INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: ISDSA7248 Public Disclosure Copy Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 26-Mar-2014 Date ISDS Approved/Disclosed: 10-Apr-2014 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: Zimbabwe Project ID: P124625 Project Name: Hwange-Sanyati Biological Corridor Project (P124625) Task Team Douglas J. Graham Leader: Estimated 04-Feb-2014 Estimated 16-May-2014 Appraisal Date: Board Date: Managing Unit: AFTN2 Lending Specific Investment Loan Instrument: GEF Focal Multi-focal area Area: Sector(s): Forestry (45%), General public administration sector (20%), Sub-national government administration (20%), Central government adminis tration (15%) Theme(s): Biodiversity (30%), Land administration and management (25%), Climate change (20%), Environmental policies and institutions (15%), O ther Public Disclosure Copy environment and natural resources management (10%) Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP No 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)? Financing (In USD Million) Total Project Cost: 19.11 Total Bank Financing: 0.00 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount Borrower 13.22 Global Environment Facility (GEF) 5.65 TerrAfrica Leveraging Fund 0.25 Total 19.11 Environmental B - Partial Assessment Category: Is this a No Repeater project? Page 1 of 9 2. Global Environmental Objective(s) To develop land use and resource management capacity of managers and communities in the Hwange-Sanyati Biological Corridor (HSBC). Public Disclosure Copy 3. Project Description The Project will have four closely inter-related components: Component 1: Protected area (PA) management and community livelihoods (US$1.795 million of GEF financing). The aim of this component is to improve management of the Hwange National Park and the livelihood of communities involved in stewardship of the natural resources in the buffer area of the HNP. The component will focus primarily on Hwange and Tsholotsho districts, the only districts in the HSBC that share boundaries with HNP. Sub-component 1.1: Improved management of Hwange National Park. This subcomponent would finance investments for improving park management, improving water and game water supply management, and supporting essential research and monitoring. Sub-component 1.2: Improved community livelihoods through wildlife management. This subcomponent would support investments in the buffer areas of HNP through the restocking of wildlife areas; mitigating human and wildlife conflicts (HWC); provision of appropriate training to environment sub-committees and communities; and conducting research on HWC mitigation and will support the CAMPFIRE system that will open new opportunities to communities to allow them to become custodians of their natural resources (largely through trophy hunting quotas that creates employment for local populations as well as revenue for infrastructure projects). Component 2: Improved forest and land management (US$3.24 million of GEF financing). The aim of this component is to improve forest and land management across the HSBC by developing tools to address land degradation, land use change, and deforestation. Public Disclosure Copy Subcomponent 2.1: Improved forestry management. Five of the country’s 24 gazetted indigenous forest areas are found within the project area: Sikumi, Ngamo, Mzola, Kavira and Sijarira. The project will focus specifically on the Sikumi and Ngamo Forests that are adjacent to the HNP and consequently provide continuity for wildlife movement within the corridor. The subcomponent will support better forestry management and implementation of REDD+ pilot project. Subcomponent 2.2: Land Rehabilitation. The root causes of land degradation, which include both natural and man-made factors, include: extensive change in land use, deforestation, intensive farming of riverbanks and hillsides, and soil composition and structure. The project area straddles the Gwayi (87,960 km2) and Sanyati (74,534 km2) catchments. These catchments receive 450 to 650 mm of rainfall per annum. Most of the catchments’ inhabitants depend on agriculture for survival, growing crops such as maize, small grain cereals, and cotton under rain fed conditions and tend to cattle and goats. In order to attain these goals the project will undertake studies, development of land management models, and investments in targeted catchments primarily to control gullies. Component 3: Corridor Sustainability (US$0.335 million of GEF financing). Specific activities to be undertaken under this component include: a) Mapping of land use patterns within the biological corridor; technical support to the units within the ministries to develop a strategy for landscape-based approaches for good management of forests and wider landscape in the HSBC. b) Review and systematically package relevant tools developed in the different project Page 2 of 9 components for wider dissemination and up-scaling to corridor level. c) Support to develop and implement a communication strategy on this integrated approach for the HSBC that encompasses branding of the HSBC. Public Disclosure Copy d) Further solidify the links with KAZA in support of the transboundary nature of the HSBC; bolster Coordination with KAZA Partners through regular meetings with practitioners and sharing practical experiences on transboundary conservation issues. e) Use experiences from greenhouse gas emission related work to support national and regional institutional capacity in climate change and natural resource use analysis, capacity building, awareness creation and establishment of an information system supported by targeted workshops and meetings. Component 4: Project Coordination (US$0.275 million of GEF financing). Manage and provide oversight of the project, including financial management and audits, procurement, and monitoring and evaluation 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) To have a meaningful impact on the ground, and given resource limitations, the project will have a limited geographic coverage. Accordingly, the project will operate in northwestern Zimbabwe, specifically in the Hwange-Sanyati Biological Corridor (HSBC). The HSBC is rich in biodiversity and consists of a mosaic of land uses under different tenure arrangements. The region is home to three national parks; two Safari areas; six gazetted forest areas; four communal lands and private and resettled lands. In terms of rehabilitating degraded land, the project will focus on the Sanyati catchment located at the northeast border of the HSBC. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Kristine Schwebach (AFTCS) Amadou Konare (AFTN1) Public Disclosure Copy 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Environmental Assessment OP/ Yes In Components 1 and 2, the Project will finance BP 4.01 small infrastructure investments such as park buildings and gully-control measures. Minor adverse environmental impacts are expected as the potential impacts will be small-scale and site- specific, typical of category B projects. An ESMF has been prepared, consulted upon and disclosed. Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 Yes The project will help conserve natural habitats and will ensure that specific project activities avoid habitat degradation. No negative impacts to critical or sensitive natural habitats are expected. However, subprojects will be screened for their impact on natural habitats during their preparation. The ESMF includes mitigation measures for impacts on natural habitats. Forests OP/BP 4.36 Yes One of the goals of the project is to reduce deforestation and forest degradation, while contributing to the well-being of forest-dependent Page 3 of 9 communities. Potential impacts of the project on natural forests and mitigations measures commensurable to those impacts have been Public Disclosure Copy formulated in the ESMF. The forest reserves under the project are not managed for timber production; local communities access only some non-timber forest products. There thus is no need to develop certifiable forest management plans as described under the OP. Pest Management OP 4.09 No The policy is not triggered because the project does not procure any pesticides nor does it support any activity involving the use of pesticides. Physical Cultural Resources OP/ Yes The project triggers OP 4.11 because the project BP 4.11 will involve ground works (under the gully management subcomponent) which may impact on underground resources of archaeological or paleontological significance. The environmental baseline shows that the Gokwe North area is rich in fossils, which are of national, regional and perhaps of global importance. Other types of cultural resources, such as sacred sites might be identified during the course of the project although none were identified during preparation as being potentially impacted by the Project. The ESMF includes measures for dealing with physical cultural resources. Public Disclosure Copy Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 Yes A community of San peoples who have the characteristics of IPs as per the Bank policy, live in Tsholotsho District, within the project area. OP 4.10 is therefore triggered. An IPPF has been prepared, consulted upon and disclosed. The team notes that the project area -- the Hwange-Sanyati Biological Corridor -- is dominated by the Ndebele who have been living in northwestern Zimbabwe since the mid-19th Century. While they are not indigenous as per the Bank’s policy, the project design seeks to ensure that they are not adversely impacted by the project or fail to reap the project benefits. Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP Yes Under Component 1 of the project, 4.12 implementation of a management plan for Hwange National Park may result in the involuntary restriction of access to a legally designated park which in turn may result in Page 4 of 9 adverse impacts on the livelihoods of adjacent communities. It is not envisioned that new parks or park extensions will result from project Public Disclosure Copy activities. The project will not finance any activities that will result in involuntary loss of land or shelter, involuntary resettlement, loss of assets or access to assets, or loss of income sources or means of livelihood (other than those noted above). A Process Framework has been prepared and submitted for Bank review and was approved. The ESMF also covers an assessment of local communities and issues relevant to OP 4.12. Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 No TThe project does not involve in any way any dams. Projects on International No The project does not result in any effect on Waterways OP/BP 7.50 international waterways. Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP No The project does not involve any disputed areas. 7.60 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: Public Disclosure Copy The proposed project is considered an environmental category “B” project since the anticipated impacts will be small-scale and site-specific and can be mitigated. There will be no large scale, significant, or irreversible impacts. From an environmental standpoint, the main issues include: (a) subproject investments in the HNP and in the forest reserves (such as buildings, track maintenance, fire breaks, etc.) could have very minor impacts; (b) water hole management investments if poorly implemented could potentially result in depletion of groundwater resources (the project itself will be supporting development of groundwater management strategies); and (c) the community livelihood investments under Component 2 will involve intra-community relations which will need to be managed (close liaison with the local community and its leadership will be important mitigation measures) and they could involve minor social impacts. From a social point of view, Components 1 and 2 will support existing restrictions of access to the Hwange Park and to adjacent forest reserves in order to prevent illegal activities such as poaching. These will be mitigated in part by project activities intended to develop alternative livelihood and promote conservation. The project pilot investments are outside of the San territory. Component 3, however, will concern San communities as it intends to map land use patterns within the corridor from which a strategy can be developed for better landscape based management of resources. This component will also implement a communication strategy for outreach activities. Once the project Page 5 of 9 is at the stage for developing a strategy, an IP Plan will be prepared to ensure San people will be involved in ways which are culturally appropriate and inclusive. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities Public Disclosure Copy in the project area: It is not anticipated that any negative indirect or long term environmental or social impacts will be caused by the project. The project is expected to bring lasting positive benefits to communities, by improving PA management effectiveness and providing alternative livelihoods to communities living within the biological corridor. In addition, it will improve biodiversity management, as well as the livelihood opportunities of communities involved in stewardship of the natural resources. Other environmental and social benefits that will accrue to local communities include, but not limited to the following: (i) land use pattern studies and mapping to determine the root-cause of land degradation; and (ii) strengthening communities capacity in sustainable land management and environmental rehabilitation and mechanical conservation works; and (iii) support to the rehabilitation of the most affected area in Sanyati - Chireya locality. If the project is successful, it will promote new activities in which adjacent communities can improve their livelihood through conservation, rather than poaching, and benefit from increased tourism. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. As no significant adverse impacts have been identified, no project alternatives were considered. 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. To address potential environmental and social issues under the project, the Recipient has prepared the following instruments: an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF); an Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF); and a Process Framework (PF). Public Disclosure Copy To successfully identify and manage potential adverse impacts on the environment from project- funded activities, since the subproject-specific sites and works are not yet finalized, the borrower has prepared an ESMF following a broad-based consultation approach with project stakeholder groups. The ESMF formulates standard methods and procedures of impact evaluation and mitigation, along with clear institutional arrangements for screening, review, approval, implementation and monitoring of subproject-specific safeguards instruments (ESIAs or ESMPs), as necessary. The ESMF contains ample provisions to guide assessment and management of impacts on natural habitats as required as well as on forest resources in the context of the Bank’s Forests Policy. The ESMF includes chance finds procedures to identify possible impacts on physical cultural resources. These procedures will ensure that ESIAs/ESMP consultants and contractors are able to do due diligence, or are teamed up with Physical Cultural Resources (PCR) experts to ensure that impacts on PCRs are assessed and mitigation measures commensurate to those impacts, including proper handling of chance finds, are implemented in the design, in accordance with national and World Bank policies. The IPPF describes the relationship of the Project to the San people, who live in an area adjacent to the HSBC and lays out provisions for development of an Indigenous Peoples Development Plan Page 6 of 9 (IPDP) during project implementation if this proves necessary. The Process Framework describes how the HNP will be managed to ensure adequate participation of local communities. Public Disclosure Copy A Process Framework has been prepared. The ESMF also covers an assessment of local communities and issues relevant to OP 4.12. Zimbabwe has implemented few Bank-funded projects. However, the institutions involved in environmental management and safeguards due diligence, as described in the ESMF, are considered to have adequate environmental management capacity. The ESMF also provides specific capacity strengthening measures for better preparedness of the actors involved in safeguards implementation, monitoring and supervision. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The preparation of the safeguard documents followed a broad-based and in-depth consultation approach that included interviews and surveys of relevant project stakeholder groups, including, but not limited to: district administrators, rural district councils, Ministry of Lands and Rural Resettlement; Ministry of Women Affairs, Gender and Community Development; Ministry of Youth Development, Indigenization and Empowerment; Department of Public Works; Environmental Management Agency; Forestry Commission; local communities (the San in particular for the IPPF); and the Parks and Wildlife Authority. Details of the consultations and their results are described in each of the three safeguard instruments. The consultation approach was based on principles of inclusivity, openness and transparency, relevance and fairness and responsiveness on the part of stakeholders. Local leaders and communities were consulted through meetings and questionnaires administered to each of the participants. The Government departments were consulted through questionnaires that were augmented by follow up discussions. Newspaper notices were also placed in the local dailies to Public Disclosure Copy capture submissions from a wide range of stakeholders. Consultations were segmented into the specific project areas of the subprojects. Issues raised in the consultations are described in the safeguard documents and are reflected in the planning, implementation, monitoring and supervision of project activities. All the safeguard documents have been disclosed locally in Zimbabwe (see details in individual documents) and will be disclosed by the Bank at the InfoShop. The subproject-specific safeguard instruments, following the screening process, will also be reviewed by the Bank and then disclosed in-country and at InfoShop when required, as per the procedures in the ESMF. B. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other Date of receipt by the Bank 09-Dec-2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 10-Mar-2014 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors "In country" Disclosure Zimbabwe 27-Jan-2014 Comments: Page 7 of 9 Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process Date of receipt by the Bank 13-Dec-2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 10-Mar-2014 Public Disclosure Copy "In country" Disclosure Zimbabwe 27-Jan-2014 Comments: Indigenous Peoples Development Plan/Framework Date of receipt by the Bank 09-Dec-2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 10-Mar-2014 "In country" Disclosure Zimbabwe 27-Jan-2014 Comments: If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/ Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Public Disclosure Copy in the credit/loan? OP/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? OP/BP 4.11 - Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to cultural Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] property? Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] potential adverse impacts on cultural property? OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Sector Manager review the plan? Page 8 of 9 If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] been reviewed and approved by the Regional Social Public Disclosure Copy Development Unit or Sector Manager? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/ Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Sector Manager review the plan? OP/BP 4.36 - Forests Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional issues Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] and constraints been carried out? Does the project design include satisfactory measures to Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] overcome these constraints? Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] does it include provisions for certification system? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] World Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of Public Disclosure Copy measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? III. APPROVALS Task Team Leader: Name: Douglas J. Graham Approved By Regional Safeguards Name: Alexandra C. Bezeredi (RSA) Date: 26-Mar-2014 Advisor: Sector Manager: Name: Jonathan S. Kamkwalala (SM) Date: 10-Apr-2014 Page 9 of 9