IPP377
REPUBLIC OF KENYA Public Disclosure Authorized
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES PLANNING FRAMEWORK FOR THE
KENYA ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN ARID AND SEMI ARID LANDS (KACCAL) PROJECT
AUGUST, 2009 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary 4
1. Introduction and description of KACCAL Project 5 1.1 Lending Instrument 5 1.2 Project Development Objective & Key Indicators 5 1.3 Project Components 5 1.4 Key Activities 6
2.0 The indigenous peoples in the operational areas and possible impacts 6 2.1 Indigenous peoples in the operational areas 6 Public Disclosure Authorized Table 1.0: Indigenous peoples assisted by ALRMP II 7 2.2 Impacts 11 Table 2.0: Potential impacts of KACCAL on Indigenous peoples 11
3.0 Proposed Social Assessment 15 Table 3.0 Specific measures for the indigenous Peoples 16 3.1 Institutional Arrangements 17
4.0 Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms 17
Disclosure 18
Annex 1: Bibliography 19 Annex 2: Screening tool for indigenous peoples 19
Photo 1: District Steering Group meeting with Watta Indigenous Peoples 22 Representatives in Malindi Photo 2: District Steering Group meeting with Watta Indigenous Peoples 23 in Malindi
Abbreviations
ALRMP Arid Lands Resource Management project CDC Community Development Committee CDD Community Driven Development DSG District Steering Group GoK Government of Kenya IP Indigenous Peoples IPP Indigenous Peoples Plan IPPF Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework IPR Indigenous Peoples Representatives KACCAL Kenya Adaptation to Climate Change In Arid and Semi-Lands Kshs Kenya Shillings M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MET Mobile Extension Teams NGO Non-Governmental Organizations PMU Project Management Unit
PICD Participatory Integrated Community Development PIM Participatory Impact Monitoring PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal USD US Dollar
Executive Summary The Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASALs) which cover more than 80 percent of the country’s land mass need special attention in order to achieve sustainable economic development in Kenya. The ASALs cut across 39 districts, mainly in the Rift Valley, Eastern, Northeastern and Coast Provinces. The striking spatial variation in incomes, poverty and human development in Kenya indicate the severe under- development and marginalization of the ASALs. This under-development arises from a range of reasons, including climatic and agro-ecological factors and socio-economic conditions, such as low levels of access to markets and services. Climate variability and change threaten to undermine poverty reduction and economic growth in the ASALs by exacerbating existing vulnerabilities.
The Kenya Adaptation to Climate Change in Arid and Semi-Arid lands (KACCAL) project is to be piloted in five districts namely, Garissa, Turkana, Marsabit, Malindi and Mwingi. These districts which are within the ALRMP II operation area cover a wide range of conditions relevant for adaptation. The selection is seeking to include a combination of districts that: (i) cover arid and semi arid areas; (ii) are exposed to multi-hazard climate risks (e.g. droughts and floods) and will likely experience continuing climate variability; (iii) include a range of livelihood types (pastoral, agro-pastoral, agricultural, natural resource based); (iv) have variation in implementation capacity; and (iv) are among the poorest and most-vulnerable areas.
During project preparation, it became clear that KACCAL might impact on indigenous peoples’ rights. To comply with the standards of the World Bank’s Operational Policy on Indigenous Peoples (OP 4.10), the Government of Kenya has prepared this Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF). The purpose of the IPPF is to ensure that the development process fully respects the dignity, rights, economies, and culture and that the project is able to gain the broad community support of affected indigenous peoples and other vulnerable and marginalized groups.
Therefore, the project will provide opportunities and mechanisms for indigenous peoples and other vulnerable and marginalized groups to:
• Participate in all project activities in their areas and are involved in decision making organs of the project; • Receive project funds; • Utilize and benefit from the resources of this project.
The KACCAL will carry out a Social Assessment in two stages: 1) initial screening (see screening tool in Annex 2) and 2) detailed social assessment. The objective of the initial screening is to identify all existing Hunters and Gatherers in the proposed KACCAL project operational area. This exercise will be undertaken with the assistance (or in close collaboration) with an indigenous person (or indigenous persons) from the operational area. This identification process will be informed by the following criteria: (i) self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition of this identity by others; (ii) collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the project area and to the natural resources in these habitats and territories; (iii) customary cultural, economic, social, or political institutions that are separate from those of the dominant society and culture; and (iv) an indigenous language, often different from the official language of the country or region. The objective of the detailed social assessment is to help the project support the aspirations and the needs of the IPs. As such, in addition to providing the social, economic and other relevant information, it will come up with an elaborate action plan that will be developed in consultation with the IPs on how the KACCAL project will extent the benefits of the project to the IPs and also mitigate all the negative impacts to them. This action plan will be adopted by all the District Steering Groups as the modus operandi for all the project areas where these peoples are found.
This action plan will include arrangements for the free, prior, and informed consultations with the affected indigenous peoples’ communities, as well as arrangements for a participatory impact monitoring (PIM) at district level. This will be an important element to assist the various structures to fine-tune their interventions and aim at maximizing culturally appropriate benefits and provide space for the indigenous peoples’ communities to voice their concerns.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Lending instrument The proposed lending instrument is a SCCF grant in the amount of USD 5.5 million. The project will be implemented through the mechanisms and processes under an ongoing IDA supported Arid Lands Resource Management Program (ALRMP II) which is under implementation. Project activities will be piloted in four ASAL districts, Garissa, Turkana, Marsabit and Malindi, with the intention of scaling-up KACCAL climate change adaptation work in other districts of the baseline project. Related activities in a fifth district, Mwingi, will be supported by the proposed United Nations Development Program (UNDP) implemented SCCF grant.
1.2 Project development objective and key indicators The goal of the overall WB-UNDP project is to enhance the resilience of communities and the sustainability of rural livelihoods threatened by climate change in the arid and semi-arid lands of Kenya. As a contribution to the achievement of the above goal, KACCAL’s development objective is to
increase the capacity of selected districts and communities of the ASALs to adapt to climate variability and change.
1.3 Project components The project components include (i) climate information products, policy and advocacy; (ii) climate risk management at district levels; and (iii) community driven initiatives for climate resilience. The latter two components will be implemented in four ASAL districts, with similar activities implemented in a fifth district with funding from an UNDP SCCF grant. All three components are contributing directly to the integration of climate actions into development processes in the ASALs, in particular through the ALRMP II.
1.4 Key activities (i) Climate risk profiling and assessment of adaptive measures to strengthen the monitoring processes and capacity for climate risk management, climate proofing and assessing adaptive strategies and investments at the national level and in selected districts. (ii) Integration of climate change information into early warning and information systems with emphasis on improving the integration of climate change information into existing bottom-up and top-down early warning systems (e.g. ALRMP, FEWSNET, LINKS, LEWS, ICPAC and FAO forecasts), and refining information formats and dissemination structures. (iii) Knowledge and advisory service partnerships development between ALRMP and various key national and international institutions and programs (such as Kenya Meteorological Department (MET), the IGAD Climate Predictions and Applications Center (ICPAC), Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI), International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) and other CGIAR centers, including south-south learning partnerships). (iv) Strengthening of technical capacities of ALRMP and other institutions on climate change. (v) Project implementation support to the ALRMP Secretariat, including monitoring and evaluation of project processes and performance. (vi) Structural interventions for land and water management through investments in a variety of land management and erosion control, small-scale water harvesting, storage and water management measures will be supported. (vii) Sustainable agricultural land and livestock management by establishing micro-projects which will enhance the resilience of agricultural practices to climate risks, through promotion of sustainable land management methods and technologies (e.g. inter-cropping, integrated nutrient management, moisture and soil conservation techniques, agro forestry, drought resistant crops) and rangeland/livestock management (e.g. silvo-pastoralism and drought- tolerant pasture species).
(viii) Opportunities to enhance carbon sequestration by offering grants to undertake technical and financial feasibility assessment for potential ecosystem services such as carbon financing. (ix) Livelihood enhancement and diversification through piloting tree species plantations such as Jathropha curcus, Acacia senegal or Acacia seyal, which are suited to semi-arid or arid climatic conditions, have economic value and provide important ecosystem services. (x) Exploration of innovative Credit and micro-insurance schemes for ASAL communities and found financially viable and technically sound, grants will support up-scaling of successful mechanisms for community based credit and insurance to facilitate the adoption of improved agro-pastoral practices and other livelihood strategies to reduce vulnerability and risks. (xi) Support Human and Livestock Health investments to reduce human exposure to vector and water-borne diseases and improve livestock health.
2.0 THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN THE OPERATIONAL AREAS AND POSSIBLE IMPACTS
During the preparation of the KACCAL, it became known that the project could impact on IPs. Taking into consideration the existence of the Wasanya, the Boni and others, who could be present in some parts of Malindi, Lamu and possibly other districts, the project team opted to prepare an Indigenous People Planning Framework (IPPF) that will guide the implementation of the micro-projects. The project will confine its definition of IPs as the known “Hunters and Gatherers” but will also broadly include vulnerable and marginalized groups as it is the sole objective of this project.
2.1 Indigenous peoples in operational areas
2.1.1. Watta Community The Watta people are mostly found in the rural arid and semi arid lands of the country. A minority of them live in thick forests scattered all over the country. The people are traditionally hunters and gatherers. In Malindi district a Watta community is found in four divisions (i.e. Malindi, Langobaya, Marafa and Magarini). In Tana River district the Watta are found in Sombo and Laza divisions while in Mandera the Watta are found in Central division. The population of Watta community in the districts is estimated at approximately 30,000 persons. This is only 2.7% of the entire Malindi, Mandera and Tana River district population. The Watta people are traditionally hunters and gatherers. However since the government abolished unlicensed hunting of game and wild animals, the Watta people now live in permanent settlements, some of them along the river and where there are forests, mainly in the mixed farming and livestock farming zones. The forests afford them an opportunity to practice bee keeping while those along the river practice crop production. The land tenure system in the district is communal ownership. Most of the land in the three districts of Malindi, Tana River and Mandera are currently under trust land by the county councils. Few influential people in the district have however managed to acquire title deeds from the land offices in Nairobi. However, most of this trust lands are controlled by the majority tribes and becomes a point of conflict if
the smaller tribes and outsiders get involved. This is what has pushed the small and marginalized tribes like Watta deep into the forests. 2.1.2 The Boni The Boni are known for their unique tradition of whistling to birds that guide them to honey. They are found in Northeastern Kenya’s district of Ijara and Lamu district. Their population is about 4,000, compared to 25,000 half a century ago (Source: Organization for the Development of Lamu Communities (ODLC). They are nomadic hunter-gatherer tribe of mainly Cushitic origin with a unique characteristic. The community sources their subsistence from forest products such as honey, wild plants/fruits for consumption and medicinal purposes. The Boni (Awer) are found in the North-Eastern part of Lamu district and Ijara District. They’re concentrated mainly in Witu, Hindi and Kiunga divisions of the district. The community is located in villages of Bargoni (Hindi Division), Milimani, Bodhei, Basuba, Mangai, Mararani, Kiangwe and Kiunga (Kiunga division), Pandanguo and Jima (Witu Division). The Boni live in forested areas of the district i.e. within the Witu and Boni forests. They live deep into the forest and only come out to the periphery when there is hardship or hunger. They perceive the forest in the Boni inhabited areas as communally theirs. However, with the gazettement of all the forest by the government this has become a source of conflict. The Watta and Boni have benefited from the ongoing ALRMP activities at a total cost of Kshs.10, 595,282.00 as detailed in the table below by the 25 interventions under different sectors.
Table 1.0: ALRMP assistance to Indigenous Peoples in Project areas District Community Activities Cost (Kshs) Remarks Malindi Watta Excavation Mogole water pan The pan is used for 2,190,086 human and livestock water. Construction of Muyu wa Kae 450,000 Complete and in use. shallow well Water trucking to Chamari 225,000 During ongoing and Watalla Primary schools drought period
Tana River Watta Purchase of 10 donkeys and 761,380 Community carts for 50 households to contributed Kshs assist in transportation of 263,600 towards the water and household food completion of the supplies and other supplies project and supported rehabilitation of abandoned irrigation scheme through purchase of genset spare parts, construction of canals, division boxes and supplied with banana suckers. Supply shelter materials to 12 1,135,380 Community households construction of 5 contribution Kshs
Toilets and one masonry tank 335,900 Lamu Boni PRA/PICD training for two 254,000 Community identified community Boni groups and trained (Mangai and Basuba) Support to modern bee 120,000 Community trained, keeping for three 80 hives fitted with communities (Pandanguo, comb starters and Mangai and Basuba) honey centrifuge machine bought Capacity building on health 140,600 Community can now and nutrition identify common ailments and its treatment Provision of planting seeds 1,771,956 172 bales of both and construction of one grain maize and cowpeas store constructed. distributed to Bargoni, Milimani, Basuba, Mangai , Mararani Community trained on crop production aspects. 1 grain storage facility constructed at Mangai Poultry improvement support 315,000 Material for to Mangai and Basuba construction of poultry communities houses procured. Water trucking to Bargoni and 100,000 Trekking of water Basuba communities done to the two villages during prolonged dry season Rehabilitation and supply 211,000 1 well rehabilitated hand pump for Pandanguo and fitted with hand pump. Ijara Boni Training on Participatory 253,400 Community identified integrated community and trained on various development for 100 participatory households tools.CDC elected and community action plan developed.120 participants attended the training 80 male and 20 female. Support to shelter 200,000 Community improvement for 100 contribution of Kshs households 25,000
Ecotourism support 1,000,000 Community contribution Kshs 250,000 Provision of modern bee hives 170,000 Community contribution Kshs 51,000 Support to ECD learning 120,000 Community centres contributed Kshs 36,000 Supply of farming tools to 76 180,140 Community households contributed Kshs 54,000 Provision of dairy goats to 10 482,000 Community households contributed Kshs 143,000 Mandera Watta Supported with two donkeys 63,000 Community raised and two carts Kshs.18,000 Eight women were supported 40,800 Individual women in Income generating saved Kshs each hence activities through matching total of Kshs.8000 grant. One youth group supported in 119,090 The group contributed income generating activities 35,720 from the group through limestone harvesting savings. and block making. Six porters were supported 23,000 The individual porter with one wheel barrow each raised 900 Kshs hence to ease the load on the head. total contribution of 5,600 Kshs. Two destitute Watta families 148,000 The communities were supported through mobilized 10 goats restocking with 30 goats each each for individual beneficiery.the 20 goats were valued at Kshs.37,000 Kshs. One artisans (Jua Kali) group 121,450 The group mobilized was supported through Kshs 36,450 through purchase of various both the cash and kind equipments to assist in their contribution. trade. Total Cost 10,595,282.00
2.2 Impacts
This IPPF is expected to provide the framework in which negative impacts to the IPs are mitigated and positive impacts are enhanced based on the free, prior and informed consultations with the affected indigenous peoples. An action plan will be developed within the scope of the proposed Social Assessment that will provide the project team with practical measures in which the IPs are enabled to benefit from the project activities.
Table 2: Potential impacts of KACCAL on indigenous peoples
Component Project Activity as Possible impacts on the Mitigation measures outlined in the PAD indigenous peoples Component 1: Climate risk profiling; (+) Enhanced capacity of Capacity building of Climate Refined and downscaled targeted communities to representatives of the IPs on information climate scenarios; prioritize, develop and climate information products, policy Assessment of adaptive implement socially collection, policy and advocacy measures; accountable investments at the formulation, advocacy and (SCCF Increment Integration of climate community level communication strategies. US$ 1.46 million change information into The source of livelihood will early warning and change due to project IP to be involved in the information systems; interventions, easy access to DSGs capacity building and Knowledge and advisory social amenities such as planning processes service partnerships; schools, health facilities. They Strengthening of will also have sedentary technical capacities of lifestyle where they will be ALRMP and other accessing these services. institutions on climate (+) The enhancement of change; policies and the studies could Project implementation provide the ground for a better support to the ALRMP protection of IP’ rights, Secretariat, including economies and might lead to monitoring and their inclusion into the evaluation of project development process and the processes and establishment of equal performance; opportunities. The draft land Policy dialogue and policy approved by cabinet in awareness raising through June 2009 may lead to targeted consultations and allocation of land hence advisory products. individual land tenure system to the IPs. This will give them incentives to develop the land in terms of Agriculture and other related livelihoods.
(+) The capacity building might also cover areas such as intercultural communication, which could lead to a better relation between governmental structures and the IPs and the development investments might provide benefits to the IPs (jobs, poverty alleviation, good governance, recognition of rights, land restitution etc.) The standard of living of the IPs is bound to change as a result of more attention by the government.
(-) The IPs marginalization in decision making process means, their needs, rights and interests are not reflected to the same extend as others in the policy formulation, planning and implementation of the studies . The lack of involvement of IPs in decision making will lead to further marginalization, disruption of their current livelihoods and mode of life. They might be pushed further to areas where they cannot access health and educational facilities. .
. Capacity building to (-) As the IP are marginalized, Involve the indigenous Component2: ALRMP District there is a risk that they are not people representatives in Climate risk Coordination Units invited to participate in the capacity building activities management at (DCUs), District Steering capacity building and/or in the and in DSGs district levels Groups (DSGs), Mobile planning process and therefore Extension Teams (METs), their needs and interests are Local Government, Civil not included into the reform Society Organizations and development agenda. (CSOs), and Non- Hence due to this lack of Governmental capacity the IPs will not be Organizations (NGOs). able to make informed decisions on their lifestyle and livelihoods. (-) As the IP are marginalized in society, there is a high risk that they are not included into the early warning system (employment or compensation for recording data). The IPs will not access EWS and this will lead to loss of livelihood in case of catastrophy/climate change.
Component 3: Structural interventions (+) Vulnerability of the local Involve the IPs in all stages Community for land and water communities to climate risks of micro-project driven initiatives management- reduced through viable long development i.e. the whole for climate investments in a variety term economic and diversified value chain of the micro resilience of land management and investments. The IP project erosion control, small- livelihoods will be enhanced scale water harvesting, through support to their The 10% community storage and water identified micro- projects. This contribution should be management measures; will lead to improvement in flexible enough to enable Sustainable agricultural their mode of life through the IPs to contribute land and livestock increased incomes resulting effectively. management -promotion from the micro-projects of sustainable land implemented. management methods (+) CDD Projects can be a and technologies and very useful instrument to rangeland/livestock empower indigenous management ; communities, contribute to Opportunities to enhance poverty reduction, better carbon sequestration: protection of indigenous rights technical and financial and culture, and enhanced feasibility assessment for relations between all people potential ecosystem living in a given area and services micro-projects , sharing natural resources such as water, forests etc. The Livelihood enhancement Livelihoods of the IPs will and diversification: by improve due to a variety of giving support to CDD micro-projects that are increased adoption of geared to poverty reduction livelihood diversification and better standards of living. projects, (+) The capacity building Credit and micro- might enable the IP to search insurance through support and find ways to participate to financially viable and more actively in the decision technically sound making process and the community based credit inclusion of IPs in the group of and insurance to facilitate beneficiaries of the project. the adoption of improved (-)As the capacities of the IP agro-pastoral practices are very low, there is a high and other livelihood risk that they are unable to strategies to reduce elaborate project proposals, vulnerability and risks; which fulfill the technical Human and Livestock requirements of the CDD Health Support screening process and due to investments that will that not receive funding; thus reduce human exposure they do not benefit from the to vector and water-borne CDD component. The IPs diseases and improving capacity will be enhanced to livestock health as enable them to elaborate appropriate. project proposals fulfill the technical requirements and hence receive funding. The funded proposals will improve the livelihoods of these IPs.
(-) As the income of indigenous peoples is three times lower than of other rural populations, they might not be able to contribute the requested 10% to all activities financed in the catchments. The IP may not benefit from the project if community contribution is the pre- condition for funding micro- projects. This affects their livelihoods as they will be forced to sell the little they have to make contributions. (-) As the IP are marginalized in the decision making process and their specific needs unknown to decision makers, there is a risk, that CDD-projects proposed by them do not receive funding. (-) As the IP are marginalized, there is a high risk that they are not invited to participate in the capacity building and or the M&E. The micro-projects implemented by the IPs might lead to loss of livelihood due to lack of sustainability, resulting from lack of M&E.
3.0 Proposed Social Assessment Given the impacts anticipated in the above table, the project plans to undertake a detailed social assessment which will use a participatory/consultative approach and give voice to the IPs. This social assessment will be undertaken two stages – initial screening and then a detailed social assessment which will cover the cover the following: • Identification of IPs and other non – visible marginalized and vulnerable groups and elaborate on their vulnerability and demographic profile as well as all other social economic areas; • Identify potential effects of project activities; • Establish the appropriate institutional framework applicable through consultation with the IPs; • Map key stakeholders and existing local level IP institutions and how they must be engaged; • Recommend the best consultation mechanisms that will enable voice, access and participation of these groups; • Examine the PICD process currently used in the Arid Lands Project for its relevance to the IPs as an empowerment tool. Propose the most applicable participatory mechanism and approach that will empower the IPs to deal with issues identified, enable voice and feedback on areas that is important for their survival and development. • Outline performance monitoring and impact indicators. Table 3: Specific Measures for the Indigenous People Issue Activity Responsibility By When Cost Indicators USD* 1.Training of Conduct sensitization PCU-ALRMP 8/02/2010 22,500 Training Report, key seminars and Barazas for II List of participants stakeholders DSGs, IPRs and IP Communities 2.Capacity Training the ALRMP PCU-ALRMP 7/6/2010 115,000 List of participants
building of the District Coordination Units II , MET Training reports actors (DCUs), District Steering Groups (DSGs), Mobile Extension Teams (METs) and IPs 3.Establish and Carry out sensitization PCU-ARMPII 6/9/2010 18,750 CDCs functional in Operationalize Barazas in all the IP all IP areas CDC operational areas and facilitate the election of the CDCs Training and backstopping 4.Enable the IP Sensitize and train project DSG, 20/9/2010 62,500 Training report, communities to staff (METs) and relevant PMU- List of participants benefit from the GOK Ministry staff. ALRMP II, CDD initiative Target the IP communities METs, GoK funds for PICD to identify their staff. needs and implement projects identified in CAPs Allow the IP communities to pay their contribution to subprojects in Kind or Cash Provide training and backstopping 5.Establish a Sensitize the IPs DSG,PCU- 1/12/2010 13,750 List of participants, participatory Train them on the ALRMP II training reports monitoring and methodology Functional evaluation team Carry out regular M&E to committee of PM&E micro-projects in place Carry out two external midterm and final evaluations of the project impact * These costs are included in the costs for component 3.2 Support for Community-Based Micro- Projects. 3.1 Institutional Arrangements The planned Social Assessment will be able to outline the existing and relevant institutions and how these can be strengthened. However, as the KAACAL project has a CDD component, the key institution used to implement this Component is the Community Development Committee (CDC) which is elected by the communities themselves. The IPs in the project will have their own CDCs whose capacities will be enhanced through the appropriate empowerment tool that will be recommended by the Social Assessment Report. The CDC will work hand in hand with the KACCAL secretariat to facilitate the development and implementation of the project activities. For subprojects which do not in the first instance gain broad support from the affected indigenous peoples, the District Steering Group (DSG)
(which decides on the funding of subprojects) will agree with the CDC for mutually acceptable solutions. 4.0 Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.
After the Social Assessment and the drawing up of IPPs, this information will be factored in the overall M&E of the project. The implementation of the participatory impact monitoring (PIM) at district level will be an important element to assist the various structures to fine-tune their intervention with a view to maximize culturally appropriate benefits and provide space for the indigenous peoples’ communities to voice their concerns.
The PIM will be based on the data gathered by the screening process/social assessments. The PIM reports at district level should be produced before June 30th of the years and then be returned to all indigenous peoples’ communities for feedback before being handed over to the DSG before August 30th. In September of each year (from 2010 on) all IPRs will meet to discuss among other issues the PIM reports, elaborate an overall evaluation and prepare recommendations on how to fine-tune the IPPF further. The district PIM reports, the IPPF evaluation and the recommendation should be communicated to all stakeholders i.e. World Bank task team and the interested public before October 30th every year.
Benefits from this projects and how they will impact on the IPs will be outlined in the final project impact evaluation
DISCLOSURE
This IPPF will the disclosed at the World Bank Infoshop and in Kenya. Identified IPs will be consulted. The stakeholders for this consultation will be mapped through district communication mechanisms. Consultative meeting will be held at appropriate site and deliberations put on record. The Government of Kenya has established the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights which is mandated to address the grievances emanating from injustices. This IPPF and the subsequent plans will be shared with the Commission for information. The current address of this Commission is CVS Plaza, Kasuku Rd off Lenana Rd; P. O BOX 74359-00200; Tel: 020-2717900-08 / 282717256; Mobile: 721–207320; Fax: 020–2716160; Email: [email protected]
ANNEXES
Annex 1: Bibliography
ALRMP II (2004): Final Report of the Social Analysis Study for Arid Lands Resource Management Project II.
World Bank: Project Appraisal Document, Kenya: Adaptation to climate change in Arid and Semi-arid Lands of Kenya (KACCAL), 2009
Annex 2. Screening tool for the Indigenous peoples in the KACCAL operational area
Objective The Objective of the exercise is to identify all existing Hunters and Gatherers in the proposed KACCAL project operational area. The Process The screening exercise will be undertaken with the assistance (or in close collaboration) with an indigenous person (or indigenous persons) from the operational area. Expected Outcome The expected result of this exercise is a Report which will provide the following information:- ♦ Who are the indigenous peoples in the Turkana, Marsabit, Malindi and Garissa area? The information available so far needs to be verified from IPs themselves. ♦ The following communities have identified themselves as indigenous peoples – Watta, Elmolo Munyu Yaya and Malakote, Boni and Ngikebootok. This needs to be double checked including what these communities and sub-communities call themselves. ♦ What areas they now occupy (including acreage) as well as areas they occupied historically. The present areas occupied by the Boni are Gazetted government forests. Did these change over the years? Maps should be included if available. ♦ Highlights of their history. ♦ Population numbers- including identity, ♦ Their language ♦ Social organization ♦ Socio-economic situation – livelihood systems and constraints experienced in relation to displacement, evictions from ancestral lands, and the consequences of these to their economic wellbeing. The assumption is that most (or all) of these communities were Hunter/gatherers but have since taken up other economic activities such as livestock keeping and some small-scale agriculture. This needs to be verified and significance of these other economic activities in the livelihoods of the IPs established. ♦ Politics – Political representation at various levels – and if none explain the consequences of this and how it impacts on access to resources , service delivery, education, health, infrastructure, markets for the resources they produce such as honey etc. Do the IPs have equal access to decision-making processes as other communities do? ♦ Conflict and insecurity – among sub-communities and between IPs and others. Access to national security apparatus and outcome if any.
♦ Cross-border issues – e.g. Boni in Ijara and Lamu Districts and Ngikebootok in Turkana. What is the relevance of this to them and for others? ♦ Any other issues that might inform the situation of the IPs in the KACCAL project operational area.
Consultative Meeting with Watta Indigenous Peoples in Malindi
District Steering Group meeting with Watta Indigenous Peoples Representatives