1. UNDP/GEF: Integrated Ecosystem Management in the Prespa Lakes Basin of Albania, Macedonia and Greece Project co–financing strategy – Experience, Challenges and Lessons Learnt – Dimitrija Sekovski, UNDP/GEF National Project Manager Daniela Stefkova, GEF Operational Focal Point for Macedonia Dubrovnik 2009

2. Transboundary Prespa Lakes Basin - Basin area of 1,600 sq km shared between the three neighboring countries (MK 62%, AL 17%, GR 21%) - Approximately 30,000 inhabitants (MK 75%, AL 17%, GR 8%) - Local economy based on agriculture, tourism, fishing, NTFPs, factories in MK…

4. Prespa region: unique values of the ecosystem under continuous stressPrespa region: unique values of the ecosystem under continuous stress Underlying causes for stress on ecosystem health:Underlying causes for stress on ecosystem health: –Serious decline of the water level of the Prespa Lake –Inappropriate scale for land-use and water use planning –Ecosystem objectives not sufficiently incorporated into the sectoral law and regulatory instruments –Pollution from pesticides, fertilizers and industrial compounds –Waste management practices (agricultural, industrial, domestic) –Fisheries and forestry management practices –Protected areas management –Wastewater management etc.

5. Supporting the trilateral initiative History –Trilateral Declaration – signed 02 February 2000 –Trilateral Prespa Park Coordination Committee –Strategic Action Plan for the Sustainable Development of the Prespa region adopted in 2003 –Resource mobilization efforts National Governments, Municipalities (primarily in-kind contribution) Donors: GTZ, KfW, GEF, UNDP, SDC, REC, SIDA, NATO, WWF (through Society for the Protection of Prespa, GR), MedWet… Projects in agriculture, infrastructure development, nature conservation and protected areas management, water and wastewater and solid waste management, river restoration, forest regeneration etc) UNDP/GEF role: to coordinate and integrate the support by all donors (in cooperation with Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning and Municipality of Resen) –Advantage: Existence of locally based Project Management Unit (PMU) established during PDF – B stage (January 2004)

6. UNDP GEF projects (implemented by the local PMU in Prespa) BudgetSource of Funds Period 1 PDF – B Prespa367,000 USDGEF Jan 2004 - Feb 2005 2 Full size Prespa4,135,000 USDGEF May 2006 – ongoing Other UNDP projects 3 Reducing Environmental Impacts of Agriculture (MK & AL) 220,000 USDUNDP Feb 2005 – May 2006 4 Extension of the Solid Waste Management Service in the Rural Communities (MK) 472,000 CHFSDC Feb 2005 – Feb 2006 5 Restoration of Golema Reka (Stage I) (MK) 2,000,000 CHFSDC Dec 2005 – ongoing 6 Restoration of Golema Reka (Stage II) (MK) 1,000,000 CHFSDC Dec 2008 - ongoing

7. Complementary/parallel funding provided by other Donors and Governments: –KfW: 5,000,000 USD –NATO: 250,000 USD –Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning (MK): 300,000 USD –Ministry of Environment and Public Works (GR): 560,000 USD –Municipality of Resen: 780,000 USD –Italian Government: 1,000,000 USD –WWF (through SPP): TOTAL: 12,330,000 USD (co-financing to GEF project prior to its submission for approval)

8. Co-financing arrangements - experience, examples and lessons learnt - Building on existing initiatives provides opportunities for commitment and support by national governments and interested donors (Prespa Park, SAP) –High level commitment (Signing of Project Document; Working Group established by the Prime minister) Provide coordination role for the other donor funded projects / Results: a) long-term cooperation with donors (for e.g. SDC) b) avoid duplication/overlapping with other projects pursuing similar objectives (for e.g. KfW interventions) Maintain local office in the Project region as a key advantage compared to the other donors (bridging the gap between PDF-B and full-size GEF project with other complementary projects developed during PDF-B)

9. Co-financing arrangements - experience, examples and lessons learnt - Promote transparency, provide adequate participation and maintain continuous communication with the key stakeholders including the affected communities to stimulate local resource mobilization actions: –Example: construction of wastewater treatment system in one rural community (GEF, MoEPP, local community raised more than 40,000 EUR to support the construction works) Use the possibilities of the GEF Small Grants Programme (develop NGO implemented complementary projects for which parallel co-financing is provided by projects funded by donors other than GEF) –Examples: integrated crop production and integrated pest management in apple production –pesticide and fertilizer packaging management system (project proposal under preparation) Provide support (professional, financial) to the subjects interested in implementing relevant initiatives to optimize the use of resources, avoid overlapping and ensure sustainability of results (matching funds) –Example: Co-financing from transboundary partners (WWF/SPP from Greece – support in the establishment of a basin-wide monitoring system)

10. Ensure Central and Local Governments’ commitment for providing long-term funding for securing sustainability of the project results –Natural Capital Resource Center, the Ezerani Nature Reserve Management Body, Watershed Management Council, Environmental Monitoring system… –Spatial Plan and Water Management Plan for the Prespa Region (planning documents of highest legal power in the country endorsed by the Parliament; clear proposals with timeframe, budget and sources of financing) / planning horizon of 15 – 20 years Develop and implement initiatives with potential for replication and scaling-up (in the same region and/or across the country): –Wastewater treatment plant –Spatial plans –Agricultural waste management –Water management plans –Other pilot initiatives (local action to serve as a model for national/regional replication) Ensuring mechanisms for long-term support to the ecosystem priorities beyond the project closure

11. THANK YOU!

12. The Prespa region