Stakeholders at a National Validation Workshop on the SESA inception report, reviewed and agreed on six case studies to be conducted in six different counties with a focus on the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. These case studies have served as the first level of the SESA engagement with local communities. The outcome of that engagement process has also contributed to the preparation of this report and provided in the Annex 1. Table 1: SESA engagement focus at County level No. County Impact issues 1. Rivercess Logging, community participation in forest governance and benefit 2. Plantation expansion and concessions. Clash between community conservation initiative and oil palm plantations in Numopoh 3. Nimba Mining and related infrastructure on community conservation, community and private sector conservation initiatives and trade- offs 4. Lofa Protected areas, level of community involvement and factors influencing same, and community benefits distribution 5. Bong Shifting cultivation, smallholder plantations, tree crops and shifting cultivation as drivers of deforestation. Traditional agriculture and livelihoods 6. Margibi Fuelwood/charcoal. Biomass energy sources. Economic benefits, potential impacts of REDD+ interventions The key institutional stakeholders responsible for natural resources and environmental management which will also benefit from improved policies, capacity development programmes and outreach and communication programmes were also consulted to solicit their views. These have included the Environmental Protection Agency, Lands Commission as well as the host institution, the Forestry Development Authority. Analysis of data and Preparation of Report The Consultant has analysed the gathered information to produce the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) document.
4 OP 4.11: Physical Cultural Resources Investigate and inventorise cultural resources potentially affected. Include mitigation measures when are adverse impacts on physical cultural resources or avoid if possible Triggered Potential impact on culturally sensitive areas for communities within the geographical area of influence of the proposed Liberians living around forested areas recognize various physical cultural resources, including sacred forest areas as well as individual sacred trees and bushes. Chance Finds Procedures have been prepared for this project. 5 OP 4.12: Involuntary Resettlement Assist displaced persons in their effort to improve or at least restore their standards of living. Avoid resettlement where feasible or minimize. Displaced persons should share in project profits. The policy aims to avoid involuntary resettlement to the extent feasible, or to minimize and mitigate its adverse social and economic impacts. The policy prescribes compensation and other resettlement measures to achieve its objectives and requires that borrowers prepare adequate resettlement planning instruments prior to Bank appraisal of proposed projects. Triggered It is expected that the LFSP will not need to relocate any villages or households in order to establish or strengthen these parks and reserves. The creation of new protected areas would deal with established, pre-existing human settlements through boundary adjustments and internal park zoning, rather than by requiring their relocation. 6 OP 4.10: Indigenous Peoples Screen to determine presence of indigenous peoples in project area. Policy triggered whether potential impacts are positive or negative. Design mitigation measures and benefits that reflect indigenous peoples’ cultural preferences. Not triggered No indigenous groups have been identified within the project’s area of influence. 7 OP 4.37: Safety of Dams Requires that experienced and competent professionals design and supervise construction, and that the borrower adopts and implements dam safety measures through the project cycle. The policy distinguishes between small and large dams by defining small dams as those normally less than 15 meters in height. Large dams are 15 meters or more in height. Not triggered There are no dams involved in the project.
Subcomponent Some relevant Proposed Activities Specific activities of Potential Environmental and Social Concern civil works needed for effective on-the-ground protected area management, including headquarters Sub-Component 2.3. Support for Community Forestry in Targeted Forest Landscapes Community grants for small community enterprises to produce, transform and commercialize a variety of timber and non-timber forest products, and other agro and agro- forestry activities (e.g. cocoa, rice, coffee, cassava, tree plantations for firewood and charcoal, etc). Promote/support establishment/strengthening of small CFE (existing or new ones) for the commercial management and add value to forest products (e.g. charcoal, lumber, furniture, construction wood) Support communities establish small-scale tourism activities in a phased manner. The targeted communities will be encouraged to adopt sustainable land use and agricultural practices that enhance the structural and functional integrity of the forest ecosystem and improve rural livelihoods. This will involve a mix of conservation agricultural practices; sustainable land use, community forest management, alternative livelihood and effective use of degraded land. Eco-tourism activities will be promoted in Lake Piso Pilot projects on alternative livelihoods Commercial management and add value to forest products (e.g. charcoal, lumber, furniture, construction wood) Ecotourism activities Development of domestic market for charcoal and lumber business Rehabilitation of cocoa plantations and also replanting and new planting of the tree crops Conservation agriculture- production of annual food crops on degraded lands Horticultural and low land rice cultivation Small scale processing mills and other activities Sub-Component 2.4. Strengthen Capacity for Sustainable Agriculture Strengthen sustainable agriculture in targeted landscapes. Establishing partnerships with private sector agents to encourage building of alliances at the local level for promoting value chain based partnerships and small and medium enterprises around common property resources for livelihoods benefits such as smallholder tree crops in targeted landscapes, small scale processing mills and post- harvest technologies. Rehabilitation of cocoa plantations and also replanting and new planting of the tree crops Conservation agriculture- production of annual food on degraded lands Horticultural and low land rice cultivation Small scale processing mills and other activities Rehabilitation (but not expansion or major upgrading) of market access roads
Subcomponent Some relevant Proposed Activities Specific activities of Potential Environmental and Social Concern lowland with good water management technology will be encouraged to reduce pressure on upland forest areas. By encouraging farmers to use the lowlands to grow rice, horticultural crops and vegetables, as well building their capacity to manage simple water management infrastructure, the current pressure on the forests would be significantly reduced. The sub component will also fund lowland infrastructure for water management and clearing of rural access roads. replanting and new planting of the tree crops Conservation agriculture- production of annual food on degraded lands Horticultural and low land rice cultivation scale processing mills and other activities Rehabilitation (but not expansion or major upgrading) of market access roads
1 MAIN FINDINGS/OBSERVATIONS FROM SESA CASE STUDY FIELD WORK Case Location/ community Benefits/Values Drivers Causes Potential REDD+ Strategy Options likely to be applicable Other Issues/Questions arising Lofa-Zigida Cultural heritage and sustenance Income and livelihood security including food, NTFP, ecosystem services Domestic energy supply for cooking, heating, preservation Shifting cultivation Commercial hunting Chainsaw milling population growth and demand for food, energy and income Poverty [limited choices or availability of viable non-forest resources and livelihoods options] arrived migrant husbands clearing forest to establish ‘first- comer’ use rights Lack of coordinated land use planning Family planning – to ensure sustainable population growth Integrated farming systems e.g. Agroforestry systems and component technologies. Renewable energy e.g. mini-hydro, solar PV on and reinforce local systems for regulating hunting Livestock and fish farming to limit local demand for bush meat and serve urban demands Land use planning Livelihood and support for non-farm income generating activities (NTFP, handicrafts, small businesses, skills training) Gender sensitive direct cash payment for conservation Build capacity for leadership skills and natural resource management and governance. Unless there is local interest in conservation efforts, outside intervention unlikely to succeed. Need to enlist local support for forest management and conservation through support for initiatives that enable communities share conservation benefits Competing priorities between community livelihood needs and national conservation plans. Equitable and fair benefit sharing mechanism (community capacity to manage benefits, administrative and management framework for direct cash payment to communities) Past interventions focused on subsistence/ livelihood; new options/ new approaches needed Nimba- Gbarpa Cultural heritage and sustenance Shifting cultivation Presence of scale mining concession and Integrated farming systems e.g. Agroforestry systems and component technologies Comments above apply. The issue of equitable and fair
Case Study Location/ community Benefits/Values Drivers Causes Potential REDD+ Strategy Options likely to be applicable Issues/Questions arising Income and livelihood security including food, NTFP, ecosystem services Domestic energy supply for cooking, heating, preservation Commercial hunting Chainsaw milling Industrial and artisanal mining Smallholders Tree crop plantation artisanal mining Absence of land use planning Poverty [limited choices or availability of viable non-forest based resources and livelihoods options] Population growth Lack of coordinated land use planning Renewable energy e.g. solar PV Build on and reinforce local systems for regulating hunting Livestock and fish farming to limit local demand for bush meat and serve urban demands Land use planning Livelihood and support for non-farm income generating activities (NTFP, handicrafts, small businesses, skills training) Enhancement of carbon loading in degraded forest areas, focusing on indigenous species / forest rehabilitation Gender sensitive direct cash payment for conservation benefit sharing mechanism (community capacity to manage benefits, administrative and management framework for direct cash payment to communities) Past interventions have focused on subsistence/ livelihood; new options/ new approaches need to be explored Overlapping of mining concession with community forest. How do communities deal with the growing pressure on farmlands from other land use interests (artisanal and industrial mining community and state forest reserves? Bong- Cultural heritage and sustenance Income and livelihood security including food and NTFP, Domestic energy supply for cooking, heating, preservation Smallholders Tree crop plantation Shifting cultivation Land pressures due to historical dispossession Lucrative income from tree crops in the 70s and 80s Presence of large agro-plantation in other parts of the county Population growth Poverty [limited Family planning– to ensure sustainable population growth Integrated farming systems e.g. Agroforestry systems and component technologies Renewable energy e.g. solar PV Livestock and fish farming to limit local demand for bush meat and serve urban demands What are the prospects for future tree crop plantations in the wake of the low global prices with respect to tree crop as a REDD+ strategy options? - ‘Migrant’ farmers from nearby ‘urbanized’ communities, i.e. Suakoko contribute to increasing the pressure on available land
Case Study Location/ community Benefits/Values Drivers Causes Potential REDD+ Strategy Options likely to be applicable Other Issues/Questions arising Tree crop plantation choices or availability of viable non-forest based resources and livelihoods options] Land use planning Livelihood and support for non-farm income generating activities (NTFP, handicrafts, small businesses, skills training) Grand Kru- Newaken Cultural heritage and sustenance Income and livelihood security including food, NTFP, ecosystem services Domestic energy supply for cooking, heating, preservation Shifting cultivation Industrial plantation Commercial Logging Commercial hunting Chainsaw milling Increase in population due to industrial activities and demand for food, energy and income Extreme Poverty [limited choices or availability of viable non-forest based resources and livelihoods options] Access to forest land enabled by forest roads and capacity for land clearance enhanced by chainsaw logging Lack of coordinated land use planning Integrated farming systems e.g. agroforestry systems and component technologies Renewable energy e.g. PV Build on and reinforce local systems for regulating hunting Livestock and fish farming to limit local demand for bush meat and serve urban demands Land use planning Livelihood and support for non-farm income generating activities (NTFP, handicrafts, small businesses, skills training) What are the prospects for food security with most of the land industrial oil palm plantations and logging concessions? How can industrial tree plantations cater for the long term economic and food security needs of the communities? What possibilities exist for communities to participate meaningfully in existing concessions to ensure maximum benefits? Rivercess- Teekpeh Cultural heritage and sustenance Income and livelihood security Shifting cultivation Commercial Logging Increase in population due to industrial activities and demand for food, energy and income Value addition to sawn timber (wood processing industries) Integrated farming systems e.g. Agroforestry systems and component Conflicts over management and sharing of benefits. The issue of equitable and fair benefit sharing mechanism
Case Study Location/ community Benefits/Values Drivers Causes Potential REDD+ Strategy Options likely to be applicable Other Issues/Questions arising heating, preservation cultivation Charcoal production Extreme Poverty [limited choices or availability of viable non-forest based resources and livelihoods options] Absence of alternative livelihood Lack of coordinated land use planning PV Develop small holder based fuel wood plantations Livestock and fish farming to limit local demand for bush meat and serve urban demands Land use planning Livelihood and support for non-farm income generating activities (NTFP, handicrafts, businesses, skills training) What other sources of income are possible when the current demand for charcoal declines? What alternatives are possible for local energy needs for cooking apart from charcoal and firewood? What lands are available for fuel wood plantations and what are the suitable species (trees with wood of high calorific values, etc)?
water resource availability and use existing demand; low intensity of water use; potential water use conflicts expected to be low; no potential water quality issues water use; multiple water users; water quality issues are important multiple water users; potential for conflicts is high; water quality issues are important Natural hazards vulnerability, floods, soil stability/ erosion Flat terrain; no potential stability/ erosion problems; no known flood risks Medium slopes; some erosion potential; medium risks from floods Mountainous terrain; steep slopes; unstable soils; high erosion potential; flood risks Land and Farming Tenure No conflicts, disagreements around use of land, tenant farmer rights and location of admitted and farmers transparent Process of land regularization and rights to natural resources being worked out with clear communication and grievance process in place Land conflicts historically unresolved, admitted farmers being evicted, tenant farmers loosing rights and no transparency or grievance redress available If Medium or High Refer to Process Framework Determination of environmental category based on findings of the screening: A B C Requires an EIA Requires preparation of additional E&S information Does not require further environmental or social due diligence Prepared by: Date:
ANNEX 5: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION Stakeholder Date Comments Project officers for the Liberia Forest Sector Development Project David Saah (National REDD+ Project Coordinator, REDD Implementation Unit, Forestry Development Authority) Ephraim S. Swen (Procurement Specialist, Readiness Preparation Activities, Forestry Development Authority) Zinnah Elijah Whapoe (SESA Coordinator, REDD+ Implementation Unit of the EPA) Nicholas Metiaki Soikan (Social Development Specialist, World Bank Group) 30 August 2015 The team provided an overview of the assignment. The main objective of this consultancy is to update EXPAN’s (i) draft Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and (ii) draft Process Framework (PF) for the Liberia Forest Sector Project, on behalf of the Government of Liberia. The EXPAN Project ended on 30 June 2015. The team provided insights to the extent of the scope of the EXPAN project and the additional requirements for the update e.g. the EXPAN was for three protected areas, while the current assignment is dealing with almost 14 protected areas. The SESA study is going on alongside the ESMF and PF. The inception phase is completed and an inception report has been submitted. At present the scoping phase is ongoing and the consultants are yet to submit the draft report for review The focus of the study should be protected areas within the three forest landscapes The team also provided a brief overview of the local administration of Liberia The team provided a brief overview of the planned activities for the week including community stakeholder workshop on 1st September 2015 at Kakata. 48 participants have been invited for the workshop and drawn from all three forest landscapes. The consultant was reminded of the deadline for submission of the draft report (i.e. 11 September 2015) Consultations were also held on the concept notes of the LFSP