INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET RESTRUCTURING STAGE Note: This ISDS will be considered effective only upon approval of the project restructuring Report No.: ISDSR15762 Date ISDS PreparediUpdated: 18-Nov-2015 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: India I Project ID: Ip132739 Project Name: Neeranchal National Watershed Project (PI32739) Task Team Leader(s): Grant Milne,Priti Kumar Estimated Board Date: 17-Jul-2014 Managing Unit: GFA12 Sector(s): Agricultural extension and research (38%), Irrigation and drainage (34%), Sub-national government administration (23%), Public admin istration- Agriculture, fishing and forestry (4%), General agriculture, fishing and forestry sector (1 %) Theme(s): Water resource management (50%), Other environment and natural resources management (50%) Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 No (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)? Project Financing Data (in USD Million) Total Project Cost: 357.00 Total Bank Financing: 1178.50 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount BORROWER/RECIPIENT 178.50 International Development Association (IDA) 178.50 Total 357.00 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Is this a Repeater project? No Is this a Transferred No project? 2. Current Project Development Objectives The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to support IWMP through technical assistance to improve incremental conservation outcomes and agricultural yields for communities in selected sites, and adoption of more effective processes and technologies into the broader IWMP in participating states. Proposed New PD~ (from Restructuring Paper) The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to support the watershed development component of PMKSY through technical assistance to improve incremental conservation outcomes and agricultural yields for communities in selected sites, and adoption of more effective processes and technologies in participating states. 3. Project Description The project would be implemented through four components: Component 1. Central Institutional and Capacity Building Strengthen the institutions and human resources of key national stakeholders, particularly the Department of Land Resources, for more effective planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, documentation and reporting of the Watershed Component of the PMKSY, through the following: 1.1 Capacity building and institutional development at national level: Support training needs assessments, institutional and human resources review, build the capacities of the Department of Land Resources for program management and policy analysis, develop common training materials, coordinate and support national and international exposure visits, and provide backstopping for Participating States to deliver training programs in Part 3. 1.2 National information and data center: Develop capacity and frameworks within the existing system for data base development and coordinate improved knowledge and information sharing related to the Watershed Component of the PMKSY. 1.3 Communications: Create awareness and enhance information about PMKSY, benefits (with focus on the Watershed Component of the PMKSY), program implementation and impacts, through a comprehensive communications outreach and branding initiatives. 1.4 Monitoring and evaluation: Develop and strengthen an integrated monitoring and evaluation system, linked to a new management information system that connects Department of Land Resources and Participating States, for tracking the national performance of the PMKSY (with focus on the Watershed Component of the PMKSY). Summary of component revisions: The existing structure of four sub-components remains unchanged. Minor changes in the description of sub-components 1.3 and 1.4 reflect how Neeranchal support to the watershed component of PMKSY will also benefit the PMSKY scheme through communications, and monitoring and evaluation/project reporting activities. Component 2. National Innovation Support Support the application of innovative, science-based knowledge, tools, and approaches to underpin improvements to the Watershed Component of the PMKSY around watershed planning and implementation, with specific focus on hydrology and augmentation of water resources, agricultural intensification, climate change and rural livelihoods, through the following: 2.1 Agricultural performance, rural livelihoods, and climate change innovations: Consolidate existing knowledge and innovations and transfer them to Participating States to support farmers in achieving better agricultural performance, build better resiliency against climate change, and improved livelihoods. 2.2. Decision support systems and databases for hydrology and watershed management benefiting PMKSY: Develop and pilot new decision-support systems to support the Department of Land Resources and Participating States to plan and implement the Watershed Component of the PMKSY in a more comprehensive and scientific manner, with land and hydrological considerations, linkages and trade-offs at the core in watershed management, support augmentation of water resources, demonstrate water use efficiency in agriculture, strengthen community water management and provide technical backstopping to Participating States for related data base development. Summary of component revisions: The existing structure of two sub-components remains unchanged. Minor changes in the description of sub-component 2.2 reflect how Neeranchal support to the watershed component ofPMKSY will also benefit the broader PMSKY scheme through activities related to development of a central data base, data portal, decision support systems and tools, and climate change activities. Component 3. Implementation Support in Participating States Provide intensive, technology-based support to improve Watershed Component of the PMKSY operational effectiveness, for planning, implementation and management, upscale innovation, operationalization, convergence/integration with other programs of the Recipient, measuring impacts on the ground in selected sites in Participating States, and addressing unique, or state specific, challenges related to watershed treatment, through the following: 3.1 Support for improved program integration in rainfed areas: Strengthen remote sensing and geographic information systems capability in the State Level Nodal Agencies, develop state-level data bases, support landscape-level catchment assessment and planning for the Watershed Component of the PMKSY, and strengthen community-based monitoring. 3.2 Institutional strengthening: Enhance relevant capacities in Participating States in the State Level Nodal Agencies, and at field level. 3.3 Adoption of research and development and technology transfer: Improve the adoption of innovations developed and tested in Part 2 of the Project with respect to agriculture performance, decision support systems for hydrology and water resource management, climate change and risk reduction, value addition, supply chains, extension systems, and livelihood improvement. 3.4 Project management and coordination: Provide incremental support to the State Level Nodal Agencies to implement activities under Part 3 of the Project effectively. 3.5 State-specific innovations and pilots: Support identified small-scale, state-specific innovations and piloting to address locally suitable watershed-related initiatives and institutionalize knowledge and lessons learned for possible upscaling. 3.6 Urban/peri-urban watershed management: Pilot in urban/peri-urban watershed management practices in up to two small catchments in each Participating State, including integrated catchment planning, upstream source securitization, in-situ water harvesting and management, improvements in water quality and natural waste water treatment and re-use for agriculture. Summary of component revisions: The existing structure of six sub-components remains unchanged. There are no substantive changes to the description of the sub-components, which remain focused on the watershed component of PMKSY. The component name has changed slightly to align with the final Government of India Cabinet note for Neeranchal. Component 4. Project Management and Coordination Provide technical assistance and other support for project management and coordination. Summary of component revisions: There are no changes to this component 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) In late 2014, the Government of India began developing a new national scheme PRADHAN MANTRI KRISHI SINCHAYEE YOJANA (PMKSY) which aims to converge three centrally supported schemes covering water, agriculture and watershed management. The Ministry of Agriculture is the designated national nodal agency for PMKSY. Based on the transitioning of the national watershed program to the new PMKSY scheme, the original Neeranchal PAD and supporting documents of the Neeranchal project require minor revisions to align them to the final Cabinet Notes prepared for the PMKSY scheme and the Neeranchal National Watershed Project. The main changes are minor editing of the PDO and a proposal to extend the closing date by 21 months to make up for the time lost between approval of the Neeranchal project by the Bank's Board of Executive Directors (July 17, 2014) and the expected effectiveness date. The overall project component and sub-component structures are not changing. The Department of Land Resources (DoLR) in the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) remains the implementing agency for the watershed component ofPMKSY and the supporting Neeranchal project. Some activities within sub-components, for example communications and M&E, are being reworded to indicate that they will be supportive to PMKSY. One other revision is to account for the recent bifurcation of one of the participating states (Andhra Pradesh) into two separate states; Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. The broad objectives of PMKSY will be to: achieve convergence of investments in irrigation at the field level (preparation of district level and, if required, sub district level water use plans); enhance the physical access of water on the farm and expand cultivable area under assured irrigation (Har Khet ko pani); integrate water source, distribution and its efficient use, to make best use of water through appropriate technologies and practices; improve on-farm water use efficiency to reduce wastage and increase .availability both in duration and extent; enhance the adoption of precision-irrigation and other water saving technologies (More crop per drop); enhance recharge of aquifers and introduce sustainable water conservation practices; ensure the integrated development of rainfed areas using the watershed approach towards soil and water conservation, regeneration of ground water, arresting runoff, providing livelihood options and other natural resource management activities; promote extension activities relating to water harvesting, water management and crop alignment for farmers and grass root level field functionaries; explore the feasibility of reusing treated municipal waste water for peri-urban agriculture; and attract greater private investments in irrigation. This will in turn increase agricultural production and productivity and enhance farm income. The project would continue to provide technical assistance and demonstrative investments in order to enhance the outcomes of the watershed component of PMKSY, which will be the flagship watershed scheme of the Government of India, operational in all the 28 States. Neeranchal would predominantly focus on dry-land areas in nine states: Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Uttarakhand. The states present a wide range of physical characteristics ranging from hilly terrain in northern India (Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh) to forested highlands in central India (Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh) on one hand to drier landscapes of the western India (Rajasthan and Gujarat) on the other. The eight states also vary in terms of agro-climatic and/or agro-ecological zones with widely varying temperature and rainfall profiles. Broadly, all the states have small and marginal farmers with small sized farmlands facing the challenges of climatic variations with current low levels of resilience to climate change. The project design for state-level investments would build on the model in the new Bank-supported Karnataka Watershed Development Project II, as well as lessons learned from earlier Bank-supported watershed projects, and smaller bi-lateral programs. The project would primarily focus on technical support, complementing ongoing and planned field investments the watershed component of PMKSY and may finance some activities as pilots and demonstrations. Technical and institutional capacity built through project would result in improving the efficiency and outcomes of the watershed component ofPMKSY. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists on the Team Anupam Joshi ( GENDR ) Sanjay Srivastava ( GENDR ) Surbhi Dhingra ( GSU06 ) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Environmental Assessment OPIBP 4.01 Yes Natural Habitats OPIBP 4.04 Yes Forests OP/BP 4.36 Yes Pest Management OP 4.09 Yes Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11 No Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 Yes Involuntary Resettlement OPIBP 4.12 No Safety of Dams OPIBP 4.37 No Projects on International Waterways OPIBP No 7.50 Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60 No II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the Restructured project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: As part of project preparation, key safeguards issues have been identified associated with the proposed project activities through a Strategic Environment and Social Assessment (SESA). It included collection and collation of secondary data, stakeholder consultations, situational analysis, risk analysis, limited field based primary surveys and policy analysis at the national, state, district, block/project, watershed and community levels. The key social challenges identified are: (i) ensuring participation, inclusion of vulnerable groups and equity through mobilizing individuals and institutions at different levels and locations; (ii) creating opportunities for landless other than labor in watershed works; (iii) challenges of gender main streaming in decision making process and building women asset base and gender based discrimination; (iv) gender sensitization of Gram Panchayats and other watershed related institutions; (v) building accountability and transparency in decentralizing service delivery and improving its performance, particularly for convergence and distribution of benefits to avoid incidences of elite capture; (vi) ensuring increased participation of tribal/indigenous communities; (vii) absence of a robust grievance redress system, other that functioning of the Right to Information (RT!) Act; and (viii) ensuring that people/communities continue to enjoy their rights and entitlements on common property resources. No additional social issues are expected to arise through the transition of IWMP to become the watershed component ofPMKSY. The key environmental challenges identified are: (i) soil erosion due to faulty practices, in untreated areas resulting in loss of potential productivity gains, increased surface runoff and local loss of soil biota; (ii) overgrazing of remaining common property resources and increased spread of invasive species, including in aquatic ecosystems and chance introduction of exotic species; (iii) lowering of groundwater and its quality; (iv) limited opportunity for mainstreaming sustainable environmental practices at the watershed level through convergence of various schemes; and (v) challenges of developing technical capacity to arrest land degradation, reduce soil erosion and improve groundwater status at the implementation level. No additional social issues are expected to arise through the transition of IWMP to become the watershed component of PMKSY. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: Given the nature of project support and generally positive outcomes of watershed development interventions, no potential indirect and/or long term impacts are envisaged due to anticipated future activities in the project areas. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. A typical watershed development program, which is implemented as a standalone project was considered but rejected as the current demand is for technical and value added support to improve the outcomes of the larger Government funded watershed component ofPMKSY. A top down department led project design was considered for undertaking various watershed activities and works but rejected. Instead, based on the social and environmental issues and the gaps identified in the SESA, the project would strengthen the existing and/or new institutions at the grassroots level to enable local communities participate in planning and construction of watershed facilities and subsequently operate and maintain the systems on their own. Support in the form of only technical assistance was considered, but partially modified to include limited demonstrative investments for fully showcasing the investment cycle from planning, coordination up to field level investments. The project is only financing technical assistance in components 1 and 2. For component 3, the project is only financing technical assistance for core activities linked with the watershed component ofPMKSY in selected sites. The project is therefore not financing operational soil and water conservation works such as field bunds, farm ponds or check dams. In addition however, participating states will also be supported for minor office upgrading, and small scale research pilots and demonstrations to showcase new approaches and innovations that could be scaled up into the watershed component ofPMKSY at a later date. For these small scale pilots and demonstrations, the project could therefore finance small trials of new types of soil and water conservation measures, conservation agriculture demonstrations, Integrated Pest and Nutrient Management (IPNM), etc. 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. As part of project preparation, four experienced and independent environment and social development consultants were contracted by DoLR who were supervised by an experienced team leader. This team undertook a Strategic Environment and Social Assessment (SESA) foridentifying, among others, key policy gaps, institutional shortfalls, technical shortcomings along with assessing the current state of watershed development, impacts of watershed investments and inclusion and participation of communities in watershed development programs. Stakeholder consultations were held and a situational analysis was undertaken, which also incorporated stakeholder views and feedback for identifying key environmental and social issues related to watershed programs. Although the scope of the project is largely technical assistance with limited demonstrative investments, a Free Prior Informed Consent was conducted during stakeholder consultations at the watershed level by informing the potential beneficiaries about the nature of the project and potential interventions planned under it. Although the project's primary support is in the form of technical assistance, it does provide an opportunity to positively influence the watershed outcomes under the watershed component of PMKSY. This justifies the need for looking at the policy/institutional level issues in the watershed sector and not limit to the impact-mitigation approach. Therefore, the SESA is being conducted in two phases. The first phase of SESA is an impact-centered one that provides an analysis of the current state of watershed development and its potential outcomes and covers the potential impacts and compliance with safeguard policy regime. It also includes an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) to address project's potential negative and positive environmental impacts (both direct and indirect) and develop measures to prevent, minimize, mitigate and compensate for adverse impacts and enhance the positive impacts. The second phase of SESA would be a policy level SESA and will be undertaken during initial days of project implementation. It will focus on mainstreaming environmental and social mitigation action, processes for improving watershed outcomes, effective steps for monitoring and building human resource capacity for ensuring inclusions and participation of the vulnerable communities, among others. It would suggest measures to introduce key policy and process changes in the ongoing IWMP and would also benefit from initial experience of bringing in technological support in community level watershed planning and coordination. The borrower has low capacity to address safeguard policy issues. There is limited prior experience of implementing Bank projects. While watershed improvement is generally associated with positive impacts, capacity to address environmental and social issues is currently weak, especially at the subproject levels. Given the fact that implementation of central schemes is administered at the state level, coordination with multiple states on safeguards may pose a challenge. Given the technical assistance scope of the project, with only limited demonstrative investments on the ground (such as, water and soil conservation works, constructing check dams and other erosion prevention structures etc.), there may be only minor environmental and/or social safeguards issues to be mitigated. The project will support institutional development, generation and adoption of new and innovative technology for watershed planning, and training and capacity building of stakeholders and the SESA has drawn from ESMF and EMPs of other Bank funded watershed projects. To improve the capacity, an Environment and Social Cell (ESC) is proposed with support from the Project Implementing Unit (Pill). The second phase of SESA would explore the feasibility and appropriateness of establishing this Cell in the proposed Center of Excellence. Until the Cell is established, one Senior Environment and Social Manager would be hired at the PIU, who may move to the Cell whenever and wherever it is established. Adequate provisions for orientation, sensitizing, and training the relevant stakeholders, including beneficiaries, implementing officers etc on environmental and social concerns would be undertaken. This will be closely supervised during implementation. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. Stakeholder Analysis resulted in identifying stakeholders at different levels and mapping the key expectations, issues and concerns as related to each stakeholder and the sub-groups thereof. This was based on stakeholder consultations at the Watershed level, PIA level, District level and State level. The key stakeholders include inhabitants of the micro watersheds (in villages), the institutions of local governance (PRI), block level officers and key line departments (for example, forests, agriculture, rural development, MNREGA, etc.), State level institutions and Watershed Development Departments, and the DoLR. Within the new PMKSY scheme, state Water and Agriculture departments become more important stakeholders. The communities in the watersheds are quite diverse - social (scheduled castes, others), economic (landless, small, marginal, and large farmers), ethnic (scheduled tribe, others), gender (female headed households). As part of disclosure plan, DoLR has disclosed the draft SESA report on its website and invited stakeholder comments/feedback before the report is finalized. An executive summary of SESA is also prepared and translated in the local language and disclosed. Besides DoLR's website, these documents would be made available in the key stakeholder offices at the state level. B. Disclosure Requirements If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Yes rx: No [ 1 NA [ 1 Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public Yes tx: No [ 1 NA [ 1 place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes rx: No [ 1 NA [ 1 responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in Yes rx: No [ 1 NA [ 1 the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include Yes [X 1 No [ 1 NA [ 1 the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with Yes [Xl No [ 1 NA [ 1 the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? III. APPROVALS Task Team Leader(s): Approved By: Safeguards Advisor: Date: 12/1/2015 Practice ManagerlManager: Name: Martien Van Nieuwkoop Date: 12/1/2015