SFG2999 REPÚBLICA DE MOÇAMBIQUE MINISTÉRIO DA TERRA, AMBIENTE E DESENVOLVIMENTO RURAL (MITADER) ADDENDUM MozBio Process Framework update to cover the National REDD+ initiatives: the Mozambique Forest Investment Project (MozFIP) and the Mozambique Dedicated Grant Mechanism for Local Communities (MozDGM) (PROJECTS: P129413, P160033 and P161241) Draft Maputo, January 11th 2017 1 Table of Contents I Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 6 1 Program Description ................................................................................................................................ 19 1.1 REDD+ Program and initiatives in Mozambique................................................................................. 19 1.2 The Mozambique Forest Investment Project (MozFIP) and the Mozambique Dedicated Grant for Local Communities (MozDGM) ..................................................................................................................... 21 1.3 MozFIP Components ........................................................................................................................... 21 1.4 MozDGM Components ........................................................................................................................ 25 1.5 Linkages with Other Projects ............................................................................................................... 27 1.6 Key issues ............................................................................................................................................ 27 2 Objectives and scope of the MozBio Process Framework Addendum ................................................. 28 3 Institutional Arrangements for the REDD+ initiatives ......................................................................... 30 3.1 MozFIP institutional arrangements ...................................................................................................... 30 3.2 MozDGM Institutional arrangements................................................................................................... 33 4 Procedures for Participation and inclusion of Project affected persons (PAPs) ................................. 35 5 Resolution of Complaints, Potential Conflicts or Grievances .............................................................. 36 5.1 Administrative and Legal Procedures .................................................................................................. 43 6 Monitoring and Evaluation Arrangements ............................................................................................ 45 7 Implementation Schedule and Costs ....................................................................................................... 47 8 Inter-Agency and Public/NGO Consultation ......................................................................................... 49 9 Appendices ................................................................................................................................................ 55 A. List of References ......................................................................................................................................... 55 B. Community Development Action Planning Process ................................................................................... 56 C. Identification of stakeholders and Project Affected People ....................................................................... 57 D. List of Consultants preparing this Addendum ........................................................................................... 60 E. Terms of Reference for FNDS Social safeguards specialist ....................................................................... 61 2 List of Abbreviations ANAC National Conservation Areas Administration / Administração Nacional das �reas de Conservação ANRLMP Agriculture and Natural Resources Landscape Management Project CBNRM Community Based Natural Resources Management CBO Community based organization CC Consultative Council CCD District Consultative Council / Conselho Consultivo do Distrito CDAP Community Development Action Plan CENACARTA National Cartography Centre / Centro Nacional de Cartografia CGRN Natural Resources Management Committee / Conselho de Gestão dos Recursos Naturais COGEP Local Participatory Management Council / Conselho de Gestão participativa CSO Civil society organization DA District Administrator DGM Dedicated Grant Mechanism DINAF National Forestry Directorate / Direcção Nacional de Florestas DINATUR National Toursim Directorate / Direcção Nacional de Turismo DINEA National Directorate of Agricultural Extension / Direcção Nacional de Extensão Agrária DINOTER National Directorate of Land Planning and Resettlement / Direcção Nacional de Ordenamento Territorial e Reassentamento DLA Department of Environmental Licensing / Departamento de Licenciamento Ambiental DNA National Directorate of Water / Direcção Nacional de �guas DNA National Directorate of Environment / Direcção Nacional do Ambiente DNAS National Directorate of Agriculture and Planted Forests / Direcção Nacional de Agricultura e Silvicultura DNAS National Directorate of Agriculture and Planted Forests / Direcção Nacional de Agricultura e Silvicultura DNAT National Directorate of Land / Direcção Nacional de Terra DNDER National Directorate of Rural Development / Direcção Nacional do Desenvolvimento Rural DNE National Directorate of Energy / Direcção Nacional de Energia DPASA Provincial Directorate of Agriculture and Food Security / Direcção Provincial da Agricultura e Segurança Alimentar DPEF Provincial Directorate of Economics and Finance / Direcção Provincial da Economia e Finanças DPOPHRH Provincial Directorate of Public Works, Housing and Water Resources / Direcção Provincial das Obras Públicas, Habitação e Recursos Hídricos DPTADER Provincial Directorate of Land, Environment and Rural Development / 3 Direcção Provincial da Terra, Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Rural EA Environmental Assessment ERPD Emission Reductions Program Document ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan FCPF Forest Carbon Partnership Facility FIP Forest Investment Program FM Forest Management FNDS National Sustainable Development Fund / Fundo Nacional de Desenvolvimento Sustentável FUNAE National Energy Fund / Fundo Nacional de Energia GoM Government of Mozambique IDA International Development Association JICA Japanese International Cooperation Agency LMU Landscape Management Unit M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MAEFP Ministry of State Administration and Public Service / Ministério de Administração Estatal e Função Pública MASA Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security / Ministério de Agricultura e Segurança Alimentar MEF Ministry of Economics and Finance / Ministério de Economia e Finanças MICAIA An NGO the MICAIA Foundation MICULTUR Ministry of Culture and Tourism / Ministério de Cultura e Turismo MINEDH Ministry of Education and Human Development / Ministério de Educação e Desenvolvimento Humano MIREME Ministry of Mineral Resources and Energy / Ministério de Recursos Minerais e Energia MISAU Ministry of Health / Ministério de Saúde MITADER Ministry of Land, Environment and Rural Development / Ministério da Terra, Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Rural MozBio Third phase of the Transfrontier Conservation Areas Project MozFIP Mozambique Forest Investment Project MSLF Multi-stakeholder Landscape Forum MUGEDE Women, Gender and Development (a national CSO) NEA National Executing Agency NGO Non-governmental organisation NSC National Steering Committee NTFP Non-Timber Forest Products ONG Organização não governamental OP Operational Policy (of the World Bank) OP/BP Operational Policy / Bank Policy (of the World Bank) PA Protected Area 4 PAP Project affected person PADC Plano de Acção de Desenvolvimento Comunitário PDO Project Development Objective PDUT District Land Use Plan / Plano Distrital de Uso de Terra PMT Project Management Team PNG Gilé National Park / Parque Nacional de Gilé PNQ Quirimbas National Park / Parque Nacional das Quirimbas PO/PB Política Operacional / Política do Banco (Mundial) PPP Public Private Partnership PRA Participatory Rural Assessment RAP Resettlement Action Plan REDD Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries REDD+ REDD plus sustainable management of forest, forest conservation, enhancement of carbon stocks RFG Gilé Forest Reserve / Reserva Florestal de Gilé SDAE District Service of Economic Activities / Serviço Distrital de Actividades Económicas SDMAS District Service of Women, Social Action and Health / Serviço Distrital de Mulher, Acção Social e Saúde SDPI District Service of Planning and Infrastructure / Serviço Distrital de Planificação e Infraestrutura SMCF Small and Medium Commercial Farmers SMFE Small and Medium Forest Enterprises SMME Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises SPEA Provincial Agricultural Extension Services / Serviços Provinciais de Extensão Agrária SPFFB Provincial Services for Forests and Wildlife / Serviços Provinciais de Floresta a Fauna Bravia SPGC Provincial Services for Geography and Cadastre / Serviços Provinciais de Geografia e Cadastro TOR Terms of Reference UGFI International Funds Management Unit / Unidade de Gestão de Fundos Internacionais UN United Nations UNAC National Farmers Union USD United States of America Dollar WB World Bank 5 I Executive Summary Overview Mozambique is one of the developing countries eligible to participate in the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) program. Mozambique was selected as a REDD+ country participant in the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) in 2012, based on the development and approval of a REDD+ Preparation Proposal (R-PP). The Government of Mozambique received a US$3.8M grant in 2013 and an additional US$5M grant in 2016 from the FCPF Readiness Fund. This process supported the preparation of the Readiness Package, which includes the National REDD+ Strategy; safeguards instruments to guide its implementation; a Reference Emissions Level and a Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification system (MRV). Taking into consideration the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, the National REDD+ Strategy addresses these drivers and aims at a consequent reduction of emissions with the promotion of rural development including agriculture, forest and energy. Considering these developments, the Climate Investment Fund (CIF) has committed to finance a five-year (2016-2020) Forest Investment Program (FIP), made up of different initiatives, including the Mozambique Forest Investment Project (MozFIP) and the Mozambique Dedicated Grant to Local Communities (MozDGM). MozFIP aims to improve the enabling environment for, and practices of, forest and land management in targeted landscapes in Mozambique. The FIP Investment Plan in Mozambique is being used to provide a support framework for implementing the country’s national REDD+ Strategy, principally via the Government’s flagship forestry program, “Floresta em Pé�. The FIP Investment Plan is a large scale modular framework for investment in which the first project or module, known as the Mozambique Forest Investment Project (MozFIP), consists of national- and landscape-level interventions that aim to reduce emissions and promote rural development, and will be implemented by MITADER. The FIP will support transformation country-wide and will pilot most of the interventions in two selected landscapes in the provinces of Cabo Delgado and Zambezia. Preparation of an Addendum updating the MozBio Process Framework MozFIP triggers the social safeguard OP/BP 4.12 (Involuntary Resettlement) since activities financed by the Project may restrict communities from accessing and using natural resources in designated PAs. Physical resettlement will not be supported by the MozFIP project. Only economic displacement (restricted access to and use of natural resources) is anticipated, which may be caused by Project activities in the Quirimbas National Park and Gilé National Reserve and their buffer zones. 6 This document is an Addendum prepared with the FCPF support which updates the Mozbio Process Framework approved in 2014. This Process Framework is adequate because activities supported by MozFIP in the two protected areas covered by the initiative, are already supported by MozBio and guidance provided in the MozBio Process Framework will be similarly applicable. The Government teams applying safeguards instruments in PAs and working with communities in identifying the restrictions and designing appropriate mitigation plans will also be the same. Applying a single Process Framework will avoid instrument replication, and make it easier for the Government to implement applicable safeguards. A continuous consultation process producing information to inform the design of the REDD+ Strategy and the MozFIP and MozDGM initiatives was conducted from the 3rd of March 2013 to 18th of November 2016. The consultation process during this time covered six provinces across the three main regions of Mozambique; South (Maputo and Gaza), Center (Zambézia and Sofala) and North (Cabo Delgado and Nampula). The process included 61 public consultation meetings, of which 10 were community consultations. In total, 3370 participants were involved, of which 978 were female. The Projects Forest Investment Program (FIP) The FIP is subdivided into two projects, namely MozFIP and MozDGM, in addition to a third planted forest project to be implemented with support of the International Finance Corporation (IFC) in the Zambézia landscape. MozFIP comprises three components: Component 1: Monitoring, Information and Incentives in the Forest Sector with the objective of improving the enabling environment and governance in the forest sector to promote sustainable forest management; Component 2: Integrated Landscape Management in Cabo Delgado and Zambézia, which seeks to promote integrated landscape management in the Cabo Delgado and Zambézia landscapes, to address the most important drivers of deforestation in the landscapes while reducing rural poverty; and Component 3: Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, Safeguards Management and Communications, which includes activities related to project coordination and management, fiduciary management, consultations, safeguards management, M&E, training and communications. MozDGM is currently under preparation. The expected project components are: Component 1: Capacity Strengthening for Sustainable Natural Resources Management, to strengthen the capacity of communities and civil society 7 organizations on natural resources management and on sustainable production and business and grant management. Component 2: Promotion of Sustainable Local Community Initiatives to generate revenues and improve local communities’ livelihood, while conserving th e resource base on which these initiatives depend. Component 3: Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, Safeguards and Communication to finance the operational costs incurred by the National Executing Agency to carry out its responsibilities. Program Preparation and Implementation Arrangements The Forest Investment Program (FIP) was formulated jointly by the Government of Mozambique (through several institutions) and the World Bank (WB). The Ministry of Land, Environment and Rural Development (MITADER) will be responsible for the Program implementation, including MozFIP and MozDGM. The lead unit for Project coordination in MITADER will be the National Sustainable Development Fund (Fundo Nacional de Desenvolvimento Sustentável, FNDS). The FNDS will also ensure the involvement of relevant National Directorates in other line ministries: Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security (MASA), through the National Directorate of Agriculture and Planted Forests (DNAS), the National Directorate of Agrarian Extension (DNEA), and the Ministry of Mineral Resources and Energy (MIREME) through the National Energy Fund (FUNAE). Each Agency and National Directorate will appoint a focal point who will participate in Project activities including in the preparation of the annual work plans and budgets, annual progress reports, prepare terms of references (TORs) in their respective areas of expertise, and contribute to the supervision of the actions under their areas of responsibility. There will be a Program Steering Committee comprising government organizations, the private sector, research institutions and civil society organizations, with the overall mandate of supporting FNDS in strategic decision-making. The National Steering Committee will coordinate activities under the overarching investment plan; approve annual work plans, budgets and reports; ensure alignment between the FIP and other government programs; liaise with development partners and relevant stakeholders; and advise on strategies and mechanisms for conflict resolution and improved management of forest resources. In line with the FIP Design Document, the MozDGM Program administrative organization and structure will involve two levels: (i) global and (ii) country-based. The National Steering Committee (NSC) and the National Executing Agency (NEA) will operate at the country level to provide orientation and to: (i) provide oversight to the MozDGM in the country and the functioning of the NEA, (ii) review and make funding decisions on eligible project proposals, (iii) liaise with and participate in meetings of national REDD+ and FIP institutions, (iv) raise funds through other 8 programs/mechanisms, (v) report to the GSC on national activities, (vi) mediate conflicts related to MozDGM funding proposals and establish additional eligibility criteria for the MozDGM in the country. Key issues and lessons learned Over the many years of community management of forest resources in Mozambique prior to the development of MozFIP and the MozDGM Project a few participation issues emerged as key challenges and lessons for the future. Some of the most relevant are listed below: • Despite opportunities provided by the legislation for local communities to be consulted and potentially participate in the co-management of their resources together with investment partners, in practice, community resource management in most cases offers little more than subsistence use rights to communities. • The majority of local participation in forest-based livelihoods is informal, including the labour and products bringing economic benefit such as charcoal, fuel wood and village-based sawn timber products, honey, timber, traditional medicines, mats, carvings and furniture. o This means that for the majority returns are relatively small, social protection is absent, wage and rights protection and career advancement is nil, and paying taxes is not perceived to bring any advantages, so they remain on the margins. o Low levels of literacy and numeracy discourage many people from considering formalizing their activities. o Various degrees of complexity of administrative and financial requirements make it difficult for community members to apply for forest exploration licenses. • Communities encounter problems when attempting to secure land rights: many do not understand the value of tenure security or what land delimitation process they need to carry out to secure a land use and benefit title; and cannot obtain adequate support from organizations and government for this. There is an overall lack of capacity, knowledge and collateral of local community members or groups and awareness of markets and credit facilities offering accessible rates contributes that constrains participation in the development of viable, profitable enterprises based on the management of productive natural resources, especially forests. 9 Objectives of the MozBio Process Framework Addendum Land acquisition for public interest will systematically be avoided by the Program as will all other activities discovered during subproject screening that under the World Bank Safeguard Policy (OP/BP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement) might require resettlement or compensation. All MozFIP activities with participants selected at landscape level aim to be achieved through voluntary agreements between communities, interest groups or individuals as necessary and the Project. However, where Program initiatives may unknowingly restrict access to legally designated parks or protected areas without acquiring the land outright these require a Process Framework. The purpose of a Process Framework is to describe the process by which communities or parties potentially losing subsistence benefits from natural resources will participate in planning mitigation of this. These displaced persons should be meaningfully consulted and should have opportunities to participate in designing the restrictions, as well as in proposing the mitigation measures critical for success. Potentially displaced people should be assisted through community development action planning (CDAP) to improve their livelihoods and standards of living or at least to restore them, in real terms, to pre-displacement levels or to levels prevailing prior to the beginning of project implementation, whichever is higher. Once developed, a CDAP, should become part of the Forest Management Plan or under MozBio, the PA Management Plan, and be approved by the World Bank. For the Program’s MozFIP initiative, the Process Framework for MozBio approved in 2014 will be amended in the form of an Addendum (this document). The Addendum updates the Process Framework for Mozbio by adding: • The scope of the Program and description of relevant Project initiatives; • Identification of two of the PAs covered by MozBio where Program initiatives may take place; • Results of ongoing consultations as part of the REDD+ Program and the MozFIP and MozDGM initiatives; • Lessons learned from MozBio implementation of the Process Framework (to be added after consultation in January 2017). In order to learn from lessons from MozBio, one or more public consultation meetings will be organized during the MozFIP pre-appraisal mission, where the updated Process Framework and clarification of the Project’s safeguards documents will be disclosed and discussed. The Process Framework and Addendum will thus cover the entire program and subproject cycle of MozBio as well as MozFIP. The known design of MozDGM will also be presented in the Addendum, but the details of this initiative will only be added once the Project has been prepared. Since these two REDD+ initiatives will have to follow the PA Management Plan in any subproject design, the principles and guidelines in the MozBio Process Framework will cover them both. 10 The MozBio Process Framework covers selected PAs in Mozambique including Quirimbas National Park (PNQ) and Gilé National Reserve (RNG) where any restrictions on resource use caused by MozFIP or MozDGM activities in these areas will automatically trigger its application. Responsive community action planning in PAs is the core domain of the MozBio Process Framework and coordination with the National Conservation Areas Administration (ANAC) social safeguards specialists will thus be required. Community Development Action Planning for MozFIP and MozDGM If social impacts are identified particularly loss of access to and use of natural resources in planted forest areas designated for conservation by local communities then mitigation will be outlined in CDAPs. These Plans will be used to manage losses of use and access to natural resources caused by forest management regulation. CDAPs will be developed as annexes of forest management plans. CDAPs will focus on multiple use areas providing an additional land and resource use planning tool for multi-stakeholder participation. CDAPs will be implemented using MozFIP and MozDGM project resources, and will focus on alternative livelihoods activities promoted under these two projects. (See summary outline of the CDAP planning process overleaf). 11 Summary of the CDAP planning process Issue When to screen? When is a CDAP necessary? How to identify PAPs What baseline information is needed for the forest management plan CDAP? Participatory Action Planning Community consultation - Total or partial restriction on - Community consultation Socio-economic assessment of a proposed forest conservation area must gain a good Communicate opportunities, eligibility during preparation of resource use for livelihoods in a during preparation of a understanding of the areas proposed for conservation including: criteria, potential roles and agroforestry proposals in forested area legally designated subproject proposal or a • Mapping of locations of natural resources used (season, volume, scarcity, distance, in or responsibilities offered by the Project protected area buffer for conservation. socioeconomic baseline for a out of the planned forest plantation, who collects, prepares, benefits) to all PAPs. zones; - Partial restriction of access to forest management plan / PA • Levels of dependency on natural resources Assist PAPs to identify existing The application of more cultural or social assets in a management plan or its • Existence of customary or recent community organization to manage natural resources activities to support, or new ones to stringent conservation forested area legally designated update. (aquatic, land, forests, wildlife) be proposed. rules by rangers as part of for conservation. - In documented agreements • Strength and influence of local traditional leadership Identify, assess feasibility and Description the PA Management Plan - (that are part of subproject • The socio-economic position of youth, women and the elderly or disabled (involvement in prioritise jointly with communities to particularly over forested proposals) to cede partially activities, income sources, leadership or cooperative potential) produce an action-oriented road map areas. or totally rights to use of • Existing systems of savings and credit (customary, in-kind as well as in cash) for community development and forest or other natural • Functionality and effectiveness of community courts resource conservation opportunities. resources in exchange for • Preferred trusted sources of information and preferred channels for delivering complaints participation in the project, or • History of participation in local economic and community development initiatives, sharing benefits from the capacities developed, targeted groups project or to use available • Existing skills in the community, education levels (men, women), experience of and accessible alternative employment, aspirations liveihoods sources. Responsible Service provider 12 Complaints and grievances redress mechanism Conflicts or grievances may arise from already existing situations particularly those involving crop losses (i.e. the frequent conflicts between people and wildlife in and around Quirimbas National Park). Inside PAs, the PA management is responsible for resolution, whether it be mediation with communities, compensation definition or improving relations with tourism investors for example. Conflicts generally arise from poor communication, inadequate or lack of consultation, inadequate flow of accurate information, or restrictions that may be imposed on people through the implementation of Project activities. Conflicts may also arise from mistrust generated by perceptions of unmet investor or Government promises over time. Conflicts may be especially prone to arising where there is a significant quantity of people carrying out illegal natural resource exploitation and communities are also implicated by the authorities. Community level structures to address local issues vary around the country. Representatives of local communities include territorial leaders (régulos, muenes), their subordinates and the local government structures, political party secretaries and village presidents. In some areas, local influence leaders who are trusted, especially by women, may in practice receive and redress local issues; these may include religious leaders, teachers, interest group leaders, community health practitioners and local extension workers. Some land and resource-use related conflicts may be resolved by traditional leaders. If such solutions are beyond their scope they may be passed on to the local community court where it exists, for resolution if appropriate. The grievance redress mechanisms already existing in PAs are described in the MozBio Process Framework. In this Addendum the grievance redress mechanisms aimed to be used by the MozFIP and MozDGM initiatives are referred to. The Social and Environmental Focal Points in FNDS/UGFI and LMUs will supervise and lead the grievance redress management process from FNDS with regards to MozFIP. The MozBio Project Management Unit’s safeguards team will also work in partnership with FNDS. Awareness-raising about Project activities will be continued throughout the Projects’ life in order to reduce misunderstanding and grievances. The participatory land use planning process, forest management planning and subsequent participatory action plan formulation will identify potential conflicts and involve potentially affected people. Consultations and negotiations will be carried out with PAPs where there are indications of potential conflicts. Training for technical teams, CGRN and local leaders in conflict management will also assist in minimizing the negative impact of conflicts. To empower communities they will be involved in awareness-raising and training concerning their rights and obligations, how to obtain legal advice and representation, and how to seek redress against what they regard as unfair practices by investment partners, forest inspectors (fiscais) or others. The Project Authority in terms of grievances recourse for MozFIP is the FNDS and for MozDGM the NEA, while for MozBio it is the National Conservation Areas Administration (ANAC). Thus for MozFIP and MozDGM the different lines of grievance 13 communication and response from the local level to the FNDS and NEA must be clearly distinguished. Communication Plans should prioritise awareness-raising about the structures that are available to redress more serious grievances that cannot be addressed satisfactorily locally. ANAC and FNDS as institutions under MITADER have already started to develop a comprehensive package of tools and channels of information to address overlapping issues and optimize the working scope of their respective personnel. The MozBio Project Management Unit’s safeguards team is also working in partnership with FNDS, and will coordinate in the management of MozFIP grievances redress when necessary. For MozDGM a very clear participatory structure designed by NEA will be established. In this, CGRN and other groups or associations created to manage specific natural resources such as water supply, agricultural or charcoal producers, and community forest guards will be involved in communication and initial grievances reception. Grievances response at community level will also be linked to the community court system where these have been duly constituted, so that they can be used for resolving as many grievances as possible at local community level. For all grievances related with non-fulfilment of community related contracts, levels of compensation, unauthorised taking of assets or certain restrictions of access to natural resources without compensation Project affected people must first try to resolve these conflicts through presentation to Project Service Providers or local influence leaders or authorities, or to one of the community associations for attention and either immediate redress action of channelling to the appropriate higher authority. General principles and procedures must be established by the Projects and publicised. As appropriate per Project area, specific people should be chosen to represent their local communities during the implementation of MozFIP and MozDGM especially for grievance presentation and to accompany the redress process. These men and women will provide a first level of listening and informal resolution. They should either be literate or be assisted by other people to carry out all the secretarial work involved in the process, such as preparing/writing grievances, collecting them, filing, sending, translating, etc. Where Project affected people/households/entities prefer to handle the whole process by themselves they should be free to do so. Representation may be appropriate in many cases but it should not be imposed. CGRN and their working groups should be involved in creating awareness that they may also be used for the communication of grievances for informal resolution. Efforts will be made to ensure that CGRN include representatives of women and youth with whom leaders will consult to offer tangible solutions. MozFIP’s formal grievances redress and conflict resolution processes should include the preparation and use of Grievance Register Forms to be provided by the Projects’ Provincial Community Management personnel to District level personnel in The District Service for Economic Activities (SDAE), CGRNs and service providers for making available at local level at publicised sites and via publicly recognised community representatives. 14 Community representatives should be encouraged to explain this entitlement whenever needed and at no time should filing a grievance be discouraged by community representatives, local authorities or Project officers. Each grievance will be captured in the Grievance/Issues Register that must be maintained in FNDS and each provincial LMU by Social safeguard staff and copies of all associated communications registered and filed by them. Reports on grievances will be regularly presented by the LMU to DPTADER and the multi- stakeholder forum (MSLF). Grievance reports should track complaints, responses, redress action and close-out of all community grievances with dates and responsible parties clearly indicated. The MSLF and Provincial LMU Project Coordinator will periodically verify response management and redress through to close-out of each grievance. A maximum of 15 days from receiving a grievance to communicating a decision should be maintained as a golden rule. Resolution should be sought at the lowest level possible in all cases. For MozDGM the NEA will maintain the documentation of the MozDGM projects, follow the communications strategy in coordination with the Global Executing Agency (GEA), manage grievances, complaints and redress processes, responding promptly to queries, and coordinate with and sending information as requested to the GEA. Grievances response in the MozDGM project is unique and for the most part separated from the MozFIP system. At community level, grievances that cannot be redressed locally will be passed through the CGRN and CBOs or local leaders to the District level in the same way as for MozFIP. However for MozDGM the District multi-stakeholder platform will receive and address grievances or if it cannot provide a resolution that is satisfactory to the complainant, it should be passed directly to the NEA as the Project Authority in Mozambique, for resolution. If the NEA is unable to provide an acceptable solution to the complainant, the grievance, accompanied by documented reports of case management up to then, should be passed by the NEA to the GEA (see the Figure below). A diagrammatic presentation of the communication channels for presenting complaints and the points of their potential resolution and communication back to the complainants can be seen below: 15 Grievance and redress channels Legend: GEA MozFIP Grievance & response or MITADER Central government redress channel National court MozDGM Grievance & response or redress channel If dissatisfied, appeal and response FNDS (UGFI) NSC/NEA channel Provincial court Provincial Coordinator Provincial government (PIU) and MSLF District court Multi-stakeholder Platform District government SDAE District Administrator Service Provider Community court Local authorities Community Community CGRN influence Association (women+youth Community leaders (women+youth reps.) traditional (women+youth reps.) leaders reps.) C O M M U N I T Y C O M M U N I T Y C O M M U N I T Y Reactions and decisions on redress and communication of these to the complainant should be timely at all levels. If affected communities’ interests are superseded or rendered ineffective by any other government actions in agreements made by them, provisions exist in most legislation to appeal with sectoral grievances to higher levels of government such as National Directors and Ministers. Should any party be dissatisfied, the aggrieved party may take the complaint to court where it will be dealt with under Mozambican law. In principle, a community can take a concessionaire or licensee to court for not abiding by the terms of an environmental management plan. Ultimately, though not usually practiced, all citizens have the right to address complaints to the Public Prosecutor, the institution responsible for ensuring the law is correctly applied, particularly in the elaboration of territorial management instruments and their implementation. Monitoring and evaluation Administratively the FNDS/UGFI in MITADER is responsible for monitoring of environmental and social safeguards compliance for MozFIP. Although MASA is responsible for external monitoring of agroforestry management compliance, social safeguards monitoring will be coordinated through FNDS/UGFI. The FNDS/UGFI Social and Environmental specialists in the Social and Environmental Safeguards Unit and the DPTADER/LMU social specialists will be responsible for the development and oversight of all MozFIP related monitoring and evaluation activities. A Monitoring, Reporting and Validation platform that includes the management system of 16 safeguards and registration for grievances management has been designed for information management of environmental and social safeguards. The LMUs in Zambézia and Cabo Delgado will consult and coordinate with the appropriate government agencies on social monitoring and present their progress in quarterly reports to the FNDS/UGFI. The social management officials in the provincial LMU, will have the local responsibility for coordinating and monitoring the implementation of Mozbio’s Process Framework within the scope of its Addendum. They will provide inputs to the Communication Plans to ensure awareness-raising programs inform stakeholders, especially service providers about the Framework, how it applies to them and how they must use its mechanisms when necessary. At district level, the SDAE may be designated to carry out local monitoring tasks in coordination with the service provider personnel. At community level, the CGRN and associations will be the main fora involved in participatory monitoring. They will identify indicators for CDAP developed with their participation, and will be trained on how to manage the information for the Projects’ and committee use. All community management structures linked to local authorities and the District multi-stakeholder platforms should listen to, verify and respond to grievances as entitlements are understood and taken up or as they change over time. Written agreements between FNDS/DPTADER, LMUs and community representatives will be jointly monitored and where possible community organizations will be responsible for ensuring the compliance of community members. Costs It is expected that as a result of triggering by the Process Framework criteria MozFIP will require approximately 10 CDAPs distributed evenly over the Project life as can be seen in the table below. Activities Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total USD MozFIP Preparation and implementation of 10 CDAPs 155,550 155,550 155,550 155,550 155,550 777,750 Monitoring and Evaluation of CDAP preparation (5% of CDAP value) 7,778 7,778 7,778 7,778 7,778 38,888 TOTAL MozFIP 163,328 163,328 163,328 163,328 163,328 816,638 Each CDAP is estimated to cost approximately USD 12,960 to prepare and five times this value (USD 64,813) for each one to be implemented. CDAP preparation costs include two Service Provider outreach officials’ services over a period of approximately one month to support communities carrying out the following activities:  A participatory gap analysis of the Community Agenda and community land-use plan in relation to the current context and MozFIP spatial and other data; 17  Community capacity development and facilitation support to carry out: o A participatory rural appraisal exercise to acquire additional socio- economic and stakeholder information; o A workshop with approximately 50 community representatives to prioritise and design viable projects over an accumulated period of a week;  Elaboration of the CDAP. Preparation of CDAPs and monitoring of these by the FNDS/LMU social specialists is estimated to occur throughout the Project. Preparation and implementation of 10 viable CDAP projects within the scope of MozFIP is included in the ESMF budget. CDAP elaboration (including service provider costs) USD Participatory gap analysis of Community Agenda, CLUP : current context : MozFIP spatial data 3,625 PRA to acquire additional socio-economic and stakeholder information 1,088 5 days workshop + 50 community representatives to prioritise and design viable projects 7,250 Elaboration of the CDAP (10 days with SP) 1,000 Sub-total: Estimated cost of preparation 12,963 Estimated cost of implementation @ x5 the cost of preparation 64,813 TOTAL: Estimated cost of preparation and implementation of one CDAP 77,775 Estimated costs may be updated during appraisal. 18 1 Program Description Mozambique is one of the countries to receive financing through the Forest Investment Program (FIP) of the Climate Investment Funds (CIF). In a new round of financing in 2015, based on a successful Expression of Interest, Mozambique was selected to develop a Forest Investment Plan. In July 2016, Mozambique had its Forest Investment Plan approved by the FIP Sub-Committee. The government since then has started to design the Mozambique Forest Investment Project (MozFIP) which included the Dedicated Grant Mechanism for Local Communities (MozDGM). MozFIP will implement part of Mozambique’s REDD+ Strategy, and will address the main causes of deforestation and start a transformation process in the forest sector towards more sustainable forest management with enhanced benefits to rural communities. Guided by the National REDD+ Strategy and other Government strategies, the MozFIP represents the Government’s ambition for transformational change to address the drivers of deforestation and promote sustainable rural development. Mozambique’s REDD+ Strategy is a key feature of the Government’s response to climate change and its effort to promote sustainable rural development. The REDD+ initiatives 1 contribute to the GoM’s efforts to access and apply global climate finance to address development challenges. Mozambique has been engaged in the REDD+ agenda since 2013, with strong support from the WB through a Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) REDD+ Readiness grant (P129413), through a $3.8 million grant in 2013, and additional $5 million in 2016. Among others, it supported the preparation of the Readiness Package, which includes the National REDD+ Strategy; safeguards instruments to guide its implementation; a Reference Emissions Level and a Monitoring, reporting, and verification system (MRV system). Mozambique’s REDD+ Strategy comprises six strategic objectives translated into equal number of main sets of activities, namely: 1: Cross-cutting actions: establish an institutional and legal platform for inter-agency coordination to ensure the reduction of deforestation; 2: Agriculture: promoting alternative sustainable practices to shifting cultivation, which ensure increased productivity of food and cash crops; 3: Energy: increase access to alternative sources of biomass in urban areas and increase the efficiency of production and use of biomass energy; 4: Conservation Areas: strengthen the system of protected areas and find safe ways of generating income; 5: Sustainable Forest Management: promote the system of forest concessions, community management and strengthening forest governance; and 6: Restoration of degraded forests and planting trees: establishing a favourable environment for forest businesses, restoration of natural forests and planting of trees for various purposes, production and use of biomass energy. 1 Interventions for the reduction of carbon emissions associated with the changes in use of land affecting its cover through the application of sustainable management principles for forest ecosystems (natural and planted) contributing to the global efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change and integrated and sustainable rural development. 19 MozFIP will implement part of the National REDD+ Strategy to improve the enabling environment and forest and land management practices in targeted landscapes in Mozambique. With the FCPF support, the GOM conducted a Social and Environmental Strategic Assessment (SESA) to ensure the National REDD+ Strategy would consider the social and environmental risks from the proposed strategic options, and to identify mitigation actions (the full report can be found on www.redd.org.mz). In addition, an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) was prepared to manage the social and environmental risks from concrete interventions on the ground from the MozFIP and Moz DGM initiatives. For the REDD+, MozFIP and MozDGM consultation extended from the 3rd of March 2013 to 18th of November 2016. The consultation process is continuous and will be continued moving foward. The consultation process covered six provinces across the South, Center and North of Mozambique, in Maputo, Gaza, Zambézia, Sofala, Cabo Delgado and Nampula provinces. The process included 61 public consultation meetings, of which 10 were community consultations. In total, 3370 participants were involved, of which 978 were female. The process was used to explore issues around the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, land use and land tenure, social and environmental protection and sustainable forest management. See Annex 1 of the ESMF for a summary of the public consultations that were carried out. Mozambique’s Forest Investment Program Mozambique’s Forest Investment Program will start a transformation process in the forest sector towards more sustainable forest management with enhanced benefits to rural communities. Guided by the National REDD+ Strategy and complementary Government strategies, the Forest Investment Program will address the drivers of deforestation and promote sustainable rural development. Mozambique’s Forest Investment Program2 is a large-scale, modular framework for implementing the National REDD+ strategy across the country, including supporting ambitious reforms in the forest sector. The Program includes three projects: i) Mozambique Forest Investment Project (MozFIP), to be implemented with World Bank support; ii) the Dedicated Grant Mechanism for Local Communities (MozDGM) to be implemented by a civil society organization (under identification) with support from the World Bank; iii) IFC’s “Emissions Reductions in the Forest Sector through Planted Forests with Major Investors�, implemented with IFC 3 support, which is not considered under the ESMF and this Process Framework Addendum. The Ministry for Land, Environment and Rural Development (MITADER) will be coordinating all the planned interventions. MITADER will coordinate implementation of the FIP. 2 The Investment Plan was approved by the FIP Sub-Committee in May, 2015. 3 This second project, Emissions Reductions in the Forest Sector through Planted Forests with Major Investors, is managed by IFC. The IFC project is focused on leveraging the private sector to support community forest management and outgrower schemes around planted forests. 20 MozFIP MozFIP will finance activities at two levels: (i) National-level activities focused on strengthening forest governance and creating enabling conditions for transformative change in forests and landscape management; and (ii) landscape-level activities focused on promoting integrated management of two landscapes (in two different provinces i.e. Cabo Delgado and Zambézia). Interventions at these two levels form a holistic approach: they create conditions to foster the implementation of activities on the ground in the two landscapes, while initiating transformation in the forest sector. At the same time, it creates a model for engagement which could be expanded to other provinces. MozFIP promotes an integrated landscape management approach promoting activities in different sectors (forestry, agriculture and energy – linked to the major drivers of deforestation), and across different stakeholders (government, local communities, private sector and civil society). The landscape approach recognizes that forest and natural resource management, agriculture development, and energy use are inextricably linked, institutionally at the local technical level and at a policy level, and that interventions need to be made at scale to have an impact on rural poverty and natural resources sustainability. Such an approach results in a complex project design, but it is needed to effectively address the most significant drivers of deforestation in a comprehensive manner. On the other hand, by focusing on two clearly- defined landscapes, the project reduces implementation complexity. The MozFIP Project Development Objective is to improve the enabling environment for, and practices of, forest and land management in targeted landscapes in Mozambique. In addition to overall coordination and management this Project is structured in two main components as detailed below (refer to Annex 1 of the Project Appraisal Document – PAD for further details): Component 1: Promotion of Integrated Landscape Management Regularizing land tenure, promoting community-level land use planning and promoting integrated landscape management tools to strengthen land tenure of local communities and of small and medium landholders., to improve local communities’ capacity to plan the use of natural resources over which they have rights and to enhance the capacity of local actors on land use planning and on multi-stakeholder planning, through: Provision of support for the land delimitation of about 160 communities, including the issuance of about 160 community delimitation certificates, preparation of about 160 community-level land use plans, and strengthening of natural resources committees (CGRNs). The Project will finance consultancy, operational costs and equipment 21 acquisition;  Issuance of about 3100 DUATs to small and medium landholders engaged in forest plantation and agro-forestry. The Project will finance consultancy and operational costs to ensure DUAT issuance;  Provision of institutional support to the provincial land administration service in Cabo Delgado province. The Project will finance office equipment and the maintenance of the land management system.  Strengthening of the multi-stakeholder landscape forums (MSLF) in Zambézia and Cabo Delgado to facilitate multi-stakeholder coordination and dialogue, and landscape-level monitoring. The Project will finance the operational costs of such Forums;  Promotion of the use of geo-spatial tools at the provincial and district levels to improve land use planning through the acquisition of equipment and training to targeted provinces and districts. Promoting multi-purpose planted forests, agroforestry systems and sustainable biomass production to establish commercial tree planting for several purposes (sawn wood, poles, wood chips, charcoal, pulp) among local communities, small- and medium- landholders, to restore degraded areas on productive land, to promote the adoption of agro-forestry practices among small landholders as a way to improve food security and reduce slash-and-burn agriculture expansion, and to produce charcoal in a more sustainable way. Promoting the Planted Forests Grant Scheme, a performance-based grant scheme to promote the establishment of around 5,000 hectares of sustainable, multi-purpose plantations amongst communities and small and medium landholders, and of 500 hectares of restored lands, through:  Provision of performance-based grants to small and medium landholders and inputs to communities for the establishment of multi-purpose plantations; and  Provision of technical assistance on tree planting and maintenance to beneficiaries. The implementing agency (FNDS) and the hired service provider will monitor the grant scheme on the ground. Establishing agroforestry systems over about 1,500 hectares by smallholders to enhance yield productivity and food security and reduce slash-and-burn agriculture, through the provision of technical assistance and agro-forestry inputs to beneficiaries. With reference to agroforestry activities in Cabo Delgado Province, it is important to highlight that the Quirimbas National Park is zoned into strict protection areas and community use areas. Hence, agro-forestry activities would only be supported in the community use areas. The location of agro-forestry activities will always follow the approved Park Management Plan. Moreover, the community use areas are already converted and currently under use by communities. It is also important to highlight that the 22 Government is currently considering reclassifying the Park as a multiple-use landscape (following the new Conservation Law) to better reflect the multiple use areas, and improve biodiversity conservation and community development. Supporting Sustainable Charcoal Production to increase wood transformation efficiency into charcoal and to reduce the overall use of wood, through:  Provision of support for (i) the elaboration of 10 forest management plans in 10 associations for charcoal production; (ii) acquisition of licenses for biomass exploration; and  The provision of training and assistance in the use of more efficient charcoal- making kilns to 750 charcoal producer organizations and/or individual producers. The Project will finance consultancy, operational costs and equipment acquisition. Component 2: Strengthening of the Enabling Conditions for Sustainable Forest Management Developing Mozambique’s National Land Use Plan to promote more balanced and long-term land use decisions, through support to the preparation of a National Land Use Plan prepared in close consultation with relevant stakeholders. The Project will finance consultancy and operational costs. Strengthening of forest governance to reduce forest-related crimes and illegal activities in the sector, to increase benefits to government and local communities from forest management, and to ensure compliance with sustainable forest management practices, through:  Strengthening of inspection, detection and control in the forest sector through support to the Recipient’s forest law enforcement institutions (particularly AQUA and ANAC) 4, so as to improve forest areas patrolling and inspecting, infractions prevention, detection and prosecution. This support includes: (i) capacity strengthening of forest rangers at AQUA and ANAC; (ii) establishment of AQUA’s provincial delegations in Zambézia and Cabo Delgado 5 , including equipment acquisition, staff financing and training and operational costs; (iii) strengthening the management of two conservation areas (Gilé National Reserve and the Quirimbas National Park) through equipment and operational costs; (iv) promoting inter-agency coordination to tackle forest illegal activities.  Implementation of a forest information system to increase transparency and accountability in the sector system by providing updated geo-referenced information on forest licensing, forest management plans implementation, inspection and law enforcement. The support will include equipment and data management infrastructure acquisition, and capacity building.  Strengthening of multi-stakeholder forest sector decision making to 4 The financing will categorically exclude any kind of support for activities that are prohibited by the Bank’s policies and rules as outlined in “Legal Vice Presidency Annual Report FY 2013: The World Bank’s Engagement in the Criminal Justice Sector and the Role of Lawyers in the “Solutions Bank��. 5 No construction works will be financed. 23 improve forest policies and regulations through a well-functioning National Forest Forum. The Project will support the operational costs of such a Forum.  Regular assessment of forest governance to monitor progress on implementation of the forest governance reforms. The Project will finance the costs associated with carrying out these regular assessments at the national level, including the assessment of forest operators’ compliance with regulations. Strengthening natural forest management to ensure sustainable use of forest resources, to increase benefits to local communities and to government and to add value to forest products, through:  Provision of technical assistance to forest operators engaged in sustainable forest management, so as to support them in obtaining forest certification and in adding value to forest products. The project will finance the costs of training and skill development initiatives through consultancies and operational costs;  Strengthening of the capacity of forest administration authorities , particularly at the provincial level on different aspects of forest management, including on forest management plan implementation and on piloting new forest concession allocation systems. The project will finance staffing and operational costs, consultancies and equipment acquisition;  Promotion of sustainable small-scale forest businesses (timber and non- timber forest products), including support to community enterprises, to community-private sector partnerships and to participatory forest monitoring. The Project will finance capacity building, staffing, operational costs, equipment acquisition and consultancies. MozDGM in Mozambique The Dedicated Grant Mechanism (DGM) is a special global initiative under the FIP to provide grants to enhance the capacity and support specific initiatives of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) in FIP pilot actions in order to strengthen their participation in FIP and other REDD+ processes at the local, national and global levels. The DGM design was developed in a participatory way by a working group of IPLCs. The DGM has been under implementation in 14 countries where governments are implementing FIP investment projects with support from Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs). DGM objectives consider (i) a series of DGM country projects; (ii) a Global Component for knowledge exchange and strengthening networks of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities . A defining feature of the DGM is that IPLCs have a key decision-making role and comprise most of the two Steering Committees; the National Steering Committee (NSC) – in each FIP pilot country – and the Global Steering Committee, which are the main decision-making bodies of the initiative. In Mozambique, the DGM does not include Indigenous People as the country is not acknowledged to have such a category of people distinctive from other populations. 24 MozDGM aims to strengthen the capacity of local communities, community-based and civil society organizations to participate actively in sustainable forest and land management and REDD+ processes at the local, national and global levels. It will operate at two levels: (i) the national level focusing on capacity building and institutional strengthening; and (ii) the landscape level focusing on the implementation of activities in the two selected landscapes, Zambézia and Cabo Delgado. The Project Development Objective is “to strengthen the capacity of local communities, community-based and civil society organizations to participate actively in sustainable forest and land management and REDD+ processes at the local, national and global levels�. It is being prepared as a stand-alone project that complements the MozFIP and operates at two levels: (i) national level focusing on capacity building and institutional strengthening; and (ii) landscape level focusing on the implementation of activities in the two selected landscapes, Zambézia and Cabo Delgado. It is designed to promote the active participation of Local Communities in Mozambique’s Forest Investment Program. The MozDGM will have the following main components: Component 1: Capacity Building and Strengthening for Sustainable Natural Resources Management. This component will finance capacity-building and institutional-strengthening activities for communities and civil society organizations7 across the country. The activities aim to strengthen community awareness, network, advocacy and technical capacity on matters related to climate change, forest and land management, as well as their managerial and grant-making competencies. At national level the activities will address short term trainings related to climate change resilience, comprehensive management of natural resources, inclusive business, and land tenure; promote interaction and engagement of communities and civil society through exchange of experiences and the development of an Information, Education and Communication strategy. At Landscape level the activities will be focused on addressing a Community Development Action Plan (CDAP). The action plan is mainly supported by the elaboration of a Community Agenda which highlights a social preparedness process as part of community land delimitation, which the CDAP will take forward in identification of a market value chain for local products and potential stakeholder partnerships. The activities will be implemented through the Natural Resource Management Committees (CGRN) and/or other community-based organizations. The component will also work on community governance regarding benefit sharing, forest monitoring, community 6 MozDGM is still under early stages of preparation, hence its description is very likely to change based on further discussions with the stakeholders and technical work. 7 Natural Resource Management Committees (CGRNs), Associations and Unions could be considered community- based organizations. The definition of CBOs will be determined by the National Steering Committee and National Executing Agency. 25 participation on law enforcement and training in fire management and fire management plans. Communities, community-based and civil society organizations across the country would be eligible to apply for financing of activities under this Component. Component 2: Promoting Sustainable Local Community Initiatives This component is related to subproject implementation. The National Executing Agency (NEA) – which will be selected through a competitive process among non-governmental, non-profit organizations – will screen and finance proposals presented by local communities that have a validated Community Development Action Plan (CDAP). The main rationale is connecting the community proposals to the preparation of CDAPs would contribute a) to better integrate components 1 and 2; b) to a more systematic approach, ensuring the community proposals will make a contribution for the medium and long term community development; and c) would avoid the criticisms often associated with community driven development approaches related to (i) immediate investments without long-term goals and (ii) about how to ensure/justify that the supported proposal is the best for the community. Candidate organizations can apply for the MozDGM grants by presenting proposals which will contribute directly or indirectly to reduce deforestation while enhancing local livelihoods and increasing resilience to climate change, including, but not limited to: food security improvement activities; production and commercialization of artisanal and non- timber forest products; community woodlots for biomass energy production; restoration of degraded areas; sustainable agro-ecological production; and ecotourism. A Service Provider will provide technical assistance to help grantees with implementation and reporting, tailored to the needs of the grantee and the technical area of the proposed activity. Such training would be designed to facilitate success of the activity during the project life and into the future. Technical assistance would be provided by agents well acquainted with participatory methodologies, and made available early on, taking into consideration traditional local knowledge, governance mechanisms, cultural values and vulnerable groups concerns. Component 3: Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, Safeguards and Communication This component will finance the operational costs incurred by the National Executing Agency to carry out its responsibilities, which include, among others: (i) serving as secretariat to the National Steering Committee (NSC); (ii) ensuring project’s technical coordination, monitoring and evaluation; (iii) reporting to the World Bank, the coordination of the MozFip, and the Global Steering Committee; (iv) ensuring Project’s financial management, procurement, and auditing as well as compliance with environmental and social safeguard policies; (v) operating the Project’s Grievance Redress Mechanism; (vi) supervising the implementation of community initiatives and assessing results; and (vii) ensuring communication, public consultation and outreach activities. 26 This component will also finance studies, the development of a grant administration manual, travel and limited procurement of equipment for desk and monitoring activities. MozFIP and MozDGM will have strong ties with (a) the Agriculture and Natural Resource Landscape Management Project (ANRLMP), which focuses on agricultural development and land tenure rights being implemented in Zambézia province (and Nampula); (b) Sustainable Irrigation Development Project (PROIRRI), which is a program aimed at reactivating irrigation in Mozambique. This project is active in Zambézia province (but also in Manica and Sofala); and (c) MozBio, that offers community incentives for conservation in parallel to the existing livelihoods systems and conservation compliance at a scale sufficient to impact families at household level, being active in PAs in Cabo Delgado and Zambézia province as well as in other provinces. The three initiatives are led by MITADER in close partnership with MASA and other ministries/sectors (e.g. MOPHRH, MIREME, MIC, etc.). At provincial level, the DPTADER is the coordinating institution; and they all have their own Management Units at national and sometimes at provincial levels. At provincial level the DPTADERs in collaboration with relevant sectors will ensure that the sectoral aspects of each project are consistently respected and streamlined in the systems and procedures built for each project and contribute to fulfil common interests. Some of the key issues identified relating to community participation in natural resources conservation and management and in particular forest management, prior to and as part of the REDD+ initiatives preparation include: • Despite opportunities provided by the legislation for local communities to be consulted and potentially participate in the co-management of their resources together with an investment partner, in practice, community resource management in most cases offers little more than subsistence use rights to communities. • The majority of local participation in forest based livelihoods is informal, including the labour and products bringing economic benefit such as charcoal, fuel wood and village-based sawn timber products, honey, timber, traditional medicines, mats, carvings and furniture. o This means that for the majority returns are relatively small, social protection is absent, wage and rights protection and career advancement is nil, and paying taxes is not perceived to bring any advantages, so they remain on the margins. o Low levels of literacy and numeracy discourage many people from considering formalizing their activities. o Various degrees of complexity of administrative and financial requirements make it difficult for community members to apply for forest exploration licenses. 27 • Communities encounter problems when attempting to secure land rights and many do not understand the value of tenure security or what land delimitation process they need to carry out to secure a land use and benefit title. • The capacity of organizations to facilitate community land delimitation varies and ensuring community capacity and mechanisms to manage the land and its resources after its concluding delimitation is limited. • Local and decentralized government institutions also need more capacity to adequately support the process. • Lack of capacity, knowledge and collateral of local community members or groups and their awareness of markets and credit facilities offering accessible rates contributes to their constrained participation in the development of viable, profitable enterprises based on the management of productive natural resources, especially forests. 2 Objectives and scope of the MozBio Process Framework Addendum Land acquisition for public interest will systematically be avoided by the Program as will all other activities discovered during subproject screening that under the World Bank Safeguard Policy (OP/BP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement) might require resettlement or compensation. All MozFIP activities with participants selected at landscape level aim to be achieved through voluntary agreements between communities, interest groups or individuals as necessary and the Project. However, where Program initiatives may unknowingly restrict access to legally designated parks or protected areas without acquiring the land outright these require a Process Framework. The purpose of a Process Framework is to describe the process by which communities or parties potentially losing subsistence benefits from natural resources will participate in planning mitigation of this. These displaced persons should be meaningfully consulted and should have opportunities to participate in designing the restrictions, as well as in proposing the mitigation measures critical for success. Potentially displaced people should be assisted through community development action planning (CDAP) to improve their livelihoods and standards of living or at least to restore them, in real terms, to pre-displacement levels or to levels prevailing prior to the beginning of project implementation, whichever is higher. Once developed, a CDAP, should become part of the Forest Management Plan or under MozBio, the PA Management Plan, and be approved by the World Bank. For the Program’s MozFIP initiative, the Process Framework for MozBio approved in 2014 will be amended in the form of an Addendum (this document). The Addendum updates the Process Framework for Mozbio by adding:  The scope of the Program and description of relevant Project initiatives;  Identification of two of the PAs covered by MozBio where Program initiatives may take place;  Results of ongoing consultations as part of the REDD+ Program and the MozFIP and MozDGM initiatives; 28  Lessons learned from MozBio implementation of the Process Framework (to be added after consultation in January 2017). In order to learn from lessons from MozBio, one or more public consultation meetings will be organized during the MozFIP pre-appraisal mission, where the updated Process Framework and clarification of the Project’s safeguards documents will be disclosed and discussed. The Process Framework and Addendum will thus cover the entire program and subproject cycle of MozBio as well as MozFIP. The known design of MozDGM will also be presented in the Addendum, but the details of this initiative will only be added once the Project has been prepared. Since these two REDD+ initiatives will have to follow the PA Management Plan in any subproject design, the principles and guidelines in the MozBio Process Framework will cover them both. People may legally live in PAs in Mozambique but PA management plans cause restrictions in access to natural resources in these areas and their buffer zones. The MozBio project has an approved Process Framework that is designed to address access restrictions for local communities living in PAs and buffer zones insofar as they are governed by PA management plans and may be subject to zoning and where created, community-based PAs. The MozBio Process Framework covers selected PAs in Mozambique including Quirimbas National Park (PNQ) and Gilé National Reserve (RNG) where any restrictions on resource use caused by MozFIP or MozDGM activities in these areas will automatically trigger its application. Proposals from people interested in participating in MozFIP in and outside of PAs will need to show documental proof of community land delimitation certification or (outside of PAs only), the land-use title (DUAT) of the proposed subproject site. Aside from the subproject candidate, any additional claimants to use of the natural resources in this area, should have their right to use and the location in this area identified. Proposals, in these cases, will also need to include documented of agreements reached with such third parties resident or using natural resources in a proposed site at the time, concerning the conditions agreed on for a subproject to proceed. These conditions may include voluntarily ceasing to continue using the resource, demonstrating adequate accessible livelihood alternatives, or, agreements on benefit sharing, participating in subproject activities or in spin-offs of the main proposed activities. During field verification of subproject sites potential PAPs will be consulted and their freely given consent and agreement verified. The present Addendum to the MozBio Process Framework is therefore necessary to cover any unforeseen restrictions caused by the MozFIP and MozDGM projects in PAs. It should be understood however, that responsive community action planning in PAs is the core domain of the MozBio Process Framework and coordination will thus be required. The poorest and most vulnerable groups of rural populations are often the most dependent on natural resources for sustenance, income generation and many incorporate natural resources use in strategies to manage food insecurity risks. Rural communities living in or 29 near PAs and forest concessions bear direct and indirect costs from improved regulation and its enforcement concerning access and use of protected natural resources, and damage to or loss of crops, livestock and human life caused by wildlife. To become partners in biodiversity conservation and managed forest product exploration, local communities must derive sufficient benefits from the activities to compensate for these costs, and participate in and share responsibility for PA and forest management. If affected populations do not participate in identifying their resources, designing and agreeing on restrictions to these, and in proposing the mitigation measures, it is unlikely that they will take the responsibility of complying with forest exploration or conservation management plans. Subprojects, here considered as the activities implemented under MozFIP components, will be screened through a participatory consultation process in which impacts will be identified and communities’ integration in Project supported activities will be defined. The MozBio Process Framework thus outlines how to:  Screen impacts and identify measures to assist affected groups to restore and improve their livelihoods; and,  Verify eligibility of affected groups to benefit from Project assistance. The present Addendum clarifies the operation of separate but coherent:  Complaints and grievance redress mechanisms for resolving disputes that may arise relating to resource use restrictions, dissatisfaction with eligibility criteria, community planning measures or actual implementation;  Monitoring and evaluation of Project effects on living standards of the Project affected people and communities participating in Process Framework mitigation, and,  Budget estimate to ensure that the Project has adequate resources to support the smooth and sustainable implementation of the participation process. Several rounds of consultation with the REDD+ preparation staff in Maputo and in the two landscape level intervention provinces as well as key stakeholders throughout the country have given rise to the current MozFIP initiative. Further consultation for validation of this Addendum to the MozBio Process Framework is still required (see details in Chapter 8). 3 Institutional Arrangements for the REDD+ initiatives MITADER’s National Sustainable Development Fund (Fundo Nacional de Desenvolvimento Sustentável - FNDS8) will be responsible for overall strategic guidance and will coordinate Project implementation, particularly through its Unit to Manage International Funds (UGFI). FNDS will be responsible for the technical and financial 8 FNDS was created on Feb 24, 2016, and it has the objectives to promote and finance programs and projects that support the sustainable development. FNDS has 4 units: finance, investments, planning and the International Funds Management Unit. 30 coordination of the Project, and will work closely with some of MITADER’s technical directorates, mainly the National Directorate of Forests (DINAF), the National Directorate of Land (DINAT), the National Agency for Environmental Quality Control (AQUA) and the National Agency of Conservation Areas (ANAC). FNDS will also coordinate with the following National Directorates in other line ministries: Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security (MASA), through the National Directorate of Agriculture and Planted Forests (DNAS), the National Directorate of Agrarian Extension (DNEA), and the Ministry of Mineral Resources and Energy (MIREME) through the National Energy Fund (FUNAE). Each Agency and National Directorate has appointed a Project Focal Point who will participate in Project activities including in the preparation of the annual work plans and budgets, annual progress reports, prepare terms of references (TORs) in their respective areas of expertise, and contribute to the supervision of the actions under their areas of responsibility. Figure 5: FNDS/UGFI’s linkages to other Ministries and Directorates Project Oversight. The FIP National Steering Committee comprises government organizations, the private sector, research institutions and civil society organizations, and has the overall mandate to support FNDS/UGFI in strategic decision-making around the FIP. The FIP National Steering Committee will serve a technical advisory role, and provide technical inputs to the MozFIP project, ensure alignment between the project and other government programs and liaise with relevant stakeholders. To further strengthen the link between FIP and DGM-financed efforts, the FIP Steering Committee will work with the DGM National Steering Committee on a regular basis. Project implementation will be carried out by the FNDS/UGFI at the central level. The FNDS/UGFI will be tasked with the implementation of all Project activities, including technical supervision and coordination, overall Project planning, quality oversight, communication, safeguards management, reporting, procurement, financial 31 management, monitoring of Project activities and monitoring and reporting on its progress on a regular basis. At the central level, the FNDS will be responsible for the management of fiduciary issues, in conformity with the standards and requirements contained in the legal agreement and agreed upon with the WBG. The FNDS/UGFI Coordinator has appointed a full-time Project Coordinator for the MozFIP. The FNDS/UGFI project management team will include a financial manager, a procurement specialist and an accountant, as well as a monitoring and evaluation officer, a communication specialist, a safeguards specialist, and technical specialists for coordination of the following areas of expertise: natural forests; plantations and reforestation; land; agriculture; biomass. The FNDS/UGFI will coordinate the work of the Focal Points from the Ministries to ensure their regular participation in project implementation. In addition to participating in the preparation of Project annual work plans, the Focal Points will participate in site visits and in discussions with Service Providers and local authorities. Figure 6: MozFIP team under FNDS/UGFI At the provincial level, Project activities will be coordinated by the Landscape Management Units (LMUs), under the supervision of MITADER’s Provincial Directorate (Direcção Provincial de Terra, Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Rural, DPTADER). The LMUs will coordinate and monitor Project implementation progress at the provincial level and interface with the District authorities, both the District Service of Economic Activity (Serviço Distrital de Actividade Econónima, SDAE) and the District Service for Infrastructure and Planning (Serviço Distrital de Planeamento e Infraestructura, SDPI)) in the targeted districts. The Provincial LMUs are presently fully staffed and composed of one provincial coordinator and staffed with technical specialists (forest specialist, agriculture specialist, biomass energy specialist, land specialist, and a sustainable development specialist, who will be responsible for the safeguards activities) and administrative support (accountant). They report to the national FNDS/UGFI Coordinator and to the MITADER Provincial Directors, and have regular meetings with the Provincial Governors. 32 The existing Provincial Multi-Stakeholder Landscape Forums (MSLFs) will play an important role in Project coordination and in promoting integrated landscape management. The provincial MSLFs bring together stakeholders around relevant issues in the landscape, including land-use trade-offs, NRM and agriculture management, and foster cooperation and coordination across actors. The Provincial LMU serve as the Forum secretariats, and assist their members in developing annual strategic action plans (SAPs) to monitor activities and track performance against clear targets established in participatory manner. MSLFs are also expected to promote better coordination of projects and other initiatives present in the Landscape, by facilitating the establishment of a common vision to manage the landscape and a space for knowledge exchange. MSLFs and their SAPs will thus contribute to fostering Project ownership and awareness among landscape stakeholders, as well as orient strategic efforts and create synergies within the Project area. Activity implementation on the ground will primarily be handled by Service Providers under the supervision of the FNDS/UGFI and the LMUs. Service Providers will be hired through a competitive process. The FNS/UGFI has already been working with some SPs on similar tasks to the ones requested in the MozFIP project, particularly with SPs working for the Agriculture and Natural Resources Landscape Management project, and hence acquired experience. The FNDS/UGFI has an extensive roster of SPs (domestic and international) that could deliver on the tasks required by MozFIP. At district level the FNDS/UGFI, LMUs has already been working with SPs and the District Service of Economic Activities (SDAE) will be the agency coordinating the Forestry Services and Agricultural Extension activities. The District Service of Planning and Infrastructure (SDPI) is will support environmental inspection and will support subproject screening. The District Service of Women, Health and Social Action (SDSMAS) supports women’s community organizations and vulnerable people. Each Agency and National Directorate has appointed a Project Focal Point who will participate in Project activities including in the preparation of the annual work plans and budgets, annual progress reports. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) will provide technical assistance to the Government to implement the project, through a Technical Assistance Agreement 9 to be signed between FAO and the Recipient. FAO will provide technical assistance on forest management activities, which will be detailed in the Agreement. The DGM Program administrative organization and structure revolves around two levels: (i) the Global and the (ii) Country-based. This structure is defined in the FIP Design Document, and will complement the FIP investment plans and programs in each country. At the Global level, there is the FIP-Committee, Global Steering Committee (GSC), and Global Executing Agency (GEA). The National Steering Committee (NSC) and the National Executing Agency (NEA) will operate at the country level. 9 The standard Technical Assistance Agreement agreed between the WB and FAO will be used. 33 The FIP Sub-Committee is the governing body for the FIP and makes policy and funding decisions on the FIP as well as the DGM. Fund utilization and delivery progress for the DGM will be ultimately reported to the FIP SC by the World Bank through the Climate Investment Fund Administrative Unit (CIF AU). The CIF AU provides secretariat functions to the FIP SC and, in that capacity, is responsible for communicating the decisions of the FIP SC and reporting back on implementation of those decisions. At the country level, the National Steering Committee (NSC) will provide to MozDGM an oversight and will be assisted by a National Executing Agency (NEA). The NSC’s main functions will be to: (i) provide oversight to the MozDGM in the country and the functioning of the NEA, (ii) review and make funding decisions on eligible project proposals, (iii) liaise with and participate in meetings of national REDD+ and FIP institutions, (iv) raise funds through other programs/mechanisms, (v) report to the GSC on national activities, (vi) mediate conflicts related to MozDGM funding proposals and establish additional eligibility criteria for the MozDGM in the country. The NSC will prepare, with support by the NEA, an annual work plan and funding portfolio for approval by the relevant MDB. Currently, the World Bank is the implementing MDB for the DGM in all the FIP Pilot countries and in this role, serves to steer all aspects of administration and management for the DGM with specific global and country level (MozDGM) implementing organizations and agencies. The MozDGM’s National Steering Committee (NSC) is composed by two chambers: (i) the Deliberative Chamber formed by Natural Resources Management Committee (CGRN) members (6 chairs) and local civil society representatives (5 chairs); and (ii) the Consultive Chamber formed by Academy (2 chairs), GoM (3 chairs), national and international NGOs (3 chairs minimum) and World Bank (1 chair) which aims to provide a multidisciplinary advisory and advocacy support. Within the NSC, members from Deliberative Chamber will be elected through a landscape forum elections and might consider CGRN and civil society representatives as candidates considering vulnerable groups and territorial coverage. The south, centre and north of Mozambique should be represented in the NSC. The Chamber members will be indicated by the Deliberative Chamber through a numeric voting process following a list of criteria previously validated. This arrangement plays in favour of a national wide and multidisciplinary representativeness of NSC. The network created by this multidisciplinary NSC is a high value feature, through it, NSC will be able to inform, consult, advocate and address community issues from the bottom to the top decision- making spheres. At provincial level the NSC representatives will be engaged in the Multi-Stakeholder Landscape Forum having active voice to interact with GoM, private sector and other interest parts. And at District level the MozDGM represented by CGRN members will link with other relevant forums in place such as Water Management Committees, Mining Management Committees and forum of CGRNs. A Multi-Stakeholder Landscape Forum has been under discussion to be implemented headed by district administration authorities mainly Serviços Distritais de Actividades Económicas (SDAE) and Serviços Distritais de Planeamento e Infra-estrutura (SDPI). 34 The National Executing Agency (NEA) will be the secretariat for the NSC. Selection of the NEA will be through a competitive process administered by the NSC and overseen by the MDB responsible for channelling DGM resources into the country. The NEA will be a not-for-profit and non-state organization that meets the programmatic, fiduciary and safeguards requirements of the World Bank. The NEA will facilitate the work of the NSC, develop country-specific review and risk assessment criteria, and provide operational and financial reporting to the relevant MDB. The NEA will be responsible for: disbursing funds to grant projects selected by the NSC as well as for monitoring grant- funded projects and ensuring appropriate use of DGM funds, in accordance with the operational and safeguards policies of the respective MDB, and will report to the MDB. The NEA will also maintain documentation of the MozDGM projects, follow the communications strategy in coordination with the GEA, manage grievance and complaints redress processes, respond promptly to queries, and coordinate with and send information as requested to the GEA. Key staff will be requested to compose NEA team which considers specialists upon: project management, community mobilization, climate change and natural resources management and procurement. Is encouraged to NEA have a support team with large expertise on fiduciary aspects, safeguards and monitoring and evaluation. Diagram 1: Institutional arrangement for MozDGM 4 Procedures for Participation and inclusion of Project affected persons (PAPs) Two aspects of the MozFIP initiative may cause new or more stringent restrictions on the access and use of natural resources in targeted PAs, these are: 35 - The application of more stringent conservation rules by rangers as part of the PA Management Plan - particularly over forested areas. - Agroforestry subprojects in protected area buffer zones. The MozBio Process Framework fully describes the process of participation and inclusion of potentially affected communities in deciding the scope of the restrictions and the mitigation measures proposed for effective PA Management Plan application and for alternative livelihood activities in buffer areas. It also covers the eligibility criteria and mitigation actions required if restrictions are placed on customary users of natural resources in the PAs. A multi-media global Communication Plan will be formulated and implemented as part of MozFIP and MozDGM with sub-plans relevant to each of the Projects’ components to ensure that timely and accurate information is readily available to Project implementers and other stakeholders up and downstream of planned enterprises, and to other interested parties. The communication plans will be an essential tool to help communities to learn about opportunities and become involved in effecting sustainable livelihood changes. They will also ensure two-way communication and knowledge exchange streams between the different levels of local government institutions and communities in Project priority areas in the context of CDAP formulation and implementation. The institutional arrangements for communicating concerns to the project authorities and receiving feedback will follow the same channels as those established for grievance procedures as described in section 5. 5 Resolution of Complaints, Potential Conflicts or Grievances Conflicts or grievances may arise from already existing situations particularly those involving crop losses (i.e. the frequent conflicts between people and wildlife in and around Quirimbas National Park). Inside PAs, the PA management is responsible for resolution, whether it be mediation with communities, compensation definition or improving relations with tourism investors for example. Conflicts generally arise from poor communication, inadequate or lack of consultation, inadequate flow of accurate information, or restrictions that may be imposed on people through the implementation of Project activities. Conflicts may also arise from mistrust generated by perceptions of unmet investor or Government promises over time. Conflicts may be especially prone to arising where there is a significant quantity of people carrying out illegal natural resource exploitation and communities are also implicated by the authorities. Preventative measures As preventative measures, awareness-raising about Project activities will be continued throughout the Projects’ life in order to reduce misunderstanding and grievances. The participatory land use planning process, forest management planning and subsequent participatory action plan formulation will identify potential conflicts and involve potentially affected people. Consultations and negotiations will be carried out with PAPs 36 where there are indications of potential conflicts. Training for technical teams, CGRN and local leaders in conflict management will also assist in minimizing the negative impact of conflicts. To empower communities they will be involved in awareness-raising and training concerning their rights and obligations, how to obtain legal advice and representation, and how to seek redress against what they regard as unfair practices by investment partners, forest inspectors (fiscais) or others. Local grievance and conflict redress mechanisms The Forest Investment Program incorporates the MozFIP and MozDGM projects. As such, the grievance redress mechanisms will take place in parallel to and in coordination with MozBio’s grievances redress mechanism. Since some MozFIP activities may involve communities living in and adjacent to PAs, the grievance redress mechanisms must be harmonized. The Project Authority in terms of grievances recourse for MozFIP is the FNDS and for MozDGM the NEA, while for MozBio it is the National Conservation Areas Administration (ANAC). Thus for MozFIP and MozDGM the different lines of transmission and response from the landscape level to the FNDS and NEA must be clearly distinguished. Project Communication Plans should prioritise awareness-raising about the structures that are available to redress more serious grievances that cannot be addressed satisfactorily locally. ANAC and FNDS as institutions under MITADER have already started to develop a comprehensive package of tools and channels of information to address overlapping issues and optimize the working scope of their respective personnel. The MozBio Project Management Unit’s safeguards team is also working in partnership with FNDS, and will coordinate in the management of MozFIP grievances redress when necessary. For MozDGM a very clear participatory structure designed by NEA will be established. In this, CGRN and other groups or associations created to manage specific natural resources such as water supply, agricultural or charcoal producers, and community forest guards will be involved in communication and initial grievances reception. Grievances response at community level will also be linked to the community court system where these have been duly constituted, so that they can be used for resolving as many grievances as possible at local community level. Five elected members led by a nominated president constitute a community court, established and paid for by the Provincial Government. They may deliberate on small civil conflicts and customary issues related to family relations. They may also exact penalties such as compensation for damages caused by the offense and / or, public criticism, community service, small fines, refraining from carrying out the activity that caused the case. Unresolved cases may be turned over to the District Courts. For all grievances related with non-fulfilment of community related contracts, levels of compensation, unauthorised taking of assets or certain restrictions of access to natural resources without compensation Project affected people must first try to resolve these conflicts through presentation to Project Service Providers or local influence leaders or authorities, or to one of the community associations for attention and either immediate 37 redress action of channelling to the appropriate higher authority. General principles and procedures must be established by the Projects and publicised including:  Verbal communication should be in locally relevant languages but all records of communications must be in Portuguese.  Grievance forms should be prepared by the Environmental and Social Safeguards Unit within FNDS and ANAC and distributed to Provincial Project Coordinators for making available to all potential users in and around Project supported activities. The same mechanism should be used by NEA concerning the MozDGM process. PAPs may also lodge their own documented grievances as they wish and it is the responsibility of each Project implementing unit and MSLF to organise and maintain records of all these.  An initial response must be provided to the communities in a recommended period of 10 days (maximum established by DGM) to 15 days maximum for MozFIP. The response time-frame should be as short as possible to maintain community trust.  The specific number of days for a response may be decided by each Project in consultation with FNDS and NEA respectively depending on the local communication and operational conditions but it must always be publicised in and around Project districts so all local communities know that they can expect a response within a certain period.  Detailed procedures to redress grievances and the appeal process should be disseminated among PAPs who should be empowered to use them. The participatory processes in this Process Framework should, among other aspects, focus on these procedures.  Measures must thus be put in place to ensure that solutions are reached by consensus based on negotiation and agreement. Community level structures to address local issues vary around the country. Representatives of local communities include territorial leaders (régulos, muenes), their subordinates and the local government structures, political party secretaries and village presidents. In some areas, local influence leaders who are trusted, especially by women, may in practice receive and redress local issues; these may include religious leaders, teachers, interest group leaders, community health practitioners and local extension workers. Some land and resource-use related conflicts may be resolved by traditional leaders. If such solutions are beyond their scope they may be passed on to the local community court where it exists, for resolution if appropriate. As appropriate per Project area, specific people should be chosen to represent their local communities during the implementation of MozFIP and MozDGM especially for grievance presentation and to accompany the redress process. These men and women will provide a first level of listening and informal resolution. They should either be literate or be assisted by other people to carry out all the secretarial work involved in the process, such as preparing/writing grievances, collecting them, filing, sending, translating, etc. Where Project affected people/households/entities prefer to handle the whole process by themselves they should be free to do so. Representation may be appropriate in many cases but it should not be imposed. 38 CGRN and their working groups should be involved in creating awareness that they may also be used for the communication of grievances for informal resolution. Efforts will be made to ensure that CGRN include representatives of women and youth with whom leaders will consult to offer tangible solutions. Formal grievances redress and conflict resolution processes should follow the general steps outlined below: Preparation MozFIP: Grievance Register Forms to be provided by the Projects’ Provincial Community Management personnel to District level personnel in The District Service for Economic Activities (SDAE), CGRNs and service providers for making available at local level at publicised sites and via publicly recognised community representatives. Community representatives should be encouraged to explain this entitlement whenever needed and at no time should filing a grievance be discouraged by community representatives, local authorities or Project officers. Each grievance will be captured in the Grievance/Issues Register that must be maintained in FNDS and each provincial LMU by Social safeguard staff and copies of all associated communications registered and filed by them. Reports on grievances will be regularly presented by the LMU to DPTADER and the multi-stakeholder forum (MSLF). Grievance reports should track complaints, responses, redress action and close-out of all community grievances with dates and responsible parties clearly indicated. The MSLF and Provincial LMU Project Coordinator will periodically verify response management and redress through to close-out of each grievance. Each of the following steps should be limited to a maximum of 15 days from receiving a grievance to communicating a decision. Resolution should be sought at the lowest level possible in all cases. Step One If issues are concerned with relationships with service providers, neighbouring communities or external stakeholders they should be presented to local CGRN to try and resolve immediately or as appropriate, to transmit directly to the local authorities for resolution. A service provider Community Management officer should screen grievances presented to the service provider to initially decide if a grievance is to be accepted or not. If so, the officer should pass them on to the appropriate agents or agencies for resolution. Grievances may be resolved directly by the service provider or SDAE at district level, but where they require redress via other agencies they should be passed to the Provincial Project Coordinator for delegating responsibilities for recommending solutions accordingly. If the subject is multisectoral it may require attention of the MSLF equivalent at district level. Presentation to this entity will be organised by SDAE or the service provider involved and communication about when this will occur made to the complainant within the timeframe established for responses by the Project/MSLF. 39 Solutions recommended by the service provider, SDAE, a district multi-sector platform10 or local authorities should be communicated to the aggrieved people immediately. In cases where conflicts or complaints are directed against governmental agencies or Project management, PAPs and communities may seek informal mediation by external agencies, such as NGOs. Where one or more communities is/are in conflict with a private-sector developer, the issue may also be taken to NGOs for amicable mediation. If the actions of local communities conflict with the sustainable natural resources management objectives of the Projects and cannot be resolved amicably by the service provider or the district multi-sector platform, then District government officials may be sought to mediate a solution. Grievance redress may require shorter or longer periods depending on the subject of the complaint. The district multi-sector platform must communicate via the SDAE or service provider’s Community Management officer to the complainant the period that the redress action will take. The district multi-sector platform, SDAE or service provider may engage with relevant local authorities or independent civil society groups with sufficient field experience in the locality and who are respected by households to help resolve these problems in such a way that the interests of communities and sustainable resources use are appropriately balanced. Step Two If the aggrieved person is not satisfied with the Step One decision he/she shall forward the case to the Head of the Administrative Post for the District Administrator’s attention with a preliminary report prepared by the Community Management officer. The report should contain the details of the grievance and hearing date and decision of the SDAE, service provider or the district multi-sector platform. If issues concerning service providers or external stakeholders are not resolvable at the lower administrative levels, they may be transmitted via the local authorities to the District Administrator for redress or mediation. The District Administrator may engage with relevant Government and local authorities to help resolve these problems in such a way that the interests of communities and sustainable resources use are appropriately balanced. The period for informing the aggrieved person of the redress steps must be followed, and the periods expected for redress communicated to them. 10 It may be necessary for operational reasons at sub-district level to have a multi-sector channel to fairly hear grievances, and respond to issues that may involve more than one sector, particular if these concern CSOs or NGOs. Such a platform would include representatives from the District Government and other actors in the district involved in MozFIP and MozDGM and might be led by SDAE representing the interests of FNDS, though leadership would be limited to a reporting role. Deliberations would be carried out by voting by all parties of an agreed quorum. As such the platform could receive and respond to both MozFIP and MozDGM grievances. 40 Step Three If the PAP is still dissatisfied with the decision taken after Step Two, he/she shall forward the case to FNDS for attention of the national MozFIP Coordinator as the representative of the Project Authority. The grievance shall be forwarded with all the documented details of the case to date. Communication with the Project Authority may also be carried out via community representation on the MSLF to the Provincial Project Coordinator and thence to FNDS (See Error! Reference source not found., below). Step Four It is expected that the Project Authority at the level of FNDS should resolve all cases presented, however where this is not possible, the PAP has the option to present his/her case to the Provincial Governor or Mayor of the Municipality for final amicable solution. Conflicts with private sector developers may be taken to the Ministry or agency with titular responsibility for the investment. Step Five If no amicable solution is reached up to Step Four, as an ultimate recourse the aggrieved person may submit the case to the Provincial / District /Municipal court system to seek reparation. In principle, a community can take a concessionaire or licensee to court for not abiding by the terms of an environmental management plan, a land use plan or a forest management plan. This final step is an option that must always be available, but it should be discouraged by all positive means possible. Timely communication and open negotiation are the main deterrents. The institutional arrangement and the principles of community consultation and participation that are intrinsic to the Process Framework are designed to allow the process to detect and deal with problems in a timely and satisfactory manner for all parties concerned. If affected communities’ interests are superseded or rendered ineffective by any other government actions in agreements entered into by them provisions exist in most legislation to appeal with sectoral grievances to higher levels of government such as National Directors and Ministers. Ultimately, though not usually practiced systematically by many people, all citizens have the right to address complaints to the Public Prosecutor, the institution responsible for ensuring the law is correctly applied, particularly in the elaboration of territorial management instruments and their implementation. 41 Legend: GEA MozFIP Grievance & response or MITADER Central government redress channel National court MozDGM Grievance & response or redress channel If dissatisfied, appeal and response FNDS (UGFI) NSC/NEA channel Provincial court Provincial Coordinator Provincial government (PIU) and MSLF District court Multi-stakeholder Platform District government SDAE District Administrator Service Provider Community court Local authorities Community Community CGRN influence Association (women+youth Community leaders (women+youth reps.) traditional (women+youth reps.) leaders reps.) C O M M U N I T Y C O M M U N I T Y C O M M U N I T Y Figure 1. Grievance and conflict resolution routes MozDGM: The NEA will maintain the documentation of the MozDGM projects, follow the communications strategy in coordination with the Global Executing Agency (GEA), manage grievances, complaints and redress processes, responding promptly to queries, and coordinate with and sending information as requested to the GEA. Grievances response in the MozDGM project is unique and for the most part separated from the MozFIP system. At community level, grievances that cannot be redressed locally will be passed through the CGRN and CBOs or local leaders to the District level in the same way as for MozFIP. However, for MozDGM the District multi-stakeholder platform will receive and address grievances or if it cannot provide a resolution that is satisfactory to the complainant, it should be passed directly to the NEA as the Project Authority in Mozambique, for resolution. All timeframes pertaining to grievances response periods will follow the agreed on principles for both MozFIP and MozDGM unless the latter specifies a different period in its communication campaigns. If the NEA is unable to provide an acceptable solution to the complainant, the grievance, accompanied by documented reports of case management up to then, should be passed by the NEA to the GEA (see Error! Reference source not found. above). 42 Administrative processes related to communities will be led by MozFIP’s Social and Environmental Specialists from the Social and Environmental Unit in FNDS. Unless resolved at community level the Community Courts may pass cases to the District Courts for resolution. Government ministries represented by respective national and provincial directorates or departments will be called on to participate in plan and agreement approval and to provide administrative and legal recourse as may be required from grievances arising from community benefit agreements and community / private / public partnerships for implementing development activities. The institutions providing oversight with responsibilities to ensure administratively and legally compliant outcomes will include: Institution Roles and Responsibilities Council of MinistersPasses decree-laws, decides on policy, promotes and regulates economic activity and the activity of social sectors. Creates, modifies or extinguishes PAs, establishes buffer zones around these per their management plans, approves the criteria for declaring historical-cultural use zones, authorises certain activities in PAs. MITADER Approves land-use, forestry and wildlife and PA management plans and is responsible for ensuring compliance. Fixes environmental taxes, timber and wildlife quotas and taxes and defines the percentages attributed to different parties of collected monies, guarantees forest and wildlife policing MITADER/AQUA Environmental quality regulator with compliance verification responsibilities for environmentally sensitive management plans, inspection of sustainable use of forest resources, land use and benefit and the use of land use planning instruments. MASA/DNAS/DPASA Planted forests management plans, and their taxes compliance. Agroforestry standards and compliance. MITADER Will enter legally binding agreements with communities to FNDS/UGFI - E&SS provide funding for development projects in exchange for Unit /DPTADER commitments to observe stipulated and agreed to sustainable uses of natural resources. These will have clear indications of validity period and conditions, and identify mechanisms for their enforcement on all parties. The Social and Environmental Focal Points are from FNDS’ Social and Environmental Safeguards Unit and are also represented in the provinces. ANAC Approves management plans for PAs and their buffer zones and is responsible for ensuring compliance. Provincial Governor Authorises historical-cultural use zones. MITADER/ Policy and oversight for land use planning and resettlement DINOTER planning and compliance. 43 MICULTUR Is responsible for ensuring that tourism planning and (DINATUR) development is integrated with other sectoral agendas at the provincial, district and local levels, and for supervising NGOs contracted for community capacity building and mobilisation. MITADER / FNDS / Where land use is required for infrastructural development UGFI - E&SS Unit or forest investments FNDS will screen and direct the appropriate permitting process for use of an area. The Social and Environmental Specialists will lead and facilitate the process with communities to acquire the needed titles and licences. FNDS shall be responsible for providing technical assistance to affected persons during adjustment periods. Such assistance will include administering training, support with material grants where necessary, and providing guidance on identification and development of alternative livelihood strategies. This may be outsourced. MAEFP District Governments through local authority chiefs and traditional leaders will provide land where land use rights shall be acquired for infrastructural development, forestry or tourist investments. MEF/DPPF + Are responsible together for implementation of MAEFP/DA + participatory decentralised district development planning MASA/DPASA and financing. MITADER. Has the authority to delimit community land and authority (DINAT/DINAF/ to certify and gazette it. The SPGC processes land use CENACARTA + rights title acquisition (DUAT) and transfers of title deeds. DPTADER/SPGC) MASA/DPA/SPEA Provides extension services and technical services for identification and evaluation of assets lost by Project affected people, demarcation of plots, and other technical assistance. MOPHRH/DNA + Shall be responsible for the development of potable water DPOPH/DAS and together with DPA/SPEA, small-scale irrigation works. MINEDH+ MISAU Teachers and health workers, respectively, shall be provided by these Ministries. The MozFIP Financial Management Unit shall be responsible for coordinating these intersectoral activities, in collaboration with the Provincial Project Coordinators and the multi-stakeholder forums. MITADER approves full ESIAs; simple EAs are approved by the DPTADER. All ESIA require a report of public consultation carried out and the full integration of local issues and recommendations into the Environmental Management Plan. Full ESIAs are obligatory for activities that imply potential conflicts concerning people’s use of natural resources. Government ministries have the legal authority to grant concessions in and outside of protected areas, without local consultation. Provisions in the EIA regulations, Land Use Law and Land Law are the principle tools for ensuring that projects are screened for their 44 potential impacts on local populations and obligate public consultation if people are found to be affected. Legal procedures for restricting access to natural resources shall be observed as provided for in the Constitution and laws of Mozambique, and impacts on local communities managed by this ESMF. Land use plan compliance is monitored by MITADER through AQUA. Attention during planning and implementation must be paid to the following principles outlined in the Constitution, and environmental, forestry and wildlife, land and land use, and conservation laws and regulations:  Consultations with local authorities and affected people must occur before and during project implementation.  Notification of intentions or plans to restrict access to natural resource must be made public as required by the law.  Determination of alternative livelihood measures will be made together with the affected people, with the assistance of the MozFIP Unit, DPTADER, DPASA, and NGOs with proven expertise in the initiative. 6 Monitoring and Evaluation Arrangements Administratively the FNDS/UGFI in MITADER is responsible for monitoring of environmental and social safeguards compliance for MozFIP. Although MASA is responsible for external monitoring of agroforestry management compliance, social safeguards monitoring will be coordinated through FNDS/UGFI. The FNDS/UGFI Social and Environmental specialists in the Social and Environmental Safeguards Unit and the DPTADER/LMU social specialists will be responsible for the development and oversight of all MozFIP related monitoring and evaluation activities. A Monitoring, Reporting and Validation platform that includes the management system of safeguards and registration for grievances management has been designed for information management of environmental and social safeguards. FNDS/UGFI Social Specialists will undertake continuous knowledge and compliance monitoring and evaluation to ensure that:  All critical people/entities (at local, district and provincial) levels have the necessary knowledge and skills to perform their duties and where needed identify and carry out remedial actions;  All project activities in PAs are implemented according the requirements of this MozBio Process Framework and its Addendum;  Problems arising during implementation are addressed early enough to avoid any spill-over that could subsequently hinder the outcomes of the Project (e.g. from Grievance Redress Mechanism issues); and  Social mitigation or enhancement measures designed as per the MozBio Process Framework and this Addendum are reflected in specific monitoring plans. 45 The LMUs in Zambézia and Cabo Delgado will consult and coordinate with the appropriate government agencies on social monitoring and present their progress in quarterly reports to the FNDS/UGFI. The social management officials in the provincial LMU, will have the local responsibility for coordinating and monitoring the implementation of Mozbio’s Process Framework within the scope of its Addendum. They will provide inputs to the Communication Plans to ensure awareness-raising programs inform stakeholders, especially service providers about the Framework, how it applies to them and how they must use its mechanisms when necessary. At district level, the SDAE may be designated to carry out local monitoring tasks in coordination with the service provider personnel. The approach of piloting and modelling taken by MozFIP allows for adapting and learning along the way and uses monitoring and evaluation as tools to ensure the continued relevance of project direction and activities. Participatory tools will be used wherever feasible in both Projects so that communities take responsibility for verifying the impact of the project and alternative livelihoods activities on affected communities and individuals. Community consultation and participation in all land delimitation, land use and forestry management planning processes will build community capacity to identify indicators and together with service provider planning facilitators they will develop participatory monitoring tools for CDAPs. These tools will be used during formulation of project proposals, and for participatory monitoring and feedback to external monitors during the implementation of these plans. Communities will also participate in external evaluation of outcomes of implemented plans. At community level, the CGRN and associations will be the main fora involved in participatory monitoring. They will identify indicators for CDAP developed with their participation, and will be trained on how to manage the information for the Projects’ and committee use. All community management structures linked to local authorities and the District multi-stakeholder platforms should listen to, verify and respond to grievances as entitlements are understood and taken up or as they change over time. The CGRN and associations will be responsible for coordinating their members for monitoring, regulating and supervising CDAP preparation and ensuring coherence with the district planning process and outputs. Service Providers will regularly monitor status of vulnerable groups through consultation, and where necessary follow-up work with communities and individuals will identify activities and sources of income that can improve their well-being. MozFIP and MozDGM will devise and undertake such social research and monitoring as is required to understand the aspirations and livelihood strategies of local affected communities to design practical, acceptable and mutually beneficial conservation and development interventions. 46 Written agreements between FNDS/DPTADER, LMUs and community representatives will be jointly monitored and where possible community organizations will be responsible for ensuring the compliance of community members. Although the contents of these agreements will be specific these may cover:  Implementation schedule;  Extent of community knowledge, involvement, actions and satisfaction;  Extent and quality of supervision by service provider;  Allocation of funds;  Problems arising and solutions devised, during implementation. The quality of monitoring processes should be regularly reviewed and improved. Issues such as leadership, representation, equity, and treatment of individuals vulnerable to specific hardships must be adequately addressed through identifying sensitive indicators and their monitoring. Training of all participants in how to use monitoring and evaluation for adaptive management decisions and how to use it as a basis for good communication flow will be essential for good project management. 7 Implementation Schedule and Costs Costs have been estimated by activity over five years in the distribution of activities per year. All costs related to Process Framework implementation activities are foreseen in the ESMF estimated implementation budget. Provision has been made for monitoring and evaluation of CDAP preparation and implementation with particular attention to resources for participation of affected vulnerable groups in order to promote their involvement in Project activities. It is expected that as a result of triggering by the Process Framework criteria MozFIP will require approximately 10 CDAPs distributed evenly over the Project life as can be seen in the table below. Activities Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total USD MozFIP Preparation and implementation of 10 CDAPs 155,550 155,550 155,550 155,550 155,550 777,750 Monitoring and Evaluation of CDAP preparation (5% of CDAP value) 7,778 7,778 7,778 7,778 7,778 38,888 TOTAL MozFIP 163,328 163,328 163,328 163,328 163,328 816,638 Preparation of each CDAP is estimated at approximately USD 12,960 and its implementation is estimated at five times the cost of preparation. CDAP preparation costs include two service provider outreach officials’ services over a period of one month to support communities carrying out the following activities:  A participatory gap analysis of the Community Agenda and community land-use plan in relation to the current context and MozFIP spatial and other data;  Community capacity development and facilitation support to carry out: o A participatory rural appraisal exercise to acquire additional socio- economic and stakeholder information; 47 o A workshop with approximately 50 community representatives to prioritise and design viable projects over an accumulated period of a week;  Elaboration of the CDAP. Cost details of this outline can be seen in the table below: CDAP elaboration (including service provider costs) USD Participatory gap analysis 3,625 PRA 1,088 Five days workshop + 50 community representatives 7,250 Elaboration of the CDAP (10 days with service provider) 1,000 Sub-total: Estimated cost of preparation 12,963 Estimated cost of implementation @ x5 the cost of preparation 64,813 TOTAL: Estimated cost of preparation and implementation of one CDAP 77,775 Preparation of CDAPs and monitoring of these by the FNDS/LMU social specialists is estimated to occur throughout the Project. Preparation and implementation of 10 viable CDAP projects within the scope of MozFIP is included in the ESMF budget. 48 8 Inter-Agency and Public/NGO Consultation The Process Framework Addendum has been developed in consultation with key officials of the World Bank and consultants developing the Project Appraisal Document in order to understand the institutional and implementation organisation of the Project. The National REDD+ Strategy development is orienting the MozFIP and MozDGM initiatives, targeting Mozambique’s key drivers of deforestation in partnership with all relevant stakeholders. To inform the REDD+ strategy and the MozFIP and MozDGM initiatives concerning environmental and social issues relating to land use and forest management, various safeguards are being developed and public consultation carried out in relation to them including this Addendum to the MozBio Process Framework. Public consultation was carried out to facilitate gathering and assessing community feedback and opinions on REDD+, MozFIP, and MozDGM nationally and with a focus on the two landscapes of Zambezia and Cabo Delgado. Visits to the areas that have implemented or are implementing REDD+ related projects included meeting with staff and visiting the following projects: MICAIA Foundation’s work in Manica, Envirotrade’s Sofala Community Carbon Project in Zambézia, the Gilé REDD+ Project, and JICA’s recently initiated “One Forest One Community for Food Security Project�. See the table below for the Projects visited: Table 1. Description of REDD+ related projects visited (Scott Wilson, 2016) Proj Organization Location Project features Nº 01 MICAIA Manica District MICAIA’s REDD+ conservation projects co- Foundation funded by the World Bank focus on adding value through co-owned business in forest, agriculture, livestock, natural products and tourism in the buffer zone of the Chimanimani National Reserve. The area has hosted relevant testing of REDD+ delivery models and studies funded by the Norwegian Government. These aimed to provide a detailed landscape-level analysis across the Beira Corridor of the rate and drivers of deforestation and degradation. Investment packages including calculation of implementation transaction costs informed the REDD+ readiness preparation process. 02 Envirotrade Gorongosa In partnership with local association District in “Associação Nfuma Ya Nhambita� the “Sofala Sofala Province Community Carbon Project� in the buffer zone of Gorongosa National Park focuses on 49 conservation based on carbon finance and sustainable forest management. It integrates fire prevention and management (early season burning), community conservation, restoration and sustainable forestry. 03 Envirotrade Quissanga, The project in the Quirimbas National Park Macomia and focused on integrating prevention and Meluco management (early season burning), districts in community conservation, restoration and Cabo Delgado sustainable forestry. It started in 2008 and was Province halted in 2011 due to lack of investors. 04 Etc Terra Pebane and The project in the buffer zone of the Gilé Gilé districts in National Reserve aims to promote conservation Zambézia agriculture to achieve food security and forest Province conservation. REDD+ related activities are at an early stage and involve quantification of carbon stocks and historical deforestation rate, seeking international recognized standards for the project to be developed, support for smallholders to adopt agro-ecological practices and strengthening the management of the Reserve focusing on anti-poaching, infrastructure, biodiversity monitoring and fire prevention. 05 JICA and Mabalane JICA initiated the “One Forest One Community Carbon Free district in Gaza for Food Security Project�, since continued by Consulting province the Carbon Free Consulting Corporation, to Corporation promote alternative livelihoods and carbon offset business. The project is expected to generate livelihood alternatives, promote food security, promote agro-forestry with conservation agriculture, promote fuel efficiency stoves and expand areas of support by carbon offsets and protecting the natural forest. The project works with organized local groups, mainly involved in charcoal exploitation and in agriculture. Consultation to date has initiated a constructive relationship with REDD+ actors and communities that may become involved in Program activities. This MozBio Process Framework Addendum and other safeguards instruments will be applicable to the MozFIP initiative and once its design is concluded the MozDGM initiative. A consultation process was conducted at community level involving mainly rural communities that may become involved in MozFIP and MozDGM, and at provincial level which targeted stakeholders with direct interest in the forest sector either as civil society organizations, government or private sector. 50 A joint analysis was carried out with these stakeholders to identify potential risks and opportunities associated with the implementation of the proposed REDD+ strategy options, MozFIP and MozDGM projects. The following table provides the geographic and demographic coverage of community consultation meetings carried out to date. Table 2. Participation in community consultation meetings to date Male participation Female participation Province District Communities Adults Elderly Youth Adults Elderly Youth Cabo Quissanga Nacoja 23 29 40 55 31 0 Delgado Montepuez 19 42 19 21 0 0 Macomia Bangala II 26 15 0 20 0 0 Meluco Massasse & 16 11 28 23 0 0 Nguya Zambézia Pebane Muceia 35 0 18 17 0 0 Gilé Namarrua 42 0 52 23 0 0 Gaza Mabalane Mavumbuque 21 5 11 30 0 0 Chaves 27 0 0 11 4 7 Total 209 102 168 200 34 7 The consultation process covered three provinces evenly distributed across the three main regions of Mozambique Gaza Province in the south, Zambézia in the centre and Cabo Delgado in the north. Nine communities were consulted in six districts with a total of 720 participants of which 241 were women. Youth and the elderly were specifically targeted for inclusion, and as can be seen in Table 2 above represented approximately 43% of all participants. A presentation of the Addendum to the MozBio for its validation and feedback on MozBio Process Framework application to date will be made in each landscape at meetings with invited stakeholders in January 2017, prior to MozFIP Appraisal. The results of these meetings will be incorporated into this Addendum. The participatory processes provide the key link for articulating social safeguard and social development policies between the Government, affected communities and other key stakeholders, and the World Bank. The results of community level meetings can be seen summarised in Table 3 below: 51 Table 3. Results of community consultation in Cabo Delgado, Zambézia and Gaza Provinces Issue consulted on Findings Forest use  The use of the forest varies by age group and gender; with young men (18-35 years of age, especially men) using forest intensively for market purposes and in some instances with lucrative illegal logging.  The intensive use of forest by this group seems associated with early marriages and the responsibilities they have resulting from children they have to take care of.  Lack of jobs in the rural community may also be one of prime reason for their intense involvement in forest activities.  The use of forest is also reported for food, firewood, furniture production, building fences and homes.  Around the GNR, because forest resources are depleted in the buffer zone, communities, especially youth, tend to harvest these resources from within the protected areas with the justification of distance as the prime resource to get in the protected area (3 km from their homes) whereas the alternative would be to go as far as 8 to 10 kms to get the resources they need in the buffer zone they are allowed to harvest from. So the incentive to enter the protected area is much greater, especially because these communities do not own any means of transportation to carry large quantities of timber or related products.  Older people, both men and women, tend to have a traditional connection to forest- they do not use it as intensely as the young men. As most live alone, the demand for forest resources is limited by the level of consumption (food preparation and others) but also by their physical capabilities.  Some of these elders have been involved in REDD projects (especially in QNP), where they planted trees in their yards and have been since then taking care of these plants.  Forest for medicinal purposes was reported across all demographic groups, given the limited coverage of health services in Mozambique in general  Charcoal production was observed in all provinces and communities visited but with different intensities (e.g more seen in the South and North, and little or none in the Central Zone). However, rural communities (producers/suppliers) appear to benefit less in charcoal production as in most cases licenses are owned by the wealthier sellers mainly from urban areas as they invariably set the final price (with few exceptions where an association acts on behalf of the producers,e.g. Mabalane district in Gaza).  Charcoal is widely used in urban and peri-urban areas to cook food because of the taste it imparts whilst most people in rural communities use firewood. REDD+ Impacts  REDD+ pilot projects have contributed to an increase in levels of awareness concerning the need for sustainable use of forest and on Forest Use conservation but this awareness has not changed the patterns of forest use described above, mainly because of poverty levels.  Money earned through carbon trading was less that that acquired through illegal logging for example.  The proximity of hunting/timber concessions to a protected areas (GNR) poses a serious threat to resources in the reserve (there was a recommendations that the tourism law be modified to prevent the establishment of concessions for tourism and hunting immediately adjacent to the protected areas).  Complaints were raised about job opportunities in the protected areas. Communities want priority in receiving job opportunities in the protected areas, for positions such as rangers in order to supplement income while protecting their traditional land.  There were reports of rangers facilitating illegal logging and charcoal production . 52 REDD+ Impacts  Learning tree planting technique, e.g. leaving gaps, fencing homes. on Land Use and  Communities encouraged to implement crop rotation. Land Tenure  Planting of fruit trees and providing alternative sources of livelihood and soil enrichment through faidherbia planting, although this had a downside of attracting elephants into the gardens and farms which destroyed crops.  There were no reports of land conflicts deriving from the implementation of REDD pilot projects. The few cases reported were outside REDD and they were all solved through communitarian system of conflict resolution. Very few cases are channelled to formal institutions to be resolved. Potential  Community members noted that the REDD+ reforestation projects are one of the key alternatives to replace their heavy reliance on forest Alternatives to resources for survival. They recognize the need to replant trees in areas that have been deforested, and they would like jobs participating Reliance on Forest in the reforestation project.  In addition to reforestation projects, it would be beneficial if individuals could participate in commercial agriculture.  At present, 90% of people living in the rural areas of Cabo Delgado and Zambézia rely on subsistence agriculture, but cannot participate in selling agricultural products because costs are too high. Sources of  The drivers of deforestation and degradation recognized by the communities are not much different than the drivers identified in the Deforestation and literature: slash & burn agriculture, illegal logging, and in the north, burning is conducted to flush out game for bush meat. Burning is Degradation also conducted for road rehabilitation and road clearing and at times burns out of control.  Fewer bush fires occur in coastal areas than inland areas because this region is dominated by Muslims, and they do not burn here because bush meat is considered to be similar to pork and is not eaten by them.  In addition to these localized sources of deforestation and degradation, large scale development projects, infrastructure projects and mining projects have a significant impact on deforestation and degradation. For example, the proposed Port project in Macuse District in Zambézia provinces, and the Pemba Port in Cabo Delgado Province will result in construction of a Port along the coastline, impacting coastal forest resources, as will a railway running 1,070 kilometres from the Port to the coal mine in Tete, as well as the development of the coal mine and supporting infrastructure  Large scale projects of this nature have a significant adverse effect on forests, undergrowth, soils and the carbon stock held therein. In addition to consideration of the environmental effect of large scale development projects, impact on forests and carbon, it is important to consider the social impacts, particularly if resettlement is required.  Similarly, large scale commercial agricultural developments, such as the pro-Savannah project being developed by Brazil, Japan and Mozambique, will result in large scale deforestation and degradation, and would require resettlement of some communities and individuals. Local perspective  Community members note that to reduce deforestation and degradation in the area, proper management of bush fires is one of the key on managing things that would help. deforestation and  They note that in addition to burning for slash & burn agriculture, and for hunting, burning for clearing road right of ways often get out of degradation control  Community members recommend establishing local committees responsible for managing all burning activities that occur in the area.  In addition to controlling burning, community members state that involving community members in reforestation projects would also help alleviate deforestation and degradation in the region. Institutional  Under the existing REDD+ pilot projects, conservation agriculture is being introduced by external sources. The concepts and ways of 53 consideration for farming are new to the people in the region, and in many ways clashes with local land use/forest use traditions. It will take time to raise managing awareness for the need for change, and to get people to accept the conservation programs and adopt them. deforestation and degradation 54 9 Appendices A. List of References ANAC, Process Framework, MozBio Project, July 21st, 2014. Bruno Nhancale, Sosdito Mananze, Nazira Dista, Isilda Nhantumbo and Duncan Macqueen, (2009) Small and medium forest enterprises in Mozambique, IIED. Cooperativa para Terras Comunitárias (Setembro 2015), Guião de Preparação Social Para Fortalecer as Comunidades na Gestão de Terras e Recursos Naturais. Dimensão. Decreto 69/2013 Etc Terra (January 2016) Analysis of historical deforestation between 1990 and 2013 in the Zambezia Integrated Landscapes Management Program Area. MITADER/ Unidade Técnica do REDD+ (2016) Mecanismo de Doação Dedicado para Comunidades Locais, Moçambique MITADER/ Unidade Técnica do REDD+ (2016) Plano de Acção da Estratégia de REDD+ 2016-2030 MITADER/ Unidade Técnica do REDD+ (2016) Várias Notas Técnicas (e.g. Governação Florestal; Agricultura de Conservação; Floresta Nativa e Biomassa; Reflorestamento, etc.). NEMUS/BETA, (Outubro de 2015) Relatório Final da Análise do Quadro Legal e Institucional para a Implementação do REDD+ em Moçambique. Política de Ordenamento Territorial, 10 de Abril de 2007 Política e Estratégia de Desenvolvimento de Florestas e fauna Bravia, Resolução 8/97 de 1 de Abril Regulamento da Lei de Ordenamento do Território. Decreto 23/2008 de 1 de Junho Regulamento da Lei de Terras. Decreto 66/98 Regulamento de Pareceria Público Privado e Concessões Empresariais de Pequena Sofala Community Carbon Project, Project Design Document According to CCB and Plan Vivo Standards. Envirotrade, August 2010. United Nations Redd Programme (UN-REDD), 2012. “Readiness Preparation Proposal for Mozambique�, Maputo, Mozambique WB (2013) - The Dedicated Grant Mechanism for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (DGM)/The Forest Investment Program WB (2016) - Report No: PAD1913 “Mozambique Forest Investment� 55 B. Community Development Action Planning Process Issue When to screen? When is a CDAP necessary? How to identify PAPs What baseline information is needed for the forest management plan CDAP? Participatory Action Planning Community consultation - Total or partial restriction on - Community consultation Socio-economic assessment of a proposed forest conservation area must gain a good Communicate opportunities, eligibility during preparation of resource use for livelihoods in a during preparation of a understanding of the areas proposed for conservation including: criteria, potential roles and agroforestry proposals in forested area legally designated subproject proposal or a • Mapping of locations of natural resources used (season, volume, scarcity, distance, in or responsibilities offered by the Project protected area buffer for conservation. socioeconomic baseline for a out of the planned forest plantation, who collects, prepares, benefits) to all PAPs. zones; - Partial restriction of access to forest management plan / PA • Levels of dependency on natural resources Assist PAPs to identify existing The application of more cultural or social assets in a management plan or its • Existence of customary or recent community organization to manage natural resources activities to support, or new ones to stringent conservation forested area legally designated update. (aquatic, land, forests, wildlife) be proposed. rules by rangers as part of for conservation. - In documented agreements • Strength and influence of local traditional leadership Identify, assess feasibility and Description the PA Management Plan - (that are part of subproject • The socio-economic position of youth, women and the elderly or disabled (involvement in prioritise jointly with communities to particularly over forested proposals) to cede partially activities, income sources, leadership or cooperative potential) produce an action-oriented road map areas. or totally rights to use of • Existing systems of savings and credit (customary, in-kind as well as in cash) for community development and forest or other natural • Functionality and effectiveness of community courts resource conservation opportunities. resources in exchange for • Preferred trusted sources of information and preferred channels for delivering complaints participation in the project, or • History of participation in local economic and community development initiatives, sharing benefits from the capacities developed, targeted groups project or to use available • Existing skills in the community, education levels (men, women), experience of and accessible alternative employment, aspirations liveihoods sources. Responsible Service provider 56 C. Identification of stakeholders and Project Affected People The landscapes targeted by the Mozambique Forest Investment Project cover, altogether, an area of 90,198 km2 and a total population of 2.9 million inhabitants, of which 75 percent are rural and 58 percent below the poverty line. These landscapes are generally known for having a wealth of natural resources, with similarly levels of threat to their sustainability. They are characterized by high investment potential in natural resources-based sectors, in fields ranging from gas and mining to agriculture and forestry. The Zambézia Integrated Landscape comprises a population of 2.3 million spanning an area of 53,362 km2. About 56 percent of the total population live below the poverty line, while around 74 percent of the total population may be considered rural. Variation across district is not insignificant – population range from 200 thousand people in Gilé to 416 thousand in Gurue, whereas poverty incidence range from 58 percent in Pebane to 67 percent in Ile. The Cabo Delgado Integrated Landscape comprises a population of 611 thousand in an area of 36,836 km2. About 65 percent of the total population in these districts live below the poverty line, while around 78 percent of the total population may be considered rural. As in the Zambézia landscape, variation across districts is significant – population range from 12 thousand people in Ibo to 234 thousand in Montepuez – the largest district in the coverage area –, whereas poverty incidence ranges from 57 percent in Ibo to 69 percent in Ancuabe. The primary stakeholders in these areas are the rural communities partly or wholly affected by the implementation of MozFIP activities and who are considered highly important to project outcomes but who still have little real influence over these. They are the main social focus of land use and natural resources management plans, CDAPs and sub-project proposals for community development to be financed under the MozDGM Project. Secondary and external stakeholders such as government departments, financing agencies, brokers, private and NGO sector agents all have greater influence over the outcomes of the Project, and over what primary stakeholders will gain or lose as a result of planning and implementing Project components. MozFIP will support secondary stakeholders to increase primary stakeholder participation in natural resources management and conservation and in achieving benefits from these. Communities At community level, in most parts of the target Districts resident communities have historical relationships to the land and other natural resources that in many places define their identities and have been strong enough to draw them back to these areas after Peace from civil strife was declared in 1992. Traditional leadership in all areas is integrated into a complex system of influence that also includes, local government authorities and political party leaders. The relationships between the territorial leaders (regulos, muenes), their subordinates and 57 the local government structure, political party secretaries and village presidents varies from location to location. Of all the ethnic groups in the centre and north of the country, the Lomwé, and Islamic Yao, Mwani, Makwe and many Macua provide more rights to women through their matrilineal inheritance and property ownership systems and matrilocal marriage and residential arrangements than their patrilineal Makonde and Ngoni neighbours for example. Local influence leaders including religious leaders, teachers, interest group leaders, community health practitioners and local extension workers must be consulted during planning processes. Women must be consulted as a social group with particular needs and areas of influence but with limitations of public expression. Almost no health services and limited public communications exist in the Project landscapes. Literacy is relatively low in comparison to the rest of the country with around a quarter of men and women in Zambézia illiterate while approximately 43 percent of the people in Cabo Delgado are11. In common with most of the poorest rural areas, people’s health and nutrition status is poor, infant mortality rate is the highest in the country in Zambézia (95 percent) while Cabo Delgado lies third at 82 percent12. Commercial infrastructure and public transport are minimal in the PAs and districts without main highways. In many places people still depend on barter arrangements and local communities participate in parallel economies. The food poverty line in rural Zambézia is 19.6 MZN/day with 56.5 percent of the rural and urban population living below it while in rural Cabo Delgado the food poverty line is 29.6 MZN/day with 44.8 percent of the population of the province living below it13. Communities and particularly the groups most vulnerable to changes in resource use such as the elderly, women, orphans and families with many dependents will merit special attention during forest and development planning. The isolation and poor access to and within many districts in both landscapes encourages dependence of communities on the local natural resources on which they base their livelihoods and the relationship is cemented by rituals to maintain such continuity. Dependence on medicinal plants and practitioners of traditional medicine is also enhanced due to the absence of health facilities. Despite these dependencies traditional management control of access and use of natural resources such as forests and water bodies are only still used at a few specific sites, and most of these have eroded due to social and cultural disruptions over many decades. The medium to high population densities are associated with the high levels of deforestation, being evident in the cases of the administrative posts of Quirimbas, Macomia, Mapupulo, Montepuez, Mucojo and Mahate in Cabo Delgado. Recent studies conducted in the landscape found small-scale slash and burn agriculture to be the key driver of deforestation, whereas timber exploration and charcoal production were the key drivers of forest degradation. Uncontrolled wild fires are also a constant threat to the Landscape, contributing to both deforestation and erosion. Associated to that is the degradation of waterways, especially as riparian forests are systematically 11 Demographic and Health Survey 2011, INE. 12 Demographic and Health Survey 2011, INE. 13 Pobreza e Bem-Estar em Moçambique: Quarta Avaliação Nacional (IOF 2014/15), Outubro, 2016, Ministério ee Economia e Finanças, Direcção de Estudos Económicos e Financeiros. 58 removed to make way for agriculture lands. Control of poaching in Quirimbas National Park (PNQ) and illegal timber extraction has tended in general to generate a fearful mistrust of the authorities by the communities who are often implicated by these forces, of collaborating with poachers and loggers. From 2000 to 2014, the Zambézia landscape area lost about 268 thousand hectares of forests, representing an annual deforestation rate of 0.62 percent. This is well above the national average of 0.58 percent. The causes of deforestation are primarily small- scale slash and burn agriculture, followed by charcoal production and sale in the nearby (and sometime further) urban centers and illegal timber extraction (Mercier et. al., 2015). Where community charcoal production and timber cutting linked to demanding markets closer to urban centres such as Pemba, Mocuba and Quelimane for example, there is a serious threat to forest and bushland resources. Community access to good quality water is also very poor and often they and their livestock must share unprotected surface water sources. Populations of elephants as well as other game (hippopotami, crocodiles, bush pigs, baboons and other monkeys etc.) around Niassa national Reserve and PNQ cause conflicts with local communities due to crop destruction and occasionally the threat to people’s lives. In almost all cases communities seek solutions from PA management and Forestry and Wildlife staff. In almost all cases the solutions involve community preferences to continue practicing agriculture and permanent occupation of the land rather than moving to another area. However, in and around the PNQ for example, communities encouraged by the PNQ have abandoned many of their isolated fields to join fields together in blocks where vigilance is easier and more effective. Restrictions established by local governments on uncontrolled burning of vegetation, and on use of natural resources in PAs and areas at risk (flood, erosion etc.) have also caused friction between communities and the Government. 59 D. List of Consultants preparing this Addendum Gaye Thompson – Lead social safeguards specialist. Honorata Chipepo – Assistant social researcher. With assistance from the FNDS Social and Environmental Safeguards Unit and World Bank project staff among others. 60 E. Terms of Reference for FNDS Social safeguards specialist FNDS hosts a four person team of Social and Environmental Safeguard specialists in a Social and Environmental Safeguards Unit to oversee and lead grievance redress management, environmental licensing, development and implementation of Community Development Action Plans and relevant Project related monitoring and evaluation. Responsibilities of the Social Specialist include but will not be limited to: Community Development Action Planning  Support the District SDAE and SDPI and Service Providers to identify a technical team to assist communities to prepare and update CDAPs. o Team members may be community management personnel or contracted.  Ensure capacity development is in place to effectively support the technical team and communities to formulate integrated CDAPs, monitor, evaluate and update them.  Supervise the CDAP technical team together with the District Administrator particularly in relation to developing participatory monitoring processes.  Monitor CDAP implementation and ensure reports are provided to the multi- stakeholder platform, the District Administrator and the MSLF, PIU and Provincial Government. Grievance redress management  Oversee and lead grievances redress management ensuring access to register complaints is freely available for the elderly and vulnerable, women and youth.  Lead the administrative and legal recourse procedures for grievances redress ensuring the process is timely. Community Development  Support awareness-raising on resource use rights and restrictions by ensuring the supply of materials and training of Community Management personnel and supervise their subsequent performance.  Ensure community participation in zoning and land use planning by ensuring linkages between Community Management personnel, Agricultural sector extension staff, territorial planning specialists, and District planning teams.  Ensure community land delimitation and certification is supported by coordinating and facilitating linkages with legal advisors and Community Management personnel.  Support Community Management personnel to facilitate community planning and guide them through the licensing processes for forest areas, investor partnerships and other initiatives.  Support the development of community capacity development needs assessments, plans for coherent training and support with resources that are screened for sustainability and long term community and conservation benefits. 61  Supervise and monitor community capacity development from service providers contracted by the Projects to ensure the communities’ maximum benefit, and that any shortcomings are followed up. Monitoring and evaluation  Together and in coordination with the Project Implementation Unit and FNDS Planning and Monitoring section develop and oversee all Project related monitoring and evaluation activities.  Support PIUs to ensure participatory monitoring and evaluation is operational in coordination with the Community Management personnel.  Assist Community Management personnel to establish Development Information and Coordination Centres on an as-needed basis. 62