RDMU - Swaziland

The European Union’s Programme for Swaziland 

Service Contract No 2007 / 147-446 

Restructuring and Diversification 

Management Unit (RDMU) 

to coordinate the implementation of 

the National Adaptation Strategy to 

the EU Sugar Reform, Swaziland 

Third Progress Report – December 2009 

for the period February - July 2009

Your contact persons 

with GFA Consulting Group GmbH are 

Susanne Pecher 

Anke Schnoor 

Restructuring and Diversification Management Unit (RDMU) 

to coordinate the implementation of the National Adaptation 

Strategy to the EU Sugar Reform, Swaziland 

Third Progress Report - December 2009 

covering the period of February – July 2009 

Address 

GFA Consulting Group GmbH 

Eulenkrugstraße 82 

D-22359 Hamburg 

Germany 

Phone +49 (40) 6 03 06 – 111 

Fax +49 (40) 6 03 06 - 119 

Email anka.greiner@gfa-group.de

DISCLAIMER 

The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of the RDMU 

and can in no way be taken to reflect the view of the European Union.

RDMU Progress Report No. 3 

Table of Contents 

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

2 RESULT 1: EC MIP 2007- 2010 IS COMMITTED 

.1 Summary of progress achieved during reporting period 

.1.1 R 1 A 1: Identify projects for SO1 – SO4 of MIP 

.1.2 R 1A 2: Recruit and mobilize short-term experts 

.1.3 R 1A 3: Guide and advise STE Missions and involve stakeholders 

.1.4 R 1A 4: Work with stakeholders to develop and agree on interventions 

.2 Problems encountered and possible solutions 

.3 Recommendations and activities for the coming reporting period 

.4 Major Issues requiring urgent attention 

3 RESULT 2: EC MIP 2007 – 2010 IS IMPLEMENTED 


.1.1 R 2 A 1: Prepare Tender Documents according to EC procedures 

.1.2 R 2 A 2: Assist to launch, evaluate and prepare contracts 

.1.3 R 2 A 3: Assist EC and MEPD to monitor, supervise contractors and project 

progress 

.1.4 R 2 A 4: Recruit short-term experts 

.1.5 R 2 A 5: Assess the progress reports by contractors and assist EC / MEPD 

in verifying invoices 


.2.1 SO 1 – Support to Smallholder Sugarcane Growers 


.4 Major issues requiring urgent attention 

4 RESULT 3: OTHER NAS ACTIVITIES FINANCED AND IMPLEMENTED 





5 RESULT 4: STAKEHOLDER LIAISON ESTABLISHED AND IN 

OPERATION 


.1.1 R 4A 1: Organise weekly planning meetings with MEPD 

.1.2 R 4A 2: Develop visibility and communication strategy and disseminate 

brochures 

.1.3 R 4A 3: Organise press conferences, radio and TV spots on NAS and MIP 

.1.4 R 4A 4: Organise NAS SC and NAS WG 

.1.5 R 4A 5: Organise site visits with the major stakeholders / NAS WG 

.1.6 R 4 A 6: Support and perform capacity building of stakeholders 

1 

3 

3 

3 

7 

17 

17 

17 

18 

18 

19 

19 

19 

20 

22 

23 

24 

24 

24 

26 

26 

29 

29 

30 

30 

31 

32 

32 

32 

32 

33 

34 

34 

35 

i




6 OTHER AREAS OF INTERVENTION 





7 BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FOR MIP AND DISBURSEMENT 

8 PROGRESS REPORT AND FUTURE WORK PROGRAMME BY RESULT 

9 CURRENT STATUS OF THE (RDMU) PROJECT ON PERSON DAYS 

USED 

.1 Overview of inputs of experts 

36 

36 

36 

37 

37 

37 

37 

38 

39 

40 

50 

50 

List of Annexes 

Annex 1: RDMU Logframe 

Annex 2: Monitoring list of short-term experts approved up until 31/07/2009 

Annex 3: Short-term expert monitoring and reporting list 

Annex 4: Implementation Schedule of Aurecon (Infrastructures South) 

Annex 5: Minutes of meeting 27 April Siphofaneni 

Annex 6: RDMU remarks related to AAP 2007 implementation 

Annex 7: Various brochures developed by the RDMU 

Annex 8: Various flyers developed by the RDMU 

Annex 9: Summary Report of the SSA Conference July 2009 

Annex 10: Monitoring Matrix of NAS Activities 

Annex 11: RDMU Logframe with results accomplished up until 31 July 2009 

List of Tables 

1: Cost estimates of the irrigation remedial actions required for 47 farmer 

associations in Emalangeni 

2: Potential Shareholders for the Special Project Vehicle 

3: Current status of irrigation designs for EC Round 2 (31 July 2009) 

4: Time Table in General Instructions to Tenders 

5: Commitments and disbursements (amounts in €) 

8 

13 

20 

20 

27 

ii

List of Photos 

1: MP Honorable G. Gamedze briefing the Tinkundla administration on 

infrastructures 

2: RDMU at Swazi Expo 2009 

3: Financing Agreement signing ceremony 

4: Visit of Akwandze Finance 

22 

33 

34 

35 

iii

ACRONYMS 

€ Euro 

AAP 

Annual Action Programme 

ACP 

African Caribbean Pacific 

ADEMU 

Agricultural Development and Environmental Management Unit 

AF 

Action Fiche 

AfDB 

African Development Bank 

AIMS 

Aid Information Management System 

AMSP 

Accompanying Measures for Sugar Protocol Countries 

BP 

Business Plan 

C 3 

CAP 

CBA 

CDM 

CDM EB 

CER 

CHP 

CMS 

CSP 

DFIs 

DNA 

DOE 

E 

EB 

EBA 

EC 

Ecofin 

ECS 

EIA 

EIB 

El 

EU 

FA 

FD&S 

FinAg 

FIRR 

Creation of Competence of Competition 

Common Agricultural Policy 

Cost-Benefit Analysis 

Clean Development Mechanism 

CDM Executive Board 

Certified Emission Reduction 

Combined Heat and Power 

Content Management System 

Country Strategy Paper 

Development Financing Institutions 

Designated National Authority 

Designated Operational Entity 

Emalangeni (currency of Swaziland) 

Executive Board 

Everything But Arms 

European Commission 

Economic and financial analysis 

Environment Centre of Swaziland 

Environmental Impact Assessment 

European Investment Bank 

Electricity 

European Union 

Farmer Association 

Final Design and Supervision 

Financing Agreement 

Financial Internal Rate of Return 

iv

GDP 

GHG 

GoS 

GWh 

IM 

IT 

KDDP 

LULUCF 

LUSIP 

M&E 

MEPD 

MIDC 

MIP 

MOD 

MoU 

MW 

NAO 

NAS 

NDS 

NGO 

NMC 

NPV 

OBA 

ODA 

PA 

PDD 

PIF 

PIN 

PMU 

PR 

PRA 

PRSAP 

PRSP 

PS 

QSG 

RDMU 

Gross Domestic Product 

Greenhouse Gases 

Government of Swaziland 

Giga Watt hours 

Impact Mitigation 

Information Technology 

Komati Downstream Development Project 

Land-Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry 

Lower Usuthu Smallholder Irrigation Project 

Monitoring and Evaluation 

Ministry of Economic Planning and Development 

Malkerns Irrigation and Development Company 

Multi-Annual Indicative Programme 

Mill Outgrower Department 

Memorandum of Understanding 

Mega Watt 

National Authorising officer 

National Adaptation Strategy 

National Development Strategy 

Non Government Organisation 

National Maize Corporation 

Net Present Value 

Output-based Aid 

Official Development Aid 

Procurement Agent 

Project Development Document 

Project Identification Fiche 

Project Identification Note 

Project Management Unit 

Promotion 

Participatory Rural Appraisal 

Poverty Reduction Strategy and Action Plan 

Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper 

Principal Secretary 

Quality Support Group 

Restructuring and Diversification Management Unit 

v

REASWA 

RMF 

ROM 

RSSC 

SA 

SACU 

SADC 

SASA 

SASTA 

SC 

SCGA 

SEC 

SHIP 

SKPE 

SNL 

SO 

SPS 

SSA 

STE 

SWADE 

SWAP 

SWOT 

SZL 

TAP 

TCH 

TCPD 

TDS 

ToR 

UGA 

UN 

UNFCC 

WG 

Renewable Energy Association of Swaziland 

Ratoon Management Fund 

Result Oriented Monitoring 

Royal Swaziland Sugar Corporation 

Southern African 

Southern African Customs Union 

Southern African Development Community 

South Africa Sugar Association 

SA Sugar Technology Association 

Steering Committee 

Swaziland Cane Growers Associations 

Swaziland Electricity Company 

Smallholder Irrigation Project 

Swaziland Komati Project Enterprise 

Swazi Nation Land 

Specific Objective 

Special Preferential Sugar 

Swaziland Sugar Association 

Short Term Expert 

Swaziland Water and Agriculture Development Enterprise 

Sector Wide Approaches 

Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats 

Emalangeni 

Technical and Administrative Provision (TAP) of the Financing 

Agreement 

Tons of cane per ha 

Tons of Cane per Day 

Tertiary Distribution System 

Terms of Reference 

Urban Government Act 

United Nations 

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 

Working Group 

vi

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This report captures the activities and progress accomplished between the 01 February and 

31 July 2009. The review of progress in this report will be illustrated in line with the results to 

be accomplished as outlined in the logical framework of the RDMU. 

Under “Result 1: EC MIP 2007-2010 is committed”, the main activities of the RDMU in the 

reporting period centred around assisting the EC in developing the necessary appraisal 

documents for the Annual Action Programme 2009. The AAP 2009 includes the rehabilitation 

of major irrigation infrastructures such as the Malkerns Canal and the Poortzicht Irrigation 

Scheme, the rehabilitation of existing farmer associations and the assistance to existing cane 

growers who cannot profitably grow sugar cane anymore and therefore wish to pull out from 

sugar cane production. The latter two components will be incorporated in a direct grant 

contract managed by the SCGA. Since the start of the project, about 66 work-months (70 %) 

of short-term expertise have been committed and contracted to assist in developing the 

various AAPs. Major assignments in the reporting period were the fine-tuning of the Ratoon 

Management Fund, the assessment and development of a FairTrade concept for Swazi 

smallholder cane growers, the socio-economic study of the Malkerns Canal, the continuation 

of the Technical Audit of Farmer Associations (47 have been covered up to now) and the 

development of several documents for Ubombo Sugar with a view to making them eligible for 

carbon finance. 

Under “Result 2: EC MIP 2007-2010 is implemented”, with particular respect to SO 1 of the 

MIP 2007-2010- Support to Smallholder Sugarcane Growers -, the RDMU assisted the EC 

and SWADE in several activities related to the preparation and launch of a works tender on 

irrigation equipment and its installation. This was for the second round of farmer associations 

in LUSIP and KDDP who applied for EC support for the development of their land under 

sugar cane. Main activities were the review of the infield irrigation designs undertaken by 

SWADE and its contractors and the physical inspection and assessment of the proposed 

farmer associations in relation to the design documents that had been produced and the 

contents of the technical reports. Moreover, the RDMU assisted in the evaluation of the 

tenders bidding for the 630 ha Round 1 irrigation works tender. The RDMU also assisted in 

the evaluation of the technical assistance team tender, which was awarded to GRM 

International in March 2009. The team started working in Swaziland in May 2009 and an 

official hand over of the SO1 related activities took place in June 2009. In order to increase 

the number of state of the art designs of irrigation schemes for farmer associations, and to 

cater for irrigation development outside of the SWADE mandated areas, the RDMU began a 

detailed soil survey and the final design for the Takhamiti farmer association which embraces 

a 240 ha net irrigated area. Given the indicative cost of 5,000 Euro per ha, another major 

contribution is made in complying with the December 2010 deadline, and to increase the 

probability that the allocation will be fully utilised. 

Unfortunately, a land conflict in the 233 ha farmer’s association in the KDDP, has delayed 

the award of the contract for this scheme. It is hoped that this conflict can be resolved as 

soon as possible. 

At a specially organised technical meeting, SWADE indicated that they have changed their 

approach. Instead of hiring contractors to undertake the final designs of the various farmer 

associations at LUSIP and KDDP, they have decided to increase the in-house capacity of 

their irrigation engineers and technicians. This is, in principle, a reasonable decision; 

however, this process has inevitably resulted in further delays as far as the development of 

designs is concerned. As such, business plans which were promised for tabling to the RDMU 

by April have not been submitted during the reporting period. 

RDMU Progress Report No 3 - 01 February – 31 July 2009 - Page 1

The slow development of business plans and designs for irrigation associations in 

conjunction with a tied deadline whereby all contracts for the AAP2007 have to be signed in 

December 2010 give reasons for concern. Therefore, the RDMU has commenced (in 

addition to undertaking the design of the Takhamiti Farmer Association) to pursue a plan with 

the millers to look into the possibilities of expanding existing reasonably well performing 

farmer associations whose possible expansion could be designed relatively quickly. As it 

looks now, about 500 ha could be tackled in this manner. 

Under SO3 of the MIP 2007-2010 – Improvement of transport infrastructure - , tenders for the 

two Final Design contracts (one in the south, the other in the north) for the transport 

infrastructures were launched and the contract for the South awarded to Aurecon from South 

Africa. 

Under Result 3: Other NAS activities financed and implemented”, the RDMU focused on the 

development of the Project Identification Note (PIN) and the Project Development Document 

(PDD) for the energy efficiency measures to make Ubombo eligible for carbon funding. 

Moreover, the RMF project has reached an advanced stage. The RDMU did not have 

sufficient time to devote to the development of bankable projects which could be submitted to 

other donors. The next reporting period will address this shortcoming and also an 

assignment reprioritising the NAS and setting up a revised logframe will be undertaken in 

due course. 

With regard to “Result 4: Stakeholder liaison established and in operation”, the RDMU is well 

established and is coordinating and liaising with the stakeholders on a frequent basis, 

including with the MEPD, the NAS WG and the NAS SC. The RDMU has implemented the 

communication strategy with the organisation of press conferences, development of 

brochures and flyers, the regular update of the RDMU webpage and representation at the 

Swazi Expo 2009. 

The activities in the next reporting period should focus on the launch of the Round 2 tender 

for irrigation supply and installation, the monitoring of the contractor in charge of the irrigation 

installation and the SHIP team, the finalisation of the grant contract for SCGA for the AAP 

2009, monitoring and supervision of the FD&S team for the infrastructures in the north and 

south, and the development of the PIF and AF 2010. Moreover, the RDMU has to facilitate 

and coordinate the development of the MIP 2011-2013 in September 2009. Over and above 

this, a Strategic Environmental Assessment needs to be undertaken on the NAS in the next 

reporting period giving details on whether or not certain NAS measures comply with 

environmental standards and whether any of them need mitigation measures. 


2 RESULT 1: EC MIP 2007- 2010 IS 

COMMITTED 

2.1 Summary of progress achieved during the 

reporting period 

2.1.1 R 1 A 1: Identify projects for SO1 – SO4 of MIP 

Annual Action Programme (AAP) 2009: Support to small sugar cane growers, 

diversification and NAS coordination 

The AAP 2009 includes SO1 (support to small cane growers), SO4 (agricultural 

diversification) and the extension of the coordination role of the RDMU for another 18 

months. The identification process for AAP 2009 started in July 2008 when several shortterm 

assignments were commissioned to assist in the identification process (for details see 

under result 3). The consultative process, particularly with EC headquarters started in 

January 2009 and ended in July 2009. The reason for this relatively long process was mainly 

attributed to the Quality Support Group’s first reservations in having a direct grant contract 

awarded to the SCGA in conjunction with a budget of approximately € 6 million. After 

dialogue, the QSG agreed to a direct grant contract, however with a reduced budget. 

The first action will focus on a) securing and increasing bulk water supply to sugar cane 

growing communities for irrigation and domestic purposes; b) lowering the barriers to entry 

for new growers by contributing to investment costs; c) rehabilitating irrigation systems of 

existing smallholder sugar cane growers; and d) improving the productivity of existing 

smallholder cane growers by facilitating access to certified seed cane. 

The second action will support the agricultural diversification of cane growers who have little 

prospect of surviving in the sugar cane business under the prevailing conditions (owing to a 

combination of commodity prices, availability of water and distance from the mill) by a) 

financing the ploughing out of cane and the planting of an alternative crop; b) assisting 

growers with on-farm trials; and c) by creating a sound platform for agricultural diversification 

by securing access to bulk water to meet minimum crop requirements. 

The third action extends support to NAS coordination and implementation by extending the 

RDMU until 2012, which supports NAS coordination and implementation. The Unit will 

ensure that EC funds are committed; that projects are implemented and monitored (including 

tendering and contract procedures); and that funding for other NAS projects is obtained. 

The expected results and proposed activities of the proposed AAP 2009 can be summarised 

as follows: 

R1.A1 – Support to cane growers (new and existing): 

1. New entrant growers: 

The project will finance the supply, installation and commissioning of the infield irrigation 

system and land preparation (including bush clearing) for new entrant smallholder cane 

growers. This support represents about 70% of the estimated total costs of land development 

as detailed in Business Plans; it will be limited to a maximum of 3.5 ha per farmer; and at 

least 75% of the cropped area benefiting from EC support must be used for sugarcane. This 

will lower the barriers to entry and the cost of debt servicing. 

To qualify for the support, growers must be members of a Farmer’s Association with a formal 

legal status; have obtained a sucrose quota and water abstraction rights; and have a viable 

business plan endorsed by all members. The business plan format developed in Phase 1 


includes, inter alia: a farm plan; an environmental mitigation plan; chief’s consent letter; 

signed membership list; an undertaking to maintain the irrigation equipment; and a detailed 

cash flow analysis. It should also set out the measures to ensure the sound operation, 

institutional management and maintenance of their irrigation systems, and demonstrate that 

membership extends to members of vulnerable groups within the community. The Technical 

Assistance team (AAP 2007) and SWADE will assist farmers to prepare their plans and to 

raise complementary financing from the DFIs or commercial banks. The business plan will be 

approved by a selection committee coordinated by the RDMU. Members of the committee 

will include the MEPD, EC, the millers and the MOA. 

When necessary, the project will finance the design of the irrigation systems and the drawing 

up of technical specifications, preferably through ‘design and build’ contracts or qualified 

design companies, particularly for those Associations falling outside government irrigation 

schemes, which are not eligible for the technical support provided by SWADE. 

2. Existing growers: 

The project will restore the profitability of existing cane growers by supporting measures to i) 

increase yields and/or lower production volatility and ii) decrease operational costs through 

the following interventions: 

• Securing access to sufficient bulk water to meet full crop water requirements (i.e., 

rehabilitating primary and secondary irrigation canals, relocating water abstraction points 

and constructing storage dams that supply bulk water to groups of cane farmers through 

a common canal infrastructure). Four major irrigation schemes benefiting small and 

medium growers have already been pre-identified (these are in Malkerns, Vuvulane, 

Poortzicht, Nsoko). 

• Improving the efficiency (energy, water and labour) of smallholder irrigation systems by 

rectifying design faults in smallholder grower infield irrigation systems, such as replacing 

pumps and water filtration units, improving sumps and in-field drainage/roads. To be 

eligible for support, an individual grower must fall within the industry definition of a smallscale 

grower and provide a viable business plan. 

• Ploughing out old unproductive ratoon cane, preparing seed beds and providing certified 

seed cane for approximately 10% of the smallholder cane area per annum. 

R1.A2 – Technical and business management training 

Existing and newly established farmers will continue to benefit from technical and 

management training. The training packages will be tailored to suit each Farm Association, 

following a detailed assessment of their problems carried out by the technical assistance 

team and the other stakeholders (Outgrowers Department, SWADE). Based on the analysis 

of a sample of FAs, it is expected that capacity building will need to focus on improving 

operational management (irrigation scheduling, system maintenance, inputs procurement 

and application) and improving management systems (budgeting, record-keeping, 

communication, good governance, procurement and cost control). It should also help 

growers comply with the condition to access premium markets, such as Fair Trade. The 

training will target farm supervisors, executive committee members and local companies that 

provide services to growers (mechanics, hauliers). It will be provided by the technical 

assistance team and other service providers financed through the TA’s incidental budget, 

and comprise an appropriate mix of on the job training, mentoring and formal training 

opportunities. It will be structured to complement existing industry extension and business 

support services. Linkages and partnerships with line services, when available, will also be 

promoted. 


R1.A3 Support diversification into alternative crops 

Presently, a few FAs and individuals farming a total of 360 ha of cane have been identified 

as indebted to the extent they have little prospect of surviving in the sugar cane business 

under the prevailing conditions (a combination of commodities prices, insufficient water 

requirements for cane production due to dried-up water sources as a result of climatic 

change and distance to/from the mill.). Other farmers might find themselves in similar 

circumstances in the near future. The project will offer support to cover the costs of ploughing 

out the cane and land preparation for the planting of an alternative crop, support the cost of 

planting trial crops and facilitate negotiation with the Financing Institutions. This activity will 

be restricted to farmers whose distance from the mill or lack of water will make them 

particularly uncompetitive. Where feasible, irrigation infrastructure will be improved to secure 

access to sufficient bulk water to facilitate diversification into alternative crops, or to continue 

in cane production (complementing R1.A1). 

R2.A1 – Provision of Technical Assistance for NAS Coordination 

The RDMU will continue to assist the MEPD and the EC until 2012 with the preparation of 

the Annual Action Programmes; the tender dossiers for individual commitments; the 

monitoring of the implementation of ongoing actions; and the NAS coordination, including the 

Steering Committees meetings and Working Group organization. Reinforced emphasis will 

be put on stakeholder capacity and institutional building and on mobilizing additional donor 

financing for NAS interventions. In addition, the RDMU will be a key actor in the dialogue 

process for implementation of agricultural policies and strategies. 

Implementation modalities for AAP 2009 

New Growers 

The activities aiming at new entrant farm associations (part of R1A1 and R1A2) will be 

implemented through works/ supply contracts coordinated by the Technical Assistance Team 

already financed under Phase 1 (AAP 2007). Provision has been made to extend this 

Technical Assistance within the implementation of the present project. 

Existing Growers 

The actions related to improvement of infield irrigation systems will be part of a grant directly 

awarded to the Swaziland Cane Growers Association (SCGA). The approval system will be 

similar to the one proposed for new entrants: i.e., based on the submission of a viable 

business plan and a cash flow statement. Each applicant will require a technical assessment 

of the proposed interventions undertaken by a technician from the respective Mill Outgrowers 

Department (MOD). 

The approval of single actions within a budget below the threshold of a competitive 

negotiated procedure (EC Budget) will be a process internal to the Sugar Industry 

(SCGA/Miller/SSA), but actions exceeding that threshold will also have to be endorsed by the 

above-mentioned irrigation project selection committee coordinated by the RDMU. 

Following the approval of each action, the SCGA will implement it through a series of works, 

supplies and service contracts, in strict coordination with the MOD and its grower 

representatives. It will also monitor the performance of each grower on the basis of their 

specific business plan and cash flow forecasts. 

Other activities under R1A1 will be initiated and coordinated by the SCGA, but the 

procurement will be the direct responsibility of the Delegation (including feasibility studies, 

detailed engineering designs and works and supervision). It is anticipated that the supply and 

cost of certified primary and secondary seed cane will be regulated by the Sugar Industry; 

therefore the procurement of seed cane will be through a directly negotiated procedure. The 


approval process for the actions to be undertaken will be similar to the one for infield 

irrigation. For irrigation infrastructure projects benefiting growers in a scheme or region, 

applications to the SCGA will be submitted jointly and endorsed by the members benefiting 

from the action to strengthen applications. 

The Support to Diversification out of the Sugarcane (R1 A3) will also be implemented by the 

SCGA as part of the grant contract. The range of actions which will be eligible for financial 

support for growers wishing to diversify from cane will be set out in the SCGA grant proposal 

agreed with industry stakeholders (including the EC) and reflected in the grant proposal (e.g., 

ploughing out cane, land preparation, and the supply of planting material). Eligible growers 

(i.e., those operating at an uneconomic distance from the mill, or facing structural 

impediments to production - such as insufficient bulk water to meet peak demand) will submit 

an application to the SCGA, supported by a business plan detailing the crops they will 

diversify into; the agreement of their financing institution; and evidence they have secured 

future financing and technical support. Following approval by the SCGA, the EC’s 

contribution will be mobilised through works, supply and service contracts financed from the 

grant contract managed by SCGA. 

Strengthening SCGA 

The grant will include the financial resources to strengthen SCGA capacity to administer and 

account for EC funds, including a technical assistant, accountant, procurement specialist and 

short term technical consultants in the fields of irrigation, land preparation and agronomy. 

Works, services and supplies that are procured under the direct grant will follow EC 

procedures. 

The existing growers will not be expected to make a financial contribution to the action, given 

that they have already financed 100% of their initial investment with loans and are heavily 

indebted; moreover the defects in irrigation systems that the project will rectify were in large 

part not their responsibility. 

The RDMU will provide general technical and administrative oversight and coordination of 

the different components. 

Training 

Training activities foreseen under R1A2 will be a continuation of ongoing activities of Phase I. 

Provision has been made to extend the Technical Assistance of phase 1 through the 

implementation of the present project. 

Technical Assistance for NAS Coordination 

The current service contract for the management of the RDMU ends in December 2010. 

Additional financing will secure the services of the RDMU for a further period, either by 

extending the contract of the existing consultants, or re-tendering. The decision will be based 

on the results of the mid-term review, which was finalised in July 2009. The role of the RDMU 

is to assist the MEPD in the implementation of the NAS, including, for this particular action: 

the selection of Farmer’s Associations to benefit from the project; the verification of tenders; 

the administration of the grant contract for existing growers; and technical and administrative 

back up to the MEPD and EC during the execution of contracts. 

Annual Action Programme (AAP) 2010: Support to Social Services 

As already mentioned in the RDMU Annual Report, the Sugar Industry was supposed to 

submit a consolidated document reflecting the sugar industry’s view on how to best use the 

allocations for the social services in August 2008. This document however has never been 

submitted to all relevant stakeholders, particularly MEPD and the various line ministries such 

as education, health and urban housing. Therefore, the elaboration of the PIF, AF and 

related documents has been delayed. Nevertheless, the RDMU in close collaboration with 


the SSA has picked certain possible packages and has started working on their indicative 

feasibility and will discuss these issues in the NAS Working Group scheduled for 05 August 

2009. Given the latest discussions, it is very likely that the AAP 2010 will contain components 

such as a) water supply and treatment at Ubombo, b) waste disposal at RSSC, c) 

construction of teacher houses for both mill groups and d) funding of some roads and 

infrastructures earmarked for the North. It is envisaged that in the last quarter of 2009, the 

RDMU will launch certain assignments exploring the cost and feasibility of some of the 

proposed options. 

2.1.2 R 1A 2: Recruit and mobilize short- term experts 

Until the end of the reporting period, a total (since commencement of the contract) of 88 work 

months of short-term experts have been committed and contracted (requests approved). Out 

of these, 54 work months were devoted to international experts and 34 work months to local 

experts. 

The following assignments were undertaken for the various Annual Action Programmes 

aiming to assist in the identification and development of the AAPs. 

2.1.2.1 AAP 2009 Support to sugar cane small growers, diversification and NAS 

coordination 

Technical Audit of irrigation systems for existing Farmers Associations 

The specific objective of this consultancy is to carry out a technical audit of all 72 Farmers 

Associations’ irrigation systems in the northern and southern Lowveld to provide detailed 

information on which to base the response strategy for the actions set out in the Financing 

Agreement “Support to Smallholder Sugar cane growers”. 

The aim of the study is to identify the nature and magnitude of any technical constraints to 

achieving commercial yields. To date, the RDMU has assessed 47 farmer associations. 

It emerges that poor management and maintenance of irrigation systems compromises 

productivity. For instance, inappropriate irrigation scheduling has lead to water-logging and 

development of saline and sodic conditions, which has resulted in reduction in yields and 

environmental degradation. The poor maintenance and state of repair of the systems has 

lead to decreases in yields and an increase in the cost of rehabilitating the same to an 

acceptable working condition in order to meet the optimum crop water requirement. 

The Financing Agreement indicates that the support will help ‘rectify design faults’. This 

wording was deliberately chosen as a) there is insufficient funding to upgrade older 

systems/technology on the scale required; and b) to avoid rewarding growers who have 

deliberately not maintained their irrigation equipment. 

The reports break down the recommended remedial action into four distinct categories: 

• Suction sumps (Location of abstraction points). 

• Pumps/Electric Motors and Accessories 

• Infield Drainage 

• Infield Irrigation Equipment 

For each category, the assessment identifies the elements that are not operational as per 

normal acceptable standards or equipment that needs repair or replacement to ensure 

proper functionality of the whole irrigation system. The reports further estimate the costs of 

the proposed interventions over the short, medium and long term. 


As indicated in the grant proposal the main criteria for justifying the intervention would be the 

rapid and cost effective restoration of a grower’s irrigation system’s capacity to deliver 

sufficient water to meet the irrigation requirements, and thereby increase the cane yields. 

This will be determined as objectively as possible using the findings of the technical 

assessments. The results obtained across the whole smallholder population will be used to 

develop a comprehensive plan consistent with the volume of financial resources available 

within the proposed Grant Contract. 

Table 1: 

Cost estimates of the irrigation remedial actions required for 47 farmer 

associations (in Emalangeni) 

Farmers Association done to date 

Area 

in ha 

Shortterm 

measures 

Med–term 

measures 

Long-term 

measures Totals 

Bambanani Balimi Farmers Association 234 1,675,000 5,000 3,610,000 5,290,000 

Bambanani Malibi Farmers Association 300 270,000 220,000 210,000 700,000 

Cathula Farmers Association 82 130,000 50,000 40,000 220,000 

Hambanati Farmers Association 56 56,500 60,000 0 116,500 

HhoHho Growers (formerly known cotton 

growers) 351 825,000 705,000 3,555,000 5,085,000 

Intamakupila Farmers Association 247 202,500 590,000 785,000 1,577,500 

Leyodvwa Farmers Association 36 130,000 50,000 0 180,000 

Mshumpula Farmers Association 21 261,500 170,000 0 431,500 

Nzama Farmers Association 23 59,000 207,000 0 266,000 

Phakama Majuscule Farmers Association 308 255,000 130,000 0 385,000 

Phasentsaba Farmers Association 31 64,000 190,000 0 254,000 

Sukumani Bomake Farmers Association 28 98,500 195,000 85,000 378,500 

Usutu Mutwe Farmers Association 35 71,000 80,000 34,000 185,000 

Vezokuhle Farmers Association 29 71,000 195,000 34,000 300,000 

Vukani Farmers Association 200 360,500 800,000 0 1,160,500 

Bambanani Magagasi Bomake 21 45,000 85,000 0 130,000 

Buhle Besive 175 172,500 30,000 120,000 322,500 

Ethembeni 15 572,500 10,000 150,000 732,500 

Ingcayizivela Farmers Association 122 2,500 200,000 200,000 402,500 

Kusile Farmers Association 73 285,000 12,500 25,000 322,500 

Kwasa Dvokolwako Farmers Association 72 234,500 70,000 50,000 354,500 

Lilandi Farmers Association 46 337,500 537,500 20,000 895,000 

Lubisana Farmers Association 113 192,500 90,000 0 282,500 

Mabhadlangeni Farmers Association 16 167,500 10,000 0 177,500 

Magwanyana Farmers Association 105 852,000 0 150,000 1,002,000 

Mangweni tingonini Farmers Association 183 407,500 0 320,000 727,500 

Maplotini Farmers Association 238 253,000 1,855,000 35,000 2,143,000 

Matsenjwa Farmers Association 47 185,000 265,000 0 450,000 

Mavalela Farmers Association 105 311,500 255,000 0 566,500 

Mavela Farmers Association 62 237,500 75,000 135,000 447,500 

Mbanana Farmers Association 18 100,000 5,000 0 105,000 

Mpilimbe Farmers Association 14 77,000 50,000 0 127,000 


Farmers Association done to date 

Area 

in ha 

Shortterm 

measures 

Med–term 

measures 

Long-term 

measures 

RDMU Progress Report No 3 - 01 February – 31 July 2009 - Page 9 

Totals 

Mpofu Multi Purpose Farmers Association 138 432,500 632,500 280,000 1,345,000 

Ntisheni Farmers Association 48 287,500 225,000 0 512,500 

Wemphilo Farmers Association 188 457,500 947,500 400,000 1,805,000 

Ayandza Emadvodza Farmers 

Association 210 45,000 402,500 80,000 527,500 

Bambanani Emobeni 86 105,000 610,000 20,000 735,000 

Emadvodza Ayayengana 106 105,000 610,000 200,000 915,000 

Hlomani Farmers Association 71 105,000 610,000 200,000 915,000 

Makhabeni Farmers Association 106 0 325,000 200,000 525,000 

Mankontjane Farmers Association 51 0 255,000 170,000 425,000 

Maphobeni Farmers Association 151 750,000 607,500 305,000 1,662,500 

Nhlanguyavuka Farmers Association 145 70,000 1,157,500 150,000 1,377,500 

Sivukile Farmers Association 105 150,000 632,500 500,000 1,282,500 

Totals 4,809 11,470,000 14,212,000 12,063,000 37,745,000 

Source: RDMU Technical Audit Report on Farmer Associations 

To date about 4,809 ha have been evaluated and the current total estimated cost to do the 

short, medium and long term interventions is SZL 37,745,000 (about € 3.5 million). 

Operationalization of the Ratoon Management Fund Study 

The process to establish how the RMF is operationalized is now on-going (Richard Bates is 

the expert). This should be able to: gather sufficient views from the growers and the millers 

on the appropriate structure that could be put in place to support the RMF; take cognizance 

of the existing structures and the legal framework; engage the financiers for the existing 

growers to negotiate their position regarding the current practice to have a 100 percent 

cessation on the growers’ proceeds from the mill; investigate the potential interface for them 

to out-source some services from the RMF structure; and finally, develop a Business Plan 

that will outline the operation and future sustainability of the Fund and identify potential donor 

support for the facility. 

Current achievements 

Sugar Industry - the current process indicates that the industry is committed to the RMF and 

is looking forward to this exercise producing a practical model to address the issues of the 

growers in a sustainable way. Both the growers and the millers will be prepared to inject 

money into this Fund to ensure that it works. Possible grant support will however still be 

required to assist with the institutional support and further recapitalization of the Fund. 

Options have to explore the operation of the RMF vs. the North and the South sugar-belts 

growers’ situation. The SSA has been engaged to establish how the proposed RMF 

information system will interface with the existing sugar infrastructure. 

The RSSC is prepared to put money into the RMF but would require that first the growers 

show their commitment. Depending on the amount required they would need to be informed 

early enough to allow the decision-making process to assess their structures. However they 

view the need for the EU to play an important part with the initial set-up of the institutional 

arrangement and complementing the capitalization. The growers have to fully own the 

operation of the RMF. 

Ubombo Sugar would prefer a situation whereby the operation of the RMF occurs at the mill 

level through the existing structures such as Harvesting Groups which are already in place.

The injection of money into the Fund is agreeable. The RMF should also explore the 

possibility of using the sugar levy fund which has now accumulated almost E 50.0 million. 

The SSA could engage Government on this issue. 

KDDP Growers – These existing growers receive support from SWADE in managing their 

financial and disbursement processes with a view to enhance their capacity to eventually 

take-over full responsibility. The proposed operation of the RMF aligns to the current function 

being undertaken by SWADE. Government of Swaziland is in the process of providing an 

approximate E 111.0 million rebate to compensate those growers in the KDDP who financed 

the land development and irrigation conveyance to field edge from their own loans. Some of 

the growers will be able to pay their loans in full from the rebate and remain with a surplus 

balance. It is envisaged that the total surplus balance might be approximately E19.0 million. 

The view has been expressed that the RMF should interface with some of the existing 

strategies that are being pursued to address the growers’ financing challenges. Surplus 

funds from the rebate after repaying the loans can be used as a start-up of the RMF concept 

for the respective growers. 

Financiers - The approach to improve the performance of the crop to assure the capacity of 

the growers to meet their debt obligation is appreciated. There are views from some of these 

institutions that they are doing enough to meet the financing needs of the growers despite 

their circumstances. However, the possibility of a better alternative for them to hedge their 

risk will be favourably considered. On the other hand, one of these institutions which is a big 

player in the financing of the farmer associations, expressed its willingness to engage with 

the finer details on how it can directly make a meaningful contribution to the Fund (e.g. handover 

the working capital financing to the RMF and concentrate on the capital development) 

as long as the bank can be assured that this will be feasible and sustainable. Effort is ongoing 

to work around the current issue of the financiers having the first call on the growers’ 

sucrose proceeds. 

Anticipated Budget 

From the previous study it was proposed that E 2.5 million would be required for the initial 

institutional set-up within the first year, which will include the acquisition of the information 

management system, purchase of office equipment, salaries and other office expenses. The 

subsequent 2 years will require an amount of E 3.0 million for each year for the operation 

costs. Approximately E 17.5 million will be needed for the initial capitalization of the RMF. 

The EC will be willing to consider the financing of the institutional set-up of the RMF if it is 

viable but, seed capitalization will need to be mobilized. 

FairTrade Certification 

This assignment ended in March 2009. The outcome of this assignment can be summarised 

as below: 

Following the weak point analysis, conducted at the farmers’, millers’, contractors’ and 

service providers’, and subcontractors’ level, a clear picture could be established and a 

target group defined for Fair Trade implementation. The millers have a very high compliance 

level in all areas (social, quality and environment); they are used to such kinds of 

investigation and have shown very professional cooperation. Concerning the cutting 

subcontractors, it became clear that the degree of compliance varies a lot. Those who are 

cooperating with the millers have at least a basic management and documentation system, 

but for those cooperating directly with the farmers a detailed improvement program is 

required. It has to be mentioned that the subcontractors are not directly involved in the Fair 

Trade process (following the explanation of FLO in Bonn / Germany) but it is inevitable that 

they should be aware of the Fair Trade requirements. FLO is in the process of improving the 

quality of their own standards, and regular updates are created. It is just a question of time 

as to when explicit details on the subcontractor issues are precisely defined. 


The core group for the certification process are the farmer associations. The gap between 

the northern and the southern sugar belt is tremendous. In some areas even the legal 

national requirements are not assured, such as the minimum wage. Only the farmer 

associations in the north (KDDP farmers) have a basic understanding of management 

systems and with some additional help and assistance they would comply with the Fair Trade 

Standard much earlier. To make the implementation of Fair Trade realistic and cost effective 

the creation of umbrella organisations is recommended. These would be responsible for 

managing the Fair Trade premium payment. To achieve compliance with the Fair Trade 

standard, two main issues have to be considered. First compliance should be achieved in the 

supply chain level, this covers: trade compliance for the millers and further stakeholders; and 

social and environmental compliance for the farmers, their subcontractors and hired labour. 

Implementing basic management systems and increasing the performance of the existing 

structure can help resolve these issues. In addition to this technical challenge it is also very 

important to support the associations in creating a functioning umbrella organisation. FLO will 

not interfere in the decision making process of these organisations, but it is required that they 

are able to decide democratically on the use of premium payments. Organisational 

development and capacity building should be a clear focus for the training and improvement 

programs of the associations. 

In brief two tasks have to be fulfilled: one achieving technical compliance with the Fair Trade 

standard requirements; and secondly assuring the democratic operation and understanding 

of decision making within the umbrella organisations. To move the farmers toward 

compliance, training is necessary in both areas, but it has to be highlighted that the FLO is 

also assisting farmer associations in the preparation process of certification. As the FLO is 

not yet operating in Swaziland, but obviously wants to start some projects (information has 

been provided by FLO Cert in Bonn) they might be very cooperative on that issue. However, 

a pro active approach might speed up the process and assure an independent and tailor 

made approach, including best practice for future annual FLO audits. 

The objective to achieve certified Fair Trade sugar in Swaziland is very realistic. The 

proposed farmers have the required skills and understanding of organisational development. 

The relevant partners in the supply chain (millers and others stakeholders such as chemical 

suppliers) are strong, well organized and interested in Fair Trade. A further important aspect 

is that SSA has considered all the marketing aspects and can assure a concept to market the 

Fair Trade sugar to customers, so that the certified sugar will be commercially viable. A 

clearly identified bottleneck is the organisational development of the farmer associations, but 

adequate training, awareness building, support and communication will lead to a sustainable 

result. 

Socio-economic study of the Malkerns Canal 

This assignment was finalised at the end of February 2009 and the major results are outlined 

below: 

In late 2008 a detailed structural survey of the Malkerns main canal was undertaken to 

establish the major areas of high risk to, and losses from the aged canal. The RDMU 

engineer recommended solutions, which could be tackled quickly and effectively utilising EC 

funds, to avoid a possible catastrophic failure of the canal and to optimise the availability of 

water to provide end-users with maximum benefit. 

This particular report assesses the financial implications to the Malkerns irrigators of the 

above recommendations. The Consultant carried out a socio-economic analysis to determine 

whether the net benefits of rehabilitating the canal justify financing from Swaziland’s National 

Adaptation Strategy to the European Union’s sugar reform. 


The cost benefit analysis shows that the “without project” profitability of the Malkerns canal 

and irrigation systems is very fragile and sensitive to the frequent outages which are being 

experienced at present. The consultant engineer determined that these are likely to increase 

in the immediate future. In the case of a catastrophic failure, the nation would lose a major 

agricultural hub with the demise of commercial farming in the Malkerns Valley, and with it the 

loss of many jobs. 

As a consequence of the nature of the canals current structure, shareholders are in jeopardy 

of losing their livelihoods and for many, agricultural diversification would not be an option. 

Domestic users are likely to lose substantial welfare benefits, especially those dependent 

upon reliable supplies of potable water such as schools, Government services (including 

clinics and the police), as well as many retail traders. Moreover, agricultural research and 

training opportunities in Government and university facilities could be compromised 

indefinitely, and smallholders would be unable to leverage donor funds to develop their SNL 

enterprises. 

The proposed remedial works on the canal include the upgrading or repair of 11 flumes and 

dump gates, and the installation of a siphon at the Malkerns Research Station to bypass the 

Usuthu Forest Section thereby reducing the canal distance by 7 km. This intervention will 

address the pending catastrophe from the collapse of the canal and increase the capacity of 

the canal after flume 8 from the current 32% to 50% 

A simple cost benefit analysis of the incremental cash flow was derived by subtracting the 

“with-out” project cash flow from the “with project” cash flow. The Net Present Value (NPV) of 

the incremental cash flow was E 20.0m (€ 2.0m) while the Financial Rate of Return (FIRR) 

was estimated at 26% using a 10% discount rate. These figures indicate the project provides 

a positive net worth under the realistic assumptions made. However, sensitivity analysis 

indicates that viability is more susceptible to changes in agricultural revenues and production 

costs hence the need to improve cane productivity performance from the average level of 

91.7 TCH in 2007. 

The model also shows that the diversification options outlined in the Exit Strategy – Cost of 

Diversification Study, if promoted and taken up by farmers will present a highly stable 

production profile for the scheme. 

The report recommends the implementation of the proposals put forward by the consultant 

engineer for funding by the European Union. It also recommends that: support should also 

be provided to undertake a technical audit of the secondary and tertiary canal systems; and 

to develop an operational and maintenance programme and accompanying business plan for 

MIDC. This is within the framework of an appropriate water management system, for 

shareholders to finance and implement. 

Assessment of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Options in the Swazi Sugar 

Industry and an Analysis of Co-financing Options via Carbon Certificates 

The second phase of the assignment concentrates on the promotion of CDM climate 

projects, capacity building of NAS stakeholders and development of an out-growers concept. 

The activities and achievement made with regard to the second phase are outlined below. It 

has to be noted that the RDMU local carbon expert, Mrs. Khetsiwe Khumalo has been 

employed by the RDMU since May 2009 funded from GFA’s overhead cost. However, it is 

proposed to have an assignment approved by using local short-term expert days focusing on 

capacity building of the DNA. 

Outgrowers’ CHP Concept 

The objective of this part of the assignment was to identify project opportunities in the 

outgrowers’ sector suitable for receiving assistance from RDMU in relation to renewable 

energy and carbon credits. The expert developed a combined heat and power (CHP) bio 


energy concept which will use cane trash from the sugar industry (both from miller cum and 

out growers). Based on the results of the first mission which indicate a theoretical availability 

of cane trash amounting to 500,000 tonnes, the consultant proposed a concept with three 

CHP power plants of 20MWel (Mega Watt electric) capacity each located in a close proximity 

to each sugar mill. However this is only ideal if the mills can use the additional steam which 

they could purchase from these power plants. The production of steam and electricity within 

each power plant will increase the efficiency of the power plant and also allow maximum 

benefit from carbon credits. According to the expert, such power plants could be operated 

under a special project vehicle which could be a new company with different shareholders. 

The proposed potential project participants are shown in the table below. 

Table 2: 

Potential Shareholders 

Potential Shareholders for the Special Project Vehicle 

Responsibilities 

Sugar mills • Providers of biomass fuel (new commodity), 

• Clients for buying thermal energy (at long-term stable and 

reliable prices), 

• Clients for buying electric energy (at long-term stable and 

reliable prices), 

• Potential investor (shareholder) 

Cane growers (through a • Providers of biomass fuel (new commodity), 

trust fund operated by the • Access to electric energy for irrigation (at long-term stable 

Growers Association) 

and reliable prices), 


EC (RDMU) • Could provide financial support to the out-growers 

SSA • Potential investor (shareholder) 

Swaziland Electricity 

Company (SEC) 

Carbon buyer / investor 

from the power sector 

• Could act as buyer of electricity, 

• Could provide the network infrastructure required to 

transport power to the irrigation systems of mills and 

growers, 


• Could act as a buyer of carbon credits, 

• Could provide technical services, 


This concept was presented to the project stakeholders, and the main project participants 

were motivated to give their feedback on it. However, no information regarding future steam 

demand was received from the sugar mills, and hence the financial analysis conducted by 

the consultant is only focused on the electricity production of the power plant. 

The financial analysis of one power plant with 20MWel, at an efficiency of 20% reveals that 

approximately €24.2 million of investment is required. 

The consultants also looked at the opportunities of producing biogas from sugar cane trash 

for farmers beyond the 80 km radius from the sugar mill. The output of this exercise reveals 

that sugar cane trash is not suitable for biogas digestion unless it is either compounded with 

another substrate or is pre-treated. This is because sugarcane trash chemically represents a 

typical lignocellulosic material, with a generally high C:N ratio of between 108-120:1. Hence it 

does not possess the physical characteristics necessary for ensuring proper and efficient 

digestion in conventional biogas digesters. In order to improve the digestibility of cane trash, 

it is necessary to either compound it with another substrate or conduct a pre-treatment. If 

compounded with another substrate the relative proportion of different material should be 


adjusted to maintain the recommended C:N ratio. Pre-treatment breaks down the complex 

organic structure into simpler molecules which are then more susceptible to microbial 

degradation. However, the higher the level of pre-treatment a feedstock requires, the more 

processing machinery will be required and as a result the project will have higher capital 

costs. The financial analysis of the biogas production through the pre-treatment of cane trash 

was not conducted due to a lack of data with regard to pre-treatment chemicals and the 

equipment required. 

Grid Emission Factor Assessment 

According to the findings of the first phase report, the current UNFCCC tool used to calculate 

the grid emission factor of an electricity grid system limits the benefit from carbon revenues 

of all potential renewable and energy efficient CDM projects which supply or use electricity 

from the Swazi national grid. This is mainly due to the current situation in the country with 

regards to electricity supply: Swaziland imports about 80% of electricity from neighbouring 

South Africa and Mozambique and generates its own electricity largely from hydro sources. 

According to the tool (CDM EB35, Annex 12): “For imports from connected electricity 

systems located in another host country(ies), the emission factor is 0 tons CO2 per MWh”’ 

Therefore, the objective of this consultancy was to identify and define possible procedures 

for overcoming this challenge. The expert team identified several options for the calculation 

of the grid emission factor for Swaziland, and developed four different scenarios. 

Scenario I considers the Swaziland grid and electricity generation sources only and the grid 

emission factor calculated was 171 tCO 2 /GWh. This value is considered too small hence 

projects using this grid emission factor are not financially attractive. 

Scenario 2 considers Swaziland electricity generation sources and imports through the 

Matraco transmission line. This scenario was based on paragraph 5 page 3 of the CDM 

Executive Board (CDM EB) Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system; 

“…where recent or likely future additions to transmission capacity enable significant 

increases in imported electricity the transmission capacity may be considered.” This is 

eligible, as a) a new transmission line was constructed connecting Swaziland, South Africa 

and Mozambique and b) this transmission line increases the capacity for electricity imports. 

The grid emission factor calculated under this scenario was 525 tCO 2 /GWh. This figure 

allows the making of a viable business case for grid connected CDM project opportunities in 

Swaziland. 

Scenario 3 considers electricity imports and their CO 2 emission. The integration of CO 2 

emissions of electricity imports in this case violates the UNFCCC tool for the calculation of 

the grid emission factor. The grid emission factor under this scenario is 683 tCO 2 /GWh. 

However, for a CDM project integrating such a violation to become officially registered under 

the UNFCCC, a request of revision must be submitted to the CDM Executive Board (CDM 

EB). Such a request of revision faces the risk of being rejected. 

It was found that the OM (Operating Margin) increases to 625 tCO 2 /GWh and the BM (Build 

Margin) involves 710 tCO 2 /GWh. The overall CM (Combined Margin) was increased to 683 

tCO 2 /GWh. Like scenario 2, this figure supports the making of a viable business case for grid 

connected CDM project opportunities. But compared to scenario 2, the overall financial 

attractiveness of grid connected CDM projects is increased further. 

Scenario 4 proposes that Swaziland should be considered as part of a regional grid either 

including South Africa and Mozambique only; or considering the full Southern Africa Power 

Pool grid. 

The experts recommended applying Scenario 3, which implies that there is a need to put 

forward a request of deviation from the tool to the CDM Executive Board. Scenario 4 is only 


ecommended, if significant political backup is found from the other SADC countries facing 

the same problem (DR Congo, Namibia and Mozambique). 

It was recommended that the request of deviation should be submitted with a draft Project 

Development Document (PDD) as per the CDM EB procedures. According to the experts the 

success of the request of revision is dependent on CDM EB’s perception of the problem. If 

the current restriction of not integrating CO 2 emissions of electricity imports is due to 

technical barriers, and if these barriers are resolved in a conservative manner, then the 

request is likely to be successful. If the restriction is due to political reasons, the success of a 

request of revision will depend on the political support for such an approach. 

If the CDM EB rejects the request of revision, then grid connected CDM projects will fall back 

on scenario 2. Scenario 2 results in significant carbon revenues for grid connected CDM 

projects being a sound basis for project development in Swaziland. However the acceptance 

of this scenario also depends to a large extent on the interpretation of paragraph 5 on page 2 

of the tool. 

Project Design Document (PDD) for Ubombo Sugar Ltd 

The development of the project design document for a potential CDM project at Ubombo 

started in mid July 2009. The project at Ubombo involves the upgrade of the current 

cogeneration system to a gross electricity generation capacity of 38MW and the 

implementation of energy efficiency measures. The international experts involved in this 

exercise spent two weeks in Swaziland working closely with the engineers at Ubombo sugar 

in trying to establish a credible baseline and collecting relevant information. The consultants 

discovered that their suitable approved methodology (ACM0006 V.08) which is applicable to 

the project activity at Ubombo, does not have a baseline scenario that depicts the situation at 

Ubombo mill. Therefore, it was recommended that Ubombo Sugar Ltd should contract a 

Designated Operational Entity (DOE) as early as possible, which will assist in applying for a 

request for revision of the methodology as per the procedures outlined by the CDM EB. The 

revision of the methodology is seen as the addition of another scenario in the methodology 

that will take into consideration or will represent the current situation at the Ubombo sugar 

mill. 

Ubombo Sugar Ltd, have contracted TÜV SÜD 1 as the DOE and the request for revision has 

already been submitted to the Meth panel of the UNFCCC. Within this reporting period, an 

acknowledgement of receipt of the request had not been sent by the UNFCCC secretariat. It 

is envisaged that the decision from the CDM EB will be known after their October 2009 

meeting. The request for revision of the methodology will result in delays with finalising the 

PDD as a final draft of the PDD is dependent on the decision of the CDM EB. 

CDM Capacity Building 

The RDMU organised a breakfast meeting aimed at building the knowledge of the key project 

stakeholders, mainly that of high government officials, on CDM issues. During the meeting a 

presentation providing a basic introduction to CDM was delivered. The presentation covered 

topics related to the CDM policy framework, a definition of CDM, an explanation of how it 

works, and the current situation in Swaziland. 

The main challenges with regard to CDM in Swaziland, i.e. the Grid emission factor and the 

non existence of CDM project approval procedures and sustainable development indicators, 

were discussed. The results of the grid emission factor assessment assignment were 

presented during the meeting. The meeting felt a strong need for the RDMU to contract an 

1 Technical Certification Organization 


expert to develop CDM project approval procedures and sustainable development indicators 

to enhance the efforts being made in developing CDM projects in Swaziland. 

The RDMU has drafted terms of reference for a consultant to develop the CDM project 

approval procedures, draft sustainable development indicators and provide capacity building 

for the DNA. A request for this consultancy was submitted to MEPD and the EC, and is 

currently waiting for approval. 

Baseline Survey of 72 Farmer Associations and 57 individual growers 

The Baseline Survey of all 72 Farmer Associations and 57 individual growers was 

commissioned in mid January 2009 and was finalised by the end of May 2009. The main 

outcomes are listed below: 

The study revealed that over the last three years or so there has been a sharp decline in 

yields owing to a number of factors. These range from those that are within the growers’ 

control e.g. poor crop husbandry and pump failures right up to those the grower has no 

control over like escalation of input prices and lack of irrigation water due to drought. Such a 

decline in yields has greatly reduced the growers returns yet on the other hand interest 

charged on their capital loans has continued to rise; making it much more difficult to pay off. 

Despite the above conditions, many growers are still determined to remain in sugar cane 

farming, as it still seems attractive when compared with other cash crops. Given their 

expertise in sugar cane farming, combined with their massive investment and experience, 

the growers are reluctant to move out of sugar cane farming. Thus there is a need to identify 

areas where NAS interventions are required. 

Overall, it is recommended that: 

• A crop that has a large and reliable market with returns comparable to sugarcane be 

identified for those growers who wish to diversify 

• Continuation of the technical assessment should be conducted on FAs’ irrigation 

equipment to identify which equipment needs to be serviced or replaced. This would 

greatly improve growers yield as pump failures have been identified as a major 

contributor towards low yield. 

• A group of neighbouring schemes should aim at hiring a qualified manager to oversee 

day to day activities and work on setting targets and standards. These managers and 

supervisors should be exposed to periodic training and courses to improve their skills. 

• An in-depth study on loan performance should be undertaken so as to clearly identify 

those FAs which will never be able to fully repay their obligations under the current 

situation. A proposal should then be presented to DFIs to have them either offer an 

interest moratorium or completely write off the debts. 

• Extension support given to the growers should also include financial control and other 

areas that touch directly on their functionality like social facilitation. 

The Small dam study 

The Ministry of Agriculture requested through the MEPD that the RDMU should conduct a 

pre-feasibility study on small dams in Swaziland in the context of agricultural diversification, 

particularly in the Shiselweni and Lubombo regions. Unfortunately, the number of work days 

to conduct this assignment was very limited for a pre-feasibility study and the team leader 

proposed by the RDMU was not accepted. A compromise was found whereby the RDMU is 

undertaking an evaluation of existing small dams in Swaziland by carrying out a scoping and 

screening exercise based on a number of criteria. The study is currently ongoing and is 

expected to be finalised in October 2009. 


2.1.3 R 1A 3: Guide and advise STE Missions and 

involve stakeholders 

Based on lessons learned from some of the first assignments and to make the consultancies 

as efficient as possible, the RDMU initiated the following approach for each short-term 

assignment. 

• At the commencement of the assignment, a minimum of half day is devoted to discuss in 

detail the Terms of Reference with the expert. This involves RDMU staff and relevant 

stakeholders of the NAS WG to make sure that all issues to be addressed are clearly 

understood. 

• The RDMU usually accompanies the mission to the various stakeholders. This not only 

facilitates getting the relevant information but also assists in monitoring and guiding the 

assignment to make it more efficient. 

• At the mid-term of each assignment, the expert provides a PowerPoint presentation to 

the NAS Working Group to get comments from the various stakeholders ensuring that 

he/she is on the right track. 

• Draft Report: by the latest 10 days after the field mission, the expert is required to send 

the draft report to the RDMU for comments. Each RDMU staff member plus some of the 

relevant stakeholders give comments within 2 weeks. All comments are sent as a 

consolidated document to the expert for drawing up the final report. 

2.1.4 R 1A 4: Work with stakeholders to develop and 

agree on interventions 

The RDMU approach is to involve the stakeholders, and particularly the NAS WG in all steps 

as far as the design of interventions is concerned. Therefore, according to need, NAS WG 

meetings are regularly organized at which the various experts make presentations on their 

findings on the one hand, but also at which the proposed intervention areas are thoroughly 

discussed and agreed upon. For each WG meeting, minutes are prepared and circulated by 

the RDMU. 

Once the NAS WG has agreed on an intervention, then the results are tabled to the NAS SC 

which as the highest advisory body has to endorse (or not) the NS WG recommendations. As 

such, various NAS WGs meetings and 3 NAS SC meetings were organized to agree and 

decide on the content of the AAP 2009. 

2.2 Problems encountered and possible solutions 

AAP 2009 

As pointed out earlier, the Quality Support Group at EC Headquarters had some reservations 

about giving a direct grant contract award to the SCGA, which does not have any experience 

in grant contracts, given a proposed allocation of approximately € 6 million. Following 

discussions, the QSG agreed on a direct award of grant contract, but recommended 

however, that a significant amount which was earmarked for the SCGA Grant Contract 

should be taken out and be considered as an individual works contract (rehabilitation of the 

Malkerns Canal). Therefore, the approval of the AF 2009 took longer than expected. 


AAP 2010 

As already mentioned, there will be a significant budget reduction for this AAP. Given the 

reduced budget it will be recommended by the RDMU to the NAS WG that the component 

”economic diversification” be dropped for this annual action programme and postponed for 

another AAP if the need arises. This means more money will be available for roads to 

rehabilitate and upgrade the Sihhoye-Mananga route (full 14 km), and the balance caters for 

the provision of social services or undertaking studies which are necessary to speed up the 

establishment of the AAPs for 2011 and 2012. 

2.3 Recommendations and activities for the 

coming reporting period 

AAP 2009 Grant Contract to SCGA 

• Fine tuning of the technical proposal for a Grant Contract to be managed by the 

Swaziland Cane Growers Association – SCGA ; 

• Supporting the SCGA in developing eligibility criteria for existing cane growers and those 

who want to pull out from cane and diversify; 

• Continuation of the technical assessment on all Farmer Associations; 

AAP 2010 

It is envisaged that some feasibility assignments will be performed in October and November 

2009 to have the PIF and AF ready by the end of December 2009. 

2.4 Major Issues requiring urgent attention 

Currently, there are no major issues requiring urgent attention. 


3 RESULT 2: EC MIP 2007 – 2010 IS 

IMPLEMENTED 



3.1.1 R 2 A 1: Prepare Tender Documents according to 

EC procedures 

3.1.1.1 SO1 Support to smallholder cane growers 

The design review and preparation of tender documents for EC funded Round 2 

After two missions in 2008 the RDMU irrigation engineer returned to Swaziland for a third 

mission (70 working days) in April 2009. Most of the time was earmarked for the review and 

approval exercise of irrigation scheme designs. 

Upon and shortly after arrival on the 14 April 2009 draft designs of 4 sublots in KDDP were 

available: Ndinda, Nhlambane, Mashekeshe and Vukutimele (350.5 ha). On the 24th April 

2009 4 sublots 1st draft designs (First Batch) were received from LUSIP for Gcekeni, 

Embusweni Matjentima, Hambanathi Nkosi and Mshiyabhantji (288.4 ha). 

All scheme designs were checked and field visits were made to the scheme sites in LUSIP 

as well as in KDDP. Comments were prepared and submitted but the response (e.g. 

resubmission of corrected designs) was slow. LUSIP decided to launch an additional tender 

(Government funded on approximately 500 ha) and the already limited design capacity was 

therefore mainly occupied with the design and tendering activities for that tender. In KDDP 

the principal design engineer resigned which seriously affected the design output: no 

additional / corrected designs have been received since the submission of the first four 

sublots. 

LUSIP submitted a second batch of designs on the 27th May 2009 (Thikumbuteni, 

Mthomanzi, Nconconco, Manzimnyama and Sibonele, 287.3 ha) but the irrigation technicians 

and engineers had mixed up maps, technical explanations and designs while compiling the 

technical documents. Reviewing was impossible and the second batch was returned to 

LUSIP. 

LUSIP submitted the corrected first batch of the Round 2 EC tender on the 10th July 2009, 

when the RDMU irrigation engineer had already completed his mission. The documents were 

redirected to the Technical Assistance Irrigation Engineer. This engineer (Peter Scott) has 

been working together with the RDMU irrigation engineer since the 4th May 2009. 

Most of the KDDP schemes are expensive, main reasons are the high pumping heads and 

the long(er) distances from water source to scheme area. To compound matters one scheme 

(Mashekeshe) also has very marginal soils. 

It has to be noted that for all LUSIP Farmer Associations, draft Business Plans were 

promised for tabling to the RDMU by the 20th April 2009. At the end of the reporting period, 

(31th July 2009), the business plans had not been submitted, either to the RDMU, or to the 

Technical Assistance team. 

It has to be noted that all activities related to the review of business plans and designs were 

handed over to the Technical Assistance Team to support Smallholder Cane Growers, 

named the Smallholder Irrigation Project (SHIP), at the end of June 2009. 


Table 3: Current status of irrigation designs for EC Round 2 (31 July 2009) 

FARMERS ASSOCIATION LOCATION 

Net Design 

Business Plans 

Area in ha 

Final Designs Comments 

1 Gcekeni LUSIP 55.8 not submitted in review & correction stage Final designs expected end Sep 2009 

2 Tikhumbuteni LUSIP 79 not submitted in review & correction stage Final designs expected end Sep 2009 

3 Mthomanzi LUSIP 63.7 not submitted in review & correction stage Final designs expected end Sep 2009 

4 Nconconco LUSIP 57 not submitted in review & correction stage Final designs expected end Sep 2009 

5 Embusweni Matjentima LUSIP 83.9 not submitted in review & correction stage Final designs expected end Sep 2009 

6 Hambanathi Nkosi LUSIP 91.9 not submitted in review & correction stage Final designs expected end Sep 2009 

7 Vukutimele KDDP 78 draft submitted in review & correction stage no concise date communicated 

8 Nhlambane KDDP 86.4 draft submitted in review & correction stage no concise date communicated 

9 Ndinda KDDP 76.5 draft submitted in review & correction stage no concise date communicated 

10 Mashekeshe KDDP 109 draft submitted in review & correction stage no concise date communicated 

11 Takhamiti (by RDMU) HLANE 356 submitted Detailed soil survey finished Final Design finalized by end of October 

12 Sesibonele LUSIP 22 not submitted in review & correction stage Final designs expected end Sep 2009 

3.1.2 R 2 A 2 : Assistance to launch, evaluate and 

prepare contracts 


AAP 2007: Irrigation Works Contract on 630 ha 

The Tender Evaluation exercise for Round1: Supply and Installation of Irrigation Equipment 

has been completed without major problems or delays. After the tender opening sessions 

only two additional evaluation sessions were required to prepare the recommendations for 

awarding the contracts. The tender opening date was on the 2nd June 2009, the last 

evaluation session was on the 18th June 2009. The table below illustrates the various steps 

with regard to tender evaluation. The evaluation committee concluded that the award of the 

contract for Lot 2 (LUSIP) should be awarded to IRRICON (based in South Africa) and Lot 1 

(KDDP) should be awarded to SII (based in Swaziland). A decision by the EC Delegation in 

Lesotho is pending. 

Table 4: 

Time Table for General Instructions to Tenders 

Date 

Clarification meeting n/a n/a 

Site visit n/a n/a 

Deadline for request for any clarifications from the 

Contracting Authority 

Last date on which clarifications are issued by the 

Contracting Authority 

Time 

11 th May 2009 12.00 

21 st May 2009 16.00 

Deadline for submission of tenders 1 st June 2009 16.00 

Tender opening session 2 nd June 2009 10.00 

Notification of award to the successful tenderer Not in the reporting period - 

Signature of the contract Not in the reporting period - 


AAP 2007: Technical Assistance to Smallholder cane growers – Phase 1 (€ 3.265 m) 

As of the 28 th January 2009, technical and financial proposals had been received from 7 

consortia. Within one week, EC, MEPD and RDMU evaluated the tender documents and a 

decision / recommendation was made on the 04 February 2009. Following the best value for 

money principle, the proposal submitted by the consortium led by GRM International was 

recommended for the contract award. The award of the contract was done on the 20 th March 

2009 and the team started working in Swaziland on the 04 May 2009. During their extended 

inception phase, the RDMU made available to the Technical Assistance team, named the 

“Smallholder Irrigation Project (SHIP), a fully operational office with stationery, one desktop 

computer, printer facility and fast internet connection. This was done free of charge for a 

period of 2.5 months. Moreover, given the teams administrative and management limitations, 

the RDMU provided significant assistance in obtaining residence permits, opening bank 

accounts and other administrative issues which are usually the task of the team leader. 

Financing Agreement changed to 3.5 ha and 70 / 30% funding 

As raised in the last progress report, the recommendation by the NAS SC has been agreed 

upon by EC Headquarters and the Financing Agreement was accordingly revised on the 15 th 

April 2009. The maximum area for eligibility per farm household was increased from 2 ha to 

3.5 ha and compliance with the EC’s 70% contribution will be based only on the business 

plan budget. 

3.1.2.2 SO3: Transport Infrastructure 

AAP 2008: Launch and award of a contract tender for the Final Design & Supervision – 

Infrastructures in the South (€ 1.489 m) 

The tender was launched on the 22 February 2009. The deadline for submission of the 

tender documents was on the 08 April 2009 and 6 technical and financial proposals were 

received. Within 3 weeks, MEPD, EC and RDMU evaluated the tenders and concluded at the 

evaluation committee on the 30 April 2009 that the technical and financial proposal of the 

South African based company AURECON (formerly AFRICON) is awarded the contract. The 

contract was awarded on the 26 June 2009 and the contractor started working in Swaziland 

on the 01 July 2009. During the inception phase, the consultant started on the traffic counting 

assignment and began some hydrological investigations with regard to the Siphofaneni 

Bridge. The inception report is expected to be tabled by mid August 2009. As far as the 

timing for implementation of the final design is concerned, Annex 4 illustrates the detailed 

schedule. 


Photo 1: 

MP Honourable G. Gamedze briefing the Siphofaneni Inkhundla 

administration on the AAP 2008 infrastructures 

AAP 2006: Launch of the tender for the Final Design & Supervision - Infrastructures in 

the North (€ 425,000) 

The tender was launched on the 28 May 2009. Deadline for submission of the tender 

documents was on the 07 July 2009 and 6 technical and financial proposals were received. 

Within 1 week, MEPD, EC and RDMU evaluated the tenders and concluded at the evaluation 

committee on the 22 July 2009 that the technical and financial proposal of the Irish company 

Nicholas O’Dwyer is awarded the contract. It is expected that the award of the contract will 

be by the end of August 2009 with the consultant being mobilised in September 2009. 

3.1.3 R 2 A 3: Assist EC and MEPD to monitor and 

supervise contractors and project progress 


Inception Phase of SHIP (Smallholder Irrigation Project) and opportunities foregone 

Prior to the dissemination of the draft report to all major stakeholders, SHIP sent a first draft 

of their inception report to the RDMU for comments. The RDMU’s opinion was that the report 

had several shortcomings. These were: 


• Inadequate consideration of existing growers (in fact, the draft inception report did not 

mentioning at all how SHIP will supervise and monitor the rehabilitation of irrigation 

schemes of existing growers); 

• Lack of consideration for the suggestion to second some of the SHIP team members to 

the outgrower departments (to strengthen their capacities and to ensure a harmonized 

approach); 

• Lack of a detailed stakeholder analysis with a view to who is doing what and how, 

enabling the SHIP team to give concise recommendations on how best they can deliver 

services in complementing existing structures, like SWADE, and particularly the millers 

out-growers departments (OGDs), 

• Lack of a draft memorandum of understanding between SWADE and SHIP and if the 

need arises involving the out-grower departments, 

• Lack of an analysis and assessment of the farm management and business model of 

farmer associations, particularly given the current non sustainable development and 

operation of sugar cane smallholder enterprises. 

In view of the above, it was felt that the Inception Report did not address some of the major 

challenges the project is facing and that a critical mass was missing in respect of the way 

smallholder cane development is currently fostered and nurtured by SWADE. The RDMU 

believes that SHIP should have had more discussions with the RDMU team and could have 

built more on the experience of smallholder development that the RDMU has had since 

January 2008 up to the start of operations by SHIP in mid 2009. During this period the 

RDMU was assigned to cover the task of technical assistance until the arrival of the actual 

TA team (SHIP). 

In summary, evidence from the inception report, the inception workshop and daily 

discussions between the RDMU and the SHIP team, suggest that the team still need time to 

fully understand the obstacles of smallholder cane grower development in Swaziland and 

how to make it sustainable. 

3.1.3.2 SO3: Transport Infrastructure 

During the inception phase of Aurecon, the RDMU assisted them in both administrative and 

also technical issues related to EC procedures, contractual management, timesheets, etc. 

3.1.4 R 2 A 4 : Recruit short- term experts 


Design, review and preparation of tender documents for EC funded Round 2 

As detailed at the beginning of this chapter, the short-term assignment started on the 14 th 

April and ended on the 10 th July. Details can be found in chapter 3.1.1.1. 

Final Design of the Takhamiti irrigation Scheme 

Prior to the mobilisation of the final design expert team (5 short-term experts), a soil survey 

had to be undertaken to identify the best soils which can be managed by smallholder cane 

growers. The soil survey started on the 28 th July and hence, no results are available. 


3.1.5 R 2 A 5 : Assess the progress reports by 

contractors and assist EC / MEPD in verifying 

invoices 

Since no progress reports and invoices were submitted until after the 31 July 2009, no 

activities were undertaken by the RDMU in this regard. 


3.2.1 SO 1 – Support to Smallholder Sugarcane 

Growers 

Irrigation Works Tender: Land conflict at KDDP farmer association 

During the evaluation process of the two lots and shortly prior to award of the contract to the 

two winning contractors, the RDMU received several letters and supporting documents 

indicating that the KDDP farmer association, Ingcayizivele, was subject to a land dispute 

whereby two chiefs claim to have ownership / usufructs right on the land earmarked for 

development. Astonishingly, the documents, signed by the King’s office and members of the 

traditional administration, were dated 2007 and hence, the implementing organisation was 

aware of this conflict. Despite this the association was proposed as being eligible for the EC 

grant even though one of the key criteria for being eligible for the EC grant is that 

associations should not be subject to a land conflict or dispute. The RDMU on behalf of 

MEPD asked for clarifications from the various parties involved and asked them to resolve 

this conflict as soon as possible since no contract can be awarded to the contractor as long 

as a land conflict remains pertinent. To date, the conflict has not been solved and the 

contractor was asked to extend their tender validity period for 40 days. 

SWADE’s capacity to design irrigation schemes and the RDMU response to undertake 

design on farmer associations outside of the mandate of SWADE 

On the occasion of a technical working group held at the SWADE offices in Siphofaneni, on 

the 27 th April 2009, SWADE indicated that they were in the process of changing from using 

private contractors for the design to creating the capacity to carry out the designs in-house. 

While SWADE has the financial resources to employ irrigation engineers, there is a shortage 

of suitable candidates on the local market. Therefore SWADE would have to recruit and train 

qualified engineers. These factors might reduce its capacity over the short term to deliver 

final designs to an acceptable standard/quality for all schemes. In this context, it may also 

require more capacity building, which could be a role for the TA. 

The meeting was informed that the SHIP-TA team is not structured to carry out designs: it 

has one irrigation engineer and no relevant equipment or facilities. According to the TORs, 

the SHIP-TA team will only review designs prepared by SWADE; prepare the tender dossier 

and supervise the works. The composition of the TA team would have to be changed were its 

task modified to include capacity building. Following consultation with the TA Team, it might 

be possible to reduce the number of working days for the finance manager to accommodate 

an additional Irrigation Engineer. The TA team (SHIP) should look at this during the inception 

period. The EC expressed its hope that there will be a transitional arrangement so as to 

avoid any delays in developing schemes. For details see the minutes of this meeting in 

Annex 5. 

Given the lack of capacity in SWADE to undertake state-of-the-art designs in conjunction 

with the tight deadline to award the last irrigation works contract in December 2010 (AAP 

2007), the RDMU recommended (agreed upon by the NAS WG and NAS SC) that it should 

undertake final designs in areas which are beyond the mandate of SWADE to ensure that the 


AAP 2007 allocations can be fully used. As such, in July 2009 the RDMU started a soil 

survey and the final design for the Takhamiti Farmer Association, which has been identified 

by RSSC on a total of approximately 240 ha. 

Moreover, the RDMU has started, in cooperation with the Ubombo Sugar mill, to identify 

existing well performing farmer associations that have plans for expansion. Currently, farmer 

associations catering for expansion of approximately 500 ha in the South have been 

identified which could in principle be eligible in terms of average hectarage per farm 

household, sucrose quota and water permit. Details and an in-depth review of these farmer 

associations will be made in October 2009. The development of the Takhamiti farmer 

association and the additional 500 ha, plus those earmarked by SWADE (Round 2) would 

ensure that the total balance of the AAP 2007 earmarked for smallholder development could 

be contracted before December 2010. 

The RDMU undertook some brainstorming on the risks, implications of the AAP 2007 and 

possible options on how to overcome some of the problems. Annex 6 depicts a concise 

overview of the critical issues and possible solutions. They are outlined below: 

• Commitment rate is low and there is a large uncommitted balance left amounting to € 8.6 

million; 

• December 2010 is the date by which, the last contract for irrigation installation can be 

signed to be funded from the AAP 2007; 

• Smallholder sugar cane development is currently not sustainable and a large number of 

schemes proposed for development by SWADE are not financially viable. Thus they will 

not be approved by the evaluation committee, again resulting in a reduction of the 

commitment rate; 

• There is an apparent risk that not all the AAP2007 money can be used; 

• Instead of concentrating purely on new entrants, alternative options should be developed 

such as the expansion of existing reasonably performing farmer associations. These 

should be considered to ensure full commitment and disbursement of the AAP2007 

allocation. Another option is the amendment of the AAP 2007 Financing Agreement 

catering for the provision of seed cane which can be quickly committed and disbursed, 

and the financing of infield roads. 

LUSIP temporarily in danger 

On the 07 February 2009, a well researched newspaper article entitled “LUSIP in danger” 

was published by the Weekend Observer. In this article it was mentioned that the country’s 

leadership had some time ago signed a 25 year lease agreement with USA Distillers 

whereby a large part of the land (about 2,500 ha) which is earmarked for LUSIP Phase 2 

(smallholder growers) development will be leased out to the distillery for ethanol production. 

This would have meant that land which has been earmarked for the development of resource 

poor smallholder farmers to alleviate poverty, through funding by various international donor 

agencies with soft loans and grant finance, would to a large extent benefit a commercial 

distillery operation. It is possible that the distillery would most likely grow irrigated sugar cane 

with water taken from the LUSIP irrigation scheme. 

The RDMU saw two serious implications of this case: 

• LUSIP Phase 2 might not be financed at all by the international donor community; 

• If LUSIP Phase 2 goes ahead and a large amount of cane is used for primary ethanol 

production (and not for Molasses as at present), a large bulk of the crop will go to the 

distillery and not to Ubombo Sugar. The latter might not invest in expanding its crushing 


capacity, as was planned assuming a larger amount of cane to be processed. Since 

economies of scale for the mill only accrue with a significant increase of the crushing 

capacity coupled with a heavy investment, the mill might decide not to invest at all given 

the uncertainty of the area under sugar cane for sugar production. 

In the RDMU’s opinion, both consequences would have serious implications on the NAS / 

MIP related to disbursement and the future expansion and investment programme of the 

Ubombo Sugar Mill. 

The RDMU disseminated this article to all major stakeholders, particularly the EC. As a 

consequence of that, it is understood that the EC funded LUSIP Project Director had to 

report on this issue to the EC several times to clarify the situation. Several weeks after 

having made this case public, it was reported by SWADE that the lease agreement with USA 

Distillers had been cancelled. 



SO1 Support to Small Sugar Cane growers Phase 1 (AAP 2007) 

• Organisation of the evaluation committee for the EC Round 2 farmer associations in 

October / November 2009 

• Launching the tender for irrigation equipment and installation for Round 2 (EC funded) in 

December 2009 or January 2010; 

SO3 Transport Infrastructure (AAP 2006 and AAP 2008) 

• Award of the final design contract for the roads and infrastructures in the North in August 

2009 with an indicative mobilisation of the team for mid September. 

• Continue the final design activities for the roads and infrastructures in the South. 

Other areas related to MIP and NAS 

The EC and the MTR report recommended that a Strategic Environmental Assessment on 

the NAS as well as a revision, prioritisation and finalisation of the NAS logframe should be 

undertaken as soon as possible. In view of that, the RDMU will prepare Terms of Reference 

for these two assignments in the next reporting period with a plan of having the two 

assignments commissioned in January 2010. 

3.4 Major issues requiring urgent attention 

SO 1 Support to Smallholder Cane Growers - Designs and business plans 

As already mentioned, the last contract for the supply and installation of irrigation equipment 

needs to be signed in December 2010 at the latest. Given that only 400 ha are very close to 

being contracted so far (Irricon) and 230 ha are still pending due to the land conflict in the 

north, the disbursement of the AAP 2007 has been very slow. Assuming that the land conflict 

is resolved quickly, we still need to design, approve and contract about 1,500 ha before the 

end of December 2010 which appears to be very difficult given SWADE’s design capacity, 

even supported by SHIP. Therefore, co-operation with the millers is important to identify 

additional viable farmer associations outside of the mandate of SWADE. The millers are 

committed to undertake preliminary designs where possible for some of these schemes 

provided the probability of the schemes being viable is likely to be high. The development of 

designs can be undertaken by the use of short-term experts from both the RDMU and from 

SHIP. 


Tertiary Distribution System (TDS) for LUSIP will not supply water before September 

2010 

SWADE informed the various stakeholders that the contractor working on the TDS started in 

July 2009 and that the works will not be completed before September 2010. This means that 

the farmer associations that will take their water from the TDS will not have water before 

September 2010. It is hoped that no major delays occur which might jeopardize the planned 

dates for planting the seed cane. 

Overall reduced commitment rate of MIP 2007-2010 

Contracted amounts and disbursements against the AAPs 2006, 2007 and 2008 are shown 

in the table below. The AAP 2009 is still in draft form. At the end of July 2009, 21% of the 

total amount of the total allocation 2006-08 was contracted. When including the forecast of 

contracted amounts until the end of 2009, slightly over 30% will be contracted. 

Disbursements at the end of July 2009 amounted to 6.7% of the total allocation 2006-08. 

Excluding RDMU operations the above-mentioned percentages would have been 11.02% 

and 0% respectively. 

Table 5: Commitments and disbursements (amounts in €) 

Year Allocation Contracted Disbursed 

Forecast to Contracted as % 

be of total allocation 

contracted including 

by the end of forecast 

2009 

AAP 2006 4,703,000 4,342,302 2,529,980 325,000 99 

AAP 2007 14,895,000 3,057,012 0 3,213,000 43 

AAP 2008 18,000,000 570,803 0 0 3 

Total 37,598,000 7,970,117 2,529,980 3,538,000 

% of Total allocation 21.2 (*) 6.7 (*) 9.4 30.6 

(*) Without the RDMU these percentages would be 11.02% and 0% 

A combination of factors has impeded the achievement of higher commitment rates and a 

number of these are mentioned below (in line with the MTR draft report). 

One key constraint is the lack of implementation capacity amongst some of the stakeholders, 

especially with regard to SWADE. This organisation has faced problems maintaining 

sufficient technically skilled and qualified staff, which has impacted on the timely delivery of 

designs of sufficient quality for the irrigation works. This has caused delays in the 

implementation of the 2007 AAP. 

The way the programme was structured is an issue. This refers to the fact that for road 

infrastructure the designs and works were incorporated in the 2008 Financing Agreement. An 

EC prerequisite is that the designs are fully approved before the works can start. The 

designs, however, are only a small percentage of the Financing Agreement Budget and 

therefore the commitment rate of the 2008 AAP was low. 

The absence of a fully-fledged Finance and Contracts Section at the EC Delegation in 

Mbabane has influenced matters. This has led to delays in the application of the procedures 

and some misunderstanding over what could or could not be included in the programmes. 


Recommendations (see MTR draft report) 

• The process of individual commitments needs to be improved so as to avoid further 

budget reductions. Possibilities to speed up the process could include: 

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

increasing the size of the tenders; 

strengthening the capacity of some institutions where necessary, for example 

SWADE; 

tendering the whole design of irrigation works to contractors; 

making use of turn-key projects; 

For road projects, incorporating designs in earlier AAPs followed by implementation 

of works in later AAPs. 


4 RESULT 3: OTHER NAS ACTIVITIES 

FINANCED AND IMPLEMENTED 



Mini-mill study 

As far as the activities within result 3 are concerned, these were not planned and hence not 

much has been undertaken. Under this result some efforts have been made to approach the 

European Investment Bank (EIB) for possible financing of the mini mill and its fully-fledged 

feasibility study. Discussions were undertaken to contribute with equity finance through the 

millers as in Mozambique. The outcome however was not very promising, since in the 

opinion of the EIB, Swaziland is not facing shortages of money and the Development 

Financing Institutions (DFI) could contribute significantly to those areas where the EIB has 

been requested to assist. 

Carbon funding 

Though not planned within this phase, the carbon team developed two Project Identification 

Notes (PIN) for Ubombo Sugar in the context of fuel switch projects and energy efficiency 

measures which are the basis for being eligible for carbon funding. One large energy supplier 

from Germany indicated that they will launch a mission to review the possibilities of cofinancing 

Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plants. 

Donor approach strategy 

The RDMU continued the development of the matrix of various donor agencies (both those 

working in Swaziland but also important donors currently not operating in Swaziland) with a 

view to identify which donor is usually financing what kind of project and how these could be 

linked with the NAS measures. However, as far as the possible financing contribution by 

other donors is concerned, it has to be noted that Swaziland and hence the NAS might not 

attract many interested donors for a number of reasons. First of all, Swaziland is not defined 

as a least developed country, secondly, it is small with a population of only about 1 million 

people and thirdly it does not fulfil several good governance criteria. Therefore Swaziland is 

not a focal country for many international donors. As a result the number of potential donors 

might be very limited and probably not different from those who are already financing 

projects in the country. Among these, the EIB, AfDB and IFAD have already indicated that 

apart from LUSIP, no other projects are likely to be of interest in the near future. 

Review of the Sugar Industry Strategy 

The SSA initiated, and the RDMU financed this assignment that was undertaken in April 

2009 by Dr Paul Goodison. However, for confidentiality reasons requested by the SSA, the 

report was not disseminated and therefore no summary can be outlined. 

NAS Activities Monitoring 

Annex 10 illustrates details on all 60 NAS measures. However, it has to be noted that this 

monitoring matrix is only a temporary solution in the absence of a fully fledged, complete and 

reprioritised logical framework for the NAS. Once, the logframe is revisited the NAS Activities 

monitoring matrix can then be improved. 



Obstacles faced with the mini-mill study 

There was a need to review the mini mill study since some stakeholders noted that certain of 

the data the study was based on did not appear to be plausible. The RDMU recalculated the 

study on the basis of the new data provided by the millers. With these revised calculations it 

has become obvious that the mini mill is not financially viable under the prevailing conditions 

(miller / grower share). The production of ethanol in a pure ethanol plant is still considered to 

be viable, however, the sugar industry in Swaziland could not provide any data to 

substantiate the calculations. Therefore, no additional resources were focused on the ethanol 

option. 

Insufficient number of bankable projects 

One of the tasks of the RDMU is to identify and elaborate bankable projects within the NAS 

to be pursued for funding with other donors. Given the fact that the RDMU was assigned to 

take over activities which were meant to be undertaken and implemented by others 

(technical assistance to smallholder cane growers from January 2008 to June 2009 and still 

guiding the SHIP team), the RDMU was not able to devote sufficient time to developing 

bankable projects. 

Over and above all, as the ROM 2008 and the MTR 2009 pointed out, the NAS is, as it 

currently stands, a compilation of many interventions, characterised by a lot of duplication 

and not following a logical framework. Therefore, it is very difficult to tailor certain packages 

and to sell them to other donors. Since we plan to launch an assignment on the review and 

reprioritisation of the logical framework for the NAS, we anticipate a clearer picture of the 

NAS will emerge which can be marketed more easily. 

Launch of a tender for irrigation supply and installation in LUSIP funded by GoS 

SWADE prepared designs for approximately 475 ha of farmer associations in LUSIP and 

launched the tender for irrigation supply and installation in May 2009. As already indicated in 

the last progress report, the RDMU was not involved at all with these farmer associations, 

neither in reviewing the designs nor in the development and approval of the business plans. 

Therefore, no evaluation committee decided whether or not the farmer associations should 

be funded. No further details are known to the RDMU in respect of this particular tender / 

contract apart from some information occasionally mentioned in the newspapers. This case 

is another example of not having a mutual information flow. Whereas the RDMU caters for a 

lot of transparency in its work, other stakeholders do not always reciprocate. 



The carbon team will continue the process of elaborating the necessary documentation to be 

submitted to the relevant UN organisation to ensure eligibility for carbon funding. 

Currently, the most promising project identified and elaborated by the RDMU is the Ratoon 

Management Fund. Therefore, one of the priorities for the coming reporting period will be to 

prepare a brochure, or some meaningful documentation, introducing and detailing the RMF 

and to then approach finance institutions. 

Moreover, given the large funding gap for infield irrigation in LUSIP, the necessity will arise to 

foster the marketing of smallholder irrigation development to AfDB, IFAD and others: 

especially funders in the Middle East who have long-term relationships with Swaziland and 

which have different criteria for assessing good governance concerns. 



Revision of the NAS Logframe 

In view of the aforementioned, we believe that the re-prioritisation of the NAS and its 

logframe need to be undertaken as soon as possible. 

RDMU is not fully integrated into the sugar sector 

In various assignments and communications, and the MTR also emphasised this, it has 

become clear that the RDMU, despite being in charge of the coordination of the NAS and 

MIP implementation, is often considered as an intruder or as an obstacle by the sugar 

industry / sugar sector. As such, information is not always transmitted to the RDMU on 

important issues such as data for studies that concern the sugar sector. Therefore, some 

studies (the mini mill study in particular) could have been of better quality, and the work of 

the RDMU in general could be more efficient and effective, if the RDMU was more integrated 

into the current industry setting. 

Flow of information is only from RDMU to stakeholders and not vice versa 

As the MTR observed, the RDMU is extremely dedicated in disseminating information to the 

various stakeholders and being as transparent as possible. However, this flow of 

communication is usually only one way and a lot of information is not reaching the RDMU 

(though it may have been agreed upon) such as regular updates on the current state of 

irrigation designs, business plans or more general plans for the industry. Therefore, the 

monitoring role of the RDMU on the NAS has its limitations. 


5 RESULT 4: STAKEHOLDER LIAISON 

ESTABLISHED AND IN OPERATION 



5.1.1 R 4A 1: Organise weekly planning meetings with 

MEPD 

In the reporting period, 23 weekly Monday meetings and 7 extraordinary meetings have been 

organised between RDMU and MEPD. These meetings are a forum where proposed 

upcoming consultancies are discussed and agreed upon, communication and visibility 

interventions are discussed, areas of concerns are tabled, and the week to week planning is 

done. 

The RDMU is usually represented by two people (the team leader and finance manager or 

economist), MEPD is usually represented by the chief economist, senior economist, 

economist and several other staff members. Usually, these meetings are the highlight of the 

week and considerable mutual trust has been established between the RDMU and MEPD. 

5.1.2 R 4A 2: Develop a visibility and communication 

strategy and disseminate brochures 

RDMU website 

The RDMU website has been continuously updated with reports which can be downloaded 

and latest news. Currently, about 90 documents are available for downloading. 

Development of a visibility and communication strategy 

Following the recommendations laid down in the communication strategy, the RDMU was 

represented with a stand at the Swazi Expo 2009 in June 2009. This is a commercial fair 

where the private sector was given the opportunity to show new products and services. 

Brochures / leaflets 

At the time of writing this report, the RDMU has developed two brochures (both in English 

and SiSwati), 4 leaflets and several posters which were all exhibited at the Expo 2009 (see 

Annexures 6 and 7). 

SSA Conference July 2009 

The SSA organised a conference entitled “Sugar Industry Adaptation in the SADC, African 

and Global Contexts – Lessons Learnt and the Way Forward”. The conference was held over 

2 days and the RDMU co-financed it with approximately Euro 20,000. Besides other 

presenters, the RDMU Agriculturalist, Sibusiso Malaza made a presentation on the 

Swaziland National Adaptation Strategy: Its Nature, Implementation and Way Forward”. For 

details, see Annex 9. 


Photo 2: RDMU at the Swazi Expo 2009 

5.1.3 R 4A 3: Organise press conferences, radio and 

TV spots on the NAS and MIP 

In February 2009, the RDMU and MEPD invited representatives of the media in Swaziland 

for a working lunch to brief them on the NAS, MIP and RDMU. Several newspaper articles 

were published as a consequence of this press meeting. 

On the occasion of the opening of the Lower Usuthu Smallholder Irrigation Project (LUSIP) 

on the 27th March 2009, the Principal Secretary of the Ministry of Economic Planning and 

Development (MEPD), Mbuso Dlamini and the Head of the Delegation of the European 

Commission to Swaziland and Lesotho, Peter Beck Christiansen, undertook a public 

ceremony repeating the Financing Agreement signing for the Transport Infrastructure 

component. 


Photo 3: 

Financing Agreement signing ceremony 

5.1.4 R 4A 4: Organise the NAS SC and NAS WG 

The NAS Working Group (WG) is organized on the occasion of special events. In the 

reporting period these events were mostly discussing, designing and agreeing upon the 

content of the AAP 2009, evaluation criteria for farmer associations applying for EC grant 

finance and discussion of short-term consultancy inputs. As a result of that, 10 NAS WGs 

were held at the premises of the RDMU. For each WG meeting minutes have been prepared 

and circulated for comment. Recommendations made by the WGs have been brought 

forward to the NAS SC for endorsement. 

The NAS Steering Committee (SC) is usually organized on a bi-monthly basis. As such, 3 

NAS SC were held in the reporting period. Main tasks were to endorse recommendations by 

the NAS WG in respect of the AAP 2009. 

5.1.5 R 4A 5: Organise site visits with the major 

stakeholders / NAS WG 

For special events, site visits have been undertaken with stakeholders, e.g. 6 workshops 

partly within the RDMU premises, but also at the locations of the stakeholders /potential 

beneficiaries. In addition to these, another 9 site visits were undertaken, particularly in the 

context of the AAP 2009 preparation. 


On the occasion of the planning of the Ratoon Management Fund (RMF) in Swaziland, 

grower representatives from the various mill groups and other stakeholders visited, under the 

guidance of the RMF expert Dr Richard Bates, the Akwandze Agricultural Finance in 

Mpumalanga. This could be an ideal model for the establishment of the RMF for the NAS. 

Photo 4: 

Visit to Akwandze Finance 

On the occasion of the SSA Conference in July 2009, first contacts were established with a 

farmer association in Malawi benefitting from FairTrade. It is envisaged that the fair-trade key 

drivers (representatives of various stakeholders) will visit this association in October 2009. 

5.1.6 R 4 A 6: Support and perform capacity building 

of stakeholders 

No major formal training has taken place in the reporting period, however capacity building 

by training on the job has been accomplished through 3 NAS SC meetings, 10 NAS WG 

meetings, 6 workshops and 9 site visits. Moreover, the RDMU organised a training workshop 

on EC and RDMU procedures in June 2009. The RDMU local expert, Khetsiwe Khumalo 

organised several capacity building exercises on carbon credits, clean development 

mechanisms, and the implications and opportunities for Swaziland. This was for non-carbon 

experts. Lastly, significant capacity building activities were performed with SWADE staff in 

developing state-of-the art business plans. 

Evidence from the various AAPs and indicative proposals for the MIP 2011-2013 suggests 

that the RDMU is the think tank of the NAS and MIP. In view of that, colleagues from the 


SSA visit the RDMU on a frequent basis to discuss and undertake collective brainstorming 

on new ideas and proposals. In view of that, a lot of training on the job is provided on an 

ongoing basis. 


As far as visibility, press releases, TV and radio spots are concerned, the understanding is 

that the RDMU is not supposed to do these events on their own. Usually, EC and MEPD 

have to agree, or the hierarchy of MEPD needs to be consulted and involved. Very often 

political issues will become important and a lot of time is spent on liaising with the 

corresponding authorities. This is often very time-consuming and high opportunity costs 

arise. Therefore, unless formally requested by MEPD, the RDMU often abstains from these 

public relations initiatives and concentrates on the priority work. 



The weekly MEPD-RDMU and bi-monthly NAS SC meetings will be continued. Moreover, 

with the implementation of SO1 and SO3, as well as in respect of upcoming issues to be 

discussed, regular NAS WG meetings will be organized. 

As far as visibility and communication is concerned, the following interventions are planned 

for the next reporting period: 

• Radio and TV spots on NAS; 

• Regular press releases coinciding with the commencement of work by the irrigation and 

infrastructure contractors. 


The RDMU has been criticised several times for not organising formal training and capacity 

building activities such as sending stakeholders on study trips abroad or inviting to Swaziland 

professional trainers in key areas. It is correct that not much has been undertaken in this 

regard and it was also recommended by the MTR mission that more training and capacity 

building should be provided. In response the RDMU has elaborated a training and capacity 

building matrix with numerous training activities including from logframe to Ecofin, grant 

management, study tours, etc. and stakeholders have been requested to fill in organisations 

and potential nominated candidates, as well as being encouraged to propose other training 

activities which the stakeholders believe could be beneficial to enhance their effectiveness 

when collaborating in the NAS implementation. However, apart from one, no responses have 

come from the stakeholders in proposing candidates as requested by the RDMU. Training 

and capacity building needs to be a joint supply and demand driven approach but if there is 

no demand, it is difficult to confirm priorities. More proactive cooperation needs to be 

requested at the next NAS SC. 


6 OTHER AREAS OF INTERVENTION 



Mid-Term Review of the RDMU 

From the 15 June to the 11 July 2009, a team of two experts performed the mid-term 

evaluation of the RDMU. The final report is expected to be tabled in August 2009. 

MIP Evaluation in July 2009 

At the beginning of July 2009, a team of 2 experts visited Swaziland for two days to perform 

the evaluation of the MIP 2007-2010. The final report is expected to be tabled in November 

2009. 

Partial Decentralisation of the management of EC Budget Lines 

In response to the EC proposal dated the 17 th June 2009, the MEPD agreed in their letter 

dated the 25 th June 2009 that MEPD is accepting from now onwards the introduction of 

partial decentralised management in the Sugar AAP 2009 and for the implementation of the 

EC Budget Lines in general. This means that for the AAP 2009, and all subsequent AAPs, 

the MEPD will become the contracting authority instead of the EC. Moreover, it also offers 

the possibility to change all previous AAPs (AAP 2007 and AAP 2008) with a rider from 

“centralized” to “partial decentralised” management. This change will not have major 

implications for the RDMU as we have already informally followed decentralised procedures. 

RDMU Logframe 

For the purpose of avoiding duplications and having a clear separation, we have slightly 

revised the logical framework for the RDMU. The new activity related to Result 2, R 2 A 3 

needs to be read as “Assist EC / MEPD supervise performance of the contractors (Service, 

Works, Supply or Call for Proposals) and monitor projects physical progress” and R 2 A 4 

has to be read as “Recruit short-term experts for MIP implementation”. 

Annex 1 illustrates the revised logical framework of the RDMU. Moreover, this annex also 

depicts an attempt to assess the objectively verifiable indicators (OVI) as stipulated in the 

RDMU logframe. From the indicators it can be concluded that after half of its implementation 

period, the indicators are considered too optimistic. At the time of the review of the NAS 

logframe, the indicators need to be adjusted accordingly. 

Annex 11 gives a brief overview of the RDMU logframe on the basis of the results and in 

terms of the indicators to be accomplished. The cut off point is the 31 July 2009. 


There were no particular problems encountered under this result in the current reporting 

period. 



As indicated by the EC in a response to the last progress report, it is an imperative to 

undertake a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the NAS. The RDMU has some 

reservations on the benefit of this assignment since the SEA should have been undertaken 

as part of the NAS development. Being 4 years after the NAS was originally developed the 


question arises as to the level of current interest about whether or not the NAS as a whole 

complies with environmental issues. Nevertheless, the RDMU is ready to develop terms of 

reference and to identify suitable experts. 


Development of the MIP 2011 - 2013 

The EC indicated at the end of the reporting period that despite not having the AAP 2010 

drafted, the MIP 2011-2013 has be developed and finalised before end of October 2009. 

Therefore, it is planned to have two consultants on board to assist the RDMU and the 

stakeholders in developing the new MIP in close consultation with the stakeholders. Given 

the short time available for developing the new MIP, all stakeholders need to cooperate and 

give their inputs ensuring it is both a timely and consultative development. Given the lessons 

learned from the previous MIP, it is proposed to include mechanisms which allow faster 

disbursement and also to keep it as flexible as possible. Potential mechanisms for improving 

the flexibility could be Trust Funds (as a buffer) or Cost Sharing Grant Systems (see the EC 

supported Caribbean Rum Sector Programme). 


7 BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FOR MIP AND 

DISBURSEMENT 

Compared to the last progress report, there are no changes as far as the MIP allocations are 

concerned. The next progress report will give more details. 

With regard to the disbursement status of the various contracts, it has to be noted that until 

the 31 July 2009, GRM International, the company implementing the SHIP project, and 

Aurecon, the contractor performing the final design for the infrastructures South have not 

asked for an advance. Moreover, the contract for Lot 2 (LUSIP first 400 ha) has not been 

signed. Therefore, no disbursements were made from the AAP 2007 and AAP 2008. 

The disbursement from the AAP 2006 (GFA/RDMU contract) has not changed compared to 

the last report. 


8 PROGRESS REPORT AND FUTURE WORK PROGRAMME BY RESULT 

Result 1: EC MIP 2007- 2010 is committed 

Activity Planned during period Achieved during period Planned for next 6 months 

R 1 A 1: Identify projects for the four specific objectives SO1 – SO4 of the MIP and assist with preparation of the PIF, AF, AAP, FA and TAP 

AAP 2009: SO 1: Support to Smallholder 

Cane Growers and SO 4: Diversification 

AF, FA, TAP approval in March 2009 

Assistance to SCGA to develop the 

technical proposal for the Grant 

Contract 

AF approved by the QSG in EC Brussels, 

FA, TAP in final stage 

Numerous stakeholder meetings on the 

content of the Grant Contract. Technical 

proposal in an advanced stage. 

Cooperate with SCGA in the elaboration of the 

technical proposal for Grant Contract to be 

managed by SCGA and of the corresponding 

Financing Agreement with particular focus on 

implementation modalities and eligibility 

criteria. 

SO 2: Support to Social Services 

Elaboration of the PIF and AF on the 

basis of consolidated concrete 

proposals made by the sugar industry. 

As of the end of June 2009 this 

consolidated proposal reflecting the sugar 

industry’s view on the social services has 

not been submitted, the RDMU was not 

able to initiate first discussion with other 

important stakeholders such as GoS. 

However, the RDMU in close collaboration 

with the SSA has picked certain possible 

packages and has started working on their 

feasibility. As such, water supply and 

treatment at Ubombo might be potential 

interventions as well as the construction of 

a solid waste treatment plant in Tshaneni 

and teacher houses for both mill groups. 

Moreover, RDMU has assisted the MEPD 

in liaising with the involved line ministries 

such as education, health and urban 

housing. 

SO 3: Transport Infrastructure Nothing foreseen. Not applicable Nothing foreseen 

Launching of various assignments to assess 

the technical and economic feasibility of 

various interventions and elaboration of PIF 

and AF. 



R 1 A 2: Recruit and mobilise short-term experts 

AAP 2008 Transport Infrastructure Nothing foreseen (see under Result 2 

MIP implementation) 

Not applicable 

See MIP implementation 

AAP 2009 Support to smallholder cane 

growers and agricultural diversification 

AAP 2010 (Social Services and Economic 

Diversification) 

Other assignments not related to SOs of 

MIP 2007-2010 

Contracting the RDMU Civil Engineer 

for: 

Rehabilitation of the Malkerns Canal: 

Final Planning and stakeholder 

involvement 

Continuation of the socio-economic 

study of the Malkerns Canal 

Fully Fledged Feasibility Study of the 

Mini-Mill 

Indicative assignments on Public 

Health and Education 

Nothing planned 

Technical Assessment of Farmer 

Associations (continuation) 

Ratoon Management Revolving Fund (Finetuning 

of current concept and introduction 

to stakeholders) 

Baseline Survey of 72 Farmer Associations 

Baseline Survey on Individual Small Cane 

Growers (57) 

FairTrade Certification 

Carbon Trade: Elaboration of Energy 

Efficiency Concept by using CHP Plants 

Electric Grid Factor Assignment 

Socio-economic Study on the rehabilitation 

of the Malkerns Canal 

In the absence of the consolidated sugar 

industry proposal, no assignment 

Commencement of an evaluation and 

screening on multipurpose small dams in 

Shiselweni and Lubombo regions 

Continuation of the Technical Assessment 

(Audit) on all Farmer Associations. 

Continuation of the RMF Assignment to finetune 

the concept and to approach possible 

donors for the fund 

Continuation of the PDD Development for 

Ubombo and starting one PDD for RSSC 

Launching of assignment on the feasibility of 

water supply and sewage at Ubombo and 

RSSC 

Continuation and finalisation of small dams 

study 

MIP 2011 – 2013 Development Nothing planned Not applicable Launching of experts to assist in the 

preparation of the MIP 2011 - 2013 



R 1A 3: GUIDE and advise the STE missions, finalise the mission reports and involve stakeholders 

Guidance and supervision of all STE 

missions 

Monitoring of STE missions 

For most of the STE missions, a detailed 

briefing was made after commencement 

together with members of the NAS WG. 

Most of the STE assignments made a midterm 

presentation of their findings from the 

mission to a NAS WG 

Approach to be continued 

Approach to be continued 

R 1A 4 Work with stakeholders to define and agree on design of specific interventions 

Stakeholder consultation in 

development of the PIF and AAP 

Numerous NAS WG & NAS SC meetings 

organised at which content of the PIFs and 

AAPs (AAP 2009) were thoroughly 

discussed, agreed upon and endorsed 

Approach to be continued with the AAP 2010 

and planning of the MIP II (2011-2013) 


Result 2 EC MIP 2007- 2010 is implemented 


R 2 A 1 

Prepare Tender Documents (Service, Works ,Supply or call for proposals) according to EC procedures 

SO 1: Support to Smallholder Cane 

Growers – Phase 1 (AAP 2007) 

Finalisation of Round 1 work contract 

tender documents and launch of tender 

Evaluation of Round 2 business plans 

and designs 

RDMU finalised tender documents on 630 

ha for LUSIP and KDDP. 

RDMU achieved EC complimentary funding 

commitments from Nedbank and SIDC 

In the absence of business plans and 

approved designs, no evaluation committee 

has taken place 

Depending on when the final designs are 

submitted, RDMU will organise an evaluation 

committee of Round 2 business plans and 

designs. 

A request to MEPD and EC was sent to 

approve that the final design of 280 ha for the 

Takhamiti Farmer Association be undertaken 

by the RDMU. This final design will take about 

2 months. 

SO 3 AAP 2008 

SO 1 and SO 4 of AAP 2009 

Finalisation of tender dossier FD&S of 

Phase 2 (North Infrastructures) 

Elaboration of a technical proposal for 

Grant Contract to be managed by 

SCGA and of the corresponding 

Financing Agreement 

Final tender documents established 

Numerous stakeholder meetings on the 

content of the Grant Contract. Technical 

proposal in an advanced stage (see under 

Result 1) 

Nothing foreseen in this particular reporting 

period 

Finalisation of grant contract technical 

proposal (see Result 1) 

2A 2 Assist EC launch and evaluate tenders, and prepare contracts (for AAPs 2007,2008, 2009 and 2010) 



Award of contract for the Technical 

Assistance Team to support 

smallholder cane growers 

Award of contract for Round 1 Irrigation 

supply and installation 

RDMU assisted in the evaluation of the 

bids, contract was awarded and the TA 

team (SHIP) mobilised in May 2009 

RDMU assisted in the evaluation of the bids 

for Round 1 irrigation supply and 

installation. It was envisaged to have the 

contract awarded by latest end of July, 

however delays related to administrative 

procedures for LUSIP Lot. Due to land 

conflict in the KDDP farmer association 

(233 ha) contract could not be awarded. 

RDMU has started and will continue handing 

over tasks, activities and responsibilities for the 

TA team 

Award of contract for LUSIP Lot as quickly as 

possible and assistance in solving land dispute 

for the 233 ha KDDP FA. 



S O 3: Transport Infrastructure (AAP 2008 

– AAP 2006) 

Finalisation of tender procedure on 

Final Design and Supervision 

(Phase 1) 

RDMU assisted in the evaluation of the 

prequalification of bidders, preparing of the 

shortlist, launch of tender, evaluation of 

tenders and award of contract (Phase 1 – 

AAP 2008)). 

RDMU has assisted in the evaluation of the 

prequalification documents and in the 

shortlisting for submission of the Final 

Design Tender (North) (Phase 2_AAP 

2006). Establishment of the tender 

documents, launch of tender and evaluation 

of tenders on 30 th July. 

Assistance in the drawing up of the contract for 

Phase 1 Final Design Tender (South). 

Assistance in the drawing up of the contract for 

Phase 2 Final Design Tender (North). 

SO1 and SO4: AAP 2009 Not applicable under this result Not applicable under this result RDMU will assist the SCGA in developing the 

technical proposal for the grant contract and it 

is expected that the Financing Agreement will 

be signed in October / November 2009 

R 2A 3 Assist EC and MEPD in supervising contractors and monitoring project progress (Service, Works, Supply or Call for Proposals) and monitor the projects physical 

progress 



Monitoring and supervision of the 

Technical Assistance Team from 

March / April 2009 onwards 

Guidance, monitoring and supervision of 

the Technical Assistance Team SHIP 

mobilised in May 2009 (company GRM) 

Several monitoring missions are planned for 

second half of the year on the installation of 

the irrigation systems of Round 1. 

Monitoring and Supervision of the 

Irrigation Works Contractors from 

September/ August 2009 onwards 

Contractor for infield irrigation installation 

not started working within reporting period. 

Guidance, monitoring and supervision of the 

Technical Assistance Team will continue. 

If need arises, the RDMU Irrigation Engineer 

will monitor and supervise the supply and 

installation of Round 1. 

Invoices from contractors for AAP2007 will be 

controlled and verified. 



S O 3: Transport Infrastructure (AAP 2008 

and AAP 2006) 

Monitoring and supervision of the 

FD&S Team from June / July 2009 

onwards. 

Guidance, monitoring and supervision of 

final design and supervision team that 

started on 01 July 2009 (company 

AURECON). 

Guidance, monitoring and supervision of final 

design and supervision team (AURECON). 

Invoices from contractors for AAP 2008 will be 

controlled and verified 

The Final Design team for the North (AAP 

2006) is expected to start in September 2009. 

The RDMU Civil Engineer and the RDMU 

Irrigation Engineer will monitor and evaluate 

project progress. 

R 2A 4 Recruit short-term experts for MIP implementation 

AAP 2007 Support to smallholder cane 

growers 

See next column 

Review of Final Designs on Farmer 

Associations and Capacity Building to 

SWADE Engineers and Technicians, 

Evaluation of irrigation Works tender of 

Round 1 (630 ha) 

Soil Survey of proposed Takhamiti Farmer 

Association 

Final Design of proposed Takhamiti Farmer 

Association 

Continuation of Soil Survey Takhamiti Farmer 

Association 

Continuation of Final Design on Takhamiti 

Farmer Association 

AAP 2008 and AAP 2006 (Transport 

Infrastructure) 

See next column 

Assistance in the evaluation of the two 

tenders on Final Design for the 

Infrastructure projects in the South and in 

the North. 

Pre-feasibility on Poortzicht Farmer Group at 

Big Bend in the context of improving bulk water 

supply 

NAS / MIP 2007 - 2010 Not foreseen in the reporting period Not applicable Undertaking a Strategic Environmental 

Assessment of the NAS 

Review and re-prioritisation of the NAS logical 

framework 


Result 3: Other NAS activities are financed and implemented by other (non-EC) donors and the sugar industry. 


R 3A 1 Draw up a strategy on donor liaison 

Donors will be approached depending 

on availability of bankable project 

proposals 

Not applicable in reporting period. 

However, EIB has been approached for 

financing some of the interventions such as 

mini-mill, Ratoon Management Fund and 

credit line for millers for becoming equity 

shareholders of the farmer associations. 

RDMU has elaborated a donor matrix which 

has been discussed with MEPD. 

RDMU will assist MEPD in developing a donor 

approach strategy. 

R 3A 2: Organize multi-donor conferences 

Donors will be approached depending 

on the availability of bankable project 

proposals 

In the absence of bankable projects, no 

donor conference organised. 

Donors will be approached depending on 

availability of bankable project proposals. 

R 3A 3: Develop bankable projects to be funded by other donors 

Fully-fledged feasibility study will be 

carried out for the mini-mill 

Mini-mill turned out not to be financially 

viable. An ethanol plant still under 

discussion, however the industry in 

Swaziland is reluctant to give figures to 

complete the study on the ethanol plant. 

Continue developing bankable projects 

emanating from the various studies. 

Finalisation of documents making some of the 

stakeholders of the NAS eligible for carbon 

finance. 

Private sector investor facilitated by the RDMU 

(power supply sector) will visit the project in 

the second half of 2009 to explore possibilities 

in co-generation and CHP plants (trash 

concept). 

Approaching banks to allocate funds for the 

Ratoon Management Fund. 



R 3 A 4 Conduct field trips with donors to brief them on the NAS and the proposed packages and brief donor missions on NAS 

Any donor mission in Swaziland will be 

approached and briefed. 

R 3 A 6 Establish funding mechanism for donor interventions 

Eligibility on carbon funding will be 

continued. 

Funding mechanisms will be 

established depending on the 

availability of bankable project 

proposals 

Continuation of the RMF assignment 

seeking finance / contributions from 

other donors / banks. 

RDMU in contact with AfDB regarding joint 

conduct of a study on economic 

diversification in Swaziland. 

The Carbon and CDM assignment 

developed two Project Idea Notes for 

carbon funding for Illovo and RSSC 

Any donor mission in Swaziland will be 

approached and briefed. 

Eligibility on carbon funding will be continued. 

Funding mechanisms will be established 

depending on availability of bankable project 

proposals 

Continuation of the RMF assignment seeking 

finance / contributions from other donors / 

banks. 


Result 4: Stakeholder liaison mechanisms are established and in operation. 


R 4A 1 Organise weekly planning meetings with MEPD 

Weekly meetings between MEPD and 


23 Monday weekly meetings and 7 

extraordinary meetings held 

Continuation of weekly meetings 

R 4A 2 Develop a visibility and communication strategy and disseminate brochures and leaflets to inform all stakeholders and donors about the NAS and MIP 

Development of several brochures and 

flyers on NAS activities 

Several brochures in English and in SiSwati 

were developed and disseminated. 

The RDMU had a stand at the Swazi Expo 

2009 and developed several posters and 

flyers to generate visibility. 

RDMU Website updated on a weekly basis. 

Production of further PR material. 

R 4 A 3 Organise press conferences, radio and TV spots on NAS and MIP 

Radio spots to be developed on NAS 

Press conference and event with 

media on the occasion of FA signature 

of the AAP 2008. 

Radio spot not developed due to time 

constraints and considering particularly 

political leadership, usually not involved in 

NAS / MIP implementation, but suddenly 

wishing to get the credits. 

Invitation of several representatives of the 

media in Swaziland to brief them on the 

NAS, MIP and RDMU. 

Media coverage for the signing ceremony of 

the Financing Agreement of the AAP 2008. 

Radio spots to be developed on NAS 

R 4 A 4 Organise NAS SC and NAS WG according to the issues raised and to be agreed upon 

NAS SC on a bi-monthly basis 

NAS WG on the occasion of special 

events 

3 NAS SC meetings held 

10 NAS WG meetings held at the RDMU 

premises 

To be continued as planned and needs arise 



R 4 A 5 Organise site visits with the major stakeholders / NAS WG 

NAS WG and stakeholder site visits on 

the occasion of special events and 

needs 

6 workshops / meetings with stakeholders 

(beneficiaries) held in various locations 

9 site visits with stakeholders / beneficiaries 

(diversification, infrastructure, social 

services and smallholder irrigation) 

Contacts with FairTrade farmers in Malawi 

established. 


Visit of Swazi cane growers to Malawi 

FairTrade scheme in October 2009. 

R 4 A 6 

Support and perform capacity building of stakeholders enabling them to efficiently contribute to the programme 

No formal capacity building planned 

Capacity building by training on the job 

accomplished through 3 NAS SC meetings, 

10 NAS WG meetings, 6 workshops and 9 

site visits 

Formal training at RDMU / NAS WG on EC 

procedures on 11 th June 

Capacity building of SWADE in developing 

state-of-the art business plans and designs 


MDF (framework contractor on EC procedures) 

will be approached to tailor some training 

packages to be provided in November / 

December 2009. 

Experiential learning visits to small-holder 

growers in Malawi, Zambia and Mozambique 

to be organized to share experiences on key 

issues such as Fair-Trade, implementation of 

the MIP and small-holder support 


9 CURRENT STATUS OF THE (RDMU) PROJECT ON PERSON DAYS USED 

9.1 Overview of inputs of experts 

EU- RDMU-SWAZILAND last update 31/07/2009 

WORK DAYS INVOICED 

Commencement date - 14 January 2008 

Month 

TL 

Batzlen 

Long-term experts 

Finance 

manager 

Cooke 

Local 

Economist 

ORIGINAL CONTRACT 

Civil 

Engineer 

Local 

Agriculturalist 

Renewable 

Energy 


Short-term Experts 

Irrigation 

Business 

Development 

Environ 

ment 

Additional 

International 

STE 

Additional 

Local STE 

Total days that can 

be Invoiced 648 648 683 683 200 200 200 200 200 50 600 1,200 5,512 

2008 0 

January 08 5 12 17 

February 08 23 23 

March 08 22 13 6 41 

April 08 22 26 18 23 6 26 121 

May 08 19 26 23 22 17 9 14 5 135 

June 08 21 23 21 23 5 25 20 8 146 

July 08 25 23 23 24 2 41 43 24 205 

August 08 21 21 21 21 6 35 7 6 25 163 

September 08 16 10 19 19 2 82 33 24 10 17 232 

October 08 18 23 22 23 5 27 37 23 10 24 212 

November 08 10 20 20 20 20 5 11 8 6 6 126 

December 08 15 15 16 18 9 17 11 2 103 

2009 0 

January 09 20 20 21 20 4 42 36 163 

February 09 22 21 23 24 56 19 165 

March 09 26 22 16 23 5 11 26 22 151 

April 09 20 18 21 22 4 13 7 54 16 175 

May 09 25 23 24 26 2 3 6 36 20 165 

June 09 25 20 24 25 5 34 66 199 

July 09 26 25 26 26 11 29 9 4 19 61 236 

TOTAL USED 381 349 338 359 103 151 84 200 100 46 316 351 2778 

TOTAL 

0 

BALANCE 267 299 345 324 97 49 116 0 100 4 284 849 2,734 


Annexes

Annex 1 

The RDMU logical framework

Logical Framework for the Restructuring and Diversification Management Unit 

Restructuring and Diversification Management Unit to coordinate the implementation of the National Adaptation Strategy to the EU Sugar Reform, SWAZILAND 

INTERVENTION LOGIC 

Overall Objective Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVI) Source of verification Assumptions 

To contribute to 

Swaziland’s adaptation to 

the EU Sugar Market 

Reform 

• Mill Groups remain profitable 

• Quantities and value of sugar processed in Swaziland 

increased by 5 % between 2006 and 2013. 

• Smallholder growers within an economically viable 

distance from the mill remain in sugarcane, and are 

profitable 

• Farmers who are not at an economically viable 

profitable in sugar have diversified into alternative 

crops, profitably. 

• Percentage of population living in the sugar belt 

having access to social services by 2013 in 

comparison to 2006 increased by 5 %. 

• Swaziland Sugar 

Reports and Sugar 

Market Statistics 

• Swaziland Sugar Cane 

Growers Reports 

• Baseline Survey on 

Farmer Associations 

• GoS Reports and 

Statistics 

• Clinics Monitoring Forms 

and School Attendance 

registers 

Purpose OVI Source of verification Assumptions 

MEPD supported in the 

implementation and 

coordination of the NAS 

• 30 out of 60 NAS strategic response measures have 

been converted into actionable projects and 

programmes by the end of 2010. 

• 20 NAS measures have started or have been 

implemented by end of 2010 

• € 100 million worth of projects have been committed 

by 2010 out of € 360 million earmarked for NAS 

• Project or Programme 

documents prepared by 

RDMU and GoS. 

• Joint Annual Review 

• Donor Progress 

Reports, MTR Reports 

• Global market of sugar stable 

Logframe for Restructuring and Diversification Management Unit – Page 1

Results OVI Source of verification Assumptions 

• € 18 m is committed for Road Transport Infrastructure • CRIS 

by end 2008. 

• RDMU progress report 

• € 10 m committed to smallholder irrigation Phase 2 by 

end 2009 

• JAR 

• € 5 m committed to Agriculture Diversification by end 

2009 

• € 11m committed to social services, € 6m to 

Economic Diversification and € 3.895 committed for 

Transport Infrastructure by end 2010 

Result 1: EC MIP 2007- 2010 

is committed 

Result 2: EC MIP 2007- 2010 

is implemented 

Result 3: Other NAS 

activities are financed and 

implemented by other (non- 

EC) donors and the sugar 

industry. 

Result 4: Stakeholder liaison 

mechanisms are established 

and in operation. 

• Road and bridge design & supervision contracts 

awarded (May 2009) 

• Phase 1 Road and Bridge construction contracts 

awarded by 2010 

• Works tenders for irrigation equipment launched in 

2009 and 2010, full commitment of funds by end of 

2010 

• At least 30% of Agricultural Diversification and 2010 

measures committed by end 2010 

• At least two other donors contribute up to € 20m to 

the NAS by 2010 

• Necessary documentation established by end of 2009 

and carbon credits valued at € 5m are sold on market 

by end of 2011 

• At least 5 NAS SC organised per year 

• 70 % of major stakeholders participate in NAS WG 

and workshops every year until 2010 

• At least 8 brochures developed and 4 radio/ TV spots 

broadcasted until end of 2010 

• Contracts 

• RDMU reports. 

• Project Reports 

• Contractor Reports and 

Invoices 

• Contracts 

• Project Reports 

• Minutes of Meetings 

• Proceedings, Donor 

Reports and Aide 

Mémoire 

• Minutes of NAS SC and 

NAS WG 

• Participation lists 

• Radio/ TV programme 

• EC and MEPD officials 

available for process follow up 

• MEPD officials available for 

process follow up 

• EC makes available more funds 

for 2011-2013 

• Current credit crunch does not 

reduce the availability of donor 

funds 

• Industry continues to have 

access to finance on the capital 

market 

• Major stakeholders are 

motivated and committed in 

identification, formulation and 

implementing of the NAS 


Activities to achieve the Results 

Result 1: EC MIP 2007- 2010 is committed 

R 1A 1 Identify projects for the four specific objectives SO1 – SO4 of the MIP and Assist with preparation of PIF, AAP, FA, 

TAP, (2009 + 2010) 

R 1A 2 Recruit and mobilise STE 

R 1A 3 Guide and advice the STE missions, finalise the mission reports and involve stakeholders 

R 1A 4 Work with stakeholders to define and agree on design of specific interventions 

Result 2: EC MIP 2007- 2010 is implemented 

R 2A 1 Prepare Tender Documents (Service, Works ,Supply or call for proposals) according to EC procedures 

R 2A 2 Assist EC launch and evaluate tenders, prepare contracts (for AAPs 2007,2008, 2009 and 2010) 

R 2A 3 Assist EC / MEPD supervise performance of the contractors (Service, Works ,Supply or CfP) and monitor projects 

physical progress 

R 2A 4 Recruit short-term experts for MIP implementation 

R 2A 5 Assess the ‘progress reports’ done by the contractors, and assist EC/MEPD verify invoices 

Result 3: Other NAS activities and interventions are financed and implemented by other donors. 

R 3A 1 Draw up a strategy on donor liaison 

R 3A 2 Organise multi-donor conferences 

R 3A 3 Develop bankable projects to be funded by other donors 

R 3A 4 Conduct field trips with donors to brief on the NAS and the proposed packages and brief donor missions on NAS 

R 3A 5 Establish funding mechanism for donor interventions 

Result 4: Stakeholder liaison mechanisms are established and in operation. 

R 4A 1 Organise weekly planning meetings with MEPD 

R 4A 2 Develop visibility and communication strategy & and disseminate brochures and leaflets to inform all stakeholders 

and donors the NAS and MIP 

R 4A 3 Organise press conferences, radio and TV spots on NAS and MIP 

R 4A 4 Organise NAS SC and NAS WG according to the issues raised and to be agreed upon 

R 4A 5 Organise site visits with the major stakeholders / NAS WG 

R 4A 6 Support and perform capacity building of stakeholders enabling them to efficiently contribute to the programme 

Assumptions 

• Stakeholders, MEPD and EC duly 

perform their tasks and 

responsibilities without delays 

• All stakeholders, MEPD and EC 

duly perform their tasks and 

responsibilities without delays 

• International donor agencies 

committed towards assisting 

Swaziland in implementing NAS 

• Funds from other donors and GoS 

(~ € 240 m) can be mobilised 

bridging the gap between NAS 

cost and EC funding contribution 

• All stakeholders participate actively 

in the development and 

implementation of these events 


Related to Result 1 




MEANS 

• Technical Assistance 

• Short-term consultancies 

• Studies 


• Short-term consultancies 


• Public Relation Material 

• Workshops and field trips 


• Public Relation Material 

• Workshops and Study Tours 

• Radio / TV spots 

COST in Euro 

€ 3,789,758 


Annex 2 

Monitoring list of short-term experts approved up 

until 31/07/2009

2_Annex_2_Monitoring All Experts 

Balance of work days as committed and approved 

Position work days used work days left 

Civil Engineer 136 64 

Irrigation Engineer 200 0 

Renewable Energy Expert(s) 200 0 

Agriculturalist 113 87 

Business Management 155 45 

Environment 46 4 

Additional International Short-term Experts 331 269 

Additional local Short-term Experts 749 451 

Total work days all 1,930 920 

Total work months all 88 42 

Total work days international 1,181 469 

Total work months international 54 21 

Overview


Monitoring of Expert Days and Budget for RDMU 

Project: 

Restructuring and Diversification Management Unit, Swaziland 

Cost Center: 3011360 

End of contract 13/12/10 

Current date 2009/11/25 

Position of assignment 

Civil Engineer 

Name of EXPERT 

Kind of assignment Start of Assignment End of Assignment Days worked 

Shaun Finley PIF preparation, designs 2008/04/15 2008/07/01 40 

Robert Geddes AAP Elaboration 20/05/2008 2008/05/30 10 

Shaun Finley Assessment Malkerns Canal 01/10/2008 15/11/2008 27 

Shaun Finley Roads, Transport, Malkerns Canal 15/03/2009 23/06/2009 50 

Shaun Finley Small dam evaluation & screening 20/06/2009 20/07/2009 9 

Total Amount 136 

Amount according to budget 200 

Still available 64 

Civil Engineer



Project: 






Irrigation Engineer 



Robert G. Bloemers Review of designs, tender docs 2008/03/25 2008/05/05 35 

Robert G. Bloemers (2. assign) Review of designs, tender docs 25/05/2008 04/07/2008 35 

Robert G. Bloemers ( extension) Review of designs, tender docs 03/07/2008 13/08/2008 35 

Johannes de Beer Technical Audit Assocations 2008/07/10 90 

Robert Bloemers extension Review of designs, tender docs 20/08/2008 15/09/2008 5 




Irrigation Engineer



Project: 





Position of assignment Renewable Energy Expert(s) Energy Concept, Carbon, CDM and CMS 



Phase 1: 

Joachim Schnurr Renewable Energy 01/08/2008 30/09/2008 27 

Christine Clashausen Bioenergy / CDM 01/08/2008 30/09/2008 32 

Richard Koech Agronomist / Sugar Expert 01/08/2008 30/09/2008 20 

Christian Schweitzer Engineer Sugar and Ethanol 01/08/2008 30/09/2008 20 

Lutz Schützenmeister Process and Electrical Engineer 01/08/2008 30/09/2008 10 

Phase 2: 

Joachim Schnurr Outgrower concept /DNA Expert 2009/04/01 2009/05/06 29 

Daniel Plank Bioenergy / CDM / PDD 2009/04/01 2009/05/26 41 

Gerald Kapp CDM / DNA 2009/04/01 2009/05/06 21 




Renewable Energy



Project: 









Christopher Forte Longitudinal Survey Malkerns 2008/08/15 2008/10/09 40 

Dr Ernst Grenzebach Exit Strategy Cost Divesification 27/08/2008 06/10/2008 35 

Rob Sawyer Small Dams Evaluation & Screening 20/06/2009 20/07/2009 6 

Mike OGG Small Dams Evaluation & Screening 20/06/2009 31/07/2009 20 

Eben Verster Soil Survey Takhamiti Farmer Assoc. 2009/07/27 2009/08/17 12 




Agriculture



Project: 






Business Management 



Folkhard Wohlgemuth Financial Assessment Associations 2008/07/07 2008/08/15 30 

Simone Iltgen Financial Assessment Associations 07/07/2008 01/08/2008 20 

Dr Richard Bates Ratoon Management Fund 13/10/2008 17/11/2008 25 

Paul Goodison Review of the Sugar Industry Strategy 22/03/2009 21/04/2009 15 

Dr Richard Bates Ratoon Management Fund: Phase 2 01/05/2009 29/08/2009 65 




Business Management



Project: 






Environment 



Rod de Vletter EIA Scoping 2008/05/20 2008/07/14 20 

Ara Monadjem EIA Scoping 2008/05/20 2008/07/14 20 

Rod de Vletter EIA Scoping 2009/03/10 2009/03/15 3 

Ara Monadjem EIA Scoping 2009/03/10 2009/03/15 3 




Environment



Project: 






Additional International Short-term Experts 



Steve Atkins RDMU hand over 2008/02/14 2008/02/28 12 

Alan Price Ecofin on transport 2008/05/21 2008/06/10 cancelled 

George Blundell O'Reilly Viability Organic Sugar Production 2008/07/31 2008/09/04 30 

Johannes de Beer Technical Assessment 20 Fas 05/01/2009 05/05/2009 80 

Daniel Lambart FairTrade Certification 05/01/2009 09/02/2009 30 

Steve Atkins Socio-economic study Malkerns 05/01/2009 14/02/2009 30 

Robert Bloemers Review designs & tender documents 14/04/2009 13/07/2009 70 

Peter Zhou Asessment Grid Factor 20/04/2009 10/05/2009 12 

Martin Burian Asessment Grid Factor 20/04/2009 10/05/2009 13 

Tiekie de Beer Technical Audit 34 Fas 01/05/2009 29/08/2009 45 

Robert Bloemers Small Dams Evaluation & Screening 20/06/2009 20/07/2009 9 




Additional int short-term exp



Project: 






Additional local Short-term Experts 



Phumelele Thwala Gender audit 2008/05/27 2008/06/09 13 

Thulile Tsela Financial Assessment Assocations 2008/07/01 2008/08/30 50 

Lwazi Mhlongo Exit Strategy: cost of diversification 2008/08/27 2008/10/01 25 

J. Constantine / S. Mamba Communication & Visibility Strategy 2008/10/06 2008/11/25 28 

G. Nkambule/ N.F. Nxumalo Baseline survey 74 Fas 2009/01/10 2009/02/19 80 

Gift Nkambule Communication / Brochures 2009/04/15 2009/08/13 27 

G. Nkambule/ N.F. Nxumalo Basline Survey 61 individual growers 2009/04/25 2009/05/30 60 

Bongani Bhembe/ Fisiwe Mavuso Technical Audit 34 Fas 2009/05/01 2009/09/28 260 

Jabulile C. Dlamini Small Dams Evaluation & Screening 20/06/2009 20/07/2009 6 

Marius Kolesky FD Takhamiti: Team Leader 30/06/2009 15/09/2009 40 

J. van Rensburg FD Takhamiti: Irrigation Engineer 30/06/2009 15/09/2009 40 

Riaan Slabbert FD Takhamiti: Irrigation Technician 30/06/2009 15/09/2009 40 

Eksteen Lindeque FD Takhamiti: Agricultural Engineer 30/06/2009 15/09/2009 40 

Claudia de Beer FD Takhamiti: Draughtswoman 30/06/2009 15/09/2009 40 




Additional local short-term exp

Annex 3 

Short-term expert monitoring and reporting list

RDMU Short Term Consultant Monitoring and Work Plan according to RESULTS to be accomplished 

RESULT Purpose STATUS Name of Expert Origin of Expert Type of STE ToRs finalised Expert Days 

Request sent to 

EC/MEDP 

Approval 

MEDP/EU 

received 

STE Contract 

signed by STE 

Period 

Draft report 

expected 

DRAFT Report/Document 

received or prepared 

DRAFT 

Report/Document 

sent to EC 

FINAL Report received or 

prepared 

FINAL Report/Document sent 

to EC 

International 

Expert 

Swazi Resident Swazi National 

RESULT 1: EC MIP 2007 - 2010 committed 

SO1 Smallholder Irrigation 

Technical Assessment of Farmer Associations AAP 2009 finished Tiekie de Beer Swazi Resident Irrigation Expert X 90 X July - Dec 2008 Reports for each FA monthly report download on RDMU website 90 

Financial Assessment of Farmer Associations AAP 2009 finished Folkard Wohlgemuth International Business Management 30 X July-Oct 2008 Report Sep-08 30 

finished Simone Iltgen International Business Management 20 X 20 

finished Thuli Tsela (Kobla Quashie) Swazi National Local STE 50 X X 50 

Summary Assessment of Farmer Associations AAP 2009 X X X July-Oct 2008 Sep-08 Sep-08 Oct-08 Oct-08 

Ratoon Management Revolving Fund AAP 2009 finished Richard Bates International Business Management X 25 X X Nov-Dec 2008 Dec-08 Jan-09 Jan-09 Jan-09 25 

Continuation of Technical Assessment of FAs (20) AAP 2009 finished Tiekie de Beer Swazi Resident Int. STE X 80 X X X Jan-April 2009 Jan, Feb, Mar Reports for each FA Mar-09 download on RDMU website 80 

Baseline Survey 69 Fas AAP 2009 Mr Gift Nkambule Swazi National Local STE x 55 x X Jan-Feb 2009 55 

AAP 2009 Mrs Nelisiwe Nxumalo Swazi National Local STE x 25 x X Jan-Feb 2009 25 

Summary of Baseline Survey finished Feb-09 Apr-09 Sep-09 to be submitted in Sep 2009 

FairTrade Certification AAP 2009 finished Daniel Lampart International Int STE X 30 X X X Jan-Feb 2009 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 30 

Technical Assessment of Farmer Associations (34) AAP 2009 Tiekie de Beer Swazi Resident Int STE 45 x May - Sep 2009 45 

AAP 2009 Bongani Bhembe Swazi National Local STE 130 x 130 

AAP 2009 Fisiwe Mavuso Swazi National Local STE 130 x 130 

Summary of Technical Audit ( 34 FAS) AAP 2009 ongoing X X X x May - Nov 2009 Reports for each FA monthly report download on RDMU website 

Baseline Survey 61 Individual Farmers AAP 2009 Mr Gift Nkambule Swazi National Local STE x 50 x X 50 

AAP 2009 Mrs Nelisiwe Nxumalo Swazi National Local STE x 10 x X 10 

Summary of Baseline Survey 61 Individual Farmers finished X X X x May- Jul 2009 Jul-09 Sep-09 to be submittted in Sep 2009 

Ratoon Management Revolving Fund : Phase 2 AAP 2009 ongoing Richard Bates International Business Management X 65 x X x May-Nov 2009 Nov-09 65 

SO 2 Social Services 

SO3 Infrastructure 

PIF Preparation/Design AAP 2008 Finished Shaun Finley Swazi Resident Civil Engineer X 40 X X May -Dec 2008 PIF / Drawings/ Tender doc 40 

AAP Elaboration AAP 2008 Finished Robert Geddes International Civil Engineer X 10 X X May-08 AAP 08 May-08 10 

Gender Audit AAP 2008 Finished Phumelele Thwala Swazi National Local STE X 13 X X X May - June 08 Report Jul-08 Jul-08 Jul-08 13 

Environmental Assessment / Scoping AAP 2008 Finished Rod de Vletter Swazi National Environment X 23 X X X May - Aug-08 Report Sep-08 Report Sep-08 23 

AAP 2008 Finished Ara Monadjem Swazi National Environment X 23 X X 23 

Summary Environmental Assessment / Scoping AAP 2008 X X X July-Oct 2008 Sep-08 Oct-08 Oct-08 

Roads Phase 2, Malkerns Canal, Evaluation tender AAP 2008 ongoing Shaun Finlay Swazi Resident Civil Engineer X 50 X Feb- May 2009 no report to be prepared 50 

SO 4 Diversification 

Small-scale organic sugar mill AAP 2009 finished George Blundell O’Reilly International Int. STE X 30 X X X Sept - Oct 2008 Nov-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Feb-09 30 

Exit Strategy – Cost of Diversification AAP 2009 finished Ernst Grenzebach International Agricultural Expert 35 X X Sep/Oct-08 35 

finished Lwazi Mhlongo Swazi National Local STE 25 X 25 

Summary Exit Strategy - Cost of Diversification AAP 2009 X X X Aug-Oct 2008 Oct-08 Nov-08 Dec-08 Dec-08 

Carbon Trade/CDM/CMS: Phase 1 AAP 2009 finished Joachim Schnurr International Renewable Energy 27 X X Sep-08/Feb-09 27 

finished Christine Clashausen International Renewable Energy 32 X 32 

finished Christian Schweitzer International Renewable Energy 30 X 30 

finished Richard Koech International Renewable Energy 20 X 20 

Summary Carbon Trade / CDM / CMS Phase 1 AAP 2009 X X X Aug-Oct 2008 Oct-08 Dec-08 Feb-09 Feb-09 

Eng. Assessment of Malkerns Irrigation Canal AAP 2009 finished Shaun Finley Swazi Resident Civil Engineer X 27 X X X Oct-Nov 2008 Dec/ Jan 2008 Jan-09 Feb-09 Feb-09 27 

Topographical Survey of Malkerns Irrigation Canal AAP 2009 finished Christopher Forte Swazi Resident Agricultural Expert X 40 X X X Sep - Nov 2008 Database received Nov 2008 no report to be submitted 40 

Socio-economic study of Malkerns Canal AAP 2009 finished Steve Atkins International Int. STE X 30 X X x Jan-Feb 2009 Feb/ Mar 2008 Feb-09 Feb-09 Feb-09 30 

Carbon Trade/CDM/PDD: Phase 2 AAP 2009 Joachim Schnurr International Renewable Energy 29 X X Sep-08/Feb-09 29 

Daniel Blank International Renewable Energy 41 X 41 

Gerald Kapp International Renewable Energy 21 X 21 

Summary Carbon Trade / CDM / PDD Ubo Phase 2 AAP 2009 ongoing X X X x Mar-May 2009 PDD in Sept 2009 

GRID Factor Assignment AAP 2009 Peter Zhou International Business Management 12 X 12 

Martin Burian International Business Management 13 X 13 

Summary Grid Factor AAP 2009 finished X X X April-May 2009 May-09 Jun-09 Jun-09 Jun-09 

RESULT 2: EC MIP 2007 - 2010 implemented 

AAP 2007 (Smallholder Irrigation) 

Irrigation Design Reviews AAP 2007 Finished Robert Bloemers International Irrigation Expert X 100 X X 100 

Mar-Aug 2008 

Tender/Report Sep-08 

September 2008 

Tender Dossier Preparation 800 ha AAP 2007 Finished Robert Bloemers International Irrigation Expert X 10 X 10 

Design Review and evaluation of works tender AAP 2007 finished Robert Bloemers International Int STE x 70 x April- July 2009 Jul-09 Jul-09 to be submitted in Sep 2009 70 

Final Design Takhamiti Irrigation System (280 ha) AAP 2007 ongoing MBB various experts International Local STE x 200 x X x July-Oct 2009 Oct-09 200 

Soil Survey Takhamiti Irrigation System (280 ha) AAP 2007 ongoing Eben Verster International Agricultural Expert x 12 x X x Aug - Sep 2009 Sep-09 Sep-09 12 

AAP 2008 (Transport and Infrastructure) 

AAP 2009 (Irrigation, Agr. Diversification, Grant C.) 

AAP 2010 (Social Services & Ec. Diversification 

RESULT 3: Other NAS Activities financed and implemented 

RESULT 4: Stakeholder liaison established and in operation 

Communication Strategy Comm & Visib Ongoing Jennifer Constantine International Local STE 15 X X Oct-08 15 

Ongoing Mr. Mamba / G. Nkambule Swazi National Local STE 40 X 40 

Summary Communication Strategy Comm & Visibility X X X Oct - Dec 2008 Nov 200 Dec-08 Dec-08 Dec-08 

OTHER INTERVENTIONS 

Hand over RDMU activities of 2007 RDMU Finished Steve Atkins International Int. STE X 12 X X X Feb-08 Feb-08 Feb-08 12 

SIS and NAS Review for SSA Other finished Paul Goodison International Int. STE X 18 X x x Mar/ Apr 2009 Apr-09 no official report received (SSA) 18 

Evaluation and Screening Small Dams 

Geotechnical Assessment Rob Sawyer Swazi Resident Agriculturalist 6 6 

Civil Engineer Shaun Finley Swazi Resident Civil Engineer 9 9 

Irrigation Engineer Robert Bloemers International Int STE 9 9 

Agriculturalist / team leader Mike Ogg International Agriculturalist 20 20 

Sociologist Jabulile Dlamini Swazi National Add Local STE 6 6 

Summary Small Dam Study Other ongoing X X X x June-Sep 2009 Sep-09 

966 387 580 

22 

Expert days / months according to Results work days work months 1933 

Overview of origin of expert days 

Days 

work 

as % 

months 

RESULT 1 72.7% 1,406 63.9 

International 966 43.9 50% RESULT 2 20.3% 392 17.8 

Swazi National 580 26.4 30% RESULT 3 

Swazi Resident 387 17.6 20% RESULT 4 2.8% 55 2.5 

TOTAL 1,933 87.9 100% Other intervention 4.1% 80 3.6

Annex 4 

Implementation Schedule of Aurecon 

(Infrastructures South)

GANTT CHART 1 of 2 

ID Task Name Start Finish Duration Predecessors 

Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 M 

W-2 W-1 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 W7 W8 W9 W10 W11 W12 W13 W14 W15 W16 W17 W18 W19 W20 W21 W22 W23 W24 W25 W26 W27 W28 W29 W30 W31 W32 W33 W34 W 

06/22 06/29 07/06 07/13 07/20 07/27 08/03 08/10 08/17 08/24 08/31 09/07 09/14 09/21 09/28 10/05 10/12 10/19 10/26 11/02 11/09 11/16 11/23 11/30 12/07 12/14 12/21 12/28 01/04 01/11 01/18 01/25 02/01 02/08 02/15 02/22 03 

1 COMMENCEMENT DATE OF CONTRACT Wed 09/07/01 Wed 09/07/01 0 days 

2 PHASE I: PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING DESIGN Wed 09/07/01 Fri 09/12/04 113 days 

3 Activity 1-1: Mobilisation Wed 09/07/01 Tue 09/07/14 2 wks 1 

4 Activity 2-1: Data Collection and Assessments Wed 09/07/15 Tue 09/07/21 1 wk 3 

5 Activity 3-1: Site inspections Wed 09/07/15 Tue 09/07/21 1 wk 3 

6 Activity 4-1: Environmental and sosial Impact Assessment Mon 09/08/03 Fri 09/11/27 85 days 13 

7 Task 4-1-1: Environmental Impact Mon 09/08/03 Fri 09/11/27 85 days 1FS+4 wks 

8 Task 4-1-2: Sosial Impact Mon 09/08/03 Fri 09/11/27 85 days 1FS+4 wks 

9 Activity 5-1: Traffic Study Fri 09/07/31 Mon 09/08/31 22 days 5 

10 Task 5-1-1: Data collection Fri 09/07/31 Fri 09/08/07 6 days 1FS+22 days 

11 Task 5-1-2: Data analysis and traffic flow projections Mon 09/08/10 Fri 09/08/14 5 days 10 

12 Task 5-1-3: Road capacity analysis (road width required) Mon 09/08/17 Mon 09/08/31 11 days 11,20SS+10 days 

13 Activity 6-1: Topographic Surveys Mon 09/07/06 Fri 09/07/31 4 wks 1FS+3 days 

14 Activity 7-1: Road Pavement Investigations and Testing Mon 09/08/24 Fri 09/10/09 7 wks 13FS+3 wks 

15 Activity 8-1: Borrow Pit and Quarries Investigations and Testing Mon 09/08/10 Fri 09/10/02 8 wks 13FS+1 wk 

16 Activity 9-1: Geotechnical Investigations for bridges Mon 09/08/17 Fri 09/11/13 13 wks 13FS+2 wks 

17 Activity 10-1: Hydrological study Tue 09/08/11 Mon 09/08/31 15 days 1FS+29 days 

18 Activity 11-1: Hydraulic Design Tue 09/09/01 Mon 09/09/21 3 wks 13,17 

19 Activity 12-1: Prelimanary Pavement Design Mon 09/10/12 Fri 09/11/13 5 wks 14,15 

20 Activity 13-1: Preliminary geometric design Mon 09/08/03 Fri 09/10/30 13 wks 13 

21 Activity 14-1: Priliminary design Bridges and Major drainage structures Tue 09/09/22 Mon 09/11/16 8 wks 11,18,20SS+3 wks 

22 Activity 15-1: Land Acquisition Drawings Mon 09/11/16 Thu 09/12/03 14 days 8FS-2 wks 

23 Activity 16-1: Bill of Quantities and Cost Estimate Tue 09/11/17 Fri 09/12/04 14 days 21 

24 Activity 17-1: Internal design check Tue 09/11/17 Thu 09/11/26 8 days 21 

25 

26 PHASE II: DETAIL DESIGN Thu 10/02/04 Thu 10/04/08 45 days 

27 Commencement Phase II Thu 10/02/04 Thu 10/02/04 0 days 55FS+2 wks 

28 Activity 1-2: Detail geometric design Fri 10/02/05 Thu 10/04/01 8 wks 27 

29 Activity 1-2a: Detail Pavement Design Fri 10/02/05 Thu 10/04/01 8 wks 27 

30 Activity 2-2: Detail design Bridges and Major drainage structures Fri 10/02/05 Thu 10/04/08 9 wks 27 

31 Activity 3-2: Tender documentation Fri 10/03/12 Thu 10/04/08 4 wks 28FF,30FF 

32 Activity 4-2: Internal design check Fri 10/03/19 Thu 10/04/08 3 wks 28FF,30FF 

33 

34 PHASE III: ACCISTANCE WITH TENDERING PROCESS Thu 10/05/20 Thu 10/12/02 140 days 

35 Commencement Phase III Thu 10/05/20 Thu 10/05/20 0 wks 57FS+2 wks 

36 Activity 1-3: Tender advertising to closing date for submission Fri 10/05/21 Thu 10/09/30 19 wks 35 

37 Activity 2-3: Tender evaluation Fri 10/10/01 Thu 10/10/28 4 wks 36 

38 Activity 3-3: Preperation contract documentation Fri 10/11/19 Thu 10/12/02 2 wks 37FS+3 wks 

39 Various reports, minutes and documentation Fri 10/05/21 Thu 10/10/28 23 wks 35 

40 

41 

42 REPORTS Tue 09/08/04 Thu 10/05/06 183 days 

43 Draft inception report Tue 09/08/04 Tue 09/08/04 0 days 1FS+5 wks 

44 Final inception report Fri 09/08/07 Fri 09/08/07 0 days 43FS+3 days 

45 Technical Report: Route plan Siphofaneni Fri 09/08/28 Fri 09/08/28 0 days 13FS+4 wks 

46 Technical Report: Route plan Project Fri 09/09/11 Fri 09/09/11 0 days 13FS+6 wks 

47 Technical Report: Topographic survey Fri 09/09/11 Fri 09/09/11 0 days 13FS+6 wks 

48 Technical Report: Geotechnical Investigation Fri 09/11/13 Fri 09/11/13 0 days 16 

49 Technical Report: Hydrological Study Mon 09/08/31 Mon 09/08/31 0 days 17 

50 Technical Report: Hydraulic study Mon 09/09/21 Mon 09/09/21 0 days 18 

51 Technical Report: Materials, Quaries and borrow pits Fri 09/10/23 Fri 09/10/23 0 days 14FS+2 wks,15FS 

52 Technical Report: Traffic study Mon 09/08/31 Mon 09/08/31 0 days 12 

53 Technical Report: Environmental and Sosial Impact Assesment Fri 09/11/27 Fri 09/11/27 0 days 7,8 

54 Draft Phase 1 Preliminary design report Fri 09/12/04 Fri 09/12/04 0 days 23 

55 Final Phase 1 Preliminary design report Thu 10/01/21 Thu 10/01/21 0 days 54FS+4 wks 

56 Draft Tender documentation (VOLUME I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII) Thu 10/04/08 Thu 10/04/08 0 days 30,31,32 

57 Final Tender documentation (VOLUME I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII) Thu 10/05/06 Thu 10/05/06 0 days 56FS+4 wks 

Project: Program Siphofaneni Bridge a 

Service Conrtact No: DCI-SUCRE/200 

Date: Wed 09/11/25 

Task 

Split 

Progress 

Milestone 

Summary 

Project Summary 

External Tasks 

External MileTask 

Split 

Page 1 

4_Annex_4_Aurecon_schedule

GANTT CHART 2 of 2 

ID Task Name Start Finish Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 Month 13 Month 14 Month 15 Month 16 Month 17 Month 18 

W35 W36 W37 W38 W39 W40 W41 W42 W43 W44 W45 W46 W47 W48 W49 W50 W51 W52 W53 W54 W55 W56 W57 W58 W59 W60 W61 W62 W63 W64 W65 W66 W67 W68 W69 W70 W71 W72 W73 W74 W75 W 

03/01 03/08 03/15 03/22 03/29 04/05 04/12 04/19 04/26 05/03 05/10 05/17 05/24 05/31 06/07 06/14 06/21 06/28 07/05 07/12 07/19 07/26 08/02 08/09 08/16 08/23 08/30 09/06 09/13 09/20 09/27 10/04 10/11 10/18 10/25 11/01 11/08 11/15 11/22 11/29 12/06 1 

1 COMMENCEMENT DATE OF CONTRACT Wed 09/07/01 Wed 09/07/01 

2 PHASE I: PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING DESIGN Wed 09/07/01 Fri 09/12/04 

3 Activity 1-1: Mobilisation Wed 09/07/01 Tue 09/07/14 

4 Activity 2-1: Data Collection and Assessments Wed 09/07/15 Tue 09/07/21 

5 Activity 3-1: Site inspections Wed 09/07/15 Tue 09/07/21 

6 Activity 4-1: Environmental and sosial Impact Assessment Mon 09/08/03 Fri 09/11/27 

7 Task 4-1-1: Environmental Impact Mon 09/08/03 Fri 09/11/27 

8 Task 4-1-2: Sosial Impact Mon 09/08/03 Fri 09/11/27 

9 Activity 5-1: Traffic Study Fri 09/07/31 Mon 09/08/31 

10 Task 5-1-1: Data collection Fri 09/07/31 Fri 09/08/07 

11 Task 5-1-2: Data analysis and traffic flow projections Mon 09/08/10 Fri 09/08/14 

12 Task 5-1-3: Road capacity analysis (road width required) Mon 09/08/17 Mon 09/08/31 

13 Activity 6-1: Topographic Surveys Mon 09/07/06 Fri 09/07/31 

14 Activity 7-1: Road Pavement Investigations and Testing Mon 09/08/24 Fri 09/10/09 

15 Activity 8-1: Borrow Pit and Quarries Investigations and Testing Mon 09/08/10 Fri 09/10/02 

16 Activity 9-1: Geotechnical Investigations for bridges Mon 09/08/17 Fri 09/11/13 

17 Activity 10-1: Hydrological study Tue 09/08/11 Mon 09/08/31 

18 Activity 11-1: Hydraulic Design Tue 09/09/01 Mon 09/09/21 

19 Activity 12-1: Prelimanary Pavement Design Mon 09/10/12 Fri 09/11/13 

20 Activity 13-1: Preliminary geometric design Mon 09/08/03 Fri 09/10/30 

21 Activity 14-1: Priliminary design Bridges and Major drainage structures Tue 09/09/22 Mon 09/11/16 

22 Activity 15-1: Land Acquisition Drawings Mon 09/11/16 Thu 09/12/03 

23 Activity 16-1: Bill of Quantities and Cost Estimate Tue 09/11/17 Fri 09/12/04 

24 Activity 17-1: Internal design check Tue 09/11/17 Thu 09/11/26 

25 

26 PHASE II: DETAIL DESIGN Thu 10/02/04 Thu 10/04/08 

27 Commencement Phase II Thu 10/02/04 Thu 10/02/04 

28 Activity 1-2: Detail geometric design Fri 10/02/05 Thu 10/04/01 

29 Activity 1-2a: Detail Pavement Design Fri 10/02/05 Thu 10/04/01 

30 Activity 2-2: Detail design Bridges and Major drainage structures Fri 10/02/05 Thu 10/04/08 

31 Activity 3-2: Tender documentation Fri 10/03/12 Thu 10/04/08 

32 Activity 4-2: Internal design check Fri 10/03/19 Thu 10/04/08 

33 

34 PHASE III: ACCISTANCE WITH TENDERING PROCESS Thu 10/05/20 Thu 10/12/02 

35 Commencement Phase III Thu 10/05/20 Thu 10/05/20 

36 Activity 1-3: Tender advertising to closing date for submission Fri 10/05/21 Thu 10/09/30 

37 Activity 2-3: Tender evaluation Fri 10/10/01 Thu 10/10/28 

38 Activity 3-3: Preperation contract documentation Fri 10/11/19 Thu 10/12/02 

39 Various reports, minutes and documentation Fri 10/05/21 Thu 10/10/28 

40 

41 

42 REPORTS Tue 09/08/04 Thu 10/05/06 

43 Draft inception report Tue 09/08/04 Tue 09/08/04 

44 Final inception report Fri 09/08/07 Fri 09/08/07 

45 Technical Report: Route plan Siphofaneni Fri 09/08/28 Fri 09/08/28 

46 Technical Report: Route plan Project Fri 09/09/11 Fri 09/09/11 

47 Technical Report: Topographic survey Fri 09/09/11 Fri 09/09/11 

48 Technical Report: Geotechnical Investigation Fri 09/11/13 Fri 09/11/13 

49 Technical Report: Hydrological Study Mon 09/08/31 Mon 09/08/31 

50 Technical Report: Hydraulic study Mon 09/09/21 Mon 09/09/21 

51 Technical Report: Materials, Quaries and borrow pits Fri 09/10/23 Fri 09/10/23 

52 Technical Report: Traffic study Mon 09/08/31 Mon 09/08/31 

53 Technical Report: Environmental and Sosial Impact Assesment Fri 09/11/27 Fri 09/11/27 

54 Draft Phase 1 Preliminary design report Fri 09/12/04 Fri 09/12/04 

55 Final Phase 1 Preliminary design report Thu 10/01/21 Thu 10/01/21 

56 Draft Tender documentation (VOLUME I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII) Thu 10/04/08 Thu 10/04/08 

57 Final Tender documentation (VOLUME I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII) Thu 10/05/06 Thu 10/05/06 

Project: Program Siphofaneni Bridge a 

Service Conrtact No: DCI-SUCRE/200 

Date: Wed 09/11/25 

Task 

Split 

Progress 

Milestone 

Summary 

Project Summary 

External Tasks 

External MileTask 

Split 

Page 2 

4_Annex_4_Aurecon_schedule

Annex 5 

Minutes of the meeting on the 27 April at 

Siphofaneni related to tasks, roles and 

responsibilities of major stakeholders in irrigation 

development: 

Capacity Building of SWADE

Minutes of a Technical Working Group to the NAS WG – Discussion on Tasks, Roles and 

Responsibilities of Major Stakeholders in Irrigation Development, Training and Business 

Development 

Date: April 27 2009 

Venue: 

SWADE Siphofaneni Conference Room 

Present: 

Moses Vilakati 

Christof Batzlen 

Noel Cooke 

David M. Myeni 

Sibusiso Malaza 

Robert G. Bloemers 

Chris Shabangu 

Oswald Magwenzi 

Chitima Mawira 

Daniela Isola 

Arthur Belsey 

Sam Sithole 

Lynn Kota 

Bafana Matsebula 

Phesheya S. Tsela 

Sabelo G. Nxumalo 

SWADE 






RSSC 

Ubombo Sugar 

SWADE 

EC 

SWADE 

SWADE 

SWADE 

SWADE 

The Business Place 

The Business Place 

Key Issues for Discussion 

1. Major Tasks of the TA Team according to the Terms of Reference 

2. Irrigation Design and Supervision 

3. Essentials of the TA Team 

4. Activities to be Carried-out by the TA Team 

5. Irrigation Installation and Acceptance 

6. Location of the Main Office of the TA Team 

1 Main Tasks of the TA 

The objective of the meeting was to discuss the location and tasks of the TA Smallholder team 

in the institutional framework supporting smallholder growers. The RDMU wanted to hear the 

views of stakeholders already working with smallholders as to how the TA could best be 

integrated. 

The RDMU’s presentation explained the team composition and the main elements of the Terms 

of Reference. The main tasks will be the preparation of the tender for the irrigation equipment 

1

supply & installation; works supervision and acceptance; and the provision of technical & 

business management training & mentoring. 

2 Irrigation Design and Works Supervision 

The issue of irrigation design was raised. SWADE is in the process of changing from using 

private contractors for the design to creating the capacity to carry out the designs in-house. 

While SWADE has the financial resources to employ irrigation engineers, there is a shortage of 

suitable candidates on the local market. The meeting was also informed that the senior irrigation 

engineer will shortly be leaving his post. Therefore SWADE will have to recruit and train recently 

qualified engineers. These factors may reduce its capacity over the short term to deliver final 

designs an acceptable standard/quality for all schemes. In this context, it may also require more 

capacity building, which could be a role for the TA. 

The meeting was informed that the TA team is not structured to carry out designs: it has one 

irrigation engineer and no relevant equipment or facilities. According to the TORs, the TA team 

will only review designs prepared by SWADE; prepare the tender dossier and supervise the 

works. The composition of the TA team would have to be changed were its task modified to 

include capacity building. Following consultation with the TA Team, it might be possible to 

reduce the number of working days for the finance manager to accommodate an additional 

Irrigation Engineer. The TA team should look at this during the inception period. The EC 

expressed its hope that there will be a transitional arrangement so as to avoid any delays in 

developing schemes. 

The meeting discussed the design of schemes that fall outside of SWADE’s mandated 

geographical focus. In fact, there is currently only one scheme of 280 ha in a position to develop 

cane. The design could be carried out using RDMU short term expertise, with the assistance of 

the Mill. The RDMU have the resources from the expert days to undertake designs for a 

maximum 800 ha for those schemes outside SWADE. 

Concerns were also raised about works supervision. The consensus was that one irrigation 

engineer will not be able to supervise and monitor the implementation up to eight new schemes, 

with more to follow. The RDMU is aware of the need to reinforce the team. One possibility is for 

the TA team to recruit technical supervisors from the eight extension staff it will contract locally. 

The RDMU can also use its short term expert days. 

The EC expressed the need for SWADE and RDMU to have a Memorandum of Understanding 

(MOU) signed between the two parties outlining all issues pertaining to the irrigation 

development. The RDMU proposed that the MEPD and MoA sign the MoU, Nevertheless, in 

practical terms SWADE, the RDMU and the TA team will have to develop it. 

3 Essentials of the TA Team 

The meeting discussed the tasks of the team in relation to new and existing growers. For 

irrigation development, the implementing modalities set out in the Financing Agreement are 

geared towards new entrant growers, whereas the training component was conceived of as a 

response to the business and operational management challenges facing existing growers. The 

feeling was that irrigation management was one of the major challenges in the performance of 

the schemes. The TA team will recruit eight local staff, whose profiles can be matched to the 

demand for either technical or business challenges. 

2

With regard to the ‘hardware’ to help existing growers repair their irrigation systems, this will be 

financed through the SCGA Grant contract financed from the 2009 AAP, should the EC endorse 

the programme. 

4 Activities to be Carried-out by the TA Team 

The main objective is to get cane planted. With this uppermost in mind, determining the role of 

the TA should focus on identifying the key tasks, who is responsible for what, and using the 

additional resource to fill gaps and/or complement the existing institutional framework. 

SWADE presented a framework (Production Support Sheet and Responsibility Matrix) which 

illustrated all the processes and activities that are undertaken from the stage of mobilizing the 

communities to form groups up to the point whereby these groups have the crop and receive 

continuous mentoring. SWADE has the resources to carry out most of the tasks related to 

association formation, training and follow up. The framework indicated particular areas where 

additional support will be required to optimize the performance of the schemes. These include 

ratoon management and the bulk purchasing of inputs, in which both the Out-grower 

Department in the Mill and the Business Place will play a significant role. 

It was agreed that the expertise of the TA should be integrated into the existing structures within 

the industry. Integration can also be understood to seconding EC contracted staff to strengthen 

other service providers. These staff can report to line managers in the host organisation. This 

practice has been successfully used by SWADE. The eight technical staff can be split among 

the stakeholders, taking cognisance of the North and South production areas. The meeting 

concurred that this approach will avoid duplicating service provision to growers, and any 

unnecessary competition that might result. 

The meeting also unanimously agreed that, while each agency has certain tasks within the 

overall framework, the aim should be to work together as a team, and look for a seamless 

overlap between different activities carried out by different actors. 

5 Irrigation Installation and Acceptance 

The EC and its representatives will enter into contract for the works and will be legally 

responsible for accepting and handing over the irrigation system. However, there will be 

occasions when the involvement and participation of all the key stakeholders (growers, the 

millers, SWADE) is required (e.g., when varying the designs, consulting the community or 

planning the delivery of seed cane). The exact modalities will have to be agreed to by all the 

parties so that any issues (social or design related) that may arise during the implementation of 

the project can be addressed quickly. 

Ideally, to enhance the ownership of the project it is imperative that the farmers be involved in 

the processes of selecting and commissioning the contractor/s that will install the irrigation 

system. While this is not possible under current procedures, the idea of allowing representative 

of the farmer associations could be observers in the tender evaluation committee could be 

proposed to the EC. Information on the processes and the time it takes to have the irrigation in 

place should be explained to the farmers. It was reported that currently the Round 1 farmers 

have expressed the need to meet with the EC as they see the project taking a long time to start. 

It was agreed that the preparation for the supervision of the installation of the irrigation and the 

involvement of the farmers should be started as early as possible. A Technical Working Group 

has to be established to work on this and to periodically provide reports on the progress 

3

achieved. The contract for the irrigation companies will have a clause which will give a 12 

months retention period for the irrigation system. The TA irrigation engineer will contractually 

sign the provisional certificate of acceptance for the hand-over of the irrigation system to the 

Farmer Associations. 

6 Location of the TA Main Office 

There was an understanding that the TA team should be ‘where the action is’. Members of the 

meeting were each asked on where the main office could be located and the majority suggested 

either Simunye/Mhlume or Manzini. The final common understanding was that while Manzini 

was centrally located, it would be preferable to be located at Big Bend, Siphofaneni, Simunye or 

Mhlume. The Business Place might have some space in their office building that can 

accommodate the TA team. However there are current challenges with accommodation for staff 

in Big Bend. 

4

Annex 6 

RDMU remarks related to the AAP 2007 

implementation

RDMU remarks related to AAP 2007 Implementation 

1 Background 

Currently the rate of implementation is very slow. 

There is an uncommitted balance of ≈ €8,600,000 (after allowance for Round 1). In addition, 

there is a contingency reserve of €582,767. 

All contracts must be signed by December 2010, requiring any local open works tender to be 

launched by June 2010, and an international open by April 2010. 

For the new entrants, all the preparatory activities are carried out by SWADE (community 

mobilization, irrigation design, preparation of business plans), with the exception of one 

scheme in the Komati that is supported by the RSSC. 

2 New Entrant Development Pipeline 

According to information provided by SWADE, a total of 1,884 ha is currently under 

development for financing through a second and third works tender. 

SWADE is providing designs for the following: 

- LUSIP: 853 ha (11 schemes) 

- KDDP: 750 ha (6 schemes) 

The RDMU will finance the irrigation design for an RSSC supported Association: 

- Komati: 280 ha (1 scheme) 

Assuming all schemes were approved, and using the average engineer’s estimates (≈ 

€5,500 per ha), the total cost would be approximately €10,360,000. The difference will have 

to be financed from the 2009 allocation. 

3 Constraints and Implementation Risks 

a) Not all the schemes in the pipeline for Round 2 are financially and technically viable 

The review of designs in KDDP indicates that four of the schemes totalling 631 ha might not 

be viable, owing to a combination of high capital costs (distance from water source to farm, 

dynamic heads of over 100 m); high operational costs (pumping heads in excess of 100 m) 

and low yields (marginal soils). 

If these four schemes are excluded, the total area for development will fall to 1,253 ha, with 

an estimated total cost ≈ of €6,890,000. This will leave an uncommitted balance of 

€1,710,000 (not including the contingency). 

In addition there might be slight reductions in the area being developed for the RSSC 

supported Association in the Komati area owing to poor soils. 

b) There is a risk that SWADE will be unable to provide sufficient complete schemes in time 

SWADE embarked on a reorganisation, cancelling contracts with consultancy companies 

and bringing selected former consultants in-house as employees. There is reason to believe 

that this process is, or will, cause considerable disruption to SWADE’s capacity to develop 

Annex 5- Page 1

schemes over the short and medium term. It also contributes to a climate of uncertainty: how 

far can the NAS depend on SWADE to deliver? 

The original assumption was that the capacity constraints were confined to irrigation design. 

SWADE committed to providing designs by May 2009. Drafts were submitted, but these 

require considerable revisions. The problem was put down to SWADE having insufficient 

irrigation engineers, and their inability to attract suitably qualified candidates on the market. 

However, there are now rumours that several key staff member in other departments have 

not taken up the option to join SWADE, and at the very least this will temporarily result in a 

loss of institutional memory and momentum. This might impair its capacity to mobilise the 

community and assist FAs with business plans. 

As currently configured, the 2007 AAP is entirely dependent on SWADE to deliver new 

entrant schemes, in line with its mandate. Therefore SHIP was not equipped to substitute for 

SWADE: as agreed in NAS Working Groups, the focus of its business extension was on 

reinforcing extension support to existing growers. 

c) Land and Social Conflicts 

As experience with Ingcaizivela Farmer Association illustrated, land conflicts could act to 

reduce the land available for development. Anecdotal evidence suggests that this is likely to 

limit expansion in the KDDP, and it may also occur in LUSIP once land development 

happens in practice. 

d) The nature of the action is likely to result in an uncommitted balance 

The average scheme is 50 ha (€275,000) and the tender can only include complete 

schemes. There a risk that the available schemes will not conveniently match the 

uncommitted balance. Unless the last tender is able to commit all the balance, funds will be 

lost. We will have an accurate estimate of the amount by June 2010, when the final tender is 

launched. By this stage it will be too late to commit further funds through a conventional 

procurement procedure. 

Breaking the tender into more lots might reduce the attractiveness of the tender to competent 

companies. 

4 Response 

To mitigate the risk of losing funds, the project teams must prepare contingency plans. 

4.1 Plan A: Strengthen SWADE’s capacity to deliver New Entrant Growers 

- 

Irrigation Design 

SHIP and SWADE have agreed to provide 6 days per month of technical assistance to build 

the capacity to prepare irrigation designs, financed from its 150 days for unspecified 

expertise. The project could explore mobilising additional financial resources for contracting 

design engineers. 

SHIP must provide a situational analysis setting out how the TA will respond to specific 

organisational and capacity constraints; the role and responsibility of the TA; the outputs; and 

a timetable. Unless the TA has delegated authority to manage the design process; SWADE 

accepts this; and other resources are available (eg, soil testing), the impact could be limited. 

- Business Plans 

Annex 5- Page 2

The six business facilitators could be tasked with assisting FAs prepare business plans. 

- 

Community Mobilisation 

The formation of Farmer Associations is a long process that should not be forced to fit with 

project timetables. We need to understand if the pace of implementation is a consequence of 

a shortage of trained staff or the very nature of the task. 

SHIP does not have the human resource capacity to assist in community mobilisation. In the 

short term additional funds could be sourced from the incidental budget for training, with EC 

agreement. However, this strategy is based on the assumption that competent training 

human resources are available immediately. Contracting former SWADE employees is also 

a zero sum game: changing their hat will not add to capacity or accelerate project 

implementation. It would also tend to contradict SWADE’s policy decision to dispense with 

consultants. 

Further, spending scarce resources on schemes that are not likely to be viable is wasteful 

and raises expectations. By pre-screening applicant Associations and eliminating as early as 

possible non-viable schemes, resource use can be optimised. 

Support to SWADE: Mobilising additional resources 

Funding Source 

Balance 2007 TA 

budget 

Incidental 

expenditures 

(GRM) 

Amount Purpose Procedure Comments 

€200,000 Irrigation Design 

Community 

Mobilisation 


€450,000 Community 

Mobilisation 


Competitive 

negotiated 

FWC 

Rider to 

GRM 

Contract 

EC 

Approval 

2009 TA Budget €925,000 Irrigation Design 

Community 

Mobilisation 


Rider 

Contract 

RDMU Irrigation Design EC 

Approval 

to 

GRM contract can only 

be changed once 

FWC not appropriate for 

irrigation design 

ToR allows for 

recruitment 

of 

consultants for training 

and mentoring. 

GRM contract can only 

be changed once 

Funds available by 

November 2009 

STE resources are 

required for NAS 

Development 

SWADE 

Irrigation Design Government 

Community IFAD 

Mobilisation 


ADB 

Millers Irrigation Design Industry Millers would require 

firm commitment to 

finance the scheme. 

Last resort. 

Annex 5- Page 3

4.2 Plan B: Develop Alternative Interventions 

In parallel with Plan A, the TA teams must work to put in place to accelerate disbursement 

and ensure that all funds are committed. 

The 2007 Financing Agreement allows for actions benefiting existing growers. This target 

group feels marginalised by the NAS, and requires support. 

The condition for support will need to be verified. The Financing Agreement states that ‘The 

EC will provide a maximum of 70% of the development costs through procurement of 

irrigation equipment and land preparation’. Existing growers who need to improve their 

irrigation equipment are also eligible. 

For all proposed interventions these conditions are a constraint. Existing growers are by and 

large unable to finance 30% of any action (except possibly seed cane), and the range of 

actions extends beyond land preparation and irrigation equipment. 

4.3 Possible interventions: 

- 

Seed cane 

This is an industry and grower priority. It will take one year to produce certified secondary 

seed cane. The unit cost per ha is around €400, and the cane can only be sourced through 

the industry, which would require a derogation allowing for a direct negotiate procedure. This 

would allow for a contract to be entered into directly to use up any balance after the results of 

the final tender are known. 

- 

- 

- 

Bulk water/Irrigation Infrastructure 

Repairs to Infield irrigation systems 

Infield roads 

4.4 Required Action: 

- Prepare a second rider to the Financing Agreement, or clarify the range of interventions 

through an exchange of letters. 

- Allow for land preparation to extend to seed cane and infield roads 

- Allow irrigation equipment to extend to irrigation infrastructure 

- Allow for 100% financing for existing growers by taking into account their initial loans as a 

contribution to the business plan. 

- With SCGA/Industry, undertake a rapid review of what could be financed and the 

requirements to prepare tenders (using the technical audits). 

- Where design is required, mobilise STE resources (RDMU, SHIP) 

Annex 5- Page 4

Annex 7 

Various brochures developed by the RDMU

Annex 8 

Various flyers developed by the RDMU

Annex 9 

Summary Report of the SSA Conference in July 

2009

Annex 9: SWAZILAND SUGAR ASSOCIATION 

Introduction 

SUGAR CONFERENCE 2009 REPORT 

This report summarises the presentations and discussions at the Sugar Conference held on 29 

July 2009 at the Royal Villas, Ezulwini, Swaziland. It is meant to provide a concise account of 

the proceedings of the day by focusing on the main issues discussed. The detailed presentations 

and corresponding discussion from the floor will be obtained from the Swaziland Sugar 

Association (SSA) Website once posted. The theme of the Conference was “Sugar Industry 

Adaptation in the SADC, African and Global Context”. 

The Conference was held under the auspices of the Federation of SADC Sugar Producers 

(FSSP). It was cosponsored by the European Commission through the Restructuring and 

Diversification Management Unit (RDMU). It was attended by approximately 200 delegates 

from sugar producing countries (Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, South Africa, Swaziland, 

Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe), SADC non-producing countries (Angola, Botswana, Lesotho 

and Namibia), international organisations (SADC Secretariat and European Commission) and 

various local stakeholders (government, civil society, academia and financial institutions). 

Opening Session 

The Guest of Honour was the Right Honourable Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Swaziland, 

His Excellency Dr Sibusiso Barnabas Dlamini who officially opened the Conference. He was 

accompanied by six Cabinet Ministers. Before he gave his Keynote Address, there was 

entertainment from a Sibhaca Team which had won first position in a recent national Primary 

Schools competition. Sibhaca is a Swazi traditional dance accompanied by rhythmic drumming. 

The main points from the Prime Minister’s Keynote Address can be summarised as follows: 

• He highlighted the importance of the sugar industry in the SADC region. 

• With particular reference to the Swazi sugar industry, he highlighted its significant 

contributions to, inter alia, national output, employment and rural development. He argued 

that, in this context, continued access to premium markets was vital. It was exactly for this 

reason that Swaziland (along with some of the members in the SADC configuration) had to 

sign the Interim Economic Partnership Agreement to ensure continued access into the EU. 

Doing otherwise was not an option. 

• He pointed out that the key to economic prosperity of the SADC region was to deepen 

economic integration. He emphasized that this was a common objective of all SADC 

member states which should be kept firmly in view. 

• He called for an assessment of progress to-date on the implementation of the various 

National Adaptation Strategies prepared over three years ago to minimise the impact of the 

EU sugar sector reforms. 

1

• He raised a number of questions which he hoped the conference would address including: Is 

there visible movement towards minimizing the negative impact of the EU sugar sector 

reform? What have been the challenges, apart from the lower price itself, and how are they 

being addressed? With particular reference to the SADC sugar industries, what is taking 

place on the ground? What strategies should SADC sugar industries adopt to ensure that 

their sustainability is enhanced in order to retain their status of being among the top lowestcost 

producers in the world? How do the non-sugar producing SADC Member States feature 

in those strategies? How will the SADC sugar industries take advantage of Fairtrade to 

enhance the viability of smallholder growers? How are SADC sugar industries planning to 

deal with the tougher requirements on sugar quality imposed by fastidious consumers? 

After the Keynote Address, seven presentations were made under three sessions. Each session 

had a set of presentations, followed by discussion from the floor. The sessions were punctuated 

by tea/lunch breaks. A summary of the presentations and discussions from the floor under each 

session follows below. 

Session I 

Two presentations were made, the first by Mr Sibusiso Malaza, Consulting Agronomist with the 

Restructuring and Diversification Management Unit on “Swaziland National Adaptation 

Strategy: Its Nature, Implementation and Way Forward”. The second presentation was by the 

EU Charge d'Affaires in the EC Delegation in Swaziland, HE Mr Amadou Traore on 

“Experiences in the Implementation of National Adaptation Strategies in Other Countries”. 

In his presentation, Mr. Malaza highlighted the key components of the Swaziland National 

Adaptation Strategy (NAS), its implementation, challenges faced and way forward. His 

presentation can be summarized in the following points: 

• The main objective of the NAS was to assist the sugar industry to maintain its 

competitiveness and contribution to the Swazi economy. 

• The NAS implementation has predominantly been premised on the deployment of the EC 

Accompanying Measures, under which the EU provided over €74 million. 

• The primary target of the assistance was improving the viability of smallholder sugarcane 

growers (SSGs). 

• For those SSGs found to be no longer viable, funds were allocated to support diversification 

out of sugarcane. 

• The pace of implementation of the NAS was extremely low. As a result, at mid-term 

assessment, Swaziland lost €11.1 million which was reallocated to other countries with faster 

disbursement rates. This loss has hindered support to interventions such as the restructuring 

of social services provision in the sugarbelt. 

• As a way forward, he stressed the need for stakeholders to fast-track prioritisation of 

programmes and urged flexibility on the modalities for delivering assistance. 

Mr Traore’s presentation focused on ACP-wide implementation of adaptation strategies in 

response to the EU sugar sector reforms. He selected countries which represented each of the 

2

main disbursement modalities – namely, budget support and grant contract. His presentation can 

be summarized as follows: 

• The EC allocated €1.244 billion to EC Accompanying Measures to support the 

implementation of NASs developed by Sugar Protocol countries. For 2007-10, the allocation 

was €657.338 million. The balance would be committed under the 2011-13 financing period. 

• He observed that due to very slow progress in committing the 2007 allocation, countries like 

Swaziland, Tanzania and Madagascar had the funding of their NASs reduced. These funds 

were used to top-up allocations of better performing countries. He lamented that there was a 

possibility that this could impact on the allocation for the 2011-13 Multi-Annual Indicative 

Programme (MIP). 

• Case studies on implementation of NASs in Mauritius, Mozambique and Belize were 

presented, including the main focus of interventions in those countries. 

• The EC was currently evaluating the progress made in the implementation of the NASs in the 

2007-10 period to provide lessons for the 2011-13 programming. 

In the discussion from the floor, delegates raised concerns on the wisdom of supporting 

diversification from sugar in the context of Swaziland where sugar is a leading commercial crop, 

and to which major economic sectors were dependent. It was suggested that efforts should be 

put on ensuring the sustainability of sugarcane growing and the wider sugar industry outputs. 

Whilst diversification for sugarcane growers who are no longer viable was a good initiative, it 

was reported that no farmers had indicated an interest in such assistance. This was blamed on 

the lack of proper marketing structures and reliable markets for alternative crops which make it 

hard to promote diversification. 

There were also concerns on the loss of much-needed adaptation funds for Swaziland. 

Furthermore, concerns were expressed about the slow pace of disbursement of EC 

Accompanying Measures in SADC countries in general and the lack of donor support for 

adaptation initiatives in Swaziland in particular. After much discussion, it was agreed that on the 

basis of the experience of other countries using different modes (e.g. budget support, grant 

contract and trust fund), there are options for accelerating the pace of implementation and 

avoiding loss of funds going forward. It was further agreed that effective implementation of 

adaptation programmes should enable the sugar industries adapt to the EU sugar reform. On 

prioritisation, it was agreed that all programmes that reduce costs for the sugar industry 

operations must receive priority in the NAS implementation. 

On the issue of increasing donor support, delegates noted that Swaziland’s middle-income status 

acted as a deterrent to potential donors who preferred to target their resources to least developed 

countries. Currently, most of the adaptation initiatives in Swaziland have been financed by the 

sugar industry, EC and government (especially in the Komati Downstream Development Project 

and Lower Usuthu Smallholder Irrigation Project). 

A good example for donor diversification was given as Mozambique. The EC promised to bring 

together all donors who were in one way or the other already involved in the support of NASrelated 

initiatives in Swaziland. Currently these donors tend shy away from associating 

themselves with the NAS. It was noted though that, for any country to attract financing, it was 

3

essential that priority needs be clearly defined. In this regard, sugar industry stakeholders in 

Swaziland were still to clearly define their priority needs for the 2011-13 period. It was further 

proposed that local institutions should develop capacity to oversee the implementation of the 

adaptation programmes to ensure sustainability once donor support has been withdrawn. 

Session II 

In the second session, after tea break, three presentations were made. The first was by Dr Paul 

Goodison, Consultant based in Brussels, on “Beyond the New EU Sugar Regime: Implications 

for SADC Sugar Industries”. The second presentation was by Mr Julian Price, the SSA 

representative in the EPA-EBA London Sugar Group, on the “Future Market Access Framework 

for Sugar under the Economic Partnership Agreements: Implications for SADC Sugar 

Industries”. The third presentation was by Mr David Willers, General Manager of the Better 

Sugarcane Initiative Roundtable in London on the “Better Sugarcane Initiative: Its Rationale, 

Current Status and Future”. 

Mr Price’s presentation focused on the practical logistical imperatives for exporting sugar into 

the EU market under the new market access framework (Economic Partnership Agreements and 

Everything but Arms Initiative). The key issues raised in his presentation were: 

• There was need to keep a close oversight in the drafting of EU regulations governing sugar 

trade, especially from LDC and ACP sugar suppliers. These had been discussed at the ACP 

Working Group level. 

• The key issues were understanding the implications on ACP suppliers of application 

procedures for licences, validity of licences, tolerances, dealing with loss of licences, force 

majeure, transfer of licences, payments and release of securities. He stressed the importance 

of ACP suppliers maintaining effective control of national licences. 

• ACP countries must have a system of continuously checking the EU sugar supplies in order 

to foresee any possibilities of triggers for the transitional safeguard mechanism so as to act 

strategically. He also stressed the need to understand the implications of declaring any new 

raw sugar quota. 

• The main issues to focus on are the WTO discussions on preference erosion, the EU sugar 

market regulation (pricing, quota management and trade with third parties), rules of origin 

and standards as these have the potential to affect ACP sugar suppliers’ access to the EU 

market. 

• He implored ACP sugar suppliers to clearly understand the structure of a future EU sugar 

market regime (one with even lower prices and no quotas) and to prepare accordingly. 

In his presentation Dr Goodison highlighted market trends in the EU and their implications for 

SADC sugar industries. His presentation could be summarised through the following points: 

• SADC sugar industries should not foresee themselves limited to the supply of raw sugar, as 

there were market opportunities for higher-value products (‘necessity purchases vs luxury 

purchases’). The market for the higher-value products ‘luxury purchases’ is characterised by 

higher prices while it is also growing. As a result, there was a need for sugar industries to 

4

add value to their products, thrive for quality labelling, ethical differentiation and 

organic/environmentally friendly products. 

• It would be highly unlikely that the sugar sector would be spared from further reform in the 

context of the EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform process. The indications on 

this would start as early as June 2010, a process in which SADC sugar industries should find 

opportunities to influence thinking. 

• The sugar sector in the EU is still to undergo further reform, which will impact on ACP sugar 

exporters. Analysis of information available indicated that the EU intends to end production 

quotas, maintain a managed trade regime up to at least 2018, accommodate an expanded 

tariff rate quota for export-oriented sugar industries after the abolition of export refunds and 

maintain/establish safety net policy tools to manage the transition to the quota-free regime. 

• The new EU sugar regime is likely to result in an increase of intra-ACP competition, new 

markets opening up as some countries exit sugar production, increased opportunities for 

value addition within ACPs, intensifying interest from quality/premium customers and 

weakening of prices (and their guarantees). 

Mr Willers presented on the structure and future of the Better Sugarcane Initiative (BSI). His 

presentation could be summarised as follows: 

• While the standard is voluntary at the moment, in the near future BSI certification will be 

compulsory. 

• BSI was committed to a sugar industry that promotes responsible business practices; respects 

labour and employment practices (particularly ILO core labour conventions) and provides a 

safe and healthy working environment; aims for continuous improvement in production and 

resource efficiency; respects the environment and aims to reduce emissions to air and water 

(with particular reference to climate change and green house gas emissions); and recognises 

the importance of biodiversity and ecosystem services in the long-term viability of 

operations. 

• BSI allows sugar producers to self assess their performance in order to make necessary 

improvements, allows benchmarking operations against competitiors, a premium can be 

payable on sugar produced under the BSI certified programmes. 

• The plan is for BSI to replace all current multi-aspect standards (by consolidating them into 

one). 

In the ensuing discussion, concerns were raised on the preparedness of SADC countries for the 

future CAP reforms, post-2012 and the attendant logistical arrangements. It was observed that 

SADC sugar producers need to develop new commercial relationships in the light of possible 

further changes to the market regime in the EU and the ongoing structural corporate adjustments 

for marketing sugar within the EU. 

Because consumers are becoming more fastidious, it is important to consider standards which 

demonstrate good management practice in sugarcane growing and milling. However, delegates 

raised concerns on the BSI which they viewed as cumbersome and discriminatory in the sense of 

targeting sugar produced from sugarcane and not sugar produced from beet. Sugar industries 

expressed their commitment to good environmental, social and labour practices. They indicated 

that they already meet stringent national requirements as well as various other sectoral and 

5

international requirements. Under such conditions, another costly bureaucratic certification 

system should be avoided. Unguarded, this could discourage the proliferation of smallholder 

sugarcane growing in the region who would find it harder to meet the stringent requirements 

imposed through the BSI. 

Session III 

This session was after the lunch break. Two presentations were made. The first was by Mr 

Wilfred Chakanika, Executive Secretary of Dwangwa Cane Growers Trust in Malawi, who 

presented on “Fairtrade as an Instrument for Enhancing the Sustainability of the Smallholder 

Sugarcane Growing Sector in SADC”. The second was made by Dr Mike Matsebula, Chief 

Executive Officer of SSA who presented on “SADC Sugar Industries in the African Context: 

Case for Using the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) Framework to Increase 

Intra-African Sugar Trade”. 

Mr Chakanika presented on the requirements and attraction of Fairtrade as a concept for 

improving SSG incomes. He focused his presentation on the Fairtrade certification process. His 

presentation could be summarised as follows: 

• Fairtrade is an instrument for supporting historically disadvantaged farmers and wage 

workers from the South (developing countries), by improving trading conditions for their 

produce in the EU market, and the operations are managed under certain best practice 

guidelines. This provides a framework for a direct link between the producer and the final 

customer. 

• Qualifying sugarcane growers receive a guaranteed minimum price and premium for sugar 

sold as Fairtrade sugar. In the case of Malawi, the premium is US$60 per ton, although this 

is negotiable by each producer organisation. Such premiums could be used for 

democratically agreed infrastructure projects to benefit the smallholder sugarcane growing 

communities. 

• Several projects had been implemented in Malawi using Fairtrade premium funds. These 

include electrification, clinic expansion, borehole construction, truck procurement, revolving 

fund for farmers and purchase of building materials for farmers. 

• The key challenges of Fairtrade were that sometimes there is a need for change of leadership 

structure and style, something difficult under the current smallholder organisation set ups. In 

addition, some producer organisations may need to adhere to stringent labour and 

environmental standards, including incurring certain costs, which could make their 

production systems uncompetitive. The administrative requirements may in some instances 

be burdensome. 

• The applicable standards change frequently and are getting tougher by the day, something 

which can be frustrating for participating organisations. 

In his presentation, Dr Matsebula made a case for increasing sugar trade within Africa through 

the framework provided by NEPAD. His presentation could be summarised through the 

following points: 

6

• The fact that sugar production is in surplus in Southern Africa coupled with sugar production 

deficits in the other African regions represents a theoretical opportunity for increased sugar 

trade within Africa. Moreover, the deficit position for the other regions in Africa is on 

upward trend. The NEPAD framework is a potential platform through which the theoretical 

opportunity could be transformed into a real opportunity. 

• Africa sugar consumption is increasing at an accelerating pace. This demand can be satisfied 

through production increases in Africa, increased imports from the surplus region and 

increased imports from non-African sources. Thus, increased intra-African trade will not cut 

out trade with non-African sources. Moreover, net price differentials could encourage 

continued African exports overseas whilst at the same time encouraging imports from into 

Africa from overseas countries. 

• For the increased intra-African sugar trade to become a reality, complementary activities 

need to be undertaken. These include the creation of a conducive environment (whose main 

instrument would be preferential trade agreements between the regions), infrastructure 

developments to improve physical linkages among the different countries in Africa and 

general commitment to African economic integration. 

Following the presentations, the conference agreed that Fairtrade labeling is a potentially useful 

mechanism for improving the welfare of SSGs. Therefore, ways have to be investigated to 

minimize the burden of certification and inspection, without weakening the drive to enhance the 

welfare of the communities where the SSGs operate or come from. To limit the potential of 

weakening the value of certification, further investigations are essential to ensure that Fairtrade 

sugar is easily traceable from source to customer. 

The delegates endorsed the concept of exploring and promoting further consolidation of intra- 

African trade especially in the sugar sector. It was noted that the integration objective of 

NEPAD can be supported via the sugar sector. The main concern and barrier to intra-African 

sugar trade was the prohibitively high transport logistics costs which rendered African-produced 

sugar uncompetitive in markets to the North of Southern Africa. Hence the wisdom of 

identifying infrastructural improvements to link countries in Africa. It was agreed that as a 

practical step, there should be further dialogue among sugar producers in SADC and Eastern 

Africa to agree on the way forward. 

Closing 

On the basis of the presentations and ensuing discussions, bearing in mind the concerns raised, 

the Conference adopted the following resolutions: 

• It calls for a closer collaboration between sugar industry representatives and EC services in 

the design as well as implementation of adaptation programmes so as to accelerate the 

disbursement of allocated funds. 

• It calls on the EC to ensure that in the management of further change in the EU Sugar 

Regime, new commercial relationships established to promote structural development of the 

SADC sugar sector are not undermined. With this in mind, dialogue on the day-to-day 

management of EU-SADC sugar relations should be intensified. 

7

• It recognizes the importance of meeting the requirements of consumers and commits to 

implement as well as maintain appropriate best management practices. 

• It supports the effort of improving the welfare of SSG communities through the Fairtrade 

mechanism and encourages SSGs to join the initiative. 

• It recognizes the potential for increasing sugar trade among the different countries and 

regions of Africa. This potential should be unlocked through arrangements negotiated in the 

context of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). The secretariats of 

SADC, EAC and COMESA should be formally notified of the interest of FSSP to pursue the 

objective of increasing intra-African sugar trade under the NEPAD umbrella. Along with 

this notification should be an indication of the desire to arrange a meeting among 

representatives of sugar producers in SADC, EAC and COMESA to discuss the way forward. 

SSA/ 07.08.09 

8

Annex 10 

Monitoring Matrix of the NAS Activities

ANNEX 10: NATIONAL ADAPTATION STRATEGY 

SUMMARY MONITORING SHEET OF STRATEGIC RESPONSE MEASURES (BY RDMU) 

Description 

A. COMPETITIVENESS 

1.Intensify programmes for reducing field level costs, 

raising sucrose content, streamlining cane delivery, 

reducing harvesting, haulage and loading costs, and 

reducing irrigation costs 

Responsibility 

SSA, 

Industry/ 

GoS, Donors 

2. Explore the use of alternative forms of energy RDMU / 

Industry 

3. Improve and expand the system of tarmac roads in the 

Lowveld 

Donor (EC) 

6. Expand refining capacity Donor - 

industry 

7. Reduce the cost of public utilities and improve their 

efficiency 

Govt 

8. Support research and development initiatives Donor – EU, 

IFAD, FAO 

COMMENTS ON PROGRESS (up to 31 July 2009) 

Last season, the millers provided a transport subsidy of E0.90/km/ton for those long 

distance growers at a distance of between 60-100km. This was an interim 

arrangement to alleviate the high haulage costs which were also worsened by high 

fuel costs. The industry provides out-grower advisory services to the small-holder 

growers to improve cane productivity. 

Some of the growers have formed themselves into harvesting groups to benefit from 

economies of scale and enhance harvesting and transport logistics. This has been 

initiated by the industry. 

The RDMU has carried out an assessment to establish the potential of using cane 

trash to reduce the energy costs. A project concept to establish a Central Heat 

Processing (CHP) plant has been proposed and work is on-going to establish the 

feasibility of this project benefitting under the CDM project concept. Scenarios 

proposed to address the Grid Emission Factor (GEF) for the country. A PDD for 

Ubombo Sugar is currently being developed to allow for the request to change the 

Tool for the country to account for emissions from the energy imports in the 

calculation of the GEF. 

A contract was awarded to Aurecon for undertaking the feasibility and designs of the 

upgrading for the 28km Siphofaneni-St Phillips-Maphobeni Road and the new 

Siphofaneni Bridge. The exercise will include a detailed environment and social 

impact assessment of the project, preparation of the final designs and the 

development of tender dossiers for the tendering process for the road construction. 

Tenders have been opened for the feasibility study and the development of designs 

for the upgrading of the 14km Mananga – Sihhoye Road and the 6km Dvokolwako 

bridge road in the North. 

Ubombo Sugar plans to expand the capacity of the mill contingent after the 

successful development of 5, 000 ha of sugarcane within the LUSIP area. At least 1, 

900 ha of this area should be ready by 2012. 

The SEC approved a tariff reduction for growers using pumps with not more than 

100 KVA capacities. The Farmer Associations are, however, not able to access this 

benefit, as the majority of them have pumping capacity exceeding the stipulated 100 

KVA threshold. On the other hand, the Water Act of 2003 requires that a water tariff 

be charged to the farmers although this has not yet been implemented. 

The RDMU will support priority areas identified by the participating stakeholders. The 

industry is currently benefiting from the ACP-wide project on agricultural research. 

1

Description 



B. TRADE POLICY DIMENSION AND ACTIVE PURSUIT OF PREMIUM MARKETS 

9. Extend the provisions of TDCA to the entire SACU area 

and modify where necessary to include the development 

of regional demand for regionally produced sugar. 

Govt, EC The initialled Interim EPA provides for unlimited access (subject to EU import 

safeguards) for Swazi sugar into the EU. It also provides for tariff adjustments to cater 

for sensitive products of the BLNS – and these include products containing sugar. A 

SADC Regional Sugar Strategy has been developed to complement this exercise by 

ensuring sustainable development of the SADC sugar industries and the SACU 

market value. It provides for development of downstream industries. The local sugar 

10. Maintain (and where possible expand) preferential 

access to regional markets and preserve the value of the 

domestic (SACU) market. 

11. Ensure a good transition arrangement is created to 

secure continued preferences on volume sales to the EU 

(particularly SPS allocation) and seek increased access of 

Swazi sugar to the EU, and other preferential markets. 

Govt, 

industry 

Govt, EC, 

other 

donors 

industry continues to have access to the COMESA market under derogation. 

Greater integration into regional markets is being promoted and supported. SSA 

participation is necessary to ensure sugar interests are protected. Opportunities for 

protection of access into COMESA are being explored. This includes a SACU-EAC 

Free Trade Area. 

This was ensured through the initialled Interim EPA, which provides for secured 

current access (of 150 000 tons) and expanded market access into the future. Other 

markets (including access to the US) are being secured. New ones are also being 

explored. 

2

Description 


C. PROMOTING SMALLHOLDER SUGAR CANE GROWING 

12. Support smallholder farmers in improving their farm Govt/ EC/ 

operations to improve efficiency and viability of existing Industry 

farmers and facilitate the entry of new ones 


Tender approved for the supply and installation of irrigation systems for Round 1 to 

cover 633.3 ha for 8 schemes under LUSIP and KDDP. However tender award for 

the 233.3 ha Ingcayizivele Farmer Association in KDDP was suspended pending an 

amicable solution to the chieftaincy dispute on the ownership of the land to be 

developed. If this is not resolved within 90 days after the opening of the tender it 

might result in the tender being cancelled. 

13. Re-examine the viability of the smallholder cane 

grower component of LUSIP and KDDP 


The AAP 2009 was approved by the EC. This will focus on both the existing and the 

new growers. The technical and financial assessments indicated key areas in which 

the existing growers may need support to improve their production efficiency. The 

SCGA is currently preparing a financing proposal for the EC Grant Management 

Contract to assist growers repair short-term irrigation system flaws, and those 

growers that are no longer viable, to diversify out of cane. Other interventions that 

have been ear-marked in the AAP 2009 are the improvement of bulk water supply 

and the provision of seed-cane for the existing growers. 

The AAP 2009 will establish a Grant Management Contract with the SCGA to 

facilitate support to the existing growers. A Grant Financing Proposal is being 

prepared by the SCGA and about €3.7 million has been earmarked for the 

interventions. The elements to be supported through this Grant include the 

rehabilitation/repairs of irrigation equipment (€1.3m), agriculture diversification 

(€1.7m), Technical Assistance (€0.6m) and other miscellaneous expenditures such 

as on evaluation, audit and the contingency. Complimenting these interventions for 

the existing growers will be the seed-cane scheme and the bulk water supply. GoS 

approved an E89.0m budget as a rebate for the KDDP growers who had to finance 

development costs from own resources. Under Round 1 a contract will be awarded 

for the supply and installation of irrigation systems for 633.3 ha under LUSIP and the 

KDDP. 

The RDMU has undertaken a baseline exercise for all the FAs and the individual 

small-holder growers. The objective of this exercise was to provide information on 

the key indicators that will inform the development of a monitoring & evaluation 

framework for the cane growers. The RDMU is continuing to finalize a Business 

Model for the Ratoon Management Fund (RMF) to improve timeous access to 

working capital for farm inputs procurement. The Technical Assistance Unit (SHIP) is 

now in place and in collaboration with SWADE and the Out-grower Departments will 

facilitate technical and business management training for the growers. This will 

include capacity building in irrigation equipment management and maintenance, 

irrigation scheduling, crop husbandry practices and corporate governance (for the 

FAs) to improve viability. 

3

Description 

14. Stabilize the financial situation of existing small and 

medium sized cane growers 

17. Provide a capacity building programme to SWADE 

and SSA extension services 

18. Introduce management (and productivity) conditions to 

smallholder cane crushing contracts 

19. Design a financing/lending model for smallholder 

farming to be used by financial institutions 

D. DIVERSIFICATION 

20. Expedite approval of legislation allowing the 

commercial sale of electric energy to the national power 

grid 

21. Identify best practices to develop electric power cogeneration 

within sugar-industry-based initiatives. 

22. Investigate alternate energy sources and products, 

including the efficiency of energy generation from bio-fuels 

23. Support studies and programmes on the (viability of 

the) generation and use of bio-energy and production of 

ethanol 


RDMU Donor 

– EC, EIB, 

ADB 

Donor – EC, 

IFAD 

Industry / 


Industry / 

Donor – EC, 

others 

Govt / 

RDMU / 

Industry 

Govt 

Industry 

Govt / 



The RDMU is currently developing a concept for establishing the Ratoon 

Management Fund (RMF). An Industry Revolving Fund to help finance seasonal 

costs more timeously is being developed. The rebate has been granted by 

Government for the KDDP growers who had to finance development costs from their 

own resources. This will drastically reduce the current debt burden of the 

associations. 

Continuous support from Government and industry exists. According to the terms of 

Reference, SHIP has to conduct a situational analysis to determine the training 

needs of the key role players amongst cane smallholder growers and the measures 

that can be implemented to address them. New areas for donor support are still to 

be considered. 

The growers outsource several services to private contractors and the performance 

of these service providers impact on the efficiency of the growers. Major 

stakeholders coordinated by the RDMU will include the participation of all the key 

service providers (that will be providing services to the growers) in their capacity 

building program to improve management and service provision. 

A Farm Management Structure to support the efficient operation of the FAs 

developed and agreed upon by the NAS stakeholders. This requires that the FAs 

employ a professional Manager to oversee the technical and administrative 

operation of the farms. Nedbank has made the implementation of this model a 

precondition for the financing of the 7 new entrant schemes under LUSIP. Work is 

on-going to have the structure in place beginning with the new entrant growers. 

The Electricity Act now allows for the generation of power by several suppliers – 

effectively ending the SEC monopoly. Investigations by the RDMU are on-going to 

identify and establish possible co-generation projects for mills that can benefit from 

the CDM projects framework. The use of cane trash for generating power can meet at 

least 70% of the country’s energy demand. 

The RDMU is facilitating the development of a Project Design Document (PDD) for a 

co-generation CDM project for Ubombo Sugar. 

RSSC and Illovo are researching and piloting these schemes; D1 Oils are piloting 

outgrower jatropha production. 

It was established that the country has the potential to benefit from the CDM projects 

framework. Possible scenarios have been developed by the RDMU to define the Grid 

Emission Factor (GEF) for the country and a PDD is being developed to allow the 

country to request a review of the current Tool to accommodate the local situation. 

4

Description 

24. Provide low-cost financing for pilot phases of cogeneration 

of electric energy 

25. Re-visit the industry agreement to ensure that growers 

get benefits from co-generation activities (on the proceeds 

of bagasse) 

26. Establish a facility/programme for farmers changing to 

other crops or to agricultural services. 

27. Establish a scheme to enhance the capabilities of 

smallholder associations for quality control, packaging, 

and marketing. 

28. Reduce transport costs and improve transport 

infrastructure and services from production centres and to 

link with markets 

29. Develop financing model for diversifiers and help them 

in accessing finance and training 

30. Promote and support research and development into 

other products/crops 

31. Establish and support institutions and infrastructure for 

the testing of products for quality and standards 


Industry 

Industry 


Donor – EC, 

IFAD, FAO 

Industry 

Donor – EC/ 

industry 


Donor 

Donor 

Govt 


Project motivations are expected from industry. 

The SSA/SCGA forum have this on the agenda for review in 2008; RDMU will provide 

some support through TA inputs to strengthen SCGA (e.g. part-time local TA) 

The RDMU developed an Exit Strategy to determine possible packages that can be 

used to support cane growers that have to diversify to other alternative crops. The 

target group are the long distance growers, particularly in Sidvokodvo and Malkerns 

that are no longer viable for cane farming. These growers would be assisted with the 

cost of pulling out (ripping) the cane, re-adjusting the existing irrigation system and 

the planting of a new alternative crop. An allocation of €1.7m has been earmarked for 

the diversification. The current indication though is that the majority of the growers 

are not willing to diversify. 

The SSA, SCGA and RDMU opened a dialogue with mill cane grower groups (both 

SNL and TDL growers) – a number of options are being reviewed for further 

consideration 

The sugar mills provided transport subsidies for growers within the 60-100km range 

to mitigate the high haulage costs for the long distance growers. This was however a 

temporary measure to be reviewed on a yearly basis. Tender awarded for the design 

of the upgrading of the Siphofaneni – St Phillips – Maphobeni Road including access 

roads to improve the road infrastructure. 

The RDMU developed packages that can be used to support long distance growers 

that want to diversify from cane growing and these were approved by the NAS 

structures (see 26 above). The SCGA supported by the RDMU will identify those 

growers that want to diversify out of cane and the criteria for the eligibility to benefit 

from the packages. Financiers are reluctant to offer financing for alternative crops 

particularly for the growers that have existing debts from cane farming. 

The Exit Strategy Report identifies possible diversification options for the long 

distance growers. It was anticipated that appropriate existing institutions will provide 

the required advisory support in the production and marketing of the alternative crops. 

The Swaziland Standards Authority (SWASA) is developing standards for local 

products through Technical Committees drawn from all the relevant stakeholders 

across all the sectors. 

5

Description 

32. Develop products for existing and new markets and 

the necessary support mechanisms (infrastructure, 

marketing information, etc), including making the 

necessary investments (and policy changes) to make the 

production of alternative products viable 

33. Provide support for downstream value-added 

industries 

34. Support the expansion of refinery capacity and 

efficiency 

35. Develop tourism products for the SME sector in the 

sugar areas, and to support new initiatives for 

diversification into the sector 

36. Establish a support mechanism to follow up 

recommendations on control of and compliance with food 

safety regulations. 

E. SOCIAL AMENITIES PROVISION 

37. Develop a model for the sustainable management and 

financing of social amenities in industry areas to ensure 

the continued provision of quality housing, health, and 

education, which is currently financed by the industry 

38. Support the gradual development of local government 

structures capable of running social & communal services 

for the sugar communities 

39. Create a programme to support transitional and coping 

measures for retrenched workers, especially with regard 

to access to industry social services 

40. Support the strengthening of basic social services 

provision for the population, and provide safety nets for 

retrenched and unemployed people 


Donor - 

IFAD 

Donors 

Industry 

Govt / 


Govt 

Govt / 


Industry 

Govt/Donor 

– EC, 

UNDP 

Govt 

Govt 

6 


IFAD supported the exercise to develop models to improve access to rural financing 

in the country. A recommendation was made that the country establish a Financial 

Services Regulatory Authority to guide the operations of savings and credit 

institutions not currently governed by the Central Bank under the Financial Institutions 

Act. The Ministry of Finance (MoF) has prepared the Financial Services Regulatory 

Authority Bill and is now awaiting the approval of Parliament and assent by His 

Majesty for this to then become the law. 

The Policy framework exists. Specific support to be sought when opportunities 

identified. 

The Ubombo Sugar Mill in Big Bend has plans to expand the capacity of the mill 

contingent after the successful development of 5, 000 ha of sugarcane within the 

LUSIP area. At least 1,900 ha of this area should be ready by 2012. 

The RDMU can assist GoS explore possibilities and seek support from other donor 

partners when developing the donor approach strategy. 

If requested, the RDMU will assist GoS explore possibilities and seek support from 

other donor partners. The SSA is in contact with EU and US customers to seek their 

support in identifying the relevant compliance requirements. Resources may be 

sought for support to comply with these requirements. 

The sugar industry is working on a strategy paper to streamline social services 

projects that can benefit from the NAS interventions. The proposed selection criteria 

include that the project should be; (i) workable or implementable under the EC 

procedures; (ii) achieve significant recurrent cost savings; (iii) be consistent with 

Government & industry strategic plans; (iv) build upon a sound institutional framework 

with sustainable management; and, (v) have cross-cutting benefits. Amongst the 

projects that have currently been earmarked are: the rehabilitation of the Big Bend 

Estate Water Supply; the RSSC Waste Disposal; and the RSSC construction of 

Teachers Housing and the rehabilitation of Sisekelo High School. Studies are yet to 

be undertaken to provide adequate information on the feasibility of the projects for 

their inclusion in the AAP2010 which is prepared by the RDMU 

This is pending finalization of the industry strategy paper on aspects of social 

services provision. 

Dito 

Dito

Description 


41. Implement multi-skilling programmes for workers Donor 

retrenched at sugar companies 

42. Establish an effective and continuous AIDS Donor - EC 

programme, and related AIDS (effects) mitigation 

measures 

F. ENHANCING A SUSTAINABLE SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 

43. Establish effective support services for rural micro- Donor - 

and small-scale enterprises, as farms and mills lay off IFAD 

personnel when outsourcing services 

44. Relax regulations governing the establishment of new 

businesses 

Govt 


The industry feels this is an unsustainable level of support and it will be dropped from 

the NAS agenda. 

The RDMU will initiate a study to establish the impact of HIV/AIDS on the 

performance of the sugar industry. 

The proposed business model for the FAs puts emphasis on the out-sourcing of 

services to reduce the impact of high fixed costs on the viability of the schemes. This 

is anticipated to provide entrepreneurial opportunities from competent former industry 

personnel as service providers. This also includes employment opportunities as 

professional farm managers. 

A policy framework has been developed with a view to come up with an Investment 

Policy. This will influence the review and development of new legislation regarding 

the establishment of businesses in the country. 

45. Support the implementation of the investor roadmap Govt/Donor The current legislation is being reviewed and 2 bills are being prepared as part of the 

implementation of the investor roadmap (SIPA, Government, etc). 

46. Establish a research farm to run practical field scale 

agronomic research and market research on alternative 

crops to sugar cane 

Donors / EC 

It was considered that the time scale of the program might not warrant meaningful 

field scale research. Support could be provided to relevant research institutions in 

areas that will impact on the NAS issues as well as by the EC funded Swaziland 

Agricultural Development Project. 

47. Improve the security of tenure on land Govt The issue of land tenure has appeared to be a serious constraint in the 

implementation of the small-holder irrigation development initiatives. The EC is to 

point out for Government attention the particular impact of land tenure on the 

implementation of the small-holder irrigation project and the disbursement rate for the 

MIP 2007-10. 

48. Ensure full concessional/grant financing for LUSIP Donor - EC The EC is assisting LUSIP, KDDP and new growers in other areas with grant support 

to leverage the DFI loans. GoS will finance the development of 475 ha for new 

entrant growers under LUSIP. SWADE is to approach other donors to fund the 

finance gap. 

49. Support semi-industrial-scale trials of substituting coal 

by baled sugar cane trash as supplementary industrial 

fuel. 

50. Expand and improve the quality of national schooling 

and Technical training 

51. Decentralise planning, budgeting and delivery of 

services to the rural poor 

Industry 

Donor - EC 

Govt 

Ubombo Sugar and RSSC are experimenting with this at present 

The sugar industry is finalizing its strategy paper on a social services program that 

could be supported by the NAS. The adoption of this program will provide information 

on individual priority projects that will be included in the AAP 2010. 

The Decentralization Policy was finalized and adopted by the GoS. The Policy seeks 

to devolve planning and service delivery to the local structures at regional and grassroot 

level. Regional Physical Development Plans indicating potential development 

areas for the country’s 4 regions have been drafted. The social services programmes 

will build-upon the identified strategies for roll out in Big Bend and RSSC. 

7

Description 



53. Promote good governance All This is a feature of all NAS activities supported by GoS, the industry and the EU. 

54. Train communities on the utilization of Poverty Funds 

to support coping and diversification, including entry into 

Donor – EC, 

IFAD 

This is being pursued by Government as part of the implementation of the Poverty 

Funds. 

the sugar industry 

55. Support the development of a national water Donor - EC This is being pursued by the appropriate authorities. 

conservation plan 

56. Improve environmental management mechanisms Donor – EC Dito. 

G. INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND COORDINATION 

57. Establish a “Restructuring and Diversification” Unit Donor – EC An interim RDM Unit was established from April 2007 to December 2007. The main 

(includes M34) 

58. Support the continuous operation of the National 

Adaptation Steering Committee 

59. Evaluate the capacity of existing institutions and 

programmes in delivering on the activities required under 

the adaptation strategy 

60. Support the creation of the additional 

structures/institutions/programmes that are necessary for 

the successful implementation of the strategy 

Govt / 


Donor – EC 

/ RDMU 

Donor – 

IFAD, 

USAID 

NB: The responsibility column is indicative only and may change as a result of developments on the ground. 

RDMU has been in place since January 2008 and operates until December 2010. 

This is MEPD liaising with the NAS stakeholders, the EC and other donor partners, 

and provides the mechanism for direction to the RDM Unit. The NAS Steering 

Committee (NASSC) meets every two months to discuss progress on the Program 

and provide strategic guidance. 

On-going as part of the activities of the Working Group and Task Teams – the RDMU 

is supporting SCGA and SSA establish the needs of sugar cane growers. The RDMU 

is providing training on the job to all stakeholders wherever it is required. 

On-going – an initial idea for a Technoserve one-stop-shop business support concept 

was developed from discussions with RDM Unit. Since the beginning of 2009, the 

Business Place funded by several stakeholders is in operation and offers training. 

8

Annex 11 

The RDMU logical framework with results 

accomplished

Annex 11: Logical Framework for the Restructuring and Diversification Management Unit: Accomplishment of Results up until 31 July 2009 

Restructuring and Diversification Management Unit to coordinate the implementation of the National Adaptation Strategy for the EU Sugar Reform, SWAZILAND 

INTERVENTION LOGIC 

Overall Objective Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVI) planned Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVI) actual Source of verification 

To contribute to 

Swaziland’s adaptation to 

the EU Sugar Market 

Reform 

• Quantities and value of sugar processed in 

Swaziland increased by 5 % between 2006 

and 2013. 

• Smallholder growers within an economically 

viable distance from the mill remain in 

sugarcane, and are profitable 

• Farmers who are not economically viable 

and profitable in sugar have diversified 

profitably into alternative crops.. 

• 5% increase in the population living in the 

sugar belt having access to social services 

between 2006 and 2013. 

• Quantities and value of sugar processed 

in Swaziland reduced from 2006 to 2008/ 

2009 by 2.9 % 

• Average yields of sugar cane per hectare 

by smallholder decreased from 79.5 tons 

in 2007 to 78.5 tons in 2008 

• No intervention yet 

• No intervention yet 

SSA Annual Report 

SSA Annual Report 

Logframe for RDMU - Results accomplished till 31 July 2009 – Page 1

Purpose OVI OVI actual Source of verification 

MEPD supported 

in the 

implementation 

and coordination 

of the NAS 

• 30 out of 60 NAS 

strategic response 

measures have 

been converted 

into actionable 

projects and 

programmes by 

the end of 2010. 

• 12 out of 50 NAS 

strategic response 

measures have been 

converted into 

actionable projects and 

programmes by 31 July 

2009 (Note: there is 

some duplication 

among the 60 

measures. In fact, there 

are 50 measures) 

1. TA to Smallholder Irrigation Development 

2. Irrigation equipment installation 

3. SCGA Grant Contract: Irrigation rehabilitation and diversification 

4. SEC approved tariff reduction for small growers 

5. Energy efficiency project at Ubombo 

6. Design of CHP plants in the sugar belt 

7. AAP 2008 and infrastructures in the South 

8. Development of the Ratoon Management Fund 

9. Development of an exit strategy programme on diversification 

10. Sugar mills provision of transport subsidies to long distance growers 

11. Rebate for indebted cane growers in KDDP 

12. EC funded FAO programme “Agricultural Development Programme” 

1. TA to Smallholder Irrigation Development (started in May 2009) 

2. SEC approved tariff reduction for small growers 

3. AAP 2008 and infrastructures in the South. Final Design started in July 2009 

4. Sugar mills provision of transport subsidies to long distance growers 

5. Rebate for indebted cane growers from KDDP approved in July 2009 

6. EC funded FAO programme “ Agricultural Development Programme” started in mid 

2009 

1. Smallholder Irrigation Development Programme (AAP 2007) amounting to 

14.895 m Euro 

2. Support to Transport Infrastructure (AAP 2008) amounting to 18 m Euro 

3. Rebate for indebted cane growers from KDDP (approximately 10 m Euro) 

4. 475 ha irrigation installation in LUSIP funded by the GoS 

5. EC funded FAO programme “ Agricultural Development Programme” (14.661 m 

Euro) 

• 20 NAS measures 

have started or 

have been 

implemented by 

the end of 2010 

• 6 NAS measures have 

started or have been 

implemented by 31 July 

2009 

• € 100 million worth 

of projects have 

been committed 

by 2010 out of the 

€ 360 million 

earmarked for the 

NAS 

• Approximately € 58 

million worth of projects 

have been committed 

by 31 July 2009 out of 

the € 360 million 

earmarked for the NAS 


Results OVI planned OVI actual Source of verification 

• € 18 m is committed for Road Transport 

• AAP and FA 2008 

Infrastructure by the end of 2008. 

Result 1: EC MIP 2007- 2010 

is committed 

Result 2: EC MIP 2007- 2010 

is implemented 

• € 10 m is committed to smallholder irrigation 

Phase 2 by the end of 2009 

• € 5 m is committed to Agriculture Diversification by 


• € 11m is committed to social services, € 6m to 

Economic Diversification and € 3.895 is committed 

for Transport Infrastructure by the end of 2010 

• Road and bridge design & supervision contracts 

awarded (May 2009) 

• Phase 1 Road and Bridge construction contracts 

awarded by 2010 

• Works tenders for irrigation equipment launched in 

2009 and 2010, full commitment of funds by the 

end of 2010 

• At least 30% of Agricultural Diversification and 

2010 measures committed by the end of 2010 

• € 18 m is committed for Road 

Transport Infrastructure by the 

end of 2008 (FA signed in Dec 

2008). 

• € 10 m is committed to 

smallholder irrigation Phase 2 by 


• € 5 m is committed to Agriculture 

Diversification by the end of 

2009 

• € 9.4m in the process of being 

committed to social services and 

for Transport Infrastructure by 

the 31 July 2009 

• Road and bridge design & 

supervision contracts awarded 

(July 2009) 

• No contract on construction 

awarded yet. Commencement of 

construction in May 2010. 

• Works tenders for irrigation 

equipment launched in 2009 and 

contract for 400 ha (EC funded) 

to be signed. 

• Works tenders for irrigation 

equipment launched in 2009 and 

contract for 475 ha (GoS) 

awarded to Stefanuti Contractors 

• Not committed yet 

• AAP 2009 indicatively 

approved, but not signed 

• AAP 2009 indicatively 

approved, but not signed 

• PIF under preparation 

• Contract with Aurecon 

• Tender for 400 ha in April 

2009 

• Tender 475 ha in May 2009 


Results OVI planned OVI actual Source of verification 

• At least two other donors contribute up to € 20m to 

• GoS Irrigation tender and 

the NAS by 2010 

GoS rebate 

Result 3: Other NAS 

activities are financed and 

implemented by other (non- 

EC) donors and the sugar 

industry. 

Result 4: Stakeholder liaison 

mechanisms are established 

and in operation. 

• Necessary documentation established by the end 

of 2009 and carbon credits valued at € 5m are sold 

on the market by the end of 2011 

• At least 5 NAS SC meetings organised per year 

• 70 % of major stakeholders participate in the NAS 

WG meetings and workshops every year until 

2010 

• At least 8 brochures developed and 4 radio/ TV 

spots broadcast before the end of 2010 

• One donor has contributed up to 

€ 13m to the NAS by the 31 July 

2009 

• PIN developed and approved in 

May 2009. PDD under 

preparation by 31 July 2009. No 

carbon credits yet sold 

• Since the GFA mobilisation 8 

NAS SC meetings have been 

organised 

• 100 % of the major stakeholders 

have participated in the NAS WG 

meetings and workshops every 

year up until 31 July 2009 

• As of the 31 July 2009, 3 

brochures and 4 flyers have 

been developed 

• PIN / draft PDD 

• Minutes 

• Minutes 

• RDMU progress reports 

and RDMU website

RDMU - Swaziland

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?