Resubmission Date: 08/24/09

PART I: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION

GEF PROJECT ID1:       PROJECT DURATION:48monthsGEF AGENCY PROJECT ID:      COUNTRY(IES): TunisiaPROJECT TITLE: Ecotourism and Conservation of Desert BiodiversityGEF AGENCY(IES): World Bank, (select), (select)OTHER EXECUTING PARTNER(S):      GEF FOCAL AREA (S)2:           Biodiversity and Land DegradationGEF-4 STRATEGIC PROGRAM(s): BD1 and BD2; LD-SP1 and LD-SP3 (see preparation guidelines section on exactly what to write)NAME OF PARENT PROGRAM/UMBRELLA PROJECT (if applicable): A. PROJECT FRAMEWORK

Project Objective: The overall goal of the Project is to help develop sustainable nature-based tourism (or ecotourism) as a means to promote environmental, financial, and social sustainabiltiy in Tunisia. It aims to reduce and reverse the degradation of Tunisia’s natural capital by integrating conservation of desert biodiversity and desert lands at all levels of ecotourism development. A secondary aim is to generate local employment and revenue streams that would serve as an incentive for community and private sector engagement; this will indirectly contribute to the conservation objective. Also, as the natural resource base is strengthened, this is expected to produce side-benefits in terms of sustainability and higher resilience to effects of climate change.More specifically the Project will support ecotourism development and conservation of desert biodiversity by:(i) Creating an incentive framework for ecotourism at the central government, provincial, and local levels, including promotion, provision of training, sensitization, inter-ministerial coordination, changes in laws and regulations, creation of a soft loan window for community-based and other private sector investments, etc. [institutional development component];(ii) Supporting the preparation and implementation of Management Plans for selected protected areas/reserves, while leveraging general support to strengthen management in new and existing protected areas and reserves. [protected area management component]; (iii) Supporting integrated natural resources management (INRM) including sustainable land management (SLM) best practices in the productive agricultural and rangeland management systems in the main arid Provinces to achieve inceased sustainability, resilience, and agro-biodiversity [INRM Component];(iv) Investing in public infrastructure improvements, including access roads, visitor centers, lodges, signage, vista points, educational materials, etc., in order to make nature more accessible to visitors at selected protected areas/agro-biodiversity sites, while at the same time keeping the ecological footprint to a minimum [public nature tourism investment component]; and(v) Establishing joint ventures between local communities, NGOs, and the public/private sector at the selected sites/protected areas, and encouraging such ventures nation-wide [community and private sector development

1 Project ID number will be assigned by GEFSEC.2 Select only those focal areas from which GEF financing is requested.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:01 PM

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION FORM (PIF)PROJECT TYPE: FULL-SIZED PROJECT THE GEF TRUST FUND

INDICATIVE CALENDAR*Milestones Expected Dates

mm/dd/yyyyWork Program (for FSP) 09/20/2009CEO Endorsement/Approval 12/15/2009Agency Approval Date 04/15/2010Implementation Start 09/15/2010Mid-term Evaluation (if planned)

09/15/2012

Project Closing Date 09/30/2014

* See guidelines for definition of milestones.

1

component]; and(vi) Effectively managing the Project, including monitoring and evaluation.

Project Components

Indicate whether Investment, TA, or STAb

Expected Outcomes

Expected Outputs Indicative

GEF Financinga

Indicative Co-Financinga Total ($)

c =a + b($) a % ($) b %

1. Development and implementation of institutional and legal frameworks at the Federal Government and provincial levels.

TA, Inv.

1. Appropriate incentive framework for ecotourism created.

2. Policy and regulatory frameworks governing the environment and related sectors incorporate measures to conserve and sustainably use desert biodiversity..

1. Inter-Ministerial Commission for Ecotourism created and MOUs signed between key Ministries; 2. Focal point for promotion of ecotourism created; 3. Focal point for environmental and financial assessments of specific ecotourism projects created; 4. Laws and regulations appropriately adjusted, e.g. to facilitate lodging and other activities in agricultural areas; 5. Public awareness campaign carried out; 6. Low-interest credit line (FOSDEC) created for ecotourism; and 7. Certification procedure agreed and adopted.

400,000 80.0 100,000 20.0 500,000

2. Development and/or upgrading of management of selected protected areas within ecotourism circuits that contain key sites with desert biodiversity.

STA, TA, Inv.

Ecotourism development is taking place within environmentally and ecologically sound, adaptable management of parks and reserves in arid lands (see Annex 2).

1. Key sites selected, using criteria as defined in Annex 3. 2. Assessments carried out of existing Management Plans (PMPs) in desert ecosystems, and PMPs updated or upgraded as necessary (in terms of zoning, inventories of flora and fauna, institutional management capacity, training, carrying capacity for ecotourism, etc.). 3. PMPs prepared for selected desert biodiversity sites without such plans.4. The role of communities in co-management of the protected areas (PAs) and in nature-based tourism will be assessed, and framework agreements developed (see Annex 1). 5. Feasibility analysis undertaken and business case developed for main PAs supported under Project. 6. Demand for visitation assessed, timing, accessibility, transportation, accommodation, provision of key services to tourists (restaurants, lodges, toilets), scenarios of user charges, etc. 7. Innovative financing measures assessed that would generate revenue streams (e.g. entrance

500,000 26.3 1,400,000 73.7 1,900,000

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:01 PM

2

fees, product sales, tour guiding, lodges, etc.) against cost streams.

3. Supporting Integrated Natural Resources Management (INRM) in main arid Provinces.

TA; Inv. An increased number of land and water users adopt sustainable land and water management practices that provide long term biodiversity and livelihood benefits.

1. Training provided to agricultural extension staff incl. visits to sites with best practices;2. Public awareness and sensitization meetings held in key communities;3. Selected Agro-Ecosystem Action Plans developed in a participatory manner and revised plans adopted.4. Twenty percent more farmers use best INRM/SLM practices;5. Selected physical and/or management investments identified in Integrated Water Resources Management Studies carried out to achieve higher efficiency of water usage in selected oases.

1,800,000 81.8 400,000 18.2 2,200,000

4. Public investments related to ecotourism in and around protected areas

Inv., TA

Ecotourism facilitated while the ecological footprint is kept at a minimum.

1. Public infrastructure needs assessment undertaken (e.g. visitor centers, lodges, access roads, camps, trails, etc.) within and outside protected areas.2. Infrastructure needs prioritized using simple ranking system that combines impacts on: (a) desert biodiversity conservation; (b) local employment; (d) public revenue generation; and (e) expected ecotourism volume.

600,000 42.9 800,000 57.1 1,400,000

5. Community outreach and private sector development

Inv.,TA

1.Financially viable and sustainable ecotourism ventures established.2. Incentives generated for local communities to support and participate in maintenance of desert biodiversity.

1. Local and regional stakeholder meetings held twice a year.2. Feasibility explored for the establishment of joint ventures between key partners (public sector, private sector, municipalities, communities, NGOs) with clearly elaborated roles, responsibilities and beneficiary arrangements. The management framework model will draw from best practices in other countries in the region and elsewhere (see Annex 1).3. Business models for ecotourism development assessed and implemented. This would include private sector development and related community development measures incl. income generating activities, which could be in the form of tour guiding, rangers, and handicraft sales.

400,000 57.1 300,000 42.9 700,000

6. Project       Project managed 1. Simple project management 572,300 65.6 300,000 34.4 872,300

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:01 PM

3

management including monitoring and evaluation

effectively. structure adopted and filled with highly motivated, and fully qualified staff.2. Participatory monitoring program developed both for the biodiversity and socio-economic aspects, which will allow for feedback into (adaptive) Management Plans, and ensure that nature tourism is financially sustainable. 3. Standard evaluations undertaken in objective and timely fashion.

Total project costs

4,272,300 56.4 3,300,000 43.6 7,572,300

a List the $ by project components. The percentage is the share of GEF and Co-financing respectively of the total amount for the component. b TA = Technical Assistance; STA = Scientific & Technical Analysis.

B. INDICATIVE CO-FINANCING FOR THE PROJECT BY SOURCE and by NAME (in parenthesis) if available, ($)

Sources of Co-financing Type of Co-financing ProjectGovernment Contribution Cash 1,500,000Government Contribution In-kind 500,000GEF Agency(ies) (select)      French Development Agency (AFD)

Grant 1,300,000

Private Sector (select)      NGO (select)      Others (select)      Total Co-financing 3,300,000

C. INDICATIVE FINANCING PLAN SUMMARY FOR THE PROJECT ($)Previous Project

Preparation Amount (a)3 Project (b)Total

c = a + bAgency Fee

Total

GEF financing 0 4,272,3004 4,272,300 427,230 4,699,530Co-financing 0 3,300,000 3,300,000 3,300,000Total 0 7,572,300 7,572,300 427,230 7,999,530

D. GEF RESOURCES REQUESTED BY AGENCY (IES), FOCAL AREA(S) AND COUNTRY(IES)1

GEF Agency Focal Areas

Country Name/Global

(in $)Project (a) Agency Fee (b)2 Total c=a+b

World Bank BD1 and BD2 Tunisia 2,922,300 292,230 3,214,530World Bank Land Tunisia 1,350,0005 135,000 1,485,000

3 Include project preparation funds that were previously approved but exclude PPGs that are awaiting for approval.4 Including USD 1.35 million from MENARID.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:01 PM

4

(select) (select)                        (select) (select)                        (select) (select)                        (select) (select)                        (select) (select)                        (select) (select)                        (select) (select)                        Total GEF Resources 4,272,300 427,230 4,699,530

1 No need to provide information for this table if it is a single focal area, single country and single GEF Agency project.2 Relates to the project and any previous project preparation funding that have been provided and for which no Agency fee has been requested from Trustee.

PART II: PROJECT JUSTIFICATIONA. STATE THE ISSUE, HOW THE PROJECT SEEKS TO ADDRESS IT, AND THE EXPECTED GLOBAL

ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS TO BE DELIVERED: Preparatory studies by the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, in partnership with German Technical Assistance, have identified five MAIN ISSUES/CONSTRAINTS to ecotourism and conservation of desert lands and biodiversity: (1) Envionmental: continued land degradation and neglect of ecologically sensitive sites with significant biodiversity values; (2) climate change: Impact on natural ecosystems, and disruptions of community livelihoods; (3) Institutional: there are numerous issues related to the instutional set-up, laws, regulations, etc., that hinder the private sector from developing the ecotourism sub-sector; (4) Protected area management: with some exceptions, protected areas are lacking or have weak Management Plans, or have difficulties effectively implementing them; a sub-issue is the financial sustainability of protected area management; (5) Involvement of local communities, private sector, and NGOs: these stakeholders are often not adequately involved and/or lack capacities for effective participation.

THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL ADDRESS THESE CONSTRAINTS BY: (i) Creating an incentive framework for ecotourism at the Central Government, provincial, and local levels, including promotion, provision of training, sensitization, inter-ministerial coordination, changes in laws and regulations, creation of a soft loan window for community-based and other private sector investments to support nature-based tourism development; (ii) Supporting the preparation and implementation of Management Plans for selected protected areas/reserves with desert biodiversity, while leveraging general support to strengthen management of all new and existing protected areas and reserves; (iii) Supporting integrated natural resources management (INRM) in productive agricultural lands in arid provinces, complementing the work on selected protected areas. The proposed Project will work with agricultural research centers and extension services to support innovation and the adoption of sustainable land management practices along with measures for higher water efficiency. The Project will also work with centers of excellence such as the Institute of Arid regions based in Medenine, Tunisia, which conducts research on mitigation of desertification and the conservation of genetic resources of crops in arid zones; (iv) Investing in public infrastructure improvements, including access roads, visitor centers, lodges, signage, vista points, educational materials, etc., in order to make nature more accessible to visitors at selected sites/protected areas, while at the same time keeping the ecological footprint to a minimum; and (v) Establishing joint ventures between local communities, NGOs, and the public and private sectors at the selected sites/protected areas, and encouraging such ventures nation-wide.

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS EXPECTED: Desert lands and desert biodiversity are unique, since plants and animals have shown tremendous resilience to water scarcity, moisture stress, and temperature variations over time. The Project's aims are to conserve this unique and globally significant biodiversity with science-based technologies

5 MENARID resources were approved by the GEF in 2008. PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:01 PM

5

that will be used/pioneered to help arrest the deterioration of the desert ecosystems at selected protected areas or in agricultural lands, in part to help retain their resiliency and continued provision of environmental and economic services to the communities. It is also expected that the coping and adaptive capacities of the desert populatons and their ecosystems will be strengthened in view of the expected increase in climate change variability. In and around the specific sites to be selected and the agricultural and rangelands benefitting from the Project, the following are expected: (a) restoration and maintenance of land resources and functions, and ecosystem integrity and services; (b) restoration and conservation of soil and water resources and functions, leading to higher net primary productivity (nutrient recycling) and increased carbon sequestration (soil and biomass carbon stocks); (c) enhanced critical ecosystem resilience to climate change and drought; (d) improved adaptation to climate change by human populations and natural systems, as a result of adaptation responses adopted; and (e) improved conservation of biodiversity and reduced fragmentation/loss of natural habitats. The lessons of experience will be shared with other countries in MNA, several of which also have large desert ecosystems that are under threat. Such sharing will be facilitated by MENARID and in particular with the recently approved MSP supporting cross-cutting M&E functions and knowledge management within the MENARID program framework.

B. DESCRIBE THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH NATIONAL/REGIONAL PRIORITIES/PLANS:

The aims of the proposed Project are fully consistent with national and regional priorities. The commitment of MENA countries in addressing desertification and land degradation matters has been evident since the mid-1990s, when they ratified the UNCCD, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the UNFCCC. Also: (1) Tunisia has made signficant commitments toward the overarching goal of sustainabilty as reflected in the Government's key economic and environmental strategies; (2) The Government already commissioned three key studies on the development of ecotourism in the country and is moving the agenda forward, including by requesting the Bank to assist. The three studies have been completed, and the proposed Project is based in part on them; (3) The Government recently decided to nearly double the protected area system by the addition of 9 new national parks to its existing 8, and by adding 11 new reserves to the 16 exising ones (see Annex 3); (4) The Project builds on others, including the Gulf of Gabes Marine and Coastal Resources Protection Project as well as the Protected Areas Management Project, both of which are funded by the GEF. The Gulf of Gabes Project aims at establishing a functional integrated monitoring and participatory management system for the project area to manage biodiversity degradation in the Gulf of Gabes region. The Protected Areas Management Project, which is about to close, strengthened the management of three national parks (Ichkeul, Jbil, and Bouhedma). An internal draft ICR has just been prepared and is not yet generally available. But from the Project's implementation it has drawn several lessons, which are relevant for the proposed Project; these have therefore been stated in full in Annex 5 of this PIF; (5) The proposed Project is also in line with regional priorities of neighboring countries, whose desert ecosystems represent an even larger percentage of their national territories; (6) MENARID, a regional project, is co-financing the proposed Project. MENARID's purpose is to reduce risks to the sustainable management of the North West Sahara Aquifer System (NWSAS) under a joint project by OSS (Sahara and Sahel Observatory) and national institutions from Algeria (Agence Nationale des Resources Hydrauliques), Libya (General Water Authority), and Tunisia (Direction Générale des Resources en Eau); (7) FAO has developed a strategy on Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS), which intends to assist with the conservation of desert biodiversity, among others; and (8) The Project is consistent with the planned MNSSD-GEF Ecotourism in Deserts (EID) Program.

C. DESCRIBE THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH GEF STRATEGIES AND STRATEGIC PROGRAMS: The primary strategic priority of the proposed Project is consistent with the GEF Strategies BD-2 and LD-1 by mainstreaming land and biodiversity conservation in desert landscapes including the agricultural production sector in arid regions of Tunisia. The entry point is nature tourism along with a package of complementary actions. The Project will also contribute to the GEF Strategy BD-1 by catalyzing sustainability of protected areas at national levels through the creation of an incentive framework for ecotourism that will provide instruments which address financial sustainability of protected areas and create appropriate incentives to local communities and the private sector. It will further be aligned with the GEF strategy LD-3 by supporting technological innovations.

D. JUSTIFY THE TYPE OF FINANCING SUPPORT PROVIDED WITH THE GEF RESOURCES:

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:01 PM

6

Tunisia is a middle-income country which nevertheless is facing budget constraints and depends on grant funding. Beyond that, project support with GEF grant resources is justified for three reasons: (1) The grant support leverages bilateral funds; (2) It helps integrate/package the funds, including those of the Government, and generates a catalytic impetus for focusing the funds on the biodiversity conservation and nature tourism objectives; and (3) Along with the GEF funds, international expertise on biodiversity conservation and ecotourism will be provided, that is expected to have a catalytic impact beyond the provision of grant funds.

E. OUTLINE THE COORDINATION WITH OTHER RELATED INITIATIVES: The activities of the proposed Project will be closely coordinated with several other important initiatives: (1) The Protected Areas Management Project, which was implemented from 2004-2009 and concentrated its efforts on three national parks (Ichkeul, Jbil, and Bouhedma). That Project is nearing a satisfactory completion, and at present (June 2009), an Implementation Completion Report is being prepared by a team from the World Bank; (2) The Gulf of Gabes Project, which has been under implementation since 2005. Both projects (1) and (2) focused largely on marine/coastal biodiversity, whereas the proposed Project will pioneer the conservation of desert biodiversity; however, it is still expected that valuable lessons will be gained from them; (3) The Project on Integrated NRM in the Middle East and the North Africa Region (MENARID), which is following a programmatic approach led by IFAD, along with the AfDB, FAO, UNDP, UNIDO, UNEP, and the World Bank. Coordination of the proposed Project and MENARID will be especially close, given the expected MENARID co-financing and the planned work on M&E and KM under one of its MSPs; and (4) Even though the proposed Ecotourism Project will be different from the main coastal tourism, the Project is expected to benefit from some of the relevant experiences through its integration in the Ministry of Tourism.

F. DISCUSS THE VALUE-ADDED OF GEF INVOLVEMENT IN THE PROJECT DEMONSTRATED THROUGH INCREMENTAL REASONING :

Baseline scenario. Some limited efforts have been undertaken to develop ecotourism but with limited success so far. Likewise, some efforts have been undertaken to conserve desert biodiversity, but these have not had any signficant success beyond small pilots. This may be due to the nature of the pilot project, single-sector approach to the problem, and to a lack of attention to the overall institutional, legal and economic incentive system. If this current approach continued, ecotourism may remain stagnant and desert biodiversity will continue to be under threat. Value added of GEF involvement. GEF resources will be strategically, catalytically, and incrementally used to support activities aimed at creating the enabling conditions for Tunisia to develop ecotourism linked with conservation of desert biodiversity. GEF resources itself will be relatively small, but they will leverage additional funding to create a critical mass to progressively adopt an approach that is expected to: (a) generate a common, coordinated approach involving several Ministries (Tourism, Environment, Agriculture and Forestry, Water, etc.); (b) improve the overall incentive system by institutional, legal and regulatory changes; (c) improve the quality of management of selected protected areas; and (d) propagate a participatory approach involving communities, the private sector, NGOs, and the public sector. While (a) and (b) have obvious nation-wide impacts beyond the particular sites to be selected, it is hoped that the GEF involvement in (c) and (d) will also produce demonstration effects that go way beyond the particular areas. G. INDICATE RISKS, INCLUDING CLIMATE CHANGE RISKS, THAT MIGHT PREVENT THE PROJECT

OBJECTIVE(S) FROM BEING ACHIEVED, AND IF POSSIBLE INCLUDING RISK MITIGATION MEASURES THAT WILL BE TAKEN:

There are a number of risks associated with the implementation of the proposed Project. Mitigation measures would be developed to respond to the following risks: Risk #1: The uncertainty of climate impacts on the conservation and ecotourism value of specific sites. Mitigation: The proposed Project will include analytical work and adaptive coping strategies to address impacts of climate, especially on biodiversity in desert ecosystems. Risk #2: Raising financial capital to implement projects by the private sector. Mitigation: An incentive-based framework to be developed will seek to address this directly in part by the establishment of a low-cost credit line for eligible investments. Also, the GEF grant will provide funding for public goods that will make the ecotoursm circuits more attractive and increase demand and profitability of complementary private sector investments. Risk #3: Ecotourism impacts on biodiversity could potentially be negative. Mitigation: There are three elements of mitigation: (a) a strategy for attracting low to moderate volumes of medium to high-end ecotourists, incl. by a permit system with volume limits for sensitive sites; (b) the provision of sound

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:01 PM

7

Management Plans for project sites along with a strengthened implementation capacity, mindful of carrying capacity of the respective ecosystems; and (c) engaging communities as direct beneficiaries by job creation related to ecotourism is expected to help ensure that adverse impacts are minimized.

H. DESCRIBE, IF POSSIBLE, THE EXPECTED COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROJECT: It is expected that the proposed Project will be cost-effective in part because an integrated approach will be used that will bring together various Ministries in a defined, collaborative manner, and it will also bring together the key stakeholders, which, jointly, will have a higher likelihood for success than the current approach where Ministries and stakeholders act quite independently in the areas of ecotourism and desert biodiversity conservation. The Project’s main approach to determining cost-effectiveness will be to compare output and outcome indicators to the component costs. Beyond that, expert judgment will be used and the results compared with cost-effectiveness of similar operations in other countries.

I. JUSTIFY THE COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE OF GEF AGENCY: Successful interventions to conserve biodiversity, to develop sustainable, nature-based tourism in desert environments, and to adapt to the impacts of climate change require integrated and cross-sectoral approaches. The Bank is in a unique position to catalyze the adoption of such approaches in Tunsia, because of its long-term engagement in biodiversity conservation in Tunisia and other countries, with investments targeting policy, technical, and governance aspects. Specifically, the Bank has a considerable comparative advantage through: (a) its experience with the implementation of the GEF-financed Protected Area Management and the Gulf of Gabes Project; (b) its strong policy dialogue with different government agencies involving environmental and economic work, such as the preparation of the Country Environmental Assessment, and its work in related key sectors, such as agriculture and natural resources management (NRM); (c) its considerable technical knowledge and experience in other biodiversity conservation and ecotourism projects in other countries; (d) its experience in bringing communities and the private sector into partnerships with the public sector for NRM, using participatory, community-driven development approaches; (e) its capacity to catalyze funding; and (f) its role as a convenor of, and facilitator for, regional work, such with the Nile Basin Initiative, the Mediterranean Investment Fund, and MENARID. This is of particular importance, given the transboundary nature of many MNA deserts and the sometimes challenging relationships between countries.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:01 PM

8

PART III: APPROVAL/ENDORSEMENT BY GEF OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT(S) AND GEF AGENCY(IES)

A. RECORD OF ENDORSEMENT OF GEF OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT (S) ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT(S): (Please attach the country endorsement letter(s) or regional endorsement letter(s) with this template).

NAME POSITION MINISTRY DATE (Month, day, year)Nadhir Hamada Minister of Environment

and Sustainable Development

MINSTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

JULY 17, 2009

                                              

B. GEF AGENCY(IES) CERTIFICATION

This request has been prepared in accordance with GEF policies and procedures and meets the GEF criteria for project identification and preparation.

Agency Coordinator, Agency name

SignatureDate

(Month, day, year)

Project Contact Person Telephone Email Address

Steve Gorman, World Bank

8/24/2009 Kanta Kumari

Rigaud; GEF Regional

Coordinator for MNA

202-473-4269

kkumari@worldbank.org

                                   

                                   

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:01 PM

9

Annex 1: Models of Sustainable Tourism

Concepts and typologies of ecotourism

There are numerous definitions of ecotourism. There are different schools of thought prevailing in the field, ranging from nature idealists who believe that tourism and nature do not go well together, to those who think that conservation and sustainable economic development can co-exist. Definitions often include elements such as:

dependent on the natural environment ecologically sustainable contributes to the protection of natural areas environmental understanding through education & interpretation culturally sustainable sustains local communities involves recreation, adventure, and enjoyment.

A distinction has often been made between “harder” ecotourists and “softer” ones. Accordingly, “harder” ecotourists have strong environmental commitments, take specialized, long trips; are physically active; and expect few, if any services. On the other hand “softer” ecotourists have moderate environmental commitments, make multi-purpose trips, enjoy physical comforts, and expect services including those of tour operators (for more details see Day and Sarma, 2006). In this spectrum between soft and hard there are of course any number of intermediate positions including well-to-do people with strong environmental commitments but who nevertheless enjoy quality services during their holidays.

Viewed pragmatically, ecotourism is a market segment within the overall tourism industry. So on the one hand one must protect the environmental and natural resources upon which the ecotourism industry is based. Yet on the other hand, ecotourism is a business, and so one must take into account consumer choices and preferences, price signals, externalities, economies of scale, market failures, and basic business principles such as financing and production chains.

Balancing partly conflicting objectives; learning from other countries

Much wisdom is needed at a strategic policy level to balance potentially conflicting objectives including: (a) economic development and local employment generation; (b) nature/biodiversity conservation; (c) revenue generation for park protection and management; and (d) finding an appropriate balance between the roles of the public and private sectors.

In that context, Tunisia can learn from destinations, such as Belize and Costa Rica, which have shown that ecotourism, together with mass sun and beach tourism can co-exist, without destroying the natural resources upon which the activity relies, while allowing sustainable economic development, including benefits for the local communities, and helping to create awareness among visitors about the value of nature and the environment.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

10

There are various possible degrees of involvement by the government and various stakeholders. For purposes of consideration for the Government and various stakeholders in Tunisia, some of the above thoughts and others are summarized schematically in Table 1.

Table 1: Various Partnership Models of Tourism and Possible Environmental and Economic EffectsDifferent models with

different degrees of government involvement

Country examples

Pros and cons, and lessons of experience

Large government role with excessive controls and with little or no private sector involvement

USSR, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Myanmar

Efficiency and creativity are limited as incentives are low for government employees to develop the business side of tourism; some natural assets are protected well, others are over-exploited.

Intermediate government role, where the public sector mainly provides the legal framework and some degree of involvement but where the other stakeholders play various roles

Co-management of public and communities

Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa, Belize, Costa Rica, USA, Switzerland, etc.

Each stakeholder brings along qualities that are in line with its comparative advantage: (a) government can provide public goods, manage common properties, issue laws and regulations, and enforce them; (b) communities’ have an abiding presence in the localities where they live, and their constructive involvement, near the PAs, etc. are essential for effective protection; (c) the private sector brings the business know-how; and (d) NGOs/civil society bring knowledge, enthusiasm, additional local ownership, even though their capacities are sometimes weak. Multi-stakeholder co-management has shown itself to be the best option for simultaneously achieving various competing objectives.

Co-management of public sector with NGOs

Co-management of public sector with private sector

Multi-stakeholder co-management of public sector with communities, private sector, and NGOs

Largely private sector development with negligible government involvement.

Cod fishery off the coast of Canada/USA; hunting in Africa and elsewhere; reefs in various countries with insufficient controls.

This arrangement seldom works due to the “tragedy of the commons”, e.g. hunting takes place until species are endangered or extinct.

Demand for experiences from ecotourists PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

11

Tourists originate mainly from industrial countries, but regional and national tourism can also be of importance. Ecotourists make up an estimated 5 to 13 percent of international visitors worldwide. This segment can be significant for the economies of developing countries in terms of its contribution to GDP, foreign exchange earnings, and employment.

Tourists have many possible options and a large number of destinations to choose from. Therefore, in terms of its planned ecotourism development, Tunisia competes with many other destinations. So the key is to market its unique nature-based products, backed up by excellent services/experiences on both quality and price. The mass beach tourism market (and those promoting it in industrial countries) should be a key target for advertising. A certain percentage of tourists may well choose a beach vacation as a package tour in which one or more days of desert ecotourism is built in.

The supply side, i.e. what countries can offer

Each country has a stock of natural capital. Aside from protecting it, the challenge for each government is to appropriately market the product and to make the natural (and/or cultural) capital accessible to tourists through appropriate infrastructure development, lodging, restaurants, nature guides, information, security, etc., while keeping the ecological “footprint” or the negative consequences of tourism, if any, to a minimum. Ecotourism includes seeking to develop an increased appreciation of the tourists for the natural asset and to motivate them to support the preservation objectives (which could, for example, find a specific expression via a small contribution to planting palm trees by a local NGO).

There can be a symbiosis between some forms of mass tourism and pure ecotourism, thus allowing pure ecotourism ventures to have financial feasibility, as they benefit from the spillover coming from mass tourism and the other activities. Costa Rica and Belize are examples that several market segments can co-exist and grow together in a mutual beneficial symbiosis, from mass sun and beach to pure ecotourism, as a large number of international visitors end up visiting at least one national park. Similar “side trips” are being made by tourists that mainly visit the beaches near Mombassa, Kenya, but then make a day trip to see large mammals in one of the nearby parks.

Among other things, South Africa has the facilities and organizes large conferences, the soccer world cup 2010, etc., and the country tries to capitalize on that by suggesting to travelers to visit one or more park. Given the outstanding attributes of some of South Africa’s national parks (e.g. Kruger), these are poles of attraction in their own right. But overall, there is a large variety of tourism to that country, and multi-objective tourism is the norm. After the change in the government in the early 1990s, they have experienced a nature tourism boom with significant annual increases in visitors. They also have a strong private sector (tour operators, hotels, restaurants, etc.). The park authorities are now less funded through the public budget; so they have increased their income through increases in park entrance fees and even the sale of surplus animals to the private sector (e.g. for trophy hunting on the private ranches).

Agro-tourism and eco-ranching are a very small but growing niche market. For example, this includes wine tourism in Napa and Sonoma valleys (USA) on the basis that these are family-owned wineries, eco-lodges in cattle ranches in Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho; or on-the-farm vacations in Switzerland.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

12

For Tunisia, ecotourism development may not increase the number of tourist arrivals much, but it would certainly help make the destination more attractive and diverse. An interest in the unique agro-biodiversity in desert and arid lands probably exists, but may be limited to a small segment of potential tourists. The key may be to package desert biodiversity and agro-ecotourism with other things of interest, e.g. oasis water management, sand dunes, berber culture, and include e.g. tasting fresh dates and figs, etc.

Park protection and involvement of local communities

Management plans are needed for all new parks and reserves. This includes considering charging entrance fees, which could be two-tiered, i.e. lower for nationals than for international visitors. Cooperation with local communities around the park is also essential. Ecotourism strives to empower and benefit local residents and rural communities in part through small-scale, locally-owned enterprises. Sometimes, these communities do not have access to the financial resources required for higher-level and/or larger tourism operations. Local and/or foreign investments may be needed to provide the lodging that well-to-do ecotourists desire even for an overnight stay.

Conclusions

Some destinations, such as Belize, Costa Rica, and South Africa have shown that hard and soft ecotourism can exist together with mass tourism, without destroying the natural resources upon which the activities rely. Tunisia has developed mass beach tourism for sun-seekers, mainly from Europe (..percent of all arrivals), but also other destinations (US…. % of total, Midde East and North Africa… % of total, etc.). The share of national visitors to parks, etc. so far has been small and is estimated to be in the order of … percent.

There is clearly is potential to develop desert- and other nature-related tourism as an add-on to general/beach tourism; this would diversify and complement the existing tourism product. There may be a percentage of tourists who is interested in a whole one-week circuit, that is focused on desert landscapes, desert biodiversity, berber life, oasis visits, etc. But options should be provided to the large number of beach tourists to take one-day or overnight trips to specific desert- and/or nature/culture-related sites.

In order for such potentially increased tourism to avoid causing damage, but to rather provide benefits to both local communities and strengthened protected area sites and other biodiversity, it will be necessary for Government to strengthen protected area management, work with local communities and the private sector, and put in place an institutional framework with appropriate rules and regulations.

Sources:

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

13

Aylward, Bruce, and Ernst Lutz. Nature Tourism, Conservation, and Economic Development in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. The World Bank and the Development Bank of Southern Africa. 2003.

Dey, Banasree, and M.K. Sarma. Tourist Typologies and Segmentation Variables with Regard to Ecotourists. Tourism Management , Vol.8 (2006), p.31-39.

Higham, James. Critical Issues in Ecotourism: understanding a complex tourism phenomenon. Butterworth-Heinemann. 2007.

Honey, Martha. Ecotourism and Sustainable Development: Who owns Paradise? Second Edition. Island Press 2008.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

14

Annex 2: Some Aspects of Desert Biodiversity and its Management

Definition of Biodiversity

Biodiversity is a concept used to describe the number, variety, and organization of entities in the biosphere, or a unit of the biosphere, and their relationships to each other. More importantly, biodiversity includes consideration of processes that create and maintain variation in ecological systems. Therefore, biodiversity is not simply about entities or taxonomy. Rather, biodiversity is concerned with the diversity of species within communities, the range of ecological processes within ecosystems, and the diversity of ecosystem processes across landscape mosaics. Ecological systems are a mixture, or diversity, of living and non-living entities interconnected by a web of interactions.6

Below ground/soil biodiversity is low in deserts. But it is hypothesized, based on studies in the Negev, North American deserts, and the Namib Desert, that above-ground desert animal diversity is higher than expected despite the low primary productivity of deserts.7

Management of Desert Biodiversity

Management of biodiversity is an active operation by humans that is aimed at preventing undesired changes in the biodiversity state, or at controlling the transition between states, or to maximize or increase biodiversity. Biodiversity management should take into consideration the nature of biodiversity as a complex state and as a web of interactions between various types of entities.8 The uncertainties involved in the manipulation-target pathway require adaptive management strategies.

In drylands, “the number, variation, and organization of organisms and landscape entities are controlled, to a high degree, by the processes of redistribution of rainfall over space…. This is done by manipulating water distribution, for enhancing the distribution and abundance of organisms”.

Native trees play a central role in deserts/arid lands.9 This is evident from the palm trees in oases, etc.

6 Biodiversity in Drylands: Toward a Unified Framework. Edited by Moshe Shachak, James R. Gosz, Avi Perevolotsky, and Steward T.A. Pickett. Oxoford University Press, 2005.

7 Yoram Ayal, Gary A. Polis, Yael Lubin, Deborah E. Goldberg. “How Can High Animal Diversity Be Supported in Low-Productivity Deserts? – The Role of Macrodetrivory and Habitat Physiognomy”. In Biodiversity in Drylands – Toward a Unified Framework. Edited by Moshe Shachak, James R. Gosz, Avi Perevolotsky, and Steward T.A. Pickett. Oxoford University Press, 2005.

8 Biodiversity in Drylands: Toward a Unified Framework. Edited by Moshe Shachak, James R. Gosz, Avi Perevolotsky, and Steward T.A. Pickett. Oxoford University Press, 2005.

9 Michael D. Robinson: “The Importance of Native Trees in Sustaining Biodiversity in Arid Lands”. In: M.K. Seely and J.R. Herschel: “Best Practices in The World’s Oldest Desert”. In Conserving Biodiversity in Arid Regions – Best Practices in Developing Nations. Edited by John Lemons, Reginald Victor, and Daniel Schaffer. Kluver Academic Publishers. 2003.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

15

Biodiversity management can have three objectives: (a) restoration, (b) conservation and maintenance, and (c) development (i.e. intentional alteration of system, e.g. to improve productivity).10

The Potential Role of Ecotourism in Conservation of Desert Biodiversity

A key question is how the unique biodiversity in deserts (or anywhere else for that matter) can be used for tourism without destroying the resource. Seely and Herschel answer this question with regard to the Namib Desert by writing: “Management of tourism in Namibia is very diffuse and can be guided by public policy, rules and regulations, but is implemented mainly by the private sector. With the current focus on low volume tourism, the balance with environmental protection could be maintained”.11 They conclude that the future of biodiversity management in Namibia lies in continuing to strengthen the association between conservation, research, tourism, management, training and dissemination of awareness and information. It involves and reaches a wide variety of people ranging from rural communities to top level politicians. An interactive partnership between public, private and NGO enterprises is needed that serves the interests of them all.

10 Toward Ecological Sustainability. Thomas W. Hoekstra and Moshe Shachak, Technical Editors. University of Illinois Press. 1999.

11 M.K. Seely and J.R. Herschel: “Best Practices in The World’s Oldest Desert”. In Conserving Biodiversity in Arid Regions – Best Practices in Developing Nations. Edited by John Lemons, Reginald Victor, and Daniel Schaffer. Kluver Academic Publishers. 2003.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

16

Annex 3: Sites with Ecotourism Potential

The the joint study by the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development and the German Technical Cooperation12 (MEDD/GTZ) indentified numerous sites across the country with ecotourism potential, ranking that potential either as weak, medium, strong or very strong (see attached tables). Of the 20 sites with very strong potential, 13 are in the North, 2 are in the Center, and 5 are in the South. They include 4 national parks (Ichkeul, Feidja, Bohedma, Jebil), 6 mountain areas with considerable forest cover (Dar Chichou, El Haouaria, Zaghouan, Djebba, Ain Drahem, Bargou), 4 Berber villages along with their immediate environments (Kesra, Zriba, Matmata, and the villages of the Dahar chain), 3 sites connected with the littoral (Kerkennah, Ghar, El Melah and the region of Zouaraa), the traditional oases, and the ksours of the South and the table of Jugurtha.

There are 11 sites in the category with strong ecotourism potential. These include 2 national parks (Chambi and Orbata), forested mountains like Sejnane, rocky coasts of the North, the mountains of Tebousouk and the Chotts of Djerid and the Isle of Djerba.

In the last table of this Annex, 17 sites are assessed in some more details, using the model of “ecotourism unit”: Centers of interest for ecotourists, possible activities, services offered (like welcome, lodging, restaurants, transport, information), and the potential benefits for the local population.

These lists are very important and they are an excellent starting point for the overall ecotourism development work, particularly since the proposed Project seeks to positively influence ecotourism in general. But since the specific interest of the GEF grant funding is to conserve desert biodiversity, an additional table is needed that lists the possible ecotourism sites containing desert biodiversity and also those with globally important agricultural heritage systems (GIAHS). This should be prepared during project identification or preparation.

Selection Criteria

The proposed Project will support investments in and around selected sites that meet the following criteria:

(a) Being part of a desert ecosystem;

(b) Containing unique plant and/or animal biodiversity;

(c) Being accessible via environmentally sound access roads or other environmentally friendly means of transport;

(d) Having near-by communities’ buy-in for conservation measures, included protected area Management Plans and having them involved in planning and decision-making; and

(e) Having potential for low-volume but if possible stable ecotourism.

12 Etude Strategique sur le Developpement de l’Ecotourisme en Tunisie, Phase 3: Proposition d’un Plan d’Action. Version Final. Decembre 2008. p. 43-48.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

17

Gouvernorats du Nord Est : Grand Tunis, Bizerte, Nabeul, Zaghouan

Sites à très fortpotentiel

écotouristique

Sites à fort potentielécotouristique

Sites à moyenpotentiel

écotouristique

Sites à faible potentielécotouristique

Le site de Ghar ElMélah La forêt de Séjnane La forêt de Remel La réserve naturelle

marine du Galiton

Le parc national del’Ichkeul

La côte rocheuse dugouvernorat de Bizertede Cap Angéla jusqu’à

Cap SerratLe site de Metline Le parc national de

Zembra et Zembretta

La forêt de DarChichou et d’Oued

AbidLe massif de Korbous L’île de la Galite

Les lagunes de lafaçade orientale du Cap

BonLa montagne d’El

HaouariaLa réserve naturelle de

Méjéne ChitaneLe massif et la forêt de

Jébel ZaghouanLa forêt de Jebel

AbderrahmanLes villages berbèresde Takrouna, Jéradou

et Zriba Alia

Le parc national deBouKornine

Le massif et la forêt deJébel Rassas

Gouvernorats du Nord Ouest : Béja, Jendouba, Siliana, Le Kef

Sites à très fortpotentiel

écotouristiqueSites à fort potentiel

écotouristique

Sites à moyenpotentiel

écotouristiqueSites à faible potentiel

écotouristique

La localité de Djebbaet ses jneins

Le domaine agricole deThibar

Les Mogods et la forêtde Bélif

La baie de corail et lesaiguilles de Tabarka

Ain Draham, le col desruines, Beni Mtir et

Hammam Bourguiba

Les monts deTéboursouk et la vallée

d’Oued Khalled

La réserverou fa deJébel Khrou

La coupe géologique spécifique Crétacée/ Tertiaire d’El Haria

La région de Zouaraa

Le parc national d’ElFeidja

La réserve naturelle deDar Fatma

La table de Jugurtha Le site de Jébel Ghorra

Jébel Bargou Jebel Essadine et laforêt de Neber

Kesra et ses environs

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

18

Gouvernorats du Centre Est : Sousse, Monastir, Mahdia, SfaxSites à très fort

potentielécotouristique

Sites à fort potentielécotouristique

Sites à moyenpotentiel

écotouristique

Sites à faible potentielécotouristique

Les Iles de Kerkennah Les marais de Mahres Les Iles Kuriat

Sebkhat El kalbia les Iles kneissLa lagune de Hergla et

Oued Essed Les salines de Thyna

Les salines de Monastir

Gouvernorats du Centre Ouest : Kairouan, Kasserine, Sidi Bou Zid, Gafsa

Sites à très fortpotentiel

écotouristique

Sites à fort potentielécotouristique

Sites à moyenpotentiel

écotouristique

Sites à faible potentielécotouristique

Le parc National deBouhedma

Le parc national deChambi

La réserve naturelle deJebel Bouramli

Les vastes nappesalfatières

La réserve naturelle duparc de Orbata

La réserve naturelle deJebel Touati

Jb El Guettar et sesenvirons Jebel Trozza

Gouvernorats du Sud Est : Gabes, Médenine

Sites à très fortpotentiel

écotouristique

Sites à fort potentielécotouristique

Sites à moyenpotentiel

écotouristique

Sites à faible potentielécotouristique

Les troglodytes deMatmata

L’Ile de Djerba :Guallala et Bin El

Ouadiane

Le parc national deSidi Toui

L’Oasis littorale deGabès

Les villages demontagnes de la chaIne

du DaharEl Hamma de Gabès

Les Ksours deMédenine et Tataouine

Le Permien de Tébagade Médenine

Gouvernorats du Sud Ouest : Tozeur, Kébili, Tataouine

Sites à très fortpotentiel

écotouristique

Sites à fort potentielécotouristique

Sites à moyenpotentiel

écotouristique

Sites à faible potentielécotouristique

Le parc national de Jébil, erg et dunes Les Chotts

Les Oasistraditionnelles

La réserve naturelle deJébel Dghoumes

Ksar Ghilane

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

19

Site(s) ou régions

Centres d’intérêt pour les écotouristes

Activités praticables, saisons

Services aux clients (accueil 1 logement 2, restauration 3,transport 4,information 5)

Bénéfices et emplois pour la population et les communautéslocales

Parc et forêt d’El Feïdja

Forêt, faune, flore, climat

Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, toute saison

1+4+5 ; 2+3 prévus au projet DGF

Élevage de chevaux, artisanat, produits du terroir, guides

Région de Aïn- Draham - Ben Métir - Fernana

Forêt, faune, flore, climat, thermes, plans d’eau

Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, sports lacustres, thermalisme, toute saison

2+3 ; 1+4+5 à développer

Élevage de chevaux, artisanat, produits du terroir, para-médical, guides

Région de Jebba et environs (Thibar)

faune, flore, géologie agriculture

Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, toute saison, agritourisme

1+2+3+4 à développer, 5 un centre est développé

Élevage des équidés, artisanat, produits du terroir, guides

Montagne et forêt de Bargou

faune, flore, géologie agriculture

Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, printemps hiver automne, agritourisme

1+2+3+4 +5 à développer, 5

Élevage des équidés, artisanat, produits du terroir, guides

Région de La Kesra

faune, flore, géologie agriculture

Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, printemps hiver automne, agritourisme

1+2+3+4 +5 à développer, 5

Élevage des équidés, artisanat, produits du terroir, guides

Parc et lac de l’Ichkeul

Ornithologie, flore, thermes, plan d’eau

Observation nature, thermalisme, arrières saisons

1+5 ; 2+3+4 à développer (prévus au projet DGF)

Artisanat, produits du terroir, para-médical, guides

Région de Ghar El Melah

Agriculture agritourisme 1+2+3+4+5 à développer

Artisanat, produits du terroir, guides

Forêt de Dar Chichou

faune, flore Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, printemps hiver automne,

1+2+3+4+5 à développer

Artisanat, produits du terroir, guides

Massif d’El Haouaria

faune, flore Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, printemps hiver automne,

1+2+3+4+5 à développer

Artisanat, produits du terroir, guides

DjebelZaghouan, gouffres et environs

Forêt, climat,traditions soufies, archéologie, thermes, histoire

Escalade, spéléologie, thermalisme,randonnée pédestre, équestre, VTT

1+4+5 ; 2+3 à développer

Artisanat, produits du terroir, para-médical, guides et encadreurs

Villages berbères Zriba, Jeradou, Takrouna

Forêt, climat,traditions soufies, archéologie, thermes, histoire

Escalade, spéléologie, thermalisme,randonnée pédestre, équestre, VTT

1+4+5 ; 2+3 à développer

Artisanat, produits du terroir, para-médical, guides et encadreurs

Archipel de Kerkennah

Flore et faune marine, flore terrestre,traditions de pêche, histoire

Randonnée pédestre, équestre, VTT,plongée et observation sous-marine

2+3 ; 1+4+5 à développer

Guides et encadreurs, produits du terroir

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

20

Parc de Bou Hedma

faune, flore, traditions Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, printemps hiver automne,

1+4+5 ; 2+3 prévus au projet DGF

Élevage des équidés, artisanat, produits du terroir, guides

Villages de Matmata

faune, flore, traditions et agriculture

Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, printemps

1+2+3+4+5 à développer

Artisanat, Élevage des équidés, produits du terroir, guides

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

21

hiver automne, agritourisme et ateliers d’artisanat

Chaîne et villages du Dahar

faune, flore, traditions et agriculture

Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, printemps hiver automne, agritourisme et ateliers d’artisanat

1+2+3+4+5 à développer

Artisanat, Élevage des équidés, produits du terroir, guides

Oasis traditionnelles

faune, flore, traditions et agriculture

Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, printemps hiver automne, agritourisme et ateliers d’artisanat

1+2+3+4+5 à développer

Artisanat, Élevage des équidés, produits du terroir, guides

Ksours du Sud-

Estfaune, flore, traditions et agriculture

Observation nature, randonnée équestre et pédestre, printemps hiver automne, agritourisme et ateliers d’artisanat

1+2+3+4+5 à développer

Artisanat, Élevage des équidés, produits du terroir, guides

Annex 4: List of Parks, Reserves, and Other Protected Areas in Tunisia

In addition to its existing 8 national parks and 16 reserves, the Government of Tunisia recently decided to add an additional 9 national parks to its national parks system. It also added 11 additional reserves [need reference to law/regulation/decree]. This represents a large expansion and reflects the commitment of the Government to nature conservation and sustainable management of its resources.

The existing 8 national parks include……

The new/additional 9 national parks include…..

The existing 16 reserves include….

The new/additional 11 reserves include….

The proposed Project will support the management of the expanded system indirectly via Components 1 (Institutional Development) and Component 2 (Protected Area Management).

Below we present a comprehensive list of parks and various other protected areas. It is proposed that, as part of the project preparation work, this list be expanded with various columns to indicate: (a) which ones have Management Plans; (b) an assessment of the effectiveness with which these plans are being implemented, using a scale from 1-5; an assessment of the level of degradation; an assessment of the ecotourism potential; and (e) an assessment to which extent the adjacent communities and the private sector are involved.

NATIONAL PARKS Bou-Hedma Boukornine Chambi Djebel Sahara El-Feidja Ichkeul Sidi Toui Tabarka Zembra and Zembretta

NATURAL RESERVES Ain Chrichira Aina Zana Complexe des Iles Kneiss Dgebel Serj Djebel Bouramli Djebel Khroufa Djebel Touati Etella Grotte de Chauve souris d'El Haouaria Ile Chikly Kechem el Kelb Lac de Tunis Majen Djebel Chitane

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

22

Sebkhat Kelbia Tourbière de Dar. Fatma

NATURE RESERVES Cap Bon peninsula Chott el Fedjadj Dar Fatma Djebel Bargou Djebel Marchana Djebel Mrhilla Djebel Ousselat Djebel Ressas Djebel Selloum Djebel Serdj Djebel Zaghouan Golfe de Bou Grara Grotte de Chauves Souris d'El Haouaria Iles Kouriates Kerkennah isles Kneiss islands and the Gulf of Gabes mudflats Lac Bizerte Lac de Radès et Salines Medjerda Estuary Nefta oasis Sebkhet Sidi Mansour Tourbiere de Dar Fatma

RESERVES Hamada-Sidi Toui

MARINE RESERVES Galiton Golfe de Gabes

WILDLIFE RESERVES Ain Baccouch Dar Chichou M'hibeus Orbata

BIRD RESERVES Jenein-oued Ouni

OTHER PROTECTED AREAS Dghoumes

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

23

Iles de Djerba OM. Chieh Sebkhat El Khalij (Golfe de Gabès) Tunis Botanic Garden

WETLANDS OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE Bahira El-Bibane Chott El Djerid Iles Kneiss et vasières du Golf Lac de Rades et Salines Salines de Thyna Sebkha Halk el Menzel Sebkhet Ariana Sebkhet El-Djem Sebkhet es Sedjoumi Sebkhet Kelbia Sebkhet Kourzia Sebkhet Sedjoumi Sebkhet-Sidi-El-Hani

WETLANDS OF INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE (RAMSAR) Ichkeul

WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION Amphitheatre of El Jem Dougga / Thugga Ichkeul National Park Kairouan Medina of Sousse Medina of Tunis Punic Town of Kerkuane and its Necropolis Site of Carthage

UNESCO-MAB BIOSPHERE RESERVE Parc national de Djebel Bou-Hedma Parc national de Djebel Chambi Parc national de l'Ichkeul Parc national des Iles Zembra et Zembretta

BARCELONA CONVENTION Galiton Ichkeul Ile Chikly Iles de Kneiss Zembra et Zembretta

Source: World Database on Protected Areas.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

24

Annex 5: Lessons Learned from the Implementation of the Protected Areas Management Project

The first lesson is that, like for so many other projects, there is a strong need for a preparatory phase before project launching, to ensure readiness for implementation, including to: (i) put in place the necessary institutional set-up (steering committee, PMU, etc.); and (ii) advance insofar as possible the required procurement procedures (preparation of bid documents, conventions, and other agreements). In the present case, such a phase – which could have been carried out in parallel with final appraisal and grant negotiation/signing – would have saved at least a year on the implementation period.

Also, as in the case of so many other projects, the setting up of a comprehensive and fully functional M&E system was found too difficult to achieve. And, yet, such a system should be seen as a management tool absolutely necessary to the efficient implementation of a multi-component project like this Project. It is as well necessary for a rigorous/precise post evaluation of the project’s realizations and impacts. In setting up an M&E system, it is important to: (i) define beforehand the baseline situation, (ii) set output and impact indicators that are clear and easily measurable, and (iii) design a system structure that is within the technical/financial reach of all the users.

The project served as pilot for the formulation of Proteced Area Management Plans (PMPs) on the basis of a participatory approach with the populations involved. The experience was very enriching for all concerned and deserves to be improved and replicated in other protected areas. A lesson learnt here is the great importance of socio-economic factors. Indeed, the populations’ support is a prerequisite to the success and sustainability of any sustainable PMP. Consequently, there should be a detailed identification of the populations directly affected; well-targeted and adequate compensatory measures/incentives must then be provided.

A thorough knowledge of the existing biodiversity in a park is also critical to its efficient management. Rather than mobilizing a large-scale technical assistance, the PMU has contracted several research institutes, science faculties and consultants to carry out small-scale analytical work on very specific subject matters. This approach showed that – despite the general organization which could have been better (see next paragraph) – a very rich and useful information base can be obtained at a lower cost than with classical technical assistance.

In the case of projects with multiple contracts and conventions involving several parties, it is recommended to: (i) consolidate the contracts and other agreements into as small a number as possible, (ii) specify clearly the expected outputs and standardize them as much as possible, and (iii) formulate the tasks to be carried out in accordance with the capabilities of the potential entrepreneurs and institutions. Furthermore, in the case of the present project, it would have been preferable to involve the same consultancy firm in the formulation as well as the implementation of the CDP in each park. This would have ensured continuity and avoided inconsistencies/contradictions between the 2 phases.

In the case of decentralized multi-purpose projects, such as the present one, there is a need for close, constant and efficient supervision (both internal and external). Adequate staffing and budgets for it must therefore be allocated for this purpose; on the Bank’s part as well as by the borrower.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

25

As already indicated, the project was meant to be the first phase of the Government’s National Biodiversity Strategy and there is now in place a Tunisian Program aiming at the establishment of 9 new parks and 11 reserves. It is imperative therefore to carry out follow-up actions, possibly formatted into one self-standing national program, with a view to: (i) complete and consolidate the project’s achievements, (ii) ensure the sustainability of these achievements in the future, and (iii) replicate the experience, drawing on all the lessons learnt, in other protected areas. More specifically, the follow-up actions should include:

Complete the implementation of the local development plans already formulated, including the intensification/broadening of community development with the populations of the three parks, mainly through the establishment of additional social infrastructures and income generating activities (including through ecotourism).

Complete the implementation of the park management plans already formulated, including the upgrading of the infrastructures and strengthening of the staff and their logistical means. Also intensify the efforts in terms of biodiversity conservation, mainly through the development of improved regeneration techniques for vegetative species and enhanced introduction/multiplication of threatened animal species.

For the purpose of ensuring the sustainability of the parks’ management, revisit their existing status with a view to provide them with more institutional and financial autonomy. A possible action would be to test a convention by a group of GDA representing the populations. On the basis of a specific and all-inclusive convention, the GDA could (for instance) collect entry fees and finance the O&M expenses.

Complete and carryout the national strategy in communication/sensitization about the protected areas. An action plan must be completed and donors should be found for its implementation.

In line with the Program, establish new parks and reserves. Particular attention should be given to the socio-economic aspects and the need for a participatory approach with the populations in the formulation of the various investments/actions envisaged.

Finally, from the Bank’s viewpoint, it would be useful to carry out a short analysis combining and comparing the experiences and lessons of the two protected areas management projects recently completed, in Tunisia and Morocco. This would help enrich the Bank’s institutional knowledge and enhance its capacity for preparing similar programs/projects in the future.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

26

GEF Trust Fund PIF Preparation Guidelines(This template is applicable to both FSPs and MSPs)

Unlocking instruction: The template, by default, is locked to allow the pull-down menu to function. However, in order to access the various documents through the hyperlink, the template has to be in an unlocked form. To unlock the template follow this path: Go to View >Toolbars>Forms. You will then see a pop up menu like this. Click on the right most icon (a lock) to unlock. When inputting information in the fields in the template, please use the “locked” mode.

Length of PIF Submission: We recommend the PIF to be as short as possible (4-8 pages), excluding Part III of the template.

Submission date: self explanatory

PART I: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION The first part is the project core information and standard selections are provided to the extent possible for ease of preparation. The Strategic Programs for each focal area have to be filled in manually, due to limitations by Microsoft Word which prevented the provision of the full range selections for all focal areas through a pull-down menu. For convenience, the strategic programs (SP) in each focal area are listed below. Please write exactly as indicated below. For example, fill in BD-SP1-PA, not just SP1 or any other combination.

BiodiversityClimate Change

International Waters

Land DegradationPOPs* ODS* SFM*

BD-SP1-PA Financing

CC-SP1-Building EE

IW-SP1-Coastal Marine Fisheries

LD-SP1-Agriculture POPs-SP1-Capacity Building

ODS-SP1

SFM-SP1-Financing

BD-SP2-Marine PA CC-SP2- Industrial EE

IW-SP2-Nutrient Reduction

LD-SP2- Forest POPs-SP2-Investment

SFM-SP2-PA Networks

BD-SP3-PA Networks

CC-SP3-RE IW-SP3-Freshwater Basins

LD-SP3-Innovation POPs-SP3-Demonstration

SFM-SP3-LULUCF

BD-SP4-Policy CC-SP4-Biomass

IW-SP4-Toxics/Ice

SFM-SP4-Policy

BD-SP5-Markets CC-SP5-Transport

SFM-SP5-Markets

BD-SP6-Biosafety CC-SP6-LULUCF

SFM-SP6-Biomass

BD-SP7-Invasive Alien Species (IAS)

SFM-SP7-Forest

BD-SP8-ABS-Capacity Building

* POPs = Persistent Organic Pollutants; ODS = Ozone Depleting Substance; SFM = Sustainable Forest Management

Indicative Calendar: Firstly, it is well understood that the dates are subject to change as new developments unfold. The expected CEO endorsement date for FSPs and MSPs will be included in the PIF clearance letter from CEO to the Agencies. In fixing these milestones, please take into account project cycle paper provisions of not exceeding 22 months from PIF/work program approval by Council to CEO endorsement. For MSPs, the maximum is 12 months from the time the PIF is approved by CEO to its final approval. The GEF Management Information System will be sending alerts to the Agencies about a month prior to the dates indicated in the letter to alert Agencies of these impending deadlines. It is therefore advisable that should there be any anticipated delay in the endorsement/approval date, Agencies should inform GEFSEC immediately and seek GEF CEO’s agreement to the new dates/milestones. For all other dates on the template (i.e. Agency approval, Mid-term review, etc.), Agencies should inform GEFSEC of any deviation from those indicated in the PIF template so that the GEFSEC database could be updated to reflect the changes. Agencies should also indicate any change in the milestone dates in its annual implementation reports submitted to GEFSEC. In order to avoid confusion on the various terms under the Indicative Calendar section, please refer to the definitions below:

GEF Agency Approval - The date on which the GEF Agency Board or Management approves the Grant proposal. This is equivalent to the WB's Board approval date, UNDP's Project Document signature date, or IFAD's approval date.

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

27

Implementation Start - The date on which project becomes effective and disbursement can be requested. This is the equivalent to the WB's grant/legal agreement effectiveness date and UNDP's Project Document Signature Date. This is also the trigger date for the Trustee to allow Agencies to apply for disbursement.

Project Closing - This is the date when all project activities are financially committed, but not necessarily all disbursements completed. Generally, Agencies provide a grace period of 6 months, or more, for final disbursement after project closing, but the sums paid may not be increased from the amounts originally committed. Agencies should submit a report to GEFSEC and the Trustee on the financial closure of the project.

A. Project Framework: The main objective of the section is to sketch out the overall design of the project and to provide information about what the GEF grant will finance in relation to other sources of funding.

Since many agencies utilize their own terminology for project design, it is important to clarify what the Secretariat is asking for under each heading. The definitions are based on those developed by OECD/DAC, Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results-Based Management (2002).13

Project Objective (refers to OECD/DAC development objective): intended impact contributing to global environmental benefits via one or more development interventions.

Outcomes: The likely or achieved short-term and medium-term effects of an intervention’s outputs (e.g. energy efficiency of existing heat and hot water supply companies in X city improved, new trust fund for the conservation of the PAs established, laws and bylaws approved to reduce impact of forestry practices on biodiversity)

Outputs: The products, capital goods and services which result from a development intervention, and are relevant to the achievement of outcomes. Outputs should be as concrete as possible at this stage; if it is not possible to give a discrete number for quantitative outputs providing a quantitative range would be helpful (e.g. x-staff trained to operate and maintain an early warning system, data capture in x-regions of costal lowlands).

The Project Component is the division of the project into its major parts; an aggregation of a set of concrete activities (e.g. strengthening regulatory and legal frameworks, introduction of innovative financial mechanisms, investment to overcome financial barriers to energy efficient technologies, institutional capacity building)

The indicative financing of the project should be broken down by Project Component. For each component also indicate whether it is of investment in nature, technical assistance, or scientific and technical analysis. Here, A=Indicative GEF Financing; B=Indicative Co-financing.

The percentage under the indicative GEF and co-financing is the percentage of GEF or co-financing of the total amount for the component, i.e. the amount listed under GEF and Co-financing for a particular component should add up to 100% of the component total (add horizontally).

B. Indicative Co-financing for the project by source and by name (in parenthesis,if available), ($) : Indicate the estimated sources of co-financing by the co-financing source categories listed in the first column. Sources indicated are general categorization of co-financiers at this stage. However, if more specific information on the names of co-financiers is available, please include the names after the category (in parenthesis). In the column on types of co-financing, please pull down menu to select whether the co-financing is a grant, soft loan (or concessional loan according to OECD classification), hard loan, guarantee, in-kind contribution or unknown at this stage. B= Indicative Co-financing.

C. Indicative Financing Plan Summary for the Project ($ ) . Provide the total indicative GEF grant and co-financing amounts. Please note that the co-financing amounts do not receive an Agency fee. In the project preparation column (the 2nd), please include preparation funding received previously either through PDF-A or PDF-B and indicate as a footnote on whether the grant is given under GEF-3. This template excludes the reporting of new PPG amount, either submitted together with PIF or to be submitted at a later date. Total amount column is the sum of previously funded project preparation grant and the project grant and does not include Agency fee. The last column on Agency fee is calculated based on the total amount in the previous column. In providing Agency fee amount, especially in Table D where there is split between/among Agencies, the rule is that total amount should not exceed 10% following the Fee Policy provisions. If for whatever reason the amount is less than 10%, please provide explanation since we will follow whatever amount Agency requested as long as it is within the 10% limit. The explanation should be included

13 The full glossary in English, French and Spanish is posted on the following website: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/29/21/2754804.pdf

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

28

in the cover letter that accompanies the submission of PIF to GEFSEC. A=Indicative GEF Financing; B=Indicative Co-financing.

D. GEF Resources requested by Agency (ies), focal area(s) and country (ies) : This table provides the share of the project amount by focal area, Agency and country. No project preparation grant is included in this table as the preparation grant amount is captured separately in the PPG template. For biodiversity and climate change focal areas, this section provides the amount of resources used by the country from its RAF allocation. For non-RAF focal areas, leave 3rd column blank. For single country, single focal area and single Agency implemented projects, this table should be skipped.

PART II : PROJECT JUSTIFICATION A. When discussing the issue, state the background and baseline, discuss how the project seeks to address it (GEF

alternative), and the expected value added of GEF involvement and global environmental benefits to be delivered (incremental reasoning).

B. State if the proposed project is consistent with country/regional priorities and how it builds on ongoing programs, policies and political commitments. Responding to this question will also show country ownership of this project.

C. Describe the project’s consistency with the GEF focal area strategies and fit with strategic programs. All projects have to be consistent with the focal area strategies to be eligible for GEF financing.

D. Justify the type of financing support with resources provided by the GEF. For instance, explain the rationale to provide a loan rather than a grant, or setting up of revolving funds, etc.

E. Describe the coordination with other GEF agencies, organizations, and stakeholders involved in related initiatives; if similar projects exist in the same country/region, including GEF projects, report on synergies/complementarity with this proposal and demonstrate that there is no duplication.

F. Refer to the June 2007 Council paper on incremental reasoning which is linked to this section. The objective is to describe the situation that would happen without GEF support and what would be the expected change in global environmental benefits. This differs from Section A in the sense that the former describes what the project will deliver while this section describes the question: what if there is no GEF support?

G. The objective is to ensure that in designing the project, all risks, including climate change risk have been taken into consideration and that proper measures are in place and that the project is resilient to climate change. Please outline the risk management measures, including improving resilience to climate change, that the project proposes to undertake.

H. Demonstrate that the selected project design is the best use of the GEF funding for achieving the global environmental benefits described in the project (e.g. $/ton of CO2 abated). One way of showing the proposed project is cost-effective is to demonstrate alternatives that may not be as cost effective. If cost-effectiveness is not presented at PIF, outline the steps that project preparation would undertake to present cost-effectiveness at CEO endorsement.

I. Use the matrix of comparative advantage as a guide (a link to the paper is provided). If the GEF Agency is within the comparative advantage matrix, please provide a short sentence to justify its comparative advantage. However, if the Agency has good reason to implement the project even though it is outside the comparative advantage matrix for the particular type of project that it is proposing, the Agency should provide more detailed justification in this section.

PART III : APPROVAL/ENDORSEMENT BY GEF OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT(S ) AND GEF AGENY(CIES). (The following sections are signatures of respective authorities and do not count as the four-page limit to the PIF).A. Record of endorsement of GEF Operational Focal Point (s) on behalf of the government . Please add fields to this

section if more than one country is involved in the project. There are two types of endorsement letters linked to this section: one for regular projects while the other for regional projects, basically to provide a section where detailed information regarding the allocation of the project amount by focal area, by Agency and by country is provided.

B. GEF Agency(ies) Certification : This section provides Agency’s certification to the submission as well as contact information for project.

Preferred Customer

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

29

/tt/file_convert/5f515e1814e051371776fefd/document.doc

PIF-December 08 05/22/2023 2:03:02 PM

30