Ethiopia Sustainable Land Management Project

Public Disclosure Authorized
Document of
The World Bank
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Report No: ICR00004449
IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT

IDA-53180/TF15838/TF15868/TF15869
ON A CREDIT
FROM THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION

IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 32.6 MILLION
(US$50 MILLION EQUIVALENT)
AND A GRANT
FROM THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY TRUST FUND

IN THE AMOUNT OF US$8.33 MILLION
AND A GRANT
FROM THE LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES TRUST FUND

IN THE AMOUNT OF US$4.62 MILLION
AND A GRANT
FROM THE ETHIOPIA SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT PROJECT TRUST FUND

(NORWAY)
IN THE AMOUNT OF US$ 42.65 MILLION
TO
THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA
FOR A
SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT PROJECT
June 19, 2019
[This ICRR replaces the version published on July 8, 2019. Changes to results attributable to Phase 2 of
the Sustainable Land Management Project were made within this document.]
Environment and Natural Resources Global Practice

Africa Region
This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not
otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
(Exchange Rate Effective December 28, 2018)
Currency Unit = Ethiopian Birr (ETB)

ETB 27.7 = US$1
US$1.39= SDR 1
FISCAL YEAR
July 1 – June 30
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
BCR Borrower Completion Report

BoA Bureau of Agriculture
CALM Climate Action through Landscape Management
CPI Consumer Price Index
CRGE Climate Resilient Green Economy
CSA Climate-Smart Agriculture
CWT Community Watershed Team
EFA Economic and Financial Analysis
EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return
ENPV Economic Net Present Value
ESIF Ethiopia Strategic Investment Framework
ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework
FIRR Financial Internal Rate of Return
FNPV Financial Net Present Value
GEF Global Environment Facility
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GEO Global Environment Objective
GIZ German Development Agency (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale
Zusammenarbeit)
GoE Government of Ethiopia
GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism
GTP Growth and Transformation Plan
ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report
ISR Implementation Status and Results Report
KfW German Government Development Bank (Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau)
KWT Kebele Watershed Team
LDCF Least Developed Countries Fund
LUC Land Use/Land Cover
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MoA Ministry of Agriculture
MoFEC Ministry of Finance and Economic Cooperation
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MTR Midterm Review
NDVI Normalized Difference Vegetation Index
NPCU National Project Coordinating Unit
NPV Net Present Value
NRM Natural Resource Management
PAD Project Appraisal Document
PD Person-day
PDO Project Development Objective
PIF Policy and Investment Framework
PIM Project Implementation Manual
PRT Project Reporting Tool
PSU Project Support Unit
RLLP Resilient Landscapes and Livelihoods Project
RPF Resettlement Policy Framework
SAWAP Sahel and West Africa Program
SLM Sustainable Land Management
SLMP-1 Sustainable Land Management Project Phase-1
SLMP-2 Sustainable Land Management Project Phase-2
SMART Specific, Measurable, Attributable, Realistic, Timely
SNNPR Southern Nations, Nationalities, and People's Region
SSI Small-scale Irrigation
SWC Soil and Water Conservation
TA Technical Assistance
USLE Universal Soil Loss Equation
WLRC Water and Land Resource Centre
WoANR Woreda Office of Agriculture and Natural Resources
Regional Vice President: Hafez M. H. Ghanem
Country Director: Carolyn Turk
Senior Global Practice Director: Karin Erika Kemper
Practice Manager: Iain G. Shuker
Task Team Leader(s): Paul Jonathan Martin
ICR Main Contributor: Michael G. Carroll

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DATA SHEET .......................................................................................................................................1

I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ...................................................................5
A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL .........................................................................................................5
B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................8
II. OUTCOME ................................................................................................................................ 11
A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs ............................................................................................................ 11
B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) ...................................................................................... 12
C. EFFICIENCY ........................................................................................................................... 20
D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING .................................................................... 22
E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS ......................................................................................... 22
III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME............................................. 25
A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION ................................................................................... 25
B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................. 26
IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME ............... 27
A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) ............................................................ 27
B. ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARD, SOCIAL SAFEGUARD, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE .............. 29
C. BANK PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................... 32
D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME ....................................................................................... 33
V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................... 34
ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................................ 36
ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION ...................................... 53
ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................................ 56
ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 57
ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ................. 66
ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ............................................................................................... 70
ANNEX 7. MAP OF PROJECT AREAS ................................................................................................... 72
The World Bank
Sustainable Land Management Project (P133133)
DATA SHEET
BASIC INFORMATION
Product Information
Project ID Project Name
P133133 Sustainable Land Management Project
Country Financing Instrument
Ethiopia Investment Project Financing
Original EA Category Revised EA Category
Partial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)
Related Projects
Relationship Project Approval Product Line

Supplement P133410-Sustainable 22-Nov-2013 Global Environment Project
Land Management
Project
Organizations
Borrower Implementing Agency
Federal Ministry of Finance and Economic Coopration,

Ministry of Agriculture
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
Project Development Objective (PDO)
Original PDO
The Project's Development and Global Environment Objective is to reduce land degradation and improve land
productivity in selected watersheds in targeted regions in Ethiopia.
Page 1 of 72
The World Bank
FINANCING
Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$)

World Bank Financing
P133133 IDA-53180 50,000,000 50,000,000 45,847,030
P133133 TF-15838 40,000,000 38,519,084 38,448,341
P133410 TF-15869 4,629,000 4,629,000 4,629,000
P133410 TF-15868 8,333,000 8,333,000 8,333,000
Total 102,962,000 101,481,084 97,257,371
Non-World Bank Financing

0 0 0
Borrower/Recipient 2,000,000 0 0
NORWAY: Ministry of Foreign
42,650,000 0 0
Affairs
Total 44,650,000 0 0
Total Project Cost 147,612,000 101,481,084 97,257,371
KEY DATES
Project Approval Effectiveness MTR Review Original Closing Actual Closing

P133133 22-Nov-2013 07-Apr-2014 13-Dec-2016 07-Apr-2019 31-Dec-2018
RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING
Date(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions

09-Mar-2017 56.77 Change in Results Framework
Change in Components and Cost
Other Change(s)
03-Aug-2018 76.62 Change in Results Framework
Change in Loan Closing Date(s)
Page 2 of 72
The World Bank
KEY RATINGS
Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality

Satisfactory Satisfactory Substantial
RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs
Actual
No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Disbursements
(US$M)
01 16-Mar-2014 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0
02 03-Dec-2014 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 8.92
03 04-Jun-2015 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 23.83
04 03-Dec-2015 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 34.62
05 23-May-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 46.26
06 10-Nov-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 56.36
07 15-Feb-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 56.77
08 09-May-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 60.32
09 04-Dec-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 71.63
10 14-Jun-2018 Satisfactory Satisfactory 76.62
11 27-Dec-2018 Satisfactory Satisfactory 84.30
SECTORS AND THEMES
Sectors
Major Sector/Sector (%)
Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 100

Irrigation and Drainage 32
Public Administration - Agriculture, Fishing & Forestry 10
Other Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 58
Themes
Major Theme/ Theme (Level 2)/ Theme (Level 3) (%)
Page 3 of 72
The World Bank
Private Sector Development 100

Jobs 100
Urban and Rural Development 39

Rural Development 39
Land Administration and Management 39
Environment and Natural Resource Management 108

Climate change 65
Mitigation 18
Adaptation 47
Environmental policies and institutions 3
Water Resource Management 40

Water Institutions, Policies and Reform 40
ADM STAFF
Role At Approval At ICR
Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop Hafez M. H. Ghanem

Country Director: Guangzhe Chen Carolyn Turk
Senior Global Practice Director: Jamal Saghir Karin Erika Kemper

Practice Manager: Magdolna Lovei Iain G. Shuker
Edward Felix Dwumfour, Dinesh
Task Team Leader(s): Paul Jonathan Martin
Aryal, Stephen Danyo
ICR Contributing Author: Michael G. Carroll
Note: The original financing amount of US$147,612,000 shown in the Financial Table reflects the incorrect
(system) double entry of funding from the Norwegian Trust Fund (both as Bank financing –TF15838-- and non-
Bank financing). The correction of this error at restructuring does not imply any cancellation of Norwegian funding.
Page 4 of 72
The World Bank
I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES
A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL
Context
1. At appraisal, the Government of Ethiopia (GoE) was implementing its ambitious Growth and
Transformation Plan (GTP) (2010/11–-2014/15), which set a long-term goal of becoming a middle-
income country by 2023, prioritizing key sectors such as industry and agriculture as drivers of sustained
economic growth and job creation. At the time, agriculture was, and continues to be, one of the key
drivers of the economy representing 48 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and 85 percent of
export earnings. The sector is mainly structured around small-scale farmers and micro-enterprises,
which grow a variety of crops on 75 percent of cultivated areas. Their livelihoods are based on farming
within severely degraded landscapes, which experience ever increasing land productivity and water
supply limitations because of inadequate management of these essential elements for economic
growth, food security, and rural wealth-generation resources. According to appraisal estimates, this
unsustainable land management was responsible for 1–1.5 percent of national GDP loss per year. This
vulnerable situation was further aggravated by climate change-related factors. Other identified
challenges were poor cropland management practices, rapid depletion of vegetation cover,
unsustainable livestock grazing practices, and land tenure insecurity.
2. To address these complex and diverse constraints to sustainable development in rural areas, the
GoE implemented the Bank-financed SLMP-1 and joined the Sahel and West Africa Program (SAWAP), as
well as introduced, in addition to the Growth and Transformation Plan (GTP) and the Climate Resilient
Green Economy (CRGE) Strategy, a series of policies, strategies, investment plans, and institutional
reforms, such as the multiyear (2009–2023) Ethiopia Strategic Investment Framework (ESIF) for
Sustainable Land Management (SLM) and the Agricultural Sector Policy and Investment Framework
(PIF).
Theory of Change (Results Chain)
3. The previous Sustainable Land Management Project Phase-1 (SLMP-1, P107139) supported by
the World Bank was designed building on the proposals for actions of the ESIF and PIF policy
instruments. Implemented between 2008 and 2013, SLMP-1 introduced SLM practices in selected areas
of the country and achieved significant progress in rehabilitating previously uneconomical and
unproductive degraded areas within 45 critical watersheds situated in six regions, providing benefits to
an estimated 98,000 rural households.
4. The SLMP-2 operation continued addressing poor cropland management practices, rapid
depletion of vegetation cover, unsustainable livestock grazing practices and land tenure insecurity by
leveraging successful outcomes of SLMP-1 and expanding its watershed restoration, SLM and systematic
land adjudication activities; increasing the project geographical coverage to 135 watersheds; and
integrating new activities targeting land productivity, deforestation, and reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions.
Page 5 of 72
The World Bank
5. To successfully achieve these outcomes, a continuity of state policy on governmental

decentralization and implementation of GTP were necessary pre-requirements, in addition to sustained
investment in modernization and expansion of the agricultural sector backed by sustained economic
growth and the pursuit of a green, carbo-neutral economic model.
6. Complementing these core strategic activities aimed at reducing land degradation, the project
supported the adoption of practices aimed at improved livelihoods through land productivity
enhancement and increased incomes in stabilized landscapes, as well as securing land tenure by issuing
formal tenure certificates to landholders located in the 135 targeted watersheds. Furthermore, a
specific component of the project also focused on improving natural resource management (NRM)-
related knowledge management for all relevant stakeholders, including national and regional policy
makers and managers, field practitioners, and beneficiary communities.
Figure 1. Theory of Change
Page 6 of 72
The World Bank
Project Development Objectives (PDOs)
7. The Project Development Objective (PDO) and Global Environment Objective (GEO), as stated in
the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) and Financing Agreement, were to reduce land degradation and
improve land productivity in selected watersheds in targeted regions in Ethiopia.
Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators
8. The two project outcomes were to (a) reduce land degradation in selected watersheds in
targeted regions in Ethiopia and (b) improve land productivity in selected watersheds in targeted regions
in Ethiopia. The indicators shown in table 1 were used.
Table 1. List of Indicators

Outcome Supported Indicator Name
Reduce land degradation in selected Total incremental land area brought under sustainable and climate-
watersheds in targeted regions in Ethiopia smart/resilient land and water management practices (ha)
Total area restored or reforested/afforested on both individual and
communal land (ha)
Improve land productivity in selected Increase in the amount of biomass in the intervention areas (t/ha)
watersheds in targeted regions in Ethiopia
Components
9. The goal was to increase natural and economic wealth and increase resilience to climate change
on over 1.3 million ha of degraded communal and smallholder lands (almost 10 percent of the area
identified in the GTP-II as requiring SLM interventions) through implementation of an integrated
package of activities targeting 135 major watersheds by improving (a) management of natural resources
(soil and water conservation [SWC] structures, agroforestry, participatory forest management,
enclosures to reduce free grazing and allow assisted natural regeneration, small irrigation, water point
development, climate-smart technologies on household farmland, and land use planning); (b) land rights
through issuance of legal landholding certificates to 1 million people, including landless youth; and (c)
support to livelihoods.
10. Component 1: Integrated Watershed and Landscape Management (US$73.98 million at

appraisal/US$61.8 million actual). This component supported the participatory process of scaling up
and adoption of sustainable land and water management technologies and practices by smallholder
farmers and communities in the selected watersheds/woredas. It also supported activities to promote
and adopt low-carbon, climate-smart technologies and practices. Subcomponent 1.a, sustainable natural
resource management in public and communal lands, was implemented through a comprehensive
package of demand-driven soil and water management practices at the level of the watersheds.
Subcomponent 1.b consisted of homestead and farmland development, livelihood improvements, and
climate-smart agriculture (CSA) activities implemented in the 135 watersheds supported by the project.
11. Component 2: Institutional Strengthening, Capacity Development and Knowledge Generation,

and Management (US$16.54 million at appraisal/US$16.54 million actual). This component was
designed to complement the SWC activities under Component 1 by strengthening the
Page 7 of 72
The World Bank
institutions/stakeholders involved in the sustainable management of natural resources, including

national and regional governmental institutions, academia, the private sector, community leaders, and
smallholder farmers. Policy revision, capacity building and training, and value chain development
composed the scope of this component.
12. Component 3: Rural Land Administration, Certification, and Land Use (US$11.9 million at
appraisal/US$7.6 million actual). This component was aimed at enhancing the land tenure security of
smallholder farmers in the project area and the local land use planning at watersheds and villages
(kebeles) supported by the project. The activities financed within this component included surveys,
adjudications, and public awareness campaigns, resulting in provision of second-level landholding
certificates to the landholders in the watershed covered by the project. Another set of activities
corresponded to the creation of participatory land use planning on the territories of kebeles comprising
project watersheds.
13. Component 4: Project Management (US$4.45 million at appraisal/US$13,4 actual). This

component supported project coordination and management at national and regional level, monitoring
and evaluation, technical assistance (TA) for project implementation, and procurement of goods and
equipment for the national and regional public agencies involved in project implementation.
B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION
Revised PDOs and Outcome Targets
14. The PDO remained without modifications throughout the project implementation. However, the
project underwent two restructurings, which introduced important changes to key elements of the
project, including outcome indicators and targets, as well as financing.
Revised PDO Indicators
Table 2. Level 2 Restructuring - March 6, 2017

Original PDO Original New/Revised PDO New/Revi Comments/Rationale for Change
Level Results Target Level Results sed Target
Indicator Indicator
1. Total Baseline: Revised: Land area No Original indicator wording and the
incremental 300,000 with sustainable definition revised for clarity. End target
land area End target: landscape maintained, and interim targets
brought 910,000 management adjusted. Two sub-indicators added to
under practices (ha) clarify that individual and communal
sustainable lands are distinct and often receive
and climate-
different land management treatments.
smart/resilie
nt land
managemen
t practices
1.a n.a. n.a. New sub- Baseline: Sub-indicator introduced to provide
indicator: 304,588.7 specific measurement of project progress
Communal land End for communal land treated within the
Page 8 of 72
The World Bank

Indicator Indicator
area treated for target: project
degradation 679,551
(degraded
hillsides, gullies,
PFM, pastures)
(ha)
1.b n.a. n.a. New sub- Baseline: 0 Sub-indicator introduced to provide
indicator: End specific measurement of project progress
Individual target: for individual land treated within the
farmland area 230,449 project
treated for
productivity
improvements
(ha)
2. Total area of Baseline and Revised: Total Baseline: Original indicator revised slightly to add
restored or end target: land area of 36,194.9 the word “land” that was missing in the
reforested/a TBD through restored or End indicator wording, and to add the
fforested on baseline reforested/affores target: baseline and targets.
both survey during ted on both 112,238
individual first year of individual and
and the project communal land
communal
land
3. Increase in Baseline and Revised: Baseline: 0 This indicator was moved up from
the amount End target: Incremental End intermediate level since it is an impact
of biomass TBD through carbon dioxide target: level indicator more appropriate for the
in the baseline equivalent 8,855,167 PDO level. The indicator was also revised
intervention survey during accumulated in for clarity in wording and the definition
areas first year of the project area and to accommodate a more appropriate
the project (metric tons)
methodology for the project. Lastly,
baseline and targets are added.
3.a n.a. n.a. (New sub- Baseline: Sub-indicator a was originally a PDO
indicator moved n.a. indicator is now moved to be a sub-
from original 3) End indicator under the CO2 indicator (new
Biomass in the target: indicator 3). Like its parent CO2 indicator,
intervention areas 155.7 this sub-indicator was also slightly
(tons/ha) revised for clarity of wording and
definition. Baseline and targets are
added.
4. n.a. n.a. New: ‘Land area in Baseline: 0 Indicator added to improve
the targeted End measurement of changes in land
micro-watersheds target: productivity and land degradation as per
with vegetation 610,000 the PDO. The formulation of this
increase of at least indicator also provides a performance
Page 9 of 72
The World Bank

Indicator Indicator
4% compared to benchmark against which micro-
baseline (ha)’ watershed performance (the central unit
of interest in the project) can be
measured using remote sensing. Lastly,
the remote sensing methodology
provides an independent verification of
the physical treatments reported in
indicator. Together, the four PDO level
indicators provide an appropriate set of
metrics against which to track PDO
progress.
Note: NDVI = Normalized Difference Vegetation Index.
15. The second Level 2 restructuring only adjusted the target values of the indicators, without any
change in the description of indicators or the verification protocols.
Table 3. Level 2 Restructuring - August 2, 2018

PDO-level Indicators after Original Target New/Revised Target Comments/Rationale for
Restructuring 1 Change
1 Revised: Land area under Baseline: Baseline: 304,589 Adjustment of end target values
sustainable landscape 300,000 End target:874,281 to reflect project
management practices (ha) End target: implementation realities and
910,000 budgetary constraints
1.a Communal land area treated Baseline: Baseline: 304,588.7 Adjustment of end target values
for degradation (degraded 304,588.7 End target:657,428 to reflect more precisely project
hillsides, gullies, PFM, End implementation realities and
pastures) (ha) target:679,551 budgetary constraints
1.b Individual farmland area Baseline: 0 Baseline: 0 Adjustment of end target values
treated for productivity End target: End target: 216,853 to reflect more precisely project
improvements (ha) 230,449 implementation realities and
budgetary constraints
2 Total land area of restored or Baseline: Baseline: 36,194.9 Adjustment of end target values
reforested/ afforested on 36,194.9 End target: 107,836 to reflect more precisely project
both individual and End target: implementation realities and
communal land 112,238 budgetary constraints
3 Incremental carbon dioxide Baseline: 0 Baseline: 0 Adjustment of end target values
equivalent accumulated in End target: End target: to reflect more precisely project
the project area (metric tons) 8,855,167 8,332,712 implementation realities and
3.a Biomass in the intervention Baseline: n.a. Baseline: n.a. Adjustment of end target values
areas (tons/ha) End target:155.7 End target:155.7 to reflect more precisely project
implementation realities and
4 Land area in the targeted Baseline: 0 Baseline: 0 Adjustment of end target values
micro-watersheds with End End target:574,010 to reflect more precisely project
vegetation increase of at target:610,000 implementation realities and
Page 10 of 72
The World Bank
PDO-level Indicators after Original Target New/Revised Target Comments/Rationale for

Restructuring 1 Change
least 4% compared to budgetary constraints
baseline (ha)
Revised Components
16. The original components were not revised during project implementation.
Other Changes
17. The first restructuring was agreed during the December 2016 midterm review (MTR) mission to
proactively address the US$14 million financing gap from foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations
(both in the SDR and the Norwegian krone), combined with project disbursement and expenditure rates,
requiring the reallocation of funds between components. This restructuring resulted in the reallocation
of funds for reinforcing project management and the inclusion of one additional micro-watershed for
CSA-related interventions. The restructuring was formally requested by the Ministry of Finance and
Economic Cooperation (MoFEC) on February 10, 2017 and received the World Bank’s approval on March
9, 2017.
18. The second restructuring occurred following the request from MoFEC on March 27, 2018,
proposing that the closing date be advanced, and the project targets to be scaled down accordingly. As a
result, the closing date was brought forward from the original date of April 7, 2019 to December 31,
2018.
Rationale for Changes and Their Implication on the Original Theory of Change
19. The rationale for the two restructurings is stated above, i.e. improved clarity of indicators and
adjustments of targets because of financing gaps. The changes had no effect on the original ToC of the
project as the structure and direction remained unchanged.
II. OUTCOME
A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs
Assessment of Relevance of PDOs and Rating

Rating: High
20. The PDO was well aligned with the priorities of the GoE, the World Bank, and the GEF at
appraisal and completion. The project was expected to contribute to the achievement of the objectives
under Pillar Two -Enhancing resilience and reducing vulnerabilities - of the World Bank Group’s Country
Partnership Strategy (FY13–16) while leveraging gender and climate change-oriented cross-cutting
aspects through dedicated interventions. It was also consistent with the World Bank’s twin goals; its
regional strategy for Africa; and with the Biodiversity, Climate Change, and Land Degradation focal area
Page 11 of 72
The World Bank
strategies of the Global Environment Facility (GEF). The PDO became even more relevant at completion,
mainly because of its consistency with major GoE ongoing strategies.
21. At completion, the SLMP-2 objectives continued to be well aligned with the World Bank’s
Country Partnership Framework for FY17–21, specifically Focus Area 2: Building Resilience and
Inclusiveness. This focus area includes the objective of enhancing the management of natural resources
and climate risks through improved natural resources and forest management, scaling up the GoE’s SLM
Program, and addressing land tenure through the issuance of land use certificates. SLMP-2’s relevance is
demonstrated by the project’s contribution to the targets related to climate, forest, water, energy, and
land tenure defined by the GoE in the GTP-II, CRGE and the forthcoming GTP-III as well as to Ethiopia’s
commitment to the Bonn Challenge1 and TerrAfrica.2 SLMP-2 supported spatial-focused interventions to
promote environmentally sustainable and socially inclusive growth and contributed to strengthening of
environmental governance both in institutions and communities engaged in promoting improved and
resilient livelihoods.
22. In addition, agriculture continued to have a significant role in employment generation, food
security, and rural development in the country. Furthermore, the results and lessons learned from the
project were instrumental to the design of the recently approved follow-on World Bank-supported
operation, the Resilient Landscapes and Livelihoods Project (RLLP) (P163383) and the Climate Action
through Landscape Management (CALM) Program for Results (P170384), which are expected to both
consolidate and scale up the successes of SLMP-2 while complementing these achievements with a
stronger focus on community livelihoods, through innovations aimed at further sustaining project
benefits, and addressing systemic factors required for sustainable mainstreaming of SLM interventions
in agricultural policies and practices.
B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY)
23. Based on the successful results of SLMP-1, the GoE received credit and grant resources through
the World Bank from different development partners, including the Royal Norwegian Government, GEF,
and the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) for the implementation of the second phase of
Ethiopia’s SLMP-2 (2014–2018). SLMP-2 was implemented in 1,820 micro-watersheds located in 135
watersheds in 142 woredas/districts (including the 45 watersheds supported under SLMP-1), in the six
regional states comprising the Ethiopian Highlands (Amhara, Benishangul Gumuz, Gambela, Oromia,
Southern Nations Nationalities and People’s Region [SNNPR], and Tigray).
24. The coordinated implementation of the project’s three components contributed to the
achievement of the overall PDO and its contributing outcomes. Applying a highly decentralized
implementation structure, comprising national, regional, and local government officials, the number and
location of different SWC practices were determined through a participatory planning process, involving
the beneficiary communities in each micro-watershed, and predominantly implemented using
1 The Bonn Challenge is a global effort to bring 150 million hectares of deforested and degraded land into restoration by 2020
and 350 million hectares by 2030. See http://www.bonnchallenge.org/.
2 TerrAfrica is a NEPAD-led partnership (New Partnership for Africa's Development is an economic development program of the
African Union) present in 30 countries on the African continent that supports innovative solutions to sustain landscapes,
address land and water degradation and adapt to a changing climate. See http://terrafrica.org/.
Page 12 of 72
The World Bank
remunerated labor from community members. Estimated total community contribution was an
impressive 20.3 million person-days (PDs) with a cost of ETB 596 million (equivalent to US$27 million).
About 80 percent of this labor was required for SWC measures on farmland and communal land, while
11 percent was for homestead and livelihood development and 9 percent for community forest
management.
25. Vegetation cover, carbon sequestration, and moisture availability were considered key
parameters to determine improvements of ecological functions and agricultural productivity potential
throughout the targeted watersheds/landscapes. In the total area of 556,776 ha receiving SLM
interventions, the vegetation cover has increased by an average of 5.2 percent in the major watersheds
treated and about 5.4 million tCO2eq is estimated as accumulated, mainly resulting from land use
change following the promotion of agroforestry.
26. In addition, the increase in overall moisture availability was verified through the significant
number of naturally recharged springs throughout the project area, as well as the increased surface
water flow measurements registered in 10 representative pilot sites, where the average discharge flow
increased by 5.6 percent between 2017 and 2018.
27. In terms of beneficiaries, overall project interventions benefitted a total of 421,130 households,
equivalent to 76.5% of total households in the project area. The Borrower Completion Report (BCR),3
included a comprehensive survey on beneficiary perceptions conducted on a sample of 1,140
households (15 households in 76 different micro-watersheds) located in targeted watersheds across the
six regions. Beneficiary responses have considerably enriched the assessment of project outcomes by
incorporating the perception of beneficiaries. Specifically, regarding project contributions to land
degradation and productivity, survey results showed that over 75 percent of respondents were fully
satisfied with the introduction of SLM technologies both in farmland and communal areas, further
confirming the overall technical assessment of project efficacy through results and coverage.
Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome
Reduce Land Degradation in Selected Watersheds in Targeted Regions in Ethiopia
28. This outcome was substantially achieved throughout the project area. The core strategic goal of
the project was to address the key factors of land degradation by supporting the scaling up and
adoption of appropriate sustainable land and water management technologies and practices by
smallholder farmers and communities in the selected highly degraded watersheds in six regional states
of Ethiopia. The objective was expected to be achieved through the introduction of watershed
management practices tested and validated under SLMP-1 such as SWC structures, hillside area
closures, afforestation/reforestation, rehabilitation of degraded areas, and protection of ecologically
critical ecosystems. Suitable physical and biological interventions in each watershed (micro-watersheds
within a watershed) were identified based on the particular agroecological conditions (topography,
rainfall patterns, existing degradation levels, and so on) and included in a multiyear Watershed
Management Plan developed through a highly participatory process which provided opportunities for
3 SLMP-2 BCR - Centre for Development Research, December 2018.
Page 13 of 72
The World Bank
the entire communities to contribute to the development of the plan and subsequently provide their
labor for the implementation of the practices, using the procedures established in the existing
Community-based Participatory Watershed Development Guidelines developed by the Ministry of
Agriculture (MoA) and applied during the implementation of SLMP-1. The description of key outputs
contributing to the achievement of this outcome is provided in the following paragraphs.
29. The overall achievement of this outcome is mainly reflected by the estimated 861,364 ha of
cumulative total incremental land area (new area equivalent to 556,776 ha under this project) brought
under sustainable and climate-smart/resilient land management practices in the 1,820 micro-
watersheds within the targeted 135 critical watersheds targeted by the project. This achievement
represented 97.7 percent of the overall restructured PDO target (874,281 ha) of the project. This area
coverage resulted in an estimated 740,831 direct beneficiary households (including 201,987 female
headed households, equivalent to 28 percent of total beneficiaries), of which 360,205 were further
benefited by the issuance of land certificates. Beneficiary communities were fully engaged throughout
the planning and implementation process and, coordinated by the Community Watershed Teams (CWT)
continue to be actively involved in the management and maintenance of treated areas.
Communal Land Natural Resource Management
30. Using a combination of different proven SWC physical and biological structures appropriate to
local agroecological conditions, a total of 665,503 ha of communal land (of which 360,914 ha were new
areas and 304,589 ha were completed following partial interventions under SLMP-1) was treated by
SLMP-2 in the 135 watersheds comprising the project area (representing full achievement over the
projected target). This output strongly contributed not only to the project outcome of reducing land
degradation but also to the objective of improving land productivity in the treated watersheds. Most
relevant practices supported under this output include erosion control and water retention physical
structures, generally combined with biological measures, degraded hillside rehabilitation through
community-enforced area closures (ban on grazing of community livestock), forest enrichment, and
communal pastureland improvement. As a result of the interventions supported, pilot measurements
conducted in a sample of watersheds show that soil erosion and water runoff were considerably
reduced, resulting in clear evidence of increased moisture retention and surface and groundwater
availability.
Table 4. Physical NRM Measures on Communal Land

% of
No. Practice/Structure Unit Achievement
Target
1. Hillside terrace construction km 15,354.7 94.8
2. Hillside terrace + trench construction km 6,490.7 110.1
3. Bench terrace construction km 4,178.4 93.6
4. Water collection trench construction number 1,596,989.6 91.2
5. Deep trench construction km 7,677.0 54.6
6. Micro-basin construction number 1,470,951.0 79.9
7. Eyebrow basin construction (EB) number 494,265.0 83.0
8. Percolation pit construction number 25,390.0 67.6
9. Percolation pond construction number 2,963.0 81.3
10. Stone paved waterway construction m3 112,008.0 79.7
Page 14 of 72
The World Bank
% of
No. Practice/Structure Unit Achievement
Target
11. Grassed waterway construction m3 154,936.8 72.7
12. Cutoff drain construction m3 379,865.0 85.7
13. Terrace maintenance (free community labor) km 13,149.0 29.7
14. Pitting for seedling planting number 66,659,346.0 115.1
Table 5 Biological NRM Measures on Communal Land
No. Biological Practice Unit Achievement % of Target
1. Hillside/degraded area closure ha 28,770.4 98.5
2. Grass planting on terraces km 34,129.0 92.1
3. Forage tree seedling planting along terraces km 11,029.3 41.8
4. Forage sowing along terraces (Sesbania spp.) km 9,389.9 91.8
5. Tree and shrub planting number 79,267,352.0 115.1
Gully Rehabilitation
31. In addition to reducing the risk of gully formation because of hillside SWC measures, the
rehabilitation of existing gullies represented one of the most successful interventions supported by the
project. Stabilization of gullies not only eliminated the considerable loss of crops and livestock due to
water runoff during periods of heavy rains but also became a valuable source of forage, which was
instrumental to support (a) the reduction of livestock grazing in degraded communal lands and (b) the
option for beneficiary households to fatten their cattle as a significant additional source of income (see
para 43). Through reshaping simple physical structures (check dams and water treatment trenches) and
biological revegetation (assisted natural regeneration or planting of forage and fruit species), a total of
5,470.6 ha of gully areas were treated (101 percent of target), of which 2,981.7 ha (74 percent of target)
were fully stabilized and transformed into productive land by the end of the project. In terms of
beneficiaries of this output, a total of 43,637 households (of which 8,514 were female-headed
households) directly benefited from using the restored gully areas for fodder and fruit production.
Community Forest and Pastureland Management
32. Based on the communal land use plans developed in each micro-watershed, community forest
and pastureland management activities were implemented, focusing on improving existing management
practices, promoting improved forage production, afforestation, and reforestation activities, as well as
forest degradation reduction measures. As a result, the total area delineated and demarcated for forest
management was 15,968.4 ha, or 82.16 percent of the original target, benefiting about 71,580
households. About 22 percent of the households were female headed. In addition, 4,523.9 ha of
pastureland (80 percent of total) were improved and 10,049.9 (57.0 percent) ha of land were planted
with bamboo species.
Nursery Establishment/Strengthening and Planting Material Production
33. The project supported the establishment and management of 1,515 nursery sites in all
watersheds of the six regional states using centrally and community-managed facilities. In the nurseries
established, about 288 million seedlings of different species were produced, which represents 108
Page 15 of 72
The World Bank
percent of the target. Of these, more than 43.7 million tree seedlings were planted on individual
woodlots to serve as a source of firewood, feed, and construction material to beneficiary households.
34. The full achievement of the outcome to Reduce Land Degradation in Selected Watersheds in
Targeted Regions in Ethiopia was largely the result of the outputs achieved through the soil and water
management activities implemented in each of the targeted watersheds under Component 1. However,
such level of achievement was also largely supported by the major contribution made regarding
improved policies and knowledge management under Component 2, as well as the improvements in
land tenure security financed by Component 3, as described under the assessment of the second
outcome.
Improve Land Productivity in Selected Watersheds in Targeted Regions in Ethiopia
35. This outcome was substantially achieved through the combined results of the key interventions
described in the following paragraphs, including SLM practices on watershed farmland (195,861 ha),
improved crop and livestock management practices, development of land use plans and provision of
land certificates.
Community Infrastructure Development
36. The scope of community infrastructure development in SLMP-2 included water-related

infrastructure for both small-scale irrigation (SSI) and water supply for household consumption
community road improvement and maintenance.
37. Regarding improved access and use of water, different technologies were implemented
depending on the types of water resource in the area and the level of moisture retention achieved. This
included the recharging of 452 springs and the construction of 351 hand-dug wells, as well as 192
community ponds and 457 household ponds that were constructed for rainfall harvesting for human and
livestock use. In terms of SSI, using different collection structures such as diversion of surface water or
springs, mechanized lifting using pumps, and harvesting runoff water, a total of 803 different irrigation
schemes were planned and implemented, benefiting about 4,600 ha (116 percent of target) of land
within 20,726 farms (45,916 beneficiaries), as shown in table 6.
Table 6. Summary of SSI Development Activities

Beneficiaries
Estimated
Area (ha)
Achieved
Achieved
Irrigable
Planned
Male Female Total

Unit
SSI Development
%
Numb 83 60 72.3
SSI feasibility studies
er
Diversion weir, diversion canal, Numb 136 127 93.0 2,585.81 546 731 1,277
spring for irrigation er
Hand-dug well, shallow well, rope Numb 1,358 957 70.5 560.53 11,902 1,744 13,646
washer construction for SSI er
Household pond, motor pump Numb 1,104 970 88.0 1,453.18 19,474 11,359 30,833
and treadle pump for irrigation er
Page 16 of 72
The World Bank
Beneficiaries
Estimated
Area (ha)
Achieved
Achieved
Irrigable
Planned
Male Female Total
Unit
SSI Development
%
Ha 4,474 4,600 102.5 4,600.00 30,375 15,541 45,916
Total Irrigable land
38. In addition, the project carried out improvement of feeder roads which provided improved
access to communities in 603 micro-watersheds, achieving about 98 percent of the planned target. This
required the improvement of 1,134 km of feeder roads (including the construction of 225 fords and 81
culverts), as well as the maintenance of 582 km of deteriorated roads.
Farmland Soil and Water Conservation
39. Depending on topography (i.e., slope), farmland treatment was part of the overall objective of
reducing land degradation in the micro-watershed and would comprise a series of interventions aimed
at improving farmland productivity, generally implemented once the overall landscape in the micro-
watershed (mainly hillsides and upper catchments) was stabilized. During the project period, farmland
treated using physical SWC measures totaled 137,155 ha, of which 83,655 ha also included biological
SWC measures. The total number of beneficiaries from farmland treatment was 363,475 households,
equivalent to 99 percent of the target, (of which 26 percent were female-headed households). These
beneficiaries also account for 66 percent of the total households in the 135 watersheds treated by the
project.
Homestead and Livelihood Development
40. Support to homestead and livelihood development included provision of productive inputs, as
well as the promotion of CSA practices through a pilot initiative implemented in 70 selected micro-
watersheds located in 30 watersheds where SLM interventions had covered a minimum of 70 percent of
the degraded area. Using a comprehensive CSA field manual, developed with procurement-related
delays that reduced the expected coverage, inputs and training were provided for soil fertility
improvement and higher-value crop production, including improved tillage, moisture and soil
management, farmer selection of indigenous varieties (supported by Bioversity International), as well as
forage/livestock management. An estimated 37,225 ha of farmland received technical and financial
assistance to adopt conservation agriculture practices, benefitting a total of 150,579 households, of
which 21 percent were female-headed households.
41. The CSA field manual included specific information related to the main technologies to be
promoted. CSA practices were clustered under five activity packages:
• Conservation agriculture (minimum tillage with mulch, intercropping and crop rotation)
• Agroforestry (around and within farmland and introduction of fruit trees)
• Cover crop and residue management
• Composting
• Improved forage management
Page 17 of 72
The World Bank
42. In addition to those benefiting from conservation agriculture practices, the CSA pilot provided
training to over 15,000 farmers and incorporated about 9,517 ha of land adopting CSA practices such as
green manuring/cover crops, while 56,622 ha were treated with compost and 7,312 ha with
agroforestry practices. Furthermore, 132 demonstration plots were established in farmer training
centers and lead farmer fields. Despite the short period of implementation, the results obtained
demonstrate that the level of overall watershed resilience to climate variability built through the SLM
physical and biological interventions is further enhanced at the farm level by the implementation of CSA
practices. This sequenced complementarity further contributed to the sustainable improvement of
household livelihoods.
43. The CSA pilot provided valuable experiences for scaling up CSA practices in the recently
approved RLLP. The new World Bank-financed operation will not only support implementation of CSA
practices at the landscape level but will also play a broader role of promoting the systemic
understanding and adoption of CSA practices by the extension system at a national level through the
establishment of a series of knowledge management activities to be supported by a consortium of
national and international research organizations, representing the community of CSA practitioners
active in Ethiopia.
Promotion of Backyard Livestock Farming (free grazing ban)
44. As one of the prerequisites to promote the adoption and sustainability of SLM practices and for
the selection of micro-watersheds for piloting the climate-smart agriculture subcomponent (discussed
above), banning of free grazing was one of the major activities implemented by the project, with major
focus on fodder/forage production, cattle fattening and breed improvement, as well as poultry
promotion. Through this output, a total of 63,830 households enjoyed social and financial benefits from
improved livestock management (achieving 84.7 percent of the originally planned target). Moreover,
about 10 percent of the households in the project areas have reportedly started using cut-and-carry
practices for backyard livestock management, while 55,123 households adopted the cut-and-carry
feeding system using forage from either area closures or rehabilitated gullies. In addition, 18,088
households benefited from breed improvement through access to bull services.
Participatory Local Land Use Planning
45. The absence of adequate land use planning policies in Ethiopia has contributed to poor
management of natural resources, which in turn resulted in soil degradation, deforestation, and
decreased land productivity, all of which increased the level of food insecurity.
46. To address these constraints and contribute to increasing the impact and sustainability of field
interventions, the project supported the preparation of participatory local land use plans in 545 kebeles
(an achievement of 100 percent of original target and 107 percent of revised target) within the target
watersheds with the objective of encouraging local decision making on the best use of the land and its
resources. To facilitate the process, public awareness and information dissemination on the benefits of
local land use planning was conducted for the local community and for kebele land use planning
committee members. In all kebeles, local land use plans were approved by community representatives
and planning decisions are now documented. Field assessments conducted as part of the Borrower
Page 18 of 72
The World Bank
Completion Report (BCR), prepared by a consultant retained by the borrower, determined that in all
kebeles where land use planning has been fully implemented, rapid improvements have been reported,
including rehabilitation of degraded lands, as well as increases in forest cover and water sources.
Apiculture Promotion
47. Apiculture was promoted both as a source of income for improved livelihoods as well as an
instrument to improve the environmentally sustainable utilization of rehabilitated communal lands. This
output benefitted a total of 10,836 households, of which 20 percent were female headed. Total
production amounted to 209,712.5 kg of honey and 11,893.3 kg of wax.
Land Certification
48. Systematic land adjudication in project watersheds contributed significantly to the achievement
of both PDO outcomes. With respect to land tenure, the number of beneficiary farmers with a sense of
tenure security increased, as over 360,205 households in the project area received second-level
certificates, of which 105,144 were women who received the certificates either individually or jointly
with a man. Moreover, 9,661 landless youth (of which 27 percent were women) were issued second-
level certificates or other legal documentation to use communal landholdings in exchange for restoring
2,737 ha of land.
49. Through interviews with beneficiaries, the BCR confirmed that land registration and certification
has contributed to develop landholder confidence on the security of land tenure on their land, which is a
basis of sustainable and productive use enabled by a greater willingness to invest into productive assets
and infrastructure. Moreover, landholders also reported satisfaction with the transparency of
adjudication procedures and the participatory approach used in every step of the adjudication process.
50. Additional positive effects reported by the BCR are:
• Decrease of number of land disputes, especially for boundaries-related cases witnessed by

74 percent of interviewed woreda court;
• Increase in confidence to make land rentals expressed by 53 percent of beneficiaries; and
• Increase in land tax recovery rate confirmed by 57 percent of woreda revenue offices,
without additional land tax rate per hectare following land adjudication activities. For
example, the Raya Azebo woreda revenue office in Tigray reported that land tax collection
has almost doubled from ETB 300,000 to ETB 589,000 after certification.
51. However, it was noted that the administrative capacity to diligently and efficiently expedite its
duties for land administration business area needs to be improved as most of investments went into
land adjudication and public awareness activities and only marginally to improve systemic shortcomings
of land offices at different levels such as information technology infrastructure, security of premises,
improvement of service delivery, and accountability and digitization of the records.
Page 19 of 72
The World Bank
GEF Contribution to the Achievement of Project Outcomes
52. The GEF funding was fully mainstreamed into project implementation, as the GEO and PDO
were identical. As such, SLMP-2 was consistent with the GEF’s biodiversity, climate change, and land
degradation focal area strategies. However, specific contributions from the GEF’s include the support to
sustainable forest management and adaptation strategies through (a) reforestation of over 80,000 ha of
degraded land; (b) distribution of efficient cookstoves to minimize forest degradation from collection of
fuelwood; (c) adoption of participatory forest management avoiding deforestation and forest
degradation in over 30,000 ha of natural vegetation areas which were closed as community
conservation areas for assisted natural regeneration and ecosystem service improvement; and (d) about
16,000 ha of forest improved through enrichment planting with indigenous species, with 9,500 ha of
woodlots established for fuelwood production, aimed at decreasing pressure on natural forests.
Justification of Overall Efficacy Rating
53. Rating. The project almost fully achieved its objectives. Based on the quantitative and
qualitative assessment of project outcomes and outputs, the efficacy rating for SLMP-2 is Substantial.
54. The efficacy rating is justified by many factors, including the satisfactory coverage and scope of
interventions at the field level and the strategy applied to sustainably sequence landscape stabilization
techniques with livelihood improvement practices.
55.
C. EFFICIENCY
Assessment of Efficiency and Rating
56. Rating. Based on a quantitative analysis, the efficiency rating for SLMP-2 is Substantial.
57. The analysis conducted at appraisal on a sample of 28 percent of watersheds and 56 percent of
project costs showed that the proposed interventions were economically and financially feasible. The
estimated benefits of the SLM component had a net present value (NPV) equivalent to US$1.67 million
(ETB 31.6 million) at a discount rate of 12 percent and a potential economic rate of return (ERR) of 24
percent over a 25-year period. Using the methodology used at appraisal, the scope of the analysis was
limited to quantifying incremental net benefits on cultivated land but expanded to 91 percent of the
watersheds and 100 percent of project costs. The impact on other types of land and beneficiaries are
acknowledged in the qualitative analysis. Details of the analysis are included in annex 4.
58. The quantifiable benefit streams were estimated using project-based data, and as presented in
the subsequent sections, the benefits outweighed the costs. The main limitation to this analysis was that
there were several activities in each component whose benefit streams could not be quantified ex ante;
hence, non-quantifiable benefits of these components are also discussed.
59. Project efficiency is assessed using a 25-year cost-benefit model with a financial discount rate of
12 percent and economic discount rate of 10 percent. The estimated financial and economic rates of
Page 20 of 72
The World Bank
return resulting from the ex post analysis is 21 percent and 23 percent, respectively, indicating that
SLMP-2 is a viable project investment. The economic net present value (ENPV) is US$150 million or US$6
million per year. With a 5 percent discount rate, this increases to US$355 million or US$14 million per
year. Most of the costs accrue from the investment (50 percent) and land lost to SWC structures (32
percent) with the remainder attributed to annual maintenance costs and variable costs for improved
fodder production on bunds and through intercropping. Most of the benefits accrue from increased
productivity (60 percent) and avoided soil loss (31 percent) with the remainder attributed to improved
fodder production on bunds and through intercropping.
60. The estimated rates of returns are comparable to the SLMP-2 PAD and BCR—all in the 19–26
percent range. While the current analysis includes 91 percent of the targeted watersheds and 100
percent of the costs, the PAD analysis included 28 percent of the watersheds and 55 percent of the
costs. The BCR estimated financial returns on a representative farm.
61. A sensitivity analysis highlights that the results are quite robust as only more extreme
assumptions lead to a nonviable investment. The 2.1 ETB per ton value of soil affects many of the cost
and benefit flows in the analysis and a 1.0 percent decrease in soil value can lead to a 1.3 percent
decrease in ENPV. Even with the conservative estimate from the PAD (ETB 0.79 per ton), the project
remains viable with an economic internal rate of return (EIRR) of 14 percent. If the estimated soil loss in
the ‘without project’ situation is 5 percent lower, the ENPV can fall by 3 percent but still with an EIRR of
23 percent. A 1.0 percent reduction in productivity increase can lead to a 1.1 percent reduction in ENPV.
In a more extreme case where beneficiaries are unable to achieve any of the assumed 10 percent
productivity gains, the project would no longer be financially viable, with an EIRR of 7 percent.
62. The captured net benefits are dependent on adequate future maintenance of the SWC
structures and capacity building for farmers to achieve the expected productivity gains. Benefits from
non-quantified project achievements include: (i) Rehabilitation of degraded communal lands; (ii) Using
local labor during implementation; (iii) Development of irrigation and road infrastructure: (iv) Supporting
improved food and income diversification; (v) Promoting cut-and-carry livestock feeding system; (vi)
Strengthening local institutions and beneficiary groups,; (vii) Strengthening tenure security that
motivates adoption of improved management practices; and (viii) Providing a net carbon sink due to
land use changes.
63. Implementation efficiency. The project design and implementation displayed a series of
elements that led to an overall high implementation efficiency. This is primarily reflected in the financial
absorption rate, which showed uniform disbursement rates throughout the life of the project, and the
fact that project funds were fully used. Project restructuring contributed to ensure financial efficiency,
as the original funds allocated by Norway were adjusted to reflect the devaluation of the Norwegian
krone during the life of the project while implementation targets were adjusted accordingly. On the
other hand, project implementation displayed a series of features which contributed to overall efficiency
by reducing overall costs, such as the predominant use of beneficiary labor for the construction of
physical SLM measures and community infrastructure, and the massive engagement of government
officials at the national, regional, and local levels to perform most technical support functions. In
addition to the intensive training provided by the project to government officials, this efficient
implementation mechanism was also possible because of the partnership of the German Development
Agency (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, GIZ) with MoA in support of the SLM
Page 21 of 72
The World Bank
platform, which was instrumental to provide technical backstopping in key activities such as the
preparation of Watershed Management Plans and the contribution to the elaboration and operation of
the M&E system. Actual project management costs appear to be relatively high, representing 13.5
percent of total costs, although this was the result of the decision to centralize procurement of vehicles,
goods and services for all regions, including the higher costs of implementing the revised M&E system.
In addition, the project experienced some procurement-related inefficiencies, including the difficulties
faced in the preparation of the CSA field manual, which was a key factor in the delayed initiation and
consequent limited coverage of CSA interventions.
D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING

Rating: Satisfactory
64. This overall outcome rating is based on the High rating allocated to the relevance of the PDO,
the Substantial efficacy of reaching intended results, and the Substantial efficiency achieved by the
project, which was within reasonable limits of error to the estimates made at appraisal. The relevance of
the PDO is further demonstrated by the decision of the GoE to pursue the further expansion and
upscaling of SLMP-2 interventions through the RLLP and CALM operations.
E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS
Gender
65. Women’s participation and equitable benefit sharing was prioritized as one of the key elements
of the project’s sustainable development. Based on this, efforts were made to promote the participation
of women in different decision-making bodies responsible for the planning and implementation of the
project. Data summarized in table 7 show that, on average (across all project regions), women
represented 17.6 percent of members of Woreda Technical Committees (WTCs), 26.0 percent of
members of Kebele Watershed Teams (KWTs), and 32.3 percent of members of Community Watershed
Teams (CWTs).
Table 7. Proportion of Female Members in WTCs, KWTs, and CWTs
WTC KWT CWT

Proportion
Proportion
Proportion
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Region
Male
Male
Male
Total
Total
Total
Tigray 265 78 343 23 1,110 709 1,819 39 3,122 2,369 5,491 43

Benishangul
110 10 120 8 625 180 805 22 981 646 1,627 40
/Gumuz
SNNPR 470 89 559 16 2,725 680 3,405 21 1,476 825 2,301 36
Oromia 295 85 380 22 920 400 1,320 30 3,412 888 4,300 21
Gambela 61 34 95 36 474 124 598 21 514 252 766 33
Amhara 384 42 426 10 1,018 345 1,363 25 2,952 982 3,934 25
Page 22 of 72
The World Bank
WTC KWT CWT
Proportion
Proportion
Proportion
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Region
Male
Male
Male
Total
Total
Total
Total 1,585 338 1,923 17.6 6,872 2,438 9,310 26.0 12,457 5,962 18,419 32.3
66. In addition, the project supported numerous activities which improved overall living conditions
of beneficiary households, in particular by reducing women’s workload. Improved fuel-saving
cookstoves were provided to 63,128 households which benefited from reduced firewood collection
required for cooking, the time and energy needed for food preparation, and diminished indoor air
pollution. Because of the combination of moisture-retention practices and complementary
infrastructure, water availability in the watersheds increased and also resulted in significant benefits for
women. This included 452 recharged springs and 350 hand-dug wells, as well as 192 community ponds
and 457 household ponds. Project reports also showed that improvement of feeder roads simplified
ambulance and public transportation access to the villages as well as women’s travel to markets and
health and social services.
Institutional Strengthening
67. The project provided a comprehensive package of capacity-building resources that strengthened
the technical and administrative capacity of institutions at all levels of the implementation structure.
This included equipment and training to public officials at the national, regional, and local (woreda and
kebele) levels, as well as training and TA to community members in all project watersheds. At the local
level, this was further achieved by the support provided for the establishment of 2,876 formal
community-based institutions and 81 fully equipped woreda information centers.
68. The SLMP-2 achievements were highly dependent on training to public officials through the
different SLM platforms. The training model was based on cascading knowledge and information from
the Project Support Units (PSU) or the regional Bureaus of Agriculture (BoAs) down to the zonal level, to
the woreda, the kebele, and finally to the community or micro-watershed level. Technical experts at the
BoAs and the woredas were the recipients of training that was generally provided by GIZ as its
contribution to the overall SLM Program. The annual training plan included a wide range of training
programs on technical soil and water management and agriculture-related topics as well as general
methodology training. The training plan would be approved each year by the regional BoAs, while the
trainers were selected from among GIZ experts at the regional and zonal levels, university experts, and
independent consultants.
69. National and regional institutions were also strengthened by the project’s participation in GEF-
supported regional initiatives such as the Sahel and West Africa Program (SAWAP) and the TerrAfrica
partnership. Specifically, as a child project of the SAWAP, SLMP-2 benefitted both in visibility as part of
regreening the Great Green Wall Initiative and through learning and regional exchanges with 12
countries and projects participating in the SAWAP. The project also received support from the World
Bank-GEF-TerrAfrica partnership, through valuable communication and knowledge products shared
Page 23 of 72
The World Bank
between 23 African countries, which emphasized the growing challenges of land degradation and
focused attention on landscape management through the adoption of SLM practices.
70. In addition, the project contributed to improving policies and institutional strengthening of the
NRM structure of Ethiopia through the development of 16 important strategic, technical, and
operational knowledge management products (listed in annex 1.B), of which the following are worth
highlighting because of their relevance and potential contribution to Ethiopia’s strategic approach to
future SLM interventions.
• Exit Strategy Performance and Sustainability Assessment for Watershed Management.

The project supported the development of a sustainability framework and management
information system, a joint initiative by experts from the Water and Land Resource Centre
(WLRC), Addis Ababa University, the German Cooperation/GIZ-SLM and MoA. The
database is focused on using predefined attributes of a sustainable watershed
management and tracking success toward implementation of those attributes over time
(that is, a comprehensive performance assessment checklist in the SLMP-2 regions). An
extensive user manual has been developed. However, before it can be fully operational,
resolution of issues on Shapefiles in terms of missing micro-watersheds and incorrect
attribute information need to be finalized. The system is open source and locally
developed, does not require licensing, is enabled for offline and online use, and is results
oriented. This database is expected to make an important contribution to Ethiopia’s SLM
platform management in general and for the implementation of RLLP, as it would allow
result-based tracking of watershed management.
• The Water and Land Resources Information System is a web-based resource information
management system developed by the WLRC that integrates both spatial and non-spatial
data of water and land resources in Ethiopia particularly from the highlands, with a trans-
boundary view on the entire Eastern Nile basin. The objective of the database is to
facilitate the compilation, archiving, and exchange of data relevant for watershed
management (climate, catchment, land, surface water, soil type, rivers, boundary data, and
so on) for policy makers; the research community; and all stakeholders who require data
for sustainable management of land and water resources to influence informed actions
and decision making.
Mobilizing Private Sector Financing
71. Although not included in the project design, the SLMP-2’s implementation supported an
innovative pilot initiative aimed at engaging the private sector in the co-financing of SLM interventions
at the watershed level. Specifically, the initiative involved the Raya Brewery, a private enterprise
established in Enda-Mokoni Woreda, Tigray. While the brewery was operating social responsibility
initiatives benefiting the local community, the decision to partner with SLMP-2 was based on the
common interest of ensuring the availability of water for the brewing process, originating from a spring
in the May-Muk microwatershed within the Upper Burka-Abagabir watershed. The efforts of the BoA
representatives in Tigray, PSU management, and World Bank team members generated a series of
meetings with the brewery’s senior management and field visits, which, during the last year of the
project, resulted in the development of a draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between MoA,
Page 24 of 72
The World Bank
Raya Brewery, Mekelle University, and the local kebele administration. The MOU outlined the roles and
responsibilities of individual partners in watershed rehabilitation, as well as the areas of cooperation
and co-financing during the period of implementation of the follow-on RLLP. This partnership is
considered a significant contribution of SLMP-2, representing a model for replication which would allow
the GoE to mobilize private sector financing to support spatially targeted social and environmental
services within relevant watersheds.
Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity
72. The participatory approach for project implementation in targeted rural areas, combined with
the introduction of SLM practices, contributed to sustainably reduce the vulnerability and degradation
of watersheds and provided beneficiary communities with opportunities to improve their livelihoods
through crop and livestock productivity gains and expanding income-generating alternatives. In addition,
financial retribution to community labor for establishment of physical and biological interventions
contributed to social cohesion and access to significant sources of income. Empirical evidence from
relevant consultancies,4 case studies,5 and the surveys conducted as part of the BCR suggest significant
improvements in the overall quality of life of beneficiaries, primarily reflected in the enhancement of
housing conditions and increased attendance of children to education.
III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME
A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION
73. The SLMP-2 preparation was considerably facilitated by the operational experience and lessons
learned for the predecessor project (SLMP-1). Because of this, project objectives were realistic, while
beneficiaries, stakeholders, and implementation structures were adequately identified. In addition,
appropriate mitigation measures to perceived risks were identified, such as the recruitment of fiduciary
staff at the regional level, and implementation readiness was not a limiting factor.
74. However, as described in other sections of this report, the overall implementation outcomes
were affected by distinct factors associated with preparation, including (a) the limited information on
the actual degree of coverage achieved in individual SLMP-1 watersheds, which influenced the
‘graduation’ assumption (reduced support allocated by SLMP-2 to SLMP-1-supported watersheds) which
guided the implementation strategy of SLMP-2, and (b) the limitations of the Results Framework
designed, which featured a number of non-SMART6 indicators, absence of baseline and target values for
key PDO indicators, and, equally important, a functional disconnect with the M&E system adopted by
the implementing entities. All these issues were highlighted as lessons learned in the Implementation
Completion and Results Report (ICR) of SLMP-1.
4 Berhane, Gebreyohannes. 2017. Assessment of Livestock Impact on NRM Interventions of SLMP-2 and Recommendations for
the Design of the Resilient Landscape and Livelihood Project.
5 World Bank and TerrAfrica. 2015. “Restoring the Landscapes of Ethiopia’s Highlands. Creating Natural Wealth for Improved
Livelihoods.”
6 Specific, Measurable, Attributable, Realistic, and Timely.
Page 25 of 72
The World Bank
B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION
75. For the same reasons described earlier, essential factors such as coordination, engagement,
commitment, and leadership of the GoE and the implementing entities were adequately established
during SLMP-1 and continued to be commendable features during the implementation of SLMP-2.
Similarly, the existing legal and regulatory framework as well as the governance structures at both
national and regional levels were adequate to support the project’s technical and operational strategies.
Equally commendable is the fact that the implementation structure largely comprised public employees
at all levels. The project is furthermore considered innovative as it emphasized a multisectoral landscape
approach that allows the GoE to effectively coordinate efforts on land use, land management, and land
administration.
76. The project outputs comprised a balanced combination of public and private goods which
effectively contributed to the transformational achievement of project outcomes at the community
level. Capacity building, small-scale private infrastructure, development and adoption of valuable
knowledge-related public instruments, and highly decentralized support to communities allowed to
transform the benefits of adopting innovative SWC practices at the micro-watershed level into tangible
and sustainable improvements of livelihoods of both the beneficiary communities and individual
households. These interventions have not only contributed to improving the role of government
agencies and local communities in the management effectiveness and sustainable use of natural
resources but also revenue generation of local communities.
77. The World Bank supervision was adequate, timely, and proactive. It was also instrumental in
addressing the M&E shortcomings described earlier and in section IV.A, conducting a constructive and
informative MTR process, collaborating with MoA in identifying the need and content of the
restructurings, and managing the delivery of valuable TA to the project through a Trust Fund provided
by Norway.
78. One distinct factor which affected implementation was the limitation in logistical and human
resources throughout the operational structure of the project, mainly at the regional and local levels. As
discussed in the efficiency section, government officials were mostly responsible for the delivery of
project interventions. The limited engagement of private sector service providers resulted in significant
gains in terms of project efficiency (by reducing the cost of providing essential support services at the
field level) and strengthening of public institutions but at the same time resulted in performance
inefficiencies caused by frequent staff turnovers, inadequate working conditions, and insufficient
capacity to support project interventions. These limiting factors were partially mitigated through an
intense schedule of staff training and the decision to recruit additional human resources for key project-
related functions (accountants, safeguard specialists, and community facilitators). In addition, logistical
limitations caused by security-related restrictions in certain regions within the project area not only
precluded the World Bank missions to conduct field visits but also affected the performance of local and
regional project staff, as well as technical advisors from GIZ. The limited coordination between the NPCU
and the NRM Directorate could have become a factor affecting project implementation, but was
effectively compensated by the active engagement of the State Minister for NRM in all aspects related
to project governance and dialogue with the Bank
Page 26 of 72
The World Bank
IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME
A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E)
M&E Design
79. The M&E system of SLMP-2 was designed mainly using the format that was used by SLMP-1.
However, the lessons learned in this regard and the significant increase in project scope and complexity
were not fully taken into consideration. The project M&E faced the problem that the Results Framework
in the PAD did not include a baseline value for two of the three PDO indicators. The PAD stated that the
missing baseline data would be supplied by a survey carried out in a baseline study in Year 1 of project
implementation. However, because of procurement-related delays, this consultancy was only
contracted in Year 3 of the project, so the baseline values were only incorporated in the Results
Framework as part of the post-MTR restructuring.
80. Furthermore, according to the assessment conducted post-MTR by a team of M&E specialists7,
one of the main constraints faced by the project’s M&E was that more than half of the original
indicators (14 out of 21) did not meet one or more of the World Bank’s SMART criteria.
M&E Implementation
81. Recognizing the complexity and shortcomings of the M&E system in place, several efforts were
jointly made during implementation to address the difficulties encountered in the process of generating
data appropriate to measure progress on the Results Framework indicators. These efforts resulted in (a)
the development of the Planning and Reporting Tool (PRT), (b) the agreement with other SLM partners
to develop a ‘Harmonized Results Framework’, (c) the agreement to recruit an M&E specialist in each of
the six regions, (d) the preparation of a ‘below woreda’ operational manual for data collection and
reporting, and (e) a full assessment of the project’s M&E system commissioned by the World Bank.
82. Under the direction of GIZ-SLM, in 2015 the PSU developed the Manual for Results Based
Monitoring and Evaluation for SLM. This web-based system, the Planning and Reporting Tool (PRT), was
aimed at improving the management of information at all levels (community, woreda, regional, and
federal). It was also used to track progress and evaluate project activities and document results. The PRT
was expected to simplify and standardize the planning and reporting system at different levels.
However, although the PRT proved to be adequate as a budgeting tool despite being difficult to use in
the field and prone to network problems and system failures, it was not suitable for measuring results
given that it recorded inputs and outputs (cash, person-hours, materials, and physical works completed)
but not results in the broader context. The PRT did not contain data on crop yields, biomass,
certification, technology adoption rates, and carbon sequestration, all of which were required for the
Results Framework.
83. In response to the unsatisfactory performance of the PRT, subsequent efforts were made to
update the Results Framework, indicator definitions and data collection tools. These changes were not
7 McCoy, K. Lynn, and Alex Rotich Rutto. 2018. SLMP-2 M&E Assessment, Final Report.
Page 27 of 72
The World Bank
captured in an updated M&E plan, but were distributed as separate documents (for example, a
Harmonized Results Framework, a World Bank SLMP-2-focused Results Framework/Indicator Matrix
with improved indicator definitions, and updated baselines and targets) and updated data collection
instructions and forms (The Below Woreda Reporting Guidelines). This lack of uniform documentation as
well as a lack of a central organized online storehouse (server location) for M&E materials and data
resulted in a lack of clarity for stakeholders on the operationalization of the SLMP-2 M&E system.
84. Following the efforts to improve project monitoring (2016 and 2017), the SLMP-2 Results
Framework was revised to align the indicators with a revised results matrix of the broader SLM
government program. The MTR and subsequent restructuring helped clarify the parameters to be
measured, although responsibilities and methodologies for data collection and how measurement and
evaluation efforts would link up to support an understanding of results remained somewhat unclear for
partners. The May 2017 Implementation Status and Results Report (ISR) noted that while “significant
progress has been made in improving the overall M&E system, more work is needed to ensure
consistent and satisfactory implementation.”
85. The revision of the Results Framework, conducted as part of the first restructuring, aligned the
indicators with the revised results matrix of the broader SLM program developed after SLMP-2 approval,
which also helped improve harmonization across donor-financed projects, and also added the missing
baseline and target values. The main revisions included (a) addition of water resources availability and
irrigated area indicators to measure changes in water security and watershed performance; (b) revision
and addition of landholding certification indicators, including for empowered landless youth and
women; (c) revision of other indicators, or dropping/replacing some indicators, to address issues with
clarity of wording and/or definitions and data collection and aggregation; and (d) adjusting targets and
baseline values for three indicators.
M&E Utilization
86. M&E faced the difficulty of having to track both progress of the indicators set out in the Results
Framework and monitoring ministry-established annual targets, resulting from the budgetary allocations
made by MoA to each region and watershed. Such budget allocations and targets were included in the
project’s annual workplan and budget, submitted annually by the Project Coordination Unit (NPCU) to
the World Bank for ‘no objection’. Considering that planning, budgeting, and reporting data had to be
generated from more than 1,800 individual micro-watersheds and consolidated for the purposes of the
annual workplan and budget, M&E data can be assessed as efficiently used for managerial decision-
making, regional performance assessments and overall reporting.
Justification of Overall Rating of Quality of M&E

Rating: Substantial
87. As designed, the M&E system of the project presented weaknesses that limited the capacity of
the system to generate quality data for monitoring of project results and outcomes. However, despite its
limitations and logistical functional challenges, the system provided an effective platform for the project
to plan, budget, and monitor project implementation at all levels. Acknowledgement of the challenges
that were faced and the proactive efforts made—primarily by the World Bank’s task team leader—
during implementation were instrumental to mobilize resources, make adjustments, and eventually
Page 28 of 72
The World Bank
revert the situation. As such, the information provided by the M&E system at project closing allowed for
a reliable and satisfactory assessment of project outputs and results.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARD, SOCIAL SAFEGUARD, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE
88. As a category B project requiring partial assessment, SLMP-2 triggered the following safeguards
policies:
• Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01)

• Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04)
• Forests (OP/BP 4.36)
• Pest Management (OP/BP 4.09)
• Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10)
• Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11)
• Involuntary Resettlement (OP) (BP 4.12)
• Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37)
89. The Indigenous Peoples Plan was prepared and disclosed on August 18, 2013, as screening in
five regions in Ethiopia found that a majority of the population met the criteria detailed in the OP/BP
4.10.
90. An Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) including integrated pest
management approaches was prepared and disclosed on September 4, 2013. According to the annual
safeguard reports produced by MoA, a total of 5,143 subprojects were reviewed for eligibility at the
kebele level and subjected to a screening process to identify potential social and environmental impacts.
The types of subprojects subjected to screening were gully treatment, community access road
construction, cut-off drain construction, bench terraces, SSI, water-harvesting structures,
afforestation/reforestation, and biological SWC measures.
91. About 1,634 subprojects were assessed as having no potential environmental and social impacts
and received direct approval at the kebele level without further screening or environmental impact
studies. An Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) was produced for 2,754 subprojects
which were categorized as having some potential environmental or social impacts. However, no other
safeguards were required and applied for any SLMP-2 subprojects that passed through the screening
process. The screening documents, together with the proposed mitigation measures, were reviewed by
the Woreda Environmental Protection and Land Administration Unit for final approval and/or granting
of the environmental certificate for the approved subproject.
92. The Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) was prepared and disclosed on August 28, 2013, as
OP/BP 4.12 was triggered for SLMP-2 based on lessons learned during the implementation of SLMP-1
regarding the acquisition of land for the activities of ‘Integrated Watershed and Landscape
Management’ component. The dispositions of the RPF aimed to mitigate any potential social impacts
resulting from eventual involuntarily restrictions of access to natural resources (for example, community
lands and protected areas), small-range irrigation subprojects, land acquisition, or creation of a
disturbance affecting livelihoods of the communities of the watersheds participating in SLMP-2.
Page 29 of 72
The World Bank
93. The provisions of the RPF were applied in some well-documented cases where farmers in all six
regions voluntarily donated land mainly for the construction of canals, hand-dug wells, access roads,
spring utilization, and community ponds. In total, 805 households voluntarily donated small parcels of
land ranging from 0.001 ha to 0.126 ha (in all cases less than 10 percent of the specific landholding) in
exchange for desired community benefits and community-devised mitigation measures.
94. SLMP-2 established a functional grievance redress mechanism (GRM) to solve unforeseen issues
during project implementation at levels ranging from federal to watershed with established grievance
redress guidelines. During the life of the project, a total of 637 cases were satisfactorily resolved.
Common causes of grievances include targeting for SWCs, income-generating activities, and incentives.
The most important outcome of this mechanism is that communities are now aware that they can freely
voice their own opinions on the project. This was not possible before in remote areas. Throughout the
life of the project, no major complaint was registered.
95. The agreed safeguards requirements such as ESMF, RPF, GRM, and Social Assessment were
given due emphasis through community consultation and participation to ensure sustainability of
investments. In total, 36,738 community members (among them 33 percent of women) were consulted
and actively participated during the SLMP-2 implementation. Community consultation has been the
main instrument to enhance the awareness of community members.
96. The client’s capacity for management of safeguard aspects at the local level was improved
significantly through ad hoc training and capacity building. Specifically, a total of 9,477 capacity
development and training sessions were organized for 1,824 regional, woreda, and zonal experts and
7,653 kebele-based development agents. In addition, 108 participants from different administrative
levels were provided train the trainer sessions on the income-generating activities implementation
manual.
97. The comprehensive gender analysis of the project was conducted, and appropriate
mainstreaming guidelines were prepared. Gender awareness trainings and capacity-building activities
were implemented at different levels and involved 919 participants from woredas offices (among them
39 percent of women), 1,926 development agents (among them 27 percent of women), and 13,546
community members (among them 41 percent of women). Train-the-trainer sessions were organized for
44 woreda experts (among them 32 percent of women) from technical committees, women affairs
offices, and focal persons.
Compliance with safeguards policies was rated by the Bank as Satisfactory or Moderately Satisfactory
throughout the project. The safeguards rating is Satisfactory. Despite the overall satisfactory
implementation of environmental and social safeguards, areas identified by the World Bank and the BCR
as subject to further improvement were the delays in submission of reports and quality of reporting, the
limited capacity in identifying types of impacts, and the lack of commitment of the responsible sector
offices in implementing timely mitigation measures. In retrospect, OP 7.50 on International Waterways
should have been triggered as most of the country’s waterways are international and the project
financed some small-scale irrigation activities. However, it should be noted that there were no issues
related to OP 7.50 during implementation and no complaints from riparian countries were received.
Procurement and Contract Management
Page 30 of 72
The World Bank
98. Procurement management is rated by examining the alignment of the procurement

management function of the project with the procedures set out in the Project Financing Agreement,
PAD, other legal documents, project structure, Project Implementation Manuals (PIMs), Procurement
Regulations, procurement process, contract management practices, disbursements, MOUs, and audit
and project reports.
Procurement Organization, Staffing, and Decision Making
99. The World Bank supported and monitored the borrower’s implementation of the project’s
procurement activities, as indicated in the Legal Agreements and PIM. All parties involved in the project
implementation, at all levels, discharged their duties and responsibilities according to the lines of
accountability defined in the PAD and Operational Manual. The procurement decision function of the
borrower was decentralized under four levels—federal, regional, woreda, and kebele. Such
decentralization minimized administrative and transport costs and avoided delays in distribution.
100. The federal and regional PSUs included reasonably qualified procurement specialists to
implement project procurement. At the woreda level, the woreda finance and economic offices were
used to carry out the project procurements. The pooled procurement of SLMP-2 such as vehicles,
motorcycles, information technology, and office equipment were handled by the procurement unit of
the Federal Project Unit. This helped standardize the items to be procured and enhance economies of
scale.
Procurement Planning and Implementation
101. Procurement planning was carried out at the woreda, regional, and federal levels and
implementation of the plan was carried out at all levels after consolidation was made at the federal
level. The project Procurement Plan was approved by the World Bank and was agreed to be updated at
least annually or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in
institutional capacity, and it has been done accordingly. To guide implementation, a step-by-step PIM
necessary for the day-to-day procurement management of the project was prepared in line with the
Financing Agreement. Country systems were used for national bidding and other procurement
methods, except for international competitive bidding.
Procurement Processing and Contracting
102. The procurement processing and contracting activities were in line with the agreed procedures.
Most of the contracts under the project were successfully completed except for some deviations that
were identified during supervision missions and independent procurement audits for which mitigation
measures and implementation plan were agreed with the borrower.
Procurement Oversight and Monitoring
103. There were adequate procurement complaint-handling procedures that were put in place
following the Federal Public Procurement Proclamation and Directives. However, the implementing
agencies’ internal and external procurement audit capacity still require improvements.
Procurement Performance Monitoring and Measurement
Page 31 of 72
The World Bank
104. There was a regular procurement reporting to monitor progress. Agreed actions and activities
were designed and carried out to ensure value for money and fairness objectives of the procurement
and contract management function. However, there were no established key performance indicators
to measure value for money and fairness of performances systematically.
105. Financial management. The financial management framework of SLMP-2 followed the
government structure. It operated on the already established systems developed under SLMP-1. The
Ethiopian mechanism for the flow of funds (Channel II) was used to transfer funds from the World Bank
to the project.
106. The project’s overall financial management has shown improvement over the project life, which
enabled reasonable assurance that reports produced by the systems could be relied upon to monitor
financial performance and use of funds. This was evidenced by the annual external audit reports of the
project which were consistently clean (unqualified opinion) except for the July 7, 2018, report, which
contained observations that were satisfactorily addressed. Based on experience from SLMP-1, financial
management-related improvements were implemented. ‘Mobile accountants’ were recruited in regions
where significant number of project watersheds exist, contributing to regularly support woredas and
improve financial reporting at decentralized levels. In addition, a dedicated project internal auditor
appointed at the federal level was instrumental in strengthening the internal audit function of the
project and improving/addressing internal control weaknesses.
107. However, financial management weaknesses noted during project implementation included (a)
delays in preparation and dissemination of approved budgets, (b) the manual accounting system applied
at the woreda level, (c) weak internal controls over project fixed assets, (d) limited involvement of
internal auditors, and (e) timeliness and quality of financial reporting.
C. BANK PERFORMANCE
Quality at Entry
108. Project preparation followed an ambitious and consistent scaling up approach supported by the
proven methodologies and successful results of SLMP-1. Despite being sustained by positive outcomes
in selected micro-watersheds, assumptions in terms of the SLMP-1 coverage and degree of actual
intervention in individual watersheds were not fully validated. This led to the development of a
graduation approach which did not adequately incorporate the need to achieve full stabilization of
degraded areas and the importance of engaging systemic elements of the country’s public support
system (mainly extension) to ensure continuity and sustainability of project interventions.
109. In addition to increasing the project area from 45 to 135 watersheds, the project design
expanded the project’s scope considerably by incorporating a challenging subcomponent supporting the
adoption of CSA. Conceptually this addition (partly supported by Norway) was fully justified as a means
to maximize the productivity of rehabilitated lands and consequently improve the livelihoods of project
beneficiaries.
110. All fiduciary- and safeguard-related elements of project preparation were adequately addressed,
as well as the development of important partnerships with other local and international partners such as
Page 32 of 72
The World Bank
Norway and Germany. As described previously, the design of the M&E system did not adequately
incorporate the project’s expanded scope and failed to establish appropriate links between the
borrower’s planning and budgeting requirements and the information required to monitor progress of
the indicators included in the Results Framework.
Quality of Supervision
111. Formal joint implementation support missions (11 in total) were regularly organized on a
semiannual basis. As a result, comprehensive and informative Aide Memoires and ISRs were produced
on time. In addition, technical field missions were conducted by World Bank staff from the country
office to supervise specific project activities or locations. The composition of the supervision team
reflected the technical and fiduciary requirements of the project, with locally based specialists from
financial management, procurement, and safeguards participating in all missions.
112. The two task team leaders responsible for leading supervision efforts were based in the country
office throughout the life of the project. This facilitated regular contact with the Project Implementation
Unit, other agencies, and beneficiaries. Each implementation support mission included field visits and a
workshop with all national and regional entities responsible for project implementation. Effective
collaboration between the World Bank team and the Project Implementation Unit, the dialogue arising
from these missions, and the close monitoring of the World Bank’s recommendations were all factors
that benefitted project performance. The World Bank’s support to the project was further enhanced by
the recruitment and management of a team of specialists, financed by Norway through a Bank-executed
Trust Fund, to provide TA to the client.
113. Beyond regular supervision tasks, overall World Bank oversight of project progress was
instrumental in addressing some of the shortcomings of project design. Through proactive engagement
and dialogue with MoA authorities and stakeholders, the World Bank led the process for improving the
M&E system of the project, including the recruitment of a specialized consultancy and the preparation
and processing of a comprehensive restructuring of the Results Framework. However, the high number
of ongoing operations within the environment portfolio in Ethiopia and the preparation of the follow-on
RLLP occasionally affected the availability and dedication of key World Bank resources to supervision
tasks.
Justification of Overall Rating of Bank Performance

Rating: Satisfactory
114. Overall, the World Bank’s performance is rated Satisfactory. Shortcomings identified in quality
at entry (project scope, M&E design, and procurement capacity assessment) were adequately mitigated
with the World Bank’s support during implementation. All technical and fiduciary requirements were
fully achieved in a proactive manner, contributing to both supporting project implementation and
enhancing the World Bank’s dialogue with sectoral counterparts and stakeholders.
D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME
115. The design of SLMP-2 identified several risk factors to project success and outcome and possible
mitigation measures. Although the project did not conduct systematic and regular assessments of risks,
Page 33 of 72
The World Bank
relevant mitigation measures for these pre-identified risks were adequately taken into consideration,
while emerging risks such as the security situation in certain project areas were appropriately reflected
in revisions to project implementation plans.
116. Project implementation has highlighted a number of features which influence the overall risk of
not sustaining project outcomes. These include the level of adoption of SLM practices by beneficiaries,
and the fact that most of the interventions to reduce land degradation were implemented by
beneficiary communities represents a clear indication that watershed rehabilitation practices can be
maintained and expanded with limited public funding, provided that the local support structures
developed by SLMP-2 are not discontinued. In addition, decisions made by communities to enact bylaws
to enforce certain practices such as area closures and grazing bans are evidence of the acceptance and
adoption of key conservation practices by watershed members. Most importantly, the support provided
by the project to enhance utilization of natural resources and increase farm productivity in stabilized
areas has resulted in tangible livelihood improvements, which provide the most compelling incentive for
beneficiary communities to sustain their commitment to a holistic approach to watershed management.
However, this expected outcome cannot be solely supported by community commitments. Public
policies and interventions at the national and regional levels must provide the necessary assistance to
address systemic issues which could challenge project outcomes, including the
alignment/mainstreaming of extension services with conservation-based production systems;
promotion of SLM-oriented governance structures, such as Watershed User Associations; development
of incentives to establish livestock production systems that incorporate SLMP-2 practices (area closures,
cut-and-carry, forage production in gullies and CSA rotations, and so on); and reduction of overgrazing in
fragile communal areas.
117. The World Bank’s decision to support the GoE’s efforts to further consolidate and expand the
SLMP-2’s success through the implementation of the RLLP and CALM operations should also be
instrumental in addressing the abovementioned risks and ensuring the long-term impact and
sustainability of project outcomes.
V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
118. A strategic lesson from SLMP-1 and 2 reflected in the design of RLLP is the need to provide
reasonable time to achieve the stabilization of degraded areas, as well as a mechanism and supporting
elements to allow watersheds to graduate from project-based assistance and continue sustainable
management of restored landscapes through normal government programs. In this respect, the creation
of Watershed User Associations could be capable of sustaining participatory watershed management
when project-based support ends. Intervened watersheds need to be prepared for graduation through
(a) building local government capacity to design and manage SLM plans and interventions, (b)
strengthening community incentives for investment in, and maintenance of, SLM through land
certification, and (c) improving returns to sustainable productive activities by promoting CSA and forging
connections to value chains.
119. Highly decentralized SLM projects require a well-designed M&E system. Careful thought must be
given to presenting M&E Results Framework, theory of change, and key learning questions to be
addressed—ensuring that this system will be focused on results-based measurements instead of
Page 34 of 72
The World Bank
activity-based M&E. In addition to identifying indicators to be measured, detailed indicator protocols

need to be developed that provide specific procedures and frequency for indicator data collection. The
M&E plan needs to include clearly defined plans for baseline data collection efforts and evaluation and
learning efforts.
120. Important technical lessons are the following: (a) area closures to limit free grazing for erosion
control should be complemented by fodder production to better support enclosed livestock
management practices (as discussed under outputs regarding gully rehabilitation and backyard livestock
farming); (b) SLM initiatives need to take into consideration the livestock population in the
microwatershed in relation to the carrying capacity of the area; (c) to achieve the effective exit strategy
of a treated microwatershed, systemic issues such as the overall capacity building of the extension
systems should be addressed; and (d) by improving livelihoods in treated areas, support for CSA and
links to value chains reinforce incentives for the maintenance of SLM investments.
121. The fiduciary lessons regarding SLM Program implementation include the importance of (a)
aligning project budgeting systems with the GoE budget calendar; (b) including the costs of
environmental mitigation measures in subproject designs; and (c) providing adequate resources to
upgrade planning, budgeting, and monitoring of inputs and outputs that are essential for decentralized
operations. As such, the appointment of regional accountants as ‘mobile accountants’ in regions where
significant number of project watersheds exist can improve financial reporting at decentralized levels,
while assigning a project internal auditor at the federal level can help improve/address internal control
weaknesses.
.
Page 35 of 72
The World Bank
ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS
For the results indicators with non-zero baseline values the achievement rates were calculated as a ratio of baseline-excluded actually achieved
value over baseline-excluded formally revised target.
A. RESULTS INDICATORS
A.1 PDO Indicators
Objective/Outcome: PDO: To reduce land degradation and improve land productivity in selected watersheds in targeted regions in Ethiopia
GEO: idem as above
Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Indicator Name Baseline Original Target
Measure Target Completion
1. Land area with sustainable Hectare(Ha) 304589.00 910000.00 874281.00 861364.00

landscape management
practices 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
1. a. Communal land area Hectare(Ha) 304589.00 0.00 657428.00 665503.00

treated for degradation
(degraded hillsides, gullies, 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
PFM, pastures)
1. b. Individual farmland area Hectare(Ha) 0.00 0.00 216853.00 195861.00

treated for productivity
improvements 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Page 36 of 72
The World Bank
Comments (achievements against targets): Substantially achieved by 97.7%. The area of communal land under SLMP increased twofold
compared to the initial baseline. The area with implemented sustainable landscape management practices was composed of 65% of
communal lands and 35 % of individual farmlands.

The GEO indicators are the Amount(USD) 300000.00 910000.00 874281.00 861364.00
same as the PDO indicators
31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Comments (achievements against targets): Substantially achieved by 97.7% very close to the project initial design target and restructurings'
adjustments.

2. Total land area restored or Hectare(Ha) 36195.00 0.00 107836.00 98682.00

reforested/afforested on both
individual and communal land 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Comments (achievements against targets): Substantially achieved by 87.2% in line with projections. Afforestation and reforestation activities
cover 11.2% of the area with sustainable landscape management practices.

3. Incremental carbon dioxide Metric ton 0.00 0.00 8332712.00 5369151.00
Page 37 of 72
The World Bank
equivalent accumulated in the 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018

project area
3. a. Biomass in the Metric ton 151.00 0.00 155.00 159.00

intervention areas
31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Comments (achievements against targets): Achievement by 200%

4. Land area of the targeted Hectare(Ha) 0.00 0.00 574010.00 315631.00

micro watersheds with
vegetation increase of at least 4 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
percent compared to baseline
Comments (achievements against targets): Partially achieved by 55%. This indicator was introduced during the first restructuring. It compares
Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI)at project end with the baseline value. Due to a discontinuation of the satellite imagery used
at this indicator's inception at restructuring, a revised routine using available imagery was adopted. Retroactively computing this value
resulted in similar values to those reported in previous periods and as such the decline from earlier reported value is unlikely due to a change
in method or source data. While the current analysis does not allow for a determination as the underlying cause of the decline, climatic
conditions relative to previous reporting years (i.e. less favorable temperatures or rainfall in the project area) is a likely cause for the decline.
A.2 Intermediate Results Indicators
Component: Component 1 : Integrated Watershed and Landscape Management

Indicator Name Unit of Baseline Original Target Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Page 38 of 72
The World Bank

1. Households in project area Number 0.00 382071.00 382071.00 421130.00
using at least three technology
packages supported by the 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
project on individual lands
1. a. Female-headed Number 0.00 60233.00 60223.00 119435.00

households in project area
using at least three 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
technology packages
supported by the project on
individual lands
Comments (achievements against targets): Achieved by 110.2% due to a higher demand and a consistently growing adoption level. Female-
headed households represent 28.3% of adopters. This confirms relevance of the technologies proposed and efficiency of the awareness
campaign considering gender aspects. Technology packages” refer to a range of locally appropriate physical activities such as soil and water
conservation (SWC) (64%), agroforestry (15.5%), and/or climate-smart agriculture (CSA) (20%) that were supported by SLMP-2 via extension
support or financing. These packages are described in the Community-based Participatory Watershed Management Guidelines, the CSA Field
Manual, and the Project Implementation Manual. The number of female-led households in the participating watersheds was underestimated
at appraisal, hence and overachievement of the indicator by 198%. Women-led households show similar patterns of preference for adoption
of technologies.

2. Targeted micro watersheds Percentage 40.60 87.00 87.00 57.00

with management and use plan
approved 31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Oct-2017
Page 39 of 72
The World Bank
Comments (achievements against targets): Partially achieved by 34.4%. Main issues in the indicator achievement were related to the plan
adoption process. Nevertheless, the PDO-level indicators have been substantially achieved as in many cases a delay in the formal approval
process of the plan did not prevent an implementation progress.

3. Targeted critical watersheds Number 45.00 130.00 130.00 135.00

with Multi-Year Plan approved
31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Comments (achievements against targets): Achieved by 105.8% in line with projections. All project watersheds had Multi-Year Plans approved
by project closing.

4. Households using cut-and- Percentage 0.00 14.00 14.00 13.00

carry practices for backyard
livestock management 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Comments (achievements against targets): The target was substantially achieved by 92.8%, showing a significant adoption rate of a critical
practice for overall sustainability of project interventions. A valuable feature to this achievement is that the process was community driven
through the issuance of by-laws banning direct grazing of livestock on degraded areas.

5. Formal community-based Number 3021.00 4508.00 4420.00 5897.00
Page 40 of 72
The World Bank
institutions, self-help groups 31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018

and associations established
and functional
Comments (achievements against targets): This target was achieved by 205.5% compared to the target set up during the restructuring and by
193.4% compared to the initial baseline. The establishment of institutions and associations, helping to share the information on good
practices and benefit from the project activities created a lot of enthusiasm and traction among the rural communities. Functionality was
measured thanks to the kebele and woredas reports established by the MoA staff observing and participating in the the communities'
activities on daily basis. The reported data have been confirmed by the sample survey during the preparation of the BCR.

14. People participating in Number 130000.00 0.00 144115.00 431354.00

income-generating activities
supported by the project 31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
14. a. People participating in Number 39000.00 0.00 43235.00 163894.00

income-generating activities
supported by the project of 31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
which female
Comments (achievements against targets): Achievement far outpaced the targets (2134.9%). Change in measurement - farmers participating in
homestead practices (backyard activities, seedlings, etc.) also included. The significant overachievement of the indicator could be due to
overly conservative estimates at appraisal combined with possible double counting (persons participating in CSA, homestead activities such
as high-value crops or livestock, farmland-based income generation outside of the homestead). The survey of over 1000 households
conducted as part of the BCR confirmed the results
Indicator Name Unit of Baseline Original Target Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Page 41 of 72
The World Bank

15. Change in dry season base Percentage 0.00 0.00 5.00 5.60
flow of sampled micro
watersheds 28-Feb-2017 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Comments (achievements against targets): This indicator was achieved by 112% which shows very consistent and positive effect of project
interventions on overall moisture retention in treated micro-watersheds, primarily reflected in springs regeneration. This is a water security
and climate resilience metric. The application of SLM technologies and approaches in targeted micro-watersheds resulted in less runoff
during the rainy season, in turn leading to an increase in groundwater, which increases water available during the dry season, finally resulting
in more flow in rivers and streams. This indicator measures the percent change in the rate of flow, quantified in liters per second (Lt/sec) in a
sample of rivers and streams drawn from 10-15 micro-watersheds supported by the project. Baseline rate of flow is estimated using field
measurements of Lt/sec taken during the dry season ending February 2017.

16. Irrigated area Hectare(Ha) 3139.00 0.00 3949.00 7739.00
31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Comments (achievements against targets): The indicator was achieved by 567.9%. The NPCU experienced difficulties reporting on this indicator
and was required to provide additional information and justification. The revision downward of the target during the restructuring reflected
the NPCU's review of the efforts in addressing data management and reporting issues in updating achievement to date for this indicator. All
SLMP-2 supported irrigation schemes were small-scale and community-managed. This indicator considers the irrigated area resulting from
construction of diversion weirs, community and household ponds, springs, hand dug wells, pumps and other water lifting structures. The
cumulative achievement of targeted Irrigated area is composed of (i) Ground water extracting (560.5 Ha), (ii) Surface water harvesting
(1453.2 Ha) and (iii) River diversion canal and Spring development (2585.8 Ha).
Page 42 of 72
The World Bank
Component: Component 2: Capacity Development, Knowledge Generation and Management

5. Formal community-based Number 3021.00 4508.00 4420.00 5897.00

institutions, self-help groups
and associations established 31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
and functional
Comments (achievements against targets): This target was achieved by 205.5% compared to the target set up during the restructuring.The
establishment of institutions and associations, helping to share the information on good practices and benefit from the project activities
created a lot of enthusiasm and traction among the rural communities. Functionality was measured thanks to the kebele and woredas
reports established by the MoA staff observing and participating in the communities' activities on daily basis. The reported data have been
confirmed by the sample survey during the preparation of the BCR.

6. Woredas equipped with Number 0.00 135.00 127.00 81.00

information centers on
sustainable land management 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
practices as a result of the
project
Comments (achievements against targets): Partially achieved by 63.8%. Updated criteria for measuring against this indicator (based on newly
prepared guideline) led to a significant reduction in what had previously been reported. Under current guidelines, only those that are
completed and sufficiently equipped (previously the reported figures included information centers that were approved and in progress).
Page 43 of 72
The World Bank

7. SLM related strategies Number 0.00 6.00 8.00 16.00

developed or improved
31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Comments (achievements against targets): This indicator was achieved by 200%. The documents have been prepared by MoA supported by a
team of consultants and in consultation with different stakeholders.
Component: Component 3: Rural Land Administration, Certification and Use

8. Second level certificates Number 0.00 3800.00 19996.00 21277.00

issued for communal land
holdings 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Comments (achievements against targets): The indicator was achieved by 106.4% which is slightly higher than the adjusted restructuring target.
The number of communal lands in the watersheds of the project was initially underestimated.

9. Parcels of land surveyed and Number 200000.00 2000000.00 1917325.00 1695636.00

mapped for certification
31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
9. a. Individual parcels for Number 200000.00 2000000.00 1893800.00 1656468.00
Page 44 of 72
The World Bank
households 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
9. b. Communal parcels Number 0.00 0.00 23525.00 39168.00
31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Comments (achievements against targets): The indicator was substantially achieved by 87.1%. The data was collected from kebele and woredas
levels and then reported at regional level. The sub-indicator on individual parcels was substantially achieved by 85.9% and on communal
parcels it was overachieved by 166.4%, which can be explained by an underestimation of a percentage of communal lands in the watersheds
under the project. A substantial yet not a complete achievement of the sub-indicator on individual parcels derives from a miscalculation due
to manual counting, which happened too close to the project closing.

10. Households who have Number 50000.00 500000.00 473450.00 410205.00

received second level land
holding certificates 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
10. a. Women who have Number 182000.00 0.00 340088.00 287144.00

received second level land
holding certificates 31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
individually or jointly with a
man
Comments (achievements against targets): This indicator was substantially achieved by 85%. The sub-indicator 10.a was achieved by 66.5%.
About 70% of certificates include women as principal or joint tenant. Significant positive results achieved during the project can be attributed
to an efficient public awareness and communication campaign undertaken during the project, as currently there is no regulatory obligation to
include married women into the certificate during adjudication of state land.
Page 45 of 72
The World Bank

11. Landless youth who have Number 1598.00 0.00 9504.00 11259.00
been issued a second level
certificate or other legal 31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
documentation to use
communal land holdings in
exchange for restoring land
11. a. Landless youth who Number 649.00 0.00 1544.00 3264.00

have been issued a second
level certificate or other legal 31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
documentation to use
communal land holdings in
exchange for restoring land of
which female
Comments (achievements against targets): This indicator was achieved by 122%. The share of females reached (27%), was considerably higher
than what was targeted (9.2%). The overachievement seems entirely due to female landless youth. More significant distribution of communal
land to landless women ensures more gender-equitable access to land resources and improvement of livelihoods.
Unlinked Indicators

12. Area of degraded Hectare(Ha) 829.00 0.00 1837.00 2737.00

communal land restored by
landless youth who have been 31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
Page 46 of 72
The World Bank
issued a second level certificate

or other legal documentation
Comments (achievements against targets): ): The indicator was achieved by 189.3%. Whereas it was not planned in the initial design, these
interventions created a significant positive effect on the ground mobilizing underutilized local human resources providing significant benefits
in a form of sustainable livelihood opportunities.

13. Local level participatory Number 0.00 540.00 508.00 545.00

land use plans prepared at
kebele level within the project 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2018
intervention areas
Comments (achievements against targets): Achieved by 107%. The planning process was met with high interest and participative engagement
from concerned communities.
Page 47 of 72
The World Bank
B. KEY OUTPUTS BY COMPONENT
Objective/Outcome 1: To reduce land degradation in selected watersheds in targeted regions in Ethiopia

1. Land area with sustainable landscape management practices disaggregated by communal and
Outcome Indicators individual land
2. Total land area of restored or reforested/ afforested on both individual and communal land
1. Households in project area using at least three technology packages supported by the project on
individual lands disaggregated by gender
2. Targeted micro-watersheds with Management and Use Plan (MUP) approved
3. Targeted critical watersheds with Multi-Year Plan
Intermediate Results Indicators
4. Households using cut-and-carry practices for backyard livestock management
5. Formal community-based institutions, self-help groups, and associations established and functional
6. Woredas equipped with information centers on SLM practices as a result of the project
7. SLM-related strategies developed or improved
1. SLM practices covered 556,776 ha (of which 65 percent of communal land and 35 percent of
individual land). Outputs on communal lands:
• Degraded hillside area covered by physical SWC technological structure was 95,458 ha.
• Farmland area covered by physical SWC technological measures was 137,155 ha.
Key Outputs by Component • Communal pasture land area treated by physical and biological measures was 4,524 ha.
(linked to the achievement of the
Objective/Outcome 1) • Communal land area treated through area closure approach was 30,905 ha.
• Total gully area treated with physical and biological gully stabilization activities was 5,471 ha.
• Total area covered by forest enrichment activities (in demarcated areas) was 15,968 ha.
• Total area covered by afforestation/reforestation was 6,589 ha.
Page 48 of 72
The World Bank
• Total area covered by wood lot establishment was 9,473 ha.
• The area of farmland covered by CSA and soil fertility management was 189,543 ha.
• Total area treated through backyard forage management was 6.318 ha.
2. Total area of restored or reforested/afforested on both individual and communal land on 62,488 ha,
including the following:
• Total gully area physically treated = 5,470.7 ha
• Total degraded area treated by area closure approach = 30,904.6 ha
• Area covered by afforestation/reforestation = 6,589.2 ha
• Woodlot establishment = 9,472.8 ha
• Total area covered by Bamboo as a result of a project = 10,049.8 ha
3. Households in project area using at least three technology packages supported by the project on
individual lands, for example, 270,670 farmers applied SWC, 65,536 farmers applied high-value crops
interventions, 84,924 farmers applied CSA practices on their farmland, of which 28.3 percent were
FHHH.
4. 57 percent of targeted micro-watersheds had MUP approved.
5. 13 percent of HHs use cut and-carry practices as a result of project.
6. 2,876 Formal community-based institutions, self-help groups and associations established and
functional, including the following:
• CWTs established = 1,820
• Watersheds User Associations established = 349
• Self-help Groups established = 707
7. 81 woredas equipped with information centers on SLM practices
8. A total of 16 SLM-related strategies were developed (200 percent). The lists of documents prepared
were
• CSA field manual and info-techs;
Page 49 of 72
The World Bank
• Income-generating activities guidelines;

• Watersheds performance assessment and exit strategy guidelines;
• SLM best practice identification guidelines;
• ESMF and social assessment guideline (translated into three local languages (Amharic, Oromiffa,
and Tigrigna);
• RPF;
• Harmonized Result Based M&E Manual;
• Below Woreda data collection and reporting guideline;
• Bamboo Marketing (value chain) Development Strategy;
• Local level participatory land use planning manual;
• Implementation Strategy for Land Administration, Certification and Land Use;
• Rural cadaster operational manual;
• Guideline for production and management of planting materials for watershed development;
• Rehabilitated land management and use plan guideline;
• SLMP Gender mainstreaming Strategy; and
• SLMP Communication Strategy.
9. 43.7 million tree seedlings were planted on individual woodlots to serve as a source of firewood, feed,
and construction material to beneficiary households.
Objective/Outcome 2: To improve land productivity in selected watersheds in targeted regions in Ethiopia
1. Incremental carbon dioxide equivalent accumulated in the project area with a sub-indicator on
Outcome Indicators biomass increase in the intervention areas
2. Land area in the targeted micro-watersheds with vegetation increase of at least 4 percent compared
Page 50 of 72
The World Bank
to baseline
1. Second-level certificates issued for communal landholdings

2. Parcels of land surveyed and mapped for certification disaggregated by individual and communal land
parcels mapped
3. Households in the intervention areas issued with georeferenced map-base certificates, with a
disaggregated sub-indicator indicating numbers on women-individual or joint landholders
4. Landless youth who have been issued a second level certificate or other legal documentation to use
communal landholdings in exchange for restoring land, disaggregated by gender
Intermediate Results Indicators
5. Area of degraded communal land restored by landless youth who have been issued a second level
certificate or other legal documentation
6. Local-level participatory land use plans prepared at kebele level within the project intervention areas
7. People participating in income-generating activities supported by the project with a gender-
disaggregated sub-indicator
8. Change in dry season base flow of sampled micro-watersheds
9. Irrigated area
1. Incremental carbon dioxide equivalent accumulated in the project area was 5,369,151 tCO2eq.
2. Biomass increment in the project intervention areas was 8 ton/ha.
3. Land area of the targeted micro-watersheds with vegetation increase of at least 4% compared to
baseline was 315,631 ha.
3. 21,277 second level land certificates issued for communal landholdings.
4. 1,495,636 land parcels surveyed and mapped for certification, among them 97.4% of individual
Key Outputs by Component parcels and 2.6% of communal parcels.
(linked to the achievement of the 5. 360,205 households received second level land holding certificates, including 70% of women (FHHH
Objective/Outcome 2) or joint tenants).
6. 9,661 landless youth were issued a second-level certificate or other legal documentation to use
communal landholdings in exchange for restoring land (of which 33% of women).
7. 1,908 ha of degraded communal land restored by landless youth who were issued a second level
certificate or other legal documentation.
8. 545 participatory land use plans were prepared.
9. 301,354 beneficiaries participated in income-generating activities supported by the project (of which
Page 51 of 72
The World Bank
41% were women).

10. 5.6% change in dry season base flow within sampled micro-watersheds.
11. 4,600 ha of irrigated areas developed via SSI schemes, including the follwoing:
• 560.5 ha through ground water pumping (HDW, CW, SHW, DW, Rpw)
• 1,453.2 ha through surface water harvesting (Dam, Check dam, HHP, CP, MP, NS)
• 2,585.8 ha through river diversion canals and spring development
12. Apiculture activities benefitted a total of 10,836 households, of which 20 percent were female
headed. Total production amounted to 209,712.5 kg of honey and 11,893.3 kg of wax.
Page 52 of 72
The World Bank
ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION
A. TASK TEAM MEMBERS
Name Responsibility/Specialization
Lending
Edward Felix Dwumfour Task Team Leader
Dinesh Aryal Co-Task Team Leader
Stephen Danyo Senior Natural Resources Management Specialist
Victor Bundi Mosoti Legal Council
Mohammad Nadeem Legal Analyst
Marcus P. Goldstein Practice Leader/ Gender
Niklas Buehren Gender Consultant
Madjiguene Seck Communications and Gender
Nneka okereke Communications Associate
Nicholas Meitaki Soikan Consultant
Kennan W. Rapp Senior Social Development Specialist
Mika-Petteri Torhonen Senior Land Policy Specialist
Andrew Osei Asibey Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist
Begashaw Wukaw Woldu Technical Specialist for Public works
Asmita Tiwari Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist
Tesfaye Ayele Senior Procurement Specialist
Jose Janeiro Senior Finance Officer
Abiy Demissie Belay Financial Management Specialist
Klaus W. Deininger Lead Economist/ Land Administration
Million Alemayehu Gizaw Natural Resources Management Specialist
Andre Rodrigues de Aquino Carbon Finance Specialist
Teklu Tesfaye Toli Senior Agricultural Specialist
Ademola Braimoh Team Member
Chukwudi H. Okafor Senior Social Development Specialist
Asferachew Abate Abebe Environmental Management and Safeguards
Mistre Hailemariam Mekuria Team Assistant
Aurore Simbananiye Program Assistant
Yesmeana N. Butler Program Assistant
Supervision / ICR
Paul Jonathan Martin Task Team Leader
Stephen Danyo Task Team Leader
Dinesh Aryal Co-Task Team Leader
Banu Setlur Co-Task Team Leader
Page 53 of 72
The World Bank
Ayalew Kebede Belew Procurement Specialist

Tesfaye Ayele Procurement Specialist
Kejela Fufa Procurement Specialist
Mekdim Hailu Yemane Financial Management Specialist
Abiy Demissie Belay Financial Management Specialist
Stephen Diero Amayo Financial Management Specialist
Meron Tadesse Financial Management Specialist
Fikremariam Adal Financial Management Consultant
Yacob Wondimkun Endaylalu Social Specialist/Environmental Specialist
Asferachew Abate Abebe Social Specialist
Samuel Lule Demsash Social Specialist
Agezew Hidaru Social Development Specialist
Michael G. Carroll NRM and Rural Development Specialist/ ICR Main Author
Andre Rodrigues de Aquino Carbon Finance Specialist
Hailu Tefera Ayeke Sr Forest Carbon Specialist
Tomothy Brown Senior Forest Specialist
Mei Xie Senior Climate Change and Learning Specialist
Million Alemayehu Gizaw Senior Natural Resources Management Specialist
Shimeles Sima Senior Forest Landscapes Specialist
Ademola Braimoh Team Member
Dereje Agonafir Habtewold Environmental Safeguards Specialist
Grazia Atanasio Communications Specialist
Zena Afework Demissie Communications Specialist
Anna Corsi Senior Land Administration Specialist
Nadege Orlova Senior Land Administration Specialist /ICR Contributor
Marguerite Duponchel Economist
Shewakena Aytenfisu Abab Land Tenure Specialist
Yasmina Oodally Operations and Soils Specialist
Sandra Maria Romboli M&E Specialist and Economist
Daniel C. Monchuk M&E Specialist
Hild Rygnestad ICR contributor / Economic Efficiency Analysis
Mistre Hailemariam Mekuria Program Assistant
Netsanet Ayalew Belete Program Assistant
Ejigayehu Teka Habte Team Member
Mahlet Gima Program Assistant
Mediha Mohammed Ahmed Team Assistant
Addis Bekele Simie Team Member
Ahmed Alkadir Mohammed Operations Officer/ Consultant
Chukwudi H. Okafor Social Specialist
Anna Elisabeth Wikman Team Member
Page 54 of 72
The World Bank
Sisay Nune Hailemariam NRM Specialist

Tewodros Gebreegizabher Climate Smart Agriculture Specialist
Madjiguene Seck Communications and gender
Gelila Woodeneh Communications officer
Yesuf Abdella (FAOCP/WBG) Senior Rural Engineer
Heywot Kedan Mariam Environmental Specialist
Tamru Temam Environmental Specialist
B. STAFF TIME AND COST
Staff Time and Cost

Stage of Project Cycle
No. of staff weeks US$ (including travel and consultant costs)
Preparation
FY13 26.337 171,995.83
FY14 18.888 296,655.11
FY15 1.225 1,828.69
Total 46.45 470,479.63
Supervision/ICR
FY14 11.488 262,757.25
FY15 31.747 358,219.78
FY16 57.133 467,519.51
FY17 111.587 853,061.57
FY18 57.945 765,444.03
FY19 98.890 810,117.89
Total 368.79 3,517,120.03
Page 55 of 72
The World Bank
ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT
Components Amount at Approval Actual at Project Closing Percentage of Approval

(US$M) (US$M)
Component 1: Integrated Watershed and 71.15 60 84.33%
Landscape Management
Component 2: Institutional Strengthening, 16.54 15.2 91.89%
Capacity Development and Knowledge
Generation and Management
Component 3: Rural Land Administration, 11.90 7.6 63.86%
Certification and Land Use
Component 4: Project Management 3.37 13.4 397%
Total 102.69 96.2 93.68%
Note: This amount does not include US$2.94 million of co-financing provided by the Government of Ethiopia, which was allocated to the Component 1. The
foreign exchange losses from the SDR and the Multi-Donor Trust Fund were reflected in the second restructuring and reduced the available funding by US$5.34
million. The resulting actual amount at closing after the reconciliation of a few outstanding disbursements is US$96.2 million taking into account US$0.096
million still to be returned to the World Bank by the Client at the time of this report finalization.
Page 56 of 72
The World Bank
ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS
1. As noted in the World Bank Guidance on Implementation and Results Report (ICR), “efficiency is a measure of how economic resources
and inputs are converted to results” (World Bank, Sep 2018). In this Annex, efficiency is analyzed by: comparing planned and actual investment
costs; performing a benefit cost analysis; and discussing non-quantifiable benefits and implementation issues.
2. Where applicable, the results of this ex-post efficiency analysis are compared back to the ex-ante economic and financial analysis (EFA)
in the PAD (World Bank, October 2013). Detailed assumptions are available in project files.
Scope
3. The PDO and GEO is to reduce land degradation and improve land productivity in selected watersheds in targeted regions in Ethiopia. As
stated in the PAD, the incremental benefits from this project accrue from the productivity and environmental gains achieved through improved
land management. To continue the methodology used at appraisal, the scope of the analysis is limited to quantifying incremental net benefits on
cultivated land. The impact on other types of land and beneficiaries are acknowledged in the qualitative analysis.
4. It is important to note that due to data availability, the ex-ante analysis in the PAD covered 38 percent or 28 percent of the 135 planned
watersheds and 56 percent of the original budget. In this ex post analysis 123 or 91 percent of the 135 watersheds and all the investment costs
are included. To evaluate ex post efficiency, it is important to include all costs even if not all benefits can be quantified. Results are then easier to
interpret in that they present the most conservative estimate of return on investment. Any additional net benefits that can be quantified will
lead to higher returns without the need to also consider increased costs.
5. The components and subcomponents of this project are not separable and are therefore all required to capture planned benefits. While
the quantitative analysis is focused on net benefits captured on cultivated land in 123 watersheds across the project area, this requires more
than just costs invested in Subcomponent 1.b (homestead and farmland development, livelihood improvements, and CSA). As noted in the PAD,
for beneficiaries to adopt improved climate smart farming practices and diversify/intensify their current production systems on private land, it is
necessary to also reduce degradation-related risks on communal lands in Subcomponent 1.a. The success of the project interventions relies on
sustaining benefits into the future by supporting institutional development and by building capacity among beneficiaries in Component 2.
Page 57 of 72
The World Bank
Similarly, component 3 is needed to facilitate tenure-security that can positively influence farm-level investments. This component also ensures
local participation in land use planning to sustain benefits after the project has ended.
Planned Versus Actual Investment Costs
6. The investments costs considered for this analysis come from the October 10, 2018, Financial Report. Total spending as of October 2018
has been US$90.66 million (ETB 2,001 million). Some additional costs have accrued in the final quarter of 2018. The project has been
restructured twice due to foreign exchange losses and the original closing date was changed from April 7, 2019, to December 31, 2018, due to
early disbursement of funds. During restructuring in July 2017, funds were reallocated to Component 4 from the other components. This was
also done to allow for higher than expected costs particularly for M&E. At restructuring, overall project design remained unchanged but
outcome targets were reduced in several subcomponents (SLMP-2 restructuring documents, June 2017 and July 2018). The comparison of the
planned and achieved targets (efficacy) is discussed in the specific section of the ICR.
7. Project management costs constitute 13.4 percent of total cost and are four times higher than the initial budget, which was allocated for
this activity. The increased cost is partially due to a low initial estimate of 4.2 percent of total costs, which was adjusted during restructuring in
2017. Other projects of this type often allocate about 10 percent of costs to project management (SLMP-1 and RLLP). While project management
has been rated as good since the start of the project, the additional costs allocated during the 2017 restructuring helped improving the M&E
system.
8. Data for actual unit costs for different project activities are not available. Total community contribution was 20.3 million person-days
(PDs) with a cost of ETB 596 million (US$27 million). 47 percent of this labor was for SWC measures on farmland, 27 percent for SWC measures
on communal land, 11 percent was for homestead and livelihood development, and 9 percent for community forest management. For project
costs beneficiaries had to provide 20 percent of labor free for communal land activities as well as on very steep farmland (slope >30 percent) and
70 percent of labor free for farmland activities. Beneficiaries were paid local rates for the remaining labor provided. The assumed unit norms at
project appraisal match the official work norms issued by MoA (2004) as follows for number of PDs for construction labor and maintenance
labor, respectively:
(a) Bench terrace: 500 PD/km; 16 PD/km

(b) Hillside terrace: 250 PD/km; 16 PD/km
(c) Stone bunds: 250 PD/km; 16 PD/km
(d) Fanyaa Juu: 200 PD/km; 16 PD/km
(e) Soil bunds: 150 PD/km; 16 PD/km
(f) Grass strip: 30 PD/km; 0 PD/km
Page 58 of 72
The World Bank
Economic and Financial Analysis
9. To match the methodology in the PAD, the economic and financial returns of the project investment are estimated using a 25-year cost
benefit model with a financial discount rate of 12 percent and economic discount rate of 10 percent.
10. Benefit streams. Detailed assumptions about benefits and costs are provided in Appendix 1. One of the main benefit streams quantified
on cropland in the project area is avoided soil erosion achieved by SWC measures. Physical structures include soil bunds, terraces, fanyaa juus,
and stone bunds. Biological measures include establishing grass strips and planting fodder on bunds. With adoption of improved farming
practices and continuous and proper maintenance of SWC structures the project interventions are expected to increase productivity over time.
Net benefits are also expected from farmers adopting intercropping with fodder crops. Appendix 3 lists the 135 watersheds with a note on which
123 watersheds are included in the analysis with: cropland area, estimated soil erosion, km of physical and biological SWC measures, and ha of
treated farmland. Against these benefit flows the analysis considers: loss of cropland to SWC structures, variable costs of fodder production on
bunds and as intercropping, as well as investment and maintenance costs.
11. Financial investment costs. Investment costs included in the analysis are based on actual spending as of October 2018 amounting to ETB
2,001 million (US$90.66 million) across six years from 2013 to 2018. As explained in appendix 1, estimated in-kind contributions are added to
this to the amount of ETB 761 million (US$34 million). When converted to 2013 amounts total investment costs correspond to ETB 2,278 million
(US$104 million) in financial values. Future maintenance costs are assumed ETB 46 million (US$2.1 million) per year in labor, materials, and
supervision.
12. Economic investment costs. Taxes and duties are excluded from the investment costs in the economic analysis equal to ETB 28 million
(US$1.3 million) based on assumptions in the PAD. After adding the economic value of the in-kind contributions and converting to 2013
amounts, the economic analysis includes ETB 1,648 million in investment costs (US$75.3 million) with annual recurring costs of ETB 33 million
(US$1.5 million).
As shown in table 4.2, the overall project is a financially viable investment with a 21 percent financial internal rate of return (FIRR) and a
financial net present value (FNPV) of ETB 2.191 million (US$99 million). In economic terms, it is also a viable investment with a 23 percent
EIRR and an ENPV of ETB 3,308 million (US$150 million). Annually this is an average of ETB 132 million or US$6 million. The annual benefit and
cost flows are shown in appendix 2 in economic values. Further analysis shows that 60 percent of the benefits come from increased productivity,
31 percent from avoided soil loss, 5 percent from livestock production on bunds, and 4 percent from fodder intercropping. On the other hand,
50 percent of the costs are investment costs, 32 percent are from lost land, 7 percent from variable costs in fodder production on bunds, 5
percent from variable costs in fodder intercropping, and 6 percent is from annual maintenance costs after project implementation.
Page 59 of 72
The World Bank
Table 4.1. Financial and Economic Analysis – PAD and ICR

ETB millions US$, millions
Indicator PAD ICR PAD ICR
FIRR, % 19 21 19 21
FNPV 1,603 2,191 57 99
EIRR, % 26 23 26 23
ENPV 3,098 3,308 111 150
Analysis scope
Investment costs included (including tax, excluding in-kind contributions) 1,609 2,001 57 91
Original (PAD) and restructured (ICR) budget 2,939 2,001 105 91
Share of budget (%) 55 100 55 100
Watersheds included, # 38 123 38 123
Share of 135 watersheds (%) 28 91 28 91
Notes: Using 25-year horizons the financial and economic discount rates are 12 percent and 10 percent, respectively for both PAD and ICR. PAD exchange rate
= ETB 28/US$. ICR exchange rate = ETB 22.07/US$. The NPVs reported in the PAD were slightly higher (FIRR = 19 percent; FNPV = 1,771; EIRR = 24 percent;
ENPV = 3,145). During ICR analysis, some calculation errors were corrected in the original PAD model. The restated results are shown in this table.
13. Comparison to the PAD. In the original PAD the estimated FIRR was 19 percent and the EIRR was 26 percent. The rates of return are
similar even if the current analysis is based on 91 percent of the watersheds and 100 percent of the costs, while the original PAD estimate was
based on 28 percent of the watersheds and 55 percent of the costs. As documented in Appendix 1 and discussed later in the sensitivity analysis,
some key assumptions in the current analysis differ from those in the PAD including: investment costs spread out over 6 years rather than 1,
higher gross margins, lower estimated soil loss, and smaller share of land lost to SWC structures.
14. Comparison to BCR. These results are similar to a financial analysis undertaken in the BCR (MoA 2018). The 20-year analysis included
initial yield loss followed by yield increases on a representative farm with SWC practices. It also assumed a future yield loss in the absence of
project implementation. With initial farm-level investment costs and annual maintenance costs in subsequent years, the resulting FIRR was 24
percent with an FNPV of ETB 10,950 using a 12.5 percent discount rate. It was concluded that the SWC measures are financially viable and they
Page 60 of 72
The World Bank
enable farmers to improve their productivity. The household survey also indicated that 79 percent of respondents believed that SWC are
profitable. MoA (2018) estimates a 24 percent EIRR over a 25-year analysis, which also corresponds to the current analysis.8
Table 4.2.Sensitivity Analysis, Financial and Economic Values

Case FIRR, % FNPV, FNPV, Change in
ETB, millions US$, millions NPV (%)
1. ICR EFA Base Case, Financial Analysis 21 2,191 99 0
3. Higher financial discount rate, 12.5% rather than 12% 21 1,974 89 -10
2. ICR EFA base case, economic analysis 23 3,308 150 0

4. Lower economic discount rate, 5% rather than 10% 23 7,827 355 137
5. 5% lower avoided annual soil loss 23 3,221 146 –3
6. Crop gross margins as in SLMP-2 gross margin study 16 959 43 –71
7. Crop gross margins as in PAD 14 537 24 –84
8. Achieve 5% rather than 10% productivity increase 17 1,412 64 –57
9. Achieve no productivity increase 7 –488 –22 –115
10. 5% lower avoided annual soil loss, medium gross margins from gross margin study, only 5% 10 25 1 -99
productivity increase
11. Revert to without project situation after 15 years 21 1,950 88 -41
12. Revert to without project situation after 8 years 9 –56 –3 –102
13. 11% rather than 6% land lost to SWC structures 21 2,783 126 -16
14. More intercropping (10% of cropland) 29 6,176 280 87
15. Sensitivity to discount rates. Table 4.3 presents several cases to discuss the sensitivity of estimated project returns. Firstly, the BCR
suggested an opportunity cost of capital of 12.5 percent. In the current analysis, FNPV decreases by 10 percent if the discount rate is increased
from 12 percent to 12.5 percent. Conversely, current World Bank guidelines suggest using a 5 percent economic discount rate (World Bank
2015). Applying this rather than the 10 percent adopted from the original PAD, ENV would increase ENPV by 137 percent.
8It was not possible to compare the results from the current analysis with the economic analysis conducted in the BCR due to lack of documentation in that document (MoA
2018).
Page 61 of 72
The World Bank
16. Sensitivity to estimated avoided soil loss. In the base case avoided annual soil losses range between zero and 63 tons/ha/year with an
average of 20 tons/ha/year. Compared to other sources these estimates are conservative, however if the estimated soil loss in the without
project situation is 5 percent lower than the Base Case, the ENPV can fall by 3 percent but still provide an EIRR of 23 percent.
17. Sensitivity to value of soil. The crop gross margin used to value soil in the PAD was lower than what was found in the SLMP-2 gross
margin study (Große-Rüschkamp 2015) and in the BCR (MoA 2018). Since crop gross margin is used to value soil in several benefit streams, the
estimated EIRR would fall from 23 percent to 16 percent when using the gross margin study, whereas the EIRR would fall to 14 percent if using
the PAD estimate. Using elasticity analysis, a 1 percent increase in the gross margin (and therefore the value of soil) is estimated to lead to a 1.3
percent increase in ENPV. Compared to the opportunity cost of capital, the overall investment remains viable regardless of which gross margin is
used, however this quantifies the importance of reducing erosion and improving farm management on land with higher productivity—as well as
the costs experienced when losing land with higher productivity.
18. Sensitivity to reduced productivity increases. Project returns are sensitive to the assumption about how improved management
practices can increase productivity in the future. If farmers are unable to adopt new practices and if SWC structures are not maintained,
productivity may only increase by 5 percent rather than 10 percent over time. This would lead to a 57 percent reduction in NPV and a drop from
23 percent to 17 percent EIRR. Using elasticity analysis, a 1 percent reduction in this productivity increase can lead to a 1.1 percent reduction in
ENPV. At the extreme, if no productivity increases are achieved in future years, the project is no longer financially or economically viable.
19. Reverting to without project situation. If lack of sustainability in the future is such that SWC structures are not maintained and farmers
revert to the original farm management practices, the annual benefits and costs could revert to the without-project situation. If, for example,
this happens after 15 years, the estimated ENPV could fall by 41 percent. If the area reverts to the without-project situation after only 8 years,
the investment is no longer viable as ENPV falls below 10 percent. This is also reflected in the estimated payback period of 8.5 years. It is
important to continue maintaining SWC structures in the future and ensure that capacity building among beneficiaries enables them to maintain
the improved management practices.
20. Sensitivity to loss of land to SWC structures. In the original PAD, it was assumed that 12.3 percent of farmland would be lost to SWC
structures (7.5 percent for grass strips). The assumption in the current analysis is a 6 percent land loss in line with the BCR. If the loss is increased
to an average of 11 percent, estimated ENPV falls by 16 percent and the EIRR falls from 23 percent to 21 percent. Note that in the current
analysis, it is assumed that some bunds are planted with improved fodder crops—thereby capturing net benefits on the land lost from other
cropping activities.
21. Sensitivity to adoption of fodder intercropping. It has been acknowledged that the initial target for intercropping has not been met. At
a national level, 35 percent or 2,434 ha of the 6,944 target, has been achieved. For the 123 watersheds included in this analysis, intercropping
Page 62 of 72
The World Bank
has been adopted on 1,982 ha (0.3 percent of cropland area). In the PAD the original assumption was that 10 percent of cropland could be
converted to intercropping. If this was achieved in these 123 watersheds it could constitute an 87 percent increase in ENPV with an EIRR of 29
percent. Building capacity and supporting farmers to adopt CSA such as intercropping can increase project economic returns significantly.
Qualitative Benefits and Implementation Issues
22. Rehabilitation of communal lands. The non-quantified benefits in SLMP-2 are linked to activities and outputs that are captured in the
quantified analysis. For example, physical and biological SWC measures and gully rehabilitation on communal lands provide direct benefits to
adjacent farmland by stabilizing hillsides. In addition, this increases ecological services and productivity for income-generating activities on
communal lands. Benefits have also been achieved by demarcating community forests and managing these for reduced degradation with
afforestation and reforestation measures.
23. Use of local labor and alternative livelihoods. Project implementation has included a substantial amount of local labor when completing
both physical and biological SWC measures. While some of the work has been provided in-kind by beneficiaries, some has also been paid labor.
Total community contribution was 20.3 million PDs with a cost of ETB 596 million (US$27 million). 47 percent of this labor was for SWC measures
on farmland, 27 percent for SWC measures on communal land, 11 percent was for homestead and livelihood development, and 9 percent for
community forest management. By using local labor, this enables local beneficiaries to take charge of maintaining structures in the future. The
project also supported the establishment of bamboo seedling production and of over 1515 local nurseries that are able to continue operating
after project implementation. Their capacity was developed while providing planting materials for the project.
24. Community infrastructure. In the current analysis, the potential for farmers to achieve increased productivity on cropland relies on
more than the SWC measures. In some watersheds this benefit relies on the development of community infrastructure for SSI, water-harvesting
technologies, and construction of feeder roads. In addition, these infrastructures generate many benefits other than those captured on cropland
by providing households with improved access to water for domestic and livestock use. Improved roads also provide access to markets, schools,
and medical and social services.
25. CSA and high-value crops. The only part of the SLMP-2 initiatives toward CSA that has been quantified directly relates to fodder
intercropping. The assumed avoided soil loss and increased soil productivity quantified on cropland may also rely on several other activities such
as composting, crop residue management, agroforestry, reduced or zero tillage, and use of cover crops. In support of this, the project has also
promoted improved and high-value crops to farmers such as planting of fruit trees, root and tuber crops, coffee, spices, vegetable, potatoes, and
high-value cereals and pulses. Together with improved market accessibility this improves both food and income diversification.
Page 63 of 72
The World Bank
26. Cut-and carry livestock feeding system. Over 55,000 households have adopted a cut-and-carry feeding system. By encouraging
households to switch to rearing livestock without allowing them to graze freely in communal areas, the project is helping reduce the pressure on
degraded areas while also improving livestock production. More crop residues are left to improve agricultural soils and the quality of livestock
feed improves. It would be very useful to evaluate the costs and benefits of this feeding system in terms of increased yield of the livestock, costs
of fencing/tethering or rotational grazing, labor costs for collecting fodder, costs of purchasing additional feed, as well as the value of reduced
pressure on degraded lands. Increased adoption of this feeding system may also have an impact on the local value of fodder crops that may or
may not be met by increased supply through fodder production on bunds and intercropping.
27. Promoting income-generating activities. It has already been noted that project beneficiaries have been able to adopt alternative
livelihoods through newly established plant nurseries. In addition, households will benefit from the promotion of and support to establish other
income-generating activities such as backyard poultry production, shoat fattening, and apiculture. While these benefits have not been captured
in the analysis, beneficiary households can improve both food and income diversification.
28. Improved capacity of community institutions and beneficiary groups. All the quantified and non-quantified benefits rely on successful
capacity development set out by the project. Working through local institutions and using local labor reduces project costs and improves
sustainability if costs can be funded in the future. Institutions have been strengthened so that the captured benefit streams can continue into
the future. The sustainability of the project interventions will rely on the capacity of and future support for the established Woreda Steering
Committees, CWTs, and KWTs. They will be responsible for implementing local land use plans and supporting local beneficiary households with
the necessary knowledge they need to achieve the improvements offered by the project. This can be done by continuing with technology
demonstrations and farmer training visits and field-days. Beneficiaries can work together in newly established watershed user associations and
self-help groups for income-generating activities.
29. Cadastral surveys and land certificates. Through the land administration and certification component, the project area and its
households have benefited from cadastral surveys, parcel-mapping and issuing of land certificates. This strengthens tenure security for
smallholders in the area that provides motivation to adopt improved management practices from which benefits accrue gradually over time.
30. M&E system. The project has put particular emphasis on developing an M&E system around the large amount of data collected. As
noted in the November 2018 Aide Memoire, more work is required to reconcile different data sources and setting up an integrated database for
project activities. This work will benefit M&E for the current project as well as for planning future related projects.
31. Improved carbon balance. The incremental CO2eq accumulated in the project area as per November 2018 has been estimated as 5.4
million tCO2eq across 855,378 ha (6.3 tCO2eq/ha). This is 64 percent of the original sequestration target of 8.3 million tons. The impact is derived
from land use changes including: Afforestation/reforestation, area closure, bamboo and gully stabilization; communal and farmland SWC
Page 64 of 72
The World Bank
measures; and agroforestry promotion. It also includes improved CSA; conservation tillage; tropical and temperate fruit seedling planting; and
annual crop systems converted to perennial systems. Finally, carbon balance improvements have been achieved through backyard forage
systems and pastureland, as well as forest enrichment in demarcated areas.
Conclusions
32. The suggested efficiency rating for SLMP-2 based on this quantitative analysis is Substantial. If more of the benefits discussed
qualitatively could be quantified the rating may possibly increase to High. The estimated financial and economic rates of return of 21 percent
and 23 percent, respectively, indicate that SLMP-2 is a viable project investment. The quantitative analysis only includes net benefits captured
on cropland in 91 percent of the watersheds with implementation of SWC measures and improved farm management. Because all project costs
are included in this analysis, all other non-quantified benefits are expected to increase the estimated rates of return.
33. The captured net benefits are dependent on sufficient future maintenance of the SWC structures as well as capacity building for farmers
to achieve the expected productivity gains. Substantial additional gains can be captured with increased adoption of farming practices such as
fodder intercropping. Benefits from many non-quantified project achievements include
(a) Rehabilitating degraded communal lands;

(b) Using local labor during implementation;
(c) Establishing irrigation and road infrastructure;
(d) Supporting improved food and income diversification and new livelihoods;
(e) Implementation of Climate-Smart agriculture practices
(f) Promoting cut-and-carry livestock feeding system;
(g) Strengthening local institutions and beneficiary groups, which can improve sustainability if their costs can be funded in the future;
(h) Strengthening tenure security that motivates adoption of improved management practices that provide benefits gradually over
time;
(i) Developing an M&E system to benefit this as well as future projects; and
(j) Providing a net carbon sink due to land use changes.
Page 65 of 72
The World Bank
ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS
Comments from the National Project Coordinating Unit of the Ministry of Agriculture
No Issues from the NPCU Comments and Suggestion

1 We acknowledge lead consultant of ICR and SLMP2
TTL for compiling and analyzing project results and World Bank to organize one to two days
output. Looking into the content of the report we interactive training for skill transfer and
would like to request skill transfer to regional and the report analysis result verification for
national staff on financial and economic cost benefit project coordinators and M&E team.
analysis. Considering its implication for efficient
RLLP implementation
2 Updated data as per the resent documents sent the

ICR consultants 1. Cumulative financial utilization
according to IFR 21 submitted to Bank
• Mismatch of figures used for report writing: and copy document forwarded to ICR
Text paragraphs and annex table 1 of Consultants through e-mail on March 15,
Results Framework Indicators and Key
2019.
Outputs
• Un-updated cumulative financial utilization 2. Final version BCR shared to the team
generated from the system and its on March 5, 2019
implication on analysis of the report.
3 Under annex 4, Appendix of Detailed Assumptions, The PCU submitted basic data of all
the report indicated incremental net benefits are watersheds including names a year
quantified for 123 watersheds, while the project before. The analysis should consider the
invested in 135 watersheds. It is indicated that remaining 12 watersheds. We need
naming of the project was a limitation. What is the clarity.
bench mark of naming comparison for the data
NPCU submitted?
4 Component 4 budget share at completion: • Incremental cost to improve weakness

Additional justification for percentage increment and address growing demand for M&E
beyond revised budget. framework improvement.
• Additional cost for follow on project
(RLLP) design mission due to
unforeseen restructuring
• Inflation of cost for items procured for
project management component
especially maintenance and fuel cost
for the project implementation.
Page 66 of 72
The World Bank
No Issues from the NPCU Comments and Suggestion

5 Detail comments • Detail comments are shown in the
main document to be considered
6 In para 79: The limited coordination between the NPCU considers this statement is not
NPCU and the NRM Directorate could have become relevant to the ICR
a factor affecting project implementation, but was
effectively compensated by the active engagement
of the State Minister for NRM in all aspects related
to project governance and dialogue with the Bank
Comments from Embassy of Norway, Addis Ababa

General feedback:
The report is comprehensive providing clear understanding on the project planning and implementation
processes; changes made during the project implementation and project achievements/results. Project
achievements under each project component have gender information in most cases.
It is very interesting to read throughout the report the interconnectedness of the project components
and its contributions/synergies to the PDO. It is also encouraging to see how the project addressed the
various environmental, economic and societal problems in integrated manner. The project efficiency
assessment is also well presented.
The report however covers minimal information on how the project addressed or managed risk factors
outlined in the project document (PAD).
Detailed feedback:
Financing (Page 2): it is unclear why Norway’s disbursement to the WB is indicated as 0.
Project Context and Development Objectives
- Theory of change (Figure 1) is well presented. However, the diagram is presented twice on page 7 & 8.
- Paragraph 12: the institutional strengthening support provided at community level was more at institution
level such as community-based organizations and different committees rather than individual level
(farmers and community leaders).
- Paragraph 18: it is unclear whether high or low expenditure rate of the project contributed for the need
for the 2016 restructuring.
- Paragraph 20: the reduction of targets during the second restructuring is because of not only devaluation
in Norwegian Kroner, but also devaluation in SDR mentioned under paragraph 18.
Page 67 of 72
The World Bank
- Paragraph 39 & 40: the report contains good information on CSA sub component. However, it would have
been more useful/ informative if some concreate results for example on household yields, incomes, labor
etc. are included in the report, similar to the results on land certification presented under paragraph 49.
This is especially useful since the project result framework does not have indicators on CSA.
- Paragraph 66 & 67 – Gender: Inclusion of information on the benefit of CSA practices for women/female
headed households for example in terms of reducing labor demand would provide good insights on the
benefit of CSA as well.
- Paragraph 72: it would be interesting to refer the private sector engagement in the context of Private
Public Partnership and corporate social responsibility in the natural resources management sector. The
linkages between SLMP and researches through higher educational/research institution such as Mekelle
University at watershed level is another value addition to the project. This kind of synergy ensures project
resource efficiency since the collaboration with Mekelle University is related to the Norway support on
research and technology development to the University.
- Paragraph 88: the limitations of the SLMP M&E system is discussed in the report, highlighting the need for
further work in order to make the system relevant and be able to provide information in line with the
project indicators at different levels. It also lacks information on how the M&E system verified the data
gathered from the fields. It is therefore unclear how the quality of M&E system is rated Substantial.
- Paragraph 89: it would be useful if the report discusses how the project (WB & PCU) addressed
safeguard issues.
- Paragraph 97: the sentence on beneficiaries from various capacity development interventions needs
revision. 9,477 is the total recipient number, not the number of capacity development sessions
provided to end users.
- Paragraph 108: One of the weaknesses of the project financial management was inability to settle
advance payments by woreda offices (audit report of the project on 2017 audits).
- Paragraph 109: Graduation approach in SLMP also needs to be understood/explained in a context as one
of the mechanisms developed in order to phase out SLMP I watersheds by transferring the watersheds
to the government SLMP programme, ensuring the sustainability of SLMP I&II interventions and results.
- Paragraph 116 & 117: the report covers only few risk factors outlined in the SLMP II PAD. Information
on how the project managed to address other risk factors mentioned in the project PAD is also
important.
- Annex I - Results framework: insertion of percentage on plan vs achievement would be more useful.
Page 68 of 72
The World Bank
- Annex IV – Efficiency Analysis – paragraph 32: it seems proper if the report includes CSA in the list of
non-quantified project achievement, since very limited quantified analysis is provided on the CSA
subcomponent of the project.
Page 69 of 72
The World Bank
ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
Centre for Development Research. SLMP-2 Borrower Completion Report. December 2018. Addis Ababa
Berhane, Gebreyohannes. 2017. Assessment of Livestock Impact on NRM Interventions of SLMP-2 and
Recommendations for the Design of the Resilient Landscapes and Livelihoods Project (RLLP).
McCoy, K. Lynn, and Alex Rotich Rutto. 2018. SLMP-2 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Assessment.
Gross, Daniel. 2016. SLMP-2 Mid Term Review. December 2016
MoA/WFP. 2004 Summary Work Norms Prepared for Field Staff Rapid Reference. Extracted from:
Revised Soil and Water Conservation Work Norms MoA/WFP, 2000. September 2004. Addis
Ababa.
Ministry of Agriculture. 2016. Climate Smart Agriculture – A Field Manual for SLM Practitioners,
December 2016. Addis Ababa
World Bank and TerrAfrica. 2015. “Restoring the Landscapes of Ethiopia’s Highlands. Creating Natural
Wealth for Improved Livelihoods.” Washington, D.C.
Große-Rüschkamp, A. 2015. Productivity and Income Contribution of Family Farm Enterprises: A Gross
Margin Study on the Sustainable Land Management Program (SLMP) – Summary Report. Addis
Ababa: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH.
Haregeweyn, Nigussie, Atsushi Tsunekawa, Jan Nyssen, Jean Poesen, Mitsuru Tsubo, Derege Tsegaye
Meshesha, Brigitta Schütt, Enyew Adgo, and Firew Tegegne. 2015. “Soil Erosion and
Conservation in Ethiopia: A Review. Progress in Physical Geography.” Progress in Physical
Geography 39: (6) 750–774.
Nyssen J., W. Clymans, K. Descheemaeker, J. Poesen, I. Vandecasteele, M Vanmaercke, A. Zenebe, M.

Van Camp, M Haile, N Haregeweyn, J. Moeyersons, K. Martens, T. Gebreyohannes, J. Deckers,
and K. Walraevens (2010). Impact of soil and water conservation measures on catchment
hydrological response – a case in north Ethiopia. Hydrological Processes. 24: 1880-1895.
doi:10.1002/hyp.7628.
WLRC (Water and Land Resource Centre). 2018. Estimating Change in Soil Erosion Due to Climate
Change in RLLP Project Watersheds Technical Analysis by Ethiopia Water and Land Resources
Center (WLRC) and World Bank.
World Bank. 2015. Technical Note on Discounting Costs and Benefits in Economic Analysis of World Bank
Projects. Washington, DC.
Page 70 of 72
The World Bank
World Bank. 2018. Ethiopia Resilient Landscapes and Livelihoods Project. Project Appraisal Document.
Report No: PAD2484.
Data Sources (Economic Analysis)
Investment costs: Sustainable Land Management Project Phase II. Interim Unaudited Financial Reports
from July 7, 2014, to October 10, 2018. Ministry of Agriculture. Addis Ababa.
Project achievement and output:
• Sustainable Land Management Project II. 2007 to 2010 E.C Cumulative Report. Results
Framework Indicators including Excel files by watershed, woreda, region, and nationally.
NPCU. Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources. November 4, 2018.
• Additional Excel files from NPCU summarizing achievements and outputs for the last half of
2018 by region and nationally. February 4, 2019.
Project multiyear plans. Sustainable Land Management Project II. Excel files with multiyear plans by
watershed, woreda, region, and nationally. NPCU.
Watershed land use and erosion. List of 135 watersheds with annual erosion, land use. and land cover
estimated from satellite data. SLMP-2 project team.
Inflation. World Development Indicators database, data series FP.CPI.TOTL. Accessed November 14,
2018.
Page 71 of 72
The World Bank
ANNEX 7. MAP OF PROJECT AREAS
Page 72 of 72

Ethiopia Sustainable Land Management Project

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ethiopia Sustainable Land Management Project

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ethiopia Sustainable Land Management Project

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Public Disclosure Authorized

Report No: ICR00004449

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT

FROM THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION

FROM THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY TRUST FUND

FROM THE LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES TRUST FUND

FROM THE ETHIOPIA SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT PROJECT TRUST FUND

THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA

June 19, 2019

Environment and Natural Resources Global Practice

Currency Unit = Ethiopian Birr (ETB)

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

BCR Borrower Completion Report

Regional Vice President: Hafez M. H. Ghanem

Country Director: Carolyn Turk

Senior Global Practice Director: Karin Erika Kemper

Practice Manager: Iain G. Shuker

Task Team Leader(s): Paul Jonathan Martin

ICR Main Contributor: Michael G. Carroll

DATA SHEET .......................................................................................................................................1

P133133 Sustainable Land Management Project

Country Financing Instrument

Ethiopia Investment Project Financing

Original EA Category Revised EA Category

Partial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)

Relationship Project Approval Product Line

Borrower Implementing Agency

Federal Ministry of Finance and Economic Coopration,

Project Development Objective (PDO)

Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$)

P133133 TF-15838 40,000,000 38,519,084 38,448,341

P133410 TF-15869 4,629,000 4,629,000 4,629,000

P133410 TF-15868 8,333,000 8,333,000 8,333,000

Total 102,962,000 101,481,084 97,257,371

Non-World Bank Financing

Total Project Cost 147,612,000 101,481,084 97,257,371

Project Approval Effectiveness MTR Review Original Closing Actual Closing

RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING

Date(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions

Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality

RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs

02 03-Dec-2014 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 8.92

03 04-Jun-2015 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 23.83

04 03-Dec-2015 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 34.62

05 23-May-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 46.26

06 10-Nov-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 56.36

07 15-Feb-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 56.77

08 09-May-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 60.32

09 04-Dec-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 71.63

10 14-Jun-2018 Satisfactory Satisfactory 76.62

11 27-Dec-2018 Satisfactory Satisfactory 84.30

SECTORS AND THEMES

Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 100

Private Sector Development 100

Urban and Rural Development 39

Environment and Natural Resource Management 108

Environmental policies and institutions 3

Water Resource Management 40

Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop Hafez M. H. Ghanem