Improving Climate Resilience of Vulnerable Communities and Ecosystems in the Gandaki River Basin, Nepal Annex 6 (b): Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) - Appendix 30 March 2020 Improving Climate Resilience of Vulnerable Communities and Ecosystems in the Gandaki River Basin, Nepal Appendix Appendix 1: ESMS Screening Report - Improving Climate Resilience of Vulnerable Communities and Ecosystems in the Gandaki River Basin Appendix 2: Rapid social baseline analysis – sample template outline Appendix 3: ESMS Screening questionnaire – template for screening of sub-projects Appendix 4: Procedures for accidental discovery of cultural resources (Chance find) Appendix 5: Stakeholder Consultation and Engagement Plan Appendix 6: Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) - Guidance Note Appendix 7: Social Impact Assessment (SIA) - Guidance Note Appendix 8: Developing and Monitoring an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) - Guidance Note Appendix 9: Pest Management Planning and Outline Pest Management Plan - Guidance Note Appendix 10: References Annex 6 (b): Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) 2 Appendix 1 ESMS Questionnaire & Screening Report – completed for GCF Funding Proposal Project Data The fields below are completed by the project proponent Project Title: Improving Climate Resilience of Vulnerable Communities and Ecosystems in the Gandaki River Basin Project proponent: IUCN Executing agency: IUCN in partnership with the Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management (Nepal) and the National Trust for Nature Conservation (Nepal) Funding agency: Green Climate Fund (GCF) Country: Nepal Contract value (add currency): US$25 Start date and duration: Early 2019, seven years Amount in CHF: CHF23.8m Has a safeguard screening ☒ yes Provide Original screening undertaken in September 2017 or ESIA been done before? ☐ no details , if yes : Step 1: ESMS Questionnaire The fields below are completed by the project proponent; the questionnaire is presented in Annex A Name and function of individual representing project proponent Date ESMS Questionnaire Narendra Pradhan, William Jackson; Prahlad Thapa, Manish Raj 8th April completed by: Pandey, and Rajan P. Paudel, 2018 ESMS Screening is 1. ☒ required because the project budget is ≥ CHF 500,000 2. ☐ required – despite being a small project (< CHF 500,000) the project (tick one of the three options) proponent has identified risks when completing the ESMS Questionnaire 3. ☐ not required because the project budget is < CHF 500,000 and the project proponent confirms that no environmental or social risks have been identified when completing the ESMS Questionnaire Step 2: ESMS Screening To be completed by IUCN ESMS reviewer(s); only needed when the options 1 or 2 above (marked in red) are ticked Name IUCN unit and function Date IUCN ESMS Reviewer: Linda Klare IUCN HQ 9th April 2018 and 27.5.2019 Scott Perkin IUCN Asia 16th April 2018 Title Date Documents submitted at Full Funding proposal: FP_IUCN_Nepal_Gandaki 9th April 2018 Screening stage: 20180406-97314_pt 20180409-94385.doc Annexes 1-12 9th April 2018 Funding_Proposal 22 May 2019 including annexes 22.5.2019 ESMS Screening Report Risk category: ☐ low risk ☒ moderate risk ☐ high risk Rationale: Summarize findings from The project aims to improve climate resilience of vulnerable communities the questionnaire and explain the rationale and ecosystems in the Gandaki River Basin and is expected to have of risk categorization environmental and social impacts that are overall highly beneficial. The project‟s interventions are designed to 1) improve climate resilient See the following sections of the Improving Climate Resilience of Vulnerable Communities and Ecosystems in the Gandaki River Basin, Nepal questionnaire for details: agroforestry and livelihood, 2) improve water availability and water use section A for findings about the efficiency; 3) natural ecosystem restoration based actions for reducing stakeholder engagement process, impacts of landslides and floods, 4) to enhance technical capacity of Section B on the 4 Standards, communities in maintaining and supporting climate resilient ecosystems, Section C on other E&S impacts and 5) to enhance community-based mechanism for planning, restoration, Section D on risk issues related to monitoring, and maintenance of ecosystems, 6) to incorporate Climate change ecosystem-based climate change adaptation approaches into government policies and plans, and 7) establish knowledge management system for climate resilient River Basin Management. It is considered unlikely that the activities carried out under this project will have major adverse environmental and/or social risks and/or impacts. However, there is a possibility that some activities might involve minor or moderate environmental or social risks given the sensitivity of the receiving environment, the complex demographic and social context and the vulnerability of social groups, including indigenous groups as well as Dalits as being members of the lowest case and often subject to social exclusion or discrimination. Also, environmental and social risks cannot be fully ascertained at this stage because the exact sites for field interventions have not been identified yet and because the design of the specific interventions will be determined by the specific vulnerability of locations within each cluster. While the project document has established generic types of interventions, the exact nature of the interventions may change once the baseline is more effectively established in year one of the project‟s operation, and as a result of more focused consultations with relevant stakeholders, and in particular with women, indigenous groups, Dalits and disadvantaged groups. The project has therefore been classified as moderate risk project and the development of an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) is needed. The questionnaire in Annex A has assessed the generic project activities proposed for implementation on potential environmental and social risks and on the applicability of Standards. The results of this assessment are described at the end of each section: Section B covering issues related to the 4 Standards, section C related to other E&S impacts and section D on risk issues related to Climate change. Required assessments or tools ☐ Full Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (Full ESIA) ☐ Partial Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (Partial ESIA) ☐ Social Impact Assessment (SIA) ☐ Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) ☒ Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) ☐ Other: ESMS Standards Trigger Required tools or plans Involuntary Resettlement and Access ☐ yes ☐ Resettlement Action Plan Restrictions ☒ no ☐ Resettlement Policy Framework (see section B1 for details) ☐ TBD ☐ Action Plan to Mitigate Impacts from Access Restriction ☐ Access Restrictions Mitigation Process Framework Indigenous Peoples ☒ yes ☐ Indigenous Peoples Plan (see section B2 for details) ☐ no ☒ Indigenous Peoples Process Framework (to be included in ☐ TBD the ESMF) Cultural Heritage ☒ yes ☒ Chance Find Procedures (see section B3 for details) ☐ no ☐ TBD Annex 6 (b): Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) 4 Improving Climate Resilience of Vulnerable Communities and Ecosystems in the Gandaki River Basin, Nepal Biodiversity Conservation and ☒ yes ☒ Pest Management Plan (potentially) Sustainable Use Natural Resources ☐ no (see section B4 for details) ☐ TBD Annex 6 (b): Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) 5 Annex A: ESMS Questionnaire Process of stakeholder engagement during project conceptualization 1. Has a project stakeholder analysis been carried out and documented – identifying not only interests, needs and influence of stakeholders but also whether there are any stakeholders that might be affected by the project? Does the stakeholder analysis disaggregate between women and men, where relevant and feasible? It is recommended to add the stakeholder analysis to the documents submitted at screening stage. To be completed by project proponent During the design phase of the project, a stakeholder analysis was conducted according to four categories: Government, Civil Society, Local communities, the Private Sector and International actors. From these categories, key stakeholders were identified and interviewed during the feasibility study. The results are documented in the feasibility study report. IUCN ESMS Reviewer The feasibility study includes a chapter titled stakeholder analysis, however the different stakeholder groups are presented in a rather general form without elaborating on the stakeholder groups‟ interest, influence and impacts in relation to the actual project. It is recommended undertaking such a focussed analysis during the inception phase for each of the sites identified for field intervention. 2. Has information about the project – and about potential risks or negative impacts – been shared with relevant groups? Have consultations been held with relevant groups to discuss the project concept and risks? Provide details about the groups involved. Have women been consulted (provide details)? Did the consultations include stakeholders that were identified as potentially affected? Has this been done in a culturally appropriate way to allow meaningful engagement of women and of potentially affected groups? Have results from the consultations been taken up and influenced project design? To be completed by project proponent The consultations