Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697797609766.pdf (Dominica)
THE COMMONWEALTH OF DOMINICA MINISTRY OF BLUE AND GREEN ECONOMY, AGRICULTURE AND NATIONAL FOOD SECURITY LEVERAGING ECOTOURISM FOR BIODIVERSITY PROTECTION PROJECT (P170846) INDIGENOUS PEOPLE PLANNING FRAMEWORK (IPPF) DRAFT – v6 May 12, 2022 Revision Record Revision Date Author(s) Remarks 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

03.22.2021 LEToBP PIU/IST Preliminary Draft 04.01.2021 LEToBP PIU/IST Draft for World Bank review 09.29.2021 LEToBP PIU/ Social Safeguards Consultant Draft – for Disclosure and Consultation 12.02.2021 Social Safeguards Consultant Draft Final for World Bank Review 02.17.2022 Update by Social Safeguards Consultant 05.12.2022 Edited by Social Safeguards Consultant Final Submission Final edits Contents 1.
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Objectives of the IPPF ......................................................................................................................... 6 2.
PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................... 6 2.1 2.2 2.3 Project Background ....................................................................................................................... 6 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 9 Project Components ................................................................................................................... 10 3.
LEGISLATIVE AND INSITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................................... 14 3.1 3.2 3.3 Kalinago Territory Act of 1978 .................................................................................................... 14 The Ministry of Kalinago Affairs .................................................................................................. 15 The Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention (ILO) ................................................................. 15 3.4 Gap Assessment between the Legal and Institutional Framework and ESS7 ............................. 16 4.
THE KALINAGO TERRITORY ................................................................................................................ 16 4.1 4.2 Location ...................................................................................................................................... 16 Socio-Economic Baseline ............................................................................................................ 16 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 4.2.4 4.2.5 4.2.6 4.2.7 Population .......................................................................................................................... 17 Education ............................................................................................................................ 18 Housing ............................................................................................................................... 18 Fuel Used for Cooking ......................................................................................................... 19 Communal Lands ................................................................................................................ 20 Employment ....................................................................................................................... 20 Tourism in the Kalinago Territory ....................................................................................... 22 4.2.8 Political and Cultural Characteristics .................................................................................. 23 4.2.9 Social and Economic Infrastructure .................................................................................... 23 4.3 Capacity of Kalinago Council to Undertake Development Planning ........................................... 24 4.4 Community –based Organisations .............................................................................................. 25 5.
SUMMARY OF THE IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT ACTIVITIES .................................................................. 26 5.1 Cultural Heritage ......................................................................................................................... 27 5.
2 Positive Impacts .......................................................................................................................... 28 5.3 Negative Impacts and Risks......................................................................................................... 28 5.4 Mitigation Measures and Implementation ................................................................................. 29 5.4.1 Consultation with Stakeholders ................................................................................................. 29 5.4.2 Risk Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................... 31 6.
CONSULTATIONS WITH KALINAGO PEOPLE ...................................................................................... 34 6.1 Consultation During Preparation ................................................................................................ 34 6.1.1 6.1.2 6.1.3 6.1.4 6.1.5 6.1.6 Goal of Consultation ........................................................................................................... 34 Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 34 Content of Consultation ...................................................................................................... 35 Size and Scope of Consultations ......................................................................................... 37 Results of the Consultations ............................................................................................... 39 Dissemination and Disclosure of Information .................................................................... 40 6.2 Framework for Meaningful Consultation During Implementation ............................................. 41 Outcome of Framework for Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) during preparation and 6.3 implementation ...................................................................................................................................... 43 7.
ACTION PLAN-MEASURES TO ENSURE CULTURALLY APPROPRIATE SOCIO-ECONOMIC BENEFITS .

44 7.1 7.2 Activities ...................................................................................................................................... 44 Implementation Arrangements with Resource Implications ...................................................... 44 8.
GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM (GRM) ........................................................................................ 50 8.1 8.2 Roles and Responsibilities ........................................................................................................... 52 Grievance Report Channels ......................................................................................................... 53 8.2.1 8.2.2 Addressing Workers Grievance ........................................................................................... 54 Addressing Gender-Based Violence .................................................................................... 54 8.2.3 World Bank’s Grievance Redress Service (GRS) ..................... Error!
Bookmark not defined.

9.

GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA FOR PREPARATION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES PLANS (IPP) .................... 55 10.

MONITORING AND REPORTING ARRANGEMENTS ............................................................................. 56 12.
ANNEXES: MINUTES/SUMMARY REPORTS OF MEETINGS.................................................................. 57 Annex 1: Responses to Informal Questionnaire to Guide Consultation with the 12.1 Town/Village Councils and Community Representatives 12.2 Annex 2: Mixed Face-to-Face and Virtual Consultation Held with Stakeholders in the Kalinago Territory (September 23, 2021) 12.3 Annex 3: Power Point Presentation on Community Consultation Kalinago Territory Leveraging Eco-Tourism for Biodiversity Protection Project (attached separately) 12.4 Annex 4: Power Point Presentation on LEToBP Leveraging of Eco-Tourism for Biodiversity Protection Project: Questions regarding IPPF (attached separately) 1.
INTRODUCTION The Leveraging Eco-Tourism for Biodiversity Protection Project (LEToBP or Project) aims to coordinate and improve the Government’s intersectoral approach towards more effective planning and management of Protected Areas (PA) and forest ecosystems, and to support the Government of Dominica’s efforts to protect the country’s biodiversity through collaborative models with local communities that will elevate Dominica as recognizable eco-tourism destination.
There are also potential negative consequences which may occur as a result and for which measures should be put in place to mitigate these negative impacts.

This Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF) was developed in keeping with relevant Dominican laws and regulations and the World Bank Environmental and Social Standards (ESSs), in particular ESS7 on Indigenous Peoples.
The purpose of the IPPF is to guide in screening of proposed investments, identify specific environmental and social risks and impacts associated with the proposed activities, establish mitigation measures and how to operationalize specific environmental and social risk management instruments, principles, organizational arrangements, and design criteria to be applied to meet the needs of the Kalinago people, who may be affected by the various activities.
The IPPF, therefore, is prepared to guide and govern the activities that are selected for financing and sets out the elements that will be common to all activities that will entail mitigation measures.

It provides the framework for design of the Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) during project implementation Another purpose of this IPPF is to outline a culturally appropriate strategy for collaboration and engagement with the indigenous people of Dominica – the Kalinago.
The revised versions of the IPP to be drafted as the project cycle continues, will present details and updates on activities which have been implemented thus far on an ongoing basis.

Additionally, they will present the challenges experienced in implementation and suggest the way forward.
The Project Paper states that it will benefit Dominica’s three national parks (Morne Trois Pitons, Morne Diablotin and Cabrits) and the Kalinago Territory through support for intersectoral planning and design as well as implementation of nature-based tourism models that enhance opportunities for sustainable livelihoods.
The project includes analyses, coordination efforts, and capacity building that will improve protection and management of the three national parks and the Waitukubuli National Trail (WNT), and offer new livelihood opportunities for the people of the Kalinago Territory and communities adjacent to the parks.
Investments in activities to demarcate the three national parks and a buffer-zone for the Morne Diablotin National Park and improve sustainable nature-based tourism operations have been prioritized according to their (i) biodiversity significance and value, (ii) needs for strengthening governance and human capacities, and (iii) the benefit to local stakeholders in sustainable resource use and reviving traditional knowledge and skills.
Given these criteria, the Project places an emphasis on the Kalinago people, especially women and youth, in component 3, as described in section 2.3 below on Project components.

5 The consultative process with the Kalinago, therefore, seeks their suggestions on priority projects in these thematic areas and on positive gender and youth impacts.
1.1 Objectives of the IPPF The specific objectives of the IPPF are as follows: • To provide a framework whereby the Kalinago people, particularly women and youth, might achieve their aspirations for improving their livelihoods, while preserving their heritage.

• To enable their active, inclusive and culturally appropriate participation in the design, implementation and monitoring of activities that will provide opportunities for entrepreneurship, create employment, and promote skills upgrade/transfer.
• To promote the inter-generational transfer of knowledge.

• To optimize the Project’s benefits to the Kalinago people, while minimizing, mitigating and/or compensating for adverse impacts that may arise.

To obtain the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) of the Kalinago People.
In this context, the project pays special attention to ensuring that vulnerable groups – the Kalinago people, women and youth- benefit from activities and results from all of its components, especially component 3 which seeks to provide opportunities for improving sustainable livelihoods in a way that strengthens biodiversity.
This will entail investments in: • sustainable land use • and through preservation and intergenerational transfer of traditional Kalinago knowledge that complements biodiversity The IPPF focal point for Project activities is the Social Officer within the Project Implementation Unit (PIU) of the Ministry of Blue and Green Economy, Agriculture and National Food Security which will be responsible for its coordination and implementation.
This IPPF will be shared with the public as part of the disclosure and consultation process to gather feedback and inputs from Kalinago indigenous communities present in the Project area, and feedback will be incorporated and reflected, as appropriate, in the final version.

2.

PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION 2.1 Project Background The Waitukubuli National Trail (WNT) and Dominica’s three national parks are a cornerstone for Dominica’s eco-tourism potential, which needs further expansion.
The WNT is the first Caribbean long-distance hiking trail and is in major need of management strengthening to attract more visitors.

The trail spans 184 km, following generally north to south the ridgeline of the two major 6 mountains of the island, each of which anchors national parks.

The trail crosses all the major ecosystems of Dominica and provides unmatched opportunities for observing the country’s biodiversity.
The Waitukubuli National Trail (WNT) also comes in close proximity to waterfalls, hot springs, wildlife viewing opportunities and other natural attractions.

It crosses the Kalinago Territory -home to the indigenous Kalinago (Carib) people.

Some 100-130 thousand international visitors visit the WNT annually and contribute to a wide variety of tourism-based enterprises ranging from hotels and guest houses to restaurants and guide services.
The three national parks are the Morne Trois Pitons National Park in the south, the Morne Diablotin National Park in the northern mountain range and the Cabrits National Park in the north near the town of Portsmouth (see Figure 1).
The national parks and trail networks are managed by the Forestry Division of the Ministry of Environment, Rural Modernisation and Kalinago Upliftment, in cooperation with the Ministry of Tourism, Transportation and Maritime Initiatives within the constraints of allocations from the national budget.
Services provided include trash removal, trail clearance, emergency evacuations and first aid, licensing of guides, promotion and management of access, but these have been severely constrained by lack of funds, staff, and capacity.

Policy and programmatic connections between biodiversity and tourism planning and management are weak and undeveloped.

Despite the labelling of Dominica as the “Nature Island” there are few ways in which biodiversity and natural resource management are systematically linked.
In particular, budgetary provisions for parks and the WNT are entirely divorced from the revenues realized by these assets and from the realistic costs of sustainable long-term management and protection.

Of greater hazard are weaknesses in implementation of safeguard provisions intended to ensure adequate protection of environmental and cultural resources from adverse impacts from tourism development investments.
There is a need for measures to enable local communities (especially the Kalinago) to benefit from, and provide support for PA and WNT management and protection, via generation of tangible benefits from linked enterprises and investments.

There are promising arrangements for inter-sector collaboration between the environment, tourism and agriculture agencies, especially with regard to the WNT.

These would be strengthened under the proposed Project.
The goal of the Project is to transform tourism from a potential threat to an opportunity for biodiversity by strengthening the management of protected areas and the trail network and by expanding their sustainable eco-tourism use.

It is an opportune time to support Dominica in leveraging its planned tourism investments to reap additional local economic returns through sustainable eco-tourism use of its protected areas.
The eco-tourism planning for the PAs in Dominica needs to identify potential sites of interest and create short value-chains benefiting the local communities.

A more satisfying visitor experience can be generated through an expanded activities portfolio as well as better management of trail services.

Providing environmentally sound access through strategically placed view-points and trails will also contain pressures on habitats.
The safety of the trail system needs to be ensured along dangerous stretches such as along steep cliffs, shorelines or hillsides.

The national park management planning process should also fully integrate stakeholder engagement to benefit local and indigenous communities.
7 Figure 1: Waitukubuli National Trail (WNT) The World Bank’s involvement in Dominica is guided by the Regional Partnership Strategy for the Organization of the Eastern Caribbean States (RPS), the objectives of which is to contribute to laying the foundations for sustainable inclusive growth through three areas of engagement: (i) competitiveness, (ii) public sector modernization, and (iii) resilience.
Under the RPS, the WBG will focus on laying the foundations for increased private participation in the economy by creating a more effective investment climate and promoting the competitiveness of industries with high potential, including tourism.

Over the long run, this is expected to contribute to higher 8 investments, private sector activity, and ultimately growth and employment, as well as to poverty reduction in rural areas where many smallholders live.
The proposed project will align with these objectives by strengthening the competitiveness of the tourism sector in Dominica through an expanded nature-based activity portfolio.

It will support eco-tourism and PA investments that simultaneously address livelihood diversification, indigenous peoples, and modernization of Dominica’s forest agencies.
The project’s intent is also to contribute to the WBG’s goal of fostering climate mitigation and adaptation by, first, strengthening forest planning and management, including land use, and thus contributing to mitigation, and second, by providing alternative livelihoods to communities affected by climate change such as subsistence agriculture and fishing to foster adaptation.

The Project complements the World Bank’s engagement in two projects that are in the implementation stages.
The first is the DVRP Eastern Roads Government of Dominica/World Bank funded project, segment 4 of which passes through the Kalinago Territory.

The other is a World Bank funded housing project which is located in several parts of the country, including in the Kalinago Territory.
It may be said that there is a link between the DVRP coordinated IPP and the current Project, which embraces the priority concerns identified by the Kalinago people as follows: • The need for free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) • Employment and skills transfer • Mitigation to treat with potential adverse impacts • The location of the grievance redress mechanism (GRM) at the local level in the first instance 2.2 Project Description The Leveraging Eco-Tourism for Biodiversity Protection Project (LEToBP) is funded by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) and is a nationwide project being implemented by the Government of Dominica through its Ministry of Blue, Green Economy, Agriculture and National Food Security.
The Project aims to coordinate and improve the Government’s intersectoral approach towards more effective planning and management of Protected Areas (PA) and forest ecosystems, and to support the Government in its efforts to protect the country’s biodiversity through collaborative models with local communities that will elevate Dominica as a recognizable eco-tourism destination.
This will be achieved by improving the institutional framework for biodiversity planning and management, strengthening national and local capacities and resources for the management of PAs and eco-tourism trails, as well livelihood opportunities for indigenous communities.

increasing sustainable The objective of the Project is to improve the management of Dominica’s three (3) national parks (Morne Trois Pitons, Morne Diablotin and Cabrits), and the Waitukubuli National Trail (WNT).
Specifically, the project includes analyses, coordination efforts and capacity building that will improve protection and management of three national parks and the Waitukubuli National Trail, and offers new livelihood opportunities for the people of the Kalinago Territory and communities 9 adjacent to the parks.
Investments in on-the-ground activities to demarcate national park boundaries and a buffer-zone for the Morne Diablotin National Park and improve sustainable eco-tourism operations have been prioritized due to biodiversity significance and the value of targeted areas, the need for strengthening governance and raising human capacities, and the involvement of local stakeholders in sustainable resource use and reviving traditional knowledge and skills.
The targeted area of the project encompasses 14,135 ha or 18,85% of the country’s territory, as presented in Table 1 on Coverage of targeted areas1.
Table 1: Coverage of Targeted Areas Targeted Area Morne Trois Pitons National Park Area in ha 6,875 Cabrits National Park (terrestrial) Morne Diablotin National Park Kalinago Territory Total 110 3,450 3,700 14,135 2.3 Project Components The project consists of four (4) components each addressing key development and sustainability constraints for eco-tourism and biodiversity protection, and mutually supporting the overall Project Development Objective ‘To improve management of Dominica’s three national parks and the Waitukubuli National Trail (WNT)’.
Of the four components, component three specifically seeks to improve the livelihoods of the Kalinago People.

Initiatives in the other components will also redound to the benefit of the Kalinago people.

Component 1: Protected Area Planning (US$846,900).

Component 1 is intended to “enhance the national capacity and strengthen the institutional framework for managing natural resources for nature-based tourism growth”.
(Project Paper) This component provides for technical support in revising management plans for the PAs and the WNT and for the demarcation of boundaries and a buffer zone for the Morne Diablotin National Park.

Sub-component 1.1.

Strengthening the institutional framework for PA planning and management.

This sub-component aims “to strengthen the current national institutional framework and enhance the involvement of decision-makers and policy planners across key institutions on the value of PAs”.
Included in this aspect of the Project is technical assistance in the revision of management plans for the three national parks and the WNT and demarcation of boundaries for the Morne Diablotin National Park.

Sub-component 1.2.

Improving national and local capacities for PA monitoring and management 1 http://forestry.gov.dm/units/national-parks-section 10 This sub-component is intended to strengthen capacities for biodiversity monitoring and protection at the national level.
It will also provide limited equipment and supplies for monitoring, data collection and sampling, especially for the Forestry Division within MERMKU.

Component 2: Biodiversity and Sustainable Nature-based tourism Operations (US$1,753,800).

This component focuses on improving tourism infrastructure that is in harmony with the natural environment, and which will improve visitor’s access, safety and experience.
In that regard, the Project provides for the construction of facilities or improvements to be made to existing services, such as interpretation centres, benches, gazebos, shelters and viewing platforms.

It mandates that these infrastructure improvements be located in “selected nature-based sites within parks and along the WNT” (Project Paper, Leveraging Eco-Tourism for Biodiversity Protection).

Sub-component 2.1.
Sub-component 2.1.

Enhancing biodiversity knowledge and awareness, and visitors’ access, safety and experience This is intended to enhance infrastructure used in the access to and interpretation and presentation of Dominica’s biodiversity, together with support services for visitor management.
One of the key aspects is the proposed introduction of an e-ticketing system that could be linked to digital maps, information and guidance to deliver a ‘one-stop-shop’ for visitors to access the PAs and the WNT, thus upgrading the service to potential visitors to the PAs and the WNT.

This innovation, together with the proposed revision in the fee structure, regular maintenance of infrastructure and focused promotion, is projected to generate a 30 per cent increase in revenue.
This sub-component also provides for the construction of new or improvement of existing infrastructure (interpretation centres, gazebos, benches, shelters, viewing platforms, river crossings and handrails).

In addition, it includes provision for clearance, realignment of trails, trail repairs, scientific, archaeological, anthropological and ecological displays; as well as user surveys.

Sub-component 2.2.
Sub-component 2.2.

Increasing capacities and resources for nature-based tourism trail management This sub-component provides for capacity building in trail management for key stakeholders, namely the Forestry Division and the Kalinago community.

It will also include the preparation of a Divisional Operational Manual with procedural guidelines for trail management.

Component 3: Sustainable Livelihoods (US$747,854).


This component seeks to provide opportunities for improving sustainable livelihoods for the Kalinago community in a way that strengthens biodiversity.

This will be accomplished through investment in sustainable land use and through the preservation and inter-generational transfer of traditional, Kalinago knowledge that complements biodiversity.
The Kalinago, particularly women and youth, are singled out for special consideration in terms of promoting sustainable livelihoods.

Sub-component 3.1.

Enhancing opportunities for sustainable livelihoods 11 “The objective of this sub-component is to provide the development framework and investment support for sustainable land use and nature-based tourism operations and to enhance opportunities for livelihoods through empowering Kalinago women and youth in cooperative initiatives" (Project Paper).
This sub-component is also intended to provide support for mapping, demarcation and preparation of participatory management plans for land use and watershed management for the Kalinago Territory.

It will also provide for assistance to the Kalinago Council in planning for forest management.

In addition, it seeks to empower Kalinago women through supporting opportunities for entrepreneurship, particularly among women and youth.
Initiatives will include support for marketing agricultural products, for promoting gastronomy experiences, and production of craft plant material (larouma, cassava, calabash, mibi).

Some 250 farmers and craft makers are expected to benefit from this programme.

Sub-component 3.2.

Reviving traditional Kalinago knowledge This sub-component is intended to increase the capacities in traditional knowledge and skills within the Kalinago community, particularly among the youth.
It provides for training programmes in Farine/Toloman crop production, canoe building, basket making, culinary arts, and making of traditional Kalinago costumes.

It will also assist in upgrading equipment for Farine/Toloman production and support the development of a traditional, model farm to be located at the Salybia propagation centre.

This component is intended to support the preservation of Kalinago heritage, mainly through knowledge transfer to the youth.
Component 4: Project Management (US$167,428).

The funding for this component is earmarked for administrative support, financial management, monitoring and evaluation and audit costs throughout the Project’s life.

Table 2 outlines those aspects of the Project that have direct relevance to the Kalinago People.

Table 2: Project Components/Sub-components of Direct Relevance to the Kalinago People Number 1.1.

Description Strengthening Institutional Framework for PA Planning & Management 1.2 2.1.

2.2.
2.2.

Improving national & local capacities for PA monitoring and management Enhancing biodiversity knowledge and awareness, and visitors’ access, safety and experience Increasing capacities and resources for nature- based tourism Trail Management 12 to & facilitate education co- Direct Link Technical support in revision of management for WNT, plan including assessment of legal issues related to private lands.
Communication programmes management amenities, Constructing clearance/realignment of trails, trail repairs, etc.
GPS Trail system for WNT & feeder trails Sustainable trail management for key stakeholders _ Forestry and in craft from training programme training and upgrading staffing, Kalinago; interpretation information trail centres, infrastructure, campground maintenance and other services required by users of the WNT & demarcation Mapping, participatory of preparation management plans for land use and watershed management; possible revenue tourism sharing activities linked to the WNT; Empowering Kalinago women and youth: establishing a cooperative for indigenous varieties & breeds, in and production and marketing of agricultural plant and material; training in provision of gastronomy experiences Assistance to the Kalinago Council on forest management planning; Interpretation centres for Senecou, Salybia, Capit and St Cyr; Feeder trails to WNT the Training programmes community, especially Kalinago youth: Training programmes for Fariine/Toloman crop production and refinement, canoe building, basket making, culinary arts and traditional Kalinago costumes.
Development of a traditional model farm at Salybia propagation centre in Involvement of the Kalinago monitoring Project through implementation, Council representation appointees on the monitoring team with the PIU and by sharing, discussing presenting and with monitoring stakeholders the Kalinago Territory.

reports for of in 3.1.

Enhancing livelihoods opportunities for sustainable 3.2 Reviving traditional Kalinago knowledge 4.
Project Management 13 Overall, based on the nature and scale of the Project intervention, the environmental and social risk classification of the project is moderate under the World Bank Environmental and Social Standards (ESSs).

This risk classification, which has so far been corroborated by the stakeholder consultations undertaken to date, is attributable to the limited scope of physical works and their locations within existing national parks and Protected Areas.
Indigenous Peoples are closely tied to land, forests, water, wildlife, and other natural resources, and therefore special considerations must be paid to the extent that such ties are affected by the project.
In this situation, this IPPF pays special attention to: (a) the customary right of the Indigenous Peoples, both individual and collective, pertaining to lands that they traditionally own, or customarily used or occupied, and where access to natural resources is vital to the sustainability of their cultures and livelihoods; (b) the need to protect such lands and resources against illegal intrusion or encroachment; (c) the cultural and spiritual values that the Indigenous Peoples attribute to such lands and resources; and (d) Indigenous Peoples’ natural resources management practices and the long-term sustainability of such practices.
In this context, foreseen project risks to the Kalinago people relate to potential restrictions on access to natural resources, that may result from the proposed mapping, demarcation and planning initiative.

No labour influx with its attendant social and economic risks is anticipated.

3.

LEGISLATIVE AND INSITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK The Government of the Commonwealth of Dominica has led the movement for the protection of its Indigenous peoples following attainment of Independence from Great Britain in 1978.
The Kalinago Reserve Act of 1978 provides for the establishment of a body corporate for the administration of the Reserve and for matters connected therewith.

The Act provides authority and responsibility to the Kalinago Council for the management of the Kalinago Territory.

3.1 Kalinago Territory Act of 1978 Prior to March 2015, the Kalinago Territory was referred to as the Carib Reserve; an amendment dated 12th March 2015 cited the change from the Carib Reserve Act to the Kalinago Territory Act.
The Act describes the establishment of the office of the Kalinago Chief, the Constitution, and powers of the Kalinago Council.

As mandated in the Kalinago Reserve Act of 1978, the lands in the Territory are the property of the Kalinago Council and no individual can own land and/or be titled land in his or her name.

The Council is solely responsible for allocating land for all purposes including housing, public conveniences, government projects and community projects.
The Council is comprised of seven (7) persons – the person elected as Chief and six (6) other persons elected as members.

In terms of other rights and privileges, the Indigenous Peoples are entitled to all rights like all Dominicans including voting, passports and political participation.

Specifically, 14 the Act gives various powers to the Kalinago Chief and the Kalinago Council and outlines the responsibilities of the Minister responsible for the Council.
The Act further outlines the procedures for conducting elections for Council Members and the Chief; indicates how funds are to be used on behalf of the Territory and provides the Kalinago Council with powers to institute various bylaws pertinent to the management of the community.

The Council is further organized into Hamlet Development Committees, governed by a constitution prepared by the Council.
There are eight (8) hamlets in the Territory; however, there are seven (7) Hamlet Development Committees (since 2 hamlets were combined).

The Development Committees serve as branches to the Kalinago Council which lends to the effective management of the Territory.

3.2 The Ministry of Kalinago Affairs The Department of Kalinago Affairs was established in the year 2000 to address the needs of the Kalinago people in the Kalinago Territory and by extension, Dominica.
It was headed by a Parliamentary Secretary.

In 2005, the Department was upgraded to the Ministry of Kalinago Affairs, and following the elections of 2019 was renamed the Ministry of Environment, Rural Modernisation and Kalinago Upliftment.
One of the missions of the Ministry is to work towards the improvement of the socio-economic condition, the preservation and promotion of the cultural heritage of the people of the Kalinago Territory and Atkinson, and to facilitate the vigorous promotion of the integration of Dominica's Indigenous People into the socio-economic life of the wider Dominican society.

The village of Atkinson does not form part of the Kalinago Territory.
However, it forms part of the political constituency with the same parliamentary representative as the Kalinago Territory, hence its inclusion under the Ministry of Kalinago Affairs.

3.3 The Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention (ILO) The international Labour Organisation is responsible for the Indigenous Tribal People’s Convention 169 of 1989 which entered into force on September 5, 1991.

In summary, the ILO Convention 169 has been ratified by twenty-three (23) countries to date.
The Convention recognizes the aspirations of indigenous peoples to exercise control over their own institutions, ways of life and economic development and to maintain and develop their identities, languages and religions, within the framework of the States in which they live; and acknowledges that in many parts of the world these peoples are unable to enjoy their fundamental human rights to the same degree as the rest of the population of the States within which they live, and that their laws, values, customs and perspectives have often been eroded.
The Convention, therefore, positions at the frontline, the distinctive contributions of indigenous and tribal peoples to the cultural diversity and social and ecological harmony of humankind and to international co- operation and understanding.

In September 2007, the Government of the Commonwealth of Dominica ratified ILO 169, the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention 8 – and signed the UN 15 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

.
.

The Declaration establishes a universal framework of minimum standards for the survival, dignity, well-being and rights of the world's indigenous peoples.

The Declaration addresses both individual and collective rights; cultural rights and identity; rights to education, health, employment, language, and others.

It outlaws discrimination against indigenous peoples and promotes their full and effective participation in all matters that concern them.
It also ensures their right to remain distinct and to pursue their own priorities in economic, social and cultural development and explicitly encourages harmonious and cooperative relations between States and Indigenous Peoples.

However, despite its ratification, it has, to date, not been enacted into national law in Dominica.
3.4 Gap Assessment between the Legal and Institutional Framework and ESS7 There are no obvious gaps between the legal and institutional framework and the provisions of ESS7, which requires that full respect for the human rights, dignity, culture and natural resource- based livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples be granted to them.

4.
4.

THE KALINAGO TERRITORY The Kalinago Territory Local Area Plan was commissioned in 2010, under the Carib Community Capacity Building Project (CCCBP) of the then Ministry of Kalinago Affairs.

The aim was to formulate a plan “to guide development in the Kalinago Territory to facilitate the optimal use of the land and related resources currently available for development in the Territory”.
Its final report in 2012 ushered in the official demarcation of the Kalinago Territory as a geographical community in Dominica.

4.1 Location The Kalinago Territory is located in the Parish of St David on Dominica’s east or windward coast.
It comprises 3,782.03 acres of land stretching over 9 miles, covering about 2.0 percent of Dominica’s landmass, bounded as follows: • North: By Big River, Lot 63 and Balata Ravine • East: By the Sea (Atlantic Ocean) • South: Lot 4 in the Majini State Lands Settlement, Aratouri Rinine, Majini River and State Lands • West: By The Pagua River, Concord Estate, Barracoua Ridge, Lot 11 in Majini State Lands Settlement.
The Territory is divided into 8 hamlets, namely; Sineku, Gaulette River, Mahaut River, St. Cyr, Salybia, Crayfish River, Bataca and Touna Concorde.

4.2 Socio-Economic Baseline 16 Population 4.2.1 Dominica is the only Eastern Caribbean Island that still has a significant population of pre- Columbian native Kalinago (previously known as Caribs) who were nearly exterminated on other neighboring islands.

The Kalinago in Dominica fought against the Spanish and later the European settlers for two centuries.
Overtime their population declined and they were forced into remote regions of the island as European settlers imported African slaves to work on the plantations.

The Kalinago population remained largely isolated from the rest of the island throughout most of the 20th century with only a ceremonial chief and no other formal self-governance.

Between the census years 2001 and 2011, the Kalinago population experienced a 1.8 per cent decline.
As of 2011, the population stood at 2,145, making the Kalinago Territory the largest settlement of indigenous people in the Caribbean, with males accounting for 56.5 per cent of the total.

The male/female ratio remained roughly unchanged between 2001 and 2011 at 1.32 and 1.29 respectively.

The male population declined from 1,260 in 2001 to 1,209 in 2011, and the female population also declined slightly from 948 in 2001 to 903 in 2011 (see Table 3 and 4 below).
Despite the decline in population the number of households increased from 579 in 2001 to 652 in 2011, while the average size of households declined.

Table 3.

Population by Area and Sex Communities Male Population Female Total No.
Of Households Average Household Size 2001 2208 498 2011 2001 2011 2001 2112 579 131 441 652 132 3.8 3.5 2001 2011 2001 2011 1260 1209 948 222 251 276 195 903 190 Total Crayfish River/Monkey Hill Gaulette River /Sim Sim Sineku/Madjini Salybia/Point Salybia/St Cyr Bataca Sources: 2001 and 2011 Population and Housing Censuses (Most Recent Report available) Table 4.
Population by Sex and Relationship to Head of the Household Sex Child Grandchild Head Spouse/ Partner Parent/Parent- in-law/In-laws/ Other relatives 88 Non- Relatives/Other Total 37 2112 Total 638 310 841 198 17 127 Male Female 71 Sources: 2001 and 2011 Population and Housing Censuses and Central Statistics Office 480 361 476 162 47 263 55 33 25 12 1210 902 4.2.2 Education An examination of the population statistics by educational institution attended at the time of the 2011 Census indicates that men/boys outnumbered women/girls in all institutions with the exception of the Dominica State College.
However, the gender gap is not as wide as might appear from these figures, given that males outnumber females in the Kalinago population, similar to the national trend.

In the case of college attendance, however, there is a distinct gap in that females represent 77.8 per cent of college students as against 22.2 per cent males.

At the university level, 7 of 13 students were male (53.8 per cent).

See Table 5.
See Table 5.

Table 5: Kalinago Population by Sex and Educational Institution Attended in 2011 Census Education Institution Pre-school Kindergarten & Day Care % No.

59.8 49 40.2 33 100 82 Sex Male Female Total University % No.

53.8 7 46.2 6 100 13 Source: Central Statistical Office.

Commonwealth of Dominica Population and Housing Report No.

2: Kalinago Secondary % No.

57.3 121 42.7 90 100 211 State College No.

6 21 27 Primary No.
6 21 27 Primary No.

156 127 283 % 22.2 77.8 100 % 55.1 44.9 100 4.2.3 Housing Following the passage of Hurricane Maria, the Government of Dominica initiated an aggressive housing programme, with climate resilience being at the heart of its strategy.

Since then, several housing schemes have been completed across the country, including in parts of the Project area.

The Kalinago Territory has benefitted from the Government’s housing drive as well as from private initiatives.
Government entered into a partnership with Pre-Conco Limited to construct 51 houses in the Kalinago Territory and by December 2020, twenty of these had been constructed in Seneku and Concord, with the remaining 31 slated to be located in other villages on scattered lots in keeping with the Kalinago way of life and making provision for backyard gardening (www.thedominicadaily.com, December 02, 2020)i2.
In addition, the Government has announced its intentions to build 50 houses with European Union funding, construction slated to 2 The Dominica Daily, December 02 2020.

Kalinago Territory Sustainable Housing: Hon.

Cozier Frederick continues to address the housing needs of residents in (the) Salybia in www.thedominicanews.com 18 commence in July 2021 (Dominica News Online, June 6, 2021)3.
In the aftermath of Hurricane Maria, Digicel announced its intention to build 360 homes in the Kalinago Territory along with seven (7) primary schools for the Territory, Castle Bruce and La Plaine (Dominica News Online, December 5, 2017)4.

4.2.4 Fuel Used for Cooking The type of fuel used in cooking is of direct relevance to the Project.
In this regard, the 2011 Census data indicates that, while liquid propane/cooking gas is the fuel most used by the Kalinago, wood is also used by a substantial number of households.

It should be noted, however, that there has been a noticeable shift from wood to propane gas in the intercensal period 2001 – 2011, with 63.2 per cent of households having used wood in 2001 as against 44.8 per cent in 2011.
Nevertheless, the use of wood as cooking fuel remains relatively high in 2011 in the Kalinago Territory, when compared with the national average of 7.2 per cent (Table 6).

The consultation with the Kalinago Council confirmed the shift towards the use of gas stoves for cooking.

It was reported that the traditional firewood method was used as backup by practically every home, and after Hurricane Maria, the community had reverted to drying meat, in the absence of electricity.
Any project effects on access to firewood by the Kalinago people will be addressed in the Process Framework as further project details are defined.

Table 6: Percentage Distribution of Kalinago Households by Type of Cooking Fuel 2001 and 2011 Type of Cooking Fuel Period Wood 63.2 44.8 7.2 2001 2011 2011 National Liquid Propane Gas/Cooking Gas Kerosene Charcoal / Other 34.4 51.6 90.6 2.4 3.1 0.5 Other/Not stated 0.0 0.5 1.7 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 Source: Central Statistical Office.
Commonwealth of Dominica Population and Housing Report No.

2: Kalinago Territory.

3Dominica News Online, June 6 2021.

50 houses to be constructed in Kalinago Territory in dominicanewsonline.com 4 Dominica News Online, December 5 2017.
Digicel receives material for building homes in Kalinago Territory in www.dominicanewsonline.com 19 Communal Lands 4.2.5 Legal residents share communal ownership of all land within the Territory, however, the authority for allocation/reallocation of land within the Kalinago Territory is in the hands of the Kalinago Chief.

Permission to use the land must be authorized by the Chief.
The procedure requires the applicant to apply to the Kalinago Council following which the application is discussed at a meeting of the Council chaired by the Chief who also has final say, while the Minister of Kalinago Affairs has final power of redress.

The Kalinago Territory, similar to other communities in Dominica with their Village Councils and Council Chairpersons, enjoys some level of local government authority in the institution of the Kalinago Council, and the Kalinago Chief.
The land tenure arrangements have constrained the Kalinago’s access to credit, as no individual has claim to a land title.

This land ownership structure “Tenants in Common” makes it impossible for a Kalinago to use the land title as collateral for securing personal loans for investment in tourism or other sectors.
Quite distinct from the challenge of the inability of the individual Kalinago to use the title as collateral, stakeholders at the consultation of September 23rd , 2021 pointed out that the Kalinago has no title for the Territory as a whole and that the Project presents an opportunity for the Kalinago to process and finalize a title; as there are provisions in the laws of Dominica under which this can be done.
Ever since the territory was expanded in 1903 to 3,700 acres, its precise boundaries have been in dispute and have been a source of indignation and frustration for the Kalinago people.

At the consultation on September 23rd, 2021, the matter came up for discussion and a stakeholder familiar with its history informed that title for the parcel of land in question is held by a non- Kalinago family and that the Court had ruled in favour of that family.
Meanwhile, the land has been occupied by the Kalinago people.

Given the court decision, the Council had exhausted all options to claim the land and it was now left to the Government of Dominica to arrange for an exchange of Crown lands to the family/land owner, who has already expressed no objection to such an arrangement.

Although the Territory has a communal land tenure system, farming is not done collectively.
Kalinago farmers use a traditional method “coup de main” of working cooperatively to cultivate or harvest one another's plots, a practice which was reported to be on the decline in recent times, and similarly efforts at forming farmers cooperatives have not been successful.
In the course of the consultations, this situation was attributed to the inability to trust competitors, cost of production and pre-occupation of female members with multitasking to save costs, and hence no time for attending meetings etc., as well as the burden of leadership not being shared.

Employment 4.2.6 Agriculture, forestry and fishing constitutes the main economic activity, with 43.1 per cent of the Kalinago labour force being employed in that sector during Census 2011.
Fifty-five (55) per cent of employed males work in the agricultural sector, as against 15.9 per cent of females.

Women 20 tend to be more evenly spread across the sectors.

For example, 18.7 per cent of employed women work in manufacturing, 15.9 per cent in agriculture, forestry and fishing, 15.9 per cent in wholesale and retail, 13.5 per cent in the education sector; 7.9 per cent in health and social work activities; and 7.5 per cent in transport, storage, accommodation and food service (Table 7).
It is noticeable that the highest percentage of women is engaged in manufacturing, which is essentially the production of Kalinago craft, known to be an activity dominated by women.

This implies that any expansion in tourism activity would have positive implications for women’s livelihoods.

Another issue is that of raw material sourcing and its links to forest biodiversity.

Larouma, the main material used for craft making is sourced from the forest, with little replanting being done to date.
Table 7: Kalinago Employed Population 15 Years and Over by Industrial Group Male Number % 312 27 62 45 25 55.3 4.8 11.0 8.0 4.4 Female Number % 40 47 2 40 19 15.9 18.7 0.8 15.9 7.5 Total Number % Industry Agriculture, Forestry & Fishing Manufacturing Construction Wholesale & Retail Transport, Storage & Accommodation and food service activities Admin.
and support service activities Public Admin and defence compulsory Social Security Education Human Health & Social Work Activities Arts Entertainment & Recreation Other Service Activities Activities of Households as Employers Other Total 2.0 100 Source: Central Statistical Office.

Commonwealth of Dominica Kalinago Territory Population and Housing Report No.
2 1.2 100 1.7 100 11 564 14 816 3 252 The occupational group which contributed to the highest level of employment in the Kalinago was skilled agricultural, forestry and fisheries workers; however, this occupational group declined from 44% in 2001 to 40% in 2011.

Craft related workers and Plant, Machine Operators and Assembles occupation also declined slightly from 22% in 2001 to 21% in 2011, both main sources of income generating activities decline over a ten-year period.
The gendered structure of male and female participation in economic activity is also observed in the occupational classification.

For example, 52 per cent of employed males are classified as skilled agricultural, forestry and 21 fishing workers; while women are more evenly distributed among the professions.
It is observed that 35.7 per cent of employed women serve as clerks, service workers and shop sales workers; 19.4 per cent are categorized as craft related workers and plant, machine operators and assemblers.

Here, this categorization of occupations masks the number of women engaged in craft as opposed to machine operators and assemblers.
An important observation is that 17.9 per cent of employed women are classified as legislators, senior officials, managers and professionals compared with 4.4 per cent of employed men.

See Table 8, (Central Statistical Office.

Commonwealth of Dominica Population and Housing Report No.2 Kalinago Territory).

This has a direct link to education outcomes where more women than men qualify for entry into the Public Service, where most of the Kalinago classified here, serve.
Table 8: Employed Population 15 Years and over by Occupational Group Comparing to 2001 Census and 2011 National Employed Population Occupation Kalinago Territory Male Female Total 2001 total Employment Legislators, Senior Officials, Managers And Professionals Technicians and Associated Professionals Clerks, Service Workers and Shop Sales Workers Skilled Agricultural, Forestry and Fishery Workers Craft Related Workers and Plant, Machine Operators and Assemblers Elementary Occupations Not stated Total No.
% No.

% No.

% % … 7.5 … 22 … 2.7 … 83 … 10.2 16.7 … … 564 100 252 100 816 100 100 2011 National Employed Population % 12.1 10.3 29.0 14.5 21.1 11.8 1.1 100 Source: Central Statistical Office.

Commonwealth of Dominica Kalinago Territory Population and Housing Report No.
2 4.2.7 Tourism in the Kalinago Territory Segment six of the WNT passes through the Kalinago Territory providing tremendous potential in community tourism engagement and additional income generation.

A modern movement in the Kalinago Territory has supported the rediscovery and preservation of Kalinago culture.

This has been fueled in part by Dominica's tourist industry.

A model Kalinago village was established in the Territory in 2006.
As a means for further interventions to improve the lives of the Indigenous People, the Government of the Commonwealth of Dominica through loan assistance 22 from the Caribbean Development Bank constructed the Kalinago Barana Aute (KBA) Village.

The Village offers tours including cultural dances and site visits.
In the shops, local creations are developed from l’arouma, calabash, pottery and coconut products, from which wood carvings, Cultural preservation groups stage baskets and other artistic creations are created.

performances at the model village and other locations, and practice traditional Kalinago crafts, such as making baskets and pottery, that are sold to tourists as souvenirs.
Historic sites and/or eco-tourist attractions within the Kalinago Territory include L’escalier Tete Chien which is located in Sineku, Centipede Trail in St Cyr and the Horseback Ridge Trail located in Salybia.

Category 5 Hurricane Maria made a direct hit on the Kalinago Territory in September 2017 causing severe damage and leaving residents in need.
Ongoing initiatives to grow the tourism sector in the Kalinago Territory while preserving the traditional customs and values and create sustainable livelihoods include the Community Based Tourism Project funded by the Compete Caribbean and implemented by the Caribbean Tourism Association; and the Haitukubuli Project funded by the Karayib Klima in Martinique, which is to be managed and implemented by the Kalinago Institute for Global Resilience and Regeneration (KIGGR).
4.2.8 Political and Cultural Characteristics The Carib Council currently comprises three male and three female Counsellors with equal voting rights, the clerk who is female, and the Chief who is male, and has veto powers.

There has not yet been a female Chief of the Carib Council.

Significantly however, the Kalinago people elected a female representative to the Parliament- the highest decision-making authority- from 1980 to 1985.
Their parliamentary representative was a member of the ruling Dominica Freedom Party, which was headed by a female Prime Minister.

The Kalinago Territory exhibits strong cultural norms in its main craft industry with men dominating the on-farm production and processing aspects of the main raw material - larouma - and women dominating the weaving and selling activities.

The Kalinago culture has evolved due to development activities undertaken on the national level.
Their traditional arts and crafts produce- baskets, mats, hats, jewelry and hammocks, however, continue to be made from locally sourced raw materials including larouma, dried palms and reeds.
4.2.9 Social and Economic Infrastructure With reference to the socio-economic status of the Indigenous People, the 2009 Country Poverty Assessment stated: “in respect of ethnic origin, indigenous persons were more likely than any other group in the population to be poor; 49.8 percent or one in two persons of indigenous origin are poor.

This is a significant finding as the indigenous population represents about 5 percent of the total population of Dominica (approximately 3,300 persons).
However, there has been a 21 percent reduction in measured poverty among the group, given that in 2003, some 70 percent was poor and half were indigent.” There was no report on the updated situation regarding these poverty indicators.

23 The issue of land ownership or lack thereof (Kalinago Council has ownership of lands in the Territory, but no title has been issued) poses serious concerns for individual socio-economic advancement.
This significantly limits their access to credit at local banks since they do not possess the required collateral i.e., certificate of title as per the laws governing the Territory.

Whereas it is necessary to ensure the lands allocated to the Territory remain indefinitely with the Indigenous People as a group, the practice also constrains individual economic advancement and sustainable livelihoods.
Despite this context, some schools of thought maintain the view that the Kalinago Territory, based on its physical and cultural endowments, should be one of Dominica's most prosperous communities with its tremendous potential for nature and cultural tourism.5 4.3 Capacity of Kalinago Council to Undertake Development Planning Section 29 of the Kalinago Territory Act gives the Council authority to develop By-Laws for the management of the Territory, while Section 48 gives overall responsibility for development and planning in the Territory to the Government of Dominica.
The Minister for Kalinago Affairs has the power to review the By-Laws developed by the Council, and these must be approved by Cabinet, and gazetted, to enter into force.

In fact, despite a local government governance structure which lists the following order of hierarchy – City Council, Urban Council, Kalinago Council followed by the Village Councils –, the Kalinago Council operates as a local government under the Village Council Ordinance.
This governance structure allows a limited role for the Kalinago Council in development planning, which is led by the Ministry of Kalinago Affairs and the Ministry of Economic Planning.

The Kalinago Territory Act provides for the Kalinago Council to develop an annual work plan and budget for central government’s approval and funding.

This does not happen, and no annual plans are submitted to the Government by the Council.
The current practice is for the Ministry of Kalinago Affairs to meet with the Council to find out what is needed in the Territory, and the final decisions on projects to be implemented are made by the Ministry of Kalinago Affairs and the Cabinet.

Although Section 30 of the Act provides the legal authority for the Council to raise financial capital for the development of the Territory, the inability to use communal property as collateral to raise capital for financing development becomes an issue.
At the stakeholder consultation held on September 23rd, 2021, stakeholders expressed the view that, in addition to the subvention given by Central Government to the Carib Council, like the 5 Kalinago Territory: One of Dominica's gifts so rich and rare; so why is it so neglected?
Sundominica.com 24 village councils, to meet its administrative expenses, an annual budget for financing development projects should be allocated to the Council and the necessary training provided to enable the Council to, independent of Central Government, identify development projects.
Stakeholders also emphasized that the capacity exists within the Kalinago People to undertake development planning for the Kalinago Territory, but that the necessary framework to mobilise the available human resource for this purpose is lacking.
In this regard, they recommended that the Government of Dominica or the World Bank works with the Kalinago Territory in sourcing of technical assistance from like-minded (indigenous people) professional groups internationally to guide the Kalinago people in developing approaches to designing and managing implementation of its development plans.
4.4 Community –based Organisations Stakeholders confirmed the existence of the following community organisations in the Kalinago Territory: • Hamlet Development Committees o Sinekou Development Committee: active o Gullet River and Mahaut River Development Committee: active o St. Cyr Development Committee: became inactive in very recent times due to COVID 19 o Salibya Development Committee: recently reorganized with support from the District Development Officer (DDO) o Cray Fish River Development Committee: a bit inactive o Bataca Development Committee: Active o Touna Concorde Development Committee: Active • Sports Clubs o Kalinago Sports Association: very active • Two cultural groups o Carina Cultural Group: inactive in recent times o Karafouna Dancers: inactive in recent times Stakeholders attributed relative inactivity of some of the above groups in recent times to two key factors: Limited access to resources for implementing activities - - Regarding the Hamlet Development Committees, which are arms of the Kalinago Council, changes in leadership of the Council which can result in changes in priorities and related changes in level of support from the Council.
25 • NGOs: Several stakeholders were not fully aware of the existence of some of the below listed NGOs: o Waitukubuli Kalinago Development Agency (WKDA) o Kalinago Heritage Development Agency o KIPE Quati Inc. funded by the Robinson Trust to develop journalism skills in the KT.
o Haitukubuli Project Kalinago Institute for Global Resilience and Regeneration (KIGGR): KIGRR has partnered with an NGO in Haiti to propose the Haitukubuli project which has the dual objective of i) promoting the use of resilient traditional species and agro-forestry ii) providing a source of additional income to committees through eco-tourism.
The project was developed under the Karayib Klima, which was developed by a consulting firm based in Martinique, with the conviction that cooperation among civil society organisations in the Caribbean is local and regional essential to find relevant and adequate solutions to environmental and livelihood concerns.

Karyib Klima allocated €40,000 for implementation of the Haitukubuli project.

Implementation of this project is likely to coincide with implementation of the LEToBP.
o Farmers’ Association: At an earlier consultation in August 2021, a female member of an apparently now inactive (defunct) Farmers’ Association, reported that she “could not tell if the association was active or inactive, as I cannot recall when the last meeting was held”.
This state of affairs she attributed to several factors including: i) unfair distribution of the administrative and coordinating work, ii) lack of trust among members (seen primarily as competitors), iii)women farmers are multi-tasking among farming, home care responsibilities, and other community development activities and when in their view they do not see the expected results they do not make participation in the Association a priority, iv) agencies come around and commit to supporting activities of the group and they either do not deliver on their promises or there is such a long lag before the support comes.
Given the population size, it is recommended that as a start, a co-ordinating group be formed with representation from each of the existing active groups to work closely with the Carib Council as a Development Planning and Implementation Committee, with standing operating procedures adopted to guide its operations.

This approach seems very timely as there is an increasing number of external grant funded projects being implemented in the Territory.
Moreover, there is a need for wider awareness of these initiatives by the Kalinago people.

5.

SUMMARY OF THE IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT ACTIVITIES 26 As indicated in the Project Paper, the Kalinago people, especially women and youth, are considered vulnerable and are therefore singled out for special consideration in all project activities which will include: • repair or construction of amenities such as interpretation centres, trails, benches, restrooms, gazebos, shelters and viewing platforms.
• developing an e-ticketing system that will be linked to digital maps and information, thus upgrading the service to potential visitors to the parks and trail.

• assisting with the administration of visitation to the parks.

• reviving traditional knowledge through training programmes in Farine/Toloman crop production and refinement, canoe building, basketry, traditional costume making and culinary arts.
• empowering Kalinago women and youth through support to cooperative initiatives in production of seeds and new breeds, production and marketing of agricultural products and craft material (cassava, larouma and mibi) • beginning the process for undertaking a mapping and land use plan for the Kalinago Territory.

• Overall, the project is rated as a moderate risk project.
However, all consultations held with the Kalinago People to date paid attention to getting their views on both potential positive and negative impacts of the project and discussion with them on risk mitigation measures.

While several positive impacts were identified and listed below (section 5.2), the main perceived risk is that related to continued access to land for traditional uses.
Cultural Heritage 5.1 The project activities are not expected to have negative impacts on the cultural heritage of the Kalinago people.

In fact, the project’s focus on national and protected parks is of inherent cultural value to the country and to the Kalinago Territory specifically as the indigenous people are land connected people and place value on their land and natural resources.
While the project may increase traffic through important areas as a result of construction works and increase in tourism business, it also has the opportunity to provide enrichment and enhance the protection of cultural heritage as it will be managed in partnership with the Kalinago people and other PAPs.

An approach that maximizes indigenous knowledge and community participation can increase the benefits of the project.
The draft ESMF includes a Chance Finds Procedure to be followed in the case that previously unknown cultural heritage is encountered during land restoration and green cane harvesting within the project intervention areas.

The ESMF also requires the development of management plans that include an approach to documenting and protecting sacred and culturally important sites in partnership with the people who hold these sites to be important.

27 5.
27 5.

2 Positive Impacts To date, all the Kalinago people consulted welcomed the project activities as having the potential to create sustainable livelihoods in the Territory.

Among the positive impacts discussed were: • Knowledge on planning and planting of crops, as the Kalinago tend to plant anytime without consideration of the likelihood of severe weather events.
• As a people of hunters and gatherers, land use by the Kalinago has been good and they are grateful for the wealth of knowledge the project will bring in this regard through a two-way knowledge flow.

• • • Possibility for assistance for an already established food nursery being supervised by the Councillor for Agriculture and Fisheries to get support from the project on selection of foods/plants that help in cancer prevention.
Increased sensitization of Kalinago People on the negative impacts of improper land use including use of agro-chemicals in areas which result in runoff into the water system and construction across water catchments.

Injection of finance in the Territory: there has been no replacement of banana as a dependable cash crop, and the cost of labour and shift away from “coup de main”, as well as marketing, are big issues.

In the area of tourism, all round positive effects are expected by the Kalinago.
The vendors, who are mostly female, were highlighted among potential beneficiaries especially from feeder trails from popular tourism sites in the Territory to the WNT and the reception areas.

• Negative Impacts and Risks 5.3 Consultations held to date revealed the following perceived risks: There could be negative impacts of the land use mapping and planning process, given people’s reluctance to part with their traditional land rights linked to their emotional attachment to their location.
Foreseen related issues discussed: • There is the possibility that the land use planning process could lead to restrictions, given the water catchment and other issues (e.g., construction around water catchment areas) associated with current land use practices.

However, the Council informed that it has little leeway in relocating people as there was no developed land available for re- allocation, should this be required.

• Total dependence on firewood for cooking is virtually non-existent.
However, it was reported that virtually every household uses firewood as a backup (maintaining a tradition).

In this regard access to areas for firewood gathering could be a risk.

• All households except those in the Tuna Village/Concorde area are served by the DOWASCO water system.

The households in the Tuna Village/Concorde area depend on spring water sources and could therefore be negatively impacted by the project in this 28 regard.
The consultation, however, revealed the existence of several spring water sources and the potential for establishment of a spring water plant.

5.4 Mitigation Measures and Implementation While it is recognized that development comes with a cost, every effort has been made, and will continue to be made to mitigate all foreseen project risks and ensure that stakeholders take ownership of the project and sustain its results.
Given the strong ties to the land of the Kalinago people and their traditional knowledge base, this will be achieved by adequate sensitization on the relevance of the project components, its objectives and purposes, adoption of sound mitigation measures with transparent grievance redress mechanisms and monitoring frameworks which must be developed through an intensely and culturally appropriate consultative process with the Kalinago People and other stakeholders throughout project implementation.
5.4.1 Consultation with Stakeholders An initial working group was established by the Government of Dominica with representatives from Government Institutions – Forestry (Parks and Wildlife) of the Ministry of Environment, Rural Modernization and Kalinago Upliftment, Discover Dominica, Ministry of Blue and Green Economy Agriculture and National Food Security-, Whitchurch Tour Operator, Kalinago Council and an Independent Consultant to discuss the preparation and implementation of the Project.
The Project’s PIU has and will continue to build on these initiatives, as it implements its Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) to disclose information and consult the public throughout project implementation.

The Project’s PIU Communications Officer will be responsible for the day-to-day implementation of the communication programme to ensure effectiveness of engagements with stakeholders.

A variety of communication methods will be used to reach the majority of stakeholders.
The project will select those that are most appropriate considering stakeholder location, means of receiving information and their ability to understand the information provided.

This is essential for vulnerable groups and the disadvantaged.
The following communications methods will be used, but will not be limited to: Internet- Dominica News Online o Newspapers- The New Chronicle and The Sun o o Radio Programs- DBS radio, Q-95, KAIRI FM and Dominica Catholic Radio o Television- Government Information Service o Brochures, leaflets, posters will be developed and placed at Information centers: Tourism information facilities, hotels, Forestry o Official correspondence of consultation from the Manager of the Project through emails, invitation letters to meetings o Social media in the form of developing a WhatsApp group for the Youth who are eager and are abreast of Facebook and the more up to date social media avenues.
29 o Individual notifications to certain Project stakeholders such as the Elderly and disabled will be provided with flyers or by phone, or information or notices read to them, or they are informed of the time and date certain announcements will be aired, so they can listen.
The advent of the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on Dominica has resulted in a revision of the consultation strategy/delivery method from unlimited face to face (no social distancing) meetings to virtual meetings and/or limited face-to-face meetings with social distancing and strict adherence to COVID-19 mitigation measures in place in Dominica and set out in the Project’s environmental and social risk management instruments.
The Government of Dominica and the Ministry of Health, Wellness and New Health Investment’s COVID Guidelines and Protocols have been adopted by the Project and will be implemented throughout the Project implementation, as required.

The following COVID 19 measures will be used and adopted by the PIU for Project-related consultations and stakeholder engagement activities that require active participation: • Minimize direct physical interaction among Project, ministries, agencies and beneficiaries.
Stakeholder engagement events should start by going over social distancing orders and • good hygienic practices.

• All consultation and stakeholder engagement meetings will require checking participants’ temperature, sanitising participants, register name, address and contact number of participants, and ensuring participants are 6 feet apart.

Conduct smaller meetings and consultations in small-group sessions, and where possible, • in outside/open air spaces.
If possible, conduct meetings through online channels (e.g., Microsoft teams, WebEx, zoom, skype).

Diversify means of communication and online tools.

Where possible, create dedicated • online platforms and chat-groups, based on the type and category of stakeholders.

Where online interaction is challenging, information can be disseminated through digital platforms (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp) and traditional means of communications (TV, newspaper, radio, phone calls).
Specify how stakeholders can provide feedback and until when, in cases where they do • not have access to online channels or do not use them frequently.

Proceedings of all consultations and meetings will be recorded and documented by the PIU, to capture comments from participating stakeholders.
Consultations on the project are expected to involve the Government, cooperatives, ecotourism groups and Kalinago communities, and other key stakeholders, including, in particular, Project affected stakeholders and vulnerable groups, will be supported by participatory processes.
In this context, a face-to-face meeting was held with the Kalinago Council on July 31st, 2021, to sensitise councillors to the objectives and purposes of the project, and the emphasis it places on 30 preserving the Kalinago culture while it creates livelihoods, and also to seek their preliminary feedback on foreseen positive and negative impacts of the project, and possible mitigation measures.
One-on-one meetings were held on August 9th, 2021, with a female councillor who was absent with excuse from the meeting with the Council and two female farmers, respectively.

A town hall consultation (hybrid of virtual and face to face) in keeping with COVID 19 protocols was held on September 23rd, 2021.

The intention was to continue to consult appropriately with the Kalinago people as the project cycle rolls out.
Participation at the meeting was reasonable considering the heightened spread of COVID in Dominica at the time.

Of the ten (10) stakeholders invited to the face to face gathering five (5) attended, and of the twelve (12) invited to participate via zoom, seven (7) attended.

This calculated to an overall attendance rate of roughly 55%.
The meeting was very interactive and met its objectives of further sensitizing the Kalinago People on the targets and planned benefits, as well as the potential risks of the project and risk mitigation plan.

Importantly too, feedback was obtained on the development priorities and governance issues faced by the Kalinago People.
Attached as Annexes 1, 2, 3, and 4, are summary reports on the discussions at the consultations and the power point presentations, while Table 10 below presents the list of participants.

5.4.2 Risk Mitigation Measures The following table presents positive and negative impacts, and risk mitigation measures which have been developed in consultation with the Kalinago people in response to the foreseen negative impacts of the project on the Kalinago.
Table 9: Risk Mitigation Plan Components Suggested Project/Activities Positive Impacts in KT Component 1: Protected Area Planning, is intended to improve the institutional arrangements for enhancing the national capacity for planning and management of -Provide technical support in revising management plans for the PAs and the WNT -Provide technical support in revising management plans for demarcation of boundaries and buffer zones for the Morne Diablotin National Park -Capacity for PA planning and Management built among Kalinago People -Enhanced awareness of the KT people to the necessity and methods of biodiversity monitoring Negative Impacts/risks in KT -There is the possibility that the outcome of creation of PAs within the national parks will have the effect of restricting access to natural resources for Mitigation measures The Process Framework which is annexed to the ESMF will guide any eventuality of such restrictions Possible mitigation measures include: -provision of substitutes e.g.
in the case of loss of access to land or natural resources, support for 31 protected areas (PAs).

Component 2: Biodiversity and Sustainable Nature-based Tourism Operations.

shifting to alternative crops and support for alternative livelihoods.

- designating areas where the Kalinago can harvest wood - identify and support replanting schemes for raw materials -improved management of protected areas Constructing - amenities, clearance/realignment of trails, repairs, etc.
-GPS Trail system for WNT & feeder trails Sustainable - trail management for key stakeholders some current users - Foreseen restrictions already being addressed in the draft Process Framework include: - access to firewood, access to spring water, and possible farm relocation.

- Technical assistance to set up the appropriate framework might not be adequate.
- visitor influx without requisite maintenance provisions -shift from agriculture to tourism and possible food shortage and upward pressure on prices - occupational hazards of construction & clearance activities poor - management practices -activities to empower and support female farmers including eg.
support for formation of a cooperative of female farmers in the Kalinago Territory Enforcement of Contractor’s ESMP, including provision of safety measures, materials and equipment; Monitoring by the PIU - Enhanced appeal of the KT to the increasing number of visitors looking for authentic indigenous and sustainable tourism experiences -enhanced efficiency of tourism services delivery in the KT -enhanced IT capacity of Kalinago service providers in the tourism sector tourism -Improve in infrastructure harmony with the environment, while improving visitor’s access, safety and experience by: -construction of new or improvements to existing facilities such interpretation as centres, benches, gazebos, shelters and viewing platforms in selected nature- based sites within parks and along the WNT - clearance, realignment of trails, GPS trail system for WNT, feeder trails 32 -introduction of an e- ticketing system that linked to digital is maps and thus information upgrading the service to potential visitors to the PAs and the WNT, towards generating a 30% increase in tourism receipts in the PAs.
-Investments in sustainable land use -activities to preserve and ensure inter-generational transfer of traditional Kalinago knowledge that complements biodiversity -activities to promote sustainable livelihoods for women and youth in the Kalinago Territory viz.

skills training modules, trust/self- esteem/character building.
-expand the capacity of the Project Implementation Unit (PIU) of the ongoing Dominica Emergency Agriculture Livelihoods and Climate Resilience Project (DEALCRP) by: -meeting administrative costs – providing financial management expertise - strengthened productive sector, community groups and cooperatives -enhanced livelihood opportunities in the KT and increased employment and income opportunities for women and youth in the KT -reduced dependence on Government assistance and poverty alleviation - preservation of Kalinago cultural heritage, and thereby further enhancing tourism appeal -Uninterrupted project implementation and high likelihood that intended project outputs and outcomes in the KT will be realized -Lessons learnt to guide design of any follow-on projects in the KT and implementation of ongoing related projects 33 Possibility of conflict with national tourism planners and other development partners in the KT Through SEP ensure exchange of information at all levels and secure project ownership by key national and local tourism and development stakeholders, including the Kalinago Council, women and youth advocacy groups in the KT -data for tracking indicators not properly recorded and cannot be accessed -Monitoring Reports not being prepared on a timely basis Place importance on monitoring functions by: -setting aside adequate budgetary provisions -Maintaining the relevance of the SEP through updates as necessary and transparent management and dissemination of 3: Component Sustainable Livelihoods.
Seeks provide to opportunities for improving sustainable livelihoods in a way that strengthens biodiversity.

4: for Component Project Management.

The this funding is component for earmarked administrative support, management, and monitoring evaluation and audit costs for the life of the Project.

financial -monitoring and evaluation, and annual audit cost for the project lifetime.
-KT people well informed on project implementation progress and outcomes on an ongoing basis information on implementation progress- output and outcomes SEP not well executed and managed, and information flow/exchange with the KT people not as transparent as envisaged in the SEP Possibility of elite capture of the processes and information flow 6.
CONSULTATIONS WITH KALINAGO PEOPLE 6.1 Consultation During Preparation 6.1.1 Goal of Consultation On project conceptualization, consultations served to ensure relevance of the project by understanding the social, economic and political status of the Kalinago people, and their development priorities going forward.

Meetings were also held to secure ownership of the project concept at the highest level of policy and decision making.
The next rounds of consultations, during preparation stage (July to September 2021), sought to sensitise stakeholders, especially affected persons, to the project objectives and goals, to seek their feedback on possible project benefits and negative impacts, possible mitigation measures and their input in project activities under consideration.
These start up engagement activities also had the ultimate objective of commencing capacity building of the Kalinago people to effectively develop and participate in project implementation activities.
6.1.2 Methodology The methodology for gathering data and consultation with the Kalinago people spanned several approaches including: o Desk research o Direct telephone conversations with key stakeholders o Meetings with policy makers o Mapping exercises 34 o Visits to the Kalinago Territory to observe the situation on the ground o Face-to-face meetings with the Kalinago Council o Telephone meetings with Kalinago business women o Town hall style meetings via a mix of face-to-face and virtual platform (this mix became necessary as a response to COVID 19 developments in Dominica).
A stakeholder mapping and analysis was undertaken during Project preparation, identifying and assessing project affected people, beneficiaries, and other categories of key stakeholders.

At this stage, major stakeholders included government agencies, the communities, the Kalinago in the Project area, tour operators, environmental NGOs, civil society organizations.
A Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) has been developed and will continue to be updated through different project stages to guide the process of engagement with stakeholders during the life of the project.

The SEP assesses stakeholders, including beneficiaries and project-affected parties, with a focus on disadvantaged or vulnerable groups, such as the Kalinago, and outlines any specific measures to remove obstacles to participation and to allow for their effective engagement.
The SEP will be updated and redisclosed publicly (as needed) during implementation.

The sensitization engagements by the Social Safeguards Consultant, commenced with the Kalinago Council which was expected to spread the word around prior to the first town hall meeting in the Kalinago Territory.

In a form, the early engagements with the Kalinago Council were part of the publicity strategy for ensuring a high attendance and participation rate at the town halls to follow.
6.1.3 Content of Consultation The Kalinago Chief attended the first public consultation which was held in March 2021 at the Goodwill Parish Hall in Roseau following which Consultation No.

2 was held with the Kalinago Council on Saturday July 31st, 2021.

The meeting was held at the Resource Centre in the Kalinago Territory.
The objective of the meeting was to administer a questionnaire designed by the consultant to seek a better understanding of the socio-economic conditions of the Kalinago Territory as well as to seek views from participants on how the Project is likely to impact their community.
The meeting was organized by the PIU whose staff contacted the Chairman of the Council to apprise him of the meeting and followed up with an email message to confirm the dates and reconfirm the importance of inviting all Council members.

The meeting took place as scheduled and was attended by 3 (50%) of the six Councillors plus the Council Chief (male) and Council clerk (female).
On investigation, it was found out that the 3 absentee councillors were female who had previously confirmed their attendance but due to unexpected family commitments respectively ended up being unable to attend.

35 To ensure that the views of these female Councillors were taken on board, a telephone meeting was held with Deborah Thomas Phillip, one of the female absentee councillors, to discuss responses to the same questionnaire which was administered at the Saturday meeting.

Mrs. Thomas Phillip obliged.


At both meetings, stakeholders unanimously welcomed the Project and were happy to share their views on the several community development impacts it could have through livelihood creation.

Both meetings indicated: • the following sector priority ranking in this order: 1. farming 2. craft 3. tourism 4. fishing 5. agro-processing • the need to develop the tourism sites along the trail to attract the overload of tourists visiting the Trafalgar Falls.
• minimal negative impacts with respect to land use however land use planning was flagged as critical given the traditional importance of land to Indians as gatherers and hunters.
• Revival of canoe making and fishing • Need for a spring water plant The meeting with the Council explained that land is not sold, but is allocated or reallocated and compensation, when necessary, is based on the value of crops or other productive activity taking place on the land, with final decision-making authority on allocation/reallocation of land resting with the Council.

The Council members advised that there is no available land for engaging in land swaps.
The meeting with the Councillor pointed to the existence of the Kalinago Women’s Farmers’ Group.

In this regard, telephone discussions were held with the following persons to determine the status of the group and most of all to sensitise them to the rolling out and objectives of the Project, to seek their feedback and to establish a line of communication to ensure their participation in continued project consultations.
Telephone discussions were therefore also held with: -Mr. Asher Burton: Agricultural Extension Officer, Tel.

number 617 6612 -Castrina Frederick: Tel.

number 265 1837: herbs, sweet potato and other root crops farmer; products sold directly on local market and to hucksters.

According to the farmer there is a high unemployment rate among Kalinago women.
In the agricultural sector, she said that while tools have been donated in the past, women farmers are most challenged by the cost of ploughing 36 provided by male labourers.

Women are forced to multitask on the farm to keep down the cost of labour, and would therefore welcome some financial support.

- Regina Joseph: Tel.

number 285 4682: root crops.


Was a Fair Trade and Europe Gap certified farmer: She expressed the need for financial support in the absence of the traditional “Coup de Main” (free labour from community members), which has resulted in high farm labour cost and affecting the viability of the farms.
The discussions revealed that the Kalinago Women’s Farmers Group is currently inactive despite its recent participation in the creole production “Belle Tori – Women is Farmers Too” sponsored by the UNDP Strengthening Disaster Management Capacity of Women Project.

Some level of frustration with past failed attempts with forming groups was expressed.

These included empty promises of capacity building support.
It was explained that the main challenge faced is the fact that the number of female farmers has shown a declining trend that has left very few active female farmers to be members of a group.

In this context, formation of a Kalinago Women in Business Group was discussed and the two women, while welcoming the project objectives, expressed the hope that it would support the formation of the proposed Kalinago Women in Business Group.
The two ladies expressed keen interest in allocation of resources by the project for rehabilitation of the Centipede Trail, a once popular tourism site which provided livelihood for women vendors, and which has been closed since 2017 with the passage of Hurricane Maria.

At the consultation on September 23rd 2021, the Power Point presentation highlighted the project benefits, risks and risk mitigation action plan and Process Framework.
Also, the consultation served as an opportunity to seek views for updating this draft IPPF including on governance issues faced by the Kalinago Territory.

6.1.4 Size and Scope of Consultations The consultations/meetings/telephone discussions all started with an introduction of speakers and participants, followed by a brief outline of project objectives, goals and component activities and a discussion session.
Using a questionnaire/PowerPoint presentation to guide the discussion session, the Social Officer then sought feedback from the participants on their impressions of the positive and negative impacts of the project, and risk mitigation initiatives.

Feedback on key social indicators and development priorities of the Kalinago Territory were also sought.
The invitations to the August meeting with Council and to the September 23rd town hall were sent out by the PIU to the Kalinago Chief who was asked to invite all Councillors and the Clerk of Council.

37 Male Male Female Male Female Female Contact 276 5512 615 5338 Gender Female Table 10 below presents the list of participants at the July/August 2021 meetings while the completed questionnaire from the August meeting with the Kalinago Council has been submitted as Annex 5 to the Stakeholder Engagement Plan.
Table 10 List of Participants at the Consultations with the Carib Council July 31st, 2021 Name Position in Council Livelihood Community Contact Gender Council Members Farmer Bataca 277 2679 Male Lorenzo Sanford Alexander Burton Anthony Luciene Dian Darroux Chairman Councillor Councillor Clerk Retired teacher Gillete Farmer/Teacher Cray Fish River St Cyr Project Team Government Official Consultant Forest Officer, PIU Social Safeguards Consultant Social Safeguards Consultant’s Associate Mr. Ronald Charles Dr. Sylvia Charles Ms. Lucilla Lewis Table 10.b List of Participants at Respective Meetings of August 9th, 2021 by Telephone Community Name Gullet River Deborah Thomas Phillip Livelihood Supervisor National Employment Programme Consultant Councillor Independent Gender Advocate Farmer Castrina Frederick Pointe/St Cyr 265 1837 Female Independent Gender Advocate Farmer St Cyr 285 4682 Female Regina Joseph Lucilla Lewis Project team Table 11 below presents the list of participants at the September 23rd, 2021 meeting while the meeting report is attached as Annex 1.
Table 11: List of Participants at Stakeholder Consultation of September 23, 2021 Participant Alexander Burton Alexis Valmond Arnique Valmond Agency Councillor Telephone Email Community Crayfish River Crayfish River St. Cyr 38 Touna Village/Concorde Bataca Irvince Auguiste Former Chief Kent Auguiste Senator Annette Sanford Louis Patrick Hill Joel Paris Pearl Williams Florence Gage Prosper Paris Mr Ronald Charles Mr Kirk Brown Mr Mike McIntyre Dr Sylvia Charles Ms Lucilla Lewis Opposition Senator Hotel owner/operator Attorney at Law Attorney at Law District Development Officer Project Team Forest Officer, PIU Safeguards Consultant, IST Environmental Specialist Social Safeguards Consultant Social Safeguards Consultant’s Associate 6.1.5 Results of the Consultations The consultations served to sensitise participants to the objectives and goals of the LEToBP project and its objectives.
Also, aided by an administered questionnaire or PowerPoint presentations, participants were encouraged to share their thoughts on possible positive and negative impacts of the project and to discuss mitigation measures regarding the negative impacts.

Importantly, the consultations confirmed that the possible project risks could be related to access to and use of land and other natural resources.
Regarding gender issues and formation of groups/cooperatives, the information shared revealed a need for specific initiatives to support women in business, especially in agriculture, and technical assistance in group dynamics and in building trust among group members.
The episodic nature of support for strengthening existing groups was cited as a source of frustration for the Kalinago, and at the September 23rd consultation, stakeholders specifically pointed to the lack of financing for group activities and lack of continuity in planning at the level of the Council as factors which contributed to dormancy of some community groups.
As a result of the consultations, the Social Safeguards Consultant was able to make recommendations on the following priority development initiatives which can be considered by LEToBP: List of Additional Priority Projects 39 Aquaculture: two possible venues were suggested.

The first, suggested at the meeting with the Kalinago Council, favoured Cray Fish River.

However, at the consultation of September 23rd it was observed that Touna Village could be a likely venue for the project.
It was noted that Cray Fish River was in need of major rehabilitation, having suffered from land degradation.

It was also observed that it would be a pity if it were allowed to dry up.

Spring water harnessing.

Support for vending linked to the WNT.

Also, suggestions regarding the way forward on title to land owned by the Kalinago, and clarity was provided on unsettled disputes regarding land in the Kalinago Territory owned by non- Kalinago Dominicans, towards arriving at a legally binding resolution.
On the issue of development planning for the Kalinago Territory, stakeholders were of the view that the capacity to do so exists within the Kalinago people, but that support was needed from the Government of Dominica or the World Bank to put the appropriate framework in place, e.g.

facilitating technical assistance from like-minded (indigenous) international groups with the relevant experience.
6.1.6 Dissemination and Disclosure of Information The following channels of information dissemination and disclosure are recommended: o All communication from the PIU relating to the LEToBP will be through the Kalinago Chief who will in turn share the information with Council and make a determination on next steps and or how next steps should be dealt with, depending on the nature of the communication.
o The Council, chaired by the Chief or a Councillor designated by him in his absence, will consult with community stakeholders on an ongoing basis.

o The Council will provide project consultants with necessary access to carry out their work in the Territory.

o The Chief is responsible for assisting in planning and organizing consultations with the Council, key community stakeholders and wider population of the Territory, at each stage of the project cycle.
o The PIU will, in all project related communications with the Chief, underscore the importance of ensuring that women and youth in the Territory are invited/involved in the meetings and consultations and in implementation activities.

o The PIU will share all reports on consultations with the Kalinago with the Council through the Chief.

o The PIU will share a copy of the adopted updated SEP with the Council through the Chief on an ongoing basis.
40 o The Council, through the Chief, will provide the consultants with information on any other ongoing or planned development projects in the Territory.

o The World Bank is authorized to publicly disclose on its website, the project SEP which includes information on all engagements in the Territory/with the Kalinago.
6.2 Framework for Meaningful Consultation During Implementation Based on the finalised project implementation activities, it will become necessary for the PIU to update the risks and mitigation plan where further negative impacts are foreseen, and also the M&E Plan.

Provisions are made in the SEP for presenting these updates to stakeholders for feedback and finalisation on an ongoing basis.

These activities will require consultations with stakeholders, especially to complete the monitoring reports.
Furthermore, consultations will be required on an ongoing basis during implementation to update stakeholders on status of implementation – progress and/or slippages.

Feedback/information gathering approaches, during implementation, also would include additional face-to-face meetings or digitally (depending on situation with COVID), and administration of small surveys.

The latter could result in capacity building of Carib Council/Village Council clerks to enable them to assist with undertaking the surveys.
In addition, a project-level Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) is set out in the SEP, with socio- culturally appropriate and accessible mechanisms for communication, which will be publicly disclosed throughout the project stages.

Table 12 presents an indicative framework for scheduling stakeholder engagements during implementation.

41 Table 12: Indicative Stakeholder Engagement Schedule.

Implementation Stage.

Kalinago Territory.

Activity Mode of Invitation/Communication Venue Date Convened by No.
of Participants Expected Results Comments Implementation and Monitoring Phase [To be determined (TBD) after further elaboration and approval of project details] Consultation among project team Leaders Town hall consultations with Kalinago Territory Consultation with all stakeholders in other affected communities Direct email and telephone follow up TBD TBD PS MBGEANFS Telephone, email and telephone follow up by the PIU; flyers, radio announcements, Digicel TV announcements, Facebook, WhatsApp; communications through Kalinago Council Telephone, email and telephone follow up by the PIU; flyers, radio announcements, Digicel TV announcements, Facebook, WhatsApp; communications through village councils Face-to-face in Kalinago Territory or Zoom or a mix of the two Face-to-face in affected communities or Zoom or a mix of the two TBD PIU - Environmental Officer and Social Officer TBD PIU-Environmental Officer and Social Officer MBGEANFS, Min.
of Finance, Min.
of Environment, Urban Renewal and Kalinago Upliftment Agreement on structure of PIU and confirmation of launch date Kalinago people sensitized and take ownership of project implementation All stakeholders in other affected communities sensitized and take ownership of project implementation 42 6.3 Outcome of Framework for Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) during preparation and implementation To ensure effective and transparent communications on finalization of project design, project implementation and monitoring of project results, the following communication procedures were put in place to be discussed with stakeholders on an ongoing basis: o The draft SEP (with its GRM) has been consulted with stakeholders, including the Kalinago, prior to appraisal.
o Consultations have taken into account the limitations on public meetings due to the COVID-19 health emergency and have been and will continue to be carried out in a manner consistent with the World Bank technical guidance on “Public Consultations and Stakeholder Engagement in WB-supported operations when there are constraints on conducting public meetings, March 20, 2020.” This is especially the case for vulnerable and marginalized groups.
o The draft SEP and draft ESCP were publicly disclosed in-country in May 2021 in the Project’s website (https://piu.agriculture.gov.dm).

Further consultation on the Draft SEP to take place before it is finalized to incorporate stakeholders’ feedback and to reflect recommendations received and adopted, and will be re-disclosed no later than 30 days after the Effective Date, and thereafter will be updated and re-disclosed as needed throughout the life of the project.
o Convene consultations with the Kalinago Territory to agree first of all on the IPPF and then on ongoing basis to keep the IPP relevant (the latter at dates to be determined as becomes necessary).
The Draft IPPF was discussed and agreed by the Kalinago at a consultation on 23rd September, 2021, and plans are afoot for publication of the Final Version on the World Bank’s Website, while the updated final version of the SEP, which will be published, will give specific details on engagements with stakeholders during implementation, on expected results, and consultation reports.

43 ACTION PLAN-MEASURES TO ENSURE CULTURALLY APPROPRIATE SOCIO-ECONOMIC 7.
BENEFITS 7.1 Activities The table below presents the action plan, with indicators for monitoring progress and results, for ensuring culturally appropriate socio-economic benefits to all the affected communities along the three national parks and the WNT.

While activities will take place, and have impacts across affected communities, activities under component three are specific to the Kalinago Territory and include: I.

Upgrading of propagation centres in Salybia (US$180,000) II.

III.

IV.
III.

IV.

Provide technical assistance for formation of a farine and craft cooperative (US$90,000) Purchase equipment for the farine and craft cooperative (US$20,000) TC for fishing & aquaculture development (Crayfish River) Kalinago Territory and provision of tools ($80,000) V. Mapping and development of a land use management plan for the Kalinago Territory VI.

VII.

VIII.
(US$111,000) Auditing and upgrading of tourism facilities: audit ($20,000); upgrading facilities ($90,000); upgrading feeder trails linking to WNT ($40,000) Conduct training programme in Kalinago entrepreneurship, gender inclusion and traditional knowledge: training for farine/toloman ($30,000); canoe building & basketry ($10,000); Equipment upgrade for farine/toloman ($20,000) Provision indigenous communities/agriculture and land ($70,000); development of traditional agricultural model farm ($40,000) technical technical services: advisory advisor of Stakeholders unanimously welcomed the above-listed project activities.
7.2 Implementation Arrangements with Resource Implications 44 Table13: Action Plan to Ensure Culturally Appropriate Benefits to the Kalinago People Objective Indicator Baseline End Activity Target Time Frame Responsible Agency Resources Verification Sources Status* To promote sustainable management of biodiversity in the buffer zone, parks & WNT Number of Hectares 0.00 150.00 Number of PAs 0.00 4.00 Component 1: Protected Area Planning Demarcation of Morne Diablotin National Park Management Plans for 3 national parks & WNT PIU MERMKU MBGEANFS PIU MERMKU MBGEANFS Q2, Yr 1 – Q4, Year 1 Q3, Yr 1 – Q1, Yr 2 Technical Consultancy ($130,000) Consultant’s Report Report Plan documents Documentation & Agreements TC for 3 national parks & WNT ($230,000) Technical Consultancy for land tenure & legislative arrangements ($90,000) TC for social-economic analysis ($20,000) TC for assessment of value of ecosystem ($90,000) TC for biodiversity planning ($70,000) TC to conduct assessment and implementation plan ($70,000) 45 To build capacity for protected area planning Number of trainees by gender 0.00 200.00 Training programme for sustainable national park management, with gender inclusion incorporated PIU Y 1 – Y 5 Office & field tools & equipment ($60,000) TC for development of education module & communication plan ($40,000) Training material Component 2: Biodiversity and Sustainable Nature-based Tourism Operations Number of facilities 0.00 70.00 Build/upgrade eco-tourism infrastructure To strengthen key tourism
 infrastructure & local capacity Q2 Y 1 – Q4 Y 2 PIU Forestry & Wild Life Department Contractor Construction company ($740,000) Site visits; Structures in place TC to update GPS trail system and maps for feeder trails ($20,000) System in place; Maps available TC to conduct audit for other eco-tourism areas & design implementation plan ($110,000) Equipment for improvement of eco- tourism trail ($70,000) Documents & Implementation Plan Equipment in place 46 Number trained 0.00 50.00 Number of systems 0.00 1.00 Training
 programme for beneficiaries in eco-tourism trail management and gender inclusion Establishment of E-ticketing system PIU Consultancy for capacity building programme for national parks & Kalinago ($110,000) Q2, Y 1 – Q4, Y 1 PIU Forestry & Wildlife Department Technical Specialist for implementation, maintenance & operation of E-ticketing system ($70,000); TC for implementation of online platform ($150,000); Equipment for e- ticketing system, control & training ($180,000) System tested & operational Platform tested & operational Number of personnel 0.00 2.00 Programme coordination & administration Component 2 PIU Y 1 – Y5 Project Coordinator & Financial Specialist ($300,000) Personnel in place Number of beneficiaries 0.00 250.00 To enhance opportunities for biodiversity- derived sustainable livelihoods Component 3: Sustainable Livelihoods Y1 – Y5 PIU Kalinago Council Promoting sustainable livelihoods Survey/Site visits Cooperative for farine & craft ($90,000) Upgraded propagation centre in Salybia ($180,000) Equipment for cooperative ($20,000) 47 0.00 3,700.00 Development of Number of hectares in improved plan Number 0.00 6.00 land use management plan for Kalinago Auditing and upgrading of tourism facilities Training programme in Kalinago entrepreneurship, gender inclusion and traditional knowledge 0.00 76 Number of beneficiaries by gender Y1 – Y5 PIU Kalinago Council TC for fishing & aquaculture development (Crayfish River) Kalinago Territory & provision of tools
 ($80,000) Y1 – Y2 PIU Forestry & Wildlife Department TC for mapping & planning ($111,000) Plan document Year 1 PIU Kalinago Council Audit ($20,000); Upgrading facilities ($90,000) Audit document Site visit Upgrading feeder trails linking to WNT ($40,000) Training for farine/toloman ($30,000) & canoe building & basketry ($10,000); Equipment upgrade for farine/toloman ($20,000) Technical advisor indigenous communities/agriculture and land ($70,000); Site visit Training modules & register of participants by
 gender Review of outputs against TOR Number 0.00 2.00 Technical advisory services Y1 PIU Kalinago Council To provide appropriate support to local initiatives in agriculture and land use Y1 Site visit 48 Number of personnel 0.00 3.00 To ensure successful management, monitoring & evaluation of Project Project Management, Monitoring & Evaluation Provisions Component 4: Project Management Y1 – Y5 Development of traditional agricultural model farm ($40,000) Social and Environmental Specialist ($90,000) Audit ($20,000) Mid-term & Final Review $50,000) Final Term Review ($10,000) Monitoring reports Community feedback PIU MERMKU MBGEANFS Physical Planning Department Lands & Surveys 49 8.
GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM (GRM) This IPPF-specific Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) has a two-fold objective, that of building on the existing Kalinago centred complaints redress mechanism and adhering to the principles outlined in the World Bank’s Environmental and Social Standards (ESS7 and ESS10) that specify inter alia that initiatives associated with Indigenous Peoples must be culturally appropriate and that a GRM must be established to allow project-affected people to seek redress without fear of reprisals.
In seeking to meet these objectives, the implementation of this GRM shall be based on mutual respect and cooperation between the Kalinago Council, the custodian of the Kalinago People and the PIU, which is charged with managing and monitoring the Project’s implementation.

The Grievance Redress Mechanism shall consist of a three-step process.

In the first instance, a complaint is lodged with the Kalinago Council.
The Council investigates, takes action, informs the complainant of its decision and submits a report to the PIU, to enable tracking and monitoring by the latter.

In the event that the matter is not or cannot be resolved at the level of the Kalinago Council, it is referred to the PIU, the second level in the process.

The PIU investigates, in consultation with the Council, with a view to arriving at a resolution.
If the matter is resolved, the PIU communicates its decision, by written correspondence, to the complainant and the Kalinago Council simultaneously.
If, however, the matter is unresolved at that level, it is forwarded to a three-person Committee comprised of the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Blue and Green Economy and National Food Security (MBGEANFS), the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of the Environment, Rural Modernisation and Kalinago Upliftment (MERMKU) and a Barrister of the Ministry of National Security and Home Affairs.
Each level of investigation/review is expected to last a maximum of 7 days, so that a case that is required to be taken to the third level should not exceed 21 days from the date of the complaint to the time of its resolution.

The steps in the process are as outlined in the Grievance Procedure Flowchart, as well as in Section 8.1, which addresses roles and responsibilities.
50 Grievance Procedure Flow Chart •A stakeholder reports a grievance to the Kalinago Council •The Council investigates, takes action, informs the complainant of the outcome and sends a report to the PIU.
The timeline between receipt of the complaint and submission of the report to the PIU shall be 7 days •If unresolved, the matter is forwarded to the PIU, the second level in the process Level 1 •The PIU investigates, in consultation with the Council, and makes a decision within 7 days •PIU informs the complainant & the Council of the decision simultaneously •If the matter is not resolved at this level, it is referred to Level 3 - the Committee of Permanent Secretary (PS) of BGGEANFS, PS of MERMKU and a barrister from the Ministry of National Security and Home Affairs Level 2 •The Committee reviews the case.
•The decision taken by this Committee is communicated to the complainant and the Kalinago Level 3 Council, through the PIU •The process of deliberation at this level shall take 7 days 51 8.1 Roles and Responsibilities The grievance redress mechanism may consist of three stages, depending on whether the case can be resolved easily or not.

In the first level, a grievance is brought to the Kalinago Council, in keeping with their traditional approach to the settlement of disputes.
When a complaint is brought to the Kalinago Council, the procedures are as follows: • The Chief calls a meeting of the Council to discuss the matter • The Council investigates and invites the concerned parties to the Council Office to present their arguments.
• The parties may present witnesses • The Council questions the parties and their witnesses • • The Chief convenes a follow-up meeting of the Council, which deliberates and takes a Where required, the Council makes site visits decision • While the Council strives for unanimity, the decision taken by the majority of the Council Members is carried • The decision is communicated in writing to the concerned parties The above indicates that if the matter can be resolved at the level of the Council, the action is taken and the complainant and the other party/parties are informed accordingly.
Following this, a report, describing the complaint and the decision taken, is communicated via email to the PIU, for record keeping, tracking and monitoring purposes.

The dates on which the complaint was received by the Council and on which the decision was taken are also recorded in the report.
On receipt of a complaint, the Administrative Officer, the Environmental Officer and the Social Officer will be responsible for registering, tracking, addressing and resolving the matter, in accordance with the Project’s GRM.
When a complaint is brought to or forwarded to the PIU, Level 2 in the Grievance Redress Mechanism, the procedures are as follows: • The Administrative Officer records all relevant information, including a description of the complaint/grievance, and the date on which it is lodged • This information is entered into a database to enable tracking and monitoring • The matter is passed it to the Social Officer for attention • The Social Officer will collaborate with the Environmental Officer in carrying out the investigations, in consultation with the Kalinago Council, and arriving at a solution • The PIU informs simultaneously the complainant as well as the Kalinago Council of its decision, through written communication.
• This decision should be communicated within 7 days of the complaint being received by the PIU 52 • If unresolved, the matter is passed on to level 3, a committee consisting of the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Blue and Green Economy and National Food Security (MBGEANFS), the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Environment, Rural Modernisation and Kalinago Upliftment (MERMKU); and a barrister of the Ministry of National Security and Home Affairs The third level of the GRM will consist of a three-person Committee, which shall be the final arbiter on complaints received in the context of the IPPF.
The following are the processes to be followed by the Committee: • The PIU Social Officer will inform the Permanent Secretary of the MBGEANFS of the unresolved grievance, requesting his/her intervention in setting up a meeting of the Committee • The Social Officer will also submit to the Committee a report on the nature of the complaint, the actions taken to date and the unresolved issues.
A copy of the original complaint should also be appended to the report • The Committee deliberates and may call witnesses as required • The decision taken by the Committee is final.

It will be communicated to the complainant • and the Kalinago Council, through the PIU.
It is anticipated that the deliberations and decision by the Committee should be completed within 7 days • Prior to commencement of Project Implementation, the Permanent Secretaries of the MBGEANFS, MERMKU and Ministry of National Security and Home Affairs should be sensitized on the Committee’s expected role in the Grievance Redress Mechanism, so that a barrister may be assigned and the Committee can be convened at short notice when required.

The responsibility for monitoring the GRM rests with the PIU.
The PIU will maintain a Data Base, managed by the Administrative Officer, to log all complaints and to track each, from the date received to the date resolved, and highlight how each case was investigated and resolved.

To maintain the synergy between the IPPF-specific GRM and the Project’s GRM, the Clerk of the Kalinago Council is tasked with submitting timely reports to the PIU for inclusion in the PIU database.
8.2 Grievance Report Channels The GRM allows for complaints to be submitted to the LEToBP PIU and Kalinago Chief and Council anonymously, online, by phone, by email, by letter and in person: In person: PIU, 19 King George V St., Roseau Letter: Attention Project Manager, PIU, 19 King George V St., Roseau • • • Phone: 266 3998 • Email: grmgef@dominica.gov.dm • Anonymous: phone, email, letter, etc.
• In person: Kalinago Council, Kalinago Territory 53 • Attention The Chief Grievance reports will be prepared on a monthly basis by the PIU and will include a name, date and contact information with a detailed description of the case and complainant.

It is expected that there will be a normal response time of 7 days for each case.

However, where matters are unresolved at the first level , they may require 14 – 21 days for resolution.
The PIU will include the details of all grievances reported by the Kalinago Council along with those connected with the Project GRMs in its Project reports to be submitted on a semester or quarterly basis to the World Bank, and shall notify promptly (no later than 48 hours from taking notice of occurrence) the World Bank of any serious Project grievance or accident or incident.

These complaints will also be recorded and tracked by the Administrative Officer and the Environmental Officer and Social Officer.
All GRM records will also be available to WB staff during supervision missions, in addition to details on grievances being provided in Project reports, as outlined above.
Non-Retaliation Clause The Bank and the Ministry of Blue, Green Economy, Agriculture and National Food Security will ensure that there is no coercion, retaliation, intimidation, or harassment directed against any Stakeholder or Beneficiary who makes a report or comment during stakeholder consultation or in a public meeting organized by the Project.
If any Stakeholder or Beneficiary feels that he or she has been retaliated against for making a report or participating in the stakeholder consultation, the alleged violation should be reported using the Grievance Redress Mechanism.

8.2.1 Addressing Workers Grievance Grievances that relate to project workers will be handled by a separate Workers Grievance Redress Mechanism which is included as part of the Project’s Labour Management Procedures (LMP) that has been prepared.
8.2.2 Addressing Gender-Based Violence The GRM will specify an individual who will be responsible for dealing with any gender-based violence (GBV) issues, should they arise.

A list of GBV service providers will be kept available by the Project.

The GRM should assist GBV survivors by referring them to GBV Services Provider(s) for support immediately after receiving a complaint directly from a survivor.
If a GBV related incident occurs, it will be reported through the GRM, as appropriate and keeping the survivor information confidential.

Specifically, the GRM will only record the following information related to the GBV complaint: • The nature of the complaint (what the complainant says in her/his own words without direct questioning); 54 • • If, to the best of their knowledge, the perpetrator was associated with the Project; and, If possible, the age and sex of the survivor.
Any cases of GBV brought through the GRM will be documented, but remain closed/sealed to maintain the confidentiality of the survivor.

Here, the GRM will primarily serve to: • Refer complainants to the GBV Services Provider; and • Record the resolution of the complaint The GRM will also immediately notify both the Implementing Agency and the World Bank of any GBV complaints WITH THE CONSENT OF THE SURVIVOR.

9.
9.

GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA FOR PREPARATION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES PLANS (IPP) The IPPs should be developed in line with the provisions of ESS7.

They should describe specific actions, budgets and time-bound indicators.

The Indigenous Peoples, including all vulnerable groups within the Kalinago Territory, should be included in the consultations and the implementation of the activities.
A summary of the Targeted Social Assessment, including the applicable legal and The Borrower’s proposed measures and actions will be developed in consultation with the Kalinago and contained in a time-bound plan, such as an IPP.

As an early implementation activity, in consultation with the Kalinago people, an IPP will be prepared, that sets out culturally appropriate mitigation measures and benefits, and specifies the timing for completion of actions required.
Considerations for inclusion in the IPP are: a. institutional framework and baseline data.

A summary of the results of the meaningful consultation tailored to LEToBP, and if the b. project involves the three circumstances specified in paragraph 24 of ESS7, then the outcome of the process of FPIC carried out with the affected Kalinago people during project preparation.

c. A implementation.


d. Measures for ensuring the Kalinago receive social and economic benefits that are culturally appropriate and gender sensitive, and steps for implementing them.

If necessary, this may call for measures to enhance the capacity of the project implementing agencies.

e. Measures to avoid, minimize, mitigate, or compensate the Kalinago for any potential adverse impacts that were identified in the social assessment, and steps for implementing them.
The cost estimates, financing plan, schedule, and roles and responsibilities for f. implementing the IP Plan.

g. Accessible procedures appropriate to the project to address grievances by the affected for meaningful consultation tailored to LEToBP during project framework 55 Kalinago arising from project implementation, as described in paragraph 35 of ESS7 and in ESS10.
h. Mechanisms and benchmarks appropriate to the project for monitoring, evaluating, and reporting on the implementation of the IP Plan, including ways to consider input from project affected Kalinago in such mechanisms.

i.

A plan for ongoing assessment of the social impact of the project components/sub- components/activities Most of the areas are already partially addressed in this IPPF.

10.
10.

MONITORING AND REPORTING ARRANGEMENTS Monitoring and reporting arrangements in respect of the Indigenous People’s Planning Framework (IPPF) will be undertaken by PIU staff, together with support from the Kalinago Council, the Kalinago Chief and the Ministry of Kalinago Affairs.
While the PIU and the Kalinago Council will have direct responsibility for ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the IPPF, oversight of the Planning Framework will be undertaken by a committee comprising of representation from the MBGEANFS, the Ministry of Economic Planning, the MERMKU and the Kalinago Chief or a Councillor designated by the him.

The PIU would be responsible for submitting quarterly reports to the committee.
Monitoring during project implementation provides information about key social aspects of the project, particularly the social impacts of the project and the effectiveness of mitigation measures.
Social and environmental standards monitoring will occur as a regular periodic activity, and will include regular, compliance monitoring, process reviews/audits, reporting of outputs, quarterly monitoring as well as third party monitoring and environmental and social auditing carried out on the basis of the impacts, indicators and mitigation measures as prescribed in the Social Assessments.
This allows the Project to evaluate the success of mitigation as part of project supervision and allows corrective action to be taken when needed.

The Monitoring and Evaluation Officer (M&E) at the PIU will coordinate monitoring activities and will (a) compile and consolidate data and verification documents; (b) ensure data quality; and (c) prepare and submit the reports to the Project Manager, Implementation Support Team (IST) and the World Bank on time.
The Project Manager will designate either the Environmental Officer or Social Officer to work alongside the M&E Officer in undertaking monitoring and reporting so that the ESSs are adequately reported on.

Reports must be prepared in keeping with contract requirements for the consultants and shared in meetings with the NOGC, MERMKU and the Kalinago Council.
The M&E framework reports should enable the Kalinago Council to: - Address concerns with constraints and problems encountered during project implementation.
56 - Ensure that principles and guidelines for public participation and guidelines for development of public participation plans presented in the SEP are adhered to and generating the planned outcome/results - Participation of Kalinago People by gender in project activity planning and implementation - Coverage of protected areas in the Kalinago Territory - Number of jobs/self-employment opportunities created in the KT (of which number of female beneficiaries).

11.
11.

DISCLOSURE ARRANGEMENTS The SEP presents the various modes of consultation to be used for information exchange and Disclosure.

The World Bank is committed to full and effective disclosure and therefore all project reports will be made public.

Emphasis will be placed on the accessibility of information disseminated, especially among vulnerable and physically handicapped stakeholder segments.
The finalized version of the IPPF will be shared with the Kalinago community, while the document will also be publicized on the Bank’s website.

In order to ensure that the IPPF is widely disseminated among the Kalinago people, the finalized document will be transmitted to the Kalinago Council, through the Chief; as well as to the Chairs of the Hamlet Committees for disclosure to members of the community.
In addition, the PIU will circulate the document via email, utilizing its database of contacts; as well as publishing it on its website.

The timeliness of information disclosure will be monitored to ensure that reasonable timeframes are allowed for stakeholder input in planning implementation steps.

12.

ANNEXES: MINUTES/SUMMARY REPORTS OF MEETINGS The following are reports of the consultations held with the Kalinago People to date and the associated PowerPoint presentations.
Annex 1: Responses to Informal Questionnaire to Guide Consultation with the Town/Village Councils and Community Representatives Annex 2: Mixed Face-to-Face and Virtual Consultation Held with Stakeholders in the Kalinago Territory (September 23, 2021) Annex 3: Power Point Presentation on Community Consultation Kalinago Territory Leveraging Eco- Tourism for Biodiversity Protection Project (attached separately) 57 Annex 4: Power Point Presentation on LEToBP Leveraging of Eco-Tourism for Biodiversity Protection Project: Questions regarding IPPF (attached separately) ANNEX 1: RESPONSES TO INFORMAL QUESTIONNAIRE TO GUIDE CONSULTATION WITH 12.1 THE TOWN/VILLAGE COUNCILS AND COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVES Introduction The Leveraging Eco-Tourism for Biodiversity Project is intended to improve the management of the Waitukubuli National Trail and the three national parks, namely the Trois Pitons National Park, the Cabrits National Park and the Morne Diablotin National Park; as well as to promote sustainable livelihoods for the populations in the affected areas.
The Project will repair or construct amenities such as interpretation centres, trails, benches, restrooms, gazebos, shelters and viewing platforms.

It will also develop an e-ticketing system that will be linked to digital maps and information, thus upgrading the service to potential visitors to the parks and trail.

It will also assist with the administration of visitation to the parks.

Women, youth and the Kalinago people are considered vulnerable and are therefore singled out for special consideration.
The Project will establish a buffer zone around the Morne Diablotin National Park and will, among other things, begin the process for undertaking a mapping and land use plan for the Kalinago Territory.

We would appreciate if you could spend a few minutes of your time to answer some questions that would provide us with a better understanding of the socio-economic situation of your community as well as present your views on how the Project is likely to impact your community.
Name of Village/Town Council _________________________________________________ Kalinago Council Date of Interview July 31 2021 ____________________________________________ Present Were: Chief Lorenzo Sandford 58 ______________________________________________________________________________ Alexander Burton, Councillor _____________________________________________________________________________________ Anthony Lucien, Councillor for Agriculture and Fisheries ___________________________________________________________________________________ Diane Darroux, Clerk ____________________________________________________________________________________ Ronald Charles, Forestry Specialist PIU Lucilla Lewis, Social Safeguards Consultant’s Associate Sylvia Charles, Social Safeguards Consultant _______________________________________________________________________________ Livelihoods and Quality of Life 1) What are the main economic activities in the community?
Please rank from them from 1 to 5, with 1 being the highest and 5 being the lowest Farming Fishing Tourism __1_____ ___4___ ____3__ Agro-processing _____5_ Craft ______2 Other (specify) _____________________ It was noted that currently all fishing is done in Marigot, because of the docking facilities there.

One or two operators fish from the rock.


2) Please provide an estimate of the number or percentage of male and female operators engaged in specific economic activities: Activity Farming Fishing Number Male % 60 98 - 99 Number Female % 40 1 - 2 59 Tourism Agro-processing Craft 40 80 50 60 20 50 3) Please give an estimate of the number of businesses whose livelihoods are linked to the National Park or Trail ________ 4) What type of businesses are they?
______________________________________________________________________________ The Barana Aute is a direct beneficiary of the WNT, which passes near it.

The Barana Aute, which promotes the history and culture of the Kalinago people engages a dance group, elders who sell craft, a cassava baker, a food service provider and about 20 tour guides.

Farmers and fishermen benefit indirectly as providers of produce to the kitchen.

At least one accommodation provider benefits from the WNT.
___________________________________________________________________ It was noted that the WNT (management) could assist in putting up stalls where people could sell their products to hikers on the trail.

The people do not benefit from overnight stays.

In addition, there are other sites that could be explored.

An example is the Magini Region to which the legend of L’Escalier Tete Chien is linked.

The Turtle Pool – Basin Tortue is another attraction.
In addition, there is a cemetery near Salybia Church – where a number of Germans had been buried.

A German ship had been torpedoed outside of the Kalinago Territory during World War II and the bodies were washed up on the shore.

Some Germans visited the site, indicating that there could be potential link with the tourist trade.

5) How has the COVID-19 Pandemic impacted the economic activities identified above?
______________________________________________________________________________ COVID-19 brought everything to a standstill, especially the craft industry.

______________________________________________________________________________ 6) Please list the education facilities located in your community (primary, secondary etc.)
_____________________________________________________________________________ There are five primary schools, one located in each of the following: Sinecou, Salybia, Concord, Lighthouse and Atkinson.

There are 5 pre-schools and 1 Special Education facility.

For secondary education, students go to the North East Comprehensive or the Castle Bruce Secondary School.
___________________________________________________________________________ 7) Please list the health facilities located in your community 60 There are 3 health centres located in Atkinson, Salybia and Mahaut River.

Referrals are made to Level III centres in Marigot and Castle Bruce.

People living in the North go to Marigot and those in the South go to Castle Bruce.

Land Use, Rights and Restrictions to Access 8) What do you think the positive impacts of the project might be?
______________________________________________________________________________ The project will have positive impacts all-round – mainly for the tourism aspect; the people will gain knowledge of the planning and also of the timing for planting crops.

For example, root crops remain underground during a storm.

We tend to plant anytime, thinking that a storm won’t come.

The use of the land has always been good for us – a people of hunters and gatherers.
We are grateful for the wealth of knowledge the project will bring.

There will be a two-way flow of knowledge.

The Councillor for Agriculture and Fisheries will be supervising a plant nursery and can concentrate on the foods that help in the prevention of cancer.

______________________________________________________________________________ Land use policy is the way forward.

We need to educate our people.

We also do not want pesticides getting into the water.
Lots of people construct across water catchments.

Relocation is a possibility.

____________________________________________________________________________ We are not producing in the KT.

We need a large injection of finance.

We don’t have a cash crop that is dependable as in the day of bananas.

We need money for hiring labour.

Marketing is a big issue.

______________________________________________________________________________ 9) What do you think the negative impacts of the project might be?
_________________________________________________________________________________ The people have an emotional attachment to their location.

Some families have a small portion of land and are emotionally attached to it.

There could be negative impacts of the land use mapping and planning process, given people’s reluctance to part with their traditional land rights.

In the past 10 families controlled the land.

Currently there are many farmers.


_____________________________________________________________________________________ 10) Are there members of the community who have had traditional rights (quite apart from legal ownership) to the land and could be displaced as a result of the demarcation, land use planning and/or the buffer zone?
_____________________________________________________________________________ 61 There is the possibility that the land use planning process could lead to displacement, given the water catchment and other issues associated with current land use practices.

However, the Council has little leeway in relocating people.

There are no lands that could be re-allocated.

_____________________________________________________________________________ 11) If so, are they mainly men, women or youth?
___________________________________________________________________________ 12) Specific to settlements around the Morne Diablotin National Park, are there persons who own lands within the proposed buffer zone?

Yes _________ No _______ 13) Are there natural resources that members of the community typically gather from within the protected area or areas that could be restricted by the Project (examples could be water, raw materials, firewood)?
Yes _____X_____ No ____________ 14) If Yes, please name them ______________________________________________________________________________ Firewood is not used as much as before.

All homes have the traditional fire wood system, but for use as a backup.

After Hurricane Maria, people had to revert to drying meat, as there was no electricity.

There is still interest in charcoal burning for use in barbecues.

Most people are connected to DOWASCO for the water.
However, in the district of Tuna Village/Concord, people are not dependent on DOWASCO.

They go to the spring water sources.

Spring water production could be a viable project in the KT.

______________________________________________________________________ 15) If Yes, who are the main users of these resources (are they men, women or youth)?
16) Specific to the Kalinago, please explain the procedures for assigning land for individual or family use within the communal land ownership system ___________________________________________________________________________________ There is very little leeway in terms of available land.

The Council does not have land to allocate.

Some persons have large tracts of land through inheritance.

A father usually wants to give each child a piece.

The Council can negotiate with someone who wants to sell.
However, it is not the land that is sold.

It is 62 the loss of use as well as the agricultural crops that are sold.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 17) What do you think are the most pressing land use issues in your community?
______________________________________________________________________________ Construction around water catchment areas ______________________________________________________________________________ Dispute Resolution and the Grievance Redress Mechanism 18) How are disputes relating to land tenure and resources settled in your community?

__________________________________________________________________________________ The Council has special days when people can come in to lodge complaints.
They pay the Council a fee.

The Council visits the area and investigates.

They then settle the dispute.

Boundary moving disputes are the most common.

__________________________________________________________________________ 19) In your view are there any gender related issues that affect access to land and dispute settlement?

__________________________________________________________________________ None.
____________________________________________________________________________ 20) Is there an individual, agency or entity where you can report community related issues (e.g.

land disputes and issues)?


Specific to the Kalinago: It is intended that the project promote the diversification of livelihood activities for 250 beneficiaries and train 76 beneficiaries in Kalinago entrepreneurship and traditional knowledge, under Component 3, which is targeted at the Kalinago community, in particular women and youth.
The following activities have so far been identified: - Marketing of agricultural products - Gastronomy/food experiences - - Cooperative and seed propagation 21) Do you agree with these priorities Plant materials for craft making (larouma, calabash etc.)

Yes ____X_____ No _________ 63 22) Do you have other priorities?

If so, please state them _______________________________________________________________________________ Fishing: We had boats where I grew up.
Each fisherman had his boat and made his canoe.

Now, everything is diverted to Marigot and transferred to Roseau.

There is a scarcity of fresh fish.

We have lost the culture of canoe making and fishing.

The young are not interested in fishing.

The Council has discussed the idea of upgrading the landing sites.

Aqua-culture is an idea and would be suitable for Cray Fish River – a good source of shrimp.
The river is small because of tree cutting; but the decline of the banana industry, with reduction in pesticide use, has led to the increase in the production of cray fish.

We need financial assistance and technical advice in this area.

_________________________________________________________________________ Specific to the Portsmouth and Tan Tan to Cottage Communities 23) Are there livelihood needs in the case of vulnerable women and youth that this project might address?
Yes _________ No ___________ 24) If yes, please explain ____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ ADDITONAL INFORMATION Gender Issues Women’s Groups Cray Fish River’s Concerned Women (not active) Waikada (active) Hamlet Development committees in St Cyre, Gullet River, Concord The Council has also been in touch with Miss Paula Williams of the Division of Cooperatives July 2021 64 ANNEX 2 12.2 Mixed Face-to-Face and Virtual Consultation with Kalinago Stakeholders Held at the Salybia Primary School in the Kalinago Territory September 233d 2021 The consultation was targeted at all stakeholders in the Kalinago Territory to sensitise them to the objectives, benefits and potential risks with considered risk mitigation action and to seek clarification on issues raised in the Draft Indigenous Peoples Plan Framework (IPPF).
Introductory remarks were presented by Ronald Charles, Forestry Officer within the Project Implementation Unit (PIU), followed by a presentation on the Project by the Social Safeguards Consultant and one by her Associate.

Introductory Remarks Ronald Charles informed the meeting that the funding agency for the Project insists on a consultative process with stakeholders, and that this consultation was one of more to come as the project goes through the stages from approval to implementation.
Importantly, he highlighted the fact that there would be ample time for input from the Kalinago people towards finalising project activities which preserve Kalinago traditions and customs during the process while creating livelihoods.
The presentation by the Social Safeguards Consultant covered the project description, objectives, potential benefits and risks, the options open to private landowners in the proposed buffer zone, and more specific to the Kalinago people, the access to resources and potential risks in light of the proposed mapping and demarcation.

The presentation also included a reference to eligibility criteria.
The Consultant’s team member led a discussion which sought specific clarifications for updating the Draft IPPF, following which the meeting continued into the discussion phase.

The presentations along with a guide to the discussions are attached to the IPFF and summarised highlights are included in the final update to the Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP).
65 Points Raised During Discussions General Comments on Project Objectives Stakeholders were unanimous in welcoming the project as having the potential to create sustainable livelihoods for the Kalinago people.

However, it was observed that Tourna/Concord could be considered as a location for the cray fish production project recommended in the Consultation with the Council.

It was also suggested that Cray Fish River needs substantial rehabilitation, after having suffered significant degradation.
Given that two sites are being suggested, it is recommended that a pre-feasibility study be undertaken as part of the activity (Social Safeguards Consultant).

In addition, concern was raised with the increasing incidence of young farmers not following traditional farming practices e.g.

not planting according to the phases of the moon and hence affecting farm productivity, in response to which they recommended that the project provide for groups who want to pursue traditional farming models.
In response to these concerns raised, the PIU representative underscored the fact that the project activities were still being defined and would only be finalised with input from the Kalinago people from consultations like this one.
Senator Sanford expressed her satisfaction with the consultative approach to ensure involvement of the Kalinago people in the planning and implementation process, and highlighted processing and marketing as two areas in which capacity must be built among small businesses in the Territory especially those in Agriculture.

The issue of marketing was suggested by a number of participants as one that needed to be addressed urgently.
Burton pointed out that two approaches to agriculture should be pursued: sustainability by “eating what we grow and growing what we eat”, guided by building resilience to climate change.

He therefore suggested activities like smoking of fish, preserving of food to ensure food security when fresh produce is in short supply e.g.

because of seasonality and post hurricane disruptions.

He also pointed to the urgent need for capacity building in marketing.
Buffer Zones and Land Rights Kirk reassured stakeholders that demarcation of land for buffer zones will be done through a participatory process so that all stakeholder issues will be taken on board.
IPP The Social Safeguards Consultant noted that the Project, in its design, has taken into account the priorities established by the Kalinago in the DVRP Eastern Roads Project, as follows: • The right to free, prior and informed consultation • Employment and skills transfer 66 • Mitigation to treat with potential adverse risks • Locating the grievance redress mechanism at the local level in the first instance This point was underscored by the IST Safeguards Specialist who noted that in the case of the World Bank housing project also, consideration was being given to hiring contractors from the local community.
Status of Community Groups Stakeholders listed the existence of the seven (7) Hamlet Development Committees most of which were active; two (2) sports committees- the Kalinago Sports Association and the KPL; two cultural groups the Carina Cultural Group and the Karafouna Dancers; two NGOs the Waitukubuli Development Agency (WKDA) and the Kalinago Heritage Development Agency.
The stakeholders explained that most of the groups were reasonably active except for instances where lack of resources to implement activities led to inactivity, and in recent times the impact of the need for social distancing brought on by COVID 19.

They also pointed to lack of continuity in the leadership of the Kalinago Council as a factor which negatively impacted on sustainability of the Hamlet Development Committees which are arms of the Council.
The Sinekou Hamlet Development Committee was cited as the most active.

The existence of the following two NGOs was also confirmed: • Kipe Quati Inc.: funded by the Robinson Trust with the objective of supporting training in journalism for the Kalinago people.
Directors are Senator Annette Sanford, Paul Crask and Claudius Sanford • The Kalinago Institute for Global Resilience and Regeneration (KIGGR) with the dual objective of i) promoting the use of resilient traditional species and agro-forestry, and ii) providing a source of additional income to committees through eco-tourism.

Directors are Patrick Hill a hotel owner, Hon.

Cozier Frederick the Parliamentary Representative for the Salybia constituency and Claudius Sanford, an Economist.
Development Planning Capacity A stakeholder, Mr Joel Paris, expressed the view that the human resource capacity to conduct development planning and implementation existed within the Kalinago people, but the necessary framework for doing so did not exist and needed to be addressed.
In this regard, Irvince Auguiste, former Kalinago Chief, recommended that the Government of Dominica or the World Bank approach “like minded” indigenous groups globally to provide guidance and technical support to Dominica for putting in place the requisite framework.

Legislative Framework Stakeholders confirmed that the ILO Convention 169 has not been enacted into national law in Dominica.

67 The issue of land ownership in the Kalinago Territory by non-indigenous people was discussed.
Attorney Pearle Williams observed that she had often heard it expressed that the Kalinago did not have land issues because land is communally owned; but that in fact there was the issue of Kalinago land being owned by non-Kalinago persons.

Patrick Louis Hill, who appeared to be informed on the history of the matter, provided specifics on ownership of the land.

He noted that the established owner had bequeathed the land to his heirs, but that the land was being occupied by Kalinago people.
He also indicated that the matter had been ruled on by the Court, which established legal ownership in favour of the “non-indigenous” owners.

He suggested that any resolution would have to be a political one.

He noted in this regard that the title holders had agreed in principle to giving up the land in exchange for crown lands.

Attorney Joel Paris expressed the view that the Project presents the best opportunity for the Kalinago people to seek to secure title to the entire Territory.
It was noted that as part of this resolution a certificate of title should be issued in the name of the Kalinago Territory for the 3, 700 acres of land demarcated as the Kalinago Territory.

Gender Based Violence A stakeholder expressed the view that the incidence of Gender Based Violence during project implementation is likely to be minimal.

Attendance Rate The following table shows that out of the 23 invitees, 11 attended giving a participation rate of roughly 48%.
Table 1: List of Stakeholder/Attendance Rate Address Crayfish River Crayfish River St Cyr Touna Village Bataka Invitee Name Alexander Burton Alexis Valmond Anique Valmond Irvince Auguiste Kent Auguiste Senator Annette Sanford Louis Patrick Hill Joel Paris Pearle Williams Position Councillor Former Kalinago Chief/Operator of Community Home Stay Tourism Company Senator Hotel Owner Attorney Attorney 68 Attended Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Sinekou Cray Fish River St Cyr.
Salybia Touna Village Salybia Florence Gage Prosper Paris Principal Garnet Joseph Lisa Eugene Natasha Green Kelly Graneau Principal Hon.

Cozier Frederick Chief Lorenzo Frederick Gweneth Frederick Donaldson Frederick Dr Charles Corbette Jaqueliine Andre Kirk Brown Mike Mc.

Intyre Ronald Charles Dr Sylvia Charles Lucilla Lewis October 2021 District Development Officer (DDO) Ministry of Kalinago Affairs Sinekou Gov.
School Former Kalinago Chief Salybia Primary School Parliamentary Representative Kalinago Chief Manager Kalinago Barana Aute Ministry of Kalinago Affairs Ambassador Forest Officer Safeguards Specialist IST PIU Environment Specialist PIU Forest Officer Social Safeguards Consultant Social Safeguards Consultant’s Associate Yes Yes No Yes No No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 12.3 Annex 3: Power Point Presentation on Community Consultation Kalinago Territory Leveraging Eco-Tourism for Biodiversity Protection Project (attached separately) 12.4 Annex 4: Power Point Presentation on LEToBP Leveraging of Eco-Tourism for Biodiversity Protection Project: Questions regarding IPPF (attached separately) 69 70