ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK (ESMF) DOCUMENT - JAMBI PROVINCE ON THE BIOCF ISFL FRAMEWORK Directorate of Climate Change Mitigation Directorate General of Climate Change Ministry of Environment and Forestry Republic of Indonesia DECEMBER 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .....................................................................................I LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................... IV LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................... IV LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................ VI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................... VIII 1.0 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................1 1.1 STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT (SESA) .......................................................................................................... 3 1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK (ESMF) .......................................................................................................... 4 1.3 LINK WITH EXISTING SAFEGUARDS INSTRUMENTS FOR REDD+ ......... 6 1.4 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY............................................................. 7 1.4.1 Data Collection ................................................................................ 7 1.4.2 Analysis ........................................................................................... 8 1.5 SCOPE OF THE ESMF ................................................................................. 8 1.6 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS ............................................................ 9 1.7 STRUCTURE OF THE ESMF ...................................................................... 16 1.8 PUBLIC DISCLOSURE ............................................................................... 18 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................... 19 2.1 COMPONENT 1: STRENGTHENING POLICY AND INSTITUTIONS .......... 19 2.1.1 Sub-component 1.1: Institutional Strengthening ............................ 20 2.1.2 Sub-component 1.2: Enabling Environment for ER Program ......... 20 2.1.3 Sub-component 1.3: Policy and Regulation ................................... 21 2.2 COMPONENT 2: IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................... 22 2.2.1 Sub-component 2.1: Integrated Forest and Land Management ................................................................................. 22 2.2.2 Sub-component 2.2: Private Sector Partnerships for Improved Forest and Land Management ....................................... 23 2.3 COMPONENT 3: PROJECT MANAGEMENT, MONITORING AND EVALUATION, AND REPORTING .............................................................. 24 3.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS.................. 26 3.1 GOVERNMENT OF INDONESIA REGULATIONS ...................................... 26 3.2 WORLD BANK SAFEGUARDS POLICIES ................................................. 29 3.2.1 OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment ............................................. 29 3.2.2 OP 4.04 Natural Habitats ............................................................... 29 3.2.3 OP 4.09 Pest Management ........................................................... 30 3.2.4 OP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples ......................................................... 30 ESMF Document – Jambi i 3.2.5 OP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources ............................................ 31 3.2.6 OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement ................................................. 31 3.2.7 OP 4.36 Forests ............................................................................ 32 3.3 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS .............................................................. 32 3.4 GAP ANALYSIS .......................................................................................... 33 3.5 OTHER PROJECTS AND PROJECT SAFEGUARDS ................................ 40 4.0 ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES .......................................................... 41 4.1 BASELINE CONDITION .............................................................................. 41 4.1.1 Forest Cover and Land Condition .................................................. 41 4.1.2 Flagship Species ........................................................................... 42 4.1.3 HCV and Critical Land Areas ......................................................... 45 4.2 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISKS .......................... 47 5.0 ESMF IMPLEMENTATION................................................................... 56 5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL PROCEDURE ....................................... 56 5.1.1 Negative List Screening ................................................................. 59 5.1.2 Screening of Environmental and Social Risks................................ 60 5.1.3 Preparation of Environmental and Social Management Plans ....... 63 5.1.4 Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) ...................................... 63 5.1.5 Review and Approval..................................................................... 63 5.1.6 Implementation of Safeguards and Verification.............................. 64 5.1.7 Monitoring and Reporting .............................................................. 64 5.2 MANAGEMENT OF INDIRECT RISKS AND IMPACTS .............................. 64 5.3 MANAGEMENT OF RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH POLICY DEVELOPMENT.......................................................................................... 65 6.0 PROJECT INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS ................................ 66 6.1 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS AT THE ACTIVITY LEVEL ............... 69 6.2 CAPACITY BUILDING PLAN AND INDICATIVE FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................ 73 6.3 SAFEGUARDS MONITORING AND REPORTING ..................................... 79 6.3.1 Regular Safeguards Monitoring ..................................................... 79 6.3.2 Regular Safeguards Reporting ...................................................... 79 6.3.3 Safeguards Reporting through SIS REDD+ ................................... 84 6.4 INFORMATION DISCLOSURE ................................................................... 85 6.5 FEEDBACK GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM .................................. 85 ANNEX 1. J-SLMP AND ERP NEGATIVE LIST ............................................ 76 ANNEX 2. SCREENING AGAINST ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISKS .................................................................................................. 77 ANNEX 3. ENVIRONMENTAL CODES OF PRACTICES ............................. 78 ESMF Document – Jambi ii ANNEX 4. GUIDANCE NOTE FOR INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT ................................................................................. 101 ANNEX 5 BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK AND GENERAL GUIDELINE FOR HIGH CONSERVATION VALUE ASSESSMENTS ................................................................................. 111 ANNEX 6. EXAMPLE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS, MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING (UKL-UPL & SPPL ACCEPTABLE TO THE BANK) ................................................................................................. 119 ANNEX 7. FEEDBACK GRIEVANCE AND REDRESS MECHANISM (FGRM) .............................................................................................. 123 ANNEX 8. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES PLANNING FRAMEWORK (IPPF) ................................................................................................. 142 ANNEX 9. RESETTLEMENT PLANNING FRAMEWORK (RPF) AND PROCESS FRAMEWORK (PF)......................................................... 174 ANNEX 10. PHYSICAL CULTURAL RESOURCES – CHANCE FIND FRAMEWORK (PCR-CFP) ................................................................ 235 ANNEX 11. MINUTES OF MEETING – STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS ............................................................................. 243 ANNEX 12. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES FOR ERP SUB COMPONENTS .................................................................................. 257 ANNEX 13. TOR FOR ENVIRONMENT AND SOCIAL SAFEGUARD TEAM ................................................................................................. 267 ESMF Document – Jambi iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Summary of Stakeholder Consultations in Jambi. ......................................................10 Table 2 Summary of Gap Analysis of Key Considerations. .....................................................34 Table 3 Forest Cover, Degraded Land and Agricultural Land in FMUs in Jambi in 2017 ............................................................................................................................41 Table 4 Forest Cover, Degraded Land and Agricultural Land inside National Parks in Jambi in 2017 ..............................................................................................................42 Table 5 Habitat Areas for Flagship Species.............................................................................43 Table 6 Areas Certified as HCV. ..............................................................................................45 Table 7 Critical Land in Jambi Watershed (Batanghari). .........................................................45 Table 8 J-SLMP Project Typology and Mitigation Measures ...................................................52 Table 9 Sub-project Environmental and Social Risk Classification .........................................60 Table 10 Risk Classification Based on Types of Investments ...................................................61 Table 11 National Agencies Involved in the Implementation of the J-SLMP .............................66 Table 12 The Sub-National Agencies and Organisations Involved in the Implementation of the Jambi Emission Reduction Program (ERP). ...........................67 Table 13 Safeguards Framework and Responsible Institutions. ...............................................69 Table 14 Indicative Capacity Building Program Plan for J-SLMP and ERP Safeguards. ..........74 Table 15 Target Group and Participant for Training and Workshop for J-SLMP and ERP Safeguards .........................................................................................................77 Table 16 Indicative Financial Requirements for Safeguards and Capacity Building Programs .....................................................................................................................78 Table 17 Summary of Relevant E&S Indicators to Monitor/Track during the J-SLMP Implementation............................................................................................................80 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Phases of BioCF ISFL Financing to Support and Reward Reducing Emissions in Jambi ....................................................................................................... 1 Figure 2 SESA Process during the Pre-Investnent and ERPD Phases ...................................... 3 Figure 3 Relationship between Main Drivers of Deforestation and Degradations with J- SLMP Components. ....................................................................................................25 Figure 4 Changes to Degraded Lands and Other Land Use inside Conservation and FMU Areas from 2006 to 2017. ...................................................................................42 Figure 5 Degraded Lands in WPK According to Districts in 2017.............................................42 ESMF Document – Jambi iv Figure 6 Distribution of Flagship Species in Jambi. ..................................................................44 Figure 7 ESMF Implementation Flowchart. ...............................................................................58 Figure 8 Institutional Chart for Implementing the Safeguards Tools of the ESMF....................59 Figure 9 Institutional Arrangements of ERP at the Provincial Level. ........................................68 Figure 10 Institutional Arrangements of ERP at the District/City Level. ......................................69 Figure 11 Safeguards Reporting through SIS REDD+ ................................................................85 ESMF Document – Jambi v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS BRWA Badan Registrasi Wilayah Adat/Customary Territory Registration Agency CPF Community Participatory Framework CSO/CBO Civil Society Organisation/Community-Based Organisation CBFMMS Community-Based Fire Management and Monitoring System DGCC Directorate General of Climate Change DPMPD District Community Empowerment and Village Government Service EA Environmental Assessment EIA/AMDAL Environmental Impact Assessment/Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework FIP Forest Investment Program FMU Forest Management Unit/Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan, KPH FPIC Free, Prior, Informed Consent GOI Government of Indonesia GSC Global Steering Committee HCVA High Conservation Values Area HCVF High Conservation Value Forest IP Indigenous Peoples ISPO The Indonesian Sustainable Palm Oil standard IPM Integrated Pest Management JKPP Jaringan Kerja Pemetaan Partisipatif/Participatory Mapping Network NEA National Executing Agency NOL No-Objection Letter NSC National Steering Committee OPD Organisasi Perangkat Daerah PAPs Project Affected Persons PDO Project Document Output PHPL Pengelolaan Hutan Produksi Lestari/Sustainable Production Forest Managemnet POM Project Operations Manual PMU Program Management Unit REDD+ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation RIL-C Reduced Impact Logging-Carbon RMA Rencana Masyarakat Adat/Indigenous Peoples Plan RPLS/ESMP Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial/Environmental and Social Management Plan RPHJP Rencana Pengelolaan Hutan Jangka Panjang/Long Term Forest Management Plan ESMF Document – Jambi vi RSPO Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil SA Social Assessment SEKDA Sekretaris Daerah/Local Government Secretary SPPL Surat Pernyataan Kesanggupan melakukan Pengelolaan dan Pemantauan Lingkungan/Letter of Commitment to Implement Environmental Management and Monitoring UKL - UPL Upaya Pengelolaan Lingkungan/Environmental Management Plan - Upaya Pemantauan Lingkungan/Environmental Monitoring Plan WB World Bank ESMF Document – Jambi vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Jambi Jurisdictional Emission Reduction Program (ERP) builds on the substantial commitments of the Government of Indonesua (GoI) and the Government of the Province of Jambi to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. The World Bank’s BioCarbon Fund Initiative for Sustainable Forest Landscapes (BioCF ISFL) provided phased financing to implement the above program. First, US$1.5 million in preparation funding was provided to the GOI to prepare a Project to improve the enabling environment for reducing emissions in Jambi. Second, a pre-investment grant financing with a value of US$13.5 million is currently being prepared for the Jambi Sustainable Landscape Management Project (J-SLMP) to implement improvements to the enabling environment, including cross-sectoral coordination and testing land use approaches to reduce emissions in Jambi. This ESMF addresses environmental and social management for J-SLMP (the Project) and lays the groundwork for the future ERP in Jambi (the ER Program). J-SLMP’s proposed development objective is to improve sustainable landscape management that reduces land-based GHG emissions in Jambi. The achievement of this objective will be measured through the following indicators: a) Land area under sustainable forest management and/or restoration practices (ha); b) GHG Emission reductions in Jambi (MtCO2e); and c) Number of people reached with benefits (assets and/or services) (percent women). Under this pre-Investment grant, technical assistance will be provided to support ERP design and systems strengthening to build government capacity to access and utilise performance-based incentives for reduced deforestation, degradation and land use change, including safeguards. As such, the project will support analytics, capacity building, design of subprojects to test different incentives models and stakeholder engagement. Key analytical areas include land and resource tenure, understanding local drivers of deforestation and how best to address them, and legal, institutional and policy analysis and stakeholder assessments. J-SLMP will support a combination of enabling conditions and promotion of sustainable management practices that will directly address the underlying drivers of emissions resulting from sectoral activities including, timber plantations, estate crops, subsistence agriculture, aquaculture, and unsustainable logging practices. The project design considers the distribution of remaining forests, the threats to those forests, and the key stakeholders involved in the respective areas. This project consists of three components, as follows: Component 1 on Strengthening Policy and Institutions : the objective of Component 1 is to enhance effective land management regulation and enforcement in Jambi with a focus on harmonizing policies and approaches that are critical for managing emissions from land use, including peat management, fire prevention and management, and green growth. This component will address issues concerning the lack of institutional capacity to ensure good forest and land-use governance. This component aims for improving the regulatory and institutional frameworks in forestry and other land-based sectors, as well as strengthening the instrument for enforcing such policies. Component 2 on Implementing Sustainable Land Management: the objective of Component 2 is to integrate forest and land management in Jambi, particularly through sustainable forest management, agriculture intensification and diversification, conservation and restoration, and value chain ESMF Document – Jambi viii sustainability. This component will particularly address lack of sustainable practices in land and resource management. Component 3: Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Reporting : this component envisages overall management of the J-SLMP implementation, and supports collaboration among stakeholders in sustainable forest management. Component 3 aims to support national and provincial� level Project coordination and management, particul arly to achieve the Project’s objectives, including Annual Work Plans and Budgets (AWPBs); fiduciary aspects (Financial Management (FM) and procurement); human resource management; safeguards compliance monitoring; monitoring and evaluation (M&E); knowledge management and sharing; and the implementation of strategies for communication and stakeholder engagement. Beside overall project monitoring and evaluation, this component also address emission monitoring, evaluation and reporting. The J-SLMP is expected to generate overall positive environmental impacts at global, national and local levels through a reduction of land-based carbon emissions, increased carbon storage, reduced land degradation, and protection of globally threatened ecosystems and endemic biodiversity. The Project triggers the World Bank safeguards policies: Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01), Natural Habitats (OP 4.04), Pest Management (OP 4.09), Indigenous Peoples (OP 4.10), Physical Cultural Resources (OP 4.11), Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12), and Forests (OP/BP 4.36). The potential key environmental risks identified include loss of natural habitats and key biodiversity species at areas designated as conservation/protected forest, through contamination of soil and water, and health risks associated with the use of pesticides and as result of poor waste management practices. Successes in reducing impacts on forests could lead to displacements of these impacts to other areas (leakages). Potential environmental risks such as reversals may be triggerred by social aspect (social forestry and alternative livelihood) that cannot provide adequate economic incentives. The potential key social risks identified include risks associated with activities conducted in areas under existing and potential conflicts, encroachments and/or disputes, or areas with overlapping boundaries and/or claims, between customary and common/formal laws e.g. claims by Marga Serampas community within Kerinci Seblat National Park, and Orang Rimba and Talang Mamak territory in Bukit 30 National Park. Additional risks include livelihoods impacts such as displacement due to bans on oil palm plantation and artisanal mining activities, loss and/or damage to physical cultural resource, community and health safety risks for fire prevention and suppression activities, lack of awareness, management capacity and participation of community in managing social forestry, institutional capacity constraints to manage potential environmental and social risks at field level, as well as gender inequalities and social exclusion. Based on the assessment of potential environmental and social impacts, and with reference to the applicable World Bank Operational Policies, an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) has been prepared as an operational guideline for the management of environmental and social risks and impacts of J-SLMP. The ESMF is supported by Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF), Resettlement Planning Framework and Process Framework (RPF and PF) and Feedback and Grievance Redress Mechanism (FGRM). The ESMF establishes the modalities and procedures to address and mitigate the potential adverse environmental and social impacts from the implementation of J-SLMP activities through employing best practices. The ESMF procedures include: (i) Consultations and engagement with relevant stakeholder groups; (ii) Capacity building measures; (iii) Environmental and social impact screening and ESMF Document – Jambi ix assessments; (iv) Development of environmental and social management plans with reference to environmental codes of practices, environmental permitting requirements, high conservation value assessments and management, the RPF and PF, IPPF, and physical cultural resource management; (v) Monitoring and reporting, including management of grievances through the project’s FGRM. A series of multi-stakeholder consultations has been undertaken as part of J-SLMP and a jurisdiction- wide ER Program preparation. A full-documentation of these consultations has been provided as part of the interim SESA, which has been prepared during the preparation of the J-SLMP. This interim SESA will be updated throughout the preparation of the ER Program. These consultations supported multi- stakeholder dialogues on potential drivers of land conversions and drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, which can be attributed to peatland conversion for palm oil, conversion of natural forests into timber plantation and encroachment in national parks. Participants include national and sub- national government agencies, CSOs/NGOs in Jambi Province, and village representatives, including Adat community representatives. Issues around lack of inter-sectoral coordination and capacity constraints to effectively manage the project activities are particularly acute within FMUs. In addition, overlapping land claims as a result of past licensing practices have also been attributed to tenure conflicts, involving local and Adat communities, particularly in oil palm plantations. ESMF Document – Jambi x 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Government of Indonesia (GOI) has made significant international commitments to reduce Indonesia’s GHG emissions, recognizing that land use and forestry sectors are the primary sources of emissions (49 percent in 2010). At the Conference of Parties meeting in Paris in 2015, the GOI pledged through its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) to reduce its GHG emissions by 41 percent by 2030 with international assistance (29 percent with its own resources) relative to a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario. For Indonesia to reach a target of 41 percent, emissions need to decrease by 1.081 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e), with 60 percent of this target to come from the forestry sector. According to recent analysis, Indonesia is on track to increase emissions from forests between 2020 and 2030 despite current policies, commitments and plans, underscoring the importance of increased ambition, enforcement and interventions for sustainable land management. Building on earlier experience in East Kalimantan Province through the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) support, BioCarbon Fund Initiative for Sustainable Forest Landscapes (BioCF-ISFL) is currently being prepared to replicate the provincial initiative in East Kalimantan to contribute to the NDC objective. BioCF ISFL promotes reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the land sector, from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries (REDD+), and from sustainable agriculture, as well as smarter land-use planning, policies and practices. The World Bank supported the GoI under BioCF-ISLF platform through phased financing (see Figure 1). Figure 1 Phases of BioCF ISFL Financing to Support and Reward Reducing Emissions in Jambi First, US$1.5 million in preparation funding was provided to the GOI to prepare a Project to improve the enabling environment for reducing emissions in Jambi. Second, the subsequent phase of BioCF ISFL grant financing (US$13.5 million) for the Jambi Sustainable Landscape Management Project (J-SLMP) to implement improvements to the enabling environment, including cross-sectoral coordination and testing land use approaches to reduce emissions in Jambi. This ESMF and its associated frameworks, including the Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF), Resettlement Planning Framework (RPF) and Process Framework (PF), and Feedback and Grievance Redress Mechanism (FGRM) have ESMF Document – Jambi 1 been prepared to address specific investments under the pre-investment grant. Future results-based ER Program will build on these framework instruments, including capacity strengthening measures financed under the pre-investment grant. Environmental and Social analysis of this future ERP is currently being undertaken as part of the SESA process, which is expected to conclude prior to the Emission Reductions Purchase Agreement (ERPA) signing. In order to achieve ERs at scale, the Project will need to leverage resources from complementary programs in Jambi. The private sector, in particular, has an essential role to play in land management in Jambi, especially considering plantation crops alone cover almost one-third of the land area in the province. To support this, a coordinated and complementary Bank-executed (BETF) operation, to be funded by the BioCF ISFL, is being prepared to support private sector engagement in Jambi. Collectively, the J-SLMP, private sector BETF operation and complementary funding from other sources will strategically target resource gaps and promote the reduction of emissions from land use in Jambi. The BioCF ISFL has further committed to purchasing emission reductions (ERs) from Jambi through a forthcoming ERPA with a contract value of up to US$70 million. The GOI has indicated their political will and buy-in for the J-SLMP through its preparation, earnest efforts to link the Project’s activities with ongoing initiatives to scale-up action on sustainable land use, and through a Letter of Intent to proceed with negotiating an ERPA. This jurisdictional ERP will advance the implementation of REDD+ at the national level, and thus contribute to the achievement of nationally and internationally significant emissions reductions. This Program is also expected to assist Indonesia in achieving its climate resilience targets and international commitments. J-SLMP will provide technical support for ERP program design and systems strengthening to build government capacity to access and utilise future performance-based incentives for reduced deforestation, degradation and land-use change. As such, the project will support analytics, capacity building, design of subprograms to test different incentives models and stakeholder engagement, as well as testing sustainable land use management practices and enforcement, and their overall safeguards management. Key analytical and capacity strengthening areas include land and resource tenure, understanding local drivers of deforestation and how best to address them, and legal, institutional and policy analysis, and stakeholder assessments. In Jambi, national safeguards-related initiatives such as The Principles, Criteria, and Indicators for REDD+ Safeguards (PRISAI)1 and the Safeguards Information System (SIS) 2 will be applied. All of these safeguards initiatives are aligned with the Cancun Principles. Further efforts were made to incorporate the local context of Jambi into these mechanisms. The ESMF has been developed in conjunction with the relevant safeguards principles, criteria and indicators (PCIs) addressed in these safeguards' initiatives. Linkages with existing safeguards under the World Bank’s financed investments are further discussed in Section 1.3. Consultation processes as well as the analytical components in the SESA to date have been used to inform the development of the ESMF. The SESA will continue to serve as a tool to mainstream environmental and social considerations into the ERP design. Both the SESA and ESMF along with its associated frameworks, including IPPF, RPF and PF, and FGRM represent integral parts of the REDD+ 1 PRISAI was conducted to further elaborate the Cancun safeguards. PRISAI outlines 10 principles, 27 criteria and 99 indicators, with an expanded focus on finance and fiduciary aspects. PRISAI was initially designed as a framework to filter, monitor, and evaluate REDD+ activities at the project and jurisdiction levels. PRISAI has been tested in several sites in Jambi and Central Kalimantan provinces, and mainstreamed into the SIS-REDD+. 2 SIS-REDD+ has been established as a web-based platform to monitor safeguards performance across program interventions. ESMF Document – Jambi 2 readiness components. These safeguards instruments will be tested and continue to be refined as part of the overall capacity strengthening support under the pre-investment grant. The safeguards instruments under J-SLMP will be revisited to assess their level of adequacy and effectiveness, including allocation of resources for capacity strengthening and supervision prior to ERPA appraisal. Overall safeguards management for the future ERP will be reviewed and cleared by the World Bank prior to the signing of the ERPA. STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT (SESA) The SESA is an integral component of this ESMF. The overall SESA process serves as a platform to enable consultations with a broad range of national and sub-national stakeholders, including potentially affected communities to integrate social and environmental concerns into the upstream policy-making process and project-level ER Program design. The SESA represents GOI’s efforts to identify potential environmental and social (E&S) risks associated with each of the program activities and mainstream E&S risk mitigation measures and good practices to address potential adverse impacts and leverage positive benefits that may accrue from the proposed activities. The SESA process has been initiated as part of J-SLMP preparation. Initial findings have been used to inform the development of the ESMF and its associated frameworks to address environmental and social risks under the project. The SESA process will continue during J-SLMP implementation in parallel with formulation of result-based Emission Reduction Program Document (ERPD). The SESA serves as a tool to guide potential investments in the future ER Program towards compliance with the World Bank’s safeguards policies and mainstream good practices in sustainable land and natural resource management. An interim SESA report is presented as a standalone document in conjunction with the ESMF. The SESA process is expected to conclude prior to ERPA appraisal. 2019 2020 2025 2026 Preparation Interim Pre-Investment SESA ERPD Final SESA 2021 ERPA Figure 2 SESA Process during the Pre-Investnent and ERPD Phases The development of SESA was aligned with the Government Regulation ( Peraturan Pemerintah – PP) No. 46/2016 on the Guideline for Strategic Environmental Assessments. ESMF Document – Jambi 3 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK (ESMF) The ESMF and its associated frameworks serve as an instrument to assess and manage potential E&S risks and impacts under J-SLMP (see Chapter 2). These frameworks set out the principles, rules, guidelines and procedures for screening, assessment and follow-up on the anticipated environmental and social impacts of project activities. Future jurisdictional ERP will warrant further assessments in light of relevant environmental and social risks as well as institutional capacities. Hence, the above frameworks will be re-assessed, with potential additional resources and capacity strengthening measures to enable effective management of environmental and social aspects under the ERP. Baseline assessments in Jambi Province focus on the Performance Evaluation Area ( Wilayah Penilaian Kinerja – WPK). This area will be the accounting area for the future ERP. The total area of WPK is 2,262,723 hectares consisting of mineral soil and peatland areas. Within this WPK, there are 1,392,464 hectares of plantations (mostly oil palm, rubber and cocoa); 183,283 hectares mining consession area (mostly has not been exploited yet); and 562,657 hectares of forest concessions and plantations. Based on a conflict database compiled by the Impartial Mediation Network in 2017, there are 135 conflicts within forest estate areas across Indonesia. The GOI has mapped tenurial conflicts, including both in and outside forest areas. The database indicates that there are 201 cases, mostly in Sumatera (60.7 percent) and Kalimantan (16.4 percent). These figures may underestimate the prevalence of tenurial conflicts due to lack of data. Some of the current conflicts are considered legacies from previous government policies, in particular, incomplete forest area establishments. Competing claims present challenges in determining the authenticity of customary claims in Jambi. Encroachments have resulted in deforestation (average deforestation rate in Jambi is 1.6 percent per year, including from illegal mining activities). In Jambi, there are 32 recorded conflicts where 11 cases have been resolved. The majority of these conflicts involve tenurial conflicts with companies (timber plantation and plantation companies) and the state (overlapping claims in forest areas). The ATR/BPN (Agraria and Spatial Planning/Land Agency) Ministry has issued Ministerial Regulation No. 3/2011 concerning Management, Assessment and Handling of Tenurial Conflicts, followed by Ministerial Regulation No. 6/2018 concerning Systematic and Complete Land Registration ( Pendaftaran Tanah Sistematik Lengkap or hereafter PTSL) to clarify land tenure and use in non-forest areas (Area Penggunaan Lain or hereafter APL). Prior to such issuance, Presidential Regulation No. 88/2017 concerning Land Tenure Settlements within Forest Areas ( Penyelesaian Penguasaan Tanah didalam Kawasan Hutan or hereafter PPTKH) was issued with the objective to enable multi-stakeholder collaboration in clarifying and addressing land tenure rights within forest areas (or Kawasan Hutan). Such policy reform provides an enabling environment for confirming land tenure as well as addressing land tenure conflicts involving communities in the ER accounting area. Further institutional capacity strengthening and coordination will be required amongst sub-national government agencies in implementing these policies and enforcing relevant regulations, particularly with regards to issuance of new concessions in Jambi Province. As part of the ESMF, the proposed measures to enhance the institutional capacities and to address the environmental and social risks and impacts are elaborated further in section 4.1 and 4.2 under chapter 4. In addition, J-SLMP will provide necessary technical support to ensure adequate measures are in ESMF Document – Jambi 4 place to address risks and impacts associated with project activities and long-term safeguards system strengthening to support the ERP implementation. Under any circumstance, potentially high-risk activities such as tenure conflict settlement will require pre-requisite conditions or hereafter “readiness criteria�, i.e. the legal framework, mediation and institutional capacities, inclusive consultations, and institutional collaboration. Decisions made as a result of conflict settlement processes supported by the project that may cause resettlement impacts, access restrictions and restrictions to land uses at the expense of the losing parties will not be executed until a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) or Plan of Action (PoA) consistent with the requirements of the RPF and PF and satisfactory to the World Bank has been prepared by the project and/or agency implementing the activities concerned. The ESMF provides an analysis of potential risks and impacts associated with J-SLMP and has included safeguard measures based on the relevant typology of activities (refer to Chapter 2). J-SLMP is not envisaged to create significant negative environmental and social impacts and are expected to yield net positive environmental outcomes through institutional capacity strengthening and pilot-testing of sustainable land and resource management options. The ESMF seeks to mainstream measures and good practices to ensure that the activities will not harm the environment, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, especially the most vulnerable groups within the WPK. Based on the nature, scope and scale of the project, J-SLMP is expected to trigger seven WB safeguards policies, which include: a. OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment; b. OP/BP 4.04 Natural Habitats; c. OP/BP 4.36 Forests; d. OP/BP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources; e. OP/BP 4.09 Pest Management; f. OP/BP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples and; g. OP/BP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement. The rationale for triggering the above policies is presented in Chapter 3.0 on Policy, Legal and Institutional Framework. J-SLMP triggered OP/BP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement as a precaution measure to address downstream impacts associated with access restrictions and risks of livelihood displacement following implementation of the project activities as well as responding to the design of future ERP. J-SLMP does not involve land acquisition or anticipates the need for involuntary resettlement to achieve the objectives of the project. A Resettlement Planning Framework, which includes a Process Framework to address access restrictions, has been developed as part of the ESMF. OP/BP 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples is triggered to acknowledge the presence of community groups that possess the criteria as defined in the policy in WPK. An Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF) has been developed as part of the ESMF. Through implementation of the IPPF, the J-SLMP and future ERP seek measures to: a) Ensure free, prior and informed consultations to obtain broad community support in line with the national SIS-REDD+; and b) Avoid potentially adverse effects on Indigenous Peoples’ communities or when avoidance is not feasible, minimise, mitigate or compensate for such ESMF Document – Jambi 5 effects. The IPPF also seeks to ensure that Indigenous People receive social and economic benefits that are culturally appropriate and gender and inter-generationally inclusive. The scope of the ESMF consists of principles, procedures and measures to manage potential environmental and social risks that may arise from J-SLMP implementation. The ESMF seeks to mainstream measures to enhance participation and opportunities for Indigenous Peoples and local communities to benefit from sustainable land use and forest management. The framework includes supplementary annexes applicable for relevant activities under the project and shall be used in conjunction with the applicable provisions of the World Bank’s safeguards policies to ensure a comprehensive approach towards management of environmental and social aspects. LINK WITH EXISTING SAFEGUARDS INSTRUMENTS FOR REDD+ Previous and on-going safeguards preparation processes have been instrumental in bringing together international good practices for adoption in the country’s safeguards systems and , particularly, the relevant REDD+ system. Starting from the mandate of COP 16, a safeguard mechanism known as Cancun Safeguards is used as a foundation for developing safeguard mechanism specific for Indonesia. Through Cancun Safeguards, UNFCCC requires that REDD+ implementation worldwide is equipped with strategies for mitigating environmental and social risks consisting of strategic environmental and social assessment (SESA), safeguard mechanism, and safeguard information system (SIS) to allow registration and monitoring of safeguards. In Indonesia, key readiness processes have been led by the GOI and supported by various development partners, including NGOs and CSOs working in Jambi. Stakeholders’ inputs and concerns have been collected in a participatory manner, involving a series of national and sub-national consultative workshops, Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), informal discussions with target communities, and document reviews. The SIS-REDD+ consultation process, for example, was intensively carried out in 2011 and 2012, involving multi-stakeholders, including community representatives. The SIS development represents the earlier process for safeguards preparation under REDD+, including SIS-REDD+ consultation and testing in Jambi. The GOI has mainstreamed environmental and social risk mitigation measures into the ER program development through an interlinked process for the development of key safeguards instruments specific to REDD+. These instruments include: a. The REDD+ Safeguards Information System (known as SIS-REDD+); and b. The national safeguards framework (known as PRISAI ( Prinsip Kriteria Indikator Safeguards Indonesia). The SIS-REDD+ has been established as a web-based platform to monitor safeguards performance across program interventions. The SIS-REDD+ will integrate Jambi contexts (i.e. issues specific to Jambi Province). Safeguards compliance standards shall be consistent with World Bank safeguards policies and include safeguards performance indicators that must be achieved by project entities. Efforts to synchronize the national safeguards frameworks and the ESMF for J-SLMP have been made as part of the project preparation. The ESMF and its associated frameworks, including FGRM will serve as reference safeguards instruments that will bring together previous safeguards initiatives into a more comprehensive ESMF Document – Jambi 6 framework for the purpose of J-SLMP and set the foundation of the safeguards system under the future ERP. An interactive web portal for SIS-REDD+ (http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/sisredd/ - under construction) administered by the Directorate General of Climate Change (DG of CC) of MoEF has been developed and will continue to be supported under J-SLMP to enable accessible and direct reporting of safeguards performance across implementing entities. Indonesia is equipped with a strong legal framework for the management of environmental and social impacts of development activities, which are applicable for activities under the J-SLMP and future ER program. Relevant mechanisms include mandatory Environmental Impact Assessments (AMDAL, UKL/UPL), Strategic Environmental Assessments (KLHS) for policy development and spatial planning processes, and Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) system. In addition, there are a number of existing certification schemes that can be relied upon for specific ER activities, such as the Indonesian Ecolabel Institute (Lembaga Ekolabel Indonesia/LEI), the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), and the Verification System of Timber Legality (SVLK) standards for ensuring sustainable forest management practices. In the oil palm sector, the Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and the Indonesian Sustainable Palm Oil (ISPO) set out compliance standards for the management of environmental and social aspects along oil palm value chains. These safeguards instruments contain specific mechanisms for oversight of environmental and social aspects of specific projects, grievance redress mechanisms, and reporting compliance based on self-assessments and independent audits. The ESMF developed under the project will therefore build on the existing country systems (whenever relevant and consistent with the J-SLMP and future ER program) and ensure that any gaps against the World Bank’s safeguards policies are addressed. The integration of the existing safeguards instruments and the use of country systems are further discussed in Chapter 4.0 (this document) on management of E&S risks and impacts. APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY This ESMF takes into account lessons learned and important insights gleaned from implementing safeguards on other projects in Indonesia and in particular Jambi. These include: a. The need to build in-house capacity at each of the implementing agencies to screen, assess, manage and monitor environmental and social safeguards issues; b. The importance of timely, systematic and inclusive consultations with all stakeholders, including culturally and socially appropriate consultation approaches for Indigenous Peoples and Adat communities, respecting social structures, language, cultural norms and availability; c. The need to establish a responsive and accessible Feedback and Grievance Redress Mechanism (FGRM) at the outset of ERP implementation. The FGRM will also serve as an “early warning system� and provides locally accessible mechanisms for dispute resolution; and d. The need to make adequate budgetary and resource provisions to ensure effective implementation, institutional capacity strengthening and management of all safeguard aspects in the ERP. The key processes for the development of the ESMF are summarized as follows: Data Collection Similar to SESA, data collection for ESMF considers secondary data sources consisting of: ESMF Document – Jambi 7 ▪ Existing and valid regulations and laws related to forestry, and social and environmental management in Indonesia which were analyzed to establish linkages with World Bank safeguard policies and potential institutional arrangements; ▪ Capacity for performing environmental and social management, track record and fiscal capacity to ensure adequate resources to implement ESMF and monitoring based on the agreed safeguards principles, criteria and indicators; ▪ Data and information relevant to the future ERP as well as contextual analysis to inform assessments of potential risks and impacts; and ▪ Results of research and studies that have been validated by scientific communities and/or consensus among key stakeholders to strengthen the contextual analysis. Primary data sources were collected from a series of technical discussions and semi-structured interviews with stakeholders’ representatives. Additionally, primary data sources include the results of public consultations, which involved community representatives. As part of this ESMF consultations, a community consultation at village and district level have been conducted between April and May 2019. A record of the consultation can be found in Annex 11. Analysis Based on the primary and secondary data collected, a risk and impact analysis for the ESMF takes into considerations the following aspects: ▪ A predictive analysis of impacts based on risks identified in the SESA. Probability of occurrence and severity of impacts are assessed to determine priorities for the management of risks. The higher probability of occurrences, and the more severe the impacts, will require more intensive management and supervision as well as resource allocation; ▪ Identification of environmental and social measures to address the identified potential risks and impacts; and ▪ Analysis of coherence with the country systems to identify if the existing safeguards measures under specific activities can properly mitigate/avoid risks and which gap filling measures will be required. SCOPE OF THE ESMF The ESMF governs the overall management of E&S risks for implementation of activities under J-SLMP. The main users of the ESMF include the Directorate General of Climate Change as the National Focal Point of REDD+, Jambi Development Planning Agency (BAPPEDA), Jambi Environmental Service (DLH) and also, all sectoral agencies at the local government levels including the Governor of the Province, as well as the implementing agencies and partners at the district and village levels (see Section 6.0 on the institutional arrangement). The scope of the ESMF and its associated frameworks responds to identified environmental and social risks of J-SLMP (refer to Chapter 4). The project typologies, mitigation measures and their respective area of implementation (boundaries/targets) are further described in Table 8 of Chapter 4. ESMF Document – Jambi 8 The ESMF includes screening and management of all relevant E&S risks and impacts where mitigation measures fall under the purview, capacity and authority of the implementing agencies and development partners. At the project level, DGCC and BAPPEDA will provide technical support for the management of FGRM and monitoring of E&S safeguards (preferably involving the use of SIS REDD+3 that links to the Cancun Principles to allow monitoring at the national level, and technical capacity building to implementing agencies to ensure implementation of the E&S provisions in the ESMF. A framework approach was adopted since specific locations will be decided during project implementation. The ESMF adopted a risk management hierarchy which, first and foremost, avoids adverse impacts whenever feasible. In circumstances where risks and impacts are inevitable and/or foreseen, mobilization of resources for mitigation measures will be commensurate to the risk levels and adapted as risks emerge and/or change during implementation. Future ERP operation will build on the ESMF and its associated frameworks, subject to further assessments as part of the on-going SESA process, which is expected to conclude prior to the appraisal of Emission Reduction Payment Agreement (ERPA). Resourcing arrangements, including capacity building aspects, will be revisited and potentially strengthened to respond to the wider scope of project implementation and inclusion of additional activities. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS The development of the ESMF draft and its revisions was undertaken through a series of stakeholder consultations conducted at the national and regional levels (provincial, district and village levels). The main purpose of the stakeholder consultations is to seek inputs for the ESMF revisions from potential client organisations, key central agencies, relevant NGOs and other institutions, as well as to disclose the ESMF to the related stakeholders. The approach that has been adopted for the identification of stakeholders has been mainly through self- selection. At the national level, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) coordinates with relevant ministries and agencies to nominate relevant stakeholders for consultations. At the sub- national level, such self-selection process has been supported by local agencies. Indigenous Peoples have been engaged through civil society organisations (CSOs), as well as through Indigenous Peoples’ institutions at the village level. An analysis and mapping of stakeholders’ influence and impact (both positive and negative) on the ERP is provided in the SESA document separate to the ESMF, which forms the basis for engaging the key stakeholder in the development of the ESMF. In particular, stakeholders who hold relevant information on the ERP were also engaged in the development of the ESMF. These include those who were involved in formulating the PDO and managing the knowledge/data relevant to the ERP. The consultation process has been ongoing since 2016. Information resulting from this process is incorporated into the formulation of this ESMF. Additional consultations in 2018-2019 are summarized in Table 1 and full documentation of these consultations is appended in the preliminary SESA report (refer Appendix A.3). 3 Assuming that SIS REDD+ is operational and accessible at sub-national level. ESMF Document – Jambi 9 Table 1 Summary of stakeholder consultations in Jambi TOPIC WHAT IS THE ISSUE RELEVANCE TO RECOMMENDATIONS REDD+ Kick-Off Meeting Joint ▪ PDO result-chain MRV, Safeguards, and The key points discussed were related to the internal arrangement within the Preparation Mission ▪ Annual Work Plan initial design of the ERP government of Indonesia especially DJPPI, BAPPENAS and Government of Jambi BioCF ISFL related to the implementation of BioCF-ISFL, the role of stakeholder in Jambi in ▪ Procurement Plan anticipating of BioCF ISFL preparation and implementation, committment from ▪ Draft Grant Agreement Jambi Government to implement BioCG-ISFL, the role of Consultants in preparing ▪ Aide of Memoire related documents for BioCF-ISFL, especially on safeguards as strictly followed up ▪ ToR Individual Consultant by the WB, Grant Agreement preparation and signing for BioCF-ISFL between the World Bank and KLHK. ▪ Concept Note Some of the emerging concerns were related to the readiness of Government of Jambi to prepare and implement the BioCF-ISFL and the complicated vertical and horizontal coordination as currently experienced in most cases in Indonesia, including in Jambi. From the meeting it was observed that the Government of Jambi demonstrated positive development toward the preparation and implementation of BioCF-ISFL as shown from the issuance of Government Decree on the Formation of BioCF Team/Taskforce and increased understanding on the part of Jambi Government on the role of BioCF-ISFL as a long term, low carbon and green development for the province. In addition, the consultation also discussed how to foster active participation of key stakeholders in Jambi and the finalization of ToR for individual consultants to support the preparation of BioCF-ISFL, including the consultant on safeguards. Agreed actions include increasing communication between Bappenas and Ministry of Finance related to Grant Agreement, as well as with the Jakarta and Jambi-based teams tasked for the preparation of BioCF-ISFL PDO and other documents, and increasing stakeholders’ involvement and participation in ERP development in Jambi. Joint Mission BioCF-ISFL ▪ PPG Procurement, Lol, Part of REDD+ The mission agreed that continued refinements of the results framework and Financial agreement progress, readiness process monitoring arrangements with interactive follow-up sessions and email AWP ESMF Document – Jambi 10 ▪ ERP Document communication with the M&E specialist were expected to take place in the next ▪ Result chain & Pre-invesment four months and would be presented in the next mission. activities ▪ Agriculture framework ▪ Private sector ▪ ER allocation ▪ Benefit Sharing Mechanism ▪ Safeguards Focus group discussion ▪ Identification WPK REDD+ As a document that ▪ The SESA needs to portray the causes/drivers of deforestation and forest (FGD) on identification of ▪ Deforestation and forest supports the degradation & strategy for handling these issues to inform the ERP design. potential locations for degradation preparation of ERP ▪ Key issues discussed include prevention and control of land and forest fire, deforestation and forest poverty in relation to deforestation, leakages to neighbouring provinces, degradation and peat inadequate numbers of patrol team, tenurial conflicts, sub-optimal forest damage (1) governance, the needs to link with the provincial action plan (RAD/Rencana Aksi Daerah) on greenhouse gas emission, roles and responsibilities(involvement) at the district level, eco-tourism and non-timber forest product (and their marketing) as non-carbon benefit, consideration for mangrove in BioCF, palm oil as potential carbon sequestration, the needs for FGRM at village and sub-district levels, credible MRV and carbon accounting; ▪ Emerging concerns include greed and speculation, which may contribute to forest degradation, lack of equipment at FMU level for fire prevention/control, implementation of sustainable agriculture policies (including non-burning methods) and incentives for zero-fire, the needs for formal agreement to prevent leakage to neighboring provinces, the need to clearly define performance areas, the need to consider aspirations/concerns from key stakeholders in defining performance areas, biodiversity outside protected areas. ▪ Agreement on follow-ups are: Manggala Agni to provide capacity building and community-based fire prevention, Manggala Agni will support FMU for fire prevention and control, Agriculture Agency to enforce sustainable agriculture (organic pesticides, allocation of sustainable agriculture areas), increase recruitment of Masyarakat Mitra Polhut (Community Patrol Team) to increase patrol efforts, use of existing regulation and guidelines (e.g., Ecolabel, HCV, RSPO, and ISPO) as safeguard instruments, acknowledgement of customary ESMF Document – Jambi 11 communities, support for customary communities, collaboration with local communities on ecosystem restoration. ▪ The obstacles to the implementation of the Jambi ERP include, procedurally, the issuance of the Decree regarding the involvement of elements from the SKPD (provincial agencies). Other main obstacles include the lack of capacity/guidance to effective implement safeguard mechanisms. Collaboration with NGOs and academics may be able to address this shortcoming. ▪ Data used for ERP, at least for the last 10 years to ensure the use of most recent data (reflecting current situations and dynamics of land-based sectors in Jambi Province). ▪ There may be inconsistencies in data and maps, even though such data and maps are sourced from the government agencies. Concensus need tp be established to justify data sources and relevant data custodians. ▪ In KPH/National Park/Tahura/BPHP Units, relevant issues include community forest encroachment expansion, forest fires, illegal logging, unlicensed plantations (oil & rubber), expansion of plantation businesses, forest encroachment for oil palm and rubber, encroachment in the inter-zone buffer zones, weak good governance implementation across stakeholders, tenure conflicts, peat decomposition, illegal mining, land use (mining, gardens, agriculture), unsustainable forest management. ▪ The agency mapping for data availability is in accordance with the required basic data requirements, which can be enhanced and revisited based on deliberative discussions and stakeholder engagement processes. This suggests that data may come from different sources, and data mainstreaming may need to be done to ensure consistencies of data; ▪ Pre-identification of the main drivers that cause issues in the forestry sector will be revisited in accordance with the next plan of follow-up discussions Focus group discussion ▪ Identification WPK REDD+ ▪ Verification of Main ▪ Participants to complete information related to the main causes of (FGD) on identification of ▪ Deforestasi and degradation Drivers & Causes deforestation and forest degradation, with supporting data available. potential locations for of Deforestation ▪ Participants presented their understanding about the social and environmental deforestation and forest and degradation impacts, along with the required strategy and directions for the ERP moving degradation and peat ▪ Screening of SESA forward. Such information has been used to inform and strengthen the PDO damage (2) Issues ESMF Document – Jambi 12 ▪ Identification of ▪ Based on the stock-taking of issues and screening of spatial data processing, Social & several issues have been addressed. A short list of agreed issues include Environmental TBD. Impacts ▪ Based on the issue categories emerging from the FGDs, several alternative ▪ PDO and ERP locations for public consultations were proposed. Expert views, for spatial Consolidation data processing and specific themes may be called for enable robust analysis. ▪ Identification of the ▪ Key issues discussed in this session included: the needs for socialisation of Area of Public BioCF at the district level, artisanal mining as driver of deforestation, illegal Consultation use of forest areas (encroachment), infrastructure development (e.g., road) in forest areas, weak forest governance, changes of traditional/subsistence economy into transactional economy, unclear village boundaries, lack of conservation awareness amongst communities/corporations/government agencies, social conflicts, human-wildlife conflicts, non-sustainable agriculture (extensification and non-organic pesticides/fertilisers), imbalance in the value chain (middlemen’s excessive profits). ▪ Emerging concerns identified from this discussion are: Influx of migrants from other provinces, conflicting development interests/agendas, inadequate resources for effective forest management, weak cross-sectoral coordination, lack of community empowerment programs, and limited access to information regarding licensing policies. ▪ Concensus on follow-ups are: Establishing a joint task force for law enforcement, partnership to include forest encroachers and convert them to support sustainable forest management, coordination between national and sub-national agencies, ensuring clear mandates for provincial and district governments, designing and implementing community development programs, empowering village communities, including ensuring enabling regulations for village development, implementing participatory mapping for boundary demarcation, improving information systems, implementing conservation awareness initiatives, improving synergy between social forestry working groups with the Forestry Agency, formulating conflict resolution strategies, and development of creative economic schemes. Interview the perceptions Interview related to the Bio Carbon ▪ Verification of Main More than half of the respondents demonstrated lack of awareness on the details of key stakeholders in the Fund, drivers of deforestation, Drivers & Causes of the emission reduction program, its relevance to REDD +, and the role of sub- sample districts (Bungo, related stakeholders, fund of DD national stakeholders in the implementation process later. Most of these Merangin, Sarolangun, management mechanisms, ESMF Document – Jambi 13 Kerinci and Tanjung important issues and future ▪ Screening of SESA stakeholders expect that the project can be applied at the local level/district level, Jabung Timur) expectations Issues to enable fair sharing of the project’s benefits. Focus group discussion Natural resource management, root SESA & ESMF Main issues raised were related to forest conversion to oil palm, illegal logging, (FGD) of six villages causes, relevant stakeholders and encroachment, limited alternative livelihood and the use of chemical agriculture (Beringin Tinggi, Guguk, solutions inputs. Kandis Dendang, Pandan Discussions on measures to address environmental and social issues include: lagan, Sungai beras, & Improving access to markets, stabilising prices for daily needs (sembako), Rantau kermas) and 1 improving skills and technoogy for added value, identification of NTFP potentials indigenous people (non-carbon benefit), development of village enterprise (BumDes), improving access for ecotourism, community-based patrol implementation, stopping illegal mining operation, community-based peatland rehabilitation, training on prevention and control of forest fire, peatleand rewetting, non-burning method for agriculture, allocation of sustainable agriculture (especially for marginal and isolated communities, including customary communities), production and use of organic fertilisers/pesticides, socialisation of social forestry schemes, increasing gender participation in sustainable land use, increasing commitment of companies (inclusion of local communities in companies’ business), Public consultations and To inform the preliminary results of SESA & ESMF The main purpose of these consultation was to obtain feedback from local focus group discussions the SESA and ESMF (including all (including all annexes) stakeholders on the draft safeguard documents being prepared by consultants. In in Tanjung Jabung Timur annexes) addition, the consultation also served an opportunity to introduce BioCF-ISFL for and Merangin districts sub-national stakeholders who were not aware of the proposed project. Some of the issues raised in Tanjung Jabung Timur (Tanjabtim) District were related to community economic development aspects, including support to non-timber forest product (NTFP) marketing and peatland management. The following were some of the main issues discussed: • Focus of the district in next Medium-Term Development Program 2021-2026 is sustainable peatland management under the flagship of “Peatland Friendly District�. This is due to the coverage of peatland (62 percent of the district’s administrative areas). Subsequent FGDs will discuss strategy to promote “Peatland Friendly District� for Tanjabtim. • High rates of land conversion from agriculture to oil palm were considered as a driver of forest degradation. ESMF Document – Jambi 14 • There is a potential for developing Social Forestry (SF) in Tanjabtim (currently there are eight SF licences in Tanjabtim). Focus will need to be placed in the whole aspect of social forestry, starting from preparation for licencing, forest management, production, marketing, and up to processing of non timber forest products. • Recurrence of forest fires is still one of the main deforestation issues in Tanjabtim due to its large peatland coverage. Efforts to prevent and control forest fires were usually intensified during the long dry season or El Nino years. • While there is a regulation on the protection of prime agriculture land (LP2B), its implementation is still problematic due to untargeted subsidies from the government. Thorough evaluation of the implementation of this regulation will need to be carried out to find out best future implementation. • The government has encouraged the communities to plant Jelutong trees, which is considered an appropriate agricultural commodity for peatland. However, market for latex extracted from Jelutong is still limited (note: Jelutong is one of the commodities to be supported by BioCF). In Merangin District, some of the important issues were related to encroachment and illegal claims of forest land especially by in-migrants (mostly from South Sumatra, Lampung and Bengkulu leading to further deforestation and social conflicts), emerging roles of Indigenous Peoples seeking recognition from the government, unclear village boundaries leading to conflicts between villages. It was expected that with the support from BoCF-ISFL, issues related to the markets for some non-timber forest products (Jelutong in Tanjabtim) and products from social forestry could be resolved, as Bio-CF-ISFL will provide expertise to help with this issue. To deal with forest and social conflicts, beside supporting local institutions to deal with these issues especially on capacity building and budget increase, the role of local communities and local wisdoms and local NGOs should be revitalized in solving some of the issues related to deforestation and social issues. ESMF Document – Jambi 15 STRUCTURE OF THE ESMF This ESMF is structured in a manner that provides clear guidance to implementing agencies. It provides an overall framework that applies when specific Operational Policies are triggered. In such a case, the ESMF framework will provide a specific action plan (ESMP) to address issues triggered by J-SLMP implementation. The structure of the ESMF will also be linked to institutional arrangement to ensure that relevant agencies are designated and mobilized according to the ESMP. A review of the country policy, legal and institutional frameworks, and the World Bank Safeguards that govern the environmental and social aspects of J-SLMP is provided in the ESMF. The project description lists the project components, together with a review of the legislations and safeguards that forms the basis of the gap analysis. Where gaps and/or risks were identified, specific safeguard instruments have been developed to address these. The safeguard instruments include the screening of activities, application of codes of practices and guidance notes, guideline for High Conservation Value and related environmental impact assessments, environmental permit, FGRM, IPPF, RPF and PF, and guidance for chance find of potential cultural sites and/or objects. These instruments are provided in the ESMF annex sections. This ESMF document is structured into the following chapters: ▪ Executive Summary. Summary of the purpose and contents of the ESMF. ▪ Chapter 1 - Introduction. Provides information on the background and scope of the ESMF in conjunction with the SESA, the approach and methodology. ▪ Chapter 2 - Project Description. Describes the purpose and objectives of the JSLMP including the project components and sub-components, and their expected outcomes. ▪ Chapter 3 - Policy, Legal and Institutional Frameworks. Identification and review of applicable Government of Indonesia regulations and World Bank Safeguard Policies triggered by the J-SLMP. ▪ Chapter 4 - Assessment of Environmental and Social Risks and Mitigation Measure. Describes the assessment and management of the anticipated environmental and social gaps and risks, ESMF implementation and safeguard instruments, institutional arrangements, procedures for review and clearance of component activities, safeguards monitoring and reporting, information disclosures and Feedback Grievance Redress Mechanism. ▪ Chapter 5 - ESMF Implementation. Adress the environmental and social procedure, safeguards policy requirement, management of leakages and reversals, risks associated with policy development, capacity building plan and indicative financial requirements, safeguards monitoring, reporting and staffing, information disclosure, environmental and social management plan, environmental code of practices, FGRM, and safeguards application for benefit sharing plan, ▪ Annexes include: - Annex 1 - ERP Negative List. The negative list outlines activities with potential significant safeguards implications. This list will be used as the basis for the preliminary screening of ESMF Document – Jambi 16 environmental and social risks and inform the inclusion of activities under J-SLMP. Activities in the negative list will not be included under the project; - Annex 2 - Screening against Environmental and Social Risks. Activities will be screened and assessed based on their potential risks and impacts. Such screening will preliminary define the required safeguards management and recommendations to address the identified risks and impacts (preventive measures, capacity building, technical assistance and oversight to strengthen risk management); - Annex 3 - Environmental Codes of Practices for relevant physical investments under J- SLMP. Environmental Code of Practice will be needed for activities that can potentially impact the ecosystem (e.g., non-forest timber product extraction, agroforestry, home/small industry, small farming and fishery, nursery, community timber plantation and ecotourism); - Annex 4 - Guidance Note for Pest Management. The ERP recognises local wisdoms in managing pests and will support communities to mainstream such local knowledge into the environmental management plan. Such pest management is not a single pest control method, but rather a series of pest management assessments, decisions and controls; - Annex 5 - General Guidelines for High Conservation Value (HCV). Undertaking HCV represents one of the key safeguards processes for identification and assessments of environmental and social risks of key forest activities in WPK. The HCV provides screening information on concentrations of significant biodiversity values, significant large landscape-level areas with naturally occurring species, rare-threatened and endangered ecosystems, ecosystem services, areas fundamental for local communities, and areas of traditional cultural identity; - Annex 6 - Terms of Reference (TOR) for Environmental Permits, Management and Monitoring Measures. The TOR outlines the required screening process to identify the degree of impact of each proposed sub-project. Some activities under J-SLMP may require environmental permits through the development of UKL-UPL (Environmental Management and Environmental Monitoring Scheme) document or issuance of a SPPL (Statement/Commitment Letter for conducting Environmental Management). Activities under sustainable land and resource management under J-SLMP may involve land fire prevention and suppression programs, social forestry, sustainable agriculture, sustainable mangrove, alternative fresh-water fish activities, ecotourism and silvofishery initiatives, which warrant further impact assessments and close monitoring and supervision by implementing agencies; - Annex 7 - Feedback Grievances and Redress Mechanism (FGRM). FGRM is a tool for early identification, assessment and resolution of complaints or disputes encountered during J-SLMP implementation. The FGRM will ensure that relevant concerns and suggestions received from the broader stakeholders, including target communities are incorporated and addressed at the planning and implementation stages of each activity. The ESMF notes that it is important to strengthen the current FGRM systems that are already in place and managed by various agencies/entities at the national, provincial and district/city levels to better respond and manage complaints, inquiries, and potential disputes and/or conflicts as a result of the J-SLMP implementation; ESMF Document – Jambi 17 - Annex 8 - Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF). The IPPF establishes a screening process, an engagement strategy, as well as requirements for free, prior, and informed consultations if J-SLMP activities affect Indigenous Peoples and other community groups who meet the criteria under OP 4.10. In the event that J-SLMP activities are assessed to result in potential adverse impacts on Indigenous Peoples, the IPPF provides a framework for the preparation of an Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) through meaningful engagement and consultations with affected communities. Such consultations are expected to lead to broad community support to J-SLMP interventions as well as identification of opportunities to share the project benefits; - Annex 9 - Resettlement Planning Framework (RPF) and Process Framework (PF) to address access restrictions. An RPF and PF have been developed as a precautionary measure to address downstream risks associated with involuntary resettlement and access restrictions as a result of J-SLMP implementation. These frameworks require that if involuntary resettlement and access restriction risks are expected to occur during J- SLMP implementation, each project-affected person will be consulted, compensated at replacement costs and assisted with restoration measures to help them improve or at least maintain the living conditions and capacity to earn income as before the project; - Annex 10 - Physical Cultural Resources - Chance Find Framework (PCR-CFF). The preparation of the PCR-CFP aims to protect physical cultural resources from the adverse impact(s) of J-SLMP activities and support preservation; and promote fair sharing of benefits from the use of Physical Cultural Resources (PCR); - Annex 11 - Minutes of Meeting of Stakeholder Consultations; - Annex 12 Assessment of Environmental and Social Risks and Mitigation Measures; and - Appendix 13 - TOR for Environmental and Social Team. This appendix outlines the scope of responsibilities for environmental and social safeguards staff assigned to oversee ERP implementation. PUBLIC DISCLOSURE The ESMF draft has been consulted with various stakeholders in a number of meetings conducted in Jambi Province as well as with district stakeholders. The document has been disclosed on MoEF’s website on 17 October 2019 (link: http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/peraturan-perundangan.html). A final version will be re-disclosed on both MoEF and World Bank’s websites following the World Bank’s clearance of the safeguards instruments. Information will be made available to potentially affected communities and individuals once specific activities and locations have been determined and additional consultations at the community level will be undertaken prior to the commencement of any activities. ESMF Document – Jambi 18 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Jambi has articulated its vision for low-carbon development in the Green Growth Plan (GGP) through six intervention areas that the J-SLMP and forthcoming ER Program are consistent with. The J-SLMP and ER Program form a critical part of the GGP given that they are a strategic umbrella for multi-sector, multi-stakeholder interventions across land uses in Jambi. Together, they will contribute to a transformation in how landscapes are managed in Jambi to deliver multiple benefits such as climate change mitigation, improved livelihoods and environmental services, and strengthened coordination and partnerships with key stakeholders. The Project’s proposed development objective (PDO) of J -SLMP is to improve sustainable landscape management that reduces land-based GHG emissions in Jambi. Specifically, the J-SLMP will foster equitable and low-carbon development by addressing drivers of emissions, deforestation and land degradation primarily through strengthening policies and institutions and implementing sustainable land management approaches. The achievements of the PDO will be measured through the following indicators: a) Land area under sustainable forest management and/or restoration practices (ha); b) GHG Emission reductions in Jambi (MtCO2e); and c) Number of people reached with benefits (assets and/or services and percentage of women). The J-SLMP and its activities have been designed to address identified gaps and to scale successful approaches throughout Jambi to maximize available Project financing. As part of this process, the GOI, including national and provincial governments, conducted an analysis of activities that would support the above PDO. Specifically, activities were prioritised based on five criteria: 1) Expected impact on reducing emissions; 2) Geographic prioritisation given the landscape in Jambi (including a spatial planning approach); 3) Livelihood impacts for communities and smallholders; 4) Complementarity and ability to leverage other programs and initiatives being implemented by the government, CSOs, development partners, communities, and the private sector; and 5) The unique value that the World Bank Group provides on sustainable land use, particularly as it relates to governance, policy and regulations. Below is a summary of the three project components under J-SLMP. 2.1 COMPONENT 1: STRENGTHENING POLICY AND INSTITUTIONS This component will address issues concerning the lack of institutional capacity to ensure good forest and land-use governance. This component aims for improving the regulatory and institutional frameworks in forestry and other land-based sectors, as well as strengthening the instrument for enforcing such policies. Specific gaps in governance that will be addressed by the Project include those related to consistent approaches and tools (including spatially explicit information) for peatland, forest, and fire management; coordinated enforcement and implementation of sustainable land use approaches; transparent monitoring of changes and social issues related to land use; and stakeholder capacity to engage and manage their natural resources sustainably, including through alternative livelihoods to ensure their continued development. Furthermore, this component will support national and provincial governments, communities and other stakeholders to effectively achieve the objectives of the Project. This component will be implemented through technical assistance and capacity building activities. ESMF Document – Jambi 19 2.1.1 Sub-component 1.1: Institutional Strengthening This sub-component aims to strengthen coordination and decision making across sectors (forestry, plantation and mining) to address primary drivers of emissions from land use in Jambi. Under the jurisdictional ERP, this sub-component will support the preparation of policies to support green growth development (i.e., Green Growth Plan/GGP) in line with Jambi TUNTAS vision. Specifically, institutional strengthening will target forestry, plantation and mining sectors. These sectors are often associated with drivers of deforestation from land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF), and from forest/land fire. Furthermore, institutional strengthening will also include translation of policies into technical guidelines to allow field-level implementation. Vertical coordination between provincial and district governments will also be strengthened in the context of law enforcement and conflict resolution. Law enforcement represents high-level political commitments to enhance good governance across relevant sectors in the project. This includes government-led initiatives to place more stringent control over primary forestry industries and plantation, strengthen forest patrol and fire prevention, and oversight of timber sales and relevant coordination and joint operations to enhance forest and natural resource protection. Synchronization of these policies and regulations will involve stakeholder consultation to gather input on institutional management. Additionally, policy synchronization with Peat Restoration Agency (Badan Restorasi Gambut/BRG) is needed to ensure institutional strengthening for managing peatland beyond forest designations Institutional strengthening will also encourage clear definition of institutional mechanism to allow collaboration among government, private sector and civil societies. Collaborations will also be established between Forest Management Unit (Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan/KPH) and the surrounding communities to promote sustainable forest management. Sustainable forest management will include stakeholders’ involvement in reporting and monitoring of policy implementation (will be part of the proposed FGRM). Effective FGRM will support this component to continuously improve policies and its implementation through relevant institutions. 2.1.2 Sub-component 1.2: Enabling Environment for ER Program Support improvements to the enabling environment for an ER Program represents the key aspect in bridging International REDD+ standards for implementation at local scale under jurisdictional approach. REDD+ readiness includes preparation of comprehensive system to measure GHG emissions. Valid methods for such measurements may require transfer of knowledge and skills from experienced professionals to the local experts/institutions. The following activities will create conditions and a framework to enable development of results-based ERP: a. GHG emissions accounting for Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU); b. Monitoring and reporting of land and forest resources changes, including a functioning MRV system; c. Development of a Benefit Sharing Plan (BSP); d. Development of a Feedback and Grievance Redress Mechanism (FGRM); and e. Support for implementation of environmental and social safeguards. ESMF Document – Jambi 20 Capacity building to implement REDD+ plays important role to support forest protection and monitoring, as it will be the responsibility of relevant management unit such as the FMU. Proper measurement of GHG emission will involve inventory and estimation of forest biomass in peat and mineral ecosystems. This will also involve sample selection in peat and mineral ecosystem to monitor the carbon stock. REDD+ readiness requires that institutions in Jambi Province are capable of finalizing and legalizing the FREL (Forest-Reference Emission Level)4. Upon finalization, the system will continue to be used in the process of monitoring land and forest resources, reporting changes and verifying of emissions reductions (MRV). Valid carbon accounting will be the basis for benefit sharing mechanism as the part of incentive scheme in implementing the ERP. REDD+ readiness also requires that the safeguard framework and instruments are prepared for Jambi context. A comprehensive and robust safeguard system will need to be developed by provincial institutions with supports from consultants, NGOs, communities and private sector. Implementation of the safeguard frameworks being prepared with support from J-SLMP needs to be assess during ERP readiness phase, where relevant aspects of legal frameworks, capacity building and access to finance are considered to ensure effective implementation and monitoring of safeguard measures Risks of reversals and displacement will need to be considered in readiness phase. Communication and coordination mechanisms among stakeholders are required to address these risks. Strategies for mitigating the risks of reversals and displacements need to be documented as parts of the requirements from ISFL and World Bank. Additionally, FGRM will also contribute to addressing the risks by providing means for identifying potential grievances and conflicts that may lead to reversals and displacement. 2.1.3 Sub-component 1.3: Policy and Regulation This component will support the consolidation and strengthening of policies and regulations for sustainable land use, including at national and provincial levels. Particular focus has been given to policies and regulations for green growth, private sector development, fire and peatland management in order to effectively address drivers of emissions, improve livelihood opportunities for land users and ensure the long-term sustainability of approaches in Jambi. Specific activities include support for provincial regulations (Perdas) for fire and peatland management, a permanent moratorium on peatland conversion, and improvement of land-based licenses and modifications to Ecosystem Restoration Concessions (ERCs) to increase private sector investment Approach in this sub-component is designed to assist sub-national government in reviewing policies and regulations to ensure effective implementation of future ERP in Jambi. Such policies will include establishment of a fiscal incentive system to channel funds to sub-national level and communities. Stakeholder consultation processes have identified that timber plantation and peat land fires contribute to the deforestation from LULUCF and peatland sources respectively. Evaluation on moratorium for new timber plantation licenses will be done to define the contribution of this policy towards protection of the remaining forest. Evaluation will also be done to identify socio-political implications of this moratorium. Evaluation of policy and regulation will also be done to identify the status of peatland management practices. It is expected that the provincial regulations support the peatland rewetting, revegetating and revitalization strategies of peatland restoration agency (BRG). Additionally, this sub-component will 4 Also includes the decision if peat decomposition will be a significant emission factor. ESMF Document – Jambi 21 assist provincial government evaluate the possibilities to support national level policy such as peatland moratorium. Evaluation of policy and regulation will also be conducted in the context of supporting multi-stakeholder collaboration on sustainable forest management system. Additional context will include evaluation of policies and regulations to ensure institutional capacity to support biodiversity protection as non-carbon benefits and enhancing private sector participation in generating ER benefits. 2.2 COMPONENT 2: IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT This component addresses the lack of sustainable practices in land management. This issue was raised during stakeholder consultations. Poor land management has also resulted in tenurial conflicts involving agricultural practices in forest area (encroachment). This issue is relevant with the drivers of deforestation from both LULUCF and peatland. The objective of Component 2 is to integrate forest and land management in Jambi, particularly through sustainable forest management, agriculture intensification and diversification, conservation and restoration, and value chain sustainability. As with Component 1, peat management, fire prevention and management, and green growth, including through private sector engagement, will be priorities. Component 2 will be supported primarily through physical investments, though complemented by technical assistance and capacity building. Together with Component 1, these activities aim to address the drivers of emissions, including weak governance, by providing resources to test sustainable land use management practices and enforcement in Jambi, including in support of the Project’s objectives. 2.2.1 Sub-component 2.1: Integrated Forest and Land Management This sub-component will provide support for integrated forest and land management through consolidated and coordinated management of forest and land resources, targeting peatland and fire as key sources of emissions. Engagement of government, communities, private sector and civil society are central to achieving this objective. Specific activities include: a. Sustainable forest management to support the remaining natural forest, forest rehabilitation, strengthening of FMU’s institutional capacity including procurement of facilities and infrastructure and monitoring the implementation of sustainable production forest management (PHPL); b. Conservation and restoration activities implemented by the government (at various levels) to reduce emissions, working with smallholders, communities and plantations in or near High Conservation Value (HCV) areas (i.e., forests, peat and mangroves). In particular, restoration and management of priority peatlands, promotion of alternative crops in degraded areas and development of incentive mechanisms to prevent encroachment of smallholders are approaches that are likely to have significant impacts on ER targets. These activities will also include clarification of smallholder land use rights to promote sustainability over the long-term; c. Social forestry support will be provided to facilitated new licences, strengthening of institutional capacity and developneg of social forestry business strategy. To support social forestry, the J- ESMF Document – Jambi 22 SLMP and ERP need to prepare a process that includes socialisation, FPIC and conflict resolution mechanism. Conflicts may arise due to the overlap between forest and plantation concessions. Conflict resolution mechanism needs to be integrated in the FGRM. Multi- stakeholder forum or association may also be optimized for FGRM and conflict resolution mechanism. Sustainable forest management may also include High Conservation Values (HCV) and/or biodiversity conservation. Conservation areas (e.g., nature reserves and national parks) are present in the Performance Evaluation Area (Wilayah Penilaian Kinerja/WPK), so collaborations with conservation area authorities such as BKSDA and National Park is included as part of this strategy. Additionally, biodiversity conservation may be regarded as non-carbon benefit of the ERP. To complete the process of improvement, monitoring and evaluation of HCV (High Conservation Value) areas in production forests by the private sectors/concession holders will be included in the management plan. J-SLMP will benefit from involvement of local communities and private sector to protect the conservation forests, including compliance with zero-burning policy. Additional values from biodiversity conservation includes conservation of forest wildlife flagship species, enhancing capacity of staffs of BKSDA and national parks on SMART patrol, resort-based management, as well as human- wildlife conflict resolution. On the peatland issue, J-SLMP will consider a) restoration of degraded peat lands; b) ecosystem restoration (on peat and mineral forests); and c) development of concept on planting for land rehabilitation, conservation of soil and water, and agroforestry. Improvement of forest management will also benefit from infrastructure development (for conservation of soil and water), and decentralized forest management system through FMUs. Decentralization will allow adjustment to the local context and needs, as well as integration of community empowerment, social forestry, and recognition of indigenous rights. 2.2.2 Sub-component 2.2: Private Sector Partnerships for Improved Forest and Land Management This sub-component will also support private sector partnerships for improved forest and land management, which will leverage private sector funding, investment and expertise to support GHG emissions reductions in Jambi. Specifically, these activities aim to create engagement models and mechanisms that could be replicated and scaled up with private sector actors. Specific activities include: a. Agriculture, plantation, and agroforestry intensification and diversification that target smallholders to facilitate productivity enhancements to reduce emissions in priority areas (e.g., HCV areas, peatland, primary forest borders, etc.), including through replanting, agroforestry and intercropping. The aim will be to leverage commercial bank financing, private sector offtake, and expertise to ensure sustainable investments; and b. Value chain sustainability targeting private sector actors, including large corporates, who are potential change agents, including through support for traceability and sustainable sourcing, coordination of stakeholders in key value chains, and support for standards that promote sustainable practices, including the Indonesian Sustainable Palm Oil (ISPO) and Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) certifications, as well as other sustainability standards, including a potentially new standard for rubber. ESMF Document – Jambi 23 This sub-component focuses on private partnerships to implement productivity-enhancing technology and farming practices. This approach is aimed to promote intensification that would reduce the demands for land expansion. In parallel, sustainable investment and partnership mechanisms will be introduced to encourage green development. This sub-component will benefit from good governance (Component 1), as it will provide clear information on land use policy, licensing process and clear demarcation for subsequent GHG inventory. This will also be strengthened through value chain coordination, multi-stakeholder dialogue and capacity building to encourage sustainable practices. Under this sub-component, the project aims to provide support for private sector to establish partnership with farmers’ groups. This approach will help enhance the knowledge on sustainable forest management among farmers’ groups and develop supply chain management tools to facilitate compliance with certification standards including “no-deforestation and no-fire� sustainability aspects. Partnership will also include the needs to balance conservation and economic goals. Ecological aspects in HCV management are applicable for business ventures under ISPO certification for plantation sector. Additionally, such balance will also be achieved through jurisdictional management tools to ensure compliance with “no-deforestation and no-fire� principles. Capacity for conflict resolution and FGRM will contribute to achieving optimal partnerships. 2.3 COMPONENT 3: PROJECT MANAGEMENT, MONITORING AND EVALUATION, AND REPORTING This component envisages overall management of the J-SLMP implementation, and highlights the roles shared among stakeholders in sustainable forest management. Due to the variation of activities and multi-stakeholder involvements, benefit sharing mechanism as incentive scheme needs to be considered. Effective and efficient management of project activities become the backbone for the success of future ERP implementation, which J-SLMP seeks to support. Management, monitoring and evaluation applies to multi-stakeholder operations under the project and the future ERP. Under public-private partnership mechanism, monitoring and evaluation system needs to be transparent and accessible to all stakeholders. This component will finance activities related to national and provincial �level project coordination and management, particularly to achieve the project’s objectives, including AWPB; fiduciary aspects (FM and procurement); human resource management; safeguards compliance monitoring; M&E; knowledge management and sharing; and implementation of strategies for communication and stakeholder engagement. Funds will cover a portion of the costs for the PIUs/PMUs’ contractual staff, and operations and maintenance costs, such as office space rental charges, vehicles and fuel, and office equipment, among others. It will also finance the costs of Project supervision and oversight provided by the National Steering Committee, Provincial Task Force, and Project Preparation Team, as well as other Project administration expenses. Project management and subsequent monitoring will refer to how J-SLMP contributes to addressing the drivers and underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation and how the project supports enabling environments for the future ERP (refer to Figure 3). ESMF Document – Jambi 24 Figure 3 Relationship between Main Drivers of Deforestation and Degradations with J-SLMP Components Consultation process will be undertaken to discuss how J-SLMP support the ERP preparation and future implementation, including how the project contributes to addressing the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. Key aspects to consider during project monitoring and evaluation include overseeing environmental and social risks that may emerge during J-SLMP implementation, which will be expected to overlap with the future ERP operation. ESMF Document – Jambi 25 3.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS GOVERNMENT OF INDONESIA REGULATIONS Activities under the J-SLMP and future ERP should adopt sustainable development principles, including environmental, social, cultural and economic considerations, consistent with applicable national and regional regulations. This ESMF document adopt the Government of Indonesia’s (GOI) laws and regulations to the extent that they are in compliance with the World Bank Policies on Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01), Natural Habitats (OP 4.04), Pest Management (OP 4.09), Indigenous Peoples (OP 4.10), Physical Cultural Resources (OP 4.11), Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12) and Forests (OP 4.36). Specific provisions are described in the ESMF to address any aspect of the Bank policies that are not fully addressed through GOI’s laws and regulations. Applicable National and Regional regulations for the ERP related to environmental and social aspects are outlined as follows: ▪ Law No. 6/2014 on Villages. This law has significant implications for the forestry sector by expanding the authority of villages to manage their own assets and natural resources, revenue and administration. It specifically reallocates a specific portion of the state budget to village administrations, providing all of Indonesia’s villages with annual discretionary funding for making local improvements that support poverty alleviation, health, education and infrastructure development. ▪ Law No. 23/2014 on Regional Governance. This law effectively weakens Indonesia’s system of regional autonomy by withdrawing authority over natural resource management (including forestry) from district and city governments and shifts it to provincial and national-level governments. ▪ Law No. 18/2013 on the Prevention and Eradication of Forest Degradation. This regulation strengthens law enforcement by providing additional legal certainty and defining the penalties for those engaged in forest destruction. It clearly defines which activities are banned, on the part of individuals and organised groups who are complicit in illegal logging activities, as well as organisations involved in the illegal timber trade and officials engaged in the falsification of permits. ▪ Law No. 32/2009 concerning Environmental Management and Protection. For the government executing agency (National and Regional levels), this Law provides the mandate for the Provinces and Districts to develop a Strategic Environmental Assessment, which will guide regional spatial planning for development. This Law also requires any development program by private sector to implement proper environmental and social considerations, including environmental assessment, management planning and monitoring; ▪ Law No. 26/2007 concerning Spatial Planning. It amends Law No. 24/1992 (Spatial Planning Act) in the context of decentralization, urbanization and other factors. It grants authority over spatial planning to provincial governments ( pemerintah provinsi) and district governments (pemerintah kabupaten and pemerintah kota). Provision of this authority is not stipulated within previous spatial planning laws. It also provides some new ways for enhancing development control including zoning, planning permits and implementation of incentives and disincentives, ESMF Document – Jambi 26 including administration and criminal sanction. Law No. 26/2007 also acknowledges the importance of public participation in spatial planning. ▪ Law No. 41/1999 on Forestry. The 1999 Law includes some conservation-oriented policies. It divides forests into three categories: Conservation Forests, Protection Forests and Production Forests. It also empowers the Ministry of Forestry to determine and manage Indonesia’s Kawasan Hutan (National Forest Estate); ▪ Government Regulation (PP) No. 24/2018 on Electronic Integrated Permitting Services (OSS); ▪ Ministry of Agrarian and Spatial Plan/Head of National Land Agency No. 6/2018 on a Complete and Systematic Land Registration (PTSL); ▪ Presidential Regulation No. 88/2017 on Resolution of Land Conflict within Forest Area (PPTKH); ▪ Government Regulation (PP) No. 46/2016 on Guidelines on Implementing Strategic Environmental Assessment; ▪ Ministry of Environment and Forestry Regulation No. 83/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.1/10/2016 on Social Forestry; ▪ Ministry of Environment and Forestry Regulation No. P.84/Menlhk-Setjen/2015 concerning Tenurial Conflict Management within Forest Area (PPTKH). This regulation was enacted to support settlements of land occupancies, including conflicts within forest areas, by way of a joint taskforce involving ATR/BPN, MoEF, and MoHA under coordination of the Coordinating Ministry of Economic Affairs (CMEA); ▪ Government Regulation (PP) No. 27/2012 concerning Environmental Permit, and Regulation of the Minister of Environment No. 16/2012 concerning Guidelines for Preparing Environmental Documents (AMDAL, UKL/UPL, and SPPL); ▪ Other applicable environmental standards such as water quality, air quality and erosion control. The J-SLMP and future ERP activities will potentially involve and impact Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and should provide benefits to and manage impacts on Indigenous Peoples (IPs). Government of Indonesia’s policy on Indigenous Peoples includes: ▪ The 1945 Constitution (Amendment) Article 18, clause #2 and Chapter 281 clause #3. Article 18B(2) (second amendment) states that “The state recognises and respects indigenous peoples and their traditional rights providing these still exist and are in accordance with the development of the people and the principles of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, which shall be regulated by law.� Article 28I(3) (second amendment) states that “The cultural identities and rights of traditional communities shall be respected in accordance with the development of the times and civilization.�; ▪ Law 6/2014 on Villages gives local communities the opportunity to propose becoming an indigenous village (desa Adat), with substantial opportunities to self-govern based on traditional laws and customs. Article 76 makes specific reference to communal land (tanah ulayat) as a village asset if a village has been legally recognised as an Adat village by district or provincial legislation; ESMF Document – Jambi 27 ▪ Law 39/2014 on Plantation Development, Article 12(1) states that, “In the case of land require for plantation businesses, companies must consult indigenous land rights holders to obtain agreement on the delivery of land and compensation�.� Article 17(1) states that “The relevant authorities are prohibited from issuing plantation permits over the land of indigenous communities.� Article 55(b) states that “[Individuals are prohibited from] working, using, occupying and/or controlling public land or the land of indigenous peoples for the purpose of conducting a plantation business.� Article 103 states that “Any officer who issues a plantation permit over land with indigenous rights holders […] shall be punished with imprisonment of five years or a fine of IDR 5 billion.�; ▪ Law No. 41 on Forestry amended through the Constitutional Court Decision No. 35/PUU- X/2012. The Constitutional Court ruled that Adat forests are not part of the state forest (Kawasan Hutan). This Court decision modified the sub-classification of what was known as forest areas as Titled Forests (Hutan Hak) and State Forests (including concessions, and village forest programs as Hutan Desa and Hutan Hak–those areas held by Adat communities). This decision further implied that Adat forests, wherever legally recognised, would be assumed to be collectively owned forests of Indigenous Peoples and Adat communities (i.e., part of the Titled Forests category); ▪ Law 5/1960 on Basic Agrarian Principles (BAL). It recognises Adat law as the law that is most relevant to most Indonesians and the basis of Indonesian land law, thus reversing the dualism of western versus Adat laws, which is specifically cited as undermining legal certainty; ▪ Presidential Decree (Keppres) No. 111/1999 concerning Development of Isolated Indigenous Community (KAT), which provides a broad definition of Indigenous Peoples and the need for government assistance; ▪ Regulation of the Minister of Land Agency and Spatial Development No. 9/2015 on the Procedures to Establish the Land Communal rights on the MHA Land and Community Living in the Special Area (non-forest estates); ▪ Provincial Regulation (PERDA) No. 7/2013, PERDA No. 2/2014 and PERDA No. 8/2016 all concerning the recognition of customary communities ( Masyarakat Hukum Adat), including Marga Serampas. ▪ MOHA Regulation No. 52/2014 on the Guidelines on the Recognition and Protection of MHA (Masyarakat Hukum Adat); ▪ In addition, there are two bills that are yet to be passed, including the one on the recognition and protection of the rights of Customary Law Communities ( Masyarakat Hukum Adat) and Land Law. The above regulations will support the J-SLMP and future ERP, and no contradictions are foreseen in the regulatory framework. Implementation on Presidential Regulation No. 88/2017 must be carefully planned and implemented, so the approach involving modification of forest areas (e.g., into other use areas) and Agrarian Reform policy (Tanah Obyek Reforma Agrarian/TORA) will not cause deforestation or land degradation. Additionally, Constitutional Court Ruling (Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi/MK) No. 35/2012 should be interpreted responsibly, so it does not provoke massive land claims within forest areas. These challenges are discussed further in Chapter 4.0 (this document). ESMF Document – Jambi 28 WORLD BANK SAFEGUARDS POLICIES The operational Policies (OP) for safeguards that are relevant to the ERP are summarized as follow. OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment The World Bank requires environmental assessment (EA) of projects proposed for Bank financing to help ensure they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and that potentially affected people have been properly consulted. The policy describes the objectives and recommended procedures and instruments for its implementation. This policy is considered to be the umbrella policy for the Bank's environmental safeguards. J-SLMP is expected to generate mainly positive environmental and social outcomes, as it is designed to improve land governance, increase capacity and seek to reduce emission level from plantation and forestry sectors. This project also provides sustainable and low carbon emission livelihood. However, potential adverse environmental and social impacts are expected for all components. Consequently, proposed activities under these components will have to go through negative and preliminary screening to identify potential impacts and safeguards requirements. The screening process consists of: ▪ Screening against the Negative List (Annex 1). This list was established as the first screening process to ensure that the activities do not contribute to escalating the drivers for deforestation and forest degradation. Additionally, any activities not aligned with GOI regulations and those with potential adverse impacts will not be supported; ▪ Screening against the Environmental and Social Risks (Annex 2) to assess potential risks of eligible activities and local capacity to manage such risks; ▪ Preparation of an Environmental and Social Management Plan as one of the safeguard instruments that provides key measures needed to manage environmental and social aspects of the project; and ▪ Compliance with an Environmental Code of Practices (ECOPs) that has been prepared to guide implementing units on how to prevent and/or minimise impacts/risks to the environment and human health (Annex 3). The ECOPs will be used as basic standards for the development of risk mitigation action plans (e.g., ESMPs, environmental permit [UKL/UPL], SPPLs) as needed, and contains provisions for a range of sectors relevant for the ERP, including agroforestry, home-based industry, farming, fisheries, seedling and community timber/social forestry activities, and ecotourism. OP 4.04 Natural Habitats The Natural Habitat Policy is triggered because some of the activities in Component 1 and 2 may have impacts on natural habitats such as agroforestry/social forestry, land use management, Non-Timber Forest Product (NTFP) harvesting, timber sub-projects, etc. The projects will not support initiatives that would potentially lead to conversion and/or degradation of critical or non-critical natural habitats and conversion of habitat of the endangered species. The ESMF includes measures to promote sound management of natural resources, natural habitats as well as conservation of endangered species. Project activities will strive to promote good practices in forest management, including innovative ideas to protect environmentally sensitive habitats and enhance the project’s positive impacts on the environment. Efforts for the identification of natural habitats will be done through existing safeguard ESMF Document – Jambi 29 mechanism such as High Conservation Value (HCV) studies that are commonly carried out for natural resource management programs. OP 4.09 Pest Management The Pest Management policy is triggered as proposed activities (Component 1 and 2) may lead to acquisition, use and disposal of small quantities of pesticides (for short term use). The project will not procure or use pesticides and chemical fertilizers that are classified as IA or IB by WHO and GOI’s regulations. J-SLMP and future ERP will encourage use of organic fertilizers for activities related to agriculture and agroforestry. However, since small quantities of eligible pesticides may be procured and used, the project will screen at the project level and when justified, assess the subsequent potential environmental and social impacts. The project will not finance any pesticide without clear guidance and monitoring of safeguard specialists nor without targeted training on use, storage and disposal or without the right equipment and installations necessary for the products to be used safely and appropriately. The ESMF has incorporated an IPM guidance note (Annex 4) and Environmental Code of Practice (Annex 3) that every activity involving uses of pesticides or pest management is required to adopt. OP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples OP 4.10 is triggered since the activities under J-SLMP will be implemented in areas claimed by communities who can be categorized as Indigenous Peoples as per-OP 4.105 and therefore, may have impact on their claims and access to land and natural resources. Furthermore, some of the J-SLMP activities under the project may also be implemented in areas where there is co-existence between Indigenous Peoples and Adat communities, and therefore, it is important to establish a robust community engagement strategy as well as fair benefit sharing processes to maintain stakeholders’ traction and buy-in to the project activities. The project must be implemented in a culturally and socially appropriate manner when implementation concerns with Indigenous Peoples based on the principles of free, prior and informed consultations. J-SLMP communication and community engagement strategy must also ensure that target communities have a full and complete understanding of the initiatives proposed. The ESMF applies to all communities with Indigenous Peoples characteristics 6 regardless of the presence of legal recognition. Therefore, the provisions of the OP 4.10 apply to address potential risks and protect the rights of these groups during J-SLMP implementation. Application of the ESMF will not be conditional upon Adat recognition and therefore, will allow broader groups participating in J-SLMP and future ERP, including other communities who possess 5 These criteria include a) self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition of this identity by others; b) collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the project area and to the natural resources in these habitats and territories; c) customary cultural, economic, social or political institutions that are separate from those of the dominant society and culture; and d) an indigenous language, often different from the official language of the country or region. 6 In conjunction with OP 4.10, the term Indigenous Peoples in this document is used in a generic sense to refer to a distinct, vulnerable, social and cultural groups with the following characteristics in varying degrees: a) self- identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition of this identity by others; b) collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the project area(s) and to the natural resources in these habitats and territories; c) customary, cultural, economic, social or political institutions that are separate from those of the dominant society and culture; and d) an indigenous language, often different from the official language of the country or region. ESMF Document – Jambi 30 characteristics as per-OP 4.10. Requirements for screening and free, prior and informed consultations to obtain broad community support will be applicable prior to implementation of J-SLMP activities where Indigenous Peoples’ claims exist. Recognizing possible constraints that Adat communities may face in participating in project activities, facilitation and engagement with Adat communities will need to be tailored to enable these communities to benefit from the project. In circumstances, where ERP activities may result in restricting the access of indigenous peoples to land use and resources, a Process Framework (PF) is provided by the ESMF to address such risk. The purpose of the PF is to establish a consultative process by which communities potentially affected by restrictions on land and natural resources for conservation and protection purposes can engage in informed and meaningful consultations and negotiations to identify and implement means to mitigate impacts of access restrictions. The PF will be strongly tied to the ongoing GOI’s program on Social Forestry and the broader Agrarian Reform Program, which are expected to benefit landless poor communities within and/or surrounded by forest areas. OP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources Physical cultural resources include movable and immovable objects, sites, buildings, and a group of buildings, natural facilities and landscapes that have archaeological, paleontological, historical, architectural, religious, aesthetic significance or other cultural properties. The policy is triggered since proposed sub-project activities may have impacts on the use of and access to sites with potential cultural significance. This may be relevant with Component 1 and 2 with the sub-components and/or activities. Studies of Jambi report several important physical and cultural sites and/or kingdoms such as the megalithic artifacts in Kerinci District, Geopark in Merangin, Kerinci Lakes (Kaco, Duo, Nyalo, Lingkat, Kerinci, Gunung Tujuh), Merangin Lakes (Pauh Depati IV) and Temple complex in Muaro Jambi. Given the monarchy and colonial history of Jambi, undiscovered cultural sites are anticipated and as such it is considered that J-SLMP efforts of improving spatial planning and sustainable alternatives for communities may have potential impacts to the physical and cultural resources in Jambi. OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement OP 4.12 is triggered when there is a possibility that J-SLMP activities may result in access restrictions or restrictions of land use amongst forest dependent communities, including Indigenous Peoples as a result of formalizing forest boundaries and zones within FMUs. The project will not require land acquisition, which would result in direct involuntary resettlement and/or livelihoods displacement. However, there may be residual risks of revocation of claims as a result of tenure regularization and/or conflict resolution, which may result in resettlement or livelihoods displacement. Such risks have been assessed as remote as the GOI seeks to adopt participatory dispute settlements through mediation and non-litigation approaches to address tenure issues. Land and forest tenurial conflicts have been and will continue to be a major concern for the overall social management of J-SLMP and future ERP operation. Such conflicts often involve Adat communities who have claims before establishment of Forest Areas ( Kawasan Hutan) and issuance of forest concessions. Since 2012, Indonesia has mobilized significant efforts to identify existing tenurial conflict and other land-use and forestry related conflicts, as well as develop relevant policies and regulatory frameworks. J-SLMP will take into account an indicative tenurial conflict map that the GOI has developed, with an inventory of 201 conflicts, mostly in Sumatera (60.7 percent) and Kalimantan (16.4 ESMF Document – Jambi 31 percent). Such identification is currently on-going to further identify tenurial conflicts in forest areas through a joint assessment between the Government and communities, including Adat communities and identify ways forward to settle conflicts through consensus. The ESMF developed under J-SLMP has incorporated a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) and Process Framework (PF) to mitigate potential resettlement and access restriction risks resulting from forest tenure settlements and boundary demarcation supported by project activities. These RPF and PF have been developed in conjunction with the current GOI’s frameworks on forest tenure settlements,7 and will seek to address any gaps, particularly with regards to free, prior and informed consultations with affected parties, compensation and livelihoods restoration. The RPF and PF are appended as a separate Annex (Annex 9) to the ESMF. OP 4.36 Forests The Bank's current forests policy aims to reduce deforestation, enhance the environmental contribution of forested areas, promote afforestation, reduce poverty and encourage economic development. Key activities under J-SLMP may bring about changes in the management; protection and/or utilisation of natural forests (e.g., support for NTFP and timber sub-projects). J-SLMP is expected to bring positive impacts on forest ecosystems through promotion of forest conservation, sustainable livelihoods, restoration of degraded lands and protection and enhancement of ecosystem services and biodiversity. Conversion of primary forests is included in the negative list, and is therefore, strictly prohibited. The ESMP will outline key strategies to promote sustainable use of forest and mitigation of impacts and risks if the project activities are implemented and/or affect forest areas such as, but not limited to, forest restoration, plantations, non-timber forest products collection/processing and agro-forestry activities. The ESMF includes code of practice for community timber activities. The ERP may support harvesting operations conducted by small-scale landholders and/or by local communities under a community forest scheme if such operations have achieved an acceptable standard of forest management developed with meaningful participation of locally affected communities, consistent with the principles and criteria of responsible forest management as outlined in the ESMF. INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS Implementation of ESMF in the ERP will assigned to the following levels of governance: • National level policies (forest and protected areas): Policies mainly fall under the jurisdiction of MoEF. Policies are related to forest area designation, issuance of licenses, moratorium on licenses (PIPPIB), moratorium on peatlands, agrarian reform (TORA), social forestry and environmental partnership mechanisms. The policy of the Ministry of Home Affairs is relevant to national policy on recognition of customary community (MHA); • National level policies (other use areas/APL): Policies related to land allocation validation falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Agrarian and Spatial Planning. Authorities for this ministry are mandated to offices at the provincial level (Kantor Wilayah/Kanwil) and at the district level ( Kantor Pertanahan); 7 The refinement of community based conflict handling mechanisms will be conducted with adherence to relevant regulatory frameworks for addressing tenurial conflict are, among others, Law No. 7/2012 on social conflict management, MoEF Ministerial Regulation No P.32/Menhut-Setjen/2015 on Forestry Rights, MoEF Ministerial Regulation No. 84/Menlhk- Setjen/2015 on Forestry Tenurial Conflict Handling, MoEF Ministerial Regulation No. 83/Menlhk-Setjen/2016 on Social Forestry, MoEF Ministerial Regulation No. 34/Menlhk-Setjen/2017 on the protection of local wisdom in natural resources and environmental management. MoEF Ministerial Regulation No. 83/Menlhk-Setjen/2016 on Social Forestry. ESMF Document – Jambi 32 • Provincial level policies: BAPPEDA plays an important role in ensuring synergy between forestry and plantation sectors. Policies on forest management fall under the jurisdiction of the Forestry Agency, while grass root implementation is administered through the FMUs (KPH). Kesbangpol (National Unity and Political Stability Agency) and Infokom (Information and Communication Agency) can potentially serve as support for provincial level policies, especially on FGRM implementation. The Joint Secretariat on Forest Resource Management (SEKBER) is not a regulatory instrument but is essential in supporting the BAPPEDA and Forestry Agency, thus playing a crucial role the implementation of the ERP in Jambi Province. Capacity gaps include the lack of capacity for FGRM, conflict resolution, and FREL, MRV and HCV assessment and management; and • District level policies: BAPPEDA plays an important role in the recognizing customary ( Adat) communities and in ensuring proper implementation of ER at the grass root level. The District Agency for Village Empowerment and Development ( Dinas Pemberdayaan Masyarakat dan Pemerintahan Desa/DPMPD) is essential in ensuring policies for channelling funds to the villages under the village fund (Dana Desa/DD) and village fund allocation ( Alokasi Dana Desa/ADD) from provincial and national government authorities. These institutions have the capacity to support provincial policies on FGRM, conflict resolution and HCV assessment and management. Recent changes in forestry regulations (e.g., social forestry, indigenous people/customary access, environmental partnerships) and in ERP requirements, such as FPIC, FREL and MRV, mean that a new approach at national and sub-national levels is required. These new regulations and requirements may not be familiar to government officials at national and sub-national levels; therefore, relevant capacity building sessions may need to be conducted. However, the most important aspect, in light of the new developments, is the need to establish collaboration with NGOs. Such collaboration would allow knowledge sharing between government and non-government organisations. GAP ANALYSIS8 Overall there are no significant gaps between Indonesian safeguards and the World Bank safeguards policies. A gap analysis was used to provide guidance for the development of ESMF, including gap filling measures towards compliance with applicable World Bank’s safeguards policies . The ESMF highlights the need to strengthen the existing safeguards related to indigenous peoples, grievance mechanism, access to forest resources, and environmental and social management and monitoring. Among the environmental and social risks, Indigenous Peoples and Involuntary Resettlement are one of the important aspects that needs to be emphasized in the J-SLMP design. Development of Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF) and Process Framework (PF) and ensuring inclusion into other management plan is crucial to ensure that the J-SLMP complies with the World Bank safeguard policies. The following Table 2 describes the gaps analysis exercise of the key consideration issues of the ER activities and how mitigation measures are built into the ESMF. 8 This section is also complemented by similar analyses in the SESA (see Table 26) and Section 5.1 of ESMF. More analysis will be provided in this section for final report. ESMF Document – Jambi 33 Table 2 Summary of gap analysis of key considerations ASPECT WORLD BANK POLICY INDONESIAN REGULATION GAP ESMF ROLE OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment Environmental OP 4.01 Paragraph 1 specifies Environmental and social assessments are No gap. While UKL-UPL Environmental assessment Assessment that projects funded by the World conducted through the AMDAL process in (according to AMDAL refers to the Indonesian Bank require an environmental accordance with the Ministry of Environment regulation) is based on Regulations that require the assessment. Regulation No. 5/2012 on business activities threshold values, this value has development of environmental mandatory to have AMDAL. already taken into documents according to the The assessment is also regulated by Government consideration the nature and results of screening (Annex 6). Regulation No. 27/2012 concerning scale of the impacts. This is in UKL-UPL assessments are Environmental Permit, where each business line with environmental expected to be required for the and/or activity (project) plan mandates an assessment of the Bank Policy nature and scale of the ERP Environmental Permit if an AMDAL or UKL-UPL which is based on nature and activities. assessment is required scale of the impact. Environmental OP 4.01 Paragraph 8 states that a Based on Minister of Environment Regulation No The screening process of the ESMF provides negative list Screening screening process is required to 5/2012, Appendix 1, a screening of potential regulation does not consider and preliminary screening determine the scale/scope of the impacts is conducted to determine the type of social impacts due to land process for ER activities that project and the type of environmental documents required (AMDAL/UKL- acquisition/involuntary include identification of potential environmental assessment UPL/SPPL) based on criteria described in the resettlement, including access impact towards involuntary required. regulation. restrictions, potential impacts resettlement/access restriction, on Indigenous Peoples and indigenous peoples, and physical cultural resources. In physical cultural resources. the context of land acquistion, (Annex 1 and 2) such screening is undertaken as part of the land acquisition planning processes (under Law 2/2012 on Land Acquisition for Public Interest). There may be lack of capacity for addressing environmental and social risks identified in this screening process ESMF Document – Jambi 34 ASPECT WORLD BANK POLICY INDONESIAN REGULATION GAP ESMF ROLE Management OP 4.01 Environmental Environmental and social assessments are The management and The ESMF strengthens the of Assessment conducted through the AMDAL process in monitoring plan developed AMDAL/UKL-UPL system by environmental accordance with the Ministry of Environment through the AMDAL/UKL-UPL providing specific and social Regulation No. 5/2012 on business activities process, in general, supports Environmental Codes of impacts mandatory to have AMDAL. the Bank requirement although Practices (ECOPs) for ER The assessment is also regulated by Government for the management of social activities such as agroforestry, Regulation No. 27/2012 concerning aspects which are not aquaculture and ecotourism. Environmental Permit, where each business sufficiently detailed in the The ESMF, and its associated and/or activity (project) plan mandates an regulations (i.e., livelihoods frameworks, including IPPF, Environmental Permit if an AMDAL or UKL-UPL impacts both direct and RPF/PF and FGRM provide assessment is required indirect, impacts on vulnerable guideline for the management groups). of social aspects of the project Capacity strengthening for (Annex 3). sustainable management of environmental and social impacts is likely needed amongst FMUs, private companies and smallholder farmers (villages). There is no integrated system of conflict resolution across sectors in Jambi. Scope OP 4.01 Environmental Under Indonesian System, the scope of EA Under the GOI regulation, the The SESA process will serve as Assessment consists of: (1) Project announcement to the AMDAL, UKL-UPL and/or a plaform for broader public For Category A projects, ESIA public and inputs received; (2) Preparation of SPPL is not required or limited consultations and engagement TORs is required, and scoping TOR; (3) EA studies; (4) EA review by EA to assessing associated on environmental and social and consultation are conducted for committee; (5) Environmental permit or rejection facilities, ancillary facilities, aspects of the ERP. the preparation of the TORs for the of EA (no permit). induced impacts and site EA report. selection analysis. Consultations are required only for the Terms of Reference and AMDAL panel. ESMF Document – Jambi 35 ASPECT WORLD BANK POLICY INDONESIAN REGULATION GAP ESMF ROLE Public OP 4.01 Environmental Under Indonesian regulation (Law No. 32/2009 By regulation, public ESMF will strengthen public Consultation Assessment on Protection and Management of the consultations for environmental consultations especially through - During EA process, the Borrower Environment and Ministry of Environment permitting is only required the the FPIC process. Project consults project affected groups Regulation No. 17/2012 on Community Terms of Reference and activities expected to be and local NGOs about the Involvement in ES and Environmental Permit AMDAL panel. No operational implemented during the pre- project’s environmental aspects Process, at least there are three levels of public guidelines on public investment grant, and hence and takes their views into involvement and consultation processes: (1) consultations for land there will be resources for such account. Announcement of proposed project/activity in the acquisition. In practice, the consultations. RBP will not - For Category A projects, the media or other means before ToR is prepared; quality of public consultations involved activities under Borrower consults these groups (2) Consultation process where the responsible vary and at times will need to category A of the bank policy on at least twice: (a) shortly after agencies receive inputs from public through one be improved to enhance their EA or that require full EA under environmental screening and or two ways communication (meeting, interview, accessibility and inclusiveness. Indonesian Law. before the TORs for the EA are etc); and (3) Public involvement in the EA finalized; and (b) once a draft EA committee to assess and approve the results of report is prepared. In addition, the EA studies, usually represented by independent Borrower consults with such experts from university and representatives of groups throughout project environmental NGO and/or community figures. implementation as necessary to address EA-related issues that affect them. For Category B project at least one public consultation needs to be conducted. - For meaningful consultations, the Borrower provides relevant project documents in a timely manner prior to consultation in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to the group being consulted. - Minutes of the public meetings are included in the reports. Grievance OP 4.01 Environmental Ministry of Environment and Forestry No. P.83 There is no specific mechanism The ESMF provides a mechanism Assessment Year 2018 regarding Guidelines on Working for managing and resolving Feedback and Redress ESMF Document – Jambi 36 ASPECT WORLD BANK POLICY INDONESIAN REGULATION GAP ESMF ROLE OP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples Arrangements for Law Enforcement on grievances related to ER Grievance Mechanism (FGRM) Environment and Forestry Aspects at Regional activities. for managing and resolving Level. grievances related to Ministry of Environment and Forestry No. implementation of ER activities P.22/2017 regarding Management of Grievances (Annex 7). related to Indications of Pollution and/or Environmental Damage and/or Harm to Forests. OP 4.09 Pest Management and OP 4.36 Forest Possible OP 4.09 avoidance of using Laws and regulation are in place on regulating Formulation and The ESMF provides guideline contamination harmful pesticides. A preferred harmful pesticides and their usage. implementation of pest on establishing an integrated to soil and solution is to use Integrated Pest management plans are not pest management plan for the water as Management (IPM) techniques specifically required by the law. ER activity base on best result of pest OP 4.36 aims to reduce Additionally, contamination to international practices (Annex management deforestation, enhance the soil and water is also relevant 4). practices environmental contribution of with artisanal / illegal mining forested areas, promote activities. afforestation, reduce poverty and encourage economic development OP 4.04 Natural Habitats Possible loss OP 4.04 promotes and supports Laws and regulations are in place on protection There is no specific regulation The ESMF provides guideline of natural natural habitat conservation and of forests, threatened and endangered species at on assessing natural habitats for the development of a habitats and improved land use by the national and provincial levels. and key biodiversity areas. management framework for biodiversity conservation of natural habitats High conservation values have biodiversity through HCV and the maintenance of ecological been identified for non-forest studies developed by FSC functions. designated lands. (Annex 5) to identify and There is no effective strategy to manage natural habitats and halt massive encroachment key biodiversity areas. into the national park. OP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples and Adat Land ESMF Document – Jambi 37 ASPECT WORLD BANK POLICY INDONESIAN REGULATION GAP ESMF ROLE Potential The policy on indigenous peoples Masyarakat Hukum Adat is recognised by the The analysis provided in the J-SLMP supports tenure impacts on underscores the requirement to constitution (article 18) SESA document identified recognition for Adat Indigenous identify indigenous peoples, Adat land rights stipulated in Forestry Law No. overlapping areas between communities. The ESMF Peoples consult with them, ensure that 41/1999 and Ministry of Home Affairs No. Adat land and forest and consists of an IPPF to guide they participate in and benefit 54/2014. plantation concessions (Palm engagement and management from Bank-funded projects in a Oil), which suggests potential of risks and impacts on Jambi Government has issued a Provincial culturally appropriate way–and, risks (e.g., tenurial conflicts and Indigenous Peoples (Annex 8). Regulation on the Guidelines for the Recognition that adverse impacts on them are access restrictions following of Masyarakat Hukum Adat in Jambi (Provincial avoided, or where not feasible, improved forest management). Regulation No. 1/2015) minimised or mitigated The realization of Hutan Adat rights is not a clear-cut process. Before the MoEF can transfer Hutan Adat rights to communities, Masyarakat Hukum Adat need to be recognised by their regional governments, either at the level of district or province. OP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources Impacts on OP 4.11 Physical Cultural Law No. 11/2010 on Cultural Heritage states that The law is in accordance with The ESMF provides a physical Resources. Identify and mitigate cultural heritage needs to be preserved and OP 4.11, however cultural sites framework for preserving and cultural potential impact towards physical protected. These sites are recognised by the that have not been recognised reporting unexpected discovery resources cultural resources for each sub- government through issuance of a decree. by the government, but have of physical cultural resources project. cultural values need to be (Annex 10) preserved by the ERP (e.g., Megalithic artifact in Kerinci and Geopark in Merangin). Before the MoEF can transfer Hutan Adat rights to communities, Masyarakat Hukum Adat need to be recognised by their regional ESMF Document – Jambi 38 ASPECT WORLD BANK POLICY INDONESIAN REGULATION GAP ESMF ROLE governments, either at the level of district or province OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement and Access Restriction Involuntary Involuntary Resettlement is The GOI’s framework for handling tenure Social forestry is considered as The ESMF contains an RPF resettlement triggered in situations involving settlements in Forest Areas (PPTKH) is set out in the GOI’s Process Framework and PF to clearly define the and/or access involuntary taking of land and the Presidential Regulation No. 88/2017. Several to provide forest dependent requirements, approach and restrictions involuntary restrictions of access measures to address forest occupation and/or communities access to land guideline for addressing to legally designated parks and encroachments are informed by the functions of and natural resources for potential access restrictions and protected areas. The policy aims the forest estates concerned (i.e. conservation, livelihoods. However, there is involuntary resettlement in to avoid involuntary resettlement protection and production). lack of clearly and formally conjuction with OP 4.12 (Annex to the extent feasible, or to Under the Agrarian Reform Program, the GOI is recognised rights to customary 9). minimise and mitigate its adverse committed to protecting the rights of the poor, forest areas resulting in the social and economic impacts. including informal occupants within the forest overlap of commercial land use estates (Kawasan Hutan). licenses with customary lands, often resulting in conflicts or dispossession, or both. ESMF Document – Jambi 39 OTHER PROJECTS AND PROJECT SAFEGUARDS There are three World Bank financed projects currently being implemented in Jambi Province which can potentially complement J-SLMP. These include: • Forest Investment Project (FIP) 2: Promoting Sustainable Community Based Natural Resource Management and Institutional Development. The project is currently being implemented in KPH Kendilo. The project is designed to support and strengthen the national effort to achieve REDD+ objectives by decentralizing forest management through the operationalization of Forest Management Units (or KPH) to manage forest areas. The Project aims to create the enabling conditions and capacity for management practices that are aligned to local conditions and effectively reverses the trend of deforestation and forest degradation. The Project has been classified as Category B by the WB, with seven WB safeguards policies triggered: OP 4.01 on Environmental Assessment, OP 4.04 on Natural Habitats, OP 4.36 on Forests, OP 4.11 on Physical Cultural Resources, OP 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples, OP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement, and OP 4.09 on Integrated Pest. An ESMF was developed and approved by the World Bank during project preparation and is currently under implementation. • Dedicated Grant Mechanism Indonesia (DGM). The project aims to improve participation of indigenous people and local community (IPLCs) capacity to engage in tenure security processes and livelihood opportunities from sustainable management of forest and land. DGMI provides small grants to CBOs/CSOs to build the capacity of participating IPLCs to pursue: (i) Clarity and security over their rights to land (including forest land) in rural areas, and (ii) Improved livelihoods. The project is a Category B under the World Bank OP 4.01 and is not anticipated to create adverse E&S impacts. The project triggered six World Bank safeguards policies including OP 4:01 Environmental assessment, OP 4.04 Natural habitats, OP 4.36 Forests, OP 4.11 Physical cultural resources, OP 4.10 Indigenous peoples, and OP 4:09 Pest management. Similar to the FIP 2, an ESMF was developed and approved by the World Bank during project preparation and is currently under implementation. • Program to Accelerate the Agrarian Reform/One Map. The objective of the project would be to establish clarity on actual land use and land rights at the village level in the target areas through the accelerated implementation of Agrarian Reform and One Map Policy. This would enhance sustainable landscape management, land governance, social stability, access to land for investments, inclusive growth, conflict resolution and environmental protection and conservation. This would also include positive benefits to climate change adaptation and mitigation. The project would target programs in the provinces of Sumatra (Riau, Jambi and South Sumatra) and Kalimantan (East, Central, West and South). The project triggered the following World Bank Safeguards Policies, including Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01), Forests (OP/BP 4.36), Pest Management (OP/BP 4.09) and Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10). Since the ESMFs for the projects above have been approved by the World Bank and aligned with the required E&S measures under the ESMF for the J-SLMP and future ERP in Jambi, safeguards compliance for the other World Bank’s projects in Indonesia will therefore remain under the purview of respective project implementing agencies. The World Bank, as financier and/or administrator of these activities, will be responsible for reviewing and clearing the safeguard instruments under each of the above operations, for ensuring that those instruments are consistent with the ESMF for the J-SLMP, and for ensuring the compliance of the respective activities with the project safeguard instruments through periodic supervision. Necessary coordination and collaboration will be made with relevant implementing agencies under leadership and coordination from the DGCC and Jambi Development Planning Bureau (BAPPEDA) during the project implementation. ESMF Document – Jambi 40 4.0 ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES A list of sub-components and activities with potential environmental and social risks that are expected to be implemented within J-SLMP is provided in Annex 12. These areas are responsive to the priority areas of support identified during several public consultation sessions with indigenous peoples, local communities and other relevant stakeholders undertaken during the SESA process. The preliminary assessment matrix in Annex 12 also provides the proposed mitigation measures for the identified risks and proposed responsible agencies. The summary of environmental and social risks was derived based on the baseline conditions presented in the SESA document. A summary of the biodiversity and critical land and watershed conditions is provided below to provide an overall context on environmental risks. BASELINE CONDITION Forest Cover and Land Condition The condition of forest cover, degraded land and agricultural land inside FMUs in Jambi is presented in the following Table 3. The scenario for J-SLMP will focus on areas under management units that still have high forest cover9, areas with low level of land use conflicts and areas of peat soil. Table 3 Forest Cover, Degraded Land and Agricultural Land in FMUs in Jambi in 2017 Agricultural Degraded Forested Grand FMUs land10 land11 area12 Total KPHP Batang Hari Unit XI dan XII 28,634 24,556 24,592 77,782 KPHP Bungo Unti II dan III 4,660 31,751 63,146 99,557 KPHP Kerinci Unit I 5,133 2,934 7,254 15,321 KPHP Limau Unit VII Sorolangun 7,895 5,884 91,963 105,741 KPHP Merangin Unit IV, V, VI 18,509 40,569 99,429 158,507 KPHP Muara Jambi Unit XIII 402 40,740 30,205 71,347 KPHP Tanjung Jabung barat Unit XV, XVI dan KPHL U* 20,608 50,249 41,861 112,717 KPHP Tanjung Jabung Timur Unit XIV 4,451 24,701 12,325 41,477 KPHP Tebo Barat Unit IX 44,469 69,396 11,687 125,552 KPHP Tebo Timur Unit X 30,522 39,449 22,669 92,640 KPHP Unit VIII Hilir Sorolangun 24,322 31,208 14,382 69,912 Grand Total 189,603 361,435 419,512 970,550 In line with the focus of J-SLMP targeted areas, there are four National Parks in Jambi that have high forest cover. These include Berbak, Bukit Dua Belas, Bukit Tiga Puluh, and Kerinci Seblat and shown in the following Table 4. 9 These criteria are in line with the forest transition theory presented in the ERP Emission Scenario (below). 10 Agricultural areas cover agricultural land covered with tree canopy suitable for agroforestry, which include mixed agriculture, dryland agriculture, ponds and transmigration area. 11 Degraded land including bare lands, grasslands, and shrubs. 12 Forested areas cover all-natural forests from primary and secondary succession, thus excluded plantation forests. ESMF Document – Jambi 41 Table 4 Forest Cover, Degraded Land and Agricultural Land inside National Parks in Jambi in 2017 Agricultural Conservation areas land Degraded land Forested area Grand Total TN Berbak 42 39,975 97,059 137,076 TN Bukit Dua Belas 1,019 3,455 48,110 52,584 TN Bukit Tiga Puluh 629 545 34,566 35,740 TN Kerinci Seblat 12,799 21,072 376,648 410,518 Grand Total 14,489 65,054 556,729 636,271 Baseline assessments in Jambi Province focus on the Performance Evaluation Area ( Wilayah Penilaian Kinerja/WPK). This area will be the accounting area for the pre-investment activities and future ERP. Baseline data on degraded land in conservation and FMU areas, and according to WPK for each district are provided in the following Figures 4 and 5 (source: Report on Analysis on Changes to Forest Cover and Land in Jambi, Oct 2019). Figure 4 Changes to Degraded Lands and Other Land Use inside Conservation and FMU areas from 2006 to 2017 Figure 5 Degraded Lands in WPK According to Districts in 2017 Flagship Species Flagship species in Jambi province include the Sumatran elephant (Elephas maximus sumatrensis), Sumatran tiger (Panthera tigris sumatrae) and orangutan (Pongo abelii). Areas identified as habitat of these key species in Jambi are listed in Table 5 below, while the distribution of these flagships species is shown in Figure 6 below. ESMF Document – Jambi 42 Table 5 Habitat Areas for Flagship Species. Species Description District Core Area (ha)13 Orangutan Sumatran orangutans (Pongo abilii), classified as Tebo 144,000 critically endangered, are found in primary tropical lowland forests, including mangrove, swamp forests and riparian forests. They live almost completely in the trees, building nests in which they nap or sleep for the night. Preferred elevations are 200 to 400 m, the area in which their preferred fruiting trees occur, but Sumatran orangutans can be found at a higher alttitude (Rijksen, et al., 2003). Sumatran Elephants Sumatran elephant (Elephas maximus Tebo 99,70014 sumatrensis), classified as critically endangered, is a subspecies of Asian elephant and is classified as endangered. The Sumatran elephant is under serious threat from illegal logging and associated habitat loss and fragmentation in Indonesia. The elephant population’s long-term viability is jeopardized by rapid forest conversion to commercial plantations. Sumatran Tiger Sumatran tigers (Panthera tigris sumatrae), Merangin 32,00015 classified as critically endangered, are the smallest surviving tiger subspecies and are distinguished by heavy black stripes on their orange coats. The last of Indonesia’s tigers—less than 400 today—are holding on for survival in the remaining patches of forests on the island of Sumatra, including Jambi. Accelerating deforestation and rampant poaching have threatened this species. Bungo 23,70016 Grand 299,400 Total 13 Defined based on existing surveys by various organisations 14 Mossbrucker, AM., Fleming, CH., Imron, MA., 2017. AKDEC homerange size and habitat selection of Sumatran elephants. Wildlife Research 43(7) 15 Kerinci Seblat Sumatran Tiger Protection and Conservation. 2017. Fauna & Flora International – Kerinci Seblat National Park 16 Linkie, M., Haidir, IA., Nugroho, A., Dinata, Y,. 2008. Conserving tigers Panthera tigris in selectively logged Sumatran Forests. Biological Conservation 141. 2410-2415. ESMF Document – Jambi 43 Figure 6 Distribution of Flagship Species in Jambi Source: BKSDA Office Jambi, 2019. Flagships species that are found inside the National Parks in Jambi include the following (source: http://tfcasumatera.org/) 1. Berbak National Park (TNBS): Flagship and endangered species include Sumatran tiger (Panthera tigris sumatrae), Asian tapir (Tapirus indicus), reptile species Sinyulong crocodile (Tomistoma schlegelii), Estuarine crocodile (Crocodylus porosus). 2. Kerinci Seblat National Park (TNKS): Flagship and endangered species include Sumatran tiger (Panthera tigris sumatrae), Sumatran elephant (Elephas maximus sumatrensis), Sumatran rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis), Sumatran deer/muntjac, Muntiacus montanus (newly discovered in 2007) and 16 endemic bird species. 3. Bukit Tigapuluh National Park (TNBT): Endangered and vulnerable species include Sumatran tigers (Panthera tigris sumatrae), Asian elephants (Elephas maximus), otters (Aonyx cinerea), clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa), spotted-winged fruit bat (Balionycteris maculate), white-collared fruit bat (Megaerops wetmorei) and Malay tapir (Tapirus indicus). 4. Bukit Duabelas National Park: Endangered and vulnerable species include the Siamang (Symphalangus syndactylus), clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa), Sun Bear (Helarctos malayanus), Sumatran deer/muntjac (Muntiacus montanus), hairy-nosed otter (Lutra sumatrana) and dhole (Cuon alpinus). ESMF Document – Jambi 44 HCV and Critical Land Areas High conservation value (HCV 1 to 4) 17 areas in Jambi province have been identified as part of the baseline for the J-SLMP and are presented in Table 6 below. There are at least four plantation areas that have been identified under the HCV assessment, which may contribute to the ERP performance in Jambi. Table 6 Areas Certified as HCV Company Type of Concession District Area (Ha) PT Wirakarya Sakti Timber Plantation (HTI) Tanjung Jabung Barat 293,812 PT Rimba Hutani Mas Timber Plantation (HTI) Tanjung Jabung Barat 65,714.75 Tanjung Jabung Timur Batanghari 19,014.26 PT Tebo Multi Agro Timber Plantation (HTI) Tebo 19,770 PT Kresna Duta AgroIndo Plantation Merangin Assessment in progress PT Satya Kisma Usaha Plantation Bungo Assessment in progress PTPN VI Plantation Kerinci Assessment in progress Batanghari Assessment in progress Grand Total 398,311.01 According to the Ministry of Forestry Regulation No. P.32/Menhut-II/2009, “Critical Land� is defined as land either inside or outside of forest area that has been damaged to the level that its expected and/or assigned function for production and/or watershed support is lost or has been reduced. Critical land has been identified and is the target for forest rehabilitation, which may contribute to the performance of Jambi Province under the ERP. Table 7 below shows that 87 percent of areas in Jambi are categorised as critical land. Table 7 Critical Land in Jambi Watershed (Batanghari) District Status Area (ha) Batanghari Production Forest 132,931.03 Other Use (APL) 258,801.26 Conservation Forest 23,597.44 Limited Production 29,189.79 Forest Muaro Jambi Other Use (APL) 238,096.75 Conservation Forest 47,475.67 17 HCV 1: Areas that contain globally, regionally or nationally significant concentrations of biodiversity values (e.g., endemism, endangered species, refugees); HCV 2: Areas that contain globally, regionally or nationally significant large landscape-level areas where viable populations of most, if not all, of a naturally occurring species exist in natural patterns of distribution and abundance; HCV 3: Areas that are in or contain rare, threatened or endangered ecosystems; and HCV 4: Areas that provide basic ecosystem services in critical situations (e.g., watershed protection, erosion control).. ESMF Document – Jambi 45 District Status Area (ha) Production Forest 49,382.39 Limited Production 55,932.91 Forest Protected Forest 23,131.34 Tanjung Jabung Barat Other Use (APL) 235,003.98 Conservation Forest 11,068.80 Protected Forest 15,993.61 Production Forest 186,363.30 Convertible production 3,126.68 forest Limited Production 42,289.45 Forest Tanjung Jabung Other Use (APL) 253,508.91 Timur Conservation Forest 122,988.78 Production Forest 54,619.52 Tebo Conservation Forest 30,815.29 Production Forest 224,212.05 Limited Production 30,082.87 Forest Convertible Production 468.61 Forest Other Use (APL) 292,252.15 Protected Forest 8,042.55 Bungo Other Use (APL) 325,350.36 Conservation Forest 38,531.42 Protected Forest 13,004.98 Production Forest 101,980.94 Kerinci Other Use (APL) 104,431.53 Conservation Forest 145,652.70 Production Forest 26,084.86 Merangin Other Use (APL) 364,903.49 Conservation Forest 79,025.08 Protected Forest 29,581.44 Production Forest 140,105.07 Limited Production 46,144.64 Forest Sarolangun Other Use (APL) 321,835.00 Conservation Forest 13,394.68 ESMF Document – Jambi 46 District Status Area (ha) Protected Forest 50,398.40 Production Forest 87,189.49 Limited Production 78,331.23 Forest Grand Total 4,335,320.44 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISKS Environmental Safeguards: J-SLMP is expected to generate overall positive environmental impacts at global, national and local levels. This will be achieved through a reduction of land-based carbon emissions, increased carbon storage, reduced land degradation and protection of globally threatened ecosystems and endemic biodiversity. Small-scale negative impacts may result from the support for sustainable production activities under this Project that provides the grant financing for pre-investment activities (upfront grant) prior to the planned ER Program. The Project triggers Natural Habitat (OP 4.04) with more positive than potential negative impacts expected on natural habitat. The overall Project aims to maintain and restore natural habitat since degradation and deforestation in HCV areas are major contributors to emissions. These measures will facilitate positive impacts that include, among others, restored and better maintained biodiversity; environmental services and ecosystems; reduced deforestation and increased carbon uptake; reduced degraded land; better protected forest areas and wildlife habitats; decreased fire hotspots; enhanced ecosystems; reduced GHG emissions; reduced possible risks of changes in physical and chemical properties of the soil; more appropriate measures for post-mining reclamation and revegetation; better assurance for well qualified reclamation; and enhanced ecosystem sustainability. These are in line with the current government regulatory frameworks on biodiversity, such as Law No. 11/2013 on the ratification of the Nagoya Protocol of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Baseline data and spatial analysis shows that the project areas (including forest and palm oil concessions) overlap with key biodiversity areas, including habitat of the endangered Sumatran tiger (Panthera tigris sumatrae), elephants and some migratory birds at Berbak National Park. However, the project would have negligible risks on critical habitats and endangered species inside the National Parks as project interventions would positively enhance the park’s function in conservation efforts. For other locations such as inside FMUs, given that selection of sub-project sites are made during implementation of the pre-investment phase, the specific risks are not known at present, and hence there may be some limited potential risks on critical habitats and endangered species of the sub-projects activities inside the FMUs (agriculture and agroforestry intensification and social forestry activities). These risks are addressed in the ESMF by screening and assessing the sub-projects, which will be undertaken by a Safeguards commission whose members include the environmental agencies at the provincial and district levels. There is also potential negative impact from the incidental loss of HCV forests due to lack of oversight, control and monitoring of it in the production forests or APL. In order to reduce the risk to biodiversity and potential wildlife habitat, a Biodiversity Management Framework and General Guideline for High Conservation Value Assessments has been prepared as can be be found in ANNEX 5. ESMF Document – Jambi 47 Other potential environmental risks include contamination of soil and water and health risks associated with the use of pesticides and as the result of poor waste management practices as well as agroforestry and agricultural activities. In compliance with OP 4.01 on the environmental assessment, an initial identification of potential risks, impacts and proposed mitigation measures will be conducted. A SESA is undertaken and considers key risks and impacts and strategic options for management in this ESMF. These safeguards processes will be the result of a long process of consultations and analyses during the country’s and provincial REDD+ Readiness process. Relevant risks and impacts along with their mitigation measures have been assessed as part of the ESMF preparation under J-SLMP. The use of the country safeguards instruments such as Environmental Impact Assessment (AMDAL) or UKL-UPL will also be applicable per GOI’s regulations on environmental management. Some preliminary assessments as part of SESA and ESMF processes have been conducted and will be refined further prior to the ERPA appraisal. Other potential risks inlcude Occupational, Health and Safety (OHS) and Community Health and Safety risks, specifically in the implementation of community-based social forestry, fire management, fire suppression and/or small-scale construction works. Mitigation measures includes the adoption and implementation of OHS general guidelines and establishing systems for emergency preparedness and response into sub-project activities (refer to Annex 3 on ECOPs). During J-SLMP implementation, sub-projects will be screened for environmental risks and impacts, including potential for increased pesticide use from agricultural intensification, pollution from ecotourism or small-scale NTFP processing or cottage industries, unsustainable use of natural resources from extractive projects, invasive species from productive and plantation activities, and other impacts that will be considered in the ESMP to be prepared for the Project (OHS for small scale infrastructure development has been included under ECOP, see Appendix 3). The ESMP will include measures and ECOP applied effectively in other projects in the country and region supported by the Bank. Land tenure strengthening may lead to more intensive use or conversion of forest and natural resources. However, one of the Project’s key objectives will be supporting villages, agriculture and private sector through technical assistance to plan and sustainably manage their resources while conserving critical habitat such as HCV forests within their lands. Social Safeguards: Jambi has a population of 3,570,272 (2018) that includes ethnic groups such as Malay, indigenous Orang Rimba, Marga Serampas and Talang Mamak, as well as Javanese and Chinese descendants. Malay, who is mostly Muslim, dominates the province (95.44 percent), followed by Christians (Protestants) with 2.37 percent, who are mainly resides in Jambi City. Customary groups or Adat communities (Orang Rimba, Talang Mamak and Serampas) continue to practice traditional or customary law, including for conflict resoultion with their own communities. The majority of people in rural areas practice agriculture and plantation (mostly rubber, palm oil, coffee and cinnamon). Population density in Jambi is 70.08 people/km 2, and around 7.8 percent of Jambi’s population was classified as poor in 201718. The distribution of poverty is skewed towards urban areas, where 6.8 percent of rural population was classified as poor, compared to 10 percent of the urban population19. 18 Central Statistics Agency for Jambi, 2018. 19 Data 2018 ESMF Document – Jambi 48 Dominant ethnic migrants in Jambi Province are Javanese who were brought in for tea plantation between 1925 and 194020. Some Javanese migrants were participants of trans-migration program started in 1970s in areas such as Rimbo Bujang (Bungo District) and Pemenang (Merangin District). Ethnic communities (customary groups) include Kerinci, which consists of sub-groups such as Lekuk 50 Tumbi Lempur in Gunung Raya Sub-district and Tamiai in Batang Merangin Sub-district. These are agricultural communities with commodities mainly consisting of coffee and cinnamon. Other ethnic groups are Marga Serampas that also practices agriculture, and Orang Rimba 21 and Talang Mamak who practice hunting and gathering for livelihood. Agriculture, forestry and fisheries sector is a dominant contribution to the economy of Jambi Province (29.41 percent), followed by mining and quarrying (17.66 percent), and wholsesale (12.12 percent). This corresponds with the numbers of people working in this sector where 805,086 people (48.56 percent of the workforce) are involved with agricutlure, forestry and fishery sector. Agriculture and mining sectors have been associated with drivers of deforestation in Jambi, yet it is a significant economic sector for the provincial economy. Therefore, the context of these sectors as a driver of deforestation needs to be explored for further intervention in the ERP, as well as its impacts on the PDRB and livelihood of almost half of the workforce in Jambi Province. At the micro-economic level, it is assumed that most of villagers are engaged with the agriculture sector (as shown in high percentage of workforce involved in this sector). Except for subsistence farming, agriculture is often coupled with the need for expansion. Therefore, agriculture (including plantation commodities) is seen as one of the drivers of deforestation in the ERP. The economic significance of agriculture is indicated by the Terms of Trade ( Nilai Tukar Petani)22 that reflect the economic strength of the villagers (i.e., farmers). In Jambi, overlapping forestry, palm oil and mining licenses leading to inconsistencies in the licensing process coupled with weak enforcement of the spatial plan regulation have contributed to tenurial conflicts, involving forest dependent communities, farmers, in-migrants, companies and governments. An indicative analysis of J-SLMP project areas (WPK) suggests that the following categories of tenurial conflicts exist: a. Potential conflict areas between forestry plantation and palm oil concessions (155.33 ha); b. Potential conflict areas between forestry plantation and mining concessions (143,695.77 ha); and c. Potential conflict areas between forestryplantation, palm oil and mining concessions (448.28 ha). On the basis of the socio-economic and political economy assessments through the SESA process, potential social risks include risks associated with activities conducted in areas under existing and potential conflicts and/or disputes or areas with overlapping boundaries and/or claims, between customary and common/formal laws and processes and in areas with competing claims especially with concessions, livelihoods impacts including displacement due to bans on oil palm plantation and artisanal mining activities, impacts to indigenous peoples, loss and/or damage to physical cultural resource, community and health safety risks for fire prevention and suppression activities, lack of 20 Sihotang, EBS,. 2018. Perkebunan Teh Kayu Aro di Kerinci 1925 – 1940. Jurnal Prodi Sejarah 3(5) 21 Some members of Orang Rimba or Suku Anak Dalam have embraced modern lifestyle and live in urban areas. 22 For Terms of Trade, 100 is considered a break event point. Values below 100 indicate deficits in farmers’ economic capacity. ESMF Document – Jambi 49 awareness, management capacity and participation of community in managing social forestry, institutional capacity constraints to manage potential environmental and social risks at field level, as well as gender inequalities and social exclusion. Acknowledging that potential activities under J-SLMP will involve multiple stakeholders across important sectors in land and natural resource management, institutional risks associated with fragmented coordination and weak capacities to address potential social risks (i.e., managing conflicts/disputes, lack of community participation, lack of access and inclusion of vulnerable groups to benefit from the Project, etc.) have been envisaged. Thus, significant efforts and financing under the J- SLMP will support institutional strengthening and multi-stakeholder coordination (Component 1). Particular attention needs to be given to the social risks associated with improving land governance conducted in areas under existing and potential conflicts and/or disputes or areas with overlapping boundaries and/or claims, between customary and common/formal laws and processes, and in areas with competing claims especially with concession areas. The baseline of Jambi shows that there are overlaps between palm oil concessions and HTI areas, and between HTI and mining areas. Potential disputes with the government will stem from private companies operating the concession areas, from the local communities, and most importantly from indigenous peoples who own rights over adat land. The issue is aggravated by the lack of dedicated grievance mechanism accessible by stakeholders to submit complaints. With consideration of existing grievance mechanisms at the regional and national levels, and recognition of Customary Forests by local and national legislations, the ESMF aims to complement the existing systems by providing a framework for managing grievances related to competing claims and tenurial conflicts (refer to Annex 7), and a framework for engaging and consulting the affected indigenous peoples (refer to Annex 8). Resettlement risks are considered very remote as the GOI commits to ensuring amicable conflict resolution and at the same time, seeks to facilitate social forestry schemes to enable forest dependent peoples to obtain tenure security. However, there could be residual risks associated with restrictions to land use following improvements in land governance, which may entail determination of forest utilisation blocks and forest tenure regularization. This may impact livelihoods patterns of forest dependent communities, including Indigenous Peoples residing or utilising areas in WPK. An RPF, which includes a PF has been prepared to address such risks. In the contexts of land tenure recognition, some communities may not fulfil the GOI’s framework on Masyarakat Hukum Adat or lack of clearly codified rights and hence may not be fully eligible to social forestry and land tenure schemes, including Hutan Adat rights (C.1). These may have implications on community expectations and the Project’s ability to address disputes and conflicts. In addition, sub - national capacities to undertake such recognition processes in a transparent and participatory manner remains to be further assessed. Various nature of tenurial and natural resource conflicts in Jambi requires different interventions and efforts to address. Conflict typologies in Jambi Province can be generally categorized as follows: a) Overlapping land claims and encroachments in forest areas especially in the upstream (conservation) zone; b) Conflict with palm oil and industrial timber plantations due to overlapping land claims and perceptions of inequitable benefit sharing in the middle (production) zone; and c) a combination of inter- communal conflicts and conflict with concession companies, mostly palm oil in the east (distribution) zone. Such conflicts typically involve concession holders, FMUs, national park managers, local communities including Adat communities, as well as in-migrants from other regions and a combination of these stakeholders. Tenurial conflicts in palm oil concessions are typically complex and difficult to ESMF Document – Jambi 50 solve and sometimes involve violence. Such due to multiple interests and stakeholders involved, often embroiled in local politics, length of such conflicts where they are allowed to fester, institutional silos and capacities to address such conflicts. Other relevant aspects that have also been considered under the risk assessment also include gender inequality in land use rights and access to natural resources, which may prevent women from fully accessing and participating in the Project; lack of participation amongst vulnerable groups, including women and youth due to limited understanding; information or incentives to participate in planning and decision-making processes; lack of access to agricultural technology, sustainable markets and post harvesting technology for forest commodities; and potential lack of trust for forest partnerships particularly in areas with history of conflicts. The Project focuses much on land and forest management, particularly peatland, forest fire management and protection of remaining forest cover. Large portion of the funds will go to capacity building and system strengthening activities (Component 1) and NRM pilot activities in select locations (Component 2). The following Table 8 provides a breakdown of the project activities organised by typologies. ESMF Document – Jambi 51 Table 8 J-SLMP Project Typology and Mitigation Measures SUB-COMPONENT ACTIVITY TYPOLOGY RELEVANT BOUNDARIES/ E&S ASPECTS MITIGATION MEASURES OPS TARGETS Component 1. Strengthening Policy and Institutions (US$4 million) Sub-component 1.1: • Cross-sectoral coordination Technical Assistance OP 4.01 on Whole province Downstream To be assessed as part of Institutional and decision making for (TA) for coordination EA regarding impacts (analysis the on-going SESA process Strengthening peatland, forest and fire and planning Public will be subject to as per the World Bank’s prevention management; consultation further policy interim guideline for TA • Operationalization of the joint details during FGRM secretary; implementation) • Low carbon development support for Jambi’s Green Growth Plan Local capacity and social inclusion TA for capacity OP 4.10 on WPK Potential ESMF, IPPF, FGRM for improved land management: building and conflict IP regarding exclusion of Policy related aspects will • FMU capacity improvement; resolution, good recogniation groups without be addressed as part of the agricultural practices of IP recognizable SESA process. • Establishment of social forestry rights, potential licenses; conflicts in areas • Support to Adat recognition; with overlapping • Support to smallholder claims, potential replanting via improved access expansion of to the Oil Palm Plantation smallholder Fund plantation and increased use of pesticide Sub-component 1.2: • GHG Emission Accounting; TA for capacity OP 4.01 on WPK Institutional ESMF, RPF&PF, IPPF, Enabling • Monitoring and Reporting of building and multi- EA regarding capacities to FRGM under the pre- Environment for ER Land and Forest Resources sector dialogue and Public undertake investment grant to set the Program Changes; inclusive building blocks ESMF Document – Jambi 52 • Development of Benefit coordination and consultation consultations, Sharing Plan (BSP); mobilization of experts and GRM potential exclusion E&S aspects for the ER • Development of FGRM; of groups without design to be assessed as recognizable land part of the on-going SESA • Preparation of safeguards rights for the process as per the World instruments and system purpose of BSP Bank’s interim guideline for strengthening for ER Program TA FGRM Sub-component Support to consolidate and TA for policy OP 4.01 on Whole province Downstream E&S aspects for the ER 1.3: Policy and strengthen policies and regulations improvements and EA regarding impacts (analysis design to be assessed as Regulations for sustainable land use including development, Public will be subject to part of the on-going SESA at the national and provincial stakeholder consultation further policy process as per the World levels, including: coordination and policy OP 4.10 on details during Bank’s interim guideline for • Provincial regulation (Perda) analysis IP implementation) TA and permanent moratorium FGRM related to peatland; • Provincial regulation (Perda) for fire; • Improvement of Land-Based Licenses and ERCs for Private Sector Engagement Component 2. Implementing Sustainable Land Management (US$8.15 million) Sub-component Activities under sustainable forest TA activities for OP 4.01 on WPK Occupational, ESMF, RPF&PF, IPPF, 2.1: Integrated management include: capacity building for EA regarding Health and Safety FRGM Forest and Land • Fire management: Hotspot fire brigades and EA (OHS) risks Management control, fire suppression, communities, conflict particularly for fire emergency response, resolution, forest prevention and OP 4.04 and rewetting; monitoring system suppression, OP 4.36 strengthening, law small-scale • Natural resource monitoring enforcement construction and conflict resolution: OP 4.11 works, escalation Stakeholder engagement, ESMF Document – Jambi 53 development of forest Physical activities: OP and/or monitoring system, capacity • Small-scale exacerbation of building for non-litigation infrastructure i.e., existing conflicts, conflict resolution; peatland rewetting restrictions of land • Conservation and restoration: (canal blocking); use, lack of peatland restoration; community • Revegetation and participation/buy- • Development of incentives establishment of in, introduction of systems to prevent community nurseries invasive species encroachment and increased use of pesticide Sub-component Activities under private sector TA activities for OP 4.01 on WPK Lack of ESMF, RPF&PF, IPPF, 2.2: Private Sector engagement include: capacity building on EA regarding community FRGM Partnerships for • Sustainable agroforestry and good agricultural EA participation, Improved Forest intercropping for intensification practices and increased use of and Land and diversification; technology transfer for pesticide, OP 4.04 Management small holder farmers, introduction of • TA for technology transfer for OP 4.36 private sector invasive species smallholder tree crop engagement and OP 4.09 productivity enhancement; coordination and • Value chain sustainability; innovation • Promotion of alternative crops Physical activities: and livelihoods in degraded • Establishment of areas; nurseries; • Technical innovation to • Demonstration support traceability and plots; sustainable sourcing; • Replanting and • Support coordination of revegetation; stakeholders in value chains • Agroforestry and intercropping in degraded areas; ESMF Document – Jambi 54 • Purchase of equipment, inputs (seeds, seedlings) Component 3. Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Reporting (US$1.35 million) This component will finance TA for the overall n/a n/a n/a n/a activities related to national and project management provincial�level Project coordination and management, particularly to achieve the Project’s objectives, including AWPB; fiduciary aspects (FM and procurement); human resource management; safeguards compliance monitoring; M&E; knowledge management and sharing; and implementation of strategies for communication and stakeholder engagement. ESMF Document – Jambi 55 5.0 ESMF IMPLEMENTATION This section describes how the Environmental and Social screening and safeguards plans/documents are conducted in accordance with the ESMF that also incorporates the Government of Indonesia ’s requirements. The screening and safeguards documents will be prepared by the implementing agencies at the national, provincial and district levels. The implementing agencies may be assisted by third party consultants for the preparation of the safeguards plan and provide capacity building. The annexes of the ESMF provides frameworks on how those plans/documents are to be prepared and implemented, in accordance with the ESMF. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL PROCEDURE Environmental and social risks are expected to be minimised by strengthening safeguards supervision and technical support for the Project. An overview of the proposed measures under the ESMF to address direct risks and impacts associated with the J-SLMP include: a. Prior to the implementation of J-SLMP, relevant E&S capacity building and ESMF training will be delivered to implementing agencies (OPDs) and development partners. On-going coaching and monitoring will be provided by provincial E&S specialists supported by the safeguards committees at the provincial and district levels; b. An early screening of potential E&S red-flags, including checking against the negative list (Annex 1) will be conducted by each implementing district under supervision of district safeguard committees and will be technically supported by the provincial E&S specialists. In the event that E&S risks are identified and/or J-SLMP implementation is deemed to potentially escalate existing risks (e.g., conflicts and/or disputes), necessary measures must be in place before the activities in question start and/or continue. Such measures may range from strengthening community engagement, putting in place E&S remediation measures, mediation, technical support for the implementation of the ESMF, to putting specific activities on hold until E&S risks have been contained and/or addressed; c. Implementation of an early E&S warning system through emissions reduction and protection of natural habitats that the FGRM developed under the J-SLMP and future ERP. The FGRM defines steps and procedures for risk reporting and grievances to respective safeguard committees at the district and provincial level and finally to DGCC; d. Building on the FGRM, J-SLMP during implementation seeks to introduce mechanisms for strengthening processes to receive and respond to citizen feedback and ensure timely responses. J-SLMP will put in place a strategy to ensure that the FGRM is widely communicated, accessible and affordable. Furthermore, under J-SLMP, proportionate resources and efforts will be invested in community dispute mediation processes, in a culturally and socially acceptable manner. Such resource allocation will be revisited prior to ERPA appraisal; e. Stakeholder consultation and FPIC implementation from the preparation phase will be continued at J-SLMP phase (pre-investment phase); f. Strengthening J-SLMP communication and outreach strategy to enable broad traction across stakeholder groups; and ESMF Document – Jambi 56 g. On-going E&S monitoring by capitalizing on the existing SIS REDD+ will be enhanced. SIS- REDD+ requires REDD+ implementers to independently assess and report on safeguards implementation. The system is intended to promote transparency and accountability from the site level. For this purpose, the MoEF has formulated APPS (Alat Penilai Pelaksanaan Safeguards or Safeguards Implementation Appraisal Tool). The tool was developed based on the principles of simplicity, transparency, accountability, completeness and comparability. APPS provides a checklist of supporting documents required as evidence of REDD+ safeguards implementation as guided by ESMF and its annexes. It is provided along with the complete PCI under SIS-REDD+ in the Annex and can be downloaded on the SIS-REDD+ website (http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/sisredd/). By ensuring that the above processes at the project level are in place and adequately resourced, E&S risks and subsequent impacts resulting from J-SLMP individual activities are expected to be minimised and contained to a lower risk level over the life of the project. A critical objective of the project, as strengthened in the measures set out in this ESMF, is to prevent and reduce existing conflicts and disputes. To do so, the ESMF has been strengthened with: a. A FGRM for J-SLMP implementation, which is presented as a separate annex to the ESMF (Annex 8). The FGRM proposed under the project seeks to set out relevant measures to address grievances and emerging disputes and incorporate additional steps to strengthen the existing Grievance Redress Mechanisms across project and sub-project levels. The FGRM will be tested during the initial years of J-SLMP implementation and evaluated to assess its effectiveness prior to ERPA appraisal. FGRM strengthening measures may be introduced under the ERP operation.; b. Addressing risks and impacts on Indigenous Peoples, and customary communities through an IPPF which form part of this ESMF. The IPPF is provided as Annex 9; c. In addressing potential access restrictions and livelihoods displacement, an RPF which includes a Process Framework (PF), has been developed as part of this ESMF as a precautionary measure. These frameworks establish screening processes to identify and respond to such risks, define roles and responsibilities, establish risk avoidance and if not feasible, set out mitigation measures associated with access restrictions and livelihoods displacement in accordance with OP 4.12. The environmental and social management procedure for the J-SLMP key activities is illustrated in the following flowchart (Figure 7). The preliminary overview of the institutional chart outlining the institutions in charge and their responsibilities in implementing the safeguards tools of the ESMF is also provided in Figure 8Error! Reference source not found.. The institutional chart will be further refined following formal assignment of project personnel through the Jambi Governor’s Decree. ESMF Document – Jambi 57 Figure 7 ESMF Implementation Flowchart ESMF Document – Jambi 58 Figure 8 Institutional Chart for Implementing the Safeguards Tools of the ESMF ORGANISATION IN CHARGE/LINE OF REPORTING RESPONSIBILITIES BAPPEDA Jambi Province Overall program management/ technical oversight Responsible Agency at the Provincial Level • Provide training • Review safeguards documents • Monitor the implementation of safeguards policies and compliances Provincial Environmental Services • Guide the implementation of FGRM and FPIC Coordinator of Provincial Safeguards • Follow up and reporting Committee • Feed information on SIS-REDD+ to national system • Support the implementation of safeguards requirements at the district level District Environmental Services • Monitor the implementation of safeguards policies and compliances Member of Provincial Safeguards • Guide the implementation of FGRM and Committee FPIC • Follow up and reporting • Implementation of safeguards: negative Implementing Agencies list screening, environmental and social Forestry Service risks Plantation Services • Identify potential impacts, prepare and Agriculture Service implementation of appropriate FMU mitigation measures National Park Authority • Disclosure of safeguards documents 5.1.1 Negative List Screening J-SLMP sub-project activities will be screened against a negative list (see Annex 1) by the implementing agencies (Organisasi Perangkat Daerah/OPDs) at the national and provincial levels. Key activities that trigger one or more of the negative lists will not be financed under the project. ESMF Document – Jambi 59 5.1.2 Screening of Environmental and Social Risks J-SLMP activities that pass the negative list screening will then be further screened for potential environmental and social risks by the implementing agency (OPDs, KPH and TN) at the national and provincial levels with technical support and oversight from the provincial E&S specialists. Activities will be screened and assessed on the basis of their potential risks and impacts (refer Table 9). Such screening will preliminary define the required safeguards management and recommendations to address the identified risks and impacts (preventive measures, capacity building, technical assistance and oversight to strengthen risk management). Table 9 Sub-project Environmental and Social Risk Classification Risk Description Instrument(s) Classification High*/Cat A Wide range of significant adverse risks and impacts on human Not applicable populations or the environment including i) long term, permanent and/or Note: High risk sub- irreversible and impossible to avoid entirely due to the nature of the projects will not be project; ii) high in magnitude and/or in spatial extent; iii) significant permitted under J- adverse cumulative impacts or transboundary impacts; and iv) a high SLMP (refer probability of serious adverse effects to human health and/or the Negative List). environment (e.g., due to accidents, toxic waste disposal, etc.) Some of the significant adverse ES risk and impacts of the Project cannot be mitigated or specific mitigation measures require complex and/or unproven mitigation, compensatory measures or technology, or sophisticated social analysis and implementation. Substantial/Cat The Project may not be as complex as High-Risk Projects, its E&S scale Environmental and B high and impact may be smaller (large to medium) and the location may not Social Assessment be in such a highly sensitive area, and some risks and impacts may be (ESA) and significant. This would take into account whether the potential risks and Environmental and impacts have the majority or all of the following characteristics: i) Mostly Social Management temporary, predictable and/or reversible and the nature of the project Plan (ESMP) does not preclude the possibility of avoiding or reversing them; ii) Equal to AMDAL Adverse social impacts may give rise to a limited degree of social and UKL-UPL in conflict, harm or risk to human security; iii) Medium in magnitude and/or Indonesia regulation spatial extent; iv) There is medium to low probability of serious adverse system (Minister of effects to human health and/or the environment (e.g., due to accidents, Environment toxic waste disposal, etc.), and there are known and reliable Regulation No mechanisms available to prevent or minimise such incidents. 5/2012) Mitigatory and/or compensatory measures may be designed more readily and be more reliable than those of High-Risk Projects. Moderate/ Cat Potential adverse risks and impacts on human populations and/or the Environmental and B medium environment are not likely to be significant. This is because the Project is Social Assessment not complex and/or large, does not involve activities that have a high (ESA) and potential for harming people or the environment, and is located away from Environmental and environmentally or socially sensitive areas. As such, the potential risks Social Management and impacts and issues are likely to have the following characteristics: i) Plan (ESMP) Predictable and expected to be temporary and/or reversible; ii) Low in Equal to UKL-UPL magnitude; iii) Site-specific, without likelihood of impacts beyond the in Indonesia actual footprint of the Project; and iv) Low probability of serious adverse regulation system effects to human health and/or the environment (e.g., do not involve use (Minister of or disposal of toxic materials, routine safety precautions are expected to Environment be sufficient to prevent accidents, etc.). ESMF Document – Jambi 60 Regulation No The Project’s risks and impacts can be easily mitigated in a predictable 5/2012) manner. Low/Cat B low Potential adverse risks to and impacts on human populations and/or the Code of or Cat C environment are likely to be minimal or negligible. These Projects, with Environmental and few or no adverse risks and impacts and issues, do not require further Social Practice ES assessment following the initial screening. Equal to SPPL in Indonesia regulation system (Minister of Environment Regulation No 5/2012) The following Table 10 provides an example of environmental and social classification based on types of investments. Table 10 Risk Classification based on Types of Investments Project-Type Low Risk Medium to Substantial High Risk* Risk Forest management and • Sawmilling & timber • Sawmilling & timber • Sawmilling & timber agroforestry measures processing (<2,000 m3); processing (2,000- processing (>6,000 m3); • Small-scale NTFP 6,000 m3); • Timber utilisation production and • Timber utilisation business operation in processing (no threshold business operation in plantation forests defined); community plantation (>5,000 ha); • Processing of rattan forests (≤10,000 ha); • Timber utilisation (preservation and • Development of business operation in heating); plantation areas on non- natural forests (any • Rice milling; state forest land or state size); • Processing of plantation forest land planned for • Development of crops; forest conversion plantation areas on non- • Processing and (seasonal: <3,000 ha, state forest land or state packaging of crops, perennial: <3,000 ha); forest land planned for forest products, and • Medium-scale NTFP forest conversion NTFPs production and (seasonal: >2,000 ha, processing (no threshold perennial: >3,000 ha); defined); • Large-scale NTFP • Breeding of natural production and plants and/or wildlife in processing (no threshold captivity for trading (any defined); size) • Projects involving earth- moving activities (>500,000 m³ of earth moved) Construction, operation • Construction of • Construction of • Construction of and maintenance of small- ecotourism facilities ecotourism facilities ecotourism facilities scale facilities and (building size: (building size: 5,000– (building size: buildings (ecotourism, <5,000 m²); 10,000 m²); >10,000 m² or land area: processing, commercial • Construction of • Construction of >5 ha); and/or administrative) processing facilities processing facilities • Construction of (building (building size: 5,000– processing facilities size:<5,000 m²); 10,000 m²); (building size: • Construction of >10,000 m² or land area: commercial/administrativ >5 ha); and ESMF Document – Jambi 61 e buildings (building • Ecotourism in • Development of (non- size:<5,000 m²) protection/production theme) recreational forest (all sizes); parks (>100 ha). • Development of (non- theme) recreational parks (<100 ha); • Tourist/visitor accommodation (all sizes) Other • Furniture production; • Water bottling (any size); • Water bottling • Small handicraft • Water consumption (freshwater extraction production (e.g., for bottling) in rate: >250 l/sec, production/protection groundwater extraction forest (<30% of water rate: >50 l/sec in area < discharge); 10 ha); • Water • Fish ponds with (semi) consumption/drinking advanced technology water (50-250 l/sec from (>50 ha) river/lake 2.5-250 l/sec from water spring 150 l/sec from groundwater); • Water processing installation (50- 100 l/sec); • Fish ponds with (semi) advanced technology (<50 ha); • Handicraft industry (>30 employees) Technical thresholds: AMDAL: Based on Minister of Environment Regulation No. 5/2012 UKL-UPL: Based on Circular Letter B-5362/Dep I-1//LH/07/2010 from the Ministry of Environment to all Governors, Bupatis, and Heads of Environmental Agencies in Provinces and Districts (based on Minister of Environment Regulation No.13/2010 on UKL UPL SPPL) and Ministry of Public Works Regulation No. 10/PRT/M/2008 *Activities under this category are not eligible for financing under the project On the basis of the initial screening and further environmental and social assessments (i.e., on the ground verification and consultations), risk classifications will be made and risk mitigation measures will be mobilized. An example of a guideline of risk classifications is provided in Table 9 and Table 10. Specifically, the screening will identify the safeguards instruments that are required to be applied for the activity, as follows: ▪ The relevant environmental codes of practices to be applied for the activity (refer Annex 3); ▪ Requirement for integrated pest management (refer Annex 4); ▪ Requirement for conducting HCV to preliminary identify potential impacts to indigenous peoples and physical cultural resources (refer Annex 5); ▪ Requirement for developing environmental and social management plans (i.e. UKL-UPL or SPPL as relevant (Annex 6); ESMF Document – Jambi 62 ▪ FGRM (refer to Annex 7); ▪ IPPF to address risks and impacts on Indigenous Peoples (Annex 8); ▪ RPF, covering a PF to address resettlement risks and access restrictions (Annex 9); and ▪ Chance Finds Procedures (Annex 10); Stakeholder consultations and community engagement will precede any activities under J-SLMP. If the project will be implemented in areas where there is presence of Adat communities and/or other community groups who meet the criteria of OP 4.10, Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) will need to be obtained prior to any activity with potential impacts. These consultations and engagement will be carried over during J-SLMP and future ERP implementation. 5.1.3 Preparation of Environmental and Social Management Plans Following the screening and identification of required safeguard tools, the implementing agencies (OPDs, KPH and TN) at the provincial and/or district levels will prepare the specific environmental and social plan (ESMP), including environmental permits as relevant. Low risk sub-project activities may adopt ECOPs. The implementing agency may obtain assistance from third party consultants in preparing the required plans and/or permits to meet the safeguard requirements (refer to Table 17). The ESMPs prepared by the implementing agencies will be reviewed and cleared by the safeguards committee established at the provincial and district levels. 5.1.4 Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) The GOI is a signatory of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) where Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is required when the project affects Indigenous Peoples. FPIC is built on iterative consultations and engagement at the community level. FPIC will need to be obtained from target communities for implementation of any activities financed by the project that may have impact on them. FPIC represents a sequential process as a result from free, prior and informed consultations required under OP 4.10 and these consultations shall precede any activities under the project and broader ER Program that may impact these communities. A full scope of its application is described in the IPPF (Section 4.2.3). 5.1.5 Review and Approval The safeguard committee at the district level will review the preparation of safeguards instruments as proposed by field level project implementor (OPDs, FMUs, National Park Authority). Verification on the quality of the environmental and social plans and permits will be made by the appointed E&S specialists at the provincial level. J-SLMP will not entertain project with high risk (see Table 9). For substantial risk sub-projects as elaborated in Table 9 will need to be approved by the Provincial Environmental Service/Provincial Safeguards Committe and, if needed, DGCC. Whereas for moderate risk sub- projects, approval will be obtained from respective District Environmental Services. ECOPs will be adopted for low risk sub-projects and hence no separate ESMPs required. Instruments that have been approved by these responsible agencies will be provided to the World Bank for review and no objection. ESMF Document – Jambi 63 5.1.6 Implementation of Safeguards and Verification The safeguards will be implemented for the J-SLMP activities by the implementing agencies (OPDs) following the endorsement of the environmental and social plans and permits. High-risk activities that involve major physical construction or construction in environmentally sensitive areas will only be commenced once relevant environmental permits and the environmental and social plan (ESMP) have been completed and endorsed by the Executing Agency (DGCC and/or Provincial SEKDA/BAPPEDA). Low risk activities must follow relevant ECOPs with technical support and supervision from the Provincial E&S specialists. 5.1.7 Monitoring and Reporting The DGCC, Provincial Sekda and Provincial Taskforce and especially Provincial Safeguard Committee will oversee the application of the ESMF (safeguards instruments) by the implementing agencies (OPDs). The implementation reports will be communicated by the DGCC to the Bank. MANAGEMENT OF INDIRECT RISKS AND IMPACTS Direct investments under J-SLMP are relatively small in comparison to the size of WPK. The project focuses on technical assistance and institutional capacity and policy strengthening, and hence are not expected to result in indirect impacts associated with displacement and reversals. However, such risks have been considered under the future ERP and will be assessed as part of the SESA process. In the context of future ERP activities, indirect risks such as displacement/leakages and reversals are considered in the following ways: ▪ Displacement/leakages may emerge as risks attributed mainly to governance risks (i.e., regulatory aspects) that cannot restrict the expansion of timber/palm oil/mining concessions to compensate for HCV allocation. Conventional practices (rather than sustainable ones) in expansion areas of forest or palm oil concessions may constitute a risk of leakages; and ▪ Reversals may be produced as the results of governance risks such as lack of regulation enforcement to ensure sustainable forestry or plantation management, and lack of regulations on benefit sharing mechanism. Other issues that may constitute reversals are lack of participation in controlling fire, and tenurial conflicts (e.g., overlapping land use). Successes in reducing impacts on forests at the jurisdictional level may lead to indirect environmental and social risks such as leakage and reversals of these impacts to other areas. The indirect risks around leakage and reversal prevention will be addressed in conjunction with support to community welfare and livelihoods (including potential benefit sharing mechanism), access rights to use of land and natural resources, protection of local wisdom, and gender equality and social inclusion (e.g., participation of Indigenous Peoples and Customary communities, as well as marginalized and vulnerable groups). Addressing these issues is expected to feed into and subsequently enhance the project’s benefit sharing mechanisms, forest governance, including prevention of leakage and reversals, transparency and accountability. Interlinkages amongst these initiatives will continue to be observed in the ERP design processes. Synergy and coordination between national, provincial and district levels for safeguards management will continue to be defined and strengthened as the ER Program is being prepared. The ESMF considers tracking and monitoring of key environmental and social indicators for displacement/leakages and reversals as the ERP is being prepared. ESMF Document – Jambi 64 MANAGEMENT OF RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH POLICY DEVELOPMENT Policies, laws, regulations and standard operating procedures, which are to be reviewed and the drafting of which technical assistance may be provided under J-SLMP will be assessed in light of potential downstream E&S risks, especially land disputes and conflicts. Such processes will be undertaken as part of the on-going SESA process. Policy development and technical support under C.1 of J-SLMP seek to improve stakeholder and community participation in policy and regulatory development through support being provided to enhance community-level dialogue and consultations. J-SLMP implementation will also undertake targeted activities to reach out and ensure participation and consultations with Indigenous Peoples, Adat communities and other vulnerable groups. E&S specialists attached to Provincial Safeguards Committee will assess the E&S implications of each policy development and technical assistance activities under the project and will facilitate overall coordination for the SESA process. The terms of reference and outputs of technical assistance activities under the project which could have environmental and social implications would be required to take into account the requirements of the applicable Bank safeguard policies. If technical assistance and inputs are provided to regulations and laws, the drafted amendments will be vetted by respective implementing agencies (OPDs), with coordination from the Provincial Secretary (SEKDA)/BAPPEDA and DGCC, to enable consultative processes and discussions with relevant stakeholders who may be impacted by such regulatory and policy changes. Where policy development and technical assistance are assessed by E&S specialists to potentially have widespread and adverse E&S implications, the Provincial Safeguards Committee and Provincial Secretary (SEKDA/BAPPEDA), in consultation with the relevant specialists, will determine if an impact assessment is necessary or further consultations are required to ensure a broader inclusion of stakeholders and enable E&S inputs to be mainstreamed in the overall policy development and technical assistance processes. When such an assessment (as a supplemental or update to the SESA) is required, it will be carried out by a qualified independent expert or institution and will include recommendations for measures to minimise negative E&S impacts, and the findings will be presented to stakeholders through J-SLMP and ERP communication and consultation platforms. All documents (e.g., terms of references, draft reports, etc.) will need to be sent to relevant stakeholders in advance of proposed public consultations in order to allow proper review and meaningful engagement. In particular, where E&S implications indicate potential for land disputes and/or conflicts, the following alternative efforts should be considered to be undertaken by the relevant implementing agencies (OPDs): ▪ Incorporate approach for community engagement and participation for tenure settlements for both forest and non-forest estates; and ▪ Incorporate specific provisions under the FGRM on how grievances are handled for specific cases on land disputes/conflict resolution. ESMF Document – Jambi 65 6.0 PROJECT INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS The implementation arrangements for the J-SLMP are consistent with regulations on local governments (i.e., Law No. 23/2014) that distribute functions and authorities on land use management to national, provincial, and district governments. For the forestry sector, the provincial government has authority over production and protected forest area utilisation; the district government has authority over management of Forest Parks; and all other forest areas are under the authority of the central government through MoEF, including the implementation of the forthcoming ER Program as the “Program Entity�. More specifically, MoEF through the MPI of the DG-CC will be the primary managing agency in close coordination with other Directorates in DG-CC such as Sectoral and Regional Resources Mobilization (Dit. M2SR), Sumatera Region Office of Land and Forest Fire and Climate Change Management (Balai PPI Karhutla), and Green House Gases Inventory (Dit. IGRK). Given the J-SLMP is taking a comprehensive landscape approach to reducing emissions and improving livelihoods, the implementation arrangements reflect this through multi-sectoral arrangements. In addition to DG-CC, the MoA is the main authority in charge for agriculture development as part of J- SLMP. The Development Planning Ministry (Bappenas) is involved in the implementation arrangements for the J-SLMP due to its essential role in overseeing the synergy between these sectors, as well as between different levels of government (District, Province, and Central). Table 11 below summarizes the national agencies involved in the J-SLMP implementation. Table 11 National Agencies Involved in the Implementation of the J-SLMP National Agency Status Roles Secretary General of Ministry of MoEF Representative • Submission of ERPD Environment and Forestry • Chairman of Steering Committee • Signing ERPA Director General Climate Change National Focal Point of ▪ Project Design (MoEF) REDD+ and Technical ▪ Consultation for Methodologies (technical Advisory assistance) ▪ Preparation for agencies for field implementation ▪ Consultation and Communication with Facility Management Team ▪ A member of Steering Committee ▪ Management of the National Registry ▪ Development and management of the FREL ▪ Management of the Monitoring, Measurement and Reporting (MMR) system ▪ Finalization and implementation of safeguards plans ▪ Finalization and implementation of the FGRM ▪ Technical Assistance ▪ Recommendation for Payment (BSM) Ministry of Agriculture ▪ Project Design ▪ Consultation for Methodologies (technical assistance) ▪ Preparation for agencies for field implementation ▪ A member of Steering Committee National Development Planning ▪ Project Design Ministry (Bappenas) ▪ A member of Steering Committee Ministry of Finance (DG BLU) Financial Authority ▪ Oversees the BPDLH (BSM) ▪ Channels funds to the BPDLH and government agencies (BSM) ▪ A member of Steering Committee ESMF Document – Jambi 66 At the provincial level, the responsible party for J-SLMP implementation is the Provincial Secretary (SEKDA)/BAPPEDA acting as the coordinator of PMU, supported by the Provincial Forestry Agency, Environmental Service (Dinas Lingkungan Hidup). During implementation of the J-SLMP and future ERP the Sekda/BAPPEDA will be advised by the Joint Secretariat (SEKBER), a multi-stakeholder forum for the planning and implementation of REDD+. The Joint Secretariat for Forest Resource Management (SEKBER) in Jambi Province is a key partner in the implementation of the J-SLMP and future ERP Program. The SEKBER is a multi-stakeholder organisation that has coordinated the planning and implementation of low-emission development (mainly in forestry/land-use sector) in Jambi Province. It has significant experience (as well as operational infrastructure) in the management of donor development funding. A list of institutions and their respective roles are provided in Table 12, while the institutional arrangement is shown in Figure 9. Table 12 The Sub-National Agencies and Organisations Involved in the Implementation of the Jambi Emission Reduction Program (ERP) Agency Status Role Provincial Secretary Executing Agency at Responsible for implementation and (SEKDA)/BAPPEDA (Tbd) Province Level achievement of the J-SLMP and future ERP Program in the Province A member of the Steering Committee Overseeing ESMF and safeguards application and reporting by implementing agencies Joint Secretariat for Forest Advisory Providing advice and inputs to local Resource Management government in relation to ER Program (SEKBER) A Member of Steering Committee Jambi Forestry Agency Implementing Agencies Coordination of FMUs, as well as supporting the provincial government for institutional strengthening and capacity building Jambi Environment Service Implementing agency Local responsibility for Safeguards and (Dinas Lingkungan Hidup), Coordinatively overseeing possibly23 REL and MMR looking after Povincial safeguards at the provincial the J-SLMP and future ERP implementation Safeguards Committe and district level As coordinator of safeguards committee at the provincial level, overseeing ESMF and safeguards application and reporting by implementing agencies Other Provincial Implementing Agencies J-SLMP and future ERP implementation Government Services (OPD) Leading consultation processes within their respective jurisdictions Applying ESMF and safeguards instruments Provincial Planning Board Coordinative implementation Coordinate all activities of OPD in relation to (BAPPEDA) Jambi Province at provincial level the J-SLMP and future ERP Possible future responsibility for REL and MMR 23 As of now, the negotiation is still taking place to put this office to manage the REL and MMR. ESMF Document – Jambi 67 Agency Status Role Development Partners Partner Provide supporting funds and technical (Prov. & Kab/Kota) advice to SEKBER or District/City Government University/NGOs (Prov. & Partner Provide scientific supports and facilitation to Kab/Kota) SEKBER and District/City Government A Member of the Steering Committee (observer) District/City Secretary Executing Agency at Responsible for Implementation and District/City Level and Feld achievement of J-SLMP and ERP in the Site District and Field Site BAPPEDA District/City Coordinative implementation Coordinate all activities done by OPD in at district/city level and field relation to J-SLMP and ERP at the site District/City level Environment Service (DLH) Coordinatively overseeing Coordinate Safeguard Committee at the safeguards at the district distrct level in implementing ESMF and level safeguards compliance OPD District/City Implementing Agencies Implementing J-SLMP and future ERP in the District/City and Field Site Applying ESMF and safeguards instruments Village Government Implementing Agencies – Implementing J-SLMP and future ERP in the Field Activities District/City and Field Site Figure 9 Institutional Arrangements of ERP at the Provincial Level At the district/city level, J-SLMP will be carried out by the District Secreatary Office overseeing project implementation at the district level. The District Environmental Service (Dinas Lingkungan Hidup) will be responsible to look after safeguard implementation for field activities. Each respective district/city government will be responsible for the implementing of the J-SLMP in its region, building mainly on the role of FMUs and National Park Authorirties to implement the ER program at the filed level. Detailed institutional arrangements for the ERP at the district/city level can be seen in Figure 10. At the village ESMF Document – Jambi 68 level, the village government, including the local community, is responsible for emission reductions in their village region. Figure 10 Institutional arrangements of ERP at the District/City Level INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS AT THE ACTIVITY LEVEL Institutional arrangements for ESMF implementation comprise of a three-tier system, i.e., district/city, provincial, and national levels. The ESMF will be implemented by the various agencies at each of these levels. The main implementing agencies will be the Project Management Unit (PMU) at the national level and the Project Implementing Units or Project Implementing Agencies (PIU/PIA), which will be the provincial taskforce with extension units at the district levels. The key elements and responsibilities of project implementation, stages and actions pertaining to application of safeguards framework are outlined in Table 13. The commitment of Bappeda (Development Planning Agency) of Jambi to incorporate the ERP and allocation of budget in the provincial planning process is a good example of an institutional arrangement. Additionally, budget for Resettlement Planning Framework (RPF) and Process Framework (PF) needs to be considered in the overall allocation for Safeguard implementation. Should either RPF or PF is not required, this budget allocation needs to be revised through revision of state budget, before October each year. Revisions may include: cut-off from the total budget, or re- allocation to other safeguard components. Table 13 Safeguards Framework and Responsible Institutions COMPONENTS MITIGATION PLAN RESPONSIBLE INSTITUTIONS Strengthening Policy and Alternative economic program to Village Development Agency Institutions anticipate loss of livelihoood from Provincial Development Planning changes in NRM. This may be Bureau (BAPPEDA) and Provincial discussed as an output from village Secretary (SEKDA) planning/village funding program (ADD Joint Secretariat (SEKBER) or DD). supporting SEKDA/BAPPEDA ESMF Document – Jambi 69 COMPONENTS MITIGATION PLAN RESPONSIBLE INSTITUTIONS Technical support and facilitation to the Provincial Forestry Agency for existing development fora (e.g., Forum managing FMU operations OPD, Forum DAS, and Forum KHP) to BPSKL, Provincial forestry agency, improve cross-sectoral coordination. Social Forestry Working Group, Facilitate multi-stakeholder Social Agency and other relevant consultations to bridge central and agencies provincial government institutions, as Provincial Environmental Agency/ well as non-government entities. Safeguard Committee, Forestry Selection and/or capacity building for Agency FMU staff for management of Implementing partners, DKN, and environemntal and social risks. other partners, including NGOs and Capacity building on FREL and MRV to Donor agencies. ensure systematic accounting of GHG Potential involvement of governor’s emission (evoiding double accounting). office and/or provincial secretariat as Enforcing the existing FGRM and a hub for FGRM mechanism establish a project contact person. Legal Bureau (SEKDA) for Proper schedule and programs establishment of policies to support (including instructors) for capacity the environemntal and safeguard building for the government and private mitigation strategies. This includes sector (ESMF and ESMP). consideration of human rights issues Collaboration with the law enforcement in law enforcement. agency to address unauthorised / DG Gakkum to set up rapid illageal activities. response team (SPORC) in Jambi Development of a Biodiversity Management Framework for the Project. Addressing the risk of access restrictions as a result of protected area and HCV interventions. Regular monitoring of the Social Forestry program and benefit sharing mechanism to avoid further encroachment and poor. Prepare an Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) based on stakeholder and community consultations and conduct training to relevant stakeholders. Strengthenig FPIC processess. Implementing Sustainable FPIC and concensus among DGCC as the Project Executing Land Management beneficiaries on the benefit sharing Agency, and Provincial Forestry mechanism (for ERP implementation). Agency as Implementing Agency This should be based on full Other entities: FOERDIA, SEKBER, understanding of risks and benefits for NGOs each stakeholder. Private companies (through CSR Formal agreement with local and or other commitments) communities including roles and District Government (Indigenous responsibilities for preventing Peoples) deforestation and land degradation Provincial and district plantation Concensus among stakholders on the agencies maps used for the ERP. Currently SK 863/2014 is used for forestry sector) Environmental services and/or Safeguards Committee Alternative community economic development program including access FMUs, national park authorities ESMF Document – Jambi 70 COMPONENTS MITIGATION PLAN RESPONSIBLE INSTITUTIONS to finance, market, and technology for sustainable agriculture and agriculture intensification. Community training/capacity development, RSPO and ISPO. Capacity building for FMUs and relevant government institutions on the ESMF and good NRM practices. Effective scheduling and planning for safeguards monitoring and supervision. Proper identification of credible trainers and/or training institutions to deliver the required capacity building sessions. Social assessments to identify potential impact on Indigenous Peoples and other forest dependent communities. Such assessments will inform the scope of the IPP. Livelihood activities under the Social Forestry Program. Enchancing benefit sharing mechanism to esure equitable access and incentives for sustainable NRM. Introduction of good and smart agricultural practices (i.e., shifting to organic fertilizers and pesticides). Forest fire prevention (early warning system) that includes participation of local communities, sub-national government agencies and the private sector. This shall include safety training to prevent hazards in fire prevention and fire fighting activities. Alternative economic program to anticipate loss of livelihoood from changes in NRM practices. This may be discussed as an output from village planning/village funding program (ADD or DD). Project Management, Capacity building on FREL and MRV to Village Development Agency Monitoring & Evaluation and ensure systematic accounting of GHG Provincial Development Planning Reporting emission (evoiding double accounting). Bureau (BAPPEDA) and Provincial Secretary (SEKDA) Monitoring of safeguards Joint Secretariat (SEKBER) implementation, including FGRM supporting SEKDA/BAPPEDA oversight, Safeguard Committee Provincial Forestry Agency for managing FMU operations BPSKL, Provincial forestry agency, Social Forestry Working Group, Social Agency and other relevant agencies ESMF Document – Jambi 71 COMPONENTS MITIGATION PLAN RESPONSIBLE INSTITUTIONS Provincial Environmental Agency, looking after Safeguards Monitoring Forestry Agency Implementing partners, DKN and other partners, including NGOs and donor agencies Potential involvement of governor’s office and/or provincial secretariat as a hub for FGRM mechanism Legal Bureau (SEKDA) for establishment of policies to support the environemntal and safeguard mitigation strategies. This includes consideration of human rights issues in law enforcement DG Gakkum to set up rapid response team (SPORC) in Jambi In order to better manage the safeguards implementation, safeguard committees will be established at the provincial level which involves representatives from forestry agency and regional development agency of the respective districts. The responsibilities of the provincial level safeguard committee include: 1. Provide training 2. Review project for safeguards application 3. Monitor the implementation of safeguards policies 4. Project monitoring for compliance safeguards standard 5. Guide the implementation of FGRM and FPIC 6. Follow up and reporting 7. Feed information on SIS-REDD+ to national system (TBD) The safeguards committee at the provincial level (under the coordination of environmental office) will report to the provincial level implementing agency, in this case Bappeda or Sekretaris Daerah (Provincial Secretary). The safeguard committees will be supported by environmental and social management specialists at the PMU. The members of safeguard committee will consist of: 1. Provincial Environmental Service (Coordinator) 2. District environmental service (member) 3. Forestry Service (member) 4. Plantation Service (member) 5. Bappeda Pronvincial and Districts (member) 6. Agriculture Service (member) 7. NGOs (member) 8. University (member) 9. Invited representatives from districts ESMF Document – Jambi 72 CAPACITY BUILDING PLAN AND INDICATIVE FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS The J-SLMP recognises that capacity for implementing safeguard measures required in the ESMF may greatly vary across project proponents. Acknowledging such constraints, the DGCC together with the national project and sub-national project management units will be responsible to ensure that capacity building components are integral to the project design, and gradually build on previous efforts to leverage understanding and awareness of safeguards amongst key actors. In addition to Component 2 of the J-SLMP, there are several steps envisioned under the J-SLMP implementation where safeguard capacity building will be focused, including: ▪ Community Participation Approaches, particularly free, prior informed consent; ▪ Identification of potential environmental and social issues, as well as risk mitigation; ▪ Overview of policy and regulatory frameworks related to J-SLMP and ERP and social and environmental management in Indonesia, procedures for obtaining environmental permits; ▪ Implementation of safeguard components, in particular Indigenous People’s Planning Framework (IPPF), Restriction Planning Framework (RPF), and Process Framework (PF); and ▪ Design and development of ESMPs, integrating provisions of land and resource management, pest management, PCRs, community participation, and free, prior and informed consultations. Capacity building will also provide implementation support where safeguards and technical specialists are assigned to assist throughout J-SLMP and ERP implementation. 1. Workshops for the J-SLMP and ERP are aimed to disseminate information and reach out to the key players at the activity level. The workshops will be divided into two types: ▪ Public Workshops. Public workshops will be organised for a wider audience of stakeholders consisting of participants from the national and sub-national levels, media, researchers, public forums, NGOs etc. Basic information about the J-SLMP and ERP, the framework for environmental and social management as referenced in the ESMF will be part of the workshop materials. ▪ Thematic Workshops/Trainings. Thematic workshops and trainings will be implemented based on the need assessment at the project activity level. Thematic workshops for each component of the J-SLMP and ERP range from the sub-national to the village levels. Example of such theme may be based on potential and/or existing cases at the project activity level, which may include the approach to the resolution of access restrictions, tenure conflicts, and how the safeguards tool in the ESMF can be referenced to manage such conflicts. Thematic workshops will be conducted to ensure that the project implementation will be in accordance with the ESMF. The capacity building program for the J-SLMP and ERP including the objectives, indicator of success, schedule, speaker and targeted audiences are provided in the following Tables 14 and 15. ESMF Document – Jambi 73 Table 14 Indicative Capacity Building Program Plan for J-SLMP and ERP Safeguards TRAINING/CAPAC INDICATOR OF PROGRAM SOURCE/SPEAKE NO. ITY BUILDING OBJECTIVE SCHEDULE SUCCESS TARGET R PROGRAM 1. Basic Training on Disseminate All stakeholders, Project In the beginning of Safeguards Environmental and information related specifically the management units the project and specialist at Social Awareness to the implementing at national and annual refresher national or sub- The general environmental and agencies/OPDs sub-national levels, trainings for all national level material will be social risks of the J- understand the Economy Bureau, ERP stakeholders. related to the SLMP and ERP. basic Village potential Foster stakeholder environmental Development environmental and buy-in and concepts, existing Agency social risks of the J- understanding of issues and Implementing SLMP and ERP. the ESMF as a applicable agencies (OPDs), The scope of the reference for the regulations. FMUs training covers management of National Parks relevant environmental and assessments and social aspects of Field facilitators development of risk the J-SLMP and mitigation ERP. instruments, including consultations (Annex 12 of the ESMF) 2. Technical / Implementing Documented plans PMU, Economy Early stage of the Safeguards Thematic training: agencies have on how to Bureau, project and every specialist at Training materials fuller implement the Implementing quarterly during national or sub- will be specific to understanding of safeguard tools at agencies (OPDs), ERP national level the theme at the the use and the project activity FMUs, National implementation. SIS-REDD project activity implementation of level. Parks, Field administrator level, which include the safeguards SIS-REDD+ is facilitators the safeguards tools in the J- updated regularly tools, contained in SLMP’s ESMF at with credible the ESMF including the project activity information negative list level. screening, ECOPS, HCV, IPPF, FGRM, RPF/PF and also hands on guidelines on how to utilise existing ESMF Document – Jambi 74 TRAINING/CAPAC INDICATOR OF PROGRAM SOURCE/SPEAKE NO. ITY BUILDING OBJECTIVE SCHEDULE SUCCESS TARGET R PROGRAM SIS-REDD system for safeguards reporting of the J- SLMP and ERP 3. Public Provide outreach Improved Economy Bureau Semi - annually DGCC, Project Workshops: on J-SLMP and understanding and Implementing management units Training material ERP components support from the agencies (OPDs), at national and will broadly include to a wider audience public on J-SLMP field facilitators, sub-national levels, basic information and obtain support and ERP activities targeted villages safeguards on the J-SLMP and for the leading to overall and communities, specialists ERP components, implementation of success of the J- media, public the benefits and the ESMF. SLMP and ERP. forums, NGOs how the ESMF can mitigate the potential environmental and social risks. 4. Safeguards Provide hands-on Improved Project During ERP PMU environmental Coaching/Mentori skills enhancement understanding and management units implementation and social ng: technical and awareness of awareness specialists at national and support to ERP environmental and amongst implementing social good implementing sub-national levels, agencies on the practices, develop agencies and implementing application of cadreship of enhanced in-house agencies (OPDs), environmental and environmental and skills for the field facilitators social safeguards social champions management of within project and/or local experts environmental and activities. within implementing social aspects. agencies. 4. Thematic Sharing of Implementing Economy Bureau, Quarterly Safeguards Workshops: information and agencies (OPDs) implementing specialists, discussions on good practices to and field facilitators agencies (OPDs), implementing managing enable discussions at the project SIS REDD agencies (OPDs), resolution of in implementing the activity level can administrator, field field facilitators potential and/or safeguards tools in share information, facilitators, existing J-SLMP the ESMF to raise constraints in FMUs, NPs, and ERP cases at manage the project the project activity environmental and implementation and safeguards level such as specialists ESMF Document – Jambi 75 TRAINING/CAPAC INDICATOR OF PROGRAM SOURCE/SPEAKE NO. ITY BUILDING OBJECTIVE SCHEDULE SUCCESS TARGET R PROGRAM access restrictions, social risks of the J- identify possible tenure conflicts to SLMP and ERP. solutions. facilitate sharing of information on implementing the safeguards tools. ESMF Document – Jambi 76 Table 15 Target Group and Participant for Training and Workshop for J-SLMP and ERP Safeguards Technical/ Basic Public Thematic No. Target Group Thematic Training Workshop Workshop Training 1. Project team and staff (PMU) √ √ √ √ 2. Consultant and technical advisors √ √ √ √ 3. Economy bureau √ √ √ √ 4. Implementing agencies (OPDs) and √ √ √ √ Implementing entities (FMUs, NPs) 5. District and village governments √ √ √ √ 6. Targeted village communities and √ √ √ √ forums 7. Field facilitators √ √ √ √ 8. Media √ 9. NGOs √ 10. Academic community/researchers √ 11. Environmental office/agencies √ √ 12. National Land Agency (BPN) √ √ The indicative financial requirements per year for conducting the above capacity building programs including outreach to the various stakeholders and communities, and also safeguards staffing, monitoring and supervision activities, and FGRM strengthening is provided in the following Table 16. ESMF Document – Jambi 77 Table 16 Indicative Financial Requirements for Safeguards and Capacity Building Programs Six Years' Implementation of Safeguards Program for J-SLMP Number of Estimated cost No Safeguards Program Total cost (IDR) program (IDR) Basic Training/public Worshop: 2 100.000.000,00 200.000.000,00 1 Screening system and UKL/UPL 2 Technical/thematic training/workshop 5 100.000.000,00 500.000.000,00 Safeguards staffing (consultant): 2 720.000.000,00 1.440.000.000,00 3 Environment and social Monitoring and supervision, including - 4 operational of safeguards team in Jambi Safeguards Secretariat and 6 120.000.000,00 720.000.000,00 4,1 operationalisation 4,2 Meetings 24 10.000.000,00 240.000.000,00 4,3 Filed visit 132 27.000.000,00 3.564.000.000,00 4.4. Reporting 132 2.500.000,00 330.000.000,00 5 FGRM 5,1 FGRM sthrengthening 1 100.000.000,00 100.000.000,00 5,2 FGRM operationalization 11 50.000.000,00 550.000.000,00 6 Continuation of FPIC Consultation - 6,1 Institutional setup 1 100.000.000,00 100.000.000,00 6,2 Implementation 11 50.000.000,00 550.000.000,00 Provincial Environmental Management 1 700.000.000,00 700.000.000,00 7 and Protection Plan (RPPLH) 8 Indegenous People - 8,1 Village meetings 24 5.000.000,00 120.000.000,00 8,2 Participatory mapping 24 30.000.000,00 720.000.000,00 8,2 Facilition of agreement 24 10.000.000,00 240.000.000,00 8,4 Faciliation of village regulation 24 30.000.000,00 720.000.000,00 8,5 Facilitaion of Conservation permit 24 6.500.000,00 156.000.000,00 9 Smart Agriculture and SLA Schemes - 9,1 Capacity building 6 75.000.000,00 450.000.000,00 9,2 Field schools 12 50.000.000,00 600.000.000,00 TOTAL 12.000.000.000,00 Note: Estimated costs per component are currently being calculated and negotiated between DG PPI and Jambi Government. ESMF Document – Jambi 78 SAFEGUARDS MONITORING AND REPORTING Regular Safeguards Monitoring Supervision, monitoring, evaluation and performance review of ESMF will be conducted at the site level and throughout the J-SLMP and ERP. At the sub-national level, it will be conducted by Safeguards Committees either at the provincial or district levels, who should provide personnel responsible for evaluation and review at the site level. At the national level this should be done by DGCC. The evaluation and review will be focused on the process of planning and implementation of J-SLMP and ERP activities requiring an ESMF, including: ▪ Record of Free, Prior, Informed Consultations process (leading to community consent) during planning of activities and its implementation with indigenous people and local communities. Assessment is based on the quality of decisions whether they are genuinely made by indigenous people and local communities through culturally appropriate decision-making mechanisms, and implementation of plans to mitigate negative impacts (further described in the IPPF); ▪ Records of implementation of community participatory framework at the planning stage, to assess if the activity involves indigenous people and local communities; ▪ Records of implementation of community participatory framework at the planning stage, to assess if indigenous people and local communities involved in or affected by the activities are accepted by relevant stakeholders; ▪ Evidence of environmental permit for relevant activities; ▪ Report of environmental management and monitoring plan (e.g., ESMP) as well as the implementation of UKL-UPL or SPPL as relevant; and ▪ FGRM and feedback from indigenous people and local communities and stakeholders and results of negative impact mitigations. Regular Safeguards Reporting The results of monitoring are used as the basis for developing ESMF implementation reports which will include evaluation and corrective actions for improvement. The implementing agency at the central level will routinely consolidate ESMF reports and advise the Bank on the results. Relevant groups of indicators from SIS REDD+ that are relevant with regular safeguards reporting are: ▪ Indicators on policies to determine if relevant policies to support safeguards (policy, legal and institutional frameworks) are developed and implemented; ▪ Indicators on process to determine if safeguard mechanisms are properly designed and implemented; and ▪ Indicators on impact to determine if social and environmental risks are properly addressed. The above indicators are monitored through a specific schedule. Timeline for reporting the ESMF implementation on Environmental and Social Indicators and summary of issues is provided in Table 17. ESMF Document – Jambi 79 Channels for safeguard reporting through the SIS REDD+ is also shown in Error! Reference source not found.11. ESMF Document – Jambi 80 Table 17 Summary of Relevant E&S Indicators to Monitor/ Track during the J-SLMP Implementation E&S Indicators Project Summary of Issues Data Sources Timeline for Reporting Compliance Components Documentation and/or Sub- components Conflicts and disputes in ▪ C1, SC 1.2 ▪ Overlapping allocation and ▪ Village Quarterly SESA, ESMF, RPF/PF, forest and non-forest and 1.3 concessions for oil palm and forestry administration; Land Tenure Report areas (e.g., plantation ▪ C2 plantations; ▪ FMU; conflicts, revocation of ▪ Unclear border of FMUs; ▪ FGRM mechanism mining permits, ▪ Accumulation of unresolved through SIS-REDD+ encroachments problems; ▪ Conflicting licenses; ▪ Lack of cross sectoral conflict resolution mechanisms (e.g., plantation, forestry sectors and environmental disturbances); ▪ Lack of formal designation for FGRM institution Access restriction to land ▪ C1, SC1.3 ▪ Previous and existing uses by local ▪ Village Monthly ESMF, RPF/PF, IPPF, and natural resources communities and indigenous people administration; FGRM ▪ FMU; ▪ FGRM mechanism through SIS-REDD+ Social tensions due to ▪ C2. SC 2.1 ▪ Influx of migrants from other ▪ Village Monthly ESMF, Land Tenure influx of migrants provinces and plantation activities; administration Report, FGRM, IPPF ▪ Disrespect for indigenous rights; ▪ FMU ▪ Tenurial conflicts; ▪ National Parks ▪ Lack of cross sectoral conflict ▪ FGRM mechanism resolution mechanisms (e.g., plantation, forestry sectors and environmental disturbances); ESMF Document – Jambi 81 E&S Indicators Project Summary of Issues Data Sources Timeline for Reporting Compliance Components Documentation and/or Sub- components ▪ Lack of formal designation for FGRM institution; Impacts received by ▪ C1 SC 1.1, ▪ Diminishing of cultural values; ▪ FMU Quarterly ESMF, IPPF, RPF/PF, indigenous peoples SC1.2, SC ▪ Indigeneous claims of land within ▪ National Parks Land Tenure Report 1.3. the WPK or within the ▪ FGRM mechanism conservation/protected areas; ▪ Forum of indigenous ▪ Contradiction between customary people (e.g., Forum and national laws Luhak 16 in Merangin) Loss/Damage to physical ▪ C2 SC 2.1, Integrity of: ▪ District government Quartely ESMF, PCF & cultural resources 2.2 ▪ Tropical rainforest heritage sites; ▪ Archaeology Agency ▪ Geopark; (Balai Pelestarian Peninggalan ▪ Temple Complex in Muaro Jambi; Purbakala) ▪ Megalithic artifacts; ▪ Water resources (lakes); Community Health & ▪ C2 SC 2.1 ▪ Health and safety issues related to ▪ FMU/TN Quarterly ESMF, IPM Safety artisanal mining; ▪ Private companies ▪ Health and safety issue related to ▪ Provincial Health forest fire; Agency ▪ Health and safety issue related to used of pestiside Awareness, management ▪ C3 SC 3.1, ▪ Capacity for J-SLMP ▪ SEKDA/BAPPEDA Semi-annualy Capacity Analysis capacity and participation 3.2 implementation, monitoring and Province Report evaluation; ▪ SEKBER ▪ Benefit sharing mechanism; ▪ DGPPI ESMF Document – Jambi 82 E&S Indicators Project Summary of Issues Data Sources Timeline for Reporting Compliance Components Documentation and/or Sub- components Institutional capacity to ▪ C1 SC 1.2. ▪ Risk mitigation capacities among the ▪ Provincial Forestry Semi-annually Capacity Analysis manage potential ▪ C3 implementing units; Agency Report environmental & social ▪ Cross sectoral coordination in ▪ Kesbangpol risk managing the ennvironmental and ▪ FGRM system social risks; ▪ Plantation agency ▪ Capacity building needs for KHP ▪ FMU Officers is needed, especially to implement & monitoring HCV, ISPO ▪ Agraria offices among local government officers; (province and district) ▪ Lack of the ability of for environmental conflicts mediation; ▪ Lack of capacity to implement sustainable palm oil plantation Gender and social ▪ C1 ▪ Gender sensitive programs; ▪ Women Annually (in paralell with SESA, ESMF inclusion ▪ C2 ▪ Gender mainstreaming within the J- empowerment and RPJMD evaluation) SLMP and ERP; child protection ▪ C3 agency ▪ Sub-optimal Involvement of women to contribute in forest management ▪ Village Development will help reduce encroachment, and Agency deforestation Area of forest ▪ C2 SC 2.1, ▪ Encroachment and illegal activities ▪ FMU Semi-annually ESMF, RPF/PF, MRV encroachment 2.2 in forestry, protected and ▪ National parks conservation areas ▪ Concession holders Fire hotspots ▪ C2 SC 2.1, ▪ Uses of burning methods by ▪ FMU Quarterly ESMF, MRV occurrences 2.2 companies and smallholder palm oil ▪ Provincial Forestry farmers; Agency ▪ Weak adoption of ISPO/RSPO; ▪ Village Government ▪ Weak empowerment of MPA; (MPA) ESMF Document – Jambi 83 E&S Indicators Project Summary of Issues Data Sources Timeline for Reporting Compliance Components Documentation and/or Sub- components ▪ Private companies (MPA) ▪ NASA sattellite hotspot data Loss of natural habitat ▪ C2 SC 2.1, ▪ Encroachment; ▪ BKSDA Semi-annually Biodiversity and HCV and Biodiversity 2.2 ▪ Damage to wildlife corridor; ▪ National parks Studies ▪ Poaching activities; ▪ FMU ▪ Non-carbon benefit (endangered ▪ DG GAkkum species conservation); ▪ Overlapping with key biodiversity areas, and endangered species population; ▪ Community-based monitoring efforts are not optimized; ▪ Lack of clear conservation guidelines Contamination and ▪ C2 SC 2.1 ▪ Deterioration of water quality and ▪ BPDAS Semi-annually DLH Annual Report and Pollution quantity downstream Batanghari ▪ BWS Sumatra Jambi Environmental watershed Status Report ▪ DLH Leakages and reversals ▪ C1 SC 1.1, ▪ Lack of access to alternative ▪ BAPPEDA/SEKDA Semi-annually ESMF, MRV 1.2, 1.3 livelihood program to address ▪ FMU ▪ C2 SC 2.1. communities’ economic needs (can ▪ National Parks be developed from Village Funding/DD/ADD) ▪ BKSDA ▪ Unequal opportunity for participation ▪ Provincial Forestry in J-SLMP; Agency ▪ Lack of agreement on benefit ▪ Village Development sharing mechanism Agency ESMF Document – Jambi 84 Safeguards Reporting through SIS REDD+ SIS-REDD+ requires REDD+ implementers to independently assess and report on safeguards implementation. The system is intended to promote transparency and accountability from the site level. For this purpose, the MoEF has formulated APPS, a Safeguards Implementation Assessment Tool. The tool was developed on the principles of simplicity, transparency, accountability, completeness and comparability. APPS provides a checklist of supporting documents required as evidence of REDD+ safeguards implementation. It is provided along with the complete PCI under SIS-REDD+ in the Annex and can be downloaded on the SIS-REDD+ website (http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/sisredd/). The following items constitute the main content of the SIS REDD+, of which details are provided in each of this key content: SIS-REDD+ aims to gather, process, analyze, and present the necessary information on how safeguards are managed and respected in REDD+ activities, ranging from the project sites to district, provincial and national SIS management units. To ensure efficiency, an institutional structure and distribution of tasks and responsibilities for the information system from the site to national level have been established. Further refinement is currently underway to achieve a well-established Safeguard system. The responsibility to further develop, implement and manage SIS-REDD+ is currently under the REDD+ Division of MoEF.24 Two components were created to promote transparency and ease access to safeguards information provided in SIS-REDD+: a. A database, to manage data and information on safeguards implementation; and b. A website, tracking progress on safeguards implementation The SIS-REDD+ website provides a public access to REDD+ implementers or users to report their activities by filling in the checklists and uploading necessary documents as required by the APPS. Stakeholders can find a summary of both general REDD+ activities data and specific information on REDD+ safeguards. The REDD+ Division at MoEF is also considering several options to link the web- platforms to other forestry instruments with REDD+ relevant safeguards elements. The SIS-REDD+ website is designed to provide comprehensive and up to date information on safeguards implementation under REDD+, as wel l as other details of REDD+ (project names, locations, implementers, partners, duration, scope of activities, key achievements as well as challenges and supporting factors). As more data arrives, the website will eventually be able to provide a summary of REDD+ activities in Indonesia in a more precise manner, for both general and detailed information. Further user-friendly and more integrated data and information presentation, such as maps, and graphics can be generated. The National SIS Management Agency (PSIS-Nas) placed under the MoEF’s REDD+ Division is assigned as the administrator and manager and is mandated to maintain and further refine the system as well as providing guidance to PSIS at sub-national levels. Including in PSIS-Nas roles and generating analytical information (such as maps and graphics) on safeguards implementation. PSIS Nas, serving as the national information focal point, is responsible in preparing information for the MoEF, to be integrated into the National Communication and/or Biennial Update Report for submission to the UNFCCC. 24 The responsibilities were previously under Pustanling of the former Ministry of Forestry, which changed to the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF). ESMF Document – Jambi 85 With respect to Safeguard Information System reporting for Jambi, it is still being discussed on who will be reporting it to the national system. The current thinking is that there will be three options as shown under Figure 11Error! Reference source not found.. This figure also shows the safeguard monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system. ▪ Direct reporting from FMU and NP to the national SIS-REDD+; ▪ Indirect reporting through District Safeguard Committee; ▪ Indirect reporting through Provincial Safeguard Committee. Figure 11 Safeguards Reporting through SIS REDD+ INFORMATION DISCLOSURE DG PPI, J-SLMP, SEKBER and Provincial Government (BAPPEDA/SEKDA) will maintain high-quality reliable documentation, as well as provide access to information to the public relating to the implementation of the ESMF, including the participation processes and implementation of UKL/UPL or SPPL. The ESMF document (both in Indonesian and English) and its associated instruments (RPF, PF, IPPF and FGRM) will be publicly disclosed in DG PPI’s websites ( http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/peraturan- perundangan.html) and the World Bank through Image Bank. In addition to website-based disclosure of information, relevant information pertaining to J-SLMP and safeguards management will be consulted and made accessible to the public, including the target communities. FEEDBACK GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM The Feedback Grievance Redress Mechanism (FGRM) will utilise existing systems through the GAKKUM (law enforcement) unit under the MoEF at the national level that will be linked to the SIS REDD+ reporting of safeguards implementation. Each implementing agency will implement the existing FGRM mechanisms with oversight from the Provincial Executing Agency (BAPPEDA/SEKDA). These systems allow the public, communities or individuals affected by the ER activities to report complaints and obtain resolution in a timely manner. The system also records and documents all complaints and tracking of resolution on a web-based platform through the SIS REDD+. The provincial environmental and social specialists will provide technical support for coordination of FGRM implementation, including management of grievances relating to J-SLMP. The FGRM mechanism is presented in Annex 7. ESMF Document – Jambi 86 ANNEX 1. J-SLMP AND ERP NEGATIVE LIST ERP activities or subprojects will comply with all relevant World Bank environmental and social safeguard policies and Indonesian laws. Activities ineligible to be funded by ERP/Carbon Fund listed below are included, but not limited to: No Negative List Yes No Remarks 1 Activities contributing to the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation (illegal logging, overlogging, uncontrolled burning and mining); 2 New settlements or expansion of settlements within conservation forests, protected areas and parks; 3 Any activity that can potentially lead to and/or result in destruction and/or relocation of physical cultural resources; 4 Any activity that can potentially lead to and/or result in conversion of primary forest and/or natural habitats, including adjacent critical natural habitats 5 Purchase and/or use of hazardous chemicals including but not limited to pesticide and insecticides that are that are classified as IA or IB by WHO and GOI’s regulations and activities with potential exposure to health risks due to interaction with such chemicals. 6 Activities where community endorsement and broad support through free, prior, and informed consultations is not obtained, or evidence for such support is not available; 7 Any activity associated with political campaigns and election; 8 Poaching and/or trade of protected species and animals; 9 Removal or alteration of any physical cultural property 10 Activity which cause negative impact to Woman and Children, including child or forced labor; 11 Forced eviction; 12 Activities or subprojects that contravene applicable international environmental agreements and/or conventions; 13 Activities warranting high risk classification (Category A) as elaborated in the ESMF. ESMF Document – Jambi 76 ANNEX 2. SCREENING AGAINST ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISKS Following Preliminary Screening against the Negative List, DGCC/J-SLMP/SEKBER/BAPPEDA/ SEKDA in collaboration with subproject proponents will screen and assess proposed subproject activities with regards to potential risks and their management. This exercise will produce recommendations whether or not particular activities should be financed although they have passed the negative list in light of the risks foreseen. The recommendations will also include preventive measures, capacity building, technical assistance and oversight to strengthen risk management. ESMF Document – Jambi 77 ANNEX 3. ENVIRONMENTAL CODES OF PRACTICES DISCLAIMER: J-SLMP will not provide funding for Category A project that requires environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) This Annex provides comprehensive environmental guidance for activities that are expected or forecasted to be taken place in BioCF WPK or the surrounding areas to complement statement letter for environmental management (SPPL). It has to be read that this guideline or ECOP will not replace the government safeguards system such as the application of UKL/UPL or SPPL as currently regulated by Law No. 32/2009 on Protection and Management of the Environment and Government Regulation, Ministry of Environment Regulation No. 5/2012 on Business Activities Obligation to have AMDAL, and Government Regulation No. 27/2012 concerning Environmental Permit, where each business and/or activity (project) plan mandates an Environmental Permit if an AMDAL or UKL-UPL assessment. The following diagram should be used as guidance for screening of activities to be supported by BioCF. The followings are simple guidelines prepared in general for potential activities under BioCF intervention that will complement SPPL. Again, ECOPS is only applied to Category C project as outline above. More analysis will be done when BioCF Pre-Investment and ERP phases for Jambi is completed so that clearer direction on intervention activities can be achieved. A. Plantation Development; B. Small Construction Works; C. Agro-Forestry; ESMF Document – Jambi 78 D. Home Industry; E. Farming; F. Fishery; G. Tree Sapling-Vegetation Seeds; H. Community Timber Activities; I. Ecotourism; J. Village Spatial Planning; K. OHS General Guidleines; A. Plantation Developments The codes of practice for plantation developments aim to increase income of the community and farmers, generate additional employment and help eradicate poverty in the rural areas by promoting the management of productive, profitable and sustainable plantation forests. This environmental protection guideline is prepared to ensure that forest plantations supported by the ERP are designed and managed to achieve the highest level of productivity and financial viability with the least possible negative impacts on local communities and the natural environment. The most important pre-requisite to a successful plantation project is clear definition of management objectives, including the following: ▪ Expected outcomes in terms of levels of productivity, rotation age and final products; ▪ Rehabilitation and maintenance of land productivity; ▪ Soil and watershed protection; ▪ Habitat conservation and restoration; and ▪ Community participation and improved livelihoods. The main objective for project activities under the ERP is to develop and manage productive and profitable forest plantations in a sustainable manner. Environmental protection measures are incorporated into the following plantation management activities: Site selection and landscape level planning and plantation design, site preparation, plantation establishment, tending, pest management, fire prevention and control, harvesting, and access tracts improvement and maintenance. 1. Site Selection Areas for commercial plantation forests must be carefully selected to ensure high productivity and profitability to farmers, and to avoid adverse impacts to the local community and to the natural environment. The forest plantation areas must be consistent with the spatial plan. The criteria for site selection are shown in the matrix below. Criteria Description Production forestland Forestland classification 1) Only bare lands will be used for plantations; Vegetative cover 2) Forest plantations of low quality; 3) Avoid projects in HCV forest or areas with important ecosystem services. Not more than 250 in slope Slope ESMF Document – Jambi 79 Criteria Description Plantation sites must be within 2 km of existing all-weather roads. Accessibility Soil type other than laterite or sterile coastal sand, soil depth above 30 cm, Soil conditions pH above 4, and soil composed of less than 40 percent stones and coarse fragments. Not used for food production, grazing of livestock, production of non-timber Existing land use forestpProduct so as not to compromise food security and other critical household needs. Area has no cultural or spiritual significance. Land allocation Land categorized by the spatial plan (national or local/regional) as land specified for other use (Area Penggunaan Lain/APL). 2. Plantation Planning The Landscape Plantation Planning will be used for all forest plantation areas. This is to ensure that stream banks are protected, and access tracts, fire breaks and fire lines are planned to benefit plantation projects. The landscape plantation plan: 1) Defines areas for biodiversity conservation, stream bank protection, access tracts, fire breaks and poor areas that are unsuitable for commercial forest plantations; 2) Guides plantation owners on appropriate plantation models, suitable species, intercropping and other information necessary to prepare simple and practical individual forest plantation management plan; 3) Can be used to obtain forest certification. The Landscape Plantation Plan must include the following basic considerations and which are properly delineated on a plantation plan map: 1) Slope and plantation operability No production plantations shall be allowed on slopes exceeding 25º for reasons of both slope instability and low productivity. Slopes between 20º-25º should have lower than normal planting densities, 4x2 m or 1,100 trees per ha, to limit site disturbance during site preparation, planting, tending and harvesting. Where site is suitable, such areas may be planted to valuable timber species. 2) Buffer zone protection Buffer zone protection of reservoirs, entrenched streams, drainage canals where natural vegetation will be retained, no clearing or ground disturbance will be allowed during plantation establishment, and no clear cutting of trees will be allowed. Native vegetation in the buffer zone may be established through Assisted Natural Regeneration (ANR) techniques supplemented by the planting of ecologically important trees and other plants such as those eaten by birds and other wild animals or economically important species like bamboo (for poles), Canarium album (nuts), Areca cathechu (nuts), Tricanthera gigantea (forage for pigs, cattle, goats, rabbits), Flemingia macrophylla (forage) and Caliandra calothyrsus (forage). The recommended buffer zone protection for rivers that have no embankments, and located at rural areas (outside of cities) will refer to the Ministry of Public Works No. 28/PRT/M/2015 regarding Buffer Zone Protection for Rivers and Lakes, Article 6, as follows: ESMF Document – Jambi 80 i. Large rivers having watershed area of > 500 km2, at least 100 m of buffer zone from the edges of the river along the length of the river; ii. Small rivers having watershed area of ≤ 500 km2, at least 50 m of buffer zone from the edges of the river along the length of the river. 3) Eroded areas Badly eroded areas characterized by deep gullies and land slips in road cuts and plantations will be stabilized using appropriate vegetative and structural soil control measure. 4) In-plantation biodiversity Plantations are not forests; they are much more like agricultural systems and have many of the same risks and uncertainties. Plantations can be made more like natural systems by incorporating diversity (of genetic materials, species, age classes and spatial structure at the landscape-level) to improve the ecological stability and resilience that limit the risk of failure and reduce the necessity for artificial inputs to these simplified ecosystems. All plantations over 50 ha should consist of several sub-compartments, the size and number of which will depend on the scale of the plantation, comprising different tree ages (to promote structural diversity), different species of indigenous and exotic trees, different genotypes within species, and residual indigenous natural vegetation types. Wherever practical given the scale of the plantation, design and layout should promote the protection, restoration and conservation of natural communities. This can be accomplished by utilising wildlife corridors, retention of native tree species, stream protection corridors, sanitation and fire breaks of native vegetation and a mosaic of different age and rotation periods to mimic the landscape patterns of natural forest communities. 5) Access provisions Landscape plantation design must show the location of existing roads, access tracks and trails that may be used for transporting seedlings and other plantation inputs, as well as in fire prevention and control. Additional access tracks may need to be constructed for eventual product extraction. 6) Fire breaks The Landscape Plantation Design must provide for the location, specifications, construction and maintenance of fire breaks and fire lines. The design must maximize the use of the buffer zones in streams and drainage canals, other native vegetation, as well as roads and access tracks. 7) Poor sites Poor sites within the plantation block such as those with very shallow top soil, very stony areas, or areas with over 25 degrees slopes that are unsuitable for commercial plantation forests, should be delineated and earmarked for rehabilitation using assisted natural regeneration and other afforestation techniques that promote the growth of native species. This may be supplemented by planting leguminous species such as Tephrosia candida and other local species. ESMF Document – Jambi 81 3. Site Preparation Site preparation are activities done before planting to improve existing site conditions and enhance survival and promote fast initial growth of planted seedlings. This includes vegetation clearance to reduce competition and fire risks, hole digging to improve soil structure and enhance root growth, and basal fertilization to increase soil fertility. 1) Vegetation clearance Environmental protection guidelines to be followed are the following: o Broadcast burning cannot be used as a tool of site clearing and site preparation; vegetation must be cleared by hand or machine; o Avoid comprehensive vegetation clearance on sloping areas. Clear vegetation in strips or on spots; o Debris in vegetation clearance should be retained on site as source of nutrients and to provide soil cover and help in reducing soil erosion; o Mechanical extraction of tree stumps and roots will not be allowed on sloping areas; only on flat terrain; o Full cultivation will be allowed only on flat or slightly sloping terrain below 15 degrees. Between, 16 to 20 degrees slope, cultivate in alternate strips. No cultivation is allowed beyond 20 degrees. 2) Digging of planting holes o Planting holes should not be excavated during the period of heavy rainfall; o Back-fill the hole immediately as soon as possible to keep the loosened soil inside the hole and minimise soil erosion; o In sloping terrain, dig planting holes along the contour and in fish scale- like pattern; 3) Basal fertilization o Apply basal fertilizer on the hole; broadcast application is not allowed; o Use a container not bare hands in handling fertilizer; o Record the kind, dosage and date of fertilizer application. 4. Intercropping Any intercropping activities on sloping plantation sites should be carried out along the contour. No intercropping will be allowed on slopes over 20 degrees and intercropping of root or tuber crops will not be permitted over 15 degrees. 5. Tending Weeding should be limited to what is absolutely necessary to maintain high survival and fast growth of planted seedlings, employing spot weeding around the base of the seedlings, and slashing of vegetation in other areas, so as to maintain ground cover. Vegetation debris from weeding and slashing should be left on site as mulch. ESMF Document – Jambi 82 Conduct singling during the dry season, when trees are about 4-6 months old and stems are still small. Do not conduct singling without the proper tools. Pruning is required only on plantations that aim to produce saw logs. It is not necessary if the final product is pulpwood. It is also not necessary on species with good natural self-pruning characteristics like Eucalyptus urophylla. It will be applied only on selected trees that will constitute the final crop (saw logs). As in singling, prune only with the proper pruning equipment, never a knife. Make a clean and straight cut at the outer edge of the branch collar. The branch collar must not be injured since this is where the healing process starts. Cut pruning debris into shorter pieces and spread them evenly in the plantation. Thinning, as in pruning, is performed only on plantations where the objective is to produce saw logs. Moreover, thinning is recommended only on good sites where the yield is high enough to warrant additional investments in thinning and pruning. Conduct thinning when canopy begins to close and competition for light begins. After selecting the trees to be retained, cut all others but with care so as not to injure the retained trees. After removing any usable stems, chop the thinning debris into shorter pieces and spread evenly on the area. 6. Fire Prevention and Control Forest fire prevention and control activities must be an integral part of the operational plan for the plantation area. Such plans should establish a fire control organisation, defined roles and responsibilities, and detailed prevention, public education, patrolling, enforcement and fire response programs. In each plantation area, reduce amount of fuel in the plantation through timely and effective weed control. Cut debris in weeding, pruning and thinning to small pieces and pile them in between tree rows. Compress the pile low by pressing or stepping on it. If plantation is adjoining grassland or other fire prone areas, construct fire breaks of at least 10 meters wide along the boundaries, at the onset of the dry season. 7. Access Tracks Access within plantation blocks will be limited to that necessary to transport planting materials to the site and to extract products from primary landings in the plantations to secondary landings at the road. Such tracks should be wide enough for motorcycles and or small tractors. Plantation block plans must show how the site is to be accessed; including details on location, design, construction and maintenance. All roads and access tracks must be properly located, designed, constructed and maintained. Roads and trails must be constructed according to acceptable engineering standards and shall have regular maintenance. Detailed access guidelines should be prepared early in subproject implementation and may include design considerations such as the following: 1) Primary extraction from felling site to the first landing at trackside will be by human labor or draft animals, depending on the size of product (i.e., fuel/pulp wood vs sawlogs); 2) Density of secondary extraction tracks shall be the absolute minimum consistent with the practical distances of primary extraction; ESMF Document – Jambi 83 3) Tracks will be permitted to encroach into stream protection corridors only at points of crossing, which must be in areas of stable, moderate terrain; 4) Stream crossings should be rock-stabilized drifts; culverts should be employed only in extreme cases where drifts are not practical; 5) Tracks shall have a maximum width of 3 m, a maximum favorable grade of 15 degrees and a maximum adverse grade of 10 degrees; 6) Cut and fill slopes must be avoided wherever possible; 7) No yarding of logs or other products will be permitted on the surface of tracks; 8) Track rights-of-way will be lightly slashed and vegetation cover will be maintained on the running surface wherever possible; 9) All tracks on side-slopes shall be out-sloped or equipped with water-bars to disperse water onto stable areas down slope; and 10) Tracks will be inspected regularly during rainy periods in the first three years after construction and during periods of active use, and immediate maintenance action taken to correct problems of drainage or erosion. 8. Plantation Harvesting Harvesting of trees and other products shall not result in long-term soil degradation or adverse impacts on water quality and watershed hydrology. All logging operations must be strictly supervised and enforced by DARD/DFD. For slopes over 15 degrees, logging coupes shall not exceed 10 ha with at least 60 m between adjacent coupes logged the same year. For slopes less than 15 degrees, logging coupes shall not exceed 20 ha, with at least 30 m between adjacent coupes felled the same year. Ground vegetation shall be preserved as far as possible during logging and the site shall be re-planted in the year following logging. B. Small Construction Works This ECOP is to be applied for projects involving small works 1. Objectives This ECOP is prepared to manage small environmental impacts involving construction works. The ECOP will be a mandatory part of construction contract or bidding documents so that contractor complies with environmental covenants. The project owner and construction supervisors will be responsible for monitoring of compliance with ECOP and preparing the required reports. The PMU is responsible for ensuring that the ECOP is effectively implemented. The PMU will assign a qualified staff to be responsible for checking implementation compliance of contractors, and include the following: (a) Monitoring the contractors’ compliance with the environmental plan ; (b) Taking remedial actions in the event of non-compliance and/or adverse impacts; (c) Investigating complaints, evaluating and identifying corrective measures; (d) Advising the Contractor on environment improvement, awareness, proactive pollution prevention measures; (e) Monitoring the activities of contractors on replying to complaints; (f) Providing guidance and on-the-job training to field engineers on various aspects to avoid/mitigate potential negative impacts to local environment and communities during construction. Contractor is responsible for carrying out civil works and informs PMU, local authority and community about construction plan and risks associated with civil works. As such, contractor is responsible for ESMF Document – Jambi 84 implementing agreed measures to mitigate environmental risks associated with its civil works. The contractor is required to obey other national relevant legal regulations and laws. 2. Contractor’s Responsibilities The following matrix is an example and is not necessarily a full treatment of all requirements for a specific subproject. For example, there might be requirements for developing an environmental impact assessment (AMDAL or UKL-UPL) and/or reason to have contractor deal with sexually transmitted diseases, medical and hazardous waste s (e.g., oil from vehicle repair and similar, fuel spills etc.). ISSUES/RISKS MITIGATION MEASURE The contractor implement dust control measures to ensure that the generation of dust is minimised and is not perceived as a nuisance by local residents, maintain a safe working environment, such as: ▪ Water dusty roads and construction sites; 1) Dust generation/air pollution ▪ Covering of material stockpiles; ▪ Loads covered and secured during transportation to prevent the scattering of soil, sand, materials, or dust; Exposed soil and material stockpiles shall be protected against wind erosion. ▪ Portable or constructed toilets must be provided on site for construction workers. Wastewater from toilets as well as kitchens, showers, sinks, etc. shall be discharged into a conservancy tank for removal from the site or discharged into municipal sewerage systems; there should be no direct discharges to any water body;. 2) Water pollution ▪ Wastewater over permissible values set by Government of Indonesia standards/regulations must be collected in a conservancy tank and removed from site by licensed waste collectors; ▪ At completion of construction works, water collection tanks and septic tanks shall be covered and effectively sealed off. ▪ The contractor shall follow the detailed drainage design included in the construction plans, to ensure drainage system is always maintained cleared 3) Drainage and of mud and other obstructions; sedimentation ▪ Areas of the site not disturbed by construction activities shall be maintained in their existing conditions. ▪ At all places of work, the contractor shall provide litter bins, containers and refuse collection facilities; ▪ Solid waste may be temporarily stored on site in a designated area approved by the Construction Supervision Consultant and relevant local authorities prior to collection and disposal; ▪ Waste storage containers shall be covered, tip-proof, weatherproof and scavenger proof; ▪ No burning, on-site burying or dumping of solid waste shall occur. 4) Solid waste ▪ Recyclable materials such as wooden plates for trench works, steel, scaffolding material, site holding, packaging material, etc. shall be collected and separated on-site from other waste sources for reuse, for use as fill, or for sale; ▪ If not removed off site, solid waste or construction debris shall be disposed of only at sites identified and approved by the Construction Supervision Consultant and included in the solid waste plan. Under no circumstances shall the contractor dispose of any material in environmentally sensitive areas, such as in areas of natural habitat or in watercourses; ESMF Document – Jambi 85 ISSUES/RISKS MITIGATION MEASURE ▪ Used oil and grease shall be removed from site and sold to an approved used oil recycling company; ▪ Used oil, lubricants, cleaning materials, etc. from the maintenance of vehicles and machinery shall be collected in holding tanks and removed from site by a 6) Chemical or specialized oil recycling company for disposal at an approved hazardous hazardous wastes waste site; ▪ Unused or rejected tar or bituminous products shall be returned to the supplier’s production plant; ▪ Store chemicals in safe manner, such as roofing, fenced and appropriate labeling. ▪ Areas to be cleared should be minimised as much as possible; ▪ The contractor shall remove topsoil from all areas where topsoil will be impacted on by rehabilitation activities, including temporary activities such as storage and stockpiling, etc; the stripped topsoil shall be stockpiled in areas agreed with the Construction Supervision Consultant for later use in re- vegetation and shall be adequately protected; 7) Disruption of vegetative cover and ▪ The application of chemicals for vegetation clearing is not permitted; ecological resources ▪ Prohibit cutting of any tree unless explicitly authorised in the vegetation clearing plan; ▪ When needed, erect temporary protective fencing to efficiently protect the preserved trees before commencement of any works within the site; ▪ The contractor shall ensure that no hunting, trapping shooting, poisoning of fauna takes place. ▪ Before construction, carry out consultations with local government and community and with traffic police; ▪ Significant increases in number of vehicle trips must be covered in a construction plan previously approved. Routing, especially of heavy vehicles, needs to take into account sensitive sites such as schools, hospitals, and markets; ▪ Installation of lighting at night must be done if this is necessary to ensure safe 8) Traffic traffic circulation’; management ▪ Place signs around the construction areas to facilitate traffic movement, provide directions to various components of the works, and provide safety advice and warning; ▪ Employing safe traffic control measures, including road/rivers/canal signs and flag persons to warn of dangerous conditions; ▪ Avoid material transportation for construction during rush hour; ▪ Signpost shall be installed appropriately in both water-ways and roads where necessary. ▪ Provide information to affected households on working schedules as well as 9) Interruption of utility planned disruptions of water/power at least two days in advance; services ▪ Any damages to existing utility systems of cable shall be reported to authorities and repaired as soon as possible. ▪ Cleared areas such as disposal areas, site facilities, workers’ camps, stockpiles areas, working platforms and any areas temporarily occupied 10) Restoration of during construction of the subproject works shall be restored using affected areas landscaping, adequate drainage and re-vegetation; ▪ Trees shall be planted at exposed land and on slopes to prevent or reduce land collapse and keep stability of slopes; ESMF Document – Jambi 86 ISSUES/RISKS MITIGATION MEASURE ▪ Soil contaminated with chemicals or hazardous substances shall be removed and transported and buried in waste disposal areas. ▪ Training workers on occupational safety regulations and provide sufficient protective clothing for workers in accordance with applicable Government of Indonesia laws and regulations; ▪ Install fences, barriers, dangerous warning/prohibition site around the 11) Worker and public construction area which showing potential danger to public people; Safety ▪ The contractor shall provide safety measures as installation of fences, barriers warning signs, lighting system against traffic accidents as well as other risk to people and sensitive areas; ▪ If previous assessments indicate there could be unexploded ordnance (UXO), clearance must be ▪ The contractor shall coordinate with local authorities (leaders of local communes, leader of villages) for agreed schedules of construction activities at areas nearby sensitive places or at sensitive times (e.g., religious festival days); ▪ Copies in Indonesian language of these ECOPs and of other relevant environmental safeguard documents shall be made available to local communities and to workers at the site; ▪ Disseminate subproject information to affected parties (for example local authority, enterprises and affected households, etc) through community 12) Communication meetings before construction commencement; with local ▪ Provide a community relations contact from whom interested parties can communities receive information on site activities, subproject status and subproject implementation results; ▪ Inform local residents about construction and work schedules, interruption of services, traffic detour routes and provisional bus routes, blasting and demolition, as appropriate; ▪ Notification boards shall be erected at all construction sites providing information about the subproject, as well as contact information about the site managers, environmental staff, health and safety staff, telephone numbers and other contact information so that any affected people can have the channel to voice their concerns and suggestions. If the contractor discovers archeological sites, historical sites, remains and objects, including graveyards and/or individual graves during excavation or construction, the contractor shall: ▪ Stop the construction activities in the area of the chance find; ▪ Delineate the discovered site or area; ▪ Secure the site to prevent any damage or loss of removable objects. In cases of removable antiquities or sensitive remains, a night guard shall be arranged until the responsible local authorities or the Department of Culture and 13) Chance find Information takes over; procedures ▪ Notify the Construction Supervision Consultant who in turn will notify responsible local or national authorities in charge of the Cultural Property of Viet Nam (within 24 hours or less); ▪ Relevant local or national authorities would be in charge of protecting and preserving the site before deciding on subsequent appropriate procedures. This would require a preliminary evaluation of the findings to be performed. The significance and importance of the findings should be assessed according to the various criteria relevant to cultural heritage; those include the aesthetic, historic, scientific or research, social and economic values; ESMF Document – Jambi 87 ISSUES/RISKS MITIGATION MEASURE ▪ Decisions on how to handle the finding shall be taken by the responsible authorities. This could include changes in the layout (such as when finding an irremovable remain of cultural or archeological importance) conservation, preservation, restoration and salvage; ▪ If the cultural sites and/or relics are of high value and site preservation is recommended by the professionals and required by the cultural relics authority, the Program Owner will need to make necessary design changes to accommodate the request and preserve the site; ▪ Decisions concerning the management of the finding shall be communicated in writing by relevant authorities; ▪ Construction works could resume only after permission is granted from the responsible local authorities concerning safeguard of the heritage. C. Agro-Forestry 1. To participate in providing policy provisions to provide incentive to farmers adopting agro forestry (such as land control or credit) and mitigate financial risks related to interventions, if possible. Threat of decreased firewood availability may not be an adequate incentive for the farmers to grow trees. Farmers are often as interested in other wood products as they are in non-wood products (such as construction poles, fruits or medicines); 2. To train farmers and field staff utilise field intervention. Training shall also include field visits by farmers and field staff to promising livelihood activities; 3. To build a partnership between the project and farmers. Farmers should have an opportunity during project identification and implementation process to convey their needs and choice in relation to biological and social economic interventions; 4. To develop a mechanism that enables farmers to cover operational costs, maintain control over trees and receive technical advice. A revolving fund, association coordination or annual gathering can ensure support to project beneficiaries. D. Home Industry/Small Industry 1. To ensure that the management plan can answer the anticipated use of natural resources and potential environmental impacts. Issues that must be addressed in the management plan should include: a. Information on the area, scope and location of activity; b. Raw materials (namely, wood, drinking water, and fuel) and required storage facility; c. Types and distance of contaminating disposal; d. Evaluation of impacts of industrial activities; e. Availability of disposal channel; f. Placement and disposal of solid waste. ESMF Document – Jambi 88 2. Monitor and diminish losses from environmental impact in each process of production; 3. Ensure that the financed activities do not use, produce, store or relate to hazardous substances (toxic, rust or explosive) or substances resulting in “B3� waste (Toxic and Hazardous Substances) (as recorded in the list of Negative Protection regulations). E. Farming Animal droppings can maintain the fertility of soil and replace soil nutrition when collected and treated accordingly. On the contrary, uncontrolled droppings can pollute water and endanger human’s or animal’s health. For instance, dropping bacterial organisms can pollute drinking water supplies with nitrate. Animals’ droppings can be managed by: ▪ Preventing the rainfall from entering, irrigation and surface water nozzle into animal pen and storage facilities; ▪ Preventing keeping too many animals in a pen; ▪ Shoveling/removing droppings from the breeding pens; ▪ Covering droppings with absorbent materials; ▪ Removing lumps of droppings/animals droppings; Complaints of odor from a farm can be minimised by: ▪ For a sensitive environment, choosing a location and design of a farm prudently with adequate distance between supports; ▪ Taking into consideration the existing direction of the wind, especially during dry season; ▪ Optimizing frequency of cleaning of pens; ▪ Maintaining dust at low level since the odor is absorbed and carried by granules of dust; ▪ Number of animals should not exceed the recommended density; ▪ Ventilation that can maximally shed the odor during cleaning of pens; ▪ Utilising solid vegetation as support partition to circulate air flow (to disintegrate odor), filter dust and relocate odor from sensitive areas; ▪ Placing halls of pens thoroughly, in relation to the direction of disposal of odor; ▪ Collecting droppings and manure under a weather-resistant cover, before relocating the droppings and manure from the location; and ▪ Utilising healthily formulated livestock feed. F. Fishery 1. Conditions of fish cultivation Characteristics of good fish: a) Shape: Good shape; ESMF Document – Jambi 89 b) Color: Bright and glossy; c) Scale: No sign of loss of scale; d) Movement: Active and showing normal movement; e) Reflex: Trying to escape when touched; f) Feeling: Slick texture Transportation of fish: a) Fish can be transported in a plastic or polyethylene container and open container such as drum, aluminum filled with oxygen. b) Support power of container/beg depends on • Size and health condition of fry; • Distance and time used; • Water temperature; • Availability of dissolved oxygen c) Normally 8,000–10,000 fry (10 and 5 cm) can be transported in a drum (200 liter) for 12–14 hours d) The following matrix can help plan the transportation of fry for 5–6 hours Ways to keep fish alive: a) Check the quality of soil and water of the embankment before releasing the fry; b) Ensure the embankment is free from: • Grass and predator fish; • Molluscs/barnacle; • Predators such as snakes, frogs, birds, insects, and so on c) Ensure that fry is placed in different ponds according to age and size groups; d) Ensure the availability of fish natural fodder; ESMF Document – Jambi 90 e) Use healthily formulated additional fodder 2. Conditions for equipment to catch fish: a) Type and size of the equipment must follow the regulations of Government of Indonesia (Minister of Marines and Fishery Affairs Regulation No. 71/PERMEN-KP/2016 regarding Fishing Areas and Placement of Fish Catching Devices in Indonesia Fisheries Management Zone) • Jaring lingkar (surrounding nets); • Pukat tarik (seine nets); • Pukat hela (trawls); • Penggaruk (dredges); • Jaring angkat (lift nets); • Alat yang dijatuhkan (falling gears); • Jaring insang (gillnets and entangling nets); • Perangkap (traps); • Pancing (hooks and lines); • Alat penjepit dan melukai (grappling and wounding) b) The equipment shall not cause damages to the environment; and c) The equipment shall be made from environmental friendly materials G. Tree Saplings/Vegetation Seeds Tree saplings/vegetation seeds should be: 1. In good condition; 2. Healthy (free from diseases, fungus, bacteria, and virus); 3. Buds and roots are well grown; 4. Local original species; 5. Legalized from its known origin or local source (if possible) Storing of seeds should meet the following: 1. It should use bales/poly-bags for packaging; 2. Moss bales/poly-bags need to be kept wet until usage; 3. It should be stored in a cool storage with adequate ventilation; 4. Cultivation may be immersed in cultivation solution prior to transportation; ESMF Document – Jambi 91 5. It should protect the seeds from overly hot or cold weather; 6. To know the number of trees to be planted, one must know the following: • Areas that need to be planted; and • Placement of distance of seeds H. Community Timber Activities ERP/Carbon Fund may support commercial harvesting operations only when, on the basis of the applicable social and environmental screening and assessment, it is determined that the areas affected by the harvesting are not critical forests or related critical natural habitats and that are no land use conflicts with local communities or indigenous peoples. Harvesting operation by local communities under forest community management or under joint forest management arrangements are eligible to project support if: (a) Have achieved a standard of forest management developed with meaningful participation of locally affected communities in a manner consistent with the principles outlined below; or (b) Adhere to a time-bound action plan to achieve such standard: 1. Compliance with relevant Indonesian laws; 2. Recognition of and respect for any legally documented or customary land tenure and use rights as well as the rights of indigenous peoples and workers; 3. Measures to maintain or enhance sound and effective community relations; 4. Conservation of biological diversity and ecological functions; 5. Measures to maintain or enhance environmentally sound multiple benefits accruing from the forest; 6. Prevention or minimisation of the adverse environmental impacts from forest use; 7. Effective forest management planning; 8. Active monitoring and assessment of relevant forest management areas; and 9. The maintenance of critical forest areas and other critical natural habitats affected by the operation. ERP/Carbon Fund will not finance industrial scale-harvesting, i.e., carried out by firms (in opposition to local communities and forests operating under joint forest or community management). NEA, NSC and project proponents (CSOs/CBOs) will monitors all such operations with meaningful and documented participation of participating communities. All of the above requirements should be assessed, documented and reflected in the progress implementation reports of participating CSOs/CBOs. I. Ecotourism 1. Strengthen the conservation effort for and enhance the natural integrity of the ecotourism areas; 2. Respect the sensitivities of local cultures; 3. Be efficient in the use of natural resources (water, energy); 4. Ensure waste disposal has minimal environmental and aesthetic impact; ESMF Document – Jambi 92 5. Develop a recycling program; 6. Keep abreast of current environmental issues, particularly of the local area; 7. Network with other stakeholders (particularly those in the local area) to keep each other informed of developments and encourage the use of this Code of Practice; 8. Endeavour to use distribution networks (e.g., catalogues) and retail outlets to raise environmental awareness by distributing guidelines to consumers; 9. Support ecotourism education/training for guides and managers; 10. Employ tour guides well versed and respectful of local cultures and environments; 11. Give clients appropriate verbal and written education (interpretation) and guidance with respect to the natural and cultural history of the areas visited; 12. Use locally produced goods that benefit the local community, but do not by goods made from threatened or endangered species; 13. Never intentionally disturb or encourage the disturbance of wildlife or wildlife habitats; 14. Keep vehicles to designated roads and tracks; 15. Abide by the rules and regulations of natural areas; 16. Commit to the principle of best practice; 17. Comply with Government of Indonesia Regulation’s requirements J. Village Spatial Planning This is a simple guideline of Environmental and Social Code of Practices (ESCOP) for reference on the inclusion and consideration of good practices in environmental and social management in village planning process. The village planning development may also generate indirect negative environmental and social impacts and the followings are the examples of potential impacts from the downstream activities of village development planning: 1. Affect local and IP communities; 2. Lead to future land acquisition and resettlement; 3. Require relocation of people that may have substantial social implications; 4. Require the use of natural resources unsustainably (for example, excessive extraction of groundwater, massive sand mining); 5. Lead to the increase of greenhouse gases emissions (for example: poor planning of the energy use or preference to fossil fuel); 6. Lead to increase the vulnerability of these investments to climate-related hazards and other natural hazards (earthquake, tsunami, etc.); ESMF Document – Jambi 93 7. Lead to mismanagement of solid wastes and wastewater (for example: the absence of allocation for local landfill and local wastewater treatment); 8. Steer the concerns on sensitive sites within or in the periphery of the village or district (for example: cultural heritage sites); 9. Enable to generate other unidentified environmental and social risks and opportunities. Specific for land use planning at the village level, the following issues are recommended to be considered and integrated into the planning process: 1. Has the development plan identified land with legacy issues (such as historical legal cases, contaminated soils, etc.) in the planning? 2. Has the development plan identified the need for land acquisition and the need for possible relocation of people and people’s assets in the downstrea m physical investment through participatory approaches in consultation? 3. Has the development plan identified the presence of indigenous peoples and designed the land use in village or district planning in a way that fosters full respect for Indigenous People’s dignity, human rights and cultural uniqueness? 4. Has the development plan identified the presence of physical cultural resources, designed without removal or alteration of any physical cultural resources and/or restriction of access of certain communities to such sites, and included improvement in management and protection of physical cultural resources? 5. Has the development plan identified the areas vulnerable to climate-related hazards and other natural hazards (landslides, earthquake, tsunami)? 6. Has the development plan identified the areas with ecological values (such as forests) and designed the plan to include care and management of such areas? K. OHS General Guidleines The sub-project implementors are obliged to protect the health and safety of all workers. This section provides guidance and examples of reasonable precautions to be implemented in managing the key risks to occupational health and safety. Preventive and protective measures should be introduced according to the following order of priority: 1. Eliminating the hazard by removing the activity from the work process. Examples include substitution with less hazardous chemicals, using different manufacturing processes, etc; 2. Controlling the hazard at its source through use of engineering controls. Examples include local exhaust ventilation, isolation rooms, machine guarding, acoustic insulating, etc; 3. Minimising the hazard through design of safe work systems and administrative or institutional control measures. Examples include job rotation, training safe work procedures, lock-out and tag-out, workplace monitoring, limiting exposure or work duration, etc; and 4. Providing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) in conjunction with training, use, and maintenance of the PPE. ESMF Document – Jambi 94 The application of prevention and control measures to occupational hazards should be based on comprehensive job safety or job hazard analyses. The results of these analyses should be prioritised as part of an action plan based on the likelihood and severity of the consequence of exposure to the identified hazards. Several considerations for OHS mitigation, amongst others, that are of relevance to the ERP sub-project typologies include the following: • First Aid Facility. Qualified first aid can always be provided. Appropriately equipped first-aid stations should be easily accessible throughout the place of work. Where the scale of work or the type of activity being carried out so requires, dedicated and appropriately equipped first- aid room(s) should be provided. First-aid stations and rooms should be equipped with gloves, gowns and masks for protection against direct contact with blood and other body fluids. Remote sites should have written emergency procedures in place for dealing with cases of trauma or serious illness up to the point at which patient care can be transferred to an appropriate medical facility. • OHS Training. Provisions should be made to provide OHS orientation training to all new employees to ensure they are apprised of the basic site rules of work at/on the site and of personal protection and preventing injury to fellow employees. Training should consist of basic hazard awareness, site specific hazards, safe work practices and emergency procedures for fire, evacuation and natural disasters, as appropriate. • Rotating and Moving Equipment. Injury or death can occur from being trapped, entangled, or struck by machinery parts due to unexpected starting of equipment or unobvious movement during operations. Recommended protective measures include: Designing machines to eliminate trap hazards and ensuring that extremities are kept out of harm’s way under normal operating conditions. Where a machine or equipment has an exposed moving part or exposed pinch point that may endanger the safety of any worker, the machine or equipment should be equipped with, and protected by, a guard or other device that prevents access to the moving part or pinch point. Guards should be designed and installed in conformance with appropriate machine safety standards. • Chemical Hazards. Chemical hazards represent potential for illness or injury due to single acute exposure or chronic repetitive exposure to toxic, corrosive, sensitizing or oxidative substances. They also represent a risk of uncontrolled reaction, including the risk of fire and explosion, if incompatible chemicals are inadvertently mixed. Chemical hazards can most effectively be prevented through a hierarchical approach that includes replacement of the hazardous substance with a less hazardous substitute; implementation of engineering and administrative control measures to avoid or minimise the release of hazardous substances into the work environment; keeping the level of exposure below internationally established or recognised limits; keeping the number of employees exposed, or likely to become exposed, to a minimum; communicating chemical hazards to workers through labelling; and marking according to national and internationally recognised requirements and standards, including Materials Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) or equivalent, and training workers in the use of the available information (such as MSDSs), safe work practices and appropriate use of PPE. • Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). PPE provides additional protection to workers exposed to workplace hazards in conjunction with other facility controls and safety systems. ESMF Document – Jambi 95 PPE is considered to be a last resort that is above and beyond the other facility controls and provides the worker with an extra level of personal protection. Recommended measures for use of PPE in the workplace include active use of PPE if alternative technologies, work plans or procedures cannot eliminate, or sufficiently reduce, a hazard or exposure; identification and provision of appropriate PPE that offers adequate protection to the worker, co-workers and occasional visitors, without incurring unnecessary inconvenience to the individual; and proper maintenance of PPE, including cleaning when dirty and replacement when damaged or worn out. Proper use of PPE should be part of the recurrent training programs for employees, and selection of PPE should be based on the hazard and risk ranking described earlier in this section, and selected according to established criteria on performance and testing. L. Emergency Preparedness and Response Guideline An emergency is an unplanned event when a project operation loses control, or could lose control, of a situation that may result in risks to human health, property or the environment, either within the facility or in the local community. Emergencies do not normally include safe work practices for frequent upsets or events that are covered by occupational health and safety. Sub-projects that are engaging physical activities should have an Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan that is commensurate with the risks of the activities being undertaken and that includes the following basic elements: • Administration (policy, purpose, distribution, definitions, etc.); • Organisation of emergency areas (command centers, medical stations, etc.); • Roles and responsibilities; • Communication systems; • Emergency response procedures; • Emergency resources; • Training and updating; • Checklists (role and action list and equipment checklist); and • Business continuity and contingency If a local community may be at risk from a potential emergency arising at the facility, the project should implement communication measures as appropriate to alert the community, such as audible alarms, like fire bells or sirens, fan out telephone call lists, vehicle mounted speakers, communicating details of the nature of the emergency, communicating protection options (evacuation, quarantine), and providing advise on selecting an appropriate protection option. A mechanism should be provided for funding emergency activities and provision of emergency resources. These emergency resources include, among others: • Medical Services. First-aid attendants for the facility as well as medical equipment suitable for the personnel, type of operation and the degree of treatment likely to be required prior to transportation to hospital should be considered to be provided. ESMF Document – Jambi 96 • Availability of Resources. Appropriate measures for managing the availability of resources in case of an emergency include: i) Maintaining a list of external equipment, personnel, facilities, funding, expert knowledge and materials that may be required to respond to emergencies. The list should include personnel with specialized expertise for spill clean-up, flood control, engineering, water treatment, environmental science, etc., or any of the functions required to adequately respond to the identified emergency; ii) Providing personnel who can readily call up resources, as required; iii) Tracking and managing the costs associated with emergency resources; iv) Considering the quantity, response time, capability, limitations, and cost of these resources, for both site-specific emergencies, and community or regional emergencies; v) Considering if external resources are unable to provide sufficient capacity during a regional emergency and whether additional resources may need to be maintained on-site. • Contact List. A list of contact information for all internal and external resources and personnel should be provided for the sub-project. The list should include the name, description, location and contact details (telephone, email) for each of the resources, and be maintained annually. • Training and Updating. The emergency preparedness facilities and emergency response plans require maintenance, review and updating to account for changes in equipment, personnel and facilities. Training programs and practice exercises provide for testing systems to ensure an adequate level of emergency preparedness. Programs should identify training needs based on the roles and responsibilities, capabilities and requirements of personnel in an emergency; develop a training plan to address needs, particularly for fire fighting, spill response, and evacuation; and conduct annual trainings or more frequent when the response includes specialized equipment, procedures or hazards. M. Guidelines for Forest and Land Fire Management and Suppression (C overing Occupational, Health and Safety Aspects) Safety is a core value and is a critical part of all activities, from planning through restoration. One of the most common reasons for establishing a fire management organisation is to protect firefighters and communities from unwanted fires. Firefighter safety begins with the provisi`on of the proper safety equipment and training to each personnel in fire suppression. This sub-section is prepared to provide guideline for fire prevention managers in managing health and safety aspects of firefighters and community volunteers. This guideline has been adapted from the FAO Fire Management: Voluntary Guidelines. a. Fire prevention Key actions for fire prevention include but are not limited to: 1. In areas in which objectives require minimising the number of fires and the area burned, a comprehensive prevention plan should be developed; 2. Prevention plans take into account traditional uses of fire, be based on laws or regulations restricting fires and involve local community leaders and organisations; 3. Data collected on a monthly and annual basis on frequency, specific causes and locations of human-caused fires, reasons for starting the fires and area burned in order to establish an effective prevention program; ESMF Document – Jambi 97 4. Fire prevention programs include information on the need to use and manage fire in certain situations; 5. The appropriate use and management of fire can promote sustainable livelihoods. b. Fire preparedness, including technical training Fire preparedness includes training, equipping and staffing prior to the start of a fire. Safety training includes education in the local weather and terrain, as well as in the flammability of fuels. Firefighters, who may also involve community volunteers, must be trained to recognise the characteristics of fire behaviour, such as intensities, spread rates and when a smouldering fire can re-ignite and begin to spread. Firefighting crews need to understand how to monitor fires and to estimate potential changes to avoid becoming trapped by an unanticipated change in spread or intensity. Training in the effective use of equipment and fire suppression techniques is also important, and providing personal protective equipment such as helmets, gloves, fire-resistant clothing and safety boots should be done. Key actions for fire preparedness include but are not limited to: 1. Preparedness plans should include all activities to be undertaken prior to the start of a fire; 2. Safety considerations, both for firefighters and the public, be part of preparedness plan; 3. Plans and implementation should be based on an effective and cost-efficient mix of resources and organisations; 4. Plans should take ecological considerations into account, such as the impact of suppression actions on the environment and the role of fire in the ecosystem or in cultural areas; 5. Plans should include processes and procedures to assess risk and hazard and to determine appropriate response and mitigation actions; 6. Plans should be based on predicted fire risks and capacities, including staffing and resources identified that correspond to the level of risk; 7. Plans should assess the capabilities of remote communities and individuals living in outlying areas to protect their own assets and assist fire services in all phases of fire management; 8. All training should be appropriate to local ecological, social and political conditions and should be delivered to the same standard for full-time, paid, volunteer or other rural workers for the expected fire characteristics. c. Fire detection, communications and dispatching Key actions for fire detection, communications and dispatching include but are not limited to: 1. A robust fire detection system should use an appropriate combination of remote sensing, established land- or water-based locations, aerial routes and private citizen and rural community networks; 2. A public communications system should be in place for the reporting of fires by private citizens and agency personnel and for alerting managers, supervisors, landowners and citizens; ESMF Document – Jambi 98 3. A dispatch and communications system should be in place to determine the appropriate response to a reported fire, mobilize and support initial-attack and backup fire suppression resources, and provide appropriate information to responders, volunteers, landowners and others involved in the incident response. A communications plan should be developed and translated into local languages to inform the public of threats and potential severe conditions and to provide prevention messages. d. Initial Response Key actions for initial attack/action include but are not limited to: 1. The initial-attack groups should be properly trained, equipped, supported and staffed to meet local requirements; 2. All initial-attack actions should be based on the resource, cultural, economic and ecological objectives and policies for the area, including the appropriate use of tactics and equipment; 3. The initial-attack groups should utilise local resources, if possible, in order to build support within the community for fire management policies and plans and to gain from local knowledge and experience; 4. The initial-attack groups should have access to communications systems to receive timely information on fire starts, locations and status from official sources and from the public; 5. The initial-attack groups should be trained and prepared for the transition activities required when fires escape and become larger, requiring large-fire suppression strategies and tactics to be formulated and applied across the incident; 6. The initial-attack organisation should be prepared for non-fire activities, such as protecting private citizens and directing evacuation, and should be trained in rescue and emergency medical procedures. e. Large fire suppression and management Key actions for large-fire suppression and management include but are not limited to: 1. Plans and procedures should be established for large-fire suppression based on expected size, duration and complexity; 2. An extensive process should be in place to gather intelligence and information on all aspects of a large fire in order to ensure effective planning, strategy formulation and community involvement; 3. A versatile and expandable management system, such as Incident Command System (ICS), should be used to manage fires of all sizes and complexities in order to minimise confusion and risk during transition periods; 4. Pre-fire-season agreements should be prepared that provide for assistance during large fires when local resources are fully committed; ESMF Document – Jambi 99 5. A process of review, evaluation and training should be in place so that personnel recognise the conditions under which a large fire is likely to occur and ascertain that prompt and adequate steps are taken in anticipation of the event; 6. Plans should contain provisions for evaluating large fires to determine if some or all of the fire can be managed in a manner that benefits the ecosystem, reduces the risk to fire suppression personnel and minimises costs; 7. Plans should include risk analysis of the probability and consequences of failure in meeting plan objectives. f. Managing multiple incidents Key actions for managing multiple incidents include but are not limited to: 1. Prior to the start of the fire season, plans should be developed that provide for the management, resource-allocation, prioritisation and other transboundary actions required during multiple incidents; 2. Consideration should be given to the possibility that additional fires will start and to the allocating of suppression resources so as to reduce the potential of additional large and damaging fires occurring in critical areas; 3. Through the use of incident command system in all jurisdictions and in response to any type of fire or other emergency, the agencies, groups and other organisations involved will acquire the experience to effectively use the system in transboundary and multiple fire situations. ESMF Document – Jambi 100 ANNEX 4. GUIDANCE NOTE FOR INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT Integrated Pest Management (IPM) refers to “the careful consideration of all available pest control techniques and subsequent integration of appropriate measures that discourage the development of pest populations and keep pesticides and other interventions to levels that are economically justified and reduce or minimise risks to human health and the environment. IPM emphasizes the growth of a healthy crop with the least possible disruption to agro-ecosystems and encourages natural pest control mechanisms�. ERP recognises local wisdoms in managing pests and will support communities to mainstream such local knowledge into the ESMP. IPM is not a single pest control method, but rather a series of pest management assessments, decisions and controls. Two Provincial Agencies in Jambi, Agriculture (Dinas TPHP) and Plantation (Disbun) have aready had detailed procedures for dealing with pest outbreaks. Not only that, they have established institutional set up to deal with agriculture and plantation pest issues and to also provide natural pesticide to control agriculture and plantation crop pests. Below are the reporting and surveillance procedures for pest management in Jambi. ESMF Document – Jambi 101 Source: Food Crop, Horticulture and Livestock Services Currently Jambi has already actively participated in the efforts to reduce pest attacks through Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in agriculture and plantation sectors. Up to now there are 16 Information and Service Units for Natural Pesticides (IPAH) across the province. These Units provide information and services to farmers on how to use and get natural pesticides. In line with this, Plantation Agency of Jambi has already developed Centre for Plantation Crop Protection (BPTP)25 that supervise 23 Plantation Crop Protection Unit across Jambi. These units are responsible for monitoring cases of pest attacks and report back to BPTP for further advice on actions to be taken. Both agencies also provide field schools for farmer on Integrated Pest Management. The following elements of the IPM will need to be established in the development of the ESMP as part of the UKL-UPL (please see Annex 6): 1. Identify and Monitor Pests. Not all insects, weeds and other living organisms require control. Many organisms are innocuous, and some are even beneficial. IPM work to monitor for pests and identify them accurately, so that appropriate control decisions can be made in conjunction with 25 Established through Governor of Jambi Regulation No.18/2018. ESMF Document – Jambi 102 action thresholds. This monitoring and identification remove the possibility that pesticides will be used when they are not really needed or that the wrong kind of pesticide will be used; 2. Set Action Thresholds. Before taking any pest control action, IPM first sets an action threshold, a point at which pest populations or environmental conditions indicate that pest control action must be taken. Sighting a single pest does not always mean control is needed. The level at which pests will either become an economic threat is critical to guide future pest control decisions; 3. Prevention. As a first line of pest control, IPM work to manage the crop, lawn or indoor space to prevent pests from becoming a threat. In an agricultural crop, this may mean using cultural methods, such as rotating between different crops, selecting pest-resistant varieties and planting pest-free rootstock. These control methods can be very effective and cost-efficient and present little to no risk to people or the environment; 4. Control. Once monitoring, identification and action thresholds indicate that pest control is required, and preventive methods are no longer effective or available, IPM then evaluate the proper control method both for effectiveness and risk. Effective, less risky pest controls are chosen first, including highly targeted chemicals, such as pheromones to disrupt pest mating, or mechanical control, such as trapping or weeding. If further monitoring, identifications and action thresholds indicate that less risky controls are not working, then additional pest control methods would be employed, such as targeted spraying of pesticides. Broadcast spraying of non-specific pesticides is a last resort. The project will not procure or use pesticides and chemical fertilizers that are classified as IA or IB by WHO and GOI’s regulations. ERP will encourage use of organic (or readily biodegradable) fertilizers for activities related to agriculture and agroforestry. However, since small quantities of eligible pesticides may be procured and used, the project will screen at the project level and when justified, assess the potential environmental and social impacts associated with use, storage and disposal. The project will not finance any pesticide without clear guidance and monitoring of safeguard specialists, without targeted training on use, storage and disposal, or without the right equipment and installations necessary for the products to be used safely and appropriately. In the event pesticides must be used for project activities, the following criteria apply: 1) They must have negligible adverse human health effects; 2) They must be shown to be effective against the target species; 3) They must have minimal effect on non-target species and the natural environment. The methods, timing and frequency of pesticide application are aimed to minimise damage to natural enemies. Pesticides used in public health programs must demonstrate to be safe for inhabitants and domestic animals in the treated areas, as well as for personnel applying them; 4) Their use must take into account the need to prevent the development of resistance in pests. Relevant specialists and/or local agricultural extension officers will provide technical assistance for implementing stakeholders and target communities in the event of pesticide use. For each ERP component, the environmental mitigation plan (EMP) should include an Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMP) that: ESMF Document – Jambi 103 1. Lists the banned pesticide use by the Government of Indonesia; 2. Provides an assessment of current relevant pest management practices; 3. Identifies specific practices and conditions that could and should be improved (e.g., calendar- based spraying, use of overly toxic or otherwise inappropriate pesticides, failure to apply available non-chemical methods, insufficient access of farmers to information about IPM, policy biases towards chemical control, deficiencies in institutional capacity to implement IPM and control of pesticide use, etc.); 4. Provides measures and activities to be taken under the project to improve the situation; and 5. Provides a monitoring scheme to determine the effectiveness of these measures and enable correction where necessary. Minimal outline for IPMP A well-written, easy-to-follow IPM plan provides staff and management with a written document on IPM procedures and policies for the facility. The plan should be a living document that is continually updated as new pest situations and new procedures or activities within the facility arise. This allows the facility to maintain a historical record of pest management procedures so the IPM coordinator can act on pest issues, with noted positive and negative experiences of their predecessors. The IPMP should be unique to each project activity, and minimally have the following sections: 1. Project description: Describe the project and its salient features that will likely require pest management measures; 2. Existing and anticipated pest problems: Prepare an overview of the crops cultivated/managed in the project and the key pest and diseases problems experienced, especially by small holder farmers. Provide estimates (preferably based on local studies) of the crop/economic losses that can be attributed to the key pests, diseases and weeds. 3. Existing and proposed measures for pest control: Describe the current and proposed methods for pest or vector management practiced in the country/region. Describe the non-chemical pest control methods, IPM approaches that are available in the country. Describe monitoring/sampling protocols, action thresholds and monitoring procedures. Assess if envisaged pesticide use under the project is justified by (a) explaining the IPM approach and the reason why pesticide use is considered; (b) providing an economic assessment demonstrating that the proposed pesticide use would increase farmers'/KPH revenues, and provide evidence that the proposed pesticide use is justified from the best available (preferably WHO-supported) public health evidence. 4. Roles and Responsibilities: Define who in the KPH will be in charge of the data collection and storage, reporting on IPM implementation. In the case of the use of chemical pesticides, assign responsibilities for the procurement, application and disposal of pesticides and the proper record keeping; 5. Monitoring and evaluation: Define a reporting mechanism on the IPMP implementation, emphasizing its efficiency and efficacy; 6. Capacity building: Define any capacity building measures necessary for KPH management, staff and beneficiaries to implement the IPMP. ESMF Document – Jambi 104 NOTE: If any pesticides are required by the IPMP, and procured by the project, pesticides must be manufactured, packaged, labeled, handled, stored, disposed of and applied according to acceptable standards26. The project does not finance formulated products that fall in WHO classes IA and IB, or formulations of products in Class II27. List of Banned Pesticides use by the Government of Indonesia The following is a list of banned pesticides according to Ministry of Agriculture Regulation No. 39/Permentan/SR.330/7/2015: 1. Pesticides classified as Class Ia and Class Ib according to the World Health Organisation (WHO); 2. Active ingredients and/or additives that have carcinogenic effect (Category I and IIa according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), mutagenic and teratogenic according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), and the WHO; 3. Active ingredients and/or additives that cause medicinal resistance to humans; and 4. Active ingredients and/or additives that are classified as POPs (Persistent Organic Pollutants) according to the Stockholm Convention. There are at least 70 pesticides that are banned for use in Indonesia: No. Active Ingredient CAS Number 1. 2,4,5-T 95-95-4 2. 2,4,5-T including its salts and derivative esters 93-76-5 3. 2,4,6-T 88-06-2 4. Aldicarb 116-06-3 5. Aldrin 309-00-2 6. Alachlor 15972-60-8 7. Alpha hexachlorocyclohexane 319-84-6 8. All Tributiltin compounds (tributyltin) including: 56-35-9 1983-10-4 - Tributyltin oxide - Tributyltin fluoride 2155-70-6 - Tributyltin methacrylates - Tributyltin benzoate 4342-36-3 - Tributyltin chloride 1461-22-9 - Tributyltin linoleate - Tributyltin naphthenate 24124-25-2 85409-17-2 85409-17-2 9. 1,2-dibromo-3-chloroprophane/DBCP 96-12-8 10. Beta hexachlorcyclohexane 319-85-7 26 For pesticides application, storage and disposal guidelines please refer to http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/agphome/documents/Pests_Pesticides/Code/Old_guidelines/ Ground_application.pdf, http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/obsolete_pesticides/docs/small_qties.pdf 27 For reference on the substances please consult the World Health Organisation. Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazards and Guidelines refer http://www.who.int/ipcs/publications/pesticides_hazard_rev_3.pdf ESMF Document – Jambi 105 No. Active Ingredient CAS Number 11. Binapacryl 485-31-4 12. Cyhexatin 13121-70-5 13. Chlorobenzilate 510-15-6 14. Dichloro diphenyl trichlrooethane/DDT 50-29-3 15. Dicofol 115-32-2 16. Dieldrin 60-57-1 17. 2,3-dichlorophenol 576-24-9 18. 2,4-dichlorophenol 120-83-2 19. 2,5-dichlorophenol 583-78-8 20. Dinozeb 88-85-7 21. Dinitro-ortho-cresol/DNOC with its salts: 534-52-1 - Ammonium; 2980-64-5 - Potassium; and 5787-96-2 - Sodium 2312-76-7 22. Dichlorvos 95828-55-0 23. Ethyl p-nitrophenyl benzenethiophosponate (EPN) 2104-64-5 24. Ethylene dichloride 107-06-2 25. Ethylene oxide 75-21-8 26. Endrin 72-20-8 27. Endosulfan 115-29-7 28. Endosulfan low grade 115-29-7 29. Etilen dibromida (EDB) (ethylene dibromide) 72-20-8 (Campuran antara alfa dan beta endosulfan) 30. Fluoroasetamida (fluoroacetamide) 640-19-7 31. Formaldehida (formaldehide) 50-00-0 32. Fosfor kuning (yellow phosphorus) 7723-14-0 33. Heptaklor (heptachlor) 76-44-8 34. Heksaklorobenzena (hexachlorobenzene) 118-74-1 35. Kaptafol (captafol) 2425-06-1 36. Klordan (chlordane) 57-74-9 37. Klordekon (chlordecone) 143-50-0 38. Klordimefon (chlordimefon) 19750-95-9 39. Leptofos (leptophos) 21609-90-5 40. Heksakloro Siklo Heksan (mixed isomers) (hexachlorocyclohexane) 608-73-1 41. Gama Heksakloro Siklo Heksan 58-89-9 42. Metoksiklor (metoxychlor) 72-43-5 (gamma HCH/lindan) (gamma hexachlorocyclohexane) ESMF Document – Jambi 106 No. Active Ingredient CAS Number 43. Mevinfos (mevinphos) 26718-65-0 44. Monosodium metil arsenat (monosodium methylarsenate)/MSMA 2163-80-6 45. Monokrotofos (monocrotophos) 6923-22-4 46. Natrium dikromat (sodium dichromate) 7789-12-0 47. Natrium klorat (sodium chlorate) 7775-09-9 48. Natrium tribromofenol 591-20-8 49. Natrium 4-brom-2,5-diklorofenol (natrium 4-brom-2,5-dichlorophenol) 4824-78-6 (sodium trybromophenol) 50. Metil paration (methyl parathion) 298-00-0 51. Halogen fenol (halogen phenol) (including Penta) 87-86-5 52. Paration (parathion) 56-38-2 Kloro Fenol (pentachlorophenol)/PCP) dan garamnya 53. Salmonella based 54. Penta kloro benzena (pentachlorobenzene) 608-93-5 55. Arsen dan senyawa arsen (arsenic compound) 1327-53-3, 007440-38-2 56. Merkuri dan senyawa merkuri (mercury compound) 10112-91-1, 7546-30-7, 7487- 94-7, 21908-53-2 57. Striknin (strychnine) 57-24-9 58. Telodrin (telodrin) 297-78-9 59. Toksafen (toxaphene) 8001-35-2 60. Mireks (mirex) 2385-85-5 61. Asam sulfat (sulphur acid) 7664-93-9 62. Asam perfluoroktana sulfonat and its salts 1763-23-1 (perfluorooctane sulfonic acid/PFOS, its salt) 63. Perfluorooktana sulfonil fluorida (perfluorooctane sufonyl 307-35-7 fluoride) 64. Klorometil metil eter (Bis(chloromethyl)ether; 542-88-1, 107-30-2 chloromethyl methyl ether (technical-grade) 65. Kadmium dan senyawa kadmium (cadmium and cadmium compounds) 7440-43-9 66. Senyawa kromium (VI) (Chromium (VI) compounds) 18540-29-9 67. 4,4’-metilenbis(2-kloroanilin) (4,4'-Methylenebis(2-chloroaniline) 101-14-4 68. Tris(2,3-dibromopropil)fosfat (Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl) 126-72-7 phosphate) 69. Prokarbazin hidroklorida (Procarbazine hydrochloride) 366-70-1 70. Antibiotics ESMF Document – Jambi 107 Forest type project activities involving pest control measures must consider four aspects, namely: 1. Biological aspects of pest (insect, nematodes, fungi, etc.) to decide the right time to control; 2. Technical aspects by using simple but effective means; 3. Economical aspect is the inexpensive cost of control or equal to the maximum value of the loss that will be saved; and 4. Ecological aspects are the controlling measures which avoid environmental pollution. Pest control techniques can be applied naturally or artificially. Natural control is the ability to rely on natural pest control components that live in environments without involving the human role. In the contrary, artificial control techniques require human ’s role and can be physical-mechanical, in silviculture, biological basis, per-laws and regulations, chemical and integrated pest management (IPM). Pest control in stand forest are conducted chemically and are ecologically very dangerous for the environment and economically very costly, however, how this method can be done in the nursery. Biological pest control, by using predators and parasites as well as planting superior pest-resistant species has become priority alternative in the future because it has competitive advantages and promising prospects. The Basic Framework Framework for Integrated Pest Management Narrative Summary Expected Results Performance Indicators Assumptions/Risks Objective: Members and • The increased Regulations, the Increasing the stakeholders understand application of IPM in provisions concerning awareness of all the importance of IPM the field; the application of IPM stakeholders on IPM approach • Reducing the use of are consistently approaches to harmful pesticides in implemented by the crop management, the field. Government. and train the facilitators, farmers and plant foresters. Activity1 Stakeholders become • Reduced accidents KPH institution more aware of the in the handling, use, regularly active in Launch dangers of pesticides. storage and disposal information awareness programs pesticide; dissemination program Benchmarks: • The increasing use Electronic media, printed of bio-pesticides; materials, distributed • IPM practices adopted brochures to the stakeholders in the field ESMF Document – Jambi 108 Activity 2 • In the Demonstration Provincial governments is Increased use of organic Area in different pilot convinced of the need to fertilizers The introduction of IPM KPHs the usefulness introduce environmentally Benchmarks: of IPM is friendly practices in the demonstrated; forestry sector. At project level, introduction to IPM is • Financial incentives launched are provided for farmers who participate; • Monitoring results of the pilot project. Activity 3 All KPH officials are Evidence of improved The provincial following the official's knowledge government is committed Strengthening about IPM Agriculture to encourage and enable development of IPM Institutional Capacity in the officials to follow IPM IPM training courses Benchmarks: Course on IPM for Forestry and district government facilitator so they stay updated of the latest developments Examples of Forest Pest Management Research and Development Centre on Forest Productivity Enhancement has been successfully controlling pests and diseases in sengon, Jabon and gmelina as follows: Type of forest pest and disease control No. TYPE CONTROL PEST 1 Eurema sp. (yellow • Insecticide with active ingredient Bacillus thuringiensis at a dose of butterfly) 0.5 to 2 grams per liter of water and spray directly to the larval body; • Parasitoids Apanteles sp. (Hymenoptera); • Phyto-pesticides from suren leaves soaked for 24 hours then squeezed, later the juice is sprayed. 2 Boktor/Xystrocera • The Beauveria bassiana fungus is obtained by blending 200 grams festiva of fungal inoculum then added to 8 liters of water (25gram per liter of (borer pest on sengon water); stem) • Insecticide with active ingredient Bacillus thuringiensis at a dose of 0.5 to 2 grams per liter of water and spray directly on the larval body. 3 Pocket worm • The Beauveria bassiana fungus is obtained by blending 200 grams of fungal inoculum was added 8 liters of water (25gram per liter of water); • Phyto-insecticides from gadung yam juice 125g per liter of water, mahogany seeds juice 150g per liter of water by spraying, bacok oles and infusion; • Insecticide with active ingredient Bacillus thuringiensis. Systemic insecticide with active ingredient imidacloprid Confidor), methamidophos + boron or borax (1: 10). 4 Uret • Using entomopathogenic fungi metarrhizium - insecticide with active ingredient fipronil (reagent). 5 Grayak worm • Insecticide with active ingredient Bacillus thuringiensis, BPMC (Baycarp) and imidacloprid ESMF Document – Jambi 109 No. TYPE CONTROL 6 Leaf-eater worm • Insecticides with active ingredient BPMC and imidacloprid 7 Locust • Insecticides with active ingredient BPMC and imidacloprid 8 White lice • Using wood vinegar + Bacillus thuringiensis, 9 Kepik renda pest • Insecticide with active ingredient imidacloprid DISEASE 1 Karat tumor disease • Materials used; lime, sulfur and salt (sulfur : limestone + 1:1; brimstone : salt = 10:1; lime : salt = 10:1; sulfur : limestone: salt 10: 10:1). Treatment; sprayed and coated (materials to spray is more liquid and filtered first, while it is more viscous material for coating). Before the spraying and coating, first, eliminates gall on attacked sengon plants, galls were collected and buried in the ground so as to not contagious. After the galls removed, stem will be coated and sprayed. 2 Spotting leaves • Using wood vinegar 40cc per liter of water disease • Fungicide with active ingredients benomil and active ingredients sulfur 3 Rotten root, tumbled • Using antagonist fungicides Trichoderma and sprout and wilt disease Gliocladium • Fungicides with active ingredient triadimefon (Bayleton) 4 Embun tepung • Using fungicide with active ingredient benomil disease Best Management Practices for Pesticides Use to Protect Water Resources • Avoid overspray and chemical drift, especially when surface water is in close proximity to treatment area. Avoid applications if wind speed favors drift beyond the intended application area. Increasing nozzle size and/or lowering boom pressure will increase droplet size and help reduce drift. Always recalibrate following equipment adjustments or modifications; • Time pesticide application in relation to soil moisture, anticipated weather conditions and irrigation schedules to achieve the greatest efficiency and reduce the potential for off-site transport. Avoid pesticide application when soil moisture status or scheduled irrigation increases the possibility of runoff or deep percolation. After application, manage irrigation to reduce the possibility of erosion, runoff and/or leaching, which may transport pesticide from the target site; • Establish buffer zones so pesticide is not applied within 50-100 feet of wells and surface water; • Apply pesticides in a manner that will minimise off-target effects. ESMF Document – Jambi 110 ANNEX 5 BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK AND GENERAL GUIDELINE FOR HIGH CONSERVATION VALUE ASSESSMENTS 1. OBJECTIVES The objective of this Biodiversity Management framework is to define the approach that will be adopted by the ERP in relation to the assessment, mitigation and management of potential biodiversity issues and impacts. 2. BIODIVERSITY GOALS The ERP seeks to ensure that the biodiversity in Jambi is not adversely impacted by the implementation of sub-project activities. This goal is aimed to be achieved over the life of the sub-project activities in the region. To achieve this goal, the ERP commits to: • Identify important biodiversity features through identification of High Conservation Values (HCVs) of relevance to the sub-project activities; • Develop an HCV management strategy and action plans (i.e., Biodiversity Action Plan) to maintain and/or enhance biodiversity features/HCVs; • Develop a monitoring program on implementation of HCV management measures capable of providing feedback and any required adjustments to the management strategy and biodiversity action plan; and • Engage and consult with biodiversity stakeholders at all stages of the program and build cross- sector partnerships with local communities, various levels of national government, non- government organisations and academic institutions. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS AND HIGH CONSERVATION VALUE The ERP sub-project activities will undertake assessment of potential impacts on biodiversity features and ecosystem services to meet national permitting requirements, and the World Bank OP/BP 4.04 on Natural Habitats. All proposed sub-project activities will be subject to an appropriate level of environmental assessment commensurate with the nature and scope of the proposed activities. The guidance for the environmental assessment and permitting of sub-project activities will take account the requirements of the ERP ESMF and include the national requirements for environmental asessments. Critical habitats are essentially those areas with high biodiversity values (HCVs) that are identified as government protected forest areas and those considered important for endangered and endemic species, migratory species, threatened and unique ecosystems and areas associated with key evolutionary processes. The HCV process will identify and assess the existence of any HCVs (critical habitats) at the sub-project sites and prepare the required HCV management strategy and action plans, and monitoring program. ESMF Document – Jambi 111 4. GENERAL GUIDELINE FOR HIGH CONSERVATION VALUE (HCV) ASSESSMENTS The HCV process essentially comprises of several phases: i) HCV area identification phase; ii) Development of management strategies and actions; and iii) Monitoring impacts of operations. The J- SLMP should be oriented on the attempt to prevent or reduce declining rate of biodiversity conservation, by not causing interference to the sustainability which support the success of local community efforts and also to potential supporting values of successful value-added development, shapes, and usage patterns of sustainable biodiversity 1. HCV Area Identification Phase The identification and determination of High Conservation Value (HCVs) areas aims at understanding the existence, condition, status and policy management in each administrative district governments. Hence the policy on area utilisation in the landscape management in each district is based on the values of the determining elements of environmental preservation. Elements include structure and function of the biodiversity conservation value in a landscape. HCV identification processes include six stages: (1) Desk study; (2) Preparation of field verification; (3) Field verification; (4) Analysis, evaluation and delineation; (5) Public consultation; and (6) Socialisation and the determination of management typology. In summary, the work flow process of defining and managing the valued areas is presented below. Stage 1: Desk study (data and information study) This stage is the early identification, aims at determining the status of the region and the potential biodiversity, the data or information obtained from BAPPEDA, the related planning offices including BAPEDALDA, NGOs, universities, LIPI and other related parties. Outcomes of desk study stage are the draft of delineation areas of valued biodiversity conservation area. Activities at this stage include the following activities: 1) Interpreting satellite imagery map; 2) Overlaying the maps; interpretation of satellite imagery, zoning, land-use agreement, agro ecological zones, biodiversity hotspots, topography, climate, and other related maps; 3) Analysis of historical land cover and space usage; 4) Analysis of the stability of the region; 5) Data collecting from public in relation to biodiversity at ecosystems, species and genetic level. If there is no indication of valued areas for biodiversity conservation in the jurisdiction of a district government, the identification will be stopped at this stage. Meanwhile, if there is any indication of the valued region for biodiversity conservation in the work area, then the identification continues to the later stage. The results of this study become the first step. Furthermore, the results of this initial study are used as a reference by departments/agencies to prepare field verification. ESMF Document – Jambi 112 Stage 2: Preparation of verification/field studies This is the stage where in-depth studies were conducted based on the data or information from various sources, including data or reports from departments/agencies. Outcome of this stage is knowledge of the conditions of ecosystems, species and genetic resources in areas suspected to have valued biodiversity conservation. Then field verification methods are compiled as described in the table framework below and the preparation of tally sheet/data collection form. Stage 3: Field verification Field verification activity is performed by agencies in accordance with the scope of their work and the methods and tally sheet/form that has been designed on Stage 2 activities. Stage 4: Analysis, evaluation and delineation This stage aims at delineating valued areas for biodiversity in the basis of data or information from field verification results collected from the departments/agencies. Stage 5: Public consultation Aiming to get input from the public in order to clarify and enrich the areas that have significant value for biodiversity conservation. The public consultation also aims at socialising the findings and delineation of the valued areas for biodiversity conservation, hence the stakeholders in the associated areas will be actively involved so that the protection and conservation of biodiversity can be maintained in the long term. In addition, to optimize decision-making that is based on data and information and to ensure the interests of the parties involved are accommodated. Public consultation is carried out by inviting interested parties where valued areas for biodiversity conservation located. These stakeholders include local governments, private sector, academia and the public and non-governmental organisations. Stage 6: Determination of delineation At this stage, the results of the delineation process for valued areas for biodiversity conservation are being socialised to public, especially to stakeholders whose areas are included in the delineation, so that the delineation can be determined and agreed upon by all related parties. Stage 7: Determination of valuable areas HCV areas that have been identified and disseminated to all stakeholders may need to be appointed by the district government based on law. The agreement on determining valued areas is used as input for the preparation and/or evaluation of provincial or district spatial planning. It is necessary to provide a legal basis for HCVs and provide direction for stakeholder management where HCVs are located. Thus, HCVs as protected areas and/or cultivated area has strong position in the context of biodiversity conservation and the preservation of supporting values on the success of sustainable development in the region. Determination of HCVs is an enabling policy for the realization of regional biodiversityobjectives in long- term. 113 Framework for initial identification of the valued areas for biodiversity conservation NO. ACTIVITY PURPOSE OUTPUT SOURCE A Identification of valued areas status and potential biological diversity A.1 Area status 1.1 Study of landscape and Analysis of land cover Information on land cover conditions • The land cover map seascape (Bappeda, the DFS); • Agro-ecological zone map MOA); • Biodiversity hotspots map (Birdlife, CI, NC, WWF). Spatial Analysis Land use information Land use maps (Bappeda, the DFS, Ministry of Environment and Forestry) 1.2 Study of the history of the Analysis of the condition and status of the area Data or information on changing • Land use data according area and biodiversity (past and present) conditions and management of the area to time series; • Public information; • Research report. 1.3 Study of the stability status of Analysis of the legality of the area (de jure and de Data and information about the legal Legislation (laws, government the area facto) status of the area regulations, policies, etc.) A.2 Biodiversity Potential 2.1 Study of potential Analysis of the condition and status of the species Data or information on changing • Agro-ecological zones species (past and present) conditions management of the species (MOA); • Public information; • Research report. 114 NO. ACTIVITY PURPOSE OUTPUT SOURCE 2.2 Study of potential genetic Analysis of conditions and status of genetic resource Data or information on changing • Agro-ecological zones resources (past and present) conditions management of genetic (MOA); resource • Public information; • Research report. B Identification of biodiversity condition in areas Identified as valued areas for biodiversity conservation B.1 Ecosystem Knowing the type of ecosystem in the study area Data and information on ecosystem: • Field verification; which has: • Uniqueness or distinctiveness; • Check-list (Under Important and/or Ecosystem Criteria). • Uniqueness or distinctiveness; and/or • High species diversity; • High species diversity; and/or and/or • Primary ecosystem that is the Primary ecosystem that is the representation of the ecosystem that has been representation of the ecosystem that degraded. has been degraded. B.2. Species (wild) Knowing plant and wildlife species in the study Data and information on the species: • Field verification; area which have: • Uniqueness or distinctiveness; • Check-list (Under Important • Uniqueness or distinctiveness; and/or and/or Species Criteria).. • Extinction threat; and/or • Extinction threat; and/or • Specific habitat needs either partly or fully. • Specific habitat needs either partly or fully. 115 NO. ACTIVITY PURPOSE OUTPUT SOURCE Genetic Resources Knowing the varieties of plants, clumps of Data and information on the varieties of animals/livestock, and fish strains in the study area plants, clumps of animals/livestock, and that have: fish strains • Field verification. • Check-list (Under Important • Uniqueness or distinctiveness of genetic • Uniqueness or distinctiveness of SDG Criteria). resources; and/or genetic resources; and/or • Advantages in terms of resistance to pests and • Advantages in terms of resistance to diseases; and/or pests and diseases; and/or • Advantages in terms of resistance to abiotic • Advantages in terms of stresses (extreme weather, soil acidity, etc.); resistance to abiotic stresses and/or (extreme weather, soil acidity, etc.); • Advantages in terms of productivity; and/or and/or • Advantages in terms of beauty and nature • Advantages in terms of productivity; relative to other species analyzed; and/or and/or • High utilisation potential in the future; and/or • Advantages in terms of beauty and • Socio-cultural and/or economy values for local nature relative to other species communities and on wider levels; and/or analysed; and/or • High threat of extinction rate • High utilisation potential in the future; and/or • Socio-cultural and/or economy values for local communities; and/or • High threat of extinction rate. 116 A simple tool to identify whether an area has significant value for biodiversity conservation or not is the use of the following questions: Identification tool for HCVs No. Question Answer Remarks 1 Is the area a conservation area? Yes All conservation areas are critically No important for the preservation of biodiversity, if not, proceed to question number 2. 2 Does the area have a unique Yes If yes, then the area has important value ecosystem? No for biodiversity conservation, if not, proceed to question number 3. 3 Does the region have a particular Yes If yes, then the area has important value typical species? No for biodiversity conservation, if not, proceed to question number 4. 4 Does the region have the typical Yes If yes, then the area has an SDG? No important value for the Conservation of Biodiversity, if not, then the region has no significant value for biodiversity conservation 2. Developing Management Strategies and Actions Development of management strategies and actions has purpose to maintain and/or enhance the identified High Conservation Values and to maintain associated High Conservation Value Areas. These strategies and actions are developed to provide the appropriate measures commnesuarte to the scale of impacts by considering: • Best available information; • Consultations and solicitations with Indigenous Peoples and/or interested and affected stakeholders and/or experts; (people and communities who might be affected by the management strategy and actions, such as indigenous peoples, forest dwellers, neighbouring landowners, local processors, local businesses, forest workers*, land use right holders, and organisations acting on behalf of affected stakeholders, for example social and environmental NGOs, labour unions, academics etc); and • Exploring opportunities for co-management of High Conservation Values. When the strategy and action plan are completed, the engagement of experts is required to: • Assess the effectiveness of the management strategies actions to maintain and enhance High Conservation Values and address identified threats. Effectiveness includes the concept that the strategies prevent damage and avoid risks to High Conservation Values, even when the scientific ESMF Document – Jambi 117 information is incomplete or inconclusive, and when the vulnerability and sensitivity of High Conservation Values are uncertain; • Conduct field inspection and interview stakeholders to verify the management strategies actions to maintain and enhance High Conservation Values* and address threats; and • Report the results of the review including recommending requirements for improvements where results are insufficient. 3. Monitoring the Impact of Operations The monitoring program evaluates: • The implementation of strategies; • The implementation of the action plan; • Compliance with agreements with Indigenous Peoples and local communities achieved through Free Prior and Informed Consent; • The status of significant concentrations of biodiversity; • The status of areas on which the concentrations of biological diversity depend; and • The effectiveness of the management strategies and actions to fully maintain and/or enhance the High Conservation Values. This means that the key metric is not if a plan has been implemented, but if the plan has achieved the desired results. The monitoring program should: • Be conducted with appropriate frequency to detect change. Some elements, such as Intact Forest Landscapes, should be monitored annually to ensure there as been no change. Others, such as carbon sequestration will likely not need to be monitored as intensively, depending on the nature of management operations in the forest; • Consider all High Conservation Values in planning; • Include measurable targets; • Describe appropriate action based on observations on High Conservation Values presented by Indigenous Peoples, affected and interested stakeholders, and experts; • Have sufficient scope, scale and frequency to detect changes in the High Conservation Values relative to the initial baseline assessment; • Record the results of the monitoring; and • Provide analysis of the results. ESMF Document – Jambi 118 ANNEX 6. EXAMPLE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS, MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING (UKL-UPL & SPPL ACCEPTABLE TO THE BANK) DISCLAIMER: J-SLMP will not provide funding for Category A project that requires environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) The purpose of environmental assessments, management and monitoring is to establish a set of policies and guidelines that will help the PMU/Safeguards Team or Committe in screening, assessing and monitoring the environmental and social aspects of all projects supported by ERP. The screening process will identify the degree of impact of each proposed sub-projects and types of mitigation measures required. J-SLMP and ERP projects, especially those related to livelihood improvement, small-medium sized infrastructure development, and forest rehabilitation and restoration, may lead to possible environmental impacts and/or risks that need to be managed, thus requiring environmental permits by developing the UKL-UPL (Environmental Management and Environmental Monitoring Measures) document or issuing SPPL. It should be noted that project locations must not directly share borders with conservation areas. Otherwise, the submission of an Environmental Impact Analysis Report (ANDAL) is required, in addition to the RKL/RPL (Environmental Management/Monitoring Plan), which must be ratified by the government in order to secure the necessary environmental permit. It is expected that most key activities will not require specific mitigation measures for environmental impact. However, several key activities may need additional mitigation measures by preparing the UKL-UPL in order to obtain environmental permits. UKL and UPL contain mitigation plans and monitoring of standards to address the typical impacts of construction activities, including workers/community, health and safety, land-related work, and waste management, including hazardous and toxic waste. UKL-UPL must be prepared by competent institutions, and must meet the requirements laid out in Environment Ministerial Regulation No. 16/2012 (please see Environmental and Social Management Plan Template below). Activities that do not require a UKL/UPL document, but must develop the necessary environmental and monitoring measures should issue an SPPL and registered at the local environmental office (no environmental permit is needed). Please see the format for Statement of Undertaking for Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan-SPPL attached to this Appendix). The following matrix provide the ToR for preparing the UKL-UPL acceptable to the Bank. The TOR builds upon the GOI requirements specified by the Ministry of Environment Regulation No. 16/2012 regarding Guidelines for Preparing Environmental Assessment Documents (AMDALs and UKL-UPLs). The UKL-UPL report essentially contains a summary of the project activities and impacts, and environmental management and monitoring action plans. ESMF Document – Jambi 119 UKL-UPL TOR (GOI requirements) UKL-UPL Acceptable to the Bank Identity of Initiator: Initiator name, business Refer UKL-UPL, no additions required address, postal code, telephone number, fax number and email Project location and maps Refer UKL-UPL, no additions required Project size and scale Refer UKL-UPL, no additions required Project description/business activity plan: Name of Refer UKL-UPL and add: project/business activity, map that is built in - Description of environmental and social setting at the project site; accordance with cartography rules and/or an - Summary of alternatives: sites and technology adequate illustration of the location, scale/size of considered; project/business activity, outline of components of - Summary of current and future developments; the project/business activity - Basis of design for the project Matrix on environmental and social impacts Refer UKL-UPL and add: (source, type and scale of impact), environmental - Identification of indirect and cumulative impacts; - Identification of impacts from associated and social management and monitoring measures facilities; (activity, location, and duration/timing), - Identification of impacts on natural, modified institution/person in charge, remarks and critical habitats; - Identification of impacts on labor, occupational health and safety and community health and safety; - Identification of impacts related to gender and violence; - Mitigation on creating grievance mechanism; - Cost estimates for management and monitoring actions and sources of funds; - Capacity building and training plans for project owner and contractors; - Institutional arrangements Requirements for PPLH permits (environmental Refer UKL-UPL, no additions required protection and management) Statement of assurance for UKL-UPL Refer UKL-UPL, no additions required implementation Biblical references Refer UKL-UPL, no additions required Appendices: Principle permit, spatial conformity Refer UKL-UPL, no additions required letter, maps, specification/standard sheets, and/or other supporting data ESMF Document – Jambi 120 Environmental and Social Management Plan template Impact & Risk Mitigation Plan Monitoring Plan No Mitigation Who Budget Key Activities Impact & Risk Significance28 Where When What Where When action 28 Minimum, medium, high ESMF Document – Jambi 121 FORMAT STATEMENT OF UNDERTAKING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING (SPPL) (For activity plan not requiring any UKL/UPL – based on the Regulation of the Minister of Environment No.16/2012) We, the undersigned below Name : Job Position : Address : Phone Number : As party in charge of the environmental management of: [Name of Company/Business : Address company/Business : Phone Number of the Company : Type of Business : Production Capacity : Permit already obtained : Purpose : Amount of Capital : Hereinafter, we confirm that we are capable and committed to implementing the action plans on Environmental and Social Codes of Practices (ESCOPs), attached under Annex 3. This SPPL shall be effective from the date of its issuance, up to the completion of our business and/or project activity. If the project undergoes any change of location, design, process, type of raw materials and/or supporting materials, this SPPL must be revised. Date, Month, Year Stamp duty of Rp, 6.000, - Signature Company seal (Name/NIP) Registry number from the local environment agency Date Receiver [Attached to the SPPL: select the relevant Environmental and Social Codes of Practices (ESCOP) ] FGRM Document – Jambi 122 ANNEX 7. FEEDBACK GRIEVANCE AND REDRESS MECHANISM (FGRM) 7.0 INTRODUCTION J-SLMP’s proposed development objective is to improve sustainable landscape management that reduces land-based GHG emissions in Jambi. The achievement of this objective will be measured through the following indicators: a) Land area under sustainable forest management and/or restoration practices (ha); b) GHG Emission reductions in Jambi (MtCO2e); and c) Number of people reached with benefits (assets and/or services) (percent women). Under this pre-investment grant, technical assistance will be provided to support pilot testing of targeted initiatives towards emission reduction and ERP design. Institutional capacity building will focus on systems strengthening to build government capacity to access and utilize performance-based incentives for reduced deforestation, degradation and land use change, including safeguards. As such, the program will support analytics, capacity building, design of subprograms to test different incentives models and stakeholder engagement. Key analytical areas include land and resource tenure, understanding local drivers of deforestation and how best to address them, and legal, institutional and policy analysis and stakeholder assessments. A Feedback and Grievance Redress Mechanism (FGRM) has been prepared to provide a clear set of procedures to enable affected and interested stakeholders to raise their concerns and suggestions related to the J-SLMP and how such concerns and suggestions will be followed-up. The J-SLMP FGRM has been consulted with relevant stakeholders at the sub-national level. Stakeholders include local communities, private companies, local government such as the sub-national government agencies (Organisasi Perangkat Daerah/OPD), Joint Secretariat on Forest Resource Management (SEKBER), non-governmental organisations and other development partners (refer to Section 6). OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE Complaint or grievance is the submission of information verbally or in writing from each complainant to the agency in charge, regarding the alleged occurrence of violations, potential and/or impacts in the field of environment and/or forestry from the business and/or activities at the planning, implementation and/or post implementation. The claimants could be individuals, groups of people, legal entities, or government agencies that complain of alleged environmental and social impact of the implementation project. FGRM is a tool for early identification, assessment and resolution on any complaints or conflicts on the activities and physical investment in this J-SLMP project. The objectives of the FGRM in this Project are five-fold: • To provide an easy access to public especially the affected community members to file complaints and/or concerns on a particular activity or physical investment (sub-project); • To identify and assess the nature of complaints and/or concerns and agree on solution as early as possible so that constructive inputs can be considered in the design of an activity and/or a physical investment; FGRM Document – Jambi 123 • To avoid stalled activities or project investments in the later stage due to the ignorance of complaints or conflicts, leading to unmanageable conflicts and high costs; • To obtain support from the impacted communities/social license to operate for the proposed activities and; • To enable feedback loops from the broader public for continued improvements; It is important to ensure that relevant concerns and suggestions delivered during project preparation and implementation are incorporated and inform necessary adjustments. It is important for the J-SLMP to strengthen the current FGRM systems that are already in place within various implementing agencies at the national, provincial and district/city levels to better manage complaints as well as conflict resolution processes particularly for activities related to J-SLMP implementation. The FGRM covers direct aspects related to J-SLMP implementation. Broader aspects related to land and natural resource management in the provincial jurisdiction may also be captured through the proposed FGRM since the mechanisms will build on the existing systems within implementing agencies. Hence, focus will be placed on strengthening institutional capacities for the management of land and natural resources, including management of grievances and conflicts that may emerge as a result of improvements in these areas. SUMMARY OF PROJECT DESCRIPTION J-SLMP will support a combination of enabling conditions and promotion of sustainable management practices that will directly address the underlying drivers of emissions resulting from sectoral activities including, timber plantations, estate crops, subsistence agriculture, aquaculture and unsustainable logging practices. The project design considers the distribution of remaining forests, the threats to those forests and the key stakeholders involved in the respective areas. This program consists of three components, as follows: Component 1 on Strengthening Policy and Institutions: The objective of Component 1 is to enhance effective land management regulation and enforcement in Jambi with a focus on harmonizing policies and approaches that are critical for managing emissions from land use, including peat management, fire prevention and management, and green growth. This component will address issues concerning the lack of institutional capacity to ensure good forest and land-use governance. This component aims for improving the regulatory and institutional frameworks in forestry and other land-based sectors, as well as strengthening the instrument for enforcing such policies. Component 2 on Implementing Sustainable Land Management : The objective of Component 2 is to integrate forest and land management in Jambi, particularly through sustainable forest management, agriculture intensification and diversification, conservation and restoration, and value chain sustainability. This component will particularly address lack of sustainable practices in land and resource management. Component 3: Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Reporting : This component envisages overall management of the J-SLMP implementation, and supports collaboration among stakeholders in sustainable forest management. Component 3 aims to support national and provincial� level Project coordination and management, particularly to achieve the Project’s objectives, including Annual Work Plans and Budgets (AWPBs); fiduciary aspects (Financial Management (FM) and procurement); human resource management; safeguards compliance monitoring; monitoring and FGRM Document – Jambi 124 evaluation (M&E); knowledge management and sharing; and the implementation of strategies for communication and stakeholder engagement. Beside overall project monitoring and evaluation this component also address emission monitoring, evaluation and reporting. Table 18 Links between J-SLMP Activities and the Underlying Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation PROXIMATE INDICATIVE ACTIVITIES TO ADDRESS KEY UNDERLYING DRIVERS DRIVERS DRIVERS ADDRESSED ▪ Unauthorized / illegal Conflict resolution (mediation) through formal All activities channels relevant with forestry, plantation and ▪ Tenurial conflict environmental regulations. Conflict resolution (mediation) through customary channels (Adat leaders). Revocation of licenses to ensure clean-and-clear status. Control of illegal mining activities. Control of encroachment in timber plantation concessions, protected forest and conservation areas. Increasing capacity of FMU to address the drivers. Remediation to address contamination and pollution. Food sustenance Sustainable agriculture and intensification Plantation, agriculture strategy. and horticulture Capacity building for smallholder farmers to adopt Village Development (RSPI/ISPO). Risk of leakage and Optimising the use of organic fertilisers and reversals pesticides for sustainable plantations and agriculture. Social forestry to optimise NTFP and wood by- products. Conservation partnership for communities around conservation areas. Participatory planning to address livelihood and sustainable agriculture issues from Dana Desa (Village Funding). Influx of migrants Halting/controlling illegal land transaction Estate crops (palm oil and coffee) Risk of leakage Activity of indigenous peoples Assessing potential impacts to indigenous people. Estate crops, timber Optimising indigenous knowledge and plantations, land claims participation in forest management (e.g., Hutan Adat). FPIC leading to consent from indigenous people. Infrastructure development in Identification of physical and cultural resources. Claims for road access forest area Alignment of spatial structure in the provincial in national parks and/or spatial plan with Green Development. in World Heritage Sites FGRM Document – Jambi 125 PROXIMATE INDICATIVE ACTIVITIES TO ADDRESS KEY UNDERLYING DRIVERS DRIVERS DRIVERS ADDRESSED Forest & peatland fire; Activation of MPAs, supported by provincial Forest and Peatland government, central government (BRG). Fire Training on community Health & Safety aspects in Estate Crop fire prevention and firefighting. Risk of reversals Incentive for MPAs. Adoption of zero-burning techniques in land preparation (can be part of ISPO/RSPO certification). Regulatory instrument for fire control and prevention. Weak forest governance Capacity building for FMU, TAHURA, and other Forestry agencies on addressing environmental and social risks (e.g., community engagement, socialisation, participatory planning). Review and synchronisation of cross sectoral policies. Enforcing moratorium on timber plantation. Limited facility, equipment and Increasing institutional capacity to manage Forestry resources for effective forest potential environmental & social risk through basic protection & management and thematic trainings. Provision of equipment and facilities to ensure effective forest protection and management SMART patrol implementation. Gender and social inclusion Gender mainstreaming to ensure equal access to All sectors livelihood. Gender mainstreaming to enable equal gender participation in forest/land management (e.g., social forestry, sustainable agriculture and plantation). ▪ Forest Encroachment Preventing Forest Encroachment by migrants and Forest, conservation ▪ Lack of effective forest local communities. areas protection and Rehabilitation of damaged forest / ecosystem management restoration. Threats to species and their One Map of wildlife corridor Non-carbon benefit habitat Implementation of Environmental Code of Practice Biodiversity action plan (following species strategy and action plan from MoEF) Anti-poaching patrols FGRM Document – Jambi 126 KEY PRINCIPLES In the handling of grievances related to J-SLMP, the following principles will be upheld: ▪ Free. The stakeholders can submit the complaints without fees, through diverse channels, which are available at each different level, namely village, district, provincial and national; ▪ Fairness. Stakeholders who submit complaints must be treated fairly and non-threatening access, and the follow-up complaints and conflict resolution regardless of their origin, ethnicity, religion, nationality status, social and economic background; ▪ Immediate response. Complaints and conflicts will be resolved as early as possible, at the lowest levels. The cases that cannot be resolved at a lower level will be brought to a higher level; ▪ Options. The complainants are given various options for settlement and they can be invited for negotiations to reach an agreed resolution and can be accepted by all parties; ▪ Objective and Transparent. The system for handling complaints will safeguard the principle of objectivity, transparency and justice, by having an independent mediation team, which will be formed based on needs and willingness to help those who complain at any level. Complainants who are still dissatisfied with the follow-up or settlement provided, can continue to seek another settlement through the litigation process in accordance with Indonesian laws and regulations. LEGAL FRAMEWORK The FGRM will follow the applicable regulations governing management of environmental and social aspects of activities implemented by participating agencies. In the context of addressing conflicts related to management of areas under IUPHHK (Business Permit for Utilization of Timber Forest Products), the following working groups have been established by the Government of Jambi Province, including: 1) Formation of the Investigation Team by the Decree of the Governor of Jambi Number 53/Kep.Gub /B/EKBANG/2008 on 28 January 2008; 2) Integrated team (tim terpadu) by the Decree No.141/Kep.Gub/BAKESBANGPOL-5.1/2019 about the formation of an integrated team handling social conflicts in Jambi Province; 3) Working Unit (POKJA) Jambi Province No. 1471/KEP.GUB/DISHUT/2017 concerning the Establishment of the Working Group (POKJA) for the Acceleration of Social Forestry of the Province of Jambi; 4) Decree of the Head of the Jambi Provincial Forestry Agency No. 168/kpts/Dishut-5.3/VIII/2018 concerning the Establishment of the Conflict Resolution Team of PT. Lestari Asri Jaya and PT. Mukti Wisesa, Tebo Regency; 5) Decree of the Head of the Jambi Provincial Forestry Agency No: SK.16/kpts/DISHUT-5.3/2019 concerning the Establishment of verification and validation team in the context of handling tenurial conflicts in forest areas in the PT IUPHHK-HTI work area of Agronusa Alam Sejahtera in Sarolangun Regency; FGRM Document – Jambi 127 6) Decree of the Head of the Jambi Provincial Forestry Agency No: SK.24/kpts/DISHUT-5.3/2019 concerning the Establishment of verification and validation team in the context of forest area tenurial conflicts handling in the working area of PT IUPHHK-HTI. Agronusa Alam Sejahtera in Sarolangun Regency; 7) Decree of the Head of the Jambi Provincial Forestry Agency No: SK.31/kpts/DISHUT-5.3/2019 concerning the Establishment of verification and validation team in the context of handling tenurial conflicts in forest areas in the PT IUPHHK-HTI work area. Samhutani in Sarolangun Regency; 8) Decree of the Head of the Jambi Province Forestry Agency No: SK.126/kpts/DISHUT-5.3/2019 concerning the Establishment of verification and validation team in the context of handling tenurial conflicts in forest areas in the working area of PT IUPHHK-HTI. Wirakarya Sakti in Tebo Regency. The safeguard committees at the provincial level is in the process of being established to better manage the safeguards implementation, including operationalization of FGRM. The safeguards committee will coordinate with the existing working groups listed above on J-SLMP project-relevant grievances submitted through the working groups. GRIEVANCE HANDLING PROCESS The project will adopt various avenues to enable the public to report grievances related to J-SLMP. Such avenues must be easily accessed, and widely disclosed to the public, especially to the affected communities. Information dissemination will be carried out through multi-media public channels, such as social media, as well as through village offices or village halls in target villages. Focus will be placed on the following aspects: ▪ Procedures for grievance submission and processing; ▪ Key focal points/agencies for grievance management; ▪ Timeline for grievance settlements and status notification; and ▪ Provisions to protect confidentiality and personal safety. FRGM channels can include a broad range of platforms such as telephone, WhatsApp, SMS, social media, web page or mailing address, managed by the provincial Environmental and Social Specialists and/or dedicated personnel from Provincial SEKDA and/or BAPPEDA. For broader grievance management associated with specific mandates and/or activities implemented by participating agencies, including tenurial conflicts, existing grievance redress systems will be used. Grievances submitted at the provincial level will follow applicable procedures at each authorized institution (OPD). The Provincial Secretary (SEKDA) and/or Planning Agency (BAPPEDA) will coordinate all activities including handling grievances related to the J-SLMP. The following agencies play key roles in the management of grievances due to their involvement in the project implementation: ▪ Jambi Environmental Agency (DLH) for the management of grievances related to environmental permitting and management; ▪ Forestry Service of Jambi (DISHUT) for the management of grievances related to forestry activities, including tenurial issues within forest areas; FGRM Document – Jambi 128 ▪ Jambi Plantation Agency (DTPHT) for the management of grievances related to plantation activities (including oil palm plantations); ▪ Jambi National Unity and Political Stability Agency (KESBANGPOL) Agency for the management of civil stability and peace SEKDA and BAPPEDA play an important role in ensuring synergy between forestry and plantation sectors, supported by the Joint Secretariat for Forest Resource Management (SEKBER). Policies on forest management fall under the jurisdiction of the Forestry Agency while management of forest resources and engagement with communities living in forest areas is the responsibility of the Forest Management Units (FMUs). KESBANGPOL (National Unity and Political Stability Agency) and Information and Communication Agency (DISKOMINFO) can potentially support the implementation of provincial level policies and management of grievances and hence, are important stakeholders for FGRM implementation. At the district/city level, the overall FGRM implementation will be oversighted by the District Environmental Service (DLH) under coordination from the District Secretary (SEKDA). District-level implementing agencies will be responsible for the management of grievances which may emerge from project activities that each of these agencies is implementing. At the village level, the village governments will be responsible for the management of grievances in their respective village jurisdictions. J-SLMP strives to ensure participatory community decision making processes related to management of land and natural resources and distribution of project benefits. Such an approach is expected to promote good governance at the village level and minimize potential grievances which may emerge as a result of J-SLMP implementation. On complaints/grievances related to business interruption in the plantation sector, particularly oil palm, the handling of complaints will be managed by the Provincial and District Integrated Team (TIMDU), headed by the Governor and District Heads respectively with members from the land and plantation agencies, depending on where the complaints are lodged. These working groups will convene relevant stakeholders and make decisions on the next settlement processes. Complaints submitted through other channels, such as the Human Rights Commission (KOMNAS HAM), Ombudsman, President Office or Ministry of Agriculture will be consolidated and coordinated for resolution under the TIMDU (refer Figure 12) FGRM Document – Jambi 129 Figure 12 Complaints Mechanism for Business Interruption in the Plantation Sector Source: Plantation Agency, Jambi Province, July 2019 At the project level, the process of feedback and grievance mechanism include: a) Receive and record grievances; b) Screen and categorise grievances; c) Acknowledge receipt and its follow up action; d) Refer to the relevant agencies and/or ministries, particularly for aspects broader than or not directly related to J-SLMP; e) Investigate J-SLMP grievances, which includes field visit for verifying and validating grievances; and f) Act/follow up and g) conclude. J-SLMP will ensure that project-related grievances are systematically documented and transparently communicated to the wider stakeholders to promote good governance of the project. The detailed institutional arrangements of the FGRM at each administrative level i.e. village, city/ district, provincial, and national is further described in Section 3. 7.5.1 Receive and Record Grievances Stakeholders can submit a grievance, directly or indirectly, through a number of ways: ▪ Face-to-face meeting; ▪ Electronic; ▪ By phone; ▪ Social media; ▪ Submission to project’s webpage; ▪ Grievances recorded in the SIS REDD+. Complaints can be submitted to the authorized institution (OPD) at the district and/or province levels or to a dedicated function/PICs. Complaints submitted through a dedicated function/PICs will be forwarded to relevant institutional authority (OPD). Dedicated functions will also have a responsibility to document, assist and monitor complaints reported to the authorities. Considering the wide coverage and the FGRM Document – Jambi 130 potential remoteness of the Project’s areas, process of receiving and forwarding grievances to relevant OPDs is expected to be completed within two weeks. 7.5.2 Grievance Records Grievances will be recorded in the grievance register report by the assigned officer at each administration level from the village to national levels. The recording process will be completed within approximately one week upon the grievance submission, depending on the existing mechanism in each respective agency. Although no response is required for anonymous grievances, these will be recorded and reported with other grievances to facilitate continuous improvement. 7.5.3 Grievance Screening and Categorization Any grievance will be filtered from the issues, whose definitions are available in the table below along with the appropriate response determinate as follows: Table 19 Categories of Grievance Screening CATEGORIES ISSUE/GRIEVANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH Land and territory Covers all issues related to land and Complaints/grievances submitted at the Issues administrative areas of the boundary village level will be resolved immediately. Unresolved disputes will be forwarded to the district level through relevant agencies. Related to sectors Covers all issues related to sectors or Complaints/grievances are handled based institutional authority (OPD) at the district/ on the existing FGRM of each relevant provincial levels. agency at the district or provincial levels. J-SLMP Covers all issues related to fiduciary Complaints/grievances will be handled by implementation aspects of the project, including financial the relevant institutional authority at each (fiduciary and management, procurement, environmental level with oversight and coordination from safeguards) permitting and safeguards issues. SEKDA and/or BAPPEDA and DGCC. 7.5.4 Acknowledgement and Follow-up Action Complainants will receive receipt for each complaint submission from designated authorities within two weeks to one month upon the submission of the grievances. The relevant OPDs with the support of the village authorities when necessary will notify the complainants about the status of the grievances. Each receipt has a specific number/code to allow systematic tracking of grievance/complaint processing. In addition to receipt, each complainant will receive information on the follow up action with regards to subsequent processes for grievance/complaint settlements. 7.5.5 Referral to Relevant Authorities Registered complaints will be submitted to the authorized unit/division responsible for handling complaints. The safeguards committee at the district and provincial levels, with support from the provincial environmental and social specialists will assist in the oversight of grievance settlements including tracking of resolution processes. Complex issues which cannot be solved at the village/community and district levels will be dispatched to the provincial and national authorities. FGRM Document – Jambi 131 7.5.6 Investigation The authorized grievance officer/PIC will lead a grievance inquiry, if needed, including collecting relevant documents, conducting field visits, consulting appropriate internal staff, contacting external stakeholders, and other activities. The investigative findings will be used to document the decision- making process and inform the proposed improvement. In the event of impasse, independent mediation will be sought. The investigation timeline will vary from cases to cases depends on the complexity of the issues. The complainant will receive regular notification at least every month on the investigation status if the case has not been resolved within one month upon the commencement of the investigation process. 7.5.7 Follow-up Complaints that have been investigated will be followed up by the authorized team and any proposed settlements will be consulted with the aggrieved parties to achieve win-win solutions for all parties in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations. The safeguards committee will continue tracking the status of grievance/complaint resolution with support from environmental and social specialists. 7.5.8 Conclusion The grievance resolution process is based on existing mechanism under GOI regulation that applies in the authorized institution and also consider existing local grievance mechanism such as musyawarah, local wisdoms, etc. If the complainants accept the proposed resolution and that the agreed action has been taken, the status of the reported complaints can be closed. The grievance officer/PIC at each implementing agency is responsible for setting the action, and the deadline for implementing the resolution. Proper records of all consultations and consensus will be maintained with supporting documentation. If necessary, monitoring will be performed to verify the implementation. The grievance/complaint closing process involves having the complainants sign the settlement form to document the satisfaction with the resolution action, documenting the action taken and closing in the grievance registry. FGRM STRUCTURE AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS The Project’s Grievance Redress Mechanisms (GRM) comprises of four-tier system, i.e., village, district/city, provincial and national level. FGRM at the lower level may hierarchically relate to the higher levels (and vice versa), depending on the nature of the complaints and follow-up actions. Complainants could submit their complaints directly to the authorized institution (OPD) in each level or may be facilitated by the safeguard committees who will ensure that reported complaints/grievances reach relevant authorized agencies for settlements. J-SLMP related complaints submitted to district, provincial and national agencies will be documented through the Safeguard Information System (SIS) managed by the DGCC. The complaint handling and reporting is coordinated by the Regional Secretary (SEKDA) and/or Planning Agency (BAPPEDA) at the district and provincial levels. In terms of recording, monitoring and reporting, SEKDA and BAPPEDA will be assisted by the safeguard’s committees and provincial environmental and social specialists. FGRM Document – Jambi 132 At the national level grievance/complaint submission can be made through relevant websites managed by DGLE, DGSFEP, and DGCC. The DGCC has been mandated by the MOEF to be responsible for handling complaints related to J-SLMP at the national level. Institutional chart for FGRM implementation is shown in Figure 13. FGRM Document – Jambi 133 Figure 13 Indicative Institutional Chart for FGRM Implementation29 29 To be formalised upon agreement of all parties involved. FGRM Document – Jambi 134 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENT AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL At the national level, FGRM is hosted under a) the Directorate General of Law Enforcement on Environment & Forestry (Ditjen PHLHK or also well-known as Ditjen GAKUM) for law enforcement on forestry related activities (i.e. illegal logging); b) Directorate General of Social Forestry and Environmental Partnership (Perhutanan Sosial dan Kemitraan Lingkungan /Ditjen PSKL) for tenure access and community forestry partnerships within the forest areas and c) Directorate General Climate Change (DGCC) for J-SLMP related issues. The SIS (Safeguard Information System), which will be adopted as a platform for safeguards reporting, is hosted by DGCC. Table 20 National Agencies Involved in the Implementation of the FGRM NATIONAL AGENCY STATUS ROLES Director General Climate National ▪ Management of the National Registry; Change (MoEF) Dedicated ▪ Development and management of the FREL; function of ▪ Management of the MMR; REDD+ ▪ Finalisation and implementation of safeguards plans; ▪ Finalisation and implementation of the FGRM; ▪ Technical Assistance; ▪ Recommendation for Payment (BSM); ▪ Handling the Grievance process at national level; ▪ Updating grievance handling based on SIS-REDD+. Director General of Law Authorized ▪ Grievance recording, screening, investigating, handling Enforcement Institution and reporting under the jurisdiction; ▪ Publish the grievance process and result. Director General of Social Authorized ▪ Grievance recording, screening, investigating, handling Forestry and Environment Institution and reporting under the Jurisdiction; Partnership ▪ Publish the grievance process and result. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENT AT THE PROVINCIAL LEVEL At the provincial level, the responsible party for J-SLMP implementation is the Provincial Environmental Service (DLH)/Safeguards Committee acting as coordinator or undertaking the day-to-day management of the J-SLMP Program. During the implementation, SEKDA and BAPPEDA will be advised by the Joint Secretariate for Forest Resource Management (Sekretariat Bersama Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Hutan- SEKBER). The Joint Secretariat (SEKBER) in Jambi Province is a key partner in the implementation of the J-SLMP Program. SEKBER is a multi-stakeholder organisation that has coordinated the planning and implementation of low emission development in Jambi Province. It has significant experience (as well as operational infrastructure) in the management of donor development funding. Grievances that are submitted at the provincial level will follow applicable procedures at each authorized institution (OPD, KPH and TN). The Safeguards Committee with technical support from the provincial environmental and social specialists will coordinate all activities including handling grievances that have been and are being handled regarding the J-SLMP activities. FGRM Document – Jambi 135 Table 21 The Provincial Agencies Involved in the Implementation of FGRM AGENCY STATUS ROLE Jambi Environment Service Advisory/Implementing agency ▪ Providing advice and inputs to local (Dinas Lingkungan government in relation to J-SLMP Hidup)/Safeguards including grievance handling; Committee ▪ Grievance handling. Other Provincial Government Implementing Agencies ▪ J-SLMP implementation; Services (OPD) ▪ Leading consultation processes within their respective jurisdictions; ▪ Project assistance, monitoring, recording, and reporting of J-SLMP implementation; ▪ Grievance handling. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS AT THE DISTRICT/ CITY LEVEL At the district/city level, the overall FGRM implementation will be oversighted by the District Environmental Service (DLH) under coordination from the District Secretary (SEKDA). District-level implementing agencies will be responsible for the management of grievances which may emerge from project activities that each of these agencies is implementing. Resolution of complex issues may require inter-agency coordination and high-level ministerial decisions. Such grievances typically involve decisions regarding gazettement of state forest areas, changes in forest land ownership status, forest area conversion etc. Grievance redress mechanism process is based on the existing mechanism in each authorized institution (OPD) and the prevailing Indonesian Regulation. Grievances filed by Masyarakat Adat (customary communities), involving tenurial claims and conflicts shall follow applicable regulations pertaining to recognition of these communities and their land rights. These communities may submit their grievances to their respective district or provincial governments and/or MoEF based on Decree No. 24/Menhut-II/2015 on the Establishment of a Team for Addressing Environmental and Forestry-Related Grievances. The district safeguards committee will support district SEKDA and/or BAPPEDA in the overall coordination and monitoring of grievance management, including making recommendations on grievance escalations to the higher level. Table 22 The District/City Agencies Level Involved in the FGRM AGENCY STATUS ROLE Environment Executing Agency at ▪ Responsible for Implementation and achievement of J- Service/Safeguards District/City Level SLMP in the District and Field Site Committee and Field Site OPD District/City Implementing ▪ J-SLMP sub-project implementation; Agencies ▪ Grievance handling. FGRM Document – Jambi 136 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENT AT THE VILLAGE LEVEL At the village level, aggrieved communities and/or individuals may bring their grievances to the village chiefs, respected figures/village representatives, village councils and/or customary leaders. If these village stakeholders fail to mediate and/or settle grievances, unresolved complaints/grievances may be be escalated to the higher level (i.e., district or province) Grievance mechanisms shall respect existing traditional practices and/or customary laws (if any) or acceptable mechanisms facilitated by the local government based on community request. On forestry related grievances, particularly on tenurial issues, affected communities may raise their grievances their respective district or provincial governments and/or MoEF based on Decree No. 24/Menhut-II/2015 on the Establishment of a Team for Addressing Environmental and Forestry-Related Grievances. Table 23 Relevant Agencies involved in FGRM at Village Level Agency Status Role Village Council Partner ▪ Participation in village planning and community mobilization; ▪ Grievance handling and mediation. Village Implementing Agencies ▪ Implementing village level activities under J-SLMP; Government ▪ Grievance handling and mediation. Customary Partner ▪ Participation in village development planning and Council community mobilization; ▪ Grievance handling and mediation. DEDICATED FUNCTION AND ACCESS POINT The safeguard committees with technical support from the provincial environmental and social specialists will be in responsible to guide the implementation of FGRM. Representatives from relevant OPDs, i.e., regional planning agency and environmental service agency of the respective districts will be appointed as the safeguards committee members. The assigned personnel must have experience in handling grievances in his/her institution. Capacity building activities including training o FGRM will be conducted for the personnel involved in the Project’s FGRM. The District and Provincial Environmental agencies will be the focal points for the management of grievances related to environmental issues. GRIEVANCE MONITORING AND TRACKING The dedicated function/PICs at the agency level will review internal and external qualitative and quantitative indicators within their own agencies, as well as externally with other relevant stakeholder groups. These PICs will conduct quarterly reviews of quantitative indicators and report on a periodic basis (quarterly) to the safeguards committee and provincial environmental and social specialists. Quarterly and annual indicators are presented in the following table. FGRM Document – Jambi 137 Table 24 Review Period and Indicator for Review Objective Recommended Indicator Quantitative indicator ▪ Assess whether grievance ▪ The total number of grievances received by the review per 4 months is correctly classified; level and type of grievance; ▪ Identify trends in the ▪ Number of open grievances by level and type grievance; and of grievance; ▪ Ensure grievances are ▪ Closing period by level and type of grievance; addressed. ▪ Repeated grievance monitoring from the same stakeholders; and ▪ Monitoring of grievance trends. Review of annual ▪ Assess compliance with ▪ Compliance with the process; grievance procedures the grievance process; ▪ Completeness of grievance records (logs); ▪ Evaluate progress ▪ The number of grievances received by the towards achieving goals; level and type of grievance; and ▪ The number of open grievances by level and ▪ Identify improvements and type of grievance; update grievance ▪ Closing period by level and type of grievance; procedures. ▪ Repeated grievance monitoring from the same stakeholders; ▪ Monitoring of grievance trends; ▪ Qualitative assessment of stakeholders' awareness of a grievance mechanism through stakeholder engagement processes; and ▪ Qualitative assessment of grievance mechanism credibility through stakeholder engagement. FGRM Document – Jambi 138 CONSULTATION AND PUBLICATION OF REDRESS GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES Several consultations of the GRM procedure have been made with the stakeholders as follows: Table 25 Summary of Stakeholder Consultations in Jambi WHAT IS THE ISSUE RELEVANCE TO RECOMMENDATIONS TOPIC REDD+ Kick-Off Meeting Joint ▪ PDO result-chain MRV, Safeguards, and Preparation Mission BioCF ▪ Annual Work Plan initial design of the ERP ISFL ▪ Procurement Plan ▪ Draft Grant Agreement ▪ Aide of Memoire ▪ ToR Individual Consultant ▪ Concept Note Joint Mission BioCF-ISFL ▪ PPG Procurement, Part of REDD+ The mission agreed that continued refinements of the results framework and Lol, Financial readiness process monitoring arrangement with interactive follow-up sessions and email communication agreement progress, with the M&E specialist would take place in the next four months and would be AWP presented to the next mission. ▪ ERP Document ▪ Result chain & pre- investment activities ▪ Agriculture framework ▪ Private sector ▪ ER allocation ▪ Benefit Sharing Mechanism ▪ Safeguards 139 WHAT IS THE ISSUE RELEVANCE TO RECOMMENDATIONS TOPIC REDD+ Focus group discussion ▪ Identification WPK As a document that ▪ The presentation of SEA stated that at this time a program design for Biocarbon (FGD) of identification of REDD+ supports the preparation Fund ISFL is needed, and how to portray the causes/drivers & strategy for potential locations for ▪ Deforestation and of ERP handling it; deforestation and forest degradation ▪ The obstacles to the implementation of the Jambi ERP at this time include, degradation and peat procedurally, the issuance of the decree on the involvement of elements from the damage (1) SKPD (provincial agencies); ▪ Data used for ERP, at least the last 10 years; ▪ The existence of data and maps that are likely to be different, even though the data (both) are sourced from Government agencies; ▪ In KPH/National Park/Tahura/BPHP Units, generally the problems that occur are community forest encroachment expansion, forest fires, illegal logging, unlicensed plantations (oil & rubber), plantation investors (non local Jambi), forest encroachment for oil palm and rubber, encroachment in the inter-zone buffer zone, lack of implementation of good governance from various relevant stakeholders, tenure conflicts, peat decomposition, illegal mining, land use (mining, gardens, agriculture), unsustainable forest management; ▪ The agency mapping for data availability is in accordance with the required basic data (attached Power Point slide-13), from the basic data they can be developed again in accordance with the progress of deliberative discussion and process; ▪ Pre-identification of the main drivers that cause issues in the forestry sector (attached-xl), will be met again by the audience in accordance with the next plan of follow-up discussion. Focus group discussion ▪ Identification WPK ▪ Verification of Main ▪ Participants to complete information on the main causes and things that underlie (FGD) of identification of REDD+ Drivers & Causes of Deforestation and Degradation, with supporting data; potential locations for ▪ Deforestation and Deforestation and ▪ Participants deliver information on the social and environmental impacts of the deforestation and forest degradation degradation arising issues, along with the required program plan directions, this input can degradation and peat ▪ Screening of SESA strengthen PDO and the details of its activities program details in participants' damage (2) Issues slide; ▪ Identification of ▪ As per initial information from the previous info recap and screening support from Social & spatial data processing, several issues have been addressed; Environmental ▪ In the process of ensuring that the issue on the second day was obtained a short Impacts list of agreed issues was seven points; 140 WHAT IS THE ISSUE RELEVANCE TO RECOMMENDATIONS TOPIC REDD+ ▪ PDO and ERP ▪ Based on cluster issues that arise from the participants' discussion, several Consolidation alternative locations for public consultation areas are proposed, the next ▪ Identification of the screening can be arranged in accordance with the consideration of the basis of Area of Public spatial data processing and expert judgment. Consultation Interview the perceptions of Interview related to the ▪ Verification of Main More than half of the respondents stated ignorance of the details of the emission key stakeholders in the Bio Carbon Fund, drivers Drivers & Causes of reduction program, its relevance to REDD +, and its role in the implementation sample districts (Bungo, of deforestation, related DD process later. However, most stakeholders hope that the program can be applied at Merangin, Sarolangun, stakeholders, fund ▪ Screening of SESA the local level at the district level, so that the benefits of the programs and Kerinci and Tanjung Jabung management Issues subprograms can be directly felt by the related units in the field in dealing with the Timur) mechanisms, important dynamics that occur at this time. issues and future expectations. Focus group discussion Know the problems of SESA & ESMF Participants complete information in accordance with the directions (FGD) of six villages natural resource (Beringin Tinggi, Guguk, management, the root of Kandis Dendang, Pandan the problem, the parties lagan, Sungai beras, & involved, and the Rantau kermas) and 1 solutions offered. indigenous people 141 ANNEX 8. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES PLANNING FRAMEWORK (IPPF) INTRODUCTION Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) is a low carbon development incentive mechanism which is expected to address both social justice and environmental sustainability. REDD+ implementation requires a robust safeguards mechanism to avoid and if not feasible, minimize and compensate, negative impacts arising from its implementation. Implementation of a safeguards framework under REDD+ is a global agreement reached as an outcome of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2010. The World Bank Safeguards encompass many aspects for the management of environmental and social risks under the Jambi Sustainable Landscape Management Project (J-SLMP). The concept of safeguarding REDD+ covers a variety of issues, including the transparency of national forest management structures, inclusive participation of various parties, including vulnerable groups, respect for the knowledge and rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, conservation of biodiversity and natural forests, emission displacement and reversals, and equitable benefit sharing. To strengthen the management of risks and impacts on Indigenous Peoples associated with J-SLMP, the Government of Indonesia (GOI) has prepared an Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF), which sets out relevant requirements for engagement and consultations as well as measures to address potential risks and impacts on these groups. This IPPF was developed through an inclusive process involving various stakeholders in Jambi, include the following consultations: ▪ Focus Group Discussions with indigencous communities (Orang Rimba and Serampas as samples) 20-27 April 2019; and ▪ Consultation at district level: 21-23 May 2019. A complete record of these consultations is appended in the preliminary SESA report (refer to Appendix A.3). Further consultations are necessary to promote inclusive participation of a broad range of stakeholders and enable their views and concerns to be addressed under the J-SLMP and future ERP. The final and consulted IPPF will be disclosed at the MoEF’s website and the World Bank’s Image Bank prior to the project’s appraisal. PROJECT DESCRIPTION J-SLMP’s proposed development objective is to improve sustainable landscape management that reduces land-based GHG emissions in Jambi. The achievements of the PDO will be measured through the following indicators: a) Land area under sustainable forest management and/or restoration practices (ha); b) GHG Emission reductions in Jambi (MtCO2e); and c) Number of people reached with benefits (assets and/or services) (percent women). The World Bank’s BioCarbon Fund Initiative for Sustainable Forest Landscapes (Bi oCF ISFL) supported the GOI in preparing a jurisdictional Emission Reduction Program (ERP) by providing phased financing (see Figure 1). First, US$1.5 million in preparation funding was provided to the GOI to prepare a Project 142 to improve the enabling environment for reducing emissions in Jambi. This project relates to the subsequent phase of BioCF ISFL grant financing (US$13.5 million) for the J-SLMP to implement improvements to the enabling environment, including cross-sectoral coordination and testing land use approaches to reduce emissions in Jambi. In order to achieve ERs at scale, the Project will need to leverage resources from complementary programs in Jambi. The private sector, in particular, has an essential role to play in land management in Jambi, especially considering plantation crops alone cover almost one-third of the land area in the province. To support this, a coordinated and complementary Bank-executed (BETF) operation, to be funded by the BioCF ISFL, is being prepared to support private sector engagement in Jambi. Collectively, the J-SLMP, private sector BETF operation, and complementary funding from other sources will strategically target resource gaps and promote the reduction of emissions from land use in Jambi. The BioCF ISFL has further committed to purchasing emission reductions (ERs) from Jambi through a forthcoming Emission Reductions Purchase Agreement (ERPA) with a contract value of up to US$70 million. The J-SLMP and its activities have been designed to address identified gaps and to scale successful approaches throughout Jambi to maximize available Project financing to promote emission reduction from land use in the province. As part of this process, the GOI, including national and provincial governments, conducted an analysis of activities that would support the project’s development objective. These were further consulted with stakeholders for the J-SLMP and the World Bank and prioritised based on their expected impacts. Specifically, activities were prioritized based on five criteria: 1) Expected impact on reducing emissions; 2) Geographic prioritization given the landscape in Jambi (including a spatial planning approach); 3) Livelihood impacts for communities and smallholders; 4) Complementarity and ability to leverage other programs and initiatives being implemented by government, CSOs, development partners, communities and the private sector; and 5) The unique value that the World Bank Group provides on sustainable land use, particularly as it relates to governance, policy, and regulations. Below is a summary of the three Project components for J-SLMP: Component 1. Strengthening Policy and Institutions: The objective of Component 1 is to enhance effective land management regulation and enforcement in Jambi with a focus on harmonizing policies and approaches that are critical for managing emissions from land use, including peat management, fire prevention and management, and green growth. Component 2. Implementing Sustainable Land Management: The objective of Component 2 is to integrate forest and land management in Jambi, particularly through sustainable forest management, agriculture intensification and diversification, conservation and restoration, and value chain sustainability. This component will also support private sector partnerships for improved forest and land management, which will leverage private sector funding, investment and expertise to support GHG emissions reductions in Jambi. Specifically, these activities aim to create engagement models and mechanisms that could be replicated and scaled up with private sector actors. Component 3. Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation: The objective of Component 3 is to support national and provincial�level Project coordination and management, particularly to achieve the Project’s objectives, including Annual Work Plans and Budgets (AWPBs); fiduciary aspects (Financial Management (FM) and procurement); human resource management; safeguards compliance monitoring; monitoring and evaluation (M&E); knowledge management and sharing; and the implementation of strategies for communication and stakeholder engagement. 143 The direct beneficiaries of the J-SLMP are smallholder farmers, communities, and officials in relevant institutions at all levels of government, who will benefit from capacity building and training, policy development, and physical investments. For the purposes of this Project, direct benefits include goods, services, small works, and training that will: a) Improve land management and empower communities to participate; b) Create alternative livelihood opportunities; c) Improve capacities and policies to better manage landscapes for multiple benefits; d) Increase private investment flows in both restoration and intensification activities; and e) Help secure ecosystem services, including biodiversity. The Project aims to maintain and restore natural habitat, especially considering that degradation and deforestation in HCV areas are major contributors to emissions. The activities under the Project will facilitate positive ecological impacts that include, among others, restored and better maintained biodiversity, as well as improved environmental services and ecosystems. The total expected number of direct beneficiaries will be confirmed during appraisal. In addition, many stakeholders in Jambi will benefit from the J-SLMP indirectly, including communities, government institutions, civil society, private sector, and academia, through indirect benefits such as a reduction in land conflicts and improvements in land governance and management, the investment climate, biodiversity, water quality, soil fertility, flooding and erosion control, and habitats of game and fish. PURPOSE OF THE FRAMEWORK The World Bank’s Operational Policy 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples is triggered for this Project due to the presence of Indigenous Peoples in the Jambi Sustainable Landscape Management Project (J-SLMP) implementation area (WPK). The IPPF has therefore been prepared to foster participation of these groups, promote their access to project benefits and in conjuction with the RPF and PF (refer to Appendix 9) address risks associated with restrictions to land uses and tenure conflict resolution from improved forest and land management. The framework has been prepared to provide operational guidance of OP 4.10 under the Program. The GOI is a signatory of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) where Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is required when the Program affects Indigenous Peoples. The scope of its application is described in this framework. The Indonesian Constitution recognises the rights of customary communities. In addition, several laws such as Law No. 27/2007 on the management of coastal and small islands and Law No. 32/2009 on the environmental management and protection explicitly refer to the the term Masyarakat Adat. The Constitutional Court confirmed the constitutional rights of Indigenous Peoples over their lands and territories in May 2013, including their collective rights over traditional forests. This framework provides guidance to the J-SLMP implementing agencies to engage in an inclusive and participatory process to ensure that the rights and aspirations of Indigenous Peoples affected by the J- SLMP implementation are respected. By doing so, it is expected that long-term sustainability of the J- SLMP can be enhanced through broad community participation and ownership. Under the World Bank OP 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples, the GOI is required to engage a process of free, prior and Informed consultations for the implementation of activities that affect Indigenous Peoples. The J-SLMP will seek to ascertain that broad community support to activities that may affect Indigenous Peoples has been obtained prior to their implementation. Such consultation processes will also equally apply to other vulnerable groups, who may not necessarily identify themselves and/or meet the requirements of Masyarakat Adat (Customary Communities) under the GOI’s framework but qualify for policy coverage under OP 4.10. Such a rationale was adopted to recognise the diversity and complexity 144 of socio, cultural and traditional characteristics, vulnerability, and relationships with land and natural resources amongst communities within the J-SLMP implementation areas. A framework approach has been adopted since the exact locations and activities, along with their potential risks and impacts will only be known at the J-SLMP implementation stage. Understanding these circumstances and given that risk assessments during the SESA phase may change, the framework has therefore been prepared to serve at least three purposes: 1. To lay out a process to ensure free, prior, and informed consultations for activities that affect Indigenous Peoples within the J-SLMP implementation areas; 2. To set out risk mitigation measures to avoid potentially adverse effects on these communities, particularly on aspects related to access to land and natural resources and ensure that they have opportunities to equitably share the Program’s benefits. If such impact avoidance is not feasible, to establish measures to minimize, mitigate or compensate for such effects; 3. To lay out participatory process related to dispute resolution and recognition of customary rights. IPPF was developed to address the above aspects and includes specific strategies and measures to ensure that Indigenous Peoples affected by J-SLMP receive socially and economically appropriate benefits. The IPPF also seeks to ensure that the negative impacts on Indigenous Peoples can be avoided, minimized, reduced and if not feasible, compensated in conjuction with OP 4.10 and OP 4.12. 8.4 SCOPE OF THE APPLICATION The IPPF covers Indigenous Peoples and vulnerable communities as characterized by OP 4.10 (see Section 2.2) affected by J-SLMP, irrespective of formal recognition by the GOI. Relevant policy provisions and mitigation measures under OP 4.10 to address potential risks and protect the rights of these groups shall apply. The scope of the measures required under the IPPF is defined based on the nature of risks and impacts and specific provisions may be required depending on the nature of the anticipated impacts. Detailed description is presented in Section 3. 145 RELEVANT LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND REGULATIONS INDONESIAN REGULATIONS RELATED TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Indonesian legal framework generally refers to Indigenous Peoples as Masyarakat Hukum Adat (customary law communities).30 Identification criteria of such communities and protection of their rights to land and natural resources can be found in various legislations. The GOI acknowledges the presence of Masyarakat Hukum Adat and their rights, provided that these groups meet eligibility requirements and have obtained legal recognition from their provincial or district governments (further elaborated in the Minister of Home Affairs’ Regulation No. 52/2014). Such legal recognition serves as a precondition for further recognition of land rights and natural resources within customary territories. In May 2013, the Constitutional Court ruled that Hutan Adat are not part of state forest (hutan negara). This Court decision modified Hutan Adat from falling under the category of state forest (hutan negara), to the category of private forest (hutan hak). The ruling further implied that Adat forests, wherever legally recognised, would be assumed to be the collectively owned forests of Indigenous Peoples. The following Indonesia laws and regulation recognise the specific rights of IPs: ▪ Indonesian’s Constitution Article 18(B) recognises the rights of Masyarakat Hukum Adat; ▪ Basic Agrarian Law No. 5/1960: Apart from defining types of land rights of private individuals and other entities, the law recognises land rights over customary territories ( hak ulayat) and customary law (adat law) as long as it is not in conflict with the national interest; ▪ Law No. 39/1999 on Human Rights: Article 6 of the Law states that the needs of Masyarakat Hukum Adat need to be recognised and protected by the law, society and the government; ▪ Law No. 6/2014 on Villages: The Law acknowledges the existence and rights of Masyarakat Hukum Adat. The communities can establish adat villages with their own institutional structures and authority although this law suffers from the lack of guiding regulations and institutional mandates to make such provisions operational. The Law grants a desa adat (customary village) the authority to conduct adat-based public administration; ▪ Law No. 23/2014 on Local Government: This Law recognises the existence of adat institutions (lembaga adat) by giving them rights to “empowerment�. Second, the Law determines that adat law is an additional rule for purposes such as village elections. Third, the Law makes adat or adat law the basis upon which to conduct local development, or as a parameter to measure social cohesiveness; ▪ Law No. 11/2010 on Cultural Heritage: This Law recognises Masyarakat Adat as owners of their cultural heritage and grants them authority to manage it. The Law requires observation and data collection on cultural heritage sites that may be affected by project activities; and 30 Relevant regulatory frameworks include Law No. 32/2009 on Environmental Protection and Management, Law No.41/ 1999 (further revised to Law No 19/2004) on Forestry, Law no 18/2013 on Prevention and Abolition of Forests Destructions, Presidential Instruction No 88/2017 on Land Tenure Settlements in Forest Areas, and Ministerial Regulation of the Ministry of Home Affairs No 52/2014 on the Guidelines for the Recognition and Protection of Adat Community and most recently the Presidential Regulation No 88/2017 on Land Tenure Settlements in Forest Areas. 146 ▪ Forestry Law No. 41/1999: Primarily, the Law divides forests into different legal categories and provides criteria for the recognition of Hutan Adat rights. The law has been amended by Constitutional Court Decision No. 35/2012 which established that adat forests are not state forest area but collectively owned private land. The clarification of Article 67 (2) of Law 41/1999 lists five conditions, based on which the government will recognise a customary community as Masyarakat Hukum Adat: o In the people’s daily life, it still is a communal society (paguyuban); o The community has adat institutions and adat leaders; o The community has clear boundaries; o The community has well-functioning customary law institutions, particularly an adat judicial system; and o The community still collects forest products for its subsistence. Below the level of national laws, a number of ministerial regulations further define Masyarakat Hukum Adat and point out the legal procedures for the legal recognition of Masyarakat Hukum Adat and the recognition of Hutan Adat or other customary land rights. In the context of Jambi, legal recognition is regulated by Provincial Regulation for the Recognition of Masyarakat Hukum Adat in Jambi. Ministry of Home Affairs regulation (Permendagri) No. 52/2014 and some regulation from Jambi government on guidelines for the recognition of Masyarakat Hukum Adat in Jambi (Provincial Regulation No.7/2013, Provincial Regulation No. 2/2014 and Regulation No. 8/2016), define Masyarakat Adat as follows: a. Customary law communities (Masyarakat Hukum Adat) are groups of Indonesian citizens who have distinctive characteristics, live in groups harmoniously according to their customary law, have ties to ancestral origins and or similarities in living, have strong relationships with land and the environment, and dispose of a distinct value system and economic, political, social, cultural, legal institutions31; b. Customary Territory (Wilayah Adat) is customary land in the form of land, water, and/or waters along with natural resources on top of it with certain boundaries, owned and preserved for presence and future generations and utilized in a sustainable manner in order to meet the needs of the community as inheritance from their ancestors or ownership claims in the form of ulayat land or customary forests; and c. Customary Law is a set of norms or rules, both written and unwritten, that live and apply to regulate human behavior that are based on Indonesian cultural values, inherited from generation to generation, which are always adhered to and respected for justice and public order and has legal consequences or sanctions. Following Constitutional Court Decision No. 35/2012, several ministerial regulations were passed that provide further details on how the government can recognise Masyarakat Hukum Adat and their land 31 Alternatively, the Minister of Agrarian Affairs/National Land Agency (Ministerial Regulation No. 10/2016) defines these communities as “groups of people bound by their customary law arrangements as members of a g roup allied by their place of residence or hereditary base.� 147 rights. The central government (MoEF or MoATR/BPN) can only recognise adat land rights if there already is a regional form of government recognition. There are two options for the recognition of Hutan Adat: a. A regional regulation (Peraturan Daerah or Perda) as stipulated in Article 67 (2) of Forestry Law 41/1999; and b. A district head/governor decree (Keputusan Kepala Daerah). Ministerial Regulation of the Minister of Home Affairs No. 52/2014 concerning Guidelines on the Recognition and Protection of Masyarakat Hukum Adat, grants district heads/mayors the authority to issue a decree on recognition based on recommendations from special committees ( Panitia Masyarakat Hukum Adat kabupaten/kota) (Article 6 (2)). These are appointed by the district head/mayor (Article 3 (1)). They consist of regional secretary, regional working unit head, district head of legal affairs and sub-district head. Article 4 stipulates that the committee has the task to verify the identification (identifikasi), validation (validasi) and determination (determinasi) of the adat law community involved. After regional recognition has been realized, the following step for Indigenous Peoples to secure their Hutan Adat rights is recognition by the MoEF. The MoEF has issued a ministerial regulation on this procedure with regard to the recognition of Hutan Adat rights. This procedure only appertains to the Forest Estate and not to state land under the jurisdiction of the MoATR/BPN. Ministerial Regulation 32/2015 concerning Private Forest Rights (hutan hak) regulates the procedural steps to be taken. A ministerial decree (keputusan menteri) can designate Hutan Adat and hence, change its from state forest into private forest. Article 6 of the Ministerial Regulation provides the following conditions for the Minister to recognise adat forests by ministerial decree: a. An Adat law community or right to avail (hak ulayat) has been recognised by a regional government through a regional legal decision (produk hukum daerah); b. There is an Adat territory that is partly or wholly located inside a forest; and c. There is a formal request from an Adat law community to designate the Adat forest; In practise, however, the realization of Hutan Adat rights is far from an easy, clear-cut process. Only those communities formally recognised as Masyarakat Hukum Adat can obtain Hutan Adat rights. In order to qualify as such, communities must meet a number of defining characteristics, which include the existence of a traditional communal territory, well-functioning traditional institutions and the existence of a clear leadership hierarchy. 32 Before the MoEF can transfer Hutan Adat rights to communities, Masyarakat Hukum Adat need to be recognised by their regional governments, either at the level of district or province.33 The latter condition provides regional authorities with large discretionary decision-making authority. Besides Hutan Adat rights and the other Social Forestry schemes, there are two other legal options available for communities to secure land rights in the Forest Estate: a. Hak Komunal (communal rights). This right pertains both to Forest Estate areas and state land (tanah negara) and was established in Ministerial Regulation No. 10/2016 on Procedures to Determine Communal Rights of Masyarakat Hukum Adat and Communities in a Specific Zone, by the Minister of ATR/BPN. The Ministerial Regulation provides the possibility for both 32 Stipulated in the elucidation of Article 67 of Forestry Law No. 41/1999 33 Article 6 of Ministerial Regulation no. 32/2015 of the Minister of MoEF on Private Forest Rights ( Hutan Hak). 148 Masyarakat Hukum Adat and other communities to obtain communal ownership rights in the Forest Estate or state land. It refers to these communities as ‘communities in a Specific Zone’ (masyarakat dalam Kawasan Tertentu). Special Zone refers to a forest area or to a plantation concession. For communities to obtain hak komunal, a request has to be filed with their district heads. These shall then form an inventory team called Tim IP4T.34 After the Tim IP4T verifies the communal land right, the land in question shall be released either from the state forest or from the plantation concession. If the land is located inside a Forest Area, the Tim IP4T will hand over its results to the MoEF, which should then release the land from the Forest Area (Article 11). If the land is located inside a plantation concession, the holder of the concession rights shall be requested to exclude the plot of land from its concession (Article 13 (1) b). Following the approval from the Tim IP4T to particular district head/governor, a district head decree or governor decree shall be issued, which shall then be sent to either the MoATR/BPN or MoEF (Article 18 (2)) who will be asked to exclude it from their jurisdiction; b. Land ownership certificate (sertifikat atas tanah). Presidential Regulation No. 88/2017 on Settling Land Tenure within Forest Estate Areas (PPTKH) put in place procedures to address issues related to land status and resource conflict within the Forest Estate (kawasan hutan). According to this regulation, individuals or communities can obtain land ownership certificates if they have cultivated a parcel of land located in the Forest Estate for more than 20 years (article 20 e). After inspection and verification, this land parcel shall then be released from the Forest Estate. The government has initiated several measures to address disputes related to land ownership 35 such as the issuance of Presidential Decree No. 88/2017 on the Settlement of Forest Tenure Disputes. In Jambi, there have been many attempts at resolving conflict through conciliation, mediation, and arbitration. Also, the provincial Forestry Office has established a Forest Conflict Resolution Desk, and the provincial Plantation Office has developed an Integrated Team to resolve plantation conflict. The Jambi Government has issued some regulations related to guidelines for the recognition of Masyarakat Hukum Adat in Jambi: Provincial Regulation No.7/2013 on Preservation and Cultural Development of Malay Jambi, and Provincial Regulation No 2/2014 on Lembaga Adat Melayu Jambi. At the district level, there is Regional Regulation No. 8/2016 on Recognition and Protection of Indigenous Peoples, the Serampas clan. This regulation authorizes district heads/mayors to form special committees, who are tasked to identify Masyarakat Hukum Adat. These committees may recommend a district head or mayor to recognise Masyarakat Hukum Adat through a district head/mayor decree (Art. 11 (2)). In case their traditional territory extends over multiple districts, the governor is authorized to recognise Adat land rights by a governor decree (Art. 11 (3)). 34 IP4T stands for Inventarisasi Penguasaan, Pemilikan, Penggunaan dan Pemanfaatan Tanah (inventory of control, ownership, use and benefit of land). 35 Since Indonesia’s reform period, the issue of land rights and land distribution has taken a central place i n dialogues related to addressing inequalities and rural poverty. At a conference on forest tenure in Lombok in July 2011, the GOI announced its intention to prioritize the needs of its forest communities, to "recognise, respect and protect Adat rights," and to tackle the lack of coordination across government agencies in addressing forest tenure policies. President Joko Widodo has stated that land reform is a pillar of the national development program. 149 THE WORLD BANK OPERATIONAL POLICY ON INDIGENOUS PEOPLE (OP4.10) The WB’s Operational Policy 4.10 (Indigenous Peoples) defines that Indigenous Peoples can be identified in particular areas by the presence in varying degrees of the following characteristics: ▪ Self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition of this identity by others; ▪ Collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the project area and to the natural resources in these habitats and territories; ▪ Customary cultural, economic, social or political institutions that are separate from those of the dominant society and culture; and ▪ An indigenous language, often different from the official language of the country or region. Identification of Indigenous Peoples in the current country system uses similar characteristics as described above. The Indonesian legal regulatory frameworks generally refer such communities as “Masyarakat Hukum Adat� (Customary Law Communities) or “Masyarakat Adat� (or Adat Communities). The GOI acknowledges the presence of these communities and their rights, provided that groups meet these and other eligibility requirements (further elaborated in the Ministry of Home Affairs’ regulation No. 52/2014). Their existence must subsequently be legally recognised (i.e., through district regulations/decrees) before their land claims and rights can be processed for further legal recognition. This district recognition process sets the initial condition for subsequent recognition processes, including land rights. Table 26 Comparison between the World Bank and Government of Indonesia Criteria on Indigenous People CHARACTERISTICS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES GOI’S FRAMEWORK1 ASSESSMENT BASED ON OP 4.10 Vulnerable due to distinct Applies to a sub-set of Masyarakat Vulnerability is not a determining factor circumstances and Adat categorized as Isolated Adat for land rights and other rights that dependence on land and Communities (or known as follow, but rather serves one of the natural resources KAT/Komunitas Adat Terpencil) targeting criteria for social assistance and development programs. Self-identification and In the process of gaining legal The current guideline is set out in the recognised by others recognition from the government, Ministerial Regulation of Home Affairs self-identification as Adat is subject No. 55/2014 which governs recognition to verification and validation by a of Adat community existence. This verification team (Tim IP4T/Tim process is often understood as the first Inventarisasi Penguasaan, step for subsequent land right Pemilikan, Penggunaan dan recognition. Pemanfaatan Tanah) established by district heads. As part of such Self-identification remains a center piece verification process, community’s of OP 4.10. Secondly, recognition by concerned need to be recognised by others does not represent legal others backed with evidences for recognition from the government, which such recognition. may represent a gap. 150 CHARACTERISTICS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES GOI’S FRAMEWORK1 ASSESSMENT BASED ON OP 4.10 Enforcement capacity to recognise and protect Indigenous Peoples seems to be lacking Collective attachment to Collective attachment as per OP Equivalent geographically distinct 4.10 is further defined into: habitats or ancestral ▪ Living in groups, in the form of territories and its natural associations (paguyuban/ resources rechsgemeenschap); ▪ Adherence to customary law that has a clear jurisdiction and specific customary law court/process; ▪ Maintenance of ancestral connection; ▪ Strong connection with land and environment, especially for daily life sustenance; and ▪ Occupation in a certain territory for generations. Customary cultural, Specific/distinct economics, politics, Equivalent economic, social or social and cultural value systems political institutions that are still practiced and respected separate from those of the dominant society and culture. An indigenous language, Not specified/required for legal The widespread use of Indonesian as a often different from the recognition lingua franca has contributed to gradual official language of the erosion of local languages and dialects. country or region Since indigenous language is not a requirement, the current GOI’s frameworks may have a broader coverage for their application in comparison to OP 4.10. A group that has lost Not specified The current frameworks for Adat "collective attachment to communities are tied to land and geographically distinct resource claims, which may habitats or ancestral consequently present barriers for territories in the project communities with no ancestral/territorial area due to forced claims from being recognised as Adat severance. communities. 1 In accordance to the relevant Law that stipulates adat community: (a) Law No 32/2009 on Environmental Protection and Management; (b) Law No 19/2004 on Forestry, (c) Law No 18/2013 on Prevention and Abolition of Forests Destruction; (d) Ministerial Regulation of the Ministry of Home Affairs No 52/2014 on the Guidelines for the Recognition and Protection of Adat Community, (e) Presidential Regulation No. 88/2017 on Land Tenure Settlements in Forest Areas. As a prerequisite for project/sub-project implementation, OP 4.10 requires the borrower to conduct free, prior and informed consultations with potentially affected Indigenous Peoples to obtain broad community support for the Project and its objectives. The primary objectives of OP 4.10 are: ▪ To ensure that Indigenous Peoples are afforded meaningful opportunities to participate in planning project activities that affects them; 151 ▪ To ensure that opportunities to provide Indigenous Peoples with culturally appropriate benefits are considered; and ▪ To ensure that any project impacts that adversely affect them are avoided or otherwise minimized and mitigated. The IPPF, therefore, has been prepared on the basis of the World Bank’s OP 4.10 to address the above objectives of the policy. 152 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL RISKS AND IMPACTS This section provides a summary of potential risks and impacts on indigenous peoples resulted from implementation of the J-SLMP. An overview of Indigenous Peoples in Indonesia and particularly in Jambi is presented to set the context for the analysis. A further in-depth analysis is presented in the SESA. indIgenous peoples in jambi and relevant issues for J-slmp Jambi has a population of 3,570,272 (2018) that includes ethnic groups such as Malay, indigenous Orang Rimba, Marga Serampas and Talang Mamak, as well as Javanese, and Chinese descendants. Malay, who is mostly Muslim, dominates the province (95.44 percent), Christians (Protestants) follow with 2.37 percent who are mainly resides in Jambi City. Dominant ethnic migrants in Jambi Province are Javanese who were brought in for tea plantation between 1925 and 194036. Some Javanese migrants were participants of trans-migration program started in 1970s in areas such as Rimbo Bujang (Bungo District) and Pemenang (Merangin District). Ethnic communities (customary groups) include Kerinci that consists of sub-groups such as Lekuk 50 Tumbi Lempur in Gunung Raya Sub-district and Tamiai in Batang Merangin Sub-district. These are agricultural communities with commodities mainly consisting of coffee and cinnamon. Other ethnic groups are Marga Serampas that also practices agriculture, and Orang Rimba 37 and Talang Mamak who practice hunting and gathering for livelihood. Of the existing ethnic groups / indigenous communities, Marga Serampas has been recognised by Merangin District Government through Perda No. 8/2016. Most indigenous groups still maintain their distinct collective identities, preserve their own language (besides Indonesian), and depend on agricultural subsistence for livelihoods. Despite the tenurial rights, these communities are often impacted by development processes. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with an Orang Rimba Community in Merangin District indicated that the expansion of estate crop plantations (i.e., oil palm) converted the landscape that Orang Rimba used for subsistence. Furthermore, the chemicals used in the palm oil plantation polluted the water sources used by Orang Rimba. This water source is frequently depleted in the dry season. Alternative livelihoods by Orang Rimba (e.g., agriculture and horticulture, rubber plantation) has not yielded adequate income. As presented in the SESA document, based on the contribution of economic sectors to gross domestic product (macro-economy), agriculture, forestry and fisheries sectors are dominant contributors to the economy of Jambi Province, followed by mining and quarrying and wholsesale. Agriculture and mining sectors have been associated with drivers of deforestation in Jambi, yet it is a significant economic sector for the provincial economy. Therefore, the context of these sectors as a driver of deforestation needs to be explored for further intervention in the J-SLMP, as well as its impacts on the PDRB and livelihood of almost half of the workforce in Jambi Province. Table 2 provides summary of livelihood issues relevant for the J-SMLP. 36 Sihotang, EBS,. 2018. Perkebunan Teh Kayu Aro di Kerinci 1925-1940. Jurnal Prodi Sejarah 3(5) 37 Some members of Orang Rimba or Suku Anak Dalam have embraced modern lifestyle and live in urban areas. Orang Rimba is also known as Suku Anak Dalam or Kubu 153 Table 27 Summary of Livelihood Issues Relevant to the J-SLMP LIVELIHOOD SUMMARY OF ISSUE RELEVANCE TO ERP POTENTIAL RISK SOURCE Income from timber Timber harvesting The need to increase Lack of capacity for best harvesting (illegal harvesting) is community involvement in management practices (e.g., associated with a managing forest areas HCV, PHPL) among local company hiring local (e.g., social forestry); communities and license people to harvest the The need for forest- holder; timber (e.g., four cases product harvesting Lack of access to of illegal logging in Tebo technology that does not technology; District – PT Alam Bukit require cutting (e.g., Tigapuluh and Bukit 30 harvesting tree barks, NP)38; fruits, saps) to halt Commodities such as deforestation cinnamon (Casiavera sp) need to be logged down for harvesting, and the timber is used for other purposes NTFPs Sub-optimal as income Potential source of Cost for production and generating options, alternative livelihoods transport may be higher in limited knowledge of and (avocado, macadamia, remote areas. This would access to markets honey, Pangium edule, create a competitive Dyera sp.) disadvantage in the market. Agriculture Decreased economic Agriculture intensification Cost for production and capacities among and improving transport may be higher in farmers (low terms of aquaculture to support remote areas. This would trade/Nilai Tukar Petani) economic capacities; create a competitive Diversification of disadvantage in the market; agricultural commodities Lack of capacity to ensure as buffer from price best practices (i.e., fluctuations environmentally friendly practices); Lack of access to innovative agriculture technology (e.g., organic farming technologies). Access to financial Lack of credibility or Green banking and Inaccurate business planning support collaterals to be eligible benefit sharing that causes losses for for bank loans, mechanisms that ensure community ventures; Indigenous Peoples receipt of financial support Constraints and delays in without legal identity to local communities/by loan repayment may not be eligible to Indigenous Peoples (instalments). benefits participating in the ERP Based on recent assessments, the land area managed and claimed by customary communities in Jambi covers 78,373 ha or approximately 2 percent of Jambi’s land cover. These customary communities in Jambi manage land areas for customary forest, settlement, cultivation and gravesites. Local land-uses include the cultivation of rubber, collection of non-timber forest and hunting. Such traditional land use systems can preserve important forest functions, including biodiversity and sequestration of greenhouse gases (van Noordwijk et al. 2012, Tata et al. 2008). Most communities own land on the basis of customary tenure (average 2 ha per household), but as they often lack formal written evidence in the form of land ownership certificates, such tenure is rarely recognised by the state. It is impossible for communities living in Forest Estate areas to obtain land 38 Antara News,8 January 2019 154 ownership certificates as such rights only pertain to land under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Agrarian Spatial Planning/National Land Agency (MoATR/ BPN), not the MoEF. Even if land is located outside of the Forest Estate, obtaining land ownership certificates has proven to be a lengthy and expensive process; hence most people in rural areas lack such titles. Lack of formal recognition of customary tenure of Indigenous Peoples has led to overlaps of commercial land use licenses with customary lands and often resulted in conflict or dispossession, or both. Institute of Policy Analysis of Conflict (IPAC) has recorded the “battle� between indigenous claim (by Orang Rimba) that dates back to 200339. The Agrarian Reform Consortium (KPA) counted 450 land-based conflicts across Indonesia in 2016, and these conflicts covered an area of 1.3 million ha. The MoEF’s map of conflicts lists six ongoing disputes between indigeneous communities and companies in Jambi. While this figure does not capture the scale of overlapping land claims, all of these conflicts are located within areas that have been allocated to private companies for estate crop production, or timber plantation. The resulting land access regimes are often the outcome of negotiated processes, where lack of formalized rights often places customary communities at a disadvantage to large concession holders. Provincial Regulation No. 6/2009 on Long Term Development Plan, Provincial Regulation No. 7/2016 on Medium Term Development Plans, Gubernatorial Regulation No. 36/2012 on Provincial Action Plan for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction, and Gubernatorial Decree 352/2013 on Strategy and Action Plan for REDD+ support the emission reduction program, and all of these regulations to some extent address the issues with indigenous communities (e.g., recognition and development) to prevent these communities from becoming marginal and vulnerable. Directions for regional development programs, including the land-based sectors, are contained in the Provincial Regulation on the Medium-Term Development Plan, which is issued every five years; and in the Gubernatorial Regulation on the Annual Government Work Plan; and in the Provincial Regulation on Provincial Revenue and Expenditure Budget, which is issued annually. The Governor of Jambi has issued Perda No.2/2014 on the Institution of Adat Melayu Jambi (Jambi Malay) that recognises the role of Depati/ Penghulu/Rio/Pembarap as key figures. Further, this PERDA defines the institution, research and development, and decision making system within this Melayu Jambi. This regulation is further strengthened by PERDA of Tanjung Jabung Timur District No. 5/2014 on Malay customary group in this district. Similarly Merangin District also issued Perda No. 8/2016 that recognises Marga Serampas as indigenous community. Beyond the national and local regulations, Indigenous communities such as Marga Serampas in Merangin has a legal recognition over a customary forest area. Despite the lack of formal recognition, customary communities such as Lekuk 50 Tumbi Lempur and Tigo Luhak in Kerinci District also managed customary forest areas. This forest area is a customary designation, and not a social forestry license. Indigenous knowledge recognises the importance of this forest patch for water to supply agriculture and daily household needs. Additionally, customary forest management benefits biodiversity consisting of endemic flora and fauna. Forest management by these Indigenous communities usually involves oversight by a customary council, and punishment system if violation is committed. Punishment may include fine (money or livestock) and exile. 39 IPAC. 2014. Report No. 9 Indigenous Rights Vs Agrarian Reform In Indonesia: A Case Study From Jambi 155 Currently, Perda No.2/2016 on Land Forest Fire and Land Prevention, and Gubernatorial Regulation No. 37/2016 on organisation of Forestry Agency in Jambi provide a general policy for provincial forest management. In relevance with the J-SLMP, Forest Management Units (FMU) are mandates with on- the ground activities (including social forestry). The authority on planning in the forestry sector, including forest utilization blocks and boundaries, is under the MoEF. Meanwhile, the implementation of forest management is conducted by the provincial government through FMUs (under the supervision of the provincial Forestry Agency). An exception applies to conservation forests where the management of the forest is under MoEF. The authority for licensing, including in registering the customary forests, is under the MoEF. In this regard, FMUs support the identification of customary forests. The legal definition of Forest Utilization Blocks is stipulated in the Ministerial Regulation of MoEF No P.64/ MENLHK-SETJEN/2015. POTENTIAL RISKS AND IMPACTS The J-SLMP will be implemented in Jambi Province area, which consists of nine districts, one city, 102 sub-districts, 20 Forest Management Units (FMU), four national parks, four conservation forest areas, and two Grand Forest Parks (Taman Hutan Raya/Tahura). These target areas include concessions for plantations, monoculture timber plantations, mining, logging, ecosystem restoration and social forestry. Project-affected communities are mostly located in rural areas, both inside and outside of forest areas. These include customary groups or Adat communities who continue to practice traditional or customary law, including for conflict resoultion with their own communities. The majority of communities in rural areas practice agriculture and plantation (mostly rubber, palm oil, coffee and cinnamon). The analysis provided in the SESA also identified overlapping areas between Adat land and forest and plantation concessions (Palm Oil), which suggests potential risks (e.g., tenurial conflicts and access restrictions following improved forest management). Land use in Jambi involves plantation (rubber, palm oil, coffee, cinnamon), timber plantation, and conservation areas. Such land use is believed to preserve important forest functions, including biodiversity (Sumatran tiger and Sumatran elephant as flagship species) and carbon sequestration. In addition, there are also areas that are culturally important for national and international communities such as megalithic artifacts, and Muaro Jambi temple complex. Based on the SESA document, potential risks and impacts on Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat are summarized in Error! Reference source not found. Table 28 Summary of Risks to Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat from the SESA COMPONENT/SUB- RISKS MITIGATION MEASURES COMPONENT Strengthening Policy & Potential exclusion, limited • Facilitating consultations and participation Institutions (sub-component access to participation and of Indigenous communities and natural 1.3) meaningful engagement, resource dependent communities in policy • Provincial regulation especially with vulnerable and regulatory deliberation processes; and guidelines on groups. • Ensuring accessible FGRM for forest and land fire Downstream impacts communities; prevention; related to policy • Strengthening community involvement and enforcement which may participation in the enforcement of affect agricultural practices regulatory mechanisms pertaining to 156 COMPONENT/SUB- RISKS MITIGATION MEASURES COMPONENT • Enforcement of peat (i.e., land and forest fire environmental and natural resource moratorium and prevention) and land uses management and protection, including licensing; (peat moratorium, HCV). PIPIB (Licensing Moratorium) and • Legal framework for Environmental Permit procedures private sector (AMDAL), which strengthen forest participation in permitting for private sector and improved emission reductions. community participation to forest management40. • Strengthening monitoring and oversight of potential downstream impacts. Potential avenues include the use of SIS-REDD+41, and periodic safeguards monitoring. Integrated Forest and Land Improvements in land and • Support and facilitation of alternative Management (sub- natural resource livelihoods in the context of Community- component 2.1) management may entail based Natural Resource Management • HCV conservation; changes in livelihoods (CBNRM); patterns, potentially • Ensuring inter and intra-community • Rehabilitation of resulting in restrictions in consensus in the event that access degraded lands; land uses and natural restrictions are envisaged (i.e., HCV • Forest and land fire resources amongst forest conservation); prevention; dependent communities, • Promoting community participation in • Good agricultural including Indigenous CBNRM activities, particularly amongst practices (GAPs) and Peoples. vulnerable groups who may be affected by climate smart Risks related to community, the project (i.e., landless, poor households, agriculture (i.e., coffee, health and safety women, etc.); rubber, oil palm); particularly in relation to • Ensuring FPIC and consensus among • Social forestry forest and land fire beneficiaries on benefit sharing (facilitation for prevention and suppression mechanism. This should be based on full community were also envisaged. understanding of risk and benefits for each businesses). Intervention to increase stakeholder; capacity of Indigenous • Implementation and oversight of ECOPs in Peoples may contradict the context of forest fire prevention and traditional values and pose suppression and GAPs (refer to ESMF the risks of inter-community appendix 3); tension and degradation of traditional practices • Ensuring accessible FGRM for communities; • Strengthening monitoring and oversight. Potential avenues include the use of SIS- REDD+42 and periodic safeguards monitoring. 40Potential avenues include a) Ministry of MOEF Reg. No. 83/2016 on Social Forestry; b) Ministry of MOEF Reg. No. 17/2012 on Involvement of Community in the EIA Process; c) The DG of KSDAE Reg. No. P.6/2018 on Conservation Partnership; e) Ministerial Reg. MOEF No. P.94/2016 on Invasive Species. 41 Interface with Indigenous Peoples is related to SIS-REDD+: Principle 1. Legal compliance and consistency with national forest programs--REDD+ activities shall comply with government regulations and nationally ratified international conventions/agreements and shall be consistent with the objectives of national forest programs and SIS-REDD+: Principle 3. Rights of indigenous and local communities (Masyarakat Adat dan lokal). REDD+ activities shall respect indigenous and local communities’ rights through actions appropriate to the scale and context of implementation. 42 Principle 3. Rights of indigenous and local communities (Masyarakat Adat dan lokal). REDD+ activities shall respect indigenous and local communities’ rights through actions appropriate to the scale and cont ext of implementation; Principle 5. Conservation of biodiversity, social and environmental services. REDD+ activities will include effective strategies that maintain, conserve or restore biodiversity and ecosystem services for social and environmental benefits. 157 COMPONENT/SUB- RISKS MITIGATION MEASURES COMPONENT Land tenure and access to Slow recognition of • Facilitating recognition of Adat communities land rights (sub-component Masyarakat Adat and and their tenure (through social forestry 2.1) verification of their tenure schemes) though participatory and • Social forestry (inc. claims may impede their community-driven processess. These customary forest and access to social forestry include technical support and facilitation of forest partnership schemes, including participatory and inclusive land tenure schemes); customary forests (Hutan mapping and development planning Adat) scheme; processes at the community level; • Tenure conflict resolution. Land tenure is often male- • Ensuring inter and intra; predominated processes • Ensuring accessible FGRM for and hence often exclude communities; women and other • Strengthening monitoring and oversight. vulnerable groups, who Potential avenues include the use of SIS- may be disproportionately REDD+ and periodic safeguards affected or prevented from monitoring. benefitting; Potential inter and intra- community disputes/conflicts in the context of overlapping claims; Customary forests or land claims may be outside of the indicative maps of social forestry (PIAPS). 158 IPPF IMPLEMENTATION This chapter outlines key processes under the IPPF, followed by the proposed institutional arrangement and monitoring and evaluation for the IPPF implementation. Identification Criteria The terms “Indigenous Peoples�, “indigenous ethnic minorities� and “tribal groups� describe social groups with a social and cultural identity distinct from the dominant society that makes them vulnerable to being disadvantaged in the development process. For the purposes here, “Indigenous People� is the term that is used to refer to the groups under OP 4.10 in subsection 2.2 as well as community groups who are recognised and/or considered as Masyarakat Adat under GOI’s legal framework (refer to sub- section 2.1). A group that has lost collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the J-SLMP and future ERP area because of forced severance 43 remains eligible for coverage under the policy. In addition, there are community groups that are vulnerable communities that may not qualify under the GOI’s framework but meet the policy criteria under OP 4.10. One of the sources to identify such communities is a consolidated map of indigenous territories developed by BRWA (the Customary Land Registration Agency—Badan Registrasi Wilayah Adat/BRWA)44. BRWA45 has consolidated maps of indigenous territories through the customary territorial registration process which includes the stages of registration, verification, validation and publication. The maps will be utilized to identify the existence of indigenous communities within the project implementation area. PHASED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IPPF The IPPF adopts a staged approach to the implementation of key provisions under the OP 4.10. The SESA developed under the J-SLMP and future ERP sets the context for the application of and provides a broad picture of relevant risks and opportunities for Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat. Ground-truthing/field verification, further consultations and development of necessary action plans will be carried out once specific investments and locations are known. Relevant risk mitigation measures will respond to, and be proportionate to, the nature and level of risks identified during implementation. 43 Forced severance� refers to loss of collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories occurr ing within the concerned group members’ lifetime because of conflict, government resettlement programs, dispossession from their lands, natural calamities, or incorporation of such territories into an urban area. For purposes of this policy, “urban area� normally means a city or a large town, and takes into account all of the following characteristics, no single one of which is definitive: (a) The legal designation of the area as urban under domestic law; (b) High population density; and (c) High proportion of non-agricultural economic activities relative to agricultural activities 44 BRWA is a non-governmental agency and serves as a forum to register customary land claims. BRWA was established by several NGOs in Indonesia, such as Indigenous Peoples Alliance of the Archipelago ( Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara/AMAN), Participatory Mapping Network (Jaringan Kerja Pemetaan Partisipatif/JKPP), Forest Watch Indonesia (FWI), Consortium for Supporting the Community Forest System (Konsorsium Pendukung Sistem Hutan Kerakyatan /KpSHK), and Sawit Watch (SW). 45 To know more about BRWA i.e., link to its website at. http://brwa.or.id/wa/ 159 Figure 14 Process Implementation IPP 8.7.3 Site Screening Site screening will commence in consultations with representatives of affected Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat, their leaders and recognised institutions. This process will also seek participation of women and Indigenous youth and other vulnerable segments of the target communities. Such screening is aimed to identify the presence of Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat, including their tenure characteristics and existing claims in areas where specific activities will be implemented, as well as relevant safeguards risks and communities’ acceptance to the Program. The results of the screening will inform potential risks before their participation in activities is sought. Key steps are outlined as follows: a. Prior to the J-SLMP implementation, preliminary screening was conducted through the SESA process. Relevant safeguards teams/Persons-in-Charge (PICs) at the provincial and district levels will be required to verify and validate the analysis provided in the SESA and develop a risk analysis of Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat in the target areas once specific target areas for sub-project interventions are known/confirmed. Specific aspects to be assessed include project implications on tenure ownership, access to land and natural resources, community acceptance of the proposed interventions, OHS risks, the size of target communities and number of households, including vulnerable groups within communities, community characteristics (i.e., literacy, local norms and practices, values, beliefs, etc.), factors contributing to vulnerability, etc.; b. Based on this identification of risks, the safeguards teams/PICs will determine whether ground- truthing/field verification will be required; 160 c. In the event that such field verification is required, an initial notification will be communicated to representatives of Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat concerned, describing the purpose and approach of the screening process. Participation will seek to ensure inclusive participation of affected communities to discuss the Program, as well as risks and opportunities. This process is further guided in Section Error! Reference source not found. on free, prior a nd informed consultations; d. If deemed necessary, the Provincial Safeguards Committee will mobilise relevant experts to carry out further social assessments in collaboration with representatives from village governments, local customary institutions and civil society organizations (CSOs). This process is further guided in Section 8.7.5 on social assessment; and e. Each stage of the screening process will be duly documented, including key concerns and risks observed during the ground-truthing/field verification. 8.7.4 Community Consultations and Mobilisation If based on the screening process, J-SLMP activities are assessed to affect Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat particularly with regards to their access and claims to land and natural resources, each relevant implementing agency is required to undertake a process of free, prior and informed consultations with the affected Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat. Such consultations are expected to be an iterative process over the J-SLMP life cycle and aimed to inform affected communities about the purpose of the activities, identify their views and obtain their broad support to the activities in question and develop necessary mitigation measures to protect their rights and address their concerns. The extent, frequency and degree of engagement required by the consultation process should commensurate with the identified potential risks and concerns raised by respective Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat. Free, prior and informed consultations are built on mutually accepted process by community representatives and their legitimate leaders. Free, prior and informed consultations serve at least two purposes: a. Provide a platform to undertake a process of consultations in good faith and in a manner that provides affected communities with opportunities to express their concerns and views on the ERP’s benefits, risks, impacts and mitigation measures and explore ways to ensure project implementation is culturally and socially acceptable; and b. Enable decision making processes based on local/customary mechanisms. Free, prior and informed consultations should be orientated towards obtaining broad community support, which consists of a collection of expressions by community members and/or their recognised representatives in support of the proposed project/sub-project activities. The consultations may use existing community institutions and local/customary decision-making processes mechanism during the J-SLMP activity planning and preparation stage, when deemed feasible and culturally appropriate and inclusive. Gender-responsive approaches and perspectives should be added to make sure that women in the community can benefit from the project. Community participation needs to be based on gender-sensitive and inter-generationally inclusive approaches. Effective consultations are built upon two-way processes that should: a. Involve members of affected communities and their recognised representative bodies and organizations in good faith; 161 b. Capture the views and concerns of men, women and vulnerable community segments including the elderly, youth, displaced persons, children, people with special needs, etc., about impacts, mitigation mechanisms and benefits where appropriate. If necessary, separate forums or engagements need to be conducted based on their preferences; c. Begin early in the process of identification of environmental and social risks and impacts and continue on an ongoing basis as risks and impacts arise; d. Be based on the prior disclosure and dissemination/socialisation of relevant, transparent, objective, meaningful and easily accessible information that is in a culturally appropriate language(s) and format and is understandable to affected communities. In designing consultation methods and use of media, special attention needs to be paid to include the concerns of Indigenous women, youth and children and their access to development opportunities and benefits; e. Focus on inclusive engagement on those directly affected than those not directly affected; f. Ensure that the consultation processes are free of external manipulation, interference, coercion and/or intimidation. The ways the consultations are designed should create enabling environments for meaningful participation, where applicable. In addition to the language(s) and media used, the timing, venues, participation composition need to be carefully thought through to ensure everyone could express their views without repercussions; and g. Be documented. Where there is broad support from Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat to participate in the project, relevant implementing agencies, with oversight from safeguards team/PICs at the provincial and district levels, should ensure the following are in place: a. Documented evidence of free, prior and informed consultations as well as measures taken to avoid and minimise risks and adverse impacts to environment and socio-cultural aspects. This will be in the form of written agreements with authorized community representatives; b. Action plan and recommendations for free,prior and informed consultations during project implementation, monitoring and evaluation; and c. Any formal agreements reached with affected communities and/or their representative institutions. To ensure that free, prior and informed consultations can be ascertained, it is also required to determine whether: a. The level of engagement in a way that enables informed participation of communities is acceptable; and b. The level of support and dissent among communities for the project is taken into account into decision making and development of mitigation measures. The process above is an integral part of the J-SLMP implementation and therefore, continues after its completion. 8.7.5 Free, Prior and Informed Consent On the basis of iterative consulations, Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) will need to be obtained from participating communities in the target 150 villages and community groups. FPIC represents a sequential process as a result from free, prior and informed consultations required under OP 4.10 and these consultations shall precede any activities under the project and broader ER Program that may impact these communities. 162 As such, the IPPF requires project implementing agencies to evaluate the circumstances and nature of the forest-dependent community, including Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat in question, on a case by case basis, through a robust risk assessment, and secure FPIC from these communities whose rights to lands and natural resources may be implicated as a result of the project interventions. Decisions to proceed with activity implementation will be made based of such community consent. In view of obtaining the FPIC through a series of consultation processes, consistent with the UN REDD+ Program, FPIC is defined as follows: Free: Free refers to a consent given voluntarily and absent of “coercion, intimidation or manipulation.� Free refers to a process that is self-directed by the community from whom consent is being sought, unencumbered by coercion, expectations or timelines that are externally imposed: a. Stakeholders determine process, timeline and decision-making structure; b. Information is transparently and objectively offered at stakeholders’ request; c. Process is free from coercion, bias, conditions, bribery or rewards; d. Meetings and decisions take place at locations and times and in languages and formats determined by the stakeholders; and e. All community members are free to participate regardless of gender, age or standing. Prior: Prior means “consent is sought sufficiently in advance of any authorization or commencement of activities.� Prior refers to a period of time in advance of an activity or process when consent should be sought, as well as the period between when consent is sought and when consent is given or withheld. Prior means at the “early stages of a development or investment plan, not only when the need arises to obtain approval from the community.� a. Prior implies that time is provided to understand, access and analyse information on the proposed activity. The amount of time required will depend on the decision-making processes of the rights-holders; b. Information must be provided before activities can be initiated, at the beginning or initiation of an activity, process or phase of implementation, including conceptualisation, design, proposal, information, execution and following evaluation; and c. The decision-making timeline established by the rights-holders must be respected, as it reflects the time needed to understand, analyse and evaluate the activities under consideration in accordance with their own customs. Informed: Informed refers mainly to the nature of the engagement and type of information that should be provided prior to seeking consent and also as part of the ongoing consent process. Information should: a. Be accessible, clear, consistent, accurate, constant and transparent; b. Be delivered in appropriate language and culturally appropriate format (including radio, video, graphics, documentaries, photos, oral presentations); c. Be objective, covering both the positive and negative potential of REDD+ activities and consequences of giving or withholding consent; d. Be complete, covering the spectrum of potential social, financial, political, cultural, environmental impacts, including scientific information with access to original sources in appropriate language; e. Be delivered in a manner that strengthens and does not erode indigenous or local cultures; 163 f. Be delivered by culturally appropriate personnel, in culturally appropriate locations, and include capacity building of indigenous or local trainers; g. Be delivered with sufficient time to be understood and verified; h. Reach the most remote, rural communities, women and the marginalized; and i. Be provided on an ongoing and continuous basis throughout the FPIC process. Consent: Consent refers to the collective decision made by the rights-holders and reached through the customary decision-making processes of the affected peoples or communities. Consent must be sought and granted or withheld according to the unique formal or informal political-administrative dynamic of each community. Consent represents: a. A freely given decision that may be a “Yes� or a “No,� including the option to reconsider if the proposed activities change or if new information relevant to the proposed activities emerges; b. A collective decision determined by the affected peoples (e.g., consensus, majority, etc.) in accordance with their own customs and traditions; c. The expression of rights (to self-determination, lands, resources and territories, culture); and d. Given or withheld in phases, over specific periods of time for distinct stages or phases of REDD+. It is not a one-off process. While the objective of consultation processes shall be to reach broad community support, which represents consent between the relevant parties, this does not mean that all FPIC processes will carry veto rights of certain individuals or rights holders in question. At the core of FPIC is the right of the peoples concerned to choose to engage, negotiate and decide to grant or withhold consent, as well as the acknowledgement that under certain circumstances, it must be accepted that the project will not proceed and/or that engagement must be ceased if the affected peoples decide that they do not want to commence or continue with negotiations or if they decide to withhold their consent to specific project activities. During project implementation, an updated social assessment shall also be carried out to monitor the positive and negative impacts of the project and obtain feedback from the project-affected people. Based on the outcome of the social assessment, further measures shall be taken to ensure full benefits and mitigation of the negative impacts envisaged. If necessary, additional activities for institutional strengthening and capacity building of Indigenous Peoples communities living within the project area shall be carried out. 8.7.6 Social Assessment A social assessment, building on the SESA process, will be undertaken prior to implementation of sub- project activities to inform risk management measures affecting Masyarakat Adat and Indigenous Peoples in the WPK. The Provincial Safeguards Committee will assess the need and scope for an activity-specific social assessment, especially for sub-project activities with potential implications on community land tenure and access to natural resources. Such assessments will be part of the community consultation processes as described above (sub-section 4.2.2). The assessment is expected to provide a more informed understanding and analysis of risks as well as opportunities through which mitigation measures can be tailored to specific contexts and needs. Both qualitative and quantitative data may be used to inform the assessment, including baseline information on the demographic, social, cultural and political characteristics of the affected Indigenous Peoples or 164 Masyarakat Adat, the land and territories that they have traditionally owned or customarily used or occupied, and the natural resources on which they depend. Main areas to be covered include but not limited to: a. Nature of vulnerability and attachments to land and natural resources; b. Specific risks and potential adverse impacts as a result of J-SLMP implementation (both direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts as specified in the ESMF); c. Level of community acceptance to the activities and/or initiatives supported by the Program; d. Analysis of relevant stakeholders, either who will be impacted or who have interest to the activities in question and the elaboration of a culturally appropriate process for consulting with the Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat at each stage of activity preparation and implementation; e. Opportunities to enhance participation of the communities concerned as well as benefits of the J-SLMP; and f. Approach to participation, including specific measures to promote participation and inclusion of vulnerable groups into the Program (based on FPIC principles in section 4.2.3); If considered necessary, Jambi Provincial Government through the Safeguards Committee will engage qualified researchers and experts to carry out such assessments and consultations. Regular monitoring of impacts (refer to ESMF) will be performed to understand the project implementation and to what extent adverse impacts have been addressed under J-SLMP. Such monitoring will also seek to obtain feedback from the project-affected people. Based on the outcome of social assessments and impact monitoring, further measures may be adopted to enable communities to receive project benefits and risks and impacts are fully understood and managed. If necessary, community institutional strengthening and capacity building targeted at Masyarakat Adat and Indigenous Peoples living within the project area will be supported under J-SLMP. 8.7.7 Development of Action Plans Measures to address risks on communities, including Indigenous Peoples, such as community, health and safety will be incorporated in Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMP) as relevant. Once sub-project locations and interventions within WPK have been identified, an Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) will be prepared based on screening and consultations with the target communities. At the project level, the IPP, as guided by the IPPF, will serve as a strategic road-map for the inclusion of Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat in the Program and development of measures that address potential risks and adverse impacts, as well as community concerns and aspirations. The IPP should respond to potential risks on Masyarakat Adat and Indigenous Peoples as elaborated in Section 3.2 (refer to Table 3). Specifically, the IPP will detail measures for handling of customary tenure, which guides the support provided to promote tenure recognition for Indigenous Peoples or Masyarakat Adat. The project’s IPP will be upgraded to respond to the future ER operations and hence, will also detail specific arrangements for benefit sharing arrangements for Indigenous Peoples or Masyarakat Adat which will draw from the future ERP’s Benefit Sharing Plan (BSP); 165 The IPP will describe required action plans to address specific risks and impacts at an activity level where measures will be implemented by the respective implementing agencies, with supervision and technical support from Safeguards Committee and safeguards specialists. The IPP is prepared in a flexible and pragmatic manner and its level of detail varies depending on the specific activities and nature of risks. For activities where the social assessment indicates that Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat are the sole or the overwhelming majority of direct beneficiaries, a separate IPP is not required and the elements of an IPP should be mainstreamed as part of the design of J-SLMP activities. Key components of an IPP cover: a. Social assessment summary, including key findings and observations from the screening process: b. Summary of consultations, including documentation of consultation processes, evidence of broad community support and FPIC in circumstances where such consent is required; c. Proposed mitigation measures and time-bound action plans, including measures to foster community participation and enhance the J-SMLP benefits; d. Estimation of costs, resources and technical support required, including specific expertise to address risks; and e. Feedback and Grievance Redress Mechanism (FGRM), including tailoring FGRM processes for afftected communities as relevant. The Provincial Safeguards Committee will provide technical oversight to the development of the project’s IPP, which will be reviewed and cleared by MoEF and the World Bank during project implementation. In the event that access restrictions to legally designated parks and/or protected areas are envisaged as a result of implementation of specific activities, relevant implementing agencies will be required to engage in a process of free, prior and informed consultations to address risks along with their mitigation measures. The management of such risks will be addressed as guided under the Process Framework. 8.8 BENEFIT SHARING ARRANGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND MASYARAKAT ADAT Under Component 1 (sub-component 1.2 on Enabling Environment for ER), J-SLMP will provide support to GOI for the development of a Benefit Sharing Plan (BSP) for the future ER operation. A BSP for communities identified as Indigenous, who may include Adat communities and others, will be developed prior to the appraisal of the future ER operation, reflecting the consultative processes that have been and will be conducted with these groups as part of J-SLMP preparation and implementation. Formal legal recognition is important for these communities to access benefits by way of government fiscal transfer. However, J-SLMP will provide technical support to develop a mechanism to ensure unrecognised communities to be able to access future ER benefits, both monetary and non-monetary. Key principles of participation and consultations under the IPPF will be applicable for the development of a BSP for future ER operation. 166 8.9 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT Overall coordination and technical oversight of the IPPF will remain under the purview of the Provincial Safeguards Committee, in coordination with MOEF. The environmental and social safeguards specialists, who will be assigned to the Provincial Safeguards Committee, will provide technical, advisory and oversight support for the implementation of the IPPF. Specific measures at the activity level will fall under the responsibility of relevant implementing agencies, as further elaborated in Table 29Error! Reference source not found.. Table 29 Roles and Responsibilities for IPPF AGENCY ACTIVITY REPORTING LINE Provincial Community Training and facilitation support for the Jambi Environment Service and and Village implementation of the IPPF and IPP (i.e., Provincial Safeguards Administration screening, consultations, social assessments, Committee Agency (DPMD complaint handling) for relevant agencies at the Provinsi) district level. District Community Training and facilitation support for the As above and Village implementation of the IPPF and IPP (i.e., Administration screening, consultations, social assessments, Agency (DPMD complaint handling) for implementing agencies Kabupaten) and village communities; Ensure budget availability and resources for the implementation of the IPP at an activity level, including potential use of village funds to support project implementation. Provincial Forestry Coordinating and establishing work plans for the As above Agency J-SLMP implementation, including addressing risks and impacts on Indigenous Peoples and target communities; Facilitating Social Forestry activities and synchronize project activities to support communities’ access to tenure and livelihoods; and Oversighting and providing technical support for FMUs to strengthen community engagement, including tenure conflict resolution. Forestry Facilitating community engagement, including As above Management Units conflict mediation within respective jurisdictions; (FMUs) Supporting community livelihoods activities and providing oversight to J-SLMP implementation District Land Agency Facilitating mediation for tenure conflicts and/or As above disputes outside the forest areas; Recognition of community claims outside the forest areas or areas with no legal encumbrances. Implementing district agencies, under coordination and guidance from the Safeguards Committee at the district level, will report on the implementation of the safeguards measures as defined in the IPPF and/or IPP to the Provincial Safeguards Committee who will be responsible to review, follow up on specific action items and submit final progress reports to MoEF and the World Bank. 167 Overall progress and implementation of the IPPF/IPP will also be documented in the annual progress report on the J-SLMP implementation. This will include key recommendations and proposed measures to address specific risks that emerge as a result from implementation of J-SLMP activities. 8.10 MONITORING, REPORTING AND EVALUATION Jambi Provincial Government under coordination of the Safeguards Committee will provide regular monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of the implementation of the IPPF/IPP and progress of the planned activities. The monitoring framework will be consistent with the ESMF (quarterly –refer to ESMF Section 6.3.2). Relevant safeguards specialists at the provincial level and safeguards PICs at the district level will provide technical and advisory support and oversight for the M&E of the IPPF/IPP, the basis of the nature and risk levels, advice on arrangements, frequency, and approach for the M&E. Relevant indicators of monitoring will include: a. Accuracy and adequacy of screening and social assessments; b. Adequacy and coverage of community engagement and consultations; c. Implementation of consultations and other processes to obtain broad community support and FPIC; d. Emerging risks, as well as changes of perceptions and concerns about the project and future ER operation; e. Adequacy of tenure facilitation support and dispute resolution; f. Adequacy and responsiveness of complaint handling, socialization and awareness raising; g. Implementation of specific measures developed under the program-level IPP, and action items at the activity level; h. Adequacy and quality of technical and facilitation support, oversight processes; and i. Level of satisfaction of target Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat with the program; In addition to IPPF/IPP implementation, the M&E arrangements will also track the quality and adequacy of tenure facilitation support and dispute resolution provided by respective implementing agencies. The result of the M&E will be documented in the J-SLMP progress report, which will outline key recommendations and specific time-bound action items to strengthen the implementation of the IPPF. As part of the project technical support, the World Bank will also periodically supervise the implementation of the IPPF and program-level IPP. Necessary technical support and expertise will be mobilised on a case-by-case basis. Quarterly reporting to the Jambi Government and MOEF will be prepared by the respective implementing agencies with technical support from the safeguards committee and the Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists. Monitoring results of the IPP implementation, reflecting the above indicators, will be incorporated into the project progress reports, which will be provided to the World Bank bi-annually. 168 8.11 DISCLOSURE The IPPF, together with the ESMF, RPF/PF, FGRM and preliminary Strategic Environmental and Social (SESA) materials have been disclosed by the MOEF (DGCC) through its website http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/peraturan-perundangan.html. To ensure accessibility, further consultations and disclosure of the project and its relevant action plans will be provided in locations that are accessible to Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat such as village / village halls, village / village offices, District DPMPD Offices and Provincial DPMPD Offices. The IPP, or at least a summary of key measures under the IPP, will be provided in Indonesian and in local languages as relevant. The method and approach for consultations will seek to ensure that the processes are simple, accessible and user-friendly, including the use of various media. At the site level, separate consultations for women and/or youth will be facilitated by taking into account their availability, facilitator preferences, and modes of delivery. The IPPF and IPP will also be disclosed on the same DGCC’s websites as well as on Jambi Provincial Government website (http://jambiprov.go.id) and World Bank’s Image Bank. These documents will be disclosed prior to commencement of any activities which may have impacts on Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat. 8.12 FEEDBACK AND GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM A program-level Feedback and Grievance Redress Mechanism (FGRM) has been established under the ESMF Annex 7. In the context of the IPPF, relevant facilitation and additional measures will be incorporated under the FGRM to ensure that affected Indigenous Peoples and local communities are aware of their rights and ensure that the system established under J-SLMP is accessible and free of charge. FGRM in J-SLMP will be important to ensure that relevant concerns and suggestions delivered during public consultations are incorporated at the planning and implementation stages of any activities under the Project. It is important for J-SLMP to strengthen the existing grievance redress systems that are already in place across implementing agencies/entities at the national, provincial, district, and village levels to address any grievances or complaints that may occur during J-SLMP implementation. J-SLMP will provide training and technical support to strengthen these existing institutions and assigned representatives to enable them to effectively deal with possible grievances, and inquiries that may arise during project implementation. 8.13 BUDGET AND RESOURCES All relevant costs and resources will be the responsibility of the implementing agencies. The Safeguards Committee will ensure that such costs and resources are available and mobilised proportionate to the nature and risk levels. Indicative financial requirements per year for conducting training and capacity building programs for provincial government in Jambi including outreach to the various stakeholders and communities, and also safeguards committee is provided in the ESMF (refer Section 6.246). Capacity building activities will cover the overall ESMF roll out, including the IPPF and FGRM. Further technical facilitation for IPP development will be provided by the Provincial Safeguards Committee, Environmental and Social 46 To be further detailed, this should also reflect the costs for relevant specialists in the PMU/Safeguards Committee, and other travels for technical support, mentoring, supervision 169 Safeguards Specialists and additional experts once specific locations and interventions with potential impacts on Masyarakat Adat and Indigenous Peoples have been identified. 8.14 IPPF ACTION PLANS This chapter outlines necessary action items that the MoEF and Jambi Government have committed to deliver to ensure that a robust system is in place to address risks and impacts on Indigenous Peoples and Masyarakat Adat. Discussions are ongoing, so most of the responsibilities and timeline will be further discussed in program design. Summary of the actions related to the IPPF are provided in Table 30Error! Reference source not found.. Table 30 Actions, Responsibility and Timeline for the IPPF ACTION RESPONSIBILITY TIMELINE District and village consultations DLH (Jambi Provincial FPIC process will be solidified at on the IPPF—Planning of FPIC Environment Agency) Safeguard the end of November-mid Implementation Committee and DGCC December for 2019 and will be continued in early 2020 Assignment of safeguards Organised by DLH (Jambi October 2019 (completed) committee at provincial and district Provincial Environment Agency) levels Training and awareness raising on To be discussed, but possibly November-December 2019 and key requirements and processes organised by Provincial will be continued in 2020 under the IPPF for FPIC Environment and/or Forestry implementation Agency Establishment of FGRM Taken over by DLH (Jambi Already taken over by Safeguards committees Provincial Environment Agency) Committee (October 2019, Safeguard Committee and DGCC completed) Training of local dispute mediators Taken over by DLH (Jambi Already taken over by Safeguards Provincial Environment Agency) Committee (October 2019, Safeguard Committee and DGCC completed) 170 Appendix A1 Outline of Indigenous Peoples Plan 171 OUTLINE OF AN INDIGENOUS PEOPLES PLAN This outline is part of the World Bank Safeguard requirements. An indigenous peoples (IPs) plan is required for all projects with impacts on IPs. Its level of detail and comprehensiveness is commensurate with the significance of potential impacts on IPs. The substantive aspects of this outline guide the preparation of an Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP), although not necessarily in the order shown. A. Executive Summary of the Indigenous Peoples Plan This section concisely describes the critical facts, significant findings, and recommended actions. B. Description of the Project This section provides a general description of the project; discusses project components and activities that may bring impacts on IPs; and identify project area. C. Social Impact Assessment This section: i. Reviews the legal and institutional framework applicable to IPs in project context; ii. Provides baseline information on the demographic, social, cultural, and political characteristics of the affected IP communities; the land and territories that they have traditionally owned or customarily used or occupied; and the natural resources on which they depend; iii. Identifies key project stakeholders and elaborate a culturally appropriate and gender- sensitive process for meaningful consultation with IPs at each stage of project preparation and implementation, taking the review and baseline information into account; iv. Assesses, based on meaningful consultation with the affected IPs communities, and the potential adverse and positive effects of the project. Critical to the determination of potential adverse impacts is a gender-sensitive analysis of the relative vulnerability of, and risks to, the affected IPs communities, given their particular circumstances and close ties to land and natural resources, as well as their lack of access to opportunities relative to those available to other social groups in the communities, regions, or national societies in which they live; v. Includes a gender-sensitive assessment of the affected IPs perceptions about the project and its impact on their social, economic and cultural status; vi. Identifies and recommends, based on meaningful consultation with the affected IPs communities, the measures necessary to avoid adverse effects or, if such measures are not possible, identifies measures to minimise, mitigate, and/or compensate for such effects and to ensure that IPs receive culturally appropriate benefits under the project. D. Information Disclosure, Consultation and Participation This section (i) Describes the information disclosure, consultation and participation process with the affected IPs communities that can be carried out during project preparation; 172 (ii) Summarises their comments on the results of the social impact assessment and identifies concerns raised during consultation and how these have been addressed in project design; (iii) In the case of project activities requiring broad community support, documents the process and outcome of consultations with affected IPs communities and any agreement resulting from such consultations for the project activities and safeguard measures addressing the impacts of such activities; (iv) Describes consultation and participation mechanisms to be used during implementation to ensure IPs participation during implementation; and (v) Confirms disclosure of the draft and final to the affected IPs communities. E. Beneficial Measures This section specifies the measures to ensure that IPs receive social and economic benefits that are culturally appropriate and gender responsive. F. Mitigative Measures This section specifies the measures to avoid adverse impacts on IPs; and where the avoidance is impossible, specifies the measures to minimize, mitigate and compensate for identified unavoidable adverse impacts for each affected IPs groups. G. Capacity Building This section provides measures to strengthen the social, legal and technical capabilities of (a) Government institutions to address IPs issues in the project area; and (b) IPs organizations in the project area to enable them to represent the affected IPs more effectively. H. Grievance Redress Mechanism This section describes the procedures to redress grievances by affected IPs communities. It also explains how the procedures are accessible to IPs and culturally appropriate and gender sensitive. I. Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation This section describes the mechanisms and benchmarks appropriate to the project for monitoring, and evaluating the implementation of the IPP. It also specifies arrangements for participation of affected IPs in the preparation and validation of monitoring, and evaluation reports. J. Institutional Arrangement This section describes institutional arrangement responsibilities and mechanisms for carrying out the various measures of the IPP. It also describes the process of including relevant local organizations and/or NGOs in carrying out the measures of the IPP. K. Budget and Financing This section provides an itemized budget for all activities described in the IPP. 173 ANNEX 9. RESETTLEMENT PLANNING FRAMEWORK (RPF) AND PROCESS FRAMEWORK (PF) INTRODUCTION Jambi Sustainable Landscape Management Project (hereafter J-SLMP) is designed to improve sustainable landscape management that reduces land-based GHG emissions in Jambi. The project will provide technical support for ERP program design and systems strengthening to build government capacity to access and utilise future performance-based incentives for reduced deforestation, degradation and land-use change. As such, the project will support analytics, capacity building, design of sub-programs to test different incentives models, and stakeholder engagement as well as testing sustainable land use management practices and enforcement and their overall safeguards management. Key analytical and capacity strengthening areas include land and resource tenure, understanding local drivers of deforestation and how best to address them and legal, institutional and policy analysis, as well as stakeholder assessments. To strengthen the management of risks and impacts related to livelihoods displacement and access restrictions as a result of the project implementation, a Resettlement Planning Framework (RPF) has been prepared as a precautionary measure in the event that resettlement risks are envisaged. The RPF also includes a Process Framework (PF) to address access restriction risks for forest dependent communities, including Indigenous Peoples, as a result of ERP implementation. These frameworks were developed through a participatory process involving various stakeholders in Jambi including national and local government, university, and NGOs. PURPOSE OF THE FRAMEWORKS This document contains two key frameworks, the Resettlement Planning Framework (RPF) and the Process Framework (PF), which have been developed to strengthen the current safeguards measures for the J-SLMP. The RPF and PF serve as a precautionary measure to address risks associated with resettlement and/or access restrictions following the implementation of the J-SLMP activities. The RPF serves as a guideline for the development of Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs) in the event resettlement is envisaged to occur as part of the project. The PF serves as a guideline for the development of Plans of Action (PoAs) that lays out consultative processes to mitigate impacts resulting from access restrictions and restrictions of land uses. Involuntary resettlement is not envisaged under J-SLMP. The Process Framework identifies the following typology of risks related to access restrictions and restrictions of land uses: ▪ Access and land use restrictions in HCV within concession areas (both forestry and non-forestry concessions i.e., oil palm). While resettlement is not required, restrictions on the permissible utilisation on forestry and non-forestry commodities (such as rubber, medicinal plants and other non-timber forestry products), accompanied with law enforcement may have implications on existing livelihoods sources. Estate crops such as oil palm are prohibited in these areas and such restrictions may disadvantage small-holder farmers who utilise forest lands for such purposes; 174 ▪ Access restrictions in forest conservation and protection areas. Establishment of conservation areas may limit communities’ access to these areas and hence may have implications on their livelihoods, religious, and/or cultural activities. Each of the above risks will need to be assessed in light of their probability, nature and severity. The PF in Section TBD. will further outline key processes and required management measures to address such risks. Both RPF and PF have been developed to address the key requirements under the World Bank’s Operational Policies (OPs) 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement and OP 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples, for specific impacts that affect these communities. Each of these frameworks is further elaborated in the following sections. The RPF and PF form part of the safeguards instruments and will need to be read in conjunction with other safeguards documents, including: ▪ Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA); ▪ Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF); ▪ Indigenous People Planning Framework (IPPF); and ▪ Framework of Grievance Redress Mechanism (FGRM) SCOPE OP 4.12 acknowledges two key possible scenarios under J-SLMP, including: ▪ Resettlement of forest-dependent communities due to occupation and/or encroachments in key conservation areas. This probability of such case is considerably very remote since amicable settlements of forest tenure are being sought by GOI under the social forestry scheme; and ▪ Access restrictions to natural reserves and/or other protected areas, and access restriction caused by land tenure dispute/ conflict and dispute/ conflict with Plantation Company (palm oil, rubber, etc.), mining and fish farmers. J-SLMP sub-project activities may utilise communal and customary land, the arrangement for this will be determined by the village government and/or through customary meeting attended by all customary members. In a case that voluntary land donation is sought for, procedure is provided in Appendix A.4. Key policy requirements under OP 4.10 also prevail in the event that the above risks are envisaged to potentially affect Indigenous Peoples. An IPPF has been prepared for this purpose as part of the ESMF (refer to Appendix 8). It is also possible that the J-SLMP may exacerbate existing disputes and conflicts over natural resources and land rights as a result of improvements of forest and HCV management and tenure conflict resolution. In this case inclusive community participation and dispute mediation should be established during J-SLMP implementation. Such risks have been considered under OP 4.01 through the SESA process and shall be addressed as part of the project design, especially under Component 2. 175 Resettlement Planning Framework: the RPF covers direct economic and social impacts that are caused by sub-projects and/or investments under J-SLMP, particularly associated with involuntary resettlement of forest dependent communities or communities without recognisable legal claims to the forest lands being occupied. Such risks are considerably remote and if at all, residual. The GOI commits to ensuring amicable conflict resolution and seeks tenure conflict resolution through social forestry schemes to enable forest dependent communities to access forest lands. The RPF applies to all sub-project interventions under J-SLMP that result in involuntary resettlement as well as other activities which are assessed to be: ▪ Directly and significantly related to J-SLMP; ▪ Necessary to achieve J-SLMP’s objectives as stated in the Project Development Objective (PDO); and ▪ Carried out, or planned to be carried out, contemporaneously with J-SLMP. Process Framework: the PF serves as a risk mitigation framework in the event of involuntary restriction of access to natural reserves, protection areas and land uses as a result of J-SLMP activities. The nature of restrictions, as well as the type of measures necessary to mitigate adverse impacts, must be determined with participation of the affected persons during the design and implementation of the sub- project activities. The RPF describes the participatory process by which: ▪ Specific components and/or activities will be prepared and implemented; ▪ The criteria for eligibility of affected persons will be determined; ▪ Measures to assist affected persons in their efforts to improve their livelihoods, or at least to restore them, in real terms, while maintaining the sustainability of the interventions, will be identified; ▪ Potential conflicts involving affected persons will be resolved; Both the RPF and PF outline the arrangements for implementing and monitoring the implementation of necessary action plans considered under these frameworks. To achieve the objectives of OP 4.12, particular attention should be paid to the needs of vulnerable groups among those displaced, especially those who are poor, the landless, the elderly, women and children, Indigenous Peoples, ethnic minorities or other affected persons who may not be protected through national land compensation legislations. CATEGORISATION OF PROJECT-AFFECTED PERSONS (PAPS) PAPs include all categories of people who may be affected by involuntary relocation and access restrictions as a result of implementation of activities under J-SLMP. The categories of PAPs include individuals, households, groups and communities that hold land ownership certificates and other recognised legal titles to the land affected by the project, as well as other individuals, households, groups and communities who currently use the land or the products of the land without holding legal titles. People who reside in protection and/or conservation forests are considered as PAPs under the project although they may be considered illegal occupants and/or encroachers. 176 Further detailed of PAPs are those who may be: ▪ Households or individuals who are local residents in communities within the performance accounting area (WPK) and who currently farm, reside on or otherwise use land that is considered critical for conservation and protection purposes. That includes households that practice settled cultivation as well as swidden farming or rotational agriculture, even if the land in question is currently under fallow; ▪ Households or individuals who are local residents in communities within WPK who currently manage plantation forests where such forests will be declared as conservation and/or protected areas or where there will be restrictions on the use of such areas (e.g., no logging activities or slash/burn activities); ▪ Individuals and/or communities who live in, or close to, conservation and/or protection forests that had been selected to be placed under improved management; and ▪ Individuals and/or communities that own or otherwise use rural and urban land (outside the state forest/Kawasan Hutan) who as a result of J-SLMP activities face restrictions on the use and utilisation of land and natural resources that are classified as High Conservation Value (HCV) areas; ▪ Those who are not owners of the affected land or properties but either reside on or their livelihoods are directly dependent on, the affected land or properties (e.g., squatters, tenants, those earning wages from working on the affected agricultural land or working on the affected businesses, or are using the land informally with or without the permission of the owner). The following categories of individuals and entities are not defined as PAPs under the RPF and PF: ▪ State forest enterprises whose jurisdictions are selected for improved management under the Program; ▪ Forestry and non-forestry concession holders whose status is not “clean and clear� and that are subject to license revocation. PRINCIPLES AND OBJECTIVES The principles outlined in the World Bank’s Operational Policy 4.12 have been incorporated in the development of this RPF and PF. The following principles will prevail: ▪ Any forms of relocation of individuals, households, communities and groups will be avoided to the extent possible. Proposed key approaches include: o In order to avoid resettlement and minimise access restriction risks, J-SLMP will seek to facilitate social forestry initiatives through a participatory process with forest dependent communities. Social forestry is expected to provide tenure security and sustainable access to land and natural resources; o Any relocation of agricultural lands and/or settlements for conservation and protection purposes will be used as the last resort and will be done through an amicable process based on mutual consensus. The RPF and PF will outline key steps required under OP 4.12; and 177 o J-SLMP seeks to adopt a participatory approach to engage forest dependent communities as important partners for improved forest management; ▪ All alternatives to avoid where feasible or at least minimise resettlement will be explored. In the event that resettlements are unavoidable, all project affected people will be compensated at a replacement cost reflecting market values of land and other assets in addition to transaction costs. Depreciation of assets is not allowed; ▪ Project affected people will be assisted in their efforts to restore their livelihoods and provided with rehabilitation measures to help them improve their standards of living, or at least restore, in real terms, their standards of living to pre-displacement levels or to levels preceding the beginning of program implementation, whichever is higher; ▪ RAPs will be developed through a consultative process with project affected people and will be disclosed publicly. A fully functioning FGRM will be established under the J-SLMP to help ensure early identification of key concerns and feedback to enable responsive mitigation measures; ▪ Vulnerable groups will be identified, and special attention will be paid to these groups during the project implementation. Any risks considered under the RPF and PF, which may impact Indigenous Peoples, and Adat communities must be consistent with the IPPF of the ESMF; ▪ Any actions resulting resettlement or access restriction impacts will not be carried out until certain readiness criteria are fully met. These include sufficient consultations and information to the target communities/individuals, adequate budget to finance transitional compensation and support for long-term livelihoods restoration measures, sufficient time for transition amongst the target communities/individuals, clear roles and responsibilities amongst relevant agencies, and approved RAPs and PoAs, subject to No Objection from the World Bank. In the event that J-SLMP activities lead to livelihood displacement impacts due to the need to restrict access to land and natural resources, the following principles prevail: ▪ Provide targeted assistance (e.g., credit facilities, training or job opportunities) and opportunities to improve or at least restore the income-earning capacity, production levels and standards of living to economically displaced persons whose livelihoods or income levels are adversely affected; ▪ Provide transitional support to economically displaced persons, as necessary, based on a reasonable estimate of the time required to restore their income earning capacity, production levels and standards of living; ▪ Any access restrictions and management of impacts shall be made through consultation processes and consensus. All the action plans, including RAPs and PoAs must be reviewed and cleared by the Provincial Secretary (SEKDA) and the Provincial Environmental Agency (MOEF) with oversight from the MOEF. These plans will be subject to the World Bank’s No Objection prior to implementation of any activities that trigger the application of the RPF and PF. Implementation of such plans will be the responsibility of relevant implementing agencies under technical coordination and oversight by Provincial SEKDA, Provincial Environmental Agency and MoEF. 178 DISCLOSURE AND CONSULTATIONS The consultation process has been ongoing since 2016. Information resulting from this process is incorporated into the formulation of this ESMF. Additional consultations in 2018-2019 are summarized in Table 1 and full documentation of these consultations is appended in the preliminary SESA report (refer Appendix A.3). As part of the preparation of this RPF and PF, the following consultations have been undertaken: ▪ Consultations with FMUs, district BAPPEDA (Merangin, Bungo, Kerinci, Sarolangun and Tanjung Jabung Timur districts), Kerinci District Environmental Agency, and Kerinci Seblat National Park authority (March-April 2019). These consultations were intended to capture perceptions and expectations of government stakeholders of the proposed interventions, including potential risks related to tenure conflict settlements, access restrictions and potential resettlement of forest dependent communities as a result of improved land and resource management, drivers of deforestation, and capacity-need assessments to address these drivers; ▪ Focus Group Discussion in sample villages (19-20 April 2019). This FGD was undertaken to verify key environmental and social issues and also to identify stakeholders at the grass root level, and to identify risk of conflicts; ▪ Focus Group Discussion with Orang Rimba and Marga Serampas, representing Indigenous Peoples, to understand tenure conflicts and their specific concerns and challenges, as well as opportunities in relation to activities being proposed under J-SLMP (20 April 2019) ▪ Two public consultations were conducted at two target districts, namely District of Tanjung Jabung Timur in May and District Merangin in June 2019. At these meetings, draft safeguards documents were presented to the public, including various district government officials, related FMUs, National Park Authorities, local NGOs, head of sub-district and some heads of villages, and WB staff. In addition to presenting the draft safeguard report, discussions also focused on capturing inputs and further analysis of environmental and social impacts as well as capacity to deal with the impacts (especially in Merangin District). ▪ Two consultation processes were conducted in late July 2019 in Jambi on the issue of risks of reversal and risks of displacement. These consultations involved national park authorities, FMUs, Provincial Government Offices, and NGOs. The consulted RPF and PF has been disclosed in MoEF’s website on 17 October 2019 (link: http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/peraturan-perundangan.html). A final version will be re-disclosed in both MoEF and World Bank’s websites following the World Bank’s clearance of the RPF and PF. Information will be made available to potentially affected communities and individuals once specific activities and locations have been determined and additional consultations at the community level will be undertaken prior to commencement of any activities. To ensure accessibility and more inclusive participation, further consultations will be undertaken at the community level 179 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL RISKS The J-SLMP will not require land acquisition that would result in direct involuntary resettlement. Chapter 4 of the ESMF provides summary of the assessment of broader environmental and social risks and its corresponding detailed assessment is presented in Annex 12 of the document. Assessment of potential risks related to access restrictions and restrictions to land uses is presented in table 2 below: Table 31 Resettlement and Access Restriction Risk Assessment COMPONENT/ ACTIVITY RISKS SUB-COMPONENT Sub-Component 1.1. The activity will support policy No physical investments are expected Strengthening Policy development, improvement and under this component. There could be and Institutions enforcement along with capacity-building downstream risks related to for sub-national agencies. This component enforcement of regulations on fire will serve as the building block for prevention and management, which improved land and natural resource may result in restrictions in land uses management with focus on: 1) (i.e., zero burning policy). Operationalisation of provincial institutions on climate change; 2) Development of Monitoring, Analysis and Reporting (MAR) for systematic and comprehensive accounting of GHG emissions; 3) Development of risk management and benefit sharing mechanism; 4) Technical studies and analysis to support ERP; 5) Legalisation of Jambi’s Green Growth Plan (GGP); and 6) Policy and Regulatory support on fire prevention and management, licensing and private sector involvement for emission reduction initiatives. Sub-component 2.1: This component will finance pilot HCV protection, reaffirmation of forest Integrated Forest and investments which will contribute to boundaries, or forest function Land Management emission reduction, capacity building to designation may result in access sub-national institutions and law restrictions and/or denial of certain enforcement, community empowerment, groups and/or individuals’ claims due to including social forestry licensing lack of legal evidence or illegal uses. facilitation and private sector partnerships Other risks assessed also include: to promote value chain sustainability. ▪ Escalation of existing land dispute Specific focus will be placed on: in areas with pre-existing conflicts ▪ Securing and protecting remaining due to lack of perceived fair forests (forest patrol, monitoring and dispute mechanisms; facilitation for the implementation of ▪ Risks associated with community sustainable forest standards); and wider stakeholders’ ▪ Rehabilitation of degraded areas, perceptions and expectations of including reforestation; what the project is expected to ▪ Peatland fire prevention and deliver (e.g., tenure security in management; forest areas and/or areas under ▪ Forest Management Unit (FMU) concessions) which may manifest institutional capacity strengthening; in: (a) Individual and/or communal efforts to strengthen land ▪ Law enforcement and conflict holding/ownership claims resolution; regardless of the locations (forest ▪ Social forestry licensing facilitation; or non-forest areas); (b) 180 ▪ Agricultural intensification, including heightened community tension good agricultural practices for key claiming the same land parcels or commodities (i.e., rubber, coffee and sharing boundaries of lands being oil palm), introduction of alternative claimed. commodities (i.e., Jelutung and ▪ Changes in the current Kepayang), post harvesting and unsustainable agricultural market support; practices (i.e. slash burn and ▪ Private sector partnerships swidden farming) may have (certification, technical support for implications in livelihoods patterns, value chain sustainability and higher costs of agriculture responsible sourcing of materials, production and food security etc.) The above assessment highlights that improvements in land and natural resource management supported by J-SLMP may result in access restrictions of forest dependent communities to natural reserves and/or other protected areas due to regularisation of forest functions and law enforcement. There may also be risks that the J-SLMP may exacerbate and affect existing disputes and conflicts over natural resources and land rights if no sufficient and inclusive community participation and dispute mediation are established during the program implementation. Potential resettlement risks are very remote since activities leading to such impacts will not be financed by the project. In other circumstances, risks anticipated in this framework would likely be part of broader government development programs, such as the Agrarian Reform, which may and/or may not be associated with J- SLMP. The framework serves as a precautionary measure to such downstream risks and relevant agencies participating in J-SLMP will be obliged to follow the provisions of the RPF and PF. Other risks that have been considered include: a. Gender/social exclusion: J-SLMP activities implementation may impact on women and vulnerable households in terms of access to NTFP, access to land, participation in J-SLMP implementation and lack of consultations. Women may be disadvantaged with regards to access to and use of forest land since their land rights may potentially be less secure than those of men’s. Access to information may potentially be more limited compared to men and hence, are less likely to be actively involved in consultations. Poor persons irrespective of gender or ethnicity are less likely to receive adequate information; b. Cultural heritage: J-SLMP activities could indirectly affect areas with cultural and spiritual values to the communities, such as sacred forests or sites in the form of access restrictions. OP 4.11 is triggered and mitigation measure are proposed in the ESMF to address potential impacts; c. Effective consultation and outreach: Lack of meaningful consultation and outreach could lead to low public buy in and ownership. Implementation of free, prior and informed consultations and access to project benefits may also be hampered as a result. 181 LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK The legal and Institutional framework will be based on GOI’s regulations and World Bank Safeguards will are described as follows: GoI’s Legal and Institutional Framework The GOI’s legal and institutional framework to address potential resettlement (RPF) and access restriction (PF) within the ERP implementation are: ▪ Indonesia’s Constitution 1945; ▪ Decree of the People’s Consultative Assembly/DoPCA (TAP MPR No . IX/2001); ▪ Law No. 5/1960 regarding Basic Agrarian Law; ▪ Law No. 41/1999 regarding Forestry; ▪ Law No. 39/2014 regarding Plantation; ▪ Presidential Regulation (Peraturan Presiden) No. 71/2012 regarding procedures for land acquisition for public interests (Revised in Presidential Regulation No. 148/2015). This regulation covers the definition of government agencies, procedures, objects related with land acquisition. This regulation also defines the public interests and land values; ▪ Presidential Regulation No. 62/2018 on responding to social impacts related with land acquisition for national development. This regulation also states the requirement to establish an integrated team for mitigating social impacts; ▪ Presidential Decree No. 88/2017 regarding Tenure Settlement within the Forest area (Penyelesaian Penguasaan Tanah Dalam Kawasan Hutan/PPTKH); ▪ Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs Decree No. 3/2018 regarding Technical Implementation Guideline for The Inventory and Verification Team of Occupied Forest Area (Pedoman Pelaksanaan Tugas Tim Inventarisasi dan Verifikasi Penguasaan Tanah dalam Kawasan Hutan) In general, land status can be divided into two function that is forest and non-forest. Any activities in forest area will be managed under jurisdiction of Law No 41/1999 regarding Forestry and its related guidance regulations include Presidential Decree No. 88/2017 and Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs Decree No. 3/2018. Non-forest land or area will be managed under jurisdiction of Law No. 5/1960 regarding Basic Agrarian Law and its specific regulation include Law No. 39/2014 regarding Plantation. Activities related to achieving the objective of the J-SLMP may involve the construction and/or rehabilitation of village roads, as well as the construction of processing facilities for (agro-) forestry products and other small-scale community infrastructure. These activities may require the acquisition of small plots of land through negotiated land acquisition or voluntary contribution. Potential access restrictions to land and other natural resources may occur because of activities under Component 2 and policy changes related to activities under Component 1. The following laws and regulations set out the principles and procedures relevant to potential land acquisition and resettlement issues related to J-SLMP. 182 ▪ Presidential Decree No. 88/2017 regarding Tenure Settlement within the Forest area Jo Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs Decree No. 3/2018 regarding Technical Implementation Guideline for The Inventory and Verification Team of Occupied Forest Area: The regulation was designed for resolving the overlapping of land rights in the Forest area. This regulation has more acknowledgement on dispute or conflict pattern within forest area or the land occupying pattern in Indonesia. There will be a technical process to resolve the land dispute. There will be several scenarios for dispute settlement including resettlement, land swaps, enclave, and social forestry. Basically, the regulation is aim to give the best scenario within community and the forest management through recognising customary territories (hak ulayat) and Adat forest; ▪ Law No. 5/1960 on Basic Agrarian Principles: This law defines the fundamental rights of private individuals and entities. The law describes the roles of the state regarding the direct use of land as well as personal rights and the private use of land. Furthermore, the law recognises land rights over customary territories (hak ulayat) and customary law (adat law), if it is not in conflict with the national interests. World Bank Safeguard Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12). This policy is triggered as a precautionary measure to address potential risks related to access restrictions. Relevant components and sub-components where such risks are considered relevant are presented in Table 31. Resettlement risks are considered remote and such risks represent downstream risks and may occur as a result of tenure regularisation for informal settlements in both forest and non-forest area. The World Bank’s Policy (OP 4.12) on Involuntary Resettlement applies to specific co mponents and activities under J-SLMP where risks associated with access restrictions and resettlement are envisaged. The policy applies to all economically and/or physically affected persons, regardless of the number of people affected, the severity of impact and the legality of land holding. Furthermore, the Policy requires particular attention to be given to the needs of vulnerable groups especially those below the poverty line, the landless, the elderly, women and children, indigenous groups, ethnic minorities, orphans, and other disadvantaged persons. Policy Requirements The Policy differentiates between situations which involve the “involuntary taking of land� (section 3[a] and the “involuntary restriction of access to legally designated parks and protected areas resulting in adverse impacts on the livelihoods of the displaced persons�. In situations where section 3(a) occurs, i.e., involuntary physical relocation, and possibly restriction of access linked to such relocation, is involved, a Resettlement Policy Framework is required. Where 3(b) occurs, i.e., involuntary restriction of access without physical relocation, a Process Framework is required. Where an RPF is in place and resettlement is required, a RAP will be developed during project implementation. The RAP sets out a detailed action plan for treating a specific situation. A RAP will be developed for each project component or activity where involuntary resettlement is envisaged and once the exact locations and affected communities have been identified. The RAP must be consistent with the provisions in the RPF. 183 Under a Process Framework, consultation processes with affected communities are required to address/minimise impacts resulting from restrictions of access to natural resources. Just as specific RAPs are required before the implementation of any project entailing resettlement, so are Bank- approved Plans of Action (PoA) or targeted Community Development Plan (CDPs) required at the implementation stage of each Program activities, before enforcing the envisaged restriction of access. These PoA/CDPs must set out the specific measures taken to assist people deprived of access to the natural resources within parks and protected areas, and implementation arrangements. The Policy requires that the nature of the restrictions of access to natural resources within protected areas, as well as the type of measures necessary to mitigate adverse impacts, is determined, with the participation of the displaced persons during the design and implementation of the project. Eligibility and Entitlements of PAPs Under the World Bank Policy displaced persons may be classified in one of the following three groups: a. Those who have formal legal rights to land (including customary and traditional rights recognised under the laws of the country); b. Those who do not have formal legal rights to land at the time the census begins but have a claim to such land or assets–provided that such claims are recognised under the laws of the country or become recognised through a process identified in the resettlement; and c. Those who have no recognisable legal right or claim to the land they are occupying. Persons covered in groups (a) and (b) are provided with compensation for the land they lose and other assistance. Persons covered in groups (c) are provided with resettlement assistance in lieu of compensation for the land they occupy, and other assistance as necessary, to achieve the objectives set out in this policy, if they occupy the project area prior to a cut-off date established by the borrower and acceptable to the Bank. Persons who encroach on the area after the cut-off date are not entitled to compensation or any other form of resettlement assistance. All persons included in three groups (a), (b) or (c) are provided with compensation for loss of assets other than land. Gap Analysis GOI’s framework for handling tenure settlements in Forest Areas (PPTKH) is set out in the Presidential Regulation No. 88/2017. Several measures to address forest occupation and/or encroachments depending on the functions of the State Forests concerned (i.e. conservation, protection and production). Agrarian Reform Program, the GOI is committed to protecting the rights of the poor, including informal occupants within the State Forests ( Kawasan Hutan). Social forestry is considered as the GOI’s Process Framework to provide forest dependent communities access to land and natural resources for livelihoods. However, there is lack of clearly and formally codified provisions in the prevailing laws that correspond to the key requirements of the World Bank’s OP 4.12. P revailing regulations on land acquisition and resettlement are generally enshrined in Law No. 2 / 2012 on Land Acquisition for Public Interest, which may not necessarily be relevant under the J-SLMP contexts. Hence, in the absence of regulatory provisions, the following assessment outlines general practices in tenure settlements, particularly in the State Forest. Further detailed analysis on key regulatory gaps is provided in Chapter 3.4 of the ESMF. Generally, unlawful resettlement for informal settlements on State Lands is prohibited under the current laws. Under the governing forest tenure settlements (PPTKH), land in question must be free from any 184 encumbrances and/or disputes with other parties. The schemes offered for tenure settlements can only be enforceable when land disputes have been settled through a separate process (e.g., mediation and/or court resolution). Government agencies involved are prohibited from enforcing evictions, criminalizing land claimants, closing access to land and/or imposing any forms of access restrictions during the implementation of forest tenure settlements. These requirements would enable investments in community facilitation and engagement, to which the GOI is committed to providing further support and facilitation under J-SLMP. Furthermore, as indicated earlier, resettlement risks are very remote in the contexts of Jambi. Under PPTKH regulation (clause no. 10), resettlement may be considered as an option for the forest tenure settlement in the event that the forest area in question is classified within the conservation zone regardless of the use (e.g., settlements, agricultural land and other land uses). In provinces where the total size of the State Forests equals to or is less than 30 percent of the total size of watersheds and/or land masses within provincial administrative jurisdictions, resettlement can also be applicable to address occupation (either for settlements and/or establishment of public and social facilities) within production forests based on recommendations from PPTKH inventory and verification teams. In the Jambi context, 2.1 million hectares or approximately 40 percent of land area, are administratively designated as Forest Area (Kawasan Hutan) which should in theory exclude the Province from such resettlement provisions. The GOI is committed to protecting the rights of the poor, including informal occupants within the State Forests (Kawasan Hutan). Under the current PPTKH regulation, social forestry schemes are considered as preferable options to address tenure issues within the State Forests. Social Forestry can therefore be considered as the GOI’s Process Framework to provide forest dependent communities access to land and natural resources for livelihoods. The ESMF will ensure any activities under J-SLMP address key requirements of OP 4.12 as well as OP 4.10 for Indigenous Peoples are in place and consulted broadly with affected parties before any action with resettlement and/or access restriction impacts can be carried out. GOI’S ONGOING POLICY TO ADDRESS TENURE SETTLEMENTS In recent years, the GOI has made strong political commitments to address land tenure issues and poverty amongst rural communities, including those occupying and using land inside the forest area. Such commitments have been translated into real actions, which are expected to provide access to land and natural resources amongst poor rural communities and hence, minimise risks considered under these frameworks. Recent policy developments are summarised as follows: Improving Spatial Planning An important step toward improved spatial planning is the ongoing delineation of the boundaries of the Forest Estate. Clear boundaries between the Forest Estate and lands that lie outside, as well as clear demarcation of land use designations within the Forest Estate, are expected to improve legal certainty in forest management, and to increase public recognition of community rights. Another positive development is what is generally referred to as the “One Map Policy� ( Kebijakan Satu Peta). This effort, first launched in 2012, involves the synchronisation of maps used by different agencies and levels of government. The objective of this policy is to create a single 1:50,000 scale map 185 that can serve as a standard geospatial reference, based on a single standard, a single database, and a single geoportal. In addition, the Government of Indonesia is developing a national cadastre and continues the delineation and demarcation of land to be designated as state forest areas. Protection of HCV Forests within Concessions and Oil Palm Plantation Areas MoEF has issued a number of regulations to support the protection of High Conservation Value Forests (HCVF) within forestry concessions (logging concessions, timber plantation concessions, and ecosystem restoration concessions). The Ministry of Agriculture and the National Land Agency have issued a letter in support of HCVF implementation within areas licensed for estate crops. A number of licenses have been issued, requiring recipients to protect HCVF within the licensed area. A number of policies related to the development and management of Estate Crops in Jambi are expected to be included in the provincial and district development plans. These policies provide justification for: ▪ Prioritising increased productivity rather than establishing new estate crop plantations; ▪ Directing new development of estate crop plantation to smallholders on land with low carbon stock values (shrubs and open land on mineral soils) through partnerships with large estate crop companies (low-emission supply chain); ▪ Encouraging the acceleration of estate crop plantations on areas where the permits have been issued and evaluating the existing permits; ▪ Protecting natural forests and peatlands with high carbon stock values. To the extent possible, collectively maintain 640,000 ha of natural forests and 50,000 ha of peatlands by 2030 in the allocated plantation areas; and ▪ Ensuring compliance with the principles of sustainable estate crop development. Agrarian Reform The government is pursuing two programs related to land reform and land distribution which aim to create more equitable access to forest land and to reduce conflict. First is the Agrarian Reform Program which covers 9 million hectares of land. The second is a program that seeks to allocate forestry land through various social forestry schemes. These are agreements between the state and communities for accessing and using areas within the forest estate for specified purposes. The main social forestry schemes are Community Forests (Hutan Kemasyarakatan/HKm), Village Forests (Hutan Desa/HD), Community Plantation Forests (Hutan Tanaman Rakyat/HTR) and partnerships (kemitraan). By the end of 2017, there were 27 partnerships between companies and timber plantation companies in Jambi, covering 1,989 ha and involving 687 community members. Customary Forests (Hutan Adat) Adat Forests are defined as forests located within territories over which Adat communities hold traditional rights (Adat). In order to bring the nation’s forest regulation in line with a high-profile decision by Indonesia’s Constitutional Court in 2013 concerning Adat forests, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry issued a new regulation on Forest Rights in 2015. Four adat areas have been recognised in 186 Jambi based on Gubernatorial Regulation No. 1/2015. There are also several potential Adat land claims in the concession. The total potential adat land claim is officially recognised as 273,314.58 ha. Traditional Zones and Conservation Partnership in National Parks Starting in 2015, conservation programs have been conducted to enable communities to access and utilise non-timber forest products in designated Traditional Zones, in National Parks. These zones may be utilised for the benefit of communities that have traditionally been dependent on certain non-timber forest products found in these zones. Through these partnership arrangements, conservation areas have contributed to improving the welfare of 4,812 households in 62 villages living in and at the fringes of 15 National Parks. Additionally, Regulation of DG of KSDAE No. 6/2018 provides possibility for conservation partnership (i.e., community development and ecosystem restoration) to be established between national park authorities and local communities. 187 MANAGEMENT OF RISKS AND IMPACTS The following section outlines two main frameworks, including the PF and RPF that are considered under the overall safeguards instruments to address the World Bank’s provisions of OP 4.12. PROCESS FRAMEWORK The purpose of the Process Framework (PF) is to establish a process by which communities potentially affected by restricted natural resource access to the protection forests, which are under the management authority of MoEF and Provincial Forestry Agency through their Forest Management Units (FMUs), engage in a process of informed and meaningful consultations and negotiations, to identify and implement means of reducing or mitigating the impact of restricted resource access. The PF is prepared to comply with the World Bank policy on involuntary resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) and GOI’s laws and regulations. The PF provides guidelines for the development of Plans of Actions (PoAs) during project implementation which: a. Define the restrictions of access to natural resources in protected areas; b. Identify and quantify the impacts that those restrictions may have on different segments of the local communities; c. Propose, implement and monitor remedial measures to compensate for the loss of those assets and the income associated with them; d. Provide grievance redress mechanisms in order to resolve any issues that may arise due to restrictions of access to resources over the course of the program. Measures to protect confidentiality and safety of the aggrieved parties will be warranted. Eligibility Individuals and communities who will be able to benefit from the Process Framework are those who are dependent on natural resources within and/or from protected and conservation forests, HCV areas (both within and outside State Forests), as well as any persons affected by access restrictions due to improved conservation measures supported by J-SLMP. These communities and individuals may experience economic/livelihoods displacement although they do not suffer from physical relocation. Individuals and communities considered as illegal or informal occupants are eligible under this Process Framework. The provisions of OP 4.10 (Indigenous People) have also been taken into consideration while preparing the Process Framework. Further details on impact management measures related to Indigenous Peoples and/or Masyarakat Adat are included in the IPPF. Management of Access Restriction Risks within Forest Area Based on Decentralization Act No. 23/2014, the Forest Estate (with the exception of forest conservation areas) is managed by the provincial government and controlled by the national government. Day-to- day management of these areas is the mandate of the Forest Management Units (KPH). All forest 188 conservation areas (such as Nature Reserves, Wildlife Reserves, and National Parks) are controlled and managed by the central Ministry of Environment and Forestry. The governing framework for the handling of tenure settlements in the forest area (PPTKH) is set out in Presidential Regulation No. 88/2017. As a consequence of this regulation, an acceleration team for PPTKH has been established by the GOI and is chaired by the Coordinating Ministry of Economic Affairs (CMEA)47 with members from MoEF, MoHA, Cabinet Secretary and the Head of the President Staff Office (KSP). The PPTKH acceleration team, supported by its implementation taskforce staffed by relevant heads of directorate generals of these ministries, is responsible to facilitate tenure settlement processes in the forest area, which include: a. Coordinating and synchronizing the implementation of settlements of land tenure within the forest area; b. Stipulating steps and policies in the resolution of problems and obstacles in the implementation of PPTKH; c. Determining the maximum land areas that can be allocated to settle land tenure within the forest area; d. Establishing resettlement mechanisms; e. Conducting supervision and control over the implementation of land tenure settlements within forest areas; and f. Facilitating the provisions of budget in the execution of land tenure settlements within forest areas. An inventory team for PPTKH is to be established at the provincial level by the governor and is responsible for assisting the PPTKH acceleration team and its implementation taskforce at the national level on specific tasks, which include: a. Receiving proposals for inventory and verification of land use and occupation within the forest area collectively submitted by district heads or mayors; b. Conducting field surveys/data collection; c. Conducting analysis of (1) physical and juridical data of land parcels within forest area; and (2) ecosystems of the land parcels concerned; and d. Outlining recommendations for tenure settlements in the forest area to be forwarded to the Governor for concurrence. Final decisions related to tenure settlement mechanisms rest with the PPTKH acceleration team hosted at the CMEA. The execution/implementation will remain the responsibility of the MoEF. Presidential Regulation No. 88/2017 Jo. Coordinating Ministry of Economic Affairs Decree No. 3/2018 sets out several measures to address forest occupation and/or encroachments depending on the functions of the forest area concerned (i.e., conservation, protection and production), as outlined in Table 33: 47 Based on the Coordinating Ministry of Economic Affairs Decree No. 3/2018 regarding Technical Implementation Guideline for The Inventory and Verification Team of Occupied Forest Area. 189 Table 32 Options for Land Tenure Settlements within the Forest Area OPTIONS CONDITIONS/ REQUIREMENTS Occupation and/or encroachment before the designation of forest area (penunjukan) Land parcels/part of Land in question has been occupied and/or titles have been granted prior to the parcels to be designation of forest area enclaved and excised from the forest area Occupation and/or encroachment following the designation of forest area (penunjukan) Land parcels/part of Occupation for settlement purposes and/or establishment of public and social facilities in parcels to be areas no longer classified as protection or conservation zones. enclaved and Land in question has been utilised for agricultural purposes for more than 20 consecutive excised from the years. forest area Note: Enclaved land parcels could be subject to the Land Distribution Schemes (TORA) and registration, including titling is to be processed through PTSL. Land swap Occupation for settlement purposes and/or establishment of public and social facilities in areas no longer classified as protection or conservation zones (applies to provinces whose forest cover equals to or is less than 30 percent of the total size of watersheds and/or land masses within provincial administrative jurisdictions). Social forestry Land in question has been utilised for agricultural purposes for less than 20 years. These schemes schemes apply to provinces whose size of the forest area equals to or is less than 30 percent of the total size of watersheds and/or land masses within provincial administrative jurisdictions regardless of the length of occupation. Resettlement Land in question is classified within the conservation zone regardless of the use (e.g., settlements, agricultural purposes and other land uses). Occupation for settlement purposes and/or establishment of public facilities in protection forests. Note: In provinces whose size of forest area equals to or is less than 30 percent of the total size of watersheds and/or land masses within provincial administrative jurisdictions, resettlement options can also be applied to forest occupation for settlement purposes and/or establishment of public and social facilities in production forests under the discretion of MoEF. In Jambi Province, 2.1 million hectares or approximately 40 percent of land area, are administratively designated as Forest Area ( Kawasan Hutan) which should in theory exclude the Province from such resettlement provisions. For the mechanisms above to be enforced, land in question must be free from any encumbrances and/or disputes with other parties. Furthermore, the government agencies (PPTKH) involved are prohibited from enforcing forced evictions, criminalization against land claimants, closure of access to land and/or any forms of access restrictions during the implementation of forest tenure settlements. These requirements would enable investments in community facilitation and engagement during the ERP implementation as guided by this framework. Management of Access Restriction Risks outside State Forest Area The area outside of Jambi’s Forest Estate covers 4.3 million hectares. Management of state lands outside the Forest Estate falls under the mandate of the district and provincial governments. The overall administration of land outside the forest estate (APL) falls under the purview of ATR/BPN. 190 Currently, ATR/BPN has been implementing a Systematic and Complete Land Registration (Pendaftaran Tanah Sistematis Lengkap or hereafter PTSL). PTSL is a complete village-based land registration system for certification to cover village by village all registered and unregistered land parcels in non-Forest area. Under the PTSL approach, all land parcels in a village will be mapped and registered with the land office and relevant data entered into the electronic database (KKP). Land parcels previously not certified and free of encumbrances (i.e. no competing claims, no overlaps with Forest Areas, concessions and other land parcels) will be declared eligible for issuance of titles. The overarching goal of this program is to provide clarity of land use and legal ownership and therefore, is expected to facilitate dispute and conflict settlements in non-forest area. On concerns with regards to access restrictions and resettlement in non-forest areas, such risks may occur only in cases where there are third party actions (government, non-forestry license holders and/or other land owners) to regularise informal settlements as an outcome of dispute settlement processes within APL lands. Under J-SLMP, such activities involving any resettlement will not be financed. Table 33 provides an analysis of land classifications where such informal settlements may be found along their respective legal frameworks. Table 33 Classification of Land Types with Possibilities of Informal Settlements LAND ASSESSMENT CLASSIFICATION State Land The GOI’s regulation PP 16/2014 concerning Land Management requires land holders to ensure that land use and occupation are: ▪ in conjunction with the district/provincial spatial plans; ▪ in compliance with protection and conservation functions of the land concerned to prevent ecosystem degradation. Land use on small islands, river banks, watershed areas, coastlines, lake flood plains, etc., is subject to public interests, conservation and environmental carrying capacity. Due to the conservation and ecosystem functions, district and/or provincial spatial plans would retain the management of the areas into relevant government agencies and restrict occupation and utilisation of land in these areas. Occupants are not eligible to private land ownership, and concession areas must enclave these areas. In the events of land use regularisation, there could be potential risks that these occupants may face increased scrutiny with regards to the status of their occupations, with potential restrictions of further land use, and evictions. The governing regulation pertaining to land acquisition for public interest is set out in Law No.2/2012. The laws require the government and/or other entities acting on behalf of the government to compensate any loss that may be incurred based on independent asset valuation. However, there remains issues with regards to compensation for informal settlers with regards to land compensation, which is currently not covered in the absence of legitimate claims of the land in question. Land under HGU (Rights The GOI’s regulation PP 40/1996 allows communities, private and government - to Cultivate) licenses owned enterprises the rights to cultivate on state lands for agriculture and farming purposes. HGU licenses last for 25 years and are extendable for another 35 years subject to certain eligibility requirements (e.g., compliant with tax obligations, cultivate land in conjunction to its purposes, including efforts to conserve, etc.). Ministerial Regulation of ATR/BPN No.7/2017 further regulates the provisions and mechanism for determinations of HGU. If within the HGU land sourced from the state land and Forest Areas, there is prior occupation, license holders are responsible to pay compensations to the occupants of the land in question based on mutual consensus between both parties. If the land is categorized as customary 191 territories, a written consent from community representatives is required and parts of the proposed areas that are considered sacred and/or culturally significant will be enclaved based on community consent. On private lands, compensations will be determined based on willing seller-willing buyer agreements. Unlawful evictions are therefore prohibited under the GOI’s law. However, in cases where encroachment takes place following licensing, often in areas not cultivated and/or abandoned, settlements of land occupation can take place either through mediation and/or court cases. If there is evidence that such occupation results from HGU owners’ lack of ability to manage the land, their license will be subject to further legal review, with possibilities of license revocation or excision of the land occupied by communities for the land redistribution (TORA) scheme. Ex-HGU land Expired HGU land that has been occupied by communities is subject to the TORA scheme to provide tenure security to the occupants provided they meet eligibility requirements (e.g., length and nature of settlements, no legal encumbrances/clean and clear status, etc.). In order for such land to be transferrable to the occupants, it has to be formally designated a status as an abandoned land ( tanah terlantar) as per-the GOI’s regulation No. 11/2010. However, ATR/BPN is often constrained by the lack of legal clarity with respect to asset handover from the previous HGU owner since the regulation (Presidential Decree) is still yet to be issued. As a result, there is legal uncertainty for both previous HGU owners, land occupants and the government, often resulting in a legal deadlock which prevents any actions by all parties. With the legal framework pertaining to State Land as well as HGU land, evictions of informal settlers are considered unlikely and such risks would be isolated cases. The GOI is responsible to ensure that there is a due process to verify claims and compensate those who may be resettled. Settlements of tenure in private property, including HGUs are settled through direct negotiation between land holders and occupants based on consensus. Under the broader Agrarian Reform Program48, which is further regulated under Presidential Regulation no. 86/2018, the GOI is committed to protecting the rights of poor people, including informal settlers, occupying the land classified under state land and HGU, including ex-HGU land through the TORA scheme. However, settlements of tenure under TORA are outside the scope of the project and are addressed under the broader GOI’s development program. The institutional capacity assessment of government institution (and other relevant stakeholders) is provided in Annex 6 of SESA. Guiding Framework This section describes the procedures that will be adopted for managing the environmental and social impacts associated with access restrictions under the J-SLMP. The approach includes a participatory planning process that seeks broad community support through free, prior and informed consultation processes from affected individuals and communities, and procedures for the screening, assessment, monitoring, and reporting of environmental and social (E&S) impacts. The following four main stages are at the core of the safeguard management approach under the PF. Each stage is subdivided into the following steps: 48 The GoI has established a new program for Agrarian Reform (Tanah Obyek Reforma Agraria/TORA). Agrarian reform in accordance with Basic Agrarian Law (BAL) of 1960 is a rearrangement for the restructuring of ownership, control and use of agrarian resources. The goal is to create social equity, increase productivity and improve people's welfare. The main prerequisite for the implementation of agrarian reform is the political support of the government and the accurate information on agrarian resources (i.e., lands and people). 192 Consultation and Participatory Planning Process Step 1: Identification of affected communities and eligible social forestry groups The approach consists of the participatory identification of eligible communities and their needs, as well as potential J-SLMP implications with regards to access to land and natural resources under the PF. Various options of social forestry schemes (refer Table 34) will be discussed based on eligibility criteria as well as processes in supporting these communities in the development of Forest Management Plans. The PF outlines procedures on how to inform, consult, engage, support and monitor participating communities in a way that their livelihoods can be improved and their role in sustainable forest management is enhanced. The identification of eligible Social Forestry groups will include a review of the available documentation of the Integrated Team (Tim Terpadu) on Assessment of State Forest Area and State Forest Function Change and the Team for Inventory and Verification of Land Tenure (Tim Inver PTKH). If there are known grievances with respect to the designation of state forest area, they are recorded by Tim Terpadu. If there are known land tenure issues or disputes in the state forest area, they are recorded by the Tim Inver PTKH. J-SLMP will provide options for anonymous complaints if the aggrieved parties/individuals choose to do so due to safety reasons. Details of the complainants will not be disclosed to the broader public and may only be disclosed for the purpose of investigation, subject to further approval of the complainants. If based on available documentation by the two teams, there are any major known land use or tenure issues, further consultations and dispute settlements will be first carried out before processing further steps. Such tenure conflicts and/or disputes will be handled separately by relevant agencies, depending on the typology and/or nature of such conflicts and disputes. Table 34 Social Forestry Schemes SCHEMES DETAILS State forests Hutan Kemasyarakatan/HKm The legal basis for HKm include Forestry Law No. 41/1999, further (community forests) elaborated in MoEF regulations No. 6/2007 and No. 88/2014. HKm is aimed to enable community empowerment through community groups. Permits are valid for 35 years and renewable. Permit holders/community groups are only allowed to harvest Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) if permits are issued in the protection forest zone. Timber extraction is only allowed in the production forest zone. Hutan Tanaman Rakyat/HTR The legal basis for HTR is Government Regulation No. 6/2007 (amended (community plantations) through Government Regulation No. 3/2008 and MoEF Regulation No. 23/2007 (amended through MoEF Regulation No. 83/2016). HRT is aimed to support community groups who work in the timber-based industries. Community groups who have received an HTR license can develop forest plantations and can harvest the timber. Hutan Desa/HD (village forests) The legal basis for a village forest is the Forestry Law 41/1999, followed by a ministerial regulation of MoEF No. 89/2014 to elaborate the process and institutional arrangements. This scheme enables state-sponsored community empowerment through village-based institutions. Permits for village forests can be issued for Forest Areas classified as production and protection forests and are valid for 35 years. If permits are issued in the protection forest zone, use of forest resources is limited to NFTPs and other environmental services, such as ecotourism. Timber harvesting is allowed in the production forest zone. 193 Title Forests (Hutan Hak) Hutan Adat (customary forests) Constitutional Court Ruling No. 35/2013 and MoEF Regulation No.32/2015 on title forests enable ownership rights of forestland to customary communities and other local communities under title forest schemes (outside the state Forest Areas). The title forest scheme directed the government to keep customary territories outside of the state Forest Areas, which consequently allow customary forests to attain the status of private forests. These communities are eligible for this scheme if they have been utilising the land for 20 consecutive years or more. Customary forest (Hutan Adat) is the most significant forest scheme as it recognises customary territory and offers the most expansive rights over land and forest resources to Adat communities and represents land ownership within the Forest Areas. Land rights are held by the communities in perpetuity. The other forestry schemes only legally grant use and management rights over forest land but the land ownership remains with the State. Step 2: Rapid Land Tenure Assessment A Rapid Land Tenure Assessment will be carried out in the location of the groups identified in the previous step. The objective of rapid assessment is to explore potentially existing competing claims and unresolved tenure issues with respect to the state forest area for which the group has received the license. The assessment concerns tenure issues that may exist between the Social Forestry group and neighbouring communities as well as within the assessed community. If unresolved tenure conflicts/issues are found during this process, the respective KPH/FMU will assess the possibility of resolving the issue with simple mitigation measures or through consensus. The process of finding a solution will be based on existing prevalent traditional or locally acceptable to the extent appropriate and feasible. If no competing claims or land tenure issues are found during the assessment or if a solution an identified issue could be found, the group is eligible for further support through social forestry schemes. This assessment will also inform the Program about potential implications of dispute and/or conflict settlements through existing processes. On the basis of which, J-SLMP implementing agencies shall not execute decisions without any acceptable risk mitigation measures if potential impacts on livelihoods due to economic displacement are assessed to be severe. Step 3: Update/ Development of the Forest Management Plan (FMP) and Business Plans Under Component 2 of J-SLMP, support will be provided to facilitating community groups to obtain social forestry licenses. This may entail development of Forest Management Plans (RKU) and associated annual work plans (RKT) for the state forest area for which they have received or will receive a license. The main components of the overall processes are: • The demarcation of the concession boundary which is done in cooperation and consultation with neighbouring communities; • The organisation of the forest area into blocks or zones, i.e., into conservation and/or protection and utilisation zones; • The actual plan for the management and uses of the forest, i.e. an activity and a work plan; and • Monitoring, evaluation, and reporting by BPSKL or KPH to Director of the Directorate General of Business Development in Social Forestry and Customary Forest ( Direktorat Bina Usaha 194 Perhutanan Sosial dan Hutan adat [BUPSHA]) (with possible assistance from Social Forestry Working Groups (Pokja PPS)). The management plans describe the bio-physical and socio-economic features of the respective state forest area, including the identification of potentially vulnerable groups. Furthermore, the plan contains the groups’ status and by laws and regulations possible restrictions in th e use of the licensed state forest area. As part of the update/development of the FMP, J-SLMP will support community groups in ensuring that Plans of Action (PoA) are developed to mitigate potential socio-economic impacts resulting from access restrictions imposed via the groups by law. Such a PoA will be integrated into the FMPs. The Social Forestry Groups will be supported through (i) Capacity building and trainings on organisational management, business development and management and/or sustainable forest management; (ii) Support to the establishment of business plans for agro-forestry sites; and (iii) Provision of funding for selected activities that contribute to forest preservation and forest rehabilitation. The sub-projects/activities presented as part of the business plans will be screened with respect to their environmental and social impacts, and the required mitigation plans will be developed (refer Stage 2). The capacity building measures will include training on the ESMF and on good agricultural practices and environmental awareness. The participatory process of developing forest management and social forestry business plans along with their management of socio-economic impacts will consult with target communities on acceptable mitigation measures to avoid and/or mitigate the negative impacts of forest management activities. This suggests that potential impacts resulting from forest management activities (planting, pest management, harvesting, etc.) and their respective mitigation measures will be defined as part of the plans. Sub-projects will be screened according to the screening guideline in Appendix A1. Activities that are part of the negative list of sub-project activities or those that would require a full ESIA/AMDAL (refer to the ESMF) will not be financed by J-SLMP. Preparation of Plan of Action (PoA) A plan of action (PoA) is prepared when J-SLMP leads to restrictions in access to natural resources and land uses in legally conserved and protected areas and these will be integrated into the social forestry’s Forest Management Plans (FMPs) as described above. The purpose of the PoA is to develop several strategies/actions to promote participation of potentially affected communities in the design of sub-project activities, management of risks and impacts and jointly monitor and oversee sub-project activities being implemented. The PoA will be developed together with the affected communities to describe the agreed restrictions, management schemes, measures to assist affected persons and the arrangements for their implementation. The action plan can take many forms. It can simply describe the restrictions agreed to, persons affected, measures to mitigate impacts from these restrictions and monitoring and evaluation arrangement. This PoA will be established in accordance with existing processes under social forestry and determination of forest utilisation blocks. The consultation will be conducted based on the free, prior and informed consultation principles and GOI’s regulations. An indicative step of consultation during PoA is described as follows: 195 a. Preparation: During preparation process, J-SLMP must conduct site screening, identification of affected communities, prepare the consultation material in local contexts, send invitation to the affected communities and identify their concerns; b. Consultation: J-SLMP must undertake consultations with potentially affected communities in the spirit of enabling free, prior, informed consultations to ensure consensus and broad support is reached prior to enforcing any regulations and/or implementing interventions resulting in access restrictions. The consultation must occur freely and voluntary without any external manipulation, interference or coercion, for which the parties consulted have prior access to information on the intent and scope of the proposed project in a culturally appropriate manner, form, and language. The consultation also recognises the importance of engaging community organisations and representatives and pay special attention to women, youth, and the elderly. The consultation needs to be start earlier in order to give more space and time during decision making processes. c. PoA Set up: A specific PoA will refer the consultation results to guide decision making and management of impacts resulting from access restrictions. Any decisions and measures in the PoA decision and recommendation must reflect community consensus and will be aligned with the prevailing GOI’s regulations. The PoA document must reflect a description of relevant J - SLMP activities, implementation arrangements, including responsible agencies for management of risks and impacts, identification of affected communities and their baseline conditions (i.e., livelihoods, access to basic services, dependence on land and natural resources, gender differentials, vulnerability analysis, etc.), agreed processes to support livelihood restoration and/or alternative livelihoods, and mechanisms of dispute/ conflicts settlement that might occur under the project; d. Formal agreement: the agreement will be signed by all participants/ representatives affected by the sub-project activities. The consultation process will be documented systematically, including any evidence of consensus and grievances that emerge during consultation processes. RESETTLEMENT PLANNING FRAMEWORK In the second scenario, if resettlement of forest dependent communities is envisaged under J-SLMP albeit remotely, the following sections outline key processes as a guideline for the preparation of Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs). This section sets out the step by step process that J-SLMP will take to determine whether the subproject will result in physical and/or economic displacements and whether a RAP is required. Risk Screening An early screening will be conducted by relevant environmental and social safeguards specialists as guided under this framework. Such screening is intended to identify and understand potential risks associated with access restrictions and resettlements under relevant components described in Table 2. This screening also seeks to identify conflict areas, Adat claims and their associated risks if the J-SLMP aims to target these areas. If these areas are assessed to be “high risk� using agreed social parameters (i.e., conflicts, tension, overlapping claims, non-functioning local systems for conflict resolution, etc.), the safeguards team at SEKDA will facilitate coordination with relevant agencies to define the appropriate approach as well as resources and engagement strategy. These high-risk areas would 196 require differentiated treatments before the J-SLMP activities are being implemented. These include strengthening local dispute mediation systems, village-level facilitation, coordination with conflicting parties, etc. Such differentiated treatments are also expected to facilitate mutual consensus amongst conflicting parties. Where there is a lack of political and institutional commitments and capacity amongst key agencies to engage and address relevant risks associated with forest boundary demarcation and dispute settlements, SEKDA, with recommendations from relevant agencies and safeguards specialists, will postpone or exclude the target areas in question until such commitments can be evidenced. Risk screening at an activity level is used to identify the types and nature of potential impacts related to the activities proposed under the Project and to provide adequate measures to address the impacts. Screening for resettlement and access restriction issues shall be part of the environmental and social screening, as is detailed in the ESMF. This screening is expected to identify and consider relevant risks associated with access restrictions and resettlement as early as possible. The screening checklist form is provided in Appendix A1 and will be incorporated into the Project’s Implementation Manual. The screening checklist will be completed by Safeguards Committee with oversight from Provincial Environmental and Social Specialists. In the event that vulnerable and marginalized groups might be affected, the screening assessment provides an additional recommendation whether for consideration of alternatives and additional mitigation measures, including consultations prior to the start of activities. Consideration of Alternatives On the basis of the screening, the SEKBER will propose which of the following options should be put in place: a. Alternative project designs and/or sites in view to avoid and/or reduce displacement risks; b. Options for impact avoidance and mitigation measures, including budget requirements; c. If alternative options are exhausted and such risks cannot be avoided, necessary processes and consultations in conjunction with the RPF and PF. The safeguards specialists at SEKBER will develop a district-level environmental and social profile that will be updated on a regular basis based on information provided by implementing agencies to ensure that emerging risks are duly identified, and necessary resources and mitigation measures can be mobilised. The safeguards committee and Provincial Environmental and Social Specialists team will be responsible to assess whether mitigation measures in the RAP and PoA developed by relevant agencies as required under the framework, is acceptable as per the World Bank OP 4.12 and whether the responsible implementers have an adequate risk management capacity to implement the agreed plan. The project may provide technical assistance support to relevant implementing agencies to strengthen their environmental and social risk management, particularly in avoiding resettlement risks and minimising risks associated with access restrictions. 197 Baseline and Socio-Economic Data Only in the event that a RAP is required due to anticipated resettlement risks due to implementation of specific activities under the J-SLMP, a baseline assessment of socio-economic profile of affected communities will be required. An important aspect of preparing a RAP is to establish appropriate socio-economic baseline data to identify the persons who will be displaced by the individual subproject, in order to determine who will be eligible for compensation and assistance, and to discourage inflow of people who are ineligible for these benefits. The affected communities may be classified into three groups: ▪ Those who have formal legal rights to the land they occupy; ▪ Those who do not have formal legal rights to land, but have a claim to land that is recognised or recognisable under the national laws including those measures put in place by the draft land policy; or ▪ Those who have no recognisable legal right or claim to the land they occupy. In summary, the census consolidates information that (1) provides initial information on the scale of resettlement to be undertaken; (2) gives an indication of further socioeconomic research needed to quantify losses to be compensated and, if required, to design appropriate development interventions; and (3) establishes indicators that can/be measured at a later date during monitoring and evaluation. Baseline data for subproject RAPs will include: Number of persons; number, type, and area of the houses to be affected; number, category and area of residential plots and agricultural land to be affected; and productive assets to be affected as a percentage of total productive assets. The safeguards committee with technical support from the Environmental and Social Specialists will decide based on a review of this data the scope of the RAP. Preparation of Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) The specific content of a RAP would depend upon information not yet known, such as locations, numbers of people who might be affected (in different ways) and eligible for resettlement-related assistance. In the events that such risks are envisaged, responsible implementing agencies will need to prepare a RAP if there are resettlement risks. The generic contents of a RAP involve: a. Description of the project: Description of the project, activities and summary of potential resettlement impacts; b. Potential impacts of the project: description of the project component or activities that give rise to resettlement; the zone of impact of such component or activities; the alternatives considered to avoid or minimise resettlement; and the mechanisms established to minimise resettlement, to the extent possible, during project implementation; c. Objectives and studies undertaken: Objectives of the resettlement program and a summary of studies undertaken in support of resettlement planning and implementation; 198 d. Regulatory framework: Relevant laws and regulations and international standards including World Bank policies and procedures; e. Institutional framework: Relevant institutions and responsibilities for resettlement programming; f. Stakeholder engagement: schedule of consultations and participation and interaction with PAPs during RAP preparation. RAP disclosure arrangements; g. Socioeconomic characteristics: Findings of socioeconomic studies to be conducted with the involvement of potentially displaced people, including results of household and census survey, information on vulnerable groups, information on livelihoods and standards of living, land tenure and transfer systems, use of natural resources, patterns of social interaction, social services and public infrastructure; h. Eligibility: Definition of displaced persons and criteria for determining their eligibility for compensation and other resettlement assistance, including relevant cut-off dates; i. Valuation of and compensation for losses: Methodology used in valuing losses to determine their replacement cost; and a description of the proposed types and levels of compensation under local law; and supplementary measures that are necessary to achieve replacement cost for lost assets; j. Magnitude of displacement: summary of the numbers of persons, households, structures, public buildings, businesses, croplands and churches to be affected; k. Entitlement framework: Categories of affected persons and what options they were or are being offered, preferably summarized in tabular form. A generic guideline to develop the entitlement matrix has been prepared as part of the RPF, which can be found in Appendix A3; l. Livelihood restoration measures: Various measures to be used to improve or restore livelihoods of displaced people; m. Resettlement sites: Site selection, site preparation and relocation, alternative relocation sites considered, explanation of the selected sites and the impacts on host communities; n. Housing, infrastructure and social services: Plans to provide (or to finance resettlers' provision of) housing, infrastructure (e.g., water supply, feeder roads), and social services (e.g., schools, health services); plans to ensure comparable services to host populations; any necessary site development, engineering, and architectural designs for these facilities; o. Grievance procedures: Affordable and accessible procedures for third-party settlement of disputes arising from resettlement; such grievances should take into account the availability of judicial recourses and community and traditional dispute settlements; p. Organisational responsibilities: Organisational framework for implementing resettlement, including identification of agencies responsible for delivering resettlement measures and provision of services; arrangements to ensure that there is an appropriate coordination between agencies and jurisdictions that are involved in its implementation; and any measures (including technical assistance) needed to strengthen the implementing agencies' capacity to design and carry out resettlement activities; provisions for the transfer to local authorities or those resettled, the responsibility for managing facilities and services provided under the project and for 199 transferring other such responsibilities from the resettlement implementing agencies, when appropriate; q. Implementation schedule: Schedule covering all resettlement activities from preparation through implementation, including target dates for the achievement of expected benefits to those resettled and their hosts, and implementing the various forms of assistance. The schedule should indicate how the resettlement activities are linked to the implementation of the overall project; r. Costs and budget: Tables showing itemised cost estimates for all resettlement activities, including allowances for inflation, population growth and other contingencies; timetables for expenditures; sources of funds; arrangements for timely flow of funds; and funding for resettlement, if any, in areas outside the jurisdiction of the implementing agencies; s. Monitoring, evaluating and reporting: Arrangements for monitoring of implementing agency’s resettlement activities, supplemented by independent monitors to ensure complete and objective information; performance monitoring indicators to measure inputs, outputs, and outcomes for resettlement activities; involvement of the displaced persons in the monitoring process; evaluation of the impact of resettlement for a reasonable period after all resettlement and related development activities have been completed; use of results of resettlement monitoring to guide subsequent implementation. REVIEW AND CLEARANCE Subprojects with potential impacts on access restrictions and resettlement proposed by relevant implementing agencies will be approved by the Provincial SEKDA and/or BAPPEDA and DGCC with technical recommendation the district and provincial safeguards committees and Provincial Environmental and Social Specialists. Provincial SEKDA and DGCC will review eligibility for subprojects based on risk assessments, which includes results of the environmental and social screening used. The PoA and RAP will be submitted once complete to Provincial SEKDA and/or BAPPEDA and DGCC in compliance with the project institutional administrative arrangements. It may be anticipated that implementing agencies may require technical support for the preparation of PoA and RAPs or key assessments and hence, will need to be assisted by relevant specialists or experts. The Environmental and Social Specialists will make such an assessment in consultation with the district and provincial safeguards committee and recommend additional capacities as relevant. Following internal approval from the SEKDA and/or BAPPEDA and DGCC, DGCC will submit to the PoA and RAPs the World Bank for No Objection. Any activities or investments can only be commenced once such No Objection from the World Bank has been obtained. Gaps in quality shall be addressed through training at the provincial and/or district level for relevant implementing agencies, funded by the project as part of the budget for capacity building. The SEKDA and/or BAPPEDA with technical support from the safeguards committees and Provincial Environmental and Social Specialists will monitor implementation of the PoAs and RAPs throughout sub-project implementation, with an independent review process led by the DGCC as agreed with the World Bank. 200 FEEDBACK AND GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM The handling of grievances is guided by the Annex 7 of the ESMF and seeks to mainstream existing dispute mediation and processes. At the time that PoA and RAPs are approved, and individual compensation and livelihoods restoration assistance have been provided, affected individuals and households will have been informed of the process for expressing dissatisfaction and to seek redress. The grievance procedure will be simple and will be administered as far as possible at local levels to facilitate access by affected communities. All grievances concerning non-fulfilment of compensation agreements, levels of compensation and livelihoods restoration assistance, or seizure of assets without compensation shall be addressed to the responsible head of the implementing agencies through supervision from the Safeguards Committee and Provincial Environmental and Social Specialists (under the Provincial Environmental Service). All attempts shall be made to settle grievances amicably. Those seeking redress and wishing to state grievances will do so by notifying their village chiefs or selected leaders as community focal points. These focal points will inform and consult with the implementing agencies to determine validity of claims. If valid, the focal points will notify the complainant and s/he will be assisted. If the complainant’s clai m is rejected, the matter shall be brought before the implementing agencies for settlement. Mediation may be required to address these complaints. It has to be noted that in the local communities, people take time to decide to complain when aggrieved. Therefore, the grievance procedures will ensure that the PAPs are adequately informed of the procedure, before their assets are taken. The grievance redress mechanism is designed with the objective of solving disputes at the earliest possible time, which will be in the interest of all parties concerned and therefore, it minimises the likelihood to refer such matters to the court for resolution. Compensation and resettlement plans will be binding as agreed by all parties involved and will respect local wisdom and customary practices especially in rural and remote areas. All objections to land acquisition shall be made in writing, in the language that the PAPs understand and are familiar with, to the village chiefs and/or local leaders. Copies of the complaint shall be sent to Project Planning Team and Resettlement Specialist and the relevant Minister for administration of land matters, within 20 days after the public notice. Channelling complaints through the Local Leader is aimed at addressing the problem of distance and cost the affected communities may have to face. The village chiefs and/or local leaders shall maintain records of grievances and complaints, including minutes of discussions, recommendations and resolutions made. The grievance mechanism will follow the flowchart that has been developed in the Framework Grievance Redress Mechanism (FGRM). The procedure for handling grievances should be as follows: 1. The affected person should file his/her grievance in writing, to the village chiefs, local leaders and/or authorised institutions. The grievance note should be signed and dated by the aggrieved person. Where the affected person is unable to write, s/he should obtain assistance to write the note and emboss the letter with his/her thumbprint. A sample grievance form is provided in FGRM Document; 2. The village chiefs, local leaders and/or authorised institutions should respond in a timely manner (based on the agreed process in consultation with affected communities) and determine if meetings and discussions need to be held with the aggrieved person. If the 201 grievance is related to valuation of assets, experts may need to be requested to revalue the assets, and hence, may necessitate a longer period of time. In this case, the village chiefs, local leader and/or authorised institutions must notify the aggrieved person that his/her complaint is being considered; 3. If the aggrieved person does not receive a response or is not satisfied with the outcome within the agreed time, he/she lodges his/her grievance to the higher level; and 4. Implementing agencies and if necessary, with involvement of Provincial SEKDA and/or BAPPEDA will then attempt to resolve the problem (through dialogue and negotiation) within the agreed period of the complaint being lodged. If no agreement is reached at this stage, the project may decide to discontinue specific sub-project activities where grievances cannot not be resolved. The specific GRM regarding land dispute in the forest area will be based on Presidential Decree No. 88/2017 and the operational mechanism will be based on Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs Decree No. 3/2018 (Figure 1). Moreover, the GRM of land dispute outside the forest will refer to Law No 5/1960 regarding Basic Agrarian Law and Law No. 39/2014 regarding Plantation. CONSENSUS, NEGOTIATIONS AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION Consensus and negotiations are central to addressing grievances. In general, people are aware of their rights, their commitments to the country as citizens and their allegiance to village and family issues. For this reason, many Government funded community projects have been implemented without obstacles from project affected persons. However, some projects have been known to stall due to delays in disbursement of compensation. Prior negotiations, between Government representatives and project beneficiaries, are therefore crucial to the success or failure of the project. As a guiding principle emphasis shall be placed on simplicity and proximity of the conflict resolution mechanisms to the affected persons and the following shall be noted: a. Negotiation and agreement by consensus will provide the best avenue to resolving any grievances expressed by the individual landowners or households affected by community projects. These grievances shall be channelled through village chiefs or local leaders; b. The project planning teams shall ensure that the main parties involved achieve any consensus freely. Relevant government representative shall clearly advise the general public, as to who is responsible for the activity and the procedure for handling grievances or compensation claims; c. Grievances shall be addressed during the verification and appraisal process. If a suitable solution is not found, the project planning teams shall defer consent of the project and the concerned project activities shall not be allowed to proceed; d. Grievances for which solutions have not been found shall be referred to the community for discussion where village chiefs, local leaders and implementing agencies will redress the matter of concern to assist the claimants. The mediation process will be implemented according to traditional methods of mediation/conflict resolution. The resolution will then be documented on the relevant consent forms and verified; 202 e. If an agreement cannot be reached at community level the aggrieved party or parties shall raise their concerns to the Project Planning teams who shall refer them to the respective district/provincial implementing agencies and SEKDA and BAPPEDA within 20 days of the verification meeting. Grievances that cannot be resolved at the community and/or village levels shall be submitted to the district and/or provincial levels. Should grievances remain unresolved at this level, specific sub-project activities where such grievances were reported will not be financed under J-SLMP. 203 Figure 1. Dispute Settlement of Occupied Forest Area Flowchart Based on CMEA Decree No. 3/2018 204 FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS The World Bank Policy requires that the RPF and PF provide a description for funding of alternative livelihood support measures and/or resettlement, including the preparation and review of cost estimates, flow of funds and contingency arrangements. At this preparation stage, where resettlement and access restriction risks along with their locations cannot be determined and the number of project affected peoples (PAPs) cannot be identified, it is not possible to provide an estimated budget for the total costs of resettlement that may be associated with the implementation of the RPF and PF. Overall costs of alternative livelihoods support and/or resettlement cannot be determined at this stage, since the number of people who might be affected (it could be zero), as specific locations remain unknown as does the nature, extent and scale. If any resettlement were to occur, then the RAP or PoA would first need to specify the dedicated source(s) of government funding to be used to carry out the budgeted resettlement-related commitments and this should form part of the overall financing of specific activities in question. Funds for implementing inventory assessments and resettlement action plans will be provided by the implementing agency. In general, the cost burden of compensation will be borne by the respective implementing agency for RAPs. The SEKDA and/or BAPPEDA will be responsible that the needed finance is available and/or ensuring that finance is directed towards the RAP or PoA activities. DISCLOSURE AND CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS All relevant information to resettlement including the RAPs and PoAs will be disclosed through the Provincial, District Agency and/or DGCC’s websites. Relevant information of these plans will be disseminated to affected communities in a language and manner accessible and appropriate to them. The project will consult and facilitate informed participation of affected persons and communities, including host communities, in decision making processes related to resettlement. SEKDA, BAPPEDA and SEKBER will ensure that consultation will continue during the implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of compensation payment and resettlement to achieve that the living conditions of the PAPs are enhanced or at least restored. 205 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS This framework recognises the complex nature of land governance in Indonesia and the fact that the management of resettlement and access restrictions risks require multi-sectoral coordination and consensus. As such the RPF and PF has been produced to outline necessary measures at the Program level, including institutional arrangements and roles and responsibilities to manage any potential displacement impacts arising from the J-SLMP implementation. Implementation of this framework will be retained within the Provincial Secretary (SEKDA) as the executing agency at the Provincial Level under coordination from BAPPEDA with relevant implementing agencies at both provincial and district levels. Oversight of resettlement and access restriction risks including implementation of processes as guided by this RPF and PF will be facilitated by the district and provincial safeguards committee and provincial environmental and social safeguards specialists. Implementation Arrangements at National Level At the central level, the implementation arrangement related to RPF and PF is managed under Director General for Climate Change (DGCC). The Directorate will coordinate the preparation of the RPF document the relevant stakeholder including P3SEKPI. DGCC will coordinate with Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs as a Leading Sector of the Inventory and Verification Team and other members to conduct the inventory and verification of occupied forest area and implementation of RPF and PF. Close coordination between DGCC with the Ministry of Agrarian and Spatial/ National Land Agency will be conducted on inventory and implementation of RPF and PF outside of Forest Estate. The Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs Finance (CMEA), as head of the team, will set up acceleration team for inventory and verification team of occupied Forest area which are consist of (1) Ministry of Environment and Forestry; (2) Ministry o Agrarian and Spatial; (3) Ministry of Internal Affairs; (4) Secretary of Cabinet; and (5) Head of Presidential Staff. The acceleration team will assist the implementation team, that will be led by Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs Finance (CMEA) and 12 members comes from related ministerial and two secretaries, to implement the dispute settlement within occupied Forest area. Table 35 presents the national stakeholders involve in the RPF and PF Implementation formally designate by the regulation. 206 Table 35 National Agencies for RPF and PF Implementation NATIONAL AGENCY STATUS ROLES RPF and PF Within Forest area Acceleration Team for Inventory and Verification of Occupied Forest area Director General Climate Change (MoEF) National Focal Point of ▪ Management of the National Registry; REDD+ ▪ Development and management of the FREL; And Executing Agency ▪ Management of the MMR; ▪ Finalization and implementation of safeguards plans; ▪ Finalization and implementation of the FGRM; ▪ Technical Assistance; ▪ Recommendation for Payment (BSM); ▪ A member of Steering Committee; Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs Head of team ▪ Leading the acceleration team on inventory and verification of occupied Forest area; ▪ Socialisation and coordination of implementation of dispute settlement; ▪ Designate of steps and policy to resolve the problem appeal; ▪ Designate the numbers of area; ▪ Designate the resettlement mechanism; ▪ Conduct monitoring, controlling and facilitate the budget of dispute settlement. Ministry of Environment and Forestry Member ▪ Member of acceleration team Ministry of Agrarian and Spatial/ National Land Agency Member ▪ Member of acceleration team Secretary of Cabinet Member ▪ Member of acceleration team Head of Presidential Staff Member ▪ Member of acceleration team Head of FORDIA (MoEF)/P3SEKPI Technical Advisory ▪ Consultation for Methodologies (technical assistance); ▪ Preparation for agencies for field implementation; ▪ Consultation and Communication with Facility Management Team; 207 ▪ A member of Steering Committee. Implementation Team for Dispute settlement of Occupied Forest area Deputy for Coordination for Management of Energy, Natural Resources, Head of Team ▪ Conduct technical coordination implementation of dispute settlement of and the Environment, Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs Occupied Forest area; ▪ Develop strategy to resolve the problem; ▪ To monitor and control implementation of dispute settlement of Occupied Forest area; ▪ Develop and submit the recommendation to the acceleration team. Deputy for Coordinating the Acceleration of Infrastructure and Regional Vice Head of team ▪ Member of implementation team Development, Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs Director General of Forestry Planning and Environmental Management, Member ▪ Member of implementation team Ministry of Environment and Forestry Director General of Natural Resource Conservation and Ecosystems, Member ▪ Member of implementation team Ministry of Environment and Forestry Director General of Control of Watersheds and Protection Forests, Member ▪ Member of implementation team Ministry of Environment and Forestry Director General of Sustainable Production Forest Management, Ministry Member ▪ Member of implementation team of Environment and Forestry Director General of Law Enforcement, Ministry of Environment and Member ▪ Member of implementation team Forestry Director General of Spatial Planning, Ministry of Agrarian and Spatial Member ▪ Member of implementation team Planning/National Land Agency Director General of Regional Administration Development, Ministry of Member ▪ Member of implementation team Home Affairs Director General of Village Government Development, Ministry of Home Member ▪ Member of implementation team Affairs Deputy for Economic Affairs, Cabinet Secretariat Member ▪ Member of implementation team Deputy for Study and Management of Social Issues, Ecology and Member ▪ Member of implementation team Strategic Culture, Presidential Staff Office 208 Deputy for Thematic Geospatial Information, Geospatial Information Member ▪ Member of implementation team Agency Expert Staff for Economic and Maritime Relations, Coordinating Ministry Secretary ▪ Assist the head of team to implement the role; for Economic Affairs; Expert Staff in the Field of Economic and Political Relations, Law and Vice of Secretary ▪ Assist the head of team to implement the role; Security, Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs. RPF and PF Outside the Forest area Director General Climate Change (MoEF) National Focal Point of ▪ Management of the National Registry; REDD+ ▪ Development and management of the FREL; And Executing Agency ▪ Management of the MMR; ▪ Finalisation and implementation of safeguards plans ; ▪ Finalisation and implementation of the FGRM; ▪ Technical Assistance; ▪ Recommendation for Payment (BSM); ▪ A member of Steering Committee; Ministry of Agrarian and Spatial/ National Land Agency Authorised Institution ▪ Register, verify and formally designate the plot of land Ministry of Agriculture Authorised Institution ▪ Give license to the Plantation Head of FORDIA (MoEF)/P3SEKPI Technical Advisory ▪ Program design; ▪ Consultation for methodologies (technical assistance); ▪ Preparation for agencies for field implementation; ▪ Consultation and communication with facility management team; ▪ A member of Steering Committee. 209 Implementation Arrangements at Provincial Level At the provincial level, the responsible party for J-SLMP Program implementation is the Provincial Secretary (SEKDA), with the Provincial Environmental Agency ( Dinas Lingkungan Hidup) acting as coordinator or undertaking the day-to-day management of the J-SLMP Program. The Joint Secretariat for Forest Resource Management (SEKBER) will advise the SEKDA during the implementation of the ER Program. The SEKBER in Jambi Province is a key partner in the implementation of the J-SLMP Program. SEKBER is a multi-stakeholder organisation that has coordinated the planning and implementation of low emission development in Jambi Province. It has significant experience (as well as operational infrastructure) in the management of donor development funding. Dispute settlement under RPF and PF implementation in the provincial level needs to set up as mandate of regulation. The following is the stakeholder involved in the RPF and PF implementation at the provincial level. Table 36 Provincial Agencies for J-SLMP Implementation AGENCY STATUS ROLE ERP Team Joint Secretariat for Forest Advisory ▪ Providing advice and inputs to local government in relation to Resource Management J-SLMP; (SEKBER) ▪ A member of Steering Committee. Jambi Environment Implementing ▪ Local responsibility for FREL and MMR; Service (Dinas agency ▪ J-SLMP implementation. Lingkungan Hidup) Provincial Secretary Executing ▪ Responsible for implementation and achievement of J-SLMP (SEKDA) Agency at in the Province; Province Level ▪ A member of Steering Committee . Other Provincial Implementing ▪ J-SLMP implementation; Government Services Agencies ▪ Leading consultation processes within their respective (OPD) jurisdictions. Provincial Planning Board Coordinative ▪ Coordinate all activities done by OPD in relation to J-SLMP (BAPPEDA) Jambi implementation Province at provincial level Institutional Arrangement when RPF and PF within Forest area is Needed Forestry Agency Head of Team ▪ Conduct socialisation in district level; ▪ Accept the registration of inventory and verify; ▪ Collect field data; ▪ Conduct analysis: physical and juridical plot of land within forest area and environment; ▪ Develop recommendation and submit to the governors. Provincial Land Agency Secretary ▪ Assist head of team to conduct the role Spatial Planning at Vice of ▪ Assist head of team to conduct the role Provincial Level Secretary 210 Spatial Planning at District Member Member of the implementing team Level Provincial Environmental Member Member of the implementing team Agency BPKH Member Member of the implementing team Social Forestry and Member Member of the implementing team Environmental Partnership Office FMU Member Member of the implementing team District Land Agency Member Member of the implementing team Sub-district Head Member Member of the implementing team Village Head Member Member of the implementing team Institutional Arrangement when RPF and PF Outside Forest area is Needed Provincial Land Agency Authorised ▪ Register and license the plot of land Institution Provincial Plantation Authorised ▪ Monitor and controlling implementation of Palm Oil Agency Institution Plantation regarding plantation Sub-district Head Member Member of the implementing team Village Head Member Member of the implementing team Implementation Arrangements at District/City Level At the district/city level, the District Environmental Agency will carry out the J-SLMP Program. Each respective district/city government will be responsible for the implementation of the J-SLMP Program in its region. To ensure effective coordination among the various implementing agencies, a Steering Committee will be established to represent the interests of the relevant Ministries of the National Government and the Governor of Jambi. Other members of the Steering Committee will represent development partners and civil society. The District Environmental Agency will report to the Provincial Environmental Agency on J-SLMP implementation. The MoEF will chair this high-level committee (Directorates-General). The World Bank and selected partner agencies will be given an observer status. Steering Committee meetings will be held every six months to evaluate activities and progress. Technical coordination meetings will be held as required. District Environmental Agency will lead and managed the steering committee member in district and report periodically to Provincial Environmental Agency on J-SLMP implementation progress. Table 37 shows all stakeholders involved in the management of impacts related to resettlement and/or access restrictions at the district level. In the case of management of impacts resulting from involuntary resettlement and access restrictions within the forest area as a result of J-SLMP, FMU as an authorised institution will be involved to lead the implementation of RAPs and PoAs. However, if any involuntary resettlement and access restrictions occur outside the forest area as a result of the J-SLMP, District Land Agency will lead the process for dispute settlements in collaboration with the District Plantation Agency (if the land is in the plantation concession) and/or other agencies as relevant. 211 Table 37 District Level Stakeholders for the RPF and PF Implementation Agency Status Role Steering Committee ERP Developmental Agencies Partner ▪ Responsible for Implementation and achievement (Spatial Planning Agency, of J-SLMP at the district and field levels; NGO, Etc.) ▪ Host of J-SLMP at the district level; ▪ Socialize J-SLMP activities; ▪ Facilitate villagers to get information related to the project and eligibility. District Environmental Implementing ▪ Support and contribute to the project Agency Agency/Partner implementation; ▪ Leading sector to implement the project; ▪ Responsible to manage the project; ▪ Documented each part of project implementation process. District Secretary Executing Agency at District/City Level and Feld Site Focal Point Program Assistance ▪ Assist the implementing agency for the overall and community project implementation; engagement ▪ Liaising between the community and government agency; ▪ Recording and reporting the implementation of J- SLMP. FMU Authorised institution ▪ Take a lead to address any issues related to in forest management forest management (complaint, dispute, etc.); ▪ Manage the forest area under their respective jurisdictions; ▪ Monitor and control forest areas from encroachment; ▪ Boundary improvement; District Land Agency Authorised institution ▪ Take the lead to address any land issue outside to land management the forest areas; outside forest area ▪ Register, manage the land, certify and issue land use concessions (i.e., plantation). District Plantation Agency Authorised institution ▪ Take the lead to address any issue involving to monitor and plantation/ crop estates; ▪ Identify and monitor plantation activities; ▪ Provide technical recommendations to the District Heads on matters related to plantation activities. Sub-District Head administrator ▪ Facilitate village members to obtain information related to J-SLMP Village Head Administrator ▪ Facilitate respective constituents participate in J- SLMP activities; ▪ Contribute to J-SLMP implementation, i.e., use of village funds. 212 MONITORING AND EVALUATION Monitoring represents a continuous evaluation process of the J-SLMP implementation and responds to emerging risks considered under the RPF and PF. A functioning monitoring process provides concerned agencies with a feedback loop to address systematic issues as well as emerging risks during the J- SLMP implementation, and therefore the main principles of risk avoidance and minimisation through this RPF and PF can be achieved. Internal Monitoring The provincial and district-level risk monitoring developed and maintained by the safeguards committees and Provincial Environmental and Social Specialists at SEKDA. Regular monitoring will be carried out based on the risk monitoring established in the ESMF, in addition to regular safeguards monitoring reports generated by the Safeguards Information System (SIS) REDD+. Districts with high- risk profiles will receive further support and facilitation to address potential risks relevant to this framework. The safeguards committees at the district and provincial levels will liaise on a periodic basis (weekly) with the respective heads/coordinators at the national, provincial and district level agencies and provincial environmental and social specialists to provide the update if there are emerging risks. In the events that RAP and PoA are required, internal monitoring of the RAP and PoA implementation of the sub-projects remains the responsibility of the implementing agency, with oversight from the safeguards committees and provincial environmental and social specialists team with technical assistance from experts as needed. The implementation agency will monitor the progress of RAP and PoA preparation and implementation throughout the regular progress reports. Key indicators for internal monitoring include but not limited to: a. Compensation payment for affected households for the different types of damage pursuant to the compensation policies described in the resettlement plans; b. Implementation of technical assistance, relocation, allowance payment and relocation assistance; c. Implementation of income recovery and entitlement to recovery assistance; d. Dissemination of information and consultation procedures; e. Monitoring of complaint procedures, existing problems that require the manageable attention; f. Prioritisation of affected persons, particularly vulnerable groups and; g. Any emerging or reported grievances. The safeguards committees and provincial and social specialists will collect information every month from the implementing agencies if RAPs and/or PoAs are required. A database tracking the resettlement implementation of the Program will be maintained and updated monthly. The executive agencies will submit internal monitoring reports on the RAP and PoA implementation as a part of the quarterly report to be submitted to the SEKDA and World Bank. The reports should contain the following information: 213 a. Number of affected persons according to types of effect and program component and the status of compensation, relocation and income recovery for each item; b. The distributed costs for the activities or for compensation payment and disbursed costs for each activity; c. List of outstanding complaints; d. Final results on solving complaints and any outstanding issues that demand management agencies at all levels to solve; and e. Emerging issues in the implementation process. Independent monitoring The general objectives of independent monitoring are to periodically supply independent monitoring and assessing results on the implementation of the resettlement objectives, on the changes of living standard and jobs, PAPs’ income and livelihoods restoration, effectiveness, impacts and sustainability of PAPs’ entitlements, and on the necessity of mitigation measures (if any) in an attempt to bring about strategic lessons for future policy development and program planning. In the event that RAPs are required, SEKDA and/or MoEF will hire a team for an independent monitoring and evaluation of RAP implementation. This team will need to be equipped with expertise in social impact assessments, including resettlement, and has experience in independent monitoring of RAPs. This organisation should start their work as soon as the program implementation commences. The following indicators will be monitored and evaluated through independent monitoring, including but not limited to: a. Payment of compensation will be as follows: (a) Full payment to be made to all affected persons sufficiently before land acquisition; and (b) Adequacy of payment to replace affected assets; b. Provision of assistance for PAPs who have to rebuild their houses on their remaining land, or building their houses in new places as arranged by the project, or on newly assigned plots; c. Assistance for recovering livelihood/income sources; d. Community consultation and public dissemination of compensation policy: (a) PAPs should be fully informed and consulted about land acquisition, leasing and relocation activities; (b) The independent monitoring agency should attend at least one community consultation meeting to monitor community consultation procedures, problems and issues that arise during the meetings, and propose solutions; (c) Public awareness of the compensation policy and entitlements will be assessed among the PAPs; and (d) Assessment of awareness of various options available to PAPs as provided for in the RAP; e. Affected persons should be monitored regarding restoration of productive activities; f. PAPs’ satisfaction on various aspects of the RAP will be monitoring and recorded. Operation of the complaint mechanism and speed of complaint settlement will be monitored; and 214 g. Through the implementation, trends on living standards will be observed and surveyed. Any potential issues in the recovering living standards are reported and suitable measures will be proposed to ensure the program objectives are met. Methodology for independent monitoring Database Storage The independent monitoring organisation will maintain a database of resettlement monitoring information. It will contain files on results of independent monitoring, HH monitored and will be updated based on information collected in successive rounds of data collection. All databases compiled by the SEKDA will be fully accessible by the independent monitoring organisation. Reports The independent monitoring organisation must submit periodical reports every six months about the findings in the monitoring process. This monitoring report will be submitted to the SEKDA, and then the SEKDA will submit to the World Bank in the form of appendixes of the progress report. The report should contain: (i) A report on the progress of RAP implementation; (ii) Deviations, if any, from the provisions and principles of the RAP; (iii) Identification of outstanding issues and recommended solutions so that the executive agencies are informed about the ongoing situation and can resolve problems in a timely manner; and (iv) A report on progress of the follow-up of problems and issues identified in the previous report. Follow-Up Monitoring Report The monitoring reports will be discussed in a meeting between the independent monitoring organisation and SEKDA. SEKDA will hold meetings immediately after receiving the report. Necessary follow-up activities will be carried out based on the problems and issues identified in the reports and follow-up discussions. Ex-Post Evaluation Report This is the evaluation at a given point of time of the impact of resettlement completion to assess whether the RAPs achieved their stated objectives. The independent monitoring organisation will conduct an evaluation of the resettlement process and impacts for six to 12 months after the completion of all resettlement activities. The survey questionnaires for evaluation are used based on the database in the program database system and the questions used in the monitoring activities. Ultimately, a summary of ex-post resettlement evaluation included in a Project Completion Report (PCR) will be prepared before closure of J-SLMP. The evaluation covers program impacts (number of affected households, scope of land acquired by subproject, compensation paid to PAPs, any pending issues resulting from land acquisition and provides information if the PAP's livelihood is restored, or at least maintain to pre-project implementation. Resettlement Action Plan cannot be considered complete until an ex-post evaluation and a program completion audit confirm that all the affected HHs have received fully all compensation, assistance and life restoration processes as planned. 215 APPENDICES 216 Appendix A1 Screening Checklist Examples 217 J-SLMP Sub-Project Involuntary Resettlement and Access Restriction Screening Checklist J-SLMP Sub-project Involuntary Resettlement and Access Restriction Screening Checklist Sub-project name: District: Village: Brief description of Site and Proposed Activities of the Sub-project: Potential Risks and Impacts of Involuntary Resettlement and Access Restriction (Please tick mark √) Issues Yes No Unknown Remarks I. Involuntary Land Acquisition (If YES is ticked in answer to any question below, the subproject is required to prepare Resettlement Action Plan) 1. Does the sub-project require land acquisition? 2. Is the ownership status of the proposed land to be acquired known? 3. Will there be loss of building and/or structures due to the land acquisition? 4. Will there be loss of agricultural such as crops, trees and/or other productive assets due to the land acquisition? 5. Will there be loss of businesses or enterprise due to the land acquisition? 6. Will there be loss of income sources and means of livelihoods due to the land acquisition? II. Access Restriction (If YES is ticked in answer to any question below, the sub-project is required to prepare Plan of Action) 1. Will the affected people lose access to the usual forest area due to implementation of the sub-project? 2. Will the access to the proposed location of the sub-project be restricted? 3. Is there any land use change in the proposed sub-project location that negatively affecting the surrounding communities? Information on Vulnerable Peoples: 1. Are there any of the affected people categorised as vulnerable i.e., poor, female-headed households and/or vulnerable to poverty risks? 2. Are there any of the affected persons categorised as indigenous peoples? Document/Plan Requirements Based on the potential risks and impacts identification process, the sub-project will prepare the following documents (please tick the applicable option): [ ] Resettlement Action Plan [ ] Plan of Action [ ] No document is required The Screening document is prepared by: Approved by: Name: Name: Position: Position: Institution: Institution: 218 Appendix A2 Suggested Outline of a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) 219 Suggested Outline of a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) This template is extracted from OP 4.12 Annex A which can also be found on the Bank’s website at www.worldbank.org. The scope and level of detail of the resettlement plan vary with magnitude and complexity of resettlement. The plan is based on up-to-date and reliable information about (a) The proposed resettlement and its impacts on displaced persons and other adversely affected groups; and (b) The legal issues involved in resettlement. The resettlement plan covers elements, as relevant. When any element is not relevant to project circumstances, it should be noted in the resettlement plan. Description of the sub-project: General description of the sub project and identification of sub-project area. Potential Impacts: Identification of (a) The sub project component or activities that give rise to resettlement; (b) The zone of impact of such component or activities; (c) The alternatives considered to avoid or minimise resettlement; and (d) The mechanisms established to minimise resettlement, to the extent possible, during project implementation. Objectives: The main objectives of the resettlement program. Socio-economic studies: The findings of socio-economic studies to be conducted in the early stages of project preparation and with the involvement of potentially displaced people, including; (a) The results of a census survey covering; • Current occupants of the affected area to establish a basis for design of the resettlement program and to exclude subsequent inflows of people from eligibility for compensation and resettlement assistance; • Standard characteristics of displaced households, including a description of production systems, labour and household organisation; and baseline information on livelihoods (including, as relevant, production levels and income derived from both formal and informal economic activities) and standards of living (including health status) of the displaced population; • The magnitude of the expected loss, total or partial, of assets, and the extent of displacement, physical or economic; • Information on vulnerable groups or persons, for whom special provisions may have to be made; and • Provisions to update information on the displaced people’s livelihoods and standards of living at regular intervals so that the latest information is available at the time of their displacement. (b) Other studies describing the following; • Land tenure and transfer systems, including an inventory of common property natural resources from which people derive their livelihoods and sustenance, non-title-based usufruct systems (including fishing, grazing, or use of forest areas) governed by local recognised land allocation mechanisms, and any issues raised by different tenure systems in the sub project area; 220 • The patterns of social interaction in the affected communities, including social support systems, and how they will be affected by the sub project; • Public infrastructure and social services that will be affected; and • Social and cultural characteristics of displaced communities, including a description of formal and informal institutions (e.g., community organisations, ritual groups, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that may be relevant to the consultation strategy and to designing and implementing the resettlement activities. Legal Framework: The findings of an analysis of the legal framework covering: (a) The scope of the power of eminent domain and the nature of compensation associated with it, in terms of both the valuation methodology and the timing of payment; (b) The applicable legal and administrative procedures, including a description of the remedies available to displaced persons in the judicial process and the normal timeframe for such procedures, and any available alternative dispute resolution mechanisms that may be relevant to resettlement under the sub project; (c) Relevant law (including customary and traditional law) governing land tenure, valuation of assets and losses, compensation, and natural resource usage rights, customary personal law related to displacement, and environmental laws and social welfare legislation; (d) Laws and regulations relating to the agencies responsible for implementing resettlement activities; (e) Gaps, if any, between local laws covering eminent domain and resettlement and the Bank’s resettlement policy, and the mechanisms to bridge such gaps; and (f) Any legal steps necessary to ensure the effective implementation of resettlement activities under the project, including, as appropriate, a process for recognising claims to legal rights to land, including claims that derive from customary and traditional usage. Institutional Framework: The findings of any analysis of the institutional framework covering; (a) The identification of agencies responsible for resettlement activities and NGOs that may have a role in project implementation; (b) An assessment of the institutional capacity of such agencies and NGOs; and (c) Any steps that are proposed to enhance the institutional capacity of agencies and NGOs responsible for resettlement implementation. Eligibility: Definition of displaced persons and criteria for determining their eligibility for compensation and other resettlement assistance, including relevant cut-off dates. Valuation of and compensation for losses: The methodology to be used in valuing losses to determine their replacement cost; and a description of the proposed types and levels of compensation under local law and such supplementary measures as are necessary to achieve replacement cost for lost assets. Resettlement Measures: A description of the packages of compensation and other resettlement measures that will assist each category of eligible displaced persons to achieve the objectives of OP 4.12. In addition to being technically and economically feasible, the resettlement packages should be 221 compatible with the cultural preferences of the displaced persons and prepared in consultation with them. Site selection, site preparation and relocation: Alternative relocation sites considered and explanation of those selected, covering: (a) Institutional and technical arrangements for identifying and preparing relocation sites, whether rural or urban, for which a combination of productive potential, local advantages and other factors is at least comparable to the advantages of the old sites, with an estimate of the time needed to acquire and transfer land and ancillary resources; (b) Any measures necessary to prevent land speculation or influx of eligible persons at the selected sites; (c) Procedure for physical relocation under the project, including timetables for site preparation and transfer; and (d) Legal arrangements for regularizing tenure and transferring titles to resettlers. Housing, infrastructure and social services: Plans to provide (or to finance resettler’s provision of) housing, infrastructure (e.g., water supply, feeder roads), and social services to host populations; any necessary site development, engineering, and architectural designs for these facilities. Environmental protection and management. A description of the boundaries of the relocation area; and an assessment of the environmental impacts of the proposed resettlement and measures to mitigate and manage these impacts (coordinated as appropriate with the environmental assessment of the main investment requiring the resettlement). Community Participation: A description of the strategy for consultation with and participation of resettlers and host communities, including: (a) A description of the strategy for consultation with and participation of resettlers and hosts in the design and implementation of resettlement activities; (b) A summary of the views expressed an how these views were taken into account in preparing the resettlement plan; (c) A review of the resettlement alternatives presented and the choices made by displaced persons regarding options available to them, including choices related to forms of compensation and resettlement assistance, to relocating as individual families or as parts of pre-existing communities or kinship groups, to sustaining existing patterns of group organisation, and to retaining access to cultural property (e.g., places of worship, pilgrimage centres, cemeteries); and (d) Institutionalised arrangements by arrangements by which displaced people can communicate their concerns to project authorities throughout planning and implementation, and measures to ensure that such vulnerable groups as vulnerable and marginalized groups, ethnic minorities, landless, and women are adequately represented. Integration with host populations: Measures to mitigate the impact of resettlement on any host communities, including, (a) Consultations with host communities and local governments; (b) Arrangements for prompt tendering of any payment due the hosts for land or other assets provided to resettlers; 222 (c) Arrangements for addressing any conflict that may arise between resettlers and host communities; and (d) Any measures necessary to augment services (e.g., education, water, health, and production services) in host communities to make them at least comparable to services available to resettlers. Grievance procedures: Affordable and accessible procedures for third-party settlement of disputes arising from resettlement, such grievance mechanisms should take into account the availability of judicial recourse and community and traditional dispute settlement mechanisms. Organisational responsibilities: The organisational framework for implementing resettlement, including identification of agencies responsible for delivery or resettlement measures and provision of services; arrangements to ensure appropriate coordination between agencies and jurisdictions involved in implementation; and any measures (including technical assistance) needed to strengthen the implementing agencies capacity to design and carry out resettlement activities; provisions for the transfer to local authorities or resettlers themselves of responsibility for managing facilities and services provided under the project and for transferring other such responsibilities from the resettlement implementing agencies, when appropriate. Implementation Schedule: An implementation schedule covering all resettlement activities from preparation through implementation, including target dates for the achievement of expected benefits to resettlers and hosts and terminating the various forms of assistance. The schedule should indicate how the resettlement activities are linked to the implementation of the overall project. Costs and budget: Tables showing itemised cost estimates for all resettlement activities, including allowances for inflation, population growth and other contingencies; timetable for expenditures; sources of funds; and arrangements for timely flow of funds, and funding for resettlement, if any, in areas outside the jurisdiction of the implementing agencies. Monitoring and evaluation: Arrangements for monitoring of resettlement activities by the implementing agency, supplemented by independent monitors as considered appropriate by the Bank, to ensure complete and objective information; performance monitoring indicators to measure inputs, outputs, and outcomes for resettlement activities; involvement of the displaced persons in the monitoring process; evaluation of the impact of resettlement for a reasonable period after all resettlement and related development activities have been completed; using the results of resettlement monitoring to guide subsequent implementation. 223 Appendix A3 Eligibility Criteria for Various Forms of Losses 224 ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR VARIOUS CATEGORIES OF AFFECTED PEOPLE This appendix sets out eligibility criteria, which are necessary to determine who will be eligible for resettlement and benefits, and to discourage inflow of ineligible people. A. PRINCIPLES The involuntary taking of land results in: relocation or loss of shelter; and loss of assets or access to assets or loss of income sources or means of livelihood, whether or not the PAPs must move to another location or not. Therefore, meaningful consultations with the affected persons (directly and through representatives), local authorities and community representatives and their leaders will be undertaken prior to any activities which cause such involuntary taking of land. Such consultations will establish the criteria by which displaced persons will be deemed eligible for compensation and other resettlement assistance to restore livelihoods. OP 4.12 suggests the following three criteria for eligibility: (a) Those who have formal rights to land (including customary/communal land, traditional and religious rights, recognised under Indonesian Law); (b) Those who do not have formal legal rights to land at the time the census begins but have a claim to such land or assets provided that such claims are recognised under the national and local laws or become recognised through a process identified in the resettlement plan; (c) Those who have no recognisable legal right or claim to the land they are occupying, using or getting their livelihood from, but are recognised under the World Bank’s OP 4.12. Those covered under (a) and (b) above are to be provided compensation for the land they lose, and other assistance in accordance with this RPF. Persons covered under (c) above are to be provided with resettlement assistance in lieu of compensation for the land they occupy, and other assistance, as necessary, to achieve the objectives set out in this RPF and PF. All persons included in (a), (b) or (c) above are to be provided with compensation for loss of assets on the affected land regardless of ownership status. The project will also seek to support livelihoods restoration of these PAPs through the social forestry initiatives and other schemes (i.e., provision of technical support for skills development, access to markets, etc.). Such categorization will be established through a baseline census in the event that relocation is envisaged. This census represents the cut-off date under the RPF. Persons who encroach on the area after the cut-off date will not be entitled to compensation or any other form of resettlement assistance. Due diligence will be undertaken prior to commencement of activities which lead to resettlement and/or render occupation of the land concerned cease to exist. Therefore, it is clear that all project affected persons irrespective of their status or whether they have formal titles, legal rights or not, squatters or otherwise encroaching illegally on land, are eligible for resettlement assistance in the event such occupation takes place prior to the entitlement cut-off date. B. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA PAPs may be classified in one of the three groups as above. The process will involve review of tenure documents owned by occupants, interviews with households and groups in the affected area. PAPs covered in (a) and (b) are provided compensation for the land they lose, and other assistance ensuring that they are: ▪ Informed about their options and rights pertaining to resettlement; 225 ▪ Consulted on, or offered choices among and provided with technically and economically feasible resettlement; and ▪ Provided prompt and effective compensation at full replacement cost for losses of assets attributable directly to the project. Land for land compensation will be applied to PAPs who lose their land to the extent such options are technically feasible. All PAPs irrespective of their status or whether they have formal titles, legal rights or not, squatters or otherwise encroaching illegally on land, will be eligible for livelihoods restoration support, including transitional support prior to relocation. The RPF also covers collective land claims by community groups or other groups who by association hold collective land holding, use and/or claims. These include communities (on communal lands) such as Indigenous Peoples and/or Adat Communities who may permanently lose land and/or access to assets and/or resources. Compensation arrangements for such collective claims will be based on consensus with these groups based on consultations with affected individuals. Table 9 outlines an entitlement matrix for each category of PAPs: Table 38 Entitlement and Compensation Matrix DEFINITION OF TYPE OF LOSS APPLICATION AFFECTED ENTITLEMENT HOUSEHOLDS Agricultural land Land on the selected Titleholders Preference land for land site for the project or Project Affected People compensation. changes in agricultural (PAPs) with traditional Compensation at replacement commodities or land land rights costs and other assistance to uses for the purpose of support livelihoods restoration conservation. to pre-project level of social and economic status of PAPs. If no land taking is involved, technical support for alternative agricultural commodities. Land users with no Agricultural cultivation permits recognisable land rights in alternative locations i.e., social forestry schemes. Assistance to support livelihoods restoration to pre- project level of social and economic status of PAPs. If no land taking is involved, technical support for alternative agricultural commodities. Commercial land Land on the selected Titleholders Compensation at replacement site for the project PAPs with traditional land costs, including assets on the rights affected land, including trees and structures. 226 DEFINITION OF TYPE OF LOSS APPLICATION AFFECTED ENTITLEMENT HOUSEHOLDS Land users with no Compensation of assets on recognisable rights the affected land, including trees and structures. Tenant/loss of access Land on the selected Tenants/sharecroppers/ Subsistence allowance by share croppers/ site for the project or leaseholders proportional to temporary leaseholders changes in agricultural income losses (three harvest commodities or land cycles). uses for the purpose of Facilitation to identify conservation. alternative suitable land. 60 days of notice for agricultural lands to harvest standing crops. If notice cannot be given, compensation for share of crops will be provided. Additional assistance for vulnerable households. Income from land Households affected by Individuals affected as a Subsistence allowance through wages and the project result of (traditional proportional to temporary loss of occupation users) income losses (up to six months). Loss of crops and trees Standing crops, trees, Owner/sharecropper/ Compensation at replacement on the project site Tenants affected costs Loss of Common CPR affected by the Affected Community Preference for land for land Property Resources Project and if not viable, (CPR) compensation at cost and assistance for reconstruction. C. METHODS OF VALUING AFFECTED ASSETS VALUATION OF LAND USED BY THE PUBLIC In cases where the land is being used by the public (for instance, for grazing, settling or otherwise), the Proponent will, in consultation with the land administration agency, relevant government departments, community representatives, and/or customary leaders if the land is under customary land rights, to identify suitable replacement land. Although sub-project locations have not been identified, the project in principle will ensure that the following principles are adhered to by the agencies implementing the project activities: ▪ The project will compensate for assets and investments (including labour, crops, buildings and other improvements) according to the provisions of the resettlement plan. ▪ Eligibility for compensation will not be valid for new persons occupying/using the project sites after the cut-off date, in accordance with this policy. 227 ▪ Compensation cost values will be based on replacement costs as above, as of the date that the replacement is to be provided or at the date of project identification, whichever is higher. ▪ The market prices for cash crops will have to be determined based on the values as determined by the Ministry of Agriculture or Provincial and/or District Agricultural Offices as relevant. ▪ PAPs who lose farmland allotted by the village under customary tenure will be provided a land plot equivalent to the land affected in terms of size and productivity. However, since the bank policy OP4.12 on resettlement makes no distinction between statute and customary rights, PAPs will be compensated for land, assets and investments including loss of access, at replacement costs. The project seeks to avoid land taking and/or resettlement to the extent possible. However, if there is a need for small-scale physical activities, such as nursery, or establishment of post-harvest processing facilities, implementation of such activities will be prioritised in government land and/or village land where available. Such land use arrangements will be implemented through the following mechanisms: • Village owned land: Land utilisation will be determined by village governments with certain conditions (size of land, form and period of utilisation) to be mutually agreed with village constituents through consultative processes. • Customary land: land utilisation will be determined by customary leaders and/or legitimate community representatives with certain conditions (size of land, form and period of utilisation) to be mutually agreed through consultative processes with land owning communities. If no such land is available, voluntary individual land donation may be sought after. Procedure for such land donation is provided in Appendix A.4. CALCULATION FOR COMPENSATION PAYMENTS AND RELATED CONSIDERATIONS In terms of acceptable forms of compensation, preference should be given to land-based resettlement strategies for displaced persons whose livelihoods are land-based. These strategies may include resettlement on public land or on private land acquired or purchased for resettlement. Whenever replacement land is offered, PAPs are provided with land for which a combination of productive potential, locational advantages, and other factors is at least equivalent to the advantages of the land taken. If land is not the preferred option of the displaced persons, the provision of land would adversely affect the sustainability of a park or protected area or sufficient land is not available at a reasonable price, non-land-based options built around opportunities for employment or self-employment should be provided in addition to cash compensation for land and other assets lost. The lack of adequate land must be demonstrated and documented to the satisfaction of the World Bank. Payment of cash compensation for lost assets may be appropriate where (a) Livelihoods are land-based but the land taken for the project is a small fraction of the affected asset and the residual is economically viable; (b) Active markets for land, housing and labour exist, displaced persons use such markets, and there is sufficient supply of land and housing; or (c) Livelihoods are not land-based. Cash compensation levels should be sufficient to replace the lost land and other assets at full replacement cost in local markets. Replacement cost is defined as a method of valuation yielding compensation sufficient to replace assets, plus necessary transaction costs associated with asset replacement. Where functioning 228 markets exist, replacement cost is the market value as established through independent and competent real estate valuation, plus transaction costs. Where functioning markets do not exist, replacement cost may be determined through alternative means, such as calculation of output value for land or productive assets, or the undepreciated value of replacement material and labour for construction of structures or other fixed assets, plus transaction costs. In all instances where physical displacement results in loss of shelter, replacement cost must at least be sufficient to enable purchase or construction of housing that meets acceptable minimum community standards of quality and safety. The valuation method for determining replacement cost should be documented and included in relevant resettlement planning documents. Transaction costs include administrative charges, registration or title fees, reasonable moving expenses, and any similar costs imposed on affected persons. To ensure compensation at replacement cost, planned compensation rates may require updating in project areas where inflation is high or the period of time between calculation of compensation rates and delivery of compensation is extensive. Individual and household compensation will be made in-kind and/or in cash (refer to Table 10). Table 39 Forms of Compensation FORM COMPENSATION DESCRIPTION Cash payments Compensation will be calculated and paid in local currency. Rates will be adjusted for inflation. In-kind compensation Compensation may include items such as land, houses or other infrastructure building materials, seedlings, agricultural inputs and financial credits, equipment. Assistance Assistance may include moving allowance, transportation and labour, administration fees or other related costs. Cash payments will need to factor into inflation and personal safety and/or security of PAPs. Such security considerations include ensuring that individuals receiving compensation cash are fully protected. For this reason, Bank transfer is preferred. In the event that such options are not available, alternative safe arrangements will need to be considered in resettlement planning. LAND MEASUREMENT The unit of measurement for land will need to be understood and agreed by the affected persons. Hence, if traditional units of measurement exist in rural areas, such units will be used and/or used as a reference where technically feasible. If a traditional unit of measurement does not exist, it is recommended that land should be measured in meters or any other internationally accepted unit of measurement. In such cases, the unit adopted must be explained to the affected persons. The unit of measurement must be easily related to recognisable land features that the communities are familiar with, such as relative location of trees, stumps and other fixed features on the sites. Understanding the unit of measurement ensures that the affected person is able to verify his/her own size of land that is being lost. This maintains transparency in the process and avoids subsequent accusations for wrong measurements or miscalculation of land areas. 229 DETERMINATION OF CROP COMPENSATION RATES Both cash and consumption crops are valued at the market price mid-way between harvest peaks. Prevailing prices for cash crops will have to be determined with the assistance from each country’s respective agency. Rate schedules must be verified for accuracy. Each type of crops will be compensated on the basis of agreed rates. COMPENSATION RATES FOR LABOR The value of labour invested in preparing agricultural land will be compensated on the basis of average wage in the community for the same period of time. The labour cost for preparing replacement land is based on the costs for land clearing and development, such as ploughing. Labour costs will be paid in IDR (rupiah). The rate used for land compensation is to be updated to reflect labour values at the time compensation is paid. COMPENSATION FOR BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES Building and structures will be compensated at replacement costs, including the costs for construction materials, labour and transitional costs before PAPs can move or use the new structures or buildings. Compensation value for affected building or structure will be on top of the affected land and no depreciation will be factored into the final calculation. The pricing of construction materials will be based on the construction standards issued by the Ministry of Public Works and Housing or alternative pricing reference whichever is higher. Replacement values will be based on: ▪ Types of building and structures, functions and supporting structures/facilities; ▪ Average replacement costs for different types of buildings and structures based on information on the quantity and type of materials used for construction (e.g., bricks, rafters, bundles of straw, doors, etc.). The list of prices for these items may be based on prevailing market prices and/or based on the construction pricing standards issued by the Ministry of Public Works and Housing; ▪ Costs for transportation and delivery of these items to the acquired/replacement land or building site; ▪ Estimates of labour costs required. COMPENSATION FOR SACRED SITES Compensation for sacred sites is determined through negotiation with the affected communities and their leaders and representatives. Sacred sites include but are not restricted to: Altars, ritual sites, sacred trees, tombs and cemeteries. The project seeks to avoid adverse impacts on these sites and alternative measures or engineering design will be pursued. COMPENSATION FOR HORTICULTURAL, FLORICULTURAL AND FRUIT TREES Trees owned by communities may serve the following functions: ▪ Subsistence food for families; ▪ Sources for cash (i.e. timber and non-timber); ▪ Rituals; 230 ▪ Shade (in the case of cashew, mango and some coconut trees); ▪ Traditional medicine. Given their significance to the local subsistence economy, fruit trees will be compensated based on replacement costs. Fruit crop compensation or valuable commodities such as coffee, rubber, etc. will be the value of lost production up to their estimated replacement production. Valuation of such replacement costs will be based on the standards issued by the Ministry of Agriculture, and/or Provincial and/or District Agricultural Offices where relevant. Preference will be given to replacement of affected trees with new seedlings and agricultural inputs unless PAPs request otherwise. The compensation value will be adjusted for inflation and the following approaches will be adopted: ▪ Compensation for loss of income from subsistence fruit trees (e.g., coconut, cashew, guava or mango) based on production yields. Cash payments to farmers will be aimed at replacing income derived from the sale of excess fruit production until replacement trees produce the equivalent (or more) in projected cash income; ▪ Provide subsistence farmers with new tree seedlings to replace the affected trees to sustain future sources of income and food from the fruits; ▪ Provide farmers with the opportunity to derive alternative income from trees bearing more valuable fruits at off-season periods. 231 ______________________________ Appendix A4 Procedure for Voluntary Land Donation 232 PROCEDURE FOR VOLUNTARY LAND DONATION Voluntary donation of a land for a subproject means there is a transfer of ownership rights from the land donor(s) to sub-project proponent (beneficiaries, community group, local government, or others, depending on the agreement between the land donor and the project). Voluntary in this context will mean the donation or granting of land and other assets with the full knowledge of the purposes for which the asset is being made available and the economic, social and legal consequences that such an act would have on the person providing the asset and which act is exercised freely and voluntarily, without any type of cohesion. Land acquired by voluntary donation should be supported by a written agreement by the landowner, witnessed by neighbours or community representatives. Voluntary land donation for a subproject will be an acceptable option if: • The land donor receives direct benefit from the subproject and will not be worse-off after the land taking; • Land donor has been informed clearly of their right on compensation at a public meeting prior to the decision on contributing the land voluntarily, but nevertheless he or she is still willing to donate his/her land without any pressure; • There is option to adjust the subproject design or location in the case that land owners refuse to donate their land; • The land is identified by beneficiary communities and confirmed by technical staff to be suitable for the subproject and free from any environmental or health risks; • The impacts on the land owners are insignificant and do not result in displacement of households, or cause loss of households’ incomes and livelihoods. The size of the donated land cannot exceed 10 percent of the overall land holding; • The donated land is free from any dispute on ownership or any other encumbrances; • Consultations with the land donors or beneficiaries are conducted in a well-informed, free and transparent manner in the presence of community leader and facilitators, and they are willing to donate land without pressure; • Land donors have the right to refuse to donate their land and therefore there should be alternative sites for a subproject; and • Spouses (husband or wife) and heirs (children or other entitled parties) will have to demonstrate agreements for land donation. Procedures and requirements of VLD The process of obtaining land through voluntary land contribution requires the implementing agency to conduct field verification and ensure that: • Land donors have voluntarily agreed to donate his/her/their land for the proposed subproject. They also need to ensure that decision on land contribution was made through participatory mechanisms; 233 • The proposal includes a statement letter signed by the community member(s) who donate the land and witnessed by the chairperson of the community (“ kepala dusun/RT/RW�) or head of wards/village and signed by heirs and other witnesses. The letter contains, among others, name and address of land contributor(s); current use, location and size of the donated land; the purpose of land donation; map of the location of the land; specification whether part of the land rights is donated, or permit for use or permit for passage; once a subproject proposal is approved by the facilitator, the land owner who contributes the land identifies on the ground the donated land and site where to build the facility; • There is a clear information to whom the land is donated, and the project should follow-up on the legal process of the status of the donated land as necessary; if part of the land rights is donated to the village or government, the project should facilitate the follow-up of the legal processing of the status of the donated land; if the land is donated to the community, the facilitator should consult with the village administration on how to record this to ensure that the donated land has a legal status; • Processes and results of consultation meetings, grievances and actions taken to address such grievances should be properly documented; • Donated land should be well recorded and documented in the project document (in the subproject proposal and/or in the site development plan); • The originals of the donation letter should be kept both by the project (in the sub-project proposal and/or in the site development plan) and by the land donor. Key information that should be included in the Donation Letter is listed below: a. Name of subproject proponent/implementing agencies; b. Brief description of subproject acquiring land; c. Size, existing use and location (with map or sketch) of donated land: d. Name and identity of land donor(s); e. Date of the donation; f. Map/sketch of the donated land; g. Type of use (for the sub-project) of the donated land; h. Statement to voluntarily donate the land by the land owner; i. Date and signing of the letter: (by the subproject proponent (or authorised representatives in the case of community group) who receive the donated land; land donor; head of village, inherits of the land donor, and witnesses (at least three people). The land donor should put his/her signature on a legal stamp (meterai). j. Attachment of: o Minutes of consultations; o Attendance list; o Any legal proof of land ownership (if applicable). 234 ANNEX 10. PHYSICAL CULTURAL RESOURCES – CHANCE FIND FRAMEWORK (PCR-CFP) 10.0 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND J-SLMP’s proposed development objective is to improve sustainable landscape management that reduces land-based GHG emissions in Jambi. The achievement of this objective will be measured through the following indicators: a) Land area under sustainable forest management and/or restoration practices (ha); b) GHG Emission reductions in Jambi (MtCO2e) and c) number of people reached with benefits (assets and/or services) (percent women). Under this pre-investment grant, technical assistance will be provided to support pilot testing of targeted initiatives towards emission reduction and ERP design. Institutional capacity building will focus on systems strengthening to build government capacity to access and utilize performance-based incentives for reduced deforestation, degradation and land use change, including safeguards. As such, the program will support analytics, capacity building, design of subprograms to test different incentives models and stakeholder engagement. Key analytical areas include land and resource tenure, understanding local drivers of deforestation and how best to address them, and legal, institutional and policy analysis and stakeholder assessments. As part of J-SLMP environmental and social management, a Physical Cultural Resources and Chance Finds Procedure (PCR-CFP) has been prepared as a pre-cautionary measure in the event such PCRs are affected by project activities (i.e., eco-tourism activities). This framework establishes key principles and good practices for the management of PCRs in consultation with affected communities. OBJECTIVE The preparation of the PCR-CFP aims to: ▪ Protect physical cultural resources from the adverse impact(s) of the Project and support preservation; and ▪ Promote fair sharing of benefits from the use of Physical Cultural Resources (PCR). LEGAL FRAMEWORK The PCR-CFP refers to several regulations, international best practices, and internal guidelines of the Company, including: ▪ Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 32/2009 concerning Environment Protection and Management; ▪ Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 11/2010 concerning Cultural Conservation; ▪ Government Regulation No. 27/2012 concerning Environmental Permit; 235 ▪ Regulation of the Minister of Environment and Forestry No. 17/2012 concerning Guidelines for Community Involvement in the Process of Environmental Impact Analysis and Environmental Permit; ▪ IFC Performance Standards; ▪ The World Bank Safeguard Policies; ▪ Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) Guidelines; ▪ Good Corporate Governance Guidelines; ▪ Code of Conduct; ▪ Risk Management Guidelines; ▪ Company’s Policy Preparation Guidelines; 236 PHYSICAL CULTURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES, ETHICS AND RISKS The Physical Cultural Resources Management Plan (PCRMP) refers to the applicable principles, including: ▪ Prudent so that the risk of damage can be assessed, measured, monitored and controlled, and adequately mitigated; ▪ Participatory involvement of local communities by providing input, suggestions and opinions in managing physical cultural resources; ▪ Collaboration with the authorised agency becomes an obligation to ensure that the physical cultural resources get proper management; ▪ Professionalism in conducting mitigation measures to reduce larger risk to physical cultural resources through the implementation of International Best Practice in each project site; ▪ Fairness for all stakeholders in utilizing the findings of physical cultural resources at the project site; ▪ Transparent and accountable in managing the benefits of physical cultural resources that is fair to all parties and as an effort to comply with good governance; and ▪ Sustainability by ensuring that the physical cultural resources shall be managed well for the future generation. RISK MANAGEMENT ANd Internal CONTROL The implementation of the PCRM is inseparable from the presence of risk, and as such, the implementer needs to manage risks that are likely to occur and take mitigation actions against the various types of risks, namely: 1. Technical Risk This risk is usually caused by lack of technical capacity of the implementer in technical management or caused by human error that can lead to the negative impact on physical cultural resources, such as damage, destruction, etc. To mitigate the technical risk, the implementer of PCRM need to get proper training, or capacity building on a regular basis in rotation so that they can easily understand and comply with the procedures. 2. Procedural Risk This risk arises due to ignorance of the procedures that have been established and/or lack of socialisation of the procedures. This type of risk can also arise due to the length of the procedures taken that needed a long time in decision making. As a result, the implementer may make their own decisions without involving the relevant stakeholders. This risk can be mitigated by conducting routine socialisation for the implementer related to the relevant mechanisms/process flow and reform the organisational bureaucracy and involving the stakeholder. 237 PHYSICAL CULTURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN The document will explain how to mitigate the impact of the Project on physical cultural resources around the Project design plan as stated in World Bank’s OP/ BP 4.11, aiming to provide guidelines on efforts to manage existing physical cultural resources and the potential for chance finds of physical cultural resources around the Project. The physical cultural resources that have been identified will be managed by applying the following: 1. Comprehensive Assessment The J-SLMP team will develop a sensitivity map of physical cultural resources document. This map will become the basis of the overall process of identifying physical resources around the project involving experts, relevant government agencies, and local communities, particularly traditional leaders and landowners. This assessment aims to: ▪ Complete the available data related to physical resources that already exist and are identified and/or that have not been identified; and ▪ Appraise the value of each existing physical cultural resource. In the preparation of this assessment, if necessary, public consultations that are more focused on identifying physical cultural resources will be held. 2. Physical Cultural Resource Management Team In order to implement the Physical Cultural Resources Management Plan, the appointed consultant and/or Jambi Forestry Agency/Bappeda will establish a Physical Cultural Resources Management Team for the following functions: ▪ Accelerate the comprehensive assessment process of physical cultural resources; ▪ Coordinate and consult with stakeholders regarding physical cultural resources; ▪ Develop a mitigation plan for the impact of the project on physical cultural resources; ▪ Conduct socialisation of project impacts mitigation plan on physical cultural resources; and ▪ Manage and/or mitigate impacts on all identified cultural resources. By the time of developing this plan, the above team is not yet established. As such, the responsibilities and functions of the Physical Cultural Resources Management Team will be carried by the Provincial Safeguards Committee established and chaired by Provincial Environmental Service, and consist of representatives from related provincial government offices, NGOs and University. When needed, the Safeguards Committee will consult with the Jambi Culture Conservation Office 49 responsible for preserving cultural and physical resources in Jambi. 3. Developing Project Impact Mitigation Plan on Physical Cultural Resources As a follow-up of the comprehensive assessment, project impact mitigation plan on physical cultural resources will be developed. 4. Capacity Building In order to increase the capacity of team members, the Project Implementing Unit will facilitate the team through training or workshops by presenting experts. 5. Socialisation of Project Impact Mitigation Plan 49 This office was established under the DJ for Cultural Affairs, Ministry of Education. 238 The Project Impact Mitigation Plan on physical cultural resources will be socialised to the project implementing unit who work at the project site to prevent any unintended impacts to physical cultural resources in the Project area. In addition, socialisation is also carried out to communities who live around the location of physical cultural resources to prevent any unintended impacts. The involvement of the community to preserve the existence of these cultural resources is also necessary. PCRMP Implementation The PCRMP will be implemented based on the results of the assessment and mitigation plan of the physical cultural resources in the Project area. The example of activities of the PCRMP implementation might include: (1) Fencing of physical cultural resources; (2) Moving physical cultural resources affected by the Project; and (3) Erecting a sign or notice board to avoid disturbance or damage by workers and others. Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring and evaluation of the PCRMP will be done regularly to check the condition of the preserve cultural assets. Evaluation will be conducted bi-annually or more frequent if the physical cultural resources are considered to be highly sensitive. The evaluation will review the existing procedure, mitigation activity and proposing corrective action plans if required. 239 PHYSICAL CULTURAL RESOURCES CHANCE FINDS PROCEDURES Chance find procedure (CFP) is developed to prevent any unintended impacts from the Project’s activities on physical cultural resources. During the implementation of J-SLMP, if the Project encounters with any unmapped physical cultural resources, the Project Implementing Unit will: 4. Stop the construction activities in the area of the chance find; 5. Delineate the discovered site or area; 6. Secure the site to prevent any damage or loss of any removable objects. In cases of removable antiquities or sensitive remains, a night guard shall be present until the responsible local authorities take over; 7. Prohibit the taking of cultural heritage objects by workers or other parties; 8. Report the discovery of physical cultural resources to the relevant Heads of Village and local cultural leaders; 9. Report the discovery of the cultural heritage objects to the Physical Cultural Resources Management Team; 10. Notify all sub-project personnel and take initial protection measures; 11. Record chance find cultural relics and take the necessary initial protection measures; 12. Physical Cultural Resources Management Team to immediately inform the responsible local authorities and the relevant Archeology Institute (within 1x24 hours or less); 13. Local authorities would be in charge of protecting and preserving the site before deciding on the subsequent appropriate procedure. A preliminary evaluation of the findings will be performed by the Regional Archeology Institute; 14. The decision on how to handle the finding(s) shall be taken by the responsible authorities. This could include changes in the layout or timeline of the project to ensure conservation, preservation, restoration and/or salvage of the resource; 15. The implementation for the authorities decision concerning the management of the finding(s) shall be communicated in writing to the relevant local government; 16. Mitigation measures can include changes in the design/layout of the proposed project, protection, conservation, restoration and/ or preservation of the site and/ or objects; 17. Construction work on the site could resume only after permission from the responsible local authorities concerning safeguard of the inheritance; and 18. Responsible for cooperate with the government to monitor all construction activities and ensure that adequate conservation measures have been taken. In summary, procedures for managing cultural heritage objects/ sites are presented in the following figure: 240 Figure 1. Physical Cultural Resource Chance Find Process Flow Chart Chance Finds Finding Report of assessment on Stop the project activity near the PCR s Find and protect the PCR chance finds of PCR site. The finding must be reported maximum in 30 working days Sending letter to Head of Report to Archeological Archeological Institution in Institution, Police, and Local Denpasar, Local Police, and Government Head of Local Government Response letter approximated will be issued on maximum 14 working days Reporting Archeological Institution, Police, Archeological Institution and Local Government will send certified PCR expert response with letter and action team to assess the PCR plan The study approximately will be conducted on maximum 30 days after the response letter Recommendation Letter from Recommendation letter Archeological Institution to Local based on assessment Government and PT SMI Recommendation letter approximately will be issued on maximum 30 working days after the study PCR mitigation plan Conduct Action Plan based on developed based on Recommendation Letter from consultation with Archeological Institution and community Action Consultation with community PCR mitigation plan will be developed on maximum 14 days after the recommendation letter accepted Socialization of the mitigation Implementation of the PCR action plan to internal, As soon as possible mitigation and continue the contractors, sub-contractor, and project. community 241 AUTHORISED OFFICIALS Officials authorised as physical cultural resource management within the Physical Cultural Resources Management Team includes: ▪ Stakeholder Engagement Officer of appointed consultant; ▪ Indonesian Ministry of Tourism and Culture; ▪ Indonesian Archaeological Center; ▪ The nearest competent university; ▪ Culture and Tourism Department of Jambi Province; ▪ Relevant village heads; ▪ Relevant district agencies; ▪ Related adat leader (respected local elderly); and ▪ Community around the project site. CLOSING STATEMENT This Physical Cultural Resources Management Plan (PCRMP) is effectively following project effectiveness. Any procedure or mechanism that is currently not regulated in this document will be explained further through implementation manual/ technical instructions. 242 ANNEX 11. MINUTES OF MEETING – STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS NO DATE AND LOCATION PARTICIPANTS (M/F) TOPICS AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS50 1 13-17 May 2019 World Bank Team, Directorate General of World Bank BioCF Joint Mission Jambi PPI, Government of Jambi’s OPDs lead by Bappeda, FMUs, National Park Authorities, This is the first Joint Mission for the newly requited BioCF Safeguards team in Jambi. NGOs, University in Jambi (Unja) While there are many discussions related to BioCF ERP in Jambi, a few points that are Male: 54 important for safeguards development are as follows: Female: 25 • There need to be more practical mitigation measures and guideline tailored to Jambi’s Province experience in developing ESMF to strengthen the pest management guidelines, working collaboratively with Provincial TPHP Office in Jambi; • Consultation with National Park Authorities on actions to prevent further encroachment within NP; • Working with Jambi Plantation office to learn replanting process and conflict resolution currently practiced by this office; • To finalise the assignment, the EMS will need to consult more stakeholders in Jambi and especially those at the district level; • The EMS consultant should use the faces approach, starting with pre investment assessment and then moving to RBP. PT. Hatfield Indonesia, which prepared the draft safeguards documents, was also given the opportunity to present the draft document for inputs from meeting participants. One issue raised was whether indigenous people living inside conservation forest was considered as problem or solution to the deforestation issues. Some meeting participants considered them, with the right approach (no detail information on what is the right approach), as solution for strengthening forest management and conservation. It was agreed during the meeting that the BioCF safeguards team will meet with WB safeguards team to further discuss the draft safeguards documents prepared by PT. Hatfield in mid June 2019 in Jakarta. 2 23 May 2019 World Bank Team, Government of Public Consultation on safeguards draft Tanjang Jabung Timur District, Tanjabtim’s OPDs lead by Bappeda, Jambi FMUs, National Park Authorities, head of This district represents peatland soil areas within the BioCF coverage area. subdistricts, and head of villages. 50 More detailed report in Bahasa Indonesia were sent to Ditjen PPI. 243 NO DATE AND LOCATION PARTICIPANTS (M/F) TOPICS AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS50 This public consultation was part of the PT. Hatfield obligation under the contract with Male: 34 Directorate General of PPI in the process of preparing the safeguards documents. EMS Female: 6 and FGRM consultants were invited to be observers. The meeting starts with the presentation of the safeguards findings by PT. Hatfield and then followed by discussion. It was observed that due to lack of knowledge on BioCF project from district stakeholders, the discussion was more focused on explaining about BioCF program in addition to discussing the safeguards findings. However, there are some valuable information presented by district stakeholders including: • The future focus of the district in next Medium-Term Development Program 2021-2026 is to manage its peatland sustainably under the icon of “Peatland Friendly District�. This is due to the coverage of peatland as much as 62% in this district. FGD will be done to discuss the meaning of “Peatland Friendly District� for Tanjabtim; • Some issues in Tanjabtim including land conservation from agriculture to Oil Palm is quite high; • There is potential for developing Social Forestry in Tanjabtim (currently there are 8 SF licences in Tanjabtim, but it should be focused on the whole aspect of social forestry starting from preparation for licencing, forest management, production, marketing, and up to processing of non timber forest products; • Forest fires is still one of the main deforestation issues in Tanjabtim due to its large peatland coverage; • There is regulation on the protection of prime agriculture land (LP2B), but the implementation is still problematic due to untargeted subsidies from the government; • The government has encouraged the communities to plant Jelutong tress, but after the latex is collected by communities, there is no market (note: Jelutong is one of the commodities that is going to be supported by BioCF). To further discuss the safeguards issues, another meeting will be scheduled in the new future in this district. 3 19 June 2019 World Bank Team, Government of Public Consultation on draft safeguards documents Merangin District Merangin’s OPDs lead by Bappeda, FMUs, Jambi National Park Authorities, head of This district represents mineral soil areas within the BioCF coverage area. 244 NO DATE AND LOCATION PARTICIPANTS (M/F) TOPICS AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS50 subdistricts, head of villages, and local This public consultation was part of the PT. Hatfield obligation under the contract with NGOs. Directorate General of PPI in the process of preparing the safeguards documents. EMS, SDS, and FGRM consultants were invited to be observers. However, learning from the similar public consultation in Tanjabtim, the ICs proposed a new approach, in which in the moring the meeting is focussing on BioCF program presentation followed by presentation on safeguards. The afternoon session was a break up FGD session discussing six question prepare beforehand by the ICs. These question area: 1. After listening to the presentation by Ditjen PPI on BioCF program and PT. Hatfield on the safeguard’s documents for BioCF, please discuss what are the main environmental and social issues in Merangin? 2. Discuss how to solve or mitigate the above issues including experiences in solving these issues. 3. What are the main obstacles in handling environmental and social issues? 4. Please list regulations including those at the district or management units that could help solve the above issues; 5. What do you think we should do in the future to help solve the above issues? 6. Please describe the current capacity of each institution in term of number of staff, budget, completed trainings, and experiences in dealing with the above issues). Due to time limitation, not all questions can be answered, therefore there will be another meeting in this district to complete answering the above questions with additional questions to be prepared by ICs. 4 17 June 2019 IC Safeguards Team Meeting on reviewing the draft safeguards documents Jakarta WB Jambi Provincial Environmental Office (4 The meeting was intended to discuss about the draft safeguards document submitted persons) by PT Hatfield. Jambi Provincial Environmental Office was invited also so that, as BioCF Deputy Director responsible agency for BioCF Safeguards output (Risk Management), the related staff from this office can follow the discussion from the beginning. Male: 7 Female: 4 The meeting was also used to describe the core of the BioCF programing and how to approach the safeguards document reviews. From the meeting it was agreed that Jambi Provincial Environmental Office will take the lead in forming and running the Risk Management Working Group for Jambi. The WB Safeguards team provided written inputs on what to be included in the revision of the draft safeguards documents. 245 NO DATE AND LOCATION PARTICIPANTS (M/F) TOPICS AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS50 The BioCF Safeguards team agreed to revise the draft safeguards document and submitted them to WB by the end of July or early August 2019 the latest. 5 3-5 July 2019 World Bank Team, Ditjen PPI, Government First Risk Management Working Group (TKRM) Meeting Jambi of Jambi’s OPDs lead by Bappeda, FMUs, National Park Authorities, NGOs University The meeting was intended to discuss about the structure and Modalities of the TKRM in Jambi (Unja) and as well as to further discuss and seek inputs on draft safeguards documents. It was agreed that the structure of the TKRM will be under coordination of the Jambi TKRM Group Provincial Environment Office and will be chaired by Ms. Lindawati, the Head of the Male : 25 Environmental Management Unit, under the Jambi Provincial Environment Office. The Female: 9 structure was supported by Deputy: Mr. Jaya Nofriandi (NGO-YLBHL), Secretary: Ms. (With additional invitees/resource persons Emi Primadona (NGO-WARSI), and Treasures: Ms. Neti (Private Sector, PT. ABT). during the meeting). During the safeguard’s discussion sessions, many inputs were documented including : Different perspectives from Jambi OPDs on the drivers of deforestation, most of which are in line with what are discussed in the SESA documents. However, there are new information on the magnitude of the mining sector which was presented by the Jambi Provincial Energy and Mineral Resources including the safeguards to deal with the post mining land rehabilitation. Plantation office also presented the magnitude of the forest encroachment from plantation in Jambi which was staggering, around 280,000 hectare of plantation in Jambi (oil palm, rubber, coffee and cassiavera) are located within the state forest land. Social forestry was mentioned as one of the potential solutions to deal with this issue. There was also presentation about the support from Plantation Office to support ISPO certification for small holder farmers. However, jurisdiction approach for ISPO was not discussed. Last session of the meeting was an FGD discussing about the capacity of Jambi Stakeholders to deal with environmental issues in anticipation of BioCF project implementation. 246 NO DATE AND LOCATION PARTICIPANTS (M/F) TOPICS AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS50 It was agreed that the TKRM team structure and modalities as well as next meetings will be further discussed through the TKRM WhatsApp Group already formed by BioCF IC team. One thing very clear from the meeting was that: most of the stakeholders attended the meeting agreed to support BioCF preparation and implementation given that they have enough information about the progress of BioCF preparation. 6 17-18 July 2019 Government officials from Jambi, FMUs, Discussion and FGD on Risk of Reversal and Risks of Displacement to be included in National Parks, NGO, Ditjen PPI. the ERPD. Male: 15 Two sources of Risks of Reversal including risk levels and mitigation plan were Female: 10 discussed. These are risks from anthropogenic and natural sources. Similar to this, during the meeting on Risks of Displacement, sources of risk with risk level and mitigation plan was discussed. Summary of consultations on the ERP conducted by PT. Hatfield. Table 40 Summary of Stakeholder Consultations in Jambi RELEVANCE TO TOPIC WHAT IS THE ISSUE RECOMMENDATIONS REDD+ Kick-Off Meeting Joint PDO result-chain MRV, Safeguards and The key point discussed were related to the interna arrangement within Preparation Mission Annual Work Plan initial design of the ERP government of Indonesia especially DJPPI, BAPPENAS< and Government of BioCF ISFL Jambi related to the implementation of BioCF-ISFL, the role of stakeholder in Procurement Plan Jambi in anticipating of BioCF ISFL preparation and implementation, Draft Grant Agreement commitment from Jambi Government to implements BioCG-ISFL, the role of Aide of Memoire Consultants in preparing related documents for BioCF-ISFL, especially on ToR Individual Consultant safeguards as strictly followed up by the WB, Grant Agreement preparation and signing for BioCF-ISFL between the World Bank and KLHK. Concept Note Some of the emerging concerns are related to the readiness of Government of Jambi to prepare and implement the BioCF-ISFL and the complicated vertical 247 RELEVANCE TO TOPIC WHAT IS THE ISSUE RECOMMENDATIONS REDD+ and horizontal coordination as currently experienced in most cases in Indonesia, including in Jambi. From the meeting it was discovered that the Government of Jambi showed positive development toward the preparation and implementation of BioCF-ISFL as shown from the issuance of Government Decree on the Formation of BioCF Team/Taskforce and increased of understanding on the part of the Jambi Government on the role of BioCF-ISFL as al long term, low carbon, and green development for Jambi; the active participation of key stakeholders in Jambi; finalization of ToR for individual consultants to support the preparation of BioCF- ISFL including the consultant on safeguards. A few followed ups would be conducted especially in relation to increasing communication between Bappenas and Ministry of Finance related to Grant Agreement, better communication between Jakarta and Jambi on the preparation of BioCF-ISFL PDO and other documents, and the widening of stakeholder’s involvement in Jambi. Joint Mission BioCF-ISFL PPG Procurement, Lol, Financial Part of REDD+ The mission agreed that continued refinements of the results framework and agreement progress, AWP readiness process monitoring arrangements with interactive follow-up sessions and email ERP Document communication with the M&E specialist were expected to take place in the next four months and would be presented in the next mission. Result chain & pre-invesment activities Agriculture framework Private sector ER allocation Benefit Sharing Mechanism Safeguards Focus group discussion Identification WPK REDD+ As a document that The SESA needs to portray the causes/drivers of deforestation and forest (FGD) of identification of Deforestation and forest supports the degradation & strategy for handling these issues to inform the ERP design. potential locations for degradation preparation of ERP Key issues discussed included prevention and control of land and forest fire, deforestation and forest poverty as key issues in deforestation, leakage to neighbouring provinces, inadequate numbers of patrol team, tenurial conflicts, sub-optimal forest 248 RELEVANCE TO TOPIC WHAT IS THE ISSUE RECOMMENDATIONS REDD+ degradation and peat governance, the needs to link with provincial action plan (RAD/Rencana Aksi damage (1) Daerah) on greenhouse gas emission, roles and responsibilities (involvement) at district level, eco-tourism and non-timber forest product (and their marketing) as non-carbon benefit, consideration for mangrove in BiCF, palm oil as potential carbon sequestration, the needs for FGRM at village and sub-district levels, credible MRV and carbon accounting; Emerging concerns include greed and speculation may contribute to the degradation, lack of equipment at FMU level for fire prevention / control, implementation of sustainable agriculture policies (including non-burning methods) and incentives for zero-fire, the needs for formal agreement to prevent leakage to neighbouring provinces, the performance area needs to be clearly defined, definition of performance area needs to consider aspirations/concerns from key stakeholders, biodiversity outside protected area, Agreement on follow-ups are: Manggala Agni to provide capacity building and community-based fire prevention, Manggala Agni will support FMU for fire prevention and control, Agriculture Agency to enforce sustainable agriculture (organic pesticides, allocation of sustainable agriculture areas), increase recruitment of Masyarakat Mitra Polhut (Community Patrol Team) to increase patrol efforts, use of existing regulation and guidelines (e.g., Ecolabel, HCV, RSPO, and ISPO) as safeguard instruments, acknowledgement of customary communities, support for customary communities, collaboration with local communities on ecosystem restoration, The obstacles to the implementation of the Jambi ERP include, procedurally, the issuance of the Decree regarding the involvement of elements from the SKPD (provincial agencies) Other main obstacles include the lack of capacity/guidance to effective implement safeguard mechanisms. Collaboration with NGOs and academics may be able to address this shortcoming. Data used for ERP, at least for the last 10 years to ensure the use of most recent data (reflecting current situations and dynamics of land-based sectors in Jambi Province). There may be inconsistencies in data and maps, even though such data and maps are sourced from the government agencies. Consensus need tp be established to justify data sources and relevant data custodians. 249 RELEVANCE TO TOPIC WHAT IS THE ISSUE RECOMMENDATIONS REDD+ In KPH/National Park/Tahura/BPHP Units, relevant issues include community forest encroachment expansion, forest fires, illegal logging, unlicensed plantations (oil & rubber), expansion of plantation businesses, forest encroachment for oil palm and rubber, encroachment in the inter-zone buffer zones, weak good governance implementation across stakeholders, tenure conflicts, peat decomposition, illegal mining, land use (mining, gardens, agriculture), unsustainable forest management. The agency mapping for data availability is in accordance with the required basic data requirements, which can be enhanced and revisited based on deliberative discussions and stakeholder engagement processes. This suggest that data may come from different sources, and data mainstreaming may need to be done to ensure consistencies of data. Pre-identification of the main drivers that cause issues in the forestry sector will be revisited in accordance with the next plan of follow-up discussions. Focus group discussion Identification WPK REDD+ Verification of Main Participants to complete information related to the main causes of deforestation (FGD) of identification of deforestation and degradation Drivers & Causes of and forest degradation, with supporting data available. potential locations for Deforestation and Participants presented their understanding about the social and environmental deforestation and forest degradation impacts, along with the required strategy and directions for the ERP moving degradation and peat Screening of SESA forward. Such information has been used to inform and strengthen the PDO. damage (2) Issues Based on the stock-taking of issues and screening of spatial data processing, Identification of Social several issues have been addressed. A short list of agreed issues include TBD. & Environmental Based on the issue categories emerging from the FGDs, several alternative Impacts locations for public consultations were proposed. Expert views, for spatial data PDO and ERP processing and specific themes may be called for enable robust analysis. Consolidation Key issues discussed in this session included: The needs for socialisation of Identification of the BioCF at district level, artisanal mining as driver of deforestation, illegal use of Area of Public forest areas (encroachment), infrastructure development (e.g., road) in forest Consultation areas, weak forest governance, changes of traditional/simple into consumptive lifestyles, unclear village boundaries, lack of conservation awareness among communities/corporations/government agencies, social conflicts, human- wildlife conflicts, non-sustainable agriculture (extensification and non-organic pesticides/fertilisers), imbalance in value chain (middlemen’s excessive profits) . 250 RELEVANCE TO TOPIC WHAT IS THE ISSUE RECOMMENDATIONS REDD+ Emerging concerns identified form this discussion are: Influx of migrants from other provinces, conflicting development interests/agendas, inadequate resources for effective forest management, weak cross-sectoral coordination, lack of community empowerment programs, and limited access to information regarding licensing policies. Consensus on follow-ups are: Establishing joint task force for law enforcement, partnership to include forest encroachers and convert them to support sustainable forest management, coordination between national and sub- national agencies, placing man clear mandates for provincial and district governments, designing and implementing community development programs, empowering village regulation, implementing participatory mapping for boundary demarcation, improving information system, implementing conservation awareness program, improving synergy between social forestry working group with Forestry Agency, formulating conflict resolution strategies, and development of creative economic scheme. Interview the perceptions Interview related to the Bio Carbon Verification of Main More than half of the respondents demonstrated lack of awareness of the of key stakeholders in the Fund, drivers of deforestation, Drivers & Causes of DD details of the emission reduction program, its relevance to REDD +, and the sample districts (Bungo, related stakeholders, fund Screening of SESA role of sub-national stakeholders in the implementation process later. Most of Merangin, Sarolangun, management mechanisms, Issues these stakeholders expect that the program can be applied at the local Kerinci and Tanjung important issues and future level/district level, to enable fair sharing of the Program’s benefits. Jabung Timur) expectations Focus group discussion Natural resource management, root SESA & ESMF Main issues raised were related to forest conversion to oil palm, illegal logging, (FGD) of six villages causes, relevant stakeholders and encroachment, limited alternative livelihood, and the use of chemical agriculture (Beringin Tinggi, Guguk, solutions inputs. Kandis Dendang, Pandan Discussions on measures to address environmental and social issues include: lagan, Sungai beras, & improving access to markets, stabilising prices for daily needs ( sembako), Rantau kermas) and 1 improving skills and technology for added value, identification of NTFP potentials indigenous people (non-carbon benefit), development of village enterprise (BumDes), improving access for ecotourism, community-based patrol implementation, stopping illegal mining operation, community-based peatland rehabilitation, training on prevention and control of forest fire, peatland rewetting, non-burning method for agriculture, allocation of sustainable agriculture (especially for marginal and isolated communities, including customary communities), production and use of 251 RELEVANCE TO TOPIC WHAT IS THE ISSUE RECOMMENDATIONS REDD+ organic fertilisers/pesticides, socialisation of social forestry schemes, increasing gender participation in sustainable land use, increasing commitment of companies (inclusion of local communities in companies’ business), Public consultations and To inform the preliminary results of SESA & ESMF While in the main purpose of these meetings were to get feedbacks from local focus group discussions the SESA and ESMF (including all (including all annexes) stakeholders on the draft safeguard documents being prepared by consultants, in Tanjung Jabung Timur annexes) the meeting also provided an opportunity to introduce BioCF-ISFL for those that and Merangin districts were new to this planned program. Some of the issues raised in Tanjbtim District were related to Community economic development aspects, including supports to non-timber forest product (NTFP) marketing and peatland management. The following were some of the main issues discussed: • The future focus of the district in next Medium-Term Development Program 2021-2026 is to manage its peatland sustainably under the icon of “Peatland Friendly District�. This is due to the coverage of peatland as much as 62% in this district. FGD will be done to discuss the meaning of “Peatland Friendly District� for Tanjabtim; • Some issues in Tanjabtim including land conservation from agriculture to Oil Palm is quite high; • There is potential for developing Social Forestry (SF) in Tanjabtim (currently there are 8 SF licences in Tanjabtim, but it should be focused on the whole aspect of social forestry starting from preparation for licencing, forest management, production, marketing, and up to processing of non-timber forest products; • Forest fires is still one of the main deforestation issues in Tanjabtim due to its large peatland coverage. Efforts to prevent and control forest fires were usually intensified during the long dry season or El Nino years; • There is regulation on the protection of prime agriculture land (LP2B), but the implementation is still problematic due to untargeted subsidies from the government. Thorough evaluation of the implementation of this regulation will need to be done to find out best future implementation; 252 RELEVANCE TO TOPIC WHAT IS THE ISSUE RECOMMENDATIONS REDD+ • The government has encouraged the communities to plant Jelutong tress, but after the latex is collected by communities, there is no market (note: Jelutong is one of the commodities that is going to be supported by BioCF). In Merangin District, some of the important issues were related encroachment and illegal claims of forest land especially by outside migrant (mostly from South Sumatra, Lampung and Bengkulu leading to further deforestation and social conflicts, the emerging role of indigenous people that need recognition from government, unclear boundary of villages leading to conflicts between villages. It was expected that with the support from BoCF-ISFL, issues related to the markets for some Non-Timber Forest Products (Jelutong in Tanjabtim) and products from social forestry could be resolved as Bio-CF-ISFL has consultant to help with this issue. To deal with forest and social conflicts, beside supporting local institution to deal with these issues especially on capacity building and budget increase, the role of local communities and local wisdoms and local NGOs should be revitalized in solving some issues related to deforestation and social issues. 253 Provincial and District Level SESA and ESMF Consultations Jambi Province STAKEHOLDERS COMMENTS/INPUTS Ramses Nainggolan - Carry out the transfer of interests by Manggala Agni in preventing and controlling forest destruction. KLHK, through Minister of KLHK Regulation Manggala Agni (Forest No. 32/2016 outlines the steps that concessionaires need to take in preventing forest fires. This includes the minimum requirements for the Brigade) number of coverage teams that need to be managed by the concession holder. Manggala Agni conducts Training for Trainers, and Training of Facilitators to ensure sufficient skills in the field. For the NTFP program and wood sampling, work with the FMU. Manggala Agni has good preparation and equipment, and this is a central advantage for the prevention and control of fire in Jambi Province. Franky Zamzani – Encroachment is not always driven by economic problems/poverty. In many cases this is driven by greed, as a fundamental cause. The use of Directorate Gen. of Climate non-combustion methods may be challenging, because conventional combustion methods are cheaper and more effective. Therefore, patrols to Change prevent fires are still needed. Dri Handoyo - FMU Forest fire prevention at the grassroots level (ie, KPH) needs to be supported by Manggala Agni. This is due to the fact that most FMUs do not Tanjung Jabung Barat have the right equipment, facilities and personnel for fire prevention and control. The involvement of the local community is very important in fire prevention and control. The fire free village (formed by Asian Agri) provides an example of community engagement work at the village level. Ibu Sri – Provincial Regulations are available for fire prevention and control in the agricultural sector. Appropriate equipment for fire management is part of the Plantation Service performance evaluation of plantation companies (evaluation is carried out by the provincial plantation office). Fire-free villages formed by Asian Agri receive incentives for incidents without fires every year. The plantation agency is now encouraging the use of organic pesticides and organic fertilizers to minimize the risks of pollution and pollution associated with pest control practices. The ratio between forest rangers and forest areas is very low. Because of this deficiency, encroachment cannot be handled adequately. Afrizal - FMU Tanjung Illegal logging is spread in peatland ecosystems in the FMU area. But wood is transported to other provinces (South Sumatra). Inter-provincial Jabung Timur task forces are needed to deal with leaks like this Haryo – Directorate Formal coordination and agreements between KPHs in neighbouring provinces (Jambi and South Sumatra) need to be formed and strengthened. General of Climate Change This is needed to overcome the risk of leakage from Jambi to other provinces. Farid - BKSDA Jambi Recruitment of Polhut Partner Communities (MMP) can be done to compensate for the lack of patrol resources. Andri - FMU Batanghari Conflicts occur in concessions such as PT REKI. This restoration concession is located next to (in the middle) the oil palm plantation. When plantations become unproductive (due to age) and replanting cost is expensive (while the price of palm oil remains the same), local farmers can choose to expand plantations to PT REKI's concessions. In addition, new families that are expanding from the main household will need an additional piece of land to support the livelihood of the new household. ESMF Document – Jambi 254 Haryo - Ditjen Climate Protection instrument does not need to be reshaped. Existing regulations and instruments (eg Ecolabel, HCV, RSPO, ISPO) have provided Change mechanisms to reduce negative risks (Protection). This mechanism will be harmonized with the World Bank Operational Policy. Tanjung Jabung Timur District STAKEHOLDERS COMMENT/INPUTS Subhan – Provincial Forest governance is not optimal. There are currently 33,000 ha under the agreement, including 20,000 ha of social forestry. However, only 1/3 Environmental Service (10,000 ha) are planted. In addition, there is a need to recognize the rights of indigenous peoples. After recognition, further facilitation may be needed to help improve the livelihoods of the local indigenous people. Ridwan - Provincial The design of the Bio Carbon Fund needs to consult with the provincial action plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Regional Action Plan- Environmental Service RAD/GHG Emissions). Dini - Bappeda Kabupaten District roles and responsibilities need to be strengthened in the implementation of BioCF. Muaro Jambi Efrian - Bank Dunia Timeline description for BioCF consisting of the project preparation stage (until December 2019); investment stage in advance (2020 - 2025); and the emission reduction stage starting in 2022. Nurhasman - Berbak Need information about the location of activities. The location is in the area of performance appraisal, but the specific locus needs to be Sembilan National Park determined prior to BioCF implementation. Current challenges include tenure conflicts within national parks. Joko - FMU XIV Tanjung Social forestry has been implemented, there are eight social forestry permits in KPH XIV. Commodities can include ecotourism, and NTFPs Jabung Timur (e.g., Dyera/Jelutung) Mustam - Bappeda Tanjung Apart from the forest/natural wealth in this district, forest degradation is taking place (eg, in the Londrang Protection Forest). This forest Jabung Timur degradation causes floods in the rainy season and fires in the dry season. Mangroves are also degraded, and need to be included as of the problems for BioCF. Anwar Sadat – Provincial Palm oil has always been seen as a trigger for forest degradation and deforestation. However, research shows that high carbon sequestration Plantation Service is present in oil palm plantations. Fire is also a problem in oil palm plantations. Arna – Tanjung Jabung There is a regional regulation of the Regency of Tanjung Jabung Timur No. 18/2013 concerning land allocation for sustainable agriculture. Timur Agriculture Service However, the implementation and enforcement of this regulation is still weak. Farid - BKSDA Jambi The location of nature reserve (mangrove) is on the coast of Tanjung Jabung Timur and Tanjung Jabung Barat. The total mangrove area is 4,160 ha. Degradation in this nature reserve reaches 1,500 ha. Replanting was carried out in 2010 (890 ha) and 2018 (30 ha). BKSDA encourages partnerships with local communities for ecosystem restoration (based on KSDE Director General No. 6/2018 regarding conservation partnerships). ESMF Document – Jambi 255 Human-wildlife conflicts (estuarine crocodiles - Crocodilus porosus) occur outside protected areas. Conflict resolution includes monitoring the population, socializing and establishing shelters. Joko - FMU XIV Tanjung Jelutung (Dyera sp) is suitable for peatland. Jelutung can potentially be used to reduce the rate of deforestation (e.g., in Londrang Protection Jabung Timur Forest). However, links with markets need to be built to ensure economic value for the local communities involved in Jelutung cultivation. Sarjuna – Mendahara Ulu There are three farmer groups in the production forest area (309 ha). They were affected by flooding due to draining of peatlands in production Sub-district forests. There is no specific complaint mechanism to deal with this problem. There has been no response from the relevant agencies. Wahyudi – FMU Batanghari The FMU area covers the provinces of Jambi and South Sumatra, so carbon accounting must be "fair". There is a risk that emissions reductions are not calculated correctly, and emissions from neighbouring districts/provinces are considered as belonging to Jambi. Need to overcome these risks. Social forestry has started at the Batanghari KPH, but illegal activities (illegal oil drilling) took place in Tahura Senami. Pramudya – Tanjung The environmental service has initiated the formation of an urban forest (40 ha) in Muara Sabak (capital of East Tanjung Jabung Regency), Jabung Timur Jelutung is the main commodity in Tanjung Jabung Timur, and grows well in the midst of oil palm plantations. Pest (wild boar) is a problem in Environmental Service Jelutung cultivation, and it requires a relationship/access to the market to produce the economic value of the product. Efrian - Bank Dunia A team to support program design and development (and protection) has been formed. ESMF Document – Jambi 256 ANNEX 12. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES FOR ERP SUB-COMPONENTS PROPOSED SUB- RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ACTIVITIES E & S RISKS MITIGATION COMPONENTS (INDICATIVE) MEASURES Component 1: Strengthening Policy & Institutions 1.1 Institutional ▪ Upgrading SEKBER into Risks associated with this Sub- Provincial Development Strengthening provincial institution on component include: Planning Bureau (BAPPEDA) climate change Environmental and Provincial Secretary Environmental (SEKDA), especially the Legal ▪ Overall the strengthened SEKBER Clear role and Beureu will be positive for the environment; responsibility of SEKBER’s SEKBER ▪ Unequal participation of members members may cost internal conflict leading to ineffective role of SEKBER Implementing partners, DKN, and other partners, including NGOs and Donor agencies. Social: Social ▪ Potential conflict with other Clear role and provincial offices in terms of role Potential involvement of responsibility mentioned in and responsibility governor’s office and/or the governor decree on the provincial secretariat as a hub formation of SEKBER for FGRM mechanism 1.2. Enabling ▪ Develop system of The risks associated with this Sub- Environmental Provincial Environmental Environment monitoring, analysis and component are: Capacity building on FREL Service (DLH) for ER reporting (MAR) for Program Environmental and MRV to ensure comprehensive and systematic accounting of Overal MAR will have no risks, but Provincial Forestry Services systematic accounting of GHG emission (avoiding incorrect data and analysys may lead to GHG emission and double accounting). bad decisison. removal in Jambi FMUs Potential risk of ineffective safeguards Proper schedule and Province; implementation leading to negative programs (including ▪ Develop risk management instructors) for capacity environment impact . National Park Authorities and BSM building for government. ESMF Document – Jambi 257 PROPOSED SUB- RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ACTIVITIES E & S RISKS MITIGATION COMPONENTS (INDICATIVE) MEASURES ▪ Action and intervention for Lack of capacity in implementing and private sector (ESMF financing plan safeguards leading to weak safeguards and ESMP). development implementation and monitoring. ▪ Assessment and planning Accumulation of social conflicts if not Ensure capacity building of for ER Program properly mediated, or if the benefit institution related to implementation sharing mechanism is not accepted. safeguards implementation Social conflicts may create risk for and monitoring. natural habitats and forest (OP/BP BSM should be developed 4.04, 4.36) due to continued or based on comprehensive increased encroachment activities consultation processes resulting from the conflicts. invoving all relevant Exclusion of customary area from stakeholders under the existing forest area (enclave or principles of justice and reduction of protected areas). This risk fainess, transparency, and is relevant with OP/BP 4.10 on accountability. Indigenous peoples, as well as OP/BP Capacity building and 4.04 and 4.36 on natural resources and training on Conflict forest. Resolution for field During ERP, weak, inadequate or implementing entities imbalanced benefit sharing mechanism (FMUs, NPs, NGO, Local may cause social conflict, and may also Government) will need to drive people back to the need for land be intensified to make expansion to support livelihood. This them more prepared for may pose risk for forest (OP/BP 4.10) solving conflicts in the field. and/or natural habitat (OP/BP 4.04). Double counting between voluntary Social carbon standards and result-based payment may cause ineffective benefit FPIC prior to project sharing. Ineffective benefit sharing may implementation to avoid demotivate eligible beneficiaries to misperception and/or over revert back to land expansion for expectation. livelihood. This may pose risk for forest ESMF Document – Jambi 258 PROPOSED SUB- RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ACTIVITIES E & S RISKS MITIGATION COMPONENTS (INDICATIVE) MEASURES (OP/BP 4.10) and/or natural habitat Consistency in monitoring (OP/BP 4.04). and law enforcement will Deforestation and degradation may need to be in place. occur outside the WPK (e.g., Mangrove Persuasive approach and in Tanjung Jabung Timur District). mediation will need to be Mangrove area covers 4,126 ha. This is use whenever possible to relevant with OP/BP 4.04 and 4.36 on avoid further conflict, natural habitat and forest respectively. especially before excessive law enforcement measures applied. Social Unauthorised activities may not be handled in timely manner due to the geographic and resource limitation of Gakkum. Delay in handling the illegal activities may create more damages to the natural habitat and forests (OP/BP 4.04, 4.36, and/or 4.10). Conflict escalation if excessive force (i.e., police and military) is used to handle unauthorised activities. Forceful approach may lead to conflict and legal prosecution towards law enforcement agencies in the name of human rights issues (OP/BP 4.12 should access and/or livelihood restriction occurs). Lack of recognition of indigenous peoples may cause customary group to be excluded from the list of eligible beneficiaries. This is relevant with OP/BP 4.10 on indigenous people. Due to the lack of recognition, their existing contribution to manage and protect ESMF Document – Jambi 259 PROPOSED SUB- RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ACTIVITIES E & S RISKS MITIGATION COMPONENTS (INDICATIVE) MEASURES customary forests may not be accounted for. 1.3. Policy and ▪ Legalize the Jambi Green Risks associated with this sub- Environmental Regulation Growth Plan (GGP); component may include: Strengthen policy ▪ Supporting provincial Environmental implementation that may policy and regulation Overall the the legalization of GGP will include establishing (forest and land fire, be positive for the environment. incentive and dis-incentive enforcement of national mechanisms. Potential risk of displacement due to policy, KEE, role of private Empower existing strengthened law enforcement. sector in policy and regulations (district and/or regulation. Delay in establishing the province) that support policies/regulations. This will cause: sustainable agricuculture Delay in setting up community and corporate’s empowerment and partnership environmental and social mechanism needed for conducting responsibilities. Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) and developing Environmental Social Action Plan (OP/BP 4.02). Dedicated FPIC for Social indigenous peoples. This includes recognition of Access restriction due to the indigenous rights. enforcement of regulation may limit livelihood option for local communities Revitalitation of Ministry of (including encroachment) (OP/BP Home Affairs Regulation 4.12). No 52/2014 on Recognition of Indigenous People. Delay in formal recognition of Indigenous peoples (OP/BP 4.10), and subsequent conflict resolution process involving customary laws. ESMF Document – Jambi 260 PROPOSED SUB- RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ACTIVITIES E & S RISKS MITIGATION COMPONENTS (INDICATIVE) MEASURES Component 2: Implementing Sustainable Land Management 2.1: Integrated ▪ Sustainable forest Risks associated with the DGCC as the Project Forest and Land managemet (protecting implementation of this Sub-component Executing Agency, and Management remaining natural forest, are: Provincial Forestry Agency as monitoring of PHPL, Environmental Implementing Agency. rehabilitation, prevention Environmental Unequal opportunity to participate Other entities: FORDIA, of forest and land fire at Formal agreement with SEKBER, NGOs among the communities. This is also peat land areas, local communities relevant with benefit sharing Private companies (through strengthening KPH, law including responsibilities mechanism that needs to be agreed CSR and or other enforcement (i.e. for preventing among the communities to avoid social commitments). strengtnening forest deforestation and land conflicts. Such conflict may lead to District Government patrol, control of timber degradation. continued (or increased) use of forest (Indigenous Peoples) sales, and oversight of Regular monitoring of the land for cultivation (OP/BP 4.04 and primary forestry Social Forestry program Provincial and district 4.36 on natural habitat and forest). industries) and conflict and benefit sharing plantation agencies resolution; Conflicting interest between livelihood mechanism to avoid any FMUs, national park and conservation may threaten natural ▪ Conservation and failure that can be a trigger authorities. habitats and forests (OP/BP 4.04 and restoration (forest to opening forest area. BPSKL, Provincial forestry 4.36). protection), institutional Attention to post licencing agency, Social Forestry capacity, law enforcement Ineffective restoration model will yield social forestry supports Working Group, Social Agency and conflict resolution; low survival rate, so the forest does not need to be prioritised and other relevant agencies fully regenerate to its natural state ▪ Social forestry; Development of (OP/BP 4.36). ▪ Conservation partnership; Biodiversity Management Degradation of indigenous values due ▪ Customary conservation Framework for the Project to modern influences (OP/BP 4.10), so area in non-forest land could be initited as part of these values can no longer be (APL); the wider biodiversity optimized for managing the local studies. ▪ Agriculture and communities, or to maintain forest and agroforestry intencification ecosystem (OP/BP 4.36 and 4.04). Implementation of HCV in and diversification. or along the plantation Resources for village land use planning areas will increase wildlife may be limited, so this participatory protection. process may take longer than anticipated. Limited resources may ESMF Document – Jambi 261 PROPOSED SUB- RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ACTIVITIES E & S RISKS MITIGATION COMPONENTS (INDICATIVE) MEASURES reduce the quality of environmental Forest fire prevention assessment (i.e., the presence of (early warning system) that ecologically important area) needed in includes participation of village land use planning (OP/BP 4.01 local communities, and on environmental assessment and 4.04 private sectors. This shall on natural habitats). include safety training to Social forestry mechanism that does prevent hazards in fire not go beyond licensing (i.e., no post- prevention and firefighting licensing activities), and do not activities. generate revenue for the groups will Review of local agriculture have risk of reversal. Group members regulation to find out best may not get adequate revenues and solution to support may revert to illegal activities that sustainabale agriculture generate more revenue. Consequently, practices. this will create more damage to natural The use of organic fertilizer habitats (OP/BP 4.04) and forest and Integrated Pest ecosystem (OP/BP 4.10). Management system Agriculture intensification may result in should be introduced or additional use of fertilizer and pestiside reinforced. leading to health and environment Strict measures will need issues (OP 4.09). to be applied for Avaibility of cheap and easy to get subsidized seedlings. plantation seedlings do to subsidies may lead to plantation inside the forest. Social Forest fire prevention and control Ensuring proper benefit activities may pose health and safety sharing that provides hazard for the local communities economic incentives for the (members of MPA). Combined with the members of MPA. lack of sufficient incentives to compensate the hazards, MPA may FPIC and consensus become inactive, and fire may not be among beneficiaries on monitored or prevented properly. This benefit sharing mechanism (including indigenous ESMF Document – Jambi 262 PROPOSED SUB- RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ACTIVITIES E & S RISKS MITIGATION COMPONENTS (INDICATIVE) MEASURES may create damages to the natural people). This should be peatland and forest ecosystems based on full (OP/BP 4.04 and 4.36). understanding of risk and Dependence on projects or supports benefits for each from companies will create stakeholder. sustainability issues on DBA (fire free Addressing the risk of villages) programs or other community- access restriction due to based forest fire management (CBFFM) protected area and HCV programs. This may create risk of allocations. reversal on the natural peatland and Partnership should be built forest ecosystems (OP/BP 4.04 and base on clear information 4.36). and strong consultation Existing district regulations to support process including FPIC. sustainable agriculture and corporate To protect communities social and environmental from health and safety responsibilities cannot be implemented hazard, proper training and properly, posing risk on natural habitat equipment will be needed (OP 4.04) and/or to fight forest fire. contamination/pollution (OP 4.09). Social Recognition of indigenous people (OP 4.10) in implementing social forestry mechanism has lead to the issuance of indicative map of customary forest as part of social forestry indicative map Health and Safety hazard for the communities involved in MPA, as well as communities affected by the smoke ESMF Document – Jambi 263 PROPOSED SUB- RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ACTIVITIES E & S RISKS MITIGATION COMPONENTS (INDICATIVE) MEASURES Partnership is missunderstood by community causing more encroachment 2.2: Private Sector ▪ Value chain sustainability Sub-component 2.2 needs to anticipate Environmental Partnerships for risks, such as: Introduction of organic improved Forest and Land Environmental fertilizers and organic Management ▪ Lack of market for Non-timber pesticides. forest products (NTFP) or forest Market link to ensure by-products. This will demotivate revenue from NTFPs / the community groups who will forest by-products (e.g., return to business as usual wood vinegar), as well as activities of encroaching the forest. product form social This risk of reversal is relevant with forestry. OP/BP 4.04 and 4.36 on natural Post-licensing phase of the habitat and forests; social forestry scenario to ▪ Unfair arrangement and/or weak ensure production and partnership between private revenue from social companies and local communities forestry licenses. may drive local communities to Implementation of HCV, expand the plantation in order to RSPO and/or ISPO. gain more revenue. Plantation Social expansion will create damage to the forest and/or peatland Alternative community ecosystem (OP/BP 4.04). The use economic development of burning methods will damage program including access the peatland and forest areas to finance, market, and leading to emission and lost of technology for sustainable biodiversity (OP/BP 4.36); agriculture and agriculture intensification. ▪ Due to the lack of access to organic pesticide, smallholder Community farmers may still use inorganic training/capacity pesticides and fertilizers in their ESMF Document – Jambi 264 PROPOSED SUB- RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ACTIVITIES E & S RISKS MITIGATION COMPONENTS (INDICATIVE) MEASURES plantation. The same case may development, RSPO and also apply to palm oil and ISPO. plantation companies participating Capacity building for FMU in the ERP. Therefore, OP/BP 4.09 and relevant government on pest management may apply to institution on ESMF this sub-component. Effective scheduling and Social planning. ▪ Intervention to increase capacity of Proper identification of indigenous peoples poses the risk credible trainers and/or of “modernization� that causes the training institutions to indigenous communities to deliver the required abandon their traditional values. capacity building sessions. This is relevant with OP/BP 4.10 FPIC prior to intervention on indigenous peoples; will increase understanding ▪ Access restriction (OP 4.12) if the and ownership of the project lacks inclusion of local project. communities, and lacks gender IP Plan to identify potential participation. impact on indigenous peoples (e.g., degradation of traditional values). Post-license livelihood program of the Social Forestry scenario and benefit sharing mechanism to avoid any failure that can be a trigger to opening forest area. Gender mainstreaming to ensure equal participation among genders. ESMF Document – Jambi 265 PROPOSED SUB- RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ACTIVITIES E & S RISKS MITIGATION COMPONENTS (INDICATIVE) MEASURES Component 3: Project Management, Monitoring & Evaluation and Reporting 3.1. Project ▪ Structure and financing Management risk (e.g., delay and Implementation of project Management insufficient M&E) cycle (Planning, DG CC Organising, Actuating and Control) BAPPEDA 3.2. Monitoring, ▪ Mechanism tool and Lack of knowledge and skill in Environmental Forestry Service Evaluation and implementation conduction emission monitoring and Capacity building on FREL Reporting reporting may hinder effort to calculate FMUs and MRV to ensure emission reduction. systematic accounting of NPs GHG emission (avoiding Possible double accounting in areas double accounting). DLH already involved in carbon trading or SOP or framework for those using different layers of GIS monitoring, evaluation, and system. reporting should be developed to make sure effective and efficient Ineffective monitoring system may system in place. cause delay in responding to issues in the field. ESMF Document – Jambi 266 ANNEX 13. TOR FOR ENVIRONMENT AND SOCIAL SAFEGUARD TEAM A. JAMBI JURISDICTIONAL EMISSION REDUCTION PROGRAM The Jambi Jurisdictional Emission Reduction Program (ERP) builds on the substantial commitments of the GOI and the Government of the Province of Jambi to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. At the pre-investment stage called Jambi-Sustainable Landscape Management Project (J-SLMP), technical support provided through the BioCF financing includes support to program design and systems strengthening to build government capacity to access and utilise performance- based incentives for reduced deforestation, degradation and land use change. As such, the project will support analytics, capacity building, design of subprograms to test different incentives models and stakeholder engagement. Key analytical areas include land and resource tenure, understanding local drivers of deforestation and how best to address them, and legal, institutional and policy analysis and stakeholder assessments. To support this achievement, the Government of Indonesia in collaboration with the World Bank is preparing the ERP. Through this collaboration, Central Government (hereafter “Government�) will support Local Governments. Funding this project will be a combination of funding support from the World Bank and Government of Indonesia’s own funds. In accordance to the World Bank Operational Policy, especially with regards to the requirements for environmental and social management, all programs funded by the World Bank are obliged to develop an environmental and social management plan. This Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) is prepared as a project operational document that provides guideline for assessing the potential impacts and preparing the environmental and social management plans for J-SLMP. The J-SLMP will support a combination of enabling conditions and promotion of sustainable management practices that will directly address the underlying drivers of emissions resulting from sectoral activities including, timber plantations, estate crops, subsistence agriculture, aquaculture, and unsustainable logging practices. The project design considers the distribution of remaining forests, the threats to those forests, and the key stakeholders involved in the respective areas. This project consists of three components, as follows: Component 1: Strengthening Policy and Institutions This component will address issues concerning the lack of institutional capacity to ensure good forest and land-use governance. This Component aims for improving the regulatory and institutional frameworks in forestry and other land-based sectors, as well as strengthening the instrument for enforcing such policies. Component 2: Implementing Sustainable Land Management This component addresses the lack of sustainable practices in land management. This issue was raised during stakeholder consultation and is related with tenurial conflicts involving agricultural practices in ESMF Document – Jambi 267 forest area (encroachment). This issue is relevant with the drivers of deforestation from both AFOLU and peat land. Component 3: Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Reporting This component envisages overall management of the J-SLMP implementation, and highlights the roles shared among stakeholders in sustainable forest management. Beside overall project monitoring and evaluation this component also address emission monitoring, evaluation and reporting. The potential key environmental risks identified include loss of natural habitats and key biodiversity species at areas designated as conservation/protected forest, through contamination of soil and water, and health risks associated with the use of pesticides and as result of poor waste management practices, successes in reducing impacts on forests could lead to displacements of these impacts to other areas (leakages). Potential environmental risks such as reversals may be triggerred by social aspect (social forestry and alternative livelihood) that cannot provide adequate economic motivation. The potential key social risks identified include risks associated with activities conducted in areas under existing and potential conflicts, encorachments and/or disputes or areas with overlapping boundaries and/or claims, between customary and common/formal laws (e.g., claims by Marga Serampas community within Kerinci Seblat National Park, and Orang Rimba and Talang Mamak territory in Bukit 30 National Park. Additional risks include livelihoods impacts including displacement due to bans on oil palm plantation and artisanal mining activities. Loss and/or damage to physical cultural resource, community and health safety risks for fire prevention and suppression activities, lack of awareness, management capacity and participation of community in managing social forestry, institutional capacity constraints to manage potential environmental and social risks at field level, as well as gender inequalities and social exclusion. Based on the assessment of potential environmental and social impacts, and with reference to the applicable World Bank Operational Policies, this ESMF is developed to provide operational guidance that is to be followed by project stakeholders. The ESMF establishes the modalities and procedures to address and mitigate the potential adverse environmental and social impacts from the implementation of ERP activities through employing best practices. The ESMF procedures include: (i) Ongoing consultations with relevant stakeholder groups; (ii) Appropriate capacity building measures; (iii) Environmental and social impact screening and assessment; iv) Frameworks for formulation of environmental and social management plans associated with environmental codes of practices, environmental permitting, high conservation value studies, grievance mechanism, process framework, indigenous peoples and physical cultural resources; v) Monitoring and reporting on implementation of the framework and safeguards through the existing systems. This ESMF covers procedures for environmental and social management for the implementation and monitoring of activities of Components 1 to 3 that includes negative list screening, preliminary screening of risks and impacts, environmental codes and practices, guideline for integrated pest management, HCV guideline, environmental permits and management and monitoring measures, FGRM, IPPF, RPF and PF, and PCR-CFP. ESMF Document – Jambi 268 B. PRINCIPLES AND OBJECTIVES OF THE SESA AND ESMF The J-SLMP and ERP should ensure that implementation of REDD+ programs and activities will not cause adverse social and environmental impacts, while striving to enhance benefits for local communities and the environment. A Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) was developed as part of the J-SLMP and ERP preparation. The SESA enabled extensive consultations with a broad range of national and sub- national stakeholders, including potentially affected communities to integrate social and environmental concerns into the upstream policy-making process. The SESA serves the basis for an Integrated Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), which will guide potential investments in the proposed emission reduction programs toward compliance with World Bank safeguards policies. The ESMF provides an analysis of potential risks and impacts associated with future REDD+ initiatives and will include adequate safeguard measures based on relevant typologies of activities and ER strategic options. The ESMF sets out the principles, guidelines and procedures to assess environmental and social risks and proposes measures to reduce, mitigate and/or offset potential adverse environmental and social impacts and enhance positive impacts and opportunities of said projects, activities, or policies/regulations. The following World Bank safeguard policies have been triggered by the J-SLMP and ERP: - Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01); - Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04); - Forests (OP/BP 4.36); - Pest Management (OP 4.09); - Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11); - Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10); and - Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) The Environmental and Social Safeguards team shall ensure that the provisions of the safeguards policies and procedures above are adequately accommodated in the ESMF to ensure that the ERP initiatives achieve objectives materially consistent with the OPs/BPs triggered. C. SAFEGUARD COMMITTEES The discussion is still taking place in Jambi on the formation of Provincial and District Safeguard Committees. As of now, these committees will be responsible for looking after the implementation of safeguard instruments including UKL/UPL, SPPL, IPPF, FPIC, RPF-PF, ECOP, etc. While the Provincial Safeguard Committees will be tasked to provide overall technical and monitoring support to the district safeguard committees, the District Safeguard Committee will be involved in reviewing and helping process any environmental permits needed by implementing entities. In conducting these responsibilities, both Provincial and District Committees will be supported by the E&S Safeguard team as described in this TOR. D. THE SCOPE OF THE ASSIGNMENT The environmental and social team will work under coordination and supervision of DGCC and BAPPEDA/SEKDA to support Provincial and District Safeguard Committees in safeguards implementation and supervision, including grievance management as well as mobilization of technical ESMF Document – Jambi 269 support and capacity building as necessary to enable effective safeguards and FGRM implementation. The team will be guided by the ESMF and the Project Operation Manual (POM) to ensure compliance with the GoI’s policies and the World Bank Safeguard Policies relevant to the project. The team are expected to participate in WB missions and provide up to date information related to social safeguards and grievance management at the implementation level. On a regular basis, the expert is also expected to provide workplans and activity reports. The environmental and social safeguards team is required to facilitate assessment and technical assistance to implementing agencies and especially the safeguard committees at the provincial and district levels and consultation processes to ensure that key provisions in the ESMF are met. Each of these responsibilities is further elaborated as follows: 1. Preparation of Environmental and Social Safeguards Plans a. Working with provincial safeguard committee and when relevant with district safeguard committee, provide technical advice and operational support to implementing agencies in the preparation of safeguards plans relevant to sub-project activities in lieu with the ESMF and update environmental and social risks as the ER program is being implemented. References of relevant frameworks of such plans can be found in Appendix 6 (TOR for Environmental Assessment, Management and Monitoring), Appendix 8 IPPF, and Appendix 9 RPF and PF; b. Facilitate stakeholder engagement, including public consultations for the preparation of the relevant safeguards plans as relevant to the Program; c. Support Safeguard Committee/DGCC/SEKDA, in particular coordinating, reviewing and supervising implementation of the required safeguards plans under the J-SLMP’s Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF); d. Liaise with Provincial and District Environmental Services as coordinator of safeguard committees in ensuring effective oversight of environmental and social aspects of the Program, including troubleshooting as required. 2. Safeguards Management a. In collaboration with the safeguard committees, prepare a capacity building strategy for the roll- out of the ESMF and its associated frameworks as well as the FGRM, including safeguards training plans and mentoring support to relevant implementing agencies; b. In collaboration with the Provincial and District Safeguard Committees, supervise the overall implementation of the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and FGRM and document lessons-learnt; c. Provide technical support to DGCC, SEKDA and relevant sub-national government agencies implementing J-SLMP activities in overseeing risks and identifying opportunities associated with ER activities including but not limited to: land tenure, conflict and dispute settlements, community participation, social inclusion, gender, access to benefits and access to FGRM under the project; d. In collaboration with the provincial and district safeguard committees, coordinate and oversee the implementation of the FGRM system for the project, identify areas for improvements and/or strengthening as well as identify bottlenecks and provide recommendations as the system is being tested and/or implemented; ESMF Document – Jambi 270 e. Contribute to documentation of good practices and lessons-learnt including knowledge- exchange initiatives related to the J-SLMP. 3. Communication and Coordination (see also Figure 1) a. Provide technical support in developing an operational strategy for community engagement in low emission development activities, particularly overseeing FPIC implementation to ensure consistency of principles as outlined in the IPPF; b. Support stakeholder engagement and community consultations to ensure that the project is broadly communicated, including the BSP for the project and there are feedback loops for any concerns, grievances and suggestions during preparation and implementation of the ER activities; c. Build and maintain strong cooperation and coordination with project implementing agencies and stakeholders both at national and sub-national levels; d. Collaborate with relevant stakeholders to improve safeguards management and establish networks and maintain contacts with appropriate government officials in MoEF, FMU, and sub- national governments, including village governments; e. In collaboration with relevant team members, assess the implementation of the project’s BSP, particularly at the community level and identify if there are access gaps or social inclusion issues that need to be addressed. Figure 1. Working Relation of E&S Safeguard Team with J-SLMP Implementation Structure (Safeguards) 4. Communication and Coordination a. Supervise management of environmental and social risks that may emerge and are triggered by project initiatives and provide mitigation strategies; b. Report and provide recommendations to safeguard committees, DGCC, and/or BAPPEDA/SEKDA, relevant PICs at the provincial and district levels if there are emerging safeguards risks and escalate to the relevant agencies as necessary; ESMF Document – Jambi 271 c. Monitor any emerging social risks, including changes in political economy situations that may affect risk levels and provide recommendations in due time to safeguard committees, DGCC, SEKDA/BAPPEDA as well as relevant agencies as necessary; d. Document and provide review of the overall safeguards implementation; e. Periodically review and evaluate the effectiveness the FGRM system (twice a year) in consultation with project implementers and affected stakeholders, including communities and recommend action plans to strengthen the system; E. DELIVERABLES a. Periodic reports (quarterly) on social safeguards implementation (management, communication, coordination, monitoring and evaluation); b. Workplan for technical support for social safeguards, including preparation of relevant action plans and their implementation; c. Safeguards capacity building strategy and workplan under the project; d. Reports on technical assistance to implementing agencies in the preparation of relevant environmental and social management plans (i.e. ESMP/UKL-UPL, SPPL, PoA, IPP, as applicable) F. TEAM QUALIFICATIONS The consultant team will at least consist of: a. Environmental Specialist (Coordinator), preferably with a graduate degree in environmental science and at least five years of experience in environmental aspects of natural resource and forestry projects; Strategic Environmental Assessments; developing environmental management plans (EMPs), and monitoring and evaluation of EMPs, environmental management frameworks (EMFs). Experience working in Jambi and/or with the World Bank, including knowledge of the Bank Operational Policies and REDD+ safeguards related experience will be highly preferred; b. Social Specialist/Community Development Specialist, preferably with a graduate degree in social science and at least five years of experience working with rural, indigenous and/or ethnic minority communities in Indonesia, participatory community planning and natural resource management, undertaking Social Impact Assessments and developing social management plans including Indigenous Peoples Plans (IPPs), Land Acquisition and Resettlement Plans (LARAPs), and have familiarity with government systems and the World Bank’s safeguards policies. The specialist must be knowledgeable about the local institutional and social structures. Experience working in Jambi and/or with the World Bank, including knowledge of the Bank Operational Policies and REDD+ safeguards related experience will be highly preferred; c. FGRM officer (optional), preferably with a graduate degree in social science and at least five operational experience in handling land and natural resource related conflicts and grievances. The specialist must be knowledgeable about the local institutional and social structures. ESMF Document – Jambi 272 Experience working in Jambi and/or with the World Bank, including knowledge of the Bank Operational Policies and REDD+ safeguards related experience will be highly preferred. In addition, the team may need to solicit additional support from senior, mid-level and junior technical professionals with the following expertise as needed: - Agriculture development/policy; - Indigenous Peoples; - Environmental Impact Assessment; - Benefit sharing; - Conflict resolution; - Participatory planning; - Community-driven development. As part of selection processes, the consultant team is required to share proposed key personnel’s Curriculum Vitae to the contracting authority (DGCC and BAPPEDA/SEKDA). It is expected that the Safeguards Coordinator is costed full time for the duration of the project. ESMF Document – Jambi 273