Document of The International Development Association Acting as Administrator of the Interim Trust Fund FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No. P-7033GH MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION ON A PROPOSED INTERIM TRUST FUND CREDIT IN AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO SDR 20.8 MILLION TO THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA FOR A VILLAGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT April 28, 1997 This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS Currency Unit = Cedi (C) US$1.00 = C 1,800 (December 31, 1996) WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Unless otherwise stated, all weights and measures used in this report are metric. I metric ton (ton) = 2,205 pounds (lb) 1 hectare (ha) = 2.47 acres (ac) 1 kilometer (km) = 0.62 miles (mi) 1 meter (m) = 3.28 feet (ft) ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS DAs District Assemblies DACF District Assemblies Common Fund ERP Economic Recovery Program GOG Government of Ghana IDA International Development Association IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development (Rome) IMTs Intermediate Means of Transport KfW Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau (Frankfurt) NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations RICU Rural Infrastructure Coordinating Unit VIP Village Infrastructure Project VTTs Village Tracks and Trails FISCAL YEAR Government of Ghana January 1 - December 31 Vice President - Jean Louis Sarbib Country Director - Serge Michailof Technical Manager - Jean Paul Chausse Task Team Leader - Rudolph Poison FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY REPUBLIC OF GHANA VILLAGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT CREDIT AND PROJECT SUMMARY Borrower: The Republic of Ghana Implementing Agency: District Assemblies and Rural Infrastructure Coordinating Unit Beneficiaries: Village Communities, Farmer Associations, District Assemblies and NGOs; the Ministries of Food and Agriculture and Local Government and Rural Development. Amount: SDR 20.8 million (US$30.0 million equivalent) Terms: Standard with 40 years maturity Commitment Fee: 0 50 percent on undisbursed credit balances, beginning 60 days after signing, less any waiver. Onlending Terms: NA Financing Plan: See Schedule A Net Present Value: Net present value of all project components US$109 million Economic Rate of Return (ERR): 26 percent Poverty Category: The project has a high poverty alleviation objective. It is targeted at poor farmers, rural communities and District Assemblies. Over 500,000 poor rural families would benefit directly. Staff Appraisal Report Number: 15942-GH Project Identification Number: 41150 Maps: IBRD 28274 Ghana - Project Coordinating Zones IBRD 28275 Ghana - Agro-ecological Zones This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION (THE ASSOCIATION ACTING AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE INTERIM TRUST FUND) TO THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA FOR A VILLAGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT 1. I submit for your approval the following Memorandum and Recommendation on a proposed Interim Fund Credit of SDR 20.8 million (US$30 million equivalent), on standard IDA terms, to the Republic of Ghana in support of its Village Infrastructure Project. 2. Country Background. Following eight years of sustained fiscal adjustment and falling inflation since the start of the ERP in 1983, Ghana's fiscal performance received a setback during the run-up to the 1992 general elections and has remained fragile since then. Expenditure over- runs have resulted in large fiscal deficits and rising inflation. Though divestiture receipts helped to finance the excess expenditures in most of these years, the impact on inflation and public debt was unavoidable. On a year-end basis, inflation rose from 10 percent in end-1992 to 71 percent in end-1995 and interest obligations rose from 1.5 percent of GDP in 1992 to 4.5 percent of GDP in 1995. The latter was due to the growth in domestic debt and in Bank of Ghana's open market operations as well as the rising nominal interest rate. Since 1994, the Government has had to borrow domestically to service part of the interest bill. 3. In the face of rising inflation and balance of payments pressures, the Government entered into a three-year Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility (ESAF) with the IMF in June 1995. The first year of the ESAF was completed in June 1996. However, large fiscal slippages, mostly in the second half of the year, have delayed the start of the second year of the ESAF which is now likely to be negotiated by the end of 1997 upon the implementation of several upfront measures. The narrow fiscal deficit in 1996 was 3.2 percent of GDP compared to the program target of a surplus of 1.8 percent of GDP. This was primarily due to over-runs in development expenditures and in non-interest recurrent expenditures. In addition, shortfalls in revenues from import taxes, excise taxes on petroleum, and non-tax sources also contributed to the slippage. Interest obligations increased to 5.6 percent of GDP and the Government's domestic borrowing was equivalent to 5.1 percent of GDP. 4. Recent Economic Developments. Notwithstanding the large fiscal slippages, the economic out-turn in 1996 was favorable. Real GDP grew by 5.2 percent largely on account of agricultural growth of 4 percent. Inflation fell from 71 percent at the end of 1995 to 32 percent at the end of 1996. This was due, in part, to the lagged effects of fiscal and monetary restraint in the first half of 1996 and, in part, to lower cost-push factors emanating from a good harvest, postponed adjustments in petroleum and power tariffs, and lower nominal depreciation of the Cedi due to foreign exchange market interventions. The government is fully aware of this fiscal slippage which occured during the last quarter of 1996, and is taking steps to restore fiscal balance. The Bank is engaged in a close policy dialogue with government on this issue. -2- 5. The Agricultural Sector. Agriculture is the mainstay of the Ghanaian economy, accounting for 45 percent of GDP, 60 percent of export earnings, and employing an estimated 70 percent of the rural labor force. Agriculture is predominantly small-scale, characterized by low input, low output technologies. Farming systems are mostly of the traditional bush-fallow system, with relatively few purchased inputs being used -- fertilizer imports have only been between 20,000 and 25,000 metric tons each year in the last 4 years. About 5.3 million ha, or 22 percent of Ghana's arable land area was estimated to be under cultivation in 1995. Food crops, livestock and fisheries account for 75 percent of agricultural GDP; non-food crops, notably cocoa and forestry, account for the remaining 25 percent. Although there are some large farms, particularly for plantation crops such as rubber, oil palm and coconut, only 15 percent of all farms in Ghana are more than 2 ha in size. Farm sizes are typically larger in the savannah areas than in the forest or coastal regions, but potential exists for increasing productivity of traditional systems in all three agro-ecological zones. These salient features of Ghanaian agriculture -- high employment, a large contribution to economic output dominated by smallholders, and significant untapped potential -- make it a strong potential vehicle for inducing high and shared growth leading to poverty reduction. 6. During the last decade, however, agriculture's contribution to accelerated growth and poverty alleviation has been well below expectations. Among the main reasons for this slow growth are the limited scope and poor conditions of rural infrastructure, which often result in the isolation of rural communities from markets and high post-harvest losses. Only about 8,000 km of the total 22,000 km of feeder roads are part of the maintainable network and significant drudgery is imposed on rural dwellers, especially women and children, who must headload produce from fields to the villages, and onwards, to local markets. As a result, transport costs are high, accounting for nearly 50 percent of the urban retail price of staple commodities. The poor rural roads network severely constrains access to markets and presents a massive impediment to the spread of modem farm inputs and improved technology, and also to farmers' incentives to produce for the market, intensify production, and diversify their farming activities. The negative impact of poor market access is compounded by other village-level constraints such as inadequate postharvest and storage facilities, and lack of potable water. Safe drinking water is available to only 35 percent of the rural population, compared to nearly 80 percent in neighboring countries such as Cote d'Ivoire. 7. Agriculture, Poverty and Rural Infrastructure. Poverty is a complex and multi- dimensional phenomenon. The profile of poverty in Ghana shows that it is largely rural and agricultural: 54 percent of those living in poverty are food crop farmers. Poverty also has a strong regional bias, linked in part to the climate and natural endowment (availability of water, good soils and vegetation) of the three main agro-ecological zones of the country. Both the incidence and depth of poverty are found to be greater in the rural savannah than in any other parts of Ghana, but major pockets of poverty also exist in the forest zone, the coastal belt, and in large urban centers such as Accra. Gender is an important dimension of poverty, especially in northern Ghana, where sharp distinctions between the income-earning roles of men and women exist. Women bear a disproportionate share of the burden of being poor -- they are obliged to spend a great deal of time not only at working in family enterprises, but also nurturing and rearing children, and in other important household tasks, such as cooking and fetching water and -3- fuelwood. These factors have strong implications for poverty targeting interventions (PTIs), not only on the basis of geography, but also on gender, which have been taken into consideration in the design of this project. 8. Decentralization and Local Empowerment. Decentralization is the first step in the process of rural empowerment. In Ghana, decentralization has involved the devolution of political, fiscal, administrative, and development planning responsibilities to District Assemblies (DAs) (there are 110 districts in Ghana). Compared to many countries in sub-Saharan Africa, fiscal and administrative decentralization in Ghana is far advanced. The Ghanaian constitution requires that 5 percent of the total national revenue be allocated to the DAs for development purposes. Since 1993 when the law was enacted, the government has been able to meet this requirement on a regular basis. In 1996, revenue ceded by the central government to the 110 DAs amounted to Cedis 82.0 billion (US$43.2 million approximately) or an average of US$390,000 per DA. This is in addition to other revenues generated at the district level. However, decentralization, as an instrument for accelerated rural development, is constrained by the limited capacity of administrative units of the DAs for effective development planning. Many DAs also lack the capacity to support development programs because of inadequate skills in participatory planning, project implementation, monitoring and evaluation. The staff of the DAs lack adequate logistic support, equipment and transport. While the basic principles of decentralization are now well accepted in Ghana. DAs need to be strengthened and made operationally relevant if rural development is to be accelerated and sustained. 9. Project Objectives. The project would support the efforts of the Government of Ghana (GOG) to reduce poverty and increase the quality of life of the rural poor through increased transfer of technical and financial resources to develop basic, sustainable village-level infrastructure. The project would also support strengthening of beneficiary groups and institutions through training and other forms of technical assistance to enable them to sustain these investments. 10. Project Description. The project would finance civil works, goods and equipment and technical assistance for the development of village-level infrastructure for rural water, transport, including intermediate means of transport (IMTs), rural market facilities and postharvest treatment of crop and animal products, (particularly drying, storage and simple processing) to enhance product quality, shelflife, and value. In addition, the project would strengthen the capacity of local government and beneficiary groups to operate and maintain these investments. 11. Project Implementation. The overall project objective is to strengthen capacity at local levels (District Assembles, communities and NGOs) for sustainable rural development. As such, project emphasis will be on working with Districts in implementation of their rural development programs. No parallel institution would therefore be set up at the District level for purposes of implementation. Instead, at the District level, project implementation would be mainstreamed within the existing administrative structure of each participating District Assembly, with training and other technical assistance directly provided to strengthen such functions as procurement, financial management, internal controls, and reporting. While each District would be in charge of implementing its rural development program, there is a need to -4- effectively coordinate rural infrastructure development activities across potentially 110 District Assemblies, and as many communities and groups. This is necessary to ensure that a common strategy exists, to avoid duplication of efforts, and more importantly, to avoid stressing the weak capacities of the Districts. For the init process, and until DAs are properly strengthened, these activities are best carried out through an autonomous unit flexible enough to respond to the diverse needs of the many rural stakeholders. 12. Implementation Support to Districts. Coordination of implementation support to the Districts and communities on a day-to-day basis would be channeled through an autonomous Rural Infrastructure Coordinating Unit (RICU). By sourcing technical assistance in building capacity at the grassroots level, the RICU would facilitate the Districts' transition to strong, viable entities capable of organizing, planning and managing the implementation of rural development programs in a cost-effective manner and within transparent budgeting and financing arrangements The RICU would be composed of a national office in Accra and four zonal offices in Tamale, Kumasi, Cape Coast and Accra. As the Districts become administratively stronger, the role of the RICU would correspondingly reduce; it is therefore not envisaged as a permanent institutional set-up. 13. Financing of Subprojects. There would be two windows for financing subprojects: (i) the District Assembly Common Fund (DACF) for public goods (feeder roads, dugouts, etc.); and (ii) the District Rural Infrastructure Fund (DRIF) for private goods (agro-processing, small-scale irrigation, etc.). Under the decentralized administrative system currently in place in Ghana, each District Assembly has a DACF to which the central government cedes a portion of the national revenue earmarked for rural development purposes. The DACF would be used as a channel for financing rural development activities. The project would provide matching grants to District Assemblies to finance public goods subprojects that are part of the District Rural Development Plan. The level of counterpart funding that would be required for each category of subproject is detailed in the Implementation Manual. The Districts would use available DACF funds to leverage project funds. By promoting community participation and priority setting, the project would help the DACF to evolve into a more sustainable window for financing rural infrastructure at the District level . 14. Given their inherent private nature, subprojects for community groups and associations would be financed through the District Rural Infrastructure Fund (DRIF). Subproject applications would be sent to the DRIF Committee for vetting, and approved sub-projects forwarded to the manager of the DRIF for processing. The DRIF Committee would be composed of District Assembly and civil society representatives, such as NGOs, farmer organizations and community leaders. Beneficiaries would be required to repay the principal for all private subproject investments, with repayments going into the DACF to leverage additional public goods for the District. Beneficiary contributions for eligible subprojects are detailed in the Implementation Manual. During Negotiations, agreements were reached on the operating procedures and policies of the DRIF. Evidence acceptable to IDA that at least five (5) of the District Assemblies have satisfied the eligibility criteria for participating in the project would be a condition of credit effectiveness. -5- 15. Eligibility Criteria. The eligibility criteria for participation by District Assemblies, communities, and associations were agreed upon during negotiations and are detailed in the Implementation Manual. For District Assemblies these would include: (i) adequate staffing; (ii) a District Assembly Common Fund account; and (iii) District Development Plan, prepared in a participatory manner with the communities. Beneficiary groups and associations would be required to have formed an association whose membership is consistent with the needs and cultural outlook of the group (where such organizations already exist, their current functions could be expanded to include infrastructure facilities to be supported under the project). They would also be organized and empowered to take full responsibility for the proper operation of the facility, including adequate routine recurrent maintenance to sustain it. These groups will be assisted by NGOs to be put into a "savings mode", with accounts opened with local rural and commercial banks, where a portion of their profits would be lodged to meet their contributions to capital costs and recurrent maintenance. 16. Lessons from Previous Operations. Since 1989, government's strategy for agricultural development has been driven by its Medium-Term Agricultural Development Strategy (MTADS) which was developed with IDA assistance. Key lessons from the implementation of projects under the MTADS framework have been that: (i) the dearth of implementation capacity at the local levels is a major constraint to achieving accelerated growth; (ii) strong community participation in the planning, implementation and management of rural infrastructure is essential for sustainability; (iii) project design must take into account implementation support by NGOs, private sector firms, and technical services agencies; and (iv) the lack of poverty targeting skews benefits of rural infrastructure development away from the poor. The lessons from these projects have been taken into account in the design of this operation as follows: (i) the design of the rural infrastructure components includes provisions for beneficiary participation in the planning, implementation and management of village infrastructure; (ii) NGOs and other community-based organizations would be contracted to assist beneficiaries to enhance their management skills; and (iii) special steps would be taken during implementation to ensure that project interventions are targeted at the poorest communities and the most vulnerable groups. 17. Rationale for IDA Involvement. The recent Participatory Poverty Assessment (PPA) in Ghana estimates that one-fifth of Ghana's population of 16.5 million live below the poverty line. The main constraints to improving rural living standards have been identified as the poor state (or non-existence) of basic rural infrastructure (rural water supply, village post-harvest and rural transport infrastructure) on which the poor depend to improve their livelihood and which is needed to unleash a rigorous supply response from agriculture. Improving the quality of life of the rural population, therefore, requires significant investments in these types of basic rural infrastructure and this would require support of Ghana's partners in development, including IDA. The Village Infrastructure Project is fully consistent with the objectives of IDA's Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Ghana, discussed by the Executive Directors on May 14, 1996 (CAS Progress Report, IDA/R96-70/1). The project would be a primary vehicle for rural development and poverty reduction. It would assist rural beneficiaries to improve employment opportunities, have better access to basic services, reduce post-harvest losses, improve the nutritional value of their produce, and increase value-added through processing. It would increase access of the poor to rural water, both for home use and for agriculture intensification, -6- and help to reduce drudgery which rural people face through the lack of appropriate means of transport between farms and villages. A central feature of the project is the empowerment of rural beneficiaries, community-level institutions such as NGOs, and DAs and their staff to participate in the design and implementation of development activities in their area. All of these interventions would help to improve rural incomes and living standards. 18. IDA Portfolio Performance. Ghana's IDA portfolio is large and performing well. Annual Country Portfolio Performance Reviews (CPPRs) have been held regularly to continuously improve implementation of the portfolio. Of 36 active projects, four are categorized as problem projects, including one project considered by the Quality Assurance Group to be at risk. In addition, Operations Support recommends that the entire power portfolio (four projects) be rated unsatisfactory due to the financial unsustainability of the sector. There are no problem projects in the agriculture sector, which has a total of 8 active projects. Overall, disbursement lag has been reduced from 33 percent in FY95 to 10 percent in FY97. A Portfolio Action Plan has been developed, focusing on the management of these problem projects. Schedule D outlines the status of Bank Group operations in Ghana. 19. Agreed Actions. Agreements reached during Negotiations are: As Conditions for Board, the Borrower has established the Rural Infrastructure Coordinating Unit and its zonal offices acceptable to IDA; prepared the operating policies and procedures of the District Rural Infrastructure Fund clearly outlining the responsibilities and relationships between the District Assemblies and the find; prepared detailed terms of reference of the fund manager; and prepared detailed terms of reference of independent auditors for purposes of conducting semi-annual review and audits of implementation performance at the District-level. Conditions of Effectiveness: the establishment by the Borrower in a commercial bank acceptable to IDA a Project Account with an initial deposit of US$100,000 equivalent in local currency to cover counterpart fund expenditures; and evidence acceptable to IDA that at least five (5) District Assemblies have met eligibility criteria for participation in the project. Other Special Conditions: the appointment of independent firms of local auditors to provide semi-annual audits of District Assemblies. Financial management of sub-projects financed partially from the District Assembly Common Fund. The design of District Assembly institution strengthening activities to ensure complementarity with the initiatives of other donors. Project procurement, disbursement and financial auditing and reporting requirements. Terms of reference of contract staff to head the RICU and the zonal offices and the granting by government satisfactory level of autonomy to such offices for day-to-day implementation. The nature of beneficiary contribution and cost recovery where applicable. Project monitoring, performance assessment of project offices and assessment of project impact on beneficiaries. Preparation and organization of the project Mid-Term Review (MTR), and the Implementation Completion Report (ICR). 20. Project Environmental Impact. The project is classified as Category B for purposes of environmental impact and an environmental impact analysis (EIA) has been undertaken by the Borrower. The various project interventions will create only limited and localized environmental problems. For example, establishment and/or rehabilitation of dugouts, village tracks and trails, and threshing and drying floors could, if improperly done, induce localized environmental problems such as gully erosion, water contamination and groundwater depletion. The sinking of -7- additional wells in rural villages may increase the abstraction rate from the aquifers in the immediate vicinity of the wells. The EIA has identified these potential risks and designed mitigation measures that have been incorporated in the design of the operation and in the implementation of subprojects and are part of the Implementation Manual. 21. Impact on Women. The project is expected to have substantial positive benefits for women. First, given the dominance of agro-processing activities by women groups, they would be the primary beneficiaries of this component: reduction in post-harvest losses coupled with value-added through processing would increase incomes of rural women. Second, women and girls are the major participants in the daily efforts to secure clean drinking water for their households. This often involves trips of up to 3 to 4 kms to fetch water. Development of water resources close to village communities would result in time-saving and reduction in drudgery among rural women and more school opportunities for girls. The time saved would provide greater flexibility to rural women in taking better care of their children or engaging in productive economic activities. Third, women are the main headloaders of produce from the farm to the village. The development of village tracks and trails and the introduction of Intermediate Means of Transport (IMTs) would reduce the drudgery for women and girls and reduce on-farm losses as products would be evacuated more efficiently from farms to the village storage and markets. 22. Community Participation and Ownership. The sustainable development of basic village-level infrastructure, which the poor can manage within the limits of their technical and financial resources, requires community participation and ownership. The project was prepared through a participatory process that visited nearly 100 village communities and a Task Force that comprised stakeholders from government, beneficiary communities and associations, NGOs and the private sector. Therefore, significant foundation has been laid for beneficiaries to play an important role in project implementation, and particularly in ensuring basic O&M, with technical assistance from DAs or central government institutions such as the Department of Feeder Roads. Some features of community ownership structures under the project include: (i) community involvement, through a local participating process, in the development of Districts' rural development plans; (ii) the demand-driven nature of most productive investment sub-projects and the contribution of beneficiaries to the cost of these investments; (iii) the direct responsibility of beneficiaries in the operations, maintenance and replacement of the assets/facilities created under the project; and (iv) capacity building within district Assemblies to better plan, finance and manage rural infrastructure. 23. Project Benefits. The project would benefit at least 500,000 rural households, many of whom are smallholder producers. Key project benefits would be: (i) increased productivity and incomes; (ii) increased rural employment; (iii) human resource development; and (iv) institutional development. The project interventions would lead to significant poverty alleviation among the poorest segments of the rural population. The introduction of labor-saving technologies would free up time previously devoted to transport, food-processing and water collection. In parallel, improved access to potable water would result in a healthier and more productive work force. This would lead to increased time allocations to, and higher productivity in, agricultural and other income-generating activities. Improvements in post-harvest facilities would enable rural communities to reduce crop losses and undertake higher value-added -8- activities. Improvement of rural transport capacity would facilitate the movement of produce from farms to villages, and of surpluses and processed goods from villages to markets. Reduced transport costs and increased load-carrying capacity would both have a positive impact on rural incomes. The project would lead to increased employment of unskilled and skilled labor in the rural sectors through the hiring of operators of processing enterprises and of unskilled labor to provide services for bagging, packing and storing. The rehabilitation of roads and the construction of village trails and tracks through labor-based methods would also create employment opportunities in rural communities. Finally, the project would lead to capacity- building in the rural sector through training of NGOs and local government in basic technical and managerial aspects of rural development. District assembly administration would also be strengthened, leading to a greater efficiency in local government services to the rural population. 24. Economic Rate of Return. Based on an opportunity cost of capital of 12 percent, economic rate of return (ERR) for the individual project components are as follows: postharvest, 32 percent; rural water infrastructure, 23.1 percent; and rural transport infrastructure, 26.6 percent. Overall project economic rate of return (ERR) is 26 percent with a net present value (NPV) of Cedis 218,683 million. 25. Project Risks. Main project risks are: (i) slower-than-anticipated development of capacity; (ii) lack of sufficient coordination among various development partners at national and local levels; and (iii) slow adoption of new technologies by project beneficiaries. The net effect of slow development of capacity and insufficient coordination would be implementation delays for some project components. Measures have been taken in project design to address these risks, including the upfront establishment of the project coordination mechanisms; clearer definition of responsibilities and implementation arrangements; a front-loaded training program for staff of local governments and NGOs; close monitoring of NGO assistance to beneficiaries; regular quality supervision and management audits of all participatory District Assemblies and beneficiary groups; and choice of simpler and appropriate technologies. 26. Recommendation. I am satisfied that the proposed Interim Fund Credit would comply with Resolution No. 184, adopted by the Board of Governors of the Association on June 26, 1996, establishing the Interim Trust Fund and I recommend that the President approves it. Gautam S. Kaji Managing Director Washington, D.C. April 28, 1997 Attachments -9- Schedule A Page 1 of 2 REPUBLIC OF GHANA VILLAGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Summary of Project Cost and Financing Local Forefin Total percent % of Base Project Components (US$ million) Foreign Costs Exchange A. Rural Water Infrastructure 10.8 3.0 13.8 22 28 B. Rural Transport Infrastructure 9.5 3.6 13.1 28 26 C. Post-Harvest Infrastructure 3.8 1.0 4.8 21 10 D. Institutional Strengthening 5.5 4.1 9.6 42 19 E. Rural Infrastructure 6.4 0.7 7.1 10 14 Coordinating Unit 0.7 0.5 1.2 40 2 F. Refinancing PPF Total Base Costs 36.7 12.9 49.6 26 100 Contingencies: Physical Contingencies 3.4 1.2 4.6 27 9 Price Contingencies 4.4 1.4 5.8 23 12 Total Project Costs 44.5 15.5 60.0 26 121 -10- Schedule A Page 2 of 2 REPUBLIC OF GHANA VILLAGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Financing Plan (US $ million) District Benefi- IDA IFAD KfW GOG Assemblies. ciaries Total Rural Water Infrastructure 7.5 2.0. 2.4 2.9 1.2 1.0 17.0 Rural Transport Infrastructure 6.6 2.3 3.3 2.4 0.9 0.7 16.2 Post Harvest Infrastructure 2.0 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.3 1.2 5.9 Institutional Strengthening 7.5 1.8 0.4 1.0 0.6 -- 11.3 Rural Infrastructure 5.2 3.0 -- 0.2 -- -- 8.4 Coordinating Unit Refinancing PPF 1.2 -- -- -- -- -- 1.2 Total 30.0 10.0 7.0 7.1 3.0 2.9 60.0 Local Foreign Total (in US$ million) Financier IDA 21.2 8.8 30.0 KfW 4.1 2.9 7.0 IFAD 6.2 3.8 10.0 Government of Ghana (GOG) 7.1 -- 7.1 District Assemblies (DAs) 3.0 -- 3.0 Communities/Groups 2.9 -- 2.9 Total 44.5 15.5 60.0 -11- Schedule B Page 1 of 2 REPUBLIC OF GHANA VILLAGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Logical Framework/M&E Indicators MOV Risks/Assumptions/ Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators Comments Development Objectives: To improve the quality of life -Average income of rural beneficiaries increased by QRs Project is evaluated as viable and donor of the rural poor through at least 25% during project life; funding is available increased transfer of financial - No. of groups with agro-processing increased by ICR Beneficiaries trained in O&M and technical resources for the 30% by 2002 improvement of basic - Additional 750 km of feeder roads in maintenance infrastructure network by 2002 Rural Water Component: Outputs Integrated development of - Yields increased by 20% for vegetables through MTR Access to extension service required water resources for agriculture supplemental irrigation by 2001 and household users. - Dry season crop intensification of at least two FS Assumes no conflict in access rights harvests for vegetable each year Assumes proper management of water - Access to safe water assured resources Outcomes - Incremental crop production of at least 20% per ARs Crop diversification and use of improved annum varieties follows current projections - Water-borne disease reduced, 10% annually by ARs type of illness, by gender and by age - Supplemental income increased by 25% for farmers Impact (indicators) - Food security enhanced due to greater survival of BD Access to markets crucial for sales of livestock (insurance policy in rural areas), more FS surpluses reliable crop production and dry season sources of Storability of processed product income. Better quality of life due to higher incomes from sales of additional surpluses and safe water Effective Community mobilization required Rural Transport: Outputs, Finance selective rehabilitation - Level of adoption of IMTs SPN VTT and IMT must be integrated to of existing feeder roads, - Kms of road rehabilitated ARs optimize impact construction and upgrading of - No. of beneficiaries trained village arterial tracks and - No. of communities involved trails, and intermediate means of transport (IMTs). Outcomes - Greater access by vehicles to at least 50% of all participating communities by 2001 SPN Inadequate capacity of private roads - Delay in evacuating surpluses reduced by 25% ARs contractors may limit achieving targets annually - Reduced headloading by women and children Inability to organize beneficiary villages to undertake VTT work Impact - Employment in villages through labor-based work MTR Adequacy of IEC critical increased by 50% ICR - Higher production of surpluses and higher incomes for 50% of participants by 2001 - Rural incomes increased by 250% by end of project life Note: QR = quarterly reports; AR = Annual Report; ICR = Implementation Completion Report; MTR = Mid-term review; SPN = Supervision; FS = Field Studies. -12- Schedule B Page 2 of 2 REPUBLIC OF GHANA VILLAGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Logical Framework/M&E Indicators Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators MOV Risks/Assumptions/Comments Postharvest Infrastructure: Outputs Finance post harvest - Outputs of quality processed food and goods SPN Capacity building aiming beneficiaries management facilities for small increased by 25% by 2001 ARs critical linkages between individual farmers to reduce post harvest - Incomes to beneficiaries increased by at least 25% investment to enhance synergy losses to increase shelf life and by 2001 storability, thereby enhancing - Quantity of stored products increased by 50% at Construction would involve contribution market flexibility, and the community level by end of Project of labor and basic material by increasing product diversity beneficiaries and value. Outcomes - At least 50% of all facilities still operating after SPN six years ARs - Healthier (more hygienic) food available locally and at wider level. Shelf-life increased by 50% of current levels by 2000 - Prices of processed food stable due to increases in supplies Impact - At least 50% of communities with enhanced food security by 2001 (e.g. elimination or reduction of ICRs lean season stress; MTRs - Better quality of life (e.g. improved indicators for health, including attendance at health facilities and nutrition, higher school enrollments, esp. of girls) - Capacity enhanced and empowerment fostered (village undertakes new projects with own funds, without relying in outside assistance) Long term sustainability assured (facilities are properly run and maintained independent of project) Institutional Strengthenin: Outputs Develop a broad program to - At least 220 district assembly members trained by SPN Staff availability within DAs is crucial to build capacity within District Mid-term Review ARs achieving desired program impact Assemblies, Community - At least 110 planning officers trained by 2001 groups and associations, as - At least half of all traditional leaders participating Lack of capable NGOs may delay well as NGOs. in the project trained by 2001 implementation Outcomes - Backlog in DA processing of rush project reduces by half by 2000 SPN Full complement of key DA staff needs to - Assembly members and traditional leadership ARs be in place more aware of gender and poverty issues - NGO staff assure support role effectively Capacity building to be parallel financed with E.U. Human Resources Im_3gag Development Program (HRDP) - DAs capable of independent setting of development priorities by 2001 ICRs - At least 75% of DAs with improve district MTRs administration by 2001 - At least 50% of DAs with improved financial management by 2001 - At least 50% of participating villages capable of undertaking new projects with own funds, without relying on outside assistance by 2001 - At least 50% of all facilities are properly run and I by beneficiaries by 2001 1 1 Note: QR = quarterly reports; AR = Annual Report; ICR =Implementation Completion Report; MTR = Mid-term review; SPN = Supervision. -13- Schedule C Page 1 of 2 REPUBLIC OF GHANA VILLAGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Summary of Procurement Arrangements (US$ million) Procurement Method Local Consulting Project Item ICB NCB Shopping Services Total Civil Works -- 20.7 13.8 -- 34.5 -- (8.3) (5.5) -- (13.8) Goods and Equipment 1.2 0.9 0.9 -- 2.9 (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) -- (1.2) Vehicles 4.1 -- 0.5 -- 4.6 (3.0) -- (0.3) -- (3.3) Consulting Services -- -- -- 5.0 5.0 -- -- -- (3.6) (3.6) Training -- 0.7 1.1 -- 1.8 -- (0.4) (0.5) -- (0.9) Studies -- 0.7 1.0 -- 1.7 -- (0.4) (0.5) -- (0.9) RICU/Operating Costs -- 3.3 5.0 -- 8.3 -- (2.1) (3.1) -- (5.2) Refinancing PPF -- -- 0.5 0.7 1.2 -- -- (0.5) (0.7) (1.2) Total 5.3 26.3 22.7 5.7 60.0 (3.4) (11.4) (10.9) (4.3) (30.0) Figures in parentheses are amounts financed by the IDA credit. Totals include contingencies. -14- Schedule C Page 2 of 2 REPUBLIC OF GHANA VILLAGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Summary of Disbursement Schedule Amount Allocated Amount Financed by (USS million) Expenditure Category (US$ million) IDA KfW IFAD Total by Donors % Civil works 34.5 13.8 6.3 4.3 24.4 71 Goods and Equipment 2.9 1.2 0.4 0.4 2.0 69 Vehicles 4.6 3.3 0.1 1.3 4.7 98 Consulting Services 5.0 3.6 0.2 0.3 4.1 82 Training 1.8 0.9 -- 0.5 1.4 78 Studies 1.7 0.9 -- 0.3 1.2 71 RICU Operating Costs 8.3 5.1 -- 3.0 8.1 97 Refinancing PPF 1.2 1.2 -- -- 1.2 100 Total Project 60.0 30.0 7.0 10.0 45.9 77 Note: Donors finance 100% of foreign exchange costs. Estimated IDA Disbursements FY98 FY99 FYOO FY01 FY02 FY03 Annual 0.5 2.0 3.5 6.5 8.5 9.0 Cumulative 0.5 2.5 6.0 12.5 21.0 30.0 -15- Schedule D Page 1 of 1 REPUBLIC OF GHANA VILLAGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Timetable of Key Events a) Time taken to prepare the project 12 months b) Preparing Agency Communities, District Assemblies and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development c) First IDA Mission August 30, 1995 d) Appraisal Mission July 1996 e) Negotiations November 20-25, 1996 f) Planned Date of Effectiveness August 30, 1997 g) Relevant ICR ASRP, Rural finance, Oil Palm II The project was pre-appraised from April 8 to 26, 1996 by a team that included Messrs./Mmes. R. Poison (Task Team Leader), R. Roche (Sanitation Engineer), A. Drabo (NGO Specialist), L. Campbell (Rural Engineer, consultant), S. Dawson (Agricultural Economist, consultant), D. Spencer (Institutions Specialist, consultant) and L. Gyekye (Rural Sociologist, consultant). The IFAD team comprised Messrs./Mmes. M. Tounessi (Project Controller) and B. Trottier (Rural Sociologist, consultant). KfW was represented by Mr. N. Gasten (Economist). The appraisal mission took place from July 17 to August 17, 1996. Mmes. A. Goffin, W. Wiltshire, and A. Lodi, Task Assistants, AFTA3, provided the technical support in preparing the final document. Mr. J.P. Chausse is the Technical Manager, Agriculture Technical III, and Mr. S. Michailof, is the Director, Country Department 10, Africa Region. -16- GHANA SCHEDULE E Statement of Loans/Credits Page 1 of 2 Schedule D (MOP) as of March 31, 1997 (in Millions of US Dollars) Amount in USS million (less cancellations) LoanlCredlt Fiscal Year Purpose IDA Undisburse Closing Date Credits 66 Credit(s) closed 1,651.04 19760 1989 FORESTRY 39.4 1.7 6/30/97 19960 1989 SME/FINANCE 30 0.59 6/30197 20390 1989 WATER SECTOR REHAB 25 7.02 6130/97 21090 1990 VRA/SIXTH POWER 20 15.08 6/30/98 21570 1990 URBAN II(SEC CITIES) 70 18.58 6/30/98 21800 1991 AGRIC DIVERS (TREE C 16.5 10.4 12/31/98 21920 1991 TRANSP REHAB II 96 8.11 12/31/97 21930 1991 HEALTH & POP 11 27 3.84 12/31197 22240 1991 ECON MGT SUPPORT 15 1,99 12/31197 22470 1991 AGRIC RESEARCH 22 11.92 3131/99 23190 1992 FEEDER ROADS 55 16.54 6/30/96 23490 1992 ADULT LITERACY 17.4 3.09 12/31/97 23460 1992 AGRIC EXTENSION 30.4 14.2 1111/97 24260 1993 ENVIRONMENT 18.1 7.18 12/31/97 24280 1993 TERTIARY EDUCATION 45 8.5 12/31/97 24410 1993 LIVESTOCK 22.45 6.77 12/31/98 24670 1993 NATL ELECTRIFICATIO 80 54.57 9/30/98 24980 1993 URBAN TRANSPORT 76.2 54.59 12/31/98 25020 1993 ENTERPRISE DEVT 41 30.64 3/31/98 25080 1993 PRIMARY SCHOOL DEVE 65.1 23.26 12/31/98 25550 1994 AGRIC SECTOR INVEST 21.5 15.23 11/30/99 25680 1994 LOCAL GOVT DEV. 38.5 32.44 12/31/01 26040 1994 COMMUNITY WATER & S 21.96 16,82 12/31199 26650 1995 PRIV SECTOR DEV 13 11.19 6/30100 26820 1995 THERMAL (P-VII) 175.6 132.89 6/30/01 26950 1995 EDUC/VOC.TRNG 9.6 7.32 6/30/01 27130 1995 FISHERIES 9 7.98 6/30/01 27180 1995 PRIV.SCTR ADJ 70 23.1 10/31/97 27430 1995 MINING SEC.DEV & ENV 12.3 10.58 12/31/00 27920 1998 NON-BANK FIN INS AST 23.9 21.94 6/30/00 28360 1996 URBAN ENV.SANITATION 71 62.98 12/31/02 28580 1996 HWY SECT INV.PROG 100 92.39 6/30/01 28770 1996 PUBLIC ENTERPRISE/PR 26.45 24.4 12/31/01 28850 1996 BASIC EDUCATION 50 46.74 6/30/01 29250 1997 PUB. FIN. MGMT. TAP 20.9 19.92 12/31/01 27182 1997 PRIV.SCTR ADJ 3.5 3.32 12/12/97 Total Numbe 36 1,478.76 827.81 Memo Item: Loans 10 Loan(s)closed 189.72 0 Total Numbe 0 0 0 Total** 189.72 3,129.80 of which repaid 160.28 47.16 Total held by Bank & IDA 29.44 3,082.64 Amount sold of which repaid Total Undisbursed 82781 -17- Schedule E Page 2 of 2 GHANA Statement of IFC's Committed and Disbursed Portfolio As of 02/28/97 In Millions US Dollars Committed Disbursed FY Approval Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic Loan Equity Quasi Partic 1988 Bogosu 0.00 0.81 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1989 Bogosu 0.00 0.00 4.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1989 Wahome Steel 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1989 Con. Acceptances 0.00 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1990 AEF Alugan 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 1990 Iduapriem 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .991 AEF Appiah Menka 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 1991 AEF Packrite 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 1991 Bogosu 0.00 0.00 1.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1991 Cont. Acceptances 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 1991 Hotel Inv. Ghana 2.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 1991 Iduapriem 2.52 0.00 4.85 5.55 2.52 0.00 4.85 5.55 1991 SDC 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 1991 GHANAL 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 1992 AEF BMK 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1992 AEF CFL 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 1992 AEF Polytex 0.1p 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 1992 Ghana Leasing 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1992 Hotel Inv. Ghana 0.0u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1992 Wahome Steel 037 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 1993 AEF Afariwaa 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 1993 AEF GHUMCO 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 1993 Bogosu 8.02 0.00 0.00 16.63 8.02 0.00 0.00 16.63 1993 Cont. Acceptances 1.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 1993 ECOBANK 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 1993 Ghana Leasing 3.64 0.15 0.00 0.00 3.64 0.15 0.00 0.00 1994 AEF Palm Royale 0.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 1994 AEF Shangri-La 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 1994 Ghacem 2.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 1995 AEF Dupaul 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1996 ECOBANK 5.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1996 Iduapriem 4.50 0.00 2.56 0.00 4.50 0.00 2.56 0.00 Portfolio Totals 37.82 6.55 13.68 24.18 32.82 6.10 13.68 22.18 Pending Commitments 1995 *AEF .40 0.00 0.00 0.00 ANTELOPE CO. 1995 * AEF GHANA PACK .36 0.00 0.00 0.00 1996 * AEF PAKO BAY .20 0.05 0.00 0.00 1996 *AEF TACKS .37 0.00 0.00 0.00 FARMS 1994 * AEF -ALUGAN II .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 Schedule F Page 1 of 2 Ghana at a glance Sub- POVERTY and SOCIAL Saharan Low- Ghana Africa income Development diamond* Population mid-1995 (millions) 17.1 589 3,188 GNP per capita 1995 (US$) 390 490 460 Life expectancy GNP 1995 (billions US$) 6.7 289 1,466 Average annual growth, 1990-95 Population (%) 2.8 2.8 1.8 GNP Gross Labor force (%) 3.0 2.8 1.9 per primary Most recent estimate (latest year available since 1989) capita enrollment Poverty: headcount index (% of population) 31 Urban population (% of total population) 36 31 29 Life expectancy at birth (years) 59 52 63 Infant mortality (per 1,000 live births) 73 92 58 Access to safe water Child malnutrition (% of children under 5) 27 .. 38 Access to safe water (% of population) 57 47 75 Illiteracy (% of population age 15+) 40 43 34 Ghana Gross primary enrollment (% of school-age population) 76 71 105 Male 83 77 112 Low-income group Female 70 64 98 KEY ECONOMIC RATIOS and LONG-TERM TRENDS 1975 1985 1994 1995 Economic ratios* GDP (billions US$) 2.8 6.3 5.4 6.3 Gross domestic investment/GDP 12.7 9.6 15.9 18.6 Openness of economy Exports of goods and non-factor services/GDP 19.4 10.7 25.5 25.0 Gross domestic savings/GDP 13.7 6.6 4.5 10.1 Gross national savings/GDP 12.9 5.3 7.5 12.2 Current account balance/GDP -0.1 -4.2 -8.4 -6.4 Interest payments/GDP 0.7 0.5 1.5 1.6 Savings Investment Total debt/GDP 25.6 35.6 99.4 E9.1 Total debt servicelexports 6.4 23.6 24.4 23.3 1 Present value of debt/GDP .. . 61.7 Present value of deot/exports 238.2 .. Indebtedness 1975-84 1985-95 1994 1995 1996-04 (average annual growth) - Ghana GDP -0.3 4.4 3.8 4.5 5.9 Low-4ncome group GNP per capita -2.6 1.1 0.5 1.4 2.8 Exports of goods and nfs -10.0 8.0 0.4 3.4 5.9 STRUCTURE of the ECONOMY 1975 1985 1994 1995 (% of GDP) Growth rates of output and investment (%) Agnculture 47.7 44.9 46.4 46.3 30 Industry 21.0 16.7 16.0 15.8 15 Manufacturing 13.9 11.5 8.5 8.3 o Services 31.3 38.4 37.7 37.9 o 9 9 92 93 94 as .15 Private consumption 73.3 84.0 83.8 77.5 -3o Generalgovemmentconsumption 13.0 9.4 11.6 12.4 - GDI ---GOP Imports of goods and non-factor services 18.4 13.6 36.9 33.5 1975-84 1985-95 1994 1995 (average annual growth) Growth rates of exports and Imports (%) Agriculture 1 2 1.9 2.6 4.2 20 Industry -8.2 5.4 4.3 3.3 Manufacturing -93 3.6 4.0 1.8 10 Services 2.8 7.5 4.5 5.0 Private consumption -0.3 3.7 4.2 1.0 0 - General government consumption 3.2 6.6 -6.4 11.6 90 91 92 93 9s Gross domestic investment -7.3 5.6 -2.6 27.8 -lo - Imports of goods and non-factor services -10.3 6.5 -8.2 1.3 - Exports -0- Imports Gross national product -0.3 4.2 3.5 4.4 Note: 1995 data are preliminary estimates. The diamonds show four key indicators in the country (in bold) compared with its income-group average. If data are missing, the diamond will be incomplete. Schedule F Page 2 of 2 Ghana PRICES and GOVERNMENT FINANCE 1975 1985 1994 1995 Domestic prices Inflation (%) (% change) 60 Consumer prices 298 10.4 24.9 59 40 Implicit GDP deflator 30.8 20.6 266 39,8 20 Government finance (% of GDP) 0. 9o 91 92 93 94 95 Current revenue 11.3 23.7 22.3 Current budget balance 0.1 4.8 4.9 - GDP def ---CP Overall surplus/deficit -4.1 -6.8 -8.3 TRADE 1975 1985 1994 1995 (millions USS) Export and import levels (mill. US$S Total exports (fob) .. 633 1,236 1,431 2,000 Cocoa . 412 320 390 Gold . 28 549 647 1500 Manufactures . . Total imports (cif) .. 729 1,724 1,842 1,ooo Food 40 45 56 50 i Fuel and energy 199 175 197 Capital goods 187 348 398 o Export price index (1987=100) .. 93 90 100 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 Import price index (1987=100) .. 103 121 127 Exports a Imports Terms of trade (1987=100) .. 90 74 79 BALANCE of PAYMENTS 1975 1985 1994 1995 (millions US$) Current account balance to GDP ratio (%) Exports of goods and non-factor services 891 672 1,384 1,582 0 Imports of goods and non-factor services 882 857 2,000 2,118 89 90 9? 92 93 94 9s Resource balance 9 -185 -616 -536 Netfactorincome -36 -111 -111 -130 5 Net current transfers 24 33 271 263 Current account balance, -1o before official transfers -3 -263 -456 -402 Financing items (net) 0 148 620 686 Changes in net reserves 3 116 -163 -284 15 Memo: Reserves including gold (mill. US$) 147 552 593 780 Conversion rate (local/US$) 1.9 54.4 956.7 1,199.8 EXTERNAL DEBT and RESOURCE FLOWS 1975 1985 1994 1995 (millions US$) Composition of total debt, 1995 (mill. US$) Total debt outstanding and disbursed 721 2,243 5,389 5,629 IBRD 40 118 70 59 G A IDA 44 259 2,094 2,375 627 59 F 62 Total debt service 57 159 343 382 349 IBRD 5 18 20 21 IDA 1 3 21 25 8 Composition of net resource flows 2375 Official grants 8 75 218 235 E Official creditors 13 93 230 259 1168 Private creditors -17 35 48 -38 Foreign direct investment 71 6 233 230 D Portfolio equity 0 0 557 102 438 C 613 World Bank program Commitments 89 191 88 299 I A - IBRD E - Bilateral Disbursements 10 70 178 242 IB-IDA 0 - Other multilateral F - Pnvate Principal repayments 2 10 19 23 C - IMF G - Short-term Netflows 8 60 159 219 i Interest payments 3 11 20 23 Net transfers 5 49 139 196 International Economics Department 8/20/96 电 �д � � " IBRD 28274 "BURKINA FASO Tumu Navrongoo B VILLAGE * \INFRASTRUCTURE LnBOLGATANGA PROJECT SpOGambaga PROJECT L. COORDINATING Nodowli Waiewale ZONES -E PROJEC1 ZONES WA - RY ROArS Gh- 0 DISTRITC CAPITALS REGION CAPITALS Sobobo NATIONAL CAPITAL Sal DISTRICT BOJNDARIES REGION BOUNDARIES INTERNATIONAL TolonO0 Yend BOUNDARIES , MALE K, 0 Zorbzngo Bole Bimbilla CÔT E TOGO Salogo D'IVOIlR E Nkwato Kintampoo Kwame Donso Karachi 0 0 WenchiO Atebubu Drobo, VO-LTA Techiman Kadjebi Berekum Ejure --ýJosian Dormaa- ST N Ahenkro ochem Mmpong Kwae 0 Dansco Keny si Tepa Offinso Ago ffiduase O Mankranso OMamponteng Gos su Konogo Nkowie UMASI dumase Mpraesa HO Kuntemise 0 Etibiani Junsa IA O0ewa Begora manso Bka Juobeso New 0Obuasi Abiremrn Odumask Atimpeku kats, WKad Kbi ® Kro Adidoma New Sunum KOFORIDUA 50 90"Y° I Sogakppe e Dunkwa- Edubiase 0 Akropong a on Offin Akim Oda O sawam a owa Keta Asomonkese ' . O Enchi Asankrangwo OposA Ada wifu Proso AsikI ma Sw.eru Tea ACCRA Aburo Ajumako ACCRA Dunwa O 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 . moWinneba MILES Daboase o • Saltpond This map was prepared by the Map Unit of the World Bank. AssnE e CAPE COAST The boundaries, colors, denominations and ony other inforrnotion 5 -C lfAsn Efmine CAECATshown on this map do not imply, on the port of The World Bank 5, EKNDI Group, any judgment on the legol status of any territory or any Axm0 aa TAKOAD) endorsement or occeptonce of such boundories. AximO Agaa AKOAD GULF OF GUINEA Nkwanta SEPTEMBER 1996 iBRD 2B275 .j 5〔PTEMB드R 1 996 IMAGING Reporl No.: P 7033 GH Type: MOMD