Mauritania Oil & Gas Project (PDFDrive) PDF

UNDP Project Document
Government of Mauritania
Executing Agency: Ministry of the Environment and Sustainable Development (MEDD)

Management Partner: German Cooperation Agency GTZ
Additional partners:
Directorate of the Marine Commercial
Ministry of Petroleum and Energy (MPE)
Mauritanian Society of Hydrocarbons (SMH)
National Park of Banc d‘Arguin (PNBA)
National Park of Diawling (PND)
IUCN – Mauritania
WWF WAMER
Oil and Gas Companies
United Nations Development Program (UNDP)
UNDP GEF PIMS no. 3700
Partnership to Mainstream Marine and Coastal Biodiversity into

Oil and Gas Sector Development in Mauritania
Brief description
The proposed project will mainstream marine and coastal biodiversity into the policies and practices of
the nascent offshore oil and gas industry in Mauritania by guiding oil and gas development in a manner
that does not degrade marine and coastal natural ecosystems and resources, and provides benefits to
local communities through a concerted partnership involving the GOM, the oil and gas industry, and
other stakeholders. The project objective is to strengthen the necessary policy, legislative and financial
instruments as well as the capacity of government and civil society stakeholders in partnership with the
oil and gas industry to protect and conserve marine and coastal biodiversity. Many areas of the coast,
such as the Banc d‘Arguin ecosystems, possess vast expanses of shallow waters that include sea-grass
beds, mangroves and many small islands, all of which are fed by the upwelling of nutrient-rich cold
waters. These rich marine and coastal ecosystems support an extremely high abundance of fish, coastal
birds, invertebrates and marine mammals as well as fish nurseries that are critical for maintaining fish
stocks and marine mammals throughout WAMER. Much of the biodiversity role in sustaining fisheries
in the region has not yet been properly estimated. Banc d‘Arguin also is a globally important nesting
and breeding area for birds, hosting the world‘s largest concentration of palaearctic migratory birds
every winter, and also providing habitat for large numbers of breeding waterfowls.
Table of Contents
SECTION I: ELABORATION OF THE NARRATIVE ................................................................................. 7

PART I: Situation Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 7
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 7
Context and global significance ........................................................................................................... 8
Mauritania‘s Coastal and Marine Biodiversity ................................................................................................ 8
Sectoral Framework for Biodiversity Mainstreaming ................................................................................... 12
Governance Frameworks for Biodiversity Mainstreaming ........................................................................... 18
Threats, Risks and Impacts................................................................................................................. 25
Overexploitation of the Fishery Resources ................................................................................................... 27
Maritime Traffic ............................................................................................................................................ 28
Oil and Gas Developments ............................................................................................................................ 28
Long-term Solution and Barriers to Achieving the Solution.............................................................. 31
System‘s Boundaries for Mainstreaming ........................................................................................... 38
Stakeholder Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 39
Baseline analysis ................................................................................................................................ 42
PART II: Strategy ........................................................................................................................................ 43
Project Rationale and Policy Conformity ........................................................................................... 43
Fit with the GEF Focal Area Strategy and Strategic Program ....................................................................... 43
Rationale and Summary of GEF Alternative ................................................................................................. 44
Project Goal, Objective, Outcomes and Outputs/activities ................................................................ 45
Project Performance Indicators .......................................................................................................... 51
Risks and Assumptions ...................................................................................................................... 54
Incremental Reasoning and Expected Global, National and Local benefits ...................................... 58
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ............................................................................................................... 59
Project Consistency with National Priorities/Plans: ........................................................................... 62
Country Ownership: Country Eligibility and Country Drivenness .................................................... 62
Sustainability and Replicability ......................................................................................................... 63
PART III: Management Arrangements ..................................................................................................... 65
Implementation Arrangements ........................................................................................................... 65
Project Oversight ................................................................................................................................ 66
Project Management ........................................................................................................................... 67
PART IV: Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget ......................................................................... 68
Monitoring and reporting ................................................................................................................... 68
Inception Phase ............................................................................................................................................. 68
Monitoring Responsibilities and Events ........................................................................................................ 68
Project Reporting........................................................................................................................................... 70
Independent Evaluations, Audits and financial reporting .................................................................. 72
Learning and knowledge sharing ....................................................................................................... 72
Audit Clause ....................................................................................................................................... 74
PART V: Legal Context ............................................................................................................................... 74
SECTION II: STRATEGIC RESULTS FRAMEWORK (SRF) AND GEF INCREMENT ..................... 75
PART I: Strategic Results Framework ...................................................................................................... 75
Indicator Framework .......................................................................................................................... 75
List of Outputs per Outcome .............................................................................................................. 78
Part II: Incremental Cost Analysis ............................................................................................................. 80
SECTION III: TOTAL BUDGET AND WORKPLAN ................................................................................ 83
SECTION IV: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION .......................................................................................... 86
PART I: Co-Financing ................................................................................................................................. 86
PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 2

PART II: Project Maps................................................................................................................................ 86
PART III: Options for the Development of Financial Mechanisms ........................................................ 87
PART IV: Organizational Chart of the Project ........................................................................................ 91
PART VI: Terms of References for key project staff................................................................................ 91
National Project Director ................................................................................................................... 91
Project Manager ................................................................................................................................. 92
Project assistant .................................................................................................................................. 93
Overview of Inputs from Technical Assistance Consultants ......................................................................... 94
PART VII: Stakeholder Involvement ........................................................................................................ 99
Overview of Related Initiatives ................................................................................................................... 99
Project Annexes............................................................................................................................................... 105
Annex 1: Multilateral Environmental Agreements by which Mauritania is bound............................ 105
Annex 2: Key Results of the Oil and Gas Industry Assessment ............................................................ 107
Annex 3: Global Significance of the Banc d’Arguin-Cap Blanc Complex ........................................... 111
Annex 4: GEF-4 SO2 Tracking Tools...................................................................................................... 113
I. Project General Information ......................................................................................................... 114
II. Project Landscape/Seascape Coverage ........................................................................................ 114
III. Management Practices Applied .................................................................................................. 116
IV. Market Transformation .............................................................................................................. 116
V. Policy and Regulatory frameworks ............................................................................................. 117
VI. Other Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 119
VII. Financial Sustainability Scorecard for National Systems of Protected Areas .......................... 119
Financial Scorecard - Part I – Overall Financial Status of the Protected Areas System .............................. 119
Financial Scorecard – Part II – Assessing Elements of the Financing System ............................................ 122
Financial Scorecard – Part III – Scoring and Measuring Progress .............................................................. 127
Annex 5: UNDP Capacity Assessment Scorecard .................................................................................. 128
Annex 6. Background Information for Biodiversity Mainstreaming into Governance Frameworks 131
Institutional Context ......................................................................................................................... 131
Ministry of the Environment and Sustainable Development (MEDD) ....................................................... 131
Banc d‘Arguin National Park Authority (Parc National du Banc d‘Arguin - PNBA) ................................. 132
National Park of Diawling (Parc National du Diawling - PND) ................................................................. 134
Ministry of Petroleum and Energy .............................................................................................................. 134
Mauritanian Society of Hydrocarbons (SMH) ............................................................................................ 134
Ministry of Fishery and Marine Economy .................................................................................................. 135
Mauritania‘s Merchant Marine Directorate ................................................................................................. 135
Scientific Panel on Oil and Gas Activities in the Mauritania ...................................................................... 136
Policy Context .................................................................................................................................. 136
National Strategy for Sustainable Development (NSSD) ............................................................................ 136
National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP)............................................................................................. 137
National Coastal Zone Management Plan (PDALM) .................................................................................. 138
Other Strategies and Plans ........................................................................................................................... 138
Regulatory Context .......................................................................................................................... 139
Code de l‘Environnement (Environmental Code) ....................................................................................... 139
Ordinance for the Protection, Development and Management of the Coastal Zone ................................... 140
Draft Law to Prevent and Combat Different Types of Marine Pollutions ................................................... 140
Decree for the Environmental Impact Assessment ...................................................................................... 140
Legislation Context to the Oil and Gas Sector ............................................................................................ 141
Law for Establishing a Hunting Code and Protect Fauna (Law No. 97-006) .............................................. 142
Fisheries Code ............................................................................................................................................. 143
Annex 7. Overview of PPG Studies ........................................................................................................... 144

List of Tables
Table 1: Summarized Industry Profile Matrix ............................................................................................................. 17

Table 2: Roles and Responsibilities of Key Stakeholders .......................................................................................... 39
Table 3: List of Project Performance Indicators ......................................................................................................... 53
Table 4: Elaboration of Risks ..................................................................................................................................... 55
Table 5: Project Risks Assessment and Mitigation Measures .................................................................................... 56
Table 6: M&E Activities, Responsibilities, Budget and Time Frame ........................................................................ 72
Table 7: Incremental Cost Matrix ............................................................................................................................... 80
Table 8: Overview of Inputs from Technical Assistance Consultants ........................................................................ 94
Table 9: Overview of Project Consultants per Source of Fund .................................................................................. 97
Table 10: Summary of Related Activities ................................................................................................................... 99
Table 11: Coordination and collaboration between project and related initiatives ................................................... 103
Table 12: International Conventions Signed-Ratified by Mauritania ....................................................................... 105
Table 13: Summary of Companies Involved in the Oil and Gas Sector in Mauritania ............................................. 107
Table 14: Industry Profile Matrix with focus on EIA ................................................................................................ 109
Table 15: Summary Results of the UNDP Capacity Assessment Scorecard ............................................................ 128
Table 16: Detailed Results of the UNDP Capacity Assessment Scorecard .............................................................. 128
Table 17: Summary of Studies Conducted under the PPG Phase ............................................................................. 144
List of Figures
Figure 1: Important oil and gas fields in selected off-shore blocks (2006)................................................................. 16
Figure 2: Mean Trophic Index for Mauritania ............................................................................................................ 27
Figure 3: Hierarchy of Risk Mitigation Measures ...................................................................................................... 34
Figure 4: Sea Areas in International Rights ................................................................................................................ 38
Figure 5: Rough Representation of Spatial Targets for Mainstreaming ..................................................................... 38
Figure 6: Capacity Development Diagram ................................................................................................................. 65
Figure 8: Thumbnail of Project Map 3 ..................................................................................................................... 108
Figure 9: Graphic Representation of the upwelling around Banc d‘Arguin and Cap Blanc ..................................... 112
List of Boxes
Box 1: Mapping Project ―Biodiversity and Hydrocarbons in Mauritania‖ ................................................................. 14

Box 2: The Value of biodiversity in Mauritania‘s Protected Areas ............................................................................ 22
Box 3: Comparing EIA and SEA ................................................................................................................................ 31
Box 4: Implementation of MARPOL and other international sea governance instruments and in Mauritania .......... 32
Box 5: Risk Assessment Guiding Matrix ................................................................................................................... 56
List of Project Maps – in a separate file
Map 1: The West Africa Marine Critical Region of the World

Map 2: Political Map of Mauritania
Map 3: Status of oil and gas concessions in Mauritania in January 2009
Map 4: Banc d‘Arguin National Park and Cap Blanc Satellite Reserve
Map 5: Diawling National Park and Chat T‘boul Reserve
Map 6a: Biodiversity and hydrocarbons in Mauritania (Carte 1): Protected Area and Conservation Priorities
Map 6b: Biodiversity and hydrocarbons in Mauritania (Carte 2): Habitats, species of interest and reproduction zones
Map 6c: Biodiversity and hydrocarbons in Mauritania (Carte 3): Fishing Activities
Map 6d: Biodiversity and hydrocarbons in Mauritania (Carte 4): Hydrocarbons and Coastal and Marine Ecosystems
Map 6e: Biodiversity and hydrocarbons in Mauritania (Carte 5): Protected Area and Conservation Priorities
Map 7: Locations of deep-water carbonate mound structures in the region
Map 8: Locations of surface oil slicks in the Mauritanian marine environment in relation to main ship traffic routes
Map 9: International maritime traffic routes: focus on Western Africa
Map 10: Mauritania's Coastal Zone

Acronyms
AFD Agence Française du Développement

APR Annual Project Review
ARC Aménagement, Remédiation, Conservation
ARR Annual Review Report
AWP Annual Work Plan
CCNL Conseil Consultatif National du Littoral
CCPME Consultative Committee to Protect the Marine Environment
CDR Combined Delivery Report
CEO Chief Executive Officer
CILSS Comité Inter-états pour la Lutte contre la Sécheresse au Sahel
CO Country Office
COP Conference Of Parties
CPP Contrat Type of Partage de Production
CSBA Conseil Scientifique du Banc d‘Arguin
CSO Community Support Organization
DAL Directives d‘Aménagement du Littoral
DAPL Direction des Aires Protégées
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EIF Environment Intervention Fund
EITI Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
EU European Union
FFEM Fonds Français pour l‘Envionnement Mondial
FIBA Fondation Internationale du Banc d‘Arguin
FNRH Fonds National des Revenus des Hydrocarbures
FPSO Floating Production Storage and Off-take Facilities and Transport of Large Quantity of Oil
GEF Global Environment Facility
GOM Government of Mauritania
GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammerarbeit GmgH
HQ HeadQuarters
HR Human Resource
IFREMER French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea
IMARESIMO Institute for Marine Resources and Ecosystem StudiesInternational Maritime Organization
IMO International Maritime Organization
IMROP Institut Mauritanien de Recherches Océanographiques et des Pêches
ISO International Standards Organization
IUCN World Conservation Unit
IW Inception Workshop
LME Large Marine Ecosystem
MAB Man and Biosphere
MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships
MDG Millenium Development Goals
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MEA Multi-lateral Environmental Agreement
MEDD Ministère de l‘Environnement et du Développement Durable
MSP Medium Size Project
MTE Medium Term Evaluation
MTI Marine Trophic Index

NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
NCSA National Capacity Self-Assessment
NEA National Executing Agency
NEAP National Environmental Action Plan
NECEMA Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement in the Maghreb
NEPAD New Partnership for Africa‘s Development
NEX National Execution modalities
NGO Non Governmental Organization
NIA National Implementing Agency
NPD National Project Director
NSSD National Strategy for Sustainable Development
OPRC International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation
PA Protected Area
PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
PANE Plan d‘Action National pour l‘Environnement
PDALM Plan Directeur d‘Aménagement du Littoral Mauritanien
PIR Project Implementation Review
PMC Project Management Committee
PNBA Parc National du Banc d‘Arguin
PND Parc National du Diawling
POLMAR Plan de lutte contre les Pollution Marines
PPG Project Preparation Grant
PPR Project Progress Report
PRCM Program Régional de Conservation de la zone côtière et Marine en Afrique de l‘ouest
PRECASP Projet pour le Renforcement des Capacités du Secteur Public
PRISM 2 Projet de Renforcement Institutionnel du Secteur – Mauritanie (second phase)
PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Program
PSC Project Steering Committee
RCU Regional Coordination Unit
SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment
SMART Specific, Measurable, Acheivable, Relevant and Time-bound
SMH Societé Mauritanienne des Hydrocarbures
SRF Strategic Results Framework
TBD To Be Determined
TNA Training Needs Analysis
TOR Terms Of Reference
UN United Nations
UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat the Desertification
UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
UNDP United Nations Development Program
UNEP United Nations Environment Program
UNESCO United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
UNSO United Nations Sudano-Sahelian Office
WAMER West African Marine EcoRegion
WCMC World Conservation Monitoring Center
WWF World Wildlife Fund
WB World Bank

SECTION I: ELABORATION OF THE NARRATIVE
PART I: Situation Analysis

INTRODUCTION
1. In 2001 the Australian based company Woodside Energy discovered exploitable quantities of oil
and gas in Mauritania‘s marine environment, more precisely in the Chinguetti and Banda fields
approximately 80 km off the capital Nouakchott. Oil and gas companies, of varying sizes and nationalities
are now queuing to explore the rest of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) while others explore onshore.
Production started off-shore in the Chinguetti area in 2006 and remains modest.
2. However, Mauritania‘s marine and coastal environment hosts at the same time biological
diversity of international importance. Some of these high biodiversity areas are widely acknowledged,
such as the Banc d‘Arguin National Park, which is a UNESCO World Heritage site, the trans-boundary
UNESCO Man and Biosphere reserve in the Senegal River delta, with the Diawling National Park, the
satellite reserve Chott Boul and the Djoudj National Park in Senegal as core areas. All these wetland areas
are at the same time recognized as RAMSAR sites. Other areas have also been documented to host rich
biodiversity and to be of International importance, such as rich benthic communities and upwelling areas
with high concentrations of cetaceans, seabirds and fish. However, new marine protected areas have not
yet been designated.
3. Currently, most of the threats to biodiversity posed by oil and gas operations off-shore in
Mauritania are only potential, and are hence ‗risks‘. Minor, inevitable impacts that are inherent to the
nature of oil and gas operations are however being felt. All in the while, the marine environment
continues to be heavily impacted by fisheries. European, Russian and Asian countries have signed
agreements with the government to exploit fishery resources in deeper waters while a rapid expanding
local fishery sector is active in the shallow coastal waters.
4. While extra revenue from the oil and gas sector is warmly welcomed in this developing country,
the main concern of the government is to reconcile this emerging oil and gas sector with fishery industries
and the protection and conservation of the marine and coastal biodiversity that is part of Mauritania‘s
natural capital. In line with good international practices, the actual and potential impacts of the oil and gas
industry need obviously to be properly assessed and mitigated; i.e. the industry needs to be regulated and
monitored. But there are also trade-offs to be explored (e.g. between the emerging oil and gas sector and
the existing fishery sector) and opportunities to be considered for marine conservation, as the stakes for
Mauritania‘s coastal and marine biodiversity increase.
5. Bordering the North Atlantic Ocean, between Senegal and Western Sahara, Mauritania, with
1,030,700 sq km of arid and semi-arid landscapes, is strategically positioned as a ‗mid-way‘ between the
Arab World and Africa, a fact that is also reflected in the country‘s cultural and ethnic composition. Most
of the population (approx. 3 million) is concentrated in the cities of Nouakchott and Nouadhibou and
along the Senegal River in the southern part of the country. Mauritania is a least developed country, but
displays now medium levels of human development, thanks to recent increases in income per capita.1
1
Human Development Reports 2009. Mauritania ranks 137th among 182 countries for its Human Development Index (0.550).
Life expectancy at birth is 63.2 years; the adult literacy rate (ages 15 and above) is 51%; the combined gross enrolment ratio is
45.6% and the GDP per capita is PPP US$ 2,234. UNDP Human Development Report (HDR) 2007/2008.

6. The recognition by the Mauritanian government of the importance of biodiversity and the aim to
find ways to reduce loss to biodiversity is in line with their agreements made in April 2002 at the 6th
Conference of the Parties (COP) to the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD). Mauritania and other parties
to the convention committed themselves ―to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of
biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to
the benefit of all life on Earth‖2. This ―2010 Biodiversity Target‖ was later endorsed at the World Summit
on Sustainable Development, and has been included in Millennium Development Goal 7 under the
―reducing biodiversity loss‖ target.
7. At the request of the government, UNDP will provide assistance towards achieving the objective
of integrating the conservation of marine and coastal biodiversity into a policy framework for the
emerging oil and gas sector through a project described in this document and titled ―Partnership to
Mainstream Marine and Coastal Biodiversity into Oil and Gas Sector Development in Mauritania‖ and to
be submitted to GEF and other agencies for co-financing.
CONTEXT AND GLOBAL SIGNIFICANCE

Mauritania‟s Coastal and Marine Biodiversity
8. From its two main biomes – the terrestrial and marine – the latter is definitely the most important
and exuberant from a biodiversity point of view. The First National Report to the CBD mentions that the
country‘s terrestrial biodiversity is subjected to rather adverse climatic conditions (high temperatures, low
and infrequent rainfall). Landscapes, which are richer towards the south and under the influence of the
Senegal River, have experienced gradual degradation and even the disappearance of entire habitats.
Several emblematic wildlife terrestrial species are now extinct in Mauritania.3 Marine biodiversity and the
associated coastal habitats are, in turn, rich and their conservation economically important.
9. Mauritania‘s marine biodiversity cannot be seen in isolation from the rest of the region. The fact
that numerous marine species pass different phases of their life cycles in different countries underscores
the need to understand Mauritania‘s marine biodiversity in a regional context. It is patent that West Africa
is one of the most diverse, and economically important, fishing zones in the world. Yet, Mauritania‘s
marine biodiversity in itself can be said to contain regionally and globally important species and habitats.
10. Mauritania‘s coast and sea waters are part of the Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem
(LME)4, transporting a major upwelling region off the coast of northwest Africa bordered by the Canary
Islands (Spain), Morocco, the Western Sahara, Mauritania, Senegal, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau and as far
west as Cape Verde. Its total surface is 1,125,327 sq km. The Canary Current LME is a highly productive
ecosystem. The upwellings are primarily the result of the year-round trade winds that push surface waters
away from the coast and draw cold, nutrient-rich waters from deep in the ocean up to the surface. Intense
tropical sun together with an almost constant input of nutrients provides a perfect environment for
massive growth of plankton – the foundation of an extremely productive food chain that supports high
levels of biodiversity.
2
Decision VI/26
3
The First National Report to the CBD mentions the oryx, the damaliscus, elephants, lions, the addax, ostrich and the bustard as
now disappeared from the Mauritanian territory.
4
Large marine ecosystems (LMEs) are regions of the world's oceans, encompassing coastal areas from river basins and estuaries
to the seaward boundaries of continental shelves and the outer margins of the major ocean current systems. They are relatively
large regions on the order of 200,000 sq km or greater, characterized by distinct bathymetry, hydrography, productivity, and
trophically dependent populations. The system of LMEs has been developed by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) to identify areas of the oceans for conservation purposes.

11. WWF includes Mauritania within their West African Marine Ecoregion (WAMER) and among
their 35 Critical Regions of the World5 (See Project Map 1 in Section IV, Part II), encompassing also
Senegal, Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Guinea (Conakry) and Sierra Leone. The coastline bordering the
WAMER presents a wide variety of habitats, from rocky cliffs and broad sandy beaches to extensive sea
grass prairies in the north and dense mangrove forests and well-developed estuaries in the South.
According to WWF, over 1,000 species of fish have been identified as well as several species of
cetaceans including dolphins and whales, five species of endangered marine turtles6, and a colony of 100
monk seals in Northern Mauritania in Cap Blanc – in fact the largest surviving population of
Mediterranean monk seals left on Earth. WWF regards the area as a single ecological unit. Fish that
spawn in northern nurseries seasonally migrate southwards and provide the source of food for human
fishing communities along the way. Recent satellite tracking has confirmed that green turtles lay eggs
along the remote beaches of Guinea Bissau and travel northwards through Senegalese and Gambian
waters to graze in the rich sea grasses of Mauritania. The Ecoregion‘s importance also extends from
Africa to other continents. Over 6 million migrating birds from Europe feed in the rich coastal waters
before beginning their homeward trek in the northern spring and marine turtles migrate between the
African and American continent. Fisheries in the WAMER generate some $400 million annually, which
makes it the single most important source of foreign exchange in the region and a key source of revenue
for economic and social development.
12. In terms of fisheries, the Canary Current LME is rich and diverse in resources. It includes small
pelagic fish such as sardine (Sardina pilchardus), sardinella (Sardinella aurita, S. maderensis), anchovy
(Engraulis encrasicolus), chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus) and horse mackerel (Trachurus spp.) that
constitute more than 60% of the catch in the LME. Other species caught in the LME include tuna (e.g.
Katsuwonus pelamis), coastal migratory pelagic finfish including Pagellus bellotti, Pseudotolithus sp.,
Dentex canariensis, Galeoides decadactylus and Brachydeuterus auritus, cephalpods (Octopus vulgaris,
Sepia spp., and Loligo vulgaris) and shrimps (Parapenaeus longirostris and Penaeus notialis). Most of
these species occupy transboundary habitats or are migratory, with the distribution of tunas often
extending beyond the bordering countries‘ EEZs into international waters. Fishing activities in the LME
have increased over the last three decades. In addition to small national fleets, these waters accommodate
large distant water fleets from the European Union, Russia and Asia.
13. Mauritania‘s coastline is about 720 km long and the total surface of its Exclusive Economic Zone
(EEZ) is 165,338 km². The literature indicates that Mauritania has 239 commercial fishery species (195
fish species, 18 species of crustaceans, and 26 species of mollusks). About one third of this coastline is
included in the Banc d‘Arguin National Park (with 1,207,500 ha) which includes a marine area of
624,500 ha (See Project Map 4 in Section IV, Part II). Located in a gulf, the Park contains varied habitats,
including islands, sea grass beds, mudflats, mangroves and natural pasture on the terrestrial side.
Abundance of food and safety conditions attracts approximately two million palearctic migratory birds to
the Banc d‘Arguin during the winter months following the path from Siberia to South Africa. It is not
only the country‘s largest and most important protected areas (PAs), but also among the most important
marine protected areas (MPA) of the (WAMER). Banc d‘Arguin‘s existence and conservation is helping
Mauritania reach the target set by CBD Parties of that ―establish[ing], by 2012, comprehensive,
effectively managed, and ecologically representative national and regional systems of protected areas,
5
WWF considers the WAMER as a critical seascape unit from a programmatic point of view and it includes Cape Verde. From
an ecological point of view, the target ecosystems for this project are within WWF‘s Global 200 Ecoregion #216 ‗Canary
Current‘, which includes Canary Islands (Spain), Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Mauritania, Morocco, Senegal and Western Sahara
(Morocco).
6
Green turtles (Chelonia mydas); hawksbill turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata) loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta); leatherback
turtles (Dermochelys coriacea) and olive ridley turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea).

and that there should be effective conservation of at least 10% of each of the world's ecological regions
by 2010‖.7
14. The most productive marine area off the northwest African coast is around Cap Blanc
(Mauritania, 21°N – see same map), an area that is currently is only partially protected. The upwelling is
year round while this phenomenon South of Cap Blanc is only observed from December to March.
During summer (August to November) the southern part of the country is also influenced by the warmer
Guinea current.
15. The confluence of all these biophysical conditions result in Mauritania standing out, within the
region and globally, with respect to marine life, fisheries included. Project Map 6b (Section IV, Part II)
shows the areas along Mauritania‘s coast that is of interest from a biodiversity point of view and Map 6a
the current level of protection within protected areas.
16. The continental shelf covers an area of 39,000 km² of which 9,000 km² are composed by the Baie
du Levrier (3,000 km²) and the marine part of the National Park Banc d‘Arguin (6,000 km²). The shelf
area is 74 km wide at the latitude of Cap Blanc and reaches 148 km at its widest, at the level of the Banc
d‘Arguin. Most marine life is concentrated along this continental shelf and the shelf break.
17. Several marine and coastal zones of high biodiversity importance in Mauritania‘s coastal and
marine environment stand out. Benthic ecosystems, that contain e.g., composed of ―ecosystem engineers‖,
are acknowledged as key habitats for marine biodiversity. They add three-dimensional structure to the
environment and often functioning as nursery areas. Marine species can seek shelter or grow on these
structures and if edible (sea grasses, corals, shellfish) use them as a food source. Such areas therefore tend
to have dense concentrations of marine life and high levels of biodiversity.
18. In terms of globally significant coastal and marine biodiversity in Mauritania, the following
important and sensitive areas are worth mentioning, either because they are harbor high levels of
biodiversity or because they are highly significant in terms of sustaining the overall health of coastal and
marine ecosystems (fish nursery areas, water filtering or carbon sinks):
Seagrasses and tidal flats of the Banc d‟Arguin National Park: About 193 km² of shallow flats
in the park are covered with dense sea grass beds and another 219 km² consist of muddy flats with
less dense sea grass cover. These vast meadows of 412 sq km of sea grass are the site of the
largest winter concentration of wading birds in the World (more than 2 million). Sea grass beds
form complex physical structures and are highly productive. The leaves slow down water currents
increasing sedimentation. They contribute to the stabilization of soft bottoms, on which most
species grow, primarily through the dense matted root system that is sufficiently durable to
withstand storms severe as hurricanes. They are a major carbon sink as a source of primary
production situated in between 500-1,000 grams of Carbon per square meter per year for
temperate species to 4,000g C/m²/year for tropical species. Soils of these muddy flats store at
least 210 g C m-2 yr-1. This has been estimated in well studied tidal flats of the US and it can be
expected that the capacity to store carbon in the subtropical habitats of Mauritania exceed this
value.89 The vast seagrass biomass provides food, habitat and nursery areas for a myriad of adult
and juvenile vertebrates and invertebrates. Seagrass meadows also help dampen the effects of
strong currents, providing protection to fish and invertebrates, while also preventing the scouring
7
UNEP, WCMC, 2008, National and Regional Networks of Marine Protected Areas: A Review of Progress
8
In contrast to freshwater wetland soils of marine wetlands produce little methane gas, which is 25 times more potent as a
greenhouse gas (based upon a 100-yr time horizon) than carbon dioxide. The presence of sulphates in salt marsh soils reduces the
activity of microbes that produce methane.
9
Laffoley, D.d‘A. & Grimsditch, G. (eds). 2009. The management of natural coastal carbon sinks. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 53
pp.

of bottom areas. Finally, seagrasses provide attachment sites to small macroalgae and epiphytic
organisms such as sponges, bryozoans, forams, and other taxa that use seagrasses as habitat. It is
recognised that the area plays a crucial role in replenishing commercial species in the entire
region. Many targeted fish species spend part of their lifecycle in the seagrasses of the Banc
d‘Arguin such as sardinella, mullet, meagre, shrimp etc. Abundance of juvenile shrimp in the
Zostera seagrass flats alone has been estimated at 400 million individuals. Next to seagrass the
Banc d‘Arguin Park harbors the most Northern population of mangroves, relics of an ancient river
delta. This vegetation is composed of exclusively Avicennia germinans and total surface
estimated at 300 ha. While this forest cover is relatively small Carbon sequestration by
mangroves is recognized as one of the most significant ―blue carbon‖ sinks at 1.5 tons/hectare/yr
of carbon.
Venus clam banks in the artisanal fishing zone just outside the Banc d‟Arguin Park: Very
much like coral reefs, shellfish banks are made up of organisms building large wave-resistant
frameworks that provide habitat for myriad of marine species. Many juvenile fish find shelter in
between shell fragments and other species against larger predators and in this way the shellfish
banks form an important nursery. Also, the Mauritanian shellfish banks harbor many species. No
research has yet been carried out in Mauritania to understand the complete functioning of the
shellfish banks in the marine ecosystem. However, samples have been taken to estimate the
harvesting potential for possible exploitation. Total biomass has been estimated between 1.3 and
2.8 million tons at an average density of 50 individuals per square meter. This makes the bank an
important carbon sink as the enormous amount of bivalves remove carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere which is converted into calcium carbonate to grow shells. Research of the harvesting
potential also revealed that the banks have extreme high biodiversity. A calcareous algae Maerl10,
also called Scottish coral an acknowledged ―ecosystem engineer‖ and also important carbon sink,
cover the entire shellfish bank. These fragile algae benefit from protection against all kinds of
disturbance in other areas of the world such as in European waters. Studies furthermore indicate
that the shellfish banks are responsible for the ecological conditions that sustain the seagrasses of
the adjacent Banc d‘Arguin Park. The shellfish filter and clear the water from high plankton
concentrations enabling the sunrays to penetrate deep enough towards the rooted seagrasses that
need light for photosynthesis11.
Estuarine biodiversity of the Senegal River mouth within the Diawling National Park: See
Project Map 5 in Section IV, Part II): The Lower Senegal River Basin used to be a complex
estuary where salinity varied according to the seasons. In the wet season, when the rain-fed flood
inundated the zone, it became almost fresh, whereas during the dry season, when the water level
decreased and seawater penetrated the delta, it became brackish. With the completion of the
Diama dam, the pseudo delta ecosystem suddenly became divided into a permanent fresh-water
ecosystem upstream of the dam, while the area downstream became deprived of fresh water most
of the year and changed into a hyper saline area. However, efforts have been undertaken to
restore pre-dam conditions in one part of the area now called the Diawling National Park on the
Mauritanian side of the river. After 18 years, results have been impressive. The area has been
transformed into a wetland again with vegetation and fishery resources returning and mangrove
trees flourishing; including the comeback of water birds. The importance of the area for marine
biodiversity is not well known. The area is nevertheless recognised as being the spawning and
nursery area for yellow mullet and several shrimp species. As the soils of the muddy flats of the
10
Maerl is a collective name for two or three species of red algae in the Corallinacease. It accumulates as unattached particles
and forms extensive beds in suitable sublittoral sites
11
Wolff, W.J., van der Land J., Nienhuis, P.H. and de Wilde, P.A.W.J. 1993. The functioning of the ecosystem of the Banc
d‟Arguin, Mauritania. — Hydrobiologia, 258 : 211-222.

Banc d‘Arguin park the soils of this estuarine wetland is expected to fix at least at least 210 g C
m-2 yr-1. Restoring this former wetland therefore increases the world‘s natural carbon sinks.
Mangroves in this southern most coastal wetland are much more diverse and denser than the
Northern mangroves of the Banc d‘Arguin Park. They are composed of Rhizophora racemosa,
Avicenna germinans and Conocarpus erectus.
Mauritania‟s carbonate mud mounds harboring deep-water coral reefs: In 2002 extensive
carbonate mud mounds have been discovered in Mauritania´s EEZ at about 80km off the coastline
(See Project Map 7 in Section IV, Part II). Carbonate mounds are seabed features resulting from
growth of carbonate producing organisms and (current controlled) sedimentation. The
Mauritanian mounds occur in waters of ~500 m depth and extend parallel to the coast for at least
85 km. They are approximately 100 m high and with a 500 m basal diameter. The mounds are
arranged in a series of rows. Water currents close to the seabed are believed to play an important
role in determining the shape of the mounds. Deep-water corals including reef-building species
cover parts of the mounds. The mud mounds off Mauritania are associated with at least four
species of reef-forming cold-water corals: Lophelia pertusa, Madrepora oculata, Solenosmilia
variabilis and Desmophyllum. These coral frameworks provide an important habitat for
invertebrates and fish and form real hotspots for marine biodiversity. Like shellfish beds deepsea
coral also take up CO2 which is converted into calcium carbonate of the reef structure.
Pelagic areas of high biodiversity (See Project Map 6b in Section IV, Part II): Areas of high
biodiversity can be found in the pelagic area as well. These areas are often situated at front zones
where warm and cold water masses converge and around geological features such as seamounts
and "shelf breaks" at the edge of the continental shelf. Seabirds flocking together reveal such
hotspot generally composed of schools of pelagic fish accompanied by predatory fish such as
tuna, swordfish, and sharks. Mauritania‘s most important year-round upwelling area is situated
around the Cap Blanc (Mauritania, 21°N), as already indicated, and could qualify as a pelagic
hotspot for marine biodiversity. This is confirmed by studies on seabirds12. The entire continental
shelf and the shelf breaks are important for marine biodiversity too. Next to dense concentrations
of fish species, fish eggs and larvae, relatively high concentrations of seabirds are likewise
encountered in this area, notably Grey Phalaropes, Sabine's Gulls, Long-tailed Skuas and storm-
petrels. Pelagic marine biodiversity also shows seasonal variation. By-catch rates of the pelagic
fleet of (sub)tropical species (manta, hammerhead sharks, bill fish) is minimal during winters and
springs (December to June) when, and high during the summer months (July to September).
These large predators seem to accompany the migration of Sardinella, an important species for
the large distance pelagic trawler fleet.
Sectoral Framework for Biodiversity Mainstreaming
Prospects of an Oil and Gas Based Economy
19. Historically, Mauritania has relied on nomadic pastoralism, agriculture, and small-scale and
commercial fisheries, with mining of iron ore playing an increasingly important role in terms of revenue
generation towards the 2000‘s. Although the country has limited agrarian resources, half the population
still depends on agriculture, livestock and fisheries for a livelihood. Many of the nomads and subsistence
farmers were forced into the cities by recurrent droughts in the 1970s and 1980s. Fishing, practiced by
12
Such as Camphuysen C.J. 2004. Seabird distribution and oceanic upwelling off northwest Africa. Comunicaçoes orais i
Congresso Internacional Aves do Atlantico, 1 November 2004, Sao Vicente, Madeira.

both the local and foreign fishing fleets, represents important economic sectors, but there are significant
disparities between the artisanal and the industrial fisheries sub-sectors. For example, while landings
exceed 600,000 tons annually, the industrial fishing fleet catches about 80% of the fish and the smaller
scale, artisanal sector catches only around 20%. Payments made by the foreign fleet in exchange for the
right to fish in Mauritania‘s EEZ contribute significantly to Mauritania‘s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
The EU e.g. currently pays 86 million Euros per year13, while the value of fisheries may be three times
that amount14. Additionally, as one of the most labor intensive sectors in Mauritania, the local fishery
sector provides work to tens of thousands of people. Estimates indicate the local Mauritanian fishery
sector employs about 30.000 people essentially living off octopus fishing.15
20. The economy is, however, at a turning point. Until 2005, iron ore exports and fisheries
represented 94% of Mauritania‘s total export value (respectively 65% and 29%).16 In 2006, this picture
changed significantly with the advent of oil production after years of prospecting. Fisheries, iron ore and
other commodities together dropped in their collective contribution to less than 40% the country‘s export
value, while crude oil represented the remaining 60%. A similar boom was in fact experienced by the
Mauritanian economy in the mid 1960‘s, when iron ore suddenly made exports of goods and services as a
percentage of the GDP practically double from 22% to 44%.17 Between 2005 and 2006, this jump went
from 36% to 55% of the GDP.18 Because the economy is not diversified, it has generally been subjected
to fluctuations both in commodities‘ production outputs and prices. Yet, growth per capita has been
increasing steadily since 2004, but modestly in average.19
21. In response to concerns expressed by a variety of stakeholders, primarily environmental and

human rights organizations, the World Bank Group conducted in a comprehensive review of its activities
in the extractive industries sector – the Extractive Industries Review (EIR). The following sticking point
is expressed in the review:
“Not only have the oil, gas and mining industries not helped the poorest people in developing
countries, they have often made them worse off. Countries which rely primarily on extractive
industries tend to have higher levels of poverty, child morbidity and mortality, civil war, corruption
and totalitarianism than those with more diversified economies. The development of extractive
industries only positively contribute to the socio-economy of a country where the fundamental
building blocks for good governance are put in place, e.g. a free press, a functioning judiciary,
respect for human rights, free and fair elections and so on.‖ (Salim, E. 2000. Extractive Industries Review.
World Bank Group)
22. Back in 2005, the advent of oil and gas in Mauritania lead to vivid society debates. It may also be
said that the ambitions it generated was the cause of political instability in-country20. In August 2009,
13
In: Walmsley, S.F., Barnes, C.T., Payne, I.A., Howard, C.A. (2007) Comparative Study of the Impact of Fisheries Partnership
Agreements – Technical Report. May 2007. MRAG, CRE & NRI. With respect to payments made by non EU countries The same
source further indicates: ―It is difficult to evaluate the financial compensation associated with non-EU fishing agreements, as the
financial or in-kind payments associated with the agreements are not usually made public. Access to fish resources may be
provided in exchange for technical assistance, development aid or other goods and services, with or without an extra financial
payment. […] China‟s approach to access natural resources also often involves payment of compensation or provision of
development aid, in return for infrastructure projects and access to natural resources‖
including oil, minerals, forestry and fishery resources."
14
IFREMER (1999). Evaluation of the fisheries agreements concluded by the European Community. Summary Report.
15
CFFA, 1999. Who benefits at what costs? When David meets Goliath. Coalition for Fair Fishery Agreements. Fishy Business.
ACP-EU Fisheries relations.
16
WB (2006): Actualisation du memorandum economique de la Mauritanie.
17
WB Development Statistics (worldbank.org)
18
Ibid.
19
Income, measured in terms of PPP$ increased by 25% since 2005 (Human Development Reports 2006 and 2007/8)
20
Recent history has seen two coups d‘etat since 2005.

general elections permitted the return to democratic rule and
normalcy. In terms of the debate that the emergence of oil and gas Box 1: Mapping Project
generated, a general polarization in opinions was initially observed. “Biodiversity and Hydrocarbons
While the government sectors together with the urban business in Mauritania”
community was taken by excitement, coastal and fishermen Using spatial data for assessing impacts
associations together with the conservation community expressed linked to Oil and Gas on biological
concern. The mining sector has been established in the country resources and fisheries in Mauritania
since the 1960‘s, so extractive industries were not exactly a novelty Key conclusions from the 2006
in Mauritania. In spite of the experience with the iron ore mining mapping exercise include:
boom, it became notable that an oil and gas based economy posed a  Areas with strong biological and
range of new challenges. Off-shore reserves seem currently to be halieutic productivity are object of
the most promising, as compared to on-shore. This creates oil and gas concessions, including in
complications, given the biological richness of the marine the National Parks of Banc d'Arguin
environment and the importance of fisheries to the economy. As an and Diawling. Hence all economic
added challenge, the knowledge on the actual production potential activities in those areas should be
is currently incomplete and the risks have only been initially developed with prudence.
 Nursery zones in the EEZ are
assessed against the prospects for the economy. This is not a very
particularly sensitive and oil and gas
solid basis for informed and strategic decision making. activities and should be regulated to
take into consideration migration
23. To gain an independent Environmental Impact Statement and reproduction periods and
(EIS)21, the first concession holder for the Chinguetti field, i.e. the zones.
Australian company Woodside, published in January 2005 an EIS  Detailed information on oil and gas
report22 on their oil and gas project, which was about to enter its development is necessary for
production phase. The EIS was carried out even though this was not adequate impact assessment.
a requirement of the Mauritania government at that time. The report  The decision-making process
should be based on detailed
was presented by the company as a display of transparency and information exchange among
willingness to undergo due diligence. Woodside pledged to apply in companies, the government and
Mauritania the same rigorous standards used for operations in other concerned stakeholders.
Australia. The report contained detailed data on several key Click hereto download hi-res maps
environmental aspects pertaining to: biophysical features, including,
climate, marine currents, sea-surface temperature, upwelling,
species, ecosystems, but also an analysis of the socio-economic
environment, stakeholders‘ concerns and engagement. Risks and
impacts were thoroughly assessed with coastal and marine
biodiversity on focus. Woodside‘s EIS report was the first of its
kind in Mauritania. As a response, the government appealed to
foreign experts to help analyze the report, admitting that such
capacity could not be found in-country. A public debate followed
the publication of the draft report. Although other EIS/EIA were
produced since by other companies, the interest that the process has
awoken in-country remains unparalleled.
24. In order to introduce clarity to the debate, an independent scientific panel on oil and gas activities,
the ‗Panel Pétrole‘, was set up by IUCN in 2006 and with support from donors. Their aim was to
contribute with information and analysis that assist with diagnosis, discuss implications, test and
consolidate recommendations for the oil and gas sector. The Panel included in their research the stakes for
21
There was no legislation back then that required companies to produce EIA at any of the stages of oil and gas developments.
22
An EIA can be both the document and decision-making process that provides a systematic, reproducible, and interdisciplinary
evaluation of the potential effects of a proposed action and its practical alternatives on the physical, biological, cultural, and
socioeconomic attributes of a particular geographic area. In the United States, though, the actual document, is referred to as the
Environmental Impact Statement or EIS.

biodiversity on which the fisheries sector is built upon. In their final report, they concluded that if the oil
and gas operations on-shore were facing challenges, the off-shore developments faced even greater
challenges. The plight of fishermen, who feared that major accidental spills could put the whole fisheries‘
industry in peril, was also considered. The presence of several environmentally sensitive areas along
Mauritanias coast make oil and gas operations risky and controversial.
25. Along the same lines of leading a more informed debate in the country and at the request of the
Mauritanian government, in 2006 a consortium of agencies embarked on an initiative to produce a
geographic overview of critical marine habitats vis-à-vis oil and gas developments. The exercise involved
IUCN‘s Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP) with support from
UNEP‘s World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) and other partners. A series of maps
(reproduced in low resolution in Section IV, Part II – see Project Maps 6a to 6e), were produced at the
WCMC in Cambridge together with national scientists from the Mauritanian Institute for Fisheries
Research (IMROP) and the University of Nouakchott. The maps clearly show that oil and gas activities
are much more intense off-shore than on-shore (Map 5e). The exercise confirmed that the off-shore area
is ecologically important, not only from a national and regional point of view, but also from a global
perspective. Box 1 contains a summary of conclusions.
26. Current predictions show that the oil and gas boom in Mauritania may last 10-15 years, contrary
to the initial expectation of 20 years. Mauritanians still places high hopes vis-a-vis the off-shore
exploitation of oil by the Malaysian operator Petronas, who secured the Chinguetti field concession from
the Australian company Woodside in 2007.23 However, due to technical difficulties, production fell in
May 2009. The general prospects from an economic point of view, as well as from a corporate
profitability, seem less promising than initially thought. This may however change, as companies‘
currently undergoing exploration discover important reserves that were previously unknown.
Industry Assessment: The Oil and Gas Sector in Mauritania
27. The extraction of oil in Mauritania started in February 2006 and the country quickly became the
sixth largest oil producing State in Africa. When compared to other African countries, Mauritania‘s 310
million barrels of proven and probable reserves (PPR) is rather modest against Nigeria's 35 billion barrels,
DR Congo's 7.3 billion and Chad's 2.1 billion. From an initial daily production of 54,000 bpd in 2006,
output decreased to the current level of 14,000 bpd, all extracted from the Chinguetti field. Two major
sedimentary basins separated by the eroded Mauritanides mountain chain contain the oil reserves of
Mauritania: (i) the Taoudeni Intracartonique Basin in the east of the country, covering an area of more
than 600,000 sq km; and (ii) the Mauritanian-Senegal Coastal Basin that covers the entire coast of
Mauritania (north-south about 750km) and 600km east-west for an area of more than 260,000 sq km,
including some 190,000 sq km offshore. (See Project Map 3 and Map 6e in Section IV, Part II). Oil and
gas exploration and development in Mauritania, including that within its EEZ, involves joint ventures
between the Mauritanian government controlled Société Mauritanienne des Hydrocarbures (SMH).
28. From the first discovery in the Chinguetti area in 1974 to mid-2008, six additional oil fields have
been discovered (Figure 1 shows some of them) with a total known oil reserves estimated at about 290
million barrels. Production is expected to peak in 2015 at around 88,000 bpd before decreasing thereafter.
Additionally, it is estimated that more than 70B m3 of natural gas is contained in the Labedna and Banda
fields.
23
Industry sources indicate that acquisition of Woodside Energy Ltd Mauritania assets were priced at $418 million.

Figure 1: Important oil and gas fields in selected off-shore blocks (2006)
29. By January 2009, fourteen oil and gas companies were registered as operating in Mauritania. The
country‘s territory and EEZ is subdivided into 104 oil blocks as shown in Project Map 3 (Section IV, Part
II). Six off-shore oil blocks were awarded to five companies, while 46 blocks are still classified as
―open‖, i.e. not allotted, including blocks 9 and 10, where Banc d‘Arguin-Cap Blanc Complex of
Protected Areas is located, and blocks 48 and 20, where another complex of protected areas, the
Diawling-Chat T‘boul-Djoudj24 is located. Of the on-shore blocks, which are generally larger than the off-
shore ones, 20 oil blocks were awarded to 8 companies and 32 other blocks are still ‗open‘. Blocks in the
Taoudeni on-shore basin are located in desert areas with little infrastructure and natural interest. Many of
the concession contracts for the Taoudeni Basin are recent and there is uncertainty as to whether oil will
actually be found in the country‘s east. Annex 2 provides a overview of mentioned companies and their
obligations vis-à-vis the concession contracts signed.25
30. The presence of experienced operators and of a few ―heavy-weighs‖ in Mauritania‘s oil and gas
sector is a display of the sector‘s dynamism in this fast-evolving business. These include the Malaysian
Petronas, French Total, Spanish Repsol, Algerian Sonatrach, UK-based Dana Petroleum, German
Wintershall AG and Irish/UK Tullow Oil. New players include the Chinese group China National
Petroleum Corporation International (CNPCI). In 2005, the CNPCI carried out exploration in partnership
with the Australia-based Baraka Petroleum in Block 20, where the Diawling National Park is located.
31. Petronas, that operates in the Chinguetti field (the only one currently productive), has been
investing significantly in exploratory drilling to confirm the presence of oil and natural gas reserves
within its allotted blocks. Petronas is also active in other blocks through partnerships with other
companies. Dana has also recently announced the discovery of commercially exploitable gas in block 7
near Banc d‘Arguin.
32. Based on the Industry Assessment Study carried out during the implementation of the Project
Preparation Grant (PPG), and with respect to the five companies that hold concessions off-shore (as of
January 2009 – see Annex 2 and Project Map 3) and data could be obtained, the following table
24
Together they compose the Transfrontier Biosphere Reserve (MAB) Delta du Fleuve Senegal, where environmentally
destructive activities should in principle be forbidden.
25
See Annex 2, Table 15: Summary of Companies Involved in the Oil and Gas Sector in Mauritania.

summarizes the companies‘ profile on EIA, and on whether they possess a Health, Safety and
Environment (HSE) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) policies/programs:
Table 1: Summarized Industry Profile Matrix

COMPANY KEY FEATURES EIA HSE POLICY CSR POLICY
Petronas Short for Petroliam Nasional Berhad, Petronas is a Malaysian-owned No new EIA Yes, but the Yes, but no
oil and gas company that was founded in 1974. Owned 100% by the report was policy is rather programs in
Malaysian government, the corporation is capitalized using oil and gas produced since general Mauritania
resources from Malaysia and is entrusted with the responsibility of Woodside‘s EIS
developing and adding value to these resources. Petronas is ranked report from
among Fortune Global 500's largest corporations in the world. With 2005.
Malaysian oil and gas resources drying up, the company is Not clear
concentrating on international projects, which contributed up to 40% of whether due
their revenue in 2008. Petronas‘ assets in Mauritania contribute to less diligence is
than 10% of that. For upstream exploration developments in several being applied in
blocks, Petronas, which remains the leading industry player in monitoring and
Mauritania, has formed a series of partnerships with other industry preventing
players. In particular, for the Chingetti field, its partners are Tullow Oil, impacts.
KUFPEC, Premier Oil, Roc Oil and Mauritanian Govt.
Dana Founded in 1994, Dana Petroleum is a leading British-based oil and gas EIA carried out Yes, there is a Yes
Petroleum exploration and production business. It is listed among the 25 largest for activities in corporate
UK companies. Its activities are focused on the North Sea and Africa the Comoran policy that
with recently acquired assets in Norway and Egypt. Dana‘s operations field (in block 7 explicitly
in Mauritania are only mentioned marginally in their website. These near Banc mentions
operations remain exploratory and of small significance within the d‘Arguin), but biodiversity
company‘s overall business volume. not for other
campains.
Tullow Oil The London based Tullow Oil plc is one of the largest independent oil No info. Yes, there is a Yes
and gas exploration companies in Europe. The Group has 86 licenses in corporate
22 countries, with operations in Africa, Europe, South Asia and South policy that
America. Tollow is the direct operator of block 2, where it holds explicitly
83.78% interest. It is a partner company with Petronas, Dana and others mentions
in several other blocks. Within these operations, as many as 30 biodiversity
exploration, appraisal and development wells have been drilled. Of the
exploration wells, Chinguetti, Tiof, Tevet, Aigrette and Banda all
resulted in significant oil and gas discoveries, while the Faucon and
Pelican wells discovered gas (the latter with the possibility of a
downdip oil leg).
CNPCIM CNPCI is a state-owned fuel-producing corporation and the largest Yes, but there No info. No info.
China integrated oil and gas company in the People's Republic of China. As of were issues with
National 2006, it was the second largest oil and gas company in the world in decom-
Petroleum terms of number of employees. CNPC holds proved reserves of 3.7 missioning
Corporation billion barrels of oil equivalent. Its Mauritanian operations are a
International fraction of its other overseas operations throughout the world.
/ Mauritania
Energem Listed both in London as in Toronto Stock Exchanges, Energem defines n/a Yes, there is a Yes, there is a
itself as ―a renewable and alternative energy resources company corporate corporate
engaged in 10 African countries and China in long term projects in the ‗Code of ‗Code of
energy sectors‖. Upstream and midstream oil developments is but one Conduct‘, Conduct‘,
of its core businesses. Biofules is the other. Energem is a new player in which covers which covers
the Mauritanian off-shore market segment. both CSR and both CSR and
HSE aspects HSE aspects
Note: See Table 16: Industry Profile Matrix in Annex 2 for more information
33. Vis-à-vis the existing protected areas along Mauritania‘s coast, it is notable that block 7 was
allotted to Dana Petroleum, which found commercial quantities of offshore gas in the area. This
concession is bordering the Banc d‘Arguin National Park. As indicated, blocks 8, 9 and 10 have not yet

been allotted. No. 8 is adjacent to the Park and No. 9 and 10 are within the park‘s boundaries. There are
on-going debates for preventing these concessions from being allotted to oil companies. The same case is
true for block No. 20. This block is situated on the south coast of Mauritania is overlapping the Diawling
National Park, and is currently not allotted to any oil company. As seen, Baraka Petroleum and CNPCIM
have explored block 20 and drilled an exploratory well within the Biosphere reserve close to the only
recorded breeding site in West Africa for the nearly threatened lesser flamingos, a species notoriously
sensitive to any large scale development near their breeding site. No commercial quantities of oil and gas
have been encountered. The well is closed and further drilling abandoned.
34. The results of the Industry Assessment Study show that the oil and gas industry in Mauritania is
fairly young but is evolving quickly. Several blocks that remain to be allotted and many operators are still
in the early stages of their exploratory phase. This indicates that the sector may still experience significant
events, which should not exclude the discovery of new and important oil and gas reserves. The ‗corporate
landscape‘ in Mauritania is characterized by many small and medium size players. This may have been a
result of low yield discoveries earlier on during the industries development not attracting industry giants
(e.g. Shell, BP or a few of the Texas-based energy companies). There has not been a consolidating thrust
as seen in Nigeria and Angola.
35. Partnerships are common between companies in Mauritania. This is due to their relative small
size and risk aversion strategies, which require them to engage with others for exploration so they can
enter into production. The State-owned Société Mauritanienne des Hydrocarbures (SMH) is an essential
and important part of these partnerships. SMH is building its capacity through various joint-ventures and
it may play a pivotal role in setting industry standards including for biodiversity mainstreaming.
36. With respect to environmental and biodiversity due diligence, companies, with exceptions, are
complying with existing regulations. However, by international standards Mauritania‘s environmental
laws are comparatively weak. This will be discussed in greater detail in the following chapter. Under the
present environment regulations, oil and gas companies operating in Mauritania are yet to raise the bar to
fully incorporate a biodiversity portfolio. Woodside‘s open attitude and detailed EIS was a landmark for
the country and remains to be replicated. The company is no longer operating in Mauritania after a fall
out with the government and a new company policy which is to primarily concentrate on LNG production
off Australia. Mainstreaming biodiversity concerns in Mauritania‘s oil and gas industry will depend on
increased pressure from government and advocacy groups. The industry Assessment study, carried out
during the PPG showed that there is capacity for it within the industry (including financial capacity) but it
is currently not being utilized.
Governance Frameworks for Biodiversity Mainstreaming
Policies, Plans and Laws
37. Mauritania does not count on a national sectoral strategy or a policy on oil and gas development.
Nevertheless, the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) Action Plan for the period 2006-2010
coincides with the start-up of oil production. This action plan includes strategies to accelerate growth and
stabilize the macroeconomic framework (pillar one) including ―Optimizing the Effects of Developing the
Oil Industry‖. Priorities for integrating the petroleum sector within the PRSP have been identified; they
include:
Planned development of petroleum exploration and production;
Oversight of production, costs, and contractual commitments;
Optimal management of petroleum income;

Prevention of potential adverse effects on the environment;
Consideration of the sub-regional dimension.
38. These strategic orientations have the global objective of enhancing the benefits the existing oil
potential for Mauritania through the promotion and the coordination of oil exploration and exploitation
activities. The current focus is on: (i) improving the institutional and legislative environments for creating
an enabling environment for new domestic and foreign investments; (ii) promoting the sustainable
management of natural resources to ensure the protection of the environment; and, (iii) strengthening the
capacities of the sector with training programs and institutional strengthening.
39. Several national policies and plans deal with environmental issues in general and serve as
instruments to implement the international environmental agreements that Mauritania signed and ratified.
Annex 1 contains a rather complete list of these international agreements. Among those, there are not just
the CBD and key COP decisions that are highly relevant for the theme of this project, as well as other
biodiversity related conventions (CITES, Ramsar, UNESCO Convention among others), but also the
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution From Ships (MARPOL) from 1973/78,
UNCLOS ‗Law of the Sea‘ (and other related instruments). Mauritania has signed but not ratified the
1984 Abidjan Convention (Convention for Cooperation in the Protection and Development of the Marine
and Coastal Environment of the West and Central African Region) concerning regional cooperation in
combating pollution in cases of emergency. While these MEAs provide a reasonable chapeau at the
international level, the challenges lies exactly in their national implementation.
40. In terms of national policies and plans, two overarching instruments, which are recent and have
incorporated to some degrees the public concerns vis-à-vis the risks and threats to biodiversity posed by
oil and gas operations, are worth mentioning: (i) the National Strategy for Sustainable Development
(SNDD) from 2004/05 and (ii) the related National Environmental Action Plan (PANE) from 2006. The
PANE contains five (05) ‗strategic axis‘, 18 ‗objectives‘ and 92 ‗sub-objectives‘. An analysis of these has
shown that at least 17 are particularly relevant for the theme of this project. It is a good example of
environmental mainstreaming vis-à-vis the operations of the oil and gas industry. Yet, these instruments
are not specific enough with respect to biodiversity and further guidance on how the pursuit of these
objectives can be unfolded into action is needed. (Annex 6 provides a more detailed overview of policy
and legal instruments analyzed in this chapter).
41. In the same way as there is a gap with respect to specific policy instruments allowing Mauritania
to strategically pursue the benefits of its oil era, it is also notable that the country does not count on a code
or a framework law to regulate the exploration and exploitation of oil and gas resources.26 Such legal
instrument could be particularly useful in terms of ‗framing‘ the development of this sector within the
sustainable development objectives of the country and taking national interests into account. Within this
context, three years into its oil boom elapsed and Mauritania is still to establish national environmental
norms for the industry. As a consequence, industry players are only subjected to comply with
international standards such as ISO 14001, if they wish, or the company‘s own standards if they have any.
This is a very central legal and policy gap that remains to be addressed.
42. A new law to prevent and combat different types of marine pollutions is being currently
prepared,, the Plan POLMAR.. This draft law has already been reviewed but it is a work in progress with
no planned dates to be finalized. The proposed law is expected to address the risks associated with marine
accidents including accidents from the exploration/exploitation of offshore hydrocarbons and to set norms
26
The existing laws that regulate the oil and gas industry are the Mining Code (2008), although it does not specifically apply to
hydrocarbons, and several regulations applicable to the fiscal, fiduciary and contractual regimes for the industry. These are
described in Annex 6.

for routine pollution caused by maritime traffic and oil and gas platforms. It would set the implementation
of risk management instruments such as the need for a national oil spill contingency plan and ensure the
implementation of OPRC and MARPOL mechanisms at the national level (see Box 4). The law would
also set the creation of a consultative committee to protect the marine environment, which would be
responsible for the coordination of government actions to protect the marine environment and combat the
marine pollution of all sorts and also for the elaboration of the guiding strategies for these actions. This is
a very positive step and an opportunity for enhanced biodiversity mainstreaming
43. In addition, two other pieces of legislation are worth mentioning with respect to industry
regulation: (i) the Decree for the Environmental Impact Assessment or EIA (2004), which framework
will be analyzed in a specific sub-chapter further down; and (ii) Production Sharing Contracts (PSC)27. As
explained earlier, all oil and gas activities within the Mauritanian territory, including its EEZ, are subject
to the establishment of partnerships with the State-owned SMH. This is normally done through a PSC,
which model was established in 1994. Contracts identify the exploration modalities and the sharing of
profits from the production and commercialization of oil. According to terms of these contracts and the
fiscal regime of the oil sector (Law 2004-029), when signing these contracts oil companies are debtors to
the government for royalties based on the area leased and two bonuses – a signature bonus and a
production bonus.
44. Further on the country‘s implementation of IMO‘s MARPOL and OPRC mechanisms, as well as
of other key international legal instruments, the National Coastal Zone Management Plan (PDALM) is
particularly relevant in the context of this project. The PDALM and POLMAR have been prepared
between 2002-2007 but are not yet approved. The PDALM is however already under implementation
with funding from IUCN and others. POLMAR‖ is obviously important in the context of this project in
terms of setting norms for routine pollution, not only for marine pollution caused by maritime sources but
also for land based pollution. The POLMAR plan is a key legal instrument for the project because
Mauritania‘s coastal and marine environment has historically been exposed to different forms of pollution
even before the oil boom. The plan also applies to oil spill risks caused by massive international maritime
traffic. (More information on these three instruments is provided in Annex 6.) The issue of funding for
implementing the measures proposed under the PDALM and POLMAR is not less important and remains
to be addressed, particularly for the POLMAR, where no rapid response framework is in place in the case
of major and accidental oil spills.
45. The PDALM and POLMAR provide a good basis for incorporating the issue of pollution and
other aspects into the national planning frameworks. They deal respectively with the coastal and the
marine of the environment and take fully into account the risks and threats posed by the oil and gas
industry in Mauritania, but less so the opportunities that it offers (e.g. the establishment of a funding
mechanism or of a rapid response unit with industry support). Yet, with respect to biodiversity, these
plans were not sufficiently specific. A deepening of biodiversity mainstreaming measures would first of
all require that the stakes for biological resources are put in evidence; secondly, that capacity is in place
for it; and, not least also, that the private sector can make a contribution to it.
Institutional and Partnerships‘ Frameworks
46. With respect to the relevant institutional frameworks for the mainstreaming of biodiversity into
the operations of the oil and gas industry in Mauritania, a few government bodies are particularly
important. They are listed and their responsibilities described in Annex 6. The Ministry of the
Environment and Sustainable Development (MEDD), the leading agency for the project, holds a broad
27
Also referred in other parts of this PRODOC as ―contrat de partage de production‖ (CPP).

mandate vis-a-vis the implementation of the environmental policy in Mauritania. This includes in
particular EIA, pollution control, coastal zone management and protected area management.
47. Historically, environmental management was the responsibility of multiple ministries and was
focused mostly on the protection of fauna and flora and on the implementation of a protected area system.
In 2008, the State Secretariat for the Environment was re-structured by decree into a full Ministry of the
Environment and Sustainable Development.
48. Today, MEDD counts on at least four technical directorates, not all of them are adequately
manned, equipped and financed. Most of MEDD‘s staff are located at the central level, although the
Ministry is also represented at decentralized level through delegations in XX of the thirteen regions of
Mauritania (See Project Map 2 in Section IV, Part II). Often, these delegations are composed of one
person only with very limited means to implement the Ministry‘s mandate.
49. Protected area (PA) management authority is overseen by MEDD, but it does not exercise it
directly. It is instead fragmented and divided into two fairly independent Park Authorities, one for the
Banc d‘Arguin National Park (PNBA) and for the Diawling National Park (PDN).28 These are the only
two functional PAs – or PA Complexes29 – in the country. Both Park Authorities have their HQ in
Nouakchott and hence located quite far from the PAs they manage.
50. Specific capacity for PA management in Mauritania has been assessed as part of this project‘s
analysis. The key findings, summarized in Annex 5: UNDP Capacity Assessment Scorecard, show that
there is in general fair capacity to (1) conceptualize and formulate policies, legislations, strategies and
programs; (2) implement policies, legislation, strategies and programs; (3) engage and build consensus
among all stakeholders; (4) mobilize information and knowledge; and (5) monitor, evaluate, report and
learn. The analysis is important to the extent that increased financial sustainability of the PA system may
benefit from the opportunities generated by the mainstreaming effort from this project.
51. There are however notable discrepancies between PNBA and PND in terms of budget, number of
staff, technical capacity, PA management effectiveness and international attention that they receive.
PNBA clearly has the primacy. Until now, there have been no efforts to rationalize or consolidate
capacity for PA management in Mauritania. The effective conservation of both areas should be pursued
together and within a PA System‘s approach.
52. Another key government body linked to MEDD is the Coastal Zone Observatory (Observatoire
du Littoral). Officially created in 2007, the Observatory is in charge of coordinating the implementation
of the PDALM, as well as collecting and disseminating key information on the coastal zone. As a new
institution and currently with the plight of mobilizing sustainable funding, it is facing capacity challenges
and counts on limited human resources.
53. In addition, several other government bodies are relevant for this proposal. Their mandate and
link to the project are summarized in Annex 6. They are: (1) Ministry of Petroleum and Energy; (2)
Mauritanian Society of Hydrocarbons (SMH); (3) Ministry of Fishery and Marine Economy; (4)
Mauritania‘s Merchant Marine Directorate; and (5) ―Panel Pètrole‖ Scientific Panel on Oil and Gas
Activities in the Mauritania.
28
When ―PNBA‖ or ―PND‖ are used throughout this project document, it refers to the Park Authorities for the two parks.
Otherwise, when the parks are referred to as a protected area their names are used.
29
This remark considers that the Banc d‘Arguin Park together with Cap Blanc can be regarded as a complex. The same applies to
the PAs in the south: Diawling National Park, the Chat T‘Boul and the Senegalese Oiseaux du Djoudj National Park form a
complex and are in the process of being gazetted as the transfrontier biosphere reserve Delta du Fleuve Senegal.

Box 2: The Value of biodiversity in Mauritania‟s Protected Areas
During the PPG phase, a preliminary biodiversity valuation study focused on the review of the total economic value of both the Banc d’Arguin and the
Diawling National Parks. These are the results.
Banc d’Arguin NP
 Direct Use Value: it is composed mostly of the fisheries sector and the transformation of the fish catch. It is estimated that about 2-3% of
the national artisanal fishery production is from the park area (2,300 tons in 2002). Local communities, mostly women, also transform
some of this fish production into fish oil and other products. It is estimated that in 2006, several communities in the park produced
direct revenue to local communities of about $6,000.
 Indirect Use Value: The park is a nursery site for an array of fish species caught off the coast of Mauritania. It contributes therefore
significantly to the sustainability of the national fisheries industry. In 2005 this represented and estimated 720,000 tons of fish valued at
$311 million. Supposing that at least 30% (or some $100 million) can be attributed to the nursery role of the park. The ecology of the
park also provides an attraction for eco-tourism activities, which is growing and was estimated at about $90,000 per year in 2005-2006.
Finally, the sea-grass of the park is a major carbon sink estimated at about 180 tons of carbon captured per year corresponding to a value
of $7,000 per year on the carbon market.
 Other Values: This includes less tangible values, e.g. of existence, such as landscape quality, history, bird refuge, etc. The existence value
of Banc d’Arguin is translated through international recognition as a world heritage site and the contribution of external donors to
protect the park. This contribution is estimated at $ 3.5 million in 2007.
Diawling NP
 Fishery: The study indicates that the fishery revenue per year in the park is estimated at USD 450-500,000 per year, providing revenue to
111 fishermen, feeding about 670 people and providing a local income per capita of UM 12,200 per month that is 30% above the
minimum wage of UM 9,000 per month in Mauritania.
 Vegetable Production: This is an activity mostly performed by women and providing a high economic value added. It is estimated that this
activity provides monthly revenue of UM 24,800 per operator, which is comparable to the revenue of a secondary school teacher in
Mauritania.
 Tourism: An activity that is still in its infancy; 2,195 persons visited the park in 2002 for a total estimated revenue of about USD 8,000.
The PND Authority anticipates these numbers to increase in the years to come.
Djigo Seybatou Alpha, 2009, Partenariats pour la promotion de la biodiversité dans le cadre du développement des secteurs pétrolier et gazier en Mauritanie – Rapport de
l’expert économiste.
54. A partnership landmark for Mauritania vis-à-vis the way it is governing its oil and gas era, is the
country‘s entry into the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). The government joined the
EITI initiative30 in September 2005, which was initiated in 2002 at the World Summit on Sustainable
Development in Johannesburg. This initiative aims to strengthen governance by improving transparency
and accountability in the extractive sector. The EITI is a global standard that promotes revenue
transparency. It has a robust yet flexible methodology for monitoring and reconciling company payments
and government revenues at the country level. The process is overseen by participants from the
government, companies and national civil society. The EITI Board and the International Secretariat are
the guardians of the EITI methodology internationally.
55. The quality assurance mechanism of EITI is done through a validation process; serving two
critical functions: (i) to promote dialogue and learning at the country level; (ii) to safeguard the EITI
brand by holding all EITI implementing countries to the same global standard. Validation is not an audit
and it does not repeat the disclosure and reconciliation work that is carried out to produce EITI reports.
Validation has broader objectives: it evaluates EITI implementation in consultation with stakeholders, it
verifies achievements with reference to the EITI global standard, and it identifies opportunities to
strengthen the EITI process going forward. The process includes 2 phases. The first phase includes the
compliance with sign up indicators to become a ―Candidate Country‖. The second phase includes
indicators to prepare, to disclose and to disseminate information on the initiative and it is concluded to
become a ―Compliant Country‖.31
30
http://eitransparency.org/
31
There are currently only two compliant countries in the world under the EITI: Azerbaijan and Liberia. The latter achieved this
status in October 2009 and is the only African country to ever do so.

56. In Mauritania an EITI National Committee was set up in February 2006 (Decree No. 2006-029).
It is a multi-stakeholder group in charge of implementation and follow-up of the EITI in Mauritania. It is
also responsible for regular public information on the national and international levels. The Committee
consists of 29 members, of which 6 representatives are from the administration, 5 from the industry and
18 from civil society. Mauritania is a ―Candidate Country‖ (first phase) and has until March 2010 to
undertake its validation process and ultimately to become a ―Compliant Country‖.
57. Two reports (2005 and 2006) have been published so far with support from the World Bank and
the 2007 report is being finalized. The most recent report (2006) concluded that the reconciliation
between payments (by oil and mining companies) and revenues (received by government) did not indicate
any significant anomalies. Most companies did cooperate with the process, which is not mandatory. A gap
remains to be filled in this regard.
58. While the issue of transparency and accountability in the extractive sector is different from that of
biodiversity mainstreaming, the two ―walk side-by-side‖. The processes of promoting each of them
respectively can potentially cross-fertilize each other. Hence, the importance of the steps that Mauritania
took under the EITI for this project.
Funding for PA Biodiversity Management
59. For the past few years and based on the long-term planning provided by PNBA‘s business plan,
there is an on-going effort to increase the Park management‘s financial sustainability. Within it, the
establishment of a foundation based in the UK (created in January 2009 and called ―Banc d‟Arguin and
Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Trust Fund Limited‖) and the capitalization of an endowment trust fund
is an important step towards it. The establishment of the trust fund was supervised by a steering
committee. Once the establishment of the trust fund will be completed, a Board will be established and
composed of 7 members, which will include two representatives from the donor community.
Additionally, certain voting rights will be given to any donor contributing 1 million Euro or more.
60. The objectives of this trust fund are to:

 Promote the conservation and sustainable development of the physical and natural environment of the
park by supporting the implementation and updating of its management plans, which includes a
balanced development for the park‘s resident population, conservation of biodiversity, scientific
research, public awareness, and administration of the Park;
 Promote the conservation and sustainable development of the physical and natural environment of
other marine and coastal protected areas in Mauritania, by supporting the implementation and updating
of their management plans. However, this will take place only if the financial resources of the trust
fund are sufficient and upon approval of at least three-quarters of its Board of Directors;
 Engage in any and all acts and activities that may be necessary, useful or appropriate for the
furtherance or accomplishment of the above objectives, including to solicit, raise and invest funds
from public and private sources wherever located.
61. The financial goal is to create a 15-million Euro endowment trust fund from which a potential
withdraw of about 750-800,000 Euros per year is anticipated to finance biodiversity conservation
activities and leave the fund (capital) invested for future generations. Currently, the foundation is created
and has applied for status as a ‗registered charity‘ in the UK; response is pending. Once this status is
obtained, the legalization of the trust fund in Mauritania will be completed and the capitalization can start.
An approximate amount of 0.5 million Euros from the GOM is already reserved in a special account
within the context of the fishery agreement between the GOM and the EU. For the duration of this

agreement the GOM is expected to contribute with approximately 3 million Euros to the trust fund (500K
per year). Other negotiations are ongoing with several contributors, including FIBA and AFD.
62. The mentioned trust fund initiative was spearheaded by PNBA, hence the proposals are geared
mostly towards benefitting the mentioned Park Authority. Still, the statutes of the Trust Fund are not
limited to PNBA as the only possible beneficiary. Any other PA in Mauritania that has up-to-date
business and management plans may theoretically access the Trust Fund. However, PND does not
currently satisfy these conditions. The limit is with respect to the type of biodiversity that can be object of
conservation efforts financed by the Trust Fund, which is restricted to coastal and marine biodiversity.
Currently Mauritania only has two functional PAs and they are both coastal-marine.
EIA Frameworks
63. Of all processes pertaining to biodiversity sectoral mainstreaming, EIA is the one that can
potentially provide a meaningful and useful interface between industry, government and society at large,
including pressure groups of varied agendas and backgrounds. If well managed by all concerned parts,
EIA is a powerful decision-making instrument and can potentially provide some insight into the intricate
biodiversity issues.
64. Reports prepared under the EIA process are, however, not as specific as ‗Biodiversity Impact
Assessments‘, which can be applied in the case of projects of different sorts (e.g. infrastructure, energy,
extraction or other projects involving large-scale land conversion or water utilization) in areas that are
considered sensitive from a biodiversity point of view. Few countries include specific legal provisions on
mandating Biodiversity Impact Assessments in such cases. It is often discretionary but as an added
decision-making tool, it can provide nuances and information that would normally be left out of EIA.
65. EIA is still rather new in Mauritania. The Environmental Code of 2000 made provisions for it, but
it was only in 2004 that more precise legislation was approved. Yet, in 2007, amendments to the 2004
EIA Decree were passed particularly taking into account activities related to the development of the oil
and gas sector, i.e. already two years into the country‘s oil boom.
66. The EIA Decree identified 2 categories of activities subject to have significant direct or indirect
negative impacts on the environment: (i) Category A includes activities that are subjected to an EIA; (ii)
Category B includes activities that are subjected to an environmental impact notice. Annex I of the
Decree provides a list of activities falling under these two categories. Among this list, activities related to
the oil sector such as seismic exploration, oil drilling, hydrocarbon and gas transport and storage, offshore
implantation, oil and gas refinery facility are all considered as category A; therefore, subjected to EIAs.
67. The Decree also details the content of any EIA which should include an Environmental
Management Plan (EMP) proposing measures to mitigate any risks. It details the need for any EIAs to
consult the public and provides the guidelines for conducting public surveys. Finally, the Decree provides
the timeframe for the reviewing process to be done by the Ministry of the Environment (MEDD); which
is 20 days to evaluate the EIA study or notice. The outcome of this review process is an authorization to
proceed (or not to proceed) with the project. This authorization is issued by the relevant ministry (to the
project) and is based on a notification from MEDD to this relevant ministry.
68. Through these pieces legislation, the process to prepare an EIA is described; including principles,
procedures, and control mechanisms to do EIAs. Additionally, a comprehensive guide to conduct EIA
exists for the applicants. As part of an EIA, the applicant must prepare an environmental management
plan to avoid, reduce and remediate possible environmental damage in connection with the realization of

the particular project. This management plan is the object of an annual declaration by the applicant,
stating the progress in implementing the plan, the internal audit procedures conducted and the eventual
corrective measures for an efficient environmental protection. These annual declarations are forwarded to
the MEDD for its approval.
69. From a governmental point of view, there are few important legislated milestones for any EIA.
 First, the MEDD is to review and approve the TOR for each EIA.
 Second MEDD is to review these EIAs within a 20-day timeframe and provide an
opinion on the environmental feasibility of the project to the Ministry that has the ability
to deliver the final authorization (approve or reject the project) to the applicant (if no
response from MEDD the opinion is considered favourable).
 Third the MEDD is responsible for the implementation of a public consultation after
receiving the EIA file.
 Finally, the ministry is to review and approve the environmental management plans,
which must be included within each EIA.
70. When the first important EIA report was submitted to the governemnt for review, that of
Woodside in 2005, the Mauritanian government requested external advice from several experts the an
independent advisory body Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment.32 This was in an
effort to improve EIA frameworks. Also along these lines, the Mauritanian EIA process was also recently
reviewed by the Maghrebian Network for the Respect and the Application of Environmental Regulations
(NECEMA) during their conference organized in Nouakchott in 2007. These consultations also included
the oil and gas company Dana Petroleum, MEDD and Panel Pètrole (panel of experts for the oil sector
lead by IUCN). These review process culminated in a national workshop organized in Nouakchott in June
2008. The conclusions of this workshop were that the EIA needs to be strengthened such as:
a. Review and amend existing Decrees (2004 & 2007).

b. Formalize the administrative tasks;
c. Initiate a preliminary selection of projects that needs EIAs;
d. Formalize the environmental audit process;
e. Introduce the notion of “sensitive zones”, when projects are in a protected area, requiring
and environmental evaluation;
f. Formalize environmental inspections;
g. Define the environmental validation of a project when irregular procedures.
71. In spite of these positive developments, this is still short of more comprehensive response in view
of all the stakes for Mauritania‘s coastal and marine environment as presented in the preceding chapters,
including the benefits of SEA methodologies, which have not yet been embraced by Mauritania.
THREATS, RISKS AND IMPACTS
72. As described in the previous chapter, the development of offshore oil and gas exploration and
exploitation in Mauritania is accompanied by growing pressure on the marine and coastal resources. The
exploration for oil and gas should intensify in the allotted concessions and the government will continue
the promotion of the concessions not yet allotted. As a result, the pressures on the local marine and
coastal environment, which are already significant today, will intensify.
32
See e.g. http://docs1.eia.nl/mer/diversen/065_tor_advice.pdf and http://docs1.eia.nl/mer/diversen/065_ar_advice.pdf.

73. Because of the fluid nature of the marine environment, threats like pollution can have far-fetching
effects and threat interactions are also worrisome (e.g. the coupled impact of marine pollution and climate
change). The need to address threats will only become greater over time, so preventive measures are
likely cost-effective at present. In summary, major threats to coastal and marine biodiversity in
Mauritania can be grouped as follows:
(i) Overexploitation of biological resources

Intense use of fisheries resources are today the most significant threat to Mauritania‘s marine
biodiversity. As it will be seen further down, stocks are being depleted and both commercial and
artisanal fisheries are playing a role. The overexploitation of fisheries resources affects not just
stocks (i.e. the populations of individual species), but also the whole marine food chain and
ecosystem functioning. There are also indications that by-catch is significant.
(ii) Pollution
Two sources of pollution are particularly significant here: the oil and gas industry on the one hand
and discharges from maritime transport on the other. Regardless of the source, pollution can
reduce biodiversity and the productivity of marine ecosystems. Pollution from maritime transport
is significant when the build-up of several years of intense traffic is taken into account. See e.g.
Project Map 9 (Section IV, Part II). Pollution caused by the oil and gas industry can be
particularly severe when there are accidental spills.
(iii) Climate Change and the Ocean Acidification

Severe climate change impacts on marine ecosystems and dependent societies include coral
bleaching, ocean acidification33, rising sea-levels, increasing invasive species, and increasing
intensity of extreme weather events. Although comprehensive studies are still to be carried out,
there are indications that the effects of climate change on Mauritania‘s coastal and marine
environment are currently not very significant. Different scenarios for the upcoming decades
indicate however that important changes with likely result in negative impacts on biodiversity,
but the scale is still uncertain.34 As for ocean acidification, it is to be expected that biomes
composed of species with shells or calcareous skeletons will be threatened first by the
phenomenon such as Mauritania‘s Venusshellfish bank or the cold water coral reefs. This remains
to be more thoroughly studied.
74. Yet it is important to distinguish between actual threats to coastal and marine biodiversity in
Mauritania and potential threats, i.e. risks. Currently, climate change can be said to be moving from being
a risk to gradually becoming a threat, and a rather important one. Also, in terms of pollution, maritime
transport has at present a much stronger impact on marine biodiversity than the operations of the oil and
gas industry. But if ever the risk of an accidental oil spill realizes, the impact will certainly be
catastrophic.
33
The ocean absorbs approximately one-fourth of the CO2 added to the atmosphere from human activities each year, greatly
reducing the impact of this greenhouse gas on climate. When CO2 dissolves in seawater, carbonic acid is formed (see e.g.
UNESCO website on ocean acidification). This phenomenon, called ocean acidification, is decreasing the ability of many marine
organisms to build their shells and skeletal structure. Field studies suggest that impacts of acidification on some major marine
calcifiers may already be detectable. Yet the full impact of ocean acidification and how these impacts may propagate through
marine ecosystems and affect fisheries remains largely unknown.
34
According to the Sea Around Us Project / The PEW Charitable Trusts (http://www.seaaroundus.org/), climate change can
impact the pattern of marine biodiversity through changes in species‘ distributions. One study under the mentioned project
focused on three indicators and global trends: invasion intensity, local extinctions and species turnover. The results show that
general climate change impacts for the Mauritanian coast appears to be modest. Definite conclusions cannot however be drawn
from one single study.

75. With particular focus on overexploitation of resources and pollution, the following sub-chapters
explain the relevant threats and risks to Mauritania‘s coastal and marine biodiversity:
Overexploitation of the Fishery Resources

76. Overfishing, habitat modification caused by industrial bottom trawling and unsustainable by-
catches of large predators by the pelagic fleet have significantly degraded the marine ecosystem It is
currently the most significant threat to marine and coastal biodiversity. Historically, fisheries in
Mauritania have been very important – and still are. However, with the proliferation of fisheries
agreement and the intensification of local artisanal fisheries, these rich ecosystems may be heading
towards collapse. Since the 1950‘s there has been a significant reduction in the mean throphic index
(Figure 2). Scientists from IMROP believe that, although pollution and, to a less extent, climate change
may have played a role in the impoverishment of marine life, fisheries are the clearly the culprit.
Figure 2: Mean Trophic Index for Mauritania
Source: Sea Around Us Project / The PEW Charitable Trusts (http://www.seaaroundus.org/)
77. In recent years this fishing has undergone a noticeable decline having profound impacts on the
marine ecosystem. A shift in species composition has been documented. The contribution of medium
sized and small pelagic species to total landings is increasing; while that of top predators and high value
bottom dwelling organisms are decreasing.
78. In particular, bottom-trawling gear has been identified as a relatively damaging technique by
marine scientists worldwide. Indeed landings of bottom dwelling species have decreased dramatically in
Mauritania. Apart from decreasing fishery resources, bottom trawling also alters habitats by dragging
heavy fishing gear over the seafloor.
79. Bottom trawling does not constitute any immediate threat to the sea-grasses. This activity is
entirely forbidden within the park of Banc d‘Arguin as well as anywhere else outside the park where
water depth is between 0 and 20 meters, which is where most of the sea-grass grows. However, bottom
trawling presents an immediate threat to the carbonate mud mounds and associated deep sea corals
situated about 80 Km offshore at the bottom of the shelf break. Trawl tracks through these ecosystems
have been revealed during exploration of the oil company Woodside energy. Additionally, bottom
trawling is allowed on the Venusshellfish bank below 20 meters water depth line (covering approximately
30% of the shellfish bank). Plans to exploit Venus shellfish with bottom trawling gear may threaten the
entire shellfish bank in the future.
80. As described in the above environmental context, IMROP identified the status of several
important fish stocks in Mauritania and for most of the reviewed species the status is either fully exploited
or over exploited (one species – white grouper - is mentioned with status ―at risk of extinction‖ in

Mauritania). Experimental trawl data indicate that bottom dwelling organisms have been reduced by a
factor 3 since the beginning of the 1980s. Catches of octopus, the most important target species of the
artisanal fleet, have been reduced with a factor 10.
81. By-catch of large predators of the pelagic fleet appears to be at the limit of sustainability. Marine
turtles, all of which with global threatened status, are also object of by-catch. Increased fishing pressure is
likely to push marine mega fauna into regional extinction with manta rays, hammerhead sharks, bill fish
(swordfish and marlins) and turtles as the most threatened species (Zeeberg, et al., 2006).
Maritime Traffic
82. Oil is transported mostly by sea routes and represents about 30-35% of all global maritime
commerce. It is a complex sector with the involvement of numerous players from all over the world.
Threats due to these operations include atmospheric emissions from the equipment, discharges into the
environment of wastewater used in these facilities and accidental oil spills.
83. The western coast of Africa is generally a site of intense maritime traffic, as show in Project Map
9 (Section IV, Part II). The oil spills identified by Woodside before oil production kicked-off (Map 8) can
be with all likelyhood attributed to international maritime traffic, in spite of the fact that the activity is
tightly regulated. The cummulative effect is not neglegible. With oil and gas activities off and on-shore in
Maritania, this traffic is already in the increase.
84. Numerous tankers on their way to the refineries in Europe and Northern America filled with oil
(some 400 to 500 million tonnes every year) produced in the Gulf area and notably Angola and Nigeria
pass offshore Mauritnia. An accident with one of these tankers could have devastating consequences for
marine biodiversity. The country has no oil spill contingency planning in place to deal with medium to
large sized oil spills.
85. No studies have been carried out on the impact of routine pollution from maritime traffic on
Mauritania‘s marine biodiversity.
Oil and Gas Developments

Seismic Method
86. The use of the seismic method for oil prospecting is recognized as one of the best methods to
provide relevant information about oil potential in an area, particularly the potential for oil reserves
located deep underground. Good results from Seismic Survey will however avoid excessive exploratory
drilling. Two key aspects are worth mentioning with respect to threats and risks:
 The use of a Streamer: Boats that carry our seismic surveys use of marine cables trailing a
hydrophone streamer. If these cables are cut off by accident (e.g. through collision) it would
involve the release of kerosene present in the hydrophone streamer.
 Noise pollution: Evidence shows that noise and vibrations produced by the seismic equipment
distress and disorient marine fauna, particularly marine mammals (cetaceans such as whales35,
porpoises, and dolphins), which use underwater sounds to communicate and understand their
environment, but also fish in general. In certain occasions, seismic surveying had proven fatal to
marine mammals. Fishing cannot take place within a certain radius while seismic surveys are
35
One study from Texas shows that a grey whale will avoid its regular migratory and feeding grounds by >30km in areas of
seismic testing.

being carried out, the size of which depends on the technical parameter of the operations. There is
also emerging scientific evidence that noise pollution can affect fish spawning and important
ecolofical structures. Shallow areas such as estuaries, mangroves and coral reef ecosystems are
particularly vulnerable zones.These critical habitats harbour many species – corals and fish eggs,
for example – that cannot swim away to escape the sound source. These organisms may well
become exposed at close range to the airguns, leading to possible developmental arrest or
abnormalities. However, this has been observed only in a small proportion of exposed eggs or
larvae. While more research is needed on the impacts of seismic surveys in such habitats, many
scientists have argued the case for a moratorium in nursery areas.36
Drilling Operations (Exploration and Exploitation)
87. When seismic operations indicate particular geological structures, exploration drilling is the only
means to confirm the presence of hydrocarbons. These operations last between 3 and 5 months, and may
include a production test to evaluate the commercial oil potential of the site. However, drilling operations
for oil exploration and exploitation can affect the local environment, where the key threats and risks are:
 Discharges from the drilling operations: It includes the drilling cuttings (small rock fragments
generated by drilling), which are deposited at the bottom of the sea. There is also the drilling
residual mud and the excess of cement slurry used to secure the casing and over-gauge hole
volumes. Oil spills are possible. The release of drilling mud and is likely to smother benthic
ecosystems in the direct vicinity of drilling operations and, therefore, should be avoided near rich
benthic systems important for biodiversity. Additionally, drilling operations produce massive
amounts of wastewater (produced water37 and injected water), which may contain hydrocarbon
residues such as PAH38. These PAH are acknowledged to have detrimental effects on the marine
environment, as these are persistent in time and likely to accumulate in the food chain. As an
example, recent research on this wastewater has led to a stringent policy in Norway prohibiting all
discharges of PAH contaminated water. This water is normally stored, analyzed for toxicity and
eventually treated before being released into the sea. This is the most significant waste stream that
is generated during the oil and gas extraction, which can reach enormous quantities near the end
of the lifetime of a hydrocarbon well.
 Discharges from the drilling platform: Although much less significant, it includes discharges
from the boats and platforms systems such as wastewater from cleaning operations, boat
machinery space washings and ballast water, deck drainage, sewage, food domestic waste, and
other solid wastes. Some of this wastewater is susceptible to be contaminated by hydrocarbons.
This wastewater is normally collected, stored and treated to separate hydrocarbons before being
released into the sea; complying with the MARPOL convention.
Floating Production Storage and Off-take Facilities (FPSO) and Massive Transport of Oil
88. An FPSO system is an offshore production facility that is typically ship-shaped and stores crude
oil in tanks located in the hull of the vessel. The crude oil is periodically offloaded from the FPSO to
36
See e.g. Government of Canada, 2004. Habitat Status report. Fisheries and Oceans. Review of Scientific Information on
Impacts of Seismic Sound on Fish, Invertebrates, Marine Turtles and Marine Mammals. Available in English and French at:
www.dfompo.gc.ca/csas/Csas/status/2004/HSR2004_002_E.pdf
37
Produced water is a term used in the oil industry to describe water that is produced along with the oil and gas. Oil and gas
reservoirs have a natural water layer (formation water) that lies under the hydrocarbons. Oil reservoirs frequently contain large
volumes of water, while gas reservoirs tend to have smaller quantities. To achieve maximum oil recovery additional water is
often injected into the reservoirs to help force the oil to the surface. Both the formation water and the injected water are
eventually produced along with the oil and therefore as the field becomes depleted the produced water content of the oil
increases.
38
PAH = Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

tankers for transport. Today over 100 FPSOs are in use world-wide, with at least another 80 at the design
stage. The Chinguetti oil field in Mauritania´s EEZ, is developed with an FPSO. There are 3 different
kinds of FPSOs:
FPSOs made out of former oil transportation tankers with a single hull configuration,
FPSOs made out of former oil transportation tankers with a double hull configuration,
New and purpose built FPSOs with double hull configuration.
89. Despite rare accidents with FPSOs, the hull may be punctured after a collision with another vessel
in the same way as an ordinary oil tanker. Making proper risk assessments is difficult as historical data is
lacking. The vast majority of FPSOs has only been put into service in the second half of the 1990s. Next
to causing possible large spills production platforms including FPSOs will cause small to medium scale
spills during terminal operations.
Accidental Large Oil Spills
90. One of the most significant potential threats to coastal and marine biodiversity linked to the
operations of the oil and gas industry is the possibility of an oil spill. An oil spill is the release of a liquid
petroleum hydrocarbon into the environment due to human activity, and is a form of pollution. The term
often refers to marine oil spills, where oil is released into the ocean or coastal waters. The oil may be a
variety of materials, including crude oil, refined petroleum products (such as gasoline or diesel fuel) or
by-products, ships' bunkers, oily refuse or oil mixed in waste. Spills take months or even years to clean
up.
91. The effects of oil spills on coastal and marine biodiversity are well known and documented, based
on historical records, from several oil spills, particularly the major ones (generally over 100,000 tons).
The oil penetrates and opens up the structure of the plumage of birds, reducing its insulating ability, and
so making the birds more vulnerable to temperature fluctuations and much less buoyant in the water. It
also impairs birds' flight abilities, making it difficult or impossible to forage and escape from predators.
As they attempt to preen, birds typically ingest oil that covers their feathers, causing kidney damage,
altered liver function, and digestive tract irritation. This and the limited foraging ability quickly cause
dehydration and metabolic imbalances. Hormonal balance alteration including changes in luteinizing
protein can also result in some birds exposed to petroleum. Most birds affected by an oil spill die unless
there is human intervention. Marine mammals exposed to oil spills are affected in similar ways as
seabirds. Oil coats the fur of Sea otters and seals, reducing its insulation abilities and leading to body
temperature fluctuations and hypothermia. Ingestion of the oil causes dehydration and impaired
digestions. In addition, because oil floats on top of water, less light penetrates into the water, limiting the
photosynthesis of marine plants and phytoplankton. This, as well as decreasing the fauna populations,
affects the food chain in the ecosystem. Thus, oil spills have also a direct negative consequence on
fisheries.
92. The negative effects of an oil spill on the marine environment depend on the quantity and quality
of spilled oil, on the season and on the oceanographic characteristics. When queried, the industry often
refers to the fact that oil spills, for which they are responsible, are statistically rare, especially considering
the intensity of oil and gas activities worldwide and of maritime traffic.
93. Several studies demonstrate that accidental oil spills within the marine environment have been
substantially reduced over the last twenty years, to the extent that technology has made operations safer.
Nevertheless, technical or human failures could cause operational or accidental spills, so the risk still
looms and it has not been adequately assessed for Mauritania.

LONG-TERM SOLUTION AND BARRIERS TO ACHIEVING THE SOLUTION
94. As seen in the previous chapter, there are significant threats and risks to coastal and marine
biodiversity in Mauritania. Companies and decision makers (e.g. governments) are constantly assessing
risks against actual and potential benefits in such contexts. This is particularly important with respect to
oil and gas development, because it is a risky business – both from a financial and an operational point of
view. It is also technologically complex and profitable.
95. We have also seen that, even if the oil and gas industry is adequately regulated, monitored and
using the best techniques to make operations, this would still not be enough to curtail the degradation of
coastal and marine biological resources that is attributable to the overexplotation of fisheries resources.
Along the same lines, if the risks posed by oil and gas development are not appropriately prevented and a
major oil spill happens, the fisheries sector would be hardly hit for years.
96. At the same time, the analysis of the context contained in this Project Document shows that the
advent of oil and gas in Mauritania presents not just threats and risks but also opportunities. Hence, two
general strategies become relevant as a response to prevailing threats and risks: ‗threat abatement‘ and
‗risk mitigation‘. A third type of response, which is Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA),
incorporates both, while it also adds other contextual elements. Making it a more helpful tool in public
decision-making.
Box 3: Comparing EIA and SEA

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Can be proactive in a way that informs development proposals and
Is reactive to a specific development proposal.
can address geographic regions or technical sectors
Enables the creation of a framework against which impacts and
Focuses on project-specific impacts.
benefits can be measured.
Has a well-defined beginning and end, and informs a Can ensure that the right information is available to inform multiple
particular development decision. decisions over a period of time.
Assess the direct positive and negative impacts of a single Enables cumulative impacts to be assessed and identifies
proposed activity. implications and issues for sustainable development.
Enables a focus on achieving and maintaining a chosen level of
Focuses on the mitigation of impacts.
environmental quality.
Emphasises the reporting of impacts in a document for Is seen more as a “process” than a “product”. A written report and
decision-making purposes. a mechanism for continued collaboration are produced.
Source: South Africa‘s Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism - DEAT (2007), Strategic Environmental Assessment Guideline, Integrated
Environmental Management Information Series 10 (www.deat.gov.za//Documents/Publications/2005Jan7/Book5.pdf). See also OECD Guidelines
(www.oecd.org/dataoecd/4/21/37353858.pdf.)
97. The lack of a strategic plan and underlying strategic environmental assessment (SEA) has been a
major point of criticism with respect to project level EIAs. Biodiversity issues can only be properly
addressed during a strategic environmental assessment which takes place before decisions are made on a
project level. An SEA will have the ability of providing the GoM with information on the best options on
‗where, when and how‘ developments can be realized in a sustainable way, taking into account
biodiversity, cumulative environmental, social and economic impacts.

98. This project has made a strategic choice to deal not with
the most pressing threat to the marine and coastal environment in Box 4: Implementation of MARPOL and
other international sea governance
Mauritania, i.e. fisheries, but rather with the challenges and
instruments and in Mauritania
opportunities linked to the oil and gas industry. Fisheries, Offshore drilling operations are expected to be
including the industrial sub-sector dominated by foreign conducted within the standards in conformity with
operators, has a long history in Mauritania. The economic, social international norms such as recommendations from
and environmental issues linked to fisheries are being addressed the MARPOL convention concerning the release of
waste in oceans. However, the MARPOL convention
by other interventions, including some from the GEF.39 has only legal text for the regulations of classical
maritime traffic waste streams such as grey water,
99. Within a broader response to threats and risks, as in garbage, oil content in deck cleaning water and ballast
what SEAs can provide (see Box 3), and in the fluid framework water etc. There are waste streams produced on a
drilling or production platform that are not covered by
of aquatic environments, all of the stakes for Mauritania‘s MAPRPOL. However they are insignificant when
coastal and marine biodiversity would necessarily need to be compared to most important waste streams such as
considered. E.g., in answering the question as to whether the drilling fluids and cuttings.
time-limited revenues generated by oil and gas can and should In fact, these wastes are not regulated by any
be invested in averting threats posed by destructive fisheries; or international conventions. Also the hull configuration
in increasing the effectiveness of existing protected areas or yet of FPSOs is not regulated by MARPOL. However,
IMO recommends that provision 13 G in Annexe 1 of
in the the creation of new protected areas. Project design will the MARPOL Convention, the double hull
not be prescriptive as to answering those question a priorii – the requirement for oil tankers, is also applied on FPSOs
answer to them they should preferably be the result of a wide It is up to each coastal State to arrange domestic legal
consultation process based on informed studies. Instead, the frameworks for off-shore oil and gas development
preferably done in collaboration with other countries
project will open up for the possiblity of these questions being in the region. This is stipulated by the United Nations
posed in relevant fora. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) but no
guidance is given on how to do this.
100. The proposed long-term solution for protecting and In the case of Mauritania, the regional context is
conserving the important marine and coastal biodiversity in logically the Abidjan Convention to which Mauritania
Mauritania within the context of the development of the oil and is a party but hasn’t ratified it yet. It provides some
provisions for “pollution from activities relating to exploration
gas sector is to strengthen and consolidate the country‘s capacity and exploitation of the sea-bed” where “contracting Parties shall
to properly address these threats by a set of preventive measures take all appropriate measures to prevent, reduce, combat and
to mitigate the risks attached with the development of this sector. control pollution resulting from or in connection with activities
It is equally to exploit the opportunities it offers in a strategic relating to the exploration and exploitation of the sea-bed and its
subsoil subject to their jurisdiction and from artificial islands,
manner for the benefit of Mauritania and its rich biodiversity. installations and structures under their jurisdiction”.
The fundamental principle is to allow the development of the oil
It also includes a protocol for cooperation in
and gas sector without jeopardizing the quality of biodiversity in combating pollution in cases of marine emergency in
the marine and coastal environment of Mauritania. the region such as incidents involving ships, including
tankers, petroleum production blow-outs and the
101. This implies to effectively plan, control and monitor presence of oil or other harmful substances arising
from the failure of industrial installations. Mauritania
such development so that the industry‘s operations are carried has however ratified IMO’s International Convention
out in a way that is compatible with conservation with their on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-
engagement in the endeavor. This long-term solution rests on operation (OPCR) from 1990. Risks linked with
three main pillars. First, strengthening the institutional, policy offshore oil and gas development were outlined in
COP-8 of this convention by WWF, together with
and legal framework for protecting and conserving marine and several important strategic options available to Governments
coastal biodiversity within the context of the oil and gas to help them take effective actions such as SEAs.
development. Second, the development of alternative financial PPG Report: Kloff Sandra, October 2009, A Preliminary Baseline Study of
mechanisms for marine and coastal biodiversity conservation Mauritania’s Marine Biodiversity - Offshore Oil and Gas Development - Threats
and Opportunities (See Also Annex 7)
through public-private partnerships. Third, by increasing the
capacity of key stakeholders for monitoring the marine and
39
See Table 12: Summary of Related Activities e.g. on the International Waters Project Canary Current Large Marine
Ecosystem.

coastal biodiversity for better decision-making related to the development of the oil and gas sector in
Mauritania.
102. However, there are key barriers to this long-term solution which are to be addressed by the
project. They are described below:
Barrier 1: Weak governance frameworks that do not provide an adequate enabling environment for the
GOM to plan, monitor and control activities from the oil industry and their impacts on the environment.
103. The existing policies, laws and regulations related to the development of the oil and gas sector do
not provide an adequate enabling environment to ensure pollution prevention and to protect and conserve
biodiversity. Several gaps exist:
104. Legislative: The legislation in place to prevent and reduce risks of pollution by hydrocarbons is
not adequate. The ―Polluter Pay‖ principle is quasi absent from the legislative framework in place. Also,
the principle can only be applied if there are adequate and fast mechanisms to attribute liability. The main
legislative instrument in place to control this risk is the Production Sharing Contract between each oil
company operating in Mauritania and the GOM. Overall there is a weak integration of the international
norms identified through the international conventions into the legal framework of Mauritania and a weak
capacity to interpret this type of legislation. There is a lack of specialized expertise within the GOM.
However, there is a plan to revise the legislative framework for the oil sector, including the elaboration of
a ―Code Pétrolier‖ and a Law on the management of the oil revenues.
105. From a biodiversity point of view, the legislative framework does not provide an adequate
framework to protect and conserve marine and coastal biodiversity. The main existing Law (No. 97-006)
to protect biodiversity is antiquated and is much focussed on protecting the fauna within the context of
hunting, which is the main purpose of this Law. The government created the national parks (protected
areas) and can use few legislative instruments to enforce the protection and conservation of biodiversity
in these parks; however, a revision of this legislative framework is needed to provide an up-to-date and
stronger legislation framework for biodiversity conservation.
106. Policies: As presented in the context section, Mauritania does not have yet a sectoral policy or a
strategy for the development of the oil and gas sector. However, strategic elements for the development of
this sector are stated in the PRSP and a consultative group exists within the Ministry of Petroleum and
Energy to implement theses strategic elements. This group is also charged with the development of a
sectoral oil policy. Still, biodiversity concerns will not be included (or mainstreamed) into this policy
framework unless specifically targeted. There is currently no effort in this direction.
107. Oil spills contingency planning: The government is attempting to develop an oil spill contingency
plan (the POLMAR plan) as a means to implement the International Convention on Oil Pollution
Preparedness, Response and Co-operation (OPRC) and other key governance instruments for protecting
its coast and the EEZ (see Annex 1 for a non-exahaustive list), but so far it is a work-in-progress.
Additionally, the capacity of the government to be prepared and respond to an accident of this type is
limited. The oil and gas industry has not yet been involved in a coordinated response to accidental oil
spills. Mauritania has a weak compensation regime with respect to damage caused by the industry.
108. Capacity to review EIAs and make informed decisions: Since the first important EIA process was
submitted by an oil gas company to the government for review – i.e. Woodside‘s EIS from 2005 – it
became pattent that the capacity to manage such process from the government‘s side was very limited.
The government resorted to foreign expertise and opened up for the involvement of the wider public,

NGOs, CSOs and other in a wide consultation process. Although only a few reviews of the EIA process
were conducted in 2007-08, very little has changed since from a capacity point of view. The EIA process
failed to avoid that seismic surveys were carried out in the Diawling National Park without due dilligence
being followed. Clearly there is room for improvements. In addition, biodiversity concerns from a broader
perspective are only marginally integrated into EIA frameworks.
109. The limitations of the current EIA process can be grouped into three areas:
 Legislative gaps: the legislation in place estalished the EIA process in Mauritania.
However, other instruments to assess environmental impacts of various activities are
missing; such as environmental audits, strategic environmental assessment (SEA) and
more importantly environmental inspections. In addition, all necessary regulations for the
implementation of the EIA process are not all elaborated. For instance, templates for
public consultation (invitation, registry, minutes, etc.) are not regulated.
 Lack of government capacity to apply the EIA process: It includes the capacity to
coordinate the public consultation process and the capacity to enforce the existing
legislation to ensure that private companies are conducting EIAs according to
Mauritanian Laws. It also includes an overall lack of capacity of the various government
directorates involved in the EIA process.
 Lack of coherence among the various pieces of legislation: There is a need to clarify
some inconsistencies of the EIA process and clarify who is bearing the EIA costs. It also
includes a greater consistency of the use of some technical terms and the review of the
Annexes.
110. A first step has been accomplished by the establishment of the EIA process in Mauritania.
However, a greater capacity is needed for Mauritania to meet international EIA standards. In the context
of the project, the current government capacity to enforce the EIA process is a critical barrier for a better
control of the development of the oil and gas sector in Mauritania. There are opportunities to improve this
process and the project will support capacity development in this sector.
111. Opportunities: In terms of threat abatement and risk mitigation vis-à-vis biodiversity and
pertaning to oil and gas developments off-shore, there is room for improved governance and industry
engagement in utilizing the options in the the hierarchy of risk mitigation measures in this case.
Generally, the costs increase, as the potential for ecosystem recovery decreases (Figure 3 illustrates that).
Figure 3: Hierarchy of Risk Mitigation Measures

Barrier 2: Weak capacity to finance biodiversity conservation.
112. In addition to the global and national importance, the marine and coastal biodiversity in
Mauritania is essential for a large part of the population, whom depend on it to make a living. Protecting
and conserving this marine and coastal biodiversity necessitates an effective management of this resource,
which in turn requires an increase of financial resources to fund these measures.
113. The GOM through its national budget, and development partners through projects, contribute to
the protection and conservation of biodiversity. However, the existing level of funding is not sufficient
and, in the case of the development partners, is not sustainable in the long run (see e.g. the analysis
provided by the Financial Sustainability Scorecard contained in Annex 4). Currently there are no
mechanisms geared towards the oil and gas industry, whose CSR activities in Mauritania are likely
negligible. In terms of HSE, companies‘ investment in ‗environment‘ beyond purely safety measures is
currently not assessed, but it is likely to be rather limited, if only the sub-set ‗biodiversity‘ in it is
considered. There is room for improvement on the industry‘s side. In other parts of the world, corporate
giants like Shell and Chevron are leading the way in terms of direct investments in biodiversity.
114. According to the initial biodiversity valuation exercise carried out during the PPG, fisheries in
Mauritania‘s EEZ is valued at $311 million (Box 2). This figure is likely also significant at the regoinal
level. WWF has e.g. estimated the value of fisheries in the WAMER at $400 million. Although yields
vary signficantly from year to year and WWF‘s figure has been contexted, Mauritania‘s fisheries may be
the a key, if not the main contributor. The whole coast is very producive and protected areas play likely
an important role in it, although the importance of this role is being scientifically debated. Supposing that
the Banc d‘Arguin-Cap Blanc Complex contributes with at least one third of the fisheries value. This is a
mind-blowing figure in terms of environmental services for a marine area of roughly 60,000 hectares of
seascapes. Yet, the contribution of donors to both the protection of Banc d‘Arguin and the Diawling
National Parks GOM represents together only a fraction of that.
115. The investments in conservation are expected to increase through the establishment of the ‗Banc
d‟Arguin and Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Trust Fund Limited‘. So will the financial sustainability of
the protected area system, which remains low. The reults of the application of UNDP‘s Financial
Sustaianbility Scorecard yielded 41 out of 206 (i.e. 20%), which is low. Still there are many constraints.
E.g. it is not clear if and how other protected areas in Mauritania (existing and to be created) will be able
to benefit from the mentioned Trust Fund. One of the conditions for other protected areas to achieve
funding is that they must have an up-to-date management plan under implementation and a business plan
approved by an entity functionig as ‗park board‘. Currently, only the PNBA qualifies. Besides financing
the operational costs of the Banc d‘Arguin It is not clear whether other conservation measures, outside of
protected areas, will ever be eligible to Also, the endowment will likely remain modest in its first years of
establishment. The goal is to create a 15 million Euros trust fund, which would provide a potential
financing of about 750-800,000 Euros per year to finance biodiversity conservation activities.
116. Therefore, it is important for Mauritania to develop new financial mechanisms. Environmental
trust funds are often considered a viable alternative to finance the recurrent cost of protected areas. In the
case of Mauritania, the government and donors are engaged in designing, contributing and implementing
long-term financial strategies, including initiatives such as environmental trust funds.
117. Worth noting also is the Intervention Funds for the Environment (IFE) which was created through
the code on the environment. However this fund is to be used exclusively for protection and restoration
activities implemented as a consequence of environmental degradation. So far this fund exists only on

paper. Finally, a National Hydrocarbon Revenue Fund (FNRH) was created by the Law 2008-020 to
receive all revenues from the exploitation of hydrocarbons in Mauritania. Yet, there are no provisions that
specifically target biodiversity.
Barrier 3: Capacity of the GOM to plan, monitor and control activities carried out by the oil industry
and their impacts on the environment.
118. The overall capacity of the government to plan, monitor and control both sectors: environment
and hydrocarbons is not sufficient to ensure pollution prevention and biodiversity conservation. Several
gaps exist:
119. Institutional capacity: Despite the existence of MEDD with its special status of reporting directly
to the Prime Minister, some environmental issues are also dealt by other ministries such as oil and energy,
rural development, mining and industry and hydraulic. Additionally, MEDD has the cross-cutting
mandate to be the custodian of environmental management from a GOM point of view but it also has
other responsibilities that are similar to responsibilities given to these other above-mentioned ministries.
As a result, confusions and contradictions in interpreting the mandate of each institution happen regularly
and hamper the performance of these institutions in preserving the environment and conserving
biodiversity.
120. In term of inter-ministerial coordination, the government made some efforts to improve it,
particularly for environmental matters. A governmental service for the inter-sectoral coordination was
created and environmental focal points were nominated in several line ministries. Additionally, the
technical and financial partners of the GOM (donors) created an environmental working group in 2003,
which tries to include the relevant government departments. Nevertheless, the coordination is leaves room
for improvements, both at the intra-ministerial and inter-ministerial level.
121. Enforcement mechanisms: In addition to policy and legislative gaps, control mechanisms to
monitor activities from the oil industry and its impact on the environment and enforce the legislation in
place are lacking. The GOM has limited capacity to manage the oil and gas industry, so that its
development path is compatible with biodiversity management needs. Both the Ministry of Environment
and the environmental office of the new Ministry of Petroleum and Energy would require significant
additional human and technical resources to be effective, and their respective mandates and modes of
cooperation must be clarified.
122. Capacity to monitor biodiversity over the long run: Mauritania suffers from a scarcity of
information on existing biophysical resources in the coastal and marine ecosystems where most oil and
gas development is slated to take place, including the understanding of potential impacts such
development may have on ecosystem functions and biodiversity. This lack of information constrains
effective decision-making at the policy level, and also limits the ability of technical personnel and local
stakeholders to advocate for specific guidelines and restrictions on oil and gas development, including
guidelines and restrictions that help protect biodiversity. Despite the existence of some limited
environmental information - including the publication of a State Of the Environment (SOE) in 2008 - the
function of environmental monitoring and reporting is not well developed and would need to be
strengthened to provide crucial information on the state of the environment; particularly biodiversity in
marine and coastal areas.
123. The Environmental Code (main environmental Law – See Annex 6 for more details) is not
explicit when it comes to environmental monitoring and reporting. However, the Ordinance for the

protection, development and management of the Littoral (No. 2007-037) provides the legal framework for
the creation of a Coastal Zone Observatory to monitor the environment of the Mauritanian littoral, to
constitute a body of knowledge on the littoral and to disseminate the available information. This
Observatory is also mentioned in the PDALM plan. However, this plan is not fully approved yet and so
far it only exists on paper.
124. The lack of a centralised data-base on the marine environment prevents the government to
capitalize its knowledge, considerably hampering ecologicaly sound decision making. Monitoring
activities conducted in the park of Banc d‘Arguin and the Diawling Park are carried out by various
foreign research institutes. Bird counts are done once a year and more fundamental research projects to
unravel the ecological functioning of the wetlands take place to year round. The Banc d‘Arguin has
recently set up a centralised data base, an observatoy to make all these data more accesible. Research on
fisheries to establish catch quota and other management measures is carried out by IMROP in
collaboration with various partner institutes and organisations, mainly fishery institutes from Europe e.g.
IFREMER (France), IMARES (the Netherlands) and Spain. There is little cross fertilisation between
scientsits studying the protected areas and those doing fishery research. In addition to these somewhat
scattered research efforts, the oil and gas industry is now also gathering data about the marine
environment. These data are sometimes published in scientific reviews but most of the time this
information remains in the hands of the oil companies. Exploration activities carried out by Woodside
have revealed the deepsea coral reef system in the Chinguietti oil field area. In spite of the importantce of
this ecosystem for marine biodiversity, this coral reef system is not on the radar screen of policy makers.
No Mauritanian policy document mentions them.
125. Capacity to determine economic values of biodiversity and ecosystem services: The marine and
coastal resources have a value that is the perception of their ecological, social, cultural and economic
functions. The economic value is composed of two complementary values: the value of existence
(advantages of having these natural resources) and the value of usage provided by the exploitation of
these natural resources.
126. The economic value indicates their role in the local and national economies. It could also indicate
the contribution of these resources in poverty reduction strategies, including the development of activities
that could generate revenues for the local population such as jobs as tourist guides in protected areas and
for the local and national authorities such as exploitation licenses and taxes on fees. Overall, knowing the
value of natural resources contributes to justify the need to preserve and develop these renewable
resources; including the need for more financial contributions to preserve these natural resources.
127. Strengthening the government capacity to value these natural resources would also strengthen the
capacity to evaluate the risks linked with potential damage on natural resources and the possible costs of
repairing and/or compensation scheme due to an environmental damage. It would contribute to a better
financing for biodiversity protection and conservation.
128. Strengthening the government‘s capacity to evaluate the value of natural resources and the
environmental costs involved with their exploitation is crucial to give decision makers an idea of the
financial benefits to enhance the network of marine protected areas. Next to protecting the sea grasses of
the Banc d‘Arguin Park and the estuarine habitats of the Diawling National Park, marine biodiversity loss
may be curbed by better regulating economic activities in and around other areas of high biodiversity.
Management options such as a partial or seasonal no-fishing zone off Cap Banc, a prohibition on bottom
trawling and oil and gas drilling on the entire Venusshellfish bank and deep sea coral reefs are
management options to be explored by making intergenerational cost benefit analysis. Such strengthened
capacity would also allow decision makers to make optimal trade-offs between the emerging offshore oil

and gas sector and the activities of the fishery sector, which pose the most significant current threat to
marine biodversity in Mauritania.
129. As seen, capacity to articulate, cost and explore options is currently remains a challenge in terms
of Mauritanians possessing the information instruments for strategically planning, regulating and
monitoring the oil and gas developments in the country but also other sources of threat to coastal and
marine biodiversity in an integrated manner. With the on-going democratization process strengthening
this capacity will be essetial.
SYSTEM‟S BOUNDARIES FOR MAINSTREAMING
130. This mainstreaming project will focus on two key targets for biodiversity mainstreaming
measures: on the one hand a sectoral target and on the other a spatial target.
131. As explained in previous chapters, the sector on focus is Mauritania‘s nascent oil and gas industry
and the governance frameworks that regulate this industry. The main analysis is contained in the chapter
‗Context and global significance‘, as well as in the subsequent chapters containing the threats and barrier
analysis. This defines the system‘s boundaries from a sectoral perpective.
In terms of the spatial target, i.e. the land or seascape on focus, the system‘s boudaries are defined by the
importance of Mauritania‘s coastal and marine biodiversity. The analysis clearly shows not only that this
is the most important biodiversity for Mauritania, but that it is also globally significant. Most oil and gas
off-shore developments in Mauritania‘s coastal basin takes place within Mauritania‘s EEZ (see Project
Map 3 and Project Map 6e in Section IV – Part II).
Figure 4: Sea Areas in International Figure 5: Rough Representation of Spatial Targets for
Rights Mainstreaming
132. In terms of the landscape (as opposed to seascape), Mauritania‘s coast, represented in Project
Map 10, covers a land area along 750 km from north to south defined in the PDALM as the ‗coastal

zone‘. For programming purposes, the focus area and theme of the PDALM goes beyond the scope of this
project, as it also focuses on land-based pollution and on other activities along the coast, such as mining,
urbanization etc. The coastal zone is only considered under spatial mainstreming under this project to the
extent that its strip is an important site for sea birds, monk seals and marine turtle nesting etc. Vis-à-vis
the EEZ, the surface of the coastal strip is however negligible.
133. Hence, the interface between the sectoral and seascape focus leads to a particular focus on off-
shore oil and gas operations in Mauritania’s EEZ and coastal strip40, covering 165,338 sq km, as the
direct mainstreaming spatial target. However, measures of biodiversity mainstreaming focusing on the
governance frameworks for the industry will help reduce threats and risks posed by the industry of as a
whole, including the on-shore operations. Although a large area (some 70% of the country), an indirect
spatial mainstreaming effort therefore includes both of the on-shore blocs within an area estimated
at 700,000 sq km.41 (Figure 542)
STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
134. The MEDD is the ministry responsible for environmental management in Mauritania including
protected areas, environmental control and pollution prevention. This is the Directorate that is proposed as
the National Executing Agency for this project.
135. In addition to the MEDD, there are a number of stakeholders that will be involved in the
implementation of this project. The table below contains a summary of the roles and responsibilities of
each stakeholder.
Table 2: Roles and Responsibilities of Key Stakeholders

STAKEHOLDER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
MEDD - Ministry of MEDD has the mandate of implementing the environmental policy in Mauritania. It is
the Environment and responsible for preparing, coordinating, executing, monitoring and evaluating the
Sustainable government policy in the environment; it is also responsible for the implementation of the
Development sustainable development objectives, including the mainstreaming of these objectives into
public policies and in the management of natural resources. It is the ministry in charge of
the two national parks and is mandated to coordinate the development of the littoral;
including the implementation of the PDALM. The ministry is structured in six Directorates
including 3 of interest for this project: Direction of Environmental Control; Direction of
Pollution Prevention and Control; and, Direction of Protected Areas ad Littoral. The MEDD
is proposed to be the National Executing Agency (NEA) for this project.
GTZ GTZ has been involved in the conceptualization and development of this project from the
very beginning. It is investing direct in-cash co-financing into the project, to be delivered
through technical assistance to MEDD. Besides being a co-financier, GTZ is hence
considered a management partner in the project. The details of this can be found in GTZ‘s
co-financing letter (See Section IV, Part I).
Directorate of A MEDD directorate, the DPAL is the government department responsible for protecting
40
Beaches and other coastal features along the 750 km long coast are interesting from a biodiversity point of view (sites for turtle
nesting, seabirds, occurrence of monk seals), but are negligible in terms of surface area. Hence, only the EEZ surface is being
considered.
41
This covers the Taoudeni Intracartonique Basin in the east of the country with > 500,000 sq km and the Mauritanian coastal
basin estimated at 130,000 sq km. (See Project Map 3 in Section IV - Part II). The latter covers the entire length of the coast and
up to some 180 km inland.
42
The content of this illustrative map does not imply official endorsement or approval whatsoever by the United Nations.

Protected Areas and and conserving biodiversity in Mauritania. Its mandate is to conceive the national policies
Littoral for protected areas, the littoral and the humid zones; as well as mainstream the sustainable
development objectives within these policies. It also has the mandate to oversee the
development and implementation of the PDALM and the management of both national
parks.
Directorate of A MEDD directorate, the Directorate of Environmental Control has the mandate to emit the
Environmental directives and guidelines for the different steps necessary to conduct the Environmental
Control Impact Assessments (EIAs); to ensure the effective application of measures to mitigate the
risks identified in the EIAs and particularly in the environmental management plans.
Directorate of A MEDD directorate, the Directorate of Pollution Prevention and Environmental
Pollution Prevention Emergencies has the mandate to elaborate and coordinate the implementation of national
and Environmental strategies preventing and combating chemical, biological, radioactive and sound pollutions,
Emergencies as well as risks linked to human activities. It is also in charge of elaborating and
implementing environmental emergency plans such as POLMAR.
IMROP - The ―Institut Mauritanien de Recherches Océanographiques et des pêches (IMROP)‖
Mauritanian Institute provides the GOM and users of the fishery resource with scientific knowledge and technical
for Fisheries analysis necessary for the sustainable management of this fishery resource and of marine
Research environment. To this end, the institute, in collaboration with the university of Nouakchott
and international organizations carries out research programs on the monitoring and
analysis of the fisheries (fish stock and species) as well as on the comprehension of the
marine and littoral ecosystems. The study of the marine environment and the risks of
pollution of this environment is also part of the mandate of IMROP.
Ministry of The oil sector is managed by the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy. Its mission is to
Petroleum and elaborate and implement government policies in the oil and energy sectors. It is in charge of
Energy promoting the exploration and management of prospective zones for hydrocarbons as well
as the production, import, export, transport, storage and commercialization of
hydrocarbons. It also includes the drafting of legislation and regulations and their
application for the exploration, transport and storage of hydrocarbons. Two Directions
under this ministry have an environmental focus: (1) Direction of Oil Geology and Data
that is in charge of maintaining an environmental management information system and
evaluate EIAs presented by the private sector before giving assessment notices; (2)
Direction of Promotion of Hydrocarbons and Partners Monitoring that is in charge of the
development of the national policy for hydrocarbons, the promotion of oil and the
monitoring of oil activities.
Mauritanian Society Created in 2004, the SMH is a public organization under the supervision of the Ministry of
of Hydrocarbons Petroleum and Energy. Its main objective is to manage the state participation in the
(SMH) exploration, development, production and commercialization of oil and gas in Mauritania. It
has also the mission to develop the national capacity within the different areas of the oil
industry. It will be an important partner to the project. The SMH advises the government in
the oil sector but has no rights on the ―partage‖ of the production of hydrocarbons between
private sector operators and the government of Mauritania.
International and As of 2009, 14 oil companies are operating in the oil and gas sector in Mauritania. The
National Oil following ones are operating off-shore: Petronas, Dana Petroleum, Tullow Oil, China
Companies National Petroleum Corporation International, Energem and SMH. (see Table 1 and Annex
2 for more information on these companies)
Directorate of the This Directorate – now under the supervision of the Ministry of Fishery and Marine
Marine Commercial Economy - is in charge of elaborating and implementing policies and legislation related to
(Direction de la the management of the public maritime domain. It is composed of four services including
Marine Marchande) the Service for the Preservation of the Marine environment and of the Public Maritime
Domain that is a service with several functions that are relevant for the project such as the
implementation of the government sponsored sea POLMAR plan, the coordination and
harmonization of oil companies‘ POLMAR plans and the monitoring of the International
Oil Pollution Compensation Funds.

Administration of The park includes 1/3 of the Mauritanian littoral and covers a total area of 12,000 km 2
the National Park of divided almost equally between marine and land areas. It is also a Ramsar site and a
Banc d‘Arguin UNESCO-MAB biosphere reserve. The park is managed by a public administration
(PNBA) (PNBA) under the supervision of MEDD and composed of about 80 staff. It is headed by a
Director nominated by a Council of Ministers‘ Decree and represents the authority of the
park. The PNBA Administration is administered by a Board chaired by a Senior Public
Servant nominated by Decree and constituted of several government representatives and
representatives from the communities residing within the park‘s boundaries and from the
staff. Finally the PNBA Administration is assisted by a scientific council (CSBA)
composed of international experts and of representatives from the local communities
residing within the park. The park has six objectives including ―Identify and catalogue
species and threatened, rare or vulnerable habitats and elaborate action plans‖, and
―Strengthen and ensure the sustainability of a terrestrial and marine monitoring and
control system of the park‖, that is to monitor about 1/3 of the Mauritanian littoral. PNBA is
co-financier in this project and will be a member of the project steering committee.
Administration of The park was created in 1991 and is situated in the delta of the Senegal River. It covers an
the National Park of area of about 16,000 ha but it is part of a vast ecological unit delimited by the Atlantic
Diawling (PND) Ocean in the West, the Chat T‘boul in Northwest, the Ndiader system in the North and the
Senegal River in the East and South. Due to the development of hydro-infrastructure, the
area loss a lot of its biodiversity and the productivity of the environment. The park is
managed by a Public Administration (PND) and one objective is to restore, conserve and
use sustainably the natural resources of the park and its peripheral zone. It consists of
recreating a flooding calendar, which would be similar to the natural flooding occurring
prior to the construction of the dam, in order to recreate the natural ecosystems in the Delta.
IUCN-Mauritania IUCN is active in Mauritania since 1986. From 1986 to 1993, IUCN activities in Mauritania
were supported by UNEP and UNSO under their national conservation strategy. It
intervenes in the national park of Diawling and also contributed to the revision of
legislative texts such as forestry code and hunting code. From 1993, IUCN has been
receiving support from the Netherlands to pursue its activities in Mauritania concentrating
on humid zones such as the park of Banc d‘Arguin and the park of Diawling and within the
IUCN program to strengthen the institutional capacity for the management of resources in
humid zones in West Africa. Since 2000, IUCN-HQ and the GOM signed a long-term
agreement, which was followed the same year by the opening of a IUCN office in
Nouakchott. As an international NGO, IUCN is very active in the protection and
conservation of biodiversity in Mauritania. It supports this project with some co-financing
and will be a strong partner during the implementation of this project. IUCN is co-financier
in this project and will be a member of the project steering committee.
WWF WAMER WWF‘s project for the West African Marine Ecoregion (WAMER) is has for the past 3-4
years been implementing its programme, which is linked to the PRCM The WAMER
Project seeks to establish links with key government sectors, NGOs, and individuals in the
region to undertake reconnaissance of all the WAMER countries in order to identify
important threats to wildlife and fisheries, and to survey the region's coastal protected areas.
WWF WAMER is co-financier in this project and will be a member of the project steering
committee.
Other local NGOs There are few active NGOs in Mauritania; particularly in the field of the environment and
and CSOs biodiversity conservation. They play an important role in implementing projects often
funded by international donors. This is the case of ―Nature Mauritanie‖ that was created in
2000 and that is specialized in sustainable development and protection of biodiversity
through communities‘ involvement. This NGO has been implementing several projects
related to coastal biodiversity such as the ―Community management of the biodiversity of
ecosystems from the Ntiallakh basin‖ project and the ―Reproduction site rehabilitation of
the spatulas in Nair within the PNBA‖ project. NGOs will be important partners to the
project.

BASELINE ANALYSIS
136. Mauritania‘s economy is at a turning point, poised to enter an era of large-scale oil exploration
and production, primarily offshore. However, the key oil reserves appear to be located within the
country‘s fragile coastal and marine ecosystems. Mauritania‘s coastal and marine ecosystems form one of
the most diverse areas of the Western Africa Marine Ecoregion (WAMER), in large part because they
encompass the transition zone from temperate to tropical ecosystems and from the Guinea to Canary
currents.
137. Mauritania‟s marine and coastal biodiversity is at risk from the growth of the oil and gas industry.
While technological advances have reduced to some degree the risk of accidental spills and other
pollution from offshore oil and gas drilling, disturbances of marine and coastal ecosystems are inevitable.
Moreover, common impacts of off-shore oil and gas development go beyond the inevitable spills to also
include seismic waves used in the exploration phase, dumping of waste materials that contain heavy
metals and chemical products, increased turbidity caused by sediments and debris from drilling, and
impacts linked to large boat traffic. In addition, the risk of large oil spills, with devastating consequences
for coastal and marine biodiversity, is not being adequately mitigated.
138. At present, commercial fisheries licenses are a very significant source of foreign income for
Mauritania, and fisheries are one of the resources most at risk from pollution related to oil and gas
development. Given that Mauritania‟s oil “boom” is projected to last no more than 20 years, it is
imperative for the country to conserve and effectively manage natural resources that are critical for its
long-term economic health.
139. Fishing is recognized as the most important cause for the degradation of Mauritania‟s marine and
coastal biodiversity. Marine trophic Index declined from 3.7 to 3.4. Bottom dwelling organisms have
been reduced with a factor 3 and pelagic top predators such as hammer heads, manta rays and sea turtles
face regional extinction. Important areas of high biodiversity are at risk and remain unprotected.
140. The GOM recognizes the national importance of ensuring that the development of oil and gas
resources does not cause the widespread environmental degradation and social upheaval seen in other
countries. Furthermore, the GOM demonstrated its interest in being transparent and minimizing the
impacts of oil and gas development by joining the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), to
which most oil companies active in the country also belong. The GOM also participated in the process of
the Scientific Panel on oil and gas activities in Mauritania, which made recommendations to improve the
legislation in place, which does not sufficiently address the basic questions: who, where, how to operate
and to improve the capacity of the GOM to meet the demands for public intervention on oil and gas
matters.
141. However, the GOM‟s steps towards strengthening the legal and policy frameworks necessary for
regulating the oil and gas industry and for ensuring that oil and gas development is implemented in a
sustainable manner with equitable sharing of benefits and due protection of globally significant
biodiversity, have been extremely limited thus far. Also, attempts to creatively use revenues from oil and
gas to promote conservation (either through protected areas or other measures) have equally been limited.
142. One of the main instruments to control the impacts of the oil and gas industry on marine and
coastal biodiversity is the EIA process. The instrument is legislated and procedures are in place for the
GOM to conduct reviews of EIAs as well as controlling the implementation of environmental
management plans (that are part of EIAs). However, the overall EIA process is recognized as being

limited. Few reviews were conducted in 2007-08 and there is room for improvements in the establishment
of requirements, processing of reports, including public consultation processes, and in particular for due
diligence to be carried out in the monitoring of the implementation on environmental plans.
143. On the biodiversity side, several initiatives are underway to protect and conserve marine and
coastal biodiversity. The GOM created the Banc d‟Arguin and the Diawling National Parks, both of
which encompassing a large part of the Mauritanian coastal zone. Within these parks, activities are
implemented to protect and conserve marine and coastal environment. Additionally, the PNBA
Administration created a trust fund to promote conservation and development of the park and, if financial
resources permit, finance the conservation of other marine and coastal areas in Mauritania may eventually
benefit. The mentioned trust fund is being capitalized by the GOM on the basis of revenue received by the
GOM from the EU from fisheries agreements. There have not yet been attempts to involve the oil and gas
industry.
144. The oil and gas corporate players in Mauritania are following industry basic standards, given that
the policies and legislation to plan, control and monitor the industry is weak. They may be willing to
enhance measures that take biodiversity into consideration into their operations, but in general, industry
players remain to be adequately engaged.
145. Finally, more sophisticated and broader decision-making frameworks, such as SEA, are not yet
tried in Mauritania, and the today a foregone opportunity to lead and informed debate on the interface
between oil and gas and biodiversity in Mauritania, including the threats, the risks, the stakes for different
groups, including benefits, and the opportunities these new developments can generate.
146. While the above describe baseline endeavors are not without merits, it is clear that the scattered
efforts without a systematic development of a coherent policy environment will lack a comprehensive
approach for the development of the oil and gas sector. The GOM with its limited budget and capacity is
requesting UNDP-EEG for support to address the issues related to the development of the oil and gas
sector; which requires three main elements: (i) Strengthen policy and legislation frameworks in order to
provide the necessary instruments to the GOM to plan, monitor and control activities from the oil industry
and its impact on the environment; (ii) Implement sustainable financial mechanism(s) to fund extra
activities for protection and conservation of marine and coastal biodiversity; and, (iii) Develop the
capacity of stakeholders including more informed decision-making based on better biodiversity
monitoring information.
PART II: Strategy

PROJECT RATIONALE AND POLICY CONFORMITY
Fit with the GEF Focal Area Strategy and Strategic Program
147. The proposed project is fully consistent with the GEF Strategic Objective #2 ―Mainstreaming
Biodiversity in Production Landscapes/Seascapes and Sectors‖, and specifically its related Strategic
Program #4 ―Strengthening the Policy & Regulatory Framework for Mainstreaming Biodiversity‖, which
were set under the current GEF cycle (GEF-4). The project is aligned with the GEF strategy to support
institutional capacity building and the development of appropriate policy frameworks to ensure

sustainable biodiversity conservation. The project will particularly address the GEF-recognized
underlying driver for biodiversity loss that is: ―Policy and legal framework, institutions and governance‖.
148. The primary focus of the project‘s objective and outcomes is the mainstreaming of biodiversity
conservation within the oil and gas sector, including within the national political and legal frameworks
within which the industry operates. As the GEF strategic program #4 states, the project will ―remove
critical knowledge barriers, develop institutional capacities, and establish policies, legislative and
regulatory frameworks required to integrate biodiversity conservation and sustainable use objectives into
the actions of the production sectors‖; in this case the oil and gas sector. It will be done through (i)
fostering an enabling environment (enacting new legislation and new policies and removing institutional
barriers through capacity development); (ii) systematically addressing the threats and risks to biodiversity
posed by oil exploration and extraction activities through environmental planning and management
approaches that involve biodiversity assessment, monitoring, conservation, and sustainable financing; and
(iii) enhancing knowledge and information regarding biodiversity as a basis for effective stakeholder
participation in natural resource management. The engagement of the industry is part and parcel of this
strategy and will build on the industry‘s strengths and on the opportunities for transforming their practice
towards a more biodiversity friendly one.
149. Additionally, one of key results of the project – revenue sharing and investments in conservation
by the oil industry – will benefit and strengthen conservation of critical habitat for biodiversity.
Therefore, it can be said the project may also have a positive impact towards achieving the GEF Strategic
Objective #1 ―Catalyzing Sustainability of Protected Areas Systems‖ and its related strategic program #1
―Sustainable Financing of Protected Area Systems at the National Level‖. However, the financial
mechanisms that will be set up by this project will not be necessarily be restricted to benefitting protected
area finance, but will also focus on other means of promoting conservation.
Rationale and Summary of GEF Alternative
150. The Government of Mauritania is requesting GEF support to remove these identified barriers.
Despite the proximity of oil and gas reserves to biodiversity-rich areas, the oil and gas development
experience in Mauritania needs not be a negative one. Assuming that the oil and gas industry will take
appropriate measures to avoid and reduce damage to biodiversity, but due to the nature of oil and gas
operations (i) some damage is unavoidable and can be cumulatively significant43; and (ii) the risk of
accidental spills should not be understated.
151. The solution proposed by this project involves a three-pronged approach: (a) the first work
package is to provide the government with policy and legislative instruments to be able to prevent, control
and mitigate the negative impacts of oil and gas upstream activities. It will include the strengthening of
policies, guidelines and regulations for the oil and gas sector, as well as strengthening government
agencies responsible for their implementation; including the review of EIAs and the control of
implementation of environmental management plan; (b) the second work package is about expanding the
existing financial capacity to protect and conserve marine and coastal biodiversity in Mauritania. The
project will build upon the experience of the PNBA Trust Fund and will seek to engage the oil and gas
industry for financing marine and coastal biodiversity conservation over the long-term [refer to options];
(c) the third work package is to build the capacity of key stakeholders in the public sector and civil
society for monitoring marine and coastal biodiversity and improving the decision-making process related
43
Building on the following hierarchy with regards to environmental damage caused by extractive industries: avoiding, reducing,
mitigating, followed by compensating or off-setting

to the sustainable development of the oil and gas sector. In addition to government staff, local
governments, coastal communities, fishermen and the public in general will benefit from increased
awareness and capacity building activities.
152. Global benefits will be realized by preventing/reducing pressure on globally significant species in
the coastal and marine ecosystems of Mauritania, which contain higher levels of globally significant
biodiversity than the country‘s terrestrial ecosystems. Protected areas within the EEZ that provide critical
habitat for biodiversity, including the Banc d'Arguin National Park, Diawling National Park, and others,
will be indirectly strengthened through increased financing for biodiversity conservation. Beyond
protected areas the project has mainstreaming spatial targets that cover the entire EEZ, Biodiversity
throughout the entire EEZ and coastal strip will benefit from controls on oil and gas exploration, drilling,
storage and transportation. In addition, coastal and marine ecosystems in Mauritania provide critical
habitat for millions of migratory birds, as well as spawning grounds for fish populations that are
ecologically and economically important throughout the WAMER, and their conservation will therefore
provide benefits that extend far beyond Mauritania‘s borders.
PROJECT GOAL, OBJECTIVE, OUTCOMES AND OUTPUTS/ACTIVITIES
153. The project strategy described below is in line with the new GEF-Results-Based-Management
approach that is ―to move away from a “blue print” approach to project development and design towards
a results-based adaptable approach focusing on delivering project outcomes and impacts during
implementation‖. As a consequence, the structure of components, outcomes and outputs presented at the
PIF stage was re-structured to fit within the new results-based-management approach. The strategy is
presented below:
154. The goal of the project is to mainstream marine and coastal biodiversity conservation into
Mauritania‘s new era of oil and gas development through a concerted partnership involving the oil and
gas industry, government and civil society stakeholders.
155. The project objective is to strengthen the necessary policy, legislative and financial instruments
as well as the capacity of government and civil society stakeholders in partnership with the oil and gas
industry to protect and conserve marine and coastal biodiversity.
156. In order to achieve the above objective and based on the barrier analysis presented above, the
project has three expected outcomes, which are further detailed in expected outputs. These three expected
outcomes are:
Outcome 1: Marine and coastal biodiversity conservation mainstreamed into the governance
frameworks for the oil and gas sector and into the industry‘s operations.
Outcome 2: Financial flows to promote biodiversity conservation are strengthened through

partnerships between the public sector and the oil and gas sector.
Outcome 3: Capacity of key stakeholders in the public sector and civil society is strengthened for
monitoring marine and coastal biodiversity and environmentally sound decision-making related to
the development of the oil and gas sector.

Outcome 1: Marine and coastal biodiversity conservation mainstreamed into the governance
frameworks for the oil and gas sector and into the industry’s operations.
157. By focusing on the EEZ, this outcome is about strengthening the enabling environment for it in
that seascape. There are two key aspects in it. First, it deals with improvements in the governance
frameworks that regulate the oil and gas sector (policy legal and fiscal aspects considered), so that its
development can better take into account the needs for protecting and conserving marine and coastal
biodiversity within the context of oil and gas developments. Secondly, it is about engaging the industry
into a constructive dialogue towards transforming its prevailing practices vis-à-vis biodiversity. Both
aspects are complementary and aimed at laying out the biodiversity mainstreaming agenda.
158. The conservation outcome will include the removal of key barriers for the mitigation of threats
and the abatement of risks posed by oil and gas development within the EEZ seascape, with 165,338 sq
km as the spatial target area for biodiversity mainstreaming. In addition, the oil and gas industry of
Mauritania will be engaged in a transformation process with respect to its operations vis-à-vis
biodiversity. This outcome will be achieved through the following expected outputs:
Output 1.1. The application of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), with particular
attention to biodiversity sensitive areas, will permit informed decision-making zoning the EEZ
from a biodiversity and sectoral development points of view
The role of SEA is to assist development processes move towards sustainability, enabling the
integration of social, economic and biophysical aspects in the policy, programming and planning
process. While EIA focuses on the positive and negative impacts of a specific development
project once it has been designed, SEA has the advantage to allow for the decision-maker to
proactively determine the most suitable development type for a particular area, before
development proposals are formulated or early in the onset (see e.g. Box 3). Existing and
approved EIA can serve as a point of departure.
Activities under this output will include a process through which the environmental consequences
of Mauritania‘s entrance into the oil era can be systematically evaluated to ensure the stakes and
opportunities are duly disclosed and debated in broad fora in a facilitated manner leading to
informed decision-making. Zoning is one of the key tools to be used in the process. Zoning
activities will build on the existing work of the Mapping Project ―Biodiversity and Hydrocarbons
in Mauritania‖, which used spatial data for assessing impacts linked to Oil and Gas on biological
resources and fisheries in Mauritania (see Box 1 for a reference and Project Maps 6 in Section IV
– Part II). The mapping exercise was very useful to pin-point sensitive areas of high biodiversity
(high concentration of species) as well as areas that are less rich but the play a key role in
sustaining marine biodiversity (perhaps the keystones of the marine environment, such as the
nurseries, the spawning areas, the sheelfish banks and deep sea corals). This information was also
juxtaposed with information on oil blocks and activities of the oil and gas industry. However the
exercise was not followed by strategic decisions, e.g. determining that oil and gas developments
will not be affected by the offshore oil and gas industry, creating spatial and temporal no-go
zones and areas under conditional use. The proposed zoning under this process will last longer
and will take the previous mapping exercise a few steps further. The intended outcome is to agree
on the use of specific special blocks with the industry concurrence (using e.g. oil blocks as a basic
decision-making unit), reaching siting agreements and applying other instruments (to be
determined upon project inception), all in line with the ‗precautionary approach‘ for reaching the
goals stated in the SEA.
Obviously, the stakes of the fisheries sector will be taken into account in the SEA exercise and
decisions may also affect that sector. Co-funding will be channeled to the activity to cover any
that may be considered the non-incremental in order to comply with GEF procedures.

As noted in the narrative section, Mauritania does not count on a national sectoral strategy or a
policy on oil and gas development. A possible outcome of the SEA and the zoning of the EEZ, as
hereby proposed, can be the preparation of a national strategy or policy for oil and gas
developments.
Output 1.2. The review, revision and strengthening of relevant legal, policy and fiscal
frameworks results on a stronger integration of biodiversity concerns in the governance of the
oil and gas sector
Key legal and policy gaps were identified in the barriers analysis. The need to incorporate
international environment agreements and legal instruments that Mauritania signed or ratified is
important. Activities under this output will start with a more thorough screening of policies and
regulatory frameworks than what was possible to carry out during the PPG phase. The exercise
will be results-oriented and focused on the integration of biodiversity concerns into the mentioned
instruments. This may be done through the addition of ‗biodiversity annexures‘ to existing
policies and proposals for amendments to existing codes, ordinances etc. Annex 6 provides the
reference to these policies and laws and chapter ‗Governance Frameworks for Biodiversity
Mainstreaming‘ an analysis. Annex 1 contains a non-exhaustive list of international agreement
pertinent to this project.
It became also patent from the PPG studies that Mauritania does not count on a law on
biodiversity, with the exception of the hunting code, which has many gaps vis-à-vis coastal and
marine biodiversity. Plans like the POLMAR, PDLAM and laws and policies such as the
Hydrocarbons Code, as well as others others are an excellent baseline for biodiversity
mainstreaming. The PDALM and POLMAR plans will be finalized and the management plan for
the national parks kept up-to-date.
Still, a review of certain codes, laws and policies that are under formulation present the best
opportunity to promote the ‗biodiversity mainstreaming agenda‘. A new Law to Prevent and
Combat Different Types of Marine Pollutions in under preparation and this is a window of
opportunity for it.
Building the results of output 1.1, EIA frameworks will be strengthen from a legal and procedural
point of view with a clear and incremental focus that deals with biodiversity. Partnering with
existing initiatives that reviewed the current EIA process, the project will support activities aimed
at strengthening the capacity of the government to coordinate the EIA process, and to review
EIAs and assess the environmental feasibility of each submitted project. Supported activities will
be aligned with other existing initiatives such as GTZ supported activities to strengthen the EIA
process in Mauritania and those under the WB Project PRISM. Activities will include training of
government staff involved in the EIA process, review of EIA procedures and materials,
assessment of the EIA process, assessment of environmental management plans and their
implementation and streamline the process in general. It will include capacity development
activities for the staff at the MEDD but also at the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy. GEF funds
will be used exclusively to foster the biodiversity element in the implementation of such
activities, given that other players are already making a significant baseline contribution.
Output 1.3. The emergence of a fast and effective response to accidental oil spills emanating
from oil and gas developments mitigate risks to coastal and marine biodiversity within the EEZ
and involves relevant government bodies and industry in a coordinated manner
The risks of an accidental oil spill were considered in chapter ‗Threats, Risks and Impacts‘ and
the POLMAR described under ‗Other Strategies and Plans‘ in Annex 6. Currently the industry is
the only player with the means to set up a response, although not yet coordinated and neither with
particular attention to biodiversity sensitive areas. Activities under this output will ensure the
actual incorporation of the ‗polluter-pays principle‘ and of the precautionary approach to
economic activities that can harm the environment into the existing emergency response

framework, but with a special focus on the biodiversity aspects of it. Building on the plans being
prepared under the POLMAR and on the zoning exercise proposed under Output 1.1, the due
completion of POLMAR, the mainstreaming (incorporation) of biodiversity elements into it and
the active engagement of the industry in the emergence response will be on focus.
Output 1.4. The oil and gas industry establishes collectively a set of operational standards that
specifically safeguard coastal and marine biodiversity
As result of competition, individual companies tend to ―follow the example‖ when a leading
industry player raises standards.
As seen in the chapter ‗Threats, Risks and Impacts‘, offshore oil and gas development can affect
marine organisms via seismic surveys, sediment (smothering), disturbance caused by drilling and
production, erection of infrastructures, introduction of foreign organisms and chemical pollution.
Applying a precautionary approach to the emerging offshore oil and gas industry will mainly be
achieved by doing a sound spatial planning of the industry. Based on the results of the SEA,
including the zoning exercise, this output will complement this through further industry
engagement. It will deal with the whole plethora of measures foreseen under the ‗Hierarchy of
Risk Mitigation Measures‘ (Figure 3), where cost elements will also be duly assessed for each of
the steps in contextual manner. These are: prevention of damage, followed by reduction and
mitigation of actual impacts while not still severe, compensation and rehabilitation in situ when
damage is severe, followed by off-setting.
The recommendations of Panel Pètrole will also be analyzed in this light. The further
engagement of the Panel with the industry will be encouraged.
Many oil and gas companies are subject to reputation risks, if they are seen not complying with
widely accepted international standards for biodiversity management for the industry. Initiatives
at the international level such as the ‗The Energy and Biodiversity Initiative‘ (www.TheEBI.org)
were groundbreaking in terms of proposing best industry practices and feasible measures for
industry engagement.
Key players obviously include the industry in particular SHM, which is partner is each and every
joint-venture, but equally the Ministry of Oil and Energy, which is responsible for issuing
different types of concessions.
As a non-exhaustive suggestion of possible standards to be adopted for off-shore operations in
Mauritania‘s EEZ, the following is being proposed:
▪ No-go zones off-shore for the oil and gas industry, as defined through the SEA, are strictly
respected for both exploration and any other oil and gas developments.
▪ No significant disturbance to marine habitats and of marine fauna caused by oil and gas
developments, including exploration, production, transport and decommissioning. More
specifically for off-shore development in Mauritania, this entails:
- No lethal effects from seismic surveys on fish eggs and larvae and benthic
communities in relatively shallow waters (seagrass and shellfish bank).
- No cetacean stranding caused by seismic surveys. Stranding events should be
investigated for brain damage (hemorrhages) and hearing apparatus. Adequate action
may include the compulsory use of ―soft start‖, have independent observers on-board
survey vessels, only survey with good visibility, avoid surveying in the summer
months when abundance of pilotwhales and dolphins chasing the sardinella spp. is
high.
- No destruction of important benthic communities such as deep sea coral reefs from the
construction of infrastructures or the smothering of drilling cutting.
▪ No significant environmental impact from routine storage, handling and disposal of solid and
hazardous wastes
▪ No accidental hydrocarbon or chemical spills to the marine environment.

▪ Minimal interference with commercial, recreational and traditional fishing activities.
▪ All environmental incidents are reported in accordance with the requirements of this EP and
legislative requirements.
These proposals will need to be refined and agreed upon through industry engagement and
dialogue. Monitoring will be ensured through activities under Outcome 3.
Outcome 2: Financial flows to promote biodiversity conservation are strengthened through

partnerships between the public sector and the oil and gas sector.
159. This outcome is about increasing the flows of finance to conservation in Mauritania. This will
encompasses the establishment and implementation of a ‗conservation financing mechanism‘, as it is
being generically called in this PRODOC, where the capitalization is with funds from the oil and gas
industry operating in Mauritania. The aim of such mechanism, which remains to be defined, is of
conserving, sustainably using and safeguarding biodiversity in Mauritanian territory, including its EEZ.
Options for the mechanism were considered during the PPG phase (See Options Paper in XXXXX), but
no definite agreement has been reached. The PPG was implemented during a period of political instability
and change in Mauritania. The country has now successfully completed a transition back to democratic
rule. The momentum is one of ‗expectation‘. Hence, from the point of view of the industry, discussing
and exploring conservation finance options was recommended postponed until the MSP entered its
implementation phase.44 The two main options for the ‗conservation financing mechanism‘ that were
considered in the ‗Options Paper‘ were either to create a new financial mechanism or to ―add-on‖ to an
existing one. In the ‗add-on‘ model, the best candidate appeared to be the existing ‗Banc d‟Arguin and
Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Trust Fund Limited‘, supposing that it can be expanded, including in its
governance structure and purpose, and certain aspects can be accommodated for.
160. Under this outcome feasibility studies and negotiation rounds will serve as the basis for defining
options and implementing a capitalization plan to be proposed. The conservation outcome will include
significant improvements in the flow of funds to biodiversity conservation, including protected areas, but
not restricted to them, and with full visibility to the industry. This will be achieved through the following
outputs:
Output 2.1. The „conservation financing mechanism‟ established with the necessary legal and
governance instruments to make it operational, a well defined capitalization plan and adequate
M&E
At the time of writing this MSP brief, the PNBA trust fund is capitalized with about 9-10 million
Euros and is a possible alternative to be expanded with the support from the project. However,
there is also the existing-only-on-paper intervention fund for the environment (IFE) that was
created through the code of the environment. At the start of the project a full assessment will be
supported by the project to explore financial mechanism alternatives. This assessment will be
conducted in strong collaboration with key stakeholders; particularly the government through
MEDD and the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy but also the oil and gas industry. Once the
decision will be made on the recommended financial mechanism, the project will support the
establishment of this mechanism through legal, policy and managerial support. GEF funds will
not be used to capitalize the mechanism, but may be used to bear the some of the administrative
costs of setting up the mechanism.
Output 2.2. Signed agreements to fund this financial mechanism between the government and
the oil and gas industry
44
The fact that Dana‘s letter of support to the project does not mention an amount is symptomatic of this.

As part of tasks of establishing a financial mechanism for the protection and conservation of the
biodiversity, the project will support activities to engage the oil and gas industry and negotiate the
details. Through awareness rising, round tables, workshops and other discussion forums, the aim
is to end up with concrete agreements from individual companies for the implementation of the
capitalization plan.
Output 2.3. Capacity of MEDD and of eligible the CSO/NGO players to propose conservation
project under the financial mechanism and manage their funds in connection with them is
strengthened
The capacity of MEDD staff, as well as of environmental NGOs and CSOs, to adequately utilize
funds from the conservation financial mechanism will be strengthened. This entails the
preparation and budgeting of proposals, their implementation and monitoring. This will be
accomplished through training programs, the wide dissemination of guidelines, manuals and
relevant biodiversity information (in tandem with output 3.3) for the effective use of these funds
towards biodiversity conservation.
Output 2.4. On-going tri-partite dialogue (oil and gas industry, government and civil society)
for the development of the oil and gas sector serves as a debate platform to support the
conservation of marine and coastal biodiversity within the EEZ
The project will foster the existing dialogue mechanisms such as the EITI process, the expert
panel Panel Pètrole and the informal working group of oil and gas companies, who meet
periodically to discuss a plethora of issues and coordinate among them. The project will also
support the establishment of a wider debate forum which also includes civil society, academia
and the media. The aim is to the dissemination of relevant information and to facilitate the
implementation of activities under Outputs 1.1, 1.2, 2.1 and all outputs under Outcome 3.
Activities under this output will include awareness-raising about biodiversity, the threats and
risks to which this biodiversity is being exposed to and what can be done to revert this picture. It
will also provide a forum for exchanging information and progress made in the development of
the oil and gas sector as well as discussing the state of the marine and coastal biodiversity.
Outcome 3: Capacity of key stakeholders in public sector and civil society is strengthened for
monitoring marine and coastal biodiversity and environmentally sound decision-making related to
the development of the oil and gas sector.
161. This outcome is about the capacity development of key stakeholders in both the public sector and
civil society to strengthen the monitoring of marine and coastal biodiversity and to contribute on an
informed basis to the decision-making process related to the development of the oil and gas sector. The
strategy of this outcome is a three-pronged approach: (i) build the knowledge of key stakeholders in the
public sector and civil society to be able to monitor the development of the oil and gas sector and its
impact on the marine and coastal biodiversity and make better related decisions: (ii) strengthen the
function of monitoring marine and coastal biodiversity, including the functions of data collection, data
storage and data access; and (iii) determine the value of marine and coastal biodiversity and ecosystem
services in order to contribute to a better understanding of the opportunity costs of the development of the
oil and gas sector.
162. The conservation outcome will be that key stakeholders (inter alia government bodies, NGOs, the
industry and fishermen communities) to become more aware of the stakes involved in oil and gas
developments. This will be measured independently during mid-term and final evaluations and will

involve the application of ‗The Most Significant Change‘ methodology.45 This outcome will be achieved
through the following outputs:
Output 3.1. Marine and coastal biodiversity awareness strengthened as well as knowledge
about the oil and gas sector for key stakeholders in public sector and civil society
The project will support activities to raise awareness in biodiversity conservation including the
concept of its total value based on the social, cultural, economic and ecological functions. The
aim of this output is to increase the knowledge about biodiversity, its value and its protection and
conservation. This knowledge will be used by key stakeholders within the context of the
development of the oil and gas sector. It will prevent that the development of this industrial sector
is detrimental to the local marine and coastal biodiversity. The targeted stakeholders will include
representatives from the public service, civil society and also Parliamentarians and Senators.
Output 3.2. An established operational marine and coastal biodiversity monitoring system
corroborates to specifically to determine threats to coastal and marine ecosystems and to
prevent/mitigate the adverse impacts of oil and gas development
The project will support activities building on existing initiatives in this area. IMROP is the
institute that monitors marine biodiversity in the Banc d‘Arguin National Park with similar
initiatives underway in the Diawling National Park. The Coastal Zone Observatory is equally an
important government body for this Output. The aim is for the project to support the development
of a national monitoring system for marine and coastal biodiversity. International technical
assistance and access to key data will make this possible. This support will include identification
of indicators to be monitored, development of information systems to collect, store and report on
the monitoring of data. It will equally contribute to capacity development of staff responsible for
the development and maintenance of the system. Disclosure will be a key element in the policies
vis-à- vis the data and information.
Output 3.3. Capacity of key government staff strengthened to determine the economic values of
marine and coastal biodiversity and of ecosystem services
The project will support activities to strengthen the government capacity to determine the
economic value of biodiversity and of ecosystem services. In return this capacity will allow the
government to evaluate the risks of the oil and gas sector, particularly potential damages on
biodiversity. It will build the basis for establishing a reparation and compensation regime with
respect to biodiversity and the oil and gas sector. This should not exclude a biodiversity off-
setting mechanism. This capacity will also help the government to make more informed decisions
related to the development of the oil and gas sector.
PROJECT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
163. The project performance indicators contained in Section II - Part I ‗Strategic Results Framework‘
include impact (or ‗objective‘) indicators and outcome indicators. These indicators are ‗SMART‘46 and
they were identified following methodology contained in the ―GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy‖
and the ―UNDP Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results‖. As per
these policy documents, ―indicators are signposts of change along the path to development. They
45
Davies, R. & Dart, J. (2005): The ‗Most Significant Change‟ (MSC) Technique. A Guide to Its Use. The publication is a
product from a NGO funded project by Care Int., Oxfam and others.
www.research4development.info/PDF/Publications/MSC_Guide.pdf
46
Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound.

describe the way to track intended results and are critical for monitoring and evaluation‖. Performance
indicators are also a critical part of the results framework.
164. The set of performance indicators presented below includes both quantitative and qualitative
indicators. Quantitative indicators are statistical measures that measure results and qualitative indicators
reflect people‘s judgments, opinions, perceptions and attitudes towards a given situation or subject. They
can include changes in sensitivity, satisfaction, influence, awareness, understanding, attitudes, quality,
perception, dialogue or sense of well-being. This set of performance indicators is also presented in the
table ―Indicator Framework‖ in Section II-Part I Strategic Results Framework of this document with
baseline information for each indicator, end of project target and source of information for each of them.
165. Particularly on the choice of the ecological indicator (# 1 in Table 3), the following is to be noted:
 Related chemical pollution caused by oil and gas development can kill marine organisms,
reduce their fitness and disrupt the function of marine communities and ecosystems. While
such effects have been unambiguously established in laboratory studies and also in the field
after well studied spills or in areas where oil development has been intense and not well
managed, such as in the Niger Delta, finding indicators that can provide proof for the
effective mitigation of chemical pollution from the oil and gas industry is extremely difficult.
 The EEZ is vast and oil and gas development still very modest within it. Most effects on the
ecosystem are caused by over fishing and related habitat destruction caused by bottom
trawling gear. Moreover pollution effects from the emerging oil and gas sector can be masked
by existing sources for chemical pollution. These are: (i) the Senegal River delta discharging
chemicals used in large scale agriculture along the river and in mining projects further
upstream in Mali; (ii) Nouadibouh port and iron ore dust; (iii) oil pollution caused either by
natural seepage or international maritime traffic.
 However, anthropogenic pollution is relatively rare and the introduction of chemicals by the
oil and gas sector can be noticed if preventive and mitigative measures towards avoidable
pollution are not being effectively applied. In spite of existing pollution, the seagrass
ecosystem of the Banc d‘Arguin has been relatively stable. Its total surface is estimated at
412 sq km since several decades. Fishing does not impact the seagrass cover either, as all
fishing and bottom trawling is forbidden in the Banc d‘Arguin National Park. Only traditional
fishing by the indigenous Imraguen is allowed.
 Although the biological significance of the chemical concentrations in surface water,
sediment and seagrass tissues is largely unknown due to the lack of published information
describing their phytotoxicities and tissue-residue effects, it may be expected that their health
and survival will be impacted if chemicals would enter these ecosystems. It is nevertheless
argued that significant losses of seagrasses in the Gulf of Mexico are partly due to chemical
pollution, which is partly caused by the oil and gas industry. Especially PAHs in production
water are persistent in time and can accumulate in the seagrass ecosystem becoming
traceable. Moreover the geological formation of the Banc d‘Arguin is such that it draws in
water with great force. Pollution caused by point-sources far outside the park will therefore
enter the park and affect this ecosystem. Therefore, an indicator for effective pollution
mitigation is that the seagrass cover is maintained.
 As a complement, monitoring of chemical content in shellfish of the Venus shellfish bank is
advisable, as an early warning indicator. Shellfish filter large amount of seawater and
accumulate in this way chemical pollution revealing undesired pollution. Monitoring of oil
and gas related chemicals in the shellfish banks could be covered by a project implemented
by IMROP in collaboration with the Dutch Fishery Institute (IMARES) which is to assess the
exploitability of Venusshellfish. Monitoring chemical content in these shellfish will be
carried out to determine compliance with European sanitary rules to safeguard health of
consumers is part of this project.

166. Finally this set of indicators will be reviewed during the inception phase of the project – including
their baseline and targets – and revised as necessary to reflect possible new developments between the
time of writing this project MSP and the starting date of the project.
Table 3: List of Project Performance Indicators

INDICATOR EXPLANATORY NOTE
Objective: to strengthen the necessary policy, legislative and financial instruments as well as the capacity of
government and civil society stakeholders in partnership with the oil and gas industry to protect and conserve
marine and coastal biodiversity
1. Seagrass beds of the Banc d‘Arguin  Currently these seagrasses are protected. So neither dredging nor
are maintained healthy with neither trawling are taking place there.
surface cover change nor traces of PAH  Assuming that (i) the effects of climate change will not be
significant during project implementation (a possible impact can be
changes in the upwelling and in plankton load); and (ii) that a
decrease in shellfish beds populations will not happen by plans to
exploit these (they are said to be keystone species sustaining the
seagrass bed ecosystem), the indicator remains central to the project
theme and relevant. Seagrass cover is expected to decrease
significantly if PAHs accumulates in this system.
 Seagrass cover can be estimated through satellite imaging.
2. Degree to which policies and  Output 1.2 proposes to carry out a thorough screening of policies
regulations governing the development of and regulatory frameworks relevant to the project theme. This will
the oil and gas sector include measures to serve to set a qualitative baseline for mainstreaming measures into
conserve and safeguard marine and legal and policy frameworks.
coastal biodiversity within the EEZ  A follow up to the assessment will be carried out by mid-term and
project end as part of the evaluation exercises.
 The choice of this indicator assumes that the policy screening, to be
based on criteria to be defined, can yield relevant results. A scoring
system may be developed by the project for the purpose.
3. Improved results from the GEF SO2  Improvements in the Tracking Tool and increases in the Scorecard
Tracking Tool and increased scores would indicate a greater capacity related to plan, control, monitor
UNDP Capacity Development Scorecard and control activities from the oil industry and its impact on the
environment.
 UNDP‘ Financial Sustainability Scorecard and the Capacity
Development Scorecard are both geared towards the management of
protected areas. But they can be used as proxies.
Outcome 1: Marine and coastal biodiversity conservation mainstreamed into the governance frameworks for the
oil and gas sector and into the industry‟s operations
4. Ecologically sensitive ‗no-go zones‘  This will be direct indicator of success of the process of the broad
within the EEZ established and respected and inclusive SEA process, as proposed under Output 1.1.
by key players  Key players obviously include the industry in particular SHM,
which is partner is each and every joint-venture, but equally the
Ministry of Oil and Energy, which is responsible for issuing
different types of concessions.
 ‗No-go zones‘ may or may not be protected areas. The aim is to
reach agreement about the principle, since exploration has happened
in the past within protected areas (see paragraph 30)
5. The oil and gas industry in Mauritania  While this is a process as proposed and directly based on what is
adopts a set of biodiversity standards for being proposed in terms of industry engagement under Output 1.4,

INDICATOR EXPLANATORY NOTE
their operations, standards whose its realization will be sign of transformation within the industry vis-
implementation can be independently à-vis biodiversity
verified
Outcome 2: Financial flows to promote biodiversity conservation are strengthened through partnerships between
the public sector and the oil and gas sector
6. A well capitalized and operational  Actual targets for the capitalization of the financial mechanism in
‗conservation finance mechanism‘ question have not yet been set. This is thoroughly explained under
(quantitative measures t.d.b.) the description of Output 2.1.
 The level of operationalization of the mechanism can be assessed
through the review of projects it has processed and approved and
measures it implemented.
7. A functioning dialogue platform,  An independent qualitative tracking of the dialogue among partners
involving GOM, oil and gas companies, of the oil and gas development, including GOM, oil and gas
NGOs and coastal community operators, NGOs and communities should be able to indicate
representatives is in place whether the platform is functional.
 This will done by mid-term and project end as part of the evaluation
exercises.
Outcome 3: Capacity of key stakeholders in the public sector and civil society is strengthened for monitoring
marine and coastal biodiversity and decision-making related to the development of the oil and gas sector
8. Increase in awareness levels among  The MSC Technique was developed by a consortium of NGOs
relevant stakeholders, as assessed working in development, which includes CARE International,
through the independent application of Oxfam, Learning to Learn (Australia), UK‘s Christian Aid and
the methodology Most Significant Exchange, Ibis and Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke (both from Denmark)
Change and Lutheran World Relief, United States of America. The
technique is a form of participatory M&E for projects, programs
and other development initiatives.
 MSC foresees that many project stakeholders are involved both in
deciding the sorts of change to be recorded and in analyzing the data
that corroborate both monitoring and evaluation reports.
 Essentially, the process involves the collection of significant change
(SC) stories emanating from the field level, and the systematic
selection of the most significant of these stories by panels of
designated stakeholders or staff. The designated staff and
stakeholders are initially involved by ‗searching‘ for project impact.
Once changes have been captured, various people sit down together,
read the stories aloud and have regular and often in-depth
discussions about the value of these reported changes.
 When the technique is implemented successfully, whole teams of
people begin to focus their attention on program impact.
RISKS AND ASSUMPTIONS
167. The project strategy, described in detail within this project document, makes the following key
assumptions in proposing the GEF intervention:

The GOM‘s commitment to the project is demonstrated by its participation in the EITI initiative
and its openness towards the Panel Pètrole. Also, by signing this project proposal, the GOM has
expressed its full support to this project.
The project is able to benefit from the current momentum existing around this sector and the willingness to
improve the instruments to better control and monitor the impacts of the development of this sector on
marine and coastal biodiversity.
Despite some uncertainties, the oil and gas sector will develop according to the most recent
targets with a production to peak in 2015 with a daily production of 88,000. The project will
benefit from the current momentum existing around this sector and the willingness to improve the
instruments to better control and monitor the impacts of the development of this sector on marine
and coastal biodiversity.
A trust fund already exists in Mauritania for the park of Banc d‘Arguin. So far the experience is
positive and the fund is reaching its capital target. Moreover, the government demonstrates its
financial transparency through EITI and also through the fishery agreement with the EU for
sharing this revenue between the national budget and environmental management and protection
in the park of Banc d‘Arguin.
Awareness rising and capacity development will lead to a change of behaviour in related
institutions contributing to the long-term sustainability of the project achievements.
168. During the PPG phase, projects risks were updated from what has been presented at the PIF stage.
They were further elaborated and classified according to UNDP/GEF Risk Standard Categories47, and
assessed according to criteria of „impact‟ and „likelihood‟ as per Box 1 below:
Table 4: Elaboration of Risks

IDENTIFIED RISKS CATEGORY ELABORATION
Due to election, political changes or Political changes may impact the commitment of the
other events, changes in government government in supporting the project, which in turn could
priorities might happen and the GOM jeopardize the progress of the project.
POLITICAL
might not remain committed to
improving the protection and
conservation of biodiversity
The objective of the project might be This is an ambitious project and the development of new
too ambitious and the support from legislation and new policies take time. Unforeseen barriers
the project resources and the may hamper project‘s progress and imply more resources
STRATEGIC
government resources may not be for an effective change.
adequate to initiate the changes
required by the project strategy
Lack of relevant expertise in local The project will rely on national expertise. However, the
market may result in delay of limited national expertise may necessitate for the project
required outputs and distortion of OPERATIONAL management team to recruit expertise regionally or
targeted deadlines internationally; possibly creating delays in project
implementation and the achievement of project targets.
The development of the oil and gas The oil production forecasts were already revised from
sector is not happening as planned 50,000+ bpd to 15,000 bpd. From this current level of
production, it should increase in the years to come and
STRATEGIC peak at around 60 or 80,000 bpd. However the risk exists
that this level of production will not materialize as planned
and a major shift of production could impact the relevance
of the project.
47
Includes the following eight categories: environmental; financial; operational; organizational; political; regulatory; strategic;
and other.

IDENTIFIED RISKS CATEGORY ELABORATION
New policy & legislation proposed by Due to unforeseen events, the government and/or the
the project is not adopted by the POLITICAL Parliament may not adopt the development of new
Government and/or the Parliament legislation and policies supported by the project.
The government does not approve the Due to unforeseen events, the government and/or the
proposed financial mechanism POLITICAL Parliament may not adopt the proposed financial
mechanism.
Low level of engagement and The oil and gas companies may not be interested in
participation among oil and gas STRATEGIC engaging with the project and its partners; hence limiting
industry players the strategy to develop public-private partnerships.
Project partners are not willing to The cooperation is functioning among the project partners
contribute to the proposed financial including the engagement of the oil and gas companies.
mechanism FINANCIAL However, these companies may not demonstrate their
willingness to contribute financially to a financial
mechanism to be proposed under the project.
Despite improved legislation and The legislation and policy work supported by the project
policy frameworks, no institutional may be adopted by the project; however, their effective
STRATEGIC
changes occur implementation may be hampered by the need for
institutional changes that are not occurring as planned.
The institutional changes might not All instruments could be in place for improving the
be followed by appropriate level of protection and conservation of marine and coastal
OPERATIONAL
resources (HR and $$) to implement biodiversity; however, the lack of resources to implement
the changes the changes may hamper the achievements of the project.
A new biodiversity monitoring The monitoring system could be developed, some staff
system is developed but it is not trained but the system may require additional resources to
matched with the required level of OPERATIONAL make it operational (staff and budget), which may not be
resources (HR a& $$) to make it available.
operational
Box 5: Risk Assessment Guiding Matrix

Impact
CRITICAL HIGH MEDIUM LOW NEGLIGIBLE
CERTAIN / IMMINENT Critical Critical High Medium Low
VERY LIKELY Critical High High Medium Low

Likelihood
LIKELY High High Medium Low Negligible
MODERATELY LIKELY Medium Medium Low Low Negligible

Considered to pose
UNLIKELY Low Low Negligible Negligible no determinable risk
Table 5: Project Risks Assessment and Mitigation Measures

RISK
IDENTIFIED RISKS IMPACT LIKELIHOOD
ASSESSMENT
MITIGATION MEASURES
Due to election, The new Government of Mauritania has nominated a
political changes or new Minister for the environment and the continuity
Medium Likely Medium
other events, changes of existing strategies and programs is ensured.
in government Moreover, there is a strong consensus in Mauritania

RISK
ASSESSMENT
MITIGATION MEASURES
priorities might for the need to mainstream biodiversity conservation
happen and the GOM in the development of the oil and gas sector. This
might not remain commitment is demonstrated by the participation of
committed to the GOM in the EITI initiative and the Hydrocarbon
improving the Panel. The GOM has also sought technical advice
protection and from the International Maritime Organization (IMO)
conservation of to formulate laws covering offshore oil exploration
biodiversity and maritime oil transport. Finally, by signing this
project proposal, the GOM has expressed its full
support to this project. The UNDP-CO and the project
management team will monitor this commitment over
time.
The objective of the Studies conducted during the PPG phase let to the
project might be too detailed design of this project. At this point the risk of
ambitious and the not having enough project resources is low. It is an
support from the ambitious project but enough resources will be
project resources and available for achieving the expected targets (e.g.
Moderately
the government Medium Low through GTZ and UNDP). The implementation will
Likely
resources may not be be monitored regularly and the project management
adequate to initiate team will discuss any slippage including the possible
the changes required need for corrective measures.
by the project
strategy
Lack of relevant It is quite possible that the project may face some
expertise in local limitations with the local consulting market.
market may result in Moderately However, this situation will be monitored on a regular
Medium Low
delay of required Likely basis and ―plan Bs‖ will be developed to avoid long
outputs and distortion implementation delays if the project needs to hire
of targeted deadlines regional and/or international consultants.
The development of The young history of the development of the oil and
the oil and gas sector gas sector in Mauritania indicates that it is still an
is not happening as emerging sector with lots of uncertainties. The
planned development of this sector will be monitored
Medium Likely Medium regularly. In the meantime, the project will benefit for
now from the momentum existing around this sector
and the willingness to improve the instruments to
better control and monitor the development of this
sector.
New policy & As said above, the project will benefit from a general
legislation proposed consensus to act in this area. The UNDP experience
by the project is not in the area of policy and legislation is that the risk of
adopted by the ―no adoption‖ always exists. The project will
Government and/or High Likely High collaborate closely with the government for the
the Parliament development of these new policy and legislative
instruments and raise the awareness of the decision-
makers and Parliamentarians to ensure the passing of
these instruments.
The government does The process to propose a financial mechanism will be
not approve the done collaboratively and with a strong participation
proposed financial Moderately of the oil and gas industry players and the
High Medium
mechanism Likely government. The risk exists but it is not likely to
happen if the process is recommending one
mechanism through consensus.
Low level of High Moderately Medium A strong collaboration with the private sector will be

RISK
ASSESSMENT
MITIGATION MEASURES
engagement and Likely constantly sought by the project implementation
participation among team, which should contribute to a good engagement
oil and gas industry of the oil and gas industry players. Nevertheless,
players these players are already active in the area by
discussing with the government and supporting some
training of government staff in environmental
assessment and control. UNDP and the project will
ensure that the process of engaging the oil and gas
industry is done in a highly professional way (using
qualified consultants that understand the industry,
their modes of operation and interests). A detailed
industry profile study was carried out during the PPG
phase. Furthermore, the project‘s efforts to engage oil
and gas industry players will benefit from the
growing trend of corporate responsibility as a factor
in industry activities, as well as awareness among oil
and gas players of the links between environmentally
responsible practices, their corporate reputations and
public and political pressure.
Project partners are The experience so far in Mauritania indicates that the
not willing to oil and gas sector is willing to collaborate with the
contribute to the government to operate as per the existing Laws and
proposed financial policies and also to mitigate the risks link with
Moderately
mechanism High Medium potential damages on the local biodiversity. They
Likely
already provide some funds to the government to
finance training activities of government staff in
environmental assessment (EIA review) and
control/enforcement.
Despite improved Once legislation changes will be introduced the
legislation and policy project will support capacity reviews of targeted
Moderately
frameworks, no Medium Low institutions to assess the necessary institutional
Likely
institutional changes changes needed to implement the new legislation.
occur
The institutional As discussed above, the assessment to determine the
changes might not be institutional changes will also take into account the
followed by resources (human resources and budget) needed to
appropriate level of Medium Likely Medium implement these changes.
resources (HR and
$$) to implement the
changes
A new biodiversity The development of this monitoring system will be
monitoring system is done on building on the existing initiatives;
developed but it is particularly the engagement of IMROP in monitoring
not matched with the Medium Likely Medium biodiversity in the park of Banc d‘Arguin.
required level of Additionally, any proposed system will also take into
resources (HR a& $$) account the required recurrent resources to maintain
to make it operational this monitoring system.
INCREMENTAL REASONING AND EXPECTED GLOBAL, NATIONAL AND LOCAL

BENEFITS

169. In the business as usual scenario, the rapid development of the oil and gas sector in Mauritania
in the coming years will take place with little or no consideration for marine and coastal biodiversity
conservation or sustainable management of critical natural resources such as fisheries. Baseline efforts to
establish mechanisms for environmental impact assessments, siting decisions, mitigation measures, and
compensation mechanisms for the oil and gas sector have made little progress thus far, and what progress
has been made has involved tools that are broadly designed for environmental issues in general, without
any specific criteria regarding globally significant biodiversity.
170. In the absence of the proposed GEF project, government revenues from oil and gas production
will continue to be earmarked for large development programs, in particular infrastructure, rather than
marine and coastal biodiversity conservation or sustainable resource use. Furthermore, baseline efforts to
redirect revenues for environmental conservation have no specific focus on biodiversity. While revenues
from the EU fisheries agreement is limited to Banc d‘Arguin National Park, other existing protected areas
critical for the conservation of coastal and marine ecosystems will continue to exist largely on paper.
171. GEF funding will incrementally support a process to remove a variety of barriers –
including those related to the nature of operations of the oil and gas sectors, the enabling policy and legal
environment, and oil and gas revenue allocation policies – to allow marine and coastal biodiversity
conservation to be mainstreamed into the oil and gas development process. Partnerships and capacity
development are at the heart of this proposal and are the key means through which Mauritania can better
conserve its marine and coastal biodiversity. The proposed GEF project has been designed within the
framework of other existing and planned interventions related to the oil and gas sector development in
Mauritania, so as to clearly define the GEF project‘s incremental niche and contribution to the
conservation of globally important marine and coastal biodiversity. This applies in particular to capacity
building actions foreseen in the PRISM2, PDALM and PRCM (Program Regional de Conservation de la
zone côtière et Marine en Afrique de l‟ouest) initiatives, the activities of the Panel on Oil and the effort of
the industry and GOM to comply with the standards of EITI. The outcomes and outputs of this project
will therefore build on these initiatives rather than duplicate them.
172. Under the first component (Outcome 1), the project will remove key barriers for the mitigation of
threats and the abatement of risks posed by oil and gas development within the EEZ seascape, with
165,338 sq km as the spatial target area for biodiversity mainstreaming. In addition, the oil and gas
industry of Mauritania will be engaged in a transformation process with respect to its operations vis-à-vis
biodiversity. Under the second component (Outcome 2), the project will result in significant
improvements in the flow of funds to biodiversity conservation, including protected areas, but not
restricted to them, and with full visibility to the industry. Under the third component (Outcome 3), key
stakeholders (inter alia government bodies, NGOs, the industry and fishermen communities) to become
more aware of the stakes involved in oil and gas developments.
COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS
173. The project will be implemented through a cost effective approach, building the capacity of
relevant government organizations to plan, control and monitor the impacts of the development of the oil
and gas sector on the marine and coastal biodiversity. ‗Capacity‘ here includes also ‗systemic capacity‘,
and hence the government‘s ability to establish an effective governance framework to plan, control and
monitor the industry. This translates into policies, laws and processes for ‗conducting the conduct‘ of the
industry. The project also proposes to work directly with the oil and gas industry, engaging corporate
partners in achieving the goal of off-shore oil and gas developments that safeguard biodiversity and
promote conservation.

174. Through the analysis of threats to Mauritania‘s exuberant and globally significant coastal and
marine biodiversity, it became clear that the current impacts of oil and gas developments are relatively
limited. They are linked to either seismic surveys, oil drilling or to the operations of the FPSO. Oil and
gas developments off-shore in Mauritania are causing some impacts, but the most significant remains the
hypothetical threat of major accidental oil spills, hence a risk. Yet, the threats posed by overfishing and
maritime transport are actual, current and significant. The project is not directly dealing with them.
Instead, in the project strategy, three key arguments support the choice of ‗oil and gas‘ as the
mainstreaming theme for this biodiversity project:
 The threats and risks posed by oil and gas developments can become much more significant,
when the industry adopts low safety and environmental standards and when it operates in within a
weak governance environment, i.e. sub-effective laws, policies and regulations to control the
industry. Within the framework of a precautionary approach, we have now a window of
opportunity to deal with this, before it is too late. Besides, the choice of project theme was widely
endorsed by the Mauritanian government.
 Fisheries are at risk from the activities of the oil and gas industry. The fisheries sector should
remain viable when Mauritania‘s oil boom is over. Through the analysis that will be enabled by
the proposed SEA methodology, it will be possible to put all the stakes for Mauritania‘s coastal
and marine biodiversity into perspective, including e.g. the threats posed by overfishing.
 The threats to the marine environment posed by fisheries and maritime traffic in Mauritania‘s
EEZ are being addressed by other interventions, including some from the GEF (e.g. international
waters projects). In addition, there are funding opportunities that are expected to be generated by
the conservation financial mechanism proposed under component 2 of this project. Through
these, it will be possible to seek solutions that may also include trade-off between fisheries and
the development of oil and gas.48
175. Considering the above, the choice of the theme remains relevant vis-à-vis prevailing threats and
opportunities. But how cost-effective is it? The question has been posed during project development.
176. This cost-effectiveness analysis is primarily based on considerations as to whether alternative

approaches to the one of choice would have been more cost-effective. One obvious comparison is a
‗protected area approach‘. Would this project be more effective in conserving Mauritania‟s coastal and
marine biodivesity if it focused on protected areas? Here is why the chosen mainstreaming approach is
more cost-effective:
 Under the current costs‘ setting, maintaining the Banc d‘Arguin and the Diawling National Parks
over 3-4 years costs approximately some $15 million. This is to protect 1.6 million hectares,
hence some $10 per hectare in average as a ‗back-of-the-envelope‘ calculation.
 Through the proposed mainstreaming approach, this project will promote biodiversity
mainstreaming measures in an area of 136,000 sq km (the EEZ) at a cost of $ 1 million from
GEF. This translates into less than $0.80 per hectare, which is only a fraction of the cost of the
PA approach. This number can be more than doubled, if the direct in-cash co-financing from
GTZ and UNDP (of $1.2 million) are also considered. The argument on the cost-effectiveness of
the proposed mainstreaming approach based on the dollars-per-hectare amounts remains quite
strong.
48
This is addressed e.g. in paragraphs 128, 236 and output 1.1.

177. Still, because the costs per hectare can be a rather ‗reductionist‘ argument, the analysis was taken
further. As it has been veryfied through PPG analyses, both the Band d‘Arguin and the Diawling National
Parks are already reasonably effective in addressing the threats posed by fisheries within their borders. In
spite of gaps, which may or may not be addressed by baseline efforts, biological resources in the two
mentioned national parks are generally well protected. Only artisanal fisheries are allowed within the
parks borders in an effort to protect fish nurseries and spawning areas.49 Community-based enforcement
of park rules generally works. Therefore, would the strengthening of the parks‟ management effectiveness
help avert other threats and risks besides those from fisheries? E.g. those posed by the oil and gas
industry? The answer is no. Here is why:
 Management actions within these two protected areas, regardless of their effectiveness, would be
restricted to the area of the parks. They represent in fact only a fraction of the EEZ, where oil and
gas blocks are located.
 The threats and risks from pollution linked with the development of the oil and gas sector would
still exist with no mitigation measures in place such as oil spills contingency planning,
environmental management plans and stronger laws to regulate the activities of the industry.
178. Hence, it is logical to ask: Would creating new protected areas within the EEZ be more cost-
effective to avert the threats and mitigate the risks posed oil and gas developments? The answer is: It
would probably help, but here is what should be additionally considered:
 It is difficult to estimate the costs of establishing new protected areas in Mauritania‘s EEZ, or
even set-asides. Supposing that the operational costs of the Banc d‘Anguin (approx. $10 per
hectare per year) can be used as a cost basis (although it may cost more to establish than to run),
only be able to establish 220,000 hectares of new protected areas would be created by investing
the totality of this project‘s in-cash envelope ($2.2 million) in it. This response is rather
constrained in scope. The area is but a fifth of the Banc d‘Anguin‘s surface and a little more than
1% of the EEZ.
 Also, the project will seek to agree on ―no-go-zones‖ as a result of the application of the SEA
methodology (output 1.1). It is not yet clear whether and how this will apply to fisheries and also
the spatial targets for these areas remain to be determined during the project. These no-go-zones
may or may not be formal protected areas. The costs of establishing and enforcing them may well
be born by the capitalized thrust fund, which will not be restricted to conservation investment in
protected areas. So, this is generally a cost-effective response from a GEF perspective,
considering all other goals that the project intends to achieve and leverage.
179. By engaging the private sector as a partner, the project will also allow the GOM to establish
mechanisms to leverage significant oil and gas production revenues to cover the costs of marine and
coastal biodiversity conservation. The increased levels of these investments will make the project‘s
catalytic role extremely cost-effective. Furthermore, by engaging the oil and gas industry in contributing
to a conservation financing mechanism, the project will ensure that funds to support marine and coastal
biodiversity conservation will be available over the long-term, even after oil and gas development may
have declined, thereby ensuring the cost effectiveness of conservation efforts post-project.
49
There is an on-going scientific debate in Mauritania on whether the Banc d‘Arguin‘s actual role in fish nursery and spawning is
as important as some advocates claim. But this is a separate issue.

PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH NATIONAL PRIORITIES/PLANS:
180. The Project is consistent with Mauritania‘s national vision, policies and strategies to protect
biodiversity and to manage the development of the oil and gas sector for the benefit of all. The new,
democratically elected government in Mauritania has embraced environmental governance as one of its
priorities, including the fulfilment of the country‘s commitments obligated by international conventions
that Mauritania signed or ratified, which includes the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD). It is also noted
that the development of the oil and gas sector was not integrated in the National Strategy and Action Plan
for the Biological Diversity (1999) and not in the third national report as a potential threat on the marine
and coastal biodiversity; however, it was added among the threats to biodiversity in the fourth
communication to UNCBD.
181. The National Action Plan for the Environment (PANE - approved in 2006) favours a system of
integrated and participatory management of natural resources in the implementation of key environment
conventions in the country – CBD included – and also flags the need to develop appropriate financial
mechanisms to deal with the country‘s environmental challenges. The project is particularly well aligned
with the strategic axis #3 of this action plan that is about the promotion of an integrated management and
the efficient use of natural resources. The project is a direct response to few objectives under this strategic
axis such as ―Prevent, limit and adapt the exploitation of the marine resources vis-à-vis risks linked to the
oil and gas exploitation (objective 12.2)‖; ―Link the development of the oil sector with the management of
the marine environment and of the littoral (objective 13.3); and ―Implement a monitoring system to
monitor impacts of oil exploration and exploitation offshore on the marine resources and on land-based
natural resources as well as on public health (objective 13.4)‖.
182. Furthermore, coastal zone management is one of two priority areas identified by the GOM, for
which the main activity is the adoption of the Coastal Zone Management Plan (PDALM), as well as the
Action Plan to Prevent Marine Pollution (POLMAR). Both plans are designed to protect and support
environmentally friendly development of Mauritania‘s coastal regions, in particular through sustainable
management of the oil and gas sector and the fishery sector.
183. Finally, the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) for Mauritania (2006-2010) recognizes the
importance of preventing negative effects on the environment from oil and gas development, in particular
in coastal and marine areas such as the Banc d‘Arguin ecosystem, and calls for the elaboration of a
strategy to allocate oil and gas resources to support sustainable development, including possibly the
establishment of an intergenerational funding mechanism. The PRSP includes strategies related to the
development of the oil and gas, which also includes the ―Prevention of Potential Adverse Effects on the
Environment‖.
COUNTRY OWNERSHIP: COUNTRY ELIGIBILITY AND COUNTRY DRIVENNESS
184. Mauritania has ratified the three Rio Conventions: UNCBD (ratified in 1992 and signed in 1996),
UNCCD (signed in 1996) and UNFCCC (ratified in 1996). GOM is eligible for technical assistance from
UNDP and GEF. Concerning the UNCBD, the government has produced a National Biodiversity Strategy
and Action Plan (NBSAP) in 1999 and since 1999, GOM has produced four national communications; the
last one was recently uploaded to the UNCBD web site. This latter report presents a state of biodiversity
in Mauritania including the threats to biodiversity where pollution by hydrocarbons is mentioned.

However, one threat that is not there is the over fishing exploitation that is one of the major threats to
marine and coastal biodiversity. The report also details the strategies to integrate biodiversity into sectors;
including the oil and gas sector and refers to the strategies indicated in the PANE (see Section on Context
and Global Significance).
185. The PANE is the main policy instrument for environmental management in Mauritania; including
the protection and conservation of biodiversity and, as it was described in the previous section, this acion
plan has the entire strategic axis #3 that is dedicated to the promotion of an integrated management and
the efficient use of natural resources. Under this strategic axis there are several objectives that are laying
out the national strategy to:
 Identify risks linked with the development of the oil and gas sector and how these risks
can be prevented, limited and adapted to protect the marine and coastal resources;
 Integrate the exploitation of oil and gas resources in the national environment and
sustainable development strategy;
 Link the development of the oil and gas sector with the development of the marine and
coastal environment;
 Establish a monitoring system to monitor the impacts of the offshore oil and gas
exploration and exploitation on the marine and coastal biodiversity;
 Evaluate the strategic impacts of the oil and gas sector;
 Control and monitor the dangerous substances used during the exploration and
exploitation of oil;
 Better integrate the contracts for sharing production (CPP) with the sustainable
development of Mauritania.
186. As discussed in the previous section, this project is a direct response to these strategies. It will
build on the past and existing initiatives with a strong focus on most of the strategies presented above.
187. In addition to the Rio Conventions, Mauritania signed/ratified several other international
conventions (see Annex 1) such as Ramsar (1983), CITES (1998), convention of Bonn (1998) concerning
natural resources. The country also signed several conventions concerning the management of sea
transport, navigation and marine pollution prevention such as MARPOL (1998), UNCLOS (1996),
convention de Bale (1996), FIPOL/CLC (1992) and the London Convention (LC) (1996). Finally,
Mauritania is a participating member of the Comité Inter-Etats pour la Lutte contre la Secheresse au Sahel
(CILSS), whose objective is to fight the consequences of drought in the Sahel through measures such as
natural resource conservation projects, sustainable management of hydrologic resources, and scientific
and technical cooperation.
SUSTAINABILITY AND REPLICABILITY
188. As it was demonstrated above, the project has strong government support. The project is
addressing critical national priorities. It will contribute greatly to the implementation of the national
action plan for the environment by mainstreaming the protection and conservation of marine and coastal
biodiversity into the development of the oil and gas sector. All project supported activities will be
accomplished with a strong collaboration/coordination with government structures; hence contributing to
the long-term sustainability of project‘s interventions.
189. The nature of project activities is that most of them require an institutionalization of results to be
final, which in turn is critical for the long-term sustainability of project results. For instance, a new policy
or new Law will be finalized only when the government will approve these instruments formally. These

instruments will become part of the policy and legislative frameworks in Mauritania and, therefore, will
be sustained over the long-term; that is they will exist as part of the bodies of national policies and of
legislation until they are declared obsolete or amended. Moreover, this is the case of most expected
outputs such as the establishment of a viable financial mechanism or the signature of public-private
agreements to fund this mechanism.
190. However, the long-term sustainability of capacity development activities targeting key
stakeholders will be more challenging and will require a particular attention from the project
implementation team. This is not because of workshops and other types of training activities that a
particular process will be strengthened over the long-term. For instance strengthening the EIA process
will require some training of staff involved in the process of reviewing these EIAs; however, training will
not be sufficient to produce the desired change. It will also require looking at the procedures and
mechanisms in place in these institutions to remove any bottlenecks and establish efficient guidelines and
procedures for the staff to be able to apply their new capacity in reviewing these EIAs.
191. Additionally, any capacity development activity of staff will be developed with a simple, yet
methodical approach including training needs analyses (TNA) to determine, for instance, the existing
capacity and by extension the capacity gaps to respond to the EIA review process. These TNAs will
provide a baseline from which training programs will be developed; ensuring that these training programs
respond to needs. Also, in order to contribute to a greater long-term sustainability, the project will not
develop training program in isolation. Instead, the project will maximize the use of existing training
capacity in Mauritania, including any training facilities providing training to public servants and also
other training organizations providing training to communities and private sector. The institutionalization
of training programs and the training of trainers within these organizations – including the development
of training programs - will also contribute to the long-term sustainability of project‘s results.
192. Finally, the proposed capacity development approach of the project will contribute to the long-
term sustainability of project results. It is proposed as a holistic approach encompassing the acquisition of
skills and knowledge for individuals, the improvements of institutional structures, mechanisms and
procedures and finally the strengthening of an enabling environment with adequate policies and Laws.
The diagram presented below summarizes these three main levels where capacity needs to be built. It also
indicates that developing capacity is more time consuming when dealing with changing/improving an
enabling environment than transferring skills and knowledge and that it is also more complex to change
laws and policies than acquiring new skills and knowledge.
193. It is now well recognized that capacity is the sum of a series of conditions, intangible assets and
relationships that are part of an organization or system and that are distributed at various levels50:
Individuals have personal abilities and attributes or competencies that contribute to the
performance of the system;
Organizations and broader systems have a broad range of collective attributes, skills, abilities
and expertise called capabilities which can be both 'technical' (e.g. policy analysis, marine
resource assessment, financial resource management) and 'social-relational' (e.g. mobilising and
engaging actors to collaborate towards a shared purpose across organisational boundaries,
creating collective meaning and identity, managing the tensions between collaboration and
competition);
Capacity refers to the overall ability of a system to perform and sustain itself.
50
See the study on ―Capacity, Change and Performance‖ conducted by the European Center for Development Policy
Management; which explored the notion of capacity and capacity development (http://www.ecdpm.org/).

Figure 6: Capacity Development Diagram
Replicability
194. The proposed project has high potential for replication; particularly its second expected outcome
―Financial mechanisms for marine and coastal biodiversity conservation strengthened through
partnerships between the public sector and the oil and gas sector‖. This mechanism may be able to be
replicated to other sectors in Mauritania but particularly to other countries with emerging extractive
industries to finance protection and conservation of biodiversity. The project will facilitate replication by
applying the following approach:
 Introduce stakeholders to new EIA management practices or approaches through
workshops and local study tours;
 Demonstrate new ideas, practices and technologies on the ground in each one of the
project‘s three outcomes;
 Identify and disseminate lessons learned and best practices to project partner institutions,
and through other relevant organizations such as IUCN, WWF and particularly the
Convention processes such as COPs and other meeting processes (UNCBD, RAMSAR
and UNESCO-MAB);
 Train individuals from other sectors to expand the project‘s main approaches to other
areas such as combat land desertification around the onshore oil and gas exploration in
the North-East of Mauritania.
PART III: Management Arrangements

IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS
195. UNDP will be the GEF Implementing Agency (IA) and the MEDD will be the National
Executing Agency (NEA). The MEDD is the primary authority responsible for biodiversity conservation
in Mauritania, including the supervision of the administration of two National Parks Authorities (PNBA
and PND). In its capacity of NEA, the MEDD will be responsible for the supervision of the project,
production of outputs and management of UNDP funds at the national level. MEDD is accountable to
UNDP for the government‘s participation in the project and therefore will provide overall guidance and
support to implementation of all project activities. It will facilitate project implementation and ensure that
internal monitoring and review systems are in place. Appropriate experts will be utilized when needed in

accordance with UNDP guidelines, and will facilitate interaction among relevant public organizations,
research institutions and private organizations. To achieve project objectives and produce required
outputs, the MEDD will partner with other stakeholders such as oil and gas industry players, other
government ministries and departments, local communities and NGOs. The Ministry of Petroleum and
Energy will play an important role as member of the Steering Committee.
196. The National Executing Agency (MEDD) will appoint a senior official as the National Project
Director (NPD), who will be the Representative of the Executing Agency and the Government to support
the implementation of the Project and be responsible for the achievement of its objectives.
197. The project will be executed in accordance with UNDP-Mauritania‘s national execution
modalities (NEX) and applicable DEX modalities for international consultancies for which foreign
currency payment of fees is expected. DEX modalities will also cover selected activities where
backstopping from the Dakar UNDP-EEG (Environment and Energy Group) Regional Coordination Unit
adds value to the project implementation while strengthening the delivery capacity of UNDP-Mauritania.
Within the proposed arrangement, the proceeds of the GEF grant will be disbursed through the UNDP
Country Office and the Execution Agency will be the MEDD. UNDP-Mauritania will work with the
Dakar UNDP-EEG Regional Coordination, together with MEDD, to carry out all required acquisitions
and ensure timely delivery of project outputs and outcomes. UNDP-Mauritania will also provide
administrative and financial oversight of the execution.
198. In order to accord proper acknowledgement to GEF for providing funding, a GEF logo should
appear on all relevant GEF project publications, including among others, project hardware and vehicles
purchased with GEF funds. Any citation on publications regarding projects funded by GEF should also
accord proper acknowledgment to GEF. The UNDP logo should be more prominent -- and separated from
the GEF logo if possible, as UN visibility is important for security purposes.
PROJECT OVERSIGHT
199. A Project Steering Committee (PSC) will provide oversight of the UNDP-EEG project activities
and to promote operational coordination among different government agencies, oil and gas industry
players, NGOs, communities and donors working in the sector. In agreement with the recently program
approach developed between UNDP and the GOM, all projects in the same portefolio, such as
environment in this case, are supervised by one unique steeting committee, in order to ensure:
 Better coherence among all interventions in the same thematic area;
 Better integration of all these interventions with national action plans coordinated by the
counterpart institutions;
 Better synergy among these interventions, which in turn shoudl improve coordination and
long-term impact;
 A strengthened communication of project activities and expected results.
200. The major functions of this thematic [environment] steering committee are to revise and approve
the project work plans, assess the reported projects progress, conduct annual review of projects, assess
eventual implementation problems and guide necessary adjustments and approve any strategic changes
including budgets. This body meets twice a year or whenever extraodinary meetings are deemed
necessary. Membership of this PSC should be multi-disciplinary and multi-sectoral related to the
implementation of this project and should include: UNDP-Mauritania, UNDP-EEG Dakar, MEDD,
representatives of the GOM (GEF Operational Focal Point, UNCBD Focal Point, Ministry of Petroleum
and Energy, Ministry of Fishery, IMROP, ...). The Chief Technical Advisor will act as Secretary to the
PSC.

201. A Project Management Committee (PMC) will be formed to provide day-to-day operational
project supervision. It will be composed of UNDP-Mauritania, the National Project Director (NPD) and
the Project Manager.
202. A Consultative Group of sectoral specialists will also be formed and consulted by the Project
Steering Committee on specific issues. This group should include: IUCN, representatives from related
projects, IMROP, PNBA, PND, Expert Panel on Hydrocarbons, related academic departments, experts
delegated by oil and gas companies, other renowned experts. A series of consultative workshops will be
organized to present project strategies, obtain technical reviews and promote information sharing between
these participants.
203. In addition, working groups will be created during the implementation of the project. These WGs
will help guide the implementation, build consensus, share decisions and validate process/results (see
Part IV of Section IV). Finally, the project will also work in close collaboration with related intiatives
funded by the GOM and several donors (see Section IV-Part III Overview of Related Initiatives).
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
204. A Project Manager will coordinate the project. The Project Manager will manage the
implementation of the project. He will report to the PSC and will act under overall guidance from the
UNDP Focal Point on Energy and Environment. He will also liaise with the NDP and the MEDD. The
Project Manager will be responsible for project coordination and implementation, consolidation of work
plans and project papers, preparation of quarterly progress reports, reporting to the project supervisory
bodies, and supervising the work of the project experts and staff. The Project Manager will also
coordinate project activities with relevant government institutions. Terms of Reference for the Project
Manager position is presented in Part III of Section IV of this document.
205. The Project Manager will be supported by an Administrative Assistant, who will be responsible
for the administration and finances of the project. They will form the core of the project implementation
unit. This project will have an office housed in the MEDD office or another appropriate location
conducive to reduce transportation time and costs and also to build synergies and linkages with other
relevant initiatives underway in Mauritania.
206. The project will be managed using the UNDP tested approach for the implementation of UNDP
funded projects that is adaptive management. This approach is the ability of the project management team
to anticipate challenges through well-established risk monitoring system and respond to challenges and
opportunities in a flexible, positive and optimizing manner. It includes a set of management
characteristics such as:
 ―Rigidity‖ should never be an issue;
 GOM and UNDP/GEF approved the project document, which included the Goal,
Objective and (3) Outcomes. Any change to these expected results would necessitate
their formal approval, including the endorsement of these changes by the GEF CEO;
 Project inputs and outputs may be adapted, dropped or added in response to current
reality (after approval by the PSC and UNDP/GEF;
 Interactive decision-making;
 Risk Monitoring contribute to feedback and learning and held to made better decisions;
 Embrace risks/uncertainties is also to build understanding.

PART IV: Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget
MONITORING AND REPORTING51
207. Project monitoring and evaluation will be conducted in accordance with established UNDP and
GEF procedures and will be provided by the project team and the UNDP Country Office (UNDP-CO)
with support from the UNDP/GEF Regional Coordination Unit in Dakar. The Strategic Results
Framework presented in Section II provides performance indicators for monitoring the implementation of
the project. A set of GEF-4 Tracking Tools for monitoring GEF funded projects under the Strategic
Objective 2 (SO2) will be used as instruments to monitor progress in PA management effectiveness,
including the Financial Sustainability Scorecard for National Systems for Protected Areas and the
Capacity Assessment Scorecard (see Annex 4 & 5). The M&E plan includes: inception report, project
implementation reviews, quarterly and annual review reports, and a mid-term and final evaluation. The
following sections outline the principle components of the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and indicative
cost estimates related to M&E activities. The project's Monitoring and Evaluation Plan will be presented
and finalized in the Project's Inception Report following a collective fine-tuning of indicators, their source
of information, and the full definition of project staff M&E responsibilities.
Inception Phase
208. A Project Inception Workshop will be conducted with the project team, relevant government
counterparts, co-financing partners, the UNDP-CO and representation from the UNDP-EEG Regional
Coordinating Unit, as well as UNDP-EEG (HQs) as appropriate. A fundamental objective of this
Inception Workshop will be to assist the project team to understand and take ownership of the project‘s
goal and objective, as well as finalize preparation of the project's first annual work plan on the basis of the
Strategic Results Framework (SRF). This will include reviewing the SRF (indicators, source of
information, risks and assumptions), imparting additional detail as needed, and on the basis of this
exercise, finalizing the Annual Work Plan (AWP) with precise and measurable performance indicators,
and in a manner consistent with the expected outcomes of the project. Additionally, the purpose and
objective of the Inception Workshop (IW) will be to: (i) introduce project staff with the UNDP-EEG team
which will support the project during its implementation, namely the CO and responsible Regional
Coordinating Unit staff; (ii) detail the roles, support services and complementary responsibilities of
UNDP-CO and RCU staff vis à vis the project team; (iii) provide a detailed overview of UNDP-EEG
reporting and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) requirements, with particular emphasis on the Annual
Project Implementation Reviews (PIRs) and related documentation, the Annual Review Report (ARR), as
well as mid-term and final evaluations. Equally, the IW will provide an opportunity to inform the project
team on UNDP project related budgetary planning, budget reviews, and mandatory budget rephasings.
The IW will also provide an opportunity for all parties to understand their roles, functions, and
responsibilities within the project's decision-making structures, including reporting and communication
lines, and conflict resolution mechanisms. The Terms of Reference for project staff and decision-making
structures will be discussed again, as needed, in order to clarify for all, each party‘s responsibilities during
the project's implementation phase.
Monitoring Responsibilities and Events
51
As per GEF guidelines, new or additional GEF monitoring requirements will be accommodated and adhered to once they are
officially launched.

209. A detailed schedule of project review meetings will be developed by the project management, in
consultation with project implementation partners and stakeholder representatives and incorporated in the
Project Inception Report. Such a schedule will include: (i) tentative time frames for Project Board
Meetings and (ii) project related Monitoring and Evaluation activities. Day-to-day monitoring of
implementation progress will be the responsibility of the Project Manager based on the project's Annual
Work Plan and its indicators. The Project Manager will inform the UNDP-CO of any delays or difficulties
faced during implementation so that the appropriate support or corrective measures can be adopted in a
timely and remedial fashion. The Project Manager will fine-tune the progress and performance/impact
indicators of the project in consultation with the full project team at the Inception Workshop with support
from UNDP-CO and assisted by the UNDP-EEG Regional Coordinating Unit. Specific targets for the first
year implementation progress indicators together with their means of verification will be developed at this
Workshop. These will be used to assess whether implementation is proceeding at the intended pace and in
the right direction and will form part of the Annual Work Plan. Targets and indicators for subsequent
years would be defined annually as part of the internal evaluation and planning processes undertaken by
the project team.
210. Measurement of impact indicators related to global biodiversity benefits will occur according to
the schedules defined in the Inception Workshop. The measurement of these will be undertaken through
subcontracts or retainers with relevant institutions. Periodic monitoring of implementation progress will
be undertaken by the UNDP-CO through quarterly meetings with the Implementing Partner, or more
frequently as deemed necessary. This will allow parties to take stock and to troubleshoot any problems
pertaining to the project in a timely fashion to ensure smooth implementation of project activities.
211. Annual Monitoring will occur through the PSC. This is the highest policy-level meeting of the
parties directly involved in the implementation of a project. The project will be subject to PSC reviews
twice a year. The first such meeting will be held within the first six months of the start of full
implementation.
212. The Project Manager in consultations with UNDP-CO and UNDP-EEG RCU will prepare a
UNDP/GEF PIR and submit it to PSC members at least two weeks prior to the PSC for review and
comments. The PIR will be used as one of the basic documents for discussions in the PB meetings. The
Project Manager will present the PIR to the PSC, highlighting policy issues and recommendations for the
decision of the PSC participants. The Project Manager also informs the participants of any agreement
reached by stakeholders during the PIR preparation on how to resolve operational issues. Separate
reviews of each project component may also be conducted if necessary. The PSC has the authority to
suspend disbursement if project performance benchmarks are not met. Benchmarks will be developed at
the Inception Workshop, based on delivery rates, and qualitative assessments of achievements of outputs.
213. The terminal PSC meeting is held in the last month of project operations. The Project Manager is
responsible for preparing the Terminal Report and submitting it to UNDP-CO and UNDP-EEG RCU. It
shall be prepared in draft at least two months in advance of the terminal PSC meeting in order to allow
review, and will serve as the basis for discussions in the PSC meeting. The terminal meeting considers the
implementation of the project as a whole, paying particular attention to whether the project has achieved
its stated objectives and contributed to the broader environmental objective. It decides whether any
actions are still necessary, particularly in relation to sustainability of project results, and acts as a vehicle
through which lessons learnt can be captured to feed into other projects under implementation of
formulation.
214. The UNDP Country Office and UNDP-EEG RCU as appropriate, will conduct yearly visits to
project sites based on an agreed upon schedule to be detailed in the project's Inception Report/Annual
Work Plan to assess first hand project progress. Any other member of the Project Board can also

accompany. A Field Visit Report will be prepared by the CO and UNDP-EEG RCU and circulated no less
than one month after the visit to the project team, all Project Board members, and UNDP-EEG.
Project Reporting
215. The Project Manager in conjunction with the UNDP-EEG extended team will be responsible for
the preparation and submission of the following reports that form part of the monitoring process. The first
six reports are mandatory and strictly related to monitoring, while the last two have a broader function
and the frequency and nature is project specific to be defined throughout implementation.
216. Project Inception Report: It will be prepared immediately following the Inception Workshop. It
will include a detailed Firs Year/ Annual Work Plan divided in quarterly time-frames detailing the
activities and progress indicators that will guide implementation during the first year of the project. This
Work Plan will include the dates of specific field visits, support missions from the UNDP-CO or the
Regional Coordinating Unit (RCU) or consultants, as well as time-frames for meetings of the project's
decision making structures. The Report will also include the detailed project budget for the first full year
of implementation, prepared on the basis of the Annual Work Plan, and including any monitoring and
evaluation requirements to effectively measure project performance during the targeted 12 months time-
frame. The Inception Report will include a more detailed narrative on the institutional roles,
responsibilities, coordinating actions and feedback mechanisms of project related partners. In addition, a
section will be included on progress to date on project establishment and start-up activities and an update
of any changed external conditions that may effect project implementation. When finalized, the report
will be circulated to project counterparts who will be given a period of one calendar month in which to
respond with comments or queries. Prior to this circulation of the inception report, the UNDP Country
Office and UNDP-EEG‘s Regional Coordinating Unit will review the document.
217. Annual Review Reports: They shall be prepared by the Project Manager and shared with the
Project Board. As a self-assessment by the project management, it does not require a cumbersome
preparatory process. As minimum requirement, the Annual Review Report shall consist of the Atlas
standard format for the Project Progress Report (PPR) covering the whole year with updated information
for each element of the PPR as well as a summary of results achieved against pre-defined annual targets at
the project level. As such, it can be readily used to spur dialogue with the Project Board and partners. An
ARR will be prepared on an annual basis prior to the Project Board meeting to reflect progress achieved
in meeting the project's Annual Work Plan and assess performance of the project in contributing to
intended outcomes through outputs and partnership work. The ARR should consist of the following
sections: (i) project risks and issues; (ii) project progress against pre-defined indicators and targets and
(iii) outcome performance.
218. Project Implementation Review (PIR) Reports: This is an annual monitoring process mandated by
the GEF. It has become an essential management and monitoring tool for project managers and offers the
main vehicle for extracting lessons from ongoing projects. Once the project has been under
implementation for a year, a Project Implementation Report must be completed by the CO together with
the project team. The PIR should be participatorily prepared in July and discussed with the CO and the
UNDP/GEF Regional Coordination Unit during August with the final submission to the UNDP/GEF
Headquarters in the first week of September.
219. Quarterly progress reports: Short reports outlining main updates in project progress will be
provided quarterly to the local UNDP Country Office and the UNDP-EEG RCU by the project team.

220. UNDP ATLAS Monitoring Reports: A Combined Delivery Report (CDR) summarizing all
project expenditures, is mandatory and should be issued quarterly. The Project Manager should send it to
the Project Board for review and the Implementing Partner should certify it. The following logs should be
prepared: (i) The Issues Log is used to capture and track the status of all project issues throughout the
implementation of the project. It will be the responsibility of the Project Manager to track, capture and
assign issues, and to ensure that all project issues are appropriately addressed; (ii) the Risk Log is
maintained throughout the project to capture potential risks to the project and associated measures to
manage risks. It will be the responsibility of the Project Manager to maintain and update the Risk Log,
using Atlas; and (iii) the Lessons Learned Log is maintained throughout the project to capture insights
and lessons based on good and bad experiences and behaviours. It is the responsibility of the Project
Manager to maintain and update the Lessons Learned Log.
221. Project Terminal Report: During the last three months of the project the project team will prepare
the Project Terminal Report. This comprehensive report will summarize all activities, achievements and
outputs of the Project, lessons learnt, objectives met, or not achieved, structures and systems
implemented, etc. and will be the definitive statement of the Project‘s activities during its lifetime. It will
also lay out recommendations for any further steps that may need to be taken to ensure sustainability and
replicability of the Project‘s activities.
222. Periodic Thematic Reports: As and when called for by UNDP, UNDP-EEG or the Implementing
Partner, the project team will prepare Specific Thematic Reports, focusing on specific issues or areas of
activity. The request for a Thematic Report will be provided to the project team in written form by
UNDP and will clearly state the issue or activities that need to be reported on. These reports can be used
as a form of lessons learnt exercise, specific oversight in key areas, or as troubleshooting exercises to
evaluate and overcome obstacles and difficulties encountered. UNDP is requested to minimize its requests
for Thematic Reports, and when such are necessary will allow reasonable timeframes for their preparation
by the project team.
223. Technical Reports: They are detailed documents covering specific areas of analysis or scientific
specializations within the overall project. As part of the Inception Report, the project team will prepare a
draft Reports List, detailing the technical reports that are expected to be prepared on key areas of activity
during the course of the Project, and tentative due dates. Where necessary this Reports List will be revised
and updated, and included in subsequent APRs. Technical Reports may also be prepared by external
consultants and should be comprehensive, specialized analyses of clearly defined areas of research within
the framework of the project and its sites. These technical reports will represent, as appropriate, the
project's substantive contribution to specific areas, and will be used in efforts to disseminate relevant
information and best practices at local, national and international levels.
224. Project Publications: They will form a key method of crystallizing and disseminating the results
and achievements of the Project. These publications may be scientific or informational texts on the
activities and achievements of the Project, in the form of journal articles, multimedia publications, etc.
These publications can be based on Technical Reports, depending upon the relevance, scientific worth,
etc. of these reports, or may be summaries or compilations of a series of Technical Reports and other
research. The project team will determine if any of the Technical Reports merit formal publication, and
will also (in consultation with UNDP, the government and other relevant stakeholder groups) plan and
produce these Publications in a consistent and recognizable format. Project resources will need to be
defined and allocated for these activities as appropriate and in a manner commensurate with the project's
budget.

INDEPENDENT EVALUATIONS, AUDITS AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
225. The project will be subjected to at least two independent external evaluations as follows: An
independent Mid-Term Evaluation (MTE) will be undertaken at the mid-point of the project lifetime. The
MTE will determine progress being made towards the achievement of outcomes and will identify course
correction if needed. It will focus on the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of project
implementation; will highlight issues requiring decisions and actions; and will present initial lessons
learned about project design, implementation and management. Findings of this review will be
incorporated as recommendations for enhanced implementation during the final half of the project‘s term.
The organization, terms of reference and timing of the MTE will be decided after consultation between
the parties to the project document. The Terms of Reference for this MTE will be prepared by the UNDP
CO based on guidance from the UNDP-EEG Regional Coordinating Unit.
226. An independent Final Evaluation will take place three months prior to the terminal Project Board
meeting, and will focus on the same issues as the MTE. The final evaluation will also look at impact and
sustainability of results, including the contribution to capacity development and the achievement of global
environmental goals. The Final Evaluation should also provide recommendations for follow-up activities.
The Terms of Reference for this evaluation will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from
the UNDP-EEG Regional Coordinating Unit.
LEARNING AND KNOWLEDGE SHARING
227. Results from the project will be disseminated within and beyond the project intervention zone
through a number of existing information sharing networks and forums. In addition, the project will
participate, as relevant and appropriate, in UNDP/GEF sponsored networks, organized for Senior
Personnel working on projects that share common characteristics. The UNDP/GEF Regional Unit has
established an electronic platform for sharing lessons between the project coordinators. The project will
identify and participate, as relevant and appropriate, in scientific, policy-based and/or any other networks,
which may be of benefit to project implementation though lessons learned. The project will identify,
analyze, and share lessons learned that might be beneficial in the design and implementation of similar
future projects. Identify and analyzing lessons learned is an on-going process, and the need to
communicate such lessons as one of the project's central contributions is a requirement to be delivered not
less frequently than once every 12 months. UNDP/GEF shall provide a format and assist the project team
in categorizing, documenting and reporting on lessons learned.
228. The table below presents a summary of the monitoring and evaluation activities with the
corresponding responsibilities, budget and timeframe.
Table 6: M&E Activities, Responsibilities, Budget and Time Frame

Responsible Budget US$
Type of M&E activity Excluding project team staff Time frame
Parties time
Project Coordinator Within first two months
Inception Workshop UNDP CO 8,000 of project start up
UNDP GEF
Project Team Immediately following
Inception Report 0
UNDP CO IW
Measurement of Means Project Manager will To be finalized in Start, mid and end of
of Verification for oversee the hiring of Inception Phase and project

Parties time
Project Purpose specific studies and Workshop. Indicative
Indicators institutions, and delegate cost: 5,000.
responsibilities to
relevant team members
Measurement of Means Oversight by Project To be determined as Annually prior to
of Verification for Manager part of the Annual ARR/PIR and to the
Project Progress and Project team Work Plan's definition of annual work
Performance (measured preparation. Indicative plans
on an annual basis) cost: 5,000 (annually);
total: 15,000
ARR and PIR Project Team Annually
UNDP-CO 0
UNDP-EEG
Quarterly progress Project team Quarterly
0
reports
CDRs Project Manager 0 Quarterly
Issues Log Project Manager Quarterly
UNDP CO Program 0
Staff
Risks Log Project Manager Quarterly
UNDP CO Program 0
Staff
Lessons Learned Log Project Manager Quarterly
UNDP CO Program 0
Staff
Mid-term Evaluation Project team At the mid-point of
UNDP- CO project implementation.
UNDP-EEG Regional
25,000
Coordinating Unit
External Consultants
(i.e. evaluation team)
Final Evaluation Project team, At the end of project
UNDP-CO implementation
UNDP-EEG Regional
25,000
Coordinating Unit
External Consultants
(i.e. evaluation team)
Terminal Report Project team At least one month before
UNDP-CO 0 the end of the project
local consultant
Lessons learned Project team Yearly
UNDP-EEG Regional
1,000
Coordinating Unit
(average 400 per year
(suggested formats for
x 4)
documenting best
practices, etc)
Audit UNDP-CO Yearly
3,000
Project team

Parties time
TOTAL indicative COST
Excluding project team staff time and UNDP staff and US$ 82,000
travel expenses
AUDIT CLAUSE
229. The Government will provide the UNDP Resident Representative with certified periodic financial
statements, and with an annual audit of the financial statements relating to the status of UNDP (including
GEF) funds according to the established procedures set out in the Programming and Finance manuals.
The Audit will be conducted according to UNDP financial regulations, rules and audit policies by the
legally recognized auditor of the Government, or by a commercial auditor engaged by the Government.
PART V: Legal Context
230. This Project Document shall be the instrument referred to as such in Article I of the Standard
Basic Assistance Agreement between the Government of Mauritania and the United Nations
Development Program, signed by the parties on July 19, 1979. The host country implementing agency
shall, for the purpose of the Standard Basic Assistance Agreement, refer to the government co-operating
agency described in that Agreement.
231. The UNDP Resident Representative in Nouakchott is authorized to effect in writing the following
types of revision to this Project Document, provided that he/she has verified the agreement thereto by the
UNDP-EEG Unit and is assured that the other signatories to the Project Document have no objection to
the proposed changes:
a) Revision of, or addition to, any of the annexes to the Project Document;
b) Revisions which do not involve significant changes in the immediate objectives, outputs or
activities of the project, but are caused by the rearrangement of the inputs already agreed to or by
cost increases due to inflation;
c) Mandatory annual revisions which re-phase the delivery of agreed project inputs or increased
expert or other costs due to inflation or take into account agency expenditure flexibility; and
d) Inclusion of additional annexes and attachments only as set out here in this Project Document.

SECTION II: STRATEGIC RESULTS FRAMEWORK (SRF) AND GEF INCREMENT
PART I: Strategic Results Framework

INDICATOR FRAMEWORK
Objective/ Source of
Indicator Baseline End of Project target Risks and assumptions
Outcome Information
Objective: To 1. Seagrass beds of the Baseline values t.b.d. by There are no significant Satellite imaging Risks:
strengthen the Banc d‘Arguin are experts upon project changes attributable to Due to election, political changes or
necessary policy, maintained healthy with inception poor management of oil Time series of other events, changes in government
legislative and neither surface cover and gas developments lab samples of priorities might happen and the GOM
financial change nor traces of seagrass might not remain committed to
instruments as well PAH improving the protection and
as the capacity of conservation of biodiversity.
2. Degree to which Biodiversity is not At least half of the Project
government and
policies and regulations mainstreamed in policies and regulations Implementation
civil society The objective of the project might be
governing the policies and regulations considered relevant for Reports (PIRs)
stakeholders in too ambitious and the support from the
development of the oil governing the governing the
partnership with project resources and the government
and gas sector include development of the oil development of the oil Independent
the oil and gas resources may not be adequate to
measures to conserve as analyzed during the effectively mid-term and
industry to protect initiate the changes required by the
and safeguard marine PPG. A thorough policy final evaluations
and conserve project strategy.
and coastal biodiversity screening will define the
marine and coastal
within the EEZ baseline more precisely.
biodiversity. Lack of relevant expertise in local
3. Improved results from Financial Scorecard: Scores, expressed in Application of market may result in delay of required
the GEF SO2 Tracking 1) Legal, regulatory and absolute terms, increase the tools and outputs and distortion of targeted
Tool and increased institutional frameworks by at least 10% scorecards by deadlines.
scores UNDP Capacity (15/82 – 18%) mid-term and
Development Scorecard 2) Business planning final evaluations Assumption:
and tools for cost- The GOM‘s commitment to the project
See Annex 4 and Annex effective PA is demonstrated by its participation in
5 management (16/67 – the EITI initiative and its openness
24%) towards the Panel Pètrole.
3) Tools for revenue
generation (10/57 – The project is able to benefit from the
18%) current momentum existing around this

Outcome Information
sector and the willingness to improve
CD Scorecard: the instruments to better control and
Systemic (11/30 - 32%) monitor the impacts of the development
Institutional of this sector on marine and coastal
(20/45 - 43%) biodiversity.
Individual (9/21 - 44%)
(Avg. 41%)
Outcome 1: 4. Ecologically sensitive No ecologically There is generalized Reports from the Risks:
Marine and coastal ‗no-go zones‘ within the sensitive ‗no-go zones‘ compliance with SEA process The development of the oil and gas
biodiversity EEZ established and have been established Ecologically sensitive sector is not happening as planned.
conservation respected by key players ‗no-go zones‘ Compliance will
mainstreamed into be New policy & legislation proposed by
the governance independently the project is not adopted by the
frameworks for the asserted (e.g. by Government and/or the Parliament.
oil and gas sector Panel Pètrole)
and into the Assumption:
5. The oil and gas The EIA process exist in A revised EIA process Legislation and
industry‘s Despite some uncertainties, the oil and
industry in Mauritania Mauritania with its addressing identified related policy
operations gas sector will develop according to the
adopts a set of known shortcomings shortcomings
most recent targets with a production to
biodiversity standards
peak in 2015 with a daily production of
for their operations,
88,000.
standards whose
implementation can be
independently verified
Outcome 2: 1. 6. A well capitalized Options for the The ‗conservation Progress Reports Risks:
Financial flows to and operational mechanism have been finance mechanism‘ is on the key The government does not approve the
promote ‗conservation finance defined but no decision established, counts on activities proposed financial mechanism.
biodiversity mechanism‘ made sufficient finance to PIRs
conservation are (quantitative measures fulfill its goal and has Low level of engagement and
strengthened t.d.b.) approved an initial participation among oil and gas
through batch of relevant industry players.
partnerships projects
between the public Project partners are not willing to
2. 7. A functioning Some dialogues are A wide dialogue Terms of
sector and the oil contribute to the proposed financial
dialogue platform, happening such as the process (that can be reference for the
and gas sector mechanism
involving GOM, oil and Panel Pètrole and the conveyed through a Platform
gas companies, NGOs EITI process, however SEA process e.g.) is
Assumptions:

Outcome Information
and coastal community no specific platform established and partners Minutes of A trust fund already exists in
representatives is in exists for a dialogue on are meeting on a regular meetings Mauritania for the park of Banc
place oil and gas development basis to discuss relevant d‘Arguin. So far the experience is
and its potential impacts themes with particular Independent positive and the fund is reaching its
on local biodiversity on the interface assessments by capital target. Moreover, the
‗biodiversity‘ with ‗oil mid-term and government demonstrates its financial
and gas‘ project end as transparency through EITI and also
part of the through the fishery agreement with the
evaluation EU for sharing this revenue between
exercises on the national budget and biodiversity
effectiveness of protection in the park of Banc
the dialgogue d‘Arguin.
Outcome 3: 3. 8. Increase in awareness Not Applicable Changes in awareness Results and Risks:
Capacity of key levels among relevant levels are assessed analysis from Despite improved legislation and policy
stakeholders in stakeholders, as The MSC technique is through the the application frameworks, no institutional changes
public sector and assessed through the to be applied once the independent application of the MSC occur.
civil society is independent application project has been of the MSC technique technique by
strengthened for of the methodology launched and some mid-term and The institutional changes might not be
monitoring marine Most Significant form of change has final evaluators followed by appropriate level of
and coastal Change occurred. The baseline resources (HR and $$) to implement the
biodiversity and corresponds to all changes.
environmentally assessments that
sound decision- corroborate the situation A new biodiversity monitoring system
making related to analysis for this project, is developed but it is not matched with
the development of particularly with respect the required level of resources (HR & $)
the oil and gas to land-uses and to make it operational.
sector livelihoods.
Assumptions:
Awareness rising and capacity
development will lead to a change of
behavior in related institutions
contributing to the long-term
sustainability of the project
achievements.

LIST OF OUTPUTS PER OUTCOME
Project’s Development Goal: To mainstream marine and coastal biodiversity conservation into Mauritania‘s new era of oil and gas development
through a concerted partnership involving the oil and gas industry, government and civil society stakeholders.
Project Objective: To strengthen the necessary policy, legislative and financial instruments as well as the capacity of government and civil
society stakeholders in partnership with the oil and gas industry to protect and conserve marine and coastal biodiversity
Outcomes Outputs
Outcome 1: Marine and coastal 1.1 The application of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), with particular attention to
biodiversity conservation biodiversity sensitive areas, will permit informed decision-making zoning the EEZ from a
mainstreamed into the governance biodiversity and sectoral development points of view
frameworks for the oil and gas sector 1.2 The review, revision and strengthening of relevant legal, policy and fiscal frameworks results
and into the industry‘s operations on a stronger integration of biodiversity concerns in the governance of the oil and gas sector
1.3 The emergence of a fast and effective response to accidental oil spills emanating from oil and
gas developments mitigate risks to coastal and marine biodiversity within the EEZ and involves
relevant government bodies and industry in a coordinated manner
1.4 The oil and gas industry establishes collectively a set of operational standards that specifically
safeguard coastal and marine biodiversity
Outcome 2: Financial flows to 2.1 The ‗conservation financing mechanism‘ established with the necessary legal and governance
promote biodiversity conservation are instruments to make it operational, a well defined capitalization plan and adequate M&E
strengthened through partnerships 2.2 Signed agreements to fund this financial mechanism between the government and the oil and
between the public sector and the oil gas industry
and gas sector
2.3 Capacity of MEDD and of eligible the CSO/NGO players to propose conservation project under
the financial mechanism and manage their funds in connection with them is strengthened
2.4 On-going tri-partite dialogue (oil and gas industry, government and civil society) for the
development of the oil and gas sector serves as a debate platform to support the conservation of
marine and coastal biodiversity within the EEZ.
Outcome 3: Capacity of key 3.1 Marine and coastal biodiversity awareness strengthened as well as knowledge about the oil and
stakeholders in public sector and civil gas sector for key stakeholders in public sector and civil society
society is strengthened for monitoring 3.2 An established operational marine and coastal biodiversity monitoring system corroborates to
marine and coastal biodiversity and

Project Objective: To strengthen the necessary policy, legislative and financial instruments as well as the capacity of government and civil
society stakeholders in partnership with the oil and gas industry to protect and conserve marine and coastal biodiversity
Outcomes Outputs
environmentally sound decision- specifically to determine threats to coastal and marine ecosystems and to prevent/mitigate the
making related to the development of adverse impacts of oil and gas development.
the oil and gas sector 3.3 Capacity of key government staff strengthened to determine the economic values of marine and
coastal biodiversity and of ecosystem services
232. A detailed list of activities with an implementation schedule will be completed during the inception phase of the project. The contents of
activities will be largely based on the descriptions contained in paragraph 156.

Part II: Incremental Cost Analysis
233. A detailed list of activities with an implementation schedule will be completed during the inception phase of the project.
Table 7: Incremental Cost Matrix

Baseline Alternative Increment
Cost/Benefit
(B) (A) (A-B)
BENEFITS
Global benefits In the absence of the proposed GEF Under the alternative scenario, project With focus on Mauritania‘s coastal and
project, the rapid development of the oil activities will remove the barriers marine ecosystems within the WAMER
and gas sector in Mauritania in the coming identified and presented in this project and the oil and gas industry, biodiversity
years will take place with little or no document. Capacity of the government conservation will be mainstreamed into
consideration for biodiversity conservation will be developed to effectively plan, Mauritania‘s new era of oil and gas
or sustainable management of critical monitor and control the development of development with a direct spatial
natural resources such as fisheries. As a the oil and gas sector and its potential mainstreaming target of 165,338 sq km,
consequence, Mauritania‘s the unique impacts on the marine and coastal which corresponds to Mauritania‘s EEZ
marine and coastal ecosystems will stay biodiversity. Measures will be in place to where the bulk of off-shore developments
exposed to any negative impacts from the prevent damaging oil and gas projects to are taking place, and indirectly into
development of the oil and gas sector take place through strengthened EIAs with ~700,000 sq km (including the remainder
without any measures to mitigate these a stronger focus on biodiversity. In of oil blocs).
risks. particular, ‗no-go zones‘, which or may
Barriers to secure the sustainability of the
not be protected areas, will be widely
Various related oil and gas development marine and coastal biodiversity removed.
respected.
threats may impact this marine Biodiversity will be more effectively
environment which by extension may The opportunity for a strategic deal with mainstreamed into policies and legal
affect the entire WAMER area with its the fisheries sector will be explored to frameworks and into the industry‘s
fisheries resources, globally significant promote the conservation of the coastal operations.
cetacean and sea bird and marine turtle and marine environment as a whole.
A partnership for improved biodiversity
species; including an estimated 6 million The oil and gas industry will collectively management in coastal and marine
migratory birds using the area in winter. adopt a set of operational standards that ecosystems will emerge, involving the
In particular, the oil and gas industry in specifically safeguard coastal and marine industry, the government and civil society.
Mauritania will continue to operate within biodiversity. They will be actively
A monitoring system will be in place for
a weak legal and policy environment. Key engaging in financing conservation with the continual monitor of the health of this
players (government and industry) remain positive spillover effects to globally unique biodiversity; including stock trends
unengaged in biodiversity conservation, significant biodiversity beyond the life of
for key species, pollution levels etc.
also representing a foregone opportunity to the project.
generate finance for conservation. Ecosystems have a known value and are
As a result, oil and gas operations in integrated within the national economy.
The capacity of key stakeholders Mauritania will be ―cleaner‖ and the risks

Cost/Benefit
(B) (A) (A-B)
(including affected communities) to gauge of damaging the local ecosystems lower, They are also recognized as a key support
the threats and risks posed by oil and gas protecting and conserving these unique for the local economy along the littoral of
developments will remain weak. ecosystems. Mauritania.
National and local Fishery is a major economic sector for The alternative scenario will bring the A government with the capacity to plan,
benefits Mauritania, while oil and gas still following national benefits: monitor and control the development of the
emerging. In the baseline scenario, the oil and gas sector to limit negative impacts
Implementation of policy and legal
marine trophic index will continue its on marine and coastal biodiversity.
instruments to control and mitigate risks
downward trend since the 1950‘s, largely
of negative impacts on marine and There will be generally increased
due to the overexploitation of fisheries awareness in Mauritanian society about the
coastal biodiversity by oil and gas
resources. threats, risks and opportunities in the
sector;
In the business-as-usual scenario, revenues interface ‗oil and gas‘ with biodviversity.
Fisheries will be better safeguarded
from fisheries will erode over time. This
from the treats and risks of off-shore oil
will both negatively affect the local coastal
and gas developments
communities benefiting from this
resources, as well as the foreign fleets A system and capacity to monitor the
operating in the EEZ. marine and coastal biodiversity;
The baseline analysis also shows that If fisheries can also be better managed,
negative threat interaction between this will ensure the maintenance of
fisheries and oil and gas developments essential ecosystem services and other
may be have irreversible effects on the economic benefits over the long-term due
marine environment. The risk of a poorly to the protection and conservation of
managed accidental oil spill is a risk to marine and coastal biodiversity to local
whole Mauritanian economy. coastal communities and also at the
national level.
COSTS
Outcome 1: Marine Baseline estimated as follows 14.000 Alternative ($ million): 15.498 GEF 0.256
and coastal biodiversity ($ million): IUCN 1.242
conservation Fisheries: Relevant investment Increment Total ($ million): 1.498
mainstreamed into the in research from national and
policy and legislation international partners
frameworks concerning (IMROP, WWF WAMER,
the development of the FAO, EU, among others) 10.000
oil and gas sector. WB PRISM2 (Program de
Renforcement Institutionnel
du Secteur Minier) 2.000

Cost/Benefit
(B) (A) (A-B)
MEDD baseline programmes
and initiatives 2.000
Outcome 2: Financial Baseline estimated as follows 11.000 Alternative ($ million): 12.986 GEF 0.230
mechanisms for marine ($ million): UNDP 0.032
and coastal biodiversity Conservation work by PNBA IUCN 1.242
conservation and PND 10.000 PNBA 0.483
strengthened through Oil and gas companies Increment Total ($ million): 1.986
partnerships between investments in HSE + CSR 1.000
the public sector and
the oil and gas sector.
Outcome 3: Capacity Baseline estimated as 6.000 Alternative ($ million): 7.918 GEF 0.369
of key stakeholders in follows ($ million): UNDP 0.009
public sector and civil Other bilateral and IUCN 1.242
society is strengthened multilateral funding WWF 0.298
for monitoring marine relevant to the environment Increment Total ($ million): 1.918
and coastal sector (UNDP, WB, AfDB,
biodiversity and GTZ, Spanish Cooperation,
AFD and others) 3.000
environmentally sound
PDALM and Coastal Zone
decision-making Observatory 3.000
related to the
development of the oil
and gas sector.
Project Management Alternative ($ million): 1.282 GEF 0.095
Unit: Program UNDP 0.159
Implementation GTZ 1.028
n/a
Technical Support Increment Total ($ million): 1.282
Team, and Indicative
Monitoring.
GEF 0.950
IUCN 3.725
PNBA 0.483
TOTAL COSTS Baseline estimates ($ million): 31.000 Alternative ($ million): $36.402 WWF 0.298
UNDP 0.200
GTZ 1.028
Increment Total ($ million): 6.684

SECTION III: TOTAL BUDGET AND WORKPLAN
Award ID: t.b.d. Business Unit: B0354

Project ID: Project Title: Partnership to Mainstream Marine and Coastal Biodiversity into Oil and
3576
Gas Sector Development in Mauritania
Award Title: PIMS 3700 - Mainstream Biodiversity into Oil Implementing Partner
(Executing Agency) Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development (MEDD)
and Gas
Resp.
GEF ATLAS TOTAL Amount Amount Amount Amount
Party/ Fund Budget
Outcome/ Donor Name Budget Altlas Budget Description Amount Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Impl. ID Notes
Atlas Activity Code (USD) (USD) (USD) (USD) (USD)
Agent
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 71200 International Consultants 120,000 30,000 40,000 40,000 10,000 a
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 71300 Local Consultants 5,000 3,000 2,000 b
Outcome 1: NEX 62000 GEF-10003 71400 Contractual Services - Individ 90,000 15,000 30,000 30,000 15,000 c
Maintream
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 71600 Travel 20,000 8,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 d
Gov
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 5,000 5,000 e
Frameworks
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 74100 Professional Services 16,000 10,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 f
GEF Subtotal Atlas Activity 1 (Outcome 1) 256,000 71,000 78,000 76,000 31,000
TOTAL ACTIVITY 1 (Outcome 1) 256,000 71,000 78,000 76,000 31,000
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 71200 International Consultants 120,000 30,000 40,000 40,000 10,000 g
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 71400 Contractual Services - Individ 90,000 15,000 30,000 30,000 15,000 h
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 20,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 e
Ouctome 2:
Fin
NEX 04000 UNDP TRAC - 00012 71300 Local Consultants 9,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 i
Mechanisms
NEX 04000 UNDP TRAC - 00012 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 18,000 4,000 6,000 4,000 4,000 e
NEX 04000 UNDP TRAC - 00012 73200 Premises Alternations 5,000 5,000 j
TRAC Subtotal Atlas Activity 2 (Outcome 2) 32,000 12,000 9,000 7,000 4,000
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 71200 International Consultants 204,000 51,000 51,000 51,000 51,000 k
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 71300 Local Consultants 30,000 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 l
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 71400 Contractual Services - Individ 90,000 15,000 30,000 30,000 15,000 m
Outcome 3:
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 72800 Information Technology Equipmt 10,000 8,000 2,000 n
Capacity
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 74100 Professional Services 35,000 5,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 o
Building
NEX 04000 UNDP TRAC - 00012 71300 Local Consultants 9,000 4,000 5,000 p
TRAC Subtotal Atlas Activity 3 (Outcome 3) 9,000 4,000 5,000 0 0

Resp.
GEF ATLAS TOTAL Amount Amount Amount Amount
Party/ Fund Budget
Outcome/ Donor Name Budget Altlas Budget Description Amount Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Impl. ID Notes
Atlas Activity Code (USD) (USD) (USD) (USD) (USD)
Agent
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 71400 Contractual Services - Individ 90,000 90,000 q
NEX 62000 GEF-10003 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 5,000 1,000 1,500 1,500 1,000 r
GEF Subtotal Atlas Activity 4 (Project Management) 95,000 91,000 1,500 1,500 1,000
Project NEX 04000 UNDP TRAC - 00012 71300 Local Consultants 72,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 s
Management NEX 04000 UNDP TRAC - 00012 71400 Contractual Services - Individ 28,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 t
NEX 04000 UNDP TRAC - 00012 71600 Travel 19,000 5,000 5,000 4,000 5,000 u
NEX 04000 UNDP TRAC - 00012 72200 Equipment and Furniture 40,000 40,000 v
TRAC Subtotal Atlas Activity 4 (Project Management) 159,000 70,000 30,000 29,000 30,000
TOTAL ACTIVITY 4 (Project Management) 254,000 161,000 31,500 30,500 31,000
.
SUB-TOTAL GEF 950,000 298,500 253,000 251,000 147,500
SUB-TOTAL UNDP TRAC 200,000 86,000 44,000 36,000 34,000
.
GRAND TOTAL (in cash) 1,150,000 384,500 297,000 287,000 181,500
Budget Notes
 Project consultants, volunteers and collaborators: Refer to ‗Section IV, PART III: Terms of References for key project staff‘, and within it ‗Overview of
Inputs from Technical Assistance Consultants‘, Table 10 and Table 11, for detailed information on the costing of the project teams and consultants by
sources of funds (GEF, UNDP, GTZ or GoM), including number of weeks (or years) and key tasks.
 Project vehicle will be purchased with UNDP TRAC funds. Government may decide to allocate a vehicle for the project.
 Domestic travel Will be necessary coordination team (for visiting specific sites along the coast as per project workplans to be prepared), as well as for other
General Notes
members of the PMU and project consultants. The bulk of the project‘s travel costs (international or not) will be borne by UNDP, including the costs of
bringing international consultants to the country.
 All international travel by the coordination team (e.g. in connection with participation in relevant international events, such CBD COPs, seminars,
training, Parks‘ Congress, etc.) will be charged to the UNDP travel budget. Else, other international travel may be connection with bringing international
consultants to the country.
a Short Term Int. Consultants: (1) Strategic Environmental Assessment specialist ( weeks)l (2) Fisheries specialist ( weeks)
b Short Term Nat. Consultant: Environmental impact assessment expert (5 weeks)
c Project Core team: Legislation & policy development specialist (3 years)
d Domestic travel in connection with consultations
e Consultations and workshops (incl. inception); rounds of negotiation towards partnerships agreements and/or training.
f Web design and Translation
g Short Term Int. Consultants: (1) Protected Areas Finance specialist (20 weeks); (2) Oil and gas development offshore specialist (20 weeks)

Budget Notes
h Project Core Team: Financial mechanisms for PAs specialist (3 years)
i Short Term Nat. Consultant: Public finance and planning (10 weeks)
j Reforming as needed the project office at MEDD and making it secure.
Short Term Int. Consultants: (1) Environmental monitoring specialist (20 weeks); (2) Environmental economics (20 weeks); (3) Capacity development (staff &
k
org.) (20 weeks); (4) Project evaluation (8 weeks).
l Short Term Nat. Consultants: (1) Environmental monitoring expert (20 weeks); (2) Project Evaluation (8 weeks)
m Project Core Team: Capacity development specialist (3 years)
Acquisition of Laptops (4@US$1400), software licenses (4@US$800), portable hard drive (3@US$200), printer (2@US$300), data projector (1@US$800) and
n
mobile phone contracts (2@US$500) and other peripherals, e.g. GPS, laser printer, copy-machine (@US1400) for project team.
o Translation, Editorial and Desktop publishing
p Short Term Nat. Consultant: Institutional reform expert (10 weeks)
q Int. Project Manager (1 year). For the remainder of the project period, GTZ will avail a specialist.
Miscellaneous costs may include: (1) Insurance, bank charges and other sundries either for project coordinating unit or directly linked to planned activities under
r a given outcome; (2) Miscellaneous costs associated with workshops and other types of consultations (e.g. printing, interpretation, rental of equipment, etc.);
and/or (3) communication costs
s Administrative, Finance and HR (4 years)
t Driver (4 years)
u International Travel (see general note)
v Allocation for 1 vehicle all terrain. Excess funds may be transferred to other lines for maintenance and fuel ($30K). Office furniture ($10K)

SECTION IV: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
PART I: Co-Financing
Table 11. Overview of the Project‟s co-financing and support letters

Page in the Amounts Amounts considered as
Name of Co-financier Date separate Language * mentioned in project co-financing
file letters (in USD)
2.5 million
IUCN Mauritania 14-Sep-09 1 French $3,725,000
USD
PNBA - Banc d‘Arguin
07-Oct-09 3 French 324,000 EUR $482,760
National Park Authority
WWF Regional WAMER
13-Nov-09 5 English 200,000 EUR $298,000
Program, Dakar Office
UNDP Nouakchott - Core
25-Nov-09 6 English 200,000 USD $200,000
resources (TRAC)**
GTZ - German Cooperation 230,000 EUR x
24-Nov-09 7 English $1,028,100
in Mauritania*** 3 years
Dana Petroleum 15-Nov-09 11 English Support letter n/a
University of British
25-Nov-09 12 French Support letter n/a
Columbia, Fisheries Centre
MEDD - Ministry of
Environment and Sustainable 25-Nov-09 14 French Support letter n/a
Development
Total $5,733,860
Notes:
* Letters that are not in English are accompanied by translations.
** This is an in-cash direct contribution, be managed by UNDP in connection with the project under the same
budgetary award.
*** This is an in-cash direct contribution to be managed by GTZ in partnership with UNDP through provision of
technical assistance to the project.
[letters are included in a separate file]
PART II: Project Maps

[maps are included in a separate file]
Map 1) The West Africa Marine Critical Region of the World

Map 2) Political Map of Mauritania
Map 3) Status of oil and gas concessions in Mauritania in January 2009
Map 4) Banc d‘Arguin National Park and Cap Blanc Satellite Reserve
Map 5) Diawling National Park and Chat T‘boul Reserve
Map 6a) Biodiversity and hydrocarbons in Mauritania (Carte 1): Protected Area and Conservation Priorities
Map 6b) Biodiversity and hydrocarbons in Mauritania (Carte 2): Habitats, species of interest and reproduction zones
Map 6c) Biodiversity and hydrocarbons in Mauritania (Carte 3): Fishing Activities
Map 6d) Biodiversity and hydrocarbons in Mauritania (Carte 4): Hydrocarbons and Coastal and Marine Ecosystems
Map 6e) Biodiversity and hydrocarbons in Mauritania (Carte 5): Protected Area and Conservation Priorities

Map 7) Locations of deep-water carbonate mound structures in the region
Map 8) Locations of surface oil slicks in the Mauritanian marine environment in relation to main ship traffic routes
Map 9) International maritime traffic routes: focus on Western Africa
Map 10) Mauritania's Coastal Zone
PART III: Options for the Development of Financial Mechanisms

234. During the PPG phase, the development of financial mechanisms to fund the protection and
conservation of marine and coastal biodiversity was reviewed. Currently, the funding to protect and
conserve biodiversity is mostly provided through the national budget of Mauritania allocated to PNBA
and PND and supplemented by several donor-funded projects. However, the existing level of funding is
not sufficient and, in the case of the development partners, is not sustainable in the long run. Therefore, it
is important for Mauritania to develop new sustainable financial mechanisms for protecting and
conserving marine and coastal biodiversity.
235. The overall aim of outcome 2 of this project is to increase the flows of finance for conserving,
sustainably using and safeguarding biodiversity in Mauritanian territory, including its EEZ with funds
from the oil and gas exploitation. In term of potential options to increase this financial flows, a key
question remains in the context of Mauritania that is to (i) either establish a new ‗conservation financing
mechanism‘, or to (ii) add-on to an existing one (see table below). Feasibility studies and negotiation
rounds during the implementation of the project, will serve as the basis for deciding which option to
implement.
Table 8: Basic Options for the Financing Mechanism

Option Description Advantages and Disadvantages
Option 1: Create a new biodiversity financial This option is lengthier, but allows for the
mechanism independent from any of the definition of objectives, governance
existing ones. arrangements and other aspects in full
collaboration with the oil and gas industry.
Option 2 No new mechanism for biodiversity The governance instruments for this Trust
financing is established, but the existing Fund are already defined. Proposing changes
Banc d‘Arguin and Coastal and Marine to it may be challenging at this stage. Also,
Biodiversity Trust Fund Limited will be the Trust Fund is 100% geared towards PA
expanded if the proposed features for the finance and weighing heavily towards the
use of funds can be accommodated Banc d‘Arguin. Any conservation work
outside of PAs may be difficult to
accommodate for.
236. The initial scan conducted during the PPG phase indicates that the financial flows to promote
biodiversity conservation should include the following features:
The financial mechanism will be the primary recipient of any biodiversity compensation or off-
setting scheme to be established as a result of the project.
The funds should not be restricted to financing protected areas in a classical sense, but may also
be used to afford protection to specific features of biodiversity that are currently not protected and
will hardly become protected through a gazettal process, e.g. (1) the venus clam banks in the
artisanal fishing zone just outside the Banc d‘Arguin Park ; (2) the marine part of the Senegal
River mouth within outside the Diawling National Park; and (3) Mauritania‘s carbonate mud
mounds harboring deep-water coral reefs.

The funds may contribute to making fisheries in Mauritania more sustainable, as certain aspects
of the activity (sea bottom dredging and trawling, as well as the unscientific determination of
quotas) are extremely harmful to biodiversity. While the deterioration of state of the marine
biodiversity that is directly driven by fisheries has nothing to do with oil and gas developments,
trade-offs are possible for the benefit of biodiversity. Fisheries are in any case at risk from the
activities of the oil and gas industry and should remain sustainable when Mauritania‘s oil boom is
over.
The industry may benefit from their participation in the mechanism(s) e.g. by advertise on it their
contribution to the results of funds‘ investments.
In case the mechanism is a trust fund, UNDP, GTZ and representatives from the industry should
be made board members.
237. The table below presents the relevant existing financial instruments and mechanisms in
Mauritania. It indicates a good contextual background upon which the project will support the increase of
financial flows to biodiversity conservation.
Table 9: Overview of Existing Relevant Financing Instrmuments

Fund Description
mechanism
Banc d‘Arguin For the past few years and based on the long-term planning provided by PNBA‘s business plan,
and Coastal and there is an on-going effort to increase the Park management‘s financial sustainability. Within it,
Marine the establishment of a foundation based in the UK (created in January 2009 and called ―Banc
Biodiversity d‟Arguin and Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Trust Fund Limited‖) and the capitalization of
an endowment trust fund is an important step towards it. The establishment of the trust fund was
Trust Fund
supervised by a steering committee. Once the establishment of the trust fund will be completed,
Limited a Board will be established and composed of 7 members, which will include two representatives
from the donor community. Additionally, certain voting rights will be given to any donor
contributing 1 million Euro or more. The objectives of this trust fund are to:
 Promote the conservation and sustainable development of the physical and natural
environment of the park by supporting the implementation and updating of its management
plans, which includes a balanced development for the park‘s resident population,
conservation of biodiversity, scientific research, public awareness, and administration of the
Park;
 Promote the conservation and sustainable development of the physical and natural
environment of other marine and coastal protected areas in Mauritania, by supporting the
implementation and updating of their management plans. However, this will take place only
if the financial resources of the trust fund are sufficient and upon approval of at least three-
quarters of its Board of Directors;
 Engage in any and all acts and activities that may be necessary, useful or appropriate for the
furtherance or accomplishment of the above objectives, including to solicit, raise and invest
funds from public and private sources wherever located.
The financial goal is to create a 15-million Euro endowment trust fund from which a potential
withdraw of about 750-800,000 Euros per year is anticipated to finance biodiversity
conservation activities and leave the fund (capital) invested for future generations. Currently,
the foundation is created and has applied for status as a ‗registered charity‘ in the UK; response
is pending. Once this status is obtained, the legalization of the trust fund in Mauritania will be
completed and the capitalization can start. An approximate amount of 0.5 million Euros from
the GOM is already reserved in a special account within the context of the fishery agreement
between the GOM and the EU. For the duration of this agreement the GOM is expected to
contribute with approximately 3 million Euros to the trust fund (500K per year). Other
negotiations are ongoing with several contributors, including FIBA and AFD.
FNRH Instituted by law Law No 2008-020 (replacing Law 2006-008 from April 4, 2006) the FNRH
National foresees the receipt and use by the GOM of all revenues from the exploitation of hydrocarbons
in Mauritania. The funds are placed in a special account opened in the name of GOM in a well-

Fund Description
mechanism
Hydrocarbon recognized foreign bank. It is managed by the Ministry of Finance, which can delegate the
Revenue Fund function to the Central Bank of Mauritania according to a convention signed on May 8, 2006. A
Fonds National Consultative Committee on Investments assists the Minister of Finance in the management of
des Revenus des this fund. The mission of this committee is to propose and advice on questions related to the
management of the FNRH.
Hydrocarbures
Bonus system Within the existing PSC, the current annual contributions that some oil companies already make
in connection to the government for capacity development may be explored to be integrated into the herein
with Production proposed financial mechanism. PSCs foresee the following:
Sharing  Two bonuses are mentioned in Article 13: (1) a signature bonus within 30 days from
effective date of the contract and (2) production bonuses, based on production rate and to
Contracts (PSC)
be paid in installments throughout the production year.
 Article 12 relates to staff (personnel); item 12.2 foresees that the oil company (the
‗contractor‘) shall contribute to the training and capacity building of ―staff of Direction des
Mines et de la Géologie‖ according to an annual pre-defined plan, approved by the Minister
and at the end of each civil year.
While the bonuses may include larger amounts of funds, the capacity building element will
likely be modest.
Intervention The Environment Code establishes an Intervention Funds for the Environment (IFE) to finance
Funds for the exclusively protection and restoration activities implemented as a consequence of
Environment environmental degradation. This management of this fund is to be detailed in a specific Decree.
(IFE) It should be noted that since 2000, this fund has not be established yet.
238. A review of international best practices indicates the following:
―Conservation Trust Funds (CTFs) have been established in more than 50 developing countries
and transition economies over the last 15 years. CTFs are private, legally independent grant-
making institutions that provide sustainable financing for biodiversity conservation and often
finance part of the long-term management costs of a country„s protected area (PA) system. They
can serve as an effective means for mobilizing large amounts of additional funding for
biodiversity conservation from international donors, national governments and the private sector.
CTFs raise and invest funds to make grants to non-governmental organizations (NGOs),
community based-organizations (CBOs) and governmental agencies (such as national parks
agencies). CTFs are financing mechanisms rather than implementing agencies. They also can
serve as mechanisms for strengthening civil society and for making government PA manage
government agencies more transparent, accountable and effective. […] Many CTFs also reduce
threats to biodiversity by financing projects that improve and promote sustainable livelihoods of
poor communities living near PAs”52.
239. The same review referenced above identified several aspects to be considered with trust funds:
Purposes and roles of conservation trust funds
Strategic planning, grant-making and administrative costs
Funding protected areas‘ recurrent costs and financial gap analysis
Monitoring and evaluating impacts on biodiversity
Board and governance issues
Legal and tax issues
Fundraising and investment management
52
Barry Spergel and Philippe Taïeb for Conservation Finance Alliance (CFA), 2008, Rapid Review of Conservation Trust
Funds.

240. Different types of trust funds can be considered. The Banc d‘Arguin and Coastal and Marine
Biodiversity Trust Fund Limited will be an endowment fund that is the capital will be invested in
perpetuity, and only the resulting investment income is used to finance grants and activities. The other
main categories include sinking fund where the entire principal and investment income is disbursed over a
long period until it is completely spent; and the revolving fund where income from taxes, fees, fines or
payments for ecosystem services that are specially earmarked regularly go into the funds to be used for
specified purposes.
241. In addition to setting up a trust fund or expanding the soon-to-be PNBA trust fund to finance
biodiversity conservation, few financial compensatory mechanisms will also be analyzed with support
from the project. They include:
Concession Royalties: Based on the concessions allotted to oil and gas companies, the
government may look into establishing compensatory mechanisms for biodiversity
conservation. It could include:
o Production Sharing Contracts: These contracts are established between each oil
company and the State of Mauritania. They define the terms and conditions for
oil and gas exploitation, including the share of financial profits to be transferred
to the State of Mauritania. Some of these contracts also include a financial
contribution for capacity development. However, they do not include
compensation for losses of economic activities due to the development of this
industry such as fishing and conservation of biodiversity. An opportunity cost
could be introduced in these contracts.
o Environmental Royalties: Similar to the above mechanism, an environmental

royalty mechanism could be instituted within the production sharing contracts,
including the subsidy for capacity development that some companies are already
paying. A joint process between the industry and the government would need to
be created to invest these financial contributions in biodiversity conservation.
Ecological Tax: The concept is to establish a tax on the use of ecosystem services;
particularly the oil and gas sector exploring and exploiting offshore, to compensate for
the loss of economic values of the marine and coastal biodiversity.

PART IV: Organizational Chart of the Project
242. A simplified organizational chart for the project is presented below and it is based on the
management arrangement discussed in Part III of Section I.
Figure 7: Organizational Chart of the Project
PART VI: Terms of References for key project staff

NATIONAL PROJECT DIRECTOR
Background
The National Project Director (NPD) is a senior civil servant, who will serve as the focal point for the
project within the national executing agency, the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development
(MEDD). Specifically, with respect to the project, the NPD will be responsible for the following tasks:
The National Project Director shall have overall responsibility for the implementation of the Project
and the engagement of government. He/she shall guide and oversee the work of the Project Manager
on a daily basis together with UNDP and GTZ.
The NPD will be responsible for certifying the Work plan, Financial Reports and Request for advance
of funds under the project, ensuring their accuracy and in accordance with the project document
The NPD shall be the authorized person who shall approve all payments to be effected under the
project after certification by the project manager or the UNDP country office.
The NPD shall be the authorized signatory for contracting services under the project following
endorsement by the PSC
The NPD will be responsible for the conduct of the Project Steering Committee meeting, ensuring in
particular high level participation from government.

PROJECT MANAGER
Background
The Project Manager will be an internationally recruited expert selected upon an open competitive
process involving UNDP and GTZ in close collaboration and the executing agency. He/She will be
responsible for the overall management and coordination of the project, including the mobilization of all
project inputs, supervision over project staff, consultants and sub-contractors. For all of the project‘s
substantive and administrative issues the Project Manager will report to the UNDP Resident
Representative (or duly designated UN officer) and to GTZ‘s Country Director as the two key
management partners, in close consultation with the National Project Director (NPD), i.e. the designated
official for the project within the national executing agency Ministry of Environment and Sustainable
Development (MEDD). From the strategic point of view of the project, the Project Manager will report on
a periodic basis to the Project Steering Committee (PSC). Generally, the Project Manager will be
responsible for meeting government obligations under the project, under the national execution modality
(NEX). He/She will perform a liaison role with the Government through the NPD, with corporate
partners, an array of relevant government agencies, CSO/NGOs, Academia, UNDP and other UN
Agencies and maintain close collaboration with other donor agencies providing co-financing.
Duties and Responsibilities

Supervise and coordinate the production of project outputs, as per the project document, on time,
on scope and on budget;
Mobilize all project inputs in accordance with UNDP procedures for nationally executed projects;
Supervise and coordinate the work of all project staff, consultants and sub-contractors;
Coordinate the recruitment and selection of project personnel;
Certify all payments and contracts, ensuring that they are in accordance with applicable national
execution rules and regulations in place;
Prepare and revise project work and financial plans, as required by MEDD and UNDP;
Liaise with UNDP, MEDD, relevant government agencies, and all project partners, including
corporate partners, donor organizations and NGOs for effective coordination of all project
activities;
Finalize Terms of Reference for consultants and sub-contractors, and coordinate the selection and
recruitment process;
Coordinate the work of all consultants and sub-contractors, ensuring the timely delivery of
expected outputs, and effective synergy among the various sub-contracted activities;
Facilitate administrative backstopping to subcontractors and training activities supported by the
Project;
Oversee and ensure timely submission of the Inception Report, Combined Project Implementation
Review/Annual Project Report (PIR/APR), Technical reports, quarterly financial reports, and
other reports as may be required by UNDP, GEF, MEDD and other oversight agencies;
Mobilize staff and consultants in the conduct of a mid-term and a final evaluation, and in
undertaking revisions in the implementation program and strategy based on mid-term evaluation
results;
Disseminate project reports and respond to queries from concerned stakeholders;
Report progress of project to the steering committees, and ensure the fulfillment of steering
committees directives.
Document lessons from project implementation and make recommendations to the Steering
Committee for more effective implementation and coordination of project activities;

Oversee the exchange and sharing of experiences and lessons learned with other relevant projects
nationally and internationally;
Create the content of the project website and oversee its launching and regular maintenance
Coordinate and assists scientific institutions with the initiation and implementation of all field
studies and monitoring components of the project;
Assists and advises the teams responsible for documentaries, TV spots, guidebooks and
awareness campaign, field studies, etc; and
Carry regular, announced and unannounced inspections of project activities.
Qualifications
A university degree (MS or PhD) in Natural Resource Management, Biodiversity Conservation,
Environmental Sciences; Management/Business Administration, Economics, Engineering or any
other area relevant for the project theme;
Consistent professional specialization in issues surrounding the interface between the oil and gas
developments / extractive industries and the environment / biodiversity, particular with emphasis
on the marine environment and off-shore oil and gas developments;
At least 10 years of work experience, of which some 3-5 year are with project/programme
management, preferably in development assistance;
Work experience in Africa, in particular in West Africa is a plus, but not a requirement;
Excellent writing and communication skills in English is a requirement; and
A good working knowledge of French or Arabic and is a plus.
Competencies and Skills

Leadership: Ability to lead processes without imposing opinions, but by coaching, persuading and
accommodating other opinions and positions with a positive attitude;
Management skills: Ability to plan, monitor progress, administers budgets, manage and supervise
HR, train and work effectively with counterparts to realize goals.
Facilitation skills: Ability to effectively coordinate a large, multi-stakeholder project, facilitate
meetings and processes effectively, compile complex and technical information in an
understandable language to a wide variety of audiences.
Negotiation skills: Skill in negotiating effectively in sensitive situations, remaining focused;
Results-orientation: Skill in achieving results through persuading, influencing and working with
others;
Conflict resolution skills: Ability to dissipate and resolve conflicts as they arise
Analytical skills: Ability to draw conclusions based on a contextual examination of facts and
processes.
Communication skills: Strong drafting, presentation and reporting skills;
Easiness with IT: Strong computer skills, in particular mastery of all applications of the MS
Office package and internet search;
PROJECT ASSISTANT
Background
The Project Assistant will be locally recruited based on an open competitive process. He/She will be
responsible for the overall administration and logistics of the project. The Project Assistant will report to
the Project Manager. Generally, the Project Assistant will be responsible for supporting the Project
Manager in meeting government obligations under the project, under the national execution modality
(NEX).

Duties and Responsibilities
Collect, register and maintain all information on project activities;
Contribute to the preparation and implementation of progress reports;
Monitor project activities, budgets and financial expenditures;
Advise all project counterparts on applicable administrative procedures and ensures their proper
implementation;
Maintain project correspondence and communication;
Support the preparations of project work-plans and operational and financial planning processes;
Assist in procurement and recruitment processes;
Assist in the preparation of payments requests for operational expenses, salaries, insurance, etc.
against project budgets and work plans;
Follow-up on timely disbursements by UNDP CO;
Receive, screen and distribute correspondence and attach necessary background information;
Prepare routine correspondence and memoranda for Project Managers signature;
Assist in logistical organization of meetings, training and workshops;
Prepare agendas and arrange field visits, appointments and meetings both internal and external
related to the project activities and write minutes from the meetings;
Maintain the project filing system;
Maintain records over project equipment inventory; and
Perform other duties as required.
Qualifications
A post-school qualification (diploma, or equivalent);
At least 5 years of administrative and/or financial management experience;
Demonstrable ability to administer project budgets, and track financial expenditure;
Demonstrable ability to maintain effective communications with different stakeholders, and
arrange stakeholder meetings and/or workshops;
Excellent computer skills, in particular mastery of all applications of the MS Office package;
Excellent written communication skills in French; and
Good working knowledge of English is a plus.
Overview of Inputs from Technical Assistance Consultants
Table 10: Overview of Inputs from Technical Assistance Consultants

Consultant Tasks and Inputs
Local / National contracting
Legislation & policy Full time for 3 Reporting to the NPC, the incumbent will be part of the project‘s core technical
development specialist years team. Key functions include:
Core team Be primarily responsible for: (1) the policy and regulatory screening exercise;
member (2) any legal aspect pertaining to the establishment of the conservation finance
mechanism; (3) legal and policy aspects siting agreements with industry; and
(4) the interpretation of international environmental agreements in Mauritanian
law with respect to EIA frameworks, establishment of industry standards and in
other relevant contexts for the project.
More specifically, the expert will contribute to the following project outputs:

1.1 The application of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), with
particular attention to biodiversity sensitive areas, will permit informed
decision-making zoning the EEZ from a biodiversity and sectoral
development points of view
1.2 The review, revision and strengthening of relevant legal, policy and fiscal
frameworks results on a stronger integration of biodiversity concerns in
the governance of the oil and gas sector
1.3 The emergence of a fast and effective response to accidental oil spills
emanating from oil and gas developments mitigate risks to coastal and
marine biodiversity within the EEZ and involves relevant government
bodies and industry in a coordinated manner
1.4 The oil and gas industry establishes collectively a set of operational
standards that specifically safeguard coastal and marine biodiversity
2.1 The ‗conservation financing mechanism‘ established with the necessary
legal and governance instruments to make it operational, a well defined
capitalization plan and adequate M&E
2.2 Signed agreements to fund this financial mechanism between the
government and the oil and gas industry
More detailed TOR for all these posts will be developed upon inception.
Financial mechanisms Full time for 3 Reporting to the NPC, the incumbent will be part of the project‘s core technical
for PAs specialist years team. Key functions include:
Core team Be primarily responsible for: (1) the policy and regulatory screening exercise;
member (2) any legal aspect pertaining to the establishment of the conservation finance
mechanism; (3) legal and policy aspects siting agreements with industry; and
(4) the interpretation of international environmental agreements in Mauritanian
law with respect to EIA frameworks, establishment of industry standards and in
other relevant contexts for the project.
2.1 The ‗conservation financing mechanism‘ established with the necessary
legal and governance instruments to make it operational, a well defined
capitalization plan and adequate M&E
2.2 Signed agreements to fund this financial mechanism between the
government and the oil and gas industry
Capacity development Full time for 3 Reporting to the NPC, the incumbent will be part of the project‘s core technical
specialist years team. Key functions include:
Core team Be primarily responsible for component 3 (Capacity of key stakeholders in

member public sector and civil society), but equally for relevant aspects under
components 1 and 2.
3.1 Marine and coastal biodiversity awareness strengthened as well as
knowledge about the oil and gas sector for key stakeholders in public
sector and civil society
3.2 An established operational marine and coastal biodiversity monitoring
system corroborates to specifically to determine threats to coastal and
marine ecosystems and to prevent/mitigate the adverse impacts of oil and
gas development.
3.3 Capacity of key government staff strengthened to determine the economic
values of marine and coastal biodiversity and of ecosystem services
2.3 Capacity of MEDD and of eligible the CSO/NGO players to propose
conservation project under the financial mechanism and manage their
funds in connection with them is strengthened
Short Term National Refer to Table 11 The project management team will procure in the national consultancy market
Consultants below for more several key skills for enhancing implementation of the project. These short term
details consultants will assist the project team in delivering project activities and
achieving expected results. The indicative skill sets for short term consultants
include:
Environmental monitoring expert
Environmental impact assessment expert
Institutional reform expert
Public finance and planning
TOR for evaluators will be established.
Specific TOR for all these posts will be designed upon inception or when
applicable, according to the project‘s needs.
Evaluation experts As per TOR to be Standard UNDP/GEF project evaluation TOR will be used and it will be in
(national) prepared for both accordance with both UNDP‘s and GEF‘s EEG evaluation policies.
the MTE and FEV
(indicatively This will include: participate, alongside the international consultant, in the mid-
assignments will term and final evaluations of the project, in order to assess the project progress,
be of 4 weeks for achievement of results and impacts; develop draft evaluation report and discuss
each evaluation) it with the project team, government and UNDP; as necessary, participate in
discussions to realign the project time-table/logframe at the mid-term stage.

International / Regional contracting
Short Term International Refer to Table 11 The project will procure in the international and/or regional consultancy market
Consultants below for more several key skills for enhancing implementation of the project. These
details consultants will assist the project teams with several key outputs under the
project, indicatively as follows:
Protected Areas Finance specialist
Strategic Environmental Assessment specialist
Environmental monitoring specialist
Environmental economics
Fisheries specialist
Capacity development (staff & org.)
Oil and gas development offshore
TOR for the evaluator will be established in accordance with UNDP‘s and
GEF‘s evaluation policy.
Specific TOR for all these posts will be designed upon inception or when
applicable, according to the project‘s needs.
Evaluation experts As per TOR to be Standard UNDP/GEF project evaluation TOR will be used and it will be in
(international) prepared for both accordance with both UNDP‘s and GEF‘s EEG evaluation policies.
the MTE and FEV
(indicatively This will include: participate, alongside the national consultants, in the mid-
assignments will term and final evaluation of the project, in order to assess the project progress,
be of 4 weeks for achievement of results and impacts; develop draft evaluation report and discuss
each evaluation) it with the project team, government and UNDP; as necessary, participate in
discussions to realign the project time-table/logframe at the mid-term stage.
Table 11: Overview of Project Consultants per Source of Fund

Duration
* Project Posts GEF UNDP GOM GTZ # Rate Per throughout total
project
Project Core Team
N National Project Director X 1 n/a year 4 Years In-kind
I Int. Project Manager (UNDP contract) X 1 90,000 year 1 Years 90,000
I Int. Project Manager (GTZ contract) X 1 342,700 year 3 Years 1,028,100
N Legislation & policy development specialist X 1 30,000 year 4 Years 90,000
N Financial mechanisms for PAs specialist X 1 30,000 year 3 Years 90,000
N Capacity development specialist X 1 30,000 year 3 Years 90,000
N Administrative, Finance and HR X 1 20,000 year 3 Years 60,000
N Driver X 1 8,000 year 4 Years 24,000
Short term international consultants
I Protected Areas Finance specialist X 1 3,000 week 20 weeks 60,000
I Strategic Environmental Assessment specialist X 1 3,000 week 20 weeks 60,000
I Environmental monitoring specialist X 1 3,000 week 20 weeks 60,000
I Environmental economics X 1 3,000 week 20 weeks 60,000
I Fisheries specialist X 1 3,000 week 20 weeks 60,000

Duration
* Project Posts GEF UNDP GOM GTZ # Rate Per throughout total
project
I Capacity development (staff & org.) X 1 3,000 week 20 weeks 60,000
I Oil and gas development offshore X 1 3,000 week 20 weeks 60,000
I Project evaluation X 1 3,000 week 8 weeks 24,000
Short and medium term national consultants
N Environmental monitoring expert X 1 1,000 Week 20 Weeks 20,000
N Environmental impact assessment expert X 1 1,000 Week 5 Weeks 5,000
N Institutional reform expert X 1 900 Week 10 Weeks 9,000
N Public finance and planning X 1 900 Week 10 Weeks 9,000
N Project Evaluation X 1 1,000 Week 10 Weeks 10,000
Note: * I = international; N = national

PART VII: Stakeholder Involvement
Overview of Related Initiatives
243. The table below presents a summary of related initiatives funded by the GOM and several donors.
Table 12: Summary of Related Activities

Initiative Overview
PRISM II (Program de This project: (1) build up and consolidate the Government's long term
Renforcement Institutionnel institutional and technical capacity to manage the country's mineral resources,
du Secteur Minier) 2004- including social and environmental management; 2) promote private
2009, funded by the World investment in the mineral sector; and 3) improve mineral sector contribution
Bank (loan of USD 5M) to national and regional socioeconomic development. This is an additional
financing project (to PRISM I) that is implemented using the same framework
and arrangements as for the original project.
PRISM II introduces an ―oil‖ component whereby the results from the first
phase of the project in the area of strengthening the legal framework and the
environmental management instruments for the mining sector would be
applied to the ―oil‖ sector. The project supports the development of a new
hydrocarbon code, a cadastre for oil reserves and an environmental
management and information system. It also introduced a social component
by providing financial support to local communities for capacity development
and activities to generate revenues.
In the context of PRISM II, the World Bank supports the implementation of a
Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) for the offshore and
onshore hydrocarbon sector. This assessment reviewed and prioritized the
potential social and environmental impacts of the sector. Based on this
information, the SESA will identify the most vulnerable marine and coastal
zones to the development of the hydrocarbon sector; including zones to forbid
any exploration and exploitation of oil and gas such as nursery zones for fish.
Capacity development needs will also be evaluated. The objective is to
reconcile the exploitation of hydrocarbons in the short term with the
exploitation of the fishery in the long term.
ProGRN (Program de The ProGRN is one program supported by GTZ in Mauritania. Its global
Gestion durable des objective is the sustainable management of natural resources in selected areas
Ressources Naturelles) 2005- by the local organized population. A first phase was implemented from 2005
2010, funded by GTZ to 2007. A second phase is now under implementation. ProGRN is composed
of four components: (1) coordination of environmental policies through
strengthening the policy, strategic, institutional and legal frameworks aiming
at a decentralized management of natural resources; (2) decentralized
management of natural resources in the Guidimakha and Hodh el Gharbi
areas; (3) Institutional and technical support to the PNBA through the
implementation of the PNBA‘s management plan and the implementation of a
trust fund; and (4) technical support to the Senegal-Mauritania biodiversity
project.
Under the first component, the project supported the finalisation of the
forestry code and its adoption by a governmental Decree and some
methodological support to the EIA process such as the production of EIA
guide.
Under the third component, the project supported the development and the

Initiative Overview
implementation of the management plan for the park of Banc d‘Arguin as
well as the development of a trust fund that is currently underway.
PAGEP (Projet d‟Appui à la The overall objective of the project is to help the Mauritanian Government in
Gestion Pétrolière) funded by its endeavour to fight poverty through an effective management of oil
GOM and BID (USD 6M) resources and reinforcement of the strategic planning function. The project is
implemented through a tripartite partnership involving the Islamic
Development Bank (IDB), the Government of Malaysia and the Government
of Mauritania. The project aims at strengthening the relevant institutions of
the country through: (i) reinforcing the capacities of the oil sector, (ii)
strengthening the strategic planning at the macro level, and (iii) reinforcing
and readapting the vocational training system. The project involves provision
of consultancy and advisory services, training, familiarization visits,
procurement of equipment, establishment of a project coordination unit and
auditing services.
So far, the training supported by the project benefited engineers from SMH
and senior officers from the Ministry of Petrole and Energy. The project is
also supporting a study on the professional qualifications needs and job
opportunity created by the exploitation of hydrocarbons. Another study is
underway to conceive an integration scheme for the SMH within the
institutional context existing in Mauritania.
PACOBA (Projet This project aims at improving the knowledge on the PNBA by strengthening
d‟Approfondissement des the capacity of PNBA staff in information management (observatoire de
connaissances du Banc d l‟environnement) and of IMROP staff in research on ecosystems
Arguin) 2008-2010, funded by
PNBA-PNUD-GEF
Projet Appui à la gestion Based on a study conducted in 2007 to assess the feasibility of an
durable du littoral ―observatoire du littoral‖, a project to support the sustainable management of
Mauritanien funded by AFD the Mauritanian littoral was identified for about euros 7M. However, due to
the recent political changes, the project is pending. It has three components:
(1) Establish the “observatoire du littoral”: with support for
institutional strengthening, purchase of equipment and capacity
development of the staff;
(2) Strengthen the trans-boundary Senegal-Mauritania biosphere reserve:
which will be a continuation of what the government of Spain was
supporting such as environmental knowledge, socio-economic
development, institutional support and finalisation of the legal status for
the Mauritanian portion as a protected area;
(3) Support activities to protect the ―cordon dunaire‖ on the coastline
near Nouakchott.
APE (Projet Articulation The objective of this project is to strengthen the sustainable management of
Pauvreté Environment) 2007- the environment and natural resources in order to combat poverty, contribute
2008 (phase 1), 2009-2011 to economic growth and achieve the MDGs. It is implemented by the MEDD
(phase 2), funded by UNDP in collaboration with the Ministry of Economic Affairs and of Development.
and UNEP (USD 710k (phase The project seeks to integrate the environment into the national and
1) + 1.3M (phase 2) decentralized planning processes; particularly the poverty reduction strategy.
The 2nd phase started in 2009 and has the following three expected results:
Sustainable environmental and natural resources management is
improved by integrating the linkages between poverty and
environment into planning and budgeting processes at the national
level;
Linkages between poverty and environment are integrated in local
development plans for the Brakna and Assaba wilayas;

Initiative Overview
National and local capacities in planning, monitoring and evaluation
of environmental policies and integration of linkages between
poverty and environment are strengthened.
So far the project carried out several assessments and developed a series of
methodological instruments such as environmental indicators. It also created
an inter-sectoral permanent technical committee on the environment (Comité
Technique Intersectoriel Permanent sur l‟Environnement (CTIPE)) to
coordinate and monitor activities implemented by various departments
involved in environmental management and to ensure adequate consultations
for the development of environmental strategies.
PRCN (Program Régional de PRCM is a coalition of agencies for the Regional Conservation Program for
Conservation de la Zone the Coastal and Marine Zone of West Africa. It was set up on the initiative of
Côtière et Marine en Afrique the World Conservation Union - IUCN, the WWF, Wetlands International
de l‟Ouest) implemented by and the International Foundation for the Banc d‘Arguin (FIBA), in
IUCN in Mauritania and partnership with the Sub-regional Fisheries Commission (CSRP). PRCM now
funded by Netherlands represents a coalition of nearly 50 partner institutions with the aim of
coordinating conservation action directed at the coastal zone of the sub-
region‘s seaboard countries – Mauritania, Senegal, the Gambia, Guinea
Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone and Cape Verde.
The purpose of this coordination is to improve the overall relevance and

coherence of conservation actions, to pool available resources, make full use
of regional expertise, foster exchanges about the experiences, develop
research, training, communications and advocacy actions with a view to
promoting sustainable coastal zone development which societies will derive
benefit from. Priorities of the program revolve around:
The support for the establishment and strengthening of Marine
Protected Areas (MPAs)
The conservation and management of habitats and species
Fisheries management
MPAs contribution to the development of Ecotourism
Hydrocarbons and conservation
Research
Communications
The PRCM is part of IUCN‘s activities in Mauritania. IUCN‘s engagement in

the Mauritanian littoral is done under the intersectoral program ARC
(Aménagement, Remédiation, Conservation), which also includes activities to
strengthen coastal planning in Mauritania with the support for the
development of the DPALM, the necessary legislation for the protection of
the littoral, and the establishment of an ―obervatoire du littoral‖. IUCN has
also been supporting a ―Panel d‟Experts‖ independent to review the mining
and hydrocarbon activities in Mauritania (see below).
Of interest for this project, IUCN in collaboration with the PRCM initiative
and UNEP/WCMC produced a map ―biodiversity and hydrocarbons‖ with the
objectives of evaluating potential impacts of the oil and gas activities on
biodiversity and contributing to the strategic environmental assessment of the
marine and coastal economic activities.
Panel d’Experts implemented The panel d‟experts is an initiative supported by IUCN-Mauritania which has
by IUCN and funded by the following objectives:
FIBA, MAVA, AFD and Improve the response capacity of the public and private sectors to

Initiative Overview
GOM (see also “The Oil and technological and environmental risks due to the offshore and
Gas Sector in Mauritania” onshore oil and gas activities;
section in Context of this Improve the environmental legislation for the development of this
project) sector;
Strengthen management and coordination capacity of the main
governmental bodies in charge of negotiating oil and gas activities
and monitor the implementation of these activities;
Stimulate national development through a better sectoral and
geographical sharing of the public investments made and funded by
the oil and gas revenue.
The report published by the panel in April 2009 indicates the weak capacity
of the government to regulate, control and coordinate the oil and gas
activities.
PRECASP (Projet pour le The objective of the project is to develop the institutional capacity and good
renforcement des capacités du governance within the government administration and develop a true
secteur public) 2006-2009, participation of stakeholders (private sector, NGOs and civil society) within
funded by the World Bank the context of implementing effectively the priorities of the poverty reduction
(USD 13M) strategy. The PRECASP project focuses on the following components:
Improvement of public finance management aims to increase
transparency and efficiency of Public Finance Management by the
creation of management tools and human resources management
capacity.
Mainstreaming environment into development management,
facilitates the integration of environmental concerns in development,
through harmonization of various sector strategies and existing texts,
to clearly establish the central character of environmental concerns
in the political domain.
Support to local development supports the implementation of
reforms aimed at increasing decentralization and de-concentration.
It supports the Directorate of Territorial Administration, the General
Directorate of Local Governments, information, education and
communication activities, and pilot operations in two cities for local
development management.
Improvement of human resources management in public
administrations strengthens structures for management of the civil
servants, maximizing utilization of the State‘s human resources,
developing management and information tools, and training.
Promoting economically, This project aims to promote the environmentally and socially responsible
socially and environmentally development of the hydrocarbon sector in the PRCM countries (Mauritania,
responsible off shore oil and Senegal, The Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone) and reflects the
gas development in West priorities expressed by PRCM partners during PRCM Phase 1. It is oriented
Africa implemented by WWF along 3 strategic axes: Capacity Strengthening, Risk Prevention and
and IUCN with help from the Management, and Public Awareness, transparency, and equity.
PRCM Coordination Unit and
funded by the PRCM project The basic premise of the project is that meeting the challenges presented by
(2009-2011) offshore hydrocarbon development depends on valorising existing
experiences and building informed partnerships between government, civil
society and industry. Key activities include:
Skills development of governmental, non-governmental, and
research institutions, including the development of integrated
strategic plans, harmonizing national legislation in member
countries, setting joint environmental standards, training of technical

Initiative Overview
staff and graduate students;
Developing strategies and tools to prevent and manage risks:
Designation of a regional PSSA (Particularly Sensitive Sea Area),
Sensitivity mapping, Strategic Environmental Assessment(s), Spill
response planning, Economic planning, etc.;
Building public awareness concerning potential risks and benefits:
production of literature and films, information for journalists,
organizing stakeholder workshops and seminars;
Promoting transparency and equity: Establishing multi-sectoral fora,
national level seminars, supporting regional network to exchange
information and experiences, promoting relevant international
instruments (e.g. Publish what you Pay, Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative)
244. The PPG phase included consultations with the project‘s key stakeholders. Consultants hired
during the PPG phase met with Stakeholders, which was followed by exchange of emails to discuss
issues, verify facts and strategize the project. In addition, several bilateral meetings were held between the
team which coordinated the design of the project, donors and key stakholders. A final workshop to
validate the MSP was organized on October 20, 2009 in Nouakchott with the participation of all project
stakholders. A draft MSP was presented at this workshop for discussion and validation. Overall, the
project design engaged stakeholders through a participatory process, in line with UNDP‘s and GEF‘s
requirements.
245. A full Stakeholder Involvement Plan will be prepared upon project inception. For the sake of
information and reference, the project‘s key stakeholders and other initiatives are listed in the table below.
Table 13: Coordination and collaboration between project and related initiatives
INITIATIVES / INTERVENTIONS HOW COLLABORATION WITH THE PROJECT WILL BE ENSURED
Directorate of Protected Areas and National Executing Agency (NEA), which will appoint a National Project
Littoral Director (NPD). The NEA will be responsible for the supervision of the
project, production of outputs and management of UNDP funds at the national
level.
MEDD - Ministry of the As the ministry supervising the DAPL, it is the ministry responsible for the
Environment and Sustainable implementation of the project on behalf of the GOM. It will ensure the
Development participation of the GOM into the project.
Ministry of Petroleum and Energy Provide information, knowledge and expertise related to the development of
the oil and gas sector. They will play a leading role in the fostering the
establishment of biodiversity standards by the industry.
Oil and Gas Industry, including Provide expertise related to the development of the oil and gas sector.
international players and the Societé The possible role of industry is codified in several of the proposed activities,
Mauritanianne des Hydrocarbures particularly under Component 2 of the project. Because of the prevailing
(SMH) political situation in Mauritania throughout project development, the
industry‘s response to PPG consultations has been cautious and slow. During
project inception there is a need to initiate a much more thorough industry
engagement work. National and international consultants, including members
of the project core team will be involved in it under the leadership of the
Project Manager. The industry assessment carried out during the PPG showed
that some companies have a more open attitude than others. A more strategic
approach will need to be devised for industry engagement work during the
MSP implementation if key industry are to be on-board the project.

INITIATIVES / INTERVENTIONS HOW COLLABORATION WITH THE PROJECT WILL BE ENSURED
Directorate of the Marine Provide information, knowledge and expertise related to the regulation of the
Commercial (Direction de la Marine marine commercial operations
Marchande)
Administration of the National Park Provide biodiversity protection and conservation expertise and financial
of Banc d‘Arguin (PNBA) mechanism of biodiversity through trust fund expertise
Administration of the National Park Provide biodiversity protection and conservation expertise
of Diawling (PND)
IUCN-Mauritania and Panel Pètrole Provide information, knowledge and expertise related to conservation.
WWF WAMER Implement a few joint activities as suggested in the co-financing letters. IUCN
and WWF will also be the focal point for the PRCM programme‘s
collaboration with the project.
Other local NGOs and CSOs Consultation of communities and provision of expertise.
Academia British Columbia University stated its interest in collaborating with the project
246. In order to emphasize a participatory process for the implementation of this project it is
recommended the creation of three Thematic Working Groups (WG) (one per outcome). These WGs will
help guide the implementation, build consensus, share decisions and validate process/results. Each WG
should include key representatives from related organizations, chaired by the key organization and
coordinated by the Project Manager. However, they should not include more than 10 participants and
meet monthly or quarterly (and on an as-needed basis) to validate work plans/activities, consultations and
findings. Three WGs are proposed:
 Marine and Coastal Biodiversity Conservation Policy and Legislation WG: to oversee
project activities with regard to mainstreaming biodiversity conservation into policies and
legislation regulating the development of the oil and gas sector;
 Financial Mechanism for Marine and Coastal Biodiversity Conservation WG: to oversee
project activities related with the identification of best practices in term of financial
mechanisms to finance biodiversity conservation activities and the set-up of the most
appropriate mechanism in the context of Mauritania;
 Capacity Development for Marine and Coastal Biodiversity Conservation WG: to oversee
project activities focusing on developing the capacity of stakeholders and their
organizations to better take into account biodiversity conservation in the development of
the oil and gas sector; including a higher capacity to monitor biodiversity and assess its
economic value.
247. Additionally, the project will work in close collaboration with related existing initiatives. Several
intiatives were underway in Mauritania during the PPG phase and the implementation of this project will
seek synergy with these other initiatives, building on their achievements (see Section IV-Part III
Overview of Related Initiatives).

Project Annexes
Annex 1: Multilateral Environmental Agreements by which Mauritania is

bound
The table below presents multilateral conventions ratified and signed par Mauritania and related to the
protection of marine and coastal biodiversity and the marine environment in general.
Table 14: International Conventions Signed-Ratified by Mauritania

Entrée en vigueur
Année
Convention Objet en Mauritanie
d’adoption
Ratifiée / signée
Ressources naturelles
UNCBD 1992 Diversité Biologique 1992 / 1996
Commerce international des espèces de faune et
Convention CITES 1975 1998
flore sauvage menacées d‘extinction
Agenda 21 1992 Développement durable n/a
Zones humides d‘importance internationale
Convention RAMSAR 1971 1983
particulièrement comme habitats des oiseaux d‘eau
Protocole amendement
Zones humides d‘importance internationale
de la Convention des 1989
particulièrement comme habitats des oiseaux d‘eau
Zones humides
Statuts de l‘Union Internationale pour la
révisé
Statuts UICN Conservation de la Nature et des Ressources
1996
Naturelles
Sur le commerce des espèces migratoires
Convention de Bonn 1978 1998
d‘animaux sauvages
Convention UNESCO 1972 Patrimoine Mondial et Humanité 1981
Convention africaine sur la conservation de la Signé pas encore
Convention d‘Alger 1968
nature et des ressources naturelles en vigueur
mesures de conservation des tortues marines de la
Protocole d‘accord 1999 1999
côté Atlantique de l‘Afrique
UNCCD 1994 Sur la lutte contre la désertification 1996
Atmosphère
Convention de Vienne 1985 Protection de la couche d‘ozone
Sur les substances qui appauvrissent la couche
Protocole de Montréal 1987 1994/ 2005
d‘ozone
UNFCCC 1994 Changement Climatique 1996
Protocole de Kyoto Sur les changements climatiques 2005
Convention de Stockholm polluants organiques persistants 2001 / 2005
Navigation
Convention des Nations
Unies - UNCLOS 1982 droit de la mer 1996
Montego Bay
du 17
Convention internationale
Juillet sur les normes de formation des gens de mer) 1995
de Londres
1978
Convention OMI sur l‘Organisation Marine Internationale 1996
prévention de la pollution des mers
Convention de Londres 1972
résultant de l‘immersion de déchets

Entrée en vigueur
Année
Convention Objet en Mauritanie
d’adoption
Ratifiée / signée
prévention de la
Convention de MARPOL*
pollution de l‘environnement marin par les navires - 1998
73/78 Annexe V
déchets
1997
Convention de MARPOL* Prévention de la pollution par les navires : eaux
approbation
73/78 Annexe IV usées
d‗acceptation
Convention de MARPOL* Prévention de la pollution par les navires : produits
1998
73/78 Annexe III dangereux transportés avec conditionnement
Convention Internationale la préparation, la lutte et la coopération en matière
1990 2000
convention OPRC 90 * de pollution par les hydrocarbures
Convention de Londres
convention SOLAS - code sécurité et la sûreté des ports et des navires 1998
ISPS),
Convention de Londres responsabilité civile pour les dommages dus à la
1969 1996
CLC pollution par les hydrocarbures.
Convention internationale
sur le responsabilité civile Amendement de la convention de 1969 sur la
pour les préjudices 1992 méthode de calcul de la limitation de la 1996
résultant de la pollution responsabilité
par les hydrocarbures
Limitation des transports des déchets dangereux
Convention de Bâle 1989 1996
transfrontaliers et sur leur élimination
The Convention covers the marine environment,
coastal zones and related inland waters falling Signed but not
Convention d‘Abidjan 1981
within the jurisdiction of the States of the Western yet ratified
African Region, from Mauritania to South Africa.
Interdiction d‘importer des déchets dangereux et le
Convention de Bamako contrôle de leurs mouvements transfrontaliers en 1991
Afrique
création d'un Fonds International d'Indemnisation
Convention internationale pour les dommages dus à la pollution par les
1971 1996
FIPOL 92 hydrocarbures
OPRC 90, CLC 92, et FIPOL 82
Convention sur les réglementations internationales
Convention 1995
pour éviter les collisions en mer

Annex 2: Key Results of the Oil and Gas Industry Assessment
The table below presents a summary of international and national oil and gas companies operating in
Mauritania with information updated as of January 2009.
Table 15: Summary of Companies Involved in the Oil and Gas Sector in Mauritania
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Date 18 – 36 mois 3 ans 3 ans
Compagnies
Bloc signature Couts Couts Couts
opérateurs Obligations Obligations Obligations
[1] du équivalents équivalents équivalents
[2] minimales minimales minimales
contrat estimés à estimés à estimés à
de travaux de travaux de travaux
USD USD USD
Bassin offshore
2 TULLOW OIL
1,250,000
DANA 1,250 km 1 forage 1 forage
1 1999 ou 400 5,000,000
Petroleum sismique 2,000 m 2,000 m 5,000,000
USD/km
1,250,000
DANA 1,250 km 1 forage 1 forage
7 1999 ou 400 5,000,000
Petroleum sismique 2,000 m 2,000 m 5,000,000
USD/km
1,000 km
1 forage 1 forage
11 IPG 2002 2D / 3D 1,000,000
3,000 m -- 3,000 m --
sismique
6 PETRONAS 2006 Pas d‟info. Pas d‟info. Pas d‟info. Pas d‟info. Pas d‟info. Pas d‟info.
en cours
18 ENERGEM de
signature
Bassin onshore
Ta 13 CNPCIM
Ta 21 CNPCIM
500 km 1 forage 1 forage
Ta 9 REPSOL Mai 2006 2,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
sismique 2D 2,000 m 2,000 m
500 km 1 forage 1 forage
Ta 10 REPSOL Mai 2006 2,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
sismique 2D 2,000 m 2,000 m
2,500 km
gravi
1 forage 1 forage
Ta 7 TOTAL Jan. 2005 /aeromag ou 2,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
2,000 m 2,000 m
500 km
sismique 2D
2,500km
gravi
1 forage 1 forage
Ta 8 TOTAL Jan. 2005 /aeromag ou 2,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000
2,000 m 2,000 m
500 km
sismique 2D
gravi
/aeromag ou 1 forage 1 forage
Ta 5 WINTERSHALL Oct. 2005 2,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
500 km 2,000 m 2,000 m
sismique 2D
gravi
/aeromag ou 1 forage 1 forage
Ta 6 WINTERSHALL Oct. 2005 2,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000
500 km 2,000 m 2,000 m
sismique 2D
Retraitement
100,000 Sismique Sismique
sismique
Ta 11 BARAKA Mar.2004 et 1 forage 5,000,000 et 1 forage 5,000,000
Gravi/
1,900,000 2,000 m 2,000 m
aeromag
Retraitement Sismique Sismique
100,000
BARAKA Mar 2004 sismique et 1 forage et 1 forage
Ta 12 1,900,000 5,000,000 5,000,000
Gravi/ 2,000 m 2,000 m

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Date 18 – 36 mois 3 ans 3 ans
Compagnies
Bloc signature Couts Couts Couts
opérateurs Obligations Obligations Obligations
[1] du équivalents équivalents équivalents
[2] minimales minimales minimales
contrat estimés à estimés à estimés à
de travaux de travaux de travaux
USD USD USD
aeromag
2,500km
gravi gravi
ZAVER
Ta 29 Fev.2006 aeromag ou 2,000,000 1 forage 4,000,000 1 forage
Petroleum 4,000,000
500 km 2,000 m 2,000 m
sismique 2D
2,500km
Ta 1, gravi
Ta30, SMH & Nov.2007 aeromag ou 2,000,000 1 forage 4,000,000 1 forage
4,000,000
Ta31,Ta SONATRACH 500 km 2,000 m 2,000 m
35 sismique 2D
Ta22
en cours
Ta39
de
Ta40Ta SMH
signature
54
en cours
GLOBAL
Ta 52 de
STEEL
signature
Notes: [1] For better references, the colors used for each company in the table above are the same colors as those used in Project
Map 3 (thumbnail figure shown below) in Section IV, Part II. [2] For all companies, a Production Sharing Contract is one block,
while for the SMH & Sonatrach, one contract is signed for 4 blocks (Ta 1, Ta 30, Ta 31 and Ta 35) and another contract also on
the SMH for 4 other blocks TA22, Ta 39, Ta 40 and Ta 54.
Figure 8: Thumbnail of Project Map 3
Note: See Section IV – Part II for full size map

Table 16: Industry Profile Matrix with focus on EIA
COMPANY * CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY EIA
Petronas According to its website, Petronas, maintains various social, Besides the EIS prepared by the Australian Woodside, from which Petronas acquired
environmental and community projects, partnering with non-profit the assets in Mauritania, no new EIA report has been prepared by Petronas in
organizations, geared to help the community gain from economic and connection with the current production in the Chingetti and exploration activities in
social opportunities and a better quality of life. None of these programs other neighboring fields and blocks. (See paragraph 14 for more info.)
are however being implemented in Mauritania. Among all of Petrona‘s In spite of queries to the company during the PPG phase it was not possible to obtain
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programs, the majority of which more information on the EIA process vis-à-vis the Chingetti field, or even other
are in Malaysia, only one relates to the environment and aims at fields, particularly with respect to the environmental management plan for the on-
educating your people on environment and biodiversity through going operations that should be under implementation now.
publications and training sessions. The Chinguetti development project is operated by Petronas and located in 800
metres of water. The development involved a gross capital expenditure of over
US$720 million and comprised twelve wells - seven production wells, five wells for
water re-injection and one for gas re-injection. Production, which commenced in late
February 2006, is via the Berge Helene FPSO.
Dana The company has a HSE Policy (Health, Safety and Environment) that An EIA report was produced in August 2009 in connection with the exploration of
Petroleum is implemented by a department within the company. Dana also has a the Comoran field (in block 7 near Banc d‘Arguin). The company does not explicitly
CSR policy and programs. Among those, Dana maintains a Carbon mention in the EIA report the existence of an environmental policy. Biodiversity is
Disclosure Project, where it indicates to being ―generally a non- considered by the company through the description of the initial state of the marine
operator of the assets in which it holds interests, so the carbon environment and the area affected by the project mentioning threats and risks to
emissions over which the Company has direct control are relatively ecosystem components. Protected areas and sensitive areas were identified in the
limited.” None of its CSR programs overseas are in Mauritania. project scope. Risk and threat assessment to biodiversity is part of the EIA To further
integrate the environmental dimension in its activities, Dana held in July 2009 a
public consultation session in Mamghar with local stakeholders: fishermen, local and
informal representatives of the people, Banc d'Arguin NP Authority, and
representative from the Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Energy and Oil.
In blocks 1,7 & 8 Dana had performed different exploration projects (drilling) in
different wells Pelican-1 (2003), Faucon-1 (2005) Flamant-1 (2006), Aigrette-1
(2006). Dana also carried out a bathymetric survey (2008). No EIA report submitted
for any of these projects. However a seismic survey was conducted (2008) for which
an EIA has been performed and report submitted.
Tullow Oil The company‘s website indicates that Tullow Oil has a CSR Program Neither through desk research nor during PPG in-country consultations was it
and a HSE policy. The latter has a stated goal ―to protect people, possible to determine whether EIA was carried out for Tullow Oil‘s opearations in
minimize harm to the environment, integrate biodiversity Mauritania.
considerations, and reduce disruption to our neighboring communities‖.
Particularly on biodiversity, the company states that ―The management
of Biodiversity is an important consideration in the development of any
long-term business, particularly for an operating Oil and Gas
Company. At Tullow we integrate Biodiversity consideration into our
EHS policy, planning and practice.‖
Tullow‘s CSR program involved 120 projects in 2007 across 19
countries with an announced spending of US$0.9 million (£0.5 million)
on social and community development projects.
CNPCIM In terms of environmental records, it is reported that in 2005, there were In May 2006, the company carried out EIA for the Heron -1 field in block 20, before

COMPANY * CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY EIA
China explosions at a CNPC owned petrochemical plant causing six deaths, a drilling. The EIA has followed the national consultation procedure. Although general
National mass evacuation, and a massive oil spill over the Songhua River. It was in some parts, the report presents information on relevant environmental components
Petroleum not possible to verify if CNCIM has either a CSR policy/program or a of the drilling site with environmental mitigation measures.
HSE policy/program. The report contains an environmental management plan that addresses project
Corporation
impacts. The plan also introduces a comprehensive plan of prevention and anti
International eruption, a safety plan and emergency response, a compliance plan and
/ Mauritania environmental monitoring plan. However, Panel Pètrole pointed out to issues with
waste, abandoned of the field without properly decommissioning and groundwater
quality.
Energem The Board has adopted a written code of conduct as a primary source of n/a
ethics, setting the standards required of employees, management and the
Board of Directors, as the Company conducts its affairs. The Code of
conduct, which covers both CSR and HSE aspects. CSR programs are
very modest and limited to water provision one to community.

Annex 3: Global Significance of the Banc d’Arguin-Cap Blanc Complex
The Banc d‘Arguin National Park is part of a number of interacting ecosystems forming one of the
world‘s most productive coastal and marine region. This particular environment represents a rare example
of desert-ocean inter-penetration. The desert progressively disappears into a shallow marine zone where
ancient estuaries have created immense silty habitats intersected by water channels and covered with
broad expanses of aquatic plants such as Zostera spp; Cymodocea spp and Halodules spp forming partly
exundated seagrass beds at low tide. This exceptional coastal ecosystem is permanently influenced by a
local marine upwelling, which brings cold and nutrient rich waters to the surface. The simultaneous
presence of the xeric herbaceous plant community and the important upwelling in the region support a
high biological productivity and explains the extremely high abundance of fish, coastal birds,
invertebrates and marine mammals.
Associated with the silt habitat is the invertebrate fauna which occupies a crucial role in the food chain
linking the primary producers and higher consumers.
The fish communities of the Banc d‘Arguin are known to be rich in pelagic species, but are poorly
documented. Migrating stocks of yellow mullet (Mugil cephalus), various species of sharks
(Carcharhinus sp., Rhizoprionodon acutus, Sphyrna sp.) and rays are subjected to important fluctuations
in abundance. This naturally occurring phenomenon is apparently linked to the alternating cold and warm
seasons and species specific reproductive cycles. Some important fish species spawn and live their
vulnerable juvenile years within the Banc d‘Arguin National Park waters.
Marine mammals are particularly well-represented in the Banc d‘Arguin National Park. The great dolphin
(Turciops truncatus) is frequently observed along the coastline and is sometimes a more or less voluntary
partner of the Imraguen fisherman who fish for mulet. Two other dolphin species, the Atlantic humpback
dolphin and the Guinean dolphin (Souza teuszii), as well as the orca (Orcinus orcas) are also found within
the Park waters. The satellite reserve established at the tip of Cap Blanc allows the Banc d‘Arguin
National Park to follow conservation efforts made for the protection of the monk seal (Monachus
monachus) colony, one of the most threatened species in the world.
Many marine turtle species are found in the Banc d‘Arguin National Park. These include the green turtle
(Chelonia mydas), the leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) and occasionally the loggerhead turtle
(Caretta caretta) and the hawksbill turtle (Erethmochelis imbricata). The capture of already banded
turtles confirms a relationship between the populations found in Mauritania and breeding populations in
Guinea-Bissau to the south.
The avifauna undisputedly constitutes the most visible group of animals in the Banc d‘Arguin National
Park. Its Palearctic shorebird community migrates progressively to West Africa for the winter season after
breeding in northern Europe and Russia. Overall, more than 2,3 million birds will stay in the Banc
d‘Arguin National Park between October and March each year. The extraordinarily high number of birds
which find plentiful food and shelter during the winter season indicates the incredible productivity of the
ecosystems in the Banc d‘Arguin National Park. Similarly, throughout the year, the park is host to a large
number of breeding waterfowl species who select small islands in the southern area. Cormorants, Caspian
terns and gulls share the site with gray herons, egrets, greater flamingos and spoonbills. An estimated 30
to 40,000 breeding pairs are found nesting in the park each year.

The perennial vegetation of the terrestrial section of the Banc d‘Arguin National Park most frequently
follows former hydrographic networks (wadi beds). Highly specific ecotypes are located in the littoral
fringe, with biodiversity adapted to the local conditions (halophilic species adapted to the high salinity
levels) Big game species have largely disappeared as a combined result of drought and unmanaged
hunting prior to the Park‘s creation. The golden jackal, striped hyena and dorcas gazelle are still found in
the Banc d‘Arguin National Park. The small remnant population of dorcas gazelles is established on Tidra
Island:
The global significance of the biodiversity of the Banc d‘Arguin National Park has been recognized
worldwide. It was declared a Wetland of International Importance (Ramsar Convention) in 1982 and, a
World Heritage Site in relation to UNESCO‘s Man and the Biosphere Program (MAB) in 1989
Biogeographical characteristics of the Banc d‘Arguin National Park converge to turn this habitat into a
refuge for numerous terrestrial and marine animal species. This being said, as in the rest of Mauritania,
big game desert species have been reduced considerably in numbers in the last decades due in particular
to unmanaged hunting and persistent droughts. Even though the oryx and ostrich populations have been
practically eradicated, a remnant population of dorcas gazelle survives. Predators like jackals and stripped
hyenas and to a lesser degree, foxes and fennecs, have avoided extinction at the cost of changing their
food habits.
Figure 9: Graphic Representation of the upwelling around Banc d‟Arguin and Cap Blanc

GEF-4 Tracking Tool for GEF BD SO2: Mainstreaming Biodiversity Conservation in Production Landscapes/Seascapes and Sectors
Annex 4: GEF-4 SO2 Tracking Tools

This section presents the GEF-4 Tracking Tools for Strategic Objective 2 (SO2), including an initial
application of the Financial Sustainability Scorecard for National Systems for Protected Areas developed
by UNDP.
GEF Tracking Tools in GEF-4 Projects –

For SO-2
for project
Partnership to Mainstream Marine and Coastal Biodiversity

into Oil and Gas Sector Development in Mauritania
Government of Mauritania
Executing Agency: Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development (MEDD)
United Nations Development Program (UNDP)
UNDP GEF PIMS no. 3700
Table of Contents
I. Project General Information

II. Project Landscape Seascape Coverage
III. Management Practices Applied
IV. Market Transformation
V. Policy and Regulatory Frameworks
VI. Other Impacts
VII. Financial Sustainability Scorecard for National Systems for Protected
Areas

I. PROJECT GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Project Name: Partnership to Mainstream Marine and Coastal Biodiversity

into Oil and Gas Sector Development in Mauritania
2. Project Type (MSP or FSP): MSP
3. Project ID (GEF): 3576
4. Project ID (IA): PIMS No. 3700
5. Implementing Agency: UNDP
6. Country: Mauritania
Name of reviewers completing tracking tool and completion dates

Name Title Agency
CEO Endorsement [1] Jean-Joseph
[1] Consultant [1] for UNDP
(November 2009) Bellamy
Project Mid-term n/a n/a n/a
Final
Evaluation/project n/a n/a n/a
completion
7. Project duration: Planned: 4 years Actual: n/a years
8. Lead Project Executing Agency:

Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development (MEDD)
9. GEF Strategic Program:

[primary] Strengthening the Policy & Regulatory Framework for Mainstreaming Biodiversity (SO2- SP4)
[with a contribution to] Sustainable Financing of Protected Area Systems at the National Level (SO1-SP 1)
10. Production sectors and/or ecosystem services directly targeted by project53:
Sector Targeted
Agriculture
Fisheries S
Forestry
Tourism S
Mining
Oil P
Transportation
Other (please specify)
II. PROJECT LANDSCAPE/SEASCAPE COVERAGE
11. a. What is the extent (in hectares) of the landscape or seascape where the project will directly or
indirectly contribute to biodiversity conservation or sustainable use of its components?
53
“P” for sectors that are primarily and directly targeted by the project, and “S” for those that are secondary or incidentally
affected by the project.

Targets and Timeframe Achievement

Achievement at
Foreseen at at Mid-term
Final Evaluation
project start Evaluation of
of Project
Project Coverage Project
Landscape/seascape54 area
165,338 km2
directly55 covered by the project n/a n/a
(EEZ area)
(ha)
Landscape/seascape area
700,000 sq km
indirectly56 covered by the n/a n/a
(all oil blocks)
project (ha)
Explanation for indirect coverage numbers:
The project will strengthen the capacity of the government and civil society to properly address the threats
on marine and coastal biodiversity due to the offshore exploration and exploitation of oil and gas. The
fundamental principle is to allow the development of the oil and gas sector without jeopardizing the
quality of biodiversity in the marine and coastal environment of Mauritania; hence protecting and
conserving the marine and coastal environment in the EEZ area over the long term.
11. b. Are there Protected Areas within the landscape/seascape covered by the project? If so, names these
PAs, their IUCN or national PA category, and their extent in hectares.
IUCN and/or national Extent in

Name of Protected Areas
category of PA hectares of PA
1. Parc national du Banc d‘Arguin (PNBA) II 1,200,000 ha
2. Parc national du Diawling (PND) II 16,000 ha
11. c. Within the landscape/seascape covered by the project, is the project implementing payment for
environmental service schemes? If so, please complete the table below.
Targets and Achievement at Mid-term Achievement at Final

Foreseen at Project Start
Timeframe Evaluation of Project Evaluation of Project
Coverage Payments Payments Payments
Extent in Extent in Extent in
/Environmental generated generated generated
Service hectares hectares hectares
(US$) (US$) (US$)
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
54
For projects working in seascapes (large marine ecosystems, fisheries etc.) please provide coverage figures and include
explanatory text as necessary if reporting in hectares is not applicable or feasible.
55
Direct coverage refers to the area that is targeted by the project‘s site intervention. For example, a project may be
mainstreaming biodiversity into floodplain management in a pilot area of 1,000 hectares that is part of a much larger floodplain
of 10,000 hectares.
56
Using the example in footnote above, the same project may, for example, ―indirectly‖ cover or influence the remaining 9,000
hectares of the floodplain through promoting learning exchanges and training at the project site as part of an awareness raising
and capacity building strategy for the rest of the floodplain. Please explain the basis for extrapolation of indirect coverage when
completing this part of the table.

III. MANAGEMENT PRACTICES APPLIED
12.a. Within the scope and objectives of the project, please identify in the table below the management
practices employed by project beneficiaries that integrate biodiversity considerations and the area of
coverage of these management practices. Please also note if a certification system is being applied and
identify the certification system being used. Note: this could range from farmers applying organic
agricultural practices, forest management agencies managing forests per Forest Stewardship Council
(FSC) guidelines or other forest certification schemes, artisanal fisherfolk practicing sustainable fisheries
management, or industries satisfying other similar agreed international standards, etc.
Name of
certification
Specific system being Achievement at Achievement
Area of coverage
management used (insert NA Mid-term at Final
foreseen at start of
practices that if no Evaluation of Evaluation of
project
integrate BD certification Project Project
system is being
applied)
1. n/a n/a
2.
3…
IV. MARKET TRANSFORMATION
13. For those projects that have identified market transformation as a project objective, please
describe the project's ability to integrate biodiversity considerations into the mainstream economy by
measuring the market changes to which the project contributed.
Please complete per the objectives and specifics of the project.
Name of the market Market Market Market

that the project condition condition at condition at
Unit of measure of
seeks to affect at the start midterm final
market Impact
(sector and sub- of the evaluation evaluation of
sector) project of project the project
n/a n/a n/a

V. POLICY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS
For those projects that have identified addressing policy, legislation, regulations, and their implementation as project objectives, please complete the
following series of questions: 14a, 14b, 14c.
14. a. Please complete this table at CEO endorsement for each sector that is a primary or a secondary focus of the project. Please answer YES or NO to
each statement under the sectors that are a focus of the project.
Sector
Agriculture Fisheries Forestry Tourism Mining Oil
Statement: Please answer YES or NO for each sector that is a
focus of the project.
Biodiversity considerations are mentioned in sector policy NO NO NO
Biodiversity considerations are mentioned in sector policy
NO NO NO
through specific legislation
Regulations are in place to implement the legislation NO NO NO
The regulations are under implementation NO NO NO
The implementation of regulations is enforced NO NO NO
Enforcement of regulations is monitored NO NO NO
14. b . Please complete this table at the project mid-term for each sector that is a primary or a secondary focus of the project. Please answer YES or
NO to each statement under the sectors that are a focus of the project.
Sector
Agriculture Fisheries Forestry Tourism Mining Oil
Statement: Please answer YES or NO for each sector that is a
Regulations are in place to implement the legislation
The regulations are under implementation
The implementation of regulations is enforced
Enforcement of regulations is monitored
14. c. Please complete this table at project closure for each sector that is a primary or a secondary focus of the project.

Please answer YES or NO to each statement under the sectors that are a focus of the project.
Sector
Statement: Please answer YES or NO for each sector that is a Agriculture Fisheries Forestry Tourism Mining Oil
Regulations are in place to implement the legislation
The regulations are under implementation
The implementation of regulations is enforced
Enforcement of regulations is monitored

All projects please complete this question at the project mid-term evaluation and at the final
evaluation, if relevant:
14. d. Within the scope and objectives of the project, has the private sector undertaken voluntary
measures to incorporate biodiversity considerations in production? If yes, please provide brief
explanation and specifically mention the sectors involved.
An example of this could be a mining company minimizing the impacts on biodiversity by using low-
impact exploration techniques and by developing plans for restoration of biodiversity after exploration as
part of the site management plan.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
VI. OTHER IMPACTS
16. Please briefly summarize other impacts that the project has had on mainstreaming biodiversity that
have not been recorded above.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
VII. FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY SCORECARD FOR NATIONAL SYSTEMS OF

PROTECTED AREAS
Financial Scorecard - Part I – Overall Financial Status of the Protected Areas System
Basic Protected Area System Information

Describe the PA system and what it includes:
Mauritania‘s PA system is composed of two areas, all of which are coastal-marine, which can be
regarded as complexes: (1) The Banc d‘Arguin-Cap Banc Complex in the north and (2) The
Diawling-Djudje Complex, which is a transfrontier biosphere reserve. In terms on national gazettal,
the core areas are two national parks: the Parc national du Banc d‘Arguin (managed by the national
park authority PNBA), IUCN category II, with 1,200,000 ha, and the Parc national du Diawling
(managed by a separate national park authority PND), also IUCN category II, with 16,000 ha. Both
are ramsar sites and the Banc d‘Arguin is also a world heritage site.
Number Total
Protected Areas System Comments
of sites hectares
National protected areas 2 1,216,000ha Includes the Parc National du Banc
d‘Arguin (PNBA) and the Parc National
du Diawling (PND)
National protected areas co- -

Number Total
Protected Areas System Comments
of sites hectares
managed by NGOs
State/municipal protected
-
areas
Others (define) -
Financial Analysis of the Baseline Year X59 Year Comments

Protected Area System year57 (US$) X+560
(US$)58 (forecast)
(US$)61
Available Finances 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
(1) Total annual central government budget allocated to SEPA management (excluding donor funds and revenues generated (4) and
retained within the PA system)
- national protected areas 2,033,286 2,333,286 2, 233,286 2,233,286 2, 133,286 2, 233,286 Govt contribution grows
according with
contribution in PPG
project
- national areas co-managed by 0 0 0 0 0 0
NGOs
- state/municipal protected areas 0 0 0 0 0 0
- others 0 0 0 0 0 0
(2) Total annual government budget provided for PA management (including donor funds, loans, debt-for nature swaps)
- national protected areas 2,772,764 3,322, 764 3,922,764 4,922,764 5,472,764 4,922,764 Contribution of donor is
expected through bi and
multilateral partnership
like NGOs partners of PAs
and trust fund
- national areas co-managed by 0 0
NGOs
- state/municipal protected areas 0 0
- others 0 0
(3) Total annual revenue generation from PAs, broken down by source
a. Tourism - total 10,000 12,000 14,400 17,280 20,736 24,883
- Tourism taxes 0 0 0 0 0
- Entrance fees
- Additional user fees 0
- Concessions 0 0
b. Payments for ecosystem 0 0
services (PES)
c. Other (specify each type of 0 0
revenue generation mechanism)
57
The baseline year refers to the year the Scorecard was completed for the first time and remains fixed. Insert year eg 2007.
58
Insert in footnote the local currency and exchange rate to US$ and date of rate [ex. 1.22 as of 9 September 2008]
59
X refers to the year the Scorecard is completed and should be inserted (eg 2008). For the first time the Scorecard is completed
X will be the same as the baseline year. For subsequent years insert an additional column to present the data for each year the
Scorecard is completed.
60
Year X+5 refers to forecasting annual data for five years in the future from the year the Scorecard is being completed. The
data should be for one year (eg is year X is 2008 then the data should be presented for year 2013). The data would be based on
long-term financial plans. If no financial planning has been done then this column can be left blank.
61
Insert in footnote the local currency and exchange rate to US$ and date of rate [ex. 1.22 as of 9 September 2008]

Financial Analysis of the Baseline Year X Year X+5 Comments

Protected Area System year (US$) (forecast)
(US$) (US$)
(4) Total annual revenues by PA type62
- national protected areas 10,000 12,000 14,400 17,280 20,736 24,883 Revenue generating from
PAs is expected growing
(20 % per year with exten-
sion of taxes and promo-
ting of PES
- national areas co-managed by 0 0 0 0 0 0
NGOs
- others 0 0 0 0 0 0
(5) Percentage of PA generated revenues retained in the PA system for re-investment63

0 0 0 0 0 0 Generated revenues are
lightly reinvest because of
there are very low now
(6) Total finances available to the PA system
[government budget plus donor support etc (2)] plus [total annual revenues (4) multiplied by percentage of PA generated revenues
retained in the PA system for re-investment (5)]
4,816,05 3,334,764 6,170,450 7,173,33 7,626,786 7,180,933
0 0
Costs and Financing Needs 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
(7) Total annual expenditure for PAs (operatingand investment costs) 64
- national protected areas 4,816,05 3,334,764 6,170,450 7,173,33 7,626,786 7,180,933 Costs concerned
0 0 Bandarguin et Diawling
PAs within integrated
projects
- national protected areas co- 0 0 0 0 0 0
managed by NGOs
- others 0 0 0 0 0 0
(8) Estimation of financing needs

A. Estimated financing needs 4,816,050 3,334,764 6,170,450 7,173,330 7,626,786 7,180,933 Basic management costs
for basic management costs and concer-ned both the 2 PAs
investments to be covered within participation of
Govt and co-financing
B. Estimated financing needs NA NA NA NA NA NA

for optimal management costs
and investments to be covered
(9) Annual financing gap (financial needs – available finances)65

A. Net actual annual 0
surplus/deficit66
B. Annual financing gap for 0
basic expenditure scenarios
C. Annual financing gap for NA
optimal expenditure scenarios
62
This total will be the same as for (3) but broken down by PA type instead of by revenue type
63
This includes funds to be shared by PAs with local stakeholders
64
In some countries actual expenditure differs from planned expenditure due to disbursement difficulties. In this case actual
expenditure should be presented and a note on disbursement rates and planned expenditures can be made in the Comments
column.
65
Financing needs as calculated in (8) minus available financing total in (6)
66
This will be more relevant to parastatals and PA agencies with autonomous budgets.

Financial Scorecard – Part II – Assessing Elements of the Financing System
COMPONENTS AND ELEMENTS SCORES COMMENTS

Component 1 – Legal, regulatory and
institutional frameworks
Element 1 – Legal, policy and regulatory support for None Some A few Fully
revenue generation by PAs 0 1 2 3
(i) Laws are in place that facilitate PA revenue
1
mechanisms
(ii) Fiscal instruments such as taxes on tourism and
0
water or tax breaks exist to promote PA financing
Under Yes, but needs Yes,
Element 2 - Legal, policy and regulatory support for No
development improvement satisfactory
revenue retention and sharing within the PA system 0 1 2 3
(i) Laws, policies and procedures are in place for PA For the park of Banc
1
revenues to be retained by the PA system d‘Arguin
(ii) Laws, policies and procedures are in place for
For the park of
PA revenues to be retained, in part, at the PA site 1
Diawling
level
(iii) Laws, policies and procedures are in place for
revenue sharing at the PA site level with local 0
stakeholders
Established
Element 3 - Legal and regulatory conditions for Establishe
Established
with
No with limited
establishing Funds (trust funds, sinking funds or d
capital
adequate
capital
revolving funds) 0 1 2 3
One for the park of
(i) A Fund have been established and capitalized to
1 Banc d‘Arguin but not
finance the PA system yet capitalized
One Trust Fund for
(ii) Funds have been created to finance specific PAs 1 the park of Banc
d‘Arguin
(iii) Funds are integrated into the national PA Not yet but it should
0
financing systems be in the near future
Under Yes, but needs Yes,
Element 4 - Legal, policy and regulatory support for None
development improvement Satisfactory
alternative institutional arrangements for PA
0 1 2 3
management to reduce cost burden to government
(i) There are laws which allow and regulate
delegation of PA management and associated 0
financial management for concessions
(ii) There are laws which allow and regulate
financial management for co-management
(ii) There are laws which allow and regulate
financial management to local government
(iv) There are laws which allow private reserves 0


In Under imple-
Not begun Completed
Element 5 - National PA financing strategies progress mentation
0 1 2 5
(i) Degree of formulation, adoption and
0
implementation of a national financing strategy
(ii) The inclusion within the national PA financing No Yes
strategy of key policies: 1 2
- Revenue generation and fee levels across PAs 1
- Criteria for allocation of PA budgets to PA sites
1
(business plans, performance etc)
- Safeguards to ensure that revenue generation does
1
not adversely affect conservation objectives of Pas
- Requirements for PA management plans to include
2
financial sections or associated business plans
Element 6 - Economic valuation of protected area
systems (ecosystem services, tourism based None Partial Satisfactory Full
employment etc)
0 1 2 3
(i) Economic data on the contribution of protected
1
areas to local and national development
(ii) PA economic values are recognized across
0
government
Element 7 - Improved government budgeting for PA No Yes
systems 0 2
(i) Policy of the Treasury towards budgeting for the
PA system provides for increased medium to long
0
term financial resources in accordance with
demonstrated needs of the system.
(ii) Policy promotes budgeting for PAs based on
financial need as determined by PA management 0
plans.
(iii) There are policies that PA budgets should
include funds for the livelihoods of communities
0
living in and around the PA as part of threat
reduction strategies
None Partial Improving Full
Element 8 - Clearly defined institutional
responsibilities for PA management and financing 0 1 2 3
(i) Mandates of institutions regarding PA finances
1
are clear and agreed
None Partial Almost there Full
Element 9 - Well-defined staffing requirements,
profiles and incentives at site and system level 0 1 2 3
(i) There are sufficient number of positions for
economists and financial planners and analysts in the
1
PA authorities to properly manage the finances of
the PA system
(ii) Terms of Reference (TORs) for PA staff include
responsibilities for revenue generation, financial 0
management and cost-effectiveness


(iii) Laws and regulations motivate PA managers to
promote site level financial sustainability
(eg a portion of site generated revenues are allowed 0
to be maintained for on-site re-investment and that
such finances are additional to government budgets
and not substitution)
(iv) Performance assessment of PA site managers
includes assessment of sound financial planning, 0
revenue generation and cost-effective management
(v) PA managers have the possibility to budget and
2
plan for the long-term (eg over 5 years)
Total Score for Component 1 Score: 15 / 82 = 18%
Component 2 – Business planning and tools for
cost-effective management
Early Near
Not begun Completed
Element 1 – PA site-level business planning stages complete
0 1 2 3
(i) PA management plans showing objectives, needs
2
and costs are prepared across the PA system
(ii) Business plans, based on standard formats and
linked to PA management plans and conservation 3
objectives, are developed for pilot sites
(iii) Business plans are implemented at the pilot sites
(degree of implementation measured by achievement 3
of objectives)
(iv) Business plans are developed for all appropriate
PA sites
1
(business plans will not be useful for PAs with no
potential to generate revenues)
(v) Financing gaps identified by business plans for
PAs contribute to system level planning and 1
budgeting
(vi) Costs of implementing business plans are
monitored and contributes to cost-effective guidance 1
and financial performance reporting
Near Fully
Element 2 - Operational, transparent and useful None Partial
complete completed
accounting and auditing systems 0 1 2 3
(i) Policy and regulations require comprehensive,
coordinated cost accounting systems to be in place 1
(for both input and activity based accounting)
(ii) There is a transparent and coordinated cost and
investment accounting system operational for the PA 1
system
(iii) Revenue tracking systems for each PA in place
0
and operational
(iv) There is a system so that the accounting data
1
contributes to national reporting
Complete
Near
Element 3 - Systems for monitoring and reporting on None Partial
completed
and
operational


financial management performance 0 1 2 3
(i) All PA revenues and expenditures are fully and
accurately reported by government and are made 1
transparent
(ii) Financial returns on investments from capital
improvements measured and reported, where
0
possible (eg track increase in visitor revenues before
and after establishment of a visitor centre)
(iii) A monitoring and reporting system in place to
show how and why funds are allocated across PA 0
sites and the central PA authority
(iv) Financial performance of PAs is evaluated and
0
reported (linked to cost-effectiveness)
Element 4 - Methods for allocating funds across No Yes
individual PA sites 0 2
(i) National PA budget is appropriately allocated to
sites based on criteria agreed in national financing 0
strategy
(ii) Policy and criteria for allocating funds to co-
managed PAs complement site based fundraising 0
efforts
Partially Almost
Element 5 - Training and support networks to enable Absent
done done
Fully
PA managers to operate more cost-effectively 0 1 2 3
(i) Guidance on cost-effective management
0
developed and being used by PA managers
(ii) Operational and investment cost comparisons
between PA sites complete, available and being used 0
to track PA manager performance
(iii) Monitoring and learning systems of cost-
effectiveness are in place and feed into management 0
policy and planning
(iv) PA site managers are trained in financial
1 .
management and cost-effective management
(v) PA site managers share costs of common
0
practices with each other and with PA headquarters
Component 3 – Tools for revenue generation
A fair
Element 1 - Number and variety of revenue sources None Partially
amount
Optimal
used across the PA system 0 1 2 3
(i) An up-to-date analysis of all revenue options for
the country complete and available including 1
feasibility studies;
(ii) There is a diverse set of sources and mechanisms
0
generating funds for the PA system


(iii) PAs are operating revenue mechanisms that
generate positive net revenues (greater than annual
0
operating costs and over long-term payback initial
investment cost)
No Partially Satisfactory Fully
Element 2 - Setting and establishment of user fees
across the PA system 0 1 2 3
(i) A system wide strategy and implementation plan
1
for user fees is complete and adopted by government
(ii) The national tourism industry and Ministry are
supportive and are partners in the PA user fee 1
system and programs
(iii) Tourism related infrastructure investment is
proposed and is made for PA sites across the
0
network based on revenue potential, return on
investment and level of entrance fees [3]
(iv) Where tourism is promoted PA managers can
demonstrate maximum revenue whilst still meeting 2
PA conservation objectives
(v) Non tourism user fees are applied and generate
1
additional revenue
None Partially Completed Operational
Element 3 - Effective fee collection systems 0 1 2 3
for fee collection is complete and adopted by PA 0
authorities (including co-managers)
Element 4 - Marketing and communication strategies None Partially Satisfactory Fully
for revenue generation mechanisms 0 1 2 3

(i) Communication campaigns and marketing for the
public about the tourism fees, new conservation 0
taxes etc are widespread and high profile
None Partially Progressing Fully
Element 5 - Operational PES schemes for PAs[2] 0 1 2 3
0
for PES is complete and adopted by government
(ii) Pilot PES schemes at select sites developed 1
(iii) Operational performance of pilots is evaluated
1
and reported
(iv) Scale up of PES across the PA system is
0
underway
None Partially Progressing Fully
Element 6 - Operational concessions within PAs 0 1 2 3
complete and adopted by government for 0
concessions
(ii) Concession opportunities are identified at
0
appropriate PA sites across the PA system


(iii) Concession opportunities are operational at pilot
0
sites
(iv) Operational performance of pilots is evaluated,
0
reported and acted upon
None Limited Satisfactory Extensive
Element 7 - PA training programs on revenue
generation mechanisms 0 1 2 3
(i) Training courses run by the government and other
competent organizations for PA managers on 2
revenue mechanisms and financial administration
Financial Scorecard – Part III – Scoring and Measuring Progress
Total Score for PA System 41
Total Possible Score 206
Actual score as a percentage of the total possible score 20%
Percentage scored in previous year n/a
Date: November 2009

Annex 5: UNDP Capacity Assessment Scorecard
Table 17: Summary Results of the UNDP Capacity Assessment Scorecard

Systemic Institutional Individual
Average
Strategic Areas of Support Project Total possible Project Total possible Project Total possible
Scores score
%
Scores score
%
Scores score
% %
(1) Capacity to conceptualize and develop sectoral and
3 6 50% 2 3 67% N/A NA NA 58%
cross-sectoral policy and regulatory frameworks
(2) Capacity to formulate, operationalise and implement
4 9 44% 13 27 48% 5 12 42% 45%
sectoral and cross-sectoral programmes and projects
(3) Capacity to mobilize and manage partnerships,
3 6 50% 3 6 50% 2 3 67% 56%
including with the civil society and the private sector
(4) Technical skills related specifically to the
0 3 0% 1 3 33% 1 3 33% 22%
requirements of the SPs and associated Conventions
(5) Capacity to monitor, evaluate and report at the sector
1 6 17% 1 6 17% 1 3 33% 22%
and project levels
TOTAL Score and average for %'s 11 30 32% 20 45 43% 9 21 44% 41%
Table 18: Detailed Results of the UNDP Capacity Assessment Scorecard

Strategic Area Capacity Numeric
Outcome Outcome Indicator
of Support Level Score
1. Capacity to Systemic The protected area agenda is being effectively 2 There are a number of protected area champions that
conceptualize championed / driven forward drive the protected area agenda, but more is needed
and formulate There is a strong and clear legal mandate for the 1 There is a partial legal framework for protected areas but
policies, establishment and management of protected areas it has many inadequacies
legislations,
strategies and
programs
Institutional There is an institution responsible for protected 2 Protected area institutions have some sort of mechanism
areas able to strategize and plan to update their strategies and plans, but this is irregular
or is done in a largely top-down fashion without proper
consultation
2. Capacity to Systemic There are adequate skills for protected area 1 Some skills exist but in largely insufficient quantities to
implement planning and management guarantee effective planning and management
policies, There are protected area systems 2 Protected area system is covering a reasonably
legislation, representative sample of the major habitats and

strategies and ecosystems, but still presents some gaps and not all
programs elements are of viable size
There is a fully transparent oversight authority for 1 There is some oversight, but only indirectly and in an
the protected areas institutions untransparent manner
Institutional Protected area institutions are effectively led 2 Some protected area institutions have reasonably strong
leadership but there is still need for improvement
Protected areas have regularly updated, 2 Most Protected Areas have management plans though
participatorially prepared, comprehensive some are old, not participatorially prepared or are less
management plans than comprehensive
Human resources are well qualified and motivated 1 Human resources qualification is spotty, with some well
qualified, but many only poorly and in general
unmotivated
Management plans are implemented in a timely 1 Management plans are poorly implemented and their
manner effectively achieving their objectives objectives are rarely met
Protected area institutions are able to adequately 1 Protected area institutions have some funding and are
mobilize sufficient quantity of funding, human able to mobilize some human and material resources but
and material resources to effectively implement not enough to effectively implement their mandate
their mandate
Potected area institutions are effectively managed, 2 The institution is reasonably managed, but not always in
efficiently deploying their human, financial and a fully effective manner and at times does not deploy its
other resources to the best effect resources in the most efficient way
Protected area institutions are highly transparent, 1 Protected area institutions are not transparent but are
fully audited, and publicly accountable occasionally audited without being held publicly
accountable
There are legally designated protected area 1 There are one or more institutions or agencies dealing
insititutions with the authority to carry out their with protected areas but roles and responsibilities are
mandate unclear and there are gaps and overlaps in the
arrangements
Protected areas are effectively protected 2 Protected area regulations are regularly enforced but are
not fully effective and external threats are reduced but
not eliminated
Individual Individuals are able to advance and develop 1 Career tracks are weak and training possibilities are few
professionally and not managed transparently
Individuals are appropriately skilled for their jobs 2 Individuals are reasonably skilled but could further
improve for optimum match with job requirement
Individuals are highly motivated 1 Motivation uneven, some are but most are not

There are appropriate systems of training, 1 Some mechanisms exist but unable to develop enough
mentoring, and learning in place to maintain a and unable to provide the full range of skills needed
continuous flow of new staff
3. Capacity to Systemic Protected areas have the political commitment 2 Reasonable political will exists, but is not always strong
engage and they require enough to fully support protected areas
build consensus Protected areas have the public support they 1 There is limited support for protected areas
among all require
stakeholders Institutional Protected area institutions are mission oriented 1 Institutional mission poorly defined and generally not
known and internalized at all levels
Protected area institutions can establish the 2 Many partnerships in place with a wide range of
partnerships needed to achieve their objectives agencies, NGOs etc, but there are some gaps,
partnerships are not always effective and do not always
enable efficient achievement of objectives
Individual Individuals carry appropriate values, integrity and 2 Many individuals carry appropriate values and integrity,
attitudes but not all
4. Capacity to Systemic Protected area institutions have the information 1 Some information exists, but is of poor quality, is of
mobilize they need to develop and monitor strategies and limited usefulness, or is very difficult to access
information action plans for the management of the protected
and knowledge area system
Institutional Protected area institutions have the information 1 Some information exists, but is of poor quality and of
needed to do their work limited usefulness and difficult to access
Individual Individuals working with protected areas work 1 Individuals interact in limited way and sometimes in
effectively together as a team teams but this is rarely effective and functional
5. Capacity to Systemic Protected area policy is continually reviewed and 0 There is no policy or it is old and not reviewed regularly
monitor, updated
evaluate, report Society monitors the state of protected areas 1 There is some dialogue going on, but not in the wider
and learn public and restricted to specialized circles
Institutional Institutions are highly adaptive, responding 1 Institutions do change but only very slowly
effectively and immediately to change
Institutions have effective internal mechanisms 0 There are no mechanisms for monitoring, evaluation,
for monitoring, evaluation, reporting and learning reporting or learning
Individual Individuals are adaptive and continue to learn 1 Performance is irregularly and poorly measured and
there is little use of feedback

Annex 6. Background Information for Biodiversity Mainstreaming into
Governance Frameworks
INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT
Ministry of the Environment and Sustainable Development (MEDD)
The main mandate of the MEDD is to implement the environmental policy in Mauritania. It is responsible
for preparing, coordinating, executing, monitoring and evaluating the government policy with respect to
the environment. It is also responsible for the implementation of the sustainable development objectives,
including the mainstreaming of these objectives into public policies and in the management of natural
resources.
In the past, environmental management was the responsibility of multiple ministries and was focused
mostly on the protection of fauna and flora and on the implementation of a protected area system. In
1995, the government of Mauritania set up, for the first time, a ministry of rural development and
environment. However, departments from multiple ministries were still involved in the management of
the environment. In 2007, a Secretariat in charge of the environment under the Prime Minister‘s Office
was created. It was a milestone for the government‘s commitment to implement the sustainable
development objectives and the mainstreaming of the environment into public policies. Finally, in 2008,
this Secretariat was re-structured into a full Ministry of the Environment and Sustainable Development
(Decree #190-2008).
The MEDD has the broad mandate to protect and manage the environment; it includes the following
functions:
Elaborate and propose strategies and policies within the government related to the management
and the protection of the Environment;
Participate in the conceptualization and implementation of sectoral policies; particularly in sectors
linked to the environment such as urban planning, development planning, agriculture, fisheries,
energy, infrastructure, transportation, extractive industries, tourism, education and health;
Draft environmental legislation, regulations and norms and ensure that they are applied after there
are approved by the government;
Coordinate the ratification process of international environmental conventions and agreements;
Monitor the implementation of policies and programs related to the environment;
Proceed as environmental police for any investigations, controls and inspections necessary to
verify the effective application of environmental regulations and norms;
Monitor the quality of the environment, the protection of nature and the prevention, reduction or
suppression of pollution and nuisances;
Assess and validate the environmental feasibility of programs and projects subjected to
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIAs). Following the 2007 decree that instituted the EIA
process, MEDD is mandated to issue directives and guidance, validate TORs for environmental
impact studies and ensure public participation in EIA processes;
Ensure a coordinated response from different governmental bodies to prevent major risks of
technological or natural origin;
Support information exchange related to the environment in Mauritania and ensure the
construction of a national database on the environment with public access;
Support environmental education actions for citizens and civil society organizations and propose
measures to improve quality of life;

Conduct inventories, studies or research on the natural environment and on human activities as
part of the body of knowledge necessary for the ministry to fulfill its mission; particularly with
regards to the biodiversity of coastal zone, protected areas and wetlands;
Sponsor and validate studies and evaluations in the environmental area;
Manage and coordinate activities of the Environment Intervention Fund (EIF) instituted by the
Code on the Environment;
The MEDD is in charge of several projects implemented through specific coordination units and financed
by different donors; some of these projects focus on the reinforcement of environmental capacity (training
and piloting) such as the project Poverty-Environment funded by UNDP-UNEP, the National Capacity
Self-Assessment (NCSA) funded by UNDP-EEG and the environmental component of the ―Projet pour le
Renforcement des Capacités du Secteur Public‖ (PRECASP) funded by the World Bank (WB) and which
deals with public sector reform.
The MEDD is also mandated to coordinate the implementation of the yet-to-be-approved Plan Directeur
d‟Aménagement du Littoral Mauritanian (PDALM); particularly the implementation of the Coastal Zone
Observatory (Observatoire du littoral) and the Coastal Zone Consultative Council.
MEDD is structured in six directorates. Three are of particularly interest in the context of the project:
Directorate of Protected Areas and Coastal Zone Management: its mandate is to elaborate the
national policy on protected areas (PAs), develop and manage the system of PAs in Mauritania
and ensure the monitoring and protection of biodiversity.
Directorate of Environmental Control: it includes two services: (1) Environmental Assessment, in
charge of publishing directives and guides for the different steps necessary for EIAs, as well as
validate TOR to conduct EIAs; and (2) Norms and Controls, in charge of disseminating the
existing environmental norms and ensure environmental control;
Directorate of Pollution Prevention and Control: its mandate is to develop, coordinate and
implement national strategies to prevent any form of pollutions, including natural risks. It is also
in charge of developing and implementing an Environmental Emergency Plan. Finally, this
directorate is in charge of solid waste management. One important service under this Directorate
is the Marine Pollution Prevention, which is in charge of monitoring the compliance with
environmental regulations both on and off shore. It also collaborates with other departments to
evaluate risks related with offshore oil exploration on the marine and coastal resources;
Banc d‟Arguin National Park Authority (Parc National du Banc d‟Arguin - PNBA)
In order to protect the unique environment of the park, the government created the Banc d‘Arguin
National Park by Decree in 1976. It was recognized as a Ramsar site in 1982, was declared a UNESCO
World Heritage site in 1989 and it is a protected area classified internationally as IUCN category II (C II).
The most recent Law defining the rules to conserve and monitor the park was passed in 2000 (Law No
2000-024) and a Decree to establish the organization rules was passed in 2006 (Decree No 2006-058).
The Law states that the park is a protected reserve for Mauritania with the following objectives:
Contribute to national sustainable development;
Support the development of human settlements residing within the park and using the natural
resources of the park;
Maintain integrity and productivity of the park‘s natural resources;
Protect, conserve and develop the terrestrial, marine and island ecosystems;

Contribute to the preservation of threatened species, including the migrating species passing
through the park;
Safeguard the natural sites with particular scientific, archaeological and aesthetic value;
Contribute to environmental research – in particular in the marine environment – and promote
environmental education activities;
Ensure the constitution of a marine protected area of ecological and biological importance in the
sub-region.
The park is managed by a public administration authority (PNBA) under the MEDD and composed of
about 80 staff67. It is headed by a Director nominated by a Council of Ministers‘ Decree. His/Her
functions are overseen by a board. The board, constituted by Decree, is composed of several government
representatives and representatives from the communities residing within the park‘s boundaries and from
the staff. Finally the PNBA is assisted by a scientific council (Conseil Scientifique du Banc d‟Arguin -
CSBA) composed of international scientists willing to voluntarily advice the PNBA on questions related
to the protection of the park. The PNBA is also supported by international partners including AFD, the
Fonds Français pour l‘Environnement Mondial (FFEM), IUCN, EU, UN system, WWF, GTZ and FIBA.
The main instrument to manage the park is a management plan, which is prepared, implemented and
monitored by the Administration of the park. This plan must contain—among other aspects—species to
be protected and fishing quotas for species that are exploited and community based projects. The current
management plan (2005-2009) takes into account the risks linked with the development of offshore oil
exploration. It recognizes that the increase in maritime traffic and the existence of hydrocarbon sites in
the area will increase the risks of maritime accidents, which would have catastrophic environmental
consequences on the park. Additionally, the economic development let by the exploitation of oil could
strengthen the fishery activities adding pressure on the natural resources of the park. However, no specific
actions are included in this management plan to better control the potential negative impacts linked with
the development of the offshore oil and gas sector.
The work program included in the management plan for the period 2005-2009 is structured around five
thematic areas: biodiversity conservation, coordination of scientific research, local development,
communication and governance. Under biodiversity conservation, the PNBA has 6 objectives:
Strengthen and ensure the sustainability of a terrestrial and marine monitoring and control system
of the park;
Increase the involvement of residents in the monitoring system of the park;
Identify and catalogue species and threatened, rare or vulnerable habitats and elaborate action
plans;
Prepare a zoning plan corresponding to the management rules of the park and its varied uses;
Monitor the waste management practices within the park boundaries;
Integrate obligations from the international conventions ratified by Mauritania within the
decision-making process of the park.
In order to monitor progress made on biodiversity conservation, the management plan includes a set of 14
indicators.
67
Secrétariat Général du Gouvernement, November 2004, Synthèse du Plan d‟Aménagement et de Gestion du Parc National du
Banc d‟Arguin.

National Park of Diawling (Parc National du Diawling - PND)
The park of Diawling was created in 1991 (Decree No. 91-005 January 11, 1991) and is situated in the
delta of the Senegal River. It is a protected area classified internationally as IUCN category II (C II).
Since 2005, the Diawling Park forms part of a transboundary UNESCO Man and Biosphere reserve
including the Chatt T‘Boul and the Oiseaux du Djoudj National Park National Park in Senegal. All of
these sites are also Ramsar sites. The buffer zones are managed in accordance with their statutes defined
by the same texts as the core areas, except the Gandon Forest (Senegal), which is a Community
Conservation Area. The transition area is public or state property, and also includes private lands.
The Diawling Park covers an area of about 16,000 ha but it is part of a vast ecological unit delimited by
the Atlantic Ocean in the West, the Chat Tboul in Northwest, the Ndiader system in the North and the
Senegal River in the East and South. This vast area underwent dramatic environmental changes in the last
20 years due to droughts and the development of hydrological infrastructures on the Senegal River
including the Diama dam constructed to prevent seawater intrusion into the river system to allow for large
scale irrigated agriculture (rice) upstream. The main consequence of this development was the loss of
biodiversity and the loss of productivity of the environment, which was characterized by a mix of fresh
water and salted water.
One of the main objectives of the PND Administration is to restore, conserve and use sustainably the
natural resources of the park and its peripheral zone. It consists of recreating a flooding calendar, which
would be similar to the natural flooding occurring prior to the construction of the dam, in order to recreate
the natural ecosystems in the Delta.
The park is managed by a public administration authority. Its rules and regulations were approved by the
government through the Decree No. R-204 of April 2, 2000. A first management plan was approved in
1997 for the period 1997-2000 with a particular focus on monitoring and research; given the complexity
and the unusual characteristics of the park. An updated management plan is under preparation based on
several studies that were conducted during the last few years.
Ministry of Petroleum and Energy

The oil sector is managed by the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy. Its mission is to elaborate and
implement government policies in the oil and energy sectors. It is in charge of promoting the exploration
and management of prospective zones for hydrocarbons as well as the production, import, export,
transport, storage and commercialization of hydrocarbons. It also includes the drafting of legislation and
regulations and their application for the exploration, transport and storage of hydrocarbons.
Two Directions under this ministry have an environmental focus: (1) Direction of Oil Geology and Data
that is in charge of maintaining an environmental management information system and evaluate EIAs
presented by the private sector before giving assessment notices; (2) Direction of Promotion of
Hydrocarbons and Partners Monitoring that is in charge of the development of the national policy for
hydrocarbons, the promotion of oil and the monitoring of oil activities.
Mauritanian Society of Hydrocarbons (SMH)

This institution was created by the decree n° 039-2004 of April 19, 2004. It is a public organisation under
the supervision of the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy. Its main objective is to manage the state
participation in the exploration, development, production and commercialization of oil and gas in
Mauritania. It has also the mission to develop the national capacity within the different areas of the oil
industry.

The SMH advises the government in the oil sector but has no rights on the ―partage‖ of the production of
hydrocarbons between private sector operators and the government of Mauritania. However, according to
the legislation and the oil contracts, SMH is in charge of collecting and commercializing the government
share of hydrocarbons following modalities determined by the Minister of Oil and Energy.
Ministry of Fishery and Marine Economy

The Ministry is in charge of the marine resources and has the government authority to control the quality,
hygiene and health of the fishing industry. Its mandate covers the sustainable exploitation of marine
biological resources, as well the conservation, stock maintenance and primary processing of these
resources. The ministry is composed of several directorates and is the government authority to supervise
several public institutes and agencies. Two entities form this Ministry are of a particular interest in the
context of this project:
Directorate for Marine Resource Management and Oceanography: It is in charge of developing
and monitoring the national policy for the conservation of the marine ecosystems, coordinating
the fight against marine pollution, developing and monitoring fishery management plans and
developing information systems and databases on the fishery industry. The service of
Oceanography participates in the development et implementation of the Action Plan for the Fight
against Marine Pollution (POLMAR - Plan de Lutte Contre les Pollutions Maritimes);
Mauritanian Institute of Oceanographic and Fishery Research (IMROP): This institute is under
the authority of the Ministry of Fishery. It was created in 1978 and is in charge of analysing the
biological, physical, socio-economic and technical critical factors of the fishery sector for
Mauritania and its constraints. As part of monitoring and evaluating the marine resources,
IMROP is the organization working in collaboration with the PNBA to monitor the biodiversity
in the park.
Mauritania‟s Merchant Marine Directorate

As of May 2009, this Directorate was brought back under the supervision of the Ministry of the Fishery
and Marine Economy (Decree No. 2009-079 May 11, 2009). Mauritania‘s Merchant Marine is in charge
of elaborating and implementing policies and legislation related to the management of the public maritime
domain. It is composed of four services including the Service for the Conservation of the Marine
Environment and of the Public Maritime Domain. This service has several functions that are relevant for
the project; they are:
Organize the fight against marine pollution and in consultation with other relevant government
departments implement POLMAR (action plan to fight marine pollution) for what the maritime
environment is concerned;
Participate with other government departments in the implementation of POLMAR with respect
to land-based pollution affecting the marine environment;
Update, in consultation with other government departments, the POLMAR plan at the national
level and monitor the updating of plans prepared by oil and gas operators, as well as port
authorities;
Participate in the harmonization of plans from oil companies, port authorities and transport
vessels subjected to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships
(MARPOL) and the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-
operation (OPCR) from 1990;
Monitor the financial contribution to the International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds

Scientific Panel on Oil and Gas Activities in the Mauritania
This is an expert panel supported by IUCN Mauritania that was created following the conflict between the
oil company Woodside and the GOM. GOM requested IUCN assistance and this panel was created in
October 2007. The main issue at stake was the need for capacity development of the government, civil
society and companies to be able to manage environmental and social impacts of oil and gas activities and
the need to identify and take several immediate measures to mitigate the risks involved. A focus of this
panel was on the offshore oil and gas exploitation with the «extraordinary» challenges that are the
presence of sensitive ecosystems with high ecological and economic value: the Banc d‘Arguin and
Diawling parks.
The panel is financed by governments (Mauritania, France and Netherlands) and international NGOs
(MAVA and FIBA) and no payments were made from oil companies. The approach included the
development of a platform for dialogue on oil and gas activities. This platform for dialogue comprises the
following partners: Mauritanian NGOs, oil and gas companies (Petronas, Total, CNPC, DANA, Zaver
Pertroleum and ASB), University of Nouakchott, the media and other bilateral (GTZ) and multilateral
(WB) donors. The main objective of this panel is to provide advice on the development of the oil and gas
sector, develop appropriate training programs with the university and conduct ad-hoc studies.
The panel identified five basic questions regarding an effective development of the oil and gas sector;
there are:
 What are the major technological risks and what are the response capacities?
 What are the existing or needed norms and standards concerning the management of
technological risks? How to increase their enforcement in the Mauritanian context?
 How are the oil and gaz activities coordinated by government? With which results? How
to consolidate the capacities for relevant coordination?
 How is the rent re-distributed, sector wise and in social and spatial terms? Which risks
are associated with this distribution? What are the means to follow and/or to influence
this distribution?
The panel initial findings that have a particular interest for this project are: (i) Present laws and decrees do
not sufficiently address the basic questions: who, where, how to operate; (ii) Present organisations and
coordination of the State do not meet demands for public intervention on oil and gas matters.
Based on their assessment, the panel proposed to the government how to address these barriers through a
series of recommendations such as the definition of ―No Go‖ zones, the implementation of the principle
of adopting best worldwide standards and practices, strengthening the coordination, and, improving
instruments for monitoring the distribution of oil and gas royalties.
POLICY CONTEXT
The environmental policy framework in Mauritania is mostly defined by the Stratégie National pour le
Développement Durable and the related Plan d‟Action National pour l‟Environnement (PANE).
National Strategy for Sustainable Development (NSSD)

This strategy was approved in 2006. It covers a period of ten years (2005-2015) that is aligned with the
PRSP and the MDGs. The strategy is an attempt at establishing a consensus on a common vision for the

sustainable development of Mauritania. It states that there cannot be economic growth, good governance
and combat poverty without good environmental governance. The strategy is defined through five axes:
Mauritania reinforces its institutional and policy means and manage efficiently its environment
and natural resources;
Mauritania promotes the sustainable access to basic services as a strategic mean to combat
poverty;
Mauritania, conscious of the multi-sectoral and multi-scale (from local level to global level)
stakes related to sustainable development, promotes at all these levels an integrated and
participative management in order to efficiently use natural resources;
Mauritania plans to manage its local and global environment in conformity with its obligations
under the ratified international agreements;
Mauritania must elaborate financing mechanisms for its National Environmental Action Plan.
National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP)

This action plan is the implementation of the strategy presented above. It transforms the five axes above
into operational objectives, main activities, mechanisms and timing for implementation. It has a five-year
horizon.
The plan is structured in five sections corresponding to the five axes and is composed of 92 objectives.
The project is particularly well aligned with the objectives that are under Axis #3 - Favoriser la Gestion
Integree et l‟Utilisation Efficiente des Ressources Naturelles. These objectives are related to the
preservation of marine resources, littoral and water reserves and aquaculture. The plan recognizes that the
marine resources are over-exploited due to over-fishing but also to the degradation of coastal ecosystems
with a decrease of predator fish. As a response, the NEAP identified strategies and objectives to preserve
the marine environment as one major goal of this plan. It is also a strategy to better articulate
environmental actions to preserve the marine environment within the context of the new fishing strategy.
Of particular interest for this project, the following objectives were noted:
Prevent, limit and adapt the exploitation of the marine resources vis-à-vis risks linked to the oil
and gas exploitation (objective 12.2);
Improve the governance of the littoral through the implementation of a policy for the
development of the littoral; referring to the PDALM (objective 12.3);
Promote the preservation of critical habitats and threatened species for a better management of the
marine resources (objective 12.5);
Integrate the oil resources in the environment and sustainable development strategy (objective
13.1);
Prevent, limit and adapt risks linked to the oil sector (objective 13.2);
Link the development of the oil sector with the management of the marine environment and of the
littoral (objective 13.3);
Implement a monitoring system to monitor impacts of oil exploration and exploitation offshore on
the marine resources and on land-based natural resources as well as on public health (objective
13.4);
Evaluate strategic impacts of the oil and ore sectors (objective 13.5);
Control and monitor the use of dangerous substances for oil exploration and exploitation
(objective 13.6);
Integrate the exploitation of ore resources in the environment and sustainable development
strategy (objective 14.1);
Better align the ―contrats de partage‖ of oil production with the sustainable development
concepts and strategy (objective 14.2);

Strengthen the institutional capacity of local actors (objective 15.2);
Strengthen the conservation of protected areas (objective 17.5);
Protect the threatened species (objective 17.6);
Promote conservation ex situ (objective 17.7);
Conserve fauna (objective 17.8);
Conserve marine and coastal biodiversity (objective 17.9).
As the main policy instrument for environmental management in Mauritania, the NEAP provides a good
policy context for the implementation of this project.
National Coastal Zone Management Plan (PDALM)

This management plan was prepared in 2004-05 with the support of the IUCN and of AFD. The plan is
published by the MEDD and has been validated by a technical committee on the development of the
coastal zone. Even though the government has not yet adopted the PDALM, its implementation has
started.
The plan covers the entire coastal zone of Mauritania that is divided into three zones: (1) the Northern
Coastal Zone with a contrast between the city of Nouadhibou and its industrial activities on one hand and
the national park of Banc d‘Arguin of global importance on the other hand; (2) the Central Zone with a
coast that is generally a flat coastal stretch area protected from the sea by only a thin strip of dunes; it
includes the coast near Nouakchott; and (3) the Southern Zone characterized by wetlands influenced by
the in the Senegal river delta.
The PDALM is coherent with the PANE and the Poverty Reduction Strategy Program (PRSP). It sets
strategic orientations for the coastal zone that are development principles for these three fragile zones
such as preserving ecological functions of the natural coastal ecosystems; strengthening activities that are
specific to the coastal zone such as fishery, tourism and offshore oil production; developing the capacity
for managing the littoral spatially; and inform the public and improve the decision-making process. Then
the plan details the different sub-zones in each of the three zones presented above with their respective
characteristics and proposed development.
The MEDD (Direction of Protected Areas) is responsible for the implementation of this plan and will
report to the National Coastal Zone Consultative Council (CCNL). The implementation will be based on a
set of directives and guidelines, ―Directives d‟aménagement Littoral (DAL)‖ that will be submitted to the
CCNL for approval.
The plan also includes the creation of a National Coastal Zone Observatory (Observatoire du littoral).
The Observatory would be in charge of coordinating the implementation of the PDALM, as well as
collecting and disseminating key information on the coastal zone.
Other Strategies and Plans

In addition to key policies highlighted above, there are several others that the project is related to and
worth mentioning here; there are:
Fisheries Management Plan: This management plan was developed in 2007 and was funded by
the World Bank. It includes a review of the fishery sector in Mauritania and presents a plan to ,
strengthen the management of this sector.
The Management plans of both national parks: Banc d‟Arguin and Diawling. The Banc d‘Arguin
is a five-year plan (2005-09) and focus on five themes: biodiversity conservation, coordination of

scientific research, local development, communication and governance. The PND focus mostly on
the degradation of the ecosystems in the park and the inventory of measures proposed to be
implemented to address the causes of the degradation (see more information above under
institutional context).
POLMAR plans68: These are plans to address any accidental pollutions of the marine environment
allowing the mobilisation and coordination of measures to respond to these accidents; particularly
the accidental release of hydrocarbons and chemical substances into the marine environment. The
plan would also apply to risks of pollution from sea origin and also from terrestrial origin. This
plan is a work in progress and is piloted by the MEDD; it is not approved yet by the government
(see more information above under institutional context).
REGULATORY CONTEXT
Mauritania signed/ratified a series of multilateral environmental agreements and a list of those related to
this project are presented in Annex 1. They provide the overarching chapeau for the existing legal
frameworks governing the environment sector in Mauritania.
Code de l‟Environnement (Environmental Code)

In order to protect the environment, the GOM elaborated a framework Law on the environment that was
passed in July 2000 (―Code de l‟Environnement‖ Law no 2000-045). It establishes general principles for
the protection of the environment and provides the legislative context to develop national policies to
protect and manage the environment. It states the fundamental principle that the environment is a national
heritage and its management and protection must address the needs of today‘s generation without
jeopardizing the needs to future generations.
The Law defines the instruments to manage the environment in Mauritania:

It defines the responsibilities of the ministry in charge of the environment (MEDD);
It states the need for the government to establish a National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP)
comprising all activities to protect and manage the environment; including the national program
to combat the desertification within the context of the UNCCD;
It states the need for EIAs for activities (or projects) susceptible to have negative impacts on the
environment in order for the ministry in charge of the environment to authorize (or not) these
activities. Some initial guidelines for EIAs are given in the Law, but the overall regulation of the
EIA process is to be described in a Decree approved by the Council of Ministers (see below);
It establishes an Intervention Funds for the Environment (IFE) to finance exclusively protection
and restoration activities implemented as a consequence of environmental degradation. This
management of this fund is to be detailed in a specific Decree. It should be noted that since 2000,
this fund has not be established yet;
It describes the parameters to protect natural resources; and,
It states the legal parameters for an environmental police, the legal process to identify infractions
and the penalties for those infractions.
68
The POLMAR plans are a French government initiative instituted in 1978 following the ―Amoco Cadiz‖ catastrophe on the
Brittany littoral. It is a response mechanism to combat marine pollution due to any marine catastrophes. It is a planning
process used to coordinate the mobilization of resources to combat marine pollution and it includes two parts: (i) a Sea
POLMAR Plan when intervention at sea is needed; and (ii) a Land POLMAR Plan when intervention on the littoral is
needed.

Ordinance for the Protection, Development and Management of the Coastal Zone
An Ordinance for the protection, development and management of the coastal zone was adopted by the
government in 2007 (Ordinance No 2007-037). It defines the coastal zone as the territory along the coast
of Mauritania, including the urban community of Nouakchott, the two national parks, the delimited
territorial sea (12 marine miles) and the communities along the coast such as Nouadhibou and others.
This Ordinance states the need for the ministry in charge of the environment to elaborate a plan for the
management of the littoral. This plan needs to be adopted by governmental decree and its implementation
is to be done by Directives for the development of the littoral (DAL). It also institutes the National
Consultative Council of the Coastal Zone (CCNL) to review and endorse the littoral management plan
and the DALs. This Council is to be chaired by the Minister in charge of the environment. This Ordinance
also institutes the ―Observatoire‖ to monitor the environment of the Mauritanian littoral, to constitute a
body of knowledge on the littoral and to disseminate the available information. It is to be noted that the
plan (PDALM) is drafted but not approved yet by the government. As for the ―Observatoire‖ no progress
has been made so far.
Finally, this Ordinance defines the rules to protect the littoral from environmental degradation; including
specific measures for the coastal dune ―cordon‖. It also includes the rules to manage the littoral and
finally, it states the legal parameters to identify infractions and the corresponding penalties.
Draft Law to Prevent and Combat Different Types of Marine Pollutions

The GOM has sought technical advice from the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to formulate
laws covering offshore oil exploration and maritime oil transport.
A code for the marine environment had been elaborated in 2006 and transformed into a draft Law on
preventing and combating marine pollutions. This draft Law had already been reviewed but it is a work in
progress with no planned dates to be finalized.
This Law would address the risks associated with marine accidents including accidents from the
exploration/exploitation of offshore hydrocarbons. It would set the implementation of risk management
instruments such as the need for a national emergency plan for responding to hydrocarbon pollution
(POLMAR plans) and the OPRC mechanisms. The Law would also set the creation of a consultative
committee to protect the marine environment (CCPME), which would be responsible for the coordination
of government actions to protect the marine environment and combat the marine pollutions of all sorts
and also for the elaboration of the guiding strategies for these actions.
Decree for the Environmental Impact Assessment

Following the provision embedded in the ―Code de l‟Environnement‖ on the EIA process, the GOM
passed a decree to provide legislation details (Decree No 94.2004) for the EIAs. A further Decree passed
in March 2007 (Decree No 2007-105) amended this initial Decree, particularly taking into account
activities related to the development of the oil and gas sector.
Article 4 of the Decree identified 2 categories of activities subject to have significant direct or indirect
negative impacts on the environment: (i) Category A: activities are subjected to an EIA; (ii) Category B:
activities are subjected to an environmental impact notice. Annex I provides a list of activities falling
under these two categories. Among this list, activities related to the oil sector such as seismic exploration,
oil drilling, hydrocarbon and gas transport and storage, offshore implantation, oil and gas refinery facility
are all considered as category A and subjected to EIAs.

Article 7 details the content of any EIA, including an environmental management plan proposing
measures to mitigate any risks. Article 17 details the need for any impact study (EIAs) to consult the
public that is followed by Chapter III providing the parameters for conducting public surveys. Finally, the
Decree provides the timeframe for the reviewing process – which is 20 days to evaluate the study or
notice - and the responsibility of the government. The authorization is issued by the relevant ministry (to
the project) and is based on a notification from the ministry in charge of the environment to this relevant
ministry.
Legislation Context to the Oil and Gas Sector

Mauritania does not have a code or a framework Law to legislate exploration and exploitation of oil and
gas; particularly to consider the development of this sector within the sustainable development objectives
of Mauritania and taking into account national interests. The sector does not have established national
environmental norms; as a consequence the operators in this sector in Mauritania are only subjected to
comply with international standards such as ISO 14001 if they wish. A new code is being prepared
currently. A Hydrocarbons‘ Code (Code pétrolier) is under preparation as part of the domestic
transposition process for the IMO MARPOL Convention.
So far the sector is mostly legislated by few pieces of legislation that are described below:
Mining Code (Code Minier Law No 2008-011 from April 27, 2008, and Decree No. 054-2004 from July
6, 2004)
This code, adopted by the GOM through the Law No 2008-011, regulates the mining sector. Article 2
states that exploration, research, exploitation of mineral substances (except liquid and gas hydrocarbons),
transport, concentration, enrichment, waste treatment and commercialization of these extracted substances
are subject legally, fiscally and environmentally to: (i) provisions of the mining code; and (ii) legislative
and regulatory provisions included in the code of the environment and further detailed in the Decree No.
054-2004 from July 6, 2004.
Article 63 stipulates that exploration and exploitation activities must respect the obligations related to the
security and health of the personnel under the legislation and regulation existing in Mauritania. Operators
must also protect the environment according to existing related laws. If needed, the ministry of mining
may prescribe rehabilitation measures to be financed by the non-compliant operator and eventually
suspend or cancel its mining exploitation permit.
Ordinance No 88-151 from November 13, 1988

This ordinance regulates the juridical and fiscal regime for the exploration and exploitation of
hydrocarbons such as the need for oil companies to have the technical and financial competencies to work
in Mauritania. It also sets the duration for exploration (9 years) and exploitation (25 years renewable
twice for 10 years). It also states that the allotments of blocks will be done through international tenders
or other means allowing the GOM to obtain the best conditions. However, this Law does not contain any
references to the protection of the environment.
Law No 2004-029 from July 15, 2004

This Law instituted a simplified fiscal regime for foreign contractors and sub-contractors, which are
providing services for oil companies in Mauritania.
Law No 2008-020 (replacing Law 2006-008 from April 4, 2006)

This Law instituted the National Hydrocarbon Revenue Fund (Fonds National des Revenus des
Hydrocarbures - FNRH) as a GOM fund to receive all revenues from the exploitation of hydrocarbons in
Mauritania. The funds are placed in a special account opened in the name of GOM in a well-recognized

foreign bank. It is managed by the Ministry of Finance, which can delegate the function to the Central
Bank of Mauritania according to a convention signed on May 8, 2006. A Consultative Committee on
Investments assists the Minister of Finance in the management of this fund. The mission of this
committee is to propose and advice on questions related to the management of the FNRH.
Production Sharing Contract Model (Contrat type de Partage de Production (CPP) or PSC in English)
Regulated by the Ordinance 88-151, the rights to explore and exploit oil in Mauritania are established
through a contract (CPP) to share the production between each operator and the GOM. A template
contract was established in 1994 by the GOM and each operator needs a specific CPP, which also needs
to be approved by the GOM through a specific Law approved by Parliament.
These contracts identify the exploration modalities and the sharing of profits from the production and
commercialization of oil. According to terms of these contracts and the fiscal regime of the oil sector
(Law 2004-029), when signing these contracts oil companies are debtors to the GOM for royalties based
on the area leased and two bonuses – a signature bonus and a production bonus. (Annex 2 in this
PRODOC provides an overview of existing and imminent contracts by January 2009.)
Article 6 of this template contract stipulates that the oil company (the Contractor) is responsible for the
preparation and execution of any operations planned in the contract - including any risks linked to the
execution of these activities - using the most appropriate methods used by the oil industry worldwide. It
includes:
Ensure that installations and equipment used are properly maintained during the period of the
current contract;
Avoid losses and releases in the environment of hydrocarbon products and other products used in
the exploration and exploitation of oil;
Ensure the protection of the water table in the area of oil exploration and oil exploitation;
Store hydrocarbon products in adequate storage facility;
Restore (if needed) sites after being used for oil exploration and oil exploitation.
In addition to these obligations, the oil company is also obligated to comply with the international
convention for the pollution prevention of seawater by hydrocarbons signed in London on May 12, 1954
and its amendments. Finally, in order to prevent pollution, the GOM could decide in agreement with the
contractor additional measures necessary to preserve the marine zone.
Law for Establishing a Hunting Code and Protect Fauna (Law No. 97-006)
This is the main Law to protect biodiversity in Mauritania; mainly providing a legal framework for fauna
in protected areas. The Law does not mention flora. Nevertheless, the Law No 97-006 passed by the
government on January 20, 1997 replaces the previous Law No 75-003 from January 1975. It legislates
hunting activities and the management of fauna. Of particular interest for this project, it provides the legal
framework to set protected areas in Mauritania such as national parks, natural reserves and zones with
hunting interest. National parks are defined as areas to sustainably protect, develop and conserve animal
and plant species as well as protect sites, landscapes and geological formations with scientific or aesthetic
values. Natural reserves are defined as areas to sustainably develop and conserve wildlife and where
human activities are strictly regulated. Finally the Law includes a list of wildlife that is totally protected
(category I) and a list of wildlife that is partially protected (category II).
It is important to note that this Law is geared toward wildlife and hunting. From a biodiversity
conservation point of view this Law provides an incomplete legal framework to ensure biodiversity
conservation.

Fisheries Code
The Code des Pêches is a Law (Law No 2000-025) to protect the fishing resources by defining the fishing
rules in waters under Mauritanian jurisdiction (both in land water bodies and sea) to allow a sustainable
exploitation of these fishing resources and conserve existing ecosystems and aquatic habitats.
The Law sets instruments to manage the fishery sector. It includes the need for the ministry in charge of
fishery to elaborate management plans for the sector. It also institutes a National Consultative Committee
for the Development of Fisheries with the responsibility of commenting on strategies for the development
of the fisheries as well as on the management plans for the sector.
The Law also defines how foreign fishing boats can be authorized to fish in Mauritanian waters and the
species that are protected. Finally the Law identifies how the control of fishing activities will be
conducted and sets the penalties for infractions.

Annex 7. Overview of PPG Studies
248. The table below presents a summary of studies conducted during the PPG phase:
Table 19: Summary of Studies Conducted under the PPG Phase

# Item Summary
1 Rasoanandrianina, Lalanirina, The study is a diagnostic of existing practices in the oil and gas
Septembre 2009, Le Secteur sector and the integration of environmental considerations in the
pétrolier et l‟environnement en development of this sector in Mauritania. It analyzed the
Mauritanie (105 pages) compatibility between the development of this sector and the
protection and conservation of biodiversity. The review covers the
critical aspects of the sector such as the legislation in place, the
institutions and the techniques used to explore and exploit offshore
oil. The study also explores the threats and opportunities for the
development of the oil and gas sector in Mauritania and the
management of the environment. Finally, few recommendations
and action plan are proposed in the last chapter.
2 Bekaye, Marieme, Septembre This study is a detailed stakeholder analysis and consultation,
2009, Analyse du cadre including the oil and gas industry, national and local government
politique et institutionnel agencies, coastal communities and resource users, NGOs and
(Gouvernance et partenariats) donors and other partners supporting Mauritania‘s oil and gas
(24 pages) development and biodiversity conservation and protection. It also
includes the identification of barriers to the conservation and
protection of biodiversity and capacity building needs;
identification of opportunities for public-private partnerships; and
initial recommendations to engage the oil and gas industry in
biodiversity conservation and protection.
3 Mohamedou Mokhtar Fall The study focused on collecting and analysing information on
Ould, 2009, Le cadre juridique existing policy, legal and regulatory frameworks for biodiversity
et politique régissant le conservation and for planning and controlling the development of
secteur pétrolier et gazier et the oil and gas sector. It identified deficiencies in these
l‟impératif de la conservation frameworks. Considerations about the needs for PA management
de la Biodiversité (74 pages) and expansion, including consultations regarding the creation and
feasibility (political, institutional and financial) of a new PA
Autonomous Authority (PAAA), were also taken into account.
Recommendations on institutional capacity building for effective
PA management were made.
4 Kloff, Sandra, October 2009, A This report gives an overview of marine biodiversity and identifies
Preliminary Baseline Study of fishing as its principle threat. It is argued that an integrated
Mauritania‟s Marine approach for the marine environment is needed to curb biodiversity
Biodiversity - Offshore Oil and loss. Besides sound environmental management of the emerging oil
Gas Development - Threats and gas sector, this sector can provide the financial means needed
and Opportunities (93 pages) to bear the short-term social and economic costs coupled to a
reform of notably the industrial fishery sector and the creation of
Marine Protected Areas in at least 10% of the EEZ covering key
ecosystems in line with the target set at the 8th COP of the CBD.
This report is divided into three sections. Section A contains a
baseline study of the marine environment including an overview of
the makeup of marine biodiversity, their current and future threats
and provides insight in the rate of biodiversity degradation. Section

B analyses the effectiveness of current management policies for the
marine environment; and Section C proposes activities to be
implemented in the context of this project including making
intergenerational Cost Benefit Analysis of reforming the fishery
sector and creating additional MPAs.
5 Djigo, Seybatou Alpha, 2009, This study reviews the economy of the environment in order to
Partenariats pour la provide arguments to decision-makers for allocating more budget
promotion de la biodiversité resources to the management, protection and conservation of this
dans le cadre du resource; particularly in the context of the oil and gas development
développement des secteurs in the marine and coastal environment of Mauritania. Expectations
pétrolier et gazier en have been raised that this sector and the fishery industry may
Mauritanie – Rapport de contribute financially to the protection and conservation of
l‟expert économiste (64 pages) biodiversity; compensating for the risks of marine and coastal
pollution and harmful effects due to exploitation of oil and gas and
overexploitation of the fish stock.
The study analyzes various mechanisms with the potential to

manage the interface between biodiversity conservation and
exploitation such as:
Determination of economic value of ecosystems and their
contribution to the national economy;
Definition and implementation of compensation
mechanisms for biodiversity loss and risks by the users of
these ecosystems such as oil and gas operators;
Identification of sustainable financial mechanisms such as
trust funds for conserving these ecosystems; particularly
the marine and coastal ecosystems;
Capacity development for determining the value of
ecosystems and demonstrate the contribution of the
environment in other economic sectors.

SIGNATURE PAGE
[Note: To be completed after CEO endorsement and before agency approval]
Country: Mauritania
UNDAF Outcome(s)/Indicator(s): Sustainable management of environment and natural resource

incorporated into poverty reduction strategies/key national development frameworks and sector strategies
(Link to UNDAF outcome. If no UNDAF, leave blank)
Expected Outcome(s)/Indicator (s): Adoption by the government of a sustainable development strategy

and of a national action for its implementation
(CP outcomes linked to the SRF/MYFF goal and service line)
Expected Output(s)/Indicator(s): The National Environmental Action Plan (PANE) and the National
Action Plan to fight Desertification (PAN/LCD) are adopted and implemented
(CP outcomes linked to the SRF/MYFF goal and service line)
Implementing partner: _________________________

(designated institution/Executing agency)
Other Partners: _________________________
_________________________
Program Period: _____________ Total budget: ____________

Program Component: Environment and Energy Allocated resources: ____________
Project Title: Partnership to Mainstream Government ____________
Marine and Coastal Biodiversity Regular ____________
into Oil and Gas Sector Other:
Development in Mauritania o Donor _________
Project ID: 3700 o Donor _________
Project Duration: ______________ o Donor _________
Management Arrangement: ______________ In kind contributions _________
Agreed by (Government): _______________________________________________________

Agreed by (Implementing partner/Executing agency):________________________________
Agreed by (UNDP):______________________________________________________________

Mauritania Oil & Gas Project (PDFDrive) PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mauritania Oil & Gas Project (PDFDrive) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNDP Project Document

Executing Agency: Ministry of the Environment and Sustainable Development (MEDD)

United Nations Development Program (UNDP)

UNDP GEF PIMS no. 3700

Partnership to Mainstream Marine and Coastal Biodiversity into

SECTION I: ELABORATION OF THE NARRATIVE ................................................................................. 7

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 2

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 3

Table 1: Summarized Industry Profile Matrix ............................................................................................................. 17

Box 1: Mapping Project ―Biodiversity and Hydrocarbons in Mauritania‖ ................................................................. 14

List of Project Maps – in a separate file

Map 1: The West Africa Marine Critical Region of the World

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 4

AFD Agence Française du Développement

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 5

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 6

PART I: Situation Analysis

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 7

CONTEXT AND GLOBAL SIGNIFICANCE

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 8

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 9

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 10

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 11

Sectoral Framework for Biodiversity Mainstreaming

Prospects of an Oil and Gas Based Economy

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 12

21. In response to concerns expressed by a variety of stakeholders, primarily environmental and

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 13

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 14

Industry Assessment: The Oil and Gas Sector in Mauritania

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 15

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 16

Table 1: Summarized Industry Profile Matrix

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 17

Governance Frameworks for Biodiversity Mainstreaming

Policies, Plans and Laws

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 18

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 19

Institutional and Partnerships‘ Frameworks

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 20

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 21

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 22

Funding for PA Biodiversity Management

60. The objectives of this trust fund are to:

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 23

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 24

a. Review and amend existing Decrees (2004 & 2007).

THREATS, RISKS AND IMPACTS

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 25

(i) Overexploitation of biological resources

(iii) Climate Change and the Ocean Acidification

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 26

Overexploitation of the Fishery Resources

Figure 2: Mean Trophic Index for Mauritania

Source: Sea Around Us Project / The PEW Charitable Trusts (http://www.seaaroundus.org/)

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 27

Oil and Gas Developments

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 28

Drilling Operations (Exploration and Exploitation)

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 29

Accidental Large Oil Spills

PRODOC - 3700 Partnership Mauritania 30