to raise awareness of PUUs prior to the initiation of the participatory process forthe design of each CLPMP. The PUUs will also be supported through a menu of options for climateproofing and vulnerability reduction measures that could be included in their respective plans, asappropriate.

Technical Risks. Livestock producer members of PUUs do not respect the pasture109.management plan decision and “estimated carrying capacity” of the assigned pastures, resulting in adegradation of the natural grass cover and herd productivity declines. Mitigating factors – a number ofthe factors cited above will also help mitigate against this risk. In addition, the information provided bythe community pasture inventories and the monitoring system modelling pasture productivity todetermine the seasonal carrying capacity estimates of pastureland will give the members of the PUUsa much clearer understanding of the nature, extent and constraints inherent in their pasture areas.This understanding combined with a more rigorous system of pasture use fees will enable thelivestock producers to better manage the carrying capacity of their pastures. However, like in commongrazing areas around the world, it will continue to be a problem that needs to be actively managed.

Livestock carrying capacity plans will be based on flexible carrying capacity estimates to110.continuously adapt the stocking rates to the highly variable climatic conditions and biomassavailability. The analysis will be undertaken through building on the Atlas that was developed duringthe project design, integrating climate change impact on the project area, and developing that into amonitoring and assessment system to determine the adaptation of the stocking rates to the highlyvariable climatic conditions.

Climate Risks. Tajikistan is assessed to be a country, which is highly vulnerable to climate111.variability and change, with a very low capacity to cope. Over the last two decades, the country hasexperienced sharp increases in the intensity and frequency of climate-induced extreme events.Expected extreme events include dramatic fluctuations in the hydrological cycle and the consequentialdownstream impacts on water resources for hydropower, potable water, irrigation, food security, andrural livelihoods. In order to help the country deal with these issues, LPDP-II will provide ASAPinvestment to help identify and implement adaptation measures for the sustainable managementpractices of pasture resources, which are a critical resource for smallholder livestock farmers relyingon livestock for their sustenance. LPDP-II will also coordinate its activities with the PPCR.


21

IV. Project costs, financing, benefits and sustainability

A. Project costsTotal investment and incremental recurrent project costs, including physical and price112.

contingencies, are estimated at US$24 million (163 million Tajikistan somoni [TJS] equivalent).Physical and price contingencies are low – at 3 per cent of total project costs – due to investmentsassociated with the various grants, representing some 76 per cent of total project costs (expressed asa lump sum, with no contingencies). The foreign exchange component is estimated at US$10.4 millionor about 43 per cent of total project costs. Taxes and duties make up approximately US$0.45 millionor 2 per cent of total project costs, and are mainly associated with civil works and equipment andgoods, which constitute some 10 per cent of total costs. Project management expenses compriseabout 6.7 per cent of total project costs and are partly covered under LPDP.


22

Table 1: Project Costs by Component

Component(Somoni Million) (USD '000)

Local Foreign Total% ForeignExchange

% TotalBase Costs Local Foreign Total

% ForeignExchange

% TotalBase Costs

A. Institutional DevelopmentDevelopment of Community Organizations 5,5 1,1 6,6 16 4 853,2 162,8 1 016,0 16 4Advancement of Policy and Legal Frameworkand Strengthening National Institutions 3,4 1,6 5,0 32 3 521,6 247,0 768,6 32 3Subtotal Institutional Development 8,9 2,7 11,6 23 8 1 374,8 409,8 1 784,6 23 8B. Productivity Enhancement andImproved Animal HealthLivestock Productivity Enhancement 5,6 4,2 9,9 43 6 866,2 653,8 1 520,0 43 6Improved Animal Health 2,5 1,0 3,5 29 2 380,0 158,0 538,0 29 2Subtotal Productivity Enhancement andImproved Animal Health 8,1 5,3 13,4 39 9 1 246,2 811,8 2 058,0 39 9C. Pasture Development andDiversification for Vulnerability ReductionCommunity Resilience Pasture Managementand Investments 59,4 57,0 116,4 49 75 9 133,2 8 771,2 17 904,4 49 75Income Diversification 3,6 - 3,6 - 2 550,0 - 550,0 - 2Subtotal Pasture Development andDiversification for Vulnerability Reduction 62,9 57,0 120,0 48 78 9 683,2 8 771,2 18 454,4 48 78D. Project ManagementProject Management 7,5 1,4 8,9 15 6 1 158,2 211,4 1 369,5 15 6Monitoring and Evaluation 0,3 0,3 0,7 48 - 53,3 48,7 102,0 48 -Subtotal Project Management 7,9 1,7 9,6 18 6 1 211,5 260,1 1 471,5 18 6Total BASELINE COSTS 87,9 66,6 154,5 43 100 13 515,7 10 252,9 23 768,5 43 100Physical Contingencies 0,4 0,4 0,8 50 1 62,1 63,3 125,3 50 1Price Contingencies 5,7 2,1 7,8 27 5 245,1 91,5 336,6 27 1Total PROJECT COSTS 94,0 69,2 163,1 42 106 13 822,8 10 407,6 24 230,4 43 102


23

B. Financing

An IFAD loan of US$8.7 million (36 per cent of total project costs) will finance 47 per cent of the113.pasture development and diversification for vulnerability reduction component. An IFAD grant ofUS$8.7 million (36 per cent of total project costs) will finance: 71 per cent of the institutionaldevelopment component (US$1.3 million), 83 per cent of the productivity enhancement and improvedanimal health component (US$1.9 million), 22 per cent of the pasture development and diversificationfor vulnerability reduction component (US$4.0 million), and 93 per cent of the project managementcomponent (US$1.5 million). An ASAP grant of US$5.0 million (21 per cent of total project costs) willfinance 8 per cent of the institutional development component (US$0.15 million) and 26 per cent ofthe pasture development and diversification for vulnerability reduction component (US$4.8 million).The government contribution is estimated at US$0.45 million (2 per cent) and includes contributionsfrom its budget primarily to cover taxes (see next paragraph). Approximately US$1.4 million (5.6 percent) will be provided by beneficiaries as cofinancing of the CLPMP and other grants.

The Government contribution would cover all taxes and duties on all Project inputs that involve114.funding from the IFAD Loan/Grant and ASAP Grant or any other external source of funding associatedwith the IFAD Loan/Grant and ASAP Grant. The estimate of taxes and duties was based on the ratesin effect prevailing at the time of the design. In conformity with the principle that no taxes or dutieswould be financed out of the proceeds of the IFAD Loan/Grant and ASAP Grant, any future changesin the rates and/or structures of taxes and duties would have to apply to the Project.

Tables 2 and 3 below provide summaries by the Project components and expenditure accounts115.of the proposed financing arrangement. Other summary financing tables are provided in the ProjectLife File.


24

Table 2: Financing Plan by Components (US$)

ComponentIFAD grant IFAD loan ASAP grant Beneficiaries Borrower Total

Amount % Amount % Amount % Amount % Amount % Amount %1. Institutional development(i) Development of communityorganizations 575 54.6 - - 153 14.5 269

25.5 56 5.4 1 053 4.3

(ii) Advancement of policy andlegal framework and strengthening ofnational institutions 738 91.3 - - - - - - 70 8.7 808 3.3

Subtotal 1 1 313 70.6 - - 153 8.2 26914.

4 126 6.8 1 861 7.72. Productivity enhancement and

improved animal health(i) Enhancement of livestock

productivity 1 375 81.4 - - - - 154 9.1 160 9.5 1 689 7,0(ii) Improvement in animal health 496 89,3 - - - - 30 5.4 30 5.4 556 2.3

Subtotal 2 1 871 83,4 - - - - 184 8.2 190 8.5 2 245 9.33. Pasture development anddiversification for vulnerabilityreduction

Community resilience pasturemanagement and investments 4 002 22.3 8 700 48.5 4 358 24.3 871 4.9 23 0.1 17 953 74.1

Income diversification - - - - 525 95.5 25 4.5 - - 550 2.3Subtotal 3 4 002 21.6 8 700 47.0 4 883 26.4 896 4.8 23 0.1 18 503 76.4

4. Project managementProject management 1 405 93.0 - - - - - - 106 7.0 1 511 6.2M&E 109 98.9 - - - - - - 1 1.1 110 0.5Subtotal 4 1 514 93.4 - - - - - - 107 6.6 1 621 6.7Total 8 699 35.9 8 700 35.9 5 036 20.8 1 348 5.6 447 1.8 24 230 100.0


25

Table 3: Financing Plan by Expenditure Accounts (US$)

Expenditure Account IFAD GRANT IFAD Loan ASAP GrantBen

Contribution GOVT: Taxes Total For.Exch.

Local(Excl.Taxes)

Duties&

TaxesAmount % Amount % Amount % Amount % Amount % Amount %I. Investment CostsA. Civil Works 69 84,7 - - - - - - 12 15,3 81 0,3 49 20 12B. Goods, Equipment andMaterialsGoods, Equipment andMaterials 1 891 79,8 - - - - 154 6,5 323 13,7 2 368 9,8 1 251 793 323C. VehiclesVehicles 88 75,0 - - - - - - 29 25,0 117 0,5 82 6 29D. Technical Assistance andStudiesInternational TA 102 100,0 - - - - - - - - 102 0,4 102 - -National TA 1 476 75,8 - - 203 10,4 269 13,8 -0 - 1 947 8,0 - 1 947 -Studies 102 100,0 - - - - - - 0 - 102 0,4 51 51 -Subtotal TechnicalAssistance and Studies 1 680 78,1 - - 203 9,4 269 12,5 -0 - 2 152 8,9 153 1 998 -E. Training and WorkshopsTraining and workshops 164 100,0 - - - - - - - - 164 0,7 - 164 -F. CLPMP Grants 3 494 20,1 8 700 49,9 4 358 25,0 871 5,0 -0 - 17 423 71,9 8 712 8 712 -G. Diversification Grants - - - - 475 95,0 25 5,0 - - 500 2,1 - 500 -H. Other Grants 440 93,6 - - - - 30 6,4 - - 470 1,9 - 470 -Total Investment Costs 7 825 33,6 8 700 37,4 5 036 21,6 1 349 5,8 365 1,6 23 275 96,1 10 247 12 663 365II. Recurrent CostsA. Salaries and Allowances 343 100,0 - - - - - - - - 343 1,4 - 343 -B. Social Fund 76 100,0 - - - - - - - - 76 0,3 - 76 -C. Operating ExpensesVehicles 246 84,7 - - - - - - 44 15,3 291 1,2 87 159 44Office 209 84,7 - - - - - - 38 15,3 246 1,0 74 135 38Subtotal Operating Expenses 455 84,8 - - - - - - 82 15,3 537 2,2 161 294 82Total Recurrent Costs 874 91,4 - - - - - - 82 8,6 956 3,9 161 713 82Total PROJECT COSTS 8 699 35,9 8 700 35,9 5 036 20,8 1 349 5,6 447 1,8 24 230 100,0 10 408 13 376 447


26

C. Summary benefits and economic analysisProject Benefits. The main Project benefits would go to households in 200 PUUs that constitute116.

the Project areas in the selected districts of Khatlon region. Some 38 000 households would benefitdirectly and indirectly from the Project’s interventions (80% of targeted). The sustainable livestock andpasture management activities would reach a high proportion of the target population with the largestpart of Project investment going directly to the beneficiaries in the form of matching grants, trainingand technical assistance. Benefits would derive from: (i) increased pasture yields and less vulnerablepastures; (ii) raised feed crop yields and expanded cultivated feed crop area; (iii) improved resilienceand capacity of smallholders for livestock and pasture management; (iv) reductions in livestockmortality and improved livestock performance; (v) opportunities for better breed improvement andselection; and (vi) reducing risk through the access to a monitoring system to determine carryingcapacity estimates and identify remote pasture areas that could be accessed, which will directlybenefit pasture communities.

Carbon Sequestration. About 132 000 Ha of pastures would be improved, including around117.7 560 Ha of pastures rehabilitated thus resulting in about 8 468 ton of carbon sequestered on anannual basis, or approximately US$ 178 thousand per annum in value terms, totalling to aboutUS$1.0 million NPV over 20 years. Implementation of the Community Livestock and PastureManagement Plans would result in incremental productivity, consumption and sales of meat and milk,which in turn improves nutrition status of the rural population in the Project areas and increases theirincome by around 15%.

The total estimated 38 000 beneficiaries also comprise: (i) 1 500 women involved in income118.diversification activities; and (ii) at least 60 private veterinarians and 20 other service providers andinput suppliers. In addition: (i) up to 5 students will receive scholarships for international masterdegree in pasture management; (ii) about 5 university teachers will participate in international trainingprogrammes and associated study tours; and (iii) at least 20 stakeholders will be involved in specificstudy tours.

Unquantifiable Benefits. The adoption of a risk-reduction community demand-driven approach119.would result in: (i) empowering communities to manage their own resources in a more efficientmanner; (ii) accustoming the community to prioritize, plan and implement proposed adaptation andsubsequent economic activities; (iii) assisting communities, organised on a voluntary basis, to interactmore effectively with local administration, central government and other sources for the delivery ofservices; (iv) helping to develop new relationships and public-private partnerships under a democraticform of governance; and (v) orienting communities and individuals to improve their livelihoods usingmarket-oriented approaches. As a result, it is expected that communities and their organisationswould be strengthened through participatory and gender sensitive approaches matched with equallystrengthened capacity of government agencies and other service providers who would be able tomeet expressed community priorities in a timely and transparent manner.

Environmental / Adaptation Benefits. The Project is designed around vulnerability reduction120.and restoration of natural assets. It supports implementation activities, technical assistance andtraining, promote policy dialogue and strengthen knowledge management related to that. The mainbenefits would accrue from: (i) increased preparedness of pasture communities and risk-mitigationthrough participatory planning; (ii) area of land saved and land restored; (iii) improved agro-ecosystems; (iv) increased value of nutrient recovery in the soil; and (v) increased moistureavailability, water infiltration and improved water quality and availability in pastures. Pastures are acritical and very extended habitat in Tajikistan, and the ecological improvements and restorationcarried out by the Project will bring significant qualitative benefits to the ecosystem goods andservices, including: (i) improved fertility and soil retention; (ii) improved hydro-geological balance andwater regime of freshwater bodies; (iii) increase in biodiversity and benefits for wildlife; (iv)enhancement of provisioning and cultural services of mountain landscapes, with positiveconsequences for income diversification and rural livelihoods.


27

Financial Analyses. A comprehensive set of financial analyses have been undertaken of the121.Project’s different investment activities, including preparation of five production models: (i) PastureImprovement; (ii) Pasture Restoration; (iii) Controlled Grazing; (iv) Alfalfa; and (v) Annual Grass. Afinancial model has also been prepared for the Project investments in the PUU as captured in theCommunity Livestock and Pasture Management Plan. In addition, financial models were preparedthree income diversification activities: berries collection, storage cellar and poultry incubator. Theresults of the detailed analyses are presented in Appendix 10, Financial and Economic Analysis and inEFA Working Paper.

The five production models, assessing income in the without and with Project scenarios, show122.incremental increases ranging between US$ 13/Ha for the Controlled Grazing model and US$ 124/Hafor the Alfalfa model. Benefit/cost ratios were also calculated for each model, which demonstrate theattractiveness of the technologies.

The model for a typical Community Livestock and Pasture Management Plan (CLPMP) was123.prepared based on the experience of the on-going LPDP. It assumes that a typical PUU has about1 100 Ha of pastures, including 354 Ha of winter pasture, 741 Ha of spring and autumn pasture and11 Ha of summer pasture. About 400 ha of summer pasture are not used due to the limited access.The PUU also cultivates about 45 Ha of forage crops and it harvests hay and straw from about 30 Haof haymaking fields and about 100 Ha of grain fields respectively on average. In addition, it purchasesabout 950 tons of cottonseed oilcake and grain by-products from the local ginning factories and millsto feed its livestock. About 1 040 heads of cattle and approximately 2 725 heads of sheep and goatsbelong to approximately 213 households on average.

Based on the above, a feed/forage balance of the typical PUU was calculated showing that the124.provision of feed/forage is at 54% of the annual demand resulted in a low livestock productivity whichin turn leads to insufficient meat and milk production and consumption.

Based on the above assessment, a list of likely investment activities has been developed to125.improve the feed/forage balance of the typical PUU. This list together with the crops budgets, pastureimprovement activities, rotational grazing, machinery requirements, veterinary services and improvedfeed/forage balance form a CLPMP. The Plan’s main objective is to define options for the increasedquantity and quality of the overall feed/forage production as well as enhanced animal health, whilereducing the pressure on overgrazed degraded areas and regenerating their productive capacity.

It is proposed in the CLPMP to improve 390 Ha of pastures by applying better technologies126.(particularly the pasture improvements and controlled grazing). It is also envisaged to improve accessto about 400 Ha of summer pastures, which are currently not used due to lack of water supply andanimal shelters. It is also recommended to expand the area under forage crops (by 35 Ha) andapplying better technology on them that would increase yields and outputs. This allows reducingconsumption of costly cottonseed oilcake and grain by-products by about 40%.

It is expected that as a result of the CLPMP’s implementation, the feed/forage provision of the127.typical PUU would increase up to 76% of the annual demand. This together with the improved animalhealth interventions would allow increasing production of meat and milk by 10% and 16% andconsumption - by 5% and 16% respectively. Households’ annual net income would increase byUS$ 245 on average, from US$ 1 957 to US$ 2 202 per household.

The financial analysis of the CLPMP shows: (i) the increase in incremental income by 13%; and128.(ii) a high benefit/cost ratio (1.9) and IRR (92%) due to the very low starting point, demonstrating theattractiveness of the investments. Sensitivity analysis was undertaken to assess the impact ofchanges in: (i) output prices; (ii) expected yields; (iii) operating costs; and (iv) investment costs on thefinancial returns. It showed that the model is more sensitive to the changes in price and productivityassumptions rather than to variations in the production and investment costs. The analysis alsoshowed that the PUU would be able to finance its CLPMP beyond the Project support out of its ownfee collection amounting to US$ 12 631 per annum (or about TJS 10/SU per year).


28

The returns from the income diversification models also give attractive results with incremental129.annual benefits ranging between US$ 900 to 1 300 per household.

Economic analysis. The economic analysis of the Project indicates that the Project is robust in130.economic terms. The analysis results in an ERR of 20% and a Net Present Value of US$ 8.6 milliontaken over 20 years with the benefit stream (discounted at 12%) based on the quantifiable benefitsthat relate directly to the activities undertaken following implementation of the components. Theincremental quantifiable benefit stream comprises of three main elements: (i) Community Livestockand Pasture Management Plans; (ii) Income Diversification Grants; and (iii) Carbon Sequestration.The sensitivity analyses show that the returns are solid. The switching values show that the Projectwould be economically viable even if benefits decreased by 41% and investment costs increased by70%. A one-year delay in Project benefits reduces the IRR to 17%. With a two-year delay in Projectbenefits, the IRR falls to approximately 15%.

Risk Analysis. Technical and climate risks associated with the Project may lead to the reduced131.economic returns. Lack of capacity in governmental agencies and communities to effectivelyparticipate in Project activities may result in the delay of realization of benefits. The described abovesensitivity analysis allows for the following reservations: the Project would be economically viableeven if benefits decreased by 41% or realization of benefits delayed by 2 years.

D. SustainabilityThrough its design, the Project is adopting a balanced approach between environmental132.

management, economic growth, and the strengthening of social capital. A key focus of the Project isto promote policy towards sustainable pasture management in country, develop the adaptive capacityin the PUUs to be able to manage their pasture areas in an improved and sustainable fashion, takinginto account the predicted impacts of climate change on pastures and pasture communities in thecountry. PUUs with secure land use rights, and empowered with technical knowledge andorganizational skills will continue to manage pastures on the ground. The pasture inventory, includingmapping and flexible carrying capacity estimates, will provide a sustainable tool for adaptivemanagement. Similarly, the interventions under the sub-component 3.2, being business focused anddriven by market demand, as well as the additional income-generating activities, would also besustainable as long as they are profitable.

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 1: Country and rural context background

29

Appendix 1: Country and rural context background

A. Introduction1. Tajikistan is a landlocked country with a total area of 42,550 km², bordering Afghanistan in thesouth, China in the east, Kyrgyzstan in the north, and Uzbekistan in the west. The mountains occupyabout 93 per cent of the country’s territory, with only 7 per cent of arable land suitable for farming.Country’s population has reached 8.2 million people in 2014, with the highest population growth ratein the CIS at 3.8 per cent14. The country is faced with poor infrastructure, especially in rural areas, lackof machinery and other inputs, lack of access to proper education and health systems exacerbated bythe rigid continental climate making agriculture highly susceptible to risks. It was estimated that overone million people15 or at least half of the country’s labour force has been working outside the countrysince 200816. Remittances from labour migrants account for as much as about a half of the GDP. Thesituation may change following the economic recession in Russia and the impact of remittances onthe livelihoods of people may be significantly reduced.

B. Agriculture2. The agriculture sector accounts for only 21% of country’s GDP, but it plays a crucial role forrural population’s livelihoods and food security. The population of Tajikistan was 73.4% rural in 2013,with a majority engaged in agriculture. Agriculture accounted for 75% of total employment and 21% ofthe total GDP in 2012. However, only about 7% of Tajikistan’s land surface is arable due to itsmountainous topography, water shortages, and a poor irrigation system. Agricultural land accounts forabout 34% of the total land area of the country, out of which 82% are pastures and hay meadows. Asa result of land reform process which started in 1997, the former collective and state farms have beenreorganized and the following major three types of farms emerged: (i) large state farms inherited fromthe Soviet system (approximately own 8% of total country’s arable land); (ii) private dehkan farms,comprising both private and collective farms, the latter managed by former managers on behalf ofworkers with land share certificates; the former with associated land use titles conferred with 50-yearleases that can be bought and sold since 1997 (approximately own 59% of total country’s arableland); and (iii) household farms (approximately own 33% of total country’s arable land). The individualhouseholds, despite their small size, are responsible for over 50% of country’s agricultural productionand in some agricultural sub-sectors their contribution goes up to 80-90% (milk, meat, vegetables).

3. All land holders have long-term land lease entitlements often tradable and inheritable. The WBand other donors supported the processes of distribution of arable land use certificates to landholdersto enable farmers to make their own decisions with respect to what crops to grow. The country’s twoleading crops are cotton and wheat occupying over 80% of country’s irrigated land. Cotton is exportedenabling the country to earn the hard currency very much needed by its economy. Wheat in turnensures country’s food security, especially for the poor.

4. The seed industry is in poor condition and the quality of seed produced domestically is of poorquality leading to proliferation of weeds. The high quality seed (cereals, fodder) are mostly importedfrom Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. The use of fertilizer remains low due to its high price. The fertilizers(nitrogen, phosphate and potassium) are mainly imported from Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. The fuelprices remain very high compared to other Central Asian countries making the Tajik agriculturalproduce less competitive and thus opening doors to imports of foodstuff such as onions, potatoes andother. Farmers lack access to agricultural machinery which is in most cases is obsolete and worn out.

14 Population data is drawn from the latest information from Official Statistics from the Goskomstat, 2015.15 The combined remittances were estimated to be US $2.6 billion or 54% of the country’s gross domestic product(GDP).16 Report of the International Crisis Group, July 2009.


30

C. Livestock5. Livestock17 is an important part of Tajikistan’s economy, particularly in rural areas where muchof the country’s poor population is concentrated. This sub-sector contributed about 7% of GDP in2013, or just under a third of all agricultural production18. Livestock numbers, having collapsed duringthe 1990s following the breakup of the USSR, have now recovered and largely surpassed those of theSoviet period. As it is seen from Table 4, the current inventories have almost doubled since country’sindependence. Settlements in Kulob zone visited during the mission19 registered sharp (70-80%)growth in animal stocks, in particular during the last 5 years, driven by population growth andremittances flow. As a result, pastures condition has significantly deteriorated.20

Table 4: Livestock number trend in Tajikistan (1992-2013)

Source: FAOSTATNote: official data represent about 70% of actual inventories. CF: 1 cattle = 6 LU, 1 small ruminant = 1 LU.

6. Livestock is concentrated in households and smallholder individual farms. Owning livestock isan activity in which nearly the entire rural population engages. According to a 2011 survey of uplandand lowland districts, respectively 85% and 92% of households owned one or more cows, 42% and63% owned poultry, 20% and 59% owed goats, and 32% and 54% owned sheep.21 There were about2 million cattle, including 1 million dairy cows, and 4.2 million sheep and goat in Tajikistan in 2014.More than 92 percent of the cattle and 85 percent of small ruminant are kept in smallholder farms22.

Table 5: Distribution of Livestock by Farm Type (%)

Source: Statistics Agency under the President of Tajikistan. Tajikistan in Figures, 2013

7. The livestock productivity remains very low due to the following major reasons: (i) poor animalhealth due to lack of access to reliable veterinary services; (ii) poor animal feeding due to lack ofaccess to high quality animal feed; (iii) poor quality of livestock breeds. As a result, the milk yieldshardly exceed 3 liters/day. The livestock subsector is facing a severe shortage of animal feed,especially in winter season and especially in the southern region of the country – Khatlon oblast. The

17 Livestock in this report includes large ruminants (primarily cows) and small ruminants (sheep and goats). Poultry isnot included owing to the rapid nature of this assessment although many of the same provisions and findings are likelyrelevant for this sub-sector of the livestock sector.18 Tajikistan State Statistical Committee (2014). Social-economic Situation of the Republic of Tajikistan January-December 2013. The figures represent a large increase from the estimated 1-2% share of GDP in previous years..19 Detailed design mission. 27 February to 7 March 2015.20 Some wild plants varieties are now endangered because of (massive) inappropriate seeds collection.21 World Bank (2011), Survey Assessing Development Impacts on Rural Vulnerability and Resilience: Evidence fromLand Reform and Sustainable Agriculture Efforts in Tajikistan, World Bank, Washington, DC.22 Tajikistan in Figures, 2013.

0

5

10

15

20

199

2

199

3

199

4

199

5

199

6

199

7

199

8

199

9

200

0

200

1

200

2

200

3

200

4

200

5

200

6

200

7

200

8

200

9

201

0

201

1

201

2

201

3

Mill

ion

LUs

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% 120.0%

Agricultural EnterprisesDehkan Farms

Individual Farms

Sheep and Goat Dairy Cows (within cattle) Cattle

100%


31

arable land is scarce and is mostly used for growing staple crops – cotton, cereals and vegetablesand fruits. Very little land is allocated to fodder production – lucerne, clover and sainfoin.

8. On the animal health side, access to reliable veterinary services remains an issue and theemerging private veterinarians is a solution to the problem. A number of donor-funded projects havepushed reforms, however a lot more remains to be done to further support private veterinary sector inthe areas of capacity building, setting up vet clinics, forging linkages with the local communities.

9. The processing industry is represented by the dairy processing factories and units, withfacilities usually located in or close to urban areas where the main markets are. The milk comes frommainly smallholder producers located within a radius of 20-30 km and is collected and delivered bymiddlemen on a daily basis. All products are marketed locally. Yet the country still imports dairyproducts from the neighboring countries.

D. Rangelands and Pastures10. The pasture resources in Tajikistan amount to 3.86 million ha out of which 1,227,157 (32.3%)ha are located in Khatlon region. Pastures remain a scarce resource and efficient pasturemanagement is important for livestock development. There are three types of pastures in Khatlonregion:

The winter pastures are located at an altitude of 500-1200 m above the sea level (asl). Thetotal area of winter pastures in Khatlon region is 570,232 ha (46.5% of total area underpastures). The winter pastures are located near villages at the average distance from 2.8 –3.4 to 8 -10 km from villages and are used from November through March.

The spring/autumn pastures are located at an altitude of 900-1500 m asl. The total area ofspring/autumn pastures in Khatlon region is 258,756 ha (21.1% of total area underpastures). The spring/autumn pastures are located at the average distance from 2.2-2.8 to30 km from villages and are used in March/April and September/November.

The summer pastures are located at an altitude of 2200-3500 m absl. The total area ofsummer pastures in Khatlon region is 151,997 ha (12.4% of total area under pastures).Depending on the area the summer pastures can be located from 200 to 500 km fromvillages and the most remote pastures.

The all year-round pastures are located around villages at the altitude from 500 to 1000-1200 m. The average distance from villages is from 0.5-2 to 3-4 km. The total area of all-year round pastures in Khatlon region is 246,172 ha (20.1% of total area under pastures).

11. All pasture land in Tajikistan is the state property. In reorganization of the collective and statefarms, pastures have been distributed between large dehkan farms, with some land left in localgovernment administration. These farms are the primary leasees of pasture land. Nearly 90% ofpasture land is owned by these farms and the local hukumats (district and Jamoat) haveapproximately 10% of pastures. Typically the local communities lease in pastures from the dehkanfarms and considered the secondary users (lessees) of pastures.

E. Environmental Issues12. Priority environmental problems in agriculture include inefficient water use, water logging andsoil salinization in irrigated lands caused by deteriorated irrigation and drainage systems; anddegradation of pasture areas due to over grazing, and under grazing in more remote areas, as well ascultivation steep slope areas causing with and soil erosion. Other issues include threats of soilpollution and, especially, nitrate contamination of surface water. These problems are furtherexacerbated by the deforestation (illegal tree cutting) leading to desertification of some areas,especially in Khatlon region. The total annual costs of land degradation in Tajikistan are estimated toamount US$ 442 million or 7.8% of GDP (based on 2010 data). Available estimates suggest that82.3% of all land and 97.9% of agriculture land (including pastures) in the country suffer some level oferosion (high to medium erosion in 88.7% of this land). Degraded pastures contribute to landslides,which affect 36% of Tajikistan territory and 11% of its population. In Khatlon region middle erosionpredominates (43-51.8%) followed by strong/very strong erosion (36.2-41%), and slight erosion (14-


32

18.8%) with just 2-3.2% non-eroded land. Erosion caused by overgrazing is estimated to involveapproximately 3 million ha (85% of pastureland).

13. The main causes of land degradation are: (i) maladaptive farming practices, with intensiveagriculture activity on slopes, excessive use of pesticides and fertilizers, poor irrigation practices (e.g.seepage losses, siltation, 60-80% water use inefficiency, water logging) causing water erosion in 97%of farmland and salinization in 16% of irrigated lands; (ii) overgrazing leading to erosion in 89% ofsummer pastures and 97% of winter pastures; (iii) illegal forest harvesting; (iv) population growth; (v)climate change (further described in the following chapter) that is already exacerbating landdegradation problems.

F. Climate Change14. The greatest concern in Tajikistan has been an increase in temperature, which has seriousimplications for its glaciers and water resources. According to the TNC, the biggest increase in annualmean temperature over a period of 65 years (until 2012) has occurred in southern Tajikistan, includingthe region of Khatlon (from +0.5 ºC to +1 ºC, with the highest increase of +1.2 ºC in Dangara) andDushanbe (+1 ºC). Greater warming has occurred in spring (+0.3 ºC and above per decade), autumn(+0.2 ºC per decade) and winter (+0.15 ºC per decade), with no change in summer. Instable weatheris a distinctive feature of the winter period, alternating very cold winters (the average monthlytemperature in winter 2008 was 8-9 ºC lower than average) and warm winters (2-4 ºC above averagetemperature in winter 2004 and 2010). As a result of the warmer climate, there are now 5-10 morefrost-free days per year, with earlier dates with average temperatures above zero in spring andautumn.

Table 6: Changes in average annual air temperature between 1940 and 2010

15. The vulnerability assessment of UNDP (2012) revealed that the population in different parts ofthe country found drought to be the most devastating consequence of climate change at present andin the future. Extreme temperatures combined with droughts hampers the growing of agriculture cropsand reduce the amount of available water causing considerable losses to crop and pastureproductivity, and the rise in the price of goods as was the case in 2000-2001, and in 2008. The deficitof water for irrigated crops is likely to increase, and agriculture and pasture soils will become moreprone to degradation due to the projected increase in torrential rainfall, floods, mudflows andlandslides.

16. Decreased pasture productivity, heat stress and reduced access to water could cause areduction in livestock productivity and an increase in disease incidence. The drought-induced lack ofpasture and fodder may lead to overgrazing, animal death, or force livestock owners to destock herdsthey are unable to feed. Current fodder varieties have been impacted by prolonged summer heatwaves. Furthermore, pastoralist communities have no access to information regarding disaster riskand no capacity to mitigate negative climate change impacts.

G. Development Strategy and Donor Assistance17. The Government’s development goals are reflected in the current 10-year NationalDevelopment Strategy (NDS) for 2006-15, which is aimed to promote sustainable growth, improve


33

public administration, and develop human resources (a new long-term strategy is currently underpreparation). The NDS also provides the Government’s principal guidance for addressing theMillennium Development Goals. The Concept for Agrarian Policy was adopted in late 2008 and isaiming to ensure the country’s food security in staple foodstuff by 2015 through continued landreforms and development of the crop, livestock and horticulture sub-sectors. In late 2009, thegovernment adopted the National Food Security Programme defining the key directions for thedevelopment of the agriculture sector from 2007-2015: (i) diversification of agricultural production; (ii)development of export-oriented crops; (iii) development of rural businesses, including processing. Thecountry also adopted the Agriculture Reform Programme of the Republic of Tajikistan for 2012 – 2020.Current agricultural policies and programmes are aimed at protecting soils, managing pasturelandsand water resources, and supporting the country’s commitments to the UNCCD. The NationalEnvironmental Action Plan has been adopted by the government and outlines key issues and steps indealing with environmental issues.

18. The Project is strongly aligned with, and contributes to the priorities of the TNC of Tajikistan toUNFCCC, which identifies agriculture and livestock as one of the most vulnerable areas to climatechange. The Project is also in line with the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAP) and theTajikistan Strategic Programme for Climate Resilience (SPCR), and will contribute to further integrateCC adaptation considerations in the NDS, that already includes environmental sustainability targets,the Poverty Reduction Strategy that explicitly mention climate change issues, and the Climate ChangeAdaptation Strategy for the period 2015-2030, which is being developed under the leadership of theHydrometeorology State Department.


34

Attachment 1: Country Data SheetLand area (km2 thousand) 2013 1/ 140 GNI per capita (US$) 2013 1/ 990Total population (million) 2013 1/ 8.21 GDP per capita growth (annual %) 2013 1/ 5Population density (people per km2) 2013 1/ 59 Inflation, consumer prices (annual %) 2013 1/ 5Local currency Tajikistan Somoni (TJS) Exchange rate: US$ 1 = 4.85 TJS 2013Social Indicators Economic Indicators

Population growth (annual %) 2012 1/2

GDP (US$ million) 2013 1/ 8 508Crude birth rate (per thousand people) 2012 1/ 33 GDP growth (annual %) 1/Crude death rate (per thousand people) 2012 1/ 7 2003 11.0Infant mortality rate (per thousand live births) 2012 1/ 42 2013 7.4Life expectancy at birth (years) 2012 1/ 67

Sectoral distribution of GDP 2013 1/Total labour force (million) 2013 1/ 3.57 % agriculture 27Female labour force as % of total 2013 1/ 44 % industry 22

% manufacturing 11Education % services 51School enrolment, primary (% gross) 2012 1/ 99.6Adult illiteracy rate (% age 15 and above) 2012 1/ 0.3 Consumption 2013 1/

General government final consumption expenditure(as % of GDP)

12

NutritionHousehold final consumption expenditure, etc. (as % ofGDP)

118

Daily calorie supply per capita n/a Gross domestic savings (as % of GDP) -30

Malnutrition prevalence, height for age (% of childrenunder 5) 2012 1/

n/a

Malnutrition prevalence, weight for age (% of childrenunder 5) 2012 1/

n/aBalance of Payments (USD million)Merchandise exports 2013 1/ 1 163

HealthMerchandise imports 2013 1/ 4 139

Health expenditure, total (as % of GDP) 2012 1/ 6 Balance of merchandise trade -2 976Physicians (per thousand people) 2012 1/ n/aPopulation using improved water sources (%) 2012 1/ 72 Current account balances (USD million)Population using adequate sanitation facilities (%) 2012 1/ 94 before official transfers 2012 1/ -4 422

after official transfers 2012 1/ -248Agriculture and Food Foreign direct investment, net 2012 1/ -198Food imports (% of merchandise imports) 2012 1/ n/a

Fertilizer consumption (kilograms per ha of arable land)2012 1/

59 Government FinanceFood production index (2004-2006=100) 2012 1/ 145 Cash surplus/deficit (as % of GDP) 2013 1/ n/aCereal yield (kg per ha) 2012 1/ 2 891 Total expense (% of GDP) 2013 1/ n/a

Present value of external debt (as % of GNI) 2013 1/ 28Land Use Total debt service (% of GNI) 2013 1/ 5Arable land as % of land area 2012 1/ 6Forest area as % of total land area 2012 1/ 3 Lending interest rate (%) 2013 1/ 24

Agricultural irrigated land as % of total agric. land 2012 1/ n/a Deposit interest rate (%) 2013 1/ 7

1/ World Bank, World Development Indicators database(30 Jan 15)

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 2: Poverty, targeting and gender

35

Appendix 2: Poverty, targeting and gender

A. Poverty and food security19. Tajikistan is still considered the poorest country in Europe and Central Asia, with the GDP atUS$8.5 billion in 2013, making about US$1,030 per capita, and a GNI of US$990 (Atlasmethodology). Poverty level has been declining during the last 15 years from its peak of 96% in 1999to 47% in 200923, and further to 36% in 201324. Extreme poverty dropped even faster—from 73% to14% during the same period. Labor earnings accounted for about 50%, and remittances for 25% ofpoverty reduction in rural and 18% in urban areas25. If to use PPP$2.15 as an extreme povertyincome threshold and PPP$4.30/day as the Income poverty threshold, almost one third or 31% ofpopulation lived in extreme poverty and 80% in poverty in Tajikistan in 2010 (Table 7).

Table 7: Trend of poverty and extreme poverty in Tajikistan using PPP$2.15/day and PPP$4.30/day (1993-2010)

Source: Poverty, Inequality, and Vulnerability in the Transition and Developing Economies of Europe and Central Asia. UNDP,October, 2014

20. Poverty is higher in rural areas, with the significant difference in rural and urban areas. It was inrural areas at 73.8% in 2003, 55.0% in 2007 and 50.8% in 2009. In urban areas poverty rate waslower at 68.8% in 2003, 49.4% in 2007 and 36.7% in 2009. Similarly, the extreme poverty rate inurban areas is also lower, it was 9.5% in urban areas and 15.6% in rural areas in 2009. Even at theregional level, rural poverty appears to be higher than urban poverty. Both the decline in inequalityand the contribution of growth to poverty reduction were much higher in the urban areas than the ruralareas, resulting in the higher reduction in poverty in urban than rural areas.

21. There are significant regional differences in the incidence of poverty, with their nature basedprimarily on the different income levels, the cost of living, access to infrastructure, and the overall levelof socio-economic development of the various regions. In terms of absolute indicators, the majority ofpoor people live in Khatlon and Sughd regions, which account for 65% of Tajikistan’s total population(Table 8)26. Baseline survey conducted for the LPDP in 2014 in six project districts confirmed thatpoverty level in Khatlon region is ranging from 37% to 42%, and extreme poverty from 8% to 14%.

Table 8: Share of population living in poverty and extreme poverty segregated by urban and rural areasand by regions in 2009

Source: Poverty Reductions Strategy –Progress Report, IMF, 2012

23 Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for Tajikistan for the period FY15-18, World Bank, May 2014.24 Tajikistan’s Household Budget Survey (HBS), 2012. Between 1999 and 2009 the country relied on the LivingStandard Measurement Surveys (LSMS), from 2009 for poverty measurement it conducted HBS. Since methodologiesare different, the estimates are not fully comparable.25 Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for Tajikistan for the period FY15-18, World Bank, May 2014.26 Republic of Tajikistan: Poverty Reduction Strategy- Progress Report. International Monetary Fund. February 2012

0%

200%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015PPP$4.30/day PPP$2.15/day

46.7 36.7 50.819.1

52.5 50.2 44.2 34.513.8 9.5 15.6 2.6

17.1 15.8 10.8 6.0

Poverty Rate Extreme Poverty Rate


36

22. Labor, land, and livestock are the key assets of rural families in Tajikistan. Average annualincome per capita in 2012 was 2,252.9 TJS (about US$474)27. Besides remittances (average 25%),the major sources of income were labour earnings (42.9%), and sale of agricultural produces (19.6%).However, middle class, mainly urban groups, benefited more from increased labor earnings andremittances than poor and vulnerable groups: only 28% of total country’s population was engaged incountry’s economy in 2012. Moreover, in rural poor areas, such as Khatlon region, according to theLPDP Baseline Survey data, more than 75% of population in target districts is not working or bringingcash income: 47% were children of pre-school and school age, 9.9% were housewives, 5.9% retired,disabled, on social benefits people, and about 12.9% working, but not getting income (mostly adultchildren working with parents on a farm). Those who were working even occasionally according to thesurvey data, were casual laborers (10%), public sector employees (5.1%) and farmers (3.1%). Veryfew among interviewed were engaged in trade and private sector employments. It is worrisome thatmost unemployed, are young people, with share of youth (15-29 years) in recorded unemployment at60-65% and with the average age of the unemployed being 29.6 years28.

23. Shortage of arable land, limited access to pastures and degradation of land are among keycauses of poverty. Ownership of land is a key determinant of household status and productivepotential. The Government, with pressure from the donors has been implementing a programme ofland reform, but generally, it has failed to provide equitable and secure land-use rights to farmers,especially poor households. The rural population depends on household plots for subsistence in theabsence of alternative employment opportunities and formidable difficulties in starting privatecommercial farming. The size of household plots is about 0.10–0.15 ha for irrigated land, and aboutdouble that for non-irrigated land, usually in higher-rainfall hilly and mountainous areas. Householdplots are by far the most productive segment of agriculture, accounting for well over 50% of the valueof agriculture production on about 12% of arable land. Surveys indicate that about 50% ofconsumption and more than 60% of household income stem from these plots. The gross value ofagricultural production of household plots is about three times that of dekhan farms and 4.6 timeshigher than that of old collective farms29. Farmers in Khatlon areas suffer from poor quality of land andits vast degradations. Thus, in interviews in the course of the design of the LPDP-II, they highlightedtwo major problems with land cultivations as very high salinity of soil and very low productivity.

24. Livestock is mostly in households and smallholder farmers, plays important role for subsistenceand food security of the poor households. Cattle, small stock, and poultry ownership has shifted tohouseholds, which own about 90% of all livestock, and are the dominant suppliers of milk, meat, andother livestock products. The commercial livestock sector has essentially collapsed. Livestock manureis important for garden plots and dried as fuel in winter. Horses are important as a substitute fortractors.

Table 9: Distribution of livestock by type of farms (2007-2012)

YearCattle Including dairy cows Ruminants

AgriculturalEnterprises

DehkanFarms

IndividualFarmers


DehkanFarms

IndividualFarmers


DehkanFarms

IndividualFarmers

2007 3.7% 5.4% 90.9% 2.2% 2.6% 95.2% 11.5% 7.9% 80.5%2008 2.9% 5.7% 91.4% 1.7% 2.8% 95.5% 9.2% 8.8% 82.1%2009 2.3% 6.1% 91.6% 1.4% 3.0% 95.6% 8.2% 9.5% 82.3%2010 2.0% 6.1% 91.8% 1.2% 3.1% 95.7% 7.1% 10.2% 82.7%2011 1.7% 6.0% 92.3% 1.0% 3.1% 95.9% 6.2% 10.5% 83.3%2012 1.6% 6.1% 92.3% 0.9% 3.1% 95.9% 5.8% 11.2% 83.1%Source: Tajikistan in Figures, 2013. National Statistics Agency, 2013.

25. Increase in productivity of livestock contributes to poverty reduction. Almost all households inrural area own livestock. LPDP Baseline Survey data showed that 98% of households owned sometype of livestock. The average number of livestock of the sampled households engaged in livestock

27 National Statistics Agency, Tajikistan in Figures, 2013.28 Tajikistan: Poverty in the Context of Climate Change. UNDP, 2013.29 Baseline update survey under the World Bank Farm Privatization Support Project, and the Rural InfrastructureRehabilitation Project, unpublished working draft, September 2003 to January 2004.


37

production comprised three cattle, two sheep, three goats, and seven chickens per household. Poorerhouseholds in rural areas generally depend on livestock and cropping, and raising productivity inagriculture could therefore be a primary rural development goal. Since a large share of the rural laborforce is engaged in agriculture, land ownership and food security remain linked due to the poorincomes earned. As a result of the extremely low incomes earned, a household's own food productionis critical to their food security. LPDP-II will continue addressing issues of productivity of livestock andbroad access to livestock related services for all community members, but especially for poor andvulnerable households.

26. Food security and malnutrition is high in poor households, especially among children. Morethan 80 percent of interviewed households under the LPDP Baseline Survey suffered from foodinsecurity and shortage of money throughout the year and had to buy food products on a credit basis(86.7%), borrowed money from friends/relatives to purchase food (22.7%), ate smaller, worse qualityor less frequent meals (10.3%), took a loan from bank to purchase food (3.1%), or even soldhousehold assets (1.7%). As a result, the poorest quintile of the population consumes fewer than2,000 calories per person per day on average30. Chronic malnutrition in Tajikistan affects almost 30percent of children under five31. Anthropometric survey conducted within LPDP Baseline Surveyfollowing IFAD methodology reconfirmed that malnutrition of children under 5 years old measured inselected districts of Khalton region is high: 23% were underweight and 8% were severelyunderweight; 40% stunted and 18% were severely stunted; 14% were wasted and 7% were severelywasted. The data was not disaggregated by poverty level, however, number of children, who areunderweight and who do not reach their optimum heights is high and it is a consequence of acute andchronic malnutrition.

27. Climate change is contributing to poverty in rural areas. Poor people are the most affected asthey tend to depend more on natural resources such as land, forest, water for their livelihoods, theyare more vulnerable to effects of degradation of these resources, calamities such as droughts, floods,landslides and mudslides associated with the climate change. At the same time, farming practices ofpoor are often more detrimental to environment, such as overgrazing of pastures, unsustainableharvesting of timber and fuel wood, ploughing and making ditches on the mountain slopes. Thegrowth of desertification from increasing temperatures will be further aggravated by the increased landdegradation. Tree-cutting and pasture-reduction is the main cause of desertification in the country.These practices are not caused only by lack of finances, but also by lack of information, technicalknowledge, limited access to land and natural resources. LPDP-II would target all pasture users, butespecially poor households in its awareness and capacity building programs on sustainable andclimate resilient practices of pasture management.

28. Labor migration, small plot cultivation and livestock are coping mechanisms, especially of poorhouseholds in Tajikistan. With few options at home, an estimated one million Tajik citizens migrateabroad to work, and their remittances are the highest in the world as a percentage of GDP. LPDPBaseline Survey in Khatlon region revealed that 31.2% of interviewed household members left forlabor migration mostly to Russia in 2013. Currently, 54.1% of labor migrants have not returned to theirhouseholds yet. Employment abroad does reduce the risk of poverty as the total and extreme povertyhead counts (using a cost-of-basic-needs approach) among households with over 20 percent migrantworkers were 43 percent and 13 percent respectively, as compared to 54 percent and 17 percentamong households with fewer migrant workers. Yet Tajikistan’s dependence on remittances is asource of considerable vulnerability increasing consumption and raising threshold for willingness toenter the labour market. It has been expected that with the current economic stagnation in Russia,there would be about 10% decline in 2014 remittances, which can negatively affect incomes andemployment in Tajikistan, and thus poverty32. There is a diverse set of coping mechanism that thepoor use to deal with their poverty in Tajikistan, including production on small household plots of

30 Source: World Bank: Republic of Tajikistan - Poverty Assessment, October 2009.31 Situational Analysis: Improving economic outcomes and expanding nutrition programming in Tajikistan, WorldBank/UNICEF, 2012.32 CPS for Tajikistan for the period FY15-18, World Bank, May 2014.


38

vegetables and fruits, and investment in livestock. The reliance on livestock is the major reason forthe fact that 90% of all livestock is in the hands of small farmers owning household plots. According toa 2011 survey of upland and lowland districts, respectively 85% and 92% of households owned one ormore cows, 42% and 63% owned poultry, 20% and 59% owned goats, and 32% and 54% ownedsheep33. Livestock is not only a source of income, but also source of food used for own consumptionand various traditional festivities and events. It also often serves as a household’s emergency asset tobe used in cases of family’s urgent financial needs.

29. Poor households are heavily dependent on relatively cheap access to pastures and the projectshould insure that if rehabilitation and management investments lead to increased charges for pastureuse poor households do not lose access. That would be possible if Government of Tajikistan and MOAsupport PUUs in transferring them pasture land use rights as to primary land users. In that case PUUwill pay land tax and other associated taxes, but not rental fee, which inhibits access to pastures forpoor households. Many PUUs supported by the LPDP have developed their own strategies to supportpoor households, such as allowing them to maintain free access to pastures. Whilst current livestockuse patterns represent a downward spiral of increasing livestock, degrading pastures and loweringproductivity it is a pattern on which poor households remain highly though unsustainably dependent.The community planning processes instigated by the project must ensure that investments to changethis pattern that have time, cost and labour implications are agreed with the poorest households toensure that they are not adversely affected in the short term. Young households (newly married andrecently separated from the extended family) should be added as a target group. These householdsusually have very little land, few livestock and young dependents. Their limited capital assets, lack ofexperience in combining livelihood strategies and need to care for young dependents renders themparticularly vulnerable.

B. Gender Issues30. Women make 49 percent of Tajikistan’s population. There is an appropriate legislation inTajikistan to protect women’s rights. The Constitution of Tajikistan adopted in 1994, amended in 1999and further in 2003 guarantees equal rights to men and women. Tajikistan joined internationalconventions on the advancement of women including the Convention on Elimination of All Forms ofDiscrimination Against Women (CEDAW, ratified in 1993), and the Platform for Action adopted at theFourth World Conference on Women (1995). GOT adopted progressive Law on Reproductive Healthand Reproductive Rights (2002), the Gender Equality Law (2005), and the Law Against DomesticViolence (2013), approved the National Plan to Increase the Status and Role of Women for the period1998-2005; followed by the State Programme, Principle Direction of the State Policy on ProvidingEqual Rights and Opportunities for Men and Women for 2001-2010. The Land Code ensureswomen’s access to land, which is also included in the State Programme, Principle Direction of theState Policy on Providing Equal Rights and Opportunities for Men and Women for 2001-2010. Despitethis extensive legal framework, women still lag behind in main social, governance and economicindicators, including health, education, and access to means of production, market and land,participation in decision making.

31. Tajikistan ranks the lowest in Europe and Central Asia on gender. Women’s status and positionin society has undergone a critical change after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Women inTajikistan have come to be less educated, literate and confident. Many working women were forced toleave better paid jobs for sectors and positions with lesser wages. Women head nearly half ofhouseholds suffering from a heavy burden of food insecurity, and a third of households are sufferingfrom moderate food insecurity. These families represent about 20% of total households in the countryand have a high level of poverty. Women’s salary is significantly, almost 47% lower then averagesalary of men: average monthly salary of women was 646.83 TJS, and of men 1,022.5 TJS in 201334.More than 90 percent of students in agricultural university and colleges are men.

33 World Bank (2011), Survey Assessing Development Impacts on Rural Vulnerability and Resilience: Evidence fromLand Reform and Sustainable Agriculture Efforts in Tajikistan, World Bank, Washington, DC.34 Women and Men. Statistics Agency, 2014.


39

32. Women are the main farmers in Tajikistan today. Agriculture is the largest employment sectorfor women, with half of them engaged in it in 2010. Health and education sectors are other largeemployment areas for women in country, where they have been engaged at 20.9% and 11.6%respectively in 2010. However, women’s participation in agriculture is characterized by seasonal, low-wage, and low-paid or unpaid positions. Women’s tasks are largely restricted to field labor, such asweeding, sowing, transplanting, and harvesting, which do not require decision-making, whereas theselection of seeds, fertilizers, and plant protection materials is controlled by men. In the livestocksector women are mainly responsible for the care of animals within the homestead and undertakemuch of the work of feed preparation, milking, cleaning, etc. Women are often hired as day laborers,working together in informal groups. Despite the fact that 70 percent of employees in the agriculturesector, 92 percent workers of dehkan farms are comprised of women, only 7.8 percent of these farmswere led by women in 2012. The low level of leadership suggests women face gender-based barriersto assuming the responsibility of dekhan farms. Nevertheless, women are assuming the de factoleadership on some dekhan farms because of male migration. Evidence suggests that a slightlyhigher proportion of privatized dekhan farms led by women relative to those led by men are able tosupport their families through income and production, suggesting women-led farms are at least asproductive men-led farms35.

33. Women’s participation in agriculture and income from it is shaped by access to land, otherproductive resources and knowledge. Access to land, and tenure security, remains limited for women.The land reform process was not equitable, and women continue to have access to less land thanmen and to face challenges in registering land in their name. It is estimated that women-led dekhanfarms are smaller than men-led farms; on average 4.1 hectares of arable land for women-led farmscompared to 5.8 hectares for men-led farms. Women’s use of new technologies is lower relative tomen as is their access to productive resources: households headed by women are less likely thanmen to own their assets. Interviews conducted during design revealed that women are less engagedin various information dissemination and capacity building activities compared to men and gain lessagricultural knowledge, especially related to livestock. Both men and women are limited in theiraccess to agricultural credit. Relative to men, women face more severe constraints in accessingcredit, particularly where property-based collateral, such as a land use certificate or other assets, isrequired. Women made only one third of those who received small credit in 2013. Gender inequalitieslimit agricultural productivity and efficiency and in so doing, undermine development agendas. Failureto recognize the different roles of men and women is costly because it results in misguided projectsand programs, forgone agricultural output and incomes, and food and nutrition insecurity. The LPDP-IIwill continue to emphasize the role of women in agricultural production and increase concerted effortsto enable women to move beyond production for subsistence and into higher-value, market-orientedproduction. LPDP and LPDP-II will be making special efforts to initiate activities for women, which willhelp them realise higher benefits from diversification of their livelihood options.

C. Targeting strategy and gender mainstreaming34. Tajikistan has five administrative divisions: capital city Dushanbe, Districts and Towns ofRepublican Subordination (RRS), Gorno-Badakshan region (GBAO), Sughd, and Khatlon. LPDP hasbeen focusing on Khatlon region, which occupies the southwest of the country, with a population of2.99 million or approximately one third of the country’s total population. The region supportssubstantial herds of country’s livestock: about 864 thousand heads of cattle and almost 2 millionthousands heads of sheep and goat. This constitutes about 41% of the large ruminant and 40% of thesmall animals in the country. In terms of pastures, Khatlon has 1.2 million hectares of pastures, whichconstitutes 32% of the total pasture resources of the country and 84% of the winter pastures.Population of Khatlon is predominantly rural and agricultural with 82 percent of it engaged inagriculture in 2013. The LPDP is covering six districts of Khatlon region: Muminobod, Shurobod,Temurmalik, Baljovan and Hovaling. Government of Tajikistan is keen to extend it to five more districtsof the Khatlon region: Dangara, Farkhor, Hamodoni, Kulob and Vose. Together the ten targeted by

35 Agricultural Technology Commercialization Assessment, EAT- USAID, June 2014.


40

LPDP and LPDP-II districts have 30% of the rural population of the Khatlon region, 0.6 millionhectares of pastures which constitutes 30% of the total pasture resources of the country and 80% ofthe winter pastures, and 25% of the area under fodder crops. The region supports substantial herds ofall livestock: about 0.9 million cattle and 2 million sheep and goat. This constitutes about 41% of thelarge ruminant and 40% of the small animals in the country.

Table 10: Data on LPDP and LPDP-II target districts: population, livestock, pasture area, pasture carryingcapacity (Statistics Agency of Tajikistan)

35. Targeting principles of the LPDP-II are focused on livestock potential and broad base inclusionof community members, including poor, women, and other vulnerable groups. LPDP-II will employtargeting strategy developed and implemented under LPDP, which is based on the following majorapproaches: i) geographical targeting of Jamoats for selection of those with the potential for livestockand pasture development, and where population and local governments are committed to pasturemanagement reforms, support establishment and functioning of users’ organizations; ii) povertyfocused selection of villages with the highest poverty level; iii) household targeting for selection ofhouseholds, which meet the Project’s poverty and gender criteria; and iii) gender targeting forselection of women for specific Project activities through fixing special quotas for their inclusion.

Table 11: Major criteria for selection of the Jamoats to be covered by LPDP-II

Criteria1 Population of Jamoat is willing to form PUU and follow all requirements stipulated in its Community

Livestock and Pasture Management Plan (CLPMP)2 Jamoat administration agrees to form PUU, participate in its activities, and provide full support3 Average carrying capacity estimates of the pastures of that Jamoat is not higher than livestock

development potential index, which is calculated as a ratio of current to optimal carrying capacity ofpasture resources. The ratio is a proxy indicator of current grazing pressure on pastures and condition ofpastures. The carrying capacity estimates should take into consideration the adaptation of the stockingrates to the highly variable climatic conditions and biomass availability.

4 Small farms and households of the Jamoat should own not less than 80% of the livestock in the area5 Jamoat should have within its administrative borders sufficient area of legally accessible pastures for

grazing of community livestock during all seasons6 Livestock should not be less than 30% in agricultural output of the proposed Jamoat7 Hukumat will agree to transfer legal rights to pasture management and use to PUU to adequate size

pasture land based on land use right/certificate.8 Hukumat will agree to transfer PUU right to collect pasture use fees, including taxes, while taxes to be

transferred to the authorized by law state bodies and pasture use fees to be used for implementation ofCLPMP

36. Further selection of villages within Jamoats is to be conducted using three major criteria: size ofthe village, adequate pasture area with significant carrying capacity estimates to develop sustainablelivestock, and poverty level based on number of livestock per household. The principle objective ofvillage targeting is to select communities that have both high poverty levels (lowest number of


41

livestock per household), and a recognized potential for livestock and pasture development. Detailedinformation on village selection is included in the LPDP PIM.

37. The primary target group of the Project will be the following: (i) smallholder livestock farmers;(ii) private veterinary service providers and small scale entrepreneurs with the potential to provideservices to smallholder farmers; and (iii) women headed households and women belonging to poorhouseholds. The ultimate Project beneficiaries are all expected to be living on less than US$ 2 percapita per day. Addressing gender in the Project will mean identifying, understanding the relevance of,and addressing the different livelihood needs, priorities, interests, and constraints of men and womenalong lines of age, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and ability. Addressing gender in the Project willbe important as a social protection measure. This will help to build assets at the individual, household,and community level through reducing vulnerability and increasing the opportunities of men, women,boys, and girls. Women in Khatlon use the income generated from their households plots, poultry anddairy production to pay for social goods such as children’s school fees, medical fees and other assetsto provide for their families. This is particularly relevant to protect those in vulnerable situations frombeing forced to take risks to secure food, income, shelter, clothing, and other necessities.

38. LPDP–II will continue to rely on social mobilization process developed under the LPDP withsome modification on mobilization of women income generation groups (WIGG) to ensure strongersustainability of groups and their activities. This social mobilization process has adopted participatoryapproach to facilitate the active participation of poor and women. There are specific constraints andopportunities for gender mobilisation that should be taken into account by the Project. The first is thesevere constraints on women’s time, the heavy burden of their domestic work and their limitedmobility. The second are the social pressures on women and the importance of ensuring thatcollective activity is organised in ways that enable and encourage women to participate and challengenegative social pressures. The third is the gender division of labour, and in particular, the fact thatmen and boys are predominately responsible for taking livestock to pastures, especially winter andsummer pastures. It is highly unlikely that women will be able to contribute labour for pasturerehabilitation given the division of labour and domestic responsibilities. The project has to work withinthese constraints on gender mobilisation and establish targets and quotas that are realistic and reflectlocal demand.

39. The gender and targeting focus of the Project recognises that the division of economic andsocial power is not equally distributed between genders and that concrete steps have to be taken toenable women to enable women to benefit from the project. One entire sub-component is targeted atwomen only and for other activities substantial quotas have been established. Gender has beenmainstreamed throughout the Project (all TOR; selection criteria for CF/TF, M&E, cost tables) and twoPMU specialists have gender issues as key objectives written into their terms of reference. The StateCommittee for Women’s Affairs and Families is the part of the PSC in order to provide higher-levelsupport and advice for gender policy issues.

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 3: Country performance and lessons learned

43

Appendix 3: Country performance and lessons learned

1. IFAD’s overarching objectives in Tajikistan are to improve the livelihoods of poor rural people bystrengthening their organizations and enabling them to access productive technologies andresources. IFAD provides strategic support for improving natural resource management, implementingland reforms and strengthening local institutions and grass-roots organizations. IFAD operations hasstarted in Tajikistan with several grants, it provided two small grants and financed on-going grantfunded project. The first grant was to support the Jamoat Advisory Service System within theframework of the IDA-initiated Community Agriculture and Watershed Management Project. Inaddition, IFAD approved a grant of US$1.2 million for a project entitled Community Action inIntegrated and Market-Oriented Feed-Livestock Production in Central and South Asia. The key projectobjective was to enable small goat breeders and women groups to increase their incomes throughincreased volume and improved quality of fiber and wool production and value adding fromprocessing and marketing of products. The project was implemented from 2009 through 2013 andcovered three countries: northern and eastern Tajikistan (Sugd and Gornyi Badahshan), Kyrgyzstan(Naryn oblast) and Iran (Kerman province).

2. The Khatlon Livelihoods Support Project (KLSP) – a first investment project of IFAD inTajikistan was approved by the Executive Board of IFAD in December 2008 and grant agreement wassigned in January 2009 with development goal to reduce poverty for 18,750 households in threedistricts in the Khatlon region. The project purpose is to increase small farm especially householdplots profitability across the project area. The total project cost is US$ 14.95 million. The sources offinancing are IFAD (82%), Government of Tajikistan (3%), community contributions (13%) and, thecommunity facilitator (2%). IFAD’s financing is being provided to the Republic of Tajikistan as a grantin the amount of SDR 7.9 million (equivalent to approximately US$12.3 million). During the first twoyears the implementation progress was slow and lagged behind schedule, and the project was besetby a number of management problems that resulted in a gradual cessation of most project activities inthe second half of 2011. A Mid-term Review in January 2013 prepared a proposal for an orderlyphasing-out of the remaining project activities. The proposal was accepted by Government, and aGovernmental Decree on resumption of project implementation under the management of the PMU ofLPDP was signed on 30 October 2013. The project coverage was reduced to two districts:Muminobod and Shurobod and the total IFAD grant financing was reduced to US$9.3 million.

3. The Livestock and Pasture Development Project (LPDP) became effective on August 5, 2011,and constitutes an investment of USD 15.8 million, of which the IFAD grant amounts to ca. USD 14.6million (SDR 9,300,000) or 92% of total project cost; a contribution by the Government of aboutUSD 407 thousand (3% of total costs); and beneficiaries’ contribution equivalent to approximatelyUSD 775 thousand or 5% of total project costs. The project, scheduled for completion in August 2017.

4. The design team has reviewed key lessons learned from the Asian Development Bank (ADB)funded Rural Development Project (RDP), which was implemented during 2010-2014. The majorlessons of that Project were reflected in the design of LPDP-II, such as the need for continuingsupport to the Government on policy and legal formulation in regards to pasture management andensuring wide engagement of key stakeholders in consultation process on policy directions and legalacts. LPDP-II will also continue support to education of pasture management specialists at the TAUstarted by the RDP but with a stronger focus on sustainability of the new academic course throughinstitutionalizing curricula into educational program. The WB funded Environmental LandManagement and Rural Livelihoods Project (ELMRLP), with the total Project cost of US$16.43 million,which has started in 2014 is aimed to enable rural people to increase their productive assets in waysthat improve natural resource management and resilience to climate change in selected climatevulnerable sites. Design team for LPDP-II has reviewed experience of other donors in Tajikistan inarea of natural resources management and livestock development and conducted consultations onthe preliminary design with them.


44

5. The experience of donor agencies36 has shown that effective project implementation requiresthe following: (i) capable local management staff; (ii) international consulting assistance to provideglobal practice in technical fields and aspects; (iii) effectively functioning procurement and financialmanagement system; (iv) flexibility in implementation to accommodate lessons as they emerge; (v)close supervision of and implementation support to project management to ensure that projectimplementation capabilities are aligned with the objectives; (vi) recognition that the central and localgovernment administrations have very weak capacity and are under-resourced, and can thereforeprovide only limited support; and (vii) recognition of the vulnerability of project implementation to top-down approaches, because the need to involve all stakeholders, particularly beneficiaries, inimplementation is understood inadequately or resisted. All these identified lessons have beenaddressed to varying degrees in the LPDP-II design and implementation arrangements.

6. During implementation, the Project will actively seek synergies and complementarities withagencies involved in livestock/pasture management, climate change, and disaster risk reduction. TheProject Design Mission established links with the Pilot Project for Climate Resilience (PPCR), fundedby the World Bank, ADB, EBRD and DFID, under the Strategic Climate Fund (SCF), which is one oftwo multi-donor trust funds within the Climate Investment Funds (CIF). Among others, the PPCR isproviding funding for projects on agriculture livelihoods and rangeland management, for theimprovement of the weather, climate and hydrological delivery services, and for enhancing thegovernmental capacity (Hydrometeorological State Department) on climate science and modelling.The Project will also work closely with UNDP, GIZ, and other donors who are working in the area ofbiodiversity and sustainable rangeland management practices.

7. The LPDP-II design also considers and incorporates lessons from the on-going IFAD projects’experience. LPDP-II is a geographical expansion of LPDP, thus it would build on its tried approachesand principles with some modifications to reflect gained from implementation lessons and experience.

Engagement of state stakeholders on a local and national levels should be strengthened.Tajikistan policy reflected so far only in legislation towards management of pasturesassigned a crucial role to local government bodies in advancement of the reforms andensuring sustainable and productive use of pasture resources. Local government bodiesneed to be at the front line of the new system if pasture management, and the Projectshould support them with capacity building, information dissemination and technicalassistance on policy elaboration.

Weak policy and legal framework will hinder LPDP-II implementation and put under risk it’sachievement of development objectives. It is evident that without GOT placing strongerfocus on pasture management policy and legislation the Project would continue facingbottlenecks in strengthening and empowering PUUs. The GOT would need to render its fullsupport to these institutions with securing their pasture land use rights at minimal cost andwithin short period of time. LPDP-II will need to be engaged in political dialogue on pasturereforms and support advancement of these reforms through technical, legal and financialaid.

Stronger focus on land use rights. Adopted in 2013 a new Pasture Law allows LPDP-II to goeven further than LPDP with ensuring secure and fair access of communities to pasturelands through proper land rights allocation process. The Project would seek GOT leadershipin developing process for allocation of these rights to communities in a transparent, timelyand affordable manner.

Targeting strategy was highlighted as successful in achieving its objectives. The LPDPtargeting and selection strategy of communities, as well as transparent and predictableprocess adopted by LPDP proved to be very successful not only in selecting communities,but to ensure adherence to the adopted criteria and avoid political pressure.

Technical knowledge and capacity in regards to pasture management in country is limited.Capacity building expertise for PUUs has been concentrated in the PMU and participatingCFs. Knowledge materials on technical issues, such as elaboration of the pasture

36 Review of Project documents, completion and evaluation reports of the FAO, ADB, WB, and projects financed byDFID, UNDP, GIZ and USAID. Meeting with in country management and visiting mission.


45

management plans, pasture health assessment, fodder production have been largelydeveloped by local and international consultants in the PMU. Training and extensionoutreach for participating PUUs on these topics has been rendered by the CFs. It isrecommended to explore a possibility of engagement professional Technical Facilitator (TF)for provision of such services.

Institutional strengthening of PUUs. LPDP-II would need to have a governance andorganizational capacity strengthening program for PUUs and PUUBs to raise trust to theseinstitutions from local government and community members, and ensure effectiveness oftheir operations. Institutional assessment of PUUs and other key stakeholders would providea foundation for development of such program, to adequately address weaknesses of eachactor. There is a need to have a strong governance strategy and mechanisms to ensuretransparent, inclusive and fair decision making process and grievances’ redress mechanismat the community level. The Project would need to develop governance strategy to addressthese issues and provide capacity building on enforcement of these mechanisms within thePUUs.

The Project should encourage horizontal learning among local initiatives. The Project mayseek to facilitate learning and sharing of good practices among communities, particularly inhaving further community efforts that build off of the social mobilization around the initialinvestment. There could be a window on Project innovations to explore such best practicesand to institutionalize them into the Project design, with ensuring provision of correspondingtechnical assistance provided on the ground, including by the CF. Exchange visits ofcommunities to share experience could facilitate spread of such best practices.

Further strengthening regional office for administrative and procurement functions.Experience from the implementation of the KLSP and LPDP has highlighted that majorimplementation bottlenecks has been encountered due to delays in undertakingprocurement and ensuring finance flow. Since livestock rearing and pasture managementare factored by the season, any significant delays in undertaking procurement, and financingcan negatively impact Project’s implementation speed and effectiveness. It was agreed withthe stakeholders to delegate some tasks to PMU’s Kulob sub-office, such as preparation ofdocuments and specifications, preparing financial reporting and budgeting with recruitmentof assistant procurement, financial officer to conduct all preliminary and preparatory work forCentral PMU Office. The same concerns with the M&E operations.

The necessity to engage international and local consultants remain strong. LPDP is playinga pioneer role in decentralization of pasture management reforms down to local governmentand communities. Key lesson extracted from its implementation that there is acute shortageof highly competent technical experts in area of holistic pasture management. That wasespecially evident in experience of elaboration of approaches to pasture managementplanning. At the same time international expertise familiar with the conditions of Tajikistan,legal and institutional set up in regards to land management and farm development is alsolacking or difficult to attract for a short term assignments. LPDP-II would still requireengagement of local and international TA, especially in regards to pasture management,animal production and health, and income generation. However, it is imperative to structuresuch TA to target outstanding shortfalls in Project’s implementation and grey areas ofknowledge for application within Tajikistan context.

Expansion of women income generation activities beyond livestock to diversify sources oflivelihood. Experience of IFAD and other donors working in the country on pasturemanagement issues shows that communities need mind-set change in their behaviour vis-à-vis pasture use. There is a clear lack of collaboration between villages and betweensettlements on maximizing the use of natural resources and pastures is a very goodexample of failed joint action of users. By promoting the values that can be generated out ofnatural pastures, project will contribute to this shift in behaviour. Discussions during fieldvisits revealed very little (if not none) knowledge of the indigenous plants among localcommunities. At the same time Tajik mountains have a wealth of unique varieties of plantsthat have high value on the (international) market. There are several success storiesgenerated by JICA and other donors on liquorice processing, producing almond oil.


46

Exposure to international experience in pasture management to set own policy agenda. TheProject was very successful in learning experience of a neighbouring Kyrgyzstan in pasturemanagement reforms. A study tour of PMU key experts, participation in international pasturemanagement conference organized jointly by GIZ and IFAD in Kyrgyzstan for all CentralAsian countries allowed not only learn about various approaches to pasture management inthe world, but establish good contacts with pasture practitioners in Central Asia, Mongolia,China and other countries. The PMU engaged two Kyrgyzstan based NGOs to facilitateelaboration of methodologies and training of trainers on community based participatorymapping and development of pasture management plans. The Project needs furtherexposure to global experiences in community based pasture management, organize studytours and joint workshops.

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 4: Detailed project description

47

Appendix 4: Detailed project description

1. Although LPDP provides opportunities in terms of enhancing the way pastures are managed atthe community and national level, the growing impacts of climate change have not yet been explicitlytaken into account, specifically in terms of development of the Community Livestock and PastureManagement Plans (CLPMP) and setting priorities for wise long-term investments in improvingpastures. LPDP-II will address integration of this urgent issue of climate change adaptation, thanks tothe availability of Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Programme (ASAP) financing, andmainstream it’s priorities within the CLPMP and subsequent investments to enhance the resilience ofcommunities. LPDP and LPDPII will be treated as one coherent project in all operational aspects andwill complement each other, specifically in terms of the “one-project” approach, implementationmodalities and project activities.

2. The LPDP-II approach is based on community–driven development to enhance adaptivecapacity, reduce climate-induced risk and reduce poverty. The Project will mainly expand the activitiesinitiated under LPDP to the Project area, yet in addition it would incorporate the lessons learned so farunder LPDP and integrate climate change adaptation throughout all the proposed activities. TheProject goal and objective for LPDPII remain the same as for LPDP. Specifically, the goal of LPDPII isto contribute to the reduction in poverty in the Khatlon region. The objective of LPDPII would be toincrease the nutritional status, incomes and resilience of poor households by enhancing livestockproductivity in a sustainable manner. The primary target groups of the Project will be the following: (i)smallholder livestock farmers; (ii) private veterinary service providers and small scale entrepreneurswith the potential to provide services to smallholder farmers; and (iii) vulnerable groups includingwomen-headed households.

3. LPDP-II will have three principal inter-related components as well as the required support forproject management and implementation as follows: (i) Institutional development; (ii) Productivityenhancement and improved animal health (iii) Pasture development and diversification forvulnerability reduction. These are described below along with their relevant sub-components.

Component 1 – Institutional Development4. The key objective of this component is to enhance the capacity of targeted public sector andcommunity organizations to be more effective and efficient at pro-poor development. The componentwould promote collaboration with Civil Society organizations and existing networks that are active inthe fields of training/capacity building, planning and policy dialogue relevant to climate changeadaptation, sustainable development of pastures and successful innovative work in income generatingactivities.

5. This investment would primarily focus on the following national institutions that support pasturedevelopment: Pasture User Unions and their Boards, Pasture Department and Tajik AgrarianUniversity. Although the capacity building would be tailored according to the needs and mandate ofthese institutions, the Project would keep an open and inclusive approach, and will strive to involveother partners that may benefit from the exercise, as appropriate. Specific adaptation training toolswould be used to support the capacity building effort, building on existing materials already availableand produced under past and existing projects.

6. The main expected outputs, and the associated indicators, for this component are: PUU are enabled to develop and implement climate risk-mitigation community pasture plans

incorporating needs and priorities of poor and women 200 of land use rights agreementsobtained by PUUs that reduce disputes regarding access to pastures by 50%;

75% PUUs acquired planning and technical skills to implement sustainable pasturemanagement and livestock production;

Increase in pasture fees collected by 20% by the end of the Project; Public institutions involved in pasture management are strengthened;


48

Improved Pasture Law and related legislation proposed/passed; 5-year Pasture Management Strategy incorporating climate change adaptation prepared

and passed; Sustainable Pasture Management curriculum is taught in Tajik Agrarian University.

7. The outputs would enable the component to achieve the following outcome (with the associatedindicators):

Targeted public sector and community organizations (disaggregated by type, i.e: PUUs,VOs, MoA, Pasture Department, TAU, Jamoats) are more effective and efficient at pro-poorpasture management and livestock development.

Satisfactory levels of governance for 75% of PUUs facilitated by the Project. Technical capacity of targeted institutions (disaggregated by type) is increased. Pro-poor policy and legislation with regard to sustainable pasture management.

8. The component will be comprised of two sub-components:

Sub-Component 1.1: Development of Community Organizations.

9. The Project will foster integrated, equitable, socially and environmentally sustainable pastureuse and management by devolving responsibility to the local level and applying a community-basedapproach to their management. It will capitalize on the approaches elaborated and tested under theongoing LPDP in regards to broad base mobilization of Pasture Users Unions (PUUs) at thecommunity level.

10. Selection of communities. Using the LPDP’s targeting approach and indicators, the PMU willcollect data and select target communities within the four Project’s districts. The initial identification ofvillages will be further refined depending upon community willingness to participate in Project activitiesand abide by its terms and conditions. The principle objective of the targeting process is to selectcommunities that have both a need and recognized potential for livestock development, but alsopossess the elements for success under the Project. According to the legislation, all householdsowning livestock can be members of the PUUs and have access to community pastures.

11. Social mobilization of communities and formation of PUUs. Mobilization and strengthening ofthe PUUs will be conducted by the Community Facilitators - NGOs experienced in social mobilizationof rural communities. LPDP has contracted MSDSP, Caritas, and German Agro Action to mobilizepasture users into PUUs in order to speed up the coverage and compare approaches to socialmobilization employed by different organizations. This experience has been a learning process for theCFs and for the PMU. The approach of engagement of CFs to mobilize communities and establishPUUs will be continued, backed by the technical expertise and knowledge provided by the TechnicalTeam that has been established under LPDP consisting of individual consultants (includinginternational) in various field.

12. Strengthening of PUUs. The governance structure of PUUs is still weak and needs furtherfostering through empowerment of the PUUs, their elected Boards (PUUB) representing and acting onbehalf of the members. LPDP experience, as well as lessons learned from other similar initiatives inTajikistan, demonstrated that inclusive community mobilisation is a time, resource and effortconsuming process. LPDP experience has shown that for establishment of legal, social andorganisational structures of the PUU and their Boards, secure the access to pasture lands, preparemid-term pasture management plans and identify sub-projects it is required to have at least one yearof intensive social mobilization and empowerment. In communities, where PUU have beenestablished, in additional to technical capacity building, it is necessary to extend mobilization tostrengthen these young institutions, empower their Boards, install and enhance accountability andtransparency mechanisms for better governance.

13. The CFs will be also facilitating formation of the Common Interests Groups (CIGs) out ofeligible smallholder households interested and capable in participating in livestock development andfodder growing activities, and women group-based income generating activities.


49

14. Allocation of pasture primary use rights to PUUs. LPDP has started a process of inventory ofrights to pasture lands in participating communities and allocating of the use rights to PUUs. However,the process to obtain primary use right is proved to be very lengthy and costly. It could take up to ayear for community/PUU to obtain such a certificate and the cost for preparing all mapping andinventory materials can reach 8,000 Somoni per PUU. At the same time, there have been alreadycases noted in target villages, when PUU applied for pasture land use right to local government body,but individual vested interests managed to secure these community pastures with primary usecertificate. To protect community right to pasture land near villages, the GOT needs to have andannounce clear policy and procedures for allocation of these rights. In order to reverse the negativetrend with not productive units - individuals or dehkan farms – to sublease pastures to communitieswithout investing into improvement of that natural resources, the GOT should demonstrate itscommitment to advance further pasture management decentralization reform and create favourableconditions for the PUUs to secure their land rights. That can be reflected in a policy to provide priorityrights for PUUs to access and secure land title to the community pastures. The GOT is also expectedto provide support to PUUs in preparing and issuing certificates at the minimal cost. The Project willprovide crucial assistance to the established PUUs through legal, technical, and financial support toobtain land certificates.

15. Associating PUUs into federations. PUUs in accordance with the Pasture Law are currentlyestablished at the village level. However, there are small villages with limited pasture area, wherework of such bodies is not going to be efficient. In such areas it is feasible to join several PUUs intothe federated structure. The objective of such federation is to create a formal member basedassociation that represents several PUUs at the Jamoat level. The federated PUU will be able betternegotiate use rights, coordinate pasture management and apply for funding and support from externalsources, and at the same time to minimize operational expenses. LPDP-II would need to explore suchoption and initiate it in the Jamoats with several small size villages in target districts.

16. The CFs’ main responsibilities will include: (i) organizing the communities and developing PUUswith PUUBs; (ii) collecting all support information on a random sample of the beneficiaries andtracking them over time; (iii) briefing the PUUs and it’s target groups on Project activities; (iv)strengthening the PUUs through provision of organizational and technical advice and training; (v)assisting the PUUs in preparation and implementation of CLPMPs and other community activities; (vi)integrating climate adaptation and risk-mitigation measures into CLPMPs and undertaking criticalassessment of the priority activities needed to enhance community resilience; and (vii) assisting thePUUs in identification of beneficiaries for all Project activities to ensure proper selection of poor andvulnerable households, women headed households and those candidates and entrepreneurs from theprivate sector who can operate on a sustainable basis. The Terms of Reference of the CFs areprovided in the Project Implementation Manual.

17. In addition to financing the work of CFs during the whole Project period, provisions have beenmade under this sub-component for: (i) five district-level workshops at the rate of two in Project Year(PY)1 and three in PY2 reflecting the anticipated phasing in of the three districts to be covered by theProject; (ii) International Community Development TA to refine targeting and selection strategy,development of capacity building programme for organizational strengthening of PUUs and PUUBsand training of CFs on it’s implementation, as well as development of the approach to federating thePUUs at the Jamoat level; (iii) organizational capacity building for established PUUs to be conductedby the CFs, (iv) local study tours in Khatlon region for up to a total of 200 PUU members, i.e. at leastone member from each of the Project’s targeted villages; (iv) two international study tours for up to atotal of six members of PUUBs, Hukumat and Jamoat governments and the PMU; and (v) issuance ofland primary use right certificates and start-up equipment for PUUs.

Sub-Component 1.2: Advancement of Policy and Legal Framework and Strengthening NationalInstitutions.

18. Strengthening Pasture Department (PD). The recently passed Pasture Law envisages theestablishment of a Pasture Department that would be dealing with pasture management policy and


50

monitoring issues. The Project would provide technical guidance to this future PD in developing policyand legislation to advance pasture management transfer, monitoring of pasture resources condition,through assessing the quality of pastures and monitoring the performance of PUUs. The capacity ofthe PD to effectively deal with sustainable pasture management will be enhanced through a specificcapacity building programme including staff training, study tours and technical assistance on resilientpasture management, monitoring, demarcation and sustainability issues. A pool of national andinternational experts would be used to plan, organize and deliver the capacity building programme.The activity would also provide for public awareness campaigns on pasture management, as theProject would continue to fund the production of public information started under LPDP including radioand television programs that improve rural communities’ understanding of the new arrangements forpasture management and best practice. The Project would fund the employment of three youngprofessionals – university graduates who will work in the Department for one to two years to gain fieldexperience. This will help to build a cadre of specialists for employment in the PD, a field-basedservice provider or directly by PUUBs in the future. The Project also would be supporting the PD inmonitoring pasture use.

19. Support to Policy and Legislation Development. LPDP-II will continue to provide assistance informulation of a state policy and strategy for sustainable pasture management, elaboration of legaland regulatory documents to support implementation of the Pasture Law, including the developmentof a 5-year Strategy for Pasture Management and Improvement 2015-2020. That would be donebased on continuous review and assessment of the evolving new practices in pasture managementand use on the ground, drafting and adopting changes and amendments to the existing legislation toharmonize it with the Pasture Law, consultations with key stakeholders through workshops,conferences and other awareness activities on new pasture management principles at central andregional levels; and in exchanging of experience with other countries with similar pasturemanagement issues. International and local TA will be mobilized to provide assistance to review andamend the Pasture Law, to develop programmes for sustainable resource management, pasturemonitoring and flexible carrying capacity estimates, the role of the private sector, veterinary law, socialaccountability and governance, as well as developing capacities relevant to climate adaptation anddisaster risk reduction.

20. To ensure sustainability and advancement of pasture management reform, the project willsupport relevant national institutions, such as the Ministry of Agriculture, given that it is appointed bythe Government to act as an authorized state body in the area of pasture policy. The support will bethrough facilitation of the policy dialogue on pasture related legislation, financing of workshops andconference, conducting information dissemination campaign to raise awareness on pasturemanagement reforms, its objectives and processes.

21. Establishment Pilot Commission for Regulating Pasture Use. Pasture Law has introduced anew player to be engaged in pasture management at the district level - Commission for RegulatingPasture Use at the district level. The Project would need to facilitate establishment of suchcommissions in target districts on pilot basis and support the Government in further elaboration oftheir legal foundation, functions and procedures.

22. Support to Tajik Agrarian University. One of the biggest challenges in undertaking pasturereforms is a shortage of highly knowledgeable pasture management experts, who understand holisticapproaches to pasture management. The Tajik Agrarian University (TAU) educational programs focuseither on livestock rearing, or botanical science, or on production of fodder. It is expected that LPDP-IIcan support the TAU in developing curricula and a comprehensive educational program for a newdegree in natural pasture management, which would combine needs of livestock as well assustainable management of ecosystem with consideration of climate change and increasedvulnerability TAU is ready to initiate introduction of such a new degree and provide facilities andhuman resources needed for development and introduction of a new curricula. LPDP-II will providesupport in refurbishing pasture fodder assessment lab, GIS and weather forecasting lab, thedevelopment of new curricula and training materials as well as the upgrade and increased knowledge


51

of the TAU teachers participating in this educational programme. The support will be provided ininternational and local technical expertise and financial resources for labs equipment. Functionalassessment of the University will be carried out at the Project’s inception stage, to develop specificrecommendations to improve it’s effectiveness and responsiveness to the needs of the sector, andidentify entry points for Project support.

23. Student Incentive Programme. There is a significant need to encourage new graduates to takeup positions in the major livestock keeping areas. The Project would include a variety of initiatives toprovide incentives for students to enter the TAU veterinary and agronomy faculties and ultimatelybecome livestock husbandry/veterinary specialists, such as: (i) scholarships, (ii) practical attachmentsduring their programme, and (iii) the opportunity to receive internship grants upon graduation.

24. LPDP-II will finance: (i) International and local TA on policy and legislation and support todevelopment of the improved Pasture Law and Pasture Management Strategy for 2015-2020 andvarious legal acts; (ii) support to the PD in enhancing its technical and monitoring capacity; (iii)informational campaign on pasture management reforms as well as international knowledgeexchange; (iv) functional assessment of the TAU and support to the TAU with establishment andequipment of the GIS in pasture management lab and development of curricula through local andinternational TA; (v) scholarships, practical studies and internships for TAU students.

Component 2 – Productivity Enhancement and Improved Animal Health25. Livestock health and production services are fundamental inputs to ensure healthy andproductive livestock essential to rural livelihoods in Tajikistan. The high prevalence of animal diseasesnot only causes high mortality and low productivity, but poses a significant public health risk. Forinstance, the high rate of brucellosis and other zoonosis reduces potential off take, limits marketaccess especially for export of animals and livestock products, and creates significant public healthconcerns. While control of animal diseases is important, vaccination and preventative interventionswould still remain ineffective without addressing the basic management practices related to animalnutrition achievable through better pasture management and adequate feed supplementation duringwinter time.

26. The key objective for the component is to increase access to livestock and veterinary services,and fodder supply for smallholder producers (mainly households), resulting in decreased mortality andincreased productivity of sheep/goat flocks and cattle herds due to the reduced incidence andprevalence of diseases. LPDPII would continue and up-scale within four Project districts many of theactivities developed under LPDP.

27. The Project would support fodder demonstrations and animal production trials as well as investin capacity building of and direct support to private veterinarians to establish, expand or consolidatetheir businesses. As part of this process, the Project would incorporate winter fodder and animalhealth requirements within the Community Livestock and Pasture Management Plans, as mentionedin the previous component. The PUUB would then be responsible for coordinating the provision ofherd health and production services, working together with the private vets to ensure that the flocksand herds remain healthy and show steady gains in production yields over the life of the project. TheCLPMPs would include guidelines for health and production practices deemed appropriate for andagreed upon by the members. This would include routine health procedures, compulsory vaccinationsand a clear understanding among members regarding expectations for individual farm feed budgeting,preparation of winter feed, and integration with the management of optimal pasture access androtational grazing. Also, the Project would provide limited support to the State Veterinary ServicesInspection.

28. The main expected outputs, and the associated indicators, for this component are: Capacity for sustainable and efficient livestock production built

At least 5 000 beneficiary HH trained in improved livestock husbandry practices (byCF)


52

1 020 beneficiary HHs engaged in participatory fodder promotion and productiondemonstrations

50 groups (3 250 HHs) engaged in improved sheep production trials At least 20 business plans prepared and received financing

Private vets provide animal health and production services on a sustainable basis 60 veterinarians trained and equipped.


Healthier livestock with lower levels of mortality and increased supplementary feedavailable to community livestock 70% of livestock households have reductions in their animal mortality 15% increase in average milk yields and 10% increase in average weight of cattle,

sheep and goats sold in local markets.

30. The component will be comprised of two sub-components: Livestock Productivity Enhancementand Improved Animal Health.

Sub-Component 2.1: Livestock Productivity Enhancement.

31. Selection of training recipients. LPDP-II will identify recipients of the livestock extension trainingthrough the PUUs. This will ensure the selection of households, which meet the criteria specified foreach type of activity. The following criteria will be applied to select communities/households toparticipate in livestock training: (i) willingness to work with the Community Facilitator to identify keyconstraints in the livestock sector; and (ii) PUUB will nominate and approve households to participatein livestock training in accordance with the following criteria: poor households; women headedhouseholds; households mainly dependent on livestock as a main source of income; own no morethan 0.5 Ha of irrigated land and no more than 1 Ha of rainfed land.

32. Livestock training. Training on livestock management and improved production techniques willbe provided to households and smallholder farmers, especially women, who are responsible for thecare of livestock. Livestock farmers/households will be organized into groups of 15 to 30 for theprovision of improved animal husbandry and management practices, feed preparation, identification ofhygiene and health aspects, etc. It is expected that the smallholder farmer’s livestock productivity willbe increased through improved animal husbandry and management techniques, joint assessment offeeding practices and constraints, introduction of improved feed management, better identification andmanagement of disease control, improved animal selection and production, etc. A special curriculumwill be developed with the help of technical assistance in collaboration with local communities onaspects relevant for the smallholder livestock farmer in the Project area. The CFs recruited underComponent 1 will deliver the training programme to the targeted communities.

33. Fodder promotion and production. The development of the livestock sector in Tajikistandepends vitally on efforts aimed at increasing the production and availability of winter fodder. TheProject will promote fodder production through the establishment of a Seed Fund using the sameapproach developed by the ongoing FAO project entitled “Improving Access of Small Scale Farmersto High Quality Seed in Tajikistan” (GCP/TAJ/010/AUS) aimed at producing high quality cereal, oil andfodder seed in Tajikistan. The Technical Facilitator recruited to support this activity jointly with the PMUPasture Management Consultant will carry out the assessment of needs of local communities forfodder seed varieties, areas to be planted and volume of seed required. This will be done within theframework of preparation of CLPMPs by PUUs.

34. The Project will further identify suitable fodder seed producers in Project districts and willstrengthen their capacity, through a partnership agreement, to produce and supply high quality seedto local communities. The Seed Association of Tajikistan and its member seed farms are likely to beone of the strongest candidates to act as potential suppliers of seed. Depending on the results of theneeds assessment, the selected seed farms will be given the selected varieties of fodder seed for


53

multiplication, fertilizer and some equipment (seed drills, seed cleaning machines, seed threshersetc.). A list of fodder species can include but is not limited to annual fodder crops (pulses, triticale,rye/barley, corn, root crops etc) and perennial grasses (lucerne, sainfoin etc). Normally, seed ofannual crops can be made available in year 2 after the seed is given to the seed farms and in case ofperennial grasses in year 3 or 4. Farmers will receive packages of fodder seed and fertilizer tocultivate fodder on up to 1 ha. The seeds will be provided by the seed farms and fertilizer will besupplied by the Project. Farmers will be obliged to return the equivalent of seed received for plantingto the Seed Fund to be established within the local communities and to be managed by the PUUB.Farmers will have a choice of returning seed in-kind or buying seed from the seed farm. In case of theformer, farmers will have to clean, bag, label and test quality of seed by using services of the seedfarm. There will be a fee established for such services, which shall not exceed 20% of the marketvalue of seed. The seed will be further redistributed to the next stallholder farmers. The seed farmsjointly with the Technical Facilitator will provide necessary training and advice to smallholder farmersin seed handling – harvesting, cleaning and bagging. In case if no seed farms are available in thetarget area the Project will identify and support progressive farmers who show willingness to becomeseed producers. These farmers will be given technical assistance and some equipment to becomeseed producers. The Project will also promote production of other high-energy and nutritious animalfeed such as silage, haylage and other.

35. The Project will provide: (i) fodder seed and fertilizer (ammonium nitrate and super-phosphate)sufficient to cultivate a land plot of up to 1 Ha; and (ii) households will be contributing at least 10% ofthe costs; (iii) households will be responsible for returning the equivalent of seed received for planting.

36. Improved livestock production. The Project would distribute rams to the target communities. Itseems that Gissar rams are most demanded by the smallholder farmers and suitable for the Projectarea. However, the Project will have a small feasibility study to assess viability of these or otherbreeds. The Project will continue piloting the livestock production activities initiated under LPDP.

37. There will be 50 groups of small households Gissar sheep breeders (owning up to 10 heads ofsheep) formed in Project villages interested in engaging/improving local breeds of sheep throughcross breeding with high quality Gissar rams. Each group will consist of approximately 65 householdsand will have approximately 650 heads of sheep of which 60% would be ewes to be mated. TheProject will provide one 1.5-2.5 years old Gissar ram per 26 ewes of 1.5 years and older. The totalnumber of 15 rams per one group will be provided. In addition a 7-month supply of high energy animalfeed (concentrate) will be provided during two years to support rams in critical periods: two months inpreparation for mating season and five months during the winter season. The group will jointly userams to improve the quality of local sheep breeds. The group will identify suitable households/personsfrom amongst its members to keep the rams, be responsible for their proper maintenance (housing,feeding and health) and for making available them during mating periods. The mating period in Projectdistricts usually starts at the end of September and finishes by mid November. During this period allother rams will be removed from the group herds to ensure that ewes mate with the highly productiverams provided by the Project. The household/person selected to maintain the rams will retain animalsafter two years of use by the group members. The groups will be given incentives and support to sendanimals to summer pastures for a period of 5 months.

38. The rams will be procured on a tender basis and will need to have been vaccinated/treatedagainst infectious animal diseases: brucellosis, sheep pox, inside/outside parasites, anthrax, FMDand others in accordance with the veterinary legislation of Tajikistan. The list of required treatmentsand vaccinations is available from the State Veterinary Inspection Services. With respect to marketingof output products and sustaining the impact of the production models the groups will be encouragedto market their offspring (rams/ewes) within the local communities thus to contribute towardsachieving the model objectives i.e. enhance sheep production in the Project area.

39. Strengthening Private Sector Services. Farmers have limited access to high quality seed andfertilizer to be able to grow fodder crops to feed their animal during the winter season. It is extremelyimportant to develop these market intermediaries as they are the ones who can provide access to


54

improved inputs for the smallholder farmers/households to improve their productivity. The Governmentof Tajikistan is also determined to reduce its role in providing funds for farming and instead encourageprivate activities in this area37. In particular, it plans to encourage the private provision of agriculturalinputs and financial services. In line with this Government policy, the Project will continuestrengthening private entrepreneurs dealing with livestock input supply such as poultry feed, animalfeed, improved fodder seed, seed cleaning services, etc. Private sector participants dealing withmarketing of dairy, meat and other animal products will be provided business and technicalassistance. Areas of high pay off such as dairy and meat processing will be especially encouraged.

40. The CFs in consultation with the PUU will identify the individual entrepreneurs supplying inputsand buying outputs in accordance with the following criteria: (i) specialize in supplying inputs for thelivestock and fodder crop production; (ii) provide services to smallholder livestock farmers andhouseholds; and (iii) dealing with processing and marketing of livestock products. The Project willundertake an assessment of all individual entrepreneurs and identify their specific needs for businessdevelopment, equipment, credit and technical training. Business advisers recruited by the Project willundertake a broker role by providing such services and linking individual entrepreneurs with therequired service providers. Business advisers will also support them in preparation of business plans.To qualify for this support the entrepreneurs, in turn, will need to sign an agreement with the Projectand PUU/VO to provide their inputs and services; the preference will be given to those privateentrepreneurs who work with women’s groups established under the Project.

Sub-Component 2.2: Improved Animal Health

41. Strengthening Private Veterinary Services. The poor state of veterinary services in the countryprovided by the State Veterinary Inspection Services (SVIS) has convinced the Government to adopta more private sector led approach to the provision of veterinary services. The Government thereforedecided that along with retaining state veterinary services, private veterinary services should bedeveloped. As a result the Government has decided to encourage the establishment of privateveterinary network across the country, which would provide both animal health and artificialinsemination services.

42. A small facility will be established under the Project, and the veterinarians selected to serve therural communities will submit applications to fund veterinary drugs, training, equipment (including AI),veterinary tools and building veterinary clinics (vet package). The Tajik Veterinary Association ofTajikistan could be considered as one of potential suppliers of veterinary drugs and the induction andrefresher training for veterinarians. In case if veterinarians choose to build vet clinics, they would beestablished in locations where no facilities currently exist. In order to ensure the sustainability of theseservices each clinic will be located to allow it to operate in a radius from which it can recover its costsfrom user charges. The Government will provide the land for the clinic and the communities willprovide part of the labour costs (min 10%) for constructing the building for the veterinary centre.Based on its experience of implementing this activity, the Project will provide the Government policyinput on how the existing policy on the establishment of these centres at the village level can befurther refined for more cost effective use and a higher level of impact. The Project will use itstechnical assistance resources to evaluate its experience and inform government policy makingregarding both the public and private veterinary services.

43. The Project would support about 60 private veterinarians in the Project area, who at least must:(i) have higher/technical veterinary education; (ii) have at least 5 years of practical experience in theProject area; (iii) sign a tripartite agreement with the Project and local community to provide servicesfor at least 5 years; and (iv) contribute at least 10% of the value of the selected package. The Projectwill encourage women participation in this activity by setting a target that at least 10% should befemale veterinarians. The Project would promote private vets as the primary service providers forcomprehensive, preventative herd/flock health, and promote the productivity improvement program.Specifically, the Project would adopt a holistic approach in dealing with animal health as an integral

37 National Development Strategy 2015. Government of Tajikistan.


55

part of the production system to include feed, feeding, reproduction and on-farm food safety as theinitial link in the value chain. To support this, a considerable amount of the training and extensionrelated to animal health, feeds and feeding would be provided to the PUUs through the private vets.To enable the private vets to provide this support to the PUUs, they would receive technical andbusiness management training. Project inputs would include essential equipment, AI equipment and astarter pack (as demanded by vets wanting to improve such a business), drugs and medications, anda fixed transportation allowance. On average, such a package would cost around US$5,000 per vet(including a 10% contribution by a vet).

44. Strengthening the State Veterinary Inspection Services. The Project will provide technicaltraining and study tours on food safety and standards, laboratory testing equipment/consumables oflivestock products and diagnosis of animal diseases. The study tours will be organized for SVIS staffto countries (e.g. Lithuania, Turkey) with the advanced food safety standards, laboratory testing oflivestock products (dairy, meat, etc.) and diagnosis of livestock diseases.

Component 3: Pasture Development and Diversification for VulnerabilityReduction

45. The key objective for this component is to increase access to more productive and climateresilient pasture areas as well as to diversified income generating opportunities for livestockcommunities through a sustainable, community-led management of natural resources. Theparticipatory planning process will incorporate both climate-resilient pasture management and animalproduction/health planning, thus linking the work to be done under both first and second components.As part of the process, the component will strengthen the governance and management capacity ofPUUs in terms of access to and sustainability of livestock and pasture management, and fodderproduction. In view of this, the component will strengthen the adaptive capacity, governance andmanagement skills of PUUs and their elected Boards (PUUB) and reduce their vulnerability to climaticstress. This will be done by building understanding within their constituent members of the importanceof incorporating disaster risk reduction measures within Community Livestock and PastureManagement Plans (CLPMPs) and ensuring the long term sustainability and health of pastures andthe restoration of pasture landscapes, thus improving livestock productivity and contributing toreduced feed shortfall and income loss.

46. The main expected outputs, and the associated indicators, for this component are: Resilient and sustainable investments prioritized in CLPMPs completed and functioning

200 PUUs implementing CLPMP plans (ASAP); US$8.5 million of new or existing rural infrastructure made climate-resilient (ASAP) 40038 of approved CLPMP in the Project areas (including LPDPI’s PUUs) effectively

integrating climate risk mitigation and adaptation measures (ASAP) 18,000 households (50% of the targeted population) have access to infrastructure

(water points; shelter; storage; pasture connectivity roads) that is climate resilient andenvironmentally sound (ASAP)

7,560 ha of pasture is rehabilitated through ecosystem restoration approaches(ASAP)

Alternative income-generating activities supported to enhance risk-coping mechanisms 100 alternative economic activities women groups established, 100 grants for economic diversification disbursed to new enterprises established

(1 500 women).

38 Estimated total number of PUUs for both LPDP-I and II.


56


Household resilience increased through sustainable use of pastures and incomediversification Beneficiaries’ household income increased at least by 20% from alternative income

activities (ASAP). 132,000 ha of accessible pasture managed in a more climate resilient manner

(ASAP).

48. The component will be divided into 2 sub-components: Community Resilient PastureManagement and Investments, and Income Diversification.

Sub-Component 3.1 – Community Resilient Pasture Management and Investments

49. Although livestock production contributes heavily to rural livelihoods and food security, and tototal agricultural sector output growth and exports, its productivity is low and far below its potential.This unfavourable situation is likely to be made worse by climate change, since pasture productivity,hay yields and fodder crops are strongly influenced by climate conditions. The UNFCCC projects thatgrassland productivity will decline in the semi-arid and arid regions of Asia by as much as 40-90% dueto an increase in temperature of 2-3°C combined with reduced summer precipitation. Decreasedpasture productivity, heat stress and reduced access to water could cause a reduction in livestockproductivity and an increase in disease incidence. The drought-induced lack of pasture and foddermay lead to overgrazing, animal death, or force livestock owners to destock herds they are unable tofeed. Current fodder varieties have been impacted by prolonged summer heat waves. Furthermore,pastoralist communities have no access to information regarding disaster risk and no capacity tomitigate negative climate change impacts.

50. Although LPDPI provides opportunities in terms of enhancing the way pastures are managed atthe community and national level, the possible impacts of climate change are not explicitly taken intoaccount when setting priorities for long-term investments in improving pastures and ensuring thesustainable development of this sector. LPDPII will mainstream adaptation priorities within CLPMPsand subsequent investments to enhance the resilience of communities.

51. The sub-component will build a monitoring and evaluation system through modelling of pastureproductivity to determine carrying capacity estimates and identify remote pasture areas that could beaccessed. With the predicted impacts of climate change, winterfeed production and spring-autumnpasture availability are the biggest constraints to development of the livestock sector in general. Thelivestock carrying capacity plans will be based on flexible carrying capacity estimates to continuouslyadapt the stocking rates to the highly variable climatic conditions and biomass availability to ensureadequate forage for grazing animals and leave enough residual forage for re-growth the followingyear. Residual forage protects soil from erosion and increases the forage yield the following year byimproving stand vigour, soil moisture and nutrient cycling. LPDPII would introduce a long-term flexiblecarrying capacity approach, which refers to the average number of animals that a pasture can supportover a planning period, and which is dependent on the climatic conditions that will affect the grazingareas

52. The livestock carrying capacity estimates would be done with support of Technical Team, andthe monitoring system with support of national technical assistance from the HydrometeorologicalState Department. This monitoring will be a part of the CLPMP performance monitoring systemestablished under LPDP, while the livestock carrying capacity estimates are to be part of the CLPMPs.

53. Technical Support for Adaptive Management will be secured to the Project, to complement theone provided under LPDP and comprise a combination of national and international short-termexperts/service providers that would be contracted by the PMU, on a needs basis. It would include thefollowing specialities: climate change adaptation, natural resource management, pasture and otherecosystem (i.e. riverine habitats) restoration and improvement, agronomists, disaster-risk reduction,animal health, governance and conflict resolution, gender, and M&E. LPDPI outreach experts would


57

undergo refreshment courses on PRA and social mobilization with special focus on governance,inclusion and representation.

54. The PUUs will develop Community Livestock and Pasture Management Plans (CLPMPs) toaddress issues of degradation of pasture resources and deterioration of pasture infrastructure, andclimate adaptation needs in sustainable pasture management and restoration, improved winterfeeding, livestock health and production issues. PUUs serve as focal points for the Project, for thetargeting beneficiaries according to the established criteria for each Project activity. The preparation ofCLPMPs will be based on the comprehensive assessment of all pasture and fodder production areasthat would be done on a village basis. Based on this assessment, sustainable pasture resourcemanagement plans would be developed, with the support of external assistance but through themobilization of the concerned communities. The main objective of the plans would be to defineoptions to increase quantity and quality of overall fodder production. Generally this is expected to beachieved by reducing grazing on nearby pastures, a higher proportion of cultivated fodder and hay,pasture and other ecosystems’ restoration, and better utilization of remote pastures.

55. The analysis of the critical elements impacted by potential future climate changes on livestockand pasture systems will feed plans with a combination of different approaches and measures thatmay include, inter alia:

Restoration of degraded pastures through rotation and fencing, and improvement ofvegetation cover/pasture yield/ha with highly diverse native plant species/genetic varieties(grasses, leguminous plants, small bushes), tolerant to climate constraints (e.g. summerdrought). The livestock production system existing today in Tajikistan relies primarily ongrazing of livestock with limited feeding of cultivated feed and concentrates. Winter feed is akey constraint for livestock production and productivity in Tajikistan. In order to address thisconstraint it is of critical importance to rehabilitate the winter pastures.

Infrastructure that allow/facilitate the revival of traditional management (transhumance),which is critical to adapt the seasonal livestock pressure on winter and summer pastures toclimate conditions (road improvement, connectivity bridges, stock watering points, etc);

Water management measures to favour pasture resilience through increased waterretention and regulation and to improve water balance and decrease evapotranspiration inareas (especially at low altitude) where hotter/prolonged summer can increase the threat ofdrought (fences for shade, measures to retain water in soil, drainage, riverine and waterspring restoration, protection and shade through reforestation in water points);

Measures to prevent soil erosion, mudslides and floods, including the plantation of bushesand trees – agroforestry systems - that, besides being effective against soil erosion, can actas a barrier against storms and wind, and serve as a possible source of by-products (fruit,berries, medicinal and edible plants, honey, wood); the natural vegetation in themountainous areas of central and southern Khatlon are characterized by pistachio andalmond woodlands, with high potential to be restored, leading to the improvement of theenvironmental services supporting sustainable pasture management, livestock productionand livelihood diversification.

Infrastructure to enhance the value of spring/autumn pastures in view of the longer grazingseason allowed by increased temperatures and shorter winter season (construction oflivestock shelters and upgrading of facilities for herders);

Agricultural machinery to produce/harvest/store fodder (grass cutters, hay makingmachines, silage choppers, etc.) to increase the availability of fodder and create reserves forthe long winter period;

Restoration of riverine vegetation (better regulation of water, barrier against floods, improvewater quality, source of fodder).

56. Whenever possible, these measures would be carried out with use of adapted technology thatallows energy saving and easy maintenance and replication (i.e. the thermo-isolation of shelters andstabling structures using straw was successfully tested in previous projects). The Project, throughscreening and defined restrictions and safeguards, will make sure that CLPMPs include a balanced


58

mix of investment activities, and that they properly capture the need for specific interventions onclimate change adaptation and climate-risk reduction

57. A bottom-up approach would allow the PUUs to decide on the detailed investment needsdemonstrating that the targets and management principles in the management plans would beachieved. Community participation and leadership in the decision making process are vital, and hencethere is a strong need for community mobilisation which would be done through the first Projectcomponent and with support from the CFs. To support the initial implementation of the CLPMPs theProject will provide investment grants. The grants would be channelled through PUUs and theirpattern (i.e. type, phasing and implementation) determined by the respective CLPMPs. The PUUswould be expected to commit to the implementation and the achievement of the targets by signedagreements, which would envisage a phased financing of the CLPMPs against the clearly identifiablemilestone indicators. Subject to the PUU’s agreement and priorities, funds will be allocated to eachPUU for the implementation of their plan, for which procurement and payments will be largelymanaged by the PMU. The total funding provided to finance the CLPMP investment mini-projects isabout USD 17.4 million, comprising of 95% as matching grant and 5% as community contribution incash (10% in case of machinery). The exact amount of each grant would be linked to the PUUpopulation and performance of the PUU, including the collection of pasture use fees.

58. As part of Component 1, training and capacity building would be provided to the PUU membersto carry out the assessment and planning efficiently, ensuring the active participation of the morevulnerable households and involvement of women in planning and decision making.

59. A series of meetings and workshops will be organized during the inception phase of the Projectinvolving all relevant/interested partners, with the objective of identifying key mechanisms, processesand frameworks to disseminate/feed best practices and lessons learned into the most relevant policyplanning processes. Such workshops for policy dialogue on climate change adaptation will continueduring the Project implementation as a part of the annual review and planning workshops envisaged

60. PUU groups would be responsible for managing the CLPMP investment mini-projects. Thesegroups, which may include informal pasture user groups or self-help groups, would prepare andimplement the agreed upon investment proposals. The project groups would submit proposals to thePUU, which will review, prioritize and select mini-projects – a process that will involve each of thevillages that comprise the PUU area and all households to ensure that all segments of the populationhave a voice. The villages would discuss their priorities through the focus group sessions andrepresent these priorities at the PUU level by selecting representatives of each focus group from eachvillage to work together to produce a series of activities including investment project proposals at thePUU level. Through interactions/feedback loops with the villages, the CLPMP would be prepared andagreed upon. The PUU would present the results of the selection process to the general assembly forits approval.

61. A full time Climate Adaptation Consultant will be hired within the Technical Team, with a specificresponsibility to lead and coordinate the implementation of climate adaptation activities. The ProjectImplementation Manual developed for LPDP will be modified at Project start-up to the extent requiredby additional activities introduced by LPDP-II.

62. The development of the CLPMPs will be entrusted to the CFs, supported by a Technical Team(TT) of national and international consultants working in close cooperation with local communities.The TT set up for LPDPI, which consists of a Lead National Consultant/Livestock Economist, aCommunity Development Consultant, a National Pasture Management Consultant, a NationalLivestock Consultant, a Geographic Information Systems (GIS)/Mapping Specialist, an InternationalPasture Management and an International Livestock Specialist, will be integrated with a ClimateAdaptation Consultant as well as experts from TA pool on a demand basis on natural resourcemanagement, pasture and other ecosystem (i.e. riverine habitats) restoration and improvement,agronomists, disaster-risk reduction, animal health, governance and, to address the adaptive andsustainable NRM nature of the plans. Government staff responsible for pasture management and


59

PUUB members will be provided training to plan and manage pasture on the basis of moderntechniques, with a focus on climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. Government staffwill also be provided opportunities to interact with other agencies in the country working on pasturemanagement such as the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, UNDP, GIZ, FAO, and the TajikAgrarian University.

63. The component will build a monitoring and evaluation system through modelling of pastureproductivity to determine carrying capacity estimates and identify remote pasture areas that could beaccessed. This activity is designed to capture and prioritise measures for vulnerability reduction andpromote adaptive and productive capacity of pastures to help remove a critical constraint in livestockproductivity in the project area.

Sub-component 3.2: Income Diversification

64. The targeted communities that are largely depended on subsistence agriculture (mainlylivestock farming and cash crops) are vulnerable to fluctuations in production and climate change;they are also those most likely to put pressure on the natural resources – pastures in particular –contained within the area. By involving these communities into Project activities and creatingalternative, sustainable means of income generation, the Project would help increase local livingstandards while decreasing pressure on critical ecosystems, endangered species, and naturalresources in general.

65. This sub-component will promote alternative sources of income to diversify family economies.Project will explore income-generating options beyond livestock to gradually reduce grazing pressureon pastures and mitigate the impact of climate change. The Project will provide financing toencourage and nurture new economic activities through which the most vulnerable of the rural society– mainly women – can build upon and develop additional sources of income as a safety net againstpossible economic losses, to help build socio-economic resilience, enhance their nutritional status andincrease their incomes. This will be coupled with training and capacity enhancement activities for theidentification, development and management of new climate-resilient businesses.

66. Drawing on the LPDP lessons, experience of other donors active in Tajikistan on income-generating activities as part of communal pasture use and management, and based on the rapiddemand assessment conducted during the design mission, the Self-help Women Groups (SWGs)acting on the participatory agro-enterprise principals would be a suitable option to secure IGA to becommercially viable and ensure sustainable use of natural resources.

67. The selected income-generating activities should respond to the growing demand for qualityraw materials from agro-processors side. Such contractual arrangements will create/strengthenpartnerships and improve the governance of the agro-food systems. PUUs will be the criticalintermediary between small households and buyers. Support to farmer organizations – PUU in thiscase - should be focused on building their capacity to act as a reliable business partner and providingneeded services to the farmers from design stage to marketing, offsetting the supply risks such asside-selling, and inconsistent quantity and quality of production. The principal concern with regard tofinancial sustainability is the maintenance of investments resulting in effective gains in income andimproved ecosystem management (indirectly) in the targeted communities, to the extent that villagersin the area would be economically and environmentally self-sustaining over time.

68. The first step in implementation of this sub-component will be demand assessment andfeasibility study (including resource mapping) of pre-selected products. Once viable business lineshave been identified and appropriate know-how selected, communities will be able to decide whatproduct cluster they want to join. For example, most of PUU members eligible for IGA may wish to gospecialized in cumin (zeera) collection and marketing, while several households owning fruit orchardswill invest in bio-climatic cellar to benefit from off-season prices. PUU members will be trained onsustainable management and climate-adapted production techniques to make sure crops are installedin suitable areas with a positive impact on soil and water resources.


60

69. Groups will be formed based on the methodology of Self Help Groups. This model is based onthe believe that for the poor, particularly women, the best approach is to begin from building theirfinancial assets and skills through savings rather than debt. Through participation in a SWG, memberscan plant additional agro-forestry plants/improve existing orchards and gradually move towards moresophisticated value chains (beyond livestock). After an initial period focused only on savings, themembers begin to borrow small amounts among themselves in rotation. When members begin toborrow from the SWG, loan sizes are generally small and manageable and the loan period is veryshort ranging from one to three months.

70. LPDP-II income-generating activities will be run by the SWGs operating within PUU mandateand divided into production (consisting in picking and processing) and marketing teams with clearfunctions and therefore training needs. The Climate Adaptation Consultant (CAC) will guide thescreening and assessment process to identify climate-adapted plant and animal species and varieties,and suitable locations and production techniques. A Technical Facilitator (TF) will provide businessdevelopment services to the SWGs on the variety of subjects ranging from self-governance,negotiation skills, financial literacy and bookkeeping to production-specific know-how and marketing.

71. Marketing team will be responsible for market prospecting and buyers (customer) relation: ordermanagement, contract singing and monitoring, invoicing and payment follow-up. It will also monitormarkets with regards to prices and specific quality requirements currently in demand. Information ofprice seasonality and different market outlets prices is critical for IGA. Picking/harvesting andprocessing team/s will be focused on production according to contractual obligations and marketingteam guidance.

72. Based on the rapid demand assessment conducted during the design mission, the followingbusiness lines with solid market potential are proposed as a starting point in implementation of thissub-component: a) agro-forestry products - wild berries, spice, aromatic and medicinal herbs; and b)storage cellars - for fruits (mainly apples) and tubers. Selection of one or another should be made bythe TF commissioned to do the feasibility study and will depend on resource mapping and prospected(targeted) buyers.

73. Under this sub-component, the Project will provide technical assistance to catalyze income-generating opportunities for residents of targeted disadvantaged rural areas. The sub-component willalso fund demand assessment, resource mapping, feasibility study and other related studies by aprofessional TF prior to micro-project funding. It will also finance information dissemination to eligiblecommunities to facilitate their access to the funding facility, as well as technical support for businessplanning and micro-project implementation support. The activities will include: (a) demandassessment of pre-selected products (by TF and CAC); (b) (based on the above), feasibility study toselect the product(s) to be marketed by a given community (=PUU); (c) SWGs formation; and (d)business plan formulation.

74. Specifically, the sub-component would finance: (i) capacity building for participatory agro-enterprise members, i.e. the administrative and technical capacity of the selected PUU memberswilling to engage into IGA. Eventually, participating communities will have to become capable tomanage their own development through efficient (=profitable and lasting in time) partnerships withagro-processors and/or aggregators; (ii) matching grants for participatory agro-enterprise start-up, i.e.investment cost and the working capital for one year of sub-projects operation.

75. Lack of technical and management skills among rural women as well as limited market linkagessuggest that the sub-component should closer coordinate its activities with other similar projects in theregion seeking for partnership arrangements where possible39. Learning from the experience ofPhase I, small-scale procurement should be done at regional level to avoid delays in input supply andaddress specific needs of the communities.

39 GIZ, CARITAS, MSDSP, AgroAction, World Bank (Environmental Land Management and Rural Livelihoods Project).

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 5: Institutional aspects and implementation arrangements

61

Appendix 5: Institutional aspects and implementationarrangements

A. Institutional aspectsMajor state institutions engaged in LPDP-II at the national and local levels. LPDP-II is a1.

geographic expansion of LPDP to three more districts in the same Khatlon region. It will beimplemented in the same modality as LPDP in a partnership between State, civil societyorganizations, service providers, community organizations, and in coordination with other donors.LPDP-II will foster a stronger role of Government at the national and local level especially in policyand legal framework development and land rights allocation. New stakeholders – future PastureDepartment, Tajik Agrarian University and State Veterinary Inspection Services will be engaged in theLPDP-II implementation.

The fact that there is still no state authorized body for pasture management at the2.national level hinders advancement of the reforms. The Pasture Law delegates pasturemanagement policy functions to a “state authorized body for regulation and use of pasture”. ThePasture Law specifies several functions for such authorized body, including development of standardnorms and methods (e.g. pasture monitoring methods), approaches and technologies for pastureprotection, rehabilitation and utilization, and control of implementation of these norms; the by-lawunder consultation also mentions approval of rules for inventory and state registration of pastures,though registration of land use rights is not mentioned in the Law as within their scope of powers;monitoring of pasture utilization plans and control of conformity of pasture utilization with pasturemanagement plans; maintenance of state pasture inventory and reporting on pasture utilization.However, almost after two years after adoption of the Pasture Law, GOT has not decided on that bodyyet. A by-law currently under consultation proposes to divide responsibility for pasture managementpolicy and monitoring at the national level between the Ministry of Agriculture and the StateCommittee for Land Management and Geodesy. Depending on the outcome of the discussions,LPDP-II would need to support the authorized body in formulation of policy and strategy in pasturemanagement, elaboration of relevant legislation.

Ministry of Agriculture will need to take leadership role in pasture management reforms.3.With the ambiguity in Pasture Law on authorized state body, it has been difficult for GOT to assignleadership role in pasture management to any state agency. However, if consider natural pasturesfrom productive point of view as a foundation for livestock development, the MOA seems to be mostappropriate agency to undertake leadership role in their management. It is evident, that even if theMOA is assigned leading role, it would require strong cooperation with the SCLMG in development ofpolicy and legislation towards the sustainable pasture management. Despite the fact that the MOAhas limited budgetary resources, poorly trained staff and low salaries that have contributed to weakadministration, public service delivery and knowledge management, it has potential to ensure propermanagement of resource. The MOA has district level staff including a division head, an agronomistand specialists in livestock, horticulture and engineering. Limited resources and experience do notenable the district department to operate effectively as an extension service, but these staff needs tobe targeted with the capacity building program on livestock development and pasture managementissues. In addition, there is a State Pasture Enterprise (Pasture Trest) within the MOA, which is aremaining structure from the Soviet period, responsible for improvement and maintaining of pastureinfrastructure. It has very limited state annual funding of about TJS 150,000-200,000, which sufficientto cover only salary of staff and some utility expenses. The Trest can’t fulfil its mandate on physicalimprovements of infrastructure and not capable to lead pasture management reforms started with thePasture Law. There are discussions in the country if to establish a Pasture Management Unit on thebasis of the Pasture Trest to take responsibility for pasture management policy development.

The MOA will be continuing to have an overall responsibility for management of the Project on4.behalf of the Government of Tajikistan. A national Project Steering Committee (PSC) will continue


62

providing overall policy guidance for LPDP and LPDP-II and maintain oversight of the Project’s AnnualWork Plans and Budgets (AWPBs). The Deputy Minister of Agriculture responsible for the livestocksub-sector will as well continue to chair the PSC. Its other members already include seniorrepresentatives of the Ministry of Finance, the State Committee of Investment and State PropertyManagement, the Ministry of Water Resources and Land Reclamation, the State Committee for LandManagement and Geodesy, the National Academy of Agricultural Science, the Governor of theKhatlon region, representative of the State Committee for Women’s Affairs and Families, andrepresentatives of the participating communities. The PSC reviews Project progress and approve itsannual work plan and budget, including the annual financial statements. The Project ManagementUnit for LPDP (PMU – see below) acts as the secretariat of the PSC.

State Committee for Land Management and Geodesy is to provide support to hukumats5.in allocation of pasture land rights. This agency responsible at district level for issuing andregistering land use right certificates, undertaking cadastral surveys, enforcing the Land Code, andadjudicating in land tenure disputes (Land Code, Article 6).

State Project Institute on Land Management (GIPROZEM) is charged with assessment of6.pasture conditions and quality. GIPROZEM is responsible for assessing land resources andproducing geo-botanical survey documents and maps with assessment of pasture soil, botanicalconditions, and its’ carrying capacity estimates. However, GIPROZEM has limited funding, norepresentation in the Khatlon region and can’t conduct such comprehensive assessment for pasturemanagement and use planning in all target areas. LPDP-II will explore possibility to engageGIPROZEM for assessment of pasture plots allocated to the PUUs in target areas for elaboration ofmid-term pasture management and use plans.

State Veterinary Inspection Services (SVIS) is a subdivision of the MOA and is responsible7.for provision of veterinary services to farmers. The SVIS has a central office in Dushanbe, threeregional offices in GBAO, Khatlon and Sugd, one sub-regional office in Kulyab and offices in alldistricts of the country. In each district office there are 5-10 veterinarians employed. The SVIS haslimited capacity to effectively deal with outbreaks of epidemic and routine diseases due to lack ofhuman and financial resources. Under LPDP-II the SVIS will be responsible for the following:

Provide the overall technical support and guidance for the Project in terms of the veterinaryand animal health activities captured under the sub-component 2.2;

Provide data (statistics, reports) for selected Project districts, Jamoats and villages tothe PMU;

Assist with the identification of Jamoats, villages and suitable veterinarian-candidates toparticipate in the strengthening of private veterinary services sub-component;

Work closely with the PMU and Community Facilitators at the community level, in particularin ensuring that the private vets are able to develop into an effective and financiallysustainable service, supporting and working closely with the PUUs.

Tajik Agrarian University will be a new implementing agency in LPDP-II. The prime8.responsibility of TAU would be to facilitate the development of a cadre of new vets and livestockspecialists who will be interested and motivated to work with the PUUs in the Project area and tofacilitate the improvements in the training of pasture management. The TAU would receive funding forupdating and delivery of pasture management curriculum, with a particular focus on the potentials andconstraints identified by the Project. For students it will organize scholarship studies and internshipsas well as field visits to Project areas to help them become familiar with the issues linked tosuccessful pasture management. To increase its teaching capacity, the TAU will arrange for a twinningprogramme and international studies as well as access to E-Learning.

Local district level administrations (Hukumat) are a key state stakeholder managing9.pastures on the ground. According to the Land Code and Pasture Law, Jamoat has a right to applyto district hukumat and district level SCLMG for allocation of pasture land and facilitate establishmentof PUUs. It has right to conduct inventory and record data on pasture users and their livestock,represent pasture users in Commission for Regulating Pasture Use. LPDP has been working closely


63

with Jamoats in target areas to establish PUUs and to secure their land rights. However, thatinvolvement would need to be strengthened to ensure sustainability of reforms through more focusedengagement of Jamoats in PUUs strengthening, obtaining pasture land rights and strengtheningrepresentation at the district level. Jamoat representatives need to participate in trainings provided byLPDP. Management of pasture land and monitoring over its use is entrusted by Pasture Law with thedistrict level government. District Hukumats are a major body responsible for allocation of land userights to legal entities such as PUUs, and individual farmers from state land fund (state land reserve)or farming land. Hukumats are responsible for protecting land users’ rights and for ensuring effectivepasture land use through conducting state monitoring of pastures, registration of pasture use rights,and undertaking pastures assessment. It is also has a right to withdraw land use rights if lands are notused properly. Management is implemented through approval of the mid-term pasture managementand use plan and monitoring over its implementation; formation of Pasture Development Fund andelaboration procedures for it’s use; control over use of pasture lands and water infrastructure inregards to environmental security and protection of historical and cultural heritage; establishment ofCommissions for Regulation of Pasture Use; and ensuring state standards and procedures formonitoring of pasture health and quality. LPDP-II will continue engagement of Hukumats in pasturemanagement reforms and strengthen their ability to advance these reforms on the ground throughproviding support in formulation local policy and procedures for allocation of pasture land use rights,for establishment of PUUs, for development and implementation of pasture management and useplans, as well as for monitoring of implementation of the pasture management plans and enforcingtheir management prescriptions.

Commission for Regulating Pasture Use is a new body to be formed at the district10.(Hukumat) level to facilitate pasture use rights allocation and pasture management. PastureLaw has introduced a new player to be engaged in pasture management at the district level-Commission for Regulating Pasture Use at the district level. These Commissions need to beestablished by the decision of local councils (Majlis) and should include representatives of districtgovernment body, Jamoats, Land Committee and pasture users. The Commissions are entitled byPasture Law with functions to demarcate pasture borders, to mitigate conflicts related to allocationand use of pastures, control over effective use of pastures, prepare mid-term pasture managementand use plans, conduct monitoring of pasture use. The Commission also has a right to establish a feerate for pasture lease, which according to Pasture Law can’t be less than pasture tax multiplied bytwo. Lack of leadership at the national level in advancing pasture reforms, vagueness in legislation onfunctions, rules and procedures of these commissions, as well as no funding allocated for their workinhibit establishment of these most crucial bodies for pasture management. The Project would need tofacilitate establishment of such commissions in target district and support Government in furtherelaboration of their legal foundation, functions and procedures.

Project’s support to public institutions will be at national and local levels to empower11.them for sustainable pasture management. In sum, all the public sector institutes with a mandatefor agriculture, livestock and pasture management have limited resources, poorly trained and badlypaid staff, unrevised organisational systems that are centrally driven and a lack of experience ofcollaborating with the private sector and community driven development. On the positive side, most ofthem have a district presence, local knowledge and some understanding of their roles andresponsibilities in the reform process. The following are the key areas in which the Project wouldsupport the public sector: (i) the technical capacity to manage pasture and livestock will be improvedthrough educational programmes, training and extension; (ii) the lack of strategic orientation will beaddressed through developing a long term policy and strategy, as well as legal framework for pasturemanagement with consideration of climate change vulnerability and resilience; (iii) weak servicedelivery will be improved by creating formal local bodies (Commissions for Regulating PastureManagement, PUUs) able to demand and supply more effective and transparent information, as wellas strengthening the capacity of the private sector to fill service delivery gaps; and (iv) greatercoordination and a more efficient organisational culture for pasture management.


64

PUU is a key stakeholder for pasture management. Pasture Law introduced in March 201312.laid a foundation for community based pasture management and livestock development in country. Itis reflected in provision for communities to form Pasture Users Unions to access pasture lands,participate in the management of pastures and monitoring of their use. There have been debates inthe country in regards to the PUUs establishment: some argued that PUUs have to be established onthe basis of the Village Organizations (VO), which are the grass root Community Based Organizations(CBOs) in line with the Law on Public Self Initiative Bodies, others suggested that they have to beregistered as separate legal entities at the district level in line with the Law on Public Unions. TheLPDP implementing team came to a conclusion that PUUs need to be registered as a separate bodyat the district government level to operate as a legal entity under the Law on Public Union andPasture Law, to gain access to pastures and be able to manage them.

PUU functions are limited by law. The functions of PUUs include obtaining pasture lease13.rights and carrying out effective use of pastures; capacity building for members; and disputesettlement related to the leased land area. PUU members participate in annual and medium-termpasture management planning, and are obliged to report on pasture condition.

PUU establishment requires time and efforts. LPDP experience, as well as lessons learned14.from other similar initiatives in Tajikistan, demonstrated that inclusive community mobilisation is atime, resource and effort consuming process. LPDP experience has shown that for establishment oflegal, social and organisational structure of a PUU and its Board with access to pasture lands,preparation of its mid-term pasture management plan and identification of priority sub-projects it isrequired to have at least one year of intensive social mobilization and empowerment. The socialmobilization process developed and implemented within LPDP is greatly appreciated by allstakeholders. In communities, where PUUs have been established, in additional to technical capacitybuilding, it is necessary to extend mobilization to strengthen these young institutions, empower theirBoards, install and enhance accountability and transparency mechanisms for better governance.

Pasture User Unions and their Boards (PUUs and PUUBs), Common Interest Groups15.(CIGs), and Women Income Generation Groups (WIGGs). LPDP-II will continue to facilitateformation of PUUs according to Pasture Law of 2013. PUU will be comprised of all communityhouseholds having livestock or those who have no livestock but would like to join the group. PUU will,in a democratic manner, elect its Board (PUUB) representing and acting on behalf of the union.Pasture Law does not regulate composition of the Board, but small livestock holders should formmajority of the PUUB with at least half of them being women. The Board members should representdifferent user groups and would elect a chairperson. The PUUs, as focal points for the Project, will beused for the introduction of the Project and participatory identification of the target beneficiariesaccording to established criteria for each Project component. Smallholder households interested inparticipating in livestock development activities will be organized into CIGs for the Projectinterventions in this field. Women’s CIGs will be used for the identification and implementation ofincome generating activities for women.

All the above community groups will be the key instrument for social mobilization, identification,16.implementation and supervision of Project activities. Mobilization and capacity building of theseorganizations will be provided by Community Facilitators (CF) contracted under the Project. The CFs,with the assistance of other service providers, where needed, will also assist with the planningprocess and implementation of the priority investments and for monitoring their implementation. Theprocesses of formation of the PUUs, CIGs, WIGGs and selection of Project activities, identification ofbeneficiaries, implementation and supervision are specified in the Project Implementation Manual.

Private sector. A burdensome or vague regulatory environment, poor enforcement of existing17.legislation, poor infrastructure and a poor investment climate are key explanations for slow growth inthe private sector. LPDP-II will continue to rely on a private sector led approach in identifying privateveterinary agents and private market entrepreneurs who can provide a range of animal health, animalproduction, processing and marketing services to the small holder livestock farmer on a sustainablebasis by charging a user fee. The SIDA funded and FAO implemented project on ‘Support to the


65

Animal Health Sector’ in Tajikistan established a Veterinary Association and veterinary clinics. Many ofthese clinics were not sustainable without project support, partly because of licensing, inspection andtaxation issues, and partly because of a lack of demand for paid services. It is important for theProject to draw lessons from the successes and failures of previous attempts to establish privateveterinary services and to negotiate with the Government for a regulatory environment that enablesthe private sector to operate in this field. This includes an early review of the animal and veterinaryhealth acts and associated regulations to ensure that a valid framework supports the proposedveterinary units.

B. Project ManagementProject Management Unit (PMU) for LPDP was legally established as a “juridical entity” State18.

Enterprise for the on-going LPDP through a Charter issued by the Government in 2012. Currently italso implements KLSP, which is to be completed by the end of 2015. The PMU is based in Dushanbeand focuses on maintaining a dialogue with the Government and state agencies, and communityorganizations. It undertakes overall management and supervision, financial and procurement,monitoring and evaluation functions. The PMU has a sub-office in Kulob to be on the ground in closeproximity to the Project districts. The staff of the PMU have been contracted through tender and havequalifications and experience commensurate with their duties (see Attachment 2 for proposedOrganizational Chart). Technical staff and consultants are mostly based in Kulob sub-office led by theLead Technical Consultant. In addition to hiring cluster officers for LPDP-II and Climate AdaptationConsultant, in order to improve effectiveness of operations, the PMU will employ additionalprocurement, financial and M&E consultants to prepare bidding documents and specifications,financial requests and reports, as well as undertaking regular information awareness, M&E activitiesand strengthening participatory monitoring conducted by the communities.

The major functions of the PMU are the following: (i) ensure that the Project is implemented in19.accordance with its PIM; (ii) submit Annual Work Plans and Budgets and Project; (iii) ensure timelyrecruitment of implementing organizations, staff and consultants; (iv) ensure effective coordination ofall activities and agencies involved; (v) maintain appropriate accounts, including reports on withdrawalapplications and disbursements; (vi) manage procurement in accordance with the IFAD andGovernment guidelines; (vii) ensure compliance with environmental requirements and other safeguardmeasures; (viii) prepare quarterly progress and annual reports in formats agreed upon with IFAD; (ix)coordinate with the Government and keep the authorities informed of progress; (x) conduct monitoringand evaluation activities including maintaining IFAD Results and Impact Management System (RIMS);(xi) assist with participatory monitoring and evaluation together with local communities; and (xii) assistIFAD and Government supervision and evaluation missions. The PMU holds regular monthlycoordination and planning meetings with all staff, including representatives of the implementingpartners such as the Community Facilitators (see below) as and when required. In these meetingswork plans, targets, performance, monitoring and report requirements will be discussed and agreed.

Project Implementation Manual.40 The PMU will use the modified Project Implementation20.Manual (PIM) developed for LPDP. That manual will be updated at Project start-up to the extententailed by the LPDP-II activities finally agreed upon. The PIM may be amended upon the PMU’sproposal and IFAD approval.

C. Implementation ArrangementsTechnical Assistance (technical facilitation). Considering lessons learned from LPDP and21.

other donor interventions in the country and lack of capacity in pasture management in the country,the LPDP and LPDP-II design makes provision for substantial international and national TechnicalAssistance (TA): (i) International Community Development to provide support to the PMU in furtherdeveloping social mobilization and institutional approach to federation of smaller PUUs at the Jamoatlevel; a realistic, transparent, effective, and inclusive approach to establishment and development ofCommon Interest Groups and Women Income Generation Groups and their functioning; capacity

40 See LPDP Project Implementation Manual in Project Files.


66

building programme for institutional strengthening of the PUUs and PUUBs and their sub-groups; andprovide training to the CFs on developed programmes and approaches; (ii) Policy and Legalinternational and national TA to assist in preparation and stakeholder discussions of amendments toPasture Law, National Pasture Management Strategy for 2015-2020, other legal and policydocuments necessary for advancement of pasture management reforms, as well as issues in theprivate sector, veterinary law, local governance at the level of PUUs, essentially all the policy andlegal issues that would prevent or could entitle people to benefit from livestock and sustainablepasture management; (iii) Pasture Management Education international and local TA who wouldprepare functional review of the TAU in terms of pasture management, fodder and livestockdevelopment, and climate change and prepare comprehensive programme and plan for introductionof the new curricula on sustainable and climate resilient pasture management; (iv) a Technical Team(TT) consisting of a National Lead Technical Consultant/Livestock Economist, a National PastureManagement Consultant, Livestock Consultant, a Geographic Information Systems (GIS)/MappingConsultant, a Climate Adaptation Consultant, an International Pasture Management Specialist and anInternational Livestock Specialist, to assist with preparation and implementation of CommunityLivestock and Pasture Management Plans (CLPMPs) as well as with technical advice related toimplementation of Project demonstrations, trials and training and strengthening of veterinary services;(v) International Business Development TA to conduct demand assessment and feasibility study(including resource mapping) of pre-selected products and develop TORs for a service provider forsub-component 3.2; (vi) national Technical Facilitator/s to assist in implementation of community levelactivities under sub-components 2.1 and 3.2; and (vii) short-term local and international TA asrequired with respect to climate change adaptation, gender, targeting, Project management,knowledge management and development of the Project’s communication strategy.

Community Facilitators (CF) for social mobilization of PUUs. The same arrangement as in22.LPDP will be pursued in contracting the services of NGOs, which have experience in organizingcommunities and following a community based approach to Project implementation and managementin rural Tajikistan. Apart from formation and strengthening of PUUs, CIGs, and Women’s IncomeGenerating Groups, the CFs will assist the communities to undertake the preparation andimplementation of the CLPMPs. The PMU will either expand on-going contracts with engaged inLPDP three CFs (MSDSP, CARITAS, German AgroAction) to cover more districts, or recruit additionalCFs in an open competitive manner and based on expertise required, experience and cost. The CF/swill be recruited or contract expanded to existing CFs within the first three months of the approval ofLPDP-II. A performance based contract will be negotiated between the PMU and the CommunityFacilitator which would specify the outputs expected from the CF, including the scope and coverage ofthe work to be undertaken, expected deliverables and estimated budgets. After signing of thecontract, the PMU will release an agreed amount of mobilization funds to the Community Facilitator.The CF will prepare an annual work plan, estimated budget and deliverables. The agreement wouldbe monitored closely by the PMU and renewed annually based on satisfactory performance. Moreinformation on the role of the Community Facilitator, including its Terms of Reference, is given in thePIM.

Community Facilitators (CF) require adequate time and resources to undertake proper23.social mobilization process of PUUs. The experience of engagement of three CFs in LPDPtargeting different districts has been a learning process for the CFs and for the PMU. All three CFshave their own sets of comparative advantages, but all were instrumental in setting up PUUs within afirst year of operation. The approach of engagement of CFs to mobilize communities and establishPUUs should be continued, though delivery of technical expertise and knowledge, as well asspecialized support to them need to be outsourced to service providers, which have in houseprofessional expertise and resources for that.

Service Provide for Self-help Women Groups. The PMU will contract a business24.development service provider based on the Terms of Reference and Feasibility Study conducted bythe International Business Development TA. Such service provider will work closely with SWGs inrefining demand assessment of pre-selected products, feasibility study carried out for selected


67

product(s) to be marketed by a selected communities, provide support to WIGGs in business planformulation, establishment and functioning of value chains.

Start-up Activities. Project start-up activities will include the following: (i) an IFAD inception25.mission to assist in training of all implementing partners and staff on PIM modalities and approaches,especially in regards to modification made to the LPDP PIM; (ii) recruitment of additional national staffaccording to agreed TORs and service rules; (iii) finalization of the Procurement Plan for the first 18months of the Project using the IFAD’s procurement guidelines; (iv) finalization of detailedspecifications for vehicles, office equipment and supplies required according to the agreedprocurement plan and invitation for bids and subsequent procurement using applicable procurementprocedures; (v) a Project Start-up Workshop to: (a) inform all Project stakeholders about the Project,including detailed presentation of Project objectives, components, activities and implementationarrangements; and (b) to reach agreement between Project management and stakeholders ontargeting and M&E objectives and tools, as well as to select indicators and achievement benchmarksfor monitoring and evaluation and (vi) holding district workshops to inform district stakeholders aboutthe Project.

Supervision. LPDP-II will be directly supervised by IFAD. According to need, two or three26.supervision and implementation support missions will be organized each year combined for LPDP andLPDP-II to assess overall progress and performance, gaps and constraints, and identify thenecessary implementation support requirements.

Governance mechanisms. IFAD adopted an anti-corruption policy in 2005, which goal is to27.prevent fraud and corruption in IFAD-supported programmes and projects, and in contracts at thelocal, national, regional and international levels. The policy affirms that the Fund shall apply a zero-tolerance policy in this regard. The development partner community has noted corruption, fraud, andabuse of funds in previous and current projects as a matter of serious concern. As a result,safeguards are built into the Project design to ensure that the laid down IFAD and GOT proceduresand guidelines are followed for staff recruitment, procurement, financial management anddisbursement. In addition, independent audit of accounts will be conducted by a certified andreputable auditing firm on an on-going basis to reduce the risk of misuse of IFAD funds. Consistentwith its commitment to good governance, accountability, and transparency, both IFAD and the GOTreserve the right to investigate, directly or through its agents, any alleged corrupt, fraudulent,collusive, or coercive practices relating to the Project. In particular, all contracts financed by IFAD inconnection with the Project will specify the right of IFAD and GOT to audit and examine the recordsand accounts of all contractors, suppliers, consultants, and other service providers as they relate toboth LPDPs. In relation to the Project, the Government will ensure the disclosure of Project-relatedprocurement actions, including consulting services contracts and the procurement of major equipmentand civil works, is widely disseminated in local newspapers and on the Internet. In connection with thefinalization of the PIM and design of the M&E system a governance and anti-corruption framework willbe developed with emphasis on stakeholders’ participation in the decision making process, andmonitoring of general Project activities and the procurement of goods and services.

Participatory Monitoring & Evaluation: The PMU will make arrangements for participatory28.monitoring and evaluation of the activities under LPDP in close coordination with all stakeholders suchas CF, TF, COs, the communities, Jamoat council, district councils etc The CF will play a key role inproviding information on Project interventions. For this purpose a system will be established forproviding regular feedback from the participating CF. The progress report of LPDP will contain asection on community and beneficiary feedback on Project activities. Negative feedback on theperformance of any implementing partner will be rectified immediately. The project will assist thecommunities to develop systems for monitoring and evaluating their performance. The foundation ofthis would be the activity-sequencing chart for implementation of the any project intervention. Regularmeetings at community levels would be held to note the progress of works and constraints faced bythe community in execution of its programme. These meetings would also provide a forum for thecommunity to provide feedback on areas on which they are not receiving adequate guidance and


68

assistance and problem areas, which require further support. The communities will also beencouraged to evaluate the progress on wider issues such as attitudinal and social change within thecommunities including the position of women and equity issues.

Procurement with Community Participation: This is applicable when community participation29.is involved in identifying, selecting and purchasing items for its use and in accordance with the Projectprocurement needs. It is applicable to all categories of procurements that are of small quantities thatare locally available provided that it has been demonstrated that the participating communities haverequired skill and knowledge about the items to be procured and the processes involved. Forexample, purchase of livestock herds, poultry birds, bee-keeping units, small quantities of feed,seeds, fertilisers, small quantities of farm implements and hand tools for agricultural operations etccan be handled by the Community. The procurement should be effected on following conditions: (i)items to be procured are specified, quantified in accordance with AWP&B, (ii) local committee relatingto the project is involved and in it a representative from PMU or on its behalf, the representatives fromCommunity Facilitator or Technical Facilitator, (iii) proper selection procedure is used and agreed bythe community, and (iv) bills and records of payments for the services and goods are maintained.

Donor Collaboration. The establishment of the Donor Coordination Councils (DCC) in 200930.with its six high level Working Groups have provided an effective platform for the GOT and donors todiscuss and coordinate progress on the ongoing governance reform processes in Tajikistan. PastureNetwork Platform supported by the GIZ provides another great opportunity for all stakeholders,including various donors and donor funded projects to discuss issues in pasture management andshape a joint strategy and agree on approaches. The LPDP’s PMU has been taking a leading role insuch discussions and raised several key issues, including a role of state institutions and changes toPasture Law at that forum. Whilst there are many lessons that can be drawn from specific sectorinterventions (in veterinary health, processing, community development), LPDP is a pioneer inseeking to field test community based pasture management on a larger scale. The fact that LPDP is apioneer is a challenge but the opportunity for supporting pro-poor institutional change, given thatthese have now picked up a certain momentum within the government, are evident. It isrecommended that the Project continue to be engaged in the policy processes, including facilitatingwork of the Inter-Governmental Working Group.


69

Attachment 1. Summary of expected institutional outcomes

Institutions andInterest Groups

Expected LPDP-II Institutional Support Expected Institutional Outcome

Community Social mobilization of PUUs, formation ofPUUB;

Technical, legal and financial support insecuring primary land use right and obtainingcertificate;

Technical support and empowerment forpreparation and implementation of the mid-term pasture management, improvement anduse plans;

Technical and financial support to PUUs inorganizational strengthening;

Technical support in participatory monitoring; Technical support in development and

installing governance safeguards, includinggrievance redress mechanism at the PUUlevel.

Possession of rights and title to pastureresources, understanding of entitlementsregarding pasture resources; technical andorganisational capacity for management ofcommunity pasture resources; improvedtechnical capacity to make informed choicesabout livestock; capacity to access privateand public sector support and marketingservices.

Vulnerablepopulation,including women

Formation of Common Interest Groups (CIG),Women Income Generation Groups (WIGG)from the PUU members;

Technical and financial support to CIG andWIGG sub groups;

Technical support in participatory monitoring.

Improved capacity to operate in the publicsphere to claim entitlement to pastureresources and participate in managementdecisions; improved technical capacity tomake informed decisions about householdlivestock; improved market access;empowerment in social and economicspheres.

Jamoats andHukumats

Engagement of Jamoat and Hukumatrepresentatives in establishment andformation of the PUUs and PUUBs;

Engagement of Jamoat and Hukumatrepresentatives legal, technical trainingprograms;

Support in establishment and strengthening ofCommission on Pasture Regulations at theHukumat level;

Development of regulations and proceduresfor pasture land rights allocation, monitoring ofimplementation of pasture management anduse plans.

Jamoats and district level Hukumats haveenhanced technical capacity for pasturemanagement; have clear terms of referenceregarding responsibilities for pasturemanagement; understand and follow normsfor transparency and accountability, take aleading role in pasture managementreforms on the ground.

Ministry ofAgriculture

Provide technical support with policy andregulatory work in pasture management;

Ensure exposure to international experience insustainable pasture management withengagement of users in decision making;

Provide support with information disseminationand awareness campaign on pasturemanagement reforms.

Improved technical understanding ofpasture management options and capacityto act as a facilitator in pasturemanagement. Capacity to act as anadministrator and enforcer of newregulations regarding pasture use andveterinary service provision that increasecommunity and private sector involvement.

Tajik AgrarianUniversity (TAU)

Provide technical and financial support indevelopment of curricula and trainingmaterials on pasture management;

Provide technical and financial support inequipping GIS modelling and fodderassessment labs;

Provide opportunity for students and youngteachers to participate in internationaleducational exchange programme on pasturemanagement.

Has a specialized educational program witha degree on sustainable pasturemanagement with climate vulnerability andresilience aspects, improved knowledge inteaching staff on holistic approaches topasture management and improvedtechnical facilities in fodder assessment,GIS and climate vulnerability assessmentand modelling for pasture management.

Private SectorVeterinarians andentrepreneurs

Provide technical and financial support toimprove services delivery on animal health toPUUs.

Improved technical capacity to provideservices for the target group and operate inthe private sector through sound businessplanning.


70

Attachment 2. PMU Organizational Chart

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 6: Planning, M&E and learning and knowledge management

71

Appendix 6: Planning, M&E and learning and knowledgemanagement

A. Planning and Reporting1. The Project will employ a bottom up planning process anchored on participatory planning at thecommunity level. The major planning instrument for capacity building and investments at the villagelevel will be Community Livestock and Pasture Management Plans (CLPMPs) developed by eachtarget community. These plans are developed by the PUUs in inclusive and participatory way withsupport and capacity building from the Community Facilitators and the PMU. After plans are approvedby Jamoat, they are submitted to the PMU for a review and final approval. CLPMP consists of fivemajors parts: i) general data about community, livestock inventory and its feed demand; ii) availablefeed and fodder resources, pasture assessment (condition, carrying capacity estimate); iii) issues anddifficulties faced by communities in livestock development and pasture use; iv) pasture use andimprovement plan (grazing regimes, improvements, pasture monitoring, livestock productivity andhealth improvements); and v) investment plan. Based on the priority areas identified by the PUUs, theCF and PMU develop preliminary plan to be fed into the AWPB. The PMU will ensure that activitiesproposed are eligible for financing under the Project and that proposed plans take into account theextent to which they are realistic in terms of time frames and availability of resources.

2. The PMU will be preparing draft annual work plans and budgets (AWPBs), for each ProjectYear (PY) to be submitted to the PSC for a review and approval. The draft AWPBs would include, inaddition to the planning from the CLPMPs, a procurement plan (an initial eighteen-month plan andthen twelve-month plans for subsequent years in accordance with the new General Conditions), and adetailed description of planned Project’s activities during the coming PY, the sources and uses offunds. The draft AWPBs would be submitted to IFAD for comments and clearance, no later than sixtydays before the beginning of the relevant PY. If required the PMU, through the PSC, could proposeadjustments to the AWPB during the relevant PY, which would become effective after clearance by theIFAD. Provision has been made in the Project’s cost for Annual Stakeholder Review and PlanningWorkshops at which Annual Performance Report findings and management implications would bediscussed and fed into the subsequent AWPB preparation process for a next PY.

3. The PMU will submit both six-monthly and annual progress reports in English to IFAD toprovide essential information on the physical and financial progress of Project activities, resultsachieved and regular assessment of Project impact using a format that would be agreed at the time ofProject start-up. These progress reports would feed into Annual Performance Reports. The annualprogress reports include a table by component, clearly indicating planned and actual targets for keyindicators agreed between the Government, IFAD and the OGM.

B. Monitoring and evaluation4. The M&E system for LPDP and LPDP-II is expected to provide comprehensive information foreffective and efficient management of the project and contribute to learning from implementationexperience for all stakeholders. The Project Log-frame provides an initial list of indicators to be usedto track progress and assess achievements in terms of outputs and associated outcomes, as well assuccess in achieving the Project’s objectives and development goal. The first level covers input-outputmonitoring for which the monitoring data would directly come from Project’s records maintained byboth management and implementing partners providing both qualitative and quantitative information.The second level would cover outcome monitoring involving the assessment of short-term andmedium-term outputs from different components. This would allow annual assessment of the Project’ssuccess in achieving its objectives. The third level would involve the impact evaluation of the Project.This would be undertaken at three stages during the life of the Project – baseline information at thestart and impact evaluation at mid-term and on Project completion. These surveys would measureimpact of the Project over time based on key indicators.


72

5. The Management Information System (MIS), which is currently being developed for LPDP willbe extended to be used for LPDP-II as well. Once the system is made operational, the Project staffand the Community Facilitator will be required to provide specific data on all activities andcomponents managed by them in keeping with the indicators identified in the log-frame and maintainrecords of beneficiaries and village profiles on livestock and pasture resources and the activities of theProject by components. The system is being designed in a manner, which allows genderdisaggregation of data, poverty profiling of households, education status, livestock ownership pattern,information on livestock yields, pasture use and management practices, asset base and employment.

6. The Project would finance in terms of M&E program: (i) annual stakeholder review and planningworkshops; (ii) information dissemination and planning workshops, covering M&E, financial andprocurement seminars and sharing of Project’s experiences; (iii) development of a ManagementInformation System (MIS); (iv) baseline including RIMS survey and training, mid-term and completionstudies; (v) gender assessments in the first and third year; (vi) participatory monitoring and evaluation;(vii) impact assessment; (viii) publications and printing associated with information dissemination and(ix) knowledge management.

7. The PMU has overall responsibility for the M&E system and recruited Monitoring & Evaluationofficers for the central office. M&E officer is to be supported within LPDP-II with the M&E FieldConsultant to oversee the collection of data, its collation and analysis, and preparation of reports foruse by Project’s management and other stakeholders. The Community Facilitator will be required toprovide data on the profile of beneficiaries and participating communities in line with the indicators tobe tracked in the Project Logical Framework (see Annex II). Formats to record the data have beendeveloped for the LPDP in partnership between the PMU, CFs and technical experts to ensure thatmeaningful and relevant data is collected for each Project’s component. All implementing partners willalso be required to identify case studies and beneficiary profiles, which highlight the Project’sprogress and impact over time. The Monitoring and Evaluation officers will ensure that the Projectmaintains a standardised central system to compile overall monitoring and evaluation information forall Project districts, and conducts periodic case studies and village profiles to measure changes overtime.

8. The PMU has conducted a baseline survey for LPDP. The indicators for this survey weredeveloped by the M&E officers using the key indicators in the Logframe, RIMS Framework with thesupport from International TA. Based on that methodology of the baseline survey, its sample size andindicators to be tracked the PMU will conduct a baseline survey for LPDP-II. The PMU will supplementthis baseline survey with information on each participating village regarding overall livestockownership, pasture resources, and pasture and livestock management practices. From each village,information will be collected on a random sample of participants for each Project component and moredetailed baseline information will be collected on them and tracked over time. The number ofhouseholds to be selected from each village for this purpose and the type of information that will becollected will be finalised by the technical specialist and agreed with the PMU and IFAD. However, it isexpected that roughly 10 households should be selected from each participating village. The type ofinformation collected for each household would be related to the baseline situation with reference tothose factors of production, which LPDP is intending to modify to ensure that the relevant indicatorsare tracked.

9. The PMU will make arrangements for participatory monitoring and evaluation of the activitiesunder LPDP-II in coordination with the CFs, local Jamoats and Community Interest Groups, PastureUser Unions and Women’s Income Generating Groups. The methodology for participatory M&E will bedeveloped by the M&E officers with the guidance from the International Community Development TA.Participatory M&E will be conducted annually and results reported to the PUUs’ meetings at the endof the calendar year. The progress reports of LPDP-II will contain a section on community andbeneficiary feedback on Project activities. It will be a job of the M&E officers to coordinate thefeedback on the performance of all implementing partners and Project activities from the communitiesin periodic sessions with them. In case there is negative feedback on the performance of any


73

implementing partner this will be conveyed to the implementing partner for remedial action. Allsupervision missions will also obtain community feedback on different Project activities as anessential feature of the supervision process.

C. Knowledge Management10. LPDP-II will present data disaggregated along gender lines. The Project’s Log-frame givesgender disaggregated targets for each sub-component, which will be carefully monitored. A first yeargender assessment will be undertaken for LPDP-II to ensure that all implementing partners have putin place a system of data collection that reports on gender indicators and monitors the extent to whichLPDP-II is achieving its targets and objectives with respect to women. An overall gender assessmentof the Project at the end of the first year of the Project will be undertaken followed by suggestions forspecific measures to strengthen the participation of women in Project activities and the capacity ofimplementing partners in this regard. The Project will also make a special effort to monitor socialperformance. As part of the Project M&E activities, gender studies will be conducted to assess impacton gender relations and women’s empowerment. The study will focus on the three dimensions ofwomen’s empowerment, namely access and control over income and assets, well-being and decision-making capacity.

11. Knowledge generated by the Project would be documented for dissemination to regional andnational audiences using a variety of instruments, including the electronic media, promotionalmeetings and workshops. A special effort will be made to share lessons from some of the innovativefeatures of the Project which will be of interest to policy makers, the donor community and technicalspecialists, government officials, scientists, NGOs, and farming communities. LPDP-II will continueproducing special policy briefs, case profiles and case studies from its learning in the field. IFAD’sField Presence in Dushanbe will play a key role in helping to keep the donor community informed ofthe progress of the project and will identify opportunities for collaboration and sharing lessons. IFADwill make regular presentations of its progress in the Donor Coordination Council meetings. This willfurther facilitate coordination, networking and the sharing of learning from the Project amongdevelopment practitioners in the country. The Project Design Missions have held individual meetingswith all key donor agencies in the country and also briefed them jointly in a specially convenedsession of the DCC.

12. The LPDP sponsored participation of the key pasture management personnel of the MOA,GIPROZEM and SCLMG, as well as representatives of the district Hukumats and local Jamoatstogether with representatives of several PUUs, including women smallholder farmers in study tour toKyrgyzstan to learn from it’s experience in pasture management reforms. LPDP also co fundedparticipation of the key stakeholders in Community based Pasture Management Global Experienceconference held in Kyrgyzstan in 2014. LPDP also plays a key role in Pasture ManagementKnowledge Sharing Platform in Tajikistan facilitated by the GIZ, sharing its experience and lessonslearned with other practitioners and policy makers in that field. LPDP-II will further explore suchpossibilities to share successful approaches on some issues, which are important for all the CIScountries. LPDP-II intends to learn from the experience of Central Asian countries, Mongolia, China inthese areas and to share with them its own experience in this regard. Opportunities for regionalexchange and visits, as well as holding international conferences in Tajikistan have been built into theLPDP-II budget.

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 7: Financial management and disbursement arrangements

75

Appendix 7: Financial management and disbursementarrangements

A. Summary of Risk Assessment1. A financial management (FM) capacity and risk assessment has been completed in accordancewith CFS guidelines, details of which could be found in Attachment 2. Overall, the financialmanagement risk is assessed as medium. The latest Transparency Indicator rating of 2.3 implies ahigh risk of corruption. However, in the last few years there has been good progress on PublicFinancial Management (PFM) reforms, and there are indications of strong commitment of theGovernment to these reforms. LPDP-II has some inherent financial management risk arising from thefact that substantial funds are earmarked for community driven subprojects, which are geographicallydispersed. However, major procurement and payments for these sub-projects would be centrallyhandled by the PMU, thereby mitigating these risks. The PMU, which is managing the on-goingIFAD’s projects (LPDP and KLSP) in the country, has established reasonably well functioning financialaccountability systems and procedures, thus further mitigating these risks.

2. Risk mitigating measures have been included in the design. The key ones are: (i) the formalappointment of the PMU for LPDP-II through a government decree; (ii) adapting the currentaccounting software at the PMU to include multiple sources of financing; (iii) hiring additionalaccounting staff; (iii) modifying the current project manuals; and (iv) conducting periodical internalaudit reviews of operational controls, in particular over community based activities. The relatedcovenants have been proposed for these actions.

B. Disbursement Arrangements and Flow of Funds3. In line with the practices for the on-going projects, disbursement arrangements for LPDP-II willinclude the following:

Withdrawals from the IFAD Loan, IFAD Grant and ASAP Grant will be disbursed into thesingle Designated Account (DA), where funds from the three financing sources for theProject will be pooled. The Designated Account (DA) will be in US Dollars and in acommercial Bank acceptable to IFAD, and will be managed on an imprest basis according tothe IFAD disbursement guidelines. The authorized allocation for the DA, as well as detaileddisbursement modalities will be defined in the Letter to the Recipient (LTR). The operatingauthority for the DA and for authorizing Withdrawal Applications will be formally defined bythe Recipient before withdrawals can begin. Direct payments may be necessary for US$denominated contracts for local contracts of large value.

Payments for all Project expenditures, including for community sub-projects, will be centrallymanaged by the PMU, based on approved CLPMPs. To meet these payments, the PMU willmove funds from the DA to a local currency Project Account. Cash contributions fromcommunity are also banked and accounted into a separate Project bank account.

A separate ledger account will be opened for each financing source (i.e. IFAD Loan, IFADGrant, ASAP, counterpart funds and community beneficiaries). At the time of makingpayments, each payment will be attributed to the relevant financing source and booked inthe ledger accordingly, based on the financing plan stated in the financing agreement. Acombined Withdrawal Application for all expenditures incurred, separately identifyingexpenditures from each source, will be generated by the accounting system.

“Smart” Statements of Expenditure (SOE) with comprehensive audit trails will be utilised tojustify advances given. The accounting software in use at the PMU is already able togenerate both Withdrawal Applications and Statements of Expenditures electronically. Thiswill reduce risks in this area for the new Project and facilitate smooth start up.

4. Counterpart funds will be essentially in the form of exemption from indirect taxes (VAT andCustoms duty) on project transactions. This exemption is currently in the form of a governmentregulation issued in November 2006, and applicable to all donor financed projects. Tax exemption


76

amounts for individual transactions will be recorded in the accounting system, in line with currentpractice.

5. Disbursement Accounts and Rules. The disbursement accounts and the financing rules (totalallocation net of taxes) adopted for each of the disbursement accounts are summarised in the tablebelow:

Table 12: Disbursement Accounts and Financing Rules

Description Financing Rules (total allocation net of taxes)1. Civil Works IFAD Grant (100%)

2. Equipment, Goods and VehiclesIFAD Grant (100%), except for fodder and production trials: IFADGrant (90%) and Beneficiaries (10%)

3. Training and Workshops IFAD Grant (100%)

4. Technical Assistance and StudiesIFAD Grant (100%), except for land certificates: IFAD Grant (50%)and Beneficiaries (50%)

5. CLPMP GrantsIFAD Loan/ASAP Grant (95%); Beneficiaries (5%, 10% formachinery)

6. Diversification Grants ASAP Grant (95%); Beneficiaries (5%)

7. Other GrantsIFAD Grant (100%), except for grants for Private Vets, whichapply the following rule: IFAD Grant (90%) and Private Vets (10%)

8. Operating Expenses IFAD Grant (100%)

6. Flow of Funds. A diagram of arrangements for the flow of funds under the Project is providedin Attachment 1.

C. Financial Reporting and Audit7. Financial Statements. The Recipient, through the PMU, shall maintain separate accounts andrecords and thereafter prepare the financial statements of the operations, resources and expendituresrelated to the Project required by the General Conditions on Financial Statements in respect to eachquarter during each Fiscal Year, and deliver such financial statements to the Fund within 45 days afterthe end of each such period.

8. Minimum financial reporting normally includes source and use of funds, reporting byexpenditure categories and components, with a comparison against approved budgets. Suggestedformats are included in the LPDP PIM.

9. Audit. The Recipient, through the PMU, shall appoint an independent auditor acceptable toIFAD, under the terms of reference cleared by IFAD, and in line with the IFAD Guidelines for Audits.The costs associated with the independent auditors would be financed from the proceeds of the IFADGrant under the “Technical Assistance” category of expenditures. The contract for the audit would beawarded during the first year of Project implementation and thereafter, extended from year to yearwith the same independent auditor, subject to satisfactory performance and IFAD clearance.

10. The Recipient, through the PMU, would use the IFAD Guidelines for Project Audits inpreparation of audit contracts and Terms of Reference (TORs). The auditors would give an opinion onthe Project Account with respect to the funding mechanism, the use of Project resources, theadherence to procurement rules, and the accountability of Project participants. The auditors wouldalso provide a “Management Letter” addressing the adequacy of the accounting and internal controlsystems. The Recipient, through the PMU, would submit the above-mentioned certified items to IFADnot later than six months after the end of the fiscal year to which they relate. The Recipient, throughthe PMU, shall submit to the Fund the reply to the management letter of the auditors within one (1)month of receipt thereof.


77

Attachment 1: Flow of Funds Chart

Notes:1. The Designated Account will be pooled for all financing sources – IFAD Loan, IFAD Grant and ASAP2. Counterpart funds will be essentially in the form of tax exemption (mainly VAT), i.e. no cash contributions will

be made. Tax exemptions from individual transactions will be recorded in the accounting system3. In the accounting system, separate ledger accounts for IFAD Loan, IFAD Grant and ASAP will be maintained.

Separate ledger accounts will also be maintained for counterpart funds and community contributions.4. Single withdrawal applications for all advances/replenishments covering all financing sources, supported by

SOEs for each financing source.

Designated Account(Pooled)

(US$. Authorized Allocation to bestated separately for each financing

source - LTB)

DirectPayments

(US$, Large valuecontracts)

Project Account(Local currency)

PMU Payments(Contractors and operational

expenses)

Reports(Combined Financial

Statements, Sources and Usesof funds)

Statement ofExpenditures

(Separate for each financingsource)

WithdrawalApplications

(WA)Ledger Accounts

(Separate chart of account foreach financing source)

Community cashContributions Account

(Local currency)

IFAD


78

Attachment 2: Financial Management Risk Assessment

A. Inherent risks: Country issues, Entity Risks, Project Design11. The FM capacity and risk exercise using the FMAQ has been done for the first time in thecountry, as the two on-going projects (KLSP 8026 and LPDP8083) were designed before the new riskassessment procedures were introduced by CFS in January 2013. Corruption risks at a TransparencyInternational (TI) rating of 2.3 are considered High. However, progress on Public FinanceManagement (PFM) reforms is good and there are indications of strong commitment of theGovernment to these reforms.

12. In March 2009 the Government adopted the Public Finance Management Reform Strategy(PFMRS) for 2009-2018. The most recent PEFA Assessment in 2012 reveals considerableimprovement across the most Performance Indicators, with slippage in some areas and no change inrating for others. There has been further progress reported since the last PEFA Assessment. Thisincludes, for instance, improvements in accounting, treasury and the budget process. A unified Chartof Accounts based on 2001 GFS was introduced from January 2014. The first ten national publicsector accounting standards based on the IPSAS standards were also introduced in 2014. A TreasurySingle Account (STA) was established for the Federal budget and coverage gradually extended tolocal authorities, to cover all local treasury accounts as of January 2015. Development of anautomated financial management information system is progressing. Today, for the first time, theGovernment of Tajikistan has immediate access to comprehensive information on its financial status.The consolidated government statement is prepared in a timely manner meeting annual deadlines ofJuly 15 for submission to Parliament and is generally comprehensive, including a statement onaccounting standards. Internal controls in government expenditure are improving. Although a law oninternal audit was passed in 2010, more capacity building is needed to bring this function in the lineministries to international standards. The government has made an initial start to strengthen theexternal audit function, though there are shortcomings in this area. The Law on External Auditincluding establishing the Chamber of Accounts (COA) was signed in June 2011, providing for thetransformation of the audit function from the Soviet era “revision and inspection” function to a modernaudit function that focuses on value for money in the use of public funds. COA has made someprogress in developing secondary legislation, including operational regulations and manuals. COAwas formally admitted to INTOSAI in November 2013. Donor partners are continuing to providecapacity building support on the PFM reform strategy.

13. The audit and accounting profession in Tajikistan is still developing. More regulations areneeded. There is no independent institution or accounting body providing oversight to the profession.Currently several local institutions involved, none of which is a member of IFAC. Licensing of auditfirms is regulated by MOF. There are many locally registered audit companies but not all are working.There are 5 international firms on the ground. Auditing is mandatory for public interest companies,state owned companies, financials and listed companies. The recommended accounting standardsare IFRS, though not yet mandatory. Local standards have not been developed. The IPSA standardsare being adapted locally. These developments suggest moderation in PFM risks in the country,despite relatively high TI ratings.

14. Past experience in the portfolio is mixed: KLSP was earlier managed by a different PCU withpoor FM. The quality of financial management of the current PMU has been generally satisfactory,with a PSR rating of 5 in 2014. The PMU has submitted audit reports in a timely manner withunqualified audit opinion.

15. The proposed LPDP-II has an inherent risk arising from the fact that substantial funds areearmarked for community driven subprojects, though these risks would be mitigated somewhat by useof international NGOs as facilitators and central procurement and payments by the PMU. In view ofthe past experience, procurement remains a risk in the project.

16. The scope for utilising national PFM systems could be explored in future, e.g. use of the STAfor the Designated Account and utilising the country’s audit institution (COA) for undertaking


79

operational audits for the projects. For the time being, the Project will adopt stand-alone financialmanagement arrangements and rely on private sector audit arrangements. Inherent financialmanagement risks are rated as medium.

B. Project Risks ControlTable 13:Summary of FM risks and mitigating measures

Risk Category Initial FM RiskRating (H/M/L)

Proposed Risk MitigatingMeasures

Notes

Inherent Risks MCountry LevelTransparencyPFM systems

HM

Reliance on stand-alone FMsystems for the Project

Entity and Project designPMU FM capacity

Geographical spread ofvillages

L

H Use of contracted services ofcommunity facilitators (CF);Internal audits of operationalsystems at CF and village level.

Conclude contractswith NGOsTOR for internal auditto be drafted by PMUand approved by IFAD

Project Risks Control M1.Organization & StaffingNumber and quality of FM

staffL Decree to appoint the PMU.

1 additional FM staff will be hiredfor LPDP-II.

EffectivenessCondition for 1st

replenishmentdisbursement (FA)

2.BudgetingAWPB accuracy,consistency withprocurement plan andFinancing Agreement

M Careful review of AWPB with FArecommended.Budgeting software is in use.Coordination with Recipient fiscalbudget through MOA and MOFrequired to ensure start-up in2016.

During implementation

3. Funds Flow &DisbursementsFamiliarity with IFAD

proceduresEfficient disbursementarrangements

L Staff have prior experience withIFAD procedures.For efficiency, a pooled DA will befollowed for all financing (IFADLoan, Grant and ASAP Grant).Use of Smart SOE formats.

State in LTR, PIM

4. Internal ControlFiduciary oversight ofcommunity generated sub-projectsPayment validationprocedures

M Strengthen oversight ofcommunity activities.Amend PIM to reflect new projectrequirements.

Amend PIM to reflectnew projectrequirements.Withdrawal condition(FA)

5. Accounting Systems,Policies & ProceduresUse of accounting

softwareAcceptable accountingstandards

L Back up storage of digitalaccounts off-site to be arranged.Customize software to includeadditional financing sources(ASAP, IFAD Loan and IFADGrant) under a pooled DAarrangement.

State in PIMCondition for 1st

replenishmentdisbursement (FA)


80

Risk Category Initial FM RiskRating (H/M/L)

Proposed Risk MitigatingMeasures

Notes

6.Reporting & MonitoringPeriodic financial

monitoringL Quarterly financial reports State in LTR, PIM

7.Internal AuditWeak operational controls M Periodical internal audit reviews of

operational controls, in particularover community activities, througha contracted third party. Scope toinclude record keeping andinternal controls of the NGOs whoare community facilitators, andcentral procurement of majoritems.

TOR in PIM

8. AuditingTimeliness and quality ofaudit

L Audit TOR will need to bemodified to broaden scope toinclude various sources offinancing.

General ConditionsLTR and PIM

Project Fiduciary Risk @Design

M

OVERALL FM RISK M* H=High, M=Medium, L=Low

C. Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements

Financial management organization and staffing17. The current PMU is well staffed, with a qualified and experienced Chief Accountant, whomanages both on-going projects, LPDP and KLSP41. He is supported by an assistant accountant forLPDP and two accounting consultants for KLSP. Job descriptions for these positions are available.The PMU’s current staff has prior experience in IFAD disbursement procedures. No serious capacityissues have been noted in their withdrawal applications for the on-going projects.

18. For LPDP-II, it is proposed to hire additional FM consultant on a competitive basis, to handlepayments and disbursements. Procurement functions are being handled by a separate team.

Budgeting19. PMU staff has experience in preparing AWPB to meet IFAD needs. AWPB (LPDP) for 2015 wasapproved in time and is well documented, with analysis to components and category allocations andprocurement plan. Some inconsistencies were however noted in the classification of contracts tospecific expenditure categories (KLSP). An Excel based program (“Planner”) is used for this purpose.Approved figures are also recorded into the accounting system to facilitate monitoring. The complexityof budgeting for two projects with very similar activities, overlapping geographical areas and multiplefinancing sources will yield risks of errors, which will require close monitoring. The same Plannerprogram will be used to develop separate AWPBs for the LPDPII.

20. Donor project financing is also included in the Government’s State Committee of Investment’s3-year investment program and in government fiscal budgets approved by Parliament. The Ministry ofEconomy approves individual projects annually. The budget preparation cycle starts from June eachyear for a fiscal period January-December of the following year. Approval by Parliament is in October -

41 KLSP was earlier managed by a different PCU that is currently under liquidation. Responsibility for KLSP wastransferred to this PMU in 2013. KLSP will reach completion date by December 31, 2015, and is therefore expected toclose by the time the LPDP-II enters into force.


81

November. For LPDPII, this process will be handled by the Ministry of Finance and Ministry ofAgriculture. Timing of this is a key for early start-up. If EB approval is September 2015, the MOA mustinform the MOF by November 2015 so that the Project would be included in the fiscal budget 2016.

Internal Controls21. The on-going project has a comprehensive Project manual, including Financial Managementprocedures, in place. Fiduciary oversight of community generated sub-projects carry an inherent risk,where controls can be weakened by remote decentralized locations. As stated in the LPDP PIM,special payment validation procedures are to be applied for community (PUU) sub-projects. Paymentsupporting documentation must include appraisal report prepared by NGO Community Facilitators, listof PUU members with signatures, documented handover of equipment to community witnessed bydistrict government staff (Jamoat), registration certification for each PUU, approved by Jamoat. Dutiesfor accounting, payments, procurement are segregated among staff, in line with the approvedorganization chart. Payments are through joint authorized signatories, and through bank transfers,cash payments only in very few exceptional cases.

Accounting systems, policies and procedures22. The PMU currently is using 1C accounting software. A brief review of the system featuressuggests this is a very versatile software, bi-lingual reporting (English and Russian), good controls onfinancial reporting. The same software will be used for LPDP-II under an overall license to the PMU.The software will need to be customised to include additional financing sources (ASAP, IFAD Loanand IFAD Grant) under a pooled DA arrangement.

23. Cash based public sector accounting standards will be followed, however, the system shouldalso able to track and report on advances / progress payments to contractors and fixed assets, andgenerate Withdrawal Applications and SOEs. Community contributions will be in cash and depositedinto the separate project bank account, and recorded in the accounting system. Tax exemptions toreflect counterpart contributions will also be recorded in the accounting system based on exemptionletters issued under each contract.

24. Accounting documents and records are sent to the State archives after Project closing. Back upstorage of digital accounts off-site should be arranged.

Internal Audit

25. Currently there is no internal audit at the PMU. This will be critical for the community drivenactivities, which will receive a majority of the Project funds. The PMU will introduce quarterly internalaudit reviews of operational controls, in particular over community activities, through a contracted thirdparty. The scope of this audit will also include record keeping and internal controls of the NGOs,Community Facilitators, who are key project parties. As in line with the current practice, their contractsshould allow IFAD to audit them if required.

External Audit26. The Chamber of Accounts (COA) is the country’s Supreme Audit Institution and is a relativelynew organization that may not yet be ready to take on audits of donor projects. Private sectorinternational audit firms are recommended as the better option for the time being, despite someweaknesses in the audit profession in the country. Recent experience with private sector audit firmsfor the on-going projects is satisfactory. Audit TORs will need to be modified to broaden scope toinclude community activities and contributions. A portfolio audit contract, covering all projects at thesame PMU, may be considered from next year if found cost effective and efficient.

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 8: Procurement

83

Appendix 8: Procurement

1. Country Procurement System. Currently various financial and other donor organisationsincluding the World Bank use their systems for procurement of goods and services.

2. Institutional Assessment of the PMU. The 2014 Supervision Mission of LPDP assessed thatthe current PMU has adequate procurement capacity in terms of qualified staff, who have beentrained internationally, and the established procedures are in place to undertake procurement ofgoods and services on a competitive basis. The quality of procurement has been generallysatisfactory, with a PSR rating of 5.

3. Procurement under IFAD Financing. The country’s procurement system is assessed as non-consistent with the IFAD Procurement Guidelines adopted by the Executive Board of IFAD inSeptember 2010. Procurement of goods and services financed by the IFAD Loan/Grant and ASAPGrant will therefore be to IFAD requirements, in accordance with relevant provisions of Section III andthe Annex of IFAD’s Project Procurement Guidelines (2010) and IFAD’s Procurement Handbook(2010) and shall be carried out by the PMU in line with the modalities established under LPDP. ThePMU Director shall be delegated the authority to initiate procurement and to sign contracts.

4. Recommended procurement methods to be further refined in the Letter to the Recipient andthresholds for the procurement of goods and non-consulting services are described below:

Contracts estimated to cost more than US$ 200 000 equivalent will be awarded on the basisof National Competitive Bidding (NCB) or International Competitive Bidding (ICB).

Contracts estimated to cost US$ 200 000 equivalent or less will be awarded on the basis ofNational Shopping (NS) or International Shopping (IS) procedures.

As an exception to the above, contracts estimated to cost US$ 50 000 equivalent or lessmay be awarded on the basis of Direct Contracting (DC) procedures, as it may bedetermined in the context of IFAD’s review and no objection to procurement plans.

5. As with goods, procurement of services will follow the methods described in the IFAD’s ProjectProcurement Guidelines (2010) and IFAD’s Procurement Handbook (2010). Indicative procurementmethods for the procurement of consulting services are described below42:

Contracts estimated to cost US$ 200 000 equivalent or more shall be awarded on the basisof expressions of interest advertised internationally following Quality and Cost BasedSelection (QCBS) as a default method or Quality Based Selection (QBS) for complex orhighly specialised assignments or those which invite innovations where the best expertiseavailable is required without consideration of price.

Contracts estimated to cost less than US$ 200 000 equivalent will be awarded on the basisof expressions of interests advertised nationally and following the following selectionmethods: Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS) as a default method; Quality BasedSelection (QBS) for complex or highly specialised assignments or those which inviteinnovations where the best expertise available is required without consideration of price.Selection of SBDU Associates will be carried out following Fixed Budget Selection (FBS)procedures and on the basis of expressions of interests advertised nationally.

As an exception to the above, contracts estimated to cost less than US$ 200 000 equivalentmay be awarded on the basis of short lists prepared by the PMU and comprising three to sixfirms/individual consultants and following the following selection methods: Quality and CostBased Selection (QCBS); Consultants Qualification (CQ), Quality Based Selection (QBS) forcomplex or highly specialised assignments or those which invite innovations where the bestexpertise available is required without consideration of price, and; Least Cost Selection(LCS) for small value services of a routine nature.

As an exception to the above, contracts estimated to cost less than US$ 50 000 equivalentmay be awarded on the basis of Sole Source Selection (SSS).

42 Actual methods to be applied will be set forth in the procurement plans.


84

6. For the purposes of Section III.H of IFAD’s Project Procurement Guidelines, the following shallbe subject to prior review by the Fund:

Award of any contract for goods and equipment to cost US$ 50 000 or equivalent or more; Award of any contract for consulting services estimated to cost US$ 25 000 or equivalent or

more; Award of any contract through direct contracting or Sole Source Selection.

7. In addition to the above, procurement will be carried in accordance with duly approved AnnualWork Plan and Budgets, including a procurement plan covering the initial eighteen month period ofProject implementation (a draft 18-month procurement plan is found below), thereafter updated tocover succeeding twelve month periods. Each procurement plan shall include the proposed contracts,methods of procurement and related IFAD review procedures. IFAD’s review of and no objection toprocurement plans is compulsory under all financing agreements directly supervised by IFAD. To theextent possible, procurement of goods and consulting services will be bulked together.


85

Table 14: Procurement Plan (first 18 months)


86

Table 14: Procurement Plan (first 18 months). (Cont'd)


87

Table 14: Procurement Plan (first 18 months). (Cont'd)

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 9: Project cost and financing

89

Appendix 9: Project cost and financing

A. Introduction

1. This section describes the assumptions underlying the derivation of Project costs, estimatedProject costs and financing plan. The Project costs are based on March 2015 prices. Some of the keyparameters are:

Project Period. The proposed Project would be financed over a five-year period Inflation. The EIU’s estimates for the consumer price inflation in 2016-17 is 10%, and this

rate was set as a base for the analysis for the whole Project period 2016-2020 Exchange Rate. The Base Exchange rate for this analysis has been set at TJS 6 to US$ 1

as an official exchange rate prevailing in March 2015.

2. The Project costs are presented in both TJS and US$. Conversions from current US$ valuesinto Tajik Somoni use the following constant purchasing power exchange rates:

Table 15: Constant Purchasing Power Exchange Rates (TJS/US$)

Up to ProjectStart-up PY1 PY2 PY3 PY4 PY5

6 6.2 6.6 7.1 7.6 8.1

3. Taxes and Duties. Overall, the items to be imported for the Project do not attract any importand excise duties. However, there is VAT of 18% levied on all imported and locally procured goodsand services. For directly recruited local staff and national technical assistance, the Project wouldcover the employer’s insurance of 25% (Social Fund). The Government would cover the cost of alltaxes on goods and services procured under the Project either through provisions in the state budgetor tax exemption.

4. Expenditure Accounts. The expenditure accounts, together with the breakdown of taxes,physical contingencies and the average rates for foreign exchange used in the analysis are shown inTable 18 below. Physical contingencies have only been applied on the items for which the requiredamounts could not be reasonably estimated, and have not been applied to the funds earmarked forthe grants as they follow a demand-driven delivery scheme.


90

Table 16: Expenditure Accounts

Description Taxes (sharein total costs)

PhysicalContingency

ForeignExchange

Investment CostsA. Civil Works 15.25% 0% 60%B. Equipment and Goods 25% 5% 70%C. Vehicles 25% 0% 70%D. Technical AssistanceInternational TA 0% 0% 100%National TA 0% 0% 0%Studies 0% 0% 0%E. Training and Workshops 0% 0% 0%F. CLPMP Grants 0% 0% 50%G. Diversification Grants 0% 0% 0%H. Other GrantsRecurrent CostsA. Salaries 0% 0% 0%B. Social Fund 0% 0% 0%C. Operating Expenses 15.25% 5% 30%

5. Project Investment Component Structure. The Project has four components, as follows: Institutional Development Productivity Enhancement and Improved Animal Health Pasture Development and Diversification for Vulnerability Reduction Project Management.

6. Project Organisation and Management. Overall implementation responsibility will rest withthe LPDP PMU in line with the similar arrangements established under LPDP.

B. Project Costs

7. Total investment and incremental recurrent project costs, including physical and pricecontingencies, are estimated at US$24 million (163 million Tajikistan somoni [TJS] equivalent).Physical and price contingencies are low – at 3 per cent of total project costs – due to investmentsassociated with the various grants, representing some 76 per cent of total project costs (expressed asa lump sum, with no contingencies). The foreign exchange component is estimated at US$10.4 millionor about 43 per cent of total project costs. Taxes and duties make up approximately US$0.45 millionor 2 per cent of total project costs, and are mainly associated with civil works and equipment andgoods, which constitute some 10 per cent of total costs. Project management expenses compriseabout 6.7 per cent of total project costs and are partly covered under LPDP


91

Table 17: Project Costs by Component

Component(Somoni Million) (USD '000)

Local Foreign Total % ForeignExchange

% TotalBase Costs Local Foreign Total % Foreign

Exchange% Total

Base CostsA. Institutional DevelopmentDevelopment of CommunityOrganizations 5,5 1,1 6,6 16 4 853,2 162,8 1 016,0 16 4Advancement of Policy and LegalFramework and Strengthening NationalInstitutions 3,4 1,6 5,0 32 3 521,6 247,0 768,6 32 3Subtotal Institutional Development 8,9 2,7 11,6 23 8 1 374,8 409,8 1 784,6 23 8B. Productivity Enhancement andImproved Animal HealthLivestock Productivity Enhancement 5,6 4,2 9,9 43 6 866,2 653,8 1 520,0 43 6Improved Animal Health 2,5 1,0 3,5 29 2 380,0 158,0 538,0 29 2Subtotal Productivity Enhancementand Improved Animal Health 8,1 5,3 13,4 39 9 1 246,2 811,8 2 058,0 39 9C. Pasture Development andDiversification for VulnerabilityReductionCommunity Resilience PastureManagement and Investments 59,4 57,0 116,4 49 75 9 133,2 8 771,2 17 904,4 49 75Income Diversification 3,6 - 3,6 - 2 550,0 - 550,0 - 2Subtotal Pasture Development andDiversification for VulnerabilityReduction 62,9 57,0 120,0 48 78 9 683,2 8 771,2 18 454,4 48 78D. Project ManagementProject Management 7,5 1,4 8,9 15 6 1 158,2 211,4 1 369,5 15 6Monitoring and Evaluation 0,3 0,3 0,7 48 - 53,3 48,7 102,0 48 -Subtotal Project Management 7,9 1,7 9,6 18 6 1 211,5 260,1 1 471,5 18 6Total BASELINE COSTS 87,9 66,6 154,5 43 100 13 515,7 10 252,9 23 768,5 43 100Physical Contingencies 0,4 0,4 0,8 50 1 62,1 63,3 125,3 50 1Price Contingencies 5,7 2,1 7,8 27 5 245,1 91,5 336,6 27 1Total PROJECT COSTS 94,0 69,2 163,1 42 106 13 822,8 10 407,6 24 230,4 43 102


92

C. Financing

8. An IFAD loan of US$8.7 million (36 per cent of total project costs) will finance 47 per cent of thepasture development and diversification for vulnerability reduction component. An IFAD grant ofUS$8.7 million (36 per cent of total project costs) will finance: 71 per cent of the institutionaldevelopment component (US$1.3 million), 83 per cent of the productivity enhancement and improvedanimal health component (US$1.9 million), 22 per cent of the pasture development and diversificationfor vulnerability reduction component (US$4.0 million), and 93 per cent of the project managementcomponent (US$1.5 million). An ASAP grant of US$5.0 million (21 per cent of total project costs) willfinance 8 per cent of the institutional development component (US$0.15 million) and 26 per cent ofthe pasture development and diversification for vulnerability reduction component (US$4.8 million).The government contribution is estimated at US$0.45 million (2 per cent) and includes contributionsfrom its budget primarily to cover taxes (see next paragraph). Approximately US$1.4 million (5.6 percent) will be provided by beneficiaries as cofinancing of the CLPMP and other grants.

9. The Government contribution would cover all taxes and duties on all Project inputs that involvefunding from the IFAD Loan/Grant and ASAP Grant or any other external source of funding associatedwith the IFAD Loan/Grant and ASAP Grant. The estimate of taxes and duties was based on the ratesin effect prevailing at the time of the design. In conformity with the principle that no taxes or dutieswould be financed out of the proceeds of the IFAD Loan/Grant and ASAP Grant, any future changesin the rates and/or structures of taxes and duties would have to apply to the Project.

10. Tables 20 and 21 below provide summaries by the Project components and expenditureaccounts of the proposed financing arrangement. The other summary financing tables are provided inProject Life File.


93

Table 18: Financing Plan by Components (US$)

Component

IFAD grant IFAD loan ASAP grant Beneficiaries Borrower TotalAmou

nt %Amou

nt %Amou

nt %Amou

nt % Amount % Amount %1. Institutional development(i) Development of communityorganizations 575 54.6 - - 153 14.5 269 25.5 56 5.4 1 053 4.3(ii) Advancement of policy andlegal framework and strengthening ofnational institutions 738 91.3 - - - - - - 70 8.7 808 3.3

Subtotal 1 1 313 70.6 - - 153 8.2 269 14.4 126 6.8 1 861 7.72. Productivity enhancementand improved animal health(i) Enhancement of livestock

productivity 1 375 81.4 - - - - 154 9.1 160 9.5 1 689 7,0(ii) Improvement in animal

health 496 89,3 - - - - 30 5.4 30 5.4 556 2.3Subtotal 2 1 871 83,4 - - - - 184 8.2 190 8.5 2 245 9.3

3. Pasture developmentand diversification forvulnerability reductionCommunity resilience pasture

management and investments 4 002 22.3 8 700 48.5 4 358 24.3 871 4.9 23 0.1 17 953 74.1Income diversification - - - - 525 95.5 25 4.5 - - 550 2.3Subtotal 3 4 002 21.6 8 700 47.0 4 883 26.4 896 4.8 23 0.1 18 503 76.4

4. Project managementProject management 1 405 93.0 - - - - - - 106 7.0 1 511 6.2M&E 109 98.9 - - - - - - 1 1.1 110 0.5Subtotal 4 1 514 93.4 - - - - - - 107 6.6 1 621 6.7Total 8 699 35.9 8 700 35.9 5 036 20.8 1 348 5.6 447 1.8 24 230 100.0


94

Table 19: Financing Plan by Expenditure Accounts (US$)

Expenditure accountIFAD grant IFAD loan ASAP grant Beneficiaries

Gov’t ofTajikistan taxes Total

Amount % Amount % Amount % Amount % Amount % Amount %I. Investment costsA. Civil works 69 84,7 - - - - - - 12 15,3 81 0,3B. Goods, equipment andmaterials 1 891 79,8 - - - - 154 6,5 323 13,7 2 368 9,8C. Vehicles 88 75,0 - - - - - - 29 25,0 117 0,5D. Technical assistance andstudies

International TA 102 100,0 - - - - - - - - 102 0,4National TA 1 476 75,8 - - 203 10,4 269 13,8 -0 - 1 947 8,0Studies 102 100,0 - - - - - - 0 - 102 0,4

Subtotal D 1 680 78,1 - - 203 9,4 269 12,5 -0 - 2 152 8,9E. Training and workshops 164 100,0 - - - - - - - - 164 0,7F. CLPMP grants 3 495 20,1 8 700 49,9 4 358 25,0 871 5,0 0 - 17 423 71,9G. Diversification grants - - - - 475 95,0 25 5,0 - - 500 2,1H. Other grants 440 93,6 - - - - 30 6,4 - - 470 1,9Total Investment costs 7 825 33,6 8 700 37,4 5 036 21,6 1 348 5,8 365 1,6 23 274 96,1II. Recurrent costsA. Salaries and allowances 343 100,0 - - - - - - - - 343 1,4B. Social fund 76 100,0 - - - - - - - - 76 0,3C. Operating expenses

Vehicles 246 84,7 - - - - - - 44 15,3 291 1,2Office 209 84,7 - - - - - - 38 15,3 246 1,0

Subtotal C 455 84,8 - - - - - - 82 15,3 537 2,2Total recurrent costs 874 91,4 - - - - - - 82 8,6 956 3,9Total project costs 8 699 35,9 8 700 35,9 5 036 20,8 1 348 5,6 447 1,8 24 230 100,0

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 10: Economic and Financial Analysis

95

Appendix 10: Economic and Financial Analysis


96

A. INTRODUCTION

1. Livestock ownership is a key coping strategy for the households and smallholder farmers inTajikistan. For the last decades there has been a rapid increase in livestock numbers. However, thisincrease has happened in spite the fall in feed availability. Historically Tajikistan has a large ruminant-based livestock sector, which provides a major source of income and security for most rural families.However, uncontrolled exploitation practiced over the last decades has resulted in resourcedestruction clearly visible around most villages. These unsustainable practices have eroded largeparts of an important natural resource base resulting in severe implications on soil fertility, vegetationcover, soil and water management and a general loss of biomass.

2. Most poor households are constrained by low productivity of livestock, limited availability offeed, degraded pasture lands especially winter and spring pastures, limited adaptation capacity toclimate change, poor animal husbandry practices, limited access to animal health care, high cost ofpurchased feed, lack of good quality fodder seed, lack of availability of financial services, poor accessto markets, and limited access to technologies for value addition.

3. Improvement in livestock productivity could help poor households deal with food security issuesand enhance their nutrition status. Despite the relative decrease in poverty there are still a significantnumber of people suffering from chronic malnutrition and poverty in the country. Investment inmeasures to overcome the constraints in the livestock sector would have an immediate impact onsmallholders’ nutrition status, food security profile, income and livelihoods and contribute to a greatercontribution of livestock in agriculture incomes, employment and productivity and help in the overallcontribution of the livestock sector to agriculture GDP to bring about growth and poverty alleviation inrural areas.

4. The proposed Livestock and Pasture Development Project-II (LPDP-II) is aiming to increase thenutritional status, incomes and resilience of poor households in the project area by enhancinglivestock productivity in a sustainable manner.

5. The outcomes expected from LPDP-II include the following: (i) increase in yields of milk andmeat production; (ii) increase in quantity and quality of livestock products marketed; (iii) reduction inanimal morbidity and mortality; (iv) improved policy and regulatory framework for pasturemanagement; (v) increase in productive capacity of pastures; and (vi) increased resilience ofhouseholds, especially women’s.

6. This Appendix identifies the possible activities and investments that the communities are likelyto choose. These are largely based on the experience of the ongoing LPDP. Nevertheless, duringProject implementation particular interventions would be tailored according to the priority needsexpressed by the beneficiaries and the economic conditions at a certain location. A number ofpotential economic activities were identified during the Project design although the opportunities forincreased production, suitable for Project support, vary with the agro-ecological conditions.Favourable cash flows from the likely Project financed investments indicate that the improvements inproduction, productivity and household incomes should be sufficient to ensure a steady adoption ofthe proposed interventions. Accordingly, the Project activities and scope discussed here and theassessment of prospective benefits and costs are only indicative.

7. The financial and economic analysis of LPDP follows recommendations for good practices andis based on the experiences of LPDP and similar projects in Tajikistan and other countries. ThisAppendix is structured as follows: (i) Project benefits; (ii) financial analysis; and (iii) economicanalysis, including sensitivity analysis by varying key assumptions of important variables associatedwith particular risks.

B. PROJECT BENEFITS

8. The Project is expected to lead to increased incomes of households, smallholder farmers andrural entrepreneurs. Benefits would derive from: (i) increased pasture yields; (ii) raised cultivated feedcrop yields and expanded cultivated feed crop area through increased rotation with cereal crops; (iii)


97

improved capacity of smallholders for livestock management; (iv) establishment of a viable plan forsupplying livestock husbandry and health services; (v) opportunities for better breed improvement andselection; and (vi) improved coping capacity for climate change adaptation. Also, there would beeconomic benefits from carbon sequestration in improved pastures. In addition, the Project willsupport investments for women’s groups who lack access to credit to provide them with the initialcapital to diversify their income-generating activities.

Unquantifiable Benefits9. Participatory Community Development. The adoption of a participatory community demand-driven approach would result in: (a) empowering communities to manage their own resources in amore efficient manner; (b) accustoming the community to prioritize, plan and implement proposedeconomic activities; (c) assisting communities, organised on a voluntary basis, to interact moreeffectively with local administration, central government and other sources for the delivery of services;and (d) helping to develop new relationships and public-private partnerships under a democratic formof governance. As a result, it is expected that communities and their organisations would bestrengthened through participatory and gender sensitive approaches matched with equallystrengthened capacity of government agencies and other service providers who be able to meetexpressed community’s priorities in a timely and transparent manner.

10. Project interventions would also provide capacity building and training to the institutionalpartners leading in the end to the institutional strengthening of local and central administrations.Strengthening local planning capacities would also include developing the synergies between differentinterventions and donors activities.

11. Environmental Benefits. The intensification of agriculture is considered an important vehiclefor economic development and poverty reduction. However, there is a growing concern about landdegradation caused by soil erosion and its impact on agricultural production. To this end, the Projectwould support soil and water conservation interventions that would have a positive impact on theenvironment and natural resources of the Project area. The main economic benefits would accruefrom: (a) increased area of land saved and land reclaimed; (b) improved agro-ecosystems; (c)increased value of nutrient recovery in the soil; and (d) increased moisture availability, waterinfiltration and improved water quality in pastures through water supply and water harvestingstructures.

12. Employment Generation. The proposed Project would generate additional employmentopportunities for the rural population in the Project area either as hired labour or as increasedhousehold labour requirements for both on-farm and off-farm activities as well as through Projectsupported-works for rural infrastructure like water supply and water harvesting structures,rehabilitation of pasture schemes and improved pasture access. Most of these opportunities wouldbenefit the poorest in the area.

13. The above benefits are rather difficult to estimate mainly due to lack of efficient and reliabledata. However, these are mainly reflected in improved incomes and environment. Therefore, theanalysis mainly assumes quantifiable revenues generated by participating households andsmallholder farmers from livestock production (increased productivity) and direct environmentalbenefits (carbon sequestration).

C. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

14. Objectives. The objectives of the financial analysis are:

to assess the financial viability of the improved technologies and systems promoted by theProject and the increase in incomes from indicative investments; and

to set a basis for the economic analysis.


98

I. Key Assumptions15. The parameters for the models are based upon the information on the production systemsgathered during the design missions: interviews with households, farmers and entrepreneurs, areview of available documents and statistics as well as information from the ongoing LPDP. Inparticular, information on labour and input requirements for various operations, capital costs,prevailing wages, yields, farm gate and market prices of agriculture produce and farm-to-markettransport costs were collected. Conservative assumptions were made both for inputs and outputs. Themodels show only incremental revenues and costs generated by the new investments.

16. Prices. Prices of commodities/inputs reflect annual average and those actually paid/receivedby the household/entrepreneur. These were collected during the field visits, national statistics,FAOSTAT and local experts. A list of prices used in the analysis is found in Appendix 1 to WorkingPaper on Financial and Economic Analysis (FEA WP).

17. Taxes and Pasture Fees. On average, a land tax of TJS 4 per Ha and a livestock tax of TJS 6per Sheep Unit (SU) were applied.

18. Opportunity Cost of Labour. For the purposes of evaluation of the average returns per labourday, a financial rural daily wage rate of TJS 35 has been assumed for planting, weeding, harvestingetc. This rate has been also used for family labour in Economic Analysis reflecting the equalemployment opportunities at other times in the agricultural year. This was confirmed during field visitsand interviews and could be explained by the fact that the country is highly dependent on remittances,which contribute to about 50% of GDP.

19. Internal Rate of Return. The internal rate of return (IRR) of 12% is used in this analysis toassess the viability and robustness of investments43. This rate is based on the National Bank ofTajikistan’s refinancing rate of about 6% plus annual inflation for 2014. The selection criterion for theIRR is to accept all investments for which the IRR is above the opportunity cost of capital. Using theIRR as the measure, the models’ sensitivity to the changes in parameters can be assessed by varyingthe cost of investments, production costs and revenues.

20. Detailed physical and financial parameters for the demonstrated models are presented inAppendices 2, 3 and 4 of FEA WP.

II. Production Models21. Five production models were prepared to serve as building blocks for the analysis: (i) PastureImprovement; (ii) Pasture Restoration; (iii) Controlled Grazing; (iv) Alfalfa; and (v) Annual Grass.

22. Table 22 shows the Production Models Summary results and the comparison of income in theWithout and With Project (full development at Year 5) scenarios for the above activities. Incrementalincreases are expected to range between US$ 13/Ha for the Controlled Grazing model andUS$ 124/Ha for the Alfalfa model. Benefit/cost ratios were also calculated for each model, whichdemonstrate the attractiveness of the new technologies.

Table 20: Production Models Summary (Financial) /a

ModelWP

InvestmentCost (US$/ha)

WP AverageRecurrent

Cost (US$/ha)

Income, US$ IncrementalIncome

(US$/ha)

WP Benefit/Cost Ratio

WOP WPPasture Improvement 238 0 25 38 13 N/APasture Restoration 322 0 25 40 15 N/AControlled Grazing 0 20 97 116 19 6,8Alfalfa 283 19 274 398 124 21,7Annual Grass 0 60 166 274 108 5,6a\ WOP – without Project; WP – with Project.

43 The IRR is a measure of the project’s worth that in this case compares the return on the investment with the bestalternative use of the funds (i.e. if the money were deposited in a bank).


99

III. Community Livestock and Pasture Management Plan (CLPMP)23. The Project would support pasture and livestock improvement interventions including access topastures, rotational grazing, rehabilitation of pasture schemes, water supply, livestock migration, etc.which would be for benefit at large and formalized in a Community Livestock and PastureManagement Plan (CLPMP) by the participating Pasture Users Unions (PUU). Preparation of such aplan would follow a set of important criteria, namely technical, social, financial and economic detailedin the Project Implementation Manual (PIM). The analysis attempts to illustrate such a plan for atypical PUU (village-based) in the Project area. The model has been developed taking into accountthe practical improvements that could be made to the existing pasture and livestock practices basedon the experience of the ongoing LPDP. A typical PUU represents the PUU of the Project districts(Dangara, Farkhot, Hamadoni, Kulob and Vose). The numbers of households and livestock,agricultural and pasture areas, outputs and other data of the typical PUU have been identified byaveraging the PUUs’ data in the Project districts and using other representative information like on thepasture yields from the District Agricultural Department as well as 20 CLPMPs prepared for LPDP.The model is indicative and underestimated as it does not capture a possible expansion of livestocknumbers. It is assumed the same number of livestock in WOP and WP situations; however due to theenhanced live weight of animals, the livestock unit value (measured in Sheep Units (SU)) is higher. Infact, the Project will be encouraging the PUUs to keep the livestock numbers steady. The details areprovided in Appendix 3 to FEA WP, and a summary is presented below.

24. It has been identified, that the typical PUU has about 1 106 Ha of pastures, including 354 Ha ofwinter pasture, 741 Ha of spring and autumn pasture and 11 Ha of summer pasture. About 400 ha ofsummer pasture are not used due to the limited access. The PUU also cultivates about 45 Ha offorage crops and it harvests hay and straw from about 30 Ha of haymaking fields and about 100 Ha ofgrain fields respectively on average. In addition, it purchases about 950 tons of cottonseed oilcakeand grain by-products from the local ginning factories and mills to feed its livestock.

25. About 1 040 heads of cattle and approximately 2 725 heads of sheep and goats belong toapproximately 220 households on average. The population of the typical PUU is about 2 002 persons.The key livestock parameters are presented in Table 23:

Table 21: Key Livestock Parameters

Item Unit Cattle SheepWOP WP Incremental, % WOP WP Incremental, %

LW (cow, ewe) kg 250 275 10% 40 44 10%LW (offsprings) kg 70 77 10% 30 33 10%Milk yield - daily average lt 6,0 6,8 13% N/A N/A N/AMilk yield - total lactation lt/head 1260 1428 13% N/A N/A N/A

26. A demonstrative model of feed/forage balance of the typical PUU was prepared to serve as abase for the analysis. This includes productivity estimates for pasture and forage production areas,which were put in the context of the feed/forage demand in the PUU. The model shows that the typicalPUU is provisioned with the feed/forage at 54% of the annual demand resulted in a low livestockproductivity which in turn leads to insufficient meat and milk production and consumption.

27. Based on the above assessment, a list of likely investment activities has been developed toimprove the feed/forage balance of the typical PUU. This list together with the crops budgets, pastureimprovement activities, rotational grazing, machinery requirements, veterinary services and improvedfeed/forage balance form a Community Livestock and Pasture Management Plan (CLPMP). ThePlan’s main objective is to define options for the increased quantity and quality of the overallfeed/forage production as well as enhanced animal health, while reducing the pressure on overgrazeddegraded areas and regenerating their productive capacity.

28. It is proposed in the CLPMP to improve 390 Ha of pastures by applying better technologies(particularly the pasture improvements and controlled grazing). It is also envisaged to improve access


100

to about 400 Ha of summer pastures, which are currently not used due to lack of water supply andanimal shelters. It is also recommended to expand the area under forage crops (by 35 Ha) andapplying better technology on them that would increase yields and outputs. This allows reducingconsumption of costly cottonseed oilcake and grain by-products by about 40%.

29. It is expected that as a result of the CLPMP’s implementation, the feed/forage provision of thetypical PUU would increase up to 76% of the annual demand. Thanks to the CLPMP the utilizationfactor of the pasture’s dry mass would raise by 15-20%. This together with the improved animal healthinterventions would allow increasing production of meat and milk by 10% and 16% and consumption -by 5% and 16% respectively. Sales of meat would grow by 10%. Households’ annual net incomewould increase by US$ 245 on average, from US$ 1 957 to US$ 2 202 per household.

30. Summary. The financial analysis of the CLPMP shows: (i) the increase in incremental incomeby 13%; and (ii) a high benefit/cost ratio (1.9) and IRR (92%) due to the very low starting point,demonstrating the attractiveness of the investments. Sensitivity analysis was undertaken to assessthe impact of changes in: (i) output prices; (ii) expected yields; (iii) operating costs; and (iv) investmentcosts on the financial returns. It showed that the model is more sensitive to the changes in price andproductivity assumptions rather than to variations in the production and investment costs. Theanalysis also showed that the PUU would be able to finance its CLPMP beyond the Project supportout of its own fee collection amounting to US$ 12,631 per annum (or about TJS 10/SU per year).

31. Table 24 presents a summary of the CLPMP model while the details could be found in Appendix3 to FEA WP.

Table 22: Summary of CLPMP Model

Items Unit WithoutProject

With Project FullDevelopment

IncrementalValue %

Number of households no 220 220 - 0%Population no 2 002 2 002 - 0%

Land structure and livestock numberPasturesSummer pasture, total ha 11 411 400 3616%Own ha 11 11 - 0%Reclaimed ha - 400 400

Winter pasture ha 354 314 -40 -11%Spring/Autumn pasture ha 741 741 - 0%

Subtotal Pasture 1 106 1 466 360 33%Fodder cropsAlfalfa ha 30 40 10 33%Annual grass ha 15 40 25 167%

Subtotal Fodder crops 45 80 35 78%

Haymaking fields ha 30 30 - 0%

Livestock number (in Sheep Units) SU 7 596 7 642 45 1%

ProductionMeat kg 59 802 65 835 6 032 10%Milk kg 544 421 630 587 86 165 16%

RevenuesMeat US$ 249 175 274 311 25 135 10%Milk US$ 181 474 210 196 28 722 16%Total Revenues US$ 430 649 484 506 53 857 13%

Average Household's BenefitsMilk consumption kg/capita 272 315 43 16%Meat consumption lt/capita 17 17 1 5%


101

Items Unit WithoutProject

With Project FullDevelopment

IncrementalValue %

Annual net income from livestock US$/hh 1 957 2 202 245 13%

Improvement ActivitiesPasture Improvement:Superficial improvement (SI) ha 63Radical improvement (RI) ha 10Controlled grazing (CG) ha 317Other operationsMachinery package a/ set - 1Access to summer pasture c/ ha - 400 400Vet services, vaccination d/ SU 1 899 7 642 5 743 302%Payment to shepherd b/ SU 1 899 3 821 1 922 101%

Cost of 3-year Improvement Plan US$ 91 045US$/hh 414

Total Net Income US$ 430 649 484 506 53 857 13%Benefit/Cost Ratio 1,2 1,9Incremental Net Income US$ 53 857Incremental annual net benefits perUSD1 of investment US$ 0,59NPV (@12%) US$ 676 805IRR % 92%

Switching Values:- Incremental Revenues % -230%- Incremental Production Costs % 177%- Incremental Investments % 510%a/ a machinery package per one villages (indicative investment, other investments may include construction ofwatering points, shelters, spot road improvement, etc. as demanded by communities)b/ coverage: WOP - for only 25% of livestock; WP - for 50% of grazing livestock (mostly for sheep and goats)c/ improved access to summer pasture land due to rehabilitation of watering point and animal sheltersd/ approximately 25 TJS per one SU. Coverage: WOP - 50% and WP - 100% of livestock

IV. Income Diversification (ID) Models32. The Project would support alternative to livestock income generation activities (IGA) forsmallholder farmers, especially women. Several models were analysed, of which three were selectedto illustrate the potential returns. The models demonstrate an opportunity for diversification of incomesources for communities/community members unable to engage into livestock grazing.

Wild Berries Model33. In response to current market demand for aggregated volumes of standardized raw material,the Project will support the development of non-grass pasture products like wild berries, spice oraromatic herbs. These have strong demand from domestic agro-processors (wild berries, wild onion)and importers (white and black cumin). In addition, a number of agro-forestry products, dog-rose forinstance, represent dual benefit for local communities: valid income source (e.g. dog-rose hips andpetals for soft drinks bottlers), while being an excellent pasture perimeter protector.

34. To secure product acceptance by the market, each element of production system should beoriented towards buyer’s specifications. PUUs will be the critical intermediary between smallholdersand buyers. The Project will support PUU members involves in IGAs to build their capacity to act as areliable business partner and will provide needed services to the farmers from design stage tomarketing, offsetting the supply risks such as side-selling, and inconsistent quantity and quality ofproduction.

35. This model indicates the likely returns over time to a women group obtaining an investmentpackage for setting up a collection/drying facilities amounting to about US$ 3 093. The financial


102

analysis demonstrates that 10 households supplying 10 tons of dog-rose hips a year (season) wouldhave an annual incremental benefit of TJS 70 500 (about US$ 11 750) and generating positive cashflow the sub-project’s 1st year. The returns to labour day would be around TJS 710.

Bio-climatic Cellar Model36. This model presents the likely returns from an investment in the establishment of bio-climaticcellars primarily for apples, but also for potatoes and other tubers. The sub-project is to be managedby a group of 10 households. An investment of US$ 7 496 into a cellar (storage capacity can varyfrom 4 to 20 tons) would allow benefiting from off-season prices, that in case of apples could be triplecompared to post-harvest price. The financial analysis demonstrates that the group would have anannual incremental benefit of TJS 80 000 (about US$ 13 333) or TJS 4 000 (US$1 333) perparticipating household and allow for a positive cash flow from year one. The model indicates that theincremental annual net benefit per US$1 of investment is US$ 1.8. The returns to labour day would bearound TJS 2 133.

Turkey Incubator Model37. The model indicates the likely returns from an investment in establishing a turkey incubatoramounting to about TJS 9 241 (10 birds and construction of a shed). The unit is run by onehousehold. The investment would result in production of 169 of turkey birds per year. The financialanalysis demonstrates that the household would have an annual incremental benefit of TJS 5 413(about US$ 902). The incremental annual net benefit per US$1 of investment is US$ 0.6. The returnsto labour day would be around TJS 91.

38. The detailed financial analysis for each of the three IGA models is contained in Appendix 4 toFEA WP. Table 25 below summarises the financial returns from the proposed ID models.

Table 23: Income Diversification Models Summary a/

Model InvestmentCosts

Annual Net Benefits - after financing, US$ Incrementalannual net

benefit per 1US$ of

investment

Benefit/CostRatio

NPV,US$WOP WP - Full

Dev. Incremental PerHH

Wild berries 3 093 - 11 750 11 750 1 175 3,8 8,4 54 987

Turkey 1 540 25 928 902 902 0,6 1,7 3 234Bioclimaticcellar 7 496 8 000 21 333 13 333 1 333 1,8 5,0 59 045a/ all models generate positive cash flow in the first year of investment, thus no IRR could be calculated

D. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

NPV =US$ 8.6 million; ERR =20%

39. The period of analysis is 20 years to account for the phasing and gestation period of theproposed interventions. The scenario presented in the economic analysis is conservative; the analysisthat appears below is indicative and demonstrates the scope of profitability originated from theconditions prevailing at the time of the design.

40. Benefit Stream. The analysis attempts to identify quantifiable benefits that relate directly to theactivities undertaken following implementation of the components, or that can be attributed to theProject’s implementation.

41. Price estimates for tradable commodities have been based on the World Bank’s CommodityMarket Review (January 2015). All local costs were converted into their approximate economic valuesusing a Standard Conversion Factor (SCF) of 0.9 as estimated by the World Bank and confirmed bythe fact that there is a minor difference between financial and economic prices in the country(basically no subsidies and protection policy). Milk and meat were considered as non-tradable


103

commodities as their imports constitute only a fraction in the total production, around 0.3% each.Local prices for these products are compatible to those in the region, thus confirming the approach.The derivation and a summary of economic prices are presented in Appendix 1 to FEA WP. All valuesare given in constant 2015 prices.

42. The incremental quantifiable benefit stream comprises of three main elements: (i) CommunityLivestock and Pasture Management Plans (CLPMP); (ii) Income Diversification Grants (ID Grants);and (iii) Carbon Sequestration.

43. The illustrative models described above have been used for the calculation of the overallbenefit stream, on the basis of economic prices. The summary of economic benefits of thedemonstrated CLPMP and ID models is presented in Tables 26 and 27, while the details could befound in the previous sections.

Table 24: Summary of CLPMP Model (Economic)

Item Unit WOP WPCost of 3-year Improvement Plan US$ 85 272

US$/hh 388Total Net Income US$ 387 584 436 055Benefit/Cost Ratio 1,3 1,9Incremental Net Income US$ 48 471Incremental annual net benefits perUSD1 of investment US$ 0,57NPV (@12%) US$ 595 464IRR % 89%

Switching Values:- Incremental Revenues % -225%- Incremental Production Costs % 180%- Incremental Investments % 491%

Table 25: Summary of ID Models (Economic)

Model InvestmentCosts

Annual Net Benefits - after financing, US$ Incrementalannual netbenefit per1 US$ of

investment

Benefit/CostRatio

NPV,US$

WOPWP - Full

Dev. IncrementalPerHH

Wild berries 3 418 - 10 038 10 038 1 004 2,9 6,1 46 381

Turkey 1 634 -190 1 108 1 298 1 298 0,8 1,3 2 596

Bioclimatic cellar 7 006 7 200 18 850 11 650 1 165 1,7 4,7 51 252

44. In calculating the overall benefits from the above two elements, the following was considered: Allowing the illustrative examples as a reasonable assumption of the investments likely to be

implemented, estimated average incremental annual net benefits per 1 US$ of investmentswere used.

In particular, an average indicator for the incremental annual net benefits per US$ 1 ofinvestments equals to US$ 0.57 for the CLPMP and to US$ 1.8 for the ID Grants.

The incremental net benefits were calculated by multiplying these indicators by the amountof estimated investments, but considering the gradual increase of such benefits over theperiod of ten years.

An 80% success rate was applied to the models, i.e. it was assumed that only 80% of theinvestments would achieve the estimated returns.

No financing flows have been undertaken in the calculations as they or represent transferpayments (grants, contributions and taxes).


104

45. Carbon Sequestration. Investments in pasture rehabilitation would increase their carbonabsorption capacity from initially 0.9 ton per Ha per annum to about 2 ton/Ha/year. It has beenassumed that around 7 560 Ha of pastures would be rehabilitated throughout the Project area thusresulting in about 8 468 ton of carbon sequestered on annual basis, or approximatelyUS$ 178 thousand per annum in value terms totaling to about US$1.0 million NPV over 20 years.

46. Summary of Project Economic Benefit. The Project would reach about 21 100 householdsfrom 120 targeted PUUs (assuming around 220 households per PUUs on average, and reachingabout 80%). Around 132 000 Ha of pasture would be improved (1 100 Ha per PUU on average). Inaddition approximately 1 500 women would benefit from the income-generating activities.Implementation of the Community Livestock and Pasture Management Plans and DiversificationGrants for women would result in incremental production (at least 15%), consumption and sales ofmeat and milk, which in turn improves nutritional status of rural population in the Project districts andincreases their income. Moreover, it is estimated that about 8.5 thousand ton of CO2 would besequestered per annum on average valued at around US$ 178 thousand.

47. The details of the calculations of benefit streams for three elements (CLPMP, ID Grants andcarbon sequestration) are presented in Appendix 5 to FEA WP.

48. Cost Stream. The incremental economic costs have been calculated by the removal of pricecontingencies and taxes/duties. There would be no recurrent costs and replacement of equipmentafter Project completion. The total economic cost of the Project amounts to about US$ 17.9 million.

49. Summary. Given the above benefit and cost streams, the base case internal rate of return(IRR) is estimated at 20%. The base case net present value of the Project’s net benefit stream,discounted at 12%, is US$ 8.6 million. The summary of economic analysis is presented in Table 8.

50. Sensitivity Analysis. Economic returns were tested against changes in benefits and costs andfor various lags in the realisation of benefits. In relative terms, the IRR is equally sensitive to changesin costs and in benefits. In absolute terms, these changes do not have a significant impact on the IRR,and the economic viability is not threatened by either a 20% decline in benefits or by a 20% increasein costs. A fall in total Project benefits by 20% and an increase in total Project costs by the sameproportion would reduce the base IRR to about 14%. The switching values shows that the Projectwould be economically viable even if benefits decreased by 41% and investment costs increased by70%. A one-year delay in Project benefits reduces the IRR to 17%. With a two-year delay in Projectbenefits, the IRR falls to approximately 15%. The results are presented in the following table:

Table 26: Sensitivity Analysis

SensitivityAnalysis(20-year period)

Basecase Costs Increase Increase of

Benefits Decrease of Benefits Delay of Benefits

+10% +20% +50% +10% +20% -10% -20% - 30% 1 year 2 yearsIRR 20% 19% 17% 14% 22% 24% 19% 17% 15% 17% 15%NPV (000'US$) 8 589 8 068 6 895 3 376 11 339 13 437 7 144 5 047 2 949 6 564 4 173Discount rate 12%

51. Risk Analysis. Technical and climate risks associated with the Project (described in the sectionon Risks of the Main Report) may lead to the reduced economic returns. Lack of capacity ingovernmental agencies and communities to effectively participate in Project activities may result in thedelay of realization of benefits. The described above sensitivity analysis allows for the followingreservations: the Project would be economically viable even if benefits decreased by 41% orrealization of benefits delayed by 2 years.


105

Table 27: Project Economic Analysis (constant 2015 values)

(US$ thousand) PY1 PY2 PY3 PY4 PY5 PY6 PY7 PY8 PY9 PY10 PY11 P12 PY13 PY14 PY15-20Project Incremental BenefitsNet Benefits of CLPMP 0 0 98 492 1 182 2 167 3 152 4 038 4 629 4 925 4 925 4 925 4 925 4 925 4 925Net Benefits of CarbonSequestration

0 0 5 30 69 109 152 158 164 171 178 186 193 201 210

Net Benefits of DiversificationGrants

0 0 29 101 230 374 518 634 706 720 720 720 720 720 720

Total Project Net Benefits 0 0 133 623 1 481 2 651 3 822 4 830 5 499 5 816 5 823 5 830 5 838 5 846 5 854Project CostsInvestment Costs 891 3 245 5 211 4 639 3 924Goods and Equipment* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Recurrent Costs* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Total Project Costs 891 3 245 5 211 4 639 3 924 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Project IncrementalNet Benefits

-891 -3 245 -5 079 -4 016 -2 443 2 651 3 822 4 830 5 499 5 816 5 823 5 830 5 838 5 846 5 854

IRR 20,3%NPV @12% (US$ thousand) 8 589

* Replacement and recurrent costs associated with CLPMPs and DGs are already included in calculation of net benefits from the Plans and mini-projectsThere are no costs required for post-project support

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 11: Draft Project implementation manual

107

Appendix 11: Draft Project Implementation Manual

Full manual to be found in LPDPI PLF

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

FISCAL YEAR

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

PROJECT AREA MAP

CHAPTER-1: INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER-2 PROJECT SUMMARY

A. Project Area, Goal and Purpose

B. Target Groups and Targeting

C. Project Components

D. IFAD Oversight Policies

E. Implementing Institutions

F. Integration within the IFAD Country Programme

G. Environment and Social Safeguard Issues

H. Project Costs and Financing

I. Project Outputs and Outcomes

J. Risks and Post-project Sustainability

K. Innovative Features

L. Project Knowledge Products

Annex 2.1: Project Logical Framework

CHAPTER-3 IMPLEMENTING INSTITUTIONS

A. Introduction

B. Ministry of Agriculture (MOA)

C. Project Management Unit (PMU)

D. Technical Assistance (technical facilitation)

E. The Hukumat (district administration) and Jamoat (sub-district administration)

F. Community Organisations: Village Organization (VO), Pasture Users’ Unions (PUUs) and CommonInterest Groups (CIGs)

G. Community Facilitator (CF)

CHAPTER-4 TARGETING AND SELECTION CRITERIA

A. Target Groups and Targeting

B. Selection Criteria

C. Selection of Jamoats and Villages


108

Annex 4.1: Criteria for Selection of Villages, COs and Beneficiaries

Annex 4.2: Calculation of current carrying capacity estimates of pastures in Project districts of Khatlon Region

CHAPTER-5 DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS

A. Social Mobilisation

5.A.1 District Launching Workshops

5.A.2 Memorandum of Understanding

5.A.3 Confirmation of Target Jamoats

5.A.4 Initial Village Meeting

5.A.5 Community Assessment

B. Community Mobilisation

C. Community Capacity Building

Annex 5.1: Terms of Reference for Community Facilitator

Annex 5.2: Terms of Reference for International Community Development Consultant

Annex 5.3: Draft Short List of Implementing Agencies for the Services of Community Facilitator

Annex 5.4: Memorandum of Understanding

Annex 5.5: Village Wealth Ranking

CHAPTER-6 INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING

A. Sub-component Activities

B. Summary of Expected Institutional Outcomes

C. Implementation Arrangements for Institutional Capacity Development

Annex 6.1: TORs for International Legal and Policy TA

Annex 5.2: TORs for International Locust Control Specialist

CHAPTER-7 STRENGTHENING PRIVATE SECTOR SERVICES

A. Sub-component Activities

B. Implementation Arrangements

CHAPTER-8 IMPROVED PASTURE MANAGEMENT

A. Introduction

B. Pasture Users’ Unions

C. Community Livestock and Pasture Management Plan (CLPMP)

D. CLPMP Appraisal and Approval

E. Grant Agreement

F. Procurement Procedures

G. Community Financial and Accounting Procedures

H. CLPMP Implementation

H.1. Responsibilities during Implementation

H.2. Contracting

H.3. Handover and Certification

I. PMUP Implementation Monitoring

J. Implementation Arrangements


109

Annex 8.1: Partnership Agreement

Annex 8.2: Terms of Reference for the Technical Team

Annex 8.3: Technical Considerations for Sustainable Pasture Management

Annex 8.4: Format for Pasture Management and Use Plan

Annex 8.5: Format for CF inspection (PMUP)

Annex 8.6: PMU Appraisal and Scorecard (PMUP)

Annex 8.7: Grant Agreement

Annex 8.8: Procurement Guidelines – Procurement with Community Participation

Annex 8.9: Statement of Accomplished Works (SAW)

Annex 8.10: Provisional Handover and Completion Report

Annex 8.11: Final Handover Report

Annex 8.12: Verification Form for Information Outreach

CHAPTER-9 INCOME GENERATION FOR WOMEN

Annex 9.1: TORs for the International IGA Specialist

CHAPTER-10 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS

CHAPTER-11: TASKS & RESPONSIBILITIES OF PMU

A. Key Success Factors

B. Project Steering Committee (PSC)

C. Project Management Unit

D. Responsibilities of PMU Staff

Annex 11.1: Criteria for Recruitment of PMU Staff

CHAPTER-12 PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES

CHAPTER-13 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

CHAPTER-14 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM

A. Objective

B. Implementation Arrangements

C. Surveys and Studies

D. Concurrent and Impact Evaluations

E. Monitoring Reports

Annex 14.1: RIMS Indicators for the LPDP

CHAPTER-15 RESULT-ORIENTED AWPB

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 12: Compliance with IFAD policies

111

Appendix 12: Compliance with IFAD policies

1. The project is fully compliant with IFAD’s Strategic Framework 2011-15, in particular with theStrategic Framework’s Principles of Engagement: (a) a differentiated approach based on countrycontext, for which targeted activities will seek to respond to the needs of disadvantaged ruralcommunities; (b) comprehensive targeting methodologies and gender mainstreaming approaches,e.g., geographic, gender-based, enabling measures, etc.; (c) supporting the empowerment ofsmallholders to engage in community based management of natural resources on which theirlivelihood depends; (d) promoting gender equality and women’s empowerment, while creating viableopportunities for rural young people; (e) innovation, learning and scaling up through piloting ofinnovative productive technologies and management arrangements; and (f) social, economic andenvironmental sustainability, in association with the key Government and private sector entities andinternational development agencies.

2. The design is further aligned with: (a) the new IFAD Policy for Environment and NaturalResource Management, which proposes greater attention to risk and resilience in order to manageenvironmental and natural resource-related shocks, and promotes livelihood diversification to reducevulnerability and build resilience for sustainable natural resource management; and (b) the IFADStrategy on Climate Change, which is articulated around three objectives: (i) support the innovativeapproaches in order to assist the small producer (women and men) to increase their resilience toclimate change; (ii) assist these small agriculturists to take advantage of available financing andincentives for mitigation; and (iii) promote a documented and more coherent dialogue on climatechange, rural development, agriculture, and food security.

3. Similarly, the design is fully compliant with IFAD’s policies on Targeting, Gender Equality andWomen’s Empowerment (see Attachment 1: Gender Checklist), and Climate Change, and it is fullyaware on the new Social, Environmental and Climate Assessment Procedures (see Attachment 2:SECAP Review Note).


112

Attachment 1. Gender Checklist

Key Issue Design Response1. The project design report contains – andproject implementation is based on - gender-disaggregated poverty data and an analysis ofgender differences in the activities or sectorsconcerned, as well as an analysis of eachproject activity from the gender perspective toaddress any unintentional barriers to women’sparticipation.

Yes. Gender differences are analyzed during poverty analysis, andproject activities are gender-sensitive.

2. The project design report articulates – or theproject implements – actions with aim to: Expand women’s economic empowerment

through access to and control overproductive and household assets;

Yes. The project will establish women’s self-help groups that willhelp women farmers acquire improved technologies for livestockmanagement and improved inputs, employment opportunities asveterinary agents, enhance their livestock asset base and haveopportunity to process and market surplus livestock products.

Strengthen women’s decision-making rolein the household and community, and theirrepresentation in membership andleadership of local institutions;

Yes. The project will organize women groups for incomediversification, and promote women’s membership in PastureUsers Unions, and their participation in the management boards ofthe PUUs.

Achieve a reduced workload and anequitable workload balance betweenwomen and men.

Yes. Women will receive technologies that will enable them toreduce their workload especially in the processing of livestockproducts such as kurut, chakka, etc.

3. The project design report includes oneparagraph in the targeting section that explainswhat the project will deliver from a genderperspective.

Yes. The report explains what it will mean to address genderissues in the project and how the project will deliver (paragraph16).

4. The project design report describes the keyelements for operationalizing the genderstrategy, with respect to the relevant projectcomponents.

Yes. One entire sub-component is targeted at women only, and forother activities specific quotas have been established.

5. The design document describes - and theproject implements - operational measures toensure gender- equitable participation in, andbenefit from, project activities. These willgenerally include:5.1 Allocating adequate human and financial

resources to implement the gender strategyYes. Two PMU specialists have gender issues as key objectiveswritten into their TOR, and implementation of the gender strategyhas been included and resourced in the budget for all activities.The M&E is geared to monitor gender and social performance, andallocations have been made for specific gender studies to assessimpact on gender relations and women’s empowerment.

5.2 Ensuring and supporting women’s activeparticipation in project-related activities,decision-making bodies and committees,including setting specific targets forparticipation

Yes. Specific measures and strategies are designed to ensurewomen’s access to information about project activities and theirparticipation in project activities. Specific quotas for women’sparticipation have been established for all activities.

5.3 Ensuring that project/programmemanagement arrangements (composition ofthe project management unit/programmecoordination unit, project terms of referencefor staff and implementing partners, etc.)reflect attention to gender equality andwomen’s empowerment concerns

Yes. The project will promote a gender-balanced working team,both in the PMU and in contracted CFs/TFs. Gender has beenmainstreamed in all project TOR and in the selection criteria forCFs/TFs.

5.4 Ensuring direct project/programmeoutreach to women (for example throughappropriate numbers and qualification offield staff), especially where women’smobility is limited

Yes. The social mobilization process developed under LPDP hasbeen modified to better address the specific constraints andopportunities for gender mobilization and facilitate the activeparticipation of women.

5.5 Identifying opportunities to support strategicpartnerships with government and othersdevelopment organizations for networkingand policy dialogue

Yes. The State Committee for Women’s Affairs and Families is amember of the PSC in order to provide higher-level support andadvice on gender policy issues.


113

Key Issue Design Response6. The project’s logical framework, M&E, MISand learning systems specify in design – andproject M&E unit collects, analyses andinterprets sex- and age-disaggregatedperformance and impact data, including specificindicators on gender equality and women’sempowerment.

Yes. The project logframe indicators are gender-sensitive and sex-disaggregated. The M&E system is gender-sensitive and geared toaddress gender issues by reporting and analysing sex-disaggregated data throughout the project cycle.


114

Attachment 2 – SECAP Review Note

Major landscape characteristics and Issues (Social, natural resources, and climate)

Socio-cultural context1. The Project will work in 5 out of the 25 districts of Khatlon region (Vose, Kulob, Hamodoni,Farkhor and Dangara), which is one of the poorest regions of Tajikistan with the 78% of the totalpopulation living on less than USD 2 per capita per day. The Khatlon region occupies the southwest ofthe country, with a population of 2.64 million, or approximately one third of the country’s totalpopulation. The project will target 200 villages (or 220 PUUs), involving 38 000 households andaround 132,000 ha of pastureland.

2. Like all agricultural land in Tajikistan, pastures are under state ownership. As stipulated in theLand Code, local district administrations in agreement with district state land committees have theresponsibility to allocate land to land users. The majority of pasture land is with the small number ofprimary land users, which are the dehkan farms and agriculture enterprises, who inherited that rightfrom the collective and state farms of the Soviet period. Almost all individual and family farms –holding 90% of livestock - act as secondary users and have to lease pastures from dehkan farms –often with no or a small number of livestock - through informal arrangements. The absence of formaluse rights for smallholder farmers together with the fact that Dehkan farms do not use lease fees forthe improvement of pasture land, represent a major obstacle to economic growth and sustainablepasture management.

3. Pasture Law adopted in March 2013 despite some ambiguity in it’s formulation, furtherstipulates that individuals and legal entities could obtain primary land user certificate for pasture landfrom local district administrations (khukumat) depending on the type and number of livestock theypossess. Khukumat is responsible for protecting land users’ rights and for ensuring effective pastureland use through conducting state monitoring of pastures, registration of pasture use rights, andundertaking pastures assessment. According to the Land Code and Pasture Law, jamoats (sub-districtlevel) have a right to apply to district khukumat and district level Land Committee for allocation ofpasture land and facilitate establishment of Pasture Users Unions (PUUs). Jamoats have right toconduct inventory and record data on pasture users and their livestock, as well as represent pastureusers in Commission for Regulating Pasture Use.

4. Pasture Law has also introduced a new player to be engaged in pasture management at thedistrict level - Commission for Regulating Pasture Use at the district level. This Commission needs tobe established by the decision of local councils (majlis) and should include representatives of districtgovernment body, jamoats, Land Committee and pasture users. The district Commissions are entitledby Pasture Law with functions to demarcate pasture borders, to mitigate conflicts related to allocationand use of pastures, control over effective use of pastures, prepare mid-term pasture managementand use plans, conduct monitoring of pasture use.

5. Pasture Law also laid a foundation for community based pasture management and livestockdevelopment in country, with the provision for communities to form Pasture Users Unions (PUUs) toaccess pasture lands, participate in the management of pastures and monitoring of their use. TheLPDP I implementing team came to a conclusion that PUUs need to be registered as a separate bodyof the Village Organizations (VO), at the district government level to operate as the legal entity underthe Law on Public Union and Law on Pastures, to gain access to pastures and be able to managethem. The functions of PUUs include obtaining pasture lease rights and carrying out effective use ofpastures; capacity building for members; and dispute settlement related to the leased land area. PUUmembers participate in annual and medium-term pasture management planning, and are obliged toreport on pasture condition.

6. The primary target group of the Project are livestock smallholder farmers, with a special focuson vulnerable groups including women-headed households. Private veterinary service providers andsmall-scale entrepreneurs with the potential to provide services to smallholder farmers are also


115

targeted by the project. Women are the main farmers in Tajikistan today (up to 60% of agricultureworkers), mainly due to the high number of men who migrate in search of jobs. The civil war alsocreated approximately 25,000 female-headed households (FHHs), predominantly in Khatlon andGarm. FHHs have less access to assets (e.g. land, water and livestock), are less food secured – inspite of receiving more humanitarian assistance – and experience a greater risk of extreme poverty(29%) than male-headed households (21%). Women work as seasonal labour in crop harvesting,weeding, animal caring, feeding, milking and cleaning, and they receive very small and irregularpayments. Men migration undermines economic growth by depriving significant workforce, andimplies an increased workload for women.

Natural resources and NRM7. Geo-physically, Khatlon region can be seeing as a series of parallel mountain ranges divided bythe river basins of the main rivers and all trending northeast to southwest. Rainfall is very low,registering a 40-year average of 286.5 mm per year. Khatlon is characterized by 11 ecosystem typesthat can be grouped as follows: (i) irrigated pastures predominate in lowland areas; (ii) low to midmountains are characterized by open xeric woodlands with grasslands, shrubs and wild fruit trees(e.g. pistachio, almond), and less abundantly by broadleaf forests and conifer forests; (iii) foot hillsemi-desert and desert shrubs and grasslands are restricted to the southwestern extreme; (iv)wetland ecosystems.

8. Khatlon has 1.2 million hectares of pastures located in valley and submontane zones, whichconstitute 32% of the total pasture resources of the country and 82% of the winter pastures. Theregion supports about 41% of the large ruminant (about 864 thousand animals) and 40% of the smallanimals (2.0 million sheep and goat) in the country, one of the highest livestock density across regions(80 standard head per 100 ha). Livestock is seen as an important source of food, and sales oflivestock products (live animals, milk, etc) are estimated to represent 56% of total sales revenue fromhousehold plots. The general pattern of livestock holding is that dairy cattle and beef are sedentaryand kept on household plots with access to local communal grazing. In contrast sheep and goat flocksare migratory, grazing on the winter pasture in the south and then migrating northeast to the higheraltitudes and rainfall where summer pastures are found. Horses and donkeys are quite widely kept fortransport but there seems to be limited numbers. Poultry has been slow to develop in the country withhouseholds now beginning to show an interest in backyard poultry particularly as a source of readycash income.

9. The increasing livestock density, namely migrating sheep and goat flocks with no managementrules, is putting stress on the winter pastures (e.g. in Kurgan-Tube zone of Khatlon optimal densityexceeds over 50%). Additionally the relative area for fodder crops has halved since 1991 due togovernmental policies supporting land conversion into grain and leguminous cultures. For instance, inKhatlon, the area of fodder crops has decreased from 41,507 ha to 27,957 ha between 2010 and2013. Lost productivity due to pasture degradation is estimated to cost USD 96 million per year.

10. Land degradation is a key factor leading to low agriculture productivity and consequently loweconomic returns and reduced incomes for farmers. The total annual costs of land degradation inTajikistan are estimated to amount USD 442 million or 7.8% of GDP (based on 2010 data). Availableestimates suggest that 82.3% of all land and 97.9% of agriculture land (including pastures) in thecountry suffer some level of erosion. Degraded pastures contribute to landslides, which affect 36% ofTajikistan territory and 11% of its population. In Khatlon region middle erosion predominates (43-51.8%) followed by strong/very strong erosion (36.2-41%), and slight erosion (14-18.8%) with just 2-3.2% non-eroded land.

11. The main causes of land degradation are: (i) maladaptive farming practices, with intensiveagriculture activity on slopes prone to erosion, excessive use of pesticides and fertilizers causing soiland water pollution, poor irrigation practices causing water erosion in 97% of farmland and salinizationin 16% of irrigated lands; (ii) overgrazing causing medium to strong erosion in 89% of summerpastures and 97% of winter pastures; (iii) illegal forest harvesting, mainly for fuel, causing forestdegradation, the risk of landslides, and a dramatic decrease of the country forest surface from 25% to


116

2% in the last century; (iv) population growth, with a density of rural population per hectare of arableland that has doubled between 1980 (3.1 per ha) and 2009 (6.3 per ha); (v) climate change (furtherdescribed in the following chapter) that is already exacerbating land degradation problems.

12. The transformation of the livestock husbandry system in Tajikistan from one based on intensivelivestock farming to one based on extensive livestock husbandry has encouraged the expansion oflivestock inventories in an effort to increase revenues without a concomitant expansion of feedresources. Adding animals creates greater demand for limited feed, leading to a further deteriorationin the feed per animal ratio and a further fall in animal yields. Winter feed is a key constraint forlivestock production and productivity in Tajikistan. In order to address this constraint it is of criticalimportance to rehabilitate the winter pastures. Most communities have livestock resources that farexceed the carrying capacity of the pasture resources. Underfed animals are also more susceptible todisease, are less fertile and die more easily.

Climate13. The greatest concern in Tajikistan has been an increase in temperature, which has seriousimplications for its glaciers and water resources. The State Organization of Hydrometeorologyinformed that around 20% of glaciers have retreated and some have already disappeared. Accordingto the TNC, the biggest increase in annual mean temperature over a period of 65 years (until 2005)has occurred in southern Tajikistan, including the region of Khatlon (from +0.5 ºC to +1 ºC, with thehighest increase of +1.2 ºC in Dangara) and Dushanbe (+1 ºC). Greater warming has occurred inwinter than summer, and precipitation has decreased in the summer period. Extreme weatherconditions are becoming more intense and frequent (e.g. the number of days with very hightemperatures (40 ºC or over); the occurrence of warm winds in southern Tajikistan; drought events;anomalous extreme winter cold conditions).

14. It is expected that Tajikistan will continue to become warmer (between 2.6 ºC and 5.2 ºC by the2080-99), especially in the winter period, with prolonged dry periods and increased risk of glacieroutbursts. Annual precipitation is expected to decrease by 3%, with a 13% decline in June-August anda 4% increase in December-February. Based on the National Communications to the UNFCCC, risingtemperatures of 2-4 ºC in February and March can lead to 20% decrease in winter-spring pastureproductivity, a decline that is greatly exacerbated during dry spells. By contrast, in high mountainpastures, rising temperatures of 1.5-3 ºC can increase pasture productivity by 25-50%.

Key Issues15. A) Unsustainable pasture management: This is a key issue to addressing land degradation inTajikistan, given that 97% of the country is mountainous with the predominance of pastureland,livestock numbers are increasing rapidly with excessive pressure on winter pastures and lack ofaccess to remote areas, pasture management is absent – exacerbated by distortions in laws andregulations – the quality of livestock is poor, and fodder production is insufficient. Unsustainablepasture management is mainly due to tenure rights and governance problems (addressed below), lowaccessibility to remote pasturelands, and overstocking. The current livestock inventories have almostdoubled since country’s independence. Settlements in Kulob zone visited during the missionregistered sharp (70-80%) growth in animal stocks, in particular during the last 5 years, driven bypopulation growth. As a result, pastures condition has deteriorated.

16. The major challenge in changing the behaviour of seeing animals primarily as “a roaming bank”(and not a production unit) would be to return the importance of productivity levels pulled by validmarket opportunities. Project interventions should aim to improve productivity of animals – thoughtbetter genetics and feeding – while raising awareness of animal owners on pasture health and its rolein animal husbandry. This will help conserve and restore pastureland, while indirectly prevent fromgrowing animal inventories. Additionally, expanding income sources beyond livestock – diversificationof income opportunities based on the sustainable use of natural resources, such as wild fruits,medicinal and aromatic plants, etc - not only contributed to the overall pasture rehabilitation concept,but also provides “easier” marketing solutions for the inhabitants of marginal rural areas.


117

17. B) Climate change: The regional index of CC vulnerability for Tajikistan shows that Khatlonregion is highly vulnerable in the north-eastern part, mid-vulnerable in the south-western parat, andlow vulnerable un the central part. The populated south Khatlon valley is among the areas withhighest exposure to CC, while the north-eastern part is among the areas with highest sensitivity andadaptation constraints. The project will give special attention to CC adaptation through an ASAP grant(see point 2.2).

18. C) Governance of tenure rights: Allocation of pasture primary use rights to PUUs is crucial forthe project’s achievement of its development objectives and sustaining outcomes. GOT demonstratedits commitment to advance further pasture management decentralization reform and createfavourable conditions for the PUUs to secure their land rights. This is reflected in the Pasture Law thatdefines provisions for PUUs to access and secure land title to the community pastures. The GOT isalso expected to provide support to the PUUs in preparing and issuing certificates at the minimal cost.

19. PUU participating in the project will need to have formal certificate to pasture land before anyinvestments are made and it is recommended that IFAD and the Government of Tajikistan reach anagreement on this condition. The Project will provide support to PUUs to secure their long-term rightsto community pasture land and obtain primary use certificate for pasture lands sufficient to grazecommunity livestock without damaging fragile ecosystem. The project will provide crucial assistanceto the established PUUs through legal, technical, and financial support to obtain land certificates. TheProject would need to explore options to join several PUUs in the case of small villages with limitedpasture area into a federated structure, to better negotiate use rights, coordinate pasturemanagement and apply for funding and support from external sources, and at the same time tominimize operational expenses..

20. D) Weak policy/legal framework and governmental support: without stronger focus on pasturemanagement policy and legislation IFAD-funded interventions would continue facing bottlenecks instrengthening and empowering PUUs. The Project needs to provide full support to the MOA inadvancing policy reforms and building legal foundation for their implementation on the ground,supporting political dialogue, the formulation of policy and strategy in pasture management, and theelaboration of relevant legislation.

21. The Project would need to facilitate establishment of the Commissions for Regulating PastureUse in target districts and support Government in further elaboration of their legal foundation,functions and procedures to help demarcate pasture borders, to mitigate conflicts related to allocationand use of pastures, control over effective use of pastures, prepare mid-term pasture managementand use plans, conduct monitoring of pasture use. The project would also need to ensureengagement of khukumats in the pasture management reforms and strengthen their ability to advancethese reforms on the ground through providing support in formulation local policy and procedures forallocation of pasture land use rights, for establishment of PUUs, for development and implementationof pasture management and use plans, as well as for monitoring of implementation of the pasturemanagement plans and enforcing their management prescriptions. The Project would need tostrengthen the involvement of jamoats in the establishment of PUUs, obtaining pastureland rights andstrengthening representation at the district level, to ensure sustainability of reforms.

Potential project’s social, environmental, and climate change impacts and risks

Key potential impacts22. The project does not generate social, environmental, and climate change impacts. On thecontrary, project design incorporates climate change adaptation measures, the restoration ofecologically-sensitive pastureland, and the special consideration of women, youth and marginalizedgroups in the economic diversification and income generation activities. The project also has potentialmitigation benefits through better management of livestock and restoration of pasture land.

Climate change and adaptation23. Based on an IFAD supported CC downscaling modelling of the impacts on pastures inKyrgyzstan for 2040-70, we can extrapolate the following conclusions for Tajikistan: (i) pastures below


118

1500 m will be less available during summer and autumn due to increased water deficit, and the waterneeds for fodder crops will increase; (ii) pastures between 1500-2500 m will benefit from longergrazing periods, especially over spring period, although water deficit in summer may affect someareas, as well as heat stress for livestock.

24. The proposed adaptation measures to face CC impacts are:

A. Addressing the climate variability and increase in the frequency of extreme events: Support the development of monitoring and evaluation system through modelling of pasture

productivity to determine carrying capacity estimates and identify remote pasture areas thatcould be accessed, to better organize grazing plans. Preventive actions to face climatehazards include the development of infrastructures, shelter for livestock, wind protection,silvopastoral restoration to protect soils, etc;

Livestock carrying capacity plans will be based on flexible carrying capacity estimates tocontinuously adapt the stocking rates to the climatic conditions that will affect the grazingareas. The analysis will be undertaken through building on the Atlas that was developedduring the project design, integrating climate change impact on the project area, anddeveloping that into a monitoring and assessment system to determine the adaptation of thestocking rates to the highly variable climatic conditions.

Support PUUs and their Boards (PUUBs) in implementation of community-based livestockand pasture management plans that fully integrate animal health activities as well as climatechange adaptation and disaster risk-reduction. This will build on the modelling of pastureproductivity. This activity is designed to capture and prioritise measures for vulnerabilityreduction and promote adaptive and productive capacity of pastures to help remove acritical constraint in livestock productivity in the project area. The PUUs will developCommunity Livestock and Pasture Management Plans (CLPMPs) to address issues ofdegradation of pasture resources and deterioration of pasture infrastructure, improvedwinter feeding, climate adaptation needs, livestock health and production issues. PUUsserve as focal points for the project, for the targeting beneficiaries according to theestablished criteria for each project activity. The preparation of CLPMPs will be based onthe comprehensive assessment of all pasture and fodder production areas that would bedone on a village basis. Based on this assessment, sustainable pasture resourcemanagement plans would be developed, with the support of external assistance but throughthe mobilization of the concerned communities. The main objective of the plans would be todefine options to increase quantity and quality of overall fodder production. Generally, this isexpected to be achieved by reducing grazing on nearby pastures, a higher proportion ofcultivated fodder and hay, and better utilization of remote pastures. Plans would define thenecessary measures to improve productivity of pastures, such as rotational grazing, areaswhich need protection for regeneration, rehabilitation measures, opportunities for additionalfodder production, better access to remote pastures, etc.

B. Addressing heat stress and drought in the lower altitudinal pastures: Increase water supply systems and water points in vulnerable areas; Restore vegetation cover, both pastures and forests, to increase soil water retention and

infiltration, pasture productivity, and shadow for livestock in summer; Piloting sustainable grazing management practices based on rotation and resting; Increase fodder production in irrigated lands making use of efficient technologies and

adapted crop varieties (e.g. tolerant to drought, shorter latent periods, intense rains) andhaymaking in rainfed areas. The Project will introduce high quality fodder seeds of climateadapted fodder species and varieties, and provide these to poor households who show awillingness to grow these on their household plots. It is estimated that the provision of goodquality of seeds, the implementation of sustainable seed sowing and fertilization techniqueswill help to regenerate the seed and will yield benefits for at least four years. The project willalso work with those progressive farmers who show a willingness to become seedproducers and link them with other farmers and private entrepreneurs for the sustainablesupply of seed beyond the project period.


119

C. Promote access to and protection of higher altitude remote pastures: construct, improve andmaintain climate-proof infrastructures (e.g. small roads, bridges, water points, shelters) toincrease access to remote pastures benefiting from longer grazing periods, making sure thathigher access will not increase impacts in the areas (e.g. avoid access of motorized vehiclesto high areas that may increase pressure for firewood collection, etc); promote integratedwatershed management approaches to enhance upstream and downstream interlinks interms of community grazing management plans, natural resources protection and restorationmeasures.

D. Enabling policies, capacity enhancement and research: (i) support the MoA in thedevelopment of a National strategy for pasture management and improvement, incorporatingCC adaptation needs; (ii) support the support the Agrarian University of Tajikistan (AUT) indeveloping curricula and a comprehensive educational program for a new degree in naturalpasture management, which would combine needs of livestock as well as sustainablemanagement of ecosystem with consideration of climate change and increased vulnerability;(iii) apply research on CC modelling of the impacts on pasture ecosystems and productivity atlocal level, and on-farm research trials on adaptive management practices, testing of foddervarieties tolerant to climate constraints, adapted livestock breeds, etc.

E. Increase resilience of vulnerable groups through income diversification: undertakeparticipatory planning processes to identify complementary income-generation activities,namely with women and unemployed youth.

Environmental and social categoryThe project is considered category B.

25. The project activities will be identified in a participatory way, as part of Community andLivestock Pasture Management Plans (CLPMP) in PUUs that will reflect climate adaptation measures,and will determine risk-mitigation priorities for investments in the PUU. The location and magnitude ofthe impact of the activities supported by the project justify its classification as category B:

Construction or rehabilitation of climate-resilient rural infrastructure in “non-sensitive areas”(e.g. no protected areas are part of the target areas) that allow/facilitate the revival oftraditional management (transhumance), which is critical to adapt the seasonal livestockpressure on winter and summer pastures to climate conditions (e.g. small dirt roadimprovement, connectivity bridges, stock watering points, etc);

Agricultural intensification of winter fodder crops in “non-sensitive areas” – near the villages– making use of climate-adapted fodder species and varieties;

Sustainable rangeland and livestock management and ecological restoration of degradedpastureland with an integrated watershed management approach (restoring sustainablemanagement practices – transhumant livestock movements - and the ecological integrity ofpastureland downstream (winter pastures) and upstream (access to remote summerpastures);

Development of saving and credit women groups (SCWGs) based on participatory agro-enterprise principles and the sustainable use of natural resources (e.g. natural resources-based value chain development, such as wild fruits, edible and medicinal wild plants,including the development of capacities and provision of the necessary equipment forproduction, post-harvesting, processing and marketing operations).

26. The Project is strongly aligned with, and contributes to the priorities of the TNC of Tajikistan toUNFCCC, which identifies agriculture and livestock as one of the most vulnerable areas to climatechange. The Project is also in line with the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAP) and theTajikistan Strategic Programme for Climate Resilience (SPCR), and will contribute to further integrateCC adaptation considerations in the National Development Strategy 2006 - 2015 (NDS) that alreadyincludes environmental sustainability targets, the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS-3) that explicitlymention climate change issues, and the Climate Change Adaptation Strategy for the period 2015-2030, which is being developed under the leadership of the Hydrometeorology State Department. TheProject is also fully consistent with the Joint Country Support Strategy (JCSS) for 2009-2012, which


120

recognizes the critical role of agriculture in Tajikistan’s overall economic development and emphasizesimproved agricultural productivity as one of the key themes for donor engagement.

Climate risk categoryThe project is considered of Moderate Risk.

27. The project has an ASAP component aiming to mainstream climate change adaptation into thewhole investment (both current LPDP I and the new project LPDP II). Project design has incorporatedall available information regarding climate change vulnerability, impacts and adaptation needsidentified in the NCs to the UNFCCC, the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAP) and theTajikistan Strategic Programme for Climate Resilience (SPCR). Moreover, the project has built on thetransferable results from the detailed CC vulnerability assessment of the pastures and livestock agro-ecosystems implemented by IFAD in Kyrgyzstan. This has resulted in the identification of CCadaptation measures (policy development, capacity building, adaptive management and restoration ofpastureland, the use of climate-adapted species and varieties, climate-proof infrastructure, income-generation diversification based on natural resources-based value chain development), described inpoint 2.2.

Recommended features44 of project design and implementation

Mitigation measures28. The project design has already mainstreamed CC adaptation into the whole investment (LPDP Iand LPDP II) through an ASAP funding of USD 5 million that will help mainstream CC adaptation intopasture management, fodder and livestock productivity and the diversification of local livelihoods. Theproject has also a poverty-reduction objective, with the main target group being smallholder farmersand vulnerable groups, including women-headed households. By involving these communities intosustainable livestock production, and creating complementary, sustainable means of incomegeneration, the project will help increase local standards of living while decreasing pressure on criticalecosystems, endangered species, and natural resources in general.

Multi-benefit approaches29. The project has a multiple-benefit approach for sustainable production, poverty reduction,environmental protection and climate-risk reduction, through the conservation and restoration ofecosystem services on which livestock production depends, the sustainable management of naturalresources, and natural resources-based value chain development for income diversification.

Incentives for good practices30. The proposed investment will generate a diverse set of economic, social and environmentalbenefits. Direct, tangible benefits are, for example, the increase in family income through rangelandand agroforestry systems in the targeted project areas and the reduction of grazing pressure thanks tocomplementary sources of income. the project would finance activities that would strengthen theadministrative and technical capacity of the selected PUU members willing to engage into incomegenerating activities (IGA). Eventually, participating communities will have to become capable tomanage their own development through efficient (=profitable and lasting in time) partnerships withagro-processors and/or aggregators. Matching grants for participatory agro-enterprise start-up: theproject will provide matching grants investment cost and the working capital for the 1 year of sub-projects operation.

Participatory processes31. The Project approach is based on community–driven development to enhance adaptivecapacity, reduce climate-induced risk and reduce poverty. Pasture Users Unions (PUU) and theirelected Boards (PUUB). Will be pivotal to organize and carry out the participatory planning processthat would be the basis for developing risk-mitigation Community Livestock and Pasture Management

44 Guidelines as to what constitutes ENRM Core Principles and Best-Practice Statement can be found in IFAD‘Environment and Natural Resource Management Policy’ (2011)


121

Plans (CLPMPs). The plans would thus provide the basis for carrying out improvements to thepastures and management of the use of those pastures in order to help improve their sustainabilityand enhance their resilience. Similarly, these plans would provide the framework for improving theavailability of feed, especially winter feed that would be supported by the Programme actions forproduction of increased quantities of fodder through the community seed fund initiative. The sameplanning process would be used to identify, prioritize and agree on the investment projects that wouldbe financed by the Programme in each PUU. These investments which would range fromimprovements in infrastructure to enhance mobility (which is essential in order to reduce pressure onpastures close to settlements) or provide water points for the animals, or provide farm investments toimprove availability of feed (including storage), would complement the other initiatives that would beincluded in the CLPMPs. Finally, the plans would be the starting point for the identification of groups oflivestock producers, both women and men that would like to engage in additional income activities asa means of enhancing their adaptive capacities, diversifying their livelihoods, and increasing thereturn to their animals and their labour.

Analysis of alternatives.Not applicable (environmental and social objectives are already included in the project design).

Institutional analysis.

Institutional framework32. The Project Management Unit (PMU) will take responsibility for establishment of effectiveimplementation arrangements, start-up activities, proper disbursement, procurement, contracting ofpartner agencies, financial management, monitoring, evaluation and knowledge management,communications and dissemination. The PMU will recruit all staff on a competitive basis, including aClimate Adaptation Consultant, to ensure that all climate-risk reduction and CC adaptation issues arewell integrated in the whole investment (LPDP I and LPDP II).

33. The PMU will procure the services of a Community Facilitator (NGO, INGO or other suitableagency) with experience of organizing communities and following a community based approach toproject implementation and management in Tajikistan. The PMU will train the CF in all the necessaryaspects to address climate change and NRM issues. The CF will assist the communities to undertakethe implementation of all the project development activities, from the participatory development ofadaptive pasture management plans, to the implementation of the pasture restoration, sustainablemanagement, infrastructure development, and income generation activities.

34. The PMU will support jamoat and khukumat with capacity building, information disseminationand policy elaboration to create the necessary enabling conditions supporting land use rights,production of land related documents and certificates.

35. The PMU together with CF will invest significant efforts in the formation of broad basedorganizations at the community level (PUUs, SCWGs, etc) as the starting point of its Project. Thesecommunity organizations will be used for the introduction of the Project, participatory identification ofthe target beneficiaries according to established criteria for each project component.

Capacity building36. PMU experts together with CF, will provide support to build and strengthen the technical andentrepreneurial capacity of PUUs, SCWGs, and other community organizations to ensure sustainablepasture management, sustainable livestock production and natural resources-based value chaindevelopment. LPDP has initiated capacity building program for PUUs established in the target areas.Various arrangements will be explored to ensure proper transfer of knowledge to the communityorganizations, including engagement of professional outreach organizations, or preparing a group ofTOT experts to roll out new knowledge to the CFs and further to the community organizations.

37. Project’s support to public institutions will be at national and local levels to empower them forsustainable pasture management, and for mainstreaming climate change vulnerability and resilienceinto long-term policy and strategy, as well as legal framework for pasture management. ; (iii) the


122

creation of formal local bodies (Commissions for Regulating Pasture Management, PUUs) able todemand and supply more effective and transparent information, as well as strengthening the capacityof the private sector to fill service delivery gaps; (Iv) greater coordination and a more efficientorganisational culture for pasture management. The MOA staff at the district level, including divisionhead, agronomist and specialists in livestock, horticulture and engineering, will be targeted with thecapacity building program on livestock development and pasture management issues.

38. One of the biggest challenges in undertaking pasture reforms is a shortage of highlyknowledgeable pasture management experts, who understand holistic approaches to pasturemanagement. The Project will support the Agrarian University of Tajikistan (AUT) in developingcurricula and a comprehensive educational program for a new degree in natural pasturemanagement, which would combine needs of livestock as well as sustainable management ofecosystem with consideration of climate change and increased vulnerability. The Project will providesupport in refurbishing pasture fodder assessment lab, GIS and weather forecasting lab, as well asdevelopment of new curricula and training materials. The support will be provided in international andlocal technical expertise and financial resources for labs equipment.

Additional fundingThe project already includes USD 5 million from ASAP.

Monitoring and Evaluation39. A baseline survey will be carried out at the start of the project to take a snapshot of the situationand will be repeated towards project completion to measure progress made towards achieving projectgoals, objectives and outputs.

40. Simple monitoring arrangements will be set up at the start of the project to measure progresstowards achieving project goals, objectives and outputs. Monitoring will focus on the progress of theProject component activities in each project village against the schedule of planned activities.Monitoring data would be gathered in simple forms presented in the PIM. The CF will record the datarequired during their regular visits to the communities using simple formats that will be included in thePIM.

41. Participatory monitoring to ensure transparency and effectiveness in sub-projectsimplementation would be beneficial. Participatory monitoring is well suited for finding out how wellproject communication and awareness campaigns are understood by the people they are supposed toreach. It can be used to obtain feedback from all stakeholders as well as to improve communicationamong these stakeholders and to strengthen their voice. When stakeholders have greater voice andcan make inputs into project decision-making, they have a greater sense of ownership of the project.Project will develop clear mechanisms for participatory monitoring and channeling its results to allstakeholders.

42. External evaluators will assess the impact of the components and sub-components atcompletion of the project. The base line data for each participating community will be recorded whenthe community joins the programme as well as for the sample communities (a separate survey) to beevaluated at project completion.

Further information required to complete screening, if anyThere is no need for additional information to complete screening.

Budgetary resources and scheduleNot applicable.

Record of consultations with beneficiaries, civil society, general public, etc43. The project formulation team has undertaken consultations with local community members, witha special focus on women-headed households. Discussions with women have facilitated theidentification of complementary income-generating activities based on the sustainable use of naturalresources (see Working Paper: Income Diversification).

Republic of TajikistanLivestock and Pasture Development Project IIDetailed design reportAppendix 13: Contents of the Project Life File

123

Appendix 13: Contents of the Project Life File

Project Concept Note OSC Issues Paper OSC Minutes Detailed Design – Terms of Reference Detailed Design – Aide Mémoire Detailed Design – Detailed Design Report Working Paper 1 – Project Costs and Financing Working Paper 2 – Productivity Enhancement and Improved Animal Health Working Paper 3 – Institutional Design Aspects Working Paper 4 – Income Diversification Working Paper 5 – Economic and Financial Analysis SECAP Review Note

republic of tajikistan livestock and pasture development ... · republic of tajikistan livestock...

Documents