INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: ISDSA6805 Public Disclosure Copy Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 26-Nov-2013 Date ISDS Approved/Disclosed: 26-Sep-2013, 26-Nov-2013 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: Samoa Project ID: P126596 Project Name: Enhancing the Climate Resilience of Coastal Resources and Communities (P126596) Task Team Samuel G. Wedderburn Leader: Estimated 30-Sep-2013 Estimated 17-Dec-2013 Appraisal Date: Board Date: Managing Unit: EASNS Lending Specific Investment Loan Instrument: Sector(s): General agriculture, fishing and forestry sector (100%) Theme(s): Climate change (100%) Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP No 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)? Financing (In USD Million) Public Disclosure Copy Total Project Cost: 14.60 Total Bank Financing: 0.00 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount Borrower 0.00 Strategic Climate Fund Grant 14.60 Total 14.60 Environmental B - Partial Assessment Category: Is this a No Repeater project? 2. Project Development Objective(s) The project development objective is to support coastal communities to become more resilient to climate variability and change. 3. Project Description The proposed project project will develop and implement immediate and urgent activities to: (a) Page 1 of 9 assist the population of Samoa in adapting to climate variability and climate change; (b) protect people’s lives and livelihoods, coastal and inland infrastructure, and the environment; and (c) increase awareness of climate change impacts and adaptation activities in communities, civil society Public Disclosure Copy and local government. The project will promote a broad “ecosystem based approach� that recognizes the importance of functioning ecosystems to enhance communities’ resilience to climate-related impacts, and manages risks through green or nature-based approaches and interventions that can be combined with hard infrastructure where necessary. The project will be concerned with all natural hazards rather than just coastal-associated hazards, and look to assess vulnerabilities and solutions on a ridge-to-reef basis, recognizing the fundamental link between processes occurring in different parts of the catchment. Component 1: Implementation of Priority Adaptation Measures to Manage Climate and Disaster- related Threats This component will strengthen the adaptive capacity of communities, and increase the resilience of coastlines and near shore areas as well as coral reefs (including their productivity) to the risks posed by climate variability and change. It will support the implementation of priority community adaptation measures derived from revised Coastal Infrastructure Management (CIM) Plans and other community planning frameworks. The project will implement a ridge-to reef-approach that involves managing climate and disaster risks from the coastal zone to upper water catchment areas. The component will include the following sub-components: a) Sub-component 1: Participatory Prioritization of Disaster Risks and Adaptation Options (US $0.6m). This sub-component will support communities in the 16 targeted districts in upgrading CIM Plans through a participatory process that will also include integration with other management plans such as Disaster Risk Management, Sustainable Development, and Watershed Management. Adaptation options will be prioritized, and sub-projects aimed at strengthening resilience will be prepared. Experienced NGOs, together with technical specialists from line agencies, will provide facilitation and undertake vulnerability and adaptation (V&A) assessments utilizing the most up-to- Public Disclosure Copy date data available in helping communities to accurately identify climate risks and appropriate responses. b) Sub-component 2: Sub-grants for implementing priority climate resilience measures (US $9.6m). This sub-component will provide financing for the priority sub-projects described in sub- component 1. Small grants of up to WST$50,000 (US$22,720)would be provided directly to community groups for village-level projects through the existing Civil Society Support Program in accordance with the provisions of a Community Engagement Plan (described under Component 2.1), which would include community procurement procedures. Larger grants (WST$50,000 < WST $500,000 per activity) or (US$22,720 < US$222,720) will be provided through line agencies for larger and more complex projects that would cover several villages. Component 2: Strengthened Climate Information Services This Component will strengthen the provision of climate information. It will include activities to increase public awareness of climate change issues and to improve the availability and use of data for risk analysis, hazard mapping and knowledge sharing. The component will include the following sub-components: Page 2 of 9 a) Sub-component 1: CSO training, national and local-level education and awareness-raising on climate resilience (US$0.3m). The capacity of CSOs would be strengthened through a series of trainings provided by line ministry specialists to enable them to deliver a range of climate change- Public Disclosure Copy related services to community-level applicants. MNRE and stakeholder line ministries would work with the Civil Society Support Program (CSSP) and interested CSOs to develop a Community Engagement Plan (CEP) that the CSOs would then use to assist communities in designing, applying for funding, and implementing simple community-based adaptation activities. The sub-component will also support the development of a comprehensive and targeted Communications Strategy to raise awareness of climate resilience at the national and level levels, including among school children and women’s groups, who have higher levels of vulnerability to climate change and disasters. Sub-component 2: Strengthened data platforms (US$.1.2m). This sub-component will support the provision of data (bathymetric, topographic, ecological) for spatial hazard mapping, through financing of a comprehensive LiDAR (light detection and ranging) system throughout the country. Component 3: Institutional strengthening for climate and disaster resilience, project coordination and monitoring This component will finance project management and technical support activities under components 1 and 2. More significantly, it will provide the Institutional Framework for a programmatic approach to climate and disaster resilience, facilitating the more effective use of funds from different sources, including the PPCR, the Adaptation Fund, and the LDCF. The Institutional Framework will be integrated with existing government structures and procedures, including the PPCR Steering Committee, which will provide overall policy guidance and supervision for the project. To reduce the burden of implementing the growing number of climate and disaster resilience projects, and meeting different donor requirements, a Project Coordination Unit (PCU) will be Public Disclosure Copy established within the MNRE-Planning and Urban Management Agency (PUMA). This unit will be responsible for the day-to-day management of the project. It is envisioned that over time, the PCU could be expanded to provide a common administration and operational platform through which all funding and support for climate and disaster resilience could be efficiently managed. The PPCR support for this project will provide for hiring of (a) a Project Manager, (b) a Financial Management Specialist, (c) a Procurement Specialist, and (d) an M&E Specialist; together with (e) a locally recruited Financial Management Officer, (f) M&E database specialist, and (g) Program Assistant. The Government will provide counterpart staff for the Project Manager and Financial Management Specialist. Additionally, the project will provide for some three person-years of short- term technical assistance (Coastal Engineer, Coastal Geo-morphologist, Ecosystems Specialist, Climate Change Specialist, and GIS specialist) to undertake the revalidation of CIM Plans. The project will also support more detailed technical review where necessary, especially for sub-projects identified in the CIM Plans and implemented by the communities and CSOs through the CSSP. 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) The project will be implemented in 16 districts which have already been selected , 12 on the island of Upolu and 4 on the island of Savai'i. A map delineating the districts is included in the PAD. Page 3 of 9 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Beverly Ann McLean (EASNS) Public Disclosure Copy Gerardo F. Parco (EASPS) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Environmental Assessment OP/ Yes The Project intends to finance a variety of types BP 4.01 of small scale structures and ecologically based measures i.e. soft approaches such as reforestration and mangrove rehabilitation, which may, in some cases, have adverse environmental impacts. These impacts will be due to the construction of structures and also due to the location of the activities. Typical construction related impacts are temporary and can be mitigated through proper measures. Potential impacts on natural habitats on the other hand need to be adequately assessed and negative impacts of which are minimized to the extent possible. Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 Yes The Project area encompasses a number of protected areas and key biodiversity areas, and may fund subprojects that may be located in, or adjacent to these and in such cases the potential to cause encroachment or to introduce access to natural habitats which did not previously exist is likely. Forests OP/BP 4.36 Yes In the ridge to reef approach of the project, Public Disclosure Copy forested areas and mangrove areas are within the project’s scope. Potential impacts on forest will have to be assessed as part of the Environmental Assessment. Pest Management OP 4.09 No There will be no use or increase in use of Pesticides in this project. Physical Cultural Resources OP/ Yes Samoa has a distinctive and long founded BP 4.11 culture, featuring a communal way of life known as Fa’a Samoa. Distinctive music, dress, faith, family structures and cuisine have evolved. To mitigate against the potential for adverse impacts on cultural property, the checklist will help ensure that Cultural property resources are identified during subproject planning, and appropriate measures are taken to amid damaging them. There is a possibility that items of archealogical significance such as graves, pigeon mounds (tie seu lupe) could be revealed, and artefacts such as adzes, potsherds and stone flakes Page 4 of 9 unearthed. Procedures for such chance finds will be incorporated into civil works Contracts and into agreements with CSOs. Public Disclosure Copy Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 Yes Triggered as per policy. Social Assessment reports ethnic and cultural homogeneity and protection of the ‘people of Samoa’ under the Constitution and law. Project design takes account of the need for consultation, protection of land-based livelihoods and benefit sharing. Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP Yes Both larger and village scale subprojects will be 4.12 developed with participation and broad support of affected communities. Most land impacts are therefore expected to occur on public or voluntarily donated land. A Resettlement Policy Framework complements provisions under Samoan law to guide resettlement planning in the event of involuntary impacts, should compulsory land acquisition for a public purpose be unavoidable, or restrictions be necessary for rehabilitation/ establishment of natural habitats or protected areas. Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 No Not applicable Projects on International No Not applicable Waterways OP/BP 7.50 Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP No Not applicable 7.60 Public Disclosure Copy II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: The project is not expected to have adverse negative impact on environment and people given the scale of investments. It does have some temporary impacts related to community-led civil works activities, but these impacts are deemed manageable and short term. The project will also finance ecologically based measures such as reforestation and mangrove rehabilitation, which on the overall will have positive impacts but in in some cases may also have environmental and social impacts. Again, given the nature of the activities, impacts are deemed short term and manageable. Social impacts include use of public land or easements, or land selected and donated voluntarily by beneficiary communities as part of the usual community contribution in CSSP projects. Similarly, village subprojects will not proceed without community consent, and as is the current practice. Indigenous Polynesians comprise 93 percent of Samoa’s population and will be the overwhelming majority-beneficiaries of the project. Provisos to ensure that land-based livelihoods are protected Page 5 of 9 and benefits are equitably shared are central to this project, and have been incorporated into the project design and ESMF. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities Public Disclosure Copy in the project area: The project is expected long term to have benefits for the entire population, but in particular for those in vulnerable areas and whose livelihoods depend on natural resources. The benefits will be not only physical, but also psychological in alleviating the mental stress associated with the anticipation of natural calamities. Women, who predominate in the village domestic work force, will have an opportunity to become a strong focal point in planning village resilience. The project will assist economic security both directly in protecting productive systems but also indirectly in diminishing disruption and insecurity in the important tourism industry. A potential future long term impact is the continued use of resources from forests and natural habitats. If this use of resources is not sustainable, degradation of these resources is possible. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. Lessons in particular from the Samoa Infrastructure Asset Management and the Adaptation Fund projects have been inculcated. The restructured project has widened its frame of reference from a Coastal Infrastructure Management to a ridge to reef focus and Community Implementation Management approach to resilience. This more holistic frame invites consideration of alternatives to hard infrastructure options, such as resilient agriculture or agro-forestry and emphasis on improved management of water and other natural resources. 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. The Recipient has over a decade of experience of managing infrastructure initiatives with the Bank through the Samoa Infrastructure Asset Management projects. MNRE and key government stakeholder Ministry of Women, Community and Social Development have considerable experience of partnership with Civil Society Support Program and the Samoa Umbrella NGO Public Disclosure Copy organization in managing community-led resilience projects under the Pilot Program for Climate Resilience and the UNDP-supported Adaptation Fund. Government partners are committed through training and development of awareness raising materials and technical support ‘tools’ in the Community Engagement Plan to strengthen CSOs to assist community organizations to apply for subproject funding, and to manage assets after implementation. The quality of CSO training and delivery will be important to successful delivery of project investments. An Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) has been developed by the GoS and is designed to identify potential negative impacts, and direct project stakeholders, CSOs and communities, to practical ways of avoiding or mitigating them. A negative list of activities has also been incorporated in the ESMF to directly avoid activities whose environmental and social risks are not acceptable. The recipient has also prepared a Land Acquisition and Resettlement Framework (LARF) as part of the ESMF which would guide subproject proponents on land acquisition and resettlement issues in case they would arise during implementation. In line with OP 4.10, since the beneficiaries are overwhelmingly Indigenous Peoples (IP), a separate IP Plan or Framework is not required, instead the elements of an IPP are integrated into the project design. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. At grass-roots level, key stakeholders are the residents of vulnerable villages that will receive Page 6 of 9 assistance under the project. First points of contact with external agencies are the Pulenu’u (Mayor) and the Women’s Representatives in each village, together with Matai and other traditional family and extended family leaders. Trained CSOs will be the main conduit for Public Disclosure Copy communication between grass-roots stakeholders, Government line agencies and CSSP, which will fund community level projects, supervised by a Board comprising MNRE, MWCSD and SUNGO representatives. Government stakeholders meet in a Steering Committee of the relevant line agencies, with facilitation through a Ministry of Finance chaired Unit that coordinates the various climate change initiatives in the country. Implementation of larger investment projects will be undertaken by the concerned stakeholder agency – Environment, Transport, Agriculture, Fisheries, Women and Community, Health etc, as appropriate. A Program Coordinating Unit within MNRE will oversee the awareness raising campaign and exchange of information amongst the stakeholders at each level. B. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other Date of receipt by the Bank 16-Sep-2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 24-Sep-2013 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors "In country" Disclosure Samoa 24-Sep-2013 Comments: Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process Date of receipt by the Bank 28-Aug-2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 24-Sep-2013 "In country" Disclosure Public Disclosure Copy Samoa 24-Sep-2013 Comments: Indigenous Peoples Development Plan/Framework Date of receipt by the Bank 25-Sep-2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 25-Sep-2013 "In country" Disclosure Samoa 25-Sep-2013 Comments: In line with OP 4.10 in cases where the beneficiaries comprise solely or overwhelimingly Indigenous Peoples (IP) and a separate IP Plan or Framework is not required, instead as required by the Policy, the Task Team has prepared and disclosed a brief summary outlining how the project complies with the IP Policy. If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/ Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level Page 7 of 9 OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] report? Public Disclosure Copy If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the credit/loan? OP/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? OP/BP 4.11 - Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to cultural Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] property? Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] potential adverse impacts on cultural property? OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/ Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? Public Disclosure Copy If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Sector Manager review the plan? OP/BP 4.36 - Forests Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional issues Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] and constraints been carried out? Does the project design include satisfactory measures to Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] overcome these constraints? Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] does it include provisions for certification system? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] World Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Page 8 of 9 Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of Public Disclosure Copy measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? III. APPROVALS Task Team Leader: Name: Samuel G. Wedderburn Approved By Sector Manager: Name: Michel Kerf (SM) Date: 26-Nov-2013 Public Disclosure Copy Page 9 of 9