E929 VOL. 1 Sri Lanka Second North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) * Environmental Management Framework 1. Introduction: Sri Lanka North-East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) intends to help conflict-affected communities to reestablish at least subsistence level of production and basic community services. This is to be achieved through repairing of 400 small irrigation schemes and 1,200 km of rural roads, constructing about 400 community buildings and 600 drinking water wells and providing livelihood support assistance to most vulnerable people to start household level income generating activities that would serve as safety nets to overcome economic stress in the event of crop failure and loss in rainfall deficient seasons. Institutional development at village level through reforming and strengthening of CBOs (farmers organizations, rural development societies and women RDSs) is one of the key outputs of the project. The project covers all eight districts of the North-East province and border villages of the four districts of neighboring Uva, North-Central, North-Western Provinces. The implementation responsibility was anchored to the North East Provincial Council - first Bank financed project in Sri Lanka with a PC as main implementation agency, but GAs as main partners of implementation at districts. 2. The project activities interventions are small scale in nature and are widely scattered over the project area. A large majority of project investments will include labor intensive, small scale civil works and household level, individual, livelihood support income generating activities. Civil works are localized activities at village levels likely to be associated with rehabilitation and improvements of irrigation schemes and intra-village rural roads, and construction of drinking water facilities and buildings that mostly utilize local construction material. Individual household level income generating activities are likely to be highland and home-garden agriculture and livestock and poultry rearing etc. The rehabilitation of irrigation schemes and ponds will include: (i) strengthening, improving and filling breaches of earthen embankments, repairs to sluices and spill ways; and (ii) cleaning, repairing and improving the earthen irrigation canals and cement/concrete canal structures. These are structures with embankment less than 15 m in height. Besides rehabilitation and improvements, there would be new minor construction of some key structures like falls, division boxes, regulators, measuring structures at canal off-take points for effective irrigation and water management. The rehabilitation of village roads will include filling depressions and pot holes and grading existing road platforms with borrowed earth, provision of culverts and other cross drainage structures and side drains. Construction of buildings and drinking water wells will involve earth excavations and construction of cement/concrete structures. 3. Therefore these activities are not expected to generate significant site-specific or cumulative adverse environmental effects. On the other hand, the nature of rehabilitation activities, particularly irrigation rehabilitation, by nature would include measures to control and prevent environmental problems such as inadequate drainage, water-logging, salinity etc. Given the small size and rehabilitation nature of the envisaged project components and related activities, their potential adverse environmental impacts on human populations or environmentally important areas including wetlands, forests, grasslands and other natural habitats are not expected be significant. Even if there are negative impacts these are expected to be easily manageable with proper guidance, training and oversight during planning, imiplementation and monitoring phases of the project activities. Therefore, as is the case with NEIAP, the proposed NEIAP II is classified as Category B of World Bank's project environmental classification. 4. Given the nature of project activities, the project adopts a simple and functional environmental oversight system to guide the management and monitoring of the environmental aspects of the project. This was particularly necessary as project investments were being determined through a continuing village planning process and were being approved on a rolling basis as village plans were developed. The functional environmental management and oversight system, therefore, includes the following planning, implementation and monitoring actions. * Development and application of checklists of potential environmental impacts and mitigation measures for the four major project civil works activity categories, namely rehabilitation and construction of small-scale irrigation systems, rural roads, tube/dug wells and construction of buildings; * Development and application of checklists of potential environmental impacts and mitigation measures for typical activities that are to financed under the Livelihood Support Activity (LSA) components; * Integration of these checklists in the Village Development Planning (VDP) Process to ensure that existing environment problems are tracked and monitored jointly by project beneficiaries and implementing agency staff/NGO social mobilizers and mitigation measures incorporated into the design and implementation of rehabilitation/construction activities; * For medium irrigation schemes (command area more than 80 ha but less that 400 ha), carrying out project specific environmental assessments on case by case basis as an integral activity of feasibility studies for rehabilitation and incorporation of environmental mitigation measures; * Revision and inclusion of clauses of existing standard civil works specifications and contract documents to ensure that contractors and community based organizations execute civil works in compliance with necessary environmental management and minimal damage to the environment; * Development and application of simple monitoring and evaluation framework including environmental indicators and outcomes; and * Arrangements for training of field-level project staff, NGOs and other technical staff to sensitize them typical environmental issues in the project area in general, and to build capacity and skills in environmental assessment techniques and monitoring specific to project activities in particular. The arrangements include: (i) identification of environmental training needs of the project and preparation of training modules; (ii) validation of the training modules through application in the field; 2 (iii) preparation of training curriculum and modules to sensitize key project stakeholders on typical environmental issues in the project area in general and project specific environmental issues and safeguard/mitigation measures in particular; (iv) translation of the training modules into Sinhala and Tamil languages for usage by the community-based organizations and community members; (v) preparation of training plan for NEAIP reflecting environmental assessment, oversight and monitoring needs; and (vi) undertaking of training of resource persons and the training of target groups such as project engineers, technical officers, social mobilizers and work supervisors, and community-based organizations in the use of the environmental impact assessment checklists, incorporation of environmental aspects in project feasibility reports, and conduct of environmental monitoring and evaluation of project activities. 5. The attachments to this note include the following: * Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Irrigation Schemes * Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Rural Roads * Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Construction of Community Buildings * Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Construction of Drinking Water Wells * Environmental Checklist/Guidelines for the Livelihood Support Activities * Sample Feasibility Study for Medium Irrigation Scheme (Vammiadi Tank in Ampara District) * Contractual Clauses * Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Rehabilitation of Irrigation Schemes * Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Rehabilitation of Rural Roads * Enviromnental Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Construction of Community Buildings * Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Construction of Drinking Water Wells * Evaluation of impact of environmental training 3 Sri Lanka - Second North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Irrigation Schemes Impacts Mitigation measures Rehabilitation of small tank Accelerated soil erosion a. Restrict construction to dry season structure head works b. Retain ground vegetation as much as possible c. Retain channel / drainage reservation to reduce soil transport d. Turf exposed surfaces quickly e. Create contour strips / steps as slope breakers Water logging and flooding a. Rehabilitation of borrow areas b. Reshape excavated areas to present stagnation and establish vegetation c. Design proper drainage system Sedimentation and siltation a. Retain ground cover to reduce soil erosion b. Dump vegetation and scraped earth at suitable location and compact c. Do not block natural drainages Seepage a. Clay cut off wall on upstream of bund b. Rubble packing and toe filler on the down stream of the bund Destruction of natural vegetation a. Retain natural vegetation as much as possible b. Avoid cutting large trees Degradation of catchment area a. Mobilize community action to prevent encroachment, fires, and tree cutting in catchment area Dust pollution during construction a. Control dust by water during construction phase b. Cover excavated soil material during transport Rehabilitation of downstream Accelerated soil erosion a. Restrict construction to dry season irrigation canals / drainage b. Retain ground vegetation as much as possible c. Retain channel / drainage reservation as much as possible Flooding Reshape excavated areas / borrow pits to prevent water stagnation Blocking of natural drainages a. Dispose plant materials and debris away from natural drainages b. Deposit scraped earth on the contours and compact Improving irrigation and Water logging and water scarcity a. Farmer training in water management agriculture productivity Salinisation of agricultural lands a. Farmer training in water management b. Maintenance of drainage canals on regular basis Soil degradation and productivity a. Farmer training in conservation agriculture loss Improper application of a. Train farmers in integrated pest management agrochemicals b. Train farmers in organic farming Disposal of pesticide and a. Create awareness on proper handling, storage and disposal of insecticide containers pesticide and insecticide Crop damage by wild animals a. Mobilize farmer action to avoid / reduce crop damage by wild animals 5 Sri Lanka - Second North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Rural Roads Activity Impacts Mitigation measures Rehabilitation / construction of Accelerated soil erosion a. Restrict construction to dry season Rural Roads b. Retain natural vegetation in road reservations c. Design and construct adequate road drainages d. Consolidate cut and fill areas e. Turf exposed road slopes f. Reshape and fill excavated and borrow pit areas Blocking of natural drainages a. Provide culverts to ensure natural water flows b. Deposit plant materials and debris away from natural drainages Increased surface run-off a. Provide adequate drains along the road Dust pollution during construction a. Control dust by water during construction phase b. Cover excavated soil material during transport Operation and maintenance of Accelerated soil erosion and run- a. Mobilize community action for regular road maintenance roads off including drains and slopes and road reservation 6 Sri Lanka - Second North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) Environmental Checklist / Guidelines for the Construction of Wells and Community Buildings Activity Impacts Mitigation measures Location of wells Contamination of ground water a. Locate wells away from agricultural lands and from agriculture run - off drainages, dumping grounds and latrines Salinization of ground water a. Locate wells away from saline deposits Construction of wells Stagnation of water ground well A. Design/ install drainage channels to discharge waste water away from wells Operation of wells Over extraction and water table a. Mobilize community action for proper water use and draw down conservation Deterioration of water quality b. Water quality monitoring as part of public Health inspection program Community Buildings Activity Impacts Mitigation measures Construction of Building Soil and vegetation disturbance a. Ensure retention of vegetation around construction site as much as possible b. Re-vegetation of disturbed areas around buildings c. Reshape excavated and borrow area 7 Sample Full Feasibility Report For Medium Irrigation Schemes Vammiyadi Tank, Ampara Distrct Environment 1. Catchment degradation. This is a medium tank with it own catchment. The catchment area of this tan, is 5.40 sq mile with moderately slope area. About 90% of the area is covered with natural dense forest vegetation and balance area is grassland. The tank is about 30km away from Akkaraipattu. Before 10 years back about 15% of catchment area was under chena cultivation but last 10 years back about 15% of catchment area was under chena cultivation but last 10 years all farmers are displace. In future will start chena cultivation by the farmers. The present situation 100% of the catchment is not having any adverse degradations activities and there will be no effects in the future too large number of elephant and forest animals and birds are living in this catchment area. Illegal timber felling activities is found in this area mitigation measure. Mitigation measures * Mobilize community action to prevent encroachment, fires, tree cutting, and chena cultivation in catchments area * Re-plantation in degraded catchments areas 2. Tank bed cultivation The present situation tank bed area is covered by medium jungle. Tank bed cultivation did not practice. Therefore, tank bed cultivation is not a problem in this area and there will be no effects in the future too. Land is not demand in the area. Large quantity of fertility land available in command area. Mitigation measures * Mobilize community action to prevent tank bed cultivation in tank bed area 3. Siltation of tank Tank bed area is covered by natural medium forest and grassland. Siltation is found in the catchments area and tank bed area. Due to the rainy seasons large amount of rainwater come down in the tank from natural forest. At the same time silt also come in the tank bed area. And Elephant corridor activity, illegal temper felling also create siltation problem. About 3 to 4 percentage of tank bed area is reduced by soil erosion and siltation. In future, water-holding capacity of the tank will be decrease even though the catchments gradient is gentle and it is within the allowable limit. Mitigation measures - Retain ground cover to reduce soil erosion - Dump vegetation and scraped earth at suitable location and compact - Do not block natural drainages - Awareness creation to public and farmers 4. Seepage through bund The length of the earthen bund is 900 feet. It had been formed with clay sand. Therefore seepage is found. Small amount of water is escaped as loss every day and at the same time silt is also removed slowly. This phenomenon may affect the band in future even though comparable erosion is not visible in the embankment. The numbers of Elephant herds are come down in to the tank across the band daily for drinking water and bathing purpose, in this activity date to date damaged both site of the band. Right end of the band is significantly damaged. Loosing water is logging in the down site of the band. So the Elephant activities may affect the bund in the future. Mitigation measure * Clay cut off wall on upstream of bund * Rubble packing and toe filler on the down stream of the bund * 5. Water logging in the command area The available command area is 530 Acs. There is no significant water logging in the command area. Water stagnates at the down stream of bund by seepage. The spill water of this tank and the drainage of this scheme fall to Sagamam tank. From sluice the water is release to a stream and water is issued by service of anicut for proper water issue. The drainage and anicut are very useful for buffalo and cattle farming, wild animals and local fishing. The aquatic ecosystem is developed due to this stream and drainage. Most of wild animals are found in this area. So, the water logging are most use full in the wild animals, and aquatic fauna and flora. Specially elephant, wild bore, peacock, spotted deer, ornamental fish etc. seepage water logging is a problem in the bund. Mitigation measures a. Train farmers on effective and efficient water management b. Rehabilitation of borrow areas c. Reshape excavated areas to present stagnation and establish vegetation d. Design proper drainage system 6. Effect on domestic water supply With the rehabilitation of this scheme, water capacity in the tank will increase. Paddy cultivation would be developed and also ground water table will increase. So this scheme helps 9 to maintain a shallow water table in the command area. Therefore, domestic water supply would develop. But, surrounding area paddy field and forest area, have not any village in this area. Farmers mostly use in this land for paddy cultivation. Therefore domestic water supply is not a problem come across in this scheme. Mitigation No action necessary, domestic water supply is a positive impact 7. Health hazards 'This tank is isolated. So No health hazards are encountered in this scheme. In this scheme is found about 20km away from the village. Farmers temperately living in this paddy land area in cultivation time only. There for health hazard is not a problem in this scheme. But, have not any shallow come across water wells in this paddy land area. The cultivation time the farmers are use stream or channel water for during and cooking purpose. The cultivation time, improper application of Agrochemicals is a health hazards in this area. The farmers are not using safety methods to apply pesticide and insecticide. And also they use over demand fertilizers. After application empty bottle & cans are thrown out or washed in a water body. Farmers and animals that consume this water get into health hazards in the paddy land area. Mitigation measures a. Train farmers in integrated pest management b. Train farmers in organic farming c. Create awareness on proper handling, storage and disposal of pesticide and insecticide d. Rehabilitation of borrow areas e. Reshape excavated areas to present stagnation 8. Land fragmentation and tenure pattern Last 10 years this paddy land is not cultivated in the security problems. Last year more than 300 Acs was cultivated land fragmentation is identified in very few cases. Tenant pattern is practiced in the command area. Only 25 % of paddy land is cultivated by tenants and the balance by owner. Tenant cultivations do not practice land management & maintenance. They will expect more income quickly. So, they apply over use of agrochemical and fertilizers. In this activities will create land degradation such us Salinisation. In this area is already high fertility land. So, over use of fertilizers is not necessary. 10 Mitigation measures a. Train farmers in integrated pest management b. Train farmers in organic farming c. Create awareness among the owners & tenants d. Introduce integrated farming system. e. Train farmers in use of Agrochemicals. 9. Encroachment The reservation of drainages and channels are not encroached. Land is available in this area. So, encroachment is not necessary. Therefore drainage and channels are functioning satisfactorily in the command area. Encroachment of private lands has not been encountered in this scheme. Mitigation measures a. Mobilize community action to prevent encroachment in tank bed, catchment and command area 10. Effects on flora & fauna The tank is isolated from village, more area is patches of jungle. Large number of wild animals living in this area and also catchment area, and part of command area are covered by natural vegetation. After rehabilitation of the scheme, the water level will increase in the tank and command area. The drainage watercourse will also develop. Therefore, the Aquatic fauna and flora will be protected and develop ecosystem in this area. At the same time vegetation cover also develop Island fishing will develop and ornamental fish would be protect. Livestock farming activities would be developed. Drinking water problems of wild animals is decrease. This scheme helps to developed and maintains fauna & flora. Totally positive impacts to fauna & flora. Mitigation measures. a. No action need b. Mobilize farmer action to avoid / reduce crop damage by wild animals 11. Conflict of Wild animals. The tank is isolated from village area catchment area and surrounding tank area is thick forest cover and grassland, large number of wild animals living. More than 200 elephant have in this area. And large number of peacock living in this area. They are affected paddy cultivation. Farmers are facing so many problems during the cultivation time The hard of elephants are damage channels bund, tank bund and paddy every day. 11 Mitigation measures. a. Mobilize farmer action to avoid / reduce crop damage 12. Soil erosion Soil erosion is found in the tank bund and command area due to wild animals (elephant and wild bore) activities, buffalo and cattle activities and in proper farming activities in command area cultivation. During rainy seasons, large amount of water is running across the command area that time large amount of soil come down to the command area tank bed area and catchment area year to year the sand is accumulated in the catchment area and command area. The tank is a isolated from village so. The review sand is not use for construction work by the people. Therefore every year should be removing in the erodable sand, and silt. Mitigation measures. - Construction in dry season - Retain ground vegetation as much as possible - Retain channel / drainage reservation to reduce soil transport - Turf exposed surfaces quickly - Create contour strips / steps as slops breakers 12 North - East Irrigated Agriculture Project ENVIRONMENTAL FULL FEASIBILITY REPORT MATRIX VAMMIYADI TANK, AMPARA DISTRICT Items Baseline Potential Impacts Reason Mitigatory Measures Catchme Area - 5.40 sq. - Catchment - Chena a. Mobilize nt Area mile degradation cultivation community action Slope - gentle - Degradation of (this is in to prevent Thick jungle - 90% biodiversity contradiction encroachment, Shrub jungle - 10% - Wetland to baseline fires, cattle grazing Chena - nil degradation which and tree cutting in Fauna and Flora - - Run- off mentions catchment area (Dangerous / - Siltation and that chena Retain ground Endangerous / sedimentation. cultivation is cover to reduce soil Threatened spp)- - Destruction of nil??) erosion Not applicable natural vegetation - Cattle b.Dump vegetation farming and scraped earth activities at suitable location - Timber and compact felling c. Mobilize - Fire wood community action collection to protect and - Wild reduce conflict animals with wild animals activities Tank, Area - 350 Acs - Tank bed - Settlement - Rehabilitation of Tank command area cultivation - Land is borrow areas Bund, Condition - (Good / - Borrowing of limiting - Reshape excavated Tank Bed Normal / Poor) pits factor areas to present area Length - 900 feet - Clay mining - No plan stagnation and bund - Water logging - Lack of establish vegetation Vegetation - (Thick - Siltation knowledge - Design proper jungle / shrub - Soil erosion - Lack of drainage system jungle / grass / - Seepage awareness - Retain ground weeds) - Illegal cover to reduce soil Encroachment - Nil clay/ gravel erosion Capacity- 1128 Ac. mining - Improve feet environmental awareness of 13 community members - Dump vegetation and scraped earth at suitable location and compact - Clay cut off wall on upstream of bund - Rubble packing and toe filler on the down stream of the bund Channels Length of channels - Siltation - Poor - .Construction in and -44000 feet (field - Accelerated operation dry season Irrigable channel) soil erosion and - Retain ground Area Condition of maintenance vegetation as much (Comman channel - normal - No as possible d Area) Vegetation - (Thick cooperation - Retain channel / jungle / shrub on farmers. drainage jungle / grass / - No plan. reservation to weeds) - In efficient reduce soil irrigation transport - Salinisation. - In efficient - Turf exposed water surfaces quickly management - Create contour strips / steps as slops breakers - Farmer training in water management - Improve farmer participation in maintenance of drainage canals on regular basis Drainage Length of drainage Flooding water - Poor - Rehabilitation of - Not avilable logging operation borrow areas Condition - (Good / and - Reshape Normal / Poor) maintenance excavated areas to Type of Vegetation - No present stagnation - / shrub jungle / cooperation and establish grass / weeds) on farmers. vegetation - No plan. - Design proper - In efficient drainage system irrigation - Improve farmer - In efficient training and water participation in management O&M of 14 irrigation and drainage Domestic Water table - Good - Over - Poor - Mobilize Water Water quality - extraction management community action Supply Good - Water table - Lack of to prevent over Depth - 6-8 feet draw down awareness extraction Location - - Condemnation - Farmer training in of agro water management chemicals - Create awareness on proper handling, storage and disposal of - Drainage pesticide and problem. insecticide - Dispose plant materials and debris away from natural drainages - Deposit scraped earth on the contours and compact Health (i)Agro chemical Water born - Lack of - Create awareness hazards empty cans disease (Typhoid, knowledge on proper handling, disposal - (Good / dairie) - Poor storage and Normal / Poor) public health disposal of (ii) Disposal of service pesticide and solid waste - - Bull cart insecticide (Low / Significant and vehicle - Design proper / High) activities. drainage system (iii) Dust pollution - Lack of - Awareness creation - (Low / awareness. to public on health Significant / High) and sanitation (iv) Mosquito aspects breading - (Low / Significant / High) 15 North -East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) Environmental Monitoring & Evaluation Frame work for Small - Scale Irrigation Schemes Impacts Scale of Scale of Scale of Mitigation Duration Responsible Impotence / present management Measures Agency impct condition 213 14 15 2 31 4 15 11 2 3 14 15 L w High Low High Low High Rehabilitation Accelerated x x x a. Restrict During and after Implementing of small tank soil erosion construction to dry construction Agency structure head season period R.D.S, F.O & works b. Retain ground P.M.U vegetation as much as possible c. Retain channel / drainage reservation to reduce soil transport d. Turf exposed surfaces quickly e. Create contour strips / steps as slope breakers Water logging x x x a. Rehabilitation of During and after Implementing and flooding borrow areas construction Agency b. Reshape period R.D.S, F.O & excavated areas to P.M.U present stagnation and establish __________________________________ vegetation 16 c. Design proper drainage system Sedimentation x x x c. Retain During and after Implementing and siltation ground cover to construction Agency reduce soil period R.D.S & F.O erosion d. Dump vegetation and scraped earth at suitable location and compact e. Do not block natural drainages Seepage x x x c. Clay cut off During the Implementing wall on upstream construction Agency of bund period F.O & P.M.U d. Rubble packing and toe filler on the down stream of _____________ the bund Destruction of x x x c. Retain During and after Implementing natural natural construction Agency vegetation vegetation as period R.D.S, F.O & much as possible P.M.U d. Avoid cutting ________________ ________________ ~~~~~~~~~large trees Degradation of x x x a. Mobil During and after Implementing catchment area ize community construction Agency _______________ ______________ action to prevent period R.D.S, F.O & 17 encroachment, P.M.U fires, and tree cutting in catchment area Dust pollution x x x c. Control dust During the Implementing during by water during construction Agency construction construction period R.D.S & F.O phase d. Cover excavated soil material during _______________________________ transport Rehabilitation Accelerated x x x d. Restrict During and Implementing of downstream soil erosion construction to after Agency irrigation dry season construction canals / e. Retain period R.D.S & F.O drainage ground vegetation as much as possible f. Retain channel / drainage reservation as much as possible Flooding x x x a. Reshape During and Implementing excavated areas / after Agency borrow pits to construction R.D.S & F.O prevent water period stagnation 18 Blocking of x x x c. Dispose plant During and Implementing natural materials and after Agency drainages debris away from construction R.D.S & F.O natural drainages period d. Deposit scraped earth on the contours and compact Improving Water x x x a. Farmer During and Implementing irrigation and logging and training in water after Agency agriculture water management construction R.D.S, F.O productivity scarcity period Salinisation x x x c. Farmer During and Implementing of training in water after Agency agricultural management construction R.D.S, F.O lands d. Maintenance period of drainage canals on regular basis Soil x x x a. Farm During and Implementing degradation er training in after Agency and conservation construction R.D.S, F.O productivity agriculture period loss Improper x x x c. Train farmers During and Implementing application in integrated pest after Agency of management construction R.D.S & F.O agrochemical d. Train farmers period s in organic ______________ ___ _ ___ farming Disposal of x x x a. Creat During and Implementing 19 pesticide and e awareness on after Agency insecticide proper handling, construction R.D.S, F.O containers storage and period disposal of pesticide and insecticide Crop damage x x x b. Mobilize During and Implementing by wild farmer action to after Agency animals avoid / reduce construction R.D.S, F.O crop damage by period __________________________ _ _ ____ wild animals 20 North -East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) Environmental Monitoring & Evaluation Frame work for Rural Roads Impacts Scale of Scale of present Scale of Mitigatory Duration Responsible Impotence / condition management Measures Agency Impac 1 231415 112 31415 31415 L w High Low __igh Low Hjgh Rehabilitation / Accelerated X X X g. Restrict During and Implementin construction of soil erosion construction to after g Agency Rural Roads dry season construction R.D.S, & h. Retain natural period P.M.U vegetation in road reservations i. Design and construct adequate road drainages j. Consolidate cut and fill areas k. Turf exposed road slopes 1. Reshape and fill excavated and borrow pit areas Blocking of x x x f. Provide During and Implementin natural culverts to after g Agency drainages __ ensure natural construction R.D.S 21 water flows period g. Deposit plant materials and debris away from natural drainages Increased x x x a. Pro During and Implementin surface run-off vide adequate after g Agency drains along construction the road period R.D.S, Dust pollution x x c. Control During the Implementin during dust by water construction g Agency construction during period R.D.S, phase construction d. Cover excavated soil material during _______________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~transport _ _ _ _ _ _ Operation and Accelerated x x x b. Mobilize During and Implementin maintenance of soil erosion community after g Agency & road and run-off action for construction R.D.S regular road period maintenance including drains and slopes and road reservation 22 North -East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) Environmental Monitoring & Evaluation Frame work for Drinking Water Wells Impacts Scale of Scale of present Scale of Mitigatory Measures Duration Respons Impotence / condition management ible Impact Agency 1213 14 5 jill31415 1 2 3 14 5 Low High Low High Low High Location Contamination of x x x a. Locate wells During and Impleme of wells ground water from away from agricultural after nting agriculture run - lands and drainages, construction Agency off dumping grounds and period latrines R.D.S, _ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~F.0 Salinization of x x x a. Locate wells away During and Impleme ground water from saline deposits after nting construction Agency period R.D.S & F.0 Constructi Stagnation of x x x a. During the Impleme on of water ground well Design/ instill construction nting wells drainage channel to period Agency discharge waste water away from wells R.D.S Operation Over extraction x x x a. Mobilize During and Impleme of wells and water table community action for after nting draw down proper water use construction Agency period R.D.S, _______ F.O 23 Deterioration of x x x b. Water quality During and Impleme water quality monitoring as part after nting of public Health construction Agency inspection program penrod R.D.S, 24 North -East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) Environmental Monitoring & Evaluation Framework for Community Buildings Impacts Scale of Scale of present Scale of Mitigatory Duration Responsible Impotence / condition management Measures Agency Impact 1 -2 3 14 15 1 23 14 15 l112 3 14 15 Low High Low _ iHgh Low High Construction Soil and x x x a. Ensure retention During and Implementin of Building vegetation of vegetation after g Agency disturbance around construction R.D.S, construction period sites as much as possible b. Re-vegetation of disturbed area around building c. Reshape excavated and borrow area 25 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL TRAINING PROGRAM NORTH EAST IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE PROJECT (NEIAP) -U~~i a ^Wjmm CT OF PER OFl-0k0 C AND ~ ~ A * A -.'-o.�L~~~~MANCT j-i 1 |,.,,,,, ks....... - --- - - \- t~~~~~~~~~~~K A-t TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABBREVIATIONS iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY v 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Back Ground Information ................................................... vii 1.2 Objectives of the Evaluation ................................................. vii 2.0 METHODOLOGY 2.1 Beneficiary Survey and Officers' Interviews .............................. viii 2.2 Data Analysis ................. ................................. ix 3.0 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY 3.1 Review of NEIAP Environmental Training Programs .................. x 3.2 Effectiveness of the Environmental Training Program ....... ........ xiii 3.2.1 Target Group I - Senior Officers Impact of Env. Training on Professional Performance ....... xiii Personal Views on Environmental Training .................... xiv 3.2.2 Target Group II - Technical Officers & Social Mobilizers Effectiveness on the Use of Environmental Safeguards ...... xv Problems Faced by Technical Officers & Social Mobilizers.xvi 3.2.3 Target Group III - Members of Community Based Organizations Effect of Environmental Training on Knowledge ............. xvii Attitude of the CBOs Towards Environmental Safeguards.. xvii Weakness the Environmental Training ................ ........ xviii 3.3 Overall Success of the Environmental Training Program ............ xx 4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............ ................. xxi 5.0 ANNEXURES 5.1 List of Officers Interviewed .................................................. xxiii 5.2 Interview Schedules ........................................................ xxv LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Sample of Focal Villages & the Target Groups Selected by Districts .... viii Table 2. Training Program followed by SOs, TOs & CBOs ................. xi Table 3. Environmental Training Conducted -Sept. 2002 to March 2003 ......... xii Table 4. Training Prgrammes Conducted by Districts at CBOs Level ...... ...... xiii Table 5. Impact of Training on Professional Performance ......... .................. xiv Table 6. Effectiveness of Environmental Training in the Activities of TOs ....... xv Table 7. Problems Faced by the Technical Officers and Social Mobilizers ......... xvi Table 8. Distribution of CBOs on Environmental Knowledge Score ................ xvii Table 9. Attitude of CBOs Towards Environmental Safeguards ...................... xviii Table 10. Usefulness in the Application of Environmental Training ................. xix Table 11. Major Weakness of the Environmental Training Conducted ......... xix ABBREVIATIONS ACAD Assistant Commissioner Agrarian Development CBO Community Based Organizations DO Divisional Officer DPD Deputy Project Director DPO District Project Review IA Implementing Agency EIA Environmental Impact Assessment FFR Final Feasibility Report FO Farmer Organization ICB International Competitive Bidding IEE Initial Environment Examination IVDA Integrated Village Development Approach LSA Livelihood Support Activities M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MPCLG Ministry of Provincial Councils and Local Government NCB National Competitive Bidding NEIAP North East Irrigated Agriculture Project NECP North East Provincial Council NGO Non-Governmental Organization PC/PA/PS Problem Census/ Problem Analysis/Problem Solving PMU Project Management Unit PAD Project Appraisal Document PIR Preliminary Inspection Report PNA Participatory Needs Assessment PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal RDO Rural Development Officer RDS Rural Development Societies SM Social Mobilizers SO Senior Officers SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences SSI Semi Structured Interviews TO Technical Officers VDP Village Development Plan VSP Village Social Profile WB World Bank WRDS Women Rural Development Societies WS Work Supervisor iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) is the largest rehabilitation project in the North and East Districts of Sri Lanka. It was started in 2000. A number of projects such as irrigation, roads, wells and other re-construction activities and livelihood support activities (LSA) with community participation have been implemented in stages. All these project investments are small in size, very localized, largely labour intensive, utilize local materials and largely of a rehabilitation nature. Since 2002, due to concerns on the environment, the Project Management Unit (PMU) with the advice from World Bank (WB) has been actively involved in the development and implementation of environmental checklists. These have been incorporated in monitoring and mitigation procedures in the project activities. Further, to encourage wider participation and to increase the incorporation of environmental safeguards in project implementation, PMU has developed environmental training modules and conducted environmental training at three levels, namely Target Group I: Senior Officers (SO), Target Group II: Technical Officers (TO) and Social Mobilizers (SM) and target group III, the members of Community Based Organizations (CBOs). Since the environmental training program is nearing completion, it was felt necessary to review the effectiveness of the implementation of the environmental management aspects. In this context, the present evaluation study was carried out in June 2003 with the objective of assessing the effectiveness of the environmental training programs and to make recommendations for increased effectiveness of environmental programs in the future. Seven districts in the North, East and conflict affected Border districts villages were selected for the environmental training evaluation, namely Mannar, Vavuniya, Trincomalee, Batticaloa, Ampara, Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa. The study relied mainly on primary data collected from multiple sources of information, namely SO (35), TO&SM (49) and CBO (84) by using interview guidelines, semi-structured schedules and survey techniques respectively. Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) was also used where farmer groups consisting both trained and non-trained members were met in the two selected focal villages in each district. To evaluate the training impact effective scale method, knowledge score, success index and frequency analytical statistics were employed. The findings of the evaluation study indicate that all SOs had a positive attitude towards conserving the environment. They were generally aware of the environmental impacts of the projects that they were involved in. SOs accepted the concepts of environmental impacts of the projects and the mitigatory measures discussed at the environmental training programs. Generally they incorporate the environmental safe guards indirectly through their routine technical auditing of the projects. However, to further strengthen the environmental aspects indicated in the training, they encouraged the TOs to incorporate important environmental safeguards through adequate use of the environmental impact checklist in planing, implementation and monitoring of the projects. Generally SOs attitude was that the environmental training efforts was not wasted, even if the acquired knowledge was not applied: the argument was that it has created a valuable environmental awareness among the concerned people. v The environmental training received by TOs was useful in promoting the environmental safeguards application in the different stages of the projects' activities such as planning, implementation and monitoring. However, this middle level training in incorporating environmental skills was found to be weak on the part of Social Mobilizers (SM). This was due to difficulties they face in mobilizing the people and lack of technical expertise in the environmental safeguards. Review of the project feasibility reports prepared by TOs revealed improvements in the use of the checklist in the environmental assessment, and mitigation procedures at the filed level. The environmental training and backstopping received by the TO was useful in promoting the use of environmental safeguards into project activities. However, the evaluation shows that training did not have much impact upon the subsequent behaviour and performance of the TOs because of: difficulty in transport due remoteness of the project areas, delay in submission of the schedule of project activities by the CBOs and specific local problems. Due to environmental training, over two third of the CBO respondents seemed to have a moderate understanding of the environmental impacts of the projects that link with their farming activities. The interview with non-participants of the training indicated that useful training information always was shared among CBOs' members for joint effort in environmental programs. Promoting active involvement of CBOs in the projects, through environmental training has generally increased concerns on group behaviour. Using the problem solving methodologies in the training has facilitated better understanding and contribution of farmers in environmental safeguard activities. About 40% of the targeted training programs to CBOs are yet to be completed. Inappropriate timing, lack of support among CBOs and backstopping were the commonly mentioned weaknesses at the CBO level training. The future training to CBOs need more close attention and monitoring. The proportion of successful environmental training was comparatively higher in Trincomalee district followed by Batticlao and Vavuniya. Training offered at Ampara was not adequate and environmental training were demanded by the women respondents in Mannar and Vavuniya. Environmental training in Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa had increased the concern of CBOs on environmental safeguards. However, there was lack of attention due to several limitations that delayed the project activities. Overall, the environmental training is found to be partially successful. One of the important factors responsible for this was that environmental training was given only after project was implemented. Based on the results of the evaluation study, some important recommendations have been made. E.g. Future environmental training should be given at the initial stage of the village development program. This helps to minimize the damage to environment and use appropriate environmental safeguards at the early stage by the CBOs and TOs. The effectiveness of any training programs depends on its continuous monitoring and evaluation, which should include appropriate and different methods. This will ensure effective incorporation of environmental concern of the beneficiaries in the project activities and helps in identifying the overall performance of trainers and trainees. This will increase the sustainability of the projects. vi THE IMPACT OF ENVIRONMENTAL TRAINING ON THE PERFORMANCE OF SENIOR OFFICERS, TECHNICAL OFFICERS AND THE MEMBERS OF COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Back Ground Information North East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP) was established under the World Bank grant in March 2000. NEIAP has invested in number of rehabilitation projects in the north, east and conflict affected border districts. Since these rehabilitation project investments are expected to be small, very localized and labour intensive, it was expected that environmental impacts would be small and readily manageable with proper planning and oversight. It adopts an Integrated Village Development Approach (IVDA) with a number of sub projects such as irrigation, roads, wells and other re-construction activities. Under the IVDA farmers are mobilized to form groups in order to more effectively address the problems they face; field officers help them to identify potential solutions and to test and adopt these solutions to their environmental problems. Therefore, a simple and easily workable environmental management and oversight system was developed to enable effective screening of the evolving plans for their environmental conformity application. However, one of the important challenges faced by the projects in applying environmental safeguards approaches was that the beneficiaries and the staff of the line agencies lacked the necessary understanding, skill and attitude in environmental monitoring and remedial measures in dealing with the project. Thus the NEIAP emphasizes environmental monitoring be an integral part of its project implementation. It was felt that the staff and farmers involved in the implementation of civil construction and those involved in the social mobilization of the project be provided with the training to carry out monitoring of the environment, and implementing environmental mitigation measures. The Project management Unit (PMU) has developed checklists for monitoring of potential environmental issues and impacts and work categories such as Irrigation, Roads, Wells, Public Buildings and other Livelihood Support Activities (LSA). Accordingly the framework for monitoring of potential environmental issues (before, during and after rehabilitation) has been prepared and safeguard measures have been undertaken. 1.2 Objectives of the Evaluation Study Since the environmental training program is nearing completion, it was felt necessary to review the effectiveness of the implementation of the environmental management aspects. In this context, the present evaluation study was carried out in June 2003 with the objectives to assess the effectiveness of the environmental training program and to make recommendation for increased effectiveness of environmental programs in the future. The specific objectives of the study are: vii (1) To find out whether any of the information impaired during the environmental training were relevant to management objective that had been set, and what effect it was on the environmental conservation of the senior officials (Target group I.) (2) To find out how effectively the Social Mobilizers have motivated the people and the Technical Officers (Target group II) to use the environmental impact assessment checklist, monitoring and mitigation measures at the field and in the village level feasibility reports, after receiving the training. (3) To find out what the community based organization members (Target group III) remembered of the training, whether any of the information and skills imparted during the training were of help in carrying out their farming operation. (4) To find out what the target groups' current problem was and what suggestions they had for future environmental conservation under the NEIAP project. (5) To make recommendations for increased effectiveness of environmental training programs in the future. 2.0 METHODOLOGY 2.1 Beneficiary Survey and Officers' Interviews The evaluation study relied mainly on primary data collected from multiple sources of information, from the sample of 35 Senior Officials, (Target group I), 49 Technical Officers (Target group II) and 84 members of Community Based Organizations (Target group III). Out of 12 districts in the North, East and border districts, seven districts namely Trincomalee, Batticalo, Ampara, Vavuniya, Mannar, Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa were selected for the data collection ( Table 1). Table 1. Sample of Focal Villages and the Target Groups Selected by Districts District Selected Focal Villages SO TO & SM CBO 1. Trincomalee Galmitiyawa & Illupaikulam 5 7 12 2. Batticaloa Kiran,Kaladivadai& 5 7 12 Vammiyadi 3. Ampara Akkaripattu & Thambilivil 5 7 12 4. Vavuniya Sasthirikoolankulam,Marakara 5 7 12 nvetti,&Kunchchukulam 5. Mannar Pichakulam & Perucharkaddu 5 7 12 6. Polonnaruwa Villachiya & Kudahalmilla 5 7 12 7. Anuradhapura Karapolla & Muthucal 5 7 12 Total: 07 14 35 49 84 viii In each district 5 SOs, 7 TOs & SMs and 12 CBO beneficiaries were selected randomly among those who had attended and not attended the environmental training. Questionnaire schedule for interviews of the beneficiaries was developed. In line with the beneficiary survey, technical officers survey was also conducted using a separate semi- structured schedule in order to triangulate some vital information on how effectively they use the environmental checklist, monitoring and mitigation measures in the village level feasibility reports. The officer interviews were also held using an interview guideline in obtaining a comprehensive description on the process followed in setting up environmental training. These officers contacted and their designations are given in Annexure 1. The interview schedules and guidelines used in the evaluation are presented as Annexes 2, 3 and 4. The sample included mainly the participants and non-participants of environmental training. Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) was also used where farmer groups consisting both trained and non trained members were met in the selected focal villages. A total of 14 farmer groups discussions were held, 11 of the 14 farmer groups were conducted in the focal villages where environmental training was offered. Both environmental training offered and non-offered focal villages were included in this study to allow comparison and to find out the effectiveness of the environmental training. 2.2 Data Analysis The data collected through beneficiaries interview and officers group discussions were coded, entered into the computers and analyzed using SPSS software package. In analyzing the data, scoring technique was adopted to determine the level of understanding, extent of usefulness of the environmental training program by the officers and the beneficiaries. To estimate the farmers' attitude towards the application of environmental safeguard a attitude scale was constructed. Attitude has been defined as the degree of the positive and negative thoughts associated with one physiological object. Among the techniques available for construction of scales Likert's scale was selected for the study. The farmers were requested to give their reaction to each statement on the environmental aspects dealt in the training on the five relating points namely strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree and strongly disagree. If the item was positive maximum value of 5 was given and strongly disagree was given one. The abstracted data were analyzed using frequency analytical statistics. It was envisaged to obtain evidence to categorize the environmental training according to the level of success and to find out the factors affecting the success. Since the valid quantitative information could not be obtained during the investigation a qualitative (success) index was developed using the quality of training received, the level of application of the instruction and number of people participated in taking environmentally related activities. Then the distributions of aggregate values were hypothetically divided to three categories as "good, average and poor". ix FINDINGS OF THE STUDY 3.1 Review of The NEIAP Environmental Training Programs The PMU conducted a comprehensive series of training by using two environmental specialists and has taken necessary steps to address the environmental aspects of the project. Following are the progress achieved in this respect. (1) Finalization and application of environmental check lists for the four most common project supported activities, namely: small irrigation works, rural roads, drinking water wells and small community buildings. (2) Identification of environmental training needs of the projects and preparation of three levels of training modules. These curricula reflect and encompass the major and minor environmental problems of the project that arise during implementation and after completion of the projects. Validation of the training modules was done through conducting a validation workshop and application in the field. The comprehensive curriculum, including aims and objectives were translated into Sinhala and Tamil and usually distributed to the CBOs trainees. Summary of training programs, which were conducted for the officers, technical officers and community based organizations, are given in Table 2. (3) Training of Trainers was conducted with the aim to build a cadre of trainers capable of implementing environmental training in an effective and participatory manner. Selection of six trainers was done on the basis of their involvement in environmental programs. Out of six who received the training of trainers, three trainers were selected to conduct training based on their characteristics in terms of their experiences in the field, which are directly related to improving the environmental training programs. (4) Beneficiaries selection followed clear, predetermined steps. Selection of beneficiaries was done by PMU through DPDs. In Target Groups I and II selection, officers' active involvement and certain criteria in NEIAP were taken into consideration in the respective districts. In Target Group III, three office bearers from FOs, RDS and WRDS were selected for the training from the focal villages. The beneficiaries who showed a keen interest to join the training were also selected. (5) The training process included problem solving approaches and groups discussions. Formal lecturing was the method least used. These approaches were usually coupled with appropriate audiovisual aids. In general, environmental training has been very useful in strengthening the project development and many training programs have been successfully completed from August 5th 2002 to May 31 st 2003. (6) Recent recruitment of civil engineers for quality monitoring to eight districts is an important action taken by the PMU to improve the sustainability of the project. x Table 2. Training Program followed by Senior Officers, Technical Officers & CBOs Objective To assist in implementing balanced approaches towards land, water and forest resources management that includes protection of the enviromnment. Methods Brainstormning: I hr., Lecturers: 5 hrs. and Group & Panel Discussion:1I hr. Media: Black board, White pape rs, Flip chart, -Pencils and Transparent sheets Title of Training Program Main Contents 1.1 Minor Tank Ecosystem * Wetlands and Biodiversity Restoration * Catchments management * Soil erosion control * Tank bed cultivation, Wild life control * Vector Born diseases Malaria, dengue 1.2 Water Use Efficiency *Cnevto fwtr * Conservation of water. * Water logging and salinity * Eutrophication 2. Drinking well Contamination * Location and water quality monitoring 3.1 Access Roads * Surface water run off 3.2 Building Construction * Soil erosion and landscaping Module Level I - Concepts (One Day) Target Group I: Civil Engineers, Assistant Commissioners and Project Assistants 1.1 Concepts of environment impacts of engineering interventions and Inter-sectoral linkages of environmental management. ( 2hrs.) 1.2 A Comprehensive Operation & Engineering Solution to Env. Problems (2 hrs.) 1.3 Introduction on IEE and EIA process, its technical and legal significance ((2 hrs.) 1.4 Env. checklist, monitoring & evaluation frame work major problems (1 hr.). Module Level II - Skill (One Day) Target Group II: Technical Officers, Social Mobilizers and Work Supervisors 2.1 Role of field level staff in environmental management (1 hr.). 2.2 Water management - Operation and Maintenance (2 hrs.). 2.3 Major environmental problems - practical use of check list ( 2 hrs.). 2.4 Evaluation, monitoring framework and mitigation of environmental problems. Interaction & coordination with the line agencies & farmer organization. (2 hrs.). Module Level III - Awareness (One Day) Target Group III: Community Based Organization Office Bearers and Members 3.1 Role of farmer organization in sustainable environmental management. Farmers' empowerment & ownership of environmental management. (2 hrs.). 3.2 Water management - Operation and Maintenance (2 hrs.). 3.3 Potential environmental problems & farmer led monitoring and evaluation (2 hrs.). 3.4 Conflict management. (1 hr.). xi Table 3. Environmental Training Conducted From September 2002 to March 2003 No. Date District Target Group Medium 1. 10.09.02 Trincomalee, Batticaloa & Ampara Group I (21) English 2. 16.09.02 Anu.pura, Polonnaruwa & Puttalam Group I (3) English 3. 24.09.02 Jaffna, Kilinochchi & Mullaitivu Group I (20) English 1. 09.09.02 Trincomalee Group 11 (30) Tamil/S 2. 16.09.02 Anuradhapura & Polonnaruwa Group 11 (30) Tamil 3. 16.09.02 Anuradhapura&Polonnaruwa Group 11 (45) Sinhala 4. 24.09.02 Jaffha, Kilinochchi & Mullaitivu Group 11 (33) Tamil 5. 03.10.02 Vavuniya Group 11 (32) Tamil 6. 04.10.02 Vavuniya Group 11 (27) Tamil 7. 16.10.02 Batticaloa Group 11 (37) Tamil 8. 17.10.02 Batticaloa Group II(44) Tamil 9. 14.11.02 Ampara Group 11 (58) Tamil 10.14.11.02 Ampara Group II (18) Sinhala 11. 30.01.03 Mannar Group 11 (36) Tamil 12. 25.02.03 Mullaitivu Group ll(26) Tamil 1&2 11.09.02 Trincomalee Group III (36) Tamil/ S 3&4 17.09.02 Anuradhapura Group III (48) Tamil/S 5. 25.09.02 Jafffa Group III (30) Tamil 6. 18.10.02 Trincomalle Group III (30) Sinhala 7. 21.10.02 Trincomalee Group III (32) Sinhala 8. 22.10.02 Trincomalee Group III (31) Sinhala 9. 24.10.02 Trincomalee Group III (31) Sinhala 10.28.10.02 Vavuniya Group III (30) Tamil 11.28.10.02 Vavuniya Group III (25) Sinhala 12. 29.10.02 Vavuniya Group III (23) Sinhala 13. 29.10.02 Vavuniya Group III (37) Tamil 14. 15.11.02 Ampara Group III (19) Sinhala 15. 15.11.02 Ampara Group III (45) Tamil 16. 09.12.02 Trincomalee Group III (35) Tamil 17. 10.12.02 Trincomalee Group III (37) Tamil 18. 16.12.02 Polonnaruwa Group III (45) Sinhala 19. 17.12.02 Polonnaruwa Group III (35) Sinhala 20. 18.12.02 Plonnaruwa Group III (32) Sinhala 21. 19.12.02 Polonnaruwa Group III (32) Tamil 22. 31.01.03 Mannar Group III (37) Tamil 23. 24.02.03 Kilinochchi Group III (34) Tamil 24. 25.02.03 Mullaitivu Group III (32) Tamil 25. 24.03.03 Batticaloa Group III (24) Tamil 26. 25.03.03 Batticaloa Group III (33) Tamil Target Groups Target Achieved Group I - Engineers & Project Assistants 03 (84) 03 (75) Group II - Technical Officers &Social Momilizers. 08 (244) 12 (416) xii Group III - CBO Beneficiaries 44 (880) 26( 793) l * Figures in parenthesis are number of participants. Source: PMU Env. records. Table 4. Training Prgrammes Conducted by Districts at CBOs Level District Number of No. of Focal Total Number Training Villages Of CBO Conducted Covered Participants 1. Jaffna 1 5 30 2. Kilinochchi 1 2 34 3. Mullaitivu 1 2 32 4. Vavuniya 4 10 115 5. Mannar 1 3 37 6. Trincomalee 8 10 232 7. Batticloa 2 6 57 8. Ampara 2 3 64 9. Anuradhapura 2 2 48 10.Polonnaruwa 4 4 144 Total 26 47 793 Source: PMU Environment Program Records 3.2 Effectiveness of the Environmental Training Programs 3.2.1 Target Group I - Senior Officers Impact of Environmental Training on Professional Performance The findings of the evaluation study indicate that all Senior Officers had a positive attitude towards conserving the environment. They were generally aware of the environmental impacts that they were involved in. Table 5 shows the response to three major questions asked: How useful was the knowledge of training in their jobs?, Whether they have used knowledge in the projects' activities? and Have they had any difficulty in applying them?. With regard to the usefulness of the environmental training: majority (above 74%) of the senior officials was generally agreeing the usefulness of the topics discussed in the environmental training. They accepted the concepts of environmental impacts of the projects and the mitigatory measures discussed at the environmental training. In respect to use of knowledge in project stages: all the SOs reported that, generally the environmental safeguards were already incorporated in the preliminary inspection report and in full feasibility reports of the projects and it was covered indirectly through the routine technical auditing of the project. However, to further strengthen the environmental aspects indicated in the training, they encouraged the TOs to incorporation of environmental safeguards through adequate use of the environmental checklist in planing, implementation and monitoring of the projects. This has generally increased the technical quality of the project. xiii Table 5. Impact of Training on Professional Performance Topic Usefulness of Used Knowledge in Difficulty in the Knowledge in Job Projects Stages Application of Kno. Very Quite Not Often Seldom Never No At first Still Inter-sectoral 52% 48% 00% 36% 45% 19% 00% 31% 69% Linkages in Env. (18) (17) (00) (13) (16) (06) (00) (12) (24) Eng. Solutions to 38% 55% 12% 31% 46% 23% 12% 15% 73% Env. Problems (12) (19) 04) (11) (16) (08) 04) (05) (26) IEE & EIA 10% 74% 16% 04% 16% 80% 00% 21% 79% Process (03) (26) 06) (01) (06) (28) (00) (07) (28) Monitoring & 32% 63% 05% 48% 52% 00% 00% 24% 76% Evaluation (11) (22) (02) (17) (18) (00) (00) (08) (27) * Figures in parenthesis are number of responses On the difficulties in the application of acquired knowledge in the environmental training: many officials (about 70%) doubted if the environment training program - though it gave more insights and ideas of environmental safeguards - was in itself adequate to improve the environmental impacts of the projects; they had to follow strict instructions and real implementations of the projects particularly in tank rehabilitation were not in a position to examine closely and apply the safeguards as indicated. Personal Views on Environmental Training The environmental training program was widely remembered on the concepts of environmental impacts of tank head works and irrigation facilities rehabilitation and its linkages of environmental management. Other subjects, such as Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) were remembered -and that too vaguely - by less than half the respondents. The majority of the respondents reported that there was a delay in the environmental training and insisted that it should be offered with the village development plan. Senior officers consider environmental training methods to be effective. They value the positive client orientation of the field officers brought about by the environmental training. Using the environmental guidelines and tools facilitated an improvement in the contribution of farmers in planning and conducting environmental safeguards. However, they accepted that, the technical officers had several obstacles in incorporating environmental safeguard application in practice. Some SOs mentioned that they learnt something about social obligation of environmental management and these officers said that, after attending the training programm, they carried out their duties related to environment more conscientiously than they had been doing previously. An attitude observed during the interviews at all levels of the hierarchy was that the environmental effort was not wasted even if the acquired knowledge was not applied: the argument was that it has created a valuable environmental consciousness among the people. xiv 3.2.2 Target Group II - Technical Officers and Social Mobilizers Effectiveness of the Environmental Training on the Use of the Environmental Safeguards The evaluation study found that the Technical Officers (TOs), Social Mobilizers (SMs) and Work Supervisors (WSs) were generally aware of the advantages of the environmental training to their present duties. Due to the its importance more than targeted number of 8 training to TOs additional 3 training were conducted (see Table 2). The training sessions conducted were subject to evaluation by the coordinators. The feed back from the trainees was helpful in updating and modifying the programs. The review of these feed back reports reveal that many training programs resulted in significant improvement in the understanding of environmental checklist and its practical application in the filed particularly by the TOs. The environmental training received by TOs were useful in promoting the environmental safeguards application in the different stages of the projects' activities such as planning, implementation and monitoring. Only a third of the TOs mentioned that the training helped incorporation of environmental safeguards measures in the preparation of village level feasibility plans/reports. Review of the project feasibility reports prepared by TOs revealed improvement in the use of the checklist in environmental assessment, and mitigation procedures at the filed level. Further the 39% of TOs and SMs indicated that they have received good support from their superior officers in doing so (Table 6). Table 6. Effectiveness of Environmental Training in the Activities of TOs & SMs Activities Responses TO SM & WS Average Promotion of CBOs in environment activities. 54% (15) 62% (15) 53% (30) Application of environment checklist in fields 30% (08) - 30% (08) Incorporation of environmental safeguards in 52% (14) - 52% (14) feasibility reports. Coordination with senior officers and others 36% (10) 41% (09) 39% (19) Total number of respondents 28 21(14 + 7) 49 * Figures in parenthesis are number of responses This middle level training in incorporating environmental skills was found to be weak on the part of Social Mobilizers (SM). This was due to difficulties they face in mobilizing the people and lack of technical expertise in the technical aspects. However, the review of the reports on VDP, VSP, PRA and PNA prepared by the social miobilizers with the help of the CBOs indicate their progress in the village development. They also give training to CBOs on environment, water management and record maintaining. The SMs agreed that environmental training offered to them has been much useful in doing their duties. However, lack of team work among TOs and SMs was observed. This was due to their own limitations. xv Problem Faced by Technical Officers and Social Mobilizers Although the NEIAP has been successful in getting the cooperation of the line agencies, filed officers who are responsible for environmental identification, monitoring and writing feasibility reports, highlighted some limitations encountered by them. The training did not have much impact upon the subsequent behaviour and performance of the target group II. Table 7 shows the problems faced by TO in carrying out environmental safeguards in their duties. About 26% of the respondents reported that environmental training was not adequate for the use of environmental safeguards into project activities. Further, 37% of the TOs face problems of transport due remoteness of the project area. In addition, lack of timely submission of the schedule of activities by the CBOs is a major difficulty in carrying out their duties. Further, TO and SM receive Rs. 200.00 per day as incentive and they feel these amounts were insufficient for the additional responsibilities in carrying out environmental safeguard in the villages. Further provision of transport facilities has to be taken into consideration in order to increase the coverage and mobility. The field staff also expressed much to be done on the system of environmental monitoring and evaluation. The difference in motivation and environmental input driven towards environmental safeguard application by the field officers is observed. In fact, success of the environmental safeguard application would be greatly on such factors. Therefore, measures have to be taken to recognize the efforts of the field staff and to reward the efficient officers based on their contribution. Table 7. Problems Faced by the Technical Officers and Social Mobilizers Problems Responses FO S M&WS Avg. Organizational constraints - different 11 18 task assigned % (03) 24% (05) % (08) Poor training about environmental 22 26 guidelines % (06) 29% (06) % (12) Problems in transport and incentive 37 - 37 payments % (10) % (10) Specific local problems 26 32 % (07) 38% (08) % (15) Insufficient facilities to conduct training 04 06 to CBOs % (01) 08% (02) % (03) Total 100 10 10 _ /o(28) 0% (21) 0%(49) * Figures in parenthesis are number of responses According to the field officers response it was found that the rehabilitation work caused less damages to environment as engineering design includes the quality checks that xvi address the environmental component of the project. According to the degree of impact of the project activities on environment, TOs ranked tank rehabilitation and ecosystem management as the most important one. Drinking wells, access roads and community buildings were considered to have less negative impact on enviromnent. Almost all the field officers were in opinion that environmental training was important for them. 3.2.3 Target Group III -Members of Community Based Organizations - Effect of Environmental Training on Knowledge Farming is the major source of income for most of the study population. Majority of the farmers is young and had received secondary education. There are no significant difference in age and education among the districts. Effect of environmental training on environmental knowledge was analyzed based on knowledge and attitude. The mean total knowledge score was 10.72 with standard deviation of 1.57. Farmers within frequencies between 0 - 9.15 were considered as low knowledge group. Score between 9.15 - 12.20 was considered as medium knowledge group and the rest was considered as high knowledge group. Distribution frequencies of CBO respondents according to knowledge score are given in Table 8. Table 8 shows that in each district Farmers had received some knowledge on environment through the environmental training conducted to them. The knowledge of Northern farmers' was followed by Eastern and Border districts, above medium knowledge were 79%, 69% and 63% respectively. With respect to difference in knowledge level among the district, chi-square test indicates that the difference is significant at 5% probability. Due to environmental training over two third of the CBO respondents seemed to have a moderate understanding of the environmental impacts of the projects that link with their farming activities. Before the environmental training people were not aware of environmental problems and their impacts on their livings. Table 8. Distribution of CBOs Respondents on Environmental Knowledge Score Environmental Northern Eastern Border Average of Knowledge Level District. District District All Districts Low 0 - 9.15 21% (05) 31% (11) 37% (09) 30% (25) Medium 9.16 - 12.2 53% (13) 49% (18) 46% (11) 49% (42) High > 12.3 26% (06) 20% (07) 17% (04) 21% (17) Total No. of repondents 24 36 24 84 * Figures in parentheses are number of responses Using the problem solving methodologies facilitated a higher understanding and contribution of farmers in environmental safeguard methods. There was a considerable variation in the quality of environmental training received by the farmers. The farmers are generally satisfied with the quality of advice given by the trained resource persons. However, some were not happy about the training received. xvii About 40% of the targeted training programs are yet to be completed. The future training to CBOs need more close attention and monitoring. This will ensure effective incorporation of the environmental concern of the beneficiaries in the project activities. Attitude of the Farmers Towards Environmental Safeguards The attitude score of farmers in the studies sample ranged from 46 to 75. This was divided into three categories as favourable (positive) 48 - 75, neutral 58 - 67 and unfavorable (negative) 66 - 75. Table 9 shows significant higher positive attitude in Northern district; followed by Eastern and border districts, the values are 85%, 55%R and 43% respectively. There was significant association between attitudes and cooperation among the farmers in group activities. The attitude of WRDSs members was higher than RDSs and FOs members. Table 9. Attitude of CBOs Towards Environmental Safeguards Attitude Level Northern Eastern Border Average of District. District District All Districts Favourable 48 - 75 85% (21) 55% (20) 43% (10) 61% (51) Neutral 58 - 67 10% (02) 15 %(05) 25% (06) 17% (13) Unfavourable 66 - 75 05% (01) 30% (11) 32% (08) 22% (20) * Figures in parentheses are number of responses The interview with non-participants of the training indicated that useful training information always was shared among CBOs' members. Promoting active involvement of CBOs in the projects, through environmental training had generally resulted in increased concerns on group behaviour. In general, environmental training programs have been useful in strengthening the environmental safe guards in the project activities. The farmers had expressed that the environmental training program has been very conducive in expanding their existing knowledge regard to environmental concerns. More than two third of the CBO respondents expressed that they very well remembered the watershed and irrigation aspects discussed in environmental training programs. Further, it was observed that there were a number of environmental concerns that would uplift both the productivity and the efficiency of water of the poor dry zone farmers. However, their involvement in identifying, monitoring and mitigatory measures in environment is inadequate. Farmers were of the opinion that all should be encouraged to cooperate in addressing the environmental safeguards measures. Further, the respondent farmers intended that the environmental safeguard measures could be attended if farmers' income level was improved. Given below is the extent of application by farmers on some important environmental safeguard measures, which are promoted by the environmental training program among xviii farmers and villagers. Majority of the respondents expressed that the information and skill impaired during the training were of help in improving their farming practices. E.g. Incorporating straw into soil, wise use of chemicals, agro forestry etc. The attitudes of the respondents towards environmental training were positive. About 82% of the respondents have expressed the usefulness of the training (Table 10). Table 10. Usefulness in the Application of Environmental Training Topics Response of CBOs North East Border Average 1. Recycling of straw 39% (9) 38% (14) 27% (7) 35% (30) 2. Wise use of chemicals 32% (8) 22% (08) 33% (8) 9% (24) 3. Tree planting - agro forestry 19% (5) 11% (04) 18% (4) 16% (13) 4. Soil & water conservation techniques 06% (1) 21% (07) 13% (3) 13% (11) 5. Operation & Maintenance of tank 04% (1) 08% (03) 09% (2) 07% (06) Total 100% (24) 100%(36) 100% (24) 100 (84) * Figures in parenthesis are number of responses Weakness of Environmental Training Mentioned by the Trained Farmers One fundamental objective of the environmental training was to disseminate the environmental safeguard practices among a large number of the target population. If considerable number of farmers has not adopted the promoted practices there could be matter worthy to be investigated. As shown in Table 11. The most frequently mentioned problems (42%) with related to environmental training were related to timing of training. They have indicated that many environmental problems could been avoided if the training was given earlier with the village development planning. The second most common weakness (35%) mentioned was about the practicality of applying technical advice imparted in the training. Carefully selecting the procedures adopted by some successful cases and using them as example in future training programes could overcome this. Also demonstration should illustrate the application of appropriate environmental identification, monitoring and mitigation. The majority of the farmers had agreed with the farmers' selection and satisfied with the duration of training conducted. Table 11. Major Weakness of the Environmental Training Conducted Type of weakness Response of CBOs North East Border Average 1. Timing oftraining 51% (12) 43% (15) 32% (8) 42% (35) 2. Technical advice 33% (8) 32% (11) 41% (10) 35% (29) 3. Duration of training 06%(2) 11% (04) 10% (2) 09% (08) 4. Beneficiaries selection 01% (1) 09% (04) 07% (2) 06% (05) 5. Location of training 09% (2) 05% (02) 10% (2) 08% (07) Total 100% (24) 100%(36) 100% (24) 100 (84) * Figures in parenthesis are number of responses xix In addition to the above mentioned weakness of the training program the following are suspected major factors that affect the success of environmental training at the CBOs level: 1) Honesty and sincere leadership, 2) Self reliant sprit of the group members, 3) Active participation of the members in discussion and decision making, 4) Homogeneity of the group, 5) Cooperation from the implementing agency. 3.3 Overall Success of the Environmental Training Programs To obtain tangible evidence to categorize the level of environmental training programs to their levels of success, a qualitative index was developed using the following indicators: a) Number of training completed.(Scale: 0%=1, 25%=2, 50% =3, 75%=4 & 100%=5) b) Number of trainees attended per training (Scale: 10=1, 20=2, 30=3, 40=4 & 50=5) c) Usefulness expressed (Scale:High=5, Good=4, Average=3, Poor=2 & Very poor =1) d) Level of application (Scale: High=5, Good=4, Average=3, Poor=2 & V.poor =1) e) Problems faced (Scaled as, Non-5, Low=4, Average=3, High=2 & V.high=l). The values allocated to for each variable were added to arrive at an aggregate. Then the distributions of aggregate values were hypothetically divided to three categories as "good (more thanl6), average (between 15 and 12) and poor (Less thanl2)". It was found that the training programs at the target group I was good with success index value of 19, while majority of the training conducted at target group II and III had an average success with success index values of 15 and 13 respectively. The overall average success index was 16, indicate that the overall environmental training programs had achieved an average success. One of the important factors responsible was that environmental training was given only after the project was implemented. The proportion of successful environmental training was comparatively higher in Trincomalee district followed by Batticlao, Vavuniya,. Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa districts. Environmental training offered at Ampara was not adequate and the women respondents in Mannar and Vavuniya demanded environmental training. Environmental training in Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa had increased concern of CBOs on environmental safeguards. However, there is lack of attention due to several limitations that delayed the project activities. The PMU get the services of one environmental trained project assistant on a part time basis, who is working for provincial council for Central Environmental Authority. It is suggested that his services should be fully utilized to complete the balance of the training program. The other staff trained under the environmental program could be used for frequent visits to the environmental sensitive project areas to encourage the use of environmental safe guards by the beneficiaries. The environmental safeguard activities such as identification, monitoring and mitigation were only followed at the beginning. Thereafter, the commitment of many farmers had gradually decreased due to the fact that xx the returns were not forthcoming in the foreseeable future. Thus frequent visits and follow up are essential in setting up successful environmental safeguard implementation. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Conclusions The following conclusions are drawn based on the analysis of the data collected and the Filed observation in the project areas. 1) The environmental training programs at senior officers level is successful and it has satisfactorily met the objective of increased concern on the environmental conservation in the project activities. They encouraged the TOs to incorporate environmental safeguards through adequate use of the environmental impact in planning, implementation and monitoring of the projects. Also they perceived favourable changes of TOs performance after the environmental training. 2) Field officers had learned the importance and the application of the environmental impact assessment checklist and the procedures at the field level. The TOs are seem to perform better in using environmental safeguards in the field. This is clearly revealed in feasibility plans and reports prepared by them now. Involvement of Social Mobilisers is highly useful for the motivation of the CBOs in using environmental safeguards and technical advice should be taken from the line agencies wherever possible. The middle level environmental training programs had an average success and there are few weaknesses in this groups for effective implementation of environmental safeguards with their present duties. 3) All the community based organizations had positive attitude on the environmental training program. Providing environmental information through CBOs will enhance the effectiveness of environmental safeguard technology dissemination at the village level. This group had a partial success and about 40% of the training still needs to be conducted. More emphasize should be paid in conducting the training properly to this group. 4) The evaluation study shows that environmental training did not have much impact upon the Subsequent behaviour and performance of the TOs because of: difficulty in transport due remoteness of the project areas, delay in submission of the schedule of project activities by the CBOs and specific local problems. xxi 4.2 Recommendations To improve the effectiveness of implementation of the environmental management aspects of the projects the following recommendation could be considered. 1. The impact of environmental training program could probably be improved if the training effort were conducted frequently in local areas, where the participants could travel easily, short training each designed to serve a particular purpose. The training should be coordinated with other measures such as organizational development and greater use of experienced people to provide advice. 2. Future environmental training should be given at the initial stage of the village development program. This helps to address the environmental safeguard of the projects at the early stage by the beneficiaries and the implementing agencies. 3. The effectiveness of any training programs depends on its continuos monitoring and evaluation, which should include appropriate and different methods. The environmental training at CBOs level is important and subject to monitoring and evaluation. This helps in identifying the overall performance of trainers and trainees. 4. Workshops of short duration on environmental aspects should be held from time to time to exchange and generalize experiences and find solution to new problems in environment in the projects. Acknowledgement The consultant thank the staff of the NEIAP particularly to Mr.P.Gnanachelvam Project Assistant for the support extended and help during the data collection in the North and East and border districts. xxii 5.0 ANNEXURES 5.1 Annexure 01 List of Officers Interviewed Name Position Organization Trincomalee Mr.S.Manoharan Technical Director PMU, NEIAP Mr.Jeganathan LSA Advisor Engineer PMIU, NEIAP Ms.Umathevi Haritharan Engineer PMU, NEIAP Mr.S.Gananchelvam Project Assistant PMU & DS - CEA Mr.Tahyanantha Konara Project Assistant NEIAP Mr.Thevanantha Finance Auditor PMU Mr.Knadasamy Technical Auditor TEAMS Mr.Silvaretnam DPD NEIAP Mr.Loganathan Irrigation Engineer Irrigation Department Ms. Sarogini Irrigation Engineer Irrigation Department Batticaloa Mr.Vinotharaj'ah DPD NEIAP Mr.Mukunthan Engineer NEIAP Ms.Puvana Engineer NEIAP Mr.Kanagasabai Project Assistant NEIAP Ms.Kumuthamalar Project Assistant NEIAP Mr.Markandu Agricultural Instructor DOA Ampara Mr.Bava DPD NEIAP Mr. Sulaiman Engineer NEIAP Mr.Kumaran Project Assistant NEIAP Mr.Ajeer Technical Assistant NEIAP Mr.Vadivelu Irrigation Director Irrigation Department Mr.G.J.Anurajah Program Coordinator World Vision P.D.A.Jeyakumar Technical Assistant Thambiluvil Vavuniya Mr.Sivapatham DPD NEIAP Mr. N.Sriskandarajah Engineer Irigation Department Mr.Suthaharan Engineer ID, Chedikulam Mr.Uthayaseelan Irrigation Engineer ID, Chedikulam Mr.Thavaseelan Irrigation Engineer ID, Chedikulam Mr.Kalaichelvam Project Assistant NEIAP Mr.T.Sithamparanathan Project Assistant NEIAP Mr.Navaneethan Project Assistant NEIAP Mr.Suthaharan Assistant Director Inland Fisheries Dpt. xxiii Mannar Mr.Nicholospillai DPD/ Addl. GA NEIAP Mr.Pathinathan Divisional Secretary Central Government Mr.Navaratnasingam Engineer NEIAP Mr.Puviraj an Project Assistant NEIAP Mr. Sakayanathan Proj ect Assistant NEIAP Mr.V.Rajarajeswaran Rural Development NEIAP Mr.Karunaharan Officer Agricultural DOA Instructor Anuradhahpura Mr.Seneveratne DPD/ N EIAP Ms.Devika Vijeyasinghe Engineer NEIAP Mr.Mendis Project Assistant NEIAP Mr.Munasinga Encineer/Quality NEIAP Mr .... Program Coordinator Seva Lanka Polonnaruwa DPD/ Mr.Weerasinghe Engineer/ Quality NEIAP Mr.S.D.Mediwake Project Assistant NEIAP Mr.Paranagama Retired Irrigation Officer NEIAP Mr.Madigasekera Engineer NEIAP Mr.P.Anandaweerasingha Divisional Engineer Central Imr. Dpt. Mr.S.J.K.Alas Central Irri. Dpt. xxiv 5.2.1 Annexure 02 Evaluation of Effectiveness of Environmental Training - NEIAP June 2003 Schedule for Member of Community Based Organizations CBO 1.0 Background Information 1.1. Name of the Respondent: .................... Village: ............... District: . 1.2 Age: .... Yrs. Sex: Male / Female Race: S / T / M Education:. 1.3 Occupation: .................. Land Extent Owned: ......... /Ac. Income ........../Month.. 2.0 Environmental Training Impact 2.1 Whether followed the environmental training: Y / N When: .......................... Who conducted the training? TO / SM / PA ................................................. 2.2 Topics Remembered, Relevance, Quality and Degree of Usefulness of the Environmental Training followed. Topic 2.2.1 2.2.2 212.3 2.2.4 Remembered Relevance Quality Usefulness Code 1 Code 2 Code 2 Code 2 1.Water use efficiency 2.Tank ecosystem restoration 3.Drinking well contamination 4.Access roads and building Code 1: 1 Very well 2. Well 3. Some 4. Very little 5. None Code 2. 1. High 2. Good 3. Average 4. Poor 5. Difficult to comment 2.3 Important aspects learnt form the environmental training. Topic Response Code No. 2 1. Soil Erosion Control 2. Water Conservation, concern about water waste. 3. Integrated Watershed Management 4. Tank Operation and Maintenance 5. Others Code 2. 1. High 2. Good 3. Average 4. Poor 5. Difficult to comment 2.4 If you feel environmental training was ineffective give reasons. Problem Areas Reasons 1. Location 2. Duration 2. Number 3. Planning 4. Others 2.5. Attitude towards the environmental safeguards xxv No. Environmental Concerns Response Code No. 3 1 Participation in watershed management 2 Reduce water use to benefit the affected farmers 3 Contribute labour in rehabilitation work. 4 Planning activity by FO activities in solving env. problems. 5 Cooperation with agencies to environmental monitoring. 6 Empowerment to FO is more important for env. mgt. 7 Importance of linking with the agencies 8. Reduce tank bed cultivation to reduce sedimentation. 9. Support to divert ag. run off to reduce G.water contamination 10 Sharing of environmental information with others. 11 Importance of honesty and sincerity leadership for CBOs 12 Concern of people to reduce habitat degradation. 13 Suggestion by people to env. program. 14 Active involvement in environmental planning activities. 15 Self-reliant sprit of the farmer. Code No. 3: 1. Strongly agree, 2. Agree, 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly disagree xxvi 2.6 Environmental Knowledge Score No Environmental safeguard measures. Response Yeas = 1 No = 0 1 Natural drainage should not be blocked 2 Retaining ground vegetation as much as possible in rehabilitation. 3 Maintaining drainage channel is equally important as maintaining irrigation channel. 4 Isolated rock mining has little effect to environment 5 Raising the tank bud will damage the downstream ecosystem. 6 Monitoring provide timely warning of potential environmental damage. 7 Salinity can be controlled through biological means 8. Degraded habitat may never return to pre- degraded levels. 9. Tank bed cultivation will increase sedimentation. 10 Over pumping lead to permanent damage of G. water xxvii 2.7 Impacts of environmental training you think in the following projects? Project Impact due to training Response Code No. 4 Minor Tanks Improvement in bank structures Importance of WS management. Improvement in irri. 0 & M Rural Roads Drainage improvement Operation and Maintenance Drinking Well Consequence of polluted water Management Com. Buildings CBO participation LSA Controlled activities: rock & brick Code No 4. 1. More awareness 2. Concern increased 3. Group action initiated 4. No change. 2.8 Problems of implementing environmental safeguards in these projects. Project Problems Rank (1=High - 5 =Low) Minor Tanks Contract procedure Rural Roads Group action Drinking wells Technical advice Community buildings Fund allocation LSA Location 2.9 Suggestions for effective environmental management in the projects. Proj ect Suggestions Response Minor Tanks/ Rural Contract Procedures Roads Strengthen group Drinking Well Training Community Buildings Fund LSA Adopt law 3. Community Based Organization 3.1 Involvement in the CBOs ? From when ............... Member of FO / RDS / WRDS: Office bearer. 3.2 Response of CBO members, villagers about the environmental training 1. Very Positive 2. Positive 3. Neutral 4. Negative 5. Very Negative. 3.3 Rank the importance of the following role you expect from the CBO and implementing agencies for you to actively involve in the environmental activity. 1. Honest & sincere leadership ........... 2. Self reliant sprit of the group members ....... 3. Active participation of members......4. Homogeneity of the group. 5. Cooperation from line agency ........ 6. Proper guidance by project personal. 4. Dissemination/ Training effect 4.1 The most effective ways of disseminating of env. practices to a wider group?......... 1. Training to CBOs 2. Leaflets 3. TV & Radio programs 4. Training to all. xxviii 5.2.2 Annexure 03 Evaluation of Effectiveness of Environmental Training - NEIAP Schedule for Technical Officers' TO 1. Name of Officer: ........................... Sex: M/F Position:. 2. Working area/village/range/ District: ........................ Institution:. 3. Time period in the present work station ..................... Qualification; 4. No. of farm families in the area: ...... No. of training conducted ....... No targeted:... 5. How are farmers selected for the training:..................................................... 6. What is your personal opinion about farmers selection? ..................................... 7. What % of farmers who actively participated in the discussions?.......................... 8. Reasons for the difference in the numbers, if any:........................................... 9. General views on the use of environmental training obtained Statements Response CN. 1 1. The content of methodological env. training provided was useful 2. Method /tool learnt are not relevant to my day to day activities. 3. The organizational facilities are not conducive to carryout training. 4. Environmental safeguards are difficult to implement in the field. 5. Env. training gave me new ideas for my day to day duties. Code No. 1 1. Strongly agree, 2. Agree, 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly disagree 12 What is your involvement and difficulties faced with respect to following environmental training aspects? a) Training of farmers........................................................................ b) Application of the environmental impact assessment checklist in the filed. c) Monitoring and mitigation of environmental impacts in the projects. d) Preparation of village feasibility plans/ reports incorporating environment. ...................................................................................................... 13. Did you get the necessary support of the superior officers in environmental training? ..................................................................................................... 14. What is your opinion on? Benefit received from the training: Hypotheses Degree of Fulfillment 1 2 3 4 5 1. Learn about the real situation of env. effect of the project. 2. Change in attitude towards the environmental safeguard. 3. Integration of other discipline for environmental solution. 4. Environmental has training lead to increased env. Awareness. 5. Obtained positive feedback from farmers 15. Problems faced and Suggestion to improve environmental training (Were the farmers' views respected and incorporated) xxix 5.2.3 Annexure 04 Evaluation of Effectiveness of Environmental Training - NEIAP Guidelines for Senior Officers' Discussions SO 1. Name of Officer: ........................ Sex: M/F Position:. 2. Working District: ........................ Institution:. 3. Time period in the present work station ..................... Qualification;. 4. No. of farm families in the area: ...... No. of training conducted ...... No targeted: 5. General comments of the officer Officers have: Responses l T2 3 4 5 1. Usefulness and adequacy of the environmental training 2. Learned and understood the approach and the methods. 3. Accepted/appreciated the approach and the methods. 4. Application & motivated TOs to use env. safeguards. 5. Achieved positive feed back from filed officers &FOs. 6. Obtained active support/ encouragement from PMU. 7. Difficulties experienced. 1 l. Very high, 2. High, 3. Average, 4. Poor & 5. Very Poor. 6. Efforts taken in incorporating environmental aspects in the project Activity Planning Implementation Monitoring and Remarks* Evaluation Process adopted Awareness, Meetings & Instructions Methods used Multidiscipline Participatory FO role Evidence Records & Observation Problems faced Technical & Approach *Indicate whether these are adequately followed? What actions & emphasis are needed? xxx 1I I