Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: ICR00005581 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT Loan Number 8311-CN & GEF TF 015418 ON A LOAN IN THE AMOUNT OF US$100 MILLION AND A GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF US$5.1 MILLION TO THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA FOR THE GUANGDONG AGRICULTURAL POLLUTION CONTROL PROJECT June 30, 2022 Agriculture and Food Global Practice East Asia and Pacific Region This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS Exchange Rate Effective: June 30, 2021 Currency Unit = CNY CNY 6.46 = US$1 US$ 0.1548 = CNY FISCAL YEAR July 1 - June 30 Regional Vice President: Manuela V. Ferro Country Director: Martin Raiser Regional Director: Benoit Bosquet Practice Manager: Dina Umali-Deininger Task Team Leader(s): Ladisy Komba Chengula ICR Main Contributor: Xueming Liu (Author); Yunqing Tian (Co-Author) ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AD anaerobic digestion ASF African swine fever CA conservation agriculture COD chemical oxygen demand CPF Country Partnership Framework CPS Country Partnership Strategy DA Designated Account DOA Department of Agriculture ECOP Environmental Codes of Practice EMDF Ethnic Minority Development Framework FIRRs Financial Internal Rates of Return FM Financial Management FYP Five-Year Plan GAAS Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences GEF Global Environment Facility GHG greenhouse gas GRID Green, Inclusive, and Resilient Development (GRID) framework GWP global warming potential ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report IPM integrated pest management LWM livestock waste management LWMEAP Livestock Waste Management in East Asia Project MARA Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs M&E monitoring and evaluation MIS management information system MOF Ministry of Finance NDC Nationally Determined Contribution NH3-N ammonia nitrogen RRI Rice Research Institute PAD Project Appraisal Document PDO Project Development Objective SPP Standing Pig Population TN total nitrogen TOC Theory of Change TP total phosphorus TABLE OF CONTENTS DATA SHEET .......................................................................................................................... II I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................... 1 A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL .........................................................................................................1 B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................4 II. OUTCOME ...................................................................................................................... 7 A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs ..............................................................................................................7 B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) ........................................................................................8 C. EFFICIENCY ........................................................................................................................... 13 D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING .................................................................... 15 E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS ......................................................................................... 15 III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ................................ 16 A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION ................................................................................... 16 B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................. 17 IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .. 18 A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) ............................................................ 18 B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE ..................................................... 20 C. BANK PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................... 21 D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME ....................................................................................... 22 V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 23 ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................... 25 ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION ......................... 34 ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................... 37 ANNEX 4: EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 39 ANNEX 5: BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ... 43 ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS .................................................................................. 45 ANNEX 7. METHODOLOGIES FOR POLLUTANT EMISSION REDUCTION CALCULATION ........... 46 ANNEX 8. GHG EMISSION REDUCTION ANALYSIS ................................................................. 54 ANNEX 9. IMPLEMENTATION SUMMARY OF RESEARCH STUDIES ......................................... 57 ANNEX 10: PROJECT M&E – DETAILED DESCRIPTION ........................................................... 63 DATA SHEET BASIC INFORMATION Product Information Project ID Project Name P127775 China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control Country Financing Instrument China Investment Project Financing Original EA Category Revised EA Category Related Projects Relationship Project Approval Product Line Supplement P127815-China 27-Dec-2013 Global Environment Project Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control Organizations Borrower Implementing Agency THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA Department of Agriculture, Guangdong Province Project Development Objective (PDO) Original PDO The proposed development objective is to reduce water pollutant releases from crop and livestock production in selected areas of Guangdong Province. ii FINANCING Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$) World Bank Financing P127775 IBRD-83110 100,000,000 77,454,537 77,454,537 P127815 TF-15418 5,100,000 5,100,000 5,100,000 Total 105,100,000 82,554,537 82,554,537 Non-World Bank Financing 0 0 0 Borrower/Recipient 108,200,000 72,800,000 72,800,000 Total 108,200,000 72,800,000 72,800,000 Total Project Cost 213,300,000 155,354,537 155,354,537 KEY DATES Project Approval Effectiveness MTR Review Original Closing Actual Closing P127775 27-Dec-2013 23-May-2014 28-Sep-2016 31-Dec-2019 30-Jun-2021 RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING Date(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions 06-Apr-2017 23.34 Change in Results Framework Change in Components and Cost Change in Loan Closing Date(s) Reallocation between Disbursement Categories Change in Safeguard Policies Triggered Change in Legal Covenants Change in Implementation Schedule 07-Feb-2021 70.25 Change in Results Framework Change in Components and Cost Cancellation of Financing Reallocation between Disbursement Categories iii KEY RATINGS Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality Satisfactory Satisfactory Substantial RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs Actual No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Disbursements (US$M) 01 13-Apr-2014 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0 02 24-Nov-2014 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0 03 27-May-2015 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 5.00 04 16-Nov-2015 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 5.00 05 26-May-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 16.83 06 21-Nov-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 16.83 07 25-May-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 23.34 08 27-Nov-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 26.42 09 08-Mar-2018 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 36.40 10 29-Jun-2018 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 44.29 11 22-Jan-2019 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 56.38 12 21-May-2019 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 56.38 13 05-Dec-2019 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 65.16 14 25-Jun-2020 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 66.88 15 29-Jan-2021 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 70.25 16 22-Jun-2021 Satisfactory Satisfactory 75.56 iv SECTORS AND THEMES Sectors Major Sector/Sector (%) Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 100 Agricultural Extension, Research, and Other Support 14 Activities Crops 14 Public Administration - Agriculture, Fishing & Forestry 1 Livestock 54 Other Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 17 Themes Major Theme/ Theme (Level 2)/ Theme (Level 3) (%) Urban and Rural Development 9 Rural Development 9 Land Administration and Management 9 v Environment and Natural Resource Management 150 Climate change 59 Mitigation 59 Environmental Health and Pollution Management 87 Air quality management 29 Water Pollution 29 Soil Pollution 29 Renewable Natural Resources Asset Management 4 Biodiversity 2 Landscape Management 2 ADM STAFF Role At Approval At ICR Regional Vice President: Axel van Trotsenburg Manuela V. Ferro Country Director: Klaus Rohland Martin Raiser Director: John A. Roome Benoit Bosquet Practice Manager: Mark R. Lundell Dina Umali-Deininger Task Team Leader(s): Jiang Ru, Wendao Cao Ladisy Komba Chengula Xueming Liu (Author); Yunqing ICR Contributing Author: Tian (Co-author) vi I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL Context 1. At the time of appraisal of the Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control Project (P127775/P127815), China had made significant progress in curbing the rapid growth in pollution discharges during the 11th Five-Year Plan (FYP) period (2006‒2010), but still faced tremendous challenges to improve the overall environmental quality. In 2010, China also officially acknowledged that agriculture and rural settlements had surpassed industry and urban areas as the most important sources of water pollution. According to the country’s First National Pollution Source Survey Report (2010),1 the shares of total pollutant discharges of chemical oxygen demand (COD), total nitrogen (TN), and total phosphorus (TP) from agricultural sources (crops, livestock production, aquaculture) were 44, 57, and 67 percent, respectively, in 2007. 2. Given the magnitude of these challenges, the 12th FYP on Environmental Protection called for controlling pollution from crop and livestock production. Specifically, it called for controlling pollution from crop production by promoting soil nutrient management, ecological and organic agriculture, and the use of biological, high-efficiency, low-toxicity, and low-residue pesticides. It listed national reduction targets for two key water pollutants: COD and ammonia-nitrogen. Guangdong also set its own targets, which formed the basis for the design of this project. 3. Although Guangdong was one of the most developed and urbanized provinces, agriculture remained the major economic sector in the northern and western regions of the province. Key crops produced were rice, vegetables, potatoes, and maize, while pigs dominated livestock production. These intensive agricultural production systems had led to serious pollution problems. The First Guangdong Pollution Source Survey Bulletin reported that, in 2007, agricultural sources contributed to 40, 41, and 56 percent of Guangdong’s gross COD, TN, and TP discharges, respectively. 4. The two major sources of agricultural pollution identified in Guangdong were the overuse of fertilizer and pesticides and the lack of treatment of livestock waste discharged from concentrated production. It was estimated that, in 2007, farmers were applying on average 771 kg of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer and 9.9 kg of pesticide per hectare. These amounts were much higher than China’s national averages as well as those in developed countries. 2 Based on statistics from the Guangdong Agriculture Department, the standing pig population (SPP) in the province surpassed 20 million, contributing 62 percent of COD discharged from livestock production. The overuse of fertilizer and pesticides and livestock production were also recognized as major contributors to climate change through the release of greenhouse gases (GHGs), particularly carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O).3, all of which are known causes of global warming. 5. The department of agriculture (DOA) acknowledged that the wide adoption of new agricultural pollution control technologies and practices faced challenges. Barriers included: (i) perverse incentives from input-oriented subsidies for farmers to use more agricultural inputs in crop production than necessary; (ii) the reluctance of cash-constrained farmers to invest in costly agricultural equipment and 1 Issued by the Ministry of Environmental Protection (now named the Ministry of Ecology and Environment), National Bureau of Statistics, and Ministry of Agriculture (now named the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs) in 2010. 2 In 2007, fertilizer application was 117 kg/ha in the United States, 259 kg/ha in the United Kingdom, 137 kg/ha in Thailand, and 350 kg/ha in Japan (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.CON.FERT.ZS). 3 Nitrous oxide global warming potential (GWP) is 265 times that of CO on a 100-year timescale (IPCC, 2014). 2 Page 1 of 68 livestock waste management (LWM) facilities, which required long repayment periods; (iii) limited on-the- ground demonstration of agricultural technologies and practices; and (iv) limited technical support and training for farmers on adopting the piloted technologies and practices. 6. Guangdong’s government recognized these challenges could prevent it from achieving its pollution reduction target under the 12th FYP on Environmental Protection. Building on the successful results of the previous initiatives, including a World Bank-managed and GEF-funded Livestock Waste Management in East Asia Project (LWMEAP),4 Guangdong requested the assistance of the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility (GEF) to prepare and implement a project to: (i) scale up previously demonstrated fertilizer and pesticide use reduction and LWM technologies and practices; (ii) pilot additional new and innovative technologies and practices; (iii) provide capacity building and training; and (iv) support policy discussions aimed at the further reduction of pollution releases from the agricultural sector. 7. The Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control Project (P127775/P127815) was aligned with the World Bank Group’s Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for FY2013‒2016 (Report No. 67566-CN) and Guangdong’s 12th FYP on Environmental Protection. The CPS aimed to support greener growth by promoting sustainable agricultural practices, pollution management, and climate mitigation and adaptation and Guangdong’s 12th FYP on Environmental Protection emphasized low-carbon green development and environmental protection. The project targeted reducing pollutants released from crop and livestock production to improve environmental performance. The World Bank brought international experience and provided technical guidance and knowledge of advanced technologies to help Guangdong province to achieve the targets in its 12th FYP on Environmental Protection. 8. The project was an integral part of the World Bank/GEF Program: Scaling Up Partnership Investments for Sustainable Development of the Large Marine Ecosystems of East Asia and Their Coasts (GEF Program ID: 4635), which would support Outcome 2.3 (innovative solutions for pollution reduction) of the International Waters Focal Area Strategy for the GEF’s Fifth Replenishment Period (2010‒2014). It was intended to contribute to the program’s objectives of promoting sustainable development of large marine and coastal ecosystems, improving the livelihoods of local populations by supporting environmental-friendly crop production technologies and practices and reducing land-based pollution from Guangdong’s crop and livestock production sectors. Theory of Change (Results Chain) 9. The Project Appraisal Document (PAD) did not present a Theory of Change. Based on the project description in the PAD, the Theory of Change (Figure 1) was constructed to illustrate the results chain from the activities under crop production and LWM to reduce water pollutant releases. By improving the environmental performance of Guangdong’s crop and livestock production systems, this project would reduce land-based pollution to the coastal and estuary ecosystems of the South China Sea. 4 With respect to crop production, Guangdong completed an initial soil testing scheme in 2011, which allowed for the establishment of a provincial soil nutrient baseline. Working from this initial baseline, the Department of Agriculture (DOA) began gradually promoting precision fertilization along with increased production and supply of organic fertilizer. For pest control, the DOA promoted integrated pest management (IPM) approaches and, more recently, the use of professional pest management services. For LWM, from 2006 to 2011, Guangdong implemented a World Bank-managed Livestock Waste Management in East Asia Project (LWMEAP) with a US$2.0 million grant from GEF. Page 2 of 68 Figure 1. Theory of Change Project Development Objectives (PDOs) 10. The PDO as stated in both the Loan Agreement (LA) and the PAD was “to reduce water pollutant releases from crop and livestock production in selected areas of Guangdong Province.”. The Global Environmental Objective (GEO) was identical to the PDO. Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators 11. The key expected outcome was reduced pollutant releases from crop and livestock production. Achievement of the PDO was assessed through two outcome indicators used to measure source reduction in: (i) chemical oxygen demand, and (ii) ammonia-nitrogen. These two key pollutants were selected because they were monitored under the 12th FYP on Environmental Protection, which also set out specific reduction targets and provided detailed monitoring and verification arrangements. Components 12. The project included the following components (see Annex 3 for detailed breakdown): 13. Component 1: Environmentally-Friendly Crop Production (estimated cost at appraisal: US$47.60 million; actual cost: US$43.36 million). This component supported: • Soil nutrient sampling and analysis informing the development of sound soil nutrient management plans and provision of subsidies to promote the use of various technical measures to improve the application and use efficiencies of fertilizer. • Upgrade of pest monitoring and early-warning systems, promotion of IPM practices for key cropping systems, and provision of subsidies for professional pest management services and for the acquisition of pesticides and related equipment. Page 3 of 68 • Support for conservation agriculture (CA) pilots to demonstrate the use of no-till or limited tillage technologies and practices for typical cropping systems. • Technical support to project beneficiaries, in particular smallholders, on crop production practices promoted by the project, along with subgrants to eligible Village Committees (VC) to finance a portion of the incremental operating costs to carry out project activities and certification incentive payments to encourage project beneficiaries to go through the processes necessary for their farms to be certified by the DOA as safe agricultural product sites or for their products to be certified by the MOA as green or organic agricultural products. 14. Component 2: Livestock Waste Management (estimated cost at appraisal: US$140.18 million; actual cost: US$81.65 million). This component supported: • Subgrants to beneficiary farms to partially finance the construction of LWM facilities to promote the proper collection and treatment of pig manure. • Output-based subgrants to finance the incremental costs incurred in the construction of pilot high-rise pig production facilities. 15. Component 3: Monitoring and Evaluation, Capacity Building, and Knowledge Management (estimated cost at appraisal: US$16.75 million; actual cost: US$20.81 million). This component supported the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of project activities, including monitoring compliance with the environmental and social safeguards requirements and measuring the impacts of various project activities. It also supported building the capacities of the DOA and project stakeholders, including through study trips and trainings, carrying out technical and policy studies, and facilitating knowledge management activities to capture lessons from project implementation. 16. Component 4. Project Management (estimated cost at appraisal: US$8.62 million; actual cost: US$3.22 million). This component supported activities to strengthen the institutional capacity of the Project Management Office (PMO) and the Project Management Units (PMUs) to implement the project, including the provision of incremental operating costs. B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION 17. The project had two level 2 restructurings—approved on April 6, 2017, and on February 7, 2021. Revised PDO and Outcome Targets 18. During the first level 2 restructuring, the PDO, PDO and intermediate indicators, project components, and technical interventions remained unchanged. During the second level 2 restructuring, there was no change to the PDO, but the targets of two PDO indicators were revised as follows: (i) Mass of COD pollution load reduction achieved under the project was reduced from 45,000 tons/year to 36,000 tons/year; and (ii) Nutrient load reduction (ammonia-nitrogen) achieved under the project was reduced from 5,000 tons/year to 4,000 tons/year. Revised PDO Indicators 19. There were no revisions to the PDO indicators other than the targets as described in the preceding paragraph. Page 4 of 68 Revised Components 20. During the first level 2 restructuring, the project areas under Component 1 were expanded from the original 6 to 22 counties and the cost of Component 2 was reduced during the second restructuring, as further elaborated below. The second restructuring also added the bio-security training and capacity building activities to Component 2. Other Changes 21. During the first level 2 restructuring, the following other changes were made: (i) adjusted the disbursement forecasts; (ii) adjusted the indicator targets in the Results Framework; (iii) extended the project closing date from December 31, 2019, to June 30, 2021; and (iv) updated the safeguard instruments and a legal covenant, including triggering one safeguard policy (OP/BP 4.10 Indigenous peoples) and revising another (OP 4.09 Pest Management Plan (PMP)).5 The second level 2 restructuring was carried out as part of proactive course correction and, in addition to the Component 2 activities mentioned above, it involved: (i) cancelling US$19.10 million from the IBRD loan proceeds; (ii) reallocating the balance of the IBRD loan of US$80.90 million among the project expenditure categories and components; and (iii) adjusting the end of project targets for the PDO and intermediate indicators (Tables 1-2). Table 1: Changes in the end targets for intermediate indicators in restructurings Intermediate Indicators Original Target Revised Target Revised Target (2017) (2021) BOD load reduction 14,000 tons/year NA 11,200 tons/year Reduction in total pesticide consumption of 100 135 project areas (metric tons) Clients who have adopted an improved 15,000 60,000 agricultural technology promoted by the project (female:3,000) (female: 12,000) Crop production areas adopted project promoted 18,800 28,000 practices (ha): Number of livestock waste management facilities constructed 300 200 123 Number of project-supported pig farms in 300 200 123 compliance of performance requirements Pig farms with bio-security training (new NA NA 100 indicator) 5 Lianshan is an Ethnic Minority Autonomous County, thus a new safeguard policy (OP/BP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples) was triggered. Therefore, a legal covenant for preparing an Ethnic Minority Development Framework (EMDF) was added and the EMDF was prepared. Due to the expanded list of crops produced in the project areas, the Pest Management Plan (PMP) was updated. Page 5 of 68 Table 2: Changes in components and costs in restructurings S Description Original Allocation Allocation Revised IBRD Loan Revised / Allocation after First after Second Amount Percentage N Restructuring Restructuring after Second of IBRD (US$M) (US$M) Restructuring Financing (US$M) 1 Environmentally Friendly 47.60 51.66 45.99 31.10 67.63 Crop Production 2 Livestock Waste 140.18 125.80 86.74 40.72 46.95 Management 3 Monitoring and Evaluation 16.75 16.14 18.83 8.81 46.72 (M&E), Capacity Building and Knowledge Management 4 Project Management 8.62 10.69 10.76 0.27 2.50 (including FEF) Total Costs 213.15 204.29 162.31 80.90 49.84 Rationale for Changes and Their Implication for the Original Theory of Change 22. Rationale for the first restructuring: The first level 2 restructuring was undertaken after the mid- term review (MTR) mission in September 2016. It responded to the growing demand for the Component 1 activities of the project from other counties and Guangdong’s request to reduce the number of pig farms supported by the project. With positive results from project implementation, Guangdong Province scaled up its efforts to control agricultural pollution for sustainable agricultural production. Specifically, Guangdong listed this project as one of the province’s key development projects. Project implementation generated positive results and strong demand existed for project financing. Specifically, 24 new counties requested financing for Component 1 activities as of March 2017. The Bank team and Guangdong government jointly reviewed the growing financing demands for Component 1 and 2 activities and agreed on how to maximize the impacts of IBRD loan proceeds by bringing in the additional counties that had requested financing for agricultural pollution control activities. The review also noted that strengthened environmental enforcement and the success of high-rise pilots had attracted many pig farms to apply for project support to adopt new production technology. The project closing date was extended to accommodate the implementation of substantially increased project activities and geographic coverage. 23. Rationale for the second restructuring: The second restructuring was mainly prompted by the need to respond to the adverse impacts and challenges posed by the outbreak of African swine fever (ASF)6 in late 2018 in China. The ASF outbreak almost halved the SPP of the participating farms under Component 2 and the total provincial pig population. As such, there were no prospects for Component 2 to fully achieve the target of installing LWM facilities at 200 pig farms as agreed at the MTR. The main reasons were: (i) some of completed LWM civil works could not be accepted by the government because the pig farms did not have sufficient animals to generate the livestock wastes needed for testing and commissioning the facilities; (ii) the owners of participating pig farms were reluctant to continue investing 6Responsible for massive losses in pig populations and drastic economic consequences, African swine fever has become a major crisis for the pork industry in recent years. Currently affecting several regions around the world, and with no effective vaccine, the disease is not only impeding animal health and welfare but also has detrimental impacts on biodiversity and the livelihoods of farmers. See https://www.oie.int/en/disease/african-swine-fever/. Page 6 of 68 in LWM facilities and restocking animals for fear of a recurring outbreak of ASF and other infectious diseases; and (iii) the government was afraid that some of the planned civil works might not be completed before the project’s closing date of June 30, 2021. 24. Except for the revisions of the end targets, the two project restructurings did not affect the Theory of Change and the originally expected outcomes. II. OUTCOME A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs Assessment of Relevance of PDOs and Rating Rating: High 25. The PDO was aligned with the national priorities outlined in China’s three most recent FYPs, National Sustainable Agricultural Development Plan (2015‒2030), and Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). China’s 12th (2011–2015), 13th (2016–2020), and 14th (2021‒2025) FYPs include green development and environmental protection priorities. In particular, the 13th and 14th FYPs include an indicator for improved surface water quality and the 14th FYP emphasizes that economic and social development should be based upon sound management of the environment and ecosystems, including the sustainable use of natural resources. The 14th FYP articulates the need to “promote green development to achieve harmonious coexistence of humans and nature” and emphasizes the need to accelerate green and low-carbon development and to continuously improve environmental quality, with reference to reductions in COD and ammonia-nitrogen (NH3-N) discharges into waterways. The National Sustainable Agricultural Development Plan (2015‒2030) focuses on (i) greening agricultural development, targeting zero growth of fertilizer and pesticide use; (ii) establishing standards and regulatory frameworks for livestock waste discharge and agricultural pollution; (iii) putting in place economic incentives for improving environmental performance (e.g. eco-compensation); and (iv) promoting a circular economy (e.g. recycling crop and livestock waste, bio-energy generation). The PDO was also aligned with China’s updated NDC,7 including identified actions related to climate-resilient agriculture that reduces emissions and improves efficiency, as well as with a range of recent climate policy commitments made by China, including the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use and a joint declaration signed by China and the United States at COP26 that includes incentives and programs that aim to reduce methane from the agricultural sector. 26. The PDO was also aligned with the World Bank’s Country Partnership Framework (CPF) (FY2020–FY2025, Report No. 11785-CN).8 The CPF focuses on closing any remaining institutional gaps and supporting interventions that generate significant global public goods. The PDO directly contributed to Engagement Area 2 (EA2) of the CPF: Promoting Greener Growth. Under EA2, the World Bank aims to support the government’s efforts to: (i) reduce air, soil, water, and marine plastics pollution; (ii) demonstrate sustainable agricultural practices and improve agro-food product quality and safety; and (iii) strengthen institutional capacity for sustainable natural resource management (especially the efficient 8 China’s NDC has targets to: (i) peak carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2060; (ii) reduce China's carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP by more than 65 percent by 2030, compared with 2005; (iii) increase the proportion of non-fossil energy in primary energy consumption to about 25 percent; (iv) increase the forest volume by 6 billion cubic meters, compared with 2005; and (v) increase the total installed capacity of solar power generation to more than 1.2 billion kilowatts. 8 World Bank Group. 2021. China ‒ Country Partnership Framework for the Period FY2020–2025. (Report No. 117875-CN). Page 7 of 68 use of scarce arable land and water). The PDO and PDO indicators were also aligned with the World Bank Group’s Green, Inclusive, and Resilient Development (GRID) framework and the World Bank Group Climate Change Action Plan (2021‒2025). B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) Assessment of Efficacy Rating: Substantial 27. Unpacking the PDO and adoption of split rating. The project had one objective (to “reduce water pollutant releases from crop and livestock production”) with two indicators measuring the reductions in (i) chemical oxygen demand and (ii) ammonia nitrogen representing outcomes. Therefore, the efficacy evaluation was conducted by outcome indicator. Although the PDO remained the same throughout the project period, the targets for outcome indicators were revised downward. At the same time, the scope of LWM facilities was reduced, hence calling for split rating.9 The split evaluation method was used to assess the project’s outcomes against both the original and the revised targets. The respective shares of actual loan disbursements (made in the periods before and after approval of the restructuring) were used to weigh the separate outcome ratings (Table 7). 28. The GEF Program shared the PDO and was fully blended with the IBRD loan.10 Specifically, the US$5.1 million GEF grant financed: (i) Under Component 1: support to conservation agriculture (CA) pilots; (ii) Under Component 3: Subcomponent (a) support to monitoring and evaluation of project activities including, monitoring of environmental and social safeguards, and measuring the impacts of various project activities; Subcomponent (b) support to building capacities of DOA and project stakeholders, carrying out studies, and providing study trips and training; and Subcomponent (c) support to knowledge management activities to summarize and disseminate lessons and experiences from implementation, and (iii) Under Component 4: support to strengthen the institutional capacity of the PMO and the PMUs to implement the GEF-related project activities (Annex 3). Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome 29. By project completion, all PDO-level outcomes and intermediate outcomes were met or exceeded. The analysis below is organized around the two PDO indicators reflecting reductions in pollutant releases from crop and livestock production, as the PDO states. The analysis is complemented by intermediate results indicators and other information. (i) Reduction in COD releases 30. Sources and modalities for chemical oxygen demand reduction. COD reduction (Table 3) was achieved through the treatment of pig manure from improved LWM facilities. The project supported the construction, equipping, and operation of LWM facilities for proper collection and treatment of pig manure. This involved adopting and upscaling two pig manure collection and treatment models developed and piloted under the GEF-funded and Bank-managed Livestock Waste Management in East Asia Project (LWMEAP), which was implemented in Guangdong from 2006 to 2011. 9 According to the ICR Guidelines, if the project becomes overall less ambitious, generally a split rating is applied regardless of whether project funding increased (perhaps through Additional Financing), decreased (perhaps through cancellation), or remained the same – unless good reasons can be presented as to why a split rating does not make sense in a specific case. 10 Para. 12 of PAD. Page 8 of 68 31. The two LWM models adopted and scaled up by the project were energy-environmental protection and energy-ecological utilization. Both models were based on anaerobic digestion technologies and practices. The first model was coupled with segregation of solids and liquids and aeration of digestate before discharging the treated wastewater into the environment, while the second model was coupled with full use of treated wastes and wastewaters in crop production systems. The project also piloted high- rise pig production facilities. Unlike the traditional single-floor flush farms, this technology involves a two- story building, with finishing or fattening pigs housed on the second floor and pig manure or wastes separated through slatted floor installations to the first floor, where composting using bedding materials occurs. This innovative model has proven efficient and effective in pig manure and waste treatment. Both LWM facility models supported by the project met Guangdong’s stringent environmental standards. These models were included in the Typical Model of Resource Utilization of Livestock and Poultry Manure issued by the Ministry of Agriculture on March 22, 2017. Methodologies for calculating the COD reduction are detailed in Annex 7. Table 3: Target and Actual Chemical Oxygen Demand Reduction Original (at appraisal) Revised (2nd restructuring) Actual Indicators Unit (2020) Target (PAD) % of target Target (revised) % of target COD reduction11 tons 43,836 45,000 97 36,000 122 32. Impact of African swine fever (ASF). The second restructuring was mainly prompted by the need to address the consequences and challenges posed by the outbreak of ASF in late 2018 in China, which almost halved the SPP on the project-supported pig farms under Component 2 as well as the total provincial pig population. ASF control and management measures, such as adding farm level bio-security12 interventions, including segregation (no animals or materials should enter or leave a pig holding unless absolutely necessary), cleaning (fecal material, urine or secretions that adhere to the surface to remove most of the contaminating pathogen), disinfection,13 fencing and ditching/trenching, quarantine of new piglets and off-takes, vaccination, and restricting visitors, were implemented. At the county level, measures to help reverse the declining pig population included establishing ASF control zones led by the private sector, involving project-supported pig farms and pig industry associations, and providing technical guidance for good on-farm bio-security management practices and training. In terms of preventing ASF outbreaks, the high-rise pig production farms under the project performed better than the traditional pig farms, as they were able to keep their SPP close to the pre-ASF level. At 102 percent, the beneficiary pig farms from bio-safety prevention, as measured by the newly added intermediate outcome Indicator, was slightly overachieved. As of the end of 2020, the SPP on the project-supported pig farms recovered to 65 percent of the pre-ASF level. The Guangdong DOA expected that SPP recovery would continue, reaching 100 percent by the end of 2024, when the designated capacity of COD reduction of 85,842 tons/year could be fully achieved. 11 As stated in the PAD, COD releases from pig farms are based on the country’s existing performance reporting and verification system under its 12th FYP, whereas the reduction coefficients came from pollution monitoring activities performed under the GEF-funded LWMEAP. However, the LWM facilities built under this project adopted more stringent standards for pollutant control than those under LWMEAP. Annex 7 provides more details on these methodologies. 12 Biosecurity is defined as: "The implementation of measures that reduce the risk of the introduction and spread of disease agents; it requires the adoption of a set of attitudes and behaviors by people to reduce risk in all activities involving domestic, captive/exotic and wild animals and their products" (FAO/OIE/World Bank, 2008). 13 The application, after thorough cleansing, of procedures intended to destroy the infectious or parasitic agents of animal diseases, including zoonoses; this applies to premises, vehicles and different objects which may have been directly or indirectly contaminated" (OlE, 2008b). Page 9 of 68 (ii) Ammonia nitrogen reduction 33. Ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) reduction was achieved from both Component 1, because of improved application and use efficiencies of fertilizer based on soil nutrient management plans, and Component 2, because of treatment of the pig manure and wastes in the LWM facilities.14 The degree of NH3-N reduction varied with the models used by LWM facilities. As for COD, methodologies for calculating the ammonia nitrogen reduction from LWM facilities at appraisal were based on the country’s performance reporting and verification system under the 12th FYP, whereas the NH3-N reduction coefficients used were from pollution monitoring methodologies under LWMEAP (the actual reduction amount achieved under this project was measured by the same independent third-party agency, with methodologies and coefficients for NH3-N reduction calculation provided in Annex 7). 34. The impact of ASF on NH3-N reduction targets was the same as with COD reduction. With the SPP of the project-supported farms reaching 65 percent of the pre-ASF level at year-end, the actual achievement in 2020 was 2,150 tons. The project activities under Component 1 reduced pollution via (a) a decrease in the use of fertilizer and pesticide, (b) an increase in application and use efficiencies of these chemicals, and (c) improvement in soil structure and organic matter to minimize releases of these chemicals from cropping systems to the environment. The 12th FYP included detailed M&E methodology and verification procedures for NH3-N reductions and a general approach for estimating ammonia releases from crop production systems. At appraisal, the target values of NH3-N reduction did not include the amounts from crop production systems. 15 To address this, the project financed on-farm monitoring activities that provided concrete data on NH3-N reductions to support the M&E methodology and verification procedures for ammonia releases from crop production for Guangdong and China (PAD Annex 3, footnote 21). Using the on-farm monitoring methodologies developed under the project, the actual reduction in 2020 (including crop farming and LWM) was estimated at 2,881 tons (Annex 7, Section 3 and Table 4). Table 4: Target and Actual Ammonia Nitrogen Reduction Original Revised Actual (at appraisal) (2nd restructuring) Indicators Unit (2020) Target % of Target % of (PAD) target (revised) target Ammonia nitrogen PDO indicator Tons 5,031 5,000 101 4,000 126 reduction 35. The achievements of other pollutant reductions (biological oxygen demand and total phosphorus) as intermediate outcome indicators are presented in Table 5. The methodologies for evaluating BOD and TP are the same as for COD and NH3-N (Annex 7). Both the original and revised targets were exceeded. 14 This was achieved by (1) applying treated pig manure to not only increase organic matter in soil but also partially substitute fertilizer application, and (2) adopting CA technologies (no tillage or limited tillage) to improve soil structure and maintain/restore soil organic matter. 11 See PAD Annex 2, Paragraph 10. Page 10 of 68 Table 5: Target and Actual Achievements for BOD and TP Reductions Intermediate Outcome Actual Original (at appraisal) Revised (2nd restructuring) Unit Indicators (2020) Target (PAD) % of target Target (revised) % of target BOD reduction Tons 19,754 14,000 141 11,200 176 TP reduction Tons 739 250 296 250 296 36. The values for pollutant reduction indicators (COD, NH3-N, BOD, TP) are based on the size of the SPP. According to the established norms and standards, the designated capacity of LWM facilities equals 120 percent of the full SPP before the outbreak of ASF, whereas the actual SPP in 2020 was only 51 percent of the pre-AFS level. With the recovery trend of the SPP (Table 6), the designated capacity (as shown in the last Implementation Status and Results Report (ISR)) is expected to be fully achieved in 2024. Table 6: SPP Recovery Trend SPP after 2nd restructuring 1,289.9 SPP pre-ASF(June 2018) 1,138.5 Aug. 2019 518.1 Dec. 2019 458.8 Mar. 2020 503.0 June 2020 566.0 Sept. 2020 662.9 Dec. 2020 743.4 Mar. 2021 842.2 June 2021 849.6 37. Intermediate Outcome Indicators “Clients who have adopted an improved agricultural technology promoted by the project”(overachieved at 896 percent and 224 percent of original and revised targets respectively)16, and “Crop production areas adopted project promoted practices” (overachieved at 240 percent and 161 percent of original and revised targets respectively), which provided a means to measure progress toward the achieving nitrogen-ammonia and TP reduction from crop production. 38. Intermediate Outcome Indicators “Number of livestock waste management facilities constructed” and “Number of project supported pig farms in compliance of performance requirements” were fully achieved against the revised target, which was only 41 percent of original target due to the ASF impact. These two indicators provided a basis for SSP accounting to measure COD, BOD, nitrogen-ammonia and TP reduction from LWM facilities. 39. Intermediate Outcome Indicator “Number of technical and policy studies completed” was significantly overachieved (original 11, actually achieved 23, or more than double the original target). With the priority accorded to the studies, the project was able to mobilize top-notch researchers and scientists from local institutions and universities. The project supported a total of 23 technical and policy studies, including those related to: (i) agricultural pollution control, (ii) high-rise pig production and CA technique development, (iii) fertigation technologies to improve nitrogen use efficiency in rice production, (iv) formulation of feed rations for enteric fermentation pollution reduction, (v) rapid composting techniques 16The targets were conservative, while the PAD emphasizes the scalability of the technical options proposed under the project (PAD, paragraph 42). Page 11 of 68 for pig manure and waste management, (vi) effective collection and disposal systems for pesticide packaging materials, and (vii) development of an effective regional agricultural pollution monitoring system. Through technical studies, various technical packages were developed to address the challenges related to the excessive application of chemical fertilizer and pesticide, low fertilizer use rate, high rice production costs, and the increasing pig manure and waste pollution in Guangdong and across China. Detailed results of the studies and patented technologies supported by the project appear in Annex 9. 40. Intermediate Outcome Indicator “Client days of training provided” was overachieved (more than tenfold). 17 The training directly supported the adoption and upscaling of the project promoted good practices. 41. Intermediate Outcome indicators “Reduction in total pesticide consumption of project areas” (overachieved at 397 percent and 294 percent of original and revised targets respectively), WHO Class I18 pesticide residue compliance rates (100 percent achieved), and WHO Class II pesticide residue compliance rates (100 percent achieved), which directly contributed to improving ecosystem, environment and farmers’ health conditions, though not directly captured by Project Outcome indicators (see below). Other significant impacts that were not covered by the project outcome Indicators 42. The project also informed the formulation of policies and plans on green agricultural development, generated health and ecological benefits, and contributed to GHG emission reductions. Guangdong Province applied for this project with a view to “embark on policy discussions aimed at the further reduction of pollution releases from its agricultural sectors”. Farmer field schools, demonstration sites, and participatory approaches involving farmer cooperatives were coupled with subsidies or grants used to disseminate new pollution control technologies. Guangdong listed it as a top priority project and mainstreamed the good practices it generated (see below) into its annual agricultural shows at the county and provincial level and, together with documentaries prepared by the project, helped to mainstream project activities and good practices generated by the project in Guangdong’s official documents and regulations.19 Guangdong has specifically written into its 14th FYP for Agriculture and Rural Development good pollutant reduction practices developed under the project for upscaling in the whole province, covering both crop production and LWM activities. 43. Health, ecological and environmental benefit: the project helped farmers to adopt high- efficiency, low-toxicity, and biological pesticides; and they have stopped using the WHO Class I and WHO Class II pesticides. During the ICR mission, farmers confirmed they have benefitted from participation in the project, citing reduced occupational health hazards (e.g. reduced incidences of chest pain due to exposure to toxic pesticides) and increased ecological benefits (e.g. return of shrimps, frogs, and small fish in rice fields) and environmental benefits (e.g. clean water in surrounding streams). Pig farmers also expressed their satisfaction with improved working environment (e.g. clearness and much-reduced obnoxious odor). 44. Global public good provision (GHG emission reductions): By design, the project generated significant climate co-benefits, which was neither recognized nor accounted for at project appraisal. Given the importance accorded to the current CPF (Section II.A), the ICR attempted to estimate the GHG emission reductions using available tools. It is estimated that, on average, the project decreased 83,757 17 The strong demand from smallholder farmers under Component 1 was under-estimated during the first restructuring. 18 WHO Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240005662. 19 “Implementation Plan for Agricultural Pollution Control in Guangdong” by Guangdong Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (DARA) in March 2019 and “Technical Measures for Upgrading Livestock and Poultry Development.” Page 12 of 68 tons of CO2e annually. This was realized through the following activities: (i) improvement of soil nutrient management (decreased chemical fertilizer application and increased use efficiency); (ii) adoption of IPM technologies and practices (increased application efficiency of pesticides and alternative methods such as insect lamps, stick boards); (iii) adoption of high-rise pig production technology (zero manure and waste discharge); (iv) increased use of treated pig manure as organic fertilizer; (circular economy); and (v) conversion of pig manure into energy (biogas and power generation). Detailed analysis and GHG reduction accounting are provided in Annex 8. Justification of Overall Efficacy Rating 45. The overall Efficacy is rated Substantial against its original outcome target and High against its revised outcome target following the second project restructuring. C. EFFICIENCY Assessment of Efficiency and Rating Rating: Substantial 46. Following the ex-ante approach adopted at appraisal, cost-benefit analysis was conducted to re- assess the entire project’s ex post economic viability at completion. However, the financial analysis was conducted only for Components 1 and 2. 47. Economic analysis: At appraisal, the economic viability of the project was justified by the benefits accruing from improved water quality, in line with the PDO. In general, the reduction in pollutant loads entering waterways generated tremendous local environmental benefits. This pollutant reduction was achieved from both crop farming and livestock production through more efficient use of chemical fertilizer and improved treatment of pig manure and waste at LWM facilities. To estimate the economic benefits of improved water quality, the benefits transfer method20 from available contingent valuation research done in other river basins in China was used to establish order-of-magnitude estimates of the project’s economic benefits and confirmed that the project’s economic benefits at appraisal significantly exceeded the project costs. For the ICR, the same approach was adopted and the conclusion that the project’s economic benefits far exceeded the project costs (with benefits outweighing costs by three to seven fold) was reconfirmed (Annex 4). If GHG emissions reduction, estimated at 83,757 tons of CO2e per year, are included (Annex 8), the project benefits increase by US$3.5-7.0 million per year. 48. Financial analysis for Component 1. Based on the M&E data,21 crop budgets for conventional and project-promoted fertilization, IPM, and conservation agriculture practices were formulated to gauge farmers’ net increases in revenues. For fertilization and IPM activities in paddy rice, the cost decreased by 15-20 percent and yield increased by 5-10 percent, resulting in a net income increase of CNY 78‒156 (US$11.6-23.3) per mu (15 mu equals 1 ha). For CA, net income increased from CNY 40 to CNY 377 (US$6.0-56.3) per mu, mostly from reduced cost of tillage, while yields remained stable. A survey conducted during project preparation on willingness to pilot IPM and CA practices indicated that small farmers required a subsidy22 to counteract the costs and risks associated with switching to new, unknown 20 The benefit transfer method is used to estimate economic values for environmental services by transferring available information from studies already completed in another location and/or context. 21 Fertilization and pest management activities were monitored from 14 sites, with data collected in 2018 and 2019, while conservation agriculture activities were monitored from 9 sites with data collected in 2019 and 2020. 22 (i) Subsidies were made to incentivize farmers to environment –friendly practices, including (i) formula/slow-release fertilizers Page 13 of 68 technologies and practices. The subsidy is also well justified since the reduction in pollutants discharged into waterways generates positive externalities or public goods. Therefore, the subsidy can be equated to eco-compensation. Participating smallholder farmers were given targeted subsidies for two years on a declining scale using IC cards23 to help them adopt the new technologies and practices promoted by the project. The experience from project implementation shows that small farmers continue to use and upscale the good practices promoted by the project, even after the withdrawal of two-year subsidies, since they reduce the cost of production (less fertilizer and pesticide use) and increase yields. This demonstrates that, in the long term, the IPM and CA technologies and practices are financially viable and sustainable. 49. Financial analysis for Component 2. A total of 21 LWM facilities24 were analyzed in line with the methodologies adopted at appraisal. Although all the facilities generated negative returns without project subsidies, indicating they were not financially viable, economies of scale are usually needed to make such investments financially viable in the long-run due to very high initial capital outlays required. With project subsidies, the financial internal rates of return (FIRRs) ranged from 6 to 11 percent, indicating they were financially viable but highly sensitive to changes in output prices. Considering the substantial positive externalities that LWM generated (Annex 4), providing subsidies was justified to help Guangdong improve water quality in its waterways without hampering the growth of the strategically important intensive pig production system. Although it is now a requirement for pig farms with more than 500 SPP to install LWM facilities, subsidies may be warranted in the short-run, particularly since LWM facilities are substantially mitigating GHG emissions and reducing non-point source pollution.25 Therefore, going forward, the costs of LWM facilities need to be internalized by the pig farms applying for production licenses. As such, the standalone analysis of LWM adopted at appraisal (only matching the benefits of LWM with LWM costs, instead of treating it as an integral production process) is no longer relevant. Nevertheless, for now, the Guangdong Provincial Government continues to provide subsidies26 to pig farms despite LMW facilities being compulsory. 50. Fiscal impact analysis. Although the project did not generate any incremental tax or other non- tax revenues (such as fees), it has helped the provincial government to avoid sizable expenditures on downstream water quality improvement and healthcare costs. The Guangdong government provided adequate counterpart funding during project implementation and has incorporated loan repayments into its provincial budget allocations. 51. Implementation efficiency. All project activities were completed at costs below the appraisal and restructuring estimates, mostly due to savings from competitive bidding (Annex 3). The reduced number to reduce total fertilizer application; (ii) biological pesticides and low residue high efficiency pesticides to reduce pesticide use; (iii) unified professional IPM services; (iv) fertigation; and (v) high quality pesticide application equipment. 23 The IC cards is a smart card contain basic information of project beneficiaries and their level of eligibility for project support. The IC card is used to purchase project promoted environmentally-friendly inputs (e.g. formular fertilizer, low-toxic and high- efficient pesticides) from accredited local suppliers. A pre-determined subsidy to cover part of the total costs that would be paid to the suppliers once the farmers had purchased the inputs and paid their own share (see Section III. B). The IC card enabled the project to monitor types and quantity of inputs used, amount of subsidy provided by the project to the beneficiaries, and number of beneficiaries. 24 Including nine energy-environmental protection models, nine energy and ecological utilization models, and three high-rise production models. 25 According to the election criteria the smallest SPP of a project supported farms would have at least 3,000 SPP . 26 See Guangdong Provincial Pig Production Management Plan issued in February 2022. http://dara.gd.gov.cn/mtbd5789/content/post_3814876.html Page 14 of 68 of pig farms supported under Component 2 led to partial cancellation of the IBRD loan proceeds and cost reduction. The extension of the closing date of the project was justified. This was done to make up for the lost implementation time due to the severe ASF outbreak and to allow more time for the 16 newly added counties to complete their activities under Component 1. As a result, the target of expanded crop production area under environmentally friendly practices was far exceeded (45,192 ha achieved, compared to the 18,800 ha target). The management for such diversified and large number of beneficiaries was cost effective, with a project management cost less than 1 percent of the total project cost (and much less than the PAD estimation, partly due to the adoption of IC cards (see Section III.A). Based on the above assessment, the project efficiency is rated Substantial. D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING Rating: Satisfactory 52. The split rating approach was used, as the two PDO outcome indicator targets were revised at the second restructuring (Table 7). Table 7: Summary of Split Rating Without With Description restructuring restructuring Relevance of PDO High Efficacy Substantial High Outcome 1: Chemical oxygen demand reduction Substantial High Outcome 2: Ammonia nitrogen reduction Substantial High Efficiency Substantial Highly 1 Outcome ratings Satisfactory Satisfactory 2 Numerical value of the outcome ratings 5 6 3 Disbursement (US$ million) 70.25 12.3 4 Share of disbursement 85% 15% Weighted value of the outcome rating 5 (row 2 * row 4) 4.3 0.9 Satisfactory 6 Outcome rating (4.3 + 0.9 = 5.2, rounded to 5) E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS Gender 53. The project designed and implemented activities to improve the welfare of female participants. The social assessment at preparation identified that women have become the key labor force for crop production in the project areas. Therefore, they were negatively affected by pest management activities. Gender equality was promoted through project-supported IPM technologies and practices, capacity building, and M&E activities. The number of training activities for female beneficiaries exceeded the original target. Page 15 of 68 Institutional Strengthening 54. The project strengthened institutional capacity to implement agricultural pollution control activities, including M&E methodologies and verification procedures, particularly under Component 3. This was achieved through training for: (i) agricultural officers and technicians at municipal and county extension service on environmentally friendly crop production technologies and practices promoted by the project; (ii) participating farmers, cooperative members, and enterprises (pig farms and agribusinesses) on technical packages and practices related to pollutants reduction in crop and livestock production systems27; (iii) participating crop farmers, cooperatives, and agribusinesses on standards and regulations for certification of safe and green agricultural products; and (iv) PMO and PMU staff on project management, including procurement, financial management, and environmental and social safeguards. 55. The project strengthened the capacity of DOA/DARA staff at both the provincial and county levels to monitor agricultural pollution, undertake technical and policy studies, and manage and share knowledge. In addition, government staff were exposed to international good practices, with 109 (of which 20 were women) attending international conferences and participating in study tours and exchange visits to the United States, Australia, and several countries in Europe, East Asia and South Asia. At the village and township levels, the trained extension services technicians continue to provide technical support to farmers. Mobilizing Private-Sector Financing 56. While the project was not designed to mobilize private sector financing, substantial investments were made by the owners of pig farms in the LWM facilities and high-rise production systems promoted under the project. With the limited output-based subsidies provided by the project to pig farms adopting new manure management technologies, the majority (80‒90 percent) of the capital investments were financed by the private sector. Many other non-project-supported pig farms learned from the demonstrations of LWM technical packages and good practices and replicated them on their pig farms using their own funds. The demonstration effect has enabled the high-rise pig farms to be adopted throughout Guangdong Province and in other parts of China. Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity 57. The project contributed to poverty reduction efforts by increasing the income of all participating farmers. Project interventions helped farmers to reduce their costs of crop production by lowering the quantity of input use (decreased quantities and increased efficiency of fertilizer and pesticide use as well as the adoption of IPM technologies and practices) (Section II.C). Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts 58. None. III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION 59. The project design was technically sound, integrating logically the well-defined components to achieve the PDO. The technical measures for the pollutant reductions from crop production and livestock waste treatment were well connected with the proper use or disposal of treated solids and liquids. The latter were used for soil nutrient improvement and replacement of chemical fertilizer. The project also 27 See Annex 9. Page 16 of 68 piloted the innovative high-rise pig production facilities and CA with minimum tillage or no-tillage. The project design responded to the challenges facing wide adoption of new technologies and practices by providing matching grants to small farmers and output-based subsidies to pig farms to create incentives and share risks of failure. Moreover, capacity building and project management under Components 3 and 4 supported the technical interventions under Components 1 and 2. 60. Client ownership and farmers’ participation were well considered in the implementation arrangements. Smallholder participation in project activities under Component 1 was facilitated by the mobilization efforts of village committees and the village technical extension services staff, while commercial pig farms under Component 2 were selected based on, among other criteria, their willingness to participate in the project and their commitment to comply with environmental discharge regulations and standards, including full treatment of pig manure and wastes and proper use and/or disposal of treated solids and liquids. The implementation arrangements were designed with overall leadership from the Provincial Steering Committee, while the Project Leading Group in the DOA, PMO, and Technical Expert Group 28 had clear division of their roles and responsibilities, drawing from the successful implementation experience of the GEF-funded LWMEAP and other multilateral and bilateral institution- funded projects implemented in the province. 61. The risk assessment at appraisal identified key risks and proposed adequate mitigation measures. The overall risk rating at appraisal was Substantial, with key risks identified, such as how to ensure that subsidies are provided fairly and that extension services and M&E capacity are adequate. Mitigation measures were adopted or identified to address the risks, including through (i) social assessment during project preparation, which laid a sound basis for analysis of appropriate levels of subsidies for various project activities; (ii) sound implementation arrangements for delivering subsidies to small farmers using IC cards; (iii) well-developed technical options in selection criteria and subsidy threshold through stakeholder consultation; (iv) enhanced support to existing extension service networks in project counties; and (v) a well-designed project M&E system, which was closely linked to the existing provincial environmental monitoring and pollution reduction M&E and verification systems. 62. In hindsight, the biggest risk turned out to be ASF, which was beyond project and government control and, therefore, should be treated as “force majeure.” B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION 63. The outbreak of ASF in China seriously affected the implementation of Component 2 (livestock waste management). After the first ASF case was found in northeast China in August 2018, the epidemic quickly spread to 26 provinces, including Guangdong.29 Project-supported farms with LWM facilities under construction stopped civil works or halted installation of equipment, thus delaying their commissioning and acceptance. Some pig farms newly selected to participate in the project dropped out. Additionally, the production and marketing disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the decline of the pork industry. As such, the intermediate outcome indicators “Number of livestock waste management facilities constructed” and “Number of project-supported pig farms in compliance with performance” were virtually impossible to achieve, resulting in reduced livestock waste being treated. 28This comprised multidisciplinary team of experts, such as crop production, soil and fertilization, LWM, agricultural mechanization, plant protection, among others. Expert group team members helped review technical documents and designs, evaluated and oversaw project implementation progress, and identified problems and provided technical solutions. It was estimated that ASF decreased China’s pig production by 30‒40 percent, and in Guangdong Province by 50 percent. Page 17 of 68 64. The conducive policy environment and government commitment supported project implementation. During the 13th FYP, China put in place national and provincial policies, regulations, standards, and guidelines for chemical fertilizer and agro-chemical reduction and efficiency enhancement, including zero growth of chemical fertilizer and pesticide (agro-chemical) use. In 2015, the MARA issued the National Agricultural Sustainable Development Plan (2015‒2030). In 2017, the State Council (SC) issued Opinions on Innovative Systems and Mechanisms to Promote Green Agricultural Development. In 2018, the MARA issued Technical Guidelines for Agricultural Green Development (2018‒2030). During the 13th FYP, the General Office of the SC issued Opinions on Accelerating the Resource Utilization of Livestock and Poultry Breeding Wastes. The MARA also issued Specifications for the Construction of Facilities for the Resource Utilization of Manure in Large-Scale Livestock and Poultry Farms; Livestock and Poultry Waste Resource Utilization; and Poultry Manure Land Carrying Capacity Calculation Technical Guidelines. In addition, Guangdong issued a series of regional/provincial policies, regulations, and development plans for green agricultural development, which guided the project implementation. 65. The innovative financial and procurement arrangement, such as the IC card system introduced by the project for targeting input subsidies, significantly improved the implementation efficiency, M&E, and transparency of Component 1 (crop production). The IC cards contain basic information regarding project beneficiaries and their level of eligibility in terms of project support. Such information was disclosed and open for comment on county PMU websites and in the project villages before it was uploaded into the IC card system. The beneficiaries’ information in the public domain was limited to technical aspects, including production data and technologies. Project beneficiaries received individual IC cards loaded with their personal information. These IC cards were used to procure eligible agricultural inputs (e.g. formula fertilizer and low-toxicity pesticides) and services (e.g. mechanization for ploughing, motorized and drone spraying, straw/residue crushing or threshing) at a subsidized price from DOA- certified suppliers and service providers. A pre-determined subsidy to cover part of the total costs was paid to the suppliers once the farmers purchased the inputs and paid their own share. 66. Excellent collaboration between the Bank and the client teams helped to address implementation challenges. From the end of 2015 to early 2018, the project implementation progress was delayed by slow processes related to selecting participating pig farms, designing LWM facilities and high-rise pig farms that met Guangdong’s environmental standards, and procuring, constructing, and equipping the farms. At the same time, the government was undergoing internal restructuring following the reconstitution of the Ministry of Agriculture. The World Bank provided strong project implementation support and worked closely with the government to effectively address these challenges and respond to emerging issues, such as the outbreak of ASF, in a timely manner. The World Bank also played a critical support role during the restructurings, including, for instance, by introducing bio-security measures following the second restructuring (Section IV.C). IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) M&E Design 67. The project designed an effective M&E system based on China’s performance reporting and verification system developed under the 12th FYP to track pollution reduction and monitoring activities performed in the GEF-funded LWMEAP. The 12th FYP system had detailed M&E methodology and verification procedures for COD and ammonia nitrogen discharges from livestock production, but only a general description for estimating them from crop production. Therefore, the project later financed on- site monitoring activities to develop the M&E procedures for COD and ammonia nitrogen releases from Page 18 of 68 crop production, which were eventually used in Guangdong Province and in China. The M&E framework developed under the project included: (a) environmental monitoring to verify the values of results indicators; (b) independent verification of outputs delivered under Component 1; (c) independent verification of achievements of agreed performance targets at various milestones under Component 2; and (d) project management M&E activities. However, the targets for two PDO indicators (reduction in COD and NH3-N) should have been disaggregated by source (crop production and livestock waste management) and supported by technical parameters. A detailed description of M&E methods is in Annex 10. M&E Implementation 68. Data were collected and verified in line with the methodologies specified in the Results Framework. The results data were recorded as part of the management information system (MIS), which tracked project management, procurement/contract management, accounting and financial management, and independent M&E reports, including for the environmental and social safeguards and socioeconomic studies. Professional teams were hired to conduct qualitative environmental monitoring studies to provide a more complete and holistic understanding of the impact of the project on agricultural pollution reduction. The results of project-supported environmental monitoring were shared with the Department for Environmental Protection (DEP), which incorporated them into its existing water quality monitoring information system. Southern China Agricultural University (SCAU) independently monitored pollutant reduction from crop production, with an objective of developing the M&E methodology and verification procedures for COD and ammonia nitrogen releases from cropping systems. 69. However, the project also experienced some challenges with M&E implementation. The M&E activities were seriously affected by the ban on on-farm visits and travel restrictions due to the outbreak of ASF and the COVID-19 pandemic, but quickly resumed after ASF was brought under control and COVID- 19 travel restrictions were eased. There were also some data inconsistencies between county-level targets and actual achievements that occurred during implementation. These were mainly caused by: (i) the time lag between the collection of data on implementation progress and data entry into the MIS; and (ii) mistakes in consolidating data from the participating 22 counties and preparing the annual M&E reports and semiannual progress reports. M&E Utilization 70. The M&E data were used effectively by DOA and the PMOs at both provincial and county levels to track the overall project implementation progress and to develop new M&E methodologies and verification procedures. The M&E reports were used to facilitate the management decision-making process aimed at addressing project implementation problems and challenges on a regular basis. Data collected on the impacts of the project interventions on the reductions in farmland nitrogen and phosphorus use, soil nitrogen and phosphorus residue, and nitrogen and phosphorus loads entering waterways (through runoff and drainage) were thoroughly analyzed by the independent monitoring agencies to generate technical parameters/coefficients for pollutant reduction from crop production. Similarly, the impacts of the project interventions on fertilizer and pesticide application, use rate, and crop yield and quality, and results of treatment of manure on pig farms informed the policy-making process for government subsidies. Furthermore, M&E data were shared with the DEP to ensure that project-financed monitoring data could be fed into its existing water quality monitoring information system. M&E data uploaded onto the MIS was used by the Bank team to prepare implementation status reports. Page 19 of 68 Justification of Overall Rating of Quality of M&E 71. The overall quality of M&E is rated Substantial based on the following: (i) the M&E design was effective, (ii) implementation arrangements for M&E were adequate, and (iii) the data collected and analyzed were used to inform project implementation and support project management decisions. B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE 72. The project was classified as safeguards Category B (partial assessment), triggering OP/BP 4.01 ‒ Environmental Assessment, OP/BP 4.09 ‒ Pest Management, OP/BP4.12 – Involuntary Resettlement Policy, and OP/BP4.10 – Indigenous Peoples Policy (following the second restructuring). An Environmental Management Plan (EMP), a Pest Management Plan (PMP), a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), and an Ethnic Minority Development Framework (EMDF) were prepared to guide the project implementation according to World Bank safeguard policies and Chinese domestic laws and regulations. In accordance with the World Bank’s information disclosure policy, the EMP and PMP were disclosed in the project areas and on the websites of the local government agencies on January 15, 2013, and were disclosed at the World Bank InfoShop on February 22, 2013. The PMO had dedicated E&S specialists who provided quality and frequent supervision of sub-projects to ensure that all safeguard policies were complied with, as summarized below. 73. OP/BP 4.01 ‒ Environmental Assessment. Overall, the project implementation complied with all the environmental safeguard requirements. The EMP prepared for the project included Environmental Codes of Practice (ECOPs) as standardized mitigation measures for each type of investment; an Environmental Management Framework (EMF) to address potential negative impacts associated with LWM activities; and the Livestock Waste Management Plan (LWMP) for the three LWM models supported by the project. The mitigation measures were incorporated into the project design to address potential negative impacts associated with the construction and operation of project-financed facilities. All mitigation measures related to civil works were included in the bidding documents and the corresponding constructors’ contracts. The environmental mitigation measures were generally well implemented and they adequately addressed the adverse impacts of the project. 74. OP/BP 4.09 ‒ Pest Management. This policy was triggered because of the project-promoted IPM practices, including the use of biological and low-toxicity, low-residue pesticides and safe and efficient pesticide application equipment. A PMP was prepared to describe the range of pest and disease control and management methods, with an emphasis on IPM practices. The PMP included detailed provisions on training project stakeholders and a monitoring program, both of which were closely followed during project implementation. 75. OP/BP4.12 – Involuntary Resettlement Policy. This policy was triggered because it was envisaged that activities on civil works might involve small-scale land acquisition. The RPF prepared by the project guided the preparation of Resettlement Plans (RPs) during implementation in case land acquisition or resettlement was unavoidable. The PPMO commissioned a third-party monitoring team to assess and monitor impacts of land acquisition and resettlement throughout the project cycle. The third-party monitoring agency submitted semiannual reports largely on time. By the project closing date, no permanent land acquisition or resettlement was reported. Most crop and livestock production activities were implemented on farmers’ own land and firms’ existing facilities or through leased land. 76. OP/BP4.10 – Indigenous Peoples Policy. This policy was triggered when the project expanded to cover more counties, and ethnic minority presence was confirmed in Lianshan Zhuang and Yao Autonomous County of Qingyuan City. An EMDF was prepared to ensure that ethnic minorities were involved in the project activities and received social and economic benefits that were culturally Page 20 of 68 appropriate as well as gender and inter-generationally inclusive. A separate third-party monitoring team was commissioned by the PPMO to monitor implementation of the EMDF and the team submitted semiannual reports to facilitate project supervision and inform the decision-making process. By the project closing date, no negative impact on ethnic minority people was reported by the third-party monitoring agency. 77. Procurement. The project awarded a total of 117 contracts (52 civil works, 42 goods and non- consulting services, and 23 consulting services). By the project closing date, 113 contracts were completed and accepted by the government, two works contracts were terminated due to the contractor’s poor performance, one contract was incomplete and was terminated because of ASF, and one contract was completed but not accepted because the pig farm was unable to commission the facilities for lack of pig heads. Under Component 2, a total of 127 livestock waste management systems owned by 123 pig farms were procured, constructed, and completed/accepted and put into operation. 78. With GEF funding, a total of 28 contracts were procured (9 goods and non-consulting services and 19 consulting services). All 28 contracts were completed and accepted. 79. Procurement of works, goods, and consultant services was carried out satisfactorily in accordance with the World Bank procurement policy and procedures. The World Bank task team closely oversaw procurement and was available to assist and clarify procurement-related issues raised by the implementing agencies. Post reviews were carried out on a random basis. These oversight functions were carried out efficiently and satisfactorily. 80. Financial Management (FM): The project had an adequate FM system that provided reasonable assurance and accurate and timely information that the IBRD loan was being used for the intended purposes. Several good FM practices were adopted by the project, including the IC card system, which significantly enhanced the quality of project monitoring and management. The project complied with the accounting and financial reporting requirements specified in the LA. However, only about half of the interim unaudited financial reports were submitted on time. No significant FM issues were noted throughout project implementation and all issues or weaknesses raised during FM reviews or in audit reports were resolved on time. All project audit reports were submitted on time and received unqualified opinions. In addition, the procedures for submitting withdrawal applications were followed and flow of funds arrangements were appropriate. C. BANK PERFORMANCE Quality at Entry 81. The project design was technically sound and innovative and responded to country priorities for the agriculture sector. The design of the LWM activities was based on the proven technologies and methodologies developed and piloted under LWMEAP and later built on experience gained through its implementation. The project also responded to the national, provincial, and local priorities for reducing agricultural pollution and was informed by the national and provincial policies and strategic plans. The World Bank team, with adequate staffing (technical skills mix) and financial resources, worked closely with the client and other stakeholders during project preparation to ensure that the project was well- structured, integrating technical interventions with capacity building and preparing a robust risk management plan with adequate risk mitigation measures. Quality of Supervision 82. The World Bank team provided adequate staff and resources for project implementation support, with adjustments to resource needs made about twice a year and, in particular, in response to Page 21 of 68 the two project restructurings. Assessments of implementation progress, key issues, and follow-up actions were documented in the Aide Memoires (AMs) and ISRs. The task team regularly reviewed the project’s implementation progress and third-party M&E reports and provided candid and thorough feedback to the client for action. In response to the restructurings due to changes in the operational environment (outbreak of ASF, which reduced demand for LWM facilities under Component 2) and to address implementation issues (increased demand for environmentally friendly crop production activities under Component 1), the World Bank team promptly supported the counterpart in adopting bio-security interventions and provided technical guidance for good on-farm management practices and training (Section II. B). The World Bank team also involved the expert panel team in providing timely and much- needed technical guidance on ASF control to the contiguous non-project farms. Furthermore, the World Bank team devoted adequate time and expertise to enhancing institutional capacity in fiduciary, environmental, and social safeguard management (Section IV.B). Justification of Overall Rating of Bank Performance 83. The overall rating of World Bank performance is Satisfactory. The World Bank team provided sufficient technical and implementation support for the development of technical packages under Component 1 and Component 2. The task team also brought significant managerial experience to support the project management entities and developed a strong working relationship with the client. D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME 84. Risk to the development outcome lies in how to sustain the key project interventions financially and institutionally on pollutant reduction: environmentally friendly crop production systems and livestock waste management facilities. 85. Risk to the sustainability of activities related to environmentally friendly crop production systems is low, given that financial profitability was demonstrated during the implementation. Specifically, key technical measures for reduction in the use of fertilizer and pesticide were proven both technically and financially viable. By receiving financial incentives in the form of subsidies, small farmers adopted technologies and practices that are increasing productivity and reducing production costs. The momentum for scaling up was maintained, even after the subsidies that were provided for two years (and on a declining scale) were withdrawn. The project had a large demonstration effect—through project extension services and field visits, non-project farmers also adopted proven technologies and applied them on their own farms without receiving subsidies. 86. However, further support is needed for the LWM facilities, as they were not financially viable without subsidies unless they reached certain economies of scale. With continued commitment and efforts to reduce pollution from livestock production systems, both the central and Guangdong governments have made the treatment of livestock manure and waste compulsory. The government now requires all pig farms with SPP of 500 herd or more install LWM facilities. 30 While the project demonstrated that, with increased access to proven LWM technologies and growing enforcement efforts, large commercial pig farms can continue to invest in LWM facilities and operate them profitably when market pork prices are competitive or relatively high, relatively smaller pig farms would likely go out of business unless subsidies continue, particularly given the initial capital outlay. Since treatment of livestock waste generates both local (e.g. reduction in point and NPS pollution) and global public goods (e.g. reducing GHG emissions), there is a clear case for providing output or performance-based subsidies. 30At appraisal, the LWM was optional for the pig farms. The financial analysis, therefore, was conducted by treating “LWM” facilities as an independent entity, without accounting for pig production itself. Page 22 of 68 Alternatively, the government could invest in centralized public manure treatment facilities for small pig farms (i.e. collection, transfer, and treatment model). To date, the Guangdong government continues to subsidize pig farms without specifically targeting LWM facilities (possibly to encourage restocking after successfully controlling ASF outbreaks), which are now compulsory.31 87. To further enhance the sustainability of project outcomes, the government mainstreamed the agricultural knowledge and good practices generated by the project into green agricultural policies and development programs. These include: (i) Guidelines on the Development of Green and Low-Carbon Economic Systems by China’s State Council, issued in April 2021; (ii) Guidelines on the Construction for High-Standard Farmland for Food Security by China’s State Council, issued in 2019; (iii) Technical Guidance and Management for High-Standard Farmland Construction, issued by the MARA in March 2021; and (iv) Guangdong Province’s 14th FYP for Agriculture and Rural Development. The policies and programs will ensure that environmentally friendly agricultural practices demonstrated by the project are scaled up in Guangdong and nationwide. They will also contribute to the country’s obligations to Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMA) in the agricultural sector. V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 88. This project generated the following lessons and recommendations, which are generally applicable to similar operations in China and other countries: 89. An integrated approach involving both livestock and crop management is needed to effectively demonstrate a rural circular economy. The project integrated investments in LWM facilities and environmentally friendly crop production systems as well as provided technical assistance and capacity building to pig farm owners and smallholder farmers. As a result, the project was able to effectively demonstrate a rural circular economy in which treated livestock manure and waste is used to replace chemical fertilizer use, thereby reducing GHG emissions and NPS pollution (Section III.A). 90. Subsidies play a critical role in helping reduce risk of adopting new technologies and practices by small farmers. Smallholder farmers’ willingness to participate and adopt new technologies and practices such as those related to agricultural pollutant reduction depends largely on financial incentives provided in the first few years to help them de-risk their investments. In addition, profitability is critical for the new technologies and practices to be sustained and upscaled in Guangdong and nationwide (Section III.A). 91. Digital agriculture tools facilitate targeting of farm support and monitoring of beneficiaries and input suppliers. Simple but innovative application of the IC card system in procuring and financing agricultural inputs and services enabled the project to target the delivery of subsidies to smallholder farmers, which significantly improved the project implementation efficiency, M&E, and the transparency of project interventions (Section III.A). 92. Local academic and research institutions can provide fit-for-purpose technical solutions to farmers. By closely working with the academic and research institutions, the project was able to develop, pilot, and adopt methodologies for monitoring and measuring the reduction of pollutants entering waterways from crop production systems. 31See Guangdong Provincial Pig Production Management Plan issued in February 2022(http://dara.gd.gov.cn/mtbd5789/content/post_3814876.html) Page 23 of 68 93. Good partnership between the World Bank task team and the client is essential to manage unexpected implementation challenges. With mutual trust and collaboration, the project was able to promptly respond to the outbreak of ASF and travel restrictions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic (Section IV.C). 94. Project-supported methodologies and approaches can easily be upscaled if they are mainstreamed in provincial or national policies. The environmentally-friendly crop production technologies and practices and LWM models supported by the project have formed the basis for the design of the China Green Agricultural and Rural Revitalization Program for Results (P177590)(Section IV.D). Page 24 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS A. RESULTS INDICATORS A.1 PDO Indicators Objective/Outcome: Reduce water pollutant releases from crop and livestock production Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Mass of COD pollution load Tons/year 0.00 45,000.00 36,000.00 43,836.00 reduction achieved under the project 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): The original target of the indicator was revised during restructuring. The original target is 97.4 percent achieved, and the revised target is 121.77 percent achieved. The reduction was achieved through the treatment of pig manure from improved LWM facilities. It directly contributed to the PDO of reducing pollutants released into waterways. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Nutrient load reduction Tons/year 0.00 5,000.00 4,000.00 5,031.00 (nitrogen- ammonia) achieved under the project 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): Page 25 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) The original target of the indicator was revised during restructuring. The original target is 100 achieved, and the revised target is 125.78 percent achieved. The reduction was achieved from both crop production (especially fertilizer use reduction and soil nutrient management) and LWM activities. It directly contributed to the PDO of reducing water pollutant releases. A.2 Intermediate Results Indicators Component: Environmentally Friendly Crop Production Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion WHO Class II pesticide residue Percentage 90.00 96.00 100.00 compliance rates 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): There is no change of the original target. It is 104.17 percent achieved. The data source was PMO’s pollution reduction monitoring reports. It indirectly supported the PDO in the area of nitrogen-ammonia and TP reduction. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Crop production areas adopted Hectare(Ha) 0.00 18,800.00 28,000.00 45,192.00 project promoted practices 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): Page 26 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) The original target of the indicator was revised during restructuring. The original target is 240.38 percent achieved, and the revised target is 161.40 percent achieved. The source of the data was project semi-annual progress reports and government ICR. It directly supported the PDO in the area of nitrogen- ammonia and TP reduction. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Clients who have adopted an Number 0.00 15,000.00 60,000.00 134,420.00 improved agr. technology promoted by the project 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 31-Dec-2020 Clients who adopted an Number 0.00 3,000.00 12,000.00 17,726.00 improved agr. technology promoted by project – female 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): The original target of the indicator was revised during restructuring. The original target is 896.13 percent (target for females is 590.87 percent) achieved, and the revised target is 224.03 percent (target for females is 147.72 percent) achieved. The source of the data was project semi-annual progress reports and government ICR. It indirectly supported PDO in the area of nitrogen-ammonia and TP reduction. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Reduction in total consumption Metric ton 0.00 100.00 135.00 397.00 of pesticides in project areas 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): Page 27 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) The original target was revised during restructuring. The original target is 397 percent achieved, and the revised target is 294.07 percent achieved. The source of the data was project semi-annual progress reports and government ICR. It indirectly supported PDO in the area of nitrogen-ammonia and TP reduction. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion WHO Class I pesticide residue Percentage 90.00 100.00 100.00 compliance rates 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): There is no change of the original target. It is 100 percent achieved. The data source was PMO pollution monitoring reports. It indirectly supported the PDO in the area of nitrogen-ammonia and TP reduction. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Phosphorus load reduction (TP) Metric ton 0.00 250.00 739.00 achieved under the project 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): There is no change of the original target. It is 295.60 percent achieved. The achievement was from both crop (e.g., fertilizer reduction and soil nutrient management) and LWM activities. It directly contributed to the PDO of reducing water pollutant releases. Indicator Name Unit of Baseline Original Target Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Page 28 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Measure Target Completion BOD load reduction achieved Tons/year 0.00 14,000.00 11,200.00 19,754.00 under the project 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): The original target of the indicator was revised during restructuring. The original target is 141.10 percent achieved, and the revised target is 176.38 percent achieved. The reduction was achieved through the treatment of pig manure from improved LWM facilities. It directly contributed to the PDO of reducing pollutants releases into waterways. Component: Livestock Waste Management (LWM) Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Number of project supported Number 0.00 300.00 123.00 123.00 pig farms in compliance of performance requirements 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): The original target of the indicator was revised during restructuring. The original target is 41.00 percent achieved, and the revised target is 100 percent achieved. The indicator supported PDO in the area of reducing COD, nitrogen-ammonia, BOD, and TP. The source of the data was semi-annual progress reports and government ICR. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Number of livestock waste Number 0.00 300.00 123.00 127.00 Page 29 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) management facilities 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 31-Dec-2020 constructed Comments (achievements against targets): The original target of the indicator was revised at restructuring. The original target is 239.62 percent achieved, and the revised target is 103.25 percent achieved. The indicator indirectly supported PDO in the area of reducing COD, nitrogen-ammonia, BOD, and TP. The source of the data was semi-annual progress reports and government ICR Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion The beneficiary pig farm from Number 0.00 0.00 100.00 102.00 bio-safety prevention (newly added) 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): This was a newly added indicator at restructuring. The target is 102 percent achieved. The indicator was added to specifically address the ASF outbreak in the project areas . The source of the data was semi-annual progress reports and government ICR. Component: Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E), Capacity Development and Knowledge Management (KM) Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Client days of training provided Number 0.00 36,000.00 385,661.00 (number) 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 Client days of training Number 0.00 7,000.00 97,937.00 provided - Female (number) 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 Page 30 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Comments (achievements against targets): There is no change of the original target. It is 1,071.28 percent achieved, in which female part is 1,399.10 percent achieved. The source of the data was semi-annual project progress reports and government ICR. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Number of policy studies Number 0.00 11.00 23.00 completed 01-May-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): There is no change of the original target. It is 209 percent achieved. The indicator is a GEF fund supported activity The source of the data was semi-annual project progress reports and government ICR. Page 31 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) B. KEY OUTPUTS BY COMPONENT Objective/Outcome: Reduce water pollutant releases from crop and livestock production Outcome Indicators: Nutrient load reduction (nitrogen- ammonia) achieved under the project 1. WHO Class II pesticide residue compliance rates 2. Crop production areas that adopted project-promoted practices 3. Reduction in total consumption of pesticides in project areas 4. WHO Class I pesticide residue compliance rates Intermediate Results Indicators 5. Phosphorus load reduction (TP) achieved under the project 6. BOD load reduction achieved under the project 7. Clients who have adopted an improved agricultural technology promoted by the project (disaggregated by females) Component 1. Environmentally Friendly Crop Production (TP reduction was 739 tons; BOD load reduction was 19,754 tons) • Soil nutrient management. Support (i) provincial, municipal, and county extension services to develop sound soil nutrient management plans, and promote (ii) the use of various technical measures to improve the application and use efficiencies of fertilizer based on soil nutrient management plans. The measures include formula fertilizer application, slow-release fertilizer application, fertigation facilities, and three-control technique (control of fertilization, crop Key Outputs by Component establishment, and pest).By the end of project life 45,192 ha were brought under (linked to the achievement of the environmental-friendly crop production technologies and practices . Objective/Outcome) • Integrated pest management (IPM). Support (i) investment in upgrading existing pest monitoring and early-warning systems, and promote (ii) IPM practices for key cropping systems in the project use was 397 tons. Project beneficiaries fully complied (100 percent) with the WHO Class I & II pesticide residue threshold. • Conservation agriculture pilots. Carried out (i) rice-rice system, (ii) rice-rice-vegetable system, (iii) maize-maize-potato system, and (iv) maize-vegetable-maize system. • Implementation support to beneficiaries. Support agricultural extension services at the county and township levels to provide field technical support to project farmers, in particular Page 32 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) smallholders, to ensure that they can understand and properly implement project-promoted crop production practices. By the end of project life the number of beneficiaries who adopted environmentally-friendly crop production technologies and practices were 134,420, of which 17,726 were female. Outcome Indicators: Mass of COD pollution load reduction achieved under the project 1. Number of project-supported pig farms in compliance with performance requirements Intermediate Results Indicators 2. Number of livestock waste management facilities constructed 3. Beneficiary pig farms from biosafety prevention (newly added) Component 2: Livestock Waste Management (LWM) (COD reduced was 43,836 tons; nitrogen- ammonia reduced was 5,031 tons) Key Outputs by Component • Livestock waste management facilities (a total of 127 wereconstructed): construction of pig (linked to the achievement of the waste collection and treatment facilities; proper use or disposal of treated solids and liquids; Objective/Outcome) activities to transport and distribute the treated solids and liquids to agricultural lands. • High-rise pig production pilots (a total of 6 were constructed). Support the incremental construction of new and innovative high-rise pig production facilities. 1. Client days of training provided (disaggregated by females) Intermediate Results Indicators 2. Number of policy studies completed Component 3: M&E, Capacity Building, and Knowledge Management • Support (i) routine M&E activities on project implementation progress, (ii) safeguard-related M&E activities, (iii) community-based M&E activities, and (iv) performance M&E activities. • Support (i) development of DOA’s capacity to monitor agricultural pollution, (ii) technical and Key Outputs by Component policy studies, (iii) technical training, and (iv) knowledge learning events. The total number of (linked to the achievement of the training days was 385,661, of which 97,937 days were for female beneficiaries. Objective/Outcome) • Support knowledge management activities to capture and disseminate lessons and experiences learned from project implementation within the province and nationally, through publications on project results, on the project’s website, and at domestic and international workshops and conferences. A total of 23 policy and technical studies were completed. Page 33 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION A. TASK TEAM MEMBERS Name Role Preparation Jiang Ru Task Team Leader Xiaowei Guo Procurement Specialist Yi Dong Financial Management Specialist Wendao Cao Co-Task Team Leader Chongwu Sun Social Specialist Songling Yao Social Specialist Yunqing Tian Team Member Kurt Roos Livestock Waste Management, Consultant Yiren Feng Social Specialist Weiguo Zhou Livestock Waste Managment Josef Kienzle FAO, Conservation Agriculture Tijen Arin Economic & Financial Analysis Supervision/ICR Ladisy Komba Chengula/Jianwen Liu Task Team Leaders Yuan Wang Procurement Specialist Yi Dong Financial Management Specialist Yan Zhang Procurement Team Page 34 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Yiren Feng Environmental Specialist Xuan Peng Team Member Yunqing Tian Team Member Aimin Hao Social Specialist Xueming Liu ICR Author Weiguo Zhou Livestock Waste Management Josef Kienzle FAO, Conservation Agriculture Jiyun Jin Fertilizer and Pesticide Management, Consultant Hanchun Yang Livestock Infectious Disease Control and Prevention, Consultant Hongmin Dong Livestock Waste Management, Consultant B. STAFF TIME AND COST Staff Time and Cost Stage of Project Cycle No. of staff weeks US$ (including travel and consultant costs) Preparation FY12 15.589 119,161.83 FY13 21.364 147,089.03 FY14 4.513 94,042.16 Total 41.47 360,293.02 Supervision/ICR FY14 5.313 46,433.79 FY15 19.060 135,615.36 FY16 6.28 33,355.09 FY17 8.9 61,681.49 Page 35 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) FY18 24.78 161,416.70 FY19 16.89 105,239.95 FY20 23.11 149,510.30 FY21 17.76 155,238.96 FY22 2.85 28,142.75 Total 124.943 876,643.39 Page 36 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT Table 3.1: Project Cost by Component Component Amount at Approval Actual at Project Actual as a Proportion (PAD Estimation) (US$, Closing of millions) (US$, millions) PAD Estimation (%) Total (IBRD loan + GEF Total (IBRD loan + Total (IBRD loan + GEF Fund + counterpart) GEF Fund + Fund + counterpart) counterpart) 47.60 43.36 91.09% A. Environmentally Friendly Crop Production B. Livestock Waste Management 140.18 81.65 58.25% (LWM) C. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E), 16.75 20.81 124.24% Capacity Development, and Knowledge Management (KM) D. Project Management 8.62 3.28 38.05% Total Project Cost 213.15 149.10 69.95% E. Front-end fee 0.25 0.25 100% F. Interest fee during construction 0.00 6.00 ‒ Total Financing 213.40 155.35 72.80% Table 3.2: Project Cost by Financer at Appraisal (US$, millions) Counterpart Funding Project Component IBRD Loan GEF Fund Government Farm Cost Fund Investment A. Environmentally Friendly Crop 47.60 36.98 2.82 6.13 1.67 Production B. Livestock Waste Management 140.18 57.13 -- 28.24 54.81 (LWM) C. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E), Capacity Development, and 16.75 5.60 2.23 8.92 -- Knowledge Management (KM) D. Project Management 8.62 0.04 0.05 8.53 -- Total Project Cost 213.15 99.75 5.10 51.82 56.48 E. Front-end fee 0.25 0.25 - ‒ Total Financing 213.40 100 5.10 51.82 56.48 Page 37 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Table 3.3: Project Cost by Financer at ICR (US$, millions) Counterpart Funding Component Project Cost IBRD Loan GEF Fund Government Farm Fund Investment A. Environmentally Friendly Crop 43.36 32.80 2.39 7.13 1.04 Production B. Livestock Waste Management 81.65 32.15 -- 19.99 29.51 (LWM) C. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E), Capacity Development, and 20.81 9.31 2.68 8.82 -- Knowledge Management (KM) D. Project Management 3.28 2.94 0.03 0.31 -- Total Project Cost 149.10 77.20 5.10 36.25 30.55 E. Front-end fee 0.25 0.25 -- -- ‒ 6.00 F. Interest fee during construction -- ‒ 6.00 -- Total Financing 155.35 77.45 5.10 42.25 30.55 Page 38 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) ANNEX 4: EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS 1. Following the approach adopted at appraisal, cost-benefit analysis was conducted to reassess the project’s ex post economic viability at completion and financial analysis was conducted separately for Component 1 and Component 2. Economic analysis 2. The proposed development objective was to reduce water pollutant releases from crop and livestock production in selected areas of Guangdong Province. This project was part of Guangdong’s efforts to achieve the agricultural pollution reduction targets called for under the national and provincial 12th Five-Year Plans (FYPs) on environmental protection. By improving the environmental performance of Guangdong’s crop and livestock production sectors, this project will reduce land-based pollution to the coastal and estuary ecosystems of the Greater Bay Area (Guangdong – Hong Kong SAR, China – Macao SAR, China) and beyond. As such, the major project benefits are derived from improvements in water quality. 3. At appraisal, cost-benefit analysis was adopted at the project level and the economic viability of the project was justified by the benefits of improved water quality, in line with the PDOs. The reduction in pollutant loads entering waterways generates tremendous local environmental benefits arising from the pollutant reduction from both crop farming and livestock production through more efficient use of chemical fertilizer and improved LWM. 4. Benefits from water quality improvements: The Pearl River system provides water for more than 100 million people in Guangdong, seven million residents of Hong Kong SAR, China, and half a million residents of Macao SAR, China. The water quality was very poor at the local level, especially around Guangzhou, Dongguan, Foshan, and Shenzhen, largely failing Grade V, making the river unsuitable for aquacultural, recreational, and irrigation uses. 32 The Pearl River also contributes to serious marine pollution of the waters of the Greater Bay Area (Guangdong – Hong Kong SAR, China – Macao SAR, China) and beyond. and as such has been identified as one of the land-based pollution hotspots and the largest source of land-based pollution emanating from China. The economic damage of such pollution is felt in terms of costs of investments to access cleaner drinking, irrigation, and industrial water sources, lost recreational opportunities and tourism revenues, diminished real estate values, reduced fisheries and aquaculture production, as well as lost non-use values such as knowing that the rivers in one’s country support diverse forms of life (biodiversity value) and that future generations can enjoy pristine rivers and the species they harbor (bequest value). 5. Chemical runoff and leaching from crop farming due to overapplication and improper application of fertilizer and pesticide and discharges from intensive livestock farms contribute to poor water quality in the Pearl River basin. The impact of discharges from animal farms is felt in small inland rivers where concentrated discharges from farms significantly lower the drinking water availability of downstream communities, at times overwhelming small water treatment plants’ ability to treat the water to the required standard, leading to treatment plant closure and expensive substitution arrangements. In some areas, highly concentrated pollution from livestock farms has also inflicted serious damage to downstream aquaculture farms, leading the latter to file complaints with the local bureau of environment. 32HK water report. Reference 77 Research Department, Hong Kong Trade Development Council (Hong Kong SAR, China) (2008). Tapping the Green Manufacturing Opportunities in the Pearl River Delta, Hong Kong Trade Development Council (Hong Kong SAR, China) Page 39 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) 6. Quantifying economic losses due to poor water quality and determining the share of the damage that can be attributed to agriculture is challenging. Even more difficult is to quantify the loss that can be avoided due to the interventions supported by this project. In the absence of direct valuation of water quality-related benefits that can be directly attributed to the project, the following approach was adopted at appraisal: willingness to pay was used to estimate the value for measures to avoid or reverse pollution. At appraisal, a high value amounted to 1.3 percent and a low value amounted to 0.55 percent of the local gross annual income, which were used to arrive at the benefit estimation. At ICR, we used the same percentages as upper and lower bounds to roughly estimate the value that Guangdong residents placed on maintaining or improving water quality in Guangdong rivers. The value was estimated to range from US$483 million to US$1,143 million annually, far exceeding the total project cost of US$155 million (see Table 4.1 below). Table 4.1: Estimation of Annual WTP Value and Program Cost33 (A) Provincial (B) % of (C) Annual per (D) WTP (0.55% of (E) WTP (1.3% of (F) Project population population capita gross income) income) cost (million) benefited from income (US$) (US$, millions, (US$, millions, (US$, millions) the project annual) annual) 127 10% 6,923 483 1,143 155 7. In addition, the project generated benefits from (i) increased net returns to crop farmers due to reduced input costs while keeping yields constant; (ii) the value of energy and heat generated from biogas and the nutrient value of digestion residues applied to land replacing mineral fertilizers; and (iii) reduced incidence of illness due to digestion of toxic residues on produce from overapplication of pesticides and due to uncontrolled exposure to pesticide packaging. It should be noted that the above benefits do not include those from GHG emissions reduction. If GHG emissions reduction estimated at 83,757 tons of CO2- e per year are included (see Annex 8), the project benefits will increase by US$3.5-7.0 million per year, making the project benefits even higher than the costs, although not significantly. Financial Analysis for Component 1 8. Based on the M&E data,34 crop budgets for conventional and project-promoted fertilization, pest management, and conservation agriculture practices were formulated to gauge farmers’ net increases in revenue. The results are summarized as follows: (i) for fertilization and pest management activities in paddy rice, the cost decreased by 15‒20 percent and yield increased by 5‒10 percent, resulting in a net income increase of 78‒156 yuan/mu (15 mu = 1 ha); and (ii) for conservation agriculture, net income increased by 40‒377 yuan/mu, mostly from reduced cost for tillage, whereas yields remained stable. As the survey on willingness to pilot these practice levels during the project appraisal indicated, small farmers require a subsidy to counteract the costs and risks associated with switching to new, unknown practices. The implementation experience shows that farmers continue to use and upscale the good practices promoted by the project after the withdrawal of two-year subsidies. At appraisal, only the willingness of farmers’ participation was analyzed, with the conclusion that farmers’ income would not decrease with the subsidies. 33World Bank team’s calculation based on 2020 data available from official statistics. 34Fertilization and pest management activities were monitored at 14 sites and with data collected in 2018 and 2019, while conservation agriculture activities were monitored at 9 sites with data collected in 2019 and 2020. Page 40 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Financial Analysis for Component 2 9. A total of 21 LWM facilities35 were analyzed in line with the methodologies adopted at appraisal. 10. Subproject costs involve capital investment costs and annual recurrent costs. Capital investments consisted of civil works and equipment. Although the useful life of most concrete structures is 20 years, that of most equipment is about 10 years. Therefore, in the analysis, replacement costs of equipment are also considered. The elements of annual recurrent costs include labor, maintenance of structures and equipment, operation costs such as electricity and transportation, as well as the cost of regular dredging of the fishponds where the liquids from the bio-digester will be disposed of. To estimate the maintenance costs for the civil works and equipment, all proposals adopted the legally mandated percentages of the capital costs, namely, 3 percent and 5 percent, respectively. 11. Benefits: Benefits of the digestion process to the livestock farm are in the form of revenues or avoided costs. These include (i) the value of electricity generated, (ii) the value of surplus gas, and (iii) the fertilizer value of solid and liquid animal manure. 12. Value of electricity generated. Electricity generated from biogas offset some or all of the electricity purchased from the power company and therefore led to cost savings. The amount of electricity generated depends on the amount of solid manure placed in the bio-digester and the efficiency of the digestion process. 13. Value of surplus biogas. Biogas that is not used for generating electricity can be used for heating and cooking purposes either on the farm itself or in nearby communities. The value of the gas used for heating or cooking purposes was estimated by multiplying the LPG equivalent thermal value by the market price of LPG. 14. Fertilizer value of solid and liquid animal manure. Solids and liquids emerge from bio-digestion and separation prior to bio-digestion. These materials contain large amounts of nutrients, including nitrogen and phosphorus, which, when applied to land, can replace or complement mineral fertilizer. Livestock farms have traditionally sold and given away solid and liquid manure to crop farmers in their neighborhood. Under the project, participating livestock farms were required to ensure that manure generated on their farms was applied to land following a nutrient management plan that considered soil and crop requirements for nutrients. 15. The results showed that all the facilities generate negative returns (without project grant), indicating that they are financially not viable. The financial rates of return (FIRRs) are at 6‒11% (with project grant), indicating that they are financially viable but very sensitive to price changes of outputs (see the FIRR by subproject in Table 4.2). Table 4.2: FIRR by Subproject Name FIRR with subsidy Rongqiang 8% Junbin 6% Songshan 10% Hengchang 9% 35Including nine energy-environmental protection models, nine energy and ecological utilization models, and three high-rise production models. Page 41 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Name FIRR with subsidy Taixiang 7% Wufengtai 11% Zhongzhi 6% Dajing 8% Xinmin 10% Buyuan 7% Dashun 8% Wencun 6% Taifeng 9% Shunda 7% Jineng 8% Guangfeng 10% Weshiqingyuan 7% Yihaotuzhu 9% Dongrui 11% Zijin 10% Jiaxing 11% 16. Considering the substantial positive externalities that LWM generated (see economic analysis), government subsidies are well justified to help Guangdong achieve its objective of improving water quality in its rivers without hampering the growth of the strategically important intensive livestock production system. Furthermore, per current Guangdong Province regulations, LWM facilities are compulsory for any pig farm with SPP above 50036; therefore, the LWM costs need to be internalized in pig farm production for licensed operation. As such, the standalone analysis of LWM adopted at appraisal (only matching the benefits of LWM with LWM costs, instead of treating it as an integral production process) is no longer relevant. 17. Fiscal impact analysis. Although the project does not generate any incremental tax or other revenue to the provincial government, it helps Guangdong avoid sizable expenditures on downstream water quality improvement and healthcare. Guangdong Province provided adequate counterpart funding during project implementation and has incorporated loan repayments into its provincial budget allocations. 18. Implementation efficiency. All project activities were completed at costs below the appraisal and restructuring estimates, mostly because of bidding savings (Annex 3). The reduced number of pig farms involved in Component 2 led to partial Bank loan cancelation and cost reduction. The reason for project extension was well justified to achieve the much-expanded crop production areas adopting project- promoted practices under Component 1 (PAD target was 18,800 ha, actually achieved was 45,192 ha). The management for such a diversified and large number of beneficiaries was cost effective (project management cost was less than 1 percent of total project cost, also much less than the PAD estimation) partly because of the adoption of IC cards (see Section III.A). The project complied with World Bank fiduciary and safeguard policies (see Section IV.B). 36 The smallest SPP of the project farms was more than 3,000 per selection criteria. Page 42 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) ANNEX 5: BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS 尊敬的世界银行项目管理团队： Dear Word Bank Task Team: 很荣幸有机会核阅世行编制的广东农业面源污染治理项目完工及成果报告，我们对此表示感 谢。 We’re honored to have the opportunity to review the Bank’s Implementation Completion and Results (ICR) report for the Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control Project. It is much appreciated. 我们祝贺世行团队编制了一份全面、客观、公正的项目完工及成果报告。我们特别同意报告 的以下评价意见： We congratulate the Bank’s task team for producing a comprehensive, objective and impartial ICR report. We especially concur with the following ratings: (i) 通过事实证明，项目发展目标已完全实现，所有关键成果指标都已达到甚至超越; It’s proved that the Project Development Objective (PDO) has been fully achieved and all the key outcome indicators have been fully achieved or even overachieved. (ii) 通过经济财务和项目实施效率的分析，对项目完成效率进行了公正评价； The project efficiency was fairly rated through economic analysis, financial analysis and implementation efficiency assessment. (iii) 项目与政府政策和投资重点保持高度关联; 以及 The project was well aligned with the government policies and investment priorities. (iv) 发展成果风险分析具有现实性和信息性。 The assessment of the risk to development outcome is realistic and informative. 我们赞成在上述报告中所吸取的经验和建议，并将进一步把这些经验纳入未来项目的设计 中。 We agree with the stated lessons and recommendations which will be further incorporated into the design of future projects. 我们赞赏世界银行团队在项目设计和实施中的出色表现，以及与我们之间亲密和富有成效的 合作。 We appreciate the outstanding performance of the World Bank team in project preparation and implementation, as well as the close and productive cooperation with us. 我们衷心感谢世行完工及成果报告团队与项目实施机构和项目利益相关者的沟通，以及与政 府完工报告团队的密切协作。 Page 43 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the Bank’s ICR team for their communication with the project implementation agency and all relevant stakeholders, as well as their close collaboration with the government ICR team. 期待今后与世界银行开展更广泛、更深入的合作。 Look forward to more extensive and in-depth cooperation with the World Bank in the future. 广东省农业面源污染治理项目办 Guangdong PPMO 2022年5月31日 May 31, 2022 Page 44 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS • Project Appraisal Document • Mission Management Letters and Aide Memoires • Progress Reports • M&E Reports • Interim Unaudited Financial Reports • Project Implementation Status & Results Reports • Restructuring Papers • World Bank Group (2012) Country Partnership Strategy for China, 2013‒2016 • World Bank Group (2019). China Country Partnership Framework, 2020‒2025 • Government Implementation Completion Report • Project Annual Audit Reports • Project supported studies Page 45 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) ANNEX 7. Methodologies for Pollutant Emission Reduction Calculation37 1. Estimate of the emission reduction target value at project appraisal 1. The target value of pollutant emission reduction estimated during project appraisal was relatively low. One reason is the lack of referable experience. Since this Guangdong project was the first to systematically manage and control agricultural non-point source pollution in China, there was little experience for reference, especially in pollution control of fertilizer and pesticide reduction in crop farming. Second, the emission reduction effect of high-rise pig production pilot farms was not calculated, as it was uncertain whether it could succeed in the project design stage. Third, the overall removal rate of pollutants is estimated to be low. The PDO was developed jointly by PPMO and the World Bank team based on extremely limited data before the project started in 2013. Target values of emission reduction of COD and NH3-N were estimated based on the monitoring results of the former GEF project, which focused on biogas digester construction and did not require emissions to meet standards. The removal rate of COD is 96.05 percent for the energy-environmental protection model and 85.36 percent for the energy and ecological utilization model. The removal rates of ammonia nitrogen are 94.93 percent and 32.40 percent, respectively. Fourth, the estimated pollutant reduction of crop farming was not included.38 2. Calculation of emission reduction from LWM facilities 2. The methodologies for calculating pollutant emission reduction of the project-supported pig farms were based on three models of treatment technology—high-rise pig production, energy and ecological utilization, and energy-environmental protection. 3. The amount of pollutants generated was calculated according to the pollution generation coefficient from Tables 2-4-6 of the Accounting Rules for Total Emission Reduction of Major Pollutants during the 12th Five-Year Plan Period (Huanfa [2011] No. 148) by the Ministry of Environmental Protection, which estimated that the COD and ammonia nitrogen produced by each pig was 36 kg and 1.8 kg, respectively. The document does not give a pollution generation coefficient for BOD and TP. The BOD pollution generation coefficient was calculated according to the actual monitoring results of the project- supported pig farms. If the BOD/COD of the effluent from the piggery is 0.45, the BOD produced by each pig each year is calculated to be 16.2 kg. The total phosphorus pollution generation coefficient is based on the data from the first National Census of Pollution Sources, that is, the total phosphorus produced by each pig is 0.56 kg per year. 4. The removal rate of pollutants of high-rise pig production and the energy and ecological utilization model was 100 percent. The removal rate of pollutants of the energy-environmental protection model adopts the average value of the actual removal rate monitored by the project-supported pig farms. The COD removal rate was 97.85 percent, and the ammonia nitrogen removal rate was 93.35 percent in 2020. In the first half of 2021, the removal rates of COD, ammonia nitrogen, BOD, and total phosphorus were 97.82 percent, 93.57 percent, 98.15 percent, and 94.73 percent, respectively. 5. The calculation formula of pollutant reduction in the livestock industry is as follows: Pollution generation coefficient per pig × actual annual SPP size × 2 × removal rate 37 Based on Annex 1 of Client’s ICR. 38 PAD Annex 2, last sentence of Paragraph 10, reads: “It is expected that if properly established and managed, these 300 LWM facilities will help Guangdong reduce about 45,000 tons of COD, 5,000 tons of ammonia, and 250 tons of TP releases from its livestock sector by Year 5 of project implementation.” Those target values match those in the Results Framework (Annex 1, PAD ). Page 46 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) 2.1 Results of the calculation 6. According to the calculation, through project implementation, the actual COD reduction of the farms supported by the project in 2020 was 43,836 tons/year, the actual ammonia nitrogen reduction was 2,150 tons/year, the actual BOD reduction was 19,754 tons/year, and the actual total phosphorus reduction was 673 tons/year (Table 7.1). In the first half of 2021, the actual COD reduction, ammonia nitrogen reduction, BOD reduction, and total phosphorus reduction were 28,873 tons, 1,418 tons, 13,010 tons, and 443 tons, respectively. Table 7.1: Emission Reduction of Pollutants from LWM Facilities Actual ammonia Actual BOD Actual COD Actual TP nitrogen emission Year Mode emission emission emission reduction reduction (t/y) reduction (t/y) reduction (t/y) (t/y) High-rise pig 12,060.50 603.03 5,427.23 187.61 production Energy and ecological 13,721.27 686.06 6,174.57 213.44 utilization model 2020 Energy- environmental 18,054.68 861.22 8,152.01 271.69 protection model Subtotal 43,836 2,150 19,754 673 High-rise pig 7352.37 367.62 3,308.57 114.37 production Energy and ecological First 9,874.42 493.72 4,443.49 153.60 utilization model half of Energy- 2021 environmental 11,648.18 556.99 5,258.35 175.43 protection model Subtotal 28,873 1,418 13,010 443 7. According to the estimation of current emission reduction capacity, when the livestock stock reaches 100 percent of the designated SPP in 2024, COD emission reduction will reach 85,842 tons/year, ammonia nitrogen emission reduction 4,190 tons/year, BOD emission reduction 38,699 tons/year, and total phosphorus emission reduction 1,312 tons/year (Table 7.2). If the ammonia nitrogen reduction rate of crop farming is not counted, the number of pigs on breeding farms needs to be restored to 95 percent of the designated number to achieve the ammonia nitrogen target value. Page 47 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Table 7.2: Pollutant emission reduction at 100% of SPP at second restructuring reaches 100 percent of the designated stock population COD BOD Breeding Ammonia nitrogen TP emission emission emission stock Mode emission reduction reduction reduction population reduction (t/y) (t/y) (t/y) (t/y) High-rise pig 11,253 562 5,063 175 production Energy and ecological 279,409 1,397 12,573 435 100% of the utilization designated model SPP Energy- environmental 46,650 2,231 21,063 703 protection model Subtotal 85,842 4,190 38,699 1,312 8. This is expected to reach 95 percent of the designated stock in 2023 and 100 percent of the designated stock in 2024 according to the expansion trend of current production and the price of pigs in the project area. 3. Calculation of emission reduction in crop farming 9. The environmentally friendly crop farming demonstration in the Guangdong project funded by the World Bank has been quite successful, contributing to the completion of the PDO and playing a leading role in promoting the reduction of chemical fertilizer and pesticide use in Guangdong. 3.1 Methodologies for calculation of nitrogen and phosphorus emission reduction in environmentally friendly crop farming 10. The pollutant reduction of non-point source pollution of nitrogen and phosphorus consists of two parts in the project: one is emission reduction due to decreased fertilizer application and the other is emission reduction due to decreased loss in chemical fertilizer application. 3.1.1 Methodologies for calculation of the pollutant reduction from the decrease in fertilizer application in 2020 compared to the baseline value (1) Rate of nitrogen loss 11. According to the average calculation of nitrogen use efficiency of nitrogen fertilizer for four-crop rice monitored under the "Environmental monitoring consulting service of chemical fertilizer reduction and pollution control demonstration" during 2018‒2019, the average nitrogen use efficiency of the current season was 42.1 percent [1,2] and 33.93 percent [2] for perennial vegetables. 12. According to the demonstration of environmentally friendly crop farming from 2018 to 2019, the planting area of four-crop rice accounted for 73.5 percent [3] and the total planting area of vegetables, maize, and yam accounted for 26.5 percent. 13. Nitrogen use efficiency of the project area has the total nitrogen use for rice and vegetables Page 48 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) divided by total nitrogen use: NE = (RNE * RTN + VNE * VTN)/(RTN + VTN) NE: nitrogen efficiency RNE: rice nitrogen efficiency RTN: rice total nitrogen VNE: vegetable nitrogen efficiency VTN: vegetable total nitrogen NE in the project area: NE (%) = (42.1% * 3,843.9 + 33.93% * 1,176.9)/(3,846.9 + 1,176.9) = 40.2% 14. According to the existing literature, the gaseous loss of nitrogen fertilizer is about (AL) 10 percent. 15. Under the condition that farmland soil fertility is relatively stable, nitrogen fertilizer applied to the field will be absorbed and used by crops and lost in gas, and the rest will enter the water environment through losses. The loss ratio is as follows: NW = 1 − NE − AL NW: proportion of nitrogen fertilizer in water environment NE: nitrogen efficiency AL: nitrogen gaseous loss Nitrogen loss in the project area is NW = 1 – NE – AL = 1 − 40.2% − 10% = 49.8% (2) Rate of phosphorus loss 16. According to monitoring under the "Environmental monitoring consulting service of chemical fertilizer reduction and pollution control demonstration" during 2018‒2019, the average phosphorus loss rate of four-crop rice was 1.69% (1.56% in 2018 and 1.82% in 2019). (3) Calculation formula of emission reduction RN = TN * NE RN: total nitrogen emission reduction TN: total nitrogen reduction from baseline NW: loss rate of nitrogen fertilizer applied RP = TP * NP RP: total phosphorus emission reduction TP: total phosphorus loss from baseline PW: loss rate of phosphate fertilizer applied 17. Nitrogen loss and phosphorus loss measured by monitoring agencies in 2018 and 2019 are used. 3.2 Nitrogen and phosphorus emission reductions in environmentally friendly crop farming Page 49 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) 3.2.1 Emission reductions from decreasing fertilizer application in 2020 compared to baseline value (1) Total fertilizer application reductions in 2020 18. Table 7.3 shows the comparison between fertilizer application in 2020 and baseline for each crop. Table 7.3: Fertilizer Application Reductions for Various Crops in 2020 Fertilizer Fertilizer application TN application Seeded area N (%) P (%) TP reduction Crop reduction (quantity of reduction reduction per (mu) (2) (3) (3) (tons) commercialization, kg) (tons) mu (kg) (1) Rice 19.28 830,715 16,016,185.2 24 3,843.9 7 1,121.1 Pomelo 66.04 56,232 3,713,561.28 24 891.3 7 259.9 Yam 34.78 3,118 108,444.04 16 17.4 6 6.5 Lichee 18.66 16,029 299,101.14 20 59.8 8 23.9 Vegetables 4.12 74,275 306,013 22 67.3 7 21.4 Potato 10.0 8,866 88,660 16 14.2 6 5.3 Maize 20.5 28,146 576,993 22 126.9 8 46.2 Fertigation 150.0 14,864 2,229,600 16 356.7 6 133.8 (4) Subtotal 23,338,557.66 5,377.5 1,618.1 Note: Data sources: 1. Annual Report of Social Safeguard Monitoring 2020 (three-year average for rice from 2018 to 2020) [5]. 2. Document No. 169 of Guangdong Agriculture/Agriculture Office (2020). 3. Nitrogen and phosphorus content in formula fertilizer promoted by the project. 4. Area of fertigation = total amount of project subsidy fund/500 (subsidy standard per mu). (2) Pollutant emission reductions in 2020 due to decreased fertilizer application 19. According to the above loss rate, the contribution of decreased fertilizer application to emission reductions in the project area is shown in Table 7.4. Page 50 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Table 7.4: Emission Reductions in Ammonia Nitrogen/Total Phosphorus due to Decreased Fertilizer Application in 2020 Total fertilizer Emission reduction in Loss rate application (tons) ammonia nitrogen (tons) Ammonia nitrogen 5,377.5 49.8% 2,678.0 Phosphorus (TP) 1,618.1 1.69% 27.3 3.2.2 Emission reductions due to decrease in loss by applying fertilization technology 20. Nitrogen loss and phosphorus loss measured by monitoring agencies in 2018 and 2019 are shown in Table 7.5. Table 7.5: Emission Reductions due to Decrease in Loss of Nitrogen and Phosphorus with Project Technology in 2018‒2019 Year TN emission reductions (tons) TP (tons) 2018 188.5 41.6 2019 217.3 35.8 Average 202.9 38.7 3.2.3 Total emission reductions in ammonia nitrogen/total phosphorus in 2020 Table 7.6: Total Ammonia Nitrogen/Phosphorus Emission Reductions in the Project Area in 2020 Type of emission reduction Emission reduction in N and A (tons) Emission reduction in TP (tons) Emission reduction from decrease in fertilizer 2,678.0 27.3 application Emission reduction from decrease in loss with 202.9 38.7 technology application Total 2,881.0 66.0 3.2.4 Methodologies for calculation of emission reductions in crop farming in the first half of 2021 21. According to the social safeguards monitoring, 70.33 percent of the farmers are still using environmentally friendly fertilizer and 84.61 percent are still using environmentally friendly pesticide after subsidies were discontinued. 22. The formula for the total emission reduction in ammonia nitrogen and phosphorus in the first half of 2021 is Page 51 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Total reduction in 2020 ÷ 2 × 70.33%. The calculation formula for total reduction in pesticide use (active ingredient) in the project area is Total reduction in 2020 ÷ 2 × 84.61%. 3.3 Conclusions 23. Through the "Environmental monitoring consulting service of chemical fertilizer reduction and pollution control demonstration," social monitoring, and annual implementation plans, we calculated that the ammonia nitrogen emission reduction and total phosphorus emission reduction for the project area in 2020 was 2,881 tons and 66 tons, respectively. In the first half of 2021, ammonia nitrogen and total phosphorus emission reduction were 1,013 tons and 23 tons, respectively. 4. Total emission reductions of the project 24. After calculation, the total emission reductions of the project are shown in Tables 7.7 and 7.8. Table 7.7: Total Emission Reductions of the Project in 2020 Actual COD Actual ammonia Actual BOD Actual TP emission nitrogen emission emission emission reduction (t/y) reduction (t/y) reduction (t/y) reduction (t/y) High-rise pig 12,060.50 603.03 5,427.23 187.61 production Energy and ecological 13,721.27 686.06 6,174.57 213.44 Livestock utilization model breeding Energy- environmental 18,054.68 861.22 8,152.01 271.69 protection model Subtotal 43,836 2,150 19,754 673 Crop farming 2,881 66 Total emission reductions 43,836 5,031 19,754 739 Target value 36,000 4,000 11,200 250 % of target completion 122% 126% 176% 295% Page 52 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Table 7.8: Total Emission Reductions of the Project in the First Half of 2021 Actual COD Actual ammonia Actual BOD Actual TP emission nitrogen emission emission emission reduction (t/y) reduction (t/y) reduction (t/y) reduction (t/y) High-rise pig 7,352.37 367.62 3,308.57 114.37 production Energy and ecological 9,874.42 493.72 4,443.49 153.60 utilization model Livestock Energy- breeding environmental 11,648.18 556.99 5,258.35 175.43 protection model Subtotal 28,873 1,418 13,010 443 Crop farming 1,013 23 Total emission reductions in the 28,873 2,431 13,010 466 first half of 2021 Estimated total emission 57,746 4,862 26,020 932 reductions in 2021 Reference materials: [1] Typical monitoring is conducted to calculate nutrient availability. [2] Relevant reports under "Environmental monitoring consulting service of chemical fertilizer reduction and pollution control demonstration." [3] Project Implementation Work Plan 2020 (Guangdong Agriculture/Agriculture Office (2020) No. 169). [4] Effects of different organic fertilizers and chemical fertilizers on crop yield and nitrogen gaseous loss in farmland [J] . Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2019, 25(11):1835‒1846, Li Yanqing, Wen Yanchen, Lin Zhan'an, Zhao Bingqiang. [5] Social Monitoring Report 2020. [6] Accounting Rules for Total Emission Reduction of Major Pollutants during the 12th Five-Year Plan Period (Huanfa [2011] No. 148) by the Ministry of Environmental Protection. [7] Data from the first National Census of Pollution Sources. [8] Manual on Accounting Methodologies and Coefficients for Pollution Generation and Emission from Emission Source Surveys (No. 24 of 2021), Ministry of Ecology and Environment of the People's Republic of China. Page 53 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) ANNEX 8. GHG EMISSION REDUCTION ANALYSIS 1. All project activities could contribute to GHG emission reductions. The analysis of reductions in GHG emissions at ICR stage was developed based on the exact outputs of the project. In total, the project could reduce GHG emissions by 83,757 tons of CO2e emissions every year (Table 8.1). 2. GHG emission reductions from the crop production component. The reduction in GHG emissions from this component is mainly related to N2O, known to be one of the main contributors to climate change from agriculture, along with CH4. The FAO EX-ACT tool was used to estimate the GHG emission balance.. Although N2O’s contribution is far less than CO2, in terms of amount, its global warming potential (GWP) is 265 times that of CO2 on a 100-year timescale (IPCC, 2014). CH₄’s contribution, roughly a third that of CO2, is 28 times more powerful than CO2 over a 100-year span. The total agricultural contribution to GHG emissions is 14 percent, while its responsibility for N2O and CH₄ is about 80 percent and 70 percent, respectively, in terms of the climate warming effect (IPCC, 2014). 3. The objective of the component is to improve soil nutrients through various environmentally friendly agronomic measures. For instance, conservation agriculture, slow controlled-release fertilizer, and fertigation are all good agricultural practices for improving soil nutrients. Consequently, the demand for chemical fertilizer, which releases much N2O at the field level, decreased at an appropriate proportion, on the premise of crop yield ensured. According to the government Implementation Completion Report (received in March 2021), the amount of chemical fertilizer decreased by 55,000 tons during the six-year project implementation period. The carbon balance attributed to chemical fertilizer is thus associated with N2O release reduction at the field level and CO2e reduction in the process of production, transportation, storage, and transfer. 4. IPM is another environmentally friendly activity at the field level. With IPM, the amount of pesticides applied decreased by 1,738.8 tons (active ingredient) vis-à-vis traditional practices, as recorded by the government ICR. 5. GHG emission reductions from livestock production management. The project focused on managing pig manure, which releases N2O and CH4 into the atmosphere under business-as-usual (BAU). Appropriate treatment of the manure could largely diminish GHG emissions. Three treatment modalities piloted and adopted by the project were: • High-rise pig production as a “manure zero discharge” model. The pig shed structure with two floors, where the pigs live on the second floor and waste leaks to the first floor through slots, enables waste to combine with the bedding material and be converted into organic fertilizer. No manure is discharged into natural water resources. This could reduce emissions by of 369.92 tons of CO2e per 1,000 pigs every year, based on the clean development mechanism (CDM).39 The results of GHG emission reductions below were calculated based on the pig heads of the last year of project implementation: 21,333 at the end of 2020. • Energy and ecological utilization (resource utilization) model. This is also a “zero discharge” model, but through “solid-liquid separation” techniques. The solid manure was eventually converted into organic fertilizer and the liquid manure was used to produce biogas. The biogas slurry could then be applied to crops, thus saving a certain amount of chemical fertilizer. 39 Renewable Energy Resources, DOI:10.13941/j.cnki.21-1469/tk.2021.04.004 Page 54 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) • Energy-environmental protection model. This model reduces wastewater pollutants to meet the national effluent standards. The technical process could produce organic fertilizer and biogas. 6. As above, the GHG emission reductions are attributed to organic fertilizer production (from models of resource use and environmental protection), biogas (from models of resource use and environmental protection), as well as “zero discharge” (from high-rise pig production). Based on studies, organic fertilizer (from pig manure) could replace chemical fertilizer in the range of 20‒40 percent (2021 and 2022),40 41 on the condition that crop yield and quality were not affected or were affected in a positive way. The government ICR recorded that the project could produce 25,000 tons of organic fertilizer and 24.8 million kwh of biogas annually. Biogas, as a kind of clean energy, is a green complementary product of fossil fuel electricity. According to the Chinese Life Cycle Database (CLCD), 1 kwh of mixed electricity could emit 960 g of CO2-e. Table 8.1: Estimated GHG Emissions Reduction under the Project Components Sources for GHG emission GHG balance per year (tCO2-e/year) reductions Project Net carbon BAU intervention balance 1.Environmentall Soil nutrient Improved (chemical 22,733 2,728 20,005 y friendly crop fertilizer use reduced) production Integrated pest management 5,423 651 4,772 (pesticide use reduced) 2. Livestock Zero waste discharge (from high- 7,893 0 7,893 waste rise pig production)42 management Manure use (organic fertilizer) 30,999 3,720 27,279 Manure use (biogas power 23,808 0 23,808 generation) Total 90,856 7,098 83,757 7. Leakage calculations. The GHG calculations above did not include potential leakage, for example, electrical power. Electricity could be used by the manure treatment equipment (fans, blowers, pumps). The leakage of electricity emissions per year (EEY) is the project activity’s share of the emissions. However, since no data was available (and the amount was limited), the leakage was not calculated. 8. Benefits beyond GHG emission reductions directly attributable to the project. The results do not include other benefits, beyond direct GHG emission reductions from project activities. For example, additional emission reductions from avoided energy use, water savings, and organic fertilizer production from high-rise pig farms were not calculated for various reasons. The data for how much organic fertilizer was produced were not readily available from government’s reports. The high-rise pig farms model saved a lot of water, as there was no need to wash (as is the case with traditional pig sheds), which avoided usage of energy, a kind of contribution to GHG emission reductions. And with the positive demonstration effect of the six high-rise pig production pilots, more than 20 pig farms were transformed into this 40 Agronomy, 2021, 11, 2429. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11122429 41 ISSNe 1678-4596, Soil Science 42 GHG emission reductions were calculated based on the pig heads of the last year of project implementation: 21,333 at the end of 2020. Page 55 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) production within and beyond Guangdong Province. But the calculation of above GHG emission reductions is only based on the six pilots, not the scaling-up boundary. Higher GHG emission reductions can be expected if these other sources were considered. Finally, the biogas slurry from traditional pig farms equipped with LWM facilities was used to irrigate crops, resulting in decreased chemical fertilizer application. While these were not calculated, they contributed to GHG emission reductions. These could also become a big contributor to China’s goal of “carbon peak by 2030, carbon neutrality by 2060.” 9. Climate Change Adaptation (Resilience). The project activities, such as conservation agriculture, also contributed to climate adaptation and food security in China. Soil management practices to enhance agricultural sustainability could build soil organic matter, improve water infiltration, and optimize moisture retention to cope with natural disasters, such as droughts and floods. Page 56 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) ANNEX 9. Implementation Summary of Research Studies Implementation No. Title of research Key research results unit 1. Found out the occurrence and harm of ampullaria snail in the project area. 2. Studied and proposed ecological control methods for snails, Technology Institute of Botany, including diminishing snail eggs and whelks at source; demonstration of Guangdong decreasing the quantity of post-winter snail residue in winter; 1 regional comprehensive Academy of controlling the food chain and breeding sites in water-dry prevention and control Agricultural rotation; 5% avermectin emulsion was developed to replace of ampullaria snail Sciences the highly toxic pesticide pentachlorophenol. 3. The research results have been widely applied in the rice cropping region of the province. 1. Used agricultural and physical control measures to reduce the occurrence and spread of pests and diseases. Experimental 2. Considered disease and insect control from the whole demonstration of growing period of crops through integrated prevention and Guangdong integrated technology of control measures to enhance crop immunity; followed Agricultural 2 reducing pesticide rational use of pesticides to improve the prevention and Technology amount and pollution control effects of major diseases and insect pests of pepper Extension Station control for pepper and and tomato, and to eliminate the use of WHO I and II tomato pesticides. 3. Effective control of pepper blight in continuous cropping fields was achieved through physiological regulation of crops. Institute of Agricultural Study and Resources and 1. Proposed the formula of dedicated fertilizer for yam and demonstration of high- Environment, obtained the national invention patent. 3 efficiency and high- Guangdong 2. Formulated technical regulations for efficient and high- quality fertilization Academy of quality fertilization in yam. technology in yam Agricultural Sciences Experimental Guangdong 1. Selected slow-release fertilizer for rice suitable for demonstration of Agricultural Guangdong soil and applied it in the project area. 4 introducing slow- Technology 2. The economic and ecological benefits of slow- (controlled-) (controlled-) release Extension Station release fertilizer were analyzed. fertilizer in rice Technical specifications Institute of Botany, Technical specifications for the comprehensive prevention for the control of Guangdong and control of diseases and insect pests of high-quality rice, 5 pesticide residues in Academy of sweet maize, and other major agricultural products have been main agricultural Agricultural formulated, and have been promulgated by the Guangdong products Sciences Market Regulation Bureau and developed as local standards. Institute of 1. The contributions of conservation tillage fertilization, soil Conservation tillage to Agricultural factors, and meteorological factors for CO2, CH4, and N2O 6 decrease greenhouse Resources and emissions have been studied, as well as the interaction among gas emissions Environment, CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions. Guangdong 2. Put forward GHG emission reduction measures under two Page 57 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Implementation No. Title of research Key research results unit Academy of new conservation tillage measures, which are moderately Agricultural increasing the application of acid modifier and selecting Sciences suitable nitrogen fertilizer to control ammonia nitrogen content in soil. 3. Published two papers. Experimental 1. The total amount of Cd absorbed by rice plants and the demonstration of soil South China content of Cd in roots, stems, leaves, and grains were 7 conditioner to decrease Agricultural decreased by applying soil conditioner. heavy metal pollution in University 2. Screened out two optimal kinds of soil conditioner. agricultural products Comparative Guangdong Dazhi 1. Screened a biodegradable film formula suitable for potato experimental study on Agricultural growth in Guangdong Province. 8 cultivation of winter Science and 2. Popularized the application of biodegradable film covering potato covered with Technology Co. for winter-planted potatoes through field demonstration and biodegradable film Ltd. mechanized harvesting. Specification and South China standard of conservation The technical specifications of conservation tillage for rice and 9 Agricultural tillage technology in maize have been formulated. University Guangdong Province 1. Studied and put forward feed nutrition technology to reduce pig farm waste discharge, including optimizing feed Research and application formula, improving digestibility of feed raw materials, and of key technologies of South China refining nutritional regulations of feed in stages, etc. 10 nutrition and feed to Agricultural 2. Proposed nutrition and feed policy recommendations to reduce waste discharge University reduce pig farm waste discharge, wastewater discharge, and from livestock farms odor discharge. 3. Published two papers. 1. Described the present situation of collection, storage, transportation, and disposal of pesticide packaging waste at Development and home and abroad. evaluation of collection, Shenzhen 2. Put forward the supervision and management mechanism storage, transportation, Noposion of recycling pesticide packaging waste. 11 and disposal chain of Agrochemicals Co., 3. Proposed a comprehensive recycling and treatment model pesticide packaging Ltd. of pesticide packaging waste. waste 4. Analyzed the cost-effectiveness of recycling, classification, storage, transportation, and treatment of pesticide packaging waste. 1. Drew spatiotemporal distribution and geospatial maps of Prevention and control Institute of Plant water floating lotus in the middle and lower reaches of strategies for water Protection, Dongjiang River. lotus in the middle and Guangdong 2. Found out the law of diffusion of water lotus in the middle 12 lower reaches of Academy of and lower reaches of Dongjiang River and the positive Dongjiang River, Agricultural correlation with agricultural non-point source pollution. Guangdong Province Sciences 3. Developed the prevention and control strategies for water lotus in the middle and lower reaches of Dongjiang River. Page 58 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Implementation No. Title of research Key research results unit 1. Completed the construction of a demonstration site Agricultural Pilot Study on (Lianshan) for comprehensive treatment of non-point source Ecology and Comprehensive Control pollution and industrial upgrading in rice-growing areas. Resource of Non-Point Source 2. Summarized the governance model of non-point source 13 Protection Station, Pollution in Small Areas pollution in small watershed of organic rice-producing area. Ministry of and Upgrading of 3. Recommended the industrial upgrading mechanism of Agriculture and Industrial Chain (Rice) comprehensive management of agricultural non-point source Rural Affairs pollution in a small watershed. 1. Completed the construction of a demonstration site Pilot Study on Agricultural (Huiyang) for comprehensive control of non-point source Comprehensive Control Ecology and pollution and industrial upgrading in vegetable-growing areas. of Non-Point Source Resource 2. Summarized the non-point source pollution control model 14 Pollution in Small Areas Protection Station, of a small watershed in pollution-free vegetable-producing and Upgrading of Ministry of areas. Industrial Chain Agriculture and 3. Studied and put forward the industrial upgrading (Vegetable) Rural Affairs mechanism of comprehensive management of agricultural non-point source pollution in a small watershed. 1. Developed rice straw pressing devices with different sizes Research on key of straw rollers. technology and South China 2. Developed a straw pressing and ditching device suitable for 15 equipment of Agricultural rice precision hill-drop planter or rice transplanter. conservation tillage in University 3. Carried out field discrete element simulation and field test South China validation. 1. Two fertilizers, "Xinshengli" urease inhibitor nitrogen fertilizer and "Kuaimei" compound fertilizer (24-7-19), with better comprehensive performance in rice yield, nitrogen use efficiency, and rice planting benefit, were screened. Rice Research Research on efficient 2. Screening was conducted for high-yield and high-efficiency Institute, application of fertigation cultivation technology combining increasing planting density Guangdong 16 for rice and technology and reducing nitrogen (“densification and reducing nitrogen” Academy of of greenhouse gas for short). Agricultural emission reduction 3. Screened the three-control fertilization + alternate dry and Sciences wet irrigation cultivation technology with good coupling effect of water and fertilizer and obvious GHG emission reduction. 4. Formulated technical specifications for efficient application of fertigation for rice and for GHG emission reduction. 1. Established a comprehensive evaluation index system for environmentally friendly crop planting industry and livestock waste management system based on social, economic, and environmental benefits. Research on policy of Guangdong 2. Analyzed the "last mile" problems restricting the 17 agricultural non-point Academy of Social implementation of agricultural non-point source pollution source pollution control Sciences control policies and recommended countermeasures and suggestions. 3. Provided policy recommendations on prevention and control of agricultural non-point source pollution. 4. Published "Research on Comprehensive Benefit Evaluation Page 59 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Implementation No. Title of research Key research results unit and Mode Selection of Non-Point Source Pollution Control in Livestock Industry" and several papers. - Article "How to Balance 'Livelihood on Table’ and 'Livelihood of Environmental Protection'?--Guangdong Pig Breeding Industry Needs to Develop 'Green Chapter'" was approved and recognized by provincial leaders. - “Research on Guangdong Agricultural Non-Point Source Pollution Control Policy from the Perspective of Farmers' Environmental Behavior” was approved by the Social Science Fund Program of Guangdong Province. - “Do Agricultural Retailers Promote or Inhibit Farmers' Choice of Environmentally Friendly Fertilizers?” and “Research on Pollution Control Policies of Crop Planting Industry in China Based on Text Analysis” were presented at the 2020 China Environmental and Economic Academic Annual Conference. 1. Found out the pollution situation of farmland soil and rice and vegetables polluted by heavy metals in Shaoguan and Guangzhou in Guangdong. 2. Developed the technical model to treat the background environment of high heavy metals and decrease existing heavy metal pollution in Guangdong. 3. Developed and established the technology system of prevention and control of heavy metal pollution in Guangdong farmland. Study and 4. Formulated technical specifications for "Integrated Control demonstration on South China of Heavy Metal Pollution (Cadmium and Lead) in Paddy prevention and control 18 Agricultural Fields," "Technical Specifications for the Production of of heavy metal pollution University Cabbage in Cadmium-Contaminated Farmland," and in farmland of South "Technical Specifications for the Inter-Cropping Restoration of China Sweet Corn and Sedum alfredii in Cadmium-Contaminated Farmland." Provided policy recommendations on the prevention and control of heavy metal pollution in soil of Guangdong agricultural production areas. 1. Published seven research papers (six SCI papers) and one paper exchanged in international academic conference. 2. Trained three doctoral students, including two overseas doctoral students. 1. Verified for rice that the average use rate of electric sprayer was 40.48% and that of manual sprayer was 30.49%. 2. Verified for maize that the average use rate of electric South China sprayer was 39.77% and that of manual sprayer was 30.01%. Verification of pesticide 19 Agricultural 3. Verified for cabbage that the average use rate of electric use rate in project area University sprayer was 39.81% and that of manual sprayer was 29.16%. 4. Based on the pesticide use rate of electric and manual sprayers in 2020, the total reduction in pesticide active components in rice, maize, and vegetables (Chinese cabbage, Page 60 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Implementation No. Title of research Key research results unit etc.) in the project area was calculated to be 33,475.72 kg, 1,125.82 kg, and 3,336.37 kg, respectively. 1. Developed the index system of evaluating nitrogen and phosphorus loss with unit division from regional planting Institute of sources in Guangdong Province. Agricultural 2. Developed the monitoring index system and methodologies Development of regional Resources and suitable for non-point source pollution of nitrogen and agricultural non-point Environment, 20 phosphorus for Guangdong regional planting industry. source pollution Guangdong 3. Established the risk-warning model and standard of monitoring system Academy of nitrogen and phosphorus non-point source pollution of the Agricultural planting industry in the project area, and evaluated the Sciences technical effect of nitrogen and phosphorus non-point source pollution of the planting industry in the project area. 1. Developed project performance evaluation report. Project performance Beijing Hailixin 2. Evaluation results: highly relevant, moderately efficient, 21 evaluation and financial Information satisfactorily effective, highly sustainable, successful project analysis Consulting Co., Ltd. performance. Institute of Plant Summary of Protection, South technological model of China Agricultural 1. Compiled and consolidated project results. 22 agricultural non-point University/Guangd 2. Summarized and compiled technical models such as source pollution control ong Academy of compensation mechanism for small farmers, etc. in Guangdong Province Agricultural Sciences Environmental Protection Analysis of project Research and Analysis report on ecological environment and economic and ecological environment 23 Monitoring social values of environmentally friendly crop planting and economic and social Institute, Ministry industry and livestock waste management. values of Agriculture and Rural Affairs Page 61 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) List of Some of the Patents Obtained under the Project 1. "Pig Building Manure Collection System," Patent No. 202120812502.X, Shi'an Huang 2. "A High-Rise Fermentation Pig Raising System," Patent No. ZL201310359692.4, Dongrui Food Group Co., Ltd. 3. "A High-Rise Fermentation Piggery Ventilation System," Patent No. ZL201320503692.2, Dongrui Food Group Co., Ltd. 4. "A Pig Manure Automatic Collection Device," Patent No. ZL201620701027.8, Dongrui Food Group Co., Ltd. 5. "A Kind of Automatic Water-Saving Feeding Equipment," Patent Number ZL201620707368.6, Dongrui Food Group Co., Ltd. 6. “A Kind of Automatic Feeding Equipment," Patent Number ZL201620707369.0, Dongrui Food Group Co., Ltd. 7. "A Kind of High-Rise Ecological Nursery Piggery," Patent No. ZL201721792632.1, Dongrui Food Group Co., Ltd. 8. "A Kind of High-Rise Ecological Delivery Piggery," Patent Number ZL201721792625.1, Dongrui Food Group Co., Ltd. 9. "A Kind of Mat Material Treatment and Mixing Device for Fermentation Bed Breeding Technology," Patent No. ZL2017205978999-, Guangdong Modern Agricultural Equipment Research Institute. 10. "A Stacking Device for High-Rise Breeding," Patent No. ZL2015208305614-, Guangdong Institute of Modern Agricultural Equipment. 11. "Compost Fan Control System," Patent No. V3.0-2014SR188027-software copyright, Guangdong Institute of Modern Agricultural Equipment. 12. "Composting Reaction Control System," Patent No. V1.0-2021SR0901270-software copyright, Guangdong Modern Agricultural Equipment Research Institute. 13. "A Water Vapor Collection System for Aerobic Composting Fermentation," Patent No. ZL201620842143.1, Guangdong Institute of Modern Agricultural Equipment. 14. "A Kind of Animal Manure Simulation Composting Device," Patent No. 202020489843.3, South China Agricultural University. 15. "IC Card Subsidy Management Information System V1.0," Registration Number 2015SR010314, Guangzhou Jiankun Network Technology Development Company. 16. "A Simple Trap for Sexual Trapping Noctuidae Adults," Patent No. CN210671789U, Institute of Plant Protection, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences. 17. "Preparation Method and Application of an Astragaltin Suspension Agent," Patent No. CN111296417b, 9.CN111411062B, Institute of Plant Protection, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences. 18. "A Kind of Sexual Trap Cage with Virus," Patent No. CN213908080U, Institute of Plant Protection, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences. 19. "Soil Depth Monitoring System Based on Tension Pressure Sensor," Patent No. ZL 2019 1 0206221.7, South China Agricultural University. Page 62 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) Annex 10: Project M&E – Detailed Description No. Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring methodology Monitoring scope and frequency agency/ content consultant Institute of - NY/T761-2008, NY/T 788-2004 (NY/T 788-2018) Samples of leafy vegetables and fruits were tested four Plant standard test, compliance rate according to the times a year, sweet corn and rice twice a year, and potato standard judgment of GB2763-2014, GB2763-2016, once a year. The monitoring area covers 10 project Protection, GB2763-2019; counties. Guangdong 19. Laboratory data analysis was performed Academy of 1 Pesticide residue according to NY/T761-2008 and NY/T 788-2018 (instead Agricultural of NY/T 788-2004) Sciences, South China Agricultural University On-site interview, questionnaire survey, market - In the first phase of 2015-2018, 14,326 households research, data analysis, news from internet, video (25.06%) were investigated in 28 towns of 6 cities (districts and search, test analysis and other methods counties), and the arable land area was 92,477.16 mu (27.84%). South China 1168 households in non-project area were surveyed. Agricultural - In the second phase of 2019-2020, 12,422 project farmers 2 PMP University (sample ratio 11.83%), 69,251.62 mu of farmland (sample ratio 12.19%), and 2,823 non-project farmers were sampled in 95 towns in 25 counties. - More than 50% of agricultural input stores and management departments in the project area have been visited. Page 63 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) No. Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring methodology Monitoring scope and frequency agency/ content consultant - Wastewater: Glass electrode method - Livestock waste management demonstration Institute of GB/T6920-1986, weight method GB/T Hj828-2017, environmental monitoring: the first batch of 12 projects, Agricultural dichromate method, HJ535-2009, ammonium continuous monitoring for 3 years. Resources and molybdate spectrophotometric method GB/T11893- - Operation monitoring selected 12 systems (pig farm), Environment, 1989, dilution and inoculation method HJ505-2009, monitoring once every six months (atmosphere and generator Guangdong multi-tube fermentation method and filtration units exhaust monitoring once a year); Three pig farms were Academy of membrane method (trial) HJ/T 347-2007 (filtration selected for quantitative monitoring once a month. The Agricultural membrane method) monitored targets were sampled continuously for 3 days each Sciences - Pig manure: Vacuum oven method NY 525- time. Livestock waste 2012, sulfuric acid-hydrogen peroxide digestion- - Environmental effect monitoring: once after the management distillation titration method NY 525-2012, sulfuric acid- completion of the project, each monitoring lasts for three days. Guangdong environmental hydrogen peroxide digestion- spectrophotometry Environmental monitoring, METHOD NY 525-2012 Protection Vocational and including - Feed: Determination of dry matter (DM) GB/T Technical aquaculture 6435-2006, determination of crude protein (CP) GB/T 3 water quality 6432-1994, determination of total phosphorus (TP) School monitoring, GB/T 6437-2002 aquaculture - Biogas: Biogas analyzer BioGas 500 Guangdong pollutant determination (origin in The United Kingdom), reagent Beiyuan emission colorimetric method Testing reduction Technology - Atmosphere: Three-point comparison odor bag Co., LTD method GB/T14675-1993, methylene blue spectrophotometric method (B) "Air and exhaust gas monitoring and Analysis Methods" (fourth edition), Pony Testing Reagent spectrophotometric method International - Exhaust gas of generator units: Measurement Group, method for boiler smoke and dust GB/T 5468-1991, Shenzhen Co., Constant potential electrolysis method (B) "Air and LTD exhaust gas Monitoring and Analysis Method" (fourth edition) Page 64 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) No. Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring methodology Monitoring scope and frequency agency/ content consultant - Atmosphere: three-point comparison odor bag - Monitoring Longchuan Dongrui High Bed Farm, 2016-2018 Guangdong method, reagent spectrophotometry, methylene - Atmosphere: once a month for, 3 consecutive days each time; Beiyuan Testing blue spectrophotometer electrochemical method, - Solid waste: once a month Technology Co., gas chromatography; - Fertilizer nutrients and heavy metals: twice a year LTD, - Organic fertilizer: potassium dichromate capacity - Breeding process and cost: each batch of pigs High bed method, sulfuric acid - hydrogen peroxide - Kjeldsen 4 fermentation determination of nitrogen, C/N method, sulfuric acid China Guangzhou breeding -hydrogen peroxide-vanadium molybdate Analysis and spectrophotometry, sulfuric acid-hydrogen peroxide Testing Center - flame photometry, saturated sodium nitrate floating method precipitation method, multi-tube fermentation, fly maggot density method and so on - Soil sample collection: NY/1121.4-2006, - Collect production information of early and late crops (rice NY/T395-2012; and corn) at 9 conservation tillage demonstration sites in 2019 - Soil testing: Soil testing-Part 4 NY/T 1121.4- and 2020 through interviews and field investigations; South China 2006, granular structure, granular structure analyzer, - Soil property monitoring: soil property monitoring was Agricultural potassium dichromic oxidation-external heating carried out at 9 conservation tillage demonstration sites, with University, LY/T1237-1999; 108 and 120 monitoring sites in 2019 and 2020 respectively. The - Water sample testing: glass electrode method sampling frequency was twice a year, and 456 ring tool and Institute of Eco- GB/T 6920-1986, alkaline potassium persulfate surface soil samples were collected. The monitoring indexes were Conservation 5 Environment digestion UV spectrophotometry HJ 636-2012 soil bulk density, organic matter and aggregate structure. and Soil, tillage Potassium persulfate oxidation molybdenum blue - Nitrogen and phosphorus loss monitoring: monitoring for Guangdong colorimetric method GB 11893-1989 6 demonstration pilots of conservation tillage, nitrogen and Academy of phosphorus runoff and leaching loss. 48 and 42 monitoring sites Sciences were selected in the first and the second half of 2020 respectively. The runoff and leaching sampling frequency was 3 times/season. In total 652 samples in 2020 were collected for runoff and leaching, monitoring index including pH, total nitrogen and total phosphorus. Page 65 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) No. Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring methodology Monitoring scope and frequency agency/ content consultant Site visit, group discussion with experts and officials, - For crop planting, the monitoring area covers 10 project questionnaire survey, follow-up survey, typical survey, counties. From 2018 to 2020, a total of 6317 project households literature and pictures and video analysis, and etc. (sample ratio 7.4%) and 1080 non-project households (17.10% Guangdong of the sample of participating households) were surveyed. In Urban addition, 66 person/times project experts, 216 agricultural input stores in the project area, 334 people of county and 6 Management Social safeguards township administrative departments and village technical Research assistants, 6 representatives of agricultural production enterprises, 811 people with disabilities, the elderly and other Association vulnerable groups were visited. - For livestock sector, the monitoring has a full coverage of all breeding farms. - Field interview, field experiment, sample collection, - Regional monitoring: From 2017 to 2019, 12 monitoring areas sample analysis and other methods. and 4 control areas were set up in 6 project counties to carry - Water samples: PH -- glass electrode method GB/T out regional monitoring of three modes: double cropping rice 6920-1986, total nitrogen--alkaline potassium (rice-rice), flood and drought rotation (rice-red onion, rice- persulfate digestion UV spectrophotometry HJ 636- melon and vegetable, rice, and corn), rice-rice-winter potato Environmental 2012, total phosphorus--ammonium molybdate planting. Monitoring includes irrigation volume, drainage and monitoring of spectrophotometry GB11899-89, Nitrate precipitation. Samples of irrigation water, drainage and chemical fertilizer nitrogen/ammonium nitrogen -- continuous flow precipitation were collected, and completing monitoring work South China reduction and analyzer HJ/T BOD5 -- Dilution and inoculation of 240 irrigation water, 361 drainage and 468 precipitation in pollution control 7 Agricultural method HJ505-2009, CODCr -- rapid digestion total. demonstration, spectrophotometry HJ/T 399-2007, Total - Typical monitoring: From 2017 to 2019, three typical University including suspended solids -- gravimetric method GB 11901- monitoring work were carried out in the selected monitoring nitrogen and 89, total salt -- gravimetric method HJ/T 51-1999, sites for double cropping rice (early rice, late rice), rotation of phosphorus chloride-silver nitrate titration method GB 11896- rice and corn (rice, corn), and perennial vegetables (oilseed, reduction in crop 89, sulfides -- iodimetry method HJ/T 60-2000, total cucumber, plum vegetable). In each planting mode, soil testing planting industry arsenic/total mercury -- atomic fluorescence formula technology, special fertilizer application technology, spectrophotometer HJ 597-2011, cadmium/lead -- optimized fertilization technology, fertilization-free (blank) absorption spectrophotometry GB 7475-87, treatment and conventional fertilization treatment were set determination of total chromium -- GB 7466-87, up, and precipitation, irrigation water, runoff water and soil fecal coliform bacteria -- multi-tube fermentation leachate water samples were collected respectively. Soil Page 66 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) No. Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring methodology Monitoring scope and frequency agency/ content consultant method and filtration membrane method (trial) samples were collected before planting and after harvest of HJ/T 347-2007, Ascaris egg numbers-sedimentation each crop; At harvest, plant samples (edible and non-edible egg collection method (HJ 775-2015); parts) are collected. A total of 53 irrigation water, 182 - Soil samples: PH -- glass electrode method NY/T precipitation, 1110 soil runoff water, 4125 soil leachate water, 1121.02-2006, organic matter -- potassium 495 plant samples and 300 soil samples were monitored. dichromate titration method NY/T 88-1988, total nitrogen -- semi-trace Kelmanic method NY/T 53- 1988, total phosphorus -- alkali melting -- Molybdenum-antimony resistance colorimetric spectrophotometry, alkali-nitrohydrolytic diffusion method LY/T 1233-1999, the extraction of available phosphorus and sodium carbonate -- ammonium molybdate spectrophotometry LY/T 1233-1999, the extraction of available potassium and ammonium acetate -- flame spectro photometry NY/T 889- 2004, ammonium nitrogen/nitrate nitrogen -- continuous flow analyzer method; - Plant samples: total nitrogen-- sulfuric acid -- hydrogen peroxide -- distillation titration, total phosphorus -- sulfuric acid -- hydrogen peroxide -- molybdenum-antimony resistance colorimetric spectrophotometry, total potassium -- sulfuric acid -- hydrogen peroxide -- atomic absorption spectrophotometry. External Questionnaire survey, case collection, field visit, For Lianshan Zhuang and Yao Autonomous County. From 2018 to monitoring of household interview, group interview, social and 2020, it was monitored once every six months for a total of six ethnic minorities economic analysis times. Two socio-economic baseline surveys were conducted 8 LI Fan development covering 179 farmers in 9 administrative villages in 5 townships. framework Through monitoring cooperatives, follow-up sampling interviews implementation with sample members of cooperatives, and continuous surveys in project communities, the comprehensive impact of projects on ethnic minority populations and communities is analyzed and Page 67 of 68 The World Bank China Guangdong Agricultural Pollution Control (P127775) No. Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring methodology Monitoring scope and frequency agency/ content consultant judged, and suggestions for improvement are put forward to help project implementation meet the relevant requirements of OP4.10 of The World Bank Operational Guidelines. Page 68 of 68