E3069 v5 ULGSP Stakeholder Consultations June 20, 2012: ESSA June 21, 2012: Technical Manual Stakeholder consultation on ESSA: June 20, 2012 Group session, Recommendations and Actions on ESSA Group 1 1. LGAs need to be allowed to play role to procure experts to do the job for ESIA – do the ESIA 2. LGAs need to form team of experts at LGA level in planning department – if new team going to counter planning process. How to do practically – need team under planning unit 3. LGAs allowed to do review of ESIA and feed to NEMC – apply to R&C issues. When ESIA/RAP done, usually sent upward to approve – doesn’t include inputs from people at district/LGA level – doesn’t take into LGA views/context. Issues with timing since approvals are centrally done. Better that review/approval happens at LGA levels. Better for LGA to invest funds in budget to keep unit functioning 4. ESIA should include gender, equity, social issues 5. Indicators: a. LGA to carry out public consult – should do consult report and feedback. To measure success, need buy-in from end users b. Performance of ESMP - mitigation measures. Looks at ESMP compared to gaps in ESIA (ESMP should fill the gaps) c. Performance of ESMP: “compliance� is if ESMF done or not. But performance should be measured by LGA. Compliance measured by Bank. d. Grievance: prompt, effective, fair, legal. These are measures/qualities. e. Promptness: when ESIA, grievances, RAPs are done. Measure performance here. f. M&E: quarterly and annually generated. Quarterly reports are to keep tabs. Annual reports are to assess overall performance. g. Number of meeting notes to get buy-in from meetings, participation. To ensure consultation. What were outcomes, feedback, reactions. 6. Checking popularity of projects among end-users. Does the project meet peoples’ needs. How to achieve results collectively. Capacity building/awareness of change. 7. By laws: multi-stakeholder process to make sure by-laws work. How to empower people to make decisions? 8. How can public be informed and engaged: LGAs have ongoing stakeholder consultations. Do needs analysis of stakeholders before projects. Group 2 1. Delegation: yes, LGAs should be able to issue certificates for smaller projects. Because EMA allows delegation. Also for valuation – decentralization can happen here too (either LGA or regional). 2. Training: Needed, specifically for ES impact ID and mitigation. Training should specifically be centered on E/S impact issues. Courses in TZ cover general envtl issues. Training needed for project screening in LGAs too for technical staff. Trained staff should be registered in NEMC system as qualified experts – if powers delegated, need to become registered experts. Would need to if issuing certificates. Tailor training program specifically for ESIA should be introduced in existing training institutions in TZ. 3. Special budget set aside: to integrate measures for E/S issues into project planning from the beginning. Problem that hinders integration is lack of budget. Also have budget for training/mainstreaming environmental and social issues in community. 4. Planning team in LGAs should be multi-sectoral, gender sensitive, multi- disciplinary. Should look at vulnerable groups as planning projects. 5. CDOs should be included in early planning of projects. CDOs have good knowledge on communities. 6. Indicators: a. Gender-sensitive indicators: e.g. with indigenous/vulnerable groups, ESIA teams- ensure gender balance b. Proportion of budget allocated to ES impact mitigation – does budget cover ES impact ID, RC, ESIA. c. Qualification and effectiveness of teams doing ESIA. Members of committees – are they qualified and effective to undertake ESIA d. Are attitudes/demands of communities changing to demand better ESM 7. By-laws: a. Incentive: e.g. awards to promote/encourage. Subsidies, tax benefits. b. Disincentive: taxes, levies, penalties. 8. Inform/engage public: should be a multi-channel means of communication – e.g. religious institutions, political meetings. Public engagement has been a failure – in urban areas, it’s hard to get people to attend political meetings (done more in rural areas), so getting information through religious institutions could be one effective avenue. 9. Politics are trying to override public administrating and management – if we don’t recognize activities in political juggling, could jeopardize what formulating and what trying to build. Be careful when discussing politics. Politics with few political inclinations do well, but projects with political issues get stuck. Group 3 Recommendations center on how environmental and social issues are often not viewed as a priority by LGAs (e.g. DED, Councillors). We asked the question “why?� and developed recommendations to create an enabling environment to improve environmental and social management. 1. Sensitization of councilors and directors a. Creating enabling environment starts at the top with the DED and Councillors – noted that the Councillors are very important because they can have more power than the DED in some cases b. One option is a study tour to other LGAs that have been successful and really see the value of good ESM (example given of how this is done under TSCP) c. The idea is that with greater awareness and placing value on ESM, it will be more effective to mainstream issues into project planning and prioritization. 2. Training for staff in LGAs on project teams a. Need to first know the gaps with EMOs/CDOs, others, develop some qualifications b. Contract an expert/consultant to develop training program, this should be in collaboration with NEMC/Lands/VPO/other MDAs to understand what competencies are necessary and develop the most effective format. 3. Community sensitization a. EMOs/CDOs get the training – needs to be more than planting trees b. Once EMOs/CDOs are trained, they can do a better job of reaching out to communities 4. By-laws a. Previous 3 points feed into developing by-laws: if you have a supportive DED/Councillors, plus a public that demands better standards, then passing by-laws for ESM is much more likely 5. Monitoring system a. E.g. in manual, specific to environmental issues in projects b. But didn’t conclude with what that person would look at, person is there, but which issues, there are checklists but what questions Stakeholder consultation on Technical Manual: June 21, 2012 Question from ULGAs Answer Eligible projects under ULGSP: Its a threshold set under ULGSP because focus is on Why only 15km of road? rehabilitation and improvement of priority urban roads. Also, based on amount of funds provided under ULGSP. Eligible projects under ULGSP: The Council has the discretion to decide on the type of equipment to procure, but, it should be tangible enough to what kind of equipment? serve the majority or resolve a crucial ill-situation Why are projects that displace Its a threshold set under ULGSP so as to have minimum more than 20 households compensation, if any and the Council will have to bear such ineligible costs. The definition of Household same as in urban planning Will fund disbursement take LGAs to prepare project concept to demonstrate their plan place before or after LGAs and budget on how the funds will be spent present project concept Not all LGA staff are The Manual is following the EIA regulations and sets a registered and will not qualify standard. to be part the ESIA Team Current requirements for registration are not very difficult to attain and allows for various sector specialists to practice and, therefore LGA staff have opportunity to register. Manual will include training and capacity building aspects that will assist LGA staff in getting competencies for registration How will the other LGAs who PMO-RALG is planning to call all ULGAs to review the final didn't attend also be involved draft. in commenting on the manual Feedback on the Environmental and Social Management System Topic Comments from ULGAs ESMU ESMU be anchored in Economic Planning Department who are overall responsible for LGA project planning and budgeting. this scan be reviewed in the future as the unit establishes itself as self- sustaining EMO (head),Environmental Engineer/ Environmental Health Officer, Sociologist/CDO, Town Planner, Land Officer/Valuer , Social Welfare Officer  EMO: to register project from IPS, to review and screen the project, to advise whether project is acceptable or not , to liaise with NEMC  CDO: SIA, vulnerability, equity, governance, Social mobilisation and awareness  Land Officer: RAP and implementation  Town Planner: Layout and plans  Environmental /Public Engineer/Health Officer: Environmental health issues Small projects to beapproved at LGA level but not interfered with other units Experience from ULGA shows that EMO are side stepped and environmental and social assessments and management are given little weight- therefore the ESMU anchored in Economic Planning will have to be involved in planning and reporting of the project. Report 2 copies of report to be disseminated: economics, works community dissemination development, town planning, health and legal and standing committees Central government and RAS Ward committees Delegation District Environment Committee RAS may be too far for some of the LGAs, hence, District Administrative Secretary can assume the role. Feedback days 14 days Public disclosure Public hearing Ward and Mtaa meetings Local newspapers Government gazette Public Notice Boards and local media Fees to cover costs 10% of the project to be given to ESMU to cover costs Costs to also include  Site visit allowance  Stationary and fuel  sitting allowance = TShs 50,000 * 12  refreshments allowance ESMU to follow LGA committee allowance structure but proposing lower rates: Chairperson TShs 75,000, members TShs 50,000 to be from Project budget. NEMC forms To be reviewed to reflect present context Regional Officers for Regional Land Offices will have Commissioner of Lands and Valuers RAP that are being established: Central, Lake, South Coast, Southern highlands, north RAP Team Land Officer to head of unit Community Development Officer/Sociologist, Valuer Mtaa/village officers, Representatives of PAP –gender based Approval of Still under Chief Government Valuer. Reform is underway to Valuation Costs decentralize Valuation approval to Zonal Offices same as for Surveys and Mapping as it is now for issuance of Land Title Deeds. PMO- RALG to discuss with MLHHSD for vest powers on the Councils to approve Valuation Costs.