esmf for epadocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/532181468101070464/e... · web viewit is classified...

Prepared by:Seth A Larmie, P O Box GP20200, Accra

April 06, 2011

E2763

Government of Sierra Leone Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security

Table of Contents

Table of contents iList of Acronyms iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY v

1.0 INTRODUCTION 11.1 Background 11.2 Objectives 11.3 Purpose of ESMF 21.4 Scope of Work 2

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 42.1 Project Description 42.2 Status of implementation of ESMF 62.3 Rationale for the Addendum ESMF 62.2 Project Components under Additional Financing 7

3.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK 93.1 Relevant National Legislation and Regulatory Framework 93.2 Other Relevant Institutions 103.3 World Bank Safeguard Policies 11

4.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA 134.1 Land Resources 134.1.1 Agro- ecological zones 134.1.2 Physiography 13

4.2 Climate 144.2.1 Temperature and Humidity 144.2.2 Evaporation and Water Balance 14

4.3 Drainage and Hydrology 154.4 Vegetation 154.4.1 Closed Forests and Secondary Forests 154.4.2 Savanna Woodlands 154.4.3 Mangrove Swamp Forests 16

4.5 Soils 164.6 Socio- economic baseline 164.6.1 Poverty reduction strategy 174.6.2 Population 174.6.3 Land tenure 174.6.4 Road infrastructure 194.6.5 Key agricultural development issues 19

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page i


5.0 CRITERIA FOR SCREENING PROJECTS 215.1 Description of potential impacts and environmental significance 21

6.0 GUIDELINES FOR MITIGATION 28

7.0 INSTITUTIONAL INVOLVEMENT AND PROJECT APPROVAL NEEDS 347.1 Institutional requirements, capacity and needs 347.1.1 Ministerial involvement 347.1.2 Sierra Leone Environmental Protection Agency 357.1.3 Project Coordinating Unit 357.1.4 District Councils 357.1.5 Implementing Agencies 357.1.6 Community Structures 36

7.2 Capacity building requirements 367.3 Awareness Creation 36

8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND MONITORING 388.1 Management Plan 388.2 Monitoring Indicators 398.3 Institutional Capacity Strengthening Programme 408.4 Summary of ESMF process 41

9.0 CONSULTATIONS, ESMF DISCLOSURE AND GRIEVANCE MECHANISM 429.1 Stakeholder consultation 429.2 ESMF Disclosure 42

9.3 Grievance redress mechanism 439.3.1 Grievance redress committee 449.3.2 Grievance redress procedure 459.3.3 Procedures for delivery of entitlements 459.3.4 Identification of vulnerable persons 469.3.5 Time frame 47

List of TablesTable 1: Regional areas, km 14Table 2: Characteristics of river basins 15Table 3: Potential impacts from rehabilitation and provision of new feeder roads 22Table 4: Potential impacts from provision of rural markets and storage infrastructure 24Table 5: Potential impacts from use of improved agricultural technologies 25Table 6: Potential impacts from provision of rural agro based processing facilities 26Table 7: Potential adverse social impacts/ issues from feeder roads construction 26Table 8: Mitigation measures for feeder roads 29Table 9: Mitigation measures for market and storage facilities 30

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page ii


Table 10: Mitigation measures for improved agricultural technologies 31Table 11: Mitigation measures for agro based processing facilities 31Table 12: Mitigation of potential social impacts/ concerns 33Table 13: Monitoring indicators 39Table 14: Institutional capacity strengthening programme and proposed budget 40Table 15: Summary of ESMF cycles and responsibilities 41

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page iii


List of Acronyms

ESMF Environmental and Social Management FrameworkEU European UnionFBO Farmer Based OrganisationGDP Gross Domestic ProductGoSL Government of Sierra LeoneIDA International Development Agency of the World BankIDB Islamic Development BankIVS Inland Valley SwampsNTE Non- Traditional ExportsMAFFS Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food SecurityMIS Market Information ServicesMLCPE Ministry of Lands, Country Planning and the EnvironmentMLGRD Ministry of Local Government and Rural DevelopmentMTI Ministry of Trade and IndustryMWHI Ministry of Works, Housing and InfrastructureNAFSL National Association of Farmers of Sierra LeoneNGO Non Governmental OrganisationNRS National Road SystemNSC National Steering CommitteePCU Project Coordinating CommitteePDO Project Development ObjectivesPRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy PaperRAP Resettlement Action PlanRFP Request for ProposalRPF Resettlement Policy FrameworkRPSDP Rural and Private Sector Development ProjectSAP Structural Adjustment ProgrammeSLEPA Sierra Leone Environmental Protection AgencySLIEPA Sierra Leone Investment and Export Promotion AgencySLRA Sierra Leone Road AuthoritySLSB Sierra Leone Standards Board

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page iv


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Agribusiness contributes both directly and indirectly to alleviating poverty by: reducing food costs and supply uncertainties and improving the diets of the rural and urban poor; generating growth, increasing and diversifying incomes, and providing widespread employment and

entrepreneurial opportunities in both rural and urban areas; and inducing productivity gains by smallholder farmers and better integrating them into local, national,

and international markets.

The Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL) jointly with the International Development Association (IDA) of the World Bank prepared the Rural and Private Sector Development Project (RPSDP), which was implemented with funds contributed by GoSL, the IDA and other donors.

The additional financing has 3 main components and support to Project management and M&E as the fourth component

Component 1: Improve access to markets through rehabilitation and maintenance of feeder roads (US$15 million). The project has financed the rehabilitation of 468km of feeder roads. This figure represents approximately 11 percent of a total 4,152 kilometers of feeder roads out of which the condition of close to 70 percent are classified as fair or poor. The additional financing of US$15 million will support the rehabilitation of additional 1,000km of feeder roads in 9 out of the 13 districts. The remaining 4 districts will be supported by IFAD.

Component 2: Support to Cocoa Production and Marketing (US$3million). The project has supported the establishment of three district cocoa cooperatives (coops) with a total membership of 12,688 (Male, 10,256; Female, 2,432). The total area cultivated by the members is approximately 26,000 acres. The coops exported approximately 127 Mt of Grade one cocoa beans between August and December 2010 (first year of operation). Better prices (70 percent of world price) paid by the coops has prompted other buyers to increase their prices giving cocoa farmers a much better income. This will be given additional support under the additional financing.

Component 3: Strengthening Farmer-Based Organizations (FBOs) (US$ 2million). The Project supports farmer-based organizations with improved planting materials and through the matching grants with processing equipment, storage facilities and capacity strengthening. Recommendations from a study on rice marketing currently being undertaken in collaboration with the IFC will be supported. This study is focusing on assessing the current processing, marketing and distribution mechanisms and proposes technically and economically feasible mechanisms to improve them. To minimize the incidence of “elite capture”, the FBOs would further be strengthening through the development of an FBO specific benefit guidelines. Currently majority of the FBOs has business plans, but do not have benefit- sharing mechanisms. The project will support the development of such mechanism and the National Association of Farmers of Sierra Leone (NAFSL).

Purpose of the ESMF

The Project triggered a number of World Bank environmental safeguards policies including OP 4.01 on Environmental Assessment. Although potential impacts are expected to be modest, it is classified as a

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page v


Category B project and requires the preparation of a form of environmental assessment, including measures taken to manage and mitigate potential impacts.

The World Bank’s environmental and social safeguards policies require that the recipient country prepare an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), consistent with national laws and OP 4.01 and a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) for the development project.

The purpose of the Framework is: to provide as much information as possible about environmental and social impacts (including

possible land acquisition and resettlement) at the project’s current state of preparation; to inform the project planning and design process by comparing the potential impacts of alternative

locations, configurations, and construction techniques that are under consideration; and to describe the procedures for subsequent assessment of impacts and development of the appropriate

impact management instruments when the details of the project become available.

These management instruments are likely to be an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) and Resettlement Action Plan (RAP).

Relevant National Legal and Regulatory Framework

The relevant national regulatory frameworks include: The Constitution of Sierra Leone, 1991; The Land Policy, 2005; Environmental Protection Agency Act, 2008 and the Environmental Protection Agency

(Amendment) Act, 2010; The Local Government Act, 2004;

Other relevant institutions include the following, and mandates and interest in project are: Ministry of Agriculture Forestry and Food Security (MAFFS), Sierra Leone Roads Authority (SLRA) Ministry of Works, Housing and Infrastructure (MWHI), Project Coordinating Unit (PCU), Ministry of Lands MLCPE, Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD) Sierra Leone Environmental Protection Agency (SLEPA); Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs).

World Bank Safe guards Policies

The RPSDP has been categorized as B implying that the expected environmental impacts are largely site-specific, that few if any of the impacts are irreversible, and that mitigation measures can be designed relatively readily. The environmental assessment for a Category B project, Examines the project’s potential negative and positive environmental impacts, Recommends measures to prevent, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse impacts, and Recommends measures to improve environmental performance

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page vi


The Bank’s ten safeguard policies are designed to help ensure that programs proposed for financing are environmentally and socially sustainable, and thus improve decision-making. The Bank’s Operational Policies (OP) are meant to ensure that operations of the Bank do not lead to adverse impacts or cause any harm. The Safeguard Policies are lumped into Environment, Rural Development, Social Development and International Law.

Status of Implementation of ESMF

The safeguards status of the original project is satisfactory even though no site specific environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) was required. Minor issues regarding resettlement were easily dealt with and no land was acquired. The processing facilities are yet to be operational hence there has not been any environmental concerns. The rehabilitation of the feeder roads did not entail the construction of any new road. The works involved clearing of weeds and unsuitable material on existing roads, cumbering, regravelling, and compaction. Other works included construction of culverts and bridges. Site-specific spot checks and screening carried out during implementation found potential impacts to be ephemeral, negligible, and preventable. These did not require ESMPs and were adequately dealt with within government policies and guidelines. Minor social impacts such as the removal of few economic trees and small portions of cassava farms were amicably resolved among the local council, contractors and the affected beneficiaries. Due to the experience with original project, the expanded scope for feeder roads rehabilitation, institutional changes and review of the original safeguards documents, it was noted that a revision would help to effectively address any concerns that may come up during implementation of additional financing activities and other activities under the original project.

Rationale for the Addendum ESMF

The restructured project has been under implementation for about two years now. Progress of work has been satisfactory and there have been no major issues regarding environmental and social impacts. Feeder road rehabilitation raised a few social concerns in a couple of districts which have been amicably resolved by the different parties involved-communities, district councils, and contractors. Based on this experience and a review of the existing safeguards instruments, it was noted that some important aspects of the ESMF needed to be strengthened. These areas included the institutional arrangements for implementing and monitoring safeguards compliance, the management and mitigation measures and the grievance redress system.

The additional financing will focus on three key areas which include feeder roads rehabilitation, support to FBOs and support to the cocoa sector. As part of the process for preparation of this additional financing there is the need to review the safeguards instruments and how they were applied. This review is also important given the fact that most of the additional financing will go into feeder roads rehabilitation which also coincides with other sub-project activity implementation that may have potential for social and environmental impacts. Thisreview led to the development of a new ESMF.

Project activities and approvals

This document provides the framework for an environmentally sustainable development and implementation of the projects under the Rural and Private Sector Development Project (RPSDP), and is

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page vii


described as an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF). The project will seek technical assistance/ approval from SLEPA for activities like road construction projects and use of agrochemicals while the local administrative authorities give approval for the other minor sub-projects like provision of market infrastructure and basic processing facilities.

The PCU in collaboration with the SLEPA will ensure that all safeguards/environmental requirements of the World Bank and GoSL are adhered to and reported on accordingly by all implementing agencies including district councils, FBOs, SLRA and all contractors.

Description of potential impacts and their environmental significance

The major project activities comprise feeder roads construction, provision of market infrastructure and processing facilities, improved farming schemes/ practices. The potential impacts from construction to operation and maintenance activities are described below. An indication of environmental significance is given in three main groups comprising:

Minor (standard construction/ operational practices to address such impacts) Moderate (standard construction practices to take care of these impacts but mitigation

measures may also be required) Major (alternatives required otherwise mitigation measures to be adopted with strict

monitoring protocols)

The above classification has been used used in the tables for the various project activities, and this is largely subjective. It may be overruled by site specific considerations prescribed by the SLEPA.Guidelines for mitigation

All significant adverse impacts are considered for mitigation. Specific measures have been suggested when practicable. The mitigation options considered include project modification, provision of alternatives, and pollution control. In cases where the effectiveness of the mitigation is uncertain, monitoring programmes will be introduced.

The mitigation measures are applied to significant impacts arising from construction, operation and maintenance aspects of the various projects. The contractor is responsible for determining the cost of mitigation and to include such cost as part of its total cost for executing the works. The PCU is therefore required to include the mitigation measures as part of the Request for Proposal (RFP) or tender documents for contractors to enable them quote appropriately.

Institutional responsibilities

The PCU will collaborate with the SLEPA to ensure sound management of the environmental aspects of the projects. They will ensure that all safeguards/environmental requirements of the World Bank and GoSL are adhered to and reported on accordingly by all implementing agencies including district councils, FBOs, SLRA and all contractors. Reports submitted by any implementing agency on activities that have safeguards or environmental implications or imperatives must include sections on actions taken or not and reasons for the later. From the PCU, all reports submitted to the Bank should include safeguards implementation status for all activities to which the instruments apply.

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page viii


The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Food Security (MAFFS), as the chair of the Steering Committee and the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD) will have overall oversight regarding safeguards compliance status.

Capacity building requirements

The capacity building requirements will mostly be in the form of a training workshop and on the job training. A training workshop on the ESMF should be organized for the following stakeholders: PCU, SLRA, FBOs District Councils Beneficiary community; and Project consultants and contractors.

The capacity of staff at the SLEPA will need be enhanced at the district level to provide guidance, and ensure adequate overall environmental supervision of the sub-projects.

Awareness creation

All stakeholders will need some orientation if they are to appreciate conditions which trigger environmental action. It is proposed that environmental management issues are included: In all monthly project site meetings; and in discussions at all Project review/ evaluation workshops to further sensitise stakeholders.

The discussions will assist to assess environmental progress especially with regard to the effectiveness of implementation of mitigation measures.

There is also the need to promote knowledge on environmental issues at the district and community levels. This approach should be through the strengthened district SLEPA to assist community members to identify their existing beliefs and practices, provide them with information and assist them to analyse the environmental consequences of the various interventions.

Management Plan

The Environmental Management Plan considered institutional arrangements required to implement the environmental actions, as well as a presentation of some monitoring indicators. The cost of the mitigation measures would be determined by the contractor at the construction stage and by the implementers at the operational stage.

The ESMF provides general guidelines for environmental management including mitigation measures for adverse impacts. As is the case under the on-going project, the pre-selection of the feeder roads will be done by SLRA and the district councils based on (i) the updated district road master plan and (ii) priorities identified by the communities and their commitment to participate in the rehabilitation and maintenance. The criteria for selection will be the same as that of the on-going project (ie, agricultural potential, population and market accessibility). The projects will subsequently go through environmental clearance by the PCU and the SLEPA.

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page ix


The specific procedures to be followed to identify and implement mitigation measures for adverse impacts (and also obtain environmental permits) for projects are provided in this section, and these are based on EIA procedures in Sierra Leone as well as World Bank environmental and social assessment safeguard policies (OP 4.01).

The local environmental regulations confirm the SLRA as the proponent for the project (or the development), and will initiate environmental screening of the project and the registration of the project with the SLEPA in consultation with the District Councils. There may be a number of options to choose from, to address perceived impacts and it is suggested that the mitigation guidelines provided in this ESMF may be useful.

On completion of the screening and registration with the EPA, and subsequent approval by the EPA and the PCU, the report which will include adequate mitigation measures designed into the project to address any untoward impacts will be submitted to the implementing agencies including the District Councils, contractors, FBOs etc. The PCU and SLEPA would make sure that guidelines are adhered to, and that the SLRA has adequately discussed with contractors and trained local community members on environmental concerns. The SLRA together with the local SLEPA will review and check for compliance with the environmental assessment process.

To ensure full use of facilities, the District Councils will draft bylaws and rules which will cover issues like accessing and protecting the water facilities, preventing inadequate wastewater disposal including sanitary facilities. The District Councils will monitor the effectiveness of implemented mitigation measures within the communities and advise SLRA accordingly.

Monitoring indicators

Environmental and social monitoring during the implementation of the sub-projects is done in order to measure the success of the mitigation measures. Monitoring is a key component of the ESMP during project implementation. It is essential that the basis for the choices and decisions made in the sub-project design and other environmental and social safeguard measures implemented are verified. Monitoring will verify the effectiveness of impact management, including the extent to which mitigation measures are successfully implemented.

Monitoring of the general project and the specific sub-project activities will help to: Improve environmental and social management practices; and Provide the opportunity to report the results on safeguards, impacts and mitigation measures

implementation.

Cost

The costs estimates are based on the assumption that resource persons are likely to come from other parts of the country and therefore require travel allowances including participants from local communities. Hence, these estimates may include travel expenses.

The total cost of the institutional strengthening and capacity building for the implementation of the ESMF is estimated at a lump sum of US$35,000.00.

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page x


Grievance redress mechanism

The PCU has discussed with the EPA and agreed on specific actions regarding the establishment of the Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM), the local language disclosure of the GRM and other relevant information about the project safeguards issues, training key stakeholders like contractors, FBOs, Councils etc on monitoring and compliance issues. Some of the required actions include establishing a grievance redress committee and outlining clear procedures. The committees will be formed at three levels – Chiefdom, District and National. Generally, affected people can lodge complaints at the district council which should properly receive and document for onward action.

Entitlements for Project Affected People (PAP) would range from cash payments and/or building materials to the provision of new land, new homes and non-cash compensation for other lost properties in accordance with the identification of the impact on their property.

Subject to the final decision on the exact position of the site and its dimensions, the approved entitlements or amounts would be communicated to the implementing agency or unit for delivery or payment to the beneficiaries. Compensation would be paid before the owners/occupiers are made to vacate their properties for commencement of construction or works. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security (MAFFS) and the project Coordinating Unit (PCU) will ensure that no construction begins until PAPs have been resettled if physical relocation is necessary and/or received their compensations (according to World Bank Operational Policies OP 4.12). All compensation, whether cash payments and /or alternative land and house provisions, would be given to the PAPs prior to any request for vacation of land/property and before commencement of construction. Compensation and resettlement will be funded by the GoSL

Identification of Vulnerable groupsVulnerable groups are those at risk of becoming more vulnerable due to the displacement, compensation, and resettlement process. Vulnerable people include, but not limited to Disabled persons, whether mentally or physically; Elderly, usually above 60 years; Widows; Children; and Female heads of households.

Time FrameTaking cognizance of the potentially low scale and scope of resettlement issues that could arise; the processing of compensation application for payment by Government should be expedited over an average maximum period of one month. Some additional one month could be allowed for exceptional circumstances where there could be some complexities or challenges. No construction will begin until PAPs have been resettled if physical relocation is necessary and/or received their full compensation (according to World Bank Policy OP 4.12). Additionally, the property owners must be given adequate notice of not less than one month after payment of compensation to vacate affected assets and relocate depending on the nature of relocation or resettlement.

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page xi


1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

The Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL) has identified the agribusiness sector (in its broad definition) as a strategic sector for investment because of the catalytic force it can represent for poverty reduction in the country, particularly in rural areas where poverty is predominant. Agribusiness contributes both directly and indirectly to alleviating poverty by: reducing food costs and supply uncertainties and improving the diets of the rural and urban

poor; generating growth, increasing and diversifying incomes, and providing widespread employment

and entrepreneurial opportunities in both rural and urban areas; and inducing productivity gains by smallholder farmers and better integrating them into local,

national, and international markets.

It is against this background that GoSL, jointly with the International Development Association (IDA) of the World Bank prepared the Rural and Private Sector Development Project (RPSDP), which was implemented with funds contributed by GoSL, the IDA and other donors.

The Rural and Private Sector Development Project (RPSDP) was approved by the Executive Directors of the World Bank on May 22, 2007. An IDA grant amount of US$30 million was allocated to finance this project, which was restructured on August 5, 2009. The original project specific objective (“to provide rural based small scale farmers increased access to domestic markets by strengthening linkages between producers, agro-processors and rural market intermediaries”) and components have remained unchanged. The project development objective of the restructured project is to increase production of selected agricultural commodities by 20% and sales by10% through improvement in efficiencies along the value chain of target beneficiaries.

The Project triggered a number of World Bank environmental safeguards policies including OP 4.01 on Environmental Assessment. Although potential impacts are expected to be modest, it is classified as a Category B project and requires the preparation of a form of environmental assessment, including measures taken to manage and mitigate potential impacts.

The World Bank’s environmental and social safeguards policies require that the recipient country prepare an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), consistent with national laws and OP 4.01 and a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) for the development project.

1.2 Objective

The main objective of this study is to develop options for the implementation of an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) to be used for the environmental and social screening and assessment of the RPSDP. The project is intended to facilitate improvements in the value chain to systematically overcome the constraints and blockages hindering the smooth and efficient flow of products from producers to ultimate consumers, and to identify and strengthen opportunities for realizing the potential of value-addition.

ESMF for RPSDP_ Additional Financing_ April 2011. Page 1


1.3 Purpose of the ESMF

The purpose of the Framework is: to provide as much information as possible about environmental and social impacts (including

possible land acquisition and resettlement) at the project’s current state of preparation; to inform the project planning and design process by comparing the potential impacts of alternative

locations, configurations, and construction techniques that are under consideration; and to describe the procedures for subsequent assessment of impacts and development of the

appropriate impact management instruments when the details of the project become available.

These management instruments are likely to be an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) and Resettlement Action Plan (RAP).

1.4 Scope of Work

The scope of work is to prepare an ESMF, which represents a plan for mitigating potential impacts of the RPSDP activities in the selected districts of Sierra Leone.

The preparation of this ESMF for the RPSDP was done following these key activities:

Box 1: Key Activities Undertaken

Reviewed Bank environmental safeguards policies within which the project will be operating, and relevant national policies and regulatory frameworks. Significant changes in regulations/legislative procedures and administrative practices and institutional needs that may be additional demand on implementing agencies were identified

Reviewed the capacity of existing agencies to carry out environmental safeguards responsibilities under the project, in respect of both existing mandates within the national regulatory framework and any additional requirements resulting from Bank policies.

Baseline description of the environment of the project areas, covering aspects relevant to the project, including the biophysical, biodiversity (natural habitats and fauna) and agro-ecological settings has been described.

Project description focusing on the environmental issues that the project is addressing, interventions, as well as the positive and negative environmental impacts that are likely to result was conducted.

Provision of a negative list of activities that will not be supported by the project, in order to avoid unnecessary environmental and social impacts.

Identified potential environmental issues related to the RPDSP activities especially the feeder roads construction, and the means to avoid and mitigate them via general aspects



of the project design and/or specific safeguards instruments and processes.

Identified potential environmental issues related to project activities, and the means to avoid and mitigate them via general aspects of the project design and/or specific safeguards instruments and processes

Designed systems and responsibilities for ensuring that the identified safeguards are followed.

Assessed what needs and capacities will be required for implementing and monitoring the environmental and social management framework to achieve its intended objectives were identified. Have outlined training and capacity building program on environmental and social safeguards requirements for the identified stakeholders.



2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE ORIGINAL PROJECT

The original project development objective (PDO) was to improve efficiencies along the value chain of agricultural commodities with higher benefits flowing to producers. Prior to effectiveness, the project was rated as risky due to lack of procurement and financial management capacities in the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security (MAFFS) and Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI), the two joint-implementing ministries. Consequently, the project was restructured in April 2009.

The restructuring focused primarily on strengthening the institutional arrangements by dropping the joint management function and allowing the MAFFS to take full responsibility of overall management of the project. The MAFFS was also given strategic and oversight responsibilities as the chair of the National Steering Committee (NSC) with Deputy Ministers for MTI and MIALGRD as deputy co-chairs. Additionally, the restructuring team revised and reformulated the PDO as follows: to increase production of selected agricultural commodities by 20 percent and sales by 10 percent through improvements in efficiencies along the value chain of targeted beneficiaries.

The key outcome indicators under the original project are as follows: (i) Efficiency of agricultural value chains in food crops, as reflected in farm level value addition and (ii) Efficiency of agricultural value chains in export crops as reflected in quality premiums. Under the additional financing the key development outcomes are: (i) increased value addition along the value chain in order to increase producer prices of the commodities (ii) increase output, income and employment of small scale farmers; (iii) improved access to markets; (iv) improved enabling environment for private sector development.

The project will support initiatives to improve quality of produce for domestic/export markets, assist in strengthening marketing organizations at the producer level as well as private trade engaged in domestic marketing and export, support value addition, and provide limited support for filling critical gaps in infrastructure along the value chain, in conjunction with initiatives supported by Government/other donors.

2.1 Project Description

The project has four components with an indicative outlay of US$34.54 million (IDA financing: US$30 million):

Component 1: Domestic market improvement. The project has supported the domestic supply chain consolidation for specific crops and products. The main sub-components include: (i) rehabilitation of critical feeder road links; (ii) provision of matching grants for rural market infrastructure improvements to address critical infrastructure needs for selected products; and (iii) knowledge management and technical assistance to improve access to market information. Under the feeder roads sub-component, a total of 468 km of feeder roads is being rehabilitated and constructed in all the 13 districts. Reports from independent monitoring teams from MAFFS, the President’s Office and the Ministry of Finance have all expressed satisfaction with the pace and



quality of work. This intervention created jobs for 4,000 youths, and injected money in the local economy as most of the contractors are from within the community. Indirect benefits include about 400 women food and water vendors serving the laborers; 400 community members providing sand and stones to the contractors; (iii) and petty traders selling various items to the workers. The sub-component on matching grants has supported 75 farmer-based organizations (FBOs) with a total membership of 4,737 (2,337 females, and 2,460 males) with the provision of storage facilities and processing equipment. The project is presently in the process of supporting an additional 200 FBOs with similar facilities. Under the knowledge management sub-component, the project has supported the establishment of Market Information System (MIS) focusing on internal marketing of agricultural commodities; the production of marketing and processing manuals for 5 crops; and the creation of market linkages between trader groups and FBOs.

Component 2: Agricultural export promotion is also satisfactory. Through this component, the project has interventions which create the enabling environment for export of agricultural commodities. The Sierra Leone Standards Board (SLSB) in collaboration with Njala University (NU) have developed standards for about 66 commodities and drafted the Standards Bill, Food safety and phytosanitary policies for parliamentary approval. The project has provided support to the Sierra Leone Investment and Export Promotion Agency (SLIEPA) to carry out a regional market survey with the objective of gaining better knowledge of market conditions, particularly within the West Africa sub-region, as well as the potential sources of supply of selected commodities in Sierra Leone. SLIEPA has also established a trade information centre that provides information to potential exporters. Other efforts to promote the marketing of agricultural produce include linking rice and cocoa producers to buyers with substantial number of producers signing MOUs with the buyers. A comprehensive sub-sector study of the Sierra Leone Cocoa Industry, with the objective of improving the supply and export of the commodity, has been carried out. The implementation of the findings of the study has led to the establishment of three cocoa cooperatives with a total membership of 12,688 (Male, 10,256; Female, 2,432). A total of 140.2 tons of Grade 1 cocoa was exported during the first year of operation of the newly established cocoa cooperatives An Export Supply Chain study to identify non-traditional export (NTE) and market opportunities has been carried out under this component. The findings of the study revealed the state of readiness of the sector to embark upon the development of NTE commodities.

Component 3: Support to farmer-based Organizations and technology Improvement. This component has two sub-components: (a) matching grants to strengthen legally registered FBOs and their unions; and (b) support to carry out studies to promote agricultural research and export promotion. Under sub-component 1 the project commissioned a study on the strengthening of the initial 75 FBOs under the matching grants scheme of the project. These FBOs are all legally registered with the local councils and the Ministry of Social Welfare. All the initial 75 FBOs have now completed their storage and drying facilities and have processing equipment to improve quality, enhance value and reduce post harvest losses. In addition, a cocoa-FBO Study has also been carried out leading to the setting up of three cocoa cooperatives, which have been legally registered and are now operating fully. The project also supported SLARI to collaborate with farmers in 11 districts to conduct on-farm adaptive trials/participatory variety selection and multiplication of improved varieties in cassava and rice. A total of 275 farmers also received training in best agronomic practices for cassava cultivation and have been provided with improved planting materials for cocoa, rice and cassava.



Component 4: Policy, Regulations, Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation. Despite receiving unsatisfactory rating at effectiveness, project management has consistently been rated satisfactory or better since restructuring. The management of the project has been realigned with the provisions of the restructuring document. The Minister for MAFFS now chairs the reconstituted National Steering Committee (NSC) with the deputy ministers for MTI and MIALGRD as deputy co-chairpersons. The Project Coordinating Unit (PCU) has been granted greater autonomy and is now able to implement annual work plans; although, some clearances are still required by the MAFFS, which sometimes cause delay in processing.

2.2 Status of Implementation of ESMF under the Original Project

The safeguards status of the original project is satisfactory even though no site specific environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) was required. Minor issues regarding resettlement were easily dealt with and no land was acquired. The processing facilities are yet to be operational hence there has not been any environmental concerns.

The rehabilitation of the feeder roads did not entail the construction of any new road. The works involved clearing of weeds and unsuitable material on existing roads, cumbering, regravelling, and compaction. Other works included construction of culverts and bridges. Site-specific spot checks and screening carried out during implementation found potential impacts to be ephemeral, negligible, and preventable. These did not require ESMPs and were guided by national and local laws and regulations. During implementation of the AF, the project will conduct screening of all feeder roads site and will again be guided by national and local laws and regulations or, where necessary, for larger works, appropriate instruments (Environmental Management Plans) will be prepared. Minor social impacts such as the removal of few economic trees and small portions of cassava farms were amicably resolved among the local council, contractors and the affected beneficiaries.

The RPF and the ESMF have been used as guide by the PCU to advise District Councils and contractors in undertaking activities that could have implications for safeguards due diligence. For instance, the Government did not prepare ESMPs for the feeder roads rehabilitation due to the negligible nature of the impacts and the works that were done mainly using labour-based techniques and relying on the community for the labour. Copies of the revised safeguards documents will be shared with all key stakeholders to support the capacity building and sensitization activities to ensure compliance. Due to the experience above, the expanded scope for feeder roads rehabilitation, institutional changes and review of the original safeguards documents, it was noted that a revision would help to effectively address any concerns that may come up during implementation of additional financing activities and other activities under the original project.

2.3 Rationale for the Addendum ESMF

The restructured project has been under implementation for about two years now. Progress of work has been satisfactory and there have been no major issues regarding environmental and social impacts. Feeder road rehabilitation raised a few social concerns in a couple of districts which have been amicably resolved by the different parties involved-communities, district councils, and contractors. Based on this experience and a review of the existing safeguards instruments, it was



noted that some important aspects of the ESMF needed to be strengthened. These areas were the institutional arrangements for implementing and monitoring safeguards compliance and the grievance redress system.

In addition, the project is seeking for additional financing to support on- going activities. This additional financing will focus on three key areas which include feeder roads rehabilitation, support to FBOs and support to the cocoa sector. As part of the process for preparation of this additional financing there is the need to review the safeguards instruments and how they were applied. This review is also important given the fact that most of the additional financing will go into feeder roads rehabilitation which also coincides with other sub-project activity implementation that may have potential for social and environmental impacts. Discussions with relevant stakeholders: The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security (MAFFS), EPA, the PCU, the Human Rights Commission, the Local Councils and some NGOs concluded the need for a revision to strengthen these two areas.

However, review showed weaknesses in the original that needs to be addressed hence leading to the development of a new ESMF.

2.4 Project Components: Additional Financing

The additional Financing has 4 main components. Component 1: Improve access to markets through rehabilitation and maintenance of feeder roads. The project has financed the rehabilitation of 468km of feeder roads. This figure represents approximately 11 percent of a total 4,152 kilometers of feeder roads out of which the condition of close to 70 percent are classified as fair or poor. The additional financing of US$15 million will support the rehabilitation of additional 1,000km of feeder roads in 9 out of the 13 districts. The remaining 4 districts will be supported by IFAD.

Component 2: Support to Cocoa Production and Marketing. The project has supported the establishment of three district cocoa cooperatives (coops) with a total membership of 12,688 (Male, 10,256; Female, 2,432). The total area cultivated by the members is approximately 26,000 acres. The coops exported approximately 127 Mt of Grade one cocoa beans between August and December 2010 (first year of operation). Better prices (70 percent of world price) paid by the coops has prompted other buyers to increase their prices giving cocoa farmers a much better income. This will be given additional support under the additional financing.

Component 3: Strengthening Farmer-Based Organizations (FBOs). The Project supports farmer-based organizations with improved planting materials and through the matching grants with processing equipment, storage facilities and capacity strengthening. Recommendations from a study on rice marketing currently being undertaken in collaboration with the IFC will be supported. This study is focusing on assessing the current processing, marketing and distribution mechanisms and proposes technically and economically feasible mechanisms to improve them. To minimize the incidence of “elite capture”, the FBOs would further be strengthening through the development of an FBO specific benefit guidelines. Currently majority of the FBOs has business plans, but do not have benefit- sharing mechanisms. The project will support the development of such mechanism and the National Association of Farmers of Sierra Leone (NAFSL).



Component 4: Policy, Regulations, Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation. This component will focus attention on policy and regulatory issues, project management and monitoring and evaluation.



3.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS

3.1 Relevant National Legal and Regulatory Framework

The relevant national regulatory frameworks include: The Constitution of Sierra Leone, 1991; The Land Policy, 2005; Environmental Protection Agency Act, 2008 and the Environmental Protection Agency

(Amendment) Act, 2010; The Local Government Act, 2004;

The Constitution of Sierra Leone, 1991The Constitution includes some provisions to protect the right of individuals to private property, and also sets principles under which citizens may be deprived of their property in the public interest as described in Section 21 of the Constitution. It also makes provision for the prompt payment of adequate compensation and access to the court or other impartial and independent authority for the determination of the land owner’s interest or right, and the amount of any compensation to which he is entitled and for the purpose of obtaining prompt payment of that compensation

The National Lands Policy, 2005As provided in the Constitution, the 2005 National Land Policy also provides for the compulsory acquisition of land in the public interest. The principles of the land policy include among others:

The principle of land as a common national or communal property resource held in trust for the people and which must be used in the long term interest of the people of Sierra Leone. Such principle only holds where it does not violate existing rights of private ownership.

Compensation to be paid for lands acquired through compulsory Government acquisition will be fair and adequate and will be determined, among other things, through negotiations that take into consideration government investment in the area.

Local Authority Assemblies, (District and Town Council), may negotiate for land for development purpose and concessionary prices or as gift, but all such grants should be properly documented and processed.

No interest in or right over any land belonging to an individual or family can be disposed of without consultation with the owner or occupier of the land.

No interest in or right over any land belonging to an individual or family can be compulsorily acquired without payment, in reasonable time, of fair and adequate compensation.



Environmental Protection Agency Act, 2008 and the Environmental Protection Agency (Amendment) Act, 2010The Environmental Protection Agency Act, 2008 is an Act to establish the Sierra Leone Environmental Protection Agency (SLEPA), to provide for the effective protection of the environment and for other related matters. This Act mandates the EPA to amongst others;

Advice the Minister on the formulation of policies on all aspects of the environment and in particular make recommendation for the protection of the environment.

Issue environmental permits and pollution abatement notices for controlling the volume, types, constituents and effects of waste discharges, emissions, deposits or other source of pollutants of substances which are hazardous or potentially dangerous to the quality of the environment or any segment of the environment.

Prescribe standards and guidelines relating to ambient air, water and soil quality, the pollution of air, water, land and other forms of environmental pollution including the discharge of waste and the control of toxic substances.

Ensure compliance with any laid down environmental impact assessment procedures in the planning and execution of development projects, including compliance in respect of existing projects.

Impose and collect environmental protection levies in accordance with this Act or regulations made under this Act.

Sections 24 of the Act list project activities requiring an Environmental Impact Assessment license which include infrastructural projects such as roads and bridges. Sections 25 and 26 of the Act describe factors for determining whether a project requires as environmental impact assessment and the contents of environmental impact assessment respectively. The Act describes the procedures to be followed to obtain permits for both existing and proposed undertakings through the conduct of environmental impact assessments. The Environmental Protection Agency (Amendment) Act, 2010 sought to give executive powers to the Board.

The Local Government Act, 2004The Act establishes the local council as the highest political authority in the locality and who shall have legislative and executive powers to be exercised in accordance with this Act. This Act in its First Schedule under section 2 establishes the localities namely: Districts, Towns, and Cities. The part II of this schedule also establishes the number of Paramount Chiefs in each local council. The Third Schedule establishes the functions devolved to the local councils. The Fourth and Fifth Schedules establish departments under each local council, and Valuation list and Rate Books respectively.

3.2 Other Relevant Institutions

Other relevant institutions include the following, and mandates and interest in project are subsequently described:

Ministry of Agriculture Forestry and Food Security (MAFFS), Sierra Leone Roads Authority (SLRA) Ministry of Works, Housing and Infrastructure (MWHI), Project Coordinating Unit (PCU), Ministry of Lands MLCPE, Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD)



Sierra Leone Environmental Protection Agency (SLEPA); Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs).

3.3 World Bank Safe guards Policies

The RPSDP has been categorized as B implying that the expected environmental impacts are largely site-specific, that few if any of the impacts are irreversible, and that mitigation measures can be designed relatively readily. The environmental assessment for a Category B project, Examines the project’s potential negative and positive environmental impacts, Recommends measures to prevent, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse impacts, and Recommends measures to improve environmental performance

The Bank’s ten safeguard policies are designed to help ensure that programs proposed for financing are environmentally and socially sustainable, and thus improve decision-making. The Bank’s Operational Policies (OP) are meant to ensure that operations of the Bank do not lead to adverse impacts or cause any harm. The Safeguard Policies are lumped into Environment, Rural Development, Social Development and International Law. These operational policies include: OP/BP 4.01: Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.04: Natural Habitats OP 4.09: Pest Management OP/BP 4.12: Involuntary Resettlement OD 4.20: Indigenous Peoples OPN 11.03: Cultural Property OP 4.36: Forests OP/BP 4.37: Safety of Dams OP/BP 7.50: Projects on international Waters OP/BP 7.50: Projects in Disputed Areas BP 17.50: Disclosure

The proposed project would trigger two of the policies: environmental assessment and involuntary resettlement.

OP/BP 4.01: Environmental AssessmentThe objective of the OP. 4.01 is to ensure that the projects financed by the Bank are environmentally and socially sustainable, and that the decision making process is improved through an appropriate analysis of the actions including their potential environmental impacts. EA is a flexible procedure, which should vary in breadth, depth, and type of analysis depending on the project. The purpose of EA is to improve decision making and to ensure that the project options under consideration are environmentally sound and sustainable. EAs identify ways of improving projects environmentally, by preventing, minimizing, mitigating, or compensating for adverse impacts.

While most RPSDP activities are not expected to generate any significant adverse environmental and social impacts, some activities may result in mainly site-specific and small-scale consequences, if no appropriate mitigation measures are incorporated in sub-project design.



OP 4.12: Involuntary ResettlementThe World Bank’s safeguard policy on involuntary resettlement, OP 4.12, (December 2001) is to be complied with where involuntary resettlement, impacts on livelihoods, acquisition of land or restrictions to natural resources, may take place as a result of the project. It includes requirements that:

Involuntary resettlement should be avoided where feasible, or minimised, exploring all viable alternative project designs.

Where it is not feasible to avoid resettlement, resettlement activities should be conceived and executed as sustainable development programs, providing sufficient investment resources to enable persons displaced by the project to share in project benefits. Displaced persons should be meaningfully consulted and should have opportunities to participate in planning and implementing resettlement programs.

Displaced persons should be assisted in their efforts to improve their livelihoods and standards of living or at least to restore them, in real terms, to pre-displacement levels or to levels prevailing prior to the beginning of project implementation, whichever is higher.

According to OP 4.12, the resettlement plan should include measures to ensure that the displaced persons are:

informed about their options and rights pertaining to resettlement; consulted on, offered choices among, and provided with technically and economically

feasible resettlement alternatives; and provided prompt and effective compensation at full replacement cost for losses of assets

attributed directly to the project.

If the impacts include physical relocation, the resettlement plan should include measures to ensure that the displaced persons are:

Provided assistance (such as moving allowances) during relocation; and Provided with residential housing, or housing sites, or as required, agricultural sites for

which a combination of productive potential, location advantages, and other factors is at least equivalent to the advantages of the old site.

Under the Project, some land acquisition or restriction of access such as during rehabilitation of feeder roads, construction of processing and marketing centres and so on may occur.



4.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA

The project sites are spread throughout the country in different districts and a brief description of the country’s physical and social setting is described in the sections below.

4.1 Land Resources

Of the total land area of about 71,740km2, some 60,650km2, are classified as upland and 11,650km2

are low lands. Out of the total land area, 53,620km2, (5.36m.ha) has been estimated as suitable for crop production. Non-arable land which includes hills, rocky land, roads, rivers and creeks account for the rest of the land resources of the country. Land in Sierra Leone is divided into arable agricultural land (60%), pastural (18%), mangrove and inland swamps (8%), forest under protection and management (4.5%) and others (9.75%). About 6.57m.ha (90%) of the land is owned privately by families, 360,000ha by communities and families and only 285, 000ha (4%) are held by Government in the form of forest reserves. The lands belonging to families are small and fragmented, restricting effective planning and management.

4.1.1 Agro-Ecological Zones

The land resource of Sierra Leone has been classified into five distinct agroecological zones as follows: Uplands: moderately well to well-drained soils of varying depth. This covers about 6.1 m.ha or

84% of the land Inland Valley Swamps (IVS): fairly flat, poorly drained depressions between adjacent uplands –

675,000 ha (9%) Mangrove Swamps: land adjacent to the coast or along estuarine rivers subject to inundation by

tidal brackish water, 215, 000 ha (3%) Bolilands: low-lying inland depressions subject to flooding during the wet season -120,000 ha

(2%) Flood plains: located along major rivers, flooded periodically during the wet season – 110,000 ha

(2%)

4.1.2 Physiography

The country can simply be divided into three physiographic regions which run approximately north-east to south-west. These are the coastal plains, interior plains and interior plateaux regions. The coastal region is generally low-lying with swampy areas covering an area of 10,444 km2 and extending some 30 km inland from the coast. The Interior Plains region is approximately 80-100km wide and the topography is an old peneplain continental land mass. This region is the most extensive covering 31, 418 km2 with altitude ranging from 40m in the west to 200m in the east. This is the region of depressions and low terraces known as bolilands which are flooded by rain during the wet season due to poor drainage of the clayey soils and water over flowing from rivers and streams. The Interior Plateau region rises rapidly above the interior plains to a height of 300 to 700 and covers an area of 30, 464 km2.



Table 1: Regional areas, km2

Region Area, km2 PercentageCoastal Plain 10,444 15Interior Plain 31,418 43Interior Plateau 30,464 42Total 72,326 100

4.2 Climate

The climate of Sierra Leone is largely determined by its geographical location on the south-west coast of West Africa, between latitudes 7o and 10o north of the equator. The climate is classified as humid tropical. The climatic pattern is closely related to the general atmospheric circulation of air masses over the tropics, with the south-west monsoon winds dominant from May to October and the north-east trade winds dominant from November to April. The zone of convergence of these two air masses is known as the inter-tropical convergence zone (ITCZ) which oscillates north and south of the equator, imposing seasonality in the distribution of rainfall over the country. This results in two distinctive periods, the biologically active wet season, and the biologically dormant dry season.

The mean annual and seasonal rainfall distribution pattern is as follows: The coastal areas receive more than 3,000 mm rain per year with the Western Area

recording up to 5000 mm. The north-central and south-eastern regions receive between 2500 and 3000 mm. The north receives from 2500 to less than 2000 mm. Distinctly higher rainfall values above 3000 mm are recorded around Makeni, Mabonto and

Bumbuna areas presumably due to the relief influence of the Sula Mountain scarp in the east.

The duration of the wet season varies from nine months, beginning in March in the east, to seven months, starting in May in the north and west, and ending in November.

4.2.1 Temperature and Humidity

The mean annual temperature in the country is 27.0oC. The monthly average maximum is 30.0oC but during February and March, temperatures of up to 35.0Oc have been recorded. The average minimum is 22.0oC.

The relative humidity varies considerably with the seasons and during the day. The mean wet season and dry season relative humidities are 90% and 70% respectively. During the day, relative humidity varies from 80% in the morning to 40% in the afternoon. In the dry season values can drop very low.

4.2.2 Evaporation and Water Balance

The annual amount of evapotranspiration in Sierra Leone ranges between 1300 and 1600 mm. During the dry season, the high sunshine hours, high air temperatures and low moisture content help to increase the daily rates of evapotranspiration to 4.5 mm per day. In the wet season,



evapotranspiration values average at 3.5 mm per day because of the high humidity values. The water balance calculations therefore indicate that during the wet season, there is “Water Surplus” ranging from about 1200 to 2600 mm and during the dry season the “Water Deficit” ranging from 240 to 610 mm above the assumed soil water storage of 100 mm.

4.3 Drainage and Hydrology

The river basins of Sierra Leone are relatively small. Five out of the nine major drainage basins originate in the country, namely Rokel, Pampana or Jong, Sewa, Waanje and the coastal rivers and creeks. The Great and Little Scarcies and the Moa rivers originate in the Fouta Djallon plateau in Guinea while the Mano River originates in Liberia. All the rivers flow an almost linear pattern from north-east to south-west. The respective total length of each river and the basin area within Sierra Leone are shown in the following table:

Table 2: Characteristics of river basinsRiver Basin Total Length,

kmCatchment area, km2

Percentage area

Great Scarcies 160 3115 4.3Little Scarcies 280 13,000 17.9Rokel/ Seli 380 10,620 14.8Pampana/ Jong 300 7,511 10.4Sewa 430 14,140 19.7Waanje 200 4,510 6.2Moa 320 9,220 12.7Mano 180 2,530 3.4Coastal Streams/ Creeks 120 6,960 9.6Peninsula and others - 720 1.0Total 72,326 100.0

4.4 Vegetation

The following main vegetation types are identified in the country.

4.4.1 Closed Forests and Secondary Forests

These are primary and mature secondary forests presently found mainly on hill slopes and crests in the Sewa, Mano and Moa river watersheds and the Peninsula Mountains of the Western Area. The primary forests are mature, dense and moist with mixed stands of evergreen and semi-deciduous trees. Previously, they covered a greater part of the country, but presently account for less than 5% of the vegetation coverage.

4.4.2 Savanna Woodlands

This vegetation is an association of trees and grasses occurring mainly on hill slopes and undulating plains in the drier zones of the country. It comprises of a fairly high density of often gnarled trees



and tall grasses. The trees generally have large crowns and can grow up to about 15m tall. The grasses grow up to 3m tall above the lower undergrowth. This vegetation type is predominant within the central and northern parts of the Little and Great Scarcies watershed.

4.4.3 Mangrove Swamp Forests

These are found in estuaries of the major rivers and creeks which line the west cost of the country. These comprise of salt tolerant, stilted shrubs and trees occurring on low mudflats of these estuaries along the edges of the creeks and the rivers and inland as far as the limit of the tidal influence. The forests are usually dense, comprising trees up to 20m tall. However densities are generally high where tidal influence is most marked, and also where estuaries are protected.

4.5 Soils

Soils in Sierra Leone have been grouped into 12 soils associations by the Land and Water Development Division (LWDD) of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security. Each of the soil associations has different attributes. Most soils in Sierra Leone are acidic (pH 4-5), and like most tropical soils are ferralitic and excessively leached as a result of the humid tropical conditions. This is particularly true of the upland soils, with such common mineral as Kaolinite, aluminium and iron. Organic matter content is low, making the soils less suitable for cropping. Top soils’ organic carbon levels range between less than 1 percent in soils under annually burnt savanna in the north and 2-4 percent in the secondary regrowth and forest in the south, to 3.10 percent in the seasonally flooded swamps which are relatively fertile and suited for rice cultivation. Available plant nutrients are low. The most important soils are the Ultisols, Oxisols, Inceptisols and intergrades. The soils are generally infertile and there is lack of proper management practices. The estimated soil loss due to erosion varies from to 109 tons/ha/year depending on soil type, slope, vegetation and land use.

4.6 Socio-Economic Baseline

The Sierra Leone economy has always been based on the exploitation of natural resources, notably agricultural, marine and mineral resources. Public sector influence has been dominant in the economic activity in the country. The economy is dominated by the agricultural sector which accounts for 44.1% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (GOSL Econ Bull, Vol 9 # 2 March 2003). Agriculture has remained traditional and subsistence in character, incapable of satisfying the food needs of the country by a wide margin, and improving the living standards of the broad mass of the population. Over 70% of the country’s labour force is employed in agriculture. Since poverty is pervasive in the country, the GOSL is implementing several measures aimed at addressing the factors responsible for the difficulties identified in the economy.

Sierra Leone embarked upon a Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) in 1989 with the following objectives:

1. Achieve and maintain a stable macro-economic environment2. Redefine the public sector’s role while restoring the government’s capacity to provide basic services3. Create an economic environment conducive to private sector development



These objectives and attendant strategies still constitute the basic framework of the Government’s economic reform policy. The Government has also embarked on a programme to achieve food security by 2007. Agriculture is a priority and it is acknowledged that in order to move from the current state of subsistence, mechanization should be seriously incorporated into agricultural practices. The linkages among all the sectors of the economy have also been recognised and highlighted in all government programmes, i.e. environment, agriculture, water resources, forestry, industry, health, transport, education and the decentralization process.

4.6.1 Poverty Reduction Strategy

The Government has completed its Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) and although the programme is based on access to basic services, empowerment has also been given strong consideration. Investments are being made in other sectors such as infrastructure. Poverty reduction programmes aim at economic and social empowerment of the poor and creating an enabling environment for development through investment in transportation, communication, energy and other economic, social and physical infrastructure.

4.6.2 Population

The population of Sierra Leone is estimated at 6 million, growing at a rate of about 2.6 percent per year. The population density of about 58 persons/km2 is relatively high as compared to other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. The population is concentrated in some particular regions of the country including the Freetown peninsula, the Kono, Kenema and Bo districts. The northern part of the country is sparsely populated. A large section of the population is unemployed, especially among the youth. An estimated 68% live close to the forest or forest regrowth area on which they depend for their livelihood.

National average population density varies among the districts, chiefdoms and towns. Generally, the regions, which have important economic activities tend to harbor larger populations. Areas with 80 persons per km2 are the diamond areas or those with large-scale rice cultivation. These include Kono, Kenema and Bo (diamonds and trading) and Freetown (capital and industrial).

Areas with medium density (50-80 persons/ km2 ) are mainly in the arable alluvial soils and centres for rice, coffee and cocoa production. Areas with low density, i.e. below 30 persons/km2 are mainly in the north, the southern coastal areas and the east.

4.6.3 Land Tenure

Land tenure in the Republic of Sierra Leone is characterized by a dual ownership structure. Land in the Western Area, which is the area originally settled by the Creole, the liberated slaves on their arrival in the country, is held under the English system of freehold interests. It is believed that the land was acquired through negotiation with the natives by the English and passed on to the settlers. This area includes the capital city, Freetown. It is also the area that has seen considerable growth and is clearly distinguishable from the rest of the country by the level and quality of development.



Land in the rest of the country is held in communal ownership under customary tenure and is controlled by traditional rulers who administer it on behalf of their communities in accordance with customary principles and usage. The result is a dichotomy between modernization and tradition. While in the Western Area interest in land can be assigned with little difficulty, in the Provinces, the traditional authorities are unwilling to assign interests in land, which would connote any possibility of perpetual alienation such as freehold interests as this will deprive posterity of its ancestral heritage.

System of Land Holding in the Republic of Sierra Leone

The Western AreaLand tenure in the Western area traces its history from the British Colonial administration. The area settled by the freed slaves was declared a Colony of the British Empire, and the settlers, having lived in England, and having experienced the English way of life and system of governance, were more inclined to live their lives like the British. As a result of this and other socio-political considerations, British concepts of tenure were introduced in the colony (Western Area). Since the land on which the freed slaves were resettled was purchased in the name of the British monarch, the settlers were therefore tenants of the British Crown and the title passed on to them was the tenancy in fee simple or freehold. After independence in 1961 the Government of Sierra Leone replaced the crown as the “landlord” of the Western Area and the freehold system was allowed to persist.

The ProvincesLand is communally held under customary tenure in the provinces though there are minor differences among the various ethnic communities, the general trend is that land is considered a divine heritage which the spirits of the departed ancestors expect to be preserved and handed down to future generations. This is because land is deemed to belong to a large family comprised of the departed ancestors, the living and the unborn generations. It is regarded as a heritage entrusted to the living with a responsibility to ensure its preservation and subsequent assignment to future generations.

Family InterestsThe absolute interest in land is vested in families who have responsibility for their portion of the land. The paramount chief is regarded as the custodian of the land on behalf of the entire chiefdom but decisions regarding land are the preserve of heads of families. The administration of the community interest is vested in the head of the land-owning family who is aided by a council of elders. One very important consequence of the fact that absolute interest in land is vested in the family is that it invests every member of the family with an inherent right to the occupation and use of any part of the family land.

The Individual’s InterestWhere a family member wishes to cultivate any part of the family land, he has to obtain special permission from the family head that would normally allocate land to him. In some societies the individual has to pay some money, locally referred to as “kola” or “handshake”, to the family head as acknowledgement of the land granted to him. The grant, however does not confer ownership of the land but only confers on him the right to use the land.



State or Public LandsThere are two types of State lands in Sierra Leone; they are Crown Lands and Government Reservations. Crown lands are found in the Western Area while Government Reservations are found in the Provinces.

Crown Lands comprise of lands which have been acquired “for the service of the colony” under the Public Lands Ordinance, 1898.

4.6.4 Road Infrastructure

The public road network constitutes the most important transport infrastructure in the country, carrying about 80% of internal passenger and cargo traffic. The national road network totals about 11,000 km of which some 8,000 km have been functionally classified in the National Road System (NRS) and the remaining 3000 km as local networks and unclassified roads and tracks. Less than 1000 km of the entire network is now paved with at least half of these reported to be in poor condition. Many formerly paved roads have reverted to gravel due to neglect during the civil war. Of the unpaved portions, less than 30% is in fair to good condition (GoSL Vision 2025, August 2003).

Road construction and rehabilitation is now being given the priority it deserves. The Feeder Roads Department of the Ministry of Works, Housing and Technical Maintenance is undertaking the rehabilitation programme with the support of donors. The Government of Sierra Leone recognises the crucial link between the road network, especially feeder roads and food self sufficiency. So far, the European Union (EU) and the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) have provided funds for road works in four Districts each.

The road rehabilitation programme does not involve the construction of new roads. It essentially deals with the rehabilitation of existing network through formation, regravelling, reshaping, compacting and reconstruction of old bridges and culverts. A National Road Fund provides funding for the maintenance of the road networks, using light equipment from the Plan Pool. Concerns have been raised about the environmental impact of using laterite on the roads, and this will be addressed in the impact assessment section of this report.

4.6.5 Key Agriculture Development Issues

Small-Scale Farming Strategy

The production of both food and cash crops in Sierra Leone is almost exclusively by small-scale farmers. It is therefore advisable that the GoSL should rely largely on a small-scale farming strategy for the increased agricultural production envisaged under the project.

The main thrust of the small-scale farming strategy is to ensure that agricultural inputs and services are directed to small-scale farmers with a view to improving their resource productivity and increasing their farm output. In pursuing this strategy, Government will liaise with and coordinate the work of local and foreign non- governmental organizations, which are currently operating in the field of food and agricultural production and related areas.



Challenges and Constraints

InfrastructureThe poor state of roads in the countryside does not only have direct impacts on the marketing of agricultural produce, but also has indirect consequence on adding to the cost and difficulty of supplying food in the rural areas. Port facilities and costs may also constitute a major constraint on exports, especially food crops which need special handling.

Investment EnvironmentLong-term investments in agriculture are required if a diversified agricultural export base is to be established. Growth and diversification cannot rely only on the activities of rural small-scale farmers. It will require a new class of entrepreneurs who will invest in larger scale of production, coupled with processing and marketing in order to drive the agricultural sector forward. This is the major role of the private sector in the project.

Sustainability of ExportsThe agricultural export market is very competitive and if Sierra Leonean producers are to maintain a place in the export business, then they must develop the culture of competition. This will require the following in all sectors: Efficiency of production, backed by strong extension service and availability of inputs including

planting materials, fertilizers and pesticides. Information on markets and consumer demand and capacity to respond Cooperation between all participants in the project – farmers groups as business units, private

sector entrepreneurs and cooperatives. Innovation in research into new products and varieties.

Environmental Management ConcernsThese have been identified as closely related to: traditional bush fallow – farming systems and changes; increased use of inland valley swamps (IVS) for agriculture and the effects on water

management ; degradation of mangrove and natural forest for fuel wood and timber; denuding of watersheds resulting in increased runoff and associated soil erosion and siltation of

water ways.



5.0 CRITERIA FOR SCREENING PROJECTS

This document provides the framework for an environmentally sustainable development and implementation of the micro projects under the Rural and Private Sector Development Project (RPSDP), and is described as an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF). The project will seek technical assistance/ approval from SLEPA for activities like road construction projects and use of agrochemicals while the local administrative authorities give approval for the other minor sub-projects like provision of market infrastructure and basic processing facilities.

The PCU in collaboration with the SLEPA will ensure that all safeguards/environmental requirements of the World Bank and GoSL are adhered to and reported on accordingly by all implementing agencies including district councils, FBOs, SLRA and all contractors.

5.1 Description of potential impacts and their environmental significance

The major project activities comprise feeder roads construction, provision of market infrastructure and processing facilities, improved farming schemes/ practices. The potential impacts from construction to operation and maintenance activities are described below. An indication of environmental significance is given in three main groups comprising:

Minor (standard construction/ operational practices to address such impacts) Moderate (standard construction practices to take care of these impacts but mitigation

measures may also be required) Major (alternatives required otherwise mitigation measures to be adopted with strict

monitoring protocols)

The above classification used in the tables is largely subjective, and may be overruled by site specific considerations prescribed by the SLEPA.Table 3 Potential impacts from rehabilitation and provision of new feeder roads

Potential Impact/ Issue Environmental Significance

Construction phaseAir quality Dust emission from movement of construction trucks and

equipment and construction activities like digging etcModerate

Solid waste Waste from bush clearing and removal of trees ModerateWater pollution Sediment laden runoff from exposed areas mainly due to

vegetation clearing during construction;Improper use of waste oils from construction equipment;Improper disposal of sanitary waste from work camps

Moderate;

MinorMajor

Noise pollution Movement of heavy vehicles MinorSoil erosion Exposed land surfaces from cleared vegetation may induce erosion

from rain eventsModerate

Loss of flora/ fauna Due to the removal of vegetation MinorPublic safety Badly managed work activity/ site within community

Poor housekeeping leading to stagnant water as breeding grounds for insect vectors (causing malaria etc)

ModerateModerate



Potential Impact/ Issue Environmental Significance

Movement of heavy trucks and equipment and road safety ModerateLand use Conflicts with incompatible activities and land uses. MajorLand take The road will occupy some space in or close to the community. It

may either be private or public land for which compensation may be required

Moderate

Raw material usage

PVC pipes, sand, stones from local and external sources (quarries etc)

Minor

Occupational health and safety

Hazards from handling heavy equipment, including noise, ergonometric stress, lifting heavy materials etc

Minor

Socio- economic Use of local labour and therefore income earning;Destruction of property- farm crops, structures;Community convenience vs Consultant’s technical judgement for chosen routesVisual intrusion by heavy trucks and equipment;Disruption of social activities

ModerateModerate;Minor

MinorMinor

Use and MaintenanceAir pollution Dust emission from movement of heavy trucks and other vehicles ModerateWater quality and pollution

Sediment laden storm runoff Moderate

Noise pollution From the movement of heavy vehicles MinorSoil erosion Erosion may be induced or enhanced by vegetation clearing Moderate;Water pollution Inadequate provision and inappropriate method of storm water

disposal Major

Public safety From road accidents due to poor traffic management ModeratePublic nuisance and health risks

Public health risks may arise from poor road maintenance;Pot holes and ponding to breed insect vectors of disease eg. Mosquitoes;

Moderate;Moderate

Continued use of facility

Availability of, and accessibility to maintenance funds Major



Table 4 Potential impacts from provision of rural markets and storage infrastructurePotential Impact/ Issue Environmental

SignificanceConstruction phaseSolid waste Waste from bush clearing and removal of trees MinorWater pollution Sediment laden runoff from exposed areas mainly due to


Moderate;

MinorModerate

Noise pollution Movement of heavy vehicles MinorSoil erosion Exposed land surfaces from cleared vegetation may induce erosion



Poor housekeeping leading to stagnant water as breeding grounds for insect vectors (causing malaria etc)Movement of heavy trucks and equipment and road safety

ModerateModerate

ModerateLand use Conflicts with incompatible activities and land uses. MinorLand take The facility will occupy some space in the community. It may either

be private or public land for which compensation may be requiredModerate

Raw material usage

Timber, sand, stones from local and external sources (quarries etc) Minor



Moderate

Socio- economic Use of local labour and therefore income earning;Destruction of property- farm crops, structures;Community convenience vs Consultant’s technical judgement for chosen sitesVisual intrusion by heavy trucks and equipment;Disruption of social activities

Moderate;Minor;Minor

MinorMinor

Use and MaintenanceWater quality and pollution

Sediment laden storm runoff Moderate

Solid waste Market refuse and other waste MajorSanitary waste Health risks and aesthetic problems from poor sanitary conditions MajorNoise pollution From the movement of heavy vehicles carting food stuff etc MinorSoil erosion and contamination

Erosion may be induced or enhanced by vegetation clearing Moderate

Water pollution Inadequate provision and inappropriate method of stormwater disposal due to poor drainage

Moderate

Public nuisance and health risks

Public health risks may arise from poor facility maintenance leading to breeding of rodents and poor hygienic conditions;

Moderate;


Availability of, and accessibility to maintenance funds; Major



Table 5 Potential impacts from use of improved agricultural technologiesPotential Impact/ Issue Environmental

SignificanceNegative impactsUse of fertilisers/ pesticides

Productive agricultural systems could encourage increased use of agrochemicals with negative effect on local environment including water bodies

Moderate

Crop pest and diseases problems

Problems may increase due to the residues left in the field Moderate

Natural or semi natural habitats

New farming practices could encourage conversion of natural or semi natural habitats

Moderate

Soil erosion Exposed land surfaces from cleared vegetation may induce erosion from rain events

Moderate

Loss of flora/ fauna Due to the removal of vegetation MinorWater use Improved agricultural systems could increase water demand ModerateFacility management

Requires higher management skills and is labour intensive Moderate

Land use Conflicts with incompatible activities and land uses MinorOccupational health and safety

Hazards from handling agrochemicals and presence of dangerous reptiles (snakes) and other animals

Moderate

Positive impactsCrop yields Optimal and stable crop yields and reduced commercial inputs ModerateProfits Increased profit MajorSecurity Improved food security MajorLand use Continuous use of same piece of land ModerateErosion Reduced erosion ModerateLand degradation Reduced shifting cultivation and land degradation ModerateWater use Improved water use efficiency ModeratePoverty Reduction in rural poverty and hunger threats MajorSocio- economic Use of local labour and therefore income earning; High



Table 6 Potential impacts from provision of rural agro based processing facilitiesPotential Impact/ Issue Environmental

SignificanceConstruction phaseSolid waste Waste from bush clearing and removal of trees MinorWater pollution Sediment laden runoff from exposed areas mainly due to


Minor;

MinorMajor

Noise pollution Movement of heavy vehiclesSoil erosion Exposed land surfaces from cleared vegetation may induce erosion



Poor housekeeping leading to stagnant water as breeding grounds for insect vectors (causing malaria etc)Movement of heavy trucks and equipment and road safety

Moderate

Land use Conflicts with incompatible activities and land uses MajorLand take The facility will occupy some space in the community. It may either

be private or public land for which compensation may be requiredMajor



Moderate

Socio- economic Use of local labour and therefore income earning;Visual intrusion by heavy trucks and equipment;Disruption of social activities

Moderate;Moderate;Minor

Use and MaintenanceWater quality and pollution

Sediment laden storm runoffDisposal of process wastewater

ModerateModerate

Solid waste Disposal of wastes ModerateSanitary waste Health risks and aesthetic problems from poor sanitary conditions ModerateNoise pollution From the poorly maintained processing facilities MinorOdour management

Odour from organic process waste not suitably disposed of Moderate


Availability of, and accessibility to maintenance funds Major

Table 7: Potential adverse social impacts/ issues from feeder roads constructionType of impact Description of Potential Impact/ Issue Social

Significance

Physical displacement

The Project will not result in the physical displacement of any community.

Minor

Employment and loss of livelihood

Some farmers may lose parts of their farmlands if the road is designed to pass through their land. Otherwise, no person will lose employment or livelihood from the project. Rather there will be job opportunities for the youth, local food vendors and

Minor



Type of impact Description of Potential Impact/ Issue Social Significance

communities who will be supplying contractors with sand and stones

Deprivation of use of land

New feeder roads to be rehabilitated may take up individual or community land

Minor

Loss of crops/ properties

Roads to be rehabilitated have been demarcated already and free from any encumbrance. New roads may interfere with individual or community farm lands and affect crops.

Minor

Impact on vulnerable groups

No negative impacts on vulnerable groups in the society (such as the elderly, disabled, women, children and minority groups) will occur as a result of the proposed development. The Project has no inherent negative impact or bias towards any vulnerable group.

Negligible

Impact on Social and Cultural Structures

The Project will have positive impacts on social and cultural structures as the Project activities will bring together persons from different communities and interact for their common good.

Major

Impact on Cultural Heritage/ Archaeological interest

There are no known sites of significant cultural heritage or archaeological interest in the vicinity of the projects. The risks to cultural heritage would be on buried resources encountered during excavation on land.

Minor

Impacts on Human Health/ Safety and sanitation

(a) Human health and safety could be compromised through road traffic accidents involving construction vehicles/equipment. Occupational injury associated with construction activities will be limited to the work force only. (b) Indiscriminate disposal of human waste or free-range defecation by project workers could create environmental health problems for local communities(c) Indiscriminate disposal of litter at the project sites and work camps will create unsightly conditions and pose safety and health risks

Minor to Moderate

Moderate to Major

Moderate



6.0 GUIDELINES FOR MITIGATION

All significant adverse impacts are considered for mitigation. Specific measures have been suggested in this section when practicable. The mitigation options considered include project modification, provision of alternatives, and pollution control. In cases where the effectiveness of the mitigation is uncertain, monitoring programmes will be introduced.

The mitigation measures are applied to significant impacts arising from construction, operation and maintenance aspects of the various projects. The contractor is responsible for determining the cost of mitigation and to include such cost as part of its total cost for executing the works. The PCU is therefore required to include the mitigation measures as part of the Request for Proposal (RFP) or tender documents for contractors to enable them quote appropriately.

The mitigation measures are presented in the following tables in a descriptive format.



Table 8 Mitigation measures for feeder roads (moderate to major impacts)Type of impact Description of mitigation measuresConstructionWater quality and pollution

Temporary storage of sanitary and cleaning wastes in containers. Disposal should occur at waste dumps. No solid waste, fuels or oils should be discharged into water bodies. Where works take place adjacent to a watercourse, temporary sediment barriers should be installed on slopes to prevent silt

from entering the watercourse. Soil erosion Application of appropriate erosion-protection measures, in particular where it concerns works on slopes and in stream

beddings. Road and other works should not be executed under aggressive weather conditions (rains, strong winds).

Public health problems Adequate sanitary facilities should be available for workers and open range defecation should not be countenanced. Contractors should use local labour as much as possible and where available. Imported workers should be provided with

proper housing, including sanitary facilities. Labourers should adhere to basic rules with regard to protection of public health, including most importantly hygiene and

disease (HIV) prevention. All land depressions and disturbed areas at work sites should be filled to avoid water ponding which could breed mosquitoes.

Safety of the public Contractors will inform local communities early of the construction programme. Contractors will provide security barriers to ward off inquisitive persons and animals from active work sites.

Visual intrusion Adequate organisation and maintenance of construction sites through good housekeeping. Restoration of construction sites directly upon completion of works.

Disturbance and interruption of commercial and social activities

Contractors to inform the affected communities early of the construction programme. Limit any temporary interference with private property (e.g. farms) in creating routes. Relocation (even temporarily) to be avoided as much as possible. Where private land or other property is affected, or where there is loss of income as a result of project activities, agree on

compensation measures with affected persons prior to start of construction. Compensation will occur in accordance with the defined Resettlement Policy Framework.

Interference with the access to and use and local community roads, footpaths should be minimized.Land take Avoidance, as much as possible, the need for resettlement by considering other options

Where resettlement is unavoidable, develop and implement appropriate plans in accordance with the Resettlement Policy Framework developed for the Project.


The Contractor should protect his workers by ensuring the use of protective equipment

Use and Maintenance



Type of impact Description of mitigation measuresAir pollution Provide speed control ramps where road is close to community to avoid dust emissions

Provide adequate signage for drivers to be aware of ramps aheadWater quality and pollution

Regular maintenance of sediment management structure to ensure sediment capture without transport to water courses

Soil erosion Application of appropriate erosion-protection measures, in particular where it concerns works on slopes and in stream beddings.

Public safety and nuisance

Provide speed ramps when close to community with visible road signs

Continued use of facility Make provision for funds to maintain roads

Table 9 Mitigation measures for market and storage infrastructure



Type of Impact Description of mitigation measuresConstructionAir pollution Prevention of excessive dust emissions including cement dust by careful handling and working under moist conditions as

much as possible. Collection and temporary storage of sanitary and cleaning wastes, as well as garbage, in containers.

Water pollution Temporary storage of sanitary and cleaning wastes in containers. Disposal should occur at waste dump. No solid waste, fuels or oils should be discharged into water flows.

Raw material use The project should preferably select raw materials that may be reused and/or recycled/recovered eg bamboo.Public health problems Adequate sanitary facilities should be provided at construction sites and in camps and offices.

Labourers should adhere to basic rules with regard to protection of public health, including most importantly hygiene and disease (HIV) prevention.

Standing water on construction sites should be avoided through proper site maintenanceSafety of the public Barriers to ward off inquisitive persons and animals.

Construction works should not be executed under aggressive weather conditions (rains, strong winds).Visual amenities Adequate organisation and maintenance of construction sites through good housekeeping.

Restoration of construction sites directly upon completion of works.Disturbance and interruption of commercial and social activities

Informing the affected institutions early of the construction programme. Excavation works should not be executed under aggressive weather conditions (rains, strong winds) Interference with the access to and use and occupation of roads, footpaths should be minimized.


The Contractor should implement the basic form of specific health and safety measures such as the use of personal protection equipment, lifting of heavy weights etc

Operation and MaintenanceNuisances and public health risks

Ensure correct operation and maintenance of the latrine facility, including regular inspection and maintenance. Minimisation of emergency repair response time through the development of emergency response procedures and training

of artisans. Community involvement in odour detection through awareness creation and the opening of a complaint desk.

Solid waste generation The District Council to identify and demarcate suitable places for final waste disposal

Table 10 Mitigation measures for use of improved agricultural technologiesType of impact/ issue Description of mitigation measuresIncreased use of fertilisers and pesticides

Adequate training and awareness creation programmes for stakeholders to appreciate hazard Provision and use of protective equipment



Type of impact/ issue Description of mitigation measuresSoil erosion Application of appropriate erosion-protection measures, in particular where it concerns works on slopes and in stream

beddings.Water use Adequate training and awareness creation programmes for stakeholders to appreciate wise useOccupational health and safety

Adequate training and awareness creation programmes for stakeholders to appreciate use of protective clothing Provide protective clothing and ensure use Good housekeeping practices followed to avoid accidents etc.

Local labour Adequate barriers to ward off inquisitive persons and animals (especially excavation works), in particular during the night, with clear marking of the safety border on the works perimeter.

Informing the local communities early of the construction programme through Water Boards.

Table 11 Mitigation measures for agro based processing facilities



Type of Impact Description of mitigation measuresConstructionAir pollution Prevention of excessive dust emissions including cement dust by careful handling and working under moist conditions as

much as possible. Collection and temporary storage of sanitary and cleaning wastes, as well as garbage, in containers.

Water pollution Temporary storage of sanitary and cleaning wastes in containers. Disposal should occur at waste dump. No solid waste, fuels or oils should be discharged into water flows.

Raw material use The project should preferably select raw materials that may be reused and/or recycled/recovered eg bamboo.Public health problems Adequate sanitary facilities should be provided at construction sites and in camps and offices.

Labourers should adhere to basic rules with regard to protection of public health, including most importantly hygiene and disease (HIV) prevention.

Standing water on construction sites should be avoided through proper site maintenanceSafety of the public Barriers to ward off inquisitive persons and animals.

Construction works should not be executed under aggressive weather conditions (rains, strong winds).Visual amenities Adequate organisation and maintenance of construction sites through good housekeeping.

Restoration of construction sites directly upon completion of works.Disturbance and interruption of commercial and social activities

Informing the affected institutions early of the construction programme through WATSANs. Excavation works should not be executed under aggressive weather conditions (rains, strong winds) Interference with the access to and use and occupation of roads, footpaths should be minimized.


The Contractor should implement the basic form of specific health and safety measures such as the use of personal protection equipment, lifting of heavy weights etc

Operation and MaintenanceNuisances and public health risks

Ensure correct operation and maintenance of the latrine facility, including regular inspection and maintenance. Minimisation of emergency repair response time through the development of emergency response procedures and training

of artisans. Community involvement in odour detection through awareness creation and the opening of a complaint desk by WATSANs. Timely implementation of repair and replacement works on facility. Locate latrine 30m away and downhill of water point and pit should be 5m above water table Promote good hygienic practices like frequent hand washing especially after visiting toilet

Solid waste generation The Waste Management Unit of the DA will dislodge latrine pits when full and dispose contents appropriately Digested sludge removed should be appropriately disposed of e.g. burial or land application for agriculture



Table 12: Mitigating Potential Social Impacts/ Concerns Type of impact Description of mitigation measures

Employment and loss of livelihood

Any affected farmer will be provided with livelihood assistance based on crops to be affected. It should be done in accordance with the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF)

It is expected that the project will further offer opportunities for the youth, women food vendors and income for community members who will supply the contractor with sands and stones

Deprivation of use of land Land compensation should be based upon current market value of land in the area and in accordance with the resettlement policy framework (RPF).

Loss of crops/ properties Appropriate compensation should be paid for any damaged or destroyed crops and propriety that belongs to the affected persons. All compensation process should satisfy the RPF developed for the project.

Impacts on Human Health/ Safety and sanitation

Trucks carrying construction materials such as sand, quarry dust, laterite etc will have the buckets covered with tarpaulin or appropriate polythene material from or to project site

Only road worthy vehicles/trucks should be used Only experienced drivers/operators should be employed Except for areas secured by fencing, all active construction areas will be marked with high-visibility tape to reduce the risk

accidents involving pedestrians and vehicles. All open trenches and excavated areas will be backfilled as soon as possible after construction has been completed. Access to

open trenches and excavated areas will be secured to prevent pedestrians or vehicles from falling in. Adequate sanitary facilities will be available for workers and open range defecation will not be countenanced. Construction workers will be provided with and educated to wear suitable Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) including

hard hats, overalls, high-visibility vests, safety boots, earplugs, gloves etc. Construction workers should be educated to adhere to basic rules with regard to protection of public health, including most

importantly hygiene and disease (HIV) prevention.


7.0 INSTITUTIONAL INVOLVEMENT AND PROJECT APPROVAL NEEDS

The PCU will collaborate with the SLEPA to ensure sound management of the environmental aspects of the projects. They will ensure that all safeguards/environmental requirements of the World Bank and GoSL are adhered to and reported on accordingly by all implementing agencies including district councils, FBOs, SLRA and all contractors. Reports submitted by any implementing agency on activities that have safeguards or environmental implications or imperatives must include sections on actions taken or not and reasons for the later. From the PCU, all reports submitted to the Bank should include safeguards implementation status for all activities to which the instruments apply. See Annex 1: Matrix of Institutions and Responsibilities.

The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Food Security (MAFFS), as the chair of the Steering Committee and the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD) will have overall oversight regarding safeguards compliance status.

7.1 Institutional Requirements, Capacity and Needs

7.1.1 Ministerial involvement

The relevant ministries comprise: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security (MAFFS), Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD), Ministry of Works, Housing and Infrastructure (MWHI) and the Ministry of Lands, Country Planning and the Environment (MLCPE)

The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security will continue to host the Project. The Ministry of Works and Infrastructure (MoWI) will exercise direct responsibility over SLRA in the design and supervision of the civil works whilst the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development will ensure effective management of the contract signed between the LCs and contractors. As is the case under the on-going project, the pre-selection of the feeder roads will be done by SLRA and the district councils based on (i) the updated district road master plan and (ii) priorities identified by the communities and their commitment to participate in the rehabilitation and maintenance. The criteria for selection will be the same as that of the on-going project (ie, agricultural potential, population and market accessibility). Sierra Leone Roads Authority (SLRA) will continue to provide technical support in the form of design and supervision of the feeder roads and will second an engineer to the PCU as well as engage a competent and experienced feeder roads engineer on retainer basis from within the West African sub-region. The engineer should have considerable experience in feeder roads design and construction, use of labor-based methods, community based and demand driven management of feeder roads. The selected applicant will be responsible for quality assurance in the design and construction, assist LCs in the preparation of bids and monitor the construction of the roads. The LCs will take the final decision on the selection of feeder roads in line with guidelines provided under the original project.


7.1.2 Sierra Leone Environmental Protection Agency (SLEPA)

SLEPA has offices at the sub-national levels that work in close collaboration with the district administrations to enforce and monitor compliance. Although relative new as a national body, it draws capacity from staff from the previous Departments of Environment and Forestry. SLEPA therefore will assist by providing technical assistance to the Project and monitor implementation of the ESMP and RPF including the grievance redress mechanism. In accordance with its legal mandate, the SLEPA will approve all specific environmental and social impact studies and resettlement action plans (RAPs) that may be done under the additional financing. The national and sub-national SLEPAs will take the lead in project safeguard monitoring.

The SLEPA will clear the safeguards framework, on behalf of the GoSL while all frameworks and action plans will be subject to final clearance from the World Bank. The PCU, with support from the EPA, will be responsible for ensuring appropriate inclusion of safeguards procedures in project manuals, reviewing investment plans for compliance and monitoring of safeguards performance overall.

7.1.3 Project Coordinating Unit (PCU)

The PCU will have responsibility for monitoring the safeguards performance of front-line implementing agencies, as well as ensuring that suitable material is incorporated into training programs. Safeguards issues will be specifically addressed in project reporting formats, and on the basis of work plans, the PCU will identify activities and settings where safeguards issues are a particular risk, and focus its monitoring and oversight activities on those. The PCU will also establish and maintain a complaints and response database, based on the complaints resolution system designed under the safeguards documents.

7.1.4 District Councils

The Councils are responsible for the overall development of their districts and their functions include: to prepare and submit development plans and budgets to superior institutions for approval and implementation.

The Councils (with consultation and guidance from PCU) will have responsibility for most of the on-the-ground implementation, including community engagement, participatory planning, establishing appropriate incentive mixes for community-selected agricultural technology options, establishing contracts with individual farmers, provision of extension services for agricultural project investments and routine field monitoring. They will also see to the implementation of safeguards measures reflected in the safeguards documents.

7.1.5 Implementing Agencies

The implementing agencies will comprise:


Farmer-Based Organizations (FBOs), Sierra Leone Roads Authority (SLRA), Contractors, Private sector and government implementing agencies,

In-country capacity for environmental and social monitoring has been enhanced through the implementation of projects and initiatives In spite of this, there is still the need for further capacity improvement given the attention on safeguards implementation as a sustainability factor for projects. Furthermore, the project intends to mainstream the implementation and monitoring of safeguards into project activities from the community-district to national level. This will require some sensitization on the World Bank policies on safeguards, GoSL policies and requirements on environmental permits and regulations. Specific training program will need to be developed and implemented to address these and other critical issues as part of the capacity enhancement plan.

7.1.6 Community structures

District Councils will, as part of the planning process, involve chiefdoms/communities who will play a key role in identifying community infrastructure investments, prioritizing project interventions, and establishing the incentive frameworks for example in the adoption of agricultural technologies by individual farmers. Community consultation protocols will ensure representation of potentially vulnerable and under-represented groups.

7.2 Capacity building requirements

The capacity building requirements will mostly be in the form of a training workshop and on the job training. A training workshop on the ESMF should be organized for the following stakeholders: PCU, SLRA, FBOs District Councils Beneficiary community; and Project consultants and contractors.

The capacity of staff at the SLEPA will need be enhanced at the district level to provide guidance, and ensure adequate overall environmental supervision of the sub-projects.

7.3 Awareness creation

All stakeholders will need some orientation if they are to appreciate conditions which trigger environmental action. It is proposed that environmental management issues are included: In all monthly project site meetings; and in discussions at all Project review/ evaluation workshops to further sensitise stakeholders.

The discussions will assist to assess environmental progress especially with regard to the effectiveness of implementation of mitigation measures.


There is also the need to promote knowledge on environmental issues at the district and community levels. This approach should be through the strengthened district SLEPA to assist community members to identify their existing beliefs and practices, provide them with information and assist them to analyse the environmental consequences of the various interventions.


8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND MONITORING COMPONENT

8.1 Management Plan

The Environmental Management Plan presented under this section considers institutional arrangements required to implement the environmental actions, as well as a presentation of some monitoring indicators. The cost of the mitigation measures will be determined by the contractor at the construction stage and by the implementers at the operational stage.

The ESMF provides general guidelines for environmental management including mitigation measures for adverse impacts. As is the case under the on-going project, the pre-selection of the feeder roads will be done by SLRA and the district councils based on (i) the updated district road master plan and (ii) priorities identified by the communities and their commitment to participate in the rehabilitation and maintenance. The criteria for selection will be the same as that of the on-going project (ie, agricultural potential, population and market accessibility). The projects will subsequently go through environmental clearance by the PCU and the SLEPA.

The specific procedures to be followed to identify and implement mitigation measures for adverse impacts (and also obtain environmental permits) for projects are provided in this section, and these are based on EIA procedures in Sierra Leone as well as World Bank environmental and social assessment safeguard policies (OP 4.01).

The local environmental regulations confirm the SLRA as the proponent for the project (or the development), and will initiate environmental screening of the project and the registration of the project with the SLEPA in consultation with the District Councils. The checklist provided in the Annex provides guidance to the SLRA for the conduct of this exercise. There may be a number of options to choose from, to address perceived impacts and it is suggested that the mitigation guidelines provided in this ESMF may be useful.

On completion of the screening and registration with the EPA, and subsequent approval by the EPA and the PCU, the report which will include adequate mitigation measures designed into the project to address any untoward impacts will be submitted to the implementing agencies including the District Councils, contractors, FBOs etc. The PCU and SLEPA would make sure that guidelines are adhered to, and that the SLRA has adequately discussed with contractors and trained local community members on environmental concerns. The SLRA together with the local SLEPA will review and check for compliance with the environmental assessment process.

To ensure full use of facilities, the District Councils will draft bylaws and rules which will cover issues like accessing and protecting the water facilities, preventing inadequate wastewater disposal including sanitary facilities. The District Councils will monitor the effectiveness of implemented mitigation measures within the communities and advise SLRA accordingly.


8.2 Monitoring indicators

Environmental and social monitoring during the implementation of the sub-projects is done in order to measure the success of the mitigation measures. Monitoring is a key component of the ESMP during project implementation. It is essential that the basis for the choices and decisions made in the sub-project design and other environmental and social safeguard measures implemented are verified. Monitoring will verify the effectiveness of impact management, including the extent to which mitigation measures are successfully implemented.

Monitoring of the general project and the specific sub-project activities will help to: Improve environmental and social management practices; and Provide the opportunity to report the results on safeguards, impacts and mitigation measures

implementation.

Some monitoring indicators to assess the effectiveness of the institutional arrangement, and also mitigation measures implemented are suggested in the table below.

Table 13: Monitoring IndicatorsType of impact/ issue Monitoring indicatorsRegistration of projects with SLEPA

Number of proposals successfully compiled by SLRA and other Implementing Agencies and submitted to the SLEPA;

Number of projects registered by the SLEPA;

Length of time between submission and registration by SLEPAFeeder roads rehabilitationWater quality and pollution

Availability and number of temporary storage containers for sanitary and cleaning wastes including waste oils.

Design provisions for temporary sediment barriers on slopes to prevent silt from entering the watercourse.

Soil erosion Constructed appropriate erosion-protection measures.Public health problems Availability and number of sanitary facilities for workers.

Number of local labourers and other workers

Number of environmental and safety meetings with workers Safety of the public Number of reported cases of accidents involving general public and related to

works.Land take/ and other resettlement related issues

RAP/ Compensation reports

Compensation payments

Time taken to pay compensationOccupational health and safety

Number of recorded accident cases

Air pollution Speed control ramps with appropriate road signs


Type of impact/ issue Monitoring indicatorsSustainability of provided facility

Length of feeder road constructed

Time taken to repair damaged roads

Number of reported water related diseases and malaria cases

Incidence and severity of floodingSocio economic Number of local youth employed

Number of women food vendors

Number of community members supplying sand and stonesMarket and storage infrastructure

Number of FBOs supported

Number of storage and processing facilities providedImproved technologies

Number of education and awareness creation sessions with communities

Incidence of crop pest and disease

Fertilizer demand

Crop yield

Number of farmers signing up and or opting out

8.3 Institutional Capacity Strengthening Programme

The table below describes the capacity strengthening programme for the implementation of the ESMF. This is to build upon capacity already acquired from previous project experiences.

Table 14: Institutional Capacity Strengthening Programme and Proposed Budget for ESMF Implementation

Description Application Target Audience

Duration (Days)

Estimate Budget (US$)

General environmental awareness seminar that will include ecological and social science principles, legal responsibilities, consequences of non-sustainable development, cost of poor environmental decisions, and introduction to the ESMF and the use of simple environmental and social screening mechanism

Personnel require knowledge of WB’s, National Environmental policies, as well as, an appreciation for the need to support environmentally sustainable development.

PCU, SLEPA staff, FBOs, District Councils

2 10,000.00

An in-depth appreciation of environmental management including legal requirements, EIA

The target audience will be responsible for EA review at the national level and for

PCU,SL EPA staff, District Councils

3 15,000.00


methodology, impact determination (methods) and mitigation analysis and costing, stakeholder involvement methods, monitoring techniques, preparation of environmental reports, TORs.Course will include field visits and class room exercises.

preparing TORs for EIA consultants as well as monitoring consultants’ work and final approval of EIAs. Conducting environmental audits on selected sub-projects and for periodic monitoring of sub-project implementation to ensure compliance.

General environmental awareness seminar that will include ecological and social science principle and monitoring, legal responsibilities, consequences of non-sustainable development, costs of poor environmental decisions, and introduction to the ESMF issues

Local Government staff level staff requires an appreciation of Sierra Leonean and WB’s environmental requirements, as well as, an appreciation of the need to support sustainable development.

NGO’s, District Councils other local government staff, FBOs

2 10,000.00

The costs estimates are based on the assumption that resource persons are likely to come from other parts of the country and therefore require travel allowances including participants from local communities. Hence, these estimates may include travel expenses.

The total cost of the institutional strengthening and capacity building for the implementation of the ESMF is estimated at a lump sum of US$35,000.00. This will be done in conjunction with capacity building activities proposed in the revised RPF to reduce cost.

8.4 Summary of ESMF Process

The table below summarizes the environmental and social management process by activity and responsibilities

Table 15: Summary of ESMF Cycles with Responsibilities

Cycle Key activity ResponsibilitiesPlanning Drafting of ESMF Consultant

Design Review of ESMF Bank/SLEPA/PCU

Finalization of ESMF SLEPA/ Consultant

Disclosure of ESMF Bank/SLEPA/PCUExecution/Operation

Implementation and monitoring MAFFS, PCU,SLRA, FBOs, District Council/SLEPA/Community


9.0 CONSULTATION, ESMF DISCLOSURE AND GRIEVANCE MECHANISM

9.1 Stakeholder consultations

The ESMF preparation included stakeholder consultations. Key project stakeholders were identified for consultations and these included Government Ministries, State Agencies/ Organisations/ and Departments, Project offices, Farmer Based Organisations, Non-governmental organization and local communities.

Meetings have been held with key officials and opinion leaders to gauge level of awareness and involvement with the project, concerns of project implementation, and to obtain relevant documents or baseline information of project area and the coastal setting of Sierra Leone. The consultations also served to gather information on the mandates and permitting requirements to inform the development of the Project.

Consultations were also held at the district and chiefdom levels as part of the disclosure activities. This involved all 13 districts and representatives of between 25 and 30 people from paramount chiefs, ward councillors, chiefdom youth leaders, farmers representative, representative from office of National Security and council representatives over a one week period. Issues raised bothered on membership of the grievance redress committees, duration for addressing grievances, further sensitization and radio discussion of project activities and the GRM. Other issues raised by the participants at the chiefdom level include payment of minimum compensation where there will be resettlement, commitment of community to ensure success of project, and development of simple ToR for the members of the different grievance committee members to avoid abuse. Another interesting outcome of the consultations was that, the GRM would be adopted to address any other disputes within the communities which affect especially farmers like fires, cattle rustling.

9.2 ESMF Disclosure

The World Bank policies require that environmental reports for projects are made available to project affected groups, local NGOs, and the public at large. Public disclosure of EIA documents or environmental reports is also a requirement of the Sierra Leone EIA procedures. However, there is no limitation as to the extent and scope of disclosure. The PCU in collaboration with SLEPA will make available copies of the ESMF in selected public places as required by law for information and comments. Public notice in the media should serve this purpose.

The notification should be done through a newspaper or radio announcement or both. The notification should provide: a brief description of the Project; a list of venues where the ESMF report is on display and available for viewing; duration of the display period; and


contact information for comments.

The SLEPA will select display venues upon consultation with PCU but would be expected that one of the venues or places will be near the proposed project sites or local communities.

There will be continuous consultations on safeguards issues as part of implementation activities and arrangements. This started with the preparation of the ESMF. The consultations were held at two levels. At the national level involving key Ministries including MAFFS, MLGRD, EPA, and Human Rights Commission.

There were also district council representatives from 11 of the 13 districts. The consultations and discussions of the draft ESMF impacted the final document as some stakeholders raised issues with dust, land, destruction of farms among others which have been taken care of in the mitigation plan. The meeting also emphasized the need for ownership and commitment by government that should go beyond the consultations so as to ensure that where required, GoSL will release the necessary funds to pay off compensations and give the needed support to implementing agencies especially contractors.

The meeting also emphasized the need to prevent grievances through strong sensitization and information dissemination on project activities. The consultation also emphasized the need to give legitimacy to the GRM through a Cabinet Paper from the Minister of Agriculture, in consultation with the Ministry of Local Government, Ministry of Lands, Ministry of Works, and EPA. The Cabinet Paper should clearly outline the authorities and powers vested in the GRM. However, the meeting acknowledged that this will require time. It recommended that a legal opinion might be needed in the process of developing the Cabinet Paper and the GRM. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security will take up this responsibility. However, the GRM as would be established for the purpose of the project implementation will be recognized as having the mandate to function as such (Annex 3 and 4 for details of the national, District/Chiefdom level consultations report.

The original ESMF was disclosed in country and at the World Bank’s infoshop in January 2007. The revised ESMF was disclosed in country after the required clearances from the World Bank and the GoSL through the media and Public Notices at the District and Chiefdom levels and at the World Bank’s infoshop after the in-country disclosure. Other avenues for disclosure included Radio stations. The consultations took place at two levels: At the national level and at the chiefdom levels involving community representatives and facilitated by the District Councils, the EPA and the PCU. Issues raised during the consultations and the disclosure meetings have been included in the final report. As an overall plan, sensitization on these safeguards instruments and implementation arrangements for all stakeholders shall be integrated into the communication plan for the project and through workshops and local media as well.


9.3 Grievance Redress Mechanism

Grievance mechanisms provide a formal avenue for affected groups or stakeholders to engage with the project implementers or owners on issues of concern or unaddressed impacts. Grievances are any complaints or suggestions about the way a project is being implemented. They may take the form of specific complaints for damages/injury, concerns about routine project activities, or perceived incidents or impacts. Identifying and responding to grievances supports the development of positive relationships between projects and affected groups/communities, and other stakeholders.

The World Bank/IFC standards outline requirements for grievance mechanisms for some projects. Grievance mechanisms should receive and facilitate resolution of the affected communities’ concerns and grievances. The World Bank/IFC states that the concerns should be addressed promptly using an understandable and transparent process that is culturally appropriate and readily acceptable to all segments of affected communities, at no cost and without retribution. Mechanisms should be appropriate to the scale of impacts and risks presented by a project.

Grievances can be an indication of growing stakeholder concerns (real and perceived) and can escalate if not identified and resolved. The management of grievances is therefore a vital component of stakeholder management and an important aspect of risk management for a project.

While this Project may have only limited potential adverse impacts to people and the environment in general, identifying grievances and ensuring timely resolution is still very necessary. As such the ESMF has developed a grievance management process to serve as a guide during project implementation.

The PCU has discussed with the EPA and agreed on specific actions regarding the establishment of the Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM), the local language disclosure of the GRM and other relevant information about the project safeguards issues, training key stakeholders like contractors, FBOs, Councils etc on monitoring and compliance issues. Some of the required actions include establishing a grievance redress committee and outlining clear procedures.

9.3.1 The Grievance Redress Committee

Based on consultations with National level institutions and district councils and their representatives, the following arrangements were agreed for the levels of grievance committees and the procedures to be followed. There shall be a grievance redress committee at the chiefdom, district and national levels as follows:

Chiefdom level


Paramount Chief, Ward Councilor, Chiefdom Youth Leader, Chiefdom Women’s Leader (mammy queen), Town Chief of affected community, CSO within the chiefdom = 6 members

RPSDP project staff to be part of the committee as ex-officio members Complainant(s) or representative(s) to witness meeting discussing his/her complaints

District level Chairman of Council, Council Engineer, District Officer (DO), DIC Chairman, Civil Society

rep., Office of National Security, District Agriculture Officer = 7 members RPSDP project staff to be part of the committee as ex-officio members.

National level Ministry of Agriculture Forestry and Food Security (MAFFS), Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA), Sierra Leone Roads Authority (SLRA) Ministry of Works, Housing and Infrastructure (MWHI), Project Coordinating Unit (PCU), Ministry of Lands MLCPE, Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD) and, Civil Society representative = 7 members

Once constituted, each committee should appoint/designate a registrar to handle the processing of complaints as detailed below. This framework for the constitution of grievance committees may be adapted to suit particular chiefdoms/districts especially where there are local committees that may be dealing with land and related issues and which are competent enough to handle disputes related to project issues. Example of such district is Koinadugu. In addition members as proposed here may change due to district and chiefdom peculiarities. For instance At Kambia, suggestion to replace Town Chief with Sectional Chief and adding religious leaders as members are all acceptable changes that can be introduced.

9.3.2 Grievance Redress Procedure

Generally, affected people can lodge complaints at the district council which should properly receive and document for onward action. In order to streamline the process, the following structure is proposed:

i. Community Level: Complaints may be submitted to any member of the community level reps which will be recorded/filed and discussed at an agreed date for possible resolution within 7-14 days upon receipt of such complaints (see Annex 2 for a sample format).The community reps will meet at the community level- convened by the council rep to investigate and address issues and complainant informed of outcome of resolution.

ii. The Council rep informs the District Level Committee members, the complainant on outcome of meeting and status of complaint within max 14 days of receipt of complaints.

iii. If complaint is not resolved then it is elevated to the level of the District Council. The District Council Officer in charge of environmental and social issues convenes a meeting with all representatives to address complaint or resolve the issue. At this level, it is recommended that a representative of an NGO/CBO working in the community and in


good standing with them could be invited as an independent witness. Maximum time for resolution should not exceed 21 days.

iv. If issue is not resolved, then Council informs PCU for a final resolution which could take any time between 2-3 months.

9.3.2 Procedures for delivery of entitlements

Entitlements for Project Affected People (PAP) would range from cash payments and/or building materials to the provision of new land, new homes and non-cash compensation for other lost properties in accordance with the identification of the impact on their property.

Subject to the final decision on the exact position of the site and its dimensions, the approved entitlements or amounts would be communicated to the implementing agency or unit for delivery or payment to the beneficiaries. Compensation would be paid before the owners/occupiers are made to vacate their properties for commencement of construction or works. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security (MAFFS) and the project Coordinating Unit (PCU) will ensure that no construction begins until PAPs have been resettled if physical relocation is necessary and/or received their compensations (according to World Bank Operational Policies OP 4.12). All compensation, whether cash payments and /or alternative land and house provisions, would be given to the PAPs prior to any request for vacation of land/property and before commencement of construction. Compensation and resettlement will be funded by the GoSL

The compensation process should incorporate the following:

Agreement on Compensation and Preparation of Contracts All types of compensation should be clearly explained to the individual or household. A listing of all property and land being surrendered, and the types of compensation (cash and/or in-kind) selected. A person selecting in-kind compensation has an order form, which is signed and witnessed. The compensation contract should be read aloud in the presence of the affected party and other stakeholders prior to signing.

Compensation Payments All compensation payments will be made by GoSL through MAFFS in the presence of the affected party and representatives of the Grievance redress Committees with an NGO as a witness. The MAFFS/PCU will ensure that due process has been followed in preparing and paying of the appropriate compensation.

9.3.4 Identification of Vulnerable groups

Vulnerable groups are those at risk of becoming more vulnerable due to the displacement, compensation, and resettlement process. Vulnerable people include, but not limited to:

Disabled persons, whether mentally or physically; The elderly, usually above 60 years;


Widows; Children; and Female heads of households.

Assistance to vulnerable peopleAssistance to vulnerable people may include the following:

Identification of vulnerable people and identification of the cause and impacts of their vulnerability through direct interviews. This step is critical because often vulnerable people do not participate in community meetings (because most often they are shielded by the society and fronted by other individuals), and their disability/vulnerability may remain unknown.

Identification of required assistance at the various stages of the process: negotiation, compensation, moving;

Implementation of the measures necessary to assist the vulnerable person; and Monitoring and continuation of assistance after resettlement and/or compensation, if

required.

Assistance may take the following forms, depending upon vulnerable persons’ requests and needs:

Assistance in the compensation payment procedures (e.g., going to the bank with the- person to cash the compensation cheque);

Assistance in the post payment period to secure the compensation money and reduce risks of misuse/robbery;

Assistance in moving: providing vehicle, driver and assistance at the moving stage; Assistance in building: providing materials, workforce, or building houses; and Health care if required at critical periods: moving and transition period.

9.3.5 Time frame

Taking cognizance of the potentially low scale and scope of resettlement issues that could arise; the processing of compensation application for payment by Government should be expedited over an average maximum period of one month. Some additional one month could be allowed for exceptional circumstances where there could be some complexities or challenges. No construction will begin until PAPs have been resettled if physical relocation is necessary and/or received their full compensation (according to World Bank Policy OP 4.12). Additionally, the property owners must be given adequate notice of not less than one month after payment of compensation to vacate affected assets and relocate depending on the nature of relocation or resettlement.


DISTRICT CONSULTATIONS

DistrictMeeting Date and Location

Issues/ResponsesLocation of GRM

Membership of

Committees

Channels of Access to GRM

Timeframe Disclosure Redress

Expected Other Issues

Kambia April 8, 2011; Resource Centre, Kambia Town

Proposed three levels adopted

Chiefdom a) Replace Town

Chief with Section Chief

b) Add Religious leaders because of their social standing

c) Add Block Extension Supervisor because of their technical knowledge in agriculture (esp. for plantations)

d) Farmers’ representative at the c/dom level.

District

Proposal in the draft adopted

Too long. Complaints to be addressed between 1 – 7 days

Public disclosure of GRM not to be limited to community radios only




Membership of

Committees




e) Replace Council engineer with SLRA engineer

f) Replace Council Chairman with Chief Administrator, as Chairman should not be member of a sub-committee

g) Add farmers’ representative

h) Add Works committee chairperson of council

Kenema April 8, 2011

Proposed three levels (chiefdom, district, and national) adopted

Chiefdoma) Add councillors in

multi-wardb) Add Section Chief

overseeing affected community

Upheld as proposed

Upheld as proposed

a) Develop a jingle in local languages for broadcast via the radio

b) Discuss

a) Where expedient, compensation could be made based on the

a) There should be clear provisions for committee to acknowledge receipt of complaint




Membership of

Committees




GRM in community meetings

type of environmental and social impact

Port Loko April 9, 2011; Council Conference Hall, Port Loko

Proposed three levels adopted

Chiefdoma) Add Religious

leaders (2)b) Add Block

Extension Supervisor

District a) Replace Council

Chairperson with Chief Administrator, as Chairpersons are political authorities (with clear political leanings) whose actions can be misunderstood along political lines.

b) Add Inter-

Upheld as proposed

Upheld as proposed

c) Radio discussions

d) Chiefdom level meetings

e) Key stakeholders (Chiefs, religious leaders, etc) to be challenged to disclose information in their

b) Where resettlement is involved, minimal financial compensation is expected for manufactured materials like CI sheets

c) Beneficiary community should

b) There is need for intensive and adequate sensitization on the existence of the GRM and its workings.

c) There is need for clear TORs to be developed for each of the committee

d) There is need for active consultations with communities before commencemen




Membership of

Committees




religious Council representative in the district

c) Add District Youth Leader

National a) Add Inter-

religious Council

separate fora

take it as a responsibility to relocate

d) In the case of plantation, Chiefdom Committees should take it as a priority to pacify AP

t of project activities within communities, as a way of minimizing/eliminating grievances in advance.

Kailahun April 9, 2011; Kailahun Town

Proposed levels adopted

Chiefdoma) Add Religious

leaders in the chiefdoms

b) Add Section chiefs

Districta) Chairman of

Complaints should be made by AP to the Town Chief who should then

Upheld as proposed

a) Community radio

b) Use Community meetings, church and

a) Depends on the level of the effect

a) RPSDP should make available some logistical support whenever the committee meets




Membership of

Committees




Environmental and Social issues in the councils

b) Add Chief Administrator in council, due to the position’s influence and non-political nature

inform the chairperson of the committee

mosque to disseminate info on GRM

Koinadugu

April 11, 2011; Kabala Community Center

Proposed levels adopted

Chiefdoma) Each chiefdom

has a functional Chiefdom Committee in place with responsibilities for handling governance and development issues in the district.

This committee can thus be used as the Chiefdom-level Committee, as

Adopted as proposed

Adopted as proposed

c) Radio discussion on GRM

d) Stakeholders to be challenged to discuss GRM in different fora

b) Some financial compensation

c) Respect (amicable resolution)

There is need for massive sensitization of communities before commencement of projects in the communities.




Membership of

Committees




they already have experience in grievance handling

b) To add a farmers’ representative and a Civil Society representative in the existing Chiefdom Committee

District a) Add Chairman,

Council of Paramount Chiefs

b) Add Chairman, District Youth Committee

c) Add Chairperson, Inter-religious Council

National d) Add Provincial

Secretary from region where complaint originates.




Membership of

Committees




Pujehun April 11, 2011; Pujehun Town

Adopted as proposed

Chiefdoma) Add religious

leaders in the chiefdoms

b) The Paramount chief should be the chairman of the committee

c) Judiciary personnel should not be members of the committees

Complaints should be made to the town chief of the affected community who shall then inform the chairman of the chiefdom committee to convene a meeting.

Upheld as proposed

a) Community radio

b) Council meetings and Ward committee meetings can be a convenient for a for sensitization about the GRM

Where necessary, compensation can be paid

Bombali April 12, 2011; Conference Hall, MAFFS, Makeni

Adopted as proposed

Chiefdoma) Add Chiefdom

Chief Imam and Chiefdom Pastor

b) Add Treasury Clerks as Secretary to the committee (as they are trained personnel in writing a recording of

Adopted as proposed

Adopted as proposed

c) Radio discussion not enough

d) Community-level sensitization

Respect a) This mechanism could be used to address other grievances within communities affecting farmers (such as fires, cattle rustling, etc)

b) There is need for community involvement and




Membership of

Committees




minutes and paid staff of chiefdoms with similar responsibilities

c) Add representative of Farmers’ Federation

District d) Inter-religious

Council representative

e) Add Chairman, Council of Paramount Chiefs

f) Replace Council Engineer with SLRA Engineer

g) Add Farmers’ Federation rep

h) Add District Youth Leader

sensitization before commencement of construction works in communities, as a preventive measure.




Membership of

Committees




Bo April 12, 2011; Bo Town

Adopted as proposed

Chiefdoma) Add Section

chiefsb) Add Religious

leaders for their high esteem and respect with communities

c) Add the head of traditional/secret societies to help solve problems with cultural and societal issues

District a) Add Religious

leadersb) Add Chief

Administrator of council

Chiefdoma) Compla

ints should be made to the Town chief in the affected community

b) Complaints from chiefdom committees to the District Committees should be channel to the

Upheld as proposed

a) Use of community radio

b) Council meetings

c) Religious gathering

RPSDP and GOSL should determine compensation package for affected persons




Membership of

Committees




PSU staff who will then inform the chairman

Tonkolili April 13, 2011; Conference Hall, Tonkolili District Council, Magburaka

Adopted as proposed

Chiefdoma) Replace Town

Chief with Section Chief

b) Add religious leaders

Districta) Add

representative of a Women’s group

Nationala) Add

representative of a Women’s advocacy group

Grievances can be channelled to any committee member, but also to a designated REGISTRAR (preferably the the youth leader in the chiefdom

Upheld as proposed

Community radio, with preference to the following local languages: temne, limba, Creole and Kuranko

a) Amicable resolution, which can be reached if APs are approached with respect.

b) In the case of resettlement, minimal compensation can be considered

Logistics support for the smooth functioning of the redress structures.

Bonthe April 13, 2011;

Adopted as

Chiefdoma) Add the Chiefdom

Chiefdomb) APs to

Upheld as

a) Community Radio

Compensation, if the




Membership of

Committees




Mattru Town

proposed

Coordinator for ONS

b) Add religious leaders

c) Add district engineer

d) Add section chiefDistrict

a) Add district engineer and religious leaders

National a) Add ONS

coordinator

channel complaints through town chief who will then inform the chairman of the chiefdom committee

Districta) forward

to the district committee through the district Civil Society Officer

proposed

b) In the mosque and church

c) Women's meetings

d) Council meetings

need arises




Membership of

Committees




Nationala) GRissu

es from the district committee should not be taken to the PCU directly rather to Prosec, which is a regional committee

Kono April 14, 2011; District Council Conference Hall, Kono

Recommended only two levels – chiefdom and district

Districta) Replace ONS with

DISECb) Add Chairman,

Council of Paramount Chiefs

c) Add District Youth

Upheld as proposed. However, Chief Administrator should be the

Upheld as proposed

a) Radiob) Chiefdom

meetingsc) Sectional

meetings

a) Minimal financial compensation

b) Respect

Logistics support for the functioning of GRM structures.




Membership of

Committees




committees.REASONS:Different land tenure systems across districts; A national committee is seen as undermining governance structures at the district level

Leaderd) Add Chief

Administrator of council

focal person at the district level

Moyamba April 14, 2011; Moyamba Town

Adopted as proposed


leadersb) Add MAFFS Block

Extension Staff, because of their

A complaint can be made to the Town chief of the

Upheld as proposed

a) Community radio

b) Community meetings

c) Drama

a) Amicable resolution

b) Minimal compensation,

a) It was recommended that the committee can proceed with deliberation once




Membership of

Committees




leading role in farming activities in the chiefdoms

Nationala) Add ONS rep

A representative of the chiefdom/district committee should always be present when deliberations are conducted on a deferred case at a higher level, as the case may be.

affected community or any member of the committee

play for local communities

where necessary

there is 2/3 majority

Western Area Rural District

April 15, 2011; District Council Hall, Waterloo

Adopted as proposed


leaders and farmers’ rep

b) Paramount Chief position does not apply in the case of western area

At village level, complaint should be channeled through the village headman

Adopted as proposed

a) Radiob) Communi

ty meetings

Compensation, where expedient

The peculiarity of the governance structure in the western area need to be given attention.




Membership of

Committees




Districta) Replace Council

Chairman with Chief Administrator

b) Add farmers’ rep and District Youth Leader

c) Add Chairman, Council of Headmen

to the chiefdom/Ward committee

Participants The following participants were targeted for each district, selected across all chiefdoms within a particular district:

PARTICIPANTSNo. Category of

Participant No. of Persons

1

Paramount Chiefs/Chiefdom Speakers 4


2 Ward Councilors 43 Chiefdom Youth Leader 3

4Chiefdom Women's Leader 4

5 Section Chief 4

6Civil Society Organization 1

7 Council Engineer 18 DIC Chairman 1

9Office of National Security 1

10District Agriculture Officer 1

11 SLRA District Engineer 112 Religious Leaders 213 Chief Administrator 1

14Farmers Representative 2

TOTAL (No. of Participants) 30


esmf for epadocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/532181468101070464/e... · web viewit is classified...

Documents