world bank documentdocuments1.worldbank.org/curated/en/915671525100107470/... · 2018. 5. 2. ·...

Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No: ICR00004348

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT

(IDA Credit: 4937-BJ, 5443-BJ, and 5642-BJ)

ON

CREDITS

FROM THE

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION

IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR64.9 MILLION

(SDR31.6M, SDR4.2M, SDR29M, RESPECTIVELY)

(US$96.4 MILLION EQUIVALENT: US$50M, US$6.4M, US$40M RESPECTIVELY)

TO THE

REPUBLIC OF BENIN

FOR THE

BENIN EMERGENCY URBAN ENVIRONMENT PROJECT ( P113145 )

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

April 30, 2018

Environment & Natural Resources Global Practice

Africa Region

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

Exchange Rate Effective: October 31, 2017

Currency Unit = SDR

SDR0.71 = US$1

US$1.00 = CFAF 563.3

FISCAL YEAR

January 1 - December 31

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AF Additional Financing

AGETUR Public Works Executing Agency (Agence d’Exécution des Travaux Urbains)

ANPC National Flood Disaster Agency (Agence Nationale de Protection Civile)

BEUEP Benin Emergency Urban Environment Project

CFAF West African CFA Franc

CPS Country Partnership Strategy

DO Progress toward the development objectives

ESIA Environment and Social Impact Assessment

ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework

ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan

FEWS Flood Early Warning System

FM Financial Management

FY Fiscal Year

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery

GOB Government of Benin

GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism

IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop

Country Director: Pierre Frank Laporte

Senior Global Practice Director: Karin Erika Kemper

Practice Manager: Benoit Bosquet

Task Team Leader(s): Africa Eshogba Olojoba

ICR Main Contributor: Sanne Agnete Tikjoeb

IDA International Development Association

IP Implementation progress

IRR Internal Rate of Return

ISR Implementation Status and Results Report

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MTR Mid-Term Review

NPV Net Present Value

OP Operational Policy

O&M Operation and Maintenance

PAPs Project Affected Persons

PCU Project Coordinating Unit

PDNA Post Disaster Needs Assessment

PDO Project Development Objective

PGUD Decentralized City Management Project (Projet de Gestion Urbaine Décentralisée)

PIM Project Implementation Manual

PP Project Paper

PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper

RAP Resettlement Action Plan

RF Results Framework

RPF Resettlement Policy Framework

SERHAU Society for Regional Study of Urban Habitats and Planning (Société d’Etudes Régionales

d’Habitat et d’Aménagement Urbain)

SMART

SWM

Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound

Solid Waste Management

TA Technical Assistance

TTL Task Team Leader

UN United Nations

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DATA SHEET ....................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................... 5

A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL .........................................................................................................5

B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION (IF APPLICABLE) .......................................9

II. OUTCOME .................................................................................................................... 12

A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs ............................................................................................................ 12

B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) ...................................................................................... 13

C. EFFICIENCY ........................................................................................................................... 16

D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING .................................................................... 17

E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS (IF ANY) ............................................................................ 18

III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ................................ 19

A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION ................................................................................... 19

B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................. 19

IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .. 21

A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) ............................................................ 21

B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE ..................................................... 22

C. BANK PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................... 23

D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME ....................................................................................... 24

V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 25

ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................... 28

ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION ......................... 45

ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................... 48

ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 49

ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ... 54

ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS .................................................................................. 59

The World Bank Benin Emergency Urban Env. Project ( P113145 )

Page 1 of 62

DATA SHEET

BASIC INFORMATION

Product Information

Project ID Project Name

P113145 Benin Emergency Urban Env. Project

Country Financing Instrument

Benin Emergency Recovery Loan

Original EA Category Revised EA Category

Partial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)

Related Projects

Relationship Project Approval Product Line

Additional Financing P148628-Benin Emergency Urban Env. Additional Financing

08-May-2014 IBRD/IDA

Additional Financing P154601-Benin Emergency Urban Env. 2nd Add. Fin.

29-May-2015 IBRD/IDA

Organizations

Borrower Implementing Agency

Minsitry of Environment and Sustainable Development AGETUR, SERHAU

Project Development Objective (PDO) Original PDO

To improve infrastructure and mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in Cotonou Agglomeration and to increase Benin level of preparedness for future flooding.


Page 2 of 62

FINANCING

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

World Bank Financing IDA-49370

50,000,000 50,000,000 46,981,415

IDA-54430

6,400,000 6,400,000 5,836,959

IDA-56420

40,000,000 40,000,000 39,902,915

Total 96,400,000 96,400,000 92,721,289

Non-World Bank Financing

Borrower 0 0 0

Total 0 0 0

Total Project Cost 96,400,000 96,400,000 92,721,289

KEY DATES

Approval Effectiveness MTR Review Original Closing Actual Closing

26-Apr-2011 13-Dec-2011 30-Jun-2014 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017

RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING

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

23-Dec-2014 33.01 Change in Results Framework Change in Components and Cost Change in Loan Closing Date(s)

06-Aug-2016 69.76 Change in Loan Closing Date(s)

KEY RATINGS

Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality

Satisfactory Satisfactory Modest


Page 3 of 62

RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs

No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Actual

Disbursements (US$M)

01 20-Sep-2011 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0

02 02-May-2012 Satisfactory Satisfactory 3.48

03 29-Oct-2012 Satisfactory Satisfactory 3.48

04 07-Jun-2013 Satisfactory Satisfactory 6.37

05 14-Dec-2013 Satisfactory Satisfactory 19.67

06 06-Jul-2014 Satisfactory Satisfactory 25.69

07 23-Jan-2015 Satisfactory Satisfactory 33.01

08 03-Aug-2015 Satisfactory Satisfactory 40.32

09 05-Feb-2016 Satisfactory Satisfactory 62.41

10 04-Aug-2016 Satisfactory Satisfactory 69.76

11 07-Feb-2017 Satisfactory Satisfactory 89.18

12 19-Jul-2017 Satisfactory Satisfactory 92.67

SECTORS AND THEMES

Sectors

Major Sector/Sector (%)

Water, Sanitation and Waste Management 100

Sanitation 56

Waste Management 28

Public Administration - Water, Sanitation and Waste Management

16

Themes

Major Theme/ Theme (Level 2)/ Theme (Level 3) (%) Private Sector Development 100

Jobs 100


Page 4 of 62

Finance 5

Finance for Development 5

Disaster Risk Finance 5

Urban and Rural Development 60

Urban Development 45

Urban Infrastructure and Service Delivery 45

Disaster Risk Management 15

Disaster Response and Recovery 5

Disaster Risk Reduction 5

Disaster Preparedness 5

Environment and Natural Resource Management 52

Climate change 16

Adaptation 16

Environmental Health and Pollution Management 36

Air quality management 12

Water Pollution 12

Soil Pollution 12

ADM STAFF

Role At Approval At ICR

Regional Vice President: Obiageli Katryn Ezekwesili Makhtar Diop

Country Director: Madani M. Tall Pierre Frank Laporte

Senior Global Practice Director: Jamal Saghir Karin Erika Kemper

Practice Manager: Idah Z. Pswarayi-Riddihough Benoit Bosquet

Task Team Leader(s): Africa Eshogba Olojoba Africa Eshogba Olojoba

ICR Contributing Author: Sanne Agnete Tikjoeb


Page 5 of 62

I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES

A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL

Context

1. In Benin, and throughout West Africa, floods were increasing in frequency and intensity and the adverse impacts

on the environment, human health, and national economy were aggravated by the social context in which they

occurred. In rapidly growing cities, such as Cotonou, densely populated areas in low-lying, flood-prone zones were

often inundated as the carrying capacity of the drainage systems were exceeded and the natural channels for storm

water to subside were obstructed. In turn, this problem was compounded by the clogging of existing drainage

networks and channels due to a general lack of proper waste management systems and operations. Illegal dumping

of household waste was a major challenge with only 8 percent of collected solid wastes being transported and

processed. During floods, contamination of surface and groundwater resulting from a mix of runoff from rain with

latrine and the contents of septic tanks and municipal wastes gave rise to water-borne diseases, notably cholera,

putting the entire population affected by the flood as well as downstream populations at risk.

2. This was the backdrop with which the initial Urban Environment Project1 was conceived and preparatory

activities begun. The project intended to support the strengthening of the government's capacity to mitigate and

manage these problems while also ensuring that the solutions developed and implemented were environmentally

compatible - essentially building a platform for sustainable urban development.

3. On September 13, 2010 a catastrophic flooding of historic proportions affected more than 680,000 people and

55 out of 77 municipalities in Benin.2 The disaster caused 46 deaths, destroyed 50,000 homes, and left 150,000

people without shelter. It ruined crops, farmland, and livestock, and erased essential food stocks. The overall

damages to infrastructure, agriculture and physical assets and economic losses were estimated at US$257 million,

or to 2% of Benin’s GDP in 2010, in the United Nations Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA).3

4. A request from the GOB for emergency funding was received on September 30, 2010, which required a change

in the objectives, preparation schedule and some content of the Urban Environment Project. The project had to be

realigned with the diagnostic findings of the PDNA report, which emphasized the need to go beyond immediate

emergency measures to implement preventive measures that could help mitigate the devastating effects of future

floods. Focus was placed on interventions to improve urban drainage infrastructure, solid waste management

(SWM), wastewater management, and flood risk management.

5. The project was approved as an emergency operation under OP/BP 8.00 to allow for expedited project

preparation and implementation. With the flexible and accelerated procedures afforded under OP/BP 8.00 regarding

1 PID for P113145 approved in November 2009 for a project of US$30 million. 2 Floods are the most important and recurring disaster in Benin, and they affect the whole country. 3 The PDNA was prepared in 2011 in the aftermath of the flood disaster by the GOB and a team composed of the World Bank, UN System, and European Commission, with support from the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR). The PDNA: (i) assessed the causes, losses and damages of the 2010 flood; (ii) determined its impact at the macroeconomic and poverty levels; (iii) estimated the short and long-term needs by sector; and (iv) suggested a strategy to mitigate future floods.


Page 6 of 62

preparation, safeguards, procurement, and disbursement arrangements, the Bank could mobilize resources

consistent with the level of urgency that the situation required. For example, safeguards studies completed prior to

approval of the Urban Environment Project, were updated and redisclosed within six months of effectiveness.

6. The project was consistent with all five pillars of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) for the period

2007-2009 to: accelerate growth; develop infrastructure; develop human capital, particularly with a focus to improve

basic services; promote good governance; and promote balanced and sustainable development. Objective 15 of the

PRSP specifically refers to the establishment of an environmental disaster preparedness and prevention system.

7. The project also contributed to all three objectives of the Country Assistance Strategy for FY 09-12.4 Objective i)

strengthening competitiveness and accelerating private sector-led growth would be supported through major

infrastructure investments, while objective ii) improving access to basic services and objective iii) promoting better

governance and strengthening institutional capacities would be supported through investments in solid waste and

wastewater management and disaster risk preparedness.

8. The rationale for Bank involvement was strongly supported by the Bank’s decades-long global experience related

to urban environmental management. Furthermore, the Bank had been supporting Benin in infrastructure

rehabilitation and environmental management since 1993, including the first and second Decentralized City

Management Project (PGUD-1 (P035648), 2000-04 and PGUD-2 (P082725), 2006-10) in Cotonou, Porto-Novo and

Parakou and other cities. However, issues such as improved collection of solid waste in Cotonou and neighboring

municipalities, wastewater treatment, and preparedness and adaptation to climate change in urban planning had

not been addressed by Bank lending or other donor interventions in Benin. This project sought to address these

issues and to build on the foundation laid by previous projects for capacity building in municipal planning,

implementation, and monitoring of basic services.

Theory of Change (Results Chain)

9. The project’s theory of change is illustrated in the figure below. The project planned to make significant

investments in infrastructure and institutional strengthening to improve (i) drainage networks, (ii) solid waste

management, and (iii) wastewater management, and develop and operationalize a system for flood risk

management. Each output underpins the impact of other outputs to mitigate the negative environmental impact of

future floods in Cotonou Agglomeration (PDO #1) and increase Benin’s level of flood preparedness (PDO #2).

10. The integrated nature of realized outputs means that essential infrastructure improvements to drainage and

solid waste management will raise Benin’s capacity and preparedness to better handle future flooding. In turn, the

development of communal flood contingency plans and other flood preparedness measures will also serve to

mitigate the negative impacts of floods.

11. At a high-level outcome, the project would help to build Benin’s resilience to the impact of future floods by

strengthening the absorptive capacity in terms of infrastructure improvements and risk preparedness. This, in turn,

will support Benin’s goal to reduce poverty by protecting vital economic, social, and health assets and by delivering

basic services. The project would also help to promote good governance in the public sector.

4 Report No. 46485 – BJ. The PAD of April 2011 mistakenly lists the objectives of the PRSP for 2007-2009 as the CAS objectives. For this section, the ICR team draws on the actual objectives stated in the FY09-12 CAS.


Page 7 of 62

Figure 1: Theory of Change

Project Development Objectives (PDOs)

12. The objectives of the project as defined in the Financing Agreement are to: (i) improve infrastructure and

mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in the Cotonou Agglomeration, and (ii) increase the Recipient’s

level of preparedness for future flooding.5

5 The Project Development Objective (PDO) in the Project Paper is to improve infrastructure and mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in Cotonou Agglomeration and to increase Benin’s level of preparedness for future flooding. Cotonou Agglomeration is composed of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi and Seme-Podji.

Activities Outputs PDO/Outcomes

Mitigate negative

impact of floods in

Cotonou

Agglomeration

• Percentage reduction of households vulnerable to flooding due to poor infrastructure

Increase Benin’s level

of preparedness for

future flooding

• Number of alerts on flood risks issued per year using the FEWS

Build Benin’s

resilience to

future floods by

strengthening its

absorptive

capacity

Reduce poverty

by protecting

against loss of

assets and

improving

delivery of basic

services

Assumptions:

High-level

commitment

Significant co-financing SWM

operational costs

Promote public

sector good

governance

Higher-Level

Outcomes

Improved drainage

networks

Improved

wastewater

management

System for flood

risk management

developed and

operational

Infrastructure

Investments:

- Clean, and expand drains and channels

- Rehabilitate Fifadji bridge

- Construction of collection points, transfer stations, clearing of dumpsites

- Pilot wastewater treatment plant

Institutional

Strengthening:

- Capacity building for GOB, municipalities, and communities

- Wastewater master plan

- Flood early warning system

- Information and awareness program

Improved

solid waste

management


Page 8 of 62

13. In the Financing Agreement, the Recipient is defined as the Republic of Benin. Throughout this report, the ICR will refer to Benin whenever stating the PDO.

Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators

14. At the appraisal stage, the project had two development outcomes and two associated outcome indicators.

PDO Outcome (i): Improve infrastructure and mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in the Cotonou

Agglomeration

PDO Outcome Indicator #1: Percentage reduction of households vulnerable to flooding in the targeted municipalities

as a result of improved infrastructure.

Baseline (2010) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Frequency

70% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% Annual

15. In interpreting the PAD Results Framework and Monitoring matrix (Annex 2), the first outcome indicator aimed

to reduce the percentage of households vulnerable to flooding due to poor drainage infrastructure, such as clogged

drains and channels, by 10 percentage points annually, or 40 percentage points over the life of the project (from 70%

of households vulnerable to flooding to 30% of households vulnerable to flooding). This is equal to an overall

reduction of 57% of households vulnerable to flooding.

PDO Outcome (ii): Increase Benin’s level of preparedness for future flooding

PDO Outcome Indicator #2: Number of alerts on flood risks issued per year using the Flood Early Warning System


0 0 3 10 15 20 Annual

16. For the second outcome indicator, the final goal was to observe 20 alerts on flood risks annually using the Flood

Early Warning System to be implemented under the project.

Components

A. Drainage improvement and rehabilitation

(Estimated: US$23.56 million - AF1: US$2.4 million - AF2: US$32 million - Actual: US$57.96 million)

Component A aimed to increase the retention areas for storm water and calibrate the water flow to the outlets

(Nokoue Lake, the lagoon and the ocean). This was to be achieved by rehabilitating and improving three main

drainage networks in key areas of Cotonou Agglomeration affected by the 2010 flood by calibrating, grading,

cleaning and expanding drains and channels. It also sought to elevate and rehabilitate Fifadji bridge with a

reinforced concrete deck resting on concrete piles in Fifadji river, which was prone to flooding.


Page 9 of 62

B. Municipal solid waste management

(Estimated: US$13.82 million - AF1: US$1.2 million - AF2: US$3 million - Actual: US$18.02 million)

Component B’s objective was to enable Cotonou and affected neighboring municipalities to mitigate

environmental and health impacts resulting from the obstruction of drainage systems caused mainly by the

indiscriminate dumping of solid waste in the open that was exacerbated by the floods of October 2010. This was

to be achieved by substantially improving: (i) collection, transport and disposal of solid wastes through

construction of collection points, transfer stations, controlled dumpsites, and one additional cell at an existing

landfill site; and (ii) capacity development support to Government, municipalities, communities and NGOs.

C. Improved wastewater management and sanitation

(Estimated: US$4.70 million - AF1: US$0.7 million - Actual: US$5.40 million)

Component C was designed to reduce the negative environmental and health impacts associated with the mix

of floods and untreated wastewater due to the poor nature of sanitation system in Cotonou Agglomeration. This

was to be achieved by the development of an appropriate institutional framework for the effective and

sustainable management of urban wastewater in Benin, preparation of a wastewater master plan for Cotonou

Agglomeration and Porto Novo, and the implementation of a small-scale decentralized sanitary drainage and

wastewater treatment pilot project.

D. Flooding and disaster risk preparedness and management

(Estimated: US$5.03 million - AF1: US$2.1 million - AF2: US$4.25 million - Actual: US$11.38 million)

Component D aimed to increase the level of preparedness and develop a system for flood risk management

including an early warning system, information and awareness program, and to strengthen the capacity of the

institutions involved in flood and disaster risk management.

E. Project management

(Estimated: US$2.89 million - AF2: US$0.75 million - Actual: US$3.64 million)

Component E was designed to provide management support for the implementation of the project, including

monitoring and evaluation.

B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION

Timeline

Approval: 26-Apr-2011

Effectiveness: 13-Dec-2011

First AF Approval: 05-Jun-2014

Mid-Term Review: 30-Jun-2014

1st Restructuring: 23-Dec-2014 (Level II)


Page 10 of 62

Amendment to original FA: 12-Jan-2015

Second AF Approval: 24-Jun-2015

Original Closing: 31-Dec-2015

2nd Restructuring: 06-Aug-2016 (Level II)

Revised Closing: 31-Dec-2016

Revised/Actual Closing: 31-Oct-2017

Revised PDOs and Outcome Targets

17. The PDO was not revised.

Revised PDO Indicators 18. The PDO outcome indicators were revised in the first restructuring of December 23, 2014. The wording and unit

of measure were changed for both indicators.

New PDO Outcome Indicator #1: At the end of the project, the drainage infrastructure in the zones of intervention in

the targeted municipalities has been improved. (Yes/No)


No No No No Yes Yes Annual

New PDO Outcome Indicator #2: At the end of the project mechanisms and institutional arrangements for the putting

in place a flood early warning system will be in place and operational. (Yes/No)


No No No No No Yes Annual

Revised Components

19. The components themselves were not revised, though changes to planned activities under component B and D

formed part of the December 2014 restructuring. An amendment to the Financing Agreement reflecting those

changes was signed on January 12, 2015. Chief among the issues addressed was the complexity associated with the

installation of a Flood Early Warning System (FEWS), which requires years of preparation prior to installation. Activities

under Component D became limited to support a FEWS through preparation of a feasibility study and provision of

technical support to the responsible authorities. Additional changes to the activities reflected in the amended FA

related to (i) the construction of a controlled dumpsite in the Abomey-Calavi municipality, which was downscaled to

a feasibility study, (ii) the construction of solid wastes collection points, and (iii) the construction of transfer stations.

20. The incremental changes effectuated through the first and second additional financing, impacted the scale of

each component. Activities were broadened, the zones of intervention were expanded, targets were adjusted


Page 11 of 62

upwards, and the number of beneficiaries significantly increased. See Annex 2 for an outline of changes to planned

activities in AF1 and AF2, by component.

Other Changes

21. Two rounds of additional financing were approved, which brought total project financing to US$96.4 million

equivalent from an original base of US$50 million equivalent.

22. The first additional financing (AF1) was approved on June 5, 2014 for a total of US$6.4 million equivalent, equal

to the remaining IDA allocation under that IDA cycle. AF1 complemented the parent project’s interventions by: i)

increasing the span of work on clogged drainage by 2.1 km, thereby benefitting at least 10,000 additional residents;

ii) increasing the number of low-cost wastewater and sanitation pilots; and iii) providing technical support to the

newly created National Flood Disaster Agency (ANPC) and Department of Climate Change Adaptation.

23. The second additional financing (AF2) was approved on June 24, 2015 for a total of US$40 million equivalent,

which became available under the new IDA cycle. The Drainage Master Plan and a Solid Waste Management (SWM)

Strategy that were prepared under the parent project in 2014 revealed many gaps in the drainage and waste

management networks, respectively, that had to be treated to comprehensively address drainage and waste

management issues. A second AF was required to address those issues and to scale-up the development effectiveness

of the project. By scaling up activities in terms of both geographic coverage and types of interventions, more than

94,000 additional beneficiaries in Cotonou and the municipalities of Abomey-Calavi, Sèmè-Kpodji, Ouidah and Porto

Novo would be reached.

24. A number of intermediate indicators were adjusted upwards and others introduced during implementation:

Table 1: Revision of intermediate indicators

Indicator Value Original target Revised target Notes

Length of drainage network rehabilitated

Kilometers 8.60 22.20 Adjusted upwards in AF2

Number of awareness campaigns and sensitization meetings on coastal erosion and coastal contingency preparedness

Number 10 Introduced in AF2

Number of municipal solid waste collection points and/or transfer stations constructed / rehabilitated and operational

Number 40 50 Revised in December 2014 restructuring. Adjusted upwards in AF2

Number of awareness campaigns and sensitization meetings on municipal solid waste management

Number 12 Introduced in December 2014 restructuring.

Number of direct beneficiaries Number 1,401,000 1,520,000 Revised in AF1 and AF2

Platform for putting in place Flood Early Warning System now operational / Availability of a feasibility and technical study on operational FEWS

Yes/No Platform for putting in place Flood Early Warning System now operational

Availability of a feasibility and technical study on operational FEWS

Introduced in December 2014 restructuring. Reworded in AF2.


Page 12 of 62

Number of awareness campaigns and sensitization meetings on flooding and disaster risk management

Number 18 Introduced in December 2014 restructuring.

Technical studies on selected coastal erosion sites

Number (annual)

6 Introduced in AF2.

25. The project closing date was extended twice. First from December 31, 2015 to December 31, 2016 in the

December 2014 restructuring. Later from December 31, 2016 to October 31, 2017 in the second Level II restructuring

of August 6, 2016.

Rationale for Changes and Their Implication on the Original Theory of Change

26. The scale of the project was significantly increased and the targets for intermediate indicators adjusted upwards

to reflect the additional reach of the project. Changes to components, PDO outcome indicators, and intermediate

indicators did not significantly impact the theory of change as presented in Section A. Although the scope of

component D had to be reduced, the feasibility study was still an important foundation for building a full-scale FEWS

and increasing Benin's level of preparedness.

27. For PDO outcome indicator #1, the Mid-Term Review cites the reason for revising the indicator as the difficulty in

measuring “the reduction in households vulnerable to floods as a result of improved infrastructure”. It may also be

noted that conceptually, “household vulnerability” is understood as a composite of factors, which presumably would

have made project achievements dependent on those other factors. The revised indicator was simplified and more

clearly tied to the infrastructure improvements planned under the project, and which would help reduce households’

exposure and vulnerability to severe floods.

28. The rationale for revising PDO outcome indicator (ii) related to the unfeasible installation and operationalization

of the intended FEWS due to the exorbitant cost and complex institutional arrangements required. Furthermore,

UNDP was working on a similar study, and it was agreed to coordinate between organizations to ensure the efficient

allocation of capital and to create synergies between planned activities. Consequently, Component D was significantly

downscaled, making a restructuring of the associated outcome indicator imperative.

II. OUTCOME

A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs

Rating: High

Assessment of Relevance of PDOs and Rating

29. The development objectives of the project have remained highly relevant to the strategic priorities outlined within

the context of the Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for the period FY13 through FY17.6 The CPS is organized around

6 The new Country Partnership Framework is still in draft and will be discussed by the Bank’s Board of Executive Directors on June 5, 2018.


Page 13 of 62

three main pillars: (i) governance and public-sector capacity; (ii) sustainable growth, competitiveness and

employment; and (iii) access to basic social services and social inclusion. The Benin Emergency Urban Environment

Project (BEUEP) project supports all those objectives.

30. Climate projections for West Africa point towards increased variability in precipitation. Similarly, Benin’s

urbanization rate is among the highest in the world and twice the global average. This means that Benin’s exposure

and vulnerability to flooding will continue to define the country’s path to sustainable development, and henceforth,

the need to build the country’s coping capacity remains highly relevant.

31. The project supports the GOB's Action Plan for the five-year period 2016-2021 called "Revealing Benin": Pillar I

"Consolidating democracy, rule of law, and good governance" Priority 2 to improve governance, and under Pillar 3

"Improving Living Environment for the People" Priority 6 to improve basic social services. The project has supported

these objective through development of strategic plans, infrastructure, and capacity building on drainage, solid waste

and wastewater. It has also laid the foundation for better governance of flood preparedness in the future.

32. It is worth noting that the entire envelope for the BEUEP project of US$ 96.4 million equivalent is equal to 1.2

percent of Benin’s GDP in one year (US$8.5 billion in 2016). Furthermore, the Prime Minister personally opened Fifadji

Bridge, and has offered strong support to the project throughout the implementation phase. Finally, during the ICR

mission from October 2-14, 2017, the team observed the daily reporting of current activities under the BEUEP project

in the evening news. In other words, the importance of this project to Benin cannot be overstated. On this basis, the

continued relevance of the project development objectives is assessed to be high.

B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY)

Rating: Substantial

Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome

33. This section is organized around each of the two outcomes included in the PDOs.

Objective (i): Improve infrastructure and mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in the Cotonou

Agglomeration

34. The project helped to mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in the Cotonou Agglomeration by

achieving infrastructure improvements significantly above the level originally envisioned: a) 43.40 kilometers of

drainage network were rehabilitated (500% of original target and 194% of revised target) and 2 bridges were elevated

and rehabilitated (only one bridge was originally planned) providing protection for more than 582,058 people in flood-

prone neighborhoods of Cotonou from the impact of cyclical floods; b) 53 collection points and/or transfer stations

were constructed/rehabilitated and operational (133% of original target and 106% of revised target), and; c)

Wastewater Master Plan (target 100% achieved). Finally, a total of 1,520,000 residents benefitted from the realized

infrastructure improvements (109% of original target and 100% of revised target), which inevitably has reduced their

vulnerability to floods. On this basis, it is assessed that PDO Outcome Indicator (i) is achieved.

35. PDO Outcome Indicator (i): At the end of the project, the drainage infrastructure in zones of intervention in the

targeted municipalities has been improved (Yes/No). Target 100% achieved.

tel:20%2016%2020%2021


Page 14 of 62

36. During the ICR mission, the team made several field visits throughout Cotonou and Abomey-Calavi to sites with

completed investments, including Fafadji and Sodo bridges, landscaped areas transformed from open dumpsites to

recreational spaces, 3 solid waste collection points, 2 solid waste transfer stations, and to a lot with 150 motorized

tricycles for collection of solid waste. The team also reviewed the studies completed as part of the project and which

are further elaborated upon under each component below. Further verification of achieved results is beyond the scope

this ICR and would require a full-scale evaluation.

Improved drainage networks (Component A)

37. A total of 43.40 km of drainage network was rehabilitated and/or constructed with 22.7 kilometers of paved road

completed on top of the drainage networks and channels. Fifadji Bridge was elevated and rehabilitated (intermediate

target 100% achieved) allowing 20,000 vehicles to pass the Fifadji River daily and uninterruptedly during the rainy

season. Sodo Bridge was elevated and rehabilitated under AF2 allowing 25,000 vehicles to pass the marshland daily

and uninterruptedly during the rainy season. The investments were supported by capacity building of the responsible

authorities for the construction, operation, and maintenance of those infrastructure investments: A Drainage Master

Plan for Cotonou Agglomeration and more specific Drainage Master Plans for each of the concerned municipalities

Porto-Novo, Sèmè-KPodji, Abomey-Calavi, and Ouidah and for the Abomey Plateau were developed; as well as

updated storm water sanitation plans for Cotonou, Porto-Novo, Sèmè Podji, Abomey-Calavi, Ouidah and the Abomey

Plateau for future interventions. See Annex 2 for more details.

38. Findings from the project-financed Impact Evaluation completed in October 2017 show that with basis in realized

investments, drainage improvements have enabled better runoff of seasonal precipitation, thereby preventing

seasonal floods from occurring in parts of the city. Particularly residents in flood-prone neighborhoods in Cotonou

report considerably reduced flooding and related damages following the completion of drainage improvements. The

Impact Evaluation estimates that the drainage improvements have provided protection for more than 582,058 people

from the impact of cyclical floods. They have also reduced the duration of required actions to remove stagnated

rainwater in the drainage network from an average of 28 days to less than 2 hours.

Improved solid waste management (Component B)

39. A total of 50 collection points and 3 transfer stations were constructed and/or rehabilitated (Table 1), compared

to a total original target of 40 and a revised target of 50. In addition, 5 mobile metal cluster collection points have also

been erected. Regarding the transfer stations, Camp Guezu in Cotonou was completed and commissioned, while those

in Ouèdo in Abomey-Calavi and Okoun-Sèmè in Sèmè-Podji were completed, but not yet operational at the time of

writing this ICR. The transfer stations were each equipped with a weighbridge. There is a plan to reinforce, expand,

and operationalize the two landfill sites in Cotonou Agglomeration. Operational support was delivered in terms of 10

pick-up trucks, 150 motorized tricycles and 7 pick-up trucks for the pre-collection, transfer and final disposal of

household solid waste in landfills. The capacity at responsible institutions was strengthened through 22 sensitization

and awareness campaigns (intermediate target 183% achieved) and through the provision of expertise, hardware,

staff training, and development of a database for SWM statistical purposes. (See map and further details in Annex 2).

Table 2: Overview of Collection points / Transfer Stations

CP New CP Rehab TC Completed & Commissioned

Cotonou 1 12 1 14

Porto-Novo 3 7 10


Page 15 of 62

Seme-Podji 6 1 7

Abomey-Calavi 12 1 13

Ouidah 3 6 9

Total 25 25 3 53

CP = Collection Point, TC = Transfer Center

40. The mitigation effect of realized investments in the SWM sector on the environmental impacts of future floods is

directly tied to the continued collection, transport, and processing of household waste. As of the time of project

closing, the solid waste investments were not yet in operation, and the vehicles were awaiting their distribution to

each of the five municipalities in Cotonou Agglomeration. However, at the time of writing this ICR, the project team

confirms that all vehicles have been distributed, and that one transfer station is in operation.

Improved wastewater management (Component C)

41. Several studies and activities have been completed under the project, which support the improvement of

wastewater management in Cotonou Agglomeration. This includes, first, the completion of a Master Plan for sewage

treatment in Cotonou Agglomeration (intermediate target 100% achieved) with the development of guidelines and

standards for municipal wastewater discharge. The Master Plan has been adopted by SONEB (Water Company of

Benin) and is now becoming the foundation for a new US$200 million investment in a follow-on PforR project. Second,

the project delivered technical assistance to SONEB including the establishment of a sanitation department, capacity

building for the implementation of the Master Plan, complete with information equipment, testing kits for the control

of wastewater parameters, and operational and transitional support for the integration of four wastewater engineers.

42. The project had intended for one or two small-scale decentralized sanitary drainage and waste water treatment

pilot projects to be implemented in neighborhoods where open defecation is still prevalent. This activity received

additional financing under AF1 in which additional pilots were planned. However, at the end of the project,

construction of one pilot project at Socomey Multi-Service Point in Porto-Novo to eradicate open defecation in this

neighborhood was on-going (construction 25% complete). Following, the project team has confirmed that

construction of the pilot project has been completed (intermediate target 100% achieved).

43. Improving wastewater management holds the potential to mitigate the negative environmental impacts and

health hazards resulting from the mix of runoffs from rains during the floods with latrine and septic tank contents and

sewage disposed of in the open. However, the impact of achieved project outputs related to improved wastewater

management will depend in large part on the operationalization of the sewage Master Plan and on the incorporation

of lessons learned from the operation of pilot projects. Strengthening the institutional and technical capacity of SONEB

is an important building block towards mitigating the negative impacts of floods.

Objective (ii): Increase Benin’s level of preparedness for future flooding

44. The project helped increase Benin’s level of preparedness for future flooding by developing the mechanisms and

institutional arrangements for flood risk management at both the communal and national level. Based on those

structures, which are summarized below and outlined in more details in Annex 2, a full-scale Flood Early Warning

System can be installed. On this basis, it is assessed that the project achieved PDO outcome indicator (ii).

45. PDO Outcome Indicator (ii): At the end of the project, mechanisms and institutional arrangements for the putting

in place a flood early warning system will be in place and operational (Yes/No). Target 100% achieved.


Page 16 of 62

46. At the communal level, the project developed and installed flood contingency plans in 28 out of 77 communes in

Benin (target 130% achieved) of which 21 were highly prone to flooding and 7 were particularly vulnerable. A total of

210 people in each commune received training on flood contingency and sensitization on disaster risk management

in case of flooding, creating a vast network of peer-educators, which remains active at the time of writing the ICR.

47. At the institutional level, the project built the technical capacity of i) Benin’s General Directorate for Water

(DGeau) by installing a network of hydrometric and pluviometric stations, and of ii) the National Meteorological

Agency (Weather Benin) by setting up a network of meteorological stations equipped with remote transmission and

remote management for early warning of hydroclimatic risks. Through the integration of technical experts and the

development of a database hosted at DGEau, the Directorate can continue its efforts to monitor rainfall and the level

and flow of watercourses. Ultimately, this primary source of climate data could feed into a comprehensive early

warning system against flood risks.

48. At the national level, the project i) prepared a technical feasibility study for the development and installation of

a FEWS system (target 100% achieved), ii) supported a National Policy on Disaster Prevention and Integrated

Management and numerous other technical studies and decentralized flood management programs; and (iii)

implemented 76 sensitization and awareness campaigns on flooding and disaster risk management (target 422%

achieved) at both the communal and national level.

49. In addition, and perhaps most importantly, the project helped build momentum for increased action by the GOB

to raise Benin’s level of flood preparedness. This is evident by the provision in 2017 of a budget of 100 million to the

Emergency Fund created by decree, and the endowment of US$450 million equivalent in a Public Investment Program

for disaster prevention and management activities for the period 2016-2030.

C. EFFICIENCY

Rating: Substantial

Assessment of Efficiency and Rating

a. Efficiency of design and implementation

50. The project enjoyed the stability of having a single TTL from preparation to project closing. Institutional

arrangements were built based on the earlier PGUD-2 project, thereby grandfathering in the project management

capacities, including financial management, built under a previous World Bank project PCU.

51. Two agencies were single-sourced to handle all project-related investments and studies, respectively, which

greatly streamlined the procurement process for the PCU. There were minimal cost-overruns, as noted in the Second

AF, where only US$1 million equivalent of a total US$40 million equivalent investment was earmarked for the FEWS

feasibility study, to cover the remaining activity under the reduced Component D. Meanwhile, there were also cost

saving under other disbursement categories, which were applied to create green public spaces. The project closing

date was extended by 20 months in total, but given the substantial additional financing it is remarkable that the

project was able to build on the momentum and disburse 99.6% of all project funds before closing.

52. Additional financing was commensurate with additional outcomes. While the budget nearly doubled, the

outcomes achieved increased respectively as recorded in the intermediate indicators. For Component A, the


Page 17 of 62

disbursements as a percentage of the appraised costs is 246%, which is matched by the 500% and 194% achievement

of the original and revised targets of intermediate indicator #1, respectively. In addition, two bridges were elevated

and rehabilitated when plans were only for one bridge. For Component B, disbursements as a percentage of the

appraised costs is 130%, which is matched by the 133% achievement of the original target of intermediate indicator

#4.

b. Calculation of NPV, IRR, and cost/benefit ratio

53. The economic and financial analysis performed at the ICR stage shows a positive NPV with IRR above 12% and a

positive cost-benefit ratio. The assumptions were conservative and only two benefits were considered: (i) land value

increase as a result of improved drainage, and (ii) reduced time loss as a result of Fifadji and Sodo bridge. The

drainage and bridge subcomponent’s aggregate economic net present value (NPV) discounted at 12% is positive with

US$ 197 million over 24 years. The cost/benefit ratio reaches 4 while the economic internal rate of return (IRR) is

positive at 35%. Despite the conservative assumptions and the few benefits considered in the economic analysis, the

drainage and bridge investments are economically viable. See Annex 3 for full details on the analysis.

Table 3: Key Economic Indicators

Key Economic Indicator Results Interpretation

NPV/24 years US$ 197 million Positive

IRR/24 years 35% IRR > 12%

Benefit/Cost Ratio/24 years 4 Discounted benefit > discounted cost

Result: The above three economic indicators show that the project was an economically viable investment

54. There are many other socioeconomic and environmental benefits that are difficult to quantify and account for in

an economic and financial analysis, such as: the impact on health evident through reduced premature deaths,

drowning, injuries, water-related diseases and vector-borne diseases; reduced damages to infrastructure (transport,

energy, water, etc.), land, households, businesses, private property including vehicles, etc.; reduced loss of economic

opportunities and poverty incidence and therefore vulnerability (loss of wages, loss of time, yield, sales, commerce,

tourism, etc.); reduced disruption of health services, schools, universities, etc.; and reduced water resource pollution,

air pollution and land degradation.

D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING

Rating: Satisfactory

55. In arriving at an overall outcome rating, it is reiterated that i) the PDO is highly relevant to the current CPS, ii)

project efficacy was rated substantial as intended development outcomes were achieved, and iii) project efficiency is

rated substantial given the positive NPV, IRR above 12% and acceptable cost-benefit ratio and the substantial

efficiencies of project design and implementation. The overall outcome rating is thus satisfactory.


Page 18 of 62

E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS (IF ANY)

Gender

56. Gender impacts can be considered in the context of project beneficiaries and project affected people. A total of

760,000 women have benefitted from the project. This include families, female-headed households, elderly

caregivers, children and youth, who are now better protected against the impacts of seasonal floods. Consequently,

they are better able to continue their economic activities and school attendance uninterrupted during the rainy

season.

57. Literature on the impact of disasters shows that there are often gendered elements at play, which can harm men

and women differently and disproportionately when disasters strike. Existing social patterns and cultural practices,

can put certain groups at higher risk during disasters, such as women who are often left out of early warning and

evacuation planning. Meanwhile, men are often expected to engage in rescue operations, in which high-risk actions

raise their vulnerability. A Bank poverty assessment after the 2010 flood shows that the increase in the poverty rate

of female-headed households were less than that of male-headed households – potentially because female-headed

households tend to have fewer family members. Any further understanding of the impact of the project on men and

women would be subject to a targeted a survey as part of a larger impact evaluation.

Institutional Strengthening

58. Institutional strengthening was an integral part of the project and the outcomes are discussed under section II.B.

Mobilizing Private Sector Financing

59. N/A

Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity

60. The project has helped to reduce poverty and to increase shared prosperity for 1.5 million people in the Cotonou

Agglomeration benefitting from the increased protection against the impacts of future floods. This includes direct

beneficiaries within the geographic scope of the project, but also rescue workers, health care workers, and others

highly exposed to the risks associated with floods. The population living downstream from flooded areas is also better

protected, as the risk of exposure to vector-and water-borne diseases arising in the aftermath of a flood is lowered.

This in turn increases labor productivity, both inside and outside the home.

Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts

61. Cost-savings realized from exchange rate changes or negotiated contracts were applied towards beautifying

green spaces in local neighborhoods. Trees also create a natural barrier and help prevent mudslides and hold water.


Page 19 of 62

III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME

A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION

62. The project design was based on good diagnostics with realistic objectives, clearly structured components, and

sound implementation arrangements. The results-framework was adequate overall (see also section IV.A), despite

that both PDO indicators had to be revised.

63. The choice of instrument was appropriate, as it allowed for accelerated preparation in the face of an oncoming

rainy season with possibly more floods. The flexibility provided under OP 8.00 allowed for the deferred completion of

safeguards instruments without compromising the quality of safeguards performance, and the use of special

procurement arrangements in sole-sourcing the contract management agencies, an arrangement which worked well

during implementation.

64. The project design took advantage of the capacities built for project implementation in a previous World Bank

PCU. The institutional arrangements in place under the PGUD-2 project were grandfathered into the BEUEP, as were

the two executing agencies, AGETUR and SERHAU. They had a proven track record in delegated contract management

and with financial management and accounting practices acceptable to the Bank.

65. Project readiness was in an advanced stage for an emergency operation, with a simplified procurement plan in

place at appraisal. Major feasibility studies were to be completed in the early phase of implementation to allow the

project to provide urgently needed emergency assistance as quickly as possible while reconstructive and preventive

measures were being finetuned.

66. Overall implementation risk was rated moderate at the time of project preparation and related mainly to the risk

posed to operations and maintenance by the project stakeholders and the possible lack of allocation of funds for

O&M. The project team made every effort to mitigate that risk through allocation of project funds for comprehensive

institutional strengthening and awareness raising at a community, institutional, and national level.

67. Overall, the project benefitted from already being under preparation at the time that it was fast-tracked as an

emergency operation. This helped to ensure due diligence regarding technical, procurement, and safeguards

measures, and allowed the project to move quickly following effectiveness. The sound and advanced preparation of

the project undoubtedly helped ensure the consistent satisfactory ratings of the project throughout the

implementation phase.

B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION

a. Factors subject to government and/or implementing entities control

68. There was an 8-months effectiveness delay due to the ratification process.

69. Under the Delegated Contract Management Agreements outlined in the FA, the two executing agencies

grandfathered into the project were responsible to implement all project activities. The “technical operator” would


Page 20 of 62

oversee all civil works, while the “service operator” would oversee institutional strengthening, training and capacity

building to be carried out. The streamlined coordination was a critical success factor. Early disbursement delay was

due to the need for extensive technical feasibility studies to be completed before the civil works could begin.

70. There was a fairly high turnover of the GOB-appointed lead Project Coordinator for the PCU due to personnel

changes in the Government and Ministry. Over the six-year life of the project, there were three Project Coordinators.

Even so, this does not seem to have impacted the project negatively.

71. Counterpart funding was for the most part rated satisfactory. However, problems with obtaining regular payments

from the participating municipalities to cover the cost of land expropriation and compensation to project affected

persons (PAPs) persisted throughout the implementation period, particularly in Abomey-Calavi, who did not release

counterpart funds under AF2 in a timely manner. The final AM noted that all the counterparties were paid except the

expected one from Abomey-Calavi municipality. Following project closure, all counterpart funds have been paid in

full.

72. Cost-savings arising from the fluctuations in the exchange rate and from the balance of negotiated contracts were

partly applied to pave additional access roads leading to solid waste collection points, partly to further scouring and

re-calibration of clogged drainage networks, as well as partly to creating green spaces in the cityscape.

73. Overall, the project was successful in disbursing nearly 100% of project funds, which doubled during

implementation, with only a 22 months extension from the original closing date of December 31, 2015 to October 31,

2017.

b. Factors subject to World Bank control

74. From preparation to project closing, the project was led by a single TTL. Issues for management attention were

raised with candor in the Implementation Status and Results Report (ISR) on a regular basis. Bi-annual implementation

support missions provided the PCU with consistent support from the Bank’s side.

75. Under normal circumstances, an emergency operation would not see two rounds of additional financing and a

doubling of project funds. However, the team responded proactively to requests from the GOB for additional

financing, and thereby offered an opportunity to scale up the support in a high priority area and to gap-fill essential

measures that would elevate development effectiveness (see also section on revised components in section I.B). AF1

of US$6 million, under the previous IDA cycle, essentially functioned as a bridge to AF2 of US$40 million, which was

approved under the current IDA allocation.

76. High-level expertise on safeguards characterized the project team, as the TTL was also a Regional Safeguards

Coordinator (RSC). Two safeguards specialists participated in technical support missions and field visits, and supported

the institutional capacity building to the PCU and executing entities. The project also benefited from in-country

specialists on procurement and financial management. All FM and audit reports submitted were unqualified and in

accordance with all Bank requirements.

c. Factors outside the control of government and/or implementing entities

77. No major factors outside the control of government and implementing entities impacted the project substantially.

However, one issue related to the invasive water hyacinth plant, which grows in the drains and can cause clogging if


Page 21 of 62

not regularly removed. The municipality is responsible for the continued operations and maintenance of the drains. If

performed regularly, the plant will not be an issue.

IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME

A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E)

Rating: Modest

M&E Design

78. Overall, the project’s theory of change was clear with intermediate indicators linked to components, which

underpinned their contribution to achieving the development objectives. However, the results framework was not

effective in tracking project achievements at the outcome level.

79. At the outcome-level, both indicators in the RF were restructured. The indicator linked to PDO #1 to mitigate

the negative environmental impact of future floods in Cotonou Agglomeration was originally intending to measure

the reduction in households vulnerable to floods due to poor infrastructure. However, it proved difficult to

measure that reduction, and the indicator was revised to “At the end of the project, the drainage infrastructure in

the zones of intervention in the targeted municipalities has been improved (Yes/No).” This changed the nature of

the indicator significantly from being impact-focused to being output-focused. Furthermore, the wording of the

revised indicator was too narrowly focused on drainage infrastructure (Component A) and excluded references to

other infrastructure improvements in solid waste (Component B) and wastewater management (Component C),

which were then no longer represented at the outcome level.

80. The original PDO indicator (ii) was tied to an ambitious objective of building a full-scale Flood Early Warning

System, which the team was proactive in restructuring in December 2014 after major feasibility studies revealed

the actual, but unrealistic for the project, cost of implementation (see also section I.B). The revised indicator “At

the end of the project, mechanisms and institutional arrangements for the putting in place a flood early warning

system will be in place and operational (Yes/No)”, however, was poorly defined in that it was not clear which

mechanisms and institutional arrangements would need to be in place and operational in order to allow for a FEWS

to be installed and in order to fulfill the indicator.

81. Finally, while the RF is not supposed to track all project outputs, some were important enough to be included

in the RF as intermediate outputs. The Drainage Master Plan, i.e., did not form part of the approved or revised set

of intermediate indicators, but was tracked in the ISRs since AF2. Also, the Sodo bridge, which was added in AF2,

was neither tracked in the RF nor in the ISRs.


Page 22 of 62

M&E Implementation

82. The responsibility to carry out ongoing M&E activities was placed within the PCU, and designed to include an

M&E specialist, who would establish and maintain an M&E system. The PCU had experience with M&E from two

previous World Bank projects, and possessed the necessary capacity to develop reliable M&E data. Overall,

baseline data was adequate to track project progress and all indicators included in the RF were tracked and

reported upon by the PCU and in the ISRs.

83. M&E was rated Satisfactory for most of the implementation period, except following the mid-term review in

which the presentation of project performance data revealed the need to define a new set of PDO outcomes

indicators. Following the restructuring and implementation of revised and simplified indicators in the PCU M&E

system, the rating was again raised to Satisfactory (August 2016).

M&E Utilization

84. M&E data was used to track project implementation and performance. Findings in the Drainage Master Plan

were used to estimate the impact of hitherto unknown gaps on project achievements related to the indicator on

kilometers of rehabilitated drainage infrastructure. The data fed into the decision about seeking additional

financing to close those gaps and elevate project achievements within the existing project scope.

Justification of Overall Rating of Quality of M&E

85. M&E is rated Modest given the shortcomings in the design of PDO-indicators in both the original and revised

results framework. Even so, the M&E system was sufficient in assessing project achievements with 12 intermediate

indicators to capture most project outputs and to test the links in the results chain. M&E was consistently executed

by a capable PCU.

B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE

86. The project was classified as a safeguards category “B”- partial assessment, and triggered OP 4.01

Environmental Assessment and OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement. Predicted impacts were related to civil works for

component A and B, which would require some expropriation of land. The project benefitted from having an

Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) already

prepared for the Urban Environment Project at the time the project was fast-tracked as an emergency operation.

The two safeguards instruments were subsequently revised to be fully aligned with the activities approved in the

emergency project, consulted upon and re-disclosed within six months of effectiveness and before commencement

of the civil works. The ESMF and RPF were disclosed on May 29, 2012 and June 1, 2012, respectively. They were also

re-disclosed following AF1 and AF2. Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs), Environmental and Social

Management Plans (ESMPs) and/or Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs) were prepared as and when necessary when

sites were identified and plans for civil works were finalized.

87. The project was consistently rated Satisfactory on safeguards issues. During implementation, an

Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), Environmental and Social Management Plans, and Resettlement

Action Plans were prepared, as required for the different interventions. According to project documentation, the


Page 23 of 62

project fulfilled all safeguards requirements and remained in full compliance throughout the project implementation

period.

88. However, according to the Borrower ICR and the Impact Evaluation there have been reports of instances

of non-compensation to some residents, who were affected by the expropriation of land for the installation of works.

The ICR team was not able to confirm the existence of nor verify the validity of those claims. In this regard, the ICR

notes that the project did not establish a Grievance Redress Mechanism as recommended by Bank guidelines, but

instead relied on existing mechanisms for dispute resolution and the Bank’s Grievance Redress Service.

89. Procurement was delegated to the two executing agencies, who had previous experience with handling

large civil works contracts. Procurement risk was rated low. During implementation, there were no major issues,

delays, cases of misprocurement, price variation or cost escalation. A Financial Assessment prepared at appraisal was

satisfactory and the financial management risk was also rated low. During implementation, timely delivery of financial

reports and audits have been satisfactory to Bank standards, and no major issues were reported. Both procurement

and financial management were consistently rated Satisfactory throughout implementation.

C. BANK PERFORMANCE

Rating: Satisfactory

Quality at Entry

90. The Bank team employed due diligence in basing the project on a solid diagnostic foundation of Benin’s

development priorities, which remained highly relevant throughout the project period. Close consultations with the

GOB were already underway when the emergency flooding happened, making a quick revision of the project design

possible while sustaining the quality of technical solutions and institutional implementation arrangements (request

for emergency assistance from the GOB was received on September 30, 2010.) Provisions for procurement, financial

management, safeguards, and risk mitigation measures were all adequate at the preparation stage, particularly so

when considered in the context of the project being approved as an emergency operation.

91. One shortcoming in the quality at entry relate to the underestimated cost and level of effort associated with

installing a comprehensive full-scale FEWS. The Bank, at the time of project preparation, had significant global

experience in disaster risk management, including in building flood preparedness, which the project team could have

- and should have - drawn on. Doing so would have allowed for a better-informed analysis and more realistic planning

and targeting of Component D. Instead, a restructuring of Component D and the associated PDO outcome indicator

(ii) became inevitable as the true cost and complexity of installing a FEWS became known to the project team.

Quality of Supervision

92. The World Bank team should be commended for its high level of commitment to the project under the steady

leadership of the same Task Team Manager from project appraisal to the time of writing the ICR. The task team

conducted an average of two supervision missions a year, and as of the third year of implementation also one technical

mission per year, showing timely and dedicated attention in addressing technical, safeguards and fiduciary issues in


Page 24 of 62

collaboration with the PCU. This commitment was underpinned by the presence of the World Bank Vice-President for

Sustainable Development at the opening of Sodo bridge.

93. The project was characterized by the collaboration with five participating municipalities, who provided co-

financing for the O&M of project investments. This required a particularly personal and skillful engagement with public

officials and politicians at the local level. The timely presence and deep understanding on the part of the project team

to the issues affecting project implementation on the ground was critically important to the success of the project.

94. It stands out that the project was rated Satisfactory for both progress towards development objectives (DO) and

implementation progress (IP) throughout implementation. This bears witness to the high quality of implementation

support shown at both an institutional level from Bank management and at a personal level among the project team

members and the TTL. It is also commendable that the project was able to disburse nearly all project funds with little

delay and with an additional US$46 million approved mid-way.

95. While the Bank team was pro-active in revising the RF and simplifying the indicators when needed, one effect

relates to the transformation of the RF from being impact-focused to being output-focused. This made it more

difficult, now at the ICR stage, to assess the impact of over US$80 million in realized infrastructure investments.

96. Adequate transition arrangements are in place for project-related activities to continue under the helm of each

beneficiary entity. The final Aide Memoire urges the GOB to ensure proper management and maintenance of the

drainage networks.

Justification of Overall Rating of Bank Performance

97. Overall Bank performance is rated Satisfactory. This is justified by the satisfactory quality of Bank performance

during project preparation and implementation with minor shortcomings, and the satisfactory outcome of the project.

D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME

98. The impact of infrastructure investments is sensitive to their sustained operations and maintenance. The project

strengthened the institutional and technical capacity of the agencies responsible for O&M of financed infrastructure

improvements. However, several external factors pose a risk to long-term O&M, including financial, political, and

environmental factors. One example is Fifadji bridge, which has been open to traffic since 2015, and which reportedly

is already experiencing a maintenance deficit as the gutters related to the bridge are not being cleaned on a regular

basis. Another example relates to the inactive status of the newly-built solid waste infrastructure, none of which were

yet operated by the municipalities at the time of project closing. If household solid waste continues to be discharged

into lakes and lagoons and lowlands causing environmental damage and obstruction of flow, the potential for these

investments to mitigate the negative impacts of floods will not be realized. Given Benin’s rank as one of the poorest

countries in the world, challenges to ongoing O&M is likely to continue to affect all the infrastructure improvements

that the project achieved, including drains and gutters, paved roads, collection points and transfer stations, tricycles

for pre-collection, trucks for transfer and disposal of solid wastes, landfills, etc.


Page 25 of 62

99. This in turn affects the ability of achieved infrastructure improvements to mitigate the negative environmental

impact of floods in Cotonou Agglomeration. Neglected infrastructure will quickly seize to function properly and begin

to decay, putting at risk the project development objectives.

100. The project increased Benin’s level of preparedness for future flooding. While the strategies are in place,

the actual level of institutional preparedness will depend on the actual development of a FEWS system in the future

and on on-going repeated rehearsals at national, departmental, communal and local levels of the emergency

measures to be taken when disaster strikes.

101. One risk mitigating factor is that BEUEP has become the catalyst for two new, large projects in Benin based

on the Drainage Master Plan and Wastewater Master Plan. This bodes well for the infrastructure improvements

realized under the project, as they became the building blocks for future investments and strategic planning. The

Drainage Master Plan prepared by the project laid the foundation for the proposed Euro 425 million Cotonou drainage

project, expected to be financed by a multi-donor arrangement including the World Bank, the African Development

Bank, the Islamic Development Bank, and the West African Development Bank.7 The Wastewater Master Plan

prepared by the project had a business plan and formed the basis of two water projects: (i) The 2017 Small Town

Water Supply and Urban Septage Management Project (US4 68 million, P156738); and (ii) The Rural Water Supply

Universal Access Program (P164186). This P4R operation is under preparation at an estimated amount of US$ 220

million

V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

102. From emergency-project to additional financing: Flexible project management allowed an emergency

project to achieve beyond emergency measures. The line between emergency response, reconstruction, and

prevention can sometimes be difficult to draw, and allowing that line to frame project design can be impractical and

inefficient. This was also highlighted in the initial PDNA assessment, which emphasized that any emergency response

in Benin should be linked to longer-term reconstruction and prevention efforts. Bank management showed flexibility

and adaptability in building upon an emergency response with two additional rounds of financing, which doubled

project financing and consolidated and scaled project achievements to address critical country priorities.

103. Integration vs. fragmentation: The challenge of embracing an integrated approach to flood risk

management, supporting necessary investments without spreading sector investments too thin. In planning a

project with major civil works in multiple sectors, it is important to weigh the need for an integrated approach with

the risk of fragmentation. The BEUEP sought to address urgent environmental issues exacerbated by local

circumstances and institutional shortcomings in a holistic manner, which is commendable and often overlooked in

other projects. The challenge was to strengthen the drainage network, rehabilitate and elevate two bridges, build an

extensive solid waste collection and transfer system, and pilot wastewater treatment plans, all of which could have

7 This project is still at a very early stage of identification.


Page 26 of 62

been standalone projects. Overall, BEUEP was able to strike a balance and, as discussed earlier, some of the work

started under the project catalyzed larger sectoral investments.

104. Moving from an impact-focused to an output-focused results framework did not serve the project well.

This lesson confirms what the Bank already knows about good practices in project M&E. In recognizing the need to

restructure the PDO indicators and the difficulty in measuring reduced vulnerability to future floods, an

oversimplification of the outcome level indicators to satisfy SMART8 requirements is never advisable. Consequently,

it becomes challenging to understand the full impact of the project.

105. Yes/No target values for PDO indicators does not capture outcomes above the bar

Project achievements exceeded original and revised targets for many of the planned activities under Component A

and Component B. However, the significant over-achievements on multiple levels of the project were not well

reflected at the outcome level. In revising the PDO outcome indicators, the value of measurement was changed from

percentage and number to “yes/no” for both indicators. While that may have fulfilled target requirements to be

specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound, a “yes/no” target value does not lend itself well to capture

achievements above the bar.

106. Early Warning System (EWS): Draw on the Bank’s global experience during the project design phase.

Establishing an EWS is highly complex and costly, requiring the right expertise, significant analysis, preparation, needs

assessments and capacity building prior to its design and implementation. Further, establishing a functional EWS in

an urban setting is ambitious and can itself be a standalone project. Going forward, projects need to draw on the

Bank’s global experience in this field.

107. Flood maps: Important to planning and evaluation. One of the main lessons from the project, which

should be reflected in the design of the new project on drainage in Cotonou, is the development of flood maps. Flood

maps are important as an analytical foundation for planning interventions, to track and visualize progress, and to

evaluate the impact of the project.

108. Communication/outreach: A key element of effective implementation. The BEUEP benefitted from

having high visibility in the country and enjoyed broad support as a flagship project. This was partly owing to a

generous communications budget that was used to raise awareness about project design, objectives and

achievements. The dedicated engagement of the Bank with counterparts, which went beyond scheduled

implementation support missions, was also an important factor. Collaboration with municipal-level partners and

understanding the local political context contributed to securing counterpart funding on time.

109. Consistent ISR ratings. Project implementation built on the stability and experience of two implementing

agencies that were already familiar with managing Bank-financed projects. Coupled with the strong communication

aspects discussed in the previous paragraph, the ISR ratings and sub-ratings were consistently “satisfactory”

throughout, a rather rare phenomenon in project implementation worldwide.

8 Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound.


Page 27 of 62

.


Page 28 of 62

ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS

A. RESULTS INDICATORS A.1 PDO Indicators Objective/Outcome: PDO (i): Improve infrastructure and mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in the Cotonou Agglomeration

Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Formally Revised

Target

Actual Achieved at Completion

At the end of project, the drainage infrastructure in zones of intervention in the targeted municipalities has been improved

Yes/No N Y Y Y

26-Apr-2011 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Revised target 100% achieved. The indicator relates to PDO outcomes (i) and (ii), and was revised in the December 2014 restructuring. The original PDO indicator sought to reduce the percentage of households vulnerable to floods due to poor drainage infrastructure from 70% of households in the targeted zones of intervention to 30% of households. The indicator was simplified due to the difficulty in measuring the impact of the project (see Section B for further details). Verification of improved drainage infrastructure is supported by the achievements reported in intermediate indicators #1 and #2 under Component A.


Page 29 of 62

Objective/Outcome: PDO (ii): Increase Benin’s level of preparedness for future flooding


Target


At end of project mechanisms and institutional arrangements for the putting in place a flood early warning system in place and operational

Yes/No N Y Y Y

26-Apr-2011 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Original target 0% achieved. Revised target 100% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO outcome (ii), and was revised in the December 2014 restructuring. The original indicator intended to install a FEWS with 20 annual alerts issued. Due to the exorbitant costs and complex implementation of a full-scale FEWS, the indicator and target was downscaled to a feasibility study and technical support to the responsible authorities. As a result, a full-fledged FEWS was not installed and there has been 0 alerts issued. However, the foundation for installing a FEWS has been achieved as verified by the outputs for intermediate indicators under Component D

A.2 Intermediate Results Indicators

Component: Component A: Drainage Improvements and Rehabilitation


Target


Drainage Master plan prepared for Abomey, Bohicon, Ouidah, Abomey-Calavi and Porto-Novo

Yes/No N Y Y Y

26-Apr-2011 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017


Page 30 of 62

Comments (achievements against targets): Original target 100% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO outcome (i) and (ii). The indicator did not form part of the approved or revised RF, but was tracked in the ISRs from July 2015 following the approval of AF2. A Drainage Master Plan for Cotonou Agglomeration was prepared in 2015 and was instrumental in the design of AF2 as it revealed many gaps in the existing drainage networks, which had to be addressed. Specific Drainage Master Plans for each of the concerned municipalities Porto-Novo, Sèmè-KPodji, Abomey-Calavi, and Ouidah and for the Abomey Plateau were developed and finalized in July 2017. The Drainage Master Plans were validated in two worksh


Target


Length of drainage network rehabilitated

Kilometers 0.00 8.60 22.20 43.40

26-Apr-2011 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Original target 500% achieved. Revised target 194% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO Outcomes (i) and (ii). The original target accounted for the three major watersheds in the city of Cotonou accumulating about 8.6 kilometers of drains, which impacted 46,000 residents from cyclical floods and related vector and water-borne diseases. The target was twice revised upwards: (i) following AF1 with an extra 2.1 kilometers to reach an additional 10,000 residents, and (ii) following AF2 with an extra 11.5 kilometers to reach an additional 94,000 residents. The achieved rehabilitation of the drainage network was 43.40 kilometers in length under 22.7 kilometers of paved access roads, thereby offering protection to 582,058 residents from the impacts of cyclical floods.


Target


Rehabilitation of Fifadji Bridge

Yes/No N Y Y Y

26-Apr-2011 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Target 100% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO Outcomes (i) and (ii). Target achieved within the original timeframe in July, 2015 when the bridge was inaugurated by the President of Benin and opened for traffic. Upgrading and raising the bridge, which was submerged for over a month during the 2010 flood, has helped ensure smooth flow of runoff to Lake Nokoue. The achievement supports the traffic of


Page 31 of 62

20,000 vehicles per day crossing Fifadji Bridge. A second bridge over the Sodo marshland in Abomey-Calavi municipality was completed in August 2017 with funding from AF2, supporting the daily traffic of an additional 25,000 vehicles.


Target


Number of awareness campaigns and sensitization meetings on coastal erosion and coastal contingency preparedness

Number 2.00 12.00 12.00 22.00

24-Jun-2015 31-Dec-2016 31-Oct-2017 31-May-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Target 120% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO Outcomes (i) and (ii), and was introduced in AF2. The target was identified as the number of campaigns and meetings to be held per year. In the final year of the project, 12 such campaigns and meeting had been held.

Component: Component C: Wastewater management


Target


Wastewater master plan developed for Cotonou Agglomeration (composed of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi and Seme-Podji) and Porto Novo

Yes/No N Y Y Y

26-Apr-2011 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Target 100% achieved. Indicator mainly relates to PDO Outcome (i). The final Wastewater Master Plan(s) for sewage treatment in Cotonou Agglomeration was delivered in December, 2015. The reports were prepared at the level of each municipality concerned, i.e. Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi, Seme-Podji, and Porto-Novo.


Page 32 of 62


Target


Pilot low-cost small scale sanitation project implemented and operational

Yes/No N Y Y N

26-Apr-2011 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Target 100% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO Outcome (i). The indicator was meant to test the feasibility of wastewater treatment options for the preparation of the Wastewater Master Plan in Cotonou Agglomeration. Lessons from the pilot projects would be used to revise the technical, economic, and financial aspects of the Master Plan. Originally, two sites were chosen for the implementation of pilot projects. Additional funding was allocated under AF1 to scale-up the implementation of additional pilot projects. At the end of project implementation, a pilot in Cotonou had been suspended, while one pilot project “Porto-Novo Multiservice Point” was recently constructed (100% complete). It is too early to report any observations.

Component: Component D: Flood Risk Management


Target


Availability of a feasibility and technical study on operational Flood Early Warning System (FEWS)

Yes/No N Y Y N

26-Feb-2011 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Target 100% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO Outcomes (i) and (ii). The target was first introduced in the December 2014 restructuring. In AF2, the indicator was reworded to reflect the specific output of a technical feasibility study upon which a FEWS could be installed. The final report was delivered in September 2017.


Page 33 of 62


Target


Technical studies on selected coastal erosion sites (Hillacondji and CAME)

Number 4.00 6.00 6.00 4.00

24-Jun-2015 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Target 100% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO Outcomes (i) and (ii). The target was introduced in the AF2 and was defined as the number of studies to be completed annually.


Target


Number of awareness campaigns and sensitization meetings on flooding and disaster risk management

Number 0.00 18.00 18.00 76.00

23-Dec-2014 31-Dec-2016 31-Oct-2017 31-May-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Target 422% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO Outcomes (i) and (ii), and was introduced in the December 2014 restructuring. The target was identified as the number of campaigns and meetings to be held during the project. In the final year of the project, 76 such campaigns and meeting had been held.


Target


Number of communities with communal flood contigency plans

Number 2.00 22.00 22.00 28.00

26-Apr-2011 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017


Page 34 of 62

Comments (achievements against targets): Target 130% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO Outcomes (i) and (ii). The indicator was revised twice: i) The target was downscaled to 21 in the December 2014 restructuring; and ii) the target was revised upwards to 22 again in AF2. At the end of the project, 28 municipalities had communal flood contingency plans, including 21 communes at high risk of flooding and 07 other vulnerable communes. The contingency plans were operational with 210 people in each commune having received training on flood contingency and sensitization on disaster risk management in case of flood.

Component: Component B: Solid Waste Management


Target


Number of awareness campaigns and sensitization meeting on municipal solid waste management

Number 2.00 12.00 12.00 22.00

23-Dec-2014 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Target 183% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO Outcome (i) and was introduced in the December 2014 restructuring. Target is linked to the activity of building capacity in municipalities and NGOs involved in pre-collection of solid wastes in the five municipalities of Cotonou, Porto-Novo, Seme-Podji, Abomey-Calavi, and Ouidah. In the final year of implementation, a total of 22 awareness campaigns and sensitization meetings had been held.


Target


Number of municipal solid waste collection points and/or transfer stations constructed and operational

Number 0.00 40.00 50.00 53.00

26-Apr-2011 30-Jun-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Original target 133% achieved. Revised target 106% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO Outcomes (i) and (ii).


Page 35 of 62

The indicator was revised in the December 2014 restructuring: (i) the wording was changed from “construction” with a focus on new construction to “construction/rehabilitated” to include rehabilitation of existing structures, and; (ii) the target was adjusted upwards to 42 collections points and/or transfer stations. With additional financing available, the target was raised again to 50 collections points and/or transfer stations in AF2. The PAD states that the project aimed to build two transfers station to correspond with each of the two landfill sites in the Cotonou Agglomerate. At the end of the project, a total of 50 collection points and 3 transfer stations had been completed. At the time of writing this ICR, 10 pick-up trucks, 150 motorized tricycles, and 7 pick-up trucks for pre-collection, transfer and final disposal of household solid waste had been delivered to Benin and distributed to each of the five participating municipalities.


Target


Direct project beneficiaries Number 695000.00 1401000.00 1520000.00 1520000.00

26-Apr-2011 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Female beneficiaries Percentage 52.00 52.00 52.00 52.00

26-Apr-2011 31-Dec-2015 31-Oct-2017 31-Oct-2017

Comments (achievements against targets): Original target 109% achieved. Revised target 100% achieved. Indicator relates to PDO Outcome (i). The target was defined as the number of residents within the geographic scope of the project in Cotonou and the municipalities of Seme-Podji, Abomey-Calavi, Ouidah, and Porto-Novo, who would benefit from the infrastructure improvements to drainage networks and solid waste management structures. The target was adjusted upwards in AF1 to 1,426,000 beneficiaries, and again in AF2 to 1,520,000 beneficiaries. At the end of the project, a total of 1,520,000 residents in Cotonou Agglomeration benefitted from project investments.


Page 36 of 62


Page 37 of 62

B. KEY OUTPUTS BY COMPONENT

PDO (i): Improve infrastructure and mitigate the negative environmental impact of floods in the Cotonou Agglomeration

Outcome Indicators 1. At the end of the project, the drainage infrastructure in zones of intervention in the targeted municipalities has been improved (Yes/No)

Intermediate Results Indicators

1. Length of drainage network rehabilitated (Km) 2. Rehabilitation of Fifadji Bridge (Yes/No) 3. Number of awareness campaigns and sensitization meetings on coastal erosion and coastal contingency preparedness 4. Number of municipal solid waste collection points and/or transfer stations constructed/rehabilitated and operational (Number) 5. Number of awareness campaigns and sensitization meeting on municipal solid waste management (Number) 6. Number of direct project beneficiaries (Number) (CORE) - Female beneficiaries (Percentage) (CORE) 7. Wastewater Master Plan developed for Cotonou Agglomeration (Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi, Seme-Podji, and Porto-Novo)

Key Outputs by Component (linked to the achievement of the Objective/Outcome 1)

Component A: Drainage Improvements and Rehabilitation The drainage network in Cotonou Agglomeration was improved through a) the completion of a Drainage Master Plan, b) calibration, opening, cleaning and expansion of existing canals and drains, and c) elevation and rehabilitation of two bridges over Fifadji River and Sodo marshland, respectively.

• The Drainage Master Plan was completed in June 2015.

• Drainage Master Plans for each of the other concerned municipalities , completed in April, 2017.

• Availaility of updated master plans for stormwater sanitation in Cotonou, Porto-Novo, Sèmè Podji,

Abomey-Calavi, Ouidah and the Abomey Plateau for future interventions;

• Environmental and Social Management Framework Plan;

• Calibration and opening of sanitation collectors (P, AA, and W);


Page 38 of 62

• The length of the drainage network rehabilitated far exceeded the original and revised targets

(intermediate indicator #1 – 500% and 194% achieved, respectively). Originally, a total of 8.6 km was

planned to be rehabilitated covering the three main drainage networks in Cotonou Agglomeration, namely

collectors P, AA, W. At the end of the project, a total of 43.40 kilometers of drainage network had been

rehabilitated.

• Civil works focused on opening and calibrating the channels floor by removing and disposing of vegetation,

solid wastes and mud, resurfacing the inner wall of drains, rehabilitating shoulders and side ditches,

constructing and expanding three additional storm water retention ponds and connecting them to the

network.

• As a related achievement, 22.7 kilometers of paved road has also been completed. This includes paved

bridges, access roads to the bridges, and paved roads above drainage pipes. This is an additional benefit to

the public, where in many cases only the main roads are paved.

• Elevation and rehabilitation of Fifadji Bridge was completed by July, 2015 to ensure smooth flow of runoff

to Lake Nokoue (intermediate indicator #2 – 100% achieved). Crossing structure 60 m, access ramps: 130

m on the side of Fifadji and 120 m on the side of Ste Rita. Development of a landscaped area adjacent to

Fifadji Bridge, which used to be an open dump site. However, there are reports of the need for repeated

repairs, which causes traffic delays. There are also reports of the lack of cleaning of gutters, which causes

frequent flooding of the Fifadji market.

• A second bridge over the Sodo marshland in Abomey-Calavi municipality was completed in August, 2017.

Crossing structure: 200 ml, access ramps: 296 ml (190 cococodji side and 106 side hêvié). The access ramps

to this work will be lanes paved 9m wide about 650 meters on the side of Cococodji and 350 meters on the

side of Hêvié. Realization of a landscaped space in Houéyiho.

Findings from the Impact Evaluation completed in October 2017:

• Protection for more than 582,058 people from the impact of cyclical floods;

• Considerable reduction of flood damage in many neighborhoods;

• Drastic reduction in the duration of work to remove stagnation of rainwater in the drainage network from an average of 28 days to less than 2 hours;

• Permanent flow of people and goods on the Fifadji Bridge for 40,000 people / 20,000 vehicles / day;

• Permanent flow of people and goods on the Sodo Bridge for 50,000 / 25,000 vehicles / day;


Page 39 of 62

Component B: Solid Waste Management Solid waste management infrastructure was improved through: i) construction of 51 collection points and 2 transfer

stations (Map 1); ii) operationalization of the SWM chain with delivery of 10 pick-up trucks, 150 motorized tricycles and

7 pick-up trucks for the pre-collection, transfer and final disposal of household solid waste in landfills; iii) civil works and

support to each of the two landfill sites in Cotonou Agglomeration; iv) elaboration of technical and economic feasibility

plans for the operationalization of the SWM chain, and: v) institutional capacity building to responsible authorities with

the provision of expertise, hardware, staff training, public awareness programs, and development of a database for SWM

statistical purposes.

Map 1: Solid Waste Management - Component B (Source: Project Coordination unit)


Page 40 of 62

• 51 household solid waste collection points equipped with 71 15 m3 bins;

• 2 transfer centers equipped with 15 tanks of 40 m3 - 1. Camp Guezu in Cotonou (completed and active) and 2. Ouèdo in Abomey-Calavi (completed, but inactive). Work on Yagbé in Cotonou to transform a collection point to a transfer center has been suspended while the situation is being clarified with the municipality. Work on Akonaboe in Porto-Novo has been cancelled and the site is inactive;

• 10 pick-up trucks

• 150 motorized tricycles with tipping capacity for pre-collection;

• 7 pickup trucks for pre-collection, transfer and final disposal of household solid waste in landfills;

• Reinforcement of the Ouèssè landfill with a new cell, which is already in service;

• Operationalization of the Takon Technical Landfill Center;

• Elaboration of a technical-economic feasibility study of the solid waste management sector in Grand Nokoué;

• Development of a harmonized plan for solid household waste management in the communes of Grand Nokoué;

• Organization of solid waste management chain;

• Technical capacity building of municipal staff officers in the Technical Services Directorate (TSD) in the Grand Nokoué;

• Provision of computer equipment and office furniture to the TSD;

• Commitment of the town halls to take care of the infrastructures carried out;

• Updated and operational statistics database on solid waste.

Component C: Wastewater management A number of studies and activities have been completed under the project, which will support the improvement of wastewater management in Cotonou Agglomeration. This includes a Master Plan for sewage treatment, operational support for the integration of two wastewater engineers in SONEB (explain), and ongoing implementation of the Socomey Multi-Service Poing in Porto-Novo to eradicate open defecation in this neighborhood.

• Master Plan for sewage treatment in the Cotonou Agglomeration, Abomey-Calavi, Sèmè-Kpodji and

Porto-Novo to guide decision-makers;

• Technical capacity building for municipal staff officers around the Wastewater Master Plan;

• Strengthening SONEB’s human resources by attaining specialists, such as 2 wastewater engineers, who have been integrated into SONEB for two years as part of the project, and who has now been recruited as full-time staff at SONEB;


Page 41 of 62

• Existence of control kit at SONEB and the DNSP for characterizing wastewater and specifying management strategies by types of wastewater;

• National Wastewater Sanitation Strategy in urban and peri-urban areas for 2016-2030 (study began in January 2017, draft strategy document delivered in September 2017);

• Detailed technical study for the rehabilitation of the wastewater treatment system and for the construction of a sewage treatment plant in Sèmè-Kpodji;

• Operationalization of the Socomey multi-service point (Porto-Novo) to eradicate the countless cases of open defecation in this neighborhood (pending).

PDO (ii): Increase Benin’s level of preparedness for future flooding

Outcome Indicators 1. At the end of the project, mechanisms and institutional arrangements for the putting in place a flood early warning system will be in place and operational (Yes/No)

Intermediate Results Indicators

1. Wastewater Master Plan developed for Cotonou Agglomeration (Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi, Seme-Podji, and Porto-Novo) 2. Number of communities with communal flood contingency plans 3. Number of awareness campaigns and sensitization meetings on coastal erosion and coastal contingency preparedness (Number) 4. Technical studies on selected coastal erosion sites

Key Outputs by Component (linked to the achievement of the Objective/Outcome 2)

Component D: Flood Risk Management Planned activities: Capacity Building and Institutional Strengthening for Flood Management; Education and sensitization of all concerned actors on floods; Integrating flood risk prevention into urban planning; Support for the implementation of operational contingency plan in vulnerable communes; Technical study on coastal erosion.

1. Increased resilience to the effects of flooding of people living in areas at high risk of flooding; 2. Team functioning of actors in the platform for disaster risk reduction and adaptation to climate change at the

national, departmental, communal and local levels; 3. Regular organization of disaster risk reduction platform sessions, including communal platforms;


Page 42 of 62

4. Provision in 2017 of a budget of 100 million to the Emergency Fund created by decree under the responsibility of the ANPC;

5. Endowment of US$450 million equivalent Public Investment Program for disaster prevention and management activities under an Action Plan 2016-2030 - still under the responsibility of the ANPC;

6. Active status of Peer Educators and Rescuers trained for emergency shelter assistance in all 21 high-risk municipalities;

7. Capacity building of 32 scale readers for the benefit of DG Water; 8. Availability of a guide on building standards in flood zones for the municipalities of Cotonou, Abomey-Calavi

and Sèmè-Podji; 9. Development of 28 municipal contingency plans for the 21 communes at high risk of flooding and 07 other

vulnerable communes; 10. Mapping unbuildable zones (elaboration of flood risk maps) (1 paper map per district) 11. Availability of the ORSEC plan 12. Availability of the updated Post Disaster Needs Assessment Report (PDNA); 13. Availability of 25 gauges and 25 tipping bucket pluviographs in the Ouémé basin for flood warning; 14. Availability of 11 gauges and 16 tipping bucket pluviographs on the Mono Basin for flood warning; 15. Availability of 9 agro-meteorological stations equipped with teletransmission and remote management for

early warning of hydro-climatic risks; 16. Availability of an updated action plan for strengthening the early warning system for floods in the Ouémé

basin; 17. Availability of a decentralized flood management program; 18. Availability of the document of the National Policy for Prevention and Integrated Disaster Management.


Page 43 of 62

Table 4: Changes to planned activities outlined in the amended Financing Agreement, AF1 and AF2 (by component)

BEUEP Activities (April, 2011)

BEUEP Impact First AF Activities (June, 2014)

First AF Incremental Impact

1st Restructuring (December, 2014)

Second AF Activities (June, 2015)

Second AF Incremental Impact

A • Calibration and unclogging of P, AA and W2 and Wbis collectors (covering a total of 8.6 km of drainage structures)

• Elevation and rehabilitation of Fifadji Bridge

43,600 residents protected from floods and associated health impact in the project target areas

• Cleaning, reconstructing and calibrating 800 additional meters in P basin

• Opening, scouring and calibrating additional 1.3km of drainage structures

10,000 additional residents protected from the adverse impact of flooding (loss of lives and property, disease and food insecurity) in an expanded target area

• • Cleaning, reconstructing and calibrating 3.4 additional kilometers in AAc, Pa, and Wd drainage basins

• Opening, scouring and calibrating additional 8.1 km of drainage structures

• Drainage Master Plan for plateau of Abomey

• Elevation and rehabilitation of Sodo Bridge

At least 70,000 additional residents protected from the adverse impact of flooding (loss of lives and property, disease and food insecurity) in an expanded target area.

B • Capacity building of the MEPN, and provision of TA and capacity building to the municipalities and NGOs involved in pre-collection of municipal wastes in the project target areas

• Construction of collection points and transfer stations

• Construction of a controlled dumpsite Construction in Abomey-Calavi (

• A more limited negative impact of solid waste on flooding

• Increased capacity of central government, municipalities and NGOs’ to handle waste collection

• additional Increased effectiveness and efficiency of component activities, resulting in further reduction of the impact of solid waste on flooding in the target areas

• Removed: Construction of a controlled dumpsite - due to institutional difficulties between the NGOs responsible for the pre-collection and collection of wastes and the municipality.

• Revised: Construction of new collection points and rehabilitation of existing collection points

• Added: A feasibility

• Construction of additional collection points and transfer stations in Abomey-Calavi, Ouidah and Sèmè-Kpodji municipalities

• Developing a financing study on the SWM chain and PPP in Cotonou

• Harmonized Master plan of SWM in the participating municipalities

Additional 24,000 residents will benefit from additional collection points and strengthened institutional capacity. Providing the participating municipalities with a harmonized master plan on SWM with PPP inputs; increasing the rate of pre-collection of solid waste and limit the negative impacts of solid waste on the environment in the cities of Cotonou,


Page 44 of 62

• Construction of a new cell at the Ouessè dump and access road construction (paving option)

study and a detailed technical design for a dump-site in Abomey-Calavi, incl. an ESIA

Porto-Novo, Abomey-Calavi, Seme-Podji and Ouidah

C • Development of master plans for municipal wastewater drainage and treatment

• Institutional strengthening and TA for improved municipal wastewater management

• Implementation of a small-scale sanitary drainage and waste water treatment pilot

• Strengthened institutional and regulatory framework for municipal wastewater management

• Scale-up to implement additional wastewater and sanitation pilot projects

2,600 additional residents protected from some of the health impact of flooding as a result of mixing flood water with untreated wastewater

No activities under the second AF

N/A

D • Supporting the establishment of a FEWS

• Strengthening the coordination capacity at the national level

• Education and awareness

• Integration of prevention of flood risk in urban planning

• Support to the establishment of operational contingency plan in vulnerable communes

• Improved operational capabilities and management of flood risks in the project target areas

• Prepare a national policy on disaster risk management

• Put in place a database for disasters management

• SupportGOB to implement priority NAPA action plans

• Purchase modern meteorological equipment and providing specialized training

• Support GOB to monitor hydrometric stations on the Oueme River

Improved legal and knowledge frameworks for disaster risk management and further improvement in national operational capabilities – both ultimately resulting in increased preparedness and adaptation of communities to natural disasters, including flooding

• Removed: Support to the establishment of a FEWS

• Added: Preparation of a feasibility study for a FEWS on the Ouémé River

• Feasibility and technical study for an operational FEWS

• Technical studies for selected sites on urban coastal management

• Communication and sensitization on coastal contingency and emergency preparedness

Improved knowledge framework for disaster risk management and preparedness through the use of FEWS. Improved and increased preparedness and adaptation of communities to natural disasters, including floods and coastal erosion


Page 45 of 62

ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION

A. TASK TEAM MEMBERS

Name Role

Preparation

Africa Eshogba Olojoba Task Team Leader

Addoul-Wahab Seyni Sr. Social Development Specialist

Daniel Sellen Sector Leader

Dahlia Lotayef Program Coordinator

Franck Bousquet Program Coordinator

Kwabena Amankwah-Ayeh Sr. Urban Specialist

Poonam Pillai Sr. Environmental Specialist

Zie Coulibaly Sr. Infrastructure Specialist

Aissatou Diallo Sr. Finance Officer

Alain Hinkati Financial Management Specialist

Itchi Gnon Ayindo Sr. Procurement Specialist

Anthony Molle Counsel

Mathias Gogohounga Procurement Specialist

Andrew Asibey Sr. M&E Specialist

Sylvain Migan Adopko Water & Sanitation Specialist

Bolormaa Amgaabazar Sr. Operations Officer

Issa Maman-Sani Sr. Environment Specialist

Salimata Follea Operations Analyst

Akpo Leissan Augustine Team Assistant

Chita Oje Team Assistant

Ernestine Ngobo-Njocke Program Assistant


Page 46 of 62

Fadi Doumani Consultant

Petrus Dahou Consultant

Djibril Doucoure Consultant

Fadhel Ghariani Consultant

Sandra Cointreau Consultant

Jeffrey Racki Consultant

Supervision/ICR

Africa Eshogba Olojoba Task Team Leader(s)

Mathias Gogohounga Procurement Specialist(s)

Angelo Donou Financial Management Specialist

Marie Bernadette Darang Team Member

Abdoul Wahabi Seini Social Safeguards Specialist

Marie Roger Augustin Team Member

Isabella Micali Drossos Counsel

Maman-Sani Issa Safeguards Advisor

Africa Eshogba Olojoba Environmental Safeguards Specialist

Sylvie Charlotte Ida do Rego Team Member

Pepita Hortense C. Olympio Team Member

Sylvain Adokpo Migan Team Member

George Ferreira Da Silva Team Member

Alain Hinkati Team Member

Ingrid Cesarine Meka Team Member

Leissan Augustine Akpo Team Member

Nevena Ilieva Operations Advisor

Sanne Agnete Tikjoeb ICR Author


Page 47 of 62

B. STAFF TIME AND COST

Stage of Project Cycle Staff Time and Cost

No. of staff weeks US$ (including travel and consultant costs)

Preparation

FY09 4.696 48,694.01

FY10 10.421 99,783.54

FY11 26.523 242,199.76

Total 41.64 390,677.31

Supervision/ICR

FY12 13.823 123,918.96

FY13 12.720 117,420.21

FY14 16.595 142,999.82

FY15 12.043 119,629.83

FY16 7.992 104,161.17

FY17 5.918 97,315.28

FY18 7.021 71,540.73

Total 76.11 776,986.00


Page 48 of 62

ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT

Components Amount at Approval

(US$M) Amount in AF1

(US$M) Amount in AF2

(US$M) Actual at Project

Closing (US$M) Percentage of

Approval (US$M)

A. Drainage Improvement and Rehabilitation

23.56 2.40 32.00 57.96 246

B. Municipal Solid Waste Management

13.82 1.20 3.00 18.02 130

C. Improved Municipal Wastewater Management and Sanitation

4.70 0.70 - 5.40 119

D. Flooding and Disaster Risk Preparedness and Management

5.03 2.10 4.25 11.38 226

E. Project Management 2.89 0.75 3.64 126

Total 50.00 6.40 40.00 96.40 193

GOB in-kind contribution for Component B equaled US$ 7 million equivalent.


Page 49 of 62

ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS

An ex-ante economic and financial analysis for infrastructure investments related to Component A and

Component B was performed at the time of appraisal. The following sub-projects were considered:

• Improvement of the AA drainage area in Cotonou;

• Improvement of the P drainage area in Cotonou;

• Improvement of the W drainage area in Cotonou; and

• Elevation of the Fifadji Bridge in Cotonou.

• Construction of 40 collection points in Cotonou Agglomeration;

• Construction of a transfer/segregation site for Cotonou Agglomeration; and

• Construction of a controlled dumpsite for Cotonou Agglomeration.

The benefits for the economic analysis were identified as: (i) the averted loss of opportunities by the

reduction of 10 disruptive severe-flood-days; and (ii) a hedonic pricing for the incremental value of land

associated with the reduction of 10 disruptive severe-flood-days.

The underlying assumptions included in the PAD were as follows:

• The analysis covers the recurrent annual flooding during the high season (not the 2010 disaster)

• The economic analysis is carried out over a period of 24 years (from 2011 to 2034);

• A real discount rate of 12 percent per annum is used;

• Priority investments are disbursed over the first 0.5 to 2.5 years of the implementation of the

project;

• Operations and maintenance (OMEX) cost increase at an average 3.0% annually in real terms;

• The lost opportunity (monetized by the GDP) of 10 disruptive severe-flood-days are considered

although an improved drainage, bridge and waste management should help Cotonou

Agglomeration avoid any major disruptive floods in the future. Actually, floods have been lasting

several weeks notably due to the missing link between these drainage areas and Lake Nokoué,

which will be tackled by the project;

• A crude hedonic method is suggested to derive the incremental cost of land with the reduction or

containment of annual floods. Current average land cost is CFAF 23,000 per m2 whereas the

incremental land cost due to the reduction of floods is assumed to be a net increase of 10% of the

value of the land located within a distance of 75 m from each side of the public setback drainage

area (150 m in total) with a total length of 8.6 km;

• The flooding of the bridge affects 40,000 people (average 2 people per vehicle, bus, truck and

motorcycle) with a loss of one hour per day over 10 days;

• The GDP per capita per year adopted for the calculation is CFAF 346,500 with an annual growth

of 3% and a distribution of 50% for the under 14 years of age, 100% for the 15 to 64 years age

bracket and 30% for more than 64 years of age;


Page 50 of 62

• There are no major infrastructure, mechanical and equipment investments that could not be

covered by OMEX over the lifetime of the subcomponents;

• Revenues perceived from the waste pre-collection were used in the analysis; and

• All benefits are assumed to begin to accrue in 2014.

The analysis showed that the drainage, bridge and solid waste subcomponent aggregate economic net

present value (NPV) discounted at 12% was positive with US$ 77 million over 24 years. The benefit/cost

ratio reached 11 while the economic internal rate of return (IRR) was also positive with 31%. Two

sensitivity tests were carried out to test the viability of the subcomponents with 1) a reduction of the

number of flood days from 10 to 2 days, and 2) a decrease of the incremental land value to 5%. The

sensitivity analysis showed that the drainage, bridge and waste subcomponents were not sensitive to a

decrease by two flood-days and moderately sensitive to a decrease of the incremental land value along

the drainage area to 5%.

An ex-post economic and financial analysis for the ICR was performed based on the methodology

presented in the PAD, applying many of the same assumptions and with updated results, benefits and

costs. Only component A is covered in the analysis, and the following infrastructure sub-projects were

considered:

• Improvement of the AA drainage area in Cotonou;

• Improvement of the P drainage area in Cotonou;

• Improvement of the W drainage area in Cotonou;

• Elevation of the Fifadji Bridge in Cotonou; and

• Elevation of the Sodo Bridge in Abomey-Calavi.

The social and economic benefits to accrue from investments under Component B have yet to materialize

as most of the collection points and transfer centers were not yet in operation at project closing (although

completed from the project’s side). However, as the analysis below will show, even without a revenue

stream from the SWM investments, the NPV is overwhelmingly positive and would easily absorb the cost

of Component B (US$18.02 million equivalent).

An updated set of key conservative assumptions have been considered for the ICR economic analysis:

• The investments will last for 24 years (from 2011 to 2034) with a conservative assumption of no

salvage value at the end of the project life;

• Project investments are conservatively assumed to be entirely disbursed in year 0;

• Benefits accrue from the year the sub-projects are realized;

• A real discount rate of 12 percent per annum is used;

• Daily travelers of 40,000 people on Fifadji bridge and 50,000 people on Sodo assuming no overlap;

• Flood is assumed to affect all bridge travelers with a loss of one hour per day over 10 days/year;

• Every traveler is assumed to be a representative person a productive capacity equal to the

country’s GDP per capita of 346,500 CFAF or $715.9 at the US$/CFAF exchange rate of 484;

• GDP is assumed to grow by 3% annually in real terms;

• Average productive hours in a year are assumed to be 2000; and


Page 51 of 62

• The incremental land value due to the reduction of floods is assumed to be a net increase of 10%

of the value of the land (23,000 CFAF per square meter) located within a distance of 75 meters

from each side of the drainage area (150 m in total) with a total length of 43.40 km;

Determination of updated NPV, IRR and Benefit/Cost Ratio

The drainage and bridge subcomponent’s aggregate economic net present value (NPV) discounted at 12%

is positive with US$ 197 million over 24 years. The cost/benefit ratio reaches 4 while the economic internal

rate of return (IRR) is positive at 35%. Despite the conservative assumptions and the few benefits

considered in the economic analysis, the drainage and bridge investments are economically viable.

Table 5: Key Economic Indicators






Economic Sensitivity Analysis

The same sensitivity analyses that was done at the time of appraisal is conducted again at the ICR stage.

First Scenario: With a reduction of the number of flood days from 10 to 2 days, the project is still viable

with an NPV of US$ 195 million with a 35% IRR and a benefit/cost ratio of 4. The results are very similar

to the table above given the low GDP per capita, which means that a reduction of lost productivity for a

total of 10 hours is small relatively to other benefits. It should be noted here that using a reduction of 1

hour time lost a day is very conservative. The analysis does not account for potential benefits to the

informal economy.

Table 6: Key Economic Indicator Sensitivity Scenario with 2 Day Flood Reduction







Page 52 of 62

Second Scenario: With a yearly land increment of 5% instead of 10%, the subcomponents are still

economically viable with an NPV of US$ 5 million with a 14% IRR and a benefit/cost ratio of 3.

Table 7: Economic Indicator Sensitivity Scenario with 5% Land Value Increment




Benefit/Cost Ratio/24 years 2.25 Discounted benefit > discounted cost


The sensitivity analysis shows that the drainage and bridge subcomponents are not sensitive to a decrease

by two flood-days and moderately sensitive to a decrease of the incremental land value to 5% along the

drainage area.

In conclusion, the economic and financial analysis performed at the ICR stage shows a positive NPV

with IRR above 12% and an acceptable cost-benefit ratio. The assumptions were conservative and

only two benefits were considered.

Other socioeconomic and environmental benefits

While difficult to measure, there are many other benefits that are not easily monetized for the purposes

of an economic and financial analysis. A “without project” scenario could notably have the following

negative direct and indirect effects:

• Health: averted costs in terms of premature death, drowning, injuries, water-related diseases,

vector-borne diseases, etc.;

• Environmental: ecological system disruption, water resource pollution, air pollution, land

degradation;

• Global externalities: carbon emission (e.g., due to additional traffic jams, animal putrefaction,

vegetal decomposition, etc.);

• Damages: infrastructure (transport, energy, water, etc.), land, household, business, private

property including vehicles, etc.;

• Economic opportunity: loss of economic opportunities and increase poverty incidence and

therefore vulnerability (loss of wages, loss of time, yield, sales, commerce, tourism, etc.); and

• Social: disruption of health services, schools, universities, etc.


Page 53 of 62


Page 54 of 62

ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS

The draft Borrower Completion Report (RAPPORT D’ACHEVEMENT DU PROJET D’URGENCE DE GESTION

ENVIRONNEMENTALE EN MILIEU URBAIN (PUGEMU)) was prepared by the Ministry of Environment and

Sustainable Development in September 2017 and it was discussed at the project completion workshop

with all stakeholders in October 2017, after which the report was finalized at the end of the month. The

report contains detailed tables and information on project execution by component. It also incorporates

the findings of the Impact Evaluation referenced in this ICR. The findings in this ICR draw on the Borrower’s

Completion Report. The full report is available in the project files, as well as the Impact Evaluation. An

Executive Summary in English, prepared by the ICR team, is included below.

The Bank team shared the draft ICR with the PCU in March 2018 following the Decision Meeting. The PCU

provided some updates since project closing, as well editorial comments both of which have been

reflected, as appropriate, in this ICR.

Executive Summary of the Borrower ICR (English translation)

1. The Benin Emergency Urban Environment Project (BEUP), approved by the World Bank's Executive Board on November 18, 2011, was formally launched on January 24, 2012 with the signature of the Government Benin and the World Bank, a credit agreement amounting to 24.120.000.000 FCFA (basic financing) supplemented later by two amendments namely, the first additional financing amounting to 3.092.270.000 FCFA and the second additional financing amounting to 21,774,980,000 FCFA, for an overall total of 48,987,250,000 FCFA. The expected duration was five years, with an actual completion date of 31 October 2017.

2. The project aims to contribute to the resolution of urban environmental problems in Greater Nokoué. These problems include: the overcrowding of the city districts of Grand-Nokoué, which are poorly served by urban amenities, thus aggravating the already poor services in these neighborhoods; the observed high urban density leading to difficulties in solid waste disposal, degradation of water quality, urban air pollution, construction in environmentally sensitive areas subject to seasonal flooding; the occupation of lowland areas by populations, solid wastes produced, vegetation and mud have obstructed the natural drainage channels of rainwater; the flat topography of Cotonou and the high level of groundwater have resulted in a mixture of rainwater with the contents of latrines and septic tanks during floods with the consequent growth of waterborne diseases; the lack of sewage systems aggravates the negative impact on the environment and the health of populations; also the absence of a complete chain of solid waste management between households and a sanitary landfill leads to a proliferation of wild dump sites and an increase in health risks for neighboring populations; the rate of solid waste disposal in Benin's urban areas is very low, barely 8% is transported and buried.

3. With a view to contributing to the resolution of these problems, the main objective of the project is to improve the infrastructure that can mitigate the negative environmental impacts resulting from the


Page 55 of 62

floods in the Greater Nokoué region and to increase Benin's readiness to cope with future floods. In this context, the project relied on a multi-component intervention strategy that simultaneously took into account the improvement of stormwater drainage, solid waste management, wastewater management and risk management, floods and natural disasters. This strategy was complemented by another, which consisted of entrusting the implementation of component activities to two delegated agencies. Indeed, the project was executed by two delegated project implementation agencies: the Regional Studies Society for Housing and Urban Planning (SERHAU SA) and the Urban Works Execution Agency (AGETUR SA) ); the former is responsible for the execution of the services and the second for the execution of the works; the coordination of BEUEP’s activities is ensured by a Project Management Unit called "Supervision and Monitoring Unit (CSS)".

4. The project configuration includes five components: Drainage Improvement and Rehabilitation (Component A), Solid Waste Management (Component B), Wastewater Management Support (Component C), Support to prevention and management of floods and natural disasters (Component D), Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation (Component E).

5. Relevance. The project is relevant in the implementation of these activities. This globally satisfactory or even very satisfactory relevance can be explained by the fact that the project has been able to meet the needs of reducing the vulnerability of its beneficiaries to floods. The project is also coherent with the priorities and policies of Benin and the communes of Greater Nokoué, as well as with the priorities of the World Bank namely: SDG 6 (access to safe water and sanitation); priority of the Government's Program of Action (GPA) (Pillar 3, axis 6 on strengthening basic social services and social protection); SDG 11, Pillar 3 Axis 7 Action 24 of the GPA, on the improvement of rainwater drainage networks, and the management and treatment of solid household waste; SDG 13, Pillar 3 Axis 7 Action 24 of the GPA on improving the well-being of all and preserving the environment.

6. BEUEP carrying out these activities has mostly achieved the expected performance and impact indicators. Execution rates are higher than forecasts for some indicators. The project has reached a satisfactory level of execution of the performance indicators. The major indicator that has been partially achieved concerns the operationalization of the collection points.

7. Effectiveness. In general, the project has largely achieved the original objectives, as planned, and therefore has been effective in all components, expect for component B where the works completed are not yet functional. Despite this aspect, the desired effect is achieved overall at more than 90%.

8. Specifically, on the side of the delegated contracting authority, AGETUR, all activities carried out within the framework of components A, B, and C are effective globally. Their overall effectiveness is greater than 90%, both for core funding and for the two additional riders. Apart from the construction of the Porto-Novo multi-service point (activity of component C), which by 31 October 2017 had a physical execution rate of approximately 50%, all the other activities planned for the implementation of the AGETUR agency's components are 100% executed as planned. The significant level of efficiency achieved is due, on the one hand, to good business planning and good contract management between the executing agency and the service delivery companies.

9. On the side of the delegated contracting authority, SERHAU, all the activities of components B (services), D, and E are 100% effective in their execution, for the basic financing, the first additional financing and the second additional financing as of October 31, 2017; only the validation session of the "Disaster Risk Management" will be held in the first week of November 2017 and for which it should be noted that the slight delay observed can be explained by the delays observed on the release of the basic


Page 56 of 62

credit for this activity. It can nevertheless be concluded that the programmed activities for the implementation of these three components were carried out on average as planned by the programming. Also, the activities carried out by the SERHAU agency are services (studies, training, awareness, supply of goods and services), whose execution is generally well within the timeframe. The level of 100% efficiency is also due to the good planning of the contracted services and good contract management between the executing agency and the service delivery companies.

10. Efficiency. Efficiency is generally good for all components; however, it would be better if alert systems, contingency plans and downstream consolidation points become more operational.

11. Regarding MOD AGETUR, the activities of components A, B (infrastructures) and C are efficient in their execution with a rate higher than 90% for both the basic financing and the two amendments. The contractual amounts are sometimes different from the amounts disbursed. These considerable levels of efficiency were made possible by good cost planning and contract management between the executing agency and the contractors.

12. Regarding SERHAU, all the activities carried out for component B (service), D, and E are 100% efficient in their execution for both the base credit and the additional credits. The contractual amounts are consistent with the amounts disbursed. This high level of efficiency can be explained by good financial cost planning on the one hand and good contract management between the executing agency and service delivery companies on the other hand.

13. Evaluation of the impact of the project. In general, the implementation of BEUEP has had positive impacts on physical, financial, and human assets and on the environment. For component A, certain impacts are already visible, notably the marked improvement in the living conditions of beneficiaries with respect to floods. The projected impact of components C and D through capacity building (equipment, personnel, master plan and contingency) is evident. As for the B component, its impacts will be noticeable only after the commissioning of the built / rehabilitated collection points and solid waste transfer stations.

14. In terms of the construction and rehabilitation of drainage systems: The project has improved the living environment of the population by reducing the effects of floods such as the inaccessibility of roads, particularly in certain districts of Cotonou, Sèmè-Podji and Porto- Novo; previously impassable ways are now very accessible, which impacts the environment, income and health; the construction of gutters / collectors by allowing the evacuation of rainwater and water have already produced positive effects in terms of a reduction in number of malaria cases, waterborne diseases and morbidity, thereby improving the overall conditions of life; the rehabilitation of "Fifadji" bridge, the comfort works (including investment in public lighting), the construction of "Somé" bridge and numerous paved roads have facilitated the smooth flow of road traffic, promoting economic and socio-cultural activities, population health, tourism, etc.

15. In terms of household solid waste management (collection points, transfer stations, lane paving, advisory support, capacity building of subsector stakeholders, provision of miscellaneous equipment) improved under-equipment of transport vehicles and garbage collectors, and the low level of training and information of the beneficiaries. The commissioning of collection points and transfer stations will, of course, have a positive impact on the cleanliness of cities with associated reduction of diseases related to lack of hygiene (diarrhea, typhoid fever, etc.).

16. In terms of support for wastewater management, the strengthening of the institutional and operational capacities of the structures dealing with their management will certainly have positive effects


Page 57 of 62

on the environment. For the moment, the effects of this support are not noticeable, but could be felt over time.

17. In terms of support for the prevention / management of flood risks / natural disasters, increasing the operational capacities of institutions (Météo-Benin, SONEB, and DG-Eau among others) by "densification of hydro-meteorological networks enabling early warning, the provision of vehicles and computer systems, capacity building, the implementation of contingency plans and specific studies, the development of endogenous control strategies for the upwellings and the creation of the inter-institutional unit of flood warning of institutions "strengthens the existing early warning system in reducing the effects and impacts that floods and other disasters can produce in the short, medium and long term.

18. Assessment of environmental and social sustainability. The induced effects are globally satisfactory. The actions implemented in component A are viable with impacts on flood reduction. At the level of component B, sustainability is ensured through training and consultation with beneficiaries, the promotion of best practices, and sanctions on polluters, etc. The actions of Components C and D had immediate effects in relation to institutional capacity building. With respect to improving drainage systems, the structures are sustainable, but the quality of the services they offer could deteriorate if continued awareness strategies for their maintenance and monitoring is not organized. In regard to Component B, the communication approach needs to be intensified for the commissioning of collection points and transfer stations to ensure their environmental and social sustainability. In terms of support for wastewater management / floods / natural disasters, training / implementation of the results of studies can ensure satisfactory environmental and social sustainability provided that the "principle of systematic feedback from participants in capacity building courses and from review of studies" is considered and incorporated at the level of beneficiary institutions.

19. All in all, the actions implemented in Components A and B are viable and some already produce immediate effects (reduction of floods) and others have medium and long-term impacts (solid waste management, etc.). The actions of Components C and D had immediate effects in relation to institutional capacity building. On the other hand, it is the implementation of wastewater management plans, contingency plan against floods and disasters, etc. which will make it possible to assess in the medium and long term the effects and impacts of the actions carried out within this framework. Town halls and local elected representatives constitute the main anchor point to implement a viable institutional and financial mechanism for the sustainability of the various components of the project. The populations are also involved through continuous awareness raising to make the various results of the project viable.

20. Some performance elements of the partners and beneficiaries. At IDA level: IDA has demonstrated timeliness and adherence to disbursement commitments throughout the project period. The funds were released on time and the supervision missions completed according to the established schedule.

21. At the level of the Government: No obstruction was noted during the implementation phase of BEUEP, even as the succession of four different ministers entailed four different Project Coordinators. The government also played an important role in entrusting the execution of the components to agencies (AGETUR and SERHAU).

22. At the level of the town halls: There were numerous difficulties observed in securing sites from the Mayors for the installation of infrastructure investments. More could have been done in town halls to raise awareness and obtain more land for public purposes. However, the release of land as part of financing the BEUEP is a worthy effort to their credit.


Page 58 of 62

23. At the level of economic interest groups involved in pre-collection of household solid waste: A total and manifest commitment has been observed through their involvement and participation in all BEUEP activities. For example, their lobbying with Mayors and project agencies helped ensure timely results, reorganization of training sessions and training topics, as well as the adoption of suitable pre-collection materials.

24. General recommendations. To extend the work of BEUEP to complete ongoing activities and build the capacity of stakeholders to achieve the objectives related to sanitation and flood risk management; to reinforce the skills of the technical staff at the town halls (local elected officials and executives) for their effective involvement in managing the implementation of works (from the design to the final acceptance) in order to build ownership and accountability; for municipalities to urgently set up local structures to promote hygiene and basic sanitation; with the commitment of the State and municipalities, to improve the technical capacity of service providers for increased sustainability of project achievements.

25. Recommendations on construction and rehabilitation of drainage works. Construct complementary structures (bridges, roads, gutters, etc.) for optimal sanitation in the various towns of Grand Nokoué; strengthen the capacity of town halls in the maintenance of sanitation facilities; to sensitize the population to avoid the purchase and / or construction of their houses in flood zones; complete implementation of the Master Plans for Sanitation of the cities of Grand Nokoué and empower beneficiary communes; promote the construction of resilient infrastructure.

26. Recommendations on solid waste management. The realization of access roads to solid waste collection points and their securitization (lighting, fences, etc.); the establishment of an integrated waste management system with the installation of a monitoring and accountability body for all levels of stakeholders; the construction of new collection points and transfer stations in the cities of Greater Nokoué, and the servicing of completed collection and transfer stations; organizational strengthening of economic interest groups; reinforcement of local awareness; the availability to stakeholders in the SWM sector of the harmonized plan for the management of household solid waste in the communes of Greater Nokoué and the popularization of the results of the studies carried out; the destruction of wild dumps around collection points; the promotion of sorting at source in the main cities of the country; the continuation of information, education and communication sessions on the negative impacts of mismanagement of garbage and waste; the establishment of a legal framework to accompany the legislation on waste management in Benin; the integration of economic interest groups and NGOs in the circuit of the new waste and waste management systems put in place by the Government.

27. Recommendations on risk management for floods and natural disasters. Continue information, education, and communication on the management of risks related to floods and natural disasters (dissemination of the results of the flood warning system set up by the ANPC, etc.); provide support for the financing of septic latrines in dwellings that do not have them; set up a disposal system by specialized companies; provide technical and financial support to municipalities, town halls in the implementation of their communal contingency plan.

28. In summary, it is suggested that the BEUEP actions be continued for a period of time (to be determined) to enable it to: carry out a study on the strategic action points to be pursued in each component to make BEUEP’s actions more sustainable; ensure the commissioning, organization, operation and monitoring of most of the collection points and transfer centers; complete the sanitation and waste management works in Cotonou and the other communes; accompany town halls in the management of gutters, the implementation of emergency contingency plans against floods and natural


Page 59 of 62

disasters; assist the town halls in the financial mobilization and sustainable management of the works and tools put at their disposal; etc.

ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

Timeline

Approval: 26-Apr-2011 (FA dated June 7, 2011)

Effectiveness: 13-Dec-2011

First AF: 05-jun-2014

Mid-Term Review: 30-Jun-2014

1st Restructuring: 23-Dec-2014

Amendment to original FA: 12-Jan-2015

Second AF: 24-Jun-2015

Original Closing: 31-Dec-2015

2nd Restructuring: 06-Aug-2016

Revised Closing: 31-Dec-2016

Actual Closing: 31-Oct-2017

ICR Mission Field Visits

Cotonou (proper)

- Sodo bridge (opened in September 2017) - Fafadji bridge (opened in 2015) - Motor-bikes for pre-collection of solid waste (marked with names of each municipality) - Green spaces

Abomey-Calavi (in Cotonou Conglomorate)

- 3 solid waste collection points - 2 solid waste transfer stations - Major’s office

Project Documents:

- Emergency Project Paper. April 21, 2011 (Report No.: 60301-BJ) - Financing Agreement. June 7, 2011 (Credit No. 4937-BJ) - Amendment to the Financing Agreement. January 12, 2015.


Page 60 of 62

- Project Paper (1st AF). May 8, 2014 - Financing Agreement. June 5, 2014 (Credit No. 5443-BJ) - Project Paper (2nd AF). May 5, 2015. (Report No.: PAD 1369) - Financing Agreement. June 24, 2015 (Credit No. 5642-BJ)

Restructurings Papers:

- Restructuring Paper. December 23, 2014.

Implementation Supervision Reports:

- Sequence 1-12

Aide Memoires & Mid-Term Review