India: Resilient Kerala Program Additional Financing Final Environmental and Social Systems Assessment [ESSA] Addendum Report May 18, 2022 India 70 Lodi Estate New Delhi - 110003 List of abbreviations and acronyms ACS Additional Chief Secretary AE Assistant Engineer AEE Assistant Executive Engineer CPCB Central Pollution Control Board CRZ Coastal Regulation Zone DEA Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, GoI DLI Disbursement-Linked Indicator DPO/L Development Policy Operation / Lending DoE Department of Environment, Government of Kerala DoECC Directorate of Environment and Climate Change DoR Department of Revenue, Government of Kerala E & S Environmental & Social EC Environmental Clearance EE Executive Engineer EHS Environmental, Health & Safety EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ESHS Environmental, Social, Health and Safety ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan ESSA Environmental and Social Systems Assessment FGD Focus Group Discussion G(R)M Grievance Redressal Mechanism GoK Government of Kerala GoI Government of India GP Gram Panchayat HED Harbour Engineering Department (Department of Fisheries) HLEC High Level Empowered Committee IDRB Irrigation Design and Research Board IITM Indian Institute of Technology Madras KCZMA Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority KII Key Informant Interviews KIIDCO Kerala Irrigation Infrastructure Development Corporation KILA Kerala Institute of Local Administration KSCADC Kerala State Coastal Area Development Corporation Limited KSDMA Kerala State Disaster Management Agency KSPCB Kerala State Pollution Control Board LSG Local Self Government M & E Monitoring & Evaluation MoEFCC Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change NCCR National Centre for Coastal Research, NIOT NCSCM National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management NGT National Green Tribunal NIOT National Institute of Ocean Technology O & M Operations & Maintenance PAD Program Appraisal Document PDO Program Development Objective PforR Program for Results PMC/SS Project Management Consultants / Support Services RBCMA River Basin Conservation and Management Authority RA Result Area RF Results Framework RKDP Rebuild Kerala Development Programme RKI Rebuild Kerala Initiative SEIAA State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority SMP Shoreline Management Plan SPF State Partnership Framework SWAK State Wetlands Authority of Kerala WB World Bank WRD Water Resource Department WRM Water Resource Management US$ United States Dollar 2 Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Executive Summary Feedback from the stakeholder consultation workshop ...................................................................................... 25 1 State Context ........................................................................................................................................................... 33 2 Program Description ........................................................................................................................................... 35 3 Environment and Social Systems Assessment – Scope and Methodology ................................... 41 3.1 Scope of the ESSA ......................................................................................................................................... 41 3.2 Structure of ESSA ......................................................................................................................................... 43 4 Key Risks and Impacts ........................................................................................................................................ 44 4.1 Preparation of a Long-Term Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) ........................................... 44 4.2 ....................... 47 Disaster recovery-related activities related to critical river infrastructure 4.3 Open Data Initiative .................................................................................................................................... 48 4.4 Climate Budget .............................................................................................................................................. 48 4.5 Other associated social risks from ongoing resettlement and rehabilitation efforts of the State and other donors ............................................................................................................................................. 49 5 Legal and Policy Framework for the Program ......................................................................................... 50 5.1 Legal and policy framework .................................................................................................................... 50 5.2 Regulatory Systems Assessment ........................................................................................................... 64 6 Institutional Systems Assessment – Institutional Structures, Programs and Performance . 67 6.1 Water Resources Department ................................................................................................................ 67 6.2 Harbour Engineering Department ........................................................................................................ 69 6.3 Fisheries ........................................................................................................................................................... 71 6.4 RKI Secretariat .............................................................................................................................................. 73 7 Stakeholder Consultations ................................................................................................................................ 74 7.1 Consultations on environmental aspects ........................................................................................... 74 7.2 Social Consultations .................................................................................................................................... 80 7.3 Feedback from the stakeholder consultation workshop ............................................................ 83 8 Assessment of the Borrower’s Systems against Core Principles ...................................................... 85 9 Overall Findings and Recommendations .................................................................................................... 90 9.1 Environmental assessment findings .................................................................................................... 90 9.2 Recommendations on environmental aspects ................................................................................ 91 9.3 Social Assessment Findings ..................................................................................................................... 92 9.4 Recommendations on social aspects ................................................................................................... 94 10 Program Exclusions .......................................................................................................................................... 102 10.1 Environmental aspects ...................................................................................................................... 102 10.2 Social aspects ......................................................................................................................................... 102 11 Program Action Plan (PAP) ........................................................................................................................... 103 3 11.1 Environmental aspects ...................................................................................................................... 103 11.2 Social aspects ......................................................................................................................................... 104 Annex 1 Environmental screening form and criteria – Draft .................................................................... 106 Annex 2: Procedure for obtaining the Coastal Regulation Zone clearance ......................................... 110 Annex 3 Social Screening Forms and Checklists ............................................................................................. 111 Annex 4 Summary Community Consultation Report .................................................................................... 117 Annex 5 Building Equal Spaces and Opportunities for Women in Coastal Management .............. 119 Annex 6 List of references ........................................................................................................................................ 122 Annex 7 KILA Report on Disclosure Workshop Documentation ............................................................ 123 4 Executive Summary Background State of Kerala is highly vulnerable to natural disasters such as cyclone, monsoon storm surge, coastal erosion, sea level rise, tsunami, flood, drought, landslides/ land subsidence and earthquakes and changing climatic dynamics given its location between the western coast and steep slopes of the Western Ghats. In last 4 years the state has seen several such adverse events one after the other, starting with Cyclone Ockhi in 2017, floods and landslides in 2018, 2019 and 2020, Nipah virus in 2019 and present COVID-19 pandemic. The 2018 floods led to widespread loss of life, property, and habitats, affecting several millions and leading to economic losses of nearly US$3.74 billion (Rs. 26,720 crores). These events and their impacts highlighted the level of under-preparedness of the State to deal with these natural disasters and climate change shocks. In order to support GoK, World Bank initiated a strategic engagement to build multidimensional resilience in Kerala through First Resilient Kerala Development Policy Operation (DPO 1, US$250 million- June 2019) by extending support to the Government’s Rebuild Kerala Development Programme (RKDP) — the state’s strategic roadmap for recovery, rebuilding and resilience. This partnership has improved state’s capacity to respond to disasters and improved resilience of the community and treat resilience and disaster risk management as cross-cutting and important concerns in policy formulation and implementation. It has also led the way towards deepening and broad-basing this partnership by looking at additional sectors crucial for building resilience of the state and citizens to shocks of climate change, natural disasters and disease outbreaks. Building on the foundations of policy and institutional reforms initiated under Resilient Kerala DPO 1, the World Bank supported a Program for Results (PforR), which forms a part of the overall Government program. The PforR’s development objective was to enhance the State Government of Kerala’s (GoK) resilience against the impacts of climate change, natural disasters and disease outbreaks. The PforR will support the two Results Areas (RAs) that contribute to the outcomes of RKDP - first through support for state- wide systems and institutions development for managing shocks from climate change, natural disasters and disease outbreaks, and second for piloting sectoral investments in four districts along the Pamba river basin- Alappuzha, Idukki, Kottayam, and Pathanamthitta. The duration of the PforR is 2021–2026, and the sectoral coverage is as follows: RA 1: Fiscal, Disaster Risk Financing and Insurance, Social Protection, Urban, and Disaster Risk Management and RA 2: Health, Agriculture, Water Resource Management, and Roads. The Program cost is US$ 530 million. Program Description (Additional Financing) While many sectors have deepened their dialogue to build multidimensional resilience, Kerala suffered additional shocks in 2019, 2020, and 2021. In order to respond to the above situation, the PforR (hereinafter referred as the Parent PforR) is being broadened and deepened with additional financing (hereinafter referred as the Additional Financing (AF) PforR) through the inclusion of coastal zone resilience as a critical new focal area, integrating it with the multidimensional resilience efforts under RKP, and by deepening efforts to mitigate the impacts of recurrent floods in the Pamba river basin. The AF PforR 5 instrument is critical at this moment to set up the appropriate upstream institutional arrangements, technical capacities, and systems for planning, budgeting and implementation and the Program will draw from the Bank’s global experiences on integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) and best practices in knowledge sharing and management, which are detailed in the next section. Through this request, GoK aims to leverage the State Partnership and the Bank’s resources to make timely adjustments to respond to rapidly and somewhat unpredictably evolving impacts of climate change in the State. The Preliminary Project Report (PPR) for the proposed AF was submitted by GoK to the Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) on February 1, 2022 and the DEA request to the Bank is being followed up on. Key Changes to the Program under the proposed AF include: • New Activity on Strengthening Coastal Resilience. The proposed new DLI 10 under Results Area 2 aim to strengthen coastal resilience and management to sustainability protect, reduce vulnerability to erosion, environment and other hydro- meteorological hazards in the coast of Kerala by (i) improving coordination and strengthening the institutional capacity for sustainable shoreline management; (ii) preparing a long-term Shoreline Management Plan (combining policy options and technical solutions) for the entire coastal stretch based on the sediment cell concept; and (iii) pilot investments supporting a hybrid of hard and soft solutions in select districts along and adjacent to Pamba basin requiring urgent attention. • Enhancement of Water Resource Management in the Pamba river basin. The proposed new activities under DLI 7 would aim to address severely flood-prone regions and minimize losses in the future. The Program would aim to strengthen the WRD and equip the Integrated Command and Control Centre within WRD with innovative tools for flood management. Based on an assessment of recent flood- related damages, the need for critical investments will be reassessed. Accordingly, investments under AF would target to minimize flood damages in the future while giving due consideration to environmental aspects. The potential activities may include (i) restoration of rivers by improving their carrying capacity; and (ii) restoration of lakes embankments; and (iii) roll out of critical remedial measures in flooding hotspots. These investments will be backed by hydraulic and structural assessments. • New Activity on Climate Budget Reform. The proposed new DLI 11 under Results Area 1 aim to strengthen a whole-of government approach to resilience by leveraging the State’s governance and public finance framework to enhance policy and institutional environment, through potential Climate Budget Tagging (CBT) exercise led by the Department of Finance. • New Activity on Strengthening Open Data. The proposed new activity will develop Diagnostics and a Roadmap for Open Data Initiative to Strengthen Climate and Disaster Resilience. 6 Table: Disbursement Linked Indicators RKP AF Fund DLIs Financing Financing Recipient (USD M) (USD M) RA 1: Strengthening transversal systems for resilience DLI 1: Fiscal sustainability of GoK to cope with disease outbreaks and natural disasters is DoF 24.38 0 strengthened DLI 2: Disaster-related adaptive safety net system of DoF 25.00 0 GoK is strengthened DLI 3: DR Financing and insurance capacity of GoK DoF 35.00 0 and vulnerable households in Kerala are improved DLI 4: Urban local bodies developed and sanctioned LSGD 30.00 0 risk-informed urban MPs and priority action plans DLI 5: Climate risk information integrated into local LSGD 65.00 0 body DRM plans DLI 11 (Newly added in AF): Climate Budget produced as part of GoK’s annual state budget for ten DoF 0 15.00 key climate relevant sectors. RA 2: Embedding resilience in key economic sectors DLI 6: Capacity to track & respond to zoonotic disease outbreaks of human importance in a timely DoHFW 35.00 0 manner DLI 7: Integrated river basin management plan is developed for Pamba Basin and implementation WRD 35.00 45.00 commenced DLI 8: Farmer producer organizations have DOA 40.00 0 increased access to new and organized markets DLI 9: CRN is rehabilitated and/or maintained to PWD 80.00 0 meet resilient service standards in the Pamba Basin DLI 10 (Newly added in AF): Long-term Shoreline WRD, HED, Management Plan for the entire coastal stretch is DoECC, other N/A 90.00 developed and investments to protect coastal relevant erosion in critical sites organizations Total: 370* 150 Institutional/ Implementation Arrangements The proposed new activities on coastal resilience and taking a holistic “catchment to coast” approach to water resilience involve new departments and organization / agencies. In addition to the WRD – a line department of GoK, new implementing agencies include (i) Harbour Engineering Department (HED) under the Department of Fisheries and (ii) Kerala State Coastal Area Development Corporation Limited (KSCADC), Kerala Irrigation Infrastructure Development Corporation (KIIDCO) and Irrigation Design and Research Board (IDRB) – all state government organizations. Bringing these additional departments / agencies / organizations on board for the AF PforR will also support capacity building for holistic coastal resilience. The proposed institutional arrangement is shown in the following figure. 7 ESSA Scope and Methodology The Environmental and Social Systems Assessment (ESSA) Addendum was prepared by a team of environmental and social specialists from the World Bank. The team examined the following in relation to the AF PforR: (i) the potential E&S effects (including direct, indirect, induced, and cumulative effects as relevant); (ii) the borrower’s capacity (legal framework, regulatory authority, organizational capacity, and performance) to manage those effects; (iii) the comparison of the borrower’s systems—laws, regulations, standards, procedures, and implementation performance—against the core principles and key planning elements to identify any significant differences between them that could affect Program performance; (iv) the likelihood that the proposed operation achieves its E&S objectives; and (v) recommendation of measures to address capacity for and performance on policy issues and specific operational aspects relevant to managing the AF PforR risks (e.g. carrying out Staff training, implementing institutional capacity- building programs, developing and adopting internal operational guidelines) through a Program Action Plan (PAP). The ESSA Addendum was informed by a detailed review of secondary literature including applicable policies, Acts, Rules, Government Orders, Circulars, notifications and guidelines as well as evaluations (on institutional or scheme performance) websites, internal assessments, reports, studies. The desk review focuses on understanding the existing policy, operational procedures, institutional capacity and implementation effectiveness relevant to the activities under the Program. This also included a review of the borrower’s systems for engaging with citizens, especially the most marginalized and excluded as well as their grievance redress. Apart from a desk review of available information, personal interviews and consultations were also held with the community and institutional stakeholders. 8 Owing to COVID-19 related mobility restrictions, the majority of community consultations were carried by a team of resource persons from Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA), an autonomous capacity building institution of the state that was commissioned by the Bank team. About 42 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and 21 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) were conducted in 5 coastal districts (Alappuzha, Kasaragod, Kozhikode, Malappuram and Thrissur) and 2 river basin stretches (Meenachal and Manimala). And, the institutional stakeholder consultations were carried out by the Bank team largely through a virtual format. About 10 virtual meetings with the relevant stakeholders covering environmental aspects and 7 on social aspects were undertaken. Assessment of Legal Policy Framework Environment As relevant to the AF PforR, the national and state framework is well developed and established. The applicable legislations – both national and state - include Environment (Protection) Act 1986, CRZ Notification 2011 and 2019, Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017, Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974, Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules 2000, Construction and Demolition Waste Management Rules 2016, Solid Waste Management Rules 2016 (and various references in the state legislations such as the Kerala State Policy on SWM 2018, Kerala SWM Operational Guidelines, 2017, Kerala Municipalities Act 1994 and The Kerala Panchayat Raj Act 1994), Plastic Waste Management Rules 2016 and state order, national Forest legislation (Indian Forest Act 1927, Forest Conservation Act 1980 and Forest Rights Act 2006) and associated state legislation (Kerala Preservation of Trees Act 1986), Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972, Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958 and associated rules, and Building And Other Construction Workers (Regulation Of Employment And Conditions Of Service) Act 1996 and Kerala Rules 1998. For the AF PforR’s coastal protection investments, MoEFCC is responsible for the regulatory requirements pertaining to the CRZ and EIA Clearance if these have to be obtained at the national level. The relevant state-level regulatory agencies include the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority (KCZMA)1, State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA),2 State Wetlands Authority of Kerala (SWAK),3 Kerala State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) and the State Forest Department. All of these agencies are well-established and operationally functional. However, these agencies do not have the capacity to proactively engage in procedural compliance and to check for their adherence to the clearance conditions. This assessment revealed that there is a need for the RKI Secretariat to have a monitoring oversight to ensure that clearance conditions are adhered to and clearances are obtained timely. Apart from these, the PforR activities involving civil works will have only limited environmental impacts and do not entail any upfront clearances. There are only certain procedural requirements such as obtaining consents prior to the commencement of civil works. These are contractor responsibilities that will have to be supervised by the respective departments and agencies that are engaged in civil works. If there are specific situations during implementation, e.g. the NGT 1 http://keralaczma.gov.in/#home 2 http://www.seiaakerala.in/home/ 3 https://envt.kerala.gov.in/state-wetland-authority-kerala-swak/ 9 orders, then additional procedural requirements may be applicable. The environmental standards included in the various legislations will have to be adhered. There is sufficient capacity within the different implementing departments / agencies, their consultants and their contractors to meet these legal requirements. Further, the EIA requirements do not emphasize on stakeholder / community consultations and disclosure as the Bank’s requirements do. Hence, this gap will need to be addressed through conducting EIAs (with consultations and disclosure) as per the ToRs that will be developed by RKI Secretariat after program effectiveness. Additionally, to ensure that there is proper adherence to the clearance conditions, it is required to have RKI Secretariat to conduct periodic supervision to ensure that the implementation performance is in line with the regulatory clearance given. Social The national and state level laws and legal policies have been reviewed and are found to adequately safeguard the interests of all communities likely to be impacted by the proposed investments under the AF, especially women, socially and economically vulnerable groups, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in the implementation of schemes across sectors. Specifically, the laws and policies related to land acquisition, local self-governance, labour, gender and grievance redressal and citizen’s engagement all provide an empowering and conducive environment for affected communities. With additional investments proposed for coastal protection, flood recovery and shoreline management, the applicable laws and policies such as the CRZ Notification 2011 and 2019 were also reviewed to see how these impact traditional coastal communities, their houses, lands and the livelihoods of fisher-folk communities. However, despite some of these strong legal and policy frameworks, there is inadequate emphasis on social impact assessment, management and monitoring requirements to address social risks. Thus, these frameworks will be further strengthened by enhancing capacities of implementing departments on social risk management, supporting the development of institutional mechanisms such as for undertaking social risk screening for each site where works are envisaged and finally to develop project-specific social mitigation measures. The ESSA for PforR had done a comprehensive assessment of the relevant laws and policies and this section extracts all laws and policies that continue to be relevant under AF. In addition, of particular significance is the Livelihood Inclusion and Financial Empowerment (LIFE) Mission of GoK that seeks to provide quality housing options to the under-privileged sections of society amongst whom people staying in outlying or coastal areas are an important target group. Until September 2021, over 12, 067 houses that were constructed were handed over to beneficiaries of which 7832 were for homeless people from general communities, 3964 for beneficiaries from SC/ST communities and 271 for homeless people from fisher-folk communities. The GoK is targeting to reach more people from coastal communities, but given the strong dependence on proximity to the coast for their livelihoods, this is not a priority for the communities. ESSA highlights that it is important to ensure that this program is seen as separate from Bank’s AF and that the communities are provided complete and transparent information on this program as being distinct from investments under Bank’s program. Assessment of Risks and Benefits 10 Environment Of the various AF PforR activities, those pertaining to the shoreline management, coastal erosion protection and disaster recovery-related activities have environmental relevance. The summary findings of the risks and benefits are as follows: Preparation of a Long-Term Shoreline Management Plan (SMP): This will assist in more informed decision-making on all aspects pertaining to the Kerala shoreline. This has the potential to bring major positive environmental benefits. Pilot Investments in Select Hotspots and Highly Vulnerable Sites: These will be undertaken in the prevailing business-as-usual scenario that is threatening to damage life, livelihood and property. Once accomplished, these investments will bring major positive environmental benefits to the coastal communities, e.g., sea over-topping will be eliminated. During construction, these investments will result in temporary and reversible EHS impacts (air pollution, noise pollution and worker / community safety) that have residual environmental risks after adoption of proper management practices. In the operation phase, if the technical designs are not appropriate, there are likely to be negative environmental risks. The due diligence of the technical solutions – prior, during construction and post-construction oversight - will be important. Disaster recovery-related activities related to critical river infrastructure: The removal of the debris, rock, boulders and stones due to landslides, and repairs / rehabilitation of the river embankments will have construction-related EHS impacts. These will be undertaken largely within the width of the river, which are under WRD’s jurisdiction. These will not have major EHS impacts on community. However, worker health and safety impacts will have to be addressed through provisions management measures in the bid / contract documents to reduce the residual environmental risks. Social Some of the proposed investments under the AF PforR that may have important bearing on communities and people are shoreline management, coastal erosion protection and disaster recovery-related activities. The comprehensive identification of social risks has been done with the aim to ensure early identification and timely mitigation measures. The ESSA finds that though there is scope for bolstering the capacities of the implementing departments on social risk management, given the strong client commitment strong mitigation measures can be evolved in order to avoid, mitigate and manage all the identified social risks. Many proposed investments, especially Open Data Initiative and Climate Budget show clear potential to shift from a "do no harm or mitigation approach' to "enhancing and deepening gender and inclusion impacts". - The summary findings of the risks and benefits are as follows: Preparation of a Long-Term Shoreline Management Plan (SMP). Aimed at enhancing the government’s informed decision making for coastal and shoreline management, this activity has potential to bring major social benefits to the most vulnerable populations along the coastline. However, there are potential social risks such as exclusion of the voice 11 and perspectives of the vulnerable groups, especially fisher-folk, women, SC/ST, migrant workers and persons with disabilities from the planning processes. If the concerns of the affected communities and vulnerable groups are not properly addressed, this process can have major short, medium and long-term impacts many of which could be also irreversible in nature. There is national and global evidence to suggest that women’s deep connection and Key Social Risks • Risk of exclusion of the perspectives of affected dependence on the coastal ecosystem is community, especially vulnerable groups, undervalued and un-recognized and women, elderly, persons with disabilities in the therefore their voices may be missed out even processes for shoreline and river management during consultations. It is therefore planning. recommended that the SMP development • Restrictions or barriers to access to the water process is highly inclusive, consultative and sources (rivers, tributaries and irrigation also focuses on community led initiatives, channels) for the dependent communities, along with the technical and infrastructure- especially the elderly, infirm, persons with based solutions. SMP presents an disabilities and pilgrims opportunity to support the development • Restrictions on traditional access to the sea and its process for the key socially excluded groups resources for fisher-folks, vendors, fishing and women on shoreline protection and communities, coastal villages owing to the management. This will also ensure their construction of sea walls and its greater buy-in, support as well as leadership • Temporary impacts on livelihood activities leading on various medium and long-term solutions to loss of wages that have lasting positive social and • Temporary relocation of affected communities to environmental benefits. To achieve these relief shelters for long duration which objectives, a comprehensive Social Inclusion compromise on their health, livelihoods and and Gender Assessment is strongly safety recommended to be a part of SMP. • Exposure of women to Gender Based Violence due to labour influx Pilot Investments in Select Hotspots • Potential social risks for workers with regards to their health, sanitation and safety, including and Highly Vulnerable Sites. The pilot GBV/SEA investments under AF are envisaged to • Though a low risk as social screening is being protect affected communities against proposed, perceived or actual unequal benefits severe situations such as flooding and sea from the subprojects to between various groups attacks that threaten their lives and within the affected community can lead to intra- livelihoods. Field consultations and visits community conflict and/or conflict between confirm the critical situation confronting construction workers and the community the coastal communities, more so the vulnerable groups such as women, SC/ST, PWD. However, there are potential construction related social risks such as affecting the access of these fisher-folk to the sea which can impact their livelihoods. With inadequate and in many cases diminishing returns from small-scale fishing, these temporary impacts may actually cause more irreversible changes in terms of livelihoods and put these families at risk of poverty and indebtedness. The construction works envisaged can likely lead to temporary relocation of households which are in close proximity to coast and river basin area. Moreover, temporary relocation of the communities to shelter homes due to the flooding as well as during the construction of coastal protection infrastructure also has potential social risks, such as lack of provision of basic amenities especially to women, exclusion of vulnerable groups, safety of women, lack of separate toilets to women etc. Since there are construction activities involved, there is possibility of labour influx, especially that of migrant labour. This can lead to issues related to the use of local resources by migrant 12 labour or interference with the local community leading to conflict with the community. Other issues could be securing labour rights related to minimum wage rate, safety at construction sites and provision of basic facilities to labours and their families during construction. Labour Management Plan will be prepared for each sub project involving migrant labours and will be monitored during the implementation stage. One of the most common concerns emerging from labour influx is the potential exposure of women in host communities to gender-based violence. Though a low risk, since the project will have significant perceived or actual unequal benefits from the subprojects to between various groups within the affected community can lead to intra-community conflict and/or conflict between construction workers and the community. Currently, there are variations in how the relief efforts are undertaken across the state. Community consultations have highlighted certain districts and villages where community is dissatisfied with the relief efforts of their Panchayats and the State and have pointed to key gaps such as not factoring in even the basic needs of women, children, elderly in selecting the shelter sites or the movement from homes to these shelters and the moving back from relief shelters to homes. For instance, a clear gap was that on return the families found their homes to be in condition to live. Women’s work in cleaning and ensuring the houses are clean and habitable increased manifold. Thus, it is imperative for ensuring proper site-specific documentation of all these risks and ensuring adequate staff and establishment of institutional mechanisms to evolve mitigation measures and their routine monitoring and reporting. Therefore, a temporary relocation and relief framework as part of the Shoreline Management Plan and separate site-specific temporary relocation and relief plans would be needed to be prepared by the contractors. This will require community involvement in identification of a safe, women-friendly relief shelter and its oversight, all provision of food and other basic amenities, sanitation. Disaster recovery-related activities related to critical river infrastructure. The river embankment works are targeted towards reducing the river erosion and flooding that impacts several vulnerable groups that live in the river basin and are entirely dependent on the rivers for their livelihoods and therefore envisage significant social benefits. However, there are likely temporary social impacts on fisher-folk community and those practicing agriculture/paddy cultivation such as restriction on access, loss of wages for agricultural labour, who are mostly women and labour influx related concerns. As recommended above, contractors will need to adhere to provisions included in the bid/contract documents for labour management and safety, including ensuring mechanisms to address Gender Based Violence related concerns. Open Data Initiative. The Open Data Initiative is expected to address key social risks and gap currently faced both by the affected communities, especially vulnerable groups such as women, SC/ST, small-holder fisher households and state’s systems. However, there is possibility of some of these gaps remaining unaddressed i) if there are no gender and social inclusion considerations in designing/selecting channels to relay and communicate the information ii) no effort to provide gender-specific information so that there is greater relevance and use by women and other vulnerable groups iii) if there continues to be gap in gender-related information being gathered such as building knowledge on how climate change impacts women, what is their current access to such weather forecasting and warnings, what gaps do they face in accessing relevant information and what more information and support they need. 13 Climate Budget. This proposed initiative is likely to have significant positive impacts for vulnerable communities such as women, SC/ST, fisher folk and other coastal communities who are facing severe and adverse climate related social impacts affecting their health, safety, land and property and livelihoods. If the budget preparation process is not informed by social and gender considerations, the sectors and interventions which are crucially needed by the vulnerable communities can get missed out. Moreover, budgets for interventions that are narrowly defined towards infrastructure or technical solutions only, may again have unintended social risks and impacts. Therefore, it is crucial for the budget planning process to be gender and social inclusion informed. This initiative has the potential to move beyond a 'risk mitigation' to "enhanced gender and inclusion impacts ' Other associated social risks from ongoing resettlement and rehabilitation efforts of the State and other donors. In particular, the State’s LIFE Mission offers a housing scheme for people staying in outlying, coastal and plantation areas or in temporary housing. Alternatively, it offers a fixed sum of Rs 10 lakhs to beneficiaries who do not want to stay in the housing complexes constructed under the Mission. While this is a good effort of the government, there is reluctance among the communities to relocate as they will lose the easy access to the sea and this directly impacts their livelihoods. It is understood that ADB is also planning to support the State and will be looking at more critical sites and hotspots for coastal protection works and likely will involve large-scale construction activities. It will be therefore important to ensure that activities under the AF, are not leading to any involuntary resettlement and relocation of the people as this could bring in some reputational risks to the Bank. Given the long-standing relationship of World Bank with GoK, there can be efforts to ensure that that concerns of the communities are properly addressed in the overall program of the Government to relocate fishing communities. Institutional Capacity Assessment Environment Overall, the various GoK implementing departments / agencies have the basic capacity to address the environmental risks and to facilitate environmental benefits. At the Program- level, the institutional assessment revealed that the environmental capacity of the implementing departments / agencies will have to be further enhanced: WRD, HED and associated agencies for coastal protection activities: These departments / agencies do not have an environmental cell or division but their engineers are given the responsibility of ensuring compliance to environmental regulations. The assessment revealed that there is a need to strengthen the capacity of engineers who have the responsibility of managing such activities. The competence-building should be both on compliance procedures and on good EHS practices. This is required to be done through the RKI Secretariat. WRD for disaster-recovery in river stretches: The WRD engineers have the capacity to oversee contractors, whose contract will include EHS provisions. Further orientation and refreshing training to the assigned WRD engineers needs to be planned to ensure that the residual environmental risks are minimal. 14 RKI Secretariat: There is a fulltime officer (through their Project Management Support Services), who is responsible for coordinating the environmental management activities pertaining to the parent PforR. Additional capacity will be needed to support and coordinate both the shoreline management plan and coastal protection activities. In particular, the capacity will be required for oversight to ensure compliance to the CRZ and environmental clearances & conditions. This will necessarily include administering an environmental screening checklist prior to design & planning and prior to execution of works; and regular monitoring & reporting. This proposed Coastal Mission Directorate that will be staffed through the RKI Secretariat will include this oversight function. Social At the Program-level, the institutional assessment has revealed gaps in the existing social capacities of the departments / agencies. Some of the highlights of the assessment are: Water Resources Department: The WRD is one of the primary implementing agencies. It has previous experience of working on Bank projects and is familiar with some of the Bank’s social safeguard requirements. However, WRD within its organizational structure does not have a social cell or division, nor any designated staff responsibilities to oversee and manage social and gender risks. The ESSA considers this to be a major institutional gap, since the proposed investments under the AF are likely to have some major social impacts. Most of these impacts are likely to be manageable through timely and well- informed mitigation measures that factor in site specific contexts (some sites may have greater risks due to a larger number of households along the coast, more vulnerable/women headed households etc). The assessment revealed that there is a need to strengthen the capacity of engineers who have the direct interface with the communities in the coastal areas and also proposing for additional deputation of staff/consultants. Thus, ESSA therefore, recommends a strong social and gender orientation for the relevant field staff of WRD and additionally, recommends the hiring of a special cadre of Social Officers for all nine coastal districts. The site visits revealed the fragile conditions of vulnerable groups and households, especially those near the coast and rivers. To garner community support and to ensure their concerns are duly addressed, this cadre is likely to play a critical role. The RKI Secretariat can provide initial capacity building and orientation support and ensure regular collection of data for social monitoring. Harbour Engineering Department: Under the AF, it is proposed to engage the HED in some of the proposed activities. The HED focuses on creating infrastructure that has direct and key benefits for the community. In its outreach to the community, it works closely with the staff of the Fisheries and Ports Department. The consultation with the HED teams showed that they have greater focus on ‘infrastructure’ rather than providing communities with livelihood related support and this partly responsible for limited direct interface with the community and limited understanding of their needs and demands. The ESSA proposes that in order to ensure a more sustained focus on community’s social and gender related needs, the department needs to nominate its staff or engage few social consultants who can strengthen its interface with the coastal communities. Site visits to some of the fish auction grounds also revealed the critical need to re-vamp these in order to make them more customer friendly and safe for women. For instance, a significant 15 concern, both environmental and social in nature, is lack of sanitation and waste disposal near the coast. Increasingly, harbors are dumping grounds for plastic and solid waste, as nearby communities do not have any options. While this is a challenge for the whole State, this can be one of the priority areas for HED to factor in its infrastructure development plans. A cadre with necessary social skills will be able to ensure such community needs are recognized and incorporated in the future plans and programs of the HED. A Gender Based Violence Mitigation Plan needs to be evolved with Bank’s support to ensure there are specific measures to ensure these auction grounds and harbor areas are safe for women. Measures such as ensuring adequate lighting, separate toilets, display of zero tolerance on violence against women, display of State’s or NGO operated helplines to report instances of violence can be placed. World Bank has secured trust funds to implement a GBV pilot and will be used to ensure GBV mitigation measures are evolved and implemented in all project sites. Fisheries and Ports: While it is not a direct implementing agency, the Fisheries department has strong community interface and therefore possesses knowledge about key social risks and challenges faced by the affected communities due to coastal and river erosion. There is also a strong understanding within the department on the various ways in which the impact of climate change is being felt on livelihoods of fishing communities. Since the HED comes under the Fisheries Department, the real demands of the community are somewhat reflected in the type of infrastructure initiatives which are taken up by the HED. The ESSA recommends that for Shoreline Management Planning, a regular engagement of the Fisheries is ensured if long term positive social impacts are to be envisaged. Though not as robust in terms of their reach and social objectives, the ‘Theeramythri’ women’s groups under the Society for Assistance to Fisherwomen (SAF) that was founded as part of the Fisheries department’s outreach to fisher women, provide potential CBOs to integrate community-based solutions to coastal protection and management. The department has expressed a willingness to oversee/support a strong social and gender assessment for the purpose of shoreline management plan that looks beyond technical solutions and incorporates the concerns of the communities, looks at community-based solutions for coastal management and their livelihood. RKI Secretariat: The RKI is in the process of recruiting a full-time Social Officer (through their Project Management Support Services), to focus on integrating social and gender concerns in the parent PforR’s program activities. There has been a delay in the hiring of the officer, and this has affected the initiation of activities that were proposed under the PAPs of the original ESSA. Based on this, the ESSA finds the current capacity of RKI to be limited in ensuring existing project work, but more so taking on the additional responsibilities that may emerge from the AF. Thus, it is recommended that RKI strengthen its existing capacity through increasing the number of social and gender staff/consultants to be able to provide timely and ongoing support to participating departments/Coastal Directorate and their nominated staff for addressing social risks and implementing mitigation measures. These increased capacities, both in terms of skills on social inclusion and gender and number of dedicated staff are required to ensure coastal protection and shoreline management planning processes are truly inclusive of all socially vulnerable groups and women. 16 Core Principle #1: Program Core Principle #2: Core Principle #3: Program Core Principle #4: Core Principle #5: Core Principle #6: E&S management systems are Program E&S E&S management systems Program E&S systems Program E&S systems Program E&S systems designed to (a) promote E&S management systems are designed to protect manage land give due consideration to avoid exacerbating social sustainability in the Program are designed to avoid, public and worker safety acquisition and loss of the cultural conflict, especially in design; (b) avoid, minimize, or minimize, or mitigate against the potential risks access to natural appropriateness of, and fragile states, post- mitigate adverse impacts; and adverse impacts on associated with (a) the resources in a way that equitable access to, conflict areas, or areas (c) promote informed natural habitats and construction and/or avoids or minimizes Program benefits, giving subject to territorial decision-making relating to a physical cultural operation of facilities or displacement and special attention to the disputes. Program’s E&S effects resources resulting other operational practices assists affected people rights and interests of from the Program. under the Program; (b) in improving, or at the Indigenous Peoples/Sub- Program activities that exposure to toxic minimum restoring, Saharan African involve the significant chemicals, hazardous their livelihoods and Historically Underserved conversion or wastes, and otherwise living standards. Traditional Local degradation of critical dangerous materials under Communities, and to the natural habitats or the Program; and (c) needs or concerns of critical physical cultural reconstruction or vulnerable groups. heritage are not eligible rehabilitation of for PforR financing. infrastructure located in areas prone to natural hazards Environment Both the regulatory systems The GoI / GoK’s The regulatory systems NA NA NA and the organizational regulatory systems include the Building and systems were examined vis- pertaining to natural Other Construction à-vis the Core principle. The habitats, particularly Workers (Regulation of GoI / GoK’s framework (laws coastal zones, Employment and and regulations) - wetlands and forests Conditions of Service) Act environmental, forests and were assessed and 1996 and Kerala Rules, pollution control acts and found to be adequate 1998. The Act and Rules rules - were assessed and to manage the adverse mandate health and safety found to be adequate to environmental effects compliance for all civil manage the environmental if these arise during works and is regulated by effects of the activities under implementation. The the Labour the AF PforR. Of the various forest clearance for Commissionerate. While legislation, it is the EIA the diversion of forest the systems are in place, Notification and the Coastal land and the enforcement needs to Regulation Zone Notification compensatory be strengthened. 2011 that are relevant to the afforestation, e.g., for Therefore, worker and coastal protection tree cutting, are public safety are generally investments being planned. mandatory. managed through The Department of Constructions in the provisions in the bid / Environment has proximity of cultural contract documents that established the SEIAA and heritage sites such as the respective the SEAC to review projects protected monuments Departments – having under the EIA Notification. are also regulated. The civil works - will be using The Department has also AF PforR activities do to procure its contractors. established the KCZMA to not include any The provisions will be review projects under the significant conversion made part of agreements CRZ Notification. These or degradation of with contractors and will systems are adequate to critical natural be monitored. Given the ensure that the legal habitats or physical prevailing Covid-19 compliance is ensured at the cultural heritage pandemic situation, this state level. These properties. In fact, should also include regulations require projects, many of the AF PforR additional requirements particularly those pertaining activities will be done of the use of PPEs (face to coastal protection along the shoreline, masks), physical investments, to be which are not natural distancing and forwarded to the central habitats of any handwashing practices ministry / MoEFCC. At the significance. In the that may be required of centre, there are adequate unlikely case of any the contractor and sub- systems to ensure to review such environmental contractor personnel. All against legal requirements effects, the respective of these have been and to prescribe conditions Departments were included as PAP to adhere to those found to be competent recommendations. With requirements during in addressing the this further implementation. Outside of regulatory strengthening, the coastal protection requirements. The consistency to this core investments, the consistency to this principle was also applicability of the GoI / principle was ensured in the Program GoK’s legal is only to the confirmed. design. activities in the river stretches. These activities 18 have only low and moderate impacts, and hence not a focus of the legal framework. In relation to civil works, there are procedural requirements to make the contractor responsible for obtaining consents from the SPCB or permissions for tree-cutting, if any, from the Forest Department. The consistency with Core Principle #1 was confirmed. Social The sector institutions/ The operations under Since the AF envisages The project will The proposed While water resources departments have low social the AF will not support physical works along the exclude investments investments are of the Pamba Basin are capacities primarily owing activities that may coast and river basins, that may lead to envisaged to have contested between to their technical focus and have an impact on the there is need for increased physical or economic positive impacts on STs governments of Kerala limited community religious or cultural supervision on complete displacement of and other vulnerable and Tamil Nadu (under interface. Given, that the AF resources of adherence to and communities or groups such as litigation), program will focus on both hard and communities. application of the individuals. SC/Women, elderly and investments are aimed soft solutions along the coast regulatory systems for persons with at improved resource and river basin, some worker and labour However, it is felt that disabilities. However, utilisation and requiring significant management. Building to manage livelihood additional measures efficiency and are not construction/embankment And Other Construction impacts triggered by will be supported to creating additional and repair works, these Workers (Regulation project investments, ensure strong demands on the water capacities need to be of Employment and additional measures community support and resources; hence are enhanced. Conditions of Service) Act will need to be consent on all not likely to lead to or 1996 and Kerala Rules, adopted as current coastal/river basin exacerbate social or The ESSA finds the potential 1998. focus on these issues is management measures. resource conflicts / risks to be ranging from In addition, it is proposed found to be low. For For this purpose, it is disputes. moderate to substantial, and to include labour sites where there is proposed that recommends the state level management and safety temporary relocation departments bolster institutions/ systems to provisions in the bid / envisaged, social their capacities and ensure engagement of contract documents that screening reports will staffing or engage additional staff/consultants the respective form the basis of NGOs/CBOs to capture and creation of clear Departments – having preparation of a people’s needs and institutional mechanisms to civil works – for comprehensive plan 19 assess and manage these procurement of to ensure that specific include them in the social risks and impacts, contractors. The mitigation measures basin level plans. ensure citizen’s engagement provisions will be made are evolved. and participatory part of agreements with Importantly, in sites State systems & approaches for contractors and will be where temporary established practices shoreline/river basin monitored. This will livelihood impacts are are expected to ensure planning and transparency include establishment of a envisaged, it is transparency and through disclosures and grievance mechanism for proposed that specific accountability in information sharing. workers, including on efforts are made to preparation of RBP and protection against Gender ensure that all the key SMP. Although the state has an Based Violence and Sexual safety net programs effective central level GRM, Exploitation and Abuse. and assistance are There is however risk of the ESSA finds that there is accessed by the exclusion of the voices currently data on project- affected communities. and perspectives of related grievances is not Ensuring awareness vulnerable fishing available or documented. on and linkages with communities, including This makes monitoring the programs supported in land fishing effectiveness, accessibility by the Fisheries communities, small and and transparency of the department through marginal farmers & GRM difficult. Thus, is its Society for women from RBP and proposed a project-level is Assistance to SMP processes, which established GRM to ensure a Fisherwomen and the may lead to non- more efficient redress of Matsyafed application of the complaints. Federations under principles of equity in Kerala State Co- the allocation decided operative Federation for inter se distribution for Fisheries of basin level water Development will resources or in ensure there is some identification of access livelihood points to sea/river opportunities tapped when construction of for affected sea walls or communities. embankments takes place. Site-specific mitigation measures will ensure these adverse impacts are avoided. 20 Key Inputs from Consultations Environment The key highlights from the different stakeholder departments / agencies / experts consultations were as follows: Stakeholder Feedback – Highlights Type Implementing All technical designs are developed with the guidance of expert agencies / agencies such as NCCR or IIT Madras. Once developed, these agencies departments verify that the specific designs are in line with their guidance. There is a shortage of armour stones and this has necessitated the use of tetrapods. Nature-based solutions such as use casuarina, fruit-bearing trees and mangroves are possible in certain stretches but not in all. Experts / Comprehensive shoreline management is very much required. Given Advisers the changes along the shoreline, it is required to be kept updated. It is important to get the institutional mechanisms for implementation upfront than to produce another technical report that does not get used. Regulatory For all shoreline interventions, regulatory clearances are required Agencies either at the state-level (KCZMA) and at the central-level (MoEFCC). Implementing departments / agencies should consult the DoECC / KCZMA as all regulatory clearances are routed through this Department / Authority Consulting Local people understand the sea better, particularly climate change firms impacts; they must be consulted or involved in the developing the technical designs prepared with the support of the expert agencies. As per the CRZ clearance, 6-monthly compliance reports are required. These monitoring reports must be prepared. Corrective and preventive action should be taken in accordance. The key highlights from KILA’s community consultations were as follows: Sector Feedback - Highlights Shoreline management 5 Coastal Issues / Problems Sea turbulence and high tides during the Districts: monsoon season, low water quality due to salinity (sea water Alappuzha, intrusion), flooding, non-scientific harbour construction and illegal Kasargod, sand mining Kozhikode, Solutions: sea wall barrier using stones and earthen material, Sand- Malapuram & filled bags Thrissur Disaster recovery in river stretches Meenachal and Issues / Problems: Landslides, degradation of agriculture land, Manimala river erosion washes the fertile topsoil, reduced agricultural Sector Feedback - Highlights basins productivity, overexploitation of water resources, reduction in fish (Kottayam, stocks, disruption of river water flows and sand mining Alappuzha & Solutions: Increasing the depth and width of the river, waste Pathanamthitta) management, clean ditches and streams before monsoon, constructing protective walls, and planting mangroves where feasible The key environmental system issues identified during the consultations have been integrated with the AF PforR design, e.g., the institutional mechanism for implementation is being established ahead of PforR. The environmental issues raised by the community will be addressed as a part of the shoreline management plan as well as the coastal protection activities. In fact, the coastal protection activities pertain directly to addressing the environmental issues raised, e.g., sea level rise, over-topping of sea water and coastal flooding. Wherever feasible, the use of nature-based solutions or hybrid solutions (mix of nature-based and physical infrastructure and beach nourishment) will be undertaken. GoK has engaged expert agencies such as the National Centre for Coastal Research (NCCR), Chennai and Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras to guide the implementing agencies / departments / organizations and confirm the appropriateness of the technical solutions using location-specific research and analysis. The technical solutions will necessarily be based on the various scientific studies related to the shoreline dynamics. Lastly, the stakeholder workshop included the presentation of the comprehensive analysis, which was well received by the participants. The most important points raised were as follows: Activity Feedback - Highlights Shoreline • There should be an attempt to sustain our existing natural management ecosystems along with hybrid solutions. Higher emphasis is and coastal currently on sea wall based solutions. protection • Public consultations might give biased results unless it is done investments with an informed group. The consultations, especially the coastal consultations, representative participation of all the strata in the coastal community must be ensured to gather comprehensive information. Furthermore, he emphasized the importance of verifying the percentage of participation in each group to avoid bias in existing data. • Coastal communities have different categories of people: (a) Active fisherfolks (b) Same community but different livelihoods; and (c) others who are outside the community but happen to be living there. Their perspectives will be different and these need to be accounted for. • Before preparing a shoreline management plan (SMP), a critical evaluation and assessment should be performed, particularly in the case of seawall construction. The existing seawall which needs restorations is one part, whereas new seawalls in areas with no seawalls must undergo critical evaluation. 22 Activity Feedback - Highlights Disaster • In the management of water bodies, there is no regulation of recovery in check dams or bunds. While increasing depth and width of water river stretches bodies, there needs to be scientific inputs which are fostered by the community inputs and consultations by considering traditional knowledge. Social Stakeholder Departments The key highlights from the different stakeholder departments / agencies / experts consultations were as follows: • Coastal protection measures such as construction of sea walls are the urgent demand of the community and currently a technically sound option. The consultations with WRD reflect the urgent need to implement some coastal protection infrastructural solutions for tackling coastal erosion and the impact of flooding and sea attacks on affected communities. Although, site visits and interactions with communities confirm this demand, it was also felt that since the increased concerns are being faced more recently , there is limited knowledge of any other alternatives that can provide effective protection. Therefore, it would be useful to explore the community- led nature-based solutions along with the construction of sea walls etc. . • There is strong oversight of Panchayats on all works at the site level, and this helps ensure community’s needs and demands are integrated. However, there is still a need to evolve a system to ensure greater community participation and support. The consultations with key departments, WRD, HED, KSCADC, KSDMA and Fisheries highlighted that though there is strong local self- governance system in the state, there is still scope for greater engagement and participation of the communities especially the vulnerable groups such ST/ SC population, women, disabled etc. The process of temporary relocation of the communities to relief shelters during flooding is also managed by the Panchayats and there is careful consideration to ensure that help reaches communities in a timely manner. However, there is lack of ant vibrant CBOs in the coastal areas which could help communities engage and have a greater sense of ownership over the proposed project activities. The establishment of Community- Based Organisations specifically to focus on coastal protection/river basin management can be explored by the implementing agencies. • Coastal management needs to be seen as beyond just technical and hard solutions. It must be seen as a longer-term and sustainable solution to coastal erosion and strengthening of the marine ecosystem. This emphasis came strongly from consultations with HED and Fisheries. Since the livelihoods of affected communities is directly associated with access to sea/rivers, until and unless these concerns are factored into the planning for coastal protection and shoreline management, there will likely be resistance from communities if certain measures impact their access to water sources. It is important to mix nature-based solutions with the construction of sea walls and other infrastructure for coastal protection to ensure its sustainability 23 and greater benefits for the affected communities. The Bank needs to ensure it explores all options based on national and global good practices. There is need for greater focus on social and gender issues integration in existing interventions on coastal protection and coastal and river basin management. The consultations also highlight the acknowledgement on behalf of the implementing agencies on the lack of adequate social skills and staff to be able to address potential social risks identified and mitigation measures evolved. It is important to envisage issues such as increased pressure on women and vulnerable groups, such as gender-based violence. Since the departments are under equipped to address these risks, there need to strengthen the capacity of the PMU/secretariat that will be proposed to implement the project. Key highlights from Community Consultations The is urgent need for coastal protection measures, but also for longer-term solutions for climate change adaptation. The community is able to recognise both immediate protection measures but also the need for climate change adaptation. For them, the impact of climate change is evident in the reduced supply and quality of fish stock. This is impacting the livelihoods of several vulnerable households and women. This is likely to lead to a situation where there will be increased poverty, indebtedness and compromises by women and girls to ensure food security of their families. Lack of access to drinking water and sanitation facilities is both a health and a social hazard. There is increased pressure on women to find ways to dispose solid waste and garbage. Moreover, coasts and harbours are being used to dump solid waste and plastic waste and this is endangering the marine ecosystem. While this puts all affected communities at risk, it is felt that women and children are likely to face the brunt of this in terms of their health. The lack of drinking water is also posing increased health risks and increasing the drudgery of women as they are seen as responsible for ensuring drinking water for their families. There is wide variation in how efficient and timely the relief efforts of the state and Panchayats are. Some sites complain of very poorly conceived and coordinated relief measures. Many poor and marginalized families lost their life savings and assets due to flood with improper shelter put in place. The rehabilitation was not completed during the flood. The impact of the flood was more on women in the region because the recouping mechanisms of the households were largely dependent on them. Loss in income and livelihood was also a major challenge during the flood. Increased drudgery and invisibility of women’s work: Existing data as well as observations data reiterate the differential impacts of coastal erosion and climate change on women and girls. For one, a most obvious impact in sites where there are flooding/ frequent sea attacks is on their increased workload and drudgery during times of flooding, relocation and re-entry into their homes after their 24 stay in relief shelters. The cultural roles and responsibilities ascribe household work, catering for food and water and other necessities on women. Even though there were existing state mechanisms to provide food and shelter, the intra-household allocation of the provisions often led to compromise from the women in the households. Some medium and long terms impacts point to the complete ‘invisibilisation’ of women’s economic roles. Women who were also allied fishery sector workers on the coast are at times completely out of work during flooding. Climate change has meant dwindling fish stock and gradually the impacts of this percolates to women’s roles and incomes thereof in fishery. Moreover, there is emerging data to point to increased possibility of women’s and girls’ exposure to domestic violence, violence in public spaces due to labour influx and during their stay in relief shelters. There are bigger players who have hegemony over the access to fish and other marine resources, with small fisher –folk at the brink of losing their livelihoods. In particular, there is diminishing role and returns from fishing related activities of women. The community consultations pointed to how the use of mechanised fishing vessels and over exploitation of marine resources by bigger fishing companies is threatening the ecosystem and reducing the access of individual fisher-folk/households to these resources. Some of the site visits showed that some fisher-folks have now been forced to become ‘coolies’ or porters or take to unskilled labour working for petty wages for bigger companies or more influential fishermen. Other issues such as illegal sand mining is causing great damage to the marine and river ecosystems, but there have not been enough measures to tackle this. This issue was highlighted in few of the community consultations undertaken by KILA and point out that despite guidelines and litigations. The key departments and large public and private sector companies need to ensure that guidelines for sustainable mining are strictly adhered to. However, the community also felt that this is a larger issue that is beyond their control or that of their Panchayats. Feedback from the stakeholder consultation workshop The stakeholder workshop on May 11, 2022, was useful to endorse and reiterate the importance of a strong focus on integrating social risk management in the overall program approach and strategies. Some of the specific recommendations, that have been incorporated are: Stronger focus and capacity enhancement for the Local Self Governance Institutions. Since at the local level Panchayats and Urban Local Bodies play a critical role in ensuring delivery of most programs and ensuring community engagement, the Additional Financing also needs to ensure these roles are acknowledged and well- defined. The role of Panchayats and ULBs will be crucial to ensure there is community support and engagement. However, for them to play these roles effectively, the project must include capacity building for them as a core strategy. There are limited capacities on social assessment and even more limited commitment to incorporate findings of such assessments. It was recommended that while the focus on ensuring social screening and conducting social assessments has been highlighted in ESSA, it is important to ensure that these are conducted by experienced 25 agencies and subject matter experts. Moreover, it needs to be ensured that there is accountability defined to ensure that relevant departments incorporate these findings and there is regular monitoring to ensure that the mitigation measures evolved to address these risks are being implemented. Informed consultations with the community need to be emphasised. For the community to be engaged and their perspectives incorporated in the project throughout the implementation, it is crucial that there are informed consultations with the community. This implies greater preparation, prior information disclosure and awareness generation on topics such as social risks. Moreover, there is diversity in the coastal communities and it is critical to engage with all of them. Apart from fisher-folk communities, there are their coastal communities comprising other livelihood groups, farmers and migrants who need to be engaged in all assessments and their perspectives need to inform the shoreline management planning process. The shoreline management plan should be inclusive and the role of civil society needs to be further recognised and highlighted. It was felt that the project will benefit from the vast experience of civil society organisations that are working with coastal communities in the state. Especially conducting social assessments, gender assessments and guiding shoreline management planning are critical opportunities for civil society to be engaged with more strategically. Disclosure The draft ESSA Addendum reports –ESSA Addendum Summary Report and the ESSA Addendum Consolidated Report were disclosed on April 29, 2022, on the RKI website. This disclosure was of the English version of the reports. In addition, the draft ESSA Summary Report was translated in the local language – Malayalam, it was also disclosed on the RKI website on April 29, 2022. Comments, suggestions and any other feedback were requested along with this website disclosure. All these disclosures were ahead of the state-level stakeholder workshop that took place on May 11, 2022. As part of the invitation to the workshop, the invitees were sent the draft ESSA Addendum Summary Report for their prior reading as part of the disclosure process. The feedback obtained during the workshop has been used to further refine and finalize the draft ESSA Addendum reports. The final ESSA Addendum reports will be disclosed on the RKI website by May 20, 2022, and also on the World Bank website. Printed copies of the final ESSA reports will be made available upon request at the RKI office. Recommendations and Actions / Exclusions Environment The following table includes the list of activities to be undertaken towards environmental systems strengthening in the context of the AF PforR activities: 26 No. Institution / Description Timeline Indicator for agency completion E1 WRD, HED and Assigning and retaining 6 months from Evidence of agencies responsibilities on environmental project responsibility management to specific Assistant effectiveness assignment Executive Engineers and Assistant Engineers E2 RKI Secretariat Strengthening and continuation of the 6 months from Evidence of Environmental Team to support project responsibility Coastal Mission Directorate and the effectiveness assignment additional coordination activities. E3 RKI Secretariat / Finalizing the draft environmental 3 months from Evidence of the WRD / HED / screening checklist and criteria for project final Implementing inclusion under the AF PforR and effectiveness environmental agencies / administering its use consistently. screening Department of checklist and Environment criteria E4 RKI Secretariat Developing the Terms of Reference 6 months from Evidence of the (ToR) for conducting the EIA project ToR and EHS (emphasizing on consultations and effectiveness Guidelines. disclosure) and preparing ESMPs for the coastal protection works; and adopting its use Developing EHS guidelines for the disaster-related recovery works along the river stretches and using the same. E5 RKI Secretariat Developing relevant environmental Throughout the Evidence of content in the training and capacity project period training building pertaining to coastal (Orientation + conducted that protection investments and SMP. Refresher) includes Conducting such training for environmental mainstreaming environmental content considerations on an ongoing basis E6 RKI Secretariat & Facilitating a regular dialogue Throughout the Evidence of the DoECC between the DoECC and the WRD, project period periodic HED and associated agencies to meetings enable a two-way capacity-building facilitating the on coastal erosion, protection and dialogue, SMP issues. discussions and field visits E7 RKI Secretariat Monitoring and reporting the Quarterly and Evidence of the progress on environmental throughout the periodic reports performance of the AF PforR activities project period Social Coastal erosion and climate change require strong technical and scientific solutions. And yet, what will make these solutions work are strong systems, institutions and the people who are at the very helm of impacts of climate change and natural disasters. With high levels of literacy, awareness and the strongest local self-governance institutions, Kerala 27 can be a strong example of inclusive solutions to coastal protection programs and climate change adaptation. The recommendations have been made keeping in mind the immediate requirements of the project which need to ensure that all social risks are identified and mitigated, but are also aimed at supporting the longer-term activities such as shoreline management plan which allow greater scope for enhancing gender and social inclusion impacts for the most vulnerable communities. In sync with the overall parent PforR and AF to strengthen state’s systems and capacities, the recommendations focus on building strong institutional mechanisms and capacities of the implementing departments to assess and manage social risks and enhance social/gender impacts. No. Institution Description Timeline Indicator for / agency completion S1 WRD Appointment of Social Officers 6 months from Recruitment of across all districts project Social Officers effectiveness S2 HED Nominate staff for additional 6 months from Staff nominated for social and gender project additional focus on responsibilities/or engage social effectiveness social and gender and gender consultants concerns reflected in Job Descriptions S3 RKI Secretariat Strengthening of the Social Team 3 months from All social officers to include 1-2 more social project are recruited with officers/consultants to support effectiveness clear job Coastal Mission Directorate and descriptions the additional coordination activities. S4 RKI Secretariat Finalizing the draft social 3 months from Social screening / WRD / HED / screening checklist and criteria project checklist and Implementing for inclusion under the AF PfoR effectiveness criteria are agencies finalized Prepare social screening reports 6 months (to be Site-specific social for each site before done prior to screening reports commencement of works commencement are prepared to of works) ensure no site requiring land acquisition/ and physical displacement of affected persons is selected S5 RKI Secretariat Consolidate all social screening 6-12 months Consolidated Social / WRD / HED / reports to prepare a Assessment and Implementing comprehensive Social Risk Enhancing Social agencies Assessment and Management Impact Report Report S6 RKI/WRD/HED Prepare a Relocation and 6 months Relocation and Livelihood Restoration Plan for Restoration Plans sites with expected temporary are prepared for impacts sites where relocation and (For temporary relocation, livelihood impacts emphasis on A focus will be to are expected ensure access to all safety net programs and linkages to specific livelihood programs of 28 No. Institution Description Timeline Indicator for / agency completion departments/Civil Society Organizations) S7 RKI Secretariat Clearly define a project level 6 months from Grievance Grievance Redressal Mechanism project Mechanism is with clearly established linkages effectiveness established and with existing central and state linkages developed mechanisms to ensure routine with the state level logging of project-related GRM grievances and redressal process and timelines Quarterly report on grievances received and redressed are being prepared S8 WRD/HED Strengthen or establish Can be tried on a To be evolved as a Community Based Organizations pilot basis in good practice on for oversight and community select sites inclusive and participation in coastal protection participate SMP works and shoreline management with support from World Bank (Where existing CBOs are there, e.g., Water User Associations under WRD, or women’s groups such as Theeramythri groups, this can be a reassessment of their existing focus, organizational maturity) S9 RKI Secretariat Gender Based Violence Mitigation Within one GBV/SEA with support of Plan to avoid instances of GBV and years of project Mitigation Plan WCD and NGOs also ensure redressal mechanisms commencement for reporting Sexual Exploitation and Abuse/Sexual Harassment issues (Trust funds for a pilot will input into this GBV Mitigation Plan) S10 RKI Secretariat Continue from Parent PforR the Throughout the Training modules development of social and gender project period prepared modules for training and (Orientation + incorporating good orientation of social staff in Refresher) practices on social participating departments and gender risk mitigation S11 RKI Secretariat Conduct a Social Inclusion and Year 2 Social Inclusion Gender Assessment for input into and Gender Shoreline Management Plan (a Assessment Report participatory and consultative assessment lead by subject matter experts/NGOs/research organization) S12 RKI Secretariat Monitor and report the progress Quarterly and Quarterly Social on social inclusion and gender throughout the Progress Reports performance of the AF PforR project period activities as a part of the overall reporting 29 No. Institution Description Timeline Indicator for / agency completion S13 RKI Secretariat Prepare guidelines for all Within 3 Letter/guideline departments and stakeholders months issued such as LSGD to re-affirm the need to ensure strict adherence to regulations on illegal sand mining and provide information on reporting any such instances Program Exclusions Environment The assessment confirmed the activities are eligible for PforR financing. There are not potentially significant, adverse environmental impacts in the AF PforR. At the outset, activities that are severely affected are not proposed under the AF PforR. Further, during implementation there will be an environmental criterion administered to screen out those activities that are not to be included. Requirements of not being in the vicinity of any natural habitats or cultural heritage sites form a part of the criteria. And only those that obtain the required CRZ and environmental clearance will be supported under the AF PforR. There are no major workplace conditions prone to health and safety risks and, no significant, cumulative, induced and indirect impacts. Social The following activities are proposed to be excluded from the current investments: • Considering the nature of operations (PforR), any repair and maintenance works requiring land acquisition and large-scale physical resettlement of affected persons and removal of structures will be excluded from the list of investments. • Sites where works require long periods of temporary relocation of affected communities should be avoided. • Schools as sites of temporary relief shelters due to project-related constructions or repair works will not be permitted. (Due to recurring disasters/flooding, children’s education has already suffered as schools have been the preferred sites to function as relief centres) Program Actions and Implementation Support Environment The Bank’s AF PforR focuses on institutional development by preparing a Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) and investment activities (coastal protection and disaster recovery of river stretches). Of these, the Bank’s implementation support should focus largely on further building the environmental management capacity as a part of the preparation of the SMP. With regard to the investment activities, the Bank’s implementation support should review and supervise (i) compliance to legal and regulatory requirements, (ii) contractual requirements and (iii) good EHS practices so that all construction-related environmental and social risks are effectively managed. 30 Social The following PAPs are in continuation of PAPs under ESSA for parent PforR and include some additional PAPs. No. Action Description Responsibility Task and Timeline Completion Measurement 1. Establishing an RKI/PMU and Year 1: Completion of recruitment IVA institutional structure for implementing and deployment, where required addressing social risks institutions (WRD • Preparation of ToRs for key and mitigation measures and HED) social positions in RKI-PMU & under the AF other key sector institutions; capacity building modules finalized • Recruitment of Social Officers for 9 districts in WRD • HED to designate staff with additional responsibilities on social risk mitigation • Coastal Management Directorate to have a Senior Social and Gender Specialist and a cadre of Social and Gender Officers Year 2 onwards: regular training of functionaries on different aspects of social management and gender. 2 2.1 Prepare a Social RKI with Year 1: Social Screening of all sites IVA and Aide Assessment report using WRD/HED/Coasta is completed and consolidated Memoires site specific social l Management into a Social Assessment Report screening reports to Directorate clearly define all social risks that are likely to arise from proposed investments Year 1-2: Relocation and 2.2 Prepare Relocation Livelihood Restoration Plans and Livelihood prepared for all sites where such Restoration Plan for sites impacts are expected as identified where temporary under social screening reports relocation and livelihood impacts are expected 3 3.1 Establish clear project RKI and key Year 1: Define a project level GRM IVA level GRM to ensure departments for Regularly analyze and track timely redress of all each sector grievances to inform the program project-specific based on assessment of existing grievances systems & requirement for developing common GRM for RKP proposed under previous ESSA 31 No. Action Description Responsibility Task and Timeline Completion Measurement Year 2 (end): A review/stock-take 3.2 Prepare a GBV report to assess effective Mitigation Plan with a functioning of the GRM GRM to report Gender Based Violence/Sexual Year 2: A GBV specific Action Plan Exploitation and and GRM is in place Abuse/Sexual Harassment 4. Establish a multi- RKI Year 1: Advisory Group is Aide Memoire stakeholder state established advisory group to ensure Year 2-3: Stakeholder social and gender aspects Consultations on addressing integration into the social and gender impacts under preparation of Shoreline SMP Management Plan 32 1 State Context The State of Kerala (the State) is highly vulnerable to natural disasters and the changing climatic dynamics given its location along the coast and steep gradient along the slopes of the Western Ghats. It is prone to a host of natural hazards such as cyclone, monsoon storm surge, coastal erosion, sea level rise, tsunami, flood, drought, lightning, landslide, land subsidence and earthquakes. Kerala’s State Disaster Management Plan assesses 39 types of known and reported hazard types in the GoK that may turn disastrous in the event of lack of proper preparedness and risk reduction planning. With Cyclone Ockhi in 2017, floods and landslides in 2018, 2019 and 2020, and now the Covid-19 pandemic, Kerala has been experiencing major disaster events for four consecutive years. The 2018 flood — the worst in nearly a century — led to widespread loss of life, property, and habitats in Kerala, causing 498 casualties with over 5.4 million people affected with loss of assets and property and 1.4 million people displaced, not to leave out financial losses of approximately US$ 3.74 billion (Rs. 26,720 crores). These events and their impacts highlighted the level of under-preparedness in the GoK to address natural disasters and climate change shocks. The main vulnerabilities associated with the floods — emblematically — follow the course of the river, starting from the basins and reservoirs upstream, to the intense developments in the cities and towns midstream, through to farms and livelihoods downstream. Addressing the underlying drivers of floods and landslides and better preparing the GoK for future disasters, therefore, follows the course of the river: upstream, through integrated water resources and reservoir management; midstream, through improved land use planning and management, infrastructure and services; and downstream, through ecologically sound agriculture and irrigation practices. Addressing these require systemically building the capability of the GoK to carry out an integrated and coordinated set of policy, institutional and budgetary changes, over time. They demand political will, institutional capacities, public support, and a continuous and iterative change process. Recognizing this, the GoK sought to use the 2018 floods as “a challenge and an opportunity to rebuild the State to ensure better standards of living to all sections of the society.” The State experienced the first confirmed cases of Covid-19 in India on January 30, 2020. High levels of urbanization and population density, tourist inflows, regular inward and outward travel of non-residents, and an aging population with co-morbidities made Kerala susceptible to infection and spread. The GoK responded proactively through a robust response plan at the early onset of the disease, based on learnings from the Nipah virus outbreak experience in 2018 and building on the institutional and policy actions carried out under the DPO 1. An initial spike of new Covid-19 cases occurred, beginning in late March, declining to zero daily cases by mid-May. A second spike occurred in mid- May, primarily due to returning expatriates and migrants from other States, as the lockdown eased. As of October 8, 2020, there have been 258,850 cases and 930 deaths. Of this, 167,256 (64.6 percent) cases have recovered. Although Kerala is one of the top three States in terms of new case rate and has a high test-positivity rate (14 percent vs. national average of 8 percent), its mortality rate (0.4) and transmission rate (1.55) are still on the lower side. To deal with the Covid-19 and other disease outbreaks in the future, the GoK needs to further strengthen its disease outbreak warning and response 33 systems and commence recovery from the current crisis amidst serious economic and fiscal constraints. 34 2 Program Description First Resilient Kerala Development Policy Operation. The World Bank (WB)’s support to GoK commenced in the immediate aftermath of the 2018 floods and landslides through a strategic engagement to build multidimensional resilience in Kerala. The foundation of the engagement was set by the First Resilient Kerala Development Policy Operation (DPO 1, US$250 million), approved in June 2019, supporting the Rebuild Kerala Development Programme (RKDP) — the GoK’s strategic and integrated roadmap for recovery, rebuilding and resilience, developed with support from the Bank. The DPO 1 set the course for centering resilience-related policy and institutional reforms in key crosscutting areas and sectors of the economy. It supported GoK’s efforts to improve fiscal sustainability through a variety of approaches, including levying a flood cess and mobilizing private finances via a masala bond. Key policy and institutional reforms were triggered in the water-agriculture nexus to engender holistic river basin management, shift agriculture to sustainable and climate-resilient models and strengthen agriculture value chains. Increased protections were afforded to human settlements by requiring risk-informed land use planning and updating disaster management plans at various levels. Reforms were also initiated to strengthen the resilience of critical infrastructure through multi-year capital planning, improved standards and mobilization of private sector expertise. Finally, a dedicated institutional modality, the Rebuild Kerala Initiative (RKI), was set up to coordinate, manage and monitor the roll out of the RKDP and the DPO 1 across various government departments and agencies, and with the civil society and the private sector. These efforts have improved the GoK’s capacity to respond to disasters and other extreme events. In part, they allowed the GoK to tackle the 2019 and 2020 floods and landslides with much reduced loss of lives, assets and livelihoods. Resilient Kerala Program PforR (RKP, P174778, US$125 million) was approved on June 24, 2021, and became effective on September 9, 2021, to support and incentivize a transformational shift to build long-term and multidimensional resilience to climate change, natural disaster, and disease outbreaks in the State. With a program development objective (PDO) to ‘enhance Kerala’s resilience against the impacts of climate change and natural disasters, including disease outbreaks and pandemics,’ the RKP aims to achieve the objectives through two Result Areas (RAs): (i) strengthening transversal systems for resilience, and (ii) embedding resilience in key socioeconomic sectors. The RKP results areas and activities have been prioritized based on three factors: (i) building on policy actions corresponding to the most critical challenges in resilience, (ii) synergies to implement an integrated model of dimensional resilience, and (iii) ownership and implementation readiness. The Program will be implemented over five years (FY2022– 27), both at the State level and in the Pamba River Basin area, comprising of four districts, namely Alappuzha, Idukki, Kottayam, and Pathanamthitta. The US$530 million PforR operation is financed by (i) US$125 million IBRD loan; (ii) co-financing of US$125 million by the AIIB which was approved on July 15, 2021, and declared effective on December 17, 2021; (iii) co-financing of €100 million (or about US$120 million equivalent) by the AFD which was approved on December 16, 2021 and is pending loan signing and effectiveness; (iv) counterpart funding of US$160 million from GoK; and (iv) €2 million technical assistance (TA) grant from KfW. The State Partnership Framework. With deepened WB engagement in Kerala woven around the theme of multidimensional resilience, it has become imperative to move away 35 from the model of standalone sector projects. The SPF aims to provide a cohesive and strategic approach to the GoK-WB partnership in strengthening institutional, economic and social resilience of the State to the impacts of natural disasters and climate change. The Framework is founded on Government priorities and programs outlined in the RKDP and the ‘Nava Keralam’ (New Kerala) and supports the strategic priorities of the Bank’s India Country Partnership Framework (CPF) as well as the Operational Framework for South Asia Region (SAR). Future Bank engagements in Kerala would be vetted against the framework of engagement. The SPF forms the basis for collaboration with development partners and civil society, as well to leverage resources across the WBG and to mobilize market-based resources to finance resilient development in the State. The SPF forms the basis for collaboration with development partners and civil society, as well as to leverage resources across the WBG and to mobilize market-based resources to finance resilient development in the State. Looking into the future, the State Partnership Framework (SPF) will be advanced through multiple tracks: one, continuing support to calibrate and strengthen the State’s transversal public administration and financing systems and institutions to prepare for and manage exogenous shocks effectively; two, deepening sectoral dimensions of resilience in critical sectors like agriculture, WRM and local infrastructure and services through sector specific programs; and, three, advancing knowledge partnerships at the institutional level and Lighthouse exchanges with peer States and other countries. The SBL will likely constrain the Bank from financing multiple and/or large state level operations in the near term. This will be overcome by the ability and track record of the partnership to leverage different sources of public and market-based finance. The experience of the Kerala SPF, DPO 1 and the proposed Resilient Kerala PforR will serve to strengthen other state partnerships as well as engender a new approach to multidimensional resilience across India. Additional Financing PforR While many sectors have deepened their dialogue to build multidimensional resilience with the GoK since the inception of the State Partnership in 2018, Kerala suffered additional shocks from out-of-normal rains, flooding, landslides, COVID-19, and sea erosion in 2019, 2020 and 2021. While the State has been able to tackle these shocks with greater degree of preparedness and, consequently, lesser human and economic losses, their cumulative impacts have been substantial and have necessitated accelerated efforts by GoK. Therefore, the GoK has initiated long term measures to address the root causes of flooding and landslides in Pamba Basin with short term actions to alleviate the impacts of successive floods during 2018-21, and to better prepare the most vulnerable areas for future. Similarly, to address the exacerbated coastal erosion, the GoK is now rolling out a long-term program of comprehensive coastal management, that includes long term planning and investments in infrastructure and nature-based solutions and strengthening institutional capacities. Simultaneously GoK also plans to address immediate needs for protection of coastal erosion. In order to respond to the above situation, the PforR (hereinafter referred as the Parent PforR) is being broadened and deepened with additional financing (hereinafter referred as the Additional Financing (AF) PforR) through the inclusion of coastal zone resilience as a critical new focal area, integrating it with the multidimensional resilience efforts 36 under RKP, and by deepening efforts to mitigate the impacts of recurrent floods in the Pamba river basin. The AF PforR is critical at this moment to set up the appropriate upstream institutional arrangements, technical capacities, and systems for planning, budgeting and implementation and the Program will draw from the Bank’s global experiences on integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) and best practices in knowledge sharing and management. The proposed AF will add further depth to the relevance and scope of the State Partnership by adapting quickly and flexibly to the evolving needs of the State of Kerala on resilience. The AF will (i) respond to the profound and complex needs on coastal erosion by supporting the development of shoreline management plan (SMP) and financing critical initial investments to better protect vulnerable coastal zone hotspots; and (ii) add to the ongoing PforR by addressing the impacts and causes of the repeated floods, further advancing reservoir and basin management plans, strengthening institutional frameworks in the Pamba Basin, and supporting critical investments to alleviate the impacts and causes of damages from 2021 floods in the Pamba Basin; enabling a holistic “catchment to coast” approach to water resilience. The AF will also strengthen the integration of open data/disruptive technologies and climate budgeting into the Program to advance multidimensional resilience, both across transversal systems and, in particular, for WRM and coastal resilience. The arc of development which started with multisector policy and institutional reforms under the First Resilient Kerala DPO has evolved into a multisector Program for Results, which is the parent Program, to the proposed AF. Moving along this development arc, the AF aims to further deepen resilience in Kerala in the critical areas of water resources management (WRM) and coastal resilience. The AF reinforces the goal of multidimensional resilience in the State by building on the foundation of the State Partnership and previous interventions, by being adaptive to evolving climate change and disaster needs of the State, and by espousing a balance between short to medium-term remedial actions to alleviate on-the-ground conditions precipitated by climatic events and long-term structural changes to address the root causes of climatic and disaster vulnerability. New Activity on Strengthening Coastal Resilience. The proposed new DLI 10 under Results Area 2 aim to strengthen coastal resilience and management to sustainability protect, reduce vulnerability to erosion, environment and other hydro-meteorological hazards in the coast of Kerala by (i) improving coordination and strengthening the institutional capacity for sustainable shoreline management; (ii) preparing a long-term Shoreline Management Plan (combining policy options and technical solutions) for the entire coastal stretch based on the sediment cell concept; and (iii) pilot investments supporting a hybrid of hard and soft solutions in select districts along and adjacent to Pamba basin requiring urgent attention. The technical assessment of new activities on coastal resilience are detailed in Section IV. Appraisal Summary. Enhancement of Water Resource Management in the Pamba river basin. The proposed new activities under DLI 7 would aim to address severely flood-prone regions and minimize losses in the future. The Program would aim to strengthen the WRD and equip the Integrated Command and Control Centre within WRD with innovative tools for flood management. Based on an assessment of recent flood-related damages, the need for 37 critical investments will be reassessed. Accordingly, investments under AF would target to minimize flood damages in the future while giving due consideration to environmental aspects. The potential activities may include (i) restoration of rivers by improving their carrying capacity; and (ii) restoration of lakes embankments; and (iii) roll out of critical remedial measures in flooding hotspots. These investments will be backed by hydraulic and structural assessments. New Activity on Climate Budget Reform. The proposed new DLI 11 under Results Area 1 aim to strengthen a whole-of government approach to resilience by leveraging the State’s governance and public finance framework to enhance policy and institutional environment, through potential Climate Budget Tagging (CBT) exercise led by the Department of Finance. New Activity on Strengthening Open Data. The proposed new activity will develop Diagnostics and a Roadmap for Open Data Initiative to Strengthen Climate and Disaster Resilience. Table 1: Program Boundaries and Proposed Changes Government program Original PforR With AF (& restructuring) Rebuild Kerala Development The Resilient Kerala PforR Programme (RKDP) (the Program, RKP) Objective: To enable the GoK’s PDO: To enhance the GoK’s resilience PDO: no change from original resilient recovery and catalyze against the impacts of climate change, PforR transformational shift toward risk- natural disasters, and disease outbreaks. informed socioeconomic development through supporting sustainable communities, institutions, livelihoods, and putting in place major infrastructure. Duration: 2019–2027 Duration: 2021–2026 Duration: 2021–2026 Geographic Coverage: Kerala Geographic Coverage: Kerala Geographic Coverage: (statewide) for development of - Kerala (statewide) for institutions and systems (mainly within development of institutions RA 1); focusing on districts along the and systems for coastal Pamba Basin for demonstrating resilience (RA 2); integrated resilience at local level (mainly - Focus on all coastal districts within RA 2) (including addition of two new districts (Kollam and Ernakulam))(RA2); - Focusing on districts along Pamba Basin (RA2) Sectoral Coverage: Encompasses Sectoral Coverage: Sectoral Coverage: key sectors of the economy such as - RA 1: Fiscal, DRFI, Social Protection, - RA2: WRM and Environment agriculture, animal husbandry, Urban, and DRM fisheries, forestry, land, livelihoods, - RA 2: Health, Agriculture, WRM, and roads, transportation, urban, water Roads supply and sanitation, water resources management (WRM), and health emergencies; also addresses cross-cutting priorities: climate change, DRM, disaster risk financing and insurance (DRFI), environment, and open data. Results Areas (RA): The RKDP RA: The two results areas are (a) RA: The are no changes to the aims to rebuild Kerala in a speedy strengthening transversal systems for RAs and effective manner that ensures resilience and (b) embedding resilience in (a) higher standards of key economic sectors 38 infrastructure, assets, and livelihoods for resilience against future disasters and (b) building individual, community, and institutional resilience to natural hazards while fostering equitable, inclusive, and participatory reconstruction that builds back better. Overall Financing: US$1,701.65 Overall Financing: US$530.00 million Overall Financing: US$150.00 million million Table 2: Disbursement Linked Indicators RKP AF Fund DLIs Financing Financing Recipient (USD M) (USD M) RA 1: Strengthening transversal systems for resilience DLI 1: Fiscal sustainability of GoK to cope with disease outbreaks and DoF 24.38 0 natural disasters is strengthened DLI 2: Disaster-related adaptive safety net system of GoK is DoF 25.00 0 strengthened DLI 3: DR Financing and insurance capacity of GoK and vulnerable DoF 35.00 0 households in Kerala are improved DLI 4: Urban local bodies developed and sanctioned risk-informed LSGD 30.00 0 urban MPs and priority action plans DLI 5: Climate risk information integrated into local body DRM plans LSGD 65.00 0 DLI 11 (Newly added in AF): Climate Budget produced as part of GoK’s DoF 0 10.00 annual state budget for ten key climate relevant sectors. RA 2: Embedding resilience in key economic sectors DLI 6: Capacity to track & respond to zoonotic disease outbreaks of DoHFW 35.00 0 human importance in a timely manner DLI 7: Integrated river basin management plan is developed for Pamba WRD 35.00 50.00 Basin and implementation commenced DLI 8: Farmer producer organizations have increased access to new DOA 40.00 0 and organized markets DLI 9: CRN is rehabilitated and/or maintained to meet resilient service PWD 80.00 0 standards in the Pamba Basin WRD, HED, DLI 10 (Newly added in AF): Long-term Shoreline Management Plan for DoECC, other the entire coastal stretch is developed and investments to protect N/A 90.00 relevant coastal erosion in critical sites organizations Total: 370* 150 *Note: Includes IBRD, AIIB, and AFD financing. Does not include USD 160 million of counterpart financing from GoK. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements. The proposed new activities on coastal resilience and taking a holistic “catchment to coast” approach to water resilience will bring in new stakeholders. In addition to the WRD – a line department of GoK, there will be new implementing agencies including (i) Harbour Engineering Department (HED) - a line department of GoK and (i) Kerala State Coastal Area Development Corporation Limited (KSCADC), Kerala Irrigation Infrastructure Development Corporation (KIIDCO) and Irrigation Design and Research Board (IDRB) - both state government-owned companies. WRD is already one of the implementing agencies under the Parent PforR. Bringing some or all of these additional agencies on board for the AF PforR will also support capacity building for holistic coastal resilience. The proposed institutional arrangement for the AF PforR are shown in the following figure. 39 Figure 1 Draft Institutional Arrangement for Coastal Resilience and Water Resource Management 40 3 Environment and Social Systems Assessment – Scope and Methodology 3.1 Scope of the ESSA The proposed ‘Resilient Kerala Program Additional Financing’ will support critical actions in Pamba River Basin to address the impacts and causes of repeated floods, develop policies and plans, strengthen institutional frameworks, and finance investments in coastal zone resilience, and expand the geographical scope of the PforR in Pamba basin from four to six districts. Therefore, as per the PforR requirements, a shorter Environmental and Social Systems Assessment (ESSA) has been undertaken to support the design of the additional interventions. This will supplement the comprehensive ESSA undertaken for the parent PforR, wherein the borrower capacities and system performance that have already been assessed and well documented in the past. It will therefore highlight the systems of the new implementation agencies that are being envisaged for implanting the additional interventions. This ESSA analyzes the state systems and the prevailing systems in the sectors where investments are planned under this operation to understand the extent to which the existing institutions, systems and capacities are aligned with the 6 core principles and their Key Planning Elements: • Promote environmental and social sustainability in the Program design; avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts, and promote informed decision-making relating to the Program’s environmental and social impacts; • Avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts on natural habitats and physical cultural resources resulting from the Program; • Protect public and worker safety against the potential risks associated with: (i) construction and/or operations of facilities or other operational practices under the Program; (ii) exposure to toxic chemicals, hazardous wastes, and other dangerous materials under the Program; and, (iii) reconstruction or rehabilitation of infrastructure located in areas prone to natural hazards; • Manage land acquisition and loss of access to natural resources in a way that avoids or minimizes displacement, and assist the affected people in improving, or at the minimum restoring, their livelihoods and living standards; • Give due consideration to the cultural appropriateness of, and equitable access to, Program benefits, giving special attention to the rights and interests of the Indigenous Peoples and to the needs or concerns of vulnerable groups; • Avoid exacerbating social conflict, especially in fragile states, post-conflict areas, or areas subject to territorial disputes. ESSA looks at the relevant policy-legal environment pertaining to social and environmental systems, the program implementation agencies, and their capacities to manage identified environmental and social impacts and risks associated with the Program. It also tries to understand the state/sector systems, procedures and strategies to ensure inclusion of various vulnerable groups in their regular planning and implementation roles and ensure equitable access to benefits. It also assesses the borrower’s social management capacities – capability of various formal as well as support 41 institutions like executing and training agencies, Civil Society Organizations (CSO) and Community Based Organizations (CBOs) to collectively assure accountability and transparency, community participation and ownership, equity in provisioning services and also their ability to offer a systematic redress to grievances of citizens and users. Methodology The Environmental and Social Systems Assessment (ESSA) Addendum was prepared by a team of environmental and social specialists from the World Bank. The team examined the following in relation to the AF PforR: (i) the potential E&S effects (including direct, indirect, induced, and cumulative effects as relevant); (ii) the borrower’s capacity (legal framework, regulatory authority, organizational capacity, and performance) to manage those effects; (iii) the comparison of the borrower’s systems—laws, regulations, standards, procedures, and implementation performance—against the core principles and key planning elements to identify any significant differences between them that could affect Program performance; (iv) the likelihood that the proposed operation achieves its E&S objectives; and (v) recommendation of measures to address capacity for and performance on policy issues and specific operational aspects relevant to managing the AF PforR risks (e.g. carrying out Staff training, implementing institutional capacity- building programs, developing and adopting internal operational guidelines) through a Program Action Plan (PAP). The ESSA Addendum was informed by a detailed review of secondary literature including applicable policies, Acts, Rules, Government Orders, Circulars, notifications and guidelines as well as evaluations (on institutional or scheme performance) websites, internal assessments, reports, studies. The desk review focuses on understanding the existing policy, operational procedures, institutional capacity and implementation effectiveness relevant to the activities under the Program. This also included a review of the borrowers’ systems for engaging with citizens, especially the most marginalized and excluded as well as their grievance redress. Apart from a desk review of available information, personal interviews and consultations were also held with the community and institutional stakeholders. Owing to COVID-19 related mobility restrictions, Bank’s ESSA team engaged Kerala Institute of Land Administration (KILA) to conduct community consultations. KILA used a checklist of questions – prepared by the Bank ESSA Social team - to guide these consultations in the coastal districts. The Bank ESSA team also anchored an orientation session for the district-level resource persons in KILA. As the consultations were done on a sample basis, KILA devised a methodology to select districts out of the total 9 coastal districts. A composite score was developed based on the share of a number of coastal LSGI in each district, percentage of coastal erosion, the share of a vulnerable population (census, 2011) and the Vulnerability Index. The composite score was calculated as the geometric mean of these individual indices with equal weights. Based on the cumulative sampling score, the five districts were selected: Thrissur, Kozhikode, Malappuram, Alappuzha and Kasaragod. In the selected five districts, sampling of LSG (three per district) was done based on the vulnerable population share and the length of coastline eroded (high erosion to moderate erosion) using the same method used in the selection of districts. Due to the non- availability of data at the LSGI level, the climate vulnerability index was dropped in the 42 selection of LSGI. Along with three selected LSGI, one replacement LSGI / district was also selected considering the uncertainty from the COVID-19 pandemic. In all about 15 LSGI were selected for the community consultations along the coast. Further, consultations were conducted with communities pertaining to the Manimala and Meenachal river stretches. Two Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) per LSGI were conducted, one with women and particularly vulnerable groups, and the second was a general FGD. These FGDs were restricted to the coastal wards in each LSGI. A total of 42 FGDs were conducted. At district level 3 Key informant interviews (KIIs) were also carried out. Fisheries officers (at LSGI level) and other concerned administrative authorities / elected representatives in the district were also consulted. A total of 21 KIIs were conducted. The following table provides the breakdown. FGDs-No. & FGDs KII/district KII Type Coast 6/district 30 5 15 WRM 6/RB 12 2 6 Total 42 21 These consultations were held between January 2022 and March 2022. A summary of the KILA’s consultation report is included verbatim Annex 4. The institutional stakeholder consultations were carried out by the Bank team largely through a virtual format. About 7 virtual meetings for social assessment and 10 virtual meetings for environmental assessment with the relevant stakeholders covering were undertaken. 3.2 Structure of ESSA In terms of the structure, the ESSA attempts to do an initial risk screening of the proposed project activities to identify potential social impacts/ risks applicable to the Program interventions. Based on this it undertakes a detailed sector-wise assessment of risk and benefit of the program investments. It then reviews the applicable national and state policy and legal framework and its adequacy for the management of environmental and social impacts of the proposed interventions. Along with this it assesses the institutional capacity for environmental and social risk management within the borrower system, including their ability to specifically address/ handle risks flagged under the core principles of PforR and identify any key gaps in the Program’s performance that need to be bridged/ mitigated. Along with the gaps identified against the Core Principles, inputs received from the stakeholder consultation process are used to assess the robustness of the program systems and the gaps therein. The risks emerging from this institutional assessment and the stakeholder consultations are then used to identify gaps in the sectoral systems and institutions and measures needed to address them. It goes on to recommend overall social actions needed to manage the risks as well as critical actions (Program Action Plans- PAPs). Along with the PAPs the report provides a brief roadmap for addressing these identified social risks and gaps, the timeframe within which these proposed actions need to be completed as well as the parties/ institutions to be responsible for getting those actions in place to avoid adverse impacts and to strengthen Program performance. 43 4 Key Risks and Impacts Some of the proposed investments under the AF PforR, that may have important bearing on communities and people are shoreline management, coastal erosion protection and disaster recovery-related activities. The comprehensive identification of social risks has been done with the aim to ensure early identification and timely mitigation measures. The ESSA finds that though there is scope for bolstering the capacities of the implementing departments on social risk management, given the strong client commitment strong mitigation measures can be evolved in order to avoid, mitigate and manage all the identified social risks. Many proposed investments, especially Open Data Initiative and Climate Budget show clear potential to shift from a "do no harm or mitigation approach' to "enhancing and deepening gender and inclusion impacts". 4.1 Preparation of a Long-Term Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) The SMP has the potential to bring major positive environmental benefits to the coastal areas of the state. By providing policy options for shoreline management, this plan will guide the GoK on coastal activities that are consistent with good practice in the wake of the ongoing climate change impacts. The plan will (i) incorporate the best available technical advice, (ii) be prepared in a consultative manner with all stakeholder inputs, (iii) is flexible and adaptable to changing circumstances, and (iv) have the full ownership of the GoK. 4.1.1 Environmental Benefits, Risks and Impacts The pilot investments will address a dire environmental problem faced by the coastal communities particularly during the monsoon. Coastal erosion will be arrested. Sea over- topping will be eliminated. Salinity intrusion will be reduced. All of these will bring major positive environmental benefits to the community. But the investments include construction that will necessarily have EHS impacts such as air pollution, noise pollution and worker / community safety. As the scale of these investments are small, these impacts will be low to moderate. With the adoption of proper management measures during the construction phase, the negative environmental impacts will be addressed. If the designs are not appropriate to the location, there could be negative environmental impacts and hence heightened environmental risks. Therefore, the due diligence of the technical solutions – prior, during construction and post-construction oversight - will be important to ensure minimal environmental impacts and to reduce residual environmental risks. The following table briefly examines the environmental relevance of the coastal-related activities - Shoreline management plan (SMP) and coastal protection investments - proposed under the AF PforR: Program Activities Environmental Relevance Preparation of a Long-Term SMP This will assist in more informed decision-making on all aspects pertaining to the Kerala shoreline. This will avoid haphazard approaches to addressing coastal erosion which eventually might bring undesired impacts on the environment. The SMP will be prepared based on state-of- the-art data to understand the current and future dynamics 44 Program Activities Environmental Relevance of the shoreline dynamics. The SMP will provide policy options that are consulted with the coastal communities. This has the potential to bring sustainable and major positive environmental benefits. Pilot Investments in Select Hotspots and These will be undertaken in the prevailing business-as-usual Highly Vulnerable Sites scenario that is threatening to damage life, livelihood and property. Once accomplished, these investments will bring major positive environmental benefits to the coastal communities. It will address the environmental problems faced by them. The proposed coastal protection works particularly seawalls can cause accretion and erosion which may eventually cause coastal erosion if not designed properly. The seawalls will be designed by NCCR based on proper understanding of the shore dynamics to avoid coastal erosion. During construction, these investments will result in localized, temporary and reversible EHS impacts. Mitigation measures for EHS will be included be included in the bidding documents. Their implementation by the contractors will be monitored by WRD. 4.1.2 Social Risks and Impacts Aimed at enhancing the government’s informed decision making for coastal and shoreline management, this activity has potential to bring major social benefits to the most vulnerable populations along the coastline. However, there are potential social risks such as exclusion of voice and perspectives of the vulnerable groups, especially fisher-folk, women, SC/ST, migrant workers and persons with disabilities from the planning processes. If the concerns of the affected communities and vulnerable groups are not properly addressed, this process can have major short, medium and long-term impacts many of which could be also irreversible in nature. There is national and global evidence to suggest that women’s deep connection and dependence on the coastal ecosystem is undervalued and un-recognized and therefore their voices may be missed out even during consultations. It is therefore recommended that the SMP development process is highly inclusive, consultative and focuses on community led initiatives, also along with the technical and infrastructure-based solutions. SMP presents an opportunity to support the development process for the key socially excluded groups and women on shoreline protection and management. This will also ensure their greater buy-in, support as well as leadership on various medium and long-term solutions that have lasting positive social and environmental benefits. To achieve these objectives, a comprehensive Social Inclusion and Gender Assessment is strongly recommended to be a part of the SMP. Pilot investments in select hotspots and highly vulnerable sites are envisaged to protect affected communities against severe situations such as flooding and sea attacks that threaten their lives and livelihoods. Field consultations and visits confirm the critical situation confronting the coastal communities, more so the vulnerable groups such as women, SC/ST, PWD. However, there are potential construction related social risks such as affecting the access of these fisher-folk to the sea which can impact their livelihoods. With inadequate and in many cases further diminishing returns from small-scale fishing, these temporary impacts may actually cause more irreversible changes in their 45 livelihoods and put these families at risk of poverty and indebtedness. The construction works envisaged can likely lead to temporary relocation of households which are near to coast and river basin areas. Moreover, temporary relocation of the communities to shelter homes due to the flooding as well as during the construction of coastal protection infrastructure has many potential social risks, such as lack of provision of basic amenities especially to women in shelter homes, exclusion of vulnerable groups, safety of women, lack of separate toilets to women etc. Since there are construction activities involved, there is possibility of labour influx, especially that of migrant labour. This can lead to issues related to the use of local resources by migrant labour or interference with the local community leading to conflict with the community. Other potential social risks could be safety at construction sites, provision of basic facilities to labour and their families during construction. Labour Management Plan will be prepared for each sub-project involving migrant labours and will be monitored during the implementation stage. One of the most common concerns emerging from labour influx is the potential exposure of women in host communities to gender-based violence. Necessary measures for GBV prevention and mitigation will be taken in the project areas. Since the project may have significant unequal benefits from the subprojects to between various groups within the affected community can lead to some risk of intra-community conflict and/or conflict between construction workers and the community. Currently, there are variations in how the Key Social Risks relief efforts are undertaken across the • Risk of exclusion of the perspectives of affected state. Community consultations have community, especially vulnerable groups, highlighted certain districts and villages women, elderly, persons with disabilities in the where community is dissatisfied with the processes for shoreline and river management relief efforts of the Panchayats and the planning. State and have pointed to key gaps such as • Restrictions or barriers to access to the water sources (rivers, tributaries, and irrigation not factoring in the basic needs of women, channels) for the dependent communities, children, elderly in selecting the shelter especially the elderly, infirm, persons with sites or the movement from homes to these disabilities and pilgrims. shelters and the moving back from relief • Restrictions on traditional access to the sea and shelters to homes. For instance, a clear gap its resources for fisher-folks, vendors, fishing communities, coastal villages owing to the was that on return the families found their construction of sea walls and its temporary homes in unlivable condition due to too impacts on livelihood activities leading to loss of much dust and water logging. Women’s wages work in cleaning and ensuring the houses • Temporary relocation of affected communities to are clean and habitable increased relief shelters for longer durations which compromise on their need for healthcare, manifold. Thus, it is imperative for sanitation, livelihoods and safety. ensuring proper site-specific • Exposure of women and girls in the coastal areas documentation of all these risks and to risk of Gender Based Violence due to labour ensuring adequate staff and establishment influx. of institutional mechanisms to evolve • Potential risks for migrant workers with regard to mitigation measures and their routine safe living conditions with basic amenities like safe drinking water, sanitation etc. monitoring and reporting. Therefore, a • Though a low risk, perceived or actual unequal temporary relocation and relief benefits from the subprojects to various groups framework as part of the Shoreline within the affected community can lead to intra- Management Plan and separate site- community conflict and/or conflict between specific temporary relocation and relief construction workers and the community. plans would be needed to be prepared by 46 the contractors. This will require community involvement in identification of a safe, women-friendly relief shelters and its oversight, provision of food and other basic amenities, sanitation, etc. 4.2 Disaster recovery-related activities related to critical river infrastructure 4.2.1 Environment Benefits, Risks and Impacts The removal of the debris, rock, boulders and stones due to landslides, and repairs / rehabilitation of the river embankments will have construction-related EHS impacts. These will be undertaken largely within the width of the river, which are under WRD’s jurisdiction. These will not have major EHS impacts. Any physical infrastructure activity will involve construction-related EHS impacts both on the workers and the surrounding community. As the scale of these activities are small, these impacts are minor, reversible and temporary. These will include air pollution, noise pollution and worker/community safety. EHS impacts will have to be addressed through provisions management measures in the bid / contract documents to reduce the residual environmental risks. With the adoption of proper management measures during the construction phase, the negative environmental impacts will be reduced and the residual environmental risks will be minimal. The following table examines the environmental relevance of the disaster recovery- related activities proposed under the AF PforR: Program Activities Environmental Relevance Phase 1: Disaster recovery-related These will have minor construction-related environmental activities related to critical river impacts; these will be undertaken within the width of the infrastructure (intakes, flow pathways, river, which is under WRD’s jurisdiction and therefore will hydraulic structures etc.) not have EHS impacts on community. However, worker health and safety impacts will have to be addressed through provisions management measures in the bid / contract documents to reduce the residual environmental risks. Phase 2: medium-term, comprehensive No environmental impact surveys will be conducted Phase 2: Selected protection works These works will have minor construction-related EHS (structural and non-structural) at critical impacts that will require to be managed through proper hotspots, such as embankment mitigation.; these will be undertaken within the river / reconstruction riverbank in areas of WRD’s jurisdiction and therefore will not have EHS impacts on community. Phase 3: Implementation of a full-scale The implementation works will have minor, temporary and river basin management plan reversible construction related EHS impacts that will require to be managed through proper mitigation. 4.2.2 Social Risks and Impacts The river embankment works are targeted towards reducing the river erosion and flooding that impacts several vulnerable groups live in the river basin and are entirely dependent on the rivers for their livelihoods and therefore envisage significant social benefits. However, there are likely temporary social impacts on fisher-folk community and those practicing agriculture/paddy cultivation such as restrictions on access, loss of wages for agricultural labour, who are mostly women and labor influx related concerns. As recommended above, contractors will need to adhere to provisions included in the 47 bid/contract documents for labor management and safety, including ensuring mechanisms to address any gender-based violence related concerns. 4.3 Open Data Initiative Sharing of data relevant to climate change will lead to greater awareness, improved problem identification and more appropriate development solutions. This activity has the potential to lead to positive social and environmental benefits and reduced social and environmental risks. 4.3.1 Environment Benefits, Risks, Impacts Given that Open Data Initiative aims to build resilience to climate and disaster to reduce the state’s vulnerability to natural hazards and the impacts of climate change. Reducing vulnerability has the potential to manage environmental impacts better in the wake of a disaster. 4.3.2 Social Risks and Impacts In particular, this can address specific key social risks and gap currently faced both by the affected communities, especially vulnerable groups such as women, SC/ST, small-holder fisher households and state’s systems. However, there is possibility of some of these gaps remaining unaddressed if i) if there are no gender and social inclusion considerations in designing/selecting channels to relay and communicate the information ii) no effort to provide gender-specific information so that there is greater relevance and use by women and other vulnerable groups iii) if there continues to be gap in gender-related information being gathered such as building knowledge on how climate change impacts women, what is their current access to such weather forecasting and warnings, what gaps do they face in accessing relevant information and what more information and support they need. 4.4 Climate Budget Climate budget preparation is envisaged to enable the state to track and report financial flow that support climate change mitigation and adaptation, to build trust and accountability about climate finance commitments and monitor trends and progress in climate-related investments 4.4.1 Environmental benefits, risks and impacts A climate budget for the state is likely to lead to better management of climate mitigation and adaptation. This has the potential to lead to greater environmental awareness and implementation performance and ultimately leading to reducing the environmental risks. 4.4.2 Social benefits and impacts This proposed initiative is likely to have significant positive impacts for vulnerable communities such as women, SC/ST, fisher folk and other coastal communities who are 48 facing severe and adverse climate related social impacts affecting their health, safety, land and property and livelihoods. If the budget preparation process is not informed by social and gender considerations, the sectors and interventions which are crucially needed by the vulnerable communities can get missed out. Moreover, budgets for interventions that are narrowly defined towards infrastructure or technical solutions only, may again have unintended social risks and impacts. Therefore, it is crucial for the budget planning process to be gender and social inclusion informed. This initiative has the potential to move beyond a 'risk mitigation' to "enhanced gender and inclusion impacts ' 4.5 Other associated social risks from ongoing resettlement and rehabilitation efforts of the State and other donors In particular, the State’s LIFE Mission offers a housing scheme for people staying in outlying, coastal and plantation areas or in temporary housing. Alternatively, it also offers a fixed sum of Rs 10 lakhs to beneficiaries who do not want to stay in the housing complexes constructed under the Mission. While this is a good effort of the government, there is reluctance among the coastal communities to relocate as they will lose the easy access to the sea and this directly impacts their livelihoods. It is understood that ADB is also planning to support the State and will be looking at more critical sites and hotspots for coastal protection works and likely will involve large-scale construction activities. It will be therefore important to ensure that activities under the AF, are not leading to any involuntary resettlement and relocation of the people as this could bring in some reputational risks to the Bank. Given the long-standing relationship of World Bank with GoK, there can be efforts to ensure that that concerns of the communities are properly addressed in the overall program of the Government to relocate fishing communities. 49 5 Legal and Policy Framework for the Program The national and state level laws and legal policies have been reviewed and are found to adequately safeguard the environment concerns and social risks and concerns of all communities likely to be impacted by the proposed investments under the AF, especially women, socially and economically vulnerable groups, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in the implementation of schemes across sectors. Specifically, the laws and policies related to land acquisition, local self-governance, labour, gender and grievance redressal and citizen’s engagement all provide an empowering and conducive environment for affected communities. With additional investments proposed for coastal protection, flood recovery and shoreline management, the applicable laws and policies such as the CRZ Notification 2011 and 2019 were also reviewed to see how these impact traditional coastal communities, their houses, lands and the livelihoods of fisher-folk communities. However, despite some of these strong legal and policy frameworks, there is inadequate emphasis on environment and social impact assessment, management and monitoring requirements to address key risks. Thus, these frameworks will be further strengthened by enhancing capacities of implementing departments on environment and social risk management, supporting the development of institutional mechanisms such as for undertaking environment and social risk screening for each site where works are envisaged and finally to develop project-specific environment and social mitigation measures. 5.1 Legal and policy framework Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation ENVIRONMENT Environment The Act is an umbrella legislation that provides a framework for Central and State Standards that are specifically applicable to air, (Protection) Act of 1986 Authorities established under prevailing laws. It provides for the protection of the water, noise and soil components to all the civil environment in an overall sense. works related to the WSS infrastructure development. Except for coastal protection investments, none of the works require national or state level EIA clearance. Organization: Department of Environment, Directorate of Environment and Climate Change, various authorities and State Pollution Control Board CRZ Notification 2011 This notification aims to protect the coastal ecosystems, ecological resources and Under the Act, the implementing agency and 2019 coastal pollution prevention. GoK is presently administering the CRZ Notification (whether WRD or HED or associated Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation 2011 for which the Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) maps are available. Once organizations) are required to obtain an the maps are revised / updated to the new CRZ Notification 2019, GoK will commence appropriate CRZ clearance from either the administering to the newer regulation. This is in line with legal and regulatory State’s Kerala Coastal Zone Management practice in the country. Authority (KCZMA) or National MoEFCC. All the civil works pertaining to the coastal protection attracts the provisions of the CRZ Notification, 2011. The Kerala shoreline is highly erosion prone due to the nature of the Arabian Sea particularly during the monsoon months. Annex 3 provides the procedures for obtaining this CRZ clearance. Applicable to all civil works pertaining to the coastal protection investments. Organization: KCZMA, Department of Environment, Directorate of Environment and Climate Change Wetlands (Conservation These Rules provide for conserving and managing (a) wetlands categorized as Under these Rules, the implementing agency and Management) Rules, 'wetlands of international importance' under the Ramsar Convention (Ashtamudi, (whether WRD or HED or associated 2017. Vembanad and Sasankota); and (b) wetlands as notified by the Central Government organizations) are required to provide and State Government. information on the proximity to any wetlands and obtain the necessary clearance either from either the State’s Wetland Authority of Kerala (SWAK) or National MoEFCC. Air (Prevention and This Act provides for the prevention, control and abatement of air pollution. It is to Under the Act, the contractor is required to Control of Pollution) Act control emissions of any air pollutant into the atmosphere when it exceeds the obtain the Consent to Establish and Consent to 1981 standards set under the Act and associated rules Operate for the ready-mix concrete plant (s)if it is used for the concrete for construction. Coastal protection investments and works in the river basin stretches will require to obtain these consents. Organization: State Pollution Control Board Water (Prevention and This is to control water pollution by controlling water pollutants and the maintaining Under the Act, the contractor is required to Control of Pollution) Act or restoring of wholesomeness of water, through establishment and empowerment of obtain the Consent to Establish and Consent to 1974 Boards at the national and state levels. Ensuring adherence to water quality and Operate for all civil works. Further, there should effluent standards is the main purpose. be no dumping the construction waste / debris into nearby water bodies like streams. 51 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation Coastal protection investments and works in the river basin stretches will require to obtain these consents. Organization: State Pollution Control Board Noise According to the provisions of the rules notified under this act, a person might make Pollution Under the Rules, the Contractors need to adhere a complaint to the designated ‘Authority’ in the event that the actual noise levels (Regulation and Control) to these rules in the context of all civil works Rules 2000 exceed the ambient noise standards by 10dB(A) or more as compared to the pertaining to the coastal protection investments prescribed standards. The designated authority will take action against the violator and in the river basin stretches. in accordance with the provisions of these rules or other law in force. Organization: State Pollution Control Board Construction and The rules shall apply to every waste resulting from construction, re-modeling, repair For all civil works, the contractor will have to Demolition Waste and demolition of any civil structure of individual or organization or authority who obtain authorizations for all the different types Management Rules 2016 generates construction and demolition waste such as building materials, debris, of wastes as required, and will dispose scrap / rubble. waste only to authorized agencies. Applicable to coastal protection investments and works in the river basin stretches. Organization: State Pollution Control Board. Solid Waste These rules define solid waste as those generated by all the households, hospitality These Rules are applicable for any incidental Management Rules 2016 industry, big and small market vendors. These rules are applicable to the municipal waste generated the contractor during the civil and references in state areas and beyond. In particular, the rules have mandated the source segregation of works. Applicable to all coastal protection acts / rules & guidelines waste in order to channelise the waste to wealth by recovery, reuse and recycle investments and works in the river basin including Kerala State stretches. Policy on SWM 2018, Organization: LSGIs and State Pollution Control Kerala SWM Operational Board. Guidelines, 2017, Kerala Municipalities Act 1994 and The Kerala Panchayat Raj Act 1994 Plastic Waste This is to ensure segregation, collection, storage, transportation, processing and These Rules are applicable for any incidental Management Rules 2016 disposal of plastic waste in a manner that there is no damage is caused to the plastic waste generated the contractor during and state orders environment during this process. the civil works. Applicable to coastal protection Ban on single use plastic items in the State, wef. 1.1.2020- GO MS No 6, 2019 Envt investments and works in the river basin dt:27.11.2019 and other related orders stretches. Organization: Department of Environment and State Pollution Control Board. 52 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation Indian Forest Act 1927, Under this Act, administrative approval must be obtained from the Forest Department The use of forestland for non-forestry purposes, Forest Conservation Act to clear designated forestland. According to this although the land is under the control replenishing the loss of forest cover by 1980, Forest Rights Act of state government, due to its protected status, approval from the Government for compensatory afforestation on degraded 2006 and associated using the land may be required. forestland and non-forest land, and permission Kerala Preservation of The State Act includes the requirement of the prior permission in writing of the for tree felling may be required in the context of Trees Act, 1986 authorized officer to cut, uproot or burn, or cause to be cut, uprooted or burnt, any civil works pertaining to infrastructure tree as defined by the Act. development Though the likelihood of forest land is low, the appropriate forest clearance will be obtained without fail. Prior permission for tree felling to be secured in case it is required for the investment activities. Applicable to all coastal protection investments and works in the river basin stretches. Organization: State Forest Department. Wildlife (Protection) Act The Act provides the details the various kinds of endangered and other important In the context of civil works pertaining to 1972 faunal groups that need to be protected. In particular, this deals with permissions for infrastructure development, this may be working inside or diversion of national parks and sanctuaries. relevant if wildlife is encountered in the civil works of the river basin stretches. Organization: State Forest Department. The Ancient Monuments The Act and Rules protect the archaeological sites, and no person shall undertake any Wherever the civil works for infrastructure and Archaeological Sites construction within the protected or regulated area except in accordance with the development are carried out in the vicinity of and Remains Act, 1958, permission granted. cultural properties, the provisions of the Act and and the Rules, 1959 Rules are applicable for chance finds in all civil works pertaining to coastal protection investments and works in the river basin stretches. Organization: Archaeological Survey of India offices at Thiruvananthapuram, Ernakulam and Thrissur. Building And Other The Act and the associated Kerala Rules is a comprehensive for regulating the safety, Health and safety arrangements for the Construction Workers welfare and other conditions of service of these workers. construction workers involved with the civil (Regulation works. Applicable to all coastal protection of Employment and investments and works in the river basin Conditions of Service) stretches. Act 1996 and Organization: Labour Commissionerate, Department of Labour 53 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation Building And Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Kerala Rules, 1998 National Green Tribunal The National Green Tribunal has been established under the National Green Tribunal NGT Orders as applicable. Applicable to all (NGT) Act 2010 and Act 2010 for effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental coastal protection investments and works in the Orders protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources including river basin stretches. enforcement of any legal right relating to environment and giving relief and compensation for damages to persons and property and for matters connected Organization: Government of Kerala, State therewith or incidental thereto. Pollution Control Board and other special Committees SOCIAL Coastal Protection Coastal Resilience Zone Regularizes the dwelling units of the traditional coastal communities including fisherfolk, The proposed investments for coastal protection Notification 2011 tribals as were permissible under the provisions of the CRZ notification, 1991, but which and shoreline management planning need to have not obtained formal approval from concerned authorities under the aforesaid acknowledge the land rights of traditional coastal notification shall be considered by the respective Union territory CZMAs and protects communities. Thus, affected persons cannot be the traditional coastal communities by ensuring land is not transferrable to non- relocated or displaced on the pretext of coastal traditional coastal community or used for commercial purposes. protection. It also provides for facilities such as fishing jetty, fish drying yards, net mending yard, fishing processing by traditional methods, boat building yards, ice plant, boat repairs and the like that are the important needs of small fisher folk. Coastal Resilience Zone Permits infrastructure that are required by coastal communities such as dispensaries, Notification 2019 schools, public rain shelter, community toilets, bridges, roads, provision of facilities for water supply, drainage, sewerage, crematoria, cemeteries and electric sub-station which are required for the local inhabitants may be permitted on a case-to-case basis by Coastal Zone Management Authority (CZMA). Facilities required for local fishing communities such as fish drying yards, auction halls, net mending yards, traditional boat building yards, ice plant, ice crushing units, fish curing facilities and the like. 54 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation National Policy on The overarching goal of the National Policy on Marine Fisheries, 2017 is to ensure the Though not directly a policy affecting proposed Marine Fisheries, 2017 health and ecological integrity of the marine living resources of India’s Exclusive Economic interventions, it is felt that development of Zone (EEZ) through sustainable harvests for the benefit of present and future generations Shoreline Management allows for a greater focus of the nation. on livelihoods of fisher-folk communities, especially small-holder fish farmers. The Government will also undertake review and periodic evaluation of the existing marine protected areas for providing legislative support to ensure that tenure rights of the traditional fishermen are secured, and their livelihoods not impacted by such conservation measures. To incorporate the rights of all stakeholders existing measures such as Territorial Use Rights for Fisheries will be promoted. The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM) will consider the integrated wellbeing of the marine and coastal resources and stakeholders. Further, participatory management or co- management in fisheries will be promoted. Water Resources Management Kerala River Basin Accepts that there is an urgent need to conserve and regulate water resources as there Provides for ‘Basin Management Committees’ Conservation and is no regulatory mechanism or law to ensure judicious, equitable and sustainable with representation of elected representatives, Management Authority management, allocation and utilization of water resources. This regulatory authority LSGs, NGO/CBO in respective river basins; Bill, 2020. provides for determining distribution of water resources, implement water tariffs and authority to fix quota of water allocation at criteria to levy water charges after consulting users, prepare and monitor integrated project, sub-basin, basin level on principles of river basin master plans for each river system, develop, maintain a comprehensive equitable distribution in command area; ensure hydro-meteorological information data base; fix the quota of water that principle of “tail to head" irrigation is allocation/distribution following principles of equitable distribution-every landholder in implemented with lands at tail-end (usually the command area shall be given quota based on the extent and nature of land in the marginalized lands and landowners) given water command area. first. Governance Related 73rd Constitutional The Panchayati Raj Act was aimed at institutionalizing a 3-tier system of local For planning and community support on coastal amendments governance at District, Block and village level for economic development & social justice. protection and shoreline management, the The Act lists 28 functions to be delegated to panchayats along with their functionaries project will engage with ULBs. Through the Gram and related funds/ resources. Kerala is the state with the highest number (21) of Sabha, Panchayats will play an effective role in functions devolved to RLBs (out of 28 functions). providing feedback on local needs and priorities These functions include internal roads, public health, water resource, agriculture and for integrating into coastal protection allied areas, poverty alleviation are within its mandate. The Act reserves seats for interventions. Moreover, the Panchayats are 55 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation women, scheduled castes, tribes. All crucial decisions related to village development are currently responsible for managing the relief to be ratified by Gram Sabha –village assembly of adult voting members. efforts during flooding, sea attacks and other disasters. 74th Constitutional ULBs are entrusted with preparing plans for economic development and social justice For planning and community support on coastal amendments under Article 243 G and 243 W of Constitution. In Kerala, municipalities are devolved 18 protection and shoreline management, the out of 19 functions related to municipalities listed in 12th Schedule urban planning project will engage with ULBs. Through the Ward including town planning; regulation of land-use & construction; planning for economic Sabha (Ward Level Assembly) the municipalities & social development; roads & bridges; water supply for different purposes; public will play an effective role in providing feedback health, sanitation; fire services; urban forestry, environment; safeguarding interest of on local needs and priorities for integrating into weaker sections; slum improvement and upgradation; urban poverty alleviation; coastal protection interventions. Moreover, the amenities like parks, gardens, playgrounds; promotion of culture, education & ULBs are currently responsible for managing the aesthetics; burials /burial grounds; cremations/ cremation grounds; cattle pounds; relief efforts during flooding, sea attacks and prevention of cruelty to animals; registration of births /deaths; public amenities- street other disasters. lighting, parking, bus stops, public conveniences; and regulation of slaughter houses & tanneries. Kerala Municipality Act In line with the 74th amendment, the Act provides for convening of Ward Sabhas, Same as above. 1994 constituting Ward (Standing) Committees in municipalities4. These local institutions create opportunities for Municipality to involve citizens, inform them, disclose information on budgets, expenses and development works, citizens in turn get opportunity to participate, share their concerns, demand accountability, and provide feedback Land related 4 Ward Committees may consist of two or more wards (population of 3 lakhs) and the Chairman of the Committee will be one of the councillors of the Wards covered under the Ward Committee. In any case, every Municipality has Ward Sabhas headed by the elected Ward Councillor for every ward if the population of the Municipality exceeds one lakh. The Act provides that a Ward Sabha/ Committee shall consist of representatives from resident associations, neighbourhood group, from various political parties, professionals, members of various cultural organizations and educational institutions. 56 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation Right to Fair Objective of 2013 Act is to ensure fair compensation, through resettlement and Makes prior consent of landowners’ requirement Compensation and rehabilitation of those affected, puts adequate safeguards for their well-being, for LA, secures the interests of vulnerable groups Transparency in Land transparency in the process of land acquisition, including benefits for indirectly impacted including indigenous communities. Acquisition, -landless, enterprise owners/ vendors. Provides crucial role to Gram Sabha in approving Rehabilitation and SIA and acquiring land for public purposes. However, the project will exclude works in any Resettlement Act Social Impact Assessment (SIA) needs to determine area of impact, details of land to be sites requiring land acquisition. (RFCTLARRA), 2013 acquired, alternate project sites, present land use classification, nature of holdings/ownership, number of families/ people to be affected. Calls for SIA in affected areas through a consultative process with LSGs. Plan must be discussed with affected community & consent sought in Gram Sabha. Where LA involves involuntary displacement of SC/ST families, a development plan has to be prepared in consultation with LSG Kerala Right to Fair Emphasizes social impact assessment (SIA) and resettlement planning even prior to Has adequate focus on landless, women, Compensation and issuance of preliminary notification and makes arrangement for R&R benefits along with encroachers & squatters from vulnerable groups in Transparency in Land compensation package. offering resettlement & rehabilitation; Acquisition, Provides for LSGs to nominate a representative to work closely with and monitor SIA undertaking SIA focused on transparency & Rehabilitation and agency; requires prior consent from PAFs, public notice to disclose SIA, encourage those disclosure. Resettlement Rules 2015 excluded or with wrong details to submit rightful claims for time bound modification, SIA Considers single women, dependent siblings, Management Plan to be developed within 6 months. widows, divorcees as separate family for the Offers compensation up to 4 times the market value in rural and 2 times in urban areas, purpose of compensation. no displacement until full payment of compensation and RR benefits, valuation of Homeless are entitled to constructed house, land structures without depreciation. for land in irrigation projects in lieu of compensation. Directs state to impose limits on area under agricultural cultivation that can be acquired. However, the project will exclude works in any Provides for transparency, minimal adverse impact so that socio-economic status of sites requiring land acquisition. PAPs doesn’t fall below what it was before acquisition. In case of acquisition for urbanization 20% developed land is reserved for owners at a price equal to rate of compensation. State Resettlement and The Government of Kerala recognizes the need to provide additional assistance to what Creates provision of negotiated settlement to Rehabilitation Policy, is provided in the 2nd schedule of RFCTLAR&R Act 2013. It states that the R&R policy is ensure PAPs can negotiate better rates than 2017. applicable all land acquisition in the State and by Direct/Negotiated purchase what’s available under LARR 2013 and also space to negotiate additional assistance/ amenities 57 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation It expedites /simplifies procedures of LA for public purpose by providing for direct However, the project will exclude works in any purchase or negotiation to ensure just and reasonable compensation for land acquired, sites requiring land acquisition. relieving owners from burden of litigation for enhanced compensation, offers space for negotiating additional package, including employment/ stake holding, infrastructural amenities as provided in 3rd schedule Scheduled Tribes and Recognizes and records customary rights of forest dwellers who have been residing and Secures indigenous communities residing inside other Traditional Forest depending on forest for generations for their bona fide livelihood needs. forest from land alienation, recognizes customary Dwellers (Recognition of rights over land, forest resources & their Forest Rights (ROFR) Provides for diversion of forest for meeting development/ infrastructure needs of development needs. Act, 2006, (including community by felling trees and permitting land use change/ diversion, providing The project will not affect the existing land tenure Amendment 2012) usufruct rights to forest produce arrangements or customary rights over land Scheduled Castes and the Protects Scheduled Castes/ Tribes from wrongful occupation/cultivation of land owned Secures property rights of vulnerable Scheduled Tribes by them or notified to be allotted to, a member of a Scheduled Caste or Tribe member communities (SC/ST) and provides legal (Prevention of or transfer of land allotted to them; protection against state or private action to Atrocities) Act, 1989 Prevents against wrongful dispossession of a member of Scheduled Caste or Tribe from alienate them from land owned/ accessed by his land or premises or interference with enjoyment of rights over land or water, any them. forceful removal/causing alienation and for them to leave house, village or place of residence. Kerala Land Reforms Under the KLR Act, 1962, Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) families are Provided for distribution of surplus land to (KLR) Act, 1962, eligible for 50% of lands identified as surplus by the State. landless from vulnerable communities and Restriction on Transfer RTLRAL Act, 1982 restricts land transfer by Scheduled Tribe members to non-tribal correcting any historical injustice in the form of of Lands and Restoration persons, and restore lands alienated to non-tribals. The Act provides for restricting alienation of their land. of Alienated Lands transfer of lands by members of Scheduled Tribes and for restoration of possessions of (RTLRAL) Act, 1975, and lands alienated by such members and for matters connected therewith. Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 Kerala Land Puts an end to the feudal system and ensures rights of tenants on their land. Cash crops/ Recognizes the right of the tiller of the land/ Reforms (Amendment) plantations were exempted from its purview, although taken up by subsequent tenant, secures their tenancy and prevent sudden Act, 1969 and Kerala legislations. eviction of tenants that have been tilling lands for Land Reforms (Tenancy) Restoration of land to dispossessed persons or tenant from whom resumed, allows for certain number of years. Act 1970 determination of fair rent in respect of land, if no such fair rent has been already determined through a Land Tribunal/ Land Board 58 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation Kerala Compensation Tenant is entitled to compensation for every spend on land and asset improvements and Acknowledges the rights of socially vulnerable, for Tenants to compensation for improvements which were made by him, his predecessor-in- economically weak tenants and investments Improvements Act, 1958 interest or by any person not in occupation at the time of the eviction who derived title made by them over the period of their tenancy from either of them at the time of returning the land to its owners. Every tenant to towards improvement of those lands and the whom such compensation is due shall be entitled to remain in possession until payment need for them to be compensated at the time of of compensation. Such improvements will include building structures, works, trees, ownership transfer. standing crops/ plantations also need to be compensated by the evictee or the landowner. Malabar Tenancy The Act prohibits eviction of tenants, who have had possession of the land for more than This, along with other legal instruments on Amendment Act, 1954 6 years. Every tenant of a plantation shall have fixity of tenure in respect of his holding tenancy, provide security to tenants/ tillers (Applicable over Kerala) and shall not be evicted. against forced eviction from the tenement If in any one of the six agricultural years following such eviction, the landlord, who has (especially in case of long duration plantations) obtained such eviction fails, without reasonable excuse to use a major portion of the and recognizes the association of tiller with their lands, for the purpose for which eviction was obtained, or transfers it to any person on land. any kind of lease or mortgage with possession, the tenant shall be entitled to sue for restoration of the possession of all the lands from which s/he was evicted and to hold them with all the rights and subject to all the liabilities of a tenant. Gender The sexual harassment Protects women workers from sexual harassment and abuse of power at their workplace Recognizes the need for legal protection of of women at workplace and provides for constituting Internal Complaints Committee to look into complaints of women workers against abuse, exploitation in all (Prevention, sexual harassment in every public and private office with 10 or more workers, including government institutions as well as private firms/ Prohibition, and women workers. agencies contracted by the program. Redressal) Act 2013 Provides guidance on redressal against such complaints, including its internal investigation in a time bound manner and encourages women’s economic participation in the formal economy. Kerala Policy on Women To strengthen gender equality and women’s empowerment in the State, it recognizes Creates systems for engendering development upgraded to Gender the gender biases in society which have skewed the distribution of development impacts and mainstreaming gender in the Equality and Women’s benefits, gender indicators and recognizes the need to work with men on behaviour functioning of public systems across Empowerment (GEWE)5 change to improve gender outcomes. departments. Policy 2014 The policy establishes an accountability framework to monitor gender-informed development projects in the State. It advocates for preparation of Gender Action Plans (GAP) by each department to ensure that gender outputs and indicators are identified, 5 https://kerala.gov.in/documents/10180/46696/Gender%20Equality%20and%20Womens%20Employment%20Policy 59 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation integrated in organizational outcomes, results tracked, monitored and periodically reported by each state agency. Kerala State Policy for One of the few states of the country that recognizes the necessity and Relevant to operation to safeguard the People with Disabilities- inevitability of including disability dimensions in its development agenda, vulnerable against exploitation and PwDs, 2015 programs, and development plans of the State. Provides for separate budgetary discrimination and ensure their inclusion in allocation for managing disability. schemes and programs. National Legal Services Free Legal Aid to vulnerable sections of the society for creating legal awareness Provides a system of legal redress on basic Authority Act, 1987 by spreading legal literacy and organizing legal aid clinics in Panchayats to rights over and above the grievance systems provide free legal services, training community level para-legal workers to help in place at the state, department and LSG vulnerable groups in accessing legal aid, knowing their rights and entitlements, levels. and negotiating. Better with the power structures. Kerala Vayojana Nayam This state policy provides for a State Old Age Council under Chairmanship of Provides social protection and safety against or the Old aged Policy, Minister of Social Justice and District Old Age Councils under District Collectors. discrimination to this vulnerable 2013 It calls for making scheme/project specific Action Plans for welfare of senior constituency in the state. citizens, ensures protection & welfare of citizens above age of 60, especially elderly women by providing better social, economic conditions and healthy life to Senior Citizens. The policy directs all departments to ensure better social conditions, legal aid, protection from abuse, help desk for elderly under Kerala Social Security Mission. It also promises better healthcare, free medicines / consultations, mobile clinics, geriatric wards and palliative care in hospitals as high priority. Street Vendors Protects rights of urban street vendors & regulates street vending. It provides for survey Gives legal protection and safety against (Protection of Livelihood & certification of street vendors to legalize their right and protect them from sudden economic displacement and un-notified and Regulation of Street eviction or relocation; provides for rights and obligations of street vendors, designation relocation to street vendors Vending) Act, 2014 of vending spots as per street vending plans; organize their capacity building to raise awareness. It sets up a Town Vending Committee-TVC to declare no-vending zones for public purposes, relocate vendors from such areas after giving notice, entitle them to new area for carrying out vending as determined by local authority and TVC. Labour Laws 60 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation Building and Other The act seeks to regularize employment, working conditions of construction workers and Measures in place for welfare of laborers, Construction Workers’ provide for their safety, health and welfare, through constitution of Welfare Boards in relevant for sectors that involve investments and Welfare Cess Act, 1996 every State to provide and monitor social security schemes and welfare measures engagement of construction workers. targeting them. It is applicable to all establishments with 10 or more workers, have to register themselves and pay a cess on cost of construction for use by the state for labour welfare. It also warrants employers to provide safety measures at construction sites like canteens, first-aid, and accommodation for non-local workers. Child Labor (Prohibition and To protect the interest of children below 14 years so they are not employed in certain Measures to prevent child and bonded or forced Regulation) Act, 1986 occupations, regulate their working conditions in certain employments. labour and provide legal safeguard against their deployment, relevant for investment sectors Contract labor To regulate the employment of contract labor in certain establishments and to engaging laborers/ workers. (Regulation & Abolition) provide for its abolition in certain circumstances Act, 1970, Bonded Labor System (Abolition) Act, 1976 Equal Remuneration Act, Provide equal remuneration to men & women workers, prevent discrimination against It prevents gender-based discrimination in 1976, women in matters of employment, employers to compensate workman’s spouse / employment and provides for labour Workmen’s dependent sons, daughter in case of injury at workplace and mandatory worker insurance/social assistance against any Compensation Act, 1923 insurance by employers against such liability eventuality/ accident. and 2009, Personal Injuries (Compensation Insurance) Act, 1963, The Minimum Wages Act, 1948, Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 Kerala Plantations An Act to provide for health & welfare of plantation workers, to regulate their working Prevents discrimination and ensures improved Labour Act, 1951 conditions; provide access to education, housing, regulation of working hours, working conditions for different category of agri prohibition of child labour and employment of women in night shifts. workers. Kerala Labor Welfare Provide for constitution of a labour welfare fund to finance welfare activities for laborers Ensure social assistance and safety net to the Fund Act, 1975/ Kerala in the state including implementing specific schemes targeting them including provision workers in the state. Payment of Subsistence of subsistence allowance to the employees in certain establishments during the period Allowance Act, 1972 of their suspension or suspension of operations 61 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation Inter-State Migrant To regulate the work conditions of migrant workers from other states and is applicable To prevent unfair wages and exploitation at the Workmen (Regulation to establishments employing 5 or more migrant workers; provides for certain facilities hands of middlemen, especially in sectors of Employment and like housing, medical aid, travelling expenses from home up to the establishment and employing outsiders. Also relevant since state has Conditions of Service) Act, back. highest proportion of migrant laborers 1979 Grievance Redress/ Citizens Engagement Right to Information Act, Empowers citizens to demand information on functioning of public systems if it impacts Ensures transparency and accountability in the 2005 their lives or is of public interest. Offers rights-based framework under which citizens get govt operations and citizen’s access to public a legal tool with which to demand accountability and explanation from all/any public information. authorities; designates a Public Information Officer in all public offices to provide info; creates State /Central Information Commissions (statutory) to look into appeals regarding unsatisfactory information provided to citizens or unclear interest in demanding information. Kerala State Right to To provide effective, time-bound delivery of services to the public, redress of grievances Government systems are made accountable, Service Act, 2012 to citizens by making government servants liable in case of default. State has notified aimed at providing agreed quality of service as more than 90 public services covering departments of SC, ST development/ finance, defined by the act. Aimed at increased agriculture, PWD, Road transport, LSGD, Co-ops, health and family welfare, social justice accountability and transparency in govt etc- services like scholarships, incentive grant, loans, distress funds, caste certificates, functioning across most departments, offering approval of building plans, valuation of structures, water sewerage connection, water good governance. quality testing; registration of societies. Also provides for a 2 -tiered appellate system to file appeals in case grievances are unattended. Kerala Municipality All municipalities and panchayats are to publish their Citizens Charter every year Promotes transparency in the delivery of core (Preparation of Citizen describing services to be rendered to its residents, conditions of such service and their functions of urban and rural local governments Charter) Rules 2000 stipulated timeframe. Some of these include birth/ death/ marriage/ property registration, enrolment in social security schemes, public works. Disaster Risk Management Kerala State Disaster Institutes structures and systems to minimise disaster related human, property and This community-based disaster management- Management Policy livelihood losses for poor, vulnerable by strengthening capacities and resilience of policy leverages existing social capital for 2010 vulnerable community, especially women; capacitates administrative and community management of disaster response and makes PRIs level systems for pre and post disaster interventions through awareness generation and the frontline agency for disaster management capacity building; planning and execution. Designates Kerala Disaster Management Authority- KSDMA to function as apex decision- making body to facilitate, co-ordinate, monitor all disaster related activities, & District 62 Name of law/policy Relevant provisions/ features of the Act/ Policy Relevance for Environment/Social Management in Current Operation Disaster Management Authority as district planning, coordinating, implementing bodies for disaster management. Emphasis on imparting training to various departments, implementation agencies, NGOs & community on DRM; local authorities to coordinate community-based disaster preparedness activities tailored to local needs. Disaster Management Notified State and District Disaster Management Authorities laying down functions and Creates a role for communities to be involved in Act, 2005 responsibilities for state and district authorities. State Executive Committee of State prevention and preparedness and recognizes the Disaster Management Authority constituted. These authorities are to evaluate need for their capacity building. preparedness at government & non-government levels to respond to any disaster; promote community education, awareness and training on disasters which the State is vulnerable to and measures needed to prevent, mitigate and respond to it. 63 5.2 Regulatory Systems Assessment 5.2.1 National-level environmental regulatory systems The Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MoEFCC) is responsible for the planning, promotion, co-ordination and overseeing the implementation of India's environmental and forestry policies and programs. The broad objectives of the MoEFCC are: (i) Conservation and survey of flora, fauna, forests and wildlife; (ii) Prevention and control of pollution; (iii) Afforestation and regeneration of degraded areas; (iv) Protection of the environment and (v) Ensuring the welfare of animals. These objectives are well supported by a set of legislative and regulatory measures, aimed at the preservation, conservation and protection of the environment. Further, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) is a statutory organization that provides technical services to the MoEFCC on all matters pertaining to the legal and regulatory systems. These broader national-level regulatory systems are a prerequisite and drive state-level legal and regulatory framework that the AF PforR will have to adhere with. It is imperative to have a well-developed, established national system in order to effectively manage environmental effects and risks at the state and the program level. Section 5 has further information on the applicable national legislations and regulations that the above institutions are responsible for. In the Indian context, MoEFCC is responsible for these national-level systems are well- developed and in place across all sectors. The regulatory procedures and practices are clear, streamlined and widely available. In the context of the AF PforR, the national-level regulatory systems pertaining to the CRZ and EIA Clearance are directly applicable. If the type of coastal protection investments is such that the state regulatory agencies are required to forward to national regulatory agencies, then MoEFCC will have to provide the CRZ clearance and the Environmental Clearance as required. However, the national- level regulatory systems, particularly EIAs, does not emphasize on stakeholder / community consultations and disclosure as the Bank’s requirements do. Hence, the EIA systems will need to be addressed through ToRs for conducting EIAs that additionally include stakeholder / community consultations, and so that their feedback suitably in the plans and designs. These will have to be developed and finalized by RKI after program effectiveness. 5.2.2 State-level environmental regulatory systems The regulatory agencies relevant to the Program activities are the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority (KCZMA) , State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), State Wetlands Authority of Kerala (SWAK), Kerala State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) and the State Forest Department. Each of their roles and responsibilities are briefly described here: • The KCZMA is the regulatory agency that is responsible for all state-level coastal zone management activities. All the coastal protection investments as well as the Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) under the AF PforR will have to be consistent with the regulatory requirements administered by the KCZMA. • The SEIAA is established at the state level and is authorized to deal with environmental clearance for projects falling under category “B” of schedule in EIA Notification 2006. To support SEIAA Kerala, the State Expert Appraisal Committee (SEA) Kerala has also been constituted to provide technical advisory inputs to the SEIAA. • The SWAK is a statutory authority that functions as State’s nodal agency to implement the task of policy development, regulatory frameworks, integrated management, planning, implementation of action plans, capacity building, research, networking, communication, awareness, creation and raising of funds for wetland management. • The KSPCB is responsible for the issuance of consents to establish and to operate to contractor for all civil works under the Air Act and Water Act; • The State Forest Department is responsible for issuing the tree cutting clearance if such incidental tree cutting is required for the civil works being planned. Related to the judiciary, under the National Green Tribunal (NGT) Act 2010, the Tribunal issues orders for effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources. Given its statutory importance, these require the attention of the highest level of the State Government. There are also NGT orders pertaining to coastal zone management, i.e. establishing a SMP, which is presently under way to meet the NGT requirements. All the aforementioned state-level regulatory agencies are in place and their procedures for compliance are also being administered. Procedural compliance is effective wherever the proponents approach them for obtaining regulatory clearance. Further, these agencies respond when complaints and issues are brought to its notice either by the public or through the legal requirements such as the NGT. For these purposes, the state- level systems pertaining to regulations are streamlined and the organizational capacities are sufficient. However, these agencies do not have the manpower capacity to proactively engage in procedural compliance and to oversee projects under implementation to check for their adherence to the conditions of the clearances given. Therefore, there is a need for the RKI Secretariat to have an environmental screening oversight to ensure that the clearances are obtained. The ESSA Environment team has drafted a possible screening form and criteria that will have to be finalized during implementation (Annex 2). Further, RKI Secretariat will also have a monitoring oversight to ensure that the clearance conditions are adhered to. Apart from these, the other PforR activities involving civil works will have only limited environmental impacts and do not entail any upfront clearances. There are only certain procedural requirements such as obtaining consents prior to the commencement of civil works. These are contractor responsibilities that will have to be supervised by the respective departments and agencies that are engaged in civil works. If there are specific situations during implementation, e.g. the NGT orders, then additional procedural requirements may be applicable. The environmental standards included in the various legislations will have to be adhered. There is sufficient capacity within the different implementing departments / agencies, their consultants and their contractors to meet these legal requirements. As mentioned under the national-level regulatory systems, the EIA requirements do not emphasize on stakeholder/community consultations and disclosure as the Bank’s requirements do. Hence, this gap will need to be addressed through conducting EIAs as per the ToRs that will be developed by RKI Secretariat after effectiveness. Additionally, to ensure that there is proper adherence to the clearance conditions, it is required to have 65 RKI Secretariat to conduct or to arrange to conduct periodic supervision to ensure that the implementation performance is in line with the regulatory clearance given 66 6 Institutional Systems Assessment – Institutional Structures, Programs and Performance One of the core requirements of the ESSA is to undertake institutional assessment of the systems of implementing departments to be able to manage environmental and social risks and mitigation measures. For environmental assessment, the following dimensions were covered vis-à-vis the department or associated agencies’ capacity: • To identify possible environmental impacts, determine mitigation measures and address them during implementation. • To adhere to the environmental laws and regulations relevant to the proposed activities. • For social assessment, the idea was to assess against the following dimensions: • Any existing staff and mechanisms for assessing and managing social risks • Existing understanding and capacities for addressing social risks through effective mitigation measures • Mechanisms and policies for citizen engagement • Mechanisms and policies for grievance redressal. 6.1 Water Resources Department The WRD is one of the primary implementation agencies and has been given the mandate for coastal protection and disaster-recovery related works along the Pamba basin. Closely associated with WRD, Kerala Irrigation Infrastructure Development (KIIDC) is a wholly owned company of the Government of Kerala was established to undertake and execute construction of irrigation and water supply projects of small, medium and large scale. Their activities have now extended to include coastal protection investments as well. KIIDC gets the required expertise from the staff of WRD to undertake the same. 67 Institutional Structure IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT Chief Engineer - Chief Engineer - Chief Engineer - Chief Engineer - Irrigation & Investigation & Inland Projects-I/II Administration Design Navigation Irrigation Major-Medium Irrigation Support to Flood Circles and Irrigation Design & paddy management Minor Irrigation Projects Research cultivation 6.1.1 Environment Assessment Both for the coastal protection investments and for the repair and rehabilitation works for disaster-recovery to be lead by the WRD, the assessment finds that there is no environmental cell or division. Whichever Engineers are assigned the coastal protection project, is given the responsibility of ensuring compliance to environmental regulations. This is best intrinsically embedded within the engineering function as opposed to establishing a separate environmental cell or division. This is generally achieved with the support of external consultants and is primarily used to obtain the required CRZ or Environmental Clearances. Beyond that, these departments / agencies are not carrying out any environmental due diligence during construction, and during operation & maintenance. For the disaster related recovery works, the AF PforR activities are limited to selected stretches and are in the nature of repair and rehabilitation works. The temporary, construction related EHS impacts will be limited, and therefore can be managed using EHS guidelines that are integrated with the bid / contract documents. The oversight on the contractor’s EHS performance can be done by the WRD’s engineers who are assigned the responsibility. Training and capacity building of these engineers on EHS management will need to be provided. These will have to conducted and facilitated through the RKI Secretariat. There is, however, a need to develop some basic capacity on environmental management. Selected Assistant Executive Engineers and Assistant Engineers in each of these departments and agencies should be assigned the responsibility of the environmental function, and then the training should be delivered. Suitable training content needs to be developed and delivered as a part of the organizational system strengthening for AF PforR implementation. This will be initially an orientation session. Subsequently, there will be periodic refresher training that will enable keeping up to date. These will have to conducted and facilitated through the RKI Secretariat. 68 6.1.2 Social Assessment As the institutional structure of the department above shows, there is no separate social cell or division, nor any designated staff responsibilities to oversee and manage social and gender risks. The ESSA finds this to be a major gap since the proposed investments under the AF are likely to have substantial social impacts. To fill the capacity gaps on social risk assessment, the WRD engages agencies for conducting Social Impact Assessment or a cadre of social consultants to do surveys to identify community feedback on proposed investments. ESSA finds this to be a short-term solution, which does not help to enhance capacity of the department in social risk management. Since, WRD is a key implementation department, some solutions to strengthen the capacities of their staff will be crucial. Moreover, given the temporary engagement of consultants, it was also felt that there is possibility of low weightage given to these reports, mainly due to the limited understanding of social issues and concerns. To push for timely and effective mitigation measures continuity of staff/consultants is critical to ensure social risk screening reports feed into mitigation measures. However, most of these impacts can be managed with timely and well-informed mitigation measures that factor in site specific contexts (some sites may have greater risks due to a large number of households along the coast, large number of vulnerable/women headed households). Social assessment recommends a strong social and gender orientation for the department staff and additionally, recommends the hiring of a special cadre of Social Officers for all nine coastal districts. The assessment revealed that there is a need to strengthen the capacity of engineers who have the responsibility of managing such activities, while also proposing additional deputation of staff/consultants. The site visits revealed the fragile conditions of vulnerable groups and households, especially those near coasts and rivers. To garner community support and to ensure that their concerns are duly addressed, this cadre is likely to play a critical role. The RKI Secretariat can provide initial capacity building and orientation support and ensure regular collection of data for social monitoring. 6.2 Harbour Engineering Department Under the AF, it is proposed to engage Harbour Engineering Department (HED) in some of the proposed activities. It is a line Department of Government of Kerala, which is involved in investigation, planning, execution and monitoring of various projects in coastal areas. This department mainly does the construction and maintenance of fishing harbours and fish landing centers, fishery infrastructures like hatcheries, ponds, farms, etc., shore-based tourism projects, infrastructures of Ports and coastal roads. HED is the service department of Fisheries Department for the execution of their infrastructure projects. In general, HED does all types of construction works such as breakwater, groins, wharfs, jetties, dredging, bridges, roads, buildings, water tanks, beach nourishment /stabilization works, fishponds/hatcheries/farms. In terms of its ongoing programs, HED’s programs come under three sectors: Fisheries, Ports and Tourism. In addition, HED carries out Investigation, Planning, Design, Execution and Management of 69 Fishery Harbours/Ports, Fish Landing Centers, Bridges, Construction of coastal Roads, Hatcheries, Water Supply Schemes etc. It includes construction and maintenance of ice plant, Cold storage and other refrigeration related works. In addition, to the above- mentioned projects HED has its own electrical and mechanical wing which monitors the related activities for successful completion of projects. Kerala State Coastal Area Development Corporation Limited (KSCADC) is a State Government owned company that integrates the development activities in the coastal areas of Kerala. KSCADC aims to accelerate socio-economic development of the fisher folk facilitating coastal and fisheries infrastructure coupled with technological support, its sustainable management through futuristic policies and appropriate interventions. More recently, its activities include the coastal protection investments. Apart from having its own staff, KSCADC gets the required staff and expertise from its parent department, HED, to undertake these activities. 6.2.1 Environment Assessment Similar to the key observations on the capacity of the WRD, it is felt that there is a need to develop some basic capacity on environmental management. Selected Assistant Executive Engineers and Assistant Engineers should be assigned the responsibility of the environmental function, and then the training should be delivered. Suitable training 70 content needs to be developed and delivered as a part of the organizational system strengthening for AF PforR implementation. This will be initially an orientation session. Subsequently, there will be periodic refresher training that will enable keeping up to date. These will have to conducted and facilitated through the RKI Secretariat. 6.2.2 Social Assessment For outreach to the community, it works closely with the staff of the Fisheries and Ports Department. The consultation with the HED teams showed that there is more focus on ‘infrastructure’ versus a more direct impact on livelihood support which is also responsible for lack of proper understanding of the community needs and demands. Site visits to some of the auction grounds revels the need to re-vamp these in order to be fisher-folk and women friendly. For instance, a significant concern, both environmental and social in nature, is that of lack of sanitation and waste disposal. Increasingly, harbors are dumping grounds for plastic and solid waste, as nearby communities do not have any other options. While this is a challenge for the whole State, this can be one of the priority areas for HED to factor in its infrastructure development plans. A cadre with necessary social skills will be able to able to ensure such community needs are recognized and incorporated in the future and programs of the HED. The social assessment recommends that for more sustained focus on community’s social and gender needs, it is proposed that the department nominates its staff or engages few social consultants who can strengthen community interface. 6.3 Fisheries While not a direct implementing agency, the Fisheries department has strong community interface and therefore knowledge about key social risks and challenges faced by the affected communities due to coastal and river erosion. Kerala fisheries sector contributes around 1.58% to the total GDP and the export of marine products has set ever time record of Rs 5919.02 Crores during the year 2017-18. Currently, there are 222 fishing villages in the marine and 113 fishery villages in the inland sector, where fishing and relative aspects provide livelihood to a vast majority of the population. The extent of inland water resources of Kerala is highly potential for expanding aquaculture. This is therefore a significant department and was included for social assessment and seen as a potential partner for contribution to the Shoreline Management Planning process. The department implements a range of schemes primarily focused to support the livelihoods of fish farmers, but also their well-being which includes education of the children, providing access to key insurance and safety net entitlements, creating infrastructure such as roads to facilitate. 71 Organizational Structure State Level: Directorate of Fisheries Director of Fisheries Additional Director of Fisheries District Level: Joint Directorate of Fisheries Joint Director of Fisheries (South/Central/North) - 3 Nos. Zonal level: Deputy Directorate of Fisheries Dy. Director of Fisheries - 10 Nos. Asst. Director of Fisheries - 4 Nos. Panchayat Level: Matsya Bhavans Matsya Bhavan Officers - 200 Nos. 6.3.1 Environmental Assessment The activities under the AF undertaken by the Fisheries department do not have environmental effects. The investment activities of these departments will be routed through the Harbour Engineering Department or its special purpose vehicles, which are covered in the previous sub-section. 6.3.2 Social Assessment There is a strong understanding within the department on the various ways in which the impact of climate change is being felt on livelihoods of fisher communities. The structure going to the down to the Panchayat level through Matsya Bhavan Officers, there is routine interface with fisher-folk communities and allows for greater community participation in all its programs and interventions. The agencies under the department are effective platforms for the fisher-folk community and allow great potential to ensure increased membership of women into more advanced economic organizations. The ‘Theeramythri’ women’s groups under the Society for Assistance to Fisherwomen (SAF) that was founded as part of the department’s outreach to fisher women, provide potential CBOs to integrate community-based solutions to coastal protection and management. In some of the field visits, interaction with women members of Theeramythri provide a clear conviction on the importance of organizing women for their improved agency, participation in community level activities and a greater influence over the panchayat’s decision making. In sites where such mobilization was weak or had not taken place, it was evident women were reluctant to talk freely when asked about specific social and gender barriers faced by them and seeking their suggestions for how projects can better respond to their needs. 72 6.4 RKI Secretariat In the aftermath of the unprecedented August 2018 landslides and floods in the history of Kerala, the Rebuild Kerala Initiative (RKI) and the Rebuild Kerala Development Programme (RKDP) were adopted as an unique approach to bring about a perceptible change in the lives and livelihoods of its citizens by adopting higher standards of infrastructure for recovery and reconstruction, and to build ecological and technical safeguards so that the restructured assets could better withstands floods in the future.” The RKI Secretariat has been established to implement the RKI’s mandate to develop, coordinate, facilitate and monitor the RKDP through a participatory and inclusive process within the various GoK's departments and agencies, and with the communities at large. 6.4.1 Environment Assessment The AF PforR will include the development of the SMP and coastal protection investments. The RKI Secretariat will need additional capacity on environmental management in order to be able to support and coordinate with the various departments / agencies, who will be implementing these activities. It has been planned that additional environmental staff in the RKI Secretariat to support the proposed Coastal Mission Directorate. This staff strengthening will lead to strengthening of environmental systems within the RKI Secretariat, which will be necessary. 6.4.2 Social Assessment To coordinate social management, the RKI Secretariat created a position of a social officer (through their Project Management Support Services), for coordinating the social assessment and risk management activities pertaining to the Parent PforR. However, there has been a delay in the hiring process, and this has affected the initiation of activities that were proposed under the PAPs of the original ESSA. Based on this, the ESSA finds the current capacity of RKI to be limited in ensuring existing project work, but more so taking on the additional responsibilities that may emerge from the AF. There is currently no clear mechanism or effort to keep track of any project-related grievances, and this does not form part of the existing monitoring reporting formats evolved by RKI. Discussions have shown that there is a need for immediate orientation on issues of gender and social risks and management for RKI team to be able to play the role of coordinating activities on these priorities with the implementing departments. With proposed project investments under AF, this role needs to be bolstered as some key potential social risks have been identified that will need ongoing guidance for departments. 73 7 Stakeholder Consultations A crucial part of ESSA is the ensuring a range of consultations are held directly with affected communities as well as stakeholders who are likely to be engaged or can provide guidance and subject matter expertise 7.1 Consultations on environmental aspects 7.1.1 Feedback from State Counterparts These consultations were carried out by the Bank’s ESSA team. This focused solely on the coastal protection investments as those pertaining to disaster recovery of river stretches were already covered in the Parent PforR. The highlights relevant to environmental systems are compiled in the following table: 74 No. Type Feedback – Highlights 1 Implementing • All technical designs are developed with the guidance given agencies / by IIT Madras or NCCR. Once developed, these agencies departments verify that the specific designs are in line with their guidance. • There is a shortage of armour stones and this has necessitated the use of tetrapods. • KIIDC takes up coastal protection works and assigns WRD engineers. And, WRD also undertakes coastal protection works on its own. These differing arrangements are due to the source of funding for various projects. Similarly, KSCADC takes up coastal protection works and assigns HED (under the Fisheries Department) engineers. And, HED also undertakes coastal protection works on its own. These differing arrangements are due to the source of funding for various projects. • CRZ clearance is not required for rehabilitating the sea wall or groyne fields that already exists. • Wherever clearances are obtained either from KCZMA or the MoEFCC, there is no established practice of sending compliance reports. Monitoring is done but documented reports are not prepared. • Nature-based solutions such as use casuarina, fruit-bearing trees and mangroves are possible in certain stretches but not in all. • Any obstruction into the sea will create one side where sand will accumulate and another side where sand erosion will occur. This requires sand bypassing to be done between the two areas. As this is a continuous operation, it is cost-intensive and hence not done. 2 Experts / • Of the various SMPs, only the Odisha one is comprehensive. Advisers Though well-done in terms of preparation, the implementation mechanisms are yet to be established. It is more important to get the institutional mechanisms upfront than to produce another technical report that does not get implemented. • Construction-related impacts are manageable, community will be cooperative. That is not the main issue. Getting to the appropriate coastal protection interventions and designing them correctly so that there are no environmental impacts during the operation phase is the big elephant in the room. Further regular maintenance of these interventions should be institutionalized. • Important to use the sediment cell concept and sediment flows in order to determine the technical design solutions. Else, there will be negative environmental impacts during the operation and maintenance phase. • Technical design solutions should be developed in consultation with the local people who will be affected. 75 No. Type Feedback – Highlights • There has been a significant increase in coastal flooding and sea over-topping in the last 3/4 years. Once the beach is lost or the sea wall subsides, the coast is exposed to over- topping. • Important to focus on areas that are already affected and those that will be affected as well. • There are lots of studies done. Different projects in different times. These should be reviewed. Their reliability and usability should be assessed. No point in reinventing the wheel. These should be extensively studied for the scientific relevance and appropriately utilized. • Important to establish the implementation mechanism for the SMP; otherwise, it will be just another document. • There is an emergency need for coastal protection. Depending on the particular coastal location, the solution should be decided. There are some locations where the hard physical infrastructure is the only solution. There are others where nature-based solutions and hybrid solutions are possible. • There are 25 fishing harbours along the coast. There is a plan for doing another 25. It is important to build the new harbours only after assessing what will be the impact on the shoreline. • The NGT has taken a firm view that a SMP has to be done. The NGT timelines and requirements have also got to be considered. • Critical coastal locations have to be identified. If there is no beach, coastal population are affected and over-topping occurs, then it is critical. 3 Consulting • The technical design of the coastal protection works is most firms important. GoK has engaged IIT Madras or NCCR to provide the technical support. As consultants, we collect the design information from these agencies. • As per the CRZ clearance, 6-monthly compliance reports are required. As consultants are not engaged after obtaining the clearance, it is not known whether the department or implementing agencies are adhering to this requirement. • Generally, projects having external funding are easier to do EIAs. The required technical designs are available to conduct the assessment. In many cases, even DPRs are not available and that makes conducting EIAs very difficult. • If there are no problems or outstanding issues, then obtaining the CRZ clearance is straightforward. If there are issues, then clarification questions are raised, site visits may also be done and experts are involved. This can be time-consuming. • Though required for all coastal protection works, CRZ clearance is not always obtained by the implementing departments and agencies. 76 No. Type Feedback – Highlights • Whether a section of the shoreline is eroding is checked with the Space Applications Centre VEDAS maps. This Centre is authorized by MoEFCC. • Comprehensive baseline monitoring is required to be done. Not always done • Six-monthly compliance reports during the construction and operational phases should be streamlined. • Based on the compliance monitoring reports, corrective and preventive action should be taken. • Local people understand the sea better and therefore climate change impacts; they have to be consulted or involved in the developing the technical designs. • Biodiversity aspects are not being considered. 4 Regulatory • For all coastal protection interventions, regulatory Agencies clearances are required either at the state-level (KCZMA) and at the central-level (MoEFCC). Implementing departments / agencies should consult the DoECC / KCZMA as all regulatory clearances are routed through this Department / Authority. • CRZ Notification 2011 is applicable even though the CRZ Notification 2019 has been published; this is because the State Coastal Zone Management Maps as per CRZ Notification 2019 are still not prepared. • State Coastal Zone Management Maps are available on the DoECC / KCZMA website 7.1.2 Feedback from Community Consultations KILA’s community consultations covered both the coastal protection investments and disaster recovery works in the river stretches. For the coastal protection investments, a sample of communities was chosen based on the list of locations where interventions were necessary. For the disaster recovery works, the communities who have been directly affected and who will benefit from the PforR activities were selected. The highlights of the environmental issues shared by the community were as follows: No. Sector Feedback - Highlights A Shoreline management 1 Alappuzha Issues / Problems • Sea turbulence, sea level rise and flooding during the months of May, June, and July; • Plastic waste Solutions • Increasing sea wall height, using geo-bags and groynes 2 Kasargod Issues / Problems • Sea turbulence and high tides during the monsoon season • Low water quality due to salinity (sea water intrusion) and flooding 77 No. Sector Feedback - Highlights • Non-scientific harbour construction • Illegal sand mining Solutions • Sea wall barrier using stones and earthen material • Sand-filled bags 3 Kozhikode Issues / Problems • Coastal erosion and frequent sea rage during monsoon • Subsidence of sea wall, sea level rise sea water intrusion and pollution of fresh water • Destruction to mangroves • Illegal sand mining Solutions • Sea wall - proper design and construction 4 Malappuram Issues / Problems • Sea turbulence during monsoon months, sea rages, and sea level rise • Changing coastal landscapes and coastal erosion • Overexploitation and deterioration of marine resources; unsustainable fishing practices. • Unscientific construction of breakwaters Solutions • Harbour construction should be done only after the groynes are established; adaptation strategies should be explored. • Increase the height of sea walls and the length of the groynes • Sand bag bunds • Better warning systems for cyclones 5 Thrissur Issues / Problems • Acute sea surges, sea level rise, storms and saltwater intrusion • Deep sea fishing, large decline in fish stock • Arappa stream flows in the opposite direction • Garbage dumping in water bodies • Shifts in precipitation patterns • Water scarcity and drying up of water • Abnormal weather patters Solutions • Harbour construction and groynes to be done more scientifically B Disaster recovery in river stretches 6 Kottayam, Issues / Problems Alappuzha • Landslides on the banks and • Degradation of agriculture land, erosion washes the fertile Pathanamthitta topsoil and reduced agricultural productivity. • Overexploitation of water resources, reduction in fish stocks and disruption of river water flows • Sand mining Solutions • Increasing the depth and width of the river 78 No. Sector Feedback - Highlights • Waste management • Clean ditches and streams before monsoon, • Construct protective walls • Prohibition of unauthorized encroachment • Raise the walls of the lower river bank • Restoration of river basins • Conservation of hydro resource • Mangroves should be planted along the bank where feasible 7.1.3 Feedback from the stakeholder workshop The stakeholder workshop provided additional feedback both to the Program design and the draft ESSA Addendum report. The main points on environmental aspects were related to the shoreline management plan and the investment activities pertaining to coastal protection. The highlights were the following: No. Sector Feedback – Highlights 1 General • There is a need for strengthening capacity related to the EIA, including critically review the EIAs. These are not properly prepared. Accountability on the EIAs should be clearly assigned to make them more effective. • There are investments that do not require EIA. These also have environmental impacts which need to be properly managed. It is better to have a body or committee to look at such projects so that there is a monitoring or tracking system in place. • There needs to be a focus on benchmarking prior to making the interventions. This should be based on data, whether it is social, economic or environment. This data should be collected with the support of the community and the local governments. Data should become an important part. 2 Shoreline • Hybrid solutions are appropriate for shoreline management. management A consolidated attempt should be made to sustain the existing and coastal natural systems in the coastal stretches wherever these are protection found. investments • Public consultations might give biased results unless it is done with an informed group. The consultations, especially the coastal consultations, representative participation of all the strata in the coastal community must be ensured to gather comprehensive information. Furthermore, he emphasized the importance of verifying the percentage of participation in each group to avoid bias in existing data. • Coastal communities have different categories of people: (a) Active fisherfolks (b) Same community but different livelihoods; and (c) others who are outside the community but happen to be living there. Their perspectives will be different and these need to be accounted for. 79 No. Sector Feedback – Highlights • Before preparing a shoreline management plan (SMP), a critical evaluation and assessment should be performed, particularly in the case of seawall construction. The existing seawall which needs restorations is one part, whereas new seawalls in areas with no seawalls must undergo critical evaluation. • Scientific management of tidal or coastal barriers is not existing and is critical to ensure. 3 Disaster • In the management of water bodies, there is no regulation of recovery in check dams or bunds. There should be a scientific basis and river the use of traditional knowledge should be encouraged. stretches Suitable scientific guidelines should be in place. 4 Others • Soil is an important micro-level issue which is not being given due consideration. It plays an important role particularly in the context of climate change. There is a need for a separate project and to draw international best practices through the World Bank. • Disappearance of buffer zones in Kerala due to urbanization and extreme climate events. Projects which can address these issues by incorporating this into regulatory or policy frameworks must be initiated. There is a need for creating buffer zones in order to protect natural resources. • The Government departments do not take the support of NGOs even though they have a lot of expertise. There is a reluctance. The Bank team thanked the participants for their valuable suggestions. They also provided a response to the Program design and explained the approach to address potential environmental and social impacts. Further the Bank team informed the participants on the plans for effective implementation of the recommendations of the ESSA Addendum. 7.2 Social Consultations 7.2.1 State Departments The key highlights from the different stakeholder departments / agencies / experts consultations were as follows: Coastal protection measures such as construction of sea walls are the urgent demand of the community and currently the most technically sound option. The consultations with WRD reflect the urgency of the need to implement some hard solutions for tackling coastal erosion and the impact of flooding and sea attacks on affected communities. Although, site visits and interactions with communities confirm this demand, it was also felt that since the increase in these concerns are only being faced now, there is limited knowledge of any other alternatives that can provide effective 80 protection. There is a need to study the nature-based solutions, which can be led by the communities. There is strong oversight of Panchayats on all works at the site level, and this helps ensure community’s needs and demands are integrated. Yet, there is need to evolve a system to ensure greater community participation and support. The consultations with key departments, WRD, HED, KSCADC, KSDMA and Fisheries highlighted the vibrant and strong local self-governance system of Kerala that ensures there is community vigilance over the works. The process of relocation to relief shelters during flooding is also managed by the Panchayats and there is careful consideration to ensure that help reaches communities in a timely manner. While this minimizes the community complaints, it cannot undermine the need for a greater community ownership over the proposed project activities. The establishment of Community-Based Organizations specifically to focus on coastal protection/river basin management can be explored. This however requires additional skill sets and staffing within the implementing agencies. Coastal management needs to be seen as beyond just technical and hard solutions. It must be seen as a longer-term strengthening of the marine ecosystem approach. This emphasis came strongly from consultations with HED and Fisheries. Since the livelihoods of affected communities is directly associated with access to sea/rivers, until and unless these concerns are factored into the planning for coastal protection and shoreline management, there will be resistance from communities if certain measures impact their access to water sources. It is important to be guarded when receiving overwhelming demand from communities for ‘sea walls’ as the one stop solution to all their concerns. The Bank needs to ensure it explores all options based on national and global good practices for coastal protection. There is need for greater focus on social and gender issues integration in existing interventions on coastal protection and coastal and river basin management. The consultations also highlight the acknowledgement on behalf of the department on the lack of adequate skills and staff to be able to ensure all social risks are identified and mitigation measures evolved. It is important to envisage issues such as increased pressure on women and vulnerable groups, such as gender-based violence. Since the departments are under equipped to address these risks, to strengthen the capacity of the PMU/secretariat that will be proposed to implement the project. 7.2.2 Consultations with Community There is urgent need for coastal protection measures, but also for longer-term solutions for climate change adaptation. The community is able to recognize both immediate protection measures but also the need for climate change adaptation. For them, the impact of climate change is evident in the reduced supply and quality of fish stock. This is impacting the livelihoods of several vulnerable households and women. This is likely to lead to a situation where there will be increased poverty, indebtedness and compromises by women and girls to ensure food security of their families. Lack of access to drinking water and sanitation facilities is both a health and a social hazard. There is increased pressure on women to find ways to dispose solid waste and garbage. Moreover, coasts and harbours are being used to dump solid waste and 81 plastic waste and this is endangering the marine ecosystem. While this puts all affected communities at risk, it is felt that women and children are likely to face the brunt of this in terms of their health. The lack of drinking water is also posing increased health risks and increasing the drudgery of women as they are seen as responsible for ensuring drinking water for their families. There is wide variation in how efficient and timely the relief efforts of the state and Panchayats are. The rehabilitation activities are met with both, approval and opposition by the community. Some sites complain of very poorly conceived and coordinated relief measures. The absence of relief centers along the coast is one of the community’s challenges. Many poor and marginalized families lost their life savings and assets due to improper shelters and this is mainly due to lack of properly planned and timely rehabilitation measures. Where the engagement of Kudumbasree (the largest women’s program in Kerala) was there in planning relief and rehabilitation measures, including in setting up of shelters, there is satisfaction and an endorsement by the community to expand these efforts. Increased drudgery and invisibility of women’s work: Existing data as well as observations data reiterate the differential impacts of coastal erosion and climate change on women and girls. For one, a most obvious impact in sites where there are flooding/ frequent sea attacks is on their increased workload and drudgery during times of flooding, relocation and re-entry into their homes after their stay in relief shelters. The cultural roles and responsibilities ascribe household work, securing food and water and other necessities of the household on women. Even though there were existing state mechanisms to provide food and shelter, the intra-household allocation of the provisions often led to compromise from the women in the households. Some medium and long terms impacts point to the complete ‘invisibilization’ of women’s economic roles. Women who were also allied fishery sector workers on the coast are at times completely out of work during flooding. Climate change has meant dwindling fish stock and gradually the impacts of this percolates to women’s roles and incomes thereof in fishery. Moreover, there is a clear expressed concern by women on chances of gender-based violence during their stay in relief shelters and in public spaces due to labour influx. There are bigger players who have hegemony over the access to fish and other marine resources, with small fisher –folk at the brink of losing their livelihoods. In particular there is diminishing role and returns from fishing related activities of women. The community consultations pointed to how the use of mechanized fishing vessels and over exploitation of marine resources by bigger fishing companies is threatening the ecosystem and reducing the access of individual fisher-folk/households to these resources. Some of the site visits showed that some fisher-folk have now been forced to become ‘coolies’ or take to unskilled labour helping carry fish stock for bigger companies or more influential fishermen. 82 Farmers along the river basin are facing deep crisis and looking for alternative livelihood options. This has also had impact on women agricultural workers. Farming has become an unprofitable venture here. The uncertainty of economic gains from farming has resulted in the farmers moving away from farming to other employment opportunities. This will cause a serious threat to food security in the region. Reduction in paddy cultivation has resulted in low employment opportunities for the women in the region. The loss in agriculture and paddy farming have contributed to the unemployment of women in the region. Paddy cultivation is largely dependent on the female workforce. So, any reduction in paddy land use severely impacts the livelihood of female labour. Other issues such as sand mining is causing great damage to the marine and river ecosystems, but there have not been enough measures to tackle this. Despite the legal policies ensuring the ban on sand mining, these measures have not translated into uniform and effective changes in reality. For the community this is a larger issue that is beyond their control or that of their Panchayats. 7.3 Feedback from the stakeholder consultation workshop The stakeholder workshop on May 11, 2022, was useful to endorse and reiterate the importance of a strong focus on integrating social risk management in the overall program approach and strategies. Some of the specific recommendations, that have been incorporated are: Stronger focus and capacity enhancement for the Local Self Governance Institutions. Since at the local level Panchayats and Urban Local Bodies play a critical role in ensuring delivery of most programs and ensuring community engagement, the Additional Financing also needs to ensure these roles are acknowledged and well- defined. The role of Panchayats and ULBs will be crucial to ensure there is community support and engagement. However, for them to play these roles effectively, the project must include capacity building for them as a core strategy. There are limited capacities on social assessment and even more limited commitment to incorporate findings of such assessments. It was recommended that while the focus on ensuring social screening and conducting social assessments has been highlighted in ESSA, it is important to ensure that these are conducted by experienced agencies and subject matter experts. Moreover, it needs to be ensured that there is accountability defined to ensure that relevant departments incorporate these findings and there is regular monitoring to ensure that the mitigation measures evolved to address these risks are being implemented. Informed consultations with the community need to be emphasised. For the community to be engaged and their perspectives incorporated in the project throughout the implementation, it is crucial that there are informed consultations with the community. This implies greater preparation, prior information disclosure and awareness generation on topics such as social risks. Moreover, there is diversity in the coastal communities, and it is critical to engage with all of them. Apart from fisher-folk communities, there are there coastal communities comprising other livelihood groups, 83 farmers and migrants who need to be engaged in all assessments and their perspectives need to inform the shoreline management planning process. The shoreline management plan should be inclusive and the role of civil society needs to be further recognised and highlighted. It was felt that the project will benefit from the vast experience of civil society organisations that are working with coastal communities in the state. Especially conducting social assessments, gender assessments and guiding shoreline management planning are critical opportunities for civil society to be engaged with more strategically. 84 8 Assessment of the Borrower’s Systems against Core Principles The following are the Core Principles to which the activities of the PforR need to be assessed against: Core Principle #1:Program E&S management systems are designed to (a) promote E&S sustainability in the Program design; (b) avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts; and (c) promote informed decision-making relating to a Program’s E&S effects Core Principle #2:Program E&S management systems are designed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts on natural habitats and physical cultural resources resulting from the Program. Program activities that involve the significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats or critical physical cultural heritage are not eligible for PforR financing. Core Principle #3: Program E&S management systems are designed to protect public and worker safety against the potential risks associated with (a) the construction and/or operation of facilities or other operational practices under the Program; (b) exposure to toxic chemicals, hazardous wastes, and otherwise dangerous materials under the Program; and (c) reconstruction or rehabilitation of infrastructure located in areas prone to natural hazards Core Principle #4: Program E&S systems manage land acquisition and loss of access to natural resources in a way that avoids or minimizes displacement and assists affected people in improving, or at the minimum restoring, their livelihoods and living standards. Core Principle #5:Program E&S systems give due consideration to the cultural appropriateness of, and equitable access to, Program benefits, giving special attention to the rights and interests of Indigenous Peoples/Sub-Saharan African Historically Underserved Traditional Local Communities, and to the needs or concerns of vulnerable groups Core Principle #6: Program E&S systems avoid exacerbating social conflict, especially in fragile states, post-conflict areas, or areas subject to territorial disputes. The following table presents the environmental and social systems assessment against each of these core principles: 85 Core Principle #1 Core Principle #2 Core Principle #3 Core Principle #4 Core Principle #5 Core Principle #6 ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT Both the regulatory systems The GoI / GoK’s The regulatory systems NA NA NA and the organizational regulatory systems include the Building and systems were examined vis- pertaining to natural Other Construction à-vis the Core principle. The habitats, particularly Workers (Regulation of GoI / GoK’s framework (laws coastal zones, Employment and and regulations) - wetlands and forests Conditions of Service) Act environmental, forests and were assessed and 1996 and Kerala Rules, pollution control acts and found to be adequate 1998. The Act and Rules rules - were assessed and to manage the adverse mandate health and safety found to be adequate to environmental effects compliance for all civil manage the environmental if these arise during works, and is regulated by effects of the activities under implementation. The the Labour the AF PforR. Of the various forest clearance for the Commissionerate. While legislation, it is the EIA diversion of forest the systems are in place, Notification and the Coastal land and the enforcement needs to Regulation Zone Notification compensatory be strengthened. 2011 that are relevant to the afforestation, e.g. for Therefore, worker and coastal protection tree cutting, are public safety are generally investments being planned. mandatory. managed through The Department of Constructions in the provisions in the bid / Environment has proximity of cultural contract documents that established the SEIAA and heritage sites such as the respective the SEAC to review projects protected monuments Departments – having under the EIA Notification. are also regulated. The civil works - will be using The Department has also AF PforR activities do to procure its contractors. established the KCZMA to not include any The provisions will be review projects under the significant conversion made part of agreements CRZ Notification. These or degradation of with contractors and will systems are adequate to critical natural be monitored. Given the ensure that the legal habitats or physical prevailing Covid-19 compliance is ensured at the cultural heritage pandemic situation, this state level. These properties. In fact, should also include Core Principle #1 Core Principle #2 Core Principle #3 Core Principle #4 Core Principle #5 Core Principle #6 regulations require projects, many of the AF PforR additional requirements particularly those pertaining activities will be done of the use of PPEs (face to coastal protection along the shoreline, masks), physical investments, to be which are not natural distancing and forwarded to the central habitats of any handwashing practices ministry / MoEFCC. At the significance. In the that may be required of centre, there are adequate unlikely case of any the contractor and sub- systems to ensure to review such environmental contractor personnel. All against legal requirements effects, the respective of these have been and to prescribe conditions Departments were included as PAP to adhere to those found to be competent recommendations. With requirements during in addressing the this further implementation. Outside of regulatory strengthening, the coastal protection requirements. The consistency to this core investments, the consistency to this principle was also applicability of the GoI / principle was ensured in the Program GoK’s legal is only to the confirmed. design. activities in the river stretches. These activities have only low and moderate impacts, and hence not a focus of the legal framework. In relation to civil works, there are procedural requirements to make the contractor responsible for obtaining consents from the SPCB or permissions for tree-cutting, if any, from the Forest Department. The consistency with Core Principle #1 was confirmed. SOCIAL ASSESSMENT The sector institutions/ The operations under Since the AF envisages The project will The proposed While water resources departments have low social the AF will not support physical works along the exclude investments investments are of the Pamba Basin are capacities primarily owing activities that may coast and river basins, that may lead to envisaged to have contested between 87 Core Principle #1 Core Principle #2 Core Principle #3 Core Principle #4 Core Principle #5 Core Principle #6 to their technical focus and have an impact on the there is need for increased physical or economic positive impacts on STs governments of Kerala limited community religious or cultural supervision on complete displacement of and also other and Tamil Nadu (under interface. Given, that the AF resources of adherence to and communities or vulnerable groups such litigation), program will focus on both hard and communities. application of the individuals. as SC/Women, elderly investments are aimed soft solutions along the coast regulatory systems for and persons with at improved resource and river basin, some worker and labour However, it is felt that disabilities. However, utilisation and requiring fairly significant management. Building to manage livelihood additional measures efficiency and are not construction/embankment And Other Construction impacts triggered by will be supported to creating additional and repair works, these Workers (Regulation project investments, ensure strong demands on the water capacities need to be of Employment and additional measures community support and resources; hence are enhanced. Conditions of Service) Act will need to be consent on all not likely to lead to or 1996 and Kerala Rules, adopted as current coastal/river basin exacerbate social or The ESSA finds the potential 1998. focus on these issues is management measures. resource conflicts / risks to be ranging from In addition, it is proposed found to be low. For For this purpose, it is disputes. moderate to substantial and to include labour sites where there is proposed that recommends the state level management and safety temporary relocation departments bolster institutions/ systems to provisions in the bid / envisaged, social their capacities and ensure engagement of contract documents that screening reports will staffing or engage additional staff/consultants the respective form the basis of NGOs/CBOs to capture and creation of clear Departments – having preparation of a people’s needs and institutional mechanisms to civil works – for comprehensive plan include them in the assess and manage these procurement of to ensure that specific basin level plans. social risks and impacts, contractors. The mitigation measures ensure citizen’s engagement provisions will be made are evolved. State systems & and participatory part of agreements with Importantly, in sites established practices approaches for contractors and will be where temporary are expected to ensure shoreline/river basin monitored. This will livelihood impacts are transparency and planning and transparency include establishment of a envisaged, it is accountability in through disclosures and grievance mechanism for proposed that specific preparation of RBP and information sharing. workers, including on efforts are made to SMP. protection against Gender ensure that all the key Although the state has an Based Violence and Sexual safety net programs There is however risk of effective central level GRM, Exploitation and Abuse. and assistance are exclusion of the voices the ESSA finds that there is accessed by the and perspectives of currently data on project- affected communities. vulnerable fishing related grievances is not Ensuring awareness communities, including available or documented. on and linkages with in land fishing 88 Core Principle #1 Core Principle #2 Core Principle #3 Core Principle #4 Core Principle #5 Core Principle #6 This makes monitoring the programs supported communities, small and effectiveness, accessibility, by the Fisheries marginal farmers & and transparency of the department through women from RBP and GRM difficult. Thus is its Society for SMP processes, which proposed a project-level is Assistance to may lead to non- established GRM to ensure a Fisherwomen and the application of the more efficient redress of Matsyafed principles of equity in complaints. Federations under the allocation decided Kerala State Co- for inter se distribution operative Federation of basin level water for Fisheries resources or in Development will identification of access ensure there is some points to sea/river livelihood when construction of opportunities tapped sea walls or for affected embankments takes communities. place. Site-specific mitigation measures will ensure these adverse impacts are avoided. 89 9 Overall Findings and Recommendations This section summarises key findings of the ESSA and then defines key areas for focus and recommendations for the AF PforR. 9.1 Environmental assessment findings The following are the highlights of the findings of this ESSA Addendum: • The AF PforR activities, particularly the institutional development (SMP) have the potential to deliver significant environmental benefits. These have the potential to deliver long-term solutions, and can be enhanced and sustained through strengthening of the environmental systems as an integral part. • All the AF PforR activities related to coastal protection investments fall under the purview of regulatory systems, i.e. CRZ and Environmental Clearance. These clearances through the DoECC and its associated authority such as KCZMA, SEIAA and SWAK will have to be obtained. Further, when civil works are carried out the contractor will need to get consents from the SPCB as required. These are simple, standard and well-established regulatory requirements. The implementing departments and the agencies have the capacity and systems to ensure that these are adhered. • For the planning and designing the coastal protection investments, GoK has engaged expert agencies such as the National Centre for Coastal Research (NCCR), Chennai and Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras to guide the implementing agencies / departments / organizations and confirm the appropriateness of the technical solutions using location-specific research and analysis. GoK is already ensuring that the technical designs of these coastal protection investments are based on the various scientific studies related to the shoreline dynamics. The current systems and approach are good practice. In this context, the environmental systems will need to be improved through (i) increasing the involvement of the local community in the planning & design of the proposed coastal protection solution; and (ii) streamlining the monitoring and progress reporting, and taking corrective & preventive action based on the monitoring. This strengthening will have to be done by the implementing departments / agencies with support from the RKI Secretariat. • The AF PforR activities will have localized, reversible and minor environmental impacts during the construction phase. These impacts are not within eco-sensitive or culturally sensitive areas. Some of these impacts are relevant to worker and public safety as well. All of these can be mitigated through management measures for which the departments (WRD and HED) and agencies (KIIDC and KSCADC) have the required capacity. There are some gaps for which recommendations for strengthening systems have been made in the Program Action Plan • There are certain coastal stretches that require only a hard physical infrastructure solution, whereas there are other stretches that have adopt a hybrid of nature-based and physical infrastructure solutions. Wherever feasible, GoK proposes to the use nature-based solutions or hybrid solutions (mix of nature-based and physical infrastructure and beach nourishment). However, the nature of the coast is such that the potential for such innovative solutions appears relatively limited. Nevertheless, GoK proposes to examine further. • The SMP by itself is intended to deliver positive environmental benefits. This should necessarily build on the plethora of studies available on the Kerala coast. Given the implications of climate change and the number of changes along the Kerala coast, it is important to periodically update the plan to keep it relevant. It is also important to establish appropriate institutional mechanisms and that should be a focus alongside the technical solutions from the very commencement of SMP preparation. Based on the review of the portfolio of AF PforR activities, it is clear that (i) the already identified coastal protection investments have been chosen keeping in view that the environmental impacts will be minor, e.g. no critical erosion protection works in the vicinity of eco-sensitive areas or cultural heritage locations; (ii) the coastal protection and disaster recovery works to be identified will necessarily adhere to the guideline that is consistent with the Bank’s PforR eligibility for financing; and (iii) the existing systems with some strengthening will be able to address the low-to-moderate environmental impacts / risks associated with the AF PforR. Though the legal framework and institutional systems are well-established, the nature of the coastal protection investments is such that careful environmental management oversight is required to ensure the appropriate designs are selected, construction management on EHS issues is executed responsibly and monitoring during the operational phase is carried out. Non- adherence to these systems has the potential to significant substantive environmental impacts. The environmental risk rating is substantial without the strengthened environmental management systems. With the implementing department / agencies’ existing capacity, regulatory compliance systems and strengthening of institutional systems through the AF PforR, the residual risk is moderate. In specific, the strengthening will include diligent environmental screening Annex 1, upfront community involvement in all activities, enhanced EIA requirements, periodic competence-building training, and improvement of monitoring & reporting through additional environmental staff capacity in both the implementing departments / agencies and the RKI Secretariat. 9.2 Recommendations on environmental aspects Based on the above findings, the ESSA Addendum has made the following recommendations, which are to be considered as inputs to the Program Action Plan. Key Recommendations with responsibilities and timelines No. Institution / Description Timeline Indicator for agency completion E1 WRD, HED Assigning responsibilities on 6 months Evidence of and agencies environmental management to from project responsibility specific Assistant Executive effectiveness assignment Engineers and Assistant Engineers E2 RKI Strengthening of the 6 months Evidence of Secretariat Environmental Team to from project responsibility support Coastal Mission effectiveness assignment 91 No. Institution / Description Timeline Indicator for agency completion Directorate and the additional coordination activities. E3 RKI Finalizing the draft 3 months Evidence of Secretariat / environmental screening from project the final WRD / HED / checklist and criteria for effectiveness environmental Implementing inclusion under the AF PfoR screening agencies / checklist and Department of criteria Environment E4 RKI Developing the Terms of 6 months Evidence of Secretariat Reference (ToR) for conducting from project the ToR and the EIA (emphasizing on effectiveness EHS consultations and disclosure) Guidelines. and preparing ESMPs for the coastal protection works Developing EHS guidelines for the disaster-related recovery works along the river stretches E5 RKI Developing relevant Throughout Evidence of Secretariat environmental content in the the project training training and capacity building period conducted pertaining to coastal protection (Orientation + that includes investments and SMP. Conduct Refresher) environmental such training for content mainstreaming environmental considerations. E6 RKI Facilitating a regular dialogue Throughout Evidence of Secretariat & between the DoECC and the the project the periodic DoECC WRD, HED and associated period meetings agencies to enable a two-way facilitating the capacity-building on coastal dialogue, erosion, protection and SMP discussions issues. and field visits E7 RKI Monitor and report the Quarterly and Evidence of Secretariat progress on environmental throughout the periodic performance of the AF PforR the project reports activities as a part of the overall period reporting 9.3 Social Assessment Findings The investments proposed under the AF envisage a range of critical interventions that the affected coastal communities and communities along fragile river basins, are in urgent need of. All key investments will have significant positive impacts on the affected 92 communities, especially the vulnerable groups, including women, fisher-folk community and the SC/ST communities. It is felt that many interventions allow a shift from ‘do no harm’ to an ‘enhancing social and gender impacts’ approach. The AF PforR activities, particularly Shoreline Management Plan have the potential to deliver significant social and gender benefits. These have the potential to deliver long-term solutions, and can be enhanced and sustained through strengthening of the environmental systems as an integral part. However, there are likely to be significant social risks on the affected communities ranging from temporary relocation, impacts on livelihoods, exposure to gender-based violence for women and girls, increased workload and drudgery of women. Thus, the ESSA team’s approach has been to highlight in detail all possible social risks with the aim of ensuring there is full preparedness by the implementing departments and sufficient time to evolve strong mitigation and management measures. Overall, the assessment of social systems shows that while state institutions and functionaries have reasonable understanding of the importance of mitigation of social risks and impacts, the experience in engaging with communities is limited and this affects their overall capacity to for social management and implementation of mitigation measures. The Water Resources Department district staff have regular interface with communities doing construction works, but the department is not engaging with the communities in seeking their feedback and for evolving appropriate measures. The Harbour Engineering Department undertakes relevant infrastructure development and is cognizant of the need to have a greater understanding of social management issues. But they have limited staff within the institutional structure to address social risks and concerns. Fisheries Department, expectedly, has greater engagement with communities and their programs are seen as providing important assistance to the fisher-folk community. It is important that sector institutions need to strengthen their capacities to undertake a deeper assessment to identify the vulnerable constituencies of their respective sectors/ sub-sectors and ensure their participation or at least a wider consultation for inclusion of their needs in these plans. This requires reach of the participating departments to prepare specific sector strategies to strengthen the role of women, tribal and fishing communities or migrants as primary benefactors, as they are the most vulnerable to disaster/ climate/ health events and may need to be provided a distinct voice and agency through the participatory planning and decision-making process. The institutional assessment points to areas for increased capacity development, but more critically of the need for putting in place specific institutional mechanisms through dedicated staff to focus on social issues in a timely manner and to ensure effective implementation and monitoring of mitigation measures. Kerala has a well-functioning central Grievance Redressal Mechanism, through the Chief Minister's Portal, which is widely advertised and a widely used mechanism for citizens to lodge their grievances. Our consultations have also shown that at the district level, the district administrative staff, along with representatives from departments address these complaints on a bi-monthly basis or as is required based on nature or urgency of grievance. At the community level, the more accessible option is that of lodging complaints directly with the local self-governments (Panchayats or Urban Local Bodies) 93 through local ward members who have regular interface with community. However, there is need for more routine oversight of the project-related grievances and their redressal and the assessment points to defining a more project-focused grievance redressal mechanism. The mechanisms for citizen’s engagement need greater strengthening as most of the implementation departments are focused on engineering and infrastructure development interventions. There is minimal engagement with civil society organizations Under recommendations, this is one of the areas that has been prioritized through some innovative solutions such as establishing or strengthening of community- based organizations to further strengthen the Panchayat and community interface. 9.4 Recommendations on social aspects Coastal erosion and climate change require strong technical and scientific solutions. And yet, what will make these solutions work are strong systems, institutions and the people who are at the very helm of impacts of climate change and natural disasters. With high levels of literacy, awareness and the strongest local self-governance institutions, Kerala can be a strong example of inclusive solutions to coastal protection programs and climate change adaptation. The recommendations have been made keeping in mind the immediate requirements of the project which need to ensure that all social risks are identified and mitigated, but are also aimed at supporting the longer-term activities such as shoreline management plan which allow greater scope for enhancing gender and social inclusion impacts for the most vulnerable communities. In sync with the overall parent PforR and AF to strengthen state’s systems and capacities, the recommendations focus on building strong institutional mechanisms and capacities of the implementing departments to assess and manage social risks and enhance social/gender impacts. 1 Establishing institutional mechanisms for implementing and monitoring social and gender risk mitigation measures at the state, sector and district levels. The proposed investments under the AF are likely to have substantial social impacts and therefore it is proposed that a specific institutional mechanism is evolved at the PMU and in each of the implementing departments/agencies. For WRD, which is one of the most implementing departments, it is proposed that there is recruitment of Social Officers for all nine districts. The works that are to be undertaken by the WRD will require awareness, support and cooperation of the community. There needs to be complete transparency on the nature and duration of inconveniences likely to be caused during the constructions and repair works. While the Panchayats play an important link between departments and their communities, in order to ensure there is direct information and communications, it is expected that a dedicated cadre to look at gender and social issues will be an effective strategy. 2 Social Screening Reports to be prepared for all sites prior to commencement of works. These to be consolidated into a Social Assessment Report highlighting risks as well as mitigation measures. While all proposed investments are aimed at increasing the environmental and social benefits for the affected communities, including for all vulnerable groups, it is important 94 to undertake social risk screening and prepare site-specific social screening reports. The site visits currently show the critical situation of households with high proximity of households to the coast/river basins. Given that departments currently do not have social staff, for the initial period, it is proposed to engage a qualified and reputed agency to help in carrying out the social screening across all selected sites prior to commencement of works. The agency selected should have prior experience of conducting social assessments. It is important to note that only environment impact assessment is not sufficient to engage the agency as assessment of social and gender issues requires deep understanding of community and their social and cultural contexts. More importantly, it is important to ensure that the findings from these social screening reports are binding for the relevant departments to incorporate in their site plans where works are envisaged. Finally, the social screening reports should become part of regular monitoring and the actions on these should be reported both at the department level and at the RKI Secretariat. A framework for comprehensive social screening has been provided in Annex 3 and it is recommended that these are modified and finalized in the form of screening tools for all implementing departments. 3 Comprehensive planning for relocation and temporary relief measures that incorporates gender concerns is critical While the sites with large-scale relocation and resettlement (social screening of each site to be done) will be excluded, it is recommended that for each of the sites where there is likelihood of temporary relocation of affected families that proper planning for relocation to relief shelters is undertaken. These plans will be evolved in coordination with the Local Self-Governance Department (LSGD) and the Revenue Departments who are entrusted with managing the relief efforts. The following are some of the broad points to keep in mind: • Identification of appropriate shelters, other than schools that are currently used during flooding as these provide the most spacious and sturdy options. However, any relocation caused by project-related construction or repair work cannot be allowed to use schools that can affect education of children and their safety • Community consent for relocation/relief shelter site, especially women and persons with disabilities • Engage civil society representatives for the oversight of the relief shelters as well as to provide any psycho-social counseling and support. 4 Strengthen or establish Community Based Organizations for oversight and community participation in coastal protection works and shoreline management planning Given the possibility of substantial social risks and impacts, it is proposed to explore the engagement and strengthening of existing CBOs such as Water User Associations where present, women’s groups such as Theeramythri groups promoted under the Fisheries Department, or where absent, on a pilot basis work with Panchayats to establish CBOs for their participation and oversight over proposed investments under AF. This requires an assessment of the existing focus of the CBOs, their organizational constitution/membership especially to assess if inclusion of vulnerable groups and women is there, their organizational maturity to gauge their potential to input into 95 development of effective community-based solutions and recommendations to enhance social and gender impacts. 5 Stronger and Dedicated Project-Specific Grievance Redressal Mechanism The state has a reasonably functioning, centralized Grievance Redressal Mechanism (Chief Minister’s Portal) in place that most citizens rely on for giving feedback to departments and government agencies. Although some departments like LSGD have their own GRMs there is a need to have a more robust, accountable, transparent GRM that is specific to the current operation and its investments. Given the assessment under the ESSA Addendum that there is a gap in any record or documentation on how project level grievances are being logged in and redressed, the proposed action under Parent PforR ESSA to undertake a ‘as is’ assessment of the existing department-level mechanisms and to understand how grievances that are logged in to the central system are channeled to the respective departments and to RKI is re-emphasized. A project specific GRM allows closer monitoring and tracking of program specific grievances that will help in refining the sector strategies and better tracking of inclusion, outreach benefits under the project investments. It is proposed that the GRM is simple to use and has multiple offline and online access options. Once in place, the PMU must ensure periodic clustering/ categorization and analysis of complaints to identify the problem areas, provide feedback to the concerned duty bearers and loop the feedback to inform the program strategies and for systems improvement. 6 Ensuring the shoreline management plan is informed by key social, gender downstream risks and impacts The SMP preparation for the State is an opportunity to be a highly participatory and inclusive process that ensures all possible downstream social and environmental risks are assessed and there are adequate mitigation measures as well as specific proposed strategies to enhance positive environment and social impacts for the communities. At the same time, the SMP should focus on areas which can be supported under the P4R, financing instrument to avoid any high-risk interventions and downstream impacts of SMP implementation. • Establishment of a multi-stakeholder State Advisory Group/Consortium to lead the SMP preparation: This must include a wide range of stakeholders from government, civil society, academic, research and private sectors. The idea is to ensure there is strong and adequate focus on social and gender concerns of affected communities from the very beginning of the planning process. • Community engagement to ensure SMP fully incorporates their perspectives and suggestions. It is recommended to explore establishment/strengthening of existing systems that build ownership among the key socially excluded groups and women for shoreline protection and management initiatives. This will ensure their support as well as leadership on various nature-based solutions that have lasting positive social and environmental impacts. There are diverse groups along the coast of Kerala and it should be ensured that all these groups are consulted with. Thus, apart from fisher-folk communities, it is important to ensure that all communities such as 96 farmers, artisans, migrants and those in other coastal-related livelihood activities are also engaged. • Stronger and more focused role of the Local Self Governance Institutions. The parent PforR has strong roles for Panchayats and ULBs through the incorporation of climate resilience in master plans and disaster preparedness plans. This needs to be strengthened by ensuring that there is capacity enhancement of these institutions on social and environmental concerns with regards to coastal protection and management. Panchayats will play a critical role in ensuring community engagement and support as well as help the implementing departments hold regular and informed community consultations. The Kerala Institute of Local Administration has been playing a pivotal role in building capacities of the Panchayats and facilitating inclusive planning processes. Their engagement can be further explored to include helping the process on increased awareness raising and defining roles and responsibilities of the Panchayats and ULBs on shoreline management and to further transfer this knowledge to affected communities. • Undertake a comprehensive Social Inclusion and Gender Assessment as part of SMP preparation process. This could lay the ground for women-focused pilot programs under the project. Departments such as Fisheries with their focus on livelihoods for small-holder fish farmers and women could be potential partners. The role of civil society organizations and subject matter experts, in particular those with strong experience of working with vulnerable groups, coastal communities and women will be critical to ensure this assessment is robust and comprehensive. The shoreline management plan needs to take into consideration the livelihood related challenges of vulnerable communities, especially women. Moreover, women not only from fisher-folk community, but other coastal communities need to be consulted with and engaged. Annex 5 outlines a broad gender analysis framework • Establishing/strengthening existing Community Based Organisations to ensure community ownership and input into shoreline management plan. The ESSA finds that the key implementing agencies do not have strong systems in place for citizen engagement. The Water User Associations under the WRD are at a nascent stage but in some sites there is community participation in irrigation programs and can be further strengthened through sustained awareness and capacity building efforts. The support from Panchayats to ensure mobilisation of community, especially vulnerable groups to ensure their representation in these CBOs needs to be ensured. Under the Fisheries department, women’s groups called Theeramythri can be engaged for this purpose. The Matsyafed Bhavanas also allow for closer engagement with fish farmers and can ensure their increased participation. • Greater synergy and convergence between all related departments and agencies who can contribute to coastal protection and management. The AF PforR proposes to create a Coastal Directorate apart from working with WRD for SMP. However, given the critical importance of this activity, it must be ensured that all key departments are engaged to into this process and ensure the concerns and priorities of affected communities are integrated. For example, department of Fisheries is a critical stakeholder. 97 • Bringing in national, regional and global good practices on social risk mitigation and management. The SMP should build on all good practices and knowledge on how coastal protection programs have addressed social risks and enhanced impacts for affected communities. It is proposed that knowledge management and sharing is a core part of the SMP process through engagement with subject matter experts, especially to bring in expertise on how to ensure SMP is community centric. 7 GBV Mitigation Plan to prevent and respond to instances of GBV Increasingly there is national and global data that shows that recurring disasters and climate change increases gender discrimination, including increase in gender-based violence, thereby undoing critical empowerment outcomes from development efforts. Displacement can exacerbate violence as women staying in shelters, camps or temporary settlements are at increased risk of rape, sexual harassment, and other forms of violence due to the lack of physical security, as well as the lack of safe and accessible infrastructure and services.6 Moreover, State’s own data shows lower human development indicators, including literacy, health and nutrition indicators as well as their interface with public institutions reflected in poorer access to services, access to safety net entitlements, and lack of health and sanitation services and practices. The AF envisaged construction works in some highly fragile sites which have been affected by flooding, sea attacks, coastal and river basin erosion. It is proposed to engage wider stakeholders such as Department of Women and Child Development, Planning Board, Police Department, Local Self- Governance Department and Civil Society Organizations to evolve a GBV Mitigation Plan focused on coastal districts. The preparation of such as plan will require an assessment of current effective state mechanisms on GBV in these areas, but also equally focus on greater community awareness, especially legal and other psycho-social support for women. Key Recommendations with responsibilities and timelines No. Institution / Description Timeline Indicator for agency completion S1 WRD Appointment of Social 6 months from Recruitment of Officers across all project Social Officers districts effectiveness S2 HED Nominate staff for 6 months from Staff additional social and project nominated for gender effectiveness additional responsibilities/or focus on social engage social and and gender gender consultants concerns reflected in Job Descriptions S3 RKI Secretariat Strengthening of the 3 months from All social Social Team to include project officers are additional social effectiveness recruited with officers/consultants to 6 https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/2022-03/Tackling-violence-against-women-and-girls-in-the- context-of-climate-change-en.pdf 98 No. Institution / Description Timeline Indicator for agency completion support Coastal Mission clear job Directorate and the descriptions additional coordination activities. S3 RKI Secretariat Finalizing the draft 3 months from Social / WRD / HED / social screening project screening Implementing checklist and criteria for effectiveness checklist and agencies inclusion under the AF criteria are PfoR finalized 3-6 months, but prior to Site-specific Prepare social commencement social screening reports for of works screening each site before reports are commencement of prepared to works ensure no site requiring land acquisition/ and physical displacement of affected persons is selected S4 RKI Secretariat Consolidate all social 6-12 months Consolidated / WRD / HED / screening reports to Social Implementing prepare a Assessment agencies comprehensive Social and Enhancing Assessment and Social Impact Enhancing Social Report Impacts report S4 RKI Secretariat Clearly define a project 6 months from Grievance level Grievance project Mechanism is Redressal Mechanism effectiveness established with clearly established linkages with existing Quarterly central and state report on mechanisms to ensure grievances routine logging of received and project-related redressed are grievances and being prepared redressal process and timelines 99 No. Institution / Description Timeline Indicator for agency completion S5 WRD/HED Strengthen or establish Can be tried on To be evolved Community Based a pilot basis in as a good Organizations for select sites practice with oversight and support from community World Bank participation in coastal protection works and shoreline management (Where existing CBOs are there, preferable women’s groups such as Theeramythri groups, this can be a reassessment of their existing focus, organizational maturity) S6 RKI/WRD/HED Initiate capacity Within one year Training building for Panchayats of project sessions for and ULBs on coastal commencement Panchayats protection and and ULBs shoreline management and define their roles Roles and and responsibilities to responsibilities support project defined for planning and Panchayats implementation and ULBs S7 RKI Secretariat Gender Based Violence Within one GBV Mitigation with support of Mitigation Plan to avoid years of project Plan WCD and NGOs instances of GBV and commencement also ensure redressal mechanisms S8 RKI Secretariat Developing of social and Throughout the Training gender modules for project period modules training and orientation (Orientation + prepared of social staff in Refresher) incorporating participating good practices departments on social and gender risk mitigation S9 RKI Secretariat Social Inclusion and Year 2 Social Gender Assessment for Inclusion and input into Shoreline Gender Management Plan (a Assessment participatory and Report consultative 100 No. Institution / Description Timeline Indicator for agency completion assessment lead by subject matter experts/NGOs/research organization) S10 RKI Secretariat Monitor and report the Quarterly and Quarterly progress on social throughout the Social Progress inclusion and gender project period Reports performance of the AF PforR activities as a part of the overall reporting 101 10 Program Exclusions 10.1 Environmental aspects Under the Policy, activities that are “judged to be likely to have significant adverse impacts that are sensitive, diverse, or unprecedented on the environment and/or affected people are not eligible for financing and are excluded from the Program.” More specifically, PforR financing should not be used to support programs, or activities within programs, that in the Bank’s opinion involve the following: • Significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats or critical cultural heritage sites; • Air, water, or soil contamination leading to significant adverse impacts on the health or safety of individuals, communities, or ecosystems; • Workplace conditions that expose workers to significant risks to health and personal safety; • Large-scale changes in land use or access to land and/or natural resources; • Adverse E&S impacts covering large geographical areas, including trans-boundary impacts, or global impacts such as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; • Significant cumulative, induced, or indirect impacts; 10.2 Social aspects The following activities are proposed to be excluded from the current investments: • Considering the nature of operations (PforR), any repair and maintenance works requiring land acquisition and large-scale physical resettlement of affected persons and removal of structures will be excluded from the list of investments. • Sites where works require long periods of temporary relocation of affected communities should be avoided. • Schools as sites of temporary relief shelters due to project-related constructions or repair works will not be permitted. (Due to recurring disasters/flooding, children’s education has already suffered as schools have been the preferred sites to function as relief centres) 102 11 Program Action Plan (PAP) 11.1 Environmental aspects 11.1.1 Inputs to the PAP As indicated in the earlier Chapter 9, these are the key recommendations, which are repeated here in the following table for easy reference. No. Institution / Description Timeline Indicator for agency completion E1 WRD, HED and Assigning and retaining 6 months from Evidence of agencies responsibilities on environmental project responsibility management to specific Assistant effectiveness assignment Executive Engineers and Assistant Engineers E2 RKI Secretariat Strengthening and continuation of the 6 months from Evidence of Environmental Team to support project responsibility Coastal Mission Directorate and the effectiveness assignment additional coordination activities. E3 RKI Secretariat / Finalizing the draft environmental 3 months from Evidence of the WRD / HED / screening checklist and criteria for project final Implementing inclusion under the AF PforR and effectiveness environmental agencies / administering its use consistently. screening Department of checklist and Environment criteria E4 RKI Secretariat Developing the Terms of Reference 6 months from Evidence of the (ToR) for conducting the EIA project ToR and EHS (emphasizing on consultations and effectiveness Guidelines. disclosure) and preparing ESMPs for the coastal protection works; and adopting its use Developing EHS guidelines for the disaster-related recovery works along the river stretches and using the same. E5 RKI Secretariat Developing relevant environmental Throughout the Evidence of content in the training and capacity project period training building pertaining to coastal (Orientation + conducted that protection investments and SMP. Refresher) includes Conducting such training for environmental mainstreaming environmental content considerations on an ongoing basis E6 RKI Secretariat & Facilitating a regular dialogue Throughout the Evidence of the DoECC between the DoECC and the WRD, project period periodic HED and associated agencies to meetings enable a two-way capacity-building facilitating the on coastal erosion, protection and dialogue, SMP issues. discussions and field visits 103 E7 RKI Secretariat Monitoring and reporting the Quarterly and Evidence of the progress on environmental throughout the periodic reports performance of the AF PforR activities project period 11.1.2 Implementation Support Plan The Bank’s AF PforR focuses on institutional development by preparing a Shoreline Management Plan (SMP), coastal protection investments and works pertaining to disaster recovery of river stretches. Of these, the Bank’s implementation support should focus largely on further building the environmental management capacity as a part of the preparation of the SMP. With regard to the investments, the Bank’s implementation support should review and supervise (i) compliance to legal and regulatory requirements, (ii) contractual requirements and (iii) good EHS practices so that all environmental and social risks are effectively managed. 11.2 Social aspects No. Action Description Responsibility Task and Timeline Completion Measurement 1. Establishing an RKI/PMU and Year 1: Completion of recruitment IVA institutional structure for implementing and deployment, where required addressing social risks institutions (WRD • Preparation of ToRs for key and mitigation measures and HED) social positions in RKI-PMU & under the AF other key sector institutions; capacity building modules finalized • Recruitment of Social Officers for 9 districts in WRD • HED to designate staff with additional responsibilities on social risk mitigation • Coastal Management Directorate to have a Senior Social and Gender Specialist and a cadre of Social and Gender Officers Year 2 onwards: regular training of functionaries on different aspects of social management and gender. 104 No. Action Description Responsibility Task and Timeline Completion Measurement 2 2.1 Prepare a Social RKI with Year 1: Social Screening of all sites IVA and Aide Assessment report using WRD/HED/Coasta is completed and consolidated Memoires site specific social l Management into a Social Assessment Report screening reports to Directorate define clearly all social risks that are likely to arise from proposed investments Year 1-2: Relocation and 2.2 Prepare Relocation Livelihood Restoration Plans and Livelihood prepared for all sites where such Restoration Plan for sites impacts are expected as identified where temporary under social screening reports relocation and livelihood impacts are expected 3 3.1 Establish clear project RKI and key Year 1: Define a project level GRM IVA level GRM to ensure departments for Regularly analyze and track timely redress of all each sector grievances to inform the program project-specific based on assessment of existing grievances systems & requirement for developing common GRM for RKP proposed under previous ESSA Year 2 (end): A review/stock-take report to assess effective functioning of the GRM 3.2 Prepare a GBV Mitigation Plan with a Year 2: A GBV specific Action Plan GRM to report Gender and GRM is in place Based Violence/Sexual Exploitation and Abuse/Sexual Harassment 4. Establish a multi- RKI Year 1: Advisory Group is Aide Memoire stakeholder state established advisory group to ensure Year 2-3: Stakeholder social and gender aspects Consultations on addressing integration into the social and gender impacts under preparation of Shoreline SMP Management Plan 105 Annex 1 Environmental screening form and criteria – Draft Screening Form for the implementing agency (WRD / HED / Other Agencies such as KIIDC and KSCADC) to submit to RKI Secretariat General 1. Site Name: 2. Site Type (Coastal / Riverbank): 1. Site Latitude and Longitude: 2. Type of proposed intervention (Only physical infrastructure / Only nature-based solutions or hybrid): 3. Brief description of proposed intervention (Coastal protection – Sea walls / groynes / nature-based solutions and /or hybrid solutions; River stretches: Debris removal bank strengthening / others): 4. Cost estimate of proposed intervention (Rs. Lakhs): Site location screening 5. Is the location in or near a Ramsar or nationally declared or state declared wetland? If yes, what is the distance (Onsite / 0-2 km / 2-5 km / Beyond)? 6. Is the location in or near coastal mangroves? If yes, what is the extent within or the distance (Onsite / 0-2 km / 2-5 km / Beyond)? 7. Is the location in or near forest areas? If yes, what is the extent within or the distance (Onsite / 0-2 km / 2-5 km / Beyond)? 8. Is the location in or near marine ecosystems? If yes, what is the extent within or the distance (Onsite / 0-2 km / 2-5 km / Beyond)? 9. Is the location in or near physical cultural properties (old forts, temples, mosques and churches)? What is the distance to the nearest physical cultural properties (Onsite / 0-2 km / 2-5 km / Beyond)? Physical Impacts screening 10. Please rate the following impacts as Low / moderate / high: • Air pollution: • Noise pollution: 106 • Water pollution / turbidity [Note: Low: Small-sized investment => less air / noise pollution / water turbidity impacts during construction; Moderate: Medium-sized investment => more air / noise / water turbidity impacts] 11. Please rate the construction safety impacts (Low / moderate). [Note: Low: Less population density => limited construction safety impacts; Moderate: Heavy population density => safety impacts will be more for both the worker and the community.] Regulatory compliance For coastal protection works7 12. Which Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) does the site fall under (CRZ 1 or 2 or 3 or 4)? 13. Has the DoECC / KCZMA been consulted to check for CRZ and Environmental clearance requirements (Yes / No)? 14. Briefly describe the DoECC / KCZMA requirements for obtaining the CRZ and Environmental clearance requirements. 15. Indicate the expected timeline for preparing the documents required for obtaining the MoEFCC clearance and getting the clearance on hand. (Month / year). For river basin works 16. Has the DoECC been consulted to check for environmental clearance requirements such as those under the Wetland Rules (Yes / No)? 17. If clearance is required, briefly describe the requirements for obtaining the same. Submitted by Received by Name: Name: Department: RKI Secretariat Date: Date 7 Note: all interventions in the coastal stretches require the CRZ clearance (either at the state-level or at the central-level) as per CRZ Notification 2011. 107 Environmental Criteria for the RKI Secretariat to verify Initial Stage – Eligibility under the PforR 1. RKI Secretariat will verifying against the PforR exclusion criteria using the following rules: No. Environmental Attribute Eligibility 1 Significant conversion or degradation of critical If Q12 is CRZ 1, Not natural habitats eligible. If Q5-8 is onsite, Not eligible. 2 Significant conversion or degradation of critical If Q9 is onsite, not eligible. cultural heritage sites 3 Air, water, or soil contamination leading to If Q10 is high, not eligible significant adverse impacts 4 Workplace conditions that expose workers and If Q11 is high, not eligible to significant risks 5 Significant cumulative, induced, or indirect If either Q10 and Q11 is impacts; moderate, not eligible Prior to contract bidding stage 2. Have the stakeholder consultations been done with the beneficiary community and other affected communities (e.g. near the construction camp)? Have these consultations been documented? Has the feedback been integrated with the design of the solutions and the environmental and social management plan? If yes, proceed to the next question. If no, reject the request to go to bidding stage. 3. Has the environmental or CRZ or both clearances, as applicable, been obtained from the regulatory authority (Yes / No)? If yes, proceed to the next question. If no, reject the request to go to bidding stage. 4. Has the environmental and social management plan been integrated with the bid documents as special conditions? If yes, accept the request for bidding. If no, reject the request for bidding. 5. Does the environmental and social management mitigate so that the residual risks are low or moderate? Check using the following table No. Environmental Attribute ESMP Adequacy 1 Air, water, or soil contamination leading to If yes, accept the request significant adverse impacts. If Q12 is high, have for bidding. If not, reject. mitigation measures been included? 2 Workplace conditions that expose workers and If yes, accept the request community to significant risks If Q13 is high, for bidding. If not, reject. have mitigation measures been included? 3 Significant cumulative, induced, or indirect If yes, accept the request impacts. If both between Q12 and Q13 are high for bidding. If not, reject. 108 No. Environmental Attribute ESMP Adequacy or moderate, have mitigation measures been included to address the cumulative impacts? During implementation 6. Any adverse community complaints or media reports on significant environmental concerns will be temporarily suspended till corrective and preventive action is taken by the contractor and the implementing department / agency. 109 Annex 2: Procedure for obtaining the Coastal Regulation Zone clearance8 All proposed physical interventions for coastal protection will require to obtain CRZ clearance prior to be considered under the AF PforR. The procedure for CRZ clearance is well-established and is as follows: The following is the checklist of documents / information as these interventions will have to be considered under the CRZ and EIA notifications: • Application form – Form I • Authenticated Building Plan and Site plan • Estimated cost of the Project • Copy of challan remitted as Scrutiny fee based on the project cost • CRZ Status Report prepared by the authorized agencies of MoEFCC • Disaster Management Plan/Risk Assessment Report from Disaster Management Authority • Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) / Rapid Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Report including Environment Management Plan (EMP) by the NABET accredited agency of MoEF&CC • Hydraulic Modeling Report vetted by Centre Water and Power Research Station (CWPRS), Pune for erosion control measures related projects • If the proposed intervention will lead to mangrove destruction, a mangrove afforestation plan prepared by the reputed Institute/Agency. • Consent from Kerala State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB), Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB), Kerala Water Authority (KWA) The following is the sequence of steps for obtaining the CRZ Clearance and/or Environmental Clearance: • Step 1: Submission of application along with above listed documents by the project proponent to the secretary of concerned local body. • Step 2: The secretary of the local body will forward the application to KCZMA. • Step 3: The project proponent shall make a detailed presentation before the KCZMA. • Step 4: KCZMA may approve the proposal and recommend to MoEFCC if only CRZ clearance is required. If environmental clearance is also required, the application will be forwarded to SEIAA. The SEIAA will recommend the proposal to MoEFCC. • Step 5: The Project Proponent shall make a detailed presentation before the Expert Appraisal Committee, MoEFCC and the CRZ/EC or CRZ & EC will be issued. Adapted from the note prepared by the KCZMA. 8 Adapted from the note prepared by the KCZMA. 110 Annex 3 Social Screening Forms and Checklists Social Screening Form for the implementing agency (WRD / HED / Other Special Purpose Organizations) to submit to RKI Secretariat General 1. Site Name: 2. Panchayat and District: 3. Site Type (Coastal / Riverbank): 4. Socio-demographic details: 5. Type of proposed intervention (Only physical infrastructure / Only nature-based solutions or hybrid): 6. Brief description of proposed intervention (Coastal – Sea walls / groynes / nature- based solutions and /or hybrid solutions; River stretches: Debris removal bank strengthening / others): 7. Cost estimate of proposed intervention (Rs. Lakhs): Social Impacts Screening: Site Selection/ Exclusion 1. Based on the type of proposed intervention, what are some of the social risks that are likely to be triggered? 2. Are these risks temporary in nature or irreversible? Specify which ones are temporary and which ones are likely to be irreversible 3. Who are the key groups that are likely to be impacted by the proposed project investments? 4. Which of the above groups are likely to be more significantly impacted and in what ways? Please specify (Eg. Households with maximum proximity to coast/riverbank; SC/ST/Women/Persons with disabilities/Any other) 5. Is the proposed investment likely to lead to loss of lands (private/common property/cultural/religious) for the people? If yes, to what extent? Please provide details 6. Is the proposed investment likely to alter land tenure arrangements and or community-based property rights/customary rights to land, territories or resources? 7. Is the proposed investment likely to physically displace people? 8. Is the proposed investment likely to require temporary relocation of people? If yes, what are the likely numbers and likely duration of relocation? 9. Is the proposed investment likely to impact the livelihoods of people? If yes, specify for what groups and in what ways 111 10. Is the proposed investment likely to affect access to key resources and services for the people, especially the vulnerable and marginalized groups? Which specific services are likely to be affected? 11. Is there a possibility that the proposed intervention in any has adverse impacts on gender equality/women’s safety and security? 12. Is the proposed investment likely to require construction/repair works? What are likely to be the requirements of labour? 13. Where is the site for labour camp? Will this site expose workers to health and safety risks? 14. When was the last time the community faced flooding/any other natural disaster? 15. Were they relocated to relief shelters? Please specify where and what type of relief shelter did they go to? 16. What has been their experience? What went well? What could have been done better? 17. Are there any Community Based Organizations (CBOs)/women’s groups/Self Help Groups active in the site? Please list these out along with their focus areas 18. Are there any ongoing government/donor/civil society lead programs in the site? Please list out with program focus areas. Exclusion: All sites requiring the physical displacement of people, loss of lands and temporary relocation of people in large numbers and for long duration of time are to be excluded. If the answers to Questions 5-8 are yes, these sites will need to be excluded. Submitted by Received by Name: Name: Department: RKI Secretariat Date: Date 112 Social Impacts Screening for Compliance and Monitoring General 1. Site Name: 2. Panchayat and District: 3. Site Type (Coastal / Riverbank): 4. Socio-demographic details: 5. Type of proposed intervention (Only physical infrastructure / Only nature-based solutions or hybrid): 6. Brief description of proposed intervention (Coastal – Sea walls / groynes / nature- based solutions and /or hybrid solutions; River stretches: Debris removal bank strengthening / others): 7. Cost estimate of proposed intervention (Rs. Lakhs): Social Risk Management during Implementation 1. How many households have been affected by the project related construction and repair work? Please list out 2. What are the type of impacts and challenges faced by them? 2.1 Any restrictions to water resources? 2.2 Any impacts on livelihoods? 2.3 Any impacts on access to services and resources? 2.4 Any other inconveniences, especially for women and other vulnerable groups? 2.5 Any impacts on non-titleholders, street vendors and kiosk owners? 2.6 Any others? 3. Are there any specific challenges faced by women? Has it altered their daily routine/workload/mobility/exposure to gender-based violence? 4. Did any households have to relocate? How many? Where have they relocated? How was the relocation managed and by who? Please detail out 5. Were these impacts expected and was the community prepared to face the same? 6. Has the project evolved any mitigation measures to address these challenges? Are these measures being effective? Please provide details 7. Was there a Relocation Plan in place? Was the plan properly implemented? 8. Was the community informed of the type of activities and the duration of the works? 9. Is the community involved in overseeing the works? If yes, in what way? 113 10. How much labour influx is here in the site? Please mention how many migrant workers, women workers. 11. Where is the labour camp? Does it adhere to health, safety and proper living conditions for workers? Are there separate toilets for women? Is there provision for a creche for children of the workers? Is there a complaints register at the site? 12. Has there been any labour related concerns? If yes, please specify. 13. Are there regular supervision visits to monitor the progress of works? By whom? 13.1 Contractors 13.2 Engineers 13.3 Social Officers 13.4 Any other? 14. Is the community aware of who to or how to raise their grievances? 15. Have there been any project related grievances raised by the community? 15.1 What was the grievance? 15.2 Where or to who did they raise this complaint to? 15.3 Has there been a redressal? Please specify the details of action taken on grievance 16. Are there any overall suggestions for improving the project activities? Submitted by Received by Name: Name: Department: RKI Secretariat Date: Date 114 Social Checklist for the RKI Secretariat to verify Social Screening Initial Stage – Eligibility under the PforR RKI Secretariat will verify against the PforR exclusion criteria using the following rules: No. Social Criteria Eligibility 1 Physical displacement of people (including Excluded non-titleholders and squatters) 2. Land acquisition Excluded 3. Voluntary land donation Avoided 2 Temporary relocation of people Avoided 4 Workplace conditions that expose workers to Avoided significant risks 1. Have the stakeholder consultations been done with the beneficiary community and other affected communities (e.g. near the construction site)? Have these consultations been documented? Has the feedback been integrated with the design of the solutions and social management plan? Please mention all relevant information. 2. Has the social screening report for the site been prepared? Were the criteria for inclusion/exclusion properly adhered to? 3. Has the social management plan been integrated with the bid documents/contract document? Are there specific provisions for: 3.1 Regular consultations and information sharing on construction details eg timing with affected community 3.2 Worker safety in construction site 3.3 Labour Camp site working conditions 3.4 Grievance mechanism for host community 3.5 Grievance mechanism for workers During implementation 1. Is the community aware of the implementation activities- their duration, extent of works required? 2. Is the community aware of the grievance mechanism to lodge their complaints with concerns related to the project? With concerns related to the labour related concerns? 3. Are women aware of any grievance mechanism to lodge a complaint on issues of sexual exploitation and abuse? 4. Are there any adverse community complaints or media reports on significant related to the project works on the site? Please specify the complaints. 115 (Note: If yes, works to be suspended till corrective and preventive action is taken by the contractor and the implementing department.) 5. Is the social risk mitigation plan for the site in place? Who is responsible for its monitoring? 6. List out mitigation measures that are in place. 7. Is the community satisfied with this mitigation plan? 8. Are there unintended social risks or concerns triggered by the project activities that need immediate attention and management? Labour Related 9. Does the labour camp site seem safe? Have all social and environmental considerations been adhered to? 9.1 Is there a proper register with all details of workers (disaggregated by gender, migrant/local worker) 9.2 Are there separate toilets for women workers? 9.3 Is there a crèche for children of workers? 10. Are the workers satisfied with their camp site? 11. Do they know the procedure and authority for lodging their complaints? 12. Have there been any complaints so far? How has this been redressed? Who was responsible for redressing? 116 Annex 4 Summary Community Consultation Report9 Kerala has been devastated by a series of natural disasters in the last four years, exacerbated by climate change and human concerns. Extreme climatic phenomena including floods, cloudbursts, cyclones, landslides, coastal erosion, and drought are becoming more common in Kerala, and their negative consequences are most obvious in the environmental and social conditions of coastal populations. Therefore, we need a fair and transparent impact system assessment. The Rebuild Kerala Initiative mainly focuses on building resilience and sustainable ecosystems through risk-informed planning. With support from the World Bank, as a part of PforR funding norms of the project, in its first stage, a social and environmental system assessment (ESSA) has to be conducted in order to understand the gaps in the state system and the capacity of the system. This will ensure efficient planning and utilization of the funds towards planned intervention activities. Even though the initial plan was to consider the Pamba river basin districts as the sole implementation area for the project, at a later stage, a proposal for extending the project to Meenachil and Manimalayar river basins was also taken up. In addition to this, considering the coastal line deterioration and the livelihood condition of the fisherfolks and allied sector, expansion of the project to coastal regions of Kerala is also under consideration. KILA is supporting the World Bank in conducting the ESSA in the extension plan of the project, by organizing consultation at the regional and local levels to mainstream people's participation in the entire planning process for the project. From the consultations it's very clear that the participants have a fair amount of knowledge about climate change, its impact and causes. They were able to relate climate change as the driving force behind all of the devastating events and its severity or frequency in the recent past. socio-economic assessment of climate change impacts among coastal communities is challenging as every issue they are facing are related to the loss in employment and income and shelter which is mainly caused by climate related activities. Since they depend entirely on the marine resources for a living it is highly unlikely that the participants were able to differentiate social issues which they are facing from the social issue caused due to climate change. Overexploitation of marine resources, extreme weather events such as cyclones, floods, heavy rainfall, sea-level rise, unscientific nature of harbor construction, depletion of water bodies, and illegal sand mining are identified as the major environmental hazards. All have an impact on people's livelihood in different ways. Climate change will have a negative impact on agricultural productivity. It is threatening food security at an alarming rate and is clear from the socioeconomic assessment of consultations. Coastal residents are majorly dependent on fishing from the sea. Fish availability has also declined during the past few years. Fish such as mackerel and sardine, which are favorites of Keralites, are largely becoming scarce. As a result of global warming, it seems that the fish are migrating to other regions. The major sea-level rise occurs during monsoon and high tides. They are altering the landforms and destroying natural and man-made structures near coastal areas. In addition to this, most of the area is flooded due to the monsoon and the life of ordinary people becomes a miserable condition. Besides, sand mining has an impact on the coastal terrain and contributes to coastal erosion. Excessive sand mining can alter the river bed, forcing it to change course, eroding banks, and 9 Prepared by Kerala Institute of Local Administration 117 causing flooding. These dangerous activities cause the entire coastal ecosystem to deteriorate. As an example, fish availability has decreased in recent years. The dumping of plastic waste into the water bodies also leads to the diminishing of fish stock. The plastics also leech into the water, degrading the water quality with toxic compounds, and end up harming human and animal health. On the social side, issues with sanitation and hygiene, safe drinking water availability, need for shelter for rehabilitation, unemployment, and coping cavity of vulnerable communities were the major issues that came up in the consultations. Environmental issues associated with river basins such as flooding, pollution, deterioration of riverbanks, deposition of biochemical wastes, construction activities near river banks, soil erosion, etc. The inconsistency in the installation of gully plugs or check dams must be identified and corrected. Gabions are widely used in river basin protection. Therefore, construction and care of gabions are of vital importance to the nature of the water flows. The local self-government bodies and authorities formulate a suitable mechanism to remove the entire barriers to river basins. Importance of an early warning system and weather advisory for the communities were highlighted in the river basin consultations. The abnormal weather calamities hinder the normal rhythm of socio-economic conditions. Huge unemployment and financial loss arise among ordinary farmers and fishermen's families. Within ten years, there has been a decline in the wealth of marine fisheries. The loss of houses and residents, as well as the loss of fishermen's boats and fishing nets, is affecting the livelihoods of those who rely on marine resources. Damage caused to houses, infrastructures, historic monuments, subsistence, and transportation facilities are very huge. The major concerns arose from that; drinking water supply and availability problems, health-related problems caused by poor water supply provisions, the amount spent for treatment during the rainy season due to drinking contaminated or poor-quality water sanitation situation in the households, etc. Climate change has been recognized as the foremost environmental problem and has been a subject of considerable debate and controversy here. Therefore, we require potential mitigation options as well as development of appropriate monitoring tools, especially in the predicted high-risk areas based on assessment of the environment and social impact system. The introduction of geo bags, and pulimuttu (Groyne), the height increase of existing seawalls, sack filling methods and granite barriers, etc are the solutions to achieve coastal protection up to a limit. The consultations had very little traditional solutions to offer. Most of the solutions in the shoreline were focused on scientific construction of ports, harbor and Groyne. 118 Annex 5 Building Equal Spaces and Opportunities for Women in Coastal Management A Gender Analysis for Technical Support When there are adverse impacts for everyone from disasters, coastal erosion and climate change, why is there a need to focus on women? Women are disproportionately impacted by natural disasters and climate change as they are the primary caregivers, responsible for meeting food, fuel and water needs of their families and communities. Moreover, women are more dependent on natural resources for their livelihoods. When these resources become scarce, it is women who find solutions and coping mechanisms, sometimes at the cost of their own health, safety and well-being. Women are the first and most crucial responders to, and therefore, most poised to lead climate change adaptation. Evidence shows they were at the frontline of response to pandemic. In Kerala, women members of Kudumbashree were as badly affected with the recurring floods from 2017 onwards, yet they played a crucial role in communities going back to normalcy. This was again the case during the COVID 19 pandemic. Women-led CBOs rose to the occasion and provided food, created shelter and other basic necessities for households, especially the more vulnerable households. Despite these crucial roles, women are largely left out of decision-making processes in which strategies for coping with climate change are designed. Without a doubt, if they were given greater control over these processes, women would lobby for essential resources for climate change adaptation. And so we must work to Masked up, but not silent…Women talk of the remove restrictions for women to land rights, urgent need to focus on their livelihoods. Fishing lack of access to financial resources, training is giving very low returns and for women who and technology, and limited access to political are engaged in cleaning, shelling, processing activities, this has meant either unpaid work, as decision-making spheres for women to be more they do it for their families, or very poor wages. effective leaders of climate change adaptation. but that’s what their families have done from generations. Community consultations helped highlight the real challenges and difficulties faced by women and girls and helped put a human face to global data on gendered impacts of climate change and disasters. Women and girls’ health and food security are likely to be threatened. Social norms ascribe care-giving roles to women and this makes them responsible for meeting food, fuel and water needs of their families and communities. When these resources become scarce, it is women who find solutions and coping mechanisms, sometimes at the cost of their own health, safety and well-being. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has highlighted that girls and women are also at higher risk of food insecurity than boys and men, are more likely to die in extreme weather events, and are more likely to 119 experience mental health impacts caused by climate change. Women face disproportionately higher health risks from the effects of climate change. Increasingly data is being analyzed to understand the impact of climate change on women’s reproductive and maternal health. With increases in temperature, rainfall, and humidity there is also rise in vector-borne diseases, such as malaria, dengue fever, and Zika virus, which can cause miscarriages, premature birth and among pregnant women.10 Climate change and recurring disasters increase the drudgery and invisibility of women’s work, threatening their livelihoods irreversibly. Community consultations highlighted the fact that before and post relocation processes but increased pressure on women to secure their household items, pack and unpack these items and also ensure the houses are habitable again. While the government support is there for relocation in most places, these activities of women are almost ‘invisible’ to program planners and policy makers. A more serious impact is seen on women’s livelihood activities. With an already low women’s workforce participation, the impacts of climate change can further worsen the situation. Women engaged in fishery sector are suffering firsthand due to the depletion of fish stock and marine resources. Their engagement in fish cleaning, shelling and processing is either unpaid, if done for the family or poorly paid if they are contracted by fishing companies. Women face increased barriers to accessing key services, information and safety net entitlements. While this is also normally true, these barriers are exacerbated during disasters. Women’s lack of financial assets and limited rights to land and property put them at great disadvantage when it comes to post disaster recovery. Moreover, they still do not have full access and control over the safety net payments and entitlements provided by the government, which means the decisions to save or judiciously use these resources are also out of their control. Women and girls face higher risks of child marriage, human trafficking, and gender-based violence due to climate change and natural disasters. Displacement can exacerbate violence as women staying in shelters, camps or temporary settlements are at increased risk of sexual abuse and exploitation and other forms of violence due to the lack of physical security, as well as the lack of safe and accessible infrastructure and services.11 Due to breakdown in regular services and law enforcement many of these concerns go unreported. Even within their homes, as climate change intensifies its impacts on people’s livelihoods and scarcity of resources, it can cause stress and disharmony at home and women could be exposed to domestic violence. The National Family Health Survey 5 has already shown an increased in percent of women reporting having faced gender-based violence. So, what can the Resilient Kerala Program do? The proposed investments provide opportunities for integrating women’s concerns and promote their deeper engagement in coastal protection and management programs. Some key priorities emerge: 10 https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/2022-03/Tackling-violence-against-women-and-girls-in-the- context-of-climate-change-en.pdf 11 https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/2022-03/Tackling-violence-against-women-and-girls-in-the- context-of-climate-change-en.pdf 120 • Supporting women’s initiatives and leadership to protect coastal areas through management of mangrove swamps, nature-based solutions to coastal erosion, developing small-scale, sustainable fishing that benefit local communities. This can be achieved through establishment of community-based organizations with mandatory membership to ensure that women’s deep understanding and extensive knowledge of their natural environment and resources is tapped effectively and used to inform RKP’s interventions. Programs need to back these efforts with adequate financing and mentoring support. • Targeted effort to support women’s livelihood opportunities. Ensure women’s full integration in the blue economy through policy that recognises women’s work in harvest and post-harvest and provides access to credit and markets, comprehensive social security and occupational health and safety measures based on women’s needs.12 Assess and strengthen existing programs and policies under key partner departments that enable and support women’s associations, organisations, and networks of women. The Fisheries department can be a potential partner and their role under SMP can be explored. • Supporting a state level network/platform to give regular advice on how to strengthen gender dimensions of proposed interventions. This network can comprise academic organisations, NGOs, research organizations, subject matter experts. Quarterly and annual meetings, learning events and collaborative research and documentation with select development partners can be an effective way to influence state policies to support women’s leadership roles in climate change adaptation. • The interventions around Open Data Initiative and Climate Budget need to be informed by gender considerations. Women should be seen as the primary target audience for weather warnings and climate change related information that they can use and apply in their household level work and livelihood activities. With the support around Climate Budget preparation, there is a huge opportunity to make shifts in budget planning by ensuring departments and programs that most strongly impact women are allocated budgets and introduce climate adaptation interventions in their programs. 12 https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/78785e4d-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/78785e4d-en 121 Annex 6 List of references General 1. Kerala Floods and Landslides 2018: Joint Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment Report, September 2018 2. Rebuild Kerala Development Programme: A Resilient Recovery Policy Framework and Action Plan for shaping Kerala’s Resilient, Risk-informed Development and Recovery from 2018 Floods, Rebuild Kerala Initiative, Government of Kerala, World Bank Group and ADB. 3. Rapid Policy Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Rebuild Kerala Development Program (Draft, March 2019) Report, World Bank Task Team, Development Policy Operation (DPO 1) May 9, 2019. 4. Draft Report of the Environmental Analysis of the Proposed Second Development Policy Operation (DPO 2), Draft, April 27, 2020 5. Proposed Resilient Kerala Program-for-Results, Program Appraisal Document (PAD) 6. Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA)’s Report on consultations conducted, March 2022 7. All applicable national and state level legislations and regulations (as listed in the report) Coastal Zone Management / Shore line management related 8. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report for Valiyathura Fishing Harbour, L&T- Ramboll for Harbour Engineering Department, December 2013 9. Sample Bid documents for the reformation of the sea wall using tetrapods in Kollam constituency, WRD, GoK, February 2022 10. Proposed list of works for World Bank pending, MS-Excel table, WRD, GoK, February 2022. 11. Note on Coastal Protection works of Kerala District, WRD, GoK, February 2022. 12. Reference Manual on Climate Change Adaptation Guidelines for Coastal Protection and Management in India, Volume 1, ADB, March 2019. 13. India: Sustainable Coastal Protection and Management Investment Program - Tranche 2, Karnataka, IEE, May 2016. 14. Building Coastal Resilience through Nature-based and Integrated Solutions, ADB Technical Assistance Report, June 2021. 15. Chellanam Seawall Cross Section 28-09-21.pdf 16. KSCDC List of ongoing projects, February 2022. 17. Shoreline Management Sub-Plan (Final) for Odisha Coast, July 2018. 18. Status of shoreline change due to erosion / accretion, Kerala Coast, Institute of Ocean Management, Anna University. 19. Shoreline Change Atlas of the Indian Coast (Volume 3) Karnataka and Kerala, Space Applications Centre (ISRO), Ahmedabad and Coastal Erosion Directorate, CWC, GoI, New Delhi, May 2014. 20. Shoreline Change Atlas of the Indian Coast (Volume 3) Karnataka and Kerala, Space Applications Centre (ISRO), Ahmedabad, August 2021. 21. Status report on Coastal Protection & Development in India, CWC, Dec 2016. 22. National Assessment of Shoreline changes along Indian Coast, Status Report for 26 years, 1990-2016, Ministry of Earth Sciences, National Centre for Coastal Research, Chennai, July 2018. 23. Shoreline Change Assessment for Kerala Coast, NCSCM and SICOM, Ministry of Environment & Forests. 24. Planning of coastal protection measures along Kerala coast, Final Report, Government of Kerala, Department of Ocean Engineering, IIT Madras, Chennai 600 036, August 2007. 122 Annex 7 KILA Report on Disclosure Workshop Documentation 1. Background of the workshop The Rebuild Kerala Initiative mainly focuses on building resilience and sustainable ecosystems through risk-informed planning. With support from the World Bank, as a part of PforR funding norms of the project, in its first stage, a social and environmental system assessment (ESSA) has to be conducted in order to understand the gaps in the state system and the capacity of the system. This will ensure efficient planning and utilization of the funds for planned intervention activities. Even though the initial plan was to consider the Pamba river basin districts as the sole implementation area for the project, at a later stage, a proposal for extending the project to Meenachil and Manimalayar river basins was also taken up. In addition to this, considering the coastal line deterioration and the livelihood condition of the fisherfolks and allied sector, expansion of the project to coastal regions of Kerala is also under consideration. KILA is supporting the World Bank in conducting the ESSA in the extension plan of the project, by organizing consultation at the regional and local levels to mainstream people's participation in the entire planning process additional financing 2. Introduction As Kerala state has taken initiative toward post-flood reconstruction, a draft Environmental and Social Systems Assessment (ESSA) report has been prepared under the Rebuild Kerala Initiative which has been financed by the World Bank. This venture has been constructed to formulate the World Bank-assisted Program for Result (PfR). In this context, Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA) organized an online workshop on 11th of May 2022, from 10.30 am to 1.30 pm to gather the comments and suggestions regarding this report. The purpose of this report is to assess the institutional capability of various state executive agencies in dealing with environmental and social issues related to the PfR. Currently, the additional financial assistance scheme is primarily implemented in river basins such as Meenachil and Manimalayar, as well as coastal districts. The World Bank team drafted the report through various consultations as well as at the state government level. This online workshop was organized by KILA in collaboration with the World Bank and RKI as part of the World Bank's procedures for formulating the Program for Result. 3. Inaugural Address Dr. Monish, Assistant Professor, KILA welcomed the invitees. He mentioned the major focuses of the ESSA stakeholder workshop. The meeting started with an introductory note from Dr. Joy Elamon, Director-General of KILA and followed by an opening remark by R.K Singh, IAS, CEO RKI. The technical session was started by Ms. Natsuko Kikutake (The World Bank) with a brief introduction to 'Resilient Kerala Program for Results; Additional Financing.' She explained the objective and result areas of Additional finance which were built on existing Government of Kerala –World Bank engagements. In the next session, Ms. Harjot Kaur (Senior Social Development Specialist, World Bank) introduced ESSA Framework and the objective and aims of ESSA. This was followed by a presentation from Ms. Geetika Hora (Social Development and Gender Consultant, World Bank) which narrated the scope, findings, engagement areas and recommendations of the Social Assessment part of ESSA. After this session, Mr. Vaideeswaran S (The World Bank) presented the Environment Systems Assessment of ESSA. Approach, Methodology, Legal systems assessments, Shoreline Management Plan (SMP), Stakeholder feedback, Environmental Recommendations for framing of ESSA environmental findings were explained in detail. 123 4. Points for the open discussion session Dr. Jos Chathukulam (Director, Centre for Rural Management) ● Raised a query on the usage of the terms local bodies, LGs, LSGs, and LSGIs simultaneously in the presentations. He suggested that, in the nomenclature about local governments, there are nuances in the meanings of these terms. According to him, the local government is the more appropriate term due to the constitutional status. ● More space in the entire framework for the LG, District planning committee and District plans, and LG planning committees. ● The report also discusses the generic risks associated with social accountability, transparency, participation, inclusion, environmental regulations, etc. According to him, more attention is required for generic risk assessment considering the functionalization of the entire framework, especially exploring potential convergence, strategies, linkages and integration. ● Urban River Syndrome causes the changes in character and property of the river while entering and leaving the cities. Some amount of work is needed to understand this change and needs to be incorporated. ● Need for incorporating the budget of the LG in the entire process by linking capacity building, planning process and budget of the Local governments. ● Furthermore, he noted that it is necessary to assess or study the capacity of civil society organizations in particular river basins such as Meenachil and Manimalayar. ● Local Self Government Department and Local self governments are different. Local self- government is important not the departments as they play a very limited role in autonomy of the LG. Ms. Geetika Hora (Social Development and Gender Consultant, World Bank) thanked Dr. Jose Chathukulam for his fruitful suggestions and inputs. Moreover, she said that banks concentrate more on strengthening the role of LSG in our revised ESSA and it'll be crucial for our Additional Financing. Dr. K. V. Thomas (National Centre for Earth Science Studies, Rtd) ● Recommended that we should have a capacity development mechanism within the departments to critically review and analyze the EIA. He clearly articulated the need for a capacity-building to review EIA and pointed out the limitations of EIA. There is currently no accountability for the EIA, and there is a need to bring in accountability for the EIA and deviations. ● There should be an attempt to sustain our existing natural ecosystems along with hybrid solutions. Higher emphasis is currently on seawall-based solutions. ● Coastal communities have different categories of people: (a) Active fisherfolks (b) Same community but different livelihoods; and (c) Others who are outside the community but happen to be living there. Their perspectives will be different and these need to be accounted for. ● Community involvement in legal compliance and in monitoring of coastal investments should be explored. ● Public consultations might give biased results unless it is done with an informed group. The consultations, especially the coastal consultations, representative participation of all the strata in the coastal community must be ensured to gather comprehensive information. Furthermore, he emphasized the importance of verifying the percentage of participation in each group to avoid bias in existing data. In addition to this, he stated that before 124 preparing a shoreline management plan (SMP), a critical evaluation and assessment should be performed, particularly in the case of seawall construction. The existing seawall which needs restorations is one part, whereas new seawalls in areas with no seawalls must undergo critical evaluation before making SMP. Informed Community consultations must be done prior during the SMP preparation process. ● Inadequate monitoring and implementation of Environmental rules, laws, and regulations. But empowering communities for monitoring and violations can be a potential solution. Also, LSG participation during initial monitoring and post monitoring process. ● Currently there is no regulation for construction of check dams and bund. There should be a scientific basis for the construction of new check dams and bunds. ● While increasing depth and width of water bodies, there needs to be scientific inputs which are fostered by the community inputs and consultations by considering traditional knowledge. ● Scientific management of tidal or coastal barriers is not existing and is critical to ensure. Dr. Jude Immanuel (Environmental Scientist, DoECC) ● Specified that EIA is normally working as per the 2006 Notification by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change ("MoEFCC"). It scrutinizes all relevant information about a project or activity to assess its potential adverse impacts on the ecology of a region. However, there are investments that do not require EIA (<50 acre). These also have environmental impacts which need to be properly managed. Currently, these projects or activities do not follow EIA notifications. Therefore, it is better to have a body or committee to look at these projects which do not attract EIA notification so that there is a monitoring or tracking system to keep track of such projects. Ms. Amrutha K (Hazard Analyst, KSDMA) mentioned that Integrated Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment (ISEA) can be adopted in short-term projects. It's less complicated as compared to EIA. Dr. Prema A (Professor & Head Dept. of Agri. Economics, COA, KAU) commented that to strengthen the role of LG apart from the climate fund. Studies after the flood on disaster damage assessment shows that the actual loss is much higher than the compensation given by the government. The reports and actions must be participatory so that these kinds of methodological issues can be sorted out while providing aids and funds. The organizational structure and institutional capacity such as agriculture university can be utilized for doing these types of participatory assessment. Dr. Jos Chathukulam: Behavioral changes must be also emphasized along with capacity building to bring more efficient and informed democratic decision-making process. Dr. Suresh Francis, Scientist, KSREC ● Social and environmental benchmarking should be done before implementation using LSG, existing data sources, and volunteers for all project activities. Open data structure with benchmarking can be taken as a model. ● Need for an approach or mechanism to strengthen LSGs and train volunteers for maintaining databases and accessing outcomes ● This data should be collected with the support of the community and the local governments. Data should become an important part. 125 Saju V. Itty, Executive Director, Kerala Voluntary Health Services talked about the importance of social impact assessment in the context of Kerala and that it is an integral part of land acquisition. According to him, social impact assessment needs more emphasis and must be extended to all projects rather than only done on land acquisition projects. We need to address and develop a clear protocol on social and health impacts in parallel with the environmental system assessment. Prof. Mini Sukumar (Member, Kerala State Planning Board) ● Women in SHG with direct livelihood connections with the river and river basin are taken care of. There is a need to look beyond by considering the women who are skilled and having knowledge but underutilized or unemployed. It is an opportunity to mobilize these women as a part of the activities planned in the project as they can contribute towards resources and knowledge. This inclusion will also bring gender-specific information, mobilization, capacity building, reviews, etc in the ongoing process, and is more efficient for the planning. Ms. Reshmi (Assistant Executive Engineer) raised a query as; Whether World Bank can also support the projects such as the mapping of land resources and soil health status as part of EIA. ● Soil is an important micro-level issue which is not being given due consideration. It plays an important role particularly in the context of climate change. There is a need for a separate project and to draw international best practices through the World Bank. ● Disappearance of buffer zones in Kerala due to urbanization and extreme climate events. Projects which can address these issues by incorporating this into regulatory or policy frameworks must be initiated ● The demarcation between rural areas and urban areas are disappearing. This is a serious issue for natural resource management. There is a need for creating buffer zones in order to protect natural resources. ● The Government departments do not take the support of NGOs even though they have a lot of expertise. There is a reluctance. Mr. Sunil (Rebuild Kerala Initiative) argues that such mapping of natural resources as well as physical infrastructure was done through community participation in the Mapathon projects under RK. Hence, such projects or activities might not be an immediate necessity as a separate project in a particular area. Comments of Additional Director (Department of Women and Child Development) ● Scope for social reengineering ● Gender based initiatives such as gender violence and livelihood initiatives, a participatory approach for women and other groups. There is also a scope of gender based social reengineering while weighing women’s work with others work. ● Playgrounds for children in coastal areas are also compromised while implementing projects, and must be considered during implementation. Comprehensive gender assessment is required. Dr. Monish added that RKI is currently undertaking risk-informed master plans for the urban local bodies and institutionalizing land-use scenarios while considering climatic risk. Bhagavathy Iyer (Geohazards society) : How can we involve more NGOs in such assessments? The World Bank team replied that the Bank would emphasize on the contributions of NGOs and CSOs in the development of project design and implementation. 126 Dr. Monish (Assistant Professor, Public Administration, KILA) thanked all the participants. He officially closed the workshop around 12:52 p.m. 127 5. Program schedule Kerala AF: ESSA Stakeholder workshop 11.05.2022 Time Session Presenter 10.30-10.40 Programme introduction Dr. Joy Elamon, Director General, KILA 10.40-10.50 Opening Remarks R. K Singh, RKI / Sunilkumar, Joint Sec, RKI 10.50-11.00 Additional Financing: context setting Ms. Natsuko Kikutake, The World Bank 11.00-11.10 Introducing ESSA Framework Ms. Harjot Kaur, The World Bank 11.10-11.25 ESSA Addendum Report: Social Ms. Geetika Hora, The World Bank 11.25-11.40 ESSA Addendum Report: Mr. Vaideeswaran S, The World Environmental Bank 11.40-01.30 Open Discussion 128 6. Meeting Details: Meeting ID Topic Start End Durat Partici Time Time ion pants (Minu tes) 82947141924 റീബിൽ& േകരള 11-05- 11-05- 156 91 ഇനിേഷ./ീ0 േ1പാ1ഗാം േഫാർ 2022 2022 12:52 റിസൽ9് (PfR) അധിക 10:17 ധനസഹായം: ഓൺൈലൻ ശിൽപശാല Rebuild Kerala Initiative, Program for Results (PfR) additional Financing: online workshop 129 7. List of Participants Participants Name (Original Name) Total Duration (Minutes) Amrutha K, KSDMA 138 Animal Husbandry Department, Govt. of Kerala 132 Beena Thankam 64 Bhagavathy Iyer (Aviram Iyer), Geo Hazards International 143 Chief Engineer, LSGD 1 Assistant Chief Engineer, LSGD 124 Chief Engineer, Harbor Engineering Department, Govt. of Kerala 78 Clint Mathew, KSDMA 141 DR Celine George 115 Dr K V Thomas, NCESS 133 Dr Manoj Samuel Executive Director CWRDM 69 Dr Suresh Francis, Scientist, KSREC 118 Dr. Jos Chathukulam 143 Dr. Drissia T K, Senior Scientist, CWRDM 83 Elizabeth Soby, RKI 152 Galaxy Tab A7 Lite 72 Geetika Hora, WB 154 Dr. HariKumar GeoHaz 45 Harjot Kaur- WB (WB505678) 149 Hydrology Wing IDRB (Chief Engineer IDRB) 138 IDRB 91 IRRIGATION PLANNING 142 Jalajakumari 14 Jerin Thomas Abraham, Project officer, UNDP 81 Jincy Jose-RKI Secretariat 132 Jose, MIRROR 95 Josnamol S Joint Director Panchayats (Director Panchayats) 84 Dr. Joy Elamon, Director General, KILA 142 Jude Emmanuel, DoECC 103 Kalaiarasan 59 KILA (KILA - Anoop) 156 130 Dr. Manoj Samuel Executive Director CWRDM 3 Dr. Mini SUKUMAR, Kerala State Planning Board 115 Dr. Monish Jose (KILA) 153 Natsuko WB 146 Natsuko Kikutake - WB 81 Dr. Nirmala Sanu George, Consultant, LSGD, Govt. of Kerala 125 Dr. Prema A, KAU 145 psexp 106 PSSP Palakkad, Kerala Sasthra Sahithya Parishad 79 RAJESH T N, Senior Town Planner, LSGD 47 Rebu Mathew 7 Rebu Thomas 122 RKI Secretariat (RKI) Sunil Kumar, Joint Secretary R.K Singh, IAS 109 Safia M, KAU 147 Saju Itty, Executive Director, Kerala Voluntary Health Services 129 Satheesh Chandran, 128 Secretary, Ponnani Municipality 139 Secretary, Thiruvarppu Panchayath 55 Seethal Mathews 15 Shana S S (KILA) 151 Sheela A.M. 121 Shinu Sheela Wilson (Anna Liza Bejoy), KSDMA 114 Thiruvarppu GramPanchayath 61 Vaideesh- The WB 152 WCD Directorate- Kerala 137 131 8. Workshop Photographs 132 133 134 135