GOVERNMENT OF UGANDA LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/663551468779157665/... · 2016-08-30 · GOVERNMENT OF UGANDA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

GOVERNMENT OF UGANDA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM II (LGDP II)

E722

GOVERNMENT OF UGANDA

LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

(LGDP 11)

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENTFRAMEWORK (ESMF) REPORT

ALSO TO BE REFERRED TO AS THE

(STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENTREPORT)

(Final)

James Orehmie Monday

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized


LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Ii (LGDP II)

TABLE OF CONTENTSPage No.

List of Acronyms 3

1.0 Executive Summary 4

2 0 Introduction 8

3.0 Description of the Proposed Project 11

4.0 Description of the area of influence 13

5.0 Description of the policy, legal, regulatory, and administrative frameworks 14

6 0 Description of the World Bank's Safeguards Policies 24

7.0 Proposed institutional framework for environmental and 27Social management

8.0 Proposed screening mechanism and checklist of risks and 32Mitigation measures

9 0 Proposed capacity building measures and costs estimates 36

10.0 Monitoring indicators and plan, including costs 38

Annex 1 0 Sample Screening Form 43

Annex 2 0 Procedures for Sub project Investments Requiring ESIA 48

Annex 3.0 List of individuals/institutions contacted 49

Annex4 0 References 50

2



List of Acronyms

EA- Environment AssessmentEMP - Environment Management PlanESA- Environment and Social AssessmentESIA- Environment and Social Impact Assessment (for subprojects)ESMF - Environment and Social Management FrameworkGoU - Government of UgandaNEMA- National Environment AuthorityPDC - Parish Development CommitteePMC - Project Management CommitteeSEA- Strategic Environment AssessmentTPC- Technical Planning Committee

3



1.0. Executive Summary

Uganda is a country endowed with rich and enviable bio-diversity. A landlocked countryof approximately 24m people, Uganda has a substantial and wide variety of naturalresources, including fertile soils, regular rainfall, significantly many rivers (e.g. VictoriaNile and Albert Nile) and lakes (e.g. Lake Victoria, Lake Albert, Lake Kyoga) , diverseflora and fauna, and sizable mineral deposits( copper, cobalt, gold ) all on about 236,040 km2 in total area Significantly, 15% of this area is water Since the late 1980's,Uganda has rebounded from the abyss of civil war, economic malaise and a scorchingaids crisis, to become a model of relative peace, stability, successful HIV infectioncontrol and even considerable and remarkable prosperity. This inheritance poses majorsocio-economic and environmental challenges for the people and Government ofUganda (GOU) in their on-going development efforts, as they seek to manage theseresources and successes using sustainable approaches and methods. Pursuant to thisgoal of sustainable development, the GOU is unquestionably committed to a strategythat would stimulate significant economic growth, enable employment creation andachieve considerable poverty reduction, in partnership with the private sector, throughthe decentralization of the planning, delivery and management of basic public services,inter alia.

The GOU's commitment to decentralization is entrenched in various legislativedocuments, most significantly, the Constitution 1995, and the Local Government Act1997 and in Uganda's Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). Among noteworthyachievements to this commitment is the realization of the complete successfuldecentralization of the recurrent budget and the near completion of the same with thedevelopment budget. In 1999 the government assisted by the World Bank undertook theLocal Government Development Program (I) in furtherance of the decentralization of thedevelopment budget based on the following key principles. Based on the Mid TermReview (MTR) of the LGDP I conducted in February 2002, the GOU officially requestedthat the Bank begin the preparation of the LGDP II in order to consolidate theachievements under the LGDP I.

The overall development objective of the proposed LGDP II is to improve LocalGovernment institution performance for sustainable, decentralized service delivery andis structured to achieve its objectives within five major investments components of theproject. Specifically, under component 2, communities will request financing for theirsub-projects through grant funds made to their Local Governments. It is envisaged thatsome of these sub-projects will involve the construction of water supply and sanitationfacilities, storm drainage facilities (e.g. culverts, earth drains), school buildings, healthcenters, road infrastructure networks, solid waste management, agricultural extensionactivities ( fish ponds, cattle crashes etc ), agric- business small industries, extension ofrural electricity networks to communities, etc.

The GOU by the National Environment Statute 1995 and the World Banks onOperational and Procedural Policies, specifically OP 4 01 requires the government toprepare a Environment and Social Management Framework, ESMF, (also referred to asa Strategic Environment Assessment Report by NEMA) report which will establish amechanism to determine and assess future potential environmental and social impactsof Local Government subproject investments under the proposed LGDP II, and then toset out mitigation, monitoring and institutional measures to be taken during design,

4



implementation and operation of the subprojects to eliminate adverse environmental andsocial impacts, offset them , or reduce them to acceptable levels. This is precisely whatis required at this stage of project preparation since the subprojects have not yet beenidentified OP 4.01 further requires that the ESMF report must be disclosed as aseparate and stand alone by the Government of Uganda and the World Bank as acondition for Bank Appraisal of the LGDP II. The disclosure should be both in Ugandawhere it can be accessed by the general public and local communities and at theInfoshop of the World Bank and the date for disclosure must precede the date forappraisal of the project.

The key highlights in this ESMF report is presented as follows:

(i) The ESMF establishes the screening process mechanism for the sub-projectsto enable the local governments and local communities to simultaneouslyidentify potential environmental and social impacts of sub-projects and toaddress them by incorporating the relevant mitigation measures into thedesigns of the sub-projects before they submit them for review andsubsequent approval.

The main feature of this mechanism requires the subproject implementers toscreen their sub projects at the preparation stage using the screening form inAnnex 1 and the revised LGDP I environmental and social checklist to identifypotential adverse effects/impacts.

The next requirement is for the implementers to incorporate the necessarymitigation measures into the sub project design following which they are tosubmit the sub project proposals accompanied by the completed screeningform and checklist to the reviewing committee, the TPC.

The use of the checklist would also identify which sub projects would requireindividual ESIA's These would be for sub projects costing more thanUS$100,000 and/or sub projects involving new roads, incorporating use ofhazardous chemicals and managing solid, liquid or medical wastes. The useof the results of the ESIA would be how these sub projects identify theiradverse effects which would then be adequately mitigated in the sub projectdesigns before submission for review and approval.

The sub project proposals would describe any investmentdesigns/plans/measures incorporated into the proposal. The respective TPCwould review the proposals for compliance with this EA process. The nextprocess would be for the TPC to recommend approval to the respective localgovernment council of the sub project proposal subject to the environmentaland social conditions the implementer must adhere to in the detailedplanning, construction and operation of the investment. The TPC may rejectsub project proposals based on non-compliance with the screening processand the implementer in that case would have to re-screen and re-design theirsub project and re-submit it for a second review to the TPC.

5



Only sub project proposals that comply with the requirements of theEnvironment Act 1995 and the World Bank Safeguards policies will berecommended for approval to the respective local government council.

(ii) The ESMF assesses the capacity at the District and Lower LocalGovernments to implement the proposed screening process and mitigationmeasures, including the provision of support to communities in cases ofcommunity-managed sub-projects, and makes recommendations asappropriate, including training needs and cost. The ESMF also proposesinstitutional arrangements for the environmental and social management offuture sub-projects, including monitoring indicators and a cost ed monitoringplan. The ESMF found that the decentralization process in Uganda was farand wide reaching and that significant success had been registered on theground in that all local government structures were in place at all levels in thesystem and that the process of planning had also been decentralized to theextent that communities were now participating and initiating their sub-projects in a demand driven nature. This was very welcome. The ESMFfound that to the extent weaknesses in the local government layers existed, itwas of the ability to implement the required sub-project ESIA processdescribed in (i) above and in the monitoring of the mitigation measures,therefore, it is proposed that this could be addressed by cementing the linksbetween the layers and not in adding additional layers/institutions. The ESMFrecommends that the top-down linkages be strengthened by focusing onknowledge transfer in the top-down direction by building capacity at all levelsthrough the provision of training for new environmental resource persons toserve among reviewers and implementers and through technical assistancein these committees. In the crucial bottom-up direction, the linkages aredesigned to strengthen the implementation of the monitoring measuresrequired in the sub-projects. This to be achieved by placing greater burdenand responsibilities for monitoring on the implementers , after they havereceived the required training and capacity building measures just outlined, tonow be required to submit regular periodic reports on the state ofoperationality of the sub-projects they are managing to the TPC's higher upthe system. Given that the number of sub-projects is likely to be in thethousands, this is considered to be the most effective way of providinginformation needed at higher levels to making monitoring and evaluationdecisions. Finally, the role of the National Environmental Authority in thecontext of this project has been clarified to be one of providing technicalassistance and facilitator for the training program

(iii) Finally, the ESMF assessed the content, use and effectiveness of existingEnvironment and Social Checklist prepared under LGDP I. It discovered thatthe checklist remains the most effective way of screening sub-projects,however, it discovered that this checklist was very rarely used. The reasonsfor this were that it appeared complicated and that capacity was lacking at thelocal levels to use this checklist. The ESMF recommends that the checklist besignificantly overhauled to make it simpler and easier to use at all levels ofthe local government system, but especially for use at the TPC and PMClevels. The ESMF provides additional screening aid, the screening form inAnnex 1, which will be used in conjunction with the revised LGDP 1

6



environmental and social checklist. The revise checklist would be updated toreflect requirements of OP 4.01.

This Environment and Social Management Framework Report presents definitive,conclusive and clear procedures consistent with the Laws in Uganda and the WorldBank Safeguard Policies

7



2.0 INTRODUCTION

The Government of Uganda has asked the World Bank for support for the second LocalGovernment Development Programme (LGDP II). It is planned that basic servicedelivery investments will be financed through Local Development Grants from CentralGovernment to Local Governments. This would take the form of Local Governments andcommunities accessing these funds to finance subprojects for which they are mandatedas provided for under the Second Schedule of the Local Governments Act 1997. It isenvisaged that some of these sub-projects will involve the construction of water supplyand sanitation facilities, storm drainage facilities (e g. culverts, earth drains), primaryeducation facilities, primary health care facilities, road infrastructure (mostly feederroads) networks, solid waste management ( dump sites), agricultural extension activities( fish ponds, cattle crashes etc ), extension of rural electricity networks to communities,etc.

However, the sub projects at the time of preparation of the project had not yet beenidentified, therefore the laws of Uganda and Operational Policy 4.01 of the Bank requiresthe GoU to prepare an Environment and Social Management Framework ( referred to byNEMA as a Strategic Environment Assessment, SEA ) which establishes a mechanismto determine and assess future potential environmental and social impacts of LocalGovernment subproject investments under the proposed LGDP II, and then to set outmitigation, monitoring and institutional measures to be taken during implementation andoperation of the subprojects to eliminate adverse environmental and social impacts,offset them, or reduce them to acceptable levels. The GoU is further required todisclose this document in-country as a separate and stand alone document so that it isaccessible by the general public, local communities, project-affected groups, localNGO's and all other stakeholders and also at the Infoshop of the World Bank and thedate for disclosure must precede the date for appraisal of the project.

Since the subprojects mentioned above which are to be created on a demand drivenbasis have not yet been identified, each subproject that is subsequently identified andpromoted by the Local Government or local community would be subjected toenvironmental and social planning and, if required, its own Environmental and SocialImpact Assessment (ESIA) prior to approval. This environmental and social planning andsubproject ESIA would be the instruments through which the subprojects environmentaland social impacts are identified and assessed and would also evaluate alternatives andwould design appropriate mitigation, management and monitoring measures.

Scope of Work

The scope of work is to .

(a) Prepare and Environment and Social Management Framework (ESMF)(b) Prepare a Resettlement Policy Framework

The ESMF is to present a framework for screening, monitoring and mitigating potentialimpacts, with a process for triggering subsequent sub project environment and socialassessments, where necessary.

8



The RPF is required to be separate document, prepared following the appropriate lawsin Uganda and the World Bank Operational Policy 4.12, and is also required to bedisclosed before appraisal of this project The RPF establishes the resettlement andcompensation principles, organizational arrangements and design criteria to be appliedto meet the needs of the people who may be affected by the project activities requiringland acquisition and /or denial, restriction or loss of access to economic resources.

Study Approach and Methodology

The study was conducted by the consultant using the following approach andmethodology;

* Review of the LGDP II literature including the Project Concept Document (PCD),the evolving draft Project Appraisal Document (PAD), the approved IntegratedSafeguards Data Sheet (ISDS), Mission Aide Memoir's, Project ImplementationPlan for LGDP (I), Participatory Guide to Local Councils, Environment MitigationPlan for LGDP (I) (which contains the referred to checklist), The Constitution ofthe Republic of Uganda 1995, The Local Governments Act 1997, The NationalEnvironment Statute 1995, The Land Act 1998, World Bank Safeguards Policiesand other relevant documents.

* A ten day study tour in Uganda during which discussions were held with theManagement of the Project Coordinating Unit and Officials of the NationalEnvironment Authority (NEMA) at the national level in Kampala, and field visits toMasaka Municipal Council, Mubende District, Mbale Municipal County Counciland Wakiso District where discussions were held with management of these localgovernments followed by site visits to subprojects completed during the LGDP I,where discussions were also held with management and staff of these facilitiesand with members of local communities Using the specific circumstances ofeach local government visited, their capacity to implement the proposedscreening process using the environment checklist and mitigation measures wasassessed, including their capacity to provide support to their communities incases of community managed sub-projects (e g where PMC's were in charge)and solicited and discussed appropriate recommendations for improvement inservice delivery, mitigation, monitoring, institutional requirements and theirtraining and capacity building needs. The local governments and communitiesremained extremely supportive of the LGDP I and the planned LGDP II projectand their level of support was evident in their enthusiasm to participate and theirlively contribution in the discussions and field visits, and also in their verbalstatements that the LGDP I had brought meaningful development to theircommunities and that they were looking forward to the LGDP II and wished tocommend and thank their Government and the World Bank for their continuedsupport. In this spirit of community support and ownership, therecommendations reached in this report were jointly agreed to as reflecting theneeds of the communities and were thus seen as sustainable It was notuncommon to hear " if it was not for the LGDP I, this school, or this health unit,this road would not have been built in my community".

9



* During the discussions with the local governments and their local communities,the use, scope and efficacy of existing environmental checklist was discussedand mutually agreed conclusions were drawn.

* The discussions and field visits took the form of the consultant and a member ofthe PCU arriving at a pre-arranged meeting at the administrative offices of thelocal government visited, where the senior management of the LG was present.Following introductory remarks by the member of the PCU accompanying theconsultant, the administrative head of the LG would make his remarks and thenthe consultant was invited to make his presentation. The presentation of theConsultant can be generally characterized as stating the purpose of his mission,followed by explaining in some detail the requirements of the EA and RPF andthe key features of the corresponding World Bank Operational Policies , a callfor the LG to share their experiences in LGDP I on any environmental and socialissues in light of the requirements of the EA/RPF, and then the consultant wouldfinalize his remarks by looking at the sector grouped list of facilities completedunder LGDP 1 and then make a request to visit typical sites on the list. This wasfollowed by an open Q&A session and then the field visit to the sites. Oncompletion of the field visits, the group returned to the administrative offices ofthe LGs, where a summary meeting was held to discuss environmental andsocial concerns based on observations of/ from the field/site visits, sharedexperiences during the Phase 1 project and recommendations and requirementsfor compliance with the EA/RPF requirements for the LGDP 11 project

* The consultations of the consultant with members of the local communities andmanagement staff of facilities/subprojects implemented under LGDP 11 were heldduring site/field visits in the presence of the member accompanying theconsultant from the PCU and the representatives of the LG's of that area Theconsultant would start by briefly stating the purpose of his visit and quickly tourthe facility and ask questions of the management staff. Members of the localcommunities who were present ( the management staff are a goodrepresentation of the local communities as they are often from "down the road" inthe local community) would explain their constraints and problems withimplementing the mitigation measures and would often make their ownrecommendations on how to effectively mitigate environment and social impactsdue to the subprojects they were now managing.

* These discussions and consultations with the local governments and thecommunities proved invaluable in designing and coming up with appropriatesolutions and recommendations that the communities could claim ownership ofand thus ensure the sustainability of the project as a whole. The discussions andconsultations were the backbone of the work done by the consultant.

* Report writing.

10



3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

The overall development objective of the proposed LGDP II is to improve LocalGovernment institution performance for sustainable, decentralized service delivery andis structured to achieve its objectives within five major investments components of theproject, which are;

The overall development objective of the proposed LGDP II is to improve LocalGovernment institution performance for sustainable, decentralized service delivery andis structured to achieve its objectives within five major investments components of theproject, which are;

a) Component 1: Support for the Decentralization Process, will consistof activities to support the improvement of the Local Governments (LG's)to plan and implement projects which will be funded by the LocalGovernment Development Grant (Component 2), support of annualworkshop through which progress towards decentralization in Uganda willbe assessed, and establishment of an analytical and design basis for thedevelopment of a decentralization budget support instrument. It wouldalso provide support to the national assessment system,operationalization of the planning guidelines and information systems.

b) Component 2: Local Development Grants This component comprisesa non-sectoral conditional grant (termed the Local Development Grant,LDG), distributed on a formula basis between all local authorities inUganda for investment in local infrastructure in accordance with localneeds as these are determined through local planning and budgetprocesses. Although all local authorities will be eligible to receive LDGfunding, actual access to the grant will be determined by capacity,accountability, and performance conditionality which are designed toprovide incentives for improvements in sustainable service delivery at thelocal level. All tiers of local governments are eligible for accessing theseresources , however, access to these funds will be limited to only thoseLGs which have met a set of minimum institutional, financial andoperational requirements. The level of funding transferred to the LG's willincrease gradually during the life of the program along with a gradualswapping of sector grants and bilateral district support programs intoLGDP modality

Local Governments and communities will access the LDG for financing ofsub projects for which they are mandated as provided for under theSecond Schedule of the Local Government Act 1997. Experiences fromthe LGDP I have however shown that most of the services invested in, byLG's are in the sector of primary health care, primary education, waterand sanitation, feeder roads and agriculture extension. The typical size ofmost of these investments can be categorized in three ranges (i) up to$25,000 (ii) $25,000 to $50,000 and (iii) $50,000 to $75,000.

c) Component 3: Capacity Building. This component will enhance thecapacity of LG's to fulfill their mandates and to develop and test a system

1 1



for sustained capacity building and training of LGs to meet the capacitybuilding needs of individuals as well as organizations. An assessment ofthe capacity building and training activities within LGDP 1, has revealed aneed for increased quality as well as a need for a more coordinated effort.Thus, though much capacity building takes place at LG level (funded by anumber of sources and agencies), it is to a large extent uncoordinated,often overlapping and with different (sometimes conflicting) approaches,content and methodologies. There is a need for establishing a nationalframework and system, which can provide the point of departure for ahigh quality national system, where the LGs themselves are empoweredto define needs, procure and carryout training. This component isstructured into three sub-components ;(i) Strategic Framework. NationalStrategy and Institutional Set-up sub-component will assist MoLG tocoordinate capacity building for decentralization by formulating andimplementing a National LG Capacity Building Strategy with theparticipation of relevant stakeholders. The strategy should provide aframework for coordination of capacity building activities for a moredemand driven process, whereby LGs themselves define their trainingneeds, (ii) Strengthen LG Human Resource Development Function sub-component is designed to strengthen the Human Resource DevelopmentFunction of the district and municipal councils to plan for their owncapacity development and training needs and thereby support a demanddriven approach to LG training. The LGDP 11 will provide resources for thedevelopment and piloting of a HRD course and introduction courses onthe new manuals to build up ' district resource pools' (trainers in LG)

d) Component 4: Local Government Revenue Enhancement a review ofthe development of the local government revenues has confirmed thefindings from the MTR that this is an area of serious concern for all localgovernments. The specific activities to be funded under this componentwill finalized when the consultants complete their assignments.

e) Support to Project Implementation , this component will containsupport to project management, monitoring and evaluation as well assome key central support activities such as the national assessmentsystem, operating of planning guidelines, LG MIS and review and controlof transfers system under LGDPII.

12


LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM II (LGDP ii)

4.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA OF INFLUENCE

The proposed LGDP II will operate throughout Uganda.

Uganda is a landlocked but well-watered country of 24m people in Eastern Africaendowed with rich and enviable bio-diversity. Located approx. 1 00 N and 32 00 E,Uganda's neighbors are: to the north by Sudan (435 km of land border), the east byKenya (933 km), the south by Tanzania (396 km) and Rwanda (169 km) and to the westby the Democratic Republic of Congo (765 km). Uganda has a substantial and widevariety of natural resources, including fertile soils, regular rainfall, significantly manyrivers and lakes, diverse flora and fauna and sizeable mineral deposits all on about 236,040 sq. km Significantly, 15% of this area is water

The climate is tropical, generally with two wet seasons ( March to May) and Septemberto November) but semi - arid in the Northeast. The terrain is a plateau in some areas butin other areas, fairly perched on gentle slopes with surrounding mountain rims Theelevation extremes range from Lake Albert 621m is the lowest to Margherita Peak onMount Stanley at 5,100m is the highest

The significant water ways in Uganda include the rivers Victoria Nile and Albert NileLakes Victoria, Edward, George, Albert, Kyoga, Kwania, Salisbury, Nakuwa andNakivali.

The main natural resources are copper, cobalt, gold, hydropower, limestone and fertileland.

Agriculture is the most important sector of the economy, employing over 80% of the workforce. Coffee is the major export crop and accounts for the bulk of export revenues TheEU is Uganda's largest trading partner. Other crops produced include tea, cotton,tobacco, cassava, potatoes, corn, millet, pulses; beef, goat meat, milk, poultry, cornflowers, bananas, pineapple and mangos. Sizeable industries in sugar, brewing,tobacco, cotton textiles and cement account for about 5% of the workforce and theservices and trade sectors account for about 13%.

Uganda is a net producer of electricity with peak production of 1.6 billion kwh and peakconsumption of 1.3 billion kwh while exporting 174 kwh. There are in total about17,000km of roads and only 15% of this is paved.

Uganda is a member of many regional, continental and international organizations and isa signatory to many international agreements on the environment that address Blo-diversity, Climate change, Desertification, Endangered Species, Hazardous Wastes,Law of the Sea, Marine Life Conservation, Nuclear Test Ban, Ozone Layer Protectionand Wetlands.

Current environment issues and cause for concern are draining of wetlands foragricultural use, deforestation, overgrazing, soil erosion, water hyacinth infestation inLake Victoria and, widespread and uncontrolled poaching

In the Northern region of the country, the LRA, a rebel force is operating in parts of Gulu,Kitgum, Pader and Nebbi Districts but concentrated around the Victoria Nile Delta.

13



5.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE POLICY, LEGAL, REGULATORY, ANDADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORKS

The Local Government Development Program II ( LGDP II) has been assigned aCategory B project, using the guidelines of the World Bank OP 4 01 on EnvironmentalAssessment. This means that overall, the project is likely to have potential adverseenvironmental impacts on human populations or environmentally important areas -including wetlands, forests, grasslands, and other natural habitats, and that theseimpacts are likely to be less adverse than Category A projects. These impact are likelyto be site specific and reversible through the application of appropriate mitigatory andmonitoring measures.

Uganda has good environmentally regulatory framework enshrined in its Constitution of1995 and in the National Environment Statute 1995 and other local laws and bye-laws.The 1995 Constitution empowers parliament to make laws that provide measuresintended to protect and preserve the environment from abuse, pollution and degradation,to manage the environment for sustainable development and to promote environmentalawareness.

Uganda is also a signatory to and has ratified all major international conventions.

The National Environment Authority (NEMA) was established by the NationalEnvironment Statute 1995 as the principal agency in Uganda responsible for themanagement of the environment and to coordinate, monitor and supervise all activities inthe field of the environment.

The Local Government Act 1997 gives full effect to the decentralization of functions,powers, responsibilities and services to local governments. The Local Governmentsystem in Uganda is based on this policy of decentralization which has achievedsignificant implementation success on the ground, with most if not all local governmentshaving been established and are functional. The LGDP II as a follow on project to LGDPI is designed to support this process of decentralization by strengthening the systemthereby enabling it to carry out its functions of service delivery, etc.

The National Environment Statute 1995

This statute provides for the sustainable management of the environment andestablishes NEMA setting out its modus operandi and roles and responsibilities . Thestatute further sets the regulatory requirements for Environmental Planning,Establishment of Environmental Standards, Environment Management, Control ofPollution, Environmental Restoration Orders and Environmental Easements, Record-Keeping, Inspection and Analysis, Financial Provisions, Offences, Judicial Proceedingsand International Obligations.

This statute establishes The Policy Committee on the Environment with the followingfunctions;

i) to provide policy guidelines, formulate and coordinate environmental policiesfor NEMA.

ii) Liaise with the cabinet on issues affecting the environment.

14



ill) Identify obstacles to the implementation environmental policy andprogrammes and ensure implementation of those policies and programmes.

iv) To perform any other function that may be assigned to it by the Government.

The National Environment Authority (NEMA)

The functions of NEMA as mandated by the National Environment Statute 1995 are;

i) to co-ordinate the implementation of government policy and the decision ofthe Policy Committee.

ii) To ensure the integration of environmental concerns in overall nationalplanning through co-ordination with national ministries, departments andagencies of government ( including Local Governments).

iii) To liaise with the private sector, inter-governmental organizations, non-governmental agencies, governmental agencies of other states on issuesrelating to the environment.

iv) To propose environmental policies and strategies to the Policy Committee.v) To initiate legislative proposals, standards and guidelines on the environment

in accordance with statute.vI) To review and approve environmental impact assessments and

environmental impact statements submitted in accordance with statute.vii) To promote public awareness through formal, non formal and informal

education about environmental issues;viii) To undertake such studies and submit such reports and recommendations

with respect to the environment as the Government or the Policy Committeemay consider necessary

ix) To ensure observance of proper safeguards in the planning and execution ofall development projects, including those already in existence that have orare likely to have significant impact on the environment determined inaccordance with statute;

x) To undertake research , and disseminate information about the environment.xi) To prepare and disseminate a state of the environment report once in every

two years.xii) To mobilize, expedite and monitor resources for environmental management.xiii) To perform such other functions as the Government may assign to NEMA or

as are incidental or conducive to the exercise by NEMA of any or all of thefunctions provided for under Statute.

15



The Local Government Act 1997

The local Government Act provides for the system of local governments.Administratively, Uganda is divided into five levels of Local Governments whereby eachlevel has statutory functions with respect to participatory development planning.

The five levels are as follows

Local Government Unit Level

District Councils and 5Kampala City Council

County Councils and 4Municipal Councils

Sub County Councils 3Town CouncilsMunicipal DivisionsCity Divisions

Parish Councils 2

Village Councils 1

There are 56 districts and each district sub divided into counties, which in turn aredivided into sub-counties/towns followed by parishes and villages. There are 13Municipal Councils which are sub divided into Municipal Divisions followed by parishesand villages. There is one city council which is Kampala City Council which is sub-divided into 4 city divisions

The District Councils, City Councils, Municipal Councils, sub-county Councils, MunicipalDivision Councils and Town Councils are Local Governments The County Councils,Parish Councils and Village Councils are administrative units.

Local Governments are corporate bodies and are charged with the responsibility ofproviding services, which are stipulated in Part II of the Second Schedule of the LocalGovernments Act 1997 with the following powers, functions and responsibilities devolvedto them;

a) The powers to prepare, approve and implement their own development plansbased on locally determined priorities.

b) The powers to prepare, approve and implement their own budgets.c) The powers to raise and utilize their own resources according to their own

priorities after making legally mandated transfers.d) The powers to make ordinances and by laws as long as they do not

contradict the Constitution and other national laws.e) The powers to hire, manage and fire their own stafff) The powers to manage their own payrolls and separate personnel system.

16



Local Governments are by law required to formulate three year rolling developmentplans The plans should incorporate priorities and plans for lower councils. Also, thisstatute mandates Village and Parish executive committees to initiate, encourage,support and participate in self help projects and to monitor local governments.

The Guide to Participatory Planning and Management

A Guide to Participatory Planning and Management for local governments exist toprovide agencies working in communities with a framework and guidelines that will formthe basis for participatory bottom up planning. The guide will also serve as a tool tofacilitate local government Councils review their performance against previous plans.This guide focuses very much on Participatory Approaches to planning, is consistentwith the provisions of the Constitution, the Local Government Act 1997, theDecentralization Policy and the LGDP I followed very closely the provisions in this guide.This guide is now the "bible" as to how the management of planning occurs in localgovernments, the relationship in this process between the Ministry of Local Governmentand the Local Governments and is fully operational on the ground.

Division of Responsibilities for Different Categories of Investment sub-project,

Community Projects Sub-county/Division/Town District ProjectsCouncil Projects

Identification Beneficiaries, * Parish(via Investment * By the Parish,Community Level Committee) or passed to Sub-

* Sub-County/Division/Town county/Division/ToCouncil wn Council, or by

Sub-county/Division/Town Council thenpassed to District,or

* B the districtInitial Prioritization Parish Development Investment Committee, District Council

Committee, endorsed endorsed by Local Governmentby Parish Council Council

Design/Costing Investment Committee Investment Committee District Technical Dept(or service provider,where service cannotbe provided by theDept

Appraisal/Screenin Technical Planning Technical Planning Committee District Technical9 Committee with comments from District Planning Committee

Technical Committee/Planner with District PlannerAllocation/Approva Local Council Local Government Council District Council

Tendering N/a Depends of threshold Depends on thresholdConstruction Local hire of labor/use Through tendering Through tendering

of local governmentstaff

Supervision Mainly Sub- Supervisor of Works or private Supervisor of Works, orcounty/Division/Town supervisor - for smaller works service provider

Drawn for the Harmonized Participatory Planning Guide (HPPG).

17



Council Technical also Sub-county TechnicalPlanning Committee- Committeealso District Tech Deptor service provider

Monitoring Project Management Project Management Committee Project ManagementCommittee, Local or sub-county investment Committee, or sub-councils, Parish Chief committee county or District,

depending on source ofproposal, LC's

Ownership Project Management Various possibilities. a) Parish or Various possibilities a)Committee Sub-County/Division/Town Parish or Sub-

Council, b) CBO, c) Local County/DivisionfTownCouncil Council, b) CBO, c)

Local Council, d)District

Operation and User group Owners responsibility, but Sub- Owners responsibilityMaintenance arrangements, Project county/Division/Town Council if plus Distnct recurrent

Management recurrent costs at that level, costs, ProjectCommittees Project Management Committee Management

Committees

The main existing technical committees with responsibilities identified in this EA are asshown in these tables;

At Village Level

Institution Composition Roles and ResponsibilitiesVillage Council . As provided for in the Local * Attend village planning

Governments Act 1997 meetings. Identify and submit to the

Parish Chief and Parish* Council issues of concern in

the village. Resolve problems identified at

the Village Level. Plan the mobilization of locally

available materials and labortowards the village projects

. Monitor the delivery of serviceswith the village

* Plan and budget for themaintenance of villageinvestments (e g watersources)

Village Executive * As provided for in the Local * Collect, analyze and keepGovernments Act 1997 village

information/data(maintain

village data bank). Mobilize village members for

planning meetings

. Initiate, encourage, supportand participate in self-helpprojects

* Submit village proposals to theParish Council for

18



consideration. Oversee implementation of

village Council decisions. Monitor projects and other

activities undertaken by theGovernment, LocalGovernments and NGO's inthe area

. Report to the Village CouncilParish/Sub-county/District onthe developmentactivities/concerns of thevillage

Project * Parish and Village Executive . Providing project site securityManagement Members a Mobilizing communityCommittee (PMC) * Community representatives from contribution for project

Project Catchment Area implementation. Representatives of . Organizing meetings for

disadvantaged groups (women, project implementationyouths, IDP's etc ) . Organizing community

. One third of members must be operation, management andwomen maintenance

At Parish Level

Structure Composition Roles and ResponsibilitiesParish Council * As provided for in the Local . Discuss and approve Parish Plans

Governments Act 1997 (plans to be implemented by theparish using the parish resources)

. Discuss and decide on Parishpriorities to be submitted to theSub-county

Parish Executive . As provided for in the Local . Initiate, encourage, support andCommittee Governments Act 1997 participate in self-help projects

. Mobilize people, materials andtechnical assistance for Parishself-help projects

* Oversee implementation of ParishCouncil decisions

a Monitor projects and otheractivities undertaken by theGovernment, Local Governmentsand NGO's in the area

. Report to the Village CouncilParish/sub-county on developmentactivities/concerns of the village,

. Monitor and supervise the activitiesof the PDC

Parish Development . Parish Chairperson * Regularly update and compileCommittee (PDC) . Parish Chief parish information/data(maintain

. Two members from every parish databank)yillage council(one male . Identify parish developmentand one female) potentials/opportunities,

19



. Four members from the development challenges, prioritiesParish Council, at least one . Assemble all village prioritiesmust be a woman based on the parish mandate

* Up to four representatives . Identify parish wide priorities basedof NGO's/CBO's operating on the parish mandatewithin the Parish where . Formulate Parish vision andthey exist development strategies

. One representative of the . Integrate village proposals intoPrivate sector operating in parish proposalsthe Parish a Formulate/review draft parish

action plans and annual work plan. Appraise parish proposals with

technical support of the Sub-county Technical PlanningCommittee

. Identify and recommend to ParishCouncil, priorities to beimplemented using parishresources

* Identify and recommend to ParishCouncil priorities to be forwardedto Sub-county Council for sub-county funding

. Facilitate village levelconsultations

At the Local Government Level (Sub-county/Divisions and Town Councils)

Structure Composition Roles and ResponsibilitiesSub- * As provided for in the . The Supreme Planning Authority inCounty/Division/Town Local Governments Act the sub-county/Division/TownCouncil 1997 Council

. Discuss and approve three yearrolling Development Plan

* Discuss and approve annualestimates of revenue andexpenditure

. Ensure integration an incorporationof lower local council plans into thesub-county/Division/Town councilplan

* Approve sub-county/Division/Townpriorities to be submitted to theDistrict/City Council forconsideration by the District/CityCouncil

Executive Committee . As provided for in the . Initiate and formulate policy forLocal Governments Act approval of Council1997 . Oversee the implementation of

Council policy. Monitor the implementation of

Council programmes. Consider and evaluate the

20



performance of the council againstthe approved work plans andprogrammes at the end of everyfinancial year

. Serve as a communication channelbetween the Government, DistrictCouncil and people in the area

. Monitor and supervise projects andother activities undertaken byGovernment, District, LocalGovernments and NGO's in thearea

Technical Planning . Sub-county/Town Clerk as * Co-ordinate and integrate allCommittee (TPC) Chairperson Sectoral plans

. All Heads of Department or . Co-ordinate and integrate plans forsectors within the area of lower local councils into the SDPjurisdiction of the Local . Appraise individual investmentGovernment projects before presentation to the

council* Appraise Parish Project. Submit the integrated plan to the

Council through the Executivecommittee for consideration

. Facilitate Parish level planningmeetings

. Give technical support to PDC's onplanning and budget issues

Investment * Sub-county council . Preparing preliminaryCommittee representatives costing/design of prioritized

. Community projectsRepresentatives . Prioritizing investments within

. Personnel from relevant limits of the IPF'stechnical departments in * Providing project monitoringthe District and the Sub- * Monitoring/verifying thecounty/Division/Town certification of contractor's (localCouncil hire) works for payment

* Retired Civil servants. Representatives of

disadvantage groups, iewomen, youth, people withdisabilities (PWDs) etc

N.B. TPC's and the PMC's exist for each project at each level

21



Land Tenure and Ownership

The Uganda Constitution of 1995

Land tenure in Uganda is governed by statute such as the 1995 Constitution, the LandAct 1998 and the Land Acquisition Act 1965 Article 237 (1) of the constitution vests allland in Uganda in the citizens of Uganda However, under Article 237 (1) a , thegovernment or local government may acquire land in the public interest. Such acquisitionis subject to the provisions of Article 26 of the same constitution, which gives everyperson in Uganda a right to own property The constitution also prescribes that land inUganda shall be owned in accordance with following land tenure systems;

* Customary* Freehold,* Mailo* Leasehold.

It provides procedures to follow during the acquisition of land for public interest andprovides for prompt payment of fair and adequate compensation prior to takingpossession of land. The constitution is however silent on resettlement andcompensation.

Key features of the recognized forms of land tenure are;

Customary Tenure

* Is governed by rules generally accepted as binding and authoritative bythe class of persons to which it applies. That is customary tenure is notgoverned by written law.

* Land is owned in perpetuity* Customary occupants are occupants of former public land and occupy the

land by virtue of their customary rights; they have propriety interest in theland and are entitled to certificates of customary ownership.

* Certificates of customary ownership may be obtained, through applicationto the Parish Land Committee and eventual issuance by the District LandBoard.

Freehold Tenure

* Derives its legality from the constitution and its incidents from thewritten law.

* Involves the holding of land in perpetuity or a term fixed by a condition* Enables the holder to exercise, subject to the law, full powers of

ownershipMailo Tenure

* Has roots in the allotment of land pursuant to the 1990 UgandaAgreement

* Derives its legality from the constitution and its incidents fromwritten law

22



* Involves the holding of land in perpetuity* Permits the separation of ownership of land from the ownership of

developments on land made by a lawful or bona fide occupant* Enables the holder to exercise all powers of ownership, subject to

the rights of those persons occupying the land at the time of thecreation of the mailo title and their successors.

Leasehold Tenure

* Is created either by contract or by operation of the law.* Is a form under which the landlord of lessor grants the tenant or lessee exclusive

possession of the land, usually for a period defined and in return for a rent* The tenant has security of tenure and a proprietary interest in the land.

The Land Act (1998)

The 1998 Land Act addresses land holding, management control and disputeprocessing. The act creates a series of land administration institutions, namely, UgandaLand Commission (ULC), District Land Boards (DLB), Parish Land Committees (PLC)and land tribunals. Section 78 of the Act gives valuation principles for compensation, i.e.compensation rates to be yearly approved by DLBs. The basis for compensation aredepreciated replacement costs for rural properties and market values for urbanproperties.

Uganda clearly has the regulatory and administrative framework for issues related to theenvironment

23



6.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE WORLD BANK'S SAFEGUARD POLICIES

The World Bank Safeguard Policies are;

1. Environmental Assessment OP 4.012. Natural Habitats OP 4.043. Forestry OP 4 364 Pest Management OP 4.095. Cultural Property OP 4.116. Indigenous Peoples OD 4.207. Involuntary Resettlement OP 4.128. Safety of Dams OP 4.379. Projects on International Waters OP 7.5010. Projects in Disputed Areas OP 7.60

In light of the type of future sub-projects anticipated, the following World BankOperational Policies will/may apply:

OP 4.01 Environmental AssessmentOP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement

Sub projects that trigger the policies on Safety of Dams , Natural Habitats, Forestry, PestManagement, Cultural Property, Indigenous Peoples, Projects on International Watersand Projects in Disputed areas would not be supported under the project.

* OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment

This policy requires environmental assessment (EA) of projects proposed for Bankfinancing to help ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and thusto improve decision making. The EA is a process whose breadth, depth, and type ofanalysis depend on the nature, scale, and potential environmental impact of the subproject activities of LGDP II. The EA process takes into account the natural environment( air, water, and land); human health and safety; social aspects (involuntaryresettlement, indigenous peoples, and cultural property) and transboundary and globalenvironmental aspects.

The environmental and social impacts of the LGDP II project will come from the activitiesof the many sub projects that the LGDP II will be financing. However, since the subprojects will not identified before appraisal of the project, the EA process calls for theGoU to prepare a Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) reportwhich will establish a mechanism to determine and assess future potentialenvironmental and social impacts of the local government and community sub projectinvestments under the proposed LGDP II, and then to set out mitigation, monitoring andinstitutional measures to be taken during implementation and operation of the subprojects to eliminate adverse environmental and social impacts, offset them, or reducethem to acceptable levels.

24



OP 4.01 further requires that the ESMF report must be disclosed as a separate andstand alone document by the Government of Uganda and the World Bank as a conditionfor Bank Appraisal of the LGDP II. The disclosure should be both in Uganda where it canbe accessed by the general public and local communities and at the Infoshop of theWorld Bank and the date for disclosure must precede the date for appraisal of theproject.

The policy further calls for the LGDP II project as a whole to be environmentallyscreened to determine the extent and type of the EA process. The LGDP II has thusbeen screened and assigned a Category B

Category B projects are likely to have potential adverse environmental impactson human populations or environmentally important areas - including wetlands,forests, grasslands, and other natural habitats - and are less adverse than thoseof category A projects. These impacts are site specific, few if any of them areirreversible, and in most cases mitigation measures can be designed morereadily than for category A projects. The EA process for category B projectsexamines the potential negative and positive environmental impacts andrecommends any measures needed to prevent, minimize, mitigate, orcompensate for adverse impacts and improve environmental performance.

Therefore, this ESMF sets out to establish the EA process to be undertaken for subprojects in the proposed LGDP II project when they are being identified.

* OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement

Significant efforts are to be made in the design and screening stages of sub projectsto avoid impacts on people, land, property, including people's access to natural andother economic resources, as far as possible. Notwithstanding, land acquisition,compensation and resettlement of people seem inevitable for certain categories ofsub projects. This social issue is of crucial concern to the Government of Ugandaand the Bank as its impact on poverty, if left unmitigated, is negative, immediate andwidespread. Thus, a resettlement policy framework has been prepared by thegovernment and approved by the bank in compliance with OP 4.12 This frameworksets the guidelines for the resettlement plans that would have to be prepared for anysub project that triggers this policy. The resettlement plans would have to besubmitted to the TPC for approval but would also have to be approved by the Bankbefore the sub projects are financed.

This policy would be triggered when a sub project causes the involuntary taking ofland and other assets resulting in: (a) relocation or loss of shelter, (b) loss of assetsor access to assets (c) loss of income sources or means of livelihood, whether or notthe affected persons must move to another location.

The resettlement policy applies to all displaced persons regardless of the totalnumber affected, the severity of the impact and whether or not they have legal title tothe land. Particular attention should be paid to the needs of vulnerable groupsamong those displaced. The policy also requires that the implementation of theresettlement plans are a pre-requisite for the implementation of the sub projects to

25



ensure that displacement or restriction of access does not occur before necessarymeasures for resettlement and compensation are in place. For sub projects involvingland acquisition, it is further required that these measures include provision ofcompensation and of other assistance required for relocation, prior to displacement,and preparation and provision of resettlement sites with adequate facilities, whererequired In particular, the taking of land and related assets may take place only aftercompensation has been paid and, where applicable, resettlement sites, new homes,related infrastructure and moving allowances have been provided to displacedpersons. For sub projects requiring relocation or loss of shelter, the policy furtherrequires that measures to assist the displaced persons are implemented inaccordance with the sub projects resettlement plan of action. The policy aims to havethe displaced persons perceive the process to be fair and transparent.

OP 4.12 requires the RPF to be disclosed both in Uganda and at the Bank beforeappraisal.

26



7.0 PROPOSED INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR ENVIRONMENTALAND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT

7.1 Background and Lessons Learned.

As presented earlier, the institutions of the local government system that exist on theground are truly functional. The links between Central Government and LocalGovernments and that between Local Governments is established and operational. Inthis respect the Government of Uganda has achieved remarkable success down thispath of decentralization and should be commended for it.

However, there are weaknesses in the system. These weaknesses are not structuralbecause the many different layers that exist are necessary to ensure accountability,community participation and delivery of services. The weaknesses in the localgovernment system are in the linkages between the layers and how effectively thisfacilitates a bottom up approach in terms of planning and decision making on one handand on the other is being followed by flow of knowledge transfer in the reverse top downdirection. For sustainability of the decentralized local government system, maintaining afunctional two directional flow is where the challenges lie.

Therefore, the proposals presented in this section are designed so that the proposedLGDP 11 will strengthen the linkages between the layers in both directions so as toachieve sustainable socio-economic development in Uganda.

During the course of the in-country consultations for the preparation of this EA reportthe following concerns were raised;

(i) The so called Environmental check list prepared for use in the LGDP I toscreen the sub-projects by the relevant committees were very rarelyused. The reasons for this as expressed by those consulted in the localgovernments was that the check list was too long and complicated for thesize and scale of sub projects being planned, and that there was no oneperson in any of the committee's whose responsibility it was to ensurethere use. The reason partly for this was that even though the LocalGovernments from Level 4 down were suppose to have an environmentalofficer, that post has remained unfilled.

(ii) There is an environmental officer at the level of the District Councils butgiven the size and shear volume of sub-projects being planned andimplemented at lower level, the technical back up to lower localgovernments was unavailable

(iii) There were far too many completed and handed over investments/sub-projects that were not being properly maintained and as a result eventhough they were suitable designed in compliance with environmentalsafeguards, these facilities were not functional and the very mitigationmeasures designed to address impacts were now rendered ineffective.For instance sewage disposal systems for toilets were blocked andspilling out raw sewage onto the ground, public water stand pipes werenot draining as designed again due to blockages in the system, solid and

27



liquid medical waste from health units was being dumped on the groundor in uncovered pits in the ground, classroom blocks were left in poorstate of maintenance over protracted periods etc.

(iv) More so for agribusiness type sub-projects such as demonstration cattlecrashes (for vaccinating cattle) and new technology seed and cropdemonstration plant farms, etc., these were located too closely to surfacewater courses and natural springs when they did not conform to therequirements of a proper waste management plan and pest managementplan. In LGDP II there is expected to be a considerable proliferation ofthese type of agribusiness investments that are expected to yieldconsiderable agricultural outputs

(v) The Project Management Committees clearly did not see their role asmonitoring the mitigation measures designed into their facilities.

(vi) The local governments whose role it was to monitor the PMC's seemedsimply overwhelmed by the large number of sub-projects to monitor andthe great travel distances between their head offices and the location ofthese facilities posed significant obstacles to effective monitoring.

(vii) In many cases too, it appeared that there was a deficiency in theengineering design of the facilities and the designed mostly favoredexcessive cutting down on construction costs which inevitably lead tosignificantly higher costs in maintaining these facilities . This was due topoor supervision of the designers and of the construction process.

(viii) The level of community participation was difficult to ascertain as allavailable indicators led to determining only those who participated. It wasdifficult to conclusively and accurately determine what percentage of thecommunity participated and what percentage did not.

(ix) On issues of resettlement, this remained a gray area. The emphasis wasput on the community to identify their own land without the TechnicalPlanning Committees making any attempt to determine whether or notpeople in those communities were impacted. The TPC's assumed thatsince the land was identified by the community, any resettlement issuesthat led to compensation did not arise or if they did, that it was settled inan amicable way.

7.2 Institutional Framework

7.2.1 Recommendations

The following institutional arrangements are recommended to address the issuesidentified above. To use the existing local government structure but to strengthen theinstitutions through changes in responsibilities of technical people on committee's,putting an effective monitoring mechanism procedure in place and in providing training atall levels of local government to build capacity. Specifically;

28



(a) Identify a person on every Local Government Councils, TPC's,PMC's and PDC's . This person is to serve as the EnvironmentalResource Person ( not a new post but adding responsibility to one ofthe existing post in the committee) who would be the custodian of theEnvironmental and Social Checklist with overall responsibility ofensuring compliance of the requirements thereof This resourceperson would be provided training. This will strengthen the top downlinkages with knowledge transfer to the lowest levels of the localgovernment system.

(b) Place responsibility of management of sub-projects on the PMC's andmonitor compliance by ensuring that monthly/quarterly/half yearlyreports (some may be in the form of filling out simple half page forms)are completed and sent to the next higher level of TPC The reports toindicate operational state of sub-project and measures taken in thatperiod to repair or restore functionality. If reports are not regularlyforthcoming or if report after report constantly indicates pooroperational state of facility, this would indicate the level ofmaintenance of the sub-project by the PMC. This could then befollowed with a site Visit to help the PMC address the problem Theincentive of looking favorable on those communities that look aftertheir sub-projects against those who do not at the planningcommittees when the decisions are made next time around on whichcommunities are approved for additional sub-projects This reportingsystem is designed to provide information to the higher localgovernments to assist them with their monitoring responsibilitieswithout them having to make site visits to all of them. This strengthensthe linkages in the bottom up linkages by providing information fromthe level of the sub-project operators to higher levels where thisinformation can be processed and changes made which can be feedback down the local government structures

(c) The Environmental and Social Checklist remains the most effectiveway of efficiently screening sub-projects. However, it must be revisedand upgraded so that it conforms with the provisions of this ESMF andall the RPF , but also making it simpler and easier to use by all It usewill also be monitored.

29



7.2.2. Summary of Proposed Institutional Framework

The Proposed Institutional Framework for the LGDP 11 would be the same as that forLGDP I as contained in the "Guide to Participatory Planning and Management"contained in tables on pages 16-20)and summarized here below,

1) Sub projects into categorized into three types:

( a) Local Community Sub Projects

( b) Sub County Sub Projects or Division Sub Projects or Town CouncilSub projects.

(c) District Sub Projects.

2) Approval of Subprojects

Community sub projects are approved by their Local Council.

Sub County, Division, or Town Council sub projects are approved by their LocalGovernment Council.

District sub projects are approved by their District Council.

3) Screening and Appraisal of Subprojects.

Community Sub projects will be screened by the Technical Planning Committee(TPC) who would then recommend for approval to the local council if sub projectcomplies with all requirements including those contained in this ESMF.

Sub County, Division or Town Council sub projects will be screened also by theTPC with support from the District Technical Committee/planner who would thenrecommend for approval to the local government council if sub project complieswith all requirements including those contained in this ESMF

District sub projects will be screened by the District Technical PlanningCommittee assisted by the District Planner who would then recommend forapproval to the District Council if sub project complies with all requirementsincluding those contained in this ESMF.

4) Subproject Implementers/Preparation of Subprojects

Community sub projects will be implemented and prepared on behalf of localcommunities by their Project Management Committees (PMC's).

Sub County , Division and Town Council Sub projects will be implementedprepared by their Investment Committee.

30



District Sub Projects will be implemented and prepared by the District TechnicalDepartment.

It is during this preparation stage that sub project implementers would use thescreening form in Annex 1 and the revised LGDP 1 environmental and socialscreening checklist assisted by service providers to identify any impacts that theirsub projects may have and then before submitting their sub projects to beapproved, would design their sub projects to mitigate these impacts, so that thesub projects they are proposing and have designed would have identified theirimpacts and have mitigated them.

31



8.0 PROPOSED SCREENING/ ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIALASSESSMENT PROCESS FOR SUB PROJECTS

The sections below will illustrate the specific steps involved in the environmental andsocial assessment process leading towards the clearance and approval of EA processfor sub projects. The steps incorporate both, Uganda's guidelines as well as with theBank's policy OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment. In applying these steps, withassistance of the Technical Planning Committees (TPC's) of the local governments, theInvestment Committees (IC's), Project Management Committees (PMC's) and DistrictTechnical Departments (DPT's) (i e. the sub project implementers) will gain initialexperience with the environmental and social assessment of their sub projects Thisinitial experience which will be invaluable to the implementers when they assumeresponsibility for managing the mitigation measures involved in the implementation,operational and monitoring stages of the sub projects. Therefore, under the proposedproject, capacity will be developed at the level of the TPC's ,DPT's, IC's and PMC's andtheir service providers to carry out the following EA process:

(a). Implementers will screen their own sub projects to identify environmentaland social impacts using screening form in Annex 1 and the revisedLGDP I environmental and social checklist In a few cases the checklistmay require that a sub project conducts a sub project environmental andsocial impact assessment (ESIA) for certain types of impacts

(b). Then the implementers will introduce into the sub project design therequired measures to mitigate impacts identified from use of the checklistor sub project ESIA, before submission of the sub project for review andsubsequent approval.

(c). Review and clear the sub projects by ensuring sub project designs haveidentified environmental and social impacts, mitigated these impacts andhave monitoring plans and institutional measures to be taken duringimplementation and operation.

Using the screening form, revised environmental and social checklists and technicalassistance from service providers and information resources supported by thePCU/Local Governments, proposed sub projects will be screened by their respectiveimplementers, to identify any potential adverse impacts/effects from sub projectactivities.

Once impacts are identified the necessary mitigation measure would then be identifiedfrom the checklist and then sub project would be designed to implement thesemitigation measures. For example, from a social standpoint if the screening formidentifies land acquisition needs that trigger OP4 12 on Involuntary Resettlement, thenthe required mitigation measure would be to chose an alternative land site that does nottrigger this policy or, the implementer of the subproject prepares a resettlement andcompensation plan consistent with the disclosed RPF

From an environmental stand point, the screening form and checklist may identifyimpacts from sub project activities, such as contamination of ground water sources dueto inappropriate waste disposal. The mitigation measure may be to chose a site far away

32



from the water source so that chances of contamination are not possible and/orincorporate appropriate waste disposal measures into the design such as channeling allwaste to closed system that is periodically emptied and disposed of safely.For some cases ( a minority of cases) where the impacts from sub project activities aredetermined by use of the checklist to be severe or challenging , the recommendationmay be that a sub project ESIA be carried following which the sub project would then bedesigned to incorporate the required results/mitigation measure.

ESIA will be required for sub projects involving new roads, incorporating the use ofhazardous chemicals and/or managing solid, liquid or medical wastes and for any subproject costing over US$100,000.

See Annex 2.0 for procedures for sub projects requiring ESIA.

Once the implementers have completed the screening of their sub projects and designedinto them the necessary mitigation measures, sub project proposals would then be sentto the respective TPC's for review and to check for compliance with this EA process.

The sub projects that are sent for review must be accompanied by their completedscreening forms and completed checklists. If the screening form has any "Yes" entries,or evidently unjustified "No" entries, the application would need to adequately explainand demonstrate from its design the issue has been managed to avoid unacceptableadverse effects/impacts. If the application has satisfactorily addressed these issues itwill be recommended for approval to the respective approving body. For approved subprojects, the TPC as reviewer will determine environmental and social approvalconditions the implementer must adhere to in the detailed planning, construction andoperation of the investment. These conditions may include, for example, such measuresas public involvement, siting or routing restrictions, construction and operation practices,restoration of disturbed areas, the complete implementation of a plan for resettlement orcompensation for land acquisition and, construction supervision to ensure the approvalconditions are being followed.

If, however the sub project application unsatisfactorily addresses these issues it may berejected out right or rejected with the requirement to carry out a sub project ESIA incases where one was not done before or with specific recommendations such as tochange site, or re-design waste management, reduce air pollution etc.

The rejected sub project will then have to be re-designed and re-screened by theimplementer and then re-submitted for review. The revised application will then have tobe reviewed again and, if now acceptable, will be recommended for consideration forapproval. If it is not acceptable for the second time, it would be referred back to theimplementer for more work or denied clearance altogether.

Any proposed sub projects that do not comply with the requirements of the EnvironmentAct 1995 of Uganda and the requirements of the World Bank Safeguards policies will notbe cleared for approval.

This process is designed to ensure that the environmental and social assessmentprocess is part of and conducted during the sub project design process thereby ensuringthat sub project activities are environmentally and socially sound and sustainable

33



Environmental Management Plan (EMP) subproject proposals must contain as part ofthe subproject proposal an EMP that will consist of a set of mitigation measures,monitoring and institutional measures to be taken during the implementation andoperation of the sub projects to eliminate adverse environmental and social impacts,offset them or reduce them to acceptable levels. The EMP should also include theactions needed to implement these measures, including the following features,

Mitigation: Based on the environmental and social impacts identified fromuse of the cheklists, the EMP should describe with technical details eachmitigation measure, together with designs, equipment descriptions andoperating procedures as appropriate.

Monitoring: Environmental and social monitoring during the implementationof the sub projects, in order to measure the success of the mitigationmeasures. The EMP should include monitoring objectives that specify thetype of monitoring activities that will be linked to the mitigation measures.Specifically, the monitoring section of the EMP provides:

* A specific description and technical details of monitoringmeasures that include the parameters to be measured, the methods to beused, sampling locations, frequency of measurements, detection limits (where appropriate), and definition of thresholds that will signal the needfor corrective actions, e.g. the need for on site construction supervision

* Monitoring and reporting procedures to ensure early detection ofconditions that necessitate particular mitigation measures and to furnishinformation on the progress and results of mitigation, e.g. by annualaudits and surveys to monitor overall effectiveness of the ESMF.

The EMP should also provide a specific description of institutional arrangements , i.e.who is responsible for carrying out the mitigating and monitoring measures ( foroperation, supervision, enforcement, monitoring of implementation, remedial action,financing, reporting and staff training.)

Additionally, the EMP should include an estimate of the costs of the measures andactivities recommended so that the PMC's can budget the necessary funds Similar tothe process for carrying out the ESIA, the mitigation and monitoring measuresrecommended in the EMP should be developed in consultation with all affected groupsto include their concerns and views in the design of the EMP.

Public Consultations: Public consultations are critical in preparing an effective andsustainable sub project. This requirement supports the participatory planning processthat exist in Uganda at the local government/councils level when sub projects are beingidentified as part of the development and implementation local development plans for thearea. The first step is to hold public consultations with the local communities and allother interested /affected parties These consultations should identify key issues anddetermine how the concerns of all parties will be addressed in the terms of reference ofthe design of sub project activities. To facilitate meaningful consultations, the localgovernments through their implementers will provide all relevant material andinformation concerning the sub projects in a timely manner prior to the consultation, in a

34



form and language that are understandable and accessible to the groups beingconsulted. Depending on the public interest in the potential impacts of the sub projects, apublic hearing may be requested to better convey concerns. To ensure that anappropriate public consultation mechanism is developed, the TPC's will ensure that therevised LGDP 1 checklist includes such a requirement. Once the sub project has beenreviewed and cleared by the TPC's and local government councils, the implementers willinform the public about the results of the review. This approach would be consistent withthe Bank's OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment as well as Uganda's efforts to enhanceits participatory planning process.

35



9.0 PROPOSED CAPACITY BUILDING MEASURES AND COSTSESTIMATES

Capacity building for environmental and social management

As described in an earlier section of this framework, component 3 of the LGDPII projecthas a Capacity Building Component to finance, develop and strengthen the private andpublic services sector linked to the decentralization process. The LGDP 11 as part of itsobjectives, is designed to significantly grow the rural economy in Uganda, by buildingcapacity through the development of human resources to generate a viable servicesindustry

This would take the form of primarily identifying trainable members of civil society in thelocal communities, local NGO's and public service workers to become service providersto the PMC's and to serve on the TPC's providing technical assistance to them in theareas of environmental impact assessment, screening etc Members of the communitiesthemselves would be trained on how to screen their sub projects and implement theirEMP's and managing the EA process as outlined in this ESMF.

At the moment, it is envisaged that the capacity at the rural level to provide serviceproviders is non existent or very minimal. The local governments have the best capacityfor implementing this EA process and supporting the TPC's Their capacity would begreatly enhanced by this project.

The training program proposed below is directly relevant to the needs of theimplementers and reviewers and the offices of the National Environment Authority(NEMA), particularly, with regard to environmental assessment and environmentalpolicies and procedures. It will be provided through national private institutions of higherlearning.

The inclusion of case studies in the proposed training program would facilitate theexchange of experiences in Uganda and other countries in the region who aresuccessfully implementing community participatory demand driven sub projects througha decentralized local government delivery system, would be particularly helpful. The EAprocess, the screening form in Annex 1 , the revised LGDP 1 Environmental and SocialChecklist and the disclosed resettlement policy framework, would be reviewed in thetraining program so that participants are aware of their content and the responsibilitiesoutlined in them for various parties

Additional training with regard to environmental protection is proposed given theprevalence of many important lakes, wetlands, flora and fauna in Uganda.

36



Proposed Training Program Duration

Environmental and Social assessment process 5dayseScreening process* Assignment of environmental categories* Rationale for using Screening form and Environmental and Social Checklists* Preparation of terms of reference for carrying out ESIA* How to review and approve sub project proposals* The importance of public consultations in the EA process* How to monitor project implementation* Case studies

Environmental and Social policies, procedures and sectoral guidelines 3 days

* Review and discussion of Uganda's environmental policies, procedures, andlegislation.* Review and discussion of the Bank's safeguards policies.* Review of ESIA, Resettlement Plan.* Review and discussion of Uganda's existing sectoral guidelines such as HPPG etc.* Collaboration with institutions at the local, regional and national levels., e g. NEMA.

Selected topics on environmental protection 2 days

* Soil erosion* Flood protection* Waste disposal, including medical/veterinary waste, hazardous chemical wastes suchas pesticides, insecticides, herbicides, etc.* Ground and Surface Water management

Cost estimates

The costs estimates are based on the assumption that the training program will be heldat the regional levels; resource persons are likely to come from other parts of the countryand therefore require travel allowances; participants will come from the local communityand attend during the day only but will receive a per diem. These estimates include anallowance for travel expenses. It is proposed that the training program will beimplemented four times a year, at least once in each quarter in each region over the firsttwo years of the project cycle. The Total costs is estimated at US$250,000

Recommendations

To successfully implement this ESMF, it s recommended that a comprehensive trainingneeds assessment and development of a training strategy plan be carried out as aninitial implementation activity which will , inter alia, determine and conform whether theintense training program proposed will suffice or is required. It is further recommendedthat technical assistance from more experienced environmental practitioners (fromNEMA for example) to "mentor" local government staff and support them in buildingexperience to complement the training program above and thus build their capacity.

37



10.0 MONITORING INDICATORS AND PLAN WITH COSTS

For LDGP I monitoring and evaluation guidelines for the sub-projects were developed tomonitor performance (to guide allocations) and process ( to track the lessons learned toenable project replication) These guidelines suggested what should be monitored,indicators of achievement of improvements, means of verifying the improvements,frequency of monitoring, methodology or how the monitoring will be done, and finallywho is responsible for the monitoring.

Additionally, for LGDP II, these guidelines will be revised to provide clear and functionalenvironmental/social issues monitoring and evaluation roles and responsibilities, and toprovide monitoring indicators in order to measure the success of the mitigationmeasures, cumulative impacts from implementation of multiple sub projects,compliances with approval processes and conditions, and identifying further ESMFprocess-strengthening and capacity building needs.

Responsibilities for Monitoring and Evaluation of the Mitigation Measures would beassigned as follows:

The Technical Planning Committee's (TPC's) - The Local Government Councils willbe responsible for monitoring the environmental and social screening process carriedout by the TPC's . Details of the screening process are outlined earlier in this report.

The Implementers - will be responsible for monitoring of (i) the environmental andsocial assessment work to be carried out on its behalf by service providers, (ii)overseeing the implementation of the resettlement plans. The monitoring will be done bythe technical staff of the implementers who will be trained

The National Environment Authority (NEMA)

NEMA will perform an enforcement monitoring role supported by the local governments(who would perform a self monitoring role) with particular focus on monitoring cumulativeimpacts of the subprojects on a National level and to ensure that individual sub projectmitigation measures are effective at the cumulative and national level. NEMA wouldprimarily achieve this objective taking the overall responsibility for coordinating andimplementing the Training Program and for technical assistance and backup services tothe Local Governments.

Other Government Agencies

The departmental technical heads of Districts and Municipalities will ensure that theyplay an oversight role in sub projects that impact their sectors. For example, the DistrictMedical Officer or the District Education Officer will provide oversight for all health andeducation sub projects, respectively, in their districts.

Monitoring activities by the TPC, Implementers, NEMA, will be performed periodicallythrough performance surveys/audits.

38



The arrangements for monitoring would fit the overall monitoring plan of the entire LGDP11 project which would be through the Ministry of Local Government and the LocalGovernments themselves.

The objective for monitoring will be to make a final evaluation in order to determinewhether the mitigation measures designed into the sub-projects have been successful insuch a way that the pre- subproject environmental and social condition has beenrestored, improved upon or worst than before

A number of indicators would be used in order to determine the status of affected peopletheir environment (land being used compared to before, standard of house compared tobefore, level of participation in project activities compared to before, how many kids inschool compared to before, health standards, how many clean water sources thanbefore, how many people employed than before etc). Therefore, the sub projects EA'swill set three major socio-economic goals by which to evaluate its success:

* Affected individuals, households, and communities are able to maintain their pre-project standard of living, and even improve on it;

* Has the pre-subproject environmental state of natural resources, bio-diversityand flora and fauna, been maintained or improved upon, and

* The local communities remain supportive of the project

In order to access whether these goals are met, the sub-project will indicate parametersto be monitored, institute monitoring milestones and provide resources necessary tocarry out the monitoring activities.

The following parameters and verifiable indicators will be used to measure the EAprocess, RPF, mitigation plans and performance,

For the EA process the following indicators;

* Number of environmental resource persons on committees who havesuccessfully received EA training in screening methods etc. ; evaluate thetraining content, methodology and trainee response to training through feedback.

* Numbers of women trained; assess understanding of the need for the EAprocess as a tool for sustainable development

* Number of local governments who have adopted the EA process as required byLGDP 11; evaluate the rate of adoption

* Number of sub-projects screened.* In how local government planning stages is the EA checklist applied?; Are the

numbers increasing and at what rate?* How has the adoption of the EA requirements improved the ehvironmental health

and bio-physical state of the communities using/affected by the sub-projects* What are the main benefits that members derive from the use of the EA process?

Economic Benefits (i) Increase in achievement of sub-projects adoptingEA guidelines (ii) Increase in revenue for PMC's resulting from adoptionof EA guidelines, compared with conventional practices.

39



Social Benefits - improvement in the environmental health status offarmersEnvironmental Benefits (i) improvement in the sustainable use ofUganda's natural resources.

* Efficiency of sub-projects maintenance and operating performance* Overall assessment of (i) activities that are going well (ii) activities that need

improvem6ents and (iii) remedial actions required.

For RPF the following indicators.

* Questionnaire data will be entered into a database for comparative analysis at alllevels of Local Governments,

* Each individual will have a compensation dossier recording his or her initialsituation, all subsequent project use of assets/improvements, and compensationagreed upon and received.

* The Local Governments will maintain a complete database on every individualimpacted by the sub-project land use requirements includingrelocation/resettlement and compensation, land impacts or damages

* Percentage of individuals selecting cash or a combination of cash and in-kindcompensation,

* Proposed use of payments* The number of contention cases out of the total cases* The number of grievances and time and quality of resolution* Ability of individuals and families to re-establish their pre-displacement activities,

land and crops or other alternative incomes* Mining and Agricultural productivity of new lands* Number of impacted locals employed by the civil works contractors* Seasonal or inter annual fluctuation on key foodstuffs* General relations between the project and the local communities

The following indicators will be used to monitor and evaluate the implementation ofresettlement and compensation plans;

VERIFIABLE INDICATORSMonitoring Evaluation

Outstanding compensation or resettlement contracts Outstanding individual compensation or resettlementnot completed before next agricultural season contractsCommunities unable to set village-level Outstanding village compensation contractscompensation after two yearsGrievances recognized as legitimate out of all All legitimate grievances rectifiedcomplaints lodged.Pre- project production and income ( year before Affected individuals and/or householdsland used) versus present production and income of compensated or resettled in first year who haveresettlers, off-farm-income trainees, and users of maintained their previous standard of living at finalimproved mining or agricultural techniques evaluation.Pre- project production versus present production ( Equal or improved production per householdcrop for crop, land for land).

40



Monitoring and Supervision Plan

The following monitoring and supervision plan is proposed as a basis for initiatingsupervision; this plan will be modified according to progress in the implementation of theProject Implementation Manual.

Project year Monitoring and Supervision activities listed

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Year 1-2

Year 3-4

Year 5-6

Monitoring and Supervision Reporting

To facilitate effective monitoring and supervision of ESMF and RPF implementation, the LGDP IIAssessment Manual will be changed so that the form used by local governments to record basicinformation on approved sub-projects includes the following questions.1) What measures, if any, are included in the subproject to avoid or reduce adverseenvironmental and social impacts9

2) Was an ESIA prepared for the subproject? Yes_ No_ Was a Resettlement Planprepared for the subproject? Yes_ No_3) What environmental and social conditions are attached to the subproject approval?

Furthermore, the assessment questions used on the six-monthly internal LG performancereviews, and the annual independent performance reviews, will be changed to gather informationon the kinds of indicators of ESMF and RFP performance discussed above For these reviews,the basic questions to ask about sub-project implementation are1) Were subproject environmental and social approval conditions followed9 If not, Why?2) Are there evident environmental or social impacts of the subproject that need to be mitigated9

If yes, what mitigation is required?3) What key factor(s) influenced the success (or lack of success) of environmental and socialimpact mitigation measures9

The overall question to ask is. Based on the performance of the subprojects reviewed, what, ifany changes to the ESMF or RFP, and additional training and capacity building, are required toimprove the performance of ESMF and RPF implementation?"

Capacity Development and Training

In order to assist the Local governments in strengthening their environmentalassessment capacity, it will be necessary to recruit qualified service providers to befunded under component 3 of the project. A breakdown of the costs of the serviceproviders is given below.

41



Subproject Implementers: The Local government council responsible for approvingsub-projects will recruit qualified service providers to train environmental resourceperson of the implementers to acquire skills in (i) environmental screening, and (il) thepreparation of mitigation measures ( iii) prepare resettlement plans and sub-projectESIA's. The cost of these activities would be included in the local governmentsdevelopment budget for the community.

Technical Planning Committee's (TPC's): The local government council will recruitqualified service providers to assist in fulfilling its responsibilities , such as review sub-project EA's, resettlement plans, environmental review, monitoring etc.

The costs to be incurred will be as follows:

Environmental assessment of sub-projects. As recommended ESIA's will be carriedout for a minority of sub-projects as needed (see page 32). The average cost ofindividual sub-projects that may require ESIA's is estimated to be around $50,000/sub-projects. It is estimated that 0.5% of the costs will be required to carry out ESIA's,amounting to $250/per ESIA/sub-project. Assuming there are 200 sub-projects in the lifeof LGDPII that require ESIA's, the total cost for EA is estimated at $50,000.

Total cost of carrying out EA: $50,000

Resettlement Plans The preparation of resettlement plans and social assessments willbe carried out by qualified service providers on behalf of implementers . Provision wouldbe made under this project at the district level to support this work. It is estimated that15% of sub-projects or 300 , may require resettlement plans; that it takes about 10 daysto prepare a resettlement plan and related studies, at a rate of $35/day, the preparationof the 300 resettlement plans will cost $105,000.

Total cost of carrying out Resettlement Plan: $105,000

42



ANNEX 1.0

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL SCREENING FORM

The Environmental and Social Screening Form (ESSF) has been designed to assist inthe evaluation of sub-components of the LGDP II in Uganda. The form is designed toplace information in the hands of implementers and reviewers (PMC's and TPC's andLG's) so that impacts and their mitigation measures, if any, can be identified and/or thatrequirements for further environmental analysis be determined

The ESSF contains information that will allow reviewers to determine thecharacterization of the prevailing local bio-physical and social environment with the aimto assess the potential sub project impacts on it. The ESSF will also identify potentialsocio-economic impacts that will require mitigation measures and or resettlement andcompensation.

Name of Sub Project:

Development Sector of Sub Project:

Name of Sub Project Execution Organization:

Name of District where is to be implemented:

Name of Local Government:

Name of Approving Authority:

Name, job title, and contact details for the person who is responsible for filling out thisform.

Name:

Job Title:

Telephone number:

Fax number

E-Mail address.

Date:

Signature-

43



1. Brief Sub Project Description

Please provide information on the type and scale of the sub project (project area, area ofrequired land, approximate size of total building floor areas, etc.)

2. The Natural Environment

(a) Describe the land formation, topography, vegetation in/adjacent to the Sub Projectarea

(b) Estimate and indicate where vegetation might need to be cleared

(c) Are there any environmentally sensitive areas or threatened species (specify below)that could be adversely affected by the project?

(i) Intact natural forests Yes No_

(ii) Riverine forest Yes No_

(iii) Wetlands (lakes, rivers, seasonally inundated areas) Yes No_

(iv) How far is the nearest Wetlands((lakes, rivers, seasonally inundatedareas)? km

(v) Habitats of endangered species for which protection is required underUgandan laws and/or international agreements. Yes No_

(vi) Others (describe) Yes No_

44



3. Rivers and Lakes Ecology

Is there a possibility that, due to construction and operation of the sub project, the riverand lake ecology will be adversely affected ? Attention should be paid to water qualityand quantity; the nature, productivity and use of aquatic habitats, and variations of theseover time.

Yes No_

4. Protected areas

Does the project area (or components of the project) occur within/adjacent to anyprotected areas designated by government (national park, national reserve, worldheritage site etc.)

Yes No_

If the project is outside of, but close to, any protected area, is it likely to adversely affectthe ecology within the protected area areas (e.g., interference with the migration routesof mammals or birds)

Yes No_

5. Geology and Soils

Based upon visual inspection or available literature, are there areas of possible geologicor soil instability (erosion prone, landslide prone, subsidence-prone)?

Yes No_

Based upon visual inspection or available literature, are there areas that have risks oflarge scale increase in soil salinity?

Yes No_

6. Landscape/aesthetics

Is there a possibility that the sub project will adversely affect the aesthetic attractivenessof the local landscape?

Yes No_

45



7. Historical, archaeological or cultural heritage site.

Based on available sources, consultation with local authorities, local knowledge and/orobservations, could the sub project alter any historical, archaeological or culturalheritage site or require excavation near same?

Yes No_

8. Resettlement and/or Land Acquisition

Will involuntary resettlement, land acquisition, or loss, denial or restriction of access toland and other economic resources be caused by sub project implementation?

Yes No_

9. Loss of Crops, Fruit Trees and Household Infrastructure

Will the project result in the permanent or temporary loss of crops, fruit trees andhousehold infra-structure (such as granaries, outside toilets and kitchens, etc)?

Yes No_

10. Noise pollution during Construction and Operations.

Will the operating noise level exceed the allowable noise limits?

Yes No_

11. Solid or Liquid Wastes, including Medical Waste.

Will the sub-project generate solid or liquid wastes, including medical waste?

Yes_ No_

If "Yes", does the project include a plan for their adequate collection and disposal?

Yes_ No_

12. Pesticides, Insecticides, Herbicides or any other Poisonous or HazardousChemicals.

Will the sub-project require the use of such chemicals?

46



Yes No_

If, "Yes", does the sub project include a plan for their safe handling, use and disposal?

Yes_ No_

47



Annex 2.0 Procedures for Sub-project Investments Requiring ESIA

Step 1: Screening

To determine the depth of ESIA required, potential impacts in the following areas needto be considered:

* Social issues* Health issues* Protected areas* Cultural heritage, archaeological sites* Existing natural resources such as forests, soils, wetlands, water resources* Wildlife or endangered species' habitats

Step 2: Scoping

To identify the relevant environmental and social issues, this step determines:

* Level of detail required for the ESIA* Extent of the area to be covered in light of the potential impact zones* Timeframe for the ESIA based on the potential impact zones* Sequencing and scheduling of the various ESIA tasks* Preliminary budgets

Step 3: Preparation of Terms of Reference for sub project ESIAs

Based on the screening and scooping results, ESIA terms of reference will be prepared.The ESIA will be conducted by a local service provider, and the report should have thefollowing format.

* Description of the study area* Description of the sub project* Description of the environment* Legislative and regulatory considerations* Determination of the potential impacts of the proposed sub projects* Public consultations process* Development of mitigation measures and a monitoring plan, including cost

estimates

48



Annex 3.0 LIST OF INDIVIDUALS/INSTITUTIONS

The Project Coordinating Unit, Ministry of Local Government, Kampala

The National Environment Agency, Kampala

Makasa Municipal Council

Mubende District

Mbale Municipal County Council

Wakiso District

The World Bank Task Team

The World Bank ASPEN Team

49



Annex 4.0 REFERENCES

The Assignment Terms of Reference

Project Concept Document (PCD)

The evolving Draft Project Appraisal Document (PAD)

The approved Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet (ISDS)

Mission Aide Memoir's

Project Implementation Plan for LGDP (I)

Participatory Guide to Local Councils

Harmonized Participatory Planning Guide (HPPG) for LGDP I

Environment Mitigation Plan for LGDP (I) (which contains the referred to checklist)

The Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995

The Local Governments Act 1997

The National Environment Statute 1995

The Land Act 1998

World Bank Safeguards Policies

50

Documents

GOVERNMENT OF UGANDA LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/663551468779157665/... · 2016-08-30 · GOVERNMENT OF UGANDA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT