41435-013: Tonle Sap Poverty Reduction and Smallholder

Safeguards Due Diligence Report

Project Number: 41435-013: TSSD- ADF (Loan 3570/8331 and Grant 0542))

July 2020

Cambodia: Tonle Sap Poverty Reduction and Smallholder Development Project - Additional Financing

Construction of 3.497 km of Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject, Kampong Trabaek Commune, Kampong Trabaek district, Prey Veng province (TSSD-AF-PVG-NCB-W/RR023-NCDDS)

Prepared by PIC of NCDD and MAFF for the Tonle Sap Poverty Reduction – Additional Fund for the Asian Development Bank.

This safeguards due diligence report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature.

In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (June 2020) Currency Unit–Cambodian Riel (KHR) 1$=4,150 KHR; KHR=0.000245$ ABBREVIATIONS

ADB Asian Development Bank AF Additional Financing AH Affected Household BMC Banteay Meanchey province BTB Battambang province CC Commune Council CDP Commune Development Plan CoI Corridor of Impact DOAENR District Office of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment DDR Due Diligence Report DRR Disaster Risk Reduction DSC Design and Supervision Consultants EA Executing Agency EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return EMP Environmental Management Plan FHH Female Headed Household ESME External Safeguard Monitoring Entity FWUC Farmer Water User Committee GRC Grievance Redress Committee IR Involuntary Resettlement KPC Kampong Cham province KPT Kampong Thom province LIG Livelihood Improvement Group LVRR Low Volume Road Standard MAFF Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries MCA Mobile Commune Access NCDDS National Committee for Sub-national Democratic Development Secretariat O&M Operation and Maintenance PDOWRAM Provincial Department of Water Resources & Meteorology RF Resettlement Framework ROW Right of Way PST Provincial Support Team PVG Prey Veng province SPS Safeguard Policy Statement SRP Siem Reap province SSP Special Service Provider SSS Social Safeguards Specialist TKM Tbuong Khmum province TSSD Tonle Sap Poverty Reduction and Smallholder Development Project WUG Water User Group WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ha – hectare km – kilometer kW – kilowatt kWh – kilowatt-hour m – meter m2 – square meter m3 – cubic meter mm – millimeter NOTE In this report, "$" refers to US dollars.

i TABLE OF CONTENTS

GLOSSARY ...... 1 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 3 1.1 Report objective ...... 3 2. PROJECT BACKGROUND ...... 3 2.1 Project description ...... 3 2.2 Selection criteria for subprojects ...... 3 3. SUBPROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 4 3.1 Proposed subproject ...... 4 3.2 Screening of subproject based on selection criteria ...... 5 4. SUBPROJECT DESIGN AND LAND REQUIREMENT ...... 8 5. SITE SCREENING PROCESS AND PROCEDURES ...... 8 5.1 Social safeguard screening and assessment ...... 8 5.2 Allowances for Affected Households ...... 9 5.3 Socio-economic information on Affected Households ...... 10 5.4 Vulnerable households ...... 10 5.5 Indigenous People ...... 10 5.6 Subproject cut-off date ...... 10 6. INFORMATION DISCLOSURE AND PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS ...... 15 7. LEGAL FRAMEWORK ...... 16 7.1 Cambodia Laws and Regulations ...... 16 7.2 ADB Policies on Involuntary Resettlement ...... 16 8. GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM ...... 17 9. VALIDATION BY EXTERNAL SAFEGUARD MONITORING ENTITY ...... 17 10. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 18 10.1 Summary of conclusions ...... 18 10.2 Follow up actions and recommendations ...... 19

Annex 1: Summary of Socio-economic data Annex 2: Detailed Engineering Design Annex 3: Land Acquisition, Resettlement Impact and Screening Checklist Annex 4: Certification of official Right of Way Annex 5: Summary of minutes of public consultations Annex 6: Description of Cambodian laws, regulations and ADB requirements Annex 7: Details of Grievance Redress Mechanism Annex 8: Project Information Booklet

i TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

GLOSSARY Beneficiary – all persons and households from the villages who voluntarily seek to avail themselves of, and are part of, the project. Compensation – payment in cash or in kind at the replacement cost of the acquired assets for the project. Cut-off Date – the cut-off date is defined as the date prior to which the occupation or use of the project areas makes residents/users eligible to be categorized as project affected persons. The cut-off date for this Project will be the date of conducting public consultation for each subproject that requires land acquisition with the project-affected persons before conducting inventory of loss (IOL) or the detailed measurement survey (DMS). Displaced persons – refers to all of the people who, on account of the activities listed above, would have their (1) standard of living adversely affected; or (2) right, title, interest in any house, land (including premises, agricultural and grazing land) or any other fixed or movable asset acquired or possessed temporarily or permanently; (3) access to productive assets adversely affected, temporarily or permanently; or (4) business, occupation, work or place of residence or habitat adversely affected; and “displaced person” means any of the displaced persons. Eligible land holders – refers to affected persons who (a) hold title to land; or (b) do not hold title but whose possession of land can be legalized with a title pursuant to the Land Law of Cambodia including those with recognizable rights. Entitlement – range of measures comprising compensation, income restoration support, transfer assistance, income substitution, and relocation support which are due to affected people, depending on the nature of their losses, to restore their economic and social base. The entitlements adopted for TSSD-AF were guided by the applicable national laws, regulations, and ADB SPS. The entitlements may be further revised based on actual status of impact, if applicable, in an updated version of the resettlement framework. Household – means all persons living and eating together as a single social unit. Income restoration – means re-establishing income sources and livelihoods of project-affected households to at least maintain to their pre-project level. Improvements – structures constructed (dwelling unit, fence, waiting sheds, pigpens, utilities, community facilities, stores, warehouses, etc.) and crops/plants planted by the person, household, institution, or organization. Land acquisition – the process whereby a person involuntarily loses ownership, use of, or access to, land as a result of the project. Land acquisition can lead to a range of associated impacts, including loss of residence or other fixed assets (fences, wells, tombs, or other structures or Project Executive Agencies – MAFF and NCDDS. Project Affected Persons (PAPs) – includes any person, households, entity, organizations, firms or private institutions who, on account of changes that result from the project will have their (i) standard of living adversely affected, (ii) right, title, or interest in any house, land (including residential, commercial, agricultural, forest, plantations, grazing, and/organizing land), water resources, fish ponds, communal fishing grounds, annual or perennial crops and trees, or any other moveable or fixed assets acquired, possessed, restricted, or otherwise adversely affected, in full or in part, permanently or temporarily; and/or (iii) business, occupation, place of work or residence, or habitat adversely affected, permanently or temporarily, with or without displacement. Rehabilitation – refers to assistance provided to persons seriously affected due to the loss of productive assets, incomes, employment or sources of living, to supplement payment of compensation for acquired assets, in order to achieve, at a minimum, full restoration of living standards and quality of life. Compensation for assets often is not sufficient to achieve full rehabilitation. Replacement cost – is the method of valuation of assets, which determines the amount of compensation sufficient to replace lost assets, including any necessary transaction costs. Compensation at replacement cost is defined as follows: For agricultural land, it is the pre-project or pre-displacement, whichever is higher, market value of land of equal productive potential or use located in the vicinity of the affected land, plus the cost of preparing the land to levels similar to those of the affected land, plus the cost of any registration and transfer taxes. For land in urban areas, it is the pre-

1 TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject displacement market value of land of equal size and use, with similar or improved public infrastructure facilities and services and located in vicinity of the affected land, plus the cost of any registration and transfer taxes. For houses and other structures, it is the market cost of the materials to build a replacement structure with an area and quality similar to or better than those of the affected structure, or to repair a partially affected structure, plus the cost of transporting building materials to the construction site, plus the cost of any labor and contractors' fees, plus the cost of any registration and transfer taxes. In determining the replacement cost, depreciation of the asset and the value of salvage materials are not taken into account, nor is the value of benefits to be derived from the project deducted from the valuation of an affected asset. Where domestic law does not meet the standard of compensation at full replacement cost, compensation under domestic law is supplemented by additional measures to meet the replacement cost standard. Such additional assistance is distinct from resettlement measures to be provided under other clauses in the ADB SPS 2009. Resettlement – means that all measures should be taken to mitigate any and all adverse impacts of a project on PAP property and/or livelihood’s, including compensation, relocation (where relevant) and rehabilitation as needed. Vulnerable groups - are distinct groups of people who might suffer disproportionately or face the risk of being marginalized from the effects of resettlement and specifically include: (i) female headed households with dependents, (ii) disabled household heads, (iii) households falling under the generally accepted indicator for poverty, (iv) elderly households with no means of support and landlessness, and (v) indigenous peoples. The vulnerability of each household will depend on the impact and their socio- economic statuses that will be assessed as the result of detail baseline socio-economic survey during the detail measurement survey or inventory of lose assets. Cambodia uses an absolute poverty line definition. In 2013, the Ministry of Planning (MOP) introduced new poverty lines. The revisions to the poverty lines include (a) a food poverty line based on 2,200 calories per person per day (up from 2,100); and (b) a non-food component that is estimated separately for Phnom Penh, other urban, and rural areas. Ministry of Planning (2013) identified those who earned less than KHR132,386 per month per person as those living below the poverty line.

2 TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

SOCIAL SAFEGUARD DUE DILIGENCE REPORT for Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject, Kampong Trabaek District, Prey Veng province 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Report objective 1. The objective of this report is to present the results of the social safeguard due diligence (DDR) for the Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject in Kampong Trabaek commune which is located in Kampong Trabaek district of Prey Veng (PVG) province. The report provides a description of the existing road, an overview of the socioeconomic situation within the subproject area, a description of the consultative processes that were completed within the subproject area, the identification of the affected households, the determination of which of these households are vulnerable, the assessment of the requirement for land acquisition and describes the Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM). 2. PROJECT BACKGROUND 2.1 Project description 2. In 2009, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) approved the Tonle Sap Poverty Reduction and Smallholder Development Project (TSSD), which achieved notable achievements in productive infrastructure and livelihood improvement. The government of Cambodia (the government), ADB and IFAD project teams concluded that successful project activities should be scaled up to broaden the benefits of increased rural incomes and economic development. 3. In January 2018 the Additional Financing (AF) for the TSSD was approved to expand activities on climate-responsive productive infrastructure from 196 communes in five provinces (Banteay Meanchey (BMC), Siem Reap (SRP), Kampong Thom (KPT), Kampong Cham (KPC) and Tboung Khmum (TKM)) to 270 communes in seven provinces, including the two additional provinces of Battambang (BTB), and Prey Veng (PVG) within the Tonle Sap Basin, and in addition to further develop the enabled environment for agricultural productivity, diversification and climate resilience with a strong emphasis on value chain strengthening. The inclusion of women, smallholder farmers and poor households remains a priority. 4. The TSSD-AF changes the original project scope by expanding the project area from five to seven provinces and enhances the climate and disaster resilience of the interventions within the target provinces. The number of beneficiary households increases from 430,000 to 650,000. The aggregate impact will be improved livelihoods in the target communes and climate resilience in seven provinces in the Tonle Sap Basin improved. The aggregate outcome will be agricultural productivity increased, climate and disaster resilience strengthened, and access to markets improved in 270 communes in seven provinces in the Tonle Sap Basin. 5. The TSSD-AF consists of main three outputs. Output 1: focuses on enhancing rural productive infrastructures and livelihood improvement with capacity in disaster risk management (such as rural roads and small scale irrigation rehabilitation, supporting new and old Livelihood Improvement Groups (LIGs) and DRR training and planning for commune councils). Output 2: focusses on enhancing environment for increased agricultural productivity diversification and climate resilience (such as value chain support and market linkages; information and communication technology and commune mobile access program). Output 3: strengthens project management. 2.2 Selection criteria for subprojects 6. Under TSSD-AF all subprojects are designed to mitigate the impact for climate change and promote local economic development. All subprojects must be screened on the basis of

3 TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject nine primary criteria followed by two additional criteria one for road subprojects and one for irrigation subprojects. All subprojects must be fully compliant with all of these primary criteria.1 3. SUBPROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Proposed subproject 7. This subproject will upgrade the existing laterite road in Kampong Trabaek commune which has a length of 3,479 meters, which is located in Kampong Trabaek district in PVG province to a SBST road. The road links the villages of Anlong Reach with Boeung Khyang village, to the district center and then to the National Road No. 1. The existing laterite road was built in about 1977 and 80 percent of the road is in poor condition but is still being used for local transport. Most sections of the road becomes muddy and waterlogged during the rainy season, while during the dry season it is also difficult to travel on and the vehicles create very dusty conditions that adversely affects the health of the villagers. As a result of this the residents have voiced their complaints to commune authorities. About 20 percent of the total road length is in satisfactory condition and this section is slightly elevated about 0.35 to 0.60m from surrounding land.2 Figure 1: Photos of existing road condition

Source: SSP6 field survey (2019)

Figure 2: Satellite image of subproject location

1 TSSD-AF Project Administration Manual TSSD-AF Project Administration Manual Appendix 3: Subproject selection criteria and recommend-dations for improved design standards for rural roads and irrigation incorporating climate change resilience and disaster risk reduction measures. 2 This information was confirmed by the Commune Chief, Mr. Chea Sokhorn and the Village Chiefs, Mr. Chea Khonn,and Mr. Kaing Thann See Annex 1 for summary of socio-economic status of the village through discussion with commune authorities and AHs

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

Figure 3: Map of subproject location

3.2 Screening of subproject based on selection criteria 8. This subproject was identified as one of the priority selected subprojects for implementation in 2019. It has been screened and selected by the application of the scoring system for sub-projects selection criteria. This subproject was identified as one of the priority subprojects in PVG province and was approved by the Provincial Support Team (PST) for the preparation of the detailed design. 9. The SSP6 engineering team together with Social Safeguard Specialist (SSS) visited the site on 7 November 2019 and conducted the site screening and conducted a public consultation meetings. The demarcation of the subproject based on the technical drawing designs were marked out and the number of affected households from the subproject were identified (see Table 4). 10. The participants in the consultation meetings signified that they clearly understood and noted that it there was a need for some additional land to be donated by affected households (AHs)and some fruit trees would be lost by the villagers based upon the detailed design of the subproject. 11. The technical designs were explained to local authorities and the subproject beneficiaries including an explanation of the length, width and height of the proposed road. The participants in the consultation signified that they clearly understood and noted that there was a need for additional land that lies within the official Right of Way (RoW). Therefore, this subproject is in compliance with the ADB SPS 2009 and the Project Resettlement Framework (RF). 3

3 https://www.adb.org/projects/documents/cam-41435-054-rf

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

12. Table 1: Priority screening criteria Primary criteria Response No overlap: There is no overlap of activities between There re no other projects funded by ADB, a. subprojects financed by ADB, IFAD or other development ✓ IFAD or other development partners in this partners commune. Initial studies and feasibility studies: Economic viability, Feasibility studies have been conducted to climate resilience and disaster risk reduction measures, and determine the economic viability, as well to b. ✓ any resettlement, indigenous peoples and environmental identify climate resilience and DRR impacts have been studied. measures, of the subproject. Community support (as evidenced by the fact that the subproject is): Subproject will support government (i) In conformity with government policy strategy. ✓ decentralization policy by empowering the commune to manage the implementation. c. (ii) Identified in the CDP ✓ - (iii) The CCs will have a plan to contribute to O&M; CCs CCs have committed to support an O&M must prepare, discuss *& agree a plan with the DSCs and ✓ plan for the rehabilitated sections of the NCDDS in writing during the site visit and prior to final road. selection. Scale: Maximum size for any single subproject $200,000 equivalent including VAT and contingencies (i) For slightly larger projects ($200,00 to $240,000) the AF n.a. - will match any additional funding from commune sources.

(ii) The AF will consider projects that require cooperation of more than one commune. In this case the subproject can go n.a. - up to the amount of combined sections of the different d. communes.

(iii) Commune has submitted more than one subproject for n.a. - funding up to a maximum of $250,000 per commune.

(iv) The AF will not finance individual subprojects that are too complex or too large that they cannot be finished within 2 n.a. - years.

Economics: Subproject has an EIRR value of 12% based Subproject has an Economic Internal Rate of e. on an economic analysis conducted as per ADB’s Guidelines ✓ Return (EIRR) of 25.7% which reduced to on the Economic Analysis of projects. 20.1% under sensitivity analysis. Additional land is required since the proposed base width of the road is greater than the existing base-width of the road. However, the villagers have agreed to Resettlement: Subprojects does not involve land acquisition voluntarily donate pieces of their land. In f. that affects more than 5%-10% of livelihood of any affected ✓ addition, the land used by villagers which will person and is not a Category A subproject. impact by the subproject belongs to the public property within the road’s ROW as identified. Therefore, there is no involuntary resettlement. The subproject falls into category C. Indigenous peoples/ethnic minorities: Subprojects is not g. ✓ No IP communities in the area. Category A. h. Environment: Subproject is not Category A. ✓ Environmental Category C A total of 453 households will benefit from Gender: All subprojects must have at least 40% female i. ✓ the subproject. Population within the target beneficiaries. villages is 51% female. Roads: Subproject will ensure connectivity and the budget is Upgraded SBST road will connect two k. ✓ sufficient to connect to a community center or another road. villages to the National Road No. 1.

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

Table 2: Prioritization screening criteria Prioritization criteria Response The villages of Anlong Reach and Boeung Poverty: Subproject will benefit the poorest 25% of villages a. ✓ Khyang have higher recorded levels of ID in the commune and will benefit LIGs that have been formed. Poor (up to 20%).

Reducing disaster risk: Subproject will improve road that is SBST road will be constructed and elevated b. subject to regular flooding and provide improved access for ✓ to reduce the risk of inundation. villages affected by flooding.

Land/soils (suitability for rice/non-rice) and topography: Subproject located in area where soils are suitable for c. n.a. - proposed cropping with minimal levelling, vegetation clearing, etc. Improved road will facilitate easier access all Production and market access: Subproject will encourage year round from the three village of Anlong d. increased crop production and will improve access to ✓ Reach and Boeung Khyang and the National markets. Road No. 1 enabling easier transport of agricultural products.

Rehabilitation: Subproject is focused on rehabilitation of This is an existing laterite road that will be e. ✓ existing facilities/assets. upgraded to a SBST road.

Additional land is required since the proposed base width of the road is greater than the existing base-width of the road. However, the villagers have agreed to voluntarily donate pieces of their land. In Resettlement: Subproject does not require any f. ✓ addition, the land used by villagers which will resettlement. impact by the subproject belongs to the public property within the road’s ROW as identified. Therefore, there is no involuntary resettlement. The subproject falls into category C. Upgraded road will benefit farmers by enabling year round transport of their g. Multipurpose: Subproject has multiple purposes. ✓ products and for the general public in having easier access to National Road No. 1.

Community participation and support: Subproject has The road upgrading is included in the CDP h. support for the community for O&M and the scale is suitable ✓ and the community have a strong interest in for communities to manage effectively. ensuring that the road is well maintained.

There are Livelihood Improvement Groups (LIGs) formed in Anlong Reach and Boeung Infrastructure status: Subproject brings direct benefits to Khyang villages with a total of 38 members i. many LIG members through improved roads and market ✓ including 26 women and 21 FHHs and seven facilities. ID Poor. These LIGs were formed in April 2019 and April 2018 respectively.

Environmental Impact: Subproject has few negative j. ✓ Subproject is Category C. environmental impacts.

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

4. SUBPROJECT DESIGN AND LAND REQUIREMENT 13. The existing road has a base-width of 4.5 to 5.0 meter and the SBST road will have a base-width of 8.0 meters and its height will range from 0.62 to 0.90 meters also depending on the surrounding land level and the height of the existing road (0.35 to 0.60).4 The official Right of Way (RoW) for the road is 30.0 meters.5 The Corridor of Impact (CoI) extends for an additional 1.0 meters on each side of the road. The CoI during the construction will require additional land for temporary use and the villagers consented during the public consultation meetings for the contractor to use these small areas of land within the CoI temporarily (see Table 3). The road is divided into five sections and the following table shows the length of the road for each section. Figure 4: Typical cross section of proposed SBST road upgrading

Source: SSP6 DSC team

5. SITE SCREENING PROCESS AND PROCEDURES 5.1 Social safeguard screening and assessment 14. Additional land is needed for the road widening along each section of the road. However, there is no impact on residential or privately owned land. Despite the land being within the RoW, the farmers are utilizing sections of the existing roads RoW for agricultural production. Based upon the screening and assessment together with public consultation meetings, there will be a requirement for the land areas from the farmers who are using land along the proposed SBST subproject to be used for the road upgrading. However, the farmers confirmed that they are willing to donate and contribute land if needed during the construction of the proposed SBST road subproject. They also agreed to the temporary use of the land within the CoI during the construction and if there is any unavoidable impact within this additional one meter of land then the contractor will need to pay compensation or reinstate the impact areas to previous condition and quality.6

4 See Annex 2 for detailed engineering design. 5 Se Annex 4 for the official confirmation of the ROW for the road provided by the district cadastral office. 6 See Annex 3 for the land acquisition, resettlement impact and screening checklist and Annex 5 for Certificates of Land Asset Transfers. In Annex 5 it indicates that one farmer, Mr. Meas Vichet has no land along the road but has donated a small parcel of land from the community secondary canal (SC) that is 2.0 meters in length.

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

Table 3: Existing road and proposed road width for upgrading

Other land for Base-width of Additional land required for road widening Width of official temporary use during Village(s)/ road (m) PK Number ROW Length (m) Total Outside ROW construction Commune (m) Width Area Width Area Width Area Existing Proposed (m) (m2) (m) (m2) (m) (m2) 0+000 - 0+350 350 5.28.0 2.8977.50.00.02.0700.0 0+350 - 1+7001,350.004.78.5 3.85,130.00.00.02.02,700.0 1+700 - 2+150 30.0 450 5.18.0 2.91,305.00.00.02.0900.0 2+150 - 2+900 750 6.010.5 4.53,375.00.00.02.01,500.0 Kampong 2+900 - 3+479 579 4.59.0 4.52,605.50.00.02.01,158.0 Trabaek Total length (m) 3,479.0 Additional land area required for canal widening (m2) 13,393.0 Total land requirement Additional land area required for canal widening outside of ROW (m2) 0.0 Other land area for temporary use during construction (m2) 6,958.0 Source : IOL data updated by Design and Supervision Consultants team during site screening 15. All participants in the screening and public consultations (see Section 6) stated that they are willing to contribute some labor if they do not lose any property due to the proposed subproject. Due to the result of social screening and assessment, it can be seen that the subproject falls into category C in both the social safeguard and IPs because there are no IPs living in the subproject. Therefore, it is in compliance with the ADB SPS 2009 and the project RF. 5.2 Allowances for Affected Households 16. To achieve compliance with the TSSD-AF the following provisions are made for compensation allowances to be paid to any AHs that are impacted by the subproject as follows: - Vulnerable households are identified as those that are categorized as ID Poor 1 and/or whose monthly income per person is below the official poverty line of KHR 132,386 per month.7 The monthly income per person is calculated from the total monthly household income compared to the number of people who reside permanently within that household. Any households below the official poverty line are entitled to receive an additional allowance of two months of this level of income calculated on the basis of the number of members of the household. - For land donated by any AH that is outside of the official RoW of the road there will be compensation paid based on an official land valuation provided by the commune council and this payment is not dependent on that AH having an official land title. - For land donated by any AH that is inside the RoW of the road there will be allowances provided for loss of crop production based on an assumed yield of 3 tons per hectare of paddy and an average selling price of paddy (based on the socio-economic data for the impacted villages) for one crop season. - Allowances are provided for the loss of trees by any AH and the value of the loss is estimated in the Certificate of Land/Asset Transfer form that is signed by the household head. - Allowances are provided for the loss of fencing by any AH and the value of the loss is based on a value of KHR10,000 per meter of fence line. 17. In the case of this subproject there are no vulnerable AHs and all the land to be donated by the 184 AHs is within the RoW of the road. There will be 355 fruit trees removed and the value of these has been included in the Certificate of Land/Asset Transfer forms and there is no loss of fencing. The compensation and allowances that will be paid to each AH are summarized in Table 4.

7 The Ministry of Planning recalculated the official Poverty Line in 2013 and revised the monthly income per capita to KHR 132,386 for other urban areas and KHR 106,560 for rural areas. http://www.mop.gov.kh/DocumentKH/New%20Poverty%20Line-FINAL%20APR%202013.pdf

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

5.3 Socio-economic information on Affected Households 18. Based upon the information in Table 4, there are 184 AHs that are impacted by the subproject and their main income sources is farming. Their monthly household income ranges from KHR 311,250 to KHR 1,892,400 with an average value of KHR 800,000 to 1,200,000 and their monthly income per capita ranges from KHR 156,000 to KHR 249,000 and an average of KHR 145,000 which is above the official poverty line of KHR 132,386. All of the AHs use the land along the road on both sides of the road for residential land and the size of their land ranges from 54 to 7,000 sq. meters with an average of 2,000 to 4,000 sq. meters. The area of land affected ranges from 5.0 to 258.0 sq. meters which represents 0.40 to 9.48 percent of the land area and this is less than the 10 percent defined in the TSSD-AF RF and the subproject will not have any adverse impact on the AHs livelihoods. Furthermore, all of the AHs will benefit from the construction of the road through improved transportation of their agricultural products to the district center and to the National Road. 5.4 Vulnerable households 19. There are 12 ID Poor households amongst the 184 AHs with their monthly per capita is KHR 157,700 to 172,400 and only 22 female headed household (FHH) whose monthly income per capita is KHR 149,400 to 186,750 which is considerably higher than the official poverty line of KHR 132,386 per month. Thus, amongst the 184 AHs there are no vulnerable households and no impact of the subproject. 5.5 Indigenous People 20. During the field visits and the public consultations, it was confirmed by the local authorities and consulted people that there are no IPs living within the subproject area and this subproject will not cause any impact on IP. 5.6 Subproject cut-off date 21. During the site screening and assessment conducted as a part of the public consultations with the local authorities and the villagers, the participants agreed on the setting a cut-off date. They agreed that from the date of the 2nd public consultation (28th November 2019) until such time as the construction commenced the local authorities will ensure that the villagers do not engage in any new production activities within the CoI. All villagers consented to this during the consultation meeting.

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

Table 4: Inventory of Loss for Affected Households

Affected Assets identified Payments to AHs (KHR) No. of household Total monthly income Total land area (m2) Occupation members (KHR) Total affected land area 2 Affected Allowances FHH ID Poor Disability along road (m ) Land area No. AH Rep. Sex Age Length of land Compensation for (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) outside of No. of fences (%) land outside of For Per Per Land along ROW trees Crop Total Working Other land Residence Agriculture (m) ROW vulnerable Trees Fences Total Primary Other household person road/canal (m2) production households

Vulnerable Housholds None - - -- - Other Affected Households 1 Vorn Lang M 58 N N N 4 3 960,000 240,000 2,580 20,000 - 11 - - - 0.4% -2,430 - - 2,430 2 Ouch Menghong M 41 N N N 6 2 888,000 148,000 750 -- 15 - - - 2.0% -3,375 - - 3,375 3 Nhim Sophany F 48 N N N 7 5 1,020,000 145,714 2,880 50,000 - 29 - 1 - 1.0% -6,480 180,000 - 186,480 4 Ly Yav F 39 N N N 4 4 608,000 152,000 60 - - 5 - - - 8.3% -1,125 - - 1,125 5 Kav Leng F 54 N N N 6 4 864,000 144,000 96 - - 8 - - - 8.3% -1,800 - - 1,800 6 Ly Yav F 39 N N N 4 4 660,000 165,000 54 - - 5 - - - 8.3% -1,013 - - 1,013 7 Tho Chantha F 51 Y N N 2 2 288,000 144,000 138 -- 12 - - - 8.3% -2,588 - - 2,588 8 Toch Thy F 52 Y N N 2 2 300,000 150,000 96 - - 8 - - - 8.3% -1,800 - - 1,800 9 Nhim Sophany M 48 N N N 7 5 1,100,000 157,143 1,600 50,000 - 16 - - - 1.0% -3,600 - - 3,600 10 Song Chomnith F 35 N N N 2 2 312,000 156,000 1,800 - - 36 - - 2.0% -8,100 - - 8,100 11 Long Sreymon F 35 N N M 4 2 900,000 225,000 1,100 5,000 - 30 - 1 - 2.7% -6,638 60,000 - 66,638 12 Va Chanthy F 61 Y N N 1 1 180,000 180,000 72 ------13 Ly Chanthy F 51 Y N N 5 4 740,000 148,000 99 - - 9 - - - 9.4% -2,093 - - 2,093 14 Neang Kang F 34 Y N N 2 1 312,000 156,000 69 - - 7 - - - 9.4% -1,463 - - 1,463 15 Meas akena F 28 N N N 6 4 960,000 160,000 1,050 15,000 - 21 - - - 2.0% -4,725 - - 4,725 16 Chea Mean M 33 N N N 5 3 780,000 156,000 2,100 10,000 - 42 - - - 2.0% -9,450 - - 9,450 17 Pouk Sreyneang F 42 Y N N 2 2 320,000 160,000 2,000 20,000 - 40 - - - 2.0% -9,000 - - 9,000 18 Ang Pheron M 49 N N N 3 2 456,000 152,000 2,000 15,000 - 60 - 1 - 3.0% -13,500 120,000 - 133,500 19 Chea Neang F 50 N N N 6 5 936,000 156,000 2,030 30,000 - 61 - - - 3.0% -13,703 - - 13,703 20 Thai Theun M 54 N N N 4 2 624,000 156,000 1,950 20,000 - 59 - - - 3.0% -13,163 - - 13,163 21 Yus Phai M 54 N N N 8 6 1,216,000 152,000 2,030 20,000 - 41 - - - 2.0% -9,135 - - 9,135 22 Kong Sreyyuon F 31 N N N 6 2 960,000 160,000 1,340 - - 54 - - - 4.0% -12,060 - - 12,060 23 Ly Sin M 46 N N N 4 1 656,000 164,000 685 -- 27 - - - 4.0% -6,165 - - 6,165 24 Ly Hok F 55 N N N 5 2 760,000 152,000 685 -- 27 - - - 4.0% -6,165 - - 6,165 25 Ly Hong F 59 N N N 3 2 496,000 165,333 685 -- 27 - - - 4.0% -6,165 - - 6,165 26 Sim Sitha F 41 N N N 5 1 780,000 156,000 920 15,000 - 37 - 1 - 4.0% -8,280 60,000 - 68,280 27 Phai Thorn M 45 N N N 6 4 912,000 152,000 3,950 30,000 - 158 - 2 - 4.0% -35,550 120,000 - 155,550 28 Mom Polla F 59 N N N 5 5 780,000 156,000 1,970 - - 79 - - - 4.0% -17,730 - - 17,730 29 Chea Sreyneang F 35 Y N N 6 3 912,000 152,000 1,670 - - 67 - 6 - 4.0% -15,030 780,000 - 795,030 30 Chea Sokorn M 59 N N N 9 7 1,412,000 156,889 2,120 - - 85 - 1 - 4.0% -19,080 40,000 - 59,080 31 Oun Sreymom F 35 Y Y N 5 3 800,000 160,000 1,050 - - 42 - 1 - 4.0% -9,450 120,000 - 129,450 32 Thai Thorn M 45 N N N 6 4 920,000 153,333 500 20,000 - 20 - - - 4.0% -4,500 - - 4,500 33 Ly Hong F 59 N N N 3 2 468,000 156,000 1,000 - - 40 - - - 4.0% -9,000 - - 9,000 34 Yim Thach F 59 Y N N 7 2 1,076,000 153,714 3,000 - - 24 - 1 - 0.8% -5,400 120,000 - 125,400 35 Ork Samady M 21 N N N 4 3 640,000 160,000 7,080 - - 47 - - - 0.7% -10,620 - 10,620 36 Vorng Sovann M 28 N N N 4 2 688,000 172,000 6,450 20,000 - 258 - 20 - 4.0% -58,050 432,000 - 490,050 37 Ny Sokha F 32 N N N 3 2 512,000 170,667 2,060 20,000 - 82 - 5 - 4.0% -18,540 224,000 - 242,540 38 Chan Sophan F 42 N N N 4 3 632,000 158,000 1,880 20,000 - 75 - 8 - 4.0% -16,920 176,000 - 192,920

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

Table 4: Inventory of Loss for Affected Households (cont.,)

39 Hing Phany F 57 N N N 6 4 936,000 156,000 2,160 15,000 - 86 - 2 - 4.0% - 19,440 8,000 - 27,440 40 Ong Sophorn F 37 N N N 6 2 968,000 161,333 3,000 15,000 - 120 - - - 4.0% - 27,000 - - 27,000 41 Meas Vichet M 55 NNN--- -20,000------42 Khat Mao F 57 N N N 4 3 656,000 164,000 2,640 - - 96 - - - 3.6% - 21,600 - - 21,600 43 Bil Sareth F 42 N Y N 5 2 780,000 156,000 2,200 15,000 - 80 - - - 3.6% - 18,000 - - 18,000 44 Teang Maraneth F 36 Y N N 1 1 156,000 156,000 2,222 25,000 - 81 - - - 3.6% - 18,180 - - 18,180 45 Uch Sida F 40 NYN 12 4 1,824,000 152,000 1,760 10,000 - 64 - 3 - 3.6% - 14,400 300,000 - 314,400 46 Hing Sarith M 50 N Y N 5 2 780,000 156,000 2,200 10,000 - 80 - - - 3.6% - 18,000 - - 18,000 47 Va Rotha M 38 N N N 9 5 1,404,000 156,000 1,804 20,000 - 66 - - - 3.6% - 14,760 - - 14,760 48 Sim Sreynan F 35 Y N N 2 2 336,000 168,000 2,134 10,000 - 78 - - - 3.6% - 17,460 - - 17,460 49 Kong Him M 59 N N N 5 5 784,000 156,800 2,321 20,000 - 84 - 3 - 3.6% - 18,990 660,000 - 678,990 50 Chan Saem F 28 NNN 12 3 1,808,000 150,667 2,420 30,000 - 88 - 2 - 3.6% - 19,800 480,000 - 499,800 51 Ly Sur M 54 N N N 2 2 304,000 152,000 1,300 - - 80 - 2 - 6.2% - 18,000 360,000 - 378,000 52 Pheng Sokon M 54 N N N 9 3 1,440,000 160,000 1,502 10,000 - 92 - 3 - 6.2% - 20,790 140,000 - 160,790 53 Chea Pov M 48 NNN 10 5 1,520,000 152,000 3,135 20,000 - 84 - 1 - 2.7% - 18,810 30,000 - 48,810 54 Pon Sovann M 28 N N N 8 5 1,216,000 152,000 238 -- 20 - 1 - 8.6% - 4,590 20,000 - 24,590 55 Ly Sur M 54 N N N 2 2 320,000 160,000 594 -- 53 - - - 8.9% - 11,880 - - 11,880 56 Ok Sarun M 52 N N N 6 5 912,000 152,000 450 20,000 - 40 - 2 - 8.9% - 9,000 480,000 - 489,000 57 Khem Pov M 36 N N N 5 3 780,000 156,000 1,650 25,000 - 44 - 2 - 2.7% - 9,900 480,000 - 489,900 58 Va Chanthorn M 43 N N N 8 3 3,124,000 390,500 864 20,000 - 77 - 5 - 8.9% - 17,280 492,000 - 509,280 59 Cheang Sithorn M 53 N N N 3 3 524,000 174,667 954 -- 85 - 7 - 8.9% - 19,080 1,680,000 - 1,699,080 60 Cheang Sithorn M 53 N N N 3 3 456,000 152,000 3,000 - - 80 - - - 2.7% - 18,000 - - 18,000 61 Morn Romdul M 26 N N N 4 4 624,000 156,000 3,000 15,000 - 80 - - - 2.7% - 18,000 - - 18,000 62 Prom Sut F 58 NNN 11 5 1,620,000 147,273 1,400 10,000 - 80 - 1 - 5.7% - 18,000 240,000 - 258,000 63 Yu Moniodom M 29 N N N 8 3 1,232,000 154,000 6,120 20,000 - 163 - 2 - 2.7% - 36,720 480,000 - 516,720 64 Son Pheakkdey M 29 N N N 5 4 760,000 152,000 3,825 20,000 - 102 - 1 - 2.7% - 22,950 40,000 - 62,950 65 Et Someang M 53 N N N 4 2 656,000 164,000 2,700 - - 54 - - - 2.0% - 12,150 - - 12,150 66 Thai Thoeun M 54 N N N 4 2 608,000 152,000 2,505 20,000 - 67 - - - 2.7% - 15,030 - - 15,030 67 Son Panha F 32 N N N 6 4 968,000 161,333 2,730 20,000 - 73 - 1 - 2.7% - 16,380 180,000 - 196,380 68 Phai Oun F 44 Y N N 5 3 792,000 158,400 6,180 25,000 - 165 - 4 - 2.7% - 37,080 470,000 - 507,080 69 Em Sophorn M 59 N N N 3 2 456,000 152,000 5,820 30,000 - 155 - 13 - 2.7% - 34,920 1,580,000 - 1,614,920 70 Kang Thorn M 51 N N N 4 4 660,000 165,000 2,220 20,000 - 59 - - - 2.7% - 13,320 - - 13,320 71 Pok Pisey F 40 Y N N 5 3 760,000 152,000 3,825 20,000 - 102 - 10 - 2.7% - 22,950 980,000 - 1,002,950 72 Chan Sophan F 38 N N N 5 3 780,000 156,000 3,570 20,000 - 95 - - - 2.7% - 21,420 - - 21,420 73 Chan Sopheun F 40 N N N 3 2 456,000 152,000 3,750 20,000 - 75 - - - 2.0% - 16,875 - - 16,875 74 Touch Sarom F 49 NNN 11 5 1,620,000 147,273 3,075 20,000 - 75 - - - 2.4% - 16,875 - - 16,875 75 Pech Puon F 52 N N N 4 3 608,000 152,000 570 10,000 - 30 - 1 - 5.3% - 6,750 20,000 - 26,750 76 Phon Channy M 27 N N N 8 1 1,232,000 154,000 860 -- 80 - 2 - 9.3% - 18,000 480,000 - 498,000 77 Phon Sarim F 32 Y Y N 4 1 616,000 154,000 570 -- 30 - 1 - 5.3% - 6,750 240,000 - 246,750 78 San Davud M 40 N N N 4 2 672,000 168,000 3,000 30,000 - 60 - 1 - 2.0% - 13,500 180,000 - 193,500 79 Heak Sokheng F 59 N N N 2 4 320,000 160,000 3,000 20,000 - 80 - 3 - 2.7% - 18,000 360,000 - 378,000 80 Chan Sophan F 38 N N N 5 2 780,000 156,000 1,020 25,000 - 82 - 8 - 8.0% - 18,360 1,860,000 - 1,878,360 81 Long Borey M 41 N N N 2 2 328,000 164,000 2,870 5,000 - 82 - 2 - 2.9% - 18,450 420,000 - 438,450 82 Chen Chivorn M 56 N N N 4 5 608,000 152,000 2,870 20,000 - 82 - 2 - 2.9% - 18,450 360,000 - 378,450 83 Leang Sokchamnan F 30 N N N 4 3 608,000 152,000 2,856 10,000 - 82 - 1 - 2.9% - 18,360 240,000 - 258,360 84 Him Sokkon M 43 N N N 5 2 760,000 152,000 6,160 20,000 - 176 - - - 2.9% - 39,600 - - 39,600 85 Phon Sary M 49 Y N N 7 3 1,092,000 156,000 6,916 - - 198 - 2 - 2.9% - 44,460 360,000 - 404,460 86 Cheang Chantha F 26 N N N 4 2 640,000 160,000 2,470 10,000 - 104 - 2 - 4.2% - 23,400 16,000 - 39,400 87 York Lers M 59 N N N 5 2 760,000 152,000 1,584 - - 141 - - - 8.9% - 31,680 - - 31,680 88 Cheang Pola M 51 N N N 3 2 468,000 156,000 1,530 15,000 - 68 - 1 - 4.4% - 15,300 60,000 - 75,300 89 Neang Chamnan F 46 N N N 6 3 928,000 154,667 2,943 15,000 - 131 - 1 - 4.4% - 29,430 240,000 - 269,430 90 Khan Sakhoeun F 47 N N N 6 4 944,000 157,333 1,350 20,000 - 60 - 2 - 4.4% - 13,500 240,000 - 253,500 91 Kong Salim M 46 N N N 4 4 608,000 152,000 1,424 20,000 - 64 - - - 4.5% - 14,400 - - 14,400 92 Un Sokha M 30 N N N 5 4 780,000 156,000 975 20,000 - 52 - 3 - 5.3% - 11,700 140,000 - 151,700 93 Long Sarom F 56 N N N 2 2 312,000 156,000 1,067 5,000 - 54 - 7 - 5.1% - 12,150 740,000 - 752,150

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

Table 4: Inventory of Loss for Affected Households (cont.,)

94 Pring Sovanna M 35 N N N 5 2 780,000 156,000 1,386 15,000 - 79 - 3 - 5.7% - 17,820 660,000 - 677,820 95 So Chamroeun M 53 N N N 3 3 456,000 152,000 1,281 15,000 - 73 - 5 - 5.7% - 16,470 780,000 - 796,470 96 Horng Sari M 59 N N N 9 4 1,368,000 152,000 1,078 20,000 - 62 - 1 - 5.7% - 13,860 20,000 - 33,860 97 Kong Bunthy M 35 N N N 6 4 944,000 157,333 1,464 25,000 - 96 - 1 - 6.6% - 21,600 240,000 - 261,600 98 Phon Phan F 40 N N N 5 2 940,000 188,000 1,049 30,000 - 69 - - - 6.6% - 15,480 - - 15,480 99 Mai Hen F 36 N N N 6 4 936,000 156,000 964 15,000 - 63 - - - 6.6% - 14,220 - - 14,220 100 Kan Mao F 32 N N N 2 2 304,000 152,000 2,509 25,000 - 77 - - - 3.1% - 17,370 - - 17,370 101 Pring Sophoeun M 41 N N N 2 2 312,000 156,000 2,314 5,000 - 71 - - - 3.1% - - 102 Chhun Yoeun M 32 N N N 3 2 468,000 156,000 3,192 30,000 - 91 - 3 - 2.9% - 160,000 103 Thy Sarong F 41 N N N 6 2 928,000 154,667 1,980 10,000 - 53 - 11 - 2.7% - 1,320,000 104 Thy Saroeun F 49 N N N 6 2 904,000 150,667 3,135 10,000 - 84 - - - 2.7% - FALSE 105 Sim Pov F 32 N N N 2 2 400,000 200,000 3,360 - - 84 - 1 - 2.5% - 60,000 106 Sek sokhli F 48 Y Y N 4 2 656,000 164,000 3,536 20,000 - 88 - - - 2.5% - 107 Eav Sreymom F 48 Y N N 7 4 1,076,000 153,714 4,704 50,000 - 118 - 3 - 2.5% - 240,000 108 Kem Sorn M 49 N N N 6 2 912,000 152,000 1,972 - - 46 - 2 - 2.4% - 480,000 109 Khim Sina F 24 N N N 6 4 944,000 157,333 3,610 - - 76 - - - 2.1% - 110 Not Mao M 49 N N N 6 4 980,000 163,333 3,838 15,000 - 81 - 5 - 2.1% - 320,000 111 Soam Kunthea F 49 N N N 3 2 468,000 156,000 2,546 - - 54 - 4 - 2.1% - 90,000 112 Sorn Rachana F 28 N N N 9 2 1,400,000 155,556 3,363 10,000 - 71 - 4 - 2.1% - 96,000 113 Teav Sambo F 37 N N N 9 2 1,376,000 152,889 5,580 10,000 - 124 - 2 - 2.2% - 120,000 114 Chek Sokhun F 54 NNN 10 2 1,520,000 152,000 2,340 - - 52 - 2 - 2.2% - 48,000 115 Em Sochetra M 29 N N N 8 4 1,224,000 153,000 3,600 20,000 - 80 - 4 - 2.2% - 608,000 116 Sorn Ravy F 31 N N N 7 2 1,088,000 155,429 3,024 5,000 - 67 - 1 - 2.2% - 120,000 117 Leng Rin F 35 N N N 5 4 860,000 172,000 3,348 10,000 - 74 - 3 - 2.2% - 510,000 118 SimChenda F 45 N N N 6 3 912,000 152,000 2,934 15,000 - 65 - 3 - 2.2% - 600,000 119 Khat Kimsan F 51 N N N 8 5 288 36 8,496 50,000 - 189 - 2 - 2.2% - 240,000 120 Chai Sareun M 49 NNN 10 1 1,520,000 152,000 833 -- 74 - 12 - 8.9% - 1,560,000 121 Phen Sinuon F 52 NNN 10 4 1,552,000 155,200 6,426 30,000 - 143 - 5 - 2.2% - 400,000 122 LengSokkha F 57 Y N N 9 3 1,372,000 152,444 3,186 15,000 - 71 - - - 2.2% - 123 Ork Somuon M 26 N N N 4 3 640,000 160,000 3,780 25,000 - 84 - 2 - 2.2% - 200,000 124 Phork Kimsab F 59 N N N 8 3 1,196,000 149,500 5,928 15,000 - 125 - 2 - 2.1% - 240,000 125 Ouk Armra F 38 N N N 9 5 1,368,000 152,000 6,631 5,000 - 140 - 7 - 2.1% - 1,080,000 126 Mai Chanthorn M 58 N N N 4 3 656,000 164,000 2,505 5,000 - 67 - 2 - 2.7% - 80,000 127 Marn Sophal M 43 N N N 5 3 780,000 156,000 3,060 30,000 - 82 - 7 - 2.7% - 1,200,000 128 Sor Sreyneang F 30 N N N 7 2 1,060,000 151,429 8,100 30,000 - 216 - 9 - 2.7% - 448,000 129 Chet Rotha F 55 N N N 5 4 780,000 156,000 1,650 30,000 - 44 - 1 - 2.7% - 40,000 130 Eev Mom F 47 N N N 4 2 632,000 158,000 1,800 20,000 - 48 - 1 - 2.7% - 240,000 131 Kan Oun F 54 N N N 3 2 512,000 170,667 1,980 20,000 - 53 - 3 - 2.7% - 420,000 132 Pherk Chanthorn M 53 N N N 3 3 460,000 153,333 1,020 30,000 - 34 - - - 3.3% - 133 Hem Kea M 56 N N N 5 3 780,000 156,000 1,560 30,000 - 52 - 1 - 3.3% - 60,000 134 Heak Sonheang F 52 N N N 4 2 632,000 158,000 1,560 20,000 - 52 - - - 3.3% - 135 Kong Somoun F 53 N N N 7 3 1,092,000 156,000 1,240 15,000 - 62 - 1 - 5.0% - 240,000 136 Preap Pichchamroeun F 29 N N N 5 1 780,000 156,000 1,200 10,000 - 60 - 3 - 5.0% - 170,000 137 Em Sokon F 30 N N N 5 3 780,000 156,000 1,974 10,000 - 75 - 4 - 3.8% - 488,000 138 Pin Ra M 47 N N N 6 3 904,000 150,667 950 -- 76 - 2 - 8.0% - 50,000 139 Cheng Sreyneang F 53 N N N 6 2 928,000 154,667 350 7,500 - 20 - 1 - 5.7% - 20,000 140 San Ratanak F 22 N N N 4 2 616,000 154,000 350 -- 20 - - - 5.7% - 141 Em Sopheap F 40 N N N 4 2 632,000 158,000 700 10,000 - 40 - 5 - 5.7% - 540,000 142 Cheng Sokhean M 50 N N N 4 4 616,000 154,000 743 10,000 - 66 - - - 8.9% - 143 Em Borey M 29 N N N 5 5 780,000 156,000 2,250 30,000 - 60 - 1 - 2.7% - 20,000

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

Table 4: Inventory of Loss for Affected Households (cont.,)

144 Pin Sarin F 55 Y N N 4 1 624,000 156,000 2,400 10,000 - 64 - 4 - 2.7% - 16,000 145 Phon Sovanroth F 33 N N N 6 3 960,000 160,000 1,050 10,000 - 40 - - - 3.8% - 146 Venn Veasna F 49 N N N 8 4 1,220,000 152,500 385 -- 28 - - - 7.3% - 147 Van Soman F 49 N N N 4 3 616,000 154,000 550 10,000 - 40 - 2 - 7.3% - 360,000 148 Van Somart F 52 Y N N 4 2 608,000 152,000 660 15,000 - 48 - - - 7.3% - 149 Theb Chanthou M 50 N N N 7 5 1,076,000 153,714 5,377 20,000 - 113 - 1 - 2.1% - 60,000 150 So Kanha M 21 N N N 5 4 780,000 156,000 3,686 50,000 - 78 - 1 - 2.1% - 120,000 151 So Samon F 48 N N N 6 2 936,000 156,000 744 -- 57 - 2 - 7.7% - 210,000 152 So Kana M 24 N N N 4 2 632,000 158,000 2,945 10,000 - 42 - - - 1.4% - 153 So Sophal F 36 N N N 3 3 484,000 161,333 2,945 50,000 - 62 - 3 - 2.1% - 240,000 154 Sin Reasey M 40 N N N 8 2 1,216,000 152,000 8,284 50,000 - 174 - 3 - 2.1% - 88,000 155 Ang Sameth F 52 N N N 4 4 608,000 152,000 5,377 20,000 - 113 - 5 - 2.1% - 20,000 156 Khem Nimol M 31 N N N 2 2 344,000 172,000 3,667 20,000 - 77 - - - 2.1% - 157 Chea Sopheap F 28 N N N 7 2 1,076,000 153,714 3,800 15,000 - 80 - 15 - 2.1% - 408,000 158 Son Soknet F 27 N N N 6 4 916,000 152,667 1,112 20,000 - 68 - 2 - 6.2% - 260,000 159 Ang Thida F 43 N N N 8 2 1,160,000 145,000 13,281 20,000 - 280 - - - 2.1% - 160 Phan Thoeun F 47 N N N 4 2 632,000 158,000 1,500 - - 120 - - - 8.0% - 161 Net Borin F 48 N N N 5 5 840,000 168,000 1,400 15,000 - 112 - 1 - 8.0% - 20,000 162 Phan Thoeun F 48 N N N 4 3 624,000 156,000 650 -- 52 - - - 8.0% - 163 Kang Thorn M 51 N N N 4 3 640,000 160,000 760 20,000 - 32 - - - 4.2% - 164 Sim Savy F 50 NNN 10 2 1,520,000 152,000 950 5,000 - 40 - - - 4.2% - 165 Sim Savy F 50 NNN 10 2 1,560,000 156,000 765 5,000 - 68 - 1 - 8.9% - 40,000 166 Duch Savy M 34 N N N 2 2 328,000 164,000 5,454 - - 216 - 11 - 4.0% - 236,000 167 Khim Reasmey M 35 N N N 5 2 780,000 156,000 3,330 50,000 - 74 - - - 2.2% - 168 KhimReasmey M 35 N N N 1 2 192,000 192,000 3,240 50,000 - 72 - - - 2.2% - 169 Heang Cheat M 32 N N N 3 1 484,000 161,333 3,240 10,000 - 72 - - - 2.2% - 170 Kem Sorn F 53 YNN 10 3 1,520,000 152,000 981 -- 87 - - - 8.9% - 171 Khan Sinak F 39 N N N 6 2 920,000 153,333 743 10,000 - 66 - - - 8.9% - 172 Neat Saream F 42 N N N 5 3 760,000 152,000 2,100 10,000 - 60 - - - 2.9% - 173 Neat Borin F 48 N N N 7 2 1,064,000 152,000 2,100 20,000 - 60 - - - 2.9% - 174 Pouch Sokha M 50 N N N 5 2 780,000 156,000 2,041 15,000 - 63 - - - 3.1% - 175 Phen Vichet F 40 Y N N 3 1 456,000 152,000 3,468 - - 116 - 1 - 3.3% - 180,000 176 Chea Bunthoeun M 37 N N N 5 2 780,000 156,000 1,195 15,000 - 96 - 1 - 8.0% - 120,000 177 Om Sothun M 39 N Y N 2 2 316,000 158,000 616 20,000 - 56 - - - 9.1% - 178 Neang Sreyuon F 34 N N N 6 3 936,000 156,000 2,293 5,000 - 91 - 6 - 4.0% - 180,000 179 Seak Savy F 35 Y Y N 2 2 304,000 152,000 590 2,000 - 47 - - - 8.0% - 180 Seak Savoeun F 40 N N N 5 5 760,000 152,000 1,976 1,500 - 104 - 7 - 5.3% - 280,000 181 Som Dara M 35 N N N 3 2 512,000 170,667 624 -- 48 - - - 7.7% - 182 Chan Sophal F 57 Y Y N 5 1 760,000 152,000 676 -- 52 - 3 - 7.7% - 320,000 183 Meas Pov M 53 N Y N 8 3 1,248,000 156,000 520 -- 40 - - - 7.7% - 184 San Saro M 38 N N N 5 5 760,000 152,000 1,512 - - 96 - 5 - 6.3% - 100,000 - --- Total 106 - 24 10 - 1 430,264.3 2,546,000 - 13,393 355 - - - 1,520,573 19,188,000 20,708,573

Notes: 1 Valuation of lost crop prodution calculated on assumption of paddy yield of 3 tons/hectare and selling price of KHR 750 per kg, which equates to KHR 225 per square meter 2 Valuation of trees lost is stated in the Certificate of Land/Asset Transfer forms (see Annex 5). 3 Valuation of fencing lost is based upon KHR 10,000 per meter of fence line.

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

6. INFORMATION DISCLOSURE AND PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS 22. The PST together with SSP6 team conducted public consultations on 7th and 28th November 2019 with local authorities and beneficiaries in the subproject villages and at Kampong Trabaek commune office. They used the public consultations to: (i) engage with the local farmers to discuss the subproject including the technical explanation on the proposed rural road subproject; (ii) meet the beneficiaries’ project-related requests; (iii) ensure beneficiaries’ inclusion and participation at all stages of the subproject; (iv) include beneficiaries’ requests, opinions and suggestions into the proposed design and implementation of the subproject; (v) get agreement from local authorities and beneficiaries on the need for land acquisition; and (vi) ensure that the proposed subproject would meet communities’ needs for transportation for agriculture and domestic purposes. 23. The methodology for the conduct of consultations and community involvement in the subproject planning process was as follows: (i) Discussion with the local authorities (village and commune authorities) and project beneficiaries to review the technical detailed design and social assessment for the subproject’s site. (ii) Organization of public consultations with project beneficiaries and local authorities to discuss the subproject and get approval from the beneficiaries regarding the construction of the proposed SBST road upgrading subproject and information sharing of the benefits of the proposed SBST road subproject to the project beneficiaries. (iii) Discussion of the proposed solution and redress mechanism while the complaints. Therefore, the participants agreed the redress mechanism as indicated in section 5 24. The local authorities, other community leaders and beneficiaries understood clearly the proposed technical design of the road rehabilitation which would be used for improved transportation for domestic purposes and to improve access to markets for agricultural purposes. Furthermore, the rehabilitation of the road is in response to the demand of the residents of the villages. They were aware of the location of proposed SBST road. All participants agreed that the subproject will provide benefits to the subproject beneficiaries by providing them with better accessibility from the subproject villages to other villages and communes and to the school and market for agriculture purpose. 25. During the public consultation the local authorities and beneficiaries visited the site, verified and confirmed that the proposed location for the subproject site was appropriate because is located within the existing ROW and does not have any negative impact on any structures or private assets. Furthermore, the road is located within public land and all participants in the public consultation agreed that the contractor may use available public land to access the constructions site. There was a unanimous agreement to rehabilitate the proposed SBST road as soon as practicable. The result of public consultation confirmed that there are no IPs living in the subproject villages. The summary of public consultations conducted in subproject villages is presented in the following table.8

8 Details of the consultation minutes and list of participants in shown in Annex 5.

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

Table 5: Summary of consultations

No. of Location Total no of No of No Date Target group Aim of the consultation HH (village) participants women beneficiaries Local Inform local authorities 1 07.11.2019 authorities and and villagers about the 74 36 beneficiaries subproject, present the detailed technical Anlong design, discuss the Reach benefits of subproject, and impact on communities Boeung and obtain their opinions Khyang and suggestions discuss villages of with farmers who wish to 2 28.11.2019 Kampong Beneficiaries 68 33 contribute to the Trabaek subproject if needed commune together with the redress mechanism for solving any complaints while occurred. Total 142 69 453 Sources: SSP6 conducted public consultation 26. The participants at consultations suggested the following: - The upgrading of the proposed SBST road subproject should be done before the rainy season starts if possible. - Remaining excavated soil and grass should be stored at the locations agreed with beneficiaries. - The operation and maintenance group should be formed with a clear management committee tasks for rural road operation and management. - There should be a regulation that the group members should follow. The regulation should clearly indicate the group’s roles and responsibilities the line with the MRD regulation. - Capacity building should be provided by the above group to enable the group to facilitate daily operation and management. 27. During the construction period the SSP6 team in cooperation with the PST and the commune council will be responsible for monitoring the compliance with all safeguard requirements. 7. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 7.1 Cambodia Laws and Regulations 28. The local laws and regulations pertaining to the application of social safeguards are as follows:9 - Cambodian constitution 1993 - Land Law 2001 - Expropriation Law 2010 - Sub-decree on Social Land Concessions, March 2003 - Sub-decree ANK/BK No 22 - MEF Sub-Decree No. 115 - Circular 02 2007 7.2 ADB Policies on Involuntary Resettlement 29. The objective of the ADB SPS (2009) is to (i) avoid adverse impacts on people and the environment, when possible; (ii) where adverse impacts are unavoidable then the Project will minimize, mitigate or compensate the adverse impacts on the environment and the affect people’ and (iii) help the EA to strengthen its safeguard system.

9 See Annex 6 for full description of Cambodian laws and regulations and ADB requirements.

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

30. The two key policy documents that define these requirements are: - Involuntary Resettlement Policy. - Project Resettlement Framework. 8. GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM 31. A subproject grievance is defined as an actual or perceived project-related problem that gives ground for complaint by an affected household (AH). As a general policy, all of the TSSD-AF subprojects work proactively toward preventing grievances through the implementation of subproject and commune liaison activities that anticipate and address potential issues before they become grievances. Nevertheless, during the construction and operation it is possible that unanticipated impacts may occur. In order to address complaints if or when they arise, a project Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) has been developed in accordance with ADB requirements and RGC practices. The GRM is a systematic process for receiving, evaluating and addressing project-related grievances voiced by AHs. 10 32. Any household affected by the SBST road upgrading subproject will be able to submit a grievance if they believe a subproject activity is having a detrimental impact on their household property, on their quality of life. The GRM will be made public throughout the public consultation process and will be maintained during the operation and maintenance period. 33. Informally, an AH can lodge a complaint directly to the contractor, during the pre- construction and construction period or the affected household can lodge complaint to village and commune authorities. Within the same day, the village and commune authorities will organize the public meeting to resolve the complaints. The contractor will also immediately inform the NCDDS about the complaint. If possible, the contractor will rectify the problem within one day of the complaint. If not, the AH can go to the district level. The PST will screen the complaint within one day of receipt. If the screening reveals the complaint as Project- related and valid, the Contractor will act within three days from confirmation by PST, that the complaint is valid. For at least one week after the confirmation of the grievance, the PST must monitor the effectiveness of the action/resolution taken. After which, PST will secure a written confirmation of satisfaction from the AH. 34. In addition, the membership of the Grievance Redress Committees (GRCs) and the contact telephone numbers of the members will be publicized through a signboard at the subproject site and on the commune notice board. The GRC will be responsible for maintaining a record of all grievances that are received and documenting the response and resolution with the AHs of other stakeholders. A Project Information Booklet has been prepared (in Khmer and English) for distribution to all local stakeholders which describes in detail the GRM procedure.11 9. VALIDATION BY EXTERNAL SAFEGUARD MONITORING ENTITY 35. To achieve compliance with the ADB SPS (2009) and the TSSD-AF RF (2017), the NCDDS has recruited an External Safeguard Monitoring Entity (ESME) to conduct independent monitoring of the safeguard implementation based upon the approved RF during the design, construction and operation of the infrastructure subprojects to ensure that acceptable consultative and grievance reporting mechanisms have been adopted and, in respect of all subprojects that require land acquisition, to verify that (i) the principles of voluntary land/asset donation have been followed; (ii) the AHs who have opted for land donation have not been forced to donate; and (iii) the living standards of those who opted for donation will not be negatively affected. In addition, the ESME team will check and verify all

10 See Annex 7 for details of the GRM established and the Grievance Redress Committee (GRC) composition. 11 See Annex 8 for Project Information Booklet for this subproject.

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject of the certificates of land/asset transfer forms and confirm that the information is accurately represented in the IOL table included in this DDR (see Table 4). 36. The ESME team will prepare a monitoring report submission plan to NCDDS with the timeline for their required activities including (i) validation of the conduct of acceptable consultative processes during the selection and design of the subproject; (ii) verification of the land and asset donation required for each AH based upon detailed design and confirmed RoW; (iii) validation of all certificates of land/asset transfer forms with the IOL table in the DDR; (iv) schedule of visit for monitoring of compliance with DDR during construction and warranty period; and (v) schedule of follow up visits to verify the efficacy of the GRM. The monitoring and reporting schedule for this subproject is shown below: Table 6: Monitoring and reporting schedule for ESME team Activity Methodology Timing12 Consultation meeting with the local Validation of conduct of acceptable authorities and local residents to assess their consultative processes during Prior to resumption level of participation and empowerment selection and design of the of civil works. during the subproject selection and design subproject. process.

Meeting with local residents to confirm that Validation that no land and asset there is no requirement for land and asset Prior to resumption donation is required based upon the donation based upon the detailed design and of civil works. detailed design and confirmed RoW. taking into account the confirmed RoW.

Monthly field visits to the subproject site to verify that the agreed requirement for no land Monitoring of compliance with DDR During remainder of acquisition has been complied with and there during construction. construction period. has been no adverse impact on the living condition or livelihoods of local residents. Consultation and coordination with all levels of the GRM committees, including the local During remained of authority, to determine the satisfactory construction period Validation of efficacy of the GRM resolution as per process and procedures of and the warranty the approved TSSD-AF RF of any period. grievances from local residents.

The ESME team will prepare a semi-annual safeguard monitoring report incorporating all validation requirements including the collection and compilation of all certificate of land/asset transfer forms for submission to ADB for concurrence and disclosure. 10. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10.1 Summary of conclusions 37. Following the detailed engineering design and the CoI that was agreed to during the public consultations and demarcation, the proposed SBST subproject will have some impact to a small strip of land used by the 184 AHs that is within the official RoW. The following conclusions have been reached: 38. Based upon the requirements in the TSSD-AF RF the following conclusions can be drawn: a. All AHs have been consulted and there is a requirement for land acquisition amounting to 13,393 m2 but there are no involuntary resettlement impacts. b. No residential land or privately owned land affected by the subproject. c. There are no landless households adversely affected. d. The official ROW of the road is 30.0 meters. e. The road upgrading will be performed within the existing road RoW. However, there will be temporary use of one meter of land on each side beyond than the proposed road

12 Specific dates will be provided in the monitoring timeline submitted by ESME to NCDDS.

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject

width for the movement of construction material but still within the ROW and no impact was foreseen during the site screening. f. There is a need for the removal of 355 fruit trees and the AHs have agree to this during the public consultation meetings based upon the allowances that will be paid to them. g. All farmers will benefit directly from the proposed road upgrading.

39. During the field visits and the public consultations, it was confirmed by the local authorities and consulted people that there are no IPs living within the subproject area and this subproject will not cause any impact on IPs. Therefore, the subproject is classified as category C for both involuntary resettlement and IPs impact according to ADB’s classification and the approved TSSD-AF RF. 40. The GRM has been established as above described in details and it has been informed to beneficiaries who participated during consultation as well. In addition, PIB which includes GRM information and its steps, was also distributed to local authorities and all participants. GRM logbook has been prepared for complaint registry and response if any potential problems may occur during the construction. 10.2 Follow up actions and recommendations 41. Internal monitoring must be performed regularly during the implementation of the subproject mainly during construction time. The monitoring will be performed by the PST and the SSP6 Site Supervision Engineer and SSS. The progress will be reported in the Quarterly Progress Report and the semi-annual Safeguard Monitoring Reports that are prepared by the PIC team. 42. Measures must be taken to avoid disruption of villager’s daily lives. The villagers must be informed in advance when works at specific locations are planned and whether some services or access will be temporarily affected. 43. If any damage to private properties occurs during the construction period, the assets replacement-based compensation will be paid as per the national laws and regulations and ADB SPS 2009. The contractor must support the GRM process and ensure timely and effective resolution of grievances. 44. The contractor will be responsible to reinstate the land used to access the subproject site to the original condition and supervision consultants will monitor the progress and report through safeguard monitoring reports. The Supervision Engineer must ensure that private land, temporally used for access to the sites, is properly restored and returned to the owner without any unnecessary delays. 45. The PST will closely monitor the construction process and shall ensure that if any impact is caused by contractor during the civil work, this is reinstated by contractor strictly in line with the entitlement matrix provided in the updated TSSD-AF, at the full replacement cost. The PST will update the status of safeguard compliance in the semi-annual safeguard monitoring reports and will include all the relevant supporting documents (i.e. receipt of payments of any compensation made by contractor, full consultations conducted etc.). 46. The PST will ensure that the subproject does not adversely impact any family during the civil works and will require the contractor to provide alternative access to other road in case of temporary blockage of the proposed road during construction as needed; and ensure access to other work and to the house are provided at all times including as temporary alternative measures in consultation with farmers and households who are living nearby. 46. To comply with the approved TSSD-AF RF (2017), the ESME will submit the monitoring report submission plan for each subproject to NCDDS and ADB. The ESME needs to verify that (i) principles on the voluntary donation are observed; (ii) those opted for donation are not forced to donate; and (iii) living standards of those who opted for donation are not negatively affected. Aside from various topics for the ESME to report, as detailed in the RF,

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject the signed copy of donation vouchers that match with the DDR IOL must be included in the report.

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 1 Summary of socio-economic data

Village(s) No. of No. of Ave HH % non- Demographics Population Male Female vulnerable HH size Khmer HH (%) Anlong Reach 1,561.0 711.0 850.0 346.0 4.5 4.0 1.5 Boeung Khyang 509.0 254.0 255.0 107.0 5.0 1.0 0.0 Total 2,070.0 965.0 1,105.0 453.0 4.75 Marital status Couples Widows Widowers Anlong Reach 80.0 18.0 2.0 Boeung Khyang 95.0 4.0 1.0 Education Illiterate Literate Primary Secondary High University Anlong Reach 19.0 81.0 28.0 17.0 8.0 5.0 Boeung Khyang .5.0 95.0 15.0 11.0 6.0 1.0 Occupation Farming Employees Business Public sector Health Fishing Anlong Reach 81.0 16.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 Boeung Khyang 81.0 16.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 Domestic Migration % of popn. % of men % of women % of popn. External migration Anlong Reach 17.0 40.0 60.0 1.0 Boeung Khyang 17.5 55.0 45.0 10. Land classification (ha) Community Land Use (ha) Total area forest Residential Common Irrigated Rainfed Crops area Anlong Reach 532.0 17.0 263.0 246.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 Boeung Khyang 172.0 11.0 86.0 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 704.0 28.0 349.0 321.0 0.0 6.0 Framing Agriculture Farming Production Farm gate price Population No. of HHs without activities production (%) (ton/ha) (riel) pesticide Anlong Reach 1,561.0 346.0 81.0 0.0 3.0 750.0 Boeung Khyang 509.0 107.0 81.0 0.0 3.0 750.0 Total 2,070.0 453.0 3.0 Water/Sanitation Boiled Safe water Flush toilet No toilet (%) water Anlong Reach 32.0 55.0 68.0 32.0 Boeung Khyang 28.0 61.0 75.0 25.0 Poverty levels (%) Very poor Poor Medium Better off Anlong Reach 14.0 60.0 6.0 20.0 Boeung Khyang 2.0 23.0 54.0 21.0

Annex 1 - Page 1

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject Annex 2 Detailed Engineering Design

Annex 2 - Page 1

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject Annex 2

Annex 2 - Page 2

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road road subproject Annex 3 Land acquisition, resettlement impact and screening checklist

Probable Involuntary Not Yes No Remarks Resettlement Effects Known Involuntary Acquisition of Land 1. Will there be land - The road widening will require the acquisition  - - acquisition? of small areas of land from 184 AHs. - During the public consultations the COI was 2. Is the site for land demarcated and the AHs understood the  - - acquisition known? amount of land that was needed for acquisition. 3. Is the ownership status and current usage of land to be  - - - As above acquired known? 4. Will easement be utilized - The road widening will be done within the within an existing Right of  - - official ROW of the road. Way (ROW)? 5. Will there be loss of shelter - There will be loss of residential land or and residential land due to -  - impact on shelters. land acquisition? 6. Will there be loss of - There will be a loss of small areas of agricultural and other  - - agricultural land but allowances will be productive assets due to provided to the AHs. land acquisition? 7. Will there be losses of crops, - There will be some loss of crop production trees, and fixed assets due  - - but there was agreement on the cut-off date. to land acquisition? 8. Will there be loss of businesses or enterprises -  - - There will be no impacts on businesses. due to land acquisition? 9. Will there be loss of income - There will be minor loss of income through sources and means of -  - the land acquisition but allowances will be livelihoods due to land provided to the AHs. acquisition? Involuntary restrictions on land use or on access to legally designated parks and protected areas 10. Will people lose access to natural resources, - There will be no loss of access to natural -  - communal facilities and resources. services? 11. If land use is changed, will it have an adverse impact on social and economic -  - - There will be no change in land use. activities? 12. Will access to land and - There will be no loss of access to land resources owned -  - communally or by the state resources. be restricted? Information on Displaced Persons: There are no displace persons

Any estimate of the likely number of persons that will be displaced by the Project? [ √ ] No [ ] Yes If yes, approximately how many?

Are any of them poor, female-heads of households, or vulnerable to poverty risks? [√ ] No [ ] Yes Are any displaced persons from indigenous or ethnic minority groups? [ √ ] No [ ] Yes

Annex 3 - Page 1

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road road subproject Annex 3

Subproject Subproject Category Next Steps Eligibility A: 200 or more persons will experience major impacts defined as (i) being physically displaced from housing, or Not Eligible Identify alternative subproject (ii) losing 10% or more of their productive or income generating assets B: Less than 200 persons will experience major impacts defined as Prepare Resettlement Plan in accordance with (i) being physically displaced from Eligible housing, or (ii) losing 10% or more of the RF their productive or income generating assets C: No involuntary resettlement Eligible None impacts.

Annex 3 - Page 2

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject Annex 4 Certification of ROW for canal by Provincial Department of Land Management, Urban Planning and Cadastral

Kingdom of Cambodia Nation-Religion-King Prey Veng province Kampong Trabaek District Administration District Office for Land Management, Urbanization, Construction and Cadastral No. 002/20 LMUCC/KPT 1 June 2020 CERTIFICATE OF ROAD RIGHT OF WAY

The district office of land management, urbanization, construction and cadastral wish to certify that the RoW of the SBST road construction subproject which is located in Anlong Reach and Boeung Khchorng villages of Kampong Trabaek commune, Kampong Trabaek district of Prey Veng province is 30 meters (see the land registration map attached).. District Office for Land Management, Urbanization, Construction and Cadastral Signed and Sealed

Head-Office (Ngor Limchiv)

Annex 4 - Page 1 TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabaek SBST road subproject Annex 4

Annex 4 - Page 2 TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabeck SBST road subproject Annex 5 Minutes of public consultation meetings

Consultation Meetings 1. (Local authorities) 2. (Local authorities and project beneficiaries) Date: 07/11/2019 Date: 28/112019 No of participants:74 No of participants: 68 No of women: 36 No. of women: 33 Meeting chairman: Mr. Chea Sokhorn Commune Chief. Meeting chairman: M. Chea Sokhorn Commune Chief. Facilitator: Mr. Sothera, PPMA Facilitator: Mr. Sotheara, PPMA Minutes taker: Mr. Hong Sophea, SSP6 Minutes taker: Mr Hong Sophea, SSP6

Content of meetings Understanding and accepting the subproject: - The local authorities and project beneficiaries understood clearly the proposed technical design of the proposed rural road rehabilitation (3,479 meter length, 5 meter top-width and height that varies from 0.62 to 0.90 meters above the surrounding land level) which will be used for local transportation. They all confirmed that the subproject will provide benefits to farmers such as travelling from home to school, going from rice farming to home and via versa and bringing rice production from field to home or to the market. - All participants agreed to rehabilitate the rural road based on the proposed technical design and the area which will be used for taking soil or laterite to construct road as identified. The accessed road from the area where will use to take soil or laterite to construct rural road is identified and agreed by local authorities and project beneficiaries and the areas belong to public land. Impact on individual land: - The local authority and project beneficiaries verified and confirmed that the proposed location for the subproject site is appropriate because it is located within the existing rural road (with 4.7 to 6.0 meter base-width) and then expands about 2.79 to 4.5 meters (base-width). The road upgrading does need land acquisition from both sides of the road. All farmers who have their productive land along the existing road confirmed and agreed that they will voluntarily donate pieces of their land for the subproject and also land for temporary use by the contractor during the construction in order to have a good road in their location. They wish to have a good road to be used for local transportation. Field validation: - The local authorities together with the project beneficiaries visited the site of the road and they confirmed that it is located within the existing road ROW and it has no negative impact on environment and homesteads. The proposed rural road rehabilitation has a top width of 5 meter. Some private land acquisition is required for subproject, and they all agreed to construct the SBST road within the proposed site. The access road from the area where they can extract soil or laterite materials to build the SBST road is public land. Some wastes and grasses need to be cleared before construction. - In addition, there was a discussion of the project cut-off date which represents the period from the conduct of the 2nd consultation meeting and the time at which the contractors commenced construction. During this time the villagers consented to only engage in the harvesting of existing crops or cutting trees and they will not commence any new production activities within the COI including the areas of voluntary land donation. Specific internal regulations for the SBST road - Based on the discussion during the meeting, the local authorities and project beneficiaries agreed that there should be a regulation that the local authorities should follow. The regulation should also indicate the amount of money or contribution from local authorities, mainly commune authorities for maintenance and repairing the rural road and its structure for a long term use. - At the end of the consultation meeting (the same day), the local authorities and project beneficiaries agreed with the identified subproject and they wished to have and use the proposed subproject as soon as possible. Subproject management proposed by beneficiaries - The local authorities should be formed with a clear management committee towards road’s operation and management based on the guideline of MRD. - Capacity building should be provided by the project team in collaboration with MRD officers to enable the management committee to facility daily operation and management.

Annex 5 - Page 1

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabeck SBST road subproject Annex 5 Photos of public consultation meetings

Annex 5 - Page 2

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabeck SBST road subproject Annex 5 List of participants - 1st public consultation meeting 7th November 2019

Annex 5 - Page 3

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabeck SBST road subproject Annex 5

Annex 5 - Page 4

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabeck SBST road subproject Annex 5

Annex 5 - Page 5

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabeck SBST road subproject Annex 5 List of participants - 2nd consultation meeting

Annex 5 - Page 6

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabeck SBST road subproject Annex 5

Annex 5 - Page 7

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabeck SBST road subproject Annex 5

Annex 5 - Page 8

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 6 Legal Framework 1. Cambodia Laws and Regulations The 1993 Constitution of Cambodia has established two governing principles pertaining to land acquisition. Article 44 states that: All persons, individually or collectively, shall have the rights to ownership. Only Khmer legal entities and citizens of Khmer nationality shall have the right to own land. Legal private ownership shall be protected by law. The rights to confiscate properties from any persons shall be exercised only in the public interest as provided for under the law and shall require fair and just compensation in advance. The 2001 Land Law. The rights to land and property in Cambodia are governed by the 2001 Land Law, which is primarily based on the provisions of the 1993 Constitution. It defines the scope of ownership of immovable properties, such as land, trees and fixed structures. The Land Law, Article 5, states that “No person may be deprived of his ownership, unless it is in the public interest. Any ownership deprivation shall be carried out in accordance with the governing procedures provided by law and regulations, and after the payment of fair and just compensation in advance.” The Expropriation Law 2010 was passed by the National Assembly in 29 December 2009 and afterwards promulgated by the King on 4 February 2010. Relevant provisions include: (i) Article 2 of the law has the following purposes to (a) ensure reasonable and just deprivation of a legal right to ownership of private property; (b) ensure payment of reasonable and just prior compensation; (c) serve the public and national interest; and (d) develop public physical infrastructure. (ii) Article 7: Only the state may carry out an expropriation for use in the public and national interest. Expropriation may only be carried out for the implementation of projects stipulated in Article 5 of this Law. (iii) Article 8: The state shall accept the purchase of part of the real property left over from an expropriation at a reasonable and just price at the request of the owner of and/or the holder of right in the expropriated real property who is unable to live near the expropriated scheme or to build a residence of conduct any business. (iv) Article 16: Prior to making any expropriation project proposal, the expropriation committee shall conduct a public survey by recording of detailed description of all entitlements of the owner and/or of then holder of real right to immovable property and other properties subject to compensation as well as the recording of relevant issues. (v) Article 22: An amount of compensation to be paid to the owner and/or holder of rights in the real property shall be based on the market value of the real property or the alternative value as of the date of the issuance of the Prakas on the expropriation scheme. The market value or the alternative value shall be determined by an independent commission or agent appointed by the expropriation committee. The Sub Decree on Social Land Concession, March 2003 provides for allocations to landless people of state lands for free for residential or family farming purposes, including the provision of replacement land lost in the cases of involuntary resettlement. The Sub-decree No. 25 on providing house ownership, April 1989 recognized private house ownership including land and confirmed in the Land Law 2001 (Article 4). Cambodians are able to register the land they occupy with the local Cadastral Administration Office (CAO), whereupon a Certificate of Land Title is granted. Issuing a land title is a lengthy process and most offices have a major backlog and pending applications. People are given a receipt and until the official title deed is issued, and the receipt is acceptable proof of real occupants of the land for purposes of sale. The present legal status of land use in Cambodia can be classified as follows: (i) Privately owned land with title: The owner has official title to land and both owners and the CAO have a copy of the deed. (ii) Privately owned land without title: The owner has a pending application for land title and is waiting for the issuance of a title deed. The CAO recognizes the owner.

Annex 6 - Page 1

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 6 (iii) Land Use Rights Certificate: In this case, a receipt for long-term land use has been issued. This land use right is recognized by CAO. (iv) Lease Land: The government or private owners lease the land, usually for a short period. There is provision for owners to reclaim land if it is needed for development. (v) Non-legal Occupation: The user has no land use rights to state Land that he occupies or uses. The CAO does not recognize the use of this land. Sub Decree ANK/BK No 22 approved on 22 February 2018 on RGC’s Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement for Externally Financed Projects sets out the policies, regulations and procedures sets out the land acquisition and involuntary resettlement in projects that are financed under Overseas Development. The SOP provides for the use of Development Partners Safeguard Policy and for gap-filling measures where the provisions of the SOP conflict with the Development Partners mandatory safeguard requirements. MEF Sub-Decree No. 115 dated 26 May 2016 on promoting Resettlement Department to General Department of Resettlement (GDR) provides mandate to GDR to lead all resettlement activities including preparation of RP, implementing and internal monitoring of the RP. Circular No. 02 dated in 26 February 2007 stares clearly that (i) illegal occupants of state land has no right to compensation and can be punished in accordance with the land law 2001, and (ii) illegal occupants who are poor, landless and part of vulnerable group can be provided a plot of land. 2. ADB Policies on Involuntary Resettlement The objectives of the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (June 2009) are (i) to avoid adverse impacts on people and the environment, when possible; (ii) where adverse impacts are unavoidable then the Project will minimize, mitigate, or compensate the adverse project impacts on the environment and the affected people; and (iii) help the EA strengthen its safeguard system. Involuntary Settlement Policy: The objectives are (i) to avoid involuntary resettlement wherever possible; (ii) to minimize involuntary resettlement by exploring project and design alternatives; (iii) to enhance, or at least restore, the livelihoods of all displaced persons in real terms relative to pre-project levels; and (iv) to improve the standards of living of the displaced poor and other vulnerable groups. Policy principles include: a. Screen the project early on to identify past, present, and future involuntary resettlement impacts and risks. Determine the scope of resettlement planning through a survey and/or census of affected persons (APs), including a gender analysis, specifically related to resettlement impacts and risks. b. Carryout meaningful consultations with APs, host communities and concerned NGOs. Inform all displaced persons of their entitlements and resettlement options. Pay particular attention to the needs of the of the vulnerable groups, especially those below the poverty line, the landless, the elderly, women and children, and indigenous peoples, and those without legal title to land, and ensure their participation in consultations. Establish a grievance redress mechanism. c. Improve, or at least restore, the livelihoods of all APs through: (i) land-based resettlement strategies when affected livelihoods are land based where possible or cash compensation at replacement value for land when the loss of land does not undermine livelihoods; (ii) prompt replacement of assets with access to assets of equal or higher value; (iii) prompt compensation at full replacement cost for assets that cannot be restored; and (iv) additional revenues and services through benefit sharing schemes where possible. d. Provide physically and economically APs with needed assistance, including the following: (i) if there is relocation, secured tenure to relocation land, better housing at resettlement sites with comparable access to employment and production opportunities, integration of resettled persons economically and socially into their host communities, and extension of

Annex 6 - Page 2

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 6 project benefits to host communities; (ii) transitional support and development assistance, such as land development, credit facilities, training, or employment opportunities; and (iii) civic infrastructure and community services, as required. e. Improve the standards of living of the affected poor and other vulnerable groups, including women, to at least national minimum standards. In rural areas provide them with legal and affordable access to land and resources, and in urban areas provide them with appropriate income sources and legal and affordable access to adequate housing. f. Develop procedures in a transparent, consistent, and equitable manner if land acquisition is through negotiated settlement. g. Ensure that APs without titles to land or any recognizable legal rights to land are eligible for resettlement assistance and compensation for loss of non-land assets. h. Prepare a RP elaborating on APs’ entitlements, the income and livelihood restoration strategy, institutional arrangements, monitoring and reporting framework, budget, and time-bound implementation schedule. i. Disclose a draft RP, including documentation of the consultation process in a timely manner, before project appraisal, in an acceptable place and a form and language(s) understandable to APs and other stakeholders. Disclose the final RP and its updates to APs and other stakeholders. j. Conceive and execute involuntary resettlement as part of a development project or program. Include the full costs of resettlement in the presentation of the project’s cost and benefits. For a project with significant involuntary resettlement impacts, consider implementing the involuntary resettlement component of the project as a stand-alone operation. k. Pay compensation and provide other resettlement entitlements before physical or economic displacement. Implement the RP under close supervision throughout the project’s implementation. l. Monitor and assess resettlement outcomes, their impacts on the standards of living of APs, and whether the objectives of the RP have been achieved by taking into account the baseline conditions and the results of resettlement monitoring. Disclose monitoring reports. Project Resettlement Framework1: Each project shall be screened for land acquisition and resettlement impacts which will be carried out from the beginning of the project design to see whether the project resettlement impacts can be avoid, mitigated, minimized as much as possible. In case where the subproject involves voluntary donation and no other land acquisition and resettlement impacts, the subproject will be classified as Category C for involuntary resettlement. However, the project implementation unit shall prepare a report to ADB to document that: (1) the subproject site was selected in full consultation with legalized or non-legalized affected owners; (2) voluntary donations do not severely affect the living standard of affected people and the amount of farmland or other productive land to be acquired from each affected household does not exceed 10% of the total landholdings of the affected household; (3) voluntary donations are linked directly to benefit the affected household; (4) any voluntary donation will be confirmed through a written record and verified by an independent third party; (5) there is an adequate grievance process; (6) none of the household will be severely affected and will not be displaced; and (7) none of the household is vulnerable.

1 https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/project-documents/41435/41435-054-rf-en.pdf

Annex 6 - Page 3

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 7 Grievance Redress Mechanism In this case the GRM consists of four grievance resolution levels: (i) Stage 1: AHs will submit a letter of complaint/request to the village or commune resettlement sub-committee or PRSC working group or IRC working groups. The Commune Office will be obliged to provide immediate written confirmation of receiving the complaint. If, after 5 days, the aggrieved AH does not hear from the village or commune or PRSC working group or IRC working group, or if the AH is not satisfied with the decision taken by in the commune office, the complaint may be brought to the district office. (ii) Stage 2: The district office has 10 days within which to resolve the complaint to the satisfaction of all concerned. If the complaints cannot be resolved in this stage, the district office will bring the case to the Provincial Grievance Redress Committee. (iii) Stage 3: The Provincial Grievance Redress Committee meets with the aggrieved party and tries to resolve the complaint. The Committee may ask for a review of the DMS by the external monitoring agency (EMA). Within 15 days of the submission of the grievance, the Committee must make a written decision and submit a copy of the same to IRC and the AH. (iv) The NCCDS investigates the complaint and then invites the AH, PST and contractors together with local authorities to a meeting to attempt to address the complaints within 15 working days. If the complaint cannot be address within that time, the AH can submit the complaint to the judicial level for final resolution and settlement All court fees will be borne by the project. The AH may choose to approach ADB under the Accountability Mechanism.1

Grievance follow up: The relevant PST coordinators may contact the AP at a later stage to ensure that the activities do not trigger any further issues. If the problem persist, it will be treated as a new grievance and re-enter the process.

Grievance Redress Mechanism

Affected Person

Redressed Grievance 1. Village level (within 2 days)

Not redressed 2. District government level Redressed (within 5 days)

Not redressed 3. Provincial government level Redressed (within 15 days)

4a. Appeal to judicial level 4b. Appeal to ADB accountability ADBNot redressed mechanism

1 The ADB Accountability Mechanism provides a forum where people adversely affected by ADB- assisted projects can voice and seek solutions to their problems and report alleged noncompliance of ADB's operational policies and procedures. It consists of two separate but complementary functions: consultation phase and compliance review phase. For more information see: https://www.adb.org/site/accountability- mechanism/main

Annex 7 - Page 1

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 7

Accountability Mechanism In addition, AHs may contact the Complaints Receiving Officer of ADB via the following address which will be included in the subproject signboard:

Complaints Receiving Officer, Accountability Mechanism Asian Development Bank No. 29 Suramarit Blvd. (268/19) Sangkat Chaktomuk, Khan Daun Penh, Phnom Penh, Cambodia Tel: + 855 23 215805, 215806, 216417 Fax: + 855 23 215807

Confidentiality and Anonymity An AH submitting a grievance may wish to raise a concern in confidence. If the complainant asks the relevant PST or the NCDDS to protect his identity, it should not be disclosed without his/her consent. In cases where AHs do not have the writing skills or are unable to express their grievances verbally, it is a common practice that AHs are allowed to seek assistance from any recognized local NGO or other family members, village heads or community chiefs to have their complaints or grievances written for them. AHs will be allowed to have access to the DMS or contract document to ensure that all the details have been recorded accurately enabling all parties to be treated fairly. Throughout the grievance redress process, the responsible committee will ensure that the concerned AHs are provided with copies of complaints and decisions or resolutions reached. If efforts to resolve disputes using the grievance procedures remain unresolved or unsatisfactory, AHs have the right to directly discuss their concerns or problems with the ADB’s Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture Division, Southeast Asia Department through the ADB Cambodia Resident Mission. If AHs are still not satisfied with the responses of CARM, they can directly contact the ADB Office of the Special Project Facilitator. The Office of the Special Project Facilitator procedure can precede based on the accountability mechanism in parallel with the project implementation. Grievance Redress Committees

No. Name Roles Contact no. Step 1: Village and commune authorities and contractor 1 Mr. Chea Sakhorn Head of commune and chairman 071 36 70 471 2 Mr. Tuon Savorn 1st deputy chief of commune 096 81 24 829 3 Ms. Meas Pisey Commune council for children and woman 015 63 83 16 4 Mr. Tum Vichet Commune clerk 088 46 88 777 5 Mr Taing Thann Head of Boeung Khyang 071 22 20 523 6 Mr. Chea Sokh Head of Rokar Thom village 096 40 30 083 7 Mr. Chea Lun Head of Kampong Svay Keut village 016 92 79 22 8 Mr. Pang Dorn Head of Prek Pnov village 096 27 43 442 9 Mr. Chea Khonn Head of Anlong Reach 015 43 48 50 10 Mr. Mom Heng Head of Anlong Chak village 010 94 88 21 11 Mr. Duong Say Head of Kampong Svay Lech vllage 096 52 90 748 12 Mr. Ol Synhem Head of Tuol Rokar village 096 22 52 855 Step 2: District authorities 1 Mr. Yao Sanin Deputy district governor and chairman 016 629 865 2 Mr. Lam Sophal DST 016 317 297 3 Mr. Samonn Sony Director of district office 081 361 718 4 Ms. Lach Channy Chief-office for women attair 015 500 341

Annex 7 - Page 2

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 7

No. Name Roles Contact no. Step 3: Provincial Support Team 1 H.E Chan Tha Deputy provincial governor as a chair 012 763 763 2 Mr. Por Pilot Director of provincial planning and investment 012 204 575 3 Ms. Y Aun Deputy director of department of women affair 012 204 561 4 Ms. Sreng Sovannchenda Deputy chief of office for planning and investment 096 887 3533 Step 4: NCDDs 1 H.E Ny Kimsan Deputy Head of NCDDS and TSSD-AF manager 011 970 565

Annex 7 - Page 3

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 7

Annex 7 - Page 4

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 7

Annex 7 - Page 5

TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 8 KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA Nation Religion King 

កូនស ៀវសៅព័ត៌掶នគសរ掶ង

គ插រោងζត់ប俒ថយ徶ពររីររ 俒ិងអភិវ㏒ឍ俒៍រសិរររ插មខ្នាតតូចតំប俒់ទ插俒េ羶ប

ជ莶俒២ំ TONLE SAP POVERTY REDUCTION AND SMALLHOLDER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT - ADDITIONAL FINANCING (TSSD-AF)

ADB Loan 3570, ADB Grant 0542 and IFAD Loan 8331

អនុគ插រោង៖ ស្ថាប侶埒លូវរាល插ៅស ូមួយᾶន់插ៅឃុកពង់ររបបក Sub-Project: Kampong Trabaek SBST road rehabilitation subproject in Kampong Trabaek commune

រ ុកកំពុងរតបែក សេតត寒រពបវង Kampong Trabaek District, Prey Veng province

Annex 8 - Page 1 TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 8 A. (PROJECT INFORMATION) អំពីគសរ掶ង An additional financing to the Tonle Sap Poverty ζរ埒ដល់ហរ⟒ញែប䞶នែបនែមដល់គសរ掶ងζត់ែនែយ徶ពរករក នងអភវ㏒ឍន៍ ិ ី ិ ិ Reduction and Smallholder Development Project is ក ិកមមខ្នាតតូចតំែន់ទសនេ羶ែ ជ莶ន២ំ រតូវ厶នស ីសា ងី រ掶ែ់សេតត proposed for seven provinces (Banteay Meanchey, Battambang, Kampong Cham, Kampong Thom, Prey ចំនួន ០៧ (ែន្ទាយ掶នជយ័ 厶ត់ដែងំ កំពង់ាម កំពងធំ់ 寒រពបវង ស ៀម Veng, Siem Reap, and Tboung Khmumprovinces) in 殶ែ និងតបូងឃមុំ)កាុងរែសទ កមពុᾶ។ ζរ埒តល់ហរ⟒ញែប䞶និ ែបនែមសន߇掶ន Cambodia. The additional financing has three major outputs that will focus on enhance agricultural លទធ埒ល ំខ្នន់ៗចំនួនែ បដលនងសតតតសលζរែសងកន埒លត徶ពក កមម ក៏ ី ឹ ី ី ិ ិ productivity and improve access to markets in 270 ដូចᾶបកលមអលទធ徶ពទទួល厶នទី埒ារកាុងឃុំ ង្កកត់សោលសៅចំនួន target communes through investments in climate resilient productive infrastructure, building capacity in ២៧០ ឃុំ ង្កក ត់㾶មរយៈζរវនិ ិសោគសលីសហដ្ឋារចន្ទ មព័នធជនែទរែកែ disaster risk management of the communities and សដ្ឋយ埒លិត徶ព រែកែសដ្ឋយ មតែ徶ពរគែ់រគងសរោ߇មហនត殶យរែ ់ commune councils, and creating an enabled environment for agricultural productivity, diversification ហគមន៍ និងរកុមរែឹកាឃុំ និងζរែសងកីននូវែរោζិ អំសោយ埒ល and climate resilience. រ掶ែ់ែសងកីន埒លិត徶ពក ិកមម ពិពិធកមមក ិកមម និង徶ពធន់រ䞶ំសៅនឹង Under Output 1, the project will invest in commune infrastructure development focusing on improvements 讶ζ 䮶តុ។ in irrigation system and road at commune level. So the

ិែតសរζមលទធ埒លទី១ គសរ掶ងនឹងវនិ ិសោគសលីζរអភិវ㏒ឍន៍សហដ្ឋា រចន្ទ subproject of Kampong Trabaek SBST road Rehabilitation is proposed by commune. មព័នធឃុំ/ ង្កកត់ សតដតសៅសលីζរសធវី쟒យរែស ីរស ងនូវ羶ែនី 徶ពរែ螶យ

សរ羶ចរ ព និង埒េូវសៅថ្នាក់ឃុំ។ ដូសចា߇ អនុគសរ掶ង羶ង់ ង埒េូវរζលសៅ ូ មួយᾶន់សៅឃុំកំពុងរតបែក រតូវ厶នស ីាស ងី សដ្ឋយឃុំ។ ទ㾶ី ងំ គសរ掶ង Sub-project location

Annex 8- Page 2 TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 8 B. (LAND ACQUISITION AND IR) ព័ត៌掶ន ពីដ រី ទពយ មបតបិត ដលែ ߇家លស់ ដ្ឋយមនិ រម័ គចតិ ត What if my land will be affected by the project? សតគសរ掶ងរតវូ គតោ ងដូចសមចត រែ នសែដរែ េ់ រំ្ តវូ ែ߇ 家ល?់ ី ិ ិ ី ី ុ Acquired privately owned land will be compensated ដីឯកជនបដលែ ߇家ល់សដ្ឋយ羶រគសរ掶ងឹងទទួល厶ន ន ំណង㾶ម at replacement cost. Land within the existing Right of Way (ROW) will not be compensated. However, អរ㾶តមសារ ចំបណកឯដបដល ែតសៅកាងដចំណរែ螶យ (ROW) ី ិ ុ ី ី based on ADB SPS 2009, those losing use of នឹងមិនទទួល厶ន ំណងសទ។ សោង㾶មសោលនសោ厶យកិចចζរ家រ productive (farming) land within the right of Way (ROW) will be entitled to assistance for loss of land ុវតែ徶ពរែ ់ធន្ទោរអភវ㏒ឍន៍讶 ុ ចំស家߇អាកបដល厶ត់ែង埒ល់ ត ិ ិ ី ិ use of productive land. But farmers can contribute to (ROW) កមម (ក ិកមម) សៅដីចំណី 埒េូវ នឹងទទួល厶នរ厶ក់ឧែតែមភ the project if that contribution will not affect their livelihood or economic status. រ掶ែ់ζរមិន厶នែនតសរែីរ厶 ់ដី埒លិតកមមសន្ទ߇តសៅសទៀត។ ែុបនត រែᾶពលរដា 讶ចសធវីζរែរាចកជូនគសរ掶ង厶និ រែ ិនសែីζរែរាចគិ Does compensation apply to my affected houses o សន្ទ߇មិនែ ߇家ល់ដល់ជីវ徶ពរ ់សៅរែ ់េេួន។ structures, crops and trees? ? សត ី ណំ ងរតវូ 埒លត ជ់ ូនចសំ 家߇埒߇ា សដមី ស ី នងិ ដោំ បំ ដរឬសទ Yes. Houses and structures that will be affected by the Project shall be compensated at replacement រ厶កដោ ់ 埒ា߇ បដលែ ߇家ល់សដ្ឋយ羶រគសរ掶ងនឹងរតូវទទួល厶ន cost without deduction for depreciation or ំណងឧែតែមភ 㾶មអរ㾶ត寒មេជំនួ សដ្ឋយមិន掶នζរζត់សចញនូវ salvageable materials. Partially affected houses will be compensated for the lost affected portion as well ត寒មេរ ំស ߇ ឬ 掶ភរៈបដលសៅស ល់ស យ។ី ចំស家߇埒ា߇បដលែ ߇បត as repair costs. Other structures (e.g. fences, wells, ប埒ាកោមួយ នឹងទទួល厶ន ំណង រ掶ែ់ζរ厶ត់ែងប埒ាកសន្ទ߇់ រួម pavement) will also be compensated at replacement cost. នឹង寒លេជួ ជុល។ រចន្ទ មព័នធស埒េងសទៀត (ដូចᾶរែង អណតូ ង កបនេង

ាក់羶ែ/រζលសែតុង) នឹងទទួល厶ន ំណង㾶មអរ㾶ត寒មេជនួំ ។ If in case our livelihoods are affected, how can th Project help me restore my livelihood and living រែ និ សែ掶ី នζរែ߇ 家លដ់ លជ់ វី 徶ពរ ស់ ៅ សតគី សរ掶ង讶ចជយួ េុំ្ standards? ? ោ ងដូចសមចត កុងា ζរ羶ត រជវី 徶ពស ងី វញិ The census and DMS will take note of the livelihoods (DMS) of affected persons and any impacts the Project may ិតែ ិនិងζរអសងកត玶 ់បវងលមអិត នឹងកត់រ㾶 ចំស家߇ជនបដល have. The Project will provide various forms of ែ ߇家ល់ដល់ជីវ徶ពរ ់សៅ និងζរែ ߇家ល់ស埒េងៗសទៀតបដល讶ចសកីត assistance to enable affected people to restore their livelihoods and living conditions to at least pre-project សចញពីគសរ掶ង។ គសរ掶ងនឹងជូនζរឧែតែមភស埒េងៗ សដីមប쯒យជនែី ߇ levels. 家ល់䞶ំង螶យ讶ច羶តរជីវ徶ពរ ់សៅស ងវី ញិ ោ ងស莶ចោ ់ Vulnerable households (e.g. those classed as poor, 厶នដូចមុនសពលគសរ掶ងសៅដល់។ disabled, etc.), the Project will seek to improve living

ចំស家߇រគួ羶រង្កយរងសរោ߇ (ឧ䞶ហរណ៍៖ ជនបដលាត់ទុកថ្នរកីរក standards at lease before project start. Such forms of assistance will include: (i) one-time assistance ពិζរ។ល។) គសរ掶ងនឹងេិតេំជួយបកលមអជីវ徶ពរ ់សៅ 쯒យ厶នោ ង allowance to households losing more than 10% of the ស莶ចោ រត់ ឹមករមិតមុនគសរ掶ងសៅដល់។ ទរមង寒នζរឧែតែមភសន߇់ productive assets the type and severity of impact; (ii) cash assistance to cover transportation costs; (iii) នឹងរួម掶ន៖ cash grant for temporary disruption to business (i) ζរឧែតែមភមតងចំស家߇រគួ羶របដល厶ត់ែងសរច់ ីនᾶង ១០% 寒នដី income for affected shops/stalls; (iv) potentially other forms of income restoration measures to be (ii) (iii) 埒លិតកមម រ厶ក់ឧែតែមភ រ掶ែ់ស羶យហ ុយដឹកជ⟒ជូ ន determined during updating of the resettlement plan រ厶ក់ រ掶ែ់ζររ ំខ្ននែសោត߇讶 នា寒នចំណូលមុេរែរចំស家߇莶ង/ in consultation with those affected; and (v) additional special assistance to vulnerable households. តូែបដលែ ߇家ល់ (iv) ζតនុពលទរមងដ寒ទសទៀត寒នវ់ 䮶នζរ羶តរិ

រ厶ក់ចំណូលស ងវី ញិ បដលនឹងរតូវកំណត់សពលសធវីែចចុែបនា徶ពប埒ន ζរសដ្ឋ߇រ羶យ埒លែ ߇家ល់ សដ្ឋយ掶នζរពិសរោ߇សោែល់ᾶមួយជន If I disagree or problems arise during project (v) ែ ߇家ល់ និង 掶នζរឧែតែមភែបនែមចំស家߇រគួ羶រង្កយរងសរោ߇។ implementation such as compensation, technical, and other project-related issues, do I រែ និ សែេី ុមំ្ និ យលរ់ ពម ឬែញ្ហា សកតី ស ងី កុងា សពលអនុវតគត សរ掶ង ដូច have the right to voice my complaint?

ᾶ ណំ ង ែសចកច សទ នងិ ែញ្ហា ន្ទន្ទបដលសកតី សចញពគី សរ掶ង If the affected person is not satisfied with the compensation package offered or, if for any reason, ? សតេី ុ掶ំ្ ន ទិ ែិធ ងឹត ត玶 បដរឬសទ the compensation does not materialize according to the agreed schedule, the affected person has the សែីរែᾶពលរដារង埒លែ ߇家ល់掶នមនាិល ឬមិនសពញចិតតចំស家߇ក⟒ចែ់ right to lodge a complaint. The grievance redress ំណងបដល埒តល់ជូន ឬក៏សដ្ឋយសហតុ埒លោមួយ ំណងមិនពិតដូច mechanism consists of a four stages process as follows: Annex 8 - Page 3 TSSD-AF Social Safeguards DDR Kampong Trabek SBST road subproject Annex 8 ζររពមសរពៀងរែᾶពលរដារង埒លែ ߇家ល់掶ន ិទធិដ្ឋក់ែណតឹ ងត玶 ែនត First Stage: AHs will present their complaints and យនតζរសដ្ឋ߇រ羶យែណត ងត玶 រតូវដសណំ រζរᾶ ៤ ដោក់ζលដូចតំ ឹ ី grievances verbally or in writing to the village chief, សៅ៖ commune chief or IRC. The receiving agent will be obliged to provide immediate written confirmation ដោំ កζ់ លទ១៖ រគួ羶ររង埒លែ ߇家ល់នងែង្កាញែណត ងត玶 នង羶 ី ឹ ឹ ិ of receiving the complaint. If after 15 days the ទុកខ សដ្ឋយតាល់掶ត់ ឬᾶ យលកខណ៍ អកេរដល់រែ䮶នភូមិ សមឃុំ ឬ aggrieved AH does not hear from the village and TSSD-AF commune chiefs or the working groups, or if he/she រកុមζរង្ករគសរ掶ង 寒នសលខ្នធិζរដ្ឋាន គ.ជ.អ.ែ ឬគណៈ is not satisfied with the decision taken in the first កមមζរអនតររក ួងសដ្ឋ߇រ羶យ埒លែ ߇家ល់ (IRC)។ អាកទទួល家កយ stage, the complaint may be brought to the District Support Team (DST). ែណដឹ ងែញ្ហជក់ᾶ យលកខណ៍អកេរពីζរទទួលζរត玶 សន߇។ សរζយ ១៥ 寒លៃមក រគួ羶ររង埒លែ ߇家ល់មិន厶នឮដណំ ឹ ងពីរែ䮶នភូមិ ឬសមឃុំ ឬពីរកុមζរង្ករសទ ឬក៏សែីោត់មិនសពញចិតតនឹងζរ សរមចចិតតសទ ែណតឹ ង Second Stage: The District Support Team has 15 ត玶讶ចរតូវ厶នែ⟒ជ នសៅរកុមោំរទគសរ掶ងថ្នាក់រ ុក (DST)។ days within which to resolve the complaint to the ូ satisfaction of all concerned. If the complaint cannot DST ដោំ កζ់ លទពី រី ៖ រកមុ ោរំ ទគសរ掶ងថ្នា ករ់ កុ ( ) 掶នសពល ១៥ be solved at this stage, the DST will bring the case to the Provincial Grievance Redress Committee. 寒លៃ រ掶ែ់សដ្ឋ߇រ羶យζរត玶 쟒យ⎶នដល់ζរសពញចិតតរែ ់រគែ់徶គី 家ក់ព័នធ។ សែីែណតឹ ងត玶 មិន讶ចសដ្ឋ߇រ羶យ厶នសៅដោក់ζលសន߇ំ Third Stage: The Provincial Grievance Redress DST Committee meets with the aggrieved party and tries សទ នឹងន្ទំយកករណី សន߇សៅζរោល័យរែᾶពលរដាសេតតិ ។ to resolve the situation. Within 30 days of the

ដោំ កζ់ លទែី ៖ី ζរោល័យរែᾶពលរដាិ សេតត ប埒ាកសដ្ឋ߇រ羶យ submission of the grievance, the Committee must make a written decision and submit copies to the ែណត ងត玶 ជួែᾶមួយ徶គត玶 សហយសដ្ឋ߇រ羶យ។ងរយៈសពល កា ៣០ ឹ ី ី ុ NCDDS, and the AH. 寒លៃែន្ទាែ់ពីដ្ឋក់家កយែណតឹ ងត玶 មក ζរោល័យរែᾶពលរដាិ រតូវសធវីζរ សរមចចិតតᾶ យលកខណ៍អកេរ សហយែ⟒ជី ូ នចាែ់ចមេងសៅសលខ្នធិ Final Stage: If the aggrieved AH does not hear from the Provincial Grievance Redress Committee or is ζរដ្ឋានគ.ជ.អ.ែ (NCDD) នងរគួ羶ររង埒លែ ߇家ល់។ ិ not satisfied, he/she can bring the case to Provincial

ដោំ កζ់ លចុងសរζយ៖ រែ ិនសែីរគួ羶ររង埒លែ ߇家ល់បដលត玶 មិន Court. This is the final stage for adjudicating complaints. 厶នឮដណំ ឹ ងអវី ពីζរោល័យរែᾶពលរដាប埒ាកសដ្ឋ߇រ羶យែណតិ ឹ ងត玶 សេតត ឬមិនសពញចិតតសទសន្ទ߇ ោត់讶ចន្ទំយកករណី សន߇សៅតុ ζរសេត្

ត។ សន߇គឺᾶដោក់ζលចុងែ⟒ចែ់ំ រ掶ែ់ζរវនិ ិចឆ័យែណតឹ ងត玶 សន߇។

ព័ត掶៌ នែបនមែ នងិ មតសិ ោែល៖់ . (PST) ១ ស ក ស厶 ពី ុត រែ䮶នរកុមោំរទគសរ掶ងថ្នាក់សេតត 羶 សេតត寒រពបវង ទូរ ័ពាសលេ៖ 012 204 575 . ២ ឯកឧតតម នី គឹម羶ន រែ䮶នរគែ់រគងគសរ掶ងថ្នាក់ᾶតិ寒នសលខ្នធζិ រដ្ឋា ន គ.ជ.អ.ែ T) ិតកាែ ុងែរសវណរកិ ួងម莶寒埒ា (អោរ ម莶វលិ ីរព߇នស殶តតម ង្កកត់ទសនេ厶羶ក់ េណឌចំζរមន 殶ជ䮶នីភាំសពញ ទូរ ័ពាសលេ៖ 011 970 565 . (023 4266 82) ៣ គណៈកមមζរអនតររក ួងសដ្ឋ߇រ羶យ埒លែ ߇家ល់សដ្ឋយ羶រគសរ掶ងអភិវ㏒ឍន៍/រក ួងស ដាកិចចនិងហរ⟒ញវតែិ ុ . (023) 215 805 ៤ ធន្ទោរអភិវ㏒ឍន៍讶 ុ៖ី ភាំសពញ

Annex 8 - Page 4