View
217
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
FAO/GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY
PROJECT DOCUMENT
PROJECT TITLE: CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF TURKEY’S
STEPPE ECOSYSTEMS
PROJECT SYMBOL: GCP/TUR/061/GFF
RECIPIENT COUNTRY/IES: TURKEY
RESOURCE PARTNER: GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY (GEF TRUST FUND)
FAO PROJECT ID: 626050 GEF/LDCF/SCCF PROJECT ID: 5657
Executing Partner(s):
- Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs (MFWA); General Directorate of Nature Conservation and
National Parks
- Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Livestock (MFAL); General Directorate of Plant Production
EXPECTED EOD (STARTING DATE): MAY 2016
EXPECTED NTE (END DATE): MAY 2020
CONTRIBUTION
TO FAO’S STRATEGIC
FRAMEWORK1
a. Strategic objective/Organizational Result: SO2 - Increase and improve
provision of goods and services from agriculture, forestry and fisheries in a
sustainable manner b. Regional Result/Priority Area: [3] Natural Resource Management,
including climate change mitigation and adaptation
c. Country Programming Framework Outcome: Sustainable use of natural
resources and forests ensured and improved:
GEF FOCAL AREA/LDCF/SCCF: BIODIVERSITY
GEF/LDCF/SCCF STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
BD-1: Improve sustainability of protected areas
BD-2: Mainstream biodiversity conservation and sustainable use into production landscapes, seascapes
and sectors
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CATEGORY (INSERT √): A B C
FINANCING PLAN: GEF/LDCF/SCCF ALLOCATION:
Co-financing:
MFWA (in kind)
MFWA (grant)
MFAL (in kind)
MFAL (grant)
FAO (in kind)
FAO (grant)
Subtotal Co-financing:
Total Budget:
2,328,767 USD
2,700,000 USD
3,310,000 USD
1,200,000 USD
1,800,000 USD
150,000 USD
350,000 USD
9,510,000 USD
11,838,767 USD
1 For projects operated by country offices, it is necessary to link projects in FPMIS at OR level. For all other
projects, linkage at product/service level is necessary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Steppes are one of the most ecologically important and vulnerable ecosystems in Turkey. Turkey’s
steppe ecosystems include pastures, meadows, and grasslands and cover approximately 32 million hectares of
the country. Steppe ecosystems are prevalent in Eastern and Central Anatolia as well as the high mountains
of the Aegean and Mediterranean Regions. Project activities will take place in Sanliurfa province, located in
southeastern Turkey along the Syrian border. Sanliurfa has an average elevation of 518m and a total surface
area of 19 million hectares. In the last twenty years, the population has grown from approximately 1,000,000
to nearly 2,000,000 inhabitants. This is in addition to more than 350,000 Syrian refugees currently hosted in
the province. Nearly 600,000 people live in the provincial capital, also called “Sanliurfa”. In spite of rapid
growth, Sanliurfa province continues to benefit from some of the nation’s best remaining, intact steppe
ecosystems. Approximately 250,000 hectares of Şanlıurfa Province are considered grasslands. These
grasslands are part of both the globally significant Akçale Steppes and Ceylanpınar Key Biodiversity Areas.
These are some of the last remaining well preserved and biodiversity rich steppe ecosystems in Turkey and
Europe. Project effort will focus upon three distinct Sanliurfa grasslands: Kızılkuyu Wildlife Development
Area, TekTek Mountains National Park, and the Karacadağ Steppes. The project will enhance biodiversity
within these sites and promote greater connectivity between these sites. These three sites represent the last
and best remaining examples of relatively intact step ecosystems remaining within the greater Anatolian
region. Each site faces nearly the same threats and barrier challenges to biodiversity conservation.
The integrity of Turkey’s steppe ecosystems faces three primary threats: habitat loss and degradation,
overharvest, and climate change. Expanding cultivation is likely the most evident driver of steppe habitat
loss, though infrastructure development also contributes significantly. Some estimate that over 15% hectares
of steppe has been converted to urban use over the last few decades. Over-grazing is the main cause of steppe
habitat degradation. Nearly all steppe areas are subject to grazing pressure by domestic livestock. Livestock
grazing generally rises beyond carrying capacity limits and diminishes the integrity of steppe ecosystems.
Overgrazing occurs on steppe systems both inside and outside of protected area boundaries. The rate and
intensity of overgrazing is increasing as the total hectares of grasslands are reduced and the total number of
livestock remains stable and/or increases.
Regarding overharvesting, numerous steppe dependent species are subject to harvest. This is particularly
pronounced in terms of flora. Most of this activity is driven by subsistence and/or medicinal use, though
some take is income motivated. Similarly, poachers often target both bustards and wild gazelle. While
bustards are harvested for sport and consumption, gazelle are primarily live capture from herds reintroduced
to the Kızılkuyu Wildlife Development Area. Rather than flight, young gazelle often rely upon cryptic
measures. This makes them relatively easy to target while hiding in steppe grass. Young animals are sold to
citizens who raise these suckling gazelle as garden pets. In addition, though the rate of fuel wood
consumption within steppe forest areas has slowed over the past decade due to energy infrastructure changes,
the residual impacts of past overharvest continue to impact steppe ecosystem integrity. Finally, climate
change is an emerging threat to Turkey’s globally significant steppe habitats. Climate change will compound
and accelerate the negative impacts of existing threats, further reducing the resilience of steppe ecosystems.
The cumulative impact of these three threats is the rapid loss and degradation of Turkey’s steppe lands:
over the past 80 years, approximately 12 million ha of natural steppe have been lost. At the same time,
Turkish experts categorize nearly 60% of Turkey’s steppe lands as highly degraded. Steppes represent less
than 1% of the national protected area system with only 6% of all grasslands having protected status. Those
with protected area status often struggle under less than ideal conservation management systems.
The long-term solution is to reduce the loss rate of steppe lands and associated biodiversity values. This
requires improving the conservation of currently degraded steppe lands, reducing the rate at which steppe
lands are permanently lost to cultivation and urbanization, and the conversion rate of steppe biodiversity.
Steppe lands must also be conserved on a landscape level. Conservation of Turkey’s globally significant
steppe biodiversity demands conservation effort both within protected areas and beyond the borders of
protected areas. The best examples of Turkey’s globally significant biodiversity must benefit from adequate
levels of conservation within protected areas. However, Turkey’s protected areas system will never be large
enough to preserve populations of large mammal species such as gazelle within protected area boundaries.
To conserve biological integrity, connectivity between the best remaining steppe habitats must be maintained.
This includes reducing the rate of species loss and habitat fragmentation.
Safeguarding Turkey’s globally significant steppe biodiversity demands conservation effort beyond the
borders of protected areas. Over 40% of Turkey is considered steppe. Many steppe species are wide ranging.
Attempting to create a protected area regime covering the entire landscape is not tenable. Steppe biodiversity
outside of protected areas benefits from almost no measurable conservation support. However, it is within
these areas outside of protected areas where biodiversity is most threatened by human encroachment and
overuse. The three barriers that will be addressed by the project are (i) limited experience with highly
effective steppe protected area design and management, (ii) limited experience with integrating steppe
conservation with grazing and agricultural management practices, and (iii) limited capacity to generate
institutional and policy level support required to achieve landscape level grasslands conservation.
In this context, the project’s objective is to improve the conservation of Turkey’s steppe ecosystems
through effective protected area management and mainstreaming steppe biodiversity conservation into
production landscapes. The project will apply three components each designed to systematically address the
three barriers standing between the existing situation and long-term solution of securing the ecological
integrity of Turkey’s globally significant steppe ecosystems. The first component will aim to facilitate the
emplacement of tools and experience required for protected area design and management to become much
more effective at conserving steppe ecosystems and associated globally significant biodiversity. This will
include setting in place a rigorous framework for steppe protected area management planning and monitoring.
The second component will support the emplacement of tools to integrate steppe conservation within
grazing and management practices. The project will support protected area managers, government extension
agencies and agriculturalists to mainstream steppe conservation within their production activities. The
protected area staff and others will work with grazing interests to emplace much better models for grassland
management predicated upon spatial and temporal carrying capacities. A major part of this effort will be to
innovate a stock management system that maintains ecosystem services, reduces business risk, and increases
profitability. Finally, the project will help generate the institutional and policy level support required to
achieve steppe conservation on a landscape level. Agriculture and associated infrastructure development is a
major driver of steppe ecosystem losses. This development is also fragmenting remaining steppe, including
existing protected areas. This problem persists due to the limited capacity and experience in Turkey with the
generation of institutional and policy frameworks required for the realization of landscape level conservation.
The project will help to remove this barrier by creating a model for provincial level steppe conservation
planning. A centrepiece of this effort will be the generation and implementation of a provincial level steppe
conservation strategy. Commensurate capacity building will support this effort.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... (i)
Glossary of Acronyms ............................................................................................................................... (ii)
Section 1: Relevance
1.1 Context ............................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Rationale .......................................................................................................................................... 15
1.3 FAO’s Comparative Advantage ....................................................................................................... 28
1.4 Stakeholder Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 29
1.5 Lessons Learned from Related Experiences ..................................................................................... 35
1.6 Links to National, GEF, and FAO Strategies and Objectives .......................................................... 36
Section 2: Project Framework and Expected Results
2.1 Project Objective, Strategy, and GEF Alternative ............................................................................ 41
2.2 Project Outcomes and Activities ...................................................................................................... 42
2.3 Expected Results and Global Benefits ............................................................................................. 52
2.4 Cost Effectiveness ............................................................................................................................ 54
2.5 Innovativeness .................................................................................................................................. 54
Section 3: Feasibility
3.1 Environmental Impact Assessment .................................................................................................. 54
3.2 Risk Management ............................................................................................................................. 55
Section 4: Implementation and Management
4.1 Intuitional Arrangements .................................................................................................................. 58
4.2 Implementation Arrangements ......................................................................................................... 59
4.3 Financial Planning and Management ............................................................................................... 67
4.4 Financial Management and Reporting ............................................................................................. 69
4.5 Procurement ..................................................................................................................................... 70
4.6 Monitoring and Evaluation ............................................................................................................... 71
4.7 Provisions for Evaluations ................................................................................................................ 75
4.8 Communications and Visibility ........................................................................................................ 75
Section 5: Sustainability of Results
5.1 Social Sustainability and Gender Mainstreaming............................................................................. 76
5.2 Environmental Sustainability ........................................................................................................... 76
5.3 Financial and Economic Sustainability ............................................................................................ 76
5.4 Sustainability of Capacities Developed ............................................................................................ 76
5.5 Appropriateness of Technology Introduced ..................................................................................... 76
5.6 Replicability and Scaling Up ............................................................................................................ 77
Appendices
1 Results Matrix ......................................................................................................................................
2 Provisional Work Plan..........................................................................................................................
3 Results Budget......................................................................................................................................
4 Draft Terms of Reference .....................................................................................................................
5 Quantifying and Monitoring Carbon Benefits ......................................................................................
6 Tracking Tools .....................................................................................................................................
Acronyms
AWP/B Annual Work Plan and Budget
BH Budget Holder
CEO Chief Executing Officer (GEF)
CFA Community Forestry Association
CBNRM Community Based Natural Resource Management
EP Executing Partner
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
BERN The Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats
BD Biological Diversity
BH Budget Holder
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity
CC Climate Change
CEO Chief Executing Officer (GEF)
CE Critical Endangered
CGRFA Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
CSOs Civil Society Organizations
DKM Nature Conservation Centre (DoğaKorumaMerkezi)
EN Endangered
EP Executing Partner
EU European Union
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
FPMIS Field Project Management Information System
GAP Southeastern Anatolian Project (GüneydoğuAnadoluProjesi)
GEBs Global Environmental Benefits
GEF Global Environment Facility
GEFSEC GEF Secretariat
GDF General Directorate of Forestry
GDNCNP General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks
GDPP General Directorate of Plant Production
GoT Government of Turkey
IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature
LTO Lead Technical Officer
LTU Lead Technical Unit
KBA Key Biodiversity Areas
METT Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool
PC Pasture Commission
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MFAL Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock
MFWA Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs
NBMS National Basin Management Strategy of Turkey
NCSA Turkey’s National Capacity Self-Assessment
NP National Park
PA Protected Area
PIF Project Identification Form (GEF)
PIR Project Implementation Review
PPG Project Preparation Grant (GEF)
PPR Project Progress Report
PRODOC Project Document
PSC Project Steering Committee
PY Project Year
PoWPA Protected Area Working Programme
SCP Systematic Conservation Planning
SPA Steppe Protected Area
STAP Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel
RAMSAR Convention on Wetlands of International Importance
TA Technical Assistance
TCI Investment Centre Division (FAO)
TOR Terms of Reference
UNCCD United Nation Convention to Combat Desertification
UNEP United Nation Environment Programme
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNFCCC United Nations Framework on Climate Change Convention
USD United States Dollar
VU Vulnerable
WDA Wildlife Development Area
WDP Wildlife Development Plan
WOCAT World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies
WWF-Turkey World Wildlife Fund-Turkey
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 1
Section 1 Relevance
1.1 Context
1.1.1 National Context
1. Turkey is situated at the cross roads of Asia and Europe. The nation’s total territory is
approximately 780,000 km2. The population exceeds 77 million. Over 90% of Turkey’s
population lives in urban areas. The national literacy rate is over 95%. Turkey’s GDP ranks in the
world’s top 20.
2. Turkey is food self-sufficient. Agriculture makes up approximately 9% of the nation’s GDP.
Crop production represents approximately 60% of all agricultural value. Nearly 35% of the
country is arable land with more than 27 million hectares under cultivation. Only 20% of all
cultivated land is irrigated. There are over four million farm households in Turkey. Nearly 70%
of these farmers work less than five hectares of land. Livestock production represents
approximately 35% of agricultural value. The national herd consists of more than 10 million
cattle and 25 million head of sheep. The Government of Turkey would like to increase
agricultural production with an ambitious target of becoming one of the world’s top five
agricultural countries by 2023. This includes expanding irrigated crop production from a current
5.5 million hectares to approximately 8.5 million hectares.
3. The country’s diverse landscapes include forests, mountains, steppes, wetlands, and coastal
and marine ecosystems. The Irano-Anatolian, Caucasus, and Mediterranean biodiversity hotspots
intersect within Turkey. The nation is on several major flyways and provides critical habitat for a
large array of bird species, including breeding habitat for several threatened European bird
species. There are 1,500 vertebrate species with more than 120 endemics. There are 236
freshwater fish species, 28 amphibians, 129 reptiles, 456 birds, and 165 mammal species. Turkey
has an estimated 21,000 invertebrates with nearly 4,000 endemic species/subspecies.
4. The country has 12,000 flowering plant species (including intraspecific taxa). There are
approximately 9,000 vascular plant species, of which at least 2991 are endemic. Of the 12,000
species known to exist in Europe – defined as everything west of the Urals – 11,000 are recorded
from Turkey. In addition to being rich in endemic species, Turkey’s flora has an important place
among other countries. The second richest country in Europe for endemism is Greece, where the
number of endemic taxa is between 800 and 1000. Although some of the endemics of Turkey are
widespread, some are peculiar to a specific region or mountain range. Some endemics might
require special habitats like soils with salt or gypsum. The Amanos Mountains, Uludağ, Kaz
Mountain, Munzur Mountains, Ilgaz Mountains, and Erciyes Mountain are the richest mountain
ranges with respect to endemism.
5. Among woody plants, one notable genus that may have its origins here is Quercus (oak). With
18 species of Quercus in Turkey, this region is the gene center of the genus. Turkish flora, among
the Middle East Countries, is also richer in woody species, as it is in other herbaceous endemic
species. The number of tree species and tall bushes is around 300, including, notably, Sorbus,
Pyrus, Amelanchier, Malus, Mespilus, Crataegus, Amygdalus, Prunus, Cerasus and Cotoneaster.
The abundance of fruit trees is high compared to other Middle Eastern countries, suggesting that
cultivation of these fruits is of Anatolian origin.
6. A number of important domestic crop plants likely originated in Turkey. These include: Isatis
(Indigo grass), Draba, Alyssum, Astragalus, Alcea, Phlomis, Salvia, Verbascum (mullein),
Scrophularia, Veronica, Campanula (bell flower), Anthemis (daisy), Centaurea (cornflower),
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 2
Achillea (klamath weed, yarrow), Allium (onion) and Iris species are among those believed to
originate in this region.
7. Turkey has declared approximately 9.5 million ha of land as protected areas. This represents
8% of the nation’s total territory. Turkey has twelve types of protected areas, ranging from
National Park to Seed Stands.
Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs Protected Areas Number of Sites Area (ha)
National Parks 40 848,202
Nature Parks 192 90,218
Nature Conservation Areas 31 64,242
Nature Monuments 112 6,683
Wildlife Development Areas 80 1,191,340
Wetlands (13 of them RAMSAR Site) 135 3,215,500
Protection Forests 55 320,450
Gene Conservation Forests (in-situ) 257 47,977
Seed Stands (in-situ) 351 47,062
Seed Orchard (ex-situ) 179 1,413
Ministry of Environment and Urbanization Protected Areas Number of Sites Area (ha)
Special Environmental Protection Areas 16 2,459,116
Natural Sites 1273 1,322,748
Total Hectares Nationally Designated Protected Areas 9,614,951
8. Steppes are one of the most ecologically important and vulnerable ecosystems in Turkey.
Turkey’s steppe ecosystems include pastures, meadows, and grasslands. Steppes cover
approximately 32 million hectares of Turkey. Steppe ecosystems are prevalent in Eastern and
Central Anatolia as well as the high mountains of the Aegean and Mediterranean Regions.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 3
9. There are four types of steppe in Turkey. The rare Gramineae steppes are dominated by
gramineae species. Broad-leaved plants define Malacophyll steppes. Tragaganthic steppes have
cushion-forming spiny species such as Astragalus L. and Acantholimon Boiss. Salty steppe
species incorporate Chenopodiaceae and Plumbaginaceae families.
10. As described in more detail below, Turkey’s steppe ecosystems are globally significant and
unique. Five separate Key Biodiversity Areas have been identified in the Urfa region alone.
These steppes have incredibly rich flora and fauna composition. Over 1,000 endemic plant
species have been identified within Turkey’s steppe region. There are numerous endemic insects,
including several butterfly species. Reptile species include the Desert monitor (Varanusgriseus).
Steppes host endemic subspecies Anatolian mouflon (Ovisorientalisanatolica), Steppe Lynx
(Felis caracal), wolf (Canis lupus), birch mouse (Sicistacaucasia), mole (Talpaeuropea), jerboa
(Allactagawilliamsi), ground squirrel (Citelluscitellus), and globally endangered bird species
including Great Bustard (Otis tarda), griffin vulture (Gyps fulvus), black vulture (Aegypius
monachus), lesser kestrel (Falco naumanni), snake eagle (Circaetusgallicus), hawks (Buteo sp.),
falcons (Falco sp.), harriers (Circus sp.), little bustard (Otis tetrax), hoopoe (Upupaepops), and
quail (Coturnix sp.).
Table: Steppe Representation in Turkey
Type of Steppe Area (ha) Key BD
area (%)
PAs
(%)
Arable
(%)
Agric.
(%)
Pasture
(%)
Permanent
crops (%)
Natural
(%)
Mountain Steppe
Mid-Anatolia Mountain 8,362,018 13 0.7 27 23 1 0.9 48.7
Central Eastern Anatolia
Mountain 2,788,501 28 0.0 11 17 1 0.6 70.0
Eastern Anatolia Mountain 5,181,794 27 2.2 13 16 2 0.1 69.2
Eastern Anatolia High
Mountain 1,567,547 34 3.2 2 7 1 0.0 90.5
South Eastern Anatolia
Mountain 1,223,513 28 0.0 36 19 23 2.8 19.0
Plain Steppe
Mid-Anatolia Plain Steppe 7,821,932 14 6.2 47 22 5 1.6 24.7
South Eastern Anatolia Plain 2,532,580 37 0.8 56 12 7 7.0 18.6
Eastern Anatolia Plain
Steppe 1,425,703 23 0.9 43 20 6 0.2 31.2
North Eastern Anatolia 193,541 21 0.0 58 11 16 0.1 16.0
High Plain
Thrace Plain Steppe 714,202 5 0.0 67 15 8 0.1 11.0
Salt Steppe
Mid-Anatolia Salt Steppe 317,156 85 59.1 16 16 10 0.6 66.9
Eastern Anatolia Salt Steppe 154,309 41 1.8 23 23 1 0.0 61.4
Total 32,282,796 94% 30% 6% 33% 15% 7% 44%
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 4
1.1.2 Project Site Context
Sanliurfa Province
11. Project activities will take place in Sanliurfa province. The province is located in
southeastern Turkey along the Syrian border. Sanliurfa has an average elevation of 518m and a
total surface area of 19 million hectares. In the last twenty years, the population has grown from
approximately 1,000,000 to nearly 2,000,000. This is in addition to more than 350,000 Syrian
refugees currently hosted in the province. Nearly 600,000 people live in the provincial capital,
also called “Sanliurfa”.
12. Şanlıurfa is a major tourism destination. The province is considered the birthplace of
Abraham. Şanlıurfa has many ancient archaeological sites. Gobeklitepe is a unique prehistoric
site dating to 9,600 BCE. This stone structure adorned with numerous carvings of wild animals is
considered the first human-made temple.
13. The major driver of growth is the Southeastern Anatolia Project (GüneydoğuAnadoluProjesi
or GAP). Begun in the early 1990’s, the Southeastern Anatolia Project (GAP) is one of the largest
river basin development projects in the world. The GAP covers nine provinces and represents an
investment worth tens of billions of dollars. The stated objective is to provide employment
opportunities for 3.8 million people. GAP is linked to major hydro-programs on the nearby
Euphrates and Tigris rivers with more than twenty dams under production. The accompanying
irrigation program is rapidly expanding and intensifying cultivation. As of 2013, GAP has brought
more than 3.1 million hectares into agricultural production. This includes more than 1.2 million
hectares in Sanliurfa. There are aspirations to bring another 1.8 million hectares under irrigation.
14. In the early 1990’s when GAP commenced, the value of agriculture in the region was less
than US$ 20 million/annually. Agriculture is now valued in the billions. The agriculture sector
employs over 70% of the population. Approximately 60% of Sanliurfa’s total territory is now
under crop production. At least two thirds of Sanliurfa’s natural steppes have been converted to
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 5
agricultural lands. Sanliurfa province now produces approximately 45% of the nation’s cotton,
10% of the barley and wheat crop, 36% of the lentils, 20% of the corn, and nearly 40% of the
national pistachio crop.
Şanlıurfa Pilot Sites
15. In spite of rapid growth, Sanliurfa province continues to benefit from some of the nation’s
best remaining, intact steppe ecosystems. Approximately 250,000 hectares of Şanlıurfa Province
are considered grasslands. These grasslands are part of both the globally significant Akçale
Steppes and Ceylanpınar Key Biodiversity Areas. These are some of the last remaining well
preserved and biodiversity rich steppe ecosystems in Turkey and Europe.
16. The world’s largest critically endangered sociable lapwing (Vanellus gregarius) population
depends upon this region during migration. Thirty-seven species of diurnal raptor have been
recorded in this region, including 14 breeding species. Important fauna include Great bustard (Otis
tarda), Egyptian vulture (Neophron percnopterus), Mahely’s horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus
mehelyi), striped hyena (Hyaena hyaena), marbled polecat (Vormela peregusna), goitered gazelle
(Gazella subgutturosa), varan lizard (Varanus griseus), lynx (Lynx lynx), lapwing (Vanellus
vanellus), crested lark (Galerida cristate), calandra lark (Melanocorypha calandra), grouse
(Pterocles orientalis), and hoopoe (Upupa epops). Many of these are IUCN and Bern Convention
species.
17. Sanliurfa is home to Turkey’s only remaining population of free-ranging goitered gazelle
(Gazella subguttorosa) representing the western fringe of this species. Gazelle depend upon large
intact grasslands, making them a very suitable umbrella and indicator species for grassland health
and connectivity. The total gazelle herd consists of approximately 300 free-roaming individuals
and more than 1,500 captive gazelles. Gazelle are a very important part of Sanliurfa culture, often
depicted in art and song.
18. The province’s forested steppe areas contain some of the world’s last stands of wild pistachio
(Pistacia terebinthus). The pistachio shrubland includes other woody plant species such as
cerasus (Cerasus sp.), whitethorn (Crataegus aronia) and ficus (ficus sp.). Additional globally
significant plant species include wild chickpea (Cicer pinnatifidum Jaub. & Spach), wild Lathyrus
(Lathyrus cicera L.), wild lentil (Lens orientalis Boiss.), iridescent flower (Centaurea obtusifolia
(Boiss. & Hausskn.) Wagenitz); astragakus (Astragalu saleppicus Boiss) whitethorn (Crataegus
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 6
aronia (L.) Bosc. var. aronia), versicolour flower (Centaurea obtusifolia (Boiss. &Hausskn.)
Wagenitz).
19. Project effort will focus upon three distinct Sanliurfa grasslands: Kızılkuyu Wildlife
Development Area, TekTek Mountains National Park, and the Karacadağ Steppes. The project
will enhance biodiversity within these sites and promote greater connectivity between these sites.
These three sites represent the last and best remaining examples of relatively intact step
ecosystems remaining within the greater Anatolian region. Each site faces nearly the same threats
and barrier challenges to biodiversity conservation. As describe below, each site presents slightly
different steppe ecotypes.
Pilot Site 1: TekTek Mountains National Park
20. TekTek Mountain was declared a national park in 2007. The protected area covers 20,000 ha.
State owned lands cover 18,000 ha with the remaining held by local communities. There are seven
villages with a total of nearly 3,000 people located inside protected area. Residents depend
primarily upon animal husbandry. The northern part of the site is not open for grazing and as a
result the steppe habitat there is well preserved. The central and southern parts of TekTek are
open to grazing. These areas are under intense grazing pressure. Approximately 2,500 livestock
graze across 10.000 ha of land. Approximately 3,000 hectares are used for dryland crop
production. The protected area’s topography is hilly, located between the Harran and Viranşehir
Plateaus. The elevation varies between 500 and 750 meters. Part of the Irano-Turanianphyto
geographic region, TekTek is defined as “forest steppe”.
21. TekTek hosts an array of endemic species. This includes one of the world’s last remaining
wild pistachio forests. There are 2,800 ha of turpentine pistachio (Pistacia terebinthus) shrubland.
Pilot Site 2: Kızılkuyu Wildlife Development Area
22. Kızılkuyu was declared a wildlife development area in 2006 managed according to the
Terrestrial Hunting Law by GDNCNP and the MFWA Şanlıurfa National Park Division.
Kızılkuyu is located just outside the city of Şanlıurfa. The average elevation of the site is 600m
with the highest elevation of 764 meters. Kızılkuyu encompasses approximately 20,000 ha. More
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 7
than 90% of the land belongs to the state. There are 6 villages within Kızılkuyu with a total
population of roughly 2,000. Residents are primarily engaged in pastureland production with
more than 6,000 sheep/goats and 1,000 cattle grazing Kızılkuyu. This represents a fluctuation of
the number of the sheep/goats and cattle depend on the climatic condition and immigration from
rural to urban areas. Since 2000 the number of the sheep/goats and cattle are degreasing 20%.
23. Kızılkuyu is the one of the most important stopover sites for the critically endangered sociable
lapwing (Vanellus gregarius). The site is also an important wintering area for great bustards.
Other species of conservation concern are the pin-tailed sandgrouse (Pterocles alchata), the
cream-colored courser (Cursorius cursor) and Montagu's harrier (Circus pygargus).
24. Goitered gazelle (Gazella subgutturosa) is the key species in Kizilkuyu. The Gazelle
Breeding Station lies in the center of the protected area. Kizilkuyu currently has approximately
200free-ranging gazelle. This herd is currently increasing. However, the herd’s capacity to
extend habitat range is constrained by surrounding urban and agricultural development.
Pilot Site 3: The Karacadağ Steppes
25. The Karacadağ steppes cover approximately 720,000ha. Karacadağ does not have protected
status. Although Karacadağ is an identified key biodiversity area (KBA), the region does not have
formal protected area status. Karacadağ is managed under the Pasture Law by MFAL. The site is
primarily within Şanlıurfa province with very small portions within neighboring Diyarbakır and
Mardin Provinces.
26. Karacadağ is an extinct volcano. The elevation ranges between 1,000 m and 1,981 m. There
are 12 villages surrounding Karacadağ. The total population is approximately 14,000. The total
number of livestock associated with these villages is estimated to be around 19,000 cattle and
50,000 sheep/goats. There are no permanent residents in the upper core areas.
27. The core area covers approximately 135,000hectares is snow covered during the winter
months (December to March). Overgrazing in the core area is often severe with widespread
evidence of depopulated species and erosion. The upper “core” area is used seasonally by
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 8
approximately 200 grazing families. The total number of livestock in this area often exceeds
70,000 animals. Many of the semi-nomadic herding families travel from more than 500
kilometers to use the pasturelands. There are three main clans who use the area. Grazing is
loosely regulated using a combination of traditional tribal structures controlled by tribal leaders
and a “Pasture Commission” headed by the Sanliurfa governor’s office.
28. Karacadağ has outstanding steppe flora diversity. There are 534 plant species representing
269 genera and 66 different families. More than 32 endemic species have been discovered within
Karacadağ. Three endemic plants are specific to the Karacadağ: (Hesperis hedge, Lathyrus
trachycarpus, and Paracaryum kurdistanicum). Six endemic plants are specific to Southeastern
Anatolia Region: (Symphytum aintabicum, Cicorechino spermum, Scrophulari mesopotamica,
Verbas cumtenue, Trigonosciadium tuberosum and Allium variegatum). More than twenty plant
species found within Karacadağ are endemic to Turkey. Numerous species are rare or
endangered.
29. Recent research indicates that Karacadağ was a center of early wheat domestication. Wild
“hot spring wheat” (Triticum boeoticum) grows in the region and is linked to Einkorn (Triticum
monococcum). Wheat agriculture likely commenced in this region using Karacadağ stock more
than 10,000 years ago. Numerous wild ornamental plants are found in Karacadağ. These include
Crocus spp. Fritillaria spp., Iris spp., and Tulipa ssp., Allium ssp., Gladiolus spp., and
Ornithogalum ssp.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 9
1.1.3 Legal, Policy and Institutional Context
Institutional Context
30. Please see the annex for a comprehensive summary of the project’s institutional context.
31. The Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Livestock (MFAL) manages grazing lands in
accordance with the Pasture Law of 1998. Two provincial directorates located in Şanlıurfa and
Diyarbakır represent MFAL in the project area. These units improve agricultural practices,
manage meadows and grasslands, and coordinate the Ministries’ relations with farmers through
capacity building and direct support.
32. MFAL is responsible for wildlife management among and nearby croplands. MFAL is
responsible for the in-situ and ex-situ conservation of genetic resources of plant species in Turkey
under the General Directorate of Agricultural Research.
33. MFAL’s General Directorate of Agricultural Research and Policies (TAGEM) is responsible
for conducting research studies on vegetable and animal production issues, and collaboration with
international research institutions. TAGEM undertakes demonstrations in plant production and
animal husbandry. TAGAM’s Ceylanpınar Enterprise located in Şanlıurfa is the largest of all
such enterprises in Turkey. Ceylanpınar Enterprise covers 176.000 ha or 9% of Şanlıurfa. The
Soil, Fertilizer, and Water Resources Central Research Institute assists in monitoring information
on soil, include organic carbon levels.
34. MFAL has several research institutes located in Sanliurfa. The GAP Agricultural Research
Institute works for the protection of genetic resources, development of new techniques, research
on plant diseases, surveys on socio economy, and capacity building. The GAP International
Agricultural Research and Training Center in Diyarbakır focuses on agricultural research and
capacity development through conferences, workshops and trainings. The Pistachio Research
Station in Gaziantep aims to improve pistachio production and marketing.
35. The Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs (MFWA) is the main management authority for
protected areas and biodiversity. The MFWA manages pastures within the borders of designated
forests. The MFWA and MFAL cooperatively manage Pasture and pasture lands declared as
protected areas.
36. The MFWA sets and implements biodiversity and natural resources management guidelines
and procedures. The MFWA is responsible for natural resource conservation including planning,
monitoring, and enforcement. The MFWA is regulated by the National Parks Law No. 2873;
Terrestrial Hunting Law No 4915; and, RAMSAR Convention. The Ministry implements and
oversees efforts to meet the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), European
Landscape Convention, Bern Convention, and Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD).
37. The MFWA General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks (GDNCNP) is
responsible for the selection, designation, planning, conservation, and management of national
parks, nature parks, natural monuments, and nature reserve areas. The GDNCNP manages each
protected area under the rules of its “long term development plan” (management plan) through a
network of Park Directorates. Each Directorate is responsible for the conservation of game and
wildlife species within their natural habitats.
38. The Şanlıurfa Province Directorate is directly responsible for carrying out the MFWA’s
mandates within the project area. The provincial directorate oversees the conservation, planning,
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 10
and management of protected areas, conducts biodiversity surveys at the regional level, manages
of wetlands and wildlife, and regulates hunting.
39. The Ministry of Environment and Urbanization (MEU) coordinates Turkey’s climate change
related policies, prevents pollution and ensures the fulfillment of environmental impact
assessments. The MEU General Directorate of Environmental Management, Department of
Climate Change, General Directorate of Spatial Planning and the General Directorate of
Preservation of Natural Heritage are each project relevant.
40. The Sanliurfa Provincial government is important with regards to development planning and
natural resource management. Provincial governments in Turkey are composed primarily of
representatives of national government agencies. The Governor of Sanliurfa is appointed by the
national government. As the province’s most senior official, the Governor oversees most
government functions and enforcement. The Governor presides over the provincial assembly and
the provincial administrative council. The administrative council consists of provincial level
representatives of key national agencies, including MFWA and MFAL. The province of Sanliurfa
is further divided into eleven districts. Each district has various national government branch
offices and representatives.
41. The Sanliurfa “Pastureland (Meadow) Commission” (MC) is responsible for high-level
decisions regarding the use of pasturelands in a province. PC is often involved in grazing land
allotments. The commission serves as a dispute resolution board for grazing lands. This
commission is headed by the deputy Governor. Additional members of the commission include
representatives and agricultural experts from MFAL, MFWA, the Union of Agriculture, and other
key officials invited by the governor’s office. The PC according to the direction the meadow law
has the authority to establishing technical working groups. The commission in Sanliurfa meets at
least monthly. The commission approves the annual grazing plan based on the recommendation of
MFAL.
42. Traditional grazing management mechanisms also exist. Although government owned,
management of most pasturelands are also informed by traditional or clan leadership models.
Policy Framework
43. A large body of legislation is relevant to the protection and management of natural resources
and pastures in Turkey. For a full description, please see the Annex.
44. The Pasture Law (1998) defines policies regarding the allocation of pastures for use by
villages and municipalities. All steppe lands in Turkey are state owned. Utilization rights may be
delegated to local people and local administrations. MFAL determines pasture boundaries and
allocates use to relevant entities. In 2015, the government passed a new by-law covering summer
pasturelands.
45. The Forest Law (1956) governs the management and protection of forests and associated
grasslands. The Regulation on Forestation (2012) describes procedures and principles for
forestation, erosion control, and pasture improvement. According to these policies, surrounding
villages determine the boundaries of protected forests. The MFWA determines management
conditions. Livestock grazing on state forestlands is to be done according to MFWA plans and
permission.
46. The National Parks Law (1983) establishes the principles governing the selection and
designation of protected areas. Protected areas include: national parks, nature parks, natural
monuments, and nature reserve areas. The law describes conservation and management criteria.
The NP Law is further defined by the National Parks by-law.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 11
47. The Regulation on Wildlife Preservation and Wildlife Development areas (2004) governs all
activities within wildlife development areas. The regional directorate of MFWA proposes and
manages wildlife development areas. These proposals are reviewed by the GDNCNP and then
approved by the national MFWA. Areas chosen for wildlife development should be large enough
to accommodate large population of migrating animals. Wildlife development areas are managed
in accordance with management and development plans prepared by GDNCNP. All activities
much comport with the management plan. This generally includes outlawing development that
could damage the ecosystem and conservation objectives. Hunting may be allowed.
48. The Environment Law governs pollution and environmental impact assessments. The Law on
the Protection of Natural and Cultural Entities establishes the baseline for the declaration and
protection of natural sites in Turkey.
49. The By-law on Protection of Wetlands (2014) regulates the identification of important
wetlands, defines protection zones, prepares management plans, and declares Ramsar sites. It
determines rules and procedures related to conservation, management, and development of
wetland areas together with relationship mechanisms and coordination among related institutions
and stakeholders.
50. The Terrestrial Hunting Law (1937, revised 2003) regulates all decisions on species and
habitat conservation, including within wildlife protection areas. The law is to ensure and regulate
sustainable hunting, protect game and other wild animals within their natural habitat, evaluate
hunting resources for the benefit of the national economy, and provide coordination among the
related institutions and the private corporate individuals.
51. The Agricultural Law (2006) defines the principles, objectives and priorities of agricultural
policies, training and advisory services for farmers, protection of biodiversity and genetic
resources, and ensures bio security and bio safety. The law mandates agricultural sector and rural
area development plans and strategies.
52. The Organic Farming Law (2004) supports organic farming and maintains consumer safety.
The Law sets up the principles and procedures of organic farming and defines the rules and
procedures of inspection and control, and certification.
53. The Regulation on Good Agricultural Practices (2010) states that agricultural procedures and
principles should protect natural resources and prevent harm to the environment, humans, or
animal health.
1.1.4 Threats and Impacts
54. The integrity of Turkey’s steppe ecosystems faces three primary threats: habitat loss and
degradation, overharvest, and climate change. The cumulative impact of these three threats is the
rapid loss and degradation of Turkey’s steppe lands; over the past 80 years, approximately
12 million ha of natural steppe have been lost (1935: 44.3 million ha of steppe existed in Turkey;
1950: 37.8 million ha; 2013: 32 million ha). At the same time, Turkish experts categorize nearly
60% of Turkey’s steppe lands as highly degraded. Steppes represent less than 1% of the national
protected area system with only 6% of all grasslands having protected status. Those with
protected area status often struggle under less than ideal conservation management systems.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 12
55. The three identified threats are also causing the biological integrity of the last remaining
steppe lands to be degraded. This includes the loss of connectivity. Turkey’s residual steppe
“islands” are increasingly separated by the rapidly expanding urban and agricultural landscape.
Wide ranging species such as gazelle, hyena, and jackal are increasingly isolated and unable to
traverse developed areas that separate intact steppe ecosystems. Integrity is also being diminished
due to the simple loss of biological diversity and carrying capacities. As a result of the three main
threats, numerous globally significant species are now endangered. This includes endemics found
only in these remaining steppe ecosystems. The impacts are compounded in that diminished
habitat availability forces key indicator species such as bustards and lapwings to exceed the
systems carrying capacity. The loss of biological integrity results in key ecosystem services being
impacted. Steppe areas are generally located in the uplands. These are critical areas to maintain
water flow, slow erosion rates, and buffer against climate change impacts. Over the past 20 years,
more than 13 species have gone extinct in Turkey.
56. Sanliurfa Province is very indicative of national trends. Although Sanliurfa Province
continues to hold a substantial percentage of Turkey’s intact steppe areas, the province is
threatened from habitat loss, unsustainable consumption of biodiversity, and climate change. The
cumulative impact of these threats is advancing rapidly. Since 1970, approximately 75,000 ha of
natural steppe have been lost. Approximately 250,000 ha of steppe remain in Sanliurfa. Of the
total remaining steppes, only 40,000 ha currently benefit from protected area status. The
remaining steppes are highly vulnerable. Approximately 33% of remaining Sanliurfa steppe are
severally degraded.
Threat #1: Habitat Loss and Degradation
57. Expanding cultivation is likely the most evident driver of steppe habitat loss. Since 1950,
over 2 million ha of steppe has been converted to cropland nationally. Over roughly the same
time period, more than 40,000 ha of steppes have been converted to agriculture in Sanliurfa
province. The rate of conversion is accelerating as Turkey continues to invest in large-scale
irrigation and cultivation programs. Over the next 5 - 10 years, a significant amount of
Sanliurfa’s remaining pastureland will be converted to agriculture if no action is taken. Once
steppe areas are brought under plow, there is generally no chance to recover these systems.
58. Infrastructure development is also causing habitat loss. As noted, the population of Sanliurfa
has increased from 1 million to 1.8 million persons over the last two decades. This increased
population is accompanied by extensive infrastructure development. This includes roads,
irrigation systems, housing development and other infrastructure that is gradually consuming
remaining steppe areas. Some estimate that over 15% hectares of steppe has been converted to
urban use over the last few decades. Although the extent is not well known or documented,
anecdotal evidence suggests that Invasive species are also causing habitat degradation ushered in
by development.
59. Over-grazing is the main cause of steppe habitat degradation. Nearly all steppe areas are
subject to grazing pressure by domestic livestock. Livestock grazing generally rises beyond
carrying capacity limits and diminishes the integrity of steppe ecosystems. Overgrazing occurs on
steppe systems both inside and outside of protected area boundaries. The rate and intensity of
overgrazing is increasing as the total hectares of grasslands are reduced and the total number of
livestock remains stable and/or increases.
60. There are 2.5 million households in Turkey that own livestock. Turkey has over 56 million
head of livestock. Approximately 35% of these animals rely upon grasslands for production.
Meanwhile the total amount of steppe lands available has decreased from 32 million hectares to
26 million hectares. This forces a greater number of livestock to rely upon a smaller amount of
steppe land. These same trends are evident in Sanliurfa. In 2007, there were 1.7 million livestock
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 13
that utilized 2.7 million ha of steppe lands. More recently, 2 million livestock utilize 2.6 million
ha of Sanliurfa’s last remaining grassland ecosystems. This phenomenon greatly accelerates the
severity of grazing impacts.
Threat # 2: Overharvest
61. Numerous steppe dependent species are subject to harvest. This is particularly pronounced in
terms of flora. Several plant species have a value. Most of this activity is driven by subsistence
and/or medicinal use. Some take is income motivated. Examples include species such as Salvia
viridis L. that is used for stomachache. The species Teucrium polium L. is used for digestive
troubles by people as well as sheep. Although the extent of this use is not well documented, it is
presumed to be extensive.
62. Poachers often target both bustards and wild gazelle. Bustards are harvested for sport and
consumption. Gazelle are primarily live capture from herds reintroduced to the Kızılkuyu
Wildlife Development Area. Rather than flight, young gazelle often rely upon cryptic measures.
This makes them relatively easy to target while hiding in steppe grass. Young animals are sold to
citizens who raise these suckling gazelle as garden pets. Young gazelles will sell for
approximately US$ 700.
63. The rate of fuel wood consumption within steppe forest areas has slowed over the past decade
due to energy infrastructure changes. However, the residual impacts of past overharvest continue
to impact steppe ecosystem integrity. Chamaephytes or “dwarf shrub” provides ground cover and
soil stabilization with deep root systems. Removal of chamaephytes for fuel wood has exposed
the region to greatly increased erosion rates. Historical records and scientific research shows that
relict dry forest across Sanliurfa and within all three pilot sites (TekTek Mountains, the Kızılkuyu,
and Karacadağ) was almost completely destroyed over the past 50 years. This includes important
species such as wild pistachio (Pistacia terebinthus) and local oak (Quercus sp.) communities.
64. An associated impact of cultivation is the increased use of fertilizers and pesticides. Although
very little information exists, Turkish biodiversity conservation experts believe that intensive
fertilizer and pesticide use adversely impacts biodiversity on proximate steppe lands. This
includes impacts to water quality, pollinators, and other critical ecological elements.
Threat #3: Climate Change
65. Climate change is an emerging threat to Turkey’s globally significant steppe habitats.
Climate change will compound and accelerate the negative impacts of existing threats, further
reducing the resilience of steppe ecosystems.
66. Turkey exhibits a peculiar heterogeneous ecology for a temperate zone. Due to its situation in
the temperate zone, global warming and climate change will influence Turkey. A 70-year model
for climate change impacts in Turkey states that precipitation will be 29.6% lower than today at
the Mediterranean coast, the central region, and the Firat basin. (Onder et al. 2009) This model
predicts a 2.8-5.5°C increase in temperature over the country. The increase in temperature is
expected to trigger evaporation and raise it 17.8% along the Mediterranean coast, 18.4% at the
Black Sea coast and 22.2 % over the country (Onder et al. 2009, Turkes 2007).
67. During the next 50 years, the desert zone that is present in southern Turkey is expected to
expand towards the north and increase the temperature. Increased aridity and desertification will
be particularly pronounced within the steppe regions of central and southeast Anatolia.
Diminished ground cover will compound the negative impacts of shifting rainfall events, exposing
systems to great vulnerability in terms of water retention and soil loss. Prolonged drought events
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 14
will compound the negative impacts of overgrazing. The negative impacts of climate change will
be further multiplied as a result of shrinking steppe “island” ecosystems that are ecologically
isolated due to increased development.
68. Endemic plant species that have evolved to exist only along thin bands of unique elevation
zones will be particularly vulnerable. Within Sanliurfa, many of these plants exist along the thin
band between alpine and subalpine. These steppe ecosystems are already degraded. The systems
have very limited resilience or elasticity remaining to allow these globally significant species to
adapt and shift range as climate change advances. This will also impact species such as wild
pistachio dependent upon highly constrained ecological zones for their survival.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 15
1.2 Rationale
1.2.1 Long-term Solution
69. The long-term solution is to reduce the loss rate of steppe lands and associated biodiversity
values. This requires improving the conservation of currently degraded steppe lands, reducing the
rate at which steppe lands are permanently lost to cultivation and urbanization, and the conversion
rate of steppe biodiversity. Steppe lands must also be conserved on a landscape level.
Conservation of Turkey’s globally significant steppe biodiversity demands conservation effort
both within protected areas and beyond the borders of protected areas. The best examples of
Turkey’s globally significant biodiversity must benefit from adequate levels of conservation
within protected areas. However, Turkey’s protected areas system will never be large enough to
preserve populations of large mammal species such as gazelle within protected area boundaries.
To conserve biological integrity, connectivity between the best remaining steppe habitats must be
maintained. This includes reducing the rate of species loss and habitat fragmentation.
70. The total amount of steppe area contained within the protected area regime must be increased.
The objective of this effort is to make certain representation of the nation’s most valuable steppe
biodiversity benefits from rigorous conservation effort. The Government of Turkey committed to
expanding the national PA network to cover 10% of Turkey by 2015. Expanding the protected areas network to incorporate steppe lands is a government priority. To date, the total protected area system includes 9.5 million hectares or approximately 7% of the nation’s territory. Steppe areas represent less than 1% of the total protected area system. More than 32 million hectares or 40% of Turkey is considered steppe. However, only five protected
areas are predominately “steppe”. These five steppe protected areas cover approximately 207,000 hectares: Beypazarı Nallıhan WDA, Konya Bozdağ WDA, Şanlıurfa Kızılkuyu WDA,
Ağrı Mountains NP and TekTek Mountains NP.
71. Safeguarding Turkey’s globally significant steppe biodiversity demands conservation effort
beyond the borders of protected areas. Over 40% of Turkey is considered steppe. Many steppe
species are wide ranging. Attempting to create a protected area regime covering the entire
landscape is not tenable. Steppe biodiversity outside of protected areas benefits from almost no
measurable conservation support. However, it is within these areas outside of protected areas
where biodiversity is most threatened by human encroachment and overuse.
72. Locations such as Sanliurfa Province must be established as national and regional models for
steppe habitat conservation. The primary success indicator is the existence of steppe. Currently,
234,000 hectares of steppe exist currently within Sanliurfa Province. Approximately 50,000
hectares are within protected areas.
73. Achieving this solution will be challenging. To maintain connectivity and resilience, the
management of productive landscapes must become much more supportive of steppe land
conservation. Best examples of remaining steppe areas must be brought within the existing
protected area system. Current and future steppe protected areas must benefit from more effective
management regimes. Better models for landscape level planning and conservation should be
emplaced. Landscape conservation models should ensure that adequate habitat is conserved for
wide-ranging species such as gazelle and resilience exists to allow for the long-term survival of
globally significant plant species. Capacities must be built so that decision-makers are better able
to identify and conserve highly critical steppe corridors within the productive landscape. This will
involve setting in place landscape level planning that supports both steppe conservation within the
context of expanding rural development. Production models that support steppe conservation are
needed and must be emplaced on both the productive and protected landscape. Government and
private agricultural enterprises must be empowered and incentivized to adopt more steppe friendly
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 16
production models. This includes addressing overgrazing, unsustainable agricultural practices,
random transformation of natural areas to cultivated lands that leads to fragmentation of
ecosystems and loss of ecosystem services.
74. To insure sustainability and long-term conservation success, each of these elements must be
secured within a strengthened institutional and policy setting. This includes establishing stronger
policies and strategies that take into account effective land use practices and natural resource
management approaches. These policies will enhance coordination and cooperation between the
authorities responsible for conservation, production, and land use. Policies will also make certain
that adequate conservation financing is allocated to actively plan for and monitor the health of
steppe ecosystems.
1.2.2 Barriers to Achieving the Solution
75. There are three barriers standing between the current situation and achievement of the long-
term solution.
Barrier #1: Limited experience with highly effective steppe protected area design and
management
76. Protected area management is very much evolving and improving in Turkey. However, the
management effectiveness of existing protected areas must be improved drastically and new
protected areas created if there is any hope of conserving remaining biodiversity. Unfortunately,
the country does not have experience with the innovative techniques required to create replicable
models of steppe-protected areas. There are no good working examples of complimentary
management schemes that balance the productive desires of community members with the
conservation objectives of the protected areas. An absence of innovative protected area
conservation approaches stymies successful conservation of biodiversity within protected areas
and progress towards the creation of new steppe-protected areas. Participatory planning that
engages stakeholders within the protected areas is crucial. Innovative mechanisms such as
controlled grazing units and rest/rotation models linked to monitoring and conservation of
biodiversity values must be emplaced.
77. Steppe protected areas do not have the technical capacity and experience to development
participatory, long-term strategic management planning. Even basic protected area management
tools require strengthening. Planning, monitoring, financing, enforcement and other conservation
skills are generally not up to par. There is an urgent need to improve landscape-level conservation
planning within protected areas. This includes better coordination between protected area
managers and other government agencies concerned with resource use within protected areas.
Monitoring of steppe ecosystems within protected areas is ad hoc and rarely linked to the
achievement of management objectives. Protected area management needs to be holistic and
ecologically centered. Protected area managers need the tools required to consider the status of
the entire suite of species and their interactions. They need the management capacity to
understand how best to maintain ecological functionality. Protected areas need the capacity to use
protected areas as centers for education and awareness. Improved monitoring should help
decision-makers at all levels better understand how grassland ecosystems work and inform
management decisions on the wider productive landscape. MFWA policy calls for protected area
staff to benefit from annual in-service training programs. Such training does not exist for steppe-
protected areas due to both financing and capacity constraints.
78. Even if existing protected areas were effectively managed to serve as a motivation for steppe-
protected area expansion, Turkey has not benefitted from a clear path for identification and
prioritization of critical landscapes to include within the protected area regime. There is no
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 17
replicable model in place for establishing a new protected area process that is inclusive of
stakeholder participation. This includes participation of government decision makers, private
industry and local resource users such as traditional grazing families. Tools are not in place for
comprehensive strategic assessment and gap analysis. The purpose of this assessment is to create
a well-reasoned proposal for the creation of new steppe protected areas. The analysis should
address not only the conservation of steppe ecosystems, but how best to establish and maintain
connectivity between protected areas. This is critical to maintaining populations of large
mammals over time. Steppe ecological and representation gaps are not critically assessed prior to
expansion decisions. There is a need to build such capacities. There is a need to do this first on
the provincial level. Then these models may eventually be scaled to the more ambitious national
level.
Barrier #2: Limited experience with integrating steppe conservation with grazing and
agricultural management practices
79. Conserving steppe protected areas demands management approaches that incorporate multiple
uses. In Turkey, steppe protected areas are typically used for production. Steppe protected areas
are used for the collection of plant species and collection of fuel wood. Steppe protected areas are
widely used for the grazing of domestic livestock. Local herding groups and villagers have strong
traditions of pastureland use. Proximate villagers or in some cases nomads travel seasonally to
access protected area pastures. This is often in conflict with the conservation objectives of the
protected areas. Grazing very often exceeds sustainable limits.
80. Protected area managers have struggled to innovate and apply the creative conservation
measures required to shift grazing and other uses towards greater sustainability. Currently, the
government supports limited land use and grazing management planning. However, the planning
process does not adequately integrate and/or reflect biodiversity conservation objectives. For
instance, individual Pasture Commissions (PC) are responsible for generating pasture
management plans at the provincial level. These management plans rarely include any reference
to or actions required for the conservation of globally significant biodiversity. Likewise,
protected area management plans generally fail to integrate and/or reference pastureland
management. The result of this capacity barrier is a failure to address one of the primary threats
to steppe biodiversity.
81. There is an immediate need to incentivize and empower stakeholders with the knowledge
required to adopt improved steppe productive practices, particularly as this relates to grazing.
Turkey has very limited experience with the integration of steppe conservation practices within
productive sector activities. Agencies, extension officers, and agricultural industries do not have
formal or informal pathways for identifying and adopting steppe-conservation friendly production
methods. There is very limited exposure to best international practices related to agricultural
management and particularly grazing designed to improve both conservation and productivity.
Turkey needs farmer field schools and extension services as a platform to improve agricultural
and grazing practices and orient farmers and herders towards conservation and good landscape
management. This includes the establishment of carrying capacity parameters and working with
women and men farmers to better understand how maintaining ecosystem services actually
generates financial benefits.
Barrier #3: Limited capacity to generate institutional and policy level support required to
achieve landscape level grasslands conservation.
82. Turkey does not benefit from national and/or provincial level examples of strategic steppe
biodiversity conservation. Steppe biodiversity is most at risk beyond the boundaries of Turkey’s
limited protected area regime. There is a high need to demonstrate and maintain connectivity at a
scale required to support long-term ecological integrity. Turkey has struggled to generate a
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 18
national and provincial level policies and institutional frameworks required to support grasslands
conservation.
83. The nation has extremely limited capacity and experience with the management of grassland
ecosystems at the landscape level. There are no specific and/or regular opportunities resource
managers to improve their knowledge regarding the status of steppe ecosystems and/or exchange
information, lessons, and opinions regarding how to improve conservation and coordination
across platforms.
84. Turkey has limited experience with conservation planning and financing designed specifically
for the productive landscape. There are no working models of a regional conservation strategy
designed to conserve steppes at the landscape level. Decision-making by national and provincial
governments is not guided by landscape level steppe conservation planning. Government
institutions need tools, capacity, and knowledge to integrate steppe conservation into their
strategic work plans. Government agencies do not have experience with the identification and
prioritization of steppe lands for conservation. There is limited experience with gaps analysis,
monitoring, and other tools required to generate informed decision-making at all levels and across
platforms. Stakeholders do not benefit from simple institutional structures designed to generate
and implement a unifying conservation vision. The result is that government action and financing
occurs with limited regard for impacts on steppe biodiversity.
85. There is minimal experience with cooperation and co-ordination between key stakeholders
across the productive and protected landscapes. Few examples exist for coordination even
between key conservation agencies. The Ministry of Food Agriculture and Livestock (MFAL) is
the primary authority responsible for steppe ecosystems in Turkey in accordance with the Pasture
Law of 1998. If pasture and pasturelands are declared as a protected area, the Pasture and
National Parks Laws states that the Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs (MFWA) and MFAL
must work in close cooperation. Steppe biodiversity is under the jurisdiction of General
Directorate of National Parks and Nature Conservation (GDNCNP) of Ministry of Forestry and
Water Affairs (MFWA). Sustainable management of steppe resources is under the jurisdiction of
Ministry of Food Agriculture and Livestock (MFAL). Successful steppe conservation depends
upon these two institutions collaborating. However, there are no formal procedures in place to
catalyze necessary coordinated and strategic approaches.
86. Steppe protected areas are managed largely in isolation from the surrounding landscapes, a
recipe for long-term ecological decline. Protected areas and surrounding lands need to be
strategically managed to deliver landscape level impacts, and maintain connectivity and resilience.
Coordination and conservation partnerships across protected area boundaries are limited.
Protected area planning should be linked to broader, provincial level planning to foster landscape
level conservation. Protected area managers do not have experience with the use of protected
areas to anchor steppe conservation across the broader landscape. There are no tools in place to
help make certain productive lands are managed in ways that support achievement of proximate
protected area conservation objectives.
87. This barrier persists because existing land management and use laws do not provide a
platform for the identification of conservation areas or areas of high conservation value. There
are no policies or strategies in place to incentivize the improvement of agricultural practices to
support steppe conservation objectives. There are no replicable examples of provincial level
development planning that integrates steppe conservation. Without such models, it is not possible
to upscale and replicate steppe conservation planning nationally.
88. There is a very limited amount of information regarding the location and function of steppe
ecosystems. Only recently have steppe areas become the subject of increased public attention,
with stakeholders and especially CSOs and academics taking up the issue. Turkey needs
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 19
assistance with the generation and implementation of a comprehensive steppe monitoring system
that can inform strategic planning and decision-making. There is a paucity of data and
information on priority species numbers, distribution and status, local resource use, and trends
regarding current and emerging threats. The absence of reliable information hampers
conservation effectiveness and associated decision-making. Scientific institutions have conducted
considerable research on the ecology and biodiversity of Turkey’s steppe areas. However,
cooperation among scientific and government institutions is extremely limited. There are no
policy or institutional pathways in place to make certain knowledge generated is utilized in
decision-making. Partnerships do not exist to coordinate information sharing among key
stakeholders such as MFWA, MFAL, Agricultural Research Institutes, National and Regional
CSOs, Regional Universities. Practical monitoring methodologies for steppe wildlife and
ecosystem health are poorly developed, resulting in significant data gaps.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 20
1.2.3 Baseline Analysis: Programmes and Co-Financing
Government Investments and Actions
89. The Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs (MFWA) actively supports steppe conservation in
protected areas and the productive landscape. The MFWA annual budget is US$ 3.5 billion. The
MFWA has approximately 5000 staff. The General Directorate of National Parks and Nature
Conservation (GDNCNP) under MFWA is responsible for protected area management. The
GDNCNP has 750 staff nationally and 15 staff in Sanliurfa Province. The total national
GDNCNP annual budget is US$ 5.7 million. The GDNCNP spends approximately US$ 85,000
each year for protected area management in Sanliurfa.
90. Under the baseline, the MFWA and GDNCNP are engaged in a number of relevant activities.
This includes regular management and operations of protected areas. Special efforts include
completing the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (2008-2017). The GDNCNP
maintains the Nuh (Noah’s Arc) Database for biodiversity.
91. The MFWA sets and implements biodiversity and natural resources management guidelines
and procedures. This responsibility extends to forest, wetland, mountain, steppe and other
habitats within all the natural areas. The MFWA is not only responsible for conservation of the
natural resources, but also it is responsible for planning, development, monitoring and working
with co-operation with all stakeholders to conserve these values. The MFWA regulates the
represent of the country in the international level on biodiversity and natural resource
management. Beside conservation of the natural resources, the MFWA is responsible for wildlife
management and conservation. GDNCNP is responsible for the selection, designation, planning,
conservation, and management of national parks, nature parks, natural monuments, and nature
reserve areas management of the wildlife development areas and RAMSAR sites. The GDNCNP
manages each protected area under the rules of its “long term development plan” (management
plan) through a network of Park Directorates. The Directorate is also responsible for the
conservation of game and wildlife species within their natural habitats by making necessary
decisions on hunting control throughout the country.
92. Establishing of the new protected areas to support conservation of the biodiversity are
regularly ongoing activities under the GDNCNP. Many of the scientific resources and field
studies are contributing by Research Centers, Scientific Bodies and Ministerial Institutions in the
field level especially management and monitoring of the valuable habitats and species. Beside
research activities, landscape restoration activities in the natural areas are carrying out by relevant
authority with support of GDNCNP. Biodiversity inventory for each province in Turkey is main
activity to identify and clarify of country level biodiversity. Besides inventorying of the
biodiversity, all the information related with BD is incorporated into the Noah Database to support
effective monitoring and management of the BD of Turkey. Many of the new protected areas
such as National Parks, RAMSAR Sites and Natural Parks are establishing by GDNCNP.
Management plans for protected areas and species action plans for individual flora and fauna
species are also preparing to support conservation of the BD. Although the inventory and
planning of the valuable protected areas and species, there are many other side management
activities such as visitor management, information and awareness activities and facilities such as
visitor centers, nature training centers and other related infrastructures are constructing by
GDNCNP. Specifically ecosystem evaluation programs, wildlife management programs and
ecotourism programs are developing for support sustainability of the protected areas and support
income generation activities for local residents in and around the PAs.
93. Example baseline investments include:
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 21
National Parks Program (MFWA financed) (US$ 40,000,000 since 2009): General support
for protected areas management and operations.
Wildlife Development Areas Program (MFWA financed) (US$ 40,000,000 since 2010):
General support for Wildlife Development Areas management and operations. The Kızılkuyu
Wildlife Development Area in Sanliurfa has received US$ 500,000 since 2004. The annual
budget for Kızılkuyu now ranges between US$ 75,000 and US$ 120,000 per annum.
Enhancing National Protected Areas System Project (MFWA financed) (2014 - 2016) (US$
1,000,000): The project aims support nature conservation and biodiversity across all
ecosystems. The MFWA will prepare a national strategy and action plan for protected areas
including strategies, policies, and management objectives for existing and new protected
areas.
National Biodiversity Research Project (MFWA financed) (US$ 10,000,000 between 2013
and 2018): The aim is to stimulate biodiversity inventory studies and a monitoring
framework. This is a national program covering all 81 provinces.
Hunting-Wildlife and Aquaculture Project (MFWA financed) (US$ 3,500,000 in 2015):
Annual support for wildlife management and hunting issues in protected wildlife areas.
TekTek Mountains National Park Integrated Flood Control Project (MFWA financed
through General Directorate of Combating Desertification and Erosion) (US$ 2,300,000):
Aims to conserve and support sustainability of natural values (soil, water, biodiversity), and
prevent/mitigate floods in 8868.9 ha of Han-El Ba‟rur (GökDeresi) Microbasin. Project
activities will be carried out by Şanlıurfa Regional Directorate of Forestry. Including flood
control measures, planting, pasture rehabilitation, improvement of agriculture and irrigation.
94. The Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock (MFAL) actively supports steppe
conservation in protected areas and the productive landscape. The MFAL annual budget is
approximately US$ 5.2 billion. The MFAL has approximately 57,000 staff. The MFAL spends
approximately US$ 750,000 annually in Sanliurfa Province. In general, the baseline activities of
the MFAL are comprised of: preservation and record of the agricultural genetic resources and
biodiversity; managing and rehabilitation of meadows and pastures; in-situ and ex-situ conservation of genetic resources of plant species.
95. Under the baseline, the MFAL is engaged in a number of relevant activities. MFAL is the
responsible authority on environmental friendly technologies and technics in order to support
biodiversity conservation and meadows-pastureland management. The Ministry supports
conservation and rational utilization of the soil and water resources. Developing of the grass,
pastureland and fodder production is important responsibilities for Ministry because of support
sustainability of the meadows and grazing areas. It supports national botanical garden to support
BD conservation in the country. MFAL is not only support agricultural practices but also support
conservation and sustainable management of the soil and water resources and rural development
to increase the knowledge, capacity and experience on sustainable use of the resources. Example
baseline investments include:
Grass Pasture and Fodder Plants Production Project (MFAL financed) (US$ 2,360,000)
(2014-2016): The national project will decrease the pressure on meadows and pastures
nationwide and increase the grass pasture and fodder plant production.
Pasture registration and monitoring system (MER-BİS) (MFAL financed): Good agricultural
practices are implemented. Environmentally friendly agricultural techniques and studies are
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 22
supported. This project is part of the regular work for MFAL with staff employed to
implement the work.
Developing Pasture Services Project (MFAL financed): Aims to improve the meadows in
Turkey through restoration, rehabilitation, and management of the meadows in Turkey. The
total budget for Diyarbakır-Şanlıurfa-Adıyaman Provinces is US$ 2,820,000.
Conservation Program on the Agricultural Lands for Environment (ÇATAK Project, 2005-
2008 external budget; 2009-2016 national budget) (MFAL financed): An innovative and
effective program to conserve and achieve sustainability of soil and water; decrease erosion;
decrease the negative effects of the agricultural practices; and support land conservation.
The program offers direct incentives for women and men farmers for better field practices.
The program encourages the implementation of environmentally friendly agricultural
practices. A new legislative regulation related to the project was completed in the first year
of the project. A total of US$ 1 million was paid to 469 producers for 1,727 ha land. In 2007,
US$ 1.7 million was paid to 1048 producers. About 2,395 ha land were supported in 2006.
After 2008 the project was financed by national budget. The budget for the project between
2010 and 2013 was US$ 28,700,000. At the end of the 2014, 143,335 ha land was supported
by the national government through the ÇATAK project, and in total US$ 51,150,000 was
paid to 44,122 land owners.
Local Government Investments and Actions
96. Southeastern Anatolia Project (Güneydoğu Anadolu Projesi - GAP): funded mainly by
Ministry of Development and more than 50 public organizations, the GAP Authority has been
working in the region since 1989. The budget of GAP changes between years and it ranges
between US$ 400,000 and 2,000,000 (ongoing). This is a multi-sector integrated regional
development project based on the concept of sustainable development in the Southeastern
Anatolia region of Turkey. GAP's basic aim is to eliminate regional development disparities by
raising people's income level and living standards; and to contribute to national development
targets of social stability and economic growth by enhancing the productive and employment
generating capacity of the rural sector. The project area covers nine provinces located in the
basins of the Euphrates and Tigris and in Upper Mesopotamia: Adıyaman, Batman, Diyarbakır,
Gaziantep, Kilis, Siirt, Şanlıurfa, Mardin, and Şırnak. Two main pillars of GAP are the GAP
TAYEP (Agricultural Training and Publication Project) and ÇATOMs (Multi-Purpose
Community Centres). In Şanlıurfa, there are 3 ÇATOMs in Viranşehir, Hilvan and Siverek
districts. TAYEP and ÇATOMs have excellent experience with capacity development and
achieving gender targets of the project in the region.
97. The GAP Agricultural Research Institute is based in Şanlıurfa and works for the protection of
genetic resources, development of new techniques, research on plant diseases, surveys on socio
economy and capacity building. Based in Diyarbakır, the GAP International Agricultural
Research and Training Center focuses on agricultural researches and capacity development
through conferences, workshops and trainings. The center undertakes large scale projects and
partnership with other key stakeholders to fulfil its goals. Lastly, the Pistachio Research Station
in Gaziantep is aiming to solve problems and overcome obstacles regarding pistachio growing
from production to marketing. The station also works to increase capacity of pistachio growers in
the region.
98. Karacadağ Development Agency is the local institute responsible for Diyarbakır and Şanlıurfa
provinces. The agency is responsible for contributing to regional and rural development studies.
The agency announces support programs according to its regional development plan. Non-profit
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 23
organizations can apply for grants, including government organizations and NGOs under direct
support, technical support, and financial support growth center support programs.
99. Karacadağ Development Agency Tourism Branding Project (GAP Administration financed)
(US$ 846,000) (2014-2017). It is supporting by Southeaster Anatolia Project _GAP
Administration in order to conservation and evaluation of cultural heritage with integrative
approaches and conservation-utilization balance; increase of the income and employment from
tourism and sustainability of tourism activities in the region. The project is started 2014 and it will
completed 2017. It is total budget is approximately 2.5 million TL. In order to implement project
activities, there is a Regional Office under the GAP Regional Office. The project will support
developing of the management plans on tourism and ınformation and branding of the region.
100. JICA Technical Cooperation Project (upcoming JICA financed project, budget not
determined yet), (2016-2020). Technical Cooperation Project on development of agricultural
based industry. The project aim is capacity building on agricultural industry in Diyarbakır and
Şanlıurfa Provinces. Karacadağ Development Agencies is the main partner of the project.
101. IPA Supported Projects under the Regional Competitiveness Operational Program (EU
funded), (US$ 3,210,000), (2014-2017) carried out by the Ministry of Science, Industry and
Technology. The “Reactivate History in Şanlıurfa“ project will be implemented by Karacadağ
Development Agency. The budget of the project is US$ 3.2 million. It will be implemented
between 2014-2017.
102. IPA Rural Development II Program (EU and Republic of Turkey -between 65-70% EU
funded, 30-35% project owner funded), (MFAL) (1,045,069,412 Euro in total with 18,847,059
Euro for Agri-Environment-Climate-Organic Farming), (2014-2020). This program is supporting
the Turkish Government modernizing and developing the agricultural sector. Beside agricultural
practices, rural development and rural tourism activities are also supported under this program.
The implementing units of the programme are the IPARD Agency and the Agriculture and Rural
Development Agency (TKDK) under MFAL. IPA Rural Development Program with the joint
finance of EU and Turkish Government aims to support Turkey’s rural development during the
accession period. The first phase of the program was undertaken during 2007 and 2013.
Şanlıurfa Province is one of the eligible provinces under the program. Supporting environment
and climate friendly agriculture as well as organic farming is one of the key themes of the
program. The program will introduce a subsidy system designed to protect farmland species in
line with the EU biodiversity mechanism. The globally threatened Great Bustards will be a part of
this program. Eligible farmers will be subsidized to change their agriculture techniques to support
great bustard conservation. Kızılkuyu Wildlife Development Area is a key site for migratory
Great Bustards. Therefore the proposed project will be aligned to coordinate with the IPARD
program.
103. Şanlıurfa Tourism Project (EU Funded), (2,416,000 Euro).EU gives support to Technical
assistance for revitalization of history in Şanlıurfa Project under the IPA program. The project
aims “to improve the regional competitiveness of the tourism industry in Şanlıurfa by developing
a site management plan which provides support for the Şanlıurfa urban conservation area and
Göbeklitepe archaeological site to enter into the Unesco world cultural heritage list by means of
increasing the regional competitiveness of the city in the tourism sector through the creation and
implementation of a sustainable tourism governance model based on the public-private
partnership.” The funding amount is 2,416,000 Euro. The project has started in 2014.
104. Agricultural Implications for Ecosystem Based Adaptation (EBA) to Climate Change in
Steppe Ecosystems. (EU IPARD II funded) (3.3 million €), (2016-2017): (Implementing Agency:
FAO). FAO will implement the project in coordination with MFAL in the Anatolian steppe. This
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 24
proposal targets the vulnerability of ecosystems and agricultural systems under impacts of climate
change in the Anatolian steppe, and is set to integrate EBA into local policies for conservation and
sustainable use of steppe ecosystems. It will receive up to USD 3.3 million as a direct grant from
EU under IPARD II, expected implementation 2016 – 2017.
105. Through two separate partnership agreements between the Government of Turkey and FAO,
it is expected that about USD 20 million will be available for a financial and operational
framework for projects in the sub-region of Central Asia which covers Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. One is the second phase of the
FAO-Turkey Partnership Programme (FTPP) on sustainable management of natural resources, the
other is the FAO-Turkey Forestry Partnership Programme (FTFP) on sustainable management of
forest and tree resources, both of which are expected to run between 2016 - 2020.
106. Integrated Approach to Management of Forests in Turkey with demonstration in high
conservation value forests in the Mediterranean region project. (GEF Contribution), (US$
7,120,000) (2013-2017), (Implementing Agency UNDP). This project promotes an integrated
approach at the landscape level to the management of high conservation value forests in the
Mediterranean region to secure, among others, biodiversity mainstreaming.
107. Maximize the production of goods and services of Mediterranean forest ecosystems in the
context of global changes (project funded by the French Global Environment Facility - FFEM),
(8.5 million €) (2013-2018) (implemented by FAO Silva Mediterranea Commission and Plan
Bleu). The project will encourage improved management of environmental products and services
for Mediterranean forest areas.
108. Conservation and Sustainable Development of Biological Diversity and Natural Resources
in Yıldız Mountains (EU funded) (2.05 million Euro) (2008-2009): The project developed the
cross-border cooperation between Turkey and Bulgaria and strengthened conservation and
sustainable development of natural resources and biodiversity of the Yıldız Mountains (Istranca
forests). The project was funded by the EU Cross-border cooperation program according to the
2006 Accession Partnership. Under the project biodiversity and natural values of the Yıldız
Mountains were evaluated and a participatory management plan for the area based on the
biosphere reserve approaches has been developed.
109. Strengthening the national nature protection system for implementation of Natura 2000
requirements project (2015-2017) (EU funded) (US$ 9,300,000) (2015-2018): The project will be funded by European Commission and is directly related to biodiversity conservation and
strengthening of institutional and technical capacity, with reference to Natura 2000. Under this
project, the technical structure for Natura 2000 will be established and potential areas to be
protected will be identified. The project budget is estimated to be US$ 9,300,000.
110. The UNDP Turkey works towards achieving addressing structural and intertwined
challenges from a crosscutting sustainable human development perspective in line with recently
adopted Sustainable Development Goals. Under its climate change and environment cluster, the
organization promotes all stakeholders’ voices on environmental issues and enabling of ecosystem
services. The UNDP in Turkey works for strengthening the capacities for environmental
degradation, forest management and chemical waste prevention and management. UNDP cluster
aims to achieve climate change adaptation and mitigation action across sectors, including
initiatives to strengthen systems and tools for risk-centered, integrated disaster management and
increase societal resilience overall, taking into account differentiated gender impact. The primary
target will be rural population in sensitive biodiversity/hot spots.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 25
Relevant Community and NGO Investments and Actions
111. Many national CSOs are working on biological diversity, especially on identification and
management of biodiversity within forests, wetlands and steppes. Universities, such as the Harran
University, civil societies and CSOs, the Nature Conservation Centre (DKM), WWF-Turkey,
DoğaDerneği and the Chamber of Agricultural Engineers will be included to assist the project
activities in the field level during the implementation process. Scientists are working on steppe
ecosystem in Turkey from Botanical, Ecological and Agricultural Departments in different
institutions. They are also key stakeholders to implement the project.
112. Nature Conservation Centre: Working on steppe habitats under its “Systematic
Conservation Planning” Program. The NGO is partnering with the MFWA since the beginning of
its work to identify the priority biodiversity-rich areas. Steppes are a key part of this analysis.
The Nature Conservation Centre has recently assessed the southeastern region of the country.
113. The Nature Association: This is the BirdLife International partner in Turkey. The Nature
Association Steppe Conservation Program has an annual budget of 350,000TL. The organization
is working in Şanlıurfa Region through their local office in Birecik. The organization works in the
Kızılkuyu Wildlife Development Area. The association supports general conservation efforts
related to gazelle, great bustard, bald ibis, and sociable plover, striped hyena, desert monitor, and
cream-coloured courser.
114. The Sustainable Rural and Urban Development Agency (SURKAL): This national NGO
supports rural development, sustainable agricultural practices, and gender issues. The Support of
Women NGOs project, encompassing the eastern and southeastern region of Turkey, has been
carried out participation with this NGO in the region.
115. Harran University: Established in Sanliurfa Province in 1992, Harran University has
approximately 12.000 students and 11 faculty. The University has an extensive and evolving
agricultural program. The teaching and research university works extensively with both grazing
and cultivation throughout out the region. This includes a botany department that does some work
with the identification and conservation of important steppe species. The botany department
currently supports approximately 60 graduate students.
116. AnaDOKU (Anatolia Nature and Culture Conservation Cooperative):This national NGO is
implemented a capacity building project on 5 endemic plants and 5 endemic animal species in
Şanlıurfa Province with financial support of XV. Regional Directorate under Ministry of Forestry
and Water Affairs.
117. Anatolian Grasslands (“AnadoluMeraları”) is the international Savory Institute's official
Hub in Turkey. Being one of the first hubs accredited throughout the World, Anatolian
Grasslands' headquarters are located in Biga, Çanakkale near the 27 ha learning site where
Holistic Management is applied, trained and monitored closely. Anatolian Grasslands consults
farmers around Turkey on Holistic Management framework and its main “Holistically Planned
Grazing” tool, trains farmers with a special focus on youth, implement special projects with local
authority. One of these project is running in Sarayönü, Konya in a 40 ha site of Commons. The
project is implemented in cooperation with local branch of MFAL and Farmers' Union. After its
high success in 7 months, the local partners requested to increase the project site to 220
ha. Another implementation of the organization is in Biga, Çanakkale where running a viable and
low-cost livestock business, they managed to increase the livestock carrying capacity of the land
by 80% in the first year of holistic planned grazing, and boost an additional 15-20% increase per
year. As a result, the soil organic matter has increased by 0.62% (in the first 30 cm) in 11 months
just by Holistic planning grazing.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 26
GEF Projects
118. During the project design period, every effort was made to make certain this project is
complimentary and symmetrical with the existing GEF portfolio. The project will also build on
the experiences and lessoned learned from past GEF investments.
119. The Biodiversity and Natural Resource Management Project- (GEF funded) (implementing
Agency Ministry of Environment and Forestry) (11.5 milion $) (2000 to 2007). The aim of the
project was sustainably conserve the biological diversity and ecological integrity of selected
forest, wetland, steppe and alpine ecosystems that are representative of Turkey's four major bio-
geographical zones, which include the Black Sea and Caucasian mountain region, the Central
Anatolian plateau, and the European and Mediterranean regions. The project helped to establish
effective intersectoral, participatory planning and sustainable management of protected areas and
natural resources at four selected biodiversity conservation demonstration sites and build capacity
at the national level to facilitate replication of these activities at priority conservation sites
throughout Turkey. These lessons are well integrated within the current project design.
120. Enhancing Coverage and Management Effectiveness of the Subsystem of Forest Protected
Areas in Turkey’s National System of Protected Areas. (GEF funded) (Implementing Agency
UNDPin partnership with WWF) (2.404.000€.) (2008-2011). T Its aim was to enhance nature
conservation and sustainable resource management in Küre Mountains National Park at the Black
Sea coast through an effective and participatory management model. The main lessons learned
from this medium-scale project were that: sustainability of project results and scaling-up of good
practices can benefit from integration with long-term strategies of other stakeholders; successful
biodiversity conservation and sustainable development require a participatory approach for
legitimacy and the buy-in of all relevant stakeholders; it is important to have practical
demonstration activities on the ground that directly contribute to livelihood benefits; and local
communities and governments can see protected areas as tools to catalyze sustainable
development. Nevertheless, during the project’s final evaluation it was noted that key barriers to
effective management of Turkey’s protected area system remained: an inadequate policy
framework; an inadequate institutional framework; capacity gaps at individual and institutional
levels; and incomplete mechanisms for protected area financing.
121. The Sustainable Land Management and Climate Friendly Agriculture project will be
operational from 2015 - 2020. Implemented with support from FAO, this US$ 5.7 million
investment aims to improve agricultural and forest land use management. The project will
support grazing improvements. Activities under this project will be closely aligned to make
certain lessons learned are well shared and transferred, building economies of scale and
replicability in two separate provinces.
122. The Integrated Approach to Management of Forests in Turkey with demonstration in high
conservation value forests in the Mediterranean region project is being implemented with support
from UNDP. The project is designed to benefit from the methods for integration of biodiversity
conservation into forest landscape management. This project promotes an integrated approach at
the landscape level to the management of high conservation value forests in the Mediterranean.
The two projects will be aligned to share lessons learned regarding biodiversity mainstreaming.
123. The Strengthening Protected Area Network of Turkey: Catalyzing Sustainability of Marine
and Coastal Protected Areas project focuses upon improving the effectiveness of the marine
protected areas. Lessons learned regarding institutional capacity building, governance issues, and
developing a collaborative working environment will be aligned.
124. Strengthening Protected Area Network of Turkey: Catalyzing Sustainability of Marine and
Coastal Protected Areas project focused upon improving the effectiveness of the marine protected
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 27
areas. Lessons learned regarding institutional capacity building, governance issues, and
developing a collaborative working environment will be aligned.
125. Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Forest Management in Kaz Daglari, The project
is currently at PIF stage. It aims at improving biodiversity conservation and sustainable forest
management in the Kaz Daglari region for environmental and socio-economic benefits and is set
for a duration of four years. As with other GEF projects under implementation, its activities will
be closely aligned to make certain lessons learned are well shared and transferred.
126. The Land Degradation Neutrality under Climate Change Conditions project aims at
establishing a decision-support system to prevent land degradation and developing suitable
interventions for agriculture, rangelands and forestland rehabilitation over a course of four years.
Upon endorsement, its activities will be closely aligned to make certain lessons learned are well
shared and transferred.
Table: Relevant On-Going GEF Supported Projects
Project Title Agency GEF Investment
(US$)
Project
Years
Brief Project Description
Sustainable Land
Management and Climate-
Friendly Agriculture Project
FAO US$ 5,750,000 2015-2019
Project aims to improve sustainability
of agriculture and forest land use
management through the diffusion and
adoption of low-carbon technologies
with win-win benefits in land
degradation, climate change, and
biodiversity conservation and increase
farm profitability and forest
productivity.
Integrated Approach to
Management of Forests in
Turkey, with demonstration
in high conservation value
forests in the Mediterranean
region
UNDP US$ 7,120,000 2013-2018
This project promotes an integrated
approach at the landscape level to the
management of high conservation
value forests in the Mediterranean
region to secure, among others,
biodiversity mainstreaming.
Mainstreaming Biodiversity
Conservation and Sustainable
Use for Improved Human
Nutrition and Well-being
UNEP US$ 5,517,620 2012-2016
Global project to strengthen the
conservation and sustainable
management of agricultural
biodiversity through mainstreaming
into national and global nutrition, food
and livelihood security strategies and
programmes.
Decision Support for
Mainstreaming and Scaling
up of Sustainable Land
Management
FAO US$ 6,116,730 2015-2019
Global project to improve capability
and decision-making of countries
engaged in the mainstreaming and
scaling-up of SLM to combat land
degradation, as well as to enhance food
security, mitigation and adaptation to
climate change.
Mainstreaming Biodiversity
Conservation and Sustainable
Use for Improved Human
Nutrition and Well-being
UNEP US$ 5,517,620 2012-2016
Global project to strengthen the
conservation and sustainable
management of agricultural
biodiversity through mainstreaming
into national and global nutrition, food
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 28
and livelihood security strategies and
programmes.
Biodiversity Conservation
and Sustainable Forest
Management in KazDaglari
FAO (US$ 4,657,535) 2017-2020
Endorsed proposal at PIF stage for
improving biodiversity conservation
and sustainable forest management in
the KazDaglari region for
environmental and socio-economic
benefits.
Land Degradation Neutrality
Under Climate Change
Conditions
FAO (US$ 3,800,000) 2017-2020
Proposal at PIF stage for establishing a
decision-support system to prevent
land degradation and develop suitable
interventions for agriculture,
rangelands and forestland
rehabilitation.
1.3 FAO’s Comparative Advantage
127. In the field of sustainable land management, FAO (i) promotes sustainable forest
management by placing technical expertise in forestry at the disposal of member countries
through field projects, (ii) gives guidance to climate-friendly agriculture and related activities and
(iii) provides intensive experiences to reduce GHG emissions from deforestation and forest
degradation as well as from agricultural practices. FAO supports member countries on a wide
range of complementary sustainable land management technologies and approaches (such as
conservation agriculture, integrated land and water management, local land planning, and farmer
field schools) by providing training, information, communications, tools and equipment, advisory
services for institutional strengthening, policy reform and national programming.
128. FAO is the leading agency in gathering and disseminating data and information related to
land degradation and SLM, which are built upon scientific knowledge, local experience and
farmer innovation, available through FAO’s web sites and information systems such as
FAOSTAT, TERRASTAT, LRIS, and GTOS. FAO is also a leading partner in several
international initiatives, such as the Land Degradation Assessment in Drylands (LADA), the
World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT), the Asia-Pacific
Agro-forestry Network (APAN), and the Participatory Watershed Management in Asia Network
(WATMANET). Regarding climate change mitigation, FAO also has proven experience in
climate change mitigation in agriculture and forestry through carbon sequestration, substitution
and conservation, assessing carbon stocks and modeling win-win scenarios of carbon
sequestration through land use change, and capacity development in developing countries.
129. FAO’s work on sustainable land and good agricultural activities in the Turkish Republic
and the wider region includes projects for capacity development on the assessment and systematic
development of modernization of forestry and agricultural management, including training on
above mentioned subjects. FAO has also piloted its tools and methods for assessing and mapping
land use systems, land degradation and SLM (LADA-WOCAT) through training on national
mapping and assessment with CACILM (Central Asia Countries Initiative on Land Management).
130. FAO has considerable experience, expertise and a proven comparative advantage in
sustainable forest and land management, grazing management and the climate change focal areas
of GEF. FAO has worked extensively on a global level to support protected areas management.
FAO’s skill is particularly strong with regards to improving protected area management in areas
with well-established productive, community-based resource use such as grazing and forestry.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 29
FAO-Turkey has actively engaged with on-going GEF protected area management projects and
will build upon lessons learned to date.
131. FAO has a strong comparative advantage in pasture management. The current FAO/GEF
portfolio includes a project in the Konya Closed Basin dealing in part with pasture management
and biodiversity conservation. The steppe and Konya projects will benefit from this synergy.
FAO has worked with Turkey to align its national UNCCD NAP with the UNCCD 10-year
strategy including all aspects of land management, monitoring and reporting. FAO assists several
land and biodiversity conservation projects through the FAO Turkey Partnership Program. These
include conservation of globally important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIHAS) in Turkey and
Azerbaijan, conservation agriculture in Turkey and Central Asia, and protection and cultivation of
medicinal and aromatic plants in West Mediterranean region in Turkey. FAO will also implement
a project on EBA to climate change in Anatolian steppe ecosystems under the EU IPARD II
programme which will be closely aligned with the proposed GEF project.
132. The FAO office in Ankara is well equipped with a multi-disciplinary team, including crop,
land and water, livestock and forestry specialists, as well as project management and
administration. FAO-Ankara is fortunate to have both a local and regional FAO technical staff in
the same location. This means that FAO has in-house regional specialists covering sectors such as
environmental services, bio-energy, forestry, rangelands management, and crop production.
FAO/Turkey is taking a programmatic approach to the implementation and support of GEF
projects. This includes having a full-time staff in the FAO/Turkey office dedicated to providing
GEF support.
1.4 Stakeholder Analysis 133. This is a complex and multi-dimensional project. The issue of stakeholder analysis and inclusion was critical to the project design phase and will be critical to the project implementation phase. The project development team undertook a detailed stakeholder analysis
through workshops, meetings, and fieldwork studies with key stakeholders. Regional, provincial, and district directorates of relevant ministries have participated to the planning.
134. Both MFWA and MFAL were heavily involved in the project design process. High-level representatives were appointed as a focal point of their organizations. The MFWA’s General
Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks and the MFAL’s General Directorate of
Plant Production are the primary government stakeholders. They will be responsible for the
coordination of both preparation and implementation processes of the project.
135. The MFWA team participated as leaders of the stakeholder consultation process.
Department Directors were appointed as a focal point from both General Directorates. Several
departments of the GDNCNP such as National Parks, Wildlife, Hunting, Nature Conservation,
and Biodiversity Nature were consulted throughout the preparation period. A project team was
built in the GDNCNP from 7 different Department Directorates. Six of them are from GDNCNP,
and one is from the EU and Foreigner Department of MFWA. High-level decision makers at the
Ministry were also consulted and their contributions were gathered through several meetings.
During the field study visits, personnel from the local branch of the Ministry were interviewed to
collect their contribution to the project design. The local know-how regarding the Kızılkuyu
Wildlife Development Area and TekTek Mountains National Park were useful to the project
design in terms of understanding and addressing the obstacles, barriers and possible solutions.
136. Detailed discussions were held with several general directorates under MFAL such as
TİGEM, TAGEM and BÜGM. Relevant personnel of the Ministries’ provincial branches in
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 30
Şanlıurfa and Diyarbakır participated in the fieldwork and regional stakeholder consultations.
Two GDPP representatives were part of the project team.
137. A series of round table meetings and workshops were held in Ankara and in Şanlıurfa with a
number of partners to gather the contributions of institutions to the project. A kick-off meeting
was held in Ankara with the participation of both Ministries’ representatives and an independent
expert group. The meeting was organized and carried out by MFWA. Participants from both
Ministries and FAO attended for the project design and implementation process.
138. Between April and May 2015, three expert meeting were held with the participation of
national consultants and FAO representatives. Another introductory meeting was held in MFAL
with the participation of relevant departments of GDPP. During 06-08 May 2015, a preliminary
site visit was held in the Şanlıurfa (Kızılkuyu Wildlife Development Area, TekTek Mountains
National Park and Karacadağ Region), with the participation of stakeholders. This was followed
by one more site visit by the FAO-SEC and experts team. In those meetings almost all of the local
governmental organizations, including regional, provincial and district branches of relevant
ministries, as well as NGOs and private sector representatives, were consulted. In addition to field
visits and meetings with stakeholders, a special meeting was held with Harran University,
Chamber of Agricultural Engineers in Şanlıurfa, GAP Agency, Karacadağ Development Agency,
and Şanlıurfa Governor’s office to introduce the project and gather information from them.
139. The second site visit was held between 29-30 June and 01-02 July 2015 in Şanlıurfa, to
further fill the knowledge gaps and to gather additional information regarding the baseline
description and the development of the project strategy and approach. Several meetings were held
with organizations and individuals to share perspectives on these objectives. A special meeting
was held with Karacadağ Development Agency, the Organization for Supporting Agricultural and
Rural Development, the Province Directorate of the Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Livestock,
the GAP Regional Office, the Education and Publications Unit, the GAP Authority Directorate,
the Environment and Social Unit, the Regional Directorate of Forestry and Diyarbakır Sub-
Regional Directorate of Forestry, academics from Biology and Agriculture Departments of Harran
University, the Chamber of Agricultural Engineers in Şanlıurfa, Local Branch of Nature
Association to discuss threats to steppe ecosystems, institutional weaknesses, problems in the
region, and pilot project sites.
Table: Stakeholders and their roles
Stakeholder
Relevance
National Government
Ministry of Forestry and Water
Affairs (MFWA)
As the executive organization of the project, the MFWA is responsible for
conservation of nature. The organization declares and manages natural parks,
nature parks, nature conservation areas, and wildlife development areas. MFWA
also manages water resources, streams, lakes and ponds, as well as forest
management and conservation planning. MFWA will play a leading role in the
design, implementation, financing and mainstreaming of the strategy, policy
improvements, and related activities for the project. As the chair of the Project
Steering Committee, MFWA will coordinate and implement the Project and
support impact and progress monitoring, information dissemination, and national
replication/scaling up of project success.
Ministry of Food, Agriculture and
Livestock (MFAL)
MFAL is the organization for the management, improvement and conservation of
soil and agricultural lands in Turkey. The ministry is the key authority for the
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 31
management of steppe habitats in Turkey. The organization works towards
combating land degradation, preventing loss of soil and water resources, and
achieving biodiversity conversation. The General Directorate of Vegetative
Production is the unit for the management of pasturelands in Turkey unless they
are part of forest areas, in which case the General Directorate of Forestry under
MFWA is the legal authority to manage the lands. However, both ministries have
means of collaboration for pasturelands management in Turkey. MFAL will
support the design and implementation of the project through its headquarters and
local branches in Şanlıurfa and Diyarbakır. The organization will be a member of
the Project Steering Committee.
Ministry of Development
Ministry of Development of the Republic of Turkey is an expert based
organization that plans and guides Turkey’s development process at a macro level
and focuses on the coordination of policies and strategy development. The
ministry will support the project in terms of impact and progress monitoring and
information dissemination.
Ministry of Culture and Tourism
Ministry of Culture and Tourism is the public authority to manage and coordinate
efforts regarding to visual and written arts, historical places, museums as well as
developing the turkey’s tourism potential and all related affairs regarding those
subjects. Ministry has a province directorate in Sanliurfa. Ministry will be the
main focal point regarding to any eco-tourism activity within or after the project
period.
Regional-Government Agencies
XV. Regional Directorate of
Forestry and Water Affairs (RDoM)
(MFWA)-Malatya
RDoM is the regional body of the MFWA based in Malatya. The RDoM is
responsible for the conservation and improvement of natural parks, nature parks,
nature conservation areas, and wildlife development areas, as well as wildlife
resources. RDoM participates in work and activities related to the conservation
and enhancement of biodiversity and natural resources over which it has
responsibility. The Regional Directorate will be a member of the project steering
committee and a coordinator unit at the field level to implement and support
project activities, monitoring of achievement of objectives, and information
sharing. The Ministry has a Division Directorate in the province of Şanlıurfa.
They are actively managing the protected areas in Şanlıurfa as well as responsible
for reproduction and release of gazelles into the natural habitat. The local branch
is active in wildlife conservation in the field, with activities such as hunting
control and awareness raising in the rural areas.
GAP Regional Development
Administration
Southeast Anatolia Project (GAP) was initiated in the early seventies as a program
to develop the water and soil resources of the region. In 1989, a master plan was
prepared to further widen the content of the program including a wide range of
activities for social and economic issues focusing on the development of the
region. It covers 9 cities and 10% of Turkey’s population. The GAP authority has
its HQ in Şanlıurfa. The organization has prepared its new strategy for 2014-2018
and started implementation. The project will align its approach and activities with
the GAP plan.
The organization has two units key to project implementation. The TAYEM
(Education and Publications) is the unit responsible for extension services for the
GAP. They have extensive experience working with farmers in the region. The
other unit is the ÇATOM (Multi-Purpose Community Centers) and they are highly
involved with working with women and youth in the region. Their experience and
local offices are key for achieving the gender targets of the project.
Karacadağ Development Agency
The Agency works for rural development for Diyarbakır and Şanlıurfa provinces.
It provides grants through several mechanisms for non-profit organizations
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 32
including government units, NGOs, and academia. The HQ is based in
Diyarbakır, and in Şanlıurfa the Agency has an Investment Office. The agency is
also responsible for contributing to regional and rural development studies as well
as capacity development in general. It is important for the project to align its
approaches with the development agency.
Regional Directorate of Forestry
Sanliurfa Regional Directorate of Forestry is the main official organization to plan
and manage the forests of the region and undertake the relations with forest
villages in the region. The Directorate also manages the rangelands that are placed
within the forest areas. Through its credit systems, regional directorate can
support forest villages to decrease the dependence of people in forest fuel
resources.
Regional Directorate of State
Hydraulic Works
Sanliurfa Regional Directorate of State Hydraulic Works is the main body of
water related affairs in the region. The organization plans and organizes the
utilization of surface and ground waters. Moreover the directorate undertakes
measures for preventing soil erosion and flood damages. The organization is also
responsible from realizing dams for irrigation and power generation purposes.
Provincial Government Agencies
Şanlıurfa Governor’s Office
As the representative of central government in the Şanlıurfa Province, the
governors have a unique role on coordination of all government organizations in
the region. Therefore the governor of Şanlıurfa will be a natural member of the
project implementation team. The Pastureland Commission operates under the
Governor’s office too.
Şanlıurfa Division Directorate of
MoFWA
Şanlıurfa Division operates under the Malatya Regional Directorate of the
Ministry. The division is responsible from management and protection of wildlife
and biodiversity in general. That includes management of protected areas and
controlling hunting activities in the region. The Şanlıurfa Division has a lonlasting
experience in conservation of gazelles and their habitats.
Province Directorate of Ministry of
Food, Agriculture and Livestock
(PDAs)
(Diyarbakır and Şanlıurfa provinces)
As the local units of the MFAL, the Şanlıurfa and Diyarbakır PDAs will be
members of the project implementation unit in the region. They are responsible
for dissemination of information about improving the conservation of natural
resources and sustainability, improvement of agricultural practices, and farmers
training activities. PDAs will support the project activities in and around both
pilot sites, as well as mainstream the steppe conservation outputs into
management of pasturelands and croplands.
Southeastern Anatolia Forestry
Research Institute
The institute is based in Elazığ. Established in 1977, it undertakes scientific
researches to rehabilitee the forests of region and increase the efficiency in forest
production.
International Development Organizations and Donors
Agriculture and Rural Support
Institution (TKDK)
TKDK is working as a mechanism under the IPARD program, and has an office in
Sanliurfa. The program distributes supports to commercial organizations as well
as individuals who are looking for investment funds. The program gives support
to farms and facilities up to 3 million euro as well as providing supports to bee
keeping, greenhouse investments, and rural tourism activities. The applicant must
be based in rural areas with a population less than 20,000. The project should
communicate with TKDK to align its priorities with TKDK’s.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 33
FAO
FAO is the main partner for the project. FAO Promotes the conservation of steppe
habitats, promotes sustainable forest management by placing technical expertise
in forestry at the disposal of member countries through field projects, provides
intensive experiences to reduce GHG emissions from deforestation and forest
degradation as well as from agricultural practices.
FAO will be a member of the Project Steering Committee and executive partner of
the project (with MFWA). FAO will coordinate and implement the project and
support impact and progress monitoring and information dissemination.
UNDP
One of the core areas of UNDP is environment and sustainable development.
UNDP Turkey has supported many environmental projects in country and made
partnership before. The project will establish close collaboration with UNDP to
exchange information and experience.
JICA
The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) supports environmental
improvement and human resources development in the five regions. Natural
environment conservation, fisheries, gender and development, environmental
management issues are supporting by JICA Turkey. Many of the field works and
awareness activities in the project regions are carrying out cooperation with local
stakeholders.
NGOs
The Chamber of Agricultural
Engineers, Şanlıurfa Division
The organization represents the agricultural engineers and mainly focuses on
policy making, advocacy and capacity building for its members and also farmers.
The group has nearly 1,500 members in Sanliurfa. Moreover, the Chamber has
various facilities in its offices and elsewhere for trainings and meetings that could
be used during the project course. They can play a role in distributing the project’s
outcomes within their network of engineers and farmers.
Nature Association
Nature Association is the BirdLife International partner in Turkey and has a local
office in Birecik, Şanlıurfa. The organization has been actively working in the
region towards the conservation of steppe habitats including Kızılkuyu Wildlife
Development Area and species like bald ibis, gazelle, striped hyena and desert
monitor. Having a Steppe Conservation Program, the organization has played an
active role in preparation of the management plan of Kızılkuyu Wildlife
Development Area as well as community involvement in steppe conservation.
Nature Conservation Centre
Nature Conservation Centre is a national NGO working to achieve nature
conservation in Turkey. The organization has a long history of working with
government and private sector on biodiversity mainstreaming, climate change, and
land degradation. Systematic Conservation Planning is one of the key working
areas of the organization that takes into account steppe habitats and prioritization
of steppe biodiversity. The organization is leading the Life Plus Environment
Program in partnership with MFAL and FAO and with the support of Coca Cola
Life Plus Foundation. The project aims to achieve climate smart agriculture
targets as well as water retention in agricultural lands.
KIRÇEV
Rural Environment and Forestry Issues Research Association is a major national
NGO on rural environment, rural development and forestry field. As well as
working on forest researches, it is regularly organizing “Forest Ecology School”
and “Steppe Ecology School” since 2000. The Association has very large expert
group as a volunteer to support these schools. They are working In center Anatolia
steppes for support sustainability and erosion control.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 34
Savory Institute Turkey “GÖZESİ” -
Anatolian Grasslands
The main responsibility of the Savory Institute is developing a holistic
management and holistic grazing plan, considering biodiversity, combatting
desertification and ecological restoration of grasslands. The Anatolia Grasslands
is an autonomous and independent enterprise but it is closely related with the
Ormanevi Cooperative and Sustainable Rural Future Association.
Anatolian Grasslands' headquarters are located in Biga, Çanakkale near the 27 ha
training site where Holistic Management is applied, trained and monitored
closely. Anatolian Grasslands consults farmers around Turkey on Holistic
Management framework and its main “Holistically Planned Grazing” tool, trains
farmers with a special focus on youth and implements special projects with local
authorities. One of these projects is running in Sarayönü, Konya on a 40 ha site of
common grasslands.
Nature Culture and Life Association
The organization is based in Birecik district of Şanlıurfa. With a strong volunteer
network in the region, the organization aims to protect the natural and cultural
assets in Birecik and Şanlıurfa. The organization is closely involved with bald
ibis and striped hyena conservation work, as well as other key species in the
region.
Academic and Scientific Organizations
Harran University
Harran University is the well-established university of Şanlıurfa, with a faculty of
Agriculture and a department of Biology. The academic members of the
university are involved with research on the agricultural activities and wildlife of
the region, as well as involved in capacity building and conservation activities.
The related departments of the University are key partners for achieving success
for the project.
GAP Agricultural Research Institute
The Research institute is based in Şanlıurfa and works under MFAL. The main
goal of the institute is to achieve protection of genetic resources, development of
new techniques, research on plant diseases, surveys on socio economic issues, and
capacity building.
GAP International Agricultural
Research and Training Center
Based in Diyarbakır, the center focuses on agricultural research and capacity
development through conferences, workshops, and trainings. The center
undertakes large scale projects and establishes partnerships with other key
stakeholders to fulfill its goals.
Pistachio Research Station
The Pistachio Research Station of MFAL is based in Gaziantep. The station aims
to solve problems and overcome obstacles regarding pistachio growing, from
production to marketing. The station also works to increase capacity of pistachio
growers in the region.
Southeastern Anatolia Forestry
Research Institute
Based in Elazığ. Established in 1977, it undertakes scientific research to
rehabilitate the forests of region and increase the efficiency in forest production.
Agriculture Representative
Organizations
Farmers of the region are organized under several structures. The main
organization for farmers in each province is the Agricultural Chambers that have
also sub-district branches. These are democratically governed units of farmers.
Moreover, there are other specialized structures farmers. These include:
Sheep/Goat Breeders Union, Cattle Breeders Union, Agricultural Credit
Cooperative, Irrigation Cooperatives.
Private sector
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 35
Local women and men farmers
As well as working with farmers through representatives organizations, the project
will also engage with farmers directly throughout the region.
Rural women
Men and women have different roles, knowledge, interests and priorities in natural
resources management and animal production. In general, rural women are
responsible for animal breeding and cultivating crops. In this sense, rural women
do not participate in selling, plowing or fertilizing activities. Women’s
involvement is constrained by social norms and poor access to extension, training,
credits and markets. Women cannot participate in marketing and entrepreneurship
activities. They cannot access technology and credit resources and decision
making processes.
The project will be based on a participatory approach with the aim of ensuring
women farmer’s participation and equity in benefit – sharing, increasing women’s
mobility and their experience in public speaking. This approach will be based on a
socio-economic assessment including gender analysis in the project villages and
carried out at micro (household), mezo (institutions) and macro (policy) level. The
target groups are grazing families in the project region. Men and women’s roles
are not static and are often renegotiated under changing economic and social
conditions. Women and men may have different knowledge and skills in various
aspects of animal production: this is important to recognize particularly when it
comes to preventing and controlling diseases. To increase women’s knowledge
not only on animal production but relevant policy and documents, awareness-
raising activities and specific trainings which will be identified during socio-
economic assessment will be conducted.
Women’s ability to benefit from animal production is restricted due to precarious
access to land, water and fodder on which animal production is dependent. The
project will aim to increase women’s access to productive assets. Additionally,
women’s involvement in decision-making processes will be increased by their
participation in project meetings and campaigns. This involvement will be
provided by the community members themselves and relevant NGOs such as the
GAP Multi-Purpose Community Centers (ÇATOMs) in Sanlıurfa for Gender
Mainstreaming. Gender mainstreaming activities will be monitored by gender
checklists and indicators.
1.5 Lessons Learned from Past and Related Work and Evaluations
140. The MFWA, through General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks,
completed a set of pilot projects on conservation of biodiversity and effective management of
natural resources. The GEF-II Biodiversity and Natural Resources Management Project was
completed for four sites, which represent four different habitat types. The ‘Conservation and
Sustainable Development of Biological Diversity and Natural Resources in Yıldız Mountains’
project is also completed. The MFWA is currently implementing the ‘Strengthening the National
Nature Protection System for Implementation of Natura 2000 Requirements’ project and the
‘National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (for the period 2008-2017),’ which supports the
conservation and effective management of existing resources. The proposed project will build on
the experience of MFWA in the implementation of these projects.
141. The proposed project will build on the experience and lessons learned of the GEF-
II/Biodiversity and Natural Resource Management Project, ‘GEF/Enhancing Effectiveness of
Forest Protected Areas in Küre Mountains,’ ‘EU/ Conservation of Biodiversity and Natural
Resources and Sustainable Development in Yıldız Mountains’ project that created the acceptance
of the need for improved protected areas management systems. The results achieved by those
projects, such as increased capacity of protected areas management, improved public awareness of
steppe habitats conservation, and strengthened policy/institutional framework, created an
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 36
understanding within provincial and local government of the need for greatly improved
management systems. The proposed project will build on this awareness to expand the coverage
of the PA system and mainstream biodiversity conservation into production landscapes.
1.6 Links to National, GEF and FAO Strategic Objectives
1.6.1 National Eligibility and fit with National Strategic Objectives
142. Turkey is a party to Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Turkey signed the
convention in 1992 and ratified it in 1996. As a response to the CBD, Turkey has prepared and
started implementing its National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan in 2007, with the
participation and contribution of a wide range of organizations and stakeholders. Besides the
CBD, the government of Turkey has signed many other international environmental conventions,
such as the Convention on the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1983), the
Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (RAMSAR) (1994), the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) (1996), the Bern
Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (BERN) (1984), the
European Landscape Convention (2001), the Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and
Biological Diversity in the Mediterranean (1988), and The Black Sea Biodiversity and Landscape
Conservation Protocol (2004).
143. The proposed project is consistent with the various strategies, programs, and action plans
published by the Government of Turkey (GoT) pursuant to its commitments under the relevant
international environment and nature conservation conventions, as well as with the relevant
national development plans and strategies adopted by the GoT. With respect to the environmental
conventions, i.e. the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the proposed project is fully
consistent with and will contribute significantly to implementation of the following strategies,
programs and action plans:
Table: Relevant International Agreements Ratified by Turkey
Convention/Agreement Signed
Convention on Biological Diversity 1992
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES) 1996
Framework Convention on Climate Change 2004
Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 2009
Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity 2004
Convention to Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitats [Ramsar] 1994
World Heritage Convention on Nature and Culture Sites under UNESCO 1983
Bern Convention (European Wildlife Conservation Convention) 1984
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification 1998
European Landscape Convention 2003
Barcelona Convention ( Protocol on Conservation of the Mediterranean Protected Areas) 2002
144. The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (2007) objectives include “protect
steppe biological diversity, to ensure the sustainable use of its components, as well as to ensure
the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from the utilization of genetic resources; and to
combat against the loss of steppe biological diversity and the social-economic results of that.”
The strategy calls for identifying the state of the existing species in steppe ecosystems, and
mapping and determining the threats. The proposed project will contribute specific responses
addressed in the National Action Plan, including: the education of people specializing in
taxonomy, ecology, and genetic areas to be able to build up a steppe biological diversity inventory
with the cooperation of education and research institutions, and the organization of those people
so that a systematized work can be done; the identification of steppe areas and the special areas
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 37
which have special importance for biological diversity and/or are especially under threat in
steppes and mapping them by using GIS; and the identification of the status of existing species in
steppe ecosystems, the determination of the threats to the existing species and habitats, and an
update of the red lists of the endangered species.
145. The proposed project will directly support the implementation of these objectives by
preparing and developing a national strategy that incorporates steppe biodiversity conservation
considerations into actions, tools, and guidelines to manage steppe ecosystem and realize the
actions under the objective.
146. The project will directly address one of the cross-cutting issues requiring capacity
development, namely national thematic assessment identified in Turkey’s National Capacity Self-
Assessment (NCSA) under the Rio Conventions (2011). The NCSA was financed by Global
Environment Facility (GEF) through the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) to assess
the existing national capacity, identify and prioritize the capacity needs, and reveal the cross-
cutting issues and synergy areas among three Rio conventions (UNCBD, UNFCCC, UNCCD) to
be implemented in Turkey.
147. The National Capacity Action Plan has been prepared by the Turkey’s National Capacity
Self-Assessment (NCSA) project for the three Rio Conventions (UNFCCC, UNCBD, UNCCD) in
order to be implemented effectively. The National Capacity Action Plan includes the activities to
be carried out in the synergy areas that cover all three conventions, the current capacity in terms
of time, human resources and finance.
148. The “Assessment of National Capacity and Identification of Needs” refers to “With regard
to legislation, gap was identified in some issues while lack of implementation and sanctions was
identified in some issues. The principal issues that have legislative gaps are biosafety, use of
genetic resources, benefit-sharing, alien species, microorganisms, steppe protected areas and
coastal-marine protected areas. The issues where lack of adaptation, implementation and sanction
are observed intensify in objectives on planning and sustainable use.”
149. The project will directly contribute to the Ninth Development Plan of Turkey (2007-2013).
Under Strategic Objective 4,”Protection and management of rural environment”, protection and
management of rural environment and sustainable management of natural resources are a priority
for the country’s overall economic development. The other important measure under the
Development Plan is “to provide sustainable utilization of natural resources.” One of the main
priorities under the measure of the Development Plan is to promote strategic management of the
country’s steppe ecosystems and its flora and fauna species.
150. The project will support implementation of the GoT’s National Rural Development Plan
(2009-2013), which targets the conservation of agricultural areas, pastures and forests, wetland,
and steppe ecosystems including flora and fauna resources in areas that will be integrated into
forest regimes. The Rural Development Plan underscores the relationship between rural poverty
and natural resource degradation, recognizing a significant increase in recent years in erosion and
degradation of land and water resources in the country, in many cases due to improper farming
techniques and increasing climate variability (droughts, floods, and landslides). To mitigate these
processes, the Plan gives priority to strategies, measures, and activities that address management
of steppe ecosystems.
151. Turkey has prepared its National Strategy and Action Plan for Combating Desertification in
alignment with the UNCCD’s 10-Year Strategy. The strategy and the action plan refer to steppe
protection under output 7.4 as “undertaking rehabilitation implementations in forests, steppes,
pasturelands, wetlands, coastal and other natural habitats…” Activity 7.4.6 indicates, “Increasing
the management effectiveness in steppe protection areas to ensure the conservation of steppe
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 38
habitats”. Activity 7.4.6 was defined as “To revise and improve the protected area definitions;
representing different types of steppe habitats in protected areas network and preparing
management plans for protected areas.”
152. The National Action Plan for Climate Change also takes into account steppe habitats in
Turkey. Objective UO2.6 refers to identification of climate change’s effect on steppe ecosystems
and its ecosystem services, monitoring the effects and developing measures towards adaptation.
The plan also aims to define and implement research criteria for steppe indicator species and
sensitive habitat types.
1.6.2 Alignment with GEF Priorities
153. GEF-5 Focal Area Strategy and Programme: The proposed project is a single focal area
project and in line with the Biodiversity Conservation (BD-1 and BD 2) Focal Areas. The
proposed project will contribute to the improvement of effectiveness of existing steppe protected
areas as well as development of new steppe protected areas under the BD-1, outcome 1.1 The
project will also contribute to mainstreaming biodiversity conservation and sustainable utilization
into the steppe production landscapes (BD 2, outcome 2.1), and its incorporation into policy and
regulatory frameworks at national level (BD-2, outcome 2.2).
Table: Fit with GEF Focal Area objectives
Relevant FA Outcomes
Associated Project Outcomes
BD-1
Outcome 1.1: Improve sustainability of
Protected Areas
Outcome 1. Representation of the various steppe ecosystems and
threatened steppe species in the PA system under various
management regimes improved.
Outcome 2: Reconciliation of land use activities with steppe
biodiversity conservation in sensitive buffer zones around
Karacadağ
BD-2
Outcome 1.1: Mainstream biodiversity
conservation and sustainable use into
production landscapes, seascapes and sectors
Outcome 3. Steppe ecosystems (landscapes) more effectively
managed by strengthened national and local PA institutions and
stakeholders, leading to reduced threats to steppe ecosystems
154. Aichi Targets: The proposed project supports the Aichi Targets adopted at the 10th
Conference of the Parties of the CBD.
Relevant Aichi Target
Project Contribution
Strategic Goal A: Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across
government and society
Target 1: By 2020, at the latest, people are aware of
the values of biodiversity and the steps they can take to
conserve and use it sustainably.
The project will build awareness regarding steppe
biodiversity and conservation at three levels:
national, provincial and field/user group.
Target 2: By 2020, at the latest, biodiversity values
The project’s strategic approach to steppe
conservation will be integrated with development
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 39
have been integrated into national and local
development and poverty reduction strategies and
planning processes and are being incorporated into
national accounting, as appropriate, and reporting
systems.
planning for both the national government
stakeholders (MFAL, MFWA) and provincial
stakeholders (Sanliurfa).
Target 4: By 2020, at the latest, Governments, business
and stakeholders at all levels have taken steps to
achieve or have implemented plans for sustainable
production and consumption and have kept the impacts
of use of natural resources well within safe ecological
limits.
The project aims to mainstream conservation of
steppe biodiversity by generating strategic
plans/policies within the productive sector.
Strategic Goal B: Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use
Target 7: By 2020 areas under agriculture, aquaculture
and forestry are managed sustainably, ensuring
conservation of biodiversity.
The project will work extensively to shift current
agricultural practices - particularly grazing - to be
more compatible with biodiversity conservation
objectives.
Strategic Goal C: To improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity
Target 12: By 2020 the extinction of known threatened
species has been prevented and their conservation
status, particularly of those most in decline, has been
improved and sustained.
The project will benefit a host of endangered and
endemic species, including plant and animal species
of global significance.
Strategic Goal D: Enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem services
Target 14: By 2020, ecosystems that provide essential
services, including services related to water, and
contribute to health, livelihoods and well-being, are
restored and safeguarded, taking into account the needs
of women, indigenous and local communities, and the
poor and vulnerable.
Maintaining ecosystem services is a major drive of
the project. This includes working with livestock
grazers to better link the conservation of ecosystem
services with improved production and profitability.
Strategic Goal E: Enhance implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity
building
Target 19: By 2020, knowledge, the science base and
technologies relating to biodiversity, its values,
functioning, status and trends, and the consequences of
its loss, are improved, widely shared and transferred,
and applied.
The project will contribute substantially to the
understanding of steppe ecosystem functionality,
status and monitoring of the positive/negative
conservation impacts of various management
decisions.
1.6.3 Alignment with FAO Strategies and Objectives
155. The project will directly contribute to the FAO global Strategic Objective 2 (SO2): Increase
and improve provision of goods and services from agriculture, forestry and fisheries in a
sustainable manner. The project will contribute to: Outcome 1 (Producers and Natural Resource
Managers Adopt Practices that Increase and Improve the Provision of Goods and Services in the
Agricultural Sector Production Systems in a Sustainable Manner); Output 1.1 (Innovative
practices for sustainable agricultural production are identified, assessed and disseminated and
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 40
their adoption by stakeholders is facilitated); Output 1.2 (Innovative approaches for ecosystem
valuation, management and restoration are identified, assessed, disseminated and their adoption
by stakeholders is facilitated); and, Output 1.3 (Organizational and institutional capacities of
stakeholders are strengthened to support innovation and the transition toward more sustainable
production systems).
156. The project reflects Regional Priorities for Europe and Central Asia in the area of [3]
Natural Resource Management, including climate change mitigation and adaptation. FAO is a
signatory to the United Nations Development Cooperation Strategy for Turkey (2011-2015)
prepared in accordance with Ninth Development Plan, which focuses on strengthening policy
formulation and implementation capacity for the protection of the environment and cultural
heritage in line with sustainable development principles under Priority Area [1] Democratic and
Environmental. The project supports the FAO Country Programming Framework (CPF) 2012-
2015. This includes the following priority areas: Natural resource management including climate
change mitigation and adaptation; Food security and nutrition (both in-country and abroad);
Policy support to small farmers; Control of trans-boundary pests and diseases (animal and plant);
and, Policy and institutional support for EU accession and integration.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 41
Section 2: Project Framework and Expected Results
2.1 Project Objective, Strategy and GEF Alternative
157. Project Objective: The project’s objective is to improve the conservation of Turkey’s
steppe ecosystems through effective protected area management and mainstreaming steppe
biodiversity conservation into production landscapes.
158. Project Strategy and GEF Alternative: The project will apply three components each
deigned to systematically address the three barriers standing between the existing situation and
long-term solution of securing the ecological integrity of Turkey’s globally significant steppe
ecosystems.
159. The project’s first component will aim to address Barrier #1 (Limited experience with highly
effective steppe protected area design and management). The project will facilitate the
emplacement of tools and experience required for protected area design and management to
become much more effective at conserving steppe ecosystems and associated globally significant
biodiversity. This will include setting in place a rigorous framework for steppe protected area
management planning and monitoring. Management will become much more coordinated,
inclusive, informed, and effective. Cooperative management approaches will strengthen linkages
between protected areas managers, government agencies, researchers, civil society conservation
organizations, and private stakeholders. The project will help protected area managers to innovate
solutions to make certain productive uses within the protected area are more in line with
achievement of long-term conservation objectives. The project will catalyze the inclusion with
the protected area regime of a substantial area of steppe that is currently at risk of being lost. The
Government of Turkey will be enabled to create a new protected area designed specifically to
bring a biologically critical steppe area within the protected area regime.
160. The project’s second component will aim to address Barrier #2 (Limited experience with
integrating steppe conservation with grazing and agricultural management practices). With GEF
support, tools will be emplaced to integrate steppe conservation within grazing and management
practices. The project will support protected area managers, government extension agencies and
agriculturalists to mainstream steppe conservation within their production activities. The
protected area staff and others will work with grazing interests to emplace much better models for
grassland management predicated upon spatial and temporal carrying capacities. A major part of
this effort will be to innovate a stock management system that maintains ecosystem services,
reduces business risk, and increases profitability.
161. The project’s third component will aim to address Barrier #3 (Limited capacity to generate
institutional and policy level support required to achieve landscape level grasslands
conservation). The project help generate the institutional and policy level support required to
achieve steppe conservation on a landscape level. Agriculture and associated infrastructure
development is a major driver of steppe ecosystems. This development is also fragmenting
remaining steppe, including existing protected areas. This problem persists due to the limited
capacity and experience in Turkey with the generation of institutional and policy frameworks
required for the realization of landscape level conservation. The project will help to remove this
barrier by creating a model for provincial level steppe conservation planning. A centerpiece of
this effort will be the generation and implementation of a provincial level steppe conservation
strategy. Commensurate capacity building will support this effort. Long-term implementation
will be ensured by institutional, policy, and financing improvements. The approach will slow the
loss of steppe ecosystems outside of protected areas, generate buffer zones for protected areas and
secure ecological corridors between protected areas. All efforts will be approached so that
national level replication and upscaling is supported. The project will help concerned national
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 42
institutions to build necessary capacity, capture lessons learned, and create policy and institutional
pathways required to facilitate national level support and replication.
162. The GEF alternative represents a substantial and transformative change to the status quo.
The GEF project will assist Turkey to catalyze immediate conservation gains in terms of
improved conservation of globally significant biodiversity within existing and new steppe
protected areas. This could not likely be realized without the exposure to best international
principles and practices facilitated through GEF financing. The project will create the foundation
required to identify and conserve biologically critical steppe habitats nationally. For a relatively
small investment, GEF financing will catalyze a long-term and lasting change. By project close,
Turkey will be much better positioned to substantially increase the effectiveness of conserving
globally significant steppe biodiversity at the protected area, provincial and national levels.
2.2 Components (Outcomes) and Activities
Component 1: Effectiveness of protected area system to conserve steppe biodiversity
increased
Component Budget: GEF (US$ 688,500), Co-financing (US$ 2,853,000)
Output 1.1 New steppe protected area established and operational
163. The project will assist with the establishment of a new protected area encompassing the
Karacadağ steppe ecosystem. The project will provide the technical support to initiate the design
and capacity building required to establish the protected area. The project will assist the GDNCNP
to generate a comprehensive proposal for protected area establishment. Declaration of this new
protected area will require completion and submission of a protected area proposal dossier. This
proposal will be submitted by GDNCNP to the Ministry of Environment for approval prior to the
close of project year two. By project close, the new protected area will be fully staffed and
financed by the Government of Turkey.
164. Effort will commence with a rapid appraisal and documentation of status of globally
significant biodiversity contained within the region. The survey work will assess biodiversity,
social and economic issues. The assessment will generate the baseline information and processes
required to inform protected area design, inform the protected area management plan (Output 1.2),
inform the monitoring program (Output 1.3), inform the mainstreaming of conservation within
productive systems (Outcome 2), inform the creation of larger landscape conservation strategies
(Outcome 3), and build public awareness regarding biodiversity and ecosystem service values.
165. The project will assess current resource use and associated impacts to biodiversity. The
assessment will review issues related to livelihoods and women and men community members.
The assessment will review current decision-making structures, including both government and
traditional grazing management regimes. The project will assist with the generation of maps
demarcating areas of highest biodiversity value and overlays detailing current and proposed
resource use patterns. The assessment will be used to help define and prioritize conservation
needs. The assessment will include recommendations for protected area establishment, including
innovating approaches for designation that integrate sustainable resource use and conservation
objectives. The process of protected areas establishment will involve identifying areas of highest
conservation importance and commensurate zoning. Methodologies will be informed by best
international and national models for biodiversity gap analysis adapted for the specific needs of
steppe protected area assessment.
166. The assessment effort will be used to build the capacities of GDNCNP and related
stakeholders. The project will provide the technical support required to build this capacity. The
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 43
effort will be complimented by assessment guidelines including gender checklists to be generated
with project support. These guidelines will be suitable for replication and use nationally. The
guidelines will be scaled appropriately to make certain future replication is cost-effective and
efficient. The assessment process will draw upon GDNCNP and GDPP staff from both national
and provincial offices. The assessment will engage other stakeholders and representatives of
academic institutions, civil society, and farmer’s organizations. The assessment will be
accompanied by a series of workshops designed to inform key stakeholders of assessment
methodologies and results.
167. The primary challenge of establishing a protected area within this landscape will be
balancing the demands of existing resource users with the achievement of desired national and
global biodiversity conservation objectives. Over fourteen proximate communities and hundreds
of seasonal pastoralists are reliant in part upon the proposed protected area’s resources. The
Government of Turkey through previous GEF projects has worked to engage stakeholders with
protected management and planning. However, the Government has extremely limited experience
with the engagement of local stakeholders for protected area establishment.
168. To address this issue, the project will generate and support implementation of a model
stakeholder engagement guidelines. The guidelines will serve as a strategy to provide a foundation
for the identification of stakeholders at the national, provincial, and local resource user level (e.g.,
pastoralists). This will include full reflection of gender, poverty, and other issues associated with
most vulnerable sectors of society. The engagement strategy will identify and describe methods
to alleviate current government staff capacity weaknesses related to effective stakeholder
engagement. This will include organizing and implementing necessary training and capacity
building efforts. The strategy will define concrete steps and recommended methodologies for
stakeholder engagement. Methodologies will be based upon best international principles and
practices, including participatory rural appraisals and open forum meetings. Engagement will
provide pathways to improve stakeholder knowledge, awareness and pride regarding existing
biodiversity benefits.
169. Issues of gender will be an important element of the guideline development and
implementation. In Sanliurfa, GAP has established multipurpose community centers specifically
for women and rural development. FAO/Turkey has a number of tools that are being used to help
facilitate engagement of rural women in decision making and planning processes, such as the
“Gender Thematic Checklist for Forestry Sector”. These tools will be modified and applied to
strengthen the engagement process to become more fully gender sensitive.
170. Strategy implementation will ideally culminate in the generation of broad-based support for
protected area establishment, reflecting and balancing both conservation priorities and the vested
economic interests of household members of existing grazing families. Through strategy
implementation, stakeholders will have an opportunity to actively exchange opinions, understand
the potential ecological and economic benefits of protected area establishment, and define and
innovate best conservation practices. Output activities will help create the capacity required for
the GDNCNP to adequately and effectively represent steppe ecosystems within the expanded
national protected area regime. The process will expose diverse government agencies and
stakeholders to best international principles and practices related to protected area creation,
financing, management, and stakeholder involvement. Lessons learned will be fully documented
and captured. Most importantly, the strategy will be used as a foundation for the creation of
national guidelines for stakeholder engagement, fully integrating and reflecting lessons learned
during project implementation. The project will support raising of public awareness,
dissemination of information material on Karacadağ and publication of the strategy document and
other field survey results.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 44
Output 1.2 Effective management plans for three steppe protected areas created and
implemented
171. The project will support the generation and initial implementation of new and/or updated
management plans for three steppe-protected areas. These management plans will reflect best
international principles and practices. The management plans will elevate the current level of
management and conservation effectiveness. The plans will be predicated upon the long-term
conservation of steppe ecosystem integrity. The plans will be organic and reviewed, reported upon
and adapted annually. The plans will cover both the protected area cores as well as associated
buffer zones. This will insure that plans fully reflect the results of on-going capacity building,
monitoring, and public awareness efforts. Conservation objectives will be established that are
fully in line with GEF global priorities, including the Aichi targets. The management plans will
link provisioning of financing and human resources with the realization of protected area
conservation objectives. The project will provide the technical assistance required to make certain
current protected area management approaches are much more innovative. This will includes
provisioning of technical expertise required to fully expose protected area managers and other
stakeholders to best international principles and practices related to protected area management.
The management plans will also include a specific “Species Action Plans” for managing and
conserving important (flag) species. The planning process will pay particular attention on
pistachio species in Tek Tek Mountains National Park for management, maintenance, researches
and administration.
172. The project will support the identification and gazetting of buffer zones around each of the
three pilot protected areas. Management plans will integrate conservation and production issues
(e.g., cultivation, water management, ecosystem services, and grazing). The management plans
will include a collaborative management system for buffer zones of the protected areas. The plans
will also identify responsibilities and implementation authority for management activities in
buffer zones according to national regulations and policies.
173. The management plans must integrate and reflect the long-standing needs of community
residents who actively use protected area resources for their livelihoods. A particular emphasis of
the project’s technical support will be building management approaches and capacities for
protected areas containing significant livestock grazing and other uses of protected area resources.
A hallmark of these new management plans will be the full identification and inclusion of a wide
range of stakeholders. This will include national and provincial government agencies, civil society
organizations, academic organizations and broad range of private stakeholders. The management
planning process will be informed by the guidelines for assessment and stakeholder engagement
generated under Output 1.1. Importantly, the management plan development process will fully
engage communities and particularly those persons who actively use protected area resources for
their livelihoods. This will include emphasis upon livelihood and gender issues. Sanliurfa is
quickly emerging as a domestic tourism destination. Management plans will specifically consider
both the potential benefits and challenges associated with tourism development. Management
planning will seek out ways to engage the tourism market as a mechanism for alternative
livelihood creation as a conservation incentive and a means to increase public awareness and
engagement with steppe conservation.
174. The management planning process will be used to build capacity both on the provincial and
national levels. The process will engage a wide-range of stakeholders. Management planning
will include workshops to inform stakeholders regarding both the process and results of
management planning. Recent GEF effort under the “GEF II” intended to generate protected area
management planning guidelines. Unfortunately, the scale of the guidelines was overly ambitious
and the result was not achieved. To fill this gap, the GEF Steppe project will generate simplified
guidelines for protected area management planning for the three Sanliurfa protected areas that can
be adapted and up-scaled nationally.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 45
175. Draft management plans will be completed prior to the project’s mid-term evaluation.
During the project’s second half of operation, priority management interventions will be
implemented and modeled with project support. This will help to make certain that management
planning is actually translated into conservation action. The project may support limited
investment in infrastructure required to operationalize protected area management planning, e.g.,
signage, border demarcation, field monitoring and enforcement equipment, restoration of
degraded areas, and public awareness materials. Prior to the close of the project, these
interventions will be fully assessed and lessons learned captured.
Output 1.3 Rigorous monitoring program for three steppe protected areas established
176. The project will work with national and provincial level institutions to set in place a
monitoring program for all three protected areas. The monitoring program will work to engage
existing and emerging regional and national academic institutions. The project will make certain
that the monitoring program is designed to inform and improve protected area management. The
monitoring program will inform decision-making both inside and beyond the protected area
boundaries. The monitoring program will be appropriately scaled with effort focused upon a few
key indicator species for each steppe-protected area. The species will include critically
endangered and globally significant plant and animal species, including wide ranging umbrella
species such as goitered gazelle and plant species particularly vulnerable to climate change
impacts. The monitoring program will provide a platform for assessing the short and long-term
impact of identified threats upon ecosystem integrity and ecosystem services. The monitoring
program will regularly assess land degradation associated with grazing and agricultural
production. This will include assessing the root causes for these impacts. The monitoring
program will therefore integrate social elements, including economic, agriculture, and gender
issues. Ultimately, the monitoring program will feed into national and provincial level planning
and decision-making mechanisms and institutions. This will include linking with and informing
the national Nuh (Noah) Database.
177. GEF investment will provide the technical and financial support such as equipment and
tools required to initiate the monitoring program. During the project’s first year of operation, a
simple monitoring handbook will be generated and published. This handbook will help to focus
and prioritize monitoring efforts. The handbook will also identify monitoring protocols and
recommend modalities for making certain information is captured and applied to inform
management decision-making. The handbook will reflect best international and national
practices. The project will catalyze the establishment of a monitoring cohort comprised of
relevant government, non-governmental and academic institutions. The project will facilitate and
provide initial financial support for this cohort to meet on a bi-monthly (six times per year) basis.
The cohort will function as a working group to advice and support protected area managers with
the design and implementation of a rigorous biodiversity monitoring program for each of the three
pilot protected areas.
178. The monitoring program should be fully functional by project close. The monitoring
program will be linked to and informing the process of improved and innovative management
planning and decision-making. The monitoring program will be used to build public awareness
and knowledge regarding the status of biodiversity conservation and associated ecosystem
services. Monitoring will be delivering the core data and information required to make certain
protected area managers and institutions are able to fully determine and understand the
conservation effectiveness of on-going protected area management decision-making. The
established monitoring program will be fully supported by the GDNCNP, including necessary
staffing and financing.
Component 2: Steppe biodiversity conservation mainstreamed into production landscapes
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 46
Component Budget: GEF (US$ 744,500), Co-financing (US$ 3,043,200)
Output 2.1 Sustainable grazing management program operational across three steppe
protected areas and associated buffer zones
179. Over-grazing presents a major challenge to steppe conservation across Turkey. Existing
grazing management is very basic. The current approach does not address fundamental
requirements for the achievement of biodiversity conservation objectives. The absence of an
effective grazing management program for the lands within and immediately proximate to
protected areas is a major barrier to steppe conservation. This limits the ability of protected area
managers, resource users, and government agencies to identify and conserve areas of highest
biodiversity value. To address this issue, the project will provide the technical and financial
assistance required to both generate and implement a model for sustainable grazing management
at each of the three pilot steppe protected areas and associated buffer zones.
180. The project will supply the technical expertise required to access and apply best
international principles and practices related to improving grasslands and grazing production with
and proximate to protected areas.. The program will begin during the project’s first year with a
comprehensive analysis of on-going grazing activities within each of the protected areas. This
will be supported and informed by the model assessment conducted for the Karacadağ steppe
ecosystem under Output 1.1.
181. The adopted grazing management system will shift de facto open access grazing within each
of the protected areas to a more sustainably managed grazing system. The system will be
predicated upon establishing livestock carrying capacities, improved livestock production
modalities, identification and conservation of areas with highest biological value, and
maintenance of ecological integrity and associated biodiversity. The objective of the grazing
management regime will be to maintain and improve ecological function and conserve globally
significant biodiversity associated with each protected area while providing reasonable support for
continued production. Each protected area will establish a carrying capacity target. Over time, the
total number of livestock will be ratcheted downwards using an innovative and exchangeable
(tradeable) permitting system. This “cap and trade” approach to livestock management within the
protected areas will increase the quality of ecosystem services and the value of livestock grazing
rights. Carrying capacity will be linked to a spatial and temporal grazing management plans.
Implementation of the grazing management plans will benefit from best international and national
examples. The adopted grazing management systems will be linked to and integrated within
protected area management planning (Output 1.2).
182. An important element of this activity will be to promote and improve coordination between
diverse government agencies, protected area administration, and livestock producers. Grazing
management within protected areas is controlled by GDNCNP. Outside of protected areas,
including within buffer zones grazing is under the purview of numerous government agencies at
both the national and provincial level. This includes the provincial Pastureland Committees. The
process will therefore stress coordination between government, private and civil society
organizations to discuss best ways to demonstrate grazing improvements. The process of
designing and implementing this grazing management program will be stakeholder driven using a
fully inclusive community-based approach. The stakeholder engagement guidelines generated
under Output 1.2 will help define this process. The grazing management system improvements
will reference appropriate elements of the FAO’s Voluntary Guidelines on Land Tenure, Save and
Grow program, and Global Agenda for Sustainable Livestock. This will be incorporated within
grazing land lease structural improvements. The project will provide support to stakeholder
working groups to prepare and implement sustainable grazing methods and practices with
biodiversity conservation objectives mainstreamed into these approaches. Grazing management
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 47
plans will be designed and implemented by project and GDNCNP staff working with closely with
relevant decision-making authorities (e.g. MFAL, MFWA, PC). The grazing management
demonstration program will be developed and implemented in close collaboration with private
stakeholders as well as government regulatory agencies and traditional government structure.
183. To make certain lessons are well-captured and disseminated, the project will support the
creation of a grazing working group. This working group will be comprised of national and
provincial level representatives of key stakeholders. This may include the Sanliurfa Governor’s
office, provincial offices of MFAL, meadow commission members, GAP representatives, grazing
union members, representatives of civil society and academic organizations, protected area staff,
and representatives of local herding groups. This working group will meet at least quarterly
during the project implementation period to exchange information, provide technical insights to
project approaches, and exchange information regarding program progress. The project’s
technical staff will facilitate the efforts of the working group. The meetings and efforts of the
working group will be used to collate and disseminate lessons learned so that provincial and
national level replication is fostered. The working group will be tasked with making certain
lessons learned are fully integrated within the annual PC pastureland management planning
process.
184. The grazing management plan will benefit from and inform the monitoring and assessment
programs (Output 1.3). The finalized land use plan will be integrated within the protected area
management planning process (Outcome 1) and the provincial level landscape level conservation
strategy (Outcome 3). The land use management plans will help to create the basis for the
generation of model grazing programs to be established at each pilot site (Output 2.2). The project
may support implementation of the grazing management plan through necessary equipment and
tools. By project close, the grazing management program should be fully adopted by requisite
government agencies at the national, provincial, and local level. Lessons learned will be well
captured, making certain that similar land use planning programming can be integrated into
protected area management nationally.
Output 2.2 Sustainable grazing management program impacts monitored at three steppe
protected areas
185. The project will work with academic and government extension agencies to provide the
technical and financial tools required to track the impact of improved grazing management on
both ecological and socio-economic levels. Ecosystem monitoring will measure and assess how
grazing management decisions effect ecological integrity. The project will also take a very
innovative approach to monitoring herd production, determining how the improvement of
pastureland quality relates to economic benefits for local pastoralists.
186. The program will track how conservation of ecosystem services impacts business
investment risks, business sustainability and profitability. The project will work with veterinary
services, extension officers, protected area staff, conservation biologists, and livestock producers
to initiate a program to track the impacts of improved grasslands and associated ecosystem
services on livestock health. The project will work directly with willing pastoralists to assess how
improved grassland management impacts herd production values. This effort will help create
understanding and incentives for local livestock raisers to shift current over-grazing practices to
more sustainable practices. The monitoring effort will likely assess the connections between
improved grassland management improves livestock fitness, recruitment, milk fat content, wool
quality, weight gain and other parameters useful to inform connections between ecosystem health,
herd quality, and overall production profitability. The monitoring program will address social
issues, including generation of indicators disaggregated by gender to assist with better
understanding of project related impacts. The project will assist participating herding families to
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 48
use this information to inform decision-making and potentially to create a livestock sales program
linked to “steppe friendly” production methods.
187. Livestock monitoring protocols and baseline analysis will be completed within the project’s
first year of implementation. This will be done in coordination with GDNCNP at the provincial
and national level. Impact monitoring will be linked to the on-going efforts supported under the
established monitoring program (Output 1.3). The project may support impact monitoring of the
sustainable grazing management program through necessary equipment and material. By project
close, the tracking program should be fully operational providing meaningful trend data to inform
management decisions by protected area administrations, livestock producers, and government
decision-makers. The program will be firmly established and incorporated within annual
protected area and government budgets.
Output 2.3 Model steppe conservation training program for pastoralists emplaced
188. The project will establish a set of training tools designed to expose and encourage local
grazing users to improve their production techniques to become more steppe conservation
oriented. The training program will build the capacities of three protected area administrations,
relevant government agencies, and agricultural producers.
189. The project’s training program will integrate with steppe conservation training and
awareness programs being implemented at the local and provincial level. Training will be linked
closely with the improved grazing management program (Output 2.1) and livestock production
monitoring (Output 2.2). An important element will be engaging with key stakeholders identified
during project design. These will include GAP, various livestock production unions, the
provincial Pasture Commission, and Harran University. The training program will design to
benefit national and provincial level staff and extension officers of MFWA, GDNCNP, MFAL
and GDPP.
190. The project will coordinate closely with the GEF/FAO Sustainable Land Management and
Climate-Friendly Agriculture (SLM/CFA) project. The SLM/CFA is making a large investment
in the establishment of Farmer Field Schools. Lessons learned and materials generated from the
SLM/CFA will be transferred and applied in each of the three pilot protected areas and
surrounding buffer zones. This project will likewise support the SLM/CFA by providing valuable
lessons on the application of FFS models to the specific concerns of grazing management and
steppe conservation in and around protected areas. This will coordinate closely with existing
livestock producer unions.
191. The project will implement a “soft” demonstration and training program. This will include
recruiting willing grazing groups and individuals to work as early adopters of best practices.
These early adopters will be incentivized by the project through the provision of expertise and
materials to realize improved grazing management benefits. Supported activities will be
prioritized within the protected grazing management plan. Example activities may include
fencing off highly vulnerable areas to allow for ecological restoration, providing families with
best practices through high-level extension services, and as necessary supporting families with
bridging financing to reduce the business risks associated with adopting innovative grazing
approaches.
192. The project will provide technical and financial assistance to initiate the pastoralists training
program. A project training strategy identifying information gaps and training modalities will be
created within the first six months of project implementation. This may include providing
opportunities for training recipients to gain exposure to best international principles and practices
related to grasslands management.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 49
193. By project close, the project initiated grazing management improvement training program
will be integrated within GDNCNP’s and GDPP’s operations. This will be facilitated by a
comprehensive hand-over plan, including identification and securing of necessary financing. The
project will support the creation of a training manual and resource materials (e.g., videos,
publications, social media, etc.) for the use of protected area staff nationally. The manual and
support materials will fully capture and distill all project effort. This will include incorporation of
best practices and lessons learned from overall project effort. The project developed manual and
resource materials will provide the tools required for GDNCNP and GDPP staff to carry out
similar pastoralist training and grazing management improvements throughout steppe areas
nationally. This innovative approach will ensure that the basic training elements are up-scaled
and replicated nationally, applied to other regions where over-grazing presents a challenge to
long-term conservation of steppe biodiversity.
Component 3: Enabling environment established for the effective conservation of steppe
biodiversity across large landscapes
Component Budget: GEF (US$ 784,967), Co-financing (US$ 3,138,300)
Output 3.1 Sanliurfa Province steppe conservation strategy and associated enabling
environment improvements implemented
194. The project will support the emplacement and implementation of a model steppe
conservation strategy for Sanliurfa Province. The strategy will serve as a platform to advance
conservation of steppe biodiversity at a large landscape scale. The strategy will:
Generate a conservation gaps analysis and associated maps to help provincial decision-
makers best understand the status, locations and priorities for steppe biodiversity
conservation;
Outline critical actions to be taken to safeguard steppe biodiversity;
Identify and make certain ecological corridors persist between protected areas;
Be informed by and integrate steppe biodiversity monitoring initiatives;
Integrate protected area management planning and implementation improvements;
Reflect integrated land use planning and grazing management enhancements;
Consider social issues related to sustainable livelihoods and gender;
Adopt and support best steppe conservation agricultural production practices;
Identify and help to secure financial support for province wide steppe conservation
improvements;
Serve as a platform for the identification and improvement of provincial policy and
institutional reforms;
Function as a model for strategic and coordinated conservation effort that can be easily
replicated nationally; and,
Catalyze, engage, inform and coordinate the efforts of diverse government, private, civil
society, and academic stakeholders.
195. The project will work with the Governor’s office to establish a steppe conservation
technical working group within the Pasture Commission. This working group will include
representation from government, private, civil society, and academic organizations.
Establishment of the working group will help foster greater coordination and cooperation between
diverse government agencies and stakeholders. Representative groups will likely include:
MFAL, MFWA, GAP, GDNCNP, Harran University, Chamber of Agriculture, and to be
identified biodiversity conservation, research and civil society institutions.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 50
196. The working group will be tasked with supporting the design and implementation of the
provincial steppe conservation strategy. This will help to catalyze a province wide discussion and
learning regarding how best to conserve and rehabilitate remaining steppe lands, both inside and
beyond protected area boundaries. The project will help by providing the technical and financial
resources required to commence this initiative. During the project implementation period, the
working group will benefit from quarterly updates regarding the status of project supported
activities. This will help to insure that a wide-base of stakeholders are benefitting from and aware
of project progress. The strategy will be an organic document, benefitting from annual review and
updating based upon on-going monitoring and assessment activities. The strategy will benefit
from and be informed by project activities implemented through Components 1 and 2. As these
and other steppe conservation activities progress and grow in sophistications, so too should the
strategy. The strategy will also identify alternative income generation activities to sustain
livelihoods and mechanisms to support conservation of valuable steppe ecosystems. These model
concepts will be used as a basis to gather support at national level and from donor organizations.
197. By project close, the provincial steppe conservation strategy should be fully operational.
The strategy should be working to help orientate provincial development, including agricultural
and urban expansion, to minimize damage and support rehabilitation of remaining steppe habitats.
Strategy implementation and further revision will enjoy full financial and technical support from
the Government of Turkey. The strategy should be delivering tangible improvements to the way
resources are used and allocated within the province to help secure the ecological integrity of
steppe systems. The strategy should enjoy the full support of the Governor’s office and associated
government agencies. These agencies should be mainstreaming the strategy’s objectives within
their operational budgets, human resource plans and associated policies and strategies. This will
include the Sanliurfa Province annual strategic action plans adopted by the Governor’s office,
Pastureland Commission grazing management plan, and GAP strategic investment plans. The
conservation strategy should be informing development and agricultural initiatives. This will
include helping to identify improvements to current financial incentives provided to agricultural
and development interests, helping to re-orient these activities towards more steppe friendly
approaches.
Output 3.2 National steppe conservation strategy and associated enabling environment
improvements established
198. The project will support the emplacement and implementation of a model national steppe
conservation strategy. The national strategy will mirror and synchronize with the model
provincial strategy. The national strategy will serve as a platform to advance conservation of
steppe biodiversity at a large landscape scale. The strategy will:
Generate a conservation gaps analysis and associated maps to help national decision-
makers best understand the status, locations and priorities for steppe biodiversity
conservation, including protected area expansion;
Outline critical actions to be taken to safeguard steppe biodiversity;
Identify and make certain ecological corridors persist between protected areas;
Be informed by and integrate steppe biodiversity monitoring initiatives;
Integrate protected area management planning and implementation improvements;
Reflect integrated land use planning and grazing management enhancements;
Consider social issues related to sustainable livelihoods and gender;
Adopt and support best steppe conservation agricultural production practices;
Identify and help to secure financial support for province wide steppe conservation
improvements;
Serve as a platform for the identification and improvement of national policy and
institutional reforms;
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 51
Function as a model for strategic and coordinated conservation effort that can be easily
replicated nationally; and,
Catalyze, engage, inform and coordinate the efforts of diverse government, private, civil
society, and academic stakeholders.
199. The project will work with both MFAL and MFWA to establish a steppe conservation
working group. This working group will include representation from a government, private, civil
society, and academic organizations. Establishment of the working group will help foster greater
coordination and cooperation between diverse government agencies and stakeholders.
Representative government institutions will include the respective sub-agencies of the Ministry of
Food, Agriculture, and Livestock; Ministry Forest and Water Affairs; Ministry of Environment
and Urbanization; and Ministry of Culture and Tourism. Appropriate civil society and academic
representatives will be identified during project implementation.
200. The working group will be tasked with supporting the design and implementation of the
provincial steppe conservation strategy. This will help to catalyze a province wide discussion and
learning regarding how best to conserve and rehabilitate remaining steppe lands, both inside and
beyond protected area boundaries. The project will help by providing the technical and financial
resources required to kick-start this imitative. During the project implementation period, the
working group will benefit from annual updates regarding the status of project supported
activities. This will help to insure that a wide-base of stakeholders are benefitting from and aware
of project progress.
201. The national strategy will be designed to fully integrate with and inform national policies
and programs. This will include mainstreaming main objectives and programs within institutional
structures, human resource allocations, and financing for government agencies responsible for
steppe conservation, agricultural management/development, and protected areas.
202. By project close, the provincial steppe conservation strategy should be fully operational.
The strategy should be delivering tangible improvements to the way resources are used and
allocated within the province to help secure the ecological integrity of steppe systems. The
strategy will be an organic document, benefitting from annual review and updating based upon
on-going monitoring and assessment activities. As these activities progress and grow in
sophistications, so too should the strategy. The strategy should enjoy the full support of the
Governor’s office and associated government agencies. These agencies should be mainstreaming
the strategy’s objectives within their operational budgets, human resource plans and associated
policies and strategies. The strategy will be absorbed and reflected within the DNCNP National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan and National MFWA Annual Strategic Performance
Documents (reviews).The conservation strategy should be informing development and
agricultural initiatives. This will include helping to identify improvements to current financial
incentives provided to agricultural and development interests, helping to re-orient these activities
towards more steppe friendly approaches.
Output 3.3 National steppe conservation training and awareness program for decision-makers and
resource managers
203. National level decision-makers and resource managers do not currently benefit from
consistent training opportunities designed to build capacities related to steppe conservation. To
help address this challenge, the project will organize an annual steppe conservation seminar.
204. The project will design and initiate a steppe conservation and management training program
for agriculture extension officers. There are currently 50,000 agricultural extension officers
within the MFAL and 750 forest extension officers within the MFWA. Project results and on-
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 52
going activities will be used to design a training and awareness program for these staff. The
training program will be designed to empower and incentivize extension officers to apply their
knowledge of available steppe conservation tools and deliver this knowledge to local decision-
makers and resources users. The project will take an innovative approach to increase awareness.
Rather than bringing staff to centralized locations for training, the project will generate a suite of
training materials. These materials will be distributed to extension officers electronically. Both
the MFAL and MFWA have email services to all extension staff. These email services will be
used to supply training materials to extension officers. This will be linked to requirements for
extension officers to response electronically using survey tools, (e.g., Survey Monkey) to respond
to questions regarding the provided awareness materials. In this way, extension managers will be
able to evaluate the effectiveness and absorption rate of supplied awareness materials.
205. Each of Turkey’s 81 provinces has a Pastureland Commission responsible for setting
conditions of pastureland management. As part of the awareness building activity, the project will
support the generation of model steppe conservation recommendations and instructions to be
officially approved by the MFAL. These recommendations will be integrated within the MFAL
instructions to provincial level Pastureland Commissions. This will insure that Pastureland
Commissions nationally benefit from project results and lessons learned. Individual Pastureland
Commissions may adopt these MFAL recommendations.
206. The two-day annual workshop will initially be organized and lead by project staff with
support from relevant protected area staff, government agencies, civil society organizations,
academics and private stakeholders. By project close, the annual workshop will be fully
organized, financed, and lead by MFWA using Government of Turkey financing. During project
implementation, the annual national steppe conservation workshop will be held in Sanliurfa. This
will provide an opportunity for national level stakeholders to learn and see first hand the results of
on-going project implementation. The workshops will serve as benchmarks to measure
achievement of required project outputs and outcomes. The briefings will also provide an
opportunity for relevant stakeholders to comment on the technical aspects of project activity. The
training program may be accompanied by opportunities for key staff from both ministries and
local government institutions of the project to visit international locations facing similar
challenges related to steppe conservation. This will be used to expose Turkish professionals for
gaining knowledge and experience regarding potential models of success for replication. Project
staff will also support integration of and exposure to any approaches and best practices in steppe
management, sustainable grazing and nature conservation at national level. Participants will be
tasked with presenting findings from this international exchange during the annual national steppe
conservation workshop. Resource materials generated for the workshops will serve as a
mechanism to capture and disseminate lessons learned. By project close all resource materials
will have been collated and published to serve as teaching tools for replication and amplification
of project emplaced success. Lessons learned and associated information generated will be
distributed through Government of Turkey websites supported by both MFAL and MFWA and a
website specifically for the project during its early phase in both, Turkish and English.
2.3 Expected Results and Global Benefits
207. The project is will contribute to the achievement of multiple global environmental benefits.
Achievement of these benefits will be indicated by:
Expand the total hectares of steppe ecosystems secured within Turkey’s protected area regime
from 207,000 ha to 277,000 ha inclusive of buffer zones.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 53
Improve the conservation management effectiveness of three steppe protected areas covering
110,000 hectares with buffer zones. (25,000 ha TekTek Mountain; 25,000 ha Kızılkıyu, 60,000 ha
Karacadağ)
Enhance the steppe conservation management capacity of 75 protected area staff and 500
extension officers
Assist at least 500 women and men farmers and ranchers to mainstream biodiversity conservation
within their production efforts, shifting 110,000 hectares of currently degraded steppe to greater
ecological functionality and integrity
Mainstream strategic steppe biodiversity conservation within national and provincial policies and
strategies, including the following: GDNCNP National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan,
National MFWA Annual Strategic Performance Documents, and Sanliurfa annual strategic action
plan.
Rigorously monitor and report on the conservation status of at least 110,000 hectares of steppe
lands annually, including support from governmental, non-governmental, and academic
institutions
Increase the free ranging population of goitered gazelle in Turkey from approximately 200 to 300,
with the total steppe habitat utilized by goitered gazelle increasing from approximately 40,000
hectares to 60,000 hectares as an indicator of connectivity within and outside protected area
boundaries
Secure the future of 40 endemic plant species currently under threat from habitat loss and over
exploitation
Expand the total number of hectares effectively conserved wild pistachio habitat from 2,800
hectares to more than 3,500 hectares
Secure connectivity and steppe conservation across Sanliurfa Province with more than 50,000
hectares of steppe ecosystems outside of protected areas conserved through strategic management
planning
Reduce grazing pressure, increase productivity, and improve ecological integrity across 100,000
hectares of currently degraded steppe ecosystems
Shift at least 15,000 hectares of agriculture production towards more steppe friendly use
Enhance the strategic and effective conservation of 8 million hectares of steppe lands across
Turkey through upscaling and replication designed to improve national level management capacity
Increase the total provincial investment/budget by Sanliurfa dedicated specifically to steppe
conservation from approximately US$ 100,000 per annum to US$ 250,000 per annum
Increase the total national investment/budget by the Government of Turkey dedicated specifically
to steppe conservation from approximately US$ 1,250,000 per annum to US$ 2,000,000 per
annum
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 54
2.4 Cost effectiveness
208. During project design, several alternative scenarios were considered from the point of view
of cost-effectiveness. These included extensive purchase of hardware and other tactical
equipment, construction of major facilities for administration and agriculture and expensive
international training programs. Stakeholders eventually abandoned these options after carefully
considering conservation priorities relevant to a limited budget. In the end, the highly precise and,
therefore, cost-effective investment rested on a number of principles, each integrated within the
activities and expenditures of this proposed project. The relatively small investment is targeted to
catalyze a substantial course change. The result is a relatively small amount of financing
potentially will leverage the long-term conservation of an immense landscape and associated
global benefits. Paramount was the desire to build the regulatory, management and financial
capacity required for Turkey to independently maintain effective conservation efforts. For
instance, the project’s limited investment will help to create capacity and decision-making
pathways that enable local governments to use revenues to make pro-conservation investments
rather than ill-advised and unsustainable short-term investments. This catalytic effect coupled
with the objective of sustainability makes the GEF investment highly cost-effective.
2.5 Innovativeness
209. The project is designed to apply innovative tools for steppe ecosystem biodiversity
conservation in Turkey’s PA and agriculture land estates. One such innovative tool is a ‘Green
Steppe” scorecard that the project will enable stakeholders to develop and to pilot under this
project as a way to certify, advanced ecosystem-based steppe lands management. In Turkey, as in
many countries, it is innovative to plan strategically to conserve biodiversity in both protected
areas and in the larger productive landscape in which the protected areas exist.
210. The sustainability of a protected area system requires that each protected area site is
effectively governed and managed according to its specific demands. Some areas will require a
low level of management activity while others may require a greater management effort to
achieve their conservation objectives. In some instances the most efficient way to improve the
system’s sustainability will be to focus on improved site level management for each protected area
within the system. With the project, site level management approaches and participatory
techniques will be carried out. Landscape-level and ecosystem based participatory conservation
planning. Stakeholders will be supported to generate management that reflects best international
principles and practices. This will support the creation and effective management of new
protected areas that extends the coverage of threatened species in protected area systems and
improves the coverage of their spatial range. The project will build capacity of natural resource
and/or protected areas managers to support and create cooperation and collaboration with related
stakeholders who benefit natural resources. The project will support policies and national strategy
for steppe ecosystems that support protection systems. These innovative approaches will be scaled
up through a paradigm shift of Turkey’s protected areas managers, staff, local people and other
stakeholders.
Section 3 Feasibility
3.1 Environmental Impact Assessment
211. The project and the GEF resources invested are expected to have positive impacts on the
protection of natural resources especial steppe species and habitats and productive landscapes,
improve the integrity of ecosystems, and result in tangible environmental benefits including
biodiversity conservation, sustainable land management, and sustainable development and public
awareness. Based on the project objective, outcomes and outputs no adverse environmental or
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 55
social impacts are likely and it conforms to FAO’s pre-approved list of projects excluded from a
detailed environmental assessment (see Appendix 7: Environmental Screening and Environmental
Management Plan).
3.2 Risk Management
3.2.1 Risks and mitigation measures Risk Type Probability Mitigation
Challenging project
coordination High
Close and collaborative cooperation between many institutional
stakeholders (particularly the MFWA and the MFAL) will be essential
for the project to achieve its stated goal and objectives. This is
mitigated through the coordinating structure of the National Project
Implementation Unit and by the already existing collaboration with the
project management team at FAO. As all relevant departments are
represented in the Project Steering Committee, it will be the main task
of this body to mitigate any challenges to project coordination.
Low capacity of local
and national
institutions
Medium
National institutions capacity and technical expertise in MFWA/MFAL
staff at various levels are weak. To mitigate this risk, the National
Project Implementation Unit will support the institutional framework
and technical capacity development at national and local levels, through
a capacity building program and training at central and local levels.
Climate change Low
Climatic changes will require evolving research on the proposed
approaches and new best practices. MFAL and MFWA, with their own
unique research institutions and with the contribution of FAO’s
technical expertise, are in a good position to steer research and adopt
forthcoming results in the field. This will be the responsibility of the
National Project Implementation Unit. On the other hand, climatic
changes can also increase political support for the project.
Low ownership and
lack of sustainability
of new technologies
and techniques
Low
Lack of ownership and subsequent lack of sustainability of new
technologies promoted under the project could cause difficulties in
achieving desired adoption levels. This will be mitigated through the
above mentioned capacity building program and through an awareness
campaign targeted at project beneficiaries. This capacity building
program will involve tools, such as economic models and plans,
economic analysis that clearly show that there is an economic and
social benefit to the adoption of these technologies (win-win). This will
be the responsibility of the project’s Field Office.
Incentives for local
stakeholders are not
adequate to generate
engagement
Medium
The project is designed to engage fully with local stakeholders. This
will make certain that stakeholder desires, including local resource
users both women and men, have the opportunity to help define how
best to conserve steppe resources. A major part of this effort will
involve working directly with pastoralists to assist them to measure
how various steppe conservation activities result in economic benefits.
For instance, the project will provide pastoralists with the technical
support required to measure how improved management of steppe
delivers both enhanced ecosystem services as well as improvements to
livestock production and value. This will serve as a major incentive for
local project support. Both, the National Project Implementation Unit
and the Field Office will be responsible to generate engagement.
Regional political
conflict may stimulate
Medium
Since the PIF was approved, the political conflicts in the region have
escalated. The project’s pilot sites are located in areas relatively far
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 56
security measures
limiting
implementation
from current conflict and outside of places of security risk.
FAO/Turkey and Government are certain that the project sites will
continue to be considered safe zones throughout the implementation.
However, this will be monitored by National Project Implementation
Unit during the project period.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 57
3.2.2 Fiduciary risk analysis and mitigation measures (only for NEX projects)
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 58
Section 4: Implementation and Management
4.1 Institutional Arrangements
a. General institutional context and responsibilities
212. The project will be provided operational and administrative support by the FAO Sub-
regional Office of Central Asia (SEC) as the operating unit of the project. The budget holder (BH)
of this project is Sub-regional Coordinator at SEC and Representative of Turkey, responsible for
operational and financial management and supervision of the project. The project itself will be
implemented through a National Project Implementation Unit (NPIU) supported by a Field Office.
MFWA and MFAL are the two lead executing partners. The NPIU will consist of MFWA and
MFAL staff but will be placed under MFWA. MFWA will be responsible for the implementation
of Component 1 and MFAL for Component 2, while Component 3 will be jointly implemented. A
Field Office will be established in Sanliurfa to provide linkages with local stakeholders, including
representatives of local staff of relevant agencies, local resource user associations and NGOs. The
MFWA and MFAL will work closely with a wide range of stakeholders, including resource
beneficiaries, farmers and herders, the private sector, universities, research institutions, civil
society organizations, etc. at national, provincial and district level. At the national level, a Project
Steering Committee will be established for the coordination of project activities.
213. The project will be launched by a well-publicized multi-stakeholder inception workshop.
This workshop will provide an opportunity to provide all stakeholders with updated information
on the project, as well as a basis for further consultation during the project’s implementation, and
will refine and confirm the work plan. In addition, certain project activities will be specifically
designed to directly involve stakeholders in project implementation.
b. Coordination with other ongoing and planned related activities
214. The project is designed to specifically respond to the demands of the Government of Turkey
to make certain coordination is facilitated. As discussed in the project framework, the generation
and implementation of steppe conservation strategies at both the national and provincial level will
be used to engage a broad base of stakeholders. One purpose of this effort is to foster improved
coordination. Representatives of on-going projects, including those financed via GEF, will be
invited to participate in associated workshops, seminars, and round-table discussions. This
engagement will help make certain that all parties are well aware of on-going project efforts,
implementation progress, and exchanging opinions and lessons learned. The result will be that all
investments are better coordinated to deliver leveraged impacts.
215. The project will also benefit from existing coordination mechanisms, such as the UNCCD
National Coordination Body, the National Drought Management Unit, etc. and contribute to the
effectiveness of the these mechanisms towards sustainable land management in Turkey. Further
analysis and detailed design of the coordination scheme will be done during project preparation to
make sure that a strong interaction among key stakeholders is facilitated.
216. The proposed GEF project will be implemented in coordination with a number of FAO on-
going and pipeline projects in Turkey consistent with and complementary to the project objectives
and outputs.
c. Coordination with other GEF Financed Initiatives
217. FAO has established a “programmatic” approach towards implementation of GEF projects
in Turkey. This includes having a dedicated set of staff within the FAO/Turkey offices
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 59
responsible for providing support for the entire FAO/GEF portfolio. The project implementation
team will work with the FAO/Turkey GEF team to regularly communicate with representatives
responsible for each of Turkey’s GEF financed initiatives. This will include facilitating and
organizing an annual meeting to discuss project progress and exchange information between
relative national GEF financed initiatives.
218. The proposed project will be coordinated with and benefit from the FAO/GEF project on
sustainable land management and climate friendly agriculture in Turkey, which is aiming, among
others, rehabilitation of degraded dry lands including pastures and mainstreaming biodiversity
conservation into production landscapes in Konya Closed Basin. Specifically, (i) preparation of
pilot integrated SLM and biodiversity conservation land use plan,(ii) certification of forest and
rangeland landscapes by internationally recognized environmental standards that incorporate
biodiversity considerations, (iii) establishment of biodiversity monitoring system, and (vi)
quantification of ecosystem services values in pilot areas of KCB, and (v) relevant enabling
environment activities, will be the main outcomes that will be coordinated with proposed project.
219. The project will also be aligned to the results of the FAO GEF project on Alignment of
Turkey's National Action Plan with UNCCD 10-Year Strategy and Reporting Process. Special
attention will be given to mainstreaming biodiversity conservation into land use strategic planning
process and to the monitoring system established for UNCCD reporting.
220. The Project will benefit from the methods for integration of biodiversity conservation into
forest landscape management developed under the ongoing UNDP/GEF project on Integrated
Approach to Management of Forests in Turkey, with demonstration in high conservation value
forests in the Mediterranean region project. This project promoted an integrated approach at the
landscape level to the management of high conservation value forests in the Mediterranean region
to secure, among others, biodiversity mainstreaming.
221. National Basin Management Strategy of Turkey (NBMS) will be the national strategy with
which the present proposal will coordinate. The results and the recommendations of NBMS will
lead the proposed project to identify the participatory measures that would maximize social
economic benefits and build capacity among key stakeholders – including local governments,
communities and private sector as part of the process of building resilience of the rural economy
and ensuring the sustainability of the natural resource base.
222. The Project will also benefit from the ‘Strengthening Protected Area Network of Turkey:
Catalyzing Sustainability of Marine and Coastal Protected Areas’, another GEF funded project,
completed by 2014. Although the project is about marine ecosystems, the general project
framework is very similar and concentrated on improving the effectiveness of the marine
protected areas. Know-how of the Marine Protected Area project will be unique asset for
institutional capacity building, governance issues, developing a collaborative working
environment, during the implementation of the steppe project. And finally, FAO will work closely
with CITES and the IUCN Cat Specialist Group to contribute information generated on the
Anatolian leopard under this project and to benefit from CITES and IUCN expertise in this area.
4.2 Implementation Arrangements
a. Roles and responsibilities of the executing partners
223. The MFWA (General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks - GDNCNP)
and the MFAL (General Directorate of Plant Production - GDPP) will be the two lead executing
partners. At the request of the Government of Turkey, the project will be executed by FAO in
close consultation with MFWA and MFAL and the other project partners. MFWA and MFAL will
carry out their responsibilities to support project execution through the National Project Director
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 60
(NPD). National executing partners MFWA and MFAL will designate the NPD in consultation
with the FAO BH and the Lead Technical Officer. The NPD will be a senior staff member of the
MFWA with relevant experiences, and will be able to devote sufficient time to take part in the
project during its implementation. Among the many duties of the NPD, he/she will act as the
responsible focal point at the political and policy level within MFWA and MFAL and he/she will
ensure that all necessary support and inputs from Government personnel are provided by MFWA
and MFAL to enable the project to implement all of the proposed component activities.
224. The administration of the project will be carried out by a Project Management Team under
the overall guidance of the Steering Committee. The Project Management Team will be composed
of a National Project Coordinator, an Operations Officer and Procurement and Financial
Associates. More specifically, the role of the Project Management Team will be to: (i) ensure the
overall project management and monitoring; (ii) facilitate communication and networking among
key stakeholders; (iii) organize the meetings of the PSC and other experts and participants; (iv)
support the local level implementing unit and working groups; and (iiv) reporting and day by day
managing of the project.
225. At the local level, a National Project Implementation Unit (NPIU) will be established with
MFWA and MFAL staff. The MFWA will host the NPIU and provide technical and logistical
support on a need basis for the overall project activities. The project will be executed by the
provincial directorates of the MFWA and the MFAL at the field level. The executing partners will
work closely with a wide range of stakeholders, including village cooperatives, village leaders,
private farmers, shepherds, the private sector, universities, research institutions, civil society
organizations, local communities and residents.
226. The Şanlıurfa Division Directorate of the Şanlıurfa Regional Directorate of MFWA will
host a Field Office for the coordination of local project activities. The Şanlıurfa Province
Directorate of Food, Agriculture and Livestock under MFAL will be the partner unit for
implementation of project activities at field level. Both MFWA Division Directorate and the
MFAL Province Directorate will work in close-cooperation to implement field level activities.
227. At the Regional Level, the Şanlıurfa Regional Directorate of MFWA will be the bridge
institution among executive and field level organization bodies.
228. Other partners supporting the execution will work closely with the MFWA and MFAL
through their nominated technical focal points at the national, provincial and local level.
Collaboration partners for the project will include: Provincial Governorates, several districts and
resource-users organizations at pilot sites. The project is designed to achieve many of its key
outputs by means of Letters of Agreement (LoA) with key partners. These LoA are listed under
the “Contracts” Budget Line of the project budget. Further details on results-based LoA including
terms of references, work plans and budget tables will be developed during inception phase of the
project. Specific LoAs will be elaborated and signed between FAO and the respective
collaborating partner through competitive process to the extent possible. This will include inter
alia, civil society organizations as appropriate. Funds received under a LoA will be used to
execute the project activities in conformity with FAO’s rules and procedures.
b. FAO’s role and responsibilities, as the GEF Agency (and as an executing agency, when
applicable), including delineation of responsibilities within FAO
229. FAO will be the GEF implementing and executing agency. As the GEF Agency, FAO will
be responsible for project oversight to ensure that GEF policies and criteria are adhered to, and
that the project efficiently and effectively meets its objectives and achieves expected outcomes
and outputs as established in the project document. FAO will report on project progress to the
GEF Secretariat and financial reporting will be to the GEF Trustee. FAO will closely supervise
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 61
the project by drawing upon its capacity at the global, regional and national levels, through the
concerned units at FAO-HQ, the Sub-Regional Office and the FAO Representation in Ankara.
There is a complete separation between the GEF oversight responsibilities and project execution
roles and responsibilities, as described below.
230. Executing Responsibilities (Budget Holder): Under FAO’s Direct Execution modality, the
FAO Representative in Turkey will be the Budget Holder (BH) of this project. The BH, provided
with the technical assistance of the Lead Technical Officer (LTO), will be responsible for timely
operational, administrative and financial management of the project. The BH will head the
multidisciplinary Project Task Force that will be established to support the implementation of the
project and will ensure that technical support and project inputs are provided in a timely manner.
The BH will be responsible for financial reporting, procurement of goods and contracting of
services for project activities in accordance with FAO rules and procedures. Final approval of the
use of GEF resources rests with the BH, also in accordance with FAO rules and procedures.
231. Specifically, working in close collaboration with the LTO, the BH will: (i) clear and
monitor annual work plans and budgets; (ii) schedule technical backstopping and monitoring
missions; (iii) authorize the disbursement of the project’s GEF resources; (iv) give final approval
of procurement, project staff recruitment, LoAs, and financial transactions in accordance with
FAO’s clearance/approval procedures; (v) review procurement and subcontracting material and
documentation of processes and obtain internal approvals; (vi) be responsible for the management
of project resources and all aspects in the agreements between FAO and the various executing
partners; (vii) provide operational oversight of activities to be carried out by project partners;
(viii) monitor all areas of work and suggest corrective measures as required; (ix) submit to the
GEF Coordination Unit, the TCID Budget Group and the LTO semi-annual financial reports on
the use of the GEF resources (due 31 July and 31 January). These reports will show the amount
budgeted for the year, amount expended since the beginning of the year, including un-liquidated
obligations (commitments), and details of project expenditures on an output-by-output basis,
reported in line with project budget lines as set out in the project budget included in the Project
Document; (x) be accountable for safeguarding resources from inappropriate use, loss, or damage;
(xi) be responsible for addressing recommendations from oversight offices, such as Audit and
Evaluation; and (xii) establish a multi-disciplinary FAO Project Task Force to support the project.
232. The FAO overall technical support through HQ. The Forest Assessment Management and
Conservation Division (FOM) of FAO’s Forestry Division will be the HQ Technical Unit for this
project and will provide overall technical guidance to its implementation. FOM will delegate the
responsibility for direct technical supervision to the SEC Office in Ankara.
233. FAO Lead Technical Officer (LTO). The Senior Forestry Officer in the SEC Office will be
the LTO for the project. Under the general technical oversight of FOM, the LTO will provide
technical guidance to the project team to ensure delivery of quality technical outputs. The LTO
will coordinate the provision of appropriate technical backstopping from all the concerned FAO
units represented in the Project Task Force. The Project Task Force is thus composed of technical
officers from the participating units (see below), operations officers, the Investment Centre
Division/GEF Coordination Unit and is chaired by the BH. The primary areas of LTO support to
the project include:
(i) review and ensure clearance by the relevant FAO technical officers of all the technical
Terms of Reference (TOR) of the project team and consultants;
(ii) preparation of terms of reference of the LoAs and contracts;
(iii) lead the selection of technical project staff, consultants and other institutions to be
contracted or with whom an LoA will be signed in consultation with MoE;
(iv) review and clear technically reports, publications, papers, training material, manuals,
etc.;
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 62
(v) guide and monitor technical implementation as established in the project RF;
(vi) review and finalize the Project Progress Reports (PPRs) and the annual Project
Implementation Review (PIR).
234. A multidisciplinary Project Task Force will be established by the Budget Holder and
comprised of technical units in the Country Office and FAO Headquarters, the Subregional office
for Central Asia (SEC), and the GEF Coordination Unit. Participating units from across FAO will
be involved in supporting the project’s work and in ensuring that the project stays on track to
achieve its overall objectives and indicators of success. When appropriate, these units within SEC
and HQ will provide technical support in areas such as: forest and sustainable land management,
climate smart agriculture, gender, climate change vulnerability assessment and adaptation. The
Asia and Pacific Service (TCIB) of the FAO Investment Centre Division will provide adaptive
management support and results-based management oversight and guidance to the LTO and the
participating units.
235. Oversight: The FAO GEF Coordination Unit (funding liaison unit) in Investment Centre
Division will provide donor coordination and accordingly review and approve PPRs, annual PIRs
and results-based financial reports and budget revisions. The GEF Coordination Unit will organize
annual independent supervision missions, in consultation with the concerned HQ Technical Unit,
LTO, the BH and TCIB. The PIRs will be included in the FAO GEF Annual Monitoring Review
submitted to GEF by the GEF Coordination Unit. The GEF Coordination Unit will work closely
with the FAO Evaluation Office (OEDD) to ensure that the project’s mid-term review and final
evaluations meet GEF requirements by reviewing evaluation ToRs and draft evaluation reports.
Should the PIRs or mid-term review highlight risks affecting the timely and effective
implementation of the project, the GEF Coordination Unit will work closely with the BH and
LTO to make the needed adjustments in the project’s implementation strategy.
236. The Investment Centre Division Budget Group (TCID) will provide final clearance of any
budget revisions.
237. The FAO Finance Division will provide annual Financial Reports to the GEF Trustee and,
in collaboration with the GEF Coordination Unit and the TCID Budget Group, call for project
funds on a six-monthly basis from the GEF Trustee.
c. Project technical, coordination and steering committees
Steering Committee
238. A Project Steering Committee (PSC) will be established and co-chaired by MFWA and
MFAL. A deputy general director from relevant general directorates will be members of the PSC
(see the table below) with the participation of the FAO representative and observers from NGOs
and the Private Sector when needed.
239. The Committee will be led by MFWA with other participants from key organizations such
as MFAL, the Ministry of Development, relevant universities, NGOs and other key organizations.
Chair of the steering committee will be from MoFWA level of Undersecretary and co- chair will
be from MoFAL.
240. The PSC will meet at least two times per year and its specific responsibilities will be: (i)
overall oversight of project progress and achievement of planned results as presented in six-
monthly Project Progress Reports; (ii) take decisions in the course of the practical organization,
coordination and implementation of the project; (iii) facilitate cooperation between NPIU/MFWA
and project participating partners and project support at the local level; (iv) advise the NPIU on
other on-going and planned activities facilitating collaboration between the Project and other
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 63
programs, projects and initiatives in Turkey; (v) facilitate that co-financing support is provided in
a timely and effective manner; and (vi) review six-monthly Project Progress and Financial Reports
and approve AWP/B.
PSC Member Organization
Organization Representative to PSC
Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs (MFWA) Deputy Undersecretary- Chairman
Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock (MFAL) Deputy Undersecretary- Co-chair
Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs (MFWA) General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks
- General Director and/or Deputy General Director
- National Park Department Director
- Wildlife Department Director
- Sensitive Areas Department Director
Şanlıurfa Regional Director
EU and Foreign Relations Department
General Directorate of Forestry
General Directorate of Combating Desertification and Erosion
Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock (MFAL) General Directorate of Plant Production
General Directorate of Agricultural Research and Policies
(TAGEM), TIGEM
Şanlıurfa Province Director
Şanlıurfa Governorship One representative from Governorship
FAO One representative from FAO
National Project Implementation Unit and Field Office
241. The National Project Implementation Unit (NPIU), which is composed of staff from
MFWA and MFAL, and hosted by the General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National
Parks (GDNCNP) under MFWA in Ankara as a central office from where the project will be
implemented and coordinated. It will be responsible for day-to-day project operations. GDNCNP
and GDPP from MFAL will be beneficiaries and responsible for carrying out all project activities
together. The office will be equipped with adequate computer facilities to enable project
implementation. The NPIU will coordinate its activities with the Field Office in Sanliurfa and
other relevant stakeholders to ensure effective co-ordination. Both, the NPIU and the Field Office
shall be established and operationalized within the first two months of the project.
242. A full-time National Project Director shall be assigned by GDNCNP to head the NPIU and
a Deputy Director shall be assigned by GDPP. The National Project Director will be responsible
to coordinate MFWA and MFAL activities related to the project, support the reporting progress
among project partners and work closely with the National Project Coordinator and the Project
Management Team at FAO.
243. The role of the NPIU will be, in close consultation with the PSC and Independent Expert
Group (IEG) members (see below), to ensure the coordination and execution of the Project
through the timely and efficient implementation of annual work plans. It will coordinate work and
follow closely the implementation of project activities, coordinate project interventions with other
on-going activities and ensure a high degree of provincial and local inter-institutional
collaboration.
244. The Field Office in Sanliurfa shall consist of a Field-based Implementation Specialist
funded by the project and staff from the Şanlıurfa Division Directorate of MFWA and the
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 64
Provincial Directorate of Food, Agriculture and Livestock. Staff of the Field Office will take
necessary actions within their areas of responsibility, under the guidance of the NPIU and the
Project Management Team. The Field Office will also be instrumental in consulting and working
with local stakeholders on specific issues in the project areas. Staff of the Field Office shall
continuously work together, while including local stakeholders for periodical meetings to review
and evaluate collaborative management and to exchange information. The Field Office, on request
of the committees or for its own purposes, can invite any expert or authority member to participate
in the meetings. The Field Office will be responsible for coordination with relevant local
government institutions and stakeholders at field level and report to the NPIU. Field Office will be
equipped with adequate computer facilities and other field equipment.
245. The NPIU will consist of the following staff based on co-financing contributions: (i) a full-
time National Project Director (funded by MFWA) in charge of overall coordination and
supervision of the NPIU and coordination with other sector departments; (ii) a full-time Deputy
Director (funded by MFAL) to support coordination and supervision of the project and
coordination with other sector departments; (iii) two full-time Technical Officers (funded by
MFWA); (iv) a full-time Technical Officer (funded by MFAL), (v) five part-time Technical
Officers (funded by MFWA); and (vi) three part-time Technical Officers (funded by MFAL)
managing project information and documentation, and distribution of project reports, newsletters
and training materials to relevant stakeholders; conducting regular field visits to project sites, and
assisting the National Project Coordinator (see below) in preparing necessary reports. MFWA will
also provide office space, equipment and utilities and part of travel as co-financing contribution to
project implementation.
Project Management Team
246. To further strengthen the NPIU the GEF resources will finance (i) a full-time National
Technical Coordinator (NTC) at FAO in charge of technical supervision including, preparing
“Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWP/B)” and allocating tasks to the Field Office, preparing
TORs and technical requirements for consultancy services, contracting documents and material,
and equipment procurement documents, providing technical supervision and guidance to the Field
Office in implementing project activities, conducting regular field supervision visits and provide
on-site guidance to technical staff, day-to-day coordination and communication with the Field
Office staff, and preparing the Project Progress Reports, monitor project progress and ensure the
timely delivery of inputs and outputs; (ii) an Operations Officer (based in the FAO SEC Office) in
charge of providing support for day-to-day activities in project implementation; and (iii)
Procurement and Financial Associates (based in the FAO SEC Office) in charge of preparing
detailed budgets for payment requests based on the AWP/B and project account cash balance,
keeping the financial records and regular review of the project account, reviewing the receipts and
financial reports submitted by field office and sub-contractors and preparing six-monthly financial
statement of expenditures, preparing the personnel and services contracting and procurement
documents and participate in contracting and procurement processes including of submission of
documentation to FAO for ex-antes clearances, and preparing relevant documents for internal and
external financial audits. The Project Management Team at FAO will support the NPIU in Ankara
and the Field Office in Sanliurfa. It will organize workshops and annual meetings in order to
monitor the project progress and develop work plans with detailed budget for the next year to be
approved by the PSC. It will be responsible for implementing the project’s M&E plan, managing
its monitoring system and communication programme, the elaboration of six-monthly Project
Progress and Financial reports and assist in the preparation of the annual Project Implementation
Review (PIR) and midterm and final evaluations. The Project Progress Reports on implemented
activities and progress in achieving project outputs and outcomes, and financial statements of
expenditures and status for the previous year will be submitted together with the Annual Work
Plan and detailed Budget (AWP/B) to the PSC and FAO via the NTC for finalization by LTO and
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 65
clearance of BH. The Project Management Team will work closely with all project partners and
other stakeholders.
Local Stakeholder Board
247. The Local Stakeholder Board will: (i) provide advice on relevant policies, actions and
measures in particular related to participation of local communities in the pilot sites; (ii) provide
new ideas and thinking on conflict resolution over management of natural resources, options for
sustainable use, and creative initiatives on how to increase public awareness of socio-economic
and global environmental benefits generated by sustainable management of steppe ecosystems;
and (iii) promote communication between the government agencies and local communities and
the private sector. The composition of the Local Stakeholder Board will include representatives
from local farming and herding communities, municipalities, universities, NGOs involved in
pasture management and conservation, and other key stakeholders at national level. The Local
Stakeholder Board will meet back-to-back with the PSC to provide consolidated advice on
stakeholder participation and engagement.
Independent Expert Group
248. An Independent Expert Group (IEG) will be established to provide technical advice on
specific project components and outputs and may among others be composed of MFWA and
MFAL technical staff representing all departments participating in the Project, technical staff from
other sector departments of the project area involved in the management and/or use of the land
and forest resources at the pilot sites, Sanliurfa and other research institutions, and FAO. The
main tasks of the IEG will be to provide technical advice to the PSC, backstop the NPIU on
request, advise the NPIU on other on-going and planned activities and facilitate collaboration
between the Project and other programs, projects, and initiatives of sector agencies and research
institutions. The IEG may also be involved in technical evaluation of project progress and outputs,
and identification of possible solutions and/or changes in project activities when technical issues
arise in the course of project implementation.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 66
d. Organizational chart
Project Steering Committee
National Project Implementation Unit
(GDNCNP Ankara)
• GDNCNP
- National Project Director
- 2 full-time staff
- 5 part-time staff
• GDPP
- Deputy-Director
- 1 full-time staff
- 3 part-time staff
Field Office
(Şanlıurfa Division Directorate of MFWA)
Field-based Implementation
Specialist
Şanlıurfa Division Directorate of
MFWA
Provincial Directorate of Food,
Agriculture and Livestock
Local
Stakeholder
Board
Independent
Expert
Group
Project Management Team
(FAO)
- National Project Coordinator
- Technical Experts
- FAO GEF Unit
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 67
4.3 Financial Planning and Management
4.3.1 Financial plan (by component and co-financier)
Component MFWA MFAL FAO Total Co-
financing
% Co-
financing GEF
%
GEF Total
Component 1: Effectiveness of
protected area system to conserve
steppe biodiversity increased
1,803,000 900,000 150,000 2,853,000 81 688,500 19 3,541,500
Component 2: Steppe biodiversity
conservation mainstreamed into
production landscapes
1,923,200 960,000 160,000 3,043,200 80 744,500 20 3,793,700
Component 3: Enabling
environment established for the
effective conservation of steppe
biodiversity across large landscapes
1,983,300 990,000 165,000 3,138,300 80 784,967 20 3,917,267
Project Management
300,500 150,000 25,000 475,500 81 110,800 19 586,300
Total Project 6,010,000 3,000,000 500,000 9,510,000 80 2,328,767 20 11,838,767
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppelands Page 68
Sources of Co-financing for baseline project Name of Co-financier Type of Co-financing Amount ($)
National Government The Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs
(MFWA) In-kind 2,700,000
National Government MFWA Grant 3,310,000
National Government The Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock
(MFAL) In-kind 1,200,000
National Government MFAL Grant 1,800,000
GEF Agency FAO In-kind 150,000
GEF Agency FAO Grant 350,000
Total Co-financing 9,510,000
GEF Agency Type of Trust
Funds Focal Area
Country Name/
Global
(in $)
Project
amount (a) Agency Fee (b) Total c=a+b
FAO GEF TF BD Turkey 2,328,767 221,233 2,550,000
Total GEF Resources (excluding project preparation) 2,328,767 221,233 2,550,000
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppelands Page 69
4.3.2 GEF/LDCF/SCCF inputs
249. The GEF funds will finance inputs needed to generate the outputs and outcomes under the
Project. These include: (i) local and international consultants for technical support and Project
management; (ii) support to designing and piloting SLM/SFM activities; (iii) support to direct
monitoring and conservation activities; (vi) LoA/contracts with technical institutions and service
providers supporting the delivery of specific Project activities on the ground; (v) international
flights and local transport and minor office equipment; and (vi) training and awareness raising
material.
4.3.3 Government inputs
250. Government in-kind co-financing will mainly consist in staff time, office space and utilities,
and support for local travel.
4.3.4 FAO inputs
251. FAO co-financing will be used to support technical assistance. FAO will provide the
following co-financing: US$ 350,000 cash and US$ 150,000 in-kind.
4.3.5 Other co-financiers inputs
252. Private enterprises, and particularly farmers and ranchers, participating in the co-
management models will contribute with parallel financing in terms of their time and experience.
They will also provide inputs by supporting much of the financial risk associated with shifting
from land degrading to SLM supportive practices.
4.4 Financial Management and Reporting
253. Financial Records: FAO shall maintain a separate account in United States dollars for the
Project’s GEF resources showing all income and expenditures. Expenditures incurred in a
currency other than United States dollars shall be converted into United States dollars at the
United Nations operational rate of exchange on the date of the transaction. FAO shall administer
the Project in accordance with its regulations, rules and directives.
254. Financial Reports: The BH shall prepare six-monthly project expenditure accounts and
final accounts for the project, showing amount budgeted for the year, amount expended since the
beginning of the year, and separately, the un-liquidated obligations as follows:
Details of project expenditures on a component-by-component and output-by-output basis,
reported in line with project budget codes as set out in the Project document, as at 30 June and
31 December each year.
Final accounts on completion of the Project on a component-by-component and output-by-
output basis, reported in line with project budget codes as set out in the Project document.
A final statement of account in line with FAO Oracle Project budget codes, reflecting actual
final expenditures under the Project, when all obligations have been liquidated.
255. The BH will submit the above financial reports for review and monitoring by the LTO and
the FAO GCU. Financial reports for submission to the donor (GEF) will be prepared in
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 70
accordance with the provisions in the GEF Financial Procedures Agreement and submitted by the
FAO Finance Division.
256. Budget Revisions: Semi-annual budget revisions will be prepared by the BH in accordance
with FAO standard guidelines and procedures.
257. Responsibility for Cost Overruns: The BH is authorized to enter into commitments or incur
expenditures up to a maximum of 20 percent over the annual amount foreseen in the Project
budget under any budget sub-line provided that the total annual budget is not exceeded.
258. Any cost overrun (expenditure in excess of the budgeted amount) on a specific budget sub-
line over the 20 percent flexibility should be discussed with the GCU/TCIB with a view to
ascertaining whether it will involve a major change in Project scope or design. If it is deemed to
be a minor change, the BH shall prepare a budget revision in accordance with FAO standard
procedures. If it involves a major change in the Project’s objectives or scope, a budget revision
and justification should be prepared by the BH for discussion with the GEF Secretariat.
259. Savings in one budget sub-line may not be applied to overruns of more than 20 percent in
other sub-lines even if the total cost remains unchanged, unless this is specifically authorized by
the GCU upon presentation of the request. In such a case, the BH will prepare revisions to the
Project document.
260. Under no circumstances can expenditures exceed the approved total Project budget or be
approved beyond the NTE date of the project. Any over-expenditure is the responsibility of the
BH.
261. Audit: The Project shall be subject to the internal and external auditing procedures provided
for in FAO financial regulations, rules and directives and in keeping with the Financial
Procedures Agreement between the GEF Trustee and FAO. The audit regime at FAO consists of
an external audit provided by the Auditor-General (or persons exercising an equivalent function)
of a member nation appointed by the Governing Bodies of the Organization and reporting directly
to them, and an internal audit function headed by the FAO Inspector-General who reports directly
to the Director-General. This function operates as an integral part of the Organization under
policies established by senior management, and furthermore has a reporting line to the governing
bodies. Both functions are required under the Basic Texts of FAO that establish a framework for
the terms of reference of each. Internal audits of accounts, records, bank reconciliation and asset
verification take place at FAO field and liaison offices on a cyclical basis.
4.5 Procurement
262. Careful procurement planning is necessary for securing goods, services and works in a
timely manner, on a “Best Value for Money” basis, and in accordance with the Rules and
Regulations of FAO. It requires analysis of needs and constraints, including forecast of the
reasonable timeframe required to execute the procurement process. Procurement and delivery of
inputs in technical cooperation projects follow FAO’s rules and regulations for the procurement of
supplies, equipment and services (i.e. Manual Sections 502 and 507). Manual Section 502:
“Procurement of Goods, Works and Services” establishes the principles and procedures that apply
to procurement of all goods, works and services on behalf of the Organization, in all offices and in
all locations, with the exception of the procurement actions described in Appendix A –
Procurement Not Governed by Manual Section 502. Manual Section 507 establishes the principles
and rules that govern the use of Letters of Agreement (LoA) by FAO for the timely acquisition of
services from eligible entities in a transparent and impartial manner, taking into consideration
economy and efficiency to achieve an optimum combination of expected whole life costs and
benefits (“Best Value for Money”).
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 71
263. As per the guidance in FAO’s Project Cycle Guide, the BH will draw up an annual
procurement plan for major items which will be the basis of requests for procurement actions
during implementation. The plan will include descriptions and specifications of the goods, works,
or services to be procured, estimated budget and source of funding, schedule of procurement
activities and proposed method of procurement. In situations where exact information is not yet
available, the procurement plan should at least contain reasonable projections that will be
corrected as information becomes available.
4.6 Monitoring and Evaluation
4.6.1 Oversight and monitoring responsibilities
264. Monitoring and evaluation of progress in achieving project results and objectives will be
done based on the targets and indicators established in the Project Results Framework.
Monitoring and evaluation activities will follow FAO and GEF monitoring and evaluation policies
and guidelines. The project Monitoring and Evaluation Plan has been budgeted at US$184,500.
265. At the initiation of implementation of the GEF Project, the NPIU will set up a project
progress monitoring system. Participatory mechanisms and methodologies for systematic data
collection and recording will be developed in support of outcome and output indicator monitoring
and evaluation. During the inception workshop M&E related tasks to be addressed will include:
(i) presentation and clarification (if needed) of the project’s Results framework with all project
stakeholders; (ii) review of the M&E indicators and their baseline; (iii) drafting the required
clauses to include in consultants’ contracts to ensure they complete their M&E reporting functions
(if relevant); and (iv) clarification of the respective M&E tasks among the Project’s different
stakeholders. One of the main outputs of the workshop will be a detailed monitoring plan agreed
to by all stakeholders based on the monitoring and evaluation plan summary.
266. The day-to-day monitoring of the Project implementation will be the responsibility of the
Project Management Team driven by the preparation and implementation of an AWP/B followed
up through six-monthly PPRs and in close collaboration with the NPIU. The preparation of the
AWP/B and six-monthly PPRs will represent the product of a unified planning process between
main project partners. As tools for results-based-management (RBM), the AWP/B will identify
the actions proposed for the coming project year and provide the necessary details on output
targets to be achieved, and the PPRs will report on the monitoring of the implementation of
actions and the achievement of output targets. NR-specific inputs to the AWP/B and the PPRs will
be prepared based on participatory planning and progress review with local stakeholders and
coordinated through the Project Management Team and facilitated through project planning and
progress review workshops. An annual project progress review and planning meeting should be
held. Subsequently the AWP/B and PPRs are submitted to the PSC for approval (AWP/B) and
Review (PPRs) and to FAO for approval. The AWP/B will be developed in a manner consistent
with the project’s Results Framework to ensure adequate fulfillment and monitoring of project
outputs and outcomes.
267. Following the approval of the Project, the project’s first year AWP/B will be adjusted
(either reduced or expanded in time) to synchronize it with an annual reporting calendar. In
subsequent years, the FSP work plan and budget will follow an annual preparation and reporting
cycle.
4.6.2 Indicators and information sources
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 72
268. To monitor project outputs and outcomes including contributions to global environmental
benefits specific indicators have been established in the Results Framework. The framework’s
indicators and means of verification will be applied to monitor both project performance and
impact. Following FAO’s logical framework monitoring tool via Field Program Management
Information Systems (FPMIS)and progress reporting formats data collected will be of sufficient
detail to be able to track specific outputs and outcomes and flag project risks early on. Output
target indicators will be monitored on a six-monthly basis and outcome target indicators will be
monitored on an annual basis if possible or as part of the mid-term and final evaluations. The
project output and outcome indicators have been designed to monitor on-the-ground impacts and
progress in building and consolidating capacities.
269. The main sources of information to support the M&E program will be: (i) participative
progress monitoring and workshops with beneficiaries; (ii) on-site monitoring of implementation;
(iii) project progress reports prepared by the Project Management Team; (iv) consultants reports;
(v) participants training tests and evaluations; (vi) mid-term and final evaluations completed by
independent consultants; (vii) financial reports and budget revisions; (viii) Project Implementation
Reviews prepared by the LTO supported by the Project Management Team; (viii) FAO
supervision mission reports; and (ix) post project impact and evaluation studies.
4.6.3 Reports and their schedule
270. Reporting: Specific reports that will be prepared under the M&E program are: (i) Project
inception report; (ii) project implementation strategy; (iii) Annual Work Plan and Budget
(AWP/B); (iv) Project Progress Reports (PPRs); (v) annual Project Implementation Review (PIR);
(vi) Technical Reports; (vii) co-financing Reports; and (viii) Terminal Report. In addition,
assessment of the GEF Monitoring Evaluation Tracking Tools (METTs) against the baseline
(completed during project preparation) will be required at midterm and final project evaluation.
271. Project Inception Report: After FAO approval of the project an inception workshop will be
held. Immediately after the workshop, the Project Management Team will prepare a project
inception report in consultation with the LTO and other project partners. The report will include a
narrative on the institutional roles and responsibilities and coordinating action of project partners,
progress to date on project establishment and start-up activities and an update of any changed
external conditions that may affect project implementation. It will also include a detailed first year
AWP/B, a detailed project monitoring plan based on the monitoring and evaluation plan summery
presented in section 4.6.4 below, and a progress and completion report on all actions agreed in the
mitigation plan of fiduciary risks (as referred to in section 3.2.2). The draft inception report will
be circulated to FAO and the PSC for review and comments before its finalization, no later than
three months after project start-up. The report should be cleared by the BH, LTO, and the FAO
GEF Coordination Unit and uploaded in FPMIS by the responsible project assistant.
272. Project Implementation Workplan: For the inception workshop, the project will be tasked
with generating a strategic workplan. The workplan will outline the general timeframe for
completion of key project outputs and achievement of outcomes. The workplan will map and help
guide project activity from inception to completion. To ensure smooth transition between project
design and inception, the inception workshop and work planning process will benefit from the
input of parties responsible for the design of the original project, including as appropriate relevant
technical advisors.
273. Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWP/B): The NTC will submit to FAO SEC a draft Annual
Work Plan and Budget no later than 10 January. The AWP/B should include detailed activities to
be implemented by project outputs and divided into monthly timeframes and targets and milestone
dates for output indicators to be achieved during the year. A detailed project budget for the
activities to be implemented during the year should also be included together with all monitoring
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 73
and supervision activities required during the year. The draft AWP/B is circulated to and reviewed
by the FAO Project Task Force, the NTC incorporates eventual comments and the final AWP/B is
send to the PSC for approval and to FAO for final no-objection and upload in FPMIS by the GEF
Coordination Unit. (See AWP/B format in Execution Agreement Annex 4.B)
274. Project Progress Reports (PPR): The NPC will prepare six-monthly PPRs and submit them
to FAO SEC no later than July 15 (covering the period January through June) and 15 January
(covering the period July through December). The 1st semester six months report should be
accompanied by the updated AWP/B, for review and no-objection by FAO. The PPR are used to
identify constraints, problems or bottlenecks that impede timely implementation and take
appropriate remedial action. PPRs will be prepared based on the systematic monitoring of output
and outcome indicators identified in the project’s Results Framework Appendix 1). The
Operations Officer will review the progress reports and collect and consolidates eventual FAO
comments from the LTO, HQ Technical Unit, the GEF Coordination Unit, and the Budget Holder
Office and provide these comments to the NPC. When comments have been duly incorporated,
the LTO will give final approval and submit the final PPR to the GEF coordination Unit for final
clearance and upload in FPMIS.
275. Annual Project Implementation Review (PIR): The LTO supported by the HQ Technical
Unit and the NPC and with further inputs from the Project Management Team, will prepare an
annual PIR covering the period July (the previous year) through June (current year) to be
submitted to the GEF Coordination Unit for review and approval no later than 31 July. The GEF
Coordination Unit will upload the final report in FPMIS and submit it to the GEF Secretariat and
Evaluation Office as part of the Annual Monitoring Review report of the FAO-GEF portfolio. The
GEF Coordination Unit will provide the updated format when the first PIR is due.
276. Technical Reports: Technical reports will be prepared as part of project outputs and to
document and share project outcomes and lessons learned. The drafts of any technical reports
must be submitted by the NTC to the LTO for review and clearance and to the GEF Coordination
Unit for information and eventual comments, prior to finalization and publication. Copies of the
technical reports will be distributed to the PSC and other project partners as appropriate. The final
reports will be posted in FPMIS by the project assistant.
277. Co-financing Report: The Project Management Team will be responsible for collecting the
required information and reporting on in-kind and cash co-financing provided. The Project
Management Team will submit the report to the FAO Representation in Turkey in a timely
manner on or before 31 July covering the period July (the previous year) through June (current
year).
278. GEF Tracking Tools: Following the GEF policies and procedures, necessary tracking tools
will be submitted at three moments: (i) with the project document at CEO endorsement; (ii) at the
project’s mid-term evaluation; and (iii) with the project’s final evaluation or final completion
report.
279. Terminal Report: Within two months before the end date of the Execution Agreement, the
NTC will submit to FAO SEC a draft Terminal Report. The main purpose of the final report is to
give guidance at ministerial or senior government level on the policy decisions required for the
follow-up of the Project, and to provide the donor with information on how the funds were
utilized. The terminal report is accordingly a concise account of the main products, results,
conclusions and recommendations of the Project, without unnecessary background, narrative or
technical details. The target readership consists of persons who are not necessarily technical
specialists but who need to understand the policy implications of technical findings and needs for
insuring sustainability of project results. Work is assessed, lessons learned are summarized, and
recommendations are expressed in terms of their application of best principles and practices
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 74
within the context of national priorities as well as in practical execution terms. This report will
specifically include the findings of the final evaluation. A final project review meeting should be
held to discuss the draft terminal report before it is finalized by the NTC and approved by the
FAO BH, LTO and the GEF Coordination Unit.
4.6.4 Monitoring and evaluation plan summary
Table: Summary Primary M&E Reports, Responsible Parties and Timeframe
Type of M&E Activity Responsible Parties Time-frame Budgeted costs
Inception Workshop
Project Management Team supported
by the FAO LTO, BH, and the GEF
Coordination Unit
Within two months of
project start up
US$ 7,500
Project Inception Report Project Management Team, cleared by
FAO LTO and the GEF Coordination
Unit
Immediately after
workshop
Covered under NTC
responsibilities, valued at
$ 2,000
Field based impact monitoring Project Management Team, NPIU and
relevant line agencies.
Continually US$ 35,000, for national
consultant
Supervision visits and rating of
progress in PPRs and PIRs
Project Management Team, FAO LTO
and GEF Coordination Unit
Annual or as required The visits of the FAO HQ
Technical Unit and the
GEF Coordination Unit
will be paid by GEF
agency fee. The visits of
the Project Management
Team will be paid from
the project travel budget
Project Progress Reports NPC, with inputs from project partners Six-monthly Covered under NTC
responsibilities, valued at
US$ 5,000
Project Implementation Review
report
Project Management Team, LTO and
project partners and cleared and
submitted by the GEF Coordination
Unit to the GEF Secretariat
Annual Covered under Project
Management Team
responsibilities, valued at
US$ 10,000.
FAO officers’ time
covered by GEF agency
fee
Co-financing Reports Project Management Team Annual Covered under Project
Management Team
responsibilities, valued at
US$ 5,000
Technical reports Project Management Team As appropriate
Mid-term Evaluation External Consultant, FAO independent
evaluation unit in consultation with the
project team including the GEF
Coordination Unit and other partners
Conducted and
completed during
project months 23 and
24
US$ 40,000 for external
consultant. In addition,
either FAO staff time and
travel or an additional
consultant will be paid
through the agency fee
Final evaluation External Consultant, FAO independent
evaluation unit in consultation with the
project team including the GEF
Coordination Unit and other partners
Conducted and
completed during
project months 45 and
46
US$ 40,000 for external
consultant. In addition,
either FAO staff time and
travel or an additional
consultant will be paid
through the agency fee
Terminal Report NPC Completed by project
month 47
US$ 10,000 for national
consultant
Total Budget US$ 154,500
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 75
4.7 Provision for Evaluations
280. Mid-Term: An independent Mid-Term Evaluation (MTE) will be undertaken during project
months 23 and 24. The MTE will review progress and effectiveness of implementation in terms
of achieving project objective, outcomes and outputs. Findings and recommendations of this
evaluation will be instrumental for bringing improvement in the overall project design and
execution strategy for the remaining period of the project’s term if necessary. FAO will arrange
for the MTE in consultation with project management.
281. The evaluation will, inter alia: (i) review the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of
project implementation; (ii) analyse effectiveness of partnership arrangements; (iii) identify issues
requiring decisions and remedial actions; (iv) propose any mid-course corrections and/or
adjustments to the implementation strategy as necessary; and (v) highlight technical achievements
and lessons learned derived from project design, implementation and management.
282. Final: An independent Final Evaluation (FE) will be completed by project month 46. The
FE will identify the project impacts and sustainability of project results and the degree of
achievement of long-term results. This Evaluation will indicate future actions needed to sustain
project results, expand on the existing Project in subsequent phases, mainstream and up-scale its
products and practices, and disseminate information to responsible management authorities to
assure continuity of the processes initiated by the Project.
283. The FAO Project Task Manager will prepare the first draft of the Terms of Reference for
the mid-term and the final evaluations and consult with and incorporate comments from key
project partners, including the FAO budget holder, the FAO Lead Technical Unit and Officer, and
the FAO GEF Coordination Unit. Subsequently the TORs will be sent to the FAO Office of
Evaluation for finalization, in accordance with FAO evaluation procedures and taking into
consideration evolving guidance from the GEF Evaluation Office.
4.8 Communications and Visibility
284. Giving high visibility to the project and ensuring effective communications in support of the
project’s message has been addressed in a number of activities that have been incorporated into its
design. The project will sponsor a series of quarterly workshops in the project area to discuss on-
going project activities. During these workshops, key stakeholders from both the private and
public sector will report on their personal involvement with project related activities. Members of
the press will be invited to key events such as workshops, field trips, and monitoring programs.
The project will be creating farmer field schools through the pilot areas. Each of these schools
will be using project generated information materials, further enhancing project visibility within
Sanliurfa province and greater Turkey. The project will launch a website. The site will be
designed as an information and learning portal. The project will sponsor several national and
regional policy meetings and workshops. The project will have inception, mid-term and final
results meetings at the pilot site, Sanliurfa city, and Ankara levels. These events will expose mid
and high-level decision makers to the project activities and results.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 76
Section 5 Sustainability of Results
5.1 Social Sustainability
285. Grazers are generally poorer women and men who rely upon access to government owned
pasturelands for survival. As detailed throughout this project document, the investment is
designed to promote social sustainability. This includes making certain that more vulnerable
groups of society, such as women and the rural poor, benefit directly from project activities. The
project will help rural communities work in a more cooperative manner to understand and identify
environmental issues that might cause social instability. For instance, land degradation and
climate change both increase economic risks and decrease social cohesion. By working to reduce
land degradation and minimize the impacts of climate change, the project will be promoting social
sustainability. This will also be improved by creating opportunities for stakeholder engagement
and discussion, such as capacity building functions.
5.2 Environmental Sustainability
286. The project in its entirety is designed to promote environmental sustainability. The project
will result in both on-the-ground improvements that will be carried forward as well as policy
improvements. This will have positive ramifications in terms of climate change
mitigation/adaptation, SLM, and biodiversity conservation. All project activity is directed
towards achieving improvements in ecosystem integrity and making certain that these
improvements are supported and progress over time. This includes setting in place a
comprehensive monitoring system linked to decision-making frameworks to make certain
environmental sustainability is achieved.
5.3 Financial and Economic Sustainability
287. Each component has integrated within it a hand-over plan. This hand-over plan will specify
the financial and economic factors required to carry forward project-initiated activities. The
Government of Turkey and other stakeholders have shown a willingness to co-finance the project
and a desire to fully absorb and continue identified best practices.
5.4 Sustainability of Capacities Developed
288. The project at all levels is designed to set in place not only mechanisms to support the
sustainability of capacities developed but to continue to improve those capacities. This is
particularly the case in terms of the improving management, monitoring programs, and land use
planning initiatives. Each of these activities and all others are designed to grow, evolve and
improve over time, all the while building and supporting capacities within the private and public
sector to support biodiversity conservation.
5.5 Appropriateness of Technology Introduced
289. The project design benefited from the inputs of numerous national experts, government
staff, and private stakeholders. Each of these parties had a hand in helping to define the types of
technology that the project will support and introduce. This applies to sophisticated technologies
such as improved agriculture and grazing techniques. Each technology has been scaled to match
the technical and financial capacities of the participating stakeholder group.
5.6 Replicability and scaling up
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 77
290. This is fundamentally a demonstration project. Every element of this project is designed to
create models that are appropriate for replication and pathways to facilitate replication and scaling
up. At both the provincial and national level, representatives of both the MFAL and MFWA
throughout the project design process have repeatedly expressed their desire to use this project to
identify best practices and broadly apply lessons learned. These agencies stand ready provide the
financial and technical support required to support replication and upscaling. This will be
enhanced by decision-making and policy structures designed to encourage and facilitate
replication and upscaling.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppelands Page 78
Appendix 1: FAO/GEF Strategic Results Matrix
Objective/Outcome Indicator Start of Project Baseline End of Project Target Means of Verification Assumptions
Project Objective:
Improve the conservation
of Turkey’s steppe
ecosystems through
effective protected area
management and
mainstreaming steppe
biodiversity conservation
into production
landscapes.
Total hectares of national
and regional steppe
ecosystems strategically
managed for improved
conservation
Total hectares national
steppe strategically
managed for conservation:
South Eastern Anatolian
Region:
0 hectares
National Steppe:
0 million hectares
Total hectares national steppe
strategically managed for
conservation:
South Eastern Anatolian
Region:
200,000 hectares
National Steppe:
8 million hectares
National steppe
conservation strategy
adopted, operational, and
monitored
Protected area management
plans reviewed and
reported upon by
GDNCNP
MFAL annual reports
Project reports and
evaluations
Project emplaced steppe
monitoring and reporting
systems
Level of national
and provincial
support for steppe
conservation is
sustained
Timely delivery of
project results
Number of national
protected areas with
updated management
plans that reflect
improved steppe
conservation strategies
Number of national
protected areas with
updated management plans
that reflect improved
steppe conservation
strategies: 0
Number of national protected
areas with updated
management plans that reflect
improved steppe conservation
strategies: 20*
** There are currently 4
“steppe” protected areas
nationally and 15 protected
areas partially containing
steppe ecosystems. The “new”
Karacadag will make 20.
Number of Provincial
Level Pastureland
Commissions adopting
improved steppe
conservation
recommendations based
upon project outputs
Number of Pastureland
Commissions
mainstreaming steppe
conservation
recommendations: 0
Number of Pastureland
Commissions mainstreaming
steppe conservation
recommendations: 40*
* Turkey has a total of 81
provincial level Pastureland
Commissions
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 79
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 80
Objective/Outcome Indicator Start of Project Baseline End of Project Target Means of
Verification Assumptions
Outcome 1: Effectiveness of
protected area system to
conserve steppe biodiversity
increased
Management
effectiveness of
protected areas increased
according to total score
of GEF5-BD monitoring
effectiveness tracking
tool (METT) Objective
One
METT score
TekTek: 64
Kizilkuyu: 68
Karacadag: 51
METT score
TekTek: 80
Kizilkuyu: 85
Karacadag: 70
GEF5-BD METT
Protected area
management plans
reviewed and
reported upon by
GDNCNP
Project reports and
evaluations
Project emplaced
steppe monitoring
and reporting systems
Level of
GDNCNP support
for steppe
conservation is
sustained
Timely delivery
of project results
Total hectares of steppe
area contained within
core protected areas of
Sanliurfa Province
Total hectares: 40,000
hectares
TekTek: 20,000
Kizilkuyu: 20,000
Karacadag: 0
Total hectares: 50,000 hectares
TekTek: 20,000
Kizilkuyu: 20,000
Karacadag: 10,000
Total hectares of steppe
area conserved within
protected area buffer
zones of Sanliurfa
Province
Total hectares: 0 hectares
TekTek: 0
Kizilkuyu: 0
Karacadag: 0
Total hectares: 60,000 hectares
TekTek: 5,000
Kizilkuyu: 5,000
Karacadag: 50,000
Output 1.1 New steppe protected area established and operational
Output 1.2 Effective management plans for three steppe protected areas created and implemented
Output 1.3 Rigorous monitoring program for three steppe protected areas established
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 81
Objective/Outcome Indicator Start of Project Baseline End of Project Target Means of
Verification Assumptions
Outcome 2: Steppe
biodiversity
conservation
mainstreamed into
production landscapes
Total hectares managed according to
improved sustainable grazing
management program.
Total hectares with sustainable
grazing management program: 0
hectares
TekTek: 0
Kizilkuyu: 0
Karacadag: 0
Total hectares with
sustainable grazing
management program:
110,000 hectares
TekTek: 25,000
Kizilkuyu: 25,000
Karacadag: 60,000
Grazing
management
program
reviewed and
reported upon by
GDNCNP
Project reports
and evaluations
Project emplaced
steppe
monitoring and
reporting systems
Level of
GDNCNP
support for steppe
conservation is
sustained
Pastoralist
engagement level
is maintained
Timely delivery
of project results
Number of pastoralists with enhanced
steppe conservation knowledge
participating in sustainable grazing
management programs.
Total pastoralists with enhanced
steppe conservation capacity: 0
TekTek: 0
Kizilkuyu: 0
Karacadag: 0
Total pastoralists with
enhanced steppe
conservation capacity:
500
TekTek: 200
Kizilkuyu: 100
Karacadag: 200
Total number of free ranging gazelle in
Sanliurfa Province
Total free-roaming gazelle:
200 individuals
Total free-roaming
gazelle:
300 individuals
Number of hectares within and proximate
to protected areas that are less severely
overgrazed.
Number of overgrazed hectares:
TekTek: 17,000
Kizilkuyu: 15,000
Karacadag: 60,000
Number of overgrazed
hectares:
TekTek: 5,000
Kizilkuyu: 5,000
Karacadag: 20,000
Output 2.1 Sustainable grazing management program operational across three steppe protected areas and associated buffer zones
Output 2.2 Sustainable grazing management program impacts monitored at three steppe protected areas
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 82
Output 2.3 Model steppe conservation training program for pastoralists emplaced
Objective/Outcome Indicator Start of Project Baseline End of Project Target Means of
Verification Assumptions
Outcome 3: Enabling
environment established for the
effective conservation of steppe
biodiversity across large
landscapes
Total government annual
investment in steppe area
conservation
Total government annual
investment in steppe
conservation:
Sanliurfa Province:
US$ 100,000 *
National:
MFAL: US$ 1 million *
MFWA: US$ 250,000 *
*Total investment is
determined by Division
Directorate of National Parks
and the Province Directorate of
Food, Agriculture and
Livestock.
Total government annual
investment in steppe
conservation:
Sanliurfa Province:
US$ 250,000
National:
MFAL: US$ 1,5 million
MFWA: US$ 500,000
National and
provincial steppe
conservation
strategies
reviewed and
reported upon by
GDNCNP
Project reports
and evaluations
Project emplaced
steppe
monitoring and
reporting systems
Level of national
and provincial
support for steppe
conservation is
sustained
Timely delivery
of project results
Total hectares of steppe
ecosystems strategically
managed for improved
conservation
Total hectares national steppe
strategically managed for
conservation:
Sanliurfa Province: 0 ha
South Eastern Anatolian
Region:
0 ha
National Steppe:
0 ha
Total hectares national
steppe strategically
managed for
conservation:
Sanliurfa Province:
40,000 ha
South Eastern Anatolian
Region:
200,000 ha
National Steppe:
8,000,000 hectares
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 83
Total number of hectares of
steppe ecosystems outside of
protected areas conserved from
future agricultural and urban
expansion as indicated within
the GAP strategy.
Total hectares planned for
cultivation within SE Anatolia:
3.3 million ha *
*According to Gap Region
Agriculture Master Plan
Total hectares planned for
cultivation within SE
Anatolia:
3.7 million ha
Number of government policies
fully integrating steppe
conservation principles and
practices
Government policies
integrating improved steppe
conservation:
GDNCNP National
Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan: 0
National MFWA Annual
Strategic Performance
Document: 0
Sanliurfa Governor’s 5-year
development plan: 0
Government policies
integrating improved
steppe conservation:
GDNCNP National
Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan: 1
National MFWA Annual
Strategic Performance
Document: 1
Sanliurfa Governor’s 5-
year development plan :
1
Output 3.1 Sanliurfa Province steppe conservation strategy and associated enabling environment improvements implemented
Output 3.2 National steppe conservation strategy and associated enabling environment improvements established
Output 3.3 National steppe conservation training and awareness program for decision-makers and resource managers
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 84
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 85
Appendix 2: Work plan
To be completed during project inception period.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppelands Page 86
Appendix 3: Results budget
Oracle code and
BUDGET in USD
Unit No. of Unit Component 1: Component 2: Component 3: PM Total
description
units Cost 1.1 1.2 1.3 Total 2.1 2.2 2.3 Total 3.1 3.2 3.3 Total
GEF
5300 Salaries professionals
Operations officer Weeks 60 1,000 - - - - -
- - -
- 60,000 60,000
Procurement Associate Weeks 64 400 - - - -
- -
- 25,400 25,400
Financial associate Weeks 64 400
25,400 25,400
5300 Sub-total salaries professionals
- - - - - - - - - - - - 110,800 110,800
5570 International Consultants
-
1 Protected Area Management Specialist
Weeks 15 3,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000
- 7,000 7,000 7,000 21,000
51,000
1 Sustainable Grazing and Grassland Biodiversity Specialist
Weeks 15 3,000
- 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 21,000
51,000
1 Large Landscape Conservation Policy Specialist
Weeks 14 3,000
-
- 20,000 20,000 2,000 42,000
42,000
Sub-total international Consultants
- - - 30,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 34,000 34,000 16,000 84,000 - 144,000
National consultants
1 Protected Area Management Specialist
Weeks 80 750 15,000 15,000 15,000 45,000
- 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000
60,000
1 Field-based Implementation Specialist
Weeks 224 200 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000
45,000
1 Sustainable Grazing and Grassland Biodiversity Specialist
Weeks 80 750
- 15,000 15,000 15,000 45,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000
60,000
1 Large Landscape Conservation Policy Specialist
Weeks 80 750
-
- 20,000 20,000 20,000 60,000
60,000
1 Field-based Impact Monitoring Specialist
Weeks
11,000
12,000
12,000
35,000
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 87
Oracle code and
BUDGET in USD
Unit No. of Unit Component 1: Component 2: Component 3: PM Total
description
units Cost 1.1 1.2 1.3 Total 2.1 2.2 2.3 Total 3.1 3.2 3.3 Total
GEF
1 Specialist to prepare Terminal Report
Weeks
3,000
3,000
4,000
10,000
National Technical Advisor/Coordinator
Weeks 224 1,000
50,000
50,000
100,000
200,000
Sub-total national Consultants
20,000 20,000 20,000 124,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 125,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 221,000 - 470,000
5570 Sub-total consultants
20,000 20,000 20,000 154,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 155,000 69,000 69,000 51,000 305,000 - 614,000
5650 Contracts
-
Assessment and PA Proposal for Karacadag (Output 1.1)
Lump sum
75,000
75,000
-
-
75,000
Stakeholder Engagement Strategy & Implementation with National Guidelines, including translation of relevant material (Output 1.1)
Lump sum
72,000
72,000
-
-
72,000
3 Steppe PA Management Plans (Output 1.2)
Lump sum
90,000
90,000
-
-
90,000
Steppe PA Monitoring System (Output 1.3)
Lump sum
-
80,000 80,000
-
-
80,000
Grazing Management Planning (Output 2.1)
Lump sum
- 97,000
97,000
-
97,000
Grassland monitoring (Output 2.2)
Lump sum
-
80,000
80,000
-
80,000
Livestock monitoring (Output 2.2)
Lump sum
-
80,000
80,000
-
80,000
Grazing steppe conservation training programme, including translation of relevant material (Output 2.3)
Lump sum
-
100,000 100,000
-
100,000
Provincial Steppe Conservation Strategy Development & Implementation (Output 3.1)
Lump sum
95,000
95,000
95,000
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 88
Oracle code and
BUDGET in USD
Unit No. of Unit Component 1: Component 2: Component 3: PM Total
description
units Cost 1.1 1.2 1.3 Total 2.1 2.2 2.3 Total 3.1 3.2 3.3 Total
GEF
National Steppe Conservation Strategy Development & Implementation (Output 3.2)
Lump sum
90,000
90,000
90,000
National Steppe Conservation Training & Awareness Programme, including translation of relevant material (Output 3.3)
Lump sum
96,000 96,000
96,000
Midterm and final evaluation independent consultants
Lump sum
30,000
25,000
25,000 - 80,000
5650 Sub-total Contracts
147,000 90,000 80,000 347,000 97,000 160,000 100,000 382,000 95,000 90,000 96,000 306,000 - 1,035,000
5900 Travel
Field work Lump
sum 15,000
15,000
15,000
45,000
Local travel Lump
sum 5,000
5,000
5,000
15,000
International travel Lump
sum 10,000
10,000
10,000
30,000
5900 Sub-total travel
- - - 30,000 - - - 30,000 - - - 30,000 - 90,000
5020 Training and workshops
Inception Workshop Lump
sum 2,500
2,500
2,500
7,500
Final workshop Lump
sum 5,000
5,000
5,000
15,000
Workshops/meetings Lump
sum 10,000
20,000
19,000 - 49,000
Trainings / site demonstrations
Lump sum
10,000
20,000
19,000
49,000
5020 Sub-total training
- - - 27,500 - - - 47,500 - - - 45,500 - 120,500
6000 Expendable procurement
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 89
Oracle code and
BUDGET in USD
Unit No. of Unit Component 1: Component 2: Component 3: PM Total
description
units Cost 1.1 1.2 1.3 Total 2.1 2.2 2.3 Total 3.1 3.2 3.3 Total
GEF
Public Awareness & Education materials: Best practices, lessons learned, guidelines
Lump sum
10,000
10,000 -
40,000
60,000
Demonstration inputs (e.g. seeds, monitoring collars)
Lump sum
15,000
15,000
5,000
35,000
6000 Sub-total expendable procurement
- - - 25,000 - - - 25,000 - - - 45,000 - 95,000
6100 Non-expendable procurement
-
PA Strategic Management design & implementation support
Lump sum
100,000
-
-
100,000
Grazing management plan strategic implementation support (e.g. exclosures, grassland monitoring equipment, livestock monitoring equipment)
Lump sum
-
100,000
-
100,000
Strategy development support equipment (e.g. computers/tablets, projectors)
Lump sum
-
-
35,000
35,000
6100 Sub-total non-expendable procurement
- - - 100,000 - - - 100,000 - - - 35,000 - 235,000
6300 GOE budget
-
Miscellaneous including contingencies
Lump sum
5,000
5,000
18,467 - 28,467
6300 Sub-total GOE budget
- - - 5,000 - - - 5,000 - - - 18,467 - 28,467
TOTAL 167,000 110,000 100,000 688,500 127,000 190,000 130,000 744,500 164,000 159,000 147,000 784,967 110,800 2,328,767
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 90
Oracle code and description
Unit No. of units
Unit cost
BUDGET in USD Expenditures by year
Component 1:
Component 2:
Component 3:
PM Total GEF
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year4
Total Total Total
5300 Salaries professionals
Operations officer Weeks 60 1,000 - - - 60,000 60,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000
Procurement Associate Weeks 64 400 - - - 25,400 25,400 6,350 6,350 6,350 6,350
Financial associate Weeks 64 400
25,400 25,400 6,350 6,350 6,350 6,350
5300 Sub-total salaries professionals
- - - 110,800 110,800 27,700 27,700 27,700 27,700
5570 International Consultants
-
1 Protected Area Management Specialist Weeks
15 3,000 30,000 - 21,000
51,000 25,500 25,500 - -
1 Sustainable Grazing and Grassland Biodiversity Specialist Weeks
15 3,000 - 30,000 21,000
51,000 25,500 25,500 - -
1 Large Landscape Conservation Policy Specialist Weeks
14 3,000 - - 42,000
42,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 -
Sub-total international Consultants
30,000 30,000 84,000 - 144,000 65,000 65,000 14,000 -
National consultants 1 Protected Area Management Specialist Weeks
80 750 45,000 - 15,000
60,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000
1 Field-based Implementation Specialist Weeks
224 200 15,000 15,000 15,000
45,000 11,250 11,250 11,250 11,250
1 Sustainable Grazing and Grassland Biodiversity Specialist Weeks
80 750 - 45,000 15,000
60,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000
1 Large Landscape Conservation Policy Specialist Weeks
80 750 - - 60,000
60,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000
1 Field-based Impact Monitoring Specialist Weeks
11,000 12,000 12,000
35,000 8,750 8,750 8,750 8,750
1 Specialist to prepare Weeks 3,000 3,000 4,000
10,000
10,000
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 91
Oracle code and description
Unit No. of units
Unit cost
BUDGET in USD Expenditures by year
Component 1:
Component 2:
Component 3:
PM Total GEF
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year4
Total Total Total
Terminal Report
National Technical Coordinator/Advisor Weeks
224 1,000 50,000 50,000 100,000
200,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
Sub-total national Consultants
124,000 125,000 221,000 - 470,000 115,000 115,000 115,000 125,000
5570 Sub-total consultants 154,000 155,000 305,000 - 614,000 180,000 180,000 129,000 125,000
5650 Contracts -
Assessment and PA Proposal for Karacadag
Lump sum
75,000 - -
75,000 18,750 18,750 18,750 18,750
Stakeholder Engagement Strategy & Implementation with National Guidelines, including translation of relevant material
Lump sum
72,000 - -
72,000 36,000 36,000
3 Steppe PA Management Plans
Lump sum
90,000 - -
90,000 45,000 45,000
Steppe PA Monitoring System
Lump sum
80,000 - -
80,000
40,000 40,000
Grazing Management Planning
Lump sum
- 97,000 -
97,000 24,250 24,250 24,250 24,250
Grassland monitoring Lump sum
- 80,000 -
80,000
40,000 40,000
Livestock monitoring Lump sum
- 80,000 -
80,000
40,000 40,000
Grazing steppe conservation training programme, including translation of relevant material
Lump sum
- 100,000 -
100,000
50,000 50,000
Provincial Steppe Conservation Strategy Development & Implementation
Lump sum
95,000
95,000
47,500 47,500
National Steppe Conservation Strategy
Lump sum
90,000
90,000
45,000 45,000
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 92
Oracle code and description
Unit No. of units
Unit cost
BUDGET in USD Expenditures by year
Component 1:
Component 2:
Component 3:
PM Total GEF
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year4
Total Total Total
Development & Implementation
National Steppe Conservation Training & Awareness Programme, including translation of relevant material
Lump sum
96,000
96,000
48,000 48,000
Midterm and final evaluation independent consultants
Lump sum
30,000 25,000 25,000 - 80,000
40,000
40,000
5650 Sub-total Contracts 347,000 382,000 306,000 - 1,035,000 124,000 334,000 353,500 223,500
5900 Travel
Field work Lump sum
15,000 15,000 15,000
45,000 11,250 11,250 11,250 11,250
Local travel Lump sum
5,000 5,000 5,000
15,000 3,750 3,750 3,750 3,750
International travel Lump sum
10,000 10,000 10,000
30,000 10,000 10,000 10,000
5900 Sub-total travel 30,000 30,000 30,000 - 90,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 15,000
5020 Training and workshops
Inception Workshop Lump sum
2,500 2,500 2,500
7,500 7,500
Final workshop Lump sum
5,000 5,000 5,000
15,000
15,000
Workshops/meetings Lump sum
10,000 20,000 19,000 - 49,000 12,250 12,250 12,250 12,250
Trainings / site demonstrations
Lump sum
10,000 20,000 19,000
49,000 16,333 16,333 16,333
5020 Sub-total training 27,500 47,500 45,500 - 120,500 36,083 28,583 28,583 27,250
6000 Expendable procurement
Public Awareness & Education materials: Best practices, lessons learned,
Lump sum
10,000 10,000 40,000
60,000
20,000 20,000 20,000
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 93
Oracle code and description
Unit No. of units
Unit cost
BUDGET in USD Expenditures by year
Component 1:
Component 2:
Component 3:
PM Total GEF
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year4
Total Total Total
guidelines
Demonstration inputs (e.g. seeds, monitoring collars)
Lump sum
15,000 15,000 5,000
35,000 17,500 17,500
6000 Sub-total expendable procurement
25,000 25,000 45,000 - 95,000 17,500 37,500 20,000 20,000
6100 Non-expendable procurement
-
PA Strategic Management design & implementation support
Lump sum
100,000 - -
100,000 100,000
Grazing management plan strategic implementation support (e.g. exclosures, grassland monitoring equipment, livestock monitoring equipment)
Lump sum
- 100,000 -
100,000
100,000
Strategy development support equipment (e.g. computers/tablets, projectors)
Lump sum
- - 35,000
35,000 35,000
6100 Sub-total non-expendable procurement
100,000 100,000 35,000 - 235,000 135,000 100,000 - -
6300 GOE budget -
Miscellaneous including contingencies
Lump sum
5,000 5,000 18,467 - 28,467
14,234 14,234
6300 Sub-total GOE budget
5,000 5,000 18,467 - 28,467 - - 14,234 14,234
TOTAL 688,500 744,500 784,967 110,800 2,328,767 545,283 732,783 598,017 452,684
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 94
Summary by Component USD Percentage
SUBTOTAL Comp 1 688,500 29.57%
SUBTOTAL Comp 2 744,500 31.97%
SUBTOTAL Comp 3 784,967 33.71%
Subtotal Comp 1 to 3 2,217,967
SUBTOTAL Project Management 110,800 5.00%
TOTAL GEF 2,328,767 100.24%
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppelands Page 95
Appendix 4: Risk Matrix
See table in Section 3.2.1
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppelands Page 96
Appendix 5: Procurement Plan (To be defined during project inception)
DATE:
PROJECT TITLE AND SYMBOL:
Ref. No. Requirem
ent
Unit Estimated
Quantities
Estimate
d Cost
Unit
Price
Solicitatio
n Method
Procurem
ent Method
Buyer Targeted
Tender
Launch Date
Targeted
Contract
Award Date
Targeted
Delivery Date
Final
Destination
and Delivery
Terms
Status Other
Constraints/Considerations
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 97
Appendix 6: Key Positions and Tasks
Position Titles $/Person
Week
Estimated
Person
Weeks
Tasks to be Performed
For Project Management
Local
National Project
Director
- - Full time position. The National Project Director is
funded by the government and ensures country
ownership of the project by carrying out the following
activities:
Assume overall responsibility for the successful
execution and implementation of the project,
accountability to the Government for the proper
and effective use of co-financing resources;
Serve as a focal point for the coordination of
projects with other Government agencies, FAO and
outside implementing agencies;
Ensure that all Government inputs committed to
the project are made available;
Ensure that the National Project Coordinator is
empowered to effectively manage the project and
other project staff to perform their duties
effectively;
Represent the Government institution (national
counterpart) at the tripartite review project
meetings, and other stakeholder meetings.
National Project
Coordinator
1,000 224 Full-time position. The National Project Coordinator
(NTC) will be responsible for overall coordination of
the project to ensure the achievement of project results.
The NTC will be responsible for overall management
and implementation of the project on a day-to-day basis
and for effective and efficient use of resources, as well
as for facilitating information to the stakeholders and
steering committee.
The NTC will be responsible from delivering techical
support to the project team and project consultants in
order to achieve project outputs.
The NTC will have responsibility on management of
project budget and fulfillment of all project reporting
according to the GEF and FAO principles. The NTC
prepares the AWP/B as well as ToR for all inputs.
The NTC will establish the links between project focal
points at Ministerial level, the Project Steering
Committee and the National Stakeholder Board and
lead interactions with stakeholders.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 98
The NTC will be ensuring that desions are made in an
informative way across all levels.
This person is expected to have extensive experience
with biodiversity conservation, planning of protected
areas, and natural resource management ideally with
grasslands conservation and large landscapes. A high
university or PhD degree in natural resources
management or a related field is required.
Operations Officer 400 64 The Operations Officer will provide support to the
National Project Director and NPC to ensure that day to
day activities are carried out in time, particularly in
DEX projects where FAO is providing the government
additional support services (operational support,
procurement, financial management, contracting). This
will be a shared position under the FAO SEC
programmatic approach to GEF implementation.
Ensure all project staff and consultants fully
understand their role and their tasks, and support
them in their work;
Oversee day-to-day implementation of the project
in line with the work plans;
Assure quality of project activities and project
outputs;
Organize regular planning and communication
events, starting with inception mission and
inception workshop;
Oversee preparation and implementation of M&E
framework;
Oversee preparation and implementation of project
communication and knowledge management
frameworks;
Support preparation of progress reports and all
monitoring reports.
Liaise with government agencies and regularly
advocate on behalf of the project;
Coordinate project interventions with other
ongoing activities, especially those of co-financers
and other GEF projects;
Regularly promote the project and its outputs and
findings on a national, and where appropriate,
regional stage.
Procurement and
Financial Associates
400 64 The Procurement and Financial Associates will support
National Project Director and NPC in managing the
administrative and financial issues of the project. This
will be a shared position under the FAO SEC
programmatic approach to GEF implementation.
He/she will be ensuring that all information is accurate,
relevant books are kept; reports are prepared and
payments are done according to the FAO/GEF
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 99
standards.
In addition, the Associate will ensure that all
procurement activities are in line with FAO’s
procurement rules and will be responsible for
supporting the NPC in the preparation and
implementation of the project’s annual procurement
plans.
These persons will be monitoring the project activities,
budgets and financial expenditures and come up with
standards for all project counterparts on applicable
administrative procedures. This person will be
responsible for preparation of procurement and
recruitment processes. He/she will be assisting the
project team in terms of logistic issues as well as
preparations for meetings, training and workshops.
International
N/A
Justification for travel, if any: Project staff will be required to complete occasional field work support.
For Technical Assistance
Local
Protected Area
Management
Specialist
750 80 Responsible for supporting achievement of Outcome 1
activities.
Will have extensive expertise in protected area
management and biodiversity conservation. Particular
emphasis upon management of multiple use grasslands.
Field-based
Implementation
Specialist
200 224 The Field-based Implementation Specialist will
contribute to the effective work of the Field Office in
Sanliurfa. Furthermore, s/he will:
Support the monitoring of project impact
indicators, identify mechanisms for systematic
data collection and recording of project
activities in close collaboration with local
stakeholders;
Monitor and report project activities and
outcomes, progress and achievements on a
monthly basis to the Project Management
Team;
Provide efficient communication and
coordination between central project bodies in
Ankara (i.e. Project Management Team and
NPIU) and the local units of executing partners
and other stakeholders on project-related
activities;
Assist national and international consultants as
well as project partners in planning and
implementing project activities (e.g.
biodiversity monitoring) and facilitate visits
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 100
and missions of project staff and consultants to
the project site;
Support project staff in preparing necessary
project reports;
Facilitate organization of workshops, trainings,
seminars or other project-related events in the
project area;
This person is expected to be a Junior Expert with
experience in biodiversity conservation or protected
areas management. A university in the field of natural
resources management is required.
Sustainable Grazing
and Grasslands
Biodiversity
Specialist
750 80 Responsible for supporting achievement of Outcome 2
activities.
Will have extensive expertise in grazing management
and biodiversity conservation. Particular emphasis
upon management of multiple use grasslands.
Large Landscape
Conservation Policy
Specialist
750 80
Responsible for supporting achievement of Outcome 3
activities.
Will have extensive knowledge and experience with the
development and implementation of provincial and
national level policy and planning mechanisms.
International
Protected Area
Management
Specialist
3,000 15
Responsible for providing technical support necessary
for the achievement of Outcome 1 activities.
Will have extensive expertise in protected area
management and biodiversity conservation. Particular
emphasis upon management of multiple use grasslands.
Sustainable Grazing
and Grasslands
Biodiversity
Specialist
3,000 15
Responsible for providing technical support necessary
for the achievement of Outcome 2 activities.
Will have extensive expertise in grazing management
and biodiversity conservation. Particular emphasis
upon management of multiple use grasslands.
Strategic Large
Landscape
Conservation Policy
Specialist
3,000 14
Responsible for providing technical support necessary
for the achievement of Outcome 3 activities.
Will have extensive knowledge and experience with the
development and implementation of provincial and
national level policy and planning mechanisms.
Justification for travel, if any:
Project staff will be required to complete occasional field work support.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 101
Appendix 7: Environmental Screening and Environmental Management Plan
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 102
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 103
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 104
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 105
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 106
Appendix 8: Extended Summary of Institutional, Policy and Regulatory Context
Project Relevant Institutional Management/Decision-Making Framework
Institution
Responsibilities
National
Ministry of Forestry and
Water Affairs (MFWA)
MFWA is responsible for the declaration and management of protected
areas, ecological construction, preparing management plans for those sites,
conservation of species of special concern and critical habitats, preparing
development strategy, planning and drafting relevant laws and regulations,
and supervising the implementation of the organization to carry out
investigation, monitoring of wildlife and ecosystems. Moreover, MFWA is
responsible for rational development and utilization of water resources, to
develop the water conservancy strategic planning and policy, and the
drafting of relevant laws and regulations, the preparation of the state for the
important rivers and lakes, flood control planning, protection of water
resources, water function zoning, organizational preparation of water
conservation planning for the major rivers, lakes, and supervise the
implementation of the approved waters assimilative capacity, proposed to
limit the total amount of emissions, to guide the protection of drinking
water sources, groundwater exploitation and urban planning area protection
of groundwater resources management. The Ministry is organizing,
coordinating and guiding national wetland conservation, making wetland
conservation planning, and national standards and regulations about
wetland protection, organization and implementation of the establishment
of wetland protection district, the wetland park protection and management,
supervising the rational use of wetlands, to coordinate the relevant
international Convention on Wetlands compliance work.
The Ministry of Food,
Agriculture and Livestock
(MFAL)
MFAL is responsible from organization of agricultural resources, pasture
management and improvement, organic agriculture and agricultural
sustainable development, guide for protection and management of
agricultural land and fishing waters, rangelands, and agricultural biological
species resources. Responsible for the development of animal husbandry,
protection of fishery waters ecological environment and provide good
conditions to develop the food safety regulations and control all stage of
food production. The Ministry is the body for drafting laws and regulations
about plant and animal epidemic prevention and quarantine, signing
intergovernmental agreements, agreements to develop standards,
organization, supervision of domestic animals and plants epidemic
prevention and quarantine work, publishing the epidemic and responsible
for the organization of extinguishing.
Ministry of Development Formulating and organizing the implementation of national economic and
social development strategies, medium-and long-term plans and annual
plans, co-ordination of economic and social development, put forward the
national economic development objectives, policies and responsible for
planning major construction projects and distribution of productive forces.
Also, promoting the sustainable development strategy, making the plans
and policy of resource conservation and utilization, coordinating the
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 107
implementation of these plans participating in the major issues including
preparation of plans of ecological construction and environment protection,
coordinating ecological construction, resource conservation and
comprehensive utilization.
Regional (Provincial)
XV. Regional Directorate
of Forestry and Water
Affairs (RDoM) (Malatya)
RDoM is responsible for the supervision and management of the regional
and province's ecological construction, and organize the survey, monitoring
and evaluation of provincial terrestrial wildlife resources, and the wetland
resources. The RDoM ensures the management of wildlife development
areas, preparing management plans for those areas and implementing the
plans. Moreover, RDoM is responsible for the supervision and management
of nature reserves, responsible for the protection of biodiversity, and
undertake to carry out teaching and research into the provincial nature
reserve buffer, enter the provincial nature reserves experimental area to
visit and approval tourism.
The RDoM ensures the organization, coordination, guidance, and oversight
of the province's wetland conservation work, development of province-
wide, regional wetland conservation planning, and provincial standards and
regulations, organization and implementation of the establishment of the
province's wetland reserve wetland park protection and management
oversight rational use of wetlands; organization, guidance terrestrial
wildlife resources protection and rational utilization.
Provincial Directorates of
MFAL (Diyarbakır and
Şanlıurfa)
The PDAs are the organizations to guide the protection and management of
agricultural lands and pasturelands. PDAs are responsible for the
development of arable land and basic farmland quality protection and
improvement of policies and guide the implementation and management of
the quality of arable land in accordance with the law. They ensure the use
of engineering facilities, agronomy, agricultural, biological, and other
measures to develop crop and livestock development.
PDAs are also responsible from development and implementation of agro-
ecological activities planning, guidance to improve of rural livelihood, to
guide the development of agricultural biomass industry and agriculture and
energy saving in rural areas, undertake guidance related to agricultural
nonpoint source pollution control work. Delineation of the prohibited
agricultural production area, guiding ecological agriculture cycle
development of agriculture. They plan for the protection of the ecological
environment of the fishing waters.
PDAs are also responsible for dissemination of information about
improving the conservation of natural resources and sustainability; improve
of agricultural practices and farmers training activities.
GAP
Karacadağ Development
Agency (Diyarbakır and
Şanlıurfa)
The development agencies are responsible for contribution to regional and
rural development studies by the way of capacity development and support
those projects.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 108
Project Relevant Policy and Planning Framework
Policy, Strategy, or
Plan
Adoption
Date Description/Assessment of relevant strategy, policy or plan
National
National Biodiversity
Strategy and Action
Plan
2007 This Strategy is Turkey’s response to the Convention on Biological
Diversity. The Strategy aims to identify and assess Turkey’s biological
diversity, to determine a generally agreed strategy for conservation and to
propose the actions required for achieving the goals of biological diversity
conservation in Turkey. The Strategy is intended “to create a society that
lives as part of nature that values biological diversity that does not consume
more than what nature is capable of replacing, and that leaves to future
generations a nature rich in biological diversity.
National Strategy and
Action Plan on
Combating
Desertification (2015-
2023) (2015-2018)
2015 The mission of this strategy and action plan is to implement policy and
programs, which are developed in order to reduce to the negative impact of
the drought and desertification and rehabilitate degraded lands. Participation
of local people, contribution for rural development and international
dialogue are the main elements of the Strategy and NAP. The Strategy will
be in place till 2023 whereas the action plan shall be revised in 2018
following the revision foreseen for 10-year strategy of UNCCD.
Climate Change Action
Plan 2011-2023
2011 Turkey’s national vision within the scope of “climate change” is to become
a country fully integrating climate change-related objectives into its
development policies, disseminating energy efficiency, increasing the use of
clean and renewable energy resources, actively participating in the efforts
for tackling climate change within its “special circumstances”, and
providing its citizens with a high quality of life and welfare with low-carbon
intensity.
National Climate
Change Strategy
2010 This strategy gives priority to conservation of habitats including steppe
ecosystems. The plan searches fro methods of identifying and then
addressing the adaption needs of steppe habitats as well as mitigation
approach through using steppe habitats as carbon stocks.
National Rural
Development Plan
(2009-2013)
2009 Plan targets the conservation of agricultural areas, pastures and forests,
including soil and water resources in areas that will be integrated into forest
regimes. The Rural Development Plan underscores the relationship between
rural poverty and natural resource degradation, recognizing a significant
increase in recent years in erosion and degradation of land and water
resources in the country.
National
Environmental Action
Plan
1998 Turkey’s Seventh Five Year Development Plan (1996 - 2000) called for
development of a national environmental strategy as the main instrument for
coordinating government policies, including those for environmental
management. The National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) responds to
the need for a strategy and can supplement the existing Development Plan
with concrete actions for integrating environment and development. The
goals of the NEAP are; better quality of life; increased environmental
awareness; improved environmental management; and sustainable
economic, social and cultural development.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 109
Project Relevant Legal/Regulatory Framework
Law or Regulation Title Adoption
Date
Description/Assessment of Law/Regulation
National
National Parks Law (2873) 1983, rev.
2011
This Law sets forth the rules and procedures of the selection of
national parks, natural monuments, nature parks, and nature reserve
areas. The Law defines the rules and approaches on the
management, protection and development of those protected areas.
The law also defines the duties and responsibilities of each ministry
and the Council of Ministers concerning the designation and
nationalization of National Parks. It outlines the duties and
responsibilities of the Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs
concerning the management and protection of national parks and
granting permissions. The Law further covers rules to the protect
the ecosystem and wildlife and to prevent soil, water or air pollution
and prohibits construction of any building or facility as well as the
production of forest products, pasturage and hunting that might
harm the ecosystem and or biological diversity.
The Terrestrial Hunting Law
(4915)
1937, rev.
2003
The Law defines relevant measures, rules and approaches regarding
the species and habitats. The wildlife development areas that are to
protect and develop wildlife species of special concern are declared
and managed under this law. The law ensures the sustainable
hunting, protection of hunting and wild animals with their natural
living environment, development, control of hunting, evaluate
hunting resources for the benefit of the national economy and
provide coordination between the related institution and the private
corporate individuals. Under this law, each year Hunting
Commission gathers and identifies the hunting limits as well as
areas open or closed for hunting for that season.
Forestry Law (6831) 1956 This Law sets forth the basic forestry legislation. The boundaries of
protection forest are determined and declared to the surrounding
villages. The conditions, principles and periods of designation of
such forests and management, development, improvement and
utilization principles and decisions are decided by the Ministry of
Forestry and Water Affairs.
Environmental Law (2872)
1983 The objective of this Law is to protect and improve the
environment. The Law includes approaches for preserving land and
natural resources in rural and urban areas as well as preventing
pollution. Through preserving the country's vegetative and livestock
assets and natural and historical richness, the Law defines all
arrangements and precautions for improving and securing health,
civilization and life conditions of present and future generations in
conformity with economical and social development objectives and
based on certain legal and technical principles.
Agricultural Law (5488) 2006 The purpose of this Law is to set the principles, rules and
approaches regarding the agricultural sector. The law has a strong
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 110
rural development approach through plans and strategies in line
with the policies and regulations supporting agricultural
development. The Law defines the principles, objectives and
priorities of agricultural policies, training and advisory services for
farmers, protection of biodiversity and genetic resources; and
ensuring biosecurity and biosafety.
Pasture Law (4342)
1998
This Law defines the fundamental procedures and rules regarding
the management of pasturelands. With this law, the pasturelands
can be allocated villages and municipalities. The Ministry of
Agriculture and Rural Affairs is authorized to determine the
boundaries of pastures and their allocation to relevant entities
according to the principles defined in the Law. Allocation process is
renewed every five years. Areas that are defined as pasturelands
under this Law cannot be used for any other purposes unless a
written consent is obtained from the Ministry of Agriculture, and
this consent can only be given under specific conditions that are set
in the Law.
Soil Conservation and Land Use
Law (5403/ 5578)
2005, rev.
2007
This Law sets forth the rules and principles for determining land
and soil resources and their classification, preparing land utilization
plans, preventing non-purpose utilization, and defining the tasks
and obligations to ensure land and soil preservation. Soil
Preservation Boards are established in each province to examine,
assess and monitor the activities related to the preservation,
development and productive utilization of lands. Lands are
classified as absolute farming lands, special croplands, cultivated
farming lands and marginal farming lands. Except for objectives
and circumstances clearly defined in the Law, farming lands cannot
be used for any purpose other than the one defined in the utilization
plans. These exceptions are specified in the Law.
Organic Farming Law (5262)
2004 The purpose of this Law is to support organic farming and maintain
consumer safety. The Law sets up the principles and procedures of
organic farming and defines the rules and procedures of inspection
and control; and certification. The Law further covers provisions
on duties and obligations of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Affairs on supervision of organic farming and of organic products.
By-law on Protection of Wetlands
(25818)
2005 The Law regulates the identification of internationally and
nationally important wetlands, defines protection zones, prepares
management plans and declares Ramsar sites.
Law on the Protection of Natural
and Cultural Entities (2863)
1983 This law aims to define the measures to be taken to conserve
cultural and natural entities.
Regulation on wildlife
preservation and wildlife
development areas
2004 The objective of this regulation is to define the procedures and
principles regarding the establishment, management, inspection and
permitted activities of wildlife development areas. Areas chosen
for wildlife development should be large enough to accommodate
large population of migrating animals. Areas that could be
proclaimed as wildlife development areas are proposed by the
regional directorate of MFWA. Areas found appropriate by the
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 111
General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks are
proclaimed as wildlife development area by the Ministry. Wildlife
development areas are managed by the regional directorate of the
Ministry, in accordance to management and development plans.
These plans are prepared by the General Directorate of Nature
Conservation and National Parks. Activities other than specified in
the management plans are not allowed in those areas, and
constructions of any kind that could damage the ecosystem and
objectives of the areas are prohibited. Hunting is not allowed until
the holding capacity of the area is exceeded. Gaming rules and
timing are determined by the General Directorate.
Regulation on Forestation 2012 Regulation includes main procedures and principles for forestation,
erosion control, pasture improvement, seed production, seedling
tree nursery and energy forestry.
Regulation amending the technical
regulation on groundwater
2011 This Regulation sets forth the technical rules and procedures of
management of groundwater. The Regulation covers provisions on
hydro geological research, application and issuing of permits for
groundwater research and water treatment facilities. The
Regulation also covers rules and procedures on preparation of
irrigation plans and projects and preparing maps of groundwater
systems as well as rules and provisions on the establishment of
groundwater irrigation systems such as well, canal and tunnels.
Regulation on Good Agricultural
Practices
2010 Regulation includes main procedures and principles for agricultural
production, which does not give any damage to environment,
human being and animal health as well as protection of natural
resources. Moreover, the regulation defines the traceability and
sustainability principles in agricultural production.
Regulation
On Soil Pollution Control
2010 This Regulation includes technical and administrative
procedures and principles for preventing of soil pollution,
determination of polluted and possibly polluted lands, monitoring
and cleaning of polluted soil and lands.
Regulation on the Principles and
Implementation of Organic
Farming
2005 This Regulation defines the principles, implementation
arrangements for organic agriculture especially those for the
certification procedures.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 112
Appendix 9: Baseline Investments
Title Donor or
Agency
Dates
Budget
US$
Project Objective and
Primary Activities
Project Coordination
Measures
Summary of Relevant Government Projects
National Parks
Program
MFWA Annua
l
800,000
(US$
40,000,000
since 2009)
Planning and management of
the protected areas in
Turkey. The results of the
program are used to assess
the effectiveness of the
protected areas and
conserving biodiversity in
the country
Enhancing of
National
Protected Area
System Project
MFWA 2014-
2016
1,000,000 The objectives/goals of the
program are: (i) preparation
a national strategy and action
plan for protected areas,
including strategies, policies
and management objectives
for both existing and new
protected areas, (ii) raising
awareness on protected areas
and biodiversity
conservation, and (iii)
increasing the effectiveness
of current protected areas
management system.
National
Biodiversity
Research Project
MFWA Augus
t 2013
- 2018
US$
10,000,000
National
Identification of biodiversity
of all provinces. The
biodiversity inventory
project is carried out in 32
provinces of Turkey in 2013
including Sanliurfa.
The results of the
inventory in Şanlıurfa and
Diyarbakır can feed into
the project.
Kızılkuyu
Wildlife
Development
Area Program
MFWA Annua
l
$75,000 and
$120,000
per annum
Strengthening
the national
nature protection
system for
implementation
of Natura 2000
requirements
project
MFWA 2013-
2015
$9,300.000
(EU
Funded)
The project is directly related
with biodiversity
conservation and
strengthening the
institutional and technical
capacity related with Natura
2000. The project will be
funded by European
Commission. Under this
project, the technical
structure for Natura 2000
will be established and
potential areas to be
protected will be identified.
Range Reform
Program
MFAL 2005
onwar
US$ 10-15
million
Program is taking into
consideration degradation of
The project activities
should benefit from the
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 113
Title Donor or
Agency
Dates
Budget
US$
Project Objective and
Primary Activities
Project Coordination
Measures
ds National rangelands and associated
food security problem of
increasing population. The
reform program covers
several measures including
comprehensive legal
framework, demarcation of
range areas and regulation of
use rights, allocation and use
rules, increasing productivity
through rehabilitation and
maintenance, continuous
surveillance, and protection.
existing experience of the
program.
IPARD MFAL,
supported by
EU
2015
onwar
ds
NA Conservation of Great
Bustards in Polatlı TİGEM
and in the surrounding
villages. Subsidizing the
farmers for the conservation
of species.
The results of the program
can feed into Great
Bustard conservation in
Kızılkuyu Wildlife
Development Area.
ÇATAK MFAL 2006-
2013
US$
17,665,000
National
US$
7,000,000
KCB
Supporting agricultural
practices and techniques that
will contribute to the
protection of soil and water
quality, enhance the
sustainability of renewable
natural resources, combat
erosion and reduce the
negative effects of
agriculture. Up to now the
program was implemented in
60,000 ha with more than
20,000 farmers benefiting.
Lessons learned from
ÇATAK can feed into the
project activities especially
in Karacadağ region.
Summary of Relevant NGO and Private Sector Projects
Şanlıurfa
Program
Nature
Association
2004
onwar
ds
350,000 TL The organization has been
actively working in the
region towards the
conservation of steppe
habitats including Kızılkuyu
Wildlife Development Area
and species like Bald Ibis,
Gazelle, Striped Hyena and
Desert Monitor. The
organization has played and
active role in preparation of
the management plan of
Kızılkuyu Wildlife
Development Area.
The existing knowledge of
the organization shall be
transferred to the project.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 114
Appendix 10: Summary of Relevant GEF Activities
Title Agency Dates GEF Grant
US$
Project Objective and
Primary Activities
4th Operational Phase of
the GEF Small Grants
Programme
UNDP/GEF 2009 -
2010
US$
42,714,
900 Global
Global Environmental Benefits in biodiversity and
climate change focal areas secured through
community-based initiatives and actions.
Strengthening Protected
Area Network of Turkey -
Catalyzing Sustainability
of Marine and Coastal
Protected Areas
UNDP/GEF 2009 -
2014
US$
2,300,000
National
To facilitate expansion of the national system of
marine and coastal protected areas and improve its
management effectiveness.
Market Transformation of
Energy Efficient
Appliances in Turkey
UNDP/GEF 2009 -
2014
US$
2,710,000
National
To reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of Turkey
by accelerating the market transformation towards
more energy efficient building appliances.
Promoting Replication of
Good Practices for Nutrient
Reduction and Joint
Collaboration in Central
and Eastern Europe
UNDP/GEF 2008-
2010
US$
974,816
Regional
To codify existing knowledge and experience
through identifying, capturing, analyzing,
displaying, and promoting replication of good
practices International Waters and Transboundary
Water Governance- related projects.
National Capacity Self
Assessment for Global
Environmental
Management (NCSA)
UNEP/GEF 2008-
2009
US$
199,500
National
The primary objective of the NCSA was to identify
country level priorities and needs for capacity
building to address global environmental issues.
Enhancing Coverage and
Management Effectiveness
of the Subsystem of Forest
Protected Areas in
Turkey’s National System
of Protected Areas
UNDP/GEF 2008 -
2012
US$
972,000
National
The overall objective of the project is to conserve
biodiversity and ensure sustainable use of natural
resources in Kure Mountains as a contribution to the
objectives of Turkey’s National Biodiversity
Strategy and towards global biodiversity
conservation.
Strategic Partnership for
the Mediterranean Large
Marine Ecosystem-
Regional Component:
Implemen. of Agreed
Actions for the Protection
of the Environ. Resources
of the Mediterr. Sea and Its
Coastal Areas
UNEP/GEF 2008 -
2013
US$
12,891,
000
Regional
To (i) ensure the overall coordination of the
Strategic Partnership; (ii) to facilitate policy, legal
and institutional reforms; (iii) to promote the
regional dissemination of new approaches; (iv) to
monitor the progress of the Strategic Partnership and
the effectiveness of the stress reduction measures
being promoted; and (v) to contribute to the
implementation of the Stockholm NIPs.
Building Partnerships to
Assist Developing
Countries to Reduce the
Transfer of Harmful
Aquatic Organisms in
Ships' Ballast Water
UNDP/GEF 2007 -
2010
US$
5,688,000
Global
To promote the development of regional
partnerships that will implement coordinated long-
term measures to minimize the adverse impacts of
aquatic invasive species transferred through ships’
ballast water on coastal and marine ecosystems,
economy, human health and well-being.
Enhancing Conservation of
the Critical Network of
Sites of Wetlands Required
by Migratory Waterbirds
on the African/ Eurasian
Flyways.
UNEP/GEF 2006-
2010
US$
6,000,000
Regional
This project aims to improve the conservation status
of African/Eurasian migratory waterbirds, by
enhancing and coordinating the measures taken to
conserve key critical wetland areas that these birds
require to complete their annual cycle, including
their stop-over sites during migration and their stay
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 115
in their "wintering grounds".
Control of Eutrophication,
Hazardous Substances and
Related Measures for
Rehabilitating the Black
Sea Ecosystem: Tranche 2
UNDP/GEF 2005-
2008
US$
6,000,000
Regional
To support participating countries in the
development of national policies and legislation and
the definition of priority actions to avoid discharge
of nitrogen and phosphorus to the Black Sea.
Consultation for National
Reporting, Participation in
the National Clearing
House Mechanism and
Further Development of
the National Biodiversity
Strategy and Action Plan
UNEP/GEF 2005-
2007
US$
365,300
National
A. To prepare Second and Third National Reports to
the Conference of the Parties of the CBD.
B. To further develop the national Clearing House
Mechanism, plus technical and scientific
cooperation.
C. To better incorporate the decisions and work
programmes of the Conference of the Parties of the
CBD into the National Biodiversity Action Plan.
Enabling activities to
facilitate early action on
the implementation of the
Stockholm Convention on
POPs in the Republic of
Turkey
UNIDO/GE
F
2003 -
ongoing
US$
469,700
National
The overall objective of the proposed Enabling
Activities is to strengthen national capacity and
capability to prepare a National Implementation
Plan for the management of POPs.
Control of Eutrophication,
Hazardous Substances and
Related Measures for
Rehabilitating the Black
Sea Ecosystem
UNDP/GEF 2002-
2004
US$
4,000,000
Regional
To prevent and remediate nutrient releases by
evaluating the use of economic instruments,
environmental regulations, strengthening public
participation, monitoring of trends and compliance.
Biodiversity and Natural
Resources Management
Project
IBRD/GEF 2000-
2008
US$
8,190,000
National
The project will support the establishment of
effective management for biodiversity conservation
and sustainable use in, and around, four priority
protected areas.
Determination of Priority
Actions for the Further
Elaboration and
Implementation of the
Strategic Action
Programme for the
Mediterranean Sea
UNEP/GEF 2000-
2006
US$
5,950,000
Regional
The Strategic Action Programme to Address
Pollution from Land-Based Activities in the
Mediterranean Region provides a broad framework
for the implementation of mechanisms and measures
that will lead to the protection of the marine
environment, including its biological resources and
diversity, from the effects of harmful land-based
activities.
Developing the
Implementation of the
Black Sea Strategic Action
Plan
UNDP/GEF 1997-
2000
US$
1,790,000
Regional
To foster sustainable institutional and financial
arrangements for effective management and
protection of the Black Sea.
In-Situ Conservation of
Genetic Biodiversity IBRD/GEF
1993-
1998
US$
5,100,000
National
To identify and establish in-situ conservation areas
for the protection of genetic resources and wild
relatives of important crops and forest tree species
that originated in Turkey.
Black Sea Environmental
Management UNDP/GEF
1992-
1996
US$
693,750
Regional
To train officers in ODS monitoring and control, as
well as establishment, operation and enforcement of
licensing systems.
Sustainable Land
Management and Climate-
Friendly Agriculture
Project
FAO/GEF 2015-
2019
US$5,750,
000
Project aims to improve sustainability of agriculture
and forest land use management through the
diffusion and adoption of low-carbon technologies
with win-win benefits in land degradation, climate
change, and biodiversity conservation and increase
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 116
farm profitability and forest.
Both projects will be implemented by FAO SEC at
the same time. The findings of SLM Project
regarding steppe ecosystems as well as biodiversity
mainstreaming into production landscapes should be
integrated into the project. Moreover, the lessons
learned from Great Bustard conservation program
shall be transferred to Kızılkuyu Wildlife
Development Area. productivity.
Alignment of Turkey's
National Action Plan with
UNCCD 10-Year Strategy
and reporting process
FAO/GEF 2014 US$
136,986
National
The objective of the project is to assist Turkey in
aligning its National Action Programme (NAP)
under the UN Convention to Combat Desertification
(UNCCD) with the UNCCD 10-year strategy and
facilitate review and reporting processes for
UNCCD.
The project will contribute to the strategic goals of
the action plan as well as benefit from the strategic
directions set in the NAP.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 117
Appendix 11: Letters of Co-Financing
(see attached files)
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 118
Appendix 12: Tracking Tools
Please complete any necessary scorecards and/or tracking tools.
The following scorecards will be required for completion by FAO and/or GEF. Please
download these and be familiar with them.
GEF Biodiversity Tracking Tool;
The tracking tools may be found at:
https://www.thegef.org/gef/BD_tracking_tool
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 119
Appendix 13: Selected Indicators of Project Site2
ŞANLIURFA PROVINCE AND ITS DISTRICTS
Basic Indicators:
According to the address-based population registration system, total population of Şanlıurfa was
1.801.980 people in 2013. Şanlıurfa has 13 districts and municipalities. In terms of population,
Şanlıurfa is the 9th biggest city in Turkey.
Young population rate in Şanlıurfa is remarkably high. According to the 2013 birth statistics, with
4.31 fertility rate, Şanlıurfa is in the first place. Although the population growth rate was 13.7%
in Turkey, Şanlıurfa had a rate of 22.4%.
With the 6.4% female labor force participation rate in between region women (Diyarbakır and
Şanlıurfa), the rate was one of the lowest when compared to other regions.
Due to the young population, seasonal agriculture worker sector is the highest when compared
with other cities. The city satisfies the need of seasonal agricultural workers of other regions. Big
amount of small cattle has been bred in Şanlıurfa. The industry in Şanlıurfa is mainly based on
agricultural industry.
When net immigration rate was examined between the years of 2012-2013 in Şanlıurfa, with the
value of -7.8 per thousand, Şanlıurfa is considered an emigration city.
In 2013, with 3.832 Million TL vegetative production value, Şanlıurfa was in 4th place. Again in
2013, with 1.353 Million TL livestock value, Şanlıurfa was in 7th place.
With 16.3% unemployment rate in 2013, Şanlıurfa was in 6th place regarding the highest
unemployment rate in Turkey.
2 Reference: Development Agency Strategic Plan, TUIK Şanlıurfa with Selected Indicators
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 120
Districts:
Population according to district, age group and gender (left to right: District – Age Group – Total
– Male – Female):
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 121
Births per district and gender (left to right: Total – Boy – Girl):
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 122
The rate of employed people per sector (left to right: Total – Agriculture – Industry):
When looking at total production amount of grain and other vegetative products in Şanlıurfa, a
23.3% of increase had occurred between the years of 2009-2013. In 2013, grain production share
was 65.1% in total grain and other vegetative products production.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 123
Livestock status in the province can be found in the table below (left to right: Cattle, Water
Buffalo, Sheep, Goat, Poultry, Horse, Donkey, Camel, Pork):
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 124
Milk and Honey Production (left to right: Cow Milk, Water Buffalo Milk, Sheep Milk, Honey):
In 2013, Şanlıurfa’s vegetative production value was 4.1% in Turkey’s total vegetative
production value share. Livestock and animal products value in Turkey’s total share is 2.4% and
0.9% respectively. Total agricultural product value of Şanlıurfa has been increased starting from
2009, and in 2013 the value has reached to 5.5 billion TL.
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 125
Animal products in accordance with the districts (left to right: Number of Cattle, Number of
Sheep, Number of Goats, Milk production, Honey Production, Number of Poultry):
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 126
POPULATION IN PROJECT AREA3
1. Şanlıurfa Central District
1.1 Kızılkuyu Village
Distance to the province centre: 38 km
Distance to the district centre: 15 km
Village Headman (mukhtar) information: N/A
Population Information
Year Total Woman Man
2012 139 69 70
2011 129 61 68
2000 123 55 68
1990 285 138 147
1985 273 128 145
Sanitarium: None
Community Clinic: Exists / Not active
Primary School: Exists/ Not active
Mobile Education: none
Post Office (PTT): None
Water Supply Network: none
Sewer System: None
2. Şanlıurfa Harran District (Tek Tek Mountains National Park)
2.1 Başkaragöz Village
Distance to the province centre: 67 km
Distance to the district centre: 22 km
Altitude: 500m
Village Headman (mukhtar) information: İsmail TAŞ BAŞKARAGÖZ
Phone: 0532 175 00 06
Population Information
Year Total Woman Man
2012 264 136 128
2011 250 128 122
2000 79 36 43
3 www.yerelnet.net
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 127
Sanitarium: None
Community Clinic: Exists / Not active
Primary School: Available
Mobile Education: Available
Post Office (PTT): None
Water Supply Network: Available
Sewer System: None
2.2 Göktaş Village
Distance to the province centre: 67 km
Distance to the district centre: 22 km
Altitude: 500m
Village Headman (mukhtar) information: Abdullah Ay
Phone: 0542 519 64 94
Population Information
Year Total Woman Man
2012 1.099 573 526
2011 980 512 468
2000 192 100 92
1990 295 124 171
Sanitarium: None
Community Clinic: None
Primary School: Available
Mobile Education: None
Post Office (PTT): None
Water Supply Network: Available
Sewer System: None
2.3 Karataş Village
Distance to the province centre: 77 km
Distance to the district centre: 30 km
Altitude: 465m
Village Headman (mukhtar) information: Kasım Bayramhan
Phone: 0544 522 94 95
Population Data
Year Total Woman Man
2012 506 252 254
2011 504 251 253
2000 135 71 64
Project Document: Conservation and Sustainable Management of Turkey’s Steppe Ecosystems Page 128
Sanitarium: None
Community Clinic: None
Primary School: Available
Mobile Education: None
Post Office (PTT): None
Water Supply Network: Available
Sewer System: None
3. Şanlıurfa Siverek District
3.1 Karacadağ-Bucak Village
Distance to the province: 126 km
Distance to the district: 33 km
Village Headman (mukhtar) information: N/A
Population Data: N/A
Sanitarium: None
Community Clinic: Available
Primary School: Available
Mobile Education: None
Post Office (PTT): None
Water Supply Network: None
Sewer System: None
Recommended