- & --- =-- - aU. .s'l -<.#I !>? i- Februarv 2003 111 I/ --. : ,- 4 OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT 111 ARIDLANDS RESOURCE MANAGEMENTPROJECT 111 (ALRMP) OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT Telegraph~caddress: "Ra~s" PERMANENT SECRFTARY P.O. Box 30510 Nairobi Telephone: 227411 PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION When replying please quote AND Ref. NO. ALRMP/1/1/1/62 INTERNAL SECURITY ?6.cB..Yax.cb......,...,20.0.J......... and date Mr. Makhtar Diop Country Director World Bank NAIROBI Dear 1bwI RE: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT As part of the preparation of the Arid Lands Resource Marlagement Project Phase 11, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was conducted jointly through a team of ALRMP officials and an external consultant. The group bad an opportunity for field visitv, which terminated in a joint wrap up meeting. A report was subiequently produced. This is therefore to certify our acceptability of the report and our endorsement that it is satisfactory. The Government therefore undertakes to meet its obligation of the report when Arid Lands kesource Management Phase I1 becomes effective. , Yours s.-*15, IUIMM~~I-~ MAHBOUB M. MAALIM, OGW FORPERIMANENTSECRETARY/PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION &a NATIONAL SECURITY This 1s tlze report of n sfudy to produce nn envzront~rentnlmanngententfranlework for the proposed Arrd Lnnds Resource Management Project, Phnse 11 (ALRMP If) for which the Governnzent of Kenyn has requested IDAfinanc~itg.l77e objectives of the study ate: Toassess the potentla1 envlronrnental mrpacts ofthe proposed A n d Lands ~e$ource Mnnageilrent Project Nrnse II, To lnforilt the pvoject prepnratron process of tlze potentlnl lnzpactof dflerent , alternatives,nnd relevnnt nlthgation measures, To establrsh clear drrectlves~ n rnethodologre~for the envlronmentnl screenltg of d sub-projects to befinanced by the ALRMP II. The project The goal ofALRMP I1 1s to foster econonuc growth nnd reduce poberhj wlthln the franzezuork of Kenya's Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). The project's developnlcr?toblecirue wlll be to enhance food securlty and promote sustainable lr~el~hoods through eflectrve systems nnd structures that reduce vulnerabrlity. ALRMP II wlll entn~lthlejbllowlng coniponents' Natural Resoirrces and Drouglzt Management. Thisconzponent will extqnd and further dmelop a drought preparedness nnd rimnagenrent system, and nrake it I s~lstnznnblern the long teriiz Commzmity-Driven Development, Tills conzponent wrllfinnnce cormunity mrcro- projects, strengthening the Colrtrnr~n~tyDevelopnrent Conlnlittees (CDCs)ebtablished lrnder phnse 1 so they cnn takegrenter clrarge nnd responsrbrllty (for pnorrtysett~n~, proczrrenlent and nlflnngementof communrty projects). I Support to local development. 7711sconzponent zl~lllsupport investments Itlmt are shared between cornnzunrtles, to support locnl developnzeizt, m d to tackle c17dllenges thnt rencll ncross coirrn~unltlclsnnd cannot be addressed at the coinrtrlinlty lebel. Major findings I The potentrnl envlron~nentalrinpncts of AL!?MP11wrll unnj rn srgnlficance izccordrng to the srze nilti strnteglc influence of sub-projects A t a strategrc level, ALRMP kn$ the potentlnl to llrnkea slgnficnnt pos~trvecontnbutton to envrronmento1 sustnlnnbihty -and specrfically pastoral sustarnnblllty -though there ore rrsks of negntlve Impacts nssonnted wrth rncltvldual sub-projects Ensurlng that ALRMP 11nlnkes a srgn;%cnntposrttve contrzbutron to envrroi~mkntnl sustalnabrllty ultll require the rntegrahon of understnndlng of pastornlrsts' rnnnpgement of their resources into the strntegrc dlrectton of the project T ~ rvlll be nddressed In the s natllrnl resources and drought nlnnagenzent componel~t Guidance on impacts Exnmples of putentml Communtiy-drlven mlcro-prolects,nnd of slzghtly larger'inter- community' projects, under the Support to Locn?Developmentconlponenbnnd the Natural Resources and Drought Mnnagement conrponent are set out In the table below. The tnblenlso lndrcntes sonre of the potenhnl negative environnrentnl l~npnctsnssocrated 201theach. Micro-project Retnarks Sclrools Adverse rmpacts are marnly assonated wath exposun of chrldren to health nsks due to lack ofsurtable sanrtafroiifacilittes, rnosqurtoes durrng evenmg classes, and tncreased rrsk of arr-bornedsease (forexample Menmgttrs) assonated rurth dusty arr construct lor^ of schools ,nay also k a ~ac localrzed tnipact on sources of materials' timber and poles Health cl~ntcs/ Thereare risks of localized Impacts due to unsattsfactory d~sposalof solrd waste drspensanes {packapng cfdrugs etc)and medrcnl waste Isynnges, used swabs etc) These should be mcinerafed to avoid eqwsure of lorn1resrdents to harnr@l wnste and contarnmatron of local water sources Blnldrng cottstruchon may also have locnlrsed rmpacts on locally sourced inafenals Other mrcroprojccts re slrelters,guesthouses, drugstores etc. Butldrrrg cortslmchon rnny nlso hnve requiring small-scale localrsed rmpacts on locally sourced malerrnls. conslructrotr Small-scale ronds Rrsb ofsorl erosron and stltahon of locd streams associated wrt11poorly destgrted road construcboir Use of ttmber, graveis and sand sourced locally may nlsohave ecolopcnl trrtp~ct~ Water pans and snmll- Threats assocrated w ~ t hwater bon~ediseases, In cases wlrcre pans are usedfir scale dams drsposnl of u~asfauaferand waslirttg, or rrtalartnwhere the pans increase local nbundartce ofmosqu~tovectors There are risks oJsorl ermron on the bairks of rcmter pans Slrailow wells Wltcrewells are trot equrpped wrth harrd pumps, there are threats of conto~nrnahon and drsease. Borehole mnstruchon Rrsks of ndverse mfpactson groutrdwater levels,and localrsed rmpncts around or rehnbrli~atrotr boreholes of lnnd degradahon wlth assonoted effects on emlogrcnl mtegnty. Tapprng of sprmgs Tapprng of spnrrgs may pose nsksfir the cuntrnurly of supply of dowrlsheanr water, 101thsocral arrd ecolog~cnlrtnpncts Small-scale rrrrgatton Small-scnle rrrrgatton carries rrsks of degradahon (rncludlng salmrzatron) cftlle {promsron ofhand rmgated Innd, however tir the cnse of the ALRMP 11, thrs activrty tor11 be ltmtted putn~s) to prwrslon of pelrol mobile putnps to cornt?rccr7ttreswho hnve mrstirrg ~rr~gatrorr Bush clearntrccfor agriculture, tftlre agr~orltrrrnlachmttm are not srrstatnab!e, ' Small-scale agricultural projecfs zurll result m land drgradafzon wrtlr tl~e~oferrtralto jmptr locnl ecosysterus income generahrtg re aptculture, fnnnrrlg of hrdes, snrall-scale qunrryng, mrik processrng, NTFPs etc. nchvrlt~s(small scale lncotrte gerrerabirgachvrhes arm to Improve revenue arnomrgfamrireswhrch processittg, quarytng, relreves the pressure otr ngn~rrlturnlnitd I~vestockproductton as a main rircorne; clrarconlproduct~orl lrence t11e ltempncts of thrs nctrzfrhJare rnalnly posttrue, although dependtng011the etc) type of actrvrty atrd the need for resources, tt rrmy rmpnct the rrntural resource bnse (collection of ruwd and herbs, qunrryrrg,fuelwood praductto~r,etc) Shelter tmprowmmt There are nsks tlial $not properly trained and educated In coirstnrctmg sheltem, tntertrally drsplaced wwrll be opted to rise the natural resource base unsustdrnably 7711scan-result in deforestahon due to tlre needfir wood, tinpacts tonatural habitats rJthe 51teIS rnappropnnte, rrrapproprmtewaste dtsposal and potentral rmpacts to surfice waters based 071proxrnrrty Snrnll scnlefislrtng Imnpacts ofjshtng are marnlyposrhve as they pmvrde alterrratrve sources ofbod for pastoraltsts and contribute lo datly mineral and vrtamrt~rntakc, however, fish~ngrfnot prachced sustartrably carr also result m reduced fertrlt$~rates aad reduced sfockfiori~over-fish~ng Protcchon of nal~irnl Act~vitrcsto support natural resource mailngernmf nirn to be posrtrue but urrtl~out resource base cnrcfut plnnrring could hue ~regahueeflects,planttng of certair~spenes 11asto be (pbntirig,formtry, etc) superulsedto ensure 8iat the species ISriot ~nua~ive,does rlot afject groundwater supplres nrid ~csult111 land degradahorr. In certarn cases, tke cu~izulaf~vee f z f'ofsorr~einvestn~entsmay have n sign$cnnt, nzgatrve lnrpnct on partrculnr enuironnrento1 resources The tnble belour sets orit sotne exnnrples- Pro]cct Potential negative i~npacts Rlsks of cuniulnhrie iinpacts on pflstoral resources, due to ovef$razrng, 111 areas urherc water palls or dams [orborcl~oles)are I I Iclose proxan~ity Therearc also rrsks ofa cun~utatlverrrlpnct or1 sources of corrsliuchon nraterrnls Very serious risk of groundwater over-extruchoriw ~ t associated risks of h saline intrusion Thcreare 11/50 risks o~curnufatme~rnpactso npnstoral resources m nreas wlrre wnter points are 111close proxrmity , Day ar~dboarding schools and Local~sedrlsks stmrlar fa those crted 111Table 5 1 Curnulatiue rrsks Irenltli cerrtres associated niarnly w ~ l hcunrulahue rnrpact orr sourcesof n~atcrmfsfbr collstnccttorl Rcstockrng Ifrestocktng 1s cnrried out r r ~rsolatron of rcrn~iigorntedtradrhqrrol sysfcnis of sustarnablcp~stornlnia~ragcnm~t,there are srg~i~ficnntr~sksofpastoral degradntiotinrtd the crcntion of dependorcy oil rcstockmgfollo~rrig droughts I Sale ynrds, nbnttorrs, nrilk arrd T/rescachurhcs are ur~tikrlyto hnrw n csrnulntiue ~rrrpnct ~ozbevertlwrc vegetable rrrarkets,vaccirratiori niay be locnliscd ~rnjmtsdue to dlsposnlof iunstewater and solld wasfes crushes, drug stores durli~goperation, nrid through sourcirrg of torrsfrrrctronrriatercnls dunrrg coilstruCfion Environmental Manngeir~entFramework Thrs report sets out fhe Enu~ronn~entnlMnrzngen~enfFranrework fknt will be us& to nvold, rnn1rge or ni~trgntenll potenttnl envirotl~nentnlr~tlpncbnssocinted wrth tide sub- I prolects The EMF inclrides~ Relevant Kenynn and World Bnnk Snfegunrd Procedures (Chapter3), Guzdance on potenttal 1t11pncts(Chapter5), I Reporhng systenrs nnd respons~btlrt~esof oficers In rn~plementcngthe EMF l(clIapter 6); Pollcy lssrdes to be ncldressed to remove constrnints to envrronrnentnl susfolnabilrty rn Kenyn's And and Sernt-~r~dlands (Chapter 71, Cnpncrty-burldzrzgand trntnrng requrrenzents (Clmpter 8);nnd Costs to be ninrnstrennied rnto project desrgn (Chnpter9) The detarls ofthe EMF wrll be Integrated Into the srib-project cycle Reporting syste~ns I Elements ofthe EMF include njlorvchurtfbr reportrng and advice, n screening checklrst for conrmunlty micro-projects, n screenrng cliecklistfor inter-conrmunrty projects under the nnturnl resources and droughf nzanngenlent, and support tolocnl development components, nnnunl report forms for officers, and expbc~tdescriptions of roles, nccompnrzl~dby tern's of reference. The screening clzeckbst for communrty rnrcro-projects ts bnsed on n llst of bnslc yes/no answers, culrninntlng In n decrslon on whetlrerfurti~eradvrce IS sought, and Gsofroin whom. The screening checklrst for lnter-community projects nlso demnnds thntfirther infbrmntion I Sgiven on the rensonlng for theyes/no answers, nnd ~tculminntes In n decislon on wllether nfurther in-depth EIA is requrred. Responsibilities The marn nzensures requzred to ~nzplernentthe EMF are: o A t thcnntionnl level, n stnffrnenzber zolll be appomted wrfhrn ALRMP PMU zulth n specific responslblllty for addressing nnturnl resources management Issues; o Also nt the nntlonal lmel, the npporntment of afull-time oficer to provlde technical backslopplng on all aspects of environmenlnl mitlgntion; o A n annual environnlental performnnce nudit, to be cnnied ouf by an rndependent consultnnt; 0 The Natural Resourcus Manngenzent Of&r ~ ~strnrulnte District Environmentnl 2 1 Conzrnztteesnnd Dlstrlct Steenng Group to dewlop strntegrc approaches to environnlental sustnznnbllrty ~nthew dlstncts, resurrecting use of the'Discrete Dwelopment Area' concept used In phase I; 0 Specijic studles would be cnrrled out on Issues of r~nturalresources nranagement nnd cumuintlve assessments. Policy issues ALRMP 11 will engnge in polrcy discussions nt i~nntionnl level, wlth n vlew to ndvocntrng reform of polry constrnlnts to environnlentnlly sustninnble development in Kenyn's nrrd nnd senzl-nr~dlarids. These pollcy dlscusslons wlll znclude: 0 Dlstrlct envlronmeirtnl oficers to be posted to all project districts, in nccordnnce wrth the Envrronrnentnl Managertlent and Coordrnntion Act; 0 Stimulating the prodrictlon of env~ro~inrentnl guidelines by the National Env~ronn~entnl Manngenzent Author1ty rn nccordnnce zvzt!~the sanle Act; Adjustment to the Dlsfr~ct-jocusedSfrnfegyfor Rurnl Developnrent to allow more room for lnter-drstrrcf plannlng pnrtlcularly mztlr regard to nntiiral resources nnd environment; o Adjustment to Wnter Law to reflect the specin1 requirenlents of small-scnlefarmers In ASAL areas, posszbiy rncluding n wnruer of fhe storage requlremenf nssoclnted wrth zrrigntlon activ~ty, o Land tenure pollcres thnt provide lncenhves for conservntlon of resources while allowing the mobillty demnnded by nrzdrty nnd pnstornlzsnr, o Support ongolng reuzsion offorestry legislntlon as n long-term strategy forfnalltntrng consematron ofwood resources of and and senti-an'd lnnds Training and sensitisation programmes Detulls of the project's training and sensitrsnt~onprogrnmrnes on environmental management nnd mrtigntron are prouzded. Reconrmendntionsfbr trnzning lnclude sensrt~satronand knozuledge frnlnrng In the nrens ofenvrronmental screentng and natural resource numagenlentfor targeted nudiences (PMU stas Drstrict Steering Groups, Dlsfrict Env1ronrnentnl/Foresty Officers, Mobile Extenston Teams, and Cornmu~nlty workers). Costs I Costsfor mninstrenntrng envzronmental recornmendahons Into the project deslgd are also prov~dedper project component The overall costs under the EMF are estzmated dt US$ 1,815,000 over the project's ~mplenlentntloi~per~od. ACRONYMS ALRMP Arid Lands Resource Management Project ALRMP I1 Arid Lands Resource Management Project Phase I1 ASAL Arld and Semi-arid Lands CAP Community Action Plan CDC Community Development Committee CDD Community-driven Development component DEC Dxstrlct Environmental Committee DEO District Environmental Officer DSGs D~strictSteering Groups EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMF EnvxronmentalManagement Framework EMP Environmental Management Plan MET Mobile Extension Team NEMA National Environmental Management Authority NGO Non-governmental organisation NRDM Natural Resources and Drought Managernentcomponent PMU Project Management Unlt SLD Support to Local Development component Acknozuledgetnents The authors would like to express theirsincere thanks to the Ar~dLands team, who gave great assistance to the study and made it both producbve and enjoyable,and to all the people we met and intervlewed in Kenya, We would particularly like to thank Mohammed Halakhe, Mohamed Farah, Geoffrey Leparteleg, Fatuma Abdikadir, Mahboub Maalib, Christ~neCornelms and Astrid Agostinr C O N T E N T S I N T R O D U C T I O N 1 OB]ECTIVES ENV~RONMENTALMANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK LAYOUTOF THIS REPORT I D E S C R I P T I O N O F T H E P R O J E C T AND P O T E N T I A L S U B - P R O J E C T S 4 BACKGROUND TO A L f l M P I I PROPOSED SECOND PHASE OF T H E A L R M P PROPOSED BUDGET PROJECT COORDINATION AND IMPLEMENTATION S A F E G U A R D S C R E E N I N G P R O C E D U R E S 12 W O R L D BANK SAFEGUARD POLICIES KENYAN LEGISLATION FOR ENVIRONMEWAL ASSESSMENT KEY B A S E L I N E I N F O R M A T I O N 16 I PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 1 16 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 1 18 LINKAGES B E M E N A S A L LIVELIHOODS AND THE ENVIRONMENT 19 G U I D A N C E O N P O T E N T I A L I M P A C T S 23 BACKGROUND GUIDANCE LOCAL, CUMULATIVE, AND STRATEGICIMPACTS LOCALISED IMPACTS CUMULATIVE IMPACTS STRATEGIC IMPACT I REPORTRVG AND R E S P O N S l B I L I T I E S IN THE EMF 1 41 KEY ISSUES AND PROPOSED ACTIONS WITHIN THE EMF FLOWCHART FOR REPORTING AND ADVICE SCREENING FOR ~OMMUNITY-MICIZO-PRO~ECTS SCREENING O F I N E R - C O M M U N I ~ P R O ~ E ~ ANNUAL REPORT FORMATS DESCRIPTION OF ROLES MONITORING AND EVALUATION P O L I C Y AND A D V O C A C Y R E Q U I R E M E N T S 72 BACKGROUND 71 REQUIREMENTS O f THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENTAND CO-ORDINATION ACT n DISTRICTFOCUSED STRATEGY FOR RURAL DEVELQPME~PT(DFSRD) 72 REQUIREMENIS OF T H E WATER ACT 73 POLICIES RELATINC TO CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES 73 POLICIES TO AVOID DEPENDENCY ON RELIEF 74 C A P A C I 7 Y - B U I L D I N G AND 7 R A I N I N G R E Q U I R E M E N T S 75 ENVIRONMENTAL TRAlNING AND SENSl'fISAXION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR C A P A C ~ B U ~ L D I N G E S T I M A T E D C O S T S COSTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INPUTS MAlNSTllEAM COSTS COSTS OF TRAINING Annexes Annex A: Llst of authors Annex B: Termsof ReJerence Annex C. Itinera y Annex D: Metltodology, people met nnd documents reviewed Annex E. Polrcy, legnl nnd dmm~stmt~ve~nmeruork Annex F. Further detail on the Environnrentnl Mnnngenlent nnd CoordtnntlonAct, 1999 Annex G: Detazled Baseline Informatron Annex H. Format for Envrronmental Inzpnct Strldzes INTRODUCTION The Government of Kenya (GoK)has requested flnanclalassistance (US$5Dm) from the World Bank for the preparation of a second phase of the Kenyo Abd Lands Resource Monagenrent Prqect (ALRMP) I The ALRMP, initiated in1995, has been Inoperation for seven years and ib nearlng ~ tcornplehon date of June 2003.Stakeholder comments and a beheficiary s assessment during the World Bank review mission of the project (~ovemker - 18 December13,2002) suggest that ALRMP has been successful in achievlng;its objectives A second phase of the project (ALMRP 11) 1sthetefore under consideration. It wlll build upon the successful processesand activities developed under the ALRMP and will be a step forwards in institutlonalhing I these processes I Thrs is a report of a study to prepare an EnvironmentaI Management ~rahework for the propwed ALRMP I1 based on an Environmental Assessment [herdafter referred to as the 'EMF study']. I The objectives of the study are. I I To assess the potentla1environmental ultpactsof the proposed prqectl whether positlve or negativeand propose mihgation measures wh~chlw~ll effectlvciyaddress these lmpacts; I To inform thc project preparation processof the potentla1Impact of different I alternatives, and relevant mlt~gationmeasures; I l To establish clear directives and methodologies for the environmental screening of sub-projects to be financed under the proposed Project ~ I I The primary tasksof the study were. To develop an environmental management framework that esta&llsh;s rnethodologlesfor environmei~talimpact assessment within project ~~ iniplementat~on,and to prepare an environmental mlt~gationplan; Identdy potential policy rssues and proposed resolution mechanlsms~ Developa capacity build~ngprogramme for stakeholders to carry 01.11 and EIA m~tlgafionthroughout the project I The study has included field visitsto Kenya's arid lands, consultaflonswith governmental and non-governmentalstakeholders, and consultation w~th pastoral communities.Thestudy's authors me listed in Annex A, and terms of reference provided In Annex B. The itineraryfor the EMFstudy is given In Annex C, and the methodology, people met and documents revrewed m Annex D. ENMRONMENTAL MANAGEMENTFRAMEWORK Thestudy has been charged with the development of an Envzronnzental Management Framework because the precisedetails of thesub-projects in terms of - exact location, materials used etc-to be financed under the second phase are not yet kn0wn.B) This is particularly the case for thecommunity-driven development component, but ISalso true for sub-projectswtthin the support to locaI development component, and the natural resources and drought management component. The above components are described in more detail in Chapter 2. It is not possible toascertain the precise location and nature of impacts at this stage. Thereforean Environmental Management Framework (EMF) is required, to screen for and manage the envlronmental impactof ALRMP 11, and tostrategically manage its overalkenvironmental impact. Principles The EMF has been prepared on the bass of the followingprinciples. Firstly, we havesought to avold considering the envlronmental susta~nabilityof ALRMP I1 in isolation. Instead we have considered (I) How can sustalnabil~ty(1.c enviro?zmenfni,soctni, ecorrorrircnnd ~nstztlitronnl)be -, ensured at cammunrty, nnd dzstrict levels? (li) How can ALRMP's contribution to thrs siistnrnabzl~tybe ntux~mzed? For example,through DistrictSteering Groups and Dlstrict Environmental Committees, ALRMP has the opportunity to fac~l~tatethe development of a caherent vision of environmental sustalnabil~tyin each district, and then work with NGO and governmental partners to achievethis. lnvestment In th~sarea of acttvlty would yield s~gnificantlonger-term benefits. (1)EnviromentalManagementFramework'8sused throughoulthisreportasasharleralternativeto lhephrasr'Envrmnmntal AssessmentManagemen$Rarncwork'used edn the termsof reference Secondly, the EMF is based on the aim of fully mainstreaming environmental considerat~onsInto the parhcipatory process for ~dentifying,planning, implen~entingand morutoring activihes orsub-projects. The forms and checklists described in Chnpter 6 have been designed to be merged fully wlth the Project Implementatioi~Manual, and the overall system of project management. Thirdly, the institutional sustainabillty of the ALRMP will be a central chajlenge to ALRMP 11. Environmental sustamabillty in ASAL dlstrlcrs will dependas much on this instttutional sustainab~lityas on specrflcenvironmental rneaiures. LAYOUT OF THIS REPORT This EMF report is shuctured as follows Chapter 1 - Introduction (this section) Chapter 2 - Description of the project and potenhal projects Chapter 3 - Safeguard screemng procedures Cl~apter4 -Key baseline mformat~on Clznpter5 Guidance on potential impacts - Chapter 6 Reporting and responsibilit~esIn the EMF - Chapter 7 - Policy and advocacy requirements Chapter 8 Training and capacity-building requirements - Cltnpter 9 Estimated costs - DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AND P O T E N T ' L SUB-PROJECTS This chapter sets out descriptions of the proposed ALRMP 11, and the potential sub-projects to be fmanced under the varlous components of the project. 2.1 BACKGROUND TOALRMP I1 Phase I of the ALRMP was initiated In 1995 by the Government of Kenya with supportof the WorId Bank. ALRMP phase I comprised of three components: drought management, marketing and infrastructure, and community development. It sought to strengthen and support community-driven ~nitratives to. 0 Reduce w~despreadpoverty and enhance food security in the arid distrrcts of Turkana, Marsabit, Mandera, Moyale, Wajir, Garissa,Tana River, Isiolo, Samburu and the arid divisions of Baringo District; and 0 Conserve the natural resource base in the arid lands using several measures: (a) improve crop and Iivestock resilwnce to drought; (b) increase economrc trnkages with the rest of the economy; and (c) improve basic health services, water supply and other socla1services. Owing to successive droughts in Kenya In the late 1990s,and the requlred emergency mterventions, ALRMP made most progress in d~sasterpreparedness, particularly through the establrshment of early warning systems. At first, less progress was made in commun~ty-dr~vensub-prolects, or the hnancing of strategic marketing infrastructure than intended, although slgnif~cantprogress was made in these areas in later years PROPOSED SECOND PHASE OF THEALRMP Under the second phase, a broadened approach ISproposed, to scale up drought management to further semi-and d~stricts,and achreve a stronger development ~mpact.This approach alms to address the complex problem of vulnerability in the project area, and enable commun~tiesto develop beyond srrnply survival and subsistence 2.2.1 Project development objectives The goal of ALRMP I1IS to foster economlc growth and reduce poverty w ~ t h ~ n the framework of Kenya's Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) The project's development objective wlll be to enlmncefood secunty and promote sustainnble lrvelihoods through effectivesystems and structures fhafreduce vulnernbrlrQ. Project cornporrents ALRMP IT wlll elitall the following components. Con~ponent1. Xntural Resources and Drought Manage~nent Thls component aims to mitrgate the risk posed by drought and other faictorsand to reduce the vulnerrrbihty of the population in areas whlch are characterized by frequent acute food ~nsecurityrelated to drought. It will build upon the brought management system established during the first phase of the ALRMP. 'dhe goal of activihes under this component are to: I Improve and extend early warning systems as appropriate (to mclu4e non- drought factors, resource tracking and ~dentlflcationof 'hot spots', ahd I Increase the number of monitors for greater accuracy), I Expand drought management system to selected food-insecure semi-arid I dlstr~cts; I Tnstltutronallw the drought management system at community, drst'rict,and I national levels; Establish distrlct drought contingency fund mechanisms ('trust funds*)whlch will remaln beyond project completion, I I Build dlstrtct level coordinahon, and instltut~onal~zerhulti-sectoral and multi- stakeholder coordinat~onin the distrrct; this will bulld on the experiLnce of D~strlctSteertng Groups under phase I to reach beyon$ coordinatio~of emergency response to coordination of development actlv~ties; ~ Strengthen distrlct planning and regulatory support where essential (eg natural resource management, catchment management etc), animal health care, and coordlnat~onof investments where complementary; I Fac~l~tatenatronal level coord~natlon,rnonrtorlng and evaluation,advocacy and polrcysupport. I Con~poner~f Cornn~unlfy-DrtvenDevelopment (CDD) 2 I This con~ponentwill flnance intervent~onsto foster devel~pmentat community levels, strengthening the Community Development Committees (CDCs) established under phase I so they can take greater charge and responslbblity(for priorlty setting, procurement and management of community proJects).~ Expected types of community driven activities as identlfled under the ~ I Community Action Plans (CAPS)fall into three broad categories I Soclnl lnfrnstnicfureand Serurce Dellvery Development priorities which affect the whole cornrnunlty (social services, health, educahon, water, smaHscale ~nfrastructure), I 0 Sajety nets: mechanisms targeted and managed by the community to support and protect the most vulnerable not just during emergency situations (to include growrng numbers of AIDS orphans, the elderly etc ); 0 Productive actzvities: Community-driven development grants for productive activities, which wilI be re-pald into acommunity-based revolving fund. Two implementation modes are envisaged. First, for cornmunlt~es/CDCswith established experience oEmanaging their priorities and finance, block grants would be provided within which they can flnance prionty act~vitiesover a specific period. Second, for less experienced communities/CDCs, micro-projects will continue (ie as in phase I) to be approved on a case-by-casebasis by the DistrictSteer~ngGroups.Grants for these communities will not exceed an established threshold (USD 10000). An across-the-board30%community contribution to all micro-projects is envrsaged as in phase I. This component will also finance capacltybuilding of communlt~esand their management committees in leadership skills, financial management and procurement, of project METstaff to support community development, visit and study tours to enable the exchange of experiencesand lessonsamong stakeholders, and the implementation of approved micro-projectsand CAPS The types of mlcro-projects to be implen~entedby communities are set out in Table2.1. This is based on experience during phase I, and interviews with stakeholders during the study. Figure 2.l~znd2.2 show photographs of sDme mlcro-projectsfinanced under ALRMP phase I. ENVIRONMENTAL RWURCES MANAGEMENT G O V E ~ M W TKEN~A O F 6 Figure 2.1 Exn-al~~plesof sclrooI birildi~igsfinanced z~llderALRMP phase I Figlire 2.2 Esa~nplesof healtll clii~icsfinnnced tinder ALRMP phnse 1 I Component 3- Support to Local Development Ths component will support activities at district and national level to support local development irutiatives,and to tacklechallenges which reach across communities and cannot be addressed at the community level. Two crosscuthng themes will be emphasized under this component, conflict resolution and natural resources management. Activities under this component will include the fol1ow1ng. 0 Support to service delivery (health, education, agricultural, animal health etc.); 0 Fostering of the development and strengthening of rural financial institutions (savings and credit); 0 Support to marketing initiatives (especiallylivestock marketing through Kenya Livestock Marketing Corporation); 0 Support to natural resource management activities and mechanisms; o Crlhcal infrastructure, including roads, water infrastructure, and communications infrastructure; 0 Support to conflict resolution mechanisms, in collaboration with Pastoral Associations and other stakeholders; 0 Researchand studles targeted at specificidentified problems, with prachcal outputs, eg training manuals, and dissemination material. Table 2.1 Types of investments under ALRMP II Project Component Types of ncttvihes Natural resourcesand drought o constructlon or rehabllitat~onof water harvest~ngstructures management such as watcr pans, roof and rock catchmenks, constructlon or rehabllltatlon of watcr dams and water storage construct~ons , protection of springs, constructlon, rehab~htatlonor equipment of boreholes, constructlon, rehabllltatlonor equ~pmentof wells, construct~onor rehabll~tationof water supply system, of natural resource base through construct~onworks such as terraces,local forestry, ind~genousso11and water conservation systems, support to emergency off-takeof livestock (making ~tmore attractwe for people to sell anlmafs), emergency food, water and seed provlslon and , emergency human and an~malhealth vacc~nat~on campaigns ENVIRONMENTAL RESOVRCF.5 M6NACEhlEfl GOVERNMENTOF KENYA 8 . Project Co~trporrertt Typesof act~vttres Comnlun~ty-drlven construct~onor rehablhtation of day schools, development (CDD) construction or rehabll~tatlonof dtspensarles , conshuct~onorrchab~lltat~onof mrnmuruiy halls, provlsronof school books, desk etc to schools, spot improvements to roads, br~dgesctc ; constructlon of shelter for internally displaced persods, constructton or rehab~litationof water harvestlng strJcturcs such as water pans and rwf catchments, I construct~onor rehab~lltationofshallow wells, 1 b re-stock~ngwith ammals, replacement ofsmall ~rrigat~onpumps & dnp ~rrlgirtin hts, support of farmers wtth Improved crop husbandry petlces (capac~tybuilding); I support women p u p s wlth thew effort to Increase tqelr working capital for trade, I construcL1onor rehab~lltat~onof guest houses as an IAcome- generating act~vlty,and I support comrnun~tieswrth development of other incqme- generahng achv~t~cssuch as apiculture, small scale h/des& shnsprbcesslng, small-scale quarrytng,sewmg,meat-drying, rnrlk-processing, fishmg, harvestlng of non-timber fo estt products (e g gum arabic) i Support to local development constructlon or rehab~lrtatlon,and equ~pmentof day and boardlng schools and health centres; support to hospitals and health centres In tcrmsof e&lpment, spot Improvements to roads. 1 support to prrvatesector communlcatlon providers ( oss~bly satellltc communication systems, but also less soph~t~cated options e g tclccentres), - I constructlon or rehabllitatlon of sale yards, abattwrsl mllk and vegetable markets ~ II rehab~l~tatlonof stock-routes (malnly watcr polnt rehablhtatlon), II canstructlon or rchabll~tatlonof vaccination crushcs and1 construct~onor rchabllltat~onof drugstores I Project target areas ~ ALRMP 11 rv~ltcontinue to work in the arid districts of Turkana, Marsabit, Mandera, Moyale, Walir, Ganssa, Tana Rlver, Islolo, Samburuand the arid divisions of Baringo In addit~on,drought preparedness and manageme4t will work in the seml-and areas of Narok, Transrnara, Kq~ado,Makueni, ~ ~ t u i , Mwingl, Tharaka, Mbeere, Laikipia and West Pokot. II Flgure 2 3 illustrates the districts ~nwhich the project w~lloperate I Figure2.3 ALRMP phase II areas PROPOSED BlLR.MP 11DISTRICTS Source World Bank,ALRMPII Project Appraisal Document, rev~sedverslon (March 25, 2003) ENVIRONMENTALRS~URCESMANACEMENT GOVERNMENTOFKENYA 10 A project cost~ngis under preparabon, but will be revised during appraisal Table 2.2 prov~desind~cahvefigures avalablefrom the Pro~ectConcept Docurnknt World Bank financingof USS60m is sought The borrower will contr~but~ U5$20m to meet thetotal ALRMP budget of US$80m I Table2.2 Proposed budget I I I Natural resources and drought 34.00 42 5 25.00 417 ~ rnana~ement I a --.--..------...- 1...- .- -------- Carnmrintty-dnvendateloprnent 3100 38 S 25.00 S7J.-..- Support to local developrnenf 1500 188 1000 16 7 Total projkct costs 80 00 100 6000 100 Tota]financing required 80 00 100 6000 100 1 I 2.4 PROIECT COORDlNATION AND IMPLEMENTATION I As under phase I, ALRMP I1 will be coordinated from a Project ~ a n a ~ e $ e nUnit t (PMU),staffed by professionals wlth extensrve experience of ASAL areas)af Kenya Withm each district an ALRMP off~ccrwith a small team of supdort staff will coordinate actlvlties, partrcularly through the District Steer~ng~ r o u b s (DSGs)established in phase I I DSGsconsist of a rnultisectoral range of stakeholders including governdent i ofhcers, NGO representatives and community elders. (The list of particl ants in meeting of the Gar~ssaDSG held during this study InAnnex D prctvides useful indicat~on.)At community levels,as under phase I, community developbent cornnuttees (CDCs)w~llbe estabhshed to coordinate act~vibes I I I I SAFEGUARD SCREENING PROCEDURES The proposed Environmental Management Framework has been designed to fully comply with national envlronmental codes and leg~slat~onsIn Kenya and with the World Bank's envlronrnental and socia1safeguard policies. This chapter sets out the key safeguard policies that provide the policy context to the EMF including World Bank pohcies and Kenyan legal requirementson environmental assessment. More details of the policy context are provided in Annex E. WORLD BANK SAFEGUARD POLICIES As part of the EMF process, proposed m~cro-activitiesunder the ALRMP I1 will be designed at the local level to ensure that they are screened for potential impactsand that they comply with the requirements set out under World Bank safeguard pohcies. The ALRMP I1wlll have mostly beneficialimpacts on the environment, however, somesafeguard policies have been triggered by the project. In accordance with the W ~ r l dBank safeguard policies, the proposed project has been rated Category B under the Bank's policy on environmental assessment (OP4.01),requiring a partial environmental assessment. The project has also triggered the safeguard pollcles OP 4.04, OF4.36, and UP 4.09 as rndlcated in Table31 Table 3.1 Safeguard Policies Eqv~ronmentalAssessment(OP 401,BP401,GP4 M) Yes Natural HablQts(OP4 04, BP 4 04,GP4 04) Yes Foreshy (OP436, GP4 36) Yes Pest Management (OP409) Yes Cultural Property (OPN1103) No lnd~genousPeoples(OD4 20) No Involuntary Resettlement(OP412, BP4.12) No Safety of Dames (OP437,BP4 37) No kojects In InternattonalWaters (OP7 3, 750,GP750) BP No ProjectsIn Disputed Areas (OP7 60, BP7 60, GP 760) No This can be explained as foIlows: E N V ~ R O N ~ N T ARWURCESMANAGEMEPCT L GOVERN~~HOFKWA 12 OP 4.01 (Enmronrrlentnl Assessn~enf) The OP 4 01 has been triggered because there ISthe potential that ~mpiemehtatlon of the ALRMP I1may lead to adverse environmental impacts. The EA stud;y, however, has determined that there are no potentla1 large-scale, significan/ or ~rreverslbleenvironmental impacts associated with the project. The poten$al impacts tdent~f~edare nialnly localized ~mpactsassociated with activities tb be financed under the CDD component of the project (i.e, schools, health clin/cs/ dispensaries, shelter ~rnprovement,water supply, etc), wh~chcan be effectjvely rnit~gatedand are addressed In the EMF and uslng the screening and revidw procedures In Cl~npfer6 The EMF ~dent~fiesthe major potentla1environmdntal issues that could ahseas a result of project interventions and proposes m{asures to be taken to mlhgate these effects, including proposed training and mon)toring measures. I i OP 4.04 (Nnturnl Hnbrtnfs) The OP 4 04 has been triggered due to the potential nature of ALRMP I1 aktlvlher to border or operate in natural habltats or protected areas Kenya has a rlcpl biodiversity and a number of protected areas designated by law The prolhct areas under the ALRMP 11encompass a number of natural habitats and/or ma4 border or operate in these areas including two interliat~onallydesignated areas, hllt. Kulal Biosphere Reserve and the Amboseli B~osphereReserve The EMF will Iddnhfy any potential Impacts that actlvlties to be flnanced under the project may have on natural hab~tats,reserves or protected areas in Kenya Moreover, the A L R ~ I1 P wlll frnance under the first project component, Natural Resources nnd Droukht Mnnngernent, (a) a baseline natural resource management and ecological s h e y of the area (aer~aland ground), and (b) preparation of a natlonal ASAL NatLjral I Resource Management Strategy. i OP 4 36 (Forestry) Forests, though not a common feature of the project area, do constrtute seheral important watcrsheds. Moreover, small-scaleinfrastructure to be hnanceg under the project may induce pressure on forest resources, mainly the need for wood for construction To mitigate this concern and comply w ~ t hthe safbguard po(~cy,the ~ EMF has provided necessary measures in the screening process to ~dent~f) Impacts on forests and forest resources. Good practice measures are also recommended to address these concerns Moreover, it is anticipated that fhe project, through the drought management component, and through enhabced 1 participatory mechanisms, wlll rase awareness and empower cornmunit es to increase protect~onof fraglle watersheds I OP4.09 (Pest Management) The project could concervably, through promotion of rain-fed or irrigated farming and vaccination crushes, indirectly increase the use of pestic~des.In addition, it is conceivable that project funds will be used for animal pesticides, either dlrectly or Indirectly. To mitigate agalnst the potential for pestic~deuse and cumuIat~veimpacts of pesticides due to the nature of subprojects, the screening and review system provtded in the EMF wit1identify the potential for subprojects to tr~ggerthe OP 4.09, and will provide guidance on mitigating impacts related to them. For projects with potent~alto introduce or encourage the use of peshcides, a mini-pest management plan will be required (either separately or as an annex to the micro-project EIA). The plan should outline the measures to be taken to ensure that the micro-project does not result in pesticide use or introduction. For potent~alcumulative ~mpactsas descrtbed under the policy, an Integrated Pest Management Plan is recommended during implementation of the project to ensure comp11ancewith the World Bank's safeguard requirements. 3.1.1 Mainstrearning safeguard compliance into sub-project screening The screening criterra provided in the EMF includes relevant questions on natural habitats/protected areas, involuntary resettlement and Iand acquisition, introduction of pestlc~des,impacts to forestry resources, impacts to culturaI property and inclusion of indigenous people in the project ~denhficationprocess. This will ensure that ail concerns related to the Bank's safeguard polic~esare taken into account during the screening of micro-projects for potential impacts, and that the appropr~atem~t~gationmeasures can be adopted to address them. 3.2 K E N Y A N LEClSLATlON FOR ENWRONMEATAL ASSESSMENT The preparat~onof this EMF has also taken into account the requirements for environmental assessment under Kenyan law, ma~nlyunder the Evu~ronmentnl Managenrent ~ n Coord~nntionAct. The Government of Kenya passed this law in d 1999, following the identif~cat~on of the need to Improveenvironmental assessment in Kenya's National EnvironmentaI Action Plan.2This requlres that the proponent of any projects or programs to be carried out in Kenya undertake a systematic examination to determine whether or not the activity wiIl have any adverse impacts on theenvironment The act stipulates: o EIAsshall be carried out In accordance with the guidelines issued by the National Env~ronmentalManagement Authority (NEMA); o Requirements for environmental aud~tand monitoring; o 'Control' environmental auditing of developments built prior to the act passing Into law, (1) KenyaGazetteSupplementNo 3 (ActsNo1)2000 EIA experts are to be registered with NEMA, but may be proposed by1the project proponent; The establishment of Dlstrict Envrronmental Committees at district levels, a tribunal (rndependent of NEMA) to oversee disputes,and a publ~ccobplaints committee. I Under thesystem of EIA, projects are screened by NEMA- ~f no significadt environmental Impactsare predicted, a license is granted, if significant environmental risks are predlctcd, NEMA requests that the proponent caknes out a scopingstudy (by experts registered with NENIA). The most common c$utcome is the grantingof a lrcense with cond~t~onal~tiessuch as the establishmend of an environmental management plan. There is no minimum slze threshold which an EIA is not necessary NEMA is developing guidelines for EIA setting standards and method01 These are expected to be available following their legal gazektement policy requirements sets out how ALRMP I1can stimulate the applrcatron of these guidel~nes. ~ I 3.2.1 Sub-project screening under Kenyan Iazu I With these requ~rementsIn mind, for those sub-projects which require ad ETA, as d determined under the screenlng and review process (Clmpter 61, a copy o the EIA report ~ ~ 1be1submitted to NEMA for approval. NEMA will have 2 wee s to 1 revrew and comment on the EA before the sub-prqect can be appra~sed ensure that sub-projects that may have potent~allys~gn~ficantimpacts an more detailed study recelve nahonal level approval as welt as dlstrict approval 3.2.2 NEMA npprovnl of this EMF II NEMA has ~ndlcatedto the authors of thls EMF that, as long as NEMA opportunity to approve the EMF, they would not requrre ETA of all or mlcro-prolects. 3 The second schedule ("Projects to undergo envlron Impact assessment") of the Environmental Management and ~oordinat~&~ Act, I 1999 is provided zn Annex F. I KEY BASELRVE lNFORMAT1ON Thischapter briefly outIineskey baseline information on environmental resources In the project areas. A more detailed assessment of the basebne features of Kenya relevant to the ALRMP II ISprov~dedin Annex G. Kenya:background 0 Kenya has a total area of 58.7 million hectares, including1.1million hectares covered by water, 0 There ISanestimated population of 28 5 milllon, with a growth rate of 3 5 per annurn.[d) 0 Eighty-five percent of the population l~vein rural areas and are dependent on agriculture for their livelihoods ASAL dlstrlcts 0 Kenya's ASAL areas cover 48 million hectares, equivalent to 82%of Kenya's land area. a ASAL areas have a populahon of approximately 5 million 0 The ALRMP project area falls mainly wlthln the arid belt in Kenya where the inadequacy of moisture imparts critical limitations to localecological productivity and soclo-economlcdevelopment. 4.1.2 Physiograplry and climate Kenya is charactenzed hy a vaned topography from the Ind~anOcean coastline to over 5000m at Mt Kenya. Key relief features are: 0 the Rift Valley,separating two sets of h~ghlandmasses to theeast (Aberdares and Mt Kenya) and west (Mau Hills and the Cherangan~s). 0 Respectively these provlde watersheds to the Ng'no lowlands runnlng down to the Indian Ocean, and the Lake Victoria bas~n Mean annual temperatures range from very low (below freezlng polnt) on Mt Kenya to over 30QCIn the lowlands (4) 1999 Populal~oncensus Potentla1Evapo-traispiratlon (PET)demand ranges from a high of over 2400mm in the arid lowlands to below 1200mmon top of Mt Kenya. I Clirnntcof the ASALs Ramfall in the arld zone ISoften below 400mm per annum, and wet seasonsare short and often separated by spells of over eight months (rifer10 Annex G)! Agro-climatzc yotentia 1 I 1 Kenya is divisible into seven distlnct agro cl~maticzones on the basis of thb ratlo of rainfall to potenhal evapotranspirat~onP) Elghteen percent of Kenya's land area is considered to be high potential f agriculture, ie the Land withln Immediate vic~n~tyof the central highland The remain~ng82%are the ASAL areas, cornpr~sedof four agro-climatic to VII), refer to Annex G The cl~mateof ASAL areas therefore places severe limitahons on ASAL a ecolvglcal potential. In addlt~onto low and erratic ramfall, ASAL areas suffer frequent droughts during which water and fodder supply for greatly decimated I Geology and soils Arrd zone soils are generally def~c~entin plant nutr~ents,have a low nat fcrtrl~tyand are vulllerable to salintzation and erosion, for the Most ASAL sollsare poorly weathered slnce they were dertved from 1 basemcnt complex rocks, Floodpla~nso~lscomprlse alluvial sedlments deposited by water and h sed~menlarymaterial developed From weatherlng of basalts; On floodplain solis, sandy loams and clay loarns developed, often ! WI i a . sahne-sod~clayer (see Flgtire1.1in Annex G); Extenswe sodlc~tyalso occurs in some areas where solls have develo ed from marine sediments (Marafa beds), and are consequently characterized y compact coarse sandy clays wlth a sandy clay loam surface locally seabng loam plains, for example these occur extensively In southeastern Wapr where h~glisoil sodlclty ISreported. ~ (51Sornbroek.elal, 1973 I 4.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 4.2.1 Population and settlement TnbIe1.3in Annex G provides data on the population of ALRMP distr~cts The total population of ALRMPdistricts is about 4,111,395(1999Census), approx~mately14%of Kenya's total popuiahon. The annual population growth rate was about 2.8%between the period of 1979 and 1999, which is slightly Iower than the national average of 3.5%. Also, unlike the nahonal populat~ongrowth rate, which has decllnedfrom close to 4%per annum, that of the ALRMP area issteady. However, the north-eastern districts of Gar~ssa,Mandera and Waj~renjoyed a high population growth rate during the period of 1989-1999,in sharp contrast with the1979-1989 period when there was little or no population growth in a11three distncts. The renewed growth rate is possibly explained by several factors including the conftict in neighboring countries, which accelerated immigration and natural migration into the region Ow~ngto then massive land areas and low agro-ecologicalpotential, ALRMP d~strictshave low population densities of below10 persons per km2. Populations are distr~butedbetween urban centres (to where they areattracted by markets and the ava~labilityof social mfrastructure), rural villages (manyattas), and mobile groups. 4.2.2 Semi-arid lands Semi-arid lands basically fall in agro-ecological zones IVand V character~zedby ramfall which exceeds potential evapotranspirat~onIn dur~ngthe wet seasons (March to May and November). The main types of land-use include Sedentary pnstornhsnl.These are some cult~vatorfarmers who keep a few heads of cattle as an investment. This takes place in agro-ecological zone.IV especially where land adjudication is complete. Agro-pastornltsm, These are former pastoralists who have taken to crop farmlng due to loss of livestock or may be pastoralists who keep livestock and at the same time practice ram-fed or irr~gationagricultural. Though agro-pastoralism IS ma~nlypracticed in semi-arid lands ~tIS increasing becorn~ngan important land use practice within the arid districts of ALRMP region, especially due to increasingfood insecurity brought by drought. Non~ndrcpastorni~sm.These are pastoral~stswho dommate the distr~ctsof ALRMP The most important pastoral districts in thrs category include Garissa, Isldlo, Marsabit, Moyale, Mandera, Wajir, Turkana and a greater part of ~amburh.Most 41 of the livestock is highly mobile and disperses over wide areas in search pasture and water. The terrltory they cover ISoften vast,sometimes acros countries The national econo~nyand the contribution of ASAL areas i f Agriculture 1sthe single largest sector of the Kenyan economy, accountin for over 30%of GDP and 70 percent of employment. Agriculture also accou ts for an additional 30%of GDP through its contribution to the manhfacturing an services sector. Two-thirds of Kenya's Industrial output 1s This fact explains why growth in the agriculture sector followed parallel trends over the last 20 years. The econonlic marnstay of ASALareas is livestock production. ~urrenti4,ASALs account for50%of Kenya's livestock, 3%of agricultural output and 7%o f commercial output. I Socio-weyare indicators 1 Escalating poverty 1sa nahonal concern as over 62% of the Kenyan popullation are 1 below the poverty hne According to findings of the GoK Welfare Monl onng Surveys of 1997,53% of the population In rural areas were categorrsed a 'overall poor' and 50%as food poor. Poverty levels among pastoral communitle within 1 ASALs are high, eg over 82%of the population ofSamburu district are p or Infant Mortality Rates are very high. in some d~strictsmore than double he national average of 74 for every 1000 births. Tnble1.4 in Anna G provld s some ~ indicators of poverty within the ALRMPdistricts Increasing frequency of drought is a major contributing factor to poverty withtn the ASAL areas Due to drought, on average, each ASA household has lost 40%of cattle and 20%shoats {GoK,200'2), negat~veimpacts on diet and nutrrtlon of pastoral on food ald has increased. LINKAGESBETWEENASAL LIVELIHOODS AND THE ENVIRONMENT 1 There are several key linkages between livelihoods and environmental rksourcer which are relevant to pastoralism in Kenya. These are outlrned below. 1 4.3.1 Exploitation of local vegetation Vegetation provides the basls for pastoralism. Under pastoralxsm, the natural vegetation1sextensivelyexploited for browse and grazing by livestock (camels, cattle, goats and sheep) where it provides both fodder and salt supplements (11)Nan-postoral use of vegefntion Range vegetation 1salso exploited to supply a host of other productsand servlces as follows. Exploitation for food Some ASAL tree species have edible fruits and parts that are used as food. When moving wlth livestock far away from homesteads, pastorallsts may also collect and chew natural gums, collect wild honey, and fruits. Material for shelters and fencing.These Include poles, posts, withies and grass for house construction and brushwood for thorn fencing Fuel~ooodDead dry wood a collected to supply household energy for cooklng and heating Charcoal production. Exploitationof Acncln torhlts for charcoal production is on the increase withm the ALRMP d~strlctsSince charcoal produchon is largely a commercialactivity, lt is increasinglyencountered along transport lines where a ready market is assured. Ethno-botanical products. Pastoral communltles have a strong tradlhon of utll~zingethno-botarucalproducts to supply herbal medicines and remedies for both human and veterinary use. Ethno-botanicalproducts are used to treat 'aliments, intestinal worms, household vermin, and tlcks,for example Gums and resins. Gum arabic, Myrrh, Hagasand Olibanum are each natural exudates from ASAL tree and shrub speciesand which have been Items of trade within theSudano-sahelian reglon for centuries. (11) Seasonal cult~vatton In formerly pastoral areas, some seasonal cultivation along permanent water channels is practiced but the combinationof aridity and poor soils makes rain-fed cropping a risky business.Some vrigation is tried using floodwater but this IS constrained by inadequacy of technology for water management. ENVIRONMEMAL R~URCESMANAGEMENT GOVERNMENT OFKENYA 20 (IV)Protected nrees nnd ecotouns!ll The ALRMParea is endowed with vast and diverse wrldlife reserves, whrdhare dispersed from the mountarn ecosystems rlght rnto savannah country ~nble in 1.7 a1 Annex G shows the main reserves In arid districts and their conservation v lue. Utilization of water resources I,,*, Pastoralrst herds hrghly mobile and drsperse over wide areas In search of odder and water. Dur~ngthe wet season, pastoral comrnunibestravel an averag of 1.4 km to source domestrc water, mcreasing to 41km during the dry season. often cover distancesof up to5.8 and 35.8 km in the wet and dry seasons respechvely rn search for water. I Traditionally, patterns of movement were synchronized wlth river supplying both water and Fodder. Tn recent decades patterns of ceased or altered as a result of erratrc river flows, and the availabilrty of points (pansand boreholes). The maln sources in ALRMP areas are the rlvers Kerro, Turkwel, Lokodetl i Perkerra, Molo, Ewaso Ng'lro, Tana and Daua and from lakes Turkana a d Banngo Surface water sources are constrained 111ASAL areas. Dramage ensity is low due to hlgh evaporative losses assocrated with arrdity. Water ISon1 readily avarlable in the lakes and channels of the maln rivers whrle the re t of the 9 area 1sdry. Water is also available in laggas immediately after the rains b t these dry up or flow as sub-surface rivers from whlch water can only be extrac d r" through wells sunk Into their sand beds Grorrndwnter 1 For the majorlty of the ALRMP area, explo~tatlonof groundwater through boreholes and shallow wells is used to supplement domestlc and lrvestoc water I!' needs. Groundwater in the ALRMP dutrrcts is ava~lableIn depths of bet een 100 and 200m below ground level from which it has to be pumped Avallabi ~ t of y 4 groundwater varres with aqulfersbut 1snormally highest for aquifers slt ated along dralnage courses where seasonal recharge IS guaranteed The maj rty of t shallow wells are also located along dramage lines where they are used t tap sub-surface flow The quallty of groundwater rn the ALRMP areas has generally high varialblllty 1 w ~ t hgroundwater reserves of divergent qualrties occurnng s ~ dby srde. n some e cases, salinity rates (ie electr~calconductivity values) in excess of 16,000 rnmhos/cm (the uppermost llm~tof salinrty for the camels, the most salt domestlc animal) are wldely encountered Other emerging concerns Increastng proneness to drought Drought occurrence in ASAL areas IScyclic, with events being experienced every 5 to 7 years. The ability of the pastoral communities to survive through periods of drought has been highly dependent on thelr capacity to spread their risks, to move on to new areas of grazing as resources are depleted, and to take advantage of highly diverse dry land environments (riverine, woodlands, hill top forests, and dispersed watering polnts). Moreover, the ability of the ASAL populations to continue their pastoral way of life has come urider increasing pressure In the last flvedecades as access to the dry-season grazingareas has been lost to agriculture and private ranching in nelghbour~ngsemi-arid lands, wildlife reserves, and more recently, irrigated agriculture. Tncreasedovergrnzing There are increasing trends of pastoralists sedentatising around water points in ASAL areas leading to localised overgrazing. Overgrazing at the watering points has led to the removal of the herb layer and exposure of the soil to forces of eroslon.The consequences of reduced vegetation cover are the loss of precious water by surface run-off and increased eroslon. This leads to a vicious clrcleof less produchon and greater tosses of water. Confiict over water Increawng population growth and economlcdevelopment in the highland catchment of Meru, Nyambene, Nyandarua, Nyeri and Lalkipia have raised the demand for water. Increas~nglymore water is being abstracted to supply rural and urban water supply projects and in some cases, ~rrigat~onespec~allywtthin Latklpia Distrlct The end result is a steady decllne in the quantity and quallty of downstream flows Reduced river flow leads to a concentratron of w~ldand domest~canimals around the few remaining accessiblewater sites with grave consequences such as increased local~sedovergrazing. Further, a drastlc degradation in water resources, such as the human-induced reduction of water flow durlng the dry season, exacerbates the conflicts between indiv~duals, different communit~es,and different users GUIDANCE ONPOTENTIALIMPACTS Thts chapter provides guidanceon the potentla1 envlronmental lmpact ALRMP 11, and provldes the basis for the EMF It 1sdesigned to provld of gutdance for those officerscharged w ~ t hthe ~mplementationof the in Clzapter6. I I Environment 'Environment' descr~besmany different aspects of Kenya's and pastora 1st~' resources 'Environment' includes issues of, for example, land degrada Ion, human health, water resources, water quabty, people's access to the be ef~tsof natural resource use, gender drfferentiatton in use of the environment, atural habitats, protected areas, and biolog~caldiversity In the ~mplementat~ n of the EMF, ofhcerswill recognize that a particular activlty or development c n have I posit~veimpacts on one aspect of 'envtronment' while havmg negattve mpacts on another aspect. Water, Pastoral Resources, and Livestock I Food security and reduced vulnerab~lityto drought in arid and semi-a Kenya are closelyassociated with sustalnabil~ty,tncludtng sustamability, and w ~ t hm~nimizingpotent~allynegatrve of development and human~tanana ~ dDlsaster . depends directly on envtronmental resources. lnteract~onw ~ t hItvestock. Officers wlll (benehctai) and negatlve (adverse) projects. Irldirect and crim~ilatrveimpacts I To predict the envlronmental tmpact of the project, off~cersshould und beneflaaries' livel~hoodstrateg~es,stnce there may be ~nducedenviron Impacts that occur as a result of the project impact on local economies 1 In add~hon,the Impacts of some of the sub-projects may 'add-up' to ha e a slgnihcant cunru/at~ve impact Officers \vrll be aware of the Issueof pot ntlal cumulahve Impacts in irnplemenhng the EMF LOCAL, CUMULATlVE, AND STRATEGlC IMPACTS The potential environmental Impactsof ALRMP I1will vary In significance accordingto the size and strategic influenceof sub-projects. At a strategic level, ALRMP has the potentla1to make a signlflcantpositlve contribut~onto environmental sustainability.This EMF has been designed to ensure that this positive ~mpactis assured. Ensurlngthat ALRMP II makes a significant posttive contribution will be based on the integration of an understanding of pastoralwts' management of their resources into the strategc direction of the project Some of the investments to be financed under the Support to LocaI Development component and the Natural Resourcesand Drought Mmnagernent component carry r~sksof significant negativeimpacts, particuIarly through cumulative impacts. Some of the smaIlercomrnunity-basedInvestmentsto be financed through the Comnzuntty Driven Development component also carry risks of locallsed negative environmental ~mpacts.However, through the application of this Environmental Management Framework, these Impacts will beavoided or mitigated Thisconclusionoffersa simple three-way categorisahonof environmental impacts that the ALRMP I1 will use to conslderand manage impacts: locallsed, cumulative, and strategic. Thlsconceptual framework is set out in Ftgure 5.1 Thesectionsbelow provide further guldanceon the potential impacts that are likely to be generated by activitiesfinanced under the proposed ALRMP 11. I Figure 5.1 Localised, cri~ntilatlvennd strategic environmental impacts I 1 Impacts are srgnrficant, unpredrctable. and drffrcultto manage development Impacts are less srgnrficant,more predrctable,and easily manageable LOCALISED IMPACTS I These are impacts that are felt wrthrn the ~mmcdiatevlcln~tyofthe centre operation. Local~sedrmpacts normally display a cause-effect therefore qu~teeasy to predict and relate to a specific actlvity potentla1to be locally severe (egcontamlnatlon of a generation of an obnoxrous smell from a tannery, local etc),and thew accurnulatron can be of wlder s~gniflcance The potentla1locallsed impacts of sub-projects are analysed under the fol1bwing sections 5.3.1 Potential impacts of the CDD cornponent M~cro-projectsmay have diverseenvironmental impacts, anticipated to range fromsmaIl issues of human health to more complex effects such as pollution of water resources, or accelerated land degradation. Whether or not these potentla1 lmpacts occur will depend on the extent of the application of environmental understandingduring design and implementation. However, micro-projects will be small in scale:and therefore thesignificanceof the direct negative environmental impacts is likely to be small. It is anbcipated that there will also be positive impacts as a result of the natural resource management activities to befinanced under the first component Table 5.1 sets out the potential impacts of likely micro-projects,and Tnble5.3provides further guidance on mitigation measures. The material in Tables 5.1 and 5.3 will be expanded upon durlng ALRMP I1for practical, applied use in the tralrung sessions and rn the fteld operations. Table 5.1 Potetttial localised ertvirontnental impacts of tnicro-projects within the Cotnrnunity-driven Development coinpottent Micro-project Remarks E ---- ---.-------.- - -.--- .-.- -.--..---..-.. - ---+ - - - Schoob x x x Adverse ~mpactsarc malnly assoc~atedw~thexposure of ch~ldrento health nsks due to lack of su~tablesanltatlonfacllltles, mosqultoesdurlng evenlng classes, and ~ncreasedrisk of arr-borne dlsease (forexample Menlng~tls)assoclated with dusty alr Construction of schools may also ------------------. - .--.----- have a locallzed Impact on sources of matenals tlmber and poles - ------- -.--- ---- -.-- .- --L- Health cl~nlcs/ x x x k - There are risks of locallzed Impacts due to unsat~sfactorydisposal of solld waste (packaging of d~spensar~es drugs etc) and med~calwaste (syringes, used swabsetc) These should be lnclnerated to avo~d exposure of local residents to harmful waste and contamlnatlon of local water sources Building -- --- ---.-----.-----.--.-- construction may also have locallsed Impacts on loca9 sourced materlals ---.-- ..--- - ---- ----- ----.----- Other m~croprojects x - le shelters, guesthouses, drugstores etc Bulldlng construction may also have local~sedImpacts requlrlng small-scale on locally sourced materials -- constructlon -- ----- -------------------------- ..-.------- -----------am---- Small-scale roads x x x - Rlsks of so11eroslon and slltat~onof local streams associated with poorly deslgned road -- -- - --- -- - -- - ---.consttuctlon.------.--------.--------- - -. -- Use of t~rnber,gravelsand sand sourced locally may also have ecolog~calimpacts - -.---.--- --- ---.-.-- ---- - -- Water pans and x x Threats associated wlth water borne d~seases,~ncases where pans are used for d~sposalof small-scale dams wastewater and washlng, or malarla where the p a w Increase local abundance of mosquito - ---- _ vectors There are r~sksof so11eroslon on the banks of water pans --. - _-._ -- -- - -^ _&_I__ __-I ShaUow wells - x x Where wells are not equipped wlth hand pumps, there are threats of contamlnahon and disease - _ I _ _ I . - _ _ _ _ _ _______C.___ + - I---- Borehole x s x . R~sksof adverse Impacts on groundwater levels, and locallsed Impacts around boreholes of land construchon or degradat~onwlth associated effects on ecological tntegrlty ---- rehabllltat~on ___ - _._________ -.___ -..--_._-.-_---I.- I - I Tapplng of sprlngs x x Tapping of sprlngs may pose risks for the conhnulty of supply oldownstream water, wlth social ----- -.- ---.-.-----. and ecolog~calimpacts ------ --\.--.---------- ----- -. Small-scale ur~gat~on - I x x Small-scale urlgatlon carrles rlsks of degradation (lncludmg sallntzatlon) of the lrrlgated land, (prov~slonof hand however ~nthe case of the ALRMP 11, thrs act~vltywill be limited to provision of petrol moblle - pumps) ---.- -__- pumps to comrnunlt~eswho have exlshng Irsatlon schemes, hence Impacts are mlnlmal ----- --..-._-- -._---- x x - - Small-scale ---- -- Bush clearance for agriculture, ~f the agricultural achvltles are not sustainable, will result In land -- __- ---- - - -- agricultural projects - - - -- - - _______..__._--_____ degradation wlth the potentla1 to lmpau local ecosystems -_-- -_- - ---- Income generatlrrg x x x x le apiculture, tanning of hldes, small-scale quarrying, milk processing. NTFPs etc Income achv~kes(small scale generating actlvltles alm to Improve revenue among famil~eswhich relieves the pressure on - processmg, agricultural and l~vestockproduct~onas a maln Income, hence the Impactsof th~sactivlty are quarrylng,charcoal mainly posltlve, although depending on the type of actlv~tyand the needfor resources,it may pmduct~onetc) Impact the natural resource base (collect~onof wood and herbs, quarrylng, fuelwood --E*xcct'o",ea)l. -- -- - - - .-.--* --.-. --" -- - - ------- --A Shelter ~mprovement - x x r There arensks that d not properly tra~nedand educated In constructingshelters, internally d~splacedwill beopted to use the natural resource base unsusta~nablyTh~scan result tn deforestatmn due to the need for wood, unpacts to natural habltats ~f the site IS inappropnate, -- -- ---- -- Inapproprlatc waste d~sposaland potentla1~mpactsto s~!rfacewaters-based on prox~n?j!y- Small scale f~sh~ng x x x x x Impacts of fislungaremainly posltlve as they provide alternahve sourcesof food for pastoralrsts and contribute to daily rnrneraland vitamn Intake, however, f~sh~ngnot pract~cedsustainably IF -- - ----- -----.------ ---- can also result in reduced fert1l3rates and reduced stock from over-fish~ng --- __- Protection of natural x x Act~v~t~esto support natural resource management aim to be pos~tivebut w~thoutcareful resourcebase plann~ngcould have negatrveeffects,planhng of certa~nspecleshas to be supewlsed to ensure (planting, forestry, that the specles IS not lnvaslve, does not affect gr~ui~dwatersupplies and result In land etc) degradatton Key: (x) impact, (-) no impact Table 5.2 Potential cnrnlrlative itnpacts of critical infrnstructlrre rrnder the SLD and NRDM components Project Remarks Water pans and small-scale k Risks of cumulat~veImpacts on pastoral resources, due to overgrazing, m areas where dams water pans or dams (or boreholes) are rnclose proxlrnlty Thereare also nsks of a cumulatlve Impact on sources of construct~onmater~als .....-.-..-.. - - - .--.----.. -. . . - - - - - - - ,.-.--.---,*-- - .- -. " - " -., Boreholeconstruction or x x + Very serrous rrsk of groundwater over-extractton wlth associated r~sksof salrne rehabll~tat~on Intruston There are also r~sksof cumulat~veImpactson pastoral resources In areas where water polnts are In close proxlmrty .... - - - - ..- . - - --.-- --- --..- -- - - - . .. .- .--". .. -" .-,- --..-- - -. - Day and boarding schools x x mainly- * x Localised rlsks s~m~larto those c~ted~nTable51. Curnulat~verlsks assG~ated ' and health centres wlth cumulahve ~mpacton sourcesof mater~alsfor constructron -, - .-- - - . ' - - - - - - - - - - . A....- ---- - --_...- - - - - - - Restockrng x - .---I.--- I If restocktng IScarr~edout In lsolatlon of re~nvlgoratedtrad~tlonalsystems of sustalnablepastoral management, there are s~gnlf~cantrlsksof pastoral degradation and the creat~onof dependency on restockrng following droughts ..- -.- -- .. -. .-. .- . - .- --.----- --- -. -.. - .-- - -.. -- - .- -* ..- - -- - . -...- . ~- .- -<..... . Sale yards, abattorrs, mlik s L + ~ h e sact~vlt~esare unllkely to have a cumulat~ve~mpactHowever there may be e and vegetable markets, localised Impacts due to dlsposal of wastewater and solid wastes durlng operation, and vaccinat~oncrushes, drug through sourcrng of constructlon mater~alsdurlng construchon stores -..,. - - . ..-.... -----..-,------ -- . - -- , -- - - - -, -. - .- -- - . .- .. " Key: (r)impact, I-) no impact Table 5.3 F~rrtherdetuilon mitigntion rneasirres -- Project -------- Risks ----- Mitigation measures . - - - - . - - - -I--_-- Waferpans nnd small-scale Soil erosxonalong excavated 0 Stabilization of walls and dams walls and xn ~mmed~ate embankment v~c~ntty 0 Perlmcter fencing and patrols 0 Adherence to other spec~f~ed designand construct~on gutdel~nes Spread of waterborne 0 Encourage use of draw off dlsease and waterlng facitit~esthat reduce dlrect contact w~th water body 0 Settl~ngand bollxngof water before consumpt~on Build-up of rnalar~a 0 Use of cultural mosqurto repellents plantlng of Neem tree in compounds, burning -- of dung,etc --- Boreholeconstruchonor Draw down oKcal 0 Baselmestudy to establ~sh rrhab~lltatron aqu~fers,and saltwater aqu~ferdynam~csand safe intrusion ~ntofreshwater yxelds (espec~allyfor the aqulfers Mert~aqu~fer) Increased local~zedland 0 Pastorallsts already degradation understand this threat. Pastorallst groups should be established to manage access to boreholes and manage rotat~onalgrazlng and whabllitat~onof dcgraded SItes Snmtl-scnlerrr~gntionschemes Confllctover water supply Med~um-scalelrrlgat~on between dorvnstream and development to be preceded upstrcam commun~t~es, by EIA studles w~ldlxfeand cult~vators, 0 ALRMP to adv~sefarmer's cult~vatorsand pastora11sts assooations on need to acqulre water permits and adhere to spec~fled requirements 0 ALRMP to 11nk-upfarmer or water user groups relyngon the same water source for the purposes of formlng an umbrella assoc~at~on('Water Partlament") whxch can adjud~cateon all water Threat of deshuchon of development tssues rtparlan forests, wlldl~fe o Scheme deslgn to migratory corridors, dry accommodate adequate season grazlng SlteS,etc access routes to waterxng Threat of so11sal~n~zat~on polnts ENVIRONMFNTALRWURCES MANAGEMENT COVEKNMUV~OF KENYA 30 ------. Project -- Risks Mitigation measures - - - - -- ALRMP to facilrtatelso~I assessment surveys on proposed lrr~gatlonwtes Collaborat~onw ~ t h I(ARI - -- -------- L qual~ty - Restock~ng May lcad to overstocking at cr~t~calt~mcsand deplet~on of forage, lcadlngto Increased twlnerabllrty to ----- - droughts Scliwls Heath r~sksthrough exposure of ch~ldrento mosqulto b~tes,dust and madequate sanltatlon ------- prolects Henltlr cl~~rrcs/drsptrsnrres Health rlsks assoiated w~th ~nadequatcdisposal of med~calwaste 1 ALRMP to Issue tnlnlum yldellnes to be a hcrcd In I ---.---------- -------- --.- --- all construction pr lects ---- ----- Otl~ernlrcro-projects S~m~larr~sksto schools and ALRMP to ~ ~ snu nunu urn e requtn>rgsrrtnll-scnle health cl~n~cs gu~dcl~nesto be a hurcd In co~rstruchor~ all conshuchon pr jects --. .-- - -------. ----- .------.--.--.- Accrss toutcsnrrd spot Local~sederos~on,dust. * Impacts llkely to b small rn~provo~rento roads ts nose ctc but act~v~tresshou d avo~d ----- - --.----- steep gradlentsite - --- S/~nllowwells Threat of water Encourage use of and contam~nat~onduring pumps rather tha manual extraction Contam~nat~onby matcf~al lntroduccd durlng floods --------- - - Tupp~ilgof spnr~gs lnadcquate flow to supply communltles and wlldl~fe reservesome spr~rigsfor downstream, generating downstream users - -- Project - Risks -- Mitigation measures ---- confl~ct. 0 ALRMP to lnvesti~ate - alternatives eg rock catchments, small dams, roof --- - - -- catchments, etc Snrall-scaletrngation (nralnly Impacts depend on thescale o METs to screen prolects to proulsron oflla~rdpu~~ps) of the project, but should be rule out occurrenceof min~malirnd include hazards such as eroston. potenttal deforestat~on,soil encroachment on access eroslon and localrzed land routesto water, wlldl~fe -- -- degradation ---- m~gratorypaths,etc --- ' Smalt-scaleagrtcultr~ral Confllct between cultivators Avo~dcult~vat~onon volahle pmlech includ~ngbush and pastoraltsts, wildl~fe, areas, dry season grazlng and culttvators. sites, mrgratory corrrdors and routes to watenng Threat of land degradation pornts. upon so11exhaushon So11conservahon measures -- --- Incomegenera tin^ nchvrhes - Pollutron of surface water, METs to ween prolects to - , (small scaleprocessmn8, groundwater, drsposal of ruleout occurrence of quarrymX, charcoal sol~dwaste, unsusta~nable hazardssuch as polluhon, product1011efc) use of natural resources lmpact on natural habitats - etc --- - -- -------LA Saleyards, abalfo~rs,mllkand Wastewater and solid waste Measures to avord use of vegetable nrarkeb. vacclnaho~t drsposal, leading to unsusta~nablesources of crushes, drug stores localised pollutron construct~onmaterials Sourcrng of rnater~als 0 Wastewater and soltd waste dur~ngconstructron control measures to be incorporated rnto construction desrgns Potential itnpacts of inter-commtmiiy projects The SLD and NRDM components will support si~ghtlylarger-scalestrategic ~nvestments.Impacts anticipated from these are similar to those for the CDD, but may be of larger scale and magnttudc. There 1salso a greater likel~hoodthat they may combine to have cumulatrve impacts Tnble5 2 setsout the potential impacts of the likely types of investments. Details of localised impacts Surface water resources Small dams and water pans are principallyconstructed to arrest and detain surface run-off, whch is then used for local water supply. Their key posit~ve impact is to improve local availabilityof surface water especially dunng dry seasons. However, other acbvttiesare likely to ~mpactadversely on surface water resources. Among these, irrigationdevelopment puts pressurean available water and has the potential to cause pollubon of water resources especially where return flows are discharged back to the river. Curnulatlve cxploitation of a single water source forirrigation is hkely to ibduce a water shortage with potential to cause conflict behveen communitiesand detween comrnunttles and w~ldl~feThe case of the Ewaso Ng'ao River clted in ~hnbfer5 serves to illustrate thrs point R g u n 5.2 shows a typ~calsmall-scale irrlgat$n pump used In ASAL areas. Groui~dwaterresources ~ The possib~l~tyof groundwater being affected by community-driven projets e very low. Shallow wells serve to drscharge ground water and have potent ha^ to expose the resource to contarninat~on,especiaIlywhere wells arenot propbrly 4 capped or where manual extractron 1sapplied (both of wh~chare a comrn n occurrence In pastoral areas).Systematic contaminatton of groundwater t ough shallow wells has the potential to trigger outbreak of contagious dlsease I communities served by the contaminated aquifer. Figure5 3 shows a Ganssa D~strict,rehabilitated under ALRMP phase I. Figure 5.2 lwigntion plrnrp, financed under ALRMP phase I, Garissa District ~ Figure 5.3 Extraction of grorrndzoater by borelrole, Gnrissa District Figme 5.4 Sorl erosion on the banks of n zuater pan, Gnrissa District AH investments in water supply serve to improve water availability and tqerefore 4 contribute to improving health and hygiene. However, where such suppll s are exposed to contamlnatlon, or where the introduction of increased water s pply IS i not accompanied by hyglene education, they can cause outbreaks of water borne dlseases (typho~d,dysentery, diarrhoea1diseases, etc). Standlng water ma also Increase the abundance of insect vectors, contributmg to vector-borne drse ses (dengueand malaria, and livestock diseases) Other activities that carry ri ks of negative ~mpactson human health include exposure of chlldren or adults to mosquitoes In school's evening classes; ~nadequatesanttattonassociated schools; dust and assoaated an-borne d~seasesin schoolyards; surface water from irrlgation; and inadequate disposal of dispensaries. These potential impacts are h~ghly I Ecology and w~ldllfc 1 Small dams and water pans have a potential positwe ~mpactfor the conse vation of fragmented wlldlife populations during drought. Potential negative lo allsed rmpacts on ecologicalconservation may occur due to destruchon of habit ts for small-skale ~rrigatedfarmlng,charcoal-produchon, and polluhon of wate courses Local sourctng of build~ngmater~alsalso may destroy the quallty of vege tion cover wlthln the v~clnityof settlements, and as this is depleted, the rad~usof degradation is extended far beyond the settlement For many localised developments, thesc impacts may accumulate to ultimately reduce the requlred to maintaln mlnimum viable populahons for specral~sed bird species Locallsed land degradation can be tr~ggeredby the removal vegetation, exposlng the so11to eroslon by water and wlnd dry season, over 90%of the ground is left bare; th~sis due to and perennial changes m grass gowt'h However, the added pressures overgrazlngcan induce further changes. Thls may be generated by for agriculture, overgrazlng around water polnts, or removal of create school yards. More subtle land degradation lncludes the texture through depos~tlonof sllt loads from irrlgation water, salrnity from poorly des~gnedlrr~gationschemes (It is therefore usually requirement for all irrigat~onto be preceded by soil and map out the threat of so11salmity build-up.) Fzgure 6 4 around water pans constructed under ALRMP phase 1. Air pollut~on Air pollu~onis likely to manifest In form of dust bowls generated from trampled fieldssuch as school compounds and overgrazed areas around watenng pans. Charcoal burning and charcoal production is also known to cause localised build- up of carbon monoxide that is poisonous when inhaled in large quantities. Cumulative impacts of community micro-projectsare unlikely, but not rmpossible. Cumulativeimpacts of many small-scaleinfrastructure developments due to the sources of materials imported Intothe district (timber, bricks, cement) is one area of concern. The other area of concern is the potentla1 cumulative impact of mlcro-projectsflnanced under the ALRMP I1in areas whlch are also being Impacted by other donor or government financed initiahves, such as drought contingency lnihatives.This needs to beassessed carefully. In terms of the ALRMP 11, cumulative impacts of the larger-scaleprojects in the SLD component are more likely, particularly in the case of borehole impact on groundwater resources, irrigation or rlver diversion impacts on surface water sources, and water development lmpact on pastoral resources. Information on triggers for cumulative Impact assessments is glvenin Chapter 6 Surfncewater resources Many smatl-scaleirrigation act~vities,espec~allyin combination with large-scale abstraction of water to support medium scale urigation schemesis l~kelyto deplete surface water flows, with implications for communities and livelihoods downstream of the irrigat~onschemes, and for the ecology of these watercourses. Groundwater resources The plight of groundwater resources withln the ALRMP area was h~ghlightedin Chapter 4. Groundwater occurs in the form of perched aquifers underneath river- beds and laggas. The main groundwater resources are regionalaquifers wh~ch are exploited through drilling of boreholes. Increasing the number of boreholes and unregulated or uncoordinated extraction of groundwater from boreholes creates a potentially sign~ficantrisk of permanent damage to groundwater resources, The maln feature w~thground water in ASAL areas is the inadequacy of recharge owing to prevailing negative water balancesituations. Further, owing to a varied geology,groundwater w~thlnthe ALRMP area displays a vaned quality scenario with both sallneand fresh water bodies occurringside by side. Fresh water bodles malnIy occur within immediate vicinity of drainage lines but further away, groundwater becomes increasingly sallne and brackish. The case of the Mart1 aquifer shared by Isiolo, Wapr and Gar~ssaDistr~ctsserves to illustrate thl$ polnt: away from the channel of the Ewaso Ng'iro River, the quality of groundwater reduces drastically. By far the single most slgn~ficantthreat to groundwater from non-regulbted 1s exploitation of freshwater aquifers. This would not only deplete the resoqrces (caus~ngdrawdown and rncreasing pumping costs) but 1salso likely to in4uce intrusron by sallneand blacksh water. Ultimately, the freshwater reserv$ will become increasingly salrneand less su~tablefor both human and livestock/ populations. ~ I Pastorn1 resources I ASAL vegetation is vulnerable to degradation by a range of development^ actlv~ties(Table 5.2).Cumulative impacts are likely to be generated as folibws * Overgrarlng assoc~atedwith settlementsattracted by supply of *erminent water sources (boreholes and small dams); I X * Destruction of rlparlan forests to create Irrigation schemes; Increased human/wildl~Eeconflict along irrlgatlon schemes and bloc ed I migratory paths, Increased conflict between pastorallsts and cultivators over blockage bf access routes to watering points and dry season grazing reserves, and I So11exhaustion and resultant land degradation assooated with seasonal cult~vat~on I I This refers to ali materials used for local development but whlch is not lo ally available, for example matcrlals used for the constructlon of small dams, roads, schools, health centers, etc Thc challenge ISto avold a cumulat~vermpa t on the source of these materials: forexample if all hmber for construchon is pur hased from markets in the D~str~ctcentre, 1sthe t~mbersourced from sustainabl or unsustainable t~mberproduct~onIn the h~ghlands?In particular, there IS common trend of sourc~ngmater~alsfrom local unlque systems such as f rested h~llsand moui~tainsIn ASAL areas (Ndottos, Mathews, Hurr~M~lls,Mt ural, nparian forests, etc) Unsustainable production from these hllls may end nger the catchment protechon and rainfall harnessing services of the hills Some ASAL hills are fog dependent, 1n.lplylngthat they have the capac~tyto tr capture fog and mist Owing to the s~gnificanceof water and pastoral resources m pastoral~sts'and agropastoralists' Iivelihoods In ASAL areas, the sustainable achievement of the ALRMP I1objective of their enhancedfood secunfynnd reduced vulnerab~htyis dependent on achieving the sustainable use of water and pastoral resources This fact is widely acknowledged among ALRMF stakeholders, and is the basis ALRMP II's potent~alto deliver an overall positlve impact. Table5.4 provides guidance on activities w~thinthe NRDM and SLD components that contribute to an overall positive impact. The following lists provide guidance on factors promokingan overall poslhve environmental impact, and opposing risks that threaten this positive impact. 5.5.1 Promotion of PositiueImpacts Factors promoting an overall posit~veimpact are as follows: 0 W~thoutthe ALRMP 11,livelihoods and environment in ASAL areas will conhnue to dechne as a result of recurring drought; 0 ALRMP will contlnue to build on the positive commitment to pastoral issues among GoK that has been fostered during phase I; 0 Key policy constraints will be tackled, provldlng a more appropnate polley context for ASAL; 0 ALRMP TI will work with traditional systems of pastoral governance, 0 A broader range of livelihood options for pastoralist and agropastoralist people wlll enable them to manage their resources w~thlonger time horizons; 0 Community management of community funds, and access to credzt, w~ll hcll~tatedec~sron-mak~ngwith longer time horizons, 0 Better livestock marketing wlll allow pastoralists to manage livestock numbers to sustalnabIe levels; o ALRMP w11lcontinue to build on progress In confllctcesolut~on 5.5.2 Risks Key risks that ALRMP 11may face in achieving a positlvestrategic impact are: 0 Difficulty of stimulahng a vxslon of a sustainable future m ASAL areas among stakeholders; 0 Pollcy development is difficult and political; 0 Traditional pastoral governance is weak and fragmented in many areas, and there is weak control of traditional governance over pastoral resources; o The social and economlcimpact of changmng l~vel~hoodsunpredictabIe, is owing to their complex and changlngsocial and economic systems; The environmentin Ar~dlands IS little understood and is unpredlctabie; Commuruty management of funds carrlessocial and environmentalrrkks; -* Bettermarketingmay be an incentive to raisegreater numbers of llvedtock. Table 5.4 Strategic environmental impacts Key JJJ v~talto posltlve Impact, JJstgnlfvant posltive Impact,Jllnllted posltlve Impact, xllmited negatlve Impact, x x slgnlfrcant ncgatlve Activity Positive Negative Comment impact impact ..-Support-----.--, -- to Local Development ---- -- ---- --.. ------ --Support -------.--.-.- to servlce dehvery' - -- No slgnlflcant Impacts Development of rural ftwncral mstltut~ons J Potentla1to contr~buteto pos~trveImpact on pastoral resources by givmg - ---- - ----- ------ pastoralrsts ophons lor savlng and invesnng cash rather than l~vestock Support to markchng lnltlatlves JJ Lr Potentla1reduced levels ofstock, thereby reduclng pressure on pastoral resources at critical tunes However there may also herisks that, in the absence of tmproved pastoral tenuresystems, better access to markets -- ---- ----- -.. - ---- - will Increase livestock numbers to unsustalnable levels Support to natural resource management JJJ Thls actlvlty provldes the potentla1 For ALRMP I1 toensure a s~gntflcant actlvltiesand mecha~~~sms . uosrtive contr~buhonto natural resources susta~nab~htv~nASAL areas .-Critlcal-- ---- - ~nfrastructure - X * Rlsks of negatlvc localised or cumuhtlve Impacts (discussed above) -" -. - ---- - Support to confllct resolutton JJJ Vltal to allow~nga sustamable d~str~buhonof livestock over pastoral -- -----.-----.------ .------ - resources -- LA Research and studles targeted at speclhc JJ Thlsactlvlty provldes an opportunity to Investigate parhcular ~ d e n t ~ f ~problems e d environmental or natural resources lssues or problems. ~ a-.u r aResources and Drought Management t ------ l ------.----- -.----- -. -- - . - improve and extend early warnlng systems ------.---.-.---.- -----.-.----- -. - /J improving the early warrung and drought management systems will - * Expand and ~nstitut~onalisethe drought JJ prevent disasters and IS an essential steppmg stone towards pastoral - - -- --- -- -. ---- - - --- ---- management system --. -- sustalnab~l~tyIn ASAL areas Drought contingency trust funds - - - -- - - /J --. Coord~nat~onof development actlvlties through No slgnlflcant Impacts, though tt will support better coord~nahonand DSGs -- ---.-planningwlthin d s l c t s . ,._ -..----.-- ___--_---_-_- --- -- ---- . S t r e n g t h ~dtstrlct planning and regulatory ~ ~ JJJ Thls actlvlty offers to potentral to strengthen strategic p l a ~ r n for g support (eg In natural resource management) .-.-- -.- -.---- .--.---.-- .- -- -- - ----.- - pastoral susta~nab~lity ASAL d~strlcts m Fac~lltatenat~onallevel coordmation, monltorlng JJ./ r x Pollcy reform, particularly ~nLand tenure, offers the potential to clanfi- and evaluat~on,advocacy and pollcy support tenure over pastoral areas, and the posslbillty of retnvigorating community-based pastoral governance (whether 'tradltlonal' or not) Poltcy reform processes carry rlsks of negatlve Impacts ~f poorly handled however REPORTING AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE EMF This chapter sets out the reportingsystems and responsib~litiesof officers ~mplernenhngthe EMF. The chapter beglns wlth detalls of issues that addressed by the EMF, and the spec~ftcnext steps to be taken. It then the varlous elements of the EMF ~ncluding. I Flowchart for reporting and advice, Screening checklist for community rnlcro-projects, Screeningchecklist for inter-community projects under the natural re urces and drought mnnagenzenf,and support to locnl development components; Annual report forms for distrlct officers, andPMU officer, Expllclt descriptions of roles, accompanied by terms of reference. 1 I KEY ISSUESAND PROPOSED ACTIONS WITHINTHE EMF I" Tnble6.2 sets out proposed achons agalnst a list of ten key Issues. In sum ary, the main measures to address these issues are 7 At the natlonal level, a staff member wlll be appomted within ALRM PMU e wlth a specific responsiblllty for addressing environmental Issues. Consultation wlth the PMU suggests that the tltle of 'Natural Resourc s Management Officer' 1spreferred, 1 Also at the nahonal level, the appointment of a full-t~meofficer to pr vide technical backstopping on all aspects of environmental mlt~gatlonT e title for thls off~cerused below ~f'environmental mltlgat~onofficer', 1 An annual environmental performance audlt, to be carrled out by an lndcpenderlt consultant; The Natural Resources Management Officer w~llstimulate Dlstrlct Environmental Cornmlttees and DSGs to develop strategic approach envlronn~entalsustainablllty m their dtstricts, resurrecting use of the Development Area' concept used in phase I. 1 At more prac,trcal levels, speclhc studies would be carrled out on issu s of natural resources management and cumulative assessments, and the eta~lsof the EMF set out In thls chapter will be ~ntegratedrnto the sub-project bycle wextsteps i The speclfic next steps to be taken are, In chronological order: I ALRMP PMU to consult with NEMA and World Bank on thls EMF, Distr~ctALRMP managers to consult with Dlstrict on the EMF, or stimulate thew operation in cases where they are formed, 0 Consultants appointed to prepare the ALRMP I1 project lrnplementation manual (PIM)to integrate the EnvironmentaI Management Framework into the project cycle set out in the PTM; 0 Appraisal mission to conhrrn the proposed operation of the EMF with ALRMP PMU; 0 ALRMP to a suitable candidate for Natural ResourcesManagement Officer in order that they can be in position in advance of the commencement of phase 11 inJune; 0 ALRMP PMU to confirm and develop the proposals for training and capacity building In order that precise deta~lshave been agreed by commencement of phase 11, (March-May 2003), 0 Inclusion of discussion on the EMF in project launch workshop(s); (June2003). Table 6.1 Issues addressed by the EMF Issue Mainstreamlng or m~tigationmeasures Responsibility for action Timing 1 Requirement for the malnstream~ngof the a Appolnt ALRMP PMU NRM off~cer ALRMP PMU From ALRMP II Envrronmental Management Rarnework start b Appolnt ALRMI' Environmental Mlt~gationOfflcer ALRMP PMU From ALRMP 11 start c An annual env~ronmentalperformance aud~t,carr~edout by an ALRMP PMU Annually independent consultant d Integration of environmental review wlth~nmld-term revlew, ALRMP PMU At MTR etc ---.- - --- ICR. and/or World Bank missions ----- ----- 2 Weak capacity for env~romnental a Develop partnershrps wlth NGOs for envlronniental D~stnctenv~ronmentalofficers Ongolng management at Dlstr~ctlevels management b St~mulatethe operat~onof the DECs Dlstrlct env~ronmentaloff~cers By January 2004 c Address budgetary constraints by earmarking finance for ALRMP PMU Durlng project - ------ ---.--- ongoing environmental management -- --.. prepara tlon ---- ----- 3 Opportun~tyto contr~buteto positive a Asslgn sufhc~entbudget for 'support lo ~RMact~vltlesand ALRMPPMIJ Done (during Impact on natural resources management mechan~sms' World Bank pre-appraisal m~ssion) b Apply the'Discrete Development Area' concept (already ALRMP PMU NRM Otflcer Ongorng floated durlng phase 1) c Compile basic data on resources to feed Into thls (eg on ALRMP PMU NRM Offlcer By December sustainablegroundwater abstraction levels) 2003 d Develop dlstrict land and natural resource tenure plans D~strietEnv~ronmental Ongolng Comm~ttees,wrth support of -.-.- --- ----------. ALRMP ----- -- 4 Requirement for pro-pastocal~stpollcy a Conhnue to advocate appropriate land pallcy development ALRMP PMU Ongoing development b ldent~tyand advocate reform of pollc~esthat Itnut sustainable ALRMP PMU NRM Off~cer Ongo~ng . -----.-- pastoral development ---*- ----. 5 Locallsed Impacts of commun~tymlcro- a Implement a system of screening, revlew and assessment, as set D~strlctEnvuonmental Commlttees From project projects or ~nter-comrnun~typrojects out in thls chapter responsible to delegate start, and ~m~lementationto Dlstrlct throughout -- .----- project - --------.--- Environmental Offlcer - md- ---I 6 Gm-~rnpacts onZGiGpp TOW~~). s out ~ s ~ - o f m ~ 6 t t g d ~ " ~ ~ - - env~ronmentalresources surface water resources, pastoral resources, and use of externally sourced construction mater~als b Assessments to be triggered, uslng criterla set out later In thls Dlstrlct Envuonmental Commlttees As requlred Chapter c Sensrtlsecommunities to ~ssuesof cumulative ~mpacts Mob~leextension teams By January2004 Issue Mainstreaming or mitigation measures Responsibility for action Timing d Carry out two or three'demonshatron' studies tn selected ALRMP NRM Officer By January 2004 - ---- --- -- - --- distrtcts 7 Varying degree of intactnessof traditional a. Where relatively Intact, engage community leaders in District-level ALRMP Ongolng pastoral governance development of strategic vislon, where posslble b In other areas, sensitisation of communrty leaders and Mobile extension teams, w ~ t h Ongorng community associations, and shmulate thlnkrng towards support of DSGs ----- -----.- -- --- appropriate models for relation of communlties with government ----- -- "" -.- 8 Ophmum lntegrntlonof technical advlce a District-level workshops to reach consensus among D~strictSteermgGroups By January2W4 wlth a demand-driven, participatory government offlcers and NGOs on optimum rntegratron of approach technical advlce b Senslhse comnlunlties to the range of technical advrce Mobile extenston teams By January 2004 available, and them responslbll~tychoose whether they require -------.- --- ---- technlcal advlce (and m what) -.-- -.-- - 9. Need to provrde advlceon relevant a Include relevant clause m the MoU's signed with communities. D~strictofficers. Ongolng envlronmentaI law to communlties b METs to provlde informat~onon relevant env~ronmentallaws Mobile extension teams Ongoing to communlties c D~strictEnvrronmental Officers to provrde inforrnat~onon Distrtct Envuonmental Officers Ongoing environmental laws to METs, or where applrcable, feedback the ---- -----..- -- inappropriatenessof particular laws to ALRMP urut. -- -- - 10 Opportunlt~esfor posrtrve environmental a Distr~ctEnvrronmental Officers to develop potenhal list, based Drstrict Envuonmental Officers By January 2004 micro-projects on ~nltraldraft UISectlon 63 1 below, and ralse awarenessof METs of these Total FLOWCHART FOK REPORTING AND ADVICE I I ~ Frgure6 1 depicts the proposed reporting lrnes and advlsory and support mechanisms that will be used in the EMF In sumnlary* Mobile extension teams wlll work closely with communities to provld guidance and advice on envlronmental risks or rnlcro-projects, mitigation measures and potential envlronmental micro-projects; In turn the METs will recelve advlce and support from the Officer (or where present Distrlct Environment Officer) advlce, as well as day-to-day guidance; Distrlct forestTy/env~ronmentalofficers will provide an environmental screening and advlce to both the District ALRMPin that district, as well as to the ALRMP Natural Resources Management Officer; ALRMP NRM Qfflcer, based in the ALRMP PMU, will technical advice to D~strlctForestry/envuonmcntal District-level officers; ALRMP NRM Offlcer will prepare an annual report and to the consultant appointed to carry out the annual envlronmenta performance audrt, Thls Independent consultant will provlde continuous advice and sup the NRM ofhcer; An external performance revlew to be carried out on an annual basis shared wlth NEMA and World Bank. Figure6.1 Flowchart of reporting and advice Cotntnttnity District National Corrr~~run~tles Dlstrrct Sterrrng Groups Advice a Adu'ce NEMA rind World Bank + ALRMP PMU + support suyyorl 9 A A 4 Advice - :';" Mobrle Exte~rszonTeonis c Dtstrtct Ei~vrra~iinental PALRMP Nnfural Resources Anniral performance (or Forestry) Oficer I Advice + Manage~nentomcrind J support Enutmnmerrtal M~hgntgon Oficer SCREENING FOR COMMUNITY-MICRO-PROIECTS Flgtrre 6.2 sets out a slmple process that METs will apply in work~ngw th commun~t~esto avoid and mitlgate environmental Impacts of commun tY micro-prolects Figure 6.2 Process of screening comrnrrtiity 171icro-projects necessa y f \ Targetri~g Screentng by and , MET or ident~fication 7 \ co~nnr~irr~tres METs or drstrict oficers See Fora~nf I 6 prav~dendv~ceto Following ~dent~hcationof micro-projects by commun~t~esw ~ t hthe as. stance of mobile extension teams, the proposed micro-project is checked agai~st a slmple screening checkl~st(Forrnnt6 1) The commun~ty/MET give the~rappl~cat~ondocument (w~thcomplete 1 screening checkl~st)to the DSG secretary who copies lt to the distr~ct forestry/environmenlal officer(DEO) The DEO reviews the appl~cat~onand determines if (a) it 1s satisfactory asIS and can be put on the DSG agenda for consldeiation, and if b) there arl l~kelyto be adverse effects and the community/MET needs to rework the micro-project to avoid or mlnlmize the effects, through a mlni-EA, jefore the DSG will cons~derit. If (a), the DEO recommends to the DSG secretary that ~tbe cons~deredor approval, perhaps with comments on the m ~ t ~ g a t ~bullt into the mlcl o n 1- project and cond~t~onsthat the DSG should attach to their approval (e construct~onsupervis~on,monitoring). The DSG gives approval, w ~ t hor w~thoutconditions The app11catlon and DSG approval records w~llbc vital for follow-upsuperv~s~onand annual auditing/M&E. nOF K w n METs should encourage communities to carry out this task themselves, possibIy by the community animal health workers, teachers or other literate members of the community The checklist is a simple yes/no checklist, culminating in whether specific advice to the community on environmental mitigation is required This decision is based on likely impacts, and the level of experience in managing micro-projectswithin the community. METs will give this advice, or in cases, will call upon District officers for specific technical advice. District forestry or environmental officers will oversee all screening forms. The screening checklist set out in Format 6.1 is based on a list of basic yes/no answers, culminahng in a decision on whether further advice is sought, and if so from whom. There are several aspects to the rationale for the design of this checklist: 0 There will be thousands of micro-projects financed by ALRMP, while there is only one District forestry or environmental officer per district. Therefore a system that is streamlined is required, and far is is feasible, communities must be responsible for completion of screening; Q In cases where communities are not able to complete the screening, METs are required to do so; 0 The screening prompts a 1stof yes/no answers in relat~onto questions on the location of the project and the anticipated impacts; if there are'yes' answers to any of these questions, then the MET / community are obliged to recommend a course of actlon; 0 This action can be for the community ~tselfto manage or avoid impacts, MET to provide specific advice, or if necessary, technical advice to be sought from elsewhere; o The forms will be reviewed by the District forestry or environmental officerhefore construction or operations begin and before the DSG considers approving the micro-project. Please note that all formats for checklists presented in this report will be copied into a Microsoft word document that can be used to provide an electronic record. Selection of the 'forms' toolbar in Microsoft word enabies the document to be 'locked' by clicking on the padlock icon, so that the shaded text areas and checkboxes can be filled. ENVIRONMENTAL REY)LII(cEs MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENTOF KUJYA 48 Fonnat 6.1 Screening checklist for cotntnunihj 111icro-projects Sub-projectname [type here] 1 Est~matedcost (KSh) [type here] Approxcmatesize of the project ~nland area [type here] How was the slte af the sub-projectchosen? [type here] Location fes No Are thereenv~ronmentallysensltlveareas (forests. nven or wetlands)or threatened 3 C] specsesthat could be adverselyaffected by the pro]ectv Is the prolectslted w~thlna strlctlyprotectedarea, nationalpark. nature reserve. 3 0 naturallhrsloncalmonument, or area of culturalheritage? I Does the projectreduce people's access (due to roads, locallonetc) to the pasture, water, publlc servlcesor other resourcesthat they depend on7 W~llthe project involve the relocat~onof people or herders' lrvestock from the site' Impacts Yes No Does the sub-project requ~relarge volumes of construction materials (eg a · gravel, stones, water, trmber, firewood)? Will the project lead to so11degradaflon or eroslon In the area? W~llthe project affect soil salinity? 0 Will the project create waste that could adversely affect local solls, 0 vegetation, nvers and streams or groundwater? Does the sub-project have human health and safety risks, dur~ng constructlon or later? Does the sub-project have the potential to indireclly or directly introduce or encourage the use of pestrcides? W~llthe project result In confl~clor dlsputes among communltles or 0 pastoralists? Will the project lead to changes In the dlstrlbutlon of people or of Ilvestock? Will the project lead to m~grat~onInto the area? 0 0 Will the project adversely affect any ~nd~genouspeople living In the area? C] fl Wrll the project adversely affect the l~velihoodsand rlghts of women? 10 El I Proposed action Summarlse the above. Guidance All the above answers are 'No' need for further acbon, There is at least one 'Yes' Recommendation If lhere is at least one 'Yes', whlch course of action do you recommend? 1 CommunityICDC glven fulf responslbillty to mjtigate environmental nsks aMETs aSpeclfic to prov~dedetailed gurdance on mitigation of rtsks to the community CDC advlce IS requlred from Dlstrlct Officers in the following area@) i I Completed by: [type here] Name: [type here] Position /Commoniiy: [type here] Date: [type here] E ~ R O N M E ~RESOURCESMANAGr.MWT A L 49 'Positive' environnrentnl micro-projects The Distnct Environmental Officer should also be responsible for raising Mobile Extension Teains' awareness of the potential for communities to identify micro-projects with en expIicitly'environmental' nature. Mobile extension teams would in turn have the responsibility forsensitising communities to the wilIingness of ALRMP to finance these projects, should the communities prioritise them. Table 6.2 provides an initial List of 'positive' environmental micrc-projects, and Fzprres 6.3 fo 6.5provide some examples, funded by ALRMP I or otherwise. Table 6.2 Potential environ~nentalcomrnrmity micro-projects o Sohd waste managementand recycl~ngwithin settlements 0 Wastewater recycl~ngschemes to use wastewater for srnalI-scaleirr~gationof homegardens Tra~ningInethnoveter~nerytechruquesfor commun~tyworkers Marketingof ethnoveterineraryproducts,or marketingof any other non-wood forest products Stoves, and household energy schemes to reduce fuelwood consumpbon Tree seedhngpropagat~on,possibly including sale Re-afforestationschemeswhere requested by communit~es Establ~shmentof 'green belts' around settlementsto preventdegradation due to livestock and collect~~nof fuelwood Colnnl~phornspp. live fencing around boreholesand water pans Tree plantingand live fenc~ngaround schoolsand dispensar~es Figure6.3 Roof cntclz~nentsfor water haruestittg from healtlz clinic buildings ~ - ~ - Figure 6.4 Live fencing zcsing Commiphora spp to avoid erosion arozcnd water points Figure 6.5 Af-tielwood scheme used to ensure sustainablegathering around refugee cainps SCREENING OF INTER-COMMUNITY PROIECTS Frgure 6.6sets out a simple process that DistrictOfficers w11lapply in avoiding and mitigating environmental ~mpactsof 'inter-community' sub-projects (for example borehole rehabilltahonor construction, and water pans) financed under the natural resourcesand droughtmanagementcomponent and the support to local development component. Figure 6.6 Process ofscreeniitg inter-colnmnnity projects \ Nojcrtlrer actior~ Target~ng atrd / 1dent9cahon \ See Fonlrot 6 2 EIA ENVIRON~~ENTAL RESOUIIGS hlANACEhlENT GOVERNMTMOFKENYA 52 The district forestry/environment officer, through the District Steer~ng~ Committee, will partlclpate in the targeting and ldentificatlon of the prbject Thls will allow for a smooth process, since ~twlll enable the officer to pfevent the financing of projects for which it is impossible to mitigate negative 1 environmental Impacts. Following identification, a Distrlct Officer will ! complete an environmental review checklist (Format 6.2). Thls is simila to the community mlcro-project checklist, but it differs In two key respects It allows more lnformatlon to be given on the reasoning for the yeslno answers; It culminates in a decirlon on whether a further in-depth EIA is reqiired. It is important to note that this screening checklist may lead to two co action: either a full EIA, or no further action. It is anticipated that a will not be warranted for all sub-projects. A suggested standard format forEIA is provided in Annex H. 1 6.4.1 Process for Screening and Approval i The community/MET give their applicat~ondocument (with completed screening checkhst) to the DSG secretary who cop~es~tto the dlslrlct 1 forestrjr/env~ronmentalofficer (DEO) 1 The DEO reviews the application and determines if (a) it is and can be put on the DSG agenda for likely to be adverse cumulatlveeffects and the rework the mlcro-project to avo~dor minlmize before the DSG will conslder rt If (a), the DEO recommends to the DSG secretary that it be approval, perhaps with comments on the mitigation built prqect and conditions that the DSG should attach to their construction supervision, rnonltoring). The DSG gives approval, wlth or without conditions. The apphcation and DSG approval records wlll be vital for follow-up supervision and annual audrting/M&E 6.4.2 Triggersfor cu~n~rlativeimpact assessments 1 I I The compilation of screenlng forms will enable each Dlshict forestry 1 /environmental officer to decide whether add~tionalcumulative impaLt i assessments are required to assess cumulatlve impacts on groundwat r resources, surface water resources, and sources of materials In carrjri g out these cumulative assessments, the potential impacts of other on-goingl initiahves, e~thergovernment financed or donor supported, such as drought contingency or food securrty programs should also be considered. In each case, the officer must relate a number of projects to the receptors of impacts Gro~ndwaterresources 0 Trigger:where ALRMPfinances the rehabilitation or construction of more than15 boreholes in a district; 0 Action Engage government and NGOs across the district in an assessment of the cumulative impact of all borehole rehabilitation / construction in the district on groundwater resources; Surfacewater resources 0 Tngger:where ALRMP I1finances more than15small-scale irrigation prolects along any one watercourse, 0 Action:Engage government and NGOs across the catchment in an assessment of the cumulative impact of all irrigation schemes extracting irrigation water from the watercourse; Sources of materials 0 Trigger:where ALRMPfinances more than 50 nucro-projects using timber, sand or gravel or any other construction material from the same single source, whether in the local area or outside of the project area; 0 Action: Cumulative impact assessment to ascertain significance of this extraction, to make recommendations on alternative course of action There is a possibility of cumulative impacts on pastoral resources: however t h ~is addressed fully by the NRDMcomponent, in which natural resources s assessments will be carried out, and does not requlre specific add~tional cumulative impact assessments. ENV~RONMENTALESOURCESMANAGEMENT R COVERNLWOF KENYA 54 Fonnat 6.2 Screeningform for inter-community projects I Sub-project name [type here] Estimated cost (KSh) [type here] What 1sthe project object~veand [type here] actrvit~es? Approximate size of the projectin land [type here] area How was the slte of the sub-project [type here] chosen? Location 'fes NO Are there environmentally sensltlveareas (forests, rivers or wetlands) or a threatenedspecies that couMbe adverse& affectedby the project? If 'Yes', give details. [type here] 1 Is the prolectsltedwithin a strictly protectedarea, natronalpark, nature cp c! reserve. naturalih~stor~calmonument or area of cultural her~aae? I If 'Yes', glve detalls [type here] Does the project reducepeople's access (due to roads, location etc) to [I the pasture, water, publlc servlces or olher resourcesthat they depend on? If 'Yes', glve details [type here] I Will the project ~nvolvethe relocationof people or herders' lrvestock from 0 the site? If 'Yes', give details [type here] impacts 'ck, increasing livestock diseases, injury and loss of human life. Aggrievt \TOT KCNYA communities will frequently hunt, trap and kill game animals and destroy theirsanctuaries in an effort to drive them away. Utilization of water resources Pastoralist herds highly mobile and disperse over wide areas in search of fodder and water. Dur~ngthe wet season, pastoral communities travel an average of 1.4 km to source domestic water, increasing to 4.1 km during the dry season. Herds often cover distances of up to 5.8 and 35.8km in the wet and dry seasons respectively in search for water. Tradihonally, patterns of movement were synchronized with river flows, supplying both water and fodder. In recent decades patterns of movement have ceased or altered as a result of erratic river flows, and the availability of water points (pans and boreholesj. Siirface water The main sources in ALRMPareas are the rivers Kerio, Turkwel, Lokodet, Perkerra, Molo, Ewaso Ng'iro, Tana and Daua and from lakes Turkana and Baringo.Surface water sources are constrained in ASAL areas. Drainage density is low due to high evaporative losses associated with aridity. Water is only readily available in the lakes and channels of the main rivers while the rest of the area is dry. Water is also available in laggas immediately after the rains but these dry up or flow as sub-surface riversfrom which water can only be extracted through wells sunk into their sand beds. Other constraints are encountered as follows: 0 Some of the nvers such as the Ewaso Ngiro, which serves the ALRMP districts of Laikipla,Samburu, Isiolo, Wajfr and Garrisa have been extensively diverted for irrigation use in the headwaters leaving very little available for downstream flow. Studies conducted recently indicate that the laver reaches of the river are receding upwards (GoK, 2002).Therefore downstream communities have to contend with reduced durations of dry season flow, and associated dry season hardship; 0 Land-use intensification and increasing erosion in the upper catchmentsof some rivers has led to heavy sediment loads, requiring treatment before consumption For example the Tana River has a recorded annual sediment load of six million tonnes at the Garissa station (GoK,1992). Figure 1.2 provides an indication of thescarcity of surface water in part of the project area, the Ewaso Ng'iro basin. b Figure 1.2 Perennial and seasonal rivers in North eastern Kenya (Ewaso-Ng'iro asin) Groundwnter 1 For the majorlty of the ALRMP area, explo~tationof boreholes and shallow wells is used ta supplement water needs Groundwater In the ALRMP districts between100 and 200m below ground level from Ava~labil~tyof groundwater vanes with aquifers aquifers s~tuatedalong drainage courses where seasonal recharge is guaranteed. The majority of shallow wells are lines where they are used to tap sub-surface flow. The qual~tyof groundwater in the ALRMP areas has with groundwater reserves of some cases, salinity rates mmhos/cm (the uppermost limit of adapted domestic anlmal) are is Wajir where out of 130 due to salinity problems (Republic of Kenya,1991). 1 The majority of operational boreholes exceed electrical conductivity vhues of 2,000 mrnhos/cm and farexceed WHO limits of destined for human consumption. Low salinlty water generally the major drainage channels (Ewaso Ng'iro and Lak Dera) but salrni gradually increases northwards due to an increase in sodium. north, there is also an increase in nitrate levels possibly due to fossil formations or due to the washing of guano manure from caves i area. Low levelsof chemlcal pollution along drainagelines implies that seasonaI flow in thesechannels probably flushesout excesssalts and naturally purifies the water. Duringdry seasons there 1sincreased pressureon the boreholescausing frequent breakageand poor performance. Wlth borehole breakdown, herds and flockshave tobe driven to other operating borehotes. In case of breakage of the second borehole, disaster can strike. Unlikesmall-scale water projects, boreholesoften provide a permanentwater supply, which attracts settlementsand host's livestock for prolonged periods. The latteroftencausesover-utilizationof vegetation within the immediate vicinity resulting in Qvergrazlngand soil erosion Figure1.3 providesa map of groundwater resources for part of the project area, the Ewaso Ng'iro basin. Figure 1.3 Groundwater potentinl in North eastern Kenya, the Ewaso Ng'iro basin G1.3.3 Other emerging concerns Increasing proneness to drorcghf 1 Drought occurrence in ASAL areas is cyclic, with events being every 5 to 7years. The ablhty of the pastoral communihes to periods of drought has been highly dependent on thelr their risks, to move on to new areas of grazing as to take advantage of highly diverse dry land environments (riverine, woodlands, hill top forests, and dispersed ability of the ASAL populations to under increasing pressure In the grazing areas has been neighbouring semi-arid lands, agriculture. Consequently, smaller, less producbve resources and which are more vulnerable to drought. " There are increasing trends of pastoralists sedentarising around wated points 1 in ASAL areas lead~ngto localised overgrazing Overgrazing at the atering points has led to the removal of the herb layer and exposure of the soil to forces of erosion The consequences of reduced vegetation cover are t e loss of precious water by surface run-off and increased erosion This leads t a vicious circle of less production and greater Iosses of water. The local overgrazing has been exacerbated by the expansion of modern sector enterprises such as irngation, ranches and game parks, either in the d season grazing areas or across migration routes and security problem front~erareas and recurrang droughts. Coriflict over wnter ~ Tncreaslngpopulation growth and economic development in the hlghland catchment of Meru, Nyambene, Nyandarua, Nyeri and La~klplahave raised the demand for water. Increasingly more water is being abstracted to supply rural and urban water supply projects and in some cases, irrigation especially within Laiklpia District. The end result 1sa steady decline in the quanbty and quality of downstream flows. On Nanyuki rlver, the maln tributary o i the Ewaso Ng'iro, it is estimated that water abstractions in the highlands and forest zones result in more than half of the dry season flow being removed from the river before the water reaches the arid lowlands It is estimated that about a quarter of the dry season river flow is used withln about 50kr,nfrom the summit of Mount Kenya. During the dry season, rlver water is usually expected to flow for another 200 to 350 km to supply the needs of dovlrnstream communities Reduced river flow leads to a concentration of wild and domestic anlmals around the few remaining accessiblewater sites with grave consequences such as increased localisedovergrazing. Further, a drastic degradation in water resources, such as the human-induced reduction of water flow during the dry season, exacerbates the conflicts between individuals, different communities, and different users. Examplesof recent scenarios for the ALRMParea are. 0 In1984 the Ewaso Ng'iro River dried up about 80 to100 km upstream of BuffaloSprings Park. BuffaloSprings provided the only permanent flow just upstream of Archers Post. Heavy overgrazing around thesprings destroyed all fodder reserves, and all buffaloes in the BuffaloSprings National Reservedied as a result, causing a decline in the tourist industry. 0 Elephant herds may travel over a hundred kilometres towards the highlands in search forwater, in the process raiding and destroying crops and irrigation fields along the way; Sufferingon the part of pastoralists, who move upstream in search of water and grazing land, to areas already occupied by settled crop producers. Quite frequently, sucha situation generatesethnic tension often culminating m ethnic flares-ups and bloody conflicts.In recent years, nomadic pastoralists from Samburu and Isiolo districts have extended grazing into the Mt. Kenya forest, destroying crops dsubsistence farmers along the grazing path and caus~ngcivil strive. In most cases, the nomadic livestock which have succumbed to diseases triggered by the exposure to the cold, tsetse fly- infested cl~mateof the Mt. Kenya Forest, ending in massive loss of livestock. Annex H Format for Environmental Impact Assessment studies Environmental Impact Fonnnt (c) Please useshort descriptions to respond to the following General Desm'ytiorr of Sub-project Sub-project object~ve [type here] Sub-project phases, components, and budget I [type here] Altemahves rejected bySub-project Presenters [type here] Bnselrne Description Could thesubproject have a negative ~mpacton any of thefollowing features? Physlcnl-chemrcal envrron!)rent Blologicnl Envlrotilirent Socro-economiccnvrronment Groundwater Pasture resources Women's llvel~hoods Rivers, streams and sprlngs W~ldl~fe Human health Sol1 0Herbs and grasses [IPeople'saccesstolandtheyarecurrentlyuslng w F b c - 0Protected areas or national parks Please gtve a short descript~onof the basehne for each tick above [type here] I Negative Environmen tal Irnpacts For each you have hcked above, please describe the type of impact, risk, significance, and proposed mitigation and monitoring (expand as necessary} Environmental Management Plan Please insert the act~onsyou propose to ensure that negat~veImpacts are mitigated, or any required monitoring Action Whoby By when Cost . [type here] [type here] [type here] [type here] [type here] [type here] [type here] [type here]