E929VOL. 1

Sri LankaSecond North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) *

Environmental Management Framework

1. Introduction: Sri Lanka North-East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) intends tohelp conflict-affected communities to reestablish at least subsistence level of production andbasic community services. This is to be achieved through repairing of 400 small irrigationschemes and 1,200 km of rural roads, constructing about 400 community buildings and 600drinking water wells and providing livelihood support assistance to most vulnerable people tostart household level income generating activities that would serve as safety nets to overcomeeconomic stress in the event of crop failure and loss in rainfall deficient seasons. Institutionaldevelopment at village level through reforming and strengthening of CBOs (farmersorganizations, rural development societies and women RDSs) is one of the key outputs of theproject. The project covers all eight districts of the North-East province and border villages ofthe four districts of neighboring Uva, North-Central, North-Western Provinces. Theimplementation responsibility was anchored to the North East Provincial Council - first Bankfinanced project in Sri Lanka with a PC as main implementation agency, but GAs as mainpartners of implementation at districts.

2. The project activities interventions are small scale in nature and are widely scatteredover the project area. A large majority of project investments will include labor intensive,small scale civil works and household level, individual, livelihood support income generatingactivities. Civil works are localized activities at village levels likely to be associated withrehabilitation and improvements of irrigation schemes and intra-village rural roads, andconstruction of drinking water facilities and buildings that mostly utilize local constructionmaterial. Individual household level income generating activities are likely to be highlandand home-garden agriculture and livestock and poultry rearing etc. The rehabilitation ofirrigation schemes and ponds will include: (i) strengthening, improving and filling breachesof earthen embankments, repairs to sluices and spill ways; and (ii) cleaning, repairing andimproving the earthen irrigation canals and cement/concrete canal structures. These arestructures with embankment less than 15 m in height. Besides rehabilitation andimprovements, there would be new minor construction of some key structures like falls,division boxes, regulators, measuring structures at canal off-take points for effectiveirrigation and water management. The rehabilitation of village roads will include fillingdepressions and pot holes and grading existing road platforms with borrowed earth, provisionof culverts and other cross drainage structures and side drains. Construction of buildings anddrinking water wells will involve earth excavations and construction of cement/concretestructures.

3. Therefore these activities are not expected to generate significant site-specific orcumulative adverse environmental effects. On the other hand, the nature of rehabilitationactivities, particularly irrigation rehabilitation, by nature would include measures to controland prevent environmental problems such as inadequate drainage, water-logging, salinity etc.Given the small size and rehabilitation nature of the envisaged project components andrelated activities, their potential adverse environmental impacts on human populations orenvironmentally important areas including wetlands, forests, grasslands and other naturalhabitats are not expected be significant. Even if there are negative impacts these are expected

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

to be easily manageable with proper guidance, training and oversight during planning,

imiplementation and monitoring phases of the project activities. Therefore, as is the case with

NEIAP, the proposed NEIAP II is classified as Category B of World Bank's project

environmental classification.

4. Given the nature of project activities, the project adopts a simple and functional

environmental oversight system to guide the management and monitoring of the

environmental aspects of the project. This was particularly necessary as project investments

were being determined through a continuing village planning process and were being

approved on a rolling basis as village plans were developed. The functional environmental

management and oversight system, therefore, includes the following planning,

implementation and monitoring actions.

* Development and application of checklists of potential environmental impacts and

mitigation measures for the four major project civil works activity categories, namely

rehabilitation and construction of small-scale irrigation systems, rural roads, tube/dug

wells and construction of buildings;

* Development and application of checklists of potential environmental impacts and

mitigation measures for typical activities that are to financed under the Livelihood

Support Activity (LSA) components;

* Integration of these checklists in the Village Development Planning (VDP) Process to

ensure that existing environment problems are tracked and monitored jointly by

project beneficiaries and implementing agency staff/NGO social mobilizers and

mitigation measures incorporated into the design and implementation of

rehabilitation/construction activities;

* For medium irrigation schemes (command area more than 80 ha but less that 400 ha),

carrying out project specific environmental assessments on case by case basis as an

integral activity of feasibility studies for rehabilitation and incorporation of

environmental mitigation measures;

* Revision and inclusion of clauses of existing standard civil works specifications and

contract documents to ensure that contractors and community based organizations

execute civil works in compliance with necessary environmental management and

minimal damage to the environment;

* Development and application of simple monitoring and evaluation framework

including environmental indicators and outcomes; and

* Arrangements for training of field-level project staff, NGOs and other technical staff

to sensitize them typical environmental issues in the project area in general, and to

build capacity and skills in environmental assessment techniques and monitoring

specific to project activities in particular. The arrangements include:

(i) identification of environmental training needs of the project and preparation of

training modules;(ii) validation of the training modules through application in the field;

2

(iii) preparation of training curriculum and modules to sensitize key projectstakeholders on typical environmental issues in the project area in general andproject specific environmental issues and safeguard/mitigation measures inparticular;

(iv) translation of the training modules into Sinhala and Tamil languages for usage bythe community-based organizations and community members;

(v) preparation of training plan for NEAIP reflecting environmental assessment,oversight and monitoring needs; and

(vi) undertaking of training of resource persons and the training of target groups suchas project engineers, technical officers, social mobilizers and work supervisors,and community-based organizations in the use of the environmental impactassessment checklists, incorporation of environmental aspects in project feasibilityreports, and conduct of environmental monitoring and evaluation of projectactivities.

5. The attachments to this note include the following:

* Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Irrigation Schemes

* Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Rural Roads

* Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Construction of Community Buildings

* Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Construction of Drinking Water Wells

* Environmental Checklist/Guidelines for the Livelihood Support Activities

* Sample Feasibility Study for Medium Irrigation Scheme (Vammiadi Tank in AmparaDistrict)

* Contractual Clauses

* Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Rehabilitation of IrrigationSchemes

* Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Rehabilitation of RuralRoads

* Enviromnental Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Construction ofCommunity Buildings

* Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Construction of DrinkingWater Wells

* Evaluation of impact of environmental training

3

Sri Lanka - Second North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP)

Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Irrigation Schemes

Impacts Mitigation measures

Rehabilitation of small tank Accelerated soil erosion a. Restrict construction to dry season

structure head works b. Retain ground vegetation as much as possiblec. Retain channel / drainage reservation to reduce soil transportd. Turf exposed surfaces quicklye. Create contour strips / steps as slope breakers

Water logging and flooding a. Rehabilitation of borrow areasb. Reshape excavated areas to present stagnation and establish

vegetationc. Design proper drainage system

Sedimentation and siltation a. Retain ground cover to reduce soil erosionb. Dump vegetation and scraped earth at suitable location and

compactc. Do not block natural drainages

Seepage a. Clay cut off wall on upstream of bundb. Rubble packing and toe filler on the down stream of the bund

Destruction of natural vegetation a. Retain natural vegetation as much as possibleb. Avoid cutting large trees

Degradation of catchment area a. Mobilize community action to prevent encroachment, fires, and treecutting in catchment area

Dust pollution during construction a. Control dust by water during constructionphase b. Cover excavated soil material during transport

Rehabilitation of downstream Accelerated soil erosion a. Restrict construction to dry season

irrigation canals / drainage b. Retain ground vegetation as much as possiblec. Retain channel / drainage reservation as much as possible

Flooding Reshape excavated areas / borrow pits to prevent water stagnation

Blocking of natural drainages a. Dispose plant materials and debris away from natural drainagesb. Deposit scraped earth on the contours and compact

Improving irrigation and Water logging and water scarcity a. Farmer training in water managementagriculture productivity

Salinisation of agricultural lands a. Farmer training in water managementb. Maintenance of drainage canals on regular basis

Soil degradation and productivity a. Farmer training in conservation agriculturelossImproper application of a. Train farmers in integrated pest managementagrochemicals b. Train farmers in organic farmingDisposal of pesticide and a. Create awareness on proper handling, storage and disposal ofinsecticide containers pesticide and insecticideCrop damage by wild animals a. Mobilize farmer action to avoid / reduce crop damage by wild

animals

5

Sri Lanka - Second North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP)

Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Rural Roads

Activity Impacts Mitigation measures

Rehabilitation / construction of Accelerated soil erosion a. Restrict construction to dry season

Rural Roads b. Retain natural vegetation in road reservationsc. Design and construct adequate road drainagesd. Consolidate cut and fill arease. Turf exposed road slopesf. Reshape and fill excavated and borrow pit areas

Blocking of natural drainages a. Provide culverts to ensure natural water flowsb. Deposit plant materials and debris away from natural

drainagesIncreased surface run-off a. Provide adequate drains along the road

Dust pollution during construction a. Control dust by water during constructionphase b. Cover excavated soil material during transport

Operation and maintenance of Accelerated soil erosion and run- a. Mobilize community action for regular road maintenance

roads off including drains and slopes and road reservation

6

Sri Lanka - Second North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP)

Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Construction of Wells and Community Buildings

Activity Impacts Mitigation measures

Location of wells Contamination of ground water a. Locate wells away from agricultural lands andfrom agriculture run - off drainages, dumping grounds and latrines

Salinization of ground water a. Locate wells away from saline depositsConstruction of wells Stagnation of water ground well A. Design/ install drainage channels to

discharge waste water away from wellsOperation of wells Over extraction and water table a. Mobilize community action for proper water use and

draw down conservation

Deterioration of water quality b. Water quality monitoring as part of public Health inspectionprogram

Community BuildingsActivity Impacts Mitigation measures

Construction of Building Soil and vegetation disturbance a. Ensure retention of vegetation around construction site asmuch as possible

b. Re-vegetation of disturbed areas around buildingsc. Reshape excavated and borrow area

7

Sample Full Feasibility Report For Medium Irrigation Schemes

Vammiyadi Tank, Ampara DistrctEnvironment

1. Catchment degradation.

This is a medium tank with it own catchment. The catchment area of this tan, is 5.40 sq mile with

moderately slope area. About 90% of the area is covered with natural dense forest vegetation and balance

area is grassland. The tank is about 30km away from Akkaraipattu. Before 10 years back about 15% of

catchment area was under chena cultivation but last 10 years back about 15% of catchment area was

under chena cultivation but last 10 years all farmers are displace. In future will start chena cultivation by

the farmers. The present situation 100% of the catchment is not having any adverse degradations activitiesand there will be no effects in the future too large number of elephant and forest animals and birds are

living in this catchment area. Illegal timber felling activities is found in this area mitigation measure.

Mitigation measures

* Mobilize community action to prevent encroachment, fires, tree cutting, and chena cultivationin catchments area

* Re-plantation in degraded catchments areas

2. Tank bed cultivation

The present situation tank bed area is covered by medium jungle. Tank bed cultivation did notpractice. Therefore, tank bed cultivation is not a problem in this area and there will be no effects in thefuture too. Land is not demand in the area. Large quantity of fertility land available in command area.

Mitigation measures

* Mobilize community action to prevent tank bed cultivation in tank bed area

3. Siltation of tank

Tank bed area is covered by natural medium forest and grassland. Siltation is found in the

catchments area and tank bed area. Due to the rainy seasons large amount of rainwater come

down in the tank from natural forest. At the same time silt also come in the tank bed area. And

Elephant corridor activity, illegal temper felling also create siltation problem. About 3 to 4

percentage of tank bed area is reduced by soil erosion and siltation. In future, water-holding

capacity of the tank will be decrease even though the catchments gradient is gentle and it is

within the allowable limit.

Mitigation measures

- Retain ground cover to reduce soil erosion

- Dump vegetation and scraped earth at suitable location and compact

- Do not block natural drainages

- Awareness creation to public and farmers

4. Seepage through bund

The length of the earthen bund is 900 feet. It had been formed with clay sand. Therefore seepage isfound. Small amount of water is escaped as loss every day and at the same time silt is also removedslowly. This phenomenon may affect the band in future even though comparable erosion is not visible inthe embankment. The numbers of Elephant herds are come down in to the tank across the band daily fordrinking water and bathing purpose, in this activity date to date damaged both site of the band. Right endof the band is significantly damaged. Loosing water is logging in the down site of the band. So theElephant activities may affect the bund in the future.

Mitigation measure

* Clay cut off wall on upstream of bund* Rubble packing and toe filler on the down stream of the bund*

5. Water logging in the command area

The available command area is 530 Acs. There is no significant water logging in thecommand area. Water stagnates at the down stream of bund by seepage. The spill water of thistank and the drainage of this scheme fall to Sagamam tank. From sluice the water is release to astream and water is issued by service of anicut for proper water issue. The drainage and anicutare very useful for buffalo and cattle farming, wild animals and local fishing. The aquaticecosystem is developed due to this stream and drainage. Most of wild animals are found in thisarea. So, the water logging are most use full in the wild animals, and aquatic fauna and flora.Specially elephant, wild bore, peacock, spotted deer, ornamental fish etc. seepage water loggingis a problem in the bund.

Mitigation measuresa. Train farmers on effective and efficient water management

b. Rehabilitation of borrow areas

c. Reshape excavated areas to present stagnation and establish vegetation

d. Design proper drainage system

6. Effect on domestic water supply

With the rehabilitation of this scheme, water capacity in the tank will increase. Paddycultivation would be developed and also ground water table will increase. So this scheme helps

9

to maintain a shallow water table in the command area. Therefore, domestic water supply woulddevelop. But, surrounding area paddy field and forest area, have not any village in this area.Farmers mostly use in this land for paddy cultivation. Therefore domestic water supply is not aproblem come across in this scheme.

Mitigation

No action necessary, domestic water supply is a positive impact

7. Health hazards

'This tank is isolated. So No health hazards are encountered in this scheme. In thisscheme is found about 20km away from the village. Farmers temperately living in this paddyland area in cultivation time only. There for health hazard is not a problem in this scheme. But,have not any shallow come across water wells in this paddy land area. The cultivation time thefarmers are use stream or channel water for during and cooking purpose. The cultivation time,improper application of Agrochemicals is a health hazards in this area. The farmers are not usingsafety methods to apply pesticide and insecticide. And also they use over demand fertilizers.After application empty bottle & cans are thrown out or washed in a water body. Farmers andanimals that consume this water get into health hazards in the paddy land area.

Mitigation measuresa. Train farmers in integrated pest management

b. Train farmers in organic farming

c. Create awareness on proper handling, storage and disposal of pesticide andinsecticide

d. Rehabilitation of borrow areas

e. Reshape excavated areas to present stagnation

8. Land fragmentation and tenure pattern

Last 10 years this paddy land is not cultivated in the security problems. Last year morethan 300 Acs was cultivated land fragmentation is identified in very few cases. Tenant pattern ispracticed in the command area. Only 25 % of paddy land is cultivated by tenants and the balanceby owner. Tenant cultivations do not practice land management & maintenance. They willexpect more income quickly. So, they apply over use of agrochemical and fertilizers. In thisactivities will create land degradation such us Salinisation. In this area is already high fertilityland. So, over use of fertilizers is not necessary.

10

Mitigation measuresa. Train farmers in integrated pest management

b. Train farmers in organic farming

c. Create awareness among the owners & tenants

d. Introduce integrated farming system.

e. Train farmers in use of Agrochemicals.

9. Encroachment

The reservation of drainages and channels are not encroached. Land is available in this area. So,encroachment is not necessary. Therefore drainage and channels are functioning satisfactorily in thecommand area. Encroachment of private lands has not been encountered in this scheme.

Mitigation measures

a. Mobilize community action to prevent encroachment in tank bed, catchment andcommand area

10. Effects on flora & fauna

The tank is isolated from village, more area is patches of jungle. Large number of wildanimals living in this area and also catchment area, and part of command area are covered bynatural vegetation. After rehabilitation of the scheme, the water level will increase in the tankand command area. The drainage watercourse will also develop. Therefore, the Aquatic faunaand flora will be protected and develop ecosystem in this area. At the same time vegetationcover also develop Island fishing will develop and ornamental fish would be protect. Livestockfarming activities would be developed. Drinking water problems of wild animals is decrease.This scheme helps to developed and maintains fauna & flora. Totally positive impacts to fauna& flora.

Mitigation measures.

a. No action needb. Mobilize farmer action to avoid / reduce crop damage by wild animals

11. Conflict of Wild animals.

The tank is isolated from village area catchment area and surrounding tank area is thick forestcover and grassland, large number of wild animals living. More than 200 elephant have in thisarea. And large number of peacock living in this area. They are affected paddy cultivation.Farmers are facing so many problems during the cultivation timeThe hard of elephants are damage channels bund, tank bund and paddy every day.

11

Mitigation measures.

a. Mobilize farmer action to avoid / reduce crop damage

12. Soil erosion

Soil erosion is found in the tank bund and command area due to wild animals (elephantand wild bore) activities, buffalo and cattle activities and in proper farming activities incommand area cultivation. During rainy seasons, large amount of water is running across thecommand area that time large amount of soil come down to the command area tank bed area andcatchment area year to year the sand is accumulated in the catchment area and command area.The tank is a isolated from village so. The review sand is not use for construction work by thepeople. Therefore every year should be removing in the erodable sand, and silt.Mitigation measures.

- Construction in dry season

- Retain ground vegetation as much as possible

- Retain channel / drainage reservation to reduce soil transport

- Turf exposed surfaces quickly

- Create contour strips / steps as slops breakers

12

North - East Irrigated Agriculture Project

ENVIRONMENTAL FULL FEASIBILITY REPORT MATRIX VAMMIYADITANK, AMPARA DISTRICT

Items Baseline Potential Impacts Reason MitigatoryMeasures

Catchme Area - 5.40 sq. - Catchment - Chena a. Mobilizent Area mile degradation cultivation community action

Slope - gentle - Degradation of (this is in to preventThick jungle - 90% biodiversity contradiction encroachment,Shrub jungle - 10% - Wetland to baseline fires, cattle grazingChena - nil degradation which and tree cutting inFauna and Flora - - Run- off mentions catchment area(Dangerous / - Siltation and that chena Retain groundEndangerous / sedimentation. cultivation is cover to reduce soilThreatened spp)- - Destruction of nil??) erosionNot applicable natural vegetation - Cattle b.Dump vegetation

farming and scraped earthactivities at suitable location- Timber and compactfelling c. Mobilize- Fire wood community actioncollection to protect and- Wild reduce conflictanimals with wild animalsactivities

Tank, Area - 350 Acs - Tank bed - Settlement - Rehabilitation ofTank command area cultivation - Land is borrow areasBund, Condition - (Good / - Borrowing of limiting - Reshape excavatedTank Bed Normal / Poor) pits factor areas to presentarea Length - 900 feet - Clay mining - No plan stagnation and

bund - Water logging - Lack of establish vegetationVegetation - (Thick - Siltation knowledge - Design properjungle / shrub - Soil erosion - Lack of drainage systemjungle / grass / - Seepage awareness - Retain groundweeds) - Illegal cover to reduce soilEncroachment - Nil clay/ gravel erosionCapacity- 1128 Ac. mining - Improvefeet environmental

awareness of

13

communitymembers

- Dump vegetationand scraped earthat suitable locationand compact

- Clay cut off wallon upstream ofbund

- Rubble packingand toe filler on thedown stream of thebund

Channels Length of channels - Siltation - Poor - .Construction inand -44000 feet (field - Accelerated operation dry seasonIrrigable channel) soil erosion and - Retain groundArea Condition of maintenance vegetation as much(Comman channel - normal - No as possible

d Area) Vegetation - (Thick cooperation - Retain channel /jungle / shrub on farmers. drainagejungle / grass / - No plan. reservation toweeds) - In efficient reduce soil

irrigation transport- Salinisation. - In efficient - Turf exposed

water surfaces quicklymanagement - Create contour

strips / steps asslops breakers

- Farmer training inwater management

- Improve farmerparticipation inmaintenance ofdrainage canals onregular basis

Drainage Length of drainage Flooding water - Poor - Rehabilitation of

- Not avilable logging operation borrow areasCondition - (Good / and - ReshapeNormal / Poor) maintenance excavated areas toType of Vegetation - No present stagnation- / shrub jungle / cooperation and establishgrass / weeds) on farmers. vegetation

- No plan. - Design proper- In efficient drainage systemirrigation - Improve farmer

- In efficient training andwater participation inmanagement O&M of

14

irrigation anddrainage

Domestic Water table - Good - Over - Poor - MobilizeWater Water quality - extraction management community actionSupply Good - Water table - Lack of to prevent over

Depth - 6-8 feet draw down awareness extractionLocation - - Condemnation - Farmer training in

of agro water managementchemicals - Create awareness

on proper handling,storage anddisposal of

- Drainage pesticide andproblem. insecticide

- Dispose plantmaterials and debrisaway from naturaldrainages

- Deposit scrapedearth on thecontours andcompact

Health (i)Agro chemical Water born - Lack of - Create awarenesshazards empty cans disease (Typhoid, knowledge on proper handling,

disposal - (Good / dairie) - Poor storage andNormal / Poor) public health disposal of

(ii) Disposal of service pesticide andsolid waste - - Bull cart insecticide(Low / Significant and vehicle - Design proper/ High) activities. drainage system

(iii) Dust pollution - Lack of - Awareness creation- (Low / awareness. to public on healthSignificant / High) and sanitation

(iv) Mosquito aspectsbreading - (Low /Significant / High)

15

North -East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP)

Environmental Monitoring & Evaluation Frame work for Small - Scale Irrigation Schemes

Impacts Scale of Scale of Scale of Mitigation Duration ResponsibleImpotence / present management Measures Agencyimpct condition

213 14 15 2 31 4 15 11 2 3 14 15L w High Low High Low High

Rehabilitation Accelerated x x x a. Restrict During and after Implementing

of small tank soil erosion construction to dry construction Agency

structure head season period R.D.S, F.O &

works b. Retain ground P.M.Uvegetation as muchas possiblec. Retain channel /drainage reservationto reduce soiltransportd. Turf exposedsurfaces quicklye. Create contourstrips / steps as slopebreakers

Water logging x x x a. Rehabilitation of During and after Implementingand flooding borrow areas construction Agency

b. Reshape period R.D.S, F.O &excavated areas to P.M.Upresent stagnationand establish

__________________________________ vegetation

16

c. Design properdrainage system

Sedimentation x x x c. Retain During and after Implementingand siltation ground cover to construction Agency

reduce soil period R.D.S & F.Oerosion

d. Dumpvegetation andscraped earth atsuitable locationand compact

e. Do not blocknatural drainages

Seepage x x x c. Clay cut off During the Implementingwall on upstream construction Agencyof bund period F.O & P.M.U

d. Rubblepacking and toefiller on thedown stream of

_____________ the bundDestruction of x x x c. Retain During and after Implementingnatural natural construction Agencyvegetation vegetation as period R.D.S, F.O &

much as possible P.M.Ud. Avoid cutting

________________ ________________ ~~~~~~~~~large trees

Degradation of x x x a. Mobil During and after Implementingcatchment area ize community construction Agency

_______________ ______________ action to prevent period R.D.S, F.O &

17

encroachment, P.M.Ufires, and treecutting incatchment area

Dust pollution x x x c. Control dust During the Implementing

during by water during construction Agency

construction construction period R.D.S & F.Ophase d. Cover

excavated soilmaterial during

_______________________________ transport

Rehabilitation Accelerated x x x d. Restrict During and Implementing

of downstream soil erosion construction to after Agency

irrigation dry season construction

canals / e. Retain period R.D.S & F.O

drainage groundvegetation asmuch as possible

f. Retainchannel /drainagereservation asmuch as possible

Flooding x x x a. Reshape During and Implementingexcavated areas / after Agencyborrow pits to construction R.D.S & F.Oprevent water periodstagnation

18

Blocking of x x x c. Dispose plant During and Implementingnatural materials and after Agencydrainages debris away from construction R.D.S & F.O

natural drainages periodd. Deposit

scraped earth onthe contours andcompact

Improving Water x x x a. Farmer During and Implementingirrigation and logging and training in water after Agencyagriculture water management construction R.D.S, F.Oproductivity scarcity period

Salinisation x x x c. Farmer During and Implementingof training in water after Agencyagricultural management construction R.D.S, F.Olands d. Maintenance period

of drainagecanals on regularbasis

Soil x x x a. Farm During and Implementingdegradation er training in after Agencyand conservation construction R.D.S, F.Oproductivity agriculture periodlossImproper x x x c. Train farmers During and Implementingapplication in integrated pest after Agencyof management construction R.D.S & F.Oagrochemical d. Train farmers periods in organic

______________ ___ _ ___ farmingDisposal of x x x a. Creat During and Implementing

19

pesticide and e awareness on after Agencyinsecticide proper handling, construction R.D.S, F.Ocontainers storage and period

disposal ofpesticide andinsecticide

Crop damage x x x b. Mobilize During and Implementingby wild farmer action to after Agencyanimals avoid / reduce construction R.D.S, F.O

crop damage by period__________________________ _ _ ____ wild animals

20

North -East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP)Environmental Monitoring & Evaluation Frame work for Rural Roads

Impacts Scale of Scale of present Scale of Mitigatory Duration ResponsibleImpotence / condition management Measures AgencyImpac1 231415 112 31415 31415L w High Low __igh Low Hjgh

Rehabilitation / Accelerated X X X g. Restrict During and Implementinconstruction of soil erosion construction to after g AgencyRural Roads dry season construction R.D.S, &

h. Retain natural period P.M.Uvegetation inroadreservations

i. Design andconstructadequate roaddrainages

j. Consolidatecut and fillareas

k. Turf exposedroad slopes

1. Reshape andfill excavatedand borrow pitareas

Blocking of x x x f. Provide During and Implementinnatural culverts to after g Agencydrainages __ ensure natural construction R.D.S

21

water flows periodg. Deposit

plant materialsand debrisaway fromnaturaldrainages

Increased x x x a. Pro During and Implementin

surface run-off vide adequate after g Agencydrains along constructionthe road period R.D.S,

Dust pollution x x c. Control During the Implementin

during dust by water construction g Agency

construction during period R.D.S,

phase constructiond. Cover

excavated soilmaterialduring

_______________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~transport _ _ _ _ _ _

Operation and Accelerated x x x b. Mobilize During and Implementin

maintenance of soil erosion community after g Agency &

road and run-off action for construction R.D.Sregular road periodmaintenanceincludingdrains andslopes androadreservation

22

North -East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP)

Environmental Monitoring & Evaluation Frame work for Drinking Water Wells

Impacts Scale of Scale of present Scale of Mitigatory Measures Duration ResponsImpotence / condition management ibleImpact Agency

1 213 14 5 jill31415 1 2 3 14 5Low High Low High Low High

Location Contamination of x x x a. Locate wells During and Implemeof wells ground water from away from agricultural after nting

agriculture run - lands and drainages, construction Agencyoff dumping grounds and period

latrines R.D.S,_ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~F.0

Salinization of x x x a. Locate wells away During and Implemeground water from saline deposits after nting

construction Agencyperiod R.D.S &

F.0Constructi Stagnation of x x x a. During the Implemeon of water ground well Design/ instill construction ntingwells drainage channel to period Agency

discharge waste wateraway from wells R.D.S

Operation Over extraction x x x a. Mobilize During and Implemeof wells and water table community action for after nting

draw down proper water use construction Agencyperiod R.D.S,

_______ F.O

23

Deterioration of x x x b. Water quality During and Implemewater quality monitoring as part after nting

of public Health construction Agencyinspection program penrod R.D.S,

24

North -East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP)

Environmental Monitoring & Evaluation Framework for Community Buildings

Impacts Scale of Scale of present Scale of Mitigatory Duration ResponsibleImpotence / condition management Measures AgencyImpact1 -2 3 14 15 1 23 14 15 l112 3 14 15Low High Low _ iHgh Low High

Construction Soil and x x x a. Ensure retention During and Implementinof Building vegetation of vegetation after g Agency

disturbance around construction R.D.S,construction periodsites as much aspossible

b. Re-vegetation ofdisturbed areaaround building

c. Reshapeexcavated andborrow area

25

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL TRAINING PROGRAM

NORTH EAST IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE PROJECT (NEIAP)

-U~~i a ^Wjmm CT OFPER OFl-0k0 C

AND ~ ~ A * A

-. '-o.¢L~~~~MANCT j-i 1 |,.,,,,, ks.......

- --- - - \-

t~~~~~~~~~~~K A-t

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABBREVIATIONS iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY v

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Back Ground Information ................................................... vii1.2 Objectives of the Evaluation ................................................. vii

2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 Beneficiary Survey and Officers' Interviews .............................. viii2.2 Data Analysis ................. ................................. ix

3.0 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

3.1 Review of NEIAP Environmental Training Programs .................. x

3.2 Effectiveness of the Environmental Training Program ....... ........ xiii

3.2.1 Target Group I - Senior OfficersImpact of Env. Training on Professional Performance ....... xiiiPersonal Views on Environmental Training .................... xiv

3.2.2 Target Group II - Technical Officers & Social MobilizersEffectiveness on the Use of Environmental Safeguards ...... xvProblems Faced by Technical Officers & Social Mobilizers.xvi

3.2.3 Target Group III - Members of Community Based OrganizationsEffect of Environmental Training on Knowledge ............. xvii

Attitude of the CBOs Towards Environmental Safeguards.. xviiWeakness the Environmental Training ................ ........ xviii

3.3 Overall Success of the Environmental Training Program ............ xx

4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............ ................. xxi

5.0 ANNEXURES5.1 List of Officers Interviewed .................................................. xxiii5.2 Interview Schedules ........................................................ xxv

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1. Sample of Focal Villages & the Target Groups Selected by Districts .... viii

Table 2. Training Program followed by SOs, TOs & CBOs ................. xi

Table 3. Environmental Training Conducted -Sept. 2002 to March 2003 ......... xii

Table 4. Training Prgrammes Conducted by Districts at CBOs Level ...... ...... xiii

Table 5. Impact of Training on Professional Performance ......... .................. xiv

Table 6. Effectiveness of Environmental Training in the Activities of TOs ....... xv

Table 7. Problems Faced by the Technical Officers and Social Mobilizers ......... xvi

Table 8. Distribution of CBOs on Environmental Knowledge Score ................ xvii

Table 9. Attitude of CBOs Towards Environmental Safeguards ...................... xviii

Table 10. Usefulness in the Application of Environmental Training ................. xix

Table 11. Major Weakness of the Environmental Training Conducted ......... xix

ABBREVIATIONS

ACAD Assistant Commissioner Agrarian DevelopmentCBO Community Based OrganizationsDO Divisional OfficerDPD Deputy Project DirectorDPO District Project ReviewIA Implementing AgencyEIA Environmental Impact AssessmentFFR Final Feasibility ReportFO Farmer OrganizationICB International Competitive BiddingIEE Initial Environment ExaminationIVDA Integrated Village Development ApproachLSA Livelihood Support ActivitiesM&E Monitoring and EvaluationMPCLG Ministry of Provincial Councils and Local GovernmentNCB National Competitive BiddingNEIAP North East Irrigated Agriculture ProjectNECP North East Provincial CouncilNGO Non-Governmental OrganizationPC/PA/PS Problem Census/ Problem Analysis/Problem SolvingPMU Project Management UnitPAD Project Appraisal DocumentPIR Preliminary Inspection ReportPNA Participatory Needs AssessmentPRA Participatory Rural AppraisalRDO Rural Development OfficerRDS Rural Development SocietiesSM Social MobilizersSO Senior OfficersSPSS Statistical Package for Social SciencesSSI Semi Structured InterviewsTO Technical OfficersVDP Village Development PlanVSP Village Social ProfileWB World BankWRDS Women Rural Development SocietiesWS Work Supervisor

iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) is the largest rehabilitation projectin the North and East Districts of Sri Lanka. It was started in 2000. A number of projectssuch as irrigation, roads, wells and other re-construction activities and livelihood supportactivities (LSA) with community participation have been implemented in stages. Allthese project investments are small in size, very localized, largely labour intensive, utilizelocal materials and largely of a rehabilitation nature. Since 2002, due to concerns on theenvironment, the Project Management Unit (PMU) with the advice from World Bank(WB) has been actively involved in the development and implementation ofenvironmental checklists. These have been incorporated in monitoring and mitigationprocedures in the project activities. Further, to encourage wider participation and toincrease the incorporation of environmental safeguards in project implementation, PMUhas developed environmental training modules and conducted environmental training atthree levels, namely Target Group I: Senior Officers (SO), Target Group II: TechnicalOfficers (TO) and Social Mobilizers (SM) and target group III, the members ofCommunity Based Organizations (CBOs). Since the environmental training program isnearing completion, it was felt necessary to review the effectiveness of theimplementation of the environmental management aspects. In this context, the presentevaluation study was carried out in June 2003 with the objective of assessing theeffectiveness of the environmental training programs and to make recommendations forincreased effectiveness of environmental programs in the future.

Seven districts in the North, East and conflict affected Border districts villages wereselected for the environmental training evaluation, namely Mannar, Vavuniya,Trincomalee, Batticaloa, Ampara, Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa. The study reliedmainly on primary data collected from multiple sources of information, namely SO (35),TO&SM (49) and CBO (84) by using interview guidelines, semi-structured schedules andsurvey techniques respectively. Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) was also used wherefarmer groups consisting both trained and non-trained members were met in the twoselected focal villages in each district. To evaluate the training impact effective scalemethod, knowledge score, success index and frequency analytical statistics wereemployed.

The findings of the evaluation study indicate that all SOs had a positive attitude towardsconserving the environment. They were generally aware of the environmental impacts ofthe projects that they were involved in. SOs accepted the concepts of environmentalimpacts of the projects and the mitigatory measures discussed at the environmentaltraining programs. Generally they incorporate the environmental safe guards indirectlythrough their routine technical auditing of the projects. However, to further strengthen theenvironmental aspects indicated in the training, they encouraged the TOs to incorporateimportant environmental safeguards through adequate use of the environmental impactchecklist in planing, implementation and monitoring of the projects. Generally SOsattitude was that the environmental training efforts was not wasted, even if the acquiredknowledge was not applied: the argument was that it has created a valuableenvironmental awareness among the concerned people.

v

The environmental training received by TOs was useful in promoting the environmentalsafeguards application in the different stages of the projects' activities such as planning,implementation and monitoring. However, this middle level training in incorporatingenvironmental skills was found to be weak on the part of Social Mobilizers (SM). Thiswas due to difficulties they face in mobilizing the people and lack of technical expertisein the environmental safeguards. Review of the project feasibility reports prepared byTOs revealed improvements in the use of the checklist in the environmental assessment,and mitigation procedures at the filed level. The environmental training and backstoppingreceived by the TO was useful in promoting the use of environmental safeguards intoproject activities. However, the evaluation shows that training did not have much impactupon the subsequent behaviour and performance of the TOs because of: difficulty intransport due remoteness of the project areas, delay in submission of the schedule ofproject activities by the CBOs and specific local problems.

Due to environmental training, over two third of the CBO respondents seemed to have amoderate understanding of the environmental impacts of the projects that link with theirfarming activities. The interview with non-participants of the training indicated thatuseful training information always was shared among CBOs' members for joint effort inenvironmental programs. Promoting active involvement of CBOs in the projects, throughenvironmental training has generally increased concerns on group behaviour. Using theproblem solving methodologies in the training has facilitated better understanding andcontribution of farmers in environmental safeguard activities. About 40% of the targetedtraining programs to CBOs are yet to be completed. Inappropriate timing, lack of supportamong CBOs and backstopping were the commonly mentioned weaknesses at the CBOlevel training. The future training to CBOs need more close attention and monitoring.

The proportion of successful environmental training was comparatively higher inTrincomalee district followed by Batticlao and Vavuniya. Training offered at Amparawas not adequate and environmental training were demanded by the women respondentsin Mannar and Vavuniya. Environmental training in Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa hadincreased the concern of CBOs on environmental safeguards. However, there was lack ofattention due to several limitations that delayed the project activities.

Overall, the environmental training is found to be partially successful. One of theimportant factors responsible for this was that environmental training was given onlyafter project was implemented. Based on the results of the evaluation study, someimportant recommendations have been made. E.g. Future environmental training shouldbe given at the initial stage of the village development program. This helps to minimizethe damage to environment and use appropriate environmental safeguards at the earlystage by the CBOs and TOs. The effectiveness of any training programs depends on itscontinuous monitoring and evaluation, which should include appropriate and differentmethods. This will ensure effective incorporation of environmental concern of thebeneficiaries in the project activities and helps in identifying the overall performance oftrainers and trainees. This will increase the sustainability of the projects.

vi

THE IMPACT OF ENVIRONMENTAL TRAININGON THE PERFORMANCE OF SENIOR OFFICERS, TECHNICAL OFFICERS

AND THE MEMBERS OF COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Back Ground Information

North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) was established under the World Bankgrant in March 2000. NEIAP has invested in number of rehabilitation projects in thenorth, east and conflict affected border districts. Since these rehabilitation projectinvestments are expected to be small, very localized and labour intensive, it was expectedthat environmental impacts would be small and readily manageable with proper planningand oversight. It adopts an Integrated Village Development Approach (IVDA) with anumber of sub projects such as irrigation, roads, wells and other re-constructionactivities. Under the IVDA farmers are mobilized to form groups in order to moreeffectively address the problems they face; field officers help them to identify potentialsolutions and to test and adopt these solutions to their environmental problems.Therefore, a simple and easily workable environmental management and oversightsystem was developed to enable effective screening of the evolving plans for theirenvironmental conformity application. However, one of the important challenges facedby the projects in applying environmental safeguards approaches was that thebeneficiaries and the staff of the line agencies lacked the necessary understanding, skilland attitude in environmental monitoring and remedial measures in dealing with theproject. Thus the NEIAP emphasizes environmental monitoring be an integral part of itsproject implementation. It was felt that the staff and farmers involved in theimplementation of civil construction and those involved in the social mobilization of theproject be provided with the training to carry out monitoring of the environment, andimplementing environmental mitigation measures. The Project management Unit (PMU)has developed checklists for monitoring of potential environmental issues and impactsand work categories such as Irrigation, Roads, Wells, Public Buildings and otherLivelihood Support Activities (LSA). Accordingly the framework for monitoring ofpotential environmental issues (before, during and after rehabilitation) has been preparedand safeguard measures have been undertaken.

1.2 Objectives of the Evaluation Study

Since the environmental training program is nearing completion, it was felt necessary toreview the effectiveness of the implementation of the environmental managementaspects. In this context, the present evaluation study was carried out in June 2003 withthe objectives to assess the effectiveness of the environmental training program and tomake recommendation for increased effectiveness of environmental programs in thefuture.

The specific objectives of the study are:

vii

(1) To find out whether any of the information impaired during theenvironmental training were relevant to management objective that had been set,

and what effect it was on the environmental conservation of the senior officials(Target group I.)

(2) To find out how effectively the Social Mobilizers have motivated the people andthe Technical Officers (Target group II) to use the environmental impactassessment checklist, monitoring and mitigation measures at the field and in thevillage level feasibility reports, after receiving the training.

(3) To find out what the community based organization members (Target group III)remembered of the training, whether any of the information and skills impartedduring the training were of help in carrying out their farming operation.

(4) To find out what the target groups' current problem was and what suggestionsthey had for future environmental conservation under the NEIAP project.

(5) To make recommendations for increased effectiveness of environmental trainingprograms in the future.

2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 Beneficiary Survey and Officers' Interviews

The evaluation study relied mainly on primary data collected from multiple sources ofinformation, from the sample of 35 Senior Officials, (Target group I), 49 TechnicalOfficers (Target group II) and 84 members of Community Based Organizations (Targetgroup III). Out of 12 districts in the North, East and border districts, seven districtsnamely Trincomalee, Batticalo, Ampara, Vavuniya, Mannar, Anuradhapura andPolonnaruwa were selected for the data collection ( Table 1).

Table 1. Sample of Focal Villages and the Target Groups Selected by DistrictsDistrict Selected Focal Villages SO TO & SM CBO1. Trincomalee Galmitiyawa & Illupaikulam 5 7 122. Batticaloa Kiran,Kaladivadai& 5 7 12

Vammiyadi3. Ampara Akkaripattu & Thambilivil 5 7 124. Vavuniya Sasthirikoolankulam,Marakara 5 7 12

nvetti,&Kunchchukulam5. Mannar Pichakulam & Perucharkaddu 5 7 126. Polonnaruwa Villachiya & Kudahalmilla 5 7 127. Anuradhapura Karapolla & Muthucal 5 7 12Total: 07 14 35 49 84

viii

In each district 5 SOs, 7 TOs & SMs and 12 CBO beneficiaries were selected randomlyamong those who had attended and not attended the environmental training.Questionnaire schedule for interviews of the beneficiaries was developed. In line with thebeneficiary survey, technical officers survey was also conducted using a separate semi-structured schedule in order to triangulate some vital information on how effectively theyuse the environmental checklist, monitoring and mitigation measures in the village levelfeasibility reports. The officer interviews were also held using an interview guideline inobtaining a comprehensive description on the process followed in setting upenvironmental training. These officers contacted and their designations are given inAnnexure 1. The interview schedules and guidelines used in the evaluation are presentedas Annexes 2, 3 and 4. The sample included mainly the participants and non-participantsof environmental training. Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) was also used wherefarmer groups consisting both trained and non trained members were met in the selectedfocal villages. A total of 14 farmer groups discussions were held, 11 of the 14 farmergroups were conducted in the focal villages where environmental training was offered.Both environmental training offered and non-offered focal villages were included in thisstudy to allow comparison and to find out the effectiveness of the environmental training.

2.2 Data Analysis

The data collected through beneficiaries interview and officers group discussions werecoded, entered into the computers and analyzed using SPSS software package. Inanalyzing the data, scoring technique was adopted to determine the level ofunderstanding, extent of usefulness of the environmental training program by the officersand the beneficiaries.

To estimate the farmers' attitude towards the application of environmental safeguard aattitude scale was constructed. Attitude has been defined as the degree of the positive andnegative thoughts associated with one physiological object. Among the techniquesavailable for construction of scales Likert's scale was selected for the study. The farmerswere requested to give their reaction to each statement on the environmental aspects dealtin the training on the five relating points namely strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagreeand strongly disagree. If the item was positive maximum value of 5 was given andstrongly disagree was given one. The abstracted data were analyzed using frequencyanalytical statistics.

It was envisaged to obtain evidence to categorize the environmental training according tothe level of success and to find out the factors affecting the success. Since the validquantitative information could not be obtained during the investigation a qualitative(success) index was developed using the quality of training received, the level ofapplication of the instruction and number of people participated in takingenvironmentally related activities. Then the distributions of aggregate values werehypothetically divided to three categories as "good, average and poor".

ix

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

3.1 Review of The NEIAP Environmental Training Programs

The PMU conducted a comprehensive series of training by using two environmentalspecialists and has taken necessary steps to address the environmental aspects of theproject. Following are the progress achieved in this respect.

(1) Finalization and application of environmental check lists for the four most commonproject supported activities, namely: small irrigation works, rural roads, drinkingwater wells and small community buildings.

(2) Identification of environmental training needs of the projects and preparation of threelevels of training modules. These curricula reflect and encompass the major andminor environmental problems of the project that arise during implementation andafter completion of the projects. Validation of the training modules was done throughconducting a validation workshop and application in the field. The comprehensivecurriculum, including aims and objectives were translated into Sinhala and Tamil andusually distributed to the CBOs trainees. Summary of training programs, which wereconducted for the officers, technical officers and community based organizations, aregiven in Table 2.

(3) Training of Trainers was conducted with the aim to build a cadre of trainers capableof implementing environmental training in an effective and participatory manner.Selection of six trainers was done on the basis of their involvement in environmentalprograms. Out of six who received the training of trainers, three trainers were selectedto conduct training based on their characteristics in terms of their experiences in thefield, which are directly related to improving the environmental training programs.

(4) Beneficiaries selection followed clear, predetermined steps. Selection of beneficiarieswas done by PMU through DPDs. In Target Groups I and II selection, officers' activeinvolvement and certain criteria in NEIAP were taken into consideration in therespective districts. In Target Group III, three office bearers from FOs, RDS andWRDS were selected for the training from the focal villages. The beneficiaries whoshowed a keen interest to join the training were also selected.

(5) The training process included problem solving approaches and groups discussions.Formal lecturing was the method least used. These approaches were usually coupledwith appropriate audiovisual aids. In general, environmental training has been veryuseful in strengthening the project development and many training programs havebeen successfully completed from August 5th 2002 to May 31 st 2003.

(6) Recent recruitment of civil engineers for quality monitoring to eight districts is animportant action taken by the PMU to improve the sustainability of the project.

x

Table 2. Training Program followed by Senior Officers, Technical Officers & CBOs

Objective To assist in implementing balanced approaches towards land, water andforest resources management that includes protection of the enviromnment.

Methods Brainstormning: I hr., Lecturers: 5 hrs. and Group & Panel Discussion:1I hr.

Media: Black board, White pape rs, Flip chart, -Pencils and Transparent sheets

Title of Training Program Main Contents1.1 Minor Tank Ecosystem * Wetlands and Biodiversity

Restoration * Catchments management* Soil erosion control* Tank bed cultivation, Wild life control* Vector Born diseases Malaria, dengue

1.2 Water Use Efficiency *Cnevto fwtr* Conservation of water.* Water logging and salinity* Eutrophication

2. Drinking well Contamination * Location and water quality monitoring3.1 Access Roads * Surface water run off

3.2 Building Construction * Soil erosion and landscaping

Module Level I - Concepts (One Day)Target Group I: Civil Engineers, Assistant Commissioners and Project Assistants1.1 Concepts of environment impacts of engineering interventions and

Inter-sectoral linkages of environmental management. ( 2hrs.)1.2 A Comprehensive Operation & Engineering Solution to Env. Problems (2 hrs.)

1.3 Introduction on IEE and EIA process, its technical and legal significance ((2 hrs.)1.4 Env. checklist, monitoring & evaluation frame work major problems (1 hr.).

Module Level II - Skill (One Day)Target Group II: Technical Officers, Social Mobilizers and Work Supervisors2.1 Role of field level staff in environmental management (1 hr.).2.2 Water management - Operation and Maintenance (2 hrs.).2.3 Major environmental problems - practical use of check list ( 2 hrs.).2.4 Evaluation, monitoring framework and mitigation of environmental problems.

Interaction & coordination with the line agencies & farmer organization. (2 hrs.).Module Level III - Awareness (One Day)

Target Group III: Community Based Organization Office Bearers and Members3.1 Role of farmer organization in sustainable environmental management.

Farmers' empowerment & ownership of environmental management. (2 hrs.).3.2 Water management - Operation and Maintenance (2 hrs.).3.3 Potential environmental problems & farmer led monitoring and evaluation (2 hrs.).3.4 Conflict management. (1 hr.).

xi

Table 3. Environmental Training Conducted From September 2002 to March 2003No. Date District Target Group Medium1. 10.09.02 Trincomalee, Batticaloa & Ampara Group I (21) English2. 16.09.02 Anu.pura, Polonnaruwa & Puttalam Group I (3) English3. 24.09.02 Jaffna, Kilinochchi & Mullaitivu Group I (20) English1. 09.09.02 Trincomalee Group 11 (30) Tamil/S2. 16.09.02 Anuradhapura & Polonnaruwa Group 11 (30) Tamil3. 16.09.02 Anuradhapura&Polonnaruwa Group 11 (45) Sinhala4. 24.09.02 Jaffha, Kilinochchi & Mullaitivu Group 11 (33) Tamil5. 03.10.02 Vavuniya Group 11 (32) Tamil6. 04.10.02 Vavuniya Group 11 (27) Tamil7. 16.10.02 Batticaloa Group 11 (37) Tamil8. 17.10.02 Batticaloa Group II(44) Tamil9. 14.11.02 Ampara Group 11 (58) Tamil10.14.11.02 Ampara Group II (18) Sinhala11. 30.01.03 Mannar Group 11 (36) Tamil12. 25.02.03 Mullaitivu Group ll(26) Tamil1&2 11.09.02 Trincomalee Group III (36) Tamil/ S3&4 17.09.02 Anuradhapura Group III (48) Tamil/S5. 25.09.02 Jafffa Group III (30) Tamil6. 18.10.02 Trincomalle Group III (30) Sinhala7. 21.10.02 Trincomalee Group III (32) Sinhala8. 22.10.02 Trincomalee Group III (31) Sinhala9. 24.10.02 Trincomalee Group III (31) Sinhala10.28.10.02 Vavuniya Group III (30) Tamil11.28.10.02 Vavuniya Group III (25) Sinhala12. 29.10.02 Vavuniya Group III (23) Sinhala13. 29.10.02 Vavuniya Group III (37) Tamil14. 15.11.02 Ampara Group III (19) Sinhala15. 15.11.02 Ampara Group III (45) Tamil16. 09.12.02 Trincomalee Group III (35) Tamil17. 10.12.02 Trincomalee Group III (37) Tamil18. 16.12.02 Polonnaruwa Group III (45) Sinhala19. 17.12.02 Polonnaruwa Group III (35) Sinhala20. 18.12.02 Plonnaruwa Group III (32) Sinhala21. 19.12.02 Polonnaruwa Group III (32) Tamil22. 31.01.03 Mannar Group III (37) Tamil23. 24.02.03 Kilinochchi Group III (34) Tamil24. 25.02.03 Mullaitivu Group III (32) Tamil25. 24.03.03 Batticaloa Group III (24) Tamil26. 25.03.03 Batticaloa Group III (33) Tamil

Target Groups Target AchievedGroup I - Engineers & Project Assistants 03 (84) 03 (75)Group II - Technical Officers &Social Momilizers. 08 (244) 12 (416)

xii

Group III - CBO Beneficiaries 44 (880) 26( 793) l* Figures in parenthesis are number of participants. Source: PMU Env. records.

Table 4. Training Prgrammes Conducted by Districts at CBOs Level

District Number of No. of Focal Total NumberTraining Villages Of CBOConducted Covered Participants

1. Jaffna 1 5 302. Kilinochchi 1 2 343. Mullaitivu 1 2 324. Vavuniya 4 10 1155. Mannar 1 3 376. Trincomalee 8 10 2327. Batticloa 2 6 578. Ampara 2 3 649. Anuradhapura 2 2 4810.Polonnaruwa 4 4 144Total 26 47 793

Source: PMU Environment Program Records

3.2 Effectiveness of the Environmental Training Programs

3.2.1 Target Group I - Senior Officers

Impact of Environmental Training on Professional Performance

The findings of the evaluation study indicate that all Senior Officers had a positiveattitude towards conserving the environment. They were generally aware of theenvironmental impacts that they were involved in. Table 5 shows the response to threemajor questions asked: How useful was the knowledge of training in their jobs?, Whetherthey have used knowledge in the projects' activities? and Have they had any difficulty inapplying them?.

With regard to the usefulness of the environmental training: majority (above 74%) of thesenior officials was generally agreeing the usefulness of the topics discussed in theenvironmental training. They accepted the concepts of environmental impacts of theprojects and the mitigatory measures discussed at the environmental training.

In respect to use of knowledge in project stages: all the SOs reported that, generally theenvironmental safeguards were already incorporated in the preliminary inspection reportand in full feasibility reports of the projects and it was covered indirectly through theroutine technical auditing of the project. However, to further strengthen theenvironmental aspects indicated in the training, they encouraged the TOs to incorporationof environmental safeguards through adequate use of the environmental checklist inplaning, implementation and monitoring of the projects. This has generally increased thetechnical quality of the project.

xiii

Table 5. Impact of Training on Professional Performance

Topic Usefulness of Used Knowledge in Difficulty in theKnowledge in Job Projects Stages Application of Kno.Very Quite Not Often Seldom Never No At first Still

Inter-sectoral 52% 48% 00% 36% 45% 19% 00% 31% 69%Linkages in Env. (18) (17) (00) (13) (16) (06) (00) (12) (24)Eng. Solutions to 38% 55% 12% 31% 46% 23% 12% 15% 73%Env. Problems (12) (19) 04) (11) (16) (08) 04) (05) (26)IEE & EIA 10% 74% 16% 04% 16% 80% 00% 21% 79%Process (03) (26) 06) (01) (06) (28) (00) (07) (28)Monitoring & 32% 63% 05% 48% 52% 00% 00% 24% 76%Evaluation (11) (22) (02) (17) (18) (00) (00) (08) (27)

* Figures in parenthesis are number of responses

On the difficulties in the application of acquired knowledge in the environmentaltraining: many officials (about 70%) doubted if the environment training program -though it gave more insights and ideas of environmental safeguards - was in itselfadequate to improve the environmental impacts of the projects; they had to follow strictinstructions and real implementations of the projects particularly in tank rehabilitationwere not in a position to examine closely and apply the safeguards as indicated.

Personal Views on Environmental Training

The environmental training program was widely remembered on the concepts ofenvironmental impacts of tank head works and irrigation facilities rehabilitation and itslinkages of environmental management. Other subjects, such as Initial EnvironmentalExamination (IEE) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) were remembered -andthat too vaguely - by less than half the respondents. The majority of the respondentsreported that there was a delay in the environmental training and insisted that it should beoffered with the village development plan.

Senior officers consider environmental training methods to be effective. They value thepositive client orientation of the field officers brought about by the environmentaltraining. Using the environmental guidelines and tools facilitated an improvement in thecontribution of farmers in planning and conducting environmental safeguards. However,they accepted that, the technical officers had several obstacles in incorporatingenvironmental safeguard application in practice.

Some SOs mentioned that they learnt something about social obligation of environmentalmanagement and these officers said that, after attending the training programm, theycarried out their duties related to environment more conscientiously than they had beendoing previously. An attitude observed during the interviews at all levels of the hierarchywas that the environmental effort was not wasted even if the acquired knowledge was notapplied: the argument was that it has created a valuable environmental consciousnessamong the people.

xiv

3.2.2 Target Group II - Technical Officers and Social Mobilizers

Effectiveness of the Environmental Training on the Use of the EnvironmentalSafeguards

The evaluation study found that the Technical Officers (TOs), Social Mobilizers (SMs)and Work Supervisors (WSs) were generally aware of the advantages of theenvironmental training to their present duties. Due to the its importance more thantargeted number of 8 training to TOs additional 3 training were conducted (see Table 2).The training sessions conducted were subject to evaluation by the coordinators. The feedback from the trainees was helpful in updating and modifying the programs. The reviewof these feed back reports reveal that many training programs resulted in significantimprovement in the understanding of environmental checklist and its practical applicationin the filed particularly by the TOs. The environmental training received by TOs wereuseful in promoting the environmental safeguards application in the different stages ofthe projects' activities such as planning, implementation and monitoring. Only a third ofthe TOs mentioned that the training helped incorporation of environmental safeguardsmeasures in the preparation of village level feasibility plans/reports. Review of theproject feasibility reports prepared by TOs revealed improvement in the use of thechecklist in environmental assessment, and mitigation procedures at the filed level.Further the 39% of TOs and SMs indicated that they have received good support fromtheir superior officers in doing so (Table 6).

Table 6. Effectiveness of Environmental Training in the Activities of TOs & SMs

Activities ResponsesTO SM & WS Average

Promotion of CBOs in environment activities. 54% (15) 62% (15) 53% (30)Application of environment checklist in fields 30% (08) - 30% (08)Incorporation of environmental safeguards in 52% (14) - 52% (14)feasibility reports.Coordination with senior officers and others 36% (10) 41% (09) 39% (19)

Total number of respondents 28 21(14 + 7) 49

* Figures in parenthesis are number of responses

This middle level training in incorporating environmental skills was found to be weak onthe part of Social Mobilizers (SM). This was due to difficulties they face in mobilizingthe people and lack of technical expertise in the technical aspects. However, the review ofthe reports on VDP, VSP, PRA and PNA prepared by the social miobilizers with the helpof the CBOs indicate their progress in the village development. They also give training toCBOs on environment, water management and record maintaining. The SMs agreed thatenvironmental training offered to them has been much useful in doing their duties.However, lack of team work among TOs and SMs was observed. This was due to theirown limitations.

xv

Problem Faced by Technical Officers and Social Mobilizers

Although the NEIAP has been successful in getting the cooperation of the lineagencies, filed officers who are responsible for environmental identification, monitoringand writing feasibility reports, highlighted some limitations encountered by them. Thetraining did not have much impact upon the subsequent behaviour and performance of thetarget group II. Table 7 shows the problems faced by TO in carrying out environmentalsafeguards in their duties.

About 26% of the respondents reported that environmental training was notadequate for the use of environmental safeguards into project activities. Further, 37% ofthe TOs face problems of transport due remoteness of the project area. In addition, lackof timely submission of the schedule of activities by the CBOs is a major difficulty incarrying out their duties. Further, TO and SM receive Rs. 200.00 per day as incentive andthey feel these amounts were insufficient for the additional responsibilities in carryingout environmental safeguard in the villages. Further provision of transport facilities has tobe taken into consideration in order to increase the coverage and mobility. The field staffalso expressed much to be done on the system of environmental monitoring andevaluation. The difference in motivation and environmental input driven towardsenvironmental safeguard application by the field officers is observed. In fact, success ofthe environmental safeguard application would be greatly on such factors. Therefore,measures have to be taken to recognize the efforts of the field staff and to reward theefficient officers based on their contribution.

Table 7. Problems Faced by the Technical Officers and Social Mobilizers

Problems ResponsesFO S

M&WS Avg.Organizational constraints - different 11 18

task assigned % (03) 24% (05) % (08)Poor training about environmental 22 26

guidelines % (06) 29% (06) % (12)Problems in transport and incentive 37 - 37

payments % (10) % (10)Specific local problems 26 32

% (07) 38% (08) % (15)Insufficient facilities to conduct training 04 06

to CBOs % (01) 08% (02) % (03)Total 100 10 10

_ /o(28) 0% (21) 0%(49)* Figures in parenthesis are number of responses

According to the field officers response it was found that the rehabilitation work causedless damages to environment as engineering design includes the quality checks that

xvi

address the environmental component of the project. According to the degree of impactof the project activities on environment, TOs ranked tank rehabilitation and ecosystemmanagement as the most important one. Drinking wells, access roads and communitybuildings were considered to have less negative impact on enviromnent. Almost all thefield officers were in opinion that environmental training was important for them.

3.2.3 Target Group III -Members of Community Based Organizations -Effect of Environmental Training on Knowledge

Farming is the major source of income for most of the study population. Majority of thefarmers is young and had received secondary education. There are no significantdifference in age and education among the districts.

Effect of environmental training on environmental knowledge was analyzed based on knowledgeand attitude. The mean total knowledge score was 10.72 with standard deviation of 1.57. Farmerswithin frequencies between 0 - 9.15 were considered as low knowledge group. Score between9.15 - 12.20 was considered as medium knowledge group and the rest was considered as highknowledge group. Distribution frequencies of CBO respondents according to knowledge score aregiven in Table 8.

Table 8 shows that in each district Farmers had received some knowledge on environmentthrough the environmental training conducted to them. The knowledge of Northern farmers' wasfollowed by Eastern and Border districts, above medium knowledge were 79%, 69% and 63%respectively. With respect to difference in knowledge level among the district, chi-square testindicates that the difference is significant at 5% probability. Due to environmental training overtwo third of the CBO respondents seemed to have a moderate understanding of the environmentalimpacts of the projects that link with their farming activities. Before the environmental trainingpeople were not aware of environmental problems and their impacts on their livings.

Table 8. Distribution of CBOs Respondents on Environmental Knowledge Score

Environmental Northern Eastern Border Average ofKnowledge Level District. District District All Districts

Low 0 - 9.15 21% (05) 31% (11) 37% (09) 30% (25)

Medium 9.16 - 12.2 53% (13) 49% (18) 46% (11) 49% (42)High > 12.3 26% (06) 20% (07) 17% (04) 21% (17)Total No. of repondents 24 36 24 84

* Figures in parentheses are number of responses

Using the problem solving methodologies facilitated a higher understanding andcontribution of farmers in environmental safeguard methods. There was a considerablevariation in the quality of environmental training received by the farmers. The farmers

are generally satisfied with the quality of advice given by the trained resource persons.However, some were not happy about the training received.

xvii

About 40% of the targeted training programs are yet to be completed. The future trainingto CBOs need more close attention and monitoring. This will ensure effectiveincorporation of the environmental concern of the beneficiaries in the project activities.

Attitude of the Farmers Towards Environmental Safeguards

The attitude score of farmers in the studies sample ranged from 46 to 75. This wasdivided into three categories as favourable (positive) 48 - 75, neutral 58 - 67 andunfavorable (negative) 66 - 75. Table 9 shows significant higher positive attitude inNorthern district; followed by Eastern and border districts, the values are 85%, 55%R and43% respectively. There was significant association between attitudes and cooperationamong the farmers in group activities. The attitude of WRDSs members was higher thanRDSs and FOs members.

Table 9. Attitude of CBOs Towards Environmental Safeguards

Attitude Level Northern Eastern Border Average ofDistrict. District District All Districts

Favourable 48 - 75 85% (21) 55% (20) 43% (10) 61% (51)Neutral 58 - 67 10% (02) 15 %(05) 25% (06) 17% (13)Unfavourable 66 - 75 05% (01) 30% (11) 32% (08) 22% (20)

* Figures in parentheses are number of responses

The interview with non-participants of the training indicated that useful traininginformation always was shared among CBOs' members. Promoting active involvementof CBOs in the projects, through environmental training had generally resulted inincreased concerns on group behaviour.

In general, environmental training programs have been useful in strengthening the environmentalsafe guards in the project activities. The farmers had expressed that the environmental trainingprogram has been very conducive in expanding their existing knowledge regard to environmentalconcerns.

More than two third of the CBO respondents expressed that they very well rememberedthe watershed and irrigation aspects discussed in environmental training programs.Further, it was observed that there were a number of environmental concerns that woulduplift both the productivity and the efficiency of water of the poor dry zone farmers.However, their involvement in identifying, monitoring and mitigatory measures inenvironment is inadequate. Farmers were of the opinion that all should be encouraged tocooperate in addressing the environmental safeguards measures. Further, the respondentfarmers intended that the environmental safeguard measures could be attended if farmers'income level was improved.

Given below is the extent of application by farmers on some important environmentalsafeguard measures, which are promoted by the environmental training program among

xviii

farmers and villagers. Majority of the respondents expressed that the information andskill impaired during the training were of help in improving their farming practices.E.g. Incorporating straw into soil, wise use of chemicals, agro forestry etc. The attitudesof the respondents towards environmental training were positive. About 82% of therespondents have expressed the usefulness of the training (Table 10).

Table 10. Usefulness in the Application of Environmental Training

Topics Response of CBOsNorth East Border Average

1. Recycling of straw 39% (9) 38% (14) 27% (7) 35% (30)2. Wise use of chemicals 32% (8) 22% (08) 33% (8) 9% (24)3. Tree planting - agro forestry 19% (5) 11% (04) 18% (4) 16% (13)4. Soil & water conservation techniques 06% (1) 21% (07) 13% (3) 13% (11)5. Operation & Maintenance of tank 04% (1) 08% (03) 09% (2) 07% (06)Total 100% (24) 100%(36) 100% (24) 100 (84)

* Figures in parenthesis are number of responses

Weakness of Environmental Training Mentioned by the Trained Farmers

One fundamental objective of the environmental training was to disseminate theenvironmental safeguard practices among a large number of the target population. Ifconsiderable number of farmers has not adopted the promoted practices there could bematter worthy to be investigated. As shown in Table 11. The most frequently mentionedproblems (42%) with related to environmental training were related to timing of training.They have indicated that many environmental problems could been avoided if thetraining was given earlier with the village development planning. The second mostcommon weakness (35%) mentioned was about the practicality of applying technicaladvice imparted in the training. Carefully selecting the procedures adopted by somesuccessful cases and using them as example in future training programes could overcomethis. Also demonstration should illustrate the application of appropriate environmentalidentification, monitoring and mitigation. The majority of the farmers had agreed with thefarmers' selection and satisfied with the duration of training conducted.

Table 11. Major Weakness of the Environmental Training Conducted

Type of weakness Response of CBOsNorth East Border Average

1. Timing oftraining 51% (12) 43% (15) 32% (8) 42% (35)2. Technical advice 33% (8) 32% (11) 41% (10) 35% (29)3. Duration of training 06%(2) 11% (04) 10% (2) 09% (08)4. Beneficiaries selection 01% (1) 09% (04) 07% (2) 06% (05)5. Location of training 09% (2) 05% (02) 10% (2) 08% (07)Total 100% (24) 100%(36) 100% (24) 100 (84)

* Figures in parenthesis are number of responses

xix

In addition to the above mentioned weakness of the training program the following aresuspected major factors that affect the success of environmental training at the CBOslevel: 1) Honesty and sincere leadership,

2) Self reliant sprit of the group members,3) Active participation of the members in discussion and decision making,

4) Homogeneity of the group,5) Cooperation from the implementing agency.

3.3 Overall Success of the Environmental Training Programs

To obtain tangible evidence to categorize the level of environmental training programs totheir levels of success, a qualitative index was developed using the following indicators:a) Number of training completed.(Scale: 0%=1, 25%=2, 50% =3, 75%=4 & 100%=5)b) Number of trainees attended per training (Scale: 10=1, 20=2, 30=3, 40=4 & 50=5)c) Usefulness expressed (Scale:High=5, Good=4, Average=3, Poor=2 & Very poor =1)d) Level of application (Scale: High=5, Good=4, Average=3, Poor=2 & V.poor =1)e) Problems faced (Scaled as, Non-5, Low=4, Average=3, High=2 & V.high=l).

The values allocated to for each variable were added to arrive at an aggregate. Then thedistributions of aggregate values were hypothetically divided to three categories as "good(more thanl6), average (between 15 and 12) and poor (Less thanl2)". It was found thatthe training programs at the target group I was good with success index value of 19,while majority of the training conducted at target group II and III had an average successwith success index values of 15 and 13 respectively. The overall average success indexwas 16, indicate that the overall environmental training programs had achieved anaverage success. One of the important factors responsible was that environmental trainingwas given only after the project was implemented. The proportion of successfulenvironmental training was comparatively higher in Trincomalee district followed byBatticlao, Vavuniya,. Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa districts. Environmental trainingoffered at Ampara was not adequate and the women respondents in Mannar andVavuniya demanded environmental training. Environmental training in Anuradhapuraand Polonnaruwa had increased concern of CBOs on environmental safeguards.However, there is lack of attention due to several limitations that delayed the projectactivities.

The PMU get the services of one environmental trained project assistant on a part timebasis, who is working for provincial council for Central Environmental Authority. It issuggested that his services should be fully utilized to complete the balance of the trainingprogram. The other staff trained under the environmental program could be used forfrequent visits to the environmental sensitive project areas to encourage the use ofenvironmental safe guards by the beneficiaries. The environmental safeguard activitiessuch as identification, monitoring and mitigation were only followed at the beginning.Thereafter, the commitment of many farmers had gradually decreased due to the fact that

xx

the returns were not forthcoming in the foreseeable future. Thus frequent visits andfollow up are essential in setting up successful environmental safeguard implementation.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Conclusions

The following conclusions are drawn based on the analysis of the data collected and theFiled observation in the project areas.

1) The environmental training programs at senior officers level is successful and it hassatisfactorily met the objective of increased concern on the environmentalconservation in the project activities. They encouraged the TOs to incorporateenvironmental safeguards through adequate use of the environmental impact inplanning, implementation and monitoring of the projects. Also they perceivedfavourable changes of TOs performance after the environmental training.

2) Field officers had learned the importance and the application of theenvironmental

impact assessment checklist and the procedures at the field level. The TOs are seem toperform better in using environmental safeguards in the field. This is clearly revealed infeasibility plans and reports prepared by them now.

Involvement of Social Mobilisers is highly useful for the motivation of the CBOsin using environmental safeguards and technical advice should be taken from the lineagencies wherever possible.

The middle level environmental training programs had an average success andthere are few weaknesses in this groups for effective implementation of environmental

safeguards with their present duties.

3) All the community based organizations had positive attitude on the environmentaltraining program. Providing environmental information through CBOs will enhance theeffectiveness of environmental safeguard technology dissemination at the village level.This group had a partial success and about 40% of the training still needs to beconducted. More emphasize should be paid in conducting the training properly to thisgroup.

4) The evaluation study shows that environmental training did not have much impact uponthe Subsequent behaviour and performance of the TOs because of: difficulty intransport due remoteness of the project areas, delay in submission of the schedule ofproject activities by the CBOs and specific local problems.

xxi

4.2 Recommendations

To improve the effectiveness of implementation of the environmental management aspects of theprojects the following recommendation could be considered.

1. The impact of environmental training program could probably be improved if thetraining effort were conducted frequently in local areas, where the participants couldtravel easily, short training each designed to serve a particular purpose. The trainingshould be coordinated with other measures such as organizational development andgreater use of experienced people to provide advice.

2. Future environmental training should be given at the initial stage of the villagedevelopment program. This helps to address the environmental safeguard of theprojects at the early stage by the beneficiaries and the implementing agencies.

3. The effectiveness of any training programs depends on its continuos monitoring andevaluation, which should include appropriate and different methods. Theenvironmental training at CBOs level is important and subject to monitoring andevaluation. This helps in identifying the overall performance of trainers and trainees.

4. Workshops of short duration on environmental aspects should be held from time totime to exchange and generalize experiences and find solution to new problems inenvironment in the projects.

Acknowledgement

The consultant thank the staff of the NEIAP particularly to Mr.P.Gnanachelvam ProjectAssistant for the support extended and help during the data collection in the North andEast and border districts.

xxii

5.0 ANNEXURES

5.1 Annexure 01 List of Officers Interviewed

Name Position OrganizationTrincomaleeMr.S.Manoharan Technical Director PMU, NEIAPMr.Jeganathan LSA Advisor Engineer PMIU, NEIAPMs.Umathevi Haritharan Engineer PMU, NEIAPMr.S.Gananchelvam Project Assistant PMU & DS - CEAMr.Tahyanantha Konara Project Assistant NEIAPMr.Thevanantha Finance Auditor PMUMr.Knadasamy Technical Auditor TEAMSMr.Silvaretnam DPD NEIAPMr.Loganathan Irrigation Engineer Irrigation DepartmentMs. Sarogini Irrigation Engineer Irrigation DepartmentBatticaloa

Mr.Vinotharaj'ah DPD NEIAPMr.Mukunthan Engineer NEIAPMs.Puvana Engineer NEIAPMr.Kanagasabai Project Assistant NEIAPMs.Kumuthamalar Project Assistant NEIAPMr.Markandu Agricultural Instructor DOAAmpara

Mr.Bava DPD NEIAPMr. Sulaiman Engineer NEIAPMr.Kumaran Project Assistant NEIAPMr.Ajeer Technical Assistant NEIAPMr.Vadivelu Irrigation Director Irrigation DepartmentMr.G.J.Anurajah Program Coordinator World VisionP.D.A.Jeyakumar Technical Assistant ThambiluvilVavuniya

Mr.Sivapatham DPD NEIAPMr. N.Sriskandarajah Engineer Irigation DepartmentMr.Suthaharan Engineer ID, ChedikulamMr.Uthayaseelan Irrigation Engineer ID, ChedikulamMr.Thavaseelan Irrigation Engineer ID, ChedikulamMr.Kalaichelvam Project Assistant NEIAPMr.T.Sithamparanathan Project Assistant NEIAPMr.Navaneethan Project Assistant NEIAPMr.Suthaharan Assistant Director Inland Fisheries Dpt.

xxiii

Mannar

Mr.Nicholospillai DPD/ Addl. GA NEIAPMr.Pathinathan Divisional Secretary Central GovernmentMr.Navaratnasingam Engineer NEIAPMr.Puviraj an Project Assistant NEIAPMr. Sakayanathan Proj ect Assistant NEIAPMr.V.Rajarajeswaran Rural Development NEIAPMr.Karunaharan Officer Agricultural DOA

Instructor

Anuradhahpura

Mr.Seneveratne DPD/ N EIAPMs.Devika Vijeyasinghe Engineer NEIAPMr.Mendis Project Assistant NEIAPMr.Munasinga Encineer/Quality NEIAPMr .... Program Coordinator Seva Lanka

PolonnaruwaDPD/

Mr.Weerasinghe Engineer/ Quality NEIAPMr.S.D.Mediwake Project Assistant NEIAPMr.Paranagama Retired Irrigation Officer NEIAPMr.Madigasekera Engineer NEIAPMr.P.Anandaweerasingha Divisional Engineer Central Imr. Dpt.Mr.S.J.K.Alas Central Irri. Dpt.

xxiv

5.2.1 Annexure 02

Evaluation of Effectiveness of Environmental Training - NEIAP June 2003Schedule for Member of Community Based Organizations

CBO1.0 Background Information

1.1. Name of the Respondent: .................... Village: ............... District: .1.2 Age: .... Yrs. Sex: Male / Female Race: S / T / M Education:.1.3 Occupation: .................. Land Extent Owned: ......... /Ac. Income .......... /Month..

2.0 Environmental Training Impact

2.1 Whether followed the environmental training: Y / N When: ..........................Who conducted the training? TO / SM / PA .................................................

2.2 Topics Remembered, Relevance, Quality and Degree of Usefulness of theEnvironmental Training followed.

Topic 2.2.1 2.2.2 212.3 2.2.4Remembered Relevance Quality UsefulnessCode 1 Code 2 Code 2 Code 2

1.Water use efficiency2.Tank ecosystem restoration3.Drinking well contamination4.Access roads and building

Code 1: 1 Very well 2. Well 3. Some 4. Very little 5. NoneCode 2. 1. High 2. Good 3. Average 4. Poor 5. Difficult to comment

2.3 Important aspects learnt form the environmental training.Topic Response Code No. 21. Soil Erosion Control2. Water Conservation, concern about water waste.3. Integrated Watershed Management4. Tank Operation and Maintenance5. Others

Code 2. 1. High 2. Good 3. Average 4. Poor 5. Difficult to comment

2.4 If you feel environmental training was ineffective give reasons.Problem Areas Reasons1. Location2. Duration2. Number3. Planning4. Others

2.5. Attitude towards the environmental safeguards

xxv

No. Environmental Concerns ResponseCode No. 3

1 Participation in watershed management2 Reduce water use to benefit the affected farmers3 Contribute labour in rehabilitation work.4 Planning activity by FO activities in solving env.

problems.5 Cooperation with agencies to environmental

monitoring.

6 Empowerment to FO is more important for env.mgt.

7 Importance of linking with the agencies8. Reduce tank bed cultivation to reduce

sedimentation.9. Support to divert ag. run off to reduce G.water

contamination10 Sharing of environmental information with others.11 Importance of honesty and sincerity leadership for

CBOs12 Concern of people to reduce habitat degradation.13 Suggestion by people to env. program.14 Active involvement in environmental planning

activities.

15 Self-reliant sprit of the farmer.Code No. 3: 1. Strongly agree, 2. Agree, 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly disagree

xxvi

2.6 Environmental Knowledge Score

No Environmental safeguard measures. ResponseYeas = 1 No = 0

1 Natural drainage should not be blocked2 Retaining ground vegetation as much as

possible in rehabilitation.3 Maintaining drainage channel is equally

important as maintaining irrigation channel.4 Isolated rock mining has little effect to

environment5 Raising the tank bud will damage the

downstream ecosystem.6 Monitoring provide timely warning of

potential environmental damage.7 Salinity can be controlled through biological

means8. Degraded habitat may never return to pre-

degraded levels.9. Tank bed cultivation will increase

sedimentation.10 Over pumping lead to permanent damage of

G. water

xxvii

2.7 Impacts of environmental training you think in the following projects?

Project Impact due to training Response Code No. 4Minor Tanks Improvement in bank structures

Importance of WS management.Improvement in irri. 0 & M

Rural Roads Drainage improvementOperation and Maintenance

Drinking Well Consequence of polluted waterManagement

Com. Buildings CBO participationLSA Controlled activities: rock & brick

Code No 4. 1. More awareness 2. Concern increased 3. Group action initiated 4. No change.

2.8 Problems of implementing environmental safeguards in these projects.

Project Problems Rank (1=High - 5 =Low)Minor Tanks Contract procedureRural Roads Group actionDrinking wells Technical adviceCommunity buildings Fund allocationLSA Location

2.9 Suggestions for effective environmental management in the projects.Proj ect Suggestions ResponseMinor Tanks/ Rural Contract ProceduresRoads Strengthen groupDrinking Well TrainingCommunity Buildings FundLSA Adopt law

3. Community Based Organization3.1 Involvement in the CBOs ? From when ............... Member of FO / RDS / WRDS:

Office bearer.3.2 Response of CBO members, villagers about the environmental training

1. Very Positive 2. Positive 3. Neutral 4. Negative 5. Very Negative.3.3 Rank the importance of the following role you expect from the CBO and

implementing agencies for you to actively involve in the environmental activity.1. Honest & sincere leadership ........... 2. Self reliant sprit of the group members ....... 3.Active participation of members......4. Homogeneity of the group.5. Cooperation from line agency ........ 6. Proper guidance by project personal.

4. Dissemination/ Training effect4.1 The most effective ways of disseminating of env. practices to a wider group?.........1. Training to CBOs 2. Leaflets 3. TV & Radio programs 4. Training to all.

xxviii

5.2.2 Annexure 03

Evaluation of Effectiveness of Environmental Training - NEIAPSchedule for Technical Officers'

TO1. Name of Officer: ........................... Sex: M/F Position:.2. Working area/village/range/ District: ........................ Institution:.3. Time period in the present work station ..................... Qualification;4. No. of farm families in the area: ...... No. of training conducted ....... No targeted:...5. How are farmers selected for the training:.....................................................6. What is your personal opinion about farmers selection? .....................................

7. What % of farmers who actively participated in the discussions?..........................8. Reasons for the difference in the numbers, if any:...........................................9. General views on the use of environmental training obtainedStatements Response CN. 11. The content of methodological env. training provided was useful2. Method /tool learnt are not relevant to my day to day activities.3. The organizational facilities are not conducive to carryout training.4. Environmental safeguards are difficult to implement in the field.5. Env. training gave me new ideas for my day to day duties.

Code No. 1 1. Strongly agree, 2. Agree, 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly disagree

12 What is your involvement and difficulties faced with respect to followingenvironmental training aspects?a) Training of farmers........................................................................

b) Application of the environmental impact assessment checklist in the filed.

c) Monitoring and mitigation of environmental impacts in the projects.

d) Preparation of village feasibility plans/ reports incorporating environment.......................................................................................................

13. Did you get the necessary support of the superior officers in environmental training?.....................................................................................................

14. What is your opinion on? Benefit received from the training:Hypotheses Degree of Fulfillment

1 2 3 4 51. Learn about the real situation of env. effect of the project.2. Change in attitude towards the environmental safeguard.3. Integration of other discipline for environmental solution.4. Environmental has training lead to increased env.Awareness.5. Obtained positive feedback from farmers

15. Problems faced and Suggestion to improve environmental training(Were the farmers' views respected and incorporated)

xxix

5.2.3 Annexure 04

Evaluation of Effectiveness of Environmental Training - NEIAPGuidelines for Senior Officers' Discussions

SO

1. Name of Officer: ........................ Sex: M/F Position:.2. Working District: ........................ Institution:.3. Time period in the present work station ..................... Qualification;.4. No. of farm families in the area: ...... No. of training conducted ...... No targeted:

5. General comments of the officerOfficers have: Responses

l T2 3 4 51. Usefulness and adequacy of the environmental training2. Learned and understood the approach and the methods.3. Accepted/appreciated the approach and the methods.4. Application & motivated TOs to use env. safeguards.5. Achieved positive feed back from filed officers &FOs.6. Obtained active support/ encouragement from PMU.7. Difficulties experienced.

1 l. Very high, 2. High, 3. Average, 4. Poor & 5. Very Poor.

6. Efforts taken in incorporating environmental aspects in the projectActivity Planning Implementation Monitoring and Remarks*

EvaluationProcess adoptedAwareness,Meetings &InstructionsMethods usedMultidisciplineParticipatoryFO roleEvidenceRecords &ObservationProblems facedTechnical &Approach

*Indicate whether these are adequately followed? What actions & emphasis are needed?

xxx

1I

I