Document of The World Bank Report No. 13048-BR PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN DEPARTMENT I TO THIE REGIONAL VICE PRESIDENT ON A PROPOSED GRANT FROM THE RAIN FOREST TRUST FUND IN AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO US$2.1 MILLION TO THE FEDERATIVE REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL FOR AN INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT JUNE 6, 1995 Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forest Country Department I Latin America and the Caribbean Region CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (As of June 5, 1995) Currency Brazilian Real Exchange Rate : US$1.11 US$1.00 = R$0.904 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 1 meter 3.28 feet 1 kilometer (km) 0.62 miles 1 hectare (ha) 10,000 m2 = 2.47 acres 1 square kilometer (km2) 100 hectares = 0.386 sq miles 1 nautical mile 1853 meters 1 cubic meter (m3) 1.31 cubic yards or 264.2 US gallons 1 kilogram (kg) 2.2 pounds 1 ton 1,000 kg = 2,205 pounds GOVERNMENT OF BRAZIL FISCAL YEAR January 1 to December 31 ACRONYMS AC State of Acre AP State of Amapa AM State of Amazonas CEC Commission of European Communities CRI Cart6rio de Registro de Im6veis (Real Estate Register) DAF Diretoria de Assuntos Fundiarios (Directorate of Land Tenure Issues), FUNAI DM Deutsche Mark DPU Departamento de Patrimonio da Uniao (Federal Property Register) EMBRAPA Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuaria (Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation) FUNAI Funda,co Nacional do fndio (National Indian Foundation) GIS Geographic Information System FNS Fundac,o Nacional de Sauide (National Health Foundation) GOB Government of Brazil GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (German Agency for Technical Cooperation) IAG International Advisory Group (Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forest) IBAMA Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renovgveis (Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources) INCRA Instituto Nacional de Coloniza,co e Reforma Agraria (National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform) KfW Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau (Credit Institution for Reconstruction) MA State of Maranhao MMA Ministerio do Meio Ambiente e da Amazonia Legal (Ministry of the Environment and the Legal Amazon) MT State of Mato Grosso NGO Non-Governmental Organization PA State of Para RFT Rain Forest Trust Fund RO State of Rondonia RR State of Roraima SPCU Special Project Coordinating Unit TO State of Tocantins TOR Terms of Reference BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS * GRANT AND PROJECT SUMMARY ..................................... i I. BACKGROUND ................................................ 1 Lessons from Previous Bank Involvement .............................. 3 II. THE PROJECT ................................................ 4 Project Objectives ............................................. 4 Project Description ..................... 4 Project Components ........................................... 4 Project Cost and Financing ................... 7 Project Implementation .......................................... 7 Procurement and Disbursement .................................... 9 Project Sustainability ........................................... 11 Rationale for RFT Funding ....................................... 11 Poverty Aspects .............................................. 12 Environmental Aspects .......................................... 12 Project Benefits .............................................. 12 Project Risks ................................................ 13 m. AGREEMENTS REACHED AND RECOMMENDATION ................... 13 Schedule A .......................................................16 Schedule B-1 .................................................... 18 Schedule B-2 .................................................... 19 Schedule C ....................................................... 20 IV. TECHNICAL ANNEXES ......................................... 21 ANNEX 1: LEGAL AND TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF INDIGENOUS AREA REGULARIZATION ...................................... 22 ANNEX 2: PRIORITIZATION AND PROPOSED LIST OF INDIGENOUS AREAS .. 31 ANNEX 3: LEGAL ASPECTS OF NATURAL RESOURCE USE IN INDIGENOUS AREAS, AND CONFLICTS BETWEEN CONSERVATION UNITS AND INDIGENOUS RESERVES .................................. 38 This project is based on the findings of a World Bank and KfW appraisal team which visited Brasilia from April 5 to 16, 1994. The Mission was composed of Messrs./Mmes. Judith Lisansky, Graciela Lituma and Jamison Suter (Land and Forest Team, LA1EA); Christoph Diewald (LAIEA); Hans Schutz (KfW); and Eberhart Goll (GTZ). Additional preparation work was done by Messrs./Mmes. Daniel Gross and Irani Escolano (Environmental Policy Team, LAlEA); and Douglas Graham (LATEN). The Rain Forest Pilot Progran Manager is Mr. Stephen J. Ettinger, the Project Advisor is Mr. Orville Grimes and the Country Director is Mr. Gobind T. Nankani. ANNEX 4: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ........................... 43 ANNEX 5: PARTICIPATION BY INDIGENOUS PEOPLE AND CRITERIA FOR DEVELOPING SURVEILLANCE AND PROTECTION PLANS FOR INDIGENOUS AREAS .................................... 47 ANNEX 6: CAPACITY-BUILDING AND STUDIES ...................... 51 ANNEX 7: MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN ................... 55 ANNEX 8: FUNAI EXTERNALLY FUNDED SPECIAL PROJECTS IN THE LEGAL AMAZON ...... ............. .................... 62 ANNEX 9: REPORT AND DOCUMENTS IN PROJECT FILES .... .......... 64 ANNEX 10: DETAILED PROJECT COST TABLES ........ .. ............ 65 Map IBRD No. 26184 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT GRANT AND PROJECT SUMMARY Grantor: Rain Forest Trust Fund (RFT) Recipient: Federative Republic of Brazil Executing Agency: National Indian Foundation (FUNAI) Beneficiaries: Indigenous Populations of the Legal Amazon Poverty: Not Applicable Amount: US$2.1 million (RFT) Terms: Grant Financing Plan: Source TOTAL (US$ million) equivalent Rain Forest Trust Fund (grant) 2.1 KfW (grant) 16.6* Brazilian Government 2.2 Total 20.9 Economic Rate of Return: N/A Map: IBRD No. 26184 * The German contribution is DM30 million. Based on an exchange rate prevailing at the time of appraisal, the dollar equivalent is US$16.6 million. Actual dollar equivalents are subject to fluctuations based on exchange rate movements. NIEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE LATIN ANIERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN DEPARTMENT I TO THE REGIONAL VICE PRESIDENT ON A GRANT FROM THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST TRUST FUND TO THE FEDERATIVE REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL FOR AN INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT 1. I submit for your approval the following memorandum and recommendation on a proposed grant from the Rain Forest Trust Fund (RFT) to the Government of Brazil for US$2.1 million. The grant will partially finance the Indigenous Lands Project. This project is part of the Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forest, which is funded by the Group of Seven countries, the European Union, and the Netherlands, and administered by the World Bank. I. BACKGROUND 2. The Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forest was created to protect the biologically diverse and globally important forests of the Brazilian Amazon region. The Program provides support for an integrated set of projects designed to reduce the rate of deforestation in the rain forests. Together, these projects are designed to: (i) strengthen the capacity of the public sector to set and enforce sound environmental policy; (ii) improve the management of special protected areas; and (iii) increase the knowledge base on conservation and sustainable development in the Amazon rain forests. The present project would address the second objective, primarily by regularizing' a significant portion of indigenous lands in the Amazon region. For millennia, indigenous people have exploited the Amazon rain forest ecosystem without causing major environmental degradation. Brazil's indigenous people have primary and inherent rights to about 89 million hectares or 17.5 percent of the area of the Legal Amazon2, nearly all of which is under native forest cover. 3. In 1500 the indigenous population of Brazil may have been as large as eight million. As a result of continuous colonization of territory, warfare, disease, and assimilation, Brazil's indigenous population has fallen to about 240,000 today, of which approximately 145,000 indigenous people live in the Amazon region. This massive depopulation was caused primarily by the introduction of western diseases. I The process of regularizing indigenous lands refers to the steps necessary to legally recognize them. Full regularization of indigenous lands is comprised of the following three basic steps: (I) Identification and Delimitation; (II) Demarcation; and (III) Regularization. Based on Brazilian usage, the English terms indigenous area and indigenous lands may be used interchangeably. In Brazil the term indigenous reserve is generally used when the indigenous people have been relocated to a new area that is not their traditional habitat. Indigenous Dark is an older infrequently used term for an indigenous area. See Annex 1 for a more complete and detailed description of the technical and legal steps necessary for full regularization. 2 The Legal Amazon is defined under Brazilian law as the area comprised of the States of Acre, Amapd, Amazonas. Para. Rond6nia, Roraima and parts of Maranhao, Mato Grosso and Tocantins. 2 Morbidity and mortality were further aggravated by decreased access to natural resources when indigenous lands are occupied or traditional livelihoods altered by resettlement, dependency on outsiders or inadequate land allocations. 4. The indigenous people of Brazil are traditionally organized at a tribal level, with no political institutions above the village level. Thus, while two neighboring populations may be culturally and linguistically similar, they often regard themselves as separate peoples. Most indigenous people of the Amazon basin retain their native language and customs, but are increasingly involved in the regional economy and social system. Under traditional resource management regimes, indigenous people have relatively low negative impact on the environment. In many areas, settlers, wildcat miners and loggers have caused environmental damage to the rain forest areas and endangered the health and security of the indigenous people, as well as their ability to maintain traditional lifestyles. 5. Since the early part of the 20th century, Brazilian law has treated indigenous people as wards of the state, with broad rights guaranteed under the Constitution. The most basic of these rights is legal recognition of their lands. Indigenous lands are owned by the nation, but indigenous communities have exclusive usufruct rights to all above-ground, aquatic and soil resources in their respective areas. Government policy limits all economic activity on indigenous lands other than traditional subsistence pursuits. The rights of indigenous people to profitably exploit their natural resources or lease these rights to other parties is currently a subject of policy debate. See Annex 3 for more details of the legal aspects of natural resource use in indigenous areas. 6. Article 67 of the Temporary Provisions of the Federal Constitution of October 1988 requires that all indigenous lands in Brazil be demarcated by October 1993. There are 532 indigenous areas recognized by the Brazilian National Indian Foundation (FUNAI), of which 370 are located in the nine states of the Legal Amazon. Only 50% of Brazil's indigenous areas were demarcated by this deadline, largely because inadequate resources were allocated. The failure to meet the target deadline, however, does not reduce the need or modify the legal mandate to complete this task. 7. The National Indian Foundation (FUNAI), created ih 1967, has been responsible for regularizing and protecting indigenous areas and for providing health, education and other services. Since then, FUNAI has had a number of reorganizations and changes of responsibilities, with some supporting services being returned to line agencies. It has a dedicated and experienced core staff with strong capacity in land regularization. However, relatively few FUNAI field staff have received training in indigenous issues or administration. Furthermore, FUNAI is short of computer equipment needed to more effectively monitor indigenous lands. 8. The proposed project would cover seven of the Legal Amazon states, where a total of 280 indigenous areas are located. The other two states, Rond6nia and Mlato 3 Grosso, already have separate Bank operations, the Rond6nia Natural Resource Management and Mato Grosso Natural Resource Management Projects (Loans 3444- BR and 3492-BR), covering the needs of indigenous people. To date in the states to be covered by the proposed project, 116 indigenous areas (41 %) have been demarcated, although not always fully regularized, an additional 91 indigenous areas (33%) have been delimited but not demarcated, and approximately 73 areas (26%) are yet to be identified. The proposed project would result in further work toward regularization of about 127 of the most threatened and vulnerable indigenous areas, thus contributing significantly toward compliance with the 1988 Constitution. See Annex 2, Tables I and 2a-c for a summary of the status of areas by state and a prioritized list of areas to be affected under this project. This project would facilitate the implementation of two related pilot projects to meet urgent needs to improve the conditions of indigenous people which were partly developed with preinvestment financing under the Pilot Program. One pilot, a community-based indigenous health program, will be carried out under the National Health Foundation (FNS), and the second pilot is a sustainable development project currently being developed with the technical assistance and support of the German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ). Lessons from Previous Bank Involvement 9. Since 1980, the World Bank has supported several projects in the Amazon region. They have included special components (financed entirely by the Government) designed to help protect indigenous populations that might be affected by Bank-sponsored development projects.3 These components supported regularization of a considerable incremental area of indigenous land, basic health services, civil works, equipment and administrative costs. They have already benefitted several thousand indigenous people. However, these activities suffered from lapses in financing, administrative difficulties stenmming from the general weakness of FUNAI, and the volatility of the frontier situation where improved access, lack of surveillance and enforcement of protected areas, and illegal use of natural resources has led to conflicts. Nevertheless, these projects succeeded in blocking and even reversing the encroachment of unsustainable colonization projects, squatting, ranching and mining activities onto indigenous land, preserving millions of hectares in relatively undegraded state. The lessons from these projects are: (a) the most durable benefits accrued from demarcation and regularization of indigenous lands; and (b) the least durable benefits were those involving introduction of exotic technologies and services without due involvement of the indigenous population in project identification or implementation or without training and means for the indigenous people to maintain them. The proposed project builds on these lessons by providing for stable financing and focusing mainly on demarcation and regularization of indigenous lands which has POLONOROESTE (Loans 2062-BR, 2116-BR and 2353-BR) and Carajas Iron Ore (Loan 2196-BR). The Rond6nia Natural Resource Mlanagement (PLANAFLORO, Loan 3444-BR), and Mato Grosso Natural Resource Management (PRODEAGRO, Loan 3492-BR) have not yet accumulated enough experience for lessons to be learned. 4 a permanent and irreversible effect and by minimizing investments in areas that FUNAI is not yet ready to address. II. THE PROJECT Project Objectives 10. The general objective of the proposed project is to improve the conservation of natural resources in indigenous areas and increase the well-being of indigenous people through: (i) regularization of indigenous lands in the Legal Amazon; and (ii) improved protection of indigenous populations and areas. Project Description 11. To achieve these objectives, the project would finance technical assistance, training, surveying and demarcation services (normally contracted for in the private sector), equipment, vehicles, pilot community-based and applied research sub-projects, and operational costs, including travel, per diem, fuel and supplies, for the following four components: (i) Regularization of Indigenous Lands; (ii) Surveillance and Protection of Indigenous Areas; (iii) Capacity-Building and Studies; and (iv) Support to Project Management. Project Components 12. Component 1: Regularization of Indigenous Lands (Total estimated cost: US$16.6 million). This component would support identification, demarcation and regularization of indigenous lands in all Legal Amazon states except Rond6nia and Mato Grosso. The design of the project is based on an annual review of the highest priority indigenous areas requiring regularization and annual revisions of the project workplan. Therefore, the number of areas targeted in each subcomponent is an estimate. The project will regularize as many areas as project funds permit. The legal and technical aspects of regularization of indigenous lands are described in detail in Annex 1. The component would consist of: Subcomponent I - Identification: (i) identification and delimitation of an estimated 42 of the highest priority indigenous areas not yet identified; and (ii) updating of information on at least four areas previously delimited. Identifications to be undertaken under this project would include environmental diagnostics. Subcomponent 2 - Demarcation and Regularization: (i) demarcation of an estimated 81 of the highest priority indigenous areas already delimited; (ii) whenever required, preparation and implementation of compensation and/or resettlement pians for good faith non-Indian inhabitants; (iii) Presidential confirmation of demarcated indigenous areas; and (iv) local and federal registration of confirmed areas. 5 Subcomponent 3 - Environmental Diagnostics: development and implementation of environmental diagnostics for priority areas to be demarcated under the project. 13. FUNAI has established a priority list based primarily on risk factors and degree of local support to establish the order in which identifications and demarcations would take place. Risk factors include (i) vulnerability, such as proximity to cities and settlements and/or regional development projects, and (ii) physical or cultural threats, such as epidemics and/or inter-ethnic conflicts. Regularization work would be undertaken based on the proposed priority list which is fully described in Annex 2 (see para. 20). Consultation with and participation of indigenous communities in this component are described in Annex 5. In certain cases, the final stage of regularization of indigenous lands would require removing good-faith non-Indians from indigenous areas. During negotiations agreement was reached that the compensation and/or resettlement plans for good faith non-Indian inhabitants in indigenous areas to be demarcated under the project would be based on the Sectoral Resettlement and Compensation Principles which were discussed during appraisal and finalized during negotiations (para. 34(a)). Where necessary, a Compensation and/or Resettlement Plan satisfactory to the Bank will be prepared prior to beginning demarcation activities in concerned indigenous areas (see para. 12, Subcomponent 2). The compensation costs will be financed by counterpart funds. Studies to evaluate and plan appropriate resettlement alternatives for indigenous areas containing larger non-Indian settlements will be funded under the project as needed (see para. 15, Subcomponent 3). To minimize delays in demarcations, the dates of requests for and issuance of the declaratory orders of indigenous usufruct (Portaria Declarat6ria de Posse Indigena) by the Ministry of Justice (FUNAI's parent agency) would be followed by the project (see para. 20). Annex 1 provides further information on declaratory orders. Also, to minimize areas of conflict, the project would not finance regularization activities where conservation units are superimposed on indigenous areas, unless the resolutions of these conflicts have been previously and mutually agreed upon by the responsible institutions (see para. 20 and Annex 3). 14. Component 2: Surveillance and Protection of Indigenous Areas (Total estimated cost: US$1.6 million). The objective of this component is to assist indigenous people in developing plans for activities designed to protect their areas while securing their subsistence and conserving the natural resource base. Therefore, the plans would be developed and implemented largely by the affected indigenous population. As needed, logistical, technical and scientific support for the design and implementation of the plan will be provided by FUNAI regional administrative offices, FUNAI identification teams and/or pertinent NGOs. To ensure the effectiveness and sustainability of the protection plans during and after the proposed project, the plans would help create the conditions for their own maintenance, by means of economically and ecologically sustainable income-generating activities as well as rudimentary infrastructure. Among the types of activities to be supported would be the encouragement of voluntary patrolling by establishing strategically located control bases (consisting of agricultural fields or fishing or hunting camps to 6 be visited periodically by the indigenous people); intensification of the use of traditional areas for hunting or collecting forest products; and possible decrease in visiting or travel to populated border areas to diminish exposure to diseases and other threats. In cases of invasions of indigenous areas which are judged as highly threatening to the physical integrity of an area, the indigenous community, through FUNAI, could request the help of pertinent government agencies (IBAMA, the Federal Police and others) capable of clearing the area. In situations in which indigenous groups are relatively incapable of protecting themselves, for example, because of cultural characteristics, newness of the contact situation, or absence of sufficient numbers of adults, FUNAI would assume responsibility for the design and initial implementation of the protection plan but with substantial participation of the indigenous community. The protection plans would be based on criteria proposed and discussed during appraisal and detailed in Annex 5. During negotiations agreement was reached on the criteria for preparing and implementing protection plans and mechanisms to assure long-term indigenous lands protection, as set forth in a side letter dated February 23, 1995 (para. 34(b)(i)). Also, during negotiations agreement was reached that the agreed-upon criteria will be used, and that the Project Consultative Commission will review and provide recommendations on each protection plan developed under the project (see para. 19 and Annex 5) (para. 34(b)(ii)). 15. Component 3: Capacity-Building and Studies (Total estimated cost: US$1.6 million). This component would support activities to strengthen the protection of indigenous populations and regularization and improved conditions for the management of indigenous lands. The training program and studies are described in more detail in Annex 6. The component would consist of: Subcomponent 1 - Geographic Information System: implementation and training for a Geographic Information System (GIS) to improve the regularization and monitoring activities of indigenous lands. Subcomponent 2 - Training in Indigenous Issues: five courses in indigenous issues for FUNAI field staff, representatives of pertinent governmental agencies, NGOs and indigenous people. Indigenous issues courses would cover administrative, cultural, legal, environmental and technical issues. FUNAI provided satisfactory basic qualification requirements for NGOs and government agencies to provide technical assistance and training, and satisfactory criteria and mechanisms for selecting trainees. These are summarized in Annex 6. FUNAI will use Bank guidelines to select and contract agencies to provide technical assistance. Subcomponent 3 - Studies: (i) study and test of a methodology for a rapid environmental diagnostic of the natural resources in indigenous areas; (ii) study to test and evaluate alternative methods of demarcation, specifically the planting of marker species along boundaries; (iii) studies of legal and policy issues with respect to indigenous rights and natural resource use and 7 management; and (iv) studies of resettlement recommendations for good faith non-Indians from indigenous areas in specific cases. FUNAI has prepared satisfactory terms of reference for the first two studies, which are summarized in Annex 6. Agreement was reached during negotiations that terms of reference satisfactory to the Bank for (i) the legal studies would be submitted to the Bank by June 30, 1995 (para. 34(c)) and (ii) resettlement studies would be submitted whenever necessary (para. 34(d)). 16. Component 4: Support to Project Manazement (Total estimated cost: US$1.1 million). The activities to be supported under this component include: (i) project management and (ii) independent evaluation. Project implementation and conditionalities are summarized below in paragraphs 18 to 21 and further described in Annex 4. The monitoring and evaluation plan is presented in Annex 7. Project Cost and Financing 17. The total project cost (including contingencies) is estimated at US$20.9 million. The project would be financed by the Rain Forest Trust Fund (RFT) (US$2.1 million), Germany through KfW (DM 30.0 million, currently equivalent to about US$16.6 million) and the Federative Republic of Brazil (US$2.2 million). Price contingencies were based on international inflation rates and physical contingencies from zero percent to 15 percent according to the expenditure category. Financing would be parallel, and would be made available on a grant basis. RFT funds would finance Components 3 and 4, except the part of Component 3 for computer equipment and training to be financed by German funds. German funds would finance Components I (except compensation costs), 2, and the computer costs from Component 3. The Goverrnment of Brazil would finance compensation costs in Component 1. Project Implementation 1 8. Management. The proposed project would be carried out over five and a half years, and would be implemented primarily by FUNAI. Project implementation would be coordinated by the Special Projects Coordination Unit (SPCU) of FUNAI, which also functions as the relevant Technical Secretariat for the Pilot Program. The SPCU would report directly to the President of FUNAI and the Executive Secretariat of the Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forest in the Ministry of the Environment and the Legal Amazon (MMA). The SPCU would be assisted by a Project Technical Coordination Unit (TC) and short-term technical consultants. FUNAI has prepared satisfactory terms of reference for short-term consultancies to be contracted during the first year of the project. Project management would also be supported by a technical consultant to be provided by GTZ and approved by the Governrnent of Brazil. Several directorates and departments within FUNAI would carry out specific project activities. FUNAI's land regularization unit is strong and well staffed, and with key training financed under the project it will be fully capable of implementing the land regularization component of the project. The project will 8 also contract for specific services with qualified NGOs and governmental organizations. FUNAI has presented satisfactory basic requirements for selecting NGOs and governmental organizations. FUNAI will enter into agreements (convenios) with: (i) the Ministry of the Environment and the Legal Amazon (MMA) for ensuring timely availability of funds to implement the project; and, whenever necessary, with (ii) qualified NGOs, universities, international and other Brazilian government agencies to undertake or support specific project activities, as appropriate. Signature of the legal agreement between FUNAI and MMA would also be a condition of Grant effectiveness (para. 35(a)). Further details on project management are provided in Annex 4. 19. Participation. Procedures to ensure adequate consultation and participation of indigenous people in project implementation were discussed and agreed at appraisal and are summarized in Annex 5. Systematic indigenous consultation will be further strengthened by the creation of a special Project Consultative Commission (PCC), which will consist of four representatives of indigenous organizations or NGOs to be selected by consultation with indigenous people and four government representatives. The Consultative Commission will advise and provide formal evaluations on project implermentation and performance for the SPCU and the Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forest. The criteria and mechanism for selecting non-government members of the Consultative Commission was discussed during appraisal and finalized durina negotiations. The establishment of the PCC (Annex 5) under terms and conditions satisfactory to the Bank will be a condition for grant effectiveness (para. 35(b)). 20. Annual Operating Plans. Monitoring and Reporting. The SPCU will prepare the Annual Operating Plan in conjunction with the Project Technical Coordination Unit (TC) and executing FUNAI directorates for submission to the Bank and KfW. During negotiations, it was agreed that the Bank would receive FUNAI's Arnual Operating Plan by November 30 of the year before each operational plan which would include: (i) project activities to be carried out during the next calendar year, including indication of the number of good faith non-Indian inhabitants to be removed from indigenous areas to be demarcated (see Annex 7); (ii) studies to confirm the necessity of resettlement and analyze available options whenever the Annual Operating Plan indicates that resettlement may be required; (iii) the priority list of proposed indigenous areas to be regularized as reviewed and revised by FUNAI and the Project Consultative Commission to take into account the beneficiaries' current needs; (iv) the list of indigenous areas ineligible for financing due to unresolved conflicts with conservation units; and (v) the proposed annual budget allocation for counterpart funds (para. 34(e)). The presentation of each year's Annual Operating Plan satisfactory to the Bank is a condition of disbursement (para. 36(a)). As a condition of grant effectiveness, FUNAI would be required to present for the first year of the project its Annual Operating Plan (para. 35(c)). The Annual Operating Plan will specify the financial and operational indicators and implementation targets that will be used for project monitoring. During negotiations, agreement was reached on basic monitoring indicators including: (i) socio-economic indicators for good faith non- 9 Indians being removed from indigenous areas; and (ii) indicators for the issuance of declaratory orders of indigenous usufruct (Portaria Declarat6ria de Posse Indigena) by the Ministry of Justice (FUNAI's parent agency); these monitoring indicators will be used to prepare the quarterly and semi annual reports (para. 34(f)). During negotiations, it was agreed that semi-annual reports on the implementation progress of the project would be submitted to the Bank by February 28 and August 31 of each year (para. 34(g)). The SPCU will receive quarterly financial and operating reports from executing directorates and other participating organizations based on the agreed on indicators from the Annual Operating Plan by the end of the month after each quarter. The SPCU, with the assistance of the Project Technical Coordination Unit (TC), will prepare consolidated biannual financial and operational monitoring and implementation progress reports based on the quarterly reports. 21. Evaluation. In addition to the biannual evaluative reports on the project compiled by FUNAI and reviewed by the Project Consultative Commission, the project will also contract for independent evaluations to be carried out by a qualified consulting firm, NGO or university. The project evaluation will include a baseline study, a mid-term evaluation, and a final evaluation. This evaluation will also use indicators to assess the impact of the compensation and resettlement plans on non- Indian inhabitants of indigenous areas covered under the project. A draft project monitoring and evaluation system is described in Annex 7. At negotiations, it was agreed that the terms of reference for the project evaluation will be presented to the Bank by July 15. 1995, the baseline study by December 31, 1995, the mid-term evaluation by September 30. 1997, and the final evaluation by six months after the conclusion of the project (para. 34(h)). Bank missions are planned for six-month intervals to supervise project progress. Supervision would be led by a unit established in the Brasilia resident mission to look after all Pilot Program projects. During negotiations, it was agreed that rot later than September 30 of each year the Government would hold an annual review with the Bank, at which time the adequacy of the project strategy would be assessed and modifications discussed and agreed, if necessary (para. 34(i)). Procurement and Disbursement 22. FUNAI, as the executing agency, will be responsible for all procurement under the project, which will be carried out in accordance with Bank guidelines, and will ensure the competitiveness, in terms of price and quality, of the items procured and their suitability for the purposes intended. FUNAI has experience with Bank procurement guidelines, in particular with respect to the implementation of pre- investment studies financed by the Bank under the Pilot Program. Civil works will not be financed by the RFT grant. KfW will finance all the civil works and demarcation field works following KFW procurement procedures. These works will be scattered throughout the Amazon region, and will be dispersed in time over the five and a half years of the project. 10 23. Goods, including computers, office and field work equipment and supplies, purchase of seedlings for demarcating borders and training materials are about ten percent of total project costs (US$250,000 approximately). These supplies and equipment with diverse characteristics would be purchased over the five and a half years of the project. Therefore, these items would be procured in packages valued below US$100,000 through shopping procedures acceptable to the Bank by obtaining three quotations by any eligible contractors. Documentation related to these purchases would be subject to ex-post review by the Bank during field supervision. The procurement arrangements for the project are shown in Schedule B. 24. The project would also finance consulting services, training and operational expenses. The operational expenses include travel, per diem and miscellaneous services for government officials. The selection and appointment of consultants for studies, workshops, training and technical assistance would follow the Bank Guidelines for the Use of Consultants by the World Bank Borrower and the World Bank Executing Agencv, dated August 1981. Selection of consultant firms valued at US$ 60,000 or more would be subject to prior Bank review (Terms of Reference, budgets, letters of invitation, evaluations and proposed contracts). For individual consultants, prior Bank review (TOR, qualifications and conditions of employment) would be required for contracts valued at US$30,000 or more. Below these limits, Bank prior review would apply only to TORs. 25. The proposed RFT grant of US$2.1 million would be disbursed over a period of five and a half years (Schedule B-2). The project Completion Date would be June 30, 2000, and the Closing Date would be December 31, 2000. The proceeds of the RFT grant would be disbursed against 100% of eligible expenditures for consultancies and training, operational expenses and equipment and supplies. 26. RFT Grant funds would be disbursed against Statements of Expenditures (SOEs) for consultant services for firms whose contract value is below US$60,000; for consultant services for individuals whose contract value is below US$30,000; for all equipment and supplies contracts; and for all operational expenses. Supporting documentation for such expenditures would not be submitted to the Bank but would be made available for review by Bank supervision missions. All other disbursements will be made against fully documented withdrawal applications. The KfW funds would be disbursed directly by KfW on the basis of KfW's own internal procedures as 100% of the total expenditures in the following categories: civil works, consultancie; and training, operational expenses, and equipment and supplies. 27. Accounts and Audits. FUNAI would maintain separate accounts for project expenditures. In order to expedite project execution, a Special Account will be opened and maintained in US dollars at a commercial bank acceptable to the Bank. Expected authorized allocation for the Special Account will be US$150,000. The project accounts and the Special Account will be audited annually by independent auditors acceptable to the Bank. After the audit, and not later than six months after the close of the fiscal year, FUNAI will transmit certified copies of the audited 11 accounts, together with certified copies of the auditors' reports to the Bank. At negotiations, it was agreed that (i) the Special Account and the project accounts would be maintained and audited annually by independent auditors according to standards and procedures satisfactory to the Bank; (ii) terms of reference for the auditors would include, inter alia, detailed procedures for the examination and verification of the SOEs for the project accounts; and (iii) certified copies of the audited accounts and of the auditors' reports would be submitted to the Bank within six months of the close of each fiscal year (para. 34(j)). Project Sustainability 28. Under the Brazilian Constitution, demarcation with confirmation by Presidential decree is a legal act ratifying a pre-existing right to the land by indigenous people. Legal protection, demarcation and regularization efforts would prevent or suppress future encroachments on indigenous reserves. Prevention of encroachment, however, also requires physical maintenance and active patrolling of boundaries by the Government. The project would enhance sustainability of project objectives by emphasizing indigenous participation in the Ciovernment's policies and actions related to land demarcation, boundary maintenance and surveillance. Since outside encroachment is a major cause of declining indigenous health, investments in land demarcation should have a beneficial impact on indigenous health status and help to reduce the future costs of health care in these areas. Finally, the Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forest includes other projects designed to support monitoring and enforcement of environmental legislation. This will be coordinated with FUNAI's effort to further protect indigenous areas, which should produce a synergistic effect. Rationale for RFT Funding 29. The Bank's assistance strategy for Brazil, which was discussed by the Executive Directors on June 29, 1993, with an additional discussion expected on June 29, 1995, is to support policies and investments that encourage economic growth and macroeconomic stability, with emphasis on efficient resource allocation and administration in the public sector and appropriate targeting and delivery of support systems to the poor. The Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forest supports the objectives of the country strategy. This project would protect significant amounts of natural and cultural resources in the Amazon region. Indigenous areas of the Legal Amazon constitute the largest remaining reserves of some of the biologically richest and least exploited forested portions of the Amazon, greater than all other conservation units in the region combined. Regularization provides a durable legal instrument for protecting and conserving these areas. This project will further regularize at least 77% of the total remaining indigenous areas requiring identification, delimitation or demarcation in seven states. Modifications to the uses and management of natural resources in indigenous areas, either because of changes in law or policies, or because of income-generating projects, will be addressed and closely monitored by the project, which seeks to protect the Amazon rain forest by 12 Amazon rain forest by maximizing the capacity of indigenous people to benefit from the sustainable management of their natural resources. Poverty Aspects 30. The project does not have a specific poverty focus, nor is it expected to have major impacts on poverty reduction. However, the project will contribute significantly to improving the well-being of about 44,000 indigenous people whose rights to land and natural resources would be assured by the regularization and protection activities funded under the project. Environmental Aspects 31. Successful implementation of the project would help secure the rights of indigenous people in the Amazon basin to maintain their distinctive lifeways, including their relatively low-impact subsistence pursuits. It would help prevent encroachment of outsiders and effectively block illegal colonization projects, extensive ranching and mining projects, thus contributing to the protection of natural resources in indigenous areas. The environrnental impacts of the project would be assessed and mitigated by the following measures: (i) carrying out innovative environmental diagnostics during reserve identification missions (Aimex 6); (ii) the development and implementation of compensation and/or resettlement plans for non-Indian occupants, if needed; and (iii) monitoring of the legal and policy changes and their implications for indigenous people's rights to use or commercialize natural resources (Annexes 3 and 6). In accordance with the Bank's Indigenous Peoples Operational Directive 4.20, the project itself can be considered an Indigenous Peoples Development Plan. The compensation and/or resettlement principles to be followed for this project, discussed and agreed in principle during appraisal and finalized during negotiations, are in accordance with the spirit of the Bank's Involuntary Resettlement Operational Directive 4.30. The project design includes mechanisms for indigenous participation (see Annex 5). With regard to environmental assessment, the Project is rated "B." Project Benefits 32. The principal beneficiaries of the project are all the indigenous people in the areas to be regularized, whose access to land and resources would be assured in perpetuity by the legal demarcation of their traditional lands. The project will support the Government of Brazil in its efforts to help indigenous people in the Amazon have the freedom to decide about maintaining their cultural identity and lifeways, and will contribute to the preservation of the Amazon environment. Indigenous people and the environment would also benefit directly from efforts to improve natural resource management, especially where indigenous groups have begun to adopt modern technologies. By protecting indigenous lands, the project would also help to slow the pace of deforestation and its negative impact on global biodiversity and greenhouse gases. 13 Project Risks 33. The major risks to project implementation are posed by the great political sensitivity of indigenous issues in Brazil. These risks include: (i) possible implications this sensitivity may have for the commitment of the government to the regularization of indigenous lands; (ii) legal, bureaucratic and physical difficulties of the regularization process; (iii) government sensitivity to external funding for the proposed project activities; and (iv) delays or cancellations of internal and/or external funding. Specific risks include: (i) potential delays in the prompt demarcation of indigenous lands due to possible bureaucratic obstacles within the Government of Brazil; (ii) potential changes and/or delays due to proposed legislation or Constitutional revisions; and (iii) lack of interagency coordination and capacity for resolving conflicts relating to non-Indians in indigenous areas. Under the project, the risk of possible delays due to changes in Brazilian policies or procedures will be addressed by providing for annual program reviews by FUNAI, NGOs, the Bank and other donors, and by making prompt action a major indicator of project performance. Delays in the timely implementation of regularization activities would be reported to the donors. The annual reviews would provide a basis for discussions and the revision and streamlining of procedures, when necessary. The general weakness of FUNAI does not pose a major risk to the project because FUNAI's key operating division for project activities (regularization of indigenous lands) is demonstrably strong and efficient. Supervision by in-country GTZ and Bank staff will also facilitate close monitoring of the project. HII. AGREEMENTS REACHED AND RECOMMENDATION 34. During negotiations, the Bank and the Government agreed that: (a) any possible compensation and/or resettlement coming from the need to reclaim indigenous lands for areas scheduled to be demarcated would be based on a detailed site-specific Compensation and/or Resettlement Action Plan acceptable to the Bank based on agreed upon Sectoral Compensation and Resettlement Principles (para. 13); (b) (i) the criteria for preparing and implementing surveillance and protection plans and the mechanisms to assure long-term indigenous lands protection are satisfactory to the Bank and; (ii) that each protection plan developed under the project would be based on the agreed criteria and be reviewed by the Project Consultative Commission (para. 14); (c) terms of reference for the legal studies satisfactory to the Bank would be submitted to the Bank by June 30, 1995 (para. 15); (d) terms of reference for resettlement studies satisfactory to the Bank would be submitted to the Bank whenever necessary (para. 15); 14 (e) the Bank would receive FUNAI's Annual Operating Plan by November 30 of the year before each operational plan which would include: (i) project activities to be carried out during the next calendar year, including the number of good faith non-Indian inhabitants to be removed from indigenous areas to be demarcated; (ii) resettlement studies whenever necessary; (iii) the priority list of proposed indigenous areas to be regularized; (iv) the list of indigenous areas ineligible for financing due to unresolved conflicts with conservation units; and (v) the proposed annual budget allocation for counterpart funds (para. 20); (f) basic monitoring indicators were satisfactory to the Bank and include: (i) socio-economic indicators for good faith non-Indians being removed from indigenous areas; and (ii) indicators for the issuance of declaratory orders of indigenous usufruct (Portaria Declarat6ria de Posse Indigena) by the Ministry of Justice (FUNAI's parent agency). These monitoring indicators will be used to prepare the quarterly and semi-annual reports (para. 20); (g) semi-annual reports on the implemeniation progress of the project would be submitted to the Bank by February 28 and August 31 of each year (para. 20); (h) the terms of reference for the project evaluation would be presented to the Bank by July 15, 1995; the baseline study by December 31, 1995; the mid-term evaluation by September 30, 1997; and the final evaluation within six months after the conclusion of the project (para. 21); (i) not later than September 30 of each year an annual review would be held with the Bank, at which time the adequacy of the project strategy would be assessed and modifications discussed and agreed, if necessary (para. 21); (j) (i) the Special Account and the project accounts would be maintained and audited annually by independent auditors according to standards and procedures satisfactory to the Bank; (ii) terms of reference for the auditors would include, inter alia, detailed procedures for the examination and verification of the SOEs for the project accounts; and (iii) certified copies of the audited accounts and of the auditors' reports would be submitted to the Bank within six months of the close of each fiscal year (para. 27). 15 35. Conditions of Grant effectiveness are: (a) signature of the legal project implementation agreement (convenio) satisfactory to the Bank between FUNAI and Ministry of the Environment and the Legal Amazon (MMA) (para. 18); (b) the establishment of the Project Consultative Commission under terms and conditions satisfactory to the Bank (para. 19); (c) submission by FUNAL of the Annual Operating Plan for the first year of the project satisfactory to the Bank (para. 20); 36. The condition of disbursement is: (a) the presentation of each year's Annual Operating Plan satisfactory to the Bank (para. 20). 37. Recommendation. I am satisfied that the proposed RFT grant would comply with Resolution 92-2 of the Bank's Executive Directors, and recommend approval of the grant. Gobind T. Nankani Director Department I Latin America and the Caribbean Region Attachments Washington, D.C. June 6, 1995 16 Schedule A BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE TIE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS BY COMPONENTS (US$ million) COMPONENT Local Foreign Total 1. Regularization of Indigenous Lands 13.8 0.0 13.8 2. Surveillance and Protection Plans 1.3 0.0 1.3 3. Capacity-Building and Studies 0.8 0.5 1.3 4. Support to Project Management 1.0 0.0 1.0 TOTAL COSTS 16.9 0.5 17.4 Physical contingencies 2.0 0.1 2.1 Price contingencies 1.4 0.0 1.4 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 20.3 0.6 20.9 17 Schedule A BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAMNI TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT COMPONENTS BY FINANCIERS (US$ million equivalent) COMPONENT |RFT [_KfW IGOB |TOTAL Regularization of Indigenous Lands Identification 0.73 0.7 Demarcation and Regularization 10.69 2.13 12.8 Environmental Diagnostics 0.26 0.3 Surveillance and Protection of Indigenous Areas Development and Implementation of Plans 1.33 1.3 Capacity-Building and Studies Capacity-Building' 0.76 0.50 1.2 Studies 0.11 0.1 Support to Project Management Project Management 0.68 0.7 Independent Evaluation 0.26 0.3 Unallocated 0.29 3.08 0.11 3.5 Total 2.10 16.59 2.24 20.9| Percent of total o0 79 11 100 1 The RFT and KtW funds are for entirely separate subcomponents. 18 Schedule B-1 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT SUMMARY OF PROCUREMENT ARRANGEMENTS (US$ million) ITEMS ICB NCB OTHER NBF TOTAL 1. Civil/Field Works' 13.37 13.37 2. Consultancies and 1.22 0.52 1.74 Training (1.22) (-) (-) 3. Operational Expenses2 0.63 1.48 2.11 (0.63) (-) (-) 4. Equipment/Supplies 0.25 1.19 1.44 (0.25) (-) (-) 5. Compensation 2.24 2.24 TOTAL (2.10) 18.80 20.90 ICB = International Competitive Bidding NCB = National Competitive Bidding OTHER = Includes consulting services to be procured according to Bank guidelines for hiring of consultants, training, research expenses NBF = Not Bank-Financed (GOB and KfW) Numbers in parentheses reflect RFT financing. Includes mainly demarcations scattered throughout the Amazon, to be carried out over five and a half years and to be financed by KfW. 2 Includes travel, per diem, training and miscellaneous services. 19 Schedule B-2 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE, TIE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT SUMMARY OF DISBURSEMENT ARRANGEMENTS (US$ 000) CATEGORY RFT Item and % of l______________ Funding Expenditures Consultancies 1,060 100 Services 530 100 Equipment/Supplies 220 100 Unallocated 290 100 [ TOTAL ] 2,100 1 RFT DISBURSEMENT SCHEDULE (US$ 000) BANK FY FY96 | FY97 FY98 FY99 FY2000 | FY2001 ANNUAL 502 507 410 331 220 130 | CUMULATIVE 502 1,009 1,419 1,750 1,970 2,100 20 Schedule C BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT TIMETABLE OF KEY PROJECT PROCESSING EVENTS Time Taken to Prepare: 20 months (August 1992 to April 1994) Prepared By: National Indian Foundation (FUNAI) World Bank: Judith Lisansky, Graciela Lituma, Daniel Gross, Robert Kaplan, Jamison Suter First Bank Mission: August 1992 Appraisal Mission Departure: April 1994 Date of Negotiations: August 1994 - May 1995 Planned Date of Effectiveness: July 1995 Summary Supervision Plan: Missions are planned for six-month intervals to supervise progress. One mission each year will be planned as an annual review to assess the adequacy of the project strategy and, if necessary, discuss design modifications. Supervision staff would be based in Brasilia. 21 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT IV. TECHNICAL ANNEXES Annex 1 LEGAL AND TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF INDIGENOUS AREA REGULARIZATION Annex 2 PRIORITIZATION AND PROPOSED LIST OF INDIGENOUS AREAS Annex 3 LEGAL ASPECTS OF NATURAL RESOURCE USE IN INDIGENOUS AREAS, AND CONFLICTS BETWEEN CONSERVATION UNITS AND INDIGENOUS RESERVES Annex 4 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION Annex 5 PARTICIPATION BY INDIGENOUS PEOPLE AND CRITERIA FOR DEVELOPING SURVEILLANCE AND PROTECTION PLANS FOR INDIGENOUS AREAS Annex 6 CAPACITY-BUILDING AND STUDIES Annex 7 MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN Annex 8 FUNAI EXTERNALLY FUNDED SPECIAL PROJECTS IN THE LEGAL AMAZON Annex 9 REPORTS AND DOCUMENTS IN PROJECT FILES Annex 10 DETAILED COST TABLES Map: IBRD No. 26184 22 Annex 1 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT ANNEX 1: LEGAL AND TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF INDIGENOUS AREA REGULARIZATION 1. Full regularization of indigenous lands in Brazil consists of three main steps: (I) Identification and Delimitation, (II) Demarcation, and (III) Regularization. Each step includes a specific set of activities which are described below and summarized in Table 1. 2. Preliminary Steps. When the National Indian Foundation (FUNAI) learns of an indigenous group of which it was not previously aware, the first step is to gather all existing information and data about the group. Once the existing information is evaluated, FUNAI's Directorate of Land Tenure Issues (DAF) characterizes the indigenous presence, opens a process, and the indigenous area is put on a list to be identified and delimited. r. Identification and Delimitation 3. Identification and delimitation consists of: (i) nominating the Working Group to carry out the identification and delimitation; (ii) fieldwork and consultations; (iii) the issuing, review and approval of the Working Group's final report; (iv) official publication of the delimitation; (v) forwarding of the signed delimitation recommendation and request for formal recognition of indigenous occupancy to the Ministry of Justice; and (vi) issuance of the Declaratory Order (Portaria Declarat6roa de Posse Ind(gena). If necessary, requests to resettle good faith non-Indians from the indigenous area are forwarded to the National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform (INCRA) after the identification report is approved. FUNAI may also request police or military assistance in removing illegal invaders, such as gold miners, at this or other points in the regularization process. 4. DAF/FUNAI nominates and confirms a specific Working Group composed of FUNAI staff and outside specialists to carry out the identification and delimitation. The Working Group is always headed by an anthropologist, usually with extensive experience with the indigenous group(s), a surveyor and land tenure specialists from FUNAI, INCRA and sometimes the corresponding state agencies. Under the auspices of this project, FUNAI will initiate the inclusion of an environmental diagnostic of the natural resources and management needs of the proposed area as part of the identification studies. The Working Group carries out anthropological, ethnohistorical, mapping and land tenure studies of the area traditionally inhabited by the indigenous group. Field studies are carried out collaboratively with the participation of the indigenous group (see Annex 5) and consultations are carried out with non-Indian residents. The identification work, which takes about two months, produces a report on the cultural situation of the group; defines and maps the geographical limits of the area; and documents the tenure situation of good faith non- Indians within the indigenous areas. The enabling legislation is Article 231 in the Federal Constitution and Decree 22, Article 2, Paragraphs 1-3. 23 Annex 1 5. The identification and delimitation report issued by the Working Group is then analyzed by DAF and FUNAI anthropologists. If they concur with its recommendations, the report is submitted to the President of FUNAI for approval and signature, and the findings are published in the National Official Gazette (Didrio Oficial da Uniao) which formally acknowledges the delimitation of the area and inforns the public of its existence. The enabling legislation is Decree 22, Article 2, Paragraphs 6-7. 6. Issuance of the Declaratory Order of Indigenous Usufruct. Once approved, the signed delimitation recommendation is forwarded to FUNAI's parent agency, the Ministry of Justice. The Ministry of Justice, upon review and approval, issues a Declaratory Order of Indigenous Usufruct (Portaria Declarat6ria de Posse Indigena) that authorizes the physical demarcation of the indigenous area. The enabling legislation is Decree 22, Article 2, Paragraphs 8-10. There is no legal time limit for the issuance of Declaratory Orders. The proposed project sought assurances of timely processing, and it was agreed that reports of the issuances of Declaratory Orders would be submitted to the Pilot Program for the Conservation of the Brazilian Rainforest and the program donors. 7. Non-Indians in Indigenous Areas. The Working Group's tenure report lists all non-Indian settlers actually residing in the area and their possessions. The Working Group must complete a background and inventory questionnaire for each non-Indian person or family encountered residing within the indigenous area. If resettlement of good faith non-Indians will be necessary and is requested, FUNAI forwards the tenure report and requests to the National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform (INCRA), the federal agency with jurisdiction for resettlement. Compensation for "good faith" non-Indian inhabitants is undertaken by FUNAI. II. Demarcation 8. The demarcation of an indigenous area consists of physically opening a 6- meter wide swath (picada) along its boundaries and the placing of concrete or aluminum markers every 2000 meters. Before opening borders, satellites plot geodesic lines between border points. The demarcation distinguishes between boundaries in forests which require the 6-meter opening (linha seca) and naturally occurring boundaries (linha natural) which do not require a cleared border, such as rivers, contiguous indigenous reserves, or international borders. Since the cost of opening and maintaining the cleared borders (linha seca) is very high, the project includes experimentation with alternative methods of marking and maintaining boundaries, including the planting of marker species and other methods. 9. Physical demarcation may proceed in several ways: (a) competitive bidding of topographical firms; (b) contracts with local entities under the supervision of FUNAI; (c) execution by the indigenous people and/or NGOs, or by agreement with other governmental entities, such as the army. If the demarcation is to be carried out by a topographical firm, the contract is competitively bid. The indigenous people are alwavs consulted about the methods of demarcation to be employed, and even when outside entities carrv out the work, indigenous representatives accompany and supervise the work. Indigenous participation in demarcation is also described in 24 Annex 1 Annex 5. FUNAI also always provides close supervision for all demarcations. Topographic firms have carried out the majority of demarcations. Bidding procedures and mobilization of the demarcation team takes, on the average, three months. Physical demarcation may vary from one to six months, depending on the size and difficulty of access of the indigenous area. Timing of the preparatory phase is important because demarcations can only be carried out during the six-month Amazonian dry season. Once the physical demarcation is completed, finalized maps are prepared, reviewed and checked by DAF/FUNAI, and the (Presidential) demarcation decree is drafted, usually over a period of two months. The enabling legislation for demarcation is the Indian Law (6001), Article 19. III. Regularization 10. Presidential Confirmation. The next step is the decree that confirms the approval of the indigenous area that is signed by the President of Brazil (homologafdo). Timing required varies, but the average is 45 days. The enabling legislation is the Indian Law (6001), Article 19, and Decree 22, Article 9. 11. Registration. The next steps for full regularization are the registration of the area in the appropriate local land registry office or offices (cart6rio de registro de im6veis or CRI) and the Federal Property Registry (Departamento de Patrim6nio da Uniao or DPU). FUNAI works with local land registry offices and the DPU to complete the registrations. Registration activities take, on the average, one month. The enabling legislation is the Indian Law (6001), Article 19, and Decree 22, Article 10. 12. Compensation of Non-Indian Inhabitants. After physical demarcation is completed, the identification and delimitation Working Group's tenure report is analyzed by FUNAI's Compensation Commission, which determines which inhabitants are in "good faith" and reviews the values of the goods to be compensated. The Conmission's findings are published in the official government gazette. reviewed and signed by the President of FUNAI, and compensation is paid. The enabling legislation is Article 231, Paragraph 6 of the Federal Constitution; Article 34 of the Indian Law (6001); Decree 22; and FUNAI Portaria 69/89. Other Nleasures 13. Other actions can be taken to secure indigenous areas, including: (i) interdiction: and (ii) rechecking and re-posting indigenous area boundaries. Interdiction consists of the provisional recognition of an indigenous area prior to identification and delimitation. This is generally done on an emergency basis for isolated groups under direct threats such as the invasion of their lands. FUNAI requests the interdiction from the Ministry of Justice. The enabling legislation is Decree 22, Article 8. Lastly, FUNAI also may arrange for orders for the boundaries of an indigenous area to be rechecked with additional clearing and replacement of markers. as needed. Tahle 1: Steps Required for Full Regularization of Indigenous Reserves STEP PURPOSE PRODUCT TIMING EXECUTOR Preliminary Steps (A) Hear about indigenous Gather available FUNAI area information (B) Characterize indigenous Gather available Open a process for Directory of Land Tenure presence information identification - put on list to Issues (DAF)/FUNAI be delimited 1. Identification/ Delimitation (A) Nominate Working Create Working Group Working Group of 30 days, beginning with the DAF identifies personnel Group specialists: anthropologist, identification of the for Working Group which surveyor, land tenure anthropologist who will be the President of FUNAI u. specialist, environmental the group coordinator finalizes by portaria. specialist, others Working group is composed of FUNAI staff and outside specialists (governmental, NGO or other) (B) Review available Studies, reports, other data 30 days, done Anthropologist/ Group information simultaneously with step Coordinator (A), starting when the anthropologist is identified (C) Ethnohistorical and Identify the indigenous Ethnological study 45 days Anthropologist of the sociological field studies people's spatial occupation Working Group of the area, including cultural and economic uses. Delimit the I indigenous area. STFEI' PURPOSE PRODUCT TIMING EXECUTOR (D) Cartographic Studies Establish position of 2 Maps: (a) coordinates 30 days from completion of Surveyor indigenous population and and boundaries of the area, (C) lands (b) location of indigenous activities and uses of the area (E) Tenure Studies Inventories the number of Tenure report, list and 75 days, contemporaneous Land tenure specialist non-Indian inhabitants and valuation of non-Indian, with (C) and (D) (from FUNAI, INCRA or their improvements. non-removable other government Records/researches market improvements agency) values for improvements (F) Environmental Characterize the ecological Environmental diagnostic 105 days, contemporaneous Environmental specialist Diagnostic characteristics of the report with (C), (D) and (G) proposed reserve and surrounding area (G) Final Report Assemble all information Final report that 60 days beginning after Anthropologist characterizing the characterizes and delimits fieldwork (C) indigenouis lands to be the indigenous land to be demarcated demarcated (H) Analysis of the final Evaluate the final report Final recornmenidation of 30 days frorn completion of DAF and FUNAI report FUNAI's Directorate of final report anthropologists Land Tenure Affairs (DAF), based upon reviews by FUNAI anthropologists (I) Approval of the final Complete procedures Ii) President of FUNAI's 1 5 days President of FUNAI, and report and publication of necessary to request the signature on final report, DAF/FUNAI the delimitation issuance of a Portaria (ii) official publication in Declarat6ria from the the National Gazette, Ministry of Justice (iii) forwarding the signed delimitation > recommendation to the Ministry of Justice x ____________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~x STEIIl l:lU RPOSE PRODUCT TIMING EXECUTOR (J) Process non-Indian Forward resettlement Tenure Report and Could be done at any time DAF and FUNAI Legal resettlement requests assistance to INCRA assistance requests after identification and Department forwarded to appropriate tenure studies completed federal agencies for further action (K) Portaria declarat6ria de Formal recognition of Issuance of a portaria that Average time: variable Ministry of Justice posse indigena indigenous occupancy by establishes physical the State demarcation HI. Demarcation' (A) Prepare operational Develop an area's Operational plan (for each 1 5 days Director of FUNAI plan demarcation guidelines and indigenous area) Demarcation Department plans (B) Preparation of tender Preparation for bidding Edital (tender documents) 1 5 days following (A); FUNAI Bidding documents simultaneously send to Commission World Bank for review (C) Publication of tender Collect bids Advertisements in several 7 days following (B) Selected publications 4 publications (D) Presentation of bids Bidding Portfolio of bids tendered 30 days following (C) Private firms (E) Opening of bids Assure all bids are 1 day following (D) FUNAI Bidding prepared correctly Commission (F) Evaluation of bids Select the most 1 5 days following (E); FUNAI Bidding competitive firm simultaneously reviewed by Commission BIRD. May need 15 additional days if firms l__________________________ challenge decision (G) Contract signing Signed contract with the At the end of the evaluation FUNAI Bidding chosen demarcation firm period Commission (D Demarcation could proceed in several ways: (a) competitive bidding to firms, lb) contracts with local entities under the supervision of FUNAI, (c) execution by Indians and/or NGOs, and (d) by convenio with other governmental entities, such as the army. This table assumes demarcation by competitive bidding to firms. STEP PURPOSE PRODUCT TIMING EXECUTOR (H) Mobilization of the Send to the field and 1 5 days Contracted firm demarcation firm prepare equipment and personnel for opening of boundary swaths (I) Opening of boundary Determine geodesic points Physical demarcation 1-6 months (depending on Contracted firm swaths along boundaries and cut size and types of swaths along boundaries boundaries) between points (J) Marking of boundaries Mark boundaries with signs Unequivocal posting of all same as (1) Contracted firm and cement markers boundaries (K) Surveillance by local Assure that demarcations Demarcation satisfactory to same as (1) Representatives of indigenous people coincide with the borders affected indian group(s). affected indigenous of the indigenous group's groups traditional territory co (L) Surveillance by FUNAI Assure demarcation work 2 or 3 1 5-day visits during 3 FUNAI staff proceeds properly, i.e. that (I) - (Must have a FUNAI boundaries are properly surveyor on site to present located, established and technical specification, marked, that indigenous authorize work, and monitors are satisfied, that determine the starting point) environmental and all other regulations are observed (M) Compilation of finalized Correct previous maps in Finalized maps of 30 days maps with mathematical light of boundary indigenous area(s) coordinates, using satellite alterations during tracing technology demarcation, digitalize exact coordinates (N) Compilation of Prepare and present the Draft demarcation decree 30 days (because FUNAI DAF/FUNAI information gathered during necessary information for reviews the firm's demarcation, and drafting presidential confirmation of calculations) of the demarcation decree the area > xJ STEP PURPOSE PRODUCT TIMING EXECUTOR 111. Regularization (A) Compensation (see E, Compensate good faith Compensation No fixed time frame. Could FUNAI/Compensation F and G for details) non-Indian inhabitants happen anytime after the Commission/DAF demarcation maps are checked and approved. (B) (i) Elaboration of the Presidential decree Confirmation No time limit - average is 45 Average is 45 days draft Presidential confirming the days FUNAI/Ministry of Confirmation Decree based demarcation. Justice/President of on reviewed calculations Brazil and maps (ii) present via the Ministry of Justice to the President of the Republic (C) Local registration Registration in the Local Registration 30 days FUNAI/CRI Property Registry; Registration FUNAI/CRI (D) Federal registration Registration in the Federal Registration 30 days (simultaneously FUNAI/DPU Property Registry with c) (E) Compensation: (il Evaluate compensation Report/process issued, (i) 30 days FUNAI/Compensation Requests for compensation claims, determine if they published, reviewed and (ii) immediately after (i) Commission/DAF and Working Group report are in good or bad faith submitted to President of (iii) and (iv) 1 5 days received by the according to criteria in FUNAI Compensation Commission FUNAI Portaria 069/89, and evaluate values assigned to improvements; (ii) list of good faith occupants published in the Official Gazette; (iii) DAF submits judgments for legal analysis/conformity to criteria, to the Legal > Department/FUNAI (iv) Legal submits its x opinion to the President of FUNAIl STEP PURPOSE PRODUCT TIMING EXECUTOR (F) Compensation: Ratifies the administrative Signed report/process 1 day President of FUNAI Report/Process signed by procedures President of FUNAI (Gi Compensation: (i) "good faith" inhabitants Compensation paid - area No time limit- depends on FUNAI/Compensation Payment of compensation receive compensation; cleared of non-Indian availability of funds Commission (ii) those vyith titles must population renounce titles to receive compensation, or (iii) disputing landholders (w/ titles) may litigate I_ I (tD 31 Annex 2 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT ANNEX 2: PRIORITIZATION AND PROPOSED LIST OF INDIGENOUS AREAS I. Current Status of Indigenous Areas in the Legal Amazon 1. The current status of indigenous areas by state in the Legal Amazon is as follows: Table 1: State Number Number Identified Number To be Total Total Under Demarcated' and Delimited2 Identified and Proposed Delimited3 Project Amazonas 44 54 60 158 89 Acre 12 10 6 28 14 Amapa 3 1 -- 4 -- Maranhao 14 2 -- 16 3 Mato Grosso 40 7 10 57 -- Para 20 12 5 37 11 Rond6nia 10 4 19 33 -- Roraima 18 10 1 29 8 Tocantins 5 2 1 8 2 TOTAL 166 102 102 370 127 Source: FUNAI, October 1993 ' Includes areas that have been physically demarcated regardless of whether or not they have been confirmed by Presidential decree and/or registered. 2 Includes lands that have been studied and delimited by an official FUNAI team but which still require demarcation. I Includes areas and groups that require further study and delimitation by an official FUNAI team. Some of these groups still live in isolation from Brazilian society, and the data are somewhat unreliable. 32 Annex 2 II. Proposed Prioritization of Areas to be Regularized Under the Proposed Project 2. To determine the order in which indigenous areas will be regularized, FUNAI first classifies unregularized indigenous areas into three groups according to the vulnerability of the physical territory and the threats faced by the communities. Territories are considered vulnerable if they meet two or more of the following criteria: (a) proximity of 100 km or less to an urban center, (b) existence of penetration by outsiders in or around the area, (c) government projects for regional development, (d) easy access by road or navigable river, and (e) demarcation necessary for recovery of part of a traditional territory. 3. Indigenous groups are considered physically or culturally threatened if they suffer from at least one of the following: (a) epidemics, (b) inter-ethnic conflicts, and (c) threat of socio-cultural disintegration stemming from external pressures. 4. By applying these two vulnerability factors, FUNAI divides all unregularized areas into three prioritization groups, namely: Group I - Vulnerable territories and threatened populations, Group II - Fither vulnerable territories with unthreatened populations, or unthreatened territories with threatened populations. Group III - Unthreatened territories with unthreatened populations. 5. FUNAI then considers the existence of local support (e.g. work in progress by NGOs or researchers), or if an area's identification studies have been completed and an administrative decree (portaria declarat6ria) issued by the Ministry of Justice. This criterion divides the previous three groups into two classes each. A group I area is given priority rating " 1" if it responds positively to one or both of these last conditions, and if it responds negatively to both it is rated "2". Group II and group III areas are likewise classified "3" and "4", and "5" and "6", respectively. Thus, after assessing the threats to a given territory and its communities, an indigenous area is given a final priority rating according to whether support for the regularization 33 Annex 2 process exists or not: the more pre-existing support for regularization, the higher the area's priority. 6. Within each of the six priority classes, areas are ranked according to their degree of vulnerability on a scale of 5 (most vulnerable in its priority class) to 0 (least vulnerable in its priority class). See attached Tables 2a-2c. 7. Areas with adjoining boundaries are treated as if they were one large area in order to lower demarcation costs. Thus priority levels (5-0) for composite areas are determnined by averaging the individual areas within their respective composite areas. 8. Population size of the indigenous group in question is not used as a prioritization criterion, because it would effectively discriminate against smaller groups. Furthermore, the Constitution guarantees the rights of indigenous groups, not individuals, so that prioritizing according to the number of individuals could be deemed unconstitutional. The size of the group, however, often renders it more threatened and size is thus considered indirectly. 9. While some areas are more costly to regularize than others, cost is not a factor in prioritization except only as it pertains to the prioritizing described in paragraph 4. III. Proposed Ranking of Indigenous Areas to be Regularized Under the Proposed Project (See following pages.) 34 Annex 2 1ESPIRITU SANTO AM TUKUNA 1 3 140 2 IGARAPE ANJO AC KAXINAWA 1 3 3 TENHARIM DO IGARAPE PRETO AM TENHARIM 1 3 62 ......CUMNAPANEMAURUCARIANA PA .......POTURU 2 5 TROM BETA S/MAPU ERA AM H IXKARINA 1 2 ... . . . . ........ ....... .. .... ....... ..... _... .. .... ..... ..... . . 6 JUMAS AM MURA 2 5 7...... ...... CASTANHA. ..... AM MURA .2_._ 4 8 IJAUARI AM MURA 2 4 25 9jJOSEFA AM MURA 2 4 _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. .............. 10OLIMAO AM MURA 2 4 11 MARI NHHEIRO AM MUKRA 2 4 2IGAMIGUEL AM MURA 2 4 1 3IMURATUBA AM MURA 2 4 143TERRA PRETA AM MURA 2 4 154ROCURUMINAPANEMA,,,,ANA PA CURUAYA _2 4 . 6T|BARARI AM MURA 23 1J7PACOVAO AM MURA 2 3 1 8 .PAl RAIMUNDO AM MURA 2 3 19 ACAPORI DE CIMA AM KOKAMA 2 3 20SAMANAYE PA AM ANAYE 2 4. 21 !XIPAYA-CURUAYA PA XIPAIA-CURUAYA 2 3 22 !LRIO MANICORE AM MURA 2 2 24 IKANAMARI DO MATRINCHA AM KANAMARI 2 2 25 KULINA DO MEDIO JUTAI AM KULINA 2 2 30 216 UTAPAUA AM APURINA 2 290 27i]MARIMA AM ISOLATED GROUPS 3 2 .,,,60 28SOSEBASTIAO AM KAYXANA 43 160 29,ARARA DO IGARAPE HUMAITA AC ARARA 4 2 200 ........... ........ i_........ . . _. _............ . . . ..... .. . _. . __. ........... . . ... ... 3O AAP SPTAM TRA 4 2 317PACOVAO RR WAPXAA 4 232 3121BALAIO AM DIVERSE 4 4 33JACAREUBA/KATAUIXI AM ISOLATED GROUPS 5 1 34 2 JURUA AM KULINA 6 0 140 351 XPARINTINTIM _A AM PARINTINTIM 6 0 53 362PiRANHAS AM KANAMARI 6 0 130 37 RIOZINHO AM TUKANO 6 0 328 SAMAUMA AM TUKANO 6 0 4KIJUTAI,IGAPO ACU AM MURA 41 RESTAURACAO AM KANAMARI 427ARIOBAN AM DJA RRUI 3 _ 31TOTALS _ _ 4 147 Tbl,, 2b I ANtS TO BE DEMARCATED Poltaria 1992 Indiganous Boundaries IKml Demarcation Cost RANK Name of Ind,geno.s Area State Indigenous Gioup Pficrity Vulnerability Doctaratoria Population Area (hal (USS) _______ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Total Man-made iNatugral 1 KARARAO PA__ KARARAHO 1 4 N 42 224000 300 25 275 79011.75 2 MEDIO RIO NEGRO AM DIVERSE 1 4 N 1,033 2142000 1033 330 703 750255.10 3PAROUiE DO ARAGUAIA TO KARAJA I 4 N 1,801 1395000 790 180 BOO 450884.60 4 BOTO VELNiO To KARAJA 1 4 N 93 145080 190 5 TUKUNA LAURO SODRE AM TUKUNA 1 4 N 60 9600 60 18 42 41288.46 6 TUKUNA UMARIACU AM TUKtlNA 1 4 N 1,720 1600 20 8 12 17683.76 7 VAIE DO RIO JAVARI AM DIVERSE 1 4 N 3,000 8338000 1500 1020 480 2149679.40 8 ALTO RIO NEGRO AM DIVERSE 1 3 N 17,738 8150000 1500 141 1359 426426.27 9 ALTO SEPATINI AM APURINA I 3 Y 70 27500 100 10 PENERI TACAQUIRI AM APURINA 1 3 Y 700 191000 400 200 575 469594.00 11 SENUINI MAPENE AM _APURINA 1 3 N 150 144000 300 12 TUMIA AM APURINA 1 3 V 110 124000 350 13 IGARtAPE PATAUA AM KATUKINA 1 3 N 14 JUMA AM JUMA 1 3 Y a 38700 130 30 100 71814. I0 15 MUNDURUKU PA MUNDURUKU 1 3 N 2,384 948541 688 180 508 421684.60 16 NOVA ESPERANCA AM ARARA 1 3 . N 6400 39 5 34 13702.35 i.I 17 PRAIA DO CARAPANA AM KAXINAWA 1 3 N _ _ 18 RIOZINHO DA LIBERDADE AC ARARA 1 3 N 19 AGUA PRETA/INARI AM APURINA 1 2 V 120 150000 275 20 CAMADENI AM APURINA I 2 V 65 151200 320 100 690 275047.00 21 CATIPARI MtAMORIA AM APURINA 1 2 V 115 117000 360 22 CABECEIRA DO RIO ACRE AC JAMINAWA 1 2 V 323 76680 170 65 105 144430.55 23 INAUINI-TEUINI AM APURINA I 2 V 450 450000 467 115 352 272154.05 24 PAUMARI DO CUNIUA AM PAUMARI 1 2 Y 53 35000 150 5 145 24802.35 25 PAUIMAP DO LAGO MARAt1A AM PAUMARI 1 2 V 270 76400 t50 15 135 44407.05 26 SAO PEDRO DO SEPATINI AM APURINA 1 2 Y 40 27800 100 13 87 35486.11 27 TUKUNA DO PJO ICA IMATINTINI AM TUKUNA 1 2 N 22000 77 13 64 33186.11 28 CUN1IA AM MURA 2 5 N 140 12730 9 111 169 245612.17 29 SAPUCAIA AM MURA 2 5 N 106150 190 30 BARATA LIVRAMENTO RR MAKUXI 2 4 N 520 13250 64 19 45 43648.93 31 BO3UEIRAO RR MAKUXI 2 1 4 N 400 13950 47 34 13 71355.98 32 IGARAPf CAPANA AM DENI 2 1 4 Y 127650 200 100 100 216047.00 33 JA8OTI M MAKUXI 2 4 N 78 13000 35 20 15 42709.40 34 JACAMIN RR WAPIXANA 2 4 N 212 107000 140 35 105 82616.45 35 KAMARU DO LAGO UALA AM KULINA 2 4 N 155 77000 180 31 149 78774.57 t 36 PARANA DO PARICA AM KANAMARI 2 4 Y 15 8220 4 7 33 17723.29 37 RAIMUNDAO RB MAKUXI 2 4 N 150 4300 28 16 12 34167.52 38 RECANTO DA SAUDADE IMOSCOWI RB MAKUXI 2 4 N 175 13750 50 20 30 44209.4 39 FA8AIASCADA RB AAPIXANA 2 4 N 220 8250 46 29 17 61453.63 40 BOA VISTA AM LUJRA 2 3 Y 30 230 _9 2 7 4820.9 * Incldde.s ntural, international *nd conrtguoJus bound ries Cost Iges reler1 to reglriawiztion only, not to protection TaLt 2b LANAS T0 BEf HfMAHCATED Portaria 1992 Indigenous Boundaries lKml Demacation Cost RANK Nam, of Indigenous Area State Indig.nous Group Priolity Vulnerability Declaretoria Population Area hal ( USS) _ _ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Total Man-Made Natural. 41 KAYABI IGLEbA SULI PA KAYABI 2 3 N 52500 145 15 130 43907.05 42 PRO APAPOflS AM . _2 3 _N 141 11_3200 150 35 115 83616.45 43 MARAMANDUBA PA KARAJA 2 2 N 26 2 2 _ 4120.94 44 PAUMARID0 IAGO MANISSUA AM PAUMAWI 2 2 N 140 11700 87 7 80 22423.29 45 EU_O 81A AM KATUKINA 2 2 Y 400 1150200 650 50 600 163023.50 46 APURINA IG. S. JOAO AM APUJRINA 3 3 N 53 15050 60 25 35 55011.75 47 T0flA AM PARINTINTIN 3 3 N 24600 100 32 68 72735.04 48 JAMINAWA IG. Pf1ETO AC JAMINAWA 3 2 Y 150 25917 170 70 100 154232.90 4 JAMINAWA.ARARfA AC JAMINAWA 3 2 V 150 28280 89 35 54 77516.45 50 JARAWARA/JAMAM.ADI/KANAMATI AM JAMAMADI 3 2 Y 262 383757 418 26 390 92572.22 St KANAMAfl DO RIO JURUA AM KANAMARI 3 2 Y 496 607563 700 200 500 462094.00 52 PARGUE DO TUMUCUMAOAUE PA WAYANA-APALAI 3 2 Y 344 2700000 800 592 785 1298298.20 53 RIO PARU DE LESTE PA WAYANA APALAI 3 2 _ 68 1182800 690 54 PAUtAARI DO LAGO PARICA AM PAUJMARU 3 2 N 30 15800 60 15 45 35407.05 55 PAUMAPl DO RIO ITUXI AM PAUMARI 3 2 Y 3 70 43 16 27 35667.52 56 POYANAWA AC POYANAWA 3 2 V 300 20081 69 10 59 26504.70 L 57 UNEIUXI AM MAKU 3 2 y 340 405000 410 120 290 276256.40 58 ALTO IARAUACA AC KAXINAWA 3 1 -N 1400 52000 350 59 KAMPA DO ENVlflA AC KAMPA 3 I Y 80 247200 102 145 455 344268.15 60 XINANE AC ISOLATED GROUPS 3 I N __175000C 2 70 61 PAIiANA DO BOA BOA AM KANAMAfIl 3 I Y 56 243500 250 25 225 74011.75 62 IGAfiAPE GFtANIDE AM KAMIEIIA 4 2 N 65 551 _ __6 S 12862.83 63 KOKAMA ISAFiriElRA DAS MISSOESI AM KOKAMA 4 2 N 480 1772 16 12 4 25125.64 64 lAMEIRAO AM MOYORUNA 4 2 N 80 49500 160 45 115 10422t;11 65 MARA-A URUBAXI AM KANAMARI 4 2 B 88 80000 156 66 90 144991.02 68 WAI WAI Rfi P WAI-WAI 4 1 N 350 330000 260 75 185 1 73035.25 67 ACItAA AM APUtRINA 5 1 Y 70 40800 130 15 115 42407.0 68 NUKINI DO RECREIO AC ARARA 5___N_ 69 KAXINAWA DO RIO BfEU AC KAXINAWA 5 0 N 175 23840 350 55 295 142825.85 70 BANAWA YAFI AM JAMAMADI 6 1 Y 200 79680 200 15 185 49407.05 71 IGARAfP JOARI AM APUlRINA 6 0 N 20 18700 97 5 92 19502.35 72 KULINA DO IGARAPE DO PAU AC KULINA 6 0 V 76 40050 130 25 105 62011.75 73 KUI INA DO RUO AKlIRAWA AM KULINA 6 0 N 74 t _UTU_CUTU AM N 400 36310 112 5 107 21002.35 75 NARAITA AM N 46941 110 42 68 93339.74 76 PORTO PRAIA AM N 120 22000 80 4 76 15841.88 > 77 RIO JANDIATUBA AM N _ 78 P"O TEA AM N 414300 580 120 460 293256.40 XD 79 SAO JOSE 00 CIPO AM N 80 SERINGAL INDEPENDENCIA AC N __ el ITUPA SUPIE AM N 27 5039 38 18 20 39088.46 . _ TOTAL ___ 39,039 32.179,33E 18,631 4.815 13.041 $11,225,263 ' Includes natural, international and contiguous boundaries Cost Igures rfero to tgularizanion only, not to protection 37 Annex 2 Tubi 2o AiEAS TOEf X - - 8 *-; 1 SORORO PA SURUI 1 4 119 26257 2 BACURIZINHO MA GUAJAJARA 2 3 1396 82132 5 3 KANELA MA KANELA 3 3 822 125212 4 PORQULINHOS MA KANELA 3 3 309 79520 3 = TOTALS =.2646 __13121 E 'Little or no data on illegal occupants, perimeters or costs are included because this information is not all known. Portaries declarstorias are not issued until demarcation. 38 Annex 3 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT ANNEX 3: LEGAL ASPECTS OF NATURAL RESOURCE USE IN INDIGENOUS AREAS, AND CONFLICTS BETWEEN CONSERVATION UNITS AND INDIGENOUS RESERVES' 1. Article 231 of the Brazilian Constitution asserts both the rights of the indigenous populations to the land and resources they need for their cultural and physical well-being, and the responsibility of the State to defend this right. Article 225 stipulates that it is the duty of the State to ensure that all Brazilian citizens have a safe environment. Taken together, these principles create the impetus for regularization and protection of indigenous areas, as well as any other area whose environmental integrity is necessary to the well-being of the indigenous populations and the ecological viability of the indigenous areas. This is because regularization and protection not only ensures indigenous rights, it also strengthens the protection of the rain forest. 1. Natural Resource Use in Indigenous Areas: Legal Aspects 2. The legal rights of indigenous populations to the natural resources of their lands are governed by a body of rules and opinions, mainly found in and/or based upon the Brazilian Constitution of 1988, the Forest Code of 1965 and the Indian Law (Estatuto do Indio, 6001) of 1973. It is expected that legal aspects of natural resource use in indigenous areas will be further clarified with the proposed revision of the Indian Law. 3. According to the Constitution (Article 231, para. 1), indigenous populations have primary and inherent rights to the lands which they (i) permanently inhabit, and (ii) use for productive activity, and which are necessary for (iii) the preservation of the natural resources on which they depend, and (iv) their cultural as well as physical well-being. Such lands are inalienable, and the rights of indigenous populations to the lands are primary, inherent and unalterable, preempting all legislation, proclamations and decrees. They are explicit in the Constitution. Regularization of indigenous lands is the official recognition and demarcation of the areas where preexisting rights of indigenous people pertain. These rights are not dependent upon land regularization for their legitimacy. This annex is based largely on a November 1993 preinvestment study on indigenous populations' rights to their land and resources, conducted by the NDI (Nz4cleo de Direiaos Indigenas), an indigenist non-governmental organization specializing in applied research of indigenous legal issues. The Bank's Legal Department was also consulted. 39 Annex 3 4. In their traditional lands, indigenous populations have "exclusive usufruct of the riches of the soils, rivers and lakes" (Constitution, Article 231, para. 2), which has been interpreted to mean rights to all above-ground, aquatic and soil resources. All legal acts by non-indigenous parties that aim to claim or transfer possession, dominion, occupation or usufruct rights of these resources and areas are null and void (ibid., Article 231, para. 6). Actions giving third parties rights to indigenous lands or resources are not grounds for compensation for improvements, except when such improvements are made "in good faith," by which is meant improvements are made in ignorance of indigenous presence and rights. (In one case where a parcel in an indigenous area was "sold" to a third party, the court held that such acts are null and void, and the parcel still belonged to the indigenous community and the third party was not eligible for compensation.) The Constitution in many respects reflects the earlier Indian Law, and gave the above definitions and rights constitutional status. 5. Indigenous lands are property of the State (ibid., Article 20, XI), but only in the case of "the interest of the Union" can the State use the resources located in indigenous areas (ibid., Article 231, para. 6). To date, neither law nor precedent exists regulating what constitutes "the interest of the Union," although specific proposals have been made for the current reforms. Proposal 260 of 1990, which was ratified by the Federal Senate but not by the House of Deputies, would have defined the interest of the Union as consisting of "imminent danger or external aggression, threat of grave and imminent catastrophe or epidemics, or the need to exploit natural resources that are crucial to national sovereignty or development, and are nonexistent or impossible to extract, given current technology, in other parts of the country." 6. Due to inconsistencies in the Constitution of 1988, the Indian Law of 1973, the Forest Code of 1965 and other laws, the legality of indigenous populations transferring usufruct to third parties is often not clear. There are also considerable legal ambiguities pertaining to the extraction or harnessing of timber and legal uncertainties about indigenous people practicing non-traditional activities and using non-traditional technology. 7. The question of timber harvesting, whether by indigenous people themselves or by contracting to third parties, is undetermined and under debate. According to the Forest Code (Article 3, para. 2), forests in indigenous areas are to be "permanently preserved," and can be appropriated by the State and cut only to realize works and projects in the public interest, but not for the purpose of extracting timber (Forest Code, Article 3, para. 1). This code should not apply to indigenous lands, however, because these can never be appropriated. The purpose of "permanent preservation" is to "maintain the necessary environment for indigenous populations." However, Brazilian laws pertaining to environmental protection apply equally to indigenous and all other territory in the Union. Thus, any activity that harms the physical environment permanently or to the point of making it unsafe for its inhabitants is explicitly unconstitutional (e.g. Article 225) regardless of who carries it out. The State has the duty to intervene in such circumstances. 8. Unlike the Forest Code, the Indian Law does allow the harvesting of wood on indigenous lands (Article 46), but does not specify the authority responsible for 40 Annex 3 approving such projects or the conditions for their admissibility. To date, in the absence of any laws regulating timber extraction from indigenous areas, all tree felling is, strictly speaking, illegal. 9. No legal precedent exists concerning what constitutes legal indigenous usufruct of tree resources, but only concerning cases of clearly illegal harvesting. The Federal Public Ministry stated in an opinion (no date provided) that indigenous populations are allowed only traditional forms of use of their lands, effectively prohibiting them from exporting timber, whether directly or through third parties. One proposal for revising the Indian Law would allow indigenous populations to cut forest themselves but not transfer such rights to third parties. Another proposal would let third parties extract wood, provided all income reverts to the appropriate indigenous group(s). 10. In order for any party to make use of the subsoil mineral and hydrological (e.g. hydropower potential) resources in indigenous areas, congressional authorization is needed. In addition, the affected indigenous communities must be heard and participate in the benefits of the production, as stipulated bv law (Constitution, Article 231, para. 3). No law regulating such activity has been passed, although several have been proposed for the current revisions. To be constitutional. such a law must prohibit activity that threatens either the environment or the physical and cultural survival of indigenous people. 11. The Constitution (Article 231, para. 7) and all proposed revisions to the Indian Law clearly and unequivocally prohibit third-party garimpagem (placer mining) on indigenous lands. The State may exploit or authorize the exploitation by third- parties of the mineral and hydrological resources in indigenous areas. Expulsion of non-indigenous garimpeiros (placer miners) would do much to protect indigenous areas since garimpagem is the single most important cause of environmental and social degradation in indigenous areas. FUNAI is responsible for protecting the exclusive use of natural resources by indigenous people while IBAMA is responsible for environmental protection in all Brazil, including indigenous areas Both agencies. however, have encountered difficulties in fulfilling these duties. The National Department of Mineral Production should keep all mineral extraction under surveillance, but has been unable to do so. 12. The Indian Law (Article 44) asserts that garimpagem is a permitted activity of indigenous people, and the Constitution indirectly grants this right by distinguishing it from mining, which is regulated by Article 231, paragraph 3. Therefore, garimpagem by indigenous people does not need specific congressional authorization. It extracts minerals from the soil, not the subsoil. Mining, which extracts minerals from the subsoil, is prohibited to indigenous populations because the subsoil and soil resources are specifically distinguished in the Indian Law (arts. 44-45) and the Constitution (arts. 20 and 176). Indigenous people have usufruct rights to soil resources, while subsoil resources are the property of the State. 41 Annex 3 13. Questions which must be addressed in the revised Indian Law and in subsequent laws include (i) which public bureaus will be responsible for the regulation, authorization and surveillance of forests and forest cutting, mining and hydrological resources development? (ii) what percentage of the proceeds of State or third-party resource use would go to the affected indigenous populations? and (iii) which economically productive activities may indigenous people engage in which are sufficiently "traditional" yet ensure their survival? Some specific issues needing to be resolved are (i) what will be the precise requirements and protection mechanisms for timber harvesting from the points of view of environmental protection and species preservation? (ii) whether and which third parties may be authorized to fell timber in indigenous areas; and (iii) under what circumstances and according to what regulations could subsoil mineral and hydrological resources be exploited by third parties'? II. Conflicts Between Conservation Units and Indigenous Reserves 14. In certain cases, environmental conservation units overlap with indigenous areas, raising the question of how to resolve possible conflicts between indigenous use and conservation principles. Under Brazilian law, indigenous people's exclusive usufruct rights to their traditional resources are primary and unalterable, preempting legislation, decrees and acts that claim or transfer rights to these resources. In the case of overlapping indigenous areas and conservation units, no matter what the nature of the conservation unit, the legal status of "indigenous area" should take precedence over that of "conservation unit" because conservation units proceed merely from legislative or executive action. Allowing conservation units to overlap with indigenous areas is in no way inconsistent with indigenous populations' exclusive and inalienable rights to their lands, but only if the relevant indigenous population agrees explicitly to the establishment of a conservation unit, receives just compensation, and is permitted restricted use of the territory according to the nature of the conservation unit.2 15. In light of the recent pressures on indigenous people to exploit their resources in a predatory and unsustainable fashion, compensation for creating conservation units in indigenous areas gives their inhabitants an incentive to reduce exploitation of their natural resources. IBAMA is responsible for environmental protection in and around indigenous areas in coordination with FUNAI. To date, this coordination has been largely lacking. Strengthening incentives for environmental protection in indigenous areas is currently the subject of policy debate in Brazil. 16. The following are the indigenous areas with overlapping lands with conservation units affected by this project. The status of each area and proposed resolution is described briefly. During negotiations, it was agreed that the project 2 The conservation unit types incompatible with indigenous populations' rights include biological reserves, which prohibit all access and resource use, national parks, which are designed for public enjoyment, and extractive reserves, which grant non-indigenous people usufruct rights, are impermissible. 42 Annex 3 would not finance regularization activities in areas in which conservation units are superimposed on indigenous areas unless the resolution of these conflicts are previously and mutually agreed upon by the responsible institutions. (a) The Inauini-Teuini Indigenous Area (Amazonas) has 50,000 hectares in common with the Purus National Forest. FUNAI requested IBAMA/MMA to alter the boundaries of the national forest, but IBAMA has not yet responded. (b) In 1992, FUNAI delimited the Upper Rio Negro Indigenous Area (Amazonas) as a single contiguous indigenous area, according to a 1984/86 proposal that it be one large area. The demarcations carried out in 1987-89 divided it into 14 indigenous areas and 1 1 national forests. The national forests exist only on paper, but no action was taken to establish them on the ground. Indigenous communities continue to use the national forests as they traditionally have without interference from IBAMA because of the latter's total absence. FUNAI has requested the declaration of the Upper Rio Negro Indigenous Area from the Ministry of Justice, and the revocation of the 11 national forests by the President of the Republic. No action has yet been taken. (c) In Para, two indigenous areas relevant to this project overlap with forest reserves: (i) the Munduruku Indigenous Area with the Mundurukania Forest Reserve, and (ii) the Tumucumaque Park Indigenous Area with the Tumucumaque Forest Reserve. These forest reserves were created on paper in 1961 but were never established on the ground. IBAMA informed FUNAI that they are under the jurisdiction of the state of Para, not the federal government, and that a solution must be found with the state of Para. No further action has been taken. (d) The Araguaia National Park (Tocantins) would be entirely inside the Boto Velho Indigenous Area, and FUNAI and IBAMA have not been able to agree on how to resolve the issue. Furthermore, a small uncontacted indigenous group lives wholly inside the borders of the proposed park. 43 Annex 4 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRANI TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT ANNEX 4: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION 1. The Indigenous Lands Project would be coordinated by the Special Projects Coordination Unit (SPCU) of the National Indian Foundation (FUNAI), which would function as the project's Technical Secretariat. It would report directly to the President of FUNAI and the Executive Secretariat of the Pilot Program to Conserve the Brazilian Rain Forest in the Ministry of Environment and the Legal Amazon (see the organizational charts of this project and of FUNAI in Diagrams 1 and 2, respectively). The SPCU/Technical Secretariat would be responsible for project administration and the coordination of all project activities. It would be wholly responsible for implementing the studies by contracting consultants, and would cooperate with the Directorate of Administration to implement the training activities. It was decided at appraisal that the SPCU would also: (i) prepare Annual Operating Plans with the appropriate directorates and transmit it to the Pilot Program Executive Secretariat for submission to the Bank and the KfW by November 30 of the preceding year; (ii) receive quarterly reports on physical and financial indicators within one month of the end of each period from the implementing departments of FUNAI; (iii) prepare biannual, monitoring summaries and evaluation reports, based upon the aforementioned quarterly reports, and transmit it to the Pilot Program Executive Secretariat for submission to the Bank and the KfW within two months of the end of each semester; and (iv) contract an independent consultancy, such as a university or a non-governmental organization (NGO). to present mid-term and final evaluations of the project by September 30, 1997 and six months after conclusion of the project, respectively. 2. The SPCU/Technical Secretariat would be assisted by a Project Technical Coordination Unit (TC) comprised initially of an Adjunct Secretary, an Administrative Support unit and three, temporary Technical Support Units: (i) Administration, (ii) Land Issues and (iii) Capacity-Building, Training and Studies. Each technical unit would consist of an expert, hired for a six-month period, who would train and assist FUNAI staff in the appropriate Directorates as project activities begin. During the life of the project, the Project Technical Coordination Unit (TC) would coordinate and monitor the proposed project activities pertaining to the regional offices and the three main directorates of FUNAI: Directorate of Land Tenure Issues, Directorate of Administration, and Directorate of Social Services. Funds have been designated to hire up to 84 months of additional consultancies to assist the Project Technical Coordination Unit (TC) and the Directorates as necessary over the life of the project. 3. To ensure continued input of indigenous people during project implementation, a Project Consultative Commission (PCC) reporting to the SPCU would be created to evaluate project implementation and make recommendations to the SPCU/Technical Secretariat. It would be comprised of four representatives of indigenous groups and NGOs and four representatives of government. Specifically, it 44 Annex 4 would review and give formal evaluations of the annual project operating plans, the recommendations of the studies funded under the project, the surveillance and protection plans for areas affected by the project, the semi-annual project reports, and the mid-term and final project evaluation reports. 4. Project management would be supported during the first year by a technical assistance consultant to be provided by the GTZ under terms acceptable to the Government of Brazil, the Bank and the German donors. The consultant would work directly with the SPCU to: (i) assist the SPCU to develop and implement a project management system; (ii) assist the SPCU in developing model Annual Operating Plans and model monitoring and evaluation guidelines; (iii) identify training and other institutional strengthening needs in the implementation of the project and organize management training and other activities as appropriate; (iv) assist the SPCU to design and implement a sustainable development pilot project; (v) coordinate bilateral GTZ- SPCU/FUNAI activities underway independently of this project; and (vi) provide oversight for disbursement of KfW funds. 5. The SPCU and the Project Technical Coordination Unit (TC) would coordinate project implementation, by component, with the following entities: Component 1: Directorate of Land Tenure Issues, and the Indigenous Property Registry (within the Directorate of Assistance), Project Consultative Commission (PCC); National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform (INCRA), NGOs, universities and contracted firms. Component 2: Indigenous Property Registry (within the Directorate of Assistance), FUNAI Regional Offices, NGOs and the PCC. Component 3: Directorate of Administration, Department of Information (within the Directorate of Administration), NGOs, universities and private firms. Component 4: Project Consultative Commission (PCC), FUNAI Regional Offices, GTZ, NGOs and universities. 6. Because many entities outside of FUNAI would be participating in activities funded by the project, FUNAI has developed basic requirements for both governmental and non-governmental organizations. Governmental agencies must: (i) be composed of people with established knowledge, expertise and dedication to environmental conservation and rural or indigenous issues in the Amazon; and (ii) have experience in implementing plans for self-sufficient, sustainable rural development and environmental recuperation in the Amazon. Non-governmental agencies must: (i) be composed of people with established knowledge, expertise and dedication to preservation of indigenous cultures in the Amazon; (ii) be devoted specitically to indigenous issues; (iii) represent and have experience working with indigenous groups affected by the project; (iv) contain members with proven experience and dedication to the conservation of biodiversity and natural resource management in moist tropical forests; (v) be able to work with FUNAI; and (vi) be officially registered. Diagram 1: Organizational Chart for the Pilot Presidency of FUNAI Program Indigenouis Lands Project (shaded unitis specific to the Indigenous Lands Project) Ps.v iCiltiv Co.s.. . . .. .'.;,," ' "'"'':'" .. . . ... ... :.Se. -Evaluation:. ....- ........ ... :: -:.,.,.,.-..;-:---: ~~~~~~~..... -... -.-...:.::{.. , - . .;: . :-.-.,::: :,:,:,:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ........ -- .. ..; ..;::'B ... ..;:... .:.. :. ,,-. i ................................................:'" ' --Support Unit :- Technt6al Support Unit: ., ' dn,TehialSjxr nt -* n , ; | ; i ~ ~~~~~. ......... ..... .F .... ........... -...-.-..... i ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I I noult~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I I ) ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I I ..... ..... Directorate of _ Diretorat of Directorate of Land Tenure Issues | Administration | ||Regional Offices Soia Sevie IField Posts/ ___________________________I_igenou A r ...........~~IdlenusAra DiaLpram 2: O)rgani7ational Chart for FUNAI's Central Administration Council President of Cbnto Fiscal F~~~~liUNI A|| FUNAI | Council Directorate of Directorate of Directorate of Land Tenure Issues: Administration: Assistance: Land Tenure Issues, Record-Keeping, Education,Health, Identification and Planning, Indigenous Property Registry, Delimitation, Information Systems, Community Development, Denaication. Administration. Isolated Groups, Craft Production. (D D (DS 47 Annex BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT ANNEX 5: PARTICIPATION BY INDIGENOUS PEOPLE AND CRITERIA FOR DEVELOPING SURVEILLANCE AND PROTECTION PLANS FOR INDIGENOUS AREAS 1. The Indigenous Lands Project would constitute an Indigenous People's Development Plan as stipulated in World Bank Operational Directive 4.20. The Directive emphasizes the importance of informed participation of indigenous people in all phases of the project cycle by identifying local preferences through direct consultation, incorporation of indigenous knowledge into project approaches, and appropriate early use of experienced specialists. The Indigenous Lands Project fully meets these guidelines. Indigenous participation in the design of this project included meetings and preinvestment studies involving indigenous organizations and indigenist organizations. Indigenous participation is an integral aspect of all proposed project activities. Participation will also be considered one ot the indicators of project success (see Annex 7). 2. To strengthen the participation of indigenous communities, all indigenous organizations in the areas covered under the project will be recognized and encouraged by FUNAI to communicate directly with the FUNAI Special Projects Coordination Unit (SPCU), the Executive Secretariat of the Pilot Program, the Pilot Program International Advisory Group (IAG), and the independent evaluation team. Non-governmental organizations that support indigenous people in the areas covered under this project will also be recognized and encouraged by FUNAI to function as communication channels, especially for indigenous people without their own organizations or those who live in situations of extreme isolation. NGOs which support indigenous people will be encouraged to work as partners with FUNAI in the preliminary socio-economic and environmental surveys of indigenous areas covered under the project. Component 1: Regularization of Indigenous Lands 3. Brazilian law requires consultation and participation of indigenous communities in regularization and other activities affecting their lands. The proposed project takes as a central premise that the success of demarcation and protection of an indigenous area depends upon direct involvement and participation of the indigenous population. 4. Identification and Delimitation. During the identification and delimitation of indigenous areas, a multidisciplinary working group is assembled to carry out the work. This group is headed by an anthropologist, selected for his or her extensive previous experience with the target group(s). Under this project, the working group will also include an environmental specialist. The anthropologist and the environmental specialist consult extensively with the local indigenous population. By 48 Annex 5 investigating present activities and oral history, the anthropologist determines the traditional and required areas needed for the indigenous population's physical and cultural survival and well-being. The environmental specialist conducts participatory research and detailed consultations with the indigenous population to integrate indigenous resource-use patterns and local ecological knowledge into an environmental diagnostic. The aim is to ensure that the indigenous area constitutes an ecologically viable system. The environmental specialist will also discuss boundary maintenance alternatives with the indigenous population (such as planting perennials), and investigate zones in neighboring areas critical to the viability of the indigenous area. The environmental diagnostic will provide preliminary recommendations about boundary maintenance and protection, and sustainable natural resource use and income-generating alternatives. About seven percent of the funds for identification and delimitation is budgeted for support to indigenous participants (approximately US$1000 per area). 5. Demarcation. Local FUNAI staff first discuss the proposed timetable and methods of demarcation with local indigenous organizations or leaders, and local preferences are communicated to the Special Projects Coordination Unit. The form and extent of indigenous participation in demarcation activities are clarified with the local population and these agreements are then included in the contracts or agreements (contratos/convenios) which FUNAI concludes with the executing firms or institutions carrying out the demarcations. During the execution of physical demarcation, representatives of the local indigenous populations participate to supervise the work. Indigenous representatives check that the surveyed boundaries are consistent with the local understanding of the population's territory. Indigenous people, if they prefer, can also participate more actively in the demarcation activities, and sometimes may choose to carry out a significant portion of the work themselves; sometimes they select another agency or non-governmental organization with which to work. 6. Prioritization of Areas. The prioritization of indigenous areas to be further regularized under the project is described in Annex 2. FUNAI's evaluation of the factors used to calculate the degree of urgency is based upon multiple sources of information, including consultation with indigenous organizations, anthropological reports, identification mission consultations, indigenous participation in demarcation arrangements and supervision, FUNAI regional offices and posts, and non- governmental organizations that work directly with indigenous people. Component 2: Surveillance and Protection Plans for Indigenous Areas 7. Introduction. The objective of the Surveillance and Protection Plans for Indigenous Areas Component is to assist indigenous people in developing activities designed to protect their areas while securing their subsistence and conserving the natural resource base. Therefore, the plans will be developed and implemented largely by the affected indigenous population. As needed, logistical, technical and scientific support for the design and implementation of the plan will be provided by FUNAI regional administrative offices, FUNAI identification teams and/or pertinent governmental and non-governmental organizations. To ensure the effectiveness and sustainability of the protection plans during and after the proposed project, the plans 49 Annex 5 should help create the conditions for their own maintenance by means of economically and ecologically sustainable income-generating activities, as well as rudimentary infrastructure. Examples of the types of activities to be supported would be encouraging voluntary patrolling by establishing control bases (consisting of agricultural fields or fishing or hunting camps to be visited periodically by the indigenous people); intensification of the use of traditional areas for hunting or collecting forest products; and possible decrease in visiting or travel to populated border areas to diminish exposure to diseases and other threats. An example of infrastructure would be establishing radio systems to report illegal incursions. 8. Physical Threats and Cultural Readiness. In cases of invasions of indigenous areas which threaten the physical integrity of an area, FUNAI will request the help of pertinent government agencies (IBAMA, the Federal Police and others) capable of clearing the area. In situations in which indigenous groups are relatively incapable of protecting themselves, for example, because of cultural characteristics, newness of the contact situation, or absence of sufficient numbers of adults, FUNAI will assume responsibility for the design and implementation of the protection plan, but with substantial participation of the indigenous community. 9. Criteria of Eligibility for Protection Plans. The Project Consultative Commission (PCC) will review and provide recommendations on each proposed Surveillance and Protection Plan according to the following criteria of eligibility: (A) Relevance of the plan to the general objectives of the Pilot Program and the Indigenous Lands Project; (B) Effective participation of the affected indigenous people in the planning, implementation and evaluation of the plan and its results; (C) Potential for the ecological sustainability of the plan; (D) Adequacy and plans to further develop indigenous subsistence activities and intensified land uses in the parts of the indigenous area most susceptible to penetration by invaders; (E) Social viability of proposed activities in terms of the needs assessment as perceived by the affected population, in accordance with type and degree of threats and pressures on the indigenous areas; (F) Long-term economic sustainability of the proposed protection activities; (G) Inclusion of plans to train the indigenous people to use and maintain any required equipment; (H) Proposed costs within cost allocations of the project; and (I) Inclusion of a radio-communication system. 50 Annex 5 Component 3: Capacity-Building and Studies 10. The series of courses on indigenous issues to be supported under the project is intended primarily to strengthen the capacity of FUNAI and civil society to work more effectively on indigenous issues. However, representatives of indigenous populations or indigenous organizations will also be invited to participate in these courses, generally as course monitors. It is also expected that researchers on indigenous legal issues will consult with indigenous people and that workshops or conferences held on indigenous legal rights and environmental law would include indigenous representatives. Lastly, the surveillance and protection plans would include specific training, such as in the use and maintenance of equipment, for the sustainability of protection activities. Component 4: Support to Project Management 11. Representatives of indigenous people will also be included on the Project Consultative Commission (PCC). The PCC will work directly with the Special Projects Coordination Unit (SPCU) in FUNAI. It will consist of four representatives of indigenous people or non-governmental organizations to be selected in consultation with indigenous people, and four representatives of government. The functions and responsibilities of the PCC would include formal evaluations of: (i) the project annual operating plan; (ii) the recommendations of studies funded under the project; (iii) the surveillance and protection plans for indigenous areas; (iv) the semi-annual project reports; and (v) the mid-term and final project evaluation reports. The process for selecting indigenous representatives for the Consultative Commission was discussed during appraisal and was finalized at negotiations. 51 Annex 6 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAMv TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT ANNEX 6: CAPACITY-BUILDING AND STUDIES 1. The main institutional weaknesses that the first two subcomponents address are: (i) FUNAI's lack of a Geographic Information System (GIS), and (ii) the lack of adequate training in indigenous issues of a large portion of FUNAI's field staff. Subcomponent 1: Computer/GIS Training 2. To meet FUNAI's cartographic and satellite-image processing needs, which are essential for delimitation, demarcation and monitoring of indigenous areas, the project would finance a geographic information system (GIS) and remote sensing data analysis laboratory. Presently, only four people working in or with FUNAI are experienced in these fields. Training would therefore be provided to increase both the number of people with expertise in GIS and satellite image processing to eleven, as well as the overall cartographic and remote-sensing capabilities of FUNAI. As early as possible after acquiring the hardware and software, three courses would be given to all eleven technicians: (i) an intense, one-week course on the operating system UNIX; (ii) a two-month course on GIS; and (iii) a one-month course on digital image interpretation and processing. Subcomponent 2: Indigenous Issues Training 3. Objectives. The objectives are to: (i) train FUNAI field staff to deliver a higher quality of assistance to indigenous communities; (ii) inform and collaborate with relevant representatives of civil society, including local, state and federal agencies and NGOs. with respect to indigenous issues and services; and (iii) encourage consensus and disseminate information on best practices for how to work with indigenous people. The specific objectives are to prepare FUNAI field staff and selected representatives of civil society in: (a) administration and planning for working with indigenous communities; (b) cultural knowledge of diverse indigenous groups; (c) methods of keeping abreast of current legal issues and regulations pertaining to indigenous populations and the environment; and (d) technical aspects of conservation and natural resource management in indigenous areas. 4. Target Group and Selection Process. The target group to be trained will include the following types of FUNAI field staff: heads of Indian posts, regional administrators, agronomists, educational coordinators and other technicians. Representatives of civil society would target government agencies and NGOs that work with or provide services to indigenous people. Representatives of indigenous groups will also be invited, as appropriate, to participate as monitors in training courses. Nominations of persons to be trained will be submitted by: (i) FUNAI regional offices; (ii) NGOs; (iii) indigenous organizations; and (iv) other interested 52 Annex 6 parties. FUNAI's Special Projects Coordination Unit (SPCU) together with the Project Consultative Commission (PCC) will make the final selection of trainees. 5. Timing and Location. There will be one course in the first year, two in the second, and two in the third year. Courses are planned for the following locations which for trainees working with the indigenous people indicated in parentheses: (i) Redencao, Para (Xicrin, Gaviao, Kayapa, Arara, Parakana); (ii) Sao Luis, Maranhao (Apinaye, Amanaye, Canela, Guajajara, Krah6, Krikati, Tembe, Urubu-Kaapor, Xerente); (iii) Boa Vista, Roraima (Yanomami, Maiongong, Taurepang, Macuxi, Wapixana); (iv) Manaus, Amazonas (Tikuna, Kokama, Sater&NMawe, Munduruku, Kayabi, Hixkariana, Mura); and (v) Rio Branco, Acre (Kaxarari, Katukina, Kulina, Paumari, Kanamari, Apurina, Jamarnadi, Jarawara). 6. The Course. The anthropological section will cover the following topics: history of contact, inter-ethnic relations, culture change, acculturation, spatial concepts, history of indigenous policies, political dimensions, health and education. The section on environment and subsistence will focus on the following concepts: ecosystems, biomass biodiversity, agroeconomic and economic zoning, conservation units, traditional and modified management regimes, sustainable development, recovery of degraded areas, and hunting and fishing calendars. Major topics include management of natural resources, agrosilviculture, agriculture, marketing, and environmental legislation and regulations. The section on law and legislation will treat indigenous rights, problems of protecting indigenous lands (e.g. mining and logging), inter-institutional relations (e.g. FUNAI and INCRA, and FUNAI and the Federal Police), relations between indigenous populations and the state, and indigenous organizations. The section on administration will cover the administrative structure of FUNAI, preparation of work plans and operating agreements, presentation of proposals and record keeping. The training will be delivered by experts in the above-mentioned specialty areas. 7. Course Evaluations. The course will be evaluated in two stages. First, questionnaires covering expectations, needs and the resolution of specific cases will be administered at the beginning and end of the month-long course. Second, a follow-up questionnaire will be sent to participants six months after the completion of the course to assess the applicability of the training to their work. Subcomponent 3: Studies (i) Environmental Diagnostic Methodology 8. The overall objective of the study would be to develop the methodology by which ecological considerations are incorporated into the identification and delimitation of indigenous areas to assure their ecological viability and the self- sufficiency of the indigenous groups living in them. The study will generate guidelines for the specific information needed, which would include data on: (i) the local and regional ecosystems; (ii) indigenous use of all types of natural resources; (iii) the resources themselves; (iv) actual and potential impacts of human activity on the local ecosystem; (v) local economies and needs; (vi) high-risk sites and resources; 53 Annex 6 and (vii) mitigation measures and relevant environmental agencies and groups. The study would specify how this information is to be collected and applied to regularization activities; it would also define qualifications for the environmental specialist to be included in the Identification Working Groups. Activities would include: (i) an inter-institutional seminar in late 1995 at which the needed information, the methodology and qualifications of the specialist would be agreed upon; and (ii) the compilation of the results of the seminar. The testing of the methodology in two identification field trips in late 1995 would be covered under Subcomponent 3 of Component 1, Regularization of Indigenous Lands. Upon completion of this study, environmental diagnostics would be incorporated into all identification missions undertaken during the project. (ii) Demarcation Alternatives 9. Current demarcation procedures require cutting a six-meter strip through the forest along the boundaries of the indigenous area and returning at about five-year intervals to re-open the swath. The money, time and environmental damage involved in maintaining borders could be greatly reduced by the planting of marker species along the area's borders after the initial demarcation. This study would develop and test, in the Tukuna Indigenous Area (Amazonas), a pilot alternative demarcation method, with a view to learning lessons applicable to other indigenous areas. Activities would include: (i) a seminar at which pertinent information on the Tukuna Indigenous Area would be discussed, test species would be selected for planting along borders, and seedling collection and planting activities with indigenous participation would be planned; (ii) the actual collection and planting of seedlings with participation of the indigenous people; and (iii) preparation, presentation and review of a report analyzing the operation and relating lessons learned, distinguishing between lessons particular to the Tukuna Area and general lessons. The study and test will be executed in 1995 by FUNAI and two non-governmental organizations with significant experience in the Tukuna Area: the Magiita Center (Amazonas) and the Research and Extension Group for Agroforestry Systems, or PESACRE (Acre). (iii) Legal Policy and Resettlement Studies 10. The legal and policy framework for indigenous issues in Brazil could be altered over the coming years due to: (i) proposed revision of the national Indian Law (6001); (ii) debate about the reassignment (Decree 1,141 of May 1994) of some indigenous services to other line agencies; (iii) policy debate about the use and management of natural resources in indigenous areas (see Annex 3); and (iv) a proposed law to require all projects within 150 km of international boundaries to be approved by the National Security Council. Preinvestment studies on legal aspects of indigenous rights and environmental law were completed in November 1993 and September 1994 during project preparation. This preinvestment report could not complete the analysis of pending revisions. The proposed subcomponent in the project would finance further analysis of the changing legal and policy framework for indigenous issues in Brazil, provide policy recommendations, encourage indigenous participation by holding meetings to disseminate and discuss policy issues, and provide the basis for the development of training materials on legal aspects of 54 Annex 6 indigenous rights and environmental law in Brazil. This subcomponent will also finance specific studies of resettlement recommendations for good faith non-Indian inhabitants of indigenous areas when and if these studies become necessary. 55 Annex 7 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT ANNEX 7: MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN I. Objective 1. The principal objective of monitoring and evaluation of the Indigenous Lands Project is to generate useful information for all project participants which will allow for the measurement of project objectives and improve project performance. II. Concepts 2. Monitoring and evaluation are distinct but complementary tasks. Monitoring concentrates on the control and supervision of project activities and seeks to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of project implementation. Evaluation should measure the progress made toward fulfilling the general and specific project objectives as they have been defined and agreed for the Indigenous Lands Project. 3. Monitoring, a continuous process, should collect information about the execution of activities programmed in the Annual Operating Plan and compare what is being accomplished with what has been programmed. Monitoring is under the direct responsibility of the Special Projects Coordination Unit (SPCU/Technical Secretariat) and will be carried out by a consultant specifically contracted for this task. 4. Evaluation, which is a puriodic activity, should measure the effectiveness of project activities for achieving project objectives. The baseline for evaluation will be established by a baseline study to be carried out under the project, and will facilitate the evaluation of the impact of the project on the target indigenous populations. The evaluation activities will be carried out by external evaluators contracted by the SPCU/Technical Secretariat of the Indigenous Lands Project and approved by the Bank. 5. The process of monitoring and evaluation will not only involve the administration and management of the project but also involve all those participating and affected by project components. These activities will be essential to the functions of the Project Consultative Commission. III. Responsibilities 6. The SPCU/Technical Secretariat is responsible for the system of project monitoring and evaluation. The SPCU will be assisted in the tasks of designing and initial implementation of the monitoring and evaluation system by a short-term technical expert to be provided to the project by GTZ. 56 Annex 7 7. The responsibilities of the SPCU/Technical Secretariat are to: (a) Define and implement the monitoring and evaluation system for the project, with the support provided by technical cooperation; (b) Process, analyze and consolidate quarterly data on the execution of project activities furnished by FUNAI Directorates and Regional Offices and by NGOs and indigenous communities involved in the project; (c) Contract the consultancy for project monitoring; (d) Contract external evaluators for project evaluation; (e) Analyze and disseminate the results of the quarterly monitoring reports compiled by the monitoring consultant among project participants; (f) Periodically and systematically transmit information from monitoring activities and reports to the Project Consultative Commission and the Executive Secretariat of the Pilot Program; (g) Establish and distribute standard reporting instruments for recording the execution of project activities to serve as a source of verification for project outputs and as indicators; (h) Collect and synthesize project monitoring information every six months; (i) Carry out randomly selected official site visits of project indigenous areas to verify actual activities being carried out, as well as reporting. 8. The responsibilities of the Project Consultative Commission are to: (a) Review and analyze the information generated by the project monitoring and evaluation system; and (b) Suggest changes in the implementation of project activities. 9. The responsibilities of the evaluation consultancy will be detailed in the Terms of Reference which will be prepared during the first three months of the project. IV. Sources 10. Data on the execution of the Indigenous Lands Project will be collected and processed by means of standard reporting instruments appropriate for each project subcomponent (or activity) and designed to minimize reporting time and cost. The participants and beneficiaries of the project will be involved in the tasks of data collection. The data will be processed, maintained and updated in a Data Bank which 57 Annex 7 will be the responsibility of the SPCU/Technical Secretariat of the Indigenous Lands Project and which will constitute the principal source of data for monitoring and evaluation activities. 11. Other sources of monitoring and evaluation information will come from documents relevant to the regularization of indigenous lands, satellite images, the geo- environmental data base, site visit reports from the SPCU/Technical Secretariat, and site visits carried out by the monitoring consultant and the external evaluators. V. Key Evaluation Criteria and Monitoring Indicators 12. Prior to proceeding to list the project's monitoring and evaluation indicators, the importance of preparing the analysis of indigenous areas (Baseline Study) should be stressed. This study is the project's starting point. Part of this analysis stems from the formulation of the project's design, specifically with regard to the list of areas and the definition of priority criteria for their identification and demarcation. The other part of this analysis (the survey of environmental conditions in indigenous areas) will be carried out during the performance of identification and demarcation activities. 13. Monitoring indicators will consider how to gauge the goals defined in the Annual Operating Plan. 14. Kev Evaluation Criteria. A more detailed design of project evaluation will be provided in the Terms of Reference for the project evaluation to be submitted to the Bank by July 15, 1995. Project evaluation will be based on information from the project monitoring indicators and other sources. Key criteria for project evaluation include the following: (a) Maintenance of the structures and functions of the tropical forest habitat of the indigenous peoples, at least within the parameters established by the baseline study for the project. (b) Completion of the regularization activities programmed under the project. (c) Satisfactory indices of removal of illegitimate occupants from indigenous areas. (d) Satisfactory indices of site-specific compensation and/or resettlement plans for good faith non-Indian inhabitants of indigenous areas. (e) Adherence to the proposed priority list for areas to be regularized. (f) Degree of indigenous participation in the processes of identification and demarcation of indigenous areas; and/or 58 Annex 7 (i) Number of indigenous areas demarcated directly by the indigenous peoples; and/or (ii) Number of indigenous areas demarcated with the participation of indigenous or indigenist NGOs. (g) Degree of participation of the indigenous population in the formulation and successful implementation of surveillance and protection plans. (h) The number of innovative environmental surveys carried out and establishment and maintenance of a multifunctional environmental data base for indigenous areas. (i) Improved deployment and coordination of FUNAI field personnel and other institutions that provide direct assistance to indigenous populations. 15. Monitoring Indicators. The Annual Operating Plan (AOP) will include the timetable for project activities and financial and operational information (targets and actual). The monitoring indicators below refer exclusively to the operational aspects of the project. A. REGULARIZATION OF INDIGENOUS LANDS 1. Identification: Number of areas to be identified. a. Number of areas for which Technical Working Groups have been established. b. Number of anthropological field studies completed. c. Number of cartographic studies completed. d. Number of land tenure surveys completed. e. Number of final reports presented. f. Number of official opinions elaborated. g. Number of official opinions published. h. Number of portarias declaratc5rias issued. 2. Demarcation: Number of areas to be demarcated. 2.1 Number of areas to be demarcated by bidding. a. Number of operational plans prepared. b. Number of bidding invitations published. c. Number of contracts signed. d. Number of demarcations concluded and received. e. Number of areas for which final calculations have been submitted. f. Number of areas approved. 59 Annex 7 2.2 Number of areas to be demarcated by indigenous communities. a. Number of agreements signed with NGOs. b. Number of operating plans prepared. c. Amount of field work begun. d. Amount of field work completed. e. Number of areas for which final calculations have been completed. f. Number of areas approved. 3. Occupants in Areas to be Demarcated: Number to be relocated. 3.1 Number of good faith occupants to be removed, with compensation. a. Number of good faith occupants reviewed by the Inquiry Commission. b. Number of good faith occupants for whom compensation calculations have been made. c. Number of good faith occupants compensated. d. Number of good faith occupants removed from indigenous areas. 3.2 Number of good faith occupants to be removed and resettled. a. Number of good faith occupants included in prepared plans for resettlement. b. Number of resettled good faith occupants. 4. Presidential Confirmation. 4.1 Number of areas confirmed by Presidential Confirmation Decree. 5. Registration: Number of areas to be registered. 5.1 Number of areas registered in respective local land registries. 5.2 Number of areas registered in the Federal Property Registry. 6. Environmental Survey: Number of areas to be studied. a. Number of areas in which Technical Groups have been created. b. Amount of field research performed. C. Number of reports submitted. 60 Annex 7 B. SURVEILLANCE AND PROTECTION OF INDIGENOUS AREAS 1. Border protection plans: Number of plans to be implemented. a. Number of plans prepared. b. Number of plans approved by the PCC. c. Number of plans started. C. STUDIES AND TRAINING 1. Studies. 1.1 Definition of profile for environmental technicians. a. Signing of contract. b. Conclusion of studies. c. Execution of methodology testing. d. FUNAI directive incorporating conclusions. 1.2 Study on the use of marker species along area boundaries. a. Signing of contract. b. Conclusion of studies. C. Execution of methodology testing. d. FUNAI directive incorporating conclusions. 1.3 Legal and Policy Studies. a. Legal Study. (i) Preparation of Terms of Reference. (ii) Signing of contract. (iii) Conclusion of studies. b. Resettlement Study. (i) Preparation of Terms of Reference. (ii) Signing of contract. (iii) Conclusion of studies. 2. Training in Indigenous Subjects: Number of courses to be given and trainees to be trained. a. Preparation of Terms of Reference. b. Number of instructors selected. c. Number of trainees selected. d. Number of courses given, and number of participants. e. Number of trainees approved at course(s). 61 Annex 7 3. Geoprocessing Laboratory. 3.1 GIS establishment. a. Preparation of bidding documents. b. No-objection by World Bank. c. Publication of bidding documents. d. Signing of contract with successful bidder. e. Equipment installed. f. Training in Geoprocessing (i) Preparation of Terms of Reference for training. (ii) Selection of firm to provide training. (iii) Signing of contract. (iv) Provision of training. e. Laboratory operating satisfactorily. D. MANAGEMENT SUPPORT 1. Management and Monitoring. a. Hiring of short-term consultants. Number of months. b. Hiring of administrative support. c. Procurement of equipment. d. Consultative Commission created and operating. Number of meetings held. 2. Evaluation a. Preparation of Terms of Reference. b. Selection of consultant(s). c. Signing of contract. d. Evaluation carried out and report delivered. BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAtAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT ANNEX 8: FUNAI EXTERNALLY FUNDED SPECIAL PRCJECTS IN TIIE LEGAL AMAZON' | Project Financing Description of Indigenous Component Project Period and Stage Amount Committed Source (US$) Comim,unilies affecied by Vale Rio Assist iidigenious groups wiih land regularization, Activities begun in 1982 and $13.6 million total. the Carajis Iron Project Doce health, sanitation, educationi, productive activities, will continue until the end of $924,000 remaininig in (I'ara, M1aranhiAo, GoiAs) Company construction of infrastructure, acquisition of funds. 1994. Xikriii do Cate(& Vale Rio Assist the Xikrin do Calete iitdigenous people in the Activities begun in 1989. $650,000/year Program Doce areas ol hela;lthi, edlucatlion, econlomiiic production, Termination date open. Company surveillance of botund(laries andl environment. Gaviio Paikaltcj Vale Rio Assist the Gaviao-Parkateje indcigenious people in Activities begun in 1990. $240,000/year Program Doce the areas of liealih, education, econiomic Termination date open. Company production, boundary protection and enviroiiinent. Parakana Plrogram ELECTRO- Compensate tlie Parakand Indligenous people tor the 1987-2013 1987-88: $594,000 NORTrE loss of part of their traditional land and adverse 1989-93: $1.4 million social impacts from the creation of the Tucur-nii 1994-2013: llydroelectric Reservoir by assisting the tribe in the $330,000/year areas of health, education, surveillance of boundaries, productive activities, administration, public works and infrastticture. 'It is important to note that several other entities also liave projects and programiis with indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin,, including: Conservation international; World co Wildlife Fund; Raiiilorest Altiance; Body Shop; ltier-Aniericaii Founidationi; Ford Foundation; Envir-onienital Defenise Fund; and Government of France. Project Financing Description of Indigenou1s Component Project Period and Stage Amount Committed Sou[ce l It S$) Waimiri-Atroari Program ELECTRO- Compensate the Waitiri-Atroari Indigenous People 1987-2013 1987-93: $3.2 million NORTE for the loss of parl of their traditional land and 1994-2013: adverse social impacts from ihe crealion of the $750,000/year Balbina Hydroelectric Reservoir by assisting the tribe in ihe areas of healilt, eutication, surveillaniicc of boundaries, docuinentation/ record-keepinig, productive activilies, administration, public works and infrastructure. Deinarcation, German Demarcale the Waiapi Indigenous Area, maintain 1994 until complete (1995-6) $380,000 Maintenance and Government/ its borders and develop surveillance plans relying (DM 600,000) Surveillance of the GTZ principally on local planning and labor. Waiapi Indigenotis Area, Amapi _ Project to Protect the Inter- Proposed activities: restoration of degraded lands; Activities began in 1985. Proposed 1994 budget: Environment and Americani development of alternalive economic activities for Ternination date open. $2.3 million Indigenous Communities Development target indigenous communities; location and (PMACI) along BR-364, Bank and protection of isolated groups in two muniicipalities. Acre, northeast Rondonia Government and soutiheast Amazonas of Brazil Mato Grosso Natural World Bank Demarcation and boundary renewal of indigenous Activities begun in 1993. $7.8 million Resource Management areas; assistance to isolated grotips; monitorinig and Pw-oject (PRODEAGRO) enforcement of indigenous ar-eas; health care and disease control; emergency assistance to the Sarere; managerial assistance. Activities limited to Mato Grosso. Rond6nia Natural World Bank Demarcation and boundary renewal of indigenous Activities begun in 1993. $3.9 million Resource Management areas; locating and protection of isolated groups; Project (PLANAFLORO) monitoring and enforcement of indigenous areas; health care and disease control. Activities limited to Rondonia. > x 64 Annex 9 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE THE BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LANDS PROJECT ANNEX 9: REPORT AND DOCUMENTS IN PROJECT FILES 1. Report on Indigenous Populations' Legal Rights to their Traditional Lands and Natural Resources. Nucleo de Direitos Indigenas: Part I - November 1993; Part II - September 1994. 2. Proposal on Computer Technology Needs of FUNAI for a Remote Sensing and Geographical Information Systems Laboratory. Paulo Roberto Meneses, July 1993. 3. Package of Supporting Documents to the Final Project Proposal. FUNAI, November 1993. 4. Considerations on the Participation of Indigenous Populations in the Regularization of their Lands. Maria Elisa Ladeira, Centro de Trabalhos Indigenistas, August 1993. 5. Final Project Proposal for the Protection of Indigenous Lands and Populations in the Legal Amazon. FUNAI, April 1994. 6. Pilot Health Subproject Proposal. FUNAI, November 1993. 7. Pilot Natural Resource Subproject Proposal. FUNAI, April 1994. 65 Annex 10 BRAZIL PILOT PROGRAM TO CONSERVE T^E BRAZILIAN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LAiNDS PROJECT ANNEX 10: DETAILED PROJECT COST TABLES COMPONENT 1: REGULARIZATION OF INDIGENOUS LANDS Costs by Unit (US$ f0001 I 1 1995 1996 1997 1998i 19991 2000 Unit Coat Subcompvzent A: Idantification Areas Affectrd 2: 10 17' 17! 15j 0J n.a. IFieldTrios 2 8i 14j 14i 121i Oj 03.5 Subcompoment B: Demarcabon Areas Affected 3 9 j 12j 12! 11 ill n.a. llncluded Compensation) IDemarcations i 3 5 7 9 n I | 10i n.a. Subcomoonent C: Environmental Arees Affec-ed Cl S; 7i 7 7! sl n.a. Diagnoatice 'i-eld Tnos a01 51 7; 71 71 SI 3.5 Note: Czits are caiculated on the oasis of field trnps and distances demarcated, not on the basis of areas affected. Coats by Expenditure Categorf per Year (US$ '000) i 'Financing Source Subcomoon-nt A: Identification i 1995i 1996; 19971 1998 1999i 2000' TOTAL; ' KtW....IGOB.... Consultancies 141 56 98: 98 94; 0! 350I 3SC Services 1 15; sOi 0OSi 1C5 90! & 375: 1 37Si SUBTOTAL 29i 116, 203i 203 174i 0 725S - 725 Physical Contingenciees 3. 12 ZI 21 1s! 0 75;! 75! Price Cont:ngr,ecies 0. 4. 13! 19 21 0 57H 57! Total Su=comnonient Costs 32 132 237' Z43 213. a 3 571 857: 0 Subcomozoent 3: Demarc3tion and Reguiarizatvin i ' I i i i C:vil/Feid .Voris 187 1738 -24S 1794. 524: 2^C5 1C094, 10694. Comoensarinr ' 71, 1386: 3s: 2_; 41 22; ^29.i 212' SUBTOTAL 257. 3124 '-33; 2019 5dS; 2-2S 1-3^-: 10694; 2129 PhlysicaI zt;n;%ncees-' 29 2S1 5371 253 79 331 1.C4 16C41 C Price Con!in_gencie._ 21 107 901i 191 711 382 104-3;1 9 34, 108 Total Suocomocoient Costs 237 3492 5359' 2473 715S 3137 1S5-d31 13232: 2A37 |Subcomoorent C: Environmental Diagnostoe* I [ I i I Corsuitanc:es 0 3 18' 13 13; 13 31t 31.a Sdrvices 0' 30 41 41 41 3C 1831 i 1a3 'SUBTCTAL 0 43 50 50 60. 431 254! l 2541 Phvsical Cznninq-nciee-^ . 0o S 7 7 7i S 3j| 31_ Price Conrtngenc:es 0! 1 4 S. 7 7i :5i 25i _ Total Subcomoonent Costs [ 01 43 70; 72 74i 54. 3191 3191 0 AGGREGA7_E CCMPONENT COSTS I 1995 1996 1997' 1998' 19991 2000i TOTAL! | _ Investment C.w,iFeld Works 1871 1728i 4:45: 1794, S24i 2:.CS 105941 | 10694! 0 Consuitancies 14. s3 11-5 115i 12i 13! 431ji 431U 0 Sdrvices i isi 901 145 146I 131! 30 -i|a | 55sa8l C.;roensaronn 71 I 12a6 ' I aa 224 41! z:20 : 191 j 1 i2129 Total Investment 236. 3233 4i535 22*3 7938 246a' I:sI! 1 116a3 21Z9 Recurrrnt Costs I ! 0' 0' ol 0 0' !' ol o Ts-ai 3ane Costs ' 1 2261 3.23 4-995s :'31 798! 24 6a 1:311 i 11683! 2129 |,oral ihysicai Corin:nqenc:es i 31 273 -j6-i- 297 IC4 3_8; 170| ! 17101 C -Tiai Price Cantinnenc:e6 2' 112 2071 216 100 389: 11 :Si 10171 1ca jGRNO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ TO 31 23 i7 - 94 c 'C ' 3' ' iS : 14'10' 233 * AIr St..n-o 31 5 1 _CC per fieid trip NdS Usdd as trid pnysical coninnenc4 y fo7r enr;ficao C'n. ' A 1 5' phy5uial continoency rate was applied on civilfield works. A 0% rate was applied to compensanon. * A fla sur- of f3 10CO per field trip was usdd as :ta physical cocintn;ency race for environmencal diagnostics. * . K <. .Kancalt fur Wiedarou.bau. G38 Goernment af =raz:l 66 Annex 10 BRAZ1IL PELOT PROGRAiM TO CONSERVE T1E BRAZILILN RAIN FOREST INDIGENOUS LAINDS PROJECT A4NNEX 10: DETAILED PROJECT COST TABLES COrMPONENT 2: SURVEILLANCE AND PROTECTION OF INDIGENOUS AREAS Numnoar of Plans to 3e Oeveloped ||19951 19961 1997l19 lss 1 t991 ZOCWOOTTAL and Begin Imcaiemenrsdion | Oi 12i 1! 17! 171 a[ sa Nota In exeeodionai circurmstances when protaction needsaere acute, and to ensure ail areas have plans, post-portana. pre-demarelffan workc will be initiated in certain ireas. Also, plans beginning development and impiermentation in 19983 will be funded by this project for two instead of three years. Costs by Expenditure Category per Year (US$ '000) |Percent of lAverage Cost | i i inancing Source Investment Cost Total Cost por Area | 1995 1996 7 1997: 199Si 1999 2000,TOTAL KfN- !C;vil/Fld Works i 8%. 2.0Z! 0 141 .C 30' 32: 14 I1 i 111 :uionment/Suoolies | 36?% a.sa o0i 6 as 129i 1933 6 5 478i ' 475 Services 41°% 9.94i o0 701 97 14a! 160 7C 545 S545 SUBTOTAL | 85 20. 1 4L ol 1_5: 20' 308; 332 1.I8 131 1 31 Recurrent Coat " 15%. 3.67 0 1 2i; 36 55: 53 25 2C1! 201 Totad Comoonent 3ase Coats 1C0S% 24.31 i 01 170 237 363 391 17 1333'1 1333 Total Phyeicai Contngencise. ! 0 20 23' 44± 47 21 1 SC 130 Total P-ice Contingencies I a 3i 1i 34! 4, Z 1301 130 GRAND TOTAL 0' 197' 29' 440 4S6: 213 16'3! 1i23 * KW - K.:editanstait fur Wiedaraufbau A pnysicai coninogency rate of 12°S was soplied. T- nis consists of suoolies and maintenance tor venicles. NOT!S: Average cost per area is based upon esrtimaes suoplied by FUNAI in Ocrocer. 1993. The costs of plans for the sarHy areas to be demarcated are act to oe above average since costs are based on suoerficie, and the hiqn pnonrty areas for protection pians tend to be above average in size. Funding for protection plans will be provided for three years. and will decrease as indigenous communities and local FiNAl agents aessume administrative end financial resoonsibiiities for vte plans. Speciflcaily, it the total cost of a plan - 100. then "sar 1 cost - sa. Ymer 2 coet * 27 snd Ysar 3 lost - 19. 67 Annex 10 COMPONENT 3: CAPACITY-BUILDING AND STUDIES (in US '000) Subcornoonent A: Capacity-Building j j Financing Source 1. Training in Indigenous Issues' 1995 1996 19971 19981 1999i ZOOOITOTAL !iFT | KfW... Investment IConsultancies | 3 51 5 i 01 0 i O 131 131 ___________________ Iservices 116' 233 233 0! Oj 0o 5a211 582! i____________________ jEquicment/SurIoies 31 62 62 i O j O 15S . 15' j ISUBTOTAL i so! a 300 3Q01 oi o0 ci 75011 750 0 11. Comouterization of FUNAI Land Records [ i F i | __j___i Investment Consultancies i 57 0 0 1 0 0 0; 57i 57 Services 4i - i ol oi oi o 4ii 1 _ 4 _Equipment/Suociies 432! 18! is, oi o° ol 46911 | 469 ISUSTOTAL 493j 18 18i ol o oi 529i1 o0 529 tSubcomponent Basa Costs 643j 313 3181 0 01 Ci 1279 | 7501 529 Physical Contingencies" 641 32, 32! 0 0 oi o 1291 751 53 Price Contingencies 4F 11. 201 Oi oj ci 35K 301 6 ITotalSubcomponentCosts 712' 361 370 0| 0| a1 1443i I 855i 588 One course will be given in 1995, two in 1996 and two in 1997. j j I _ i j Subcomponent B: Studies I _ i i I ___jj 1. Environmental Diagnostic* 1995! 1996 19971 19981 1999 20001TOTAL I Investments: !Consultancies 9 0 o[ °i ! oi s9 Services 8; 0 01 0 01 0 a Ii 9 tSUBTOTAL 171 C 01 0 0' 0; 17! 171 0 11. ODrsarcation Alternatives i Investments: CiviilField Works ' 4 0 0 C! 0i O 41 41 Consuitancies 141 O Oi C' 0 01 14! 141 Sarvices 14! c 0' C' 0' ol 1! 141 Equitment/Succiids I 3' 0 01 0| o 3 1i 3i 'SUSTOTAL 36i 0 0! 0' Oi 01 360 361 0 111. Legal Studies ! I i I Ii Investments: Consultancies a O i 6 Si 33: 33i i Services 0 24 0 1 0C o0 i O 241 ::ujoment/Suscoies 0o A. 0 C C. a' 2: 21 SUBTOTAL 0C 35. 5s 6 61 691' 53j 0 Subcomoonent Base Cos" i i53 35' 6 6; 6i oi 112, 112i 0 i~~ 1 Physical Contingencies"' 5 4 1 1 i1 1| 11, 11. Pric Contingencies 0 0 1 a ii 1i 1 41 14 0 iTotal Subcomoonent Costs Sa1 40, 7 7! 7 a 1 1 27 [1 1 271 0 AGGREaATc COMPCNENT COSTS 19951 1996! 1997! 1998> 1999! 20001TOTAL I I I Investment .Cinsultancies i 8_ 1 4 11 i 6 6 i I1 1,51 65S 57 Ser/icas I 13: 257 233 0C1 O o I 32'' 628. 4. lE9wtoment/SugoiieY 4d66 82- 80 CI oj oi i6:9 I 160; 463 *Civii/Field Worxs 4i a' 0' ol ol ol 4!! 41 0 |Total Investment i 696! 353' 32.o 6 6, 6i 13911! 8621 529 Recuirent Costs a 0' 0 ' 0' ° ° o! C! Oi 0 Total Base Csxts 69SI 353 3Z 6 is 51 13311 8621 529 Total Phvsic3i Cantinqencies 7^ 35 2'' I 1I 1 139' 9 6i 53 Total Prce Cnrtnqenc:es 5 1 2' 2' 1 1 1 j 41 341 aGPARIND0 77 -O-AL 77 0 I- 37' 7 7' Si 1572' 9821 5as ' A pn rsicai o n,:r.,nc/ ratraor 1oC% VSs 3cc.iaC. ' 'R , Rair orelt Trust Fund. KfN - Kroditanstalt fur Wiaderauftau 68 Aanex 10 COMPONENT 4: Support to Project Management 8ase Costs by Unit (USS 000) saginning I I CQuantity! Unit |Unit Cost 9 Cost i Yaar Coneultanciee IStart-Up I 8lmonth, 1 .5 27 1995 Evaluation S i year p 30 150 i 1996 !Technicai Assistant 5.5 -veer I S 99r 1995 'Others 84 4month 1 .5 126 1996 Service Typists | 11 year S . 161 57' 1995 iSecretary .5.Syear 10.981 60 1995 Airfares ' 451 tickat 0.5 S 2265 1995 IPer Diemrs 23601day 005ia 137' 1995 Training 1 2'course 0.41 1 1995 Equipment/One-tim.UrAices 1 _ 1 6.54 17' 1995 SupplieS 5.5 year | 84i 46 1995 ITotal Base Casts 945 Costs by Expenditure Category per Year (USS '000) Financing Source Subcomoonent A: Project Management 1995' 1996 1997' 1998 19991 2000ITOTAL RFT - Investment Consultancees 23 63 4s 45 36 36: 2':! 252 E;uiorment/Supplies 20 a a 8 a Ba i2. 62 Services 29 68 6a 65 53 53 i 369 369 SUBTOTAL 72 1 1 Z. 12' 1 I2 112' 632 6S3 Physica/ Contingencies 7' 14, 1 12 111 1'1 2a 58 Price C.:ntingencies I 01 5 3 11 141 17 55 Total Subcomponent Costs 79 1 1563 141 145 1371 141 3C, 3C6 Subeomoonent a: !nd-oendent Evaluation 1996! 1996' 1997 1998: 1999i 20001TOTAL Investment C3nsultancies 0 i 30i 1 S; 45 i s 45, 1 -0 150 Ser,ices 0' 2' 22' 2 22 ' 22 1- 112 SU8TOTAL 0 1 52 37 67 37i 67 i23 252 Phywical Contingencies' 0 5 4 7 41 7 5 Price Contingencies ' 0 2 2 6 -5 10i e 25 Total Subcomoornent Costs 0I 60 44: SC 46 84' 314 314 AGGRE5ATE CCMP-'INE?9-t COSTS 1995 1996 1997' 1998 1 9991 2000iTOTAL Investment Consultancies 23i 98' 6C 90 i1 a1 4C: 402 ' tuioment/Suei.joos 20' i 38 3 3 . B s !6: 2 Services 291 90 30 90 90 sol 4a9 ' 431 Total Investment ' 72 1956 -3 139 1-i' 130 945 945 Recurrent Costs 0 ° i o' 0' oCi 01 01 0 Total 3ao- Costs 72 196i 153! 139' 15Cr 180' 945 945 Total Physical Contingenei-ee 7 20 16 19' 15 l 1 a 3s9 95 Total Pric: Contingencies 01 7 I(" 17 13' 27 30 80 GRAND TOTAL i 79 223 ' s5 225 *33 225 _10 1120 A ,n,sical con'tinency rate of 10%G was apoied. F - Rain Forss: irust Furd MAP SECTION I IBRD 26184 | _ * ' r > * 0 5 1 7 - :: . i V E N E Z U E L A t 2 a b > A . . ... ;5 LJ Oei- ) R I N A M EE F FRR 1 ,> S ; zff - > i)COLOMBIA Z E } , t < U A S 0 - T =~~~ R A \ r , A PA J.FO. AM-'IA T < A ' jr, . 9 . ' - - *_/ rAo WCrld RonR CrooET B R A Z IL m~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SPTME 9