The revolutionary government of zanzibar


World Bank’s Safeguard Policies



Download 0.64 Mb.
Page8/16
Date02.02.2017
Size0.64 Mb.
#15086
1   ...   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   ...   16

4.3 World Bank’s Safeguard Policies


Under OP 4.01 concerning environmental assessment, the ZSEP WKCDD is Category B and this ESMF has therefore been designed to ensure that all investments under the ZSEP will comply with all the Environmental laws of the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar and the Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies of the World Bank. In this chapter, the World Bank’s safeguards policies likely to be triggered by the ZSEP are highlighted while brief texts are provided in Annex One. They include:-

  • Environmental Assessment (OP4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01)

  • Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04)

  • Forestry (OP 4.36, GP 4.36)

  • Pest Management (OP 4.09)

  • Cultural Property (OPN 11.03)

  • Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20)

  • Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12)

  • Safety of Dams (OP 4.37, BP 4.37)

  • Projects on International Waters (OP 7.50, BP 7.50, GP 7.50)

  • Projects in Disputed Areas (OP 7.60, BP 7.60, GP 7.60)

In preparing this ESMF, a consideration of the type of future investments planned vis-à-vis the baseline data presented in Chapter 3 against the requirements of the Bank Safeguard policies, has led to the determination that Three World Bank safeguard policies will be triggered namely:-


Brief commentaries on reasons why each safeguard will be triggered and safeguard measures are presented below:-


(i) Environmental Assessment (OP4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01)

OP 4.01 requires environmental assessment (EA) of projects proposed for Bank financing to help ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and thus to improve decision making. The EA is a process whose breadth, depth, and type of analysis depend on the nature, scale, and potential environmental impact of the program investments/activities under the ZSEP. The EA process takes into account the natural environment (air, water, and land); human health and safety; social aspects (involuntary resettlement, indigenous peoples, and cultural property) and trans-boundary and global environmental aspects.


The environmental and social impacts of the ZSEP will come from the secondary school construction program/activities of the schools and any other construction/rehabilitation type activities that the ZSEP will be financing. However, since the location of these schools will not be identified before appraisal of the project, the EA process calls for the GoT to prepare an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) report which will establish a mechanism to determine and assess future potential environmental and social impacts of the construction activities under the proposed ZSEP, and then to set out mitigation, monitoring and institutional measures to be taken during implementation and operation of the school construction program, to eliminate adverse environmental and social impacts, offset them, or reduce them to acceptable levels.
The policy further calls for the ZSEP as a whole to be environmentally screened to determine the extent and type of the EA process. The ZSEP has thus been screened and assigned an EA Category B status in which, an ESMF is a mandatory requirement. The EA process proposed in this ESMF pertains to a category B Project.
OP 4.01 further requires that the ESMF report must be disclosed as a separate and stand alone document by the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar and the World Bank as a condition for bank Appraisal of the ZSEP. The disclosure should be both in Zanzibar, where it can be accessed by the general public and local communities and at the Infoshop of the World Bank and the date for disclosure must precede the date for appraisal of the program.
Category B projects are likely to have potential adverse environmental impacts on human populations or environmentally important areas – including wetlands, forests, grasslands, and other natural habitats – and are less adverse than those of category A projects. These impacts are site specific, few if any of them are irreversible, and in most cases mitigation measures can be designed more readily than for category A projects. The EA process for category B projects examines the potential negative and positive environmental impacts and recommends any measures needed to prevent, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse impacts and improve environmental performance.
This process requires the MoEVT to use the screening form and checklist contained in Annexes 3.0 and 4.0 respectively, to identify potential adverse impacts of their school construction program and thereby determine the corresponding mitigation measures to incorporate into their planned activities. Section 9.0 sets the relevant process and requirements for environmental and social management.
(ii) Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12)

Significant efforts are to be made in the design and screening stages of the secondary schools construction program financed under the ZSEP, to avoid impacts on people, land, property, including people’s access to natural and other economic resources, as far as possible. Notwithstanding, land acquisition, compensation and resettlement of people seem inevitable for some selected school sites. This social issue is of crucial concern to the Government of Zanzibar and the Bank, as its impact on poverty, if left unmitigated, is negative, immediate and widespread. Thus, OP 4.12 will be triggered in those cases. Thus a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) is under preparation by the RGZ for approval by the Bank in compliance with OP 4.12. The RPF sets the guidelines for the Resettlement and Compensation Plans (RAPs) that would have to be prepared when any program investment triggers this policy. The RAPs would be prepared by the School Boards and would have to be submitted to their respective District Environmental Coordinator for approval. The RAPs would also have to be approved by the Bank as a condition for that particular school construction to be financed.


(iii) Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11)

Under this ESMF, the ZSEP will not support subprojects that involve the significant conversion2 or degradation of critical natural habitats. The latter described as land and water areas whose ecological functions have not been essentially modified by human activities, and that are protected by government (e.g. parks, World Heritage Sites) or by tradition (e.g. sacred groves); have known high suitability for biodiversity conservation; or are critical for rare, vulnerable, migratory, or endangered species. OP 4.04 will largely not be triggered as the ZSEP will not finance construction in protected areas. However, given that the project will support rehabilitation of properties in Stone Town, which is preserved as cultural heritage site, this ESMF has inbuilt modalities for dealing with requirements of OP/BP 4.11.


(iv) Other WB safeguard policies are deemed not to be applicable to the ZSEP. OP 4.09 (Pest Management) is not triggered as ZSEP does not target agriculture.

Construction of schools under ZSEP touches on OP 4.36 (Forestry) on account of consumption of timber and wood during construction and the need to sustainably supply fuel wood to the institutions. However, given that OP 4.37 (Safety of Dams) introduces specific safety requirements applicable only to dams more than 15 meters in height. The ZSEP will not support construction of any dams and the policy is therefore not applicable.



It is not anticipated that the ZSEP may have any adverse impact on people identified as indigenous, and therefore OD 4.20 is not applicable.



Download 0.64 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   ...   16




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page