INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: ISDSA1448 Public Disclosure Copy Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 09-Jan-2014 Date ISDS Approved/Disclosed: 09-Jan-2014 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: Rwanda Project ID: P126498 Project Name: Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project (P126498) Task Team Tesfamichael Nahusenay Mi Leader: Estimated 13-Jan-2014 Estimated 27-Mar-2014 Appraisal Date: Board Date: Managing Unit: AFTTR Lending Specific Investment Loan Instrument: Sector(s): Rural and Inter-Urban Roads and Highways (50%), General agriculture, fishing and forestry sector (30%), General transportation secto r (20%) Theme(s): Rural services and infrastructure (60%), Decentralization (30%), Administrative and civil service reform (10%) Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP No 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)? Public Disclosure Copy Financing (In USD Million) Total Project Cost: 49.00 Total Bank Financing: 45.00 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount BORROWER/RECIPIENT 4.00 International Development Association (IDA) 45.00 Total 49.00 Environmental A - Full Assessment Category: Is this a No Repeater project? 2. Project Development Objective(s) 1. The proposed Project Development Objective (PDO) of the Rwanda Feeder Roads Development Project (RFRDP) is to enhance all season road connectivity to agricultural market centers in selected districts. The proposed PDO will be mainly achieved by improving access roads to agricultural market centers in selected areas. Page 1 of 10 2. The proposed project contributes to the overarching goal of increasing agricultural production, ensuring food security, and enhancing agricultural marketing. The project is designed as an integral Public Disclosure Copy part of the agricultural support initiatives in Rwanda. This project, coupled with the agriculture operations, is expected to have impact on improving the livelihood of the rural population, and this will be monitored during implementation. 3. Project Description 1. Component 1 – Rehabilitation, Upgrading and Maintenance of Selected Feeder Roads (US$41.1 million), enhancing connectivity to agricultural marketing centers; high agricultural production areas; and the classified road network. The objective is to improve about 310 km of feeder roads in four (4) districts. This component caters for: 2. Sub-component 1.1 – rehabilitation, upgrading and maintenance of approximately 135 km of selected feeder roads, in Karongi and Nyamasheke districts, through rehabilitation and upgrading plus multi-year (three years) maintenance contracts. Depending the final cost estimate of the detailed engineering design approximately 75 km and 60 km of priority roads would be improved in Karongi and Nyamasheke district, respectively. 3. Sub-component 1.2 – rehabilitation and upgrading of approximately 175 km of selected feeder roads,in Rwamagana and Gisagara districts. Depending the final cost estimate of the detailed engineering design approximately 103 km and 72 km of priority roads would be improved in Rwamagana and Gisagara district respectively. This includes: 1.1(a) Civil works, and 1.1(b) supervision services. 4. Sub-componet 1.3- –multi-year (three years) maintenance of selected feeder roads , about 175 km of roads rehabilitated and upgraded in Rwamagana and Gisagara districts, to be financed by the Government of Rwanda (GoR). This includes: 1.1(a) Civil works, and 1.1(b) supervision services. Public Disclosure Copy 5. Sub-component 1.4 - Technical Services under the Project Preparation Advance (PPA). This supports preparatory activities, including (i) design and bid document preparation of priority roads to be improved under the proposed project; (ii) updating Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs); and (iii) provision of Technical Assistance (TA), implemented under a Project Preparation Advance (PPA). 6. Component 2: Strategy Development for Rural Access, Transport Mobility Improvement and Support to Institutional Development Support to Preparation of Follow-on Operations (US$5.5 million), including: 7. Sub-component 2.1 - Preparation of business plans for feeder roads development and maintenance as well as improvement of rural transport services. This will help to provide a strategic framework for the development and maintenance of feeder roads as well as improving provision of affordable rural transport services, including promoting the use of intermediate modes of transport (IMTs). 8. Sub-component 2.2 – support to Institutional Development for Rural Infrastructure Management to build the institutional base for rural feeder roads management at the participating districts and strengthening the capacity of the national level coordination entities. The Page 2 of 10 implementation of this sub-component will be coordinated by the RTDA and include: Sub-component 2.2 (a) - Support to participating districts capacity building and strengthening the Public Disclosure Copy national coordination entities. and the support includes: (i) Support to the participating districts capacity building, including: (1) Provision of project manager for the participating districts; (2) Technical assistance (TA) to the districts Infrastructure, Finance, Procurement, Environmental Management, and Planning Units through adoption of systems and manuals; and provision of training to district staff. (ii) Strengthening the capacity of national coordination entities, through provision of training on feeder roads development planning, monitoring and maintenance tools to MINAGRI and RTDA staff. Sub-component 2.2 (b) - Provision of project management support equipment, including (i) basic equipment to facilitate the project management task at office level and field inspections to the participating districts; and (ii) Provision of basic project management support equipment to the RSSP- Project Implementation Unit (PIU) and RTDA 9. Sub-component 2.3 - Support to strengthening of the capacity of the Road Maintenance Fund (RMF) (US$0.5 million), through provision of TA, training and studies improving the effectiveness and efficiency of Road Fund management. 10. Sub-component 2.4 - Preparation of follow-on operations; including: (a)Feasibility study, ESIA and Design - for selected priority feeder roads for future improvement, including roads under the second priority package; and (b) Bidding document preparation for a second cycle multi-year maintenance contract 11. Sub-component 2.5 - Training and organization of Local Community Associations (LCAs) Public Disclosure Copy from the road side rural population to undertake road maintenance. 12. Component 3 - Support to project management (US$2.4 million), including: (a) Provision of TA (Financial Management and Monitoring and Evaluation) to RSSP- PIU. (b) Provision of TA (Technical Advisor) to RSSP-PIU and RTDA. (c) Technical, environmental, social and financial audit. (d) Support to monitoring project outputs, outcomes and impact. (e) Support to operational costs for district project management tasks. (f) Support to operational costs to central coordination entities. 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) 1. The proposed project will focus on improving feeder roads in four districts, namely: (i) Karongi (Western Province); (ii) Rwamagana (Eastern Province); (iii) Gisagara (Southern Province); and (iv) Nyamasheke (Western Province). In terms of the roads to be improved, priority will be given to roads connecting agricultural marketing centers, often located at sector headquarters to main roads and district centers, followed by collector roads linking villages, cells (hamlets) and agriculture project sites to market centers and sector headquarters. Page 3 of 10 2. The roads in Karongi are mainly hillside roads. The roads in Gisagara traverse partly hilly and partly flat terrain. Rwamagana is mainly flat, but at certain locations the roads cross swampy or marshlands. The roads in Nyamasheke cross mainly hilly areas. Public Disclosure Copy 3. The hills are densely populated with scattered settlements often located on the small holdings of individual households. However, the government has launched an initiative, which encourages the scattered settlers to live in small townships established at selected central locations for a population living in a defined rural neighborhood. 4. The hills are covered with farms and small grazing lands, with no or limited vegetation. Forest areas are mainly in the national reserves. 5. The marshlands are often in between hills and more and more used for small scale community owned irrigation based farming. The farmers usually live on the foot of the hills adjacent to the marshland. The roads crossing marshlands may have to be raised and the side slopes may have to be made flatter and involve widening, but this will not require relocating people. The existing roads often cross on the shorter side of the marshland, which will limit the negative impact. The impact on fauna and flora is expected to be limited as the roads follow existing routes, and road sides are cultivated or already cleared. 6. Roads in the hilly terrain require construction of culverts, often small in size, following the existing natural water course. Side drains may require stone pitching and check dams to control erosion. The soil along the roads is mostly soft that could be excavated by labor, which helps in limiting damages to the environment, as labor construction involves gentle cutting and minimal spillovers, when a road section has to be widened. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Antoine V. Lema (AFTCS) Public Disclosure Copy Jane A. N. Kibbassa (AFTN3) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Environmental Assessment OP/ Yes The project has prepared an ESMF and four BP 4.01 ESIAs. Preliminary findings from the Environmental and Social Impact Assessments for the first package feeder roads in Rwamagana Gisagara, Nyamasheke, Karongi districts indicate that rehabilitation and upgrading of roads will have potential adverse impacts. Potential adverse impacts include: loss of agricultural land and vegetation due to excavation of land from right of way and borrow areas; slope instability due to soil, water erosion and operation of machinery; disruption of natural drainage/flow and flooding; pollution of water bodies due to improper disposal of solid waste and spoil; increased noise and air pollution in the vicinity of construction sites. The ESMF provides detailed procedures to be followed during project implementation for Page 4 of 10 preparing the environmental assessments necessary for the selected feeder roads, as well as the details of potential impacts and suggested Public Disclosure Copy mitigation measures. Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 Yes Marshlands may be traversed by the project roads and, for this reason the Natural Habitats policy is triggered. These wetlands may have ecological value, and provide shelters to populations of birds, insects, and aquatic animal species of fauna and flora. Improper dumping of spoil and solid waste from construction sites into marshlands could lead to degradation and loss of habitat to the aquatic flora and fauna species of the wetlands. The project will strive to ensure that the ecological functions of the wetlands are retained, through mitigation measures as part of the ESMPs. Forests OP/BP 4.36 Yes The road rehabilitation will follow existing alignments with some widening, which are not expected to have significant negative impacts on forest resources. However, initial Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs) indicate that road widening on some of the selected feeder roads may lead to tree felling and/or re-planting along the roads. Potential impacts will be assessed in the ESIAs for each of the selected roads and mitigation measures provided in the ESMPs. A forest management plan may be Public Disclosure Copy prepared during project implementation as and when necessary. Pest Management OP 4.09 No The project does not involve pest management activities. Physical Cultural Resources OP/ Yes Physical Cultural Resources (PCR) are not yet BP 4.11 fully known, but some road works may be located in the influence area of some sites. Preliminary ESIAs indicate that graves could be located in the right of way. The ESMF has provided guidance on handling of PCR. Accordingly, the ESIAs address impacts on physical cultural resources and provide a physical cultural management plan including “Chance Finds”. Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 No The project does not trigger this policy. Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP Yes Civil works will induce land acquisition. A 4.12 Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) has been prepared, reviewed by the Bank and disclosed in Page 5 of 10 country and at the Infoshop on November 21, 2013. Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs) for the selected feeder roads have been prepared and Public Disclosure Copy disclosed before appraisal. Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 No The project will not finance construction or rehabilitation of any dams as defined under this policy. Projects on International No Project does not affect any international Waterways OP/BP 7.50 waterways, thus the policy is not triggered. Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP No The project does not operate in any disputed 7.60 areas, therefore the policy is not triggered. II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: The roads to be widened cross hilly terrain susceptible to land slide and marsh lands which may have fauna and flora. The rehabilitation and upgrading works will involve significant earthwork and construction of slide protection and drainage structures, as well as embankments crossing marshlands. The project is assigned Environmental Assessment (EA) Category A as upgrading of the roads to meet the proposed design standard is expected to have negative environmental and social impacts. Potential adverse impacts include: loss of agricultural land and vegetation due to excavation of land in road expansion and borrow areas; slope instability due to soil, water erosion and operation of machinery; disruption of natural drainage/flow and flooding; pollution of water bodies due to improper disposal of solid waste and spoil; increased noise and air pollution in the vicinity of construction sites. Public Disclosure Copy Bank safeguard policies applicable to this project include: (i) OP/BP 4.01 (Environmental Assessment), (ii) OP/BP 4.04 (Natural Habitats), (iii) OP/BP 4.36 Forests (iv) OP/BP Physical Cultural Resources (4.11), and (v) Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12). Cultural heritage resources are not yet fully known, but some road works may be located in the influence area of some sites, such as graves, which could be located in the right of way. Therefore, OP/BP 4.11 has been triggered. The roads crossing the marshlands may have negative impact on natural flora and fauna and OP/BP 4.04 has been triggered. The ESMF and ESIAs for the first package of selected feeder roads include proposed measures for mitigating impacts on natural habitats and physical cultural resources. The widening of the roads will have impact on natural vegetation including felling trees along the roads, which may disturb natural soil and lead to exposure to erosion, hence triggering the Forests policy, OP/BP 4.36. Proposed mitigation measures including:, tree planting to stabilize slopes, provision of proper surfacing and side drainage facilities, stone pitching steep slopes and check dams have been proposed as part of Environmental and Social Mitigation Plans. A forest management plan may be prepared during project implementation as and when necessary. The widening of the roads may also require acquiring farmlands and involve resettlement. Therefor the project has triggered OP/BP 4.01and OP/BP 4.12. As the roads proposed for upgrading may involve negative impact, the ESIAs and RAPs prepared by the Consulting firm engaged by RTDA to conduct feasibility study and ESIAs for the first Page 6 of 10 package roads have been reviewed and updated by an independent consultant. Draft Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs) and Resettlement Action Plan (RAPs) prepared by the independent consultant have been submitted to the Bank for review. Upon Public Disclosure Copy completion of the review these documents will be disclosed before appraisal. An Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) have been prepared to guide preparation of safeguards instruments during project implementation. These documents and are under review by the Bank and will be disclosed before appraisal. Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMP) to be prepared as part of the ESIAs for selected feeder roads will be incorporated in the bidding documents. In addition RAPs will also be prepared in line with the RPF and will ensure that, every person affected by the works has to be relocated and/or properly compensated according to Bank policies before commencement of construction works. All works contracts will have a provision for social impact mitigation measures, such as HIV/AIDS prevention campaigns. Land acquisition and compensation of project affected people, will be borne by the Government. Overall, the project is expected to have positive social benefits by improving the livelihoods of farmers through enhanced agricultural production. , The project will engage local communities and micro-enterprises for maintenance. Further, the rehabilitation and upgrading works under the proposed project will be carried out by small and medium contractors applying labour-intensive methods. This arrangement will help to provide employment opportunity for about 1,500 to 2,000 people living in the project influence area. Rwanda is committed to ensuring that gender issues are not only a part of the national discourse, but also that they are integrated into policies and development programs. As part of project implementation, a gender study and consultations with communities will be conducted to assess the challenges and opportunities for the mainstreaming of gender concerns in the use of, access to, and maintenance of roads. Public Disclosure Copy 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: The widening of the roads will have impact on vegetation and disturbing natural soil, which may lead to exposure to erosion and pollution of water bodies, unless proper surfacing is provided and side drainage facilities are provided with erosion protection measures, such as stone pitching steep slopes and providing check dams. The widening of the roads may also require acquiring farmlands and involve resettlement. The roads crossing the marshlands may have negative impact on natural flora and fauna. Dumping of construction waste / spoil in haphazard manner may cause surface and ground water pollution near the construction sites and breeding site for mosquitoes. In order to minimize and mitigate potential and long term impacts, the project has prepared safeguard instruments, ESMF and RPF to ensure that investments under the project are environmentally and socially sustainable and comply with international best practice and GoR policies and legislation. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. Alternatives considered to minimizing adverse safeguard-related impacts: The road rehabilitation and upgrading of the roads to a narrower road standard that could fit into the existing road alignments was suggested. However, this was not consistent with the Road Act and upgrading of the roads to the proposed standard has to be followed. To reduce the safeguard risk a detailed Page 7 of 10 ESIA and RAP have been prepared and mitigation measures will be implemented as part of the project. 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an Public Disclosure Copy assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. The ESIAs, ESMPs and RAPs have been prepared for the selected feeder roads. These documents explain the project’s environmental and social impacts and provide detailed mitigation measure to ensure sustainability and compliance with GoR’s regulations and legislations, as well as with World Bank social and environmental policies. Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI) through the RFRDP is the lead agency in the implementation of the ESMPs and RAPs and building the capacity of other actors in environmental and social management. MINAGRI has the required capacity to coordinate and implement the environmental and social management plans and monitoring programs. MINAGRI will designate one of its officers to act as an Environmental and Social Safety Officer (EO), who will provide oversight of environmental aspects of the construction contracts, including the enforcement of all monitoring requirement. The project is spread in four districts in three provinces, which also have in their core staff the environmental and social safeguard officers under the Environment and Water Resource Management Units. However, Most of the Environmental Officers at district level have limited experience and will need to be supported by the Environmental and Social Safeguard Experts of RTDA.. It is envisaged that Resident Engineers / contractor firm under the project will contribute to the capacity enhancement on environmental and social management at district level. Moreover, expert opinion could be sought from government agencies or specialist consultants. Addition support on safeguards will be provided by RTDA, through training and technical assistance on safeguards to districts under the project. The ESMF and ESIAs have made provisions for staff training and individual capacity enhanced through specialized module in the required field. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. Public Disclosure Copy CConsultations with various stakeholders: Public consultations were held throughout the preparation processes for ESMF, RPF and ESIAs and RAPs in communities along the selected roads. The stakeholders included: local governments and administrations; Community Based Organizations; Community Based Facilitators; and Non-Governmental Organization (NGOs). The consultations focused on confirming the support of the population to the project, defining potential impacts and mitigation measures, identifying potential areas of conflict between stakeholders and defining areas of collaboration. The safeguard instruments namely, ESMF, RPF, ESIAs and RAPs will be disclosed locally on the website of the National Coordinating entity (Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources – MINAGRI). The ESIAs and RAPs will be approved by the Rwanda Development Board, which is responsible for reviewing and approving development projects safeguard instruments. The safeguard documents will be provided to the four district administration, which will share with the local population through the sectors (administration structure under district) and cells (conglomerate of villages where storage facilities are established to deliver agricultural inputs and store surplus products of farmers). B. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other Date of receipt by the Bank 19-Nov-2013 Page 8 of 10 Date of submission to InfoShop 22-Nov-2013 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive 22-Nov-2013 Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Public Disclosure Copy "In country" Disclosure Rwanda 22-Nov-2013 Comments: Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process Date of receipt by the Bank 20-Dec-2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 10-Jan-2014 "In country" Disclosure Rwanda 10-Jan-2014 Comments: If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/ Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Public Disclosure Copy in the credit/loan? OP/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? OP/BP 4.11 - Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to cultural Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] property? Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] potential adverse impacts on cultural property? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/ Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Sector Manager review the plan? OP/BP 4.36 - Forests Page 9 of 10 Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional issues Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] and constraints been carried out? Public Disclosure Copy Does the project design include satisfactory measures to Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] overcome these constraints? Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] does it include provisions for certification system? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] World Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? Public Disclosure Copy III. APPROVALS Task Team Leader: Name: Tesfamichael Nahusenay Mi Approved By Regional Safeguards Name: Alexandra C. Bezeredi (RSA) Date: 09-Jan-2014 Advisor: Sector Manager: Name: Supee Teravaninthorn (SM) Date: 09-Jan-2014 Page 10 of 10