Page 1 1 AZERBAIJAN RURAL ENVIRONMENT PROJECT ACCESS RESTRICTION PROCESS FRAMEWORK Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources Project Implementation Unit 1 JANUARY, 2005 1 Prepared with the assistance of Mr. Gordon Appleby RP291 Page 2 2 ACRONYMS AREP Azerbaijan Rural Environment Project EA Environmental Assessment FDD Forestry Development Department MENR Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources NGO Non-governmental Organization ONP Ordubad National Park OP Operational Policy (World Bank) PA Protected Area PCU Project Coordination Unit (local) PIU Project Implementation Unit (central) PF Process Framework REA Rayon Executive Authority SDNP Shah Dag National Park VC Village Cluster Page 3 3 1. The Azerbaijan Rural Environment project (AREP) will establish one new national park, Shah Dag in the Caucasus mountains, and greatly enlarge another, Ordubad, in the Zangezur mountains. Creation or extension of national parks for biodiversity conservation typically entails the imposition of restrictions on resource use in park areas, and this will be the instance of Shah Dag National Park (SDNP) and, to a lesser extent, Ordubad National Park (ONP). This Process Framework (PF) therefore provides guidelines for the development of local Action Plans during AREP implementation that: i) define the restrictions on access to natural resources in national parks developed under AREP, ii) identify and quantify the impacts that those restrictions may have on different segments of the local population, iii) propose, implement and monitor remedial measures to compensate for the loss of those assets and the income associated with them, and iv) provide grievance resolution mechanisms in order to resolve any issues that may arise due to restrictions on resources over the course of the project. 2. The organization of the PF is as follows. Section I, Project Description, describes the project and identifies activities that may result in new or more stringent restrictions on access to natural resources. This section also details project efforts to minimize impacts, and describes the general process through which potentially displaced persons may participate in project design, implementation and monitoring. Section II, Legal and Administrative Framework, outlines the legal and administrative context in which the program will be implemented. Section III, Eligibility Criteria, defines the eligibility criteria for people's participation in the identification of potential impacts, the assessment of the significance of impacts, and determination of necessary mitigating or compensatory measures. Section IV, Remedial Measures, lays out the methods and procedures by which communities will identify and choose potential compensatory measures for those who are adversely affected. Section V, Grievance Resolution, defines the process for resolving disputes relating to resource use restrictions that may arise with individuals, communities, or ministries. Finally, Section VI, Monitoring Arrangements, reviews the arrangements for participatory monitoring of project activities as they relate to impacts on persons within the project area, and for monitoring the effectiveness of the measures taken to improve, or at a minimum restore, incomes and living standards, as well as to maintain biodiversity. 3. This Process Framework draws upon two short field visits undertaken by the author (one to each of the project areas), information from field visits by numerous other national collected by a number national and international consultants over a period of approximately three years, and information provided by the Project Implementation Unit (in particular the two Project Coordinators based in the project areas). This includes the local consultant team which prepared the Environmental Assessment 2 . The Environment Assessment (EA) team held numerous meetings with residents in the regional centers of Gusar, Guba, Shamakhi, Ismailli, Gabala, Oguz and Ordubad, and in 30 villages situated within the territory of the designated National Parks. These meetings were attended by more than 700 local residents, including both field-based 2 In accordance with World Bank policies, the EA included social assessment Page 4 4 representatives of the concerned ministries 3 , the National Academy of Sciences, heads and officers of six forestry units and of the Pirkuli and Ismailli Nature Reserves, heads of municipalities and other municipal officers, village opinion leaders (e.g. school directors), and local NGOs. Views expressed during these meetings are cited below. 4. This Process Framework is premised on the design of the Azerbaijan Rural Environment Project (AREP) at this time (November, 2004). Any change in project design that significantly affects the organization or operation of AREP, particularly with regard to the nature and manner of restrictions on access to use natural resources, may require revision of parts of this PF. Since this PF will be disclosed and disseminated throughout the project area for public discussion, any subsequent revision must also be disclosed and disseminated for public discussion. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION, PROJECT IMPACTS, AND PARTICIPATION A. P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION 5. The Azerbaijan Rural Environment project (AREP) aims to conserve biodiversity and reverse forest and pasture degradation in two high priority areas, one in the Caucasus mountains, Shah-Dag, and one in the Zangezur mountains, Ordubad. It is envisioned that Park management will follow a multiple-use approach based on zoning each park into areas with distinct types and levels of use, including fully protected core conservation areas, areas for sustainable use of wood and other forest products, areas for agricultural activity, areas for seasonal pastures, as well as areas for tourism, residences, and other defined uses. While most investments and activities will be focused inside the parks’ boundaries, the project may also support some activities in areas surrounding the parks in order to reduce pressure on park resources and enhance the benefits to local communities. 6. To these ends, REP will undertake three major activities: i) Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use, ii) Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resources Management, iii) Rural Enterprise Development and iii) Project Management, Communications, and Monitoring and Evaluation. These activities are described below. i. Biodivdersity Conservation and Sustainable Use 6. The Biodivdersity Conservation and Sustainable Use component will establish and manage two protected areas (PAs), zoned for protection and for sustainable use of biological resources in each area. The areas to be included in the PAs are large and include numerous villages and areas that have long been used for grazing and other purposes and will continue to be. This is a new and unfamiliar approach to biodiversity conservation in Azerbaijan, and will require awareness raising and capacity building to implement properly. Improved management of the multiple-use areas (including restrictions on access or use levels) will be phased in over time, beginning with the highest priority locations from a biodiversity and environmental standpoint. ii. Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resources Management 3 Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources, Ministry of Agriculture, State Land Committee, etc.) Page 5 5 7. The Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resources Management component aims to help reduce pressure on the natural ecosystems (pastures and forests) by helping local communities to develop more productive and sustainable practices, particularly for livestock husbandry and meeting their energy needs. It will support investments at the village level aimed at encouraging and supporting a shift in production systems from the extensive sheep grazing (which is causing degradation of natural pastures due to excessive livestock), towards more intensive rearing methods in general (stall and supplementary feeding) and towards dairy cattle in particular. Other elements include support for communities to improve municipal pastures and to do reforestation on degraded municipal forest lands and unforested State Forest Fund land near the villages, and a demonstration of cost-effective, fuel efficient heating stoves. iii. Rural Enterprise Development . 9. This component will also support the development of small- and medium-scale enterprises that support the conservation and sustainable natural resource use objectives of the project. Tourism development will be a particular focus because of the direct synergy with the PAs, and because this is recognized as an economic activity for which these mountainous areas have a comparative advantage. Road rehabilitation to be done under Component 1 will support this objective by improving access to priority tourism sites. Another emphasis will be on enterprises that directly complement the community investments under Component 2 (e.g. processing of high value dairy products; production of fuel-efficient stoves and alternative energy sources). The project will also support enterprises for value-added products based on sustainable use of the less vulnerable and more resilient forest resources, such as fruits, nuts and some medicinal plants. The project will help prospective local entrepreneurs start up or expand eligible small and medium enterprises by providing essential technical and business advice and capacity building (modern production methods, availability of markets, business and financial planning and management, etc. ), and by providing start-up capital through a matching grants program. iv. Project Management, Communications and Monitoring and Evaluation 11. This component supports project implementation by funding a central Project Implementation Unit (PIU), with a small, branch Project Coordination Unit (PCU) in each project area. The central PIU, already established under the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources (MENR) to manage a previous World Bank-financed project 4 , will be responsible for project-wide support such as project administration, procurement, financial management, inter-Ministerial coordination, liaison with the World Bank and other donors, and reporting. It will be strengthened with additional capacity in natural resource management, communications and monitoring and evaluation. The PCUs will each consist of a Coordinator (with experience in implementation of natural resource management and/or rural development projects) and an Assistant (with accounting and procurement experience). They will provide day-to-day implementation support for all 4 Urgent Environmental Investment Project Page 6 6 components in their respective project areas, including serving as a home base for Technical Advisors working in the field. 12. The PIU, together with the PCUs and the implementing agencies (particularly the National Park Administrations), will also undertake several cross-cutting activities, such as the preparation and implementation of a public education and awareness program, development and implementation of a monitoring and evaluation program and coordination of a multi-sectoral exercise to develop a tourism strategy and plan for the greater Shah Dag area. The communications program will include a variety of approaches, from regular visits and discussions with community leaders and members to preparation and dissemination of posters, brochures and other informational materials. The PIU will keep records of these public consultations and meetings, including time and place, names of attendees, breakdown of the participants by village representation, position, gender and other key factors, and key issues raised and results of discussions (minutes of the meetings to be circulated among participants for comment prior to being finalized and filed). Both the public awareness/education program and the monitoring and evaluation program will be prepared and implemented in collaboration with local communities, NGOs active in the area, and the project-based Technical Advisors (under Components 2 and 3). B. P ROJECT C OMPONENTS THAT R ESTRICT A CCESS TO N ATURAL R ESOURCES i. Land Categories and Probable Restrictions on Resource Use. 13. The existing conservation areas in Shah Dag and Ordubad are, respectively, either too small and scattered or too ecologically restricted for efficacious biodiversity conservation. Within the Shah Dag area today there are some seven small conservation areas that are neither contiguous nor large enough to support habitat conservation. Ordubad NP, which was declared the first national park in Azerbaijan in 2003, comprises only the ridge of high mountains along the eastern border of Naxchivan. This represents and important but insufficient conservation area, particularly for several migratory mammals with wide ranges (in some cases, transboundary). 14. Land ownership in Azerbaijan falls into three categories: state land, municipal land, and private land. Both SDNP and ONP will include all three categories. In both cases, most of the land is state owned (Forest Fund and pasture land). This includes all the high elevation summer pastures. Relatively small areas comprising villages and surrounding areas are owned by the municipalities ( balladiyas ). The municipal land is mainly pasture or agricultural land, as most of the remaining forest areas (former communal forests, or leskhoz ) have been reclaimed by the State or are in the process of being reclaimed. Municipal forest and pasture lands, being the most accessible to villagers, are in many cases heavily degraded. Privately owned land consists of family residences and gardens, and agricultural fields. Because of the way the land privatization process was carried out, villagers often own agricultural fields at considerable distance from their homes. Under the charters of the new national parks, municipalities and private individuals will retain the ownership of their existing lands, but certain regulations or requirements may be brought into force by virtue of their being part Page 7 7 of the park 5 . In some cases, privately owned land may be brought into the park through a contracting mechanism (which is already provided for in the Charter of the ONP). 13. Access to state-owned forest is controlled by the State Forest Enterprise, which alone is authorized to cut and sell wood or to grant licenses for fuelwood collection. However, the control is quite limited in reality, with a considerable amount of illegal harvesting, particularly in areas that are relatively accessible to villages or near roads. Access to pastures for grazing is allocated on the basis of licenses which are issued by the Rayon (District) Executive Authorities (REA). Sixteen Rayon REAs have the right to allocate grazing permits within the area of the proposed SDNP, and six REAs have this right within the proposed expanded ONP. Some of these pasture users are local residents, while others are absentee large-scale livestock owners who hire local shepherds to take their flocks to the pastures. During project preparation it has not been possible to obtain the information needed to determine the numbers of users within each category, or the areas or numbers of livestock they hold (and therefore the likely impact of the project on them). This gap will be addressed during the process of identifying stakeholders to participate in the park planning process. Official grazing license fees are low, but the real price to the user is often much higher due to corruption. Livestock owners apply for and receive grazing permits for a certain amount of land, based on a given number of livestock, following official stocking rates (ranging from 1-8 head/hectare, depending on pasture type). However, the permits themselves do not specify the number of animals that may be taken to the area, and there is no system in place for checking or regulating livestock densities. As a result, actual densities far exceed official standards, with an estimated 2.5 million head now grazing in the summer pastures of SDNP area each year, compared with the 500,000 that the area would support if official standards were followed. The summer pastures inside the existing ONP have all been closed to livestock as a result of the creation of the park in 2003, with new areas allocated to the herders who used to have permits for these areas. Overgrazing is not as great a problem in the ONP area as in the SDNP area, due to the lower population density. However, some areas, including regions surrounding villages and some of the corridors used by migratory ungulates, are overgrazed. 14. Creation of the SDNP and expansion of the ONP will require and create a mechanism for imposition of greater restrictions on natural resource use on the state- owned forests and pastures. Some areas that are particularly rich in biodiversity or vulnerable to erosion will be declared fully protected core conservation zones, closed to any habitation or economic use. While these areas will be identified through the park management planning process, it is accepted that one criterion for selecting core conservation zones will be that they have no resident human populations. Therefore, no physical displacement or relocation of homes will be required. Certain other areas will be identified as high priority for improved ecological and natural resource management. It is likely that much of the SDNP forest area will fall into this category, as over half of the forested area is on steep slopes highly vulnerable to erosion, while the more accessible lower elevation areas are already sufficiently degraded that they will require protection and restoration to regain acceptable ecological quality and productivity. In the case of the pastures, it is expected that most of these areas will continue to be available for use. The long term objective is to restore them to good ecological and productive quality and then use them sustainably. This will involve restrictions in numbers of animals per hectare, and also on the length of the grazing 5 following the legal principle of “Servitude,” under Azerbaijan’s Land Code Page 8 8 season, as bringing the livestock into summer pastures too early in the Spring, before the vegetation has established itself, is one important cause of degradation. However, given the very large area of pasture, the lack of local capacity and experience in pasture management, improved management will be introduced gradually, beginning with the highest priority areas. It is likely that only 10-15 percent of the total pasture area of SDNP will be brought under effective management by the end of the project. 15. The municipal lands falling into the park areas for the most part have already been greatly altered and are therefore not of great significance from a biodiversity perspective. They do, however, have an important role to play as they must become the main source of wood products and carry an increasingly large proportion of the total grazing pressure for communities in the park boundaries, as areas of state land become unavailable or restricted. Therefore, one important objective of the project (under Component 2) is to begin the process of restoring productivity of these municipal forests and pastures. Another is to assist local communities to appreciate the need for, and to implement, more sustainable management of these resources. In addition, although ownership of these lands will remain with the municipalities, the park management plans are likely to establish some regulations and limits for these areas as well, consistent with the objectives of sustainable use. Municipality leaders will be involved in developing and negotiating these regulations and limits, and will be responsible for enforcing them. 16. There will be little or no restriction on the use of private lands, which will remain under private ownership and control. The exception may be restrictions on the use of certain inputs on agricultural fields, such as pesticides, particularly when there is a risk of negative ecological impacts, for example through contamination of watercourses from irrigation run-off. Similarly, residences or tourism operations located on private lands within the parks may be subject to different or more strict environmental regulations and requirements than similar operations elsewhere. 17. The park management planning process will be the key exercise for identifying and designating core conservation areas and priority management areas, and for establishing complementary rules and regulations. The zoning and planning will be done through a consultative and participatory process, and the Park Administration will negotiate these area designations and restrictions with the current users. Where areas are taken out of use or access and use become limited, the Park Administration will negotiate compensatory measures with the users to avoid loss of income or negative impacts on livelihoods and nutrition. To some extent this may involve redirecting users to other areas, where these are available. The main mitigation measure, however, is assistance and material and financial support from the project for intensification of production systems (Component 2) and for developing new income sources. Therefore, communities which are most likely to experience negative impacts due to restrictions imposed by the park will have first priority for this assistance. Restrictions on access and use will not be implemented by Park authorities until the compensatory measures have been put into effect. The PIU, which will be the channel for project assistance to the Park Administrations, authorities, will work with them and with the affected communities to ensure that this is the case. The PIU will also be responsible for carrying out ongoing monitoring of socio-economic impacts of project interventions to ensure that, to the fullest extent possible, no local user is adversely affected by the creation of the park. It is not clear at this time whether provision will need to be made for some form of compensation to livestock owners from outside the area who hold long-term grazing permits (usually up to 10 years, if these permits have to be revoked or modified to Page 9 9 achieve the parks’ objectives. 18. Regardless of who is titleholder of record, if an area has been customarily used by local residents for purposes other than those officially permitted under the land classification, those customary rights will be fully respected. For example, if individual agricultural plots exist within State or Municipal forest land, those plots will be allowed to remain (but no new plots will be opened) and the park planning will work around them, unless the area is a critical ecological resource that must be allowed to revert to its natural state. In such an instance, the landowner (Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources or other) will provide to the user an alternative area of equal size that has similar soil, water and other characteristics and that is acceptable to the user. The same logic applies if a highland pasture area is zoned within a fully or partially protected area: the Park Directorate will negotiate compensatory measures with users before implementing any regulations so that, to the fullest extent possible, no user is adversely affected by the creation of the national park. 6 ii. Park Areas and Population 19. The proposed SDNP will cover about 343,000 hectares. This area includes some 60 villages with a total population of about 27,000 7 . Two proposed extensions of the park area (in Guba and Gusar Rayons) that were under consideration have been rejected on the grounds that the areas are too heavily populated. The total populations of the Rayons which have some area included within the proposed park is about 550,000, but the majority of these live at mid and lower elevations and have a different type of livelihood than those in high elevation villages. 20. The existing 12,200 hectare ONP has no villages within its boundaries, although local populations graze sheep in the alpine pastures there. The proposed expansion of this park will greatly increase the land area to some 137,342 has. Thirty three villages, with a total population of about 23,000, will be located within, or very close to the park boundary. Unlike the case in the SDNP area, villages that will be just outside the park boundary are very similar to the ones that will be inside the boundary. 21. Neither the SDNP nor the ONP is expected to have a formal buffer zone, as the multiple-use model means that the “buffer” areas (around the core conservation zones) are in effect incorporated within the park itself. As noted above, some people living outside the park boundaries have traditional usufruct rights to bring livestock into these mountain areas during the summer, and in some cases hold grazing permits. In the Shah Dag region, for example, livestock are commonly herded to transhumant pastures from as much as 60 km away. iii. Zonation of Park Areas and Definition of Restrictions . 22. The project is not expected to involuntary resettlement of villages or households from their present areas. It is recognized as both impractical and undesirable to relocate local residents from, or to completely exclude resource users in, the national parks. 6 It warrants mention that if a natural calamity such as an earthquake or landslide damages existing infrastructure, the requisite repairs will be made so that villagers are not disadvantaged simply because their village lies within a national park. 7 Population of these villages has been declining over the past decade, due to out-migration Page 10 10 Therefore, the project will assist the Government to establish and implement a new model of National Park, in which core conservation areas and sustainable use areas are brought together under a coordinated management framework based on a zoning plan that harmonizes existing official land use with critical ecological needs. The project could in fact help to resolve a long-standing problem of some settlements within the SDNP and ONP. Several existing PAs, totaling approximately 70,000 hectares, will be included within the proposed NP areas: two Strict Nature Reserves (Zapovedniks) and two Nature Preserves/Wildlife Sanctuaries (Zapovedniks) in SDNP; and one Strict Nature Reserve, one National Park and 2 Preserves in ONP. Habitation within Strict Nature Reserves is prohibited, but in one case (in SDNP) a group of residents that were relocated several years ago and have re-occupied the Reserve. While most of the existing PA area within SDNP is likely to become core conservation zone in the new park, park management zoning and planning will if possible work around this situation, thereby making it possible for the people to remain where they are legally. If involuntary resettlement of any population should be become necessary, based on biodiversity imperatives or management issues that are not known at this time, the PIU, in consultation with Government, will develop a Resettlement Plan that accords with the requisite international policies, including the World Bank’s Policy on Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12) 23. The ecological zones will be identified and delineated through a participatory process, based on both biodiversity and socio-economic criteria. Management objectives will focus on maintaining natural ecosystems and flora and fauna, particularly rare and endangered species, and on enabling local communities to use the resources of the park to enhance their livelihoods and protecting indigenous quality of life, in ways that do not undermine the biodiversity and ecosystem objectives. At the same time, as mentioned above, zonation will take existing land use into account. Restrictions will mainly apply on what are already State lands, rather than municipal or private lands. 24. The core protection zones will provide direct protection for biodiversity and preserve intact natural ecological systems, while serving as an asset for tourism development and as a breeding refuge and source of genetic material for animal and plant populations throughout the area. The multiple use zones will reduce pressure on the protection zones and host activities that enable local communities to obtain economic value from the biodiversity, thereby strengthening local and national political support for conservation. As needed, they will also be managed to provide corridors to connect core protection areas. 25. In sum, creation of the Shah Dag national park and extension of the Ordubad national park must take into account the fact that the areas to be incorporated into these larger conservation zones are already – and indeed have been for a long time – populated areas and areas that have been used for grazing and harvesting of wood and other natural products. Management of the parks as multiple-use areas accommodates the interests and concerns of these local populations. Nevertheless, even multiple-use zones will impose restrictions on access to resources since resource use must be regulated – and in some areas even prohibited – in order to meet the dual aims of biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. C. P ARTICIPATORY A PPROACH Page 11 11 26. Azerbaijan public administration has largely been characterized by a centralized and tec hnocratic ‘command and control’ approach to planning, resource management and public order. In essence, technical staff from line ministries such as agriculture and forestry determine land use, and the local population is expected to respect the technical directives issued by the political authorities. This approach is inadequate to the requirements of today. Official plans often bear little reality to the actual situation, and local populations, faced with few alternatives, use and overuse common resources such as forests and pastures despite technical planning directives. 27. The present situation clearly calls for integral public participation in park management, for there are not now -- and cannot be -- sufficient park guards and forest rangers to enforce the technical directives. Sustainable use of natural resources and biodiversity conservation require the cooperation and close collaboration of the local populations in all project activities. The AREP project is therefore designed to build capacity and support activities at several levels: public sector agencies at the national, district and local levels, local government at the Rayon and Baladiyya levels, community groups, NGOs and individual community members. This mix is needed in order to ensure an enabling environment while putting as much control, responsibility and resources as possible into the hands of the end-users, the rural populations. 28. Public involvement and participation must continue throughout the AREP project if local ownership is to develop and conduce toward project success. This means that local populations must, to the extent feasible, participate in all aspects of park management planning, including the delimitation and demarcation of park boundaries, the zonation of park areas, the determination of resource-use restrictions and compensatory measures, and in the monitoring of both socio-economic and biological changes due to project interventions. 29. The nature and extent of public participation may vary in each stage of the project cycle for technical and other reasons. For example, the preliminary boundaries of the Shah Dag National Park and the proposed expansion of the existing Ordubad National Park are based on biodiversity assessments carried out by technical specialists in 2002-2004. The proposed boundaries took some account of the existence of villages in the area and their use of natural resources 8 , but the primary concern at this stage was the ecological integrity of the zone. This initial exercise has indicated provision boundaries, but there remains a process of review, consultation and discussion before they can be refined and finalized. It should be noted that, according to Azerbaijan law, anyone owning land that is proposed to be incorporated within a Protected Area must agree to this. While the majority of the land to be included in the SDNP is State owned, it would be difficult if not impossible to create a cohesive park while excluding all or most of the municipal and private land. Thus, the discussion and negotiation will of necessity be a two-way process 9 . 30. With the support and incentive provided by the project, rural populations will play an much more integral role in the zonation of the park areas, the definition of resource- use restrictions and remedial measures (Section IV, below), and the monitoring of project activities (Section VI, below) than has been customary. The MENR will 8 E.g., excluding some areas of biodiversity importance because they are embedded within densely populated areas 9 This issue is less relevant in the case of the ONP Page 12 12 undertake a detailed biological and ecological assessment of the park areas in the first year of the project, to determine priority areas for biodiversity conservation and also areas of particular ecological importance and advanced degradation. Rural populations, who are intimately familiar with the local areas and their conditions over time, can assist in this work. Based on these assessments, MENR together with other technical specialists can develop proposed plans for biodiversity protection and ecological management. However, some sectoral Ministries (e.g. Agriculture, Water) already have land and resource use plans for the SDNP and ONP areas. The land/resource-use and biodiversity maps must be harmonized into a single land-use plan that will provide the basic structure for the Park management plan. To harmonize these plans, the Park Administrations will need to convene working groups of all interested parties, including Rayon Executive Authorities, Municipality leaders and representatives of local user groups, staff of sectoral Ministries, NGOs, etc. 10 . This will need to be an iterative process, with draft plans being circulated for public comment before they are finalized. Once the land use plan is agreed upon, mechanisms will be required to lay out the respective responsibilities of different parties for their implementation, particularly with regard to land use zoning and regulations. This may take the form of Memoranda of Understanding, contracts, or other types of agreements, for example between the Park Administration and each Municipality that falls within the park. These agreements will need to reflect the compensatory economic measures that have been agreed upon and which will need to be put into effect prior to new restrictions being implemented and enforced. 31. Finally, monitoring must integrally involve the local populations, so that they have first-hand understanding of the ecological process set in motion and have the ability and opportunity to express their views on the positive and negative impacts. Villagers should participate in the baseline studies to be undertaken during the first year of the project (including the baseline for monitoring of socio-economic impacts 11 ). There are sufficient well-educated village residents that it will not be difficult to engage local enumerators and research assistants. Researchers must also report their findings back to the communities for discussion and validation. More meaningfully, villagers can carry out basic ecological and socio-economic field studies, under the supervision of technical experts. (See Section VI.) They can also monitor illegal activities, and provide critical information to the responsible authorities for action. 32. Involving key stakeholders, such as local populations, early in the project design and throughout project implementation helps ensure not only that project design and specific investments make sense in the country and local contexts but also that local populations understand and support the project’s aims, feel a real sense of ownership of project activities, and facilitate the success of the investment. II. ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK 10 To take one example, livestock are traditionally herded along routes to yaylak(summer)/kishlak (winter) pastures. These traditional routes would be respected and would be demarcated. However, if there is a need for redesigning these from the point of view of biodiversity and landscape values of the park, this would be done in consultation and cooperation with the local communities concerned. 11 It is recognized that the information collected during project identification and preparation (e.g. on use of wood and other fuels, and the likely effects should wood become less available), is not sufficiently detailed or location-specific to serve as an effective baseline against which to measure project impacts Page 13 13 33. The Republic of Azerbaijan enjoys a strong political and administrative system that is supported by a well-developed technical bureaucracy. While local participation is legally possible, such participation, including the assistance of NGOs, is relatively recent. The Constitution of the Azerbaijan Republic establishes certain principles for environmental protection, as well as for municipal rights and obligations, among other matters. Other legislation, such as the Special Protected Areas Act, the Environmental Protection Act, the Forest Code, the Wildlife Act, define specific sectoral concerns. Meanwhile, the various land laws define municipal and private property. These laws are discussed below in terms of their relevance for public participation in AREP. 1 2 A. C ONSTITUTION OF THE A ZERBAIJAN R EPUBLIC 34. The Constitution of the Azerbaijan Republic, adopted on 12 November 1995 by referendum and amended on 24 August 2002, defines certain principles about the environment and local responsibility. 35. Article 39 states that everyone has the right to live in a healthy environment, and that everyone has the right to information about the actual ecological situation, as well as the right to compensation for damage done to health or property because of violations of economical requirements. Article 78 declares that every citizen is responsible for the protection of the environment. 36. Chapter IX empowers municipalities to ‘approve and implement local ecological programs,” however, it goes on to say that they depend on “…the necessary financial means for executing this authority. Realization of this authority is controlled by the legislative and executive power.” Local municipalities (Article 144) also establish local taxes and duties, approve the local budget, approve and implement local programs for social protection and social development, approve and implement local programs of economic development, and approve and accept local ecological programs. B. L AW ON S PECIALLY P ROTECTED A REAS AND O BJECTS . 37. The Law on Specially Protected Areas provides the legal basis for protecting and preserving natural areas in the territory of Azerbaijan. Such areas are defined for the ‘protection of biological variety and ecology,’ and provide for ‘the improvement of tourism and recreation, taking into consideration of social and economic factors and interests of local people ,’ and involving the ‘participation of population and social organizations in the field of preservation of the specially protected natural areas and objects’ (Article 3). 38. The law establishes eight categories of specially protected natural area: state natural reserves (including biosphere reserves), national parks, natural parks, ecological parks, natural monuments, zoological parks, botanical gardens and dendrological parks; and treatment and health resorts (Article 5). Each category of area may be of international, national, or local importance. Together the level of park and the scope of 12 The charters for the two national parks are also pertinent to issues of public participation in REP. However, the Shah Dag National Park Charter exists only in incomplete draft, and that for Ordubad National Park, which pertains only to the existing park, where there is no resident population, has yet to be approved. Revision of these documents to accord with the circumstances of the new Shah Dag National Park and the expanded Ordubad National Park must therefore fully recognize and take into account the principles of this Process Framework. Page 14 14 its importance determine the management entity. (Only natural parks, zoos, spas and resorts may be managed by individual parties; Article 7.) 39. Every protected area will have a management plan (Article 8). These plans specify that ‘regulated procedure of economic activity shall consider restrictions for utilization of natural resources in specially protected natural areas and objects and in other specially allotted areas” (Article 10). The law is not entirely clear on the subject of residence within parks: “The specially protected natural areas and objects may be used for the following purposes of the Azerbaijan Republic: nature protection; researches; environmental monitoring; normalizing; training; tourism and rest (recreation). Other kind of activities not contradicting the requirements on purposeful assignment, protection, rehabilitation and utilization of natural complexes and separate objects may be carried out in specially protected natural areas and objects (Article 11), with the exception of state natural reserves.” In these areas of highest priority (the state natural reserves), “utilization of lands as well as the water, plant and animals within the territory of the state natural reserves for business purposes shall be forbidden” (Article 17). In these areas, no buildings, roads, installations or other use that would cause impact of any kind is permitted (Article 19). These statements suggests that residence within parks could be permissible in national parks and other PAs except for the strict natural reserves, if it does not undermine objectives of protection and rehabilitation. These objectives, along with permissible activities and uses, would in each case be specified in the Charter which legally creates the park. However, in the four national parks created to date, all habitation and all economic activities other than tourism have been prohibited. (It should also be noted that the Land Code conflicts with the Law on Protected Areas, by saying that no economic activity is allowed inside any Protected Area 13 ). C. E NVIRONMENTAL P ROTECTION L AW 40. “This Law governs the legal, economic and social framework for environmental protection. The purpose of this Law is to guarantee environmental safety and the ecological balance of the environment, prevent the impact of socioeconomic and other activities, preserve biological diversity, and effectively manage the use of nature” (Preamble). Importantly, among the basic environmental principles are ‘the balanced achievement of social, economic, moral and aesthetic objectives’ and ‘ the participation of the general public and civic organizations in environmental protection’ (Article 3). Although much of the law pertains to outside users of natural resources, rather than to resident populations, the stipulations are stated generally and therefore may certainly be interpreted as applying to resident populations as well. 41. The law provides significant safeguards for the public interest, which would include the rights and interests of people affected by the establishment of national parks, and also for the involvement of NGOs. Specifically (Article 7), “civic organizations in the field of environmental protection shall have the right to: 1.1 design and promote their environmental programs, protect the rights and interests of citizens, and involve citizens in this activity; 1.2 exercise public oversight in the field of environmental protection; 13 A legal opinion is being sought as to whether an amendment to the Land Code is required, to bring it into conformity with the Law on PAs. Page 15 15 1.3 obtain complete and accurate information from the governmental authorities on the condition of the environment and its recovery; 1.4 perform certain services under contract with governmental authorities and international organizations as provided by environmental law; participate in the discussion of environmental projects; request administrative and judicial review of decisions concerning the location, construction, renovation, and operation of plants and other environmentally hazardous facilities that will affect human health… 1.5 raise the issue of holding organizations, public officials, and citizens accountable; file suit in court against organizations, public officials, and citizens for violations of environmental law.” 42. The law permits the use of nature (for example, grazing on natural pastures), for either an indefinite period or for a fixed term (Article 8), in accord with procedures to be specified in the law. Limits and quotas on use ‘shall be set by the executive authorities’ and ‘shall define the maximal levels of natural resources use for a specific period” (Article 10). Use may be for payment or free of charge (Article 9). In either case, users are obligated to ‘comply with applicable environmental and technical requirements and to ‘take the actions necessary to protect the environment and renew natural resources,’ among other matters (Article 13). These stipulations are specified in a natural resource use contract (Article 15). Current grazing contracts issued by Rayon Executive Authorities do not specify any such actions for protecting the environment and renewing natural resources. One objective of the project is to introduce such provisions for any contract for grazing (or other natural resource use) inside the SDNP or ONP. The necessary measures would be identified through the management planning process, included in the contracts by the REA, monitored by the Park Administrations, and enforced by both the REA and Park Administrations. D. L AW ON W ILDLIFE . 43. ‘Wildlife within the Azerbaijan Republic shall belong to the nation, as long as this does not inflict damage on the rights and interests of any physical or legal entity, and shall be the property of the nation” (Article 5). 14 Users of wildlife must (Article 24) “observe established regulations, standards, limits and time frames” and, if they are large legal entities, manage and preserve the wildlife for future generations. “Hunting shall entail a fee and shall be undertaken on the basis of special authorization, as well as hunting permits, issued by the appropriate executive bodies” (Article 15). (Fishing is governed by other laws; Article 16.) 44. Municipalities also have various rights and obligations in the endeavor of protecting wildlife (Article 10). These include: “adoption of regulatory statues governing the utilization and preservation of…wildlife that have been relegated to municipal ownership”; “the formulation, approval and implementation of solutions to local ecological problems involving the restoration and preservation of wildlife, as well as its 14 The objectives of the law ar e various, including: “establishment of regulations and standards for the efficient utilization and preservation of wildlife, as well as for restoring it and increasing its numbers”; “the federal monitoring of the utilization and preservation of wildlife”; “the setting of limits on the utilization of wildlife, the establishment of forms and rates of payment for its utilization, and the regulation of trapping work”; “the promotion of activities aimed at efficiently utilizing, preserving, and increasing the numbers of wildlife.” Page 16 16 habitat”; “the requirement of the cancellation, in accordance with the administrative or judicial procedure of permits for the siting, construction, renovation, and placement into service of enterprises, structures, and other facilities that are capable of exerting a harmful influence on wildlife and its habitat, as well as the requirement of the restriction or suspension of the activities of legal and physical entities”; and ”the planning and implementation of expenditures within the make-ups of local budgets in the area of the utilization and preservation of wildlife” (Article 10). 45. “During the siting, planning, and construction of population centers, enterprises, structures, pipelines, transportation arteries, electric lines, communication lines, and other facilities, the incorporation of virgin land, swamps, coastal areas, and shrub- covered areas into the economic cycle, the performance of reclamation, forest management, and geological exploration work, the establishment of pastures and roaming areas for agricultural animals, and the organization of tourist routes and pubic recreation areas, provisions shall be made and measures shall be implemented that ensure the preservation of the habitat, breeding conditions, and migration routes of wild animals, as well as the inviolability of areas of ecological value” (Article 29). 46. Monitoring is a federal responsibility, but will involve the municipalities and the public (Articles, 44-46, respectively). E. F OREST C ODE 47. The Forest Code aims to “ensure an efficient utilization of the forests, and protection, safeguarding and rehabilitation thereof through scientific maintenance of the forests, as well as maintenance of the biological diversity of the forest ecosystem under the principles of increase of the resource potential of forests” (Article 3). In general, the Forest Code reserves forest lands to the state, without the possibility of privatization. State forests are maintained by the Forestry Development Department (FDD), which manages and cuts the forest according to management plans prepared by Forest Protection and Rehabilitation Units. The FDD then sells the wood in order to finance part of its operations. Licenses are also given for timber lumbering. Municipal forests do exist; these are not under the Forest Department, although there is an edict that reallocates some municipal forest land to the State. 48. “The forest fund belongs to the state and is the property of the state in Republic of Azerbaijan . Forests and lands under the forest shall not be subject to privatization ” (Article 11). Under these conditions, “The right of utilization of the lands under the forest fund shall be awarded on the basis of the lease agreement, license on forest cutting, order and forest license.” (Article 16) Such use licenses can be revoked for abuse and other reasons (Article 20). It is within the power of the Minster of Ecology and Natural Resources (under which the FDD), to issue decrees imposing specific limits or bans on use of forests in specific areas, where this is regarded as necessary to prevent overuse and degradation. The Minister has recently issued such a decree prohibiting any cutting of wood other than “sanitary cutting 15 ” in the Shah Dag forest. 15 Removal of dead or diseased trees, thinning saplings to achieve appropriate densities, etc. In recent years approximately 5,000 m 3 /year of wood has been cut in the Shah Dag forest and sold by the FDD Page 17 17 49. In principle, ”The procurement of firewood shall be undertaken according to the forest rehabilitation and cutting for other purposes, as well as other cutting (including comprehensive sanitary cutting, as well as cuttings associated with the construction of the water links, pipelines, motor roads, electric cable lines, as well as fire protection channels and other cuttings;(Article 67). Page 18 18 F. L AND C ODE OF THE R EPUBLIC OF A ZERBAIJAN 50. Legislation regulating land rights in Azerbaijan includes: the Land Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan (25 June 1999); ‘the Land Code’), the Law on Land Reform (16 July 1996), the Law on Land Lease (17 March 1999), the Law on Land Market (7 May 1999) and other acts. 51. The Land Code and Law on Land Reform recognize state, municipal, and private ownership of land by Azeri nationals and legal entities. State or public lands include: summer and winter pastures lands, forestry lands, lands of water resources fund, lands of environmental, reservational, recreational, health resort, historic-cultural purpose, lands of state research and educational organizations, and several other categories (e.g., Caspian Sea, mining and ore areas; Land Reform Law, Clause 6). Municipal lands are: commons, lands being used by individuals, and depository lands, defined as those intended for development, those ‘in termless use of state farms” (i.e., unallocated), and unleased lands (Land Reform Law, Clause 7). (Depository lands can be privatized; Land Reform Law, Clause 19.) Private property includes: dwelling houses, personal plots (adjoining the house), individual collective and cooperative gardens, as well as lands of the state and collective farms to be privatized Land Reform Law, Clause 8). 52. “The landowners have the right to own, use as intended, rent, sale, donate, exchange, mortgage, inherit and devise the land (Land Reform Law, Clause 17). Rent payments for state and municipally owned lands are determined according to market conditions, but cannot be less than the specified statutory rent. (For agricultural land, discounts from statutory rents are possible, depending on market conditions in the agricultural sector.) The period for rental agreements varies widely, from one to 99 years, depending on the resource and on municipality and State policy. 53. Under the Land Code, each parcel of land has its own legal status. This legal status includes its destination (purpose); rights in relation to possession, use and leasing; and specified restrictions on use of the parcel. The Land Code recognizes following categories of lands (Article 9): - Lands of agricultural destination; - Lands of settlements; - Lands of industrial, communication, transport, defense and other destination; - Lands of Specially Protected Natural Areas (SPNA); - Lands of the Forest Fund; - Lands of the Water Fund; - Lands of the Reserve Fund. 54. Creation of SDNP would require some changes in land use and legal designations. All the State owned lands would change their current legal status to SPNA status 16 . MENR would then become the “proper executive authority” for management of SDNP area, with the possibility of delegating specific responsibilities and authorities for day-to-day management to a SDNP Administration entity . It is expected that 16 Currently only a small proportion of the area(the four existing nature reserves) is designated as SPNA Page 19 19 ownership of the municipal and privately owned lands within the SDNP would not be transferred to the State, but it is not yet clear by what mechanism they would be incorporated into the SDNP without changing their status to SPNA or, if their status does change to SPNA, how this will be harmonized with the Land Code’s prohibitions against habitation or economic activity inside SPNAs. One option might be to bring these lands into the national park on a contractual basis (i.e., the SDNP leases them from the owners 1 7 ). PA legal opinion is being prepared on this issue. 55. Current legislation legislation also does not provide clear legal tools of management of state owned lands that were managed before by different state agencies (such as roads, transmission facilities, irrigation canals, etc.) after they are included within a SPNA. The existing practice is that the issue is resolved on basis of special agreements between SPNA authorities and relevant agency. This practice could be also applied in SDNP area. Taking into account large and various area of SDNP, where different agencies are using lands of different destination, the institutional arrangements for SDNP will require a multi-sectoral management structure in order to avoid possible conflicts of interest within different stakeholders. G. L AW ON M UNICIPALITY S TATUS 56. The Law on Municipality Status defines the principles for the establishment of municipalities, their role in local government, and their legal and financial basis, among other matters. Importantly in terms of REP, municipalities can undertake local environmental programs. “the goal of the local environmental programs – mass attraction of the local population to solve the issues not envisaged in the implemented [sic] by the state environmental programs or as an addition to them – issues of environmental cleanness. The indicated programs can include preservation of the environmental balance under the existing conditions, planting of greenery and accomplishment of the municipal territory, collection and processing of the domestic waste, water, air and land protection from any pollution, [and] implementation of the environmental activities along with neighboring municipalities and other local measures.” (Article 6). III. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Villages in the project areas are small, widely scattered and hard to reach due to the difficult terrain and limited infrastructure. Therefore, it will not be possible for the project to provide development assistance to all villages and residents in the project area. 40 villages within the proposed SDNP and 15 in and around the expanded ONP have been identified during project preparation to receive benefits in the form of community-level investment packages under Component 2 . The total population of these villages is 27,900, and represents 67% of the total population within the proposed SDNP boundaries, and 29% of those within or next to the proposed expanded ONP boundaries. Implementation of Component 2 will be phased, so that two VC in SDNP (six villages) and one VC in ONP (3 villages) will receive development assistance in the first year. The proposed selection of villages (which remains to be confirmed by 17 This mechanism for brining private lands into national parks is used elsewhere, e.g. in South Africa Page 20 20 Government) was based on the following criteria: · relatively high population (maximizing the number of people who will benefit); · proximity to others (enabling the project to work more efficiently through Village Clusters (VC), rather than individual villages); · location in or near areas which were judged as being most likely to be identified as priorities for closure or increased use restrictions, due to their biodiversity and ecological significance and/or severity of degradation (in most cases, this means high elevation areas); · likelihood that the project interventions will be successful (e.g., villages have adequate agricultural land to increase fodder production; road access is sufficiently good that dairy and other products can be marketed competitively; etc.). 57. As noted above, the park management planning process, to be undertaken during the first year of the project, will definitively identify the priority areas to be permanently to local users, temporarily closed, or where increased use restrictions will be imposed during the life of the project (core conservation areas, priority areas for forest or pasture restoration, and priority areas for improved forest or pasture management, respectively). The selection of villages to receive development assistance may be modified accordintly. 58. Assistance under Component 3 (Rural Enterprise Development) will be offered more widely, to residents of all villages inside and immediately adjacent to the park areas. However, it should be noted that the prospects for success of most commercial enterprises (other than tourism-related) are likely to be limited in the higher elevation areas, and the poorest residents are not likely to be able to start businesses or to provide matching funds to obtain grants. This segment of the population is more likely to benefit from employment opportunities provided by new enterprises and by the parks themselves. 59. Vulnerability . Vulnerability means the capability of specific segments of the population to manage changes induced by project actions. Generally, poverty makes populations less able than better off groups to manage changes. In Azerbaijan, rural populations are generally poor; indeed, poverty is widespread. The average poverty incidence in the Rayons comprising Shah-Dag area runs 38 percent in Ismailli and Shemakha, and 58 percent in Guba, Gusar and Khachmaz. The poverty incidence in the Ordubad area of Naxcivan is 45 percent. 18 Restricting access to natural resources and income risks exacerbating this situation unless appropriate remedial measures are put in place. 60. Several factors are associated with poverty in the project regions. Altitude correlates with poverty in both areas. People living above 2000 m are generally much poorer than people in the lowlands. Unemployment rates in the highlands (i.e., villages located in areas over 2000 m) run over 90 percent of the working age population, while 18 The majority of people in the two project zones engage in crop production on small plots of less than one hectare of recently privatized arable land and in livestock production through the seasonal transhumant grazing of animals, mostly sheep and cows. Page 21 21 unemployment in the lowlands average about a third of that rate, approximately 35 percent. Consequently, the average monthly income is only about $16 per person in the highland areas, compared to approximately $50 per person in the lowlands. 61. Age and gender also are important considerations in the distribution of poverty. Because of very limited employment opportunities outside of agriculture, many families rely on remittances from outside. In many villages, one or two persons from a number of families have been working in other countries such as Russia, Turkey and Iran for as much as ten to 15 years. The émigrés are invariably working-age people, often men, who remit funds home to support the remaining members of the family. This labor migration has impacted importantly on the population structure: the farm population is aging, and there is an increase in the incidence of female-headed households, with women taking on new responsibilities in managing the family farm. 62. Family size also correlates with poverty. Large households have a greater risk of being poor, and those with more than three children have the highest risk since these, as a group, are younger families whose children have yet to reach an age where they can emigrate in search of work. 63. It is important for several reasons that these factors be taken into consideration in determining restrictions on resource use and in planning compensatory measures. First, limiting access to resources will impact poorer families more than better off families, so that the remedial measures must be within the reach of the poorest segments of the population from the outset. This is one reason that Component 2 focuses on community-level investment. Second, planning remedial measures must take into account the physical capacity of the aging farm population and the increasing incidence of women-headed farm households. The elderly may not be able to work as long or as hard as younger farm workers. And, women have not only production but also domestic household chores, which can cause serious labor shortages at critical periods in the agricultural cycle. Thus, in deciding on compensatory measures for restrictions on use of natural resources, it is critical to determine who is impacted, how poor or vulnerable the affected population (or part of it) is, and to decide upon remedial measures that take into account the special conditions and constraints of the poorer and more vulnerable segments of the population. IV. REMEDIAL MEASURES 64. A fundamental objective of this Process Framework (PF) is to ensure that populations affected by restrictions on natural resource use themselves define and undertake activities that at least restore their income to the levels they would have enjoyed had there been no restrictions. This objective means that the extent of remedial measures is commensurate with the extent of loss of resources due to restrictions on use: those who are affected more severely are assisted to a greater extent than those who incur smaller losses. Further, and for the same reasons, this PF holds that no restrictions on resource use can be implemented in the local area unless and until compensatory measures not only have been defined and accepted but also are being implemented by the affected population. In addition, the implementing agencies will ensure that all communities, groups, and individuals who have suffered adverse impacts because of resource restrictions are assisted before applications for those who have incurred no impacts are considered. The ongoing socio-economic impact analysis Page 22 22 included in the work program of the PIU will provide the information needed for this purpose. 65. The nature and extent of the compensatory measures depends on the extent of people’s use of the resource and the scope of the restrictions placed on the use of that resource. Only those who exploit a resource will lose access and/or income when restrictions are imposed. The impact on them will be directly related to the extent those people depend upon the exploitation of the resource and the extent of the restrictions. People who depend wholly on a resource (e.g., shepherds who need pasture land) may be more affected than those who engage in the activity only part-time or not at all. Similarly the extent of the impact will depend on the nature of the restriction. A total ban on use will have deeper effects than a partial ban, and a seasonal ban might have no effect at all on certain users (e.g., ban on logging in forests would not affect berry collectors, a seasonal ban on all uses in an area [for bird migration, for example] would not affect those who use the area in other seasons). 66. In general, the remedial measure should relate directly to, and directly replace, the resource that is being restricted. For this reason, the emphasis under Component 2 are on: (i) increasing fodder production and improving grazing conditions on municipal lands, to replace reduced access to grazing in highland pastures, and (ii) re- afforestation of municipal forest lands and state Forest Fund lands near villages, to compensate for improved enforcement on illegal cutting in the state forest. In some cases (e.g., hunting), there may be no acceptable alternative. And in other cases, the affected population may wish to undertake a completely unrelated activity which will compensate for lost income, although not necessarily for cultural values associated with the activity. Component 3 is aimed at providing assistance for this purpose, for example for activities such as tourism, value-added processing of wild fruits and nuts, value- added dairy products, high-value wood parquet, tourism, handicrafts, production of fuel- efficient stoves, etc.). The emphasis will be on enterprises that directly or indirectly contribute to environmental sustainability and conservation objectives and that are decided upon, and managed, by project affected persons. 19 Tourism has been identified as an area of particular promise and interest, because it is one economic activity for which these mountain areas have a comparative advantage, and because entry barriers for modest rural and eco-tourism enterprises can be low. 67. Table 2 (below) provides an illustrative list of remedial measures that directly relate to specific restrictions on resource use, as well as other remedial measures that are unrelated to the resource used but that could help replace income lost due to restrictions on resource use. 68. While project technical staff can suggest a menu of options of environmentally sensitive compensatory measures with short- and long-term benefits to communities and individuals communities, the resource users themselves will need to assess the impacts of restrictions on segments of the local population and to have a voice in determining appropriate collective or individual compensatory measures. For example, while nearly all residents will be affected by restrictions on grazing and wood collection, smaller sub- groups may be particularly involved in using other resources such as medicinal plants, fruits, etc. These regular users are most likely to know the resource and whether it is stable or declining, to understand the consequences of losing it entirely, and to 19 Additional eligibility criteria will be provided in the Project Implementation Manual . Page 23 23 participate effectively in negotiations regarding short term restrictions and compensation, and long-term management. Local communities are also best placed to select from the menu of proposed investments under Component 2, those that are most relevant and appropriate for them. Holding these discussions and negotiations will require time and personnel, particularly as people in these areas are not accustomed to being consulted by government agencies or participating in decisions on matters of natural resource use. Both Components 1 (park management planning aspect) and Component 2 have been designed accordingly, with realistic implementation schedules (e.g., phasing in pasture management, starting with only a small proportion of the total area; providing investment assistance for only a few Village Clusters addressed each year), and with a substantial amount of long-term local technical assistance. Page 24 24 Table 2: Illustrative Remedial Measures, Directly Relating to Losses Caused by Restrictions on Access to Resource Use And Unrelated to the Specific Resource Lost Resource Use Restriction Expected Remedial Measure Remedial Measures Directly Related to Resource Loss Highland Pastures Improved forage production and direct support for improving livestock varieties and rearing conditions to encourage and enable farmers to shift to fodder-based systems; Technical and financial support for improving heavily degraded municipal pastures Fuelwood and timber Support for community-based reforestation and management of degraded municipal forests and unforested state forest land; Demonstrations and support for local production of fuel- efficient stoves, and of alternative energy sources; Forest Department to sell wood harvested through sanitary cutting only to locals Non-timber forest products (mushrooms, berries and other fruits, medicinal herbs) Limit restrictions by accommodating managed harvesting by locals to the extent possible in park management plans; Support for increasing value of the products through processing (jams and jellies, juices, etc.) and marketing, within the context of a managed and monitored harvesting system; Support for enterprises based on cultivation of valuable species (mushrooms, medicinal plants, etc.) Hunting No direct substitution or remedial measure proposed, but income-generating activities (e.g. tourism, beekeeping, handicrafts, wine production, etc.) supported by the project will help to compensate for economic losses 69. Village meetings and development initiatives may be facilitated by an agency, such as an NGO or research-and-development firm, that is specialized in such work. Such intermediary agencies will be contracted by the Park Directorate to assist in the implementation of its program. V. CONFLICT RESOLUTION Page 25 25 70. This section defines the process for resolving disputes relating to resource use restrictions that may arise between individuals in the same community, between communities, and with line ministries responsible for resource management. A basic premise of any grievance resolution system is that resolving a dispute early on and at a lower administrative level is much more likely to lead to amicable results than a dispute that continues through various levels. In other words, it is incumbent on project officials to deal as efficaciously as possible with all complaints over restrictions on access to natural resources, to maintain careful records of complaints and their resolution, and to refine the conflict resolution process over time so that project-affected people come to see the project and the national parks as allies. 71. In the instance of individual complaints and conflicts, mutually satisfactory solutions within the project framework -- and, failing that, then, within the local traditions and authority of the community or communities involved -- should usually be possible. Conflict resolution mechanisms will be discussed with local communities as part of the awareness raising/public awareness activities, so that they are aware of their options. 72. Depending on the nature of the complaint, an aggriev ed party’s first step may be to raise an issue related to project implementation with the local Project Coordinator, either directly or (if this is difficult) through the Technical Advisors or Municipal leaders, who are elected representatives. Project Coordinators will seek to resolve the issue themselves, or seek assistance from the central PIU. Alternatively, if the matter cannot be resolved informally within the project, the issue can be raised with Municipal authorities or other local leaders. Villages in Azerbaijan have strong local, traditional leadership in a system of elders. In such an instance, the village elder contacted will consult with his fellow elders, and together they will discuss the matter with the parties concerned. In most cases, the elders’ recommendations provide resolution of the issue at the local level. The project management and the municipal leaders will both have an interest to help resolve conflicts, and will be in a position to intervene on behalf of community members with Park officials, Rayon Executive Authorities, and other government officials. At the same time the PIU/PCU and municipal leaders provide a useful “balance of power” in that each will have different responsibilities and also considerable leverage with the other. Thus, an individual who has a complaint about project implementation or actions of project staff can enlist the assistance of the municipal leaders. If the complaint concerns misuse of position or other actions of the municipal leaders (e.g. complaints of being excluded from village level decision making or benefits), he or she can go to the project officers for help. The PIU will keep a record of complaints and conflict issues encountered and action taken resolve them. World Bank supervision missions will review this issue as well, both by reviewing the PIU reports and in discussions with communities during field visits (community members were quite open and vocal regarding their concerns and wishes at meetings during the preparation period, and it may be expected that they will continue to be). 73. Reliance on local systems of grievance resolution in no way precludes the intervention of administrative, police, or juridical authorities in the exercise of their stated powers. Further, individuals always have the prerogative of presenting their claims to the courts for adjudication. 74. Secondly, where intense grievances between two groups or communities arise, the only solution may be the intervention of public authorities to decide upon the matter. Page 26 26 If local officials cannot resolve their differences, the matter may be referred to the Executive Power (i.e., Governor) for resolution. Again, municipalities can present their claims in court if administrative resolution of the issue is unsatisfactory to either party. 75. Thirdly, when individuals (or communities) dispute the position of a ministry responsible for land use (e.g. Ministry of Forestry for cutting licenses, Ministry of Agriculture for grazing licenses), the aggrieved party may present his or her case to the local representative of the Government’s Ombudsman’s Office. If the decision of the local ombudsman is unacceptable, the aggrieved may appeal to the national office in Baku. Again, if the administrative conflict resolution system cannot find a mutually satisfactory resolution, the aggrieved may take his or her case to court for resolution. 76. In sum, the grievances resolution procedure has three levels, informal local resolution, administrative resolution, and finally judicial resolution. Ideally, issues will be resolved at the local level as quickly and as informally as possible. If local resolution of a grievance is not possible informally at the local level, the issue may be referred to administrative authorities for consideration. If it is still not possible to resolve the issue, the complainant, whether an individual or a group, has the right to take the matter to court, although, admittedly, this is a long and costly procedure. VI. MONITORING ARRANGEMENTS 77. AREP will institute three interrelated monitoring systems: i) project administrative reporting, ii) monitoring of natural resource use and the ecological status of each area, and iii) socio-economic monitoring to ensure that compensatory economic measures in fact replace income lost due to restrictions on natural resource use. 20 78. i) Project administrative reporting provides the standard record of activities undertaken in each reporting period, along with cost information. This covers: staffing in each area and staff activities, equipment needs and other administrative concerns (e.g., additional studies needed). For this PF, the annual project progress reports will include a section that details the number and type of local meetings held (e.g., on restrictions on State land, on restrictions on municipality land, on compensatory measures for forest land and for pastures lost), the number and types of grievances registered and their resolution, and the nature of compensatory measures implemented, as well as the findings of the socio-economic monitoring program (item iii, below). 79. ii) Monitoring of natural resource use and the ecological status of local areas will provide a useful complement to the formal project monitoring system. Local populations are already aware of what the restrictions are and how well they are observed. Local 20 This participatory approach to monitoring accords with the approach espoused in the Environmental Protection Law. Government, that is, in the present instance, the Park Management Directorate, is responsible for establishing a monitoring system to manage the environment and natural resources, including the state of natural resources and anthropogenic impacts on them (Section 2). The monitoring system will be governed by regulations approved by the executive authority (Section 3). Further, “Environmental enforcement in the Azerbaijan Republic shall be conducted at the governmental, plant (industry), and civic levels (Article 70). “Civic environmental enforcement shall [be] conducted by civic associations on the basis of agreements between nature users and the proper executive authorities” (Article 73). In the context of REP, civic environmental enforcement is equivalent to community-based monitoring, as proposed in this PF. Page 27 27 populations are also able and willing to monitor the status of the natural resources in their areas – and in doing so will be able to correlate the impact of the restrictions with the improvement or degradation of their local resources. To this end, each community can map the present state of the ecosystem in their area at the outset of the project. The community can then assess the state of natural resources each year, e.g., the extension or degradation of forests and pastures in their area, the presence or absence of economic trees, the quantity of berries, mushrooms and nuts available. This exercise will form an important element of the park management planning process, and will be organized and supported by sociologists working with the Park Administrations. (Both SDNP and ONP will have have sociologists among their regular staff. In addition, Component 1 includes a large provision for Technical Assistance for strengthening the capacity of the Park Administrations in areas with which the staff are likely to be relatively weak or inexperienced, such as community extension/partnership and socio-economic assessment. The budget for this component also has a separate line item for supporting this participatory process) . The Technical Advisors working with communities under Component 2 will work in a similar way, encouraging community members to identify and assess their key agricultural resources and set goals for improving them. 80. Further, and as an adjunct to this participatory monitoring component, REP will ensure that scientific investigations undertaken for biodiversity and ecological monitoring and evaluation will include capable local people. For example, biomass studies typically hire local study participants to collect samples in designated areas. These local employees are also capable, with adequate training, of processing the samples and carrying out the initial analyses. Local populations can also carry out inventories of flora and fauna, including counts of plants and animals in specified areas. Such integral participation of local populations in scientific studies not only provides employment, it also provides a window, and a control, on the work of the various scientists whose studies will constitute one basis for the definition of future restrictions on natural resources. 81. Socio-economic monitoring focuses on the maintenance or restoration of income levels and standards of living when restrictions on natural resource use impinge on the local populations’ production and therefore on family nutrition and income. In view of the importance of this aspect within this project (and general lack of relevant data or existing systems to collect it), Component 4 includes a long term study of socio- economic impacts, beginning with a detailed baseline survey of family incomes (with income source and amount for each family member) and basic demographic information. With this baseline, the PIU (or an NGO contracted for the purpose), will monitor the success of compensatory measures in maintaining or restoring families’ incomes over time. The project implementation plan includes the baseline survey, a midterm assessment at the end of Year 2, and an end of project assessment in the second half of Year 4. Such information is fundamentally important, for in those instances where economic compensatory measures fail to maintain incomes, project management will need to direct additional attention and resources in order to redress the situation. Page 28 28