INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 09/12/2011 Report No.: AC6331 1. Basic Project Data Country: Tanzania Project ID: P125484 Project Name: TANZANIA AGRICULTURAL SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT- PHRD ADDITIONAL FINANCING Task Team Leader: Zainab Z. Semgalawe Estimated Appraisal Date: June 9, 2011 Estimated Board Date: April 7, 2011 Managing Unit: AFTAR Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: Agro-industry, marketing, and trade (68%);Agricultural extension and research (21%);Irrigation and drainage (10%);Public administration- Agriculture, fishing and forestry (1%) Theme: Rural services and infrastructure (63%);Rural markets (33%);Other rural development (2%);Rural policies and institutions (2%) SPF Amount (US$m): 0.00 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: Borrower 0.00 Japan Policy and Human Resources Development Fund 14.25 14.25 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) Yes [ ] No [ ] or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies) 2. Project Objectives ASDP has two complementary objectives: (i) to enable farmers to have better access to and use of agricultural knowledge, technologies, and infrastructure, all of which contribute to higher productivity, profitability, and farm incomes and (ii) to promote private agricultural investment based on an improved regulatory and policy environment. The proposed PHRD Grant would foster the achievement of these objectives of the ASDP. 3. Project Description The PHRD Grant would support the scaling-up of rice production activities in small scale irrigation schemes, supported under the local level support and national level support components of the ASDP: a) Component 1: Local Support. This component primarily fosters the first Project objective by improving Local Government Authorities'(LGAs') capacity to plan, support, and coordinate agricultural services and investments in a more efficient, participatory, and sustainable manner, through implementation of District Agricultural Development Plans (DADP) which are supported by District Agricultural Development Grants. A competitive funding mechanism, the District Irrigation Development Fund (DIDF), provides supplemental resources for small-scale irrigation. Under this component the PHRD Grant will support scaling up of agricultural services (research and extension), capacity building and market linkage activities for enhancing rice productivity in 20 irrigation schemes. b) Component 2: National Support. This component fosters the achievement of both Project objectives. The first objective is supported by improvements in the relevance and responsiveness of the agricultural research system, including better linkages with extension. The second objective is supported by improvements in the national policy environment and by the development of mechanisms for greater public-private partnerships. The grant would provide funding for the National Irrigation Development Fund (NIDF) established under this component to scale up ongoing capacity building activities for irrigation development to Zonal Irrigation and Technical Units (ZITSUs), extension staff and Irrigation technicians; and enhance the training capacity and quality of Irrigation Training Institutes (MATI-Igurusi and Kilimanjaro Agricultural Training Institute). 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis The ASDP is implemented in 132 districts throughout Tanzania. Significant amount of the funding from the original credit and two previous Additional Financing credits have been used to support development of small-scale irrigation through the District Agricultural Development Grants (DADGs) and the District Irrigation Development Fund (DIDF). The grant resources will be used to increase returns from irrigation investments in selected rice producing irrigation schemes through scaling up of agricultural services (research and extension), capacity building and market linkage activities for enhancing rice productivity. Salient physical features of ASDP with implications for safeguards include the utilization of surface water resources for irrigation development. Many of these resources are riparian lakes and rivers, although some are solely national resources. The proposed grant activities will focus on software issues in existing irrigation schemes, and no irrigation investment expansion is envisaged, thus no effect on riparian water resources in national and riparian lakes and rivers. Rather, interventions such as System of Rice Intensification will help to reduce water utilization for rice production thus help to mitigate some of the risks. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Ms Helen Z. Shahriari (AFTCS) Ms Jane A. N. Kibbassa (AFTEN) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: The Project's environmental and social impacts are associated with implementing subprojects in the District Agricultural Development Programs (DADPs). These subprojects receive financing through the DADGs, DIDF, and also from the national- level NIDF. Many of the adverse impacts with the DADPs will continue to be of low intensity, minor, site-specific, and relatively straightforward for the beneficiaries to manage, assisted and primarily monitored by their local institutions. For districts that manage many and relatively larger irrigation schemes, the potential impacts may become more significant, intense, and widespread. These impacts may be associated with the unsustainable abstraction of water (affecting water quantity and quality), point and nonpoint pollution of water sources, soil erosion, increased loss of soil fertility, cultivation of marginal lands, and other water and land use conflicts. There is also a potential for some public health concerns, as irrigation schemes will provide breeding ground for disease vectors (such as mosquitoes) in stagnant pools of water. With regards to OP 4.12, in accordance with the Bank's safeguard policies and procedures, a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) was prepared for the original ASDP credit and disclosed in the country and InfoShop on March 25, 2010. The activities under the PHRD Grant are a continuation of the on-going activities of the original project and are not expected to generate significant negative environmental or social impacts. As the nature of the works to be financed under the grant will not change, the existing RPF for the initial project will also apply for the activities supported by the Grant and will be the basis for the preparation of the specific RAPs, as need arises. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: Tanzania's National Environment Policy identifies several critical environmental problems facing the country: land degradation; lack of accessible, good quality water for urban and rural inhabitants; environmental pollution (such as water contamination); the loss of biodiversity, habitat, and wetlands; the deterioration of aquatic systems; and deforestation. During the preparation of the original project, the immediate and root causes of these problems were reviewed and it is concluded that PHRD Grant will not aggravate the situation. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. N/A 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. For the original project, the Government of Tanzania prepared and disclosed an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) to meet the World Bank's and the government#s own requirements. It also prepared and disclosed a RPF in compliance with the Tanzanian laws and the World Bank OP 4.12. The ESMF and RPF were re-disclosed again in March 2010 for the purpose of the second Additional Financing (Cr. 4740-TA). Review of implementation of ESMF: During the preparation and appraisal of the original project and the preparation of the PHRD Grant, the Preparation Teams reviewed the ESMF and confirms that its scope and content adequately capture the issues associated with Grant operations. The Mid-Term Review and Joint Implementation Review (JIR) done in October 2010 examined implementation of the ESMF, and noted areas for improvement, and developed corresponding action plans to be implemented according to an agreed timetable. For instance, some districts seem unaware of the ESMF and RPF and the capacity for safeguards management was found weak. Owing to a lack of due diligence by local staff, safeguard issues were not addressed adequately. The Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) was delayed because the contract was not awarded on time. To strengthen and improve implementation of the ESMF and other safeguards requirements, several actions have been implemented by the Government since the MTR in 2008. ESMF processes have been incorporated into the training modules and DADP guidelines issued by PMO-RALG, ESMF and RPF documents have been distributed to all districts and training has started. The LGAs have appointed District Environmental Management Officers (DEMOs) responsible for coordination and supervision of local investments to ensure integration of safeguards issues. The DEMOs have been trained on application of ESMF/RPF, and the need to carry out Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIAs) and preparation of Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMPs) for specific subprojects. Most of the civil works so far have focused on rehabilitation of existing irrigation systems and few new irrigation subprojects which required preliminary ESIAs. A full ESIA is been undertaken for an irrigation scheme in Msoga village in Bagamoyo District. In order to ensure full compliance with Safeguard Policies, the project will carry out an environmental and social audit for all the irrigation subprojects. The Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) for the national irrigation master plan and the national irrigation policy was completed in May 2011. The SESA identifies potentially adverse environmental and social impacts emanating from the implementation of the national irrigation policy/national irrigation masterplan, and provides strategic guidance on how to minimize and mitigate those impacts when implementing irrigation development projects/programs in the sector. With regard to pest management and responsible pesticide use, the government's performance in implementing the original Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMP) (effective since 2006 under original project) was reviewed in 2009. The government prepared an Integrated Pest Management Capacity Building Plan, which has been integrated into the capacity- building framework of ASDP to ensure that the IPMP is implemented and remains sustainable beyond the life of ASDP. To understand further how safeguards principles and procedures were followed and whether the mitigation measures based on the principle of the ESMF/RPF were implemented, especially in sub-projects involving land where affected people need to be compensated and preparation of ESIA and ESMP, an environmental and social audit for ASDP subprojects will be conducted in FY12. International Waterways (OP7.50). For reasons explained earlier, the PHRD Grant, like the original project and previous additional financings (Cr 4639-TA and Cr. 4740-TA) , triggers the safeguard policy on international waterways. The Task Team worked with Government to determine the extent to which the original notified amounts of water extraction from the original project, AF-I and AF-II may have been exceeded and to ascertain the additional amounts required given the anticipated irrigated area and water abstraction rates for irrigation schemes supported under AF-I and AF-II. In both cases the notified water extractions were exceeded and new notification letters were sent out to the concerned riparian countries. As aforementioned, the activities under the PHRD Grant will not involve expansion of irrigation investments and riparian notification is thus not required. Safety of Dams (OP4.37). Irrigation infrastructure will include small dams and dykes. To comply with OP4.37, the government has integrated dam safety requirements into the ESMF for situations where it may apply. Environmental Management (OP4.01). Under the original project as well as the additional financing credits, the environmental management of irrigation will be undertaken at the subproject and national levels: a) Subproject level. Irrigation within subprojects will be managed through the ESMF in all districts. As stated, ESMF processes have been included in DADP guidelines, and the ESMF and RPF have been distributed to all districts. b) National strategic environmental management. The SESA, which has been prepared under the original project, adequately covers irrigation issues and the agriculture sector in general. The Strategic Environmental Assessment covers the country's national irrigation policy and national irrigation master plan, and it provides specific guidance for preparing Environmental Assessments (EAs) for individual national level irrigation projects. Involuntary Resettlement Issues (OP4.12). Since the implementation of the ASDP none of the sub-project required the preparation of the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP). Nonetheless, to ensure that the principles of the RPF were followed, as noted above, an environmental and social safeguards audit for sub-projects under preparation and implementation will be undertaken under the ASDP. During the implementation of ASDP activities in the districts, the Project design and ESMF require that Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIAs) and/or Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMPs) be prepared for subprojects. These will obtain more detailed and site-specific information about the impacts of project activities, including information on whether there is a need for site specific RAPs, especially in districts where irrigation schemes may be intensified. In the event that there will be land acquisition or/and resettlement, sub- project specific resettlement action plan will be prepared and executed in line with the World Bank and Government policies as guided by the RPF. Cumulative impacts. No later than three months before project closing, the Government of Tanzania has agreed to complete a Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA). In documenting the cumulative impacts of this operation, the government will gain a better understanding of the broad effectiveness of its various safeguard plans and measures (such as the SEA, IPMP, and ESMF). The CIA for ADSP will be done jointly with the Accelerated Food Security Project (AFSP). Capacity assessments. With regard to the government#s capacity to plan and implement safeguard measures, substantial progress has been made over the years in a number of Bank-funded operations in the agricultural sector, such as the Participatory Agricultural Development and Empowerment Project (PADEP) and ASDP. Nevertheless, institutional and technical capacity for environmental and social management at the district and lower levels could be improved. This deficiency is being addressed in detail in the individual plans and reports noted above. Some training is already funded under the original project. These plans have undertaken or will undertake substantial assessments of capacity in the key implementing institution, and they will develop plans to address any gaps. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The key stakeholders are the farming communities that will develop and receive support for their District Agricultural Development Plans. They include individual farmers, farmer associations and groups, agribusiness dealers, national research and extension service providers, national and local institutions such as water boards, customs agents, and others who are linked to the plan in question. The process of preparing and/or reviewing the development plans and related documents is continuous and requires meaningful participatory consultation. The on-going training on the ESMF and RPF for the NFT, DFTs, and WFTs in conjunction with the incorporation of ESMF processes into DADP guidelines will increase awareness and capacity for managing environmental issues related to district development plans. During the planning process the respective stakeholders are consulted to ensure that the plans are relevant and responsive to their needs. The preparation of the site specific RAPs, if required, also will be done in consultation with the communities and a summary of the RAPs will be distributed among the affected communities in Kiswahili. Once completed, the revised and/or new plans will be disclosed in Kiswahili in Tanzania and at the World Bank InfoShop. The plans will be available at the district level and in the offices of the relevant agencies. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 08/05/2005 Date of "in-country" disclosure 08/09/2005 Date of submission to InfoShop 08/11/2005 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 08/05/2005 Date of "in-country" disclosure 08/09/2005 Date of submission to InfoShop 08/10/2005 Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 07/09/2009 Date of "in-country" disclosure 09/09/2009 Date of submission to InfoShop 09/09/2009 * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: The additional financing operation will continue to use the ESMF document prepared and disclosed for the Original Project. The ESMF did not need to be revised. Similarly, the IPMP prepared and disclosed for the Original Project will be used. C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? Yes If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) Yes review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the Yes credit/loan? OP 4.09 - Pest Management Does the EA adequately address the pest management issues? Yes Is a separate PMP required? Yes If yes, has the PMP been reviewed and approved by a safeguards specialist or Yes SM? Are PMP requirements included in project design? If yes, does the project team include a Pest Management Specialist? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/process Yes framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Yes Manager review the plan? OP/BP 4.37 - Safety of Dams Have dam safety plans been prepared? N/A Have the TORs as well as composition for the independent Panel of Experts N/A (POE) been reviewed and approved by the Bank? Has an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) been prepared and arrangements N/A been made for public awareness and training? OP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways Have the other riparians been notified of the project? Yes If the project falls under one of the exceptions to the notification N/A requirement, has this been cleared with the Legal Department, and the memo to the RVP prepared and sent? Has the RVP approved such an exception? N/A The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Yes Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a No form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities Yes been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project Yes cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the Yes monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the Yes borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Ms Zainab Z. Semgalawe 04/20/2011 Environmental Specialist: Ms Jane A. N. Kibbassa 05/03/2011 Social Development Specialist Ms Helen Z. Shahriari 05/03/2011 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Ms Alexandra C. Bezeredi 08/03/2011 Comments: Sector Manager: Mr Iain G. Shuker 08/29/2011 Comments: