Upload
phamdang
View
259
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
1
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
2
Government of the Republic of Zambia
United Nations Development Programme
PIMS No. 3942
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological
Regions I and II in Zambia
Brief description
The majority of Zambia’s farmers lack the capacity, resources and financial assistance to
adapt to and overcome worsening climatic conditions. The Zambia National Adaptation
Programme of Action (NAPA) highlights that Zambian communities are vulnerable to
climatic hazards (such as drought, flooding, extreme temperatures and prolonged dry spells)
which precipitate widespread crop failure, negatively impact food and water security and,
ultimately, affect the sustainability of rural livelihoods. Indeed, within the last 20 years,
prolonged dry spells and shorter rainfall seasons have reduced maize yields to only 40% of
the long-term average. Furthermore, based on a CO2 doubling scenario in these regions,
estimates predict a yield reduction of approximately 66% under rain-fed conditions. The
ability of the agricultural sector in Zambia to cope with increases in temperature and
potential reductions in rainfall is negligible. Reasons include: i) low levels of investment ii)
land degradation; iii) limited access to agricultural inputs such as fertilizer; and iv) a
reduced labour force due to HIV/AIDS. To reduce the vulnerability of communities in AER
I and II to climate change impacts, the project will take a two pronged-approach: i)
mainstream adaptation into agricultural planning at national, district and community levels
to make the case for increased investment in adaptation in the agricultural sector ii) test and
evaluate the adaptation value of interventions that protect and improve agricultural incomes
from the effects of climate change. Capacity and systems to anticipate assess and prepare for
climate change risks will be developed at community, regional and national levels.
Adaptation learning generated from the pilot projects will be used to guide mainstreaming
of adaptation in national fiscal, regulatory and development policies, to support adaptive
practices on a wider scale. The following four outcomes will be delivered:
1. Climate change risks integrated into critical decision-making processes for
agricultural management at the local, sub-national and national levels
2. Agricultural productivity in the pilot sites made resilient to the anticipated impacts
of climate change
3. National fiscal, regulatory and development policy revised to promote adaptation
responses in the agricultural sector
4. Knowledge and lessons learned to support implementation of adaptation measures
compiled and disseminated
The project will address the barriers that prevent the scaling up of successful interventions
and the adoption of profitable activities by local entrepreneurs. Barriers that will be
overcome by the project include: i) limited access to markets ii) limited climate risk
information used in agricultural planning iii) limited institutional capacity to adequately
address climate change; and iv) limited public awareness of climate change and the need to
adapt.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
3
Acronyms ADC Area Development Committee LDC Least Developed Country
AER Agro-ecological Region LDCF Least Developed Countries Fund
APDD Agriculture Policy Planning Department MACO Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
APR Annual Project Report MDG Millennium Development Goal
ASIP Agriculture Sector Investment
Programme
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
AWP Annual Work Plan MEWD Ministry of Energy and Water Development
BEO Block Extension Officer MT Metric tons
CAC Camp Agricultural Committee MTENR Ministry of Tourism, Environment and
Natural Resources
CAP Conservation Agriculture Project NAIS National Agricultural Information Services
CASPP Conservation Agriculture Scaling up from
Increased Productivity and Production
NAP National Agricultural Policy
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity NAPA National Adaptation Programme of Action
CCFU Climate Change Facilitation Unit NAPSSFZ National Association for Peasant and Small
Scale Farmers of Zambia
CEO Camp Extension Officer NCSA National Capacity Self Assessment
CF Conservation Farming NDMP National Disaster Management Policy
CFU Conservation Farming Unit NEX National Execution
CIF Cost Insurance and Freight NGO Non-governmental Organisation
COMA
CO
Community Markets for Conservation NGOCC NGO Coordinating Committee
DAC District Agriculture Committee NIP National Irrigation Policy
DACO District Agricultural Coordination Officer NPE National Policy on Environment
DDCC District Development Coordination
Committee
NTFP Non-Timber Forest Product
DMMU Disasters Management and Mitigation
Unit
PAC Project Appraisal Committee
DOA Department of Agriculture PACO Provincial Agricultural Coordination
Officer
DOF Department of Fisheries PAM Programme Against Malnutrition
DSSAT
3
Decision Support System for Agro-
Technology Transfer
PB Project Board
DWA Department of Water Affairs PDCC Provincial Development Coordination
Committee
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment PIF Project Identification Form
EPPCA Environmental Protection and Pollution
Control Act
PIR Project Implementation Report
ERC Evaluation Resource Centre PM Project Manager
EWS Early Warning System PPG Project Preparation Grant
FMU Financial Management Unit PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
FNDP Fifth National Development Plan PS Project Secretariat
FSP Food Security Pack PTC Project Technical Committee
GCM Global Circulation Model PTR Project Terminal Report
GDP Gross Domestic Product RCU Regional Coordination Unit
GEF Global Environmental Facility RMG Results Management Guidelines
GNP Gross National Product SADC Southern African Development Community
GRZ Government of the Republic of Zambia SCCI Seed Certification and Control Institute
HADC
M3
Hadley Centre Coupled Model Version 3 SNC Second National Communication
HDI Human Development Index SRF Strategic Results Framework
HIPC Heavily Indebted Poor Countries TPR Tripartite Review
HPI Human Poverty Index TTR Terminal Tripartite Review
IDA International Development Agency UNCBD United Nations Convention on Biological
Diversity
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
4
IDRC International Development and Research
Centre
UNCCD United Nations Convention on Combating
Desertification
INC Initial National Communication UNDAF United Nations Development and
Assistance Framework
IPD Irrigation Development Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
ITCZ Inter-Tropical Convergence AER UNDPCA
P
United Nations Development Programme
Country Programme Action Plan
IR Inception Report VAC Vulnerability Assessment Committee
IW Inception Workshop ZARI Zambia Agriculture Research Institute
JASZ Joint Assistance Strategy for Zambia ZMD Zambia Meteorological Department
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I: ELABORATION OF THE NARRATIVE ......................................................................... 8
PART I: Situation Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 8 Zambian context ................................................................................................................................... 8 The Problem ......................................................................................................................................... 9 Root causes ......................................................................................................................................... 14 LDCF Alternative Scenario ................................................................................................................ 16 Barriers .............................................................................................................................................. 18 Institutional baseline .......................................................................................................................... 19 Stakeholder analysis ........................................................................................................................... 20
PART II: STRATEGY ........................................................................................................................... 22 Project Goal, Objectives, Outcomes and Outputs/Activities .............................................................. 24 Project Indicators, Risks and Assumptions ........................................................................................ 49 Expected national and local benefits ................................................................................................. 52 Country Ownership: Country Eligibility and Country Drivenness .................................................... 52 Sustainability ...................................................................................................................................... 54 Replicability ....................................................................................................................................... 54 Linkages with other programmes and action plans at regional and sub-regional levels .................. 55
PART III: MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS ................................................................................ 59
PART IV: Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget ........................................................................ 63 Monitoring and Reporting .................................................................................................................. 63 Monitoring Responsibilities and Events............................................................................................. 64 Independent Evaluation ...................................................................................................................... 67 Learning and Knowledge Sharing ...................................................................................................... 68 Indicative Monitoring and Evaluation Work Plan and Corresponding Budget.................................. 68
PART V: Legal Context ........................................................................................................................... 69 SECTION II: Strategic Results Framework .......................................................................................... 71
PART I: Strategic Results Framework ................................................................................................... 71
PART II: Cost-effectiveness Analysis .................................................................................................... 75 SECTION III: Total Budget and Workplan .......................................................................................... 76 SECTION IV: Additional Information ................................................................................................... 85
PART I: Terms of Reference for Key Project Groups, Staff, and Sub-Contractors ............................... 85 A. Project National Steering Committee ............................................................................................ 85 B. Project Executive ........................................................................................................................... 85 C. Project Manager ............................................................................................................................ 86 D. Administrative and Financial Assistant ......................................................................................... 86 E. Site Level Managers ....................................................................................................................... 87 F. Monitoring and evaluation expert ................................................................................................. 88 G. Knowledge Management Expert ................................................................................................... 89
PART II: Stakeholder Involvement Plan ................................................................................................ 89 ANNEXES ................................................................................................................................................. 92 ANNEX A - The major impacts of the four main climatic hazards within Zambia and the main
coping strategies adopted by the local communities. ............................................................................. 92 ANNEX B – Analysis of mean temperature over the last three decades from 32 meteorological
stations in Zambia ..................................................................................................................................... 94 ANNEX C – Vision setting and site selection workshop report. ........................................................... 95 ANNEX D – Checklist for field trip data collection to inform site selection ....................................... 98
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
6
ANNEX E – Site selection criteria. ........................................................................................................ 101 ANNEX F – Strategic Results Framework: Outcomes, outputs, indicators and targets ................. 103 ANNEX G: Cost calculations for outputs ............................................................................................ 114 ANNEX H - List of stakeholders consulted during the PPG phase of the project ............................ 130 ANNEX I – A brief description of policies that address environmental issues. ................................ 136 ANNEX J – Current fertilizer distribution schemes and irrigation schemes in place in Zambia ... 139 ANNEX K – Kataba Community Fish Farming Initiative, Senanga District, Western Province ... 140 ANNEX L – List of people who attended the Draft Project Review Workshop on the 15
th July 2009
and the PAC meeting on 7 August 2009 ................................................................................................ 141 ANNEX M – National Agricultural Information Services budget breakdown for the dissemination
of lessons. ................................................................................................................................................. 143 ANNEX N – Capacity assessment for project implementation........................................................... 147 ANNEX O – LPAC Minutes .................................................................................................................. 152 SIGNATURE PAGE ............................................................................................................................... 154
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
7
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Main crop zones within Zambia_________________________________________________ 13
Figure 2: Map indicating the districts in which the selected pilot sites are situated_________________ 17
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Ministries and departments involved in the project and their specific roles. ....................... 20 Table 2. Co-financing donors and amounts per project Outcome. ...................................................... 24 Table 3. Project outputs and the corresponding pilot sites in which the outputs will be implemented.
.................................................................................................................................................................... 44 Table 4. Risks that could potentially affect the success of the project. ................................................ 50 Table 5. Additional projects in progress in the pilot sites. .................................................................... 56 Table 6. Indicative Monitoring and Evaluation Work Plan and Corresponding Budget. ................. 68 Table 7. Strategic Results Framework of the project. ........................................................................... 71 Table 8. Total budget and workplan. ...................................................................................................... 76 Table 9 Budget notes for Outcome 1: Climate change risks integrated into critical decision making
processes for agricultural management at the local, sub-national and national levels. ...................... 79 Table 10. Budget notes for Outcome 2: Agricultural productivity in the pilot sites made resilient to
the anticipated impacts of climate change. ............................................................................................. 80 Table 11. Budget notes for Outcome 3: National fiscal and development policy revised to promote
adaptation responses in the agricultural sector...................................................................................... 82 Table 12. Budget notes for Outcome 4: Lessons-learned and knowledge management component
established. ................................................................................................................................................. 83 Table 13. Budget notes for Project Management. .................................................................................. 83 Table 14. References for Budget Notes. .................................................................................................. 84 Table 15. Stakeholder Involvement Plan. ............................................................................................... 89
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
8
SECTION I: ELABORATION OF THE NARRATIVE
PART I: Situation Analysis
Zambian context
1. Zambia is a landlocked sub-Saharan African country with an estimated population of 11.8 million
and is characterised by an annual growth rate of 1.63% (2009 estimate)1. When compared to its seven
neighbouring countries2, Zambia exhibits the lowest life expectancy (38.6 years), which can be partly
attributed to its devastating HIV/AIDS epidemic. The UNDP’s 2008/2009 Human Development Index
(HDI) ranks Zambia as 163rd
out of 179 countries, whilst the Human Poverty Index (HPI) places it 124th
out of 135 developing countries3. Approximately 39.2% of the population is concentrated in urban areas
making Zambia one of the most urbanized countries within the Southern African Development
Community (SADC) region4.
2. Despite Zambia having a stable and peaceful multi-party democratic system characterised by a
free press and an active civil society, development and economic success is currently marred by a number
of factors, including: i) high levels of poverty (73% of Zambians are classified as poverty-stricken5 with
rural poverty as high as 78% in 20086 – defined as a daily income of less than 1 US dollar); ii) food
insecurity (over 70% of the population is food-insecure7); iii) insufficient economic diversification; iv)
insufficient investment initiatives and savings; and v) debilitating levels of HIV/AIDS and malaria8.
3. Four decades ago, Zambia was a prosperous middle-income country with a per capita income of
$752 (1965). However, per capita income fell as low as $351 in 2002. The main reason behind the
economic decline was the reduction in the purchasing power of copper, Zambia’s primary export at that
time. During the 1970s, oil prices escalated whilst international copper prices dropped, resulting in severe
economic hardship in Zambia9. As a result, Zambia’s economic development has been adversely
influenced by declining copper prices leading to a steady decrease in all development indicators since the
1990s. In response, and with short-term interests in mind, the Government of the Republic of Zambia
(GRZ) borrowed heavily which rendered Zambia one of the most heavily indebted countries in sub-
Saharan Africa. Investment into human development was replaced with interest repayments on foreign
debts and, as a result, Zambia was granted debt relief in 2000 as part of the Highly Indebted Poor
Countries (HIPC) initiative. Despite the debt relief, Zambia remains heavily dependent on foreign donors
at present10
.
4. The HIV/AIDS epidemic has exacerbated the poverty and food security situation in Zambia.
HIV/AIDS prevalence was as high as 15.2% in 200711
. As a result, The HIV/AIDS disease burden has
1 CIA World Fact Book 2009 (https://www.cia.gov).
2 Angola, Democratic Republic of Congo, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Tanzania, Zimbabwe.
3 UNDP 2008 Statistical Update (http://hdrstats.undp.org/2008/countries/country_fact_sheets/cty_fs_ZMB.html).
4 WHO Country Cooperation Strategy Zambia (2002 – 2005) (http://www.who.int).
5 2002 – 2005 Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP).
6 Central Statistical Office (2006) Statistical Fact Sheet.
7 Jorgensen, S.L. & Loudjeva, Z. 2005. A Poverty and Social Impact Analysis of Three Reforms in Zambia: Land,
Fertilizer and Infrastructure. The World Bank. Social Analysis Paper No. 49 8 World Bank – Zambia Country Brief (http://web.worldbank.org) 9 Jorgensen, S.L. & Loudjeva, Z. 2005. A Poverty and Social Impact Analysis of Three Reforms in Zambia: Land,
Fertilizer and Infrastructure. The World Bank. Social Analysis Paper No. 49 10
Jorgensen, S.L. & Loudjeva, Z. 2005. A Poverty and Social Impact Analysis of Three Reforms in Zambia: Land,
Fertilizer and Infrastructure. The World Bank. Social Analysis Paper No. 49 11
CIA World Fact Book 2009 (https://www.cia.gov).
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
9
increased to adversely impact on inter alia household incomes, the health system, the labour force and
overall economic development. Malaria is also endemic in Zambia with an estimated three million
clinical cases reported each year12
, with major repercussions for economic development in Zambia.
5. Zambia experiences a predominantly sub-tropical climate characterised by three distinct seasons,
namely a hot and dry season (mid-August to the end of November), a rainy season (November through to
April) and a cool dry season (May to mid-August). Rainfall is strongly influenced by the movement of the
Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) as well as the El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO)
phenomenon and varies from an annual average of 600 mm in the lower south up to 1300 mm in the
upper north of the country. Due to the variation in rainfall, the country has been divided into three agro-
ecological regions (AERs) according to rainfall, namely:
Agro-ecological Region I: this region covers the western and southern part of Zambia and receives
less than 800 mm of rain annually. It was once considered the bread basket of the nation but it has
experienced low, unpredictable and poorly distributed rainfall over the last 20 years. The observed
meteorological data indicates that it is currently the driest region in Zambia. In addition, the region is
particularly drought-prone and has limited potential for crop production. AER I has a growing season
spanning between 80 and 120 days. The soils are highly erodible and agricultural production is
concentrated on bulrush millet (Pennisetum glaucum), sorghum and livestock.
Agro-ecological Region II: this region covers the central part of the country, extending from the east
through to the west. It is the most populous region with over 4 million inhabitants and has the
greatest agricultural potential. The region receives about 800–1000 mm of rainfall annually, which is
evenly distributed throughout the crop growing season and its soils are relatively fertile. AER II has a
growing season of between 100 and 140 days. The central plateau of AER II has productive soils,
allowing permanent cultivation of sorghum, maize, groundnuts, cow peas and a range of cash crops
including tobacco, sunflowers, irrigated wheat, soybeans and horticultural crops. The aggraded
Western plateau is characterized by infertile, coarse sands. Cassava, bulrush millet and Bambara nuts
(Voandzeia) predominate on the upland with some maize and sorghum. Maize, rice and sorghum are
grown in the flood plain.
Agro-ecological Region III: this region spans the northern part of the country and has a population
of over 3.5 million. It receives over 1000 mm of rainfall annually. As a result, the soils within this
region are highly leached and acidic. AER III has a growing season of 160 days. The main crops,
grown by traditional slash and burn farming systems, are finger millet (Eleusine coracana), beans
and cassava. Cash crops include maize, sunflowers, coffee, tea, tobacco, irrigated wheat and
soybeans13
.
The Problem
6. The majority of Zambia’s farmers lack the capacity, resources and financial assistance to adapt to
and overcome worsening climatic conditions. Agricultural production within Zambia is dominated by
small-scale farmers14
, the majority of whom farm on less than two hectares of land. With very little
infrastructure for water collection, many farms lack irrigation systems15
and rely solely on rain-fed
agriculture, rendering them particularly vulnerable to variations in climatic conditions and to predicted
12
Zambia Country Profile: Overview of malaria control activities and programme progress. (http://rbm.who.int) 13
Aregheore, E.M. Country Pasture/ Forage Resource Profiles. (http://www.fao.org). 14
Crops cultivated include maize, groundnuts, roots and tubers. 15
Of the country’s irrigation potential, conservatively estimated at 2 750 000 hectares, only about 100 000 hectares
is currently under irrigation mostly by commercial farmers who account for about 52 000 hectares (Ministry of
Agriculture and Cooperatives. 2004. Irrigation Policy and Strategy).
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
10
climate change. To further aggravate the situation, poverty is endemic among small-scale farmers, with an
incidence of 84%16
.
7. The Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) highlights that Zambian
communities are vulnerable to climatic hazards (such as drought, flooding, extreme temperatures and
prolonged dry spells) which precipitate widespread crop failure, negatively impact food and water
security and, ultimately, affect the sustainability of rural livelihoods. AER I and II are particularly prone
to such climatic hazards (the impacts of which and the communities’ associated coping strategies are
listed in Annex A). Since the 1980s, agricultural production within both AER I and II has been hampered
by a later onset and shortening of the rainy season. Furthermore, drought and flooding episodes across
Zambia have become more frequent and of increasing intensity, which is believed to be a manifestation of
long-term climate change17
. The negative impacts of such events have adversely impacted inter alia water
quality, soil quality, agricultural production, food security, water security, wildlife and infrastructure and
resulted in the displacement of human populations18
. Predicted climate change is likely to exacerbate this
situation. For this reason, this LDCF project (hereafter referred to as “the project”) has chosen to focus on
adapting AER I and II to drought and other predicted climatic changes, including variability.
Climate change projections and expected impacts
8. Climate change projections outlined in the NAPA show an increase in temperature and a change in
rainfall patterns, leading to prolonged droughts, localized flooding and a shortened growing season in
Zambia19
. As a result, AER I and II are predicted to experience strong water deficits at critical periods of
the cropping calendars, resulting in severe decreases in crop yields20
. Without the implementation of
timely adaptation measures, all of the abovementioned impacts will drastically reduce food security,
particularly in rural communities in AER I and II. Climate change is also expected to impact
disproportionately on women. As such, understanding how the different social expectations, roles, status,
and economic power of men and women affect, and are affected differently by, climate change will
improve actions taken to reduce vulnerability and combat climate change in the developing world. For
example, climate change is predicted to reduce crop yields and food production in certain regions.
Women are responsible for 70 – 80 % of household food production in sub-Saharan Africa. They achieve
this despite unequal access to land, information, and inputs, such as improved seeds and fertilizer. In
Zambia, the agricultural sector, which has been identified as one of the most vulnerable sectors to climate
change, is the main source of employment for rural women who constitute 65% of the total rural
population.
9. Climate projections reported by the IPCC AR421
indicate that Africa is very likely to warm by 3 to
4oC during this century
22, which is predicted to be greater than the global mean temperature increase.
16
Jorgensen, S.L. & Loudjeva, Z. 2005. A Poverty and Social Impact Analysis of Three Reforms in Zambia: Land,
Fertilizer and Infrastructure. The World Bank. Social Analysis Paper No. 49. 17
Jain, S.2007. An Empirical Economic Assessment of Impacts of Climate Change on Agriculture in Zambia. The
World Bank Development Research Group. Sustainable Rural and Urban Development Team. 18
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 19
Zambia Project Preparation Grant, 2008. 20
Results of an assessment of the economic costs of climate change on agriculture in Zambia undertaken by the
World Bank, with support from FAO, IWMI, Yale University and the University of Pretoria. 21
Christensen, J. H., Hewitson, B., Busuioc, A. et al. 2007. Regional Climate Projections. - In: Solomon, S., Qin, D.,
Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K. B., Tignor, M. and Miller, H. L. (eds.), Climate Change 2007: The
Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 848-940. 22
Under the A1B scenario i.e. projected atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration of 850 parts per million in 2100.
This prediction is based on a future world of very rapid economic growth, global population that peaks in mid-
century and declines thereafter, and the rapid introduction of new and more efficient technologies, with a balance of
fossil intensive and non-fossil energy sources.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
11
Climate change assessments for Zambia suggest that projected mean temperatures (between 2010 and
2070) are set to increase relative to baseline mean temperatures (between 1970 and 2000) by
approximately 2°C (HADCM3 Global Circulation Model, GCM)23
. Projections of mean annual rainfall
are less certain. IPCC projections indicate that rainfall in the southern African region may decline by
between 10-20% by 2050 as a result of climate change24
. Within Zambia, seasonal changes in rainfall are
predicted with a reduction in rainfall envisaged for the hot, dry season (in particular from September to
October) and an increase in rainfall expected for the rainy season especially in AER III (in particular from
December to February)25
. Heavy bouts of rainfall are projected to increase annually26
, which is likely to
cause additional flooding events. However, rainfall predictions are frequently inconclusive, partly because
the GCM’s are unable to reproduce the mechanisms largely responsible for precipitation (such as sea
surface temperatures, dust aerosols, deforestation and soil moisture). Ambiguity also exists as to how
climate change may affect ENSO, which exerts a strong influence over rainfall variability within
Zambia27
. Any increase in rainfall, however, is likely to be offset (potentially entirely) by warming and
loss of water via evapotranspiration. In short, projections of future climate indicate that within AER I and
II there will be a trend of increasing temperatures (with concomitant increases in evapotranspiration rates)
and alternating periods of drought and flooding28
.
10. Analysis of the observed mean temperature trends over the last 30 years from 32 meteorological
stations29
in Zambia (see Annex B) supports the predicted trend of warming, and indicates that summer
temperatures have been increasing at a rate of approximately 0.6°C per decade. Similarly, baseline data
shows that rainfall in the southern African region has been decreasing over the last 25 years30
. Analysis of
observed rainfall data from all of Zambia’s meteorological stations reflect that of the 14 years between
1990/1991 and 2003/2004, at least ten years experienced below normal rainfall in each AER. AER I was
also shown to have experienced more severe dry seasons than AER II over the past two decades31
.
11. Currently, Zambia experiences an average annual potential evapotranspiration (ranging from 1394
to 1892 mm) that exceeds average rainfall (estimated at 684 mm between 1970 and 2000) resulting in a
precipitation deficit of up to 1100 mm each year32
. This already has serious implications for agricultural
productivity and water availability and management. Climate change is likely to exacerbate this situation
with additional negative consequences for the agriculture and water resources sectors.
12. Since the 1990s, crop production in Zambia has been exposed to more extreme events such as
drought and flooding. Although Zambia has historically been affected by drought and flooding, the
frequency, intensity and geographic distribution of such incidents have increased over the past two
decades. Over the last 16 years, for example, six droughts have affected the country during the growing
23
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 24
Christensen, J. H., Hewitson, B., Busuioc, A. et al. 2007. Regional Climate Projections. - In: Solomon, S., Qin, D.,
Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K. B., Tignor, M. and Miller, H. L. (eds.), Climate Change 2007: The
Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 848-940. 25
McSweeney, C., New, M. & Lizacana, G. UNDP Climate Change Country Profiles: Zambia. (http://country-
profiles.geog.ox.ac.uk). 26
McSweeney, C., New, M. & Lizacana, G. UNDP Climate Change Country Profiles: Zambia. (http://country-
profiles.geog.ox.ac.uk). 27
Hulme, M, RM Doherty, T Ngara, MG New, and D Lister. 2001. African climate change: 1900-2100. Climate
Research 17:145-168. 28
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 29
Jain, S. 2007. An Empirical Economic Assessment of Impacts of Climate Change on Agriculture in Zambia. The
World Bank Development Research Group. Sustainable Rural and Urban Development Team. 30
Hulme, M, 1996. Climate change and Southern Africa. Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia, UK. 31
Jain, S. 2007. An Empirical Economic Assessment of Impacts of Climate Change on Agriculture in Zambia. The
World Bank Development Research Group. Sustainable Rural and Urban Development Team. 32
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
12
seasons. The 2004/2005 drought, which coincided with the critical flowering period for major cereal
crops, resulted in two thirds of the country receiving little or no rainfall. Following this event, the
Vulnerability Assessment Committee (VAC) (June 2005) reported some 1.2 million starving people and
estimated that at least 120 000 tons of food aid was required to ensure their survival until the 2006
harvest33
. Maize production failures as a result of the drought were estimated at 740 000 metric tons (MT),
the largest production loss in recent history34
. In addition, the 2006/07 floods affected almost 1.5 million
people in 41 out of 72 districts in the nine Zambian provinces and for several of those districts it was the
first time that they had been affected by flooding35
.
13. The Zambian NAPA process and the Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP) have established
that climate change and variability will have detrimental effects on Zambia’s agricultural sector beyond
the current baseline pressures. In light of the heavy reliance of small-scale farming on rain-fed agriculture,
the agricultural sector is highly vulnerable to increasing temperatures and variable precipitation in the
coming years. Overall, climate change (the impacts of drought, flooding and increased evapotranspiration)
is likely to have numerous adverse consequences within Zambia including inter alia: i) reduced
agricultural productivity (crop and livestock production); ii) reduced fisheries production iii) reduced
water availability for human consumption iv) human welfare impacts in urban areas due to increased
migration from rural to urban areas; v) reduced hydro-electric power generation; iv) human health
impacts; and vii) biodiversity impacts. These risks are discussed in detail below.
i) Reduced agricultural productivity
14. Agriculture is an integral part of Zambia’s economy and seen as one of the driving forces for the
anticipated economic growth that is required to reduce poverty36
. Agriculture contributes between 18-20%
to GDP37
, employs approximately 67% of the labour force and remains the principal source of income and
employment for women in rural areas38
. Assessments using the Decision Support System for Agro-
Technology Transfer (DSSAT3) have indicated that the predicted shortening of the growing season will
prevent key crop varieties, particularly maize39
, from reaching maturation in AER I and II. Furthermore,
the Zambia NAPA highlighted that the area suitable for staple crop (such as maize) production under rain-
fed conditions is likely to decline by 80% by 2100 as a result of climate change. Consequently, food
security will be undermined nationwide because these two regions are the primary maize producers (see
Figure 1) 40
. Indeed, within the last 20 years, prolonged dry spells and shorter rainfall seasons have
reduced maize yields to only 40% of the long-term average41
.
33
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 34
Umetsu C., Thamana L., Sakurai T. District Level Analysis of Drought Response and Resilience Index
(http://www.chikyu.ac.jp). 35
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 36
Ministry of Finance and National Planning, 2006. Fifth National Development Plan, 2006-2010. 37
Ministry of Finance and National Planning, 2006. Fifth National Development Plan, 2006-2010. 38
Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives, 2004. National Agricultural Policy, 2004-2015. 39
Maize is the major staple food in Zambia and accounts for over 87% of the caloric intake. 40
Maize dominates the area dedicated to crops in AER I and II by 84% and 72%, respectively. Maize is only planted
across 18% of AER III’s cropping area (Jain, 2007). 41
Jain, S.2007. An Empirical Economic Assessment of Impacts of Climate Change on Agriculture in Zambia. The
World Bank Development Research Group. Sustainable Rural and Urban Development Team.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
13
Figure 1. Main crop zones within Zambia, indicating that maize is predominantly grown in AER I and II,
cassava in AER III, millet in AER I and III, sorghum in AER I and II and wheat in AER II and III42
.
15. Furthermore, vulnerability assessments indicate that agricultural production in AER I and II will
exhibit severe yield deficits at critical periods of the cropping calendar as a result of climate change43
.
Based on a CO2 doubling scenario in these regions, estimates predict a yield reduction of approximately
66% under rain-fed conditions compared to 16% under irrigated conditions44
.
16. Apart from being the major maize producing belts, AER I and II are also the major livestock
producing regions in the country. Communities in AER I, for example, are largely dependent on livestock
as a source of livelihood, food and draught power45
. The livestock industry is increasingly becoming an
important component of Zambia’s economy as it contributes approximately 7.45% to GNP and accounts
for approximately 35% of the total agricultural production46
. However, the livestock sector is particularly
vulnerable to the impacts of climate change because livestock numbers are strongly correlated with
rainfall and temperature47
. As such, the anticipated variability in rainfall and increase in temperatures in
AER I and II are likely to impact negatively on the livestock industry with additional consequences for
food security.
42
Source: The IDL Group. 2002. Trends in the Zambian Agriculture Sector. 43
Results of an assessment of the economic costs of climate change on agriculture in Zambia undertaken by the
World Bank, with support from FAO, IWMI, Yale University and the University of Pretoria. 44
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 45
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 46
Policy Advisory Note on Enhancing Livestock Development in Zambia. 47
As temperatures rise, population size is reduced and vice versa. Livestock population size improves during
periods of high rainfall as a result of the effect rainfall has on pasture. The opposite is true during periods of low
rainfall.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
14
ii) Reduced fisheries productivity
17. The productivity of fisheries is also at risk of climate change impacts48
. The potential reduction in
rainfall in AER I and II will reduce nutrient levels in lakes and rivers thereby negatively impacting fish
breeding activity and depleting fish populations in the long-term. Bream and sardines were identified as
being the fish species most vulnerable to the impacts of drought within AER I and II49
. Overall, the
envisaged reduction in agricultural (crops and livestock) and fisheries production is likely to have various
negative impacts on all sectors of the economy and may affect political stability within Zambia.
iii) Reduced water availability for human consumption
18. Both flooding and drought events are likely to impact on the availability of safe and clean drinking
water for human populations within Zambia. Flooding events have the ability to spread disease and
thereby reduce the availability of safe drinking water. Drought directly reduces the amount of drinking
water available, with additional health impacts. Furthermore, drought affects surface water reserves by
lowering water tables and causing boreholes and streams to dry up. In rural communities, women and
children frequently have to travel long distances in order to collect water50
. The distances to be walked in
the future are likely to increase as climate change effects continue to manifest, and surface water reserves
begin to dry out, resulting in a vastly reduced quality of life for many people. The time taken to collect
water by these vulnerable groups also has a negative economic effect in that the water bearers are unable
to contribute to economic productivity.
iv) Human welfare impacts
19. Floods and droughts have additional socio-economic consequences, such as migration. The
increased frequency of floods and droughts in the Gwembe Valley in AER I, for example, has resulted in
increased migration to the nearby cities51
. Already considered a highly urbanized country compared to its
neighbours, the increase in rural-urban migration is likely to increase the stress on the GRZ’s ability to
provide basic services and amenities for these migrants.
V) Forestry impacts
20. Climate change poses a significant threat to the forestry sector within Zambia. For example, the
regeneration of the Miombo Woodland52
, which usually occurs relatively rapidly, has already been
hampered by drought and excessive temperatures53
. Over 80% of Zambian households rely on the
Miombo Woodland for charcoal and fuelwood and it is vital that their use of the woodlands is rapidly
curtailed in order to manage for lower precipitation levels and to avoid unsustainable harvesting of the
woodlands (e.g. clearing of forest for agriculture and charcoal production). The negative effects of
climate change within Zambia will be superimposed on the effects of current unsustainable land-use
practises including the clearing of forests for agriculture and charcoal production amongst other practises.
Root causes
21. There are various factors driving Zambia’s poor agricultural performance. These factors include: i)
low levels of investment ii) land degradation; iii) limited access to agricultural inputs such as fertilizer in
the last two decades; iv) a reduced labour force due to HIV/AIDS.
48
Brander, K. 2006. Assessment of Possible Impacts of Climate Change on Fisheries.
49 Data is based on the Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessments conducted under the United States Country Study
Programme, 1992. 50
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 51
Zambia Vulnerability Assessment Committee (2004) Zambia Livelihood Map Rezoning and Baseline Profiling. 52
The Miombo Woodland covers approximately 60 % of Zambia’s total surface area and thus is the most important
vegetation type. 53
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
15
i) Low levels of investment
22. The ability of the agricultural sector in Zambia to cope with increases in temperature and potential
reductions in rainfall is negligible given the limited investment in this sector and the minimal amount of
supporting infrastructure (e.g. storage depots, transport networks). Despite the fact that over 60% of the
population derives their livelihood from agriculture54
, government spending on the sector is less than 5%
of the government budget and only approximately 1% of GDP55
. This low level of investment into
agricultural-related developments has resulted in the deterioration of agricultural support infrastructure,
high incidences of livestock diseases and extension service delivery operating at only 40% of its potential
capacity56
.
23. Despite holding about 40% of the water in the SADC region, irrigation has not been promoted in
Zambia57
. Less than 5% of arable land in Zambia is currently irrigated58
, rendering small-scale farmers
particularly vulnerable to the predicted increase in temperature and rainfall variability as a result of
climate change. The development of the irrigation sector has been limited by the lack of infrastructure
available for extracting and distributing water, the lack of appropriate technologies to facilitate water
extraction, and inadequate access to markets and financial resources59
. In addition, water resources are
often mismanaged as a result of insufficient knowledge concerning appropriate maintenance and
management techniques60
. For example, to ensure sustainable management of community irrigation
schemes and dams, the establishment of management committees as well as establishment of maintenance
funds are required. However, in most of the districts visited during the preparation of this document,
neither of these was in place.
ii) Land degradation
24. After Zambia achieved independence from the United Kingdom in 1964, its agricultural policy
focused on promoting maize production through large-scale marketing support and provision of extensive
fertilizer subsidies. Maize marketing guarantees provided further incentive for the adoption of high-input
maize packages by farmers. Following decades of heavy application of nitrogen fertilizers and extensive
ploughing, many agricultural landscapes in Zambia (particularly in AER I and II) became acidic by the
1990s, thereby reducing land quality and productivity61
. Consequently, agricultural production in Zambia
is strongly reliant on fertilizer use and liming to improve yields. Zambia’s agricultural sector is also
largely reliant on cash crops, with tobacco and cotton being particularly important to the economy. This
has a major impact on farmers’ capacity to adapt to climate change as promoting cash crops is, to a large
extent, the endorsement of monocultures62
. Because monocultures tend to be vulnerable to pest and
disease outbreaks, the canopy cover of crops can be rapidly and markedly reduced during the rainy season,
exposing the bare soil to raindrop impact. Such raindrop impact degrades the structure of the soil by
breaking up aggregates and also increasing dispersion of clay. The clay dispersion causes soil crusting
54
Adverse Impacts of Climate Change and Development Challenges: Integrating Adaptation in Policy and
Development in Zambia. A Least Developed Countries for Adaptation to Climate Change (CLACC) project. 55
Ministry of Finance and National Planning, 2006. Fifth National Development Plan, 2006-2010. 56
Ministry of Finance and National Planning, 2006. Fifth National Development Plan, 2006-2010. 57
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 58
UNDP Initiation Plan: Adaptation to the Effect of Drought and Climate Change in Agro-ecological Zone I and 2
in Zambia. 59
MACO, 2004, Zambia Irrigation Policy Review and Strategy. 60
During field missions in the four pilot provinces for the purpose of site selection, the field mission teams came
across some poorly managed silted dams in some of the districts. 61 Haggblade, S. and Tembo, G. 2003. Conference Paper No. II: Conservation Farming in Zambia. Paper presented
at the InWEnt, IFPRI, NEPAD, CTA conference “Successes in African Agriculture”. 62 Ikeme. J. 2003. Climate change adaptation deficiencies in developing countries: the case of sub-Saharan Africa.
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 8(1): 29-52.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
16
which dramatically reduces infiltrability of the soil, increasing runoff and soil erosion as a result63
. The
effect of monocultures can thus, unless managed carefully, greatly increase the agricultural sector’s
vulnerability to climate change64
.
iii) Limited access to farming inputs
25. Although there are fertilizer support programmes in place in Zambia (details contained in Annex H),
they reach a very small proportion of farmers, despite the fact that support for the programmes constitutes
80% of the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives’s (MACO) budget65
. Fertilizer imported for
government distribution programmes, for example, has declined from over 100 000 MT in the early 1990s
to less than 40 000 MT. Furthermore, the price of fertilizer has increased more than two-fold whilst
delivery has become progressively less reliable. As a result, agricultural productivity across Zambia
suffered as subsistence farmers, who constitute 75% of the farming community, have struggled to access
agricultural inputs66
. Although early maturing and drought-resistant seeds are distributed to farmers in
AER I and II, suitable seed is also frequently unavailable and delivery is often late. As a result, farmers
plant inappropriate crops, resulting in below-optimum yields.
iv) HIV/AIDS prevalence
26. Zambia’s agricultural sector has been significantly affected by the HIV/AIDS pandemic. One in six
Zambians between 15 and 49 years of age is estimated to be infected with HIV, with four times as many
females between 15 and 24 years of age infected than males67
. The higher infection rate in females, the
primary caregivers, adversely affects food security and income streams because women, who are more
involved in food provision at the household level, cannot participate as much as they used to in
agricultural activities68
. In general, labour is constrained by the incidence of disease and sickness. Malaria,
for example, is endemic during the rainy season and prevents numerous able-bodied men and women
from taking part in farm activities. Not only does sickness inhibit time spent in the fields, but it also
increases medical costs.
LDCF Alternative Scenario
27. To reduce the vulnerability of communities in AER I and II to climate change impacts, the project
will take a two pronged-approach: i) mainstreaming of adaptation into agricultural planning and national,
district and community levels to make the case for investment in adaptation in the agricultural sector ii)
test and evaluate the adaptation value interventions that protect and improve agricultural incomes from
the effects of climate change. Capacity and systems to anticipate assess and prepare for climate change
risks will be developed at community, regional and national levels. Adaptation learning generated from
the pilot projects will be used to guide mainstreaming of adaptation in national fiscal, regulatory and
development policy, to support adaptive practices on a wider scale. The following four outcomes will be
delivered:
1. Climate change risks integrated into critical decision-making processes for agricultural
management at the local, sub-national and national levels
63 Mills, A.J. and Fey, M.V. 2004. Effects of vegetation cover on the tendency of soil to crust in South Africa. Soil
Use and Management 20:308-317. 64
Salinger, M.J., Stigter, C.J. and Das, H.P.: 2000, ‘Agrometeorological adaptation strategies to
increasing climate variability and climate change’. Agric. Forest Meteor. 103: 167–184. 65
Slater, R. 2007. Climate change: implications for DFIDs agricultural policy. Overseas Development Institute. 66 Jain, S. 2007. An Empirical Economic Assessment of Impacts of Climate Change on Agriculture in Zambia. The
World Bank Development Research Group. Sustainable Rural and Urban Development Team. 67
United Nations Development Assistance Framework for the Republic of Zambia 20007 – 2010 (2005). 68
World Food Programme (2006) Country Programme-Zambia (2007-2010)
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
17
2. Agricultural productivity in the pilot sites made resilient to the anticipated impacts of climate
change
3. National fiscal, regulatory and development policy revised to promote adaptation responses in the
agricultural sector
4. Knowledge and lessons learned to support implementation of adaptation measures compiled and
disseminated
28. The pilot interventions implemented in the eight pilot sites will test the extent to which agricultural
productivity; income streams and quality of life are protected and improved under changing climatic
conditions.
29. The results of the pilot interventions will be used to promote policy and budgetary adjustments so
that successful pilots are scaled up and catalysed throughout Zambia.
30. Importantly, local capacity will be strengthened (through extensive training and involvement in the
implementation of interventions) to facilitate effective project management, generate community
ownership and to ensure that project interventions are sustainable beyond the project lifespan. In
particular, the project will focus on overcoming barriers that prevent the upscaling of successful
interventions and the adoption of profitable activities by local entrepreneurs. The adaptation rationale
here is that successful adaptation to climate change across the country can only be achieved if adaptation
interventions are profitable for local communities and are thus spontaneously adopted by local businesses.
A policy environment needs to be created that facilitates such entrepreneurship. In order to address
inequalities, the project will promote gender equality and empowerment of women through affirmative
action.
Lusaka Province: Kabeleka (Chongwe District) and Zalapango (Luangwa District).
LEGEND
Shangombo
Luangwa
Senanga
Kazungula
Chongwe
Chama
Mambwe
Siavonga
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
18
Figure 2. Map indicating the districts in which the selected pilot sites are situated.
Barriers
31. There are a number of barriers that are likely to hinder adaptation in the agricultural sector in
Zambia, which the project will address. These are set out below:
Limited access to markets limits farmers’ ability to sell goods and their ability to source goods
such as fertilizers, equipment and extension advice. One of the largest determinants of fertilizer
price is the high cost of transportation over Zambia’s deteriorating roads69
. Furthermore,
information on current market prices is rarely available and, in most cases, trade is through a
barter system.
Limited climate risk information hampers decision makers’ ability to make informed policy
changes. At the farmer-level, planning tools are lacking for the planting and harvesting season. At
the national level, strategic decisions on agricultural planning over the medium term are
prevented by a lack of national-level long-term projected changes in climatic parameters.
Although there is an early warning system (EWS) in place in Zambia to disseminate climate risk
information, there are a number of key weaknesses associated with the system, namely: i) a lack
of agro-meteorological stations70
; ii) forecasting institutions are inadequately equipped and have
little capacity; iii) inadequate communication to stakeholders (such as water managers, extension
officers, other agricultural/hydrological stakeholders) and, in particular, farmers (including
packaging the information in a format that is not easily understood or accessible)71
; iv)
insufficient institutional processes in place to ensure effective distribution of information due to
ineffective links between the MACO and the District authorities72
; and v) limited capacity to cater
for effective adaptation support at all levels (national, district, and local community levels).
Limited institutional capacity to adequately address climate change: climate change is not
properly integrated into planning processes73
. Certain planning processes and policies within
Zambia, such as the National Agricultural Policy (NAP) and the National Irrigation Policy (NIP),
do not explicitly acknowledge the impact climate change is likely to have on their ability to
achieve their objectives (see Institutional, Sectoral and Policy context). In addition, apart from the
Environmental Protection and Pollution Control Act, Zambia lacks a clear and specific legal and
policy framework to address climate change concerns.
Limited public awareness of climate change. The public within Zambia have a limited
understanding of how climate change will potentially impact on socio-economics, livelihoods,
resources and ecosystems. This dearth of awareness hinders public participation in shaping
climate change policy and legislation74
. In Zambia, there is also a lack of private sector
involvement on issues related to climate change.
69
Jorgensen, S.L. & Loudjeva, Z. 2005. A Poverty and Social Impact Analysis of Three Reforms in Zambia: Land,
Fertilizer and Infrastructure. Social Development Papers. The World Bank. Social Analysis Paper No. 49. 70
Presentations during the Inception Workshop by ZMD revealed that there are only 9 agro-meteorological stations
in Zambia and none are situated within AER I. 71
Information from consultations with MACO as well as with the ZMD during the Project Identification (PIF) phase. 72
Information from consultations with MACO as well as with the ZMD during the Project Identification (PIF) phase. 73
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 74
National Capacity Self Assessment (NCSA), Draft. 2006 (http://ncsa.undp.org/docs/237.doc).
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
19
Institutional baseline
32. Zambia is vulnerable to present climatic hazards, which significantly affect food security and
poverty. In response, the GRZ has set in motion a number of policies and programmes, detailed below,
aimed at mitigating the impacts of these hazards.
33. A prominent example is the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP, 2002-2004), which was
succeeded by the Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP, 2006-2010). A large proportion of the
development fostered by these two strategies lies within the agricultural sector, which has been bolstered
by an improved provision of seed, fertiliser, livestock, equipment, training and land development as well
as the establishment of new investment opportunities and disease control. Other sectors being further
developed by the PRSP and FNDP include the infrastructure, education, health, tourism and mining
sectors. Through the FNDP, the government plans to raise expenditure on agriculture from less than 5%
of the government budget to approximately 9% by 2010. The FNDP programmes for the agricultural
sector are aimed at:
a. Attaining food security for the majority of households with at least 90% of the population
being food secure by 2010;
b. Increasing the contribution of the agricultural sector to total foreign exchange earnings from
current 3-5% to 10-20 % by 2010;
c. Attaining growth in the agricultural sector of 10% per annum from 2006 onwards;
d. Increasing the overall agricultural contribution to GDP from 18-20% to 25% by 2010;
e. Increasing incomes for those involved in the agricultural sector.
34. Other policies relevant to adaptation include the National Disaster Management Policy (NDMP,
2005), the National Agricultural Policy (NAP, 2004-2015) and the National Irrigation Plan (NIP, 2006-
2011). The NDMP was put in place in an effort to respond to local, regional and national disasters related
to flooding, drought and other climatic hazards. The purpose of Zambia’s NAP and the NIP is also to
enhance agricultural productivity and thereby reduce poverty by means of inter alia capacity building,
sustainable agricultural practices, soil conservation measures and increasing the extent of irrigated
agriculture.
35. The National Environment Policy (NPE, 2004) identifies 11 government ministries involved in
environmental affairs75
. Nine of these ministries have policies that include environmental matters
(nineteen policies in total, the details of which are contained in Annex G). The draft NPE also highlights
current shortfalls in these nineteen policies including ineffectual mechanisms for community-based
natural resources management, lack of informal inter-sectoral links, limited up-to date baseline data and
limited national guidelines for effective integration of international environmental conventions76
. In
addition, intra and inter-sectoral institutional arrangements are limited and few coordination mechanisms
exist for effective multi-sectoral integration of legislation, and of adaptation into such legislation.
36. Furthermore, Zambia has a Gender Policy, which was adopted in 2000. This policy recognizes the
gender disparity that exists between men and women, where women remain a disadvantaged and
vulnerable group. In this regard, the policy advocates for gender equality and women’s empowerment in
all sectors. This is also captured in the FNDP where gender concerns are regarded as a sectorial as well as
a cross-cutting issue. Furthermore, the strategic plan for the implementation of the gender policy has
prioritized five sectors and agriculture is one of these sectors where affirmative action has to be
undertaken in the planning and implementation of projects/programme.
75
These ministries are: Finance and National Planning; MACO; Mines and Mineral Development; Health;
Education; Local Government and Housing’ Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources; Community
Development; Lands; and the Cabinet Office. 76
NPE (2004)
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
20
37. Although climate change is likely to have serious impacts on Zambia’s ability to meet its
development targets as outlined in the FNDP and attain the MDGs, climate change has not been
integrated into any of the abovementioned policies, apart from the FNDP. However, the policies do
acknowledge that present climatic variability is, to a large degree, responsible for crop failure and
associated food, water and health insecurity. As a result of this acknowledgement, most of the policies
emphasise the need for an improved EWS that is effective at a local level. Due to the fact that climate
change is not adequately taken into account, the policies’ mitigation and development strategies are likely
to be less effective and potentially maladaptive in the future. For example, the NAP and the NIP promote
an increase in irrigation to reduce the reliance on rain-fed agriculture. While irrigation is a viable option at
present due to Zambia’s substantial groundwater reserves, this may not be the case in the future due to
climate change. With increasingly variable rainfall, increasing temperatures and concomitant increasing
evapotranspiration, the rate of depletion of groundwater reserves may outstrip the recharge rates.
Although the FNDP recognizes climate change as a problem and highlights the importance of
incorporating climate change considerations in development planning, it does not propose how to address
the situation.
Stakeholder analysis
38. Project interventions will range from the level of national government to that of village farmer. In
order to foster ownership of the project, the project document was formulated with the help of stakeholder
consultations from the outset. These consultations included:
The Project Preparation Grant (PPG) Pre-Inception Workshop held from 2-6th February 2009;
The PPG Inception Workshop held on 2nd
March 2009;
The Vision Setting workshop held on 3rd
April 2009;
Consultations with Agricultural and Natural Resources subcommittees of the Provincial Development
Coordination Committee (PDCC) and District Development Coordination Committee (DDCC),
which were held between 28th April and 10
th May 2009;
Consultations with the communities in which the interventions are to be piloted, which were held
between 28th April and 10
th May 2009, and;
A site selection workshop held between 14 and 15th May 2009;
A draft review workshop where all the stakeholders from the government departments; non-
governmental organisations; provincial, district and site level representatives as well as the
international consultant were present. This was held from the 14th to 17
th of July 2009.
A PAC meeting was held on the 7th of August 2009.
39. Reports of the consultation meetings and workshops, including the list of stakeholders involved, are
included in Annex C and J. Annex F contains a summary of PPG activities as well as a list of stakeholders
consulted during the PPG phase. Table 1 below contains the list of key Ministries/Departments and their
role in the project.
Table 1. Ministries and departments involved in the project and their specific roles. Ministry/ Department/
Organizations
Role in Project
Ministry of Agriculture
and Cooperatives
(MACO)
Will serve as the Government Cooperating Agency.
Will be directly responsible for government’s participation in the project.
Will designate a representative for the project who will perform the role and
functions of either the Executive or Senior Beneficiary on the project board.
Department of Agriculture
Will serve as the implementing Department and will, therefore, be responsible for
executing the project.
Will chair the Project Technical Committee (PTC).
Served as the resource institution during PPG for technical aspects related to
agricultural production.
Will delegate implementation responsibilities to other departments such as ZARI,
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
21
Department of Fisheries (DOF), NGOs and others which are still to be identified.
A National Project Coordinator will be appointed from within the Department.
Will house the Project Secretariat (PS).
Will implement project activities through its extension network.
Department of Policy and
Planning Will be a member of the PTC.
Will be responsible for reviewing existing policies to ensure the incorporation of
climate change considerations.
Will facilitate the sharing of lessons and experiences at a national level as
resources permit.
Served as a resource institution during the PPG for policy-related issues.
Responsible for M&E.
Department of Veterinary
and Livestock
Development
Will be a member of the PTC.
Served as a resource institution during the PPG for technical aspects related to
livestock development.
Will provide the PS with technical assistance on livestock related matters during
project implementation.
Departmental staff will be engaged at a local level to implement certain livestock
related interventions.
Department of Fisheries
(DOF) Will be a member of the PTC.
Served as a resource institution during the PPG for technical aspects related to
aquaculture development.
Will provide the PS with technical assistance regarding fisheries related matters.
Departmental staff will be engaged at a local level to implement certain fisheries
related interventions.
Zambia Agricultural
Research Institute Will be a member of the PTC.
Researches the feasibility of drought-resistant crops, horticulture and agro-forestry
for livelihood diversification.
Will provide field-level technical support to farmers in the project areas where
necessary.
Will conduct field-level adaptation research concerning crop diversification
options.
Will be responsible for adaptive technologies demonstrations in AER I and II.
Will provide training to project staff and farmers concerning the adoption of
suitable drought-tolerant crop varieties that have been tested and proven suitable
for AER I and II.
National Agricultural
Information Services Will be a member of the PTC.
Will disseminate climate change information.
Serves as a channel for disseminating weather data from Zambia Meteorological
Department (ZMD) to local farmers.
Serves as a channel for disseminating information concerning improved climate
resilient practices through radio and television programmes.
Ministry of Energy and
Water Development
(MEWD) (Department of
Water Affairs, DWA)
Will be a member of the PTC.
Provide technical assistance concerning water-related activities such as dam
building.
Will assist with the revision of water-related policies to ensure that they
incorporate climate change considerations.
Served as a resource institution during the PPG for activities related to water
resources.
Responsible for collection of hydrological data at the pilot sites.
Ministry of
Communication and
Transport (Zambia
Meteorological
Department)
Will be a member of the PTC.
Served as a resource institution during the PPG for activities related to
meteorology.
Supervises and provides technical assistance on climate modelling and
downscaling of climate information.
Will be responsible for coordination and implementation of activities related to
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
22
meteorological information production and dissemination.
Office of the Vice
President [Disaster
Management and
Mitigation Unit (DMMU)]
Will be a member of the PTC.
Served as a resource institution during the PPG for activities related to the impacts
of climatic hazards.
Will be a recipient of project information and input from the project to incorporate
climate change projections into disaster management plans, policies and projects.
Ministry of Tourism,
Environment and Natural
Resources
Will be a member of the PTC.
Served as a resource institution during the PPG for activities related to the
environment.
Departmental staff (Forestry Department) will be engaged at a local level to
implement certain environment-related interventions.
United Nations
Development Programme
(UNDP) Country Office
Served a technical advisory role during the PIF and PPG processes.
Provided technical support to the Project Manager during the site selection
workshops and project preparation phase.
Will provide support to the National Project Coordinator and the PS concerning
the implementation of project components.
Will be responsible for reporting project progress to GEF.
Will participate in the PTC.
Will be responsible for monitoring (technically and financially) the use of project
funds.
Will mobilize and coordinate support from international partners through a global
network.
Will facilitate the international dissemination of project knowledge and lessons.
Local Communities/
CBOs/ NGOs Was consulted during the PPG process.
Participated in the site selection at the National, Provincial, District and
Community levels.
Members of the field mission teams.
Will participate in the planning and implementation of the project interventions at
the community-level.
Agricultural and Natural
Resources Subcommittee
of the PDCC and DDCC
Participated in the site selection at provincial, district and community levels.
Served as a resource institution during the PPG phase regarding local knowledge
and relevant interventions.
Will facilitate effective coordination of the project at the provincial, district and
community levels.
Will be responsible for supporting and monitoring the project at provincial,
district and community levels.
Will be responsible for community mobilization.
Gender in Development
Division Will be a member of the PTC.
Served as resource institution for promoting gender equality and women
empowerment.
Will serve as resource institution on gender-related issues during the project
implementation.
PART II: STRATEGY
40. To reduce the vulnerability of communities in AER I and II to climate change impacts, the project
will take a two pronged-approach: i) mainstreaming of adaptation into agricultural planning and national,
district and community levels to make the case for investment in adaptation in the agricultural sector ii)
test and evaluate for adaptation value interventions that will protect and improve agricultural incomes
from the effects of climate change. The metric to be used with be percentage increases in agricultural
incomes. Capacity and systems to anticipate assess and prepare for climate change risks will be developed
at community, regional and national levels. Adaptation learning generated from the pilot projects will be
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
23
used to guide mainstreaming of adaptation in national fiscal, regulatory and development policy, to
support adaptive practices on a wider scale. The following four outcomes will be delivered
41. Outcome 1 of the project will improve capacity to use climate risk information to inform planning
processes in the following ways:
Training will be provided to ZMD in order to capacitate them to provide seasonal and long-term
weather forecasts. This will be used to inform decision-making by government planners and farmers;
An economic impact assessment evaluating the benefits of climate risk information will be
undertaken to guide further investments in climate risk information services.
Equipment for the collection and monitoring of water and weather data will be provided for the pilot
sites. Staff within pilot sites will be trained on how to operate equipment and how to collect water and
weather information.
Existing EWS’s will be evaluated and strengthened where necessary and, based on assessments
within the pilot sites, new EWS(s) will be developed so that climate risk information is effectively
communicated to end-users.
42. Outcome 2 of the project will implement priority interventions identified through consultation with
communities within the eight pilot sites. These interventions will be closely monitored and their cost-
effectiveness will be determined. Barriers to the upscaling of successful activities will also be identified.
Results of the interventions will be documented and disseminated to all key stakeholders (e.g. the
community, policy- and decision-makers, and the public). In addition, lessons learned will be formulated
in order to catalyse upscaling and entrepreneurship. Interventions to be implemented in the eight pilot
sites (all of which are situated within AER I and II) include:
Implementation of soil and water conservation techniques.
Promotion and introduction of crop diversification practices.
Promotion and introduction of alternative livelihoods
Water storage and irrigation systems improved or developed to ensure adequate water provision to
crops and livestock.
43. Outcome 3 will use the results of Outcome 1 and 2 to encourage adjustments of the strategies and
policies that reduce the resilience of rural communities to climate change impacts. Central to this
argument for adjustments will be information regarding the economic benefits offered by adaptation
investments. The activities of Outcome 3 will sensitise decision-makers and sectoral planners of the
benefits associated with mainstreaming adaptation into planning in the agriculture sector.
44. Outcome 4 will ensure that the project lessons are adequately disseminated to stakeholders (at all
levels) and to other African countries that are experiencing a situation similar to that of Zambia.
45. For all of the above outcomes the project will contribute to an understanding of how adaptation
responses can be designed to strengthen gender equality. To achieve this, the project will ensure that
women attend workshops and are part of interventions and management committees. Disaggregated
indicators will be used to monitor the project performance on this.
46. Overall, the project will improve food security in the most vulnerable regions of Zambia (with the
potential for upscaling), which will contribute towards attaining MDG 1 (“Eradicate extreme poverty and
hunger”). The resultant improved nutritional status of Zambians will lead to better health outcomes,
thereby positively affecting MDGs 4 and 6 (“Reduce child mortality” and “Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria
and other diseases”, respectively). In addition, the project will promote environmental sustainability of all
interventions, thus contributing towards MDG 7 (“Ensure environmental sustainability”).
Project Financing
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
24
47. Table 2 includes the project’s co-financing amounts and donors according to project Outcomes. The
GRZ, with support from cooperating partners, is implementing the CCFU, ZMD and CASPP projects
(detailed in forthcoming sections).
Table 2. Co-financing donors and amounts per project Outcome.
Outcome Support Type Donor Amount
(US$) Outcome 1: Climate change risks integrated into critical decision-
making processes for agricultural management at the local, sub-
national and national levels
In-kind ZMD 500,000 In-kind CCFU 250,000
Outcome 2: Agricultural productivity in the pilot sites made
resilient to the anticipated impacts of climate change In-kind FAO (CASPP) 5,000,000 Cash GRZ (MACO) 809,000
Outcome 3: National fiscal, regulatory and development policy
revised to promote adaptation responses in the agricultural sector In-kind CCFU 2,020,000 Cash UNDP-CO 15,000
Outcome 4: Knowledge and lessons learned to support
implementation of adaptation measures compiled and disseminated In-kind CCFU 330,000
Project management In-kind GRZ
(MACO)77
720,000
Cash UNDP-CO 160,000
TOTAL 9,804,000
Note: The GRZ is presently in dialogue with the Japanese Government with respect to undertaking the African
Adaptation Programme (AAP) within Zambia. A decision had at the time of completion of this document not been
taken and consequently the AAP is not recorded in the budget as contributing co-financing to this LDCF project.
Project Goal, Objectives, Outcomes and Outputs/Activities
48. A number of responses will be employed in order to reduce the anticipated impact of climate
change on the agriculture sector in Zambia. The implementation of NAPA priorities will largely be
adding to and expanding on present government and donor projects.
49. The overarching goal of this project is to “to improve food security through enhanced adaptive
capacity to respond to the risks posed by the effects of climate change (including variability) in AER I and
II of Zambia 78”. The objective of the project is “to develop adaptive capacity of subsistence farmers and
rural communities to withstand climate change in Zambia”. As a result, the project’s expected outcomes
are:
a. Climate change risks integrated into critical decision-making processes for agricultural
management at the local, sub-national and national levels.
b. Agricultural productivity in the pilot sites made resilient to the anticipated impacts of climate
change.
c. National fiscal, regulatory and development policy revised to promote adaptation responses in the
agricultural sector.
d. Lessons learned and knowledge management component established.
50. The PIF outcomes and expected outputs have been slightly revised during the project preparation
process. The content remains the same as in the PIF, but the order of presentation and the wording have
been altered to improve the structure of the project. The order of the new structure is summarised as
follows: 1) risk assessment and early warning systems; 2) on-the-ground piloting of proposed
interventions; 3) policy review and revision; and 4) dissemination of results.
77
This will be in form of office space, staff and vehicles, for example. 78
See the Vision Setting Report in Annex B.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
25
Outcome 1: Climate change risks integrated into critical decision-making processes for agricultural
management at the local, sub-national and national levels.
Rationale
Baseline Situation
51. To date, climate change management efforts have not been aligned with mainstream development
processes in Zambia. This is largely due to a shortage of human, technical and institutional capacity in the
field of climate change and adaptation79
. In particular, knowledge gaps have been identified as a particular
barrier to the mainstreaming of climate change risks into agricultural planning. There are, for example,
few planning tools available which can assist communities in adapting to the increasing threats of climate
change. Such technical barriers are constraining climate change adaptation.
52. Weather forecasting is another example of a technical capacity barrier to adaptation. Rural
communities in Zambia are inadequately equipped with the weather forecast information required to
inform agricultural planning. Indeed, the lack of accurate downscaled information on predicted climate
scenarios for the AERs hinders adaptation planning at all levels (local, provincial and national). In
addition, forecasts that are generated are not adequately disseminated to relevant stakeholders. There are
programmes, such as the RANET80
Zambia Project, that aim to assist rural communities by providing
climate and weather information in a timely manner. However, assessments show that many communities
have not been able to access this information, and those that do access RANET programme information
via radio are unsure how to firstly, interpret the information and secondly, react appropriately81
. These
shortcomings may be due to the design of the programmes, which are currently targeted at building
capacity of the ZMD and tend to overlook the needs of the end-users of the information such as local
farmers and policy makers. Overall, the agriculture sector lacks adequate forecast tables, planting
calendars and advice on which crops to plant, leaving farmers without planning tools for the planting and
harvesting season.
53. Zambia’s NDMP of 2005 observes that the present disaster management strategy in place in
Zambia requires improvement82
. The NDMP identifies crucial gaps affecting its functionality including: i)
the lack of an overarching disaster management policy, which has led to ad hoc management efforts; ii)
the lack of a legal framework to authorise management actions; ii) inadequate coordination and therefore
duplication of activities; and iii) insufficient up-to-date information available on risks, vulnerabilities and
resources. Further barriers to effective risk reduction and management in Zambia are that risk monitoring
information is not widely distributed, and is not packaged in a format that is understandable, to small-
scale farmers in particular, limiting the ability of vulnerable communities to respond to warnings.
54. The NDMP therefore aims to enhance national capacity to: i) prepare for, ii) respond to, iii)
mitigate against and iv) prevent the impacts of disasters. To do this, the NDMP outlines a series of actions
and measures to be undertaken to develop an improved disaster management regime, which will
incorporate an effective over-arching early warning system (EWS)83
. These actions include building
capacity for: i) disaster preparedness and timely response; ii) disaster prevention; iii) disaster mitigation
79
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 80
RANET refers to the Radio and internet communication mediums that will be targeted by the RANET Zambia
Project, for disseminating information. 81
Ziervogel, G., Taylor, A., Hachigonta, S. and Hoffmaister, J. 2008. Climate adaptation in southern Africa:
Addressing the needs of vulnerable communities. Oxfam and Stockholm Environment Institute. 82
Zambia is party to a number of regional and international EWS’s, including the SADC regional famine EWS and
the international Famine EWS Network (FEWSNet), but there are no EWS’s specific to Zambia. 83
Zambia NDMP. 2005. Zambia National Disaster Management Policy. Lusaka, Zambia.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
26
and restoration of livelihoods; and iv) coordination. In formulating these actions, the NDMP has produced
a solid foundation for establishing a people-centred EWS84
.
55. The NAPA confirms the strengthening Zambia’s disaster management regime as a first priority and
stipulates the need for: i) an EWS for floods (which includes a health/malaria as well as a crop loss
warning); and ii) a strengthened EWS for agricultural/food security (warning of floods, drought,
shortened growing season, and agricultural disease outbreaks). Entry points that the NDMP can utilise in
addressing the NAPA priorities and developing country-wide EWS(s) include: i) the Malaria Control and
Prevention Programme, part of the Public Health Sector Strategy (PHSS, 2006-2010) under the FNDP,
which needs, but does not include, a climate-driven warning system85
; and ii) the Integrated Disease
Surveillance network (also part of the PHSS), which could form the foundation of a health EWS in
Zambia86
.
56. No economic assessments of the value of improved climate risk information for the protection and
improvement of livelihoods have been undertaken in Zambia, which limits understanding of how much to
invest in climate information services.
Adaptation Alternative
57. The capacity of rural farmers to manage climate change, including variability, will be strengthened
by providing short-term and seasonal forecasts and training farmers to use this information to assist in
agricultural planning. Furthermore, staff within pilot sites will be provided with equipment (and trained
on how to use the equipment) to collect and monitor weather data within the pilot sites. As such, the
project will capacitate staff within the eight pilot sites to provide key data to MACO, ZMD and the Water
Department.
58. The ZMD requires technical capacity in the form of staff training to downscale information from
global and regional climate models to a format relevant and appropriate for Zambian farmers. In addition,
the capacity of end-users to access, interpret and use the information also needs strengthening. The
project will collaborate with the ZMD project (“Capacity development for effective early warning
systems to support climate change adaptation in Zambia” to co-produce the outputs (see para 155 for
more details). This collaboration will complement the support ZMD have to develop EWS(s) to ensure
that these are driven by user needs and are ultimately useful to decision-makers.
59. Building on the foundations Zambia already has in place for people-centred EWS, the project will i)
build further technical and human capacity to incorporate climate risk considerations into disaster
reduction; ii) increase access by disaster reduction planners to up-to-date information including climate
risk data; and iii) increase public and private sector participation, to ensure the implementation of
effective EWS(s). Based on assessments at each of the eight pilot sites, the appropriate EWS(s) will be
implemented to reduce the climate-related risks faced by vulnerable communities by allowing them
adequate time to react to impending hazards.
60. An economic assessment of the value of climate risk information to protecting and improving
agricultural incomes from the effects of climate change will be undertaken pre- and post seasonally at
least twice during the project, to guide policy makers’ understanding about appropriate levels of resource
allocation to climate information services.
61. Co-financing amounts for Outcome 1:
84
People-centred EWS’s are comprehensive, integrated warning systems in which a multi-stakeholder network is
responsible for forecasting the warnings and then ensuring that a pre-determined, well-rehearsed response is
activated (Basher 2006). 85
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 86
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
27
ZMD: US$ 500 000
CCFU: US$ 250 000
LDCF Project Grant Requested: US$ 350 000.
Outputs and activities
Output 1.1. Number of government planners and private sector trained on climate risk management for
improved agricultural productivity.
62. The above output incorporates the PIF outputs 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3, which pertain to seasonal weather
forecasts, training in the agricultural and water sectors, and partnerships with the Meteorological Services,
respectively.
Indicative activities under Output 1.1:
1.1.1. Provide equipment for the collection and monitoring of water and weather data for the pilot
sites. Staff within pilot sites will be trained on how to operate equipment and how to collect
water and weather information.
1.1.2. Train ZMD staff to provide short-term and seasonal forecasts, from downscaling of
available data, in a format that is suitable for use by small-scale farmers and planners in the
agriculture sector. This will be undertaken in collaboration with the ZMD under their
project, entitled “Capacity development for effective Early Warning Services to support
climate change adaptation in Zambia”. The training will be ongoing for the duration of the
project and will entail consultants, who will work directly with ZMD staff, to: i) develop
and/or configure the appropriate software and databases; and ii) use the software, databases
and training to produce regular short-term and seasonal forecasts that are accessible to the
end-users. This new approach to forecasting and to dissemination of information will be
incorporated into the day to day activities of the ZMD.
1.1.3. Train farmers, extension staff, and the Agricultural and Natural Resources subcommittees
of the DDCC/PDCC on how to access, interpret and apply ZMD forecasts for planning
purposes in collaboration with their project, entitled “Capacity development for effective
Early Warning Services to support climate change adaptation in Zambia”.
Output 1.2. Effective EWS(s) developed to enhance preparedness and reduce climate-related risks.
63. The above output pertains to the PIF output 1.4 on revising the national approach to disaster
management.
Indicative activities under Output 1.3:
1.2.1 Assess and document the EWS needs of the eight pilot sites to safeguard investments in
alternative livelihoods and protect the interventions to be implemented at pilot sites. This
will be undertaken in collaboration with the ZMD under their project, entitled “Capacity
development for effective Early Warning Services to support climate change adaptation in
Zambia”.
1.2.2 Develop EWS(s) based on the needs assessment undertaken in activity 1.2.1 for all the pilot
sites. This will require the help of a consultant and will be undertaken in collaboration with
the ZMD under their project, entitled “Capacity development for effective Early Warning
Services to support climate change adaptation in Zambia”.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
28
Output 1.3: Economic impact assessment on the adaptation value of climate risk information to protect
agricultural incomes from climate change effects.
64. The above incorporates the PIF outputs 1.5.
Indicative activities under Output 1.3:
1.3.1 Conduct annual pre- and post-season farmer surveys to evaluate incomes gains from the use
of seasonal weather forecasts.
Outcome 2: Agricultural productivity in the pilot sites made resilient to the anticipated impacts of
climate change.
Rationale
Baseline Situation
65. Today in AER I and II, maize cultivation still covers the majority of cropped land, averaging 84%
in Southern Province and 72% of total cropped area for Central and Eastern Provinces, yet climate change
is predicted to result in the contraction of suitable maize-growing areas in AER I and II by more than
80%87
.
66. The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), FNDP and the NAP have highlighted numerous
non-climatic factors that have undermined the agricultural sector’s ability to contribute to national
development and increased food security. As such, the GRZ, in its FNDP, has formulated a plan to tackle
these problems so as to make the agricultural sector an engine for economic growth.
67. The ‘baseline’ activities (i.e. activities that would be implemented in the absence of climate change)
outlined in the FNDP are aimed at increasing agricultural productivity between 2006 and 2010. These
activities include: i) crop research into drought-resilient crop varieties; ii) improved seed distribution
services; iii) improved and extended irrigation; iv) increased agricultural extension advice; v) increasing
the availability of micro-finance to rural farmers; and vi) improving market and trade conditions88
. In the
fisheries sector, the Zambian fisheries department has a number of initiatives underway including a strict
fisheries licensing system89
and the promotion of aquaculture and aquaculture research90
. To provide an
alternative livelihood in drought years, the department plans to promote the stocking of fish in farm dams.
68. The challenge remains to scale up those interventions that have high adaptive value and to
implement new types of interventions that would help communities become resilient to climate change.
Many of the interventions being tested currently, such as planting early maturing crops and crop
diversification are potentially sustainable under climate change conditions, but better information on
sustainability and cost effectiveness is needed to help decision-makers allocate resources to scaling these
up. A more informed and integrated policy approach to adaptation is required to support and promote the
sustainability of current coping strategies.
69. The GRZ plans to increase funding in the agriculture sector from 1.6% of GDP to at least 2.3% of
GDP by 2010, in light of the FNDP statement that agriculture is to be the key driver of economic
development in Zambia. The GRZ, with support from the donor community, has allocated a total of
US$93 950 200 for the irrigation support development project; US$89 607 200 for agricultural
infrastructure and land development; US$107 120 600 for agricultural services and technical development;
87
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 88
Zambia’s Initial National Communication (2002). 89
To improve the ability to monitor fisheries exploitation and maintain the sustainability of fish resources. 90
Zambia’s Initial National Communication (2002).
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
29
and US$100 515 200 for the fertilizer support programme, for the period 2006 to 2010 (see below). These
programmes are specifically designed to improve food security through increased productivity but do not
consider how climate change risks could damage investments or where investments could yield greater
benefits by promoting those projects that help the economy to adapt to climate change.
70. Current projects underway in the pilot sites are detailed in Table 5.
71. The following is a list of relevant baseline activities outlined in the FNDP that have been
implemented in the agriculture and water sectors in Zambia that, although not focused on adaptation per
se, have assisted Zambians in coping with changing climatic conditions.
The Irrigation Development and Support Project
This project is managed by MACO and funded by concessionary credit from the International
Development Agency (IDA). Its focus is on increasing the income of small-scale farmers by
developing reliable irrigation schemes. In this way, the project aims to promote a well-regulated and
profitable irrigation sub-sector, attractive to both private and public sectors. Another facet to the
project is the establishment of an irrigation development fund allowing farmers access to loans to
purchase irrigation technology.
Agricultural Infrastructure and Land Development
Managed by MACO, this project aims to improve agricultural infrastructure and the land available for
agricultural production in a sustainable manner in order to improve food security. By achieving this,
the project aims to create employment opportunities, augment food production and enhance the
standard of living within rural areas. Activities undertaken by the project include the development of
farm blocks. Development will involve the supply of electricity, improvement of surrounding
infrastructure, provision of irrigation materials (dams and boreholes) and social amenities
surrounding the farm block. The main objectives of the programme include: i) commercializing
agricultural land; ii) exploiting land to its full potential in order to attain economic diversification and
growth; iii) enhancing food security through production of adequate food; iv) utilizing undeveloped
rural areas; v) reducing poverty; and vi) minimizing migration from rural to urban areas. The project
will cost the GRZ approximately US$28 million.
Livestock Development Programme
This programme falls under MACO and aims to improve the livestock sector and thereby enhance
food security and increase the income of farmers. A central feature of this programme will be the
development of an EWS to reduce the negative impacts of disease outbreaks.
Agricultural Services and Technology Development
This programme is also managed by MACO. It aims to improve agricultural production by
developing technology and transfer services. Activities include crop diversification schemes and the
promotion of sustainable agricultural technologies.
Fertilizer Support Programme
Operating since 2002, under the guidance of MACO, this programme aims to augment household
food security and incomes. To achieve this, the programme provides small-scale farmers with seed
(early-maturing seed for drier areas such as Agro-ecological Zones I and II) and fertilizer, 50% of
which is subsidized. The programme currently supports 120 000 small-scale farmers.
Conservation Agriculture Project
Managed by MACO, this programme seeks to conserve soils, water and nutrients under variable
rainfall conditions. The programme’s objectives are inter alia to promote early preparation of land,
reduce the cost of land preparation and improve crop growing conditions through soil, nutrient and
water conservation methods.
72. In addition, other programmes implemented by various cooperating partners are currently underway
in Zambia. These include:
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
30
IUCN climate change and development project
This project commenced in 2007 and will finish in 2009. It is funded by the Government of Finland
and has a budget of US$2 700 000. The pilot phase of the project was implemented in Zambia
between January and September 2007. The full-size project will expand project activities within
Zambia, Tanzania and Mozambique. The key objective of the project is to mainstream climate change
adaptation into natural resources management and poverty reduction related development
interventions. The project supports the collection of site-specific data for climate change in order to
develop tools to enable stakeholders to assess vulnerability.
Conservation Farming In a bid to reverse declining productivity among smallholder farmers, a growing coalition of
stakeholders from the private sector, government and donor communities has been promoting in-situ
water harvesting techniques such as conservation farming (CF) since 199691
. CF systems involve dry
season land preparation, retention of crop residues and planting in fixed stations, thereby enabling
farmers to plant with the first rains so that seeds benefit from the nitrogen flush and to buffer the
effects of shortened rainy seasons. By breaking pre-existing plough-pan barriers, the CF rip lines and
basins improve water infiltration, water retention and plant root development. Research has shown
that despite the fact that CF is labour intensive, CF farmers produced 1.5 tons more maize per hectare
compared to those using conventional tillage implying that the technology has the potential to
improve food security92
. This is a six year project which has been running since 2005 and is
implemented by FAO, MACO and the Conservation Farming Unit (CFU). The aim of the project is to
support sustainable farming practices within the southern, eastern, central and western provinces of
Zambia. In so doing, the project aims to achieve an increase in agricultural production and build the
capacity of farmers. The project budget is estimated at US$29 000 000.
ZNFU/CFU Agro Dealer Programme This programme supports improved availability and timely delivery of agricultural equipment and
inputs for conservation farmers. The programme is funded by the Norwegian government (with a
budget of US$405 000) and commenced in 2008 for a period of two years. The programme area
involves the eastern, western, central and southern provinces of Zambia.
COMESA Climate Change Project This project is also funded by the Norwegian Government and has an estimated budget of
US$2 200 000. The project aims to enhance adaptive capacity and knowledge concerning climate
change. Furthermore, it sets out to promote the engagement of civil society in climate change matters
and concerns. Its main objective, however, is to develop an African political platform on climate
change to support policy dialogue.
Second National Communication to the UNFCCC The objective of this four year project (implemented in 2007) is to prepare the Zambian Second
National Communication to the UNFCCC. This is undertaken by a number of implementers including
the Environmental Council of Zambia and the Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural
Resources (MTENR). Included in the document will be a complete Green House Gas inventory,
progress reports on vulnerability assessments and adaptation interventions and information
concerning the dissemination of climate change information at a national level.
Ground Water Resources for Southern Province This on-going project funded by the German Government seeks to establish a complete groundwater
database, including hydro-geological maps. The objective is to develop a comprehensive management
programme for ground water resources, which are likely to be negatively impacted by climate change.
Project areas include the Southern Province, the Kafue Basin and Lusaka.
Gender Support Programme
91
Haggblade, S. and Tembo, G. 2003. Conference Paper No. II: Conservation Farming in Zambia. Paper presented
at the InWEnt, IFPRI, NEPAD, CTA conference “Successes in African Agriculture”. 92
Haggblade, S. and Tembo, G. 2003. Conference Paper No. II: Conservation Farming in Zambia. Paper presented
at the InWEnt, IFPRI, NEPAD, CTA conference “Successes in African Agriculture”.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
31
Managed by the Gender in Development Division, this programme seeks to strengthen the capacity of
line ministries for gender analysis, accountability and mainstreaming. Through this programme, it is
envisaged that the skills of the staff in MACO, particularly at the district level will be enhanced for
undertaking affirmative action for the purpose of women’ empowerment in the implementation of the
project activities.
73. Current fertilizer distribution schemes and irrigation schemes in place within Zambia are detailed in
Annex J.
74. Although the abovementioned baseline interventions will enhance adaptive capacity by improving
livelihoods and reducing food insecurity, concerns remain regarding their long-term effectiveness and
sustainability as the frequency and intensity of climatic hazards increase. As such there is a clear need to:
i) develop strategies for adaptation supported by a coordinated mix of policy and financial instruments
and based on evidence of best practice; ii) develop political will for policy change to upscale cost-
effective adaptation measures and to adjust national spending plans where appropriate. Understanding
current as well as projected levels of climate risk in affected regions in Zambia is essential to these
objectives.
Adaptation Alternative
75. An indicative 31 interventions will be implemented under Outcome 2, which will be spread across
eight pilot sites. It is estimated that these interventions would benefit a total of 7629 people within the
eight pilot sites. The number of beneficiaries per output is included in Annex G, Table 1. This table also
shows the interventions individually to be small scale - all will be community-based and managed. The
tables in Annex G also illustrate the areal extent and spread of activities across the eight pilot sites.
76. The project will implement high priority interventions within the pilot sites, the effective
implementation of which will contribute towards boosting agricultural productivity under changing
climatic conditions and improving the income streams of vulnerable farmers. For example, crop
diversification is an important response to the impacts of climate changes on maize (80% loss of suitable
croplands, see paragraph 14). Fish farming and rice growing are both important potential adaptation
options, as they could become more viable with climate change (i.e. using harnessed floodwater). Other
interventions (such as soil and water conservation and soil improvement techniques) will rehabilitate
degraded lands, allowing the expansion of agricultural activity, and alternative livelihoods will be
investigated, tried and tested. To effectively mitigate the effects of drought in the pilot sites, water storage
and irrigation facilities will be developed (and rehabilitated where necessary). This will also serve to
improve agricultural productivity under changing climatic conditions by providing water to humans,
livestock and crops.
77. These interventions will be tested at the pilot sites to identify the interventions that can be upscaled
catalytically to other areas of AER I and II, based on their demonstrated cost-effectiveness. Furthermore,
the interventions will aim to build local capacity to ensure that the adaptation measures are sustainable
beyond the project lifespan.
78. The approach taken to identify the interventions that can be catalytically upscaled to other areas of
AER I and II is as follows:
Undertaking “economic experiments” i.e. implementing the priority adaptation interventions
identified by pilot sites in a scientifically controlled manner.
Assessing the profitability of interventions (cost-benefit analyses) and using this information to
revise policy and catalyse entrepreneurship. This will be done after the first year of operations
(likely to be in Year 2 of the project).
Determining which interventions are most successful in terms of profitability and feasibility.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
32
Determining which interventions will be spontaneously adopted by entrepreneurs within the
communities given the right economic and regulatory environment (policies will be amended to
facilitate this). Barriers to this and to the upscaling of interventions will be determined and
documented. This information will be used to catalyse policy revision. In addition, during the
analyses, incentives for interventions will be identified and provided should the intervention fail.
Training management committees in order to equip them with the ability to train neighbouring
communities in the adoption of profitable interventions. Training management committees
consisting of community members to oversee implementation of successful interventions will
ensure ownership and longevity of the interventions at the local level. Training will not only
involve the actual intervention but will also include financial, administrative and business
management training in order to facilitate entrepreneurship involving interventions. A strong
focus of the project will be to sufficiently capacitate members of the management committees in
order to promote that the committees become permanent features within each pilot sites. Each
pilot site will establish one management committee and sub-committees where necessary for
managing specific interventions. For example, Kataba requires two management committees,
one for fish farming and one for rice farming. Therefore, the project will establish one
management committee with two sub-committees for these two interventions.
79. Additionally, in order to ensure that the pilot interventions are successful and sustainable after the
project lifetime, the following activities will be undertaken at all the pilot sites for all of the interventions
under Outcome 2:
Market access will be improved for the products produced from the pilot sites as well as to
improve farmers’ access to input markets. A consultant will be hired to review the existing
agricultural marketing arrangements at the pilot sites to identify gaps. In addition, he/she will
review existing interventions more broadly to extract lessons and promote partnership linkages.
Based on these gaps, an improved marketing system will be developed, which will assist in
boosting the income streams and introduce farmers to sources of high yielding inputs (such as
fertilizers). This will shift the focus of existing agricultural production from subsistence
activities and maximise benefits from the pilot interventions and promote their sustainability.
Access to weather forecasts will be improved to allow farmers and input suppliers to make
informed pre-production decisions (i.e. to ensure that the appropriate seed will be planted
depending on anticipated seasonal weather). This will minimise losses and protect investments.
Continuous monitoring of the i) progress; ii) productivity; iii) feasibility and profitability (using
cost-benefit analyses); and iv) acceptability by the farmers of each intervention.
Capacity will be built (through training) within the management committees to ensure
continuous monitoring and improved management above and beyond assistance received from
extension officers.
Lessons will be continually captured during the process by knowledge management experts.
These will be documented in the form of technical reports as well as in a feasibility analysis,
which will be used for lobbying for policy change and catalysing upscaling.
Public awareness on the benefits of adaptation will be increased though continuous capturing of
lessons and their dissemination to the general public by the NAIS. This will be achieved using
newsletters, television programmes, radio programmes, and brochures and newspaper articles.
This increased awareness will assist all stakeholders when lobbying for policy changes.
80. The evidence generated under Outcome 2 will be used in work undertaken in Outcomes 3 and 4 on
policy development and the strengthening of national awareness of the need for adaptation.
81. Annex G set out the financial feasibility of the outputs proposed under Outcome 2. The
interventions will be implemented through the already existing MACO extension structures, which are
well represented from the national to the village (site) level. The extension system has representation at
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
33
the district level in the development decision bodies (DDCC). At each of the pilot sites there are block
extension officers and camp extension officers who live within the communities. Furthermore, experts in
different interventions (e.g. agronomists and fisheries experts) will be visiting the pilot sites and selecting
and overseeing feasible interventions. Overall, there is sufficient staff within the districts represented by
the eight pilot sites in order to ensure that the interventions are correctly implemented and monitored.
82. Co-financing amounts for Outcome 2:
FAO (CASPP): US$5 000 000
GRZ (MACO): US$ 809 000
LDCF Project Grant Requested: US$2 641 038.
Outputs and activities
Output 2.1. Techniques for soil and water conservation as well as soil improvement tested for their ability
to improve the productivity of small-scale agriculture.
83. This output is a subcomponent of the PIF outputs 2.1. and 2.2. pertaining to technologies on water
storage and land management techniques for maintaining yields and income levels in rural areas despite
climate change effects.
84. In several districts, restoring land degraded by water erosion and poor farming practises has been
identified as a priority. For example, in districts characterized by hills with steep gradients, heavy rainfall
on slightly vegetated or bare soils causes extensive soil erosion and gully formation. Gully erosion, in
particular, enhances the water stress caused by irregular rainfall by channelling rain water away from
fields as surface runoff, preventing infiltration. Furthermore, poor farming practises have mined the soils
of nutrients in many regions, leaving a legacy of nutrient-poor, acidic and largely unproductive lands.
85. To restore degraded farmland for crop production, soil and water conservation methods will be
introduced, which are mostly included in the practice of CF. Restoration of soil nutrient levels will be
achieved by several soil improvement methods including inter-cropping with leguminous crops,
agroforestry techniques involving leguminous trees/shrubs, mulching, and the judicious application of
fertilisers. Water harvesting methods such as potholing93
, tied ridging94
and bunds will be implemented to
relieve water stress. Baseline interventions involving CF are mainly taking place in AER II where return
on investment is greatest95
. Due to climate change, there is a need to scale up these interventions to other
regions, especially the relatively dry AER I. The project will facilitate this expansion and experiment
with interventions in this latter region. In this way the project is different from the baseline and is
responding specifically to climate change risks.
86. Pilot sites which will participate in Output 2.1 are Lusitu, Chikowa, Mundalanga-N’ganjo, Sioma,
Kataba and Zalapango. In total, soil and water conservation and soil improvement techniques will be
implemented across 245.25 ha (see Annex G for details on costs and coverage).
Indicative activities under Output 2.1:
93
Potholing involves digging holes between the planting rows in order to trap excess water to potentially reduce
runoff. 94
Tied-ridging is a form of micro-basin tillage which involves forming ridges in order to trap water. A ridge is a
long, narrow elevation of land aimed to create a micro-catchment for retention of water during heavy rainfall events.
This results in more water available for crop production due to reduced runoff. 95
The CASPP Project, for example, is underway in both AER I and II, but of the 12 districts in which it is
underway, nine are entirely in AER II and the other three fall within both AER I and II (two of which are
predominately within AER II).
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
34
2.1.1. Train agricultural extension staff and community development staff from the pilot sites on
soil and water conservation and soil improvement techniques, and task them with extending
the training received to surrounding communities’ extension and development staff (to be
undertaken by the PS, PTC and consultants).
2.1.2. Form farmer/user groups96
and train them on soil and water conservation and soil
improvement techniques97
designed to protect agricultural yields against climate change
(such as potholing; tied ridging; mulching98
; contour ridges; planting of Sesbania sesban99
and Winter Thorn; grass fencing; terracing; bunds; planting of indigenous plants; and
conservation farming techniques) via training workshops given by the government
extension staff. The project will ensure that at least 50% of the farmers who attend and
participate in the training workshops will be women.
2.1.3. Provide farmers with an input pack, which will comprise 5kg early maturing maize (or
cassava/ sweet potato equivalent), 50kg fertilizer, 10kg of legume, a bag of Faidherbia,
herbicides and a chaka hoe, after successfully completing the workshops. This input pack
will be supplied once and will serve as a “starter pack” to assist farmers. In the year
following the training workshops and the provision of the input pack, farmers will be linked
to local suppliers.
2.1.4. Identify and assess which techniques are applicable at each site. This will entail undertaking
an economic analysis and performing cost-benefit analyses to ascertain which techniques
are most suitable for each site.
2.1.5. Establish and train management committees of at least 10 members at each pilot site to
oversee and encourage sustainable soil and water conservation techniques. Five of the
management committee members will be women. (To be undertaken by the PS and the
extension officers).
Output 2.2. Crop diversification practices tested for their ability to improve resilience of farmers to
drought.
87. This output is a subcomponent of the PIF output 2.2. Pertaining to land management techniques for
maintaining yields and income levels in rural areas despite climate change effects.
88. For the last two and half decades following independence, Zambian agricultural policy has focused
on the promotion of maize farming. Large-scale marketing support coupled with extensive fertilizer and
input subsidies encouraged farmers to devote large areas to maize. Consequently, other crops such as
cassava, sorghum, millet (especially in AER I and II), and others that may be better adapted to changing
climate conditions, were neglected. Increasing water scarcity, shortening of the growing season and
increased temperatures will alter crop yields as their ideal climatic zones (in which their optimum
growing conditions are found) shift. In order to maintain agricultural productivity, alternative crops which
are more suited to changing conditions will be identified (e.g. drought-tolerant, early maturing or tolerant
of water-logging), and cropping practices will be diversified (e.g. planting several different crop types and
96
These groups will comprise the farmers within the pilot sites who will be involved in and benefit from the project
intervention. The management committees formed will be a subset of these groups. 97
Both Mundalanga-N’ganjo and Chikowa have identified contour ridges, bunds, vetiver grass and drought-resilient
crops as priority measures to restore degraded lands within those sites. Lusitu has identified soil improvement as a
priority, and Zalapango has prioritized water harvesting. 98
Mulching may also be used to trap water in the field. It involves the spreading of leaves, straw, peat moss or
remains of crop residues on the ground around the crops to prevent water evaporation from the soil. Moreover, it
lowers the speed of runoff across fields. As a result, it helps to maintain the soil stability and fertility by reducing
erosion and trapping nutrients that would be washed away with runoff.
99 Sesbania sesban is a leguminous nitrogen-fixing shrub/tree which can be used in inter-cropping, improving soil
nutrients and stability, and providing high-nitrogen forage.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
35
planting different varieties of the same crop), to insure against widespread crop failure. These measures
are of critical importance for improving the adaptive capacity and resilience of communities to climate
change.
89. The crop diversification activities will be undertaken at all eight pilot sites. In total 315 ha will be
dedicated to crop diversification (see Annex G for details on costs and coverage).
Indicative activities under Output 2.2:
2.2.1. Train farmers at all the pilot sites on the importance of crop diversification as well as crop
diversification techniques as an adaptive measure to climate change (e.g. planting drought
tolerant crops, early maturing crops as well as adopting multiple cropping techniques to
spread risks).
2.2.2. Supply farmers with an input pack after successfully completing the training on crop
diversification. Each input pack will comprise 5kg early maturing maize (or cassava/sweet
potato/sorghum equivalent), 50kg fertilizer, 10kg of legume, a bag of Faidherbia, herbicides
and a chaka hoe. Each farmer will only receive one input pack. During the following years,
farmers should be able to produce their own seed (training will help is this regard) as well
as source other inputs from local suppliers.
2.2.3. Conduct farm trials to demonstrate drought resilient and/ or alternative crops as climate
change adaptive techniques. ZARI will select farmers in the pilot sites on whose farms
researchers will conduct the farm trials.
2.2.4. Facilitate the production of drought-resilient and improved seeds within the communities in
order to boost accessibility to seed. This will be achieved by training the local cooperatives
and farmers on seed production methods so that they can produce seed for sale to the
community. This will be undertaken by the staff from Seed Certification and Control
Institute, SCCI, and ZARI, who will also be responsible for preservation of genetic
resources.
2.2.5. Assess the suitability of techniques in the pilot sites. This will entail undertaking an
economic analysis and performing cost-benefit analyses to ascertain whether crop
diversification or the use of drought-resilient crops are suitable at each site. In addition, this
will identify suitable crop species.
2.2.6. Form farmer/user groups on crop diversification and establish and train management
committees of at least 10 members at each site to facilitate and oversee the adoption of
drought-resistant and alternative crops by the wider community. Five of the committee
members will be women. In addition to production methods, training of the committees will
include financial, administrative and general business management.
Output 2.3. Alternative livelihoods tested for their ability to diversify incomes away from maize
production.
90. The above output is a subcomponent of the PIF outputs 2.2. Pertaining to land management
techniques for maintaining yields and income levels in rural areas despite climate change effects.
91. Coping mechanisms when food shortages are experienced (because of floods or droughts), include
engaging in alternative livelihoods that directly provide communities with food or with income to
purchase food. Increasingly unpredictable climate conditions as a result of climate change require the
development of alternative livelihoods that communities can rely on in case of crop failure or simply to
augment low yields. Alternative livelihoods are likely to become an important source of cash for families
to meet basic requirements such as food and health. However, barriers exist to the upscaling of activities
(such as insufficient market linkages). The project will test the feasibility of certain alternative livelihoods
to act as financially sustainable income streams that are resilient to changing climatic conditions.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
36
Furthermore, the project will focus on capacitating community members to manage and market the
alternative livelihoods in order to ensure their sustainability beyond the project lifetime and market
linkages will be developed in order to improve income streams. In this way, the project will make these
alternative livelihoods profitable, which will potentially offset losses experienced by farmers as a result of
changing climatic conditions.
Output 2.3a. Bee keeping tested for its ability to diversify incomes away from maize production
92. Traditional honey collection is unsustainable as a coping mechanism, as it involves chopping down
trees, on an ad hoc basis, where honey combs are sighted. In improved practices, hives are manufactured
from planks and set near homesteads or in the forest. The honey collected by these techniques is usually
sold locally. These improved bee keeping activities will be upscaled and further refined, with the
establishment of management committees and standard bee keeping procedures (based on best practises
and lessons-learned).
93. This demonstration project will be carried out in Kasaya, Chikowa and Mundalanga-N’ganjo.
Indicative activities under Output 2.3a:
2.3.1. Establish and train a “bee keeping group” at each of the three pilot sites that identified bee
keeping as a priority intervention. The group will comprise at least ten farmers. Five of the
farmers will be female. The groups will be trained in bee keeping, honey processing, forest
management and basic business skills.
2.3.2. Assess the suitability of beekeeping in the sites as well as establish the most suitable
beekeeping techniques. This will entail undertaking an economic analysis and performing
cost-benefit analyses to ascertain whether bee keeping is an economically viable option and
which techniques are most suitable for each site.
2.3.3. Assist farmers in identifying and engaging a local carpenter to manufacture at least 4
beehives per farmer.
2.3.4. Provide technical assistance to the groups on setting up of beehives and construct firebreaks
where necessary to protect the beehives.
Output 2.3b. Fish farming tested for its ability to diversify incomes away from maize production
94. Fish farming can provide supplementary food and income where crop loss due to adverse climatic
conditions (flooding and drought) has negatively affected food security and financial resources, and
current coping strategies are not effective in ensuring sustainability of community livelihoods. Fish
farming was initiated in Kataba once before with numerous problems, the key ones being (see Annex K
for more details):
poor cost recovery;
poor technical design and construction so that floods were poorly managed;
limited technical backstopping.
95. Capacity will be built in community members to handle all aspects of fish farming from pond
construction to harvesting. Management committees, set up by the community and trained during the
course of the project, will oversee the running and monitoring of the project. Technical backstopping will
be provided by Fisheries Officers to ensure that management and fish harvesting is done in accordance
with set standards.
96. Kataba will be the only pilot site carrying this demonstration project.
Indicative activities under Output 2.3b:
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
37
2.3.5. Establish and train a “fish farming group” at the Kataba pilot site. The group will comprise
at least 20 farmers. Ten of the farmers in the group will be female. The training will cover: i)
feed formulation; ii) pond stocking, construction and management; iii) AquaSilviculture;
and iv) integration of fish with livestock and v) fingerling production. Training will be
undertaken by the PS, MACO and DOF.
2.3.6. Assess the suitability of techniques as well as production methods, and certain fish breeds.
This will entail undertaking an economic analysis and performing cost-benefit analyses to
ascertain whether fish farming is an economically viable option and which methods and
breeds are most suitable at Kataba. In addition, suitable sites for fish ponds will be selected.
2.3.7. An appropriate management plan, including cost recovery, agreed by all stakeholders will
be put into place.
2.3.8. Rehabilitate existing drainage canals in the selected sites using local labour (The project
will only supply manual excavation equipment, such as shovels).
2.3.9. Construct breeding and growing fish ponds, this will entail: i) digging and building of
embankments; ii) curing of ponds; iii) filling them with water; and iv) construct water inlet
and outlet channels.
Output 2.3c. Rice farming tested for its ability to diversify incomes away from maize production.
97. At present, the demand for rice in Zambia exceeds supply and deficits are met by imports. The
national demand for rice is estimated at 54 107 MT annually. For example, the 2008/09 crop estimates
indicate that although there was a 39% increase in rice production compared with the previous season,
Zambia will still have to import approximately 22% (12 000 MT) of the commodity to meet the national
demand. The flood-prone areas in Eastern (where Mundalanga is located) and Western (where Kataba and
Sioma are located) Provinces have comparative advantage and approximately 24% and 37%100
of the
households, respectively, are engaged in rice production. However, despite this comparative advantage,
production has not been upscaled as a result of the following constraints:
The tendency of local people (particularly in Western Province) to focus on maize growing
even in areas where maize no longer performs well, remains a constraint to the upscaling of
rice production101
. This is likely due to insufficient knowledge on rice farming.
Inputs, particularly improved seeds, for non-maize crops such as rice are not usually supplied
as part of the government input programmes.
A lack of specialized equipment for processing rice exists in Zambia. This results in the poor
quality of the product and, consequently, lower prices, which discourages production.
98. Flood waters (the incidence of which is likely to be exacerbated by climate change) can be
harnessed in order to form paddy fields for rice farming. Rice farming is therefore one option for
recouping losses of maize during floods, and is a potential opportunity presented by climate change.
During times of minimal rainfall and drought, rice paddies can be irrigated using the rehabilitated and
newly formed irrigation and water storage facilities at the pilot sites (see below). The project will
therefore test the feasibility of rice farming under changing climatic conditions and determine the barriers
to the upscaling of the activity. In addition, the project will identify and provide incentives to farmers to
facilitate the adoption of rice farming activities. For example, if the crop fails, farmers should be provided
with compensation for the economic cost of the failure. Local capacity will be developed to manage all
aspects of rice farming, from land preparation to harvesting and marketing. Rice farming groups and
management committees will be established to ensure sustainability and ownership of the project and
pilots sites will be equipped with specialised equipment for rice processing (dehullers). All farmers in the
groups will actively participate in establishing rice training fields, where all community members will
100
Central Statistical Office 2003, Agriculture Analytical Report, Zambia 2000 Census of Population and Housing. 101
A report in the Times of Zambia newspaper
(http://www.times.co.zm/news/viewnews.cgi?category=10&id=1035879825)
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
38
learn how to grow rice. This demonstration project will be undertaken in Sioma (areal extent: 100 ha) and
Kataba (areal extent: 200 ha).
Indicative activities under Output 2.3c:
2.3.10. Establish and train a “rice farming groups” at each of the two pilot sites that identified rice
farming as a priority intervention. The group will comprise at least 40 farmers. Twenty of
the farmers in the group will be female farmers. The training will cover land preparation,
sowing, transplanting, tendering and harvesting.
2.3.11. Distribute rice seeds and fertilizer as starter packs. Thereafter, farmers will be linked to
local input suppliers where they will obtain inputs.
2.3.12. Assess the suitability of rice growing, varieties of rice to be grown as well as techniques for
growing the rice. This will entail undertaking an economic analysis and performing cost-
benefit analyses to ascertain whether rice farming is an economically viable option and
which varieties and methods are most suitable for each site. In addition, incentives will be
identified and provided.
2.3.13. Facilitate the farmers’ harvesting of the rice, and the marketing of the product (this will
include purchasing rice milling equipment).
Output 2.3d Integrated fish and rice farming activities tested for its ability to diversify incomes
away from maize production
99. With increased flooding predicted as a result of climate change, an opportunity is presented to
increase or introduce the practice of fish or rice farming. Intensification of production to produce greater
yields per hectare may be possible by combining fish and rice farming. The project will capitalise on this
opportunity by conducting trials to test the feasibility of such intensification. Rice fields will be stocked
with locally grown fingerlings. Initially five farmers will volunteer for trials in the first year. Each farmer
will allow one basin for fish farming trials. Of the five, at least two will be female farmers. If successful,
the number of basins and participating farmers will be upscaled in the following years.
100. The site will be at Mundalanga-N’ganjo (areal extent will be 30 ha). Technical backstopping will be
provided by the District Fisheries extension officer.
Indicative activities under Output 2.3d:
2.3.14. Establish and train an “integrated fish and rice farming group” at the Mundalanga-N’ganjo
pilot site. The group will comprise at least 20 farmers. Ten of these farmers will be female.
The training will cover basin preparation for integrated rice and fish farming, stocking,
feeding and harvesting.
2.3.15. Assess the suitability of integrated fish and rice farming and identify appropriate sites and
varieties/species. This will entail undertaking an economic analysis and performing cost-
benefit analyses to ascertain whether integrated fish and rice farming is an economically
viable option and which varieties and methods are most suitable at Mundalanga-N’ganjo.
2.3.16. Supply the fingerlings and distribute rice seeds, fingerlings and fertilizer. Trial sites will be
formed on farms within Mundalanga-N’ganjo.
Output 2.3e. Additional Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) promoted and tested for their ability
to diversify incomes away from maize production
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
39
101. Despite 39% of Zambia still being forested102
, reports show that Zambia has one of the largest
annual area deforestation rates at 850 000 ha (8500 km2) in the world
103, mainly because of timber
extraction and clearing for agricultural production. Indeed, during the consultations undertaken to
determine priority interventions to be implemented by the project, the Kasaya community proposed
degazetting the forest to allow the locals exploit it for timber as one of the means of improving incomes in
the area. To a small degree, in order to diversify household income and increase community resilience to
climate-related shocks, rural communities harvest high value non-timber forest products (NTFPs). NTFPs
frequently used include: i) harvesting seasonal mushrooms; ii) collecting Mopane worms; iii) harvesting
Mungongo nut for its oil; iv) carrying out traditional bee keeping; v) collecting baobab fruit and Mubuyu
fruit to sell in Lusaka and other urban markets; and vi) harvesting thatch and palm fronds for basket and
mat making. There is also potential for developing local crafts and tourism. However, constraints exist
that prevent the upscaling of NTFP production include:
Lack of knowledge concerning the benefits and uses of NTFPs.
Lack of business development services in the area, especially regarding NTFPs.
Lack of personnel with appropriate expertise on exploitation of NTFPs in the district.
Lack of financial services for procuring equipment such as oil presses for extracting oil from
forest nuts, such as Mungongo nuts.
Lack of knowledge on value addition for some of the products.
Lack of market access for the products.
102. The project will focus on mushroom and mopane worm harvesting. (Scaling up of bee keeping is
tackled in Output 2.3a). Capacity building activities will encompass production and quality control, value
addition and market access and linkages. The project will facilitate linkages to marketing mediums such
as Community Markets for Conservation (COMACO), which links NTFPs to local markets and abroad.
OXFAM is involved in similar activities. Details will be fine-tuned and inserted after the Inception
Workshop. The potential for generating additional benefits for communities through carbon trading or
eligibility for benefits from the United Nations Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation
(UN-REDD) programmes will also be determined.
103. Community participation in the project will be through producer groups and will be demand driven.
Group level management and performance monitoring will be done by community members while
technical backstopping will be by the District Agricultural Extension Staff (camp extension and block
extension officers).
104. Kasaya is the only pilot site that will be implementing this Output.
Indicative activities under Output 2.3e:
2.3.17. Identify suitable and viable NTFPs and assess the feasibility of the identified NTFPs as
sources of income and alternative livelihoods. Develop NTFP production system/value
addition and market linkages.
2.3.18. Undertake feasibility assessments of the techniques and identify suitable methods of
extraction.
2.3.19. Establish and train producer groups within Kasaya once relevant NTFPs have been
identified. Training will include information concerning the NTFPs (including harvesting,
collection and storage) and how to market each product.
Output 2.4. Community-based water storage and irrigation systems improved or developed to test their
ability to raise agricultural productivity.
102
CIA World Fact Book 2009 (https://www.cia.gov). 103
http://www.africanconservation.org/content/view/1271/405/
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
40
105. The above output is a subcomponent of the PIF output 2.1. Pertaining to technologies on water
storage.
106. Zambia holds approximately 40% of the water in the SADC region, in groundwater reserves as well
as five major river systems (the Zambezi, Luangwa and Kafue Rivers in the Zambezi River basin, and the
Chambeshi and Luapula Rivers in the Congo River basin), several wetlands and numerous dambos104
.
Yet, despite having access to such water resources, less than 5% of arable land is currently irrigated105
.
As a result of the reliance of the agriculture sector on rain-fed agriculture, increasing climate variability is
causing a greater frequency of crop failure and concomitant food insecurity.
107. Furthermore, climate change projections outlined in the NAPA point to a continued increase in
temperature and a change in rainfall patterns, leading to more frequent prolonged droughts and a
shortening of the rainy season106
. Assessments of the economic costs of climate change on agriculture in
Zambia indicate that AER I and II will exhibit strong water deficits at critical periods of the cropping
calendars, resulting in severe yield decreases for crops such as maize107
. Increasing and improving
existing rain water storage capacity and irrigation systems to insure against crop failure are therefore a
priority.
108. In Zambia, past experience of smallholder irrigation schemes show that implementation problems
arising from poor planning, lack of ownership and other socially related problems108
(such as inequitable
access of the resource, use of improper water extraction methods and allowing cattle to graze too close to
the dams which loosens the soil leading to siltation of the dams) exist. Where irrigation systems are in
place they are often in disrepair, and water storage facilities are compromised (e.g. earth dams are
breached or leaking because of low levels of maintenance), predominantly as a result of poor management
arrangements (including cost recovery). Furthermore, the NIP identifies that lack of participatory
rehabilitation of shared irrigation schemes as one of the reasons for farmer’s failure to operate and
maintain these schemes. In addition, the lifespan of water small dams is estimated at about 10 years.
Some dams have therefore exceeded this estimated lifespan and require rehabilitation. However, this has
not yet been undertaken as a result of resource constraints (financial and technical). The project will
address these issues by ensuring farmer participation (to establish community ownership) in all activities
by forming and training management committees and farmer user groups. Training will be centred on
water management, irrigation techniques (such as scheduling), appropriate water extraction methods,
irrigated crop production, fish farming, livestock production as well as usage of communal water
resources. Additionally, management arrangements (including cost recovery) will be developed for each
intervention in participation with the farmer/user groups. In this way, farmers will be participating
actively in decision making on how the interventions are developed. Furthermore, where possible, local
community members will supply manual labour to the project in order to build the water storage facilities,
for example. The World Food Programme has offered to supply food to locals in exchange for manual
labour109
. This will also create community ownership of project interventions.
109. Many of the pilot sites have some form of irrigation and water storage facilities, which will be
improved and expanded upon by the project110
. Extensions and improvements undertaken by the project
104
Dambos are natural wetland areas, usually in valley bottoms, and are used by many farmers for crop cultivation. 105
UNDP Initiation Plan: Adaptation to the Effect of Drought and Climate Change in Agro-ecological Zone I and 2
in Zambia. 106
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007. 107
World Bank with support from FAO, IWMI, Yale University and University of Pretoria. 108
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, 2004. Irrigation Policy and Strategy: Strategy for the Development of
Zambia’s Irrigation Sector 109
This linkage has not yet been fully approved; the details will be finalized during the Inception Workshop. 110
For example, the Kasaya community is already utilizing an abandoned road construction pit for water catchment
and storage.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
41
will include: i) building a series of weirs, gabions and dams to capture surface runoff; ii) building
reservoirs to store captured water and supply irrigation systems; iii) increasing the capacity of and
improving existing irrigation systems and iv) connecting irrigation canals to fields. Community members
in many villages have offered to partially finance these plans (established during consultations with
community members at the pilot sites).
110. Capacity building of the communities will include training in dam, reservoir, weir and irrigation
management. Management and performance monitoring will be done by community members while
technical backstopping will be by Technical Services Branch of the District Agriculture and Cooperatives.
The participation of community members in all activities and the training provided will establish
ownership and ensure that interventions will not fall into disrepair as has previously occurred.
Indicative activities under Output 2.4a:
Output 2.4a. Community-based multipurpose dams in Kasaya, Sioma, Zalapango and Kabeleka
constructed and irrigation systems tested for their ability to improve agricultural productivity.
2.4.1. Form farmer/user groups, facilitate the formation of four dam management committees in
four pilot sites (which will comprise at least 10 members, of which at least five will be
women) and train the communities and the committees within the pilot sites on group
formation and management. (To be undertaken by technical staff from the DWA and
MACO).
2.4.2. Train the farmer/user groups on water management, irrigation techniques (such as
scheduling), appropriate water extraction methods, irrigated crop production, fish farming,
livestock production as well as usage of communal water resources. (To be undertaken by
the MACO DOA and DWA.)
2.4.3. Assess the suitability of techniques (e.g. undertake all relevant feasibility (environmental,
social and cost-benefit assessments to determine the types of dams suitable to the sites). (To
be undertaken by the MACO DOA and the DWA.)
2.4.4. Construct multipurpose dams. (This will be undertaken by local contracted companies under
the supervision of MACO and DWA. The types of dams will depend on the sites. However,
they will be multipurpose and be used for fish farming, livestock watering, irrigation and
household water supply.)
2.4.5. Construct canals or other suitable water extraction methods as well as watering points for
livestock. This may include supply of manual pumps and pipes for irrigation. (This will be
undertaken by the DWA, MACO and PS.)
2.4.6. The project will ensure that an appropriate management and sustainability plans, including
cost-recovery, agreed by all stakeholders, is in place.
Output 2.4b: A community-based earth dam in Chikowa constructed and irrigation systems tested
for their ability to improve agricultural productivity.
2.4.7. Form a farmer/user group, facilitate the formation of a dam management committee (which
will comprise at least ten members, of which at least five will be women) at the Chikowa
pilot site, train the communities and the committees at Chikowa on group formation and
management. (To be undertaken by technical staff from DWA and MACO.)
2.4.8. Train the farmer/user groups on water management, irrigation techniques (such as
scheduling), appropriate water extraction methods, irrigated crop production, fish farming,
livestock production as well as usage of communal water resources. (To be undertaken by
the MACO DOA and DWA.)
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
42
2.4.9. Assess the suitability of techniques (e.g. undertake feasibility and cost-benefit assessments
to determine which type of dam is most suitable to the site111
). (To be undertaken by the
MACO DOA and DWA.)
2.4.10. Construct an earth dam (or other, if appropriate). (This will be undertaken by local
contracted companies under the supervision of MACO and DWA.)
2.4.11. The project will ensure that an appropriate management plan, including cost-recovery,
agreed by all stakeholders, is in place.
2.4.12. Construct canals or other suitable water extraction methods as well as watering points for
livestock. This may include supply of manual pumps and pipes for irrigation. (This will be
undertaken by the DWA, MACO and PS.)
Output 2.4c: A community-based storm water dam in Kasaya constructed and irrigation systems
tested for its ability to improve agricultural productivity.
2.4.13. Form farmer/user groups, facilitate the formation of a dam management committee at the
Kasaya pilot site (which will comprise at least ten members, of which at least five will be
women) and train the communities and the committees at Kasaya on group formation and
management. (To be undertaken by technical staff from DWA and MACO.)
2.4.14. Train the farmer/user groups on water management, irrigation techniques (such as
scheduling), appropriate water extraction methods, irrigated crop production, fish farming,
livestock production as well as usage of communal water resources. (To be undertaken by
the MACO DOA and DWA.)
2.4.15. Assess the suitability of techniques (e.g. undertake feasibility and cost-benefit assessments
to determine the types of dams suitable to the site). (To be undertaken by MACO DOA and
DWA).
2.4.16. Construct storm water dams. (To be undertaken by local contracted companies under the
supervision of MACO and DWA. The types of dams will depend on the sites. However,
they should be multipurpose and be used for fish farming, livestock watering, irrigation and
household water supply.)
2.4.17. The project will ensure that an appropriate management plan, including cost-recovery,
agreed by all stakeholders, is in place.
2.4.18. Construct canals or other suitable water extraction methods as well as watering points for
livestock. This may include supply of manual pumps and pipes for irrigation. (To be
undertaken by MACO DOA and DWA).
Output 2.4d: A community-based reservoir in Lusitu constructed and irrigation systems tested for
its ability to improve agricultural productivity.
2.4.19. Form farmer/user groups, facilitate the formation of a reservoir management committee at
the Lisutu pilot site (which will comprise at least ten members, of which at least five will be
women) and train the communities and the committees at Lusitu on group formation and
management. (To be undertaken by technical staff from the DWA and MACO.)
2.4.20. Train the farmer/user groups on water management, irrigation techniques (such as
scheduling), appropriate water extraction methods, irrigated crop production, fish farming,
livestock production as well as usage of communal water resources. (To be undertaken by
the MACO DOA and DWA.)
2.4.21. Assess the suitability of techniques (e.g. undertake feasibility and cost-benefit assessments
to determine the types of reservoirs suitable to the sites). (To be undertaken by the MACO
DOA and DWA.)
111
Earlier assessments are not thought by stakeholders to have been detailed enough. Undertaking this assessment
will ensure that the most suitable type of dam is constructed.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
43
2.4.22. Construct reservoirs. (To be undertaken by local contracted companies under the
supervision of MACO and DWA. The types of reservoirs will depend on the sites. However,
they should be multipurpose and be used for livestock watering, irrigation and household
water supply.)
2.4.23. The project will ensure that an appropriate management plan, including cost-recovery,
agreed by all stakeholders, is in place.
2.4.24. Construct canals or other suitable water extraction methods as well as watering points for
livestock. This may include supply of manual pumps and pipes for irrigation (This will be
undertaken by the DWA, MACO and PS).
Output 2.4e: A community-based weir in Kasaya constructed and irrigation systems tested for its
ability to improve agricultural productivity.
2.4.25. Form farmer/user groups, facilitate the formation of a weir management committee at the
Kasaya pilot site (which will comprise at least ten members, of which at least five will be
women) and train the communities and the committees within the pilot sites on group
formation and management. (To be undertaken by technical staff from the Department of
Water Affairs (DWA), and MACO).
2.4.26. Train the farmer/user groups on water management, irrigation techniques (such as
scheduling), appropriate water extraction methods, irrigated crop production, fish farming,
livestock production as well as usage of communal water resources. (To be undertaken by
the MACO DOA and DWA.)
2.4.27. Assess the suitability of techniques (e.g. undertake feasibility and cost-benefit assessments
to determine the types of weirs suitable to the sites). (To be undertaken by the MACO DOA
and DWA.)
2.4.28. Construct weirs. (To be undertaken by local contracted companies under the supervision of
MACO and DWA.)
2.4.29. The project will ensure that an appropriate management plan, including cost-recovery,
agreed by all stakeholders, is in place.
2.4.30. Construct canals or other suitable water extraction methods as well as watering points for
livestock. This may include supply of manual pumps and pipes for irrigation. (To be
undertaken by DWA, MACO and PS.)
Output 2.4f: Irrigation systems in Lusitu rehabilitated and tested for its ability to improve
agricultural productivity.
2.4.31. Form farmer/user groups, facilitate the formation of a dam management committee at the
Lisutu pilot site (which will comprise at least ten members, of which at least five will be
women) and train the communities and the committees at Lusitu on group formation and
management. (To be undertaken by technical staff from the DWA and MACO.)
2.4.32. Train the farmer/user groups on water management, irrigation techniques (such as
scheduling), appropriate water extraction methods, irrigated crop production, fish farming,
livestock production as well as usage of communal water resources. (To be undertaken by
the MACO DOA and DWA.)
2.4.33. Assess the suitability of techniques (e.g. undertake feasibility and cost-benefit assessments
to determine the types of irrigation systems suitable to the sites). This will be undertaken by
the MACO (DOA) and the DWA.
2.4.34. Rehabilitate irrigation systems that require rehabilitation. (To be undertaken by local
contracted companies under the supervision of MACO and DWA.)
2.4.35. The project will ensure that an appropriate management plan, including cost-recovery,
agreed by all stakeholders, is in place.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
44
2.4.36. Construct canals or other suitable water extraction methods as well as watering points for
livestock. This may include supply of manual pumps and pipes for irrigation (To be
undertaken by the DWA, MACO and PS).
111. Outputs and sites for identified interventions are summarised in Table 3. The details of the
interventions to be implemented at each pilot site are included in Annex G. Indicators and targets for the
outputs are available in Annex G.
Table 3. Project outputs and the corresponding pilot sites in which the outputs will be implemented. Outputs Pilot sites
Output 1.1. Institutional capacity to support climate risk
management in the agricultural sector at the national,
district and village level developed.
All eight pilot sites.
Output 1.2. Effective EWS(s) developed to enhance
preparedness and reduce climate-related risks.
All eight pilot sites.
Output 2.1. Techniques for soil and water conservation
as well as soil improvement implemented to reduce
erosion and improve the productivity of small-scale
agriculture.
Lusitu, Chikowa, Mundalanga-N’ganjo, Sioma,
Zalapango, Kataba.
Output 2.2. Crop diversification practices promoted to
improve the resilience of farmers to drought.
All eight pilot sites
Output 2.3. Alternative livelihoods introduced.
Output 2.3a. Bee keeping implemented and/or
upscaled.
Kasaya, Chikowa, Mundalanga-N’ganjo.
Output 2.3b. Fish farming implemented. Kataba.
Output 2.3c. Rice farming implemented. Sioma, Kataba.
Output 2.3d Integrated fish and rice farming
activities implemented.
Mundalanga-N’ganjo.
Output 2.3e Additional Non-Timber Forest Products
(NTFPs) identified and promoted. Kasaya.
Output 2.4. Water storage capacity and irrigation
systems improved or developed to ensure adequate water
provision to crops and livestock.
Kasaya, Chikowa, Lusitu, Sioma, Zalapango, Kabeleka.
Output 2.4a. Construct multipurpose dams in
Kasaya, Sioma, Zalapango and Kabeleka.
Kasaya, Sioma, Zalapango, Kabeleka.
Output 2.4b: Construct an earth dam in Chikowa Chikowa
Output 2.4c: Construct storm water dams in Kasaya Kasaya
Output 2.4d: Construct reservoirs in Lusitu Lusitu
Output 2.4e: Construct weirs in Kasaya Kasaya
Output 2.4f: Rehabilitation of irrigation systems in
Lusitu
Lusitu
Output 4.1. Knowledge and lessons learned to support
implementation of adaptation measures compiled and
disseminated.
All eight pilot sites.
112. The eight pilot sites (in which priority interventions will be implemented) were identified through
an intensive consultative process at the national, provincial, district and community levels (see Annexes
C,D and E). At the national level, a team of stakeholders from different sectors identified the Zambian
provinces most vulnerable to climate change impacts. Four of the nine Zambian provinces were selected,
namely the Southern, Eastern, Western and the Lusaka provinces. Missions to each of the four chosen
provinces were undertaken by four teams of consultants to facilitate the selection of districts and pilot
sites. Based on the information gathered and the selection criteria (see Annex E), the provincial level
selection process, undertaken by the Agriculture and Natural Resources subcommittee of the Provincial
Development Coordinating Committee (PDCC), identified candidate districts within each province (see
Figure 2). The target districts then nominated their most vulnerable communities. The community level
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
45
selection process was used to assess the vulnerability of target communities as well as to assess the
existing community capacity available to implement project activities. Priority interventions (i.e.
appropriate adaptation responses) were identified for each pilot site by the application of climate risk
assessments. The eight pilot sites that were selected are as follows:
Western Province: Kataba (Senanga District) and Sioma (comprising two closely situated villages,
Kabula II and Kandiyana, in the Shangombo District).
Southern Province: Kasaya Catchment (Kazungula District) and Lusitu Catchment (Siavonga
District).
Eastern Province: Mundalanga-N’ganjo (comprising two closely situated villages, Mundalanga and
N’ganjo, in the Chama District) and Chikowa (Mambwe District).
Outcome 3: National fiscal, regulatory and development policy revised to promote adaptation
responses in the agricultural sector.
Baseline Situation
113. Despite the serious impacts climate change is likely to have on Zambia’s ability to meet its
development targets as outlined in the FNDP and the MDGs, adaptation has not been mainstreamed into
the national policy framework. The draft National Environment Policy112
identifies 11 government
ministries involved in environmental affairs. Nine of these ministries have policies referring to the
environment. In addition, intra and inter-sectoral institutional arrangements are limited and few
coordination mechanisms exist for effective multi-sectoral integration of policies, or for the integration of
adaptation into such policies. The draft NPE also highlights current shortfalls in these policies including
ineffectual mechanisms for community-based natural resources management, lack of informal inter-
sectoral links, limited up-to-date baseline data and limited national guidelines for effective integration of
international environmental conventions into the policies113
.
114. Baseline activities being implemented in the FNDP include policy formulation and regulation in the
agriculture sector, and policy, institutional and legal reforms in the communication and meteorology
sector. Although considerable funding has been set aside for these reforms, adequate consideration of
current and projected climate risks has not been taken. As such, without the project interventions, climate
change impacts will remain largely overlooked. This is likely to result in ineffective use of the funding.
115. A limitation to adaptation responses being incorporated into Zambian policy114
. is that there have
been no comprehensive analyses on adaptation measures, their impacts and their cost-effectiveness. It is
difficult to make the case for realignment of budgets and adjustments to policy if the costs and benefits of
adaptation versus other public policy investments are unknown.
Adaptation Alternative
116. Policy support is critical to promote replication of pilot adaptation measures. The project will
review existing and proposed national fiscal, regulatory and agricultural development policies (such as the
NPE, the NAP and the NIP), and develop policy recommendations that promote long-term adaptive
capacity in the agriculture sector. The activities in Outcome 3 include identifying the most pertinent
information needed by policy- and decision-makers in order to fast-track policy revision. An improved
evidence base will be used to formulate and motivate for the adoption of national fiscal, regulatory and
development policies that promote climate change risk management.
117. This top-down approach will complement the bottom-up approach taken in Outcome 2, (which
establishes adaptive farming practises), to generate the evidence base on what constitutes effective
adaptation responses. The project will introduce regular dialogue between key stakeholders implementing
112
Zambia National Policy for the Environment, 2004. 113
Zambia National Policy for the Environment, 2004. 114
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
46
adaptation responses and policy- and decision-makers to sensitise the latter to the economic benefit of
adaptation.
118. The project will build institutional capacity to formulate climate-resilient policies and strategies to
support adaptation measures in Zambia’s agriculture sector. Training workshops will promote awareness
of the importance of adaptation, and build administrative and planning skills at both national and local
levels. Trained stakeholders will then be tasked to utilise their new skills, e.g. sectoral planners will be
capacitated to incorporate climate risk information into agricultural planning, and community members
will be empowered to implement the strategies resulting from the agricultural planning. This awareness-
raising and importantly tasking of government staff to incorporate climate change risks into planning will
ensure stakeholder buy-in.
119. In addition, resources (technical and financial) will be provided to the Agriculture and Natural
Resources subcommittees of the DDCC and the NGOCC in the eight pilot districts to equip them to act as
the local climate resource and support centres, which would coordinate different stakeholders on
adaptation policy. The financial support will be used to monitor the progress and success of the adaptation
measures in Outcome 2 (monitoring will be undertaken by the DDCCs). In addition, the financial support
will facilitate meetings and reviews of community-based adaptation initiatives to identify complementary
activities and mandates. Staff within the centres will hold meetings and develop strategies to incorporate
climate change considerations into district and provincial planning.
120. Co-financing amounts for Outcome 3:
CCFU: US$2 020 000
UNDP-CO: US$ 15 000
LDCF Project Grant Requested: US$ 258 962.
Output 3.1. Awareness of climate change risks and to the economic value of adaptation responses raised
among policy- and decision-makers.
121. The above output incorporates components of the PIF outputs 3.1 and 3.2 which pertain to national
policy dialogues and agricultural investment planning, respectively.
Indicative activities under Output 3.1:
3.1.1. Develop and conduct national training seminars on climate-resilient agricultural planning
(including the results of activity 1.1.1.) involving all the departments in MACO, ZMD,
DWA, DMMU and MTENR. (To be undertaken by the PS, in collaboration with the CCFU.)
At least 60 government officials working in the planning section of the relevant
ministries/department, including the ministries mentioned above, will be trained. Of these
officials, as many women as possible will be included.
3.1.2. Develop awareness and training materials (such as briefing notes, fact sheets and cross-
sectoral guides) for sectoral planners on the need to incorporate climate change
considerations into agricultural planning, including the economic benefits thereof based on
lessons from the pilot sites. This will be undertaken in collaboration with the ZMD under
their project, entitled “Capacity development for effective Early Warning Services to
support climate change adaptation in Zambia”. These materials will be used for capacity
development and policy advocacy by the CCFU. (To be undertaken by PS, ZMD and
CCFU.)
3.1.3. Design and conduct training workshops in each of the eight pilot districts for Agricultural
and Natural Resources subcommittees of the DDCC, the Non-Governmental Coordinating
Committees (NGOCC) and other relevant district level stakeholders. The workshops will
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
47
include information on assessing, planning and implementing community-based adaptation
measures (see Outcome 2), and strengthening linkages between key institutions, such as
government officials and NGOs, to avoid duplication of activities. This will be undertaken
in collaboration with the CCFU.
3.1.4. Provide technical and financial support to the Agricultural and Natural Resources
subcommittees of the DDCC and the NGOCC in the eight pilot districts to equip them to act
as the local climate resource and support centres, which will ensure coordination among
different stakeholders. This will be undertaken in collaboration with the CCFU.
Output 3.2. National policy dialogues conducted to discuss project findings in relation to cost-
effectiveness of piloted adaptation options.
122. The above output incorporates components of the PIF outputs 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 which pertain to
national policy dialogues, policy revision and agricultural investment planning.
Indicative activities under Output 3.2:
3.2.1. Assess barriers that may be hindering institutional coordination among government
ministries and departments and suggest mechanisms for integrated and synergistic
approaches to achieve joint climate-resilient development planning in AER I and II. (To
be undertaken by CCFU, PS, PTC and consultants.)
3.2.2. Establish regular dialogue between the members of the DDCC, PDCC and the District
NGOCC to enable coordinated and climate-resilient development planning in the
vulnerable provinces. (To be undertaken by PS and PTC.)
3.2.3. Monitor the institutional coordination process over the project lifetime and communicate
monitoring results to policy stakeholders.
Output 3.3. Policies that require adjustments to promote adaptation identified and reviewed.
123. The above output incorporates components of the PIF outputs 3.2 and 3.3 which pertain to
agricultural investment planning and policy revision, respectively.
Indicative activities under Output 3.3:
3.3.1. Analyse sectoral policies that promote or impede the resilience of communities within
AER I and II to climate change, such as the National Irrigation Policy, Land Policy,
National Agricultural Policy, Water Policy and Meteorological policies, with a focus on
livelihoods and financial impacts at the community level. This activity will follow on
from evidence collected under Outcome 2 on cost effective adaptation interventions and
will be undertaken in collaboration with the CCFU.
3.3.2. Identify gaps in the existing policies, relating to climate change using evidence collected
at the pilot sites. This will be undertaken in collaboration with the CCFU.
3.3.3. Develop policy notes for each sectoral policy analysed outlining and describing the
impacts, costs and benefits of a particular sectoral policy on the resilience of livelihoods
in AER I and II. This will be undertaken in collaboration with the CCFU and hired
consultants.
Outcome 4: Lessons-learned and knowledge management component established.
Baseline Situation
124. At present in Zambia, very little knowledge is disseminated to the public regarding climate change
and the need for adaptation. Disseminating project results is useful in order to: i) inform future enterprises
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
48
in best practises; ii) effectively overcome informational barriers to the uptake of adaptation measures; iii)
prevent duplication of efforts.
Adaptation Alternative
125. The project will establish a knowledge platform that will serve as a resource base for current and
future projects to publish their lessons-learned, and obtain lessons-learned from other projects. A project
website will be established to make all project reports accessible to a wider audience. Appropriate
platforms are the web-based UNDP’s ALM, and WikiADAPT. The ALM hosts lessons-learned from
UNDP projects, while WikiADAPT is a website that hosts lessons-learned from diverse institutions and
agencies from various adaptation activities. Other means of communication are to be utilised to reach
those sectors of the public that do not have access to the internet (e.g. pamphlets, workshops, seminars,
and radio broadcasts). This will be undertaken in conjunction with NAIS, who produce agricultural
programmes for television, radio and print media in seven local languages for dissemination at the pilot
sites (see Annex K). Other means of developing awareness of the project results and enabling replication
are developing knowledge products, holding public and government consultations and implementing
awareness campaigns.
126. Co-financing amounts for Outcome 4:
CCFU: US$330 000
LDCF Project Grant Requested: US$ 165 000.
Output 4.1. Knowledge and lessons learned to support implementation of adaptation measures compiled
and disseminated
127. Indicative activities under Output 4.1:
4.1 Document lessons-learned from the project on a continual basis and compile the results of
activities under Outcomes 1 and 2. Present the lessons in a summary document that is
distributed to all stakeholders. In addition, collate and submit all technical reports and
documents on lessons-learned to the ALM and WikiADAPT.
4.2 Post project information, including all project reports, regularly on the CCFU website. (To
be undertaken by PS, CCFU and UNDP.)
4.3 Develop a briefing paper on lessons-learned from the project for publication in a peer-
reviewed journal and for presentation at an international conference on adaptation to
climate change as well as for use as technical evidence by the CCFU in lobbying for policy
adjustments. This will be undertaken in collaboration with the CCFU.
4.4 Conduct one national workshop and one regional workshop targeting neighbouring
countries to facilitate the dissemination of project lessons to countries potentially facing
similar climate change problems. This will be undertaken in collaboration with the CCFU.
4.5 Publish workshop proceedings and distribute as hardcopies and electronic copies (including
publication on a CCFU climate change website, see activity 4.2.). This will be undertaken
in collaboration with the CCFU.
4.6 Develop newsletters, television and radio programmes, newspaper articles, booklets and
pamphlets highlighting the lessons-learned during the project and sensitizing the general
public on climate change adaptation. The newsletter will be produced at least once a month
to maintain project visibility and momentum. The television and radio programmes will be
broadcast at least once a month. This will be undertaken in collaboration with the NAIS.
4.7 Conduct community workshops in the eight pilot sites in order to disseminate project
lessons to farmers.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
49
Project Indicators, Risks and Assumptions
Indicators
128. The project indicators will rely largely on the Vulnerability Reduction Assessment115
(VRA), which
is an important element of UNDP’s “Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Climate Change
Adaptation”. This has been implemented in a growing number of GEF initiatives under UNDP’s
Community Based Adaptation (CBA) Programme. VRA is designed to measure the changing climate
vulnerabilities of communities, and to be comparable across vastly different projects, regions, and
contexts making it possible to determine if a given project is successful or unsuccessful in reducing
climate change risks.
129. At the level of the four Outcomes, indicators are:
Outcome 1: Climate change risks integrated into critical decision-making processes for agricultural
management at the local, sub-national and national levels.
Indicators:
1. Number of Government planners and extension staff that include climate risk information in their
decision processes
3. Early Warning Systems developed and applied effectively in 3 pilot sites.
Outcome 2: Agricultural productivity in the pilot sites made resilient to the anticipated impacts of
climate change
Indicators:
1. Number of interventions in selected pilot sites implemented, with appropriate management (including
cost recovery) plans in place, agreed by all stakeholders, for sustainability beyond the project grant.
2. Percentage increase in agricultural incomes in the pilot sites.
4. Number of women involved in interventions in the pilot sites.
Outcome 3: National fiscal, regulatory and development policy revised to promote adaptation
responses in the agricultural sector.
Indicators:
1. The number of policies that are adapted to take into account climate change risks.
2. Awareness level of rural population in pilot sites and local/national government of climate change and
its impacts improved.
Outcome 4: Lessons learned and knowledge management component established.
Indicators:
1. Number of proposals, papers and other documents that incorporate learning from the project.
2. Number of lessons included in the ALM.
3. Number of regional and national workshops conducted for dissemination of project lessons.
4. The number of awareness campaigns conducted on the need to incorporate adaptation needs in policy.
115
Droesch, A.C. Gaseb, N. Kurukulasuriya, P. Mershon, A. Moussa, K.M. Rankine , D. and Santos, A. 2008. A
guide to the Vulnerability Reduction Assessment. United Nations Development Programme Community –Based
Adaptation Programme.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
50
130. These indicators track progress in achieving project Outcomes, and the degree of their collective
achievement will be a measure of the degree of progress in meeting the project objective. For more
information and for indicators at the Objective and Output level, refer to the Strategic Results Framework
in Section II, Part I and in Annex F. Baseline values for these indicators will be gathered within the first
six months of project implementation.
Assumptions and Risks
131. Key assumptions underlying the project design include:
The GRZ remains committed to implementing baseline activities complemented by the
additionality interventions the project aims to implement.
Stakeholders such as NGOs and CBOs remain committed to implementing baseline activities
complemented by the additionality interventions the project aims to implement.
Pilot sites are best placed to demonstrate the benefits of measures to adapt to climate change.
The major implementing agents at the community level (extension workers and community
workers) remain committed to the project during the entire duration.
Climate change concerns are not overshadowed by other emergency matters on the government
agenda such as the expected 2011 Presidential and Parliamentary elections.
132. Risks that could potentially affect the success of the project are included with recommended
mitigation measures in Table 4.
Table 4. Risks that could potentially affect the success of the project. Risk Risk
Rating
Risk Mitigation Measure
Private sector and communities do not respond
positively to improved policies/incentives.
Low Sound business planning in the planning
stage will ensure only profitable ventures are
undertaken
The slow pace of policy modification may mean
that identified policy changes are not
implemented in a timely fashion.
High The project will take advantage of the current
impetus within the GRZ on mitigating
climate change impacts.
Identify and work with champions for policy
change in GRZ.
Research-based evidence and systematic
feasibility assessment reports will be supplied
to the CCFU to enhance their lobbying
capacity and speed up the process.
Continuous sensitization on the benefits of
adaptation through NAIS programmes on
radio and television will also ensure full
support of the general public for policy
adjustments
Conflicts among stakeholders as regards roles in
the project leading to uncoordinated approach in
tackling climate change impacts.
High Clear statement of each stakeholder role in
the stakeholder involvement plan. Also the
newly formed CCFU will ensure coordinated
approaches as regards climate change
projects
Poor co-ordination among implementing
institutions leading to delays in deliverables.
Medium The project has been designed with full
involvement of all the stakeholders from
identification to implementation
The strengthened M&E system would
provide an early warning to enable the
project management team to resolve the
issues
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
51
Inadequate staffing in the MACO extension
system limiting the project’s upscaling potential.
Medium Continuous training of management
committees so that they continually take up
the extension officers roles during the
upscaling process
The slow implementation of baseline projects by
the GRZ may imply that they may not be
complete within the pilot phase negatively
impacting on project outcomes.
Medium Continuous lobbying and sensitization of the
policy makers based on evidence from the
pilot sites to secure cooperation and
commitment
Agricultural and water management interventions
at the pilot sites are not cost effective.
Low Interventions will be designed according to
affordable levels of cost recovery.
Cost recovery analysis of water management
measures will be a central component of the
cost-effectiveness analyses. Cost recovery
should be clearly linked to agricultural
productivity increases.
Limited human resources in the country may limit
project implementation.
Medium The project will focus on capacity building in
the relevant departments of the GRZ as well
as at the community level. The PPG phase
will identify and develop human resources
capacity as required.
International experts will be recruited where
there are gaps.
Farmer acceptability of risky adaptation measures
may limit project implementation.
Low The pilot interventions to be implemented are
demand-driven through wide stakeholder
consultation.
Difficulties in getting support for the project due
to the number of competing challenges.
Low Increased sensitization of stakeholders and
potential support systems on climate change
adaptation.
Lack of commitment from the community. Medium Intensive awareness raising campaigns
through the NAIS radio and television
programmes, CCFU awareness campaigns
and extension officers should prevent this
from occurring
Avoiding a top down approach throughout
the project processes
A change in donor interest could result in
government interests changing and reduce
momentum on implementation.
High High risk but very low probability of
occurrence given the increased focus on
climate change by the donor community
Delays in the release of funds could impede
progress and prevent deliverables being achieved
on time.
Medium Effective administrative planning will
overcome this risk.
High illiteracy levels in villages may hinder the
progress of pilot interventions and/or
dissemination of lessons learned.
Medium Management committees and farmers
involved in various interventions will
undergo extensive training to ensure that they
understand the task at hand.
Project lessons will also be disseminated via
workshops, television and radio programmes
to ensure that they reach a larger audience.
Failure to address gender equity and women’s
empowerment.
Medium Capacity building in gender analysis,
accountability and mainstreaming.
Adopting gender affirmative action in all
project activities.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
52
Expected national and local benefits
133. Zambia is highly dependent on climate-sensitive sectors for food and income. The predicted
increases in temperature and rainfall variability are, therefore, likely to impact negatively on the nation’s
ability to maintain and improve agriculture productivity. Investment in adaptation will address a number
of the major barriers identified in the FNDP as preventing the agriculture sector’s optimal contribution to
economic growth. These barriers include: i) the high dependence on rain-fed agriculture; ii) deficiencies
in the EWS’s; and iii) environmental degradation due to unsustainable agricultural practices.
134. The project will focus its “on the ground” interventions at strengthening the adaptive capacity of
vulnerable small-scale farmers within the eight pilot sites in AER I and II to changing climatic conditions.
The project will benefit local communities by equipping with the tools to improve crop yields and income
streams. The dependence of vulnerable communities on rain-fed irrigation will be alleviated by ensuring
year-round provision of water following the implementation and rehabilitation of irrigation systems as
well as water capturing and storage facilities. Alternative livelihoods will be promoted to boost income
streams of vulnerable groups. Local government and management institutions will be more accountable
and transparent, and will alter long-term development strategies and polices to encourage adaptation and
reduce the risks posed by climatic hazards. Lessons learned from the implementation of “on the ground”
interventions will be documented and disseminated to other regions and countries embarking on similar
adaptation projects in order to refine project strategies to ensure the early achievement of project results.
Overall, a better understanding of adaptation mechanisms will be achieved.
135. Other national benefits of the project include increased food security thereby positively affecting
MDG 1, better healthy outcomes (as a result of better nutritional status) thereby positively affecting
MDGs 4 and 6. Furthermore, the anticipated improved farming practices will lead to increased
environmental sustainability, which will positively affect MDG 7. Overall, the project will contribute to
building adaptive capacity to climate change in the agriculture sector in Zambia. At the national level,
capacity will be strengthened to integrate climate change risk reduction strategies into development
policies and programmes.
Country Ownership: Country Eligibility and Country Drivenness
136. As a Least Developed Country (LDC) and a Landlocked Developing Country (LLDC)116
, Zambia
recognizes that it has limited resources to effectively lower the risks that climate change poses to hard-
won development gains. As a result, the GRZ is making efforts to address climate change and is
committed to ensuring that the poorest and most vulnerable communities are supported by programmes
that enhance their long-term adaptive capacity. The GRZ’s resolve to tackle climate change is evident
from efforts such as creation of the Climate Change Facilitation Unit (CCFU) (See paragraph 152 for
details).
137. The GRZ ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and
its Kyoto Protocol (KP) in 1993 and 2006, respectively. As a result, a number of activities have been
undertaken (detailed below), which the project will build upon and complement, including the work
achieved under the INC and the National Capacity Self Assessment.
116
“Landlocked developing countries are generally among the poorest of the developing countries, with the weakest
growth rates, and are typically heavily dependent on a very limited number of commodities for their export earnings.”
UN Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and
Small Island Developing States. (http://www.un.org/special-rep/ohrlls/lldc/default.htm).
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
53
National Communications. The GRZ produced the Initial National Communication (INC) and is in
the process of preparing the Second National Communication (SNC). The SNC will also serve as a
management tool, as well as indicating the gaps in the current national capacity to address climate
change.
National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA). The MTENR prepared the NAPA to
specifically identify and highlight urgent adaptation intervention targeting selected vulnerable groups
(such as small-scale farmers, the poor, women and children) that require implementation in Zambia.
It was submitted in October 2007.
Climate change awareness campaign. The GRZ has also undertaken a comprehensive national
climate change awareness campaign in line with the commitments originating from the UNFCCC
membership. The objective of the campaign is to ensure national ownership and the success of future
climate change-related efforts, through sensitization of stakeholders and national consensus building.
National Capacity Self Assessment (NCSA). The NCSA was completed by the Ministry in 2007 to
assist in the implementation of the Rio Convention. The assessment identifies the national capacity
and development gaps hindering the effective implementation of the United Nations Conventions on
biodiversity (UNCBD), desertification (UNCCD) and climate change (UNFCCC), and proposes a
strategy and an action plan to address such gaps, in the short- and long- term.
138. The LDCF was created with the objective of funding urgent and immediate adaptation needs in the
LDCs as identified in the NAPAs. The project conforms to the LDCF’s eligibility criteria, namely: 1)
country drivenness; 2) implementing the NAPA priorities; and 3) supporting a “learning-by-doing”
approach.
Country drivenness: Four sets of consultations were undertaken in the PPG phase: i) pre-
inception workshop, attended by 11 staff from variousi ministries; ii) inception workshop,
attended by 29 staff, primarily from MACO, but also with representation from ZMD and Ministry
of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources (MTENR); iii) vision setting and site selection
workshop, attended by 14 national government staff primarily from MACO, but also with
representation from ZMD and MTENR, together with site selection visits where 114 staff from
district-level government were consulted; iv) a draft review workshop, attended by 27 people
from MACO primarily, ZMD, MTENR and NGOs and v) two appraisal committee meetings.
Implement NAPA priorities: Five of the NAPA priorities are directly addressed by this project,
see Section A.
Supporting a “learning-by-doing” approach: Pilot interventions will test the cost effectiveness of
different approaches to adaptation to generate understanding of how GRZ could best support
adaptation across the economy. This information will be used to faciliate policy and budgetary
adjustments.
139. The project will support climate-resilient water management and agricultural practices and, in this
way, will implement NAPA priorities one, two, three, six and seven, namely:
NAPA Priority 1: “Strengthening of early warning systems to improve services to preparedness and
adaptation to climate change in all sectors”.
NAPA Priority 2: “Promotion of alternative sources of livelihoods”.
NAPA Priority 3: “Adaptation to the effects of drought in the context of climate change in AER I and
II of Zambia”.
NAPA Priority 6: “Adaptation of land use practices (crops, fish, and livestock) in light of climate
change”.
NAPA Priority 7: “Maintenance and provision of water infrastructure to communities to reduce the
human-wildlife conflict”.
140. The project is based on UNDP’s comparative advantage in capacity building. The UNDP-CO has
strong links with the GRZ. Furthermore, UNDP is a partner in the Joint Assistance Strategy for Zambia
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
54
which ensures the effectiveness of aid and is aligned with Zambia’s FNDP. The project will seek
opportunities to ‘bolt onto’ other relevant initiatives for broader adaptation mainstreaming (e.g. the
Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme).
Sustainability
141. The sustainability of the project’s benefits will largely depend on the willingness of stakeholders to
adopt interventions and continue with them beyond the duration of the project grant, and the long-term
political and financial commitment of policy-makers to provide enabling investment environments for
scaling up of successful adaptation measures. Adequate technical, legal and institutional capacity and
expertise - all part of adaptive capacity -is required at both levels for sustainability.
142. Adaptive capacity will be strengthened in the following ways:
Improving institutional coordination between government ministries and departments117
.
Building awareness and a greater understanding of climate change risks and adaptation benefits at all
levels (i.e. from community members at the local level to policy-makers at national level).
Enhancing the capacity of stakeholders to implement adaptation measures.
Developing the evidence base to make the case for greater levels of investments in adaptation, and to
develop national understanding of which policies and strategies can be expected to provide overall
net benefits to economic growth.
143. Under Outcome 2, the project will prioritize interventions with sustainable operational models that
involve: (i) attachments to on-going programmes of existing line ministries; and (ii) a strong focus on
designing interventions based on farmers’ levels of affordability, so that they can be sustained beyond the
duration of the LDCF grant.
144. Finally, the global flow of information on climate change has greatly increased national
consciousness concerning climate change risks. A positive attitude revolved around “doing something” to
address climate change is evident at all levels on a global scale. This will improve the likelihood of
success of the proposed interventions.
Replicability
145. The project is being piloted in eight pilot sites within eight districts in AER I and II. The project is
designed to pilot adaptation in districts in Zambia subjected to the broadest possible range of climate
vulnerabilities precipitating a range of agricultural problems, but which have reasonable capacity in terms
of infrastructure and human resources. By developing systematic capacity while demonstrating adaptation
measures on the ground, the project will determine the conditions necessary for replication and upscaling.
Project results will not only be replicable in the other districts within AER I and II but also in other
countries such as Malawi, Zimbabwe and Mozambique which share similar AERs.
146. The project will support a “learning-by-doing” approach by using the pilot projects to demonstrate
climate-resilient methods of development in Zambia with the intention of informing national development
plans and policies. This will include generating evidence on the cost-effectiveness of adaptation options
117
The project formulation process was based on extensive consultations from the national to the community level.
At the national level, stakeholders from various government departments (namely MACO, MTENR, Department of
Water Affairs, ZMD and DMMU) were involved in the PPG phase. The implementation process will also involve
these departments and the long-term viability of the project will depend on institutional coordination between these
departments.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
55
in order to faciliate policy and budgetary adjustments. The close involvement of government agencies and
departments demonstrates potential for future incorporation of the project’s approaches into their on-
going planning and strategies. Furthermore, the project will build capacity for documenting lessons learnt,
establishing a mechanism for replication and initiating policy dialogue for formulation and review of
policy and legal frameworks for adaptation initiatives. Learning will be ensured through Outcome 4,
including contributions to the ALM and wikiADAPT so that government ministries, other organizations
and the general public will have access to new knowledge on effective adaptation.
Linkages with other programmes and action plans at regional and sub-regional levels
147. The project will contribute to meeting UNDAF Outcome 3, namely “by 2010, institutions, systems
and processes in support of national development priorities strengthened”. In addition, by meeting its
outcomes and outputs, the project will contribute towards attaining the energy and environment for
sustainable development component in the UNDP Country Programme118
(UNDP CP, 2007-2010). The
UNDP CP acknowledges that the changing climate, specifically the increasing frequency of floods and
droughts, is adversely impacting the agriculture, water resources, natural resources and health sectors in
Zambia and that the quality of human development is tied to the state of the natural environment. The
UNCP CP aims at ensuring that sustainable management of environment and natural resources is
incorporated into national development frameworks and sector strategies. The project will complement
this aim by building the capacity to conduct and apply climate risk assessments to planning processes.
The UNDP Country Programme for Zambia (CP) acknowledges that the quality of human development is
tied to the state of the natural environment. As such, one of the outputs in the CP and Country Programme
Action Plan (CPAP) is “systems, processes and scenario planning for climate change adaptation and
mitigation strengthened”. The project will link to this output by providing lessons from the pilot sites that
will be used to strengthen the systems and processes for climate change adaptation within Zambia.
148. The FNDP states that the environment is considered to be a crosscutting national priority by the
GRZ. This is appropriate given the relationship between environmental sustainability and the overall
objectives of the FNDP. Under the Joint Assistance Strategy for Zambia (JASZ), UNDP is a co-leader
with Finland in the environment sector.
149. The project will also assist in meeting UNDP outcomes in the UNDAF and UNDPCAP relating to
food security. In particular, the project will address UNDAF outcome 4 “by 2010, the proportion of food
secure households increased from 35 to 75%”119
, and also by 2010, the proportion of food secure
households among female-headed households increases to 60%”. The project will also complement
planned and on-going projects in the FNDP, NAP and NIP by boosting the sustainable productivity of the
agriculture sector. In this way, the project will assist the agriculture sector in becoming one of the major
drivers of Zambia’s economic development.
150. The project will complement other on-going projects being implemented by the GRZ, donor
community and other NGOs in the pilot sites. One of the first activities to be implemented in Outcome 1
and 2 will be to work out how the LDCF project will collaborate with existing relevant initiatives in the
pilot areas, and how it might draw on lessons learnt and partnerships with similar pilot interventions
outside the pilot sites.
151. Table 5 lists some of these projects operating in the pilot sites.
118
GRZ/UNDP (2007) Country Programme Action Plan for 2007-2010 of the Government of the Republic of
Zambia and the United Nations Development Programme. 119
UNDP (2007) United Nations Development Assistance Framework for the Republic of Zambia, 2007-2010.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
56
Table 5. Additional projects in progress in the pilot sites. Site Project Description
Kataba Kataba Multipurpose Cooperative
This is a community initiative supported by the Ministry of
Community Development. They run a hammer mill.
Parent-Teachers Association This association looks at the education needs of the
community and oversees the running of local schools.
Kataba Crush Pen Association This is the management committee that looks after the
maintenance and management of the cattle crush pen.
Kataba Area Development
Committee
This is a community-based organization that promotes
development in terms of agricultural productivity, youth
skills and gender equality projects.
AIDS Committee The AIDS committee is responsible for sensitization of the
community on HIV/AIDS and related preventative
measures.
Keepers Zambia Foundation,
OXFAM, PUSH
These are international NGOs which run developmental
projects in the area. They promote agricultural development
and the maintenance of health standards.
Kabula
(village within
Sioma pilot
site)
Parents Association This association looks at the education needs of the
community and oversees the running of local schools.
Area Development Committee This is a community-based organization that promotes
development in terms of agricultural productivity, youth
skills and gender equality projects.
Neighbourhood Watch Committee This committee is responsible for ensuring security in the
neighbourhood.
Agriculture Committee This committee oversees the development of agriculture in
the Community.
Nutritional Group and Home
Based Care
This group handles health-related problems, such as caring
for the HIV patients.
Bee Keeping Association This is a farmer group comprising of bee-keepers. The
association organizes training, market linkages and other
bee-keeping requirements for its members.
Catholic Relief Services This is an international NGO that has various interests, such
as improving the nutritional status of the community
through increasing agricultural productivity and combating
health problems.
Heifer International This is an international NGO that promotes livestock
production.
Zambia Wildlife Authority This is a government body that protects wildlife. They also
promote alternative livelihoods as well as control animals to
reduce human-animal conflict.
Kandiyana
(village within
Sioma pilot
site)
Participatory Village Development
in Isolated Areas (PAVIDIA)
project
This is a JICA/ MACO project that promotes development
in isolated areas through the provision of extension support
to increase agricultural productivity.
Nutritional Support Group This group handles health-related problems, such caring for
the HIV patients.
Area Development Committee This is a community-based organization that promotes
development in terms of agricultural productivity, youth
skills and gender equality projects.
Catholic Relief Services
Hernwood Foundation
This is an international NGO that has various interests, such
as improving the nutritional status of the community
through increasing agricultural productivity and combating
health problems.
Lusitu Mwanahapone Project This project focuses on improving the health status of
children in the area.
Lusitu Parish Development
Association
This is a community-based organization that promotes
development in terms of agricultural productivity, youth
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
57
skills and gender equality projects.
Kayuni Cooperative This is a community initiative supported by the Ministry of
Community Development. They run a hammer mill.
Heifer International This is an international NGO that promotes livestock
production.
Gwembe Tonga Valley
Development Project
This is a government supported project aimed at assisting
the communities that were displaced during the construction
of the Kariba Dam.
Kasaya Care International Promotes the resilience of communities through the
promotion of dry season cropping.
Africa Wildlife Foundation Assists with the control of problem animals, to reduce
human-animal conflict.
Catholic Relief Services This is an international NGO that has various interests, such
as improving the nutritional status of the community
through increasing agricultural productivity and combating
health problems (e.g. HIV and maternal health problems).
Sekute Community Development
Trust
Community development.
Mambwe
(District in
which
Chikowa pilots
is located)
Community Resource Board Community Development.
Village Area Group Community Development.
Lutheran World Federation Targets vulnerable communities and focuses on improving
food security and soil conservation.
Wildlife Conservation Society Promotes wildlife conservation.
CARE International Aims to improve maternal health.
Dunavant and Cargill Private out-grower schemes for cotton.
Zalapango Churches Health Association of
Zambia (CHAZ)
This association focuses on establishing HIV and health
programmes.
Christian Children’s Fund (CCF) This fund provides support and assistance to HIV patients.
Catholic Relief Services (CRS) Provides anti-retroviral treatment to HIV positive people
and promotes bee keeping for income generation.
Wildlife Conservation Society Provides training on Conservation farming and erosion
control.
Department of Social Welfare Supports agriculture through input distribution.
Programme Against Malnutrition
(PAM)
Implements the FSP programme.
Zalapango Multi-purpose
Cooperative
Operates hammer mills and promotes maize production.
Zalapango Women’s Association Involved in tailoring and embroidery.
Kabeleka World Vision Zambia Provides support to enhance agricultural productivity.
Kabeleka Village Productive
Committee
This committee teaches farming skills, and aims to improve
access to fertilizer.
Mububa Women’s Group Running hammer mills/green house vegetable production.
Micro Bankers Trust Micro Bankers Trust is a Non-Bank Regulated Financial
Institution established in 1996. It provides financial services
to vulnerable women and men for enterprise development
and improved quality of lives. The trust is under the
Ministry of Community Development and Social Services.
Its products include training, consulting, voluntary savings
and loans.
152. The project will also have linkages with other projects aimed at addressing environmental and
climate change concerns. Among these are:
Climate Change Facilitation Unit (CCFU). This is an initiative of the MTENR. The major
objectives of the CCFU include assisting the MTENR to develop a comprehensive strategy for
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
58
addressing climate change concerns and subsequently to develop the necessary policy and legal
framework. CCFU outcomes include:
− Develop a comprehensive National Climate Change Response Strategy;
− Develop a climate change response policy and legal framework;
− Develop a communication and advocacy strategy on climate change;
− Develop a strategy for the effective participation in regional and international
conferences;
− Develop of a profile on data sources for analytical work (conducting information needs
assessments/catalyse and facilitating relevant minor research)/create an information
management system (including hosting and popularising a climate change website);
− Train the ZMD staff on EWS and forecasting;
− Conduct workshops to sensitize sectoral planners to the threats posed by climate change
and how to overcome them.
153. The project will link with the CCFU by co-producing some outputs as well as supplying
information from the project to the CCFU to use when lobbying for policy revisions, and to bolster
presentations at national and international conferences. In addition, the project will provide the CCFU
with adaptation information (specifically lessons learned from the project) to post on their website. In turn,
the CCFU will finance certain project activities that are related to its own outcomes (see above).
Building Adaptive Capacity to Cope with Increasing Vulnerability due to Climate Change
Project. This is a three year international project being undertaken by ZARI and is funded by the
International Development Research Centre (IDRC). The general objective of the project is “to
develop education, research and extension competencies to be able to create strategies that facilitate
rural communities to increase their adaptive capacity to cope with risks and opportunities associated
with climate change and variability”. Specific objectives of the project include:
− Establish and document the existing preconceptions of drought risk held by poor
smallholder farmers that can be used by change agents and meteorological services to
better target their interventions;
− Determine how rural communities have coped with existing climate variability and
extremes and develop appropriate strategies for adapting to future climatic change;
− Build capacity and competency within Zambian and Zimbabwean institutions to use
simulation and climatic forecasting tools for predicting climate variability in order to
facilitate rural communities in developing and evaluating improved coping strategies;
− Use farmer participatory research approaches linked with simulation and climate
forecasting methods to develop and evaluate scenarios with farmers that enable
adaptation of their agricultural production systems to climate variability;
− Develop, test and disseminate climatic risk communication materials and appropriate
delivery interventions to all stakeholders.
154. The project will link with the ZARI project by using the staff trained under this project to conduct
the adaptation trials in the pilot sites and to produce technical reports on the benefits of adaptation that
will be used for lobbying and awareness creation purposes.
Conservation Agriculture Scaling Up for Increased Productivity and Production (CASPP). This
is a two year project being implemented by MACO and managed by the Food and Agriculture
Organisation (FAO). The project aims to upscale the Conservation Agriculture Programme (CAP)
funded through the Royal Norwegian Embassy’s Climate Change Facility. As part of upscaling CAP,
CASPP intends to rapidly upscale proven technologies (through MACO extension systems) to
beneficiary farmers. CASPP Outcomes include:
− Upscale of the phased out conservation agriculture project model;
− Build capacity of MACO’s district structures;
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
59
− Implement an information, education and communication strategy;
− Undertake adaptation research and training;
− Develop market linkages;
− Develop national policy dialogues on conservation agriculture and information education
communication.
155. The project will link with the CASPP project by co-producing certain activities, such as training
extension workers and farmers on conservation farming in some pilot sites.
Capacity Development for Effective Early Warning Services to Support Climate Change
Adaptation in Zambia. This project is being implemented by the ZMD and is supported by the
UNDP. They have made funds available to support GRZ regarding upgrading the current EWS’s to
accommodate adaptation concerns of the different sectors of the economy adversely impacted by
climate change. Among the project’s outcomes include:
− Strengthen institutions to facilitate the establishment of effective EWS’s that consider
climate change impacts;
− Develop capacity for the provision of effective early warning services to support climate
change adaptation;
− Build capacity and sensitize relevant sectors to highlight the relevance of early warning
services for climate change adaptation.
156. The project will co-produce some of the outputs with the ZMD project. Additionally, the project
may link with the World Food Programme. However, this has not yet been finalised and the details will
be determined during the Inception Workshop.
PART III: MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS
157. The project will be implemented over a four year period three months after CEO endorsement to
allow for recruitment. MACO will be the government cooperating agency directly responsible for the
government’s participation in the project. They will also form the implementing partners/executing entity.
In addition, MACO will be responsible and held accountable for managing the project, which will include:
i) monitoring and evaluation of project interventions; ii) ensuring the achievement of project outputs; and
iii) ensuring the effective use of UNDP resources. Furthermore, MACO will designate a representative
who will undertake the role of Executive or Senior Beneficiary120
on the Project Technical Committee
(PTC). MACO will also provide office space for the project secretariat.
158. The implementation arrangements will seek to establish a bridge between: i) national authorities
responsible for formulating and integrating climate change policies; ii) national, regional and local
authorities responsible for project implementation; and iii) on-the-ground practitioners of agricultural
resource management. Continuous monitoring of project progress at all levels will ensure the project
activities are always aligned with project goals.
159. MACO will manage the project through a Project Secretariat (PS) and will delegate specific project
activities to appropriate ministries and departments, such as the ZMD, Zambia Agricultural Research
Institute (ZARI), Department of Agriculture, Department of Forestry, Department of Fisheries,
Department of Veterinary and Livestock Development and the DMMU. The responsibilities of each
department are detailed in Table 1.
120
United Nations Development Programme, 2006. The UNDP Results Management Guide: A process-based
description of required minimum programming methods articulated as policies, tasks, and deliverables, for use in the
effective planning and execution of development programmes and projects.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
60
Project National Steering Committee (Project Board)
160. The PNSC will meet at least once a year. It will be the highest oversight body and will ensure that
the project is consistently aligned with GRZ’s broader climate change, environmental and development
objectives as well as complementary to the implementation of the FNDP and the MDGs. The Director of
the Department of Agriculture or the Director of the Policy and Planning Department (if the Director of
the Department of Agriculture is not available) will chair the PNSC meetings. The director MACO will
hold the position of Executive and will represent the project ownership while chairing the PNSC.
Members of the PNSC will include directors from MTENR (Forestry and Environment Departments),
Department of Water Affairs, ZMD, ZARI, Environmental Council of Zambia, Department of Veterinary
and Livestock Development, DMMU, UNDP, FAO and a Board member or representative from the
Zambia National Farmers Union.
161. The Senior Supplier role will be held by a representative of the MACO (Chief Agricultural
Specialist, Land Husbandry) whose role will be to provide guidance regarding the technical feasibility of
the project. The Senior Beneficiary role will be held by the President of the National Association for
Peasant and Small Scale Farmers of Zambia (NAPSSFZ). His/her role will be to ensure the realisation of
project benefits from the perspective of project beneficiaries. Project Assurance will be the responsibility
of UNDP, who will recruit and pay for a Programme Officer (Project Support). Among his/her functions
will include provision of objective and independent oversight, monitoring and ensuring appropriate
project management milestones are managed and completed.
Project Technical Committee (PTC)
162. The PTC will meet once per quarter or more frequently as deemed necessary by the project
Secretariat and the UNDP CO. They will form the main decision-making body of the project. In
consultation with other implementing partners MACO, as the government cooperating agency, will
designate a representative who will perform the role and functions of executive and will chair the PTC.
Representatives from other relevant ministries and government departments will be members of the PTC
(see Table 1). In addition, the PTC will make policy decisions (in line with agreed project document as
well as UN and GRZ rules and regulations) as well as guide and oversee the progress of the project and
review delivery targets and budgetary issues. Furthermore, the PTC will oversee that all the ministries and
departments are complying with the project commitments.
163. The PTC will also be responsible for making management decisions (which will be done by
convening a meeting with all board members and reaching consensus on decisions) for the project when
guidance is required. This will include approval of project revisions. The PTC will also be consulted by
the PM to assist in making critical decisions that the PM cannot make by him/herself, such as when an
activity is running behind schedule and the workplan requires adjusting.
Project Secretariat (PS)
164. The role of the PS in this project will be to: i) co-ordinate meetings between the implementing
government departments; ii) manage finances; iii) undertake all reporting commitments; iv) undertake
budget revisions; v) undertake monitoring and evaluations; and vi) co-ordinate the day-to-day operations
of the project. The PS will comprise of the Principal Land Husbandry Specialist responsible for land
management and conservation farming. This person will act as PM and will be responsible for the day-to-
day management of the project. Other key persons in the PS include a nominee from the Monitoring and
Evaluation Unit in the Agriculture, Policy and Planning Department (PPD). This person will be
responsible for the project monitoring and evaluation. A nominee from the donor section of MACO’s
Financial Management Unit (FMU) will also be a member of the PS and will be responsible for the
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
61
project’s finances. The members of the PS will report to the Chief Agricultural Specialist- Land
Husbandry.
Programme Implementation Technical Support Team
165. The Programme Implementation Technical Support Team will consist of short-term and medium-
term experts from different fields, who will be engaged to assist in the delivery of different outputs and
outcomes in the project. These include:
Experts
Experts on climate modelling who will be responsible for developing a communication channel that
will ensure climate data is properly packaged and delivered in a timely manner to the end users such
as policy makers and farmers. This will be undertaken with input from the ZMD.
Experts on climate change adaptation, who will help undertake the economic impact assessments
investigating the value of using climate risk information to inform agricultural planning.
Experts on policy will be hired to review and revise the current policies in the relevant ministries to
include climate change considerations.
Experts will also be hired to undertake the economic analyses.
Other experts will include: one knowledge management expert for Outcome 4; one Monitoring and
Evaluation Expert to develop the overall progress monitoring system and one communications expert.
Provincial Level Staff
166. At the provincial level, the Agricultural and Natural Resources sub-committee of the Provincial
Development Coordinating Committee (PDCC) will be the main project decision-making body at the
provincial level. The Provincial Agricultural Coordination Officer (PACO) will assign an officer from the
provincial office to coordinate the involvement of other departments at the provincial level and to be
responsible for incorporating climate change in provincial development plans.
District Level Staff
167. At the district level, the Agricultural and Natural Resources sub-committee of the District
Development Coordination Committee (DDCC) will be the main project decision-making body at the
district level. The District Agricultural Coordination Officer (DACO) will appoint an officer from the
district office to coordinating the involvement of other departments at the district level, and be responsible
for incorporating climate change in district development plans. The person will also be responsible for the
monitoring of the project’s activities at the district level.
Field Staff
168. In the project areas, the Department of Agriculture will provide space to accommodate field-based
staff. The field-based staff will facilitate activities at the local site level and report to the PS. These may
include Block and Camp Extension Officers (BEO and CEOs), Community Development Officer and
Forestry/ Fisheries Officers where available. These officers will work closely with the Area Development
Committees (ADCs) and the Camp Agricultural Committees (CACs) were available. These will act as the
site level technical committees. The BEOs and CEOs will interact with the interest/user groups through
the management committees that will be formed at the community level to oversee the management and
operations of the investments that will be piloted at the sites. Traditional leaders will also be represented.
Organigram of the project management arrangements
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
62
169. See Terms of Reference for the above positions and managing bodies in Section IV, Part I.
Results of MACO’s capacity assessment
170. The detailed assessment is attached as Annex N. Below is a summary of the gaps identified in the
assessment:
1. National institution capacity for project management:
a. Managerial: generally sufficient except in the area of disseminating lessons learned and
knowledge management which needs strengthening.
b. Technical: capacity exists in the domain of agriculture management except for the project
management, agro-meteorology, forest and ecosystem management, climate modelling,
climate change adaptation techniques, policy and economic analysis
2. National institution capacity for administrative and financial management: this is not adequate
particularly in management and maintenance of infrastructure and equipment as well as in
financial management.
National Steering Committee
Project Technical Committee
Interest groups/ User groups/ Livelihoods
Provincial Agricultural and National
Resources Sub Committee
District Agricultural and National
Resources Sub Committee
Area Development
Camp Agricultural
Management Committee at the pilot sites
Project
PACO Office
DACO Office
Block/ CAMP extension
Project Implementation Technical Support Team
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
63
PART IV: Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget
171. Project monitoring and evaluation will be conducted in accordance with established GRZ and
UNDP procedures and will be undertaken by the PS and the UNDP-CO with support from UNDP. The
Strategic Results Framework (SRF) in Section II provides performance and impact indicators for project
implementation along with other corresponding means of verification. These will form the basis on which
the project’s Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system will be built.
172. The following sections outline the principal components of the M&E Plan and indicative cost
estimates related to M&E activities, based on the UNDP Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluation for
Results. The project’s M&E Plan will be presented and finalized in the Project Inception Report following
a collective fine-tuning of indicators, means of verification and full description of project staff M&E
responsibilities.
Monitoring and Reporting
Work Plans and Progress Reports
173. Work Plans will be the main management instruments governing the implementation of the project.
The project will prepare the Annual Work Plan (AWP) with well-defined result indicators, using the
standard format for UNDP supported projects. AWPs will be appraised and endorsed by MACO and
UNDP. Upon approval, the work plan will be an instrument of authorization to the PM for
implementation of the project. Human resources mobilization and procurement plans will be added to the
AWP as annexes and be subject to review and endorsement by MACO and UNDP. Quarterly progress
reports (short reports outlining main updates in the project’s progress) will be provided quarterly to the
PTC by the PS who in turn will submit to the UNDP-CO.
Project Inception Phase
174. A Project Inception Workshop (IW) will be held within the first 2 months after the project starts
and will comprise those with assigned roles in the project organization structure (see Project Organigram,
Section IV, Part I), staff from the UNDP CO, regional technical policy and programme advisors, if
appropriate/feasible, and other stakeholders. The IW is crucial to building ownership for the project
results and to plan the first year Annual Work Plan.
175. The IW should cover and address a number of key issues, including:
Assist all partners to fully understand and take ownership of the project.
Detail the roles, support services and complementary responsibilities of UNDP CO and Regional
Coordination Unit (RCU) staff vis- à-vis the project team.
Discuss the roles, functions, and responsibilities within the project's decision-making structures,
including reporting and communication lines, and conflict resolution mechanisms. The Terms of
Reference for project staff will be discussed again as needed.
Based on the project results framework, finalize the first Annual Work Plan. Review and agree on the
indicators, targets and their means of verification, and recheck assumptions and risks.
Provide a detailed overview of reporting, monitoring and evaluation (M&E) requirements. The M&E
work plan and budget should be agreed and scheduled.
Discuss financial reporting procedures and obligations, and arrangements for the annual audit.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
64
Plan and schedule Project Board meetings. Roles and responsibilities of all project organisation
structures should be clarified and meetings planned. The first Project Board meeting should be held
within the first 12 months following the inception workshop.
176. An IW report is a key reference document and must be prepared and shared with participants to
formalize various agreements and plans decided during the meeting.
Monitoring Responsibilities and Events
177. The PS in conjunction with the PTC will develop a detailed schedule of project review meetings,
which will be incorporated into the inception workshop report. This schedule will include time-frames for
Tripartite Reviews, PTC Meetings and other relevant advisory and coordination mechanisms. Day-to-day
monitoring of implementation progress will be the responsibility of the PM based on the AWP and its
indicators. Project team members will inform the PM and UNDP-CO of any delays or difficulties faced
during the implementation so that appropriate support or corrective measures can be adopted in a timely
and remedial manner.
178. The PM and UNDP-CO will undertake the quarterly progress monitoring of the project
implementation. Although this should be undertaken quarterly, it may also be undertaken when deemed
necessary. This will allow the parties to take stock and troubleshoot any problems pertaining to the
project in a timely manner to ensure the smooth implementation of project activities. This monitoring will
be based on the project’s performance indicators which would have been fine-tuned in consultation with
the stakeholders during the IW. Specific targets for the first year of implementation, which will be
included in the AWP, will be used to assess whether implementation is proceeding at the planned pace.
The targets and indicators may be revised annually as part of the internal evaluation process.
179. UNDP CO and the UNDP RCU will conduct visits to the pilot sites based on the agreed schedule in
the project's Inception Report/Annual Work Plan to assess first hand project progress. Other members of
the Project Board may also join these visits. A Field Visit Report/BTOR will be prepared by the CO and
UNDP RCU and will be circulated no less than one month after the visit to the project team and Project
Board members.
180. Annual monitoring will occur through the tripartite review (TPR). This is the highest policy level
meeting of the parties directly involved in the implementation of the project (i.e. MACO and UNDP-CO).
The project will be subjected to TPR at least once every year, the first one to be held within the first
twelve months since the start of full implementation. With support from the PM, the National Coordinator
(Project Executive) will prepare an Annual Project Report (APR) and submit it to UNDP-CO at least two
weeks prior to the TPR for review and comments.
181. The APR will serve as the basis for assessing the performance of the project in terms of its
contribution to the intended outcomes through outputs and partnership work. The APR will provide an
accurate update on the project results, identify major constraints and propose future directions. The APR
will be prepared by the PS and used for performance assessment, learning and decision making. It will be
a brief report and will contain the basic minimum elements required for the assessment of results, major
problems and proposed actions. These elements include an analysis of project performance over the
reporting period, including: i) outputs produced and, where possible, information on the status of the
outcome; ii) constraints in progress towards results and reasons behind the constraints; iii) three (at most)
major constraints to achievement of results and; iv) lessons learned and clear recommendations for future
approaches, including addressing the main problems restricting progress.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
65
182. The Terminal Tripartite Review (TTR) will be held in the last month of operations. The TTR
considers the implementation of the project as a whole, paying particular attention to whether the project
achieved its objectives and contributed to the broader environmental objective. It decides whether any
actions are still necessary, particularly in relation to sustainability of project results, and acts as a vehicle
through which lessons learnt can be captured to feed into other projects.
183. MACO, with the assistance of the PM will be responsible for the preparation and submission of the
following reports which will form part of the monitoring process:
Inception Report (IR)
184. The project IR will be prepared immediately following the IW. It will include a detailed First Year
AWP divided into quarterly timeframes detailing the activities and progress indicators that will guide
implementation during the first year of the project. The AWP will include dates of specific field visits,
support missions from the UNDP-CO or consultants as well as timeframes for project’s decision-making
meetings. The report will also include the detailed project budget for the first full year of implementation
and any M&E requirements to effectively measure project performance during the targeted twelve months.
185. The IR will also include a more detailed narrative on the institutional roles, responsibilities,
coordinating actions and feedback mechanisms of project partners. In addition, a section will be included
on progress to-date on project establishment and start-up activities and an update of any changed external
conditions that may affect project implementation. When finalized, the report will be circulated to project
counterparts who will be given a period of one month in which to respond with comments or queries.
Annual Project Report (APR)
186. The APR is a UNDP requirement and part of UNDP-CO’s central oversight, monitoring, and
project management. It is a self-assessment report compiled by PS to the UNDP-CO and it also provides
input on the UNDP-CO’s reporting process, as well as providing key input to the TTR. This key report is
prepared to monitor progress made since project start and in particular for the previous reporting period
(30 June to 1 July). The APR/PIR (see below) combines both UNDP and GEF reporting requirements.
187. The APR/PIR includes, but is not limited to, reporting on the following:
Progress made toward project objective and project outcomes - each with indicators, baseline data and
end-of-project targets (cumulative).
Project outputs delivered per project outcome (annual).
Lesson learned/good practice.
AWP and other expenditure reports.
Risk and adaptive management.
ATLAS QPR.
Portfolio level indicators are used by most focal areas on an annual basis as well.
Project Implementation Review (PIR)
188. The PIR is an annual monitoring process mandated by GEF. It is an essential management and
monitoring tool for PMs and offers a means of extracting lessons from on-going projects. Once the
project has been going for a year, a PIR must be completed by the UNDP-CO together with the PS. The
PIR can be prepared any time during the year (July-June), although it would be ideal to prepare it prior to
the TPR. The PIR should then be discussed in the TPR so that the result would be a PIR that has been
agreed upon by all the parties.
Quarterly Progress Reports
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
66
189. Short reports based on the AWP outlining main updates in project progress will be provided
quarterly to the local UNDP-CO and MACO by the PM or national consultants. Progress made shall be
monitored in the UNDP Enhanced Results Based Management Platform.
190. Based on the initial risk analysis submitted, the risk log shall be regularly updated in ATLAS.
Risks become critical when the impact and probability are high. Note that for UNDP projects, all
financial risks associated with financial instruments such as revolving funds, microfinance schemes, or
capitalization of ESCOs are automatically classified as critical on the basis of their innovative nature
(high impact and uncertainty due to no previous experience justifies classification as critical). Based on
the information recorded in Atlas, a Project Progress Reports (PPR) can be generated in the Executive
Snapshot. Other ATLAS logs can be used to monitor issues, lessons learned and so on. The use of these
functions is a key indicator in the UNDP Executive Balanced Scorecard.
Periodic Thematic Reports
191. As and when called for by UNDP-CO or the GEF Secretariat, MACO will prepare Specific
Thematic Reports, focusing on specific issues or areas of activity. The request for a Thematic Report will
be provided to the MACO in writing by UNDP and will clearly state the issue or activities that need to be
reported on. These reports can be used as a form of lessons learned exercise, specific oversight in key
areas, or as troubleshooting exercises to evaluate and overcome obstacles and difficulties encountered.
UNDP is requested to minimize its requests for Thematic Reports, and when such reports are necessary
UNDP is requested to allow reasonable timeframes for their preparation by the project team.
Project Terminal Report
192. During the last three months of the project, MACO will prepare the Project Terminal Report (PTR).
This comprehensive report will summarize all activities, achievements and outputs of the project, lessons
learnt, objectives not met or not achieved, structures and systems implemented, and thus provide an
assessment of the project’s performance during its lifetime. It will also lay out recommendations for any
further steps that may need to be taken to ensure sustainability and replicability of the project’s activities.
Technical Reports
193. Technical Reports are detailed documents covering specific areas of analysis or scientific
specializations within the overall project. As part of the IR, the PS will prepare a draft Reports List
detailing the technical reports that are expected to be prepared on key areas of activity during the course
of the project, and tentative due dates. Where necessary, this Reports List will be revised and updated,
and included in subsequent APRs. Among the key technical reports expected to be produced by the
project in the first year is the synthesis document on cross-cutting issues including financial mechanisms,
based on materials generated during the PPG phase. Elements of this report will be disseminated widely
among the key stakeholders involved in the project.
194. Technical reports may also be prepared by external consultants and should be comprehensive,
specialized analyses of clearly defined areas of research within the framework of the project and pilot
sites. These technical reports will represent, as appropriate, the project’s substantial contribution to
specific areas, and will be used in efforts to disseminate relevant information and best practices at local,
national and international levels.
Project Publications
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
67
195. Project publications will be a key method for disseminating the results and achievements of the
project. These publications should be scientific (i.e. published in peer-review journals) as well as popular
texts on the activities and achievements of the project. These publications can be based on technical
reports, or may be summaries or compilations of a series of technical reports and other research. The
project team will determine if any of the Technical Reports merit formal publication and will also (in
consultation with UNDP, the government and other relevant stakeholder groups) plan and produce these
publications in a consistent and recognizable format. It is anticipated that a minimum of one major
publication synthesizing key lessons from the project and experiences of the case sites will be produced in
the last year of the project. Project resources will need to be defined and allocated for these activities as
appropriate and in a manner commensurate with the project budget. Other publications will include
shorter policy briefs.
Independent Evaluation
196. The project will be subjected to at least two independent external evaluations as follows:
Mid-term Evaluation
197. The project will undergo an independent Mid-Term Evaluation at the mid-point of project
implementation. The Mid-Term Evaluation will determine progress being made toward the achievement
of outcomes and will identify course correction if needed. It will focus on the effectiveness, efficiency
and timeliness of project implementation; will highlight issues requiring decisions and actions; and will
present initial lessons learned about project design, implementation and management. Findings of this
review will be incorporated as recommendations for enhanced implementation during the final half of the
project’s term.
198. The organization, Terms of Reference and timing of the mid-term evaluation will be decided after
consultation between the parties to the project document. The Terms of Reference for this Mid-term
evaluation will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from the Regional Coordinating Unit
and UNDP. The management response and the evaluation will be uploaded to UNDP corporate systems,
in particular the UNDP Evaluation Office Evaluation Resource Centre (ERC).
Final External Evaluation
199. An independent Final Evaluation will take place three months prior to the final Project Board
meeting and will be undertaken in accordance with UNDP and GEF guidance. The final evaluation will
focus on the delivery of the project’s results as initially planned (and as corrected after the mid-term
evaluation, if any such correction took place). The final evaluation will look at impact and sustainability
of results, including the contribution to capacity development. The Terms of Reference for this evaluation
will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from the Regional Coordinating Unit and UNDP-
GEF.
200. The Terminal Evaluation should also provide recommendations for follow-up activities and
requires a management response which should be uploaded to PIMS and to the UNDP Evaluation Office
Evaluation Resource Centre (ERC).
201. The relevant GEF Focal Area Tracking Tools will also be completed during the final evaluation.
202. During the last three months, the project team will prepare the Project Terminal Report. This
comprehensive report will summarize the results achieved (objectives, outcomes, outputs), lessons
learned, problems met and areas where results may not have been achieved. It will also lay out
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
68
recommendations for any further steps that may need to be taken to ensure sustainability and replicability
of the project’s results.
Auditing
203. The project will be audited annually, using the National Execution Modality by the Office of the
Auditor General. Audit reports and follow up action plans will be endorsed and monitored by UNDP.
Learning and Knowledge Sharing
204. Results from the programme will be disseminated within and beyond the programme interventions
zone through a number of existing informal sharing networks, in particular, the ALM and wikiADAPT.
The ALM lessons learned template will be adapted for use by the project.
205. The project will identify, analyze and share lessons learnt that might be beneficial in the design and
implementation of similar future projects. Identifying and analyzing lessons learned is an on-going
process, and the need to communicate such lessons as one of the project’s central contributions is a
requirement to be delivered not less frequently than once every 12 months. UNDP will provide a format
and assist the project team in categorizing, documenting and reporting on lessons learned. To this end a
percentage of project resources will need to be allocated for these activities.
Indicative Monitoring and Evaluation Work Plan and Corresponding Budget
206. The following table (Table 6) provides the outline of the M&E framework. More information can
be found in Table 12 (Total budget and workplan).
Table 6. Indicative Monitoring and Evaluation Work Plan and Corresponding Budget. Type of M& E Activity Responsible Parties Budget (US$)
(Excluding Project team
Staff time)
Time Frame
Inception Workshop PTC
PS
UNDP
15,000121
Within two months after
the project has
management unit has
been setup.
Inception Report PS None A month after the
inception workshop
Measurement of Means
of Verification or
project results
PTC
PS
UNDP-CO
To be finalised at the
inception phase and
workshop
Start, mid and end of
project (during
evaluation cycle) and
annually when
required).
Measurement of Means
of Verification for
Project Progress on
outputs and
implementation
PTC
PS
UNDP-CO
To be determined as part
of the AWP’s
preparation
Annually prior to
APR/PIR and to the
definition of annual
workplans
Annual Project Review
(APR) and Project
Implementation Review
PTC
PS
UNDP-CO
15,000 Annually
121
Based on the assumption that 50 people attend. This includes accommodation for 2 nights and transport refunds
for those from other places outside Lusaka.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
69
(PIR)
Tripartite Review (TPR) MACO
UNDP
PTC
PS
15,000122
Annually
Terminal Tripartite
Review (TTR) PS
PTC
MACO
20,000123
At the end of the Project
Project Technical
Committee Meetings PS
PTC
UNDP-CO
30,000 Following the Inception
workshop and at least
once a year
Periodic Status/Progress
Reports PM
PS
15,000 Quarterly
Technical Reports/
Publications PS
PTC
MACO
Individual Consultants
20,000 To be determined during
the Inception Report
Mid-Term External
Evaluation MACO
PS
PTC
External Consultants
(i.e. evaluation team)
40,000 Midway during the
project Implementation
Final External
Evaluation MACO
PS
PTC
External Consultants
(i.e. evaluation team)
40,000 At least 3 months before
the end of project
implementation
Lessons Learned and
shared (both local and at
international level)
PS
UNDP
0124
Every year of the project
implementation from
year two.
Audit CO
PS
Indicative cost per year:
10,000
Yearly
Field Visits to the Sites PS
PTC
UNDP-CO
30,000125
Yearly
Project Terminal Report
(PTR) MACO
PS
None Start three months
before the project ends.
Total Indicative Cost
Excluding project
team staff time and
UNDP staff time and
expenses
280,000
PART V: Legal Context
207. This project document shall be the instrument referred to as such in Article 1 of the Standard Basic
Assistance Agreement between GRZ and the UNDP.
122
This will be some kind of a workshop. The costs will be mainly venue hire and refreshments annually. 123
The PS and the PTC will hire a consultant to conduct the TTR. The cost includes consultancy fees and logistical
support for the field work. 124
The cost of lessons learned is covered by Outcome 4. 125
The allocation for field visits was reduced from US$90,000 to US$30,000 since the cost of other monitoring
includes the cost of travel as well.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
70
208. Revisions may be made to this project document with the signature of the UNDP Resident
Representative only, provided he or she is assured that the other signatories of the project document have
no objections to the proposed changes, that is to say revisions which do not involve significant changes in
the outcomes, outputs or activities of a project, but are caused by rearrangement of inputs agreed to or by
cost increases due to inflation.
209. The GRZ will provide the Resident Representative with certified periodic financial statements, and
with an annual audit of the financial statements relating to the status of UNDP (including GEF) funds
according to the established procedures set out in the Programming and Finance manuals. The Audit will
be conducted by the legally recognized auditor of the Government, or by a commercial auditor engaged
by the Government.
210. This document together with the CPAP signed by the Government and the UNDP which is
incorporated by reference constitute together a Project Document as referred to in the Standard Basic
Assistance Agreement and all CPAP provisions apply to this document.
211. Consistent with the Article III of the standard Basic Agreement, the responsibility for the safety and
security of the implementing partner and its personnel and property, and of UNDP ‘s property in the
implementing partner’s custody, rests within the implementing partner.
The implementing partner shall:
a) Put in place appropriate security plan and maintain the security plan, taking into account the
security situation in the country where the project is being carried;
b) Assume all risks and liabilities related to the implementing partner’s security, and the full
implementation of the security plan.
212. UNDP reserves the right to verify whether such a plan is in place, and suggest modifications to the
plan when necessary. The implementing partner agrees to undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that
none of the UNDP funds received pursuant to the Project Document are used to provide support to
individuals or entities associated with terrorism and that the recipients of any amounts provided by UNDP
hereunder do not appear on the list maintained by the Security Council Committee established pursuant to
resolution 1267(1999).
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
71
SECTION II: Strategic Results Framework
PART I: Strategic Results Framework
Table 7. Strategic Results Framework of the project.
Project Strategy
Indicators
Baseline Value
Targets and benchmarks
Sources of
verification
Risks and
Assumptions
Objective: to
develop adaptive
capacity of
subsistence
farmers and rural
communities to
withstand climate
change in Zambia
1. Number of
subsistence farmers in
the rural communities
who have successful
adopted adaptation
measures.
2. No of policy-level
activities that enable
policy adjustments for
replication of cost-
effective adaptation
measures.
3. No of knowledge
products generated
that promote
replication of cost-
effective adaptation
approaches.
1. At present, adaptation
measures have not been
adopted by subsistence
farmers.
2. Limited mainstreaming of
adaptation into national
planning processes and
policies.
3. Limited documented
information on cost-
effectiveness of adaptation
responses, and promotion of
adaptation.
By the end of the project, at
least 1000 subsistence
farmers adopt at least one
adaptation measure.
2. By the end of the project,
5 key sectoral policies and 2
provincial and district plans
are revised to promote
adaptation.
3. By the end of the project,
at least 20 key project
lessons are documented and
disseminated in local,
national and international
fora and media.
Field Surveys.
Consultants’
reports.
Government
policies and
plans; minutes
of meetings.
Knowledge
products,
workshop
proceedings.
Outcome 1:
Climate change
risks integrated
into decision-
making processes
for agricultural
management at
the local, sub-
national and
1. Number of
government planners
and extension staff
that include climate
risk information in
their decision
processes.
2. EWS developed
At present, climate risk
information is not included
in decision-making
processes.
Zambia’s National Disaster
By the end of the project,
250 government planners and
extension staff trained to
routinely include climate risk
information in their decision
processes.
Farmers’ incomes in 3 pilot
sites protected against the
Surveys and
interviews with
sectoral
planners.
Review of legal
texts for
agencies
Availability of
technical
expertise and
equipment for
downscaling
international
climate data to
AER level.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
72
national levels and applied
effectively in three
pilot sites.
Management Policy
identifies gaps affecting its
functionality and measures
that need to be undertaken to
improve disaster risk
management.
effects of extreme weather
events.
concerned.
Outcome 2:
Agricultural
productivity in
the pilot sites
made resilient to
the anticipated
impacts of climate
change
1. Number of
interventions in
selected pilot sites
implemented, with
appropriate
management
(including cost
recovery) plans in
place, agreed by all
stakeholders, for
sustainability beyond
the project grant.
2. Percentage increase
in agricultural
incomes in the pilot
sites.
3. Number of women
involved in
interventions in the
pilot sites.
At present, although there
are a number of measures
that the government and
other donors are
implementing. However,
these do not take climate
change into consideration;
neither are they monitored
for their adaptation value.
10% increase in agricultural
incomes.
At least 50% of the people
involved in the interventions
at each pilot site are women
(this includes management
committees).
Surveys, end of
project
evaluation
reports
Private sector
and
communities do
not respond
positively to
improved
policies/incentiv
es.
Poor co-
ordination
among
implementing
institutions
leading to
delays in
deliverables.
Agricultural and
water
management
interventions at
the pilot sites
are not cost
effective.
Farmer
acceptability of
risky adaptation
measures may
limit project
implementation.
Lack of
commitment
from the
community.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
73
High illiteracy
levels in villages
may hinder the
progress of pilot
interventions
and/or
dissemination of
lessons learned.
The current
momentum on
climate change
does not fade or
is not overtaken
by events such
as global
financial crisis.
Outcome 3:
National fiscal,
regulatory and
development
policy revised to
promote
adaptation
responses in the
agricultural
sector.
1. The number of
policies that are
adapted to take into
account climate
change risks.
2. Awareness level of
rural population in
pilot sites and
local/national
government of
climate change and its
impacts improved.
At present, the national
policies as well as the
provincial and district
development plans that are
available do not address
climate change and
adaptation issues in an
integrated manner.
At present, rural
populations’ understanding
of climate change and its
impacts is minimal.
By the end of the project, 2
provincial plans and district
plans and 5 key national
policies are revised to
promote sustainable climate
resilient development.
By the end of the project,
rural populations within the
eight pilot sites will have
been exposed to climate
change information and
adaptation training with
catalytic intentions.
Policies, action
plans, policy
briefings and
communication
reports
The project
interventions are
able to generate
convincing
benefits.
Policy
stakeholders are
willing to make
changes in
policies within
the time-frame
of the project.
Government
remains stable
and climate
change remains
a policy priority
throughout the
project.
Outcome 4.
Lessons learned
and knowledge
management
component
established.
1. Number of
proposals, papers and
other documents that
incorporate learning
from the project.
2. Number of lessons
Development projects
currently do not
systematically benefit from
learning practices and
project lessons on
community-based
adaptation.
By the end of the project, at
least four proposed or
ongoing projects draw on
lessons and knowledge
generated by the LDCF
project.
ALM platform
Papers,
proposals and
other
documents.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
74
included in the ALM.
3, Number of regional
and national
workshops conducted
for dissemination of
project lessons.
4. The number of
awareness campaigns
conducted on the
need to incorporate
adaptation needs in
policy.
By the end of the project, at
least 20 key project lessons
are captured and
disseminated in the ALM.
By the end of the project, at
least 1 national and 1
international workshop on
adaptation to effects of
drought and climate change
is conducted.
By the end of the project, at
least two campaigns have
been conducted
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
75
PART II: Cost-effectiveness Analysis
213. The measures implemented through this project were identified during the NAPA process. Multi-
criteria analysis was used to prioritise the list according to potential for positive effects on economic
development, social capital and environmental management. Cost effectiveness was one of the criteria
measuring economic development. The actions proposed are not only the most urgent and most pressing,
but are also judged to be cost effective.
214. Detailed cost information for the indicative 31 interventions in the eight pilot sites within AER I
and II in Zambia has been included in Annex G. The effectiveness of these measures in increasing
resilience to climate change will be tested and measured during the course of the project. This will
involve undertaking an economic analysis and performing cost-benefit analyses to ascertain whether each
activity is an economically viable option given climate change. The most successful interventions will be
prioritized in policy-level work (Outcome 3) to promote upscaling to other areas of AER I and II
215. The following measures will also ensure that the proposed project is cost effective:
1. The project will be managed within the existing MACO extension frameworks. This will
ensure cost sharing with other projects and reduce on the overheads.
2. The project will closely with existing projects (see paragraphs 151-156) to co-produce
outputs. The project will benefit from $809,000 cash co-financing from the Government for
Outcome 2, and $175 of cash co-financing from UNDP
3. The technical and financial support for the management communities, which is an integral
component in all the proposed interventions, will ensure capacity is developed within the
communities. This will ensure cost effectiveness in terms of monitoring and enhance
sustainability beyond the project lifespan.
4. Strengthening of market linkages in the pilot sites will ensure that the farmer groups will be
able to acquire inputs on their own (as the project progresses).
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
76
SECTION III: Total Budget and Workplan
Table 8. Total budget and workplan.
Award ID: 00058205
Award Title: PIMS 3942 CCA FSP: Zambia NAPA Follow up (LDCF)
Business Unit: ZMB10
Project Title: Adaptation to the Effect of Drought and Climate Change in Agro-ecological Zone 1 and 2 in Zambia
Project ID: 00072197
Implementing Partner
(Executing Agency)
Ministry of Agriculture & Cooperatives
LDCF Outcome
Responsible
Party
Fund
ID
Donor
Name
ATLAS
Budgetary
Account
Code
ATLAS Budgetary
Account Code
Year 1
(US$)
Year 2
(US$)
Year 3
(US$)
Year 4
(US$)
Total
(US$)
Budget
Notes
OUTCOME 1: Climate
change risks integrated
into critical decision
making processes for
agricultural management
at the local, sub-national
and national levels
Ministry of
Agriculture &
Cooperatives 62160
GEF 71300 Local Consultant 40,000 20,000 60,000 1
GEF 72200 Equipment 30,000 30,000 2
GEF 74500 Miscellaneous 60,000 60,000 3
GEF 72100 Contractual Services 40,000 60,000 60,000 160,000 4
GEF 71200
International
Consultant 40,000 40,000 5
GEF Subtotal
OUTCOME 1 80,000 150,000 60,000 60,000 350,000
OUTCOME 2:
Agricultural productivity
in the pilot sites made
resilient to the
anticipated impacts of
climate change
Ministry of
Agriculture &
Cooperatives 62160
GEF 72300 Materials & Goods 29,640 266,340 216,620 203,180 715,780 6
GEF 72100 Contractual services 22,000 1,070,916 140,916 66,916 1,300,748 7
GEF 71600 Travel 110,940 150,570 164,850 115,350 541,710 8
GEF 74200 Audio Visual 15,000 27,600 27,600 12,600 82,800 9
GEF Subtotal
OUTCOME 2
177,580 1,515,426 549,986 398,046 2,641,038
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
77
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
78
OUTCOME 3: National
fiscal and development
policy revised to promote
adaptation responses in
the agricultural sector
Ministry of
Agriculture &
Cooperatives
62160
GEF 71200 International Consultant 40,000 40,000 80,000
10 GEF 71300 Local consultants 20,000 20,000 20,000 60,000
GEF 72100 Contractual Services 30,000 18,962 30,000 78,962 11
GEF 71600 Travel 30,000 10,000 40,000 12
4000
UNDP-
CO 74500 Miscellaneous 43,750 43,750 43,750 43,750 175,000 13
Subtotal GEF 120,000 38,962 100,000 258,962
Subtotal UNDP-CO 43,750 43,750 43,750 43,750 175,000
SUBTOTAL
OUTCOME 3 43,750 163,750 82,712 143,750 433,962
4. Lessons-learned and
knowledge management
component established
Ministry of
Agriculture &
Cooperatives 62160
GEF 71300 Local Consultant
10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 14
GEF 72400 Comm. & Audio Visual 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 15
GEF 74200
Audio Visual & Print
Prod 20,000 20,000 60,000 100,000 16
GEF 71600 Travel 20,000 20,000 17
Subtotal OUTCOME 4 35,000 35,000 95,000 165,000
5. Project Management
Ministry of
Agriculture &
Cooperatives 62160
GEF 71200 International Consultants 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 40,000 18
GEF 71300 Local Consultant
15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 60,000 19
GEF 71600 Travel
20,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 60,000 20
GEF 72500 Office Supplies 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 40,000 21
GEF 72200 Equipment 60,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 100,000 22
GEF 74500 Miscellaneous 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 80,000 23
Subtotal GEF 135,000 95,000 75,000 75,000 380,000
SUBTOTAL
MANAGEMENT 180,000 220,000 190,000 90,000 540,000
Grand total GEF 392,580 1,915,426 758,948 728,046 3,795,000
Grand total UNDP-CO 43,750 43,750 43,750 43,750 175,000
GRAND TOTAL 436,330 1,959,176 802,698 771,796 3,970,000
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
79
Summary of Funds:
126
Donor Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total
GEF 392,580 1,915,426 758,948 728,046 3,795,000
UNDP 43,750 43,750 43,750 43,750 175,000
ZMD 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 500,000
CCFU 650,000 650,000 650,000 650,000 2,600,000
FAO (CASPP) 1,250,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 5,000,000
GRZ(MACO) 382,250 382,250 382,250 382,250 1 529 000
TOTAL 2,843,580 4,366,426 3,209,948 3,179,046 13,599,000
Budget notes pertaining to Total Budget and Workplan
Table 9. Budget notes for Outcome 1: Climate change risks integrated into critical decision making processes for agricultural management at the local,
sub-national and national levels.
Budget Description Ref
A consultant will be hired to:
1) Undertake economic impact assessments on the adaptation value of using climate risk
information to inform agricultural planning. The cost to the project is estimated at US$25,000
2) The ZMD project intends to engage a local consultant to develop a National Early Warning
System (NEWS). The consultant who will do the EW needs assessment will also develop the
EWS for the sites based on the needs assessment.
3) The CCFU will hire consultants to revise the policies to incorporate climate change
considerations. The proposed project will use lessons learnt from the pilots as inputs to the
process.
1
The project will purchase equipment for water monitoring and weather data monitoring such as rain
gauges for collecting and monitoring water and weather data in the project sites.
2
The project in collaboration with the DWA and ZMD will conduct trainings in the project sites
1) For staff DWA staff, ZMD and extension staff on how to monitor water and weather data. This
will complement the trainings under the ZMD project “capacity development for effective early
3
126 Summary table includes all financing of all kinds: GEF financing, co-financing, cash, in-kind, etc.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
80
warning….) the ZMD will conduct capacity enhanced of agro/met staff in agroshell software at
provincial level in order to develop capacity for the provision of effective early warning services
to support climate change adaptation. The budget is US$190,000. Similarly, the CCFU, as one of
its planned activities will train ZMD staff in early warning forecast and modelling as well as
training in data interpretation for agricultural and DMMU staff. The budget is US$50,000. This
makes a total of US$240,000
2) On early warning targeting the local communities/ PDCC and DDCC will be conducted at the
project sites. This is estimated to cost US$5000 at each site per year. This will be covered under
the cross-sectoral sensitization and capacity building on the relevance of early warning for
climate change adaptation by the ZMD.
The Following undertakings will be done through DDCC and CCFU:
1) The DDCC will be facilitated with financial and technical assistance to act as climate change
resource centres. Each will be provided with US$5000 annually.
2) The CCFU, under its development of a communication and advocacy strategy on climate change
intends to disseminate information through the Ministries such as the education ministry. They
will spend US$53,500. The project will conduct trainings in the project sites for the school
children on climate change. 4
The ZMD project intends to engage an international consultant for technical assistance for the
establishment of cross sectoral early warning services for climate change adaptation as well as technical
assistance for the evaluation of a suitable legal framework and financial system for sustainability of EWS.
The entire process will cost US$60,000. The project will engage a consultant to conduct site specific early
warning needs assessments in all the project sites. This will cost the project US$30,000
5
Table 10. Budget notes for Outcome 2: Agricultural productivity in the pilot sites made resilient to the anticipated impacts of climate change. Budget Description Ref
In order to implement successful demonstration of Techniques for soil and water conservation as well as
soil improvement implemented to reduce erosion and improve the productivity and income of small-scale
agriculture, farmers in the pilots will be provided with free inputs in the first year so as to properly
implement the trainings. This will facilitate comparisons and enhance adoption of diversified seeds. To
achieve this Local dealers and companies will be Contracted:
1) To supply rice dehullers [4] to the rice producing groups. The groups will operate the machine
which farmers will use at a fee. The funds raised should assists in meeting the repair costs and
other group operating costs. The estimated cost of the machine with capacity of 3-5MT/h is
US$5000. Each site will have two machines.
2) To supply fingerlings, rice seed and fertilizers. Each of the 20[5] farmers will be supplied with a
rice-fish input pack for 2 acres (0.80937 hectares). This will consist of 5X50kg D-compound
fertilizer at US$62 and 3X50kg Ammonium Nitrate at US$62 and rice seed whose cost is to be
determined later. Fingerlings estimated at 100 per pond will also be supplied. These costs of rice
and fingerlings for the 20 farmers are estimated at US$5000 annually making an approximate
total annual cost of US$15,000. Estimated yields per hectare for this type of farming are
1,517kg/ha for rice and 196kg/ha of fish in Zambia [6].
6
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
81
Local manufacturers/Construction companies will be contracted or their Equipment hired for the following
Undertakings:
1) Local manufacturers/ carpenters will be contracted to manufacture modern beehives to be
supplied to the farmers.
2) Local engineering firms will be contracted to construct new dams for supplying water for
domestic use, animal watering and irrigation. The dam size will depend on the number of
households in the catchment area. The cost of construction [7] is estimated at US$0.33/m3 while
household demand for domestic, livestock and irrigation usage is estimated at 200m3 per year
[8]. To account for loses8 due to evaporation and seepage each household needs 800m3 in total
from the dam. Each dam will be equipped with water extraction mechanism for irrigation as well
as animal watering points to prevent direct extraction by animals and people which leads to
silting. Each household in the sites is expected to have sufficient water for irrigating 1000m2 of
land for vegetables for 90 days, water 35 animals for 180 days as well as domestic water use for
a family of six[9].
3) Local construction companies will be contracted to construct fish ponds. 3 production ponds
constructed each year at US$4,000 each labour inclusive (2,000M2 @ US$2/M2 for earthen
ponds and US$6/M2 for concrete ponds. Earthen are preferred, for they are cheaper to construct)
[1] .Three rearing ponds (166M2 @ US$332 each) will also be constructed each year to supply
the production ponds with fingerlings (2.5 fingerlings per metre squared [2]). One breeding pond
will be constructed each year. A 200M2 will supply fry to all the three rearing ponds. This will
cost US$400. The total cost of pond construction annually will be US$14,196. Assuming that the
fish will be under supplementary feeding, estimated harvest per year on average is 1800kg for
the three production ponds (30kg/M2 )[3] . With fish costing approximately US$2/kg.
4) The construction of earth dam in Chikowa and the six storm water dams in Kasaya will be
constructed by the communities with technical assistance from the DWA and MACO staff.
These will need fuel and DSAs for a maximum of 10 days per dam where necessary machinery
may be hired. Two storm water dams will be constructed each year in Kasaya from year two
using community labour and technical assistance from the DWA and MACO. In second year, 2
storm water dams in Kasaya and the earth dam in Chikowa will be constructed. This implies 3
sites by 2 officers at each site.
5) Local communities under the supervision of DWA and MACO staff will construct 3 weirs in
Kasaya and 2 holding reservoirs in Lusitu. These should be designed with mechanisms to extract
water to protect them from silting. The cost of a weir/ sand-dam 175ft long and 9ft high expected
to hold 2000m3 of water is estimated at US$5,600 plus the community labour [10].
7
Travel costs (DSA and Fuel) for all field trips for Consultants, project staff and technical personnel will be
partly covered by project funds
8
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
82
Audio Visual Equipment and Publication/demonstration Materials will be needed for the following
undertakings
1) MACO and DWA staff will be conducting regular trainings and providing technical advice on
high value irrigated crop production and marketing to ensure increased productivity from the
irrigated crops in all the sites with irrigation projects. The DWA staff will be conducting regular
monitoring to provide technical advice on dam maintenance to prevent siltation of dams. The
training and routine monitoring will be done at least 3 times in a month each year by two officers
(one from DWA and the other from MACO). These will require DSAs amounting to US$60/
day, and fuel allowances amounting to US$24 per day (20 litres per day at US$1.2/litre).
2) Department of Water Affairs technical staff from the provinces together with MACO (TSB)
officers will conduct trainings on river bank control on the Bazimu River. They will also select
the suitable sites where check dams and gabions will be constructed to realign the river. They
will also conduct training on construction of impounding structures and basins. The expenses
will include fuel and DSAs for a maximum of 10 days.
9
Table 11. Budget notes for Outcome 3: National fiscal and development policy revised to promote adaptation responses in the agricultural sector Budget Description Ref
The CCFU will hire consultants to revise the policies to incorporate climate change considerations. The
proposed project will contribute lessons learned to the CCFU for use in sensitization campaigns and policy
advocacy. The project will hire consultants who will conduct barrier analysis based on the project
objectives; conduct seminars to disseminate project specific information. All the analyses supported by the
project will be done in project areas and will also feed into the larger CCFU objectives
10
Funds earmarked for:
1) National training seminars on climate resilient agriculture
2) Seminars/Workshops meant to foster dialogue between DDCC, PDCC and the communities
3) Development and production of awareness and training materials
11
Consultant travel costs (DSA & fuel) on policy revision and Climate change mainstreaming related
business
12
UNDP-CO will contribute US$175,000 to support outcomes under outcome 3. This will be in form of cash
financing. The distribution of the money will be decided during the inception workshop when the
stakeholder involvement plan is finalized. Particularly the rows between CCFU and the project as regards
outcome 3 will be finalized during the IW.
13
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
83
Table 12. Budget notes for Outcome 4: Lessons-learned and knowledge management component established.
Budget Description Ref Consultancy Services-Individuals: One Knowledge Management Expert will be engaged to document
lessons learnt from the project on a continuous basis and present the lessons in summary to all
stakeholders; collate and submit all technical reports and documents on lessons learnt to the ALM and
WikiADAPT; and Develop a briefing paper on lessons-learnt from the project for publication in a peer
reviewed journal. The total cost for this activity will be US$30,000 for the project duration.
14
The CCFU will establish a climate change website and regularly update and popularize it through
electronic and print media to ensure that it is accessible to the general public. They will spend US$15,000.
The project will use the same website.
15
In order to raise awareness on the lessons learnt
1) The CCFU will conduct climate change workshops at district, provincial and national level. The
project will benefit by disseminating its information through these workshops.
2) The project will work in collaboration with the National Agricultural Information Services who
will coordinate the dissemination of information through broadcasting on both radio and
television and publications in the national dairies and posters. An indicative budget submitted by
NAIS for these activities is attached.
16
Travel costs for Community workshops in the pilot sites to disseminate project lessons 17
Table 13. Budget notes for Project Management.
Budget Description Ref The mid-term evaluation and the final evaluation will cost the project a total of US$80,000. These will be
conducted by an international consultant. UNDP-CO will contribute US$40,000 to supplement the GEF
contribution of US$40,000.
18
The UNDP-CO will facilitate for the hiring of a project officer who will hold the role of project assurance.
The annual budget for this is US$60,000. The person will be employed for two years.
19
PMU staff travel on project management and programme coordination related business 20
Office supplies-stationary and sundry
21
Hardware and software equipment for PCU and office furniture
22
Includes telecommunications and internet connection 23
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
84
Table 14. References for Budget Notes.
Notes.
[1] Estimates for cost of pond construction were supplied by Dr. Harris Phiri, Chief Fisheries Research
Officer, Department of Fisheries, MACO
[2] Mwale, M., Chizyuka, C.H., Sokotela, S.B, Banda, K.P and Matsuda. A. 2007 PaViDIA Field Manual
(Volume 3): Sustainable Agricultural Practices. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives/ Japan
International Cooperation Agency.
[3] Mwale, M., Chizyuka, C.H., Sokotela, S.B, Banda, K.P and Matsuda. A. 2007 PaViDIA Field Manual
(Volume 3): Sustainable Agricultural Practices. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives/ Japan
International Cooperation Agency
[4] Machine for milling rice to remove the husks. This will improve the quality of rice as traditional
systems of dehulling result in broken grains which are not accepted by some retailers.
[5] Although the facilitators report recommended 5 farmers for trial purposes, this is uneconomical as the
monitoring costs are likely to be high. Also to gauge the impact, a larger sample is required.
[6] Nilsson, H. and Blariaux, D. 1994. Rice-Cum Fish Trials in Luapula Province, Zambia. Downloadable
at http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/AD004E/AD004E00.HTM
[7] Mati, B.M., Malesu, M. and Oduor, A. 2005. Promoting Rainwater Harvesting Eastern and Southern
Africa: The RELMA Experience.
[8] Niessen-Petresen, E. 2006 Water from Small Dams, A handbook for technicians, farmers and others on
site investigations, designs, cost estimates, construction and maintenance of small earth dams. Danish
International Development Assistance
[9] Niessen-Petresen, E. 2006 Water from Small Dams, A handbook for technicians, farmers and others on
site investigations, designs, cost estimates, construction and maintenance of small earth dams. Danish
International Development Assistance
[10] http://thewaterproject.org/kalwa.asp
[11] Sivanappan, R.K. Technologies for water harvesting and soil moisture conservation in small water
sheds for small-scale irrigation. Downloadable at http://www.fao.org/docrep/W7314E/w7314e0q.htm
[12] Estimates from Eastern Province Field Report
[13] Southern Province Facilitators Report
[14] Southern Province Facilitators Report
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
85
SECTION IV: Additional Information
PART I: Terms of Reference for Key Project Groups, Staff, and Sub-Contractors127
A. Project National Steering Committee
216. The PNSC will be established by MACO and will meet at least once a year, though they may meet
more frequently if the need arises. The PNSC will be made up of the following members (their role in the
PNSC is included in italics):
1. Director, Department of Agriculture (MACO) – Chairperson.
2. Director, Policy and Planning Department (MACO).
3. Director, Forestry Department (MTENR) – Member.
4. Director, Department of Environment and Natural Resources (MTENR) – Member.
5. Director, DWA (MEWD) – Member.
6. Director, ZMD (MCT) – Member.
7. Director, ZARI (MACO) – Member.
8. Director, Environmental Council of Zambia (MTENR) – Member.
9. Director, DOF (MACO) – Member.
10. Director, Department of Veterinary and Livestock Development (MACO) – Member.
11. Representative, UNDP.
12. Director, DMMU (Office of the Vice President) – Member.
13. Representative, FAO.
217. The PNSC will be chaired by the Director of the Department of Agriculture. However, if the
Director of the Department of Agriculture is absent, the Director of the Policy and Planning Department
(MACO) will chair the PNSC.
Responsibilities
Establishing policies to define the functions, responsibilities, and delegation of powers for the
implementing agencies and the PS.
Providing overall guidance on budget management and project activities.
Facilitating coordination of project activities across institutions.
Making decisions on issues brought to its attention by the PTC and PS.
B. Project Executive
218. MACO will appoint a Project Executive (MACO Climate Change Focal Point Person) who will be
responsible, on behalf of the government, for the project. The project executive will be responsible for the
overall administration, management, coordination, implementation, monitoring, and reporting. The
Project Executive will chair the PTC and will head the PS with support from the PM.
Responsibilities
Ensuring effective partnership between the implementing ministries.
Ensuring that project activities are integrated and coordinated with the established operations of
the MACO at the national level.
127
Details of the terms of reference as well as qualifications will be finalized during the inception workshop
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
86
Developing and maintaining close linkages with relevant sectoral government agencies, UNDP,
NGOs, civil society, international organisations and implementing partners of the project.
Supervising and leading the project team in carrying out their duties at an optimum level through
ensuring efficient and effective resource utilization.
219. With the support of the PM, the Project Executive shall:
Oversee establishment of the PS.
Prepare detailed annual breakdowns of the work plan for all project objectives.
Identify resource requirements, responsibilities, tasks outlines, performance evaluation criteria
and work plans.
Prepare quarterly work plans.
Prepare and finalize detailed terms of reference and qualifications short term consultants.
Submit all project reports as required.
Approve quarterly status and financial reports for comments and approval by the PNSC.
Oversee implementation of the PNSC directives.
C. Project Manager
220. The PM will report to the Project Executive and will lead the project team through the planning,
implementation, and delivery of policies, reports, knowledge products, and other results approved in the
project document and annual work plans. The PM will provide overall operational management for the
successful execution and implementation of the programme. The PM will be responsible for financial
management and disbursements, with accountability to the government and UNDP. The PM will also
work closely with the staff from inter alia ZMD, MTENR, DMMU, DWA and DOF.
Responsibilities
Facilitating the day-to-day functioning of the PS.
Managing human and financial resources in consultation with the Project Executive to achieve
results in line with the outputs and activities outlined in the project document.
Leading the preparation and implementation of annual results-based work plans and logical
frameworks as endorsed by the management.
Coordinating project activities with related and parallel activities both within MACO and with
external implementing departments.
Monitoring project activities, including financial matters, and preparing monthly and quarterly
progress reports, and organising monthly and quarterly progress reviews.
Supporting the Project Executive in organising PTC meetings.
Coordinating the distribution of responsibilities amongst team members and organising the
monitoring and tracking systems.
Reporting and providing feedback on project strategies, activities, progress, and barriers to UNDP
and the PTC.
Managing relationships with project stakeholders including donors, NGOs, government agencies,
and others as required.
D. Administrative and Financial Assistant
221. One administrative and financial assistant will report to PM and the Project Executive.
Responsibilities
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
87
Standardize the finance and accounting systems of the project while maintaining compatibility
with the GRZ and UNDP financial accounting procedures.
Prepare budget revisions of the project budgets and assist in the preparation of the annual work
plans.
Comply and verify budget and accounting data by researching files, calculating costs, and
estimating anticipated expenditures from readily available information sources, in particular
partner agencies.
Prepare status reports, progress reports and other financial reports.
Process all types of payments requests for settlement purposes including quarterly advances to the
partners upon joint review.
Prepare periodic accounting records by recording receipts, disbursements (ledgers, cash books,
vouchers, etc) and reconciling data for recurring or financial special reports and assist in
preparation of annual procurement plans.
Undertake project financial closure formalities including submission of terminal reports, transfer
and disposal of equipment, processing of semi-final revisions, and support professional staff in
preparing the terminal assessment reports.
Assist in the timely issuance of contracts and assurance of other eligible entitlements of the
project personnel, experts, and consultants by preparing annual recruitment plans.
E. Site Level Managers
222. Site Level Managers will mainly be Block and Camp Extension Officers (BEO/CEO). They will
report to the PM and receive technical guidance on day-to-day project activities from the PS, the PACO
and the DACO. They will be responsible for facilitating community mobilization and coordination of all
project activities at the site level and will act as focal points for community mobilization. The site level
managers will be guided by the DACO and will get technical assistance from technicians from the
different departments in the province.
Responsibilities
Coordination
Coordinate participating agencies/ partners at the site level.
Work with site level partners to implement project activities and complement ongoing activities.
Serve as the site level project representative.
Organise and conduct monthly meetings, workshops, seminars, and other meetings
Present monthly progress reports to the Agricultural and Natural Resources subcommittee of the
DDCC.
Liaise with local service providers and contractors.
Training and Awareness Programmes
Conduct training courses as per work plan to strengthen and sustain the management committees,
producer groups and local input suppliers.
Prepare periodic awareness programmes in consultation DACO.
Assist field-level workers and other project partners in organising awareness campaigns and
workshops at the district and village levels.
Institutional Development
Assist in formation of farmer/ user groups where they are not in existence.
Assist in formation of community level management committees.
Help the farmer groups build capacity to prepare adaptation initiatives and to access and make the
best use of project funds.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
88
Support farmer groups to improve their capacities to effectively raise issues of concern at local
level.
Act as an advocate for community members during decision making processes in the DDCC
meetings.
Support project staff to monitor district project accounts and provide financial management
guidance.
Facilitate farmer groups to build strong relationships with other projects in the area as well as
with the local authorities.
Monitoring and Reporting
Prepare concrete and verifiable targets for project activities, including awareness campaigns,
monitoring surveys and institution building.
Prepare monthly, quarterly, and annual work plans for the project activities.
Prepare and submit monthly and all other types of progress reports at the site level.
F. Monitoring and evaluation expert
223. The M&E expert will report directly to the Project Executive. He/she will lead the project team
(including implementing partners) through the planning, implementation, and delivery of policies, reports,
knowledge products and other results approved in the project document and annual work plans. Together
with a contracted Knowledge Management expert (see G below), the M&E expert will design and
implement a system to identify, collect, analyze, document and disseminate lessons learned. The M&E
expert will be responsible for collecting and collating information from the pilot sites and submitting it to
the CCFU website manager for uploading on the climate change website. The M&E expert will also
provide support on the ground, which is needed to closely evaluate progress and barriers and to prepare
detailed quarterly, annual, and other monitoring reports. The M&E expert’s work will be guided by the
strategic results framework, a draft which is provided here-in (see Table 6) but will be refined and agreed
upon by all the stakeholders during the IW. This will provide performance and impact indicators for the
project along with their corresponding means of verification.
Responsibilities
Establish the overall results-based M&E strategy in accordance with M&E plans outlined in the
project document.
Provide timely and relevant project performance information to the PS and the PTC.
Together with the hired Knowledge Management Expert, design a system for collecting
information on project lessons to be used in preparing lessons learnt documents periodically by
the expert.
Together with subject matter specialists, develop questionnaires and other data collection tools
that will be used to collect information during the project period for writing technical reports.
Guide and coordinate the review of the project Strategic Results Framework, including:
a. Provide technical advice for the revision of performance indicators.
b. Together with a hired expert, conduct a baseline study at project initiation.
c. Identify sources of data, collection methods, who collects data, how often, cost of
collection and who analyses the data.
d. Ensure all critical risks are identified.
Coordinate the preparation of all project reports. Guide project staff and executing partners in
preparing their progress reports in accordance with the approved reporting formats and ensure
their timely submission. This includes quarterly progress reports, annual project reports, inception
reports, and ad-hoc technical reports.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
89
Foster participatory planning and monitoring by training and involving primary stakeholder
groups in the monitoring and evaluation of activities.
G. Knowledge Management Expert
224. This expert will be contracted periodically and when the need arises.
Responsibilities
Develop a mechanism for capturing lessons learned and consolidating a culture of lessons
learned involving all project staff.
Ensure all the ToRs for project consultants recruited also incorporate mechanisms to capture
and share lessons learned through their inputs to the project, and ensure that the results are
reflected in the M&E reporting system and the adaptation learning mechanism.
Document, package, and disseminate lessons learned at least every 12 months.
Facilitate exchange of experiences by supporting and coordinating participation in any
existing networks of UNDP projects sharing common characteristics. These networks would
largely function on the basis of an electronic platform but would also entail other methods
and tools such as workshops.
Together with the M&E expert, design a system that will be administered by the M&E expert
for capturing lessons learned from the project on a continual basis and synthesize results of
activities under outcomes 1,2, and 3 for use by CCFU and other stakeholders.
Collate technical reports and other documents from the project and contribute to the ALM.
Guidelines for extracting lessons learned will be drawn from the ALM.
Advise on the hiring of a consultant to develop and publish (in a peer-reviewed international
journal) a briefing paper on lessons learned from the project.
MACO’s Financial Management Unit will undertake the accounting role for the project.
PART II: Stakeholder Involvement Plan
Table 15. Stakeholder Involvement Plan. Outcome Output Lead Institution Partners Key Responsibilities
Outcome 1:
Climate Change
risks integrated
into critical
decision making
processes for
agricultural
management at the
local, sub-national
and national levels
1.1 Institutional capacity to
support climate risk
management in the agric
sector at the national,
district, village level
developed
ZMD MACO, CCFU Preparation of awareness
and training materials for
sectoral planners
Provision of weather
collection equipment
Training of extension staff
on how to collect weather
data.
Training for ZMD staff to
conduct seasonal forecasts
Training workshop in
project districts on EWS for
DDCC
1.3 Effective EWS(s)
developed to enhance
preparedness and reduce
climate related risks
ZMD PS, CCFU Assessing the EWS needs of
the sites
Development of an EWS for
the sites
1.2 Economic impact ZMD MACO Selection of communities
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
90
assessment of the value of
climate risk information to
farmers
Design of questionnaires
Selection of consultants and
review of outputs
Outcome 2:
Agricultural
productivity in the
pilot sites made
resilient to the
anticipated impacts
of climate change
2.1 Techniques for soil and
water conservation as well
as soil improvement tested
for their ability to improve
the productivity of small-
scale agriculture.
Department of
Agriculture
(MACO)
PS, ZARI,
Consultants (CFU),
Local Communities
Formation of farmer groups
Training on conservation
farming
Linking farmers to input
suppliers
Assessment of suitability of
techniques
2.2 Crop diversification
practices tested for their
ability to improve resilience
of farmers to drought
Department of
Agriculture
(MACO)
ZARI, SCCI, PS,
Local Communities
Formation of farmer groups
and training on crop
diversification
Linking farmers to input
suppliers
Assessment of suitability of
techniques
Conducting of farm trials to
gather scientific evidence
on CC adaptation
Training farmers on seed
multiplication
2.3 Alternative livelihoods
tested for their ability to
diversify incomes away
from maize production.
Forestry
Department (FD)
PS, MACO, Local
Communities,
Local suppliers
Group formation and
technical training and
business skills
Assessment of suitability of
techniques
Supply of inputs
Technical assistance for
implementation
2.4 Community-based water
capacity and irrigation
systems improved or
developed to test their
ability to raise agricultural
productivity.
DWA/ MACO
(DOA)
Local communities
local contractors
Formation of management
committees
Trainings on water
management, group
dynamics etc.
Assessments and surveys
Technical assistance for
implementation
Outcome 3: National fiscal,
regulatory and
development policy
revised to promote
adaptation responses
in the agricultural
sector.
3.1 Awareness of climate
change risks and to the
economic value of
adaptation responses raised
among policy- and decision-
makers.
CCFU DMMU, MACO
PPD, ZMD, PS
Barrier analysis, policy
analysis and gap
identification
Training seminars for
government officials
3.2. National policy
dialogues conducted to
discuss project findings in
relation to cost-effectiveness
of piloted adaptation
options.
CCFU DMMU, MACO
PPD, ZMD, PS
Review experiences from
other countries
Consultation of stakeholders
for input in policy revision
Production of concept paper
3.3. Policies that require
adjustments to promote
adaptation identified and
reviewed.
CCFU PS, MACO PPD,
ZMD, PS
Workshop seminars
(consensus on gap analysis)
Workshops and seminars to
disseminate lessons
Outcome 4:
Lessons-learned
4.1 Knowledge and lessons
learned to support
National
Agricultural
CCFU
Capturing and documenting
lessons learnt
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
91
and knowledge
management
component
established
implementation of
adaptation measures
compiled and disseminated.
Information
Service (NAIS), PS
CCFU
National
Agricultural
Information
Services (NAIS)
PS, MACO, DWA,
DOF, FD,
MTENR, DMMU
Dissemination of project
information to the public
through the media.
Development and posting
project information on the
CCFU website.
CCFU will be responsible
for organizing local and
regional workshops.
The PS will ensure lessons
learned are captured and
packaged for presentation
during these workshops.
The NAIS will undertake to
produce programmes for
television, radio, and
newspapers to be
broadcasted on a monthly
basis.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
92
ANNEXES
ANNEX A - The major impacts of the four main climatic hazards within Zambia and the main
coping strategies adopted by the local communities128
.
DROUGHT FLOODING EXCESSIVE
TEMPERATURES
SHORTENED RAINY
SEASON
Impacts
Crop damage/loss
Water shortages
Reduced fish stocks
Income loss
Increase in the
extent of diseases
Decreased water
quality
Increased soil
erosion
Decreased soil
fertility
Increased honey
production (if
drought is not too
severe)
Crop damage/loss
Loss of pasture and
arable land
Decline in fish
catches
Increases in the
extent of diseases
Destruction of
infrastructure
Loss of life (human
and livestock)
Interference with
energy production
due to change in
energy flow
Loss of life
Increase in the extent of
diseases
Decreased human
capacity to do work
Crop damage/loss
Reduced fish stocks
Reduction in livestock
feed
Reduction in water
quality
Increase in the risk of
crop failure
Crop damage/loss
Reduction in income
from the selling of
crops
Crop seeds do not reach
maturity (thereby
negatively affecting the
next crop generation)
Reduction in forest
regeneration
Coping Strategies
Income
diversification
(charcoal making,
fishing, honey and
beer production,
selling grass and
livestock, casual
labour)
Trading other
commodities for
food
Gathering and
selling wild food
Food rationing
Selling fewer crops
to keep more for
household
consumption
Shifting agricultural
production from
highlands to lower
lands
Earlier crop planting
Growing more
drought-resistant
crop varieties
Incorporation of
crop residues instead
of burning
Crop rotations,
Income
diversification
(charcoal making,
fishing, honey and
beer production,
selling grass and
livestock, casual
labour)
Trading other
commodities for food
Gathering and selling
wild food
Shifting agricultural
production, livestock
and houses to higher
land.
Using medicinal
plants to treat
diseases
Boiling water or
treating it with
chlorine
Bury ditches to
prevent waterborne
diseases
Early evacuation
when water levels
increase
Improve drainage
around houses
Using medicinal plants
to treat diseases
Boiling water or
treating it with chlorine
to prevent diseases
Going to the medical
clinic
Buying and using
mosquito nets and
repellents
Starting work earlier in
the morning
Purchasing medicines
for cattle
Income diversification
(e.g. agricultural
production to cope with
decreased fish stocks
and charcoal production
to cope with crop loss)
Trading other
commodities for food
Planting crops earlier
Taking animals out
early in the morning
Using zero-grazing
methods for some
animals
Using medicinal plants
to treat diseases
Buying and using
mosquito nets and
repellents
Working earlier in the
morning
Trading other
commodities for food
Earlier crop planting
Taking animals out to
graze in the early
morning
Using zero-grazing for
some livestock
Income diversification
(selling charcoal,
livestock or grass,
casual labour)
Selling less crops to
keep more for
household consumption
Gathering wild food
Buying seeds for the
following growing
season
Exchanging crop seeds
between community
members or between
villages
128
Zambia National Adaptation Programme of Action, September 2007.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
93
intercropping, and
cover cropping
Irrigation (practised
by very few)
Sinking wells
Walking longer
distances to fetch
water
Using medicinal
plants to treat
diseases
Boiling water or
treating it with
chlorine to prevent
diseases
Fitting roofs with
plastic
If houses are
destroyed, people
either build
temporary shelters or
live temporarily with
neighbours
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
94
ANNEX B – Analysis of mean temperature over the last three decades from 32 meteorological
stations in Zambia
Mean temperature between November to December within AER I (Source: Jain, 2007).
Mean temperature between November to December within AER II (Source: Jain, 2007)
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
95
ANNEX C – Vision setting and site selection workshop report.
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND COOPERATIVES
VISION SETTING AND SITE SELECTION
WORKSHOP REPORT ON THE
“ADAPTATION TO THE EFFECTS OF DROUGHT/FLOOD
AND CLIMATE CHANGE/ VARIABILITY IN AGRO-ECOLOGICAL
REGIONS I AND II IN ZAMBIA”
SURVEYOR GENERAL’S CONFERENCE ROOM,
MULUNGUSH HOUSE
3RD
APRIL, 2009
1. Introduction
In a follow-up meeting to the inception129
which was held at the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
(MACO) on the 3rd
of March, 2009 it was suggested and agreed upon that the site selection criteria and
the site selection should only be done after the project vision had been set up. Consequently, a two day
vision setting workshop was planned (activity 1.7 in work-plan) for the first week of April. However, this
was later changed to a half day workshop.
2. Objectives of the Workshop
The workshop which was attended by the National based key stakeholders aimed at implementing sub-
activity 1.7 in the work plan which is “selection of pilot catchments and project pilot sites”. It also aimed
at coming up with a vision that would provide guidelines, objectivity and focus during the project
preparation phase in order to guide the project site selection at both provincial and district levels.
2.1 Specific objectives
The workshop had the following specific objectives, to:
1. Refine the draft project vision and objectives.
2. Develop the criteria for selection of pilot sites.
3. Select pilot provinces at National level and determine the provisional number of pilot sites
per province and/or district.
3. Expected Outputs
The vision setting workshop had the following expected outputs:
1) The project vision, general objective as well as specific objectives clearly spelt out.
2) Guided by the project vision, site selection criteria as well as number of possible pilot sites
developed.
129
The follow-up meeting was chaired by MACO Climate change/ variability Focal Point Person Mr. Martin N.
Sishekanu and attended by the Chief Irrigation Engineer, Mr. George W. Sikuleka, Agricultural Specialist Mapping
and Remote Sensing, Mr. Rasford Kalamatila the Chief Crops Agronomist, Mr. Mathias Kanyemba, the
International Consultant Dr. Anthony Mills, the PM Mr. Richard Bwalya and the UNDP representative Ms. Annalisa
Lodato.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
96
3. Provinces to be assessed for pilot sites selected.
4. Workshop Proceedings
The workshop was opened and chaired by the Deputy Director Agriculture (DOA) Mr. Henry Sichembe
who emphasized the need to move quickly as time was running out.
Project Vision and Objectives fine tuning
The Chief Agricultural Specialist (MACO climate change focal point person) Mr. Martin Sishekanu gave
an overview of the project. He pointed out that there was need to adjust the project title by replacing the
word Zone with Region. This is because the project is targeting AERs.
The PM Mr. Richard Bwalya briefed the meeting on the progress in the preparation of the
project document. The progress constituted of the desktop activities scheduled for March in the
work plan as well as contacting the Meteorological Department as regards the climate modelling.
During the questions and answer session, Mr. Henry Sichembe suggested that the meeting be
availed with the pending activities so that a way forward can be discussed. After deliberations, it
was concluded that the issues concerning the Request for Direct Payment with UNDP had been
cleared and the Ministry would facilitate for the signing of all the relevant documents by
Monday. UNDP should receive these documents latest Tuesday.
The Chief Agricultural Specialist –Land Husbandry (MACO Climate change/ variability Focal
Point Person) Mr. Martin Sishekanu gave an overview presentation and analysis of the current
project vision which was supposed to be fine-tuned. This activity was combined with the
identification of possible interventions required to meet the vision. After a series of
deliberations, the following were suggested as possible vision statements for the project
“climatic resilient farming practices in Agro-ecological Regions I and II by Dr. Masuhwa” and
“Food security and incomes enhanced through climate resilient farming practices in Agro-
ecological Regions I and II by 2012 from Mr. Sishekanu”. As a way forward, Dr. Masuhwa and
the PM were given the task to come up with a fine-tuned vision statement from the suggestions.
This will be circulated to all the meeting participants through e-mail for comments and adoption.
This should be done by Thursday 9th April.
Concerning the project objectives, it was observed that the project overview clearly outlined the
project objectives. What was to be done was to just rearrange them and separate them into main
objectives and specific objectives for inclusion into the project document. As such, Mr. Martin
Sishekanu, Mr. Rasford Kalamatila, Mr. Reynolds Shula and the PM were assigned this task.
The product should also be circulated to all the members by e-mail for comments and adoption.
1. Project Site Selection Criteria
The Chief Agricultural Specialist –Land Husbandry (MACO Climate change/ variability Focal Point
Person) Mr. Martin Sishekanu led the team in developing the selection criteria for pilot areas. The
following criteria for site selection was presented and later adopted by the meeting:
In broad terms site selection would be determined by the feasibility of:
Water harvesting for either or both irrigated and rain-fed agriculture as well as rangeland natural
pasture enhancement,
Irrigation systems development and efficient application,
Improved land and water management practices, and
Crop diversification options
Specifically the criteria will include:
Likelihood of generating adaptation benefits,
Vulnerability of the beneficiary community,
Implementation capacity of local institutions,
On-going investment programmes that the project can bolt onto,
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
97
Geographical/catchment characteristics,
Agro-ecological region,
Physical characteristics,
Social-economic activities,
Resource endowments of the area,
Settlement pattern,
Replicability of the adaptive interventions nationally.
2. Selection of pilot sites at national level and number of sites
The Deputy Director (DOA) Mr. Henry Sichembe led process of selecting pilot provinces as well as
determining the number of pilot sites to be visited and evaluated in each province. It was agreed from the
start that there was no need to spread the investment thinly and as such, there was need to go for areas
where the project had higher chances of success - “success breeds success”.
Of the nine provinces in Zambia, five which are in Agro-Ecological Regions (AER) I and II
were picked. These include Western, Eastern, Southern, Lusaka and Central Provinces. These
are the ones identified in the NAPA as being most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change/
variability. AER II, though not as vulnerable as AER I, was included because actions in this
AER had an impact on the livelihoods of the people in AER I. Examples were given of floods
and siltation of rivers in AER I as a result of actions such as deforestation in AER II.
Of these five provinces, Central province was eliminated because the vulnerable communities in
this province were located in the game management areas and the people there are hunters/
poachers rather than farmers and thus the probability of success for the agricultural pilots was
likely to be low (a more detailed description of site selection backed by statistics will be
produced for inclusion in the project document).
Considering the time constraint, it was agreed that four teams will go into the four provinces to
work with the Provincial Development Committees in selecting the districts. Then they will
work with the District Development Committees in choosing the pilot sites. A maximum of
three sites will be selected per province giving a total of twelve sites nationally. The importance
of looking at all possible potential interventions such as in livestock and other crops instead of
concentrating on maize was highlighted.
After the field trips, the team shall convene a workshop/ meeting in which the selected sites will
be screened using the agreed upon criteria to come up with four sites in which the pilots shall be
set.
To ensure that uniform information is collected from the provinces and districts for site
selection, a checklist shall be developed. A checklist development team was appointed which
would be led by Mr. Nicholas Mwale. Other members include Dr. Masuhwa, Mr. Shishekanu,
Mr. Lenganji Sikaona (or any other person from DMMU and the PM. Work on the checklist
should start by Monday 6th and be complete by Friday 17th).
The meeting was closed by Mr. Sichembe at 12:45 hrs. He reiterated that the Department of Agriculture
was doing everything possible to ensure that the necessary documents required by the UNDP are signed
on Monday and delivered to the UNDP immediately after.
ANNEX D – Checklist for field trip data collection to inform site selection
CHECKLIST FOR FIELD TRIP DATA COLLECTION
(Sources of information: Desk study or visits at province, district or
community level)
Sources of information
1.0 CLIMATE CHANGE/ VARIABILITY CONTEXT AND
CLIMATE RISKS
1.1 What are the observed changes in the climate in this area in the last
10 years?
Desk
1.3 What are the anticipated climate change/ variability impacts in the
area?
Desk
1.2 What are the observed climatic changes/ climate variability in the
area? List the climate related hazards that affect the area (e.g. floods, excess
heat, droughts etc).
Desk/Province/District
1.4 List the associated impacts of these climate hazards (e.g. crop
damage, disease spread, accelerated soil erosion, reduced soil fertility etc).
District/Community
1.5 What are the coping strategies currently being employed (e.g. food
rationing, rainwater harvesting, dambo cultivation, supplementary
irrigation, winter irrigation, crop diversification, non-traditional farm
enterprises etc).
Community
2.0 LIVELIHOOD RESOURCES
2.1 Which are the most important NATURAL RESOURCES in the
area? (E.g. Natural resources upon which people depend for income, food
etc such as forests, wetlands, land, livestock, fisheries, wildlife etc).
District/Community
2.2 Which are the most important PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE in
the area? (E.g. basic infrastructure such as buildings, roads, bridges, storage
sheds, dams, etc).
Province/District
2.3 Which are the most important FINANCIAL RESOURCES in the
area? (E.g. stocks and flows of cash that allow people to achieve their
livelihood objectives such as access to markets, access to credit, loans etc).
Province/District/
Community
2.4 Which are the most important HUMAN RESOURCES in the area?
(E.g. the sources of skills and knowledge that allow people to achieve their
livelihood objectives such as agricultural management, water management,
animal husbandry skills etc. Need to probe for available skills such as
bricklayers, herbalists, bankers etc).
District/Community
2.5 Which are the most important SOCIAL RESOURCES in the area?
(e.g. formal and informal institutions from which people draw in pursuit of
livelihood objectives such as NGOs, farmer associations, local government
institutions etc).
District/Community
2.6 Which are the most important PRODUCTIVE ASSETS in the area
(e.g. Livestock, oxen, ploughs, hammer mills, farm implements).
District/Community
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
99
CHECKLIST FOR FIELD TRIP DATA COLLECTION
(Sources of information: Desk study or visits at province, district or
community level)
Sources of information
3.0 PROPOSED PROJECTS/ INTERVENTIONS, SYNERGIES AND
BARRIERS
3.1 What are the proposed adaptation projects for the area? Province/District/
Community
3.2 What issues or developments in the area might hinder the
implementation of the project? (E.g. local needs, local capacities, financial,
political, institutional support etc).
Province/District/
Community
3.3 What issues or developments in the area might support the
implementation of the project? (E.g. local needs, local capacities, financial,
political, institutional support etc).
Province/District/
Community
3.4 Provide information on the on-going projects/ programs as well as the
implementing institutions in the area that (for each project provide the
following information – focus and ability):
a) increase crop production/ productivity,
b) increase livestock production,
c) Increase fish production,
d) Increase clean water supply,
e) Increase market access.
Province/District/
Community
a. For each of the identified project/ intervention in 3.4, also provide the
following information
a) Coverage of these programs,
b) Core intervention activities,
c) implementation approach/modalities,
d) What are the existing barriers to the effective implementation of
these activities?
e) Potential for upscaling of activities (analyzed in relation to area
available for this and management challenges),
f) Community demand for upscaling of these activities (e.g. required
increase in area),
g) What is the cost of undertaking the activities (e.g. per hectare or per
household/annum).
Province/District/
Community
4.0 OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION
4.1 Do any of the farmers in the area use drought-adapted crop
varieties? If so, which ones and how successful are they?
District/Community
4.2 Do any of the farmers in the area practice water and land
management practices in the area? (E.g. tied ridges, contour ploughing, pot-
holes etc)? If so, which ones and how successful are they?
District/Community
4.3 What are sources of water supply in the area and what is the state of the
water infrastructure in the area (for supplying communities and livestock
with water for drinking and/or irrigation, fisheries?)
a) Is it regularly maintained?
b) Does it need rehabilitation?
c) What is the capacity?
District/Community
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
100
CHECKLIST FOR FIELD TRIP DATA COLLECTION
(Sources of information: Desk study or visits at province, district or
community level)
Sources of information
4.4 Are there schools in the area?
a) What percentage of the children in the area receives formal education?
b) Do the children receive any lessons on climate change/ variability
effects in school?
Province/District
4.5 What sort of income-generating activities are undertaken by the
community?
Community
4.6 What opportunities does the community see to increase these activities? Community
4. 7 What opportunities exist for starting new activities if agricultural
production in the future were to decrease?
Community
4.8 How are women involved in the community? Are there obvious gender
issues?
Community
4. 9 How does the community manage communal resources, input
acquisition, agricultural production and sale of produce? Are there
committees overseeing these activities? Is there a need for this sort of
capacity?
District/Community
4.10 Is erosion a problem in the area?
a) How is erosion tackled?
b) Is there a need for up scaling the prevention of erosion or
rehabilitation of eroded areas?
District/Community
4.11 Is deforestation a problem in the area?
a) How is deforestation tackled?
b) Is there a need for up scaling the prevention of deforestation or
rehabilitation of deforested areas?
c) If so, in what way and how often?
District/Community
4.12 Is the community often affected by flooding events?
a) If so, in what way and how often?
b) What, if any, measures are in place to reduce the impacts of
flooding?
District/Community
4.13 Is the community aware of the predicted impacts of climate change/
variability on crops, livestock, fisheries and water supply?
Community
4.14 Is the community aware of actual climate change/ variability on
agriculture, fisheries, livestock and water supply?
Community
4.15 What is the approximate population for the selected pilot
catchment?
District
4.16 What are the HIV/ AIDS prevalence rates in the catchment? Clinic
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
101
ANNEX E – Site selection criteria.
Site selection at provincial level
The Agricultural and Natural Resources Sub-Committee of the Provincial Development and Co-
coordinating Committee will be consulted and engaged as a vital link to facilitate and authenticate the
selection of respective district(s) for piloting the interventions.
Site selection at district level
The District Agricultural and Natural Resources Sub-Committee of the District Development
and Co-coordinating Committee (including District Planner) will facilitate and coordinate the
selection of communities and physical catchments using the District Development Plan and its
situational analyses.
A representative community will then be selected. The selection team would then go and agree
with the chosen community for the Climate Risk Assessment (CRA) exercise in the selected
physical catchment area. The CRA should be conducted with 2 to 3 communities in order to
have a fair feel and analysis of the challenges and possible interventions.
Broad selection criteria
In broad terms site selection would be determined by the feasibility of:
Water harvesting for either or both irrigated and rain-fed agriculture as well as rangeland natural
pasture enhancement,
Irrigation systems development and efficient application,
Improved land and water management practices, and
Crop diversification options.
Selection of pilot sites
The following criteria were agreed up-on by the stakeholders:
Likelihood of generating adaptation benefits,
Vulnerability of the beneficiary community,
Implementation capacity of local institutions,
On-going investment programmes that the project can bolt onto,
Geographical/catchment characteristics,
Agro-ecological region,
Social-economic activities,
Resource endowments of the area,
Settlement pattern,
Replicability of the adaptive interventions nationally.
Selection of the actual interventions
The following criteria were used for selecting the interventions to be piloted:
During the consultation workshops with the communities, after the project had been introduced
and the Climate Risk Assessment Framework administered, the community was asked to list the
priority interventions (in order of priority) they would like to have to address their current
problems.
The top three were recorded by the facilitators and were presented in Lusaka during the site
selection workshop. Therefore, during the workshop, we had three districts from each of the
four provinces. Also, each district had two pilot sites with each project site having a maximum
of three interventions.
During the site selection workshop, the teams that went to the field were tasked to select the two
districts which they judged to have a lot of potential based on the site selection criteria above.
They were then asked to present to the stakeholders the reasons why they had selected those
districts. During this process, the stakeholders ranked and scored the sites.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
102
The rationale behind this was to come up with four sites based on the scores by the stakeholders.
However, after reviewing, Dr Anthony Mills advised that it would be preferable to include all of
the sites.
Then the groups were asked to develop the budgets for each site. The rationale was that from the
budgets, we would sum up and see if the proposed budgets were within the project’s budget.
However, since the budgets were also within the allocated amount, all the interventions have
been picked except for those like bee-keeping, which are not climate-proof.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
103
ANNEX F – Strategic Results Framework: Outcomes, outputs, indicators and targets
Goal: to improve food security through enhanced adaptive capacity to respond to the risks posed by the effects of climate change (including
variability) in AER I and II of Zambia
Objective: to develop adaptive capacity of subsistence farmers and rural communities to withstand climate change in Zambia
Project Strategy
Indicators
Baseline Value
Targets and benchmarks
Sources of
verification
Risks and
Assumptions
Outcome 1:
Climate change risks integrated into decision-making processes for agricultural management at the local, sub-national and national levels
Output 1.1.
Number of
government
planners and
private sector
trained on climate
risk management
for improved
agricultural
productivity.
Number of ZMD staff
trained to provide
short-term and
seasonal forecasts,
from downscaling of
available data, in a
format that is suitable
for use by small-scale
farmers, agricultural
sector planners and
water managers.
Number of farmers,
agro-business dealers,
extension staff, and
Agricultural and
Natural Resources
subcommittees of the
DDCC/PDCC trained
on how to access,
apply and interpret
forecasts for planning
purposes.
Number of local
weather stations
installed.
At present, very few ZMD
staff members are capable of
conducting forecasts from
downscaling of international
data.
To date, few people have
undergone training on how
to apply forecasts to
decision-making. Farmers, in
particular, are not exposed to
accurate forecast data.
At present, only two districts
targeted by the project have
their own weather stations.
By year 2, at least 30% of the
ZMD staff are able to
provide forecasts by
downscaling available
international data
By year 2, at least 250 people
trained on how to access,
apply and interpret forecasts
for planning purposes, by the
end of the project.
By year 4, all 8 pilot sites
have their own functioning
weather stations developed to
collected and monitor
weather data.
Consultants
reports, Field
surveys, Reports
and training
reports.
Availability of
technical
expertise and
equipment for
downscaling
international
climate data to
AER level.
Output 1.2
Effective EWS(s)
developed to
enhance
preparedness and
reduce climate-
related risks.
Number of pilot sites
where their EWS
needs have been
documented and
assessed.
EWS(s) developed
based on the needs
assessment
undertaken in
activity.
At present, EWS needs of
the pilot sites have not been
documented and assessed.
Zambia’s National Disaster
Management Policy
identifies gaps affecting its
functionality and measures
that need to be undertaken to
improve disaster risk
management. Improved
EWS is central to this.
By year 1, the early warning
needs of the pilot sites
assessed and documented
By year 3, at least 1 EWS is
developed and applied in at
least 3 pilot sites.
Experts reports
on assessments,
Field surveys
against baseline
targets, Revised
policies
Availability of
technical
expertise and
equipment,
Political will by
policy makers to
revise the
policies,
Sufficient
awareness on
climate change
by farmers
Output 1.3
Economic impact
assessment on the
adaptation value
of climate risk
information to
protect
Economic impact
assessment on the
adaptation value of
climate risk
information to protect
agricultural incomes
from climate change
At present, no economic
impact assessment on the
adaptation value using
climate risk information
have been undertaken for
AER I and II.
By year 3, a report of the
adaptation value of using
climate risk information.
Consultant
report, farmer
surveys against
baseline
information.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
104
agricultural
incomes from
climate change
effects.
effects.
Outcome 2:
Agricultural productivity in the pilot sites made resilient to the anticipated impacts of climate change
Output 2.1. Soil
and water
conservation and
soil improvement
techniques tested
for their ability to
improve the
productivity of
small-scale
agriculture.
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of
agricultural extension
staff and community
development staff
from the eight pilot
sites trained on soil
and water
conservation
techniques.
Number of farmers
trained on soil and
water conservation
techniques.
Number of farmers
who adopt
techniques.
Number of
management
committees at each
pilot site trained to
oversee and
encourage sustainable
soil and water
conservation
techniques.
Poor land productivity. Land
degraded by water erosion
and poor farming practices.
Gully erosion channels water
away from field as surface
run-off, preventing
infiltration. Soils are
depleted of nutrients.
Most of the extension staff
in the pilot areas need
refresher training on water
and soil management
techniques
At present, farmers in the
pilot sites are not exposed to
soil and water conservation
techniques.
At present, the communities
do not have management
committees to oversee and
encourage sustainable soil
and water management
techniques.
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
By year 1, all agricultural
extension workers covering
the 8 pilot sites are trained on
improved water management
practices.
By year 2, 900 farmers are
trained on soil and water
conservation techniques.
By year 3, 900 farmers have
adopted soil and water
conservation techniques.
By year 2, 80 people,
including 40 women, have
been trained to form 8
management committees
(one at each site).
Farmer surveys
Physical
inspections
Field reports
Annual reports
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
105
Output 2.2 Crop
diversification
practices tested to
improve the
resilience of
farmers to
drought
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of farmers
trained on crop
diversification
Number of farm trials
undertaken in the
pilot sites.
Number of local
cooperatives and
farmers trained on
seed production
methods so that they
can produce seed for
sale to the community
as an additional
source of income.
Number of
management
committees
established and
trained at each site to
facilitate the adoption
of drought-resistant
and alternative crops
by the wider
community.
Poor crop productivity.
Maize farming has been
promoted at the expense of
cassava, sorghum and millet
– crops that are better suited
to drier conditions and
higher temperatures.
At present, most farmers are
not trained on climate
resilient crop diversification
practices.
At present, one of the major
impediments to increased
agricultural productivity has
been inaccessibility of
suitable seeds/ inputs in
remote communities
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
By year 2 1000 farmers at
the 8 pilot sites are trained on
crop diversification.
By year 3, 2 farm trials have
been undertaken at each of
the 8 pilot sites.
By year 2, 300 people are
trained on how to produce
and market drought resistant
seed locally.
By year 2, 80 people,
including 40 women, have
been trained to form 8
management committees
(one at each site).
Farmer surveys
Technical
reports from
experts.
Annual reports
Field surveys
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Output 2.3: Alternative livelihoods tested for their ability to diversify livelihoods away from maize production.
Output 2.3a. Bee
keeping tested for
its ability to
diversify incomes
away from maize
production.
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of “bee
keeping groups”
established and
trained at each of the
pilot sites that
identified bee keeping
as a priority.
Number of bee hives
manufactured from
sustainable sources.
Traditional bee keeping
practices, where they exist,
are unsustainable as they
involve the ad hoc cutting
down of trees where honey
combs are sighted.
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
3 bee-keeping groups
established.
By year 2, 30 people,
including 15 women, have
been trained to form 3
management committees at
each of the site where this
was identified as a priority.
By year 3, each farmer in the
bee-keeping groups has at
least four bee hives
manufactured from
sustainable sources.
Technical
reports from
experts.
Annual reports
Field surveys
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Output 2.3b. Fish
farming tested for
its ability to
diversity incomes
away from maize
production.
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of “fish
farming groups”
Fish farming was initiated in
Kataba once before, with
numerous problems, the key
problems being:
i) poor cost recovery
ii) poor technical design and
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
By year 1, establish a fish
farming group at Kataba
pilot site.
Field Surveys
Annual Reports.
Evaluation
reports.
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
106
established and
trained at each of the
pilot sites that
identified fish
farming as a priority
intervention.
Total area dedicated
to fish farming.
Number of breeding
ponds constructed,
with appropriate
management
(including cost
recovery) plans in
place, agreed by all
stakeholders.
Number of growing
ponds constructed,
with appropriate
management
(including cost
recovery) plans in
place, agreed by all
stakeholders.
Number of production
ponds constructed,
with appropriate
management
(including cost
recovery) plans in
place, agreed by all
stakeholders.
construction so that floods
were poorly managed
iii) limited technical
backstopping
The project has since failed
(details are contained within
Annex I).
By year 2, 20 people,
including 10 women, have
been trained to form a
management committee at
Kataba.
By year 3, at least 18 000 m2
is dedicated to fishing
farming.
By year 2, 1 breeding pond is
constructed.
At year 2, 9 growing ponds
are constructed.
Training
protocols.
Output 2.3c. Rice
farming tested for
its ability to
diversify incomes
away from maize
production.
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of “rice
farming groups”
established and
trained at each of the
pilot sites that
identified rice
farming as a priority.
Number of farmers
who undertake rice
farming.
Number of dehullers
in operation within
the pilot sites that
Flood waters can be
harnessed for rice farming,
diversifying away from
maze which will become less
viable with climate change.
Although rice farming is
underway in parts of
Zambia, productivity is low
and upscaling of the activity
is prevented by a lack of
inputs (i.e. fertilizer and
improved seed), insufficient
knowledge on rice farming
and the lack of specialised
equipment (i.e. dehullers)
(see paragraph 114).
Demand for rice in Zambia
exceeds supply and deficits
are met by imports.
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
By year 1, establish 2 rice
farming groups in 2 pilot
sites.
By year 2, 80 people,
including 40 women, have
been trained to form
management committees at
each of the pilot sites that
identified rice farming as a
priority.
By year 3, 400 farmers are
partaking in rice farming,
with the help from inputs
(e.g. seed and fertilizer)
provided by the project.
By year 2, Kasaya and Sioma
will be equipped with two
dehullers each and the
Field Surveys
Annual Reports.
Evaluation
reports.
Training
protocols.
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
107
identified rice
farming as a priority.
farmers will have undergone
training on the operation of
these machines.
Output 2.3d
Integrated fish
and rice farming
activities tested
for its ability to
diversify incomes
away from maize
production.
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of
“integrated fish and
rice farming groups”
established and
trained at each of the
pilot sites that
identified this as a
priority intervention.
Number of farmers
who undertake
integrated fish and
rice farming.
To date, integrated fish and
rice farming has not been
implemented in AER I or II.
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
By year 1, 1 integrated fish
and rice farming group
established at 1 pilot site.
By year 2, 20 people,
including 10 women, have
been trained to form
management committees at
each of the pilot sites that
identified integrated fish and
rice farming as a priority.
By year 3, 60 farmers have
undertaken integrated fish
and rice farming.
Field Surveys
Annual Reports.
Evaluation
reports.
Training
protocols.
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Output 2.3e.
Additional Non-
Timber Forest
Products (NTFPs)
tested for its
ability to diversify
incomes away
from maize
production.
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of suitable
NTFPs identified
Number of feasibility
assessments on
extraction methods
undertaken.
Number of people
trained on NTFP for
use as an alternative
livelihood.
Improved market
linkages established.
Potential to access
carbon finance
assessed.
Zambia has one of the
largest annual deforestation
rates in the world, mainly
because of timber extraction
and clearing for agriculture.
Community members within
Kasaya do partake in the
harvesting of NTFPs but
these are currently practiced
on a small scale and market
linkages are lacking.
Constraints exist that prevent
the upscaling of NTFP
production (see paragraph
118).
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
By year 2, 3 NTFPs have
been identified.
By Year 2, 3 feasibility
assessments have been
undertaken
By year 2, 60 people have
been trained on the benefits,
uses and sustainable
exploitation methods of
NTFPs.
By year 3, all identified
NTFPs are linked to
marketing mediums such as
COMACO.
Report that recommends
action to access carbon
finance.
Field Surveys
Annual Reports.
Evaluation
reports.
Training
protocols.
Report.
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Output 2.4: Community-based water storage and irrigation systems improved or developed to test their ability to raise agricultural
productivity,
Output 2.4a.
Community-level,
multipurpose
dams in Kasaya,
Sioma, Zalapango
and Kabeleka
constructed and
irrigation systems
tested for their
ability to improve
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of
management
committees
established and
trained.
Zambia holds c. 40% of
water in Southern Africa, but
less than 5% of land is
irrigated. Agriculture in
AER I and II is largely rain-
fed and therefore susceptible
to drought, which climate
change is expected to
worsen.
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
By year 1, establish 4
management committees in 4
pilot sites.
By year 2, 40 people,
including 20 women, have
Field Surveys
Annual Reports.
Evaluation
reports.
Training
protocols.
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
108
agricultural
productivity.
Number of farmers
trained on water
management,
irrigation techniques
(such as scheduling),
appropriate water
extraction methods,
irrigated crop
production, fish
farming, livestock
production as well as
usage of communal
water resources.
Number of dams
constructed, with
appropriate
management
(including cost
recovery) plans in
place, agreed by all
stakeholders, for
sustainability beyond
the project grant.
Extent of area under
irrigation as a result
of project.
Water storage facilities in
the pilot sites are in poor
condition or lacking
altogether, mostly as a result
of a lack of ownership and
insufficient knowledge on
the management of facilities
(see paragraph 125).
Irrigation facilities are most
often in disrepair and require
rehabilitation, as a result of
poor management
arrangements, including cost
recovery, improper water
extraction methods and a
lack of ownership (see
paragraph 125).
been trained to form 4
management committees
(one at each site).
By year 2, 1000 farmers
trained.
By year 3, 4 dams are
constructed.
By year 3, at least 227 ha are
under irrigation.
Output 2.4b: A
community-level
earth dam in
Chikowa
constructed and
irrigation system
tested for its
ability improve
agricultural
productivity.
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of
management
committees
established and
trained.
Number of farmers
trained on water
management,
irrigation techniques
(such as scheduling),
appropriate water
extraction methods,
irrigated crop
production, fish
farming, livestock
production as well as
usage of communal
water resources.
Number of dams
constructed, with
appropriate
management
(including cost
recovery) plans in
place, agreed by all
stakeholders, for
sustainability beyond
Zambia holds c. 40% of
water in Southern Africa, but
less than 5% of land is
irrigated. Agriculture in
AER I and II is largely rain-
fed and therefore susceptible
to drought, which climate
change is expected to
worsen.
Water storage facilities in
the pilot sites are in poor
condition or lacking
altogether, mostly as a result
of a lack of ownership and
insufficient knowledge on
the management of facilities
(see paragraph 125).
Irrigation facilities are most
often in disrepair and require
rehabilitation, as a result of
poor management
arrangements, including cost
recovery, improper water
extraction methods and a
lack of ownership (see
paragraph 125).
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
By year 1, establish one
management committee at
the Chikowa pilot site.
By year 2, 10 people,
including 5 women, have
been trained to form 1
management committee at
Chikowa.
By year 2, XX farmers have
been trained.
By year 3, 1 earth dam has
been constructed.
Field Surveys
Annual Reports.
Evaluation
reports.
Training
protocols.
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
109
the project grant.
Extent of area under
irrigation as a result
of project.
By year 3, 80 ha are under
irrigation.
Output 2.4.c. A
community-level
storm water dam
in Kasaya
constructed and
irrigation system
tested for its
ability to improve
agricultural
productivity.
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of
management
committees
established and
trained.
Number of farmers
trained on water
management,
irrigation techniques
(such as scheduling),
appropriate water
extraction methods,
irrigated crop
production, fish
farming, livestock
production as well as
usage of communal
water resources.
Number of storm
water dams
constructed, with
appropriate
management
(including cost
recovery) plans in
place, agreed by all
stakeholders, for
sustainability beyond
the project grant.
Extent of area under
irrigation as a result
of project.
Zambia holds c. 40% of
water in Southern Africa, but
less than 5% of land is
irrigated. Agriculture in
AER I and II is largely rain-
fed and therefore susceptible
to drought, which climate
change is expected to
worsen.
Water storage facilities in
the pilot sites are in poor
condition or lacking
altogether, mostly as a result
of a lack of ownership and
insufficient knowledge on
the management of facilities
(see paragraph 125).
Irrigation facilities are most
often in disrepair and require
rehabilitation, as a result of
poor management
arrangements, including cost
recovery, improper water
extraction methods and a
lack of ownership (see
paragraph 125).
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
By year 1, establish one
management committee at
the Kasaya pilot site.
By year 2, 10 people,
including 5 women, have
been trained to form 1
management committee at
Kasaya.
By year 2, 150 farmers have
been trained.
By year 3, 6 storm water
dams have been constructed.
By year 3, 28 ha are under
irrigation.
Field Surveys
Annual Reports.
Evaluation
reports.
Training
protocols.
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Output 2.4d: A
community-level
reservoir in
Lusitu
constructed and
irrigation system
tested for its
ability to improve
agricultural
productivity.
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of
management
committees
established and
trained.
Number of farmers
trained on water
management,
irrigation techniques
(such as scheduling),
appropriate water
Zambia holds c. 40% of
water in Southern Africa, but
less than 5% of land is
irrigated. Agriculture in
AER I and II is largely rain-
fed and therefore susceptible
to drought, which climate
change is expected to
worsen.
Water storage facilities in
the pilot sites are in poor
condition or lacking
altogether, mostly as a result
of a lack of ownership and
insufficient knowledge on
the management of facilities
(see paragraph 125).
Irrigation facilities are most
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
By year 1, establish a
management committee at
the Lisutu pilot site.
By year 2, 10 people,
including 5 women, have
been trained to form 1
management committee at
Lusitu.
By year 2, 150 farmers have
been trained.
Field Surveys
Annual Reports.
Evaluation
reports.
Training
protocols.
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
110
extraction methods,
irrigated crop
production, fish
farming, livestock
production as well as
usage of communal
water resources.
Number of reservoirs
constructed, with
appropriate
management
(including cost
recovery) plans in
place, agreed by all
stakeholders, for
sustainability beyond
the project grant.
Extent of area under
irrigation as a result
of project.
often in disrepair and require
rehabilitation, as a result of
poor management
arrangements, including cost
recovery, improper water
extraction methods and a
lack of ownership (see
paragraph 125).
By year 3, 2 reservoirs have
been constructed.
By year 3, 52 ha are under
irrigation.
Output 2.4e:
A community-
level weir in
Kasaya
constructed and
irrigation system
tested for its
ability to improve
agricultural
productivity.
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Number of
management
committees
established and
trained.
Number of farmers
trained on water
management,
irrigation techniques
(such as scheduling),
appropriate water
extraction methods,
irrigated crop
production, fish
farming, livestock
production as well as
usage of communal
water resources.
Number of weirs
constructed, with
appropriate
management
(including cost
recovery) plans in
place, agreed by all
stakeholders, for
sustainability beyond
the project grant.
Extent of area under
irrigation as a result
of project.
Zambia holds c. 40% of
water in Southern Africa, but
less than 5% of land is
irrigated. Agriculture in
AER I and II is largely rain-
fed and therefore susceptible
to drought, which climate
change is expected to
worsen.
Water storage facilities in
the pilot sites are in poor
condition or lacking
altogether, mostly as a result
of a lack of ownership and
insufficient knowledge on
the management of facilities
(see paragraph 125).
Irrigation facilities are most
often in disrepair and require
rehabilitation, as a result of
poor management
arrangements, including cost
recovery, improper water
extraction methods and a
lack of ownership (see
paragraph 125).
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
By year 1, establish a
management committee at
the Kasaya pilot site.
By year 2, 10 people,
including 5 women, have
been trained to form 1
management committee at
Kasaya.
By year 2, 200 farmers have
been trained.
By year 3, 3 weirs have been
constructed.
By year 3, 39 ha are under
irrigation.
Field Surveys
Annual Reports.
Evaluation
reports.
Training
protocols.
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Output 2.4f:
A community
level irrigation
system in Lusitu
Percentage increase in
agricultural incomes
in the pilot sites.
Agriculture in AER I and II
is largely rain-fed and
therefore susceptible to
drought.
10% increase in agricultural
incomes
Field Surveys
Annual Reports.
Refer to risks
listed under
Outcome 2.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
111
rehabilitated and
tested for its
ability to improve
agricultural
productivity.
Number of
management
committees
established and
trained.
Number of farmers
trained on water
management,
irrigation techniques
(such as scheduling),
appropriate water
extraction methods,
irrigated crop
production, fish
farming, livestock
production as well as
usage of communal
water resources.
Number of irrigation
systems rehabilitated,
with appropriate
management
(including cost
recovery) plans in
place, agreed by all
stakeholders, for
sustainability beyond
the project grant.
Extent of area under
irrigation as a result
of project.
Irrigation facilities are most
often in disrepair and require
rehabilitation, as a result of
poor management
arrangements, including cost
recovery, improper water
extraction methods and a
lack of ownership (see
paragraph 125).
By year 1, establish a
management committee at
the Lisutu pilot site.
By year 2, 10 people,
including 5 women, have
been trained to form 1
management committee at
Lusitu.
By year 2, 150 farmers have
been trained.
By year 3, 2 irrigation
systems have been
rehabilitated.
By year 3, 22 ha are under
irrigation.
Evaluation
reports.
Training
protocols.
Outcome 3: National fiscal, regulatory and development policy revised to promote adaptation responses in the agricultural sector.
Output 3.1.
Awareness of
climate change
risks and to the
economic value of
adaptation
responses raised
among policy-
and decision-
makers.
Number of awareness
and training materials
(such as briefing
notes, fact sheets and
cross-sectoral guides)
developed for sectoral
planners on the need
to incorporate climate
change considerations
into agricultural
planning, including
the economic benefits
thereof.
Number of training
seminars on climate
resilient agricultural
planning developed
and conducted for
MACO, ZMD, DWA,
DMMU and MTENR
Number of training
workshops designed
and conducted in each
of the eight pilot
districts for
agricultural and
natural resources
At present, the different
sectors and institutions have
been addressing climate
change issues in an ad hoc
manner
At present, there are no
awareness and training
materials that are developed
based on actual adaptation
practices in Zambia
At present, only a few senior
staff have attended seminars
or trainings on climate
resilient agricultural
planning in the government
departments.
Only a few of the members
of the Agricultural and
Natural Resources
Subcommittees of the PDCC
and DDCC are trained on
climate change
considerations for planning
purposes
By year 4, at least 1 national
workshop is conducted to
discuss the project findings
and recommendations
By year 4, the PDCC and the
DDCC are able to coordinate
climate change activities to
ensure coordinated approach
By year 4, at least 3 briefing
notes, 3 fact sheets and one
cross sectoral guide
produced.
By year 4, at least 3 national
training seminars on climate
resilient agriculture planning
developed and conducted for
planners from the MACO,
ZMD, DWA, DMMU and
MTENR
By year 4, at least 60
government officials
working in the planning
section of the relevant
ministries/department,
including the ministries
Number of
workshops
conducted
Field surveys
Field reports
The project
interventions are
able to generate
convincing
benefits.
The current
interest in
climate change
issues among
planners in the
ministries is
sustained.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
112
subcommittees of the
district development
coordinating
committee (DDCC),
the Non-
Governmental
Coordinating
Committees
(NGOCC) and other
relevant district level
stakeholders.
Functional climate
resource and support
centres in the eight
pilot districts.
mentioned above trained.
By year 1, all the members of
the PDCC and 50% of the
members of the DDCC
Agriculture and Natural
Resources subcommittees are
trained on incorporating
climate change
considerations in planning
processes.
Output 3.2.
National policy
dialogues
conducted to
discuss project
findings in
relation to cost-
effectiveness of
piloted
adaptation
options.
Number of meetings
or workshops
conducted between
the members of the
DDCC, PDCC and
the District NGOCC
to enable coordinated
and climate-resilient
development planning
in the vulnerable
provinces.
At present, there is a lack of
coordination and dialogue
processes on climate change
adaptation.
By year 4, at least 4
meetings/workshops have
been conducted.
Project reports
Project reports
The project
interventions are
able to generate
convincing
benefits.
Support and
coordination
from other key
stakeholders
Policy
stakeholders are
willing to make
changes in
policy based on
emerging issues
and community
needs
Output 3.3.
Policies that
require
adjustments to
promote
adaptation
identified and
reviewed.
Number of sectoral
policies that promote
or impede the
resilience of
communities within
AER I and II to
climate change
analysed.
Number of policy
notes developed for
each sectoral policy
analysed outlining
and demonstrating the
impacts, costs and
benefits of a
particular sectoral
policy on the
resilience of
livelihoods in AER I
and II.
Number of gaps in the
existing policies,
relating to climate
change identified.
The current policies and
provincial/ district plans do
not exclusively address
climate change
By year 4, 2 provincial plans
and district plans and 5 key
national policies are revised
to promote sustainable
climate resilient
development.
By year 2, recommendations
developed for at least 5
sectoral policies.
By year 3, at least 5 policy
notes developed.
Project reports.
Outcome 4. Lessons learned and knowledge management component established
Output 4.1.
Knowledge and
Number of lessons
systemized.
Development projects at
present, do not
By Year 3, at least 1 good
practice fact sheet produced
Project
documents,
The ALM is
functional to
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
113
lessons learned to
support
implementation
of adaptation
measures
compiled and
disseminated.
Number of lessons
included in the ALM.
Number of lessons
included on
wikiADAPT.
Number of project
documents included
on the CCFU website.
Number of briefing
papers documenting
lessons learned
developed and
published in peer-
review journals.
Number of regional
and national
workshops conducted
for dissemination of
project lessons.
Number of radio and
television
programmes
developed to convey
project lessons.
Number of
newsletters produced.
Number of
community
workshops conducted.
The number of
awareness campaigns
conducted on the
need to incorporate
adaptation needs in
policy.
systematically benefit from
learning practices and
project lessons on
community-based adaptation
Zambia, is at present, not
contributing to the ALM
At present, there is no
systematic knowledge
transfer on climate change
adaptation in Zambia
for each pilot intervention
and distributed.
All monitoring and
evaluation reports are
screened for inclusion in the
ALM by six months after end
of the project.
By year 4, at least 20 key
project lessons are captured
and disseminated in the
ALM and on wikiADAPT.
By year 4, all project
documents are available on
the CCFU website, on a page
dedicated to the project.
By year 4, at least 1 national
and 1 international workshop
on adaptation to effects of
drought and climate change
is conducted.
By year 4, at least 2 radio
and 2 television programmes
have been developed and
aired.
By year 4, at least 1 work for
each of the 8 pilots has been
held.
By year 4, at least 2
campaigns have been
conducted
proposals,
research papers,
ALM platform,
and Workshop
proceedings
facilitate
learning
The
communities
and regional
actors are
interested in
knowledge
sharing.
Other regions
and countries
believe
experiences
from the project
are applicable to
their situations.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
114
ANNEX G: Cost calculations for outputs
Table 1: A summary of the number of beneficiaries per activity in Outcome 2 and the cost of the activity
per beneficiary.
SUMMARY TABLE: COSTS OF INTERVENTIONS OVER ALL SCOPED PILOT SITES
2.1 Soil conservation techniques
Number of beneficiaries 900
Cost of intervention per farmer (US$) [1] 313
Number of sites 6
Total cost 281 340
2.2 Crop diversification
Number of beneficiaries 1 260
Cost of intervention per farmer (US$) [2] 394
Number of sites 8
Total cost 496 140
2.3a Beekeeping
Number of beneficiaries 160
Cost of intervention per farmer (US$) [3] 473
Number of sites 3
Total cost 75 690
2.3b Fish Farming
Number of beneficiaries 340
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 219
Number of sites 1
Total cost 74 448
2.3c Rice farming in flood-prone areas
Number of beneficiaries 300
Cost of intervention per farmer (US$) 649
Number of sites 2
Total cost 194 720
2.3d Integrated fish and rice farming
Number of beneficiaries 60
Cost of intervention per farmer (US$) 794
Number of sites 1
Total cost 47 640
2.3e Additional Non-Timber Forest Products Introduced
Number of beneficiaries 100
Cost of intervention per farmer (US$) 237
Number of sites 1
Total cost 23 660
2.4 Expansion of area under irrigation
2.4a Dam construction
Number of beneficiaries 2 272
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 377
Number of sites 4
Cost of intervention 856 560
2.4b Earth dam construction
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
115
Number of beneficiaries 811
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 264
Number of sites 1
Cost of intervention 214 140
2.4c Construction of storm water dams
Number of beneficiaries 288
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 264
Number of sites 1
Cost of intervention 76 140
2.4d Construction of reservoirs
Number of beneficiaries 523
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 264
Number of sites 1
Cost of intervention for the site 138 140
2.4e Construction of Weirs
Number of beneficiaries 395
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 264
Number of sites 1
Cost of intervention 104 280
Irrigation systems rehabilitated
Number of beneficiaries 220
Number of dams 1
Number of sites 1
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 264
Cost of intervention 58 140
TOTAL COST 2 641 038
Table 2: A breakdown of output costs to achieve Outcome 2
UNIT COST
(US$)
NUMBER
OF UNITS/
PERSONS
ANNUAL
TOTAL
COST
(US$)
OVERALL
TOTAL
COST (US$)
2.1 SOIL CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES
Formation of farmer groups and training of
farmers in soil conservation techniques for 3
years
Fuel costs per site 300.00 7 2 100.00 6 300.00
Other allowances for trainers per site 300.00 7 2 100.00 6 300.00
Training materials per site 300.00 7 2 100.00 6 300.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 7 2 100.00 6 300.00
Trainers DSAs per site 480.00 7 3 360.00 10 080.00
Support to management committees at US$3000
per group each year 3 000.00 7 21 000.00 63 000.00
Training 32 extension officers
Transportation (return) 60.00 32 1 920.00 1 920.00
Lodging for 32 extension officers for 5 days @
US$80/day 400.00 32 12 800.00 12 800.00
Consultants fees (lump sum) 10 000.00 1 10 000.00 10 000.00
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
116
Training of farmers on conservation farming
Contract for trainers @US$15/ farmer/ session
for 4 sessions 60.00 300 18 000.00 54 000.00
Purchase of input packs for trained farmers
5kg maize/ cassava/ sweet potato seed @ US$10 10.00 300 3 000.00 9 000.00
50kg fertilizer @US$62 62.00 300 18 600.00 55 800.00
Legume seed @US$12 12.00 300 3 600.00 10 800.00
Faidherbia for crop rotation @US$2 2.00 300 600.00 1 800.00
Herbicides @ US$8 8.00 300 2 400.00 7 200.00
Chaka hole @US$7 7.00 300 2 100.00 6 300.00
Assessment of suitability of techniques at the six
sites
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 7 11 760.00 11 760.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 7 1 680.00 1 680.00
Subtotal 6 119 220.00 281 340.00
2.2 CROP DIVERSIFICATION
Formation of farmer groups and training of
farmers crop diversification for 3 years
Fuel costs per site 300.00 8 2 400.00 7 200.00
Other allowances for trainers per site 300.00 8 2 400.00 7 200.00
Training materials per site 300.00 8 2 400.00 7 200.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 8 2 400.00 7 200.00
Trainers DSAs per site 480.00 8 3 840.00 11 520.00
Support to management committees at US$3000
per group each year 3 000.00 8 24 000.00 72 000.00
0.00
Assessment of suitability of techniques at the
sites
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 8 13 440.00 13 440.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 8 1 920.00 1 920.00
Training of farmers on crop diversification
Contract for trainers @US$15/ farmer/ session
for 4 sessions for 1260 farmers 60.00 420 25 200.00 75 600.00
Purchase of input packs for trained farmers for
1260 farmers
5kg maize/ cassava/ sweet potato seed @ US$10 10.00 420 4 200.00 12 600.00
50kg fertilizer @US$62 62.00 420 26 040.00 78 120.00
Legume seed @US$12 12.00 420 5 040.00 15 120.00
Faidherbia for crop rotation @US$2 2.00 420 840.00 2 520.00
Herbicides @ US$8 8.00 420 3 360.00 10 080.00
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
117
Chaka hole @US$7 7.00 420 2 940.00 8 820.00
0.00
Support for farm trials for ZARI
DSAs for 4 researchers @ US$60/ day for a
minimum of 20days per site a year for 3 years 4 800.00 8 38 400.00 115 200.00
Fuel Costs (4 trips to each of the 8 sites/ year
using 250 litres(US$1.2/ litre)/ site for 3 years) 1 200.00 8 9 600.00 28 800.00
Farmer training on seed production for 3 years
DSAs for 2 staff from Seed Certification
Institute to train farmers on seed production
(they require DSAs @US$60 for 5 days for each
of the 8 sites) 600.00 8 4 800.00 14 400.00
Fuel costs for trainers @ 250 litres per site for all
the three years 300.00 8 2 400.00 7 200.00
Subtotal 175 620.00 496 140.00
2.3a BEE KEEPING
Formation of bee keeping groups and training of
farmers in bee keeping for 3 years
Fuel costs per site 300.00 3 900.00 2 700.00
Other allowances for trainers per site 300.00 3 900.00 2 700.00
Training materials per site 300.00 3 900.00 2 700.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 3 900.00 2 700.00
Trainers DSAs per site 480.00 3 1 440.00 4 320.00
Support to management committees at US$3000
per group each year 3 000.00 3 9 000.00 27 000.00
0.00
Assessment of suitability of techniques at the
sites
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 3 5 040.00 5 040.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 3 720.00 720.00
Other costs for beekeeping
Purchase of improved beehives from local
carpenters (4 beehives will be given to each of
the 260 farmers. Each hive costs US$20) 80.00 54 4 320.00 12 960.00
Technical assistance for setting beehives. This
includes fuel, labour and DSAs. The estimated
cost per site each year is US$1650). 1 650.00 3 4 950.00 14 850.00
Subtotal 29 070.00 75 690.00
2.3b. FISH FARMING
Formation of fish farming groups and training of
farmers on fish farming for 3 years
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
118
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
Support to management committees at US$3000
per group each year 3 000.00 1 3 000.00 9 000.00
0.00
Purchase of manual excavation tools 0.00 0.00
Wheel barrows 60.00 50 3 000.00 9 000.00
Mattocks 12.00 50 600.00 1 800.00
Shovels 12.00 50 600.00 1 800.00
Hand hoes 10.00 50 500.00 1 500.00
Pick axes 10.00 50 500.00 1 500.00
0.00
Assessment of suitability of techniques at the
sites
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 1 680.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 1 240.00 240.00
Construction of ponds
Nine (2000m2) production ponds (3 each year) at
a cost of US$4000 each 4 000.00 3 12 000.00 36 000.00
Three (166m2) growing ponds (3 each year) at a
cost of US$332 each 332.00 3 996.00 2 988.00
One breeding pond annually @ US$400/ pond
for 3 years 400.00 1 400.00 1 200.00
Subtotal 4 732.00 26 096.00 74 448.00
2.3c RICE FARMING IN FLOOD-PRONE
AREAS
Formation of rice farming groups and training
of farmers on rice farming for 3 years
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Training materials per site 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 2 3 360.00 10 080.00
Support to management committees at US$3000
per group each year 3 000.00 2 6 000.00 18 000.00
Supply of rice input packs 0.00 0.00
Rice Seed 10.00 100 1 000.00 3 000.00
4x50kg D-Compound 200.00 100 20 000.00 60 000.00
4x50kg Ammonium Nitrate 248.00 100 24 800.00 74 400.00
45 800.00 137 400.00
Purchase of rice hulling equipment for the two
sites (2 for each site @ US$5000 each) 5 000.00 4 20 000.00 20 000.00
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
119
Assessment of suitability of techniques at the
sites 0.00 0.00
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 2 3 360.00 3 360.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 2 480.00 480.00
Subtotal 332 120.00
2.3d INTEGRATED FISH AND RICE
FARMING
Formation of rice farming groups and training
of farmers on rice farming for 3 years
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
Support to management committees at US$3000
per group each year 3 000.00 1 3 000.00 9 000.00
0.00
Supply of rice input packs
Rice Seed 10.00 20 200.00 600.00
4x50kg D-Compound 200.00 20 4 000.00 12 000.00
4x50kg Ammonium Nitrate 248.00 20 4 960.00 14 880.00
Purchase of fingerlings estimated at US$0.1
each. Each farmer gets 250 fingerlings 25.00 20 500.00 1 500.00
0.00
Assessment of suitability of techniques at the six
sites
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 1 680.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 1 240.00 240.00
Subtotal 17 160.00 47 640.00
2.3e ADDITIONAL NTFPs PROMOTED
Formation of NTFP groups and training of
communities on NTFPs for 3 years
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
Support to management committees at US$3000
per group each year 3 000.00 1 3 000.00 9 000.00
Assessment of suitability of techniques 1 920.00 1 1 920.00 1 920.00
Consultancy for identification of viable NTFPs 5 000.00 1 5 000.00 5 000.00
Subtotal 23 660.00
2.4a DAM CONSTRUCTION
Formation of dam management committees and
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
120
training of communities on group dynamics for 3
years
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 4 1 200.00 3 600.00
Training materials per site 300.00 4 1 200.00 3 600.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 4 1 200.00 3 600.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 4 6 720.00 20 160.00
0.00
Trainings for communities on water
management and irrigation management 0.00 0.00
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 4 1 200.00 3 600.00
Training materials per site 300.00 4 1 200.00 3 600.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 4 1 200.00 3 600.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 4 6 720.00 20 160.00
0.00
Trainings irrigated crop production, livestock,
fish farming and marketing 0.00 0.00
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 4 1 200.00 3 600.00
Training materials per site 300.00 4 1 200.00 3 600.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 4 1 200.00 3 600.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 4 6 720.00 20 160.00
0.00
Support to management committees 0.00 0.00
Lump sum amount for trainings and any other
activities to strengthen committees 3 000.00 4 12 000.00 36 000.00
0.00 0.00
Assessment of suitability of interventions 0.00 0.00
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 4 6 720.00 6 720.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 4 960.00 960.00
0.00
Contractual services for dam construction 0.00 0.00
Dam Construction (different types of dams
depending on site conditions) 150 000.00 4 600 000.00 600 000.00
Construction of irrigation canals were suitable/
supply of pressure pumps and accessories 30 000.00 4 120 000.00 120 000.00
Subtotal 770 640.00 856 560.00
2.4b CONSTRUCTION OF EARTH DAMS
Formation of dam management committees and
training of communities on group dynamics for 3
years
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
121
0.00
Trainings for communities on water
management and irrigation management 0.00 0.00
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
0.00 0.00
Trainings irrigated crop production, livestock,
fish farming and marketing 0.00 0.00
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
0.00 0.00
Support to management committees 0.00 0.00
Lump sum amount for trainings and any other
activities to strengthen committees 3 000.00 1 3 000.00 9 000.00
0.00 0.00
Feasibility assessment each of the sites 0.00 0.00
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 1 680.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 1 240.00 240.00
Contractual services for earth dam construction
Dam Construction (different types of dams
depending on site conditions) 150 000.00 1 150 000.00 150 000.00
Construction of irrigation canals were suitable/
supply of pressure pumps and accessories 30 000.00 1 30 000.00 30 000.00
Subtotal 192 660.00 214 140.00
2.4c CONSTRUCTION OF STORMWATER
DAMS
Formation of dam management committees and
training of communities on group dynamics for 3
years
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
0.00 0.00
Trainings for communities on water
management and irrigation management 0.00 0.00
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
122
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
0.00 0.00
Trainings irrigated crop production, livestock,
fish farming and marketing 0.00 0.00
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
0.00 0.00
Support to management committees 0.00 0.00
Lump sum amount for trainings and any other
activities to strengthen committees 3 000.00 1 3 000.00 9 000.00
0.00 0.00
Feasibility assessment each of the sites 0.00 0.00
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 1 680.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 1 240.00 240.00
0.00 0.00
Contractual services for storm water dam
construction 0.00 0.00
Dam Construction (different types of dams
depending on site conditions) 5 000.00 6 30 000.00 30 000.00
Supply of pressure pumps and accessories 2 000.00 6 12 000.00 12 000.00
Subtotal 54 660.00 76 140.00
2.4d: CONSTRUCTION OF RESERVOIRS
Formation of dam management committees and
training of communities on group dynamics for 3
years
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
0.00 0.00
Trainings for communities on water
management and irrigation management 0.00 0.00
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
0.00 0.00
Trainings irrigated crop production, livestock,
fish farming and marketing 0.00 0.00
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
123
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
0.00 0.00
Support to management committees 0.00 0.00
Lump sum amount for trainings and any other
activities to strengthen the committees 3 000.00 1 3 000.00 9 000.00
0.00 0.00
Feasibility assessment each of the sites 0.00 0.00
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 1 680.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 1 240.00 240.00
Contractual services for reservoir construction
Construction of reservoir 50 000.00 2 100 000.00 100 000.00
Supply of pressure pumps and accessories 2 000.00 2 4 000.00 4 000.00
Subtotal 116 660.00 138 140.00
2.4e: CONSTRUCTION OF WEIRS
Formation of dam management committees and
training of communities on group dynamics for 3
years
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Training materials per site 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 2 3 360.00 10 080.00
Trainings for communities on water
management and irrigation management
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Training materials per site 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 2 3 360.00 10 080.00
Trainings irrigated crop production, livestock
and marketing
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Training materials per site 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 2 600.00 1 800.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 2 3 360.00 10 080.00
Support to management committees
Lump sum amount for trainings and any other
activities to strengthen the committees 3 000.00 2 6 000.00 18 000.00
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
124
Feasibility assessment each of the sites
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 2 3 360.00 3 360.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 2 480.00 480.00
Contractual services for construction of weirs
Dam Construction (different types of dams
depending on site conditions) 5 000.00 6 30 000.00 30 000.00
Supply of pressure pumps and accessories 1 000.00 6 6 000.00 6 000.00
Subtotal 61 320.00 104 280.00
2.4f: IRRIGATION SYSTEMS
REHABILITATION
Formation of dam management committees and
training of communities on group dynamics for 3
years
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
Trainings for communities on water
management and irrigation management
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
Trainings irrigated crop production, livestock
and marketing
Fuel costs per site (250 litres @ US$1.2/ litre) 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Training materials per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Participants meals per site 300.00 1 300.00 900.00
Trainers DSAs per site (DSAs @ US$60 for 4
trainers for 7 days) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 5 040.00
Support to management committees
Lump sum amount for trainings and any other
activities to strengthen the committees 3 000.00 1 3 000.00 9 000.00
0.00 0.00
Feasibility assessment each of the sites 0.00 0.00
DSAs for seven days at each site @ US$60/
person for 4 people (per site) 1 680.00 1 1 680.00 1 680.00
Fuel costs estimated at 200 litres per site
(US$1.2/ litre) for six sites 240.00 1 240.00 240.00
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
125
Contractual services for irrigation systems
rehabilitation
Irrigation system rehabilitation 10 000.00 2 20 000.00 20 000.00
Supply of pressure pumps and accessories 2 000.00 2 4 000.00 4 000.00
Subtotal 36 660.00 58 140.00
SITE SPECIFIC COSTS
Trainings and monitoring by extension officers
for 3 years
Lunch allowances (3days/month x12 months @
US$10/ person for 2 extension officers) for 3
years 720.00 8 5 760.00 17 280.00
Fuel allowances (3 days/month x12 months
@US$24 for 20litres) for 3 years 864.00 8 6 912.00 20 736.00
Subtotal 1 584.00 8 12 672.00 38 016.00
Development of market linkages for all pilot
sites / feasibility studies
Consultants fees (market linkages assessment
and development) 60 000.00 0.00 0.00
Consultants fees (Feasibility and profitability
study for all pilot sites) 100 000.00 0.00 0.00
Subtotal 160 000.00 1 160 000.00 480 000.00
Community sensitization
DSAs PS staff from National Office (US$60 for
4 days per site for 5 people) 1 200.00 8 9 600.00 9 600.00
Fuel estimated at 250 litres per site 300.00 8 2 400.00 2 400.00
DSAs Provincial Staff (US$60 for 4 days per site
for 5 people) 1 200.00 8 9 600.00 9 600.00
Fuel estimated at 150 litres per site 180.00 8 1 440.00 1 440.00
DSAs District Staff (US$60 for 2 days per site
for 5 people) 600.00 8 4 800.00 4 800.00
Fuel estimated at 50 litres per site 60.00 8 480.00 480.00
Subtotal 28 320.00 28 320.00
Table 3: Cost and coverage of interventions under Outcome 2.
Southern Province Eastern Province Western Province Lusaka Province
Total Kasaya Lusitu Chikowa Mundalanga Sioma Kataba Zalapango Kabeleka
No. of Households 1000 1000 293 1241 208 340 115 333
Activities
2.1 Soil conservation techniques
Sites prioritizing activity x x x x x x 6
No. of farmers trained 120 180 240 120 120 120 900
Hectare under soil conservation 30.00 60.00 60.00 30.00 22.50 202.50
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 312.60 312.60 312.60 312.60 312.60 312.60 312.60
Total cost per site (US$) 37 512.00 56 268.00 75 024.00 37 512.00 37 512.00 37 512.00 281 340
2.2 Crop diversification
Sites prioritizing activity x x x x x x x x 8
No. of farmers trained 120 120 240 240 120 120 120 180 1 260
Drought resistant species disseminated 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28
Alternative crop species disseminated 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 32
Hectares under drought resistant crops 30 30 60 60 30 30 45 315
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 393.76 393.76 393.76 393.76 393.76 393.76 393.76 393.76 393.76
Total cost per site (US$) 47 251.43 47 251.43 94 502.86 94 502.86 47 251.43 47 251.43 47 251.43 70 877.14 496 140
2.3 Alternative livelihoods
2.3a Bee keeping
Sites prioritizing activity x x x 3
No. of farmers trained 100 30 30 160
Bee keeping groups formed 10 3 3 16
Modern beehives supplied 400 120 120 640
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 473.06 473.06 473.06 473.06
Total cost per site (US$) 47 306.00 14 191.80 14 191.80 75 690
2.3b Fish farming
Sites prioritizing activity x 1
No. of breeding ponds constructed 1 1
No. of growing ponds constructed 9 9
No. of production ponds constructed 9 9
Total area under fish farming (m2) 18000 18000
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
127
No. of households benefiting 340.00 340
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 218.96 218.96
Total cost per site (US$) 74 448.00 74 448
2.3c Rice farming in flood prone areas
Sites prioritizing activity x x 2
No. of farmers targeted 100 200 300
No. hectares under rice farming 100 200 300
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 649.07 649.07 649.07
Total cost per site (US$) 64 906.67
129
813.33 194 720
2.3d Integrated fish and rice farming
Sites prioritizing activity x 1
No. of farmers trained 60 60
No. of integrated fish and rice basins 60 60
No. hectares under fish and rice farming 30 30
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 794.00 794.00
Total cost per site (US$) 47 640.00 47 640
2.3e Additional NTFPs Introduced
Sites prioritizing activity x 1
No. of new NTFPs introduced 3 3
No of farmers trained in NTFPs 100 100
No. of NTFP groups formed 5 5
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 236.60 236.60
Total cost per site (US$) 23 660.00 23 660
2.4 Expansion of area under irrigation
2.4a Construction of dams
Sites prioritizing activity x x x x 4
No. of concrete dams to be constructed 1 1 1 1 4
No. of beneficiaries 568 568 568 568 2 272
No. of hectares under irrigation 56.8 56.8 56.8 56.8 227.2
No. of dam management committees 1 1 1 1 4
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 377.01 377.01 377.01 377.01 377.01
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
128
Total cost per site (US$)
214
140.00
214
140.00 214 140.00
214
140.00 856 560
2.4b Construction of earth dams
Sites prioritizing activity x 1
No. of earth dams proposed 1 1
No. of beneficiaries 811 811
No. of hectares under irrigation 81.1 81.1
No. of dam management committees formed 1 1
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 264.04 264.04
Total cost per site (US$)
214
139.99 214 140
2.4c Storm water dams constructed
Sites prioritizing activity x 1
No. of storm water dams proposed 6 6
No. of hectares under irrigation 28 28
No. of beneficiaries 288 288
No. of dam management committees 6 6
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 264.38 264.38
Total cost per site (US$) 76 140.00 76 140
2.4d Reservoirs constructed
Sites prioritizing activity x 1
No. of reservoirs proposed 2 2
No. of beneficiaries 523 523
No. of hectares under irrigation 52.3 52.3
No. of dam management committees 2 2
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 264.13 264.13
Total cost per site (US$)
138
139.99 138 140
2.4e Weirs constructed
Sites prioritizing activity x 1
No. of weirs proposed 3 3
No. of hectares under irrigation 39.5 39.5
No. of beneficiaries 395 395
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 264.00 264.00
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
129
Total cost per site (US$)
104
280.00 104 280
2.4f Irrigation systems rehabilitated
Sites prioritizing activity x 1
No. of irrigation systems rehabilitated 2 2
No. of beneficiaries 220 220
No. of hectares under irrigation 22 22
Cost of intervention per household (US$) 264.27 264.27
Total cost per site (US$) 58 140 58 140
Total cost of interventions/site 512 777 281 043 379 103 231 359 363 810 289 025 298 903 285 017 2 641 038
Total no. of beneficiaries/site 1571 983 1261 570 908 780 808 748 7629
ANNEX H - List of stakeholders consulted during the PPG phase of the project
The following consultations and activities were held during the PPG phase.
Pre-inception workshop 4th
-5th
February 2009
Specific objectives: 1. To share the project background and information on the adaptation to the effects of drought,
floods and climate change in agro-ecological regions I and II.
2. To formulate an Action Plan to facilitate the development of the full project proposal document
for GRF consideration.
3. To draw up a programme for the inception workshop on the aadaptation to the effects of drought
and climate change in Agro-Ecological Regions I & II.
Inception workshop 2nd
March 2009
The overall objective of the Inception Workshop was to bring together stakeholders to be familiarised to
the drought/floods and climate change project and fine-tune the project proposal road-map.
Specific objectives: 1. To appraise and share experiences with stakeholders on the importance of water in agricultural
development in Zambia’s three Agro-Ecological Region’s;
2. To inform and stakeholders on the GEF’s role in climate change adaptation, and GEF Project
Cycle;
3. To appraise and get feedback from the stakeholders on the project concept document of the
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-Ecological Regions I & II
project in order to shape the proposal document;
4. To agree on and finalise the drafting of the project document proposal work-plan and roadmap.
Vision setting and site selection workshop 3rd
April 2009
The workshop aimed at implementing sub-activity 1.7 in the work plan which is “selection of pilot
catchments and project pilot sites”. It also aimed at coming up with a vision that would provide
guidelines, objectivity and focus during the project preparation phase to guide in the project site selection
at both National, Provincial and District levels.
Specific objectives:
1. To refine & spell-out the project vision and objectives;
2. To develop criteria for the selection of pilot catchments and pilot sites;
3. Select pilot Provinces at National level and determine the provisional number of pilot sites per
province and/or districts.
Site selection field visits 28-11th
May, 2009
Specific objectives:
1. Consultation with the Agricultural and Natural Resources subcommittees of the PDCC and
selection of the pilot districts
2. Consultation with the Agricultural and Natural Resources subcommittees of the DDCC and
selection of the pilot sites
3. Consultations with the communities and identification of the desired pilot interventions
Site selection workshop 14th
to 15th
May 2009
This was held at Kafue Gorge between 14th and 15
th May 2009. The technical working group, field
facilitators and the international consultant were present.
Specific objectives:
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
131
1. Narrowing down the sites from the 16 which were selected from the field trips to eight sites based
on the site selection criteria
2. Review the progress and chart the way forward
First draft review workshop
This was held from the 14th to 17
th July 2007. Participants included:
1. The technical working committee members
2. Representatives from government departments
3. Representatives from the provinces, districts & sites.
Specific objectives:
1. Barrier analysis
2 Development of detailed business plan
3 Co-financing
4. Stakeholder involvement plan
5. Many others
Internal appraisal committee 22nd
July 2009
This was held in the UNDP conference room on 22nd
July 2009. The aim was to review the draft
document and provide input.
External appraisal committee meeting on 7th
August 2009
This was held in the UNDP conference room. The aim was to review the draft document and provide
input.
Name Institution
People consulted during the Pre-Inception Workshop from 2-6th
February 2009
Joseph Kanyanga Chief Meteorologist- Zambia Meteorological Department
Jacob Nkomoki Deputy Director –Zambia Meteorological Department
Lenganji Sikaona Principal Research Officer- Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit
Adam Hussein Director
Kayoya Masuhwa Principal Agricultural Officer (MACO)
Anthony Mporokoso Principal Hydrologist (Department of Water Affairs)
Nicholas Mwale A/ Senior Statistician (Department of Policy & Planning) MACO
Rasford Kalamatila A/ Principal Agricultural Specialist (Remote Sensing) MACO
Martin N. Sishekanu Chief Agricultural Specialist (Land Husbandry) MACO
Esnart Makwakwa Analyst/ Programmer- Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit
Young N. Vibetti Chief Agricultural Research Officer (Livestock) MACO
People consulted during the vision setting workshop on 3rd
April 2009
Henry Sichembe Deputy Director (DOA) MACO
Kayoya Masuhwa Principal Agricultural Officer (MACO)
Anthony Mporokoso Principal Hydrologist (Department of Water Affairs)
Martin N. Sishekanu Chief Agricultural Specialist (Land Husbandry) MACO
Rasford Kalamatila A/ Principal Agricultural Specialist (Remote Sensing) MACO
Young N. Vibetti Chief Agricultural Research Officer (Livestock) MACO
Harris Phiri (PhD) Chief Research Officer (Department of Fisheries) MACO
Nicholas Mwale A/ Senior Statistician (Department of Policy & Planning) MACO
Richard Bwalya PM
Mathias Kanyemba Chief Crops Officer- MACO
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
132
Mwase Phiri Chief Vegetables and Crops Officer- MACO
Reynolds K. Shula Climate Change Facilitation Unit
Samuli Leminen Environmental Officer (UNDP)
Oversease Mwangase Chief Meteorologist- Zambia Meteorological Department
People consulted during the PPG Inception Workshop 2nd
March 2009
Rasford Kalamatila A/ Principal Agricultural Specialist (Remote Sensing) MACO
Martin N. Sishekanu Chief Agricultural Specialist (Land Husbandry) MACO
Kafula Chisanga Zambia Agricultural Research Institute (MACO)
Mwila Mulundu Zambia Agricultural Research Institute (MACO)
Chileshe Bwalya MACO- Mambwe District
Richard K. Mwamba MACO- Southern Province
Peters Kamusaki MACO- Western Province
Valentine Michelo MACO- Western Province
Moses C. Kapuka MACO- Nyimba District
Joyce S. Musiwa Zambia Rain Water Harvest Association
Oversease Mwangase Chief Meteorologist- Zambia Meteorological Department
Harris Phiri (PhD) Chief Research Officer (Department of Fisheries) MACO
Young N. Vibetti Chief Agricultural Research Officer (Livestock) MACO
Moses Lungu MACO Lusaka Province
Shadreck Mungalaba Provincial Agricultural Co-ordinator Lusaka -MACO
Nicholas Mwale A/ Senior Statistician (Department of Policy & Planning) MACO
Kambani Banda National Agricultural Information Services -MACO
Shamwinda Tembo National Agricultural Information Services -MACO
Matildah Kaliba Participatory and Ecological Land Use Management- Zambia
Charles Mvula Policy and Planning Department-MACO
Daniel Chamba Technical Services Branch- MACO
Mainga S Provincial Agricultural Co-ordinator (Western Province -MACO
Shitima E. M Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources
Samuel Mukelebai MACO Southern Province
Mathias Kanyemba Chief Crops Officer- MACO
Maurice Muchinda Director- Zambia Meteorological Department
Richard Bwalya PM
Annalisa Lodato UNDP
Anthony Mills International Consultant
George Sikuleka Chief Irrigation Engineer- MACO
David Mulenga MACO
People consulted during the site selection missions 28th
April-10th
May 2009
Western Province Provincial Development Coordinating Committee (Mongu)
Albert Mate PM- Concern Worldwide
Simataa Nakamboa PM- Keepers Zambia Foundation
Mulenga Lawrence Agricultural Officer MACO
James Masinja District Fisheries Officer
Carol M. Mubita Programme Officer- Barotseland.com- Lyambayi Adaptation
Beatrice Lukama Principal Forestry Extension Officer- Forestry Department
Agness C. Shawa Area Warden- Zambia Wildlife Authority
Peter S. Kamusaki SAMS- MACO
Senanga District Agriculture and Natural Resources Subcommittee of the District Development
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
133
Coordinating Committee
Muyowambuya Likando Project Officer- Keepers Zambia Foundation
Charles Mjumphi Programme Manager Concern Wildwide
Matilda Libi District Coordinator- People’s Participation Services
Roy Moonde Technical Officer- Department of Agriculture
Fausto Chimya Extension Assistant- Forestry Department
Clive Simwanza Veterinary Officer- Department of Vet. & Livestock
Rodrick Washeni Fisheries Technical Officer- Department of Fisheries
Mubita Musiwa PM- Adventist Relief Services- SFSP
Howard Hakubobya District Marketing Officer- MACO
Nyambe Soopu National Agricultural Information Services (Senanga)
Likando Mubiana District Agricultural Officer- MACO
Sesheke District Agriculture and Natural Resources Subcommittee of the District Development
Coordinating Committee
Mwangana Mwandamena District Agriculture Coordinator-MACO
Faustina Simasiku Assistant Planner- Sesheke District Council
David Mutemwa Chairperson- Sesheke Pastors Fellowship Advocacy Committee
L.I. Nalumino District Forestry Officer- Forestry Department
Anthony Wakumelo Officer-in Charge- Zambia Meteorological Department
Litia Litia Officer-in Charge- Department of Fisheries
Jairos Makuni District Planner- Sesheke District Council
Nyambe Mwambwa Officer in Charge- Zambia Wildlife Authority
Webster Chikampa District Veterinary Officer
Pius Maambo Agricultural Officer-MACO
Reuben Kabiti Senior Agricultural Officer
John Chipandwe District Agricultural Information Officer
M. Lubinda Vice Chairperson- Timber Producers Association of Zambia
Kafue District Agriculture and Natural Resources Subcommittee of the District Development
Coordinating Committee
Dr. Christine Inambao District Veterinary Officer- MACO
Loziwe Ndhlovu Fisheries Research Officer- MACO
Katongo Bwalya Community Development Officer- Ministry of Community
Development and Social Services
Moddy Malowa Community Development Officer-Kafue District Council
Frank Simushi Senior Agricultural Officer- MACO
Muwowo Mutende District Forestry Officer- Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural
Resources
Gomes Hikanyeu District Agricultural Coordinating Officer- Kafue District Council
Mr. Musonda District Planning Officer- Kafue District Council
Wilson Chilembo Extension Methodology- MACO
George Sikuleka Chief Irrigation Engineer- MACO
Dr. Kayoya Masuhwa Chief Agricultural Officer- MACO
Matilda Kaliba Programmes Officer- PELUM
Gregory Chilufya Facilitator- Independent Consultant
Chongwe District Agriculture and Natural Resources Subcommittee of the District Development
Coordinating Committee
John Lungu Acting Senior Agricultural Officer
Dennis Mbita Mistimanzi Junior Technical Officer- MACO
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
134
Mwenya Mulenga Technical Officer-MACO
Francis Kubi Technical Officer-MACO
Sinda Mabvuso Technical Officer- MACO
George Sikuleka Chief Irrigation Engineer- MACO
Bernard Chulu Provincial Agricultural Officer- MACO
Dr. Kayoya Masuhwa Chief Agricultural Officer- MACO
Matilda Kaliba Programmes Officer- PELUM
Dr. Msiska C.Y District Medical Officer
Choongo P.C Manager, District Planning and Development- Chongwe District Council
Laura Gondwe Human Resource Manager- Chongwe District Council
Buis Pallu Malaria Focal Person- Chongwe District Council
Luangwa District Agriculture and Natural Resources Subcommittee of the District Development
Coordinating Committee
Happyday Nzila District Agricultural Coordinator- Luangwa District
White Nyirenda District Community Development Officer
Kelvin Hamusonde Officer-in Charge- Wildlife Conservation Society
Alex Choompo District Forestry Officer- Department of Forestry
Justice Nchimunya District Education Officer- Ministry of Education
Musekiwe Ntembe District Information Officer- Zambia Agricultural Information Services
E.M. Chisanga District Marketing and Cooperatives Officer- MACO
Silvia Sombe MACO
Mutinta C. Zulu MACO
Mupeta MAvis Agricultural Officer- MACO
George Sikuleka Chief Irrigation Engineer- MACO
Kayoya Masuhwa Chief Agricultural Officer- MACO
Matilda Kaliba Programme Officer- PELUM
Eastern Province Provincial Development Coordinating Committee (Chipata)
Bwalya Chendauka Provincial Forestry Officer- Forestry Department
Dr. Roy M. Chiti Programme Coordinator-Lutheran World Federation
Thomas Mwanza Senior Education Standards Officer
Vincent Nguluwe Provincial Water Affairs Officer
Mporokoso Anthony Principal Hydrologist- Department of Water Affairs
Mwale Lusizi Area Warden- Zambia Wildlife Authority
Titus Ngandu Acting Senior Planner/ Disaster Management focal Person
Patson Phiri Provincial Planner- Ministry of Local Government and Housing
Mambwe District Agriculture and Natural Resources Subcommittee of the District Development
Coordinating Committee
Chileshe Bwalya Crop Husbandry Officer- MACO
Mathias Zulu Agricultural Information Officer- MACO
Morrison Hamoonge Technical Services Officer- Department of Agriculture
Patrick Kapampa Fisheries Officer- Department of Fisheries
Sinyala Nyirongo Regional Planner- Zambia Wildlife Authority
Sungizwayo Banda Extension Officer- Wildlife Conservation Society
Christine Shawa Marketing Officer- Cargill Cotton Limited
Martha Sekelani Marketing Officer- MACO
Daniel Chamba Irrigation Engineer- Provincial Agricultural Office- MACO
Rasford Kalamatila Principal Technical Officer- MACO
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
135
Chama District Agriculture and Natural Resources Subcommittee of the District Development
Coordinating Committee
James Ngalamilo MACO
Vincent Banda MACO
Fred Chikuta MACO
Sherry Phiri CARGIL Cotton Zambia Limited
Anthony Mporokoso Principal Hydrologist- Department of Water Affairs
Daniel Chamba Irrigation Engineer- Provincial Agricultural Office- MACO
Sichembe Isaac Department of Veterinary and Livestock Development- MACO
Thomas Banda Ministry of Community Development and Social Services
Kabonso Japhet Forest Department
Kabange Masenga MACO
Noel Phiri Social Worker
Newton Nyirenda Chama District Council
L. Mutukwa Office of the President
Samson Habulembe Department of Fisheries
Moyo Maboto Dunavant
Evaristo Nanyoka MACO
Nyimba District Agriculture and Natural Resources Subcommittee of the District Development
Coordinating Committee
Moses C. Kapuka District Agricultural Coordinator- MACO
Widson Nyirenda District Planner- Nyimba District Council
Joseph Zulu Water Officer- Department of Water Affairs
Abner Kumbuyo Forestry Officer- Forestry Department
Daniel Chamba Irrigation Engineer- Provincial Agricultural Office- MACO
Anthony Mporokoso Principal Hydrologist- Department of Water Affairs
John Dimuna Fisheries Officer- Department of Fisheries
Dr. Happy Kanyini Department of Veterinary and Livestock Development
Ziwa. S.Z Principal Technical Officer/ Department of Agriculture
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
136
ANNEX I – A brief description of policies that address environmental issues.
Decentralisation Policy (Cabinet Office)
Decentralization may facilitate better environmental management at the local level, if it gives greater
power to those whose livelihoods are dependent upon the sustainable management of renewable natural
resources.
Land Policy (Ministry of Lands)
By proposing the change in land tenure system through titling land, the policy encourages environmental
protection by reducing degradation resulting from the “tragedy of the commons”. Land ownership with
titles promotes responsibility.
Health Policy (Ministry of Health)
The policy acknowledges that the prevalence of malaria, TB, other epidemics, sanitation and safe water
and reproductive and child health are all closely linked to environmental policy and management. It also
acknowledges the potential complementarities between better environmental management and improved
public health and the importance of wider linkages between health and the environment.
National Population Policy (Ministry of Finance and National Planning)
The National Population Policy was adopted in 1989. The Policy recognizes the need to integrate
population issues into development planning. The policy also acknowledges that reduced population
growth would in turn reduce pressure on the country’s renewable natural resources.
Education Policy (Ministry of Education)
The National Policy on Education also articulates the need for environmental health. It regards the role of
the school as an environmental health affirming and promoting institution for all pupils and the
communities.
Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) Policy (Ministry of Communications and
Transport)
One specific objective relates to support for the conservation of the environment and natural resources.
Gender Policy (Cabinet Office, Gender and Development Division)
The vision of the Government is to achieve full participation of both women and men in the development
process to ensure sustainable development and the attainment of equality and equity between the sexes.
The policy acknowledges the gender imbalance in the environment and natural resources sector, which
has impacted negatively on women. It aims to facilitate the involvement of women in decision making at
all levels in institutions dealing with the environment and natural resources.
National Housing Policy (Ministry of Local Government and Housing)
Specific objectives include “assisting the poor to acquire decent shelter through alleviation of their
affordability problems” and “fostering homes that are functional, healthy, aesthetically pleasant and
environmentally friendly”. The objectives are consistent with improving environmental conditions in
housing, especially for the poor, and the use of environmentally friendly technologies.
Transport Policy (Ministry of Communications and Transport)
The policy acknowledges that poorly designed transport and communication can damage the environment.
Agriculture Policy (Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives)
One of the strategies involves the conversion of customary land into large blocks of leasehold land, to
create large farms that will grow crops for export. Many of these farms will have out-grower schemes
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
137
attached. Implementation of the agricultural policy will strengthen land tenure, realizing land values,
protecting investments, and improving farmland management thereby reducing land degradation.
Fisheries Policy (Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives)
The proposed policy encourages sustainable fisheries management, and stakeholder participation
(especially the participation of local communities) in the capture fishery and aquaculture.
Tourism Policy (Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources)
This policy advocates for the support of environmentally sustainable tourism. This includes sustainable
waste disposal, eco-tourism, green packaging and recycling, water and energy conservation, integrated
environmental management, and social and environmental audits.
Mining Policy (Ministry of Mines and Minerals Development)
One specifically environmental policy objective is to reduce the danger of ecological damage arising from
mining operations as well as damage to the health of workers and inhabitants of the neighborhood through
air, water and land pollution.
Forestry Policy (Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources)
Seven of the 13specific policy objectives are directly relevant to Environment, namely:
1. To ensure the integrity, productivity and development potential of the forest reserves
(especially through the involvement of stakeholders);
2. To ensure adequate protection of forests by empowering local communities and promoting
the development and use of forest and non-timber forest products.
3. To ensure sustainable management of forest ecosystems and biodiversity application through
scientific and indigenous technical knowledge (through, inter alia, promoting the value of
forests for catchment protection, biodiversity and ecosystem goods and services).
4. To ensure sustainable management of forest resources for wood fuel production.
5. To recognize and support the development of non-wood forest products.
6. To regulate exploitation and ensure efficient use of forest resources and products.
7. To ensure gender equity in all aspects of forestry management, production and utilization of
forest products, extension training and education.
Energy Policy (Ministry of Energy and Water Development)
The policy aims “to promote optimum supply and utilization of energy, especially indigenous forms, to
facilitate the socio-economic development of the country and maintenance of a safe and healthy
environment”. However, the policy is seen as the main driver of woodland destruction nationally, for fuel
wood and charcoal production.
Water Policy (Ministry of Energy and Water Development)
The policy is consistent with the sustainable management of water resources and complements a National
Policy on Environment. The institutional and legal framework highlights the importance of EIA prior to
the implementation of any development project, and the application of other legislation, notably the
Environmental Protection and Pollution Control Act, for effective management of water quality.
Wetlands Policy (Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources)
The aim of the policy is twofold: firstly to ensure the wise use of wetlands and their resources, and
secondly, to create a comprehensive, stakeholder-based institutional and legal framework for their
management. Some of the specific objectives are:
To promote the integrity and natural productivity of wetland ecosystems and the maintenance of
their functions and values.
To conserve their biodiversity.
To promote international action of national interest for the conservation of wetlands.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
138
To provide training and strengthen the capacity of wetland conservation institutions.
Wildlife Policy (Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources)
The objectives include promoting the appreciation and sustainable use of wildlife resources by facilitating
the active participation of local communities in the management of the wildlife estate, promoting and
developing tourism, and enhancing the recognition of the economic value of wildlife resources. By doing
so, ZAWA contributes to the maintenance of Zambia’s rich biodiversity and to economic development of
the sector.
Biodiversity Policy (Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources)
Following ratification of the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1993, the Government prepared the
Biodiversity Policy of 1999. The Government’s mission is “to establish legal, policy and institutional
frameworks and mechanisms that promote the conservation, management and sustainable use of Zambia’s
biological resources and the equitable sharing of benefits from the use of these resources by all sectors of
the population”.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
139
ANNEX J – Current fertilizer distribution schemes and irrigation schemes in place in Zambia
Fertilizer distribution schemes
Currently, the GRZ employs two fertilizer distribution schemes to improve productivity and food security,
namely the Food Security Pack (FSP) Programme and the 50/50 Scheme. The FSP Programme has been
implemented by the NGO Programme Against Malnutrition (PAM). Since its inception in 2002, the FSP
Programme has targeted vulnerable130
but viable131
small-scale farming households who are selected by a
community committee132
. The programme promotes crop diversification and CF methods to optimise
agricultural output, and provides training in market entrepreneurship to enhance farmers’ sustainability.
The FSP provides selected candidates with a range of inputs, including fertilizer, lime and seeds (of
cereals, legumes and roots or tubers) appropriate to the target AER. Furthermore, the programme builds
capacity for developing seed/grain banks to improve seed availability and therefore food security.
Candidates pay back 50% of their harvest in kind to the programme, part of which is stored (the amount is
decided by the community and supported by facilitators) whilst the remainder is sold and the proceeds put
towards providing FSPs to additional farmers. In this way, the programme seeks to build community
capacity nation-wide (including instilling a sense of self-worth in productive farmers), encourage
sustainable farming techniques and eradicate the existing “dependency” syndrome133
. Furthermore, the
programme encourages participation in the Food-for-Work programme which is involved in developing
public infrastructure.
Using the 50/50 scheme, implemented in 2002, the GRZ subsidizes fertilizer and hybrid seed (maize only)
so that farmers need only pay 50% of the normal price134
. To participate in the scheme and receive the
subsidy, farmers are encouraged to make a 50% down payment during the first year and during the second
year they are eligible for a 25% subsidy. Candidate selection is undertaken by the District Agriculture
Committees (DAC), which are comprised of members of the private sector, GRZ and NGOs, and is
focused on farmers with market potential. However, government-provided agricultural inputs such as
those in the abovementioned schemes, although less expensive, have a tendency to arrive late and the
necessary amount is rarely delivered135
. Furthermore, obtaining fertilizer on credit is difficult and the
productivity of many farms in Zambia, particularly the small-scale farms, suffers as a result.
Irrigation schemes
In its irrigation policy and strategy the GRZ acknowledges that investment in irrigation is critical in order
to boost agricultural productivity and food security. As such, the National Irrigation Policy and Strategy
was introduced in 2004. In its strategic programmes, informal irrigation methods, including water
harvesting and the utilization of dambos, have been targeted together with rehabilitation of the few
existing irrigation schemes. Furthermore, the GRZ has embarked on an Irrigation Development Project
(IDP) which will run from 2009-2016 and will implement the National Irrigation Policy. The objective of
the IDP is to increase the agricultural incomes of smallholder farmers in selected development sites with a
high irrigation potential. The project, which is expected to cost US$50 million over a seven year period, is
being piloted in various districts of the Southern, Copperbelt, Lusaka and Central Provinces.
130
Vulnerable small-scale farming households include: i) households headed by women, children or terminally ill
persons; ii) households with disabled farmers; iii) orphanages/households supporting orphans; iv) households
farming on less than one hectare; or v) households with unemployed youths (PAM). 131
Viable households are those that include small-scale farmers with marketing potential. 132
The selection committee is comprised of extension workers, local council representatives, farmers, the chief and
NGO representatives. 133
Currently, a large number of rural Zambians are dependent on the government for food relief. 134
Jorgensen, S.L. & Loudjeva, Z. 2005. A Poverty and Social Impact Analysis of Three Reforms in Zambia: Land,
Fertilizer and Infrastructure. Social Development Papers. The World Bank. Social Analysis Paper No. 49. 135
Jorgensen, S.L. & Loudjeva, Z. 2005. A Poverty and Social Impact Analysis of Three Reforms in Zambia: Land,
Fertilizer and Infrastructure. Social Development Papers. The World Bank. Social Analysis Paper No. 49.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
140
ANNEX K – Kataba Community Fish Farming Initiative, Senanga District, Western Province
The Kataba Fish Farming Initiative was an initiative undertaken by the GRZ to reduce levels of poverty
among the communities within the Kataba area by encouraging them to generate an alternative source of
income through fish farming. The initiative commenced in 2007 as part of government community
extension programme spearheaded by the Department of Fisheries in the then Ministry of Agriculture,
Food and Fisheries. The initiative had no specific time frame and budget but was run on normal
government expenditure as a Poverty Reduction Programme. The initiative was developed following the
fish farming suitability assessment carried out in the area in early 2006 by the Department of Fisheries
and subsequent recommendation that fish farming be undertaken in the area.
The Department of Fisheries, working together with target communities, constructed a total of seven fish
production ponds in the plains of Kataba area. Upon completion, the fish production ponds were handed
over to communities for management and fish production. The Department of Fisheries only provided
technical backstopping services.
Currently, the Kataba fish farming initiative has come to halt due, presumably, to either management
problems or the adverse effects of natural events. The fish breeding ponds were not constructed but
instead the communities opted to bring in fingerlings from Mongu (40 km away from Kataba). This had
cost implications which the communities failed to manage. In addition, poor technical support led to
improperly designed ponds. For example, the embankments for some of the ponds were poorly
constructed and did not take into account the possibility of flooding. During one of the seasons, the
Kataba plains got flooded submerging the fish production ponds leading to loss of fish stock into the main
river system. In terms of backstopping, the District Office in some cases lacked financial resources to
provide backstopping as it is located 70km from Kataba. The communities are now on their own and only
one fish farmer has continued to produce fish but under very difficult conditions.
A number of lessons were learnt from the Kataba Fish Farming Initiative following its implementation
over the year among them were the following:
The cost of fish production increases with an increase with distance for transportation of
fingerlings;
Technical backstopping could be provided in time if a Fisheries Officer is based in the area or if
financial resource flow are consistent;
If ponds are constructed in low lying area like plains, the design of the embankments should
mitigate flood impacts or the fish production should such that harvesting is done well in advance
of the floods; and
Regular monitoring of fish stocks was critical for successful fish farming.
It is a felt need that the next project will take into account the lessons from the previous initiative.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
141
ANNEX L – List of people who attended the Draft Project Review Workshop on the 15th
July 2009
and the PAC meeting on 7 August 2009
Draft Project review Workshop – 15th
July 2009
NAME ORGANISATION DESIGNATION
1 Dr. Anthony Mills International Consultant
2 Bwalya Chendauka Forestry Department Principal Forestry Officer
3 Richard Bwalya MACO/ UNDP Project Manager
4 Bwendo Kabanda OXFAM Livelihood Coordinator
5 Esnart Makwakwa Disaster Management and Mitigation
Unit
Acting Analyst/ Programmer
6 Jacob Nkomoki ZMD Deputy Director
7 Ruth Tembo MACO District Agriculture Coordinator,
Mambwe
8 James Ngalamila MACO District Agriculture Officer,
Luangwa
9 John Lungu MACO Senior Agricultural Officer
10 Ernest Munthali MACO Senior Agricultural Officer
11 Oversease Mwangase ZMD Chief Meteorologist
12 Chulu Paul MACO Principal Agricultural Officer
13 Richard Konkola MACO Land Husbandry Officer
14 Valentine Michelo MACO Senior Land Husbandry Officer
15 Tibaire Emmanuel MTENR Environmental Advisor
16 Joyce Munkombwe MTENR Monitoring and Evaluation
Officer
17 Joyce Musiwa Zambia Rain Water Harvesting
Association
President
18 Assan Ngombe UNDP Programme Analyst
19 Simainga S MACO Provincial Agricultural
Coordinator
20 Matildah Kaliba PELUM Association Programme Officer
21 Muki Phiri MACO (NAIS) Principal Information Officer
22 Stubbs Malambo MACO (NAIS) Chief Agricultural Information
Officer
23 Kabinda O. MACO District Agricultural Coordinator
24 Mukelabai Mwangala MACO District Agricultural Officer
(Senanga)
25 Mwiya Makungu MACO District Agricultural Officer
(Shangonmbo)
26 Shadreck Mungalaba MACO Provincial Agricultural
Coordinator (Lusaka)
27 Joseph Kanyanga ZMD Chief Meteorologist
28 Rasford Kalamatila MACO Principal Agricultural Specialist
29 Moses Mwale MACO (ZARI) Deputy Director
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
142
Appraisal of a proposal on “Adaptation to effects of drought and climate change in Agro-
ecological Regions I and II”.
7 August 2009
Name Organisation E-mail
Esnart Makwakna DMMU [email protected]
Lenganji Sikaona DMMU [email protected]
Misael Kokwe FAO [email protected]
Rhoda M. Mwiinga GIDD [email protected]
Henry Sichembe MACO/DoA [email protected]
Mary M Chipili MACO/DoA [email protected]
Martin N Sishekanu MACO/DoA [email protected]
Maurice Muchinda Met. Dept. [email protected]
Reynolds Shula MTENR/CCFU [email protected]
Richard Bwalya Project manager [email protected]
Litumelo Mate Danish Embassy [email protected]
Winnie Musonda UNDP [email protected]
Georgina Fekete UNDP [email protected]
Samuli Leminen UNDP [email protected]
Anock Kapira UNDP [email protected]
1. A.Hussein MEWD, DWA [email protected]
Miyoba Mukengani WFP [email protected]
Alfred Daka WFP [email protected]
Allan Mulando WFP [email protected]
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
143
ANNEX M – National Agricultural Information Services budget breakdown for the dissemination
of lessons.
I. BROADCASTING SECTION
A. Eastern Province
Television Documentary and Radio (English) Costs
1. Field Allowances
Unit Cost (US$) Units
Total
(US$)
T.V Producer 57 10 570
Camera Man 57 10 570
Radio Producer 57 10 570
Driver 55 10 550
DAIOS X2 Officer 20 8 160
Total 2 420
2. Post Production
Unit Cost (US$) Units
Total
(US$)
Editor 10 5 50
Producer 10 5 50
Narrator 10 1 10
Total 110
3.1 Accessories Television
Unit Cost (US$) Units
Total
(US$)
Mini DVs 6 10 60
Batteries 4.2 1 4
DVDs 2 1 2
Total 66
3.2 Accessories Radio
Unit Cost (US$) Units
Total
(US$)
CDs 8 1 8
Audio Cassettes 9 1 9
Mini discs 16 1 16
Batteries size 9 1 9
Batteries 4.4 1 4
Total 46
4. Fuel costs 0
Fuel to all the sites (2220km) 370 1.2 444
TOTAL EASTERN 3 087
B. Lusaka Province
Television documentary and radio (English ) costs
Unit Cost (US$) Units
Total
(US$)
T.V Producer 57 10 570
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
144
Camera Man 57 10 570
Radio Producer 57 10 570
Driver 55 10 550
DAIOS X2 Officer 20 8 160
Total 2 420
2. Post Production
Editor 10 5 50
Producer 10 5 50
Narrator 10 1 10
Total 110
3.1 Accessories Television
Unit Cost (US$) Units
Total
(US$)
Mini DVs 6 10 60
Batteries 4.2 1 4
DVDs 2 1 2
Total 66
3.2 Accessories Radio
Unit Cost (US$) Units
Total
(US$)
CDs 8 1 8
Audio Cassettes 9 1 9
Mini discs 16 1 16
Batteries size 9 1 9
Batteries 4.4 1 4
Total 46
0
Fuel to all the sites (648km) 108 1.2 130
0
TOTAL LUSAKA 2 772
C. Southern Province
Radio Producers (X4)
Driver (X1)
4 Officers, 2 DAIOs
1. Crew Costs
UNIT COST QTY TOTAL
4 Radio Producers 228 10 2 280
Driver 55 10 550
Meal Allowances 10 8 80
Total 2 910
2. Accessories Radio
UNIT COST QTY TOTAL
CDs 8 2 16
Audio Cassettes 9 8 72
Mini discs 16 10 160
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
145
Batteries size 9 8 72
Batteries 4.4 8 35
Total 355
Fuel to all the sites (2614km) 436 1.2 523
0
TOTAL SOUTHERN 3 788
D. Western Province
4 Radio Producers
Driver
2 DAIOs and 2 Extension Officer
1. Crew Costs
ITEM UNIT COST QTY TOTAL
4 Radio Producers 228 10 2 280
Driver 55 10 550
Meal Allowances 10 8 80
Total 2 910
2. Accessories Radio
UNIT COST QTY TOTAL
CDs 8 2 16
Audio Cassettes 9 8 72
Mini discs 16 10 160
Batteries size 9 8 72
Batteries 4.4 8 35
Total 355
Fuel to all the sites (8338km) 1390 1.2 1 668
TOTAL WESTERN 4 933
TOTAL BROADCASTING
BUDGET 14 580
II. PUBLICATIONS AND PRESS SECTIONS
A. Publications
Activity Comment
Cost
(US$)
Climate Change Newsletter Design and Typesetting 200
Printing costs (1000 copies) 2 000
Training materials Booklets Design & type setting 200
Printing costs (US$2/
book) 400
Visual aids Design & type setting 100
Printing costs 600
Brochures/ booklets Design & type setting 60
Printing costs 600
DVD Production Cover design 100
Production costs 300
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
146
Production of posters Design and Typesetting 60
Printing costs (1000 copies) 800
Production of banners Design and Typesetting 60
Printing costs (1000 copies) 400
Translation Seven main local languages 700
TOTAL BUDGET 6 580
B. Press
Activity Comment
Cost
(US$)
News and Feature Stories Reporter @ US$57 for 5
nights 285
Feature stories (1 per month) 0
News story 0
TOTAL PRESS 285
TOTAL PUBLICATIONS 6 865
GRAND TOTAL NAIS 21 445
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
147
ANNEX N – Capacity assessment for project implementation
Title CAPACITY ASSESSMENT FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Unit Bureau for Development Policy – Capacity Development Group
Contributor(s) BDP/CDG, BOM/CBS Team, Management Practice Team
Date approved January 2008
Contact [email protected] [email protected]
Document
Location
Management Practice Document Repository
Project Management - Defining – Templates and Forms
Applicability
This checklist applies to Institutions considered to serve as Implementing Partner of UNDP-
funded projects. For NGO implementation, please use the CSO Capacity Assessment Tool
(see below).
Is Part of UNDP Programme & Operations Policies and Procedures – Project Management
Related documents
UNDP Programme & Operations Policies and Procedures – Project Management – Defining
a Project
UNDP Programme & Operations Policies and Procedures – Programme & Project
Management - Selecting an Implementing Partner
Capacity Assessment Practice Note
CSO Capacity Assessment Tool
Harmonized Approach to Cash Transfers to Implementing Partners (HACT)
Introduction
Potential Implementing Partners must have been identified during the CPAP preparation or during the
process “Justifying a Project”.
Through the process “Defining a Project”, these potential Implementing Partners must be assessed using
the checklist below in order validate the initial identification. The review shall also assist in identifying
capacities of an Implementing Partner with the objective of identifying those areas in need of
strengthening. Where deficiencies are noted, the assessment should include recommendations to address
them. These recommendations should be reflected in the project document through the identification of
required level of assurance and support services. In assessing the Implementing Partner, the following
capacities must be reviewed:
Managerial and technical
Administrative and financial
It must be noted that a more detailed assessment of financial management capacity must take place as part
of the Harmonized Approach to Cash Transfer. Conducted by the UNCT during programme preparation,
the purpose of this review is to assist in the identification of the most suitable modalities, procedures and
assurance activities by the Agencies for the transfer of cash to the Implementing Partner.
In addition, a UNDP framework and tool to assess the enabling environment/national level capacity can
be found under the Capacity Assessment Practice Note.
Responsibilities
It is the responsibility of the Project Developer to conduct the capacity assessment and to submit it to the
PAC along with the draft project document.
The PAC should review the capacity assessment to validate the selection of the Implementing Partner for
the project.
Project Title Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in agro-ecological zones I
and II
Name of the Institution Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MACO)
Date of assessment 07/08/2009
INDICATOR AREAS FOR
ASSESSMENT
APPLICABLE
DOCUMENTS/TOOLS
COMMENTS
PART I – REFERENCES AND PRELIMINARY CHECKS
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
148
1.1 History and Compliance with International Resolutions/Standards
1.1.1 History Date of creation and length in
existence Since 1964 ( over
45 years )
Has the institution gone
through a recent re-
organization/re-structuring?
Yes: three times
Annual Reports: Yes-
these are produced
annually
Media Kit Yes- these
are produced and used
by the National
Agriculture
Information Service
Website Yes but not
functional
The ministry been existence
for over 45 years and it is one
of the biggest ministries in
terms of budgetary allocation
and operations from national
to community levels. The
information on ministry can
be obtained from the website
but it is currently not active
1.1.2 United
Nations Security
Council 1267
No
Is the institution listed in any
reference list?
No
United Nations Security
Council 1267
Committee’s list of
terrorists and terrorist
financiers No
1.1.3 Certification Is the institution already
certified through
international standards?
No
ISO, Project
Management standard,
other standards
None
The ministry has staff that
have international
qualifications in agricultural
management and accounting
PART II. ASSESSING NATIONAL INSTITUTION CAPACITY FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT
2.1 Managerial Capacity
Ability to plan, monitor and coordinate activities
Planning,
Monitoring &
Evaluation
Does the institution produce
clear, internally consistent
proposals and intervention
frameworks, including
detailed workplans? Yes
Does the institution hold
regular programme or project
review meetings? Yes
Are there measurable
outputs/deliverables in the
defined project plans? Yes
Was the institution
previously exposed to UNDP
RBM approach/methodology
or equivalent in other donor
agencies? Yes
Well-designed project
and programme
documents Yes
Action Plans/Work plans
Yes
Log frame or equivalent
Project reports Yes
Evaluation reports Yes
Indicators available in
project plans Yes
Lessons-Learned reports
No
The ministry have experience
in donor funded projects.
However, there is limited
capacity in the area of lessons
learnt reporting
2.1.2 Reporting and
performance track
record
Does the institution monitor
progress against well defined
indicator and targets, and
evaluate its
programme/project
achievements? Yes
Does the institution report to
its stakeholders on a regular
basis? Yes
Reports to donors and
other stakeholders Yes
Reporting system Yes
The ministry has general
capacity in reporting and
performance based
management
2.2 Technical Capacity
2.2.1 Specialization Does the institution have the
technical skills required? Yes
Does the institution have the
knowledge needed? Yes
Does the institution keep
informed about the latest
techniques/
competencies/policies/trends
Publications on
activities, specific issues,
analytical articles,
policies No
Reports from
participation in
international, regional,
national or local
There is adequate capacity in
technical skills related to
agriculture management but
there is need to strengthen
capacities in areas of agro
meteorology
information/knowledge
management, forest and
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
149
in its area of expertise? Yes
Does the institution have the
skills and competencies that
complement those of UNDP?
Yes
meetings and
conferences Yes
Tools and methodologies
Partially
Evaluations and
assessments Partially
ecosystem management,
climate modelling, climate
change adaptation techniques,
policy and economic analysis
as well as in development of
appropriate tools and
methodologies for sustainable
livelihoods
2.2.2 Ability to
monitor the
technical aspects of
the project.
Does the institution have
access to relevant
information/resources and
experience? Partially
Does the institution have
useful contacts and
networks? Partially
Does the institution know
how to get baseline data,
develop indicators? Partially
Does it apply effective
approaches to reach its
targets (i.e participatory
methods)? Partially
Evaluations and
Assessments Partially
Methodologies/training
materials Partially
Use of toolkits,
indicators and
benchmarks/capacity-
development tools
Partially Databases Partially
The ministry’ capacity in
knowledge development and
management as well as
networking is limited
2.2.3 Human
Resources
Does the institution staff
possess adequate expertise
and experience? Partially
Does the institution use local
capacities
(financial/human/other
resources)? Partially
What is the institution
capacity to coordinate
between its main office and
decentralized
entities/branches (if
relevant)? Yes
Have staff been trained on
project management
methodology? Partially
Profile of staff, including
expertise and
professional experience
Staff turnover (Stable)
Chart of assignments of
roles and functions Yes
Reports on technical
experience from national
or international agencies
for operations and
capacity-building
Partially Individual certification
on project management
such as PRINCE2 No
The Depart of agriculture has
staff with MSc, BSc, Diplomas
and Certificates in agriculture,
environment and natural
resources, land and water
management. However,
capacity in project
management is limited.
Further the ministry is
decentralised from national to
camp level adequately
PART III. ASSESSING NATIONAL INSTITUTION CAPACITY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AND
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
3.1 Administrative capacity
Ability to provide adequate logistical support and infrastructure
3.1.1 Ability to
manage and
maintain
infrastructure and
equipment
Does the institution possess
logistical infrastructure and
equipment? Partially
Can the institution manage
and maintain equipment? No
Adequate logistical
infrastructure: office
facilities and space, basic
equipment, utilities
Partially Computer capability and
library materials
Partially Proper equipment for
area of specialization
Partially inventory to track
property and cost Yes
The capacity for asset
management is limited
3.1.2 Ability to
procure goods
Does the institution have the
ability to procure goods,
Standard contracts Yes
Examples of how The Ministry have adequate
capacity in procurement and
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
150
services and works
on a transparent and
competitive basis.
services and works on a
transparent and competitive
basis? Yes
Does the institution have
standard contracts or access
to legal counsel to ensure that
contracts meet performance
standards, protect UNDP and
the institution’s interests and
are enforceable? Yes – but in
part Does the institution have the
authority to enter into
contracts? Yes
procurement is done Yes
Written procedures for
identifying the
appropriate vendor,
obtaining the best price,
and issuing commitments
Yes
have a dedicated unit to carry
out this function which could
undertake the procurement
for project needs.
3.1.3 Ability to
recruit and manage
the best-qualified
personnel on a
transparent and
competitive basis.
Is the institution able to staff
the project and enter into
contract with personnel? Yes
Does the institution use
written job descriptions for
consultants or experts? Yes
Standard contracts Yes
Job descriptions Yes The ministry have job
descriptions for all staff
(technical and administrative
staff) and these are regularly
reviewed and updated to meet
current needs.
3.2 Financial Capacity
Ability to ensure appropriate management of funds
In addition to the following questions, see also the questionnaire provided in the Guidelines on Micro-assessment of
the Framework on Harmonized Approach for Cash Transfer (HACT):
http://www.undg.org/archive_docs/7110-Framework_for_Cash_Transfers_to_Implementing_Partners.doc
(ANNEX 3)
The assessment report is reviewed by the UN agencies to select the most suitable cash transfer modality, and
establish appropriate cash transfer procedures and assurance activities to be used with the Implementing Partner.
3.2.1 Financial
management and
funding resources
Is there a regular budget
cycle? Yes
Does the institution produce
programme and project
budgets? Yes
What is the maximum
amount of money the
institution has managed?
+USD$ 5 million Does the institution ensure
physical security of
advances, cash and records?
Yes Does the institution disburse
funds in a timely and
effective manner? No
Does the institution have
procedures on authority,
responsibility, monitoring
and accountability of
handling funds? Yes
Does the institution have a
record of financial stability
and reliability? N/A – It is a
core government institution
that depends on allocations
from treasury
Operating budgets and
financial reports Yes
List of core and non-core
donors and years of
funding Partially
Written procedures
ensuring clear records
for payable, receivables,
stock and inventory Yes
Reporting system that
tracks all commitments
and expenditures against
budgets by line Partially
The capacity in financial
management is generally
adequate as the ministry has
computer based management
system in place. However, on
assumption of the project
implementation HACT
assessment will be undertaken to
provide detail gaps that may
require addressing.
3.2.2. Accounting
System
Does the institution keep
good, accurate and
A bank account or bank
statements Yes The ministry has got an
accounting system but may
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
151
informative accounts?
Partially Does the institution have the
ability to ensure proper
financial recording and
reporting? Partially
Audited financial
statements Yes
Good, accurate and
informative accounting
system Partially
Written procedures for
processing payments to
control the risks through
segregation of duties,
and transaction recording
and reporting Yes but
requires reinforcement
require further support to
ensure accurate reporting on
real data
3.2.3. Knowledge
of UNDP financial
system
Does the institution have
staff familiar with Atlas
through External Access? No
External access provided
No
Need project staff to be
trained on UNDP accounting
systems
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
152
ANNEX O – LPAC Minutes
Appraisal of a proposal on “Adaptation to effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II”.
7 August 2009, UNDP Conference room – Record of discussion Welcome words by Georgina Fekete, the Deputy Country Director of UNDP. Encouraged the meeting to concentrate on substantive issues of the project proposal: clarity of objective, definition and appropriateness of results, management arrangements, project justification, realistic budget and risks. Presentation by Mr. Sishekanu, Chief Land Husbandry, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (to be distributed), including Background on Climate Change and Agriculture and Project interventions. Discussion chaired by A. Hussein, Director of Water Affairs Department, Ministry of Energy and Water Development:
1. Clarification on meaning of the issue of staff incentives in Mr. Sishekanu’s
presentation. Mean the necessary provisions for the working environment for
MACO provincial and district staff, including transport and allowances.
2. The roles and membership of the Project Technical Committee and
Secretariat to be defined, including the location of the project management
focal point in the Technical Committee.
3. WFP believes that collaboration would add value to the project, looking for
suitable entry point, suggested link with community resilience. Suggestion
welcomed by MACO.
4. Need to provide for TA needs during implementation. Technical support from
project collaborators, but also need for consultancies has been taken into
account in the budget.
5. Climate Change has different impact on women and men. Gender analysis
should be included in the situational analysis. Also in UNDAF there’s an
outcome to enhance food security in women headed households
6. Project sites should function as climate monitoring stations. Requested if rain
gauges procured by MACO may be used. Additionally need other equipment
and training for staff. Currently only 2 of the proposed districts have weather
stations. MACO and Met. Dept. collaborating on this. Also the role of Water
department in information management to be taken into account.
7. Document should be made clearer and more concise. Currently difficult to
follow and use of terminology is inconsistent. 18 page summary will be
developed, will address the user friendliness issue.
8. The appropriateness of the scope of the project in terms of the number of
small activities and sites is large. This makes the implementation costly and
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
153
targets hard to reach. UNDP suggests limiting the number of project sites and
consolidating activities. However, MACO explains that the conditions and
activities at sites are different and there is need to learn experiences even
from conditions where implementation will be difficult. Due to specificity of
sites, the lesson for up-scaling can be best applied locally. The proposed
sites are limited to a catchment or agricultural block, do not target whole
districts.
9. Risk aspect and analysis missing from the documented. Risks to include the
anticipated difficulties in implementation (e.g. in the most remote locations)
and cost of risks needs to be accounted for.
10. Selection of sites to be clarified in document. A balanced selection of Agro-
Ecological Regions I and II sites was not the objective, but to view the issue
from a catchment approach, regions being interlinked.
11. Innovative approaches needed for dissemination of lessons. The website to
be established will not reach rural areas.
12. Project Management arrangements should be agreed within MACO: will there
be a Project Management Unit or fully using existing MACO systems?
List of participants
Name Organisation E-mail
Esnart Makwakna
DMMU [email protected]
Lenganji Sikaona DMMU [email protected]
Misael Kokwe FAO [email protected]
Rhoda M. Mwiinga
GIDD [email protected]
Henry Sichembe MACO/DoA [email protected]
Mary M Chipili MACO/DoA [email protected]
Martin N Sishekanu
MACO/DoA [email protected]
Maurice Muchinda
Met. Dept. [email protected]
Reynolds Shula MTENR/CCFU [email protected]
Richard Bwalya Project manager [email protected]
Litumelo Mate Danish Embassy [email protected]
Winnie Musonda UNDP [email protected]
Georgina Fekete UNDP [email protected]
Samuli Leminen UNDP [email protected]
Anock Kapira UNDP [email protected] 2. A.Hussein MEWD, Water
aff. [email protected]
Miyoba WFP [email protected]
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
154
Mukengani
Alfred Daka WFP [email protected]
Allan Mulando WFP [email protected]
SIGNATURE PAGE
UNDAF Outcome 3: By 2010, institutions, systems and processes in support of national development
priorities strengthened.
UNDAF Outcome 4: By 2010, the proportion of food secure households increased from 35% to 75%.
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
155
UNDP Strategic Plan Environment and Sustainable Development Primary Outcome:
Strengthened capacity of developing countries to mainstream climate change adaptation
Policies into national development plans.
UNDP Strategic Plan Secondary Outcome: MDG-based national development strategies promote
growth and employment and reduce economic, gender and social inequalities.
Expected CP Outcome: Systems and processes and scenario planning for climate change adaptation
strengthened.
Expected CPAP Output 2: Systems and processes and scenario planning for climate change adaptation
strengthened.
Implementing Partner: Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives.
Responsible Parties:
On behalf of:
Signature Date Name/Title
UNDP
Viola Morgan
Country Director
UNDP Zambia
GRZ
……………………………….
…………………………….....
Ministry of Agriculture & Cooperatives
Adaptation to the effects of drought and climate change in Agro-ecological Regions I and II in Zambia
156