DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental and Social Impact Report for Construction of Bridges on Torit Kapoeta Road Draft

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental and Social Impact Report for Construction of Bridges on Torit Kapoeta Road Draft Environmental and Social Impact Report for Construction of Bridges on Torit Kapoeta Road Draft Ministry of Roads and Bridges June 2016 www.smec.com 5116021 | Unit Rate Analysis Report | Draft Ver #02 | 02 January 2016 Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................. 7 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................15 1.1 Background Information................................................................................................. 15 1.2 Description of the Project............................................................................................... 16 1.3 Importance of the Project .............................................................................................. 17 1.4 Requirement for an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) .................... 17 1.5 Project Component......................................................................................................... 17 1.6 Objectives of Environmental and Social Impact Assessment ......................................... 18 1.7 Environmental Impact Assessment Methodology.......................................................... 18 1.8 Contents of the ESIA report............................................................................................ 20 2 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK .............................................................21 2.1 Regulatory Framework for Environmental Management .............................................. 21 2.1.1 The Constitution of South Sudan............................................................................ 21 2.1.2 The Interim National Constitution of South Sudan (ICSS)...................................... 21 2.1.3 The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) ........................................................ 21 2.1.4 The Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011 (TCRSS) ....... 22 2.1.5 Environment Policy (2010) ..................................................................................... 22 2.1.6 Draft Environment Protection Bill (2010)............................................................... 22 2.1.7 National Environmental and Social Screening Assessment Framework (ESSAF) ... 23 2.1.8 Land Act 2009......................................................................................................... 23 2.1.9 Wildlife Conservation and National Parks Act 2003............................................... 25 2.1.10 The Forestry Commission Act, 2003....................................................................... 25 2.1.11 Wildlife Conservation and Protected Areas Bill, 2010 ........................................... 26 2.1.12 Draft Forestry Policy............................................................................................... 26 2.1.13 Mines and Quarries Act 1972................................................................................. 26 2.1.14 Traffic Act ............................................................................................................... 26 2.1.15 World Bank safeguard policies triggered by the project .................................... 27 2.2 International Conventions and Treaties ......................................................................... 28 2.3 Institutional Arrangements............................................................................................. 29 3 DESCRIPTION OF PROECT AND JUSTIFICATION ...................................................................31 4 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................32 4.1 Physical Setting............................................................................................................... 32 4.1.1 Location .................................................................................................................. 32 4.1.2 Topography and Soils ............................................................................................. 32 4.1.3 Geology................................................................................................................... 33 4.1.4 Rainfall and Temperature....................................................................................... 33 4.1.5 Agro-Economical Zoning within South Sudan ........................................................ 34 4.1.6 Drainage Pattern and Surface Water ..................................................................... 35 4.1.7 Soil Erosion ............................................................................................................. 35 4.2 Historic and Cultural Resources...................................................................................... 36 150616 | ESIA Report – Construction of Nine Bridges between Torit and Kapoeta | June 2016 Page i 4.3 Biological Resources and Ecological Analysis ................................................................. 37 4.3.1 Vegetation Description........................................................................................... 37 4.4 Socio Economic Baseline Results and Discussions.......................................................... 38 4.4.1 Social Environment................................................................................................. 38 4.4.2 Religion................................................................................................................... 38 4.4.3 Economic Environment .......................................................................................... 42 4.4.4 Community Health Status....................................................................................... 47 5 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT ..............................................................................52 5.1 Kapoeta –Torit Bridges ................................................................................................... 52 5.1.1 Road Condition between Kapoeta and Torit.......................................................... 53 5.1.2 Activities Associated with the Construction of bridges and approach roads......... 53 5.1.3 Sources of Construction materials for bridges project........................................... 54 5.2 Clearance for the Project................................................................................................ 55 5.3 Specific Environmental Characteristics of the Proposed Bridges................................... 55 6 PRESENTATION OF ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND COMPARISONS....................................59 6.1 Project alternatives......................................................................................................... 59 6.2 The “No Project” Alternative .......................................................................................... 59 6.3 Alternative I – Use of Existing road route for Bridges and Approach Roads.................. 59 6.4 Alternative II – Construction of all bridges on New alignment ...................................... 60 6.5 Alternative III – The realignment alternatives................................................................ 60 6.6 Advantage....................................................................................................................... 61 6.7 Dis-advantage ................................................................................................................. 61 6.8 Quarry and borrow pit sites............................................................................................ 61 6.9 Campsites........................................................................................................................ 61 6.10 Results of comparison of alternatives ............................................................................ 61 7 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS.............................................................62 7.1 Positive Impacts or Project Benefits............................................................................... 62 7.1.1 Improvement of Internal and Regional Trade........................................................ 62 7.1.2 Improved access to social services due to availability of reliable and faster road transportation........................................................................................................................ 63 7.1.3 Employment creation and income improvement .................................................. 63 7.1.4 Other benefits mentioned by stakeholders ........................................................... 63 7.2 Biological Environment................................................................................................... 63 7.2.1 Climate change ....................................................................................................... 63 7.2.2 Natural vegetation.................................................................................................. 63 7.2.3 Wildlife.................................................................................................................... 64 7.3 Physical Environment ..................................................................................................... 64 7.3.1 Interference with natural flow of rivers and sedimentation.................................. 64 7.4 Human Environment......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Terminal Evaluation Report UNDP GEF Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Threatened Savanna Woodland in the Kidepo Critical Landscape in North Eastern Uganda
    Terminal Evaluation Report UNDP GEF Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Threatened Savanna Woodland in the Kidepo Critical Landscape in North Eastern Uganda Terminal Evaluation Report Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Threatened Savanna Protected Area Network Management & Building Capacity Woodland in the Kidepo Critical Landscape in North Eastern Uganda UNDPin PIMS Post-Conflict ID: 4592 SouthGEF Project Sudan ID: 4456 Country: Uganda Region: Africa Focal Area: Biodiversity Implementing Agency: United Nations Development Programme Executive: Ministry of Finance Implementing Partner: National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) Project Timeframe: July 2013 – May 2019 Prepared by: Richard Sobey, International Consultant / Team Leader Michael Mbogga, National Consultant September 2019 TE (UNDP PIMS #4592) Terminal Evaluation Report UNDP GEF Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Threatened Savanna Woodland in the Kidepo Critical Landscape in North Eastern Uganda Table of Contents Abbreviations and Acronyms ............................................................................................................ iv Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 14 1.1. The project .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Tanzania Pas Proposal To
    PROJECT DOCUMENT Republic of Uganda United Nations Development Programme Global Environment Facility Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Threatened Savanna Woodland in the Kidepo Critical Landscape in North Eastern Uganda GEFSEC PROJECT ID: 4456; GEF AGENCY ID: PIMS 4592; AWARD ID: 00072558; PROJECT ID: 00085611 1 Brief Description: The Government of Uganda has made significant investments in most protected areas (PAs) in the country. However, the Kidepo Critical Landscape of North Eastern Uganda, encompassing eight protected areas under a range of management authorities received limited investment over the past 20 years due to protracted conflict, and proportionately suffer from lower management effectiveness compared to other sites. The long-term solution proposed by this project is to strengthen the national system of protected areas in Uganda by improving the management effectiveness of protected areas in the Kidepo Critical landscape in the North Eastern part of the country, thus affording biodiversity sufficient protection from emerging and future threats. This can be achieved through providing planned, targeted and effective support to the operational capacity of core PAs within the landscape and through creating a coordinated landscape management approach in the KCL to serve as a shield against human-induced pressures on Uganda’s threatened biodiversity. This proposed project in the Kidepo Critical Landscape of PAs and buffer zones in northern Uganda satisfies the requirements for GEF financing under GEF Biodiversity Focal Area, Strategic Objective one: Improve sustainability of Protected Area systems. The project will directly bring 416,485 ha of land under strengthened PA management arrangements designed to conserve biodiversity, involving three different forms of PA Status (NP, CFR and CWA) as well as public lands, with a wider positive influence on an additional 239,215 ha of dispersal areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Invitation to Bid Contract
    SOUTH SUDAN RECOVERY FUND - EASTERN EQUATORIA STABILIZATION PROGRAM CONSTRUCTION OF BRIDGE ACROSS KIDEPO RIVER AND AUXILLARY DRAINAGE WORKS IN IKOTOS COUNTY, EASTERN EQUATORIA STATE, REPUBLIC OF SOUTH SUDAN United Nations Office for Project Services (“UNOPS”) Invitation to Bid Contract Measured Price Construction Contract Contract No.: [Insert Contract Number] Date of Issuance:14/02/2013 ITB Case No.: UNOPS/SSOC/77184/ITB/WORKS/2013-020 1 INVITATIONOperational excelle nTOce fo rBIDresult s that matter CONTENTS 1. INVITATION LETTER ………………............................................................................. 2. SECTION I – BID PARTICULARS ……………………………………………................. 3. SECTION II – INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS …………………………………….......... 4. SECTION III – EVALUATION METHOD AND CRITERIA …………………………........ 5. SECTION IV – RETURNABLE BID SCHEDULES ………………………………............ SCHEDULE 1 Form of Bid……………………..................................................... SCHEDULE 2 Form of Bid Security……………................................................. SCHEDULE 3 Bidder’s Details……………......................................................... SCHEDULE 4 Bill of Quantities…………............................................................ SCHEDULE 5 Bidder Preliminary Programmes …………….............................. SCHEDULE 6 Proposed Project Team and Organizational Structure............... SCHEDULE 7 Insurances……………………………........................................... SCHEDULE 8 Capacities, Experience, Work in Hand and Work Completed..... SCHEDULE 9 Implementation/Quality
    [Show full text]
  • PPCR SPCR for Uganda
    PPCR/SC.20/6 May 11, 2017 Meeting of the PPCR Sub-Committee Washington D.C. Thursday, June 8, 2017 Agenda Item 6 PPCR STRATEGIC PROGRAM FOR CLIMATE RESILIENCE FOR UGANDA PROPOSED DECISION The PPCR Sub-Committee, having reviewed the document PPCR/SC.20/6, Strategic Program for Climate Resilience for Uganda [endorses] the SPCR. The Sub-Committee encourages the Government of Uganda and the MDBs to actively seek resources from other bilateral or multilateral sources to fund further development and implementation of the projects foreseen in the strategic plan. Uganda Strategic Program for Climate Resilience (Uganda SPCR) Republic of Uganda STRATEGIC PROGRAM FOR CLIMATE RESILIENCE: UGANDA PILOT PROGRAM FOR CLIMATE RESILIENCE (PPCR) Prepared for the Pilot Program for Climate Resilience (PPCR) 2 May, 2017 i Uganda Strategic Program for Climate Resilience (Uganda SPCR) Foreword The Government of Uganda recognizes the effects of climate change and the need to address them within the national and international strategic frameworks. This Strategic Program for Climate Resilience (SPCR) is a framework for addressing the challenges of climate change that impact on the national economy including development of resilience by vulnerable communities. The overall objective of the SPCR is to ensure that all stakeholders address climate change impacts and their causes in a coordinated manner through application of appropriate measures, while promoting sustainable development and a green economy. This SPCR will build on and catalyzes existing efforts in climate resilience-building Programs in Uganda, and will address key identified barriers and constraints, in order to accelerate the transformative accumulation of benefits of climate resilience and sustainable socio-economic development in the targeted sectors and areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Water and Agriculture in Uganda
    Water and Agriculture in Uganda Supporting a CLEW’s assessment Caroline Sundin Nicolina Lindblad Supervisor: Mark Howells Bachelor of Science Thesis MJ153X Bachelor of Science Thesis, Energy and Environment Stockholm 2015 Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................... 2 List of Tables ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Acronyms and abbreviation ........................................................................................................ 4 Abstract .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Sammanfattning .............................................................................................................................. 7 Acknowledgment ............................................................................................................................ 8 Disclaimer .......................................................................................................................................... 8 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 9 1.1 Uganda ..................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Policy Strategies to Augment Groundwater Through Rainwater Harvesting
    UGANDA POLICY STRATEGIES TO AUGMENT GROUNDWATER THROUGH RAINWATER HARVESTING UGANDA POLICY STRATEGIES TO AUGMENT GROUNDWATER THROUGH RAINWATER HARVESTING Author: Sushmita Sengupta and Erisa Kyeyune Editor: Archana Shankar Cover and design: Ajit Bajaj Production: Rakesh Shrivastava and Gundhar Das Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA) © 2020 Centre for Science and Environment Material from this publication can be used, but with acknowledgement. Maps in this report are indicative and not to scale. Citation: Sushmita Sengupta and Erisa Kyeyune, 2020, Uganda: Policy Strategies to Augment Groundwater through Rainwater Harvesting, Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi. Published by Centre for Science and Environment 41, Tughlakabad Institutional Area New Delhi 110 062 Phones: 91-11-40616000 Fax: 91-11-29955879 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.cseindia.org Contents 1. Introduction 7 2. Management of water sources in Uganda: Overview 10 3. Status of water supply in rural Uganda: Role of groundwater 12 4. Challenges due to poor quality and scarcity of groundwater 16 Health and socio-economic impact 16 State of groundwater in rural areas: Existing policies, strategies and actions 20 5. Suggested action plans to augment groundwater sources through rainwater harvesting 21 Fixing gaps in existing policies 22 Institutional mechanism and strategy for planning and implementation at district and national levels 23 Technological options to augment groundwater sources 27 Monitoring and evaluation 33 Information, education, communication 35 6. Conclusion and recommendations 37 References 39 5 1. Introduction • Water supply in Uganda—both surface and groundwater—is rainwa- ter-based. • More than 75 per cent of the population live in rural areas and depend to a large extent on groundwater reserves.
    [Show full text]
  • Country Profile – Uganda
    Country profile – Uganda Version 2014 Recommended citation: FAO. 2014. AQUASTAT Country Profile – Uganda. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Rome, Italy The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO. FAO encourages the use, reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product. Except where otherwise indicated, material may be copied, downloaded and printed for private study, research and teaching purposes, or for use in non-commercial products or services, provided that appropriate acknowledgement of FAO as the source and copyright holder is given and that FAO’s endorsement of users’ views, products or services is not implied in any way. All requests for translation and adaptation rights, and for resale and other commercial use rights should be made via www.fao.org/contact-us/licencerequest or addressed to [email protected]. FAO information products are available on the FAO website (www.fao.org/ publications) and can be purchased through [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • National Parks
    UGANDA’S NATIONAL PARKS www.ugandawildlife.org I Published by: Uganda Wildlife Authority 7 Kira Road Kamwokya P.O. Box, Kampala Uganda Tel: +256 414 355 000 Fax: +256 414 546 291 Email: [email protected] www.ugandawildlife.org ugandawildlifeauthority ugwildlife ©2018 Uganda Wildlife Authority II Uganda Wildlife Authority Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) was established in August 1996 by the Uganda Wildlife Statute, which merged the Uganda National Parks and the Game Department. It is governed by a Board of trustees appointed by the Minister for Tourism and Antiquities. UWA is responsible for 10 National Parks; 12 Wildlife reserves; 5 Community Wildlife Management Areas; and 13 Wildlife Sanctuaries OUR MISSION The Mission of Uganda Wildlife Authority is to conserve and sustainably manage the wildlife and Protected Areas of Uganda in partnership with the neighbouring communities and other stakeholders for the benefit of Uganda and the global community OUR VISION To be a leading self-sustaining wildlife conservation agency that transforms Uganda into one of the best ecotourism destinations in Africa. Uganda National Parks Just 93,000km2 in size – equivalent in area to the United Kingdom or the US state of Oregon - Uganda is a land of dramatic contrasts. Here, the forests of Central Africa merge with East African savanna while hot, open plains sink beneath great lakes and rise to chill, snow-capped mountaintops. Tourist activities in our ten spectacular national parks are also excitingly varied. Track the endangered mountain gorilla through the dense forests of the Bwindi Impenetrable National Park in the morning, before looking for lions on the open, rift valley grasslands of nearby Ishasha.
    [Show full text]
  • National Large Carnivore Conservation
    Strategic Action Plan for Large Carnivore Conservation in Uganda ==== 2010-2020 1 Acknowledgements We are grateful to the people who participated from the following institutions and who contributed to this Action Plan: • Game Trails Safaris • Makerere University Biological Field Station • Makerere University Department of Zoology • Makerere University Wildlife and Animal Resource Management • Ministry of Tourism, Trade and Industry • Panthera Foundation • Uganda Wildlife Authority • Wildlife Conservation Society • World Wide Fund for Nature • Zoological Society of London We are also very grateful to Panthera Foundation, Daniel K. Thorne Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and Wildlife Conservation Society who funded the development of this plan. Photographs in this plan were supplied by Andrew Plumptre and Jan Broekhuis. 2 Table of contents Acknowledgements.................................................................................................................................2 Table of Contents....................................................................................................................................3 Abbreviations..........................................................................................................................................4 Foreward................................................................................................................................................5 Executive Summary ..............................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Projected Water Resource Dynamics in the Sub-Humid Upper Nile Water Management Zone of Uganda, East Africa
    African Journal of Rural Development, Vol. 3 (2): April-June 2018: pp.753-760. ISSN 2415-2838 This article is licensed under a Creative Commons license, Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Projected water resource dynamics in the sub-humid Upper Nile Water Management Zone of Uganda, East Africa A. EGERU.,1,2* B. BARASA.,3 G. GABIRI4 and G.L.OPENJURU5 1Regional Universities Forum for Capacity Building in Agriculture (RUFORUM), P.O. Box 16811, Wandegeya, Kampala, Uganda 2Department of Environmental Management, Makerere University, P.O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda 3 Department of Geography and Social Studies, Kyambogo University, P.O. Box 1, Kyambogo, Kampala, Uganda 4Department of Geography, University of Bonn, 53113 Bonn, Germany 5Gulu University, P.O. Box 166, Gulu, Uganda Corresponding author: [email protected] ABSTRACT Projected scenarios in land, population, resource use, land use/cover, climate and urbanization over the Nile Basin reveal an acceleration and dynamical transitions in near- to-medium term. These changes have a bearing on water resource dynamics including the acceleration of the long-held yet hitherto managed conflicts over the Nile waters. This paper presents a projection of water resource dynamics in the River Nile using the Upper Nile Water Management Zone (UNWMZ) of Uganda as a reference site. Results showed variability in sub-catchment discharge into the Upper Water Management Zone. By 2040, the catchment’s water resources base will decrease by 12.6% whilst gross and net demand will increase. The projected decrease in the water discharge in the catchment can be attributed to the anticipated increase in temperatures, a decrease in rainfall and expected increase in human population in the sub-region.
    [Show full text]
  • Kidepo Valley National Park General Management Plan 2012-2022
    MINISTRY OF TOURISM, WILDLIFE AND ANTIQUITIES (MTWA) UGANDA WILDLIFE AUTHORITY KIDEPO VALLEY NATIONAL PARK GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 2012-2022 August 2012 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) prepared this General Management Plan with part funding from Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS). Consultations were held with all relevant stakeholders as shown in the appendices. Furthermore an analysis of stakeholders was done which gave guidance on the consultations made. Uganda Wildlife Authority highly acknowledges the communities and the entire Karamoja region leadership especially Kaabong, Kotido, Kitgum and Pader districts, who were bold enough in giving there proposals during the Planning process. Prepared by: Uganda Wildlife Authority, Planning Unit In put from: KVNP field staff, Senior UWA staff and stakeholders Guidance from: Uganda Wildlife Authority, Top Management members Drafted and edited by: Mr. Edgar Buhanga and Mr. Richard Kapere ii FOREWORD Kidepo Valley National Park (KVNP) started as the Kidepo Valley Game Reserve, which was established in 1958. Kidepo Valley National Park was 2 2 gazzeted in 1962, with an area of 1,259 km and, in 1967, 181 km of important dry season grazing habitat was added to the upper Narus catchment region of the park to maintain seasonal migrations. Establishment of the National park did not immediately stop traditional hunting and occupation of these areas. In the late 1970‟s, automatic weapons became more widespread in Karamoja as Amin‟s defeated army moved through the area. Coupled with two years of drought, people displaced as a result of famine took to poaching and the killing of wildlife accelerated significantly. Despite this, great effort has been made to reduce poaching with the assistance of the Karamoja disarmament program.
    [Show full text]
  • PROJECT DOCUMENT Republic of Uganda United Nations Development Programme Global Environment Facility
    PROJECT DOCUMENT Republic of Uganda United Nations Development Programme Global Environment Facility Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Threatened Savanna Woodland in the Kidepo Critical Landscape in North Eastern Uganda GEFSEC PROJECT ID: 4456; GEF AGENCY ID: PIMS 4592; AWARD ID: ____________ Brief Description: The Government of Uganda has made significant investments in most protected areas (PAs) in the country. However, the Kidepo Critical Landscape of North Eastern Uganda, encompassing eight protected areas under a range of management authorities received limited investment over the past 20 years due to protracted conflict, and proportionately suffer from lower management effectiveness compared to other sites. The long-term solution proposed by this project is to strengthen the national system of protected areas in Uganda by improving the management effectiveness of protected areas in the Kidepo Critical landscape in the North Eastern part of the country, thus affording biodiversity sufficient protection from emerging and future threats. This can be achieved through providing planned, targeted and effective support to the operational capacity of core PAs within the landscape and through creating a coordinated landscape management approach in the KCL to serve as a shield against human-induced pressures on Uganda’s threatened biodiversity. This proposed project in the Kidepo Critical Landscape of PAs and buffer zones in northern Uganda satisfies the requirements for GEF financing under GEF Biodiversity Focal Area, Strategic Objective one: Improve sustainability of Protected Area systems. The project will directly bring 416,485 ha of land under strengthened PA management arrangements designed to conserve biodiversity, involving three different forms of PA Status (NP, CFR and CWA) as well as public lands, with a wider positive influence on an additional 239,215 ha of dispersal areas.
    [Show full text]