English - Global Environment Facility

ANNEX B: RESPONSES TO PROJECT REVIEWS (from GEF Secretariat and GEF Agencies, and
Responses to Comments from Council at work program inclusion and the Convention Secretariat
and STAP at PIF)
1. GEF Secretariat Review for full/medium size projects
GEF-SEC IADB response
Project design
February 23, 2009
a) As part of the project rationale, please further
justify this investment through an analysis of the
national and international ecotourism market
and identify the niche that Panama is aiming to
fill and incorporate this information into the final
design.
b) Please clearly distinguish what the IADB loan
will be supporting and the increment that the
GEF is paying for that will generate global
benefits.
c) Please identify for the nine sites appropriate
biodiversity impact indicators or measures
that the project will monitor to assess impact of
tourism on the protected areas.
d) Please also include a description of the
biodiversity of each PA and the threats to the
biodiversity of each PA.
e) Please identify how ecotourism development
will both help reduce site-based funding gaps
for management and how the GEF project will
complement ongoing management efforts within
each PA to address the threats to biodiversity.
f) Please identify for each protected area the
revenue shortfalls and propose how the
ecotourism options will reduce that shortfall and
include these measures as part of the project
monitoring framework.
g) Please also clarify the added value of
"certification" of the product (Component Four)
and justify these investments. Please clarify what
system the project will use and provide a rationale
for whatever certification system is chosen.
CEO Endorsement Template-December-08.doc 40
a) See Part II, A in paragraphs 9 and 10 of the Request for CEO
Endorsement. The market analysis undertaken during
preparation shows that to date, a handful of protected areas
around the Panama Canal and specific sites concentrate most of
national and international visitation. The nine protected areas
selected to pilot the Program account for 60% of the current
visitation. The major market potential for ecotourism in Panama
related to “soft ecotourism” is in the so-called Canal Cluster,
where ecotourism is part of a combined and unique offer (canal,
historical sites, and nature), as well as visitation of
coastal/marine parks and PAs close to the Costa Rican border.
The marketing strategy should be geared towards increasing of
the proportion of total visitation to Panama to actually visiting a
PA, and in articulating Panama´s ecotourism offer with Costa
Rica.
b) See Part IV in paragraph 4 of the Request for CEO
Endorsement. The loan has been postponed indefinitely. See
Part II Section E for an explanation of how related initiatives
complement the activities to be financed by the GEF grant.
c) See Part I Section H of the Request for CEO Endorsement.
Biodiversity impact indicators have been included into the
monitoring and evaluation plan (required Annex #3 of the Draft
Grant Proposal).
d) See Part II, A in paragraph 19 (b) of the Request for CEO
Endorsement and Annex E for a summary of biodiversity and
ecotourism values and threats. See also Biodiversity Report
(Optional Annex #2 of the Draft Grant Proposal).
e) See Part II, A in paragraph 15 of the Request for CEO
Endorsement. As part of Component 1 of the project, entrance
fees, fees for ecotourism services, concession and operation
permit fees will be increased to reflect enhanced services and
willingness to pay data collected in Year 1. It is expected that
total revenues generated from these sources will be increased
200% in 5 years and will cover 30-35% operating costs
(compared to a baseline of 17%), thereby reducing the current
shortfall.
f) See Part II, A in paragraph 3 (a) of the Request for CEO
Endorsement. See also Optional Annex #5 of the Draft Grant
Proposal.
g) See Part IV in paragraph 3 of the request for CEO Endorsement.
The decision was made to shift the focus away from certification
using an international recognized system to the promotion of
best practices and quality standards in the provision of
ecotourism services, recognizing this as a more feasible first
step given the current capacity of local and community-based
enterprises in the vicinity of the PAs.