SFG2566 SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOODS FOR DISPLACED AND VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES IN EASTERN SUDAN – SLDP Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) Revised June 2016 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Government of Sudan has received funding from the World Bank’s State and Peace- building Fund (SPF) ($3.08 M) for project titled “sustainable livelihoods for displaced and vulnerable communities in eastern Sudan–initial phase Project (SLDP) for a period of 28 months, started October 2013. The project preparation is under the overall responsibility of Ministry of Finance and National Economy (MOFEP). The project targets Kassala State in Eastern Sudan. The overall objective of the project is to strengthen the capacity of local stakeholders including state authorities, displaced persons, and vulnerable host communities to plan and deliver services and sustainable livelihood for displaced population and vulnerable host communities in Kassala State. The “Sustainable livelihoods for displaced and vulnerable communities in Eastern Sudan - Initial Phase Project” (the Project) was approved in 2013, and the initial set up activities started in late 2013. Phase one of the Sustainable Livelihoods for Displaced and Vulnerable Communities in Eastern Sudan Project (SLDP) pilots a Community Driven Development (CDD) approach of organizing and assisting communities to plan and deliver livelihood opportunities through intensive community mobilization facilitated entrepreneurial and vocational training, and delivering in-kind grants to beneficiaries. Communities were oriented towards the project objectives and organized into clusters represented by existing village committees and community facilitators communally elected to function as liaisons for the project. Within the 6 communities, 900 households were targeted for grants delivery, 25% of which were vulnerable women headed households. Communities selected the 900 households to receive project inputs from a selected menu of feasible livelihood activities in the target areas as identified by in-depth studies conducted by SLDP. These households received intensive technical support to identify their priorities and vet their business proposals, as well as entrepreneurial and vocational training by experts to enhance the productivity of their economic activities. Phase 2 of the project has been proposed and can be considered as a continuation of the pilot phase of SLDP, which seeks to consolidate successes and lessons learned over the course of the first phase. The phase 2 project seeks to address durable solutions to displacement whilst employing a paradigm shift from the prescribed methods of livelihoods support and delivery. Rather than introducing livelihood support as a self-contained intervention, this project seeks to use livelihoods support as an economic incentive to engage IDPs and host communities in planning and undertaking larger tasks that support other durable solutions in their surroundings, specifically pertaining to better management of their natural resource environment. Communities will be mobilized to plan and implement a portfolio of small-scale works in their communities aimed at mitigating the effects of environmental degradation that requires low or unskilled labor. This directional specification of the project’s small works component comes in affirmative response to priorities expressed by local stakeholders, strategies of the World Bank and Republic of Sudan, as well as global development agendas most recently expressed through the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 2015 UN Climate Change Conference. The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to strengthen the capacity of local stakeholders, including state authorities, displaced persons and vulnerable host communities, to plan and implement improved livelihoods and natural resource management practices. To achieve the Project PDO, the following are four interlinked components • Component 1: Development of Local Government Structures and Capacities • Component 2: Analytics and Technical Assistance • Component 3: Community Small Works Support • Component 4: Economic Livelihoods and Benefit Trans-passing 2 The project will seek to employ the livelihood grant mechanisms established in the first phase, however as an ex-post economic incentive to mobilize communities towards effective development planning and implementation of small works. Communities will be organized to select beneficiaries, identify livelihood priorities, vet their proposals through technical experts, and receive training in their chosen area of income generation. Given the gains achieved in community cohesion through application of the trans-passing system, the SLDP2 will aim to consolidate this approach. The benefit trans-passing system will be retained from phase 1, however strengthened to ensure larger, more sustainable investments from communities. The possibility of linking the trans-passing system with local state structures to oversee successful functioning will also be explored. Also encompassed in component 4 is a participatory M&E system, which will employ community leaders to be the first line of data collection for the project. They will be equipped with data collection tools and trained to collect key information within their communities for further transmission to a local NGO or consultant. This local NGO or consultant will verify and consolidate the information for the Kassala State Ministry of Finance, Economy, and Labor, which implements the project through a specialized sub-nodal agency called the East Sudan Transitional Solutions Initiative Coordinating Agency (ESTSI-CA). The ESTSI-CA, at intervals, will also verify this information directly within target communities to ensure data accuracy. The SLDP is rated as Category B per the World Bank safeguards categorization. The environment and social issues and risks associated with the project include: failure to introduce sustainability and self-reliance principles by target communities, increase in competition within communities as a result of higher resources circulating at community, and lack of technical knowledge to plan and implement small works focusing on improved Natural Resource Management (NRM) practices effectively, and impacts related to minor civil works (ex. dust, waste, noise). The following three safeguards policies have been triggered for the implementation of SLDP2: (a) 4.01 Environmental Assessment: This Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) has been prepared with guidance and procedures for environmental and social management issues during implementation period. For the management of impacts caused by subproject activities, the use of a simplified, checklist-type ESMP is envisaged. This would be the default instrument to manage the expected low-risk, low-impact activities (such as small scale civil and construction works), and would be produced, and attached to the tender package and works contracts for every identified sub-project with potential E&S impacts. (b) 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement: The proposed SLDP project as designed might not undertake involuntary displacement of people. But, small-scale civil works activities require land for construction and other minor civil works might result in economic and or physical displacement. While the specific location for the sub projects are not known, it is not possible to determine the nature of ownership of land at this stage (whether private and/or public). Therefore, as a precautionary measure to preclude the risks of land acquisition the policy will be triggered and a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) will be prepared to identify and address potential land acquisition or restriction to access and use of natural resources. (c) 7.50 Projects on International Waterways: 6 of the project’s 10 target communities are located in proximity of the Gash River (<3 km), an international waterway which originates in Eritrea, borders Ethiopia, and ends in eastern Sudan. The small works activities envisaged by the project are demand-driven and will be identified after successive community mobilization, natural resource management sensitization, and environmental 3 planning processes. Based on common practice in the area, distance from the Gash River, and experience in past projects, it is not expected that the small works to be proposed by target communities will appreciably affect the quantity or quality of water flows in the Gash River or any other international waterways, however some effect is possible. The activities that may be implemented may involve minor rehabilitation, additions, or alterations of existing small-scale community water supply for household use and irrigation infrastructure. In the event of rehabilitation, the incremental rate of abstraction or discharge into the above-mentioned international waterways or their tributaries as a result of rehabilitation is likely to be minimal. The annual incremental rate of abstraction is estimated to be 113,300 m3, or 0.016% of the mean annual discharge of the Gash River. The rationale for this calculation has been provided by the Kassala State Drinking Water Corporation, the technical authority for water supply in Kassala State. In accordance with project objectives of strengthening the capacity of stakeholders to plan and deliver natural resource management practices, communities will be supervised by environmental experts to ensure that small works undertaken are sustainable in nature and do not pose adverse impacts to the environment or surrounding communities. As such, the proposed project activities fall under the exception to the notification requirement under paragraph 7 (a) of OP 7.50. This ESMF aims to ensure that the future community sub-projects and household-based interventions to be supported under SLDP2 will be carried out in an environmentally and socially sustainable manner. It is designed to ensure the application of appropriate level of environmental and social mitigation measures. The ESMF provides an overview of relevant World Bank and National Environmental and Social policies and describes the planning process concerning environmental and social issues, including for screening, preparation, implementation, and monitoring of sub-projects and household-based interventions. Therefore, this ESMF outlines the institutional arrangements for: (i) identification of environmental and social impacts arising from activities under the SLDP sub-projects, (ii) the implementation of proposed mitigation measures, (iii) Capacity Building and (iv) Monitoring The ESMF outlines mechanisms for: (i) Screening of proposed sub-projects, identifying potential environmental and social impacts and management of safeguard policies implications; (ii) Institutional arrangements for implementation and capacity building (iii)Monitoring Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) measures implementation; (iv) Public consultation and Grievance Redresses. In addition to this ESMF, a separate Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) has been prepared, predicated on the assumption that execution of (SLDP2) investment activities may have negative social impacts related to resettlement –acquisition of land, physical displacement of people, loss of assets, loss of income sources and means of livelihood, and loss of fodder or grazing areas by certain sections of pastoral communities. Thus, the RPF will serve as a guide to project implementers to ensure that, prior to implementation of any investment activity likely to result in resettlement, project-affected people are consulted and appropriate preventive and mitigation measures are exhaustively considered and executed. Methodologically this ESMF was prepared using different tools, including critical desk review of secondary data, which triangulated with Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) tools including individual interviews, focus group discussions, and participatory observation. In terms of substance, this ESMF document draws lessons from the 4 implementation of the SLDP 1 ESMF, and provides a list of the main challenges encountered. It also includes descriptions of the components and proposed major activity areas, the environmental and social screening process, checklist of potential environmental risks and social impacts and guidelines to be considered for mitigating any potential adverse impacts identified under the proposed SLDP2. The ESMF key findings that relate to Environmental and social issues associated with the project include: potential failure to introduce sustainability and self-reliance principles by target communities, potential increase in competition between traditionally conflicting segments of communities, such as farmers and pastoralists, as a result of higher resources circulating at the community-level, potential construction issues like noise, dust, social conflict, accidents, and resettlement, and lack of technical knowledge to plan and implement NRM activities effectively. Mitigation measures include awareness-raising activities on sustainability and environmental protection/recovery actions, introduction of several sustainability principles in project design, and hiring of an Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer in the Project Coordination Unit (PCU.) which oversees the ESTSI-CA from Khartoum and also forms part of the project implementation team Community Development Committees and Community Facilitators will also be sensitized to local level conflict resolution, as will the communities themselves. The guidance from members of the Community Champions Program will also contribute to alleviating these risks. Environmental and social screening will be conducted for individual sub-projects financed by SLDP. Once a proposed activity is considered by the SLDP for implementation, desk and field appraisals must be conducted by the project Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer to ensure the eligibility of the activity and to validate the information included in the proposal package. The screening and resulting steps must be undertaken before sub- project approval, during the design phase. The purpose of the screening process is to determine whether sub-projects are likely to have potential negative environmental and social impacts; to identify and mitigate against potentially adverse impacts of activities such as social conflict, resettlement, accidents, dust, noise, etc.; to incorporate mitigation measures into the sub-projects design; to review and approve sub-projects proposals and to monitor environmental parameters during implementation. The extent of further environmental and social analysis that might be required for the sub-projects prior to implementation will depend on the categorization of the sub-project as a result of the screening process. In order to effectively carry out the environmental and social management responsibilities for subproject implementation, institutional strengthening will be required. Capacity building will encompass SLDP staff and sub-project executing institutions such as contractors. SLDP has prepared a training plan that includes training modules for the project staff, communities and contractors as part of the ESMF. The proposed capacity building training needs are as follows: • Environmental and Social Management Process. • Use of Screening form and Checklist • Design of appropriate sub-project mitigation measures. • Public consultations in the ESMF process. • Design of appropriate monitoring indicators for the sub-project’s mitigation measures • Integration of sub-projects ESMPs into the SLDP’s project cycles during their project implementation stages. • Community mobilization/participation and social inclusion • Cultural Heritage Management Sensitization • Health/ hygienic training 5 • Training sessions on mitigation of environmental and social impacts and ESMP • Training on how to generate baseline data SLDP2 builds upon the achievements and experiences of the now closed SLDP1 such as the community mobilization approach, and will fine-tune the Community Consultation Manual, developed under SLDP1. The SLDP Team will conduct broad consultation with project beneficiaries and stakeholders and will involve them in development of project implementation arrangements. Participation of beneficiaries, particularly in planning, budgeting and monitoring is required to ensure community voices are heard and addressed. SLDP will facilitate community participation to ensure that the communities in all selected neighborhoods establish elected community councils “Cooperating)” to represent each member to be the interlocutor for SLDP, and that these include women the same approach will be applied to ensure active role by women in the entire project processes). The Government of Sudan intends to make all project documentation publicly available to the relevant stakeholders. SLDP has already held a series of public consultations with communities, particularly in connection with the site specific ESMPs for the civil works funded through the Project Preparation Grant for SLDP. Kassala State is committed to apply the same procedures to all sub-projects to be covered under SLDP prior to commencement of works in each of the project site. The SLDP will consult project-affected people about the project's safeguards aspects, and will take their views into account, and site specific ESMPs will be submitted to World Bank for prior approval. The SPU/PCU are the entities designated by MOFEP to manage and implementing the project. The SPU Team will also supervise the implementation of the ESMF. The SLDP Team includes an Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer to ensure that the sub-project comply with the relevant National requirements and the World Bank’s environmental and social safeguard policy requirements, including reviewing screening documents from SLDP. The SLDP will also be responsible for the dissemination of the ESMF/ESMPs in the country. Environmental and social monitoring of an activity must start with the implementation. Monitoring measures address how an activity is performing in regards to the implementation of mitigation measures during construction and operation. Hence, site visits during activity execution and operation must be carried out to assess how environmental and social screening and mitigation measures are succeeding or have succeeded in minimizing impacts. Based on the results of the monitoring and evaluation of how well the activity has addressed environmental and social considerations, changes may be needed to improve the environmental performance of the activity. Environmental Monitoring must be the responsibility of the SPU/PCU including: (i) Compliance monitoring during implementation and (ii) Monitoring of significant impacts during the operation of the subproject. The Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer of the SPU will conduct periodic monitoring by visiting the sites of the various activities. Monitoring indicators must be developed in coordination with the project’s Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Officer. Monitoring of activities ensure that mitigation measures of impacts are being implemented appropriately while the monitoring of operation activities is to ensure that no unforeseen negative impacts arise. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS # Content Page (i) Executive Summary 2 (ii) Table of Content 7 (iii) List of Acronyms 9 (iv) Definition of Terms 10 1. Chapter one Background of Project Area 1.1 Introduction 11 1.2 Physical Environment 11 1.3 Population Dynamics 12 1.4 Socioeconomic Characterizations 15 1.5 Livelihood and Productive Sectors 18 Chapter Two Project Description 2.1 Introduction 21 2.2 The Project Geographic Focus and beneficiaries1 21 2.3 Project community beneficiaries 23 2.4 Project Components 23 3. Chapter Three: Policy and Regulatory Framework 3.1 Safeguard screening procedures 28 3.1.1 Regulatory Framework for Environmental Impact Assessment 29 3.1.1.1 Land Tenure Regulation 30 3.1.1.2 National Adaptation Plan of Action 31 3.1.1.3 Sudan National policy for IDPs 31 3..1.1.4 PRSP 32 3..1.1.5 Constitution of Sudan 33 3.1.1.6 Sudan Protection sector Strategy 33 3.1.2 World Bank Safeguard Policies 33 4. Chapter Four Environmental and Social Management Plan 4.1 Introduction 36 4.2 Positive Environmental Impact 36 4.3 Process of Identification of Potential Adverse Environmental and Social 37 Impacts and Relevant Stakeholders 4.4 Potential Adverse Social and Environmental Impacts 38 4.5 Environmental and Social Screening at the Project Level 40 4.6 Summary of Social and Environmental issues. 45 4.7 Environmental and Social Mitigation Measures 45 5 Chapter Five: Implementation Institutional Arrangements: 5.1 Implementation Arrangements Overview 48 5.2 Institutions At Federal/National level 49 5.2.1 Federal Ministry of Finance and National Economy (MOFEP 50 5.2.2 Project Steering Committee (PSC/FAB): 50 5.3 Institutional Arrangements at Project Level 50 5.3.1 Project Technical Working Group (TWG) 50 5.4 Community Institutions 51 5.5 Permits 52 6. Chapter Six: Mitigation Measures and Monitoring and Evaluation 6.1 Mitigation measures 53 6.2 Training and Capacity Building 56 6.3 Stakeholder consultations and Participation 57 1 Project Baseline Survey 2014 7 6.4 Public Consultations and Participation 57 Annexes Annex A List of Environmental Legislation in Sudan 58 Annex B1 Good Practice Environmental Procedures 60 Annex B2 Draft Environmental Contract 62 Annex C1 Environmental Check list 66 Annex C2 Environmental Data Sheet for proposal Programme 68 Annex C3 Environmental Appraisal/Screening Form 69 Annex D Environnemental Impact Assessment 70 Annex E Sample Check list ESMF 71 Annex F Consultation Meetings 78 8 LIST OF ACRONYMS AWP Annual Work Plan CBOs Community Base Organizations COR Commission of Refuges (Government of Sudan) CPA Comprehensive Peace Agreement ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan EMP Environmental Management Plan ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment E&S Environmental and Social ESTSI-CA East Sudan Transitional Solutions Initiative Coordination Agency EHS Environmental, Health, and Safety GPFD Global Program on Forced Displacement GAM Global Acute Malnutrition HAC Humanitarian Aid Commission HCENR Higher Council for Environment and Natural Resources ISM Implementation Support Mission ISN Interim Strategy Note IDP Internally Displaced Person JAO Junior Account Manger M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MOFEP Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning MEPD Ministry for Environment and Physical Development Mo EFPP Ministry of Environment Forest and Physical Planning NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations PCU Project Coordination Unit PDO Project Development Objective PAPs Project Affected Persons PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal PS Project Steering Committee (S)MFEL (State) Ministry of Finance and Economy and Labor SPC State Project Coordinator SPF State and Peace –building Fund SPU State Project Unit SSMO Sudan Standards and Metrology Organization SLDP1 Sustainable Livelihood for Displaced Persons Phase One SLDP2 Sustainable Livelihood for Displaced Persons Phase One TOR Terms of Reference TWG Technical Working Group UNDP United Nation Development Programme UNHCR United Nation High Commission of Refugees WFP World Food Programme WB World Bank 9 DEFINITION OF TERMS • Associated Projects: Means any subprojects or activities, which are directly related to the World Bank financed project. • Environment: physical, biological and social components and processes that define our surroundings • Environmental Social Management Framework: Instrument (in the case of SDLP2 this document), which establishes a mechanism to determine and assess future potential environmental and social impacts of the project funded activities, i.e. SLDP funded activities. The framework sets out mitigation, monitoring and institutional measures to be taken during design, implementation and operation of the project activities to eliminate adverse environmental and social impacts, offset them, or reduce them to acceptable levels. • Environmental impact: Any change to the environment whether adverse or beneficial, wholly or partially resulting from organizations activities, products, or services. • Environmental management plan: A site or project specific plan developed to ensure that appropriate environmental and social management practice is followed during the construction and/ or operation of a project. • Internal Displacement: Population movement of a group of society members, organized or otherwise, rapid or slow, from a big or a small population group because of natural disasters or as a result of man-made actions. • IDPs; Individuals who were compelled to flee their homes as a result of or to escape natural disasters or man-made actions; they are Sudanese citizens enjoying full rights and commitments enshrined in the constitution. • Land Refers to agricultural and/or non-agricultural land and any structures thereon whether temporary or permanent and which may be required for the Project. • Mitigation: Steps taken to avoid or minimize negative environmental impacts. Mitigation can include: avoiding the impact by not taking a certain action; minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action; rectifying the impact by repairing or restoring the affected environment; reducing the impact by protective steps required with the action; and compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources. • Project Affected Persons (PAPs) Means persons who, for reasons of the involuntary taking or voluntary contribution of their land and other assets under the project, result in direct economic and or social adverse impacts, regardless of whether or not the project affected persons physically relocated. • Resettlement; The process by which IDPs are transferred to another place to live for permanent settlement, because they are no longer allowed, or able, to stay in the original areas of domicile. • Rehabilitation; Reconstruction of infrastructure and rebuilding of components of social, economic, and political life through developmental short term projects and programs. • Screening: An initial step when a project is being considered for environmental assessment. The screening is the determination of the level of assessment that will be conducted. • Stakeholder: Any person or group that has an interest in the project, and the environmental effects that the project may bring about. • Vulnerable Groups: Refers to widows, the disabled, marginalized groups, low income households and informal sector operators; incapacitated households and those no longer fit for work; and child-headed households and street children. These group are, among other things, characterized by one or more of the following: low nutrition levels, low or no education, lack of employment or revenues, old age, ethnic minority and/or gender prejudice. 10 Chapter One: Background of the Project Area 1.1 Introduction Kassala State is located between latitude 34 12 and 36 57 East, and between longitude 14 12 and 17 12 North. The total area of the State is 55,370 square kilometers, bordering the Red Sea State and River Nile State to the North, Gezira state to the West and Gedarif State to the South. The state is composed of eleven localities (administrative zones called 'mahaliyas'). Of these localities, nine are primarily rural in composition while the two are urban (Kassala Town and New Halfa). The state shares an international border with Eritrea to the east. The state is composed of eleven localities (mahaliyas) as per attached map. Of these administrative units, nine are primarily rural in composition while the two localities of Kassala Town and New Halfa are urban centers. The total population of the state according to 2008 census is 1,789,806, distributed by locality as in Table (1) below Table (1): Kassala State Population by Locality, 2008 Locality/Mahalyia Total Population Kassala Town 298,376 Rural Kassala 154,630 Kassala West 79,376 New Halfa 211,864 Nahr Atbara 136,911 Hamashkoreab 255,288 Wad Al Helew 84,681 Aroma Rural 102,759 Shamal Al Delta 91,851 Telkuk 274,978 Seteet 98,939 State Total Population 1,789,653 Source: Fifth National Population Census, CBS,2008 1.2 Physical Environment Over 80% of Kassala State consists of flat plains, whereas rocky outcrops and hilly terrain comprise the rest of the area. Alluvial and volcanic deposits cover the state and beneath these clays lie Basement Complex Formations that are only a poor repository for ground water. Water sources in the state tend to be distributed along the cracks in the geological formations and in the few areas where alluvial deposits accumulate. The largest of the state’s aquifers is the Gash Basin, which has an estimated storage capacity of 600 million cubic meters’ and runs North, from the Eritrean highlands and through Kassala Town. Heavy dark clay soil formations cover most of the land of Khashim al Girba (Badoba) and continue towards the state’s southern border. This area supports irrigated and rain-fed cultivation, such as the New Halfa scheme, as well as most of the Butana range lands. Irrigation in the state is concentrated almost entirely in this scheme. The predominant Verticals formations in these areas are an agriculturally useful soil, but difficult to work as it swells significantly during rainy season and creates deep cracks during dry season (fig 1). 11 Karab land surrounds the major watercourses in the state and supports natural vegetation (such as the Seyal, Samar, and Tundub trees). These areas often function as a grazing reserve for livestock during periods of drought. In contrast to the soils of the southern areas, the northern part of Kassala state is covered by lighter, highly permeable clay soils deposited by seasonal wadis. This soil base supports rain fed systems of cultivation such as the Gash Delta and provides rich seasonal pastures for livestock. Rainfall ranges from a low of around 83mm per annum in the northernmost part of the state to around 300 mm per annum across most of the southern area and fall within the dry and semi dry rainfall zone. The southernmost part of the state, namely Wad Al Helew locality, receives significantly larger amounts of rainwater with an average fall of 608mm per annum over the last three decades. Effective use of rainfall is, however, hampered by its short duration, uneven distribution, and high rates of Figure 1 Soil Types 12 evaporation. Overall, a trend of long-term decline in rainfall has been observed in Kassala State since the 1940s and the current rate of depletion is calculated to stand at 2.6mm per annum.2 Kassala precipitation trend for 2012 as indicated in the graph. The Gash River provides the state with around 560 million cubic meters of water per year during its two to four months of heightened flow. The River Atbara supplies the state with an additional 12 billion cubic meters of water each year, This source is used to irrigate the New Halfa agricultural scheme, which spans some 500,000 Fadden’s3, as well as for fishing purposes in the Khashim el Girba dam– returning a high yield on a regular basis. Silt accumulation in the dam reservoir has however limited the state’s capacity to manage the resources efficiently and reduced the dam’s current storage capacity to only 27% of its original amount. The region remains fragile, subject to multiple sources of stress as, among others, deteriorating environmental conditions (climate change and diminishing water resources), recurrence of natural disasters (floods and droughts), competition for scarce agricultural land, and conflicting demands of pastoralist and sedentary communities. These stresses are compounded by acute poverty, a large number of disfranchised displaced households, and a public sector unable to meet mounting demands. The state is experiencing an increased vulnerability to stress factors, as the continued deterioration of natural resources (water availability and soil), and the recurrence of natural disasters (drought and floods), which have marked a negative impact on the productivity of the agricultural sector and livestock - the main sources of income in the east. External stress is compounded by changes in land tenure and agriculture patterns through the introduction of large mechanized farming and the organizing of small holders in cooperatives, which create social tension and conflicting demands for access to land. The weak capacity of the state institutions and limited entrepreneurial drive of the private sector constrain the ability of the state to develop alternative activities. Sudan possesses a diverse biological resource base. An estimated 11.6% of the country’s total areas is covered by forests. Agricultural lands constitute 13.7%, rangelands 26.4%, and water bodies 0.17%.4 Most forests in the country are open or semi-open environments. The country experiences deforestation and overgrazing due to the expansion of agricultural land, grazing needs for large livestock populations, and a dependence on charcoal and firewood. According to the estimates from the Forestry National Corporation in 2009, forests in Kassala State covered an area of 902,277.8 hectares (18.04% of the total area) and per capita consumption of forest products was 0.67 m3.5 With regards to the localities targeted by SLDP, only Telkuk Locality contains a Forest Reserve of 2,400 hectares, though no target communities are in nearby proximity to the reserve. The main threats to biodiversity in the state are worsening climatic conditions, weak governance, natural resource-based conflict, and economic pressures giving way to resource exploitation in the informal sector. Pastures and rangelands are located across the country in different types, ranging from desert zones to high rainfall savannah. These rangelands are open areas for grazing and pastoralists practice transhumance by following traditional livestock migration routes to graze their herds. These livestock migration routes have been commonly managed by traditional native administration systems composed of tribal leaders. These native administrations mediate conflict between nomadic pastoralists and settled farmers. With time, this system has become more prone to failure and conflict due to a variety of reasons, 2 UNDP (2009): Kassala Situational Analysis 3 I Fadden= 1.038 acre 4 USAID (2012): Sudan Environmental Threats and Opportunities Assessment with Special Focus on Biological Diversity and Tropical Forest 5 UNDP (2010): MDG Profile of Eastern Sudan 13 including a loss of credibility in traditional structures, climate change depleting the resource base, growing human and animal populations, increase of small arms and light weapons from previous conflicts, and expansion of cultivated land and overgrazing. Wildlife ecosystems in Sudan are located in protected areas across the country in the form of nationally recognized reserves, parks, and sanctuaries. There are no such protected areas or parks for marine or wildlife in Kassala State. The national policy of large-scale farming linked with a policy of sedentarization of nomadic population was intended to reduce pastoralism and to increase agriculture. But the misconception and mismanagement, which went along with the implementation of large- scale agriculture, led to the opposite and agro-pastoralism is starting to be recognized as the most adapted form of economy in the area (Ahmed and al-Shazali 1999). The situation of the pastoral groups however is far from being idyllic: many small pastoralists and small farmers never recovered from the drought years. Having lost their herds or their land they became wage-labourers or migrated to urban areas or Gulf countries. Moreover, the traditional tenure system and rules cannot protect the environment from increasing pressures on key resources (cf. deforestation, overgrazing etc.). 1.3 Population Dynamic The population in Kassala State is characterized by high levels of chronic poverty and food insecurity and by vulnerability to shocks, including drought, floods, and conflict. Hence, livelihoods are clearly dynamic and adapting to the changing environment, which includes both threats, such as environmental degradation, and opportunities, such as urban growth. Levels of poverty are extremely high, with 85 percent of the population estimated to be below the poverty line. A high proportion of income is spent on food, with water and fuel also representing significant expenses, and high levels of household debt is common. The 2007 annual needs assessment found that for Kassala, “the 2006 agricultural season was good overall”. It argues that, “the food security situation in Kassala reflects chronic poverty, rather than the impacts of transitory shock” and that “development and safety net interventions would be more appropriate than emergency food assistance”. One of the key historical problems in Kassala State is that, while food production of the staple crop sorghum (dhura) is primarily in the rain-fed and traditional sector, investment in agriculture has historically been concentrated in the modern and irrigated sector and very little attempts were made to develop the traditional sector or address its problems. In addition, there is no national food security policy and food security management system, and generally there is fragmentation between various ministries, which has led to an unintegrated food security approach in the state. Furthermore, there is a deficiency of food security information, and a lack of adequate early warning systems, monitoring systems and quick-response mechanisms (poor timing of interventions). There is also limited research on and support to traditional agriculture and subsistence pastoralism. Both Gedarif and Kassala States suffer the problem of continued influx of refugees since the 1960s and currently hosting over 300,000 refugees mainly from Ethiopia and Eritrea. Kassala State is one of the biggest as a “host community” to refugees and IDPs, most of the population in the rural areas suffer of acute poverty and limited development prospects, not dissimilar from those experienced by the IDPs and refugee population in their midst. Most of the IDPs originated mainly from the war and drought-affected rural areas where the livelihood conditions have continued to deteriorate over the years. Like elsewhere in Sudan, rural people in Kassala State have found themselves under severe stress from chronic food insecurity and poverty caused by the series of droughts that hit the region during the 1980s and the 1990s. Most IDPs in camps arrived in the second half of the 1990s and early 2000s (specifically in 2002). They were displaced mainly due to the Eritrea- Sudan war and civil war. Movements of IDPs to Kassala State have not fared that well, 14 having to settle mostly in arid lands with limited possibilities of making a living through agriculture or animal husbandry alone. The verified population of refugees in eastern Sudan stood at 79,847 by mid-November 2010, and there are over 147,000 IDPs in the three States. The issue of long-term refugees and IDPs represents a significant conflict stress factor in Sudan, where an estimated 16% of the world’s 27.1 million internally displaced people reside along with refugees and people in refugee-like situations. Displacement is particularly pronounced in the conflict-affected regions of Darfur and Eastern Sudan. The government has therefore included the attention to IDPs and long-term refugees as one of the four key development priorities of the current Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (I-PRSP). According to the information to the Humanitarian Aid Commission, 2014, there are 90,842 IDPs in Kassala State residing in 12 camps1 (which are currently officially regarded by Kassala State authorities as permanent IDP villages) and in Kassala town. The 12 camps are as follows: Sub-region in relation to IDP camp area Kassala town Southeast Fedaieb Adman Goulsa Southwest Fatoo Fireneage Teshotiai Amara Eid Gloub Northeast Deblaweit Northwest Hadalia Metateib Togly The number of IDPs who settled permanently in Kassala town is estimated to be 25,132. However, there are indications that large numbers of IDPs have located in the town and that a significant number of IDPs in rural areas commute regularly between the villages (the former camps) and Kassala town to engage in income generating activities and/or to access social services 1.4 Socioeconomic Characterizations Kassala State suffers from some of the lowest socio economic and development indicators seen among states in Sudan. In line with the wealth sharing protocols, defined by the CPA, 70% of the National Development Reconstruction Funds are to be targeted towards the least developed states in North Sudan. In 2012, the Kassala State Governor (Wali) developed a long-term State Recovery and Development Plan that built upon this provision, addressing the period of 2012 to 2017. The overall vision of the strategic plan was to create, ‘a state where [Kassala’s] people and in particular the war-affected, vulnerable and poor groups enjoy security, access to basic social services and decent means of livelihoods within a just inclusive and equitable governance.’ Table (2) below summarized the key social development indicators Table (2): Social Development Indicators for Kassala State 15 Indicator Measurement % Health index Infant mortality rate (per 1000) 86 Under 5 mortality rate (per 1000) 87 Child mortality rate (per 1000) 27 Maternal mortality ratio(100000) 245 Prevalence rate of acute malnutrition among children less than five years 19 Full immunization against childhood diseases 40.6 Poverty Indicators Food secure status 91 Severely food insecure 6.2 The proportion of households using firewood 63 The proportion of households that have no Lighting 23 Percentage of households do not have a latrine 54 The proportion of households using improved drinking water 48 The rate of overcrowding 35 Poverty by state and style of living Urban poverty 36 Rural poverty 48 Total poverty 48 Education Index Illiteracy rate (age 15+)* 46 The net enrollment rate in Basic Schools 48 Population age and sex structure The percentage of the state's population 5.89% The proportion of children less than 15 years 38.6% Male rate 1.23% The annual growth rate 3.5 The labor force and the unemployment rate Unemployment rate 10.9 Participation rate in economic activity 45.2 The relative share of the population 15 + 5.9 Source: State of Sudan's population in 2013 The state economy is largely based on traditional, natural resource related activities. In recent years, the ability to use natural pastures, as well as the pursuit of other agricultural and livestock-based activities, has been severely curtailed by armed conflict in the region. During the period of heightened violence in the 1990s many farmers and herders abandoned their homelands to join the ever-swelling ranks of displaced people located in urban centers. Within the context of the local economy of Kassala State, a person’s ethnic background powerfully influences their livelihood pattern. Tribes from Northern Sudan, such as the Ja’aliyeen, Shaigiya, Manaseer, and Halanga have a strong presence in the commercial sector and in horticultural agriculture. During the last few years, the Beni Amir has started to emerge as a new economic power in the region due, in large part, to their involvement in border-trade and agriculture as well as real estate in urban areas. The Rashaida managed to survive periods of drought through economic diversification and have now become significant actors in agriculture as well as trade. In contrast to this, these events; losing their livestock and seeing their economic powerbase diminish accordingly hit tribesmen like the Hadendawa hard. Many Hadendawa have now moved into towns where they work as manual laborers, petty traders, and guards. Among the IDP and refugee populations, 16 activities rooted in the informal sector predominate. Migrants frequently find work in food processing, handicrafts, tea and coffee vending and household servant positions. Lacking specific skills and facing severe competition for employment, the level of poverty and food insecurity has risen sharply among IDPs in recent years. The total cultivable area in Kassala State is around 4 million acre or 40.5% of the state’s total land. Of this land, between 1.1 million and 1.58 million acre is actually cultivated and around half of the total cultivated area is irrigated. Rain-fed cultivation techniques predominate within the state and around 60% of the farmers in Kassala State are situated in these areas. However, the yield of this rain-fed land is only 16% of that achieved in equivalent areas under systems of full pump-based irrigation. According to official state reports, Kassala’s food production meets only a small fraction of the state’s total nutritional needs. The remaining shortfall is met, where possible, through contributions from the Federal Government, WFP and international NGOs. Nonetheless, malnutrition remains a serious problem for the state’s population with a GAM rate of 29.3% (TANGO 2005). Kassala State is estimated to have over 7 million acre of natural pastureland. This area supports around 3 million heads of livestock in the state. It also supports a similar number of additional livestock that pass through the state on a seasonal basis. Forest-land covers three per cent of the state’s total area, equivalent to some 311400 acres, 000 Fadden’s. Of this amount, 21,625 acres have been set aside for conservation. The fig (2) shows the land use and cover in the State. The impact of environmental factors on the economy of Kassala was again stressed in 2004 when a period of drought affected the majority of rural areas, impacting hard upon the spectrum of livelihoods and income generating activities which relate to seasonal farming, herding, wood cutting and charcoal production In camps situation wood is often the only available source of energy, traditionally wood has been used for cooking, the daily per capita consumption of fire wood is 3 kgs per person, however this can be reduced 1-2 kgs if wood saving techniques are used and fire wood collection is restricted as well as provision of other sources of energy. The lack of income generating opportunities in IDPs camps significantly affects the use of firewood and other natural resources. IDP camps have mostly low population density and few livelihoods opportunities within them. In general, they depend on casual labor, charcoal making, and handicrafts. IDPs rely to a large extent on nearby towns to purchase household supplies. Men from IDP camps in Kassala state tend to move to towns in search of work opportunities, while in their absence, women often have to assume responsibility for the household. The living conditions of IDPs are mostly similar or lower than those of neighboring communities and refugee camps. One of the most significant environmental impacts of displaced population settlements is the severe deforestation that has occurred around the larger camps. Deforestation is clearly visible around all major camp locations in the state for instance, the illicit felling of trees for firewood and to clear land for slash-and-burn agriculture on the outskirts of a local IDP camp has resulted in the deforestation of a large area surrounding the camp. Tree cover is particularly sparse in northern parts of Kassala, two regions that host large displaced populations. Besides, the majority of settlements have been established in locations that were already occupied, and where the existing burden on forest resources may or may not have been sustainable. Furthermore, inside Kassala Town, the damage caused by the Gash floods in 2003 and 2007 has eroded savings and the asset base of many town dwellers. 17 Figure 2 Land Cover 1.5 Livelihoods and Productive Sectors The food insecurity and malnutrition situation in the State has been the result of several inter- related factors, which collectively resulted in what has been known as a “complex emergency”, and the main drivers varied in time and space. Key among these drivers are 18 the civil war and its attendant displacement, climatic variability resulting in recurrent droughts and floods, inadequate investment in small-holder farming, lack of food security policies, poor rural infrastructure and weak rural markets. There are many risks associated with livelihood sector as indicated by UNDP CRMA Project (2010) as per attached fig 3, including continued limited access to public services for people in remote pastoralist regions and the focus on selected cereal commodities suitable for urban population and emerging international market situations will further exacerbate the food security situation in the Sudan. Numbers of vulnerable communities are also on the rise. According to the 2009 National Household Baseline Survey (NHBS), one out of three people suffered from food deprivation. Parts of the country remain in the grip of civil conflict and large numbers of people live in poverty. The prevalence of under nourishment remains high. The recent armed conflict and resultant displacement in the region, combined with the proliferation of land mines and increasingly severe cycles of drought, have placed the resource base under increasing pressure. The amount of land available for grazing and rain- fed agriculture has subsequently contracted, causing widespread food insecurity and several tribal disputes over resources. It is estimated that 91% (TANGO 2005) of households in Kassala fail to meet their nutritional needs through domestic production and malnutrition is pervasive in the state. This situation is often particularly acute for war-affected communities and assistance to this vulnerable population must rank high on the agenda. Over a longer time-horizon, policy makers need to address the threat to the region posed by Mesquite – an invasive plant species that has rendered large swathes of land unproductive. In recent years, the Kassala’s strategic position has diminished due to the construction of a highway that connects Port Sudan and Khartoum via Atbara. The government has developed ‘The National Policy on Internally displaced Persons’ which contains provisions regarding the government approach to the issues. The policy defines the obligations of the “State” in relation to IDPs, among others: preventing the causes of displacement; the upholding of IDPs’ rights; ensuring adequate allocation of resources for IDPs; and supporting sustainable solutions to the causes of displacement. In the case of eastern Sudan some of these obligations have only been partly met. Nonetheless, the separation of rural and urban interventions into distinct entities has, on occasion, hindered their effectiveness. Culturally, Beja livelihoods both centre upon and traverse the rural-urban interface. This interdependence of sectors must be factored into programming. Questions arising over land rights and access to natural resources are central not only to security, but also to economic wellbeing in Kassala. The need for legislation, which integrates state-based and traditional mechanisms of land management, is widely recognized. Nonetheless, little practical progress has been made to date. Current livelihood interventions are formulated in an unclear policy and legal environment; the potential for failure and dissatisfaction is therefore high. The need to draw together a coalition of stakeholders with clear parameters, and to base policy upon evidence gleaned from feasibility studies, market surveys and a livestock census is transparent. 19 Figure 3 Kassala Livelihoods related Risks 20 Chapter Two: Project Description 2.1 Introduction: In 2013 the Government of Sudan received funding with amount of $3.08 million from the World Bank’s State and Peace-building Fund (SPF) for a project titled “sustainable livelihoods for displaced and vulnerable communities in eastern Sudan–initial phase Project (SLDP)”. The overall objective of the project is to strengthen the capacity of local stakeholders including state authorities, displaced persons, and vulnerable host communities to plan and deliver services and sustainable livelihoods for displaced population and vulnerable host communities in Kassala State. The “Sustainable livelihoods for displaced and vulnerable communities in Eastern Sudan - Initial Phase Project” (the Project) was approved in 2013, and the initial set up activities started in late 2013. The key 4 components under this project are: Component 1: Development of Local Government Structures and Capacities, Component2: Research and Design of Pilot, Component 3: Implementation and Evaluation of Pilot and Component 4: Evaluation and Recommendations for Expansion and Replication 2.2 The Project Geographic Focus and beneficiaries6 The 12 identified IDPs settlements or camps are located in rural areas of the State. The pilot project focuses on six priority communities selected by the Government of Kassala State taking into account the findings of the initial baseline survey: The six locations of the project as below: Southwest: Amara Northeast: Beryay Northwest: Hadalia River Atbara West Bank: Elgnaid Kassala West Rural Locality: KarayDareer Rural Kassalalocality: Tagoug – El Madrasa SLDP Phase 2: Phase one of SLDP piloted a CDD approach of organizing and assisting communities to plan and deliver livelihood opportunities through intensive community mobilization facilitated entrepreneurial and vocational training, and delivering in-kind grants to beneficiaries. Communities were oriented towards the project objectives and organized into clusters represented by existing village committees and community facilitators communally elected to function as liaisons for the project. Within the 6 communities, 900 households were targeted for grants delivery, 25% of which were vulnerable women headed households. Communities selected the 900 households to receive project inputs from a selected menu of feasible livelihood activities in the target areas as identified by in-depth studies conducted by SLDP. These households received intensive technical support to identify their priorities and vet their business proposals, as well as entrepreneurial and vocational training by experts to enhance the productivity of their economic activities. Apart from the household grants program, the project also sought to benefit the target communities at large in two discrete ways: 1) a joint initiatives program and 2) a small works program. The joint initiatives program was implemented with funds garnered from commitments received from the Federal Government for cash allocations to the project. The project allocated complementary resources to implement activities targeted at supporting youth initiatives, which was an explicit request from the communities and not adequately covered by the Pilot. The small works program refers to community works with 6 Project Baseline Survey 2014 21 direct benefits and costs that go beyond the ceiling determined for the targeted households (or group of households) but that are essential to the feasibility of selected activities or benefit the livelihood opportunities of the communities at large. For example, upgrading of water supply or increasing access to water are common small works proposals put forth that address general well-being and substantially decreases input costs for many livelihood activities in the area. Finally, to address the issue of sustainability, the pilot project, employing the CDD approach, oriented communities towards revolving the benefit received the project to other community members. Coined the “benefit trans-passing system,” each community devised their own solutions to adopt inclusive approaches to passing the benefit received to other beneficiaries to pursue livelihood opportunities of their own. The main safeguards-related lessons learned from the first phase related to complications stemming from land ownership, land rights, and availability of water affecting project activities. Due to disagreements on land ownership, there were instances where income generation activities could not move forward without consensus. In one pilot community, lack of a sustainable water source severely limited the options of small works and joint initiatives available to that community. These issues can be properly planned for and mitigated in advance. In phase 2, the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) in particular will guide implementation to mitigate issues arising from land ownership. SLDP2 with amount of funding of USD 4.435 M from SPF can be considered as a continuation of the pilot phase of SLDP1, which seeks to capitalize on the successes and lessons learned over the course of the first phase as well as ix in-depth studies. The phase2 project also seeks to push the envelope further on addressing durable solutions to displacement whilst employing a paradigm shift from the prescribed methods of livelihoods support and delivery. Rather than introducing livelihood support as a self-contained intervention, this project seeks to use livelihoods support as an economic incentive to engage IDPs and host communities in planning and undertaking larger tasks that support other durable solutions in their surroundings, specifically pertaining to better management of their natural resource environment. Communities will be mobilized to plan and implement a portfolio of small-scale works in their communities aimed at mitigating the effects of environmental degradation that requires low or unskilled labor. This directional specification of the project’s small works component comes in affirmative response to priorities expressed by local stakeholders, strategies of the World Bank and Republic of Sudan, as well as global development agendas most recently expressed through the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 2015 UN Climate Change Conference. The total project cost is USD 4,435,000 for which SPF funding is sought. It should be noted that partner parallel financial contributions are also expected in order to support project activities. This parallel financing will be directed primarily to Component 1 (capacity building) and Component 3 in particular (small works). This encompasses contributions from the Recipient, the federal Ministry of Finance, and Economic Planning (MoFEP), and the Kassala State Ministry of Finance, Economy, and Labor (MFEL). Grant Financing % Project Components Project cost (USD) (USD) Financing 1. Development of Local Structures 875,000 875,000 100 and Capacities (Including Project Management) 150,000 150,000 100 2. Research and Analytics 330,000 330,000 100 22 3. Small Works Support 3,026,000 3,026,000 100 4. Economic Livelihoods and 54,000 54,000 100 Benefit Trans-Passing Total Baseline Costs Physical contingencies Price contingencies Total Project Costs 4,435,000 4,435,000 100 Interest During Implementation Front-End Fees Total Financing Required 4,435,000 4,435,000 100 2.3 Project community beneficiaries The beneficiaries of the project are IDPs and host communities (with particular provision for women and youth), local authorities responsible for the promotion of livelihood in vulnerable communities and other organizations active in delivering public services. 2.4 Project Components 1. Component 1: Development of Local Structures and Capacities (Including Project Management) (US$0.875 million) This component will include the following activities: (i) Project Management, (ii) Capacity Building (iii) Communications and sensitization, and (iv) Project Evaluation. (i) Project Management Project Management activities will include overall administration and management of the project. Activities that will be financed through this component include salaries, rent, furniture, equipment, operating costs, etc. to help ensure coordination, implementation, and management of the project. The ESTSI-CA, commonly referred to as the State Project Unit (SPU), was established in Phase 1 of SLDP and worked closely with the Kassala State MFEL in implementing the pilot project. In Phase 2, the project will be strengthened with two new positions: an Environmental Specialist and a Livelihoods Expert. Given the project’s focus on sustainable environmental management practices, in-house expertise in this area will be essential to vet proposals and provide technical support throughout the project. The Environmental Specialist will also be responsible for applying World Bank Environmental and Social Safeguards policies. The Livelihoods Expert will be responsible for technical assistance to identification, vetting, selection, training, and oversight of beneficiary livelihoods activities. The Livelihoods expert will also function as a Community Mobilizer. (ii) Capacity building Phase 1 provided substantive, positive hands-on experience for the implementing agency and state government in the area of livelihoods in rural communities affected by displacement. It has also garnered the interest of the state government in adopting new approaches to service delivery (such as the piloting of GIS-based systems to track basic service provision). However, there remain gaps in terms of in-depth analysis of development needs and, in some cases, even basic skills. The link between sustainable natural resource management practices and long-term income generation is one that also requires substantial nurturing at the state, locality, and community levels. 23 This component will finance the capacity building of local government structures, project staff, and target communities. Beneficiaries from the state government are to be identified based on the degree that their existing official capacities and/or planned future role is aligned with the objectives of the project. Beneficiary identification will aim to also strike a balance between beneficiaries who have managerial/oversight functions and those who are hands-on technical staff. In addition, local vocational training capacity will be strengthened. (iii) Communications and Sensitization Sensitization will involve a robust public information strategy to inform the beneficiaries, host communities, and the local stakeholders. Sensitization activities will help beneficiaries and their communities to understand the scope of the program, its advantages and components, and help to manage expectations. Furthermore, effective project communications and public awareness will be critical in promoting widespread adoption of new practices and technologies. Within communities, the level of knowledge on sustainable natural resource management is low and requires deliberate planning and investment to increase familiarization. This is highly linked with the capacity building in that it serves the same purpose of proliferating espousal of novel techniques to mitigate and adapt to stresses to the environment. Of particular importance to inspire traction on project objectives within target communities is to strengthen the link between environmental protection and tangible social and economic benefits. Past experiences in other projects have shown that, unless this link is clear, beneficiaries and other stakeholders may not readily uptake notions of environmental protection. Under Component 1, informing and educating local stakeholders on the social, economic, and health impacts of environmental degradation and measures to mitigate such effects will be an overarching priority, through communications and capacity building. (iv) Project Evaluations SLDP2 continues in the same vein as the pilot phase in moving towards self-reliance and durable solutions for displaced communities. It is envisaged that the model developed and being incrementally improved by SLDP can be a platform for further replication in other areas in the country facing the same compound challenges of forced displacement in increasingly arid environments. Phase 2 will finance two extensive evaluations of the project at midterm and project completion. The results of these assessments do not preclude recommendations to not expand and/or replicate the project in other areas. 2. Component 2: Analytics and Technical Assistance (US$0.15 million) – Bank executed on behalf of the Recipient This component will cover two main activities: (i) Research Studies and (ii) Technical Assistance to project design, with view towards possible scaling and replication elsewhere. (i). Research Studies Livelihoods activities and social and cultural dynamics in the target region vary widely based on local conditions. The initial phase project has successfully commissioned in-depth studies in directly informing, and laterally adjusting, design of livelihoods packages and project implementation methodology. In recognition of the heterogeneity in the area, the second phase includes a similar component, albeit a sizably smaller budgetary provision, for the continuation of similar analytical work in new communities of project expansion. These studies may look into assessments of local market conditions, value chain analysis, informal systems and markets, the formal and informal decision-making processes, and the role of women in the communities. Research studies will also be aimed at exploring opportunities for sustainable natural resource management interventions that would inform current and future programming. As it relates the small works, expertise may be attained to assess the feasibility and design of the small works proposals in target communities. The 24 objectives of the analytical work will be to technically backstop project activities and, where possible, examine prospects for adopting new approaches to livelihood service delivery and natural resource management. Knowledge sharing of the results of these studies will be the dual responsibility of the Bank TT and the PCU. Studies may be circulated via sharing hardcopies with local partners, the project website, verification workshops upon study completion, presentations in the ‘Livelihoods Forum’ established by SLDP in Kassala during the initial phase, BBLs and/or other events by the Bank, and other relevant channels. If not explicitly captured in the results framework, records will be kept, tracking (a) the recommendations adopted from the studies and (b) the amount of communications outputs conducted containing the studies. The Bank TT will be the responsible party in keeping track of Component 2 activities. (ii) Technical Assistance In addition, Bank assistance in design and guidance of the project will be increased at key intervals given the increased coverage and reliance on community-driven planning in the project. This approach requires sufficient oversight, as communities can be easily derailed from the project objectives without proper and timely technical assistance to implementation. With consideration for the complexities of sustainable environmental management techniques, a provision is also made for recruiting international specialists to provide training to local stakeholders, if needed. Technical assistance via hiring of consultants to support the design of the project will be retained, with a view towards possible scaling to other areas acutely affected by displacement7. Component 3: Community Small Works Support (US$0.33 million) – recipient executed This component will finance two main activities: (i) Community small works support and (ii) Community Champions Program. (i) Community Small Works Pursuant to introducing project objectives, content, and design, communities will be organized and mobilized to plan and implement a portfolio of small scale work in their communities that are focused on integrating natural resource management practices that contain climate change co-benefits. Community participation will be an essential part of the small works identification, as the identification of priorities will be done through a participatory, community-driven approach. In each community, the project team will bring together beneficiaries into a Community Development Committee (CDC), which will include youth and women representatives. Through the CDCs and a series of sensitization activities, the communities will be oriented towards the project’s objectives. To the extent possible, the project will utilize existing structures to serve as CDCs (i.e. communally-elected village committees and/or community liaisons). With technical support from the project, the CDCs will be fundamental in organizing communities to draft Environmental Management Action Plans. These plans will be developed under the technical oversight of project staff, the government, and locally recruited experts, and will clearly identify the environmental protection priorities and small works portfolio to be undertaken within the community. To ensure the project responds to the site-specific needs of target communities, the small works program has a degree of flexibility in the project design. The range of small works proposals that can be implemented, while thematically defined, may take many forms. Examples of these works may include: Improved Agricultural Management, Improved Animal Production, Irrigation and Drainage, Community afforestation activities to increase 7 Possible replication of the project might be in Gedarif and Red Sea state of Eastern Sudan, and the five Darfur States. 25 resilience of farm systems, Environmentally friendly upgrades to off-farm and rangeland structures (eg. using renewable energy to provide power to school) and income Diversification and IGA activities that provide an alternate source of income and can measurably reduce burden on natural resources. (iii) Community Champions Program Exceptional performers in the community will have the opportunity to participate in a “Community Champions” program wherein they are trained to be more involved, such as serving as civic leaders, ambassadors, and trainers to other target communities. This program is devised to also support the cross-fertilization of knowledge on sustainable natural resource management practices and empower communities to become civically engaged. Eligible candidates for the Community Champions Program will include beneficiaries from phases 1 and 2 of SLDP, as well as beneficiaries from other development projects financed by the World Bank and other partners to maximize the opportunity for experience sharing and exchange. Component 4: Economic Livelihoods and Benefit Trans-passing (US$3.145 million) – recipient executed This component will finance three main activities: (i) Livelihood Credits (Including Livelihoods Training), (ii) Benefit Trans-Passing System, (iii) Joint Initiatives, and (iv) Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation. (i) Livelihood Credits Component 4 will seek to employ the livelihood grant mechanisms established in the first phase as an ex-post economic dividend to mobilize communities towards effective development planning and implementation of small works. Communities will be organized to select beneficiaries, identify livelihood priorities, vet their proposals through technical experts, and receive vocational training in their chosen area of income generation. The use of a tripartite procurement committee including a community representative, a project staff member, and technical expert to purchase livelihood assets for households via pre- established purchasing procedures will also be retained. (ii) Benefit Trans-Passing System With consideration for the gains achieved in community cohesion through application of the trans-passing system (BTPS) in Phase 1, the Phase 2 project will aim to consolidate this approach. The BTPS will be strengthened to ensure larger, more sustainable investments from communities. The possibility of linking the BTPS with local state structures to oversee successful functioning will also be explored. It will be critical for the messaging of the BTPS to be clear from the outset of the project. Procedures concerning the individual beneficiary’s responsibility to manage assets prudently and repay grants to the community are to be communicated unambiguously. This is to manage the risk of community’s regarding the grant as form of non-conditional aid. Particularly given that the livelihood grants will be predicated on successful completion of the small works, it is incumbent on the project to emphasize the associated fiduciary obligations of the livelihood credits. (iii) Joint Initiatives As another form of livelihood support, the SPU will allocate a complementary budget earmarked for supporting group income-generating initiatives and not adequately covered by the resources made available by the project’s household livelihood credits. This will be a limited central budget available to all target communities, which community groups can apply for on a rolling basis. Locations/beneficiaries will be selected based on the feasibility of the proposals received as evaluated by project team, and not necessarily on an equal distribution among communities. Preference is also given to women and youth groups. The project team will assist in detailing the proposal(s) and ensuring its/their feasibility. 26 (iv) Participatory M&E The ESTSI-CA will update the results-based M&E plan that was developed in the previous phase. Overall responsibility for M&E rests with the Monitoring and Evaluation Officer of the ESTSI-CA, complemented by close World Bank supervision. A results framework and monitoring matrix to track inputs, outputs, and outcomes has been developed for the project with intermediate and key performance indicators (Annex 1). The participatory M&E system which will equip community leaders to be the first line of data collection for the project. They will be equipped with data collection tools and trained to collect key information within their communities for further transmission to a local NGO or consultant which will be recruited by the ESTSI-CA, applying World Bank Procurement Policies. The local NGO or consultant will verify, consolidate, and provide data analysis information to the project team. The project team, at intervals, will also verify this information directly within target communities to ensure data accuracy. The M&E activities have the following objectives: (i) Improve project management, (ii) Ensure transparency in project data sharing with stakeholders, (iii) Ensure efficiency of the activities, (iii) provide accurate information, and (iv) Modify the activities in relation to the evolution of the context during implementation, where necessary. The M&E Officer will produce quarterly, and annual reports, which will be available in electronic form and submitted to the World Bank Task Team via the Program Manager of the Project Coordination Unit. The M&E reports are part of the PCU’s overall quarterly reporting obligation to the World Bank. During the project’s midterm review, progress towards achieving the PDO will be evaluated and remedial action will be taken as needed. 27 Chapter Three: Policy and Regulatory Framework 3.1 Safeguard screening procedures The SLDP is rated as Category B per the World Bank Environmental safeguards categorization. The project investments aim to The Project Development Objective is to strengthen the capacity of local stakeholders, including state authorities, displaced persons, and vulnerable host communities, to plan and implement natural resource management practices and improve livelihood techniques. The environment and social issues associated with the project include: increase in competition within communities as a result of higher resources circulating at community. Mitigation measures include awareness-raising activities on sustainability and environmental protection/recovery actions, introduction of several sustainability principles in project design, and hiring of an Environmental Specialist in the PCU. Community Development Committees and Community Facilitators will also be sensitized to local level conflict resolution, as will the communities themselves. The guidance from members of the community champions program will also contribute to alleviating these risks. The following three World Bank safeguards policies are triggered for the SLDP2: (a) Operational Policy 4.01 Environmental Assessment: This Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) includes guidance and procedures for environmental and social management issues during the project implementation period. For the management of impacts caused by subproject activities, the use of a simplified, checklist-type ESMP is envisaged. This would be the default instrument to manage the expected low-risk, low-impact activities (such as small scale civil and construction works), and would be produced, and attached to the tender package and works contracts for every identified sub-project with potential E&S impacts. (b) Operational Policy 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement: The proposed SLDP project as designed might not undertake involuntary displacement of people. But, small-scale civil works activities require land for construction and other minor civil works might result in economic and or physical displacement. While the specific location for the sub projects are not known, it is not possible to determine the nature of ownership of land at this stage (whether private and/or public). Therefore, as a precautionary measure to preclude the risks of land acquisition the policy and a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) has been prepared to identify and address potential land acquisition or restriction to access and use of natural resources. (c) 6 of the project’s 10 target communities are located in proximity of the Gash River (<3 km), an international waterway which originates in Eritrea, borders Ethiopia, and ends in eastern Sudan. The small works activities envisaged by the project are demand-driven and will be identified after successive community mobilization, natural resource management sensitization, and environmental planning processes. Based on common practice in the area, distance from the Gash River, and experience in past projects, it is not expected that the small works to be proposed by target communities will appreciably affect the quantity or quality of water flows in the Gash River or any other international waterways, however some effect is possible. The activities that may be implemented may involve minor rehabilitation, additions, or alterations of existing small-scale community water supply for household use and irrigation infrastructure. The size and location of the activities to be financed by the Project remain to be defined; however, only 1 of the project’s 10 target communities practices irrigated agriculture and obtains water supply through a seasonal canal flowing from the Gash River. 28 This irrigation system is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Gash Agricultural Scheme Authority, and therefore will not be targeted by the project for rehabilitation. With reference to water supply structures, from the 6 target communities in close proximity of the Gash River, 3 have been assessed to potentially have a need for rehabilitation based on the water supply and demand characteristics in the target area. In the event of rehabilitation, the incremental rate of abstraction or discharge into the above-mentioned international waterways or their tributaries as a result of rehabilitation is likely to be minimal. The annual incremental rate of abstraction is estimated to be 113,300 m3, or 0.016% of the mean annual discharge of the Gash River. The rationale for this calculation has been provided by the Kassala State Drinking Water Corporation, the technical authority for water supply in Kassala State. In the event that communities should prioritize water-related subprojects from the small works options available, the impacts of such work will be limited and localized. In accordance with project objectives of strengthening the capacity of stakeholders to plan and deliver natural resource management practices, communities will be supervised by environmental experts to ensure that small works undertaken are sustainable in nature and do not pose adverse impacts to the environment or surrounding communities. As such, the proposed project activities fall under the exception to the notification requirement under paragraph 7 (a) of OP 7.50. This Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) has been prepared to fully comply with environmental legislations and procedures in Sudan and with the World Bank’s environmental and social safeguard policies. The key safeguard policies that provide the policy context to the ESMF including World Bank policies and Sudan’s legal requirements on environmental assessment have been outlined below. 3.1.1 Regulatory Framework for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Overview Sudan is one of the first African countries that passed sectoral laws for the protection of the environment (annex A). However, these laws are further supported by an umbrella law enacted in 2001, the 2001 Environmental Conservation Act. This Act provides general principles and guidelines to be considered in implementing any development project. The Act makes it the responsibility of the project proponents before embarking on any development activity to carry out an EIA to identify the positive and negative impacts of the project along with recommendations to mitigate negative impacts. The Act provides definitions and clarifications regarding natural resources management, pollutants and sources of pollution, endorses the Polluter Pays Principle, and specifies issues to be considered in EIAs (Article 18) which include: • Description of the existing environment before the project; • Description of the project activities; • Assessment of potential environmental impacts, both positive and negative; and • Provision of recommendations to mitigate the negative environmental effects. The implementation of the provisions of the Act is entrusted to the Higher Council for Environment and Natural Resources (HCENR) established in 1991 and the Ministry for Environment and Physical Development (MEPD) established in 1995. 29 The 2005 Interim National Constitution of the Republic of the Sudan further supports environmental protection. This Constitution is based on the provisions and articles of the 2005 CPA and relevant articles of the 1998 Constitution of Sudan. The Interim Constitution endorses the rights of citizens to live in a clean environment (Article 11) and directs attention to the protection and conservation of natural resources. Article 43 (2) of the Interim Constitution gives the National Government the right to expropriate land for development purposes and compensates the owners. There are a number of articles related to natural resource management, pollution control, and protection of cultural heritage sites and respect of traditional and customary regulations related to land ownership. The Interim Constitution also specifies land issues, which are under national powers (Federal level) and those under the control of states as well as joint powers (concurrent powers) shared by the Federal and State institutions. The states manage issues related to State lands, which are not under the National control. These include management, lease and utilization of lands belonging to States, town and rural planning and agricultural lands within the state boundaries. The concurrent powers include matters related to urban development, planning and housing, electricity generation, waste management, consumer safety and protection, water resources other than inter – state waters, and regulation of land tenure and the rights on land. Articles of the Constitution and the Environment Conservation Act (2001) of relevance to this project are the right to expropriate land and compensate the owners as well as issues related to the safety and protection of the inhabitants, beside penalties incurred for environmental damage and pollution as well as respect of the International Environmental Agreements ratified by Sudan. 3.1.1.1Land Tenure Regulations There are many laws that govern the land in Sudan including: 1. Land Demarcation and Survey Act 1905: This law is still in force and is important because the surveying authorities determine the demarcation of land and its boundary. 2. Land Settlement and Registration Act 1925 is an important law which necessitates the settlement rights of people. The Act provides for the process of obtaining land ownership and transaction in land certificates. 3. The 1970 Unregistered Land Act: It was in 1970 when the first substantive national legislation on natural resources, the Unregistered Lands Act, was introduced and implemented indiscriminately all over the country, even in places that have or had no previous system of land registration. 4. The Civil Transactions Act 1984. It incorporated many laws, which were active at its promulgation, and they were codified therein such as the Prescription and Limitation Act 1928, the Unregistered Land Act 1970 and so on. This Act contains distinct and multiple sections exceeding four hundred sections, all of them dealing with land issues such as the provisions relating to the ownership and undivided ownership, family ownership, benefits of land, the easements and expropriation of land by time bar or inheritance, will or (shufaa). 5. Physical Planning and Disposal of Land Act 1994 6. Towns Land Disposal Regulations 1947. 7. Villages Land Disposal Regulations 1948. 8. Religious Purposes Land Regulations 1949. 9. Non-governmental Schools Lands Regulations 1949. 10. Clubs Sites Land Regulations 1950. 11. Petroleum Storage and Sale Sites Land Regulations1950. 12. Rain Fed Land Disposal Regulations1953. 13. Disposal of Schemes, which do not require License 1953. 14. Disposal of Schemes, which require License 1953. 15. Cinema Land Sites Regulations 1960. 16. Private Hospitals Lands Regulations 1960. 17. Investment Act 1992, 2014 18. Quarrying and Mines Act 1972. 30 19. Toker Delta Act, 1922. 20. Laws regulating Water, Irrigation, Rivers, and Nile Waters and the relevant Agreements. 21. Land Acquisition Act 1930, it provides for the process of compensation and arbitration between the beneficiaries and the Government. 22. Antiquities Ordinance (1952, amended 1999) on the Protection of Cultural Heritage. The law aims protect national cultural heritage and cultural property in general against illegal destruction, modification, alteration, excavation, alienation, exportation, or importation. National cultural heritage comprises cultural property created or discovered on national territory. Particular articles applicable to this project include: (a) movable and immovable cultural property, whether publicly or privately owned; (b) Protected sites (c) Possible suspension of civil works in case of chance find; and (d) Authorization of surveys. The policy, legal and institutional framework created during the past century has been rendered inadequate by the tremendous changes in the social, political, economic and cultural circumstances of the country over this period. The increase in population and the large-scale process of population redistribution have resulted in a heightened demand and competition for access to land and other natural resources. In addition, the changes in the global environment brought about by the globalization of economies and politics have combined to create a reality significantly different from the one conceptualized when the existing frameworks were created. This reality necessitates a reform process and the need for new approach to address land tenure and natural resources governance. The CPA and the Sudan Interim National Constitution (SINC) provided a perceived impetus to that. Besides sectoral laws implemented by Federal Institutions, there are also State Level Laws based on National Laws with emphasis on particular local or State problems. However, most of these are considered local orders issued by localities to address problems related to pasture and grazing which are based on customary tenure to specify corridors to be followed by nomads. 3.1.1.2 National Adaptation Plan of Action (NAPA): Sudan prepared National Adaptation Plan of Action (NAPA) as a framework for mainstreaming adaptation to climate change in the development process by inclusion of climate and vulnerability in sectoral and development policies. NAPA highlights key environmental issues that need to be addressed which include soil erosion; deforestation; water resources degradation and depletion; threat to fish resources; threat to biodiversity; human habitat degradation; high population growth among others. Also NAPA provides guidelines actions to be taken by stakeholders such as local communities, government, agencies non-governmental organizations, and donors in environmental planning and management. 3.1.1.3 The Sudan National Policy for Displacement (2009).8. Internal displacement of Persons emerged as a “phenomenon” in Sudan in the mid 1980s as a result of the wave of drought and desertification, which hit the country and the whole region at that time. Most parts of the country were affected by that wave. The basic principles of the policy are: • The state endeavors to prepare IDP plans, programs and projects, in which international community may be involved, without infringement on national supremacy, as displacement is an internal affair in which efforts of the state and the international community go hand in hand to provide humanitarian assistance. • An IDP in the Sudan is free to move and choose the place of his stay. IDPs have the right to move freely within IDP camps and exit without any restriction. www.brookings.edu/~/.../idp/Sudan_IDP Policy. 8 31 • The state ensures the provision of protection to IDPs as citizens who were compelled to leave their homes as a result of natural disasters or wars. They have their dignity, which must be cherished and are fully entitled to the care provided by the state • The state ensures the provision of policing services and maintenance of law and order in IDP communities. Local authorities provide protection to IDPs in their return areas as well as in their resettlement areas. • The state ensures facilitation of procedures pertaining to acquiring of ID documents and land deeds to enable them enjoy all their constitutional rights. • Provision of assistance to IDPs to enable them has decent means of subsistence. The state endeavors to develop IDPs capabilities and skills, which could be used to achieve stability and development. • Provision of comprehensive care to IDPs, including basic services such as education, health, accommodation, and drinking water. • Development projects must cater for the IDPs so long as to encourage fostering relationships between IDPs and host communities to achieve social bonding. • With regard to options available to IDPs, the state endeavors to achieve what is best for them, including voluntary return to original areas, integration in host communities or resettlement in other areas in the country. • Minimizing reliance on relief by training IDPs on different ways of production and by encouraging them to proceed to production areas. • Adoption of approaches of balanced development and sustainable development in dealing with IDP issues. • Promotion of the culture of peace and reinvigoration of social activities. Attention must be given to youngsters, with special care provided to creative groups amongst IDPs. • Local authorities are to ensure that IDPs, who have returned to their homes and places of abode or have chosen to settle in any part of the country, are not discriminated against and have equal rights in the participation in public affairs at all levels. • IDP experience in the Sudan must be documented and studies be carried out to shed light on the positive aspects of the phenomenon, including its effect on national unity and cultural understanding. • Humanitarian assistance provided to IDPs must not have any form of harmful effects, short or long term, on them. Prompt fixes for such effects must be provided. • Assistance provided to IDPs must not constitute any source of tension or conflict and must not kill the spirit of self-reliance. • Humanitarian assistance provided must work to upgrade the capabilities of IDPs. • Priority must be given in the provision of assistance to the most vulnerable groups, especially women and children. Assistance must be given without any form of discrimination and must cover host communities. • All government institutions, at federal, southern Sudan and local levels, have to ensure that all items of this policy are equally applied to IDPs who voluntarily return to their homes using their own resources. 3.1.1.4 Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper: The interim poverty reduction strategy focuses on the reintegration of displaced persons, the reintegration involves a systematic approach to end the temporary, uncertain and dependent status of these displaced populations by providing permanent access to shelter and sustainable livelihoods in new or existing communities, to economic and social opportunities such as land, credit, market places, schools and health facilities, and participation in civic activities and decision making in the communities. Section 88 reintegration, for sustained peace and development recognized a systematic and credible national reconciliation effort that aims to bring diverse groups of people together and helps to consolidate national economic and political aspirations, creates a supportive environment for reintegration. By reintegrating IDPs into communities and permanent self- sustaining livelihoods and away from dependence on relief assistance, largely funded by international relief agencies, the costs of maintaining them will be eliminated and they will begin to make value-adding contributions to the national economy. 32 3.1.1.5 Interim Constitution of Sudan 2005 Constitution of Sudan provides legal framework under section guiding principles and direction chapter 11 environment and natural resources gives peoples of Sudan right to: • A clean and diverse environment; the State and the citizens have the duty to preserve and promote the country’s biodiversity • The State shall not pursue any policy, or take or permit any action, which may adversely affect the existence of any species of animal or vegetative life, their natural or adopted habitat. • The State shall promote, through legislation, sustainable utilization of natural resources and best practices with respect to their management. 3.1.1.6 Sudan Protection Sector Strategy 2013 Since the beginning of 2013, Sudan has been witnessing a significant deterioration in the humanitarian and security situation in many parts of the country and a marked increase in internal displacement. In this context, the Protection Sector’s overriding objective is to support the Government of Sudan in strengthening the protection environment for conflict affected populations. In light of the significant challenges to delivering protection in Sudan, this Strategy focused on developing a response based on the most urgent protection needs identified, namely the risk to life and the physical insecurity suffered by conflict-affected populations, especially IDPs. The Protection Sector is guided in the pursuance of its strategy by the following legal underpinnings. The national legal framework in Sudan is notably strong with a Constitution that includes respect for ratified international treaties and conventions, as well as a Bill of Rights. Key international instruments Sudan is party to include the International Covenants on Civil & Political Rights and on Economic, Social & Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination, the Child Rights Convention, the 1951 Refugee Convention and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Important national instruments for the first time reference to violations of International Humanitarian Law with provisions for strong safeguards and protection to populations affected by armed conflicts, including IDPs. There is also the Armed Forces Act of 2007, which prohibits causing the displacement of populations, as well as the 2009 National IDP Policy. On the other hand the Protection Sector was identifying seven priority areas of intervention one of them was: • Prevent/mitigate the effects of conflict /violence through advocacy and awareness raising on conflict induced protection issues. • Identify and respond to the protection/assistance needs of extremely vulnerable individuals and persons with special needs. • Prioritize community resilience to improve self -protection capacities and support to extremely vulnerable individuals and persons with special needs. • Support response mechanisms and safe service delivery to survivors of violence and those at risk, including psychosocial, legal aid and medical & physical safety. • For durable solutions, advocate and ensure safe and secure conditions through monitoring and tracking, in line with the principles of voluntariness, safety & dignity. • Support IDPs and host communities’ active participation in durable solutions processes, to ensure IDPs make an informed choice about their right to local integration, return or relocation. 3.1.2. World Bank Safeguard Policies The World Bank has a framework consisting of 10 policies governing environmental and social safeguards, plus a disclosure policy, which also applies to the sharing of 33 environmental and social data, and documents in Bank financed projects. The World Bank Safeguard Policies are: 1. Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) 2. Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) 3. Forestry (OP/BP 4.36) 4. Pest Management (OP/BP 4.09) 5. Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) 6. Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) 7. Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) 8. Safety of Dams (OP/BP4.37) 9. Projects on International Waters (OP/BP7.50) 10. Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) The SLDP project has been rated as Category B for the purposes of OP 4.01. This means that the project and its subproject activities are not expected to have any significant adverse environmental impacts that are sensitive, diverse, or unprecedented (which would make it category A). Instead, potential adverse environmental impacts on human populations or environmentally important areas--including wetlands, forests, grasslands, and other natural habitats--are less adverse than those of Category A projects. These impacts are site- specific; few if any of them are irreversible; and in most cases mitigation measures can be designed more readily than for so-called Category A projects. The safeguards policies that have been triggered for the SDLP are listed in the table (3) below: Table (3): Safe guard Polices that might Apply Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No TBD Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X This ESMF has been designed so that all investment under the SLDP2 will comply with the relevant laws of Sudan and the Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies of the World Bank. The key policy governing the environmental and social assessment and management approach in all Bank financed investment projects, is Operational Policy (OP) 4.01 on Environmental Assessment (EA). This OP defines the World Bank’s environmental assessment requirements to ensure that funded projects are environmentally sound and sustainable. OP4.01 requires a screening process is undertaken for all funded projects to assess the magnitude and adversity of predicted environmental impacts and to determine the appropriate extent and type of EA (Annex B2). Physical and Cultural Resources (OP 4.11): This policy is not triggered, no physical resources are expected, however OP 4.11, it is included here as chance find procedures for included as part of this ESMF as in the Annex Protection of cultural property in Chapter 6, below. In the case of a chance find, mitigation measures should be undertaken in conjunction with the appropriate authorities, organizations, and institution that are also required to be consulted and involved in the management of cultural property. The Bank 34 does not support development actions likely to significantly damage non-replicable cultural property, and does assist only those projects sited or designed to prevent such damage. In case of chance finds of cultural property (archaeological artifacts) during implementation of sub-projects involving civil works, these will be handled according to provisions in the “Law on Preservation of Sudan’s Historical and Cultural Heritage (1999 replaced act of 19529)” and be reported to the State or locality commissioners, who then will inform the Archaeological Committee. 9 The Sudan Law (antiquities Act 1952), which is one of earliest on the continent and has survived with minimum amendments. The Ministry od Education holds the same mandate over archeology and museums 35 Chapter Four: The Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) 4.1 Introduction The purpose of this ESMF is to provide a tool to screen subprojects for possible adverse impacts, and ensure that any activity supported by the project is environmentally and socially sound and sustainable, does not cause harm to valued environmental components (VEC), or negatively affects people’s lives and livelihoods when that can be avoided, and introduce mitigation measures and compensation when avoidance of adverse impacts is not possible The implementation of the project must ensure that: • Environmental and social considerations are included as criteria for project screening, site selection, design and development of project activities; • Environmental and social assessment is an integral part of project designs and any resulting activity with potentially adverse impacts; • ESMF guidelines are followed and applied throughout the project cycle; • The purpose, principles, and provisions of this ESMF are introduced to stakeholders and beneficiaries through awareness raising, education, and promotion of environmentally and socially beneficial activities. • Negative environmental or social impacts are effectively avoided, minimized of mitigated / compensated / offset, and projects implemented and operated in a sustainable manner. 4.2. Positive Environmental Impacts The Mid-term evaluation for SLDP1 reported that the environmental issues have been carefully considered in all project operations and interventions. In addition, through diversification of livelihood activities away from traditional activities such as livestock and agriculture the project is expected to have a positive environmental impact by reducing heavy reliance on the existing limited natural resources. No adverse social and environmental impacts were reported and observed. All the implemented activities are in compliance with ESMF guidelines. The potential SLDP2 activities include: capacity building, delivery of in-kind livelihood grants for sustainable income generation, and community-based, small-scale works focused on improved natural resource management practices. These small works may fall into the following categories: a) Improved Agricultural Management: increase resilience of degraded areas for crop production, expand soil conservation practices (minimum tillage, rotating crops), introduce crop mixes more suited to climate change, improve crop storage, proliferate improved seed varieties and seed banks, safeguard biodiversity, invasive species management, switch to lesser water intensive crops, switch to crops with improved nitrogen use efficiency, introduce measures to increase agricultural productivity, establishing demonstration farms to showcase and receive training on improved seeds and practices. b) Improved Animal Production: improve animal waste management (manure and methane biogas), improve range management to increase carbon sequestration, establishing nurseries for improved pastures, demarcate livestock routes, reduce losses, improve productivity, and feed-to-food conversion efficiency through improved animal health, genetics and feed practices. c) Irrigation and Drainage: rehabilitate, alter, or add to water pumping for small-scale irrigation using renewable energy sources (not to affect transboundary waters), replace existing diesel pumps with more energy efficient or electric pumps, plant 36 hedges and cover crops to reduce evaporation and soil moisture loss, reduce water use in land preparation, introduce or expand technologies that improve water use efficiency, construct or improve water harvesting systems for rainwater (farm ponds, storage tanks, check dams, etc.), revise water management plans and pricing for increased efficiency. d) Forestry: Promote small-scale agroforestry, farm forestry, and community afforestation activities to increase resilience of farm systems. e) Other Civil Works Upgrades: Environmentally friendly upgrades to off-farm and rangeland structures (e.g. using renewable energy to provide power to school). f) Income Diversification: Large IGA activities that provide an alternate source of income and can measurably reduce burden on land. Livelihoods support under the SDLP2 could include micro-projects in agriculture and small businesses like livestock, community farm/poultry, agro-processing, and mechanics and metal carpentry. The proposed activities are not anticipated to cause significant adverse impacts on the environment or community. The identified potential adverse impacts would be localized in spatial extent and short in duration, and would be manageable by implementing proper mitigation measures. The impacts have been categorized into beneficial and adverse impacts, the positive beneficial impacts are: • Capacity Development • Increased farm incomes from crop output and Food Security • Poverty Alleviation • Development and rehabilitation of water supply for people and livestock • Improved soil conservation • Provide economic incentive through community livelihoods interventions and small works • Environmental and climate changes awareness • Employment creation for community members, and Empowerment of farmers • Reduced the adverse environmental impact including, reduction of wood cutting and charcoal selling, provision of energy options, environmental awareness, etc • Community stability • Reduce school dropout • Bring effective and lasting improvement in the livelihoods of people, and can lead to better use and protection of the natural resource base • Increase access to markets and social services, such as health care and education • Improvement of skills and knowledge at community productive segments 4.3 Process of Identification of Potential Adverse Environmental and Social Impacts and Relevant Stakeholders This section identifies the potential environmental and social impacts likely to arise as the result of the investments of the SLDP projects with a view to facilitate early evaluation of such impacts and integrate suitable mitigation measures during planning stage itself. Based on field visits and discussion with the potential executing agencies, the typical adverse impacts associated with the investments are expected to be minor or negligible. The following major stakeholders were consulted for role identification and for potential environmental and social impacts likely to arise from the subproject implementation: • Ministry of Finance • Ministry of Agriculture and livestock • Localities • Affected communities within the project’s area of influence • Ministry of Environment • Higher council of environment and natural resources 37 • Humanitarian and Aid Commission (HAC) • NGOs, CBOs • Community Development Committees (CDC) The Ministry of Finance at State level through the implementation arrangements established by the project, will ensure the overall application of the safeguard policies. The envisaged project activities, including the appraisal studies and capacity building, as well as the promotion of livelihoods in IDP camps, which will not have significant negative environmental impacts. Potential negative impacts will be limited and mostly reversible. Mitigation measures have been included in the design of the proposed activities as necessary. The project is located in arid areas with scarce water resources and not very favorable soil conditions. As such, the design of the project will considers the introduction of adequate practices for agriculture development, animal husbandry, and small-scale irrigation to ensure environmental sustainability. 4.4 Potential Adverse Social and Environmental Impacts a. Environmental Impacts The proposed activities are not anticipated to cause significant adverse impacts on the environment or community. The identified potential adverse impacts would be localized in spatial extent and short in duration, and would be manageable by implementing proper mitigation measures. The key component added in this project is community small works. The proposed small works will have minimal impact on the environment. An assessment of the negative impacts can be classified into construction phase and post- construction phase impacts. The constructional works would present minor negative environmental impacts. Some of the potential minor environmental impacts are: • Soil and land degradation; • Potable water supply and water disposal • Air quality impacts; • Vehicular traffic implications; • Noise level increase and ground vibration; • Construction waste generation and additional garbage generation by workers during construction; • Damage to/loss of Cultural heritage, archaeological sites • Loss or degradation of existing natural resources such as forests, soils, wetlands, water resources • Attraction of large migrant populations to communities that have successfully improved social infrastructures (such as farms, water sources) resulting in pressures that lead to depletion of resources. • Improper disposal of waste • Water depletion due to increased use of water • Pollution • Communicable disease from livestock and poultry rearing b. Potential Adverse Social Impacts Social impacts may emanate from the various infrastructure services delivery activities under the SLDP. The following are some of the potential social negative impacts: • Disruption of utility services (e.g. water pipe, power cable, and etc.); • Temporary impacts on houses and businesses from construction noise, flying debris, and other nuisances and dangers; • Restriction of access to source of livelihood and other assets; • Minor land/asset acquisition impacts; • Delays in compensation payment and provision of alternative mean of livelihood; 38 • Community disputes. • Attraction of large migrant populations to communities that have successfully improved social infrastructures (such as farms, water sources) resulting in pressures that lead to overcrowding, constraint of resources, and tension and/or conflict. • Occupational, health, and safety issues etc • Individual or group dispute over land ownership, possibly along ethnic lines • Conflict between livestock herders and farmers/local population The main potential environmental issues/impacts arising from project activities and their impacts are listed in the table (4) below. This scope of potential impacts will be used to inform and facilitate the screening process as described below (see Section 4.4): 39 Table (4) Project activities, with potential adverse environmental and social impacts N Projects and Associated Potential Major Environmental and Social Impact Impact Magnitude Duration o Activities Issues Ne Mi Mod Sig La Sho Mid Long Per gli no erat nifi rge rt ter Term man gib r e ca Ter m ent le nt m 1 • Irrigation facilities. • Land or water degradation due to the alteration, X X additions, maintenance, and rehabilitation of small-scale irrigation systems (not to affect transboundary waters). • Water related diseases. • Potential increased water consumption due to brick-making process; also clay for the bricks is X X sourced from borrow pits by hand, in areas that were often previously farmed. In the wet season, these pits may fill with stagnant water and X X contribute to environmental health problems such as malaria. 2 • Community farm/ • The spread of diseases related to poultry breeding X X poultry. • Management of chicken manure and its contamination potential for land, surface water, and X X groundwater. • Management of large amounts of manure, which X X could be polluting the environment. 3 • Agro processing • Land clearing- vegetation loss X X facility • Noise, water pollution, and solid waste disposal. X X • Plantation • Changes in biodiversity X X development • Soil and land degradation X X (agriculture) • Agro chemical usage X X • Groundwater pollution X X • Micro climate changes X X X X • Fire management (bush fire) X X 4 • Project may attract • Land degradation caused by overharvesting of X X outside immigrants to seasonal fodder and shrubs. already stress environment and further increase pressure on existing resources. 5 • Removal of silt from • May lead to soil erosion, remove of clay/fertile X the canals. soil on the surface 6 • Disposal of Waste • Might create pollution X X Materials, such Irrigation, Poultry, community Farm, Metals workshops, etc 7 • Small Works • Improper disposal of wastes X X • Tribal Land dispute • Chance FindsNoise, dust Standard occupational health and safety guidelines will be applied at all work sights 4.5 Environmental and Social Screening at the Project Level The screening process is the first step in ESMF implementation. Once a proposed activity is considered by the SLDP for implementation, desk and field appraisals must be conducted by the project Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer to ensure the eligibility of the 40 activity and to validate the information included in the proposal package. The screening and resulting steps must be undertaken before project approval, during the design phase. The purpose of the screening process is to determine whether sub-projects are likely to have potential negative environmental and social impacts; to determine appropriate mitigation measures for activities with adverse impacts; to incorporate mitigation measures into the sub-projects design; to review and approve sub-projects proposals and to monitor environmental parameters during implementation. The extent of environmental and social work that might be required for the sub-projects prior to implementation will depend on the outcome of the screening process. This process should include screening for possible resettlement impacts. A screening process, selection, and evaluation of SLDP sub-projects are required to manage environmental and social aspects of these activities. The following list shows the various stages of this environmental and social safeguards screening: • Identify actions that have negative environmental and social impacts; and determine repercussions of selected projects as to whether they likely to cause potential negative environmental and social impacts; • Determine appropriate mitigation measures for activities with adverse impacts; • Incorporate mitigation measures into project design • Review and approve project proposals • Implementation of environmental and social work: activities that require separate ESMP and or abbreviated RPF); • Review and approval of the selection. • Dissemination of safeguards documents, such as ESMPs, etc • Supervision and monitoring The Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer of the ESTSI-CA will be in charge of the screening activities and will propose the resultant environmental categorization. The Officer may recruit the services of consultants to collect data to feed into the screening process. The Officer will be expected to consult with all relevant stakeholders, including communities, service providers, and others affected by the particular sub-project in making determinations during the screening process. Screening will also help to propose whether a proposed sub project is eligible and/or will further require a full-fledged ESIA, per procedures outlined in this ESMF. This ESMF provides a clear procedure for identification, protection, and treatment of archaeological artifacts discovered; these procedures will be included in the environmental and social management plan and in standard bidding documents. The project will be reviewed for potential impact on physical cultural property and clear procedures will be required for identification, protection of cultural property from theft, and treatment of discovered artifacts will be included in standard bidding documents. While not damaging cultural property, sub-project preparation may identify and include assistance for preservation of historic or archaeological sites. The proposed sub-project will be checked against the screening checklist (Format in Annexes C1-3 below). The SLDP Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer will encourage community participation in carrying out this task through direct consultation, or possibly with the help of the facilitators, extension agents, health workers or other literate members of the community. The checklist is a simple yes/no form culminating in whether specific advice to the community on environmental mitigation is required. The Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialist will give this advice as required. 41 The result of the screening process may result in the following categorization outcomes and subsequent steps: Category A: Sub-Projects Requiring Further ESIA Work: Further assessment is required. Preparation of a separate Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) to get a better understanding of the potential environmental and social issues that have been identified in the screening process and development of a specific Environmental and Social Management Plan is required. Examples of issues requiring the implementation of specific mitigations in cases where specific environmental or social issues are identified and where a change in the design or sitting of the sub-program is not possible include: • Potential conflicts between upstream and downstream users, • Impacts on land without physical displacement or significant impacts on livelihoods, • Potential for heavy traffic at construction phase through inhabited areas, • Construction in water bodies (pipeline river crossings, water works in river beds-intakes), • Construction through areas with contaminated soil. For the project components for which the decision is the conduct of an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (WB category A Projects), stand- alone reports will be prepared. 
The Environmental and Safeguards specialist will prepare the Terms of Reference for the ESIA, and follow procurement rules for the recruitment of consultants for the ESIA. The ToR should be prepared using issues identified during the screening exercise. Also, the impact mitigation measures provided in this ESMF may provide some basis for the design of the ToR. 
The ESIA will identify and evaluate potential environmental impacts for the proposed activities, evaluate alternatives, and design mitigation measures. It will also analyze any cumulative impacts, where applicable. The preparation of the ESIA will be done in consultation with stakeholders, including people who may be affected. Public consultations are critical in preparing a proposal for the activities of the projects likely to have impacts on the environment and population. The public consultations should identify key issues and determine how the concerns of all parties will be addressed in the ESIA. Procedures for projects requiring an ESIA First stage: Preparation of Terms of Reference
 The results of identification, and extent of the ESIA (scoping), the Terms of Reference will be prepared by the Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer. Second stage: Selection of consultant Third stage: Preparation of the ESIA with public consultation. The report will follow the following format: . Description of the study area . Description of the subproject . Discussion and evaluation of alternatives . Environment description 42 . Legal and regulatory . Identifying potential impacts of proposed sub-projects, including cumulative 
impacts . Process of public consultations . Development of mitigation measures and a monitoring plan, including 
estimates of costs and responsibility for implementation of surveillance and monitoring Category B: Sub-Projects Not Requiring Further ESIA Work: Sub-projects categorized as B will not require any further environmental assessment work. They will, however, be applied the general Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) presented further in this ESMF (Annex. No further environmental assessment work required; application of mitigation measures as outlined in the ESMF and ESMP. Category C: No significant environmental issue identified, no specific mitigation required; sub-program implementation can proceed. With regard to the SLDP2, it is likely that most projects will be categorized as low risk or category B. If the screening form has only "No" entries, the project will not require further environmental impact assessment work, and the Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer will recommend approval of the activity to SLDP and implementation can proceed. Regardless of the categorization, standard occupational health and safety guidelines will be applied at all work sights. The project will not support investments that have the potential to cause significant conversion or degradation of natural habitats or fragile ecosystems, directly or indirectly. In case the project may result in resettlement, then the resettlement procedures shall be instituted as provided for in the RPF. All project activities must be screened and an ESMP or EA should be prepared as required. With consideration for the limited scale of works in SLDP2, it is envisaged that a checklist- type ESMP such as that in Annex E will be sufficient to ensure the proper mitigation measures are in place, to be supervised and applied by a qualified Civil Engineer. The results of the various environmental appraisal documents must be summarized in an environmental appraisal form shown in Annex C3, and would be included with the Activity Appraisal Report. For activities requiring an ESIA, the SLDP ESTSI-CA is required to obtain approval of the ESIA from the federal Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MoFEP). During the first year of project implementation, the World Bank must be requested to review and approve the EA before financing is authorized. Post review of EA will be subsequently undertaken as part of the regular World Bank supervision missions provided that the World Bank is fully satisfied that the EA requirements comply with OP 4.01 during the first year. The SLDP project team, particularly the Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer and Procurement Officer, must ensure that the recommendations of the EA are included in the technical specifications of the construction bidding documents and in the mitigation measures developed for each activity incorporated in the Project document (Annex B). 43 Finally, prior to and during implementation of each sub-project, it is the Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer’s responsibility to ensure proper monitoring and mitigation measures are in place and complied with. This is described in more detail in Chapter 6. In summary, the following steps apply to each project activity in order to correctly implement the ESMF: Table (5): Summary of ESMF Implementation Steps and Responsibilities Step Responsibility Remarks Step 1: Environmental Environmental Registration: Registration of the SLDP Project Coordinator of the project following signing the PCU with Ministry of grant agreement. Environment Grant Agreement Signing: Minister of Finance (MoFEP) and World Bank Country Director Step 2: Identification of Project State Project Unit (the ESTSI- Activities CA), through CDD process with communities and support of technical subject experts. Step 3: Screening of sub-project Environment and Social Will result in categorization activities for environmental and Safeguards Officer of the of sub-project as A, B, or C. social implications PCU Step 4: Assessment, as needed, Environmental and Social For Category A sub- and Preparation of ESIA/ESMP Safeguards Officer projects: ESIA For Category B sub- projects: ESMP For Category C sub- projects: None. Clear for Implementation. Step 5: Public Consultation on Environmental and Social For Category A sub-projects EA Safeguards Officer of the PCU Step 6: Approval of Submitted by Environmental Category A sub-projects: activity/screening outcome and and Social Safeguards Officer prior review by MoFEP in EMP/ESIA as needed consultation with The Approved by Ministry of Secretariat of Higher Finance and Economic Council for Environment & Planning (MoFEP) focal point Natural Resources (HCENR). Subsequent No Objection from World Bank (WB). Category B sub-projects: prior review by MoFEP. Category C sub-projects: post review by MoFEP 44 WB No Objection required for ESMPs and ESIAs Step 7: Monitoring and Environmental and Social Reporting Safeguards Officer Supervision from MoFEP and WB 4.6 Summary of Social and Environmental issues. The project is not expected to involve relocation and resettlement as most of the work is envisaged to involve upgrading work or rehabilitation of infrastructure within the existing right of way of access paths and roads/drains. However there may be minor land requirements for sub-project involving new construction minor civil works. Such land should preferably be available government land, or could only be obtained through compensation payments by the local community, or through private voluntary donations. Adverse social impacts of such works are likely to be negligible or ephemeral. Nevertheless, as a precaution a comprehensive resettlement policy framework (RPF) has been prepared for the project as a separate document alongside this ESMF. 4.7 Environmental and Social Mitigation Measures The mitigation measures in the last column of Table 5 have been designed in order to avoid, minimize, and reduce negative environmental and social impacts (Table 5). The ESMF considered a number of mitigation and enhancement measures and also principles for implementation to ensure that the project become socially acceptable, environmentally sound and sustainable. One of the key objectives of this ESMF is to provide a framework for preventing or mitigating the negative impacts associated with the project implementation. The following mitigation measures will be used: Table (6) Project activities, with potential adverse environmental and social impacts N Projects Activities Environmental and Social Impact Issues Mitigation measures 1 Irrigation facilities. • Land or water degradation due to additions, • Contractors should follow code of construction of water alterations, maintenance, and rehabilitation of facilities small-scale irrigation systems. • Health Hygiene • Water related diseases. • Awareness raising on environmental water sanitation • Potential increased water consumption due to • Training of Beneficiaries on Water Management brick-making process; also clay for the bricks • Provision of livelihoods options is sourced from borrow pits by hand, in areas • Provision mosquito nets that were often previously farmed. In the wet • Close Monitoring and follow up by Project Unit season, these pits may fill with stagnant water • Traditional water terracing and embankments and contribute to environmental health problems such as malaria. • Groundwater depletion and soil salinization. 45 2 • Community • The spread of diseases related to poultry • Regular vaccination of poultry by vets. Project to work on farm/ poultry. breeding linking community with veterinary extension agents from • Management of chicken manure and its the state-level to accomplish this activity. This is a regular contamination potential for land, surface practice in Kassala and other states in Sudan. water, and groundwater. • Development of simple waste management • Management of large amounts of manure, • Provision of barrels for waste which could be polluting the environment. • Designation of Waste areas by Localities • Usage of manure as source of fertilizers • No tobacco products will be financed by the project. 3 • Agro processing • Land clearing- vegetation loss • Code of land preparation for contractors restoration ,re-vegetation and facility • Noise, water pollution, and solid waste afforestation • Plantation disposal. • Proper equipment with mufflers and insulators; development • Time management by keeping to daylight working hours and • Changes in biodiversity respecting weekends / holidays; (agriculture) • Soil and land degradation • Prohibition of idling machinery; erection of sound barriers • Agro chemical usage • Proper placing of workshops, generators, plant or machinery at • Pest management sufficient distance from settlements or sensitive receptors. • Groundwater pollution • Extension efforts for farmers who may use agro-chemicals on good • Micro climate changes proper pesticide use even though no pesticides are being financed by the project • Fire management • Awareness raising • Use of Natural manures • The project will not finance use of pesticides • Weeding • Extension services 4 • Project may attract • Land degradation caused by overharvesting of • Provision of possible additional services outside immigrants seasonal fodder and shrubs. • Training of community /traditional leaders on conflict to already stress management environment and • Might Create resource based conflict • Enforcement of laws and regulations further increase • Allocation of destination areas by the locality for new pressure on existing comers resources. • Development of Monitoring and follow up system by Project Unit 5 • Removal of silt from • May lead to soil erosion, remove of • Training for beneficiaries the canals. clay/fertile soil on the surface • Use on intermediate technology • Use of plastic irrigation pipes 6 • Disposal of Waste • Might create pollution • Installation of sedimentation basins, oil skimmers, Materials, such • Silt barriers, Irrigation, Poultry, • Biological attenuation ponds such as engineered wetlands, community Farm, • Evaporation ponds; Metals workshops, • Reuse and recycling as far as possible; Collection at central etc points; transport to a licensed waste management facility, if not available then incineration or burial, where the impact on air, soil and water is proven to be acceptable by an appropriate assessment. 7 • Small Works • Improper disposal of wastes • Proper disposal of solid wastes • Tribal Land dispute • Priority given to rehabilitation of toilets • Dichotomy between customary and judiciary • Installation of sanitation facilities of land laws • Public environmental awareness • ‘Chance Finds’ regarding physical cultural • Hygiene awareness resources. • Environmental awareness • Small Work Management System • Community mobilization and participation • Permission • Assessments • In the highly unlikely event of “chance finds’ regarding physical cultural resources, to ensure works do not contravene Sudan’s national legislation, any small civil works will be supervised by locality or state government staff. ESMF contents will be shared and explained with local stakeholders in plain language. Given the unlikelihood and the localized scale of potential civil works, WB policy is not triggered. • Archaeological chance finds will be covered by a chance- 46 finds procedures clause included in the works contract. In the event any other significant civil works projects are undertaken, the chance-finds procedures will be included in the contract. • Procedure for Chance Finds: Stop construction activities and delineate area (ii) Secure area to prevent damage and/or removal of objects (iii) Notify responsible authorities and Ministry of Culture, Youth, and Sports immediately (iv) Work with authorities on decision about how to handle the find and proceed. Report chance find. 47 Chapter Five: Implementation Institutional Arrangements: 5.1 Implementation Arrangements Overview The implementation of the ESMF will follow the SLDP2 project implementation arrangement. Implementation arrangements will continue from SLDP Phase 1. One grant agreement will be signed for the implementation of components 1, 3 and 4 with the MoFEP, which is the Bank’s counterpart in Sudan. MoFEP would then sign a Subsidiary Agreement (SA) with the Kassala State MFEL. MFEL will be responsible for overall project execution and coordination through the East Sudan Transitional Solutions Initiative Coordinating Agency (ESTSI-CA) that has been recruited in Phase 1 and functions as the State Project Unit (SPU). The SPU will undertake the day-to-day operations of all recipient-executed activities under the SLDP2. The project will maintain government oversight arrangements from Phase 1, including the state-level Technical Working Group (TWG) in Kassala, chaired by the State MFEL, and Federal Advisory Board (FAB) in Khartoum. These two bodies function as project steering committees, formed to ensure regular consultation with partners and governmental oversight. The TWG will include representatives of the state ministries participating in the project, the Commissioners of target localities in Kassala, and Humanitarian Aid Commission (HAC). The TWG will meet at least on a quarterly basis or more frequently as required by the project. The FAB will meet at least semi-annually or more often as required by the project. With regards to staffing, the ESTSI-CA will retain the grant-funded positions from phase 1, an Operations Officer and a Monitoring and Evaluation/Communications Specialist, adding a Livelihoods Officer due to the increased coverage. The State Government of Kassala will second one accountant to East Sudan TSI Coordination Agency and provide support staff as required from time to time. At the Khartoum-level, the Project Coordination Unit (PCU) will be retained, comprised of the following grant-funded positions: Program Coordinator, Finance Officer, Procurement Officer, and adding an Environmental Specialist to technically oversee environmental and social safeguards issues. The PCU positions will be shared and co-financed with the Sudan Peacebuilding for Development Project (SPDP) for as long as SPDP is effective. The Program Coordinator reports to the head of the Directorate for Planning and Development, MFEL, and works under the overall supervision of the World Bank TTL. For the flow of the recipient-executed funds, MoFEP is the main recipient, which then in turn will transfer the funds to the East Sudan TSI Coordination Agency on behalf of Kassala State MFEL for project management and project activities. The diagram below depict the flow of funds and implementation structure expected to continue into phase 2. 48 5.2. Institutions at Federal/National level The institutions at national level responsible for the implementation and monitoring compliance to both national and international agreements include: • Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MoFEP) • The Higher Council for Environment and Natural Resources (HCENR); • Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Physical Development (MEF&PD); • Federal Ministries of Health, Education, Industry, Utilities and Agriculture; • Ministries and Locality Councils at State and Local Levels. The environmental acts and laws provide standards to be applied in assessing the probable environmental impacts of the project. It is important to note here that State Organs and Local laws deal with issues at State or Local levels, while the Federal Acts provide general directives and set limits and standards to certain environmental concerns without going into problems of a local nature. Based on the provisions of these legal requirements and sectoral laws as well as policies of different departments, the impacts of the proposed projects are to be assessed and appropriate mitigation measures recommended. Although EIA is a requirement of the Sudan Environmental Protection Act of 2001, EIAs were being undertaken before 2001 for most projects, especially those funded by international organizations and agencies. In most cases, EIA is being conducted by prominent local and international consulting firms and submitted to the HCENR for approval. At the ministerial level, only the Ministry of Transport, Roads and Bridges, the 49 Ministry of Health, and the Ministry of Energy and Mining have established Environmental Units with guidelines for companies working in transport, health and petroleum development. The work of the Sudan Standards and Metrology Organization (SSMO) adds to the legal requirements for environmental protection. At the State Level, only few States have established State Environmental Authorities and hence, the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act (2001) are applied with modifications to suit local problems. 5.2.1 Federal Ministry of Finance and National Economy (MOFEP): The ministry is in charge of the project at the federal level and is signatory to the Grant Agreement (GA) with the World Bank. It has the fiduciary responsibility of ensuring correct use of funds, observance of other conditions of the GA, and reporting to the World Bank. It is also the recipient of the project funds from the World Bank and transferring these to the designated project account. 5.2.2 Federal Advisory Board (FAB): The Federal Advisory Board will meet at least biannually or more often as required by the project requirements. Its key functions will include: • General oversight of project implementation; • Approval of annual work plan (AWP) and Budget; • Annual and mid-year review of project progress and addressing implementation issues; • Review annual report and give directions for improvement of performance, as needed; • Receive audit report and take decisions on audit objections/observations; • Addressing issues which cannot be resolved at SPU and department levels and by the Technical Working Group (TWG) chaired by MFEL; • Approve proposals to restructure the project; and to seek extension of the project closing date, as needed • Review the mid-term review report (MTR) and the project completion report at the close of the project term; and • Recommend to the ministry to issue directions for compliance by state government, PCU and other implementing agencies on issues of importance. 5.3 Institutional Arrangements at Project Level The state-level project bodies described in the sections above, with focal leadership from the ESTSI-CA under the supervision of the MFEL, will be responsible for overall implementation of SLDP and the ESMF, including the following key steps of environmental regulation: o Screening and classification, determination of required assessment process o Supervision of ESIA process and review / quality control of outputs. o Issuance of environmental license / permit o Environmental compliance supervision during project implementation 5.3.1 Project Technical Working Group (TWG) The Technical Working Group (TWG) key functions will include: • Review AWP and annual Budget and recommend for approval to the PSC; • Approve changes in the AWP and budget on the basis of a mid-year review; • Review quarterly progress reports put up by the TSI-CA, and also individual progress reports if put up by UNDP and UNHCR in respect of their respective 50 programs and make suggestions/comments for the benefit of the implementers in order to make improvements in program implementation; • Address inter-agency issues tabled by the TSI-CA and any other implementer; also give appropriate directions in this regard; and • Activities under the project and the sub project. Site inspections jointly with SPU/TSI-CA 5.4 Community Institutions Beside government institutions responsible for environmental management, there are also local institutions that play important roles in environmental management. These include: • Native Administration (Nazer and Chiefs): the Native Administration implements both traditional customary regulations as well as delegate’s authority to implement forest, range, and pasture regulations. In this respect, they organize village land for agriculture and areas for grazing. They also organize nomadic corridors, specify their grazing areas, and mobilize local communities to open fire lines to protect rangelands from bush fires, fight locust attack, prohibit illegal tree felling, and organize use of water resources. Despite changes introduced by the government in the structure of Native Administration, they still play very important roles in natural resource management and mobilization of local communities. • At the village level there are a number of institutions with inputs in environmental management, the most important of which is the village Chief who controls land allotment and takes part in specifying grazing areas. In recent years, nearly all villages have elected popular committees to administer village affairs in coordination and collaboration with the Chief. Any development activity at the village level will starts with permit or request issued by the village committee to be raised to the locality for approval. In the environmental field, such committees play important roles in sanitation and garbage collection beside taking part in mobilization of local communities and providing direct links to the locality for any issues related to village affairs. The roles and responsibilities of the above institutions summarized as in the table (6) below: Table (7) Institutional Arrangements in Environmental Decision – Making: Institution Mandate A. At National Level: Minister chairs the Higher Council for Environment Ministry of Environment & Physical Development Environmental, Forestry and Physical Development Policies The Secretariat of Higher Council for Environment & Develop Environmental Policies / Plans Natural Resources (HCENR) Raise awareness on environment Approves EIAs Sign International Conventions Inspections, monitoring, site visits and overall compliance control Line Ministries Implementation of environmental policies and plans Implement Sectoral Laws Coordinate with State Ministries B. At State Level: Implement State Policies State Ministries Implement Sectoral Laws (National or State Laws) Approval of development activities C. At Local Level: Implement local orders on environment Localities Implement local orders on locality natural resources Popular Communities, CBOs and NGOs Implement State Laws Native Administration, Chiefs and sub-chiefs Approval of projects at Locality Level Implement local orders Mobilize local communities 51 Submit requests for development activities 5.5 Permits Depending on the type and size of the activities to be implemented and according to the National and State legislation requirements, a number of approvals and permits might be required from various governmental agencies (Table 7). Given the scope of the works considered in SLDP2, involvement or authorization of the Higher Council for Environment and Natural Resources (HCENR) or the Federal Ministry of Environment & Physical Planning is not anticipated. Permits and authorizations will be at the state and locality levels, as described in Table 7 below. Table (8) Permits Required for Various Projects in Urban & Rural Areas Project Type Permit required & authority issuing it Agricultural Activities, Locality, State and State Ministry of Agriculture and livestock, State Ministry of including agricultural inputs, Physical planning, SWC tools, irrigation facilities Establishment women farms Community Committee, Women Union, Locality, State Ministry of Physical Planning, Restocking Locality and Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, Ministry of Physical Planning, native administration Small Business including Village Committee, Native administration, Locality & State Ministry of physical Carpentry, Balk smith planning, workshops Providing Rural Transport Community Committee, Native administration, Locality, Trade Union, State, Services Small shops( Min grocery) Community, Locality, Trade Unions, State Small Works Locality, State and State Ministry of Agriculture and livestock, State Ministry of Physical planning, SWC, NFC, 52 Chapter Six: Mitigation Measures and Monitoring & Evaluation 6.1 Mitigation Measures Environmental monitoring of an activity must start with the construction phase and extend to the operation phase. Monitoring measures how an activity is performing in regards to the implementation of mitigation measures during construction and operation. Hence, site visits during activity execution and operation must be carried out to assess how environmental screening and mitigation measures are succeeding or have succeeded in minimizing impacts. Based on the results of the monitoring and evaluation of how well the activity has addressed environmental considerations, changes may be needed to improve the environmental performance of the activity. Environmental Monitoring must be the responsibility of the SPU including: • Compliance monitoring during construction • Monitoring of significant impacts during the operation of the subproject The SLDP Environmental and Social Safeguards Officer must conduct periodic monitoring by visiting the sites of the various activities at least twice a year. Monitoring indicators must be developed for both the construction and operation phases of the activities. Monitoring of construction activities ensure that mitigation measures of construction impacts are being implemented appropriately while the monitoring of operation activities is to ensure that no unforeseen negative impacts arise. The table (7) below summarized the key institution responsible of monitoring of the environmental and social negative impacts 53 Table (9): Mitigation Measures and Responsibilities: Potential Major Mitigation measures Roles and Responsibilities Environmental and Social Impact Issues • Land or water degradation • Contractors should follow code of M& E with the support of due to the additions, construction of water facilities Environmental specialist alterations, maintenance, • Health Hygiene Project coordination Unit and rehabilitation of small- • Awareness raising on environmental Technical working group (TWG) scale irrigation systems. water sanitation Contractors • Water related diseases., • Training of Beneficiaries on Water Procurement Specialist Environmental hygiene Management and ponding issues • Provision of livelihoods options Locality, State and Ministry of • Potential increased water • Provision mosquito nets, Provide Culture, Youth, and Sports consumption due to brick- workers with clean water, garbage bins, immediately making process; also clay Avoid ponding at construction sites as for the bricks is sourced mosquito habitats; Avoid blocking from borrow pits by hand, water flows by designing appropriate in areas that were often culverts/discharging channels; fill in pits previously farmed. In the where necessary; and apply wet season, these pits may environmentally sound measures to fill with stagnant water control mosquitos flies and other pests and contribute to • Operate ponds in a manner that only environmental health allows waste water meeting prescribed problems such as malaria. quality standards leaving the treatment • Groundwater depletion site; ensure that ponds are sized and and soil salinization. operated to retain waste water for an • Irreparable damage to adequate period to complete the and/or loss of physical treatment process cultural resources • Ensure regular emptying; conduct • Chance Finds hygiene education campaign to raise awareness of the health risks of exposed sewage; establish and support affordable pump out services • Close Monitoring and follow up by Project Unit • Traditional water terracing and embankments • Capacity Building • Environmental awareness campaign • Procedures for Chance Find of Physical and Cultural Resources, the chance- finds procedures will be included in the contract. • Stop construction activities and delineate area (ii) Secure area to prevent damage and/or removal of objects (iii) Notify responsible authorities and Ministry of Culture, Youth, and Sports immediately (iv) Work with authorities on decision about how to handle the find and proceed • Reported chance find • • The spread of diseases • Regular vaccination of poultry by vets. MOH, SMOF and SLDP related to poultry breeding Project to work on linking community • Management of chicken with veterinary extension agents from manure and its the state-level to accomplish this contamination potential for activity. This is a regular practice in land, surface water and Kassala and other states in Sudan. groundwater. • Development of simple waste • Management of large management amounts of manure which • Provision of barrels for waste could be polluting the • Designation of Waste areas by 54 environment. Localities • Usage of manure as source of fertilizers. Manure may cause surface and groundwater pollution if mismanaged. The key to a proper management is to determine the nutrient content of the manure, the percentages of those nutrients that are available to crops, and the nutrient requirements of the crop at a realistic yield goal. These three factors will help you to apply the proper amount (agronomic rate), but the method and timing of application will ensure the effectiveness of nutrient you applied. Best management practices will minimize the impact of manure on the environment. • • Land clearing- vegetation • Code of land preparation for contractors MOA, SMOF and SLDP loss • Restoration, • Noise, water pollution, and • re-vegetation and afforestation solid waste disposal. • Proper equipment with mufflers and • Changes in biodiversity insulators; • Soil and land degradation • Time management by keeping to • Agro chemical usage daylight working hours and respecting Groundwater pollution weekends / holidays; • Micro climate changes • Prohibition of idling machinery; • Fire management (bush erection of sound barriers fire) • Proper placing of workshops, generators ,plant or machinery at sufficient distance from settlements or sensitive receptors. Used oil and machinery waste shall be collected, containerized and disposed off periodically and appropriately at designated sites or be reused or sold for reuse locally. Awareness raising of employees • The use of pesticides will not be financed by the project. However, extension efforts for farmers who may use agro-chemicals on good proper pesticide use even if no pesticides are being financed by the project. • In the highly unlikely event of “chance finds’, to ensure works do not contravene Sudan’s national legislation, any small civil works will be supervised by locality or state government staff. ESMF contents will be shared and explained with local stakeholders in plain language. Given the unlikelihood and the localized scale of potential civil works, WB policy is not triggered. • Awareness raising • Use of Natural manure • No tobacco products will be financed by the project. • Weeding • Extension services 55 • Land degradation caused by • Provision of possible additional services MOSA, HAC, SMOF, Localities, overharvesting of seasonal TWG, and SLDP fodder and shrubs. • Training of community /traditional leaders on conflict management • Might Create resource based conflict • Enforcement of laws and regulations • Allocation of destination areas by the locality for new comers • Development of Monitoring and follow up system by Project Unit • May lead to soil erosion, • Training for beneficiaries • SLDP, Ministry of Physical remove of clay/fertile soil • Use on intermediate technology planning and Community on the surface • Use of plastic irrigation pipes Leaders • Might create pollution • Installation of sedimentation basins, oil • Procurement Specialist skimmers, • SLDP • Silt barriers, • Ministry of Physical planning • Biological attenuation ponds such as • Community Leaders engineered wetlands, • Evaporation ponds; • Reuse and recycling as far as possible; Collection at central points; transport to a licensed waste management facility, if not available then incineration or burial, where the impact on air, soil and water is proven to be acceptable by an appropriate assessment. • • (i) • 6.2 Training and Capacity Building Awareness and training programs will be conducted at three levels as indicated in the table below. The nature of capacity building is sensitization and awareness programs rather than a formal training. A sample training requirements for various groups is included in table 9 below. Table (10): Training Requirements Activity/Stakeholders Authorities Approval Government Local Staff Government SPU & Local CBOs NGOs Contractors Workers & Stakeholders/ / Linkages between environmental and social management and A S A A sustainable livelihoods Local EA legislation and relevant environmental policies, SDGs A S A A Potential localized impacts of activities and suitable mitigation A S A S measures Addressing and land acquisition and access to resources through A S A S resettlement planning and compensation Use of the Environmental Guidelines & WB Safeguards A A A S Chance find Procedure A S A S Methods of stakeholders involvement – PRA A S S A Cumulative impacts assessment A S A A Potential environmental and social activities A S A A Stakeholders lesson-learning and review A S - - Veterinary and Agricultural Extension Training A A T 56 Conflict Sensitive Planning and dissemination of IDPs National Policy S S S S Community Environmental Action Plan S S A S Legend: T = Detailed training, S = Sensitization to the issues, A = Awareness-raising Source: Adapted from World Bank (2005), ESMF Toolkit, adapted 2011 6.3 Stakeholder consultations and Participation: The ESMF preparation included extensive stakeholder and participation consultations. Key project stakeholders were identified for consultations and these included Government Ministries, State Agencies/ Organizations’/ and Departments, Project offices, Non- governmental organization and local communities, both the affected and host communities to discuss the SLDP project and the key elements of the ESMF. 6.4 Public Consultations and Participation Public participation may be used to convey information about a proposed project’s activities, clear up misunderstandings, allow better understanding of relevant issues and how they may be resolved and tackle controversial issues while the project is still in its early phases. Components of effective participation include: • Identification of groups/individuals interested in or affected by the proposed road project; • Provision of accurate, understandable, pertinent and timely information; • Dialogue between those responsible for decisions and those affected by them; • Assimilation of public views with the decision; and, • Feedback about actions taken and how the public influenced the decision. Consultation with relevant stakeholders should be conducted throughout the project cycle but timed to coincide with significant planning and decision-making activities, i.e., before, during and after the EIA. Forms of consultation include: • Individual/personal interviews; • Community meetings; • Advisory meetings; • Public hearings; • Information brochures/notices; and, • Press conferences and questionnaires. • Minutes of meetings conducted with the public should be recorded for submission as part of the EIA report. Various persons and institutions were consulted in the project area in the process of preparing this ESMF. In addition, two public consultations and participation workshops were held in during mid-term evaluation in Kassala and Khartoum, which were attended by over 110 stakeholders including the relevant line ministries at state level, academia, practitioners, NGOs, CBOs and both the affected and host communities. In addition, fourteen meetings were held with displaced persons and vulnerable host communities’ in the project location using participatory approach the purpose of these consultations is to allow for the identification of the main issues and how the concerns of all parties should be taken into account and to assess the social and environmental impact of the project. During the appraisal workshop also many consultation meeting were conducted at state and community level (Annex F). 57 Annex A: List of Environmental Legislation in Sudan Soil Conservation 1. Rural Water Development Corporation Act (1967) 2. Allotment of Lands for the Development of the Mechanized Farming Corporation Act 3. Parts of the National Parks, Sanctuaries and Reserves Regulation (1939), issued under the Preservation of Wild Animals Ordinance (1935) 4. Gezira Scheme (1960) 5. Mining and Quarries Act (1972) 6. Mining and Quarries Act (1973) 7. Mechanized Farming Corporation (Establishment) Regulations (1975) 8. Plant Disease Act (1913) 9. Agricultural Pest Control Act (1919) 10. Seeds Act (1990) Forest Conservation 1. Forests Act (1989) 2. Forests National Corporation Act (1932) 3. Central Forests Act (1932) - repealed but rules and regulations effective until repealed 4. Provisional Forests Acts (1932) - repealed but rules and regulations continue in effect until repealed Wildlife and Protected Areas 1. Wildlife Conservation and National Park Act (1987) 2. Wildlife Conservation Forests Act (1981) 3. Wildlife Protection Act (1936) 4. Hides and Animals Skins Act (1935) 5. Preservation of Wild Animals Act (1935) 6. Game Regulations (1935) 7. National Parks, Sanctuaries and Reserves Regulation (1939) 8. Arms Ammunition and Explosives Ordinance (1939) 9. Local Government Act Water Resources 1. Nile Water Pump Control Act (1939) 2. Irrigation and Flood Control Act (1990) 3. Environmental Health Act (1975), amended (1993) 4. Public Health Act (1935) 5. Rural Water Development Corporation Act (1966) 6. General Electricity and Water Corporation Act (1966) 7. Water Hyacinth Control Act (1960) 8. Fresh Water Fisheries Ordinance (1954) 9. River Transport Ordinance (1958) 10. Nile Pumps Control Ordinance (1939) 11. Nile Pumps Use Control (Tendencies) Regulations (1969) 12. Nile Pumps Control (Standby) Regulations (1953) 13. Nile Pumps Control (general) Regulations (1951) 14. Public Ferries Ordinance (1939) 15. Regulations of Inland Navigation Act (1980) Marine Resources and Coastal Zone Management 1. Maritime Act (1961) 2. Marine Fisheries Act (1973) 3. General Regulations and Control of Merchant Shipping Act (1971) 4. Harbours and Shipping Ordinance (1961) 5. Terrestrial Waters and Continental Shelf Act (1970) Animal Resources 1. Rabies Act (1974) 58 2. Animal Disease Free Zone Act (1973) 3. Diseases of Animals Act (1901) 4. Hides and Animal Skins Act (1954) 5. Animals Export and Import Act (1913) Hazardous Substances 1. Pesticides Act (1974) 2. Food Control Act (1973) 3. Pharmacy and Poisons Act (1913) 4. Narcotics Act 5. Industrial Safety Act (1978) 6. Sulphur Ordinance (1932) Energy and Mining 1. Mines and Quarries Act (1974) 2. Mining and Quarries Regulations (1973) 3. Investment Act (1989) 4. Petroleum Act (1931) Environmental Health (Including Pollution Control) 1. Environmental Health Act (1975) amended (1993) 2. Public Health Act (1975) 3. Locusts Destruction Act (1907) 4. Plant Diseases Act (1913) 5. Investment Act (1989) 6. Industrial Safety Act (1976) 7. Road Traffic Act (1983) 8. Quarantine Act (1974) 9. Industrial Waste Local Order (1971), Khartoum North Cultural Environment 1. Antiquities Ordinance (1952) 2. Organization of Higher Education Act (1990) 59 Annex B1: Good Practice Environmental Procedures Introduction The prevention of injury and/or illness to site personnel and the public, damage to the Works and to public and private property, protection of the environment, and compliance with applicable laws, shall be the primary objectives of the contractor. All work shall be carried out in a way as to minimize disturbance and avoid dangers to the public. Selected minimum requirements are outlined in these Good Practice Environmental Procedures with which contractors shall comply. Given that these Procedures cannot cover every eventuality, the contractor shall be expected to exercise good judgment in all such matters, even though not mentioned in these Procedures, and shall take all necessary measures to meet his responsibility with respect to environmental matters. The Contractor shall, throughout the execution and completion of the Works and remedying of any defects therein: • Have full regard for the safety of all persons on Site and keep the Site and the Works in an orderly state appropriate to the avoidance of danger to any person; • Know and understand all laws governing his activities along with any site requirements and work site hazards; • Take all necessary measures to protect his personnel, other persons, the general public and the environment; • Avoid damage or nuisance to persons or to property of the public or others resulting from pollution, noise or other causes arising as a consequence of carrying out the Works. Protection of the Environment The Contractor shall comply with all environmental requirements, rules and regulations under Sudanese laws, laid down by Sudanese Authorities or issued by the Employer or the Engineer. Specific attention should be paid to regulations for materials, including hazardous substances or wastes under his control. The Contractor shall not dump, release or otherwise discharge or dispose of any such dump without the authorization of the Engineer. When releases resulting from Contractor action occur, the Contractor shall take proper precautionary measures to counter any known environmental or health hazards associated with such releases. These would include remedial procedures such as spill control and containment and notification of the proper authorities. Air Pollution The Contractor shall take all necessary measures to limit pollution from dust and any windblown materials during the Works, including wetting down with water on a regular basis during construction. The Contractor shall ensure that all trucks leaving the Site are properly covered to prevent discharge of dust, rocks, sand, etc. Water Pollution The Contractor shall not dispose of waste solvents, petroleum products, toxic chemicals, or solutions in the village drainage system or watercourse, and shall not dump or bury any garbage on the Site. He shall maintain the Site in a sanitary condition and shall remove from the Surface of the ground all rubbish, surplus spill, and litter, which may have been left on site. All wastes shall be taken to an approved disposal facility regularly as specified by the locality. The Contractor shall dispose of all fluids and test pumping discharge in a manner that does not cause contamination or nuisance. He shall also be responsible to control all run-offs, erosion, etc. Where a temporary reduction in downstream flow or discoloration by suspended solids 60 from excavations is, in the opinion of the Engineer, unavoidable, the Contractor shall make alternative arrangements for supplying all effected users throughout the period of flow reduction or coloration. Solid Waste General Housekeeping: The Contractor shall maintain the Site and any ancillary areas used and occupied for performance of the Works in a clean, tidy and rubbish-free condition at all times. Upon completion of work, the Contractor shall clear away and remove from the Site all Contractors’ Equipment, surplus material, rubbish and temporary works of any kind, and leave the Site in a clean condition to the satisfaction of the Engineer. Rubbish Removal and Disposal: The Contractor shall comply with the local orders of the locality and requirements for the disposal of rubbish and waste. No waste shall be burnt on site unless approved by the Engineer. Noise Control The Contractor shall adopt the best practicable means of minimizing noise. All equipment shall be maintained in good mechanical order and fitted with the appropriate silencers, mufflers, or acoustic covers where applicable. Stationary noise sources shall be sited as far away as possible from noise-sensitive areas, and where necessary acoustic barriers shall be used to shield them. 61 Annex B2: Environmental Contract Clauses Clause No. ___ Environmental Management, Safety and Security 1. Before the order to commence civil works, the contractor is required to implement the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) as specified in the Environmental Impact assessment (EIA) prepared for the particular road works. The plan shall spell out how the contractor should achieve environmental targets and objectives specified in the EMP and agreed upon by the Environmental Coordinator, Environmental Management Unit, and the Ministry of Environment and Physical Development. The plan shall include, to the extent practicable and reasonable, all steps to be taken by the Contractor to protect the environment in accordance with the provisions of the Environment Act, 2001 and Environmental Guidelines for Transport Projects, 2005. Where the EMP does not exist, the clauses obtained herein shall form the basis of a rehabilitation plan. 2. Notwithstanding the contractor’s obligation under the above clause, the Contractor shall implement all measures necessary to restore the sites to acceptable standards and abide by environmental performance indicators specified under the EMP to measure progress towards achieving objectives during execution or upon completion of civil works. These measures shall include, but not limited to the following: 3. (a) Minimize the effect of dust on the surrounding environment resulting from earth mixing sites, asphalt mixing sites, dispersing coal ashes, vibrating equipment, temporary access roads, etc to ensure safety, health and the protection of workers and communities living downward of dust producing activities. (b) Ensure that noise levels emanating from machinery, vehicles and noisy construction activities are kept at a minimum for the safety, health, and protection of workers within the vicinity of high noise levels and communities near rock – blasting areas. (c) Ensure that existing water flow regimes in rivers, streams and other natural or irrigation channels is maintained and / or re – established where they are disrupted due to civil works being carried out. (d) Prevent bitumen, oils, lubricants and waste water used / produced during the execution of works from entering into rivers, streams, irrigation channels and other natural water bodies / reservoirs and also ensure that stagnant water in uncovered borrow pits is treated in the best way to avoid creating possible breeding grounds for mosquitoes. (e) Prevent and minimize the impacts of quarrying, earth borrowing, piling and building of temporary construction camps and access roads on the bio – physical environment including protected areas and arable lands; local communities and their settlements. In as much as possible restore / rehabilitate all sites to acceptable standards. (f) Upon discovery of ancient heritage, relics, or anything that might or believed to be of archaeological or historical importance during the execution of works, report such findings to the Department of Antiquities, in fulfillment of the Environment Act, 2001, and outline measures aimed at protecting such historical or archaeological resources. (g) Discourage construction workers from engaging in the exploitation of natural resources such as hunting, fishing, collection of forest products or any other activity that might have a negative impact on the social and economic welfare of the local communities. (h) Implement soil erosion control measures in order to avoid surface run off and prevent siltation, etc. (i) Ensure that garbage, sanitation, and drinking water facilities are provided in construction workers camps. 62 (j) Ensure in as much as possible that local materials are utilized to avoid importation of foreign material and long distance transportation. (k) Ensure public safety and meet traffic safety requirements for the operation of work to avoid accidents. 3. The contractor shall indicate the period within which he / she shall maintain status on site after completion of civil works to ensure significant perturbations arising from such works have been taken into account. 4. The contractor shall adhere to the proposed activity implementation schedule and the monitoring plan / strategy to ensure effective feedback of monitoring information to both project management and the Environmental Specialist, so that impact management can be implemented properly and if necessary, adapt to changing and unforeseen conditions. 5. The Project Coordinator, the Environmental Specialist, in conjunction with the Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Physical Development, shall inspect significant sites where civil works have been carried out and proposed mitigation measures implemented and shall give certification regarding the adequacy or inadequacy of rehabilitation measures carried out in the bio – physical environment and compensation for socio – economic disruption resulting from implementation of civil works. 6. If the contractor fails to implement the approved EMP, the Project Coordinator and Environmental Specialist shall seek legal redress through the Ministry of Environment, Forestry, and Physical Development and appropriate penalties shall be instituted in accordance with the provisions of the Environment Protection Act, 2001. SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE CONSIDERED Worksite / Camp Site Waste Management • All vessels (drums, containers, bags, etc) containing oil, fuel, surfacing material and other hazardous chemicals must be bonded in order to contain spillage. All waste containers, litter and any other waste generated during the construction shall be collected and disposed off at designated disposal sites in line with the provisions of the Environment Act, 2001 and Locality orders. • All drainage and effluent from storage areas, workshops and camp sites shall be captured and treated before being discharged into the drainage system in line with the provisions of the Environment Act, 2001. • Used oil from maintenance shall be collected and disposed off appropriately at designated sites or be re – used or sold for re – use locally. • Entry of runoff to the site shall be restricted by construction diversion channels or holding structures such as banks, drains dams, etc to reduce the potential of soil erosion and water pollution. • Construction waste shall not be left in stockpiles along the road. Waste and other excess material shall be used for rehabilitating borrow areas and landscaping around the road. • If other spoil disposal sites are necessary, they shall be located in areas of low land use value and where they will not result in material being easily washed into drainage channels. Whenever possible, spoiled materials should be placed in low – lying areas and should be compacted and planted with species indigenous to the locality. Material Excavation • Contractors shall obtain the appropriate license / permits from relevant authorities to operate quarries or borrow areas. • The location of quarries and borrow areas shall be subject to approval by relevant authorities including traditional authorities if the land on which the quarry or borrow area falls is traditional land, Environmental Specialist. 63 • Extraction sites shall not be located in the vicinity of settlement areas, cultural sites, wetlands, or any other valued ecosystem component. • Extraction sites shall not be located adjacent to stream channels wherever possible to avoid siltation of river channels. Where they are located near water sources, borrow pits and perimeter drains shall surround quarry sites. • Extraction sites shall not be located in forest reserves. However, where there are no other alternatives, permission shall be obtained from the Department of Forestry and an Environmental Impact Assessment shall be conducted. • Extraction sites shall not be located on high or steep ground or in areas of high scenic value. • Only sites that can easily be rehabilitated shall be chosen. Areas with minimal vegetation cover such as flat and bare ground or areas covered with grass only or covered with shrubs of height less than 1.5 m. • Extraction site boundaries shall clearly be demarcated and marked to minimize vegetation clearing. • Vegetation clearing shall be restricted to the area required for safe operation of construction work. Vegetation clearing shall be done for not more than three months in advance of operation. • Extraction sites shall not be located in archaeological areas. Excavations in the vicinity of such areas shall proceed with great care and shall be done in the presence of staff from the Antiquities Department. • Stockpile areas shall be located in areas where trees can act as buffers to prevent dust pollution. Perimeter drains shall be built around stockpile areas. Sediment and other pollutant traps shall be located at drainage exist from workings. Rehabilitation and Soil Erosion Prevention • To the extent practicable, rehabilitate the site progressively so that the rate of rehabilitation is similar to the rate of construction. • Always remove and retain topsoil for subsequent rehabilitation. Soils shall not be stripped when they are wet as this can lead to soil compaction and loss of structure. • Topsoil shall not be stored in large heaps. Low mounds of no more than 1 – 2 m high are recommended. Re-vegetate the stockpile to protect the soil from erosion, discourage weeds and maintain an active population of beneficial soil microbes. Locate stockpiles where they will not be disrupted by future construction activities. To the extent practicable, reinstate natural drainage patterns where they have been altered or impaired. Remove toxic materials and dispose them off in designated sites. Backfill excavated areas with soils or overburden that is free of foreign material that could pollute ground water and soil. Identify potentially toxic overburden and screen with suitable material to prevent mobilization of toxins. Ensure the reshaped land is formed so as to be inherently stable, adequately drained, and suitable for the desired long - term land use and that would allow natural regeneration of vegetation. Minimize the long – term visual impacts by creating landforms, which are compatible with the adjacent landscape. Minimize erosion by wind and water both during and after the process of reinstatement. Compacted surfaces shall be deep ripped to relieve compaction unless subsurface conditions dictate otherwise. 64 Re-vegetate the area with plant species that will control erosion, provide vegetative diversity, and that will through succession; contribute to a stable and compatible ecosystem. The choice of plant species for rehabilitation shall be done in consultation with local research institutions, Forest Department and the local people, as they will be long – term beneficiaries. Water Resources Management • The contractor shall at all costs avoid conflicting with water demands for local communities. • Abstraction of water, both surface and underground, shall only be done with the consultation of the local community and after obtaining a permit from the relevant Water Authority. • Abstraction of water from wetlands shall be avoided. Where necessary, permits have to be obtained from relevant authorities. • Temporary damming of streams and rivers shall be done in such a way that disruption of water supplies to communities downstream is avoided and maintain the ecological balance of the river system. • No construction water containing spoils or site effluents, especially cement and oil, shall be allowed to flow into natural water drainage courses. • Wash water from washing out of equipment shall not be discharged into watercourses or road drains. • Site spoils and temporary stockpiles shall be located away from the drainage system and surface run off shall be directed away from stockpiles to prevent erosion. Traffic Management • Location of access roads / detours shall be done in consultation with the local community especially, where access road may traverse important ecosystem components. Access roads shall not traverse wetland areas. • Upon the completion of civil works, all access roads shall be ripped off and rehabilitated. • Access roads shall be sprinkled with water, at least five times a day in settled areas and three times in unsettled areas to suppress dust emissions. Blasting • Blasting activities shall not take place in the vicinity of settlement areas, cultural sites, or wetlands. • Blasting activities shall be done during working hours and local communities shall be consulted on the proposed blasting times. • Noise levels reaching the communities from blasting activities shall not exceed 90 decibels. Health and Safety • The contractor, in advance of the construction work, shall amount an awareness and hygiene campaign. Workers and local residents shall be sensitized on health risks particularly of AIDS. • Adequate road signs to warn pedestrians and motorists of construction activities, diversions, etc shall be provided at appropriate points. • Construction vehicles shall not exceed maximum speed limit of 40 km per hour. 65 Annex C1: Environmental Check List: The output from the screening process is often a document called an Initial Environmental Examination or Evaluation (IEE). The main conclusion will be a classification of the project according to its likely environmental sensitivity. This will determine whether an EIA or EMP is needed and if so to what detail. Will the project generate the following impacts? Yes No Remarks 1 Loss of trees 2 Soil erosion/degradation in the area 3 Affect soil salinity and alkalinity 4 Pollution to land 5 Dust emissions 6 Solid and liquid wastes 7 Spread of HIV/Aids and other diseases 8 Potential for conflict between beneficiaries 9 Pressure on land resources 10 Impact on flora and fauna (incl. introduction of exotic plants and animals) 11 Long term depletion of water 12 Reduced flow of water 13 Involve drainage of wetlands and other permanently flooded areas 14 Divert water resource from its natural course/location 15 Cause poor water drainage and increase the risk of water- related diseases such as malaria. 16 Pollution of aquatic ecosystems by sedimentation and agrochemicals 17 Noise 18 Health hazards associated with irrigational system 19 Affected families who are likely to lose their house due to construction activity 20 Loss of soil fertility 21 Incidence of flooding 22 Loss of land 23 Loss of properties –houses, structures 24 Loss trees, fruit trees by households 25 Loss of crops by people 26 Loss of access to river/forests/grazing area 27 Loss or degradation of natural habitats 28 Affect the aesthetic quality of the landscape 29 Impact cultural site, graveyard land 30 Conflict over local agricultural land/water rsrcs 31 Loss communal facilities 32 Social integration (access to services) 33 Economic integration (inter-linkages in sources) 34 Loss of other livelihood system 35 Subproject located within or nearby environmentally sensitive areas 36 Significant complain from land owners authorities and public 37 Human exposure to other health risk 38 Specific gender issues. If the answer to any of the above is ‘yes,’ at minimum an EMP needs to be included with the subproject/activity application. 66 Land acquisition and access to Resources Will the sub-project: Yes No Remarks Require that land (public or private) be required (temporarily or permanently) for 1 its development? Use land that is currently occupied or regularly used for productive purposes (e.g. gardening, farming, pasture, fishing 2 locations, forests) Displace individuals, families or 3 businesses? Adversely affect small communal cultural property such as funeral and burial sites, 4 or sacred groves? Result in involuntary restriction of access by people to legally designated parks and 5 protected areas? If the answer to any of the above is ‘yes’, there will be need to prepare a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) in accordance with the project’s Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) for the subproject/activity application 67 Annex C2: Environmental Data Sheet (EDS) for Proposed Program Geographical Location: Program Reference No.: Program Name: Activities included in the Program: Program Location: (besides geographic location, information about the key environmental characteristics of the area likely to be affected by the program, and proximity of any protected areas or sites or critical natural habitats) Environmental Issues: (identified or suspected in project) Justification/Rationale for Environmental Category: (presents reasons for environmental category selected) Is this Categorization in Harmony with the Sudan Environmental Protection Act (2001)? Proposed Assessment and Management Instruments: (to mitigate environmental issues described above) • No EA or EMP required (Cat C) • Only simplified EMP required (Cat B) • ESIA and specific EMP required (Cat A) Reporting Schedule: (Is there a separate environmental analysis? If yes, when is it due?) Anticipated appraisal date Date for first draft Current status Remarks: (gives status of any other environmental studies, lists local groups and local NGOs consulted.) 68 Annex C3: Environmental Appraisal/ Screening Form Program Name: Ref. No: 1. Type of Sub-Projects included 2. Does the program require an environmental screening Yes No If No, go to Question 20 3 Was the environmental screening and EDS completed satisfactorily? Yes No 4 Has any clarification of the EDS been requested? Yes No 5 Has clarification been received? Yes No 6 Is an Environmental Assessment required for any of the sub-projects? Yes No If No, go to Question 7 If Yes, go to Question 9 7 Has the EDS information been verified during Field Appraisal? Yes No 8 Was the information found to be satisfactory? Yes No If No, give details: On the basis of environmental issues, is the proposed program and its sub-projects acceptable for funding under project? Signed and Stamped: Date 69 Annex D: Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): General Content of an EA Report Executive It should contain a concise statement of the project objectives and a brief project description in Summary: addition to a description of key project findings and recommendations for environmental management. Policy, Legal, and Describe the pertinent regulations, permitting conditions and standards governing Administrative environmental quality, health and safety, protection of sensitive areas, land use control, etc. Framework: Tables should be used to list applicable standards and note which authorities are responsible for their application. Where there are no relevant local standards, suitable international norms may be used. Project Objectives This section should describe the need for the project in the context of the local and national and Description: situation and strategy. The effect on economic and social development goals of the locality, country and region should be described. If the project is an element of an overall development program in the area, then a description of the other program elements must be presented. A description of the relevant parts of the project should be provided using maps and including the following information: location; general layout; size; capacity; etc.; pre-construction activities; construction activities; operation and maintenance activities; and life span. Baseline Data This section should include descriptions of the area of influence or study area and the relevant physical, biological, and socioeconomic conditions. This should include any topics falling under the safeguard polices of the World Bank. The data presented should be relevant to decision making regarding project location, design, operation, and mitigation measures for adverse impacts. The source, accuracy, and reliability of the data should be clearly stated. Environmental A prediction of the changes in the environment resulting from project construction and Impacts & operation are to be considered, and an assessment of the effect on the surrounding physical, Mitigation biological, and social environment, should be presented. This should include positive as well Measures: as negative impacts. Mitigation measures should be identified as well as any negative impacts for which there are no mitigative measures. This section should also identify and estimate the extent and quality of available data, key data gaps, and uncertainties associated with predictions, and specific topics that do not require further attention. Analysis of This section should provide a brief description of possible alternatives to the project including Alternatives: the ‘no action’ alternative. These may include alternative location, site layout, technologies, design options, and management systems. The reasons why the various alternatives considered were rejected should be documented. Environmental This section should include details of the management initiatives to be implemented during Management both the construction and operational phase of the project. The EMP should have three Plan: main components: (i) Environmental mitigation plan: Recommend feasible and cost-effective measures to prevent or reduce significant negative impacts to acceptable levels. Estimate the impacts and costs of those measures, and of the institutional and training requirements to implement them. Consider compensation to affected parties for impacts, which cannot be mitigated. Prepare a management plan including proposed work programs, budget estimates, schedules, staffing and training requirements, and other necessary support services to implement the mitigating measures. (ii) Institutional capacity and needs: Review the authority and capability of institutions and recommend steps to strengthen or expand them so that the management and monitoring plans in the environmental assessment can be implemented. The recommendations may extend to management procedures and training, staffing, operation and maintenance training, budgeting, and financial support. (iii) Monitoring Plan: Prepare a detailed plan to monitor the implementation of mitigating measures and the impacts of the project during construction and operation. 70 Annex E: Sample “Checklist” ESMP PROJECT, COUNTRY: CLIENT: Environmental Management Plan (EMP) Checklist for Civil Works General Guidelines for use of EMP checklist: For construction projects that have low and clearly defined environmental and social risks, such as the cleanup and demolition of the remains of the Marche Central, a streamlined approach is applied to mainstream the World Bank’s environmental safeguards requirements, as well as general good international practice into projects. The EMP checklist-type format covers typical key mitigation measures to civil works contracts with small, localized impacts or of a simple, low risk nature. This format provides the key elements of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) to meet the minimum World Bank Environmental Assessment requirements for Category B projects under OP 4.01. The intention of this checklist is that it offers practical, concrete, and implementable guidance to Contractors and supervising Engineers for simple civil works contracts. It should be completed during the final design phase and, either freestanding or in combination with any environmental documentation produced under national law (e.g. EIA reports), constitute an integral part of the bidding documents and eventually the works contracts. The checklist EMP has the following sections: Part A includes a descriptive part that characterizes the project, specifies institutional and regulatory aspects, describes technical project content, outlines any potential need for capacity building and briefly characterizes the public consultation process. This section should indicatively be up to two pages long. Attachments for additional information may be supplemented as needed. Part B includes a screening checklist of potential environmental and social impacts, where activities and potential environmental issues can be checked in a simple Yes/No format. If any given activity/issue is triggered by checking “yes”, a reference to the appropriate section in the table in the subsequent Part C can be followed, which contains clearly formulated environmental and social management and mitigation measures. Part C represents the environmental monitoring plan to follow up proper implementation of the measures triggered under Part B. It has the same format as required for MPs produced under standard safeguards requirements for Category B projects. Part D contains a simple monitoring plan to enable both the Contractor as well as authorities and the World Bank specialists to monitoring due implementation of environmental management and protection measures and detect deviations and shortcomings in a timely manner. Part B and C have been structured in a way to provide concrete and enforceable environmental and social measures, which are understandable to non-specialists (such as Contractor’s site managers) and are easy to check and enforce. The EMP should be included in the BoQ (bill of quantities) and the implementation priced by the bidders. Part D has also been designed intentionally simple to enable monitoring of key parameters with simple means and non-specialist staff. 71 CONTENTS A) General Project and Site Information B) Safeguards Information C) Mitigation Measures D) Monitoring Plan 72 PART A: GENERAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION INSTITUTIONAL & ADMINISTRATIVE Country Country Project title Project Name Scope of project and Very brief description (max 1 paragraph) activity Institutional WB Project Local Counterpart and/or Recipient arrangements (Project Team Management (Name and contacts) Leader) Implementation Safeguard Local Counterpart Local Contactor arrangements Supervision Supervision Inspectorate (Name and contacts) Supervision SITE DESCRIPTION Name of site Describe site location Attachement 1: Site Map [ ]Y [ ] N Who owns the land? Description of geographic, physical, biological, geological, hydrographic and socio- economic context Locations and distance for material sourcing, especially aggregates, water, stones? LEGISLATION Identify national & local legislation & permits that apply to project activity PUBLIC CONSULTATION Identify when / where the public consultation process took place INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY BUILDING Will there be any [ ] N or [ ]Y if Yes, Attachment 2 includes the capacity building program capacity building? 73 PART B: SAFEGUARDS SCREENING AND TRIGGERS ENVIRONMENTAL /SOCIAL SCREENING FOR SAFEGUARDS TRIGGERS Activity/Issue Status Triggered Actions A. Roads rehabilitation [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section A below B. New construction of small traffic infrastructure [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section A below C. Impacts on surface drainage system [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section B below Will the site activity D. Historic building(s) and districts [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section C below include/involve any of the following?? E. Acquisition of land10 [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section D below 11 F. Hazardous or toxic materials [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section E below G. Impacts on forests and/or protected areas [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section F below H. Risk of unexploded ordinance (UXO) [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section G below I. Traffic and Pedestrian Safety [] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section H below 10Land acquisitions includes displacement of people, change of livelihood encroachment on private property this is to land that is purchased/transferred and affects people who are living and/or squatters and/or operate a business (kiosks) on land that is being acquired. 11 Toxic / hazardous material includes but is not limited to asbestos, toxic paints, noxious solvents, removal of lead paint, etc. 74 PART C: MITIGATION MEASURES ACTIVITY PARAMETER MITIGATION MEASURES CHECKLIST 0. General Conditions Notification and (a) The local construction and environment inspectorates and communities have been notified of upcoming activities Worker Safety (b) The public has been notified of the works through appropriate notification in the media and/or at publicly accessible sites (including the site of the works) (c) All legally required permits have been acquired for construction and/or rehabilitation (d) The Contractor formally agrees that all work will be carried out in a safe and disciplined manner designed to minimize impacts on neighboring residents and environment. (e) Workers’ PPE will comply with international good practice (always hardhats, as needed masks and safety glasses, harnesses and safety boots) (f) Appropriate signposting of the sites will inform workers of key rules and regulations to follow. A. General Air Quality (a) During excavation works dust control measures shall be employed, e.g. by spraying and moistening the ground Rehabilitation and /or (b) Demolition debris, excavated soil and aggregates kept in controlled area and sprayed with water mist to reduce dust Construction Activities (c) During pneumatic drilling or breaking of pavement and foundations dust shall be suppressed by ongoing water spraying and/or installing dust screen enclosures at site (d) The surrounding environment (side walks, roads) shall be kept free of soil and debris to minimize dust (e) There will be no open burning of construction / waste material at the site (f) All machinery will comply with Polish emission regulations, shall well maintained and serviced and there will be no excessive idling of construction vehicles at sites Noise (a) Construction noise will be limited to restricted times agreed to in the permit (b) During operations the engine covers of generators, air compressors and other powered mechanical equipment shall be closed, and equipment placed as far away from residential areas as possible Water Quality (a) The site will establish appropriate erosion and sediment control measures such as e.g. hay bales and / or silt fences to prevent sediment from moving off site and causing excessive turbidity in canalization and nearby streams and rivers Waste management (a) Waste collection and disposal pathways and sites will be identified for all major waste types expected from excavation, demolition and construction activities. (b) Mineral construction and demolition wastes will be separated from general refuse, organic, liquid and chemical wastes by on-site sorting and stored in appropriate containers. (c) Construction waste will be collected and disposed properly by licensed collectors (d) The records of waste disposal will be maintained as proof for proper management as designed. (e) Whenever feasible Contractor will reuse and recycle appropriate and viable materials (except when containing asbestos) B. Impacts on surface Water Quality (a) There will be no unregulated extraction of groundwater, nor uncontrolled discharge of process waters, cement slurries, or any other drainage system contaminated waters into the ground or adjacent streams or rivers; the Contractor will obtain all necessary licenses and permits for water extraction and regulated discharge into the public wastewater system. (b) There will be proper storm water drainage systems installed and care taken not to silt, pollute, block or otherwise negatively impact natural streams, rivers, ponds and lakes by construction activities (c) There will be procedures for prevention of and response to accidental spills of fuels, lubricants and other toxic or noxious substances (d) Construction vehicles / machinery washed only in designated areas where runoff not polluting surface water bodies 75 ACTIVITY PARAMETER MITIGATION MEASURES CHECKLIST C. Historic building(s) Cultural Heritage (a) If construction works take place close to a designated historic structure, or are located in a designated historic district, notification shall be made and approvals/permits be obtained from local authorities and all construction activities planned and carried out in line with local and national legislation. (b) It shall be ensured that provisions are put in place so that artifacts or other possible “chance finds” encountered in excavation or construction are noted and registered, responsible officials contacted, and works activities delayed or modified to account for such finds. D. Acquisition of land Land Acquisition (c) If expropriation of land was not expected but is required, or if loss of access to income of legal or illegal users of land was Plan/Framework not expected but may occur, that the Bank’s Task Team Leader shall be immediately consulted. (d) The approved Land Acquisition Plan/Framework (if required by the project) will be implemented E. Toxic materials Asbestos management (a) If asbestos is located on the project site, it shall be marked clearly as hazardous material (b) When possible the asbestos will be appropriately contained and sealed to minimize exposure (c) The asbestos prior to removal (if removal is necessary) will be treated with a wetting agent to minimize asbestos dust (d) Asbestos will be handled and disposed by skilled & experienced professionals (e) If asbestos material is be stored temporarily, the wastes should be securely enclosed inside closed containments and marked appropriately. Security measures will be taken against unauthorized removal from the site. (f) The removed asbestos will not be reused Toxic / hazardous waste (a) Temporarily storage on site of all hazardous or toxic substances will be in safe containers labeled with details of management composition, properties and handling information (b) The containers of hazardous substances shall be placed in an leak-proof container to prevent spillage (c) The wastes shall be transported by specially licensed carriers and disposed in a licensed facility. (d) Paints with toxic ingredients or solvents or lead-based paints will not be used F. Affected forests, Ecosystem protection (a) All recognized natural habitats, wetlands and protected areas in the immediate vicinity of the activity will not be damaged or wetlands and/or protected exploited, all staff will be strictly prohibited from hunting, foraging, logging or other damaging activities. areas (b) A survey and an inventory shall be made of large trees in the vicinity of the construction activity, large trees shall be marked and cordoned off with fencing, their root system protected, and any damage to the trees avoided (c) Adjacent wetlands and streams shall be protected from construction site run-off with appropriate erosion and sediment control feature to include by not limited to hay bales and silt fences (d) There will be no unlicensed borrow pits, quarries or waste dumps in adjacent areas, especially not in protected areas. G. Risk of unexploded Hazard to human health and (a) Before start of any excavation works the Contractor will verify that the construction area has been checked and cleared ordinance (UXO) safety regarding UXO by the appropriate authorities (b) No tobacco products will be financed by the project (c) No use of pesticides will be financed by the project H Traffic and pedestrian Direct or indirect hazards to (d) In compliance with national regulations the Contractor will insure that the construction site is properly secured and safety public traffic and construction related traffic regulated. This includes but is not limited to pedestrians by construction Signposting, warning signs, barriers and traffic diversions: site will be clearly visible and the public warned of all activities potential hazards Traffic management system and staff training, especially for site access and near-site heavy traffic. Provision of safe passages and crossings for pedestrians where construction traffic interferes. Adjustment of working hours to local traffic patterns, e.g. avoiding major transport activities during rush hours or times of livestock movement If required, active traffic management by trained and visible staff at the site for safe passage for the public Ensuring safe and continuous access to all adjacent office facilities, shops and residences during construction 76 PART D: MONITORING PLAN Phase What Where How When Why Cost Who (Is the (Is the (Is the (Define the (Is the (if not (Is parameter to parameter to parameter frequency / parameter included responsible be be to be or being in project for monitored?) monitored?) monitored?) continuous?) monitored?) budget) monitoring?) During activity site access at the site check if before safety of marginal, Contractor, preparation traffic design and launch of general within Engineer management project construction public, budget at the site planning Availability foresee timely of waste diligent detection of disposal in site vicinity procedures waste facilities on site before start disposal Marginal, of bottlenecks within Hazardous Contractor’s visual / rehabilitation budget; waste store / analytical if works (Prepare inventory building yard in doubt before public and special (asbestos) approval to workplace account visual / use materials health and for Construction research in safety analyses material toxic at PMU?) quality materials control (e.g. databases paints / solvents) During activity dust on site and in visual daily avoidance marginal, Contractor, supervision generation immediate consultation of public within Engineer neighborhood, of locals daily nuisance budget Noise close to emissions potential impacted residents Visual, Daily / analytical if continuous Avoidance waste and at discharge suspicious of negative wastewater points or in count of impacts on types, storage waste ground/ quality and facilities transports Daily / surface volumes off site, continuous waters check flow Ensuring surface rates and proper drainage runoff waste soundness routes for management wastewater and disposal 77 Annex F: Consultation meetings Project Related Issues, ESMF and RPF Consultation Meetings: The project has conducted extensive consultation process to assure that the project interventions are pro- community, conflict sensitive and will not create adverse environmental impacts and assure any possible minimum impact if any. The process conduct at two levels as below: 1. Federal Level Process: 5 meetings were conducted with environmental management related structures at the national level. The key structures are the Ministry of Environment and Physical Development MEPD and the Higher Council for Environment and Natural Resources HCENR. This is in addition to big national consultative workshop attended 38 participants from different line ministries and stakeholders including other key institutions at the national level include: Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife, Forests National Corporation of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forests, Natural Resources Administration of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forests, Desertification Control and Coordination Unit of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forests, the Ministry of Irrigation and Water Resources, National Population Council, HAC, Media, Environment Unit of the Ministry of Health, National Council for Strategic Planning. In these meeting the Environment strategy, land legislations and the issues related to compensation were discussed and reviewed. The guides for environmental impact assessment also was shared and reviewed, this in addition to the information and guide on land laws including modern and traditional State Level Consultation meetings Appraisal Consultation Workshop Outcomes An appraisal workshop was held in Kassala on January 20, 2016 to consult with state stakeholders on the pilot phase of SLDP, and the proposed design and scope of phase 2. The State authorities attended it, service providers, NGOs, UN Agencies, Academia, and representatives of phase 1 and potential phase 2 target communities. Attendance sheets of participants can be found in Annex 3. Following presentations, the feedback received from the attendees can be summarized as follows: • The importance and need for capacity building was echoed at all lev els, to be directed towards communities as well as state and locality governments to increase the level of services they are able to render to local populations. It was mentioned that SLDP is a transformative project, in that it aims to change the perceptions, means, and ability of local stakeholders to address development needs via social development. 78 • New communities targeted in Phase 2 can benefit fr om the experience of phase 1-target communities. It would be in the project’s best interest to facilitate knowledge exchange between the communities. Leveraging and engaging educated youth in these communities can be particularly useful. • SLDP’s presence in phase 1 target communities should be phased out gradually. The project should not suddenly leave, so as not to create a shock and lose the gains achieved since the pilot first became effective towards the end of 2013. SLDP should consider leaving a staff member in their office specifically for monitoring phase 1 communities. • A few members of SLDP phase 1 target communities requested that the project not leave abruptly and consider injecting grant resources into their already functioning benefit trans-passing systems in order to hasten the rate of revolving and reach more community members. They also expressed satisfaction with phase 1 intervention and willingness to support the project to mentor other communities. • In addition to the thematic areas for project intervention mentioned in the presentation, water, health, nutrition, and education are areas in need of support in Kassala. This is needed. As evidenced in El Ginaid (a phase 1 target community), communities can manage water sources sustainably if supported with initial inputs. • With regards to NRM, communities have indigenous knowledge on coping mechanisms to deal with their tough environmental conditions. SLDP is recommended to focus on “soft” work in raising awareness and building capacities to manage the environment sustainably, with minimal support to infrastructure projects such as check dams and other water harvesting techniques. • Some communities display characteristics of dependency on international aid (monikered “relief syndrome”), they must be empowered to be drivers of their own development and be willing to contribute themselves. The project should avoid giving “free” aid. • Before mobilizing financing to target 79 communities, the project must ensure that the communities have fully absorbed and understood the objectives of the project. They should first meet with the previous target communities from phase 1 and receive training on their chosen livelihood activities. • Localities must be involved in SLDP implementation from ‘day 1.’ The pilot phase did not adequately involve locality government structures when first selecting target communities, however the project corrected this once it was on the ground. Localities were invited to participate in mobilizing and training communities, and even had formal involvement in the procurement and delivery of livelihood assets to target communities. This should continue, b/c locality authorities can ensure fair distribution of project resources, have the most precise knowledge of communities in their districts, and can ensure success. • Microfinance, and increasing community access to MF services, was mentioned as a possible vehicle for sustainability. A representative of Kassala Microfinance Institute (KMFI) requested the project to consider linking new target communities to microfinance from the very start, without providing grants from the project. • Selection criteria was discussed a great deal, regarding the criteria used to select communities for assistance and individuals within those communities. Many attested to SLDP’s transparent coordination and communication of criteria in this area during phase 1. Consultation with all levels of government and development partners was stressed. Northern localities, including Hamashkoreib and Telkuk, were recommended for targeting, cited as being in high need, affected by displacement from previous conflict, and receiving little to no aid. With reference to selecting beneficiaries within communities, a recommendation was made that those with livelihood activities that benefit the whole community beyond the individual should be given preference. • The focus on natural resource management is essential to sustainability and impacts economic wellbeing. Communities need fertile soil and land to bolster their agriculture and livelihood activities. Environmental degradation has detrimental impacts. The feedback received during the workshop contains positive signals that SLDP’s objectives and design are relevant to the context of Kassala state. Embedded within the comments received are notions of CDD, capacity building, enabling and empowering communities, community exchange visits, partner consultations, and other fundamental characteristics of SLDP. Items mentioned and not already housed in the SLDP model, such as microfinance and financing pilot communities in phase 2, can be considered further. Supposing overall relevance of SLDP’s design, which the workshop attendees appear to verify, the focus of phase 2 should be on 80 strengthening the quality of results delivered by the project. Taking capacity building as an example, phase 2 should find ways to innovate the planning, implementation, and monitoring of capacity building programs. Community Consultation (Amara and Tajouj) The mission visited two phase 1 target communities: Amara and Tajouj. The visits confirmed previously reported results on SLDP through presentations and anecdotal descriptions of livelihood projects undertaken by households, and the process by which the communities were mobilized to plan project interventions. The mission sought to focus on a) identifying areas for project improvement and b) gauge community opinions on the role and significance of sustainable natural resource management. The main areas for improvement mentioned were increased monitoring and technical support from the project. With regards to the environment, communities acknowledged the significant role it plays in their livelihoods. Deforestation, in particular, was mentioned as a damaging practice as well as brick making and the proliferation of mesquite trees in Kassala. The mesquite tree, which is ubiquitous along the terrain, siphons nutrients from the surrounding soil and has sharp thorns, which the communities attest cut their livestock, and exposes them to infectious diseases. Toglay With due regard to the state government’s request for project focus on northern localities, the mission opted to visit Toglay IDP camp in Rural Aroma locality. A discussion was held with the community there. Toglay IDP camp is estimated to contain 800-1000 households. Most of the residents moved to Toglay in the late 1990s to early 2000s in flight from the Civil War and associated conflict in their native settlements on the eastern border with Eritrea. In Toglay, rain-fed agriculture along the Gash River, animal husbandry, and, to a lesser extent, trade activities are the primary means of income. Following the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2006, a sizable portion of Toglay’s IDPs returned to their native villages. The community members interviewed feel strongly that there will be no more exchange of people from their native land to the camp. Barring extreme circumstances, the IDPs in Toglay presumably will stay for the foreseeable future due to the better availability of services in Toglay, and those who have returned will not come back. Toglay IDPs and host community residents are all from the Hadandawa ethnic group. The IDPs chose to concentrate in this area in order to 81 stay under the hospitality of their ethnic group. Consequently, land ownership is not felt to be an issue. Each IDP household is given land through traditional systems and this form of ownership remains uncontested. The camp has a clinic staffed by a few individuals. Medicine for children ages 5 and under is provided by the government, while other medicine is bought in local markets. The clinic services 10-15 patients a day on average. The most frequent maladies are malaria, diarrhea, eye problems, infections, and chest colds. The community also has an elevated water tank a distance away, wells, and a school with 4 classrooms and 3 teachers. With respect to aid received, several international and local NGOs seem to have had interventions in the camp. The community claims that this aid stopped around 2012. The aid was mainly focused on providing humanitarian assistance in the form of staple foods, livestock, and other foodstuffs for food security. There was a project that also supported agricultural terracing. From the signage erected in the community, there appear to be one project currently active in the area, a Joint Resilience Program funded by UKaid and implemented by WFP, FAO, and UNICEF. The community says the program has not yet started in Toglay, but they have been informed that it will. The visit afforded some valuable information. The level of poverty in the IDP camp is immediately clear, though the population in the camp do enjoy support from development agencies and modest access services (water, education, health). The interviewees as the top three priority areas for support rated poverty, education, and health. A question remains on whether the returnee populations that have returned to their lands from the IDP camps are in fact in more vulnerable situations then the IDPs and their host communities. This is an area to be further considered during project preparation and research studies, particularly when evaluating assessment criteria for phase 2-community selection. SLDP (TSI) Consultation Workshop1: Participants List No Name Institution 1 Ali Abu Fatima Karaar Local governance-Kassala Locality 2 Mohamed Osman Mohammed SLDP 3 HatimMerghani Ahmed German Agro Action (GAA) 4 Jamal Mohamed Elhasan DG- General Directorate of Planning-Ministry of Finance 5 Ahmed Jamal CTA-TSI JP-UNDP 6 Dr. MohyeldinEltohami SPDP 7 Mohamed ElnourBadawi Ministry of Welfare and Social Affairs 8 Atta ElmanaanKaramallah Acting DG Ministry of Education 9 Mohamed MurtadaYosuf SPDP 10 Badreldin Osman Yahia SPDP 11 Mustafa mohamedElhasan Ali SORD Organization (NGO) 12 Salwaibrahim Mohamed Development Unit- Ministry of Finance 13 Mohamed Abdel Mahmoud UNDP 14 ElhusainElkhazinAbdallah SPDP /SLDP 15 Ali Mohamaden Mahmoud Coordinator - Kassala Grassroots Development of Network 16 ElKhair Mohamed Mohamed Ali Chair- National Youth Union 17 Mubarak Ibrahim Mohamed WES 18 Khalid Gaffar Ibrahim TVKassala 19 Murwaan Ibrahim TVKassala 20 Manahil Mohamed Saalih HAC 21 WegdanAbdelrahman FAO 22 BadriaElaminKharag General Woman Union- Kassala 23 Randa Omer Mohamed Osman UNHCR 24 AbdelrahmanSiber Kassala Radio 25 HaidarRooha Kassala Radio 26 Osman BanagaElshaik Strategic Planning -Kassala 27 Mohamed Musa Abdelrahman Local Governance -Kassala Locality 28 JadallahElradi Partners in Development Services (PDS- Consultancy Firm) 82 29 SaalihOraabi FAO 30 Dr. Elbagir Mohamed Nour Director- PlanningandDevelopment Unit 31 BadrElzaman Osman TVKassala and Kassala Radio 32 Anwar Mohamed Rahamtallah Ministry of Finance -Kassala 33 Mohamed Osman Musa Secretary General--Kassala State 34 Musa Mohamed Osheik DG- Ministry of Finance-Kassala 35 Jorge Gavida WB- Consultant 36 AbdelrahimFiraiji WB-TTL 37 Maria Ahmed Elagid Micro Finance Institution (MFI)-Kassala 38 Husain Haashim Mohamed HAC 39 Alaa Omer Elmubarak Strategic Planning -Kassala List of person interviewed Name Position Mr. Musa AbdelKareem Executive Director, Rural Kassala Locality Mr. Hamid Mohamed Omer Head, CDC, Amara Village Mr. Musa Osheik Director General, Ministry of Finance, Economy and Labour, Kassala State Mr. Mohamaddeen Hassan Representative, Rural Talkook Locality Ohaj Mr. Ahmed Obeid Deputy Secretary General, Zakat Chamber, Kassala State Mr. Elamin Ali Elamin Director Gneral, Ministry of Social Affairs, Kassala State Mr. AbdelGadir Ali Ibrahim CDC, Tajooj-Elmadrasa Village and Facilitator, Tajooj-Elmadrasa Village Ms. Faiza Ramadan Mr. Gamal Mohamed Elhassan Director, Development and Planning Department, Ministry of Finance, Economy and Labour, Kassala State Mr. Kita Senior Livelihhod Officer, UNHCR Sub-office, Kassala Mr. Hassan Makki Director, Vocational Training Centre, Kassala State Mr. Ali Eisa Director General, Ministry of Animal Resources, Kassala State Ms. Hanan Zayed Woman Development Association Network, Kassala. Ms. Aliaa Eltoum Mr. Oshiek Osman Executive Director, North Delta Locality Director General Veterinary Department, Ministry of Animal Resources, Kassala State Mohamed Ali Adam Director, Algandoul Network for Rural Development Ms. Maria Ahmed Elkhadir Director, Kassala Microfinance Association SLDP2 Appraisal Mission Consultation Workshop: Date: 30/1/2016 # Name Lushes Phone Emil 1- Dr.Hassan Mohammed Ahmed Faculty of economic –University of Kassala 0912258382 Hassanmohm@hotmil.com 2- Mohammed Alnuor Badawi Ministry of Social affairs 0916529504 Mohnur233@gmail.com 3- Ali Ahmed Mohammed Ali Tekuk Locality 0912834903 4- Ali Abu Fatima Krarr General Secretariat – Kassala Government 0912318197 Aliabufatma@gmail.com 5- Rashid Sir elkhatim Mahgoub Talawaeit NGO for Development 0121438640 rashidabgasis@gmail 6- Abd Almageed Gabber Sudanese Red Crescent (SRC) 0912356405 mageedg@yahoo.com 7- Khalid Abd alazeez Zakat chamber 0919904245 Khalidasi269@gmail.com 8- Basher Babiker Ali Locality of Atbara River 0911178059 9- Hashim Hassan Omer Sustainable Management Project 0910438488 Hashimalh11@gmail.com 10- Mohammed Ali Dafaalla Legal Adviser for Kassala State 0911336660 11- Musa Abd elkareem Salih Kasaala Rural Locality 0912410822 12- Albager Mohammed Nor Salih Head of Poverty Unit State Ministry Of Finance 0918323333 Bagernoor@gmail.com 13- Ali Isa Hassan Ministry of Agriculture 0918053830 kassalaaggric@yahoo.com 14- Mohammed Ahmed Alharith Vocational Training 0912225972 Alharith13@yahoo.com 15- Gamal Mohammed Hassan Osman Head of Planning and Development -SMOF 0912833204 * 16- Mohammed Kheer Omar Amara Community 0914765506 17- Hamid Margani Amara Community 0916368074 18- Alsadig Omar Kleel ElGandool Association 0909830629 19- Alsir Hassan Ali Elgeneed Community 0999777358 83 20- Mohamed Hamid Humanitarian Aid Organization 0906550244 21- Ramdan Wad Alfaki Tajoj Community 0919558090 22- Mohammed Ibrahim UNHCR 0910002339 23- Alsanosi Mohamed British Islamic Aid 0910015700 24- Khadega Mohammed British Islamic Aid 0912333127 khdmal@hotmail 25- Nargs Hassan British Islamic Aid 091778588 Narishassan999@yahoo.com 26- Hatim Mirgani Ahmed German Agro Action (GAA) 0912160406 Hatim.mirganiah 27- .Khadiega Omar Abdalla Judiciary –Ksassala 0912563008 28- Mustafa Hassan Mohammed UNHCR 0912333008 29- Faizh Ramdan Alfaki Tajoj Community 0911475070 30- Mohammed Sharif Baryay Community 0918092899 31- Adel Osman Mohammed Hamash Koraeb 0917880080 32- Omar Mohammad Ahmad Consultant for Tekuk Locality 0914801249 omergdorf@gmail 33- Abd Alsamia Mohammed Consultant- Delta North Locality 0917409370 cahalzky@gmail 34- Mohamed Abdelrazing World Bank 0912511296 35- Morat Onur World Bank 36- Rifait Bashir Practical Action 0112426168 37- Narmein Hassan KMFI 0912705375 38- Ahmed Mohammed Osman Sudan Police 0910001792 39- Khadega Alnaim Sudan Police 40 Abdelraheim Fraiji TTL- World Bank 41 Elhussein Elkhazin Project Coordinator SPDP/SLDP 42 Mohamed Osaman SLDP Project Manager 42 Nazik Elmahi M&E Officer-SLDP 43 Taha Musa Procurement Officer-SLDP 84