Baobab Iron-Ore Project, Tete Province, Mozambique Community
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Baobab Iron-Ore Project, Tete Province, Mozambique Community Health Impact Assessment Report Project Number: COA2014 Prepared for: Baobab Resources Plc _______________________________________________________________________________________ Digby Wells and Associates (International) Limited (Subsidiary of Digby Wells & Associates (Pty) Ltd). Co. Reg. No. 07264148. Henwood House, Henwood, Ashford, Kent, TN24 8DH, United Kingdom Tel: +44 123 363 1062, Fax: +44 123 361 9270, [email protected], www.digbywells.com _______________________________________________________________________________________ Directors: AR Wilke (South African), AJ Reynolds, GE Trusler (C.E.O) (South African) _______________________________________________________________________________________ This document has been prepared by Digby Wells Environmental. Report Type: Community Health Impact Assessment Report Project Name: Baobab Iron-Ore Project, Tete Province, Mozambique Project Code: COA2014 Name Responsibility Signature Date Vumile Dlamini Report Writer V. Dlamini May 2015 Natasha Taylor- 1st Review May 2015 Meyer Jan Perold 2nd Review March 2015 This report is provided solely for the purposes set out in it and may not, in whole or in part, be used for any other purpose without Digby Wells Environmental prior written consent. Digby Wells Environmental i Community Health Impact Assessment Report Error! Reference source not found. COA2014 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Capitol Resources Limitada (Capitol Resources), a wholly owned subsidiary of Baobab Resources Plc (Baobab) - a Mozambique-focused iron ore, base and precious metal explorer, is proposing to develop the Tete Iron Ore Project located north of the provincial capital of Tete, in the Chiúta and Moatize districts of Mozambique. The concession, covering exploration licence areas 1032L, 1034L and 1035L is being explored and managed by Capitol Resources Limitada (CRL); a 100% owned subsidiary company of Baobab. The Tete Pig Iron Ore and Ferro-Vanadium Project (Project) is focused on the Tenge Hill deposit located approximately 80 kilometers northeast of the town Tete, Tete Province, on the banks of the Revuboe River. HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY A Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is a practical, multi-disciplinary process, combining a range of qualitative and quantitative evidence in a decision-making framework. An HIA seeks to identify and estimate the lasting or significant changes of different actions IFC Performance Standard 4 “Community Health, Safety and Security” on the health status of a defined population. The methodology of this “The client will evaluate the risks and impacts to the health and safety of the Affected Communities during project life-cycle and HIA was based on the Good Practice will establish preventive and control measures consistent with Note (GPN) for HIAs as supported by Good International Industry Practice (GIIP), such as in the World the International Finance Corporation Bank Group Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines (EHS Guidelines) or other internationally recognised sources. The (IFC). The IFC has published a set of client will identify risks and impacts and propose mitigation Performance Standards (PS) for large measures that are commensurate with their nature and projects that will require international magnitude. These measures will favour the prevention or avoidance of risks and impacts over minimization.” funding. PS4 which deals specifically with Community Health, Safety and Security, recognises that project activities result in both positive and negative impacts to communities. The GPN has been developed specifically to provide guidance on community health for this Standard. The HIA was supported by a systematic and consistent approach to collecting and analysing baseline health data through the Environmental Health Areas (EHA) framework. Twelve different EHAs are described, which provide a linkage between project-related activities and potential positive or negative community-level impacts. This incorporates a variety of biomedical and key social determinants of health. Through this integrated analysis, cross- cutting environmental and social conditions that contain significant health components are identified instead of focusing primarily on disease-specific. Specific Potentially Project Affected Communities (PACs) and health impacts related to different activities of the Project have been described. Digby Wells Environmental ii Community Health Impact Assessment Report Error! Reference source not found. COA2014 COMMUNITY HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES The specific activities of the community HIA (cHIA) included: ■ A desktop literature review outlining the host country and community health profile; ■ Collecting primary data by participatory means with the use of semi-structured questionnaires and key informant interviews with relevant stakeholders; ■ Collecting additional secondary information that was not available in the public domain that is available in published and grey data; ■ Understanding proposed Project designs, present and planned work activities, project schedule and location of PACs; ■ Considering the potential future health impact that the proposed Project will have on the health of the respective communities; ■ Determining the existing health needs of the community based on health strategies, infrastructure, programs, service priorities, delivery plans and challenges; and ■ Developing evidence-based recommendations to avoid/mitigate negative and enhance positive impacts resulting from the proposed Project at the relevant project stage. The field work was performed by cHIA specialists from Digby Wells. The desktop work was completed in May 2014. The field work took place from the 30th June to 5th of July 2014. A broad range of stakeholders was consulted. Key informant interviews were conducted with district health authorities and medical personnel at the local health facilities and hospitals. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were held in eight communities that are in close proximity to the proposed Project including; ■ Cacoma; ■ Chianga; ■ Massamba; ■ Matacale; ■ Mbuzi; ■ Muchena; ■ Nhambia; and ■ Tenge KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Access to the Healthcare facilities is a challenge for the communities in the proposed Project area as many reside approximately a six hour walking distance from a healthcare facility and Digby Wells Environmental iii Community Health Impact Assessment Report Error! Reference source not found. COA2014 have to rely on public or private transport to access care. Emergency services are non- existent. Services are not free, substantiated by 100% of respondents claiming to have to pay for medical services. The communities have a relatively high dependency ratio1 due to the high levels of poverty and unemployment. In terms of Healthcare services and infrastructure, the proposed Tenge Project (Project) induced impacts need to be considered in two tangents. One, being a positive impact whereby there is the potential for the proposed Project to support the development of improved health services through direct and indirect interventions; and the second, being a negative impact whereby the proposed Project may stretch the already burdened capacity of the Healthcare services in the Project Region and communities in the vicinity of the proposed Project area. Malaria is a major public health challenge in the Project area and is regarded as the biggest concern related to burden of disease. It accounts for a significant portion of medical consultations (both clinics and hospitals) at the local level. Community knowledge on transmission and prevention of malaria is good. Ownership of insecticide-treated nets is good, although it is difficult to assess proper utilisation. Ninety four percent (94%) of Chiúta household respondents declared that they sleep under a mosquito net, this decreases to 66% of Moatize households. Over one third of Moatize households (37%) do not sleep under a mosquito net. There are very few interventions in the area to reduce the burden of disease from malaria. Although water is available throughout the year (during both wet and dry seasons), there is generally poor access to drinking water sources. There are two boreholes serving the communities in the project area, and 5 to 6 boreholes serving the project concession area alone. Thus, untreated water sources such as rain, rivers/streams, open-air wells, and hand dug wells supply water to a considerable portion of the population in the project area. There are very few improved sanitation facilities such as ventilated improved pit latrines (VIP) within the communities. The vast majority of households throughout the villages do not have access to their own improved sanitation facility and resort mainly to traditional pit latrines (more common) or open-air defecation (less common). Diarrhoeal diseases are common. The spontaneous migration and settlement of job seekers and their families into the proposed Project area can be expected, and this may have specific health impact implications for the receiving communities, as well as the in-migrants. These include: 1 A measure showing the number of dependents (aged 0-14 and over the age of 65) to the total population (aged 15-64). This indicator gives insight into the amount of people of non-working age compared to the number of those of working age. A high ratio means those of working age - and the overall economy - face a greater burden in supporting the ageing/ elderly population. Digby Wells Environmental