Page 1 INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 11/21/2005 Report No.: AC1084 1. Basic Project Data Country: Kiribati Project ID: P089326 Project Name: Adaptation Program Phase II - Pilot Implementation Phase (KAP II) Task Team Leader: Idah Z. Pswarayi-Riddihou GEF Focal Area: Climate change Global Supplemental ID: Estimated Appraisal Date: December 15, 2005 Estimated Board Date: April 5, 2006 Managing Unit: EASRD Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: General water, sanitation and flood protection sector (60%);General public administration sector (25%);General agriculture, fishing and forestry sector (15%) Theme: Vulnerability assessment and monitoring (P);Climate change (P);Natural disaster management (P);Other environment and natural resources management (P) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00 IDA Amount (US$m.): 0.00 GEF Amount (US$m.): 1.80 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: BORROWER/RECIPIENT 2.29 AUSTRALIA: AUSTRALIAN AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 1.49 NEW ZEALAND, GOV. OF (EXCEPT FOR MIN. OF FOR. AFFAIRS) 1.02 4.80 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Simplified Processing Simple [] Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) Yes [ ] No [X] 2. Project Objectives The key objective of the proposed Pilot Implementation Phase of KAP (KAP-II) is to develop and demonstrate the systematic diagnosis of climate-related problems and the design of cost-effective adaptation measures, while continuing the integration of climate risk awareness and responsiveness into economic and operational planning. The global environmental objective of the KAP-II is to assist the GoK in enhancing its capacity to plan and implement adaptation measures to the climate-related issues facing the country, which will also reduce the detrimental impacts of climate change on the fragile atoll ecosystems of Kiribati. Page 2 3. Project Description KAP-II aims to change the way Kiribati handles its planning and implementation of regular activities so that they better take account of climate risks. This requires progressive reinforcement of adaptation-related programs in the national Governmentâ ™s budget and sectoral plans, in combinat ion with a process of participatory adaptation, involving island councils, NGOs, churches, communities, and individuals. The priority adaptation investments supported by KAP-II will not only provide immediate results in terms of reduced vulnerability, but will also help to demonstrate and promote a climate risk aware approach to planning and design of such activities. After KAP-II, these activities will be expanded as part of a continued adaptation program, both in scope and in terms of addressing additional sectors. Component 1: Policy, planning, and information (US$ 1.4 million). This component supports three core elements of all adaptation efforts in Kiribati. The first element is awareness raising and consultation, including technical assistance to review and redesign frameworks and processes for participation and awareness at national and local level; two-yearly national consultations; regular adaptation-related participatory events; a newsletter, media releases, educational material; and an annual survey on public attitudes and awareness. The second element is policy coordination and planning, including technical assistance for the new National Strategic Risk Management Unit in the Office of Te Beretitenti; capacity building in Integrated Coastal Zone Management among key government staff; continued mainstreaming into Ministry Operational Plans; and integration of adaptation into population and resettlement programs. The third element is to generate scientific climate risk information and refurbish the capacity of the Meteorological Office with new equipment and training of staff. Component 2: Land use, physical structures, and ecosystems (US$ 2.1 million). This component will contribute to reducing the vulnerability of the coastline including key public assets and ecosystems, shifting the coastal management practice from a reactive, single technique approach to repairing damage as it occurs, to a preventative and more technically varied risk mitigation strategy, including more attention for environmental sustainability. More specifically, the component would support technical assistance, workshops, and awareness materials for the development and application of improved risk diagnosis and response methods, and improvements in planning and permitting processes to guide coastal zone activities, including regulatory adjustments, awareness raising and enforcement, and economic and environmental monitoring. Secondly, the component will produce design and construction guidelines, and apply them by implementing protective measures at a sample of public assets that are at risk, including the national hospital and vulnerable coastal areas. Thirdly, the component includes monitoring and pilot activities to protect and restore coastal ecosystems and biodiversity affected by climate change, climate variability and sea level rise, including the detrimental effects of current adaptation practices. Component 3: Freshwater resources (US$ 2.1 million). This component includes the development and management of freshwater resources to reduce their vulnerability to climate variability and climate change. It will provide support for technical assistance, Page 3 awareness materials, and workshops to update the national water policy, improve water resource management, and revise building codes to enhance opportunities for rainwater catchment and storage. Given that water management problems are most acute on the central island, Tarawa, the component will also support the preparation of a master plan for water resources on Tarawa, as well as the implementation of pilot projects to identify and increase water resources in freshwater lenses; rainwater collection and storage systems at government and community buildings; and a public awareness and education campaign to change user attitudes. On the outer islands, the component will support water resource assessments as well as physical improvements in the water supply system in selected locations, and technical assistance to review the feasiblility of non-polluting sanitation systems. Finally, the component will establish an outer island household loan scheme for roof catchment and sanitation. Component 4: Capacity at island and community level (US$ 0.55 million). This component will provide technical assistance to the Ministry of Internal and Social Affairs (MISA) to include adaptation in the Outer Island Profiles, and training on climate risk management for local governments. Furthermore, it will finance a pilot program of small- scale adaptation investments in two selected outer islands, identified through participatory planning and implemented directly by communities. Component 5: Program management (US$ 0.38 million). This project component will provide overall support to the project, including program management, accounting, procurement, and running costs of the Program Management Unit. It will also support the evaluation of KAP-II in view of the design of the next phase of GoK adaptation efforts. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis The project would take place in the Republic of Kiribati, an extremely isolated nation of approximately 98,000 inhabitants spread over 33 islands covering an area of ocean 2,000 km north to south and 4,000 km east to west. As a country consisting primarily of small coral atolls, Kiribati is one of the countries most threatened by rising sea levels and climate change. In the absence of adaptation measures, a recent Bank-funded study estimated that Kiribati could suffer damages equivalent to 17 to 34 percent of the 1998 GDP. The main impacts are likely to be periodic inundation of atoll islands due to rising sea levels (compounded by storm surges), health and agriculture impacts due to more intense droughts and floods, and loss of revenue from offshore fisheries as tuna stocks move westward. The proposed project would help the Government of Kiribati in adopting risk minimization strategies and prioritizing adaptation options to handle climate change impacts. There are no particular critical natural habitats in Kiribati; however, the atoll systems are naturally fragile. Given the extreme isolation of the outer islands; traditional systems of decision making remain important. The lack of freshwater in many outer islands and job opportunities is exacerbating problems of overcrowding in the main islands of Tarawa and Kiritimati (Christmas). Page 4 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Mr Bruce M. Harris (EASSD) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Cultural Property (OPN 11.03) X Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: The project will have some environmental impacts, but in most cases these impacts are not likely to be substantial. There is an established regulatory environment in Kiribati that mandates certain actions in the case of negative environmental impacts. The Environment Act of 1999 establishes an integrated system of development control, environmental impact assessment and pollution control. The Minister of Environment, Lands and Agricultural Development is responsible for the due administration and implementation of the Act. All development proposals of government ministries, island councils, private developers and non-government organizations must undergo the environmental screening procedures of the Environment and Conservation Division (ECD) as stipulated in the Environment Regulations 2001. The screening procedure requires all project proponents to apply for a permit to carry out a prescribed development. The application form will be reviewed by ECD to determine whether the proposal requires an initial environmental examination (IEE) or an EIS (a comprehensive EIA study). The EIA procedure allows for the project proponent to conduct its own EIA study and implement the ECD approved environmental management plan of project activities. The ECD would also provide monitoring measures for the proponent to implement and for which National Environment Inspectors would closely monitor environmental compliance of the project. Project activities in an outer island would undergo the same environmental screening system. The Implementation, management and monitoring of the local project would be supervised by the Island Council, with possible assistance from ECD. All subprojects under the small-scale adaptation investments on the outer islands, as well as any major activity under component 2 and 3 will undergo environmental screening to determine the likely level of environmental impact. Activities will be categorized in a way consistent with Bank OD4.01. Page 5 The process of decision-making in adaptation has already progressed considerably under the preparation phase of the project through a series of comprehensive national and local consultations and the achievement of a national consensus on the prioritization of adaptation options. A social assessment has been conducted which has identified the major areas of vulnerability on different kinds of islands (atoll and non-atoll, islands in different climatic zones, etc.) and potential adaptive strategies to address those vulnerabilities. The social assessment has also identified decision-making mechanisms at the local, island and national levels which can be used to address, inter alia, safeguards issues. Population relocation within Kiribati (and possible migration to neighboring countries) is a long term solution, and will very likely fall outside the lifetime and scope of KAP II. In the unlikely case that population relocation would need to be considered during the project (due to a major disaster), the provisions of a Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework, developed under the project, would apply. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: No negative impacts anticipated 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. The main alternative scenario considered was to work exclusively with the Ministry of Environment, Land and Agriculture Development. However, this was rejected as it would not promote mainstreaming of adaptation strategies into overall development planning in the country. Instead, the project is expected to be coordinated by the Office of the President, and involve key sectoral Ministries involved in adaptation (Environment, Lands and Agriculture Development; Public Works and Utilities; Fisheries and Marine Resources Development; Internal and Social Affairs; and Ministry of Line and Phoenix Islands Development). 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. A Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has examined the environmental issues that are likely to arise under KAP-II. As many specific investments to be undertaken under KAP-II have yet to be designed, the SEA provides a general methodology for environmental screening of policies and plans; the preparation of environmental impact assessments for various kinds of potential activities, including how best to mitigate any possible negative consequences; and the monitoring of the implementation of the recommendations of those EIAs. In addition, a Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework was developed and it forms the basis of agreement with government concerning approaches to be taken in the event land acquisition and/or resettlement becomes necessary during the project implementation. The approach taken during the preparation phase of the project has Page 6 ensured that the safeguard approaches are developed in the context of an overall adaptation strategy which make sense within the Kiribati context, are genuinely "owned" by the I-Kiribati, while at the same time meeting Bank requirements. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The key stakeholders are the people of Kiribati, including those at the community level on individual islands (the unimanwe, or councils of elders, church groups, women's groups, youth groups, etc.), island level bodies such as Island Councils and councils of churches, and national level bodies including government, civil society, and the private sector. The Adaptation Steering Committee includes the Chairman of the Kiribati Association of NGOs (KANGO), the Chamber of Commerce (representing the private sector), as well as government officials from key ministries and agencies. The preparation phase of the project included an iterative process of national and local workshops in key islands designed to stir national debate and consensus on adaptation options, and how to best mainstream them into national programs, including Ministry Operational Plans (MOPs) and the National Development Strategy. This process has institutionalized expectations of regular exchanges of information, opinions and concerns among all levels of Kiribati society. The EA and Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework describes mechanisms for dealing with environmental and/or social impacts of the project, including ongoing consultation strategies, grievance procedures, and participation in decision making processes. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Date of receipt by the Bank 10/30/2005 Date of "in-country" disclosure 11/30/2005 Date of submission to InfoShop 12/15/2005 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Date of receipt by the Bank 10/30/2005 Date of "in-country" disclosure 11/30/2005 Date of submission to InfoShop 12/15/2005 * If the project triggers the Pest Management, Cultural Property and/or the Safety of Dams policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: Page 7 C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? No If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit review and approve the EA report? No Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? No OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan, abbreviated plan, or process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? Yes If yes, then did the Regional Social Development Unit review and approve the plan / policy framework / policy process? No BP 17.50 - Public Disclosure Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Infoshop? No 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? No All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Yes Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Yes Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Yes Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? Yes Page 8 D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Ms Idah Z. Pswarayi-Riddihough Environmental Specialist: Mr Bruce M. Harris Social Development Specialist Mr Bruce M. Harris Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Mr Glenn S. Morgan Comments: Sector Manager: Ms Hoonae Kim Comments: