Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: ICR00068 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT TF-A9474, TF-18842, and TF-A9512 ON A CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF US$7 MILLION AND A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF US$41.89 MILLION FROM THE STRATEGIC CLIMATE FUND (SCF) TO THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA FOR THE GHANA FIP - ENHANCING NATURAL FOREST AND AGROFOREST LANDSCAPES PROJECT December 23, 2024 Environment, Natural Resources & the Blue Economy Western and Central Africa 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 14, 2024) Currency Unit = New Ghanaian Cedi (GHS) GHS 15.05 = US$1 US$1.32 = SDR 1 FISCAL YEAR January 1 - December 31 Regional Vice President: Ousmane Diagana Country Director: Robert R. Taliercio Regional Director: Chakib Jenane Practice Manager: Lia Carol Sieghart Task Team Leader (s): Justice Odoiquaye Odoi, Darshani De Silva ICR Main Contributor: Olamide Oluwaseyi Bisi-Amosun ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ADB Agricultural Development Bank AF Additional Financing AfDB African Development Bank ASGM Artisanal Small-scale Gold Mining BCR Benefit-Cost Ratio CBO Community-Based Organization CCDR Country Climate Development Report CCI Climate Change initiative CIF Climate Investment Fund COCOBOD Ghana Cocoa Board CPF Country Partnership Framework CPS Country Partnership Strategy CREMA Community Resource Management Area DDEP Domestic Debt Exchange Program DGM Dedicated Grant Mechanism DoF Director of Finance EFA Economic and Financial Analysis EnABLE Enhancing Access to Benefits while Lowering Emissions ENFALP Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project EPA Environmental Protection Agency ER Emissions Reduction ESA European Space Agency ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan ESRI Environmental Systems Research Institute EU European Union EX-ACT Ex-Ante Carbon-balance Tool FAO Food and Agriculture Organization (of the United Nations) FC Forestry Commission FCPF Forest Carbon Partnership Facility FI Financial Institution FIP Forestry Investment Program FM Financial Management FSD Forest Services Division GAP Good Agricultural Practices GDP Gross Domestic Product GERP Ghana Emissions Reductions Program GHG Greenhouse Gas GLRSSMP Ghana Landscape Restoration and Small-Scale Mining Project GoG Government of Ghana GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism GSGDA Ghana Sustainable Growth and Development Agenda HFZ High Forest Zone IA Implementing Agency ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report IFC International Finance Corporation ILM Integrated Landscape Management IR Intermediate Results IRR Internal Rate of Return ISR Implementation Status and Results Report KIDS Knowledge, Information, and Data Services LULC Land Use/Land Cover M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MinCom Minerals Commission MLNR Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources MoF Ministry of Finance MRV Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification MTR Midterm Review MTS Modified Taungya System NGO Nongovernmental Organization NPV Net Present Value NREG Natural Resources and Environmental Governance NRG Natural Resource Governance NRM Natural Resource Management O&M Operation and Maintenance PAD Project Appraisal Document PDO Project Development Objective PDI PDO Indicator PMU Project Management Unit PPG Project Preparatory Grant RF Results Framework SCF Strategic Climate Fund SMPEs Small- and Medium-scale Plantation Enterprises STEP Systematic Tracking of Exchanges in Procurement TF Trust Fund ToC Theory of Change TOR Terms of Reference TTL Task Team Leader The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS DATA SHEET ................................................................................................................................................. i I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................1 II. OUTCOME ...................................................................................................................................................7 III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME.......................................................... 14 IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME ............................ 18 V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................... 22 ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................................................ 24 ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION ....................................................... 32 ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ......................................................................................................... 35 ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................ 36 ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ................................. 43 ANNEX 6. PICTURES AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE ............................................................................................. 46 ANNEX 7. ADJUSTMENTS TO RESULTS FRAMEWORK DURING ADDITIONAL FINANCING ...................................... 47 ANNEX 8. INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF FOREST ANALYTICS ........................................................................... 49 ANNEX 9. MAP OF PROJECT AREA ..................................................................................................................... 54 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT DATA SHEET @#&OPS~Doctype~OPS^dynamics@icrbasicdata#doctemplate BASIC DATA Product Information Operation ID Operation Name Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest P148183 Landscapes Project Product Operation Short Name Investment Project Financing (IPF) Ghana FIP - Enhancing Forest Landscapes Operation Status Approval Fiscal Year Closed 2015 Original EA Category Current EA Category Partial Assessment (B) (Restructuring Data Sheet - 30 Jun Partial Assessment (B) (Approval package - 05 Feb 2015) 2023) CLIENTS Borrower/Recipient Implementing Agency Republic of Ghana Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE Original Development Objective (Approved as part of Approval Package on 05-Feb-2015) To improve forest and tree management practices by cocoa farmers, CREMA communities and forest reserve managers to reduce forest loss and degradation and demonstrate rehabilitation of mined-out sites in selected landscapes in Ghana's High Forest Zone (HFZ). Current Development Objective (Approved as part of Additional Financing Package Seq No 1 on 03-May-2019) To improve forest and tree management practices by cocoa farmers, CREMA communities and forest reserve managers to reduce forest loss and degradation and demonstrate rehabilitation of mined-out sites in selected landscapes in Ghana's High Forest Zone (HFZ). s s i The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT s s s s @#&OPS~Doctype~OPS^dynamics@icrfinancing#doctemplate FINANCING Financing Source Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$) World Bank Administered 48,885,000.00 48,885,000.00 48,885,000.00 Financing TF-A9512 12,385,000.00 12,385,000.00 12,385,000.00 TF-A9474 7,000,000.00 7,000,000.00 7,000,000.00 TF-18842 29,500,000.00 29,500,000.00 29,500,000.00 Total 48,885,000.00 48,885,000.00 48,885,000.00 RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING Amount Disbursed Date(s) Type Key Revisions (US$M) 10-Feb-2022 Portal 30.36 • Reallocations 08-Feb-2023 Portal 35.19 • Loan Closing Date Extension 30-Jun-2023 Portal 41.36 • Other Changes @#&OPS~Doctype~OPS^dynamics@icrkeydates#doctemplate KEY DATES Key Events Planned Date Actual Date Concept Review 25-Mar-2014 03-Sep-2014 Decision Review 27-Oct-2014 27-Oct-2014 Authorize Negotiations 14-Jan-2015 14-Jan-2015 Approval 27-Feb-2015 27-Feb-2015 Signing 09-Sep-2019 10-Apr-2015 Effectiveness 01-Oct-2019 22-May-2015 ICR/NCO 13-Dec-2024 23-Dec-2024 Additional Financing Sequence.01 Not Applicable 03-May-2019 Restructuring Sequence.01 Not Applicable 10-Feb-2022 Restructuring Sequence.02 Not Applicable 08-Feb-2023 ii The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Restructuring Sequence.03 Not Applicable 30-Jun-2023 ICR Sequence.01 (Final) -- 22-Dec-2024 Operation Closing/Cancellation 14-Jun-2024 14-Jun-2024 @#&OPS~Doctype~OPS^dynamics@icrratings#doctemplate RATINGS SUMMARY Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Modest ISR RATINGS Actual Disbursements No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating (US$M) 01 28-May-2015 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.00 02 02-Dec-2015 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 2.00 03 06-Jun-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 2.00 04 18-Dec-2016 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 8.50 05 22-Jun-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 12.95 06 19-Dec-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 12.95 07 25-Jun-2018 Satisfactory Satisfactory 15.95 08 27-Dec-2018 Satisfactory Satisfactory 18.95 09 19-Jun-2019 Satisfactory Satisfactory 18.95 10 10-Oct-2019 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 21.45 11 23-Apr-2020 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 21.45 12 11-Nov-2020 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 24.07 13 18-May-2021 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 27.36 14 13-Dec-2021 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 30.36 15 13-Jun-2022 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 32.81 16 19-Dec-2022 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 35.19 17 09-Jun-2023 Satisfactory Satisfactory 41.36 iii The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT 18 20-Dec-2023 Satisfactory Satisfactory 48.53 19 28-Jun-2024 Satisfactory Satisfactory 48.85 @#&OPS~Doctype~OPS^dynamics@icrsectortheme#doctemplate SECTORS AND THEMES Sectors Adaptation Mitigation Major Sector Sector % Co-benefits (%) Co-benefits (%) FY17 - Agriculture, FY17 - Forestry 70 0 0 Fishing and Forestry FY17 - Public FY17 - Other Public Administration 30 0 0 Administration Themes Major Theme Theme (Level 2) Theme (Level 3) % FY17 - Climate change FY17 - Mitigation 50 FY17 - Environmental policies and FY17 - Environment and 30 institutions Natural Resource Management FY17 - Biodiversity 5 FY17 - Renewable Natural Resources Asset Management FY17 - Landscape 5 Management FY17 - Land FY17 - Urban and Rural FY17 - Rural Development Administration and 15 Development Management ADM STAFF Role At Approval At ICR Practice Manager Magda Lovei Lia Carol Sieghart Regional Director Chakib Jenane Global Director Paula Caballero Valerie Hickey Practice Group Vice President Juergen Voegele iv The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Country Director Yusupha Crookes Robert R. Taliercio Regional Vice President Makhtar Diop Ousmane Diagana ADM Responsible Team Leader Timothy Brown Justice Odoiquaye Odoi Co-Team Leader(s) Martin Fodor Darshani De Silva ICR Main Contributor Olamide Oluwaseyi Bisi-Amosun v The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL Context 1. At appraisal, Ghana was experiencing slower economic growth, higher inflation, and sharp currency depreciation. Half of Ghana’s population of 26.2 million lived in rural areas where the poverty rate (31 percent) was higher than in urban areas (11 percent). Over 70 percent of Ghanaians depended directly on natural resources for food, water, and energy, and two-thirds of rural dwellers had forest-related livelihoods. Agriculture, dominated by cocoa, was the backbone of the economy, contributing 21.5 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP). Agriculture and forestry together employed about 60 percent of the population (and 53 percent of women) and accounted for over 50 percent of land use. 2. Cocoa was Ghana’s most important agricultural commodity and a key driver of deforestation. Ghana was the world’s second largest exporter of cocoa, generating an annual revenue of about US$2 billion from cocoa sales. While global demand for chocolate was increasing, Ghana’s cocoa production faced economic, environmental, and sustainability challenges. According to the Ghana Sustainable Growth and Development Agenda (GSGDA), 2011–2013, cocoa production volume reduced by 14 percent and value reduced by 2.8 percent in 2012. Key challenges to competitiveness included low yields and returns to farmers; aging cocoa farms; limited access to technology, skills, and modern inputs; declining soil fertility; and environmental degradation. Production was being sustained by area expansion, not efficiency, productivity improvements, or intensification, leading to increased deforestation in the High Forest Zone (HFZ).1 3. The HFZ has Ghana’s highest carbon stocks and is a core cocoa production area. In 2011, the annual deforestation rate in the HFZ was 6 percent, and only 4.6 million ha of Ghana’s forests remained, which was half of the country’s original forest cover. This high deforestation rate was driven mostly by agricultural expansion (particularly cocoa production); timber, fuelwood, and charcoal harvesting; illegal logging, mining, and mineral exploitation; population growth; and development pressures. Forests were also increasingly depleted due to land use change, with the cost of environmental degradation estimated at 10 percent of Ghana’s GDP. The GSGDA identified four key challenges to improved forest and natural resource management (NRM): (a) weak enabling environment and low incentives for better stewardship and investment by local institutions, communities, and farmers; (b) lack of diversified livelihoods for communities as an alternative to forest degrading activities; (c) fragmented incentives for improved livelihoods across multiple layers of institutions and stakeholders; and (d) limited access to climate change financing. 4. The Government of Ghana (GoG) recognized the growing threats of natural resource degradation and climate change. The five-year Natural Resources and Environmental Governance (NREG) program was launched in 2008 to help ensure economic growth, alleviate poverty, increase revenues, and improve environmental protection, while the GSGDA (2011–2013) emphasized improved cross-sectoral environmental management and reduced emission from deforestation and forest degradation, as critical to the country’s climate change agenda. In 2012, the GoG approved a Forest and Wildlife Policy to address deforestation and forest degradation and take advantage of emerging carbon financing opportunities, which also recognized the importance of active community participation, improved land tenure, and equitable benefit sharing for sustainable NRM. The 2013 National Plantations Strategy aimed to improve the complex tree tenure system and the incentives for landowners to maintain trees on farms. 1 The HFZ is one of Ghana’s two main ecological zones characterized by wet and moist evergreen forest, moist and dry semi -deciduous forests, and rich indigenous flora (Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO] of the United Nations, 2022, https://www.fao.org/4/y7210e/y7210e05.htm#bm05). Page 1 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT 5. With the support of the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) and the World Bank, Ghana hoped to achieve Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+).2 In 2014, Ghana’s Emissions Reduction Program Idea Note was accepted into the pipeline of the FCPF Carbon Fund, aiming to reduce emissions from deforestation by 18.5 million metric tons of CO2 (MtCO2e) from 2016 to 2020. The World Bank-supported Natural Resources and Environmental Governance Technical Assistance Project aimed to address policy and institutional weaknesses in the enabling environment for investment and enhance capacity to deliver forest management services. Ghana was working with the European Union (EU) on a Voluntary Partnership Agreement to verify the legality of timber exports to the EU. The GoG also introduced the concept of Community Resource Management Areas (CREMAs)3 to devolve some management rights and responsibilities to the local level, particularly for wildlife management. 6. The Forestry Improvement Program (FIP) was an opportunity to finance Ghana’s efforts to improve forest and landscape management in the HFZ. The FIP was part of the Strategic Climate Fund (SCF) within the Climate Investment Funds (CIF), a global multi-donor trust fund (TF). The Ghana FIP sought to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from deforestation and forest degradation while reducing poverty and conserving biodiversity. Ghana’s FIP Investment Plan, approved by the global FIP governing mechanism in November 2012, identified three interrelated projects (Table 1), and a Dedicated Grant Mechanism (DGM) to promote dialogue and enhance capacity among local communities. Table 1. Ghana FIP Program Ghana FIP Program. Aiming to reduce GHG emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, while reducing poverty and conserving biodiversity Location Forest landscape corridors Agriculture and cocoa landscapes On and off forest reserves Project World Bank: Enhancing Natural Forests African Development Bank (AfDB): International Finance Corporation and Agroforest Landscapes Project Engaging Local Communities in REDD+ (IFC): Project 3 - Building Private (ENFALP) Sector Engagement in REDD+ FIP DGM for local communities. Working with communities, community-based organizations (CBOs), nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and cocoa agents on outreach, access, participation, and equity 7. ENFALP was approved on February 27, 2015, for an SCF grant of US$29.5 million under the Ghana FIP. Consistent with the GoG’s national priorities and the World Bank’s Country Partnership Strategy (CPS, FY13–FY16)4, ENFALP was designed to reduce deforestation and forest degradation in the HFZ by improving policy implementation, management practices, and institutional capacity. It also aimed to pilot improved forest and landscape management through a community-based approach that devolved more rights and responsibilities to communities and farmers. Theory of Change (Results Chain) 8. The Project Appraisal Document (PAD) did not explicitly describe a Theory of Change (ToC). 5 Therefore, a ToC (Figure 1) was created for the Implementation Completion and Results Report (ICR) based on the Project Development Objective (PDO), activities, and outcomes. 2 'REDD' stands for 'Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries. The '+' stands for additional forest- related activities that protect the climate, namely sustainable management of forests and the conservation and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. REDD+ aims to create financial incentives for developing countries to better manage their forest resources, contributing to the global effort to reduce emissions. It goes beyond reducing deforestation and forest degradation and includes conservation, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. 3 CREMA is a decentralized community-based NRM framework in Ghana that enables local people to manage their natural resources — predominantly wildlife, forest habitats, and on-farm trees—for economic and sociocultural benefits. 4 World Bank. 2013. Ghana - Country Partnership Strategy for the Period of FY13–FY16. Report No. 76369-GH. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. 5 ToC in PADs became mandatory in May 2018, three years after the project was approved. Page 2 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Project Development Objective (PDO) 9. At appraisal, the PDO was to improve forest and tree management practices by cocoa farmers, CREMA communities and forest reserve managers to reduce forest loss and degradation in selected landscapes in Ghana's HFZ. The HFZ in the Western and Brong Ahafo regions was selected as it was a core cocoa production area with high carbon stock and accelerating deforestation rates. Beneficiary cocoa farmers and CREMA members were expected to gain access to improved/new skills, opportunities, and markets. Additionally, institutions such as the Forestry Commission (FC) and Ghana Cocoa Board (COCOBOD) were expected to benefit from improved policies, resource management practices, and capacity. Figure 1. ToC Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators 10. The project’s key expected outcomes were improving forest and tree management practices and reducing forest loss and degradation in selected landscapes in Ghana’s HFZ. At approval, the PDO indicators (PDIs) were as follows: • PDI 1: People in forest and adjacent community with monetary/non-monetary benefit from forest (Number), of which female (Number) • PDI 2: Area under improved CREMA management or climate smart cocoa management practices in targeted landscapes due to Project intervention (Hectare (ha)), disaggregated by CREMA management and climate smart cocoa management practices (ha) Page 3 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT • PDI 3: Area of forest in targeted landscapes (ha), disaggregated by closed6 forest and open7 forest • PDI 4: Total greenhouse gas emissions reductions plus enhancement of carbon stocks, estimated in millions tons equivalent CO2e/year, disaggregated by GHG emissions and enhanced carbon stock (Metric ton) • PDI 5: Direct project beneficiaries (Number), of which female (Percentage). Components 11. The project has four components: 12. Component 1. Policy Reforms and Institutional Strengthening (estimated cost: US$3 million; actual cost: US$5 million) was designed to advance policy implementation, improve enabling environment, and strengthen institutions for sustainable landscape and forest management. The component supported (a) analysis and review of policies; (b) institutional procedures, guidelines, and models to improve policy implementation; and (c) expansion of consultation and multi-stakeholder governance platforms initiated under NREG and FCPF at both the national and local levels. 13. Component 2. Pilot Investments for Improved Forest and Landscape Management with Communities (estimated cost: US$22.94 million; actual cost: US$38.40 million) aimed to demonstrate improved forest and landscape management practices on farms and forest reserves required to restore and protect forest cover and reduce deforestation. The component has two subcomponents: 14. Subcomponent 2.1. Enhancing Trees and Climate-Smart Practices in Agroforestry Corridors and Cocoa Landscapes on Farms with Communities supported three main activities: (a) securing and enhancing trees in key landscapes/corridors with communities, (b) enhancing trees and smart cocoa practices in admitted farms within forest reserves, and (c) supporting integrated landscape-level planning in support of community-based resource use decisions. The subcomponent also financed trainings in extension services for Forestry Services Division (FSD) and trainings on fire prevention and fire suppression strategies for farmers and CBOs. 15. Subcomponent 2.2. Pilot Investments on Forest Reserves for Reducing Degradation, Enrichment Planting, Nurseries, and Plantation Development for Restoring Degraded Forest Landscapes financed (a) reducing degradation of permanent forest estates by engagement with admitted farms and CBOs; (b) enhancing carbon stocks through facilitation of plantation investment in severely degraded landscapes; and (c) enrichment planting, nurseries, and native species for restoring degraded forest and agricultural landscapes. It also supported the procedures and land use demarcation for small and large plantation investments. 16. Component 3. Innovation, Capacity Building, and Communications (estimated cost: US$2.8 million; actual cost: US$3.8 million) was designed to finance communication and capacity-building activities that support innovative landscape management practices including research; information campaigns; field demonstrations; and consolidation of economic, environmental, and social assessments to improve acceptability and uptake of successful agroforestry practices in the project landscape. It also supported monitoring and reporting activities necessary for recording project data in the national monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) system. 17. Component 4. Project Management, Monitoring and Coordination (estimated cost: US$3.77 million; actual cost: US$4.8 million) supported project management activities such as financial management (FM), procurement, contract 6 Ghana defines closed forest as an area of land greater than or equal to 1 ha with a minimum tree height of 5 m at maturity and a canopy cover exceeding 60 percent. 7 Ghana defines open forest as an area of land greater than or equal to 1 ha with a minimum tree height of 5 m at maturity and a canopy cover between 15 percent and 60 percent. Page 4 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT management, operating costs, and equipment and supplies. It also supported the establishment of a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system including reporting at the international level and coordination among FIP-financed interventions and related activities to promote synergies among all FIP projects (World Bank, AfDB, IFC, and DGM). B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION (IF APPLICABLE) 18. The project underwent three Level 2 restructurings and obtained US$19.39 million of additional financing (AF). In May 2019, the World Bank Board approved an AF of US$7 million as concessional loan and US$12.39 million as an SCF grant and extended the project closing date to June 30, 2023. The first Level 2 restructuring in February 2022 amended the Grant Agreements for TFs TF018842 and TF0A9512, the second in February 2023 extended the closing date to June 14, 2024, and the third in June 2023 changed the US$7 million credit from a loan to managed funds. Revised PDOs and Outcome Targets 19. The PDO and outcome targets were revised during the 2019 restructuring. The revised PDO—to improve forest and tree management practices by cocoa farmers, CREMA communities and forest reserve managers to reduce forest loss and degradation and demonstrate rehabilitation of mined-out sites in selected landscapes in Ghana's High Forest Zone (HFZ)—was changed to reflect newly added rehabilitation activities addressing the impact of illegal artisanal small-scale gold mining (ASGM) on forests and natural landscapes. Outcome targets for all PDIs were also revised (annex 7). Revised PDO Indicators 20. A new PDI ‘Number of mining sites that have been rehabilitated (number)’ was included in the Results Framework (RF) during the 2019 AF to reflect and monitor the new activity of ‘rehabilitation of mined-out sites’. In June 2022, the end target for the sub-indicator ‘enhancement of carbon stock – closed forest’ under PDI 4 was revised to 0, as it had become redundant after a GoG carbon assessment revealed that closed forests inherently have higher carbon storage capacity due to their mature and dense canopy and require little/no intervention to enhance their carbon stock. All intermediate results (IR) indicators were increased except the number of community-based NRM institutions provided with access to improved management practices for sustainable landscape management (annex 7). Revised Components 21. All restructurings maintained the project’s four components, but the activities were adjusted during the AF as follows. 22. Component 1 was expanded to cover mined-out site rehabilitation. It (a) supported additional analytical and policy studies to assess the magnitude and geographic spread of ASGM impacts on forests and to draw lessons from previous and existing activities/strategies; (b) expanded support for strengthening institutional coordination across national, regional, and local government agencies; and (c) added the Minerals Commission (MinCom) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the Project Implementing Unit given their key role in the restoration of mined areas. 23. Component 2 was revised to include three additional subcomponents: (a) Pilot demonstration of clean-up and reclamation practices with alternative livelihood support after forest and land degradation and loss due to ASGM, to support (i) Larger GoG initiatives to control and manage ASGM by developing successful and replicable models for the rehabilitation of mined-out areas; Page 5 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT (ii) Demonstrations of appropriate technical approaches, sampling and analysis, cleanup/reclamation, and restoration of vegetation to selected illegally mined-out areas in four forest districts; and (iii) Community consultations and alternative livelihoods to complement rehabilitation efforts (b) Pilot for incentivizing investment and local level job creation in timber plantations, to (i) Provide financial support for tree planting by small- and medium-scale plantation enterprises (SMPEs); (ii) Support SMPEs to develop loan applications and build a relationship with financial institutions (FIs) for long-term financial access; and (iii) Provide employment benefits to community members for site preparation, nursery establishment, tree planting, and plantation maintenance (c) Field activity and technical assistance, to finance technical assistance, and professional monitoring and follow-up to ensure that investments, FM, and plantation maintenance stayed on track. 24. Components 3 and 4 were expanded to support communication, outreach activities, project monitoring, and coordination activities related to mine site rehabilitation. These include (a) awareness campaigns on good environment practices in ASGM and mine site rehabilitation; (b) trainings for mine owners and workers, traditional authorities, and local communities on health and environmental impacts of ASGM; and (c) the addition of key agencies such as the Ministry of Chieftaincy and Traditional Affairs to the Ghana FIP Steering Committee. Other Changes 25. Amendment of grant agreements. The Project Management Unit (PMU) flagged a slight overdraft in one of the original project's disbursement categories; therefore, the grant agreements for TF018842 and TF019512 were modified in February 2022 to consolidate the four original disbursement categories (1, 2, 3, and 4) into one. This amendment was to prevent another overdraft and ensure that these grants were fully utilized for the orderly completion of all planned project activities.8 26. Change of loan administration modality for private plantation establishment. At the GoG’s request, the World Bank provided no-objections in June 2023 for the GoG to administer the US$7 million credit for private plantation development (under Component 2) as managed funds instead of a loan. The credit was supposed to be administered as a loan to a local FI for an on-lending facility for private plantation owners. The Agricultural Development Bank (ADB) was competitively selected to administer the loan, but it withdrew after signing a loan agreement with the Ministry of Finance (MoF). This was due to the impact of the GoG’s Domestic Debt Exchange Program (DDEP) 9 on ADB’s liquidity and profitability, compelling a review of activities—including the project’s lending facility—affecting its capital requirement. 27. Closing date extensions. The project closing date was revised from June 30, 2020, to June 30, 2023, as part of the AF in May 2019. In February 2023, the closing date was extended to June 14, 2024. 8 According to the 2022 Restructuring Paper, Report No: RES41469. 9 The GoG launched its DDEP in December 2022 to restructure the country’s domestic debt by exchanging existing high-coupon bonds for new bonds with lower coupon rates and longer tenors. This voluntary exchange resulted in a loss of value for existing bondholders, especially local commercial banks such as ADB, which held one-third of Ghana’s domestic debt. This sudden loss of value rendered some local banks technically insolvent, requiring additional capital from shareholders and/or donors (Source: The Business & Financial Times, November 22, 2023, https://thebftonline.com/2023/11/22/ghanas-original-ddep-and-revised-ddep-banking-sector-impact-2022-2023-an-autopsy/). Page 6 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Rationale for Changes and Their Implication on the Original Theory of Change 28. The 2019 AF was sought to reduce degradation and deforestation due to ASGM in the HFZ and to enhance private investment in forest plantations.10 The AF was timely as the GoG was accelerating efforts to address the negative impacts of illegal ASGM and to promote sustainable rural jobs.11 But it was quite small and could only pilot approaches to reclaim mining sites and establish plantations. The 2019 restructuring also increased the project’s ambition because four out of five PDIs were achieved or exceeded by Midterm Review (MTR). 29. The change in loan administration to managed funds rather than rebidding for a new FI was to avoid delays of another round of statutory clearances (unlikely to happen within the project period) and the possibility of other FIs in the country having the same challenge as the ADB due to the debt exchange program (2023 Restructuring Paper). 30. The extension of the closing date in 2019 and 2023 was to achieve the PDO satisfactorily and to complete all planned activities, particularly the piloting of reclamation of mined-out sites and private plantation establishments. II. OUTCOME 31. A split rating was not applied, despite the PDO revision as part of the AF, because the project’s scope expanded. Thus, the outcome is assessed based on the more ambitious revised targets after the AF. A. RELEVANCE OF PDO Assessment of Relevance of PDOs and Rating 32. The relevance of the PDOs is rated High. The project objectives were highly relevant at project approval, during implementation, and at closure. ENFALP was fully aligned with the CPS for FY13–FY16,12 which aimed to support Ghana’s transition to middle-income status by sustaining economic growth, accelerating poverty reduction, and enhancing shared prosperity sustainably. Under its Pillar 1 (Improving Economic Institutions), the CPS listed natural resource governance (NRG) as a key priority for economic growth and poverty reduction. It emphasized the importance of removing obstacles to private sector engagement and community participation in forest management to reversing the alarming decline in Ghana’s forests, harnessing their potential to diversify GDP, generating jobs, and providing global and local public goods. 33. The PDOs were also consistent with the Country Partnership Framework (CPF) for Ghana for FY22 –FY2613, and Country Climate Development Report (CCDR). The CPF adopts a greener, resilient, and inclusive development approach and aimed to promote green growth through investments in solutions that sustain natural capital and do not undermine future growth. The CPF Pillar 3 (Promoting Resilient and Sustainable Development) emphasizes integrated and cross- sectoral approaches to NRM through the restoration of degraded forests and landscapes (including from illegal small-scale mining), as well as reducing deforestation and biodiversity conservation. The project contributes to the CPF objective indicator ‘land area under sustainable landscape management practices’ and supports the CCDR’s Priority Area 4 ‘Realize new opportunities for carbon sinks in the forestry sector’, specifically to operationalize Ghana’s ambition of zero 10 Ghana’s FIP Investment Plan allocated a US$7 million concessional loan and US$3 million grant to IFC for private timber sector engagement in REDD+. US$250,000 of the grant was used as a project preparation grant (PPG), including US$114,850 for an assessment of the role of the private sector in Ghana’s FIP Investment Plan. But as IFC could not identify suitable borrowing clients for the remaining funds nearly 18 months after approval (despite due diligence), the GoG reallocated the loan in 2017 to the World Bank as part of the AF to pilot timber plantation investments. 11 According to the 2019 Project Paper, Report No. PAD2662. 12 World Bank. 2013. Ghana - Country Partnership Strategy for the Period of FY13–FY16. Report No. 76369-GH. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. 13 World Bank. 2022. Ghana - Country Partnership Framework for the Period of FY22–FY26. Report No. 157249-GH. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Page 7 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT deforestation by 2030. The PDOs also align with the Global Challenge Program on Forests for Development, Climate and Biodiversity, which aims to develop integrated and inclusive approaches to forest management and investments.14 34. The PDOs are highly relevant to Ghana’s development priorities and climate commitments. Ghana’s deforestation rates are among the highest in Africa, with land use change from forest to agriculture causing 92 percent of deforestation.15 The destruction of Ghana’s forests due to legal and illegal ASGM is also increasing and widespread.16 To combat this, Ghana’s Medium-Term National Development Policy Framework (2022–2025) outlines interventions such as restoring degraded forests and establishing forest plantations. These efforts align with the project’s objectives to support forest and land restoration, reduce GHG emissions, and promote improved forest practices. Additionally, these objectives are in line with Ghana’s REDD+ Strategy (2016–2035), which aims to significantly reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and enhance carbon stock through sustainable forest management and forest restoration strategies. The PDOs also contribute to the Nationally Determined Contributions (2020–2030), which target an unconditional emissions reduction (ER) of 24.6 million metric tons of CO2 (MtCO2e). B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome 35. The project’s efficacy is assessed based on the achievement of each of its three objectives: (a) to improve forest management practices by cocoa farmers, CREMA communities, and forest reserve managers; (b) to reduce forest loss and degradation; and (c) to demonstrate the rehabilitation of mined-out sites in selected landscapes in Ghana’s HFZ. Objective 1: Improve forest and tree management practices by cocoa farmers, CREMA communities and forest reserve managers in selected landscapes 36. The achievement of this objective is rated Substantial as the project improved forest and tree management practices in targeted landscapes and fully achieved all PDIs related to this objective. The project provided monetary and nonmonetary benefits to 106,029 people in forest and adjacent communities, over half of which were women, and directly benefitted 13,186 people, of which 53 percent were females exceeding its target of 12,501 direct beneficiaries. Monetary benefits include incomes from farming, alternative livelihoods, and labor wages.17 Additionally, the project interventions brought 80,661 ha of land area under improved CREMA management or climate-smart cocoa practices, of which 43,613 ha are under climate-smart cocoa management practices surpassing the end target by 9 percent. 37. These outcomes were supported by the achievement or overachievement of all IR indicators related to the objective. The project achieved its targets related to policy reforms and institutional strengthening by providing technical 14 World Bank. 2024. Global Challenge Program: Forests for Development, Climate and Biodiversity - Approach Paper (English). Washington, DC: World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099259010042437278/SECBOS199b2d350fb1aec514a9fd51eab44. 15 Carrera, Lorenzo, Aurelien Kruse, Neeta Hooda, Sally Beth Murray, and Ayse Ozgul Calicioglu Sengul. 2022. Ghana Country Climate and Development Report. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. https://documentsinternal.worldbank.org/search/33926968. 16 In October 2024, there were demonstrations across Ghana against illegal mining due to its negative impacts on waterbodies and forests, as reported by local (MyJoyOnline, https://www.myjoyonline.com/anti-galamsey-protest-work-together-to-address-illegal-mining-un-urges- ghana/#google_vignette, and GBC Ghana Online, https://www.gbcghanaonline.com/general/galamsey-11/2024/) and international media (National Broadcasting Company News, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/sickness-pollution-money-anger-mounts-ghanas-illegal-gold- mines-rcna174636, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/hundreds-march-against-ghanas-damaging-informal-gold-mining-boom-2024- 10-11/, and British Broadcasting Corporation https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn9dn8xq92jo). 17 The FC hired community members as work gangs for afforestation and reforestation activities within forest reserves. Page 8 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT and financial support for the multi-stakeholder consultations and drafting of legal documents for reforms in forest legislation including the following: (a) Wildlife Resource Management Act 111518 (approved by Parliament in March 2024), which aims to promote sustainable wildlife management, conservation, and community involvement in protecting Ghana’s biodiversity by consolidating existing laws and policies relating to wildlife and protected areas and devolving the rights and responsibilities of wildlife management to communities, through the creation of CREMAs. (b) Tree tenure and benefit-sharing regime that gives ownership rights of trees planted on farms to farmers thereby allowing them to be compensated for crop damage during timber harvest on farms. The project piloted a registration software for verification of trees on farms and supported the development of a compensation formula that has been agreed upon by the FC, farmers, and timber companies in the project area. (c) Guidelines for the implementation and dissemination of the Domestic Wood Supply Policy, which mandates the use of legal timber in all government projects and was incorporated into Ghana’s national standard tender document for public procurement. (d) Institutional framework and guidelines for rehabilitation of mined-out sites that set out clear roles and responsibilities of all relevant stakeholders as well as methodologies and approaches for rehabilitation. 38. The implementation of these policy reforms improved the practices of three main groups: (a) cocoa farmers, (b) CREMA communities, and (c) forest reserve managers. 39. Cocoa farmers. The project provided 5,422 cocoa farmers with capacity-building support to improve their management practices for tree planting or nurseries (IR 2.2), surpassing the revised target of 3,500 by 55 percent. Key activities include provision of agricultural inputs, tree seedlings, and extension services, as well as trainings on good agricultural Box 1. Farmer Testimonial practices (GAP) and agribusiness. Before ENFALP, full-sun cocoa Extension officers came to show how I can plant production was the most predominant in Ghana; however, the trees on the cocoa farm so that the farm can last project’s pilot investments resulted in the adoption of cocoa longer and prevent the sun from damaging the agroforestry, a farming system that allows the incorporation of cocoa. They also brought male and female officers trees on cocoa farms in targeted landscapes. Cocoa agroforestry who prune the trees to have an increased yield. Now has been determined to be more productive (in the long term), I harvest in abundance and have no problems. climate resilient, and environmentally beneficial than full-sun cocoa Because I didn’t know anything about cocoa, I production in Ghana.19 Farmers in the project landscape have also operated my farm anyhow and the yields were low, reported an increase in yields from cocoa agroforestry (Box 1).20 you could not get 6 or 10 bags on 1 acre of farm. But The project also supported COCOBOD in facilitating a climate-smart Ghana FIP has assisted us to now have bumper cocoa certification scheme between cocoa farmers and licensed harvests, and we feel proud and happy on our farms. – Nana Adu Tutu (2018) buying companies resulting in successful completion of the climate- smart cocoa production certification process. These project interventions provided positive incentives for beneficiary farmers to improve tree management practices. 18 Republic of Ghana. Wildlife Resources Management Act, 2023 (Act 1115). 19 Abdulai, I., P. Vaast, M. P. Hoffmann, R. Asare, L. Jassogne, P. V. Van Asten, R. Rötter, and S. Graefe. 2018. “Cocoa Agroforestry Is Less Resilient to Sub‐Optimal and Extreme Climate than Cocoa in Full Sun.” Global Change Biology 24 (1): 273–286; Olwig, M. F., R. Asare, P. Vaast, and A. S. Bosselmann. 2024. “Can Agroforestry Provide a Future for Cocoa? Implications for Policy and Practice.” In Agroforestry as Climate Change Adaptation, edited by M. F. Olwig, A. S. Bosselmann, and K. Owusu. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45635-0_6. 20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nzlLlsUv-k. See annex 6 for documentaries including testimonials of farmers in the project landscape. Page 9 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT 40. CREMA communities. Five community-based NRM institutions (that is, CREMAs) were provided with access to improved management practices for sustainable landscape management (IR 2.1). The project supported these five CREMAs with the establishment of governance structures; biodiversity conservation education; small-scale social infrastructure such as boreholes and community centers; and alternative livelihoods such as beekeeping, snail farming, nursery establishment, and soap making. The project support resulted in 80,661 ha of new areas outside of protected areas being managed as biodiversity friendly (IR 2.5), slightly exceeding the end target of 80,000 ha. The project also trained 5,422 forest users (IR 3.1) on GAP and tree management practices including fire prevention and suppression, surpassing the end target of 4,500. Additionally, the project increased nonmonetary benefits from forests, for example, access to drinking water and the restoration of sites of cultural/religious significance. The project’s inv estments relating to policy review and reforms resulted in the enactment of the Wildlife Resource Management Bill in 2024, which provides legal backing for CREMAs to manage their natural resources including forests and wildlife. 41. Forest reserve managers. The project financed skill enhancement and logistical support to enhance the capacity of forest managers for effectively translating forest policies and delivering service on the ground. It also improved the knowledge of forest district officers on rehabilitation of degraded forests including mined-out areas. The project trained 475 staff of the FC, exceeding its target of 300. The improved forest management practices by forest reserve managers, who oversaw the field implementation of project activities on and off forest reserves, contributed to the achievement of several PDO and IR indicators. The number of project beneficiaries satisfied with service delivery by the FC staff or benefits received under the project (IR 2.4) was 6,850, surpassing the target of 6,500. Objective 2: Reduce forest loss and degradation in targeted landscapes of Ghana’s High Forest Zone 42. The achievement of this objective is rated Modest due to ill-defined indicators and attribution issues. The two PDIs for the objective were fully achieved except one sub-indicator. The project reported an increase in forest area (closed and open) in targeted landscapes from 303,885 ha to 458,387 ha at the end of the project, surpassing the target of 417,518 ha by 10 percent. The total GHG ER including carbon stock enhancement target of 4.6 MtCO2e was also exceeded by 336 percent; however, a sub-indicator under this PDI ‘including enhancement of carbon stock – open forest’ fell short by 8 percent.21 These outcomes are also supported by the overachievement of the IR indicator ‘area restored or reforested’ with the project surpassing its target of 17,100 ha by 3 percent. Further, the project interventions incentivized cocoa farmers and CREMA communities to improve their tree management practices thereby reducing encroachment of forests. The project also contributed to reduced forest loss and degradation by providing logistical support including vehicles and motorbikes to improve the monitoring of illegal activities in forest reserves. 43. The ICR commissioned an independent assessment22 to validate these two PDIs due to the significant difference between the project-reported results and global/national data sets on Ghana’s forests. The project recorded a 50 percent increase in forest cover in targeted landscapes, conflicting with global reports on deforestation trends in the country, which showed a −0.1 percent to 5 percent change in forest cover. The assessment shows an increase in the forest area from 689,116 ha at appraisal to 697,585 ha at project closing, indicating a 1.2 percent increase (specifically 3 percent increase in closed forest and 0.1 percent decrease in open forest) in the project districts.23 Assuming the project’s baseline 21 The partial achievement can be attributed to the shift in land-use cover from open to closed forests and the replacement of images with heavy cloud cover and haze in the Western Region with clearer images to ensure accurate results and better estimation of area change and emissions reductions. 22 See annex 8 for an independent assessment of PDIs 3 and 4 based on publicly available data conducted by the World Bank’s Knowledge, Information & Data Services (KIDS). 23 The GoG was unable to provide sufficient geospatial data on project areas; therefore, the assessment used the 13 districts within which ENFALP implemented afforestation, reforestation, and climate-smart cocoa production activities as a proxy for the project area. However, geospatial data provided by the GoG on the project landscapes show a 1.3 percent increase in the forest area from 3,064,997 ha to 3,105,440 ha (5 percent and −0.1 percent change in closed and open forest, respectively). Page 10 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT of 303,885 ha was accurate, the total forest area at closing should be about 309,006 ha.24 The assessment also estimates a total of 3.5 MTCO2e of ER plus enhanced carbon stock between 2014 and 2021, using the same methodology as the project (Table 2).25 However, the FAO Ex-Ante Carbon-balance Tool (EX-ACT) methodology shows lower ER of 1,118,301 tCO2e, and the World Bank shadow price of carbon methodology shows carbon stock of 1,093,040 tons of carbon resulting in a total of GHG ER plus carbon stock enhancement of 2,211,341 tCO2e. The significant difference between the project- reported and independently validated results indicates an overestimation of the RF targets for PDIs 3 and 4. At appraisal, the deforestation rate in Ghana’s HFZ was 6 percent,26 with the project expecting a lesser decrease in the forest cover than the without-project scenario. Ghana’s Emissions Reduction Program, which covers all 5.9 million ha of the HFZ, aims to produce 10 MTCO2e of ER over five years. Thus, setting targets of a 37 percent increase in forest cover and 4.6 MTCO2e in GHG ER plus carbon stock enhancement for ENFALP was overly ambitious and inconsistent with the project’s assumptions. Consequently, the achievement of this objective is considered modest due to ill-defined targets, limited attribution, and overestimation of results, despite an independent assessment showing increased forest cover and reduced GHG emissions. Table 2. Project-Reported versus Independently Estimated Targets for Reduced Forest Loss and Degradation Project-Reported Independent Assessment Achieved at Achieved at Baseline % Increase Baseline % Increase Completion Completion PDI 3: Forest Cover (ha) 303,885 458,387.60 50 689,116 697,585 1.2 PDI 4: Total GHG emission reductions plus 0 20,197,996.00 — 0 3,453,933 — carbon stock enhancement (tCO2e/year) Objective 3: Demonstrate rehabilitation of mined-out sites in selected landscapes in Ghana's High Forest Zone 44. The achievement of this objective is rated Substantial as the project achieved its PDI target of rehabilitating five mining sites. The project supported mapping and characterization of mining degradation in forest reserves, assessments of cleanup approaches and techniques, stakeholder engagement, and awareness campaigns on good mining practices as well as rehabilitation activities including topographic surveys, filling of open pits, reshaping of river/stream course, and restoration of biodiversity through planting of native tree species. These activities led to the successful rehabilitation of five mined-out sites totaling 120 ha across two forest reserves with 70% tree survival rates at project completion.27 The project’s rehabilitation activities provided important lessons on costs, approaches, and methods of rehabilitation to guide replication by other initiatives in Ghana including the World Bank-financed Ghana Landscape Restoration and Small-Scale Mining Project (GLRSSMP, P171933). However, the costs of rehabilitation activities were highly underestimated.28 Justification of Overall Efficacy Rating 45. Overall efficacy is rated Substantial, as the project achieved or surpassed the targets of most of its PDIs. The rating considers that the project improved the forest and tree management practices by cocoa farmers, CREMA communities, and forest reserve managers and successfully demonstrated how to rehabilitate mined-out sites. However, an independent assessment of the project-reported results showed that the project was overly ambitious and overestimated the achievement of two PDIs related to reduced forest loss and degradation. Although forest loss and 24 See Table 4.1, Table 4.5, and Table 4.6 in annex 4. 25 GHG ER of 2.19 MtCO2e and 1.27 million tons of carbon stock. See annex 8 for the detailed methodology. 26 ENFALP PAD: Report No: PAD1008 (page 95). 27 See annex 6 for photos of mined-out site before and after the project intervention. 28 According to the AF Project Paper (PAD2662), an assessment conducted during the AF preparation estimated the rehabilitation cost as US$6,450 per ha. But the actual cost ended up being US$46,450 per ha. Page 11 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT degradation did decrease in the project districts and targeted landscapes, it was not to the extent of intended targets. Additionally, the ICR could not assess the outcome of the private plantation scheme because the selected SMPEs did not receive their loans until May 2024, a month before the project closed.29 C. EFFICIENCY 46. Efficiency is assessed based on standard economic criteria and qualitative factors. The former include net present value (NPV) of incremental benefits with and without the project, while the latter include aspects of design and implementation and COVID-19-related disruptions. 47. The Economic and Financial Analysis (EFA) justifies the project investment. The ICR EFA replicated the methods used to calculate incremental benefits in the appraisal EFA but with actual data instead of assumptions (annex 4). Noting that benefits would include enhanced biodiversity, employment and earnings in beneficiary communities, higher social capital (including for women), less waste on bureaucratic procedures, and more forest investments, the appraisal EFA only estimated benefits from reductions in emissions from closed and open forests on and off reserves due to a reduction in the annual deforestation rate from 1.3 percent to 1 percent and increases in farmer incomes from improved cocoa productivity and Modified Taungya System (MTS) interventions.30 Based on the project data, the NPV of actual incremental net incomes from the two benefits estimated at appraisal is US$453 million, with an internal rate of return (IRR) of 14 percent and benefit-cost ratio (BCR) of 21, using the same assumptions as appraisal EFA (discount rate of 7 percent, 30 years post-project benefits)—thus justifying the total project costs of US$48.53 million (including the AF). Revised calculations based on independent assessment 31 of these data yielded a lower NPV of non-carbon benefits alone of US$35.72 million with an IRR of 13 percent and BCR of 2.06, showing that the project is economically viable (assuming that the project assets are maintained over time). That conclusion holds even if future benefits are reduced by 20 percent, annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs are added (at 10 percent of the total project cost) in future, and the discount rate is doubled to 15 percent. Table 3. Summary of Ex Ante Cost-Benefit Analysis 20% Less 10% CAPEX Scenario All Benefits with Carbon All Benefits without Carbon Future Benefits as Future O&M Discount Rate (%) 7 7 7 10 15 7 10 15 NPV (US$, millions) 405.11 420.22 452.98 239.91 111.97 35.27 11.90 3.52 IRR (%) 37 37 38 37 38 13 13 13 BCR 13.18 7.36 14.62 5.98 5.84 2.06 1.41 1.13 48. Aspects of design and implementation. The GoG spent the first 18 months setting up systems for implementation, coordination, monitoring, and evaluation while addressing procurement challenges. Subsequent delays, mainly due to weak institutional capacity to implement a multisectoral project such as ENFALP, only reduced after increased supervision and training by the World Bank. By the MTR, the project had met or exceeded targets for four out of five PDIs, prompting a restructuring to increase funding, as well as PDO targets, and project outcomes. But AF activities were delayed due to (a) a gap of 9 months between approval and effectiveness of the AF (compared to 3 months for the parent project); (b) the long time taken by the MoF and Parliament to approve loan disbursement to private plantation owners; (c) the impact 29 See footnote 9 on page 7. 30 The EFA done during the 2019 AF only presented a qualitative analysis of the benefits of the rehabilitation and reclamation of mined-out sites, noting that the timber plantation investments would give incremental benefits in the long term of 10–20 years justifying the incremental cost. 31 The reported change in the forest area and ER do not stand up to scrutiny; therefore, a Forest Analytics Assessment of the project was independently commissioned from the World Bank’s KIDS, which showed that forest cover decreased (details in annex 8). Page 12 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT of the DDEP on the selected FI’s liquidity; and (d) the COVID-19 pandemic disruption of key activities (for example, policy reform consultations, model nursery construction, rehabilitation of mined-out sites, and loans for SMPEs). 49. Project efficiency was also affected by other factors. The high turnover of the FC and COCOBOD officers (due to civil service requirements disrupting field activities and necessitating additional training resources) and rigid fiduciary controls (for example, the lack of thresholds for low-value and high-value procurements) also increased the PMU’s administrative burden and caused implementation delays. Additionally, the project grossly underestimated the costs of rehabilitating mined-out areas at the AF preparation,32 causing the land area of each to be reduced even though the project achieved its target of five sites. Post-COVID price escalations forced the project to downsize construction plans for a model nursery, which would require additional investments to make it fully functional. ENFALP also overdrew one disbursement category, leading to the 2022 restructuring to consolidate four disbursement categories into one, to improve efficiency. Despite delays, mostly beyond the project’s control, the project achieved most of its objectives with closing date extension of 11.5 months and ended without a cost overrun. Assessment of Efficiency and Rating 50. The project’s efficiency is rated Substantial, based on the EFA findings at closing, the achievement of most PDIs, and the project ending without cost overrun, demonstrating the project’s ability to effectively convert resources into results despite implementation challenges. D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING 51. The overall outcome is rated Moderately Satisfactory due to the project’s high relevance at closing, substantial achievement of its objectives, and substantial efficiency. The project successfully achieved most of its objectives of improving forest and tree management practices, reducing forest loss and degradation, and demonstrating the rehabilitation of mined-out areas, despite implementation challenges. E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS (IF ANY) Gender 52. The project had a strong gender focus. Project design and implementation carefully considered the role of women in managing forests, trees, and agricultural landscapes and ensured women benefitted from trainings, input and extension services, and alternative livelihood. ENFALP exceeded all its gender targets: (a) women were 53 percent of direct beneficiaries (against a target of 49 percent); (b) capacity-building targets were surpassed—for female farmers (by 48 percent), for female forest users (by 16 percent), and for government officials/extension agents (by 21 percent); and (c) women’s inclusion in natural resources decision-making was enhanced through representation in CREMA governance. Institutional Strengthening 53. Weak institutional coordination was a significant challenge in Ghana’s forestry sector at project preparation. ENFALP enhanced capacities of government institutions and officials for sustainable forest management through (a) integrating project implementation (for example, procurement, FM, and environmental and social safeguards) into existing institutional and administrative frameworks; (b) building capacities of 45 government institutions and 805 government officials, extension agents, and service providers (exceeding the target by 46 percent); and (c) providing 32 Rehabilitation cost estimated as US$6,450 per ha according to the AF Project Paper (PAD2662) ended up being US$46,450 per ha. Page 13 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT capacity building and infrastructure (for example, vehicles, computers) to the FC and COCOBOD staff to facilitate extension services and monitoring, with around 7,000 beneficiaries reporting satisfaction with the service delivery or benefits. 54. The project strengthened coordination between the FC and COCOBOD at both the national and subnational levels. It provided an opportunity for these two institutions to take an integrated and collaborative approach to forest and landscape management and to share responsibilities in tackling common challenges to improve the lives of farmers and communities. Project activities such as joint extension visits and outreach campaigns (via radio) contributed to unprecedented and transformational changes in norms and practices of both institutions that later became standard practice across several GoG initiatives, including World Bank-financed projects such as the GLRSSMP (P171933), the Ghana Tree Crop Diversification Project (P180060), and the Ghana Emissions Reductions Program (GERP, P160339). GERP also adopted several environmental and social safeguards instruments developed for ENFALP, reducing costs and improving efficiency. Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity 55. The project was designed to contribute positively to poverty reduction and shared prosperity in Ghana’s HFZ. About 106,000 people living in and around HFZ derived monetary and nonmonetary benefits from forests through several project interventions including inputs and extension services to cocoa farmers, alternative livelihoods to local communities, and loans to SMPEs. The beneficiary survey findings show that beneficiary households reported a positive impact of the project on their income from cocoa farming and alternative livelihood enterprises. Additionally, ENFALP was one of the key investments that Ghana used to address major barriers to REDD+, specifically rollout of climate-smart cocoa practices, CREMA establishment, and tree tenure reform, 33 making it an integral part of the country’s strategy for unlocking ER payments. The project contributed to the enhancement of carbon stock in forest landscapes that are part of the Ghana Emissions Reduction Program’s accounting area.34 It was implemented in the Western and Brong Ahafo regions, which are two of the five regions covered by the Ghana Emissions Reduction Program. As of June 2024, Ghana has received US$20,458,085 in ER payments, with 69 percent allocated to farmers and CREMA communities as performance-based incentives35 for planting and managing trees on farms and avoiding forest encroachment. III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION 56. Realistic objectives and sound design. It would have been too ambitious for one project in a short time frame to simultaneously harmonize policies and financing across the interrelated sectors of forests, cocoa production, and land use. Therefore, Ghana designed its FIP to catalyze changes in its forest landscapes through three complementary projects, two focused on agricultural landscapes and private sector engagement (Table 1), and the third, ENFALP, aimed at reducing forest loss and degradation. ENFALP focused on improving practices of the three main stakeholders and policy reforms to legitimize community rights over forest and wildlife resources and enhance institutional practices for forest and landscape management. With limited resources, ENFALP had clearly structured components and a logical rationale and piloted improved forest and landscape management models to promote wider replication. ENFALP’s objectives and design 33 The Ghana Emission Reductions Program Document, https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/system/files/documents/GCFRP_Carbon Fund_Final Draft_April 22 2017-formatted.pdf, published by the FCPF in May 2017 assessed Ghana’s progress in overcoming barriers to REDD+ as part of its readiness to achieve verifiable ER and access results-based payments. 34 ER Agreement PAD, Report No: 137297-GH dated June 6, 2019. 35 Incentives for farmers include farm inputs and equipment while communities can only use ER payments for eligible development projects such as boreholes, solar lighting, school, or health facilities (Source: Ghana ER Benefit Sharing Plan). Page 14 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT (particularly pilots) were realistic, given this context, as reversing deforestation would require sustained government commitment and investments across multiple sectors and landscapes over a long period. 57. Community-based NRM. The Ghana REDD+ strategy emphasized including local communities in transparent benefit-sharing and decision-making processes to reduce pressure on forests and ensure sustainable forest investments. The CREMA model36 was central to ENFALP design, devolving management and benefit rights to communities through an established legal and administrative structure. ENFALP supported the GoG to expand the CREMA model to include management rights for forests and trees in landscapes through policy reform, establishment of governance structures and investments in local communities. The CREMA model coupled with tree tenure and benefit-sharing reforms (see paragraph 40) resulted in strong involvement and uptake of improved tree management practices by beneficiary communities which was crucial to achieving project objectives, particularly increasing forest cover. ENFALP also positioned CREMA communities to benefit from ER payments. 58. Institutional arrangements. The project’s institutional arrangements were comprehensive and considered lessons from development investments in Ghana. These investments highlighted the importance of embedding project implementation within existing institutional and administrative structures. This approach was favored because establishing project-based structures and hiring external consultants had proven ineffective in building capacity and influencing institutional change. While this approach was advantageous for long-term capacity building and institutional strengthening, it took approximately 18 months for the government team to establish the necessary systems and processes for project implementation, posing a risk to the achievement of the PDO. However, with continuous training and supervision by the World Bank, implementation pace eventually increased. 59. Adequacy of risks and mitigation measures. The project assessed institutional capacity for implementation and sustainability as Moderate, which was underestimated. It took 1.5 years for the GoG to establish effective implementation processes and kickstart implementation on the ground, despite having a PPG, due to weak institutional capacity.37 An implementation readiness assessment could have identified key capacity gaps and appropriate mitigation measures early on. The PPG could have probably financed training and technical activities to build requisite capacity for implementation. Nevertheless, the World Bank team addressed these gaps through training and proactive supervision, including regular virtual and in-person meetings38 with the PMU, until progress improved. The risk of institutional capacity implementation and sustainability was also revised to Substantial during the AF. B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION 60. The project faced several challenges, but the Government’s adaptive decision-making and the World Bank's proactive support enabled the project to conclude satisfactorily, achieving or exceeding all its objectives. The key challenges during implementation included weak capacity for implementation and fiduciary management, lengthy statutory processes, expansion of illegal mining, a global pandemic, and macroeconomic issues such as high inflation and currency depreciation. 36 Before ENFALP, CREMAs had been shown to be an innovative wildlife conservation and landscape-level planning and management tool for community initiatives on off-reserve lands, bringing transformational change on how land is used and managed, but they lacked legal backing. Communities sought more involvement and support to establish CREMAs, based on perceived benefits and a desire for greater control, despite the process being time consuming and complex. 37 The impact of weak institutional capacity on project implementation is analyzed under factors within IAs’ control. 38 According to the Implementation Status and Results Report (ISR) (ISR Seq No.: 1, archived on June 6, 2016), the co-Task Team Leader (TTL) was based in Ghana and maintained daily and weekly contact with the PMU. Page 15 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Factors outside of Government’s Control 61. COVID-19 impacts. The COVID-19 pandemic had significant impacts on the Ghanaian economy, disrupting various sectors and livelihoods. About 75 percent of Ghanaian households were affected by increased food prices, and 23 percent faced business failures or unemployment.39 The price escalations caused by the pandemic raised the project cost, leading to partial completion of a model nursery and limited support for CREMA business plans. The project helped cushion COVID- 19 shocks in beneficiary communities through input support to farmers and wages for restoration activities in forest reserves. However, project support could not keep pace with inflation and rising food prices. At project closure, some of the livelihood activities were no longer profitable as increased prices of goods and services appear to have eroded the value of businesses and household purchasing power in CREMA communities. COVID-related travel restrictions also slowed down implementation under the parent project, particularly the model nursery construction and consultations for policy reforms, and delayed the commencement of AF activities (rehabilitation and loan scheme for SMPEs). It is important to note that the 2023 Restructuring Paper40 did not specify whether COVID-19 informed the closing date extension. 62. The COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine exacerbated Ghana’s economic challenges resulting in high inflation rates, currency depreciation, and depleting reserves. In response to the imminent public debt crisis, the GoG launched a strategy (DDEP) in 2022 for restructuring the country’s domestic debt. The DDEP had adverse impacts on local FIs, which in turn had significant implications for the private sector plantation development loan scheme under the project. Initially, the project had identified ADB to receive the loan for subsequent on-lending to SMPEs as a credit line. However, in May 2023, ADB revised its position due to the impact of the DDEP on its liquidity and regulatory capital requirements. Given the circumstances, the GoG considered rebidding for a new FI. However, it was unlikely that all statutory clearances could be achieved within the project implementation period, and it was probable that other FIs were facing similar challenges as ADB due to the DDEP. Consequently, the project decided to proceed with ADB as a fund manager rather than as a borrower, with the MoF assuming the risk of recovery, resulting in the fourth project restructuring. This decision ensured the implementation of the loan scheme before project completion in June 2024. Factors Subject to Government’s Control 63. Lengthy statutory processes and decision-making. Parliamentary and cabinet approval of policy reforms were significantly delayed. The Wildlife Resource Management Act was signed into law in March 2024, after years of extensive lobbying by the PMU/implementing ministry. Additionally, clearances of several aspects of the concessional financing under the AF were delayed. The AF became effective in February 2020, nine months after Board approval. Furthermore, the Government did not approve the subsidiary loan agreement between the MoF and ADB until December 2022, primarily due to lack of consensus on the loan facility’s interest rate. The fourth restructuring to change the loan modalities could have been avoided if statutory processes had been timely, allowing the MoF and ADB to sign the loan agreement before DDEP was introduced. This delay contributed to the late disbursement of loans to SMPEs, which occurred a month before project closing, making it difficult to assess the outcome of this private plantation scheme. 64. Increase in Illegal ASGM. After project approval, the rate of forest loss due to illegal ASGM (galamsey) exceeded the pace of efforts to reduce forest degradation in Ghana’s HFZ.41 This prompted the Government to focus on ASGM issues, creating an opportunity for the project to support actions needed to pilot and replicate good practices and expand reformed policies for ASGM. In 2015, Ghana requested US$10 million in AF from the global FIP to address the impacts of illegal mining on forests and livelihoods through pilot land/forest rehabilitation in key mined-out areas. The project, 39 Kwakye, Kwabena Gyan, Michael Tobias Geiger, David Jacques Elmaleh, Dhushyanth Raju, and Mpumelelo Nxumalo. 2020. Ghana Economic Update: Structural Transformation and Labor Market Performance - Challenges and Opportunities. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. 40 ENFALP Restructuring Paper, Report No.: RES54340. 41 Additional Financing Project Paper. Report No: PAD2662. Page 16 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT through the AF, piloted the rehabilitation and reclamation of mined-out sites in forest reserves and captured critical lessons for future interventions. It also streamlined policies and legislation related to ASGM and improved coordination between government agencies in the gold mining sector. Factors Subject to Implementing Entities’ Control 65. Weak institutional capacity. The project faced significant delays, particularly in the early stages, taking 1.5 years after effectiveness42 for activities to start on the ground, despite disbursements aligning with original estimates. According to the ISRs,43 delays were due to inadequate technical and fiduciary capacity and poor coordination among implementing agencies (IAs), resulting in incomplete annual workplans, low-quality terms of references (TOR) and technical specifications, and late and incomplete semiannual progress reports. Procurement initiation and execution were notably slow, with most activities in the Procurement Plan not started six months post effectiveness, leading to a downgrade in the procurement rating from Satisfactory to Moderately Unsatisfactory. Mitigation actions by the Government and the World Bank improved procurement performance. The PMU scheduled regular meetings with beneficiary agencies to develop and review TOR, follow up on workplan execution, and ensure adequate reporting. The World Bank committed to quicker review of procurement documents and hands-on support for TOR and technical specifications. The government team also received several trainings in the first year, including FM, procurement, and safeguards. Furthermore, the PMU contracted NGOs to facilitate project interventions at the community level. Early implementation delays could have been reduced by investing more in building institutional capacity and strengthening coordination between key institutions during project preparation. 66. Early implementation delays compounded other challenges relating to AF milestones. Discussions about the AF began in late 2015, but the World Bank initiated processing in January 2017, and the AF was approved in May 2019 due to several factors, which were compounded by early implementation delays. First, the GoG was exploring three areas44 of AF with disparate timelines and uncertainties. Second, Ghana’s general elections in December 2016 paused AF discussions due to uncertainties about the new ruling party’s stance on concessional financing. Third, weak political commitment and follow-through in addressing ASGM issues posed substantial political economy risks. By the time a letter of request was sent to the World Bank in September 2017, the project was lagging and needed to prioritize accelerating implementation to achieve a Satisfactory rating for the parent project at the time of AF processing and the approaching MTR (May 2018). Consequently, the AF was not approved until 2019, and the project had to process two no-cost closing date extensions to complete all activities. 67. AF activities were more innovative and complex than the parent project. The Government team’s limited experience with the two main AF activities (rehabilitation and private plantation loan scheme) caused implementation delays, increased costs, and posed significant risks to project objectives. The project underestimated rehabilitation costs by over 600 percent and had to prioritize the mined-out sites based on environmental risks. The overlapping mandates among the FC, EPA and MinCom also resulted in occasional delays. Additionally, the loan scheme was complex, involving multiple steps and agreements between stakeholders (MoF and FI, as well as FI and private plantation owners) and required separate parliamentary approval. Consequently, full implementation of AF activities began only in May 2023, leaving just one year for completion. While COVID-19 and late government approvals contributed to the delay, 42 The project became effective on May 22, 2015. Implementation Progress rating was downgraded from Satisfactory to Moderately Satisfactory in December 2015 and was maintained until June 2018, after the MTR. 43 ISR21376 (Seq No.: 2, archived on 12/02/2015); ISR23661 (Seq No.: 3; archived on 06/06/2016); ISR25189 (Seq No.: 4, archived on December 18, 2016). 44 (a) US$10 million SCF grant for reducing degradation and deforestation due to mining; (b) US$10 million FIP (SCF) allocation to IFC for private plantation establishment; and (c) IDA credit. Page 17 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT preparatory activities not requiring cabinet approval, such as costing activities, selecting mined-out sites, and screening loan applications, could have started earlier. 68. Strong coordination between the FC and COCOBOD. As previously mentioned, the strengthened coordination between the FC and COCOBOD especially at the subnational levels had a significant positive impact on the project (see paragraph 53). Given that agricultural (cocoa) expansion is the major driver of deforestation, a unified approach to reducing forest loss by both institutions was crucial in driving change and balancing trade-offs in targeted agroforest landscapes. It fostered effective and efficient delivery of services to farmers and CREMA communities, which led to the adoption of improved tree management practices on agricultural lands. Factors Subject to World Bank Control 69. High turnover of TTLs. The project benefitted from the continuity of having the same TTL from preparation through the first four years of project implementation (May 2015–May 2019). However, between 2019 and 2022, the TTL position changed four times. This frequent turnover led to some inconsistencies in supervision, as each TTL brought different approaches to project management and relationship building with government counterparts. The government team found it challenging to repeatedly explain the project’s context and prior decisions/actions to new TTLs. To mitigate the impact of TTL turnover on implementation progress, the World Bank ensured that incoming TTLs had prior working knowledge of the project to facilitate smooth handovers and transitions. For example, the second and third TTLs served as co-TTLs before assuming the role of TTL (Accountability and Decision-Making), while the fourth TTL was a task team member during the preparation of the parent project and AF. Additionally, the World Bank team conducted regular follow- ups, sometimes on a weekly basis, to build a strong rapport with the government team and to keep the project on track. 70. Adequacy of supervision and reporting. Despite the high TTL turnover, the World Bank supported the achievement of project objectives through proactive supervision, close monitoring, and timely adjustments to the project. ISRs and Aide Memoires were of good quality and provided candid accounts of project status as well as key issues and actions. IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) M&E Design 71. The M&E design was integrated into national frameworks but had some shortcomings. The project relied on existing M&E structures of the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources (MLNR), FC, and COCOBOD, and data collection was designed to feed into Ghana’s FIP reporting. However, an independent assessment for the ICR revealed that two PDIs were ill-defined with unrealistic targets and unclear attribution to the project (see paragraph 42). The project could have benefitted from comprehensive baseline data collection and verification for these forest and ER-related indicators. Additionally, some RF indicators could have been better disaggregated to reflect project outcomes such as people receiving monetary versus nonmonetary benefits, direct beneficiaries who were cocoa farmers or CREMA members or received alternative livelihood activities, mined-out areas rehabilitated and revegetated, (the percentage of) rehabilitated land with restored soil fertility or improved water quality, and gender indicators (in percentages). Additionally, unreliable results on income benefits (due to unrealistic assumptions and incomplete data) made it challenging for the ICR to replicate the appraisal EFA.45 45 See annex 4 (paragraph 5 and footnote 59). Page 18 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT M&E Implementation 72. The M&E implementation started slowly but eventually became routine and provided records of project results. The project relied on IAs to monitor activities, and annual workshops were conducted to review and validate data on project performance. All RF targets had to be increased at AF, as low initial targets meant that most indicators had been exceeded by midterm. There was a huge overlap between two intermediate indicators46 relating to training and capacity by project end, as it was hard to distinguish beneficiaries (farmers and forest users). The M&E protocols for forest cover and GHG emissions should be sustained after the project, being crucial for monitoring climate agreements.47 However, the project M&E could have been strengthened by adoption more robust methodologies for estimating forest cover and ER, which would have identified overestimation and attribution issues before project closure (see para 42). 73. The PMU would have benefitted from having an M&E unit. Although the PAD specified a dedicated project M&E unit headed by MLNR’s Director of Policy, Planning, Monitoring & Evaluation Division, M&E responsibilities were handled by an M&E Officer who also served as the Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer. Given the comprehensive M&E design, a dedicated M&E unit to implement and coordinate M&E activities would have ensured credible project result documentation. M&E Utilization 74. The RF was a useful tool to monitor PDO and other indicators, aiding project decisions. The M&E system positively influenced implementation, justifying changes such as revised project ratings, target increases, AF, and closing date extensions. The PMU received, collated, and shared quarterly reports (albeit often late) from IAs on implementation progress with the World Bank team semiannually, usually during ISR missions. Early identification of gaps, such as data collection uncertainties, poor reporting, and delayed progress reports, informed decisions to enhance the government team’s monitoring and reporting capacity. Project results were communicated to stakeholders, including the World Bank, the Global FIP, and CIF. M&E findings on policy reforms, CREMA establishment, and rehabilitation of mined-out areas informed subsequent forest and agroforest landscape interventions, such as GERP and GLRSSMP. Justification of Overall Rating of Quality of M&E 75. The overall quality of the project’s M&E is rated Modest. There were some shortcomings in the quality of the M&E design and implementation, which made it somewhat difficult to assess the achievement of two (out of five) PDO indicators. However, the M&E system informed key decisions for project implementation. B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE 76. Environmental. The project was classified as Category B and triggered four safeguard policies: OP/BP 4.01 (Environmental Assessment), OP/BP 4.04 (Natural Habitats), OP/BP 4.09 (Pest Management), and OP/BP 4.36 (Forests). Key environmental risks (including biodiversity loss from herbicides and monoculture plantations, soil fertility loss, erosion, invasive species proliferation, and worker accidents) were mitigated through site-specific Environmental and Social Impact Assessments and Environmental and Social Management Plans following Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) guidelines. During implementation, the GoG proactively monitored and addressed these issues through district-level environmental and social teams led by FSD heads. The PMU struggled initially to understand 46 Farmers/participants provided with capacity-building support to improve management practices for tree planting or nurseries and forest users trained. 47 Including Emissions Reduction Partnership Agreement with FCPF/World Bank for ER payment; United Nations Framework Commission on Climate Change for Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/article-64-mechanism; and EU Deforestation Regulation compliance, https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/forests/deforestation/regulation-deforestation-free-products_en. Page 19 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT World Bank safeguards (given their familiarity with AfDB requirements), but the World Bank environmental and social staff support and training helped overcome this challenge. The challenge of routine transfer of FSD staff, causing a loss of experience and capacity, was addressed by continuous trainings for new staff on environmental and social risk management, monitoring, and supervision. 77. Social. The project triggered OP/BP 4.12 (Involuntary Resettlement) and OP/BP 4.11 (Physical Cultural Resources), and social risks identified included potential livelihood losses due to land use changes from Component 2 activities in farms, communities, and forest reserves. To mitigate these risks, an ESMF and Process Framework were prepared, ensuring no negative impact on sacred sites and incorporating participatory resource management and alternative livelihood support. No involuntary resettlement was anticipated for World Bank-financed activities. The Process Framework was updated during the AF preparation to protect forest reserves and restore mined-out sites through tree planting and rehabilitation, addressing access restrictions for community members. Continuous consultations with beneficiaries and communities were guided by the Process Framework, and safeguard impacts were integrated into the project’s M&E system. An effective grievance redress mechanism (GRM) was established to resolve disputes at the community, district, and national levels, and regular GRM reports were submitted to the World Bank. A total of 163 complaints were received, all resolved by project closing. 78. FM. ENFALP’s FM arrangements were integrated into the GoG’s approval, authorization, and payment processes within the respective IAs, eliminating the need for separate accounting consultants. The MLNR’s Director of Finance (DoF) held overall fiduciary responsibility, ensuring judicious use of project funds and regular financial reporting. Throughout implementation, ENFALP maintained Moderately Satisfactory or Satisfactory FM rating, attesting to the competence of the Accounts Team and oversight by senior management and DoFs. The project has generally complied with financial covenants (including the submission of Interim Financial Reports and Annual Audit Reports), despite occasional delays in consolidating returns from IAs, and these audit reports and management letters indicate a reliable control environment with no major internal control lapses. The two major FM challenges of delays (obtaining adequate returns from IAs and the transfer of accountants) were mitigated through training and orientation for new staff. 79. Procurement. Procurement followed World Bank Procurement Regulations for IPF Borrowers and standard documentation. It was mainstreamed initially, but delays led to hiring a consultant to expedite processes. Most procurement was of low value and complexity, successfully handled by national firms, but key challenges (procurement lead time overruns, delays in award publication, inadequate record keeping, and delayed updates in Systematic Tracking of Exchanges in Procurement [STEP]) were resolved through regular engagement and monthly procurement clinics. Implementation Support Missions discussed challenges and monitored and implemented mitigation measures. At project closure, all contracts had been completed and STEP fully updated. C. BANK PERFORMANCE Quality at Entry 80. The World Bank’s long-standing engagement in Ghana’s forestry sector resulted in a preparation time of less than a year. ENFALP was relevant and strategic in targeting cocoa-driven forest loss and degradation in Ghana’s HFZ. It was technically sound, with a clear PDO and well-defined activities aligned with government priorities and beneficiaries’ needs. Gender gaps were addressed with appropriate RF indicators, and most project risks were adequately assessed and effectively mitigated. However, the GoG capacity to implement activities was overestimated, including FM, procurement, and safeguards, resulting in significant implementation delays and jeopardizing the achievement of planned outcomes. The team could have better utilized the PPG to establish coordination and communication processes. The M&E design could have had more specific RF indicators, more frequent reporting of key indicators, and less conservative targets. Page 20 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Quality of Supervision 81. The World Bank’s robust and consistent guidance of a well-designed project ensured satisfactory completion despite challenges and delays. Project performance was improved with close monitoring and timely adjustments, enhancing government systems and institutional capacity through training, regular meetings, and technical review/guidance. The task team adjusted supervision based on project performance and regular risk assessments, offering intensive support when needed including monthly/weekly review meetings. There were 18 implementation support and supervision missions, including site visits, producing comprehensive and candid ISRs and Aide Memoires about performance and challenges. Relevant specialists, including environmental and social safeguards, FM, and procurement, contributed significantly to project supervision. The World Bank also leveraged its position as the lead multilateral development bank for the Ghana FIP to secure grants for enhanced supervision and implementation support. 82. The task team proactively adjusted the project as circumstances evolved, contributing to the effective resolution of implementation challenges. The project was restructured four times to address various issues (increasing ambition and targets, mitigating FM risks, revising implementation modalities, and addressing time constraints), successfully implement key activities, and achieve expected outcomes. It is noteworthy that the World Bank team took over the administration of concessional financing from IFC (at the GoG’s request), adapted implementation to fit the GoG priorities, and thus implemented two of three Ghana FIP projects—making its support crucial to the FIP’s development impact. 83. The World Bank’s implementation support record was generally positive, but there were some weaknesses. Implementation challenges and delays were largely due to factors outside the World Bank’s control; however, the high turnover of TTLs negatively affected implementation. Having five TTLs during project implementation (four in the last five years) caused inconsistencies in guidance given to the government team, especially during the critical implementation of complex AF activities. The first official mission48 occurred 15 months after project effectiveness, likely too late given the GoG’s capacity challenges. Although the co-TTL and fiduciary and safeguards specialists were based in-country and maintained weekly contact with the PMU, more missions in the first 1.5 years could have improved progress. The World Bank team could also have improved its supervision by ensuring that M&E data collection was methodologically sound, as the project lacked reliable data that were crucial for assessing some of its outcomes. Justification of Overall Rating of Bank Performance 84. Overall World Bank performance is rated Moderately Satisfactory. The quality at entry was Satisfactory: however, there were some shortcomings with the quality of supervision, particularly high TTL turnover and weak monitoring of data collection and analysis of some PDIs. D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME 85. There are several risks to the development outcomes and their sustainability, including financial, institutional, macroeconomic, and political risks. Lack of long-term financing and overreliance on donor support in the forest sector threaten the ability of MLNR and FC to sustain project outcomes.49 Reforms such as tree tenure and benefit sharing have built farmers’ confidence but, without expansion, there is a risk of losing their trust and disincentivizing improved tree management practices. Some livelihood activities (for example, shaded cocoa and apiculture) may continue to supplement 48 The World Bank team organized a joint mission with three other World Bank-financed projects to synergize efforts, six months after project effectiveness. 49 For example, as previously mentioned, the model nursery is at risk of becoming a redundant asset if the FC cannot secure additional resources to make it operational. Page 21 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT household income but others (such as nurseries and soap making) may not be sustainable beyond the project, reducing CREMAs’ ability to maintain small-scale enterprises and communities’ incentives to avoid encroaching on forests. Additionally, persistent macroeconomic challenges such as inflation could exacerbate the risk of loan default by SMPEs. 86. Illegal ASGM remains pervasive in and around forest reserves in Ghana, potentially reversing the project achievements in reducing forest loss and degradation. Weak regulations and compliance monitoring as well as higher income from illegal ASGM compared to other rural livelihoods drive encroachment into forest reserves and cocoa farms, posing significant threats to the sustainability of the project outcomes. The Environmental Protection (Mining in Forest Reserves) Regulations (L.I.2462), enacted in 2022, grant mining licenses in forest reserves except for certain prohibited zones, including globally significant biodiversity areas, protected provenance zones, and cultural sites. While the GoG announced its intention to revoke this policy after public protests in October 2024, this policy remains a significant threat to the project’s development outcomes unless successfully repealed. 87. Existing mitigation measures could minimize the risks to the sustainability of the project’s development outcomes. Current World Bank-financed projects in Ghana’s forest sector, the GERP (P160339), GLRSSMP (P171933), and Ghana Tree Crop Diversification Project (P180060) are supporting the FC and COCOBOD to sustain and expand the project outcomes. Additionally, the Enhancing Access to Benefits while Lowering Emissions (EnABLE) Project (EnABLE Ghana Country Project Supporting Social Inclusion in FCPF Emission Reductions Program, P181123), approved by the World Bank in June 2024, aims to enhance the inclusion of target beneficiaries in accessing benefits from the GERP. EnABLE promotes climate-resilient livelihoods for women in communities benefiting from GERP, supporting the sustainability of project outcomes (particularly CREMA business plans), as all CREMAs established by ENFALP fall within GERP’s intervention area. The project also screened loan applicants (including financial analysis and credit and tax history) and established loan conditions (such as collateral registration) to minimize loan repayment risk. V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 88. Decentralized governance and legal benefit-sharing mechanisms incentivize communities to manage forests sustainably. ENFALP’s community-based NRM approach—focusing on forest management rights, inclusive decision- making, and benefit-sharing mechanisms—enhanced tree and forest management by farmers and communities. Transferring management rights to communities empowered them with greater control and vested interest in forests. This decentralized governance along with reforms that ensured communities benefitted equitably from forest revenue and alternative livelihoods to offset economic losses from restricted access to forests incentivized sustainable forest management at the local level in the targeted landscapes. Additionally, financially viable livelihoods are crucial to offset economic losses from restricted forest access and sustain improved forest management by communities. The project outcomes underscore the importance of decentralized governance, pilot investments, and legitimized benefit-sharing mechanisms in local communities as prerequisites for catalyzing improved forest management practices and sustaining long-term community engagement. 89. A holistic and coordinated approach such as Integrated Landscape Management (ILM) is necessary to address the complex drivers of deforestation. ENFALP adopted an ILM approach that (a) balanced improved forest management with environmental and livelihood considerations; (b) combined policy reforms and NRG with comprehensive investment packages (including livelihood support, agricultural inputs, tree seedlings, trainings, and extension services) to increase monetary and nonmonetary benefits for forest communities; and (c) synchronized their efforts of institutions (even with some conflicting interests) to conserve forests. This approach enabled the project to simultaneously tackle multiple deforestation drivers and engage diverse stakeholders within the same landscapes, leading to reduced forest loss and degradation. Forest projects should adopt a holistic approach that balances conservation and economic objectives, Page 22 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT manages trade-offs between competing land uses, engages multiple stakeholders, and adapts to local contexts to improve forest management and overall project outcomes and sustainability. 90. Preventing forest degradation from ASGM is better than rehabilitation of such degradation. Rehabilitation of mined-out areas is not only expensive, technically complex, and time consuming but its sustainability depends critically on the commitment of multiple stakeholders, including several government institutions, communities, and NGOs. The project provides evidence that the most economically viable approach is to avoid forest degradation from ASGM; promote cost-effective, inclusive, and sustainable ILM approaches to forest management; and prioritize legal, regulatory, and enforcement frameworks that protect forests from mining. 91. A robust MRV system is crucial for ensuring credibility and effectiveness of forest investments. As previously discussed, ENFALP had several M&E challenges such as lack of verifiable forest cover data, overestimation of ER, and incomplete data on economic benefits. This underscores the importance of comprehensive baseline data and independent analysis of results for improving accuracy, transparency, and quality of data related to forest cover and GHG ERs. An effective MRV system could track economic, environmental and social benefits, demonstrating the full value of forest investments. Therefore, forest projects should prioritize strong MRV systems with sound methodologies for data collection, analysis, and reporting to validate and maintain the integrity of outcomes as well as justify future investments and carbon financing. This is crucial for countries such as Ghana, which are becoming increasingly active in voluntary carbon markets under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. 92. Mainstreaming implementation into government frameworks enhances sustainability of project outcomes but may slow down implementation. ENFALP, led by government institutions with minimal external consultant support, experienced slower implementation. However, this approach improved the capacity of key institutions and technical staff for integrated forest and landscape management in Ghana. The institutional processes and unified approach piloted by ENFALP are now standard practice, demonstrating the long-term benefits of using government frameworks. While development projects often prioritize quick delivery, they should balance rapid progress with the long-term benefits of strengthening government institutions. Additionally, thorough institutional assessments are crucial to identify and mitigate risks associated with government frameworks. Page 23 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS A. RESULTS FRAMEWORK PDO Indicators by Outcomes Improved forest and tree management practices in selected landscapes in Ghana's High Forest Zone Indicator Name Baseline Closing Period (Original) Closing Period (Current) Actual Achieved at Completion Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year 0.00 Nov/2014 87,500 Jun/2020 106,000.00 Jun/2024 106,029.00 Jun/2024 People in forest&adjacent Comments on achieving targets Target exceeded. The indicator measured the extent to which people have seen improved livelihood as a result community with monetary/non- of the project. It covered monetary and non-monetary benefits like improved and easier access to fuelwood as monetary benefit from forest well as cultural and spiritual services. The number of people who derived monetary/non-monetary benefits (Number) from forest is 106,029 slightly surpassing the target of 106,000. Its original target of 87,500 was increased during the AF approval in 2019. 0.00 Nov/2014 45,000 Jun/2020 53,000.00 Jun/2024 56,568 Jun/2024 People in forest and adjacent Comments on achieving targets Target exceeded by 7%. The project improved the livelihoods of 56,568 women in forest and adjacent community with benefits from communities, representing 53% of the total number of people with monetary and non-monetary benefits from forest-female (Number) forests. Area under improved CREMA 0.00 Nov/2014 50,000 Jun/2020 80,000.00 Jun/2024 80,661.34 May/2024 management or climate smart cocoa Comments on achieving targets Achieved. The project brought 80,661 ha of land under improved CREMA management to protect and enhance management practices in targeted forests and trees in the landscape. Its original target of 50,000 was increased during the AF. landscapes due to Project intervention (Hectare(Ha)) 0.00 Nov/2014 30,000 Jun/2020 40,000.00 Jun/2024 43,613.00 May/2024 including under climate smart Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 9%. The project brought 43,613 ha of land area under climate-smart cocoa management practices, cocoa management practices surpassing its target of 40,000. This indicator measured land area within CREMAs for which certified cocoa (Hectare(Ha)) management schemes were prepared, endorsed and/or implemented. 0.00 Nov/2014 50,000 Jun/2020 80,000.00 Jun/2024 80,661.34 May/2024 including under CREMA Comments on achieving targets Achieved. management (Hectare(Ha)) 0.00 Nov/2014 9,501 Jun/2020 12,501.00 Jun/2024 13,186.00 Jun/2024 Page 24 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Direct project beneficiaries Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 5%. This measures people who directly derived benefits from a project intervention. The original (Number) target of 9,501 was revised as part of the AF. 0.00 49 Jun/2020 50.00 53 Female beneficiaries Comments on achieving targets Exceeded. The proportion of direct project beneficiaries who are women is 53%, surpassing the target of 49%. (Percentage) Reduced forest loss and degradation in selected landscapes in Ghana's High Forest Zone Indicator Name Baseline Closing Period (Original) Closing Period (Current) Actual Achieved at Completion Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year 303,885.00 Nov/2014 412,064 Jun/2020 417,518.00 Jun/2024 458,387 May/2024 Comments on achieving targets Target exceeded by 10%. At completion, the forest area in targeted landscapes increased by 51% from 303,885ha to 458,387ha. The original target of 412,064ha was increased to 417,518ha during the AF approval in 2019. The PAD and AF project paper anticipated a decrease in forest area during the project, though to a lesser Area of forest in targeted landscapes degree than in the without-project scenario. Thus, the target of a 37% increase was overly ambitious, given (Hectare(Ha)) Ghana’s HFZ deforestation rate of 6% at appraisal. This high ambition and inconsistency with global datasets led to an independent assessment of the indicator and its subindicators, which found a 1.2% increase in forest cover to be more realistic. Ghana defines forest as an area of land greater than or equal to 1.0 hectare, with more than 15% tree canopy cover and a minimum tree height of 5 meters at maturity. 132,312.00 139,298 Jun/2020 139,298.00 Jun/2024 168,408.62 May/2024 Comments on achieving targets Target exceeded by 21%. This indicator measures the extent of closed forest in targeted landscapes. At completion, the area of closed forest is 168,409ha, surpassing the target of 139,298ha and indicating a 27% including closed forest increase in closed forest in targeted landscapes compared to the baseline. This is contrary to expectations of a (Hectare(Ha)) decline. However, an independent assessment estimated a 3-5% increase in closed forest. Closed forest is defined as an area of land greater than or equal to 1.0 ha with a minimum tree height of 5 meters at maturity and a canopy cover exceeding 60%. 171,573.00 272,765 Jun/2020 278,220.00 Jun/2024 289,978.98 May/2024 Comments on achieving targets Target exceeded by 4%. The area of open forest is 289,978.98 ha, surpassing the target of 278,220 ha. Instead of including open forest the anticipated decrease in forest cover, the project reports an increase in open forests over the course of the (Hectare(Ha)) project. An independent assessment using global datasets estimated a decrease in open forest by 0.1%. Open forest is defined as an area of land greater than or equal to 1.0 ha with a minimum tree height of 5 meters at maturity and a canopy cover between 15% and 60%. Total greenhouse gas emissions 0.00 Nov/2014 1,038,262 Jun/2020 4,628,548.00 Jun/2024 20,197,996 Jun/2024 reductions plus enhancement of Comments on achieving targets Target exceeded by 336%. The project achieved 20,197,996 tons of CO2e in GHG emissions reductions and carbon stocks, estimated in millions carbon stock enhancement, surpassing the revised target of 4,628,548 tons of CO2e, which was increased from tons equivalent CO2e/year (Metric the original target of 1,038,262 tons of CO2e during the AF approval in 2019. The indicator was measured by ton) comparing landcover change and mean CO2 equivalent per hectare of closed and open forest areas at baseline, Page 25 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT mid-term and project completion. The mean carbon dioxide equivalent per hectare values defined for the Closed forest and Open forest were 251 and 83 respectively (see annex 8 for an explanation of the methodology). An independent assessment indicates an overestimation of the indicator's achievements (see annex 4 and 8 for an explanation of the methodology). It shows total GHG emissions reductions and carbon stock of 3,453,933 tCO2e using the project's methodology and 2,132,807 tCO2e using the World Bank-approved FAO Ex-ACT tool. 0.00 Nov/2014 484,454 Jun/2020 973,322.60 Jun/2024 9,060,251.62 Jun/2024 including greenhouse gas Comments on achieving targets Target exceeded by 830%. At completion, the project reported 9,060,251.62 tCO2e of GHG emissions emission reductions - closed reductions from closed forest, surpassing the revised target of 973,322.6 tCO2e, which was increased from the forest (Metric ton) original target of 484,454 tCO2e during the AF approval in 2019. An independent assessment, using the project's methodology estimates 2,223,609 tCO2e of GHG emissions reductions from closed forest. 0.00 Nov/2014 362,189 Jun/2020 2,279,534.39 Jun/2024 9,875,058.72 Jun/2024 including greenhouse gas Comments on achieving targets Target exceeded by 333%. At completion, the project reported 9,875,058.72 tCO2e of GHG emissions emission reductions - open reductions from open forest, surpassing the revised target of 2,279,534.39 tCO2e, which was increased from forest (Metric ton) the original target of 362,189 tCO2e during the AF approval in 2019. An independent assessment, using the project's methodology, estimates -31,540 tCO2e of GHG emissions reductions from closed forest. 0.00 Nov/2014 50,620 Jun/2020 0.00 Jun/2020 0 May/2024 Comments on achieving targets The target was revised to 0 to reflect the government team's better understanding of carbon assessments. including enhancement of Closed forests inherently have higher carbon density due to their maturity and dense canopy, therefore, they carbon stock - Closed forest naturally store more carbon than open forests and require less active intervention to achieve carbon stock (Metric ton) enhancement if any. That is why technically, the target was revised to reflect the current understanding of Ghana's Carbon Assessment Team. 0.00 Nov/2014 141,000 Jun/2020 1,375,691.00 Jun/2024 1,262,685.66 May/2024 Comments on achieving targets Target not achieved. The total carbon stock enhanced in open forest 1,262,685.66 CO2e/year, not achieving its including enhancement of target of 1,375,691 CO2e/year, which was increased from the original target of 141,000 tCO2e during the AF carbon stock - open forest approval in 2019. The partial achievement can be attributed to the shift in land-use cover from open to closed (Metric ton) forests and the replacement of images with heavy cloud cover and haze in the Western Region with clearer images to ensure accurate results and better estimation of area change and emissions reductions. Demonstrated rehabilitation of mined-out sites in selected landscapes in Ghana's High Forest Zone Indicator Name Baseline Closing Period (Original) Closing Period (Current) Actual Achieved at Completion Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year 0.00 Jan/2019 5.00 Jun/2023 5.00 Jun/2024 5 May/2024 Number of mining sites that have Comments on achieving targets Achieved. The project rehabilitated 5 mined-out sites in 2 forest reserves to a standard agreed with local been rehabilitated (Number) stakeholders. These mined-out sites spanning 120ha were revegetated with native tree species with 70% survival rates at project completion. Page 26 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Intermediate Indicators by Components Component 1. Policy Reforms and Institutional Strengthening Indicator Name Baseline Closing Period (Original) Closing Period (Current) Actual Achieved at Completion Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year No Nov/2014 Yes Jun/2020 Yes Jun/2024 Yes May/2024 Reforms in forest policy, legislation or Comments on achieving targets Achieved. The project facilitated reforms in the forestry sector including: (i) Wildlife Resource Management Bill, other regulations supported (ii) Tree Tenure and Benefit Sharing Regime; and (iii) Domestic Wood Procurement Policy. Under the AF, the (Yes/No) Project targeted improving the institutional framework and coordination for rehabilitation and reclamation of mined-out sites. 0.00 Nov/2014 23 Jun/2020 30.00 Jun/2024 45 May/2024 Govt institutions provided w/ Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 50%. The project provided capacity building for 45 government institutions at national, regional and capacity buildg to improve mgt of district levels, surpassing its target of 30 (increased from the original target of 23 during AF). Targeted institutions forest resources (Number) included MLNR, FC, COCOBOD, EPA, FORIG, COCOBOD, MESTI, EPA, Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development, Mineral Commission and 16 district assemblies. Component 2. Pilot Investments for Improved Forest and Landscape Management with Communities Indicator Name Baseline Closing Period (Original) Closing Period (Current) Actual Achieved at Completion Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Community based natural resources 0.00 Nov/2014 5 Jun/2020 5.00 Jun/2024 5.00 May/2024 management institutions provided Comments on achieving targets Achieved. The Project established and provided 5 community based natural resources management institutions with access to improved (i.e., CREMAs) with access to improved practices for tree and forest management. The target for this indicator management practices for was not revised. sustainable landscape management (Number) 0.00 Nov/2014 2,200 Jun/2020 3,500.00 Jun/2024 5,422 Jun/2024 Farmers / participants provided with Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 55%. The number of farmers/participants provided with capacity building support to improve capacity building support to improve management practices for tree planting or nurseries is 5,422, surpassing the target of 3,500. The original target management practices for tree of 2,200 farmers was increased during in 2019. The indicator measured capacity building efforts aimed at planting or nurseries (Number) improving skills in plantation development, tree establishment and nursery supply and management of specific audiences, not general awareness campaigns. The project ensured that individuals who participated in a series of training events were not double counted. Page 27 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT 0.00 Nov/2014 1,283 Jun/2020 1,750.00 Jun/2024 2,603 Jun/2024 Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 49%. A total of 2,603 female farmers/participants were provided with capacity building support to including female (Number) improve management practices for tree planting or nurseries, surpassing the target of 1,750. The original target of 1,283 was increased during AF. Women represented 48% of the 5,422 farmers/participants who received capacity building support. Although the project surpassed the numerical target, it fell short of its targets in terms of proportion, as 50% of the farmers/participants were expected to be women. 0.00 Nov/2014 13,500 Jun/2020 17,100.00 Jun/2024 17,600 Jun/2024 Area restored or re/afforested Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 3%. The project restored, reforested or afforested 17,600 ha of land area, surpassing the target of (Hectare(Ha)) 17,100. The original target of 13,500 was increased during AF to account for the increase in ambition relating to reforestation and afforestation. 0.00 Nov/2014 12,500 Jun/2020 12,500.00 Jun/2024 12,944.86 Jun/2024 Area restored (Hectare(Ha)) Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 3.6%. The project restored 12,945 ha of land area, surpassing the target of 12,500. The indicator was measured by land area restored through enrichment planting. This target was not revised during the AF. 0.00 Nov/2014 1,000 Jun/2020 4,600.00 Jun/2024 4,655.14 Jun/2024 Area re/afforested Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 1%. The project reforested or afforested 4,655 ha of land area, surpassing the target of 4,600. The (Hectare(Ha)) original target of 1,000 ha was increased during AF to reflect the project's increased ambition. The indicator was measured by land area reforested or afforested in CREMA areas and through establishment of model plantations on forest reserves. 0.00 Nov/2014 1475.00 Jun/2020 6,500.00 Jun/2024 6,850 Jun/2024 Farmers / participants in targeted landscape corridors reporting Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 5%. A total of 6,850 farmers/participants in the project landscape corridors reported satisfaction satisfaction with service delivery or with service delivery or benefits received under the Project, surpassing the target of 6,500. The original target of benefits received under the Project 1,475 was increased during the AF. The indicator measured the result of changed behaviors and practices of MLNR (Number) / FC officials in interacting with communities and landscape users. Surveys were designed and distributed regularly among project beneficiaries. 0.00 Nov/2014 840 Jun/2020 3,250.00 Jun/2024 3,494 Jun/2024 including female (Number) Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 7.5%. A total of 3,494 female farmers/participants in the project corridors reported satisfaction with service delivery or benefits received under the Project, surpassing the target of 3,250. The original target of 840 was increased during the AF. 0.00 Nov/2014 50,000 Jun/2020 80,000.00 Jun/2024 80,661.31 Jun/2024 New areas outside protected areas Comments on achieving targets Achieved. The project brought 80,661 ha of new areas outside of protected areas under biodiversity-friendly managed as biodiversity-friendly (ha) management, slightly surpassing the target of 80,661ha. The original target of 50,000 was increased during the (Number) AF. This indicator measured the number of terrestrial hectares outside protected areas where, as a result of the Project, the site is managed at least in part to obtain biodiversity gains. Component 3. Innovation, Capacity Building, and Communications Page 28 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Indicator Name Baseline Closing Period (Original) Closing Period (Current) Actual Achieved at Completion Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year Result Month/Year 0.00 Nov/2014 1,600 Jun/2020 4,500.00 Jun/2024 5,422 Jun/2024 Forest users trained (Number) Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 20%. The project trained 5,422 forest users, surpassing its target of 4,500, which was increased from the original target of 1,600 during the AF. This indicator measured the number of forest users and community members that received capacity building through training as a result of the project. 0.00 Nov/2014 910 Jun/2020 3,250.00 Jun/2024 2,606 Jun/2024 Forest users trained - Female Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 16%. A total of 2,606 female forest users were trained by the Project, surpassing the original target (Number) of 2,250, which was increased from the original target of 910 during AF. While the project surpassed the numerical target, it fell short of its targets in terms of proportion, as 50% of the farmers/participants were expected to be women. But, at project closing, only 48% of the forest users trained are female. 0.00 Nov/2014 450 Jun/2020 550.00 Jun/2024 805 Jun/2024 Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 46%. A total of 805 government officials / extension agents and service providers were trained by Government officials / extension the Project, surpassing the target of 550. The original target of 450 was increased during the AF and all sub- agents and service providers trained indicators were increased accordingly. The indicator measured capacity building efforts to strengthen (Number) government officials and extension agents to improve service provision and community relations / responsiveness. The indicator was disaggregated by agricultural / cocoa extension agents, local government officials, FC staff, and gender. including agricultural / cocoa 0.00 Nov/2014 135 Jun/2020 180.00 Jun/2024 240.00 May/2024 extension agents / service Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 33%. The project trained 240 agricultural / cocoa extension agents / service providers, surpassing providers (Number) the target of 180, which was increased from the original target of 135 during AF. 0.00 Nov/2014 45 Jun/2020 70.00 Jun/2024 90.00 May/2024 including local government officials (Number) Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 28.5%. The project trained 90 local government officials, surpassing the target of 70, which was increased from the original target of 45 during AF. 0.00 Nov/2014 270 Jun/2020 300.00 Jun/2024 475.00 May/2024 including Forestry Commission staff (Number) Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 53%. The project trained 475 local government officials, surpassing the target of 300, which was increased from the original target of 270 during AF. 0.00 Nov/2014 171 Jun/2020 220.00 Jun/2024 266.00 May/2024 including female (Number) Comments on achieving targets Exceeded by 21%. The project trained 266 female government officials / extension agents, surpassing the target of 220, which was increased from the original target of 171 during AF This represents 33% of all government officials / extension agents trained by the Project. Page 29 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT B. KEY OUTPUTS Improved forest and tree management practices in selected landscapes in Ghana's High Forest Zone 1. Area under improved CREMA management or climate smart cocoa management practices in targeted landscapes due to Project intervention PDO Indicators 2. People in forest & adjacent community with monetary/non-monetary benefit from forest 3. Direct project beneficiaries 1. Area under improved CREMA management or climate smart cocoa management practices in targeted landscapes due to Project intervention 2. Reforms in forest policy, legislation or other regulations supported 3. Farmers / participants with improved tree management practices 4. Government institutions with improved forest management capacity Intermediate Results Indicators 5. Forest users trained 6. Government officials / extension agents and service providers trained 7. Community based natural resources management institutions provided with access to improved management practices for sustainable landscape management 8. Farmers / participants in targeted landscape corridors reporting satisfaction with service delivery or benefits received under the Project 1. 106,029 people with monetary/nonmonetary benefits from forest 2. 80,661 ha brought under improved CREMA management or climate-smart cocoa management practices in targeted landscapes due to project intervention 3. 43,613 ha of land area under climate-smart cocoa management practices 4. Reforms in forest policy, legislation, or other regulations supported: (a) Wildlife Resource Management Bill, (b) Tree Tenure and Benefit Sharing Regime, (c) Domestic Wood Procurement Policy, Key Outputs and (d) Streamlined Guidelines for Rehabilitation and Reclamation of ASGM (linked to the achievement of the PDO Outcome) 5. 45 Government institutions with improved forest management capacity 6. 805 Government officials/extension agents and service providers trained including 266 women, 475 FC staff, 240 agricultural/cocoa extension agents, and 90 local government officials 7. 5,422 Farmers/participants with improved tree management practices, of which 2,603 were women 8. 6,850 Farmers/participants in targeted landscape corridors reporting satisfaction with service delivery or benefits received under the project, including 3,494 women 9. 5,422 Forest users trained, including 2,606 women Page 30 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT 10. Five community-based NRM institutions provided with access to improved management practices for sustainable landscape management Reduced forest loss and degradation in selected landscapes in Ghana's High Forest Zone 1. Area of forest in targeted landscapes PDO Indicators 2. Total greenhouse gas emissions reductions plus enhancement of carbon stocks, estimated in millions tons equivalent CO2e/year 1. Area restored or re/afforested Intermediate Results Indicators 2. New areas outside protected areas managed as biodiversity-friendly 1. 458,387 ha of forests including 168,408 ha of closed forest and 289,978 ha of open forest 2. 17,600 ha restored or reforested/afforested Key Outputs 3. 80,661 ha of new areas outside protected areas managed as biodiversity friendly (linked to the achievement of the PDO Outcome) 4. 18,935,311 tons of CO2 ER/year 5. 1,262,685 tons of carbon stock enhanced Demonstrated rehabilitation of mined-out sites in selected landscapes in Ghana's High Forest Zone PDO Indicator 1. Number of mining sites that have been rehabilitated Intermediate Results Indicator 1. Number of mining sites that have been rehabilitated Key Outputs 1. 5 mining sites rehabilitated (linked to the achievement of the PDO Outcome) 2. Guidelines on rehabilitation and reclamation of mined-out sites Page 31 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION A. TASK TEAM MEMBERS Name Role Preparation Timothy Brown, Martin Fodor Task Team Leader Charles John Aryee Ashong Procurement Specialist Robert Wallace DeGraft-Hanson Senior Financial Management Specialist Ana Isabel Dos Reis E Sousa Piedade Abreu Team Member Anders Jensen Team Member Charity Boafo-Portuphy Team Member Edith Ruguru Mwenda Senior Counsel Esther Awume Team Member Kenneth M. Green Safeguards Specialist Lesya Verheijen Consultant Lydia Sam Team Member Maiada Mahmoud Abdel Fattah Kassem Team Member Neeta Hooda Team Member Paul Bennett Siegel Team Member Paula F. Lytle Team Member Neeta Hooda Team Member Shingira Samantha Masanzu Team Member Stig Gustaf Johansson Team Member Yesmeana N. Butler Team Member Supervision / ICR Justice Odoiquaye Odoi, Darshani De Silva Task Team Leaders Neeta Hooda, Phillipe Ambrosi, Asferachew Abate, Timothy Task Team Leaders Brown, Martin Fodor, Yasmina Oodally Robert Wallace DeGraft-Hanson Financial Management Specialist Esinam Julia Nduom Financial Management Specialist Patrick Kwadwo Ansah Procurement Specialist Muhammad Abbass Rahimi Procurement Specialist Page 32 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Charles John Aryee Ashong Procurement Specialist George Amoasah Environmental Specialist Georgette Baaba Atakorah Environmental Specialist Kobina Otu Okyne Team Member Sarah Antwi Boasiako Social Specialist Frederick Amoako Addison Social Specialist Lydia Sam Procurement Team Charity Boafo-Portuphy Procurement Team Ayishetu Terewina Procurement Team Maclean Oyeh Team Member @#&OPS~Doctype~OPS^dynamics@icrannexstafftime#doctemplate B. STAFF TIME & COST Staff Time & Cost Stage of Project Cycle No. of Staff Weeks US$ (including travel and consultant costs) Preparation FY14 16.360 169,323.00 FY15 9.093 92,871.05 FY16 5.685 48,274.50 FY17 0.000 5,338.33 FY18 2.400 40,750.79 FY19 0.000 19,967.44 Total 33.54 376,525.11 Supervision/ICR FY16 2.340 18,387.24 FY17 21.890 176,850.98 FY18 23.514 270,618.71 Page 33 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT FY19 6.909 75,056.43 FY20 16.675 117,455.02 FY21 10.325 50,826.34 FY22 12.517 87,903.86 FY23 11.462 65,110.54 FY24 7.862 62,298.13 FY25 12.375 92,092.40 Total 125.87 1,016,599.65 Page 34 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT Amount50 at Amount at AF Actual at Project Component Approval Approval Closing51 (US$, millions)a (US$, millions) (US$, millions) Component 1. Policy Reforms and 3.00 (0.5) 5.00 5.00 Institutional Strengthening Component 2. Pilot Investments for 22.94 (2.0) 38.40 38.40 Improved Forest and Landscape Management with Communities Component 3. Innovation, Capacity Building, 2.80 (0.2) 3.80 3.80 and Communications Component 4. Project Management, 3.70 (0.3) 4.76 4.76 Monitoring and Coordination Total 32.50 52.00 52.00 Note: a. Government in-kind contribution in parenthesis. 50Costs include US$3 million of government contribution in staff time and in-kind services. 51The in-kind contribution materialized during implementation as time dedicated to the project by government staff and extension services provided to farmers and CREMA communities. Page 35 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS 1. The EFA carried out as part of the ICR replicated as best as possible the methodology used by the EFA in the 2015 PAD of the ENFALP of the Ghana FIP.52 This ICR EFA calculated the combined NPV of the net incremental benefits of the same two benefits estimated in the appraisal EFA (reduced GHG emissions and increased farmer income) as US$144.46 million, with an IRR of 22 percent and a BCR of 4.85, using data from the 2024 project ICR compiled by the client, and using the same assumptions as in the 2015 PAD EFA (7 percent discount rate and 30-year post-project period), and the average of time series of ‘high’ and ‘low’ shadow prices of carbon. 2. Since the increase in forest area and the GHG ER claimed by the project were much higher than what the national and other data for that period showed, an independent analysis of change in forest area using publicly available global data sets was commissioned from KIDS of the World Bank. Using (a) an analysis of global data sets that showed an average of 4 percent increase in closed forest area and a 0.1 percent decrease in open forest area during the project,53 (b) the EX-ACT to calculate GHG ER for these area changes, and (c) the average of time series of ‘low’ and ‘high’ shadow prices of carbon, yields an NPV of net incremental benefits of the revised GHG ER of US$384 – US$802 million with EIRRs of 35–46 percent and BCRs of 12–25. 3. Further, since there are insufficient data to independently verify incremental farmer incomes, the ICR EFA recalculated farmer and other beneficiary incomes using details from the 2024 Beneficiary Survey Report and other sources. However, these estimates showed that non-carbon benefits (estimated at appraisal) alone would not justify the project. Therefore, the analysis was broadened to include incremental benefits mentioned but not estimated at appraisal, that is, increased soil moisture, water quality, and quantity; enhanced availability of pollination services; shade and microclimate improvements leading to more wildlife and greater biodiversity (Borrower Completion Report, p. 44);54 and timber production on plantation areas targeted by the AF.55 Using the same assumptions as the appraisal EFA (7 percent discount rate and 30-year post-project period), this raised the NPV of non-carbon project benefits to US$35.72 million with an IRR of 13 percent and BCR of 2.06, assuming that the project assets are maintained over time. The incremental project benefits including carbon, under the same assumptions, have an NPV of US$453 million, with an IRR of 14 percent and a BCR of 21. 4. The finding that the project is economically viable holds, even if future benefits are reduced by 20 percent per year, if annual O&M costs (at 10 percent of total project cost) are added for the post-project period, and if the discount rate is doubled to 15 percent. 52 While a no-cost extension was granted till June 30, 2024 (from June 30, 2020), the 2023 Project Restructuring Paper, https:/documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099062823173544255/pdf/P1481830da00030ec0968f0b53ca42da0ca.pdf, only changed the fund administration arrangements without changing financial allocations. Also, the 2019 Additional Financing, https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/494961557194531394/ghana-forest-investment-program- and-enhancing-natural-forest-and-agroforest-landscapes-project-additional-financing, of US$19.39 million was justified on the basis that benefits of two key interventions (plantation establishment and mine site rehabilitation) were ‘both expected to generate significant and positive benefits that outweigh the costs’ (para 93, p. 34). Since these are not among the benefits listed in the PAD EFA and since no project-level data are available on these two benefits, they are not considered any further. 53 Details of the independent assessment using global data sets are in annex 8, while it is discussed further in this annex. 54 Other benefits from the plantation investments mentioned in the AF report include increased tree cover due to plantations and associated carbon benefits plus greater habitat connectivity, productive economic activities of communities engaged in alternative livelihoods, and the multiplier effects of processed wood products in the economy (ENFALP, AF, 2019, p. 35). 55 AF activities focused on plantation establishment and mine site rehabilitation. A study by the FC concluded that, over a 25-year period, returns to 100-acre timber plantations would yield an IRR of 19 percent for teak, 11 percent for Cedrela, and 6.8 percent for mixed-timber (ENFALP AF, 2019, p. 34). Page 36 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Ex Ante Analysis 5. The appraisal EFA estimated two project benefits: higher yields and better returns to land for farmers and owners and reduced emissions and enhanced carbon stocks in forest landscapes. However, the appraisal EFA calculated separately the NPV of each of these two streams of annual incremental benefits and compared each benefit stream with the total project cost of US$32.5 million. It did not carry out a benefit-cost analysis nor compute the IRR but concluded based on the BCR that the project was ‘economically and financially feasible and will generate significant and positive benefits that outweigh the costs.56 6. Monetary Benefit 1: GHG ER. The appraisal EFA estimated that project activities would reduce GHG emissions by 9.5 million tCO2e over the 30-year project period. Valued at US$5.5 per ton and delivered in equal increments over the 30- year period, the total benefits are estimated to be US$1.74 million per year. The NPV of this benefits stream, assuming a 7 percent discount rate and a 30-year post-project period, is US$22.55 million—but stated as US$32 million in the PAD EFA, and hence taken to be about equal to the project cost of US$32.5 million. 7. Monetary Benefit 2: Farm income increases. The appraisal EFA estimated the NPV of this incremental benefit as US$69 million, more than twice the project cost, assuming (a) a 10 percent increase over the adjusted national annual household income of US$3,400 (that is, by US$346) for 3,343 households in plantation establishment areas; (b) a 25 percent increase over US$3,400 (that is, by US$865) for 6,157 households benefiting from cocoa productivity increases, (c) a discount rate of 7 percent, and (d) a 20-year post-project period (though GHG ER benefits were calculated for 30-years post project). Ex Post Analysis 8. Project costs. Disbursement is used as a proxy for annual project costs, which shows that only 27 percent was disbursed in the first three years of the project (2014–2017), and nearly three-quarters was disbursed in five years (2017– 2023), while the last year 2023–24 was a no-cost extension (Table 4.1). Table 4.1. Annual Disbursement as Proxy for Cost Annual Cumulative Year Disbursement Disbursement % Change % Change (US$, millions) (US$, millions) 1 2015 2.00 4 2.00 4% 2 2016 6.50 13 8.50 18% 3 2017 4.45 9 12.95 27% 4 2018 6.00 12 18.95 39% 5 2019 2.50 5 21.45 44% 6 2020 2.62 5 24.07 50% 7 2021 6.29 13 30.36 63% 8 2022 4.83 10 35.19 73% 9 2023 13.34 27 48.53 100% 10 2024 0.00 0 48.53 100% Total 48.53 100% 56 Ghana FIP-ENFALP PAD, February 2015, Annex 9: Detailed Economic Analysis and Technical Appraisal, p. 102. Page 37 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT 9. Nonmonetary benefits. Project benefits that were not measured include reduced costs, risks and uncertainty (to farmers and the wider society effective land management regime, land disputes, and degradation), and enhanced capacities and social capital formation (Borrower Completion Report, p. 44). 10. Monetary Benefit 1: GHG ER. The project ICR shows that project interventions increased forest area from 303,885 ha in 2014 to 458,388 ha in 2021, an increase of 51 percent with a concomitant increase in GHG ER of 18,935,310 tCO2e. Using the same assumptions as in the appraisal EFA (7 percent discount rate, 30-year post-project benefit period, and US$5.5 per ton of carbon), this yields an NPV of net benefits of US$86.23 million, with an IRR of 17 percent and a BCR of 3.02. A critical aspect of this finding, however, is the increase in forest area. Assessed on behalf of ENFALP by the FC of the GoG, this increase in forest area was reported in its 2024 Carbon Stock Assessment Report, which detailed changes in land use and land cover at the landscape and project levels (Table 4.2).57 Table 4.2. Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) Change at Landscape and Project Levels (Hectares) Area Change Area Change Area Change Area Change LULC 2014 2017 2019 2021 (2014–17) (2017–19) (2019–21) (2014–21) Landscape Closed forest 858,090 828,074 −30,016 769,955 −58,119 925,672 155,717 67,581 Open forest 2,002,536 2,798,390 795,854 3,139,361 340,971 3,326,750 187,389 1,324,214 Water 151,931 106,062 −45,869 146,840 40,777 147,752 912 −4,180 Grassland 1,504,621 1,116,113 −388,508 1,071,194 −44,919 765,680 −305,513 −738,941 Settlement/bare 98,475 158,916 60,441 190,799 31,883 194,259 3,460 95,784 surface Cropland 1,798,233 1,406,331 −391,902 1,095,738 −310,593 1,053,775 −41,963 −744,458 Total 6,413,887 6,413,887 6,413,887 6,413,887 Project level Closed forest 132,312 131,121 −1,191 161,000 −29,879 168,409 −7,409 −36,097 Open forest 171,573 173,632 2,059 194,119 −20,487 289,979 187,389 −118,406 Total 303,885 304,753 355,119 458,388 Source: MLNR (2024) Borrower Completion Report. 11. These increases from 2014 to 2021 in project-level areas under closed forests by 27 percent and under open forests by 69 percent are mirrored in GHG ER, as fixed ratios were used to calculate GHG ER from forest areas (251 tCO2e/ha for closed forests and 83 tCO2e/ha for open forests). Thus, the increase of 154,502 ha over seven years (2014–2021) yields total GHG ER of 18,935,310 tCO2e—which is a 40 percent reduction from the baseline GHG emission levels (Table 4.3). Table 4.3. Changes in Forest Areas and GHG Emissions,58 2014–2021 2014 2021 Difference % Change Forest Cover (ha) Closed forest 132,312 168,408 36,096 27 Open forest 171,573 289,979 118,406 69 Total 303,885 458,387 154,502 51 Carbon Stocks (tCO2e) 57 The GoG defines closed forest as areas with more than 60 percent tree cover, and open forests as those with less than 60 percent. 58 Total carbon stocks for various project interventions calculated based on aboveground and belowground carbon. Page 38 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT 2014 2021 Difference % Change Closed forest 33,210,312 42,270,564 9,060,252 27 Open forest 14,309,188 24,184,247 9,875,059 69 Total 47,519,500 66,454,811 18,935,310 40 Source: MLNR (2024) Borrower Completion Report. Note: Closed forest area (in ha) x 251 = carbon stock in closed forests (in tCO2e), which is ER due to carbon sequestration; while open forest area (in ha) x 83 = carbon stock (and ER) in open forests. 12. These large increases in forest areas, however, are at odds with national and other project data: FAO data from 2015 and 2021 show that the forest area in Ghana increased from 78,804,400 ha to 79,929,300 ha (1.43 percent),59 while Global Forest Watch reports that Ghana lost 106,000 ha of humid primary forest between 2014 and 2023 (a decrease of 9.8 percent);60 GERP reported ER between 2019 and 2024 in the entire HFZ of Ghana of 4,351,617 tCO 2e.61 The last is in striking contrast with the ENFALP ER claim of 18,935,310 tCO2e, which is 400 percent higher, over a smaller area, in roughly five years.62 Also, project officials were unable to provide shape files for ENFALP areas within the FIP area, raising further concerns about the robustness of the data used to assess project-linked increases in forest area. A Forest Analytics Assessment using public domain data was therefore commissioned from the World Bank’s KIDS. 13. This independent analysis showed that closed forest increased, and open forest decreased (details in annex 8) for three approximations of ENFALP area (in the absence of the project shape files): (a) the entire FIP area (landscape area), (b) the overlap between the GERP area and the FIP area, and (c) the area of 13 Forest Districts that overlap with ENFALP but not entirely. In these areas, publicly available data sets were used to calculate forest area changes using LULC maps, showing a maximum of 5 percent increase in forest cover (Table 4.4). Table 4.4. Changes in Open and Closed Forest Areas (2014–2022) (ha) 2014 2017 2019 2022 % Change (2014-22) Area under Landscape areas 2,182,818 2,182,756 2,181,292 2,180,838 −0.1 open forests Forest District area 348,731 348,731 348,441 348,341 −0.1 Area under Landscape areas 882,179 886,518 910,493 924,602 5 closed forests Forest District area 340,385 341,481 344,916 349,244 3 Source: Commissioned independent assessment (details in annex 8). 14. Using (a) an average of +4 percent as the change in closed forests, and −0.1 percent as the change in open forest area, (b) EX-ACT to calculate the ER in tCO2e, and (c) the ‘high’ and ‘low’ shadow prices of carbon 63 yields an NPV of net benefits ranging from US$384–US$802 million (at 7 percent discount rate and 30-year post-project benefit period) with economic IRRs of 35–46 percent and BCRs of 12–25 (Table 4.5 and Table 4.6). 59 World Bank Group Data (2024), Forest Area (sq. km) - Ghana. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.FRST.K2?end=2021&locations=GH&start=2014. 60 Global Forest Watch (2024), Ghana, Primary Forest Loss. https://www.globalforestwatch.org/map/country/GHA. 61 World Bank. 2024. Ghana Emission Reductions Program (P160339), ISR, 28 June 2024 . More than 50 percent of the GERP area of 5.9 million ha overlaps with ENFALP. 62 If implementation progress is gauged by disbursement, the project had disbursed only 27 percent by end 2016, so the claim is effective for five years, from 2017 to 2021. 63 World Bank (2024) The Shadow Price of Carbon in Economic Analysis. The average of the time series of low value of the shadow prices of carbon (2017 – 2050) and that of the high prices, i.e., USD 58 and 116 per ton of carbon, respectively, were used. The tCO2e measured in metric tons was converted to tons by dividing by 1.102311. Page 39 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Table 4.5. Revised Change in Forest Area, 2014–21 (ha) Forest Area 2014 2021 Difference Change (%) Closed forest 132,312 137,604 5,292 4.00 Open forest 171,573 171,401 −172 −0.10 Total 303,885 309,006 5,121 Table 4.6. Revised GHG Benefits Parameter Unit Quantity Incremental forest area (2014–2021) metric tCO2e 5,121 Incremental GHG ER (EX-ACT) metric tons of CO2e 1,118,301 Incremental GHG ER (carbon) tons of carbon 1,014,506 Value of carbon stocks (using the ‘low’ shadow price of carbon) US$ 61,884,859 Value of carbon stocks (using the ‘high’ shadow price of carbon) US$ 123,769,718 Parameter Unit ‘Low’ Carbon Price ‘High Carbon Price Present value of GHG ER benefits (30 years, 7% discount rate) US$, millions 417.7 835.41 Present value of net benefits (7%, 30 years) US$, millions 384.44 802.14 IRR (7%) % 35 46% BCR Ratio 12.56 25.11 15. Monetary Benefit 2: Increases in farmer incomes. The 2024 Borrower Completion Report summarized average incremental earnings due to the project as US$1,369 per household per year for 2,810 households (49 percent of the total of 5,713 households) in the Brono and Ahafo forest reserve/plantation area and US$1,579 per year for 4,510 households (60 percent of the total of 7,473 households) in the Western and North Western forest reserve/cocoa landscapes area (Annex 3, p. 107). It calculates the present value of this stream of incremental net annual earnings over 4 years of project implementation and over 20 years post project as US$153.35 million (assuming a 7 percent discount rate) with a BCR of 3.52. While this report did not clarify how the average incremental net incomes were derived, the 2024 ENFALP Beneficiary Survey Report (Table on pp. 21–22) provides some clarification, based on which the incremental project benefits were recalculated (Table 4.7).64 Table 4.7. Revised Incremental Income Benefits Amount Quantity Unit Price (US$) Short-term employment. Working gang 45,500 Household 120 1,365,000 (boundary clearing, maintaining MTS, cutting pegs, fire belts, and so on)a Informal employment. Natural resources products 350 Household 2,500 875,000 (timber, non-timber forest products, nursery operation, wood fuel, and so on)b 64Tables on p. 14 and p. 21 of the 2024 Beneficiary Survey Report contain different numbers, for example, income per household per year from working gangs (US$825 and US$600) and from livelihood enterprise (US$667 and US$663), giving different totals (US$8,006 and US$8,269), which in turn give different estimates of incremental income (US$5,294 for Brono and Ahafo forest reserve/plantation and US$2,177 for North and North Western forest reserves/cocoa landscapes), for different numbers of affected households (33 percent, 49 percent, and 60 percent). While the textual explanation (pp. 14–15) reveals that the benefit calculations themselves are incorrect, the basic premise of the table is unrealistic, that is, every family benefited from every type of income, every year. Page 40 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Amount Quantity Unit Price (US$) Off-farm employment. Livelihood enterprises 3,678 Beneficiary 51 187,500 (beekeeping, small ruminant, soap making, and so on)c 1,276 Cocoa farmer 75 96,000 On-farm self-employment. Direct farm revenue 43,613 ha 3.27 142,440 (from cocoa, food crops, oil palm, coconut, and so on)d Total incremental income per year 1,300,940 Note: a. An average of 3,500 people in each of the 13 Forest Districts participating in ENFALP were paid US$5 per day for 120 days in a year. b. Around 3,500,000.00 seedlings were procured from 350 beneficiaries during the project, each seedling costing US$0.25, totaling US$850,000. c. 3 million seedlings were suppled to 3,678 beneficiaries, each costing US$0.25; Also, 80,000 plantain suckers were suppled to 1,276 cocoa farmers practicing climate-smart cocoa, each of which cost US$1.20 d. Incremental farm revenue was recalculated using the area reported as being under climate-smart cocoa (from the RF), and assuming 1,000 kg of additional cocoa per hectare, and US$3.266 per kg of cocoa (September 2024 price announced by the COCOBOD)65 16. The NPV of the benefit stream of net incremental farmer incomes, however, is negative, although the NPV of the combined stream of revised GHG ER and farmer income net benefits is US$2,986.94, with an IRR of 29 percent and a BCR of 8.64—chiefly because of carbon benefits. This indicates that farmer incomes alone do not justify the project. 17. Additional monetary benefits: Ecosystem benefits and teak plantations. Given the earlier finding, the range of benefits estimated was expanded beyond those estimated in the PAD EFA to include forest watershed ecosystem benefits (in the PAD EFA) and timber plantation (in the AF Project Paper). Using the latest value of the former, that is, US$350 per ha for Sahelian Africa,66 and the project area restored/reforested from the RF (17,600 ha), the annual benefit of the former is estimated at US$6.16 million. Assuming that (a) one-third of the area restored/reforested (that is, 5,876 ha) is under teak plantations, one of the three options considered in the 2019 AF Project Paper (along with cedar and mixed timber); (b) the conservative 20-year yield of teak is 27 m3;67 and (c) the average price of teak logs is US$476 per m3,68 the one-time benefit of harvesting 20-year trees from the project’s teak plantation is US$75.40 million. If these were planted in the last year of the project, that is, 2024, this harvest will be in 2043. The inclusion of these two benefits raises the NPV of all incremental non-carbon net benefits of the project to US$35.27 million, with an IRR of 13 percent and a BCR of 2.06. Sensitivity Analysis 18. Decreasing incremental net benefits by 20 percent and adding 10 percent of the total project costs as annual O&M costs still yields a positive NPV, an IRR above 10 percent, and a BCR above 1, as does doubling the discount rate to 15 percent (Table 4.8). 65 https://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/business/2024-2025-Season-COCOBOD-sets-cocoa-producer-price-at-GH-3-000-per-64-kilogram- bag-1950219. 66 Mirzabaev, A., M. Sacande, F. Motlagh, A. Shyrokaya, and A. Martucci. 2022. “Economic Efficiency and Targeting of the African Great Green Wall.” Nat Sustain 5: 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00801-8. 67 The high-productivity 20-year average yield is 46 m3, based on the assessment of teak yield from various fertility classes (Bois Et Forêts Des Tropiques, 1999, No. 261). 68 This is the average price of the top five species harvested and exported (teak, wawa, eucalyptus, ceiba, and denya) for the period January–April 2024. Forestry Commission. 2024. Report on Export of Ghana’s Timber and Wood Products. https://fcghana.org/wp- content/uploads/2024/08/EXPORT-OF-GHANAS-TIMBER-AND-WOOD-PRODUCTS-FOR-APRIL-2024.pdf. Page 41 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Table 4.8. Sensitivity Analysis 20% Less 10% CAPEX All Benefits without Scenario Unit All Benefits with Carbon Future Benefits as Future O&M Carbon Discount rate % 7 7 7 10 15 7 10 15 NPV of net incremental benefits US$, 405.11 420.22 452.98 239.91 111.97 35.27 11.90 3.52 millions IRR % 37 37 38 37 38 13 13 13 BCR Ratio 13.18 7.36 14.62 5.98 5.84 2.06 1.41 1.13 Conclusion 19. The project is economically viable when the incremental post-project net benefit streams—both combined benefits and non-carbon benefits alone—are assessed using standard economic efficiency parameters such as NPV, IRR, and BCR. This finding stands even if future benefits are decreased by 20 percent, annual O&M costs are added, and the discount rate is doubled to 15 percent. Page 42 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS The final draft of the ICR was shared with the Borrower and the following comments were received by the Bank team on December 17, 2024. 1. The Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources (MLNR), together with the project Team have carefully reviewed the World Bank’s Implementation Completion and Results (ICR) report for the ENFALP project and the team largely agrees with the findings and recommendations. 2. Generally, the ICR report is fair to the main project results and captures substantially the achievements made under the project. In specific terms: (a) The Team agrees to the Development Objective Rating – The development Object was rated Satisfactory and this is consistent with the project performance, and we agree with the Bank. (b) The Team agrees to the Outcome Rating – Moderately satisfactory (c) The Team does not fully agree to the M & E Quality rating (Modest). The team is of the opinion that the rating needs to be reviewed upwards. The M & E System developed and Implemented positively influenced decision- making and the project outcome. It enabled the project o keep track on progress, made amendments to field activities, ensured sound financial management and effective coordination among the FIP. The inadequacy of economic data to assess the project efficiency and efficacy was by default in the project design and not a failure by project implementers. We acknowledge that the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system deployed during the project was designed collaboratively by the World Bank and the Government, based on an agreed set of indicators (Bank-Centric) and data collection methods. These were aligned with both the project’s goals and the technological and institutional capacities available at the time of design. However, as technologies and data collection standards advanced over the project lifecycle, it is evident on hindsight that the M&E system could have evolved earlier to incorporate these advancements. This would have further enriched the project’s outcomes and supported a more comprehensive evaluation at closure. (d) Looking forward, the MLNR is committed to leveraging these lessons to strengthen future projects, ensuring that M&E systems remain adaptable, forward-looking, and aligned with emerging global and local priorities. There are many documentary evidence on the ENFALP conducted by Climate Investment Funds, World Bank and MLNR, which are available online. We are happy to share specific documentary evidence (pictures, videos, case studies, publications) related to the interventions. (e) The explanation given to why Carbon Stock (open forest) was not achieved includes, but not limited to the following: (i) Shifts in land-use cover classes and changes from the open to closed forests (ii) Mostly due to misclassification of land-use cover (iii) The images used were affected by heavy cloud cover and haze in parts of the Western Region, ie images with heavy cloud cover were substituted with clearer images to ensure accurate results and better estimation of area change and emissions. Page 43 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Other Specific Comments M&E System Design and Implementation • Collaborative Design: o The M&E framework was a product of collaborative efforts between the Bank and the Government, informed by shared priorities and available resources at the time. o The system reflected the level of capacity, technology, and standards available in 2014, with GIS-based monitoring and field sampling being cutting-edge tools at the time (by design, the GFIP was to use the National MRV which was being developed by the REDD+ Secretariat. Engaging RMSC was the option when the national system was not ready). o As highlighted in the ICR, certain data gaps such as baseline socio-economic metrics (e.g., incremental household incomes) and real-time monitoring tools were missing. This is attributed to the fact that they were not explicitly captured in the M&E framework agreed by both Bank and GoG Teams at design and appraisal stage. This underscores the need for adaptive M&E systems capable of evolving alongside technological and institutional advancements overtime. Indicators: Balancing Global Standards with Local Relevance • Bank-Centric Indicators: o Many of the indicators, such as avoided emissions and hectares of land rehabilitated, area managed biodiversity friendly, were standard metrics required by the Bank for global consistency across REDD+ and SCF projects. These indicators effectively demonstrated the project’s contribution to global environmental goals. However, this focus sometimes limited the ability to include indicators that reflected Ghana’s unique priorities and how we measure some of these achievements, such as improved biodiversity, tree tenure reforms, community governance. Lessons and Recommendations for Future Projects 3. The lessons drawn from this project and the ICR’s findings point to several opportunities for improvement: (a) Adaptability of M&E Systems: o Future projects should design M&E systems with built-in flexibility to incorporate technological advancements and evolving data standards over time. o Real-time monitoring tools (e.g., mobile data collection platforms and drone-based surveys) should be prioritized for efficiency and accuracy. (b) Enhanced Baselines and Indicators: o Comprehensive baselines that capture both environmental and socio-economic dimensions should be established during project preparation. o The results framework should integrate both Bank-centric indicators and locally relevant metrics to fully capture project impacts. Page 44 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT (c) Capacity Building for M&E Teams: o Investments in training and equipping national and local M&E teams will ensure sustainability and ownership of M&E processes beyond project closure. (d) Stronger Collaboration: o Early and continuous collaboration between the Bank and the Government during the design and implementation of M&E systems will ensure that both global and local priorities are adequately addressed. Page 45 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT ANNEX 6. PICTURES AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE Figure 6.1. A Mined-out Site before and after Rehabilitation Source: The GoG. Table 6.1. Documentaries and Feature Stories on Ghana FIP Documentary/Feature Story Date Documentary on Ghana FIP: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nzlLlsUv-k February 17, 2021 In Ghana, Sustainable Cocoa-Forest Practices Yield Carbon Credits: June 1, 2023 https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2023/06/01/in-ghana-sustainable-cocoa-forest-practices- yield-carbon-credits?cid=ECR_YT_Worldbank_EN_EXT Curbing Deforestation: Sustainable Cocoa Farming Yields Carbon Credits for Ghana: July 19, 2023 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH4y7-06orc Page 46 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT ANNEX 7. ADJUSTMENTS TO RESULTS FRAMEWORK DURING ADDITIONAL FINANCING Revised PDIs 1. PDIs, their definition and description, and outcome targets were modified as part of the AF (Table 7.1). Table 7.1. Revisions to PDIs and Outcome Targets PDI Original Target Revised Target Rationale People in forest & adjacent community with monetary/non- 87,500 106,000 The end target was adjusted to monetary benefit from forest (Number) reflect the AF. • Including female (Number) 45,000 53,000 Area under improved CREMA management or climate smart 50,000 80,000 The end target was adjusted to cocoa management practices in targeted landscapes due to reflect the AF. Project intervention (Hectare (Ha)) • Including under climate smart cocoa management 50,000 40,000 practices • Including under CREMA management 30,000 80,000 Area of forest in targeted landscapes (Hectare (Ha)) 412,064 417,518 The end target was adjusted to • Including closed forest 139,298 139,298 reflect the AF. • Including open forest 272,765 278,220 Total greenhouse gas emissions reductions plus 1,038,262 4,628,548 The end target was adjusted to enhancement of carbon stocks, estimated in tons equivalent reflect the AF. CO2e/year • Including greenhouse gas emissions reductions – 484,454 973,322.60 closed forest • Including greenhouse gas emissions reductions – open 362,189 2,279,534.39 forest • Including enhancement of carbon stock – closed 50,620 0 The end target was revised since forest closed forests inherently have higher carbon storage capacity due to their mature and dense canopy and require little/no intervention to enhance their carbon stock. • Including enhancement of carbon stock – open forest 141,000 1,375,691 Direct project beneficiaries (Number) 9,501 12,501 The end target was adjusted to • Including female (Percentage) 49 50 reflect the AF. Mining sites that have been rehabilitated n.a. 5 This indicator was added during the AF to reflect and monitor activities designed to address illegal ASGM. Note: The timeline for the end targets were adjusted to reflect the closing date extension during the AF. Page 47 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Table 7.2. Revisions to IR Indicators and Targets Indicator Name Original Target Revised Target Rationale Component 1. Policy Reforms and Institutional Strengthening Reforms in forest policy, legislation or other regulations Yes n.a. The indicator was not revised. supported (Yes/No) Government institutions provided with capacity building to 23 30.00 The end target was revised to improve management of forest resources (Number) reflect the AF. Component 2. Pilot Investments for Improved Forest and Landscape Management with Communities Community-based NRM institutions provided with access to 5.00 5.00 The indicator was not revised. improved management practices for sustainable landscape management (Number) Farmers / participants provided with capacity-building support 2,200 3,500 The end targets were revised to to improve management practices for tree planting or nurseries reflect the AF. (Number) • including female (Number) 1,283 1,750 Area restored or re/afforested (ha) 13,500 17,100 The end target was revised to reflect the AF. • Area restored (ha) 12,500 12,500 The sub-indicator was not revised. • Area re/afforested (ha) 1,000 4,600 The end target was revised to reflect the AF. Farmers / participants in targeted landscape corridors reporting 1,475 6,500 The end targets were revised to satisfaction with service delivery or benefits received under the reflect the AF. project (Number) • including female (Number) 840 3,250 New areas outside protected areas managed as biodiversity 50,000 80,000 The end target was revised to friendly (ha) reflect the AF. Component 3. Innovation, Capacity Building, and Communications Forest users trained (Number) 1,600 4,500 The end targets were revised to • Including female (Number) 910 2,250 reflect the AF. Government officials / extension agents and service providers 450 550 trained (Number) • including female 171 220 • including agricultural / cocoa extension agents / service 135 180 providers • including local government officials 45 70 • including FC staff 270 300 Page 48 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT ANNEX 8. INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF FOREST ANALYTICS 1. This analytical work uses public domain data sets for assessing trends in forestry-related metrics for Ghana and associated subregions for the Ghana FIP. Various metrics here are reported at three spatial aggregations: landscape level (the broad area representing five regions of Ghana for FIP); overlap level (the area intersection between FIP and GERP); and project level (13 forest districts representing the ENFALP area), used as proxy for project areas. Figure 8.1 shows the area for landscape-level analysis (right) and overlap-level analysis (intersection area for two projects, left). Figure 8.1. Landscape-Level (Right) and Overlap-Level (Left) Land Cover, 2017–2023 Source: Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). 2. The project area selected is 1.6 million ha, selected to represent the project intervention areas within the project landscape area of ~6.4 million ha. The projects overlap area is around 3.1 million ha. Within these three areas of interest, changes in the land use and land cover, in the aboveground biomass, and in forest cover, are analyzed. Changes in Land Use and Land Cover 3. ESA Climate Change initiative (CCI) land cover:69 The CCI land cover project delivers consistent global land cover maps at 300 m spatial resolution on an annual basis from 1992 to 2020 (for example, Figure 8.2). The CCI land cover product has many classes, and to simplify visualization and analytics, these are further aggregated noting that not all broader global classes are relevant for Ghana and that only subsets exist in the biomes and landscapes of Ghana (Table 8.1). 69 European Space Agency (ESA) CCI Land Cover version 2.1.1. Page 49 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Figure 8.2. Land Cover Map of Ghana Source: ESA CCI. Page 50 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT 4. The ESA CCI land cover class that corresponds roughly to ‘open forests’ in Table 8.1, roughly matches the definition by the FC of the GoG of open forests (<60 percent forest cover) while open forests are defined as having >60 percent forest cover. Table 8.1. Land Cover Classes, ESA CCI CLASS LANDCOVER Bare areas Bare Areas Consolidated bare areas Bare Areas Cropland, irrigated or post-flooding Cropland Cropland, rainfed Cropland Cropland, rainfed: Herbaceous cover Cropland Deciduous shrubland Shrubland Grassland Grassland Mosaic cropland (>50%) / natural vegetation (tree, shrub, herbaceous cover) (<50%) Mosaic Mosaic herbaceous cover (>50%) / tree and shrub (<50%) Mosaic Mosaic natural vegetation (tree, shrub, herbaceous cover) (>50%) / cropland (<50%) Mosaic Mosaic tree and shrub (>50%) / herbaceous cover (<50%) Mosaic Shrub or herbaceous cover, flooded, fresh/saline/brakish water Shrubland Shrubland Shrubland Tree cover, broadleaved, deciduous, closed to open (>15%) Closed Forest Tree cover, broadleaved, deciduous, open (15 - 40%) Open Forest Tree cover, broadleaved, evergreen, closed to open (>15%) Closed Forest Tree cover, flooded, fresh or brakish water Flooded Forest Tree cover, flooded, saline water Flooded Forest Urban areas Urban Water bodies Water 5. Analysis of LULC change between 2014 and 2022 (or indeed, 2017–2022 and 2019–2022) finds that open and closed forest areas decreased, stayed the same, or increased marginally (2–5 percent)—a finding that remains unchanged even if Mosaic areas are included (tables 8.2–8.4). Table 8.2. Project Landscape Area - LULC Change, 2014–2022 (ha) Percentage Change Class 2014 2017 2019 2022 2014–22 2017–22 2019–22 Bare areas 755 747 1,207 1,207 60 62 0 Cropland 2,542,116 2,537,911 2,526,452 2,514,933 −1 −1 0 Flooded forest 3,704 3,641 3,969 3,899 5 7 −2 Grassland 508 499 506 523 3 5 3 Mosaic 546,961 545,294 535,415 513,979 −6 −6 −4 Shrubland 96,033 95,042 93,173 91,883 −4 −3 −1 Page 51 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Percentage Change Class 2014 2017 2019 2022 2014–22 2017–22 2019–22 Urban 48,085 50,764 52,484 73,127 52 44 39 Water 125,581 125,569 123,751 123,749 −1 −1 0 Open forest 2,182,818 2,182,756 2,181,292 2,180,838 0 0 0 Closed forest 882,179 886,518 910,493 924,602 5 4 2 Table 8.3. Projects Overlap Area - LULC Change, 2014–2022 (ha) Percentage Change Class 2014 2017 2019 2022 2014–22 2017–22 2019–22 Cropland 1,997,520 1,994,742 1,991,788 1,989,029 0 0 0 Flooded forest 1,980 1,918 1,828 1,800 −9 −6 −2 Grassland 89 80 89 89 0 11 0 Mosaic 210,699 209,971 209,781 202,893 −4 −3 −3 Shrubland 2,797 2,811 2,752 2,387 −15 −15 −13 Urban 21,963 23,584 24,922 35,289 61 50 42 Water 3,408 3,408 3,170 3,170 −7 −7 0 Open forest 9,031 9,022 9,162 9,033 0 0 −1 Closed forest 839,074 841,024 843,070 842,872 0 0 0 Table 8.4. Project Area - LULC Change, 2014–2022 (ha) Percentage Change Class 2014 2017 2019 2022 2014–22 2017–22 2019–22 Cropland 810,423 809,362 807,611 800,064 −1 −1 −1 Flooded forest 38 38 46 37 −3 −3 −20 Grassland 70 70 79 79 13 13 0 Mosaic 87,213 86,494 84,029 78,490 −10 −9 −7 Shrubland 2,389 2,380 2,408 2,147 −10 −10 −11 Urban 21,967 22,660 23,834 32,963 50 45 38 Water 322 322 173 172 −47 −47 −1 Open forest 348,731 348,731 348,441 348,341 0 0 0 Closed forest 340,385 341,481 344,916 349,244 3 2 1 Table 8.5. Project-Reported Changes in GHG Emissions and Carbon Stocks, 2015–2024 2014 2022 Difference tCO2/ha Closed forest (ha) 33,210,312 42,270,564 9,060,252 251 Open forest (ha) 14,309,188 24,184,247 9,875,059 83 Total GHG ER (tCO2e) 83,260,250 104,196,438 18,935,311 Total GHG ER plus carbon stock enhancement (tCO2e) = 20,197,996 (18,935,311 + 1,262,686) Page 52 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT Note: Total carbon stocks for various project interventions calculated by adding the mean aboveground and belowground carbon stock from the area planted because of project interventions (Table 8.7). Table 8.6. Independently Estimated Changes in GHG Emissions and Carbon Stocks, 2015 –2024 Carbon Stocks (tCO2e) 2014 2022 Difference tCO2/ha Closed forest (ha) 85,436,635 87,660,244 2,223,609 251 Open forest (ha) 28,944,673 28,912,303 -31,540 83 114,383,322 116,574,569 2,191,247 Total GHG ER plus carbon stock enhancement (tCO2e) = 3,453,933 (2,191,247 + 1,262,686) Table 8.7. Carbon Stocks by Project Intervention Type Mean Mean Mean Management Intervention AGC BGC Total Mean AGC CI Total Area (ha) Total tCO2e Area Type (tCO2e/h (tCO2e/h (AGC + BGC) (tC/ha) a) a) Forest reserve Boundary 3.76 13.800 1.6 3.44 17.24 5.26 90.69 planting Enrichment 2.83 10.400 0.6 2.59 12.99 10,218.25 132,730.98 planting MTS/model 11.39 41.780 18.2 10.40 52.19 2,347.59 122,516.53 plantation Seed orchard 17.40 63.854 22.2 15.90 79.75 606.20 48,346.66 Subtotal 16,299.55 303,684.86 OFR Climate-smart 2.74 10.066 3.4 2.51 12.57 1,400.00 17,601.41 Agric Climate-smart 3.68 13.510 1.7 3.36 16.87 54,279.81 915,916.97 cocoa Plantations 10.17 37.314 9.1 9.29 46.61 98.20 4,576.63 Watershed 4.39 16.130 4.8 4.02 20.14 555.50 11,187.84 Woodlots 4.71 17.271 2.1 4.30 21.57 450.50 9,717.95 Subtotal 56,784.01 959,000.80 Total 73,083.55 1,262,685.66 Note: AGC = Aboveground Carbon; BGC = Belowground Carbon; CI = Confidence Interval. Page 53 The World Bank Ghana FIP - Enhancing Natural Forest and Agroforest Landscapes Project (P148183) ICR DOCUMENT ANNEX 9. MAP OF PROJECT AREA Page 54