Page 1 INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 10/29/2008 Report No.: AC3458 1. Basic Project Data Country: Cambodia Project ID: P101156 Project Name: Demand for Good Governance Project Task Team Leader: Bhuvan Bhatnagar Estimated Appraisal Date: March 17, 2008 Estimated Board Date: December 2, 2008 Managing Unit: EASSO Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: Law and justice (30%);Other social services (23%);General public administration sector (17%);Sub-national government administration (15%);Media (15%) Theme: Other accountability/anti-corruption (P);Participation and civic engagement (S) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00 IDA Amount (US$m.): 20.00 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: BORROWER/RECIPIENT 1.44 AUSTRALIA: Australian Agency for International Development 3.62 5.06 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Simplified Processing Simple [] Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies) Yes [ ] No [X] 2. Project Objectives The development objective of the project is to enhance the demand for good governance (DFGG) in priority reform areas by strengthening institutions, supporting partnerships, and sharing lessons. The state and non-state institutions and partnerships supported will be those that (a) promote, (b) mediate, (c) respond to, or (d) monitor to inform DFGG. The priority reform areas where DFGG approaches will be supported are those identified in the Governance Pillar of the Bank’s Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Cambodia, viz., (i) private sector development, (ii) natural resource management, (iii) public financial management, and (iv) decentralization and promoting citizens’ partnerships for better governance. The project will contribute to the Government’s and the Bank’s higher level objectives of gradually improving governance. It recognizes, however, that no single project can address all the challenges for strengthening DFGG. Therefore a comprehensive long-term effort is required of which this project is one modest piece. The project also supports several CAS objectives by strengthening the linkages between demand-side approaches and supply-side activities supported through a number of operations in the four priority Page 2 sectors of the Governance Pillar. Finally, the project will promote learning about new approaches to building DFGG in Cambodia as well as other countries, by working with both state and non-state actors concurrently, and constructively linking their work. 3. Project Description The project has three components: (i) Support to State Institutions, (ii) Support to Non- State Institutions, and (iii) Coordination and Learning as described below. Component 1: Support to State Institutions. The project’s first component will support four promising state institutions (SIs) and programs. These institutions have committed leadership and/or demonstrated success in fulfilling one or more DFGG functions (promotion, mediation, response or monitoring). In addition, they are active in the priority reform areas of the CAS Governance Pillar. The SIs were selected for support through a thorough, six-month long process of consultations with government, donors, and civil society organizations, informed by review of existing institutional and political economy assessments in Cambodia. The four selected SIs (and the ways in which they enhance DFGG) are: (a) The Arbitration Council (AC) (Component 1A) - a quasi-judicial body that mediates DFGG and contributes to building an effective governance environment for private sector development by resolving collective labor disputes between employers and employees when such disputes cannot be settled through prior conciliation; (b) The Ministry of National Assembly-Senate Relations and Inspection (MONASRI) (Component 1B) - a relatively new ministry engaged in promoting and mediating DFGG through its mandate for law dissemination and complaints handling; (c) The One Window Services Office (OWSO) and District Ombudsman (DO) (Component 1C) – two flagship reforms at the district level piloted by the Ministry of Interior (MOI) that respond to and mediate DFGG respectively by providing certain basic administrative services to citizens and small businesses under a single roof, and creating an avenue for receiving complaints from citizens and the business community on the performance of district officials; and (d) Radio National Kampuchea (RNK) (Component 1D) - the national public radio broadcasting station, which will help promote, mediate and monitor DFGG by filling a gap in public availability of balanced, accurate and up-to-date radio programs, thus informing and facilitating dialogue between citizens, non-state actors, businesses and government on topics of public interest. With IDA financing of US$ 10.66 million under this component, the expected support to the above institutions will vary, but will generally cover: (a) improving and scaling up the scope and coverage of existing operations; (b) piloting new initiatives; (c) adding communication and partnership programs to support and extend these activities; (d) building capacity through technical assistance (TA) and training; (e) improving facilities, office equipment, supplies, and transportation; (f) providing performance-based salary incentives; (g) supporting monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and learning activities, (h) implementing fiduciary arrangements; and (i) using other anti-corruption, good governance and risk management measures. Page 3 In terms of implementation, each of the four SIs is being treated as a separate implementing agency (IA) in charge of managing their specific subcomponent. The project is aiming to work as far as possible with the existing IA structures in order to promote ownership and sustainability over the longer term. However measures have been included to prepare IA structures for project implementation by strengthening processes, building existing staff capacity and allowing for additional recruitment of staff and consultants to support implementation as needed. A transparent merit-based pay initiative (MBPI) and performance-based Priority Mission Groups (PMG) incentive system have also been proposed for IA staff to provide the right incentives for high performance. Finally, a Multi-Stakeholder Advisory Committee, which has been set up for each SI during project preparation, will provide strategic feedback and guidance during implementation. Component 2: Support to Non-State Institutions: With IDA financing of US$ 4.27 million, this component is designed to provide grants and capacity-building assistance to non-state actors (NSAs) so as to strengthen their governance-related work. All NSAs receiving grants will be required to commit to a set of “Constructive Engagement Principles”, which are being prepared in consultation with the Government and NSAs. Two forms of grants will be offered: (a) Partnership Grants (Component 2A - about 25% of all grants) – which will go to activities proposed by NSAs that complement and support the work with one or more of the four SIs in Component 1, and (b) Thematic Grants (Component 2B – about 75% of all grants) – that will support NSA-led initiatives that strengthen DFGG in the four priority reform areas of the CAS Governance Pillar and will be independent of the activities of the four SIs supported in Component 1. Three different sizes of grants – small (<$15,000), medium ($15,000 to $50,000)and large ($50,000 to $150,000) will be provided under the Component. The medium and larger grants aim to scale up existing NSA pilots and strengthen coalitions and networks of NSAs. The smaller grants aim at supporting grassroots initiatives and new DFGG ideas. Given these different sizes and purposes, two grant-making mechanisms will be used: (i) a Development Marketplace-like competition (a high profile, ‘trade fair’ type event to select medium and large grants), and (ii)asmall grants program (with a simpler application process for smaller initiatives). In addition, the component will support learning activities and capacity building for NSAs (Component 2C). For implementation of Component 2, the Government agreed that, for independence and credibility, management should be entrusted to a non-state entity. Through a rigorous identification process, in which several alternatives were considered, The Asia Foundation (TAF) was selected to be the IA for Component 2, given its extensive experience in both governance issues and complex grant-making in Cambodia. TAF will establish a management team and a group of full-time staff to support implementation. They will also receive support from existing TAF units locally and internationally. For deciding on grants, an independent multi-stakeholder Grant-Making Committee (GMC) with representatives from CSOs, the private sector, Government and other stakeholders will be established. The selected GMC members are expected to be widely respected and Page 4 high-profile i ndividuals within their sector, and will be required to sign a ‘Code of Conduct’ to help guard againstconflicts of interest. Component 3: Coordination and Learning: With IDA financing of US$ 2.42 million, this component aims to (a) support effective implementation of the project overall, ensuring its timely progress and strategic relevance vis-Ã -vis the evolvingCambodian context (Component 3A: Coordination), and (b) raise awareness of and building capacity in designing and implementing DFGG activities across and beyond the institutions directly supported by the project (Component 3B: Learning). It will seek to promote a “ripple effect” of constructive engagement across stateand non-state institutions by showcasing effective partnerships emerging from the project. Component 3B will work to achieve these objectives through its: (i) Awareness Raising and Capacity Building Program; (ii) Communications Program, and (iii) an action-oriented Studies Program. For implementing Component 3, the Ministry of Interior (MOI) will appoint a high- level official as Project Coordinator to supervise overall implementation and will set up a Project Coordination Office (PCO) within the Ministry which will be responsible for daily management of the project and dialogue with the Bank supervision team. A Project Coordination Group (PGC) will be established, consisting of the Project Directors of the different IAs (four from Component 1 and one from TAF for Component 2), civil society representatives, and representatives from MEF and other Ministries. The PCG will be responsible providing guidance on strategic planning and overseeing progress monitoring of the project. The PCO will serve as the secretariat of the PCG. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis The project is national in scope. However, different elements will target specific locations and at different stages of project implementation. For instance, the law dissemination by MONASRI will be undertaken in only a small set of provinces in the first year and then be scaled up nationally by the final year of implementation. Of relevance for safeguard analysis, are (a) Component 1C (OWSO-DO) which will target urban capital districts in all provinces of the country and will require minor construction and/or renovation of existing office buildings; (b) Component 3 which may also require renovation of an existing office in Phnom Penh; and (c) the RNK subcomponent, whose radio transmitter is currently located within the urban area of Phnom Penh and will require repair and possibly relocation during the project implementation period. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Mr John D. Clark (EASSO) Ms Maria Teresa Serra (EASSO) Page 5 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: During the project preparation, two issues emerged which merited attention and which relate to Civil Works under Components 1C and 3, and the issue of the RNK radio transmitter repairs under Component 1D. These are described in more detail below. A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues The safeguard classification of the project is Category B (Partial Assessment). The trigger for the Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) policy was the RNK transmitter issue. The project does not trigger the policy on indigenous peoples (OP 4.10) since none of the activities specifically target ethnic minorities or indigenous communities. The two safeguards-related issues which merited attention are described below. 1) Minor civil works are envisaged in two cases. Under Component 1C, construction and/or renovation of offices for the OWSO and DO that will be established in the participating districts is foreseen. Under Component 3, similar works may be required to accommodate the PCO (and possibly a Governance Resource and Learning Center). In both cases, it is expected that existing buildings will be rehabilitated and that new construction will be minor. The IAs have confirmed that all works will be done on existing Government property and there will be no land acquisition or involuntary resettlement. The IAs will follow a set of specific environmental safeguards guidelines that have been agreed upon by the Government and Bank at project appraisal. Civil works are excluded from the eligible activities to be funded in Component 2. 2) Repair of RNK’s transmitter. During project preparation, a technical assessment of the transmission system was undertaken jointly by RNK and AusAID-supported engineers and revealed that (i) the existing 200 kW transmitter was operating at only 20- 30 percent of its rated capacity; and (ii) repairs were the least-cost option to increase its power output, so as to allow better coverage in remote areas in the country. RNK requested financing of about US$ 290,000 for repair (and purchase of spare parts) of the main (200 kW) transmitter and a standby (25 kW) transmitter. The study also Page 6 recommended that a due diligence analysis be undertaken to: (i) determine whether the increase in output could be done within the internationally recognized general public safety limits for radio frequency electromagnetic radiation (EMR); and (ii) assess whether, and what, measures would be necessary to ensure safety of workers and nearby residents at the current site. Following the study’s recommendations, RNK (with AusAID funding) carried outtwo other technical assessments which were subsequently evaluated by an independent review funded by the Bank. The conclusion was that the EMR emissions from the RNK transmission tower, at its current and increased capacity, are within internationally accepted general public safety levels but a number of measures should be implemented to improve the site hazard signage and restrict access around the AM mast. These measures have been agreed to by RNK and are currently under implementation. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: The project is not expected to have any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to the implementation of anticipated future activities given their nature and scale. Environmental aspects will be taken into account by the project-supported activities during the activity cycle, so as to ensure that any concerns that may arise are addressed at the planning, design and implementation phases as needed. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. Reducing transmission output and/or immediate relocation of the RNK transmitter was initially considered but was found to be unnecessary given the results of the detailed technical analyses and expert review subsequently carried out regarding EMR levels at current and proposed output levels of the transmitter. 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. A set of preventive safety and security measures in relation to the EMR emissions from the transmitter are being undertaken by RNK during the pre-implementation period. These include posting hazard signs (in both Khmer and English) on the front and rear of the power transformer cabinet and restricting public access to the compound where the transmitter is located. In addition, building on the assessments undertaken during preparation, RNK has agreed to prepare an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) to ensure the application of sound environmental and social safeguard practices and standards, should there be a need to further repair the RNK transmitter in the future. An EMP may also be required if the Government decides to eventually relocate the transmitter complex to a new site, away from populated areas due to general encroachment as a result of rapid urban growth in the vicinity of the transmission site or for any other reason. The negotiated Financing Agreement includes standard Bank requirements for implementation of such an EMP. Page 7 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The key stakeholders involved for the RNK transmitter issue include: (a) residents living in the vicinity of the RNK transmitter, (b) workers carrying out repairs of and overseeing on-site operation of the transmitter, (c) the MOI (the project executing agency), (d) AusAID, and (e) the RNK. The MOI posted the agreed safeguards framework (presented in Annex 10 of the Project Appraisal Document) and the relevant assessment reports (including the environmental safeguards guidelines for civil works) on its website. The relevant safeguards-related documents were also sent to the Bank Infoshop. In addition, it was agreed at negotiations that the Government shall: (i) in the case of the repair and operation of the existing RNK transmitter, disclose to the public the detailed mitigation plans at the current site; (ii) in case of relocation of the RNK transmitter, disclose to the public the relocation plans to a new site; and (iii) carry out public consultations on the said mitigation or relocation plans, as the case may be, before implementation of mitigation measures at each of the said site. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 03/17/2008 Date of "in-country" disclosure 03/07/2008 Date of submission to InfoShop 03/10/2008 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. Page 8 If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: Not Applicable C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? Yes If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Yes Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? Yes The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Infoshop? Yes Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? Yes All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Yes Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Yes Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? N/A Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? Yes D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Mr Bhuvan Bhatnagar 10/28/2008 Environmental Specialist: Ms Maria Teresa Serra 10/28/2008 Social Development Specialist Mr John D. Clark 10/28/2008 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Mr Janmejay Singh 10/28/2008 Approved by: Sector Manager: Mr Cyprian F. Fisiy 10/29/2008 Comments: