Demonstration of effectiveness of diversified, environmentally sound and sustainable interventions, and strengthening national capacity for innovative implementation of integrated vector management (IVM) for disease prevention and control in the WHO AFRO

Project General Information




Harmful substances and hazardous waste

Persistent Organic Pollutants

Full Size Project(FSP)



Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Kenya, Zambia, Namibia, South Africa, Botswana, Liberia, Senegal, Ethiopia, Gambia, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Mozambique

GEF Trust Fund

Stage Grant to UNEP Grant to other IA Co-Financing UNEP Fee Other IA Fee
$ 16,154,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 15,408,000.00 $ 1,615,400.00 $ 0.00



Executing Agency Category
WHO Regional office of Africa
International NGO

Partner Category

Name Category Period
Jan Betlem

Moderate Risk

There is potential risk of increased malaria transmission posed by reduced reliance on DDT or its withdrawal for IRS applications. Community acceptance of the alternative interventions may not be at the desired level at the beginning of the project as is the case in a number of situations currently with the use of DDT as well. The comparative high prices of alternative insecticides to DDT, as well as some times the high tariffs on imported nets, could undermine the implementation of alternative interventions. Insecticide resistance to alternative that will be used and the reluctance of some policy makers to move to the use of alternatives are important anticipated risks to project success. In addition, the sustainable application of alternative vector control interventions, which are proven to be cost-effective and acceptable to communities, could be jeopardized by inadequate financial allocation by national authorities for the implementation of these options. These risks can be averted through the establishment of an effective disease surveillance system coupled with prompt diagnosis and treatment. The project is designed to ensure the intimate involvement of communities in the project. This will include increasing public awareness of the nature, availability and effectiveness of alternative interventions. Clear insecticide resistance management guidelines and well-designed projects with clear objectives and the imposition of precautionary measures will help to convince policy makers. A critical assumption of the project is that governments will maintain their political will towards scaling up the implementation of interventions that are proven to be effective. Relevant government ministries as stakeholders in the project will promote dialogue and facilitate appropriate changes in relevant policies. Additional resources channeled to the countries by the Global Fund, the RBM and projects funded by other donors aimed at lowering the costs of health interventions will also contribute to resource mobilization and to the reduce costs of alternative methodologies. The experience gained through implementation of the project will result in operational experience for each of the various alternative interventions. This experience will not only include logistical issues, but also the problems, constraints and potentially weak links associated with each type of alternative intervention. Documentation of these potentially weak links as well as the constraints and problems experienced, will allow an assessment of the risks associated with sustainability. DDT spraying is well understood in these terms, but the newer methods are not. Except for the chemical methods, as yet, there is not a comparable body of knowledge to characterise such risks, and therefore comprehensive anticipation of options for reducing them. The assessments of alternative interventions may reveal problems associated with adverse climatic conditions or difficulties of funding and retraining. These are all subjects that will be considered in respect to scaling up to wider areas and ensuring wider community acceptability. Although Parties to the Stockholm Convention are obliged to explore alternatives to DDT in vector management, in many if not all project countries these considerations are not or not fully taken into account by the respective relevant government organizations. This is not a matter of unwillingness, but rather a matter of urgency (malaria outbreaks have to be responded to in a short period of time) and/or a matter of not fully overseeing the possibility of alternatives to DDT. Even when alternatives are considered, many times a proper cost-benefit analysis taking into account all pro's and con's is not possible to do due to time, financial and technical capacity constraint within the relevant organizations. This project aims at providing the relevant organizations with such information. It also aims at increasing the public awareness of malaria and DDT issues. A potential risk is that the governments in the respective project countries assume that NGOs and CSOs will go against their respective policy with regards to malaria and DDT use and as such they might not support the project. Potential delays in collaboration and understanding by governments of participating countries might be an issue. However, the risk will be mitigated by liaising with the WHO and national Ministry of Health officials responsible for the execution of 'promotion of alternatives to DDT-activities' to work together to facilitate the crucial process of obtaining full community response and collaboration. The enthusiasm and commitment of the NGOs to participate in this project is underlined in their Dar-Es-Salaam Declaration of April 8, 2009 which stated inter alia; "Demand to participate in the UNEP/GEF/WHO program on Demonstrating and Scaling-up of Sustainable Alternatives to DDT in Vector Management (DSSA - Global Programme) especially in projects designed for the sub-Saharan African region". Some institutional capacity exists within the participating NGO’s on POPs issues that can be used during project preparation and implementation. Most of them have been involved in the preparation of the POPs inventory, NIP development and were also members of their National Steering Committees on the Implementation of the Stockholm Convention. Further more in 2006 the International POPs Elimination Network (IPEN) embarked on a GEF project which enabled NGOs in 40 developing and transitional countries (including in some project countries) to engage in activities that provided concrete and immediate contributions to country efforts in preparing for the implementation of the Stockholm Convention. The project also enhanced the skills and knowledge of NGOs to help build their capacity as effective stakeholders in the Convention implementation process; and helped establish regional and national NGO coordination and capacity in all regions of the world in support of longer term efforts to achieve chemical safety. However, another potential problem is that in some countries NGOs and CSOs lack the capacity to embark on proposed activities. For that purpose, extensive strengthening of these collaborating organizations is foreseen and budgeted for. Scientific evidence in recent years has demonstrated that increased temperatures due to climate change have resulted in expansion of insect zones. This has also been witnessed in the case of the malaria vector with areas formerly too high or cold to be malaria prone becoming endemic malaria areas. Climate change triggers that increase the number of vector borne disease outbreaks may be followed by intensified malaria vector eradication campaigns that rely heavily on IRS using DDT. Such an eventuality will be mitigated by intensification of discussions between all stakeholders in the project. Communities will be educated about the potential changes of disease patterns due to climate change and the need to adopt various safe, innovative and sustainable measures.


Fiscal Year Project activities and objectives met
PIF Submission

$ 0.00