Finance Minister Dr Haseeb Drabu with WB team.
APPRAISAL STAGE
Report No.: 95968
Date prepared/updated:April 20, 2015
- Basic Information
- Basic Project Data
| Country | India | Project ID | P154990 | ||
| Project Name | Jhelum and Tawi Flood Recovery Project (P154990) | ||||
| Task Team Leader | Saurabh Suresh Dani | ||||
| Estimated Board Date | May 29, 2015 | ||||
| Managing Unit | GSURR | Lending Instrument | IPF | ||
| Sector(s) | General transportation sector (38%), General Water, Sanitation and Flood Protection Sector (28%), Health (22%), General Education Sector (12%) | ||||
| Theme(s) | Natural disaster management (100%) | ||||
| Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)? | Yes | ||||
| Project Financing Data (In USD Million) | |||||
| Total Project Cost | 250.00 | Total Bank Financing | 250.00 | ||
| Financing Gap: | – | ||||
| Financing Source | Amount | ||||
| Borrower/Recipient | 0.00 | ||||
| International Development Association (IDA) | 250.00 | ||||
| Total | 250.00 | ||||
| Environmental Category | B – Partial Assessment | ||||
| Is this a Repeater project? | No | ||||
| Is this a Transferred project? | No | ||||
- Project Objectives
The project development objective is to support the recovery and increase disaster resilience in targeted areas of the Project Implementing Entity, and increase the capacity of the Project Implementing Entity to respond promptly and effectively to an eligible crisis or emergency
Based on the Rapid Post-Disaster Damage and Needs Assessment results, restoration works underway, and discussions with the government, the project will focus on restoring critical infrastructure using international best practice on resilient infrastructure. Given the region’s vulnerability to both floods and earthquakes, the infrastructure will be designed with upgraded resilient features, and will include contingency planning for future disaster events. Therefore, the project aims at both restoring essential services disrupted by the floods and improving the design standard and practices in the state to increase resilience.
Project Components. The project has seven components: (i) Reconstruction and strengthening of critical infrastructure (US$60 million); (ii) Reconstruction of roads and bridges (US$80 million); (iii) Restoration of urban flood management infrastructure (US$50 million); (iv) Restoration and strengthening of livelihoods (US$15 million); (v) Strengthening disaster risk management capacity (US$25 million); (vi) Contingent Emergency Response (US$0 million); and (vii) Implementation Support (US$20 million).
Component 1 –Reconstruction and Strengthening of Critical Infrastructure
The objective of this component is to support the reconstruction/restoration of damaged public buildings, such as hospitals, schools, higher education buildings, fire stations, and selected block and district offices, and other important public buildings. It will include the restoration of partially damaged structures and the reconstruction of fully damaged structures, including equipment and furniture.
The component will finance infrastructure and equipment damaged by the disaster, and improvements to current structures to increase resilience. Assessments will be carried out to determine the extent of structural integrity and retrofitting/reconstruction needs. For hospitals, the reconstruction will be focused on replacement of damaged specialized medical equipment, setting up specialized equipment on higher levels which will entail strengthening the structural integrity of buildings in order to be able to sustain the heavy load. For some hospitals, special diagnostics and pathology sections/extensions will be built since existing structures will be unable to sustain the load of heavy equipment on higher levels. Some older hospitals will also require retrofitting in order to ensure seismic resistance. The component will also finance the repair and reconstruction of damaged higher education, fire station, and other public buildings, including the procurement of equipment/furniture, etc.
Component 2 – Reconstruction of Roads and Bridges
The objective of this component is to restore and improve the connectivity disrupted due to the disaster through the reconstruction of damaged roads and bridges. The infrastructure will be designed to withstand earthquake and flood forces as per the latest official design guidelines. The affected areas will benefit by the restored access to the markets thereby increasing the economic growth in these areas and timely access to health and education services. Restoration of roads will also serve as supply/rescue lines in the event of disaster.
The component will finance support the reconstruction of about 300km of damaged roads and associated drainage works, retaining walls, breast walls and other structures to increase resilience. It will also finance the restoration and improvement of about 40 damaged bridges, designed to be seismic resilient (per the guidelines of the Bureau of Indian Standards) and with regard to topography and hydrology (per the guidelines of the Indian Roads Congress, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways), and projected demographic changes.
Component 3 – Restoration of Urban Flood Management Infrastructure
The objective of this component is to strengthen and reinforce existing weak and vulnerable flood control infrastructure. Investments will primarily include rehabilitation/renovation of storm water pumping stations in Srinagar city, and replacement of the power equipment, switch/ panel boards at elevated places, and related investments for improvement and increased resilience
Component 4 – Restoration and Strengthening of Livelihoods
The flood resulted in damage to infrastructure and assets such as workshops, stores, tools, raw material, and finished product stocks, which severely impacted non-farm livelihood in urban centers. In addition to the direct impact on livelihood, the sector is an important contributor to tourism in the region. This component will support:
Subcomponent 4.1 – Restoration of physical and productive assets. To finance the restoration of the training workshop and display building within the premises of the main handicraft & handloom market in Srinagar and the School of Design, as well as damaged productive assets in livelihood training institutions and affected craftsman families.
Subcomponent 4.2 -Technical assistance for risk proofing non-farm livelihood. To finance: i) vulnerability assessment of non-farm livelihoods and to identify opportunities for increased resilience; and ii) developing options to increase access to finance and insurance for non-farm livelihood
Component 5 – Strengthening Disaster Risk Management Capacity
The objective of this component is to enhance the capabilities of government entities in managing disaster risks, enhancing preparedness, and achieving resilient recovery. This component will entail the following:
Sub-component 5.1:Capacity building for disaster management (US$17 million). To finance strengthening of the disaster management systems in the state by augmenting the capacity of stakeholders and institutions. The activities will include: i) capacity building of the state disaster management authority by strengthening its institutional and organizational structure, staffing, and resources and funding of training programs and regular drills for the emergency operations center staff and Disaster Management Officers at the district and higher government levels; ii) setting up and capacitating the Disaster Response Force, and upgrading capacity of their services; iii) setting up a Decision Support System (DSS) and Emergency Operation Centers to integrate and analyze information from multiple sources in an integrated geo-spatial system.
Sub-component 5.2: Technical assistance for risk reduction and response preparedness (US$8 million). To finance activities such as: i) preparation of a Hydro-meteorological Resilience Action Plan focusing on extreme weather events to develop resilience solutions/recommendations and a robust, fail-safe EWS in the region including optimum use of strengthened networks and facilities; ii) River Morphology Study for some key rivers impacted by the disaster and to analyze and identify critical protective infrastructure works needed for river bank strengthening; iii) Urban vulnerability assessment study with specific focus on seismic risk mitigation to undertake detailed urban vulnerability analysis and model various risks for effective mitigation planning and disaster response preparedness; iv) Upgrading design guidelines and material specification for construction in seismic zones in order to carry out an update of current construction design standards and material specifications to align them with national and international best practices; v) Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance (DRFI) to work out options to increase the resilience of the government’s financial response capacity to secure cost-effective access to adequate funding for emergency response, reconstruction, and recovery.
Component 6 – Contingent Emergency Response
Following an adverse natural event that causes a major natural disaster, the government may request the Bank to re-allocate project funds to support response and reconstruction. This component would draw resources from the unallocated expenditure category and/or allow the government to request the Bank to re-categorize and reallocate financing from other project components to partially cover emergency response and recovery costs. This component could also be used to channel additional funds should they become available as a result of the emergency.
Component 7 – Implementation Support
This component would finance incremental operating costs of the Project, including the operation of the Project Management Unit (PMU) and Project Implementation Units (PIUs). In addition, the component will include consultancies required for the preparation and supervision of specific activities, trainings, exposure visits and knowledge exchange programs, etc
Project Beneficiaries. The primary beneficiaries would be the communities in the districts that were affected by loss of public service infrastructure that will be restored and improved under the project. By strengthening disaster risk management systems and institutions, the project will benefit the entire affected region.
Post-flood view of Srinagar’s Lambert lane. Photo: Bilal Bahadur.
- Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to safeguard analysis
The project activities will be implemented in twenty two (22) districts affected by floods in Jhelum and Tawirivers in Srinagar and Jammu regions. According to Census of India – 2011, the flood affected region has a population of 12.5 million, with a density of 56 persons per sq.km and a sex ratio of 883 females per 1,000 men. The literacy level is 67.16 per cent with men having a literacy rate of 76.75 per cent, while female literacy is 49.12 per cent.
The region is basically agrarian. Agriculture occupies an important place in the economy of the region whereby nearly 70 per cent of the population derives their livelihood directly or indirectly from the sector. In addition, this is also a tourist and pilgrimage destination. Every year, more than 10 million tourists visit the region, a majority of who are religious pilgrims visiting the holy shrines of Vaishno Devi, Amarnath, Hazratbal shrine and the Buddhist monasteries of Ladakh.
The region, owing to its geographical and geo-climatic setting, is a multi-hazard prone region that has experienced natural disasters like earthquakes, floods, landslides, avalanches, high velocity winds, and snowstorms. Most parts of the Srinagar Valley and northern districts fall in Seismic Zone V. The rest of the southern districts fall in the Seismic Zone IV. Floods and flash floods are also frequent. Floods generally occur in the summer when heavy rains are followed by snowmelt. Flooding of the river Jhelum is the main cause of floods. Floods also occur occasionally in Jammu and neighboring districts.
- Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists on the Team
Neha Pravash Kumar Mishra, Senior Environment Specialist, GENDR
Satya N. Mishra, Social Development Specialist, GSURR
- Safeguard Policies Triggered
| Safeguard Policies Triggered | Yes | No | TBD | |||
| Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) | ü | |||||
| Specific interventions envisaged under the project such as those for strengthening of critical infrastructure, road transportation, flood control and restoration of livelihoods may have some potential adverse environmental impacts in the project area. Such impacts will depend upon the location, nature and magnitude of interventions. Identification of sub-projects and their environmental screening will help identify possible environmental impacts.
OP 4.01 has been triggered to facilitate creation/strengthening of mechanisms whereby sub-projects can be planned, designed and maintained in an environmentally sound manner through integration of appropriate approaches into the over-all decision making process of the project. |
||||||
| Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) | ü | |||||
| While the proposed project interventions are not likely to cause significant conversion or damage to natural habitats, OP 4.04 has been triggered for this operation. The proposed activities such as reconstruction of roads and bridges, and flood management infrastructure might have impacts on natural habitats, flora and fauna and the local natural ecosystem.Activities such as strengthening of existing embankments, channel improvements, dredging and other activities might have potential impacts on surrounding natural habitats. Management measures, particularly diligence in appropriate site selection would also be required for avoiding/minimizing disturbances, particularly during the planning and design stage. | ||||||
| Forests (OP/BP 4.36) | ü | |||||
| OP 4.36 has been triggered for this project as some interventions are envisaged in/around forest areas. Activities envisaged under the project include, but not limited to, minor realignment of roads and change of bridge locations may result in impact on adjoining forest area/s.
While no significant conversion/degradation of this natural resource is expected to occur, screening mechanism that has been formulated for the project enables in early identification of such issues. Based on the screening result, site assessment and the availability of alternative sub-project site/s, further decision about inclusion/exclusion of a specific sub-project/s will be made.No commercial logging will be supported under the project. |
||||||
| Pest Management (OP 4.09) | ü | |||||
| OP 4.09 is not being triggered for this project as biological/environmental control methods or reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides is not envisaged. | ||||||
| Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) | ü | |||||
| The implementation of the project/program is not likely to affect religious structures of local significance or other physical cultural resources. Impacts, if any would be addressed through appropriate design interventions. Since some civil works are involved, ‘chance finds’ at work sites is a likely impact that has to be managed through appropriate provisions in the relevant (safeguards as well as bidding) documents. | ||||||
| Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) | ü | |||||
| OP 4.10 is triggered in view of the presence of tribal groups in Rajouri district affected by floods. | ||||||
| Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) | ü | |||||
| OP 4.12 is triggered keeping in view of the likelihood of IR impacts emerging out of civil works such as roads, bridges and public buildings proposed to be built as a part of the project. | ||||||
| Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) | ü | |||||
| OP 4.37 is not being triggered for this project as there is no construction of new dams or activities that are concerned with safe functioning of existing dams. | ||||||
| Piloting the Use of Borrower Systems to Address Environmental and Social Safeguard Issues in Bank-Supported Projects (OP/BP 4.00) | ü | |||||
- Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management
- Summary of Key Safeguard Issues
- Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts.
The project will target areas that were hit hardest by the devastating floods in the state. Given the magnitude of damage caused by flooding and associated landslides, the project is designed to provide reconstruction and recovery support to affected areas in which public infrastructure and service delivery were impacted severely. It is expected that it will yield benefits and livelihood opportunities through provision of high priority reconstruction and rehabilitation of public infrastructure in the worst affected areas of the state in addition to enhancing state’s capacity in dealing with future disasters.
The major activities proposed to be financed under the project include: (i) reconstruction and strengthening of public buildings such as schools and hospital infrastructure, (ii) reconstruction of roads and bridges, (iii) restoration of urban flood infrastructure, (iv) restoration and strengthening of livelihoods, (v) strengthening disaster risk management capacity, (vi) contingency emergency response, and (vii) project management support.
Environment Issues/Impacts:Interventions proposed under Components 1, 2 and 3 have a bearing on the approach and design of environment management and safeguard aspects of the project. While the project is expected to benefit the flood affected communities through restoration of infrastructure and strengthening of disaster risk management capabilities of the state, the proposed investments are likely to generate some adverse environmental impacts. Since the proposed activities/works would be largely carried out in the environmentally sensitive mountainous terrain of the state that is marked by various degrees of vulnerability and ecological features, there are some issues and risks that need to be managed through appropriate planning and upfront care during the sub-project selection and preparation phase. Specifically, due diligence during site selection and appropriate engineering/design is required for most sub-projects/activities owing to the challenges emanating from difficult terrain and climatic conditions.
Potential adverse impacts on account of activities/works proposed under Components 1 to 3 of the project may include: (i) direct/indirect environmental and social impacts resulting from poor site selection and inappropriate engineering/designs; (ii) impact on the drainage pattern of the area, including risks from future flood events; (iii) felling of trees and clearance of vegetation for sub-project construction; (iv) impact on certain/specific fauna (outside the protected areas, including habitats; nesting/breeding areas; movement zone); (v) safety and health concerns for general public from construction activities; (vi) occupational health and safety concerns for workers involved in construction; (vii) inconvenience and temporary disruption to services and access to certain public places and facilities; (viii)impacts due to construction material (sand, water, earth, aggregate) sourcing and transportation; (ix) concerns arising out of improper disposal of debris and other construction wastes and; (x) slope fragility and stabilization issues.
No long term, adverse or irreversible impacts are anticipated as the proposed activities are largely associated with reconstruction and strengthening of flood damaged infrastructure. In view of the potential impacts on the environment, Bank’s OP 4.01 on Environmental Assessment, OP 4.04 on Natural Habitats, OP 4.36 on Forests and OP 4.11 on Physical Cultural Resources have been triggered, and the project is designated as Category B.
Social Issues: The damaged public buildings including schools and hospitals will be reconstructed within the existing premises. The reconstruction and strengthening of the affected rural roads, bridges and urban flood infrastructure, to be carried out within the existing alignments, may occasionally involve some involuntary resettlement impacts on land owners, lease holders, traditional occupiers, and squatters. Therefore, OP 4.12 has been triggered.
OP 4.10 has been triggered in view of the presence of scheduled tribe groups (mostly nomadic Gujjar cattle herdsmen) living in the flood affected districts such as Rajouri where some of the activities are likely to be undertaken.
The project with its support for restoring the affected livelihoods of the artisans and weavers will benefit positively poor and vulnerable households engaged in craft based income activities mostly in rural areas.
- Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area.
The long-term impacts will be generally positive as the project will help in rebuilding the damaged public buildings such as schools and hospitals apart from roads, bridges and urban flood control infrastructure reducing the vulnerability of the people from similar disasters. This will stimulate or bring economic and social development in the flood affected areas. Most significantly, the reduction in the vulnerability of the affected communities in the state to the adverse impacts of floods and other climate related hazards would be a desirable long term impact.
The restoration of livelihoods through replacement of damaged assets and infrastructure will benefit the artisan households affected by the floods. This intervention is likely to minimize impoverishment risks of this income groups which has lost raw materials, equipment and finished products due to the floods in September 2014. Improvement in urban flood infrastructure would reduce the exposure of people to hazardous environmental conditions caused due to drainage problems and urban flooding.
Further, the experience gained during the project implementation may help the implementing agencies to address environmental and social issues more systematically in their regular operations. The project’s treatment of environmental and social issues specifically with regard to the approach used for screening sub-projects can set an important precedent for non-project activities/areas now and in the future.
At the same time, long-term/indirect adverse environmental and social impacts may result if road and flood control infrastructure are designed and/or implemented without due considerations to local environmental and social features.
- Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts.
Most of the project interventions are related to restoration/reconstruction of damaged infrastructure, facilities and public spaces, albeit with an attempt of building better and more resilient assets/systems, wherever possible. Since this is an emergency operation and specific locations and sub-projects have not yet been chosen,
The appropriate selection of a site for a sub-project plays an important role in minimizing the overall adverse impact of the disasters economically, environmentallyor socially. This is an emergency operation and specific activities to be undertaken under this project have not been identified as yet, though the key sectors of intervention have been agreed upon. The key activities proposed to be undertaken as a part of this project, namely reconstruction of public buildings, restoration and strengthening of damaged roads, bridges and urban flood control infrastructure will be carried out in-situ. While preparing specific activities, project alternatives and implementation methodologies shall be decided upon in line with provisions set forth and agreed in the ESMF.
A detailed or limited environmental impact assessment study (as the case may be depending on findings from the screening exercise) may be required for specific sub-projects/activities. These sub-projects will undergo an analysis of alternatives, especially in terms of their proposed location and/or design as required under standard EA practice.For sub-projects requiring regulatory clearances, alternative site/s will be explored, and for those with no viable alternatives, permissions will be sought in line with regulatory requirements.
- Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described.
Environmental and Social Management and Safeguards Instrument:In order to ensure effective environmental management in a scenario where multiple sub-projects/activities are proposed at different locations across the state and their specific locations are not known (at this stage of project preparation), an approach involving preparation, application and implementation of an Environment and Social Management Framework (ESMF) has been adopted for the project.It includes: (a) Environment and Social Screening approach and methodology; (b) Environment and Social Assessment for certain type of sub-projects, if and as necessary (determined by the screening results); (c) guidelines and generic management measures for all category of works/activities proposed under the project.
Environment Management and Safeguards
The EMF serves as a comprehensive and a systematic guide covering policies, procedures and provisions, which will be integrated in the over-all project cycle to ensure that the environmental concerns/issues are systematically identified and integrated into the project/sub-project cycle. It will guide the integration of environment, health and safety aspects within the decision making and implementation process of various sub-projects/activities. It will also support compliance with applicable laws and regulations of GoI and the state government apart from meeting the requirements of the relevant Bank policies.
In line with Bank policy requirements, the EMF provides clarity on the following: (i) policy triggers for the project; (ii) the screening criteria to be used for sub-project identification and selection; (iii) list out comprehensively a range of likely environmental impacts for the various types of works/activities envisaged under the project and; (iv) applicable national/state policy and regulatory requirements; (v) the measures to mitigate the identified environmental risks/issues; (vi) assessment of the institutional capacity of the implementing agency and measures for filling capacity gaps; and (vii) an estimate of the budget needed for the implementation of the EMF and related instruments. The EMF provides a list of activities that cannot be financed, and screen out activities that correspond to Category A projects, or that may trigger additional safeguards policies.
To avoid, minimize and mitigate adverse impacts, generic/standard activity-specific Environmental Management Plans (EMPs) have been developed, which form a part of the EMF. Activity-specific EMPs will help in addressing various construction and operation-stage impacts. However, critical environmental issues, which may result on account of improper site selection (an important factor of consideration in an ecologically sensitive hilly terrain), would be considerably avoided and/or minimized by effectively using results from the Environment Screening Exercise. This will ensure that no sub-project with the likely possibility of creating significant or irreversible adverse impact on environment is taken-up without a proper study (environment assessment/analysis). Accordingly, sub-projects or activities without significant or irreversible adverse impacts will be selected for investment under Phase I while others, which are located in/close to environmentally sensitive zones will be either dropped from the project scope or will be considered only after duly completing the required assessment/s. This over-all environment management approach for the project has been elaborated below and will include the following key steps:
- The sub-projects will be selected after detailed/appropriate level of assessment, including consultation with concerned key stakeholders. However, any activity/work having significant adverse, irreversible and long term impacts will be excluded from the scope of the project. For this, after identification of proposed works, an Environment Screening Exercise using well-established methodology and process will be carried out.
- Environment screening, which helps in early identification of key environmental issues at the sub-project level. The screening process forms the first step in the environment management process for the project and will be carried out in parallel with the project identification/engineering feasibility studies for the sub-projects under consideration for inclusion in the project. Proposed investments will be screened and sub-projects with no significant adverse environmental impact would be identified for implementation under the project.
- If required, for specific sub-projects/activities (as identified from the screening results), an Environment Assessment (EA) and sub-project specific Environment Management Plan (EMP) will be prepared in accordance to Bank’s OP 4.01. The EA will include an assessment of baseline conditions, analysis of alternative options, assessment of potential impacts, identification of mitigation measures and preparation of sub-project specific environmental management plans.
- Based on screening results, if a sub-project does not require an EA, the generic/standard activity-specific EMP, developed as part of the EMF, will apply. These generic/standard activity-specific EMPs provide over-all guidance on avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures to be adopted during the planning/selection, design, implementation and operation stages of a sub-project.
- Integration of Environmental Requirements in Bidding Documents. The considerations/requirements will be mainstreamed as part of the over-all decision making and execution process. For environment, health and safety requirements to be followed by the Contractor during construction, the requirements in form of conditions/specifications will be integrated into the Bidding Documents and Bills of Quantities (as required/relevant) will be provided for.
The EMF describes institutional arrangements, including roles and responsibilities of various players and monitoring requirements, required for effectively managing the environmental aspects of project planning and execution. Also, mid-term and end-term project assessment/evaluation will be undertaken by the PMU and the report will be shared with the Bank.
Social Safeguards Management
Safeguards Framework Preparation: A Social Management Framework (SMF) has been prepared as per the Bank requirements, and the Client has disclosed the said document incorporating the comments provided by the Bank. The client has no experience of having implemented a project recently by applying Bank’s safeguard policies. However, it has experience in managing social safeguards in infrastructure projects implemented with financial support from the Asian Development Bank (ADB).
The Social Management Framework (SMF) prepared for the JTFRP includes a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), an Indigenous People’s Development Framework (IPDF) and Gender Equity and Social Inclusion (GESI) Guidelines. The RPF sets out principles and procedures for carrying out social screening, and preparing and implementing Resettlement Action Plans (RAP) based on safeguards categorization during screening.
The IPDF (i) lays down identifying and addressing IP related impacts through social screening, (ii) records consultations carried out for the project, (iii) sets out a framework for free, prior, and informed consultations with the primary stakeholders including the tribal people for implementing sub-projects, (iv) charts out specific strategies for ensuring that positive benefits are delivered to the tribal groups living in project area by addressing their socio-economic needs in a culturally sensitive manner and through their participation, and (iv) measures to mitigate adverse impacts, if any, compliant with Bank safeguards policy. The GESI guidelines set out actions to be taken to ensure equal participation of women and men beneficiaries without discrimination and recommend actions for targeting women and vulnerable people with better outreach.
Existing Legal and Policy Framework: The recently legislated Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in LA and Resettlement and Rehabilitation Act of India (RFCT-LARRA, 2013) is yet to be ratified by the Provincial Government. The Project Implementing Entity’s Land Acquisition (LA) Act (1990) sets out procedure for compulsory land acquisition, which is not at par with the RFCT-LARR, 2013 in terms of the compensation package offered. However, the procedure under Section 19-20 of the Client’s LA Act (1990) Rules allow “Acquisition through Private Negotiations” providing “replacement value” as agreed with the affected land/lease owner through a high powered negotiations committee headed by the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district and including the Member of the Legislative Assembly. Land acquisition is carried out through special LA-Collectors assigned the responsibility at the district and specific project areas. The provincial government has established no generic Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy, however, has promulgated R&R Policies for specific projects including those aided by the Asian Development Bank (ADB). The provincial government has in place specific legislations, polices, and schemes for protection and welfare of the scheduled tribes, women, children, and other vulnerable groups.
Gender Equality and Social Inclusion: The project strongly emphasizes attention to gender equity and social inclusion in the implementation process. The proposed livelihoods component will support restoration and strengthening of about 10,000 artisans and weavers, about fifty percent of whom are women. The Women Development Corporation of the State will be a key stakeholder in the implementation process. The restoration of public buildings including schools and hospitals will pay special attention to the needs and interests of vulnerable people including children, women, and aged, physically challenged, and other socially marginalized and vulnerable groups. The proposed disaster risk reduction initiatives will similarly focus on equal participation of and benefits for women, children, and other vulnerable groups. The gender equity and social inclusion outcomes of the project shall be monitored with key performance indicators specified in the Results Matrix.
Citizen Engagement Strategy: The key elements of the citizen engagement strategy for this operation include the following: (i) suomotu disclosure of important project related information by the government on its website and at the appropriate local level under section 4 of the Right to Information Act and disclosure procedures agreed with the Bank, (ii) framework for consultation with the key stakeholders including the scheduled tribes (IPs) during planning, design and implementation of all sub-projects; (iii) ensuring free, prior, informed consultation with the Scheduled Tribe groups and their representatives for obtaining broad community support as a part of preparation of specific sub-projects relevant to that area; (iv) upgrading the established Grievance Redress Mechanisms (GRM) at PIU and PMU levels to meet specific grievance redress requirements of this operation; (v) promoting community based risk reduction initiatives with the participation of and networking with relevant stakeholders including women, school children, youth, civil society organizations, and local bodies.
Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM). The established GRMs of the state and relevant PIUs shall be upgraded with guidelines agreeable to the Bank as Senior and Field level GRMs at PMU and PIU levels. In case of land acquisition, there is a multi-layered GRM with the LA-Collector, District Collector, Revenue Divisional Commissioner, and Finance Commissioner (Department of Revenue) responsible for hearing and resolving grievances relating to the award of compensation. The Committee for Acquisition through Private Negotiations is constituted by the Deputy Collector of the concerned District, elected Member of the Legislative Assembly, District Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineer concerned, and District level officer of the intending department, and the Chairperson of the relevant Notified Area Council. The Project will have district level GRMs will be the second level GRM, chaired by the District Collector or her/his nominees, and PIU representatives. At the PMU level, the Project Steering committee shall be the highest body to entertain and resolve appeals against decisions of lower GRMs. The state has an online GRM helpline, which will also entertain grievances related to the project.
Grievance Redress Service of the World Bank: Communities and individuals who believe that they are adversely affected by a World Bank (WB) supported project such as this operation may also submit complaints to the Grievance Redress Service (GRS) established by the World Bank. The GRS ensures that complaints received are promptly reviewed in order to address project-related concerns. Project affected communities and individuals may also submit their complaint to the WB’s independent Inspection Panel, after having brought the complaint to the World Bank’s attention through its GRS. Information on how to submit complaints to the World Bank’s Grievance Redress Service is available at http://ift.tt/1z9f82J. Information on how to submit complaints to the World Bank Inspection Panel is available at http://ift.tt/1vKqJPX.
Institutional Capacity and Implementation Arrangements
Institutional Capacity: The client has limited previous experience in applying Bank’s safeguard policies in development projects (previous Bank funded operations in the state were closed nearly 10 years back) but has some experience in implementing infrastructure projects supported by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) for which it has in place an Environment Management Framework (EMF) Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), IPF, GAP and activity-specific RAPs, IPPs, GAPs and Environment Management Plans (EMPs). To implement these instruments, it has established an SPV called Economic Reconstruction Agency (ERA) supported by consultants.
Implementation Arrangements for the Project
A Project Steering Committee (SC) will be set up for the over-all strategic guidance and monitoring of the project. It will be headed by the Chief Secretary and will comprise all concerned line departments, and additionally the departments of Finance, Planning, Environment/Forests and Social Welfare. The SC will formally approve the project investments and help coordinate the activities of various departments, including in obtaining required approvals/clearances for the Project. This shall be done through semi-annual review meetings, where the SC shall: (a) review the budget; (b) review progress against the defined milestones; (c) review critical findings of the audit and evaluation reports and; (d) provide such guidance, as it may deem necessary for the project.
A Project Management Unit (PMU), housed within the Relief & Rehabilitation Department (R&RD), will be responsible for overall project management, coordination, and reporting, and for implementation of Component 5. The PMU will also be responsible to carry out procurement of goods, services, and small scale works for other components, with technical inputs from the relevant line departments.The PMU will be responsible for:
- Overall project management and reporting.
- Coordination with PIUs and line departments in approval of designs, assisting the PIUs in preparation of: DPRs, bidding documents, tendering schedules, etc.
- Appointment of technical assistance consultants and other safeguards management support for the implementing agencies.
- Quality Assurance through third party audits.
- Maintaining MIS and Quarterly reporting.
- Progress reporting, financial management, monitoring and reporting.
- Implementation of Component 5.
- Ensuring compliance with agreed implementation procedures and other Bank requirements, including environment and social management activities.
- Grievance redress.
Three Project Implementation Units (PIUs) that will be set-up at the beginning of the project. During project implementation, additional PIUs might be set-up depending on the volume of investments and capacity. The three PIUs are: (i) Roads and Building Department (R&B), will be responsible for all civil works under Components 1 and 2, and it will receive technical inputs from the Departments of Health, Higher Education, Fire, and others as relevant depending on the nature of the civil works; (ii) Srinagar Municipal Corporation (SMC) will be responsible for implementation of Component 3 and it will be assisted by the Urban Environment Engineering Department (UEED) for technical inputs and procurement of goods, works, and services in line with its official responsibilities and capacity; and (iii) Industry & Commerce Department (I&CD) will be responsible for implementation of Component 4 with support from other agencies.ThePIUs will be responsible for:
- Preparation of Detailed Project Reports including technical designs, surveys and investigations, etc.
- Tendering, bid evaluation, contract award, contract management, etc.
- Financial Management
- Environment/Social management and safeguards compliance.
- Progress and expense reporting to the PMU.
- Coordination with line departments for design, implementation, and hand-over arrangements.
- Grievance redress.
Line departments will provide technical inputs to the PIUs as relevant, in line with their sectoral responsibility. In line with their capacity and, as agreed by the PMU and the respective PIU, they will also carry out procurement of goods, works, and services.
Monitoring: The PMU will put in place a monitoring mechanism that includes photo identification and geo-referenced tracking system for works. The PIUs will be responsible for feeding the required information into the system.
Implementation and Quality Monitoring Arrangements for Safeguards
A Social and Environment Management Unit (SEMU) with Social Development and Environment Specialists will be established as part of the Project Management Unit (PMU) for JTFRP. The PIUs will have similar arrangement with social and environment specialists. The Client has proposed to establish social and environment safeguards management capacity at the PMU and PIU levels with mobilizing officers having relevant experience and skills.
The Client has initiated steps for appointing two of its officers earlier managing the Social Development Unit and Environment Unit for the ADB funded project as its Social Development and Environment Specialists at the PMU to be established at the Department of Relief and Rehabilitation for this project. The PMC hired to support client in designing and implementing activities under this project will have social and environment specialists. The PMU will hire social and environment management consultants, as necessary, to carry out social and environment screening and impact assessments, prepare and implement activity/sub-project specific safeguard instruments acceptable to the Bank.
While the PMU and PIUs will be responsible for internal monitoring, the Project Implementation Quality Audit Consultants will have social development and environmental expertise to provide external monitoring support.
- Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people.
Stakeholders: The primary stakeholders include the intended beneficiaries and people affected by the proposed activities – Project Beneficiaries including health facility users, school children, people using the damaged roads and bridges planned to be reconstructed, city dwellers exposed to hazardous conditions due to urban floods, the affected artisans and their associations, local bodies like village Panchayats, municipalities, local NGOs, and people likely to be affected due to IR impacts. The secondary stakeholders will include the Department of Relief and Rehabilitation, implementing departments and agencies, Public Works Department, Industries, Forest Department Revenue and Social Welfare.
Consultations: Stakeholder participation is/will be central to design and implementation of the project and provides for information sharing, consultation and collaboration measures. A consultation framework has been laid out in the EMF, and SMF (RPF, IPF and GESI guidelines) to ensure proper consultation and participation of stakeholders at the various stages of project preparation and implementation. The ESMF (EMF and SMF) provide for preparing sub-projects with free, prior and informed consultations including with the tribal stakeholders affected by the floods.
Community/stakeholder consultations will also be carried out during the implementation stage of the project. In accordance with the applicable Bank policies, public consultations at the local level (in areas where specific investments will be made) will be carried out. The consultation process for the project will include a range of formal and informal on-site discussions, focus group discussions/meetings and targeted stakeholders. The public consultation process is being designed in a way that: (i) affected people are included in the decision making process; (ii) public awareness and information sharing on project alternatives and benefits is promoted; and (iii) views on designs and solutions from the communities are solicited.The sub-project specific assessments and Action Plan/s, where required, will be prepared in consultation with affected/concerned communities and the draft/s will be disclosed to solicit feedback.
Expert opinion on specific issues related to the over-all design/components of the project and applicability of environmental regulations will be sought, including through meetings/workshops. Outputs from this process will be integrated into the project/sub-project design, where technically feasible.
Disclosure. The ESMF (EMF and SMF)has been disclosed by the Project Authority through their website on April 21, 2015. The same has been disclosed through the Bank’s Infoshop on April 22, 2015.Other relevant project documents (including screening reports and sub-project specific plans) will be disclosed on the website and at other places accessible to the general public/interested individuals/groups in line with the requirements of Bank’s Operational Policies and at the field office/ community level in compliance with the Right to Information Act. Community level disclosure will cover public disclosure of beneficiary lists, safeguard action plans, key instructions and relevant contact addresses. The project sites will have display boards indicating the project logo, year of construction initiation and completion, funding agency, and contact details to provide suggestions or record grievance.
- Disclosure Requirements
| Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other | |
| Date of receipt by the Bank | March 27, 2015 |
| Date of submission to InfoShop | April 21, 2015 |
| “In country” Disclosure | April 21, 2015 |
| Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process/Social Assessment | |
| Date of receipt by the Bank | March 27, 2015 |
| Date of submission to InfoShop | April 21, 2015 |
| “In country” Disclosure | April 21, 2015 |
| Indigenous Peoples Development Plan/Framework (as part of SA) | |
| Date of receipt by the Bank | March 27, 2015 |
| Date of submission to InfoShop | April 21, 2015 |
| “In country” Disclosure | April 21, 2015 |
| If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP.
Pest Management – Not Applicable/Policy Not Triggered. Physical Cultural Resources – Done – Covered under ESMF |
|
| If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why:
Not Applicable |
|
- Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level
| OP/BP/GP 4.01 – Environment Assessment | |||||||||||||||||
| Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? | Yes | [ Ö ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? | Yes | [Ö] | No | [ ] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? | Yes | [ Ö ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| OP/BP 4.04 – Natural Habitats | |||||||||||||||||
| Would the project result in any significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats? | Yes | [ ] | No | [ Ö ] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| If the project would result in significant conversion or degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? | Yes | [ ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ Ö] | |||||||||||
| OP 4.09 – Pest Management | |||||||||||||||||
| Does the EA adequately address the pest management issues? | Yes | [ ] | No | [ ] | NA | [Ö] | |||||||||||
| Is a separate PMP required? | Yes | [ ] | No | [ Ö ] | NA | [] | |||||||||||
| Are PMP requirements included in project design? | Yes | [] | No | [ ] | NA | [Ö] | |||||||||||
| OP/BP 4.11 – Physical Cultural Resources | |||||||||||||||||
| Does the EA include adequate measures related to cultural property? | Yes | [ Ö] | No | [ ] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the potential adverse impacts on cultural property? | Yes | [ Ö ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| OP/BP 4.10 – Indigenous Peoples | |||||||||||||||||
| Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? | Yes | [Ö] | No | [] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? | Yes | [Ö] | No | [] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been reviewed and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit or Sector Manager? | Yes | [ ] | No | [ ] | NA | [Ö ] | |||||||||||
| OP/BP 4.12 – Involuntary Resettlement | |||||||||||||||||
| Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/ process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? | Yes | [Ö] | No | [ ] | NA | [] | |||||||||||
| If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? | Yes | [Ö ] | No | [] | NA | [] | |||||||||||
| OP/BP 4.36 – Forests | |||||||||||||||||
| Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional issues and constraints been carried out? | Yes | [ ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ Ö ] | |||||||||||
| Does the project design include satisfactory measures to overcome these constraints? | Yes | [ ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ Ö ] | |||||||||||
| Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, does it include provisions for certification system? | Yes | [ ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ Ö ] | |||||||||||
| OP/BP 4.37 – Safety of Dams | |||||||||||||||||
| Have dam safety plans been prepared? | Yes | [ ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ Ö ] | |||||||||||
| Have the ToRs as well as composition for the independent Panel of Experts been reviewed and approved by the Bank? | Yes | [ ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ Ö ] | |||||||||||
| Has an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) been prepared and arrangements been made for public awareness and training? | Yes | [ ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ Ö ] | |||||||||||
| The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information | |||||||||||||||||
| Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank’s Infoshop? | Yes | [Ö] | No | [] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? | Yes | [Ö] | No | [] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| All Safeguard Policies | |||||||||||||||||
| Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? | Yes | [ Ö ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? | Yes | [ Ö ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project includes the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? | Yes | [ Ö ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
| Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? | Yes | [ Ö ] | No | [ ] | NA | [ ] | |||||||||||
- Approvals
| Signed and submitted by | Name | Date |
| Task Team Leader | Saurabh S. Dani | April 21, 2015 |
| Environmental Specialist | Neha Vyas | April 20, 2015 |
| Social Development Specialist | Satya N. Mishra | April 20, 2015 |
| Approved by | ||
| Regional Safeguards Coordinator | Francis V. Fragano | April 22, 2015 |
| Comments | ||
| Sector Manager | Bernice K. Van Bronkhorst | April 21, 2015 |
| Comments | ||
from Kashmir Life http://ift.tt/1z9f6rM
via IFTTThttp://ift.tt/1iGhVXj
No comments:
Post a Comment