1 Indigenous People Planning Document Due Diligence Report Loan Number: 2796 and Grant Number: 0267 NEP October 2013 Nepal: Decentralized Rural Infrastructure and Livelihood Project- Additional Financing Kalakanda-Khamale-Kawa Road Subproject Mugu Prepared by the Government of Nepal The Due Diligence Report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB s Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature.
2 Government of Nepal Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development Office of District Development Committee, Mugu District Technical Office, Mugu District Project Office, Mugu Decentralized Rural Infrastructure and Livelihood Project-Additional Financing (DRILP-AF) Detailed Project Report Kalakanda-Khamale-Kawa Road Sub Project Section III : Safeguards Volume 3 Peoples : Impact Screening Report on Indigenous October 2013
3 TABLE OF CONTENT Page. 1. Project Background 1 2. Road Sub-project s Background Demographic information of ZOI Identification of IPs Sub-project activity 3 6. Conclusion 4 ANNEXES Annex 1: Annex 2: Annex 3: Indigenous People Screening checklist Meeting minute about consultation with stakeholders Certified letters from VDCs
4 1. PROJECT BACKGROUND 1. The Decentralized Rural Infrastructure and Livelihood Project-Additional Financing (DRILP AF) is an extension of DRILP. DRILP was an initiative of GoN and an ADB, SDC funded project to reduce rural poverty in 18 very poor remote hill and mountainous districts affected by the conflict. The project is implemented over 5 years; the duration is from January 2012 to December The project implementation is to achieve sustainable increased access to socio-economic services and enhance social and financial capital of the people, particularly poor and disadvantaged groups in previous conflict affected areas. The underpinning thrust of the Project is labor based equipment supported (LBES) in construction techniques to promote greater involvement of Building groups (BGs) in construction activities which will boost local jobs. DRILP AF aims to reduce the poverty level in 18 project districts from 41 percent to 20 percent by employment generation of 4.7 million person days. The project design provides project districts select rural transport sub-projects that help to extend the district network of rural roads, trails and pedestrian bridges. The project objectives are achieved through a series of project activities that are broadly grouped into four components: (i) Community Development and Rural Livelihood Restoration; (ii) Capacity Building and Decentralized Governance; (iii) Rural Transport Infrastructure; and (iv) Project Management Services. 2. The Project Coordination Unit (PCU) of Department of Local Infrastructure Development and Agricultural Roads (DoLIDAR) is the project Executing Agency (EA) responsible for the overall project coordination, management and implementation. DDC/DTO/DPO is the Implementing Agencies (IA) responsible for subproject planning, design, and implementation. DDC is responsible not only for the implementation of the Project but It also to coordinate all activities related to resettlement and Indigenous Peoples (IP s) issues. 2. ROAD SUB-PROJECT S BACKGROUND 3. Mugu is one of the project districts from Mid Western Development Region of Nepal. The Kalakanda-Khamale-Kawa Road Subproject (SP) starts at Kalakandalek in Khamale VDC (linked to Nagama-Gamgadhi Section of Karnali Highway at Gudhijiula) and ends at Kawa of Khamale VDC. The major settlements along the subproject are Chakpate, Tarapani, Lamera, Kotila, Khamale, Bhagoti and Kawa. The construction of 18 km Kalakanda-Khamale-Kawa Road in Mugu district was started under DRILP. Due to the limitation of budget in DRILP, only km of the road was detail cost estimated, packaged and implemented under joint fund of ADB and GoN. During the DRILP, among the total length of km of the SP up to km works was done by contractors and BGs. Out of km of the Kalakanda-Khamale-Kawa road SP, first km has been already constructed and total 700 m altogether is under new construction, km length needs land slide clearance, curve and grade improvement, widening at rocky area and structural improvement and 4.2 km length does not need any construction activities. Thus total length proposed to make motor able in DRILP-AF is km. District Roads Coordination Committee (DRCC) and Village Works and Roads Construction 1
5 Committee (VWRCC) have been established at district and VDC level respectively in order to perform a role of key agents for consultation and information dissemination process during subproject implementation. 4. Local communities will have direct employment generation opportunities from SP activities such as the road construction works. However, the construction works of this road was started under DRILP. In DRILP-AF total 700 m is under new construction and km length needs land slide clearance, curve and grade improvement, widening at rocky area and structural improvement. The SP implementation work will be awarded through contract packages as such BGs are not formed for SP intervention. Hence, the involvement of local people/labor will be executed through contractors. 3. DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION OF ZOI 5. According to information referred from survey report, the population within ZOI is 1,989 (1,023 male and 966 female) and the total HHs is 325. The detail populations of VDCs along the SP ZOI areas are as mentioned in Table 1. Table 1: Demographic structure of ZOI VDCs Total HH Name of VDC Male Female Dalit Chhetri Brahmin Total Population Male Female Male Female Male Female Khamale 325 1, ,989 Source: DDC, Mugu Census Report B.S Regarding the ethnicity of ZOI area, the main castes in Khamale VDC is Chhetri and then Dalit. Brahmin is significantly lower in population comparing to other castes. The majority of the population belongs to Chhetri 1,669 (84%) followed by Dalit 185 (9.3%) and Brahmin 135 (6.7%) in SP ZOI area. Out of the total population of 1,989, 48.6% consist of female and 51.4% consist of male. The male female ratio of ZOI VDCs is 1:0.94. The Female headed HHs is 37 in ZOI VDC. The Indigenous people (IP) as defined by Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN) are not living in the SP ZOI VDCs. 7. Agriculture and Animal husbandry is main occupation of the ZOI area. The main crops of the ZOI VDC are Wheat, Maize, Rice, Potato, and Legumes. In addition to this, collection and selling of high valued non timber forest product (NTFP) is also the important source of income of this area. With reference to livelihood of local communities, very few HHs depend on business and services. 4. IDENTIFICATION OF IPs 8. The term IPs is refer to the Janajati or ethnic groups, indigenous cultural communities which maintain cultural and social identities separate from the mainstream societies or cultures in the context of Nepal. 2
6 9. The legal framework for this Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF) is based on the ADB Safeguards Policy Statement (SPS) (2009); the Interim Constitution of Nepal, the Three Year Interim Plan ( ), sections of the National Foundation for Development of Indigenous Nationalities (NFDIN) Act 2002, National Human Rights Action Plan 2005; Environmental Act 1997; Forest Act 1993 and Community Forestry Guideline. 10. In ADB s 2009 SPS, for operational purposes, the term Indigenous Peoples (IPs) is used in a generic sense to refer to a distinct, vulnerable, social and cultural group possessing the following characteristics in varying degrees: Self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition of this identity by others; Collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the project area and to the natural resources in these habitats and territories; Customary cultural, economic, social, or political institutions that are separate from those of the dominant society and culture; and A distinct language, often different from the official language of the country or region. 11. Based on the characteristics, the NFDIN, a Government founded institution, has recognized 59 different nationalities as IPs/ethnic groups of Nepal. IPs in Nepal is a very heterogeneous group. In the context of this project and framework it is important to distinguish the vulnerable and poor IPs from the others. The NFDIN affiliated NEFIN has classified IPs into five different categories, these are - Endangered, Highly Marginalized, Marginalized, Disadvantaged and Advantaged based on socio economic variables that include literacy, housing, occupation, language, area of residence and population size. A majority of these groups are integrated into the mainstream society/culture, whereas several of them (recognized by NEFIN as Highly Marginalized/Endangered) are still remains distinct. 12. The BLS report, information from the DDC / VDC profile, IP screening checklist filled by DISC team and consultation meeting with local authorities and stakeholders conducted under the chairpersonship of the Local Development Officer and VDC certified letter confirmed that the IPs as defined by Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN) are not living in the SP ZOI VDC. 5. SUB- PROJECT ACTIVITY 13. The IPPF provides a framework for continued consultation with the affected IP communities during project implementation and specifies measures to ensure that IPs receive culturally appropriate benefits; identifies measures to avoid, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for any adverse project impacts, and includes culturally appropriate grievance procedures, monitoring and evaluation arrangements, and a budget and time bound actions for implementing the planned measures. 3
7 14. The IPPF is prepared to guide the preparation of SPs under the Project to ensure better distribution of the project benefits and promote development of the Janajati (IPs) along with other disadvantaged social groups in the project areas of influence. The IPPF is developed based on the national policies/strategies as well as ADB s 2009 SPS. The principal objectives of the IPPF are to: Ensure the participation of the affected IPs and other disadvantaged communities in the entire process of preparation, implementation and monitoring of Project activities; Ensure Project benefits will accrue to IPs and other disadvantaged communities; and mitigate any adverse Project impacts; Define the institutional arrangement for screening, planning and implementation of Indigenous People Plans (IPPs) for SPs and Outline the IPP monitoring and evaluation process. 15. It was confirmed that there is no IPs living in VDCs of ZOI area, hence the SIA of IPs is not necessary. 6. CONCLUSION 16. DPO with support of district team has carried out VDC consultation, filling up checklist on screening of IPs and meeting with district stakeholders. According to the survey report, DDC/VDC profile and consultation meetings with local stakeholders, there is absence of IPs communities in ZOI VDC of the SP. Furthermore, the VDC has also confirmed it. 17. All these findings confirm that there are no indigenous populations residing in the SP ZOI area. Therefore, the sub-project is category C for IP in accordance with the IPPF and no further action required for IPs. 4
8 ANNEXES 5
9 Annex 1: SCREENING CHECKLIST Indigenous People Screening Checklist Key Concern Yes t known Remarks A. Identification of Indigenous Peoples (IPs) 1. Are there socio-cultural groups present in or uses the project area who may be considered as tribes, minorities, or Indigenous communities in the project area? 2. Are there national or local law or policies as well as Anthropological Research consider these groups present in or using the project areas as belonging to ethnic minorities or IPs? 3. Do such groups self identify as being part of a distinct social and cultural group? 4. Do such groups maintain collective attachments to distinct habitats or ancestral territories and/or to the natural resources in these habitats and territories? 5. Do such groups maintain cultural, economic, social, and political institutions distinct from the dominant society and culture? 6. Do such groups speak a distinct language or dialect? 7. Has such groups been historically, socially, and economically marginalized, disempowered, excluded and/or discriminated against? 8. Are such groups represented as IPs or as ethnic minorities or scheduled tribes or tribal populations in any formal decision making bodies at the national or local level? B. Identification of Potential Impacts t presence of ethnic minorities or indigenous communities in SP ZOI area. 9. Will the project directly benefit or target IPs? Yes 10. Will the project directly or indirectly affect IPs traditional, socio-cultural and belief practices? (eg. Child-rearing, health, education, arts, and governance) 11. Will the project affect the livelihood systems of IPs? (eg. Food production system, natural resource management, crafts and trade, employment status) 12. Will the project be in an area (land or territory) occupied, owned, or used by IPs, and or claimed as ancestral domain? C. Identification of Special Requirements Will the project activities include : 13. Commercial development of the cultural resources and IPs? 14. Physical displacement from traditional or customary lands? 6
10 15. Commercial development of natural resources (such as minerals, hydrocarbons, forests, water, hunting, or fishing grounds) within customary lands under use that would impact the livelihoods or the cultural, ceremonial, spirituals uses that define the identity and community of IPs? 16. Establishing legal recognition of rights to lands and territories that are traditionally owned or customarily used, occupied or claimed by IPs? 17. Acquisition of lands that are traditionally owned or customarily used occupied or claimed by IPs? D. Anticipated Project impacts on IPs Project component/ activity/output SP component: Total road length : km Activity: Road construction Awareness raising Job creation Community Infrastructure Output: Road construction Capacity building Social development Livelihood improvement Anticipated positive effect Yes Yes Yes Anticipated negative effect
11 Annex 2: Meeting minute of consultation with local stakeholders about IPs living in ZOI area Synopsis of the Meeting Minute Date: 4 September 2013 Agenda: IPs living in DRILP AF SP ZOI areas or not The district level meeting was organized by the DPO under the chairpersonship of the Acting Local Development Officer Mr. Anil Dhungana. The meeting has taken the following decisions after the discussion with its stakeholders and representatives from DDC, NGO federation, district level organizations and VDC Secretary Khamale. The main agenda discussed during the meeting was whether the IP communities reside in Kalakanda-Khamale-Kawa Road Subproject ZOI area or not. Decisions of the meeting: With the consultation and discussion, meeting has come to the point that the IPs communities are not living in Kalakanda-Khamale-Kawa Road SP ZOI area.
13 Minute of the consultation meeting about identification of IPs in ZOI VDC
14 Annex 3: VDC Certified letters The VDC secretary of Khamale VDC in ZOI areas of Kalakanda-Khamale-Kawa road sub project have forwarded letter stating that IP communities are not living in ZOI VDC.