Gold Standard for the Global Goals Stakeholder Consultation Report

Version 1 – July 2017

SECTION A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

A. 1. Title of the project

Title: GS5658 VPA 18: Water is Life, Madagascar Date: 15/06/2020 Version no: 02

A. 2. Project description and current status The micro-scale voluntary Project Activity (VPA) “Water is Life, Madagascar” is developed by an Italian Associazione Mondobimbi Veneto onlus (later referred as Mondobimbi) in collaboration with Carbonsink.

The project foresees to provide safe drinking water for the local families living in the surroundings of the city of Tulear (village of Miary Ville), in the Region of Atsimo-Andreafana, Madagascar. The construction of the first safe water system started in June 2019 and ended in September 2019.

In this semi-desert area in the south-west of the island, the project area, the lack of drinking water is the cause of various diseases that afflict adults and children, including typhus, pest and malaria. Moreover, the inhabitants are forced to long daily journeys to reach the few sources of water supply, and this activity is in most cases carried out by women and children. Local people typically use boiling with firewood or charcoal to purify their drinking water. This process results in the release of greenhouse gas emissions from the wood combustion.

The project is addressed to supply safe drinking water for domestic use and consequently to improve the hygiene, social, economic and environmental issues related to the water consume. Morover, verifiable Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emission reductions are achieved through the reduced wood/charcoal combustion and the need for water purification through boiling is reduced. The project will also raise awareness among population regarding hygiene and contribute to sustainable development.

The current project status and key dates of the project can be summarized as follows: 16/07/2018: Groupped Stakeholder Consultation life meeting was organized on 16th of July 2018. This stakeholder consultation live meeting was planned with target to apply it also for the future VPAs implemented in the same area1.

15/05/2019: The construction activities of the safe water system started in May 2019 within the project area of GS10659. 22/09/2019: The crediting period start of GS10659. Current Status (15/06/2020): The internal validation of the project GS10659 on-going.

1 The same live meeting can be applied for the future VPAs when the following conditions are fullfilled: 1) The VPA is implemented in the surroundings of the city of Tulear in Atsimo-Andreafana Region, 2) The VPA includes the installation of ‘zero emission’ water supply system/systems 3) The VPA is implemented by Assiociazione Mondobimbi Veneto Onlus, and 4) The VPA implementation start date is within 3 years from the date of grouped stakeholder consultation approval.

SECTION B. DESIGN OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION PROCESS

B. 1. Design of physical meeting(s)

i. Agenda

The consultation meeting was designed and organized following the Gold Standard guidelines regaring the stakeholder consultation process available at the time i.e. in line with “Gold Standard for the Global Goals Stakeholder Consultation & Engagement Procedure, Requirements & Guidelines version 1.1. (Published March 2018)”. The meeting followed the below agenda including all the points required these guidelines:

1. Opening of the meeting 2. Explanation of the project 3. Questions for clarification about project expalantion 4. Sustainable development and its monitoring 5. Discussion on continuous input /grievance mechanism 6. Closure of the meeting

ii.Key project information

Title of Project: Title: GS5658 VPA 18: Water is Life, Madagascar GS ID: GS10659

Title of the PoA: GS5658 “PoA – Climate Finance for Sustainable Development”

Brief description of Project: The micro-scale voluntary Project Activity (VPA) “Water is Life, Madagascar” is developed by an Italian Associazione Mondobimbi Veneto Onlus in collaboration with Carbonsink.

In targeted areas, many families do not have access to safe and clean drinking water and, moreover, long

daily journeys are needed to reach the water sources in these semi-desert areas. Many health problems are linked to the use of unsafe drinking water: a high incidence of diseases such as diarrhea, intestinal infections, and parasites. Local people typically use boiling with firewood or charcoal to purify their drinking water. This process results in the release of greenhouse gas emissions from the wood combustion.

The project is addressed to supply safe drinking water for domestic use and consequently to improve the hygiene, social, economic and environmental issues related to the water consume. Moreover, verifiable Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emission reductions are achieved through the reduced wood/charcoal combustion and the need for water purification through boiling is reduced. The project will also raise awareness among population regarding hygiene and contribute to sustainable development.

Expected Implemetation Date: 15/05/2019 Expected duration of Project: Expected duration of the project is 15 years

Project Developer: Associazione Mondobimbi Veneto Onlus (Mondobimbi)

Project Representative: Carbonsink Group S.r.l (Carbonsink)

Project Participants and any communities N/A involved:

Version of PDD: 03 Date of Version: 15/06/2020

Host Country / Location: Madagascar

Certification Pathway (Project Impact Statements & Products Certificatin/Impact Statements & Products

Activity Requirements applied: Community Services Activity Requirements (version 1.2) (mark GS4GG if none relevant)

Methodologies applied: Technologies and practices to displace decentralized thermal energy consumption (TPDDTEC), version 3.1

Product Requirements applied: N/A

Regular/Retroactive: Regular

SDG Impacts: 1 – SDG 13: Climate Action 2 – SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being 3 – SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation 4 – SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

Estimated amount of SDG Impact Certified SDG 13: Annually 9,220 Verified Emission Reductions (VERs) SDG 3: People are suffering less of diarrhea and other water-borne diseases in the project scenarion compared to the baseline scenario. Totally 2,590 additional persons using safe water in the project activity compared to the baseline scenario SDG 6: 2,877 additional persons having access to a safe water source in the project activity compared to the baseline scenario SDG 12: Annually at least one campaign on water, sanitation and health related issues made in the project area

iii.Invitation tracking table

Category Organisation (if Name of Way of Date of Confirmation code relevant) invitee invitation invitation received? Y/N

C DNA of Lantonirina Email 22/06/2018 N Madagascar Ratovonjanah ary E Gold Standard N/A Email 20/06/2018 N

F Mercy Corps David Email 21/06/2018 N Nicholson F REEEP Katrin Harvey Email 21/06/2018 N

F WWF International Bella Roscher Email 21/06/2018 N

F World Vision Dean Email 21/06/2018 N Thomson

F HELIO International N/A Email 21/06/2018 N

B ANDRIANJAFI Letter Y NAIVO 19/06/2018 Toliara Prefect LAHINIRINA Edward B Head of Region Letter Y RABE JULES 22/06/2018 ATSIMO Colonel ANDREFANA

B District Chief HERVEY A. Letter 22/06/2018 Y TOLIARA 2 RATSIHOBIRY

B REGIONAL RASAMIMAN Letter 22/06/2018 Y DIRECTOR OF ANA WATER Region Onjaniaina Atsimo Andrefana Vonimalala

B REGIONAL Letter 22/06/2018 Y DIRECTOR OF RAKOTOHAR POPULATION O Tiaray Region Atsimo Eugenie Andrefana

B HELSON Letter Y DEPUTY OF BRISSON MADAGASCAR 28/06/2018 ERAFA dit TOLIARA 2 Jube

B Tulear RABEHAJA Letter Y 19/06/2018 Municipality/Major Jean

B Tulear ZAFINDRAVO Letter Y Municipality/Vice LA Niny 19/06/2018 Major Augustine

B Tulear Letter Y RAMAHA Municipality/Secret 19/06/2018 Rakotoniana ary General

B EVELOGNOM Letter Y Tulear BIASA Municipality/Respo TAGNANAND 19/06/2018 nsible of RO Abolaza communication Slim

A VILLAGE CHIEF RAMIARISON Letter 20/06/2018 Y AMBOHITSABO Raymond

A FANAMPINIM Letter 20/06/2018 Y LOCAL PEOPLE ARO Jean AMBOHITSABO Philippe

A VILLAGE CHIEF Letter 20/06/2018 Y JEAN CLAUDE TSOKOBORY

A LOCAL PEOPLE Letter 20/06/2018 Y JULES TSOKOBORY

A VILLAGE CHIEF BOUDA Letter 20/06/2018 Y ANDABOLY ANDRE

A RANDRIAMBA Letter 23/06/2018 Y VILLAGE CHIEF HINY ALEXIS ANTARAVAY JEROME

A RASOLO Letter 23/06/2018 Y VILLAGE CHIEF EDMOND BETSINGILO JOSEPH

A VILLAGE CHIEF NAMBOATSE Letter 23/06/2018 Y AMBOLOFOTY ALBERT

F WelthHungerHilte Letter 21/06/2018 Y Director TOLIARA

D COLLEGE ETIENNE Letter 21/06/2018 Y DE FLANCOURT Director Toliara

D COLLEGE JOLIS Letter 21/06/2018 Y Director MOINEAUX Toliara

A LOCAL PEOPLE Letter 28/06/2018 Y RANOELINY ATSOKOBORY

A LOCAL PEOPLE Letter 28/06/2018 Y ROZINIANA ATSOKOBORY

A TOVONDRAI Letter 28/06/2018 Y LOCAL PEOPLE NY ATSOKOBORY FRANQUELIN E

A LOCAL PEOPLE ALEXIS Letter 28/06/2018 Y ANDABOLY RAMARO A LOCAL PEOPLE NOROVELO Letter 28/06/2018 Y ANDABOLY SAMBA

A LOCAL PEOPLE Letter 28/06/2018 Y ZARA ANTARAVAY

A LOCAL PEOPLE REDOKO Letter 28/06/2018 Y ANTARAVAY LOUIS

A LOCAL PEOPLE ZARA Letter 28/06/2018 Y ANTARAVAY GABRIEL

A RASOAMIHAJ Letter 28/06/2018 Y LOCAL PEOPLE Y EUGENIE ANTARAVAY JULIA

A LOCAL PEOPLE RASENDRAS Letter 28/06/2018 Y ANTARAVAY OA THERESE

A LOCAL PEOPLE Letter 29/06/2018 Y RA MICHEL BETSINGILO

A LOCAL PEOPLE Letter 29/06/2018 Y FRANKLINE BETSINGILO

A LOCAL PEOPLE RAZAFIMAN Letter 29/06/2018 Y AMBOLOFOTY GA HELENE

A LOCAL PEOPLE Letter 29/06/2018 Y HERLINE AMBOLOFOTY

A LOCAL PEOPLE SOAMAMY Letter 29/06/2018 Y AMBOLOFOTY LAURENCE

A RASOANIRIN Letter 29/06/2018 Y LOCAL PEOPLE A VALERIE AMBOLOFOTY JULIETTE

A LOCAL PEOPLE KAMIHA Letter 29/06/2018 Y AMBOLOFOTY SYLVESTRE

A Local stakeholders N/A Poster 06/07/2018 N

As show in the above table different invitation methods (both public as direct invitations were used) in line with the Gold Standard requirements2 to ensure that the invitations would reach a board range of stakeholders. All the local invitations were made using the local laguage Malagasy. The invitations included also indications for those not able to attend the physical meeting about the methods in which they could provide their feedback (via email or telephone). Moreover, the invited persons were enouraged to extend the invitation to the enventual other stakeholders or other intrested persons.

2 Gold Standard for the Global Goals Stakeholder Consultation & Engagement Procedure, Requirements & Guidelines version 1.1. (Published March 2018) i.e. the latest version of this guideline available at the time.

iv. Text of individual invitations

Invitations for the physical meeting were made through public poster invitation and individual invitations made via emails and letters. When possible the project summary and official invitation letter were attached to the invitations. Individual invitations were made to the representatives of the local administrative and technical authorities, local village chiefs and local and international NGOs as well as the Gold Standard representatives and supporters 2-4 weeks before the meeting date. The personal invitations were made via email or via direct letters. The invited persons were encouraged to speard the invitation freely to any interested person or other stakeholder.

Below are presented examples of invitation emails and letters made in English and in Malagasy.

Figure 1. Screenshot of the invitation email send to the GS and GS NGO supporters on 19th of June 2018

Figure 2. Example of invitation letter attached to the sent invitations

Figure 3. Example of the Project Summary attached to the sent invitations

v. Text of public invitations

Figures 4-5. Example of the poster which was exposed together with the Project Summary Placing a poster invitation was identified as the most effective way of publicizing the consultation meeting for locally and for reacing a board range of the stakeholders. The desing of the poster itself was kept very simple so it was easy for the local stakeholders to read and understand. Moreover, the posters were accompanied with the Project Summary (see Fugure 3) for furher details. The posters were placed in Afaka Village, at Villa Star No. 3, West Bethany 10 days before the meeting date. This place is a strategic place as it is widely frequented by the persons of different ages, gender and the ethnical group living in the project area.

The translation of poster: Project “Water is Life”, Stakeholder Consultation, Monday 16 July 2018 at 10 o’clock, Village Afaka Toliara, Villa Star n°3, Betania Ouest, Toliara.

B. 2. Description of other consultation methods used

The invited persons were encouraged to spread the invitation to any other interested person or relevant stakeholder as well as to give their feedback using the given contact details in case they were not able to participate the physical meeting. Moreover, all the particpats of the meeting were encouraged to spread information within their communities and organizations about the project and about the possibility of making questions and giving inputs/grievance via the shared contact details. No comments via email or other means were anyhow received.

SECTION C. CONSULTATION PROCESS

C. 1. Participants’ in physical meeting(s)

i. List of participants

The meeting was attended all together by 55 persons (from which 22 women (40%) and 33 men (60%)). Within the participants there were present for example the representators of the local authorities from quarter (village), district and regional level as well as and communities (village chefs and normal local persons). The scanned version of the original participants’ list is showed in Annex 1.

Participants list Date and time: 16/07/2018 Location: Toliara, Madagascar Category Name of participant, Male/ Signature Organisation (if Contact details Code job/ position in the Female relevant) community Hervey Auguste Chef District B M See the original 032 04 701 93 RATSIHOBIRY Toliara 2 Adjoint au Maire de la Commune M 034 91 182 56 B EFAHAMANA Henri See the original Betsinjake Toliara 2

Adjoint au Maire ZAFINDRAVOLA B F See the original de la Commune 033 83 071 55 Niry Augustine Urbaine Toliara

CSRSE Direction RANDRIANILAINA régionale Eau, B M See the original 034 41 555 92 Herimampionina assainissement hygiène

Chargé de communication de M 034 05 052 42 B RETANA See the original la Commune urbaine Toliara

Habitante au SOAMAMAY A F See the original Quartier Laurence Ambolofoty

Habitante au RASENDRASOA A F See the original Quartier 033 02 300 55 Thérèse Antaravay

Habitante au A YOLANDE F See the original Quartier Antsokobory

Habitante au A RANOELINE Zotoliny F See the original Quartier Antsokobory

Habitante au A ROSINAINA F See the original Quartier 034 39 984 49 Antsokobory

Habitante au RAZANANDRIAKE A F See the original Quartier Perline Ambolofoty

Habitante au A PERLINE F See the original Quartier Ambolofoty

MAMPIONONA Habitante au A Tovondrainy F See the original Quartier 034 55 125 50 Antsokobory Franckline Nautaire au RAHONIZAFY A M See the original Quartier 034 70 540 00 Themon Samontilahy

Habitante au A NAENGA Martine F See the original Quartier 034 32 330 41 Ambolofoty

Habitante au RAZAFINDRATIANA A F See the original Quartier Justine Ambolofoty

Habitante au SOAMANDIMBY A F See the original Quartier 033 28 483 49 ORELINE Ambolofoty

Habitante au ZIARINIRINA Denise A F See the original Quartier 033 37 741 76 Nathalie Ambolofoty

Habitante au A LAURA Marie F See the original Quartier Betsingilo

Habitante au A FRANCKLINE Noro F See the original Quartier 032 50 951 14 Betsingilo

Habitante au RAZAFIMANGA A F See the original Quartier Hélène Betsingilo

Habitante au RASOANIRINA A F See the original Quartier 034 19 034 37 Valérie Juliette Ambolofoty

Habitante au A BOUDA Cathérine F See the original Quartier 033 07 201 84 Andaboly

Habitant au A REDOKO Loris M See the original Quartier 033 01 812 82 Antaravay

Habitant au A KAMIMA M See the original Quartier 033 20 665 42 Ambolofoty

Habitant au A Christophe M See the original Quartier 033 09 065 01 Tsinjoriake

Habitant au A TOVONELY M See the original Quartier 033 14 954 16 Andaboly

Habitant au A TSIHETSY M See the original Quartier Tsinjoriake

Habitant au RAZAFITIA A M See the original Quartier 033 04 595 54 Ratsimihanta Betsingilo

Habitant au RANDRIAMANANTE A M See the original Quartier 032 63 964 59 NA Jocelyn Andaboly

Habitant au RAZAFIMANDIMBY A M See the original Quartier 033 48 258 37 Samuel Antsamontilahy

Habitant au A RAZAKANDRAINY M See the original Quartier Antsamontilahy

Habitant au A RENAMBO Félix M See the original Quartier 033 49 228 82 Andaboly

MANDAMBOATSE Chef du Quartier B M See the original 033 05 436 36 Albert Ambolofoty Chef du Quartier M 032 04 458 80 B RALAY VOAVY See the original Antsamontilahy

Notaire au ANDRIANATOZY A M See the original Quartier Solovay Antsamontilahy

Habitante au B Cathérine HOVA F See the original Quartier Betsingilo

CHef du Secteur M 032 69 307 54 B JULES See the original Antsongobory

CHef du Quartier M 032 48 983 59 B Jean CLAUDE See the original Antsongobory

CHef du Quartier M B JEAN PHILIPPE See the original Ambohitsabo

CHef du Quartier M 034 49 786 49 B BOUDA André See the original Andaboly

Habitante au A RASOANIRINA F See the original Quartier 033 24 965 37 Andaboly

Habitant au A NESTOR M See the original Quartier Antsinjoriake

Habitant au A LUCIEN M See the original Quartier 033 63 001 31 Antsinjoriake

Habitant au A EDSON Joseph M See the original Quartier Antsinjoriake

Habitant au A PEPIN M See the original Quartier Antsinjoriake

Habitant au A REVEZO M See the original Quartier Antsinjoriake

Habitant au A VENANCE M See the original Quartier Antsinjoriake

Habitant au A REMOND M See the original Quartier Antsinjoriake

Habitant au A SONDROTA M See the original Quartier Antsinjoriake

Habitant au A RAFIDISON M See the original Quartier 034 38 271 57 Antsinjoriake

Habitant au A Albert Samin M See the original Quartier 033 71 677 44 Antsinjoriake

Chef du Quartier M 033 49 969 14 B ALEXIS Gerome See the original Antsamotilahy

Chef du Quartier M 032 78 078 67 B RAMISELY See the original Betsingilo

Chef du Quartier B RASOLO Edmond M See the original Qdjoint à 034 76 811 65 Betsingilo

ii. Evaluation forms The scanned evaluation forms (filled in Malagasy) are available in the Annex 2. Totally 30 Evaluation Form were received and they were filled both by woman (9 forms) and men participants (21 forms). Below are presented, as an example, five of the evaluation forms translated to English.

Name ZAFINDRAVOLA Niny Augustine Gender Female What is your impression of the meeting? I am satisfied with the meeting, I saw a good organization on the welcome of the guests What do you like about the project? Everyone was attentive and took part in answering the questions. So there was a massive participation. What do you not like about the project? It is necessary to make known to the public the existence of the activities that the association carries out because it is still unknown to the population of Toliara. Signature See the original

Name RANDRIANILAINA Herimampionona Gender Male What is your impression of the meeting? This is a success because there is participation of the Vice-President of the Malagasy National Assembly, the representative of the District of Toliara 2, representative of the Toliara Urban What do you like about the project? Involvement of all the local authorities and institutions concerned, objective in drinking water supply to the population, vision regarding the standardization of the works to be put in place. What do you not like about the project? Recommendation: it requires the commitment of the municipality and the heads of local neighborhoods Signature See the original

Name Hervey Auguste RATSIHOBIRY Gender Male

What is your impression of the meeting? In general, this meeting leads us more in knowledge to which the activities of the “Water is Life” project are oriented What do you like about the project? It help the neediest population What do you not like about the project? - Signature See the original

Name TOVONELY Phillipe Jean Senge Gender Male What is your impression of the meeting? This meeting, for me, allows a

development of the municipality and each neighborhood What do you like about the project? What I liked was the change that this project brings to the commune and each neighborhood. What do you not like about the project? Nothing displeases me. Signature See the original

Name CATHERINE Hova Séraphine Gender Female What is your impression of the meeting? The meeting is fine with me and what was

said was clear about access to drinking water. What do you like about the project? The possibility for us to have access to drinking water to drink, wash, irrigate agriculture and feed pets. What do you not like about the project? There is nothing that I do not like. For me, everything pleases me. Signature See the original

C. 2. Pictures from physical meeting(s)

C. 3. Outcome of consultation process

i. Minutes of physical meeting(s)

1. Opening of the meeting The stakeholder life meeting was opened by Project Leader Mr. RAZAFIMBOLATIANA Dera Mampionona with the welcoming speech and with an introduction of himself and the Mondobimbi Veneto Onlus association that he represents. Furthermore, he continued with the introduction to the meeting and it’s scope which was to share information on the planned activities and to gather feedback, comments and suggestions for the participants. At this stage the project participants introduced themselves and signed the participant list. Totally 55 participants were presents. During the meeting, all the speeches were held in Malagasy for the comprehension of all the participants.

2. Explanation of the project After this, the meeting continued by presenting the project based on the Project Summary distributed to the participants (figure 3 in section B.1). First of all, the Project Leader spoke about the importance of clean water in daily life and the introduced the construction plan of the new wells. It was explained that carbon dioxide emissions will be reduced when the use of charcoal or wood used to boil water for purification purposes is reduced. Moreover, further explanations were given regarding the functioning of the water system envisaged by the project and regarding the carbon credits and the transfer of their ownership. After the speech of Project Leader, the following speakers made short interventions:

• The Deputy Mayor of the Urban Commune of Toliara, Mrs ZAFINDRAVOLO Niny Augustine. • The district chief of Toliara II, HERVEY A. RATSIHOBIRY • The Deputy of Madagascar elected in Toliara II and Vice-President of the National Assembly, HELSON BRISSON ERAFA dit Jube All of them thanked the Mondobimbi Veneto Onlus association and referred to the high importance of the project and the collaboration with stakeholders. Aslo the importance of access to water for the social-economic development of area/country was highlighted by the speakers. They all referred or recommended to create a sense of belonging to this project and to take responsibility and protection of the common good.

3. Questions for clarification about project explanation. After the project presentation, the participants were encouraged by the Project Leader to make questions and give comments on the project. During the discussion the participants expressed to appreciate especially the project’s scope to provide safe drinking water to the local community. The projects contribution to environmental protection and climate mitigation were also appreciated. Moreover, the project was considered in generally important for the local communities. Some stakeholders expressed suggestion about the maintenance of the wells for a good performance of the water systems, the Project Leader ensured that a decent management and monitoring activities are planned for this project (i.e. regular water quality analysis). The main comments and suggestions are reported in the below paragraph iii “Assessment of all comments”.

4. Sustainable development and its monitoring After the general discussion of the planned project, the eventual impacts of the project and the means and possibilities to monitor these impacts were evaluated together with the help of the pre- established indicator list: the participants were ask to indicate their opinion on project’s impact on the different sustainable development and safeguarding principle aspects (environmental, social, economic) . Project Leader declaimed the indicators one by one and volunteers counted those who raised their hands for different scorings for each indicator (negative, positive or no impact). The detailed results for each indicator are reported in the Section D.2 of this report. As a summary the project was evaluated by the participants to have mostly only positive impacts (i.e. access to clean water, less fuel consumption, improvement of the local economy). As a risks or negative impacts the participants identified, based on the previous borehole projects, the possibility that the water is contaminated with the salt. Regarding the absence of impact, few participants affirmed that the project will not have impact on the erosion and the quality of the soil. For further information refer to the table below. The safeguarding principle and SDG assessment was carried out together applying a simplified “blind assessment” approach adapted for the local context .

Indicator Scores accounted by Final Score Comments on the raised hands eventual risks and mitigation measures

Negative impact: Score ‘-’ in case negative impact or

risk of a negative impact No change in impact: score ‘0’

Positive impact: score’+’

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Water quality “+” 52/ “0“ 3 Positive Positive votes: The quality of the consumed water will be good. No impact votes: There is a risk that the boreholes are not maintained and will not work after some years. This can be mitigated by regular and decent mainteinance activities.

Natural water patterns/flows “0“ 55 No impact No relevant impacts were identified by the participants.

Water quantity “0“ 55 No impact No relevant impacts were identified by the participants.

Soil conditions and erosion “+”36 / ”-“16 / ”0” Positive Positive votes: The 3 provided water can be used to watering plants which will reduce erosion. Negative votes: In some zone there is a high salinity and the previous borehole projects have had difficultes with the salinity levels of the water. The lesson learned from the difficulties of the the previous projects needs taken. Full mitigation: This can be mitigated by selecting a correct

location for the borehole. No impact votes: Boreholes do not have impact on erosion or quality of soils.

Air quality “+” 55 Positive Reduction of fuel consumption will reduce smoke.

Climate change “+” 51 / “0”4 Positive Positive votes: Reduction of fuel consumption will reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. No impact votes: Climate change is international issue.

Vulnerability to natural disaster “+” 55 Positive Access to clean drinking water improves the resilience of the local families.

ECONOMICAL IMPACTS

Working and income generation “+” 55 Positive Access to clean opportunities drinking water helps the community. Working oppoirtunities during the construction and maintenance.

Economic consequences “+” 55 Positive Access to clean drinking water source is good for the local economy.

TECHNOLOGICAL IMPACTS

Technology transfer “+” 39/”-“12/”0”4 Positive Positive votes: The locals will learn the maintenance activities of the new boreholes Negative votes: There is a risk that boreholes are not maintened and will not work well or will be abandoned.

Full mitigation: The maintenance need to planned well and guaranteed by the project, this will mitigate the tehnology failures.

Human and institutional capacity “+”31/”-“/”0”24 Positive Positive votes: The locals will learn the maintenance activities. No impact votes: The project does not have impact this indicator.

Access to clean and safe drinking water “+”51/”0”4 Positive Positive votes: New and easy access to clean water. No impact votes: The project will not change the level of access to water. The local people already have access to water.

SOCIAL IMPACTS

Community health “+”46/”-“9 Positive Positive votes: Clean water will help to avoid diseases to spread. Negative votes: There is a risk that the boreholes are not maintained and will not work well and will not provide hygienic drinking water. Full mitigation: Maintanance activities.

Agriculture and animal husbandry “+”53/”-“2 Positive Positive votes: Water can be used for agriculture. Negative votes: The location of the boreholes should be more near to the cultivations.

Food availability “+” 55 Positive Easy access to water will help in cooking.

Livelihood for the poor “+” 55 Positive Easy access to water will help especially the workload of woman and children who are taking care of cooking and water fetching.

Human rights “+” 55 Positive Access to water is a human right.

Gender Equality and women’s rights “+” 55 Positive Easy access will to water will help especially the workload of woman and childer who are taking care of cooking and water fetching.

Indigenous Peoples’ rights “+” 55 Positive Boreholes can be used by everybody.

Resettlements or forced placement of “+” 55 Positive No any need for people resetlements. Peole can contunue to live in their homes as they have access to water.

5. Discussion on continuous input /grievance mechanism The upcoming project steps and as well as the means of continuous input and grievance mechanism were also discussed and approved by the participants. For this purpose, the contact details for project developer were given for the participants (Section E.2. of this report).

6. Closure of the meeting At the end of the meeting, the evaluation forms were distributed for the participants and they were encouraged to give feedback on the meeting and on the project before the meeting was closed. All the necessary support was provided to all the participants during the compilation of the forms (i.e. people who cannot write). Totally 30 filled feedback forms were received. The summary of the main comments received during the meeting and via the gathered evaluation forms are presented in the below paragraph “Assessment of all comments”. The scanned evaluation forms are available in Annex 2.

ii. Minutes of other consultations

N/A iii. Assessment of all comments

The responses to questions and comments raised during the meeting together with the main comments received through the evaluations forms are discussed below.

Stakeholder comment Was comment taken into Explanation (Why? How?) account (Yes/ No)? We have already used a Y In-depth studies will be modern well with nozzles carried out to ensure the and hand pump. After a functioning of long-term few years this has dried wells and therefore to and is no longer working. guarantee clean water to So, for this project, it is residents. necessary for us to know how to use this well to keep it functioning for a long time. We have already benefited Y First of all, we apologize from a well from the for your previous TARATRA project. After a experienzes. Our aim is to few moments, the water carry out detailed drain pipe to the sewer inlet geographic studies for the fails to reach the water sites proposed for the level in the groundwater installation of the wells to table. So right now we still guarantee this way the have the well without a obtainment of long-term pump or a pipe without drinking water. providing us with water. These are our experiences with these wells. However, we hope that things would be different for this project.

Because of the lack of Y Decent management and awareness on how to use monitoring activities are the well, some finice foreseen for this project. becomes dry. I suggest For example the water setting up a management, quality will be monitored monitoring and maintenance regularly. committee in case of damage.

I support all your Y Decent management and suggestions and advice the monitoring activities are adoption of a transparent foreseen for this project. management at local level For example the water for the sustainability of the quality will be monitored structures. I also recommend regularly. the elaboration of a regulation for the use of these structures that will provide for the monetary participation of the local community for possible periodic maintenance. I am very satisfied with the Y We agree with the project objective and that importance of the all the local authorities collaboration. The involved are present at the approach of this project is, meeting. The success of the in fact, to include the project requires anyhow the stakeholders in planning commitment of the and implementing phases. municipality and the head of local neighbourhoods. I am satisfied with this The scope of the meeting and I notice a good stakeholder consulation participation. This project is meeting is to make the very interesting, but we must planned project activities publicize and make known know to the local the project activities to the population. There will be population, so that everyone also, for example, annual is aware and can take hygiene campagings to advantage of clean water spread the information from wells. regarding good and safe habits regarding the water usage. I really appreciate the idea Y The project is expected to of providing safe and clean have several positive water to the local impacts in addition to the communities that need it, supply of clean drinking even for the resulting water to communities, like environmental benefits. Try mitingating the climate to carry out the project change by reducing CO2 activities. emissions. The project impacts be monitored annually.

iv. Revisit sustainability assessment

Are you going to revisit the SDG and safeguards assessment? Yes No

Please note that this is necessary when there are differences between your own assessment and feedback collected during stakeholder consultation.

The feedback collected during the stakeholder consultation doesn’t give reasons for modifying the sustainability assessment.

v. Summary of alterations based on comments

The feedback received by the stakeholder consultation doesn’t give reasons for modifying the project design.

SECTION D. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT

D. 1. Own sustainable development assessment

i. Safeguard assessment

Safeguarding Assessment Assessment of relevance Justification Mitigation principles questions to the project measure (Yes/potentially/no) (if required) Social & Economic Safeguarding Principles 1 – Human 1. The Project No The project is implemented in N/A Rights Developer and the the field by an Italian Project shall Associazione Mondobimbi respect Onlus internationally (http://www.mondobimbi.org/) proclaimed human in collaboration with rights and shall not Carbonsink be complicit in (www.carbonsink.it).This Project violence or human (as all the projects of rights abuses of Mondobimbi and Carbonsink ) any kind as respects internationally defined in the proclaimed human rights and is Universal no complicit in violence or human rights abuses of any kind as defined in the

Declaration of Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Human Rights.

2. The Project shall The Project will not discriminate not discriminate with participation and inclusion with regards to as the safe water supply participation and systems are free to be used for inclusion. everybody.

2 - Gender 1. The Project shall No JUSTIFICATION POINT 1: N/A Equality and complete the Women’s following gender The project activity doesn't Rights assessment endorse any form of questions in order discrimination based on to inform gender. Requirements 2-4, Madagascar has ratified ILO below: Convention 100 and 111.

Is there a The safe water supply systems possibility that the are free to be used for Project might everybody and located in the reduce or put at central places of the project risk women’s access villages and will not put to or control of therefore at risk women’s or resources, any other marginalised groups entitlements and access to or control to water benefits? resources. It’s not foreseen either any reduction or risk Is there a related to any other resource, possibility that the entitlement or benefit. Project can adversely affect It is thereafter not either men and women in foreseen that the Project would marginalised or adversely affect man and vulnerable women in marginalised or communities (e.g., vulnerable communities. potential increased burden on women The Project takes into account or social isolation gender roles and the abilities of men)? of women and men to participate in the decision/designs of the project Is there a activities. For example the possibility that the stakeholder consultation made Project might not in the project design phase take into account included both women and men gender roles and participating in the consultation the abilities of meeting. women or men to Moreover, for example, the participate in the future annual hygiene decisions/designs campaigns will be planned of the project’s and organized in the way to activities (such as avoid any discrimination of lack of time, child women or other marginalized care duties, low groups. Infact, the women’s literacy or participation will be essential educational levels, for guaranteeing the success in improving the hygiene.

or societal discrimination)? In addition, the design of the hygiene campaigns as well as Does the Project other project activities will take take into account into account gender roles and gender roles and the abilities of women and men the abilities of to participate and benefit from women or men to the project activities. benefit from the Project’s activities The project is not contributing (e.g., Does the to an increase in women’s project criteria workload or preventing them ensure that it from engaging in other includes minority activities. In fact, the groups or landless availability of clean water is peoples)? foreseen to reduce women’s work load related to water Does the Project purification and caring design contribute to activities as the risk for for an increase in water born diseases will be women’s workload reduced. that adds to their care responsibilities The project is not foreseen to or that prevents reproduce or deepend them from discrimination agains women. engaging in other The women will have the same activities? possibilities to access for clean water supply systems, the hygiene campaigns and for Would the Project giving feedback regarding the potentially project as any other community reproduce or member. further deepen discrimination The project is not foreseen to against women limit women’s ability to use, based on gender, develop and protect natural for instance, resources. Instead the project regarding their full gives an easy access for clean participation in and safe drinking water. design and implementation or It’s not either likely that the access to project activy would exposed opportunities and women or girsl to further risks benefits? or hazards as the project borehoels are located in the Would the Project central places of the project potentially limit villages. Moreover, the clean women’s ability to safe water and improved use, develop and hygiene are foreseen to protect natural improve the conditions of resources, taking women and girl. into account different roles and JUSTIFICATION POINT 2: priorities of women and men in The Project will not directly or accessing and indirectly lead or contribure to managing adverse impacts on gender environmental equality or the situation of

goods and women. In fact, the access to services? clean and safe water are forseen to improve the general Is there a likelihood conditions of women and not to that the proposed lead to any risk of contributing Project would issues like sexual harassment/ expose women and exploitation, violence, human girls to further risks trafficking slavery, or hazards? imprisonment, drudgery or restriction of women’s rights or 2. The Project shall access to resources. not directly or indirectly lead The project activities are to/contribute to providing free access to clean adverse impacts on and safe water for the local gender equality communities. It will not have and/or the situation any impact on women’s of women. ownership rights to inherit and Specifically, this own land, homes and other shall include (not assets. exhaustive):

JUSTIFICATION POINT 3: Sexual harassment and/or any forms of violence against The Project applies the women - address principles of nondiscrimaiton the multiple risks of and equal treatment and, in gender-based fact, the access to clean and violence, including safe water is free to sexual exploitation everybody. or human trafficking. For the water system construction works and for any Slavery, other eventual paid or imprisonment, volunteer work the principle of physical and the equal pay for equal work mental drudgery, will be applied and organized punishment or in way to provide the coercion of women conditions for equitable and girls. participation of men and women. Restriction of women’s rights or Project activities, like using the access to resources clean and safe water and (natural or participating in the annual economic). hygiene campaigns, are planned in way that the Recognise women’s participation of both women ownership rights and men is guaranteet. There regardless of are no limitations on marital status - participation or benefiting adopt project from the Project depeding on measures where the pregrancy, possible to support maternity/paternity leave or to women’s access marital status. to inherit and own land, homes, and JUSTIFICATION POINT 4:

other assets or natural resources. The Project will not include any specific gender related risks. 3. Projects shall The “Plan d’Action National apply the principles Genre et Développement of (PANAGED)”3 has been nondiscrimination, consulted to assess this risk. equal treatment, and equal pay for equal work, JUSTIFICATION POINT 5: specifically: Not applicable. Where appropriate for the implementation of a Project, paid, volunteer work or community contributions will be organised to provide the conditions for equitable participation of men and women in the identified tasks/activities.

Introduce conditions that ensure the participation of women or men in Project activities and benefits based on pregnancy, maternity/paternity leave, or marital status.

Ensure that these conditions do not limit the access of women or men, as the case may be, to Project participation and benefits.

4. The Project shall refer to the country’s national gender strategy or equivalent national commitment to aid

3http://evaw-global-database.unwomen.org/en/countries/africa/madagascar/2004/plan-d-action-national-genre-et- developpement-panaged-2004-2008

in assessing gender risks.

5. Based on the Preliminary Review assessment of Requirement 1, above, Gold Standard may require that the Project seek the input of an Expert Stakeholder and to include their recommendations in the Project design.

3 - 1. The Project shall No The project activities doesn’t N/A Community avoid community include exposing the community Health, exposure to to increased health risks and is Safety and increased health not adverserly affecting the Working risks and shall not health of workers and the Conditions adversely affect community. the health of the workers and the For example the workers community. participating the project activity are not exposed to unsafe or unhealthy work environments as the construction of safe water supply system or the monitoring activities of the project will not include any hazardous chemicals or other hazardous material. 4 - Cultural Sites of Cultural No The project activity doens’t N/A Heritage, and Historical include sites, structures or Indigenous Heritage objects with historical, cultural, Peoples, Does the Project artistic, traditional or religious Displacement Area include sites, values or intangible forms of and structures, or culture. The Project will Resettlement objects with introduce clean and safe water historical, cultural, sources in the two villages and artistic, traditional it does not require alternation, or religious values damage or removal of any or intangible forms historical, artistic, traditional, of culture (e.g., religional or cultural heritage knowledge, issues. innovations, or practices)? The project activity consists of introducing clean and safe Forced Eviction water sources and therefore no and Displacement physical or economic relocation Does the Project of peoples is involved. require or cause the physical or

economic relocation The project doesn’t require any of peoples change to land tenure (temporary or arrangements and/or other permanent, full or rights. partial)? There are no indigenous Land Tenure and peoples present within the Other Rights area of influence nor the 1. Does the Project project is located on terriotory require any change claimed by indigenous people. to land tenure arrangements and/or other rights?

2. For Projects involving land-use tenure, are there any uncertainties with regards land tenure, access rights, usage rights or land ownership?

Idigenous Peoples Are indigenous peoples present in or within the area of influence of the Project and/or is the Project located on land/territory claimed by indigenous peoples? 5 - 1. The Project shall No The Project doesn’t involve, be N/A Corruption not involve, be complicit in or inadvertently complicit in or contribute to or reinforce inadvertently corruption or corrupt Projects. contribute to or reinforce corruption The project is, in fact, or corrupt Projects. implemented in the field by Mondobimbi Onlus in collaboration with Carbonsink. The ethical codes of Mondobimbi and Carbonsink are against corruption. Moreover, Madagascar has ratified the UN Convention against Corruption.

6 - Economic Labour rights No JUSTIFICATIONS RELATED TO N/A Impacts 1. The Project LABOUR RIGHTS: Developer shall ensure that there is The project is implemented in no forced labour the field by Mondobimbi Onlus

and that all organization employment is in (http://www.mondobimbi.org/) compliance with in collaboration with national labour and Carbonsink. occupational health The employees' rights are a and safety laws, cross-cutting issue and with obligations respected in all of the projects under international of Mondobimbi and law, and Carbonsink. Madagascar has consistency with the ratified ILO Convention 87 and principles and 98. standards embodied in the All employees (mainly hired International for monitoring activities and Labour water system construction Organization (ILO) activities) will work voluntarily fundamental for the project, no forced conventions. Where labour is used and all these are employment is in compliance contradictory and a with national laws and breach of one or consistencu with the principles other cannot be an dstandard ILO conventions. avoided, then In fact, Madagascar has guidance shall be ratified ILO Convention 29 and sought from Gold 105. Standard. The workers are able to 2. Workers shall be establish and join labour able to establish organizations. and join labour organisations. The working agreements with the individual workers will be 3. Working documented and implemented agreements with all and the minimum requirements individual workers stated in section 3.6.1. of shall be GS4GG Safeguarding documented and Principles & Requirements implemented. These (version 1) will be respected shall at minimum whenever applicable. comprise: The employment model (a) Working hours applied will be also locally (must not exceed and culturally appropriate. 48 hours per week on a regular basis), Moreover, all the possible staff AND hired has a minimum age of 18. Madagascar has ratified (b) Duties and ILO Convention 138 and 182. tasks, AND All the works will be made by (c) Remuneration using appropriate equipment, (must include training of workers, provision for documentation and reporting payment of of accidents and incidents, and overtime), AND emergency preparedness and response measures.

(d) Modalities on health insurance, AND

(e) Modalities on termination of the contract with provision for voluntary resignation by employee, AND

Provision for annual leave of not less than 10 days per year, not including sick and casual leave. 4. The Project Developer shall justify that the employment model applied is locally and culturally appropriate.

5. Child labour, as defined by the ILO Minimum Age Convention is not allowed. The Project Developer shall use adequate and verifiable mechanisms for age verification in recruitment procedures. Exceptions are children for work on their families’ property as long as:

(a) Their compulsory schooling (minimum of 6 schooling years) is not hindered, AND

(b) The tasks they perform do not harm their physical and mental development, AND

(c) The opinions and recommendations JUSTIFICATION RELATED TO of an Expert NEGATIVE ECONOMIC Stakeholder shall CONSEQUENCES: be sought and demonstrated as The main investment of the being included in project activity is the initial the Project design. construction cost of the safe water systems and it will be 6. The Project covered by the Project Developer shall Developer. The use of the safe ensure the use of and clean water is free for the appropriate local communities. The safe equipment, training water supply and the foreseen of workers, improved hygiene knowledge documentation and via the annual campagns are reporting of foreseen to last beyond the accidents and Project Certification period. incidents, and emergency The use of clean and safe preparedness and drinking water is free for response measures. everybody and therefore the project benefits can be Negative considered socially-inclusive. Economic The project water supply Consequence systems will be equipped by 1. The Project manual pumps to extract the Developer shall water from the wells, hence demonstrate the energy use is not foreseen and financial can be considered sustainable. sustainability of the Projects There are not expected any implemented, also direct economic impact or including those that potential risks to the local will occur beyond economy. the Project Certification period.

2. The Projects shall consider economic impacts and demonstrate a consideration of potential risks to the local economy and how these have been taken into account in Project design, implementation, operation and after the Project. Particular focus shall be given to vulnerable and marginalised social

groups in targeted communities and that benefits are socially-inclusive and sustainable.

Environmental & Ecological Safeguarding Principles 1 – Climate Emissions No The project will reduce the N/A and Energy Will the Project GHG emissions as will be increase monitored and verified in line greenhouse gas with the GS4GG. emissions over the Baseline Scenario? The project will use handle pumps and no energy from Energy Supply other sources is used. Will the Project use energy from a local grid or power supply (i.e., not connected to a national or regional grid) or fuel resource (such as wood, biomass) that provides for other local users? 2 - Water Impact on Natural No The project water systems will N/A Water use groud-water but will not Patterns/Flows affect negative natural or pre- Will the Project existing pattern of affect the natural watercourses, ground-water or pre-existing and/or watersheds. pattern of watercourses, The project will not cause ground-water additional erosion and/or and/or the water body instability of or watershed(s) such disrupt the natural pattern of as high seasonal erosion. flow variability, flooding potential, lack of aquatic connectivity or water scarcity?

Erosion and/or Water Body Instability 1. Could the Project directly or indirectly cause additional erosion and/or water body instability or disrupt the natural pattern of erosion? If ‘Yes’ or ‘Potentially’

proceed to question 2.

2. Is the Project's area of influence susceptible to excessive erosion and/or water body instability? 3 – Landscape No The Project provides safe and N/A Environment, Modification and clean drinking water and ecology and Soil doesn’t involve the used of land use Does the Project land and soil for production of involve the use of crops ar other projects. land and soil for production of crops The Project provides supply of or other products? safe and clean drinking water and is not suscepted to or will Vulnerability to leas to increased vulnerability Natural Disaster to any extreme climatic Will the Project be conditions. susceptible to or lead to increased The Project provides safe and vulnerability to clean drinking water and wind, earthquakes, doesn’t involve / or be subsidence, negatively impacted by the landslides, erosion, use of genetically modified flooding, drought organisms or GMOs. or other extreme The Project is not potentially climatic conditions? resulting in release of pollutants to the environment. Genetic Resources The Project is not involving the Could the Project manufacture, trade, release, be negatively and/or use of hazardous impacted by the chemicals and or materials. use of genetically modified organisms or GMOs (e.g., The Project doesn’t involve the contamination, application of pesticides collection and/or and/or fertilisers. harvesting, commercial Neither harvesting of forests is development)? involved.

Release of The Project doesn’t modify the pollutants quantity or nutritional quality Could the Project of food available. potentially result in the release of The Project doesn’t involve pollutants to the aninal husbandry. environment?

Hazardous and The project is not located in an Non-hazardous area within a high concervation Waste value area or within scritical Will the Project natural habitats. Furthermore, involve the the aim of the project is to manufacture, trade, reduce the quantity of

release, and/ or firewood consumed in the use of hazardous project area for boiling the and non-hazardous water (for purifying) which chemicals and/or may save the natural materials? resources.

Pesticides & The project boundary is the Fertilisers physical, geographical sites of Will the Project the project technologies, in involve the other words, the physical application of location of the two project safe pesticides and/or water supply systems (as fertilisers? described in Section A.5. above) . There are no Harvesting of endagered species identified Forest as potentially being preset the Will the Project project boundary. involve the harvesting of The safe water supply systems forests? are not expected either potentially impact other areas Food where endangered species Does the Project may be present through modify the quantity transbondary affects. or nutritional quality of food available such as through crop regime alteration or export or economic incentives?

Animal husbandry Will the Project involve animal husbandry?

High Concervation Value Areas and Critical Habitats Does the Project physically affect or alter largely intact or High Conservation Value (HCV) ecosystems, critical habitats, landscapes, key biodiversity areas or sites[12] identified?

Endangered Species 1. Are there any endangered species identified

as potentially being present within the Project boundary (including those that may route through the area)?

2. Does the Project potentially impact other areas where endangered species may be present through transboundary affects?

ii. Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) outcome

Sustainable Development Relevant target4 Goal (SDG) 1 – SDG 13 Climate Change Mitigation measured as reduced tCO2e5 Indicator: Reduced CO2e emissions / year Outcome: Approximately 9,220 tCO2e / year 2 – SDG 3 By 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and neglected tropical diseases and combat hepatitis, water-borne diseases and other communicable diseases

Indicator 1: Number of persons having provision to safe water in the project activity compared to the baseline scenario Outcome 1: Approximately 2,877 persons

Indicator 2: Frequency of water-borne diseases (like e.g. diarrhea) Outcome 2:Less people suffering of diarrhea and other water-borne diseases in the project scenarion compared to the baseline scenario 3 – SDG 6 By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all

Indicator: Number of persons having access to a safe water source in the project activity compared to the baseline scenario Outcome: Approximately 3,043 persons 4 – SDG 12 By 2030, ensure that people everywhere have the relevant information and awareness for sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with nature

Indicator: Number of campaigns on water, sanitation and health related issues Outcome: One campaign/year

4 http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/ (Site visited 11/07/2018) 5 In line with the GG4GG Claims Guideline: “Unlike other SDGs the targets and Indicators associated with SDG13 cross- reference the Paris Agreement. A specific target is therefore not provided, Gold Standard interprets this as mitigation, measured as tCO2e for the purpose of this document.”

D. 2. Stakeholders’ Blind sustainable development assessment i. Safeguard assessment

According to GS4GG Stakeholder consultation & engagement procedure, requirement & guidelines 1.1. the safeguard assessment and Sustainable Development assessment have been carried out together in a simplified “blind assessment” adapted to the local context. During the stakeholder consultation the stakeholders discussed the project impacts based on the pre-established indicators evaluating each indicator by scoring them as negative, neutral and positive . The full results of the assessment together with the main reasonings and proposed mitigation measures are reported in table in Section C.3. of this report. Below table summaries the results instead regarding the safeguarding principles.

2. The Project shall not discriminate with regards to participation and inclusion. 2 - Gender 1. The Project shall No No concerns raised by the N/A Equality and complete the stakeholders on this issue. Women’s following gender Stakeholders identified the Rights assessment project to have potiantiality questions in order to reduce burden on women. to inform Requirements 2-4, below:

Is there a possibility that the Project might reduce or put at risk women’s access to or control of resources,

entitlements and benefits?

Is there a possibility that the Project can adversely affect men and women in marginalised or vulnerable communities (e.g., potential increased burden on women or social isolation of men)?

Is there a possibility that the Project might not take into account gender roles and the abilities of women or men to participate in the decisions/designs of the project’s activities (such as lack of time, child care duties, low literacy or educational levels, or societal discrimination)?

Does the Project take into account gender roles and the abilities of women or men to benefit from the Project’s activities (e.g., Does the project criteria ensure that it includes minority groups or landless peoples)?

Does the Project design contribute to an increase in women’s workload that adds to their care responsibilities or that prevents them from

engaging in other activities?

Would the Project potentially reproduce or further deepen discrimination against women based on gender, for instance, regarding their full participation in design and implementation or access to opportunities and benefits?

Would the Project potentially limit women’s ability to use, develop and protect natural resources, taking into account different roles and priorities of women and men in accessing and managing environmental goods and services?

Is there a likelihood that the proposed Project would expose women and girls to further risks or hazards?

2. The Project shall not directly or indirectly lead to/contribute to adverse impacts on gender equality and/or the situation of women. Specifically, this shall include (not exhaustive):

Sexual harassment and/or any forms of violence against

women - address the multiple risks of gender-based violence, including sexual exploitation or human trafficking.

Slavery, imprisonment, physical and mental drudgery, punishment or coercion of women and girls.

Restriction of women’s rights or access to resources (natural or economic).

Recognise women’s ownership rights regardless of marital status - adopt project measures where possible to support to women’s access to inherit and own land, homes, and other assets or natural resources.

3. Projects shall apply the principles of nondiscrimination, equal treatment, and equal pay for equal work, specifically:

Where appropriate for the implementation of a Project, paid, volunteer work or community contributions will be organised to provide the conditions for equitable participation of men and women in

the identified tasks/activities.

Introduce conditions that ensure the participation of women or men in Project activities and benefits based on pregnancy, maternity/paternity leave, or marital status.

Ensure that these conditions do not limit the access of women or men, as the case may be, to Project participation and benefits.

4. The Project shall refer to the country’s national gender strategy or equivalent national commitment to aid in assessing gender risks.

3 - 1. The Project shall No Stakeholders identified the N/A Community avoid community project to have potiantiality Health, exposure to to improve heath through Safety and increased health reducing incidence of water Working risks and shall not borne diseases. The regular Conditions adversely affect and decent maintenance of the health of the the boreholes can guarantee workers and the the correct functioning of the community. boreholes and the qood quality of the water. The

location of the boreholes should be selected in correct way to avoide the salinity problmes of the water. 4 - Cultural Sites of Cultural No No concerns or comments N/A Heritage, and Historical raised by the stakeholders on Indigenous Heritage this issue. Peoples, Does the Project Displacement Area include sites, and structures, or Resettlement objects with historical, cultural, artistic, traditional or religious values or intangible forms of culture (e.g., knowledge, innovations, or practices)?

Forced Eviction and Displacement Does the Project require or cause the physical or economic relocation of peoples (temporary or permanent, full or partial)?

Land Tenure and Other Rights 1. Does the Project require any change to land tenure arrangements and/or other rights?

2. For Projects involving land-use tenure, are there any uncertainties with regards land tenure, access rights, usage rights or land ownership?

Idigenous Peoples Are indigenous peoples present in or within the area of influence of the Project and/or is the Project located on land/territory

claimed by indigenous peoples? 5 - 1. The Project shall No No concerns or comments N/A Corruption not involve, be raised by the stakeholders on complicit in or this issue. inadvertently contribute to or reinforce corruption or corrupt Projects. 6 - Economic Labour rights No No concerns or comments N/A Impacts 1. The Project raised by the stakeholders on Developer shall this issue. ensure that there is no forced labour and that all employment is in compliance with national labour and occupational health and safety laws, with obligations under international law, and consistency with the principles and standards embodied in the International Labour Organization (ILO) fundamental conventions. Where these are contradictory and a breach of one or other cannot be avoided, then guidance shall be sought from Gold Standard.

2. Workers shall be able to establish and join labour organisations.

3. Working agreements with all individual workers shall be documented and implemented. These shall at minimum comprise:

(a) Working hours (must not exceed

48 hours per week on a regular basis), AND

(b) Duties and tasks, AND

(d) Modalities on health insurance, AND

(e) Modalities on termination of the contract with provision for voluntary resignation by employee, AND

(a) Their compulsory schooling (minimum of 6 schooling years) is not hindered, AND

(b) The tasks they perform do not harm their physical and mental development, AND

(c) The opinions and recommendations of an Expert Stakeholder shall be sought and demonstrated as being included in the Project design.

6. The Project Developer shall ensure the use of appropriate equipment, training of workers, documentation and reporting of accidents and incidents, and emergency preparedness and response measures.

Negative Economic Consequence 1. The Project Developer shall demonstrate the financial sustainability of the Projects implemented, also including those that will occur beyond the Project Certification period.

2. The Projects shall consider economic impacts and demonstrate a consideration of

potential risks to the local economy and how these have been taken into account in Project design, implementation, operation and after the Project. Particular focus shall be given to vulnerable and marginalised social groups in targeted communities and that benefits are socially-inclusive and sustainable.

Environmental & Ecological Safeguarding Principles 7 – Climate Emissions No No concerns or comments N/A and Energy Will the Project raised by the stakeholders on increase this issue. greenhouse gas emissions over the Baseline Scenario?

Energy Supply Will the Project use energy from a local grid or power supply (i.e., not connected to a national or regional grid) or fuel resource (such as wood, biomass) that provides for other local users? 8 - Water Impact on Natural No No concerns or comments N/A Water raised by the stakeholders on Patterns/Flows this issue. Will the Project affect the natural or pre-existing pattern of watercourses, ground-water and/or the watershed(s) such as high seasonal flow variability, flooding potential, lack of aquatic connectivity or water scarcity?

2. Is the Project's area of influence susceptible to excessive erosion and/or water body instability? 9 – Landscape No No concerns or comments N/A Environment, Modification and raised by the stakeholders on ecology and Soil this issue. land use Does the Project involve the use of land and soil for production of crops or other products?

Vulnerability to Natural Disaster Will the Project be susceptible to or lead to increased vulnerability to wind, earthquakes, subsidence, landslides, erosion, flooding, drought or other extreme climatic conditions?

Genetic Resources Could the Project be negatively impacted by the use of genetically modified organisms or GMOs (e.g., contamination, collection and/or harvesting, commercial development)?

Release of pollutants

Could the Project potentially result in the release of pollutants to the environment?

Hazardous and Non-hazardous Waste Will the Project involve the manufacture, trade, release, and/ or use of hazardous and non-hazardous chemicals and/or materials?

Pesticides & Fertilisers Will the Project involve the application of pesticides and/or fertilisers?

Harvesting of Forest Will the Project involve the harvesting of forests?

Food Does the Project modify the quantity or nutritional quality of food available such as through crop regime alteration or export or economic incentives?

Animal husbandry Will the Project involve animal husbandry?

High Concervation Value Areas and Critical Habitats Does the Project physically affect or alter largely intact or High Conservation Value

(HCV) ecosystems, critical habitats, landscapes, key biodiversity areas or sites[12] identified?

Endangered Species 1. Are there any endangered species identified as potentially being present within the Project boundary (including those that may route through the area)?

2. Does the Project potentially impact other areas where endangered species may be present through transboundary affects?

ii. Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) outcome

As described above as well as more in detailed in the Section C.3, during the stakeholder consultation the stakeholders discussed the project impacts based on the pre-established indicators and they were ask to indicate their opinion on project’s impact on the different sustainable development (environmental, social, economic) aspects (“Blind exersice”) and make proposals for the monitoring of these indicators. In genaral result of the sustainable development assessment done with the stakeholders resulted positive and that the stakeholders perceive the project will lead to improvements in their lives and in the environment. Especially the impact of the project on drinking water quality (SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation) and health related issues (SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being) were identified relavant by the participants. The participant identified positive impacts also on climate change mitigation (SDG 13: Climate Action) and reducing workload of women (SDG 5: Gender qequality). Also, potential impacts were identified related capacity and technology transfer (SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production) as well as regadign the working opportunities (SDG 8: Desent work and economic growth). No negative impacts on the sustainable development goals were identified by the participants. However, the participants identified potential risks regarding the technology failures or failures regarding the selection borehole location and consequent problems with the water quality. As a mitigation measures for these risks participants highlighted the importance of the regular and decent maintenance activities. Also the selection of the borehole location was identified as a

mitigation measure for avoiding later water quality problems. Duiring the assessment process no further suggestions for monitoring of the sustainable development impacts were received from the participants. In conclusion, the feedback received by the stakeholder consultation doesn’t give reasons for modifying the safeguard or sustainable development assessment, selected inidicators or estimated outcomes.

SECTION E. SUSTAINABILITY MONITORING PLAN

E. 1. Discussion on Sustainability monitoring Plan During the local stakeholder meeting the participants discussed on project’s impact on the different sustainable development (environmental, social, economic) aspects. During the discussion no proposals for cost effective monitoring solutions or ways to increase the stakeholder participation on the monitoring of the sustainable development indicators were arised.

E. 2. Discussion on continuous input / grievance mechanism Method Chosen (include all Justification known details e.g. location of book, phone, number, identity of mediator) Continuous Input / Tulear Municipality at the This site was approved by Grievance Expression Afaka Village, Villa Star 3, stakeholders during the meeting Process Book West Bethany Telephone access +261 336172599 These contact numbers for Mondobimbi were indicated for the +39 328 9778080 stakeholders during the meeting Internet/email access [email protected] These cointact emails of Mondobimbi were indicated for the stakeholders [email protected] during the meeting

Nominated Not indicated It was decided to not nominate an Independent Mediator independent mediator (optional) Other Not indicated N/A

In addition, continuos input/grievance can be sent directly to Gold Standard (help@goldstandard).

All issues identified during the crediting period through any of of the above methods will be taken in consideration and consequent mitigation measure will be added to the monitoring plan when relevant.

SECTION F. DESCRIPTION OF THE DESIGN OF THE STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ROUND

The stakeholder feedback round (SFR) was made between 12/02/2019 and 11/04/2019.The start of this feedback round was right after the first VPA, GS6752, using this grouped stakeholder consultation was listed and it’s draft VPA-DD (including the description and outcomes of the grouped stakeholder consultation) was made public on GS Registry. The feedback round was designed, to cover all the future VPAs implemented within the same area as stated in the below shown invitation letter example (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Screenshot of the invitation email for SFR send to the GS and GS NGO supporters on 12th of February 2019

During the 2 months period of the feedback round the hard copy of the PDD draft of GS6752 including the report on the Stakeholder Consultation was disposed in the Tulear Municipality at the Afaka Village, Villa Star 3, West Bethany and made publicly available also online in the GS Registry. The PDD draft of the VPA GS6752 is considered representative example of the other VPAs applying in the future the same grouped stakeholder consultation.

The invitations for the SFR were made mainly via email to invite stakeholders to participate on SFR and were sent to the persons/groups who had been originally inviated via mail to the stakeholder consultation. Also letter, telephone calls and mutual inviatations were made in line with the applied Gold Standard guidelines.

ANNEX 1. ORIGINAL PARTICIPANTS LIST

ANNEX 2. ORIGINAL EVALUATION FORMS

Below are presented the five examples indicated in Section C.1. The file including the scannerization of all evaluation forms has been uploaded to GS Registry (file name: “Scanned Evaluation Forms”).