RP355 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Table of Contents

Table of Contents.1 Li toT Kf...... y A ro y s ...... List of Key Acronyms.3 Acknowledgement..3

1.0 Executive Summary..4

2.0 Introduction ...... 7

3.0 Description of Proposed Project ...... 8

4.0 Baseline Data ...... 10 4.1 The Bio-physical Environment .10 4.1.1 Specific features of Sapo National Park . 1.. 4.2 Key Social Features and the Legacies of the Civil War and other Civil Strife .11 4.2.1 Characteristics of Poverty..14 4.3 The Economic Features ...... 15

5.0 Description of World Bank Environmental and Social Safeguards Policies and Triggers ...... 28 5.1 Environmental Assessment (OP4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01) ...... 28 5.2 Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04) ...... 29 5.3 Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) ...... 29 5.4 Forests (OP/GP 4.36) ...... 30

6.0 Description of the Administrative, Policy, Legislative and Regulatory Framework ...... 17 6.1 The Administrative Structure for Governance, Environmental and Forest Management .....17 6.2 Policy Framework for Management of the Forest Sector ...... 18 6.3 Policy Framework for the Management of the Environment ...... 18 6.4 The Legislative and Regulatory Framework for Forest Management ... 20 6.4.1 The Liberian Constitution .20 6.4.2 The New National Forestry Act of 2000 .20 6.4.3 The Act creating the Forestry Development Authority (1976) .20 6.4.4 An Act to Amend the Act Creating the Forestry Development Authority (1988). 21 6.4.5 Timber Concession Agreement (1973) Revised 1988 .21 6.4.6 The Decree Creating Sapo National Park (SNP 1983) .21 6.4.7 Wildlife and National Parks Act of 1988 .22 6.4.8 The Protected Forest Area Network Law (2003) .22 6.5 The Legislative and Regulatory Framework for Environmental Management . .22 6.5.1 The Act Creating the Environmental Protection Agency of Liberia .22 6.5.2 The Environmental Protection and Management Law of Liberia .24 6.6 International Conventions .25 6.6.1 The African Conventions on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (Algiers, 1968 and Mozambique, 2003) . . . 25 6.6.2 Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat, Ramsar, 1971.25 6.6.3 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, Washington, 1973 (frequently referred to as 'CITES') .. 25 6.6.4 Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration on the Environment and Development, and the Statement of Principles for Sustainable Management of Forests . .25 6.6.5 Convention on Biological Diversity, Rio de Janeiro, 1992 (CBD) .26 6.6.6 International Tropical Timber Agreements, 1983 and 1994 .27 6.6.7 Membership of International River Basins .27

7.0 Determining Potential Environmental and Social Impacts ...... 32 7.1 Potential Environmental Concerns and Impacts .32

1 7.1.1 Generic Environmental Concerns ...... 32 7.2 Bio-Physical, Social and Economic Issues and Concerns Facing Sapo National Park ...... 35 7.2.1 Biophysical ...... 35 7.2.2 Social ...... 36 7.2.3 Institutional ...... 36 7.3 Potential Positive Environmental Impacts of the BCSNP Project .37 7.4 Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of the BCSNP Project .37 7.5 Potential Positive Social Impacts of the BCSNP Project .38 7.6 Potential Adverse Social Impacts of the BCSNP Project .38

8.0 Institutional Assessment and Framework for Environmental and Social Management . 39 8.1 Institutional Roles and Responsibilities ...... 39 8.1.1 Fauna & Flora International (FFI) - Project Coordination and Management ...... 39 8.1.2 The Environment Protection Agency/County Environment Committees (CEC) ... 40 8.1.3 For Type 1 Investments ...... 40 8.1.4 For Type 2 Investments ...... 41 8.1.5 Capacity Assessment to Perform these Roles ...... 43 8.2 Training Needs ...... 43 8.2.1 Proposed Training Programme ...... 43

9.0 Environmental and Social Planning, Review and Clearing Process for Sub-project Activities to be Funded under the BCSNP ...... 47 9.1 Environmental and Social Management Process .47 9.2 For Type 1 Investments .47 9.3 for Type 2 Investments .50

10.0 Monitoring Plan .53 10.1 Monitoring Roles and Responsibilities (refer to Figure 9.1) .54 10.1.1 Communal Forest Establishment Committee (CFEC) .54 10.1.2 County Environment Committee .54 10.1.3 The Forestry Development Authority .54 10.1.4 Fauna & Flora International .55 10.2 Monitoring Plan (Table 10.1) .55

ANNEX 1 - References ...... 59 ANNEX 2 - Summary of World Bank Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies ...... 60 ANNEX 3 - Environmental and Social Screening Form ...... 62 ANNEX 4 - Environmental and Social Appraisal Form ...... 68 ANNEX 5 - Indicative Environmental and Social Mitigation Measures Checklist ...... 71

2 List of Key Acronyms BCSNP - (this project) Biodiversity Conservation at Sapo National Park BP - Best Practice (a guidance note of the World Bank) CBD - Convention on Biological Diversity CEC - County Environment Committees CF - Communal Forest CFEC - Communal Forest Establishment Committee (also Communal Forest Council and Communal Forest Management Committee) CFMP - Communal Forest Management Plan DEC - District Environment Committee DWNP - Division of Wildlife and National Parks EA - Environmental Assessment EIA - Environmental Impact Assessment EPA - Environmental Protection Agency ESMF - (this report) Environment and Social Management Framework ESMP - Environment and Social Management Plan FDA - Forestry Development Authority FFI - Fauna & Flora International GDP - Gross Domestic Product GoL - Government of Liberia GP - Good Practice (a World Bank guidance note) IDPs - Internally Displaced Persons MIA - Ministry of Internal Affairs NTFP - Non-Timber Forest Product OD - Operational Directive (of the World Bank) OP - Operational Policy (of the World Bank) OPN - Operational Policy Note (of the World Bank) OTC - Oriental Timber Company PF - Process Framework SME - Small and Medium Enterprises SNP - Sapo National Park UN - United Nations

Acknowledgement FFI wishes to acknowledge the tremendous contribution of Mr James Orehmie Monday, World Bank Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialist, for having prepared the bulk of this Environment and Social Management Framework. Thanks are due also to Mr Jean Michel Pavy of the World Bank for his untiring efforts to see this framework and the overall project through to implementation.

Jamison Suter Senior Projects Advisor Fauna & Flora International November 2004

3 1.0 Executive Summary The south-east Liberian Forest ecosystem is under extreme pressure principally from commercial logging, bushmeat hunting and subsistence agriculture, with localized disturbances from alluvial gold mining, settlement and non-timber forest product collection. These pressures increased exponentially between the end of the first civil war (late 1996) as people returned to the countryside, and logging companies began being granted relatively unhindered access to forest areas.

In 2000, Liberia harbored the largest remaining proportion of the Upper Guinean Ecosystem, an ecosystem spanning 6 countries from Togo to Sierra Leone, with perhaps 42% of the remaining forest. Biological, Liberia's forests are exceptionally diverse, with high rates of endemism and harboring many more species that are nearly extinct outside the country. Liberia is home to over 20000 flowering plants, including about 240 timber species, and approximately 125 mammal species, 590 bird species, 74 known reptiles and amphibians and over 1000 described insect species. Notable fauna including significant populations of forest elephants and pygmy hippopotami. The exceptionally rare Liberian moose is found in Liberian forests.

Sapo National Park (SNP) is a protected area within this forest ecosystem. The Government of Liberia (GoL) has requested the World Bank to finance a project referred to here as the Biodiversity Conservation at Sapo National Park (BCSNP) Project, with the long term goal of contributing to the establishment and sustainability of Sapo National Park as the flagship protected area of Liberia. This project's five-year development objective is to consolidate management and development of Sapo national Park and peripheral communal forests as part of landscape-level development. To achieve these objectives, this project is structured into five components, namely:

* Component 1: Building up Park management operations and co-ordination mechanisms.

* Component 2: Strengthening the capacity of Park staff and the Liberian Forestry Development Authority's (FDA's) Division of Wildlife & National Parks (DWNP) to manage Sapo Park and expand the national network of parks and reserves in accordance with national policies, laws and regulations, as well as to international park management standards.

* Component 3: Launching a programme of environmental education and conservation & Park awareness around Sapo Park.

* Component 4: Continuing research, monitoring of biological parameters and resource-use at SNP and in surrounding areas, and regional/international conservation planning for south-east Liberia.

* Component 5: Supporting integrated sustainable development & community empowerment, specifically establishing and managing communal forests around SNP, and supporting income-generating activities, sustainable agriculture and general rural development in a manner that supports Sapo Park and communal forests.

Under components 1 and 5, Sapo National Park and local communities will receive funding to implement their small scale-infrastructure sub-projects and communal forest management plans.

4 However, since the exact locations within and around the park for these activities had not been identified at the time of project preparation, the environmental laws of Liberia and Operational Policy 4.01 of the World Bank require the GoL to prepare this Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) which is written to establish a mechanism to determine and assess future potential environmental and social impacts of all the project activities to be financed under this project. The ESMF then sets out mitigation, monitoring and institutional measures to be taken during project implementation to eliminate these impacts, offset them, or reduce them to acceptable levels.

The project proponents (GoL,- FFI) are required to disclose this ESMF in-country as a separate and stand-alone document so that it is accessible by the general public, local communities, potentially project-affected people/groups, local NGO's and all other stakeholders, and also at the Infoshop of the World Bank. The date for disclosure must precede the date for appraisal of the project.

The key highlights in this ESMF are as follows:

* Detailed and comprehensive environmental and social baseline data will provide the environmental and social management process with key baseline information when identifying adverse impacts. The information contains data on Liberia's bio-physical environmental features such as its ecosystems, geology, hydrology in terms of ground and surface water resources, major and sensitive wetlands, flora and fauna. On social baselines the report discusses the main features of Liberia's demographics, public health features and poverty.

* A thorough review of the World Bank's Safeguards Policies is made. The policies triggered are:

- OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment - OP 4.04 Natural Habitats - OD 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement

Section 5.0 presents a summary of the requirements to comply with these polices. The report states that other Bank policies may apply and includes a summary in Annex 2.0 of all the Bank Safeguards Policies.

* The administrative, policy, legislative and regulatory frameworks in Liberia for Biodiversity Conservation in particular and for environmental management in general are presented in chapter 6.

* Generic potential adverse environmental and social concerns and impacts from anticipated project activities with root and immediate causes are presented in detail in Chapter 7.

* The roles and responsibilities of key institutions and players for the purposes of this ESMF are discussed in Chapter 8.

Chapter 8 also proposes a training program at a cost of US$40,000.

* The Environmental and Social Management process is contained in Section 9 with the following key features/steps:

Step 1: SNP staff and local communities will screen their own sub-projects to identify adverse environmental and social impacts using the screening form in Annex

5 3 and the checklist in Annex 5, aided by FFI and District Environment Committees (DECs) as appropriate. Step 2: Then SNP staff and local communities will introduce into sub-project designs and communal forest management plans the required measures to mitigate impacts identified with the screening form and checklist before submission of the designs and plans to the appropriate County Environment Committee (CEC) for review and subsequent environmental and social clearance. Step 3: The County Environment Committeel will review and clear the sub-projects and plans by ensuring designs and plans have identified environmental and social impacts, mitigated these impacts and have monitoring plans and institutional measures to be taken during implementation and operation.

Because Liberia is emerging from a period of civil strife and institutional break-down, and because the Environmental Acts requiring environmental impact assessments (ElAs) and the establishment of district and county environment committees are so new, the institutions and procedures required to make the above system function smoothly do not yet exist. The BCSNP project will pilot them for the districts and counties around Sapo Park, building capacity for them locally. Until the time that local capacity is established for them to function adequately and independently, the FDA, EPA and FFI all commit to ensuring that proper screening, review, consultations, mitigation and clearances occur within the structures created by the project. For example the Park's district-based liaison groups, its Management Advisory Council and Communal Forest Establishment/Management Committees will serve as interim surrogates for the CECs and DECs.

Chapter 10 contains a detailed monitoring plan, with verifiable indicators, monitoring roles and responsibilities. The cost to implement this plan is included in the overall project budget.

1The County Environment committee (CEC) clears the sub-projects for environmental and social management purposes only. Sub-projects themselves are approved by the Dept. of Wildlife and National Parks of the FDA, and the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) once they are cleared by the CEC from an environmental and social management standpoint.

6 2.0 Introduction The Government of Liberia (GoL) has asked the World Bank to support the project for Biodiversity Conservation at Sapo National Park. However, since the exact locations of the activities to be funded in and around the Sapo National Park were not identified at the time this project was prepared, the environmental laws of Liberia and the World Banks OP 4.01 require GoL to prepare this Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), written to establish a mechanism to determine and assess future potential environmental and social impacts of all program activities to be financed under this project. It also sets out mitigation, monitoring and institutional measures to be taken during implementation and operation of the project activities to eliminate adverse environmental and social impacts, offset them, or reduce them to acceptable levels.

Furthermore, GoL is also required to prepare a Process Framework (PF) to set the guidelines and processes by which members of potentially affected communities participate in the design of project activities. This is a separate document.

Both this ESMF and PF are required to be publicly disclosed in Liberia and at the Infoshop of the World Bank.

7 3.0 Description of Proposed Project The proposed Biodiversity Conservation at Sapo National Park (BCSNP) project will consolidate management and development of Sapo National Park in Liberia and peripheral forest areas traditionally used by local communities for subsistence and small-scale commercial purposes. It will furthermore establish a model for national-scale replication across Liberia as the country reviews and updates its protected forest network, and will develop national capacity to replicate the model.

The project's development objective is to consolidate management and development of Sapo National Park and peripheral communal forests as part of landscape-level development. The Long-term goal to which this project contributes is to establish & sustain Sapo National Park as the flagship protected area of Liberia.

The project consists of 5 inter-dependent components: * Component 1: Building up Park management operations and co-ordination mechanisms.

* Component 2: Strengthening the capacity of Park staff and the Liberian Forestry Development Authority's (FDA's) Division of Wildlife & National Parks (DWNP) to manage Sapo Park and expand the national network of parks and reserves in accordance with national policies, laws and regulations, as well as to international park management standards.

* Component 3: Launching a programme of environmental education and conservation & Park awareness around Sapo Park.

* Component 4: Continuing research, monitoring of biological parameters and resource-use at SNP and in surrounding areas, and regional/international conservation planning for south-east Liberia.

* Component 5: Supporting integrated sustainable development & community empowerment, specifically establishing and managing communal forests around SNP, and supporting income-generating activities, sustainable agriculture and general rural development in a manner that supports Sapo Park and communal forests.

Components 1 and 5 include activities that could result in negative environmental impacts. Specifically component 1 will involve, inter alia, the installation of infrastructure inside and around the Park's boundaries, including in the proposed communal forest buffer zones. Such infrastructure includes construction or upgrading of small and medium-sized buildings: ranger sub-stations, ranger outposts, Park headquarters buildings and the safari camp outside the Park, and the research station at Gbabone inside the Park. It will also include the opening and/or maintenance of trails for patrols, access to sites within the Park (for patrolling, research or tourism). The Park and later communal forest boundaries will be 'cut' and marked according to traditional Liberian standards. This means a narrow pathway of one meter or so will be cut, not cutting (but marking with a machete) trees unless they have fallen across the pathway. Cement beacons will be placed every 500 meters or so along the boundary as permanent markers.

Component 1 also includes the provision of equipment, supplies and transportation to Park staff, NGO partners and local community members involved in Park management. This

8 could result in provision of polluting equipment like diesel generators and toxic substances like chemicals, paints, batteries, etc. that will need to be discarded.

Component 5 will entail the establishment and management of communal forests as well as the piloting of rural development activities compatible with communal forests and the Park. Regarding the former activity, environmental sustainability is inherent in all aspects of communal forest management. The (draft) Communal Forest Handbook requires that a community agree on the specific objectives of its communal forest, and works with the Liberia Forestry Development Authority (FDA) to develop a management plan that the community executes with assistance from the FDA if needed, and monitored by the FDA. These plans must respect the overall restrictions set out in Liberia's Act to Establish a Protected Forest Area Network (2003) which describes a communal forest as "an area set aside legally or temporarily by regulation for the sustainable use of non-timber forest products by local communities on a non-commercial basis.... Acts prohibited in Communal Forests shall include: No prospecting, mining, farming or commercial timber extraction. Other uses are to be regulated by the designated local community with assistance from local authorities and declared by Regulations of the [Forestry Development] Authority." The manual furthermore requires that in the case of-a communal forest doubling as a buffer zone to a strictly protected area, additional protective measures can be required to ensure the associated park or nature reserve is fully protected.

The second part of Component 5 consists of working with international and Liberian NGOs who will facilitate villages to prepare detailed, prioritized assessments of development needs, in collaboration with relevant FDA staff. The International NGOs will then provide modest start-up grants to communities to address health, education, income-generating activities, agricultural intensification, apiculture, fishponds, etc. Successful initiatives can be expanded later with larger grants. Development activities will be executed nearly entirely by communities themselves, with international and possibly national NGOs providing only technical support and start-up capital. Without proper screening and co-ordination with Park and communal forest management, these activities have the potential to undermine rather than support the project objectives.

9 4.0 Baseline Data

4.1 The Bio-physical Environment Liberia, is a small country of 111,369 km2 (of which 15,050km2 or 13.5% is water), located in West Africa, at latitudes 6 30 N and longitude 9 30 W. It is bordered on its southern coastline by the Atlantic Ocean for 579km, to its north west by Sierra Leone for 306km, the north by Guinea for 563km and to the north east by Ivory Coast for 716km.

The climate of Liberia is equatorial and humid, particularly during the rainy season from May- October. Annual rainfall varies from 2,240 mm (88 inches) in the interior to 5,210 mm (205 inches) along the coast. The average temperature in Monrovia is about 260C (about 790F) in January and 240C (about 760F) in July.

From a narrow, flat coastal belt the country rises in a series of ill-defined plateaus to a higher interior. The highest point is over 1,400m in the Nimba Mountains adjacent to Guinea.

Facing the Atlantic Ocean, the entire coastline is characterized by lagoons, mangrove swamps, and river estuary-deposited sandbars. Liberia lies between the Mano and Cavalla Rivers on the west and east respectively. The Mano river forms the border between Sierra Leone and Liberia, and the Cavalla River borders Ivory Coast. Other significant rivers in Liberia are the the Lofa, St. Paul and St. John rivers which originate in Guinea; the Cestos (also known as Nuon or Nipoue) river; the Mesurado river which flows into the Atlantic at Cape Montserrado in Monrovia; and the Ya river.

Liberia presently has one site, Lake Piso, designated as a Wetland of International Importance. Lake Piso, with a surface area of 76,091 ha., is an open coastal lagoon west of Monrovia. It is surrounded by forested hillsides and fed by a number of creeks and rivers that drain a series of swamps above the lagoon, the lower ones of which are tidal and support mangroves. Other mangrove swamps occur behind the dune ridge on the west side of the lake's mouth and at other creek mouths. A series of small lakes with swampy margins, occur on the sandy forested spit that separates the lake from the sea. The site is important both as a nursery and spawning ground for fish and sea turtles and as feeding and roosting places for large numbers of shore and sea birds. Mammals such as antelopes, duikers, monkeys, bushbucks, and a few crocodiles are also found in the area.

Other significant wetlands are the Marshall Wetlands and Lake Shepard. Lake Shepard is part salt water and part fresh water.

Also, Liberia harbors the largest remaining proportion of the Upper Guinean Ecosystem, with perhaps 42% of the remaining forest, followed by Ivory Coast estimated at 28%, Ghana estimated at 16%, Guinea estimated at 8%, Sierra Leone estimated at 5% and Togo at 1%. Outside of Liberia and the Tai forest complex in south-west Ivory Coast, the forest survives principally in threatened fragments scattered unevenly across the region. In 2001 Liberia retained an estimated 40-50% of its original cover.

Biologically, Liberia's forests are exceptionally diverse, with high rates of endemism and harboring many more species that are nearly extinct outside the country. Liberia is home to over 2000 flowering plants including about 240 timber species, and approximately 125 mammal species, 590 bird species, 74 known reptiles and amphibians and over 1000 described insect. Notable fauna include a few of the significant populations of forest elephant (Loxodonta africana cyclotis) in West Africa and several viable populations of the pygmy

10 hippopotamus (Hexaprotodon liberiensis), as well as Jentink's Duiker (Cephalophusjentinki), the Zebra Duiker (C. zebra) and the Liberian mongoose (Liberiictis kuhn,). A survey of the forests of the middle Cestos and Senkwehn rivers in early 1999 found dozens of endangered bird species, some thought extinct or whose range had not been established before in Liberia.

In late 1999, the West African Conservation Priority-Setting Exercise for the Upper Guinean Ecosystem identified Liberia as the top priority country for biodiversity conservation in this humid coastal rainforest belt stretching across seven countries, from Togo and eastern Ghana to Sierra Leone. Put another way, Liberia contains two of the three remaining large blocks of Upper Guinean rainforest. Using Parren and de Graaf's 1995 characterization of this rainforest belt, the first block consists of evergreen forests within the per-humid evergreen and wet evergreen forests that cover the coastal band of Liberia stretching up to 90 km inland. Coastal south-east Liberia receives the highest rainfall in West Africa. Here the forests are dominated by Caesalpiniaceae species such as Tetraberlinia tubmaniana and others of only moderate commercial value, more appreciated for processed wood products than as solid hardwoods. Thus although floristically exceptionally rich, these two types of evergreen forest are poorer from a commercial logging perspective compared to the drier Upper Guinean forest types, which is perhaps one contributing factor to their relatively intact state today.

The second Liberian forest block consists of moist evergreen and semi-deciduous forest types characterized by distinct dry seasons, located in Lofa County in the north-west. Similar to the forests in Sierra Leone, Guinea, Ivory Coast and Ghana in this same rainfall zone, this forest contains species of higher commercial value, including many of the hardwoods prized in European markets. Along with Tai National Park, these two Liberian forest blocks are the last relatively intact large-scale representations of the Upper Guinean Forest Ecosystem which once extended from Sierra Leone to the so-called "Dahomey Gap" of Benin/Togo.

4.1.1 Specific features of Sapo National Park * 1,614 km2 or approximately 580 square miles * a breeding ground for animals including many rare and endemic species which otherwise could become extinct such as many species of hornbills and other birds, elephants, monkeys and chimpanzees, duikers, pygmy hippos, crocodiles, Liberian mongoose, African linsang, giant pangolin, etc. Many of these species figure in international Species Survival Plans prepared by agencies like the World Conservation Union (IUCN), making SNP of great interest to international donors. Sapo National Park is home to migratory species as well, so its ecological integrity depends upon the integrity of neighboring areas as well. * contains largely undisturbed evergreen wet lowland forest, a forest type poorly protected in West Africa but rich in endemic species. Forest blocks the size of Sapo National Park are rare in the Upper Guinean Forest ecosystem so the Park is important internationally. * protects watersheds for rivers and creeks in the area as well as the Sinoe River which provides water, transportation and food. * helps wildlife populations and forest regeneration in surrounding areas outside the Park. * thought to contain large numbers and varieties of medicinal and herbal plants. * considerable carbon sequestration occurs within the forest.

4.2 Key Social Features and the Legacies of the Civil War and other Civil Strife

I1 Liberia remains one of the poorest countries in the world. According to the latest estimates, the population of Liberia is estimated at 3.3 million people with a 2.7% growth rate. Since the 1980s and especially since 1990, Liberia has experienced sustained and brutal conflicts, engulfing the wider region of West Africa in decades of war and political instability. Liberians have endured human rights violations of major proportions including deliberate and arbitrary killings, disappearances, torture, gender-based and sexual violence, arbitrary detention, forced recruitment and use of child soldiers, and systematic and forced displacement. As of mid-2004, over 250,000 people had died from civil conflict, more that 300,000 were classified as refugees and 500,000 were internally displaced.

In 2002, the gross national income for Liberia was estimated at US$140 per capita, around 70% lower than the average for sub-Saharan Africa. Life expectancy at birth was 47 years, infant mortality was as high as 157 per 1000 live births, and illiteracy rate of the population 15 or more years of age was 44%.

The legacies of the recently ended civil war continue to weigh heavily on the social and economic recovery of Liberia. Recent political unrest and the preceding civil conflicts further impoverished Liberians and increased their vulnerability, particularly among recent returned refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs).

In the past year however, Liberia has undergone profound changes. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement of August 2003, UN Security Council Resolutions 1509 and 1521, the coming into being of a transitional government and the re-engagement of the international donor community together have created a spirit of hope after nearly 2 decades of conflict. The people of Liberia are determined to make a success of this, but it will not be easy.

A recent survey of the population found that poverty/economic hardship, security, health care, and lack of trust/sincerity as the major social problems. The loss of social capital and community solidarity that help to cope with poverty has increased social and economic vulnerability. The rebuilding of the social fabric will take time; continued assistance to reintegrate combatants and other vulnerable populations, and the rapid expansion of economic opportunities, will accelerate the process.

In March 2001, a workshop of participants in Jalay's Town, Sinoe County, where the SNP headquarters is located, noted the following about Sapo National Park's status:

* The 1990-96 war had been vicious in Sinoe County and around the Park, causing major disturbances to the entire population. People fled their villages for safe havens far away, or dispersed into small groups, including into the Park, surviving from hunting, small-scale farming, alluvial gold mining and collection of forests products. Much farmland returned to fallow and many villages were looted and destroyed. * Social services collapsed during the war. In only the most privileged places did they start to recover, slowly, while in most places they did not exist. In some cases, schools and clinics have been built but remained empty due to lack of teachers, doctors/nurses and supplies. * Since 1997, the population around the Park had increased dramatically as people returned to villages and to a lesser extent, migrants settled in the area. However, the exact distribution of people around the Park was poorly known because it was always changing, norwas it known if this distribution is different from before the war. * The Park boundaries were not clear to the increasing population around the Park, much of whom was young and had little pre-war knowledge of the Park. * People needed and benefited from development assistance before the war but their needs were currently much higher post-conflict.

12 * Apart from 'low-tech' extraction of natural resources, few economic alternatives exist. Livestock, coffee and cacao production, important pre-war cash products, were extremely low compared to the period before 1990. * The infrastructure of Sinoe County was notably worse than before the war. Many roads and bridges had not been repaired and were inaccessible by vehicles. Near the Park, only the major roads such as the Greenville-Zwedru highway were maintained (by logging companies). Logging companies were building new roads to certain communities around the Park, too. Access to markets thus was generally difficult and perishable products like vegetables and fruit were not widely marketed by communities. Light and not easily perishable commodities like bushmeat and minerals are more attractive in these circumstances. * Development assistance had focused mostly on the more road-accessible villages, creating envy and resentment among less accessible communities. * Gold mining was more important in the local economy than prior to the war. Gold is an easily transportable, high-value commodity that is attractive in an area with poor transportation infrastructure. It was not known if arsenic or mercury were used for gold extraction. No evidence existed to indicate this but if it were so, severe water contamination would result. * Wildlife populations increased during the war, especially fast reproducing species like certain duikers. Several species were recorded in places they had not been found before the war. At the same time, dependence on wildlife for food increased among those who remained near the Park during the war because livestock was lost in the fighting. In the post-war period, wildlife populations have suffered dramatically because people returning have been dependent upon bushmeat for their meat consumption and for income in the absence of abundant livestock. Organized commercial hunting has flourished along the main roads with the collusion of security forces and suppliers. Some in the security forces have undermined law enforcement at the Park and the surrounding areas. Bushmeat has become even an export business. This has caused conflict between County authorities and bushmeat dealers in Grand Geddeh County to the north where local prices were very high. * Employment in the logging sector remained very low, with almost no direct benefits accruing locally and only a few indirect benefits like roads to show. The former administration's promise to re-invest logging tax revenues in development in the counties where the logs were taken never happened. Many expressed worry that Oriental Timber Company (OTC), which owned the concessions to the west, north and east of the Park, could start logging in the area. In 2002, OTC planned to build a road through the middle of the Park, and to log the Park's south-eastern sector, but this was halted in the face of national and international pressure. Then in late 2002/early 2003, OTC subcontracted Royal Timber Company to log in the Park's then-proposed western extension at the same time as a Sapo Park management planning workshop occurred. * Despite the poor infrastructure, demand for forest products like meat and timber was driven by national-level forces and so the solutions to over-exploitation of forest resources must be addressed nationally instead of just locally. * Support from FDA to the Park had decreased and been far less regular than before the war. The complaint was aired that "development resources do not reach end- users in Sinoe County". The very poor logistical support available to Park staff rendered their jobs extremely difficult. FDA was not able to enforce Park laws and policies effectively. Likewise, local authorities were not able to support FDA and on occasion directly undermined Park staff. * The Park lost much of its trained personnel during the war years, and an entire generation of Liberians lost access to education. * During the war local people forgot much of the content of the awareness programs concerning the Park and bushmeat. Much of the population in the area was too

13 young to have been affected by the pre-war programs. The Park lost its educational facilities. * In the 18 years since the first management plan was prepared, the Upper Guinean forests in the other five countries sharing this ecosystem continued to be degraded, destroyed or fragmented, leaving only Liberia with large tracts of forest (apart from TaT National Park).

The BCSNP project's five components address each of these threats at the local level. By focusing on Sapo Park in the context of the development of south-east Liberia, the project's five components attempt to take a broad view of the Park, not building metaphorical walls around it but rather integrating it into the economy of south-east Liberia. This will be successful in the long-term only if overall governance and political & economic reconstruction succeed too. 4.2.1 Characteristics of Poverty

Based on reports available, and the results of in-country consultations with local communities, local and central governments and civil society members, the following characteristics of poverty in Liberia and sub-Saharan Africa were derived:

Who in general are the poor?

* Rural households. * Female headed households, other households with less than two adult-members, elderly and handicapped persons. * Large households. * Urban poor. * Internally displaced people (IDPs) * Returned and returning refugees.

The groups are not mutually exclusive.

Why are they poor?

* Rural Households - long periods of political instability and war. - low agricultural productivity, declining soil fertility and environmental degradation. - lack of access to land, land fragmentation, insecurity of land tenure. - lack of access to markets, absence of rural commercial activity and alternative income earning opportunities. - social and economic isolation due to high transport costs and insecurity. - poor health services and health standards and rise in HIV/AIDS incidence (relatively new to Liberia), impacting negatively on productivity. - loss of capital stock (livestock and other animals) during the war. - absence of agricultural extension services, lack of access to and knowledge of the use of improved inputs. - very little low-cost capital, micro-credit or micro-grants. - lack of access to affordable and sustainable household energy sources (in urban areas).

* Female-headed households - the same factors as for rural households generally apply, but in addition there is: - shortage of household labor.

14 - many women have to take care of dependant parents, orphans, handicapped (war affected) husbands and children (de-mobilized child-soldiers), returning refugees, and other dependents. - low education attainment, poor access to land, paid employment and credit - poor social services, e.g. water, health, education etc.

* The recent political unrests created refuaees and IDPs - lack of permanent housing. - poor access to social services, water, healthcare and education - lack of land and other assets - loss of capital stock- livestock, agricultural produce, farm implements and supplies. - lack of social support due to disconnection with or dislocation from original/nuclear families as resettlement may not have been to original home base.

* Urban Poor - lack of security and prevalence of lawlessness. - rapid increase in urban population leading to stiff competition for employment and poor sanitation. - few employment opportunities particularly among poorly educated young people. - poor basic social services and infrastructure. - lack of safe housing. - lack of land. - high food prices due to low agricultural productivity, high transport costs and restrictions on petty trade.

* Where are the poor?

Poverty which is widespread in Liberia, continues to be predominantly a rural phenomenon. All the counties in Liberia suffered reductions in household and individual incomes over the last two decades. Even counties with high agricultural potential have been adversely affected by insecurity.

4.3 The Economic Features

The Liberian economy has always relied on the agricultural sector (subsistence agriculture, rubber and timber) which accounts for about half of its GDP. The sector is made up mostly of subsistence agriculture (rice, cassava, cocoa, coffee and palm oil). In the subsistence area there is a modest tradition of commercially oriented agriculture and therefore productivity has been low. Agricultural production was severely affected by the war years, leading to aid dependency and increased imports of food. Nevertheless, the agriculture sector has the potential to become the major source of employment and income generation for displaced farmers.

Rubber is the most important cash crop, accounting for up to 30 percent of total exports at moments in the past, employing about 4000 workers and generating income for a significant number of small and medium landholders. There are extensive areas with rubber plantations that belong to smallholders, which cannot be put into production at present because of the security situation. This activity used to be self-sustaining (with the plantation purchaser advancing part of the final price to the smallholder).

Forestry has since 1977 attracted much of the foreign direct investment into Liberia and logging is the largest provider of foreign currency. Prior to the fighting of 2003, 25-30 logging companies operated in Liberia. Allegations have been made that some companies obtained

15 their concessions unlawfully or did not comply with applicable forestry and fiscal regulations. This is being addressed through a comprehensive and transparent concession review process. It is estimated that at least 6-7000 people were employed in the sector, prior to the fighting in 2003. Though the situation of the forest sector is shrouded in accusations and counter-accusations, it is known that the physical environment has suffered as a result of the lack of implementation of forestry laws and regulations, and that serious governance issues have arisen. As a result, in 2003 the UN Security Council imposed sanctions on exports of timber and timber products originating in Liberia, bringing the logging industry to a near stand-still. Before and when sanctions are lifted and logging activities resume, to contribute to sustainable growth, forestry in Liberia will require substantial reform and initial financial assistance.

Fisheries. There is little reliable data about the number of people employed in fishing, levels of production, income, and marketing practices. However, fishing is largely artisanal, and does not play a significant role in Liberia's economy.

Mining. Iron ore production stopped early in the war, although important deposits still exist in Liberia. Its revival will require high levels of foreign direct investment. Gold and diamonds are also mined on a small scale but illegal and informal activities render getting accurate data difficult about the level of production, prices and exports.

Manufacturing. The manufacturing sector has never been a significant contributor to GDP. Traditionally, iron-ore mining and rubber processing have dominated the manufacturing sector. SMEs used to produce everyday consumer goods, though mostly packaged finished products came from abroad (soap, furniture, clothes, beer, cigarettes, etc) so its value added was low. Although the small size of the domestic market could be a handicap for the manufacturing's growth, better security and a rehabilitated basic infrastructure should make possible the rebirth of light industry, which would contribute to import-substitution as well as providing an important source of urban job creation.

Construction and Services. The construction sector is already developing fast as rehabilitation and reconstruction start. But monopolies, for example on cement importation, previously were a source of rent-seeking and increased construction costs. The service sector is likely to lead the economic recovery, together with the construction sector, now that monopolies have been abolished.

"Informal sector" activity constitutes the largest segment of the service sector and is the main source of employment and income for more than 500,000 Liberians.

16 5.0 Description of the Administrative, Policy, Legislative and Regulatory Framework. 5.1 The Administrative Structure for Governance, Environmental and Forest Management

Administratively, the Republic of Liberia is divided into 15 counties namely Bomi, Bong, Gbarbolu, Grand Bassa, Grand Cape Mount, Grand Gedeh, Grand Kru, Lofa, Margibi, Maryland, Montserrado, Nimba, River Cess, River Gee and Sinoe.

Counties are further divided into Districts, Townships and Villages. Townships are made up of a number of villages. In the traditional structure, the county is also divided into clans, which are subdivided into sub-clans. Townships are grouped into clans depending on the language groups and traditional affiliations.

The County administrative head is the Superintendent. A District is headed by a Commissioner, a Clan by a paramount chief, a sub-clan by a clan chief, a township by a town chief and the village by a village chief.

Sapo National Park boundaries lie mostly within Sinoe County, although the northern boundary is close to Grand River Gee County. Park boundaries include communities from three of Sinoe's five districts, namely, Jeadepo, Pynestown and Kpanyan.

In Liberia, the responsibility for environmental protection and management lies with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and within the EPA each county is assigned a County Environmental Officer and a County Environment Committee. While the EPA now exists, County Environmental Officers and County Environment Committees had not yet been established at the time of preparation of this ESMF.

With regards to forest management by rural communities, the Forestry Development Authority has primary protection and management oversight responsibility.

The following are Ministries whose jurisdictions are relevant to various protected forests:

Ministry of Agriculture (land use, farming, shifting cultivation, farming settlements, plantations); Ministry of Gender and Development - created 2002 (the role of gender in development); Ministry of Information and Culture/Bureau of Culture and Tourism (eco-tourism, recreational use, cultural/natural heritage sites); Ministry of Internal Affairs (administration of political subdivisions from counties to towns, native forest reserves); Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy (hydrological survey and geological survey, mining rights and licenses); Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs (long-term national planning, coordination of international aid programs, the agriculture and forestry section provides planning for all protected forest areas including wildlife and national parks); Ministry of Rural Development (integrated rural development including agricultural development); and Ministry of Public Works (road and bridge construction).

17 5.2 Policy Framework for Management of the Forest Sector. In 1997, the Forest Development Authority prepared a strategic action plan entitled "Forestry Development and Projects in the First Ten-year National Socio-economic Development Plan for Post-war Liberia". This action plan, inter alia, proposes to (a) safeguard the environmental functions of forests, which means managing Liberia's forest on a sustainable basis, (b) increase the involvement of rural peoples in forest management, decision-making and benefit-sharing, (c) establish national parks and nature reserves, and presumably other protected forest categories as necessary. 5.3 Policy Framework for the Management of the Environment The National Environmental Policy of Liberia offers a set of guidelines for sustainable management of the environment. It is part of a strategic plan of action on which laws and regulations related to the environment are based. The overall goal of the policy is to "ensure the long-term economic prosperity of Liberia through sustainable social and economic development to meet the needs of present generation without compromising the potential of future generations to meet their needs".

Particularly, the policy seeks to:

* maintain ecosystems and ecological processes essential for the functioning of the biosphere; * ensure sound management of natural resources and the environment; * adequately protect humans, flora, fauna, their biological communities and habitats against harmful impacts, and preserve biological diversity; * integrate environmental considerations in sector and socio-economic planning at all levels throughout the nation; and * seek common solutions to environmental problems at regional and international levels.

Regarding Liberia's forests the policy states "Liberia contains the last remaining portions of the Upper Guinean Forest in West Africa, with high biological diversity and standing timber potentials. ... Liberia is considered the most important country in the West Africa Region to contain a remnant of the major tropical rainforest blocks, and related exceptionally high priority area. These forests are significant for conserving biodiversity of flora and fauna species, and maintaining an ecologically balanced system. However, this unique forest environment is now seriously threatened with depletion and species extinction because of uncontrolled logging, shifting cultivation, infrastructure development and settlements, indiscriminate hunting practices, firewood and charcoal production and the harvesting of non-timber forests products. Recognizing the role rainforests play in maintaining food security, medicinal plants, income generation and global and regional climate offset and realizing the alarming rate at which the forest of Liberia is disappearing, it is imperative and incumbent upon the Government of Liberia to take some mitigating measures".

The policy recommends the following strategy measures: * Encourage lowland (swamp) farming, mechanized farming, introduction of crop rotation methods and creating farming zones; Develop a comprehensive land-use planning strategy Enact laws that will legalize and regulate hunting into seasons based on off-take and non-off-take periods; * Review activities of mining concessions to set operational standards that are internationally accepted and follow sustainable management practices; * Enact laws that maximize uses of non-timber forest products on a sustained basis;

18 * Build capacity in forest and wildlife management and launch a public awareness campaign; * Organize vocational training for hunters; * Promote the concept of locally managed communal forests nationwide; * Empower local communities to develop their own forest management programs; * Encourage traditional forest management practices; * Put in place an effective awareness program about the conservation of forests and wildlife; * Promote the concept of protected species management outside of protected areas; * Strengthen forest protection programs to ensure adequate vegetation cover in critical areas and discourage development that is likely to cause harmful changes; * Protect the fauna and flora of Liberia that is considered in danger of extinction as well as forest reserves for scientific, recreational and other cultural purposes.

Regarding protected areas the policy states "In recent years there have been increasing deforestation, soil and other forms of land degradation, and unwarranted deterioration of the environment. The need is compelling, more than ever before, to secure development while at the same time sustaining the productivity of natural vegetation, protecting wildlife, maintaining genetic diversity and avoiding forest and soil destruction. ... In order for Liberians to communicate to decision makers their true desires about the maintenance of the natural environment and the pace of development, it is essential for the people to have a clear idea of the benefits they obtain from nature in its undeveloped state. Attention should be given to linkages between the environment and economy-wide processes and policies. Protected areas can meet the needs of people only if social analysis is fully integrated with economic and eco-biological analysis in their application to protected areas."

The policy recommends the following strategic measures: * Regulate forestry activities to enhance conservation and environmentally sound management practices; * Establish more protected areas in consonance with recommendations from environmental survey of the late 1970's; * Strengthen programs for the identification and study of the natural heritage in fauna and flora and for establishing a national inventory of forest resources; * Put in place a protected areas system throughout the country; * Advocate for more protected areas other than Sapo National Park; * Enact laws on the management of natural resources to provide for conservation of biodiversity in its widest sense, including areas outside the protected areas system; * Develop a policy framework for identifying and managing buffer zones in and around protected areas to help reduce conflicts between multiple-use and users; * Encourage and promote local community involvement in understanding, planning and managing protected areas and in sharing benefits derived from these areas; * Re-assess priorities in protected area management and rationalize the protected area system through economic and social analyses to maximize its cost- effectiveness in the conservation of biodiversity and human development; and * Increase the protected area system to conserve and sustain management of a representative portion of Liberia's rainforests for future generations.

The policy recognizes that environmental concerns are cross-sectoral and require an integrated multi-sectoral management approach. The institutional arrangement to enhance effectiveness of implementing this policy is principally through two corporate bodies: (i) the National Environmental Council of Liberia, foreseen in the Act Creating the Environmental Protection Agency, will be responsible for policy formulation and implementation of the Environment Protection and Management Law, setting

19 environmental protection priorities, national goals and objectives, ensuring implementation of environmental policies and programs, and collaborating with the Agency on policy affecting the environment. The Council has yet to be formed; and * (ii) the Environmental Protection Agency shall be responsible for coordinating, integrating and harmonizing implementation of environmental policy and decisions of the Council and line ministries, shall encourage the use of appropriate environmental technologies, and shall propose environmental policies and strategies.

5.4 The Legislative and Regulatory Framework for Forest Management 5.4.1 The Liberian Constitution Article 7 of Chapter 11of the Constitution of the Republic of Liberia can be interpreted to support sustainable management of Liberia's natural endowment, as it states "The Republic shall, consistent with the principles of individual freedom and social justice enshrined in the Constitution, manage the national economy and natural resources of Liberia in such a manner as shall ensure maximum feasible participation of Liberian citizens under conditions of equality so as to advance the general welfare of the Liberian people and the economic development of Liberia."

This Article could provide the constitutional basis for protecting Liberia's natural resources if one interprets "...the general welfare of the Liberian people..." to include sustainable environmental management. Article 7 of the Liberian Constitution appears to mandate the full participation of the Liberian people in the management of Liberia's natural resources, too. 5.4.2 The New National Forestry Act of 2000 This Act places overall oversight responsibility for the administration of the forest sector with the Forestry Development Authority (FDA) and details the process for granting Forest Concessions, the operation of concessions and the rights and obligations of the concessionaries.

This Act appears to empower (although the reference is ambiguous) the FDA to establish regulations for the sustainable management of forest resources. It defined Communal Forests as " a small described forest area immediately adjacent to one or more villages to be used exclusively by the local inhabitants and shall not be used for any commercial purpose". This definition was superseded by that of the National Protected Forest Area Network Law of 2003 and is presented in section 3.0.

5.4.3 The Act creating the Forestry Development Authority (1976) This act establishes the Forestry Development Authority (FDA) and provides the legal arrangements that form the basis for existing forest and wildlife management in Liberia. The primary functions of the FDA are to: * establish a permanent forest estate made up of reserved areas upon which scientific forestry will be practiced, * devote all publicly owned forest lands to their most productive use for the permanent good of all the people, * prevent the waste and destruction of the forest and associated natural resources to assure that the supply of forest products is perpetuated, * correlate forestry with other land uses and adjust the forest economy to the overall national economy, * conduct research in forest conservation,

20 * provide training in the practice of forestry, offer technical assistance and spread knowledge of forestry and the acceptance of the conservation of natural resources throughout the country, and * conserve recreational and wildlife resources of the country concurrently with development programs.

Further, the FDA is empowered to: * create, establish and administer reserved areas such as Government Forest Reserves, Native Authority Forest Reserves, Communal Forests and National Parks, * enforce all laws and regulations for the conservation of forests and the development of their resources, and * carry out a program for the wise use and perpetuation of the forest, recreational, fish and wildlife resources of the country.

The Liberian Forestry Development Authority is an independent government agency reporting to a Board of Directors that reports to the President, with the statutory responsibility to regulate the use of the country's forest and wildlife resources. FDA is expected and legally empowered to monitor the full cycle of logging operations, and to ensure proper compliance with forestry and hunting regulations. It manages the system of 10 national forests, covering about 500,000 hectares in the north-west and 885,000 ha in the south-east, which are intended to remain under permanent forest cover and to be managed for timber and for other forest products and services in perpetuity. The FDA was created in 1976, including a Section of Wildlife and National Parks (WNP) and began functioning independently in 1977 and today is a classified as a Division within the FDA.

5.4.4 An Act to Amend the Act Creating the Forestry Development Authority (1988) This act adds eight new sections to the FDA Act of 1976 that deal mostly with forest utilization agreements, fees, permits, etc.

5.4.5 Timber Concession Agreement (1973) Revised 1988 This is the FDA's detailed and comprehensive document for granting forest utilization concessions. It states, inter alia, the terms of the concession, operations of the concessionaire, rights and obligations of the concessionaires, and a forest management plan that governs logging methods, timber harvesting, reforestation, construction of logging roads and scaling.

However, section 1 of the Forest Act 2000, states that all references in the Liberian Code of Law and amendments to "what heretofore has been called concession to a land area, whether for purposes of logging, mining or agriculture, are hereby repealed". The Forest Act 2000 seems to have incorporated the 1988 revised Concession Agreement and accordingly would be the FDA for what is now called " Forest Resources Utilization Agreements" and the source of definitions for protected forest categories relating to forest exploitation in Liberia.

5.4.6 The Decree Creating Sapo National Park (SNP 1983) Sapo National Park is the only proclaimed National Park in Liberia, established by Presidential Decree in 1983. The decree does not include any definitions but does establish the boundaries of the Park. In 2002, westwards and northwards extensions of the Park were agreed in principle by the Executive Branch of Government, and in 2003 the Park was expanded to the west and the north. This expansion coincided with the onset of civil

21 hostilities and no management presence has been established in the extensions. The Division of Wildlife & National Parks of the FDA manages SNP.

5.4.7 Wildlife and National Parks Act of 1988 This Act provides a legal framework for wildlife conservation and the creation and management of national parks. This Act is consistent with the FDA Act, however, it is more specific to national parks and nature reserves, and does not address other protected area categories like game reserves, communal forests, sustainable use areas and cultural sites.

Relevant features of the Act include the administration of wildlife, national parks, nature reserves and other conservation areas in Liberia.

5.4.8 The Protected Forest Area Network Law (2003) Because the New National Forestry Law of 2000 had seemingly repealed the 1988 Wildlife & National Parks Act but had not replaced this with coherent directives, a law was passed in 2003 restoring relevant clauses and adding additional clarification to the protected forest types legally recognised under Liberian law, as well as the general steps to create these. Eight protected forest types are now recognised and defined legally in Liberia: strict nature reserves, nature reserves, national parks, national forests, communal forests, game reserves, multiple sustainable-use reserves and cultural sites.

In addition, the law specifies a "Protected Forest Areas Network along with Conservation Corridors shall be established, incorporating existing National Forests, to cover at least 30% of the existing forest area of Liberia".

5.5 The Legislative and Regulatory Framework for Environmental Management

5.5.1 The Act Creating the Environmental Protection Agency of Liberia The Act (approved in November 2002) creating the Environmental Protection Agency empowers the EPA to be the principal authority in Liberia for the management of the environment and to co-ordinate, monitor, supervise and consult with relevant stakeholders on all activities in the protection of the environment and sustainable use of natural resources.

Specifically, the functions of the EPA, inter alia, are: * to review and approve environmental impact statements and environmental assessments submitted in accordance with the act, * to monitor and assess projects and activities with regard to their environmental impacts, * to co-ordinate, integrate, harmonise and monitor the implementation of environmental policy, decisions, legislation and regulations; * build capacity of line ministries, authorities and organisations through the exchange of data and information, and to render advice, technical support and training in environmental and natural resource management; and * to review project documents for donor-sponsored environment related projects to ensure and/or recommend to the negotiating ministry or agency, the inclusion of strategies and activities for capacity building of nationals.

The Act further requires a County Environment Committee (CEC) to be established in every county to carry out the following:

22 * collaborate with and facilitate the activities of the Line Ministries in the County relating to the management of the environment and natural resources, * ensure that the environmental concerns of the county and the local populations are integrated in all plans and projects approved by the government at the County level, * promote dissemination of information about the environment through education and outreach programs, * coordinate with the EPA on the design and implementation of community environmental projects and all issues relating to environmental management, * create District Environment Committees within the County to enable it to carry out its functions at community level, * advise and receive reports of the District Environment Committees on environmental outreach programs and other matters pursuant to this Act, * prepare a state of the environment report of the County every 5 years, * prepare a County Environment Action Plan, * report to the EPA on all matters relating to the environment and natural resources in the County under its jurisdiction, and * submit reports as the EPA may require.

The Act further requires the EPA to appoint a County Environmental Officer for each County, and shall have the following functions:

* advise the County Environment Committee on all matters relating to the management of the environment and natural resources, * function as the Secretary to the County Environment Committee, * compile reports to the EPA as may be prescribed, * promote environmental awareness through dissemination of information, public education and campaigns, * conduct public hearings on environmental impact assessment in the county and district as prescribed in this act, * ensure that the views and concerns of all groups within the local population are represented at public hearings on environment and natural resource management decisions, and * assist the District Environment Committees to perform their functions.

The County Environment Committee shall create District Environment Committees in accordance with the guidelines provided to it by the EPA to enable it to carry out its functions at community level, which are to:

* promote environmental awareness through dissemination of information and public education campaigns, * mobilize people within the district to conserve natural resources through self help, * mobilize people within the district to restore degraded environmental resources through self help, * mobilize people within the district to improve their natural environment through self help, * create awareness of the people in the district to enhance, preserve and protect their indigenous knowledge and the cultural and spiritual values of biodiversity, * monitor all activities in the district to ensure that such activities do not have any significant impact on the environment, * report any events or activities which have or are likely to have significant impact on the environment to the District Environment Officer, and

23 * perform such other functions as may be prescribed by the County Environment Committee in consultation with the Agency.

Further, this Act requires the EPA to appoint a District Environmental Officer for each district, whose main functions shall be to:

* advise the District Environment Committee on all matters relating to the environment and natural resources, * function as the secretary to the District Environment Committee, * liaise with the County Environmental Officer and agency on all matters relating to the environment, * compile such reports to the EPA as may be prescribed, * promote environmental awareness through dissemination of information, public education and campaigns, * assist the County Environmental Officer to conduct public hearings on environmental impacts assessment in the county and the district as prescribed in this Act, and * ensure that the views and concerns of all groups within the District are represented at public hearings on environment and natural resource management decisions.

Regarding requirements for Environmental Impact Assessment, the Act requires:

* the EPA to require an EIA be undertaken on all projects, policies, programs and activities specified by the EPA in consultation with relevant ministries and agencies and published by notice, * a developer, or project proponent not to commence, carry out, execute, implement or conduct a project or activity for which an EIA is required unless an EIA has been conducted, * a licensing or permitting agency or authority under any law in force in Liberia shall not issue a license for any project for which an EIA is required under the Act, unless the applicant produces to the licensing agency or authority an EIA license or permit issued under this Act and the regulations made there under, and * the EPA shall establish all rules, regulations and procedures relating to the implementation of the EIA requirement under this Act, and which shall be reviewed 5 years after implementation date to assure their effectiveness.

As stated earlier the statues of this Act, passed late 2002, have not yet been implemented. 5.5.2 The Environmental Protection and Management Law of Liberia This Act lays out the requirements concerning environmental standards, environment impact assessments, environmental monitoring, environmental audits, registering and handling of pollutants, environmental restoration, and related fees and fines. It also addresses the management and conservation of natural resources like forests, wildlife, water bodies, coastline, the atmosphere and biological diversity. It requires Liberia to domesticate in national law all international conventions, treaties and other legal items to which Liberia is party. Finally, it stipulates that Liberia's environment will be best managed if a rational process of land-use planning is followed with full and transparent information, and it assigns responsibilities for this. Full transparency and participation of Liberian society in environmental decision-making is at the core of this law.

This Act lays out most of the details that the EPA is supposed to ensure are implemented.

24 5.6 International Conventions Liberia is party to many international agreements such as:

5.6.1 The African Conventions on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (Algiers, 1968 and Mozambique, 2003) This Algiers convention is an African regional replacement for the 1933 London Convention. Liberia became a party in December 22, 1978. The African Convention expands on and incorporates the principles of the London Convention. This convention requires state parties to "adopt the measures necessary to ensure conservation, utilization and development of soil, water, floral and faunal resources in accordance with scientific principles and with due regard to the best interest of the people". In keeping with the London Convention, the African Convention requires State Parties to maintain and extend, where appropriate, existing conservation areas, including strict nature reserves, national parks and other reserves within the framework of land-use planning programs.

In July 2003, the African Union adopted an updated and improved version, incorporating changes in thinking since 1968 on biological diversity, protected areas, sustainable development, international and inter-generational equity, transboundary issues and more. Although this convention has not yet formally come into force, Liberia is a signatory and ought to ratify it.

5.6.2 Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat, Ramsar, 1971. Liberia acceded to the Wetlands Convention (Ramsar) in March 2002. The convention addresses the conservation and wise use of wetlands as a habitat primarily for birds. It recognizes the ecological functions of wetlands, including biodiversity conservation. State parties are required to designate at least one national wetland for inclusion in the List of Wetlands of International Importance. Liberia has designated Lake Piso as a Ramsar site.

5.6.3 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, Washington, 1973 (frequently referred to as 'CITES') The primary objective of this convention is to make sure that international trade in certain species of wild animals and plants does not threaten the survival in the wild of the plants and animals being traded. Thus, the convention reflects the concerns about both foreign trade in vulnerable species and wildlife conservation. Liberia's 1988 Wildlife and National Park Act incorporates CITES in Chapter VIII with a list of "Protected Animals of Liberia" in Schedule I.

5.6.4 Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration on the Environment and Development, and the Statement of Principles for Sustainable Management of Forests. These non-legally binding documents were adopted by more than 178 governments at the UN Conference on Environment and Development June 1992, in Rio de Janeiro. Liberia was represented.

SpecKfically, the Statement of Principles for a Global Consensus on the Management, Conservation and Sustainable Development of All Types of Forests, recognizes in the problematic Principle 2(a)2 that " States have the sovereign and inalienable right to utilize,

2Principle 2(a) also recognizes the right of states to convert forest areas "for other uses".

25 manage and develop their forests in accordance with their development needs ..", but then goes on to state, inter alia, that: * Forest resources and forest lands should be sustainably managed to meet the social, economic, ecological, cultural and spiritual needs of present and future generations. * National policies should provide a framework for increased efforts .... for the management, conservation and sustainable development of forests and forest lands. * The vital role of all types of forests should be recognized as they maintain the ecological processes and balance at the local, national, regional and global levels through, inter alia, their role in protecting fragile ecosystems, watersheds and fresh water resources and as rich store houses of biodiversity and biological resources and sources of genetic material for biotechnology products, as well as photosynthesis. * Sustainable forest management and use should be carried out in accordance with national development policies and priorities and on the basis of environmentally sound national guidelines. * Forest management should be integrated with management of adjacent areas so as to maintain ecological balance and sustainable productivity. * National policies and/or legislation aimed at management, conservation and sustainable development of forests should include the protection of ecologically viable representative or unique examples of forests, including primary/old growth forests, cultural, agricultural, historical, religious and other unique and valued forests of national importance. * National policy formulation with respect to all types of forests should take account of the pressures and demands imposed on forest ecosystems and resources from influencing factors outside the forest sector, and inter-sectoral means of dealing with these pressures and demands should be sought. 5.6.5 Convention on Biological Diversity, Rio de Janeiro, 1992 (CBD) Liberia ratified the CBD in 2001. The convention seeks to conserve biological diversity, promote the sustainable use of its components and encourage equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources. State parties have a duty to conserve biodiversity within their jurisdictions, as well as outside their jurisdictions in some cases. They are further responsible to formulate and implement strategies, plans or programs for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. The CBD gives a detailed treatment of in-situ conservation, placing on state parties the duty to take the following actions, inter alia:

* establish a system of protected areas or areas where special measures need to be taken to conserve biological diversity; * develop where necessary guidelines for the selection, establishment and management of protected areas or areas where special measures need to be taken to conserve biological diversity; * regulate and manage biological resources important for the conservation of biological diversity, whether within or outside protected areas, with a view to ensuring their conservation and sustainable use; * promote the protection of ecosystems, natural habitats and the maintenance of viable populations of species in natural surroundings; and * promote environmentally sound and sustainable development in areas adjacent to protected areas, with a view to furthering protection of these areas.

Protected area is defined in the CBD as "a geographically defined area, which is designated or regulated to achieve specific conservation objectives". The intent is that they have clearly delineated boundaries established by law and translated into physical markings and/or mapping; and the designation of "protected area" confers legal status on the area to meet conservation and/or sustainable use objectives.

26 5.6.6 International Tropical Timber Agreements, 1983 and 1994 The International Tropical Timber Agreements, both in 1983 and 1994, to both of which Liberia is party, provide the framework for cooperation and consultation between countries producing and consuming tropical timber. While the agreements focus on international trade in tropical timber, they recognize the need for conservation, sustainable management and development of all types of forests, stressing that exports of tropical timber and timber products must be from sustainably managed sources. They encourage the development of national policies aimed at sustainable utilization and conservation of tropical forests and their genetic resources, and at maintaining the ecological balance in the regions concerned, in the context of tropical timber trade. 5.6.7 Membership of International River Basins Liberia is a member of the Mano River Union.

27 6.0 Description of World Bank Environmental and Social Safeguards Policies and Triggers.

This ESMF has been designed so that all investments under the Biodiversity Conservation at Sapo National Park project will comply with national and local laws of Liberia and the Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies of the World Bank. In this chapter, the Bank's safeguards policies and their applicability are discussed and in the subsequent chapter those of Liberia are presented. The World Bank safeguard policies are:

1. Environmental Assessment (OP4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01) 2. Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04) 3. Forests (OP 4.36, GP 4.36) 4. Pest Management (OP 4.09) 5. Cultural Property (OPN 11.03) 6. Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20) 7. Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) 8. Safety of Dams (OP 4.37, BP 4.37) 9. Projects on International Waters (OP 7.50, BP 7.50, GP 7.50) 10. Projects in Disputed Areas (OP 7.60, BP 7.60, GP 7.60) (OP - Operational Policy, OPN - Operational Policy Note, BP - Best Practice, GP - Good Practice, OD - Operational Directive)

In preparing this ESMF, the investments planned were considered against the baseline data in Chapter 4 and the requirements of the Bank safeguard policies. This indicated that only the following Bank policies are triggered:

1. Environmental Assessment (OP4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01) 2. Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04) 3. Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12)

Notwithstanding that the Forests Policy (OP/GP 4.36) is not triggered by this project, its requirements apply to this project and are adequately covered by complying with the requirements of the Environmental Assessment OP 4.01.

The project activities of the BCSNP project are to be implemented in Sapo National Park and its peripheral areas and buffer zones. Since the exact locations of the investments were not known at the time of preparation of the BCSNP project, other Bank policies may apply and not all policies selected above may apply simultaneously. Therefore, a complete description of the bank safeguards and their triggers for applicability can be found on the World Bank's official web site www.worldbank.orc and summarized in Annex 2. 6.1 Environmental Assessment (OP4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01)

This policy requires environmental assessment (EA) of projects/investments proposed for Bank financing to help ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and thus improve decision-making. EA is a process whose depth and type of analysis depend on the nature, scale, and potential environmental impact of the activities proposed for funding under the BCSNP project. The EA process takes into account the natural environment (air, water, and land), human health and safety, social aspects (involuntary resettlement, indigenous peoples, and cultural property) and transboundary and global environmental aspects. It incorporates all aspects of environmental impact assessments (EIA) but is broader in scope.

28 This ESMF is FFl's and GoL's response to the Bank's EA policies and guidelines so that adverse environmental and social impacts are eliminated, offset or reduced to acceptable levels.

OP 4.01 further requires that the ESMF report must be disclosed as a separate and stand alone document by the GoL and the World Bank as a condition for Bank appraisal of the BCSNP project. The disclosure should be both in Liberia where it can be accessed by the general public and at the Infoshop of the World Bank and that the date for disclosure must precede the date for appraisal of the project. 6.2 Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04)

The conservation of natural habitats, like other measures that protect and enhance the environment, is essential for long-term sustainable development. The Bank therefore supports the protection, maintenance, and rehabilitation of natural habitats.

Natural Habitats are land and water areas where (i) the ecosystem's biological communities are formed largely by native plant and animal species, and (ii) human activity has not essentially modified the areas primary ecological functions. All natural habitats have important biological, social, economic, and existence values. Important habitats may occur in tropical humid, dry, and cloud forest; temperate and boreal forests; Mediterranean-type shrub lands; natural arid and semi-arid lands, mangrove swamps, coastal marshes, and other wetlands; estuaries, sea grass beds, coral reefs, freshwater lakes and rivers; alpine and sub-alpine environments, including herb fields, grasslands, and paramos; and tropical and temperate grasslands.

Therefore, the Natural Habitats policy is triggered because the investments proposed under this project are located in forest areas within and around Sapo National Park.

The natural ecosystems of Sapo National Park are known to support complex arrays of natural flora and fauna. Therefore this OP requires that activities funded under the BCSNP that adversely impact these ecosystems are successfully mitigated so that the balance of the ecosystems is enhanced or maintained.

This requires the BCSNP project to design appropriate conservation and mitigation measures to remove or reduce adverse impacts on the forest resources or their functions, keeping such impacts within socially defined limits of acceptable change. Specific measures may depend on the ecological characteristics of the affected forests. Such measures must include provision for monitoring and evaluation to provide feedback on conservation outcomes and to provide guidance for developing or refining appropriate corrective actions. No project activity that results in the significant reduction of forest resources will be permitted.

All these measures are already addressed by the ESMF as a response to OP/BP/GP 4.01. Therefore although the Natural Habitats policy is triggered, it does not require an additional response beyond the ESMF.

6.3 Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12)

Significant efforts will be made in the design and screening stages of proposed BCSNP project investments to avoid impacts on people, land and property, including people's access to natural and other economic resources, as far as possible. There will be absolutely no land taken from local communities in the project. Instead land will be titled to local communities.

29 Commercial concessionaires may lose access to parts of their concessions. However it is within the rights of GoL to revoke concessionary rights according to the terms of concession agreements, and compensation is planned by the project and in accordance with Liberian law.

Notwithstanding, compensation and resettlement of livelihoods seem inevitable for certain investments where specific project activities may restrict access of certain people (hunters in particular) to natural resources in and around Sapo National Park. This social issue is of crucial concern to GoL and the Bank as its impact on poverty, if left unmitigated, is negative and immediate. OP 4.12 will be triggered in those cases.

Therefore a Process Framework (PF) was prepared by the project proponents and approved by the Bank in compliance with OP 4.12. The PF sets the guidelines and processes by which potentially affected persons participate in the design of measures necessary to achieve resettlement policy objectives, and implement and monitor relevant project activities.

OP 4.12 requires the PF to be disclosed both in Liberia and at the Bank Infoshop before appraisal of this project can occur. 6.4 Forests (OPIGP 4.36)

The Bank's involvement in the forest sector aims to reduce deforestation, enhance the environmental contribution of forested areas, promote afforestation, reduce poverty and encourage economic development. In pursuit of these objectives, the Bank's lending operations in the forest sector are conditional on government commitment to undertake sustainable management conservation-oriented forestry.

This policy prohibits Bank financing for commercial logging operations or purchase of logging equipment for use in primary tropical moist forest.

This policy requires the adoption of a legal and institutional framework to (a) ensure conservation and sustainable management of existing forests, (b) promote active participation of local people and the private sector in the long term sustainable management of natural forests, and (c) adopt a comprehensive and environmentally sound forest conservation and development plan that clearly defines the roles and rights of the government, the private sector, and local people (including forest dwellers).

This policy is not triggered by the BCSNP project, although its requirements apply to this project and so a description is included as a reminder to the project implementing team including the EPA.

6.5 Evaluation of Liberia's policy, legal and regulatory frameworks from the perspective of the World Bank's environmental and social safeguard policies A detailed reading of the Liberia's environmental and social policies, laws and regulations reveals that with regard to OP/BP/GP 4.01, OP/BP/GO 4.04 and OP/GP 4.36, Liberia's existing frameworks meet World Bank standards. Where Liberia currently falls short is by lacking the capacity and resources to implement them adequately. Therefore the BCSNP project will pilot at SNP implementation of the relevant environmental and social laws and regulations, in many cases for the first time. This should permit Liberia to roll out their implementation to other forested areas as experience is accumulated at SNP and as Liberian society reconstructs itself and can do so.

30 Liberia's policy, legal and regulatory frameworks do not adequately address the safeguard mechanisms found in OP/BP 4.12. In 1983-84 the FDA paid compensation for lost livelihoods and infrastructure (crops, buildings, other) related to the Park, determined at prevalent local rates and negotiated with affected stakeholders. However the predominant approach to forest-resource decision-making has been highly commercially driven and Monrovia-focused. Local concerns were seldom given relative priority. Thus the measures to establish communal forests, and to involve local communities and district & county environment committees in Park decision-making and development planning, represent tremendous strides towards establishing communities' rights over their environment and natural resources.

The measures outlined in the Process Framework will address situations where OP/BP 4.12 is triggered and will establish precedent in Liberia for dealing with similar situations in a transparent and consistent manner.

31 7.0 Determining Potential Environmental and Social Impacts 7.1 Potential Environmental Concerns and Impacts 7.1.1 Generic Environmental Concerns The Tables 7.1 to 7.4 present generic root and immediate causes for environmental problems in Africa, with a focus on those prevalent in Liberia, and discuss the impacts and their severity, providing the background against which adverse impacts on the environment from the BCSNP project can be analyzed.

Table 7.1 - Deforestation

Immediate Causes Root Causes Impacts Severity

. Forest conversion due to . Poverty and population . Decreasing HIGH increasing need for arable land; pressure leading to vegetation/forest cover; buming practices for land unsustainable pressure on loss of density and clearing and shifting cultivation. resources; absence of diversity. alternative livelihoods and . Excessive and uncontrolled weak capacity to increase . Deterioration of watershed: commercial logging, in some unit agricultural production. high run-off associated with cases illegal increased erosion leading . Desperate demand for to loss of fertile soils and * Uncontrolled logging for fuel increased revenue during the sedimentation and siltation wood and charcoal production for conflicts. downstream. domestic/household energy consumption, construction . Insufficient energy . Urban energy problems material and local industry fuel alternatives to fuel wood; no associated with price needs and for high value job altematives; economic increases due to commercial (export) reasons. incentives to produce decreased availability of charcoal fuelwood and charcoal. . Unsustainable and inefficient resource use (e.g. cultivation on . Insufficient awareness and . Large scale habitat steep hill slopes, unregulated knowiedge of sustainable fragmentation or loss; loss logging). land use practices and of wildlife in terms of effects of deforestation. numbers and biodiversity; . Lack of local tree planting or progressive fragmentation replanting. . Land/resource tenure system of forest blocks. leading to lack of investment . Human migration and in trees and sustainable soil resettlement due to increasing management; lack of numbers of retumees and other incentives for sustainable war affected groups, encroaching land use practices. into forested areas.

32 Table 7.2 - Mining: mostly artisanal

Immediate Causes Root Causes Impacts Severity

HIGH in * Use of toxic chemicals and lack . Inadequate policy guidance, * Water and air pollution. of containment and treatment lack of or insufficient specific facilities (esp. mercury & arsenic safeguards (EIA, anti- . Soil degradation and locations use in gold mining). pollution/environmental erosion of sites and regulations). adjacent river banks; . No site rehabilitation. deforestation and . No regulation/enforcement of landslides leading to river . Physically destructive mining mining. siltation. practices. . Lack of (govemment) . Adverse impact on flora . High demand for construction planning, oversight and and fauna. materials (sand); indiscriminate political will. clearing of vegetation.

Table 7.3 - Land Dearadation: From soil erosion, soil exhaustion, forest loss and fire.

Immediate Causes Root Causes Impacts Severity

. Continued loss of vegetative . Population pressure (in peri- . Loss of top soil and HIGH cover due to deforestation urban areas) and lack of reduction of soil fertility (commercial logging, deficient technological altematives leading to decrease in forest regeneration, slash-and- leading to unsustainable land agricultural production and burn agriculture, settlement) and use practices. food security. loss of other land cover, deterioration of catchment areas. . Topography (uneven relief, . Reduction of vegetative high stream flow velocities) cover and loss of habitats . Inappropriate agricultural and rainfall pattems (floods, and biodiversity. practices leading to decreased droughts, climate variability) soil quality and erosion. . Water quality degradation . In rural areas, land remains from high sediment loads, . Lack of soil and water a non-limiting input even siltation of shallow lakes, conservation measures - land though it is quickly damaged wetlands, reservoirs, and always treated as a non-limiting valley bottoms and other economic input; no anti-erosion . No rational land-use policies low-lying lands works. enforced; improper land use downstream. management; no extension . Bush fires and slash and burn services for soil . Degradation of river beds practices. conservation; land tenure and river bank erosion; system does not encourage reduced forest investment. regeneration and fire vulnerability; sheet and rill . No inter-ministerial co- erosion and gully formation ordination so that one (after heavy rainfall) in sector's activities result in highlands. extemalities to others. . Landslides and flooding . No systematic ElAs for leading to destruction of infrastructure projects due to infrastructure (houses, lack of financial and human means of communication, resources, and low political communal facilities, etc.) will.

33 Table 7.4- Loss of Blodiversitv and Habitats

Immediate Causes Root Causes Impacts Severity

Species loss and decline of ecosystems . Population pressure and poverty Species loss and decline of SEVERE and unique habitats. combined with high reliance on ecosystems and unique primary natural resources and habitats. . Poaching and illegal trade in valuable income from agriculture. species as well as intensive and . Disappearance of unsustainable resource use such as . Low financial and staff capacity in unique animal and logging, wetlands conversion, management of protected areas plant species, expansion of agriculture (crops and and associated lack of control especially endemic livestock farming, overfishing, and monitoring; poor enforcement ones; decline of uncontrolled burning). of laws protecting gazetted species diversity. forests and game sanctuaries; . Lack of altemative income sources lack of financial resources for * Decrease in numbers especially in areas for IDF and development and implementation of large mammals with refugee settlement. of effective and relevant negative impact on programs. future tourism and Loss of agrodiversity. associated decrease . No agricultural extension in revenue. . Loss of land races during prolonged services. periods of fighting . Decrease in forest . Low understanding of biodiversity cover constituting concems and benefits from decrease in food, fuel conservation. timber and shelter.

* Short-term survival mentality is Loss of agrodiversity. prevalent, born of 14 years of civil unrest. . Loss of genetic base (small livestock . Inadequate and unregulated land breeds, crops, use practices; insufficient vegetables/fruits); loss integrated programs for people of benefits from local living in protected areas. variety qualities (tolerance productivity, resilience).

Wetlands Degradation:

* Conversion of wetlands to expand * Lack of wetland protection and * Decrease and HIGH agricultural (rice) production, management regulations and degradation of wetland measures and/or lack of areas (reclamation, * Deforestation, erosion and implementation, siltation, flood sedimentation. damage; water weed * Inadequate extemal inputs to infestation) * Loss of wildlife & botanical habitat. make efficient use of converted wetlands * Decreased benefits * Overuse of natural resources (over- from functioning fishing/hunting, unsustainable farming * Lack of awareness of wetlands wetlands, e.g. less practices) function and value, cultural groundwater re- habits. charge, decreased * Pollution from industrial, agricultural buffering of floods, and domestic sources. loss of filter function to absorb and degrade pollutants and associated decrease in water quality; decreasing ability to act as sediment trap; destruction of habitats and loss of ______biodiversity.

34 7.2 Bio-Physical, Social and Economic Issues and Concerns Facing Sapo National Park Sapo National Park and its surrounding areas, especially the Putu Mountains to the north, contain species many of which are rare and/or endemic to Liberia. For example the Putu range has plants not found within the Park, which may be restricted to the two Putu ridges.

The main issues threatening Sapo National Park include both immediate threats to its fauna and flora, as well as their underlying causes. These may be grouped broadly into biological threats, issues related to the local conditions (economic & demographic factors, Park- community relations) and institutional issues. 7.2.1 Biophysical Agriculture/Farming. Slash-and-burn agriculture destroys significant forest areas, leading to soil exhaustion and erosion. This threat is pronounced from the Park's south-eastern to south-western boundaries where farming threatens the Park's proposed buffer zone.

Hunting and Fishing - They deplete wildlife populations but answer local needs for protein and income.

Poaching - This is defined as hunting where it is prohibited either because it is inside the Park or it targets protected species. Problems include poor enforcement of anti-poaching laws and involvement of the military in the bushmeat trade for export. Loss of keystone species like elephants is significant and affects on seed dispersal and forest regeneration. Since rebels took control of the area and the FDA withdrew, hunting inside the Park and of protected species have started.

Non-Timber Forest Product (NTFP) Collection and Buffer Zones. Collection of NTFP's is not regulated and may damage the Park. No buffer zones have been established in which limited economic activity can occur in a manner that protects the Park. Outside of wildlife, the primary NTFP whose collection potentially threatens the Park is rattan, a vine collected only in high forest. As long as high forest survives outside of the Park, local communities can collect rattan there. But if this forest is lost, or if it is exhausted of its rattan, then villagers will enter the Park to collect it.

Logging - This damages forest cover, but overall its impacts are not too bad. However when forestry regulations and laws are not enforced, it provides roads, transportation and markets for farming and hunting to penetrate the forest. Commercial Logging has not been pursued intensely in the immediate vicinity of Sapo National Park since before the war, although some (debatably illegal) logging occurred in the Park's western extension in 2002- 03. Two concessionaires hold the concessions surrounding the Park: Daba Logging to the south, where logging has come close to the Park boundary, and Oriental Timber Company to the east, west and north.

Mining - Alluvial gold mining inside the Park is an on-going problem both for the forest disturbance it creates (forest loss, stream and groundwater pollution) as well as for the camps inside the Park and consequent hunting and agriculture. This activity contributes to trapping animals, pollutes water sources and destroys vegetation. Like hunting, this activity has gotten underway to a significant extent inside the Park since the FDA withdrew.

Seftlement is a threat often linked to farming, mining, hunting or logging, and requires problematic removal of people and loss of their investments (like farms and houses).

35 Climate Change could alter the long-term vegetative and faunal make-up of the Park, and the Park's climate and hydrology as well as the Park's carbon sequestration ability. 7.2.2 Social Poor Economy - Local residents have few options but to farm, hunt or mine unless they emigrate or work for a logging operation (although very few jobs reportedly go to local residents). Very little secure, on-going development support has been provided to encourage local residents to turn from damaging economic activities. Park management has not contributed much the local economy, and local communities have not benefited much from the Park recently and do not see benefits of collaborating.

Exclusion - The Park excludes residents from economic activities inside it, while providing benefits to only a limited number of local inhabitants. This causes resentment locally.

Population Pressures - In the post-war era, returning and increasing populations are exerting pressure on the Park in certain areas, to the south and south-east of the Park in particular.

Civil Conflict causes population migration, dependence upon hunting and gathering, economic hardships, a break-down of law enforcement or any protection actions for the Park, loss of trained manpower and problems later to restart conservation activities when conservation is not a priority for government.

Misinformation/Lack of Awareness and Education - Local residents, local authorities, law enforcement agents, central government authorities, private operators, development agencies and others influencing the Park are insufficiently aware of the values of the Park and the consequences of their actions on it. They are unaware also of the rules and regulations pertaining to the park. Groups with vested personal interests have spread misinformation about conservation, the FDA and NGOs to promote their own profit motives (usually hunting, mining, logging) and to discredit those concerned with forest management.

Acute Poverty - Poverty is widespread in Liberia. Despites its rich natural resources, civil conflicts and poor govemance have made Liberia one of the poorest countries in the world. It is estimated that 80% of the population lives beneath the poverty line, only 25% has access to safe water, 36% has access to sanitation facilities, and 35% is undernourished.

Gender issues - Women are often poorer than men, own fewer assets like land and livestock, and have fewer years of schooling. Gender imbalances are rooted and sustained by traditional and cultural values.

HIV/AIDS - Infection rates and prevalence have increased rapidly in recent years, with prevalence estimated at 12 percent (from 8.1 percent at the end of 2002). Gender-based and sexual violence that took place during the conflict is likely to have played a part in the upward trend.

7.2.3 Institutional Institutional Capacity is currently too weak within government agencies to enforce laws and regulations effectively. This is due both to persistent lack of financial and human resources due to past political interference, the effects of timber sanctions, and under- trained manpower.

Administrative Neglect - Conservation does not figure high on the Government's list of priorities. Lack of political will by Government authorities is particularly dangerous.

36 Low capacity of other Stakeholders for conservation. Low levels of involvement by stakeholders around the Park, due to the absence of structures and processes for their participation and to inadequate skills within Park staff to encourage meaningful participation, has the effect of making local communities resist and resent the Park rather than support it and seek ways to benefit from it. Furthermore the actors influencing the Park do not co- operate, communicate or agree on common priorities, so that misinformation and conflict frequently spoil collaboration.

Lack of Policy Coordination - Policies relating to mining, forest management, infrastructure, agriculture and other sectors are not integrated with conservation objectives or each other, threatening the long-term integrity of the Park and its surrounding areas.

Lack of Secure, Adequate Long-term Support for the Park. Until reform is entrenched within the FDA and timber sanctions are lifted, and financial management broadly speaking is reformed in Liberia, such support cannot come from Government or from logging revenues. Donors are reluctant to support Liberia except through NGOs, especially when the prospects for handling over recurrent financial responsibilities to Government are low. 7.3 Potential Positive Environmental Impacts of the BCSNP Project Given these issues facing Sapo National Park, this project is likely to have a positive impact on conservation efforts at the Park and on the environment overall in Liberia in the short, medium and long term for the following reasons:

* implementation of this ESMF will increase the practice of subjecting development projects in Liberia - especially projects in forested areas - to an environmental management process at a time when implementation of the National Environmental Policy and the regulatory framework have understandably lost their priority to emergency relief efforts and demobilization/reintegration of armed combatants. * This ESMF offers the opportunity to mainstream environmental management into communal forest management and biodiversity conservation efforts in an integrated approach by building capacity at community and district levels through training and "learning by doing", community participation and consultation, and accountability. * This project will significantly increase income-generating opportunities of forest resources by local communities in a manner that is economically, socially and environmentally sustainable. * This project is an opportunity to identify direct and attributable adverse impacts from project activities, to mitigate these impacts, and to monitor mitigation measures in an integrated and participatory mechanism based on partnership between communities as implementers on the one hand, and state and local authorities as regulators and facilitators on the other. * Any activities that have potentially irreversible adverse impacts on biodiversity, natural habitats, wetlands and cultural property will not be funded. 7.4 Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of the BCSNP Project * Poor planning resulting in poor choice and design of community plans and location of Park facilities, leading ultimately to land degradation, soil erosion, destruction of forest resources, and loss of endangered flora and fauna. * During sub-project implementation, poor performance of civil works contractors (and their supervisors) could lead to unsuccessful mitigation measures. * Poor implementation of maintenance plans and other project designed monitoring mechanisms could lead to environmental damage (pollution, erosion, other).

37 7.5 Potential Positive Social Impacts of the BCSNP Project Overall this project is likely to have a positive impact on the social issues facing post-conflict Liberia in the short, medium and long term, for the following reasons:

* it will create opportunities for sustainable income-generating activities within and around Sapo Park; * it will increase opportunities to train local communities and FDA officials in communal forest management, biodiversity conservation, sustainable forest-resource use, etc.; * it will provide small-scale infrastructure in a planned and organized process that would facilitate more efficient uses of economic resources in and around the Park; * it will empower local communities to control and manage forest resources for their benefit in the forest surrounding Sapo National Park, and establish a model to be replicated elsewhere in Liberia; * it will increase opportunities for Sapo National Park stakeholders to consult one another, to plan activities and to participate in conservation and natural resources management issues inside and around the Park; * it will introduce social impact screening and develop explicit precedent for Liberia with regard to loss and relocation of livelihoods due to conservation efforts; * it will assist provision of social services to surrounding communities; * it will create local employment opportunities, although most will be short term; * it will establish a model of sustainable, forest resource-based development to be replicated across the country; and * together with other ongoing donor activities, the BCSNP project will demonstrate continued Government efforts and concern for the plight of the Liberian rural poor. 7.6 Potential Adverse Social Impacts of the BCSNP Project The risk exists that the project will have negative impacts if the participatory processes designed for the project break down or are not implemented. Likewise if bad governance and exploitative divisions of the past reappear, the vulnerable, powerless and/or marginalized groups could be blocked from effectively participating and benefiting from the project, leading to resumption of conflicts. Failure to implement the Process Framework's provisions would lead to individuals living in or deriving an income from the Park illegally, or being blocked from doing so in which case their incomes and living standards would not be restored to pre-project levels.

The environmental and social screening form and checklist in Annexes 3.0 and 4.0 are designed specifically to ensure that adverse social impacts from the BCSNP project are identified in the planning stages and effectively mitigated in advance.

Both environmental and social mitigation measures would be verifiably monitored during the various stages of the project cycle.

38 8.0 Institutional Assessment and Framework for Environmental and Social Management.

Potential negative (and positive) environmental and social impacts must be identified during the implementation of Components 1 and 5 of this project. To delineate roles and responsibilities clearly, this ESMF categorizes project activities into two sets, distinguishable by those who implement them. The two investment categories are:

* Type 1 Investments - Implemented by SNP/DWNP staff, which are investment activities such as construction of - ranger stations - ranger out posts - the Park HQ buildings - the Safari camp - the research station at Gbabone - foot trails and foot paths

* Type 2 Investments - Implemented by neighbouring communities, which are investment activities such as: - management of communal forests - piloting of rural development activities 8.1 InstitutionalRoles and Responsibilities 8.1.1 Fauna & Flora International (FFI) - Project Coordination and Management FFI will, inter alia, be responsible to (i) coordinate activities across all participating Counties/Districts/Clans throughout Sapo National Park; (ii) establish and manage with FDA an Information Management System (IMS) to adaptively monitor quality of implementation, use of funds, and their impact throughout the project; (iii) transfer funds to SNP and local institutions/bodies, such as Communal Forest Establishment Committees (CFEC) 3, to finance sub-projects; (iv) handle most procurement, and (v) provide training and capacity- building.

Specifically with regard to this ESMF, FFI will play an oversight role by monitoring SNP staff and local communities to ensure that they carry out their responsibilities as detailed in Sections 8, 9, 10 and 11 of this framework. FFI will forward monitoring reports to the EPA for analysis of the cumulative impacts and efficacy of corresponding sub-project and communal forest management plans' (CFMPs') mitigation measures.

Thus FFI will perform a central processing and coordination role between the SNP and local communities. However FFI's objective is not to play this role alone but rather to build FDA and other GoL capacity to take over as soon as possible. FFI will report to the World Bank.

3 Communal forest establishment committees will evolve into communal forest councils and communal forest management committees as communal forests are established. References to CFECs shall be understood to include these councils and management committees as well.

39 8.1.2 The Environment Protection Agency/County Environment Committees (CEC) The EPA is officially responsible for ensuring that all development projects in Liberia comply with relevant environmental laws. The EPA is centrally located in Monrovia but is envisioned to have a decentralized structure through its County Environment Committees (CECs) and District Environment Committees (DECs). Therefore, to ensure timely review and approval of proposed initiatives with environmental impacts, given that the proposed investments involve modest sums and that only minor adverse impacts are anticipated, the review and clearing of the environmental and social management process required of direct SNP investments and local community sub-projects will be discussed at the level of DECs and carried out at the level of County Environment Committees.

However because CECs were not yet operational when this ESMF was prepared, as an interim measure the Sapo Park Management Advisory Council will formally make such decisions based upon a formal written summary and recommendation prepared by SNP management and FFI. In advance of any relevant decision, affected district-based liaison groups will review the matter and make a formal recommendation based on consensus to the Management Advisory Council.

This ESMF recognizes that the EPA has a significant role to play in this project. One role would be to provide (i) on-the-ground ESMF performance reviews/audits both for enforcement purposes, but more importantly to reinforce training and to keep SNP & other FDA staff, local communities and CECs cognizant of their ESMF responsibilities, (ii) training, and (iii) periodic monitoring. Regarding training, the EPA and County Environmental Officers will benefit from a training program outlined in section 8.2 of this ESMF that will provide capacity for the counties to post suitably capable environmental officers. The EPA would also monitor to ensure no adverse cumulative impacts at the landscape level from SNP or local communities are left unmitigated and will provide oversight and technical assistance to the counties and districts when required.

As of 2004, nearly all of the EPA's capacity is located in Monrovia, which has grown rapidly in 2004 from under 10 professional staff to over 20. This core capacity will be drawn on during the BCSNP project, and training in specialised skills will be part of this and other projects led by FFI, Conservation International, the US Government and UNEP, among others. Still no sector-specific EIA procedures and guidelines have yet been prepared by the EPA, and its EIA and audit capacity remains inadequate to address national needs and fulfill its national mandate. However the BCSNP project's focus must remain on Sapo Park and so the project will focus more on the EPA structures in south-east Liberia than in Monrovia. At times this may require hiring of independent experts to supplement the EPA's personnel. 8.1.3 For Type I Investments The institutions with key responsibilities for environmental and social management are:

8.1.3.1 Sapo National Park (SNP) - Division of Wildlife and National Parks, Forestry Development Authority SNP staff will be responsible (i) to comply with all national laws regarding the environment, forest management and biodiversity, and with all social/poverty guidelines, parameters and targets set by the project and triggered World Bank safeguards policies; (ii) to implement small-scale infrastructure according to the provisions of this ESMF implementing, inter alia, all appropriate mitigation measures identified in environmental and social screening forms and checklists into the construction planning cycle, technical and engineering designs and drawings, and civil works contracts, etc.; (iii) to ensure that mitigation measures are complied with during construction and post construction (i.e. operations) stages of activities, by self-monitoring of activities and periodic reporting to the relevant County Environment

40 Committee (or SNP Management Advisory Council); and (iv) to implement the appropriate * maintenance procedures and practices for Park operations, to ensure mitigation measures identified in the environmental and social screening forms and checklists are implemented and sustained, and (v) to comply with any directives that may be issued from time to time from the EPA, CECs, DECs or surrogate bodies like SNP's Management Advisory Council.

8.1.3.2 County Environment Committees The EPA's County Environment Committee (CEC) in Sinoe and River Gee Counties (or the SNP Management Advisory Council acting as a surrogate) will be required to review and clear the environmental and social management process prior to funding small-scale infrastructure.

The CECs will be responsible for: (i) ensuring the SNP construction program complies with Liberia's environmental, forestry and conservation laws and requirements, and with the World Bank's triggered safeguards policies, (ii) receiving, reviewing and commenting on, requiring revisions where necessary and clearing4 of completed environmental and social screening forms and checklists for SNP, (iii) carrying out a regular monitoring regime during the planning, implementation, construction, operations and maintenance stages of relevant activities, (iv) preparing periodic monitoring reports on SNP's construction program at all stages of operations and to send these reports on a regular basis to the EPA who will then process them and send them as appropriate to other bodies within GoL, as well as to FFI, (v) complying with (consistent with national laws) the directives of EPA and FDA, and (vi) issuing directives to SNP consistent with national laws on environmental requirements. See chart 8.1 for an illustration of these arrangements. 8.1.4 For Type 2 Investments 8.1.4.1 Communal Forest Establishment Committee (CFEC) The Communal Forest Manual outlines that the implementing community elects a Communal Forest Establishment Committee (CFEC) whose roles will be to: * assure community input through public consultations, and reporting on inter- tribal/clan issues that may need resolution; * draft a preliminary report stating the rational and criteria for site selection based on needs and desires expressed by all elements of the community, and on the benefits to accrue to the community as well as to forest conservation; * facilitate gathering of all necessary documentation and information from stakeholders (within the community initiating Communal Forest creation as well as holders of rights to and in the vicinity of the targeted forest area); * assure that all information needed is provided when presenting a communal forest creation request to the appropriate authorities; and * make sure that the proposed or approved communal forest meets the community's agreed-on criteria.

Therefore with regard to this ESMF, the CFEC will be responsible:

(i) for preparing their Communal forest Management Plans (CFMPs) with technical assistance form the FDA, (ii) for ensuring their CFMPs comply with all national laws regarding the environment and with all social/poverty guidelines, parameters and targets set by the project, and all triggered World Bank safeguard policies, assisted by the FDA, relevant CEC and FFI,

4 To aid this process, Annex 5 contains an Environmental and Social Appraisal Form for use by the County Environment committees.

41 (iii) for obtaining the necessary environmental clearances and approvals from local and national authorities, consistent with the provisions of this ESMF (iv) to implement their approved CFMPs consistent with the provisions of this ESMF, implementing all appropriate mitigation measures identified in the environmental and social screening form and checklist into the CFMP planning cycle, technical and engineering designs and drawings, and civil works contracts, assisted by the FDA and FFI, (v) to ensure that these mitigation measures are complied with during implementation of their CFMP, whether during planning or implementation of activities, by self-monitoring of activities and by periodic reporting to the FDA, (vi) to implement appropriate maintenance procedures for activities required to ensure the mitigation measures identified in the environmental and social screening form and checklist are implemented and sustained as the CFMPs are executed, and (vii) to comply with any directives that may be issued from time to time from the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA), the FDA, the EPA and the latter's district and county authorities.

8.1.4.2 The Forestry Development Authority (FDA) For type 2 investments, the FDA (Park staff, DWNP) will be responsible (i) for approving the CFMPs after they are reviewed and cleared by the appropriate CEC; (ii) for ensuring that the contents of the CFMPs are consistent with all national laws and international conventions/requirements, (iii) for supervising the CFECs and providing them with technical support during preparation and implementation of CFMPs; (iv) for carrying out regular and intrusive monitoring during the implementation of CFMPs; and (v) for preparing periodic monitoring reports on the implementation of CFMPs at all stages and for sending these on a regular basis to the CEC/EPA, MIA, and FFI (the latter of which will process and send them to the World Bank).

8.1.4.3 County Environment Committees As with Type 1 investments, the EPA's CECs (or surrogate) for Sinoe and River Gee Counties will be required to review and clear the environmental and social management process required of the CFEC prior to funding their CFMP. The CECs would: (i) ensure CFMPs comply with Liberia's environmental, forestry and conservation laws and requirements, and the provisions of the World Bank's triggered safeguards policies; (ii) receive, review, comment on, require revisions of and clears environmental and social screening forms and checklists completed by CFECs transmitted via the FDA; (iii) carry out regular monitoring during the planning, implementation, construction, operations and maintenance stages of the CFMP with regard to the CEC's mandate; (iv) prepare periodic monitoring reports on the CFMP at all its stages and send these on a regular basis to the FDA who then processes them and sends them to FFI; (v) comply with the directives of EPA, consistent with national laws; and (vi) issue directives to the CFECs consistent with national and international laws on environmental requirements.

8.1.4.4 The Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) Oversight of all county and local government activities is the responsibility of the MIA, including the actions of the County Superintendent and traditional chiefs. The MIA is responsible for sensitizing tribal authorities of their rights to use forest resources in a sustainable manner, to facilitate establishment of CFECs, to prepare Tribal Land Certificates

5To aid this process Annex 7 contains an Environmental and Social Appraisal Form for use by County Environment Committees.

42 for areas selected for establishing communal forests (CFs), to ensure wishes and needs of the community are met in this process, and to monitor and prevent or resolve conflicts. After participating in the establishment of CFs, the MIA will receive regular reports from FDA on their status. See chart 8.2 for an illustration of these arrangements.

Until such time as CECs are established, as an interim measure the SNP Management Advisory Council will play the role of the CECs, supported by the FDA and FFI. Due caution will be taken to prevent a conflict of interest so that FFI never ends up screening, approving and monitoring sub-projects. 8.1.5 Capacity Assessment to Perform these Roles Liberian institutions suffered greatly during the war. Their capacity to carry out the roles and responsibilities stated above is inadequate in the short term, and will require investment throughout the project for the institutions to function independently by the end of the project.

Therefore this ESMF will heavily rely on components 2 and 3 of this project to provide technical assistance and support to these institutions to enable them perform some of these roles and to build capacity in the process. However as previously stated, this project's mandate focuses on Sapo National Park and surrounding forested areas in the south-east. Additional investment is urgently required to address the EPA's capacity at a national level. 8.2 Training Needs All institutions, including those at the district and even the communal forest level if possible, should undergo the following training program, targeted at the level and needs of the trainees. 8.2.1 Proposed Training Programme The formal training envisioned to support the ESMF process in the BCSNP project will occur in two phases. The first phase will be carried out after approximately 3-6 months as the project begins. Its objectives are to ensure basic awareness of the rationale, objectives, requirements and procedures for the ESMF are known by the main personnel to be involved in implementing this ESMF. It will also build the skills of these people to a common minimum level, since at the outset their skills and experience in the topic will differ greatly. Table 8.1: Course outline for the first training in ESMF skills. Target Course description Duration Resources audiences - EPA-Monrovia 1. Environmental and social policies, procedures and 2 days Because the staff responsible guidelines three training for EIA and 1.1 Review and discuss Liberia's national environmental modules will - CEC and DEC policies, procedures, and legislation as well as the relevant another, a total staff international conventions informing Liberia's policies, budget of staff ed FDA procedures and legislation $15,00o0sf -sectaffat DA 1.2 Review and discuss the Bank's safeguards policies propo0sefo regional HQ and 1.3 Strategies for consultation, participation, conflict the three of in Monrovia prevention, conflict resolution and social inclusion them. The -selected CFMC 2. Selected topics on environmental protection 2 days, course is to leaders following the occur at or - MIA tribal 2.1 Principles of ecology and the importance of the Sapo above near Sapo reserve staff National Park ecosystem module Park. The 2.2 Principles of sustainable forest resources use methods Word Bank Approximately 2.3 Safe waste disposal and implications on public health will supply a 25 people to be 2.4 Protection and management of water resources senior trainer trained, plus 5 2.5 Disaster preparedness (civil conflict, floods, other) for modules 1

43 trainers and 3. Environmental and Social Management process: 5 days, and 3. organisers. including However 3.1 Review of environmental and social management field additional SNP processes exercises, staff (rangers, 3.2 Use of screening forms and the checklist to determine following the officers) will be adverse impacts from sub-projects above pulled into 3.3 How to measure cumulative adverse environmental and modules topics 1.3, 2.1, social impacts 2.2,cs2.3,2.4, a 3.4 Design of appropriate mitigation measures 2.2,5 2.3,'2 4 aid3.5 How to review and clear the communal forest 2.5. management plans 3.6 The importance of public consultations 3.7 How to monitor mitigation measures 3.8 How to embed the environmental & social management process into civil works contracts

Between 12 and 21 months into the project, depending upon when is deemed most suitable (and not during the height of the rainy season), a second 10-day training session will be organised. This will focus much more on topics 1.3 and all those in module 3, and will proceed in a learning-by-doing manner. It will emphasise solving real problems encountered in the implementation of the project by conducting a series of evaluations of proposals, simulated audits and other practical skills. The specific outline will need to be determined nearer to the time. The World Bank once again will be requested to provide one senior trainer to ensure consistency with all applicable social and environmental safeguards. The training will be organised by FFI, with assistance from the EPA, FDA and participating donors like the World Bank. Costs estimates are based on the assumption that the training program for all participants will be held at the county level, with resource persons coming mostly from other parts of the country. Participants will come from local communities and relevant towns and cities. Estimates include cost for all participants and consultants. Refresher training for CECs and the FDA may be offered subsequently, if useful. The total training budget is estimated at US$30,000 and is covered in the existing budget of Component 2. However the World Bank offered to furnish expert consultants in applying World Bank safeguard policies, worth an additional $10,000.

44 Figure 8.1 - For Type 1 Activities (i.e. those implemented by the SNP)

Flow Chart of Institutional Roles and Responsibilities (Note: other institutions not directly involved in the ESMF process omifted for clarity)

4b

FFI

committee (CEC) BCSNPCT

< < Fo~~restry / \ / ~Development / \ ( ~Authorityl Sapo* / \ ~National Park/

Monitoring Reporting

45 Figure 8.2 - For Type 2 Activities (i.e. those implemented by the local communities) Flow Chart of Institutional Roles and Responsibilities (Note: other institutions not directly involved in the ESMF process omitted for clarity)

Environment F Protection Agency FFI

T * BCSNP|PROJECT

committee(C ) /\ \__._.t F~CmmualorestrX/ / t~~~~~ \ D~~~estalshment/

Environment~ F----\--/~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ---- -

Monitoring ReportFng

46 9.0 Environmental and Social Planning, Review and Clearing Process for Sub-project Activities to be Funded under the BCSNP. 9.1 Environmental and Social Management Process Sub-projects had not been identified at the time of preparation of the BCSNP project. Consequently specific information on numbers, specific locations, land requirements, local communities involved, geo-physical land features, nature, type and use of equipment/plant, etc. of sub-projects was not available. The exact details and intensity of social and environmental impacts and their effective mitigation could not be determined during project preparation. This Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) therefore prepares the mechanism to determine and assess potential adverse environmental and social impacts of sub-projects, identified based on a community-driven process, and then to set out mitigation, monitoring and institutional measures to be taken during implementation and operation of the subprojects6 to eliminate adverse environmental and social impacts, offset them, or reduce them to acceptable levels.

This section identifies and illustrates the specific steps involved in the environmental and social assessment process leading to the approval of SNP and local community sub-projects from an environmental and social management standpoint. This process is embedded into the overall sub-project cycle, timeline, phasing and project implementation process for the BCSNP. The steps incorporate the requirements of relevant national laws and the Bank's triggered safeguards policies. 9.2 For Type 1 Investments Step 1: SNP staff will screen their own sub-projects to identify adverse environmental and social impacts using the screening form in Annex 3 and the checklist in Annex 5. Step 2: SNP will then introduce into the sub-project design the required measures to mitigate impacts identified from use of the screening form and checklist before submission of the sub-project design to the appropriate County Environment Committee for review and environmental and social clearance. Step 3: The County Environment Committee 7 will review and clear the sub-projects by ensuring sub-project designs have identified environmental and social impacts, mitigated these impacts and have monitoring plans and institutional measures to be taken during implementation and operation.

World Bank OP 4.01 on Environmental Assessment requires the screening of sub-projects by SNP management to ensure that they carry out the appropriate environmental and social management process for each sub-project proposed. Before clearing a sub-project, the respective CEC verifies that sub-projects meet the environmental and social requirements of the Government of Liberia and are consistent with OP 4.01, the overall ESMF (i.e. this report) and all the other safeguard policies of the World Bank. This means that when SNP staff designs proposed sub-projects, it would simultaneously screen sub-project design using the screening form in Annex 3 and the checklist in Annex 5.

6 Subprojects refers to activities funded under this project implemented by SNP staff, contractors, local communities and their partners. 7The County Environment Committee (or surrogate) clears sub-projects only for environmental and social management. Sub-projects are approved by the Dept. of Wildlife and National Parks of the FDA, and the MIA if appropriate, after they are cleared by the CEC from an environmental and social management standpoint.

47 Once impacts are identified in the completed screening form and checklist, various mitigation measures would then be identified. SNP staff, assisted by their service providers and FFI, will modify various aspects of sub-project design to incorporate the required mitigation measures.

SNP staff, assisted by their service providers and FFI, will re-screen the modified designs using the previously completed screening form and checklist to ensure that all impacts have been adequately identified and mitigated.

Additionally, for situations where this screening process has identified that OP 4.12 is triggered, then the provisions of the Process Framework would apply. It should be encouraged that SNP staff alter sub-project design so that OP4.12 is not triggered. If this is not possible, then the original sub-project design is maintained but made to comply with the provisions of the Process Framework (PF).

Therefore sub-project proposals/designs will have already been screened by SNP staff and contain appropriate mitigation measures. SNP staff will also be guided by the generic potential adverse environmental and social impacts outlined in Section 7.0 of this report. Throughout this screening process SNP staff will be assisted by service providers and FFI.

Once SNP management is satisfied that the modified designs are now environmentally and socially compliant the modified designs will be submitted, accompanied by the site location plan, completed screening form, checklist and environmental and social management plan (ESMP) 8, to the County Environment Committee (or surrogate) for review and clearance.

The County Environment Committee using the appraisal form in Annex 5.0 will review the submitted modified design to ensure that all environmental and social impacts have been identified and successfully mitigated based on use of the screening form and checklist. If the screening form has any "Yes" entries, or evidently unjustified "No" entries, the application would need to be justified and demonstrate from the modified design that the issue has been managed to avoid unacceptable adverse effects/impacts. If this is the case then the CEC will give conditional clearance to the FDA for approval, copied to FFI (or other financier if appropriate) for funds to be released for the sub-project, based on the following conditions:

* compliance with the requirements of Liberia's Forest(ry) and Environment Acts, international agreements, EPA requirements and the World Bank OP 4.01 (and 4.04), * complete implementation of the provisions of the Process Framework where OP 4.12 is triggered, * any construction contract documents (i.e. the works and materials specifications, drawings, bills of quantities, contract conditions , etc.) are made consistent with the modified designs. This ensures that the environmental and social management process is embedded into civil works contracts/processes, * an application for approval includes a maintenance plan for the works, and * local service providers assist SNP staff to supervise implementation. The ESMP's accompanying SNP infrastructure proposals must explain how monitoring measures are to occur during implementation and operation of sub-project to ensure that

8 In this case the ESMP would consist of the actions and measures envisaged to avoid or mitigate any potential negative environmental or social impacts, as well as a summary of planned maintenance of infrastructure or other interventions after their installation/setting up, how negative impacts will continue to be avoided or mitigated, and how the implementation (construction) and maintenance of sub-projects would be monitored for environmental and social impacts and compliance.

48 mitigation measures identified in modified sub-project designs are implemented as designed and remain functional throughout the life of the sub-project. The ESMP should also include monitoring of environmental and social parameters during the implementation and operational phases of the sub-project to measure the success of mitigation measures. If the CEC finds that the submitted modified design is not consistent with the requirements of the screening form and checklist, then SNP staff will be requested to make additional modifications and/or chose other sites until it is consistent, at which time clearance will be given.

Any proposed design that does not comply with the requirements of Liberia's Forest(ry) and Environment Acts, EPA requirements and World Bank OP 4.01 on Environmental Assessment (and OP 4.04 on Natural Habitats) will not be cleared for implementation.

This process is designed to ensure that the environmental and social assessment process is part of and conducted during the planning stages with full participation of local residents, thereby bolstering ensuring the environmental and social sustainability of sub-projects.

Figure 9.1 - Type I Investments - Summary of Key Roles in the Environmental and Social Review Process:

preparesr sub-pmject k esignis, assisted by TA

, Committe review sub- \ .,--. project desiqnif6r,hf ; < -cDMpI1ance w1,ihe ,gSMF-

. relpases furnding for ;'impie6ientation onlyij e: i6suprojwdectnsi a .

49 * 9.3 for Type 2 Investments Step 1: CFECs will work with FDA's CF staff to screen their sub-projects to identify adverse environmental and social impacts using the screening form in Annex 3 and the checklist in Annex 5. District Environment committees will provide technical assistance. Step 2: The CFEC and DEC (or surrogate) will together introduce into sub-project design the required measures to mitigate impacts identified from the screening form and checklist before submission of the sub-project to the appropriate CEC (or surrogate) for review and subsequent environmental and social clearance. Step 3: The County Environment Committee9 will review and clear the sub-projects by ensuring sub-project designs have identified environmental and social impacts, mitigated these impacts and have monitoring plans and institutional measures to be taken during implementation and operation. Bank OP4.01 requires screening of sub-projects by CECs to ensure that they have appropriate environmental and social management process. Before clearing a sub-project, the appropriate CEC verifies that the Communal Forest Management Plan (CFMP) meets GoL's environmental and social requirements and are consistent with OPs 4.01 and 4.04, this ESMF and all the other safeguard policies of the World Bank. This means that when the CFEC is preparing its CFMP, it automatically screens sub-project designs using the screening form in Annex 3 and the checklist in Annex 5. Once impacts are identified, mitigation measures are identified using of the completed screening form and checklist. The CFEC and DEC, assisted by partner NGOs and service providers, will modify various the CFMP to incorporate the required mitigation measures.

The CFEC assisted by their service provider will re-screen the modified CFMP using the previously completed screening form and checklist to ensure that all impacts have been adequately identified and mitigated.

For situations where screening identifies that OP 4.12 is triggered, the provisions of the Process Framework will apply. It should be encouraged that the CFEC alter the CFMP so that OP4.12 is not triggered. It should be recalled that Footnote 6 of OP4.12 states that "This policy does not apply to restrictions of access to natural resources under community- based projects, i.e. where the community using the resources decides to restrict access to these resources, provided that an assessment satisfactory to the Bank establishes that the community decision-making process is adequate, and that it provides for identification of appropriate measures to mitigate adverse impacts, if any, on the vulnerable members of the community."

Therefore CFMPs will contain designs and proposals that have already been screened by CFECs and DECs, and contain mitigation measures. CFECs and DECs will be guided also by the generic potential adverse environmental and social impacts outlined in Section 7.0 of this ESMF. Once the CFEC and DEC are satisfied that the modified designs are environmentally and socially compliant, they then submit the modified CFMPs to the CEC for review and clearance, accompanied by a site location plan, completed screening form(s), checklist and environment and social management plan.

9The County Environment Committee clears sub-projects only for environmental and social management. Sub- projects are approved by the Dept. of Wildlife and National Parks of the FDA, and the MIA if appropriate, after they are cleared by the CEC from an environmental and social management standpoint. * Using the appraisal form in Annex 4, the County Environment Committee will review the modified CFMP to ensure that all environmental and social impacts are identified and successfully mitigated based on the screening form and checklist. If the screening form has any "Yes" entries, or evidently unjustified "No" entries, the application would need to be justified and demonstrate from the modified CFMP that the issue has been managed to avoid unacceptable adverse effects/impacts. If this is the case, the County Environment Committee gives conditional clearance to the FDA for approval for funds to be released to the CFEC for the CFMP to be implemented, according to the following conditions:

* compliance with the requirements of Liberia's Forest(ry) and Environment Acts, international agreements, EPA requirements and World Bank OPs 4.01 and 4.04. * complete implementation of the provisions of the Process Framework where OP 4.12 has been triggered, * any construction contract documents (i.e. works and materials specifications, drawings, bills of quantities, contract conditions , etc.) are made consistent with the modified designs. This ensures that the environmental and social management process is embedded into the civil works contracts/processes, * full implementation of a conflict resolution mechanism, * the application for approval includes a maintenance plan for the intervention to ensure that later on adverse environmental and social impacts are identified and mitigated, and * local service providers and the relevant DEC assist the CFEC to supervise implementation.

The CFEC's Communal Forest Management Plans must contain as part of their application an Environment and Social Management Plan (ESMP) including monitoring measures for setting up and operating the sub-project to ensure that mitigation measures identified in modified sub-projects are implemented as designed and remain functional throughout the life of the sub-project. The ESMP should also include monitoring environmental and social parameters during the setting up and operational phases of the plan, in order to measure the success of the mitigation measures. If the CEC finds that the submitted modified design is not consistent with the requirements of the screening form and checklist, then the CFEC is requested to modify it and/or chose other sites until the design is consistent whereby clearance would then be given as per above.

Any proposed design that does not comply with the requirements of Liberia's Forest(ry) and Environment Acts, EPA requirements and World Bank OP 4.01 or OP4.04 will not be cleared for implementation.

This process is designed to ensure that the environmental and social assessment process is part of and conducted during the planning stages with full participation of local residents, thereby bolstering ensuring the environmental and social sustainability of sub-projects.

51 Figure 9.2 - Summary of Key Roles in the Environmental and Social Review Process for Type 11Investments:

modifiedsub-projects, A F V by the FDA, NGOs asisted b

CFMPSfor,ompliance wlth the ESMF ,-ard appov \ them- if.bppropriate.

. - ag -. eF

\-: - - d therrievanti CE§E and~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- - J-reea r ppovd'; y heFDAN

52 10.0 Monitoring Plan The objective for monitoring is two-fold: 1) to alert project authorities and to provide timely information about the success or otherwise of the environmental and social management process outlined in the ESMF in such a manner that changes can be made to continually improve the process; and 2) to conduct a final evaluation to determine whether the mitigation measures in the sub- projects at Sapo Park (component 1) and the Communal Forest Management Plans have successfully restored, improved or worsened the pre-project environmental and social conditions, and to determine what further mitigation measures may be required. A number of indicators will be used to determine the status of affected people and their environment: land-use compared to the baseline, how many communal forests under management compared to before, are marginalized groups being included in decision- making and benefit-sharing, absence of conflicts etc. Therefore the project's environmental and social management process will set two major socio-economic goals by which to evaluate its success: * has the pre-project environmental state of natural resources, biodiversity, and flora & fauna been maintained or improved upon, and * the extent to which job opportunities at and access to forest resources around Sapo National Park by local communities have increased their livelihood opportunities. In order to assess whether these goals are met, FFI and FDA will indicate parameters to be monitored, institute monitoring milestones and provide resources necessary to monitor them. The following are some pertinent examples of parameters and verifiable indicators to be used to measure the ESMF process, mitigation plans and performance: * the number of people in the FDA, SNP, EPA, CECs, DECs, CFEC and local communities who successfully received ESMF training in screening and mitigation methods, evaluations of (trainee responses to) the content & methodology of the training; * the number of CFECs who have adopted the ESMF process as required for their Communal Forest Management Plans; the rate of adoption; * the quality and intensity of monitoring by SNP staff of sub-projects at the Park; * the number of conflicts between groups arising out of the project and the number to have been resolved successfully using the project's conflict resolution mechanisms; * the frequency and intensity of the CECs' and FDA's monitoring of the activities of CFECs; * the percentage of project-affected people are participating in communal forest activities; and * whether the EPA receives periodic monitoring reports of CFECs and the main related concerns of the EPA and FDA. 10.1 Monitoring Roles and Responsibilities" (refer to Figure 9.1) 10.1.1 Communal Forest Establishment Committee (CFEC) It is planned that environmental and social impacts and their mitigation measures are to be monitored during implementation (construction/rehabilitation works) and operation (including maintenance) stages of a CFMP. The roles and responsibilities for monitoring impacts and mitigation measures will be as follows: for type 2 investments, CFECs assisted by their service providers, the FDA and partner NGOs, will monitor the environmental and social impacts and mitigation measures of their CFMPs' activities as outlined in the completed screening forms, checklist and other documents in their individual application." Monitoring will be as regular and frequent as specified in the application and will maintain suitable records to be made available to FDA-Monrovia and the appropriate DEC & CEC. Monitoring will occur for all phases of the CFMP execution cycle, i.e., from planning to construction, operations and maintenance stages. CFECs will be responsible for monitoring the environmental and social impacts and mitigation measures resulting from the actions of their contractors, sub-contractors, transporters, suppliers, partner NGOs and all other third parties involved. CFECs, assisted by DECs, CECs and FDA, would be responsible for monitoring the environmental and social impacts and mitigation measures of their CFMP's activities in areas outside their sub-project sites, such as in nearby wetlands, rivers, forest areas, etc.

CFECs will be responsible for monitoring and evaluating any and all environmental and social impacts attributable to activities under the CFMP, and related mitigation measures. CFECs will prepare and submit periodic monitoring reports to their respective CEC and to the FDA. 10.1.2 County Environment Committee CECs will play the leading role in monitoring activities at SNP and of the CFECs. A CEC will carry out this role by ensuring that an implementer's12 environmental and social management plan (ESMP) contained in the cleared sub-project application/design package is implemented as specified. This means that CECs will monitor the implementer's monitoring procedures and reports on a regular basis, perhaps quarterly. They will rely on a bottom-up feed-back system to them from the implementers by going through their monitoring reports and making regular site visits to inspect and verify the nature and extent of impacts and the success or lack thereof of mitigation measures.

The CECs will prepare consolidated periodic monitoring reports for submission to the EPA and FDA. CECs will be assisted as possible by the project with equipment and transportation to carry out their task effectively. 10.1.3 The Forestry Development Authority The FDA will do on-the-ground ESMF performance reviews/audits both for enforcement purposes and to reinforce the training and to keep SNP staff, CFECs and County Environment Committees cognizant of their responsibilities. The FDA will carry out this role by reviewing in each sub-project location: (i) the completed screening form and application package prepared by the implementers as they are submitted to their respective County Environment Committee, (ii) the appraisal form completed by the County Environment Committee and the clearance decision contained therein, (iii) visits to a sample of sub- project locations in the park (Type I activities) or around it (Type 11activities) during

10 Capacity building requirements to achieve and sustain this are addressed in Section 8. " Application refers to the complete set of sub-project documents requiring environmental and social clearance including the completed screening forms, checklist, ESMP, technical designs, drawings, civil works contracts, etc. 12 "Implementers" refers to SNP staff for Type 1 activities and to CFECs for Type 2 activities.

54 construction to ensure construction/implementation activities occur as specified in the ESMP and in the civil works contract, and to ensure that after construction, the maintenance program is implemented as designed.

For Type 1 investments (when the SNP is implementing its own small scale infrastructure projects), the FDA will perform this same monitoring role as CFECs in section 10.1.1, but would report to the CEC, the FDA and to FFI directly (see Fig 9.2). 10.1.4 Fauna & Flora International FFI will provide technical assistance as described above, and will monitor the activities of the FDA (including SNP staff), CFECs and DECs/CECs by reviewing the monitoring reports and by conducting periodic technical audits of implementers. In addition to on-the-ground environmental reviews and implementing the training program, FFI will monitor as detailed in Section 8.0. FFI will report its findings to the FDA, MIA and the World Bank.

In conclusion, the system for monitoring functions on a bottom-up approach, on the one hand, in terms of placing monitoring responsibilities on the implementers and local communities who are then supervised and monitored by their CEC who in turn are accountable to the EPA and to FFI (for the duration of the project only). On the other hand, this system is made functional by the transfer of appropriate technology, capacity-building through training (mostly through learning-by-doing) and technical assistance. 10.2 Environmental and Social Management Plans (Table 10.1, 10.2 and 10.3) These environmental and social management plan consists of a set of mitigation, monitoring and institutional measures to be taken during implementation/construction and operations of the activities of the implementers, to eliminate adverse environmental and social impacts, offset them, or reduce them to acceptable levels.

55 Table 10.1 - Proposed Environmental and Social Management Plan for Type I activities

Plan for Tyve I activities (Component 1. imolemented by Sapo National Park staff)

Potential Social and Mitigation Measures Monitoring Phase/Stage Responsibility Costs Environmental Measures Negative Impacts 1.Deforestation Fully implement the ESMF, Periodic monitoring On-going throughout 1. Sapo National Park Contained in overall 2. Land degradation, PF, use screening form and and evaluation of the life of the sub- staff project costs including including soil erosion checklist (Annexes 3-5), target verifiable indicators for projects and project CFMP implementation such as all impacts identified in and beyond, thereby 2. County Environment 3. Water contamination mitigation measures 14 4. Disturbance of training in the use of modern the sub-projects' ensuring the Committees natural habitats and and appropriate technologies application as institutional wildlife in the design of small-scale described above. arrangements are 3.Forest Development 5.Degradation of infrastructure, environmental sustainable beyond the Authorityl 5 wetlands restoration, regular and life of the program. 4. Fauna & Flora 6. Social exclusion suitable maintenance of 6 7. Loss of land, loss of infrastructure/equipment, co- International' livelihoods, loss of ordinate patrols with assets, loss of access infrastructure design 5. Communal Forest Establishment to natural resources 1 7 8. Opening areas to Committees illegal access (miners, poachers, other) 6. SNP staff and CECs will be assisted by (see Section 7.0 of service providers and ESMF for complete will receive training lists)

13 The monitoring role of SNP staff is detailed in Section 10.1.3 '4 The monitoring role of County Environment Committee (CEC) is detailed in Section 10.1.2 15 The monitoring role of Forest Development Authority (FDA) is detailed in Section 10.1.3. 16 The monitoring role of Fauna & Flora International (FFI) is detailed in Section 10.1.4 17 TheMonitoring role of the Communal Forest Establishment Committee (CFEC) is detailed in Section 10.1.1 Table 10.2 - Proposed Environmental and Social Management Plan for Tvpe 2 Activities

Plan for TyDe 2 activities (Component 5. development sub-proiects and Communal Forest Management Plans) Potential Social and Mitigation Measures Monitoring Phase/Stage Responsibility Costs Environmental Measures Negative Impacts I.Deforestation, forest Fully implement the ESMF, PF, use Periodic monitoring and On-going throughout the 1.CFECs Built into project degradation & screening form and checklist evaluation of verifiable life of the project and costs; fragmentation (Annexes 3-5), target mitigation indicators for all impacts beyond (sustainable 2. FDA subsequently 2. Soil erosion & loss of measures such as training in the identified in the sub- institutional recurrent costs soil moisture use of modern and appropriate project ESMP arrangements are 3. MIA will be covered 3. Increased emission of technologies in the design of small- needed) by FDA, EPA greenhouse gases scale infrastructure, environmental 4. EPA and its CECs and MIA 4. Loss of flora + fauna restoration, regular and suitable 6. Increased disturbance maintenance of 5. FFI of ecosystems and loss infrastructure/equipment, co- of their regenerative ordinate patrols with infrastructure 6. CFECs and CECs will capacity design. be assisted by service Ensure sound technical (forester, providers and will zoologist, ecologist, economist) receive training input into the design of CFMPs. Emergency preparedness and response and environmental restoration. l_l _l_l _

57 Table 10.3 - Proposed Environmental and Social Management Plan for situations where OP 4.12 is triggered

Potential Social and Mitigation Measures Monitoring Phase/Stage Responsibility Costs Environmental Measures Negative Impacts Involuntary restriction of l.Consultations with and 1. Track the incomes of On-going and whenever 1'.Communal Forest Built into project access to Sapo National participation of all stakeholders local communities, CFECs and CFMPs Establishment/ costs; Park and associated including forest dwellers, especially those are cleared for Management subsequently protected areas, agriculturalists, etc. during displaced, and verify implementation Committees recurrent costs resulting in adverse preparation of the Communal Forest that forest resources are will be covered impacts on local Management Plans not declining (i.e. that 2. Forestry Development by FDA, EPA livelihoods local communities have Authority and MIA 2. Include conflict resolution sustainable livelihoods) mechanism(s) in Communal Forest 3. Ministry of Internal Management Plans 2. In cases where Affairs people and their 3. Measures to assist the displaced properties were 4. Environment persons in their efforts to improve impacted, determine if Protection Agency and their livelihoods, or at least to affected people have at its County Environment restore them, in real terms, while least restored their pre- Committees maintaining the sustainability of the project incomes/ Park. This would require measures economic conditions 5. Fauna & Flora ensuring affected people are International included and participate in activities of the Communal Forests and other 6. CFECs and CECs will development activities (Component be assisted by service 5.2). People with displaced providers and will livelihoods will be given preference receive training in local employment, too.

58 ANNEX 1 - References 1. The World Bank. Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet. 2. The World Bank, March 2004. Country Re-Engagement Note for Liberia. The World Bank, Washington DC. 3. Society for the Conservation of Nature of Liberia, 1998. Community Needs and Perspectives around Sapo National Park, Liberia. The Society for the Renewal of Nature Conservation in Liberia, California, USA. 4. Suter, J, 2001. An 18-Month Operational Plan for the Management and Development of Sapo National Park, Sinoe County, Liberia (draft). Fauna & Flora International, Cambridge, UK. 5. Suter, J, 2001. Report on the Workshop to Review the 1986 Integrated Management and Development Plan for Sapo National Park, to Develop an Operational Plan and to Outline a Long-term Management Plan for the Park, 17-21 March, 2001, Jalays Town, Sinoe County, Liberia. Fauna & Flora International, Cambridge, UK. 6. Magin, C and Suter, J, 2002. Report on the Workshops to Develop a 5-year Management Plan for Sapo National Park, 26-29 November 2002, Jalays Town, Sinoe County, and 2-5 December 2002, Monrovia, Liberia. Fauna & Flora International, Cambridge, UK. 7. Vohiri, A, 2002. A Study to Clarify the Protected Forest Types Officially/Legally Recognized in Liberia. Report prepared for the Liberia Forest Re-assessment Project, Fauna & Flora International, Monrovia, Liberia. 8. National Environmental Commission of Liberia, 2001. National Environmental Policy of Liberia. Government of Liberia, Monrovia, Liberia. 9. FDA, MIA and FFI, 2004. Draft Communal Forest Manual Outline. Prepared under the auspices of the Liberia Forest Re-assessment Project, FFI, Monrovia, Liberia. 10. GoL, 1976. An Act Creating the Forestry Development Authority. Government of Liberia Publishing Offices, Monrovia, Liberia. 11. Forestry Development Authority Regulation No.19. 12. GoL, 1988. The Constitution of the Republic of Liberia. Government of Liberia Publishing Offices, Monrovia, Liberia. 13. GoL, 2000. The New National Forestry Law of Liberia, April 6, 2000. Government of Liberia Publishing Offices, Monrovia, Liberia. 14. GoL, 2002. An Act Creating the Environment Protection Agency of the Republic of Liberia. Government of Liberia Publishing Offices, Monrovia, Liberia. 15. Gol, 2002. An Act Establishing the Environmental Protection and Management Law of Liberia. Government of Liberia Publishing Offices, Monrovia, Liberia. 16. Sambola, R and Murray, J, 2002. Report and Recommendations from the Sapo National Park Socio-economic Survey of March 2002. Fauna & Flora International, Monrovia, Liberia. 17. Parren, M and de Graaf, S,1995. The Quest for Natural Forest Management in Ghana, Cote d'lvoire and Liberia, Troppenbos series 13, Wageningen, Netherlands. ANNEX 2 - Summary of World Bank Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies

* Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01). Outlines Bank policy and procedure for the environmental assessment of Bank lending operations. The Bank undertakes environmental screening of each proposed project to determine the appropriate extent and type of EA process. This environmental screening process will apply to all sub- projects to be funded by BCSNP. * Natural Habitats (OP 4.04). The conservation of natural habitats, like other measures that protect and enhance the environment, is essential for long-term sustainable development. The Bank does not support projects involving the significant conversion of natural habitats unless there are no feasible alternatives for the project and its siting, and comprehensive analysis demonstrates that overall benefits from the project substantially outweigh the environmental costs. If the environmental assessment indicates that a project would significantly convert or degrade natural habitats, the project includes mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank. Such mitigation measures include, as appropriate, minimizing habitat loss (e.g. strategic habitat retention and post- development restoration) and establishing and maintaining an ecologically similar protected area. The Bank accepts other forms of mitigation measures only when they are technically justified. Should the sub-project-specific screening procedures indicate that natural habitats might be affected negatively by the proposed sub-project activities, such sub-projects will not be funded under the BCSNP. * Pest Management (OP 4.09). The policy supports safe, affective, and environmentally sound pest management. It promotes the use of biological and environmental control methods. An assessment is made of the capacity of the country's regulatory framework and institutions to promote and support safe, effective, and environmentally sound pest management. This policy will most likely not be triggered to BCSNP. * Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12). This policy covers direct economic and social impacts that both result from Bank-assisted investment projects, and are caused by (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. This policy is triggered by the BCSNP and therefore the project proponents prepared and disclosed the required Process Framework. * Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20). This directive provides guidance to ensure that indigenous peoples benefit from development projects, and to avoid or mitigate adverse effects of Bank-financed development projects on indigenous peoples. Measures to address issues pertaining to indigenous peoples must be based on the informed participation of the indigenous people themselves. Sub-projects that would have negative impacts on indigenous people will not be funded under BCSNP . * Forests (OP 4.36). This policy applies to the following types of Bank-financed investment projects: (a) projects that have or may have impacts on the health and quality of forests; (b) projects that affect the rights and welfare of people and their level of dependence upon or interaction with forests; and (c) projects that aim to bring about changes in the management, protection, or utilization of natural forests or plantations, whether they are publicly, privately, or communally owned. The Bank does not finance projects that, in its opinion, would involve significant conversion or degradation of critical forest areas or related critical habitats. If a project involves the significant conversion or degradation of natural forests or related natural habitats that the Bank determines are not critical, and the Bank determines that there are no feasible alternatives to the project and its siting, and comprehensive analysis demonstrates that overall benefits from the

60 project substantially outweigh the environmental costs, the Bank may finance the project provided that it incorporates appropriate mitigation measures. Sub-projects that are likely to trigger this OP are not expected. If any are proposed, FFI will ensure that the FDA and CEC are trained to apply the policy appropriately. * Cultural Property (OPN 11.03). The term "cultural property" includes sites having archeological (prehistoric), paleontological, historical, religious, and unique natural values. The Bank's general policy regarding cultural property is to assist in its preservation, and to seek to avoid its elimination. Specifically, the Bank (i) normally declines to finance projects that will significantly damage non-replicable cultural property, and will assist only those projects that are sited or designed so as to prevent such damage; and (ii) will assist in the protection and enhancement of cultural properties encountered in Bank-financed projects, rather than leaving that protection to chance. The management of cultural property of a country is the responsibility of the government. The government's attention should be drawn specifically to what is known about the cultural property aspects of the proposed project site and appropriate agencies, NGOs, or university departments should be consulted. If there are any questions concerning cultural property in the area, a brief reconnaissance survey should be undertaken in the field by a specialist. BCSNP will not fund sub-projects that will have negative impacts on cultural property. * Safety of Dams (OP 4.37). For the life of any dam, the owner is responsible for ensuring that appropriate measures are taken and sufficient resources provided for the safety to the dam, irrespective of its funding sources or construction status. The Bank distinguishes between small and large dams. Small dams are normally less than 15 m in height; this category includes, for example, farm ponds, local silt retention dams, and low embankment tanks. For small dams, generic dam safety measures designed by qualified engineers are usually adequate. This policy will not apply to BCSNP. * Projects on International Waterways (OP 7.50). The Bank recognizes that the cooperation and good will of neighbouring countries is essential for the efficient utilization and protection of international waterways and attaches great importance to neighbouring countries making appropriate agreements or arrangement for the entire waterway or any part thereof. Projects that trigger this policy include hydroelectric, irrigation, flood control, navigation, drainage, water and sewerage, industrial, and similar projects that involve the use or potential pollution of international waterways. OP 7.50 will not be triggered by the BCSNP. * Disputed Areas (OP/BPIGP 7.60). Project in disputed areas may occur the Bank and its member countries as well as between the borrower and one or more neighbouring countries. Any dispute over an area in which a proposed project is located requires formal procedures at the earliest possible stage. The Bank attempts to acquire assurance that it may proceed with a project in a disputed area if the governments concerned agree that, pending the settlement of the dispute, the project proposed can go forward without prejudice to the claims of the country having a dispute. This policy is not expected to be triggered by sub-projects. This policy will not be triggered by sub-projects to be funded by BCSNP.

61 ANNEX 3 - Environmental and Social Screening Form The Environmental and Social Screening Form is designed to assist evaluating design proposals for civil works construction/rehabilitation, and any investments in communal forest management plans or other development activities. The form is designed to place information in the hands of implementers and reviewers (i.e. the Forest Development Authority, local communities, and Environment Committees and environmental officers at the national, county and district levels) so that impacts and their mitigation measures, if any, are identified and/or requirements for further environmental analysis are determined.

This form contains information to allow reviewers to characterize prevailing local bio-physical conditions and social environment with the aim of assessing potential impacts on it. It will also help identify potential socio-economic impacts requiring mitigation measures and/or resettlement and compensation. This form is a suggested format but may be expanded in response to locally identified needs.

Location of proposed investments:

County:

Name of Village/Town/Area in which investment is to be made:

Name of contact person for sub-project:

Name of approving authority (e.g. National/County/District Environment Committee or the FDA):

Name, job title, and contact details for the person who is responsible for filling out this form- Name:

Job Title:

Location:

Telephone number:

Fax number:

E-Mail address:

Date:

Signature:

1. Description of Sub-project/Communal Forest Management Plan.

Provide information on the type and scale of the sub-project (sub-project area, flora and fauna, type and nature of proposed civil works, amount of construction related waste (solid, liquid and air generation), buried and or surface located pipes, etc.) including construction work areas and access roads, trees to be cut, and provide information on economic benefits, income generating activities, etc. (complete on a separate sheet of paper and attach).

2. The Natural Environment

62 (a) Describe the land formation, topography, vegetation in/adjacent to the sub-project area

(b) Estimate and indicate where vegetation might need to be cleared

(c) Are there any environmentally sensitive areas or threatened species (specify below) that could be adversely affected by the sub-project?

(i) Intact natural forests Yes No_

(ii) Riverine forest Yes No_

(iii) Wetlands (lakes, rivers, seasonally inundated areas) Yes No

(iv) How far are the nearest wetlands ((lakes, rivers, seasonally inundated areas)? km

(v) Habitats of endangered species for which protection is required under Liberian law and/or international agreements. Yes No_

(d) Protected areas:

Does the sub-project area (or components of the project) occur within/adjacent to any protected areas designated by government (national park, national reserve, world heritage site etc.)?

Yes No

If the project is outside of, but close to, a protected area? Is it likely to adversely affect the ecology within the protected area areas (e.g., interference with the migration routes of mammals or birds)?

Yes No_

(vi) Other noteworthy natural characteristics (describe).

63 If "Yes", to any one of the above, tick the following boxes as appropriate:

EJ The Environmental and Social Management Plan (EMSP) included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

El The Architectural and Engineering (technical) drawings, included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

El The proposed civil works contract included in this sub-project contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

3. Rivers and Lakes Ecology

Is there a possibility that, due to construction and operation of the project, any river and lake ecology will be adversely affected? Attention should be paid to water quality and quantity, the nature, productivity and use of aquatic habitats, and variations of these over time.

Yes No_

If "Yes", tick the following boxes as appropriate: EJ The Environmental and Social Management Plan included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

Li The Architectural and Engineering (technical) drawings, included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

LI The proposed civil works contract included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

4. Geology and Soils

Based upon visual inspection or available literature, are there areas of possible geologic or soil instability (erosion prone, landslide prone, subsidence-prone)?

Yes No_

Based upon visual inspection or available literature, are there areas that have risks of large scale increase in soil salinity?

Yes No_

If "Yes", to any one of the above, tick the following boxes as appropriate: Li The Environmental and Social Management Plan included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

LI The Architectural and Engineering (technical) drawings, included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

El The proposed civil works contract included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

64 5. Landscape/aesthetics

Is there a possibility that the sub-project will adversely affect the aesthetic attractiveness of the local landscape?

Yes No

If "Yes", tick the following boxes as appropriate: O The Environmental and Social Management Plan included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

LI The Architectural and Engineering (technical) drawings, included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

OL The proposed civil works contract included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

6. Historical, archaeological or cultural heritage site.

Based on available sources, consultation with local authorities, local knowledge and/or observations, could the sub-project alter any historical, archaeological or cultural heritage site or require excavation near same?

Yes No

If "Yes", tick the following boxes as appropriate: O The Environmental and Social Management Plan included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

O The Architectural and Engineering (technical) drawings, included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

O The proposed civil works contract included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

7. Resettlement and/or Land Acquisition

Will involuntary resettlement, land acquisition, or loss, denial or restriction of access to land and other economic resources be caused by the sub-project implementation?

Yes No_

If "Yes" Involuntary Resettlement OP 4.12 is triggered. Please refer to PF for appropriate mitigation measures to be taken.

8. Loss of Crops, Fruit Trees and Household Infrastructure

Will the project result in the permanent or temporary loss of crops, fruit trees and household infra-structure (such as granaries, outside toilets and kitchens, etc)?

Yes No_

65 If "Yes", tick the following boxes as appropriate: O The Environmental and Social Management Plan included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

LI The Architectural and Engineering (technical) drawings, included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

Oi The proposed civil works contract included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

9. Noise pollution during Construction and Operations.

Will the operating noise level exceed the allowable noise limits?

Yes No_

If "Yes", tick the following boxes as appropriate: O The Environmental and Social Management Plan included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

O The Architectural and Engineering (technical) drawings, included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

OL The proposed civil works contract included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

10. Solid or Liquid Wastes.

Will the sub-project generate hazardous solid or liquid wastes?

Yes_ No_

If "Yes", tick the following boxes as appropriate: LI The Environmental and Social Management Plan included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

OL The Architectural and Engineering (technical) drawings, included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

LI The proposed civil works contract included in this sub-project application contains measures to suitably address these impacts adequately.

11. Public Consultation

Has adequate public consultation and participation been sought?

Yes_ No_

If "Yes", describe briefly the measures taken to this effect.

66 CERTIFICATION sub- We certify that we have thoroughly examined all the potential adverse effects of this in project application. To the best of our knowledge, the proposed sub-project as described the application and appended design reports (e.g. ESMP, Process Framework requirements, to completed screening form, proposed civil works contract, etc.), if any, will be adequate avoid or minimize all adverse environmental and social impacts.

Representative of the sub-project implementer/proponent (signature):

Service Provider (signature):

......

Date: ......

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY - Desk Appraisal by County Environment Committee/Forest Development Authority possible decisions:

The sub-project application can be considered for approval. [The application is complete, all significant environmental or social issues are resolved, and no further subproject planning is required.]

A field appraisal is required. A field appraisal must be carried out if the sub-project: * Needs to acquire land, or an individual or community's access to land or available resources is affected or changed, or any individual or family is displaced; that * Encroaches onto an important natural habitat, restricts access to resources within area, or may affect ecologically sensitive ecosystems (e.g. forests, rivers, streams, wetlands); * Involves, or results in: a) diversion or use of surface waters; b) construction and/or rehabilitation of latrines, septic or sewage systems; c) production of waste (e.g. fuel waste, medical waste, etc); d) new or rebuilt drainage systems; or e) reservoirs or water points.

The following issues need to be clarified at the sub-project site: ......

A field appraisal report will be completed and added to the sub-project file.

Name of County Environmental Officer (print): ......

Signature: ......

Date: ......

67 ANNEX 4- Environmental and Social Appraisal Form one is The Environmental and Social Screening Form is to be used during field appraisals if deemed necessary from the screening process. It is designed to assist evaluating design forest proposals for civil works construction/rehabilitation, and any investments in communal management plans or other development activities. The form is designed to place information in the hands of implementers and reviewers (i.e. the Forest Development the Authority, local communities, and Environment Committees and environmental officers at are national, county and district levels) so that impacts and their mitigation measures, if any, identified and/or requirements for further environmental analysis are determined.

This form contains information to allow reviewers to characterize prevailing local bio-physical It will conditions and social environment with the aim of assessing potential impacts on it. also help identify potential socio-economic impacts requiring mitigation measures and/or in resettlement and compensation. This form is a suggested format but may be expanded response to locally identified needs.

Sub-project Application Number:......

Part 1: Identification

1. Sub-project name:

2. Location in/around Sapo National Park:

3. Reason for Field Appraisal: Summarize the issues from the ESMF checklist that determined the need for a Field Appraisal.

4. Date(s) of Field Appraisal:

5. Field Appraisal Officer and Address:

6. Service Provider Representative and Address:

7. Community Management Board Representative and Address:

Part 2: Description of the Sub-project Application in the 8. Sub-project Application Details: Provide details that are not adequately presented of sub-project application. If needed to clarify sub-project application details, attach sketches the subproject component(s) in relation to the forest, community and to existing facilities.

Part 3: Environmental and Social Issues

9. Will the sub-project: Need to acquire land? Yes ...... Affect an individual or the community's access to land or available resources? Yes .No. * Displace or result in the involuntary resettlement of an individual or family? Yes .No.

If "Yes", tick one of the following boxes:

68 o The provisions of the Process Framework have been complied with in the subproject application/ design. No further action required. u The actions proposed in compliance with the Process Framework included in the subproject application must be improved before the application can be considered further. o The provisions of the Process Framework have not been complied with. These provisions must be complied with and approved before the application can be considered further.

10. Will the project: * Encroach onto an important natural habitat? Yes...... No. * Negatively affect ecologically sensitive ecosystems? Yes ... No.

If "Yes", tick one of the following boxes: o The Environmental and Social Management Planincluded in the sub-project application is adequate. No further action required. z The ESMP included in the sub-project application must be improved before the application can be considered further. u An ESMP must be prepared and approved before the application can be considered further.

11. Will this project involve or result in:

* Diversion or use of surface waters? * Construction and/or rehabilitation of latrines, septic or sewage systems? . Production of waste (e.g. slaughterhouse waste, medical waste, etc.)? * New or rebuilt irrigation or drainage systems? * Felling of trees? * Adversely affects endangered species?

If "Yes", tick one of the following boxes: o The application describes suitable measures for managing the potential adverse environmental effects of these activities. No further action required. o The application does not describe suitable measures for managing the potential adverse environmental effects of these activities. An Environmental and Social Management Plan must be prepared and approved before the application is considered further.

12. Are there any other environmental or social issues that have not been adequately addressed?

If "Yes", summarize them:

and tick one of the following boxes:

C1 Before it is considered further, the application needs to be amended to include suitable measures for addressing these environmental or social issues.

69 cl An Environmental and Social Management Plan needs to be prepared and approved before the application is considered further.

Part 4: Field Appraisal Decision o The sub-project application can be considered for approval. [Based on a site visit and consultations with all important interested and affected parties, the field appraisal determined that the proposed sub-project application adequately addresses environmental and/or social issues as required by the BCSNP's ESMF and meets the requirements of all relevant Environment and Forest Acts in Liberia, the requirements of the EPA, the FDA and the World Bank Safeguard Policies.] o Further subproject preparation work is required before the application can be considered further.

The field appraisal has identified environmental and/or social issues that have not been adequately addressed. The following work needs to be undertaken before further consideration of the application:

All required documentation such as an amended application, ESMP, process framework requirements, screening forms, draft civil works contracts, etc., will be added to the sub- project application package before it is considered further.

Name of County Environmental Officer (print): ......

Signature: ......

Date:a.. .

70 ANNEX 5 - Indicative Environmental and Social Mitigation Measures Checklist This list should be updated with reference to the local and evolving context in Liberia.

Land Degradation Water Bio-diversity, Natural Habitats People and Wetlands

Planning Soil Erosion: i) Promote potable water and i) Consider altemative siting of i) Discourage involuntary sanitation sub-projects. sub-projects. settlement allowed due to land (i)Training of Subsistence and Cash Crop ii) Promote environmental health ii) Reduce biomass use through acquisition, denial or restricton of Farmers and Pastoralists on soil measures and public health altemative energy sources and access to economic resources conservation methods. education. construction materials (cooking such as trees, buildings etc., used (ii) Rehabilitate anti-erosion infrastructure iii) Improve management of stoves, photo-voltaic). by members of communities. such as, micro-basins, micro dams, hill side household and solid waste, iii) Strengthen natural resource ii) Provide social services: terracing, soil bunds etc. including infrastructure for management capacities . Primary education (iii)Construct new anti-erosion infrastructure collection and treatment of liquid iv) Develop altematives to slash . Primary health care as listed in (ii) above. waste and waste water. and buming clearing. . Water supply (iv) Introduce crop rotation management, iv) Review, update and enforce v) Promote agro-forestry. . Micro-finance use of fertilizers, tree planting and soil pollution control legislation. vi) Wetlands management and . Feeder roads drainage. v) Strengthen enforcement small irrigation development. . Soil conservabon and (v) control bush buming and fires. capacity. vii) Protect sensitve ecosystems natural resources vi) Protection of roadsides by planting of vi) Develop and implement rural such as sensitive areas of the management. vegetation. water supply and sanitation forests and wetlands. Ensure these services are vii) Protection of outlet of drainage canals policy. viii) Enforce existing laws. equitably distributed throughout and culverts to avoid gully forming vii) Locate sub-projects at far/safe ix) Locate trails so that hunting, the districts and that access is downstream of the canal or culvert. distances from water points and mining, other encroachment is open to all ethnic groups viii) Prepare an effective and sustainable sources. minimised; co-ordinate patrols. irrespectve of status. maintenance plan. viii) Increase public awareness. x) Training of communites of iii) Ensure social inclusion of all sustainable uses of resources. vulnerable groups, including war xi) Promote awareness of species affected people (IDPs, retumees, of trees, plants and animals that orphans, the elderiy etc.) at all must be protected. levels of decision-making and xii) Exclude ecosystems that implementabon. provided and important habitat for iv) provide employment protected species. opportunities during contracting of xiii) Establish buffer zones around civil works etc. protected parks and wetlands * Construction to occur in dry season. Protect soil surfaces during construction. Constru_Uon . Employ unskilled labor from local districts and semi-skilled labor first from local districts when available. . Source goods and services from local districts first, when available. . Control and daily cleaning at construction sites. . Provide adequate waste disposal services. Proper disposal of chemicals and other hazardous . Dust materials. control by water, appropriate design and siting, restrict construction to certain times. . Appropriate and suitable storage of building materials on site. . Siting of latrines at safe distances from wells and other water points and using closed systems for sewage drainage. . Restrict construction to certain hours . Minimize loss of natural vegetation during construction; altemative sites; various special * Restoration measures for sensitive species of vegetation; cleanup of construction sites. . Safety designs (signage) . Ensure availability of clean potable water for use in latrines, . Use appropriate canteens and for drinking. building materials. No asbestos etc. Day-to-day i) Use facilities/infrastructure as designed and as intended. operations ii) Employ trained staff to man and secure facilities; provide iii) Log and report training as needed. any damages done and repairs needed. iv) Perform periodic monitoring of al aspects as contained in the sub-project Environmental and Social Monitoring Plan. i) Prepare and adopt suitable maintenance plan. Maintenance ii) Maintain appropriate budget necessary to implement iii) Implement maintenance plan. maintenance plan in two stages: for activities longer/periodic requiring day-to-to maintenance such term maintenance. as repairs to damages done, regular inspections iv) Have suitably trained staff etc and to carry out maintenance and access to materials/goods/equipment.

72