The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Sustainable ... · ESMF for the Sustainable Land Management Project II 1 ... 2.2 Component 1: Integrated Watershed and Landscape Management

ESMF for the Sustainable Land Management Project II

1

The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia

Sustainable Land Management Project II

Revised Final Draft Document

On

Environmental and Social Management

Framework (ESMF)

September, 2013

Addis Ababa

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized


2

List of Acronyms

ANR Assisted Natural Regeneration

BoA Bureau of Agriculture

CBPWDG Community Based Participatory Watershed Development Guideline

CRGE Climate Resilient Green Economy

DA Development Agent

EA Environmental Assessment

MoEFA Ministry of Environmental and Forestry

ESIAR Ethiopia Institute for Agricultural Research

EPLAU Environmental Protection and Land Administration Unit

ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework

FDRE Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia

FEPA Federal Environmental Protection Authority

GHG Green House Gas

GTP Growth and Transformation Plan

KWDC Kebele Watershed Development Committee

MERET Managing Environmental Resources to Enable Transition to more sustainable

livelihoods

MoA Ministry of Agriculture

MoFED Ministry of Finance and Economic Development

MoWE Ministry of Water and Energy

NSC National Steering Committee

NTC National SLM Technical Committee

OP/BP Operational Policy/Bank Procedure

PAD Project Appraisal Document

PIM Project Implementation Manual

REPLA/B Regional Environmental Protection and Land Administration Agency/ Bureau

RSC Regional Steering Committee

SLM Sustainable Land Management Project

SLMPSU Sustainable Land Management Support Unit

WB World Bank

WWDC Woreda Watershed Development Committee


3

Table of Contents

Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 5

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 8

1.1 Overview of the SLMP II ................................................................................................................. 8

1.2 Purpose and Objectives of the ESMF ........................................................................................... 9

1.3 Methods of the ESMF Preparation ............................................................................................. 10

1.3.1 Review of Project Related Documents ............................................................................... 10 1.3.2 Review of Relevant Policies, Laws and Proclamations, Environmental and Social

Assessment Guidelines ............................................................................................................ 10

1.3.3 Consultations with Selected Key Stakeholders ................................................................ 10

1.4 Public Consultation in a Validation Workshop ....................................................................... 11

1.5 Organization of the Report ............................................................................................................ 13

2. Project Description ................................................................................................................................... 13

2.1 Project Components ........................................................................................................................ 13

2.2 Component 1: Integrated Watershed and Landscape Management ................................. 14 2.3 Sub-Component 1.1: Sustainable Natural Resource Management in Public and

Communal Lands ............................................................................................................................. 14 2.4 Sub-Component 1.2: Homestead and Farmland Development, Livelihoods

Improvements and Climate Smart Agriculture........................................................................ 14

2.5 Component 3: Rural Land Administration, Certification and Land Use ........................ 14

2.6 Sub-Component 3.1: Rural Land Administration and Certification ................................. 14

2.7 Sub-Component 3.2: Local Level Participatory Land Use Planning ................................ 15

2.8 Institutional and Implementation Arrangements .................................................................... 15

2.9 Sub-project Identification and Watershed Planning Process............................................... 16

2.10 Environmental Context and Baseline Conditions ................................................................... 16

3. Administrative, Policy and Regulatory Framework for Environmental Management ......... 18

3.1 The FDRE Constitution .................................................................................................................. 18

3.2 Environmental Policy of Ethiopia ............................................................................................... 19

3.3 Biodiversity Conservation and Research Policy ..................................................................... 19

3.4 Proclamations and Environmental Guidelines ........................................................................ 19

4.4.1 Proclamations ............................................................................................................................. 19

4.4.2 Environmental and social impact assessment guidelines and directives .................. 22

3.5 Relevant and applicable international conventions ratified by Ethiopia .......................... 23

3.6 Applicable World Bank Safeguard Policies Triggered by the SLMP II .......................... 23

4. Potential Environmental and Social Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................................... 26

4.1 Positive Impacts ............................................................................................................................... 27

4.2 Potential Negative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ........................................................... 27

5. Environmental and Social management plan (ESMP) ................................................................... 28

5.1 Guiding principles............................................................................................................................ 28

5.2 Procedures .......................................................................................................................................... 28

Step (i): Eligibility check (Guidance for the DAs) .......................................................................... 29 Step (ii): Screening of sub-projects that require special attention and environmental and

social concerns (Guidance for Woreda EPLAU) .................................................................... 29 Step (iii): Notification of sub-projects of Environmental and Social Concern: Guidance for

the Woreda Council and BoA ...................................................................................................... 32

Step (iv): Review of notified sub-projects: Guidance for the REPLA/B .................................. 32

Step (v): Conducting an ESIA: Guidance for the Woreda EPLAU office ................................ 32

Step (vi): Reviewing the ESIA Report: Guidance for the REPLA/B ......................................... 32


4

6. Gaps identified in the implementation of the ESMF in SLMP 1 ................................................ 34

7. Capacity Building Training and Technical Assistance .................................................................. 35

8. Implementation, supervision and monitoring ................................................................................... 37

8.1 Implementation and process monitoring ................................................................................... 37

8.2 Results monitoring ........................................................................................................................... 37

9. Implementation cost of the ESMF and safeguards .......................................................................... 38

9.1 Budget for capacity building ........................................................................................................ 38

9.2 Budget for implementation of the ESMF and Mitigation Measures ................................. 39

Annexes ............................................................................................................................................................. 40

Annex 1: Sub-project eligibility checklist for DAs at the Kebele level (form 1) ................... 40 Annex 2: Screening checklist for sub-projects needing special attention (form 2)- Guidance

for Woreda EPLAU focal person ................................................................................................ 41 Annex 3: Screening checklist for sub-projects of environmental concern (form 3)-

Guidance for Woreda EPLAU focal person ............................................................................. 41 Annex 4: checklist of potentially negative impacts and possible mitigation measures for

sub-project activities ....................................................................................................................... 43

Annex 5: Guidelines for sub-projects requiring special attention ............................................... 47 Annex 6: Checklist of questions for consultative meeting and discussions with regional

SLMP Coordinators, Woreda focal persons and community members .......................... 48 Annex 7: Summary of the discussion held with stakeholders in a validation workshop at

Adama, August 11, 2013 ............................................................................................................... 51

Annex 8: Summary of the discussions held with community representatives at Adama,

August 11, 2013 ............................................................................................................................... 62

Annex 9: Summary of Small Dam Safety Guideline (MoA) ........................................................ 65


5

Executive Summary

Natural resource conservation and sustainable utilization is among the top priority

development agendas of the Government of Ethiopia. This commitment is shown in various

actions that have been undertaken through different initiatives such as Managing

Environmental Resources to Enable Transition to more sustainable livelihoods (MERET),

Productive Safety Net Programs (PSNP) and the national Sustainable Land Management

Project (SLMP). The first phase of the SLMP was launched in 2008 and it has successfully

introduced land management practices and rehabilitated thousands of hectares of degraded

lands using physical and biological measures in 45 selected Woredas and watersheds. The

first phase of the SLMP will be finalized in September, 2013.

The second phase (SLMP II) is under preparation for the period 2013-2019. It will build on

the results of the SLMP I and introduces measures to address climate change/variability

related risks and to maximize Green House Gas (GHG) emission reductions so as to meet the

Growth and Transformation Plan (GTP) and the Climate Resilient Green Economy (CRGE)

goals while reducing land degradation and improving land productivity of small holder

farmers. The SLMP II will be implemented in 90 new and 45 existing Woredas and

watersheds through the existing government structures and community institutions in six

regions namely Oromia, Amhara, Tigray, Southern Nations and Nationalities Peoples,

Gambela and Benishangul Gumz. This ESMF document is prepared in order to manage and

avoid the negative environmental and social impacts that may arise from the implementation

of sub-projects to be financed under some of the project components in the SLMP II. The

environmental and socioeconomic milieu of the intervention areas are characterized by high

production potential but with significant limitations due to severe land degradation, high agro-

ecological variability and diverse farming systems, high population density and land

fragmentation.

The main objectives of the ESMF are i) to establish clear procedures and methodologies for

the environmental and social assessment, review, approval and implementation of

investments to be financed under the program; ii) to specify appropriate roles and

responsibilities, and outline the necessary reporting procedures, for managing and monitoring

environmental and social concerns related to program investments; and iii) to determine the

training and capacity building needs of the implementing institutions. The social impacts and

risks are addressed in a separate parallel Social Assessment (SA) study in which the main

social impacts are identified and mitigation measures are proposed along with a Resettlement

Policy Framework (RPF) document. This Environmental and Social Management Framework

(ESMF) will be implemented along with the social safeguard instruments. The SA objectives

include assessing socio-economic factors that require due consideration, identifying

vulnerable and underserved groups that may be excluded from the project and affected by the

project, assessing the potential social impacts, risks and the mitigation measures. Thus,

separate SA and RPF documents are prepared in parallel with this ESMF, which will all be

implemented together as safeguard instruments of the project.

This ESMF is prepared by collecting primary and secondary data as well as compiling

information through extensive review of project documents, environmental policies, laws,

regulations, proclamations and guidelines at the Federal and Regional levels, consultative

discussions with project team members of the project support unit (PSU) at the Ministry of

Agriculture, consultations with legal experts, monitoring and evaluation experts at the former

Federal Environmental Protection Authority, and environmental regulatory experts at


6

representative regional environmental protection agency. In depth discussions were held with

the SLMP regional coordinators of Tigray, Amhara, Oromia, Southern Nations and

Nationalities Peoples, Gambela and Benishangul Gumuz. In addition, consultations with

Woreda focal persons and local communities were held during a field visit to selected

Woredas and watersheds. The draft ESMF, as per the requirement of OP 4.01, has been

consulted with stakeholders drawn from governmental and non-governmental organizations

and feedback obtained from the consultation has been incorporated.

The project has four major components. Component 1: Integrated Watershed and Landscape

Management Component 2: Institutional Strengthening, Capacity Development and

Knowledge Generation and Management; Component 3: Rural Land Administration,

Certification and Land use; and Component 4: Project Management (component 4).

Component 1 and 2 have range of activities such as construction of small scale irrigation

schemes, community access road construction, water harvesting structures, small or micro-

dams, degraded forest rehabilitation and reforestation, gully rehabilitation, land mapping and

registration, most of which may involve manipulation of landscapes and resources, and or

affect the use rights (tenure rights) of people and/or their access rights to resources. These

activities may cause some unforeseen negative environmental and social impacts. These

impacts may include biodiversity loss, natural habitat and cultural resources destruction, soil

erosion and sedimentation, restriction of access to resources, flooding, involuntary loss of

land and displacement of people, pollution and diseases. Whereas Component 3 and 4, are

focused on capacity building and knowledge management, monitoring and evaluation,

safeguard implementation, etc… and may not have any adverse environmental and social

risks. This ESMF is prepared to manage and mitigate the negative impacts arising from the

first and third components.

The ESMF outlines the relevant national and regional administrative and environmental

policies, laws, proclamations, guidelines and procedures to be followed during the screening

of sub-projects against any potential environmental and social impacts. The SLMP II is a

category B project as described in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) and generally the

impacts will be positive contributing to improving the rehabilitation of degraded areas and

improving productivity the agricultural landscape. However, site specific and less sensitive

localized environmental social impacts (e.g., pollution from agrochemicals, erosion,

biodiversity loss, salinity, habitat destruction may occur in the implementation areas. As a

result, the project is anticipated to trigger seven of the World Bank safeguard policies and

these policies require adhering to appropriate environmental assessment procedures and steps

to address all possible negative impacts.

The environmental and social management process starts with the sub-project planning

process in the SLMP II during the identification of sub-projects by local communities based

on their needs and priorities through a participatory watershed planning process guided by the

Community Based Participatory Watershed Development Guidelines (CBPWDG), technical

support from development agents (DAs) and Woreda experts. The DAs at the Kebele level

will screen eligibility of sub-projects against pre-set eligibility criteria. The project support

unit will ensure and document such procedures are properly followed. The project design/plan

will then be sent to the Woreda Agriculture Office and the Watershed Technical Committee.

The Technical Committee including experts from the Woreda Environmental Protection,

Land Use and Administration Unit (EPLAU), will screen the sub-projects. This committee

passes recommendations if any design modifications are required. The Woreda council will


7

then approve plans based on the recommendations of the Technical Committee. After

approval, the plan document is referred to the regional Bureau of Agriculture (BoA) with all

the accompanying environmental and social screening documents/files. If sub-projects of any

significant environmental concerns are included, then the plan document will be directed to

the attention of the Regional Environmental Protection and Land Administration Agency/

Bureau (REPLA/B). The REPLA/B will make decisions if an Environmental and Social

Assessment (ESIA) is required for those projects. Based on ESIA outcomes, REPLA/B will

recommend modifying the design, preparing environmental and social management plan to

mitigate negative impacts or reject/disapprove the project.

Consultations with regional SLMP coordinators, Woreda focal persons and local communities

revealed that there were two major gaps in implementing the ESMF during phase I of the

SLMP. These were limited technical capacity at the Kebele and Woreda levels in screening

sub-projects and absence of appropriate reporting formats; and absence of budget for the

implementation of the ESMP and mitigation measures. In order to address this, capacity

building trainings on watershed management, environmental management, safeguard policies,

project screening, monitoring and evaluation skills, participatory planning, and environmental

and social audit are proposed to be provided to Woreda and regional experts, technical

committee members and steering committee members. In addition, monitoring of the ESMF

implementation and backstopping support on technical issues would be provided by the PSU.

The implementation of the ESMF including capacity building and implementation of

mitigation measures may require an estimated budget of 1.59 million USD for the coming

five years.


8

1. Introduction

1.1 Overview of the SLMP II

Despite the efforts to reverse environmental degradation in the past many years, rampant

degradation of natural resources continued to be a serious environmental problem in Ethiopia

distressing land/agricultural productivity and slowing down economic progress. Agricultural

production in the country is largely rain-fed and practiced by small-holder farmers, which is

heavily affected by land degradation resulting in food insecurity and rural poverty.

In the successive national development plans, the Ethiopian government has put sustainable

natural resource management among the top priority development agendas. The commitment

of the government to address land degradation is supported by the actions that are undertaken

through different initiatives such as the PSNP and MERET projects. In the current

development plan, agriculture is one of the two priority sectors to drive sustained economic

growth and to achieve the development goals of the GTP. The CRGE strategy also identified

adoption of agricultural and land use efficiency measures as well as increasing carbon

sequestration in forestry by protecting deforestation and increasing reforestation as pathways

of green growth.

In an effort to complement the land rehabilitation activities of earlier initiatives such as the

PSNP, MERET and others, a national Sustainable Land Management Project (SLMPI) was

launched in 2008 with prime objective of reducing land degradation in agricultural landscapes

and improving the agricultural productivity of smallholder farmers. The main project

components were watershed management (scaling up best practices), land certification

(strengthening land tenure) and project management (knowledge management). The project

has successfully introduced land management practices and rehabilitated thousands of

hectares of degraded lands using physical and biological measures in 45 selected watersheds.

The SLMP I will be closed by the end of September, 2013 and its follow-up project (SLMP

II) is being prepared. The SLMP II aims to reduce land degradation and improve land

productivity of smallholder farmers through the provision of capital investments, technical

assistance and capacity building at national and sub-national levels. The SLMP II will build

on the results of SLMP I and also will introduce measures to address climate

change/variability related risks and to maximize Green House Gas (GHG) emission

reductions so as to meet the GTP and the CRGE goals. The results of the project will be

measured by the total land area to be put under sustainable and climate resilient land

management practices and amount of total carbon sequestered per unit area and time.

The SLMP II will be implemented in 90 new and 45 existing Woredas/watersheds in six of

the regions such as Oromia, Amhara, Tigray, SNNP, Gambela and Benishangul Gumuz. The

implementation will take place through the existing government structures and community

institutions spanning from the Federal to the Kebele levels. The planning and implementation

of the sub-project activities will be guided by the Project Appraisal Document (PAD), the

Community Based Participatory Watershed Development Guideline (CBPWDG) and Project

Implementation Manual (PIM).


9

1.2 Purpose and Objectives of the ESMF

This ESMF is prepared to serve as a safeguard framework to examine the environmental and

social impacts of sub-projects, to be financed under the SLMP II. The type and location of the

sub-projects are not identified at this stage and their impacts cannot be determined until

project planning is started by communities. Thus, the ESMF outlines the principles, rules,

guidelines and procedures to be followed during the screening of sub-projects against any

potential environmental and social impacts at the community level. The document guides in

designing appropriate measures and plans to reduce, mitigate and/or offset adverse impacts

and enhance positive outcomes.

The objectives of the ESMF are:

To establish clear procedures and methodologies for the environmental and social

assessment (the social assessment dealt in depth in a separate SA document), review,

approval and implementation of investments to be financed under the program;

To specify appropriate roles and responsibilities, and outline the necessary reporting

procedures, for managing and monitoring environmental and social concerns related to

program investments;

To determine the training and capacity building needs; and

To establish the budget required to implement the ESMF requirement

In addition to meeting the above objectives, the ESMF is intended to facilitate the

implementation of the projects based on the following principles:

Provide support to communities to develop their sub-project application to avoid or

minimize environmental and social safeguards concerns;

Provide support to local authorities to review applications and determine if additional,

more detailed environmental or social planning is required before applications can be

approved;

Provide fund for extension teams to assist communities in preparing their sub project

applications;

Provide support to communities, local authorities and extension teams in carrying out

their respective roles by funding substantial training, information resources and

technical assistance; and

Provide fund for annual reviews for assessing compliance, learning lessons, and

improving future performance, as well as assessing the occurrence of, and potential for

cumulative impacts due to project funded and other development activities

As mentioned elsewhere above, the key areas of the social concerns are addressed in the SA

assessment study. The objectives of the SA study were:

To assess and document key socio-economic factors that require consideration;

To identify vulnerable and historically underserved groups that may be excluded from

the project and be adversely affected as a result, and the necessary impact mitigating

measures.

To assess any potential adverse social impacts of the SLMPII, and determine whether

the project is likely to trigger the World Bank social safeguards policies.


10

To recommend in the early stage of project preparation the appropriate measures

towards addressing World Bank requirements on social safeguards that may be

triggered by the project (OP/BP 4.10 and OP/BP 4.11).

In addition, an RPF is prepared to address key social issues of the SLMP II such as land

acquisition and valuation, entitlements and compensation; dispute resolution and grievance

redress procedures in cases of involuntary or voluntary resettlements in the country.

1.3 Methods of the ESMF Preparation

1.3.1 Review of Project Related Documents

Review of the ESMF of the SLMP I: The ESMF document and the PAD of SLMP I were

reviewed to gather information on the project components and sub-components, institutional

arrangements for the implementation of the project and the ESMF, the anticipated sub-project

types, the identified potential environmental and social impacts, the proposed mitigation

measures and how these were designed to be implemented vis-à-vis the applicable safeguard

policies. The information from the review was useful in addressing the gaps identified from

the discussions held with stakeholders during the preparation of this ESMF. The SLMP II

PAD was also reviewed to understand the project components and sub-components, the

institutional arrangement for the implementation of the project and to identify the

improvements made in the project components.

1.3.2 Review of Relevant Policies, Laws and Proclamations, Environmental and

Social Assessment Guidelines

A thorough review of the relevant environmental management policies, proclamations and

guidelines in the country was made to take into account of these policies and laws during

preparation of sub-projects and environmental and social management plans to address

negative impacts. In addition, these documents, especially the proclamations and operational

guidelines provide important information on environmental and social management issues,

the ESIA procedures on different environmental hazards (agricultural, industrial, domestic,

etc…) and relevant institutions. The guidelines provide not only the applicable procedures

and but also suggest appropriate mitigation measures for some anticipated negative impacts.

These are listed in this ESMF to serve as references for the preparation and implementation of

environmental and social management plan.

1.3.3 Consultations with Selected Key Stakeholders

Consultation with Project Preparation Team: Meetings were held with the project

preparation team members at the MoA/SLMPSU to discuss detailed activities of the project

components and sub-components, experience in the implementation of the ESMF during the

first phase of the project, the institutional arrangement for the implementation of the SLMP II,

the ESMF, the monitoring and review of project activities, capacity building needs and

technical backstopping to Regional coordinators and Woreda focal persons during the

implementation of the ESMF.


11

Consultation with the former FEPA and Regional EPA experts: Consultations were held

with the legal and policy experts, monitoring and evaluation experts at the former FEPA, and

environmental regulatory expert at the Oromia Environmental Protection and Land

Administration Bureau, on applicable federal and regional environmental policies, applicable

guidelines and ESIA procedures. In addition, their views on the proposed project and its

anticipated impacts, mitigation measures, the environmental management process at the

regional level and the roles of the different project partners at the Woreda and Kebele levels

were discussed.

Consultations with Regional SLMP Coordinators: Discussions were held with the SLMP

coordinators of the Oromia, Amhara, Tigray, SNNP, Benishangul Gumuz and Gambela

regions. The main issues discussed were status of the implementation of the ESMF during

phase one of the SLMP, major impacts of the projects, addressed and unaddressed impacts,

problems encountered at the different stages of the project, technical capacity gaps, the ESIA

process, institutional barriers on the procedures and application of the proposed guidelines.

Their views in addressing the identified gaps and suggested solutions to be considered in

Phase II were forwarded during the discussion (see questionnaires and checklists in Annex 6).

The discussion results are presented in chapter seven of this document.

Consultations with Woreda Focal Persons in Selected Woredas: Discussions were held

with the SLMP focal persons at two selected Woredas such as Woliso and OmoNada. The

discussions covered issues in sub-project identification and screening, Woreda level

screening, major impacts of the SLMP activities during phase one, addressed and unaddressed

impacts, capacity gaps, technical backstopping, monitoring and review of project activities,

encountered problems during implementation, what should be improved in the ESMF in

phase II (see questionnaires and checklists on Annex 6 and discussion results are summarized

in Annex 7).

Consultations with local communities during site visits in the selected Watersheds: Small

group discussions were held with local communities (project beneficiaries) during a visit to

the Rebu Watershed in Woliso and Nada Asendabo Watershed in OmoNada Woredas. The

community members generally reflected on the beneficial impacts of all the project activities,

particularly the upland rehabilitation through afforestation in Rebu Watershed prevented

flooding and erosion in the cultivated fields at the foothills. Farmers didn’t mention of any

negative environmental and social impacts from the SLMP project. According to the farmers,

activities implemented in the watershed improved soil fertility, increased ground water

availability and diversified income. All implemented activities yielded positive impacts.

There were no serious and unaddressed impacts. One single example of social impact

mentioned by communities in Woliso was restriction of grazing in a reforestation site at Rebu

watershed. The impact was addressed through community meetings and discussions.

1.4 Public Consultation in a Validation Workshop

The draft ESMF document was presented and discussed in a workshop to validate the results

and to enrich the document with comments and feedbacks from the workshop participants.

The workshop was organized by the PSU of the MoA and it was held from August 9 to 11,

2013 at Adama. It was attended by over 200 participants drawn from international

organizations, civil society organizations, federal agencies, regional agriculture bureaus and

environmental agencies, and community representatives from selected SLMP Woredas.


12

Although the purpose of the workshop was to review the SLMP phase I implementation, half

day was committed for the discussion on the draft ESMF and the Social Assessment study for

the SLMP II. Two separate discussions were held with experts and administrators in one

group and local community representatives in another. The discussion with experts and

administrators were focused on the implementation status of the ESMF in phase I, the level of

participation of local communities in the planning process, the screening process, unaddressed

impacts, the procedures and the implementation as well as monitoring processes and what

aspects to be improved and included in the current ESMF. The discussions with community

representatives were focused on participation of community members in watershed selection,

identification of sub-project activities, examples of serious environmental and social impacts

caused by similar projects and how they were addressed, role of the community in reducing

and mitigating the negative environmental and social impacts are some to mention. A

summary of the discussions (questions and responses) and list of workshop participants is

provided in Annex 7. .

Figure 1: Partial view of the workshop participants


13

1.5 Organization of the Report

The main body of this document was structured into nine chapters.

Chapter One: introduction about resource conservation activities, similar initiatives in

sustainable land management, the objectives of the ESMF and the methods used in to prepare

this ESMF are covered in chapter one.

Chapter Two: The project components and sub-components in the SLMP II are described,

the institutional arrangements for the implementation of the project, the project planning

process, the environmental and social context of the intervention areas are provided in this

chapter.

Chapter Three: The legal, policy and regulatory issues relevant to the ESMF implementation

are reviewed and summary of the provisions are covered in the chapter.

Chapter Four: The potential positive and negative impacts of the project and the mitigation

measures are discussed in this chapter.

Chapter Five: The guiding principles, the procedures and the environmental management

process are described in chapter five. The major steps in the review process and involved

institutions at the different levels are illustrated.

Chapter Six: In this chapter, the results of the stakeholder consultations and the major gaps

in the implementation of the ESMF in phase I are presented as a summary. In addition, the

forwarded recommendations for successful implementation of the ESMF in Phase II are

indicated in this chapter.

Chapter Seven: Based on the identified capacity gaps, relevant topics, for capacity building

trainings, the target beneficiaries and duration of trainings and other backstopping activities

are identified and presented in this Chapter.

Chapter Eight: The roles of relevant institutions in the implementation and monitoring of

mitigation measures (process and results monitoring) are discussed in the chapter.

Chapter Nine: The budget for capacity building and implementation of the ESMF as well as

for mitigation measures are presented in this chapter.

2. Project Description

2.1 Project Components

The Project has four main components:

Component 1: Integrated Watershed and Landscape Management;

Component 2: Institutional Strengthening, Capacity Development and Knowledge

Generation and Management;

Component 3: Rural Land Administration, Certification and Land Use; and

Component 4: Project Management.

(Refer PAD for detailed descriptions of all the components).

Components two and four may not pose adverse environmental and social risks during

implementation. This ESMF is prepared mainly to address environmental and social impacts

arising from the implementation of sub-projects to be financed under Component one and

Component three.


14

2.2 Component 1: Integrated Watershed and Landscape Management

The objective of this component is to support scaling up and adoption of appropriate

sustainable land and water management technologies and practices by small-holder farmers

and communities in selected watersheds/Woredas in the country. The project component

objective will be achieved through the following activities grouped into two sub-components:

2.3 Sub-Component 1.1: Sustainable Natural Resource Management in

Public and Communal Lands

The major activities in this sub-component are Afforestation and Reforestation of degraded

communal land (hillside communal land treatment and management including woodlot

establishment, gully rehabilitation using biophysical measures and seedling production); crop

production aiming increasing productivity and carbon sequestration (treatment of farmland

with slope < 30% with suitable bio-physical measures, treatment of farmland with slope >

30% with suitable bio-physical measures, applying conservation agriculture, agro-forestry,

and biodiversity; agro-forestry promotion); livestock production aiming improving

productivity and reducing carbon emission (promotion of fodder or forage production,

improved breed for stock reduction, improved poultry breed, improved beekeeping activities,

modern artificial insemination (AI) service and cattle crush); Climate Resilience Building

and Increasing Water Availability (support small scale irrigation, potable water supply - hand

dug well and spring development, renewable energy potential at the rural setting).

2.4 Sub-Component 1.2: Homestead and Farmland Development,

Livelihoods Improvements and Climate Smart Agriculture

The major activities in the sub-component are construction of water harvesting structures with

water efficient irrigation methods,, homestead development by promoting high value crops

and multi- purpose fruit trees and forage tree planting, livestock improvement (e.g. small

ruminant fattening, promotion of beekeeping and honey production etc.), promoting bio-

fuel/biomass, biogas energy, promotion of fuel saving and efficient technologies, and feeder

road construction.

2.5 Component 3: Rural Land Administration, Certification and Land Use

The objective of the component is to enhance the tenure security of smallholder farmers in

order to increase their motivation to adopt sustainable land management practices on

communal and individual land. It would support an on-going national program providing land

certificates to all land holders, by enhancing rural land certification and administration as well

as local level land use planning at watersheds or Kebeles assisted by the project. The

component is subdivided into two sub-components targeted to achieve the overall objective of

land administration and use:

2.6 Sub-Component 3.1: Rural Land Administration and Certification

This is targeted to provide security of land tenure to smallholder farmers in the project areas

so that the adoption of sustainable land and water management technologies will be increased.


15

The activities include provision of gender disaggregated geo-referenced land certificates to

individual land users and geo-referenced land certificates for communal lands to the

communities. This might result in loss of land or property leading to disputes and injustice to

underserved groups unless guided by safeguard policies and implementation framework

guidelines.

2.7 Sub-Component 3.2: Local Level Participatory Land Use Planning

The sub-component would support the preparation of local land use plans for decision making

on the best uses of the land and its resources for improved, alternative, sustainable and

productive development at the grass root level. Delineating land use types at the local level

would help to ensure that the choice of a particular use represents the optimal alternative

ensuring sustainable use of individual plots.

2.8 Institutional and Implementation Arrangements

The implementation of the SLMP II project activities and the ESMF will take place through

the existing government structures from the federal to the local or community level

institutions. This will follow suit of the SMLP I implementation structure.

FEDERAL: the overall coordination and implementation of the project will be facilitated by

the Federal Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) in collaboration with other relevant Ministries

(e.g., MoFED, MoWE, former FEPA, etc). The MoA will use the organization structure and

institutional mechanisms established to coordinate all sustainable land management projects

financed by the Government and development partners. The SLMP has its own National

Steering Committee (NSC) but the existing National Technical Committee (NTC) is

responsible for other national projects as well. However, it is suggested that the SLMP will

form a technical committee fully responsible for the project. The SLM Support Unit

(SLMSU) within the MoA is the core unit that coordinates the project activities. The MoA is

responsible for the day-to-day program management, preparation of annual work plan and

progress reports, monitoring/supervision of overall implementation progress; evaluation of

program impacts, fFinancial administration, procurement of goods and services.

The NSC has high level representations from the MoA, MoFED, MoWE, former FEPA,

ESIAR and BoAs of the SLMP II regions. The Committee is chaired by the State Minister for

Natural Resources in the MoA and will be responsible for (a) establishing policy guidelines

and providing overall supervision for project implementation; (b) approving the annual

federal and regional work plans and budget, and the annual procurement plan; and (c)

reviewing the annual implementation performance report to be prepared by the SLM Support

Unit; and overseeing the implementation of corrective actions, when necessary.

The NTC is composed of senior technical staff from MoA, MoFED, MoWE, former FEPA

and ESIAR. Representatives from the development partners who are supporting SLM projects

are members of the committee. The NTC is responsible for providing technical advice to the

MoA on coordination and synergies, technical issues of the SLM and other similar projects,

on the quality of project implementation reports, special study documents on policy,

guidelines, documentation of best practices, and M&E reports. However, it was discussed

with the support unit that the SLMP will form its own technical committee.


16

The SLMPSU will be led by an appointed senior technical staff as National Project

Coordinator at MoA. The unit will be responsible for the day-to-day management of SLMP

II and will be responsible for (a) preparation of consolidated annual work plans and progress

reports; (b) monitoring and supervision of overall implementation progress and evaluation of

project impacts; (c) financial administration; and (d) procuring goods and services.

REGIONAL: Implementation will be led by the Bureau of Agriculture (BoA). BoA will

appoint one regional coordinator and it will be responsible for approving annual work plans

and progress reports from the Woredas. The reports would then be submitted to the SLMPSU.

A regional steering committee (RSC) will be formed from heads of relevant sectors to provide

guidance and leadership at the regional level. The RSC will meet quarterly to review

performance, to endorse the quarterly progress reports and to provide necessary guidance on

project implementation, and at the beginning of the fiscal year to endorse the annual plan.

WOREDA AND KEBELE: On-the-ground implementation of the project would be

undertaken jointly by Woreda office of Agriculture through the Woreda Watershed

Development Committee (WWDC), the Kebele Watershed Development Committee

(KWDC), and communities. The WWDC and KWDC would assist communities in: (i)

developing annual work plans and budgets for submission to the Regions for endorsement and

integration into the Regions’ work plans and budgets; (ii) facilitating community participation

in watershed planning and rehabilitation; (iii) training; (iv) monitoring and evaluation; (v)

dissemination of innovations in SLM.

2.9 Sub-project Identification and Watershed Planning Process

Sub-projects are identified by the communities based on their local needs and priorities

through a participatory watershed planning process whereby all community members have the

opportunity for sharing ideas and making decisions. The DAs at the Kebeles and the KWDC

members will provide the necessary technical support to the community team during the

identification and planning. The planning process is guided by the Community Based

Participatory Watershed Development Guidelines. The list of identified sub-projects will

then be referred to the KWDC for approval. The draft plan will be submitted to the WWDC

for screening and hierarchical approval (Woreda and Region).

2.10 Environmental Context and Baseline Conditions

The project will be implemented in different agro-ecological and administrative regions

characterized by different regimes of rainfall, temperature, growing periods, socioeconomic

and biophysical environments. The newly selected watersheds are 90 and they will be

implemented in six regions (refer PAD). Majority of the areas are located in typically

highland agro-climatic zones (in Dega or high altitude and dry Woina Dega or mid-altitude)

with cereal crop-based or mixed crop-livestock faming systems, high altitude and high

rainfall, high potential productivity and moderate to severe land degradation, longer growing

periods and high population density. Some are located in the lowland agro-climatic zones

where farming is crop-livestock mixed or annual/perennial crop-livestock mixed farming

system. Generally, the environmental and socioeconomic milieu of the intervention areas are

characterized by high production potential but with significant limitations due to severe land

degradation, high agro-ecological variability and diverse farming systems, high population

density and land fragmentation. Those areas with potential access to markets to maximize

return from agricultural production, development potential for surface and ground water


17

resources to increase production; and areas with critical importance for the protection of vital

economic infrastructures from on-going or potential erosion-sedimentation problems will be

selected for intervention.

Figure 2: Location map of the SLMP watersheds in phase I

Figure 3: Partial view of the afforestation/reforestation site in Woliso, Rebu Watershed


18

3. Administrative, Policy and Regulatory Framework for

Environmental Management

3.1 The FDRE Constitution

The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia constitution issued in August 1995 has several

provisions, which have direct policy, legal and institutional relevance for the appropriate

implementation of environmental protection and rehabilitation action plans to avoid, mitigate

or compensate the adverse effects of development actions. Article 40 of the constitution

proclaims that land and natural resources are commonly owned by the people of Ethiopia and

shall not be subject to sale or other means of exchange. It stipulates the rights of Ethiopian

farmers and pastoralists to obtain land for cultivation and for free grazing without payment

and the protection against eviction from their possession.

In articles 43, 44 and 92 referring the rights for development and environmental obligations,

the following are important provisions of the constitution:

People have the right to improved living standards and to sustainable development,

People have the right to full consultation and to the expression of views in the

planning and implementations of environmental policies and projects that affect them

directly

People have the right to commensurate monetary or alternative means of

compensation, including relocation with adequate state assistance for persons who

have been displaced or whose livelihoods have been adversely affected as a result of

State programs

The people and the state have common responsibility/obligation to protect the

environment

The state endeavors to ensure all people live in a clean and healthy environment

The state shall ensure that the design and implementation of development projects will

not damage or destroy the environment.

Regional states constitutions:

Regional states have their own constitutions upholding the federal constitution in its entirety

and constituting their regional particulars. All the regional state constitutions have addressed

land and natural resources management and environmental protection. The regional states

constitutions state that:

The regional governments are entrusted to administer land and natural resources in the

name of the people and deploy for the common benefit of the same;

The regional governments and all citizens of the regions are responsible for the

conservation of natural resources and the environment;

Concerned communities shall be given opportunity to express their opinions in the

formulation and implementation of policies in relation to the environment.


19

3.2 Environmental Policy of Ethiopia

The environmental policy of Ethiopia, approved in 1997, is aimed at guiding sustainable

social and economic development of the country through the conservation and sustainable

utilization of the natural, man-made and cultural resources and the environment at large. The

policy lists specific objectives encompassing wide range of environmental issues to be

addressed through the adoption of the policy. It also provides overarching environmental

guiding principles to be adopted to harmonize the environmental elements in sectroral, cross-

sectoral and other policies. The policy clearly outlined the sectoral environmental policies,

relevant to environmental management among others are: (i) Soil Husbandry and Sustainable

Agriculture; (ii) Forests, Woodlands and Trees; (iii) Genetic, Species and Ecosystem

Biodiversity; (iv) Water Resources; (v) Energy Resources; (vi) Human Settlement, Urban

Environment and Environmental Health; and (vii) ESIA.

3.3 Biodiversity Conservation and Research Policy

The biodiversity policy was approved in 1998 and it provides policy guidance towards the

effective conservation, rational development and sustainable utilization of the country's

biodiversity. The policy objectives accentuate public participation in biodiversity

conservation, development and utilization, and also ensure that communities share from the

benefit accrued from the utilization of the genetic resources and their traditional knowledge.

The policy consists of comprehensive provisions on the conservation and sustainable

utilization of biodiversity, and it underlines the requirements for implementers to adopt during

planning and operational phase of projects and for those projects engaged in biological

resource utilization to follow ESIA procedures.

3.4 Proclamations and Environmental Guidelines

4.4.1 Proclamations

Environmental Protection Organs Establishment Proclamation, No. 295/2002

The proclamation was made to re-establish the Federal Environmental Protection Authority,

to establish Sectoral Environmental Units and Regional Environmental Protection Agencies.

The former FEPA is established to formulate policies, strategies, laws and standards, which

foster social and economic development in a manner that enhance the welfare of humans and

the safety of the environment, sustainable development projects and to spearhead in ensuring

the effectiveness of the process of their implementation.

The former Federal Environmental Protection Authority, among others, has the powers and

duties to:

Coordinate measures to ensure that the environmental objectives provided under the

Constitution and the basic principles set out in the environmental Policy of Ethiopia

are realized;

Prepare, review and update, or as necessary, cause the preparation of environmental

policies strategies and laws in consultation with the competent agencies, other

concerned organs and the public at large and upon approval, monitor and enforce their

implementation;


20

Liaise with competent agencies in the field of environmental protection and

rehabilitation and support them in capacity development;

Establish a system for environmental impact assessment of public and private projects,

as well as social and economic development policies, strategies, laws, and programs s

Provide advice and support to regions regarding the management and protection of the

environment

Sectoral Environmental Units (SEUs): Every competent agency (sectoral) is required by the

Proclamation No. 295/2002 to establish or designate an environmental unit that shall be

responsible for coordination and follow up so that the activities of the competent agency are

in harmony with this Proclamation and with other environmental protection requirements.

Accordingly some sectoral agencies (e.g., Ministry of mines) have now environmental units

or at least experts to deal with environmental issues.

Regional Environmental Protection Agencies (REPAs): the Proclamation No. 295/2002

decrees that each national regional state shall establish shall establish an independent regional

environmental agency or designate an existing agency that shall, based on the Ethiopian

Environmental Policy and Conservation Strategy and ensuring public participation in the

decision making process. REPAs are responsible for:

Coordinating the formulation, implementation, review and revision of regional

conservation strategies, and,

Environmental monitoring, protection and regulation.

Ensuring the implementation of federal environmental standards or, as may be

appropriate, and issue and implement their own no less stringent standards.

Preparing reports on the respective state of the environment and sustainable

development of their respective states and submits the same to the Authority.

Environmental Impact Assessment Proclamation, NO. 299/2002

The Environmental Impact Assessment Proclamation was decreed in December, 2002 in order

to make ESIA a mandatory procedure for projects to be undertaken by the government, public

or private entities that require environmental impact analysis. The Proclamation elaborates on

considerations with respect to the assessment of positive and negative impacts and states that

the impact of a project shall be assessed on the basis of the size, location, nature, cumulative

effect with other concurrent impacts or phenomena, trans-regional context, duration,

reversibility or irreversibility or other related effects of a project. Based on directives or

guidelines pursuant to this proclamation, projects will be categorized as:

Projects that are not likely to have negative impacts, and thus do not require

environmental impact assessment; and

Projects those are likely to have negative impacts and thus require environmental

impact assessment.

As per the procedures in the proclamation, a proponent is required to undertake a timely

environmental impact assessment, assess the possible adverse impacts of the proposed

project, and propose the means of mitigation, and shall submit the study report to the relevant

body (Federal or regional EPA) for review and decision. It is also a requirement that ESIA

reports be prepared by an expert that meet the requirements specified under any directive

issued by the Authority (regional/federal).


21

Jurisdictions in the Proclamation: The regional environmental agency in each region shall be

responsible for the evaluation and authorization or any environmental impact study report and

the monitoring of its implementation if the project is not subject to licensing, execution and

supervision by a federal agency and if it is unlikely to produce trans-regional impact.

Rural land Administration and Use Proclamation, No. 456/2005

The main aim of the Proclamation is to conserve and develop natural resources in rural areas

by promoting sustainable land use practices. In order to encourage farmers and pastoralists to

implement measures to guard against soil erosion, the Proclamation introduces a Rural Land

Holding Certificate, which provides a level of security of tenure. The MoA is tasked with

implementing the Proclamation by providing support and co-coordinating the activities of the

regional governments. Regional governments have an obligation to establish a competent

organization to implement the rural land administration and land use law. Accordingly the

REPAs are responsible for rural land administration. The Proclamation states that if a land,

that has already been registered, is to be acquired for public works or for investment,

compensation commensurate with the improvements made to the land shall be paid to the

land use holder or substitute land shall be offered. The Proclamation imposes restrictions on

the use of various categories of land, for example wetland areas, steep slopes, land dissected

by gullies, etc.

Environmental Pollution Control Proclamation, No. 300/2002

The aim of the proclamation is to control and manage possible causes of environmental

pollution from hazardous substances, waste and any other forms of pollutants that pose

serious environmental, social and health threats. The proclamation has important provisions

on environmental standards, inspection procedures, offences and penalties, etc…. In its

provision to control pollution, the proclamation states that, among others,

No person shall pollute or cause any other person to pollute the environment by

violating the relevant environmental standards

The Authority or the relevant Regional environmental agency may take an

administrative or legal measure against a person who, in violation of law, releases any

pollutant to the environment.

Ethiopian Water Resources Management Proclamation, No. 197/2000

The proclamation is decreed to ensure that the water resources of the country are protected

and utilized for the highest social and economic benefits of the people of Ethiopia, to follow

up and supervise that they are duly conserved, ensure that harmful effects of water are

prevented, and that the management of water resources is carried out properly. It proclaims

that all water resources of the country are the common property of the Ethiopian people and

the state. It provisions on general principles of water use and management, inventory of water

resources, professional engagement in water resource management and supply. Among other

articles, the proclamation clearly indicates the requirements on water bank management and

prevention of harmful effects on water resources in the articles 24 and 25 of the proclamation.

The supervising body (the ministry), in collaboration and in consultation with the appropriate

public body may:


22

Delimit the boundaries of the banks of certain water bodies;

Prohibit clearing and cutting trees or vegetation and construction of residential houses

within the delimited banks of water bodies.

The appropriate public bodies shall, before allowing or causing the founding of towns

or villages, request the supervising body for technical advice in order to prevent or

avoid damages, adverse impacts or accidents which may occur as a result of floods

and other factors related to water.

4.4.2 Environmental and social impact assessment guidelines and directives

The former FEPA has published series of environmental and social impact assessment

guidelines for the different sectors outlining the key issues, principles, procedures and

processes to be adopted and adhered to avoid and/or mitigate potentially negative

environmental and social impacts during project planning, implementation and operation by

government, public and private entities. Some of the guidelines are generic and applicable in

different sectors and there are also sector specific guidelines prepared for key environmental

and social issues to adhere during the ESIA analysis in those specific sectors.

Environmental Impact Assessment Guideline, May, 2000

The guideline provides the policy and legislative framework, the general ESIA process and

key sectoral environmental issues, standards and recommendations for environmental

management in key sectors such as agriculture, industry, transport, tannery, dams and

reservoirs, mining, textiles, irrigation, hydropower and resettlement projects.

Environmental and Social Management Plan Preparation Guideline, Nov. 2004

The guideline provides the essential components to be covered in any environmental

management plan (e.g., identified impacts, mitigation measures, monitoring, capacity

building, etc….) and structured formats for mitigation measures, monitoring and institutional

arrangements.

Similar guidelines for the different sectors include the following:

Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Guidelines for Dams and Reservoirs,

2004

Environmental Impact Assessment Guideline for Fertilizer, 2004

Guidelines for Social, Environmental and Ecological Impact Assessment and

Environmental Hygiene in Settlement Areas, 2004

Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines on Irrigation, 2004

Integrated Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Guidelines Livestock and

Rangeland Management, 2004

Environmental Impact Assessment Guideline For Mineral and Petroleum Operation

Projects, December 2003

Environmental Impact Assessment Guideline On Pesticides, May 2004

Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines on Road and Railway, 2004

Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines on Forestry, 2004


23

A Directive Issued to Determine Projects Subject To Environmental Impact Assessment,

Directive No.1/ 2008

The directive was issued to identify and list out those investment projects subject to

mandatory Environmental Impact Assessment. The regions are entitled to issue similar

directive to their own specific cases based on this directives. Extensive list of project types

requiring ESIA are provided in this directive.

3.5 Relevant and applicable international conventions ratified by Ethiopia

Ethiopia has ratified several international/multilateral environmental conventions and many of

the principles and provisions in those conventions have been well addressed in the national

environmental policies and regulations. Some of these conventions include the following:

Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and

Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, Done at Aarhus, Denmark, On 25 June

1998

Cartagena Protocol on Bio-Safety to the Convention on Biological Diversity

Convention on Biological Diversity, Rio, 5 June, 1992

Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

UN Framework Convention on Climate Change

Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage Paris, 23

November 1972

3.6 Applicable World Bank Safeguard Policies Triggered by the SLMP II

The ESMF will be required to comply with not only the relevant national policy and legal

frameworks but also with the applicable environmental and social safeguard policies of the

World Bank. The safeguard policies that will be triggered by the SLMP II (specifically by

component I and component III) are described below.

Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01: This policy will be triggered because the SLMP II

project will finance small-scale infrastructure projects such as irrigation, construction of

community access roads, water harvesting structures, soil and water conservation structures,

ex-closures, afforestation, gully rehabilitation, agro-forestry, etc....The policy objective is to

ensure that sub-projects are environmentally and socially sound. The type of EA would

depend on the nature, scale, and potential environmental impact of the proposed investments.

The EA process takes into account the natural environment (air, water, and land); human

health and safety; social aspects (involuntary resettlement and cultural resources) and trans-

boundary and global environmental aspects. Projects are classified by the World Bank into

specific categories based on the type, location, sensitivity and potential environmental

impacts:

Category ‘A’ projects: The project is likely to have adverse environmental impacts that are

diverse, sensitive and unprecedented affecting broader area than implementation sites. A full

ESIA is always required for projects that are in this category, and for which impacts are

expected to be ʹ adverse, sensitive, irreversible and diverse with attributes such as pollutant

discharges large enough to cause degradation of air, water, or soil; large‐scale physical


24

disturbance of the site or surroundings; extraction, consumption or conversion of substantial

amounts of forests and other natural resources; measurable modification of hydrological

cycles; use of hazardous materials in more than incidental quantities; and significant

involuntary displacement of people or other significant social disturbances.

Category ‘B’ Projects: The potential environmental impacts on humans and sensitive areas

(wetlands, forests, natural habitats, etc...) are less adverse, site specific, few if any are

irreversible. Even though an ESIA is not always required, some environmental analysis is

necessary and some form of environmental management plan needs to be prepared with

recommended measures to prevent, minimize, mitigate or compensate for adverse impacts.

Typical projects include renewable energy; irrigation and drainage (small-scale), rural water

supply and sanitation, watershed management or rehabilitation projects, rehabilitation,

maintenance, or upgrading of projects (small-scale), rather than new construction.

Category ‘C’ Projects: There are no or minimal adverse environmental and social impacts.

Such projects may not need ESIA other than screening. Typical projects include education,

family planning, health, nutrition, institutional development, technical assistance, and most

human resource projects. Such projects will not directly cause disturbance of the physical

environment and biological components and do not need environmental assessment.

The SLMP II project is a category B project and sub-projects classified as B or C will be

financed. The policy will be triggered because of activities included in project component I

and component III. Since most of the watershed and landscape management activities are

focused on degraded land rehabilitation, they will have more positive environmental and

social impacts and the potential negative impacts will be minimal and they will be contained

with mitigation measures.

Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04: This policy is triggered by any project (sub-project) with the

potential to cause significant conversion (loss) or degradation of natural habitats (protected or

unprotected ecologically valuable habitats), either directly through construction or indirectly

through human activities induced by the project. The natural habitats are land and/or water

areas where the biological communities are formed largely by native plant and animal species,

and human activities have not essentially modified the primary ecological functions. Natural

habitats have important biological, social, economic, and existence value.

The policy will be triggered because sub-projects in SLMP II may have some adverse impacts

on wetlands, protected areas, conservation sites, and critical ecosystems. Sub-projects

involving significant conversion of natural habitats or if an environmental assessment

indicates that a proposed sub‐project would significantly convert or degrade natural habitats,

the proposed sub‐project will not be eligible for financing under SLMP II

Pest Management OP 4.09: The policy requires safe, effective, and environmentally sound

pest management. In Bank financed agricultural operations, pest populations are normally

controlled through IPM approaches such as biological control, cultural practices, and use of

crop varieties that are resistant or tolerant to pests. The Bank may finance the purchase of

pesticides when their use is justified under an IPM approach. However, purchase of pesticides

must be in accordance with Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard

and Guidelines to Classification (WHO, 1994/95). During selection, the following criteria

must be applied: Pesticides i) should not have adverse human health effects; ii) should be


25

effective against the target species; iii) should have no/minimal effect on non-target species

and the natural environment; iv) should not lead to the development of resistance in pests.

The policy will be triggered by the SLMP II activities, particularly those in agriculture and

irrigation (introduction of high value crops and use of pesticides, introduction of new varieties

of crops, new fruit tree species and varieties, high yielding varieties) may increase the use of

agrochemicals (insecticides, herbicides, fertilizers, etc...). An integrated pest management

framework needs to be prepared as indicated in the guideline in Annex 1

Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11: the policy requires countries to avoid or mitigate

adverse impacts from development projects on physical cultural resources. The physical

cultural resources refer to movable or immovable objects, archaeological and historical sites,

historic urban areas, sacred sites, grave yards, burial sites, structures, paleontological,

historical, architectural, religious, aesthetic, or others that have unique natural, social and

cultural significance.

The policy is triggered by the SLMP II because the small scale infrastructure sub-projects

involve access road construction, small scale dam construction, irrigation, and other similar

infrastructure, which may potentially affect physical and cultural resources. The necessary

steps of public consultations, engagement of cultural or religious leaders, local authorities

need to be conducted before decision on project is made.

Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12: the policy on involuntary land acquisition aims to

avoid or minimize involuntary resettlement where feasible, exploring all viable alternative

project designs; assist displaced persons in improving their former living standards, income

earning capacity, and production level, or at least in restoring them; encourage community

participation in planning and implementing resettlement; and provide assistance to affected

people regardless of the legality of land tenure. The policy covers any loss of land or other

assets resulting in relocation or loss of shelter; loss of assets or access to assets; loss of

income sources or means of livelihood whether or not the affected people must move to

another location. When the policy is triggered, a Resettlement Action Plan must be prepared.

An abbreviated plan may be developed when less than 200 people are affected by the project.

In situations, where all the precise impacts cannot be assessed during project preparation,

provision is made for preparing a Resettlement Policy Framework. The Resettlement Action

Plan /Resettlement Policy Framework must include measures to ensure that the displaced

persons are informed about their options and rights pertaining to resettlement. The displaced

persons are consulted on, offered choices among, and provided with technically and

economically feasible resettlement alternatives and provided prompt and effective

compensation at full replacement cost for losses of assets attributable directly to the project.

Under SLMP II, activities related to afforestation and reforestation sub-projects may not

necessarily cause large scale involuntary land acquisition since such projects will be

implemented on communal lands. However, such activities may trigger this policy during

enclosure of areas for rehabilitation and natural regeneration since it restricts access and also

may result in relocation of few numbers of households outside of the project areas.

Forests OP/BP 4.36: the policy aims to reduce deforestation, enhance the environmental

contribution of forested areas, promote forestation, reduce poverty, and encourage economic

development. the policy applies to Bank financed investment projects: i) that have or may


26

have impacts on the health and quality of forests; ii) that affect the rights and welfare of

people and their level of dependence upon or interaction with forests; iii) that aim to bring

about changes in the management, protection, or utilization of natural forests or plantations

under public, private, or communally ownership. The Bank does not finance projects that

involve commercial logging, significant conversion or degradation of critical forest areas and

related habitats.

Under SLMP II, the forest related activities will have positive impacts because activities are

on reforestation, rehabilitation of degraded forests land and communal lands. Community

infrastructure such as access roads and irrigation infrastructures may pose some negative

impacts if forests are found in those sub-project sites. Management plans with mitigation

measures will be prepared avoid or reduce such impacts. If there are projects likely to cause

significant conversions of forests, they will not be financed under the SLMP II.

Projects on International Waterways OP/BP 7.50: the policy applies to any river, canal,

lake, or similar body of water that forms a boundary between, or any river or body of surface

water that flows through, two or more states. It also includes any tributary or other body of

surface water (any bay, gulf, strait, or channel) bounded by two or more states or, if within

one state, recognized as a necessary channel of communication between the open sea and

other states and any river flowing into such waters. The policy applies to hydroelectric,

irrigation, flood control, navigation, drainage, water and sewerage, industrial, and similar

projects that involve the use or potential pollution of international waterways. The policy

recognizes prior riparian states agreements/arrangements and calls for notification of riparian

states by parties that proposes to undertake project that affects international waters.

Activities under Component 1 of the project are aimed at better watershed and pastureland

management, afforestation and reforestation, biodiversity conservation as well as climate

smart agriculture. These activities will contribute to reducing soil erosion and rejuvenate

degraded landscapes hence lesser siltation of rivers and streams in the targeted watersheds.

None of the project activities will therefore adversely change the quality or quantity of water

flows to the other riparian of the Nile and its tributaries or any other international waterway

and no actual works will be financed on or along the river system. In addition, based on the

assumption that investments under the Project are unlikely to affect the overall hydrological

balance of any of the international waterways or tributaries, this policy will not be triggered

under the SLMP II.

Safety of Dams OP 4.37: Although there will possibly be construction of small dams under

SLMP II, particularly for irrigation, they may not be large (more than 4.5 meters high) and

may not require special procedures to follow. Thus, the project will not trigger OP 4.37

(safety of dams). In cases of small dams construction (less than 4.5 meters), implementers can

use the FAO ‘Manual on Small Earth Dams, a guide to siting, design and construction’. In

addition the guideline for small dam construction prepared by the MOA will be used to ensure

safety of small dams. The guideline is attached in Annex 9.

4. Potential Environmental and Social Impacts and Mitigation

Measures

The proposed SLMP II project is land rehabilitation and capacity building project, which will

implement interventions that directly affect the biophysical and human environment. The

project can have both positive and negative impacts and the impacts may occur at different


27

stages of the project cycle (mainly during implementation and operation). The environmental

and social management plan is intended to maximize the positive impacts and ensure

sustainability of projects by avoiding, minimizing and/or mitigating the negative impacts

through appropriate mitigation measures.

4.1 Positive Impacts

The environmental and social impacts of the watershed and landscape management

component of the SLMP II are expected to be largely positive because the project activities

are focused on degraded landscape rehabilitation through physical and biological conservation

structures (bunds, terraces, trenches, diversion canals, etc...), afforestation and reforestation

on communal and private lands. To mention some of the cumulative positive impacts of such

interventions:

Important habitats and biodiversity will be restored at the landscape level

Critical ecosystems will be rehabilitated and ecosystem goods and services will be

revitalized

Farm and landscape productivity will be improved

Local livelihoods will be diversified and improved.

Adaptive capacity of local communities will be improved by promoting climate smart

agriculture.

Food security will be improved through better crop yields, managed agricultural

resource base

Local climate will be regulated and carbon sequestration will be increased

Carbon sequestration will increase and GHG emission will be reduced

4.2 Potential Negative Impacts and Mitigation Measures

Some of the project interventions may have some localized but less sensitive, site specific and

perhaps reversible environmental impacts if appropriate screening is not done and if such

impacts are not considered with regard to their locations or in the design of the sub-projects.

The types of sub-projects include construction of water harvesting structures (e.g., ponds,

storage tanks), community access roads, roadside flood harvesting/drainage systems,

diversion canals, small dams, small scale irrigation structures, area ex-closures, reforestation

and afforestation in communal and private lands. The sub-projects may include agricultural

land management activities that may necessitate applying agrochemicals as part of the

agronomic practices. The sub-projects will be screened for the possible environmental and

social impacts during the participatory watershed planning at the community level and

appropriate mitigation measures will be developed. For projects of environmental and social

concern, a detailed site-specific environmental and social management plan will be prepared

to contain the adverse impacts before the start of implementation activities. The checklist of

activities (source of impacts), the potential negative impacts and possible mitigation measures

which are part of the Environmental and Social Management Plan for the selected project sub-

component are indicated in Annex 4.


28

5. Environmental and Social management plan (ESMP)

5.1 Guiding principles

The SLMP II is a category ‘B’ project and sub-projects may not require a full scale ESIA.

However, environmental and social analysis is necessary and appropriate environmental and

social management plan has to be prepared to prevent, minimize, mitigate or compensate for

adverse impacts. Thus, the environmental and social management planning and

implementation under SLMP II will be guided by the following principles.

The watershed and landscape management project component of the SLMP involves

relatively small-scale projects that can be designed, implemented and managed at the

kebele level using standardised published guidance, and with the assistance of woreda

staff as required.

The project planning process will be participatory and communities have the

opportunity to prioritize needs; and participation in the community projects will be

entirely voluntary ;

The design of sub-project watershed and landscape activities will be guided by

technical materials such as the community watershed management guideline which

incorporates specific design procedures to avoid or minimise adverse impacts and

encourage positive environmental effects.

Project planning and implementation will integrate appropriate Environmental and

Social Management Plan.

Identified sub-projects by the communities will be screened, vetted and adopted in the

Kebele watershed management plan on the basis of selection criteria and screening

designed to eliminate projects with major or irreversible environmental or social

impacts (as stated in the guidelines below). Sub-projects with special environmental

concern will be directed to the attention of the technical body at the regional level

Approval at regional level will involve the Regional Environmental Protection and

rural Land Administration Agency/Authority/Bureau (REPLA/B), which will have the

right to decline a project on environmental or social grounds, or to conduct an

assessment of likely impacts prior to approval.

Special attention will be given to the impacts of small-scale irrigation projects, water

harvesting structures and community roads involving land/asset acquisition. Such

types of sub-projects will be notified to the REPLA/B. The REPLA/B will decide

whether an ESIA is required. Following such ESIA, the REPLA/B may modify the

project, recommend a management plan, or disapprove the project.

Project implementation will be supervised and monitored at Kebele and Woreda

levels. The DAs, with assistance as deemed necessary from the Woreda, will ensure

that the specified mitigating measures are implemented.

5.2 Procedures

During sub-project selection by communities, the Development Agents have to check whether

the identified sub-projects fall into the categories that are not eligible financing under SLMP

II activities. Such sub-projects may include those that may cause damage to physical and

cultural resources; construction of reservoir dams that are above 4.5 meters, that may

potentially affect the quality or quantity of water or a waterway shared with other nations; that

require physical relocation of people, access to assets, etc.... The project design/plan will then


29

be sent to the Woreda Watershed Technical Committee. The technical committee members,

which include experts from the Woreda land use, administration and environmental protection

unit (EPLAU), will screen the sub-projects. This committee passes recommendations if any

design modifications are required and the Woreda council approves plans based on the

recommendations of the technical committee. If sub-projects of any significant environmental

concerns are included, then the plan document will be directed to the attention of REPLA/B.

Such cases are rare since the project does not involve construction of large dams, canals and

roads. The REPLA/B will make decisions if ESIA is required for those projects. Based on

ESIA outcomes, REPLA/B will recommend modifying the design, preparing environmental

management plan to mitigate negative impacts or reject/disapprove the project. The

environmental and social management will involve the following steps:

Step (i): Eligibility check (Guidance for the DAs)

Sub-projects that are not eligible under the SLMP II can be reviewed and checked by DAs at

the Kebele against any of the features mentioned in the checklist provided in Table 1 below.

This simple checklist can be used by DAs as a format for fast track eligibility checking of

identified sub-projects (Annex 1).

Table 1: Checklist for sub-project eligibility screening at Keble level by DAs

Yes No

Will the sub-project:

cause any large-scale physical disturbance of the site or the

surroundings

cause significant involuntary displacement of people or social

disturbances, involuntary loss of assets

involve removal or conversion of forests and other natural resources

disrupt the quality or quantity of water in a waterway shared with

other nations

cause degradation of critical natural habitats

affect important physical and cultural resources (historical, religious,

archaeological sites and monuments)

involve construction of dams more than 4.5 meters

cause any loss of biodiversity

Affect any vulnerable or underserved groups

If the sub-projects have any of the above features, those with ‘Yes’ responses will be

considered as not eligible and have to be rejected unless the features can be avoided by

change of design or location.

Step (ii): Screening of sub-projects that require special attention and

environmental and social concerns (Guidance for Woreda EPLAU)

Eligible sub-projects are further screened for potential impacts and environmental and social

concerns by the Woreda Environmental Protection, Land Administration and Use (EPLAU)

case team together with the Natural Resource Management case team at the Woreda

Agriculture Office. The following checklist can be used by the Woreda EPLAU focal person

for screening and the format indicated in Annex 2 can be used for reporting.


30

Table 2: Screening sub-projects requiring special attention

Yes No


involve use of agro-chemicals?

involve land acquisition, loss of assets or access to assets on the land?

cause displacement of people?

incorporates dams more than 4.5 meters?

Small scale irrigation and agricultural sub-projects may introduce high value crops and new

varieties, which may require introduction and increased use of agro-chemicals including

pesticides. Land rehabilitation, irrigation and access road construction sub-projects may

involve voluntary land acquisition and loss of assets or minor displacement of people. If the

sub-projects have any of the above features (‘Yes’ answers), the Woreda EPLAU expert

notifies the Woreda NRM case team to make sure that the necessary procedures and

guidelines are followed in the environmental and social management plan (Annex 5).

Then, sub-projects have to be screened for any potential environmental and social concern

and can be screened using the checklist shown below.

Table 3: Checklist for screening sub-projects of environmental and social concern

Yes No


be located in forest priority areas and cause destruction of habitats?

instigate soil erosion and flooding?

cause disturbance to ecologically sensitive areas?

be located close to national parks and protected areas?

cause pollution of surface and ground water?

cause breeding of disease vectors (malaria)?

cause soil pollution?

involve area enclosures and loss of access?

be located close to cultural heritage, historical and religious sites?

cause erosion and sedimentation into international waterways?

involve draining of and/or disturbance to wetlands?

cause involuntary land acquisition and resettlement?

affect local communities?

If the sub-project has any of the above listed features (with ‘Yes’ answers in Table 3), try to

avoid the impacts by modifying the design. Otherwise, the sub-project has to be tagged as

‘sub-project of environmental and social concern’.

For those sub-projects of environmental and social concern, a checklist of potential impacts

and level of adversity shown in Table 4 can be used to judge if the sub-projects should be

modified to avoid/mitigate the impacts or should be referred for further environmental and

social analysis because of complex or unknown impacts. The table can be used by

checking/ticking () the approximate degree of adversity. The format indicated in Annex 3

can be used for reporting purposes.


31

Table 4: Checklist of potential impacts and level of adversity for sub-project screening

Sub-project types Adversity of Impacts

None Low Med High Unknown

Community access roads will cause:

soil erosion and initiation of flooding, gully erosion

loss of biodiversity through cut and fill activities

cross and cause destruction of natural habitats

sedimentation to water sources and reservoirs

cause flooding and erosion

disturbance to ecologically sensitive habitats

damage to cultural, religious and historical sites

cause opening of quarry/borrow sites and result in

water pollution

Small scale irrigation will cause:

significant deforestation

competing claims for water and social tension

disturbance to wildlife habitats or populations

disrupt ecologically sensitive areas

land clearing and biodiversity loss

disturbance to cultural or religious sites

new settlement pressures

increased soil salinity

risk of vector born diseases

Gully and degraded land rehabilitation will cause:

restriction of human and livestock mobility

restriction of access to communal lands

risk of rodents and other pests

risk of introduction of invasive exotic species

Water harvesting structures will cause:

risk of disease causing vectors breeding

voluntary loss of land

Afforstation/Reforestation may cause:

compromise to local biodiversity

risk of mono-cropping (resorting to exotics)

restriction of access and mobility

voluntary land acquisition

risk of wildlife attack on domestic animals

Those sub-projects with no potential adverse impacts can be directly approved. For those sub-

projects likely to have low to moderate impacts may be modified if suitable mitigation

measures are incorporated into the design by Woreda experts (Woreda technical team).

Mitigation measures can be referred from Annex 4 and/or from the Community Based

Participatory Watershed Development Guideline (MoA, 2005). Those sub-projects likely to

have ‘high’ adverse impacts and ‘unknown’ impacts should be tagged as ‘sub-projects of

environmental and social concern’ before referring the plan for approval. For further

reference on potential impacts and mitigation measures of the sub-project types, it is advisable

to use the different environmental guidelines prepared by the former FEPA and listed

elsewhere in this document.


32

Step (iii): Notification of sub-projects of Environmental and Social

Concern: Guidance for the Woreda Council and BoA

The Woreda Council consolidates plans and forwards the same to the BoA together with the

list of sub-projects that are tagged as of ‘environmental concerns’. The BoA then notifies

the REPLA/B of the sub-projects of environmental concern and requests for review of the

same to determine if an ESIA is required.

Step (iv): Review of notified sub-projects: Guidance for the REPLA/B

The REPLA/B experts conduct review of the sub-projects taking into account that most sub-

projects may not necessarily need a full scale ESIA since SLMP II is a category B project;

those sub-projects tagged as ‘sub-projects needing special attention’ are already identified

following the special procedures and guidelines referred in Annex 5. For water abstraction in

small scale irrigation or potential disruption to the quality of water in international waterways,

it is advisable to consult applicable international agreements.

The Review report to the BoA should include i) the decision on each sub-project whether an

ESIA is required or not, ii) if an ESIA is required, the recommended scope of the ESIA

clearly indicating the aspects to be seriously addressed, the skills required and duration of the

ESIA, iii) A detailed TOR for the ESIA expert (consultant), iv) if an ESIA is not required,

include guidance on special needs such as technical guidelines and an environmental

management plan on any of the sub-projects.

Step (v): Conducting an ESIA: Guidance for the Woreda EPLAU office

The Woreda EPLAU office together with the NR case team is responsible for ensuring that

the required ESIA is conducted, in liaison with the BoA and with the support from the

REPLA/B. The ESIA can be conducted by a team of experts drawn from the Woreda sector

offices (or the Woreda technical team) coordinated by the Woreda EPLAU focal person. In

this case, Woreda experts have to be given the necessary trainings on ESIA procedures,

safeguard policies, relevant policies and ESIA guidelines before the ESIA. OR the ESIA can

be conducted by a consultant to be hired by the Worea agriculture office. The cost of

conducting the ESIA should be covered from the budget earmarked for the implementation of

the ESMP for the particular SLMP II Woreda. The TOR for the ESIA should be provided by

the REPLA/U with the review report. The ESIA report should consist of i) description of the

sub-project (with location), the environmental baseline, the impacts, mitigating measures, and

recommendations for implementation and monitoring of the mitigating measures. Reference

for mitigation measures can be made in FEPA ESIA guidelines, CBPWD guidelines and in

this document.

Step (vi): Reviewing the ESIA Report: Guidance for the REPLA/B

The ESIA report will be submitted to the REPLA/B through the BoA. The REPLA/B will

review the ESIA report and makes decision by approving the sub-project, recommending re-

design, or rejecting the sub-project. ESIA report reviews should be done in the given time

frame (shortest possible time) to avoid delays in project implementation. The result of the

review has to be communicated to the BoA as soon as completed.


33

The ESMP process in steps (i) and (ii) must be conducted for all sub-projects in SLMP II

while the steps from (iii) to (vi) should be conducted only for sub-projects needing special

attention and those of environmental concerns.

Figure 4: Flow of the Environmental and Social Management Process

Keys on colors and flow of activities:

Kebele level

Woreda level

Region level

Flow of project activity plan

Flow of screening

Flow of review decisions

Kebele Office

Drafts Kebele WM Plan

Woreda Agriculture Office.

Consolidates plans Step (ii):

Woreda

EPLAU

Project Screening

BoA

Consolidates plans

and

Step (iii):

informs REPLA/B (Regional

Environmental Protection, Land

use and Administration

Authority/Bureau)

Projects of Environmental

Concern

Step (iv):

REPLA/B

decides if ESIA is

required and notifies

BoA

Step (v):

Woreda EPLAU

arranges ESIA with

assistance of BOA

and REPLA/B

Step (i)

DAs

Check sub-

project

Community/Kebele/DA

Sub-project identification and

design Plan

Woreda Council/Cabinet Approves plans

Step (vi):

REPLA/B

reviews ESIA

report and

makes decision

ESIA report


34

6. Gaps identified in the implementation of the ESMF in SLMP 1

A rapid assessment survey and consultative meetings held with the six regional SLMP

coordinators during the preparation of this ESMF revealed that there were two major gaps in

the implementation of the ESMF in phase I of the SLMP:

Lack of capacity at the different levels (Kebele, Woreda and Region)

Lack of resources (financial) to implement the ESMP and mitigation measures

Major gaps Main reasons

Gaps in identification, planning and

screening of sub-projects at the Kebele level

by DAs

Lack of capacity and experience (skills and

knowledge) by DAs and some Woreda

level experts in environmental issues,

environmental management process, and

environmental analysis

Absence of proper screening/reporting

formats

Shortcomings in sub-project screening at

Woreda level Lack of capacity and experience (technical

skills and knowledge on environmental

screening

Absence of proper screening/reporting

formats

Lack of skills for implementing mitigation

measures

Gaps in conducting ESIA and

implementation Lack of resources for conducting ESIA,

when there were needs for ESIA

Lack of skills and knowledge at Woreda

level for conducting ESIA and

implementing results

Limited regional support in conducting and

implementing ESIA for lack of budget

Gaps in implementation of recommended

mitigation measures Lack of resources (budget) earmarked for

implementation of mitigation measures

Gaps in monitoring of implementation and

results Lack of budget earmarked for monitoring

of ESMP activities and results

Absence of staff at the federal level to

oversee the ESMF implementation

Suggested recommendations:

Training and technical support to DAs at the Kebele level and experts at the Woreda

and Region levels during the different stages of the ESMP implementation: Planning,

review, ESIA, implementation and results monitoring stages.

Allocation of budget earmarked for the ESMP implementation including

implementation of mitigation measures.

Include proper screening and reporting format

Assigning safeguard expert at the federal level


35

7. Capacity Building Training and Technical Assistance

For effective implementation of the ESMP, it is necessary to provide capacity building trainings and technical backstopping to experts at the

different levels of the implementing institutions during the different stages implementation as shown in Table 5

Table 5: Menu of proposed capacity building trainings and schedules

Types of trainings/

capacity building

supports

Target

groups

Training topics/ aspects of ESMF Potential Trainers Duration and

Time of training

TOT training

(Regional level)

Technical Staff of BoA,

REPLA/B,

BoWE

RTC members

Integrated Watershed and Landscape Management

Planning,

EA, ESMP, ESIA

Safeguard policies

Environmental policies

ESMF implementation process

Review and Reporting procedures

Implementation of mitigation measures

Consultants

SLMPSU

members

NTC members

MoEF staff

1 week, Before

the planning

phase

TOT training

(Woreda level) WWDC members

EPLAU staff,

Woreda NRM experts

Water office experts

and energy office

experts

Woreda council

members

Integrated Watershed and Landscape Management

Planning,

EA, ESMP, ESIA

Safeguard policies

Environmental policies

ESMF implementation process

Review and Reporting procedures


BoA experts

REPLA/B experts

RTC members

1 week, Before

the planning

phase

Skill development

training

DAs, KWDC members,

Kebele cabinet members Participatory planning

Safeguard policies

Project identification and screening

Use of appropriate tools and formats for screening

ESMF implementation

EPLAU staff,

Woreda NRM

experts

Water and energy

office experts

1 week, Before

the planning

phase


36


EA concepts

Awareness creation

training/workshop NSC members

RSC members

Decision makers at

region and Wroedas

Safeguard policies,

Environmental policies and guidelines

ESMF implementation

Consultants

NTC members

3 days, Before the

planning phase

Monitoring and

evaluation training Technical Staff of

BoA, REPLA/B,

BoWE

RTC members

Monitoring and evaluation skills

Monitoring and evaluation guidelines

Participatory M &E

M & E expert

(consultant)

3 days, during

implementation

Monitoring and

evaluation training EPLAU staff,

Woreda NRM experts

Water and energy

office experts

Monitoring and evaluation skills

Monitoring and evaluation guidelines

Participatory M &E

Technical Staff of

BoA, REPLA/B,

BoWE

RTC members

3 days, during

implementation

Awareness creation

training

Local Community

members

Participatory planning

Environmental issues

Monitoring of implementation

DAs

Woreda experts

3 days,

Before planning

phase

Exposure visits

(abroad)

Regional TC members,

NTC members,

SLMPSU staff

Selected successful ESMP implementation projects in

relevant countries

- 1 week, during

implementation

Monitoring visits

and supervision

follow up by

SMLPSU, NTC

members

Regional SLMP

coordination offices,

Woreda SLMP offices

Backstopping support on various issues to regional and

woreda level experts

Field visits

- 3 times a year for

1 week, during

implementation


37

8. Implementation, supervision and monitoring

8.1 Implementation and process monitoring

After the approval of projects for implementation (i.e., after getting the ESIA clearance) by

the Regional Environment Protection and Land Administration Bureau, the recommended

mitigation measures will be implemented by the Woreda Agriculture office in collaboration

with the Woreda Environment Protection and Land Administration unit (i.e., the environment

expert or a safeguard specialist to be hired by the project).

At the community level, mitigation measures will be implemented by the community and

closely supervised by the DA. With the support from the Woreda experts, the DA will be

responsible for the effective implementation of the mitigation measures at any stage of the

project operation (at the beginning, in the middle or at the end) as specified in the

management plan. The safeguard specialist, to be hired at the beginning of the project, will

monitor the implementation of mitigation measures as per the management plan. In fact, the

safeguard specialist has to supervise the screening of projects at the different stages of the

project planning, mainly at the Woreda level.

The safeguard specialist from the SLMPSU will closely work with the Woreda Agriculture

Office Natural Resource Management expert, SLMP focal person and the Woreda EPLAU

Environment officer. The experts, either as a team or individually, will inspect the

implementation of the mitigation measures. During inspections, the expert will verify that the

proper procedures are being followed in screening the SLMP II activities and in the

implementation of the mitigation measures in the Woreda. They also make field observations

to inspect that no negative environmental impacts are taking place anywhere in the project

area. Where such impacts may occur, the experts (mainly the Woreda EPLAU officer) will

provide advice on further actions and this will be communicated to the safeguard specialist at

the SLMPSU.

The implementation, monitoring and supervision of the ESMF activities in general is a joint

task of the SLMPSU (through the safeguard specialist), the BoA and the REPLA/B. The three

bodies will jointly monitor the effective implementation of the mitigation measures in

avoiding or minimizing adverse impacts, and the nature and extent of any such impacts.

The design of the process monitoring and reporting procedures need to be prepared in parallel

with the preparation of the activity plan for the SLMPII project. It should be made ready

before the commencement of the implementation of the project activities.

8.2 Results monitoring

The results monitoring plan has two components: i) monitoring of the compliance and

effectiveness of the ESMF and application of the recommended standards; ii) impact

monitoring, i.e., measuring the biophysical and socio-economic impacts of the SLMP II

project. The M&E system of the SLMP II, which will be facilitated by the SLMPSU will

provide the required information for results monitoring.

Independent Annual reviews of the project and the implementation of the ESMF will be

conducted at the end of each year and this has to be facilitated by the SLMPSU. It is


38

necessary that the independent review should be conducted by an independent entity

(consultant). The compliance assessment and performance review reports, which will be

produced by the independent review body, will be used as a monitoring and review tool to

track ESMP results. In the review process, the SLMPSU and the REPLA/B will play the lead

role in coordinating the process with the key stakeholders.

9. Implementation cost of the ESMF and safeguards

The proposed budget shown below in Table 6 (for capacity building) and in Table 7 (for

implementation of the ESMP and mitigation measures) is prepared taking into account of

existing norms and expert estimates for proposed activities. The budget includes those

proposed social risk aversion and reduction measures including the RAP (Resettlement

Action Plan) and other mitigation measures in the social assessment. The budget stands open

for revision and improvement as and when needed by the SLMPSU.

9.1 Budget for capacity building

Table 6: Estimated budget for capacity building

Capacity building activities Budget for the period 2013-2019 ($) Total ($)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 TOT training (Regional level) 30000 30000 TOT training (Woreda level) 20000 20000 Skill development training 80000 80000 Awareness creation training

/workshop NSC members 18000 18000

Monitoring and evaluation

training (regional level) 14000 14000 28000

Monitoring and evaluation

training (Woreda level) 10000 10000 20000

Awareness creation training 8000 8000 Exposure visits (abroad) 60000 60000 Monitoring visits, supervision by

SMLSU, NTC members 10000 10000 10000 10000 40000

Total 156000 34000 70000 34000 1000 304000


39

9.2 Budget for implementation of the ESMF and Mitigation Measures

Table 7: Estimated budget for capacity building

ESMF activities Budget for the period 2013-2019 ($) Total ($)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Sub-project screening process

Kebele:

Technical support from

Woreda

Site assessment (social and

environmental)

Analysis, Design plan, and

reporting

Woreda:

Analysis of sub-projects for

special attention and

environmental concern

Analysis of impacts

Review and design

adjustment

Design of mitigation

measures

30000 20000 20000 15000 85000

Conducting ESIA

At least 12 ESIAs

Review and Reporting

40000 40000 40000 40000 160000

Review process

Sub-project review at

BoA/REPLA/B

Reporting

30000 30000 30000 30000 120000

Implementation of mitigation

measures

Mitigation measures of

access roads

Mitigation measures of small

scale irrigation

Mitigation measures of water

harvesting structures

Compensations for loss of

land, property, etc…

RPF/RAP

50000

40000

45000

30000

25000

50000

40000

35000

30000

25000

50000

40000

35000

30000

25000

50000

30000

35000

20000

20000

150000

150000

110000

95000

200000

ESMF coordination

Federal level

Regional level

Woreda level

25000 30000 30000 30000 7000 122000

Monitoring and review

Periodic monitoring

(quarterly)

Independent annual review

15000

10000

15000

10000

15000

10000

10000

10000

55000

40000

Total 95000 285000 275000 270000 162000 1,287,000


40

Annexes

Annex 1: Sub-project eligibility checklist for DAs at the Kebele level (form 1)

Will the sub-project: Yes No

cause large-scale physical disturbance of the site or the surroundings

cause significant involuntary displacement of people or social

disturbances, involuntary loss of assets

involve removal or conversion of substantial amounts of forests and

other natural resources

affect the quality or quantity of water or a waterway shared with other

nations

cause degradation of critical natural habitats

affect important physical and cultural resources (historical, religious,

archaeological, sites and monuments)

involve construction of dams more than 4.5 meters

Recommendations:

Sub-project is not eligible and rejected:

Sub-project is eligible and approved:

Screening supervised and approved by:

Name………………..…. Position: …………..Signature: ………... Date: ……..............

Sub-project :____________________________ Woreda: ___________________________

Kebele: _____________________________

Person/DA who did the eligibility check: ________________________________________

Date: ___________________________ Signature: _______________________________


41

Annex 2: Screening checklist for sub-projects needing special attention (form 2)- Guidance

for Woreda EPLAU focal person

Sub-projects needing special attention

Yes No


involve use of agro-chemicals

involve land acquisition, loss of assets or access to assets on the land

cause displacement of people

incorporates dams

Recommendations:

Sub-project needs special attention:

Sub-project does not need special attention:

Screening supervised and approved by:

Name………………..…. Position: …………..Signature: ………... Date: ……..............

Annex 3: Screening checklist for sub-projects of environmental concern (form 3)-

Guidance for Woreda EPLAU focal person

Sub-projects of environmental concern

Yes No


be located in forest priority areas and cause destruction of habitats

instigate soil erosion and flooding

cause disturbance to ecologically sensitive areas

be located close to national parks and protected areas

cause pollution of surface and ground water

cause breeding of disease vectors (malaria)

cause soil pollution

involve area ex-closures and loss of access

be located close to cultural heritage, historical and religious sites

cause erosion and sedimentation into international waterways

involve draining of and/or disturbance to wetlands

Sub-projects of environmental concern Sub-project types Adversity of Impacts

Sub-project:____________________________ Woreda: ___________________________

EPLAU focal person/person who did the screening : ______________________________

Date: ___________________________ Signature: _______________________________

Sub-project:____________________________ Woreda: ___________________________

EPLAU focal person/person who did the screening : ______________________________

Date: ___________________________ Signature: _______________________________


42

None Low Med High Unknown

Community access roads will cause:

soil erosion and initiation of flooding, gully erosion

loss of biodiversity thought cut and fill activities

cross and cause destruction of natural habitats

sedimentation to water sources and reservoirs

wet season excavation and erosion

disturbance to ecologically sensitive habitats

damage to cultural, religious and historical sites

creation of quarry/borrow pits and water pollution

Small scale irrigation will cause:

significant deforestation

competing claims for water and social tension

disturbance to wildlife habitats or populations

disrupt ecologically sensitive areas

land clearing and biodiversity loss

disturbance to cultural or religious sites

new settlement pressures

increased soil salinity

risk of vector born diseases

Gully and degraded land rehabilitation will cause:

restriction of human and livestock mobility

restriction of access to communal lands

risk of rodents and other pests

risk of introduction of invasive exotic species

Water harvesting structures cause:

risk of disease causing vectors breeding

voluntary loss of land

Afforstation/Reforestation may cause:

compromise to local biodiversity

risk of mono-cropping (resorting to exotics)

restriction of access and mobility

voluntary land acquisition

risk of wildlife attack on domestic animals

Recommendations:

Sub-project is of environmental concern and needs further EA:

Sub-project is not of environmental concern and approved:

Certification (for all approved sub-projects): I certify that all the potential adverse effects

of the sub project have been thoroughly examined, and the sub-project does not have any

impact and/or the mitigation measures in the plan are adequate to avoid or minimize all

adverse environmental and social impacts.

Woreda EPlAU focal person: ............................ Date................. Signature .........................


43

Annex 4: checklist of potentially negative impacts and possible mitigation measures for sub-project activities

Types of sub-projects Potential negative impacts Examples of possible mitigation measures

Construction of small scale

irrigation schemes Competing claims over water use and conflicts

Risk of erosion to downstream areas

Reduced water flow and limited access to water in

the downstream areas

Development of salinity due to mismanagement

of water and irrigated land

Increased use of agro-chemicals and pesticides

Soil and air pollution from agro-chemicals

Ground and surface water pollution

Faulty designs causing flooding

Reservoirs (small dams for irrigation) become

breeding place for disease vectors (malaria)

Involuntary land acquisition

Risk of land clearing and biodiversity loss

Mismanagement of water may cause gully erosion

Loss of water due to mismanagement

Reduced flow, erosion and sedimentation on

international waterways

Impacts on physical cultural resources

Destruction of natural habitats through land

clearing for cultivation

Carry out assessment study on water demand and availability

Carful design and installation of canal structures so that

excess flows will be directed to natural waterways

Regulate water flow and maintain the optimum flow to

downstream dwellers and ecological requirements

Adopt IPM for pest and weed control

Use only prescribed and standard agro-chemicals (avoid

unpermitted chemicals that are classified by WHO)

Conduct social assessment and prepare RAP

Apply water efficient technologies and techniques

Provide alternative designs and locations or avoid if sub-

projects directly affect physical cultural resources, destruct

natural habitats, inflict deforestation, or cause biodiversity

loss

Construction and

rehabilitation of community

access roads and path

Road side erosion and initiation of flooding and

gully erosion in agricultural fields

Quarry site opening causes pollution of surface

and ground water

Roads may cross and cause destruction of natural

habitats and forests

Disturbance to ecologically important habitats,

Apply road drainage guidelines and include standard road

side stabilization activities as part of the design

Chanel road spillways to natural waterways

Rehabilitate quarry sites with natural vegetation, rip raping,

shaping and refilling, and avoid creation of standing water

Avoid disturbance to cultural or religious sites. Unavoidable

incidences must be agreed with stake holders such as leaders


44

cultural, religious and historical sites or resources

Loss of biodiversity thought cut and fill activities

and soil excavations

Restriction of wildlife movement

Disturbance of ecologically sensitive areas

Erosion and sedimentation to water

infrastructure and water sources


loss of livelihood and economic benefits

of churches, mosques and community.

Reroute/redesign if alignment crosses important habitats and

forests

Avoid effects on habitats and wildlife movement corridors

through alternative routes, or relocate species for ex-situ

conservation

Avoid forest, riparian and wetland habitats with particular

biodiversity

Avoid occupied land. Prepare procedures to ensure equitable

resolution

Avoid and minimize if project causes of relocation of people

Gully treatment on

communal and private lands

using physical and biological

measures

Restriction of access to communal lands

Restriction of human and livestock mobility

Risk of introduction of invasive exotic species

Risk of harboring rodents and other crop pests

Community awareness,

Consultative meetings and consensus built

Alternative routes formed

Compensations for loss of access (if caused economic loss)

Non-invasive exotic and indigenous species

Use those species that disfavor pests

Degraded land treatment on

communal and private lands

using physical and biological

measures

Restriction of access to communal lands

Restriction of human and livestock mobility

Risk of introduction of invasive exotic species

Risk of rodents and other pests

Risk of disease vectors from water harvesting

structures (ponds)

Low standard physical structures due to lack of

capacity

Community awareness,

Consultative meetings and consensus built

Alternative rout formed

Compensations for loss of access (if caused economic loss)

Selection and use of non-invasive exotic and indigenous

species, pest repellent and species that doesn’t harbor rodents

Implement physical structures as per the standards given in

relevant guidelines

Area ex-closures for

degraded and upland

rehabilitation through natural

regeneration and

reforestation

Restriction of access to humans and livestock

Risk of involuntary land acquisition and causing

relocation of households

Risk of conflict over diverse interests

Loss of economic or livelihood benefits

Risk of wildlife and crop pests

Provision of alternatives (options for cut and carry, awareness

on alternative forage sources, forage species provision)

Consecutive community consultations and consensus on

benefits and costs, responsibilities of management, benefit

sharing arrangements

Compensation for loss of land or economic benefits to


45

victims

Carry out social assessment report and prepare social

management plan if up to 40 hhs are affected by the activity

Prepare resettlement action plan if more than 40 hhs are

affected by the activity

Prepare wildlife management plans and training of

communities on cultural practices to manage pests

Reforestation/afforestation on

communal lands Restriction of access and mobility


Wildlife attack on domestic animals and increase

of crop pests (birds, primates, mammals)

Risk of mono-cropping (resorting to one or two

exotic species)

Loss of economic or livelihood benefits

Compromise to local biodiversity (indigenous

species)

Provide alternative routes for human and livestock mobility

Make interventions participatory and entirely based on

community consensus

Avoid appropriation of land or eviction of households

Conduct continuous consultative meetings

Compensate for loss of economic benefits

Prioritize indigenous and multiple mix of species for planting

Soil and water conservation

measures (terracing, check

dams, trenching), reseeding,

re-vegetating on individual

lands

Risk of harboring of rodents and crop pests

Loss of farmland due to structures

Introduce cultural pest management practices

Use species that disfavor pests and rodents

Train farmers on pest management

Follow guidelines to implement structures

Agro-forestry interventions Risk of harboring of rodents and crop pests Introduce cultural pest management practices

Use pest resistant crop varieties

Introducing PFM for forest

and woodland management Restriction of access

Loss of economic and livelihood benefits

Rising of conflicting interests

Disruption to indigenous/traditional resource use

and management systems

Risk of creating competing claims

Consultative meetings and community consensus on benefits

and responsibilities

Provide alternatives or compensate for loss of economic and

livelihood benefits

Build community consensus and constitute regulatory

mechanisms

Integrate traditional systems

Create opportunities for wider participation


46

Establishing and/or

strengthening community

level protected area system,

conservation zones,

communal reserves, groves,

wildlife corridors


Restriction of access for humans and livestock

Loss of economic and livelihood benefits

Wildlife attack on livestock and increased crop

pests

Provide alternatives or compensate for loss of economic and

livelihood benefits

Avoid or minimize land acquisition from individual holdings

Prepare wildlife management plans and training of

communities on cultural practices to manage pests

Carry out social assessment report and prepare social

management plan

Integrating agro-silvo-animal

husbandry systems/practices Loss of land (grazing land shortage) due to

increased density of trees

Increased risk of crop pests

Avoid competing claims on land (for grazing and tree

planting)


Establishing pockets of wood

stands at homestead level Increased risk of crop pests

Competition with annual or food crops

Ground water depletion through deep root system

Disruption to nutrient cycle if species have

allelopatic effects


Planting sites should be different and with sufficient

distance from crop fields

Planting should not be done close to water bodies, wetlands,

shallow water table areas

Select species that do not cause allelopatic effect

Construction of water

harvesting structures (ponds,

reservoirs)

Site becomes mosquito (disease vectors) breeding

area and malaria infestation increases

Loss of land

Plant mosquito repellent tree and shrub species around water

ponds

Compensate for loss of land, livelihoods or economic benefits

Introduction of high value

crops (vegetables, root crops

and fruit seeds, seedlings)

Increased load of agro-chemicals to control pests

and plant diseases

Introduce and apply cultural pest management practices

Introducing new varieties of

plant species for forage and

food crops

Risk of introducing new pests and crop diseases

with new the germplasm

Conduct quarantine checks and follow national guidelines

for introduction of new germplasm


47

Annex 5: Guidelines for sub-projects requiring special attention

I. Agricultural sub-projects involving use of agro-chemicals: Guidelines for Integrated

Pest Management (IPM)

Government policy encourages use of biological or environmental controls and other

measures to reduce reliance on agricultural chemicals. IPM refers to a mix of farmer-driven,

ecologically based pest control practices that seek to reduce reliance on synthetic chemical

pesticides. It involves (a) managing pests (keeping them below economically damaging

levels) rather than seeking to eradicate them, (b) relying, to the extent possible, on

nonchemical measures to keep pest populations low; and (c) selecting and applying

pesticides, when they have to be used, in a way that minimizes adverse effects on beneficial

organisms, humans, and the environment. The following strategy should be used to address the

use of agricultural chemicals and to promote IPM in the SLMP II:

Project funds will not be used for the purchase of pesticides or fertilizers.

Information on acceptable and unacceptable pesticides will be provided to farmers and

Woreda staff to encourage compliance with government policy and international standards.

Training in irrigated agriculture, including pest and fertilizer applications, safe

chemical handling and IPM will be provided to communities as required.

A basic Guide for IPM in the SLMP II will be prepared as a menu of practical

methods for reducing the need for pesticides, covering the following techniques:

- Pest-resistant crops varieties

- Use of disease/weed-free planting stock

- Farming practices that increase resistance to pests (proper soil preparation,

spacing, planting, watering, etc.)

- Farming practices that suppress pest populations (crop rotation, cover crops,

intercropping, etc.)

- Traditional manual control of pests (weeding, removing insect pods, etc.)

- Biological controls (predators, pathogens, pheromones, etc.)

- Targeted chemical use (pest scouting/selective treatments)

Based on the Guide, an IPM Plan will be produced for each small-scale irrigation

scheme or other agricultural sub-projects likely to utilize agrochemicals.

II. Sub-projects involving any form of involuntary resettlement

As much as possible, involuntary land acquisition and involuntary resettlement are avoided or

minimized. All viable alternative options for designs have to be checked. When sub-projects

trigger involuntary resettlement, a social assessment must be carried out and a Resettlement

Action Plan must be prepared. A brief action plan may be developed when less than 200

people are affected by the sub-project. The Resettlement Action Plan must include measures

to ensure that the displaced persons are informed about their options and rights pertaining to

resettlement. The displaced persons are consulted on, offered choices among, and provided

with technically and economically feasible resettlement alternatives and provided prompt and

effective compensation at full replacement cost for losses of assets attributable directly to the

project.


48

Annex 6: Checklist of questions for consultative meeting and discussions with regional

SLMP Coordinators, Woreda focal persons and community members

I. Checklist for discussion with regional SLMP coordinators and Woreda focal persons

General on SLMP I

Project identification and planning process

How the sub-projects identified and what steps / processes were followed during the planning?

Who identifies the sub-projects of the integrated watershed and landscape management

activities at the community level?

What kinds of support did communities receive in identifying sub-projects and screening the

same for potential negative environmental and social impacts?

What is the role of the DAs and/or the Woreda experts in the project identification?

Were the sub-projects screened for environmental and social impacts at the community level?

Who did the screening at the community and Woreda levels using what instruments?

Major impacts observed and mitigation measures taken?

What were the major environmental and social impacts of the watershed management

activities of the project?

What major negative environmental and social impacts were observed as a result of the SLMP

I activities in your region and how were they tackled?

How were the impacts identified and what measures were taken to address them?

Were there any ESIAs carried out for any of the sub-projects? Who conducted the ESIA?

How were the mitigation actions monitored during implementation?

Who monitored the implementation of the recommended actions?

Unaddressed impacts

Were there unaddressed impacts of the project? What types and why were not they addressed?

How can they be addressed in the ESMF II?

Were there any unexpected or unforeseen negative impacts after implementation of the project

activities? If yes, what were they?

Were there any serious environmental and social impacts that were not adequately addressed

in the ESMF I? If yes, what were they?

ESMF application

Do you think the ESMF has been effectively applied? If not, what were the reasons or gaps?

Did the ESMF contribute to the identification, avoidance or management of any negative

environmental and social impacts of the projects?

What were the processes of impact identification, screening of projects and approval?

Which types of project activities did require critical EAI analysis? Who did the EAI analysis

and how were the mitigations measures implemented? Who monitored the implementation?

What were the major bottlenecks, in your opinion, in implementing the ESFMF?

Which step of the Environmental management process is critical and what kinds of problems

did you experience at the different stages? (e.g., at community/Kebele, Woreda, regional)

What were the major environmental and social impacts that were effectively addressed

through the implementation of the ESMF?


49

Capacity gap in implementation

Was there capacity gap in implementing the ESMF? If yes, what are they? (e.g., Lack of

relevant experts, lack of experience and skill, absence of the necessary guidelines and less

responsive bureaucracy, etc...)

What is your suggestion for capacity building support? (e.g., training of Woreda level experts,

DAs and regional level experts)

When do you think is appropriate to provide capacity building trainings? (e.g., before the start

of implementation, during implementation, etc....)

What should be the focus of the training? ( on environmental management issues, project

preparation, environmental assessment processes, monitoring and evaluation)

Which offices are pertinent for the capacity building training? (MoA, EPRLA, WWO, etc...)

Which experts are pertinent for the capacity building training? (Crop, livestock, natural

resources, gender, cooperative, extension, etc...)

What kind of capacity building support was provided to the communities?

What was the source of the budget for the ESMF implementation and how was it utilized?

(e.g., training, assessment, screening, guideline preparation, TOR preparation, mitigation

measures, conducting ESIA, Review, etc...)

Were there any capacity (skill, knowledge or experience) gap in implementing the ESMF I?

Improvements in ESMF II

What is your recommendation for the ESMF II and what should be improved in the ESMF II?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Checklist for discussions with community members

Who identifies watershed intervention projects in your Keble?

Who assesses the environmental and social impacts of the sub-projects?

What were the major environmental and social impacts of the SLM project activities in your

Keble?

How were they addressed and who addressed them?

Were there any unaddressed impacts?

How was your participation in the implementation of mitigation measures?

III. Self-Administered Questionnaire for consultative meeting with regional SLMP coordinators

General on SLMP I

1. Who identifies the sub-projects of the integrated watershed and landscape management activities

at the community level?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. What kinds of support did communities receive in identifying sub-projects and screening the same

for potential negative environmental and social impacts?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


50

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Major impacts observed and mitigation measures taken

3. What were the major environmental and social impacts of the watershed management activities of

the project?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. How were the impacts identified and what measures were taken to address them ?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Were there any serious environmental and social impacts that were not adequately addressed in

the ESMF I? If yes, what were they?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ESMF application

6. Do you think the ESMF has been effectively applied? If not, what were the reasons or gaps?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. What were the major bottlenecks, in your opinion, in implementing the ESFMF?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Capacity gap in implementation

8. Were there any capacity (skill, knowledge or experience) gap in implementing the ESMF I?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. Which institutes did play key role and what were the tasks of such offices in the environmental

management process?

MoA main task in the ESMF process:

Woreda: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Region: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


51

EPLAU (Environmental Protection and Land Administration Unit) main task in the ESMF process:

Woreda -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Region: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Water Office (Water Office) main tasks in the ESMF:

Woreda: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Region: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Improvements in ESMF II

10. What is your recommendation for the ESMF II and what should be improved in the ESMF II?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Annex 7: Summary of the discussion held with stakeholders in a validation workshop at

Adama, August 11, 2013

Hailu Tefera from World Vision Ethiopia:

Question: Lack of capacity at the Woreda level is mentioned as one major gap to implement

the ESMF. But ESIA is guided by a procedure already prepared by regions and how can it be

justified that capacity is am implementation gap?

Answer: although it is true that ESIA is guided by a procedural guideline prepared at the

federal and regional level experts, there is still lack of skill and understating in identifying the

main environmental impacts and the mitigation measures. Most important is experts at the

Woreda level have to be trained on the relevant federal and regional policies, proclamations

and the safeguard policies. In some cases, there are also gaps in knowledge on watershed

planning and management.

Question: Why is budget mentioned as a constraint since the ESIA is going to be carried out

by the implementing organization?

Answer: there was no budget separately allocated for the ESMF and it was found out that

ESIA was not carried out and mitigation measures were not properly implemented for lack of

financial support.

Question: DAs are very busy and have multiple responsibilities in their regular activities. If

implementing and monitoring of the environmental impact mitigation measures is left to

them, there is a risk that these activities will not be properly implemented. They have too

many other activities and there should be an alternative way to oversee the implementation of

the ESMF activities.


52

Answer: the issue will be taken care by the respective offices at the different levels and the

support unit at the federal level should look into the matter to provide appropriate solutions.

Tenaw Tessema from Jima Zone, OmoNada Woreda, SLMP focal person

Question: How can the impacts of other projects implemented in the watershed be mitigated?

Or how is it possible to prevent environmental impacts caused by not by SLMP but other

projects such as rural road connectivity project?

Answer: This can happen in any of the selected watersheds. But this ESMF is prepared for

activities that are going to be implemented thorugh SLMP in the selected Woreda. However,

if such incidences happen, the focal person and the local administration should be able to

solve the problem by discussing with the other project implementers.

Question: In the Capacity building plan, Zones are not included while they directly control

Woredas?

Answer: we simply followed the SLMP implementation platform in the PAD. If the PSU and

the other partners find it necessary, the role of the zones should be defined and should also be

reflected in the implementation organizational structure.

Mr. Abubeker Ali, FAO natural resource expert

Question: The focus seems to be only on individual lands and the community lands are not

well covered? Why?

Answer: No, this is not true. The types of activities to be conducted on community lands

(e.g., afforetation, area closure, gully rehabilitation, physical structures, etc...) are indentified

and the mitigation measures are also included in the analysis.

Question: Did the document consider the difference in the upper and lower zones of the

watershed in discussion the impacts? How can it be possible to mitigate impacts in the lower

part of the watershed while degradation continues in the upper part of the watershed?

Answer: this is a technical question and refers to the planning and implementation process.

Technical experts need to prioritize activities in terms of appropriate period and location

during the project identification and planning. Watershed activities are always implemented

by following the watershed logic (i.e., hill to valley).

Question: why were the gaps mentioned in the document were not addressed in the SLMPI?

Answer: For lack of budget and little expertise support from the higher offices, as explained

by the regional SLMP coordinators.

Ali Ahmed, from Amhara region, YIlmana Densa Woreda

Question: Now the implementation of the measures finally rests on the responsibility of the

DA at the Kebele level. But DAs are overwhelmingly loaded with other regular activities.

Don’t you think this jeopardizes the implementation? And also, what incentives have you

suggested for the DAs to handle the work?

Answer: this is the current working structure of the government and the DAs are responsible

to closely follow up the implementation of mitigation measures. In the ESMF, capacity

building plans (mainly training for DAs) is included and this one incentive. This question

might further be addressed by the PSU later.

Takele Admasu, Benishangul Gumuz region

Question: Conservation agriculture or Zero tillage is very difficult to convince farmers in our

region. Because, there is enough organic matter in the soil and the land it still relative

productive. Farmers are not willing to practice zero tillage. What can we do?

Answer: this is purely a technical and specific project activity related question and should be

answered by the PSU or technical committee members at the region.

Shiferaw Mideksa, Oromia GIZ adviser

Question: the format for rating the adversity of impacts (low, medium, high, etc...) is not

feasible to use it to identify the impacts and mitigation measures. Thus, it is improved in our

region. Can’t you improve it as well?


53

Answer: format is useful to preliminarily categorize the impacts by Woreda experts. I believe

it is a simple and useful format that can easily differentiate the impacts as per their degree of

adversity. We found it necessary to keep it but If you have a better format I would be willing

to review it and if found important, it can be included in the document.

Ato Abera Willa, SNNPR, NRM expert:

Comment: capacity gap is a serious problem at the Woreda and Regional level in

implementing the ESMF. The points raised as gap are realistic and should be well addressed

in the next phase. However, zones are not included in the ESMF implementation and also

they are not included in the capacity building activity. Woredas are directly accountable to

Zones. Thus, they should be included in the implementation structure.

Ans: the comment is accepted and referred again to the PSU to look into the structure and

where the Zones fit.

Mr. Mekonen Dechasa, Kuyu Woreda (farmer):

Comment: We are very happy that our Woreda is included in the phase II SLMP project. We

have been already practicing some soil conservation activities but in a very fragmented and

uncoordinated way. Biological measures are not implemented for various constraints

(seedlings, seeds, nursery, finance, etc...). Thus, the project will solve all these problems and

once again our landscape will be rehabilitated. We thank you. We need support on farm

implements and seedlings. We are ready to actively take part in the project.

W/ro Deises, from Kuyu Woreda (Farmer):

Comment: we have learned about the SLMP a lot. Our kebele is highly degraded and this is a

great opportunity for us. In the past, some conservation structures were done but most are

destroyed simply because biological measures were not integrated. We have a problem of

forage. We also lack some knowledge and capacity. This is what we need to reverse and solve

degradation in our Kebele and Woreda. Thank you for inviting us.

Since the SLM activities are environmental friendly, there were no major impacts in the

implementation areas. ESIA decision can be made at the Woreda level since there are serious

impacts to be caused by this project. The regional level is too long a process to follow and it

will cause delays in activity implementation. This should be reconsidered. Despite this, the

ESMF in the previous phase was not properly implemented. One of the reasons was the

lengthy process. Thus, shorten the procedural process (comment from participant of Oromia

region).

Response: the decision on ESIA assessment and outcome should be made by the regional

authority as stipulated in the ESIA proclamation.

Reforestation and afforestation was mentioned that it might cause some negative impacts on

biodiversity. I guess it rather improves the conservation of biodiversity if species selection is

carefully limited to locally adapt indigenous species (Dr. Gemedo Dalle, Director General of

the Institute of Biodiversity).

Response: the document is concerned about the use of indigenous species. Most plantations

are done with exotic species and this might undermine the recovery of the locally adapted

indigenous species. Otherwise, the activity surely improves biodiversity.


54

Environmental and social impacts can also be caused by other project activities than the

SLMP activities within the watershed. In such a situation, what can be done and how do we

deal with the costs of mitigation. The capacity building training should also include zonal

experts (participant from Jima zone)

Response: this ESMF is prepared for the SLMP activities. Impacts from other projects need

to be dealt with respective implementers. The training for zonal experts can be reconsidered

by the PSU.

The gap is not only in capacity. The experience in phase one is a complete ignorance of the

ESMF itself. Thus, this time the document should be implemented seriously. Impacts from

irrigation are not only conflict over water but mismanagement and salinity development are

serious impacts (participant from Amhara region)

Response: yes the gap is not only capacity but there were no ESMF activities at all. This time

the ESMF is prepared with the necessary budget and the capacity building activity is a key

component. The irrigation impacts mentioned are well treated in the document with

appropriate mitigation measures.

As per the ESIA proclamations in the regions, ESIAs are carried out at the different levels

(region, zone, wereda) and not all ESIA documents necessarily come to the region.

Developers are responsible to carry out ESIA study and implement measures. This needs to

be considered in the document (Aman Muda, head of the Oromia Rural Land Administration

and Environmental Protection Bureau).

Response: it can be true but the SLMP activities are implemented through the existing

government structures. Projects of environmental concern have to be referred to the regional

Bureau for high level decision. The document also clearly stated that only those project that

require high level decision are referred to the regions.

At Woreda level, environmental and social impact assessment expert is critically short. Those

that are available, their willingness to carry out the assessment are hampered by lack of

incentive. This may need reconsideration (participant from SNNPR).

Response: Capacity building training for all relevant experts and budget is allocated in the

currently ESMF, which will solve the problem.

The question of format is not about the screening. The tables are perfect to carry out the

screening. But where to list the mitigation measures and how to plan them is missing

(participant from SNNPR).

Response: the ESMF has clearly put potential impacts and mitigation measures in Annex 4 of

the document. You can use this format for planning the mitigation measures for each project.

Capacity building training should be also include the decision makers at the different levels of

administration because the results of such training are clearly observed in facilitating the

project implementation.

Response: they are included in the RCS training. Decision makers at the Woreda sector

offices and administration are also included in the proposed training components and targets.


55

List of Workshop participants during a discussion on the draft ESMF at Adama

No. Name Region Woreda Position Telephone

1 Asmamaw

Kume

Fderal Addis Ababa National steering

committee

0912142271

2 Taye Takele SNNPR Gimbo Agri. Office head 0910642006

3 Wondimu

W/Mariam

SNNPR Gimbo SLM focal person 0932220487

4 Tenaw

Tessema

Oromia Omo Nada SLM focal person 0924773304

5 Takele

Adamasu

Benishangul

Gumuz

Assosa Project coordinator 0911071911

6 Chelkeba

Eticha

Oromia Omo Nada Administration

office head

0917809964

7 Tenaw Hailu Addis Ababa Addis Ababa Senior adviser 0911933993

8 Shambel

Sharew

Amhara Shewa Robit Focal person 0913667061

9 Shayu

Gidyelew

Amhara Bahirdar IFAN 0918766982

10 Abera Willa SNNPR Region/Hawassa Deputy head 0912068409

11 Kedir Wabela SNNPR Alicho Woreiro Land

administration

officer

0913429308

12 Tesfaye

Gadisa

Oromia Gobu Seyo Agri. Office head 0912812707

13 Mohammed

Haji

Oromia Gobu Seyo coordinator 0911312919

14 Abubeker Ali Addis

Ababa/FAO

NRM

FAO/NRM NRM expert 0911408350

15 Mebrahtom

Fekadu

Tigray GIZ/SLM PM and adviser 0914026476

16 Seife Aregawi Amhara Lagambe Focal person 0914069612

17 Alebachew

Araya

Amhara Legambe Woreda admin

office head

0914062484

18 Ahmed Gillo Amhara Legambe Agric. Office head 0914063557

19 Addisu Fetene Amhara Fegita Leqoma Agri.office head 0913086661

20 Mulugeta

Mekonnen

Amhara Fegita Leqoma Focal person 0918193077

21 Worku Haile Oromia Mensibu Agri office head 0917813562

22 Israel Idodsa Oromia Mensibu Focal person 0917816556

23 Elias Kedir Oromia Sebeta Agri office head 0912158609

24 Abera Hadera Oromia Region Land

Administration

Office

0914722751

25 Tesfaye

Chekol

Addis Ababa SLMPSU NRM expert 0911035483

26 Tesfaye Oromia Woliso Focal Person 0920596634


56

Mengistu

27 Alemayehu

Shiferaw

Oromia Woliso Agri. Office head 0910947722

28 Beyene Gede Oromia Ada Berga Admin head 0913337515

29 Urge

G/Mariam

Oromia Ada Berga Farmer 0913341269

30 Simegnew

Eshete

Amhara Bahir Dar Adviser 0918782870

31 Enkosa Ebsa Oromia G/bila Admin office head 0917130497

32 Birhanu

Geleta

Oromia G/bila Education head 0917033994

33 Bizu

Chemeda

Oromia G/bila Agri office head 0913326043

34 Regasa

Wagari

Oromia G/bila Focal person 0920421431

35 Teshome

Demissie

Oromia GIZ-sun expert 0911545278

36 Emiru Dibaba Oromia GIZ-sun Cluster adviser 0913344248

37 Abdi Boru Oromia GIZ-sun Cluster adviser 0911702796

38 Kassu Abebe Oromia GIZ-sun Cluster adviser 0911894537

39 Aman Muda Oromia Region/OBRLEP Head 0911486655

40 Hassen Fenta Amhara Anded Focal person 0918473285

41 Yasin Hussien Oromia Guto Gida Focal person 0921201501

42 Tibebu Bekele Oromia Guto Gida Administrator 0917136699

43 Gutuma

woyesa

Oromia Guto Gida Food security

office. Head

0911805700

44 Wodajo

Negasa

Oromia Guto Gida Agri office deputy

head

0917818370

45 Dereje worku Amhara Jabi Tehnan Focal person 0913942445

46 Misgana

Belay

Oromia Tiro Afeta Focal person 0917163039

47 Hailu tefera Addis Ababa WVE Expert 0911059112

48 Ware Geda Oromia Bore Admin head 0916312176

49 Berhanu

Beriso

Oromia Bore Eed head 0932533403

50 Asmamaw

Tefera

Oromia Bore Focal person 0926724689

51 Fekede Gelete Oromiya Nedjo Focal person 0917813364

52 Terefe Gare Oromiya NRP 0913236244

53 Bahiru

Gutema

Oromiya Accountant 0913317180

54 Tadesse

Bizuneh

Oromiya Bore D head of Agri.off 0916312168

55 Barcu Barisa Oromiya Bore Head of agri. off 0932533403

56 Gemedo

Shefesa

Oromiya Uraga Head of agri. offi

57 Mosisa

Negasa

Oromiya Uraga DA 0913793446

58 Guluma Oromiya G/bicha Head of FED 0911805700


57

Eyessa

59 Girma Deme Oromiya Wolmera Head, agri.off 0913020739

60 Tesfaye

Fekegna

Oromiya Wolmera Focal person 0913229158

61 Asmamaw

Tefera

Oromiya Bore Focal person 0926724689

62 Dereje Bekele Oromiya Gimbichu A/head agri offic

63 Eliyas Tadese Oromiya Gimbichu Focal person

64 Dawit

Angassa

Oromiya Lume A/head FED 0911356102

65 Worku Haile Oromiya Kfw Menolisbu A/head office 0917813562

66 Israel Iddony Oromiya Kfw Menolisbu Foccllp 0917816556

67 Admasu tasew Oromiya Anbo Head off Aq.off 0912193180

68 Ware gede Oromiya Bore Adminster 0916312176

69 Yasin hussen Oromiya Guto Gida Focal person 09121201505

70 Wadajo

Nagassa

Oromiya Guto Gida V.Ag.Head 0917818370

71 Tibebu Bekele Oromiya Guta Gida adminster 0917136699

72 Dejene

Gemechu

Oromiya Toke Kutaye Social person 0911350173

73 Haile Doratto Oromiya Boddla Vic .Ag.head 0917805672

74 Habtamu

Goban

Oromiya Bedele Admin 0911732660

75 Neiguse

Byebue


76 Dereje

Wodajo


77 Geda Taye Oromiya Bedele Admin 0911910468

78 Numeri

Shemsu

Oromiya Sigmo Admin head 0917110944

79 Wondimagegn

Fasil

Oromiya Sigmo Focal Person 0917107143

80 Eliaco Tadese Oromiya Gimbichu Focal person 091020621

81 Kedir Wabela SNNPR A/Wriro Asstedader agent 0913429308

82 Taye Takele Slash Ginb Office Head 0910642006

83 Betelihen

Gizaela

SNNPR Ginb Land Adminster 0917232442

84 Abebaehn

Memshnis

NNPR Gedeo P focal person 0932659178

85 Tefetha

Feyissa

NNPR Gedeo Adminster 0916331169

86 Shibeshi

Dejene

NNPR Wonsho F-Person 0911714607

87 Fasika Shode NNPR Wonsho Adminster 0913306818

88 Tirckegne

Gemeda

NNPR Gedeo 0916830915

89 Negash

Gesesse

NNPR Mareka Adminster 0917830915

90 Haile Hadero NNPR Mareka Focal 0917832422


58

91 Nega Abera SNNPR Konta Focal person 0917836279

92 Wendimu

W/mariam

SNNPR Gimbo Focal person 0932220487

93 Zewge Gedw SNNPR Anyayn F.P 0911567823

94 Alemayehu

Abiso

SNNPR Anyayn Administrator 0913438496

95 Gezahagn

Alemayehu

SNNPR Region NR and o

population

0916008382

96 Molla Teggne SNNPR Coordnator 0916821722

97 Hayder

Seman

SNNPR Accountant 0911928611

98 Wandinw

W/Mechael

SNNPR 0911957106

99 Dutse Tamiru SNNPR Basketo Administrator 0916601894

100 Mitika

Zewkie

SNNPR Basketo Focal person 0913896168

101 Mekdim

G/Hana

Muhir/Aklil Focal person 0910511695

102 Ginbaru

Bedru

Muhir/Aklil Administrator 0920995112

103 Abraham

Lamboro

Muhir/Aklil 0911857133

104 Ashenafi

Habtamu

Basketo 0926303735

105 Demene

Demis

Basketo 0920817713

106 Abone Wega Hawassa D/Head 0912068409

107 Mengistu

Mamo

Hawassa Damu 0916592633

108 Mulugeta

Abny

Benishangul

Gumuz

Pawi Ass.

Adminstration

0913513194

109 Mohammed

Kedir

Benishangul

Gumuz

Pawi P .Focal person 0920288053

110 Beruhu

Kahsay

Benishangul

Gumuz

Assosa Shm Focal person 0913475105

111 Oumer

Mohamed

Benishangul

Gumuz

Assosa w.Adminstration 0911004212

112 Yirgalme

Wakgar

B.G Bambosi 0920712066

113 Nigatu Kabeto B.G Bambosi Slmp 0917816838

114 Tsegaye

Adhem

B.G Assosa Slmp 0911910410

115 Takele

Admasu

B.G Assosa Slmp 0911071911

116 Abdurahman

Hussen

Gambella Abol p.representative 0911571350

117 Sahle Biza Gambella Godere Slmp 0917870347

118 Alemayehu

Shiferaw

oromiya woliso Head of agr. 0910947722


59

119 Tesfaye

Mengistu

,, woliso Focal per. 0920596634

129 Dawit

Dewude

,, uraga ,, 0912428994

121 Brhanu Gelete ,, G/Bila 0917033994

122 Enkosa Ebsa ,, G/Bila add/office 0917130497

123 Buzu

chemega

,, G/Bila W/add. 091332643

124 Regasso

wakgari

,, G/Bila Focal per. 0920421431

125 Desata Bayrsa ,, Region GIZ-SLM 0910574450

126 Alemayehu

Nigussie

,, Region GIZ-SLM 0911686026

127 Mohammed

Haji

,, Region OBOA 0911312919

128 Kassu Abebe ,, Region GIZ-SLM 0911894537

129 Tekaw

tessama

,, o/Nada Focal per. 0924773364

130 Chelkeba

Eticho

,, o/Nada add/office 0917809964

131 Teshome

Demissie

,, Region GIZ-SLM 0911545278

132 Getu Tibrbu ,, A.A Driver 0911048875

133 Kresa kajala ,, ?? Admin 0911339729

134 Bekele

Beyeeha

,, Lumee Admin 0911718024

135 Kedir Jundi ,, Lumee v/Admin 0911835892

136 Thilahun

Hailu

,, Driver 0910167564

137 Terefe Foghi ,, Gimbi Focal per. 0911816905

138 Giddii Forfaa ,, Driver 0922236958

139 Daniel Benti ,, Gimbi Admin 0911030576

140 Amare

Mamuye

,, H/Abote Focal per. 0913399588

141 Desalegn

Asfawu

,, Gimbi Driver 0917704750

142 Ararso

Kebede

,, Toke Kutaye Dep/Admin 0920116796

143 Solomon

Tesema

,, A.A Driver 0923761472

144 Fekede Geleta ,, Nedjo Focal per. 0917813364

145 Terefe Gore ,, Nedjo N/R/P/admin 0913236244

146 Bahiru

Gutema

,, Nedjo Accountant 0913317180

147 Tadesse

Bizuneh

,, Boore Vice H/Admin 0916312168

148 Barcuu

Bariisoo

,, Boore Head of Fd. 0932533423

149 Elemeda ,, Uraga Head of Fed. 0916439548


60

shefesa

150 Mosisa

Nagasa

,, walisoo Driver 0913793436

151 Gusuma

Woyesoo

,, G/Gido Head of Fed. 0911805700

152 Girma Deme ,, Walmara Head of Agri 0913020739

153 Tesfaye

Fekegna

,, Walmara Focal per. 0913229158

154 Asmamaw

Tefera

,, Bore Focal per. 0926724689

155 Darajjee

Beekaa

,, Gimbi A/head office 0912830139

156 Eliyas Tadese ,, Gimbi Focal per.

157 Dawit

Angassa

,, Lume Add/office 0911356102

158 Ayele Abebe ,, Lume Focal per. 0911944105

159 Ashena

Dalatera

,, B/nopa Focal per. 0921015432

160 Kinde Dereje ,, B/nopa Admin. 0917806295

161 Misagana

Belay

,, Tiro Afefa Focal per. 0917163035

162 Gezahegn

Kinoti

,, Ambo Focal per. 0912102517

163 Dr.Abdi Boru ,, Ambo Customer 0911709796

164 Ayehu

Legesse

,, GIZ Soc.Adv. 0911155281

165 Tesfaye

Gadissa

,, Eobu soya Woreda agri. 0923122230

166 Belina

Senbeta

,, Nedji v.Admin. 0925784511

167 Abera

Mogose

,, Ambo Fin.head 0912182215

168 Chala

Magarsa

,, Jeldu Focal per. 0920677663

169 Mamo mulata ,, Jeldu Accountant 0910631378

170 Daba Gareda ,, Jeldu Vice Head 0913221141

171 Gudeta Dinka ,, Ambo Admin.head 0911350214

172 Addisu Wase ,, Alle Agri vice Head 0917225489

173 Meseret

Alemu

,, ,, Accu. 0911894069

174 Rani Mesele ,, M.Accu 0911415264

175 Kayire

HUssen

,, Bore Driver 0926959715

176 Mashar

Abamoda

,, Agri 0921509647

177 Ruad Kalifa ,, Sokoru Head agri bio 0917013290

178 Endale Bekele ,, ,, Focal per. 0913141655

179 Aman Muda ,, A.A Head admin 0911486655

180 Dereje ,, Dedessa Agri. Of admin 0911905681


61

Seyoum

181 Kaasaaluu

Tilahun

,, ,, Finance & eco

deve.

0913096201

182 Amboro

Getachew

,, ,, ,, 0911731451

183 Wezir Jemal ,, ,, Focal per. 0911957790

184 Genene Birafu ,,` rersamalime H.admin 0911465074

185 Tamirat

Tessema

,, ,, 0916285982

186 Desta tolessa ,, ,, Driver 0912209085

187 Taye Takele Slash Ginb Office Head 0910642006

188 Betelihen

Gizaela

SNNPR Ginb Land Adminster 0917232442

189 Abebaehn

Memshnis

NNPR Gedeo P focal person 0932659178

190 Tefetha

Feyissa

NNPR Gedeo Adminster 0916331169

191 Shibeshi

Dejene

NNPR Wonsho F-Person 0911714607

192 Fasika Shode NNPR Wonsho Adminster 0913306818

193 Tirckegne

Gemeda

NNPR Gedeo 0916830915

194 Negash

Gesesse

NNPR Mareka Adminster 0917830915

195 Haile Hadero NNPR Mareka Focal 0917832422

196 Nega Abera SNNPR Konta Focal person 0917836279

197 Wendimu

W/mariam

SNNPR Gimbo Focal person 0932220487

198 Zewge Gedw SNNPR Anyayn F.P 0911567823

199 Alemayehu

Abiso

SNNPR Anyayn Administrator 0913438496

200 Gezahagn

Alemayehu

SNNPR Region NR and o

population

0916008382

201 Hailu tefera Addis Ababa WVE Expert 0911059112

202 Ware Geda Oromia Bore Admin head 0916312176

203 Berhanu

Beriso

Oromia Bore Eed head 0932533403

204 Asmamaw

Tefera

Oromia Bore Focal person 0926724689

205 Fekede Gelete Oromiya Nedjo Focal person 0917813364

206 Terefe Gare Oromiya NRP 0913236244

207 Bahiru

Gutema

Oromiya Accountant 0913317180

208 Tadesse

Bizuneh

Oromiya Bore D head of Agri.off 0916312168

209 Barcu Barisa Oromiya Bore Head of agri. off 0932533403

210 Gemedo

Shefesa

Oromiya Uraga Head of agri. offi

211 Mosisa Oromiya Uraga DA 0913793446


62

Negasa

Annex 8: Summary of the discussions held with community representatives at Adama,

August 11, 2013

General comment by Kuyu, Wore Jarso and Wonchi Woreda participants

The SLMP is basically focused on the conservation of natural resources. This makes us happy

simply because our little efforts did not bring critical changes. We did not do any activity

before two years but only in the last two years that we started doing some physical measures

in our individual farms. This project is an opportunity to harness what we started. There is

already a kebele watershed team (organized into a group of five). Some activities are also

taking place. But inputs are lacking like seedlings and farm implements. The project includes

many aspects such as soil fertility, conservation of soil and afforestation. But water is very

critical for us and we need this to be prioritized for us. The shortage of water has a big impact

on human and livestock health. Thus, for use discussing about the project activity impacts

may be not good since we don’t want to complain before the project starts. Thus, let us first

get activities implemented on the ground. However, we have also followed it from the

discussion and presentation about the environmental and social impacts. They are properly

described and many are the types of impacts that we see in our village road and irrigation

projects. The local issues are mentioned well. We have heard about the SLMP work from

neighboring Woredas but we didn’t benefit from it earlier. Now it is coming to our Woreda

and we will do all our best to avoid the impacts. Since we have a very critical land

degradation problem, support is highly needed (not necessarily financial but technical

support, capacity building, farm implements, knowledge improvement are critically

important).

Question from facilitator to participants: From other projects implemented in your Kebele

earlier, what kinds of environmental and social impacts did you experience, for instance

irrigation projects, road projects etc...

Asefa Gadisa, administrator of Kuyu Woreda said that the project is a development work

similar to what our community has been doing in the past. We did not observe any significant

impact to bring meaningful change. For instance, irrigation can bring a lot of opportunity to

benefit large numbers of people at once. This is for instance already identified in consultation

with the local communities. Road and water related constructions will be done in consultation

with the relevant offices. If there is going to be any negative impact, those offices will be

involved. If people are going to lose land or any property, they will be compensated either in

the form of replacement land or cash. This is often handled by the Kebele administration.

With regard to water harvesting, the negative impacts are minimum. The problem is seepage

loss. The health related impacts are handled by the Woreda health office. Most of these

impacts will be discussed during planning since communities involve in selecting sub-

projects.

W/ro Desatu Wojeta from Kuyu Woreda explained that the natural resource conservation

activities in our Kebele are encouraging. The new coming project will bring resources and we

expect more participation in the project. Participation of women is important since women in

our keblele take part in farm activities like men.


63

Mr. Lgesse Ayansa, head of the Wonchi Woreda administrator added that examples of

impacts are seen in irrigation and road construction. For instance, irrigation water user

communities have had conflicts over water use. The upper part of the water users sometimes

block and use the water for longer time. Community members in the lower part may not get

water for days. In this case, there has been always complaints and conflicts. However what

the Kebele administration did was to call for repeated meetings and carry out discussions.

The other example is the URARP (Urban Rural Access Road Project) by the government

often crosses individual lands. This also created tension and project work has been affected.

Again, what the Woreda and Kebles did was to engage the individuals in discussions and

convince them either to get compensation from the communities or get a replacement land.

This has worked very well. Thus, all impacts, including environmental ones will be solved by

the local administration and the community. The other one is quarry sites have been opened

individual lands and community lands. Some of them created unnecessary erosion to

cultivated fields. Then, the Woreda administration arranged meetings with the project

implementers and later on the community agreed to allow the quarry but prevent or avoid the

erosion. Then, the project and the community together constructed a spillway to divert

running water from the quarry site to a natural waterway. The best tool to address impacts is

to carry out consultations with communities and implement some of the possible mitigation

measures. The local traditional conflict resolution systems are very effective in dealing with

social impacts. We don’t at this stage worry about the impacts but we rather worry about

getting the project implemented in the Woreda to reverse the land degradation.

Question from to participants: How did you participate in selecting the watersheds and the

main activities to be done there?

There were consecutive meetings with the DAs and the community leaders together with

members of the community. The watershed site was selected in agreement with the

committee. The types of activities or interventions are commonly known and these are soil

and water conservation, tree planting, terraces, etc... these were selected by community

members with the support from experts. There was nothing decided without our participation.

The Woreda administrator stated that before the projects were decided to be implemented in

the area, repeated discussions were held with the communities. The watershed and the

activities to be done were decided by communities. The best interventions (livelihood

changing activities) were selected by the communities.

List of community representatives participated in the discussion at Adama

No. Name Sex Age Woreda Kebele Telephone

1 Gezahagn

Fitsum

M 42 Wore Jarso Hoose 0921750906

2 Erena Belay M 32 Wore Jarso Laltu wonji 0935310312

3 Seyoum Adere M 33 Wore Jarso Got 2 0911775572

4 Asefa Gidisa M 38 Kuyu Got2 0911775249

5 Mekonen

Dechasa

M 32 Kuyu Wuye gose 0933541227

6 Dese Mamo F 40 Kuyu Wuye gose 0921804177

7 Getachew

Kasaye

M 50 Kuyu Wuye gose 0922596941

8 Ayelech Diriba F 33 Wore Jarso Jafna


64

9 Fikre Tadesse F 35 Wore Jarso Jafna

10 Asmera Adere F 28 Wore Jarso Jafna


65

Annex 9: Summary of Small Dam Safety Guideline (MoA)

1. Introduction

The overarching dam safety objective is to protect people, property and the environment from

the harmful effects of mis-operation or failure of dams and reservoirs. To ensure that dams

and reservoirs are operated and that activities are conducted so as to achieve the highest

standards of safety that can reasonably be achieved, measures have to be taken to achieve the

following three fundamental safety objectives:

To control the release of damaging discharges downstream of the dam,

To restrict the likelihood of events that might lead to a loss of control over the

stored volume and the spillway and other discharges,

To mitigate through onsite accident management and/or emergency planning the

consequences of such events if they were to occur.

These fundamental safety objectives apply to dam and activities in all stages over the lifetime

of a dam, including planning, design, manufacturing, construction, commissioning and

operation, as well as decommissioning and closure.

2. Planning of small Dams

There are some fundamental principles which should be applied through the investigation,

design, construction and commissioning stages to achieve an adequate level of safety. The

principles are:

i. the competence and experience of the owner’s agents relative to the nature and

dam hazard category of the dam, must be appropriate in all areas;

ii. there must be a cooperative and trusting relationship between the owner and

technical advisers, and the designers must be given full control over decision

making in critical areas;

iii. the owner must agree to apply the appropriate level of funding for

investigations, design and construction to reduce the chances of critically

important issues (particularly related to foundations) being not sufficiently

well assessed or under protected;

iv. the designer/technical adviser has a duty not to compromise unduly due to

financial pressures from the owner, developer or contractor;

v. continuity of key technical advice should be maintained throughout all stages

of the dam from development, through design, construction and

commissioning, to reduce chances of critical points of design philosophy and

intent being misinterpreted during construction or commissioning.

Dam site investigation


66

Selecting the Dam Site

When choosing the location and size, the dam owner should also take into account what

would happen if the dam failed suddenly and whether it would result in loss of life, injury to

persons or livestock, damage to houses, buildings, roads, highways or railroads. The owner of

the dam should ensure to avoid locating the dam where run-off from houses, dairies or septic

systems can pollute the water.

Considerations at Investigation Stage

Technical Consideration

Site selection and site investigations are critical components to the success or failure of a dam.

Regarding the technical consideration the following important aspects should be considered:

a. The catchment is the area of land from which run-off is to be collected. If it is the

main source of water supply, make sure that it is capable of yielding enough water to

maintain both, the supply in the dam and the required releases over all periods of

intended use. The catchment area however should not be too large, as it will then

require a big and expensive overflow system (or spillway) to safely pass excess run-

off from heavy rainfall without overtopping the dam.

b. Topographical features such as slope, width and height of dam, as well as reservoir

capacity will influence construction costs.

c. Conducting site tests to establish the material properties for the embankment and

foundation.

d. A good location for a spillway that will effectively handle runoff and minimize

erosion.

e. Watershed activities that can affect the water quality or quantity of runoff.

Environmental Considerations

Dams with their associated reservoirs can have substantial environmental effects and any

existing dam or new project must comply with the Ethiopian environmental and

environmental legislations and associated licensing or permit requirements. It also complies

with World Bank Safety of Dam Operational Policy (OP/BP. 4.37). It should be recognized at

the outset that dam developments have effects extending beyond the immediate confines of

the dam and inundated areas. For example;

Reservoir slope stability may become a dam safety issue due to the risk of overtopping

caused by large volumes of reservoir water being displaced by slope failures.

Sitting of the dam/reservoir must take into consideration the local earthquake and

faulting activity which may cause breaching of the dam

Groundwater level changes may affect stability and land use around the reservoir

margins and possibly adjacent to the downstream river, as a result of changed water

levels.

Trapping of sediments in the reservoir can result in upstream shoaling and loss of

reservoir storage.


67

Flora/fauna effects may occur in storage basin, downstream, and in passage around

and through the dam.

Minimum flow maintenance downstream of the dam to ensure the survival of flora

and fauna, and to reduce causes of stream bed deterioration.

Social development/changes to downstream use given the changed flood situation.

Dam Design

Embankment dams Design

The single most common cause of earthen dam failures is overtopping of the embankment.

An undersized spillway will lead to overtopping; therefore spillway design is critical to

reservoirs. The spillway must be located such that discharge will not erode or undermine the

toe of the dam. If the banks of the spillway are made of erosive material, provision must be

made for their protection. Consideration must be given to the hazard to human life and

potential property damage that may result from the failure of the dam or excessive flow rates

through the spillway. Further consideration must be given to the likelihood of downstream

development that may result in an elevation of the hazard classification.

Extreme Events

Large earthquakes, storm/flood activity and failure of upstream dams can be considered

extreme events. The risk of failure from these events is minimized by using engineering

design standards and relevant guidelines incorporating adequate margins of safety.

Emergency preparedness set up well in advance is the only available measure of reducing the

impact when a dam failure is about to happen.

Sedimentation

The effective life of many of small dams is reduced by excessive siltation – some small dams

silt up after only a few years. This issue is poorly covered in the many small dam design

manuals that are available, as they mostly focus on the civil engineering design and

construction aspects. Appropriate methods/tools have to be chosen to predict, and where

possible reduce, siltation rates in small dams.

3. Construction of a Dam

The quality of construction is all-important to dam safety. As far as construction is concerned,

the following requirements are necessary from the dam safety viewpoint:

the contractors must be suitably experienced and committed to achieving the standards

of work specified;

the level of supervision of the works, quality assurance procedures and designer

continuity, must be appropriate to the scale and complexity of the dam;

the owner must recognize that inherent uncertainties may remain after design

investigations and only be revealed during construction, and have funding in place to

deal with costs arising from additional requirements identified during construction;


68

any area identified in the design process as requiring confirmation by the designer

during construction, must be totally under the designer’s control, and no design

change, however small, shall be made without the designer’s review and formal

approval;

a suitably detailed design report and drawings showing the as-built structure of all

components of the dam and foundation shall be developed as an on-going and integral

part of the construction supervision process, and be prepared after completion of each

component so that there is a reliable record to refer to at all times in the future.

Therefore, the dam owner should ensure all the above mentioned requirements are fulfilled

and complied.

Selecting the contractor

The use of inexperienced contractors and/or inadequate supervision can develop into an

expensive liability. Nothing can take the place of a reputable contractor, using appropriate

equipment and experienced machine operators and working under supervision of an

experienced engineer.

Construction Supervision

Construction supervision is an important phase of dam construction. Supervision is meant to

ensure that the design factors and specification requirements have actually been included in

the final product.

If foundation preparation, material selection, outlet/spillway installation and embankment

compaction are not properly carried out then the safety of the dam will be compromised. So,

for all small dam types (both earthen and rock fill) expected to be constructed, all the dam

safety requirements applicable should be considered accordingly.

4. Safety Surveillance

Purpose of Regular Inspection

The purpose of a dam safety surveillance program is to avoid failure of the dam, by giving

early warning of any kind of symptom of trouble as early as possible. It is the most

economical and effective means an owner has of maximizing the long-term safety and

survival of the dam. Its primary purpose is to monitor the condition and performance of the

dam and its surroundings.

Frequency of Inspections

The frequency of inspection required for an effective program of surveillance depends on a

variety of factors including:

• Size or capacity of the dam;

• Condition of the dam; and


69

• Potential for damage resulting from failure of the dam (represented by the hazard

category).

Adoption of the inspection frequency for a particular dam is the responsibility of the owner,

though professional advice should be sought for large dams or those categorized under

significant and high hazard dams.

According to the dam safety guidelines prepared for AGP, the suggested inspection

frequencies for small dams of less than 15 m height for the two levels surveillance (quick

visual inspection and comprehensive examination) is presented in the table below and should

be followed critically.

Quick Visual Inspection

Dam Hazard Potential classification

High twice weekly

Significant weekly

Low fortnightly

Comprehensive Examination

Dam Hazard Potential classification

High monthly

Significant 3-monthly

Low twice-yearly

Special Inspections

Special inspections will be required after unusual events such as earthquakes, major floods,

rapid drawdown or volcanic activity. Special inspections should enable the dam owner to

become aware of faults before partial or total failure occurs. Times when inspections

additional to those above are recommended are:

before a predicted major rainstorm (check embankment, spillway and outlet pipe);

during and after severe rainstorms (check embankment, spillway and outlet pipe);

after any earthquake, whether directly felt on the owner's property or reported by local

news media (check all aspects of the dam).

Inspections should be made during and after construction and also during and immediately

after the first filling of the storage.

Dealing with Problems

A systematic program of safety surveillance should maximize the likelihood that any

developing conditions likely to cause failure would be found before it is too late. Surveillance

will also help early detection of problems before they become major repair bills. As identified

earlier typical problems (many of which are treatable if found early enough) are most likely to

fall into one of the following categories: seepage/leakage; erosion; cracking;

deformation/movement; concrete structure defects; and spillway blockage.

Instrumentation and Monitoring


70

Instrumentation at a dam furnishes data to determine if the completed structure is functioning

as intended, provides a continuing surveillance of the structure, and is an indicator of

developments which may endanger its safety. Typical items instrumented or monitored

include;

profiles and condition, deformations, seepages or damp areas (visual)

reservoir water levels which relate to dam loads and flood behaviour

local rainfall which relates to background seepages

drainage and distinguishable seepages which relate to control of leakage water

flow

Clarity of seepage flow which relates to potential erosion of embankment or

foundation material.

water pressures within the dam and foundations which relate to structural behavior

movement or deformation of the dam surface and internal structure which relates

to structural behavior

stresses within the dam which relate to structural behavior

seismic acceleration which relates to structural behavior

5. Operation and Maintenance of Dams

Effective and ongoing operation, maintenance and surveillance procedures are essential to

ensure the continued viability and safety of a dam and its appurtenant structures. Poor

operation, maintenance and surveillance will invariably result in abnormal deterioration,

reduced life expectancy and possibility of failure. The proper operation, maintenance and

surveillance of a dam provide protection for the owner and the general public. Furthermore,

the cost of good operation, maintenance and surveillance procedures is small compared with

the cost and consequences of a dam failure which could include major repairs, loss of life,

property damage and litigation.

Because many small dams fail through lack of maintenance, it is prudent to have a definite

and systematic maintenance plan.

The maintenance plan should be decided upon when the construction work on the dam is

completed. It will affect the life of the storage if you do not maintain it properly. A good plan

should include the practices to be used, as well as the approximate time of the year when they

are applicable.