sign in sign up
<<
Home , Chakghat, Satna district, Suthaliya, Waidhan

Social Safeguard Due Diligence Report

June 2016

IND: District Roads II Sector Project

Prepared by MPRDC (Madhya Pradesh Roads Development Corporation), Government of Madhya Pradesh for the Asian Development Bank.

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS As of 23 April 2016 Currency unit – Indian Rupee (Rs) INR 1.00 = $ 0.0147 $ 1.00 = 68.00

ABBREVIATION ADB Asian Development Bank AP Project Affected Persons CSC Construction Supervision Consultant DPR Detailed project report EA Executing agency FGD Focus Group Discussion GOI Government of GoMP Government of Madhya Pradesh GRC Grievance redress committee GRM Grievance redress mechanism IA Implementing Agency IP Indigenous People IPPF Indigenous People’s Planning Framework IR Involuntary Resettlement MDR Major District Road MPRDC Madhya Pradesh Roads Development Corporation PIU Project Implementation Unit PWD Public Works Departments R&R Resettlement and Rehabilitation RF Resettlement Framework RoW Right of Way SDDR Social Safeguard Due Diligence Report SPS Safeguard Policy Statement 2009 TCS Typical Cross Section

This Social Safeguard 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. Your attention is directed to the “terms of use” section of this website.

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.

CONTENTS I. PROJECT BACKGROUND 1 II. SUBPROJECT COMPONENTS AND DESIGN CRITERIA 3 III. SUBPROJECT SCREENING AND CATEGORIZATION 4 IV. CONSULTATION AND PARTICIPATION 6 V. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT 9 VI. GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM 9 VII. GENDER ISSUE UNDER THE PROJECT 12 VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 12

APPENDICES Appendix 1: List of Proposed Road Sections and Packages 14 Appendix 2: Involuntary Resettlement Impact Categorization Checklist 16 Appendix 3: Indigenous Peoples Impact Categorization Checklist 17 Appendix 4: Recors of Public Consultations 19 Appendix 5: GRM Document Shared with DPS During Consultation 23

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Selected Sample Subproject under the Project ...... 2 Table 2: Subproject wise details of the Public consultation ...... 7 Table 3: Summary of Issues Discussed during Consultations and Measures Taken to address these Issues ...... 8

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Subproject map - Northern Madhya Pradesh ...... 2 Figure 2: Subproject map – Southern Madhya Pradesh ...... 3 Figure 3: Typical Cross Section ...... 4 Figure 4: Grievance Redress Mechanism ...... 11

1

I. PROJECT BACKGROUND

1. The state of Madhya Pradesh (MP) is the second largest state in the country, with an area of about 308,000 sq.km and population of about 73 million.1 Madhya Pradesh is amongst the poorer states in the country, and its per capita income is about 60% of the national average. However, the state’s gross state domestic product (GSDP) grew at a compound annual growth rate of about 8.5% during FY2005-FY2014, being fostered through a series of development measures. These include the Pithampur–Dhar–Mhow region as a key node on the Delhi- Mumbai Industrial Corridor extent in Madhya Pradesh, many notified industrial areas, and industrial growth centers. However, agriculture is the mainstay of the state's economy and about 73% of the people live in rural areas. The dispersed nature of industrial development and agricultural production means that the road network is a critical element of the economic infrastructure. The state has a road network of about 127,000 km, out of which about 4700 km are National Highways (NHs), 11,000 km are state highways (SHs), and about 20,000 km are Major District Roads (MDRs) and other rural roads make up the balance road network.

2. The state is close to completing its program of upgrading its entire state highway network with a combination of budgetary allocations, ADB support in three previous loans, and public-private partnerships.2 However, MDRs have had marginal attention, and major portions of the MDRs still need to be upgraded. Government of Madhya Pradesh (GoMP) through Madhya Pradesh Roads Development Corporation (MPRDC) has now taken up improvement of MDRs as a critical part of the state road core network, which are being improved in a planned manner. ADB has sanctioned one previous loan for improvement of MDRs.3 MDRs form a key link in the road network between the rural roads and the state highways. Continued development of this network will foster inclusiveness by enabling larger segments of the state’s population to better access markets and basic services. The MPRDC specifically, targeting MDRs to form key linkage between rural, semi urban and urban areas and complete state road connectivity.

3. The GoMP has requested financing from the ADB to implement part of its proposed improvement plan for MDR through this proposed Madhya Pradesh District Roads II Sector Project (the Project). The Project constitutes (i) rehabilitating and upgrading of about 1,500 km of MDRs; (ii) cashless accident victim treatment facility piloting; and (iii) improving and mainstreaming an efficient accident response system. About 54 subprojects road sections packaged into 20 contract packages have been proposed for financing under this sector project. Appendix 1 present the list of possible subprojects proposed for financing under the project.

4. Since the project will follow a sector loan modality, nine sample MDRs totaling about 250 km road length (Table 1) were selected to screen significance of potential social safeguard issues and determine the scope of mitigation measures to address these issues. The construction period for all roads under the project including both sample and non-sample subproject will include a 12 – 24 month construction period and a 5 years performance based maintenance period.

1 Government of India, 2011. Census Data 2011. New Delhi 2 The loans are: 1959-IND Madhya Pradesh State Roads Sector Development Project; 2330-IND Madhya Pradesh State Roads Sector Project (MPSRSP)-II; and 2736-IND Madhya Pradesh State Roads Project-III. 3 The loan is 3189-IND: Madhya Pradesh District Connectivity Sector Project.

2

Table 1: Selected Sample Subproject under the Project Sl. No. MDR No. Road Section District Length (Km) 1. MP-MDR-37-07 Barghat-Kanhiwada road Seoni 20.50 2. MP-MDR-37-11 Dharna-Aata-Dondiwada-Dharmakua Seoni 26.40 3. MP-MDR-42-06 Waraseoni-Katangi road Balaghat 30.00 4. MP-MDR-44-16 Kharamseda-Kirhai-Ramgarh road 39.35 5. MP-MDR-44-19 Jharkua-Raigaon-Karsara Satna 24.20 6. MP-MDR-46-03 Parsona-Mada road Singroli 24.40 7. MP-MDR-46-04 Ramgarh-Mada road Singroli 22.60 8. Jhurai-Sarai road Singroli 35.40 Harfari Khaira-Misirgawan via 9. MP-MDR-46-08 Singroli 27.00 Shivpurva road Total 249.85 Source: Detailed Project Report (DPR), MPRDC

5. As a part of project preparation, detailed social impact assessment has been carried out for the nine sample subprojects. Based on the social impact assessment for these nine sample roads, a Resettlement Plan (RP) has been prepared for three subprojects having R&R impacts and this Social Safeguard Due Diligence Report (SDDR) report is prepared for the six sample subprojects, which does not have any negative social impacts. The remaining non-sample roads are at various stages of planning and designing and the technical details are being finalized. This SDDR is based on the review of final detailed design report and social assessment of individual subprojects carried out during the project preparation. A Resettlement Framework (RF) and an Indigenous People’s Planning Framework (IPPF) is already prepared for the entire project under Madhya Pradesh District Roads I Sector Project to guide the preparation of non-sample subprojects. The RF and IPPF are prepared in compliance with relevant policies and regulations of the Government of India, GoMP, and the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement 2009 (SPS). The subproject roads are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

Figure 1: Subproject map - Northern Madhya Pradesh

3

Figure 2: Subproject map – Southern Madhya Pradesh

II. SUBPROJECT COMPONENTS AND DESIGN CRITERIA

6. The subproject activities involve improvement of existing major district roads within available ROW. The road widening activities primarily will comprise of raising the embankment at certain locations and its stabilization including construction of retaining wall if required especially near water bodies overlay on the existing carriageway, junction improvement, and construction of minor bridges, culvert and RCC drain in built-up section.

7. The existing Right of Way (RoW) of the subproject roads are varies from 8 to 20 meters, which are not properly demarcated on ground. Keeping in view the unavailability of the uniform RoW and existing ribbon development along the subproject roads, multiple design criteria are adopted to ensure avoidance of any adverse impacts to the roadside settlers. It is confirmed that no additional land will be acquired under any of the subproject and therefore the standard design criteria adopted for the subproject roads are the following:

 Proposed carriageway for the open area will be from 5.5 meter to 7.0 meter depending on the availability of the land.  Proposed carriageway for the built-up area will be from 3.75 meter to 5.5 meter depending on the availability of land.  Proposed pavements will be concrete one and width of shoulders and provision of drains will be accommodated within the existing RoW.

8. The typical cross sections (TCS) in built-up area, rural areas, overlay locations are shown in Figure 3.

4

Figure 3: Typical Cross Section

III. SUBPROJECT SCREENING AND CATEGORIZATION

9. Based on the review of detailed design report and social assessment report for individual subprojects, summary findings of these six subprojects are presented below:

(i) Kharamseda – Kirhai - Ramgarh Road: This subproject road falls in of Eastern Madhya Pradesh. The project road starts at Km 9/6 of - Badera Road (SH-13) in Kirhai village and terminates at Km 12/10 of Bela – Govindgarh Road (SH-49) in Mukundpur covering a total length of 34.350 kms. The existing road is a single-lane pavement having carriageway width from 3.0 m to 4.2 m with earthen shoulder both sides. Formation width

5

varies from 5-8m and Mukundpur village is very congested market. Average available ROW is 10m. Proposed widening of this subproject is limited to available RoW and formation width as per availability and will not have any negative impacts.

(ii) Jharkua – Raigaon - Karsara Road: This road is situated in Satna district of Eastern Madhya Pradesh. The project road starts at Km 155/2 of Satna - Panna Road (NH-75) at Jharkua Tiraha and terminates at Km 28/8 of Sundra – Kothi Road (MDR) by making T-Intersection near Karsara village covering a total length of 23.9 km. The land use is predominantly agricultural and open lands and scattered urban and village settlements of Devra Bhatta, Shivpur, Sohawal, Raigaon, Etama, Semariya, Karsara etc. The existing carriageway is single-lane having varying widths from 3.0 m to 4.2 m with earthen shoulder both sides. Formation width varies from 5 to 10. Average available ROW is 15m. Proposed subproject widening proposal is limited within the existing formation width in the settlement area and available RoW in open area. The subproject will not have any negative impacts on its roadside properties.

(iii) Persona - Mada Road: The subproject road is situated in District in eastern part of Madhya Pradesh. The subproject road takes off from Km 18/4 of – Road in Parsona and terminates at Makrohar-Dhangarh road in Mada at Km 24+390 covering a total length of 24.390 kms. The project road passes through villages namely Asni, Parsona, Hardi, Karahiya, Khutar, Batauli, Jarha, Rajmilan, Kulhui, Situl Khurd, Rampa, Koyal Khunth and Mada. The existing land use along the project road is mostly agricultural mixed with roadside development mostly rural and scattered semi-urban settlement. Open fallow land is also noticed on both side of the road with thin vegetation and patches of agricultural activities in between. The existing carriageway is single- lane pavement having varying widths from 3.0 m to 4.2 m along the entire stretch with earthen shoulder both sides. Formation width varies from 5 to 10 and average available ROW is 15m. Proposed widening of this subproject is limited to available RoW and formation width as per availability and will not have any negative impacts.

(iv) Ramgarh - Mada Road: The subproject road is situated in in eastern part of Madhya Pradesh. The subproject road starts from Makrohar - Parsona Road in Mada Town and terminates at Karouti - Dhangarh road covering a total length of 22.600 kms. The existing land use along the project road is predominantly forests with thick vegetation and agricultural mixed with residential areas. The project road passes through two settlement locations namely Mada and Jeer. Existing road is a single-lane road with asphalt pavement. Carriageway varies from 3.0 m to 3.75 m along the entire stretch with earthen shoulder both sides. Formation width varies from 5 to 7.30 and available average ROW is 12m. Proposed widening of this subproject is limited to available RoW and formation width as per availability and will not have any negative impacts.

(v) Jhurai - Sarai Road: The subproject road section falls in Singrauli District in eastern part of Madhya Pradesh. The subproject road takes off at T-intersection on NH-75E ( - Singrauli Road) near Jhurai village and ends at a T- Intersection on Sidhi - Waidhan road about 4.0 km before Sarai Village covering a total length of 31.500 kms. About 12.5 km of the road alignment is along the

6

forest area, having boundary markings next to the existing RoW. Land use pattern is predominantly agricultural & forest. There are few scattered village settlements along the project road i.e. Jhurai, Kulhara, Purani Deoasar, Purail, Gannai, Bahrai, Godbhara. Existing road is a single-lane road with asphalt pavement. Carriageway varies from 3.0 m to 3.75 m along the entire stretch with earthen shoulder both sides and formation width varies from 5 to 7.30 and available ROW is 12m. Proposed subproject widening proposal is limited within the existing formation width in the settlement area and available RoW in open area. The subproject will not have any negative impacts on its roadside properties.

(vi) Harfari – Khaira - Misirgawan Road: The project road is situated in Singrauli District in eastern part of Madhya Pradesh. The subproject road starts at km 12/10 Karthua-Chitrangi Road (MP-MDR- 46-01) in Harphari Village & terminates at Sihawal-Chitrangi road (MP-MDR-46-08) in Khaira village coveirng a total length of 25.990 kms. The topography of the project area is plain to rolling hilly. About 4.8 km of the road alignment is along the forest area. The existing land use along the project road is mostly agricultural mixed with road side development in plain terrain. The project road passes through settlement locations namely Harphari, Dhani, Korsar, Mudrpali, Bharut, Dharauli, Khaira Villages. Existing road is a single-lane major district road with asphalt pavement. Carriageway varies from 3.0 m to 3.75 m along the entire stretch with earthen shoulder both sides. Formation width varies from 5 to 7.30 and available ROW is 12m. Proposed widening of this subproject is limited to available RoW and formation width as per availability and will not have any negative impacts.

10. The sample subproject roads have been evaluated and categorized using the prescribed ADB Involuntary Resettlement (IR) Checklist (Appendix 2) and Indigenous People (IP) Checklist (Appendix 3). The six sample subprojects evaluated are classified as category ‘C’ from IR and IP point of view. This categorization was primarily based on the following considerations: (i) Proposed subproject roads are existing roads and upgrading activities are limited to the available RoW. (ii) Proposed subproject road improvement works will not involve any land acquisition or cause any adverse impacts on the roadside communities. (iii) Proposed subproject road does not have any negative impacts on indigenous people in terms of loss of land, livelihood, and other assets.

IV. CONSULTATION AND PARTICIPATION

11. Public consultations were held early and throughout the subproject preparation stages to allow the incorporation of relevant views of the stakeholders in the final project design, mitigation measures, implementation issues, and enhance the distribution of benefits. During the project preparation stage, 32 focus group discussions (FGDs) were organized within these six sample subprojects involving 417 participants. Among these 32 FGDs, 16 were held exclusively for women. Out of 417 participants, 264 (63%) female and 153 (37%) male participants. Table 2 show the details of the public consultations carried out along various road sections.

7

Table 2: Subproject wise details of the Public consultation Name of the Road Name of Date of Number of Participants No. Section Village Consultation Male Female Total 1 Bichhia kala 25/08/14 10 4 14 2 Bichhia kala 25/08/14 - 8 8 3 Bhishmpur 26/08/14 10 4 14 4 Bhishmpur 26/08/14 - 13 13 Kharamseda-Kirhai- Jamuna 5 25/08/14 8 6 14 Ramgarh road (Singhol Majra) Jamuna 6 25/08/14 - 10 10 (Singhol Majra) 7 Kotar Ka Bada 25/08/14 9 5 14 8 Kotar 25/08/14 - 11 11 Gopalganj / 9 Etma 29/09/14 8 6 14 Gopalganj / 10 - Jharkua-Raigaon- Etma 29/09/14 14 14 Karsara 11 Dhaurhara 29/09/14 10 4 14 12 Dhaurhara 29/09/14 - 14 14 13 Simria 30/09/14 11 2 13 14 Simria 30/09/14 - 14 14 15 Asni 05/01/15 10 4 14 16 Asni 05/01/15 - 14 14 17 Parsona 06/01/15 10 4 14 18 Parsona 06/01/15 - 14 14 19 Karhia/Khutaar 06/01/15 11 3 14 Parsona-Mada road 20 Karhia/Khutaar 06/01/15 - 14 14 21 Situl Khurd 06/01/15 11 3 14 22 Situl Khurd 06/01/15 - 14 14 23 Raundi 06/01/15 11 3 14 24 Raundi 06/01/15 - 14 14 Ghawaiya Tand 25 06/10/14 9 5 14 / Jeer Ramgarh-Mada road Ghawaiya Tand 26 06/10/14 - 14 14 / Jeer 27 Godbahra 07/01/16 9 5 14 Jhurai-Sarai road 28 Godbahra 07/01/16 - 12 12 29 Dhani/Tiraha 05/09/14 8 6 14 Harfari Khaira- 30 Dhani/Tiraha 06/09/14 - 4 4 Misirgawan via 31 Gadhor 05/09/14 8 6 14 Shivpurva road 32 Gadhor 05/09/14 - 10 10 Source: Field surveys during DPR preparation, 2014-2016

12. The local communities’ responses to the subproject are summarized below and details are provided in Table 3.

 Project Awareness: The majority of the beneficiary, especially men communities were found aware of the Project activities.

8

 Effects on business and living conditions: Almost all of the community expect a positive impact of the sub-project in terms of improved living standards.  Job Opportunities: The communities requested to be hired for unskilled to semi- skilled jobs during the construction and operation of the project activities. In such case, priority will be given to women headed households identified during socioeconomic survey.  Provision of Drainage: almost all the villagers reside along the road has made request of appropriate and effective drainage system.  Road Safety: traffic on the existing road is low but after improvement, traffic will increase and will be a major issue of road safety; therefore road safety measures are necessary.  Road Quality: villagers are not sure about the quality because of past experience; local people should be involved in quality check and monitoring. Road must be up to the standards and road should be constructed within given time.

Table 3: Summary of Issues Discussed during Consultations and Measures Taken to

address these Issues Date and Issues Discussed Measures to be taken Participant Location At 32  People are facing acute  Proposed widening and Total 417 villages problem related to poor strengthening of the road participants along the condition of the road. will provide better level of (264 female sample  Where the road passing services in terms of and 153 subproject through the settlements improved riding quality and male). roads there should be provision smooth traffic flow Participants during field of Speed breakers  There will be considerable included local surveys  Suggestion viz. (i) design reduction in the number of villages, between shall take into accident and level of affected June 2014 hydrological aspects into pollution people, and January consideration (ii) minimal  Accessibility to social health school 2016 loss of structures and and educational teachers, provision of jobs to land infrastructure will increase formers, shop losers through all-weather road. owners,  Local people informed  Generation of employment women that present road in some during construction phase groups etc. sections of this area of the road. submerges during normal  The discussion generate rainfall also. Adequate considerable awareness of measures shall be taken the project to avoid water logging  As the proposed road shall during normal rainfall. be widened one, it shall  They suggested that provide an efficient public existing alignment shall transportation system also be improved and besides ensuring reduction maintained properly in congestion level

9

 Suggestion viz., Minimal  The non-title holders loss of structures, shall also be Adequate rehabilitation compensated as per and resettlement ADB guidelines. measures  Drainage system is  The local community mention in built-up stressed on adequate area and earthen safety provisions to be drainage for rural area. made along the road.  Road safety features like traffic signs, Overhead Sign Boards, Road Illumination, Delineators, pavement marking, pedestrian path and rumble strips has been included in the design.

13. The Details of Participants and Public Consultation photographs are attached in Appendix 4. In addition information on the GRM procedures and formats in local language (), which was shared with the local people during consultation are provided in Appendix-5.

V. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT

14. The Executing Agency for the project is GoMP through MPRDC. MPRDC is wholly owned by GoMP and has been equipped with adequate capacity to implement the project. A General Manager (GM) at MPRDC headquarter has been designated as person in charge for project implementation. The Environmental and Social Cell at MPRDC headquarters, reporting to the General Manager, will be responsible for ensuring compliance with environmental and social safeguards of project roads. MPRDC has seven division offices (, , Sagar, , , Indoor, Seoni, and ) acting as Project Implementation Units (PIUs), each headed by a Divisional Manager (Tech.) will be responsible for project road implementation in the field. MPRDC will engage Construction Supervision Consultants (CSC) to act as the engineer for the construction contracts. The Social and R&R Expert from CSC will assist the PIUs for managing social and R&R activities under the project.

VI. GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM

15. A project-specific grievance redress mechanism (GRM) will be established to receive, evaluate and facilitate the resolution of displaced people’s concerns, complaints and grievances about the social and environmental performance at the level of the Project. The GRM will aim to provide a time-bound and transparent mechanism to voice and resolve social and environmental concerns linked to the project. The project-specific GRM is not intended to bypass the government’s own redress process, rather it is intended to address displaced people's concerns and complaints promptly, making it readily accessible to all segments of the displaced people and is scaled to the risks and impacts of the project. The complainant may access the formal legal system at any time.

16. During project preparation, information regarding GRCs will be disclosed as part of the public consultation process. Grievances related to the implementation of the project will be

10

acknowledged, evaluated, and responded to the complainant with corrective action proposed. The outcome shall also form part of the semi-annual monitoring report that will be submitted to ADB. The decision of the GRCs is binding, unless vacated by the court of law. The GRC will continue to function, for the benefit of the DPs, during the entire life of the project including the maintenance period. The cost of GRM will be included in the budget under subproject RP.

17. A Grievance Redress Committee (GRCs) will be established at the MPRDC state level and at the PIU level to assure accessibility for DPs. The GRCs are expected to resolve grievances of the eligible persons within a stipulated time of 3 weeks at the PIU level and 3 weeks at the state level. The State level GRC will comprise of the:

i) General Manager, MPRDC, Bhopal ii) Superintended Engineer, PWD, Bhopal iii) DGM, MPRDC, Bhopal iv) Manager (Environment & Social), MPRDC, Bhopal v) A representative from IP community or NGO for IP related issue

18. The PIU level GRC will comprise of the:

i) Divisional Manager from MPRDC ii) Executive Engineer, local PWD office iii) A representative from local NGOs or a local person of repute and standing in the society, elected representative from Zila Parisad /District Council. iv) A representative for women from a relevant agency which could be from the government, or NGO or local community v) A representative from IP community or NGO for IP related issue.

19. One of the above members in the PIU level GRC will be a woman. The following flow chart defines the process of the GRM.

11

Figure 4: Grievance Redress Mechanism

Complaints by individuals, Complaints by People’s

Groups, or institutions representatives: political, religious, community

Step 1 GRC Secretary at Decision to divisional Level (Complaints to GRC in written be taken within 3 week Simple issues of receipt of complaint Step 1 GRC meeting

6 Weeks

Step 2 GRC

Decision to meeting at State l Complex issues be taken within 3 week of receipt of Decision of Step 2 GRC – Convey the complaint decision to Public / Chairman and other members of Step 1GRC GRC process ends

20. The response time prescribed for the GRCs would be three weeks at each level. Since the entire resettlement component of the project has to be completed before the construction starts for the whole project, the GRC will meet at least once in three weeks to resolve the pending grievances. Other than disputes relating to ownership rights under the court of law, GRC will review grievances involving all resettlement benefits, relocation, payment of compensation and other assistance. The subproject specific Resettlement Plans will detail out the step-by-step mechanism for grievance redress.

21. People who are, or may in the future be, adversely affected by the project may submit complaints to ADB’s Accountability Mechanism. The Accountability Mechanism provides an independent forum and process whereby people adversely affected by ADB-assisted projects can voice, and seek a resolution of their problems, as well as report alleged violations of ADB’s operational policies and procedures. Before submitting a complaint to the Accountability Mechanism, affected people should make a good faith effort to solve their problems by working with the concerned ADB operations department. Only after doing that, and if they are still dissatisfied, should they approach the Accountability Mechanism.4

4 For further information see: http://www.adb.org/Accountability-Mechanism/default.asp.

12

VII. GENDER ISSUE UNDER THE PROJECT

22. During the FGD, the women members expressed the view, that construction of road will definitely ease the trouble, especially during the monsoon. Better quality road will help students, especially girls to attend schools. The bicycle journey to school will become comfortable for them. Improved road will increase women’s mobility, especially those who go for distance unskilled jobs, local markets, and health centres etc. Due to better road, visit of health staff, especially ANM and school teacher will increase.

23. Women’s contribution to the project area economy is very low because of under estimation of the role of women in various sectors of economy. There are differences in men’s and women’s pay, unequal access to stable employment. Women are engaged in “hidden work” unpaid but economically necessary in the domestic, agriculture and informal sectors.

24. Information on Access to and Control over certain important aspects; such as Resources, Markets and Socio Cultural, were obtained from the respondents. It is revealed that while women have access to almost all resources and services, the controls are primarily in the hands of men only.

25. Women use the road for transport of water, fuel, farm inputs and products, animal fodder, and building materials as well as their participation in rural production are significant. Improved road will provide

VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

26. The assessment of sample subprojects reveals that the improvement work will be limited to the existing RoW and will not involve any additional land acquisition. The design options considered for the subprojects have fully avoided any negative impacts on road site settlers and property owners. To avoid impacts, the road design and improvement work is further limited to existing formation width in settlement areas. These six sample subprojects assessed under the project ate classified as Category C projects with regards to involuntary resettlement and indigenous people according to ADB SPS-2009.

27. The Resettlement Framework (RF) and Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF) prepared under the project will further guide the management of social safeguard issues during subproject implementation. The following specific actions are proposed to be implemented during the subproject construction period.

 During the implementation any impacts identified under the subprojects will be addressed and mitigated as per the entitlement matrix provided under the project RF.  The EA will ensure that contractor engaged undder the subprojects will finalise the construction camps in consultation with the local community and execute formal lease for the land under utilization.  Equal wages will be paid for men and women workers engaged under the subproject construction work.  The contractor will take all necessary safety measures during costruction for commuters and workers.  To ensure easy access to the registration of grievance by the DPs, PIU should include arrangement of receiving it at contractor camp.

13

 A semi-annaual progress report will be submitted by the EA to ADB on management of social safeguard issues under the project.  The Project RF has provision of assistance for temporary livelihood loss and in case during the implementation, any such impacts are identified and the DPs will offer to forgo these small assistance amount against the positive impacts resulted from the improved road, an memorandum of understanding (MoU) will be signed by both the parties and the details of such process will be documented in the semi-annual monitoring report and submitted to ADB.

Appendix 1 14

APPENDIX 1: LIST OF PROPOSED ROAD SECTIONS AND PACKAGES

S.No. Package District Name of Road Length Length of (in Km) Package (in Km) 1 1 Guan Khatakia to Suthaliya via NH-3, 87 87 Kumbhraj, Barod, Mragwas, Batawda, Chanchoda, Binaganj, Teligaon 2 2 Shivpuri Sirsod– Pichhore 33 59 3 Shivpuri Narwar– Chitori to Amola 26 4 3 Ashok Mungawali– Malahargarh 17 64 Nagar 5 Ashok Piprod– Thubon 8 Nagar 6 Ashok Belai– Kareela Mata Mandir 18 Nagar 7 Bhounrasa– Malhargarh 21 8 4 Sanwer– Chandravatiganj– 35 55 Gautampura 9 Indore Kshipradwa– Budhi– Barlai– Solsindi– 20 Khandakhedi– Jamodi– Maharajganj– Baloda– Rajod– Panod– Sanwer 10 5 Narsinghpur Gadarwara– Gotetoria 20 74 11 Narsinghpur Babai– Barha-Sukhakhairi 24 12 Narsinghpur Kareli– Singhpur– Dangidhana 30 13 6 Sagar Maharajpur– Sahajpur 25 84 14 Sagar Samnapur– Bilehra– Nanhi Deori– 45 Narayanpur 15 Sagar Kesali– Sahajpur 14 16 7 Sagar Gadpera– Dhamoni 35 90 17 Sagar Barodiya– Dhamoni 20 18 Sagar Nauniya– Madanpura 3 19 Sagar Khurai– Rajwas 32 20 8 Panna Shahnagar– Hardua via Thepa Bori 40 40 21 9 Chhatrpur Bariya Choki– Lugasi 16 101 22 Chhatrpur Rajnagar to Dumra (Part of Bamitha– 26 Dumra) 23 Chhatrpur Rajnagar– Bachhon 24 24 Chhatrpur Khaparia Banspahari 24 25 Chhatrpur Chhatarpur– Rajnagar– Vikrampur 11 26 10 Seoni Barghat– Kanhiwada 21 77 27 Seoni Dharna– Aata– Dondiwada– 26 Dharmakua 28 Balaghat Waraseoni– Katangi 30 29 11 Balaghat Rampayali– Garra Choki 26 78 30 Balaghat Khairlanji– Agasi 25 31 Balaghat Laalbarra– Samnapur 9 32 Balaghat Seetapathor– Mahkepaar– Goreghat 18 33 12 Barela– Niwas 46 46 34 13 Chhindwara Chourai– Panjara– Chand 19 68 35 Chhindwara Chand– Bichhua– Khamarpani 37 36 Chhindwara Reymond chowk (Teenkheda) to 12 Saikheda 37 14 Rewa Tyonthar– Shankargarh 23 111

15 Appendix 1

S.No. Package District Name of Road Length Length of (in Km) Package (in Km) 38 Rewa Bahera– Dabar– Piparahi– Jadkud 15 39 Rewa Naigarhi– 14 40 Rewa – Hanumana 59 41 15 Satna Kharamseda– Kirhai– Ramgarh 39 76 42 Satna Jharkua– Raigaon– Karsara 24 43 Satna Bhatura– Bhadpur– Barakhurd 12 44 16 Sidhi, Chitrangi to Sinhawal 84 113 Singroli 45 Singroli Chitrangi– Garhwa 29 46 17 Singroli Parsona– Mada 24 109 47 Singroli Ramgarh– Mada 23 48 Singroli Jhurai– Sarai 35 49 Singroli Harfari Khaira– Misirgawan via 27 Shivpurva 50 18 Umaria Sohagpur– Manpur 59 59 51 19 Shahdol Anooppur– Jaitpur 26 84 52 Shahdol Gohparu– Rasmohni– Budhar (via 33 Bathiya) 53 Shahdol Pasgarhi– Deori– Janakpur 25 54 20 Dewas Bijawar– Kataphod– Satwaas– 56 56 Khategaon Total 1530 1531

Note: Totals may not exactly match because of rounding

Appendix 2 16

APPENDIX 2: INVOLUNTARY RESETTLEMENT IMPACT CATEGORIZATION CHECKLIST

Probable Involuntary Resettlement Effects Yes No Not Remarks Known Involuntary Acquisition of Land 1. Will there be land acquisition? ✔

2. Is the site for land acquisition known? Not Required

3. Is the ownership status and current usage of Not Required land to be acquired known?

4. Will easement be utilized within an existing ✔ Right of Way (ROW)?

5. Will there be loss of shelter and residential ✔ land due to land acquisition?

6. Will there be loss of agricultural and other ✔ productive assets due to land acquisition?

7. Will there be losses of crops, trees, and fixed ✔ assets due to land acquisition?

8. Will there be loss of businesses or enterprises ✔ due to land acquisition?

9. Will there be loss of income sources and ✔ means of livelihoods due to land acquisition? Involuntary restrictions on land use or on access to legally designated parks and protected areas 10. Will people lose access to natural resources, ✔ communal facilities and services?

11. If land use is changed, will it have an ✔ adverse impact on social and economic activities?

12. Will access to land and resources owned ✔ communally or by the state be restricted? Information on Displaced 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-headed households, or vulnerable to poverty risks? [✔ ] No [ ] Yes Are any displaced persons from indigenous or ethnic minority groups? [✔ ] No [ ] Yes

17 Appendix 3

APPENDIX 3: INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IMPACT CATEGORIZATION CHECKLIST

KEY CONCERNS NOT (Please provide elaborations YES NO Remarks KNOWN on the Remarks column) A. Indigenous Peoples Identification 1. Are there socio-cultural groups present in or use the project area who may be considered as "tribes" (hill tribes, schedules tribes, tribal peoples), "minorities" (ethnic or national minorities), or "indigenous communities" in the project area? 2. Are there national or local laws or policies as well as anthropological researches/studies that consider these groups present in or using the project area as belonging to "ethnic minorities", scheduled tribes, tribal peoples, national minorities, or cultural communities? 3. Do such groups self-identify as being part of a distinct social and cultural group? 4. Do such groups maintain collective attachments to distinct habitats or ancestral territories and/or to the natural resources in these habitats and territories? 5. Do such groups maintain cultural, economic, social, and political institutions distinct from the dominant society and culture? 6. Do such groups speak a distinct language or dialect?

7. Has such groups been historically, socially and economically marginalized, disempowered, excluded, and/or discriminated against? 8. Are such groups represented as "Indigenous Peoples" or as "ethnic minorities" or "scheduled tribes" or "tribal populations" in any formal decision-making bodies at the national or local levels? B. Identification of Potential Impacts 9. Will the project directly or indirectly benefit or target  Indigenous Peoples? 10. Will the project directly or indirectly affect Indigenous Peoples' traditional socio-cultural and belief practices? (e.g. child-rearing, health, education, arts, and governance) 11. Will the project affect the livelihood systems of Indigenous Peoples? (e.g., food production system, natural resource management, crafts and trade, employment status) 12. Will the project be in an area (land or territory) occupied, owned, or used by Indigenous Peoples, and/or claimed as ancestral domain? C. Identification of Special Requirements Will the project activities include: 13. Commercial development of the cultural resources and knowledge of Indigenous Peoples? 14. Physical displacement from traditional or customary lands?

Appendix 3 18

KEY CONCERNS NOT (Please provide elaborations YES NO Remarks KNOWN on the Remarks column) 15. Commercial development of natural resources (such as minerals, hydrocarbons, forests, water, hunting or fishing grounds) within customary lands under use that would impact the livelihoods or the cultural, ceremonial, spiritual uses that define the identity and community of Indigenous Peoples? 16. Establishing legal recognition of rights to lands and territories that are traditionally owned or customarily used, occupied or claimed by indigenous peoples? 17. Acquisition of lands that are traditionally owned or customarily used, occupied or claimed by indigenous peoples?

19 Appendix 4

APPENDIX 4: RECORD OF PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS

A. PHOTOGRAPHS DURING CONSULTATION

Interview with Local residents along Harfari Public Consultation with women group along Khaira-Misirgawan via Shivpurva road Jharkua-Raigaon-Karsara

Discussion with School Teachers along Harfari FGD in village along Jurai-Sarai Road Khaira-Misirgawan road

FGD in village along Kharamseda-Kirhai- FGD in village along Kharamseda-Kirhai- Ramgarh road Ramgarh road

Appendix 4 20

FGD along Parsona-Mada road FGD along Parsona-Mada road

Group Discussion along Waraseoni-Katangi Consultation with Farmers along Ramgarh- road Mada Road

Consolation with women along Waraseoni- Katangi road

21 Appendix 4

B. ATTENDANCE SHEET

Appendix 4 22

23 Appendix 5

APPENDIX 5: GRM DOCUMENT SHARED WITH DPS DURING CONSULTATION

Appendix 5 24

25 Appendix 5

Appendix 5 26