RESILIENT KERALA Program for Results [PforR] Final Environmental and Social Systems Assessment [ESSA] 15 March 2021 India RESILIENT KERALA Program for Results [PforR] Environmental and Social Systems Assessment [ESSA] Part A: Final ESSA Summary Report 15 March 2021 India List of abbreviations and acronyms AEU Agroecological Units AEZ Agroecological Zones BMW Bio-Medical Waste BOD Biological Oxygen Demand CAPEX Capital Expenditure CC Climate Change COD Chemical Oxygen Demand CPCB Central Pollution Control Board CPF Country Partnership Framework CRN Core Road Network CSO Civil Society Organization DCAT Disaster and Climate Action Tracking DDMA District Disaster Management Authority DEA Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, GoI DLI Disbursement-Linked Indicator DPO/L Development Policy Operation / Lending DoA Department of Agriculture, Government of Kerala DoE Department of Environment, Government of Kerala DoF Department of Finance, Government of Kerala DoECC Directorate of Environment and Climate Change DoR Department of Revenue, Government of Kerala DRF Disaster Risk Financing DRM Disaster Risk Management DRR Disaster Risk Reduction E&S Environmental & Social EHS Environmental, Health & Safety EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ESHS Environmental, Social, Health and Safety ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan ESSA Environmental and Social Systems Assessment FGD Focus Group Discussion FPO Farmer Producer Organizations GHG Green House Gas GIS Geographic Information Systems G(R)M Grievance Redressal Mechanism GoK Government of Kerala GoI Government of India GP Gram Panchayat GSDP Gross State Domestic Product IDSP Integrated Disease Surveillance Program IEC Information, Education and Communication IT Information Technology JJM Jal Jeevan Mission Page | 2 KII Key Informant Interviews KILA Kerala Institute of Local Administration KSDMA Kerala State Disaster Management Authority LG Local Government LSGD Local Self Government Department LSGI Local Self Government Institutions (Gram Panchayat or Municipality or Corporation) M&E Monitoring & Evaluation MoEFCC Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change MoHUA Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs O&M Operations & Maintenance OH One Health OPBRC Output and Performance-Based Road Contracts OPEX OPerational EXpenditure PDO Program Development Objective PDNA Post Disaster Needs Assessment PforR Program for Results PHLs Public Health Laboratories PMSS Project Management Support Services PMT Project Management Team PMU Project Management Unit PWD Public Works Department RA Results Area RM(A)MS Road Maintenance (Asset) Management Systems RBCMA River Basin Conservation and Management Authority RF Results Framework RKDP Rebuild Kerala Development Programme RKI Rebuild Kerala Initiative RoW Right of Way RTI Right To Information SDRF State Disaster Risk Financing SEIAA State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority SOP Standard Operating Procedures SPCB State Pollution Control Board TCP Town and Country Planning ULB Urban Local Body WB World Bank WRD Water Resource Department WRM Water Resource Management Page | 3 I. Background 1. State of Kerala is highly vulnerable to natural disasters such as cyclone, monsoon storm surge, coastal erosion, sea level rise, tsunami, flood, drought, landslides/ land subsidence and earthquakes and changing climatic dynamics given its location between the western coast and steep slopes of the Western Ghats. In last 3 years the state has seen several such adverse events one after the other, starting with Cyclone Ockhi in 2017, floods and landslides in 2018, 2019 and 2020, Nipah virus in 2019 and present COVID-19 pandemic. The 2018 floods led to widespread loss of life, property, and habitats, affecting several millions and leading to economic losses of nearly US$3.74 billion (Rs. 26,720 crores). These events and their impacts highlighted the level of under-preparedness of the State to deal with these natural disasters and climate change shocks. 2. In order to support Government of Kerala (GoK), World Bank initiated a strategic engagement to build multidimensional resilience in Kerala through First Resilient Kerala Development Policy Operation (DPO 1, US$250 million- June 2019) by extending support to Rebuild Kerala Development Programme (RKDP) — the state’s strategic roadmap for recovery, rebuilding and resilience. It supported key policy and institutional reforms for a) improved irrigation- agriculture nexus, b) engendering river basin management, c) shifting to sustainable and climate-resilient agriculture, d) risk-informed land use planning and updating disaster management plans, e) apart from fiscal reforms to ensure greater investments for preparedness and rehabilitation. Under this DPO, a dedicated institution - the Rebuild Kerala Initiative (RKI) - was set up to coordinate, manage and monitor the roll out of RKDP and DPO 1 across various government departments and agencies. As part of the DPO, GoK has already initiated reforms laid out in the Rebuild Kerala Development Program (RKDP) such as local disaster risk mapping, performance-based road contracting, shifting agricultural and river basin management practices to align with agroecological conditions and introducing risk- informed master planning for cities and towns. 3. This partnership has improved state’s capacity to respond to disasters and improved resilience of the community and treat resilience and disaster risk management as cross-cutting and important concerns in policy formulation and implementation. It has also led the way towards deepening and broad-basing this partnership by looking at additional sectors crucial for building resilience of the state and citizens to shocks of climate change, natural disasters and disease outbreaks. This PforR is part of a series of engagements between Government of Kerala and the World Bank that started after the 2018 floods. II. Program Description 4. The Resilient Kerala PforR builds on the foundations of policy and institutional reforms initiated under Resilient Kerala DPO 1. The new PforR aims at two key Results Areas (RAs): (1) building institutional capacities and systems for managing shocks from climate change, natural disasters and disease outbreaks; and (2) demonstrating integrated approaches to multidimensional resilience at the local level. The former aims at working to strengthen the state-level institutions and systems for greater resilience, the latter aims at addressing the underlying drivers of floods and landslides by building state capacities and simultaneously working on integrated water resources and reservoir management; improved land use planning and management; and ecologically sound agriculture practices. 5. The Program Development Objective ‘is to enhance the State of Kerala’s resilience against the impacts of climate change, natural disasters and disease outbreaks.’ The Program will support the two Results Areas (RAs) that contribute to the outcomes of RKDP - first through support for state-wide systems and institutions development, and second for piloting sectoral investments in four districts along the Pamba river basin- Alappuzha, Idukki, Kottayam, and Pathanamthitta. Page | 4 RA 1: Strengthening transversal systems for resilience 6. Building on RKDP and the policy and institutional reforms achieved through RKP DPO 1 and 2 prior actions, this RA aims to enhance the sustainability of GoK’s fiscal and debt management framework to cope with large scale exogenous shocks, and institutionalize climate and disaster risk-informed urban and disaster risk planning at the State level for enhanced preparedness and response. Objective 1.1: Enhancing the sustainability of the GOK’s public finances to cope with exogenous shocks 7. The Program aims at strengthening public debt management capacity and fiscal sustainability of the GoK to manage its contingent liability to natural disasters and disease outbreaks, and to ensure that these events do not negatively impact the debt profile and budget objectives for the State’s sustainable development. This will be complemented by parallel Technical Assistance (TA) and capacity building support to enhance revenues, and to improve expenditure efficiency and performance orientation in select spending departments. 8. The Program will support the development and implementation of a comprehensive state disaster risk financing & insurance plan and social protection system. This will enable the GoK to identify and develop potential public and private sources (e.g. bonds, (re)insurance) of disaster risk financing to safeguard the state finances, provide transparent and timely assistance to the vulnerable households, and to protect the economy and livelihoods against natural disasters and pandemics. The system provides cost-benefit trade-offs to investments in climate and disaster risk reduction, risk retention, and risk transfer and ensures that the GoK is financially prepared to enact effective preparation, response and reconstruction actions. Relief payments made to fisherfolk families will be made to the bank accounts of female head of the family, which is expected to empower women further and ensure better usage of funds. Objective 1.2: Mainstreaming climate and disaster risk informed development and investment planning 9. This Program intends to establish norms, systems and capacities for risk-informed master planning and implementation across the State, and pilot risk-informed Urban Master Plans and Priority Action Plans in a sample of urban local bodies (ULBs) in the Pamba river basin. This intends to support better disaster preparedness for planning, service delivery and emergency response. 10. LSGD has initiated development of local body DRM plans. These plans are a part of local development plans, which are updated on an annual basis by LSGs based on extensive public consultations. LSGD is currently pursuing aligning the investment planning of local governments (LGs) with DRM plans. Specifically, the LSGD provided the LGs with vulnerability and disaster risk profiles for each local body with draft state-level hazard and vulnerability grid maps prepared by the KSDMA. One of the key bottlenecks for improving and mainstreaming climate-informed local body DRM plans is the lack of down-scaled climate data and information, which can be utilized to better evaluate localized climate and disaster risks as well as associated sectoral impacts. 11. The Program will support mainstreaming climate and disaster risk considerations into the development and implementation of local DRM plans. These risk-informed local DRM plans and target-based grant incentives (measured and tracked by climate co-benefits through Disaster and Climate Action Tracking (DCAT)) will motivate LGs to invest in disaster risk reduction, to enhance disaster preparedness, and to ‘Build Back Better’ in recovery, rehabilitation, and reconstruction phases. Over time, these changes will mainstream climate change and DRM considerations into local planning and development processes. Page | 5 RA 2: Embedding resilience in key economic sectors 12. Building on the policy and institutional reforms achieved so far in key economic and climate- sensitive sectors, this RA will test an integrated approach basin-based multidimensional resilience at local level among key climate-sensitive sectors: health, water resources management, agriculture and road. Objective 2.1: Strengthening the resilience of public health systems for disease outbreaks 13. The Program intends to strengthen the public health systems of the GOK for disease outbreak preparedness and prevention. This includes strengthening diagnostics systems at the district level through empowered State PHLs with facilities for molecular diagnostics and rare zoonotic intra-parasite detection to support timely identification of diseases with potential for outbreaks; and strengthening Integrated Disease Surveillance Program (IDSP) with enhanced capacity and institutionalizing One Health (OH) approach to identify and respond to zoonotic disease outbreaks. Objective 2.2: Strengthening the resilience of water resources systems 14. Declining ground water levels and high variation of rainfall over the years exacerbated by climate change have increased vulnerability, with many dried wells getting inundated during the floods. There is need for integrated water resources management to unlock the development potential of water resources. There is a lack of detailed information on water resources conditions to properly manage water resources and plan measures to make more productive use of water in various water-dependent sectors and mitigate water-related risks. The DPO1 supported drafting a River Basin Conservation and Management Authority (RBCMA) Act, which is currently awaiting legislative approval. The Act will empower RBCMA to conserve and regulate water resources within the State; facilitate its sustainable management, allocation and utilization; and fix rates for use of water for agriculture, industrial, drinking, inland transport, commercial purposes. 15. The Program will enable the operationalization of RBCMA, which will play a critical role in building climate resilience through improved integrated water resources management. This includes tooling and upskilling the RBCMA to operationalize integrated reservoir operations, water monitoring, data collection and management, flood management (including flood forecasting), evaluation of environmental flows, and more efficient water allocation to agriculture, irrigation, domestic purposes, industrial, and other uses to improve productive and sustainable water use. Climate-proofed local level district management plans will ensure climate resilience is mainstreamed into water resources planning and management. Objective 2.3: Strengthening resilience of agricultural productivity through AEZ-based practices 16. Agroecological approaches offer a paradigm shift to more sustainable and resilient food systems while restoring ecosystem services and biodiversity in the context of climate change. Through DPO 1, the State has been divided into five AEZs of unique agroecological characteristics and suitability for specific crops and extension needs. A restructuring of the Department of Agriculture (DoA) was facilitated to ensure that planning, resource allocation, and deployment of human resources are aligned with agroecological classification of blocks and districts. During the preparation of DPO 2, reallocation of funds to agroecological units (AEUs), sub-administrative units under the AEZs, was also initiated. 17. The Program will support the further implementation of the AEZ-based practices initiated under DPO 1, strengthening farmer access to finance, seeds, technology, the market and strengthening their bargaining power. The Program will also integrate the management information systems and strengthen agroecologically relevant farming systems across the Page | 6 State. Program support will be rolled out in 16 agroecological management units (AEUs) covered by 264 Krishi Bhavans in the four Pamba River Basin districts. Objective 2.4: Strengthening the resilience of core road networks 18. Post 2018 floods, PWD commissioned a study to prioritize 1,600 km of select flood and landslide impacted road network for rehabilitation using resilient standards and identified 800 km of road network requiring climate resilient reconstruction. Out of the central and southern cluster about 173 km were located in Pamba River Basin area which was impacted most. Other than the resilient infrastructure program, 7000 km of Core Road Network (CRN) was identified and updated through a scientific assessment by PWD Maintenance Wing and was notified in early 2020. Currently, a web and GIS based Road Maintenance Management System (RMMS) with a climate module is being established which is expected to be operational in 2021. Going forward, RMMS shall guide sector planning and budgeting of CRN. A new contracting model for long term maintenance of CRN to resilient standards has also been developed and sanctioned in 2020. The initial plan is to roll out these 7-year Output and Performance based Road Contracts (OPBRC) for around 380 km of CRN. 19. The Program aimed to address the climate change risks, by building resilience to the CRN which included interventions on drainage systems, landslide risk mitigation to maintain enhanced resilient standards and strengthening institutional capacity and systems in finance, climate resilience, and performance-based management of contracts. The development of institutions and systems shall have a statewide coverage, and the districts along Pamba basin shall pilot integrated resilience building of the road assets. III. Institutional/ Implementation Arrangement 20. The key institution to coordinate implementation across departments will be the Resilient Kerala Initiative, a special purpose vehicle (SPV) established following 2018 floods to accelerate long-pending policy and institutional reforms to address the risks of natural disaster and climate change and improve the State’s resilience to future shocks/ disasters. RKI is mandated to identify the state’s agenda for change by selecting key reforms and investments across sectors that can help the state move towards greater resilience, while partnering with various multilateral institutions, civil society entities and the community. RKI, through a consultative and participatory process, aims to create synergies across sectors, departments, and agencies for a comprehensive and resilient recovery and reconstruction. Page | 7 RKI Institutional Framework - Roles and Responsibilities 21. A High-Level Empowered Committee (HLEC) will act as the Steering Committee for the Program and report directly to the Council of Ministers, while an Advisory Council headed by the Chief Minister will provide guidance and advice to the program. A Project Management team within Rebuild Kerala Initiative (RKI) - Project Management Support Services (PMSS) will be responsible for implementation, coordination, monitoring and evaluation. PMSS will provide technical and management support to the RKI and participating line departments and will include their directorates, executing agencies, training institutions, partner institutions. PMSS will support them in investment planning, technical studies, policy formulation, capacity building, monitoring and evaluation, communication, setting up grievance redress, etc. on projects funded under RKDP, including Bank supported PforR. IV. ESSA Methodology 22. The proposed ‘Resilient Kerala Program’ will focus on improving the Government of Kerala’s resilience against the impacts of climate change, natural disasters and disease outbreaks using the Program for Results (PforR) modality. Therefore, a detailed Environmental and Social Systems Assessment (ESSA) to identify the key environmental and social risks (E&S) that may impact the achievement of the Program Development Outcomes has been undertaken. Given that this program builds on the strategic engagement that began in 2019 between the Bank and the GoK, this ESSA is informed by, and is in continuation with, the previous borrower level studies and vulnerability assessments that have been commissioned by the Bank to assess the system performance of different sectors in the state. 23. The ESSA has been carried out by a team of environmental and social specialists from the World Bank. It primarily relied on a detailed review of secondary literature including applicable policies, Acts, Rules, Government Orders, Circulars, notifications and guidelines as well as evaluations (on institutional or scheme performance) websites, internal assessments, reports, studies. Apart from a desk review of available information, personal interviews and consultations were also held with the community and institutional stakeholders of the program. The desk review focuses on understanding the existing policy, operational procedures, institutional capacity and implementation effectiveness relevant to the activities under the Program. This also included a review of the borrowers systems for engaging with citizens, especially the most marginalized and excluded as well as their grievance redress. Page | 8 24. Owing to COVID-19 related mobility restrictions, majority of personal interviews and group consultations are being done by a team of experts and faculty members from Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA), an autonomous capacity building institution of the state that was commissioned by the Bank to facilitate virtual and physical consultations with state level stakeholders and those in 4 districts within the Pamba river basin (where most implementation/ investment are planned). These consultations aim to examine the roles, responsibilities and capacity of key institutional stakeholders – including nodal and statutory authorities, local bodies and community institutions. 25. A total of 11 State Consultations were conducted with departmental/ agency representatives and their teams and another 32 Community Consultations at 16 different locations (3 ULBs and 13 Gram Panchayats) in the 4 Pamba Basin districts covering more than 328 community members cutting across social and economic groups. These also included 8 dedicated consultations with women and 8 exclusive consultations with poor and socially vulnerable. 26. The draft ESSA reports were disclosed seeking feedback from interested citizens and stakeholders on February 8, 2021 (English version) and February 13, 2021 (Malayalam version). Two state-level disclosure workshops were organized on February 18 and 22, 2021 where the findings of the ESSA were shared with the state level stakeholders to seek their comments and feedback before appraisal. The final ESSA, after incorporating stakeholder comments, will be disclosed on the website of Rebuild Kerala Initiative, GoK as well as World Bank external website. V. Risk Screening Environment 27. Each of the sector Programs was screened to determine the environmental risks. This was first done at the PCN stage and subsequently updated / revised as the Program preparation advanced. The summary of the environmental risk screening is as follows: a) Agriculture: No negative environmental impacts and risks are perceived in the institutional development activities planned. The supporting of the paradigm shift of reorganization of the Agriculture Department into agroecological zones with a focus on the Pamba river basin will bring positive environmental effects as the crop selection will be the one most suitable for the agroecological conditions. Hence the use of fertilisers and pesticides is expected to reduce. b) Disaster Risk Financing / Social Protection: There are no environmental risks as all of these pertain to cash / financial transfers. c) Disaster Risk Management: The aim in this sector is to bring about a climate and disaster considerations in the annual LSGI budget planning. The climate-responsible, resilience-building actions in the local DRM and LSGI planning will not have any negative environmental impacts and hence no risks. d) Fiscal: Being purely financial in nature, there are no environmental risks. e) Health: No environmental risks are envisaged in enhancing the One Health Surveillance Platform at the local level to track and respond to zoonotic disease outbreaks. It provides an opportunity to reduce environmental risks by establishing the link between sanitation / waste management practices and disease. Construction-related EHS impacts are minor in improving district-level Integrated Public Health Laboratories (IPHLs) and will not pose risks. f) Roads: The environmental impacts will be limited to those related to the construction phase of the Core Road Network (CRN) and / or maintenance to resilient standards in the Pamba basin. This will include air, dust and noise pollution; limited tree cutting / trimming; water pollution; worker and public safety; waste, scrap and debris disposal. These physical impacts could result in environmental risks in the construction phase. Page | 9 g) Urban: In the risk-informed master planning, the focus will be on incorporating risk information in the Urban Master Plans and the Priority Action Plans. The environmental risks - apart from disaster and climate risks - will be considered in the upfront planning. This will result in lesser residual environmental risks when the investments are implemented. h) Water Resource Management: The proposed investments when initiating the implementation of the Integrated River Basin Management Plan for the Pamba river will have construction- related impacts that will be localized, limited and reversible. From the typology of the investments, it is determined that these risks will be limited. Further, there are contextual risks due to environmental concerns that need to be considered at the time of investment planning in order to ensure compliance to the regulations and prevailing NGT orders pertaining to the Pamba river basin. Social 28. A comprehensive social risk screening, an important part of ESSA, of the proposed program investments and activities shows that most activities have low to moderate social risks. With strong engagement of local government institutions by all key departments, the overall risk of poor participation and exclusion of intended beneficiaries/communities is minimized. However, given the technical focus of many participating departments, there is limited awareness and capacity on managing social risks and inadequate social accountability mechanisms to ensure inclusive outreach of key activities. Moreover, many sectoral planning activities have the risk of exclusion of vulnerable communities such as SCs, STs and women, if interventions are not accompanied by greater information dissemination, inclusion and use of community based organizations and LSGs during the planning process. Following are the sector-wise interim risk assessments: a) Social Protection: The social risk rating is low as there are strong social benefits of a unified disaster-resilient adaptive safety net system for the vulnerable households, who are most at risk of disasters. However, mechanisms to ensure that there is no exclusion of women and other vulnerable groups such as tribal households / landless households, especially during consolidation of the database will need to be evolved. b) Health: The investments under health are assessed as potentially leading to moderate to low social risks. While the expansion of laboratory network is likely to lead to improved coverage and outreach for local communities, especially women and ensure greater health and safety of technicians, it may have land requirements or may lead to displacement of non- titleholders. Moreover, through the emphasis on engaging cadres of health volunteers, there is possibility of exclusion of members from marginalized communities. Switching to untested/ new health approaches may have reputational risks, cause hesitation among communities, unless backed by strong IEC & community orientation. c) Agriculture: With a strong focus to ensure Famer Producer Organizations have access to new information, market and technology there are potential benefits for small and marginal farmers. However, low current institutional capacities and coordination to ensure inclusion/ participation and outreach; overstretched extension staff and low off-take of services due to low awareness amongst women and small and marginal farmers, and limited representation of women and S&M farmers in FPO leadership are potential social risks. The risks are moderate to low for most of the activities envisaged. d) Water-Resource Management: The investment includes development of an Integrated River Basin Management Plan developed for Pamba Basin and largely has moderate to low social risks. Some of the specific social risks are exclusion of women & vulnerable from the river basin planning process; risk of lack of equity in principles of water allocation, distribution and even on decision around tariff or pricing for water users given that staff have limited capacities around social development to ensure equity based allocations. Page | 10 e) Urban: The focus on strengthening capacities of ULBs with sanctioned risk-informed Master Plans and Priority Action Plans are to face the potential risk a lack of recognition of peculiar vulnerabilities/ needs of women and poor may exclude them from master plans and its preparation process. The social risks range from low to moderate. f) DRM: The investment envisages the creation and integration of Climate risk Information system into local DRM plans. The social risk is moderate as there is possibility of exclusion of women & vulnerable, especially tribal communities, from DRM planning process. g) Road: The social risks for investments under road are substantial. Presence of squatters or encroachers on PWD land, lack of community involvement in identification & prioritization of alignments and the risk of exclusion of tribal habitations situated in remote/ hilly areas during alignment selection, labour influx are potential social risks and poor institutional capacities to manage non-titleholders. VI. Assessment of Legal Policy Framework Environment 29. The applicable legislations – both national and state - include Environment (Protection) Act 1986, Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974, Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules 2000, Construction and Demolition Waste Management Rules 2016, Solid Waste Management Rules 2016 (and various references in the state legislations such as the Kerala State Policy on SWM 2018, Kerala SWM Operational Guidelines, 2017, Kerala Municipalities Act 1994 and The Kerala Panchayat Raj Act 1994), Plastic Waste Management Rules 2016 and state order, national Forest legislation (Indian Forest Act 1927, Forest Conservation Act 1980 and Forest Rights Act 2006) and associated state legislation (Kerala Preservation of Trees Act 1986), Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972, Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958 and associated rules, and Building And Other Construction Workers (Regulation Of Employment And Conditions Of Service) Act 1996 and Kerala Rules 1998. These are applicable across all sectors that are in the Program. 30. There are other legislations that are relevant to particular sectors. In the health sector, Bio- medical Waste Management Rules 2016 is applicable. In the agriculture sector, the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act 2008 is applicable. And, in the WRM Sector, the National Green Tribunal Act 2010 and orders are applicable. The assessment revealed that all of these legislations – cross-sector and those relevant to particular sectors - are well-developed and are a part of the overall legal enforcement in the state. The appropriate legislations will be sufficient to address any of the environmental impacts in these sectors. The borrower’s regulatory agencies such as the Department of Environment (Directorate and the different authorities), State Forest Department and the State Pollution Control Board are well- established and their functions were found to be streamlined. 31. Further, the Program activities have only limited environmental impacts and therefore do not entail any upfront environmental clearances. There are only certain procedural requirements such as obtaining consents prior to the commencement of civil works. These are contractor responsibilities that will have to be supervised by the respective departments that are engaged in civil works. If there are specific situations during implementation, e.g. the NGT orders, then additional procedural requirements may be applicable. The standards included in the various legislations will have to be adhered. There is sufficient capacity within the different implementing agencies, their consultants and their contractors to meet these legal requirements. Page | 11 Social 32. ESSA analysed all the relevant legal policies that impact the program’s scope and finds that Kerala has one of the most progressive legal policy environments among Indian states. Along with national laws and policies, state laws and policies create adequate legal safeguards for women, socially and economically vulnerable, including the poor, scheduled castes and tribes/ indigenous communities in the implementation of schemes across sectors, in preferential selection of beneficiaries for schemes. The reforms to empower local self-government institutions by bringing most subjects under local bodies (along with their functionaries and funds), strong history of land reforms to secure rights of land tillers/ share croppers and a women-oriented policy focus, including the comprehensive approach to gender-budgeting bear testimony to people-centred policy environment of the State. GoK has mainstreamed gender considerations into local-level planning by, inter alia, earmarking a minimum of 10 percent of LSGI budgets to the Women Component Plan, ensuring women’s representation in LSGI’s sectoral Working Groups, and requiring gender impact statements to be presented as part of budget cost-benefit analysis. There are special programs to assist the elderly, SC and ST population, migrant workers, and fisher women. The proposed operation will enhance the capacity for managing disaster risks, which will contribute to building robustness of such social programs in times of disaster. 33. The legal policy framework also provides for social sustainability of marginalised and vulnerable population including the SC and ST, by providing for citizen engagement/ stakeholder participation across interest groups and a rights-based framework to demand accountability in the functioning of various public offices, including central and state agencies. Apart from this, the framework proactively offers legal assistance, safety nets/ entitlements, security against resource or land alienation, protection against discrimination and proactive state support for constituencies with poor voice and agency including women, old-aged and transgenders. 34. In assessing the sector-specific policies that impact urban, health, agriculture, water resource management, disaster risk mitigation and roads and infrastructure investments, the ESSA finds that overall, there is an adequate focus on engagement of local governments in planning and outreach of most programs. For instance, the state agriculture sector policies focus on the interests of small, marginal and tribal farmers and in some cases even agricultural labourers and tenants. Agriculture and other land related policies secure the tenancy rights of tillers and land leasers and secure them from sudden eviction without following due process of law. The policies are positively inclined towards the tenants in compassionately looking at their investments in land and asset improvements, physical and financial investments in multi-year / plantations crops. They emphasize the need for efficient delivery of inputs, advisories and credit to the cultivators and acknowledge the need for capacitating institutions and extension services to deliver on this mandate. State policy also encourages farmers collectives at various levels and calls for creating an inclusive governance structure for Farmer Producer Organization’s (FPOs). 35. However, this ESSA also highlights specific areas where further state policy attention will be needed to enhance inclusion and impact of vulnerable groups, such as SC/STs and women. For instance, the agriculture interventions envisaged under the program will benefit from additional policy measures to incentivize and promote women’s participation in agriculture by targeting specific schemes/ benefits towards women farmers. VII. Assessment of Risks and Benefits Environment Benefits Page | 12 36. The institutional development and investment planning proposed in the different sectors offer an opportunity to render positive benefits through mainstreaming environmental management. For instance, in both DRM and urban sector, introducing risk informed planning is bound to result in upfront consideration of environmental risks among others. The investments in the agriculture sector are bound to be environmentally positive as the agroecological zone approach will result in crop selection that will be appropriate to the respective ecosystems. That will also lead to reducing the negative environmental impacts of agriculture such as fertilizer use, pesticide use and soil erosion. Environment Risks 37. The Program’s investment activities in the Pamba river basin (Agriculture, Health, Roads and WRM) could have physical impacts that could result in environment risks. In Agriculture, there are no civil works and hence no such impacts. In the other three sectors, these are largely construction-related impacts, e.g. air, dust and noise pollution; worker and public safety; waste and debris disposal related to the civil works. All of these investment-related impacts will be minor, localized, generic and reversible, and can be mitigated effectively through management measures. At the time of contracting civil works to implement activities, adequate provisions in the bid / contract documents - that are commensurate with the extent of impacts – will need to be ensured. For instance, in the roads sector, as a part of the pre-investment studies, environmental management plans have been prepared and integrated with the bid / contract documents to ensure proper management of the limited environmental impacts. Sector Benefits Risks Agriculture • Supporting the shift to the AEU approach in • No negative environmental the Pamba basin has positive implications for impacts and risks are perceived in environment and natural resource the activities planned conservation. Selecting the crop using the agro-climatic conditions and topography will result in reduced chemical use, restore soil health and result in effective water use. • The integrated agricultural information systems will progressively assist the farmer in all aspects that will include chemical use as well. Disaster Risk • No environmental benefits as these pertain to • No negative environmental Financing / cash / financial transfers. impacts and risks are perceived in Social the activities planned Protection Disaster Risk • The more widespread implementation of local • The climate-responsible, Management plans that include climate and DRM resilience-building actions will not considerations could lead to environmental have major negative benefits as these are likely to protect eco- environmental impacts and hence systems such as wetlands, lakes and ponds. no risks. Civil work activities arising out of these plans will have minor, localized construction-related EHS impacts and hence associated risks. Fiscal • No environmental benefits as these are purely • No negative environmental financial in nature. impacts and risks are perceived in the activities planned Health • improved health surveillance will establish the • Better capacity strengthening will link between disease (diarrhoea and contribute towards reducing the leptospirosis) and environmental sanitation; environmental risks arising from Page | 13 Sector Benefits Risks and this will drive improvements in bio-medical waste management in environmental performance the selected IPHLs and that will • Tightened controls to avoid spread of can be addressed through infections such as Covid-19 is resulting in improved health surveillance. better bio-medical waste management and infection control • Improving PHLs offer an opportunity to strengthen bio-medical waste management in health diagnostics and hence better environmental managemnet Roads • Long-term performance-based maintenance • Construction-related EHS impacts contracts will bring environmental benefits such as air, dust and noise such as reduced debris generation / disposal pollution; limited tree cutting / and reduced road accidents. trimming; water pollution; worker and public safety; waste, scrap and debris disposal will result in minor physical environmental risks. Urban • Risk-informed master plans will consider all • No negative environmental risks that will bring abouut positive impacts and risks due to this environmental benefits particularly during and investment planning activities. post-event in case of disasters. WRM • The institutional development and investment • The proposed investments will planning activities will, will contribute towards have only construction-related positive environmental benefits through the impacts that will be localized, integrated river basin management plan. limited and reversible. There will be limited environmental risks due to these impacts. • Contextual risks due to environmental concerns in the Pamba river basin after the 2018 floods. These risks have to be considered at the time of investment planning in order to ensure compliance to the regulations and prevailing orders. Social Benefits 38. Through a robust and comprehensive sector specific social screening, the ESSA finds specific and key social benefits and social risks under each of the program investments that cover multiple sectors. Some of the key social benefits and risks that are common across the investments are highlighted below. 39. Strong focus on last mile service delivery and assistance. Most of the sectoral investments, through partnership with local self government institutions, focus on deeper engagement with communities to enhance last mile service delivery of key schemes and programs under participating departments. The unified, resilient safety net, the strengthening of FPOs to be able to access improved markets, established of health laboratories for improved disease surveillance and improved access to testing facilities for remote communities and the engagement of the LSGs in disaster risk management planning process are important design elements for the program to reach the most marginalised with efficient set of services and benefits. 40. Special attention to the vulnerable groups: ESSA finds that the sectoral investments include adequate focus on vulnerable groups. The shift to agroecological farming is expected to Page | 14 improve agricultural productivity, thereby directly improving the livelihood of small and vulnerable farmers, especially women. The work with ULBs for Master planning will seek to address vulnerabilities of marginalised communities and settlements. Through regulated land use, spatial planning of settlement it also seeks to prevent development in hazard prone areas that directly affect vulnerable groups, such as tribals. The investment also identifies the need for improved HR capacities and sensitivity of ULB staff to the needs of urban poor and women. Through the creation of a single, unified system of social protection with a payments platform that releases disaster payments to eligible beneficiaries in a transparent and timely manner, into the bank accounts of female head of eligible families, which is expected to increase women’s autonomy and their position within family. 41. Systems for citizen’s engagement to improve social benefits. The investments also include, in varying focus, mechanisms of citizen engagement. For instance, the health investments envisage citizen engagement in surveillance to improve awareness on disease outbreaks and access to testing facilities. Similarly, the integration of disaster risk mitigation planning through LSGs will ensure improved local capacities & preparedness for climate and disaster related risks/events. Social Risks The potential benefits envisaged through the programme investments can be undermined, if the social risks are not identified and mitigation measures evolved to address these. Across the investments, some of the key social risks that are likely are: 42. Exclusion of vulnerable groups such as scheduled tribe/ caste groups and women. A key social risk across the investments is that of exclusion of vulnerable groups such as SC, STs, small and marginal (S&M) farmers and women. Some sectors, such as roads and water resource management are likely to lead to exclusion of vulnerable groups during the planning process. Under roads sector, a potential risk is lack of community participation during prioritisation / selection of road packages, or lack of selection of roads in hilly, difficult terrains connecting tribal settlements. Likewise, crop insurance schemes are skewed against those with unclear land ownership/ titles, like women and tribal farmers. Similarly, investments under agriculture can end up perpetuating low participation of women, S&M farmers during planning of AEU; there is risk of capture of FPO leadership by dominant interest groups, with very few positional roles left for women or the marginal farmers. The unified system for safety-nets and the payments can also lead to risk of exclusion of households during the database consolidation and de-duplication process. 43. Low awareness on services and entitlements among vulnerable groups. For most investments, a likely potential risk is low uptake of key schemes and programmes by the poor and vulnerable communities. The lack of awareness on beneficial schemes and entitlements such as social safety-net programs, as also the schemes being envisaged under water, agriculture and disaster management planning are a critical barrier to access. Institutional mechanisms are as critical as mechanisms for strong information dissemination, especially targeted at the marginalized groups, who rely on these entitlements for basic survival. 44. Limited institutional capacities for community engagement and management of social issues. Other than the LSGs and LSGD, most participating departments have low social capacities primarily owing to their technical focus and limited community interface. Investments under water resource to work on issues of equity in water distribution, ensure outreach of WRIS to the community for their increased preparedness and resilience; investments under agriculture that seek to ensure information access to FPOs, technology and improved markets, improved spatial planning and risk informed DRM plans- all these require Page | 15 additional capacities within participating departments around social risk management, use of inclusive approaches and community engagement in different aspects of planning and implementation. These agencies also have limited mechanisms around social accountability, grievance redress or tracking of social inclusion in their respective sectoral schemes and programmes. Sector Benefits Risks Agriculture • Focused on last mile service and • Multiple agencies with low capacities assistance operating in silos • Improvement in farm incomes of • Institutions at cutting edge understaffed and smallholders overburdened • Strengthened institutional /individual • Low participation of women, S&M farmers capacities of service vulnerable during planning of AEU PoPs/IAMIS content cultivators • Exclusion of women collectives leasing land • Expanded IAMIS to offer farmer like Krishi Sanghs friendly ICT services • Low offtake of AEU and IAMIS based services • Robust farmer database to help among smallholder deliver benefits to smallholders, • Elite capture of FPO leadership with few women and tribal farmers positional roles for women & vulnerable • FPO also likely to improve access to • Lack of active departmental GRM to track input, credit, services for marginal grievances farmers • Improved information sharing, disaster preparedness and community resilience • Localised information to help in panchayat level water security planning / budgeting Water • RBMPs offer social and economic • Exclusion of vulnerable communities from Resources benefits through greater availability the process of planning or decision making Management and resource sustenance • Risk of priorities and needs of women and • Prevents resource conflict around landless getting excluded from river basin water scarcity plans or water allocation principles • Plans allow for equitable allocation • Inabilty to pay water tariffs/ charges for to meet different needs /demands water access/ consumption decided by the • RBMCA to help regulate water use river basin plans and conservation • Untested institutional capacities for basin or • Allocate water resources based on aquifer level planning- reputational risks principles of equity • Multiple agencies with low capacities operating in silos, with fragmented mandates- irrigation, groundwater • No functional department level GRM to track and reddress sector specific grievance • Low representation of landless/ vulnerable in Basin level management committees Health • Improved physical and economic • Reputational risk of shifting to a new health access to public testing facilities for surveillance system the community • Exclusion of marginalsed members from • Reduced health expenditure, time being appointed in IPHLs saving and lower transaction cost • Worker safety of the lab techicians involved • Citizens engagement in surveil-lance in testing and handling samples will improve awareness on disease • Safety of community surveillance volunteers outbreaks unless adequately trained and practising • Better collaboration among LSGs precautions and departments for surveillance • Setting up new IPHLs may lead to small scale • Improved health outcomes for poor physical displacement and vulnerable in Basin districts Page | 16 Sector Benefits Risks Roads • More resilient road infrastructure • Physical Displacement of encroachers and • Time saving, road safety for squatters during improvement works commuters/ citizens • Temporary or permanent economic • RMMS to improve institutional displacement of roadside vendors capacities, citizens engagement • Exclusion of tribal habitations due to hilly/ • Greater accountability ofvendors difficult terrain due to improved monitoring • Lack of community participaiton during • Digitial platforms providing greater prioritisation / selection of road packages transparency and information • Labour influx during repair, resilience, • Creation of systems for sharing maintenance works feedback and seeking redress • Risk of gender based violence & sexual • Improved road network and exploitation accountabilty in road maintenance Social • Improved efficiency in the delivery of • Risk of exclusion of households during the Protection public benefits and entitlements database consolidation and de-duplication • Enhanced and timely access for poor • Low awareness among vulnerable about & vulnerable- especially those their eligibility & process of establishing it critically dependent for schemes • Improved awareness among farmers • Exclusion of tenants & those not accessing about crop insurance as a risk formal credit from crop insurance schemes mitigation mechanims • Denial for those with unclear land • Lowers risks of income loss due to ownership/ titles like women and tribal crop failure or productivity losses farmers Disaster Risk • Better understanding & • Lack of participaiton by poor & vulnerable Management preparedness for climate risks during preparation of climate informed DRM • Improved local preparedness for plans climate disaster events • Limited capacities of LSG staff & ERs to • Inclusive Resilience - marginalised understand CC risks and imacts have dependence on climate • Exclusion of tribal habitations due to hilly/ sensitive sectors difficult terrain • Preparedness based approach to • Plans not backed by adequate human and minimize adverse impacts esp. on financial resources to ensure effective poor & vulnerable implementation Urban • Master planning to address • Non-recognition of the spatial needs of vulnerabilities of marginalised women, vulnerable gorups while drafting communities and settlements Mater Planning guidelines • Regulated landuse, spatial planning • Exclusiom of vulnerable during the Master of settlement to prevent plan preparation process in the ULBs development in hazard prone areas • Limited capacities of city planners and ULBs • Improved HR capacities to reflect in staff to facilitate Master Planning guidelines sentizised to needs of • Overstretched, low human resoures in ULBs urban poor and women to implement Master Pans • Comunity participation in plan • Lack of complete autonomy within ULBs to development to lead to greater regulate landuse as per plan or to deter plan awareness - Improved accountability violations • Master Plans to help communities develop greater resilience aimed at future disasters/ risks VIII. Institutional Capacity Assessment Environment 45. The various GoK implementing agencies have adequate capacity to address the environmental risks and also to enhance their environmental performance where such opportunities exist. Page | 17 The highlights of the institutional capacity assessment of the sector institutions / agencies are as follows: (a) Agriculture-Department of Agriculture: Given that the nature of environmental effects are positive and intrinsically embedded in the Program, there is no need for a separate environmental cell or independent stream of environmental management activities. Though there are no environmental risks, there are opportunities to integrate the environmental management in the capacity building - developing suitable training modules / content within the context of promoting the AEU approach, building FPO’s environmental awareness and progressively including environmental concerns in the Agriculture Information Management Systems. In terms of environmental performance, the Department of Agriculture is clearly committed to promote environmentally responsible practices, e.g. the Department is supporting organic farming and similar initiatives to reduce the use of chemicals in agriculture. The assessment concluded that their capacity is adequate and can be further strengthened as outlined. (b) DRM-KSDMA: In this investment planning initiative, environmental concerns have been identified in the template for DRM plans at the LSG levels. These will suffice in terms of addressing environmental concerns of the DRM plans. With KSDMA’s technical capacity to develop these plans using relevant information from various sectors, no separate environmental cell or division is required. However, in the capacity building that KSDMA will undertake, it is necessary to cover the management of environmental effects as one of the modules in the overall training to be administered during implementation. The assessment concluded that their capacity is adequate. (c) Health – Department of Health: In terms of organizational systems dealing with civil works for enhancing diagnostic laboratories, the inclusion of EHS provisions in the bid / contract documents is required to be done. As these environmental effects are localized and minor, this would suffice. For the streamlining BMW in these new laboratories, there is capacity within the Department to ensure that these are done in compliance with the BMW rules, i.e. obtaining the authorizations and streamlining its management in the laboratory facilities. Related to the disease surveillance and its linkages to environmental issues, though the organizational systems are in place, this can be strengthened in a manner that more follow-up action by the LSGIs is done to improve the waste management and sanitation practices. (d) Roads – PWD: As the road investments have been so chosen that the environmental impacts are minimal, the proposed arrangements of having Technical Audit consultants (for maintenance roads) and Supervision Consultants (for CRN rehabilitation) were planned to augment the PWD’s capacity. The assessment concluded that these were found to be satisfactory. However, GoK’s ongoing effort to build in-house capacity in the PWD requires to be continued, and modules of environmental management training should be integrated with all capacity building initiatives through the Program period. (e) Urban - LSGD: Under the Program, risk-informed planning will include environmental risks among other risks in its upfront consideration. Though LSGD does not have an organizational set-up related to environmental management, this may not be necessary given the activities proposed under this Program. Integrating environmental considerations in LSGD’s organizational systems can be accomplished through the external agency support that will be required to streamline risk information in planning. The assessment concluded that would be adequate for LSGD to address issues under this Program. (f) Water Resources - WRD: For institutional development and investment planning activities, the environmental capacity needs to be mainstreamed and this is best achieved through training and capacity building of all the WRD staff involved with operationalizing RCBMA. Establishing a separate environmental cell or division will not be necessary. The training and guidelines that will be a part of their organizational systems require to be adequate environmental management content. Given the focus of the State Pollution Control Board and the National Page | 18 Green Tribunal on the Pamba river basin, it is required to integrate good environmental practices in their organizational systems. For the proposed investments that will be identified, WRD’s capacity to address environmental safeguards in large projects will suffice to ensure that these are suitably addressed during implementation. The assessment concluded that WRD’s existing capacity would be adequate to address issues under this Program. Social 46. Kerala has a strong history of integration of pro-people and participatory planning mechanisms in its administrative, policy and legal set-up. This required assessing the overall system and institutional framework against key elements of citizen’s engagement, grievance redressal, social inclusion and gender. Capacities of the following state institutions are assessed as part of this ESSA: S No Sector Partnering Sector Institutions 1 Agriculture Directorate of Agriculture, Kerala Small Farmers Agri-business Consortium (SFAC), Krishi Vikas Kendras (KVK), Krishi Bhawans, Farmer Producer Organizations / Companies (SPOs/FPCs) 2 Water Resource Irrigation Department, IDRB, Groundwater Department, RBCMA 3 Roads Public Works Department- PWD, Kerala Highway Research Institute-KHRI 4 Social Protection & Department of Revenue (DoR), Food and Civil Supplies (F&CS), DRFI Information Kerala Mission, Department of Agriculture (DoA) 5 Fiscal Reform Department of Finance 6 Health State Health Directorate- Integrated Disease Surveillance Project (IDSP)- State Surveillance Unit (SSU), District Surveillance Unit (DSU)/ Public Health Laboratories (IPHL) 7 Urban Local Self Government Department (LSGD), Department of Town and Country Planning (T&CP), Urban local Bodies (ULB) 8 Disaster Risk Kerala State Disaster Management Authority-KSDMA, Local Self Management Government Department (LSGD), Local Self Governments (LSGs) Adequate Social Capacities of State-wide Institutions to Manage Social Risks (i) Citizen Engagement: A supportive policy environment for decentralisation through empowerment of LSGs by transfer of most subjects under their domain, activating the village assemblies (Gram Sabhas) to articulate development needs of the community, sectoral priorities and prioritizing them during the annual plan preparation, a regular system of community monitoring (social audit) wherein the annual performance is reviewed and scrutinized by citizens shows adequate attention to citizen engagement and social accountability. ESSA finds that the state has a few centralized GRMs, including the Chief Minister’s Public Grievance Redressal Cell, which keeps department and category wise records of grievances, the state-wide helpline Citizen's Call Centre (CCC), and Local Self Government Departments GRM- all these provide access for citizens to submit online or telephone based complaints. Another slightly less structured system of ‘file adalats’ or file courts exists in some departments wherein all pendencies in resolution of grievances and works need to be explained by bureaucrats to elected representatives twice a year. The state also has an effective but informal system of redress given the strong organic linkage between the LSGs and the community, wherein citizens directly register their grievances (orally or through petitions) with their elected representatives (ERs). (ii) Gender and Women’s Empowerment: The Kudumbashree campaign for social and economic empowerment of women by nurturing local leadership through village institutions and women’s collectives has today emerged as a pivotal agency for implementation of all key programmes for women and vulnerable groups. State also implements gender budgeting across all departments and undertakes an annual review of performance of five year plans and tracking gender outcomes Page | 19 identified in the gender sub-plans and providing reservation for women in government positions. GoK has a Women’s Cell to look into grievances of women, particularly, harassment against women, neglect, desertion, not recognizing her rights, and even family discords apart from a separate Domestic Violence Cell headed by a protection officer, Kerala also has multiple helplines and support systems including a dedicated Women helpline, and a Snehitha helpdesk- a 24-hour gender help desk that works to offer support to shelter-less and abandoned women through immediate help, shelter, counselling, motivation and legal assistance. (iii) Social Inclusion - The state has been promoting the interests of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities by specifically earmarking funds under the Tribal Sub-Plan (TSP) and Scheduled Castes Sub-Plan (SCSP) for them in districts/areas predominated by these social groups. These include specific schemes in the agriculture and livelihoods sector. Even under the RKVY since 2017- 18 the states have been allocating funds under the Scheduled Caste Sub Plan (SCSP) and Tribal Sub Plan (TSP) to ensure that benefits of the scheme go directly to their intended beneficiaries- SC and STs, respectively. All development departments of GoK have to ensure that approximately 20 percent of their annual budgets are spent directly or indirectly on the welfare of these vulnerable constituencies. Limited Social Capacities of Participating Sector Institutions 47. Need for stronger sector-specific institutional mechanisms and capacities for social management. The borrowers /RKDPs own internal assessments have alluded to the overlap and duplication of functions of multiple sectoral agencies that leads to sub-optimal efficiency and poor accountability on social management/inclusion. It recognizes the need to reorganizing these institutions to create better synergies and clearer accountability for social management. Most programme investments therefore envisage the creation of stronger institutional mechanisms to increase outreach to communities, engagement with LSGs and other community based organizations (CBOs). Under the agriculture sector, the need for revamped agriculture extension, which capacitates women extension workers, to work more closely with women farmers and other vulnerable farmers in creating awareness, ensuring their participation in planning and selection of AEU-wise packages. Similarly, ensuring representation from vulnerable sections and women in FPO leadership (including organizing women only or tribal only FPOs) - to ensure that benefits are equitably distributed across gender, social and economic groups. 48. Limited capacities of participating departments on social risk management. ESSA finds that specific interventions for managing exclusion risks need to be augmented through greater sensitization and capacity building of field staff and extension workers. For instance, this is more critical in sectors such as roads and water resources management, where capacities are more technical than social, largely because these departments are traditionally ‘engineering’ departments with no public dealing of an ‘accountable’ nature. This also holds relevance for social protection, where there are no established institutional structures for the proposed unified social protection database and is likely to be created within the department of revenue, which has limited experience around social safety. Social protection schemes are mainly accessed by those who are most vulnerable to disaster events and shocks in the society- including elderly, PwD, single women, children, patients, victims of violence and abuse and transgender. Any transition to a new and unified system of benefit/ entitlement delivery is likely to lead to increase the susceptibility of the eligible beneficiaries unless the intervention is accompanied by strengthening of capacities of participating institutions. This will require specific capacities in the area of citizen’s engagement (for making the scheme participation more inclusive and norms simplified), awareness generation (to create awareness about schemes, their eligibilities and process for accessing them) and accountability. Page | 20 IX. Assessment Against Core Principles Environment Principle#1 Principle #2 Principle#3 The GoI / GoK’s framework (laws and regulations) - The GoI / GoK’s regulatory systems The regulatory systems include the Building And Other environmental, forests and pollution control acts and rules pertaining to natural habitats, particularly Construction Workers (Regulation Of Employment And - were assessed and found to be adequate to manage the forests and eco-sensitive areas were assessed Conditions Of Service) Act 1996 and Kerala Rules, 1998. environmental effects of the Program activities. As these and found to be adequate to manage the The Act and Rules mandate health and safety compliance activities have only low and moderate impacts, these are adverse environmental effects if these arise not a major focus of the framework. The applicability of the during implementation. for all civil works, and is regulated by the Labour framework is limited and only to the investment activities / Commissionerate. civil works proposed in the PWD, Health Department and The Program activities do not include WRD. The capacity to ensure regulatory compliances environmental effects on natural habitats or While the systems are in place, the enforcement needs to requirements exists in the regulatory and implementing cultural heritage sites. No significant be strengthened. Worker and public safety are generally departments. conversion or degradation of critical natural managed through provisions in the bid / contract habitats or physical cultural heritage is documents that the implementing departments – having At the Program level, the implementing department’s in- envisaged. house capacity will be strengthened through use of civil works - will be using to procure its contractors. The external consultants and EHS provisions in the bid / The consistency to this core principle was provisions will be made part of agreements with contract documents on EHS management in the sectors confirmed. contractors and will be monitored. where civil works have been planned. Given the prevailing Covid-19 pandemic situation, this In the institutional development and investment planning should also include additional requirements of the use of activities, there is sufficient awareness, competence and PPEs (face masks), physical distancing and handwashing guidelines with the department systems to ensure that environmental issues are appropriately considered. practices that may be required of the contractor and sub- contractor personnel.1 All of these have been included as The consistency to this core principle was confirmed. PAP recommendations. With this further strengthening, consistency to this core principle was also ensured in the Program design. 1 World Bank ESF / Safeguards Interim Note: Covid-19 Considerations in Construction / Civil Works Projects, April 2020 Page | 21 Social Sector Principle#1 Principle #2 Principle#3 Principle #4 Principle#5 Principle#6 Agricul The program will operate within NA Proposed investments No Activities are aimed at increasing The nature of ture adequate legal framework; project involve government investments income of S&M, women & tribal program screening shows no substantial risks; employees who are are planned farmers; the operation seeks shift investments is institutions and systems are competent protected by national /state that may lead to a new approach for which such that they to manage impacts; state has mature laws, service rules from to physical or existing institutions need to ensure are not likely to systems to promote citizens exploitation, & abuse. economic adequate consultations & lead to or engagement, gender, inclusion & Majority functionaries in displacement awareness; investments aim at exacerbate transparency. Kerala are women, of creating farmers collectives so that social or LSGs have a system of social audit including agri extension communities exclusion & economic risks are resource wherein performance across sectors workers therefore burden or individuals minimised. conflicts. (including agriculture) is collectively of expanded mandate will - whether State systems, established norms reviewed by Gram Sabha (village fall on them for which safe temporary or will need to ensure equity in assembly). GoK deploys competent and reasonable working permanent in benefit distribution, especially to human and financial resources, although hours will need to be nature. women, who despite land reforms last mile delivery is affected as enforced. don’t have land ownership in organizations are overburdened; Kerala has highest no. of proportion to their participation in capacities need to be augmented, as the S&M & women farmers agricultural sector and get program intends to change basic (Kudumbshree) due to excluded from receiving farm approach to agriculture planning in the which there is strong benefits. Pamba Basin. enabling ecosystem for Potential lack of affordability to State level GRMs are responsive, women safety and new PoPs for marginalised, tribal although more robust department inclusion. Laws provide and women farmers as well as risk specific GRMs are needed to make the security to agricultural of exclusion of vulnerable from system accountable. workers and allowances decision making roles in FPOs. during temporary unemployment. Water The sector institutions/ departments The The project workers in this No Proposed activities are aimed at While water Resour have low social capacities primarily operations in sector involve public investments improved information generation resources of ce owing to technical focus and limited this sector servants of irrigation are planned and analysis for equity in water Pamba Basin community interface; social capacities do not department, IDRB and that may lead allocation, timely information for are contested Page | 22 Sector Principle#1 Principle #2 Principle#3 Principle #4 Principle#5 Principle#6 need bolstering as they have to work on support some contracted staff in to physical or better flood preparedness and between Govt equity in water distribution, making activities that RBCMA and its PMU. The economic hence resilience. of Kerala and usable WRIS for increased community may have an public servants are displacement If prepared through a participatory Tamil Nadu, resilience and preparedness. impact on protected by national / of process, basin plans could better operations are Considering the potential risks which are the religious states laws, service rules communities respond to community needs, esp. aimed at low to moderate, state systems are or cultural from abuse and or individuals of women & landless. Sector efficient mature and with added capacities sector resources of exploitation. - whether institutions will need to bolster utilisation, not institutions can handle these risks and communities The operation will need to temporary or social capacities by partnering with creating impacts, ensure citizen’s engagement, ensure fair working permanent in NGOs, CBOs and LSGs to assess additional participatory river basin planning and conditions for contracted nature. people’s needs and articulate them demands on greater transparency through workers that are deployed in plans. There is, however, risk of water; hence disclosures and information sharing. in the RBCMA. exclusion of vulnerable & women not likely to The department needs a dedicated and from the planning process, which exacerbate comprehensive GRM to ensure efficient may lead to inequity in inter se conflicts. redress of complaints allocation of water or in fixing tariff/ cess. Roads Sector institutions have low social Operations Safety of workers/ labour Although state Roads planned for expansion and The nature of capacities although continued don’t management will be systems for improving connectivity to tribal program engagements with Bank under KSTP I & support secured through effective land habitations are likely to be socially investments is II, Resilient Kerala Program Development activities that contractor management. management beneficial- improved access, better such that they Policy Loan have led to a more have an Large scale mobilization of are closely rescue-relief to tribal settlements are not likely to accountable and responsive working. impact on non-local labourers is aligned with during adverse events and better lead to or This is notwithstanding that religious or expected for maintenance, bank policies, resilience. Usually such habitations exacerbate departmental decisions are still driven cultural repair contracts. This will there is get excluded as tribal / indigenous social or purely by technical considerations- resources. need developing Covid- divergence in communities live on hilly terrains / resource selection of roads for maintenance or Any road compliant Labour treatment of uplands, which are the least conflicts. repair is based on estimated volume of modification Management Procedures encroachers. preferred landscapes owing to future traffic and present road adversely for worker & community PWD calls for difficulty of construction (costs and conditions rather than need to reach infringing on safety. legal action forest clearances) and remote, inaccessible, tribal habitations. community Labour mobilization can and eviction of convenience. Likely social risks relate to land conserved pose influx related risks, occupants, There is risk of exclusion of tribal management esp. treatment of areas/ sacred especially considering that while bank communities & women from Page | 23 Sector Principle#1 Principle #2 Principle#3 Principle #4 Principle#5 Principle#6 encroachments and squatters, will need groves will state has dispersed, low policy calls for prioritization of roads needing to be aligned to Bank policies. be excluded population settlements, resettlement. urgent expansion or maintenance Although PWD has a dedicated GRM from which further reduces the Works as departmental systems look at it and a new digital platform based GRM program absorptive capacity of requiring large from technical perspective rather (proposed under RMMS), it needs to be investment communities. Adequate scale displace- than adding an inclusion lens to accessible and transparent in order to measures will be needed, ment to be the decision making. build the trust of citizens/ users to including orientation of excluded. access them. workers and community awareness on labour influx. Social Investments are aimed at creating better The Proposed investments No Unified state database of ‘eligible’ The nature of Protec disaster preparedness by improving operations in involve working with investments is likely to greatly benefit poor and program tion & efficiency in delivery of public this sector government staff governed are planned vulnerable. Since reconfiguration investments is DRFI entitlements and benefits under do not by national/ state laws and that may lead of social security entitlements is likely to reduce different social security schemes and support protected by service rules to physical or aimed at improved efficiency and vulnerability also supporting risk financing in activities that from abuse, exploitation. economic timeliness, which is crucial for and create agriculture as a measure to increased may have an Majority of functionaries in displacement elderly, PwD, single women, who systems to resilience of farmers. impact on agriculture extension are of depend on these benefits for food improve their However, the exclusion of marginal, religious or women; legal framework communities security and survival. resilience. women and tribal farmers from cultural offers safeguard to women, or individuals Crop insurance may, however, accessing crop insurance and lack of resources. but work of social - whether lead to exclusion of smallholders enabling local ecosystems, including protection /crop insurance temporary or and those with unclear land titles limited human resources and will fall on women frontline permanent in (women and tribal producers), institutional capacities remain a concern staff for which safe and nature sharecroppers if eco-system and reason for low off-take. reasonable working hours around it is not improved to make need to be enforced. it inclusive- in terms of eligibility or transaction costs . Fiscal NA NA NA NA NA NA Refor m Health Sector investments are likely to operate The IDSP has detailed & Dept will use State systems are geared to The nature of within a strong sectoral and state legal operations in functional protocols on space within provide free/ affordable inclusive program framework that ensures equity and this sector worker safety - bio-safety existing health health services. District health investments is Page | 24 Sector Principle#1 Principle #2 Principle#3 Principle #4 Principle#5 Principle#6 inclusiveness in delivery of health do not and biomedical waste institutions- planning processes ensure such that they services. support management procedures, for IPHL consultation with different are not likely to Relevant health institutions and local activities that which are regularly Although 150 constituencies and representation lead to or governments are competent to assess may have an reviewed and reported. sq meters per of their needs in Health Plans. exacerbate and manage likely social risks. There is, impact on Most IDSP positions in SSU, lab is needed Based on realisation of social or however, risk of new IPHLs being the religious DSU and IPHLs are at district vulnerabilities and specific health resource understaffed to deliver on their larger or cultural contractual whose level, it’s related needs of social groups, conflicts. mandate of conducting more tests for resources of employment conditions are possible that state operates several social effective disease surveillance. An communities not clearly defined. Key these sites security schemes providing health assessment of reasons for high positions in DSUs/IPHLs are may not be benefits and healthcare to elderly, vacancies at IIPHLs will need to be done vacant impacting scheme & free of PwD, orphans, single women, to ensure competent staff that enjoy lab performance. encumbran- children of female headed favourable work conditions Likewise, Engagement of ces. households. Understanding the capacities of community health Kudumbshree members as Considering need to bring these services closer volunteers also need to be enhanced health volunteers is also divergence in to the community, department is before they are engaged in disease likely to impose safety risks treatment of expanding the IPHL network. State surveillance. unless they are made well non- titlehol- strategy of mobilizing health The program (IDSP) does not have a aware of risks & , der Bank volunteers is aimed at improving dedicated functional GRM to handle precautions. policy will outreach and responding to program specific grievances and need to be vulnerable. feedback and needs to be created. adhered. Urban Proposed investments operate within The The project workers here No Sector activities are aimed at The nature of adequate legal and regulatory operations in are public servants- staff of investments enhanced institutional capacities program framework. LSGD has strong systems this sector line department and are planned to respond to future disaster investments is and institutions to ensure social do not municipal bodies. These that may lead events, better planning of urban such that they sustainability, equity and inclusiveness. support public servants are to physical or settlements to create urban are not likely to LSGIs are strongest institutions in the activities that protected by service rules, economic resilience. Improved land-use lead to or state with a rich history of associating may have an national/ state laws from displacement planning, better community exacerbate with citizens for development planning, impact on exploitation & abuse. The of awareness and regulated social or although experience of associating for the religious operation will need to communities development in hazard prone resource master planning is rather limited. ULBs or cultural ensure fair working or individuals areas will reduce vulnerability. conflicts. lack adequate human resource and are conditions and working ULBs will need institutional Page | 25 Sector Principle#1 Principle #2 Principle#3 Principle #4 Principle#5 Principle#6 overburdened to support effective and resources of hours for staff deployed in - whether strengthening so that they can participatory Master Planning. Being communities preparation of Master temporary or enforce stronger regulation largely dependent on state, ULBs lack Plans, especially female permanent in around land-use/ town planning financial resources to implement these staff, who will be nature. and be made accountable for plans. They lack sufficient regulatory facilitating participation in these Master Plans. powers to ensure adherence to land plan preparation. If tribal settlements or common use, prevent plan violations or property regimes fall near or timebound preparation and notification within municipal limits, such ULBs of plans. will be excluded from the pilot. Disast Kerala has most enabling legal The The project workers in case No Climate and disaster events The nature of er Risk environment for DRM. Recent spate of operations in of this sector are public investments adversely impact the marginalised, program Mana floods & landslides forced the state to this sector servants- staff of KSDMA, are planned and inter-sectionally vulnerable. investments is gemen ensure a comprehensive and inclusive do not local bodies. These public that may lead Better hazard & vulnerability risk such that they t DRM framework. support servants are protected by to physical or assessment & its use to make are not likely to LSGD and LSGs that anchor DRM activities that the service rules, national economic climate informed DRM plans will lead to or activities address issues of equity and may have an /state laws on protection displacement improve community awareness exacerbate inclusion in public services and have impact on from abuse and of and capacities for preparedness. social or competent systems to ensure inclusion the religious exploitation. communities Decentralised, planning adopted resource of vulnerable groups during preparation or cultural Since most disaster related or individuals- and refined over last 25 years, has conflicts. of climate risk informed DRM plans. In resources of frontline workforce in the whether led GoK to pay significant attention recent years LSGs have developed communities state comprises women- temporary or to identifying needs, (through capacities to undertake DRR planning. Kudumbshree members permanent in dedicated gram / ward sabhas or Nearly 850 GPs have prepared DRM and ASHA or Anganwadi nature. women sabhas) and ensuring place plans, but await implementation for Workers, additionality of for them in final plans. Such plans want of resources and mandate. mandate will impact their explicitly identify investments LSG functionaries are overburdened and working conditions and directed at the welfare of lack human resource to support working hours, which needs vulnerable groups- women, participatory DRM planning. to be addressed to ensure elderly, children, SC, ST and fair working conditions and transgender. safety. Page | 26 X. Key Inputs from Stakeholder Consultations Environment 49. State-level consultations feedback: These consultations were carried out both the Bank’s ESSA team and by local institution, KILA. The highlights relevant to environmental systems were as follows: No. Sector Feedback - Highlights 1 Agriculture • Agroecological Zone (AEZ) approach with agroecological management units will lead to selecting the most suitable crop for particular ecosystems. This will lead to less environmental damage, i.e. less fertilizer use, less pesticide use and less erosion. It is expected to be beneficial for the environment. • Building the relevant environmental capacity in the Farmer Producer Organization as part of the overall capacity strengthening will be required. • In the Integrated Agricultural MIS, the first is to focus on information of economic and financial relevance to the farmer. Subsequently, this will be extended to include relevant environmental information as well. 2 Disaster Risk • There are no environmental effects and hence environmental systems Financing are not relevant. 3 DRM • In the template for disaster management plans for the LSGIs, there is inclusion of environmental considerations such as environment- friendly roads, water & soil conservation, green buildings and adoption of the green protocol • Flood, land use changes, watershed management and appropriate capacity building of LSGIs should be done in an integrated manner. 4 Fiscal / Debt • There are no environmental effects and hence environmental systems are not relevant. 5 Health • There is only one bio-medical waste disposal facility in the state and is overburdened. This is a constraint and disposal facilities need to be expanded. • For liquid waste, the treatment systems are not adequate. Further there are no municipal sewer network except for Thiruvanathapuram. Therefore, there are liquid waste disposal constraints. • ISDP data for 2019 revealed that (i) there is the highest occurrence of deaths due to Leptospirosis; and (ii) there is the highest number of cases of diarrhoea. Both these are due to poor solid waste and sanitation practices. 6 Roads • None of the roads in the Program pass through ecosensitive areas such as forests and wildlife areas. • To manage the construction-related impacts during the road rehabilitation, the contractor requires to have environmental capacity. Further, there will be environmental capacity within the supervision consultants to support the PWD. • For the long-term performance-based maintenance, there will be supervision consultants to support the PWD in overseeing the contract. These supervision consultants will interface between the PWD and the contractors; and provide the necessary support on environmental issues as well. Including environmental capacity strengthening as a part of road asset management systems is a good idea. • There will be no widening in any of the roads rehabilitation that are being planned under the Program. There may be some incidental tree- cutting that will be done after taking the required permissions. 7 Urban • Risk informed plans will be beneficial. This should necessarily include environmental risks. One of the main urban problems is the conversion of land use (paddy lands, wetlands and hilly lands), which results in Page | 27 No. Sector Feedback - Highlights environmental problems indirectly. Town and Country Planning Department will need the capacity to develop these risk informed plans and facilitate the adoption by the LSGs. • Finding land for waste disposal, preventing the conversion of paddy land and adopting proper scientific approaches to planning are the main issues. 8 WRM • In the river basin approach, environmental management has to be integrated. Capacity building of the WRD institutions will be required in order to achieve effective environmental performance. • WRD has done a number of externally aided projects (e.g. dams) and is familiar with the environmental studies such as ESIA and ESMPs, which are used to manage environmental impacts. • The Pamba River Basin is particularly important from an environmental point of view as it has been a focus of the State Pollution Control Board in terms of polluted stretches and also the National Green Tribunal in the aftermath of the floods. In finalizing the river basin plan, the environmental concerns should be duly considered and suitably integrated. • River pollution due to drainage outfalls, pesticide run-off and lack of a scientific approach are the primary problems that needs to be addressed in an integrated manner. 50. Community consultations feedback: The highlights relevant to environmental systems from the consultations with the gram panchayats and municipalities (covering 328 community members) in the four districts done by KILA were as follows: No. Sector Feedback - Highlights 1 Alappuzha • Agriculture: AEU-based planning will help protect the environment. (Mannar, • Roads: These assets are inhibitors of natural flow and there is a Pandanad and lack of proper scientific approaches in road design & construction. Kainakari • Urban: Capacity strengthening of LSGIs to manage the main Panchayat; and problems – floods, water contamination and solid waste pollution Alappuzha – is required. Municipality) • WRM: Depth of the Pamba river is decreasing, river mining should be regulated an integrated approach is necessary. 2 Idukki • Agriculture: Pollution caused by chemical fertilizers, loss of fertility (Peermade, and soil erosion are the main problems. Peruvanthanam, • DRM: The planning should be based on geographic, climatic and Vandiperiyar and environmental features of a particular location. Kumily • Roads: Management of road construction is important, i.e. Panchayat) landslides, quarry management, accident management and worker use of safety gears • WRM: Water shortages and the need for conservation, protection of ponds and water bodies and rainwater harvesting are all important and the panchayats have a critical role in the Pamba river basin plan. 3 Kottayam • Agriculture: The current farming practices are leading to adverse (Kooruthodu, environmental impacts. And, the FPO capacity on dealing with Mundakayam environmental issues have to be built. and • Roads: Drainage, air & dust pollution, tree cutting, roads not Manimala weather resistant, water-logging and unscientific approaches to Panchayats; and design and construction. Changanaserri • Urban: Unscientific road constructions, degraded canal system, Municipality) inefficient drainage system, drinking water shortage, decreasing Page | 28 No. Sector Feedback - Highlights attention to agriculture sector, air and water pollution, excessive waste generation and absence of waste management are the key environmental issues • WRM: River depth is a key issue, integrated approach is required and Government & civil society should work together. 4 Pathanamthitta • DRM: LSGIs are not capable. Need to improve their capacity (Ranni, Perunad through training and awareness on different sectors. and Aranmula • Roads: Air pollution, worker protection and conversion of paddy Panchayats; and land are the key issues. Thiruvalla • Urban: Drinking water and sanitation, drainage and sewage Municipality) systems are the main issues. • WRM: Past constructions were unscientific, sand mining in the rivers, rock falls due to deforestation and waste dumping are issues that need to be addressed in an integrated manner. 51. Two ESSA stakeholder workshops: The feedback was largely on the activities proposed in the Pamba river basin, and the environmental issues. The highlights relevant to the environmental systems were as follows: No. Sector Feedback – Highlights 1 WRM • Sabarimala is one of the largest annual pilgrimage sites in the world where an estimated 50 million devotees are visiting every year. How is that addressed? • How in this particular geographical area is the program going to foster the existing natural resources and address the core issues? • The conservation of Pamba Riverine Ecosystem and abetment of pollution especially solid waste management and legacy waste management system may be given much attention. • What about the Pamba Action Plan? • For the effective implementation, the institutional arrangement is vital. Coordination among agencies is the key. There is a need to involve civil society organisations along with the LSGIs. This has to be a massive effort. 2 General • What are the measures suggesting for the integration of different institutions and prevention and production of anticipated environmental hazards? 52. Email feedback: A Trivandrum resident and a nature / environmental educationist opined that systemic and integrated approach was not adequately adopted in this multi-sector program. The Task Team was of the view that the extent of integration could only be advanced in time, and the current Program design is sufficient to usher the Departments to functioning in a coordinated manner. In particular, the introduction of the river basin management approach in the Pamba river and realizing the integrated outcomes that could result is an initial step for a more comprehensive adoption of systemic thinking and ecology-oriented planning in Government functioning. The other suggestions will be included in the training and institutional development activities. 53. All the feedback obtained through the different forums were considered both from a Program design and ESSA perspective. On the key environmental issues and the lack of capacity within the LSGIs, these will be addressed as a part of the Program’s support in developing institutions to create the foundations for multidimensional resilience. This will address the feedback pertaining to Agriculture, DRM, Health, Roads, Urban and WRM. The feedback related to the investments that will be in the four districts along the Pamba Page | 29 river basin, namely Alappuzha, Idukki, Kottayam, and Pathanamthitta, will have to be addressed through building the capacity in the three sectors - Health, Roads and WRM. These are primarily related to managing civil works through EHS provisions in the bid / contract documents and streamlined monitoring & supervision. Certain capacity already exists within the implementing departments. In the light of the feedback, these were re- examined and measures to enhance the capacity where necessary, e.g. Health Department, were included in the ESSA’s Program Action Plan. 54. The overarching feedback about adopting an integrated approach between implementing departments and between GoK and civil society organizations is an important one from the community-level consultations. This has already been considered through the multi- sector Program design at the local level. In specific, the river basin management approach of the Pamba river is aimed to encourage such an integrated approach. Building environmental content in the capacity building initiatives pertaining to the river basin management has been identified as one of the Program Action Plans. In the light of the suggestions received, the environmental content will be enhanced to include ecology- based integrated and systemic thinking. Social 55. Feedback from the stakeholder consultations: These consultations were carried out both the Bank’s ESSA team and by local institution KILA engaged for the purpose. The feedback received from the stakeholders informed the gap analysis and the recommendations made for strengthening the management of social risks and impacts. Sector State Consultations Community Consultations Agriculture • IAMIS features are being • Tenants (and landless) don’t get the expanded and made more user same scheme benefits as the friendly/ simple landowners. • AEU based packages are based on • FPO leadership is under constant affordable technologies targeting pressure from external entities, so smallholders members need to be educated and • AOs should have more time to made aware about its use and purpose spend on field for extension work • IAMIS is being used by very few & handholding homestead progressive farmers (with farmers smartphones), awareness and easier access needs to be created Water Resource • Deptt has a limited community • Most Local bodies don’t have interface and banks on LSGs/ experience of water budgets or water NGOs security plans, but with some capacity • Comprehensive capacity building development could be best suited to of department/authority required prepare inclusive river basin plans. to secure interest of vulnerable • The current flood forecasting communities during river basin systems/ messages are too technical planning and difficult to understand sometimes • Basin level discussions were only • Water scarcity felt more acutely on done sometimes with elected highlands where even water tankers representatives, never with are difficult to reach community Roads • Most projects get delayed due to • Roads made by LSGD need approval by the process of land acquisition Gram Sabha and consultation with • For roads costing more than INR community, not so in case of PWD 150m, there is a E&S cell to assess roads- Panchayats have no role impacts • No discussion or awareness in • Labour management is community on how road packages are contractors responsibility and Page | 30 current PWD tenders don’t make selected and if some screening prevention of GBV/ SEA part of performed to assess impacts contractors obligation. • Panchayats should be consulted before road selection and monitor adverse livelihood impacts due to road construction Social • Although revenue department • There are some exclusion errors in Protection & will be nodal for social registry, social protection database although Disaster Risk LSGD is best placed for the job. periodic update and rectification takes Financing • Access and inclusion can only be place addressed through awareness and • Scope for making the procedure for gram sabha mobilization accessing social protection • Crop losses are mostly entitlements simpler compensated through IAMIS for • Crop loss is compensated only if those already registered on the impact is large scale, payouts are portal sometimes delayed and insurance is usually accessed by those with smart- phones, large and progressive farmers Fiscal Reforms No consultations around this sector No consultations around this sector Health • Government facilities are free and • There are no cases of denial or charges of private ones are discrimination in rendering services regulated, large population is although in some areas with no public covered by national health facilities charges are unaffordable insurance scheme • Need to deploy more health workers • Worker safety is ensured through to manage pandemic with training on series of trainings on infection awareness generation and pandemic control and provision of management equipment • Concerns about long work shift and lack of insurance cover of frontline health workers Urban • For resilience planning, instead of • There is limited community vulnerable communities, focus participation during master plan should be on vulnerable areas preparation- lack of clarity about the which covers all process of its preparation • Most buffer zones are under high • SHGs, Resident Associations, ward pressure and public awareness sabhas need to be involved and inputs can counter attempts at sought before finalization of master encroachment/ land grab plans. Disaster Risk • Primary relief agencies are • Most elected leaders or community Management revenue and agriculture but have members have not received any limited understanding of social formal DRM training and need to issues and risks of the vulnerable create awareness • LSGD is therefore being provided • ULB capacities need to be augmented a more important role in relief to steer preparation of climate and and rehabilitation disaster informed plans XI. Disclosure 56. The draft ESSA reports – this draft ESSA Summary Report (Part A), the draft ESSA Environmental Report (Part B) and the draft ESSA Social Report (Part C) were disclosed on Monday, February 8, 2021 in the RKI website. All of these were in English. The draft ESSA Summary Report (Part A) was translated in the local language - Malayalam – and disclosed on Saturday, February 13, 2021. Comments, suggestions and any other feedback was requested along with this website disclosure. Page | 31 57. All of these disclosures were ahead of the stakeholder workshops planned on Thursday, February 18, 2021 and Monday, February 22, 2021. As part of the invitation to the workshop, the invitees were sent the draft ESSA Reports for their prior reading. This constituted disclosure as well. The feedback obtained during the workshop was used to further refine and finalize the three draft ESSA reports. Once final, the ESSA reports were disclosed in the RKI website and also the World Bank website. Print copies of the ESSA reports will be made available upon request at the RKI office. XII. Recommendations and Actions / Exclusions Environment 58. The assessment revealed that the implementing departments have adequate capacity to deal with the various environmental effects, which are low-to-moderate in nature. For those sectors that include civil works, i.e. roads, health and WRM, there will be environmental effects that have to be managed during construction. Capacity augmentation planning in terms of external consultants and including provisions in the bid / contract documents have already been planned. More than addressing gaps, this Program offers opportunity to strengthen environmental performance in the different sectors. Further, the environmental sector institutions such as the DoECC are not integrally connected with the sectoral environmental issues and the sector departments. Their expertise is not reaching these sectors and integrated approaches are not being facilitated. This gap and other areas of strengthening have been included in the Program Action Plan. 59. The following table includes the list of activities to be undertaken towards environmental systems strengthening in the context of the Program activities: No. Sector Description Timeline Indicator for completion E1 Agriculture Develop relevant environmental End of Year 1 Evidence of the content in the training and capacity and the rest of conduct of building to be given to AEUs and project period training that FPOs. Conduct such training for includes mainstreaming environmental environmental considerations. content E2 Health Review and strengthen the bid / End of Year 1 Standard bid / contract provisions pertaining to contract EHS for civil works when the new or documents of expansion of PHLs is undertaken DoHFW include EHS provisions E3 Health Develop and conduct focused staff End of Year 1 Evidence of the training to streamline BMW and the rest of training material management systems in the new or project period and the conduct expanded PHLs of training in PHLs E4 WRM Develop relevant environmental Throughout the Evidence of content in the training and capacity project period training building pertaining to institutional conducted that development and investment includes planning. Conduct such training for environmental mainstreaming environmental content considerations. E5 Environment Facilitate a regular dialogue Throughout the Evidence of the / RKI between the environmental sector project period periodic institutions such as the DoECC and meetings Page | 32 No. Sector Description Timeline Indicator for completion SPCB and sector institutions to facilitating the enable a two-way capacity-building. dialogue, discussions and field visits E6 RKI Monitor and report the progress on Quarterly and Evidence of the environmental performance of the throughout the periodic Program activities as a part of the project period environmental overall Program reporting performance reports Social 60. The ESSA proposes the following recommendations that have emerged through analysis of potential social risks and the systems’ capacities, inputs from stakeholders, including from field consultations with the community on possible ways to better address these. Sector Gaps/ Risks Recommendations Agriculture 1. Multiple institutions with 1. Need for a more enabling policy overlapping mandates leading to environment with clearer low accountability accountability frame 2. Risk of exclusion - from the 2. Improved departmental capacities, planning processes (voice), or especially of managers and extension representation in decision making staff to ensure inclusion in design and roles in FPOs (agency) implementation 3. Lack of a strong and dedicated 3. Need for a dedicated GRM to address GRM for closer scrutiny and sector and investment specific complaint tracking grievances Water 1. Women as prime impactees (of 1. Involvement of local CBOs like Resource disaster) and benefactors of flood Kudumbshree to facilitate information (preparedness) need participation of women & dialogue to have central role in basin level with community planning and water allocation 2. Close working with LSG for inclusion 2. RBCMA may lack requisite social of interest of all constituencies, capacities to ensure gender equity and community participation mainstreaming and participation in river basin planning, in basin planning or developing 3. Need for a dedicated GRM to address WRIS that fits community needs sector and investment specific 3. Lack of a strong and dedicated grievances GRM for closer scrutiny and complaint tracking Roads 1. Low participation/ LSG 1. Need for closer, direct or indirect community in selection and dialogue (with users/ CSOs/ LSGs) for prioritization of road packages selection and screening of road 2. Existing GRM needs to be further packages strengthened, RMMS also likely to 2. A more transparent, accountable and bolster existing system well disclosed GRM will improve 3. Land Management practices, usage and trust especially with respect to 3. Current ‘eviction’ based approach to management of non-titleholders is encroachers and non- titleholders not aligned with the Bank policy needs to be replaced with a more responsive & rehabilitation based one or exclusion of investments requiring large scale resettlement; labour risks related to GBV/ SEA and Page | 33 Sector Gaps/ Risks Recommendations labour influx need to be duly incorporated in tender documents. Social 1. Unification of social protection 1. Need to strengthen capacities of Protection & database may lead to exclusion or institutions for smoother transition, DRFI need to re-establish eligibility simplified norms and accountability (afresh) leading to denial for ensuring continuity of 2. Eco-system around crop finance is entitlements, as the most vulnerable exclusionary, favouring S&M depend on these safety nets. farmers and processing of 2. Need for restructuring crop settlement lacks transparency insurance scheme to make it 3. Other than PDS, no other major inclusive and processing transparent, social entitlement scheme has a timebound. strong GRM, with GRM for crop 3. The new social registry needs a insurance. strong, simple, well publicized GRM as people with least awareness and most vulnerability access them; similar mechanism needed around crop insurance as well Fiscal Reform No risks NA Health 1. Outreach or extn is offered by 1. Need of fair working conditions for contractual staff with insecure deptt. staff/ frontline workers/CBOs/ tenure & vague terms / conditions; volunteers with reasonable working sometimes CBO & volunteers, hours, safety measures and capacity especially for health surveillance, building / awareness on precautions this has health and safety related and health safety risks for workers- mostly women. 2. Need to familiarize concerned 2. Potential sites for IPHLs may not institution with the bank policy, esp. be free from encumbrances and with regards to encroachments and may have to be vacated for setting need for rehabilitation/resettlement up labs of non-titleholders. 3. Lack of scheme specific GRM 3. Need to create a dedicated GRM around health/ disease surveillance Urban 1. Good overall social management 1. ULBs/LSGD will need adequate but need more capacities to human and financial resources plus understand specific social risks/ capacities to integrate social vulnerabilities related to sector management practices into investments- like capacities for proposed investment areas like making spatial plans inclusive and development of Master Plans using a linking them with district participatory process. development plans 2. Stronger legal regime will help in 2. Accountability framework for fixing clearer accountability of ULBs town planning is unclear and for preparation of time-bound, risk weak- while ULBs are made informed Master Plans responsible for their preparation, 3. Need to strengthen the existing they lack regulatory powers GRM, create awareness and 3. Even though LSGD and LSGs have transition towards digital systems of their own GRMs their use is limited grievance redress that are traceable and their functioning not as clear/ and accountable. transparent Disaster Risk 1. Good overall social management 1. ULBs/LSGD will need adequate Management but need more capacities to human and financial resources plus understand specific social risks/ capacities to integrate social vulnerabilities related to sector management practices into investments- like local impacts of proposed investment areas like climate change and integrating Page | 34 Sector Gaps/ Risks Recommendations those complexities into DRM or development of Master Plans using a LSG plans. participatory process. 2. Climate informed DRM plans will 2. Need for roadmap with clear be ineffective if not linked to assignment of roles and budgets, local development plans responsibilities within ULBs to with clear assignment of integrate CC-DRR into annual plans responsibilities. 3. Need to make GRM digitally inclusive 3. Even though LSGD and LSGs have and accessible through multiple their own GRMs their use is limited mediums, grievances traceable, and their functioning not as clear/ proactive disclosure of grievances transparent and how they are being used for systems improvement 61. Strengthening Capacities for Inclusive and Participatory Planning in Different Sectors . The PforR operation demands key institutions such as WRD, PWD, Health to engage more closely with communities to meet the PSO and its DLIs. The overall strong capacity of the state on participatory planning needs to percolate down to these sectors through focused capacity enhancement of these institutions on social management. This needs to be complemented by initiating development of specific sector strategies to strengthen the role of women or tribal or migrants as primary benefactors, as they are most vulnerable to disaster/ climate/ health events and may need to be provided a distinct voice and agency through participatory planning and decision making process for greater individual and community level resilience. 62. Improved Capacities of Sectoral Institutions on Social Issues. The key partnering departments need to bolster their capacities for citizen’s engagement, gender mainstreaming, making existing services more inclusive and accessible to citizens and the vulnerable. This will include activities like servicing the information needs of women farmers, tenants/ sharecroppers, S&M farmers through an expanded IAMIS, reorienting the process of selecting or prioritizing road packages and even agriculture package of practices, ensuring an WRIS that can be used by S&M farmers and landless in the river basin. For example, in Urban sector/ ULBs it will mean creating additional capacities for linking spatial plans with district development plans; augmenting capacities of LSGs to assess community level/ local impacts of climate change and building those social risks (depending on social groups impacted and their specific vulnerabilities) in the climate informed plans; tracking inclusiveness of programmes; ensuring allocation of budgets for integrating social management strategies in their work. 63. Fair Working Conditions for frontline staff and outreach workers. Given the program’s focus on deeper engagement with the community, field level cadres of key departments and institutions, who are mostly women and are already overburdened, are likely to see expansion in their current responsibilities if the current planning processes are to be made more rigorous and participatory. Moreover, shortage of staff is often met through hiring of contractual workers or by engaging frontline staff- extension workers in case of agriculture, ASHA/ AWW in case of health or Kudumbshree members providing outreach in local bodies- all of which are mostly women. It is proposed that sectors undertake assessment of the staff arrangements, capacity needs and working conditions of staff in order to evolve specific measures to ensure that the safety, including GBV/SEA, and fair working conditions are met with. 64. Stronger and Dedicated Grievance Redressal Mechanisms. While the state has a reasonably functioning, centralized Grievance Redressal Mechanisms in place, it is proposed to create strong department level GRM in all participating sectors/ departments, or explore creation of a central program level GRM that pans across sectors Page | 35 to allow improved tracking of inclusion, outreach and benefits and help make the services, practices and packages more accessible. Owing to the complex and multi-sectoral nature of the operation, it will also be important that the PMU undertakes a periodic clustering/ categorization and analysis of complaints to identify the problem areas, provide feedback to the concerned duty bearers and loop the feedback to inform the program strategies and for systems improvement. 65. Stronger legal framework for social accountability. Some of the investment areas have legal or operative eco-systems that do not provide for clear accountability. In many sectors like water, agriculture, urban development and social protection, there are multiple institutions with sometimes overlapping mandates that often makes social accountability very difficult to establish. For example, in case of agriculture insurance the operating framework (at least for the national crop insurance scheme- PMFBY) is skewed against the small and marginal farmers and therefore will need re-engineering of the eco- system to remove these exclusionary eligibility criterion, expand awareness and coverage and make the system more transparent. Likewise, in case of spatial development planning or town master planning, accountability is not clear. While the LSG are made accountable for their preparation and finalization, there are no fixed timelines in the enabling policy for different stages of planning. This needs a stronger legal regime or enabling environment, with clear assignment of roles and responsibilities, to help fix clearer accountability for achievement of outputs. 66. Land Management. The Program does not foresee any requirement of private lands for Program investments and most investments will mainly be on existing public or government land. However, there is gap in the land management practices of the GoK, specifically Public Works Department (PWD) in relation to their treatment of the non- titleholders (encroachers and squatters), which needs to be aligned with the Bank’s Policy. In the present PforR operation due consideration will need to be given to treating such occupants as per the Bank policy- rehabilitating the non-titleholders that may suffer due to economic or physical displacement as a result of the road maintenance and modernization work. Contractors and institutions to be engaged in clearing potential sites, RoWs will have to ensure that the processes are aligned with Bank procedures with respect to management of physical and economic displacements. Program Exclusions Environment 67. The assessment confirmed the activities do not include those not eligible for PforR financing. There are no potentially significant, adverse environmental impacts in the Program. In particular, this was confirmed in the Roads, WRM and Health sectors. These are not in the vicinity of any natural habitats or cultural heritage sites. There are no such workplace conditions prone to health and safety risks. And, no significant, cumulative, induced and indirect impacts in the Pamba river basin. During the implementation, it will be required to ensure that all such activities not eligible for PforR financing remain excluded. Social 68. The following activities are proposed to be excluded from the current investments: • Considering the nature of operations (PforR), any road repair and maintenance works requiring large scale resettlement and removal of structures (on a single alignment/ package), such that they impact more than 50 persons will be excluded from the list of investments. • Any ULB master planning that is likely to impact tribal settlements or common property regimes near or within their municipal limits will be excluded from being Page | 36 selected as a pilot for City/ Town Master Planning, if this spatial planning is likely to adversely impact existing settlements or resources accessed by these tribal / indigenous communities. Program Actions and Implementation Support Environment 69. The Bank’s Program focuses on institutional development, investment planning and capital investment activities. Of these, the Bank’s implementation support should focus largely on further building the environmental management capacity as a part of the institutional development. With regard to the capital investments, the Bank’s implementation support should also supervise compliance to contractual requirements and good EHS practices so that no risks ensue. The program exclusion requirements for PforR financing should be maintained. The sectors of focus will be the WRM for the institutional development activities and the roads for their investments in building climate resilience. Social Action Description Sour DLI Responsibili Timing and Tasks Completio ce # ty n Measurem ent Incorporating social ESS NA RKI- Year 1: Capacity assessment and IVA, management through A PMSS/PMU Preparation of ToRs for key social Training plans and bid and positions in RKI-PMU & other key completion documents in civil implementi sector institutions; capacity reports, works / investments ng building modules finalized AMs and social safeguards institutions Year 2: Completion of and social inclusion anchoring recruitment and deployment, content in training & participator where required capacity building y planning Year 2 onwards: regular training programs for ensuring of functionaries on different inclusiveness in aspects of social management. sector/ resource planning and implementation If needed set up new ESS NA RKI and key Year 1: Assessment of existing IVA, AMs or strengthen existing A department systems & requirement for grievance redress s for each developing common GRM for mechanism at state, sector RKP by the end of year 1. department, local Year2: Regularly analyse and levels to enhance track grievances to inform the transparency and program responsiveness by enabling creation of an open log of grievances and redressal actions. Page | 37 RESILIENT KERALA Program for Results [PforR] Environmental and Social Systems Assessment [ESSA] Part B: ESSA Environmental Report 9 March 2021 India HT House, Kasturba Gandhi Marg New Delhi - 110 001 List of abbreviations and acronyms AEU Agroecological Unit AEZ Agroecological Zone AFD Agence Française de Développement AIIB Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank BMW Bio-Medical Waste BOD Biological Oxygen Demand CAPEX Capital Expenditure CC Climate Change COD Chemical Oxygen Demand CPCB Central Pollution Control Board CPF Country Partnership Framework CRN Core Road Network CSO Civil Society Organization DCAT Disaster and Climate Action Tracking DDMA District Disaster Management Authority DEA Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, GoI DLI Disbursement-Linked Indicator DPO/L Development Policy Operation / Lending DoA Department of Agriculture, Government of Kerala DoE Department of Environment, Government of Kerala DoF Department of Finance, Government of Kerala DoECC Directorate of Environment and Climate Change DoR Department of Revenue, Government of Kerala DRF Disaster Risk Financing DRM Disaster Risk Management DRR Disaster Risk Reduction E & S Environmental & Social EHS Environmental, Health & Safety EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ESHS Environmental, Social, Health and Safety ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan ESSA Environmental and Social Systems Assessment FGD Focus Group Discussion FPO Farmer Producer Organizations GHG Green House Gas GIS Geographic Information Systems G(R)M Grievance Redressal Mechanism GoK Government of Kerala GoI Government of India GP Gram Panchayat GSDP Gross State Domestic Product IDSP Integrated Disease Surveillance Program IEC Information, Education and Communication IFC International Finance Corporation IT Information Technology 2 KII Key Informant Interviews KILA Kerala Institute of Local Administration KFW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau KSDMA Kerala State Disaster Management Authority LG Local Government LSGD Local Self Government Department LSGI Local Self Government Institutions (Gram Panchayat or Municipality or Corporation) M & E Monitoring & Evaluation MoEFCC Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change MoHUA Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs O & M Operations & Maintenance OH One Health OPBRC Output and Performance-Based Road Contracts OPEX OPerational EXpenditure PDO Program Development Objective PforR Program for Results PHLs Public Health Laboratories PMSS Project Management Support Services PMT Project Management Team PMU Project Management Unit PWD Public Works Department RA Results Area RM(A)MS Road Maintenance (Asset) Management Systems RBCMA River Basin Conservation and Management Authority RF Results Framework RKDP Rebuild Kerala Development Programme RKI Rebuild Kerala Initiative RoW Right of Way RTI Right To Information SDRF State Disaster Risk Financing SEIAA State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority SOP Standard Operating Procedures SPF State Partnership Framework SPCB State Pollution Control Board TCP Town and Country Planning ULB Urban Local Body WB World Bank WRD Water Resource Department WRM Water Resource Management 3 Table of Contents 2 List of abbreviations and acronyms ........................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................ Table of Contents 4 1 7 Background ................................................................................................................................................. 1.1 7 State Context ..................................................................................................................................... 1.2 9 Government of Kerala (GoK) Program .................................................................................. 1.3 Bank Program ............................................................................................................................... 10 1.4 ......................................................... 10 Program Development Objectives and indicators 1.5 Results Areas (RAs) .................................................................................................................... 10 1.6 ............................................................................ 13 Disbursement-Linked Indicators (DLIs) 1.7 Institutional and implementation arrangements .......................................................... 15 1.8 About ESSA ..................................................................................................................................... 15 1.9 World Bank’s ESSA requirements ........................................................................................ 16 1.10 About the structure of this ESSA report ............................................................................ 16 2 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................ 17 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 17 2.2 Secondary literature review ................................................................................................... 17 2.3 ............................................................................................. 17 Risk screening at concept stage 2.4 Consultations ................................................................................................................................. 18 2.4.1 State-level consultations done by the Bank’s ESSA team ................................. 18 2.4.2 State-level and community consultations done by KILA .................................. 18 2.4.3 ESSA Stakeholder workshops ....................................................................................... 19 2.4.4 ................................................................ 20 Analysis, findings and recommendations 2.5 Preparing the ESSA reports ..................................................................................................... 20 3 Key issues, benefits, impacts and risks ........................................................................................ 21 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 21 3.2 Sector: Agriculture ...................................................................................................................... 21 3.3 Sector: Climate Change and Disaster Risk Management ............................................ 21 3.4 Sector: Disaster Risk Financing and Social Protection ................................................ 21 3.5 Sector: Fiscal Reform and Debt Management ................................................................. 22 3.6 Sector: Health ................................................................................................................................ 22 3.7 Sector: Roads ................................................................................................................................. 22 3.8 Sector: Urban ................................................................................................................................. 23 3.9 Sector: Water Resource Management ................................................................................ 23 4 Applicable legal and regulatory framework .............................................................................. 24 4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 24 4 4.2 Framework applicable to the Program .............................................................................. 24 5 Institutional Systems Assessment – Procedures, practices and performance ........... 27 5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 27 5.2 Regulatory systems ..................................................................................................................... 27 5.2.1 National-level regulatory systems .............................................................................. 27 5.2.2 State-level regulatory systems ..................................................................................... 27 5.3 Program-level organizational systems ............................................................................... 28 5.3.1 Agriculture – Department of Agriculture ................................................................ 28 5.3.2 CC and DRM – KSDMA ...................................................................................................... 29 5.3.3 DRFI and Social Protection – Department of Revenue ...................................... 30 5.3.4 Fiscal reform and Debt Management – Department of Finance .................... 30 5.3.5 Health – Department of Health .................................................................................... 30 5.3.6 Roads – PWD ........................................................................................................................ 31 5.3.7 Urban – LSGD ....................................................................................................................... 32 5.3.8 Water Resources - WRD .................................................................................................. 33 6 Assessment of the borrower systems against the three environmental core principles ............................................................................................................................................................ 34 6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 34 6.2 Core Principle #1: E & S management systems .............................................................. 34 6.3 Core Principle #2: Natural habitat and cultural properties ...................................... 35 6.4 Core Principle #3: Public and worker safety ................................................................... 35 7 Consultations and disclosure ........................................................................................................... 36 7.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 36 7.2 Stakeholder consultations ....................................................................................................... 36 7.2.1 State-level consultations ................................................................................................. 36 7.2.2 ..................................................................... 38 Summary of community consultations 7.2.3 Consultations feedback - How addressed in the Program ............................... 39 7.2.4 ESSA Stakeholder workshops ....................................................................................... 40 7.2.5 Email feedback to RKI ...................................................................................................... 40 7.3 ........................................................................................................................................ 41 Disclosure 7.3.1 Draft ESSA reports ............................................................................................................. 41 7.3.2 Final ESSA reports ............................................................................................................. 41 7.3.3 During Program Implementation ............................................................................... 41 7.4 Grievance Mechanism ................................................................................................................ 41 8 Findings and recommendations ..................................................................................................... 43 8.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 43 8.2 Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 43 5 8.2.1 Program exclusions ........................................................................................................... 43 8.3 Highlights ........................................................................................................................................ 44 8.4 Recommendations & Inputs .................................................................................................... 45 8.4.1 ESSA Recommendations ................................................................................................. 45 8.4.2 ESSA inputs to the Program Action Plan ................................................................. 46 8.4.3 ESSA Inputs to the Implementation Support Plan ............................................... 47 Annex 1: Summary of ESSA Core Principles and Exclusion List ................................................. 48 Annex 2: Environmental Screening of activities – benefits, impacts and risks .................... 49 Annex 3: Consultations - Suggested Checklist recommended for KILA .................................. 53 Annex 4: Feedback from KILA’s state-level and community-level consultations, and how these are addressed ....................................................................................................................................... 62 Annex 5: Summary report of the two state-level ESSA stakeholder workshops (February 2021) .................................................................................................................................................................... 73 Annex 6: Highlights of feedback from the ESSA stakeholder workshops & via email, and how these are addressed ............................................................................................................................. 88 Annex 7: List of consultation meetings held ....................................................................................... 94 Annex 8: List of references .......................................................................................................................... 96 6 1 Background 1.1 State Context The State is highly vulnerable to natural disasters and the changing climatic dynamics given its location along the coast and steep gradient along the slopes of the Western Ghats. The State Disaster Management Plan identifies 39 hazard types that can turn disastrous without proper preparedness and risk reduction planning1, Some of the dominant hazards include: cyclones, storm surge, coastal erosion, sea level rise, tsunami, flood, drought, lightning, landslide, and earthquakes. In recent past the state has experienced Cyclone Ockhi in 2017; floods and landslides in 2018, 2019, and 2020; and the Covid-19 pandemic. The 2018 floods—the worst in the century—led to widespread loss of life, property, and habitats in Kerala, mainly in the Pamba river basin, causing 498 casualties, affecting over 5.4 million people, displacing 1.4 million people, and financial losses of US$3.74 billion (INR 267.20 billion or Rs. 26,720 crores). The devastating impacts of these disasters highlighted the under-preparedness of the State. The World Bank’s support to build multidimensional resilience in Kerala commenced right after the 2018 floods and landslides. The foundation of the engagement was set by the World Ban supported First Resilient Kerala Development Policy Operation (DPO 1, US$250 million), approved in June 2019. It supported the Rebuild Kerala Development Programme (RKDP)2 – the GoK’s strategic and integrated road map for recovery, rebuilding, and resilience. DPO 1 set the course for centering resilience-related policies and institutional reforms in key cross-cutting areas and sectors of the economy. It supported the GoK’s efforts to improve fiscal sustainability including through mobilizing private finances. Key policy and institutional reforms to enhance resilience were triggered to enable: holistic river basin management; sustainable and climate-resilient agriculture; risk-informed land-use planning requirements; updating disaster management plans at all levels; multi-year capital planning; and by creating a dedicated institutional modality, the Rebuild Kerala Initiative (RKI), to manage the rollout of the RKDP and DPO 1. These efforts have improved Kerala’s capacity to respond to disasters and other extreme events, evidenced by reduced loss of lives, assets, and livelihoods by the 2019 and 2020 floods and landslides. Kerala experienced the first confirmed cases of Covid-19 in India on January 30, 2020. High levels of urbanization and population density, tourist inflows, regular inward and outward travel of non-residents, and an aging population with co-morbidities made Kerala susceptible to infection and spread. The GoK responded proactively through a robust response plan, based on learnings from the Nipah virus outbreak experience in 2018. As of February 17, 2021, there have been 1,016,848 total confirmed cases, including 60,803 active cases, 951,742 recovered, and 4,032 deaths.3 Kerala has one of the lowest causality rates (0.4%) among Indian states. 1 Kerala State Disaster Management Authority: Government of Kerala, State Disaster Management Plan 2016, 2 Rebuild Kerala Development Programme (RKDP): https://rebuild.kerala.gov.in/reports/RKDP_Master%2021May2019.pdf. 3 GoK Dashboard for COVID-19. URL: https://dashboard.kerala.gov.in/index.php. 7 Building on the RKDP and DPO, the partnership between the GoK and the World Bank has both expanded and deepened. Among its highlights are the technical support provided for launching first subnational ‘masala bond’ that raised around US$300 million to finance rebuilding activities; the RKDP Development Partners Conclave in July 2019; scoping of International Finance Corporation (IFC) and Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) support for climate resilient infrastructure; and engagements in other sectors built around the core theme of enhancing resilience. The close working relationship between the GoK and the World Bank has influenced the State’s policy, institutional, and investment agenda to advance resilience to climate change impacts and natural disasters. In advancing the partnership, the GoK and the World Bank have worked closely to bring other partners on board, among them, the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW)4; and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), and Agence Française De Développement (AFD) that are co-financing this operation. A state-level cohesive and strategic GoK-World Bank partnership was developed to strengthen institutional, economic, and social resilience of the State to the impacts of natural disasters and climate change. The Kerala State Partnership Framework (SPF, figure 1) brings together Kerala’s priorities and programs as in the RKDP and the strategic priorities of the World Bank’s India Country Partnership Framework for FY18- 22 (CPF, Report No. 126667-IN). Figure 1. Kerala State Partnership Framework (SPF) Over the medium term, the engagement with Kerala is expected to evolve and advance through multiple tracks as depicted in Figure 2. 4 Provided €2 million grant for technical assistance (TA) and a €100 million loan to parallelly finance DPO 1 8 Figure 2. Expected Evolution of the Resilient Kerala Program DPO 1 was followed by the preparation of a Second Resilient Kerala Development Policy Operation (DPO 2, US$350 million) aimed at deepening policy and institutional reforms initiated under DPO 1. Due to Covid-19 outbreak and a change in India’s strategy in using World Bank financing, the Government of India (GoI) dropped its request for DPO 2, while majority prior actions were already achieved. Instead, GoI sought World Bank support for Resilient Kerala Program for Results (PforR). 1.2 Government of Kerala (GoK) Program The RKDP constitutes the GoK’s medium-term road map for a Green and Resilient Nava Keralam (New Kerala) - the main vehicle to mainstream resilience in development. The RKDP launched in July 2019 is to be implemented over a period of eight years. It aims at “the creation of a society that has sustainable livelihoods for its inhabitants and a land with modern infrastructure that cannot be undone by natural disasters”. The RKDP encompasses policy, regulatory, institutional, and investment actions and programs across four cross-cutting and 12 sector-based areas that are critical for resilient and sustainable recovery and rebuilding. It has also initiated critical steps toward addressing climate vulnerability, enhancing resilience and redoubling its efforts to protect the coastline against sea level rise and erosion. An analysis of RKDP priorities details a total outlay of US$4.96 billion (INR 365.068 billion) for 2019–2027. A subset of the RKDP and the State Health Mission (SHM) have been strategically selected and merged into the government program (the program) within which the proposed PforR Program (the Program) is situated. Considering the health scope of the Program, which includes promoting an integrated One Health approach to diagnose, track, and respond to disease outbreaks, the ‘Public Health’ section of the State budget has been considered as the government program. The subset of activities considered under Public Health include prevention and control of diseases, strengthening integrated public health laboratories and public health education and training. These activities are complemented by the National Health Mission.5 5 A GoI program to enhance state systems to improve health outcomes, including disease surveillance and response 9 1.3 Bank Program The Bank Program will support a subset of results and priority activities identified under cross-cutting themes (i.e. Fiscal, Climate Change, DRM, Social Protection, Urban) and key economic sectors (i.e. Health, WRM, Agriculture, Road) within the Government program. The results and activities to be supported under the Program have been prioritized with the GoK based on the most urgent challenges for which GoK requested support, considering readiness for implementation, building on previous Bank programs and findings from recent analytical work, and aiming to complement other Bank/donor- financed projects in the State. The Program will be structured into two results areas that will support the GoK to: (i) strengthen transversal systems for resilience; and (ii) embed resilience in key economic sectors. The Program will be operating through a tiered approach for engagement. At the State level, the Program will support development of systems and institutions to create the foundations for multidimensional resilience. At the local level, drawing from the State level systems and capacities, it will implement the integrated approach in four districts along the Pamba river basin, namely Alappuzha, Idukki, Kottayam, and Pathanamthitta. 1.4 Program Development Objectives and indicators The development objective of the Program is to enhance the Kerala’s resilience against the impacts of climate change and natural disasters, including disease outbreaks and pandemics. PDO level results indicators include the following: • Fiscal sustainability of GoK to cope with disease outbreaks and natural disasters is strengthened • Women’s access to post-disaster adaptive safety net payment is enhanced • People are benefiting from local DRM plans and One Health Community Surveillance systems in Pamba Basin districts • People are benefiting from early flood warning services and flood protection measures in Pamba Basin 1.5 Results Areas (RAs) A description of the RAs and their associated activities are as follows: Results Area 1: Strengthening transversal systems for resilience The results will focus on strengthening transversal systems—both foundational areas and cross-cutting elements—of resilience to help the State prepare and respond systemically to the challenges posed by exogenous shocks from climate change, natural disasters, or disease outbreaks. Key objectives include (a) financial protection against disasters through sustainable fiscal and debt management, (b) a comprehensive DRF and social protection system and (c) disaster preparedness through mainstreaming climate and disaster risk-informed urban and DRM planning. 10 Enhanced financial protection against disasters will be achieved through the following activities: (a) Sustainable fiscal and debt management. Kerala’s limited fiscal space and high levels of debt have severely constrained its ability to deal with major exogenous shocks. Initial steps were undertaken in the DPO to enhance revenues through a masala bond issue and a flood cess. The Program will strengthen GoK’s ability to deal with contingent liabilities due to natural disasters and disease outbreaks. The Program will support establishment of a debt management unit in the Department of Finance (DoF) and implement a debt management plan to scale down the State’s debt-to-GSDP ratio to a sustainable trajectory. A TA will be provided to enhance the capacity of this unit to strengthen revenue mobilization, and expenditure management. (b) Comprehensive DRF and adaptive social protection system. The existing system for DRF has several issues. Delays in delivering timely, adequate assistance to affected and vulnerable households is a key issue in addition to the increasing burden on State’s financial resources. The Program will support the GoK to: develop a comprehensive DRF framework that bolsters the financial resilience of the Government and the communities; build a unified database of vulnerable households and a payments platform which triggers post-disaster safety net payments to the bank account of eligible beneficiaries on time, and protection of the personal data collected, integrated, and processed; roll out modified crop risk insurance, risks transferred to the insurers; and mobilize market- based resources, over and above the State Disaster Relief Fund, either through issuance of bonds or purchase of (re)insurance. The Program envisages disbursing disaster- related payments to the bank accounts of the female head of the household. Decision- making capabilities and financial literacy of women will be enhanced through: (i) conducting information dissemination drives for women on post-disaster safety net payments; (ii) creating help desks at the community level to achieve 100% coverage of bank accounts for women to receive and access payments; and (iii) strengthening community-level support systems for gender-based violence (GBV) prevention and providing referral support to victims of domestic violence. The Program will also rely on Theeramythri program, to support self-employment and empowerment of fisherwomen. (c) Risk-informed urban master plans for cities and towns. Unplanned developments and lack of investments in resilient urban infrastructure and services increased the impacts of 2018 and 2019 floods and landslides. Through the earlier DPO and TA, the TCP Act was amended by GoK to mandate risk-informed master plans by urban local bodies (ULBs), and guidelines for the use of annual plan funds were restructured to enable and encourage multi-year investments in urban infrastructure. The Program will support roll out of these reforms across the State, and incentivize the ULBs in the Pamba River Basin districts for adoption of risk-informed master plans and priority action plans. Beyond the Program, building on the experience, the state department will support ULBs across the State to adopt risk-informed master plans. (d) Risk-informed local DRM plans. World Bank has been supporting the Kerala State Disaster Management Authority (KSDMA) to establish norms, systems, and capacities for strengthening local-level disaster risk planning and management across the State. The Program will build on it and support the formulation/updating of DRM plans with local level climate risk information, for all the 263 Local Self-Government Institutions (LSGIs) 11 in the Pamba River Basin districts. The Program will include (i) the development of technical tools and training in DRM; (ii) multi-year investment planning integrating climate risk information, at the local level; and (iii) support development of a scoring matrix, called the Disaster & Climate Action Tracker (DCAT), to evaluate local investments which are climate and disaster risk informed. The DCAT will be used by the LSGD to establish a performance and reward-based system for incentivizing LSGIs that mainstream climate and disaster risk in their development and investment planning. RA 2: Embedding resilience in key economic sectors This results area aims at embedding norms and practices of resilience in a sample of socioeconomic sectors: health, WRM, agriculture, and roads, to demonstrate an integrated approach to build multisectoral and multidimensional resilience. Key objectives and interventions to achieve the envisaged results are detailed here: (a)Resilient public health systems. High population density, large number of non- resident citizens and international travelers, aging population with co-morbidities, and large forest cover increase Kerala’s vulnerability to large-scale disease outbreaks, especially zoonotic diseases, such as Covid-19. Critical bottlenecks in the GoK’s preparedness for disease outbreaks and pandemics include lack of health surveillance, coordination and the associated infrastructure to support the same at the district and local levels. THE PROGRAM intends to strengthen the public health systems of GoK for disease outbreak preparedness and prevention. Specific activities include operationalizing integrated public health laboratories (IPHLs) supporting disease surveillance and enhanced clinical case management in the Program districts; establishment of a One Health platform to strengthen coordination, collaboration, networking, joint surveillance, preparedness, and response to counter health hazards; and implementing community-based One Health surveillance practices by LSGIs. An IT- enabled platform will be established for community level networking of Prevention of Epidemics and Infectious Diseases (PEID) cells at medical colleges to undertake operational and applied research to inform State disease containment policies. (b) Integrated and sustainable WRM. Declining ground water levels and high variation of rainfall over the years exacerbated by climate change have increased water vulnerability. There is a need for Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) to unlock the development potential of water resources, including making more productive use for hydropower, agriculture, fisheries, energy, and domestic needs, and reducing water-related risks and vulnerability to floods, erosion, sedimentation, environmental water stress, and pollution. A draft River Basin Conservation and Management Authority (RCBMA) Act was prepared under the DPO. The Program will support the establishment of the RBCMA to institutionalize integrated reservoir operations, water monitoring, data collection, knowledge management, flood forecasting, and evaluation of environmental flows, for ensuring more efficient and sustainable water allocation to agriculture, irrigation, domestic, industrial, and other uses. The RBCMA will foster multisectoral and interagency coordination to build climate resilience and improve IWRM in the State. An integrated river basin plan and flood forecasting system for the Pamba River Basin is being prepared and will be used as the basis for developing detailed investment plans for mitigating impacts of climate-related events to be supported under the Program. 12 (c) Sustainable and resilient agriculture. Kerala’s agriculture faces persistent climate risks impacting predictability in returns and viability of farming. Over the last two years, through the DPO engagements, GoK has adopted an agroecological zone (AEZ) approach to agriculture sector by delineating the State into five AEZs and 23 agroecological units (AEUs) based on geographic and climatic factors. It further aligned the planning, budgeting, and implementation architecture in the sector to AEZ-based approaches. To support this shift, and to move towards precision farming, an Integrated Agricultural Management Information System (IAMIS) is being developed to improve production. Parallelly, new guidelines for establishment of crop-based Farmer Producer Organization (FPO) has been rolled out to promote aggregation of produce, to create volumes, to attract and access the emerging market requirements. In the interim period, a study on AEZ based crop insurance has been completed and recommendations for development of a new insurance product will be undertaken during implementation. The Program will support GoK to strengthen 16 AEUs in the Program districts to facilitate implementation of AEZ-based approaches. The Program will also support increased women’s participation in agricultural activities, which has been on the decline in the State, by incentivizing FPOs with at least 25% of their board represented by women members. Focused support would be provided to small and SC/ST women farmers through common service center kiosks to access IAMIS for information, benefits and other services to improve their capacities. Priority will be to include members of Kudumbashree’s Joint Liability Groups and ‘sangha krishis’, who had suffered huge losses post the recurring floods, in the FPOs. In addition, business development and leadership training will be provided for women farmers to strengthen their capacities to support FPO operations. AEU staff will be sensitized to support these initiatives. (d) Climate-resilient road infrastructure. The road network of the State is susceptible to natural disasters due to intense rainfall and unique terrain features. There is no integrated geographic information system (GIS)-based vulnerability and hazards risk mapping of the asset stock to develop a resilience framework for roads sector. Additionally, a low capital outlay creates challenges for financing road improvement projects to meet resilient standards. Due to limited mechanization and poor capacities of local contractors the state has not been able to fully adopt modern and green construction technologies. Through the DPOs and with KSTP support, the Public Works Department (PWD) has notified core road network (CRN) of 7,000 km and established a GIS-based Road Maintenance Management System (RMMS). The CRN would entail enhanced budgetary provisions, improved climate- and disaster-resilient standards. The Program will support for upgradation of 400 kms of CRN in the Program districts which shall be contracted adopting output and performance-based road maintenance contracts (OPBRC), to address higher disaster and climate risk vulnerability. The Program shall also support establishment of a fully staffed RMMS cell to plan and roll-out similar climate proof designs, budgeting and implantation for the entire road sector in the state. 1.6 Disbursement-Linked Indicators (DLIs) Program resources will be disbursed based on the achievement of nine DLIs. These DLIs have been chosen to reflect five principles: (i) integrated approach to multidimensional resilience; (ii) alignment with and ability to add value to the Government program; (iii) building on policy and institutional reforms achieved through DPO1 and DPO2 prior 13 actions; (iv) technical merits; and (v) ability to incentivize results and achievement of the PDO. The following table provides the list of DLIs and the associated funding allocations. Total External Fund DLI IBRD (US$) AIIB (US$) AFD6 (US$) Financing Recipien (US$)7 t RA 1: Strengthening transversal systems for resilience DLI 1: Fiscal sustainability to cope with disease outbreaks 5,000,000 5,000,000 15,000,000 25,000,000 DoF and natural disasters is strengthened DLI 2: Disaster-related adaptive safety net system of 5,000,000 5,000,000 15,000,000 25,000,000 DoF GOK is strengthened DLI 3: Disaster risk financing and insurance capacity of GoK 5,000,000 5,000,000 25,000,000 35,000,000 DoF and vulnerable households in the State are improved DLI 4: ULBs developed and sanctioned risk-informed 7,500,000 7,500,000 15,000,000 30,000,000 LSGD Urban Master Plans and Priority Action Plans DLI 5: Climate risk information integrated into local body 17,500,000 17,500,000 30,000,000 65,000,000 LSGD DRM plans RA 2: Embedding resilience in key economic sectors DLI 6: Capacity to track and respond to zoonotic disease outbreaks of human 15,000,000 15,000,000 5,000,000 35,000,000 DoHFW importance are conducted in a timely manner DLI 7: Integrated River Basin Management Plan developed 10,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 35,000,000 WRD for Pamba Basin and implementation commenced. DLI 8: FPOs have increased access to new and organized 20,000,000 20,000,000 - 40,000,000 DoA markets DLI 9: CRN is meeting resilient standards in the Pamba Basin through climate informed 40,000,000 40,000,000 - 80,000,000 PWD investment works and long- term performance-based maintenance contracts 125,000,000 125,000,000 120,000,000 370,000,000 The achievement of DLIs/disbursement-linked results (DLRs) will be assessed and verified by the IVA, as per verification protocols agreed between the GoK and the World Bank. The RKI will recruit the IVA which will conduct verification of Program DLIs. The 6 The total amount of AFD funding tentatively planned as €100 million (US$120 million equivalent). 7 The breakdown of allocation by DLI has been agreed among IBRD, AIIB, and AFD in consultation with GOK. 14 IVA shall submit its assessment reports to RKI, which in turn will, submit the report to the World Bank, the AIIB, and the AFD for disbursement of funds. The World Bank will retain the right to make the final decision on whether a DLI has been achieved or not, and may undertake additional quality assurance checks to confirm achievement of the results. 1.7 Institutional and implementation arrangements The Program will be implemented through GoK’s existing institutional modalities and systems. At the apex level, the RKI will serve as the Program Management Unit (PMU), responsible for management, coordination, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of the Program. RKI is supported by a Program Management Team (PMT) providing Program Management Support Services (PMSS). The participating sector departments shall be the Program’s implementing agencies. RKI will collaborate and coordinate with all departments and associated technical agencies such as the KSDMA, the Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA), LSGIs and district administrations in the Program area, to implement the Program. RKI will be supported in the field by District Disaster Management Authorities (DDMAs), which are statutory units headed by the District Collector and includes representation from LSGIs and line departments, to coordinate and oversee implementation in the four districts. Participating departments (implementing agencies) and supporting line agencies associated with each results area will be responsible for achieving the agreed results. The implementing agencies will be responsible for coordinating with relevant departments, line agencies, and local governments to implement the Program and achieve the agreed results. They will also be responsible, either directly or through coordination and oversight, for ensuring compliance with the relevant fiduciary, environmental and social (E&S) safeguards rules, Program Action Plan (PAP), procurement guidelines, norms and systems of the GoK, during Program implementation. 1.8 About ESSA At the Program level, the World Bank undertook the Environmental and Social Systems Assessment (ESSA) in which the following were examined: (i) the potential E&S effects of the PforR (including direct, indirect, induced, and cumulative effects as relevant); (ii) the borrower’s capacity (legal framework, regulatory authority, organizational capacity, and performance) to manage those effects; (iii) the comparison of the borrower’s systems— laws, regulations, standards, procedures, and implementation performance—against the core principles and key planning elements to identify any significant differences between them that could affect Program performance; (iv) the likelihood that the proposed operation achieves its E&S objectives; and (v) recommendation of measures to address capacity for and performance on policy issues and specific operational aspects relevant to managing the Program risks (e.g. carrying out Staff training, implementing institutional capacity- building programs, developing and adopting internal operational guidelines) through a Program Action Plan. ESSA refers both to the process for evaluating the acceptability of a borrower’s system for managing the Program’s E&S risks in the particular operational context, and to the final report that is an output of that process. 15 1.9 World Bank’s ESSA requirements The following are the World Bank’s ESSA requirements: • Preliminary screening is done to ensure that activities that are “judged to be likely to have significant adverse impacts that are sensitive, diverse, or unprecedented on the environment and/or affected people are not included in the PforR design and are excluded from the Program • Stakeholder engagement is an essential element of the ESSA process. Through this engagement, both internal and external stakeholders get an opportunity to meaningfully participate in the ESSA process, inform the preparation of the ESSA Report, and provide meaningful inputs throughout the lifecycle of the operation. Generally, during the PforR preparation process, field-level one-to-one and focused group community consultations and a stakeholder workshop are conducted to meet the stakeholder engagement requirements. • Analysis: Using secondary literature and the information collected during the stakeholder engagement process, the ESSA analyses the borrower’s applicable systems, considering the system both as it is defined in laws and regulations, and as it is implemented in practice. The purpose of this analysis is to determine the systems’ capacity to manage program risks during preparation and throughout implementation. • Grievance Mechanism (GM): The ESSA reviews the Program-level grievance mechanisms and conducts an assessment of their adequacy and effectiveness. The ESSA confirms that the GMs can receive, record, resolve, and follow up on complaints or grievances received. Further, the ESSA includes any recommendations for enhancing or improving the GM. • Recommendations: ESSA identifies measures and actions to manage any significant gaps in the borrower’s capacity to implement E&S management systems at a level commensurate with the identified risks to The Program, and consistent with the Bank’s core principles and planning elements. The Bank and the borrower together agree to implement these as part of The Program. • Disclosure: It is required for the draft ESSA report to be disclosed before the appraisal decision meeting so that the views of interested members of the broader public may be solicited and considered before all Program decisions are made final. Further, the final ESSA Report and recommended actions are to be completed before negotiations, and the final version is disclosed accordingly. 1.10 About the structure of this ESSA report This ESSA report is structured into three parts: Part A: ESSA Summary Report, Part B: ESSA Environmental Report and Part C: ESSA Social Report. This volume is the Part B: Environmental Report. 16 2 Methodology 2.1 Introduction The methodology included: (a) secondary literature review, (b) screening, (c) consultations – field-level and state-level8; (d) analysis and synthesis of systems strengths & areas for improvement; which is followed by (e) preparing the ESSA report. The ESSA was carried out by a team of specialists (staff and consultants)9 from the World Bank. The desk review focuses on understanding the existing policy, operational procedures, institutional capacity and implementation effectiveness relevant to the activities under The Program. This also included a review of the borrowers systems for engaging with citizens, especially the most marginalized and excluded as well as their grievance redress. 2.2 Secondary literature review The ESSA team reviewed the relevant secondary literature prior to and during the conduct of the ESSA. The key documents included the following: Program Document of the Bank-funded Development Policy Operation / Lending (DPO/L) operation The list of secondary literature reviewed is included in the Annex ##. Using the findings of the secondary literature, the ESSA team carried out the screening, and prepared the scope of work for the consultants who conducted the consultations with community, particular in the Pamba river basin, which will be the focus of the capital investments under this Program. The 2.3 Risk screening at concept stage Using the findings of the secondary literature, the ESSA team carried out the environmental risk screening at the concept stage of The Program. This considered the likely risks arising from environmental impacts, contextual risks, institutional capacity & complexity risks and political and reputational risk. The screening revealed that The Program’s institutional development and investment planning will result in an overall positive environmental contribution. However the direct environmental effects related to the physical infrastructure activities will have to be effectively managed. The screening revealed that The Program will have a few physical risks due to the environmental impacts of activities, particularly related to physical road, WRM and health infrastructure that are to be supported through co-financing. The contextual risks are limited as these are within the existing, well-established environmental regulatory agencies in Kerala. Possible risks arising from the state’s weak environmental capacity were also to be examined. And, political and reputation risks arising from environmental issues were not envisaged under The Program. The risk screening had also confirmed that program activities did not include those not eligible for financing using the PforR instrument. The 8 In view of the Covid-19 conditions, ESSA Team participated in the consultations remotely, facilitated by local consultants. 9 The World Bank team responsible for the environmental aspects of this ESSA included Vaideeswaran S (Consultant) and Pawan Patil, Senior Environmental Specialist. 17 environmental risk rating at the concept stage was rated as Substantial and was to be reviewed through further examination of the portfolio of interventions through this ESSA. The screening also ensured that The Program does not include those components which are not eligible for financing using the PforR instrument. Based on the information available, the following were confirmed: (a) No limited or significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats or critical cultural heritage sites; (b) No air, water, or soil contamination leading to significant adverse impacts on the health or safety of individuals, communities, or ecosystems; (c) No workplace conditions that expose workers to significant risks to health and personal safety; (d) No adverse environmental impacts covering large geographical areas, including transboundary impacts, or global impacts such as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; and (e) No significant cumulative, induced, or indirect impacts. Further, the preliminary screening confirmed that the exclusion criteria was adhered to. 2.4 Consultations Apart from a desk review of available information, interviews and consultations were also held with the state-level implementing agencies and community members. Consultations were conducted by the Bank’s ESSA team and also through Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA), the state’s apex organization in the area of local governance and participatory planning. This institute has a state-wide outreach, and the scope of their consultations focused on community in the Pamba river basin, which was planned to be the main beneficiary from The Program activities in the various sectors. 2.4.1 State-level consultations done by the Bank’s ESSA team Between December 2020 and January 2021, the Bank’s ESSA team carried out selected consultations with particular stakeholder department in order to better appreciate the possible opportunities for environmental systems strengthening through the institutional development and investment activities, and the environmental effects of investment activities. All of these consultations were done through the virtual approach due the prevailing Covid-19 pandemic. These consultations were held between November and December 2020. 2.4.2 State-level and community consultations done by KILA To enhance the limited consultations done virtually, the Bank’s ESSA team engaged Kerala Institute of Land Administration (KILA) to conduct further consultations. The Bank’s ESSA team provided a detailed checklist to guide these consultations (Annex 3). These consultations were conducted at the state level and with communities in the four districts pertaining to the Pamba river basin, i.e. Alappuzha, Idukki, Kotayyam and Pathanamthitta. A total of 11 state-level consultations were conducted with representatives of the implementing departments and their teams. Another 32 community consultations were held at 16 different locations (3 ULBs and 13 Gram Panchayats) in the 4 Pamba river basin districts covering more than 328 community members cutting across social and economic groups. The ULBs covered in each district are furnished here: 18 • In Alappuzha district, three panchayats - Mannar, Pandanad and Kainakari – and Alappuzha Municipality were covered. • In Idukki, four panchayats - Peermade, Peruvanthanam, Vandiperiyar and Kumily - were covered. • In Kottayam district, three panchayats – Kooruthodu, Mundakayam, Manimala – and Changanaserri Municipality were covered. • In Pathanamthitta, three panchayats – Ranni, Perunad and Aranmula – and Thiruvalla Municipality were covered. The breakdown of the number of participants in the districts is provided in the following table: District No. Alappuzha 45 Idukki 127 Kottayam 62 Pathanamthitta 94 These consultations were held between December 2020 and January 2021. Further information is included in Annex 4. The analysis of the consultations feedback and how these were addressed through The Program design and / or ESSA is included in Annex 5. The full report of the KILA consultations forms a part of the documents referred and is in Annex 7 List of References. 2.4.3 ESSA Stakeholder workshops The two workshops were conducted under the aegis of Rebuild Kerala Initiative (18 and 22 February 2021) and were facilitated by KILA. GoK officials from the relevant implementing departments and other stakeholder (community and civil society organizations) representatives were invited to this workshop. All the invitees to this workshop were sent the draft ESSA Report about ten days / week prior to the conduct of the workshop. Given the constraints due to the Covid-19 pandemic situation, the two workshops had to be conducted via Zoom. At the workshop, the Bank Task team presented a brief overview of The Program and shared the findings – both environmental and social - included in the draft ESSA reports, and sought feedback from the participants. The structure of the workshop was such that it focused on drawing out inputs from the participants so that these can be gainfully used to enhance The Program design and the ESSA itself. The KILA prepared the proceedings of the workshop, which will included the presentations, minutes (including the list of invitees and attendees) and the recording. Using the feedback obtained during this workshop, the draft ESSA reports (Part A, B and C) were revised and recommendations for The Program design were considered. Annex 6 provides a summary of the ESSA stakeholder workshop along with the list of invitees and screen shots of the participation taken when the virtual workshop was under progress. Further to these workshops, RKI disclosed the draft ESSA reports on their website on 8 February 2021 (English) and 13 February 2021 (draft ESSA summary report in Malayalam) and requested email feedback. And one feedback was received and included in Annex 7. 19 2.4.4 Analysis, findings and recommendations Using the data / information collected through the secondary research and consultations (state-level, community-level and stakeholder workshop), the ESSA team carried out the analysis. This focused on determining the strengths and the weaknesses / gaps of the existing environmental regulatory systems and institutional systems relevant to The Program and arriving at recommendations that need to be addressed through The Program Action Plan (PAP). 2.5 Preparing the ESSA reports The draft ESSA reports – Part A, B and C - were prepared by the World Bank ESSA team using the inputs obtained from different sources: secondary information, discussions with the GoK’s implementing departments / agencies, consultation feedback (state-level and community-level) through KILA and the feedback from the stakeholder workshop. All of these inputs were analyzed and evaluated to determine the findings and recommendations. The conduct of the ESSA and preparing the set of ESSA reports were done between November 2020 and February 2021. 20 3 Key issues, benefits, impacts and risks 3.1 Introduction This chapter examines the Program in each of the sectors in order to determine the environmental issues, benefits, impacts and risks. This was first done at the Program Concept stage and progressively updated, as the Program preparation unfolded. Annex 2 includes a table that examines each of the Program activities and its environmental relevance. 3.2 Sector: Agriculture The environmental issues in agriculture in Kerala include top soil erosion (flooding and landslides). land degradation, chemical (fertiliser and pesticide) use, and conversion of agricultural lands. The Program activities focus on (i) supporting the paradigm shift of reorganization of the Agriculture Department into agroecological zones with a focus on the Pamba basin and (ii) establishment of integrated agricultural information systems. Supporting the shift in the Pamba basin has positive implications for environment and natural resource conservation. Selecting the crop using the agro-climatic conditions and topography will result in reduced chemical use, restore soil health and result in effective water use. This will bring about better environmental benefits. And, the integrated agricultural information systems will progressively assist the farmer in all aspects that will include chemical use as well. This will once again bring positive environmental benefits. No negative environmental impacts and risks are therefore perceived in the activities planned in the agriculture sector. 3.3 Sector: Climate Change and Disaster Risk Management The Program will focus on building the capacity and enhancing the use of DRM plans at the local level. At the first level, these local level DRM plans will be in place. In parallel, there will be efforts to provide climate risk information through downscaling climate models and developing & implementing a Disaster & Climate Action Tracker (DCAT) to assess the annual plans and incentivize their inclusion of such actions. All of these will be in the context of the DRM plans guidelines, which have strong environmental sustainability principles embedded in them. Given that, the climate-responsible, resilience- building actions will not have negative environmental risks and hence no risks. On the contrary, the more widespread implementation of local DRM plans could lead to environmental benefits. 3.4 Sector: Disaster Risk Financing and Social Protection The Program will focus on improving women’s access to post-disaster safety net and/or insurance payments through establishing an unified database that will enable the same. Further, the Program will focus on increasing the effectiveness of agriculture insurance program in Pamba Basin districts by promoting crop insurance. Insurance as a disaster risk financing instrument will complement SDRF/CMDRF funds. All of these pertain to cash / financial transfers, there are no environmental issues, impacts, benefits or risks. 21 3.5 Sector: Fiscal Reform and Debt Management The Program will focus on fiscal sustainability when having to deal with disease outbreaks and natural disasters. This will be done through developing, adopting and implementing a debt management plan, particularly the priority actions. Being purely financial in nature, there are no environmental issues, impacts, benefits or risks. 3.6 Sector: Health The Program will focus on enhancing the One Health Surveillance Platform at the local level to track and respond to zoonotic disease outbreaks, and on improving district-level Integrated Public Health Laboratories (IPHLs). Construction-related EHS impacts due to establishing new or expanded facilities will entail minor risks. The typology of investment activities will be limited to the IPHLs. Those will be the typology of the investment activities that will be undertaken. Improved health surveillance should unequivocally establish the link between sanitation / waste management practices and disease. In 2019, Diarrhoea was the highest at 544,027 and Leptospirosis was the highest cause of death at 57. Both these diseases are clearly linked to sanitation and waste management practices. Therefore, improved health surveillance will bring positive environmental benefits. Further, health care facilities have tightened their controls to avoid the spread of infections due to the Covid-19. This needs to be sustained beyond the current pandemic and mainstreamed into all health care facilities in order to strengthen infection control. Improving IPHLs will offer an opportunity to strengthen bio-medical waste management in health diagnostics, which is only a small contributor to the waste problem. Overall, there are concerns of bio-medical waste management in the state such as only one centralized disposal facility, issues regarding local incinerators, infection control programs have to be scaled-up, liquid waste treatment in health care facilities have to be enhanced and handling the increase in PPEs due to Covid-19. The capacity strengthening will be beneficial and will lead to reducing risks. Overall, the interventions in this sector provides an opportunity to reduce environmental risks by establishing the link between sanitation / waste management practices and disease, and contributing towards better biomedical waste management in health diagnostics. Construction-related EHS impacts will entail minor risks that need to be managed. 3.7 Sector: Roads The Program will focus on the rehabilitation of the Core Road Network (CRN) and / or maintenance to resilient standards in the Pamba basin. Further, the Road Maintenance Management Systems, and streamlining its use in the investment and budget planning through long-term performance-based maintenance contracts. The roads selected under the Program are those that do not pass through eco-sensitive areas such as forests; and the rehabilitation will be restricted within the available right-of-way without any widening. Given that, the environmental impacts will be limited and to those related to the construction phase. This will include air, dust and noise pollution; limited tree cutting / trimming; water pollution; worker and public safety; waste, scrap and debris disposal. 22 These environmental impacts could result in physical risks but can be effectively managed through effective mitigation measures. Once the roads are rehabilitated and / or maintained up to resilient standards through long-term performance-based maintenance contracts, the environmental impacts during the operational phase will be lower than the existing conditions. 3.8 Sector: Urban The Program aims to streamline developing and sanctioning risk-informed master plans. As this is an investment planning initiative, there will be no direct environmental impacts. With the focus on incorporating risk information, these plans – both the Urban Master Plans and the Priority Action Plans - will consider the environmental risks apart from disaster and climate risks that are directly linked to building resilience. For instance, tighter controls to conserve the paddy land and wetland and to restrict the conversion or reclamation. Addressing all these risks upfront in the planning is bound to bring positive environmental benefits. 3.9 Sector: Water Resource Management Developing and initiating implementation of the Integrated River Basin Management Plan for the Pamba river will be the focus of this Program. Developing flood forecasts, sharing of information between departments (WRD, KSDMA, Agriculture, Irrigation, PWD and LSGD), identifying critical investments and initiating implementation of civil works such as raising embankments, repair of sluice gates, river training works and channel / link lining. Those will be the typology of the investment activities that will be undertaken. The institutional development and investment planning activities will have no negative environmental impacts, and, will contribute positively through the integrated approaches. The proposed investments will have only construction-related EHS impacts that will be localized, limited and reversible. There will entail limited environmental risks due to these impacts. After the recent flood events, particularly the one in 2018, issues related to the Pamba river have become a focus of the National Green Tribunal. Further the polluted stretches of the Pamba river have been the focus of the Kerala State Pollution Control Board in terms of monitoring the water quality, which is known to have very low BOD and DO levels in certain stretches. And, the Pollution Control Board has also been a part of Committees established to study the quality of the water in the Pamba River for the last several years. Given that, there are contextual risks due to concerns raised on environmental issues raised in different forums and are relevant to the Pamba basin. These need to be considered at the time of (a) designing the capacity building initiatives, and (b) doing the investment planning in order to ensure compliance to the regulations and prevailing orders during the project period. 23 4 Applicable legal and regulatory framework 4.1 Introduction This Program for Results (PforR) focuses on institutional development, investment planning and capital investments in multiple sectors. This chapter examines the environmental legal and regulatory framework (referred hereinafter as “framework”) – both at a national and state level - that are relevant to the activities to achieve the key results areas. By legal, the reference is to acts and rules pertaining to environmental issues. By regulatory, the reference is on the procedures and practices being adopted by the GoK agencies to ensure compliance to the legal requirements. At the outset, it is to be noted that there is a limited applicability of the framework to the Program activities. These are covered by sector briefly in this chapter. 4.2 Framework applicable to the Program In India, the national and state framework is well developed. A brief description of the different important elements of the framework that are directly relevant to the Program is provided by sector in the following table. No. Title and brief description Relevance to the Program A Common to all sectors 1 Environment (Protection) Act of 1986 Standards that are specifically The Act is an umbrella legislation that provides a applicable to air, water, noise and framework for Central and State Authorities established soil components to all the civil works related to the WSS under prevailing laws. It provides a single focus for the protection of the environment. infrastructure development. None of the works require national or state level EIA clearance. Organization: Department of Environment, Directorate of Environment and Climate Change, various authorities and State Pollution Control Board B Relevant to sectors with civil works / investment activities – Roads, WRM and health sectors 2 Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981 Under the Act, the contractor is This Act provides for the prevention, control and required to obtain the Consent to abatement of air pollution. It is to control emissions of any Establish and Consent to Operate air pollutant into the atmosphere when it exceeds the for the ready-mix concrete plant standards set under the Act and associated rules (s)if it is used for the concrete for construction. Organization: State Pollution Control Board 3 Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974 Under the Act, the contractor is This is to control water pollution by controlling water required to obtain the Consent to pollutants and the maintaining or restoring of Establish and Consent to Operate wholesomeness of water, through establishment and for all civil works. Further, there empowerment of Boards at the national and state levels. should be no dumping the Ensuring adherence to water quality and effluent standards construction waste / debris into is the main purpose. nearby water bodies like streams. Organization: State Pollution Control Board 4 Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules 2000 Under the Rules, the Contractors need to adhere to these rules in the 24 No. Title and brief description Relevance to the Program According to the provisions of the rules notified under this context of all civil works under the act, a person might make a complaint to the designated Program ‘Authority’ in the event that the actual noise levels exceed Organization: State Pollution the ambient noise standards by 10dB(A) or more as Control Board compared to the prescribed standards. The designated authority will take action against the violator in accordance with the provisions of these rules or other law in force. 5 Construction and Demolition Waste Management Rules For all civil works, the contractor 2016 will have to obtain authorizations The rules shall apply to every waste resulting from for all the different types of wastes construction, re-modeling, repair and demolition of any as required, and will dispose scrap civil structure of individual or organization or authority / waste only to authorized who generates construction and demolition waste such as agencies. building materials, debris, rubble. Organization: State Pollution Control Board. 6 Solid Waste Management Rules 2016 and references in These Rules are applicable for any state acts / rules & guidelines including Kerala State Policy incidental waste generated the on SWM 2018, Kerala SWM Operational Guidelines, 2017, contractor during the civil works. Kerala Municipalities Act 1994 and The Kerala Panchayat Organization: LSGIs and State Raj Act 1994 Pollution Control Board. These rules define solid waste as those generated by all the households, hospitality industry, big and small market vendors. These rules are applicable to the municipal areas and beyond. In particular, the rules have mandated the source segregation of waste in order to channelise the waste to wealth by recovery, reuse and recycle 7 Plastic Waste Management Rules 2016 and state orders These Rules are applicable for any This is to ensure segregation, collection, storage, incidental plastic waste generated transportation, processing and disposal of plastic waste in the contractor during the civil a manner that there is no damage is caused to the works. environment during this process. Organization: Department of Ban on single use plastic items in the State, wef. 1.1.2020- Environment and State Pollution GO MS No 6, 2019 Envt dt:27.11.2019 and other related Control Board. orders 8 Indian Forest Act 1927, Forest Conservation Act 1980, The use of forestland for non- Forest Rights Act 2006 and associated Kerala Preservation forestry purposes, replenishing the of Trees Act, 1986 loss of forest cover by Under this Act, administrative approval must be obtained compensatory afforestation on from the Forest Department to clear designated forestland. degraded forestland and non- According to this although the land is under the control of forest land, and permission for tree state government, due to its protected status, approval felling may be required in the from the Government for using the land may be required. context of civil works pertaining to The State Act includes the requirement of the prior infrastructure development permission in writing of the authorized officer to cut, Though the likelihood of forest land uproot or burn, or cause to be cut, uprooted or burnt, any is low, the appropriate forest tree as defined by the Act. clearance will be obtained without fail. Prior permission for tree felling to be secured in case it is required for the investment activities. Organization: State Forest Department. 9 Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 In the context of civil works The Act provides the details the various kinds of pertaining to infrastructure endangered and other important faunal groups that need to development, this may be relevant be protected. In particular, this deals with permissions for if wildlife is encountered in the working inside or diversion of national parks and Pamba basin. sanctuaries. 25 No. Title and brief description Relevance to the Program Organization: State Forest Department. 10 The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Wherever the civil works for Remains Act, 1958, and the Rules, 1959 infrastructure development are The Act and Rules protect the archaeological sites, and no carried out in the vicinity of person shall undertake any construction within the cultural properties, the provisions protected or regulated area except in accordance with the of the Act and Rules are applicable permission granted. for chance finds. Organization: Archaeological Survey of India offices at Thiruvanathapuram, Ernakulam and Thrissur. 11 Building And Other Construction Workers (Regulation Health and safety arrangements for Of Employment And Conditions Of Service) Act 1996 and the construction workers involved Building And Other Construction Workers (Regulation with the civil works. Of Employment And Conditions Of Service) Kerala Rules, 1998 Organization: Labour The Act and the associated Kerala Rules is a comprehensive Commissionerate, Department of for regulating the safety, welfare and other conditions of Labour service of these workers. C Relevant only to health sector 12 Bio-medical Waste Management Rules, 2016 All management of bio-medical These Rules contains schedules that outline requirements waste is as per these rules. All pertaining to categorization and management; standards health care facilities including the for treatment and disposal of bio-medical waste; prescribed Integrated Public Health authority and duties; and label of containers, bags and Laboratories have to obtain transportation of bio-medical waste. authorizations as per these Rules. Organization: State Pollution Control Board D Relevant only to the Agriculture sector 13 Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 In the unlikely requirement This is intended to conserve the paddy land and wetlands Permission shall be required in and restrict their conversion or reclamation, to promote case any facility is proposed on growth in the agriculture sector and sustain the ecological paddy land/wetlands (as balance. documented in revenue records). Organization: Department of Revenue E Relevant only to WRM sector 14 National Green Tribunal (NGT) Act 2010 and Orders NGT Orders as applicable. The National Green Tribunal has been established under the National Green Tribunal Act 2010 for effective and Organization: Government of expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental Kerala, State Pollution Control protection and conservation of forests and other natural Board and other special resources including enforcement of any legal right relating Committees to environment and giving relief and compensation for damages to persons and property and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. For example, NGT Order Application (OA) No. 75/2020 This Program activities do not entail any upfront environmental clearances but there are procedural requirements such as obtaining consents prior to the commencement of civil works. These are contractor responsibilities that will have to be supervised by the respective departments that are engaged in civil works. If there are specific situations during implementation, e.g. the NGT orders, then additional procedural requirements may be applicable. The standards included in the various legislations will have to be adhered. 26 5 Institutional Systems Assessment – Procedures, practices and performance 5.1 Introduction This Program for Results (PforR) focuses on institutional development (including investment planning) and capital investments across multiple sectors. This chapter examines the environmental management systems that are institutionalized and are relevant to the activities to achieve the key results areas. These institutional systems can be broadly classified as (i) those external to the sector and involved with the regulations / enforcement, e.g. State Pollution Control Board, regulatory authorities and State Forest Department and (ii) those within organizations in the respective sectors. 5.2 Regulatory systems 5.2.1 National-level regulatory systems Description The Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MoEFCC) is responsible for the planning, promotion, co-ordination and overseeing the implementation of India's environmental and forestry policies and programs. The broad objectives of the MoEFCC are: (i) Conservation and survey of flora, fauna, forests and wildlife; (ii) Prevention and control of pollution; (iii) Afforestation and regeneration of degraded areas; (iv) Protection of the environment and (v) Ensuring the welfare of animals. These objectives are well supported by a set of legislative and regulatory measures, aimed at the preservation, conservation and protection of the environment. Further, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) is a statutory organization that provides technical services to the MoEFCC on all matters pertaining to the legal and regulatory systems. These broader national-level regulatory systems are a prerequisite and drive state-level legal and regulatory framework that the Program will have to adhere with. It is imperative to have a well-developed, established national system in order to effectively manage environmental effects and risks at the state and the program level. Section 4.2 has further information on the applicable national legislations and regulations that the above institutions are responsible for. Assessment In the Indian context, these national-level systems are well-developed and in place across all sectors. The regulatory procedures and practices are clear, streamlined and widely available. In the context of the Program, the national-level regulatory systems are not directly applicable as the management has been devolved to the state. Hence, there are no gaps in these systems vis-à-vis the Bank’s Program that needs to be addressed. 5.2.2 State-level regulatory systems Description The two regulatory agencies relevant to the Program activities are the Kerala State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) and the State Forest Department. The KSPCB is 27 responsible for (a) issuance of consents to establish and to operate to contractor for all civil works prior to their commencement; this is under the Air Act and Water Act; (b) issuance of authorizations as per the BMW Management Rules 2016, and monitor the compliance of various provisions and conditions of the authorization. Further district Level Monitoring Committees under District Collector shall monitor and submit half- yearly reports on compliance to the State Level Advisory Committee headed by the State Health Secretary which shall monitor implementation every six months. The State Forest Department is responsible for issuing the tree cutting clearance if such incidental tree cutting is required for the civil works being planned under this Program. This is particularly relevant to the Roads sector wherein minimal tree cutting may be required as a part of road rehabilitation works. Related to the judiciary, under the National Green Tribunal (NGT) Act 2010, the Tribunal issues orders for effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources. Given its statutory importance, these require the attention of the highest level of the State Government. Assessment These two state-level regulatory agencies – KSPCB and State Forest Department - are in place and their procedures for compliance are also being administered. The compliance monitoring is being periodically undertaken. The state-level systems pertaining to regulations are streamlined and the organizational capacities are sufficient. The Program activities form a rather small part of the overall responsibilities of these regulatory agencies. The environmental impacts associated with the Bank’s Program are localized, minimal and reversible. There are only low environmental risks. The findings were that there are no gaps in these state-level systems vis-à-vis the Bank’s Program that needs to be addressed. Pertaining to NGT cases, the findings revealed that GoK takes the required follow-up action as per the judiciary directions received. Under this Program, these are particularly to the WRM sector as the Pamba basin is one of the NGT areas of attention. This will need to be considered and suitably incorporated as per the prevailing orders during the Program period. 5.3 Program-level organizational systems 5.3.1 Agriculture – Department of Agriculture Description The Department of Agriculture will be the main implementing agency of the activities in this sector. The main activities are examined from the organizational systems on environmental management: • In the promotion and strengthening of Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs) across state, capacity-building will be done. Training material will have to be developed and implemented. These will offer an opportunity to integrate basics of environmental management as per the crop focus of the respective FPOs. • In the roll-out of the Integrated Agriculture Management Information System, it is not proposed to include environmental concerns in the first phase and the subsequent 28 phases have not yet been designed. This will again offer an opportunity to integrate environmental aspects if this is planned during the Program period. • In promoting and strengthening of agroecologically relevant farming systems across the state through realigned crop assistance schemes and stakeholder capacity building, positive environmental effects are expected as the selected crop will be most suitable for the agroecological conditions. In the training content that will be a part of the capacity building, these positive effects would be emphasized. As mentioned earlier, such training content needs to be developed and made a part of the organizational systems. There is no environmental cell or division in the Department of Agriculture that will be associated with the Program activities. Environmental effects are generally managed within the agriculture functions at the various levels of the Department. Assessment As part of the capacity building, there is an opportunity to integrate the basics of environmental management. Suitable training content needs to be developed and made a part of the organizational systems for Program implementation. Given that the nature of environmental effects are positive and intrinsically embedded in the Program, there is no need for a separate environmental cell or division. The environmental mainstreaming is better accomplished through training that will contribute to organizational strengthening. Overall, in terms of environmental performance, the Department of Agriculture is clearly committed to promote environmentally responsible practices. Apart from the move to agroecological zone approach, the Department also was also found to support organic farming and similar initiatives to reduce the use of chemicals in agriculture. Their capacity was found to be adequate and can be further strengthened as outlined. 5.3.2 CC and DRM – KSDMA Description KSDMA will be the main implementing agency of the activities in this sector. Enhancing the DRM plans with climate information is the main activity. This will be done in close collaboration with LSGD as the DRM plans with climate information is for the 263 LSGIs in the Pamba basin. Initially, the plans will be developed and subsequently their increased consideration of climate information will be facilitated through an incentive mechanism. The template for DRM plans include environmental concerns. There is no separate environmental cell or division in the KSDMA. Environmental effects are generally integrated and managed along with other KSDMA activities. Assessment In this investment planning initiative, environmental concerns have been identified in the template for DRM plans10 at the LSG levels. These will suffice in terms of addressing environmental concerns of the DRM plans. With KSDMA’s technical capacity to develop 10 Local Self Government - Disaster Management Plan: Framework, Template and Guidelines, KSDMA and KILA, January 2020. 29 these plans using relevant information from various sectors, no separate environmental cell or division is required. However, in the capacity building that KSDMA will undertake, it is necessary to cover the management of environmental effects as part of the overall training content when it is developed and during implementation. Their capacity was found to be adequate. 5.3.3 DRFI and Social Protection – Department of Revenue Description The Program activities pertain to financial transfers and therefore have no environmental relevance. Assessment Assessment was not undertaken as it was not relevant. 5.3.4 Fiscal reform and Debt Management – Department of Finance Description The Program activities pertain to financial transfers and therefore have no environmental relevance. Assessment Assessment was not undertaken as it was not relevant. 5.3.5 Health – Department of Health Description The Program will be implemented by the Department of Health & Family Welfare Department, Government of Kerala (GoK) and would use existing GoK and National Health Mission (NHM) structures at state and district levels. The Program will be implemented through the State Program Management Unit (SPMU) and its units at the district and Block Program Management Unit (BPMU). The SPMU would be responsible for day-to-day project planning, implementation, technical support, monitoring, and fiduciary management. The Program includes two results areas as follows: (i) Building and strengthening diagnostics systems at district level and (ii) strengthening Integrated Disease Surveillance Program (IDSP) and institutionalizing One Health approach to identify and respond to zoonotic disease outbreaks in a timely manner. Establishing new and rehabilitation of existing laboratories will include minor construction-related EHS impacts, which are best addressed through adequate EHS provisions in the bid / contract documents. Further, health care facilities – including laboratories – have to adhere to the BMW Rules. There is organizational capacity within the Department to address these BMW issues even though this is not referred as an environmental cell or division. There is an overall coordinator in the Department on BMW issues. And, there are assigned responsibilities at the 30 different levels, i.e. state and health care facility. Related to the other results area, the organizational systems to link disease with environmental issues – waste management and sanitation – is being done though not explicitly documented. Assessment In terms of organizational systems dealing with civil works for enhancing diagnostic laboratories, the inclusion of EHS provisions in the bid / contract documents is required to be done. As these environmental effects are construction-related, localized and minor, this would suffice. For the streamlining BMW in these new laboratories, there is capacity within the Department to ensure that these are done in compliance with the BMW rules, i.e. obtaining the authorizations and streamlining its management in the laboratory facilities. Though the contribution of these new laboratories towards bio-medical waste will be miniscule, it is required to ensure that these are properly streamlined. Related to the disease surveillance, though the organizational systems are in place. It will be useful to review in order to determine how this can be strengthened in a manner that more follow-up action by the LSGIs is done to improve the waste management and sanitation practices. Having documented systems and procedures vis-à-vis surveillance of disease due to environmental causes should be examined as a part of the capacity building under the institutional development activities. During the stakeholder consultations, the issue of the state’s overall BMW management was brought up. Building the overall capacity and contributing to the state’s adequacy is well beyond the scope of this Program. 5.3.6 Roads – PWD Description The Program will be implemented by the Public Works Department (PWD) with support of primarily the institutions like Kerala State Transport Project (KSTP) and Kerala Highway Research Institute (KHRI). Broadly, the Program includes institutional development pertaining to Road Maintenance Management Systems (RMMS) on the one part. And investment activities that pertain to the core road network (CRN) to resilient standards and long-term performance-based road maintenance contracts in the Pamba river basin on the other part. The institutional development on RMMS and investments through the maintenance contracts will be done by PWD’s maintenance cell. The investments have been so chosen that they have limited or no environmental impacts. As the Maintenance cell has no environmental capacity, the PWD will be engaging external Technical Audit consultants who will support in the event of any environmental incidents. The contractors engaged with the maintenance contracts will have environmental capacity to adhere to the bid / contractual’s EHS requirements. The road rehabilitation in the CRN to resilient standards will be done by the PWD with project-level institutional arrangements akin to that of the Kerala State Transport Project. Here again, the investments have been so chosen that they have limited environmental impacts, i.e. not in ecosensitive areas / forests and limited tree-cutting. As the PWD’s in- 31 house environmental capacity is weak, arrangements have been made to support through external supervision consultants, who will be available till the completion of the investment. The contracts engaged with these road rehabilitation contracts will have the environmental capacity to adhere to the EHS provisions in the bids / contracts. Assessment As the road investments have been so chosen that the environmental impacts are minimal, the proposed arrangements of having Technical Audit consultants (for maintenance roads) and Supervision Consultants (for CRN rehabilitation) to support the PWD were found to be satisfactory. Further the bid / contract documents will integrate environmental management plans to be implemented and also other EHS provisions that the contractors will need to necessarily adhere with. However, GoK’s effort to build in- house capacity in the PWD requires to be continued, and environmental management training should be integrated with all capacity building initiatives throughout the Program period. 5.3.7 Urban – LSGD Description The LSGD will be the prime implementing agency for this program. The Rebuild Kerala Initiative will provide oversight and any support required for procurement, financial management, environmental and social aspects. Within LSGD’s jurisdiction, the activities associated with town planning will be executed through the Department of Town and Country Planning. LSGD will directly interface with selected ULBs for supporting and facilitating project development and the investment planning. Over a four-year period, this Program will strengthen the capacity for risk-informed urban planning and implementation. This will result in the preparation of risk-informed master plans and priority action plans for at least four ULBs, one in each district of the Pamba River Basin. To accomplish this, the program will be implemented in two parallel tracks – capacity building and risk-informed Master Planning. Both the capacity building and the risk- informed master planning have to integrate environmental effects. The training content for the capacity building and the guidelines for the master planning will be part of the organizational systems. These will have to include environmental considerations in its design and its implementation. No separate organizational set-up like an environmental cell or division exists in the LSGD or the Department of Town and Country Planning. Assessment Though LSGD does not have an organizational set-up related to environmental management, this may not be necessary given the activities proposed under this Program. Integrating environmental considerations in the organizational systems can be accomplished with the planned external agency support that should also include environmental capacity as well. That would be adequate to address possible issues under this Program. 32 5.3.8 Water Resources - WRD Description The Kerala Water Resources Department (WRD) will be the implementing agency for the Program activities that aim to establish and operationalize RBCMA and to initiate implementation of priority investments in the Pamba river. The associated agencies / departments will include (but not be limited to) the Kerala State Disaster Management Authority (KSDMA), and the Departments of Agriculture, Local Self Government (LSGD), Land Commissioner, Environment, Forests, and Planning and Finance, among others. WRD will be the nodal agency various training and capacity building activities, in doing the investment planning and initiating the implementation of critical investments. WRD has been associated with many externally funded projects and is aware of the environmental safeguard requirements. For instance, recently WRD has undertaken ESIA and ESMP studies, and integrated these with the bid / contract documents in their dam projects. Though WRD doesn’t have a separate environmental cell or division, they have the capacity to arrange to get the various studies done and to ensure the implementation of environmental management requirements in these investment projects. Assessment The Program activities are largely institutional development (including investment planning) in nature. For such activities, the environmental capacity needs to be mainstreamed and this is best achieved through training and capacity building of all the WRD staff involved with operationalizing RCBMA. Establishing a separate environmental cell or division may not be necessary. The training and guidelines that will be a part of their organizational systems require to be adequate environmental management content. Given the focus of the State Pollution Control Board and the National Green Tribunal on the Pamba river basin, it is required to integrate good environmental practices in their organizational systems. WRD’s capacity to address environmental safeguards in large projects will suffice to ensure that these are considered in the context of the investments that will be identified during the Program period and when the implementation is initiated. WRD’s capacity was found to be adequate to address issues under this Program. 33 6 Assessment of the borrower systems against the three environmental core principles 6.1 Introduction In this chapter, the borrower systems is assessed against the three environmental core principles and the associated key planning elements. In carrying out this assessment, the guiding questions given in the analytical framework provided in the ESSA Guidance have been used. Its application helped to identify areas in which environmental systems are consistent with Bank principles, those in which systems are functioning well, and those in which there may be important system gaps that need to be addressed before or during implementation. The consistency of the Program systems with these principles on two levels: (1) as systems that are defined in laws, regulations, and procedures (those external to the Program institutions), and (2) the capacity of Program institutions to effectively implement the Program’s E & S system (those internal to Program institutions). The three core principles 1-3 are of environmental relevance and borrower systems are assessed against them. Annex 1 includes the summary of the core environmental principles. 6.2 Core Principle #1: E & S management systems Both the regulatory systems and the organizational systems were examined vis-à-vis the Core principle. The GoI / GoK’s framework (laws and regulations) - environmental, forests and pollution control acts and rules - were assessed and found to be adequate to manage the environmental effects of the Program activities. At the outset, the applicability of the framework is limited and only to the investment activities / civil works proposed in the PWD, Health Department and WRD. Even these activities have only low and moderate impacts, and hence not a major focus of the framework. In relation to civil works, there are procedural requirements such as contractor has responsibilities for obtaining consents from the SPCB or permissions for tree-cutting from the Forest Department. There are performance standards that have to be met. The respective department coordinating the Program activities including civil works, e.g. PWD, have the capacity to incorporate contractual provisions for compliance, supervise their implementation and ensure adherence. The same is the case with the WRD and Health Department, where the civil works, associated environmental effects and legal & regulatory requirements are even more limited. The on-the-ground performance was found to be satisfactory. For externally funded projects, recognizing that their in-house capacity is not sufficient, the PWD systems include the conduct of the ESIA/ESMPs that studies laws and regulations, including compliance requirements in the bid / contract documents, and supervising compliance. And, the WRD is also undertaking large externally funded projects, e.g. dam rehabilitation, for which environmental management is implemented. By and large, the capacity to administer legal and regulatory requirements exists both in the agencies and in the concerned Departments. At the Program level, the implementing department’s in-house capacity will be strengthened through use of external consultants and EHS provisions in the bid / contract documents on EHS management in the sectors where civil works have been planned. For 34 instance, in the Roads sector, the PWD conducted ESIA/ESMPs with support from external consultants. The PWD is also seeking the support of external supervision consultants to monitor / supervise and the contractors assign responsibility to ensure the implementation of good environmental practices. In WRD, there are large projects for which the capacity is being externally arranged. Similar such sourcing of external capacity may be required once the civil works are identified. In the health sector, the civil works are limited and EHS provisions in the bid / contract documents will be required and are included as a part of the PAP recommendations. Related to the institutional development activities, it was found that there is sufficient awareness, competence and guidelines with the department systems to ensure that environmental issues are appropriately considered. For instance, in the CC and DRM sector, the guidance for developing DRM plans includes environmental considerations. The environmental mainstreaming required in the context of the Program activities in the different sectors should be built through training and capacity-building programs. The consistency with Core Principle #1 was confirmed. 6.3 Core Principle #2: Natural habitat and cultural properties The GoI / GoK’s regulatory systems pertaining to natural habitats, particularly forests and ecosensitive areas were assessed and found to be adequate to manage the adverse environmental effects if these arise during implementation. The forest clearance for the diversion of forest land and compensatory afforestation, e.g. for tree cutting, are mandatory. Constructions in the proximity of cultural heritage sites such as protected monuments are also regulated and there is a guideline in place to address chance findings. The Program activities do not include environmental effects on natural habitats or cultural heritage sites. There is clearly no significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats or physical cultural heritage is envisaged. In the unlikely case of any such environmental effects, the respective Departments were found to be competent in addressing the regulatory requirements. The consistency to this principle was confirmed. 6.4 Core Principle #3: Public and worker safety The regulatory systems include the Building And Other Construction Workers (Regulation Of Employment And Conditions Of Service) Act 1996 and Kerala Rules, 1998. The Act and Rules mandate health and safety compliance for all civil works, and is regulated by the Labour Commissionerate. While the systems are in place, the enforcement needs to be strengthened. Therefore, worker and public safety are generally managed through provisions in the bid / contract documents that the respective Departments – having civil works - will be using to procure its contractors. The provisions will be made part of agreements with contractors and will be monitored. Given the prevailing Covid-19 pandemic situation, this should also include additional requirements of the use of PPEs (face masks), physical distancing and handwashing practices that may be required of the contractor and sub-contractor personnel.11 All of these have been included as PAP recommendations. With this further strengthening, consistency to this core principle was also ensured in the Program design. 11 World Bank ESF / Safeguards Interim Note: Covid-19 Considerations in Construction / Civil Works Projects, April 2020 35 7 Consultations and disclosure 7.1 Introduction This chapter includes the main findings of the consultations during the conduct of the draft ESSA between November 2020 and January 2021. There were consultations conducted by the Bank team as well as by the Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA), which is the state’s apex institution in the area of local governance and participatory planning. Using the collected information, the draft ESSA was prepared. The findings and recommendations of the draft ESSA will be shared through a stakeholder workshop to be conducted in January 2021. This chapter also informs of the disclosure processes adopted for the ESSA during its preparation and also during implementation. This chapter provides reference to the Annexes that include the summary of the consultations during the conduct of the ESSA (Annex 5) and the stakeholder workshop (Annex 6 – to be included) as well. 7.2 Stakeholder consultations 7.2.1 State-level consultations These consultations were carried out both the Bank’s ESSA team and by KILA. The highlights relevant to environmental systems are compiled in the following table: No. Sector Feedback - Highlights 1 Agriculture • Agroecological Zone (AEZ) approach with agroecological management units will lead to selecting the most suitable crop for particular ecosystems. This will lead to less environmental damage, i.e. less fertilizer use, less pesticide use and less erosion. It is expected to be beneficial for the environment. • Building the relevant environmental capacity in the Farmer Producer Organization as part of the overall capacity strengthening will be required. • In the Integrated Agricultural MIS, the first is to focus on information of economic and financial relevance to the farmer. Subsequently, this will be extended to include relevant environmental information as well. 2 CC and DRM • In the template for disaster management plans for the LSGIs, there is inclusion of environmental considerations such as environment-friendly roads, water & soil conservation, green buildings and adoption of the green protocol. • Flood, land use changes, watershed management and appropriate capacity building of LSGIs should be done in an integrated manner. 3 Disaster Risk • There are no environmental effects and hence Financing environmental systems are not relevant. 36 No. Sector Feedback - Highlights 4 Fiscal / Debt • There are no environmental effects and hence environmental systems are not relevant. 5 Health • There is only one bio-medical waste disposal facility in the state. This is a constraint and disposal facilities need to be expanded. • For liquid waste, the treatment systems are not adequate. Further there are no municipal sewer network except for Thiruvanathapuram. Therefore, there are liquid waste disposal constraints. • ISDP data for 2019 revealed that (i) there is the highest occurrence of deaths due to Leptospirosis; and (ii) there is the highest number of cases of diarrhoea. Both these are due to poor solid waste and sanitation practices. 6 Roads • None of the roads in the Program pass through ecosensitive areas such as forests and wildlife areas. • To manage the construction-related impacts during the road rehabilitation, the contractor requires to have environmental capacity. Further, there will be environmental capacity within the supervision consultants to support the PWD. • For the long-term performance-based maintenance, there will be supervision consultants to support the PWD in overseeing the contract. These supervision consultants will interface between the PWD and the contractors; and provide the necessary support on environmental issues as well. • There will be no widening in any of the roads rehabilitation that are being planned under the Program. There may be some incidental tree-cutting that will be done after taking the required permissions. 7 Urban • Risk informed plans will be beneficial. This should necessarily include environmental risks. One of the main urban problems is the conversion of land use (paddy lands, wetlands and hilly lands), which results in environmental problems indirectly. Town and Country Planning Department will need the capacity to develop these risk informed plans and facilitate the adoption by the LSGs. • Finding land for waste disposal, preventing the conversion of paddy land and adopting proper scientific approaches to planning are the main issues. 8 WRM • In the river basin approach, environmental management has to be integrated. Capacity building of the WRD institutions will be required in order to achieve effective environmental performance. • WRD has done a number of externally aided projects (e.g. dams) and is familiar with the environmental studies such 37 No. Sector Feedback - Highlights as ESIA and ESMPs, which are used to manage environmental impacts. • The Pamba River Basin is particularly important from an environmental point of view as it has been a focus of the State Pollution Control Board in terms of polluted stretches and also the National Green Tribunal in the aftermath of the floods. In finalizing the river basin plan, the environmental concerns should be duly considered and suitably integrated. • River pollution due to drainage outfalls, pesticide run-off and lack of a scientific approach are the primary problems that needs to be addressed in an integrated manner. 7.2.2 Summary of community consultations The highlights relevant to environmental systems from the consultations with the gram panchayats and municipalities (covering 328 community members) in the four districts done by KILA were as follows: No. Sector Feedback - Highlights 1 Alappuzha • Agriculture: AEU-based planning will help protect the (Mannar, environment. Pandanad and • Roads: These assets are inhibitors of natural flow and there Kainakari is a lack of proper scientific approaches in road design & Panchayat; and construction. Alappuzha • Urban: Capacity strengthening of LSGIs to manage the Municipality) main problems – floods, water contamination and solid waste pollution – is required. • WRM: Depth of the Pamba river is decreasing, river mining should be regulated an integrated approach is necessary. 2 Idukki • Agriculture: Pollution caused by chemical fertilizers, loss of (Peermade, fertility and soil erosion are the main problems. Peruvanthanam, • DRM: The planning should be based on geographic, Vandiperiyar climatic and environmental features of a particular and location. Kumily • Roads: Management of road construction is important, i.e. Panchayat) landslides, quarry management, accident management and worker use of safety gears • WRM: Water shortages and the need for conservation, protection of ponds and water bodies and rainwater harvesting are all important and the panchayats have a critical role in the Pamba river basin plan. 3 Kottayam • Agriculture: The current farming practices are leading to (Kooruthodu, adverse environmental impacts. And, the FPO capacity on Mundakayam dealing with environmental issues have to be built. and 38 Manimala • Roads: Drainage, air & dust pollution, tree cutting, roads Panchayats; and not weather resistant, water-logging and unscientific Changanaserri approaches to design and construction. Municipality) • Urban: Unscientific road constructions, degraded canal system, inefficient drainage system, drinking water shortage, decreasing attention to agriculture sector, air and water pollution, excessive waste generation and absence of waste management are the key environmental issues • WRM: River depth is a key issue, integrated approach is required and Government & civil society should work together. 4 Pathanamthitta • DRM: LSGIs are not capable. Need to improve their capacity (Ranni, Perunad through training and awareness on different sectors. and Aranmula • Roads: Air pollution, worker protection and conversion of Panchayats; and paddy land are the key issues. Thiruvalla • Urban: Drinking water and sanitation, drainage and Municipality) sewage systems are the main issues. • WRM: Past constructions were unscientific, sand mining in the rivers, rock falls due to deforestation and waste dumping are issues that need to be addressed in an integrated manner. 7.2.3 Consultations feedback - How addressed in the Program All the feedback obtained from the various stakeholder consultations have been considered both from a Program design and ESSA perspectives. On the key environmental issues and the lack of capacity within the LSGIs, these will be addressed as a part of the Program’s support in developing institutions to create the foundations for multidimensional resilience. This will address the feedback pertaining to Agriculture, DRM, Health, Roads, Urban and WRM. The feedback related to the investments that will be in the four districts along the Pamba river basin, namely Alappuzha, Idukki, Kottayam, and Pathanamthitta, will have to be addressed through building the capacity in the three sectors - Health, Roads and WRM. These are primarily related to managing civil works through EHS provisions in the bid / contract documents and streamlined monitoring & supervision. Certain capacity already exists within the implementing departments. In the light of the feedback, these were re-examined and the ESSA’s Program Action Plan has included measures to enhance the capacity where necessary, e.g. in the Health Department to manage the construction-related EHS impacts. Annex 4 compiles the highlights in detail. Against each feedback, how this has been addressed in the Program design and ESSA has been examined. The overarching feedback about adopting an integrated approach between implementing departments and between GoK and civil society organizations was an important one from the community consultations. This has already been considered through the multi-sector Program design at the local level. In specific, the basin management approach of the Pamba river is aimed to encourage such an integrated approach. Building environmental 39 content in the capacity building initiatives pertaining to the river basin management has been identified as one of the Program Action Plans. 7.2.4 ESSA Stakeholder workshops The two mid-February 2021 ESSA stakeholder workshop provided additional feedback both to the Program design and the draft ESSA reports. The main feedback was to the activities in the WRM sector and in the Pamba basin. The highlights were the following: No. Sector Feedback – Highlights 1 WRM • Sabarimala is one of the largest annual pilgrimage sites in the world where an estimated 50 million devotees are visiting every year. How is that addressed? • How in this particular geographical area is the program going to foster the existing natural resources and address the core issues? • The conservation of Pamba Riverine Ecosystem and abatement of pollution especially solid waste management and legacy waste management system may be given much attention. • What about the Pamba Action Plan? • For the effective implementation, the institutional arrangement is vital. Coordination among agencies is the key. There is a need to involve civil society organisations along with the LSGIs. This has to be a massive effort. 2 General • What are the measures suggesting for the integration of different institutions and prevention and production of anticipated environmental hazards? During the workshops, the Bank provided a detailed response on how the Program design and the ESSA address the issues raised. A more detailed description of the feedback and how these were addressed through the Program Design / ESSA are included in Annex 6. 7.2.5 Email feedback to RKI There was one feedback obtained from a Trivandrum resident and a nature / environmental educationist opined that systemic and integrated approach was not adequately adopted in this multi-sector program. The Task Team is of the opinion that current Program design pilots an integrated approach towards planning, which includes bringing in concept of river basin planning and crowding-in interventions from multiple departments in the same basin. In particular, the introduction of the river basin management approach in the Pamba and realising the integrated outcomes is an initial step for a more comprehensive adoption of systemic thinking and ecology-oriented planning in Government functioning. Further, the suggestions received will form a part of the training and institutional development activities in the different sectors. Building environmental content in the capacity building initiatives pertaining to the river basin management has been identified as one of the Program Action Plans. In the light of 40 the suggestions received, the environmental content will be enhanced to include ecology- based integrated and systemic thinking considerations. 7.3 Disclosure 7.3.1 Draft ESSA reports The draft ESSA reports – the draft ESSA Summary Report (Part A), this draft ESSA Environmental Report (Part B) and the draft ESSA Social Report (Part C) will be disclosed on Monday, February 8, 2021 in the RKI website. This disclosure included the English version. The draft ESSA Summary Report (Part A) was translated in the local language - Malayalam – and will be disclosed in the RKI website on Tuesday, February 9, 2021. Comments, suggestions and any other feedback will be requested along with this website disclosure. Further, all the invitees to the ESSA stakeholder workshop - GoK officials from the relevant implementing departments and other stakeholder (community and civil society organizations) representatives - will be sent the draft ESSA Summary Report about a week prior to the conduct of the workshop. Disclosure to the invitees will also accomplished through this approach. At the workshop, the Bank Task team will present a brief overview of the Program and will share the findings – including environmental - in the draft ESSA report, and seek feedback from the participants. Disclosure to the invitees in the form of a presentation was also accomplished through this approach. 7.3.2 Final ESSA reports The feedback obtained through the disclosure will be used to strengthen the Program design and the draft ESSA reports. The final versions of ESSA reports will be used to replace the drafts in the RKI website. And, the final versions will also be disclosed in the World Bank external website. 7.3.3 During Program Implementation On its website, RKI will disclose information on the Program as a whole and about the ESSA implementation in particular. This will be periodically kept up-to-date. Further, the disclosure of information will be done in line with the Right to Information Act 2005. This mandates timely response to citizen requests for government information. Further, Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act lays down the information which should be disclosed by Public Authorities on a suo moto or proactive basis. 7.4 Grievance Mechanism The assessment of the grievance mechanism was elaborately carried out under the social assessment. As grievance mechanism is the same for both environmental and social issues and there are more community / public grievances than environmental ones, this is covered in the draft ESSA social report. At the coordination level, within Rebuild Kerala Initiative (RKI), Project Management Support Services (PMSS) will be responsible for implementation, coordination, monitoring and evaluation. Their services will include 41 grievance management as well. And, within each of the sectors and their institutions, there are separate grievance mechanisms. Gaps and institutional strengthening requirements have been identified as a part of the social assessment. These are included in the draft ESSA Summary Report and the draft ESSA Social Report. 42 8 Findings and recommendations 8.1 Introduction This chapter includes the findings and recommendations emerging from the analysis presented in the earlier chapters. As part of the findings, the Program exclusions and highlights both on environmental issues have been included. And, as part of the recommendations, the ESSA inputs to the Program Action Plan and to the Implementation Support Plan covering environmental issues have been included. In these inputs, the focus is on strengthening the environmental systems relevant to the Program activities in the various sectors addressed. 8.2 Findings 8.2.1 Program exclusions The Bank’s Program was reviewed to ensure that the activities do not include those not eligible for PforR financing. It was confirmed that: PforR financing eligibility Verification notes No limited or significant conversion or None of the already identified investments degradation of critical natural habitats or – in Roads, WRM and Health sectors - are critical cultural heritage sites; in the vicinity of any natural habitats or cultural heritage sites. And, guidelines for their non-inclusion in the investments that will be identified during the program period. No air, water, or soil contamination None of the already identified investments leading to significant adverse impacts on – in Roads, WRM and Health sectors – have the health or safety of individuals, significant EHS impacts. Impacts are communities, or ecosystems; limited, localized, reversible and low-to- moderate in nature. No workplace conditions that expose None of the already identified investments workers to significant risks to health and – in Roads, WRM and Health sectors – have personal safety; such workplace conditions prone to worker health and safety risks. No adverse environmental impacts No such large-scale impacts. All are covering large geographical areas, limited, localized, reversible and low-to- including transboundary impacts, or moderate in nature. global impacts such as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; No significant cumulative, induced, or Even though the investments are in the indirect impacts; Pamba river basin, none of the impacts are large enough to result in any cumulative, induced and indirect. In fact, the Program activities are expected to enhance the environmental quality of the Pamba river basin. 43 There were no potentially significant, adverse environmental impacts in the Program design. During the implementation, all such activities shall remain excluded. As part of the Bank’s implementation support, it will need to be ensured that none of the activities identified during the Program period deviate from these PforR eligibility requirements. 8.3 Highlights The following are the main highlights from the findings: • Overall: The Program activities, particularly the institutional development and the investment planning has the potential to deliver significant environmental benefits, e.g. in the CC and DRM, Urban and WRM sectors. These can be enhanced and sustained through strengthening of the environmental systems. • Overall: The Program investment activities will have localized, reversible and minor environmental impacts. These impacts are not within eco-sensitive or culturally sensitive areas. Some of these impacts are relevant to worker and public safety as well. All of these can be mitigated through management measures for which the arrangements were found to be satisfactory. There are some gaps for which recommendations for strengthening systems have been made in the Program Action Plan. • Overall: Most of the Program activities do not fall under the purview of regulatory systems except for civil works – Health, Roads and WRM – which will require the contractor to get consents from the SPCB as required. These are simple, standard and well-established regulatory requirements. • Overall: The environmental sector institutions such as the DoECC are not integrally connected with the sectoral environmental issues and the sector departments. Therefore, their expertise is not reaching the sectors. Also, their own expertise is not evolving with the sector experiences, i.e. practices being adopted and the performance being achieved. • Agriculture: The move towards the agroecological approach will lead to appropriate crop selection that is consistent with the natural features of the agroecological unit. This will lead to reducing the use of fertilisers and pesticides during crop cultivation. This will bring positive environmental benefits in terms of reducing chemical run-offs. No separate systems strengthening is required to enhance these benefits. • CC and DRM: The LSG’s DRM templates and guidelines are already take into account a number of environmental considerations. These organizational systems should be sufficient to mitigate the impacts when the Program moves to implementing these initiatives. • Health: Improving the disease surveillance has the potential to link particular diseases with possible waste management and / or sanitation issues within the community. Strengthening systems will assist in taking preventive action, which is to address waste management and / or sanitation issues effectively. And, in the case of expanded health care diagnostic facilities, streamlining BMW systems will be necessary and should be done with the support of the SPCB. • Roads: Rehabilitating the CRN and establishing the long-term performance based contracts for road maintenance – both in the Pamba basin – will have localized and reversible negative environmental impacts. Given the limited environmental capacity of the PWD, the Program has already included strengthening of environmental systems in its design, i.e. through the provision for supervision consultants for the 44 CRN rehabilitation contracts and technical audit consultants for the road maintenance contracts. • Urban: Having risk-informed master plans and identifying priority plans will consider climate risks, disaster risks and others including environmental risks. Such upfront considerations through the proposed systems strengthening will go a long way in avoiding unnecessary negative environmental aspects as well. • WRM: By structure, making operational RCBMA establishes an integrated approach that augurs well for better environmental management within the river basin. Training and capacity building on environmental management should be included so that there is environmental systems strengthening of the sector as a whole. As the Pamba river basin has been a focus of the NGT after the floods of 2018 and also due to certain polluted stretches, it is important to ensure that the Program activities incorporate all the stakeholder concerns adequately. During the Program concept stage, the environmental risk rating was indicated as substantial as the nature of the investments was not confirmed then. Based on the review of the portfolio of Program activities, it is clear that (a) the already identified investment activities have been chosen keeping in view that the environmental impacts will be minor, e.g. not in the vicinity of eco-sensitive arears or will require cutting of a limited number of trees if at all; (b) the investment activities to be identified during the Program period will necessarily adhere to the eligibility criteria guideline that is consistent with the Bank’s PforR eligibility for financing; and (c) the existing systems with some strengthening will be able to address the low-to-moderate environmental impacts / risks associated with the Program. Given these findings, the environmental risk rating is categorized as moderate. 8.4 Recommendations & Inputs 8.4.1 ESSA Recommendations The following table includes the list of activities to be undertaken towards environmental systems strengthening in the context of the Program activities: 45 No. Sector Description Timeline Indicator for completion E1 Agriculture Develop relevant End of Year 1 Evidence of environmental content in the and the rest the conduct of training and capacity building of project training that to be given to AEUs and FPOs. period includes Conduct such training for environmental mainstreaming environmental content considerations. E2 Health Review and strengthen the bid End of Year 1 Standard bid / / contract provisions contract pertaining to EHS for civil documents of works when the new or DoHFW expansion of IPHLs is include EHS undertaken provisions E3 Health Develop and conduct focused End of Year 1 Evidence of staff training to streamline and the rest the training BMW management systems in of project material and the new or expanded IPHLs period the conduct of training in IPHLs E4 WRM Develop relevant Throughout Evidence of environmental content in the the project training training and capacity building period conducted pertaining to institutional that includes development and investment environmental planning. Conduct such training content for mainstreaming environmental considerations. E5 RKI / Facilitate a regular dialogue Throughout Evidence of Environment between the environmental the project the periodic sector institutions such as the period meetings DoECC and SPCB and sector facilitating the institutions to enable a two- dialogue, way capacity-building. discussions and field visits E6 RKI Monitor and report the Quarterly and Evidence of progress on environmental throughout the periodic performance of the Program the project environmental activities as a part of the overall period performance Program reporting reports 8.4.2 ESSA inputs to the Program Action Plan Based on the ESSA recommendations, the Program Action Plan has included environmental activities which is included in the following table. 46 Action Source DLI Responsibility Timing and Completion Description # Tasks Measurement Incorporating ESSA NA RKI and Continuous Incorporation of environmental implementing and to environment management agencies commence compliance in through plans within three plans, bid and / or bid months of documents for the documents in loan civil works / civil works / effectiveness investments, investments, and environmental Inclusion of safeguards environmental content in safeguard training & modules in capacity building training & capacity programs building programs 8.4.3 ESSA Inputs to the Implementation Support Plan The Bank’s Program focuses on institutional development, investment planning and capital investment activities. Of these, the Bank’s implementation support should focus largely on further building the environmental management capacity as a part of the institutional development. With regard to the capital investments, the Bank’s implementation support should also supervise compliance to contractual requirements and good EHS practices so that no risks ensue. The sectors of focus will be WRM and Agriculture for the institutional development activities and the Roads for their investments in building climate resilience. 47 Annex 1: Summary of ESSA Core Principles and Exclusion List Summary of ESSA Core Environmental Principles Core Principle #1: Program E&S management systems are designed to (a) promote E&S sustainability in the Program design; (b) avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts; and (c) promote informed decision-making relating to a Program’s E&S effects Core Principle #2: Program E&S management systems are designed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts on natural habitats and physical cultural resources resulting from the Program. Program activities that involve the significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats or critical physical cultural heritage are not eligible for PforR financing. Core Principle #3: Program E&S management systems are designed to protect public and worker safety against the potential risks associated with (a) the construction and/or operation of facilities or other operational practices under the Program; (b) exposure to toxic chemicals, hazardous wastes, and otherwise dangerous materials under the Program; and (c) reconstruction or rehabilitation of infrastructure located in areas prone to natural hazards. Exclusion List Under the Policy, activities that are “judged to be likely to have significant adverse impacts that are sensitive, diverse, or unprecedented on the environment and/or affected people are not eligible for financing and are excluded from the Program.” More specifically, PforR financing should not be used to support programs, or activities within programs, that in the Bank’s opinion involve the following: • Significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats or critical cultural heritage sites; • Air, water, or soil contamination leading to significant adverse impacts on the health or safety of individuals, communities, or ecosystems; • Workplace conditions that expose workers to significant risks to health and personal safety; • Large-scale changes in land use or access to land and/or natural resources; • Adverse E&S impacts covering large geographical areas, including transboundary impacts, or global impacts such as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; • Significant cumulative, induced, or indirect impacts; 48 Annex 2: Environmental Screening of activities – benefits, impacts and risks12 Program Activities Environmental Impacts, Risks & +ve Benefits / - ve / nil Sector: Agriculture (i) promoting and strengthening of Opportunity to integrate +ve Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs) environmental content in the across State; strengthening of FPOs. (ii) roll-out of the Integrated Agriculture Opportunity to integrate +ve Management Information System; and environmental information to facilitate better farmer decisions. (iii) promotion and strengthening of AEZ / AEU approaches are +ve agroecologically relevant farming intrinsically environmentally systems across the State through responsible as the crop selection is realigned crop assistance schemes and based on the local ecosystems. stakeholder capacity building. Sector: CC and DRM (i) developing local level climate and Availability of data has the potential +ve disaster risk data; to lead to environmentally sound decisions. (ii) strengthening capacity of LSGs to Upfront considerations of all risks – +ve prepare risk informed local DRM plans; including environmental risks – has the potential to lead to environmentally sound decisions. (iii) developing a scoring matrix (the No environmental relevance nil Climate Action Tracker (CAT)) to track investments that are climate and disaster risk informed (or co-benefits); and (iv) pilot a system of financial incentives Promoting DRM and CC has the +ve to the 263 LSGs in the Pamba River Basin potential to lead to better to develop and activate local DRM plans environmental decisions. and achieve agreed co-benefits target. Sector: DRFI-SP (i) adopting a comprehensive DRFI No environmental relevance nil strategy; (ii) putting in place an institutional No environmental relevance nil framework for managing the DRFI system; (iii) building a Statewide adaptive safety No environmental relevance nil net system with parametric norms for 12 The environmental screening was done from the Concept Stage, and has been updated to reflect the list of Program activities at the Decision meeting in February 2021. 49 Program Activities Environmental Impacts, Risks & +ve Benefits / - ve / nil support and a payments platform which triggers disaster-related ex ante or ex post payments to bank accounts of affected populations, particularly the poor and vulnerable, in a transparent and timely manner; (iv) piloting such payments to vulnerable No environmental relevance nil fisherfolk families in the Pamba river basin districts; (v) rolling out market based risk transfer No environmental relevance nil mechanisms through agriculture risk insurance for targeted farmer groups in the Pamba river basin districts and leveraging additional funds from the market either by issuance of bonds and/or purchase of (re)insurance. Sector: Fiscal (i) establishing and strengthening a debt No environmental relevance nil management unit in the DoF; (ii) carrying out a debt restructuring No environmental relevance nil study and adopting a debt restructuring action plan; and (iii) implementing a debt management No environmental relevance nil plan to bring the State’s debt-to-GSDP ratio onto a more sustainable path. Sector: Health (i) operationalizing integrated PHLs There will be additional / -ve supporting disease surveillance and incremental increase in the enhanced clinical case management in generation of bio-medical wastes; Pamba River Basin districts; training of personnel and streamlining waste systems will be required. (ii) establishing a OH platform to Strengthened surveillance will +ve strengthen coordination, collaboration, establish a link between community networking, joint surveillance, waste management and sanitation preparedness and response to practices, and human health. This counteract health hazards; and will lead to better environmental management practices. (iii) piloting community-based OH Strengthened surveillance will +ve surveillance practices in Pamba River establish a link between community Basin districts and scaling it up if waste management and sanitation resources allow. practices, and human health. This 50 Program Activities Environmental Impacts, Risks & +ve Benefits / - ve / nil will lead to better environmental management practices. Sector: Roads (i) implementing the RMMS with a fully Building climate resilience in road +ve functional climate module; maintenance has the potential to improve environmental management as the designs will be appropriate (ii) establishing a RMMS cell with Opportunity to integrate +ve required in-house and contracted staff to environmental expertise pertaining produce annual capital, maintenance and to roads O & M in the RMMS cell. This climate works program, which would is particularly relevant to those inform state road sector planning and roads that require climate budget; and adaptation (iii) implementing climate-resilient CRN Construction-related environmental -ve road infrastructure and long-term impacts – though minor, localized OPBRC contracts in selected districts and reversible – will have to be along the Pamba river basin. properly managed using management measures. Sector: Urban (i) developing guidelines for risk- Opportunity to integrate +ve informed Master Planning; environmental risk considerations in these guidelines. (ii) developing capacity building Opportunity to integrate +ve programs for risk-informed planning and environmental content in the training Department of Town and planning and training of DTCP and Country Planning (DTCP) and ULBs; and ULBs (iii) preparing risk-informed Master Opportunity to integrate +ve Plans and Priority Action Plans for at environmental content in the risk- least four ULBs in Pamba River Basin, informed Master Plans after generating all the risk data and maps required and conducting stakeholder engagement. Sector: WRM (i) equipping the RBCMA with advanced Advanced water resources planning +ve water resources planning and analytical and analytical tools has the potential tools, along with the needed staff, to include environmental capacity and equipment; considerations and that will become integral to the staff capacity building (ii) operationalizing systems of Increased sophistication in +ve integrated reservoir operations, water integrated approaches in WRM has monitoring, data collection and 51 Program Activities Environmental Impacts, Risks & +ve Benefits / - ve / nil management, flood management the potential to contribute to better (including flood forecasting), evaluation environmental management. of environmental flows, and more efficient water allocation to agriculture, irrigation, domestic purposes, industrial, and other uses to improve productive and sustainable water use; (iii) fostering multi-sectoral and inter- Better inter-agency coordination has +ve agency coordination to mainstream the potential to result in better river climate resilience into water resources basin decisions, which are planning and management; environmentally sustainable. (iv) developing climate-proofed local Climate proofing of local-level +ve level district management plans; and district management plans has the potential to lead to environmentally sound decisions. (v) implementing priority investments Construction-related environmental +ve based on integrated river basin plans impacts – though minor, localized developed for Pamba River Basin and reversible – will have to be districts. properly managed using management measures. 52 Annex 3: Consultations - Suggested Checklist13 recommended for KILA DRM Results Area 1: Building systems and institutional capacities for managing shocks from climate change, natural disasters and disease outbreaks Program Activities: Description Dept / Agency Establish protocols for climate informed planning and tools LSGD, LSGIs, KSDMA for application [1] Train LSG staff on application of local DRM plans and LSGD, LSGIs, KSDMA climate proofing processes [1]LSGD, LSGIs, KSDMA Apply screening and planning tools for climate proofing/ LSGD, LSGIs, KSDMA smart investments in LSGIs [1,2]LSGD, LSGIs, KSDMA Note: 1. Institutional development (e.g. capacity building, training, institutional strengthening); 2. Investment planning and management; and 3. Infrastructure development and maintenance. Environmental Checklist: Sector / Department / District • What are the key environmental aspects to be considered in climate-informed planning? For establishing protocols, should KSDMA and LSGD’s capacity require strengthening? What are the gaps? What’s the type of capacity strengthening on environmental aspects? [Note: Capacity strengthening can be (a) environmental norms and guidelines; (b) environmental training and (c) incentives for environmental performance.] LSGIs / Community • What are the key environmental aspects to be considered in climate-informed planning? What is the capacity of the LSGIs in applying these tools in ensuring that environmental aspects are addressed? What are the gaps? What is the nature of capacity strengthening required in the LSGIs? • In LSGIs located in eco-sensitive areas or culturally sensitive areas, what are the additional issues that need to be addressed? Are there any particular gaps? What is the capacity strengthening in these LSGIs that will be required? 13 These checklists were based on the Program activities as of December 2020. The exact description and the wording of the Results areas and activities may vary from the later version of the Program Appraisal Document (PAD), e.g. those included in Annex 2. 53 DRFI / SP Results Area 1: Building systems and institutional capacities for managing shocks from climate change, natural disasters and disease outbreaks Program Activities: Description Dept / Agency Develop a unified registry for disaster assistance and social DoF, DoR, KSDMA, welfare benefit payments [1] DoA, Fisheries Develop guidelines on payment norms/modalities, DoF, DoR, KSDMA, administrative rules, and monitoring arrangements; [1] DoA, Fisheries Develop and adopt a comprehensive disaster risk finance and DoF, DoR, KSDMA, insurance strategy/action plan; [1] DoA, Fisheries Pilot at least two alternative risk transfer and insurance DoF, DoR, KSDMA, (parametric) products targeting both household/vulnerable DoA, Fisheries population and the state government.[1] Note: 1. Institutional development (e.g. capacity building, training, institutional strengthening); 2. Investment planning and management; and 3. Infrastructure development and maintenance. Environmental Checklist Sector / Department / District • Nil LSGIs / Community • Nil 54 Fiscal Results Area 1: Building systems and institutional capacities for managing shocks from climate change, natural disasters and disease outbreaks Program Activities Description Dept / Agency Establish and staff a debt management unit to produce quarterly/annual DoF debt forecasts/ updates and annual debt management plans; [1] Undertake a feasibility study on debt restructuring options and DoF implementing its recommendations, considering the fiscal implications of recent natural disasters and Covid-19 pandemic [1] Note: 1. Institutional development (e.g. capacity building, training, institutional strengthening); 2. Investment planning and management; and 3. Infrastructure development and maintenance. Environmental Checklist Sector / Department / District • Nil LSGIs / Community • Nil Urban Results Area 1: Building systems and institutional capacities for managing shocks from climate change, natural disasters and disease outbreaks Program Activities Description Dept / Agency Establish systems and strengthen institutional and technical capacities of LSGD ULBs to undertake and operationalize risk-informed master planning, and TCP and LSGD to support and incentivize risk-informed master planning by ULBs. [1,2] Note: 1. Institutional development (e.g. capacity building, training, institutional strengthening); 2. Investment planning and management; and 3. Infrastructure development and maintenance. Environmental Checklist Sector / Department / District • What are the key environmental issues relevant to the master planning process from a TCP and LSGD perspective? What are the gaps, if any? What kind of capacity strengthening is required within the TCP and LSGD that can be integrated with the risk-informed approach? [Note: Capacity strengthening can be (a) environmental 55 norms and guidelines; (b) environmental training and (c) incentives for environmental performance.] • Are there any specific additional considerations for the master planning process when it is in eco-sensitive or culturally sensitive areas? Any additional capacity strengthening requirements? LSGIs / Community • What are the key environmental issues relevant to the master planning process from an ULB perspective? What are the gaps, if any? What kind of capacity strengthening is required that can be integrated with the risk-informed approach? • If the ULBs are located in eco-sensitive or culturally sensitive areas, are there additional issues that need to be dealt with? If yes, what kind of capacity strengthening is required to address them effectively in the risk-informed approach? Health Results Area 2: Supporting effective Covid-19 response and disease outbreak preparedness Program Activities Description Dept / Agency Plan for expanded laboratory network developed and approved; DoHFW, Establishment of infrastructure; Procurement of materials, chemicals, and DoAH equipment; Training of personnel.[1,3] Plan for expanded Integrated Disease Surveillance Program (IDSP) for DoHFW, humans (including zoonotic diseases) developed and approved; piloting of DoAH system; modifications; and expansion.[1,2] Note: 1. Institutional development (e.g. capacity building, training, institutional strengthening); 2. Investment planning and management; and 3. Infrastructure development and maintenance. Environmental Checklist Sector / Department / District • In expanding the laboratory network, additional arrangements for managing the bio- medical waste – as per BMW Rules 2016 – will have to be put in place? What is the capacity strengthening required in terms of equipment, awareness-building and competence training? • What are the environmental implications related to IDSP in terms of BMW and infection control? LSGIs / Community • What is the prevailing capacity in managing BMW – infection control protocols, storage of BMW and collection of BMW with the treatment facility - in the sub-centres, primary health care facilities, secondary health centres and existing laboratories, if any, connected to these? What are the gaps? What is the capacity strengthening required? [Note: Capacity strengthening can be (a) environmental norms and guidelines; (b) environmental training for awareness & competency building, and (c) incentives for environmental performance.] 56 • What is the on-the-ground environmental performance of the existing IDSP? What are the gaps, if any? What are the capacity strengthening needs that needs to be considered with the proposed expansion? WRM Results Area 3: Demonstrating integrated approaches to multidimensional resilience at the local level Program Activities Description Dept / Agency Develop the Pamba basin plan through capacity building support [2] WRD Establish flood forecasting and IROS for the Pamba basin through capacity WRD building support [1] Operationalize RBCMA with technical and operational staff through WRD capacity building support (training, equipment investments) [1,3] Establish WRM Command and Control Center through capacity building WRD support (training, equipment investments) [1,3] Identify critical investments in Pamba Basin [2] WRD Make operational flood forecasting and IROS for 4 districts in Pamba basin WRD [1,3] Complete 2 climate proof investment plans based on the Pamba basin plan WRD [2] Note: 1. Institutional development (e.g. capacity building, training, institutional strengthening); 2. Investment planning and management; and 3. Infrastructure development and maintenance. Environmental Checklist Sector / Department / District • With the RBCMA, what requires to be done to strengthen the environmental capacity? In which agencies? Any suggestions on how it should be done? • Any suggestions on integrating environmental capacity through awareness and training in the context of implementing the RCBMA? • What are the key environmental issues to consider in the Pamba river basin? What are the capacity strengthening needs to address these issues? [Note: Capacity strengthening can be (a) environmental content in the river basin plan including norms and guidelines; (b) environmental training for awareness and competence building, and (c) incentives for environmental performance.] LSGIs / Community • In implementing the integrated river basin approach in the Pamba river basin, what are the key environmental issues that need to be considered? Which agencies should be involved and how should their capacity be strengthened? • The Pamba river basin includes highlands, forests and water bodies. It also includes culturally sensitive properties such as the Sabari Mala. Which agencies should be involved and how should their capacity be strengthened to avoid impacts on these natural habitats and culturally sensitive properites as the intergrated river basin approach is implemented? 57 • What will be the critical investments in the Pamba basin? What are their environmental impacts likely to be? How should capacity be strengthened to address them? Agriculture Results Area 3: Demonstrating integrated approaches to multidimensional resilience at the local level Program Activities Description Dept / Agency Realignment of state budget support towards promotion DoA, SFAC (Small Farmer's of AEU designated crops. [1] Agri-Business Consortium) Promotion and strengthening of Farmer Producer DoA, SFAC (Small Farmer's Organizations (FPO) in select AEUs in Pamba basin [1,3] Agri-Business DoA, SFAC (Small Farmer's Agri-Business Consortium) Consortium)WRD Expansion of Integrated Agriculture Management DoA Information System (IAMIS) as per Software Requirement Specifications (SRS)[1,3] Note: 1. Institutional development (e.g. capacity building, training, institutional strengthening); 2. Investment planning and management; and 3. Infrastructure development and maintenance. Environmental Checklist Sector / Department / District • What are the key environmental issues confronting agriculture, e.g. excessive water use, soil run-off, use of chemical pesticides and excessive use of chemical fertilizers, and what is the capacity of agencies to address them? Is there a need to strengthen the capacity? [Note: Capacity strengthening can be (a) environmental guidelines; (b) environmental training and (c) incentives for environmental performance.] • How will the transition to AEU result in the better environmental performance? What needs to be done, if any, to facilitate the transition more effectively and quickly? Capacity strengthening requirements (training, awareness, competence) if any? • In the strengthening of FPOs, do environmental aspects have to be addressed? If yes, what capacity strengthening is required and how can these be facilitated? • In IAMIS, what and how can environmental information be included so that it can guide improving the environmental performance of the agriculture sector? LSGIs / Community • Due to the AEU designated cropping pattern, is there likely to be any environmental implications? If yes, what are they? What capacity strengthening is required to address them? • What is the capacity of a typical FPO to take action related to environmental issues? What capacity augmentation is required? Roads Results Area 3: Demonstrating integrated approaches to multidimensional resilience at the local level 58 Program Activities Description Dept / Agency Conduct TA, training and capacity building [1] PWD Implement RMMS (Survey and data collection for entire CRN, Roll out PWD FWP, Staffing of RMMS Cell, CRN Budget allocation and COE institutionalization) [1,2] • Roll-out of performance-based management contracts for road asset PWD management in the Pamba Basin – List of roads included • Capital works and climate enhancement layered works for climate PWD resilient core road networks (CRN) implemented in Pamba basin - List of roads included Note: 1. Institutional development (e.g. capacity building, training, institutional strengthening); 2. Investment planning and management; and 3. Infrastructure development and maintenance. Environmental Checklist Sector / Department / District • What would you suggest about integrating environmental assets in the RAMS? Is there a need for capacity strengthening within the PWD pertaining to RAMS and in general? Capacity strengthening (content including guidelines, awareness, competence, budgets)? • Any suggestions on natural habitats (highlands, forests, wetlands and others) and cultural property considerations in the proposed guidelines on climate-resilient construction? Capacity strengthening (content including guidelines, awareness & training)? • Any suggestions on public and worker safety in the considerations in the proposed guidelines on climate-resilient construction? Capacity strengthening (content including guidelines, awareness & training)? LSGIs / Community • What are the key environmental issues related to the roads? Which are the Government agencies involved? Is there a gap in their capacity? If yes, what strengthening is required? • Which are the forests, wetlands and other eco-sensitive areas, if any, associated with roads? • Which are the cultural considerations in relation to roads, if any, that need to be addressed? What requires to be done and by whom? What capacity strengthening is required, if any? • What are the public and worker safety issues seen in road projects? Any particular roads wherein this is a significant concern? ? What capacity strengthening is required, if any, with the Government agencies, e.g. PWD, Local Government and Police? 59 List of roads under the output and performance-based road maintenance contracts Approx. Road name District Length (km) Chengannur Angamaly Kottayam/Ernakulam 118.00 Chengannur-Mavelikkara Alappuzha 16.00 Kozhenchery- Chgengannur Pathanamthitta/Alappuzha 14.00 Ponkunnam-Thodupuzha Idukki/Kottayam 50.00 Kumaly-Pooppara Part I & II Idukki 78.60 Vattavada Top Station-Moonar Idukki 44.00 Kayamkulam-Mavelikkara-Thiruvalla Alappuzha/Pathanamthitta 31.00 K.P. Road from Kayamkulam to Adoor Alappuzha/Pathanamthitta 21.00 Thrikkunnapuzha-Karthikapally- Alappuzha/Pathanamthitta 118.00 Thattarambalam;Pandalam-Kaipattoor Kollam-Ayoor Kollam 30.00 List of roads under the climate-resilient core road networks (CRN) Package 4 Approx Road name District Length (km) Gandhinagar-Medical College-Babu Chazhikadan road-Kottayam- Parippu road-Athirampuzha Kottayam 21.95 Liessue-Kaippuzha-Mannanam- Pulikkuttissery- Parolickal- Muttappally road Vadayar Chandappalam- Mulakkulam Road and Kottayam 24.70 Vadayar Kallattippalam Muttuchira road Pathanamthitta Ayroor-MuttukudukkaIllathupadi - Muttukudukka Prakkanam-Prakkanam Pathanamthitta 28.12 Elavumthitta-Kulanada Ramanchira-Thannikkuzhy Thonniamala road Mallapally-Komalam Paduthodu Kalloopara Chengaroor Komalam Kavungumprayar Pattakala, Pathanamthitta 22.65 TMV road Malamekkara Kunnathukala Chala Puthenchanda Pathanamthitta 8.6 factory Junction Azad Junction road Thattararnbalam-Michael Junction-Kochalummood- Allapuzha 21.8 Mangankuzhy-Pandalam Veeyapuram-Edathua-Puthukarry- Marnbuzhakkary-Kidangara-Kunnamgary- Allapuzha 21.35 Kumarangary-Valady-Mullakarnthuruthy Package 3 Approx Road name District Length (km) Mookannoor Ezhattumugham road and Blachippara Ernakulam 20.30 Palissery road Kakkadassery - Kaliyar road Ernakulam 20.60 Kumarakom-Nedumbassery road (proposed SH) Ernakulam 15.75 60 Approx Road name District Length (km) Ponkunnam-Thodupuzha Ernakulam 21.03 Neyyassery-Thokkumbansaddle road Idukki 28.50 Nenmara - Nelliyampathy road Palakkad 30.71 Kodungallur- shornur (SH-22) road Thrissur 34.00 Vazhakkodu-Plazhy (SH-74) road Thrissur 22.64 Thrissur Kuttippuram road (SH 69) Thrissur 29.98 Arakunnam-Amballoor-Poothatta-Piravam Road Thrissur 7.00 Note: Only the road in Idduki is in the Pamba basin. 61 Annex 4: Feedback from KILA’s state-level and community-level consultations, and how these are addressed A State-level consultations No. Description of feedback How addressed through Program Design / ESSA Agriculture 1 Soil acidity is the cause for reducing The AEU approach adopted in the agricultural productivity Program will help address the issues of soil health. 2 Soil runoff, pesticide and fertiliser The AEU approach adopted in the overuse also exists Program will help address in addressing these issues. 3 Intensive campaigns and education on This will be taken up under the WRM watershed management with greater sector and LSG initiatives. community involvement is required. 4 NRM, bio-resources and recycling Though not an explicit part of the initiatives Program but would partly addressed through various sector interventions particularly Agriculture and DRM. 5 Key sectors require environmental This is outside the scope of this Program, guidelines, e.g. housing however existing procedures related to environmental assessments address the issue. Additional provisions as may be necessary would be incorporated in master planning process. 6 Including environmental considerations Its importance is recognized and in Agriculture Information Management considered in the information processing Systems should be explored. and dissemination of the Integrated AIMS through crop-based package of practices. CC and DRM 7 Flood and land use changes are to be The multi-sector Program brings addressed in an integrated manner. together various sectors and crowds in resources in a limited geography to achieve integrated approach towards flood management. 8 Waste management during the disaster This is recognized and will be addressed event is a problem. through the LSGI’s DRM plans. 9 Watershed management to deal with Watershed management approach will flood and drought address both flood and drought. 10 Capacity strengthening of LSGD is LSGIs capacity strengthening will be an required integral part of the Program design. Health 11 Centralised bio-medical waste Addressing this problem is beyond the management systems are causing a scope of this Program. problem. It is overburdened. A 62 No. Description of feedback How addressed through Program Design / ESSA decentralised system is required in each district. 12 Health assessment should be a part of During Program implementation, environmental assessment environmental assessments are not required as the nature of investments are limited. If done, this will be incorporated. Roads 13 Including environmental aspects into Program design focuses on RAMS is a good idea. Capacity environmental management aspects in enhancements should include the performance-based contracts and in environmental aspects. strengthening the PWD’s capacity in addressing those issues 14 The monitoring mechanism of the Program design includes the provision contractors on environmental aspects for technical auditors who will oversee needs strengthening. environmental aspects and advise corrections wherever required Urban 15 Waste management and finding land for Beyond the scope of this Program. disposal is a major issue. However, risk-informed master planning process should address the issue if identified in the process of stake holder consultations at that stage. 16 Paddy land conversion is a real problem. Beyond the scope of this Program. Mainly an enforcement problem in the However, risk-informed master planning paddy and wetland act process should address the issue if identified in the process of stake holder consultations at that stage. 17 GPs need to be given training in methods Training / capacity building of the LSGIs and scientific approaches is an integral part of the Program. 18 Buffer zones of eco-sensitive areas are This will be included under the training / under tremendous pressure due to high capacity building of the LSGIs during demand from the construction industry. Program implementation. In addition, Awareness must be created to risk informed master planning process emphasise the importance. should address the issue if identified in the process of stake holder consultations at that stage. WRM 19 Training and capacity building on Training / capacity building of the biodiversity management, groundwater various agencies involved with WRM is recharge and protecting flora & fauna an integral part of the Program. needs to be done. 20 Interface between concerned Program design aims to have an Department should be effective. integrated basin management approach that would bring the stakeholder departments together. 63 No. Description of feedback How addressed through Program Design / ESSA 21 Pollution of the rivers from drainages. This will be considered as a part of the Pesticide run-off is also another Program implementation; activities will concern. comply with the applicable environmental laws. 22 Using scientific expertise to come up The Program design includes a basin with a comprehensive solution is management approach which adopts required. scientific approach towards problem- solving. B Community-level consultations B1: Alappuzha District No. Highlights of stakeholder feedback Program Design / ESSA How addressed Agriculture 1 AEU-based planning will help protect Program design incorporates AEU-based their environment. approach 2 FPO must promote bio-pesticides to While the program is not focused at that, protect from environmental damage however resilience being the corner stone of program AEU plans should address these aspects that emerging as good practices. CC and DRM 3 The main environmental issue is the Basin level planning will address the decreasing depth of rivers in the region. issue of capacities of water bodies and Desilting must be done on regular channels. intervals to ensure the river reaches its natural capacity during the monsoon. 4 In Alappuzha municipality and also at The roads stretch selected under the Kainakary, roads need to be constructed Program will incorporate climate and at an elevation to protect from floods disaster resilient features. and on the basis of scientific planning. 5 In Pandanadu GP, stagnant water in Program design includes LSGIs paddy fields requires to be diverted. investment planning, which will identify such issues that need to be addressed at the local level. 6 Local action plan on climate change is This is a part of the Program design. required and appropriate training has to be provided. Health 7 Transparency in the operation of the Beyond the scope of this Program. centralised BMW disposal agencies lacking. 8 Lack of pure drinking water has forced Beyond the scope of this Program. people to rely upon contaminated sources 64 No. Highlights of stakeholder feedback Program Design / ESSA How addressed 9 PHCs and private hospitals do not have Beyond the scope of this Program. the capacity to manage BMW properly. 10 Need for a decentralised waste Beyond the scope of this Program. management facility in each district. Roads 11 Roads are inhibitors of natural flow of The Program is aiming the road designs water. to be climate and disaster resilience. 12 Absence of crash barriers in selected The Program is aiming the road designs roads. to be incorporate appropriate road safety measures. 13 More scientific and technical The Program is aiming the road designs implementation of road projects is to be climate and disaster resilience and necessary. also address road safety and other important aspects of road designed based on scientific studies. 14 There are issues of air pollution due to Environmental management plans will dust during road construction. be implemented during construction to address these issues. Urban 15 Floods, high tides from water bodies, Training / capacity building of the LSGIs water contamination and solid waste is a part of the Program design. pollution are the main issues. Capacity strengthening is required. 16 In eco-sensitive areas, ULBs must be Building capacity of LSGIs (including specifically capable of handling the ULBs) is a part of the Program design. disaster management needs. Managing issues in eco-sensitive areas will be integrated into the training modules. 17 Weather stations are required in the Beyond the scope of this Program. vicinity of eco-sensitive areas. However, basin level plan by WRM department should address the issues related to availability of relevant data. WRM 18 Rivers need to be rejuvenated and depth Basin level planning will address the of river bed is decreasing. issue of capacities of water bodies and channels. 19 Road construction along the paddy The roads selected under the Program fields in the valley should address water have been designed to be climate- management. resilient and designs have considered management of water flows. 20 River sand mining should be regulated. The Program will address this as part of the river basin management approach. 21 An integrated approach should be The objective of the multi-sector established. Program is to establish an integrated approach. 65 B2: Idukki District No. Highlights of stakeholder feedback Program Design / ESSA How addressed Agriculture 1 In Kumily GP, pollution caused by Beyond the scope of the Program. chemical fertilizers and loss of fertility However, there are schemes to promote due to soil erosion have created a need organic agricultural practices. These will for organic agricultural practices. be implemented along side the AEU approach. 2 In Vandiperiyar, the use of chemical Beyond the scope of the Program. fertilizers should be regulated. CC and DRM 3 In Peerumade and Peruvanthanam The Program design is multi-sectoral. panchayats, the environmental issues These will be addressed through not only raised: develop plans based on the disaster management sector but also geographical, climatic and environment urban and WRM sectors. features of the particular location; planting trees; develop schemes for maximum use of rainwater, (develop and train rapid response team in each panchayat (rescue operation and use different resources/tools), conservation of small and large water bodies, soil conservation, protection of river shores, waste(solid/liquid) disposal, and removing water logging 4 In Kumily GP, large scale constructions There will be no large-scale construction on eco-sensitive areas, sand mining and in eco-sensitive areas under this paddy field filling were identified as Program. Issues of sand mining and issues. paddy field filing are outside the scope. However, the river basin planning will address these issues. 5 In Vandiperiyar the concerns were on The Program design will result in agricultural methods, soil erosion, and strengthening the DRM planning at the flow of water. Quarry operations and local level. These issues will get earthmoving equipment need more addressed through those plans. training. Health 6 In Peerumade, Peruvanthanam, Kumily Beyond the scope of the Program. and Vandiperiyar panchayath, BMW facilities at a local level is the expressed need. Roads 7 In Peerumade Panchayat, land use Beyond the scope of the Program. conversion of paddy, reduction agricultural productivity and water scarcity. 66 No. Highlights of stakeholder feedback Program Design / ESSA How addressed 8 In Peruvanthanam panchayath, the Environmental management plans will environmental issues related to roads be implemented as part of the are landslides and dangerous extraction construction procedures. by quarries and clogging of sewage drains. 9 In Kumily GP, flow of water, traffic These are a part of Environmental management due to construction and management plans, which will be accident management were identified as implemented as part of the construction environmental concerns. procedures. 10 In Vandiperiyar GP, safety training for Construction safety is a part of workers and issuing safety gears were Environmental management plans, identified which will be implemented as part of the construction procedures. WRM 11 In Peerumade, and Peruvanthanam The river basin management approach panchayats, water shortages and the will address these issues. need for conservation, protection of ponds and water bodies and rainwater harvesting. These panchayats have a critical role in the Pamba river basin plan. 12 In Kumily panchayat, cleaning of water The river basin management approach canals and implementing anti-litter will address these issues. practices were identified. 13 In Vandiperiyar GP, pollution of the The river basin management approach river, soil erosion and associated loss of will address these issues. fish life were identified. Importance of check dams and small canals to ensure water for agriculture were also noted. B3: Kottayam District No. Highlights of stakeholder feedback Program Design / ESSA How addressed Agriculture 1 At Mundakayam GP, the current farming The AEU approach adopted under this practices are leading to adverse Program primarily address the issue of environmental impact. The system appropriate cropping practices for should be based on soil characterises climate and soil parameters in the region. rather than being market-driven. 2 FPOs are incapable of addressing While the focus of the programs will be environmental issues. They need to on creating market linkages, as part of build their capacity. the capacity building of the FPOs, the environmental aspects will also be integrated. 67 No. Highlights of stakeholder feedback Program Design / ESSA How addressed 3 At Changanaserry, the need is to Program design supports the AEU improve the cropping selection using approach. the AEU approach. 4 FPOs are capable but need to provide Through this Program, support to the Government support. FPOs will be provided to improve their activities. CC and DRM 5 Climate informed planning must be Beyond the scope of this Program, as the induced at the school level onwards as education sector is not included. per the Manimala GP. 6 The political environment and social As part of the integrated approach, this nexus are hindering the progress of Program aims to address various issues climate-informed planning. related to climate-informed planning and mechanism is being created to incentivize mainstreaming of climate and disaster risk management into investment planning. 7 An integrated training platform to solve Program design includes training and the environmental issues. capacity building across multiple sectors. These will include environmental training as required. 8 Unscientific construction is taking a toll As part of the integrated approach, this on the environment. Program aims to address various issues related to climate-informed planning and mechanism is being created to incentivize mainstreaming of climate and disaster risk management into investment planning. 9 The cultural and traditional value of The Program supports decentralized these sensitive regions needs to be planning, and this should help prioritize protected. This is particularly the case local issues. during the pilgrimage season. 10 Financial resources are a constraint to The overall objective of the Program is to ensuring climate-resilient bridges. bring in more resources towards climate and disaster resilient planning of investments. Health 11 A lack of sufficient staff in managing Beyond the scope of this Program BMW being done by the centralised agency. The system should be decentralised. 12 IDSP helps in early identification of The Program aims to strengthen and pandemic incidences. expand the system for timely detection to undertake remedial measures. Roads 13 Drainage facility, air and dust pollution, The Program is aiming the road designs cutting down of trees, road construction to be climate and disaster resilience and 68 No. Highlights of stakeholder feedback Program Design / ESSA How addressed that are not weather resistant causing also address road safety and other water logging. Unscientific construction important aspects of road designed and lack of monitoring and based on scientific studies. Environment maintenance. management plans will also be part of the construction procedures. 14 Stop funding projects which are The Program does not support any covering forests, wetlands and eco- investments in eco-sensitive areas. sensitive areas (Mundakayam GP). 15 A more participatory approach, The Program design has been developed involvement of cultural and including different expertise that development experts and focus on road comprises road safety as well. safety should be undertaken. Urban 16 Unscientific road constructions, The Program objective is to enhance degraded canal system, inefficient climate and disaster resilience of various drainage system, drinking water participating sectors. shortage, decreasing attention to agriculture sector, air and water pollution, unavailability of waste management units, extensive use of plastics, bio and non-bio waste management and lack of proper monitoring WRM 17 Changanassery ULB the main The Program supports the river basin environmental issues they are facing are management approach which will pollution, coastal line damage. address these issues. 18 In the Pamba river basin plan, the main Basin level planning will address the issue is the decreasing depth issue of capacities of water bodies and channels. Government and civil society should The multi-sector Program aims to be collaborate. integrated across stakeholders. 19 In coastal areas, the losing soil fertility. Coastal areas and issues therein within the purview of the river basin will be addressed under the Program. 20 In Manimala, the main issues identified The Program objective is to enhance were drought, flood and pollution. climate and disaster resilience of various Agriculture, water resource department participating sectors and mainstream and LSGD should get involved these issues in investment planning. 21 In the Pamba river basin, soil, water and The river basin management approach transportation. construction and will address these issues. development activities 22 In Koruthode FGD, the river basin plan By its very nature, the river basin must take an integrated approach management approach is integrated and covering all areas of environment. will address these issues. Water and unique ecosystems are the most critical investment in this region 69 No. Highlights of stakeholder feedback Program Design / ESSA How addressed 23 LSGD must play a critical role in Training / capacity building is a part of implementing the Pamba river Basin the Program design. The LSGD and the Plan. Agencies like Kerala Sastra Sahitya civil society organizations as relevant Parishad. Training must be more will be engaged to be part of the training integrated and should be made effective activities. to deal with practical issues. B4: Pathanamthitta District No. Highlights of stakeholder feedback Program Design / ESSA How addressed CC and DRM 1 In Thiruvalla municipality is the The Program supports approaches that unscientific construction which leads to have their basis in technical studies. water logging in many places. LSGIs are Capacity building of the LSGIs is a part of not capable. the Program 2 In Aranmula panchayath, the LSGs lack Capacity building of the LSGIs is a part of of trained and equipped personnel the Program 3 In Ranni panchayath, the LSGI have no Capacity building of the LSGIs is a part of capacity. the Program 4 In Perunad grama panchayath, there are Through the various training and several environmental aspects: capacity building activities in the environment protection, conservation different sectors, the Program aims to of small and large water bodies, address these issues as relevant locally. protection of river shores, protection of trees and planting trees, waste(solid/liquid) disposal, soil conservation, removing water logging, rain water harvesting, volunteer group formation, training for rescue operation in disaster and training to use different resources/tools. 5 Improve the capacity of LSGIs, study, Capacity building of the LSGIs is a part of training and awareness of different the Program sectors, enhance the stakeholder’s capacity and improve transparency Health 6 In Tiruvalla municipality, primary and Beyond the scope of the Program. secondary health centres have no However, the Program will streamline options to deal with BMW. proper BMW management within the health care facilities where interventions are made. 7 In Ranni panchayath , BMW should be Beyond the scope of the Program disposed in a decentralised manner 8 In Perunad panchayath, the staff in Beyond the scope of the Program. managing the biomedical waste is less; However, the Program will streamline Health officials need training in proper BMW management within the 70 No. Highlights of stakeholder feedback Program Design / ESSA How addressed environmental protection, waste health care facilities where interventions management. are made. Training / capacity building will be done and will address environmental issues. Roads 9 In Aranmula panchayath, water-logging The Program aims to build climate- is the major issue. resilient roads. 10 In Ranni panchayath, the main Environment management plans will be environmental issues concerning road part of the construction procedures. developments are air pollution and unhygienic sewage systems. Workers employed by contractors have to be protected. 11 In Perunad panchayath, the The Program aims to build climate and environmental issues related to roads disaster resilient roads. are filling of paddy fields, reducing agricultural productivity, and developing water scarcity. Urban 12 Drinking water and sanitation, drainage While the Program scope does not and sewage system renovation are the address the issues directly the efforts main issues. towards multisectoral integrated planning and mainstreaming climate and disaster resilience in investment planning of LSGIs should address the issues. WRM 13 In Thiruvalla municipality, the pattern The Program supports a river basin of agriculture, construction of roads, management approach which will housing etc, and their effect on the address these issues in conjunction with ecology of the Pamba River should be all relevant stakeholders. examined. Travancore Devaswom Board should be included. 14 In Aranmula panchayath the major The Program supports a river basin environmental issue is the flow management approach that would also regulation of the river water in the address the river flow issues. Pamba. A minimum level of river water is needed to maintain groundwater levels. 15 Past constructions were unscientific Through the river basin management which caused the diversion of river approach, the Program aims to plan water and more aggressive soil erosion based on scientific and technical studies. 16 Unscrupulous mining of sand, rocks The river basin management approach along with deforestation. will address these issues. 17 In Ranni panchayath, main concerns of The river basin management approach the project should be Forestation, will address these issues. However, 71 No. Highlights of stakeholder feedback Program Design / ESSA How addressed Environmental Conservation and Waste waste minimization or eradication is Eradication. outside the scope. 18 Illegal sand mining and waste dumping The river basin management approach has to be urgently stopped. Urgent will address these issues. restoration of the river bank is necessary to prevent it from collapsing regularly. 72 Annex 5: Summary report of the two state-level ESSA stakeholder workshops (February 2021) Introduction As a part of Environmental and Social Systems Assessment (ESSA), the Rebuild Kerala Initiative (RKI) and Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA) jointly convened two state-level ESSA stakeholder consultation workshops on 18 February 2021 and 22 February 2021. Given the prevailing Covid-19 constraints, both these workshops were done using the virtual forum (Zoom). Prior to the workshops, the draft ESSA reports – ESSA Summary Report (Part A), ESSA Environmental Report (Part B) and the ESSA Social Report (Part C) - were sent to the invitees. The English version of the three reports and the Malayalam version of the ESSA Summary Report were sent along the invitation. The invitees were requested to go through the draft before the workshop so that the suggestions and feedback can be an output of a careful examination. The English version of the three reports were disclosed in the RKI website on 8 February 2021 and the Malayalam version of the Summary report on 13 February 2021. The participants were thus given enough time and opportunity to download, read and provide their feedback on the draft ESSA reports. And, these reports have already benefited from extensive stakeholder consultations at the state-level and in the four Pamba river basin districts. Additionally, provision was made to email feedback on these draft ESSA reports to the RKI. Purpose The purpose was to offer an opportunity to the stakeholders to provide a feedback to the draft ESSA reports in general and the assessment, findings and recommendations in specific. The details list of invitees is provided in Appendix 1 of this Annex. In the first workshop, there were 54 participants, and in the second workshop there were 27 participants. The screenshots of the two workshops are given in Appendix 2. Structure of the workshops Both the workshops had identical structures: Opening remarks from KILA and / or RKI, Presentation of the Program by the World Bank Task Team Leader, Presentation about the ESSA by the World Bank Senior Social Development Specialist, Presentation about the social findings by the Social Development Consultant and on the environmental findings by the Environmental Consultant. After the presentation on the findings, ample time for stakeholder feedback was provided. For each feedback obtained, the World Bank Task Team provided a detailed response on the considerations already undertaken and will be taken up during implementation. All of the stakeholder feedback and the responses are recorded in this Annex. In the first of the two workshops, Mr. R.K. Singh, Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Kerala, provided the opening remarks. 73 Participation A total of 175 participants were invited to the workshops which consisted of state/district level officials, NGOs, CSOs, Local Self Governance Institutions (LSGIs), multilateral organizations, independent researchers and individuals. The category wise breakup of the invited participants is given in the following figure. The first of the two workshops benefited from the participation of the Mr. T.K.A. Nair, Former Cabinet Secretary from the Government of India. During the workshop, Mr. Nair shared his detailed feedback for the Program’s consideration. ESSA Team – Environmental Presentation The Bank’s ESSA team made a short presentation on the Environmental Systems Findings. The presentation is included in Appendix. It was noted that the borrower’s capacity to address environmental impacts of the program at departmental level as well as, state and national level regulatory levels were checked against the core principles of the bank. The report finds that these capacities were consistent with what core principles. As far the exclusion principle is concerned the assessment finds no links to the program which could cause significant environmental effects during the implementation of the program. The recommendations based on the environmental assessment were also presented. 74 ESSA Environmental Team - Q&A Feedback from Shabeer Mohammed, Citizens India Foundation Description: This ESSA prepared for geographic focus on areas of the Pamba River Basin, right? Sabarimala is one of the largest annual pilgrimage sites in the world where an estimated 50 million devotees are visiting every year. Sabarimala is situated in Pathanamthitta district this temple complex located at Sabarimala in Tiger reserves. Rites and rituals on Sabarimala pilgrims' are completely connected with the Pamba River. The large influx of pilgrims brings health hazards and diverse environment impacts on both pilgrims and local inhabitants. Actually, I think this ESSA did not mention anything about that large influx. Out of these 50 million people 80% to 90% are coming in a short span of three months. They're coming from four states and and from countries such as Sri Lanka, Malaysia and Indonesia. That actually is a major problem. From the base camp of Sabarimala, Nedumala, there are trekking routes to Sabarimala through the forest area. This camp is very small and cannot contain all the pilgrims. There is a need for another special plan for this area for ESSA to consider. Because that is another focus area. Also I have a suggestion, that a green pilgrimage program for such places to be a model of forest environment and public health. I didn't see anything regarding the Sabarimala pilgrimage in ESSA. ESSA Team Response: Now, if you remember that when we spoke about the program, there are some program activities, which were in the investments are fairly clear as to what is going to be done. For instance, in the road sector, there are particular investments over the next four years that have been designed and the planning has already reached an advanced stage and that will get implemented as a part of the program. Then there are the other investment planning tools and institutional development aspects initiatives that are a part of this program. In particular, if you recall, I mentioned about the work that's going to be done on the climate change in the DRM as well as on the urban and there's going to be a lot of institutional development activities in the context of the RCBMA, which is the water resources interventions that we're doing. Now, these are more granular and they will get into the details of what needs to get done within the various local governments in the Pamba River Basin. And of course, whatever we do in the Pamba River Basin has to consider what you just mentioned, broadly in terms of that river basin receives a large number of people who visit every year from the neighboring states and all over the world. So it is not as though that is not going to be considered but, it will be considered at a local level. And it will be considered through the various investment plans that we get developed, and the various institutional development exercises that will be done as a part of the overall program. In terms of the second suggestion to have a green pilgrimage program, this is something that we have not yet considered. This is a very good suggestion. So then again, I would think as a part of the overall institutional development exercise, over the Pamba in the Pamba River Basin as a part of the program, if this does, this does emerge from a state level or at a local level through the various consultations that will be held, we will definitely considering throwing it into the program. Bank Task Team Response: Because I also got to travel every year, I could immediately relate what you addressed and there are two parts to it. One is the water resource management. Another one is the environment management and the combined impact of 75 it, on the lives of the people who are residing and who are dependent on the forests and the area around it and the other local government areas around it. So, this is one of the things which we are addressing in the Basin Plan which will be taken up the the first phase of the basin, I mean, there's two-three levels to the basin plan. Some detail assessment will have to be done before we come up with a plan. It is a very nice suggestion which you are given as a green pilgrimage before we get into drawing up the course of the charter there. So that plus with the support of the local governments is going to be very, very critical because if they don't participate in this program, even the state government coming out of the policy will not be able to bring the change. So their role is going to be very critical as we move forward. And this is definitely going to put in this feedback. We will address that and as we move forward and as we build an implementation, KILA will be sought after for giving the very valuable inputs on how to design and carry forward to the implementation. It's easier said than done when especially when you have this spike in the influx of people that are otherwise normally very quiet and serene and green. So, that is something that we will be definitely looking into the planning and then implementation. Definitely we, RKI and the State government will definitely come back to key people like you for engaging in the process because it's a collective engagement which is required there. Bank Task Team Response: It's a program for results, the result areas have been identified and one of the result areas is the basin level plan which will be developed. It is going to be a multi-stakeholder approaches where, not only the people that it will consult, but also the departments and the activity that would come in as part of the basin level plan. The second level is the institutions that work in that area, which are the local governments, they are also free to incorporate the positive and the affirmative actions in their planning process. So I think, even though many of the issues may not specifically get mentioned and flagged in the program or ESSA or in the related documents but if you look into the activity level details, and these details will emerge with continued association with the NGOs and with the community, with the people who have who have experience of the these issues. The program would assure such association, which will then not only help in identifying the issues but will also get addressed. Feedback from Ms. Meena Kuruvila Description: When we're thinking about capacity building programs, we should have a clear cut training module and we should give the TOT for the resource persons also. Then another important thing is we should identify the target group from the community itself or from the concerned local Self Govt. For example, women, school teachers, they are an important target group. The youth and elders of that community are also one of the important target groups. Then other government officials, so many government departments are there under the LSGIs. They should also get this type of training. So, for different target groups different training modules should be prepared. And before starting the training, we have to conduct some sort of small research like, what knowledge they have before that training. After that training, the exercise must be repeated to know the outcome of the training and the implementation of their knowledge in the community, so that, based on that level of capacity building, we have to plan for the capacity buildings to reach the community. Finally, we have to plan the training, based on the target of the local self-government. 76 Feedback from the Director of Agriculture Description: The training and capacity building should be given to the Agri Ecological Units instead of Agri Ecological Management Units. ESSA Team Response: Thank you very much for the suggestion, we'll make the appropriate inclusions in the proposed capacity building during implementation. Feedback from Mr. Jomon Description: How in this particular geographical area is the program going to foster the existing natural resources and address the core issues? ESSA Team Response: This is likely to be done in two levels. The first level is when we are looking at the Pamba River Basin, the water resource management initiative of having the comprehensive River Basin management approach will hopefully as a part of the implementation come up with the balance in the use of the various resources in the region. That's one of the objectives of having an integrated river basin approach. So that's one way in which this, the use of existing resources will be managed. The second is from the point of view of the risk informed master plans as well as the tracking tools that we're going to have as part of the DRM. We also expect that there'll be some throughout of what are the risks that come out of the various resource use particularly, what I have in mind as I respond is the use of land and what are the environmental risks and therefore, how does risk inform master planning regard land as a resource, so that will also get addressed during the implementation, when it comes to actually doing the various things at local government level. Task Team Response: The way the program is designed, particularly on the urban planning side and also on DRM and climate risk mitigation side is that the more affirmative actions you take, the capacity of mitigating the risk or climate variability or the disaster would get rewarded. So I think it's now basically up to the local government and institutions to bring more and more of such actions. There is going to be a kind of graded response in the sense that every year the target for the local governments to achieve will be higher and higher. So I think that there's a good set of incentive mechanisms for the institutions to start thinking of these initiatives. Feedback from Mr. Madav Reddy Description: What are the measures suggesting for the integration of different institutions and prevention and production of anticipated environmental hazards? ESSA Team Response: One of the things that we are looking at is when we are doing climate resilient roads, the building of climate resilient roads is not just a responsibility of the PWD. We need to get the involvement of the other departments who also can contribute gainfully in addressing a variety of issues and needs in the context of climate resilience. Let's take for instance, Soil Survey and soil investigation department; one of the ways in which we are doing it at the program design is that we will have at a higher level a coordinating committee, in order to ensure that some of these issues get addressed 77 while we are actually doing the climate resilient road construction. Now, this is one aspect in terms of the other aspects of the program, wherein if you're looking at integration and coordination is the main theme, and which is one of the reasons why we're having a multi sector program at the Mumbai River Basin, the approaches, River Basin approach and which requires integration and coordination just come out very clearly, from the consultations we have had and also integral to our program design. So that's how the different institutions will work together. And we are also saying that apart from the institutions, we work with the various civil society organizations which can contribute gainfully in the implementation of the program. Feedback from Mr. Kalaiarasan Periasamy, DoECC, GoK Description: The conservation of Pamba Riverine Ecosystem and abetment of pollution especially solid waste management and legacy waste management system may be given much attention. ESSA Team Response: This is something that would definitely get interest as a part of the overall River Basin management approach. But one of the things that we need to keep in mind is that this is a program with limited resources, limited capacities, and limited timeframe. So one of the things that we will strive to end to ensure that we do as much as we possibly can. But some of these issues are really very hard issues on the ground. Secondary information, research on this revealed that there is a lot that needs to be done. But whatever we can incorporate as part of the Pamba River Basin planning, we definitely will include. Feedback from CARD KNH Description: What about the Pamba Action Plan? Essa Team Response: Yes, we have reviewed the Pamba action plan and we are aware that that exists. The work has been done both by CESS as well as the State Pollution Control board as well as the KSDMA on the Pamba River Basin. The Program design considers that and will incorporate during implementaton. And as in when we get into the nitty gritty of the Pamba River Basin Plan, we will ensure that we will integrate the inputs that we get from various sources. Feedback from Mr. T K A Nair, Former Chief Secretary, GoI Description: we also need to stress again and again that the institutional arrangement or the law which was passed, gives you practical reality. Just to have a legal framework is just not enough. Coordination we all agree is the essence of everything and without an integrated plan and coordinate production, nothing will happen. This has been the history particularly in respect of Pamba. Pamba is inextricably linked to the Sabarimala pilgrimage. So, various aspects of the river basin management are extremely important and unless they are looked at and unless they are addressed, well again, we will be ending up with another plan. And another equally important aspect that I would like to mention here is that the willing cooperation and participation of the people living on either side of the Pamba river basin, they are crucial people who can either make the scheme successful or otherwise. That can be achieved only through the local Panchayats. From 78 my own personal experience, the Panchayats may not be extremely keen to undertake this task. There are for various other organizations, such as Youth in various colleges, schools, etc, and nongovernmental organizations. All of them have got to be together in a massive effort, for this plan to have any chance of success. One more thing, let me stress, the biomedical waste you mentioned about it's good. That is very good, because in certain areas where you have large hospitals like medical college or hospital premises biomedical waste management is the problem. But throughout the state, one of the most important and one of the most pernicious problems is waste management. The whole stage looks like a dumping yard. So therefore, municipalities and Panchayats, particularly, are very important. Capacity building capacities, in particular of staffs, engineers, etc., are extremely important. In the panchayats, how can you mobilize the public opinion against people who are polluting the environment by throwing waste? Waste management in any program needs to evolve as an integral element in the context of Kerala because Kerala spares to become a clean slate, and a green state. Thank you. ESSA Team Response: Those suggestions and observations are indeed in line with the Program design. Sufficient focus and action will be taken during implementation. Bank Task Team Response: There is also a Kerala solid waste management project, which as you highlighted the issues of solid waste, is very important and critical for the state. That project is also in preparation should be getting approved, probably next month, which is taking a deeper look at the issues of solid waste management in the State. In terms of the planning part, where it needs to be integrated into the Basin Plan and the local government plans, while this project could also work on that, there will be a lot of activities on that front through that project. Feedback from Ms. Shyama Kuriakose Description: There are several laws on enrollment and forests, which are outdated and not in tune with the current theme of climate change resilience. So are there any plans to amend these outdated frameworks? ESSA Team Response: I can't agree with you more. that there is a need for reviewing all the regulations and figuring out as to what is compatible with climate resilience and what is not. But this program is focusing largely on climate resilience within the state of Kerala. And it's in the sectors that have been identified and building resilience capacity. Now, if we get into a law focused program, then all of that in terms of reviewing these laws and which are outdated and strengthening these laws and revising these laws, that's a fairly large piece of activity that would need to get done. So to give you a direct answer, is there any plans to amend the same under the program? The answer is no. But one of the things that we can assure you is that if we find some of the laws are outdated, and they are going to cause negative environmental effects and they are going to be countered to the resilience goals, we will examine them and make sure that we do don't adopt designs which are outdated and don't implement anything which is outdated. So to that extent, within the program design, we can make sure that we work with the government of Kerala and request them to ensure that some of these outdated things that you speak 79 about are not implemented. But in terms of going back and amending the laws themselves that is well beyond the purview of this program. Concluding remarks The organizers – RKI, KILA and the World Bank - thanked all the participants and institutions for the suggestions and feedback they have given to revise the draft ESSA report. The announcement regarding the email feedback mechanism was also mentioned along with the timeframe for the same. Appendices Appendix 1: List of State level Officials invited Sl Name Position Department no. 1 Sekhar L. Member Secretary Kerala State Emergency Kuriakose Operations Centre, KSDMA 2 Smitha R Nair Joint Director of Fisheries Directorate of Fisheries 3 P. Venugopal IAS Principal Secretary Department of Food and Civil Supplies 4 Gigi George Chief Town Planner Local Self Government Department 5 Renu Raj IAS Director Directorate of Urban Affairs 6 K M Dileep Director Directorate of Animal Husbandry 7 C.K. Jagadeesan Dy.DHS(Planning) Directorate of Health Services 8 A Nadeer Executive Engineer, ALAPPUZHA Irrigation Department 9 V. Rejatha Deputy Director of Agriculture Department of Agriculture Development and Farmers' Welfare 10 Jiju P Alex Director of Extension Kerala Agricultural University 11 Ajith Chief Engineer(Roads) Public Works Department Ramachandran 12 Chandini Agriculture department Kerala State Planning Board 13 Rathan U Kelkar Director State Health Mission, Government IAS of Kerala 14 Meenakshy Add.DHS (PH) Directorate of Health Services, Government of Kerala 15 Shaji Environmental Engineer Kerala state Transport Project (KSTP), Government of Kerala 16 Vijay Rohidekar Team Leader PMC-KTSP-II, Eptisa, Kerala state Transport Project Project Management Consultant (KSTP), Government of Kerala 17 Madhav Reddy Project Management Consultant, Louis Berger Group 18 Debashis Pal Environmental consultant, EGIS New Delhi 19 P.N Rajesh Senior Town Planner, Town and Government of Kerala country Planning Department 20 Priyesh R Director, Irrigation research and Water resources department, design Board Government of Kerala 21 Director (Generation - Civil) Kerala State Electricity Board 22 G Jayalekshmi Head/Senior Scientist (Programme Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Kerala Co-ordinator) Agricultural University, 80 Sl Name Position Department no. Kumarakom P.O, Kottayam Kerala 686563 23 D.Balamurali Director Directorate of Environment and I.A.S Climate Change 24 Sreekala S Member Secretary Kerala State Pollution Control Board 25 Principal Secretary Revenue & Disaster Management, State Relief Commissioner & Convener, Kerala State Disaster Management Authority 26 Principal Secretary & APC Department of Agriculture Development & Farmers' Welfare 27 Secretary, Animal Husbandry Animal Husbandry Directorate 28 Director DIRECTORATE OF FISHERIES, 29 Executive Director Information Kerala Mission (IKM) 30 Additional Chief Secretary Department of Local Self Government 31 Principal Secretary Health & Family Welfare 32 Additional Chief Secretary Water Resources Department 33 Additional Chief Secretary Finance Department 34 Secretary Public Works Department 35 Principal Secretary Local Self Govt Department (Urban) 36 Director Department of Panchayats 37 Additional Secretary Department of Local Self Government 38 Chief Engineer Department of Local Self Government 39 Chairman Kerala State Pollution Control Board 40 Dr Mridul Eapen Kerala State Planning Board mridul@cds.ac.in, 41 Dr. B Ekbal Kerala State Planning Board ekbalb@gmail.com, 42 Prof. K N Harilal Kerala State Planning Board harilal@cds.ac.in, 43 Prof T Jayaraman Kerala State Planning Board tjayaraman@gmail.com, 44 Prof. R Kerala State Planning Board ramakumarr@gmail.com, Ramakumar 45 Member Kerala State Planning Board ms_spb.ker@nic.in, Secretary, KSPB 46 Principal Secretary Revenue , 47 chiefagri.spb@kerala.gov.in, 48 nagesh.spb@kerala.gov.in, 49 ssdnklaspb@gmail.com Appendix 2: List of LSGIs invited for the workshop District Panchayath/Municipality/Block Email id Alappuzha Alappuzha secretaryalappuzha@gmail.com, Alappuzha Chengannur seccgnrmlty@gmail.com, 81 District Panchayath/Municipality/Block Email id Alappuzha Harippad sec.hpd@gmail.com, Alappuzha Ambalapuzha North ambalapuzhanorthgp@gmail.com, Alappuzha Ambalapuzha South ambalapuzhasouth@gmail.com Alappuzha Punnapra North punnapranorthgp@gmail.com Alappuzha Punnapra South punnaprasouthgp@gmail.com Alappuzha Purakkad purakkadgp@gmail.com Alappuzha Aryadu aryaadgp@gmail.com Alappuzha Mannancherry mannancherrygp@gmail.com Alappuzha Mararikulam South mararikulamsouthgp@gmail.com Alappuzha Champakulam nrega.ckm@gmail.com, Alappuzha Edathua edathuagramapanchayat@gmail.co m Alappuzha Kainakary kainakarygp@gmail.com Alappuzha Nedumudi nedumudygp@gmail.com, Alappuzha Thakazhy nregatky@gmail.com Alappuzha Thalavady thalavadygp@gmail.com, Alappuzha Ala alagramapanchayat@gmail.com Alappuzha Bhudhanoor secretarybudhanoor@gmail.com Alappuzha Cheriyanad cheriyanadgp@gmail.com, Alappuzha Mulakuzha mulakkuzhagp@gmail.com Alappuzha Pandanadu pandanaadgp@gmail.com Alappuzha Puliyoor puliyoorgp@gmail.com Alappuzha Thiruvanvandoor hiruvanvandoorgp@gmail.com, Alappuzha Venmoney venmonygp@gmail.com, Alappuzha Cheruthana cheruthanagp@gmail.com Alappuzha Karuvatta karuvattagp@gmail.com Alappuzha Kumarapuram kumarapuramgp@gmail.com Alappuzha Thrikkunnappuzha thrikunnappuzhagp@gmail.com Alappuzha Veeyapuram veeyapuramgp@gmail.com Alappuzha Chennithala-Thripperunthura chennithalathripperumthuragp@g mail.com Alappuzha Mannar mannargp@gmail.com Alappuzha Ramankary secretaryramankary@gmail.com Idukki Elappara elapparagp@gmail.com Idukki Kokkayar secretarykokkayargp@gmail.com Idukki Kumily kumilygp@gmail.com Idukki Peerumade gpsec.peermade@hotmail.com Idukki Peruvanthanam peruvanthanamgp@gmail.com Idukki Vandiperiyar vandiperiyargp@gmail.com Kottayam Kottayam Erumely erumelygpktm@gmail.com Kottayam Koruthodu koruthodugpktm@gmail.com, Kottayam Manimala manimalagpktm@gmail.com, Kottayam Mundakayam mundakkayamgpktm@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Pathanamthitta Pathanamthitta Chenneerkara chenneerkkaragramapanchayat@g mail.com Pathanamthitta Cherukole ,cherukolegp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Elanthoor elanthoorgp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Kozhencherry kgp030405@gmail.com, 82 District Panchayath/Municipality/Block Email id Pathanamthitta Mallappuzhassery mallappuzhassery.gramapanchayat @gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Naranganam naranganam.gp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Omalloor omalloorgp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Ayroor agpsec301@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Eraviperoor eraviperoorgp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Ezhumattoor ezhumattoorpanchayat@gmail.co m, Pathanamthitta Koipuram koipuramgramapanchayat@gmail. com, Pathanamthitta Puramattom puramattomgp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Thottapuzhassery tpsry1@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Aurvappulam aruvappulampanchayat@gmail.co m, Pathanamthitta Konni konnigp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Malayalapuzha gpmalayalappuzha@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Mylapra mylapragp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Thannithodu thannithodugp2015@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Kottanad kottanadgp@gmail.com Pathanamthitta Kottangal kottangalgp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Aranmula aranmulagp@gmail.com Pathanamthitta Kulanada ,secretarykulanadagp@gmail.com Pathanamthitta Mezhuveli ,mezhuvelygp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Kadapra kadapragp@gmail.com Pathanamthitta Kuttoor kuttoorgp@gmail.com Pathanamthitta Nedumpuram nedumpuram.secretary@gmail.co m, Pathanamthitta Niranam niranamgp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Chittar chittargp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Naranammoozhy secretarynaranammoozhygp@gma il.com, Pathanamthitta Ranni rannigp@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Ranni-Angadi ranniangadigp@gmail.com Pathanamthitta Ranni-Pazhavangadi rannipazhavangadigp@gmail.com Pathanamthitta Ranni-Perunadu rperunadugramapanchayath@gma il.com Pathanamthitta Seethathodu lsgdseethathode@gmail.com, Pathanamthitta Vadaserikara vadasserikkaragp@gmail.com Pathanamthitta Vechoochira vechoochiragp@gmail.com, Appendix 3: List of NGO/CSOs invited for the workshop S. Name of the NGO Location Head/ Nodal Person - NGO No. 1 Kerala Grama Nirmmana Samithy Kozhikode Mr. Manikandan KGNS 2 OISCA Kozhikode Mr. Narendradev 3 Welfare Services Ernakulam Ernakulam Mr. Ajaykumar 4 Rajiv Youth Foundation Manjeri Rasheed 5 Centre For Employment And Malappuram Mr.Ashraf Educational Guidance 83 6 Peoples Services Society Palakkad Fr.Jestin 7 Kerala Rural Development Agency Karunagappally, Chairman- Ibrahimkutty Kollam 8 Changanachery Social Service Changanacherry Fr. Joseph Kalarickal - Society Secretary/ Executive Director 9 Jyothi Jeevapoorna Trust Archana Kottayam Shiny Joshi - Senoir Programme Women's Centre Officer 10 Peermade Development Society Idukki Dr Siby Joseph - Director 11 Centre for Socio - Economic and Pathanamthitta Krisnakumar K K Environmental Studies 12 Kerala Voluntary Health Service Kottayam Saju Itty 13 Soci-Economic Unit Foundation Alppuazha Saji Sebastian 14 Soma Trivandrum Satheesh 15 Solidarity Movement of India (SMI) Idukki T.K Thulaseedaran Pillai 16 CARD Thiruvalla- Rev. Abraham P.Varkey Pathananmthitta 17 The Palai Social Welfare Society Kottayam Dantees Koonanickal P.V George 18 Kottayam Social Welfare Society Kottayam Fr.Mathew 19 Gandhiji Study Centre Idukki Jose Vattakandam 20 AVARD Kottayam Fr. Manoj 21 High Range Development Society Idukki Fr.Mathew Thadathil 22 Rajagiri Out Reach Ernakulam Meena Kuruviila 23 Bodhana-Tiruvalla Social Service Pathanamthitta Fr.Samuel Society 24 STARS Kozhikkode Mr.Robin 25 AGES Trivandrum Mr.Mohan 26 MIRROR Wayanad Mr.Thomas Pulpally Appendix 4: Others (activists, environmentalist, and researchers) invited for the workshop S. Name Email id No. 1 Jayan Champakulam jayanchampakulam@gmail.com 2 Omal Shaji omalshaji@gmail.com, 3 Sajida sajidassbi@gmail.com 4 TKA Nair akuttynair@gmail.com 5 Shabeer shabeermhd@gmail.com 6 2cifoffice@gmail.com 7 iyerbhag@gmail.com Appendix 5: Officials invited from of multilateral development/funding agencies S. Name E mail id No. 1 jan.alber jan.alber@kfw.de, 2 Elif Ayhan Elif Ayhan , 3 Balakrishna Menon Parameswaran Balakrishna Menon Parameswaran , 84 4 Deepak Singh Deepak Singh , 5 Balakrishnan Madhavan Kutty Balakrishnan Madhavan Kutty