Ministry of agriculture and ministry of public works smallholder tree crop revitalization support project


procedure for Sub-project Screening



Download 1.2 Mb.
Page14/25
Date02.06.2016
Size1.2 Mb.
1   ...   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   ...   25

procedure for Sub-project Screening

The selection of target project areas/communities will focus on Districts and Sub-districts where there is a significant number of small farmers involved in the growing of one or more of the four focal tree crops. The table below provides a guide to selection of sub-project that comply with the requirements, policy and regulations of the PIU, the World Bank and the Government of Liberia


Table 19:Verification of Safeguards Policies triggered by Subprojects


Identification Process

Questions:

Actions:

Initial Investigations

1) Has there been an appraisal visit to the community and proposed sub-project location?

If ‘yes’ go to question 2). If ‘no’ organize an appraisal mission by a qualified and experienced person to assess the potential impacts to the natural and human environment and the amount of additional information need to produce (if necessary) an adequate ESMP (see Note 1 below)

Location

2) Is the location currently under tree crop that requires rehabilitation?

If ‘yes’ go to question 8). If ‘no’ go to question 3).

3) Is the location currently degraded forest as a result of traditional shifting cultivation?

If ‘yes’ go to question 8). If ‘no’ go to question 4)

4) Is the location recently logged forest?

If ‘yes’ go to question 6). If ‘no’ go to question 5)

5) Is the location on lands covered with primary or mature secondary forest or otherwise rich natural habitat?

If ‘yes’, it will fail to comply with the World Bank’s OP 4.36 and OP 4.04, the Bank will not support the subproject. If ‘no’ go to question 7)

6) Is the location on lands that prior to degradation by logging were (or potentially were) high value natural habitat?

If ‘yes’ may not comply with provisions of World Bank’s OP 4.04 and EPA regulations – submit to PIU EMT for decision on further action. If ‘no’, go to question 8).

7) For a location with significant natural habitat, are there potential alternatives for the subproject?

If, ‘yes’ go to the potential alternative and go to question 2i). If ‘no’, submit to PIU EMT for decision on further action.

8) Will implementation of the sub-project result in relocation of current occupants of the land?

If ‘yes’ it may fail to comply with the World Bank’s OP 4.12 - go to question9). If ‘no’ go to question 11)

9) Were resettlement will be required, has an assessment of requirements been carried out in compliance with OP 4.12?

If ‘yes’ are the impacts significant to require a RAP/ARAP -go to question 10). If ‘no’, submit to PIU EMT for decision on further action.

10) Has a RAP/ARAP been prepared or if only special monitoring required has a protocol been established?

If ‘yes’ go to question 11). If ‘no’, submit to PIU RMT for decision on further action.

11) Are there any physical cultural resources located within the proposed sub-project location?

If ‘yes’ go to question 12i). If no, go to question 14i)

12) Where any physical cultural resources are present, will the implementation of the sub-project have an adverse impact on them?

If ‘yes’ go to question 13). If ‘no’ go to question 14)

13) Has a PCR Management Plan been prepared in accordance with OP 4.11?

If ‘yes’ go to question 14). If ‘no’ submit to PIU EMT for decision on further action

Base Data Bank

14) Is there an ESMP (see Note 1 below) covering the sub-project?

If ‘yes’ go to question 15). If ‘no’, submit to PIU EMT for decision on further action.

15) Is there need for any further study?

If ‘yes’ submit recommendations to PIU EMT for decision on further action. If ‘no’ go to question 16)

Community Organization

16) Does the beneficiary Community have a Farmer Organization/Cooperative?

If ‘yes’ go to question go to question 17). If ‘no’ submit recommendations to PIU PRT decision on further action.

17) Is the Farmer Organization Registered?

If ‘yes’ go to question18). If ‘no’ submit recommendations to PIU EMT decision on further action (e.g. refer to the CDA/Other relevant Agency able to provide assistance/guidance in establishing a viable organization)

18) Have all condition of the procedures of the PIU project ESMP, the World Bank and GoL policy, legislation and regulations and been met?

If ‘yes’ submit the sub-project assessment to PIU EMT for review and approval. If ‘no’ submit the sub-project with recommendation for deselection to the PIU EMT.

Note 1): See Chapter 3.2.1 above and Annex E for guidance. Possible options, depending on the identified potential impacts, could be:

i) A Fonsi - when the nature of the activity and the results of the site visit show that there is not likely to be any impact that requires a management plan.

ii) A “Generic" ESMP, in cases where there is nothing unique about the site or the sub-project activities that would require special mitigation measures (e.g., removing under-brush in coffee and cocoa plantations in an agricultural area – see Chapter 5 above.

iii) A site-specific ESMP, in cases where there are features of the environment that require more study leading to an ESMP that is designed to take particular sensitive features into account.  For example the presence of a significant natural habitat conservation area or water-body on/near the site that could be significantly affected by the sub-project activities.

iv) A full ESIA.  The may be a requirement for sub-projects that are extensive in size (e.g. greater than 50 ha) or for value-added initiatives involving agro-process as set out in Annex 1 of the EPML.




Share with your friends:
1   ...   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   ...   25




The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2020
send message

    Main page