Page 1 INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 05/17/2010 Report No.: AC5199 1. Basic Project Data Country: Mozambique Project ID: P115217 Project Name: Maputo Municipal Development Program II (MMDP II) Task Team Leader: Uri Raich Estimated Appraisal Date: May 17, 2010 Estimated Board Date: September 30, 2010 Managing Unit: AFTUW Lending Instrument: Adaptable Program Loan Sector: Sub-national government administration (100%) Theme: Decentralization (25%);Municipal governance and institution building (25%);Municipal finance (25%);Access to urban services and housing (25%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00 IDA Amount (US$m.): 50.00 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: BORROWER/RECIPIENT 55.00 55.00 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Simplified Processing Simple [] Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies) Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Project Objectives The long term objective of the Maputo Municipal Development Program (MMDP) is to strengthen the capacity of Maputo City Council (CMM) to develop, manage and maintain quality service delivery to its citizens. The PDO of this second phase (MMDP II) is to "Improve the delivery and sustainability of priority municipal services in Maputo". While the first phase of the program focused on the strengthening of the financial and organizational systems, the second phase seeks to consolidate these reforms and to increase the delivery and sustainability of municipal services. 3. Project Description The project is composed of the following five components: Component A: Institutional Development (cost US$13.9 million of which US$8.0 million IDA) The objective of component A is to strengthen municipal capacity to deliver services in response to citizen demand. The component will address two type of constraints: limited technical and administrative capacity to carry out municipal functions, and limited Page 2 responsiveness and accountability. Many of the component activities will continue and expand the efforts promoted under Phase I. A-1 Organizational and Human Resource Development Activities of this subcomponent include: (a) Increase individual and departmental productivity through organizational development, staff training, and provision of adequate working conditions; (b) Improve planning and management capacity through human resource systems, information technology applications, and integrated monitoring of municipal resource flows, activity implementation, and achievement of results; (c) Prevention and services related to HIV/AIDS for council staff and their families. A-2 Governance Improvement Activities of this subcomponent include: (a) Increase transparency and accountability of municipal policies, resource use, administrative acts, and service outcomes; (b) Enhance responsiveness of municipal governance and service provision by gradually deconcentrating selected functions to municipal districts; (c) Promote greater private sector investment and participation in urban development and municipal service provision. Component B: Financial Sustainability (cost US$4.7 million of which US$4.2 million IDA) The objective of component B is to ensure the financial sustainability of CMM. It seeks to raise revenues and rationalize expenditures with the support of an integrated financial management system. Key component activities build upon Phase I results and will be implemented in three areas: revenue enhancement, financial management, and improvements in procurement capacity. The component will: (a) Enhance revenues by increasing the collection of taxes and fees with emphasis on property taxation and by creating the conditions to administer the newly created/transferred municipal taxes and supporting revenue enhancement campaigns; (b) Improve financial management and programming by completing the full design and implementation of the Integrated Financial Management System (SIGEF) initiated during the first Phase. Comprehensive financial planning on the basis of a Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTNEF) will be linked to CMM strategic plans and annual budget cycles; and (c) Improve procurement practices and performance of the municipality by mainstreaming the procurement functions into a single unit, including a medium-term procurement capacity building strategy and greater transparency of procurement-related information. Component C: Urban Planning (cost US$14.9 million of which US$11.9 million IDA) Page 3 The objective of component C is to ensure the equitable and sustainable management of municipal land. It will be comprised of two subcomponents: urban land and environmental management and neighborhood improvements. C-1 Urban Land and Environmental Management Activities of this subcomponent include: (a) Increased coverage of spatial development planning through the formulation and approval of land use, zoning, urbanization, and related plans; (b) Regularization of land tenure and titling, with a focus on high-revenue potential properties in the urban core and on high population peri-urban residential neighborhoods to cover at least 50,000 newly recorded plots; and (c) Implementation of a municipal GIS (SIGEM). C-2 Neighborhood Improvement Activities of this subcomponent include: (a) Development and field testing of an integrated methodology for improvement of informal settlements in high-density and spatially complex peri-urban neighborhoods through a participatory, multi-sectoral approach; and (b) Regularization of tenure and implementation of modest, targeted infrastructure improvements. Component D. Urban Infrastructure Investment and Maintenance (cost US$38.6 million of which US$11.9 million IDA) The objective of Component D is to ensure the construction and maintenance of key municipal transport and drainage infrastructure. Component activities include: (a) Rehabilitation of a major municipal artery (Avenida Julius Nyerere) destroyed in the year 2000 floods which links the central city to important peri-urban residential and commercial areas; (b) Rehabilitation of critical segments of the primary and secondary road network, including construction of new collector roads and extensions of existing roadways; (c) Maintenance and spot repairs of earthen peri-urban roads to enhance access to residential neighborhoods after degradation due to annual rains and road use; and (d) Improvement and spot repair of drainage structures in selected catchments to facilitate local drainage. Component E. Metropolitan Development (cost US$24.9 million of which US$6.0 million IDA) The objective of Component E is to introduce a metropolitan approach for the improvement of selected municipal services. Urban transport has been selected as a critical priority for the next five years, with an emphasis on linking transport plans with access to other key urban facilities and services. This component also builds upon significant Phase I investments in solid waste management within Maputo municipality, which increasingly require upstream and downstream linkages across the metropolitan region for their sustainability. Page 4 E-1 Solid Waste Management Activities of this subcomponent include: (a) Continued improvement of solid waste management through technical assistance, goods, and services, including declining operating subsidies for contracted collection based on the Phase I sustainability strategy already being implemented; and (b) Civic education and communication campaigns to increase awareness of proper management of municipal waste; and (c) Studies and formulation of future projects to ensure the environmental sustainability of solid waste management. E-2 Strategic Development of Metropolitan Services Activities of this subcomponent include: (a) Formulation of a Master Plan for Transit and Transport across the Maputo metropolitan region and (b) Subsequent implementation of management improvement interventions and targeted investments based on the Master Plan. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis The physical works of the project will take place in the municipality of Maputo, which is divided in 7 districts covering an area of approximately 300km2 and a population of 1.1 million. Some plans financed under the project (component E) will be of metropolitan scope also covering the adjacent municipality of Matola, but no physical investments will be done outside of Maputo municipality. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Mr George Campos Ledec (AFTEN) Ms Kristine Schwebach (AFTCS) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X Page 5 II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project The project triggers the following World Bank safeguards polices: Environment Assessment OP 4.01; Involuntary Resettlement OP 4.12; Natural Habitats OP 4.04; and Physical Cultural Resources OP 4.11. The safeguard screening category is S2 and the environmental screening category is B. These ratings result from the proposed infrastructure activities which include refurbishment of buildings, neighborhood development, road maintenance and reconstruction. Potential safeguard related issues are likely to be air pollution, noise, loss of vegetation, soil erosion and on the social side impact on assets, such as loss of economic activity, or land as a result of land boundary changes, may occur. Most of the resettlement is expected to be voluntary, in which participants would have a free choice of whether to stay, or to move to an improved site. The involuntary resettlement policy will mostly apply in cases where loss of land, income sources or means of livelihood occurs. Since environmental impacts are likely to arise from the proposed activities, to protect people and the biophysical environment from the negative impacts and minimize their potential damage to the environment, the Borrower has updated the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) developed for Phase I. The updated ESMF outlines the institutional arrangements and related environmental training needs for the implementation and monitoring of the mitigation measures. It provides environmental guidelines and a screening mechanism to be used by contractors and qualified members of the Municipality to ensure that construction and subsequent operation and maintenance of the infrastructure are carried out in an environmentally and socially sustainable manner. Similarly, the Borrower has updated the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) developed for phase I to ensure that should the project involve any involuntary taking of land resulting in loss of shelter, assets, income sources, or means of livelihood, then a fully-costed Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) will be prepared and appropriately implemented. No adverse impacts on cultural property are expected from any program activity. However, in the event that archeological relics, fossils, or other items of cultural significance are discovered during construction works, then the civil works contractors would be required to follow the cultural property chance finds procedures that are outlined in the ESMF. Similarly, the project is not expected to adversely affect natural habitats. However, to the extent that the project might help to plan future activities within the remaining natural ecosystems in Maputo#s coastal zone (such as mangroves and sand dunes), the principles of the Bank#s Natural Habitats Policy would be followed to guide the planning of those activities. Page 6 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: The updated ESMF and RPF concluded that none of the potentially adverse social and economic impacts associated with the project#s activities will be irreversible, or significant in size or scale. All impacts will be amenable to the appropriate mitigation measures. The rehabilitation and reconstruction of about 12km of the Avenida Julius Nyerere, one of the main arteries of the city, is the only currently known sub-project that could have significant adverse environmental impacts; however, this sub-project is being designed with appropriate mitigation measures. For the other activities, the framework documents have been prepared to screen every sub- project on their social and environmental merits to ascertain that any indirect impact will be appropriately captured and addressed in a timely fashion. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. N/A 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. The first phase of the project demonstrated that CMM's capacity to apply the Bank safeguard policy tools to project activities is adequate. During this second phase, to ensure that the required environmental and social safeguards are in place, two steps are being followed: # First the ESMF and RPF prepared for MMDP II have been updated by the client to reflect any significant changes or additional types of project investments in the new project that were not considered in MMDP I; and # The structure and guidelines of the final ESMF and RPF (approved and cleared by IDA and MICOA) will be used to produce Environmental Management Plans and Resettlement Action Plans for all MMDP II investments which, based on screening, may have significant environmental or social impacts. In addition, in order to satisfactorily apply the Bank safeguard policy tools to the project activities the following institutional arrangements have been made: # The National Environment Agency, MICOA, has seconded an Environmental Officer to CMM to assist in applying the environmental and social safeguards and in building capacity within CMM. To this end, a new Environmental Department at CMM has been created within CMM. It is staffed with seven employees, four of which have university degree. # The Borrower has a good understanding of the purpose of ensuring that all project investments remain in compliance with Bank safeguard policies as well as national legislation. The ESMF discusses the Borrower#s environmental track record in the implementation of MMPD I, which has been generally positive. Page 7 # CMM has further identified the Head of Environmental Management Department as the person responsible for environmental and social safeguards during Phase II. The Environmental Management Department, designated by the Program Authority to lead the resettlement process, will participate in the development of capacity to manage involuntary and voluntary resettlement that will be needed in Phase II for DMPUA. Capacity development will require technical assistance to train personnel of DMPUA and DMI/DEP and help prepare for progressive allocation of responsibilities to DMPUA. For these teams to be able to implement they must be supported with the means to organize and directly supervise resettlement implementation at project sites, and be or be provided with, field facilitators. Men and women social facilitators should be drawn from DMPUA or if necessary, should be contracted to carry out the social and organizational aspects of resettlement. The use of the same facilitators in the consultation process required to prepare the RAP as well as to implement it is very advantageous in creating and maintaining community trust. At the community level, in cases where resettlement is required for more than fifty families, a gender representative resettlement committee will be established comprised of representatives of affected families as well as others who are not affected. The local Resettlement Committee (RC) will be identified by the local Neighborhood (bairro) Collective and include a sub-group of its members as well as other trusted local influence leaders and representatives of the men and women affected by the project. It will be a key forum for linking community issues, including resettlement and grievances with the social facilitator, the Municipal District, the DMPUA and ultimately the Municipal Assembly or Law Courts. For the implementation of a RAP, the present norm of creating a Project Resettlement Commission (PRC) led by the councilor of the main Municipal District affected to ensure adequate dialogue with an organization of displaced and affected people and to ensure they are correctly consulted and compensated for losses should be continued. A Technical Working Group created from Project Resettlement Commission members to carry out the technical (and social) resettlement implementation tasks will also be continued, so that the Municipal District councilor leading the Commission can ensure coordination of District Consultative Council (CC) representatives in an informal working group liaising with the local RC, or where no RC is created, directly with affected people as an important communication channel. This organizational structure has been used in Phase I, and should continue to be followed as it appears to be effective. RCs and the informal District Working Group members at community level should be trained in social and management issues and be supported by social facilitators. At Municipal District (DM) level, the DM Councilor is responsible for the operation of the informal Working Group at District level. The Project Resettlement Commission will coordinate and supervise community consultation and participation in RAP implementation at district level realized through its Technical Working Group or, when resources are available, contracted consultants. Project Resettlement Monitoring Commissions have also been created to ensure Page 8 implementation of resettlement in projects carried out by the CMM over the past two years. These have been successfully used to assess the effectiveness of RAP implementation and provide the report for official approval liberating the previously occupied areas and permitting the main construction project activities to go ahead. Resettlement Monitoring Commissions will continue to be used into MMDP II and constituted by a mix of independent uninvolved reviewers as well as representatives of affected families. Informal District Working Groups must coordinate their activities with the executive Project Resettlement Commission and in particular with the councilor leader of this Commission who is responsible for ensuring technical coordination through the Environmental Management Department. The Commission leader must ensure the Department secures and archives a copy of all technical information collected locally. The Department should pass copies of relevant information to the Municipal Communication Office. Intra- and interdepartmental coordination for resettlement is overseen by the GDEI. The GDEI will also be responsible for ensuring compliance concerning public consultation and disclosure. Mechanisms to address grievances Project affected people and host community grievances concerning proposed or actual resettlement arrangements can initially be presented for local redress to the Quarter Chief, a local influence leader or the local Resettlement Committee where this is created. Failing resolution at community level, issues may be presented to the District (Resettlement) Working Group for resolution or transmission to the Project Resettlement Committee. If the complaint merits higher level treatment, this should be transmitted to the Program Authority via the Environmental Management Department, or it may be formally taken to the Municipal Assembly to investigate and coordinate appropriate solutions. Grievances may also be taken to the social facilitator working with the affected community. This channel may assist in local resolution or provide a rapid channel for timely resolution involving the Project Resettlement Commission. Unresolved issues, dissatisfaction with solutions or if a community is in conflict with a private-sector contractor, may require formal recourse to the Municipal Assembly via the customary presentation and hearing of a municipal citizen#s petition. Failing resolution there, it will be taken to the Ministry or agency with titular responsibility for the investment. Provisions to appeal concerning sectoral grievances to higher levels of government such as National Directors and Ministers exist in most legislation. Should any party be dissatisfied, the grieved party may take the complaint to court where it will be dealt with under Mozambican law. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. During the process of updating the ESMF for MMDP II, public consultations were carried with a broad range of stakeholders, including representatives of the Maputo Page 9 Municipality, national environmental authorities, district authorities, NGOs operating in Maputo, and local citizens# representatives. The ESMF lists the organizations that participated in these public consultations, along with the main issues raised. A local communication strategy outlining awareness-raising activities about the project(s) and resettlement procedures and entitlements would be implemented throughout preparation and implementation of resettlement in order promote dialogue and to reduce misunderstandings and grievances. This strategy would be developed as part of the RAP. Communities will be involved in awareness-raising and training concerning their rights and obligations; how to obtain legal advice and representation, and how to seek redress against what they regard as unfair practices. Training for technical personnel from the DMPUA and DMI facilitated by the Communication Office (GC) that can then be replicated with the District (Resettlement) Working Group members and local leaders in conflict management can assist in minimizing the negative impact of conflicts. The Resettlement Policy Framework and RAP preparation processes are participatory. Resettlement preparation via consultation during the socio-economic studies and impact assessments would identify potential conflicts and communication channels for grievances. The consultation process for RAP preparation will involve all potentially affected people. During and after physical resettlement, individual and group consultation should be continued by social facilitators to verify progress in people taking up new livelihoods activities and in restoring their lives to the levels they were prior to resettlement. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 04/07/2010 Date of "in-country" disclosure 04/30/2010 Date of submission to InfoShop 04/30/2010 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 04/07/2010 Date of "in-country" disclosure 04/30/2010 Date of submission to InfoShop 04/30/2010 Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Page 10 Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? Yes If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Yes Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? Yes OP/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats? N/A If the project would result in significant conversion or degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? N/A OP/BP 4.11 - Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to cultural property? N/A Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the potential adverse impacts on cultural property? N/A OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? Yes If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? Yes The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Infoshop? Yes Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? Yes All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Yes Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project Yes Page 11 cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Yes Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? Yes D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Mr Uri Raich 05/10/2010 Environmental Specialist: Mr George Campos Ledec 04/19/2010 Social Development Specialist Ms Kristine Schwebach 04/21/2010 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Sector Manager: Mr Junaid Kamal Ahmad 05/11/2010 Comments: