RP1059 V2 REPUBLIC OF KENYA MINISTRY OF LANDS HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Kenya Informal Settlements Improvement Project (KISIP) ABBREVIATED RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN FOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS IN HURUMA, KAMUKUNJI AND MUNYAKA INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS, ELDORET MUNICIPALITY Ref. No. KE-103877 2013-10-10 KAMUKUNJI SETTLEMENT MUNYAKA SETTLEMENT Kenya Informal Settlements Improvement Project (KISIP) Component 3: Infrastructure and Service Delivery Consultancy services for socio-economic surveys, infrastructure upgrading plans and detailed engineering designs in informal settlements Contacts: Dr. Robert Zwahlen Sven Bolomey Environment and Manager of Engineering Components Social Development Specialist Pöyry Infra Ltd. Pöyry Energy Ltd. Hardturmstrasse 161, P.O. Box Hardturmstrasse 161, P.O. Box CH-8037 Zurich/Switzerland CH-8037 Zurich/Switzerland Tel. +41 44 355 55 55 Tel. +41 44 355 55 54 Mobile +41 76 356 28 61 Mobile +41 76 356 21 13 Fax +41 44 355 55 56 Fax +41 44 355 55 56 e-mail sven.bolomey@poyry.com e-mail robert.zwahlen@poyry.com http://www.poyry.com http://www.poyry.com Steve Ouma Elisha Akech Executive Director Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Pamoja Trust GA Consultants Ltd. Mbaru road off Mucai Road Standard Building, Standard Street P. O. Box 10269 – 00100 Nairobi, Kenya P.O. Box 2670 00100 Nairobi, Kenya Tel. +254 20 3871504 Tel. +254 20 312 931 +254 72 0896025 Mobile +254 721 629 706 Fax +254 20 3865752 Fax +254 e-mail souma@pamojatrust.org e-mail akech@g-a-consultants.com http://www.pamojatrust.org http://g-a-consultants.com/ Copyright © Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development This report has been prepared by Pöyry Energy AG (“Pöyry”) for the Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development of the Government of Kenya (the “Recipient”) under Consultancy Services for socio-economic surveys, infrastructure upgrading plans and detailed engineering designs in informal settlements. Front cover photos: by Marlon Konchellah on 15th March 2013 Panorama for Kamukunji and Munyaka settlements. FACT SHEET Project Name Kenya Informal Settlements Improvement Project (KISIP) Assignment Name Consultancy for socio-economic surveys, infrastructure upgrading plans and detailed engineering designs in informal settlements Lead Implementing Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development Agency Funding Agencies Government of Kenya, World Bank, AFD, SIDA Consultants POYRY, GA Consultants, Pamoja Trust Start Date February 20, 2012 Completion Date October 20, 2013 Team Leader Robert Zwahlen, POYRY Deputy Team Leader Steve Ouma, Pamoja Trust Target settlements Eldoret –Huruma/Mwenderi, Munyaka, and Kamukunji Prepared by: Consultants Pamoja Trust, GA Engineering and Pöyry Energy AG (“Pöyry”) Signed: Date Approved by: Client: Ministry of Housing, Government of Kenya (the “Recipient”). Signed: Date: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban is implementing the Kenya Informal settlements Improvement Project (KISIP) in 15 municipalities. Mombasa is one of the municipalities chosen to participate in the project based on defined criteria. The project is jointly financed by the World Bank, the Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA), the French Agency for Development (AFD) and the Government of Kenya (GoK). The project’s development objective is to improve the living condition of people living in the informal settlements through securing land tenure and provision of infrastructure and services. KISIP is implementing infrastructure improvement projects in four informal settlements in Eldoret. The settlements are Huruma/Mwenderi, Kamukunji, and Munyaka. The types of infrastructure that will be implemented in the settlements include: upgrading of roads, security flood lightning, storm water drainage, and rehabilitation of sewer. These projects will be responding to the current challenges within the settlements as identified and prioritized through community consultation. When implemented, the projects will benefit an estimated population of 37,724 in the settlements in improved accessibility, drainage, security, and better sanitation. The nature of implementation of the proposed projects will trigger some minor displacement of assets and livelihoods. However, no private land will be expropriated as all the affected assets are encroachments on designated public way leaves. This Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) has been prepared in conformity with the World Bank’s Operational Policy on Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12), the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) that was approved prior to the project approval, and Government of Kenya legal framework governing resettlement issues. An Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) for the project has been conducted and identified displacement as a potential project impact. To mitigate, the likely displacement impacts, the ESIA proposed the development of this RAP. A total of 103 Project Affected Persons (PAPs) have been identified through community consultations and surveying of the road corridors. The distribution of PAPs is as follows: Huruma/Mwenderi has 321 PAPs, Kamukunji has 53 PAPs, and Munyaka has 4 PAPs. The kinds of losses identified are temporary structures, house extension erected on way leaves, A and temporary market stalls and kiosks. In addition, livelihood losses have been identified for traders who sell their wares on the road corridors and will have to move to alternative sites. Consultations with the PAPs have been undertaken to discuss and agree on the mitigation options. The PAPs recognize that they illegally occupy land reserved for infrastructure development particularly roads and are willing to remove their structures and temporal businesses to pave way for the project. The population affected by this project, includes people occupying land on the road reserve in violation of Kenyan laws. These groups of people; who are often referred to as encroachers, are not entitled to compensation for loss of land under both the OP 4.12 and the government of Kenya laws. However, they are entitled to compensation for any improvement made to the land as well as to resettlement assistance if they occupied the project area before an established cutoff date. The estimated compensation sum has excluded the value of land, due to it being designated as a road reserve and therefore no individual has a legal ownership claim on any part thereof. A census and socio-economic survey of the PAPs was undertaken and a PAP register prepared. A valuation of the affected assets and livelihoods has been undertaken and an entitlement matrix and compensation package proposed in this RAP. The RAP proposes the settlement of compensation and resettlement assistance before the commencement of the project. The Uasin Gishu County Government will give alternative space for traders who will be displaced in the existing markets in Huruma/Mwanderi and Kamukunji. In Munyaka, where there is no market space, the affected structures will be compensated at full replacement cost. Resettlement assistance in form of transport, labour for removing structures and loss of livelihoods will also be offered to the PAPs. This RAP will also be publicly disclosed. The construction of the proposed infrastructure (roads, drainage, sewer line, and security lightning) will greatly improve the living conditions of the inhabitants in all the four settlements. With the implementation of mitigation measures such as this RAP, the overall social impacts of the project will be minimal. The project will also offer significant socio-economic opportunities for communities and the population of the area. B Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... A LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................8 Table 1.2: Proposed Projects per Settlement...................................................................................8 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................9 1.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................... 10 1.2.1 General Project Description .......................................................................................... 10 1.2.2 Selected Settlements in Eldoret ..................................................................................... 11 1.2.3 Proposed Projects ......................................................................................................... 20 Table 1.2: Proposed Projects per Settlement................................................................................. 20 1.2.4 Project Impacts............................................................................................................. 21 1.3 Statement of the Problem and Need for RAP .................................................................... 22 1.4 Objectives of RAP ............................................................................................................ 22 2 POLICY, LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK .................................................. 24 2.1 Applicable GoK Policy and Legal Framework ................................................................... 24 2.2 World Bank Safeguard Policies ......................................................................................... 26 2.3 Gaps between OP 4.12 and GoK Policies .......................................................................... 28 2.4 Institutional Responsibilities for RAP ............................................................................... 29 3 RAP PROCESS........................................................................................................................ 32 3.1 Census of PAPs ................................................................................................................ 32 3.2 Inventory of Project Affected Assets ................................................................................. 33 3.3 Inventory Project Affected Persons (PAPs) ....................................................................... 33 3.4 Socio-Economic Survey of PAPs ....................................................................................... 35 3.4.1 Huruma/Mwenderi Settlement ..................................................................................... 35 3.4.2 Munyaka Settlement ..................................................................................................... 36 3 3.4.3 Kamukunji Settlement .................................................................................................. 36 3.5 Cut-Off Date .................................................................................................................... 37 3.6 Valuation of Assets ........................................................................................................... 38 3.7 Community Consultation and Participation ...................................................................... 39 4 COMPENSATION AND RESETTLEMENT ASSISTANCE ................................................ 41 4.1 Eligibility Criteria ............................................................................................................. 41 4.2 Entitlement Matrix ........................................................................................................... 41 4.3 Notification ...................................................................................................................... 43 4.4 Payment of Compensation ................................................................................................ 43 5 GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM ............................................................................... 45 6 IMPLEMENATION SCHEDULE ......................................................................................... 47 7 MONITORING AND EVALUATION ................................................................................... 49 7.1 Objectives of Monitoring and Evaluation ......................................................................... 49 7.2 Monitoring and Evaluation Framework ............................................................................ 50 8 COST AND BUDGET ............................................................................................................ 53 9 DISCLOSURE ........................................................................................................................ 55 10 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 56 ANNEXES 4 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AFD Agence Francaise de Developpement RIM Register Index Map CBO Community-based Organization CDF Constituencies Development Fund CEMP Community Environmental Management Plan EA Enumeration Areas EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMP Environmental Management Plan ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment FBO Faith-based Organization FGD Focus Group Discussion GoK Government of Kenya KISIP Kenya Informal Settlements Improvement Project KMP Kenya Municipal Program SEC Settlement Executive Committee KNBS Kenya National Bureau of Statistics KURA Kenya Urban Roads Authority KWFT Kenya Women’s Finance Trust LA Local Authority LASDAP Local Authority Service Delivery Action Plan LATF Local Authority Transfer Fund MCM Municipal Council of Mombasa MM Man Month 5 MoH Ministry of Housing MoL Ministry of Lands MoLH&UD Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development NACHU National Cooperative Housing Union NEMA National Environment Management Authority PAD Project Appraisal Document PAP Project Affected Person PDP Part Development Plan RAP Resettlement Action Plan SIDA Swedish International Development Agency SPA Special Planning Area SRS Simple random sampling SUP Settlement Upgrading Plan ToR Terms of Reference WaSSIP Water and Sanitation Services Improvement Project WSB Water Services Board WSTF Water Services Trust Fund 6 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1: Location of settlements in Eldoret Municipality Figure 1.2: Map of Huruma/Mwenderi with verified boundaries Figure 1.3: Map of Kamukunji settlement with verified boundaries Figure 1.4: Land use map of Mkomani settlement with verified boundaries Figure3.1: Shop extension in Huruma Figure3. 2: Kibanda(kiosk) Figure 3.3: Aerial view of Kamukunji Figure 3.4: One of PAPs structure Fig5. 1: Grievance Redress Mechanism 7 LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1: Socioeconomic baseline information for each settlement Table 1.2: Proposed Projects per Settlement Table 2.1: Relevant Laws Related To Resettlement Table2.2: Statutory Institutions with Roles in the RAP process Table 3.1: Affected Structures Table 3.2: Categories of Project Affected Persons Table 4.1: Entitlement Matrix Table 6.1: Proposed Implementation Schedule Table 7.1: RAP Monitoring Plan Table 7.2: RAP Monitoring Framework Table 8.1: Proposed budget for RAP 8 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background The Kenya Informal Settlements Project (KISIP) is a five year project of the Government of Kenya (GOK) with support from the World Bank, through The International Development Association, (IDA), the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) and the Agence Française de Development (AFD). The overall project development objective is to improve living conditions in informal settlements in fifteen (15) selected municipalities in Kenya, by improving security of land tenure and investing in infrastructure based on plans developed in consultation with communities. KISIP is housed by Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development and implemented in close partnership with the 15 participating municipalities of Eldoret, Embu, Garisa, Kakamega, Kericho, Kisumu, Kitui, Machakos, Malindi, Nakuru, Nairobi, Naivasha, Nakuru, Nyeri and Thika; selected on the basis of agreed criteria. The KISIP is desirous to ensure that environmental and social issues are adequately identified and addressed in all its components and in particular for infrastructure investments. To achieve this, an Environment and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) have been prepared and approved. The key objective of the ESMF and RPF is to provide a framework for systematic and effective identification and management of environmental and social issues for KISIP. The ESMF provides guidance on integrating of environmental issues into project design and implementation; while the RPF provides guidance on mitigating the likely impacts associated with land acquisition and displacement. The ESMF/RPF forms part of the financing agreement between the World Bank and the Government of Kenya. Component three of KISIP supports investment in settlement infrastructure such as roads, bicycle paths, pedestrian walkways, street and security lighting, vending platforms, solid waste management, storm water drainage, water and sanitation systems, public parks and green spaces. Poyry Consultants in association with GA Consultants and Pamoja Trust have been contracted under the Consultancy services for socio-economic surveys, infrastructure upgrading plans and detailed engineering designs in 9 informal settlements,in Nakuru, Nakuru and Eldoret. The development of the RAP is part of the assignment under this consultancy. Prior to the undertaking of this RAP, the proposed projects were screened for both environmental and social impacts. The screening identified limited displacement of structures built on the way leaves and likely temporal livelihood disturbance as likely impacts. This RAP has been prepared in conformity to the World Bank’s Operational Policy on Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12), the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), the Environmental Management and Coordination Act, 1999 and other Government of Kenya policies and laws dealing with resettlement issues. 1.2 Project Description 1.2.1 General Project Description The project has the following four components: Component 1: Institutional Strengthening and Program Management: This component supports institutional strengthening and capacity building of the MoLH&UD, and the participating municipalities, as well as development of policies, frameworks, systems, and guidelines for slum upgrading. Component 2: Enhancing Tenure Security: This component directly supports implementation of the new national land policy in urban informal settlements through refinement, systematization and scale-up of ongoing efforts to strengthen tenure security in urban informal settlements. Component 3: Investing in Settlement Infrastructure and Service Delivery: This component supports the implementation of settlement upgrading plans that have been developed at the community level. Infrastructure investment that is eligible under KISIP includes the following: roads, bicycle paths, pedestrian walkways, street and security lighting, vending platforms, solid waste management, storm water drainage, water and sanitation systems, public parks and green spaces. Component 4: Planning for Growth: Supporting Delivery of Serviced Land and Affordable Housing: This component supports planning and development of options that facilitate delivery of 10 infrastructure services, land and housing for future population growth. The objective is to provide an alternative to the current chaotic practice of informally establishing settlements on any open land. 1.2.2 Selected Settlements in Eldoret In Eldoret municipality, the following informal settlements are targeted for infrastructure improvement: a) Huruma/Mwenderi settlement: 70.9 ha, population estimated at 15 090 inhabitants b) Kamukunji settlement: 11.1 ha, population estimated at 4527 inhabitants c) Munyaka settlement: 88.2 ha, population estimated at 18 107 inhabitants Figure 1 shows the locations of the settlements relative to each other within Eldoret municipality. Figure 2.1: Location of settlements in Eldoret Municipality The following table presents a summary of socio-economic data for the three settlements. 11 Table 1.1: Socioeconomic baseline information for each settlement City Unit Eldoret Settlement Huruma/Mwenderi Kamukunji Munyaka Area ha 70.9 11.1 88.2 Clusters 6 4 4 Stage 1 Bahati Big Five Stage 2 Cyrus Gatanga Stage 3 Munyaka Nyathiru Stage 4 Mwitirithia Pilot Stage 5 Stage 6 Socio-economy HH N 289 274 279 Mean HH size N 3.4 4.1 4.8 Inhabitants N 15090 4527 18107 Female headed HH % 20 25 22 Unemployment % 15 14 16 Land/house owners % 15 12 58 Tenants % 79 85 39 Other (occupant) % 7 3 3 Years resided in current Y 9.8 11.2 10.8 settlement Feels tenure is secure % 95 88 78 12 City Unit Eldoret Settlement Huruma/Mwenderi Kamukunji Munyaka Have electricity % 83 54 37 Have piped water - in- house or shared tap in % 88 46 68 compound Obtain water from % 3 9 14 boreholes or wells Households who say there is street lighting % 33 8 NA that works most of the time Households who say that the main access road is tarmac, gravel, % 51 34 14 murram or paved (not earth) Toilet facilities No facility % 0.3 1 0.4 Individual toilet - VIP, % 82 91 86 ordinary pit, WC Shared/public toilet % 23 8 14 Excreta disposal system Formal connection to % 54 55 2 public sewer Informal connection to % 16 7 0 public sewer Septic tank / soak pit % 2 2 2 Pit latrine % 27 34 96 13 City Unit Eldoret Settlement Huruma/Mwenderi Kamukunji Munyaka Drainage Households with a drain % 71 33 11 outside their home Garbage disposal system Dumping in own % 39 37 49 neighbourhood Burning / burying / dumping in own % 30 29 51 compound Organized private % 23 15 0 collection system Municipality collection % 5 1 0 system 1.2.2.1 Huruma/Mwenderi Huruma/Mwenderi is located in Eldoret North Consitutency, Huruma Ward, Turbo location and Kapyemit sublocation and is approximately 3 km northeast of downtown Eldoret (Figure 1.2). 14 Figure 1.2: Map of Huruma/Mwenderi with verified boundaries Source: Prepared by Malachi Odongowith Google Earth on August 30, 2012 Between 1974 and 1976, the Kingongo Farm put up 120 acres for sale. This land was bought as a collective, with individuals owning shares. The farm directors opted to sell to “common citizens” rather than to wealthy landowners and farmers (FGDs 2012). This is the origin of the name ‘Huruma’, which means compassion in Kiswahili. Many of the residents of Huruma came from other slums within Eldoret town - and many were previously squatting in government forests in the region. These first residents opened up businesses that later gave names to the clusters in which they are found (e.g. Pilot, Gatanga, Nyathiru, Big Five and Flamingo). 15 Mwenderi’s history is similar. The land was purchased by 37 cooperative members in 1969 from a white settler by the name of Evanson. Each member paid Ksh 1020. The new owners called the settlement ‘Mwienderi’, which means ‘to love oneself’ in Kiswahili. The group moved onto the land in 1970 out of fear that others would lay claim to the area. The settlements of Huruma and Mwenderi are composed primarily of people from the Kikuyu ethnic group. The community from the two settlements of Huruma and Mwenderi see themselves as a family. There is no developmental initiative that can happen in one and not extend to the other settlement. The SEC members also come from both settlements (Huruma and Mwenderi). Although Huruma is much bigger than Mwenderi, the SEC chair comes from the latter. During post-election violence, the settlements were caught up in fighting with groups from another tribe that live on the other side of the Sosiani River. They have once again started dealing with each other through business interactions but remain mistrustful of each other. Physical characteristics Together, the settlements of Huruma and Mwenderi have a combined area of 70.9 ha. Huruma takes up the bulk of the area with Mwenderi being comprised of only two rows of houses on the southeastern edge of Huruma. The settlements are on a gradient. At the bottom of the slope are the Sosiani River and ELDOWAS’ wastewater treatment lagoons. The settlement is also bordered by the main road exiting Eldoret to the northwest (Jua Kali road) as well as a wheat farm and some factories - including a particularly large plywood factory called Raiply Ltd. Clusters Mwenderi is not divided into clusters. Huruma is divided into four clusters: (i) Big Five, (ii) Gatanga, (iii) Nyathiru and (iv) Pilot. All of these clusters were named after a prominent shop or business located in the respective cluster. 1.2.2.2 Kamukunji Kamukunji is located in Uashin Gishu District, Soi Consituency, Kapsuswa-kwinet ward, Kiburgen location, and Kamukunji sub-location. The settlement has an area of 11.1 hectares and is 16 approximately 2.5 km north of the central business district (Figure 1.3). The settlement is named after a meeting place where initial residents used to converge, and is part of the wider Kamukunji Estate as mapped on the PDP. A group of shareholders purchased the land that is known as Kamukunji Estate from a white settler called Woodler. The land was subsequently subdivided into 50x100 m plots. Kamukunji has many different PDPs - and it is unclear which version is the legitimate PDP. The slum formed within the settlement as the demand for inexpensive housing grew. The Estate is ‘planned’ but poorly served with infrastructure. In 2011 the first multi-storey building was built (FGDs 2012). Figure 1.3: Map of Kamukunji settlement with verified boundaries Source: Prepared by Malachi Odongo with Google Earth on August 20, 2012 17 Kamukunji suffers from tribal tensions. These tensions were especially heightened during the violence that followed the 2007 elections. Kamukunji is ethnically diverse and the SEC membership represents this ethnic diversity. The settlement is surrounded by three settlements, namely: Kambi Teso, Bondeni and Landi tatu. All four settlements are within Block 16. The community feels strongly that development initiatives cannot be carried out in one while excluding the others - and the SEC members even come from settlements other than Kamukunji. There are youth groups that are engaged with waste collection. Though they just started the business, there is great opportunity in terms of growth for the group even though they lack proper equipment for waste collection. They would like to grow into the field of waste management as well. Physical characteristics The settlement is flat on its southern edges and then extends up the sides of a rocky hill on its northern boundaries. The settlement becomes quite muddy during the rainy season and is surrounded by undeveloped or agricultural land as well as other, less dense settlements to its north. The upper reaches of the settlement were divided into 2 ha plots (5 acres) for agricultural purposes. Clusters The settlement is organized into six clusters: Stage 1, Stage 2, Stage 3, Stage 4, Stage 5, and Stage 6. These names refer to the name of the nearest matatu stop. 1.2.2.3 Munyaka Munyaka is located in Eldoret East District, Ainabkoi constituency, Kapsoya ward, Chepkoilel location and Sigot sub-location approximately 4.3 km northeast of the central business district. The subdivision of the original farm of 121.4 ha began in the 1980s. The farm was divided into 969 small plots of about 50 m2 each (Figure 1.4). 18 Figure 1.4: Land use map of Mkomani settlement with verified boundaries Source: Prepared by Malachi Odongo with Google Earth on August 30, 2012 Physical characteristics Munyaka has a land area of more than 88 hectares (88.2 ha). It is situated on an area of slightly rolling hills and has a rural feel to it. They community has respected the PDP and there is very little if any encroachment on public way-leaves. Clusters There are four clusters in Munyaka: (i) Bahati, (ii) Cyrus, (iii) Munyaka, and (iv) Mwitirithia. 19 1.2.3 Proposed Projects According to the Project Appraisal Document (PAD), the menu of eligible projects that can be financed under KISIP are: roads, bicycle paths, pedestrian walkways, street and security lighting, vending platforms, solid waste management, storm water drainage, water and sanitation systems, public parks and green spaces. The communities in the three settlements were involved in the identification and prioritization projects from the menu of the projects provided in the PAD. Moreover, communities were consulted and participated during the socio-economic surveys, conceptual designs, and the development of settlement upgrading plans. During these consultations, the likely impacts of the proposed projects were discussed and informed the prioritization process. Such impacts included both positive and negative environmental and social impacts. Table 1.2 shows the prioritized and proposed projects for each of the settlements in Nakuru. The projects address the prioritized challenges within the settlements as identified during the socio- economic surveys. Table 1.2: Proposed Projects per Settlement Settlement Scope of works 1. Huruma / Mwenderi 1.1 R2, R3 and R4 - Full rehabilitation of settlement road network – 9946 m 1.2 D1 - Construction of 1394 m of major drainage canals 1.3 S1 - Rehabilitation of existing sewerage reticulation - lump sum 1.4 S2 - Construction of ablution blocks – 3 units. ablution block 1.5 L1 - Construction of 3 No. high mast lighting structures 2. Kamukunji 2.1 R2, R3 and R4 - Full rehabilitation of settlement road network – 1835 m 2.2 R2 and R3 - Construction of 1796 m of roads with 9 m reserve width 20 2.3 S1 - Rehabilitation of existing sewerage reticulation - lump sum 2.4 L1 - Construction of 1 No. high mast lighting structures 3. Munyaka 3.1 R2, R3 and R4 - Full rehabilitation of settlement road network – 21222 m 3.2 D2 - Construction of 600 m of major drainage canals 3.3 D2 - Construction of 5 no. infiltration pits- borehole type 3.4 S2 - Construction of ablution blocks – 5 units. ablution block 3.5 L1 - Construction of 4 No. high mast lighting structures 4. Solid Waste Management 4.1 Training of local communities in Solid Waste Management and operation and maintenance of infrastructure 1.2.4 Project Impacts These proposed projects will have the following positive impacts:  Improve accessibility within the three settlements by upgrading the poor road and footpath network in the settlements  Improve drainage and solve flooding related impacts within the settlements  Improve sanitation and solve sanitation related health risks  Improve security through security lightning However, the projects may have limited negative impacts which should be mitigated:  Displacement of people, structures and businesses located on the way leaves  Noise and dust from construction activities  Occupational health risks during construction 21 1.3 Statement of the Problem and Need for RAP Displacement impacts are anticipated to be quite small in scale occasioned by: o Partial demolition of structures to expand / realign road reserves o Reclamation of encroached way-leaves o Displacement of open and mobile shops (kiosks) to expand / realign road reserves, provide drainage canals, etc, o Displacement of settlements to reclaim public utility land o Land reservation for receptacles and waste collection centres, posts for security lighting o Removal of structures to create room for trunk infrastructure such as drainage. Both the World Bank’s Policy on Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12) and the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) require the development and implementation of a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) to address any anticipated displacement impacts of a Bank financed project. Moreover, the Environmental Management and Coordination Act, 1999 provides for RAP, whenever displacement is identified as an impact during environmental impact assessment (EIA). 1.4 Objectives of RAP The objective of the RAP is to clarify the principles and procedures that will govern the mitigation of adverse social impacts induced by the proposed projects. Specifically, the RAP is designed to ensure:  All types of losses are identified, clearly defined and properly categorized to reflect the nature of the loss.  A standard or measure for defining eligibility and entitlement in order to have a fair basis for assessing compensation for the loss or impact suffered.  Compliance with provisions of Kenyan Laws and World Bank Operational Policies (OP 4.12, paragraph 2(b)): that resettlement activity would be conceived and executed as development programs, providing sufficient investment resources to enable the PAPs to share in project benefits. 22  Displaced persons will be compensated for their losses at full replacement cost and provided assistance for disturbance prior to the beginning of civil works.  A comprehensive database, based on which values will be assessed, validated in the event of disputes and more importantly serve as the database for monitoring and evaluation of the resettlement instrument.  The project affected persons would be consulted and given the chance of participating in the design, implementation and monitoring of the resettlement. 23 2 POLICY, LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK Resettlement of project affected persons (PAPs) in the project will therefore be carried out in accordance with laws, regulations and guidelines for Resettlement/Land Acquisition Policy Framework of the Government of Kenya and World Bank’s Operational Policy (O.P 4.12), which has resulted in the preparation of this RAP. 2.1 Applicable GoK Policy and Legal Framework This RAP has been prepared in accordance with laws, regulations and guidelines for Resettlement/Land Acquisition Policy Framework of the Government of Kenya. The relevant national and local laws, regulations and guidelines are presented in Table 2.1. Since no land acquisition will undertake by the project, laws, policies and regulations relating to land acquisition will not be discussed. Table 2.1: Relevant Laws Related To Resettlement Name of Act Application Remarks The Land Act No.6 of An act of Parliament to make The project will not compulsorily 2012 provision on land regulation and for acquire private land. the compulsory acquisition of land for Will apply if the project elects to public benefit. An inquiry held, ask the government to allocate objections heard, compensation public land for any the relocation payable. PAPs within the way leaves will Applies to allocation of and dealings be required to voluntarily with Public land and private land. remove their structures without All encroachment on the public right expectation of any compensation of way under the section 143 of the Act will not be compensated or permitted The Constitution of Anyone dissatisfied with the award of The procedure of compulsorily Kenya 2010, Section compensation for compulsory acquiring private land for the 40 (3)(ii) acquisition of private land by the purpose of the project can be 24 Commissioner has the right to seek considered where any extra space judicial recourse. A further appeal to is needed for setting up the the High Court can be made. Further, infrastructures proposed in this multiple structure owners dissatisfied project. with the RAP implementation can bring a constitutional reference against deprivation of property without compensation. The Physical Planning Requires preparation of To be considered when planning Act, Cap 286 (Act No development plans for every residential sites and other 6 of 1996) intended development and relocation sites. invitation to the public to comment /object to the development Code 95, the City The municipal Council of Nakuru As above Building code (came Department of Planning may require into effect in 1995) the observation of the code. The Local Empowers the Nakuru Municipal The municipal council of Nakuru Government Act, Cap Council to buy, lease or sell land: to would need to consider this if 265 ask the government to compulsorily faced by any need of relocation acquire land for it, to appropriate any and resettlement. land not in use for its intended purpose to be used with the approval of the Minister for another purpose. Land Registration Act A maximum of 5 persons can be Would be applicable if land No. 3 of 2012 registered as owners of one piece of identified for relocation of the land. Nakuru PAPs is registered under this Act. 25 The Public Applies to all procurements by Would apply to the acquisition Procurement and government and public entities of any land that will be required Disposal Act No 3 of for relocation. 2005 and the Public It would also apply to contracts Procurement And for the construction work to be Disposal (Public undertaken. Private Partnerships) Regulations, 2009 Kenya Roads Act Applies specifically to the function of KURA shall have the Cap.2 Kenya Urban Roads Authority in responsibility for supervising implementation of the KISIP road construction, rehabilitation and upgrading project. maintenance of all public roads in the municipalities in Kenya under KISIP project. Environmental Provision for resettlement action plans Regulations require RAP Management and to address displacement/relocation whenever relocation is identified Coordination Act, impacts as a project impact. 1999 and subsidiary legislation on EIA/EA (Legal Notice 101). 2.2 World Bank Safeguard Policies According to OP 4.12, any World Bank assisted project/program must comply with the provisions of OP 4.12 for impacts associated with land acquisition and displacement. OP 4.12 applies to all components of the project that result in involuntary resettlement, regardless of the source of financing. This policy covers direct economic and social impacts that both result from World Bank- assisted projects, and are caused by: 26 a) The involuntary taking of land resulting in (i) relocation or loss of shelter; (ii) loss of assets or access to assets; or (iii) loss of income sources or means of livelihood, whether or not the affected persons must move to another location; or b) The involuntary restriction of access to legally designated parks and protected areas resulting in adverse impacts on the livelihoods of the displaced persons. Towards addressing the said impacts, OP 4.12 requires that a resettlement plan or a resettlement policy framework be prepared with the following objectives:- a) To outline measures to ensure that the displaced persons are: (i) informed about their options and rights pertaining to resettlement; (ii) consulted on, offered choices among, and provided with technically and economically feasible resettlement alternatives; and (iii) provided prompt and effective compensation at full replacement cost for losses of assets attributable directly to the project. b) If the impacts include physical relocation, the resettlement plan or resettlement policy framework includes measures to ensure that the displaced persons are: (i) provided assistance (such as moving allowances) during relocation; and (ii) provided with residential housing, or housing sites, or, as required, agricultural sites for which a combination of productive potential, locational advantages, and other factors is at least equivalent to the advantages of the old site. Where necessary to achieve the objectives of the policy, the resettlement plan or resettlement policy framework also include measures to ensure that displaced persons are: (i) offered support after displacement for a transition period based on a reasonable estimate of the time likely to be needed to restore their livelihood and standards of living; and (ii) provided with development assistance in addition to compensation measures demanded by the policy; (iii) such as land preparation, credit facilities, training, or job opportunities. 27 2.3 Gaps between OP 4.12 and GoK Policies The RPF was prepared in conformity with the policy and legal provisions of the GoK and the World Bank. However, in preparing the RPF, operational gaps between the policy/legal frameworks of both have emerged as follows:- a) While the GoK through diverse legal tools including the new constitution allows for acquisition and thus displacement, OP 4.12 favors a policy of avoidance or minimization of involuntary resettlement and design of appropriate mitigation in case avoidance or minimization is not possible. b) While Cap 288 provides for compensation in respect of acquired land at market rates, OP 4.12 emphasizes the need for compensation at replacement cost coupled with provision of support during the transitional period to improve or at least restore living standards of affected people to pre-displacement levels. c) The Kenyan law has no provision for compensation is respect of economic displacement unlike OP4.12 which recognizes both physical and economic displacement. d) The Kenya system originally recognized only title holders as bonafide property owners but currently, the new Constitution has opened an „in-good-faith’ window through which compensation can be extended to non-title holders which is more in harmony with the OP 4.12 premise that ‘lack of legal title should be no bar in extending assistance and support to those displaced by projects’. The KISIP complies with the requirements of OP 4.12 in the following ways:  The ESIA study assesses project alternatives to avoid, where feasible, or minimize involuntary resettlement.  The potential economic and social impacts of the project have been assessed in the ESIA study and summarized in this report as well.  Project-affected persons, host communities and local nongovernmental organizations, as appropriate have been consulted. 28  PAPs have been informed of their rights including prompt compensation at full replacement cost for loss of assets attributable to the project; assistance during relocation, and transitional support and development assistance.  RAP has been prepared to deal with social impacts associated with likely displacement. 2.4 Institutional Responsibilities for RAP During the RAP preparation process, a number of key institutions were identified as critical to both preparation, and implementation of the RAP. This is summarized in Table 2.2 below. Consultations and involvement has been sought during the process. Table2.2: Statutory Institutions with Roles in the RAP process No Institution Role Capacity 1 Ministry of Land Houses the KISIP project The ministry has experts Housing and Urban in key areas: land Provides policy direction Development management and Handle land tenure issues administration, physical planning, resettlement 2 County Government of Has the responsibility of Financial capacity is Uasin Gishu implementing the RAP as lacking. In the transition, spelled out in the RPF. KISIP providing assistance 3 Kenya Urban Roads In charge of the Capacity exists Authority management of urban roads. It approves road designs and maintains roads. 4 KPLC Responsible for Capacity exists. Costs relocating electricity provided in the BQ. transmission lines from the road reserves 5 Eldoret Water and Responsible relocating Capacity exists. Costs Sewerage Company affected water 29 (ELDOWAS) infrastructure e.g. pipes, provided in the BQ. water kiosks to maintain service levels 6 National Environment Approving and issuing Capacity exists. Costs of Management Authority EIA licenses for projects license provided for in (NEMA) which have addressed the budget. environmental and social impacts 7 Ministry of Finance Financial management on Capacity exists and behalf of the Borrower ( funds will be made GoK) available. Provision of counterpart funding – part of which is used to settle compensation claims by PAPs In addition to the above governmental institutions, several structures were established at the community level in each of the settlements: a) A Community Resettlement Advisory Committee: This was formed during the preparation of RAP to mobilize the community; provide a link between the community, the consultant, the County Government of Nakuru, and KISIP. The Committee has been involved in all stages of RAP development and is expected to continue playing an active role in monitoring its implementation. b) The Grievance Committee: Formed to address all grievances related to the development and implementation of this RAP. c) The Valuation Committee: Was formed during the RAP preparation to lead valuation of affected assets and negotiations with the PAPs. The overall coordination of the whole process from development to implementation and monitoring is provided by the KISIP PCT. The National KISIP Coordinating Unit has the following roles: 30 a) Coordinate the effective implementation of the ESMF/RPF and ensure compliance with agreed implementation procedures and guidelines. b) Prepare Progress reports on the implementation of the environmental and social safeguards. c) Procure and supervise consultants for Social and Environment Assessments d) Build the capacity at all levels to implement the ESMF/RPF e) Supervision of ESMF/RPF implementation during and after project implementation a) Ensure integration of EMPs and RAPs into Contract and Bid Documents b) Ensuring adequate community participation 31 3 RAP PROCESS 3.1 Census of PAPs A census of PAPs and assets that will be affected was conducted in all the three settlements. The enumeration exercise was to identify project affected people (PAP) that will require resettlement, compensation and other forms of assistance as a consequence of the impacts of the proposed project on their livelihoods. In accordance with OP 4.12, persons affected by the project would be assisted to resettle in new locations and to continue their normal lives in their new locations with minimal or no difficulties. Against this backdrop, it was considered necessary to undertake a survey of the respective project areas (Huruma/Mwenderi, Kamukunji, and Munyaka ) to determine the number of the PAPs in each of these areas, ascertain their socio-economic characteristics, types of structures and businesses where applicable, that would be affected by the envisaged project. LOCATION: PIG KIOSK EXTERNAL RESIDENTIAL TOTAL SHED PERIMETER & ABOLUTION BLOCK HURUMA/MWENDERI 0 31 6 9 46 KAMUKUNJI 1 1 0 2 4 MUNYAKA 53 0 2 55 TOTAL 1 85 6 13 105 32 3.2 Inventory of Project Affected Assets Table 3.1: Affected Structures Enumeration of PAPs and affected properties on each of the three settlements on respective projects in these areas are presented in Table 3.1. The table shows the different categories of PAPs based on the type of structures used. In the three settlements it was observed that about 99% of the PAPs are vendors operating temporary kiosks, open stalls and mobile vending tables. All the identified PAPs are categorized as encroachers to existing right of way; hence no loss of land is envisaged. These affected structures will have to be shifted backwards or relocated to a comfortable place for the project to be implemented. It is worth mentioning that mobile vendors (mostly vegetable sellers) do take their wares home and in most cases the tables are removed at the close of each day. 3.3 Inventory Project Affected Persons (PAPs) The project affected persons under this project are those people that will be physically displaced from their business or residential locations as a result of the proposed projects in the three settlements. This means that the PAPs directly located within the portions of land designated for road upgrading, drainage canals, sewer line and walkway shall be entitled to assistance or compensation. These categories of project affected persons are presented in Table 3.2. 33 Table 3.2: Categories of Project Affected Persons LOCATION PROJECT AFFECTED PERSONS FULLY AFFECTED PARTIALLY TOT AFFECTED AL RELOCATED DEMOLISHED Kiosk External Residential Kiosk Residential Residential Kiosk Perimeter HURUMA 31 6 9 /MWEND ERI KAMUKUNJ 2 2 I MUNYAKA 53 2 TOTAL 86 6 13 Majority of 85% of the affected structures are Kiosks, 5% houses while 10% are shops extensions. Over 50% of the above structures have earth floors, 40.6% earth walls, 20% metal sheet walls, 46.6% wooden doors, 53.4% wooden windows, 70.9% Galvanized Corrugated Iron (GCI) Sheets roof and 18.2% makuti roofs. Overall, majority of the structures are temporary. The survey shows that over 83.5% of properties will be partially affected but remain in usable condition while 16.5% will be wholly affected. About 85% of the affected structures will have salvage value and can be reused. Demolition of permanent structures either residential or commercial within each of the three settlements for the envisage projects will be avoided. The project is not considering demolition of permanent structures except where it is completely inevitable. About three (3) permanent structures will be partly affected by the project in the three settlements (two structures in Kamukunji and one 34 in Huruma) affected structures in Kamukunji and Huruma are respectively on the road to be upgraded. 3.4 Socio-Economic Survey of PAPs The Socio-economic survey was conducted for the purpose of identifying:  Current occupants of the right-of-way  Standard characteristics of project affected persons (baseline information on livelihood, economic and social information)  The magnitude of the expected loss (total or partial)  Information on vulnerable groups or persons (for whom special provision may have to be made) 3.4.1 Huruma/Mwenderi Settlement A total of 46 potential Project Affected Persons (PAPs) were identified and interviewed in Huruma/Mwenderi. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents Nearly all of the affected structures are temporary business premises; either kiosks or shop extension on which the PAPs sell various items within the settlement including: fruits and vegetables, fabrics and textiles, foot wears, ready-made food, soft drinks and snacks; fish; kitchen and household wares. The PAPs also provide services like hair dressing, dress making, shoe repair, wrist watch/clock repair. 69% of the identified PAPs are female while 31% are male. The average age of the identified PAPs is 30 years, the minimum age being 20 years while the maximum being 55. The average household size of the PAPs is five members. About 98% of the identified affected structures are used for business purposes. 35 Figure3.1 : Shop extension in Huruma Figure3. 2: Kibanda(kiosk) Source: photos by Marlon Konchellah 3.4.2 Munyaka Settlement A total of 53 project affected persons (PAPs) were identified and interviewed in Munyaka. Nearly 100% of the affected structures are temporary business kiosks where PAPs do vending of vegetables and clothing within the settlements. The following is the characterization of the PAPs identified in Munyaka: 79% of the identified PAPs are female while 21% are male. The average age of the identified PAPs is 33 years; the minimum age being 21 years while the maximum age being 65. The average household size is five. 3.4.3 Kamukunji Settlement The PAPs identified and verified in Kamukunji are 4. Six (6) other PAPs who were identified in the verification process will not be considered under this study, this is because the designs for improvement of the road indicate that the first lane on the left when entering the settlement is a 9 meter road whiles the RIM indicates that the road is a 7 meter. It is thus recommended that a redesign is considered for this road to retain the measurements existing in the RIM otherwise any adjustment might trigger acquisition of the extra land. 36 Out of the four (4) affected structures, one is a pig shed, a kiosk, a residential mad wall structure and a shop extension. Figure 3.3: Aerial view of Kamukunji Figure 3.4: One of PAPs structure Souce: Photo by James Ketta Source: photo by Marlon Konchellah 3.5 Cut-Off Date The entitlement cut-off date refers to the time when the assessment of persons and their property in particular sub project areas is carried out, which is the time when the census or economic survey was initiated. The consultant completed the census process for the project areas in Eldoret on March 16th 2013. This date is therefore the cut-off date. It is the opinion of the consultant that the completion of the census of the PAPs represents a provisional cut-off date. People moving to the project area after the cut-off date should not be considered as PAPs. It is recommended that the Client and/or the relevant Government Agencies or County Government of Nakuru should issue a formal notice prohibiting any further construction, capital improvements or approval of any construction on the project areas. 37 3.6 Valuation of Assets Valuation of assets in Huruma/Mwenderi, Kamukunji and Munyaka along the roads, drainage and sewer to be upgraded was conducted by a qualified surveyor and a registered valuer between 23rd and 27th September 2013 to ascertain individuals whose properties or livelihoods will be directly or indirectly affected by the project activities. Valuation was conducted at locations of structures encroachment to the project area. A general principle adopted in the formulation of the compensation valuation is that lost income and assets will be valued at resettlement assistance cost such that the project affected populations should experience no net loss. This is in accordance with the KISIP Resettlement Policy Framework and World Bank operational policy on involuntary resettlement, OP 4.12. In line with the above principle, an all encompassing survey and valuation of the assets and loss of income by the Project affected persons (PAPs) was conducted. Considering that compensation, in the form of alternative spaces in nearby markets ( in Huruma and Kamukunji) will be offered to the PAPs who are predominantly small market traders and due to the fact that they will not need their structures in the new markets, there will be no huge monetary compensation or replacement of land or business premises/structures. As already stated, there will be no demolition of structures hence structures will not be valued since PAPs will be allowed to dismantle their structures and reuse them at relocated locations or in the markets provided as alternatives. KISIP will provide supplementary assistance to affected PAPs. Depending on the type of materials used for the construction of structures, rates will be considered for cost of labour and transportation allowance. Basically two types of materials are prevalent: wood/plywood and steel/iron sheets. The rates that were confirmed to us by the PAPs and assessed by a certified valuer will apply and these are: 1. Transportation allowance for moving structures from project corridors  Kiosk (lock-up wooden shops) and open stall (dismantled wooden materials) Ksh.1000 2. Cost of labor for dismantling the affected structure  Kiosk (lock-up wooden shops) and open stall Ksh.2,000 38 3. Allowance for income losses: at an average of Ksh.750 for 4 days. It was agreed that in Munyaka since an alternative site is not readily available for the PAPs the structures will be compensated at full replacement cost. The structures are valued at an average of Ksh. 2000. 3.7 Community Consultation and Participation Consultations with stakeholders, was initiated very early with preliminary meetings with County Government leadership and other stakeholders within Uasin Gishu County. To date, KISIP have conducted series of consultations. Broad ranges of stakeholders, including state and county authorities, settlements leaders, non-Governmental organizations, Community Based Organizations, youth organizations and market associations in the project areas have been contacted. The consultations were aimed at identifying the best ways to mitigate the impacts the project is likely to have on the affected people. In each area, KISIP alongside the RAP consultant and the valuation experts conducted open forums with the PAPs to inform them about the proposed improvement projects and the need for some of them to either shift or get relocated away from the right of way in each of the four areas. The consultations carried out prior to the RAP study is a follow-up to the continuous consultations that KISIP has been carrying out since the conceptualization stage of this project. The KISIP implementation team has been very consistent with this approach to ensure that all stakeholders are adequately briefed about the project and their suggestions and inputs are included in total project design. This approach further strengthened the sustainability of the project. During consultation meetings, the PAPs from all the three settlements recognizes that they have encroached on the public way leaves and are wiling to remove their structures to pave way for the project. They recognize the benefits that the infrastructure improvement projects will have on their communities. However they regrets that they will be losing parts of their structures which they spent money constructing and some of their structures are business premises so a loss of livelihood. In terms of relocation preferences, many of the PAPs expressed the desire to be relocated within their present locations. Many of them wished to be relocated near the road where they can have easy access to customers rather than being relocated to hidden markets. In this regard, many expressed 39 their interest to be allowed to move their stalls back beyond the ‘right of way’ Field observation showed that many of the Vendors could simply be required to move some steps back off the right of way. This would probably be mutually satisfactory, as the project would have succeeded in moving the PAPs away from the right of way, while the PAPs would also be satisfied with the minimum dislocation. In economic terms, this would also reduce the burden of relocation and compensation as most of the people would not need to be paid any financial compensation, and would entail little or no disruption to daily economic activities. Many expressed the desire to be relocated before the project commences, and being given adequate notice, while others emphasized the need for justice and fairness in the relocation process. When the PAPs were asked about the forms of assistance that they would need if they were to be relocated, many (42%) of the PAPs preferred to be given financial assistance/loan; and 40% to be provided with another business space/market. Other forms of assistance wished by the PAPs include: assistance in kind (9%); assistance with the cost of transportation between their homes and the new location (4%); and provision of alternative means of livelihood (3%). However, 2% of the PAPs expressed no need for any form of assistance. When asked about the possible effects of relocation, the respondents mentioned various effects. At the economic level, some of the Vendors expressed concerns about possible negative impact on their livelihood, loss of income, loss of customers and inability to make any savings. Furthermore, some Vendors also expressed concerns about difficulties in adapting to new environments; distance from residence to new business locations; ‘starting all over again’, and cost of relocation. 40 4 COMPENSATION AND RESETTLEMENT ASSISTANCE 4.1 Eligibility Criteria The World Bank Resettlement Policy/Guidelines require compensation for the lost assets and replacement costs to both titled and non-titled landholders and resettlement assistance for lost income and livelihoods. In this project, the absence of formal titles will not constitute a barrier to resettlement assistance and rehabilitation. Further, the principles adopted herein contain special measures and assistance for vulnerable affected persons, such as female-headed households, disabled persons, and the poor. Persons affected by land acquisition, and relocation and/or rehabilitation of structures/assets, Small Business Enterprises (SBE) houses, etc., are entitled to a combination of compensation measures and resettlement assistance, depending on the nature of ownership rights of lost assets and scope of the impact, including social and economic vulnerability of the affected persons. In general terms, the affected persons in the project area will be entitled to various types of compensation and resettlement assistance that will help in the restoration of their livelihoods, at a minimum, to the pre- project standards. The qualified PAPs that are eligible for compensation and other project assistance include: 1. Those PAPs that are on the way leaves for drainage and roads. 2. PAPs that will have to demolish part or whole of their dwellings. 3. PAPs who require to transport their properties to another location. 4. PAPs that need to carry out re-construction works due to either relocation or shifting backwards. 5. PAPs whose income will be impaired. 4.2 Entitlement Matrix In line with World Bank Involuntary Resettlement Policy OP 4.12 supplementary assistance is support provided to people who are physically displaced by a project, which may include transportation, food, shelter, and social services that are provided to affected people during their relocation (Table 5). Assistance may also include cash allowances that compensate affected people for the inconvenience associated with resettlement and defray the expenses of a transition to a new 41 locale, such as moving expenses and lost market days. The affected vendors that will be entitled for supplementary assistance include:  Affected business stalls (shop extensions) will not be relocated but will be required to move backwards  Tenants who are small traders will lose their market and livelihood for a few days. The supplementary assistance will vary from; cost of transportation, cost of labor, and allowance for income losses. In doing so, priority will be given to the vulnerable groups like aged persons, widows, single mothers etc. Such priorities will include: where transportation and labor are required, KISIP shall specifically assist to get vehicles/drivers and labor respectively. In addition, for loss of income, they shall be given prompt compensation before any other PAP. Table 4.1: Entitlement Matrix TYPE OF CATEGORIES ENTITLEMENT LOSSES OF AFFECTED PERSONS Loss of access All types of affected  No cash compensation or land replacement for to the road persons loss of land at the project area in the three reserve as settlements. This is because public right of way is space for public property and the PAPs are considered as business squatters. But affected persons will be given alternative space for business e.g. inside nearby markets. Loss of Relocation of open  Alternative place for business will be provided by business stalls, wooden stalls, the County Government for all affected PAPs. premise Kiosks etc.:  Movement allowance to cover the cost of moving a) Land and structures (transport plus loading/unloading) shall Business Owners be provided by KISIP. b) Business owners  Cost of labour for dismantling and reconstruction who are not land will also be provided by KISIP. owners  Owners of affected structures will be allowed to c) Vendors take/reuse all the salvageable materials for 42 d) Tenants rebuilding/rehabilitation of the structure. Relocation of  The County Government shall liaise with mobile vendors: appropriate market associations to provide space a) Business owners in nearby markets for the vendors. who are not land  For a location that is far (50m), transfer allowance owners to cover transportation will be provided by KISIP. b) Vendors c) Itinerants Shifting of vendors’ KISIP will provide labour cost for dismantling and Stalls and shops reconstruction of affected vendors stalls and shops. Loss of Income Only PAPs that will KISIP will provide allowances in lieu of lost daily profit from business be relocated to for 4 days. premises nearby the market Transport allowances will be provided to the PAPs to allow them transport their salvaged structures. Vulnerable group KISIP shall provide loss in daily profit to all identified vulnerable group 4.3 Notification The PAPs will be served with adequate notice of 30 days to relocate upon compensation and before the commencement of works. All the stakeholders in the project e.g. KURA, NEMA, KPLC, will also be notified of the relocation exercise. 4.4 Payment of Compensation In line with the World Bank operational policy on involuntary resettlement (OP 4.12), KISIP will ensure that the conditions of PAPs are restored to the status that is at the minimum commensurate to their pre-project status. List of all PAPs has been documented in the PAP register. In addition, every person affected by the project registered with their national identification card for easy identification for possible compensation. The register has among other parameters indicated the 43 name of the person, business type, and identification number. The identity cards will serve as the major identification for restitution. The RAP implementation will verify the correctness of each PAPs as stated in the register and ascertain that every identity card holder is correctly documented in the register. On completion of the PAP audit list, the Project Coordinator will setup a team that will carry out payment and compensation. This team will consist of KISIP’s accountant, legal and a social safeguard expert including representatives of the County Government and SEC. Payments will be made according to locations and adequate information will be made available to all affected persons prior to payment. Such information will include: 1. Dates and locations of payment 2. List of eligible people and amount 3. Mode of payment etc. An appropriate framework to deliver the compensation payments to the PAPs will be decided by KISIP in line with government financial management regulations and as much as possible keeping in mind that most PAPs have no bank accounts. In the event that an individual is absent during payment, the compensation committee will immediately communicate a new date of payment to such individual(s). 44 5 GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM Given the enormity of the challenges associated with grievance redress, the consultant recommended a dispute resolution mechanism in which, as far as possible, all disputes are resolved at the community level. A community grievance committee was formed at the settlement level which should mediate conflicts that arise at settlement level. An appeal from the settlement grievance committee lies to a joint grievance committee made up of SEC representatives, at least representatives from a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO), three officers representing the client from the KISIP Municipal Team- heads of component 3, which should include legal expertise and accountant, and representation from KURA. It is recommended that the team should be chaired by the Municipal KISIP Coordinator. The legal expert from the joint grievance committee shall be the secretary of the committee and they shall meet once every week to address pertinent issues raised. The functions of the Grievance Redress Committee are:  Provide support to affected persons on problems arising from loss of business area and/or eviction from the setbacks;  Record the grievance of the affected persons, categorize and prioritize the grievances that need to be resolved by the Committee; and  Report to the aggrieved parties about the developments regarding their grievances and the decision of the Project authorities. The main objective of the grievance redress procedure will be to provide a mechanism to mediate conflict and cut down on lengthy litigation, which often delay such infrastructure projects. It will also provide people who might have objections or concerns about their assistance, a public forum to raise their objections and through conflict resolution, address these issues adequately. The committee will undertake a highly consultative process for the project. The committee will provide ample opportunity to redress complaints informally, in addition to the existing formal administrative and legal procedures. However, the major grievances that might require mitigations include: a) Affected persons not enlisted; b) Losses not correctly identified; 45 c) Inadequate assistance or not in line with entitlement matrix; d) Dispute about ownership; e) Delay in disbursement of assistance; and f) Improper distribution of assistance. It is the responsibility of the grievance redress committee to satisfactorily address all complaints brought by the project-affected persons. On the condition that an affected person is not satisfied with the decisions of the committee to the appeal level, such person has an opportunity to seek the intervention of the formal judicial mechanisms. Fig 1: Grievance Redress Mechanism First Instance: Local mediation with ruling under the auspices of settlement grievance Committee, and area chief. If not successful Second Instance: Joint Committee SEC representative, at least representatives from two Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs), three officers representing the client from the KISIP municipal Team- heads of component 3 and representation from KURA, in the presence of legal counsel. If not successful Third Instance: Court of Law according to Kenyan laws with legal representation of PAP. 46 6 IMPLEMENATION SCHEDULE The implementation schedule for this RAP covers the periods from the preparation of the RAP to the conclusion of the envisaged projects in the three settlements ( Kwa Rhonda, Gilani, and Kaptembwo) to the completion and the time that the infrastructure will be fully available to full use. It should be noted that the procedure in the schedule starting from notification of the PAPs before their displacement through compensation and resettlement will be done in phases to synchronize with the various phases of the project. The RAP Implementation schedule defines the duration and timing of the key milestones and tasks. The major component tasks for the schedule include:  Preparation of RAP  Consultation and Disclosure of RAP  Audit of the PAP register and compensation package due to each PAP  Signing of agreements on compensation packages by PAPs  Resolving emerging grievances  Compensation and/or Supplementary assistance  Notification of PAPs to relocate  Commencement of project operations  Monitoring and evaluation, including baseline update Table 6.1 shows the implementation schedule specifically for relocation of PAPs within the Project beneficiary areas; this however will be developed in further details and timeline after the World Bank Review and approval. Table 6.1: Proposed Implementation Schedule Activity Weeks from Approval of RAP Report 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Approval of RAP Disclosure of the RAP Report 47 Audit of the RAP report to verify PAP and compensation details Signing of compensation and relocation assistance agreements Resolution of conflicts and Grievances Payment of compensation to PAPs and facilitation of relocation Issuance of notices for relocation Actual relocation Commencement of works Monitoring of the resettlement activities Post – Relocation activities 48 7 MONITORING AND EVALUATION 7.1 Objectives of Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) procedures establish the effectiveness of all land and asset acquisition and resettlement activities, in addition to the measures designed to mitigate adverse social impacts. The procedures include internal track keeping efforts as well as independent external monitoring. The purpose of resettlement monitoring for the KISIP project will be to verify that:  Actions and commitments described in the RAP are implemented;  Eligible project affected people receive their full compensation prior to the start of the rehabilitation activities on the project area;  RAP actions and compensation measures have helped the people who sought cash compensation in restoring their lost incomes and in sustaining/improving pre-project living standards;  Complaints and grievances lodged by project affected people are followed up and, where necessary, appropriate corrective actions are taken;  If necessary, changes in RAP procedure are made to improve delivery of entitlements to project affected people. The World Bank operational policy (OP 4.12) states that the project sponsor (KISIP) is responsible for adequate M&E of the activities set forth in the resettlement instrument. Monitoring will provide both a warning system for the project sponsor (KISIP) and a channel for the affected persons to make known their needs and their reactions to resettlement execution. KISIP monitoring and evaluation activities and programs would be adequately funded and staffed. In-house monitoring may need to be supplemented by independent monitors to ensure complete and objective information. Accordingly, the primary responsibility for monitoring rests with KISIP. Interestingly, KISIP already has an Environmental and Social safeguard team, and an implementation-monitoring unit. These different groups, in cooperation with each other and with guidance from the External actors will monitor the project. 49 7.2 Monitoring and Evaluation Framework The RAP monitoring plan and framework is adopted from IFC (Handbook for Preparing a Resettlement Action Plan). It involves:  Internal monitoring by KISIP;  Impact monitoring commissioned to specialized firms; and  RAP Completion Audit Table 7.1: RAP Monitoring Plan Component Type of Source of Responsibility Frequency/ Activity Information/ Information/ for Data Audience of Data Collected Data collection Collection, Reporting Methods Analysis and Reporting Performance Measurement of Monthly or KISIP PCT Semi-annual/annual monitoring input indicators quarterly narrative KISIP County as required by KISIP against proposed status and Team, and World Bank time table and financial reports SEC budget including procurement and physical delivery of goods, structures and services. Impact Tracking Quarterly or semi- Project Annual or more monitoring effectiveness of annual resettlement frequently as inputs against quantitative and unit or required by KISIP baseline qualitative surveys contracted and WB indicators external Regular public monitoring Assessment of meetings and agency PAP satisfaction other consultation 50 with inputs with people affected by the project; review of grievance mechanism outputs Completion Measurement of External Contracted On completion of audit output indicators assessment/sign- external the RAP time table such as off report based auditing and as agreed between productivity on performance evaluation KISIP and WB gains, livelihood and impact agency restoration, and monitoring developmental reports, impact against independent baseline surveys and consultation with affected persons Table 7.2: RAP Monitoring Framework 1. Verify internal RAP implementation reports by a field check of the following: • Payment of compensation including its levels and timing • Settlement of land/resource access claims • Preparation and adequacy of resettlement sites • Housing construction • Provision of employment, its adequacy and income levels • Adequacy of training and other developmental inputs 51 • Rehabilitation of vulnerable groups • Infrastructure repair, relocation or replacement • Enterprise relocation, compensation and its adequacy • Transition allowances 2. Interview a random sample of affected people in open-ended discussion to assess their knowledge and concerns regarding the resettlement process, their entitlements and rehabilitation measures. 3. Observe public consultations with affected people at the village or town level. 4. Observe the function of the resettlement operation at all levels to assess its effectiveness and compliance with the RAP. 5. Check the type of grievance issues and the functioning of grievance redress mechanisms by reviewing the processing of appeals at all levels and interviewing aggrieved affected people. 6. Survey the standards of living of the affected people (and of an unaffected control group where feasible) before and after implementation of resettlement to assess whether the standards of living of the affected people have improved or been maintained. 7. Advise project management regarding necessary improvements in the implementation of the RAP, if any. 52 8 COST AND BUDGET The project has made the necessary budget provisions to ensure that the mitigation commitments, including compensation and the monitoring programs can be fully implemented. The population affected by this project, includes people occupying land on the road reserve in violation of Kenyan laws. These groups of people; who are often referred to as squatters, are not entitled to compensation for loss of land under both the OP 4.12 and the government of Kenya laws. However, they are entitled to compensation for any improvement made to the land as well as to resettlement assistance if they occupied the project area before an established cutoff date. The estimated compensation sum has excluded the value of land, due to it being designated as a road reserve and therefore no individual has a legal ownership claim on any part thereof. The overall budget for the resettlement action plan is presented in Table 8.1. Table 8.1: Proposed budget for RAP No Budget Item Proposed Budget (Kshs.) 1 Payment for resettlement assistance in the form of: 0.814M i. Loss of income for four days ii. Transport allowance to allow them transports their salvaged structures. iii. Labour cost for dismantling the affected structures. iv. Compensation of structures in Munyaka at replacement cost 2 Resettlement Activities 1M i. Auditing and verification of PAP register and compensation packages ii. Grievance Redress mechanism 53 iii. Issuance of notices iv. Facilitating PAPs to move to the new markets v. Supervision and monitoring of resettlement activities vi. Community consultations vii. Meetings of resettlement Committees 3 Implementation of post-project community support activities 0.5M including monitoring and evaluation of resettlement impacts Sub-Total 2.314M 4 Add 10% contingencies 0.2314M TOTAL 2.5454M 54 9 DISCLOSURE This RAP will be publicly be disclosed by KISIP which will make copies available at its offices, County Government Offices in Nakuru, as well as on the Ministry of Lands Housing andUrnab Development website. KISIP will organize the presentation of this report to the various stakeholders (SEC, traditional leaders, County Government and other Governmental Agencies). The following process will be used to disclose the RAP:  The RAP will be placed in designated places and at least through the construction phase. This will be the MoLH&UD offices in Nairobi, Uasin Gishu County Offices, NEMA office in Nakuru, and Community Library in Eldoret.  The RAP will be placed on the MoLH&UD website throughout the period of the project.  A Public disclosure meeting will be held in all the settlements where all the PAPs and stakeholders will be present. The main objectives are to: 1. Inform and explain the entitlement policy and various options to the affected people (APs) prior to financial assistance; 2. Socially prepare the affected persons for relocation; 3. Help counter rumors and prevent unnecessary distress; 4. Bring clarity on issues that might be raised by the affected persons about their entitlements and benefits through question-and-answer sessions; 5. Attempt to ensure that vulnerable groups understand the process and their needs are specifically taken into consideration. 55 10 CONCLUSION The construction of the proposed infrastructure (roads, footpaths, drainage, ablution blocks, security lightning and gabions) will greatly improve the living conditions of the inhabitants in all the three settlements. With the implementation of mitigation measures such as this RAP, the overall social impacts of the project will be minimal. The project will also offer significant socio-economic opportunities for communities and the population of the area. 56 ANNEXES A2 Minutes of the community consultation sessions 57 MINUTES OF RAP INDUCTION MEETING WITH STAKEHOLDERS AT ELDORET MUNICIPLE COUNCIL PREMISE ON 13TH March 2013 (see annex for list of participants) INTRODUCTION Present in this meeting was the town engineer, staff within the municipal participating in projects under KISIP, Settlement Executive Committee (SEC) from the three settlements and the consultant. The agenda of the meeting was to: 1. Introduce RAP process within the three settlements. 2. Establish SEC position on the Relocation Action Plan concept for the PAPs. 3. Familiarize SEC with the approved maps for the project and identify the project affected areas from the maps. 4. Strategies on how to identify the Project Affected Persons (PAPs). 5. Facilitate the mobilization of the Project Affected Persons on ground. CONSULTATION OVERVIEW The consultant introduced the RAP process to be undertaken in Huruma/Mwenderi, Munyaka and Kamukunji settlements. SEC member’s report from each of the three settlements indicated that from the sharing of the conceptual designs they could easily identify PAPs in the project area. The PAPs reached by SEC agreed to remove any of their structure within the project area. The strategy adopted in this meeting was for the consultant accompanied by the city surveyor and area SEC members to do a transept walk within the project areas and mobilize PAPs for a consultative meeting. From the meeting it was pointed out that land within the three settlements was clearly demarcated, owners had titles and beacons to their plots, hence those on the wayleaves are encroaching. It was reiterated that under the Kenya law encroachment on wayleaves cannot be compensated. 58 CONSULTATION MEETING IN HURUMA/MWENDERI ON 14TH MARCH 2013 AT PCEA CHURCH HURUMA (See annex for list of participants) INTRODUCTION A consultation meeting with 23 PAPs mobilized by SEC and the consultant during the transept walk took place. The agenda for the meeting was to:  do a census of the PAPs  Introduce the proposed project to them  Agree on relocation plan OVERVIEW OF DISCUSSIONS The number of PAPs identified in the meeting was 23 in total. The projects priorities agreed under the PDP for the settlements were revisited and adopted as originating from the community. The PAPs agreed they were a party to the project prioritized in the PDP and thus would welcome the project in the settlement. It was agreed that plots within Huruma and Mwenderi were clearly demarcated, titles issued and beacons marked. Those who had encroached the wayleaves had only temporary extension of their shops and few “vibandas” (temporary kiosks). The PAPs in consensus agreed to remove their structures voluntarily. The PAPs signed a consent agreement to this effect (see annex). The only precondition requested by the PAPs was sufficient notice to be provided on which it was agreed that at least three month notice before the commencement of the project will be sufficient. 59 CONSULTATION MEETING IN KAMUKUNJI SETTLEMENT ON 15TH MARCH AT 10.00AM (See annex for list of participants) INTRODUCTION After a transept walk and mobilization of PAPs this meeting was scheduled for the 4 PAPs identified in Kamukunji, the area SEC leaders and the consultant. The meeting’s agenda being to agree on the resettlement action plan for the PAPs identified. OVERVIEW OF CONSULTATION A recap of the project priorities in the PDP was done and the PAPs committed to have been part of originators of the settlement PDP. It was indicated that the project to be carried out in the settlement was roads, drainage and 2 floodlights. The PAPs identified were within the road identified for the project. Drainage runs along the road to be upgraded while the flood lights will be place in public spaces in the area hence, not affecting the current occupancy. It was agreed that land in Kamukunji was demarcated, titles issued and beacons set on each plot to indicate boundaries. Those with structure within the wayleaves have them there illegally. Four PAPs were identified in the settlement, their affected structures included; a pig shed, a kiosk, perimeter fence and part of a temporary house front. All the PAPs identified welcomed the project and said they were ready to remove their structures from the project area before commencement of the project voluntarily. A consent agreement was signed to this effect by the PAPs and witnessed by a lawyer. The only precondition was sufficient notice be issued which was agreed to be about 3 month before commencement of the project. There being no other business the meeting ended at 12.30pm. 60 CONSULTATION MEETING IN MUNYAKA SETTLEMENT ON 16TH MARCH 2013 (See annex for list of participants) INTRODUCTION Transept walk was done on 15th March by area SEC members and the consultant to identify and mobilise PAPs for this meeting. 39 PAPs were identified and mobilised for a consultation meeting to agree on resettlement action plan to take place on the morning of 16th March 2013 OVERVIEW OF CONSULTATION The PAPs identified in Munyaka mainly owned business premises along the project area. These structures were mainly shop extensions on the road to be upgraded.. The consultation meeting was attended by identified PAPs, area SEC leaders and the consultant. The main agenda of the meeting was to agree on resettlement action plan for PAPs. The projects to be implemented within Munyaka as prioritised by the community were reviewed and agreed upon. It was noted that land within Munyaka was demarcated, titles issued and beacons clearly marked. It was thus agreed that the PAPs who mainly had temporary business premises on the project area should remove them to allow the commencement of the project. All the 39 PAPs were in agreement of the appeal to move as almost all had plots with shops but only extensions were within the road set for upgrading. A consent agreement was signed to this effect in the presence of a lawyer with the PAPs agreeing to voluntarily remove their structures (see annex). The only precondition was sufficient notice be issued which was agreed to be about 3 month before commencement of the project. There being no other business the meeting ended at 12.30pm 61 A2 Details of Project Affected Persons Including Estimated Valuation 62