Institutional Support to the Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning (mesp) and River Basin Authorities cris n° 2008/162-152

3Assumptions

3.1Assumptions at different level

The ToR mentioned different assumptions regarding Project implementation, see Table 13.

Table : Comments on Project assumptions

Assumptions	Comments
Continuous support and active involvement of the Project’s Beneficiaries.	Support has been active especially for data acquisition in pilot projects.
Smooth and effective co-operation and interaction between all parties involved in the project.	The consultant has supported the definition of roles and responsibilities for each stake-holder.
Sufficient support and commitment from the recipient institutions.	Weekly meetings were organised.
Absorption capacity and technical capability of the institutions to fulfil their commitments.	Absorption and technical capacity limited the transfer of know-how especially as far as data control and processing is concerned.
Unrestricted access to all available relevant data including maps, water quality and quantity records, etc.	Access in WD and HMIK was provided but data from private sources or other institutions were difficult to access.
Unrestricted access to any required information relevant to the subject of the project.	Generally speaking, access to information was provided.
Timely approval of the submitted reports by the authority and timely approval of necessary actions, licenses etc. from the appropriate authorities.	There were a few difficulties regarding the procedures for the approval of JSTE experts. In June 2008, these led to the cancellation of the recruitment of JSTE.
Additional Assumption	Comment
The River Basin Councils are established at the beginning of the project.	There has not been a high support for establishment of River Basin institutions.

3.2Risks and flexibility

Several risks were identified by Project’s ToR including:

• 
  The poor quality of data;
  
• 
  The unwillingness of data-holders to share data freely;
  
• 
  The uncertainty regarding the political support to establish River Basin District Authorities.
  

The Project did face these risks to various degrees, so with the support of partners, strategies were developed to overcome these difficulties. For example:

• 
  Good quality data from the period 1950 to 1986 were utilised for calculating key hydrological parameters. The Hydrology Expert also used special techniques and methods to fill data gaps.
  
• 
  A Memorandum of Understanding was signed between MESP and the Independent Commission for Mines and Minerals (ICMM). This memorandum assisted the Project in obtaining some key geological and hydro-geological maps and data for Drini River Basin. However, on-line access to the ICMM database including most recent ortho-photographic maps was not permitted.
  

Where existing data could not been obtained, new data were collected and generated during the Pilot Projects. This approach was revealed to be particularly fruitful.

It was observed that quality control and checking of the consistency of the measurements were poor. Improvements are needed in both the public and private sectors. The Project organised training for this purpose including study tours. The Project also recruited a JSTE to check the quality of topographic data to be input in the OASIS software, which was utilised for flood risk mapping.

Other unforeseen circumstances, which had to be tackled by the Project included:

• 
  The handover process between EAR and ECLO hampered the approval process of experts and the incidental budget during a three-month period from June to September 2008.
  
• 
  The great instability in the top position of the MESP hampered the development of the Project‘s legislative and institutional contribution.
  
• 
  The circulation of a new draft Water Law in 2009, which included a new institutional setting that did not follow the 2004 Water Law.
  

To smooth the impact of these unforeseen circumstances, the Project had to adjust its work plan. Some activities were postponed, human resources were allocated to data acquisition through Pilot Projects, and posters were produced to explain technical details of Project activities. Fortunately, the Project caught up on its work plan in February 2009, and the external monitoring mission confirmed that the project made up for the time lost, thus reaching a normal pace of implementation by the beginning of 2009.

4Implementation

4.1Physical and non physical means

Physical means

The Project was installed in the premises of the WD, which provided office space against the provision of formal English training of staff. The Project also rented additional office space in the same building.

The Project employed local staff for office management, transport and translation. Two vehicles were used for transportation. Equipment for office work, most notably computers and software for GIS development, were purchased for the use of the Project staff.

For the Pilot Projects’ implementation, measuring equipment was purchased. The EAR then ECLO approved the software acquisition through the use of the Incidental Budget. This included ArcGIS licenses as well as software for processing the data, which were recorded by the measuring equipment.

For laboratory analyses of the Pilot Project on river ecology, the equipment of the zoology laboratory of the University of Prishtina was utilised. The physio-chemical analyses and hydrological measurements were performed by the HMIK staff with HMIK equipment. The KEPA provided the electro-fishing equipment, which was operated by a KEPA employee.

For the groundwater pilot project, the Project purchased several specialised items of equipment (GPS units, dip-meters, transducers, water sampling equipment, field chemistry meters and calibration solutions) using its own resources.

Non physical means

The Project’s human resources included 3 Key Experts, 2 Junior Long-Term Experts (JLTE), 13 Senior Short-Term Experts (STE) and 9 Junior or local STE. The specialities covered by the experts were Water Information Systems including Database-GIS, River Basin Planning, Water Framework Directive Implementation, Hydrology, River Ecology, Hydrogeology, Modelling Water Balances, Modelling Flood Risk, Water Supply and Sanitation, Software Programming, Quality Management for Laboratory Analyses, Legislation, Communication and Awareness.

A consortium meeting was organised on 18 April 2008, which was attended by the Project Directors of the consortium’s partners (GFA, Oieau and BRL Ingénierie). The GFA Director carried out many backstopping missions and provided extensive support especially for reporting and liaising with ECLO and the Project’s partners.