Page 1 RP339 V. 2 GOVERNMENT OF UGANDA UGANDA RAILWAYS CORPORATION AND PRIVATISATION AND UTILITY SECTOR REFORM PROJECT MINISTRY OF FINANCE, PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ABBREVIATED RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN FOR UGANDA RAILWAY CONCESSIONING Kampala June 2005 Page 2 2 PREAMBLE The Government of Uganda (GOU) agreed with the World Bank (IBRD) to carry out an independent study of the nature and extent of resettlement necessary due to encroachment within 5.2 m of the rail centerline in preparation for the Uganda Railway Corporation (URC) Concessioning initiative. The resettlement team consisted of: Gordon Appleby, an international involuntary resettlement consultant; Samuel K. Kayabwe, an economist with the Makerere Institute of Social Research; and Jasper Anywar, surveyor, URC. The team thanks URC, especially, Mr. Perez Wamburu, Chief Civil Engineer, for their assistance throughout the mission. The resettlement team surveyed the entire railline to be concessioned. Within the Kampala metropolitan area, the team inspected the Nalukolongo (i.e., URC workshops) and Port Bell spurs by rail trolley on June 14, and the main railline from the Kampala station to Seete, on June 18. The team inspected the mainline from Lugazi to Iganga by rail trolley on June 23, and continued by vehicle the same day from Iganga to Tororo and Malaba at the border. In those areas where the 2003 URC inventory indicated structures or where the rail-car inspection indicated the possibility of encroachment within the 10.4 m safety zone (5.2 m on either side of the centerline of the track), the team subsequently walked the track and measured the distance of all structures and vendor facilities that might be within the safety corridor. Specifically, the team wa lked the Port Bell spur on June 17, and the Nalukolongo spur on June 21, 2005. In each place, the team first contacted the local council chairperson and his councilors in order to inform them of the purpose of the study (i.e., determining the number of vendors in the 5.2 m safety corridor who would have to move out before concessioning could be effective), to enlist their assistance in carrying out the physical count of vendors within the safety corridor in their jurisdiction, and to discuss how the reassignment of market spaces and the transfer of marketing facilities (e.g., kiosks, tables) would be carried out. In each place, the councilors and the chairperson agreed on the necessity of clearing a 5.2 m safety zone on either side of the rail centerline, and pointed out that the contracts with URC to occupy this space already specified that a 5 m safety zone from the centerline would be maintained. Further, in every local jurisdiction, the council chairperson and those councilors who were available at that time walked the line with the field team to determine whether any vendors were within the 5.2 m limit of the safety corridor, and, if so, to discuss with the vendors the need to move back or to locate outside of the 5.2 m limit. From time to time, several neighboring vendors would join the discussion to learn the purpose of the field visit. In all instances, the vendors readily accepted the necessity to clear the safety corridor and indicated their willingness to do so at the time specified. The field survey documented that there are no structures within the 10.4 m safety corridor centered on the railline. The URC 2003 inventory had recorded five structures within the safety corridor on the Port Bell spur: two kiosks, two pit latrines, and a small wattle-and-daub hut. This field inspection verified that these structures had all been Page 3 3 relocated by their owners subsequent to the URC survey as part of usual reserve maintenance. The ARAP field inspection also verified that 225 vendors are within the 5.2 m safety corridor in four markets, the village Kisugu Central market and the three distinct but contiguous urban markets along the Nalukolongo line, Entebbe-Kibuye Road, Ndeeba, and Nalukolongo. In Kisugu Central market, only two tables and three groundcloths were within the 5.2 m safety corridor. By contrast, on the day the counts were conducted for the Nalukolongo line, there were some 220 vendors within the safety corridor in the three local districts concerned. In all instances, local officials have agreed to work closely with the vendors to clear the 5.2 m safety corridor and to ensure that no one subsequently encroaches within that zone. These arrangements are detailed in t he Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan. Page 4 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATED RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN List of Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 I. Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Requirement for a Resettlement Action Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Minimisation of Resettlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Justification of an Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan for the 10.4 m Safety Corridor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Preparation of a Resettlement Action Plan for Further Clearance In the Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 II. The Affected Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Prior Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 ARAP Field Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Field Study Findings: The Affected P opulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 III. Compensation and Other Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Loss of land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Loss of Permanent Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Reassignment of Marketing Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 IV. Public Consultations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 URC and Market Officials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 ARAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Future Consultations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 V. Grievance Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 VI. Institutional Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 VII. Monitoring and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 VIII. Calendar and Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 IX. Disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Page 5 5 M APS AND F IGURES Map 1 Uganda-Kenya Rail Concession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Map 2 Uganda Rail Conce ssion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 Figure 1 Organizational Structur e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 T ABLES 1. Persons Affected by the 10.4 m Safety Corridor and the Nature of Impact, by Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2. Budget for Clearing the 10.4 m Safety Corridor . . . . . . . . . . . 19 P HOTOGRAPHS 1. Encroachment onto the Safety Corridor, Ndeeba Market, Junction of Road and Railroad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2. Engine on Track, Entebbe-Ki buye Road Market, with Vendors Encroaching within the Safety Corridor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 A PPENDICES A. Letters of Collaboration from Local and Mark et Officials . . . . . . .20 B . Photographs of the Railline to be Concessioned. . . . . . . . . . 24 C. URC 2003 Inventory of Structures wit hin 15 m of Rail Centerline . . 28 D. Operational Directive 4.12 and Annex A (OP 4.12) . . . . . . . . . 35 LIST OF ACRONYMS ARAP A bbreviated Resettlement Action Plan GOU Government of Uganda IBRD International Bank for Rec onstruction and Development; the World Bank IDA International Development Association NGO Non-Governmental Organization OP Operational Policy PUSRP Privatisat ion and Utility Sector Reform Project RAP Resettlement Action Plan ROW Right of Way URC Uganda Railways Corporation Page 6 6 Page 7 7 UGANDA RAILWAYS CONCESSIONING PROGRAM ABBREVIATED RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN I. P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION Introduction. The Kenya Railways and the Uganda Railways will be concessioned to a private company to operate freight services along existing lines. In 2001, the Government of Uganda (GOU) approved the long-term concessioning and privatisation of URC as the most viable privat isation strategy for its “Railway Sector Reform and Privatisation” programme. Subsequently, in July 2003, H. E. the President of Uganda and H. E the President of Kenya reached the decision to implement a joint concession of the Kenya Railways and Uganda Railways in the interest of their citizens and in furtherance of the East African Community Partner States’ decision to foster economic cooperation. A Joint Steering Committee was therefore formed by the two Governments to oversee the implementation of the Joint Railways Concession. The Committee commenced work in August 2003, and the joint Kenya and Uganda Railways Concession was advertised in local and international media from September 1, 2004. In the last quarter of 2004, potential concessionaires were pre-qualified and proposals to operate the joint railline were solicited. The concession contracts are presently scheduled to be signed in late 2005, with financial closure and commencement of the concession operation scheduled for late 2005 / early 2006. In Uganda only a portion of the total rail network is to be concessioned. The lines included in this initiative are: the single-track mainline from Malaba through Tororo, Iganga, and Jinja to Kampala (251 km), as well as the short spurs from Kampala to Port Bell on Lake Victoria (9 km) and from Kampala to the URC workshops at Nalukolongo (7 km) on the now inoperable Kasese line. (See Maps 1 and 2.) Operating raillines requires standards of safety that include, among other issues, adequate separation between trains and adjacent properties, people, and structures. The Uganda Railway Corporation owns or controls both Rights of Way (“Reserves”) and other land (parts of the overall “Estate”) such as yards, maintenance and repair shops, housing areas and other parcels that are of substantial size and value. As part of the concession agreement, URC will transfer to the concessionaire operational control over those assets necessary for the operation of the rail, which includes “real estate, including the Railway Reserve (…), station land and land not included in the Railway Reserve required for the provision of the Freight “ (draft concession agreement, Section B.3.1). Further, “URC may at any time with at le ast sixty (60) days notice, require the Concessionaire to return any part of the Railway Reserve beyond a distance considered to be essential for safety considerations [emphasis added] and not being used by the Concessionaire to provide the Freight Services or conduct a business activity in conjunction therewith…” (Section B.3.3). Thus, at present, concern lies with the ‘safety zone,’ which is a narrow corridor within the reserve (or right of way) that would provide for the safe operation of the lines and for the substantial reduction of risk to people and property. Because the concessionaire will insist on delivery of the operating corridor free of encroachment, URC must ensure that a corridor of sufficient width to ensure operational safety is available at the time that the concession contract comes into effect. The URC reserve varies between 30 meters in Page 8 8 Map 1: Uganda-Kenya Rail Concession (Kampala-Mombassa) Map 2 Uganda Rail Concession (Malaba-Tororo-Jinja-Kampala + Port Bell and Nalukolongo [Kasese] Spurs) Page 9 9 the countryside and 15 meters in urban areas. In the concession to be made, only rights in the safety zone will be transferred to the control of the concessionaire, while ownership of that zone, and the remainder of the Estate, will remain with the residual railway corporation. The safety corridor has been defined as 5.2 m on either side of the centerline of the railroad; the 5.2 m standard is also being implemented in the concessioning program of Kenya Railways. Requirement for a Resettlement Action Plan. Improving safety on the lines by modifying existing land use within the safety corridor in the reserve (i.e., moving markets, and residential and commercial structures out of the safety corridor) requires application of both national policies, laws and strategies, and the relevant policies of the World Bank. This is because the International Development Association (IDA) is assisting the transaction through a credit to the Government of Uganda. The Bank (IDA) requires that the environmental and social impacts of projects it supports be mitigated according to operation policies (OPs) that spell out the principles and planning methods for mitigation work. For the concessioning operation, the relevant policy is OP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement. OP 4.12 applies whenever property must be acquired, or its use modified, for a project, and that acquisition or modification results in the loss of income, residence or access to resources, whether permanent or temporary and whether the occupation is legal or illegal. Minimisation of Resettlement. The fundamental objective of resettlement planning is to avoid resettlement whenev er feasible, or, when resettlement is unavoidable, to minimize its extent and to explore all viable alternatives. Where land acquisition and involuntary resettlement are unavoidable, resettlement and compensation activities are carried out in a manner that provides sufficient opportunity for the people affected to participate in the planning and implementation of the operation. Further, if incomes are adversely affected, adequate investment is required to give the persons displaced by the project the opportunity to at least restore their income-earning capacity. The Uganda Railway Concessioning has greatly reduced – indeed, almost eliminated – resettlement by opting for clearance of a 5.2 m width on either side of the rail centerline (10.4 m overall) as the safety corridor. There are no permanent structures in this corridor, and relatively few market vendors. By contrast, there are houses, businesses, and other structures, as well as markets, beyond the 5.2 m limit. In this wider area, the extent of property acquisition correlates directly with the width of the area to be cleared: the wider the clearance area, the more houses, businesses and markets that will be affected. Within the 15 m limit, for example, there are at least 130 structures, including two- and three-storey concrete buildings, that would be demolished, and several markets that would have to be relocated. The 5.2 m limit to the safety corridor affects none of these structures and has minimum impact on several of the markets. Justification of an Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan for Clearance of the 10.4 m Safety Corridor. OP 4.12 allows that “where impacts on the entire displaced population are minor, or fewer than 200 people are displaced, an abbreviated resettlement plan may be agreed with the borrower” (OP 4.12, Para. 25). “Impacts are considered ‘minor’ if the affected people are not physically displaced and less than 10% of their productive assets are lost” (OP 4.12, footnote 25). Page 10 10 Clearance of 5.2 m on either side of the centerline of the concessioned track meets these conditions for the following reasons. First, the safety corridor lies within the URC reserve, which URC has attempted to maintain free of occupation. Second, there are no permanent structures of any kind (e.g., businesses, homes, latrines, fences) within the full 10.4 m wide corridor required for safe operation of the trains anywhere along the lines to be concessioned, so there is no loss of any productive asset. Third, however, there are several markets along the raillines in the Kampala metropolitan area. Along the Nalukolongo line to the URC workshops, there are three nearly contiguous markets: Entebbe-Kibuye Road market, Ndeeba market, and, near the URC workshops, the Nalukolongo market. Each of these markets is organized by the Local Council, which in at least one case has a contract with URC for a temporary market in the area. Along the Port Bell railline, there are small village markets at Kisugu Central, Kasanvu, and Namuwongo Zone A and Namuwongo Zone B. Of these markets, there is limited encroachment within the 5.2 m zone along the Nalukolongo line and in the Kisugu Central market on the Port Bell spur. A field survey done the week of June 20, 2005, counted 68 kiosks, 60 tables and 92 vendors with groundcloths within the clearance zone in Nalukolongo markets and two tables and three vendors with groundcloths within the clearance zone in Kisugu Central market. (See Table 1, below.) In all instances, it is possible to rearrange the spatial organization of the market so that the vendors in the 5.2 m zone can be accommodated within their market but immediately outside the restricted rail safety corridor. (See Annex B, Photograph 8.) There is no market encroachment within the 5.2 m safety corridor along the mainline from Kampala to Malaba at the Kenyan border. In sum, in terms of the conditions specified by OP 4.12 for presentation of an Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (ARAP), 150 people (i.e., fewer than 200) have structures (i.e., tables or kiosks) that will hav e to be moved outside of the safety corridor. Further, all of the affected vendors can be accommodated within their existing market area but outside the restricted 5.2 m zone, so that no one must be physically relocated to another area. Importantly, reassignment of market spaces can be done in collaboration with the vendors, and relocation of selling facilities can be done, literally, overnight so that no one loses any income. In other words, no vendor or other person will lose any productive asset or income. For these reasons, it is appropriate to develop an abbreviated RAP, which requires a demographic survey, a description of the compensation and assistance to be provided, public consultation, grievance procedures, inst itutional responsibility for the operation, monitoring arrangements, and a calendar and budget. Preparation of a Resettlement Action Plan for Further Clearance in the Future. Parts of the URC reserve are encroached, especially in urban areas, so that clearance of the entire reserve would entail significant dislocation of homes, businesses and markets. To minimize resettlement, PUSRP and URC have agreed to clear immediately only 5.2 meters on either side of the center of the existing track. Other relocation from the URC reserve and estate must be deferred to a later time and a different planning process. Indeed, the question of relocating informal settlements and markets on URC reserve and estate land should be addressed in conjunction with other institutions in the country involved in questions of poverty reduction and slum upgrading, or with the disposition of unneeded corporate assets. This is a massive problem which Page 11 11 cannot be addressed by railway operators within the timeframe of the present concessioning operation. In view of these factors, URC reserves the right to clear up to 15 meters on either side of the center of the concessioned rail line at some future time. When the decision is taken to clear additional area for the operational corridor, URC will prepare a Resettlement Action Plan that accords with World Bank Operational Policy 4.12 (appended to this report as Annex D) and is acceptable to the Bank. No action other than routine enforcement against further encroachment will be taken beyond the 5.2 m safety corridor unless and until an acceptable Resettlement Action Plan has been defined, presented, and approved. 1 II. T HE A FFECTED P OPULATION Prior Studies. In 2003, as part of the studies done for the concessioning programme, SMEC Consultants, an international consulting group, carried out on behalf of the GOU a review of environmental and social issues along the Ugandan raillines, including the issues of encroachment. The report notes that areas along all the lines and at many stations of Uganda Railway are subject to encroachment. While this study is a useful baseline reconnaissance of the issue, there is no action plan for the displacement of encroachers because it had not yet been decided which portions of the lines were to be included in the concession and, consequently, it was not then useful to distinguish between occupation/encroachment with in a specified rail reserve or safety corridor. Later in 2003, URC conducted an enumeration of people with its rail reserve. This enumeration concerns structures only. (See Annex C for details.) It details the name of the property owner, the location of the structure (chainage along the railline and which side of the railline), distance from the rail centerline, and type or use of structure, as well as, in most cases, construction materials (but not square meters of area). This enumeration was originally done in preparation for evicting all the people enumerated. The decision to evict was eventually countermanded, and GOU and URC decided to remove only vendors and others who pose a threat to themselves and to the rail operations by being within the narrow corridor of operational safety (5.2 m on either side of the rail centerline), without displacing people occupying other parts of the reserve or the estate. ARAP Field Studies. A team composed of an international consultant, a national consultant, and URC staff surveyed by rail car t he entire railline to be concessioned in the Kampala area. The team inspected the Port Bell and the Nalukolongo spurs on June 14, 2005, and the mainline to Seete, June 18, and the remainder of the line, from Jinja to Malaba, June 23. 1 GOU will neither countenance nor accommodate further encroachment w ithin the rail Reserve. This decision, taken in January 2005, has been published in newspaper articles, and followed up by URC sending letters to owners of structures within the reserve. URC is now updating its 2003 inventory of structures (Annex C) in order to ascertain all structur es within 15 m and to facilitate enforcement of the no new or upgraded structure decision. Page 12 12 In those areas where the 2003 URC inventory indicated structures or where the rail-car inspection indicated the possibility of encroachment within the 10.4 m safety zone (5.2 m on either side of the centerline of the track), the team subsequently walked the track and measured the distance of all structures and vendor facilities that might be within the safety corridor. (See Annex B, Photograph 3.) The team walked the Port Bell spur on June 17, and the Nalukolongo spur on June 21, 2005. In each place, the team first contacted the local council chairperson and his councilors in order to inform them of the purpose of the study (i.e., determining the number of vendors in the 5.2 m safety corridor who would have to move out before concessioning could be effective), to enlist their assistance in carrying out physical count of vendors within the safety corridor in their jurisdiction, and to discuss how the reassignment of market spaces and the transfer of marketing facilities (e.g., kiosks, tables) would be carried out. In each place, the councilors and the chairperson agreed on the necessity of clearing a 5.2 m safety corridor, and pointed out that their contracts with URC to occupy this space already specified that a 5 m safety zone from the centerline would be maintained. Further, in every local jurisdiction, the council chairperson and those councilors who were available at that time walked the line with the field team to determine whether any vendors were within the 5.2 m limit of the safety corridor, and, if so, to discuss with the vendors the need to move back or to locate outside of the 5.2 m limit. From time to time, several neighboring vendors would join the discussion to learn the purpose of the field visit; in all instances, the vendors readily accepted the necessity to clear the safety corridor and indicated their willingness to do so at the time specified. Field Study Findings: The Affected Population. The field survey documented that there are no structures within the 10.4 m safety corridor centered on the railline. The URC 2003 inventory had recorded five structures within the safety corridor on the Port Bell spur: two kiosks, two pit latrines, and a small wattle-and-daub hut. The ARAP field inspection verified that these structures had all been relocated by their owners subsequent to the URC survey as part of usual reserve maintenance. The two kiosks had been moved out of the rail corridor and closer to a nearby population cluster; the two pit latrines had been rebuilt closer to the homes; and the wattle-and-daub hut had been demolished. The ARAP field inspection also verified that vendors encroached within the 5.2 m safety corridor in four markets: the village Kisugu Central market and the three distinct but contiguous urban markets along the Nalukolongo line, Entebbe- Kibuye Road, Ndeeba, and Nalukolongo. In Kisugu Central market, only two tables and three groundcloths were within the 5.2 m safety corridor. (See Annex B, Photograph 7.) By contrast, on the day the counts were conducted for the Nalukolongo line, there were some 220 vendors within the safety corridor. (See Photographs 1 and 2, below, and Annex B.) The specific numbers of people affected and the nature of the impact are detailed in Table 1 (below). It warrants mention that the numbers of vendors in the safety zone of each market should be taken as indicative only. The number of kiosks and tables within the safety zone were counted whether or not they were occupied, but some of these spaces may be vacant. More problematically, there is no way to determine the maximum number of sellers using groundcloths since, unless the sellers are present when the count is conducted, there is no physical evidence of their presence. The market authorities in each place, however, do keep records of all vendors, their market site assignment, and the amount of tax each vendor pays. Thus no one will be overlooked in the clearance exercise because even if they were not present at the time that the market census was Page 13 13 conducted, the local authorities have records, and know the vendors, and can therefore verify eligibility. Table 1: Persons Affected by the 10.4 m Safety Corridor and the Nature of Impact, by Location * The difference between a kiosk (Annex B, Phot ograph 5) and a table (A nnex B, Photograph 6) is that a kiosk has sides and can be locked at ni ght with the wares inside. A table has no sides, so that the vendor must take his or her wares home each evening. For purposes of financial costing, however, tables with sun-shade roofs (A nnex B, Photograph 5) are counted as kiosks because they cannot be moved simply -- the pol es supporting the sun-sc reen roof must be dug out and repositioned in the new locale, which imp lies an additional cost. By contrast, a ground cloth is nothing more than a cloth laid on the ground to display the vendor’s wares, all of which are taken home each evening (Annex B, Photograph 4). The dates of the ARAP field survey, as verified by local authorities’ records, constitute the cut-off date for eligibility for assistance in reallocating market spaces. Location Market Vendors Permanent Structures Kiosks* Tables* Ground Cloths* Mainline (Kampala- Malaba) Kireka 0 0 0 0 Port Bell Kisugu Central 0 2 3 0 Kasanvu 0 0 0 0 Namuwongo Zone A 0 0 0 0 Namuwongo Zone B 0 0 0 0 Port Bell 0 0 0 0 Nalukolongo (URC Workshops) Nalukolongo 6 6 0 0 Ndeeba 57 23 80 0 Entebbe-Kibuye Road 5 31 12 0 Totals 68 62 95 0 Page 14 14 Photo 1: Encroachment onto the Safety Corr idor, Ndeeba Market, at Junction of Road and Railroad Photo 2: Engine on track, Entebbe-Kibuye Road View Market, with Vendors Encroaching within Safety Corridor Page 15 15 III. C OMPENSATION AND OTHER A SSISTANCE Land taking typically entails compensation for land, houses, businesses and other structures on that land, as well as other assistance in order to mitigate the adverse consequences that affect people and communities when they give up property for the public good. In the present case of the 5.2 m safety corridor on either side of the rail centerline, URC owns the land within the Reserve and Estate. Although others may occupy areas with or without permission, there is no question of compensation for land acquisition. Equally importantly, there are no st ructures within the 5.2 m safety zone, so that there is no compensation for lost structures either. In this instance of railway concessioning, the only question is assistance in helping vendors within the 5.2 m safety zone to move back out of that area but still within their market. Loss of Land. URC owns the land within 15 m of either side the rail centerline (30m overall) in urban Kampala and within 30 m on each side (60m overall) in the countryside. URC has leased some of the ci ty land within the ROW to businesses and markets; other areas are encroached by vend ors in city and village markets. Each contract (clause 7) specifies that “Market activities will be carried out at a distance not less than 5 meters from the center line of the track.” Local market officers have tried to enforce this stipulation, so vendors were already aware of the need to clear a safety corridor. In any case, there is no question of compensation for land since URC is the legal owner, and has allowed markets on a temporary basis as long as the vendors maintained a safety corridor along both sides of the track. (Occupancy leases will have to be taken into account if a wider corridor is cleared in the future.) Loss of Permanent Structures. As for structures, at the time of the physical survey of assets, people had no permanent structures within the 10.4 m safety corridor sufficient for daily rail operation, which e liminates the question of compensation for structures. (There are, however, numerous residences, businesses, and other structures between 5.2 and 15 m, so that any additional clearance of the ROW in the future will require a RAP that values these properties and provides adequate compensation at undepreciated market rates. (See Annex C for the 2003 URC inventory of structures within 15 m of the rail centerline.) Reassignment of Marketing Locations. The question of compensation and assistance therefore involves only vendors with kiosks, tables, or groundcloths. The kiosks are all small wooden structures with no foundation, which means that the inventory and kiosk can be relocated outside of the safety corridor as long as transport (e.g., animal cart) is provided. The same is true for tables that are covered by sun- screens. By contrast, vendors with unprotected tables or groundcloths do not require assistance, as they normally pack their wares up everyday, and can, therefore, set up the next morning in a slightly different location, outside of the 5.2 m corridor. Organizing the reallocation of selling locations and movi ng vendors outside the safety corridor will be undertaken either by market officials (e.g., Nalukolongo line) or local officials (e.g., Kisugu Central). Although no property will be lost in the operation to clear the safety corridor, it is nonetheless necessary to move various structures, such as kiosks and tables. Kiosk inventory must be packed up, so the kiosk can be transported to the new location; the wares must then be restocked. The major cost here is transportation of the kiosk and the wares. Transport costs depend on the weight of the structure: metal kiosks cost approximately UGS 50,000 to move, while the lighter wooden kiosks cost about UGS 15,000 apiece to move. Tables are easier to move in that two people can shift a table easily. Still, many tables stand within a s hed or shelter from sun or rain, and these Page 16 16 protective shelters must also be moved. Market officers estimate that it would cost about UGS 10,000 to dig out and implant elsewhere the poles that hold up the sun- screen roofs. Finally, there is no compensation necessary for vendors with groundcloths since these sellers set up each morning and take their wares home each evening. IV. P UBLIC C ONSULTATIONS URC and Market Officials. URC officers have from time to time informed vendors in markets and owners of structures along the railline that they are encroaching upon URC property. While these warnings have generally had little effect, they have served to sensitize people to their tenuous rights. Similarly, the market contracts with local councils along the Nalukolongo line specifically state that a safety corridor 5 m on each side of the centerline of the track will be maintained. Market officials have therefore tried to maintain the required safety corridor. In part for this reason, perhaps, there are no permanent structures within the safety corridor. There are, however, sellers using groundcloths, and some vendors with tables, clothing racks, or other types of movable displays. The local market authorities have brought to the attention of the vendors the need to stay outside of the 5 m safety corridor, but their warnings have not always been heeded. ARAP. In this context, the ARAP team, with URC officers, consulted with local officials and the market vendors concerned during the weeks of June 13 and June 20, 2005. Along the Nalukolongo line, the contracted market authorities agreed to work with the vendors involved to reassign spaces. At the Kisugu Central market, local administrative officials made a similar commitment. In all markets, either local officials or the market association agreed to collaborate in the reassignment of selling spaces in order to clear the 5.2 m safety corridor. (See Annex A for the corroborating letters of collaboration.) Future Consultations. In the future, officials in the markets along the Nalukolongo line and the administrative official s of Kisugu Central will be informed by URC when the reassignment of market spac es must be accomplished. Those officers will convene a general meeting with the market leaders to explain the clearance program and to enlist their assistance. The market o fficers and leaders will then speak with the individual vendors to help ensure cooperation. New vending sites within the market will be identified and allocated to the affected vendors in a general meeting, and the relocation of vending facilities will be scheduled. The procedures for the relocation will be explained: kiosks will be cleared of wares, transported to the new site, and restocked. Tables, which have no wares in the evening, will be moved the short distance to the new locale. Tables with fixed overhead sun-shades will be moved and the sun-shade reinstalled. And vendors with groundcloths can simply set up at their new spots the next day. Finally, any complaints about the transfer will be brought to the administrative or market officials for resolution. V. G RIEVANCE P ROCEDURES The likelihood of dispute is much reduced because the few vendors concerned by the clearance of the safety corridor have been consulted and have agreed to move out of the rail safety corridor to acceptable locations within the market. In the event of disagreement, the vendor may first seek recourse through his or her marketing group, which deals with the market association. (See Figure 1, below.) If that Page 17 17 approach fails, the aggrieved party may take the matter up with the local council officers, who are their elected leadership and who can present the grievances to other parties. The councilors may consult with the market officials to resolve the issue. If informal conciliation does not resolve the matter, the vendor may seek redress through the judicial system, though this is admi ttedly a costly and time-consuming procedure. VI. I NSTITUTIONAL R ESPONSIBILITIES URC has ultimate responsibility for clearing and certifying the safety corridor prior to concessioning. At the same time, URC will work through loca l officials to implement the clearance programme. URC will inform the council chairperson in each locality of the date to begin clearance of the safety corridor. The chairperson will convene the market officers and leaders to again explain the program to them. The Operations and the Space Allocation officers of the market association (see Figure 1, below) will work with the vendors to identify and assign available vendor si tes. These same officers will work with the vendors to organize and effect the transfer of selling facilities (i.e., kiosks, tables with sunshades, tables) and to ease the installation of vendors the following day. The market association will certify to URC that the transfer of vendors out of the safety corridor has been completed successfully. URC will engage a national research or consulting firm to verify the success of the space reassignment initiative. The firm will interview affected vendors to ascertain their participation in the planning process, their experiences during the transfer, and their satisfaction with the new locations. Figure 1: Organizational Structure URC L OCAL C OUNCIL V ENDOR A SSOCIATION R EVENUE C OMMITTEE O PERATIONS C OMMITTEE A LLOCATION C OMMITTEE V ENDOR G ROUP A V ENDOR G ROUP B ( ETC ) V ENDORS Page 18 18 VII. M ONITORING AND E VALUATION Monitoring a simple relocation operation such as this should be correspondingly simple. The local market or administrative officials will certify to URC that the vendors involved have been provided alternative locations outside the safety corridor. Resettlement operations that involve business people and market vendors usually monitor income restoration. In the present instance, such monitoring will not be necessary because this resettlement involves no more than a minor rearrangement of market space and because relocation in both markets can be carried out overnight. There should, therefore, be no impact on vendor incomes. As mentioned above, URC will also contract a loca l firm or research institute to confirm that the operations have been completed successfully to the satisfaction of all parties involved. VIII. C ALENDAR AND B UDGET Clearance of the 10.4 m safety corridor along the railline will be undertaken once this ARAP has been reviewed and ratified, and prior to the effectiveness of the concessioning agreement. URC will ensure that the local council in each area is informed of the necessity to begin the trans fer process by a specific date. The Corporation will then transfer the funds necessary to assist the local council and market authorities to compensate the affected vendors. URC will also inform the local officials that the move-back needs to have been completed within a period of 30 days. Planning for the transfer of vendors to new locales will take more time than the actual transfer. Local councils must inform market leaders of the purpose of the operation, and then with those market leaders must contact and speak with each vendor who must move. The market officers must then make available new space for the vendors, and the spaces need to be reallocated in a satisfactory and participatory manner. Once this preparatory work has been completed, rearranging market spaces can be done overnight. Local officials (administrative officers in Kisugu Central and Entebbe- Kibuye Road and market officers in Ndeeba and Nalukolongo) will consult with the vendors concerned to decide upon when and where to relocate their facilities. The financial implications of this operation are small. The major costs are small assistance to each vendor with a table or a kiosk, and budgeting for a post-transfer monitoring and evaluation exercise. (See Table 2, below.) Page 19 19 Table 2: Budget for Clearing the 10.4 m Safety Corridor In addition, the post-operation evaluation carried out by a national research institute or firm could cost some UGS 6,800,000. This would enable one senior researcher and one or two junior staff to carry out interviews over the course of two or three days, write up their findings, and present a draft final report. The total cost of the clearing of the 5.2 m safety zone on either side of the centerline of the track is, therefore, approximately UGS 8,475,000 ($5,000 US). IX. D ISCLOSURE This Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan w ill be disclosed in Uganda by URC, which will make copies available at its headquarters in Kampala and will distribute copies to the local councils involved in rearranging market space. GOU will also authorize the World Bank to distribute this ARAP electronically through its InfoShop. Location Kiosks (wood) @ UGS 15,000 per Tables (with sun- screen roof) @ UGS 10,000 per Totals (UGS) R AILLINE M ARKETS Mainline (Kampala- Malaba) Kireka 0 0 0 0 0 Port Bell Kisugu Central 0 0 2 20,000 20,000 Kasanvu 0 0 0 0 0 Namuwongo Zone A 0 0 0 0 0 Namuwongo Zone B 0 0 0 0 0 Port Bell 0 0 0 0 0 Nalukolongo (URC Workshops) Nalukolongo 1 metal 5 50,000 75,000 6 60,000 185,000 Ndeeba 57 855,000 23 230,000 1,085,000 Entebbe-Kibuye Road 5 75,000 31 310,000 385,000 Subtotal for railline markets 68 1,055,000 62 620,000 1,675,000 M ONITORING /E VALUATION 6,800,000 TOTAL 8,475,000 Page 20 20 ANNEX A: L ETTERS OF C OLLABORATION FROM L OCAL AND M ARKET O FFICIALS Page 21 21 Page 22 22 Page 23 23 Page 24 24 ANNEX B: PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE RAILLINE TO BE CONCESSIONED Page 25 25 Photo 3: Encroachment, Entebbe-Kibuye Road Market Photo 4: Measuring the 5.2 m Safety Corridor; Vendors Selling from Groundcloths Page 26 26 Photo 5: Metal Kiosk, Photo 6: Table, with sun screen Ndeeba Market Ndeeba Market Photo 7: Tables, Kisugu Central Market, Railline in Mid-ground (16 June 2005) Page 27 27 Photo 8: Entebbe Road View Market, Showing Encroachment within the 5.2 m Safety Corridor and Av ailability of Open Space for Reassignment Page 28 28 ANNEX C: URC 2003 INVENTORY OF STRUCTURES WITHIN 15 M OF RAIL CENTERLINE Page 29 29 Page 30 30 Page 31 31 Page 32 32 Page 33 33 Page 34 34 Page 35 35 A NNEX D: O PERATIONAL D IRECTIVE 4.12 AND A NNEX A (OP 4.12) Page 36 36 OP 4.12 December 2001 These policies were prepared for use by World Bank staff and are not necessarily a complete treatment of the subject. Involuntary Resettlement (Revised April 2004) (Revised April 2004) OP 4.12 (Revised April 2004) applies only to projects that are governed by OP / BP 6.00 , Bank Financing - that is, those in countries with approved country fi nancing parameters . Other operational policy statements governing Bank financing that have been amended to reflect OP/BP 6.00 also apply to these projects, click to view a full Table of Contents (blue) . Projects in countries without approved country financing parameters continue to be subject to other operational policy statements governing Bank financing; click here for a full Table of Contents (yellow) that includes these statements. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ Note: OP and BP 4.12 together replace OD 4.30, Involuntary Resettlement . This OP and BP apply to all projects for which a Project Concept Review take s place on or after January 1, 2002. Questions may be addressed to the Director, So cial Development Department (SDV). ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ 1. Bank 1 experience indicates that involuntary re settlement under development projects, if unmitigated, often gives rise to severe economic, social, and environmental risks: production systems are dismantled; people face impoverishment when their productive assets or income sources are lost; people are relocated to environments where their productive skills may be less applicable a nd the competition for resources greater; community institutions and social networks are weakened; kin groups are dispersed; and cultural identity, traditional authority, and the potential for mutual help are diminished or lost. This policy includes safeguards to addr ess and mitigate these impoverishment risks. Policy Objectives 2. Involuntary resettlement may cause severe long-term hardship, impoverishment, and environmental damage unless appropriate meas ures are carefully pl anned and carried out. For these reasons, the overall objectives of the Bank's policy on involuntary resettlement are the following: (a) Involuntary resettlement should be avoi ded where feasible, or minimized, exploring all viable alternative project designs. http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0718525 65A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD 85256B18006D964D?OpenDocument2 (b) Where it is not feasible to avoid rese ttlement, resettlement activities should be conceived and executed as sustainable de velopment programs, providing sufficient Page 37 37 investment resources to enable the persons displaced by the project to share in project benefits. Displaced persons http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0718525 65A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD 85256B18006D964D?OpenDocument3 should be meaningfully consulted and should have opportunities to particip ate in planning and implementing resettlement programs. (c) Displaced persons should be assisted in their efforts to improve their livelihoods and standards of living or at least to restore them, in real terms, to pre-displacement levels or to levels prevailing prior to the beginni ng of project implementation, whichever is higher. 4 Impacts Covered 3. This policy covers direct economic and social impacts http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0718525 65A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD 85256B18006D964D?OpenDocument5 that both result from Bank-assisted investment projects http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0718525 65A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD 85256B18006D964D?OpenDocument6 , and are caused by (a) the involuntary http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manua ls/OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0718 52565A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD 85256B18006D964D?OpenDocument7 taking of land http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC071852565 A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD 85256B18006D964D?OpenDocument8 resulting in (i) relocation or loss of shelter; (ii) lost of assets or access to assets; or (iii) loss of income sources or mean s of livelihood, whether or not the affected persons must move to another location; or (b) the involuntary restriction of access http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC07185256 5A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD 85256B18006D964D?OpenDocument9 to legally designated parks and protected areas resulti ng in adverse impacts on the livelihoods of the displaced persons. 4. This policy applies to all components of the project that result in involuntary resettlement, regardless of the source of fi nancing. It also applie s to other activities resulting in involuntary resettlement, that in the judgment of the Bank, are (a) directly and significantly related to the Bank-assist ed project, (b) necessary to achieve its objectives as set forth in the project documen ts; and (c) carried out, or planned to be carried out, contemporaneously with the project. 5. Requests for guidance on the application and scope of th is policy should be addressed to the Resettlement Committee (see BP 4.12http://wbln0011.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/BProw/383197 ED73D421A385256B180072D46D?OpenDocument , para. 7). http://wbln0011/Instituti onal/Manuals/OpManual.ns f/58AA50B14B6BC071852565A3 0061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B18006D964D?OpenDocument10 Page 38 38 Required Measures 6. To address the impacts covered under para. 3 (a) of this policy, th e borrower prepares a resettlement plan or a resettlement policy framework (see paras. 25- 30) that covers the following: (a) The resettlement plan or resettlement policy framework includes measures to ensure that the displaced persons are (i) informed about their opti ons and rights pertaining to resettlement; (ii) consulted on, offered c hoices among, and provided with technically and economically feasib le resettlement alternatives; and (iii) provided prompt and e ffective compensation at full replacement cost http://wbln0011/Institutional/Ma nuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA50 B14B6BC071852565A30061BEB6/ 8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B 18006D964D?OpenDocument11 for losses of assets http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA5 0B14B6BC071852565A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD85256 B18006D964D?OpenDocument12 attributable directly to the project. (b) If the impacts incl ude physical relocation, the resettleme nt plan or resettlement policy framework includes measures to ensure that the displaced persons are (i) provided assistance (such as moving allowances) during relocation; and (ii) provided with residential housing, or housing sites, or, as required, agricultural sites for which a combination of productive potential, locational advantages, and other factors is at least equivalent to the advantages of the old site. http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA50 B14B6BC071852565A30061BEB6/ 8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B 18006D964D?OpenDocument13 (c) Where necessary to achieve the objectives of the policy, the resettlement plan or resettlement policy framework also include meas ures to ensure that displaced persons are (i) offered support after displacem ent, for a transition period, based on a reasonable estimate of th e time likely to be needed to restore their liveli hood and standards of living; http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA 50B14B6BC071852565A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD8525 6B18006D964D?OpenDocument14 and Page 39 39 (ii) provided with development assistance in addition to compensation measures described in paragraph 6(a) (iii), such as land preparation, credit faciliti es, training, or job opportunities . 7. In projects involving invol untary restriction of access to legally designated parks and protected areas (see para. 3(b)), the nature of restrictions, as well as the type of measures necessary to mitigate adverse impacts, is determined with the participation of the displaced persons during the design and implemen tation of the project. In such cases, the borrower prepares a process framework acceptable to the Bank, describing the participatory process by which (a) specific components of the projec t will be prepared and implemented; (b) the criteria for eligibility of di splaced persons will be determined; (c) measures to assist the displaced persons in their efforts to improve their livelihoods, or at least to restore them, in real terms, wh ile maintaining the sustainability of the park or protected area, will be identified; and (d) potential conflicts involving disp laced persons will be resolved. The process framework also includes a descri ption of the arrangements for implementing and monitoring the process. 8. To achieve the objectives of this policy, part icular attention is paid to the needs of vulnerable groups among those displaced, espe cially those below the poverty line, the landless, the elderly, women and children, indigenous peoples, http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0718525 65A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B 18006D964D?OpenDocument15 ethnic minorities, or other displaced persons who may not be protected through national land compensation legislation. 9. Bank experience has shown that resettlement of indigenous peoples with traditional land-based modes of production is particularly complex and may have significant adverse impacts on their identity and cultural survival. For this r eason, the Bank satisfies itself that the borrower has explored all viable a lternative project desi gns to avoid physical displacement of these groups. When it is no t feasible to avoid such displacement, preference is given to land-based resettlement strategies for these groups (see para. 11) that are compatible with their cultural pref erences and are prepared in consultation with them (see Annex A , http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/ Institutional/Manuals/OpM anual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC07 1852565A30061BEB6/46FC304892280AB785256B19008197F8?OpenDocument para. 11). 10. The implementation of resettlement activit ies is linked to the implementation of the investment component of the project to ensu re that displacement or restriction of access does not occur before necessary measures fo r resettlement are in place. For impacts covered in para. 3(a) of this policy, thes e measures include provision of compensation and of other assistance require d for relocation, prior to disp lacement, and preparation and Page 40 40 provision of resettlement sites with adequate facilities, where required. In particular, taking of land and related assets may take place only after compensation has been paid and, where applicable, resettle ment sites and moving allowances have been provided to the displaced persons. For impacts covered in para. 3(b) of this policy, the measures to assist the displaced persons are implemented in accordance with the plan of action as part of the project (see para. 30). 11. Preference should be given to land-based re settlement strategies for displaced persons whose livelihoods are land-based. These strate gies may include resettlement on public land (see footnote 1 above), or on private la nd acquired or purchased for resettlement. Whenever replacement land is offered, resettlers are provided with land for which a combination of productive potential, locational advantages, and other factors is at least equivalent to the advantages of the land take n. If land is not the pr eferred option of the displaced persons, the provision of land would adversely affect the sustainability of a park or protected area, http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC071852565 A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B 18006D964D?OpenDocument16 or sufficient land is not available at a reasona ble price, non-land-based options built around opportunities for employment or self-employmen t should be provided in addition to cash compensation for land and other assets lost . The lack of adequate land must be demonstrated and documented to the satisfaction of the Bank. 12. Payment of cash compensation for lost assets may be appropriate where (a) livelihoods are land-based but the land taken for the project is a small fraction http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0718525 65A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B 18006D964D?OpenDocument17 of the affected asset and the resi dual is economically viable; (b) active markets for land, housing, and labor exist, displaced persons use such markets, and there is sufficient supply of land and housing; or (c) livelihoods are not land-based. Cash compensation levels should be sufficient to replace the lost la nd and other assets at full replacement cost in local markets. 13. For impacts covered under para. 3(a) of this policy, the Bank also requires the following: (a) Displaced persons and their communities, and any host communities receiving them, are provided timely and relevant informa tion, consulted on resettlement options, and offered opportunities to participate in planning, implementing, and monitoring resettlement. Appropriate and accessible grievance mechanisms are established for these groups. (b) In new resettlement sites or host commun ities, infrastructure and public services are provided as necessary to improve, restore, or maintain accessibility and levels of service for the displaced persons and host communities. Alternative or similar resources are provided to compensate for the loss of access to community resources (such as fishing areas, grazing areas, fuel, or fodder). (c) Patterns of community or ganization appropriate to the new circumstances are based on choices made by the displaced persons. To th e extent possible, the existing social and cultural institutions of resettlers and any host communities are preserved and resettlers' Page 41 41 preferences with respect to relocating in preexisting communities and groups are honored. Eligibility for Benefits http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC071852 565A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD 85256B18006D964D?OpenDocument18 14. Upon identification of the n eed for involuntary resettleme nt in a project, the borrower carries out a census to identify the persons who will be affected by the project (see the Annex Ahttp://lnweb18.worldbank.org/Institutional/M anuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0 71852565A30061BEB6/46FC304892280AB785256B19008197F8?OpenDocumenthttp:// wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/what newvirt/CA2D01A4 D1BDF58085256B19008197F6?OpenDocument , para. 6(a)), to determine who will be eligible for assistance, and to discourage inflow of people ineligible for assistance. The borrower also develops a proce dure, satisfactory to the Bank, for establishing the criteria by which displaced persons will be deemed eligible for compensation and other resettlement assistance. The procedure incl udes provisions for meaningful consultations with affected persons and communities, local authorities, and, as appropriate, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and it specifies grievance mechanisms. 15. Criteria for Eligibility . Displaced persons may be classified in one of the following three groups: (a) those who have formal legal rights to la nd (including customary a nd traditional rights recognized under the laws of the country); (b) those who do not have formal legal rights to land at the time the census begins but have a claim to such land or assets—provi ded that such claims are recognized under the laws of the country or become recognized thr ough a process identified in the resettlement plan (see Annex Ahttp://lnweb18.worldbank.org/Institutional/M anuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0 71852565A30061BEB6/46FC304892280AB785256B19008197F8?OpenDocumenthttp:// wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/what newvirt/CA2D01A4 D1BDF58085256B19008197F6?OpenDocument , para. 7(f)); and http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals/O pManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC071852565A 30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B18006D964D?OpenDocument19 (c) those who have no recognizable legal right or claim to the land they are occupying. 16. Persons covered under para. 15(a) and (b) are provided compensation for the land they lose, and other assistance in accordan ce with para. 6. Persons covered under para. 15(c) are provided resettlement assistanc http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC071852 565A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD 85256B18006D964D?OpenDocument20 in lieu of compensation for the land they occupy, and other assistance, as necessary, to achieve the objectives set out in this policy, if they o ccupy the project area prior to a cut-off date established by the borrowe r and acceptable to the Bank. http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC071852565 A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B 18006D964D?OpenDocument21 Persons Page 42 42 who encroach on the area after the cut-off da te are not entitled to compensation or any other form of resettlement a ssistance. All persons included in para. 15(a), (b), or (c) are provided compensation for loss of assets other than land. Resettlement Planning, Impl ementation, and Monitoring 17. To achieve the objectives of this policy, different planning instruments are used, depending on the type of project: (a) a resettlement plan or abbreviated resettleme nt plan is required for all operations that entail involuntary resettlement unless otherwise specified (see para. 25 and Annex Ahttp://wbln0011.worldbank.org/Institutiona l/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/OPolw/C19E5F01 0F97E04485256B180070DD3E?OpenDocument ); (b) a resettlement policy framework is require d for operations referred to in paras. 26-30 that may entail involuntary resettleme nt, unless otherwise specified (see Annex Ahttp://lnweb18.worldbank.org/Institutional/M anuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0 71852565A30061BEB6/46FC304892280AB785256B19008197F8?OpenDocument ); and (c) a process framework is prepared for pr ojects involving restri ction of access in accordance with para. 3(b) (see para. 31). 18. The borrower is responsible for preparing, implementing, and monitoring a resettlement plan, a resettlement policy framework, or a process framework (the "resettlement instruments"), as appropriate, that conform to this policy. The resettlement instrument presents a strategy for achieving the objectives of the policy and covers all aspects of the proposed resettlement. Bo rrower commitment to, and capacity for, undertaking successful resettlement is a ke y determinant of Bank involvement in a project. 19. Resettlement planning includes early screen ing, scoping of key issues, the choice of resettlement instrument, and the informa tion required to prepare the resettlement component or subcomponent. The scope a nd level of detail of the resettlement instruments vary with the magnitude and comp lexity of resettlement. In preparing the resettlement component, the borrower draws on appropriate social, technical, and legal expertise and on relevant comm unity-based organizations and NGOs. http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC07185256 5A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B 18006D964D?OpenDocument22 The borrower informs potentially displaced persons at an early stage a bout the resettlement aspects of the project and takes their views into acc ount in project design. 20. The full costs of resettlement activities n ecessary to achieve the objectives of the project are included in the tota l costs of the project. The co sts of resettlement, like the costs of other project activiti es, are treated as a charge ag ainst the economic benefits of the project; and any net benefits to resettle rs (as compared to the "without-project" circumstances) are added to the benefits str eam of the project. Resettlement components or free-standing resettlement projects need not be economically viable on their own, but they should be cost-effective. Page 43 43 21. The borrower ensures that the Project Implem entation Plan is fully consistent with the resettlement instrument. 22. As a condition of appraisal of projects i nvolving resettlement, the borrower provides the Bank with the relevant draft resettlement instrument which conforms to this policy, and makes it available at a place accessible to displaced persons and local NGOs, in a form, manner, and language that are understa ndable to them. Once the Bank accepts this instrument as providing an adequate basi s for project appraisal, the Bank makes it available to the public through its InfoS hop. After the Bank has approved the final resettlement instrument, the Bank and the borrower disclose it again in the same manner. http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0718525 65A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B 18006D964D?OpenDocument23 23. The borrower's obligations to carry out the resettlement instrument and to keep the Bank informed of implementation progress are provided for in the legal agreements for the project. 24. The borrower is responsible for adequate monitoring and evaluation of the activities set forth in the resettlement instrument. The Bank regularly supervises resettlement implementation to determine compliance w ith the resettlement instrument. Upon completion of the project, th e borrower undertakes an assessment to determine whether the objectives of the resettlement instrume nt have been achieved. The assessment takes into account the baseline conditions and the results of resettleme nt monitoring. If the assessment reveals that these objectives may not be realized, the borrower should propose follow-up measures that may serve as the ba sis for continued Bank supervision, as the Bank deems appropriate (see also BP 4.12http://wbln0011.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/BProw/383197 ED73D421A385256B180072D46D?OpenDocument , para. 16). Resettlement Instruments Resettlement Plan 25. A draft resettlement plan that conforms to this policy is a condi tion of appraisal (see Annex Ahttp://lnweb18.worldbank.org/Institutional/M anuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0 71852565A30061BEB6/46FC304892280AB785256B19008197F8?OpenDocumenthttp:// wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/what newvirt/CA2D01A4 D1BDF58085256B19008197F6?OpenDocument , paras. 2-21) for projects referred to in para. 17(a) above. http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC07185256 5A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B 18006D964D?OpenDocument24 However, where impacts on the entire displaced population are minor, http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC07185256 5A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD85256B 18006D964D?OpenDocument25 or fewer than 200 people are displaced, an abbreviated re settlement plan may be agreed with the borrower (see Annex Ahttp://lnweb18.worldbank.org/Institutional/M anuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0 71852565A30061BEB6/46FC304892280AB785256B19008197F8?OpenDocumenthttp:// wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/what newvirt/CA2D01A4 Page 44 44 D1BDF58085256B19008197F6?OpenDocument , para. 22). The information disclosure procedures set forth in para. 22 apply. Resettlement Policy Framework 26. For sector investment operations that ma y involve involuntary resettlement, the Bank requires that the project implementing agency screen subprojects to be financed by the Bank to ensure their consistency with th is OP. For these operations, the borrower submits, prior to appraisal, a resettlement po licy framework that conforms to this policy (see Annex Ahttp://wbln0011.worldbank.org/Institutiona l/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/OPolw/C19E5F01 0F97E04485256B180070DD3E?OpenDocumenthttp ://lnweb18.worldbank.org/Institution al/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA 50B14B6BC071852565A30061BEB6/46FC304892280 AB785256B19008197F8?OpenDocumenthttp://wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/M anuals/OpManual.nsf/whatnewvir t/CA2D01A4D1BDF58085256B19008197F6?OpenDo cument , paras. 23-25). The framework also estimat es, to the extent feasible, the total population to be displaced and the overall resettlement costs. 27. For financial intermediary operations that may involve involuntary resettlement, the Bank requires that the financial intermediary (FI) screen subprojects to be financed by the Bank to ensure their consistency with this OP. For these operations, the Bank requires that before appraisal the bo rrower or the FI submit to th e Bank a resettlement policy framework conforming to this policy (see Annex Ahttp://wbln0011.worldbank.org/Institutiona l/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/OPolw/C19E5F01 0F97E04485256B180070DD3E?OpenDocumenthttp ://lnweb18.worldbank.org/Institution al/Manuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA 50B14B6BC071852565A30061BEB6/46FC304892280 AB785256B19008197F8?OpenDocumenthttp://wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/M anuals/OpManual.nsf/whatnewvir t/CA2D01A4D1BDF58085256B19008197F6?OpenDo cument , paras. 23-25). In addition, the framework includes an assessment of the institutional capacity and pro cedures of each of the FIs th at will be responsible for subproject financing. When, in the assessment of the Bank, no resettlement is envisaged in the subprojects to be financed by the FI, a resettlement policy framework is not required. Instead, the legal agreements specify the obligation of the FI s to obtain from the potential subborrowers a resettlement plan co nsistent with this policy if a subproject gives rise to resettlement. For all subprojects involving resettlement, the resettlement plan is provided to the Bank for approval before the subproject is accepted for Bank financing. 28. For other Bank-assisted project with multiple subprojects http://wbln0011/Institutional/Manua ls/OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0718 52565A30061BEB6/8BC51CC87982E5BD8525 6B18006D964D?OpenDocument26 that may involve involuntary resettlement, the Bank requires that a draft resettlement plan conforming to this policy be submitted to the Bank before appraisal of the project unless, because of the nature and design of the projec t or of a specific subpr oject or subprojects (a) the zone of impact of subpr ojects cannot be determined, or (b) the zone of impact is known but precise sitting alignments cannot be determined. In such cases, the borrower submits a resettlement policy framework consiste nt with this policy prior to appraisal (see Annex Ahttp://lnweb18.worldbank.org/Institutional/M anuals/OpManual.nsf/58AA50B14B6BC0 71852565A30061BEB6/46FC304892280AB785256B19008197F8?OpenDocumenthttp:// wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institutional/Manuals /OpManual.nsf/what newvirt/CA2D01A4 D1BDF58085256B19008197F6?OpenDocument , paras. 23-25). For other subprojects Page 45 45 that do not fall within the above criteria, a resettlement plan conforming to this policy is required prior to appraisal. 29. For each subproject included in a project described in para. 26, 27, or 28 that may involve resettlement, the Bank requires that a satisfactory resettlement plan or an abbreviated resettlement plan that is c onsistent with the provisions of the policy framework be submitted to the Bank for approval before the subproject is accepted for Bank financing. 30. For projects described in paras. 26-28 a bove, the Bank may agree, in writing, that subproject resettlement plans may be approve d by the project implementing agency or a responsible government agency or financial intermediary without prior Bank review, if that agency has demonstrated adequate instit utional capacity to review resettlement plans and ensure their consistenc y with this policy. Any such delegation, and appropriate remedies for the entity's approval of resett lement plans found not to be in compliance with Bank policy, are provided for in the legal agreements for the project. In all such cases, implementation of the resettlement plan s is subject to ex post review by the Bank. Process Framework 31. For projects involving restri ction of access in accordance with para. 3(b) above, the borrower provides the Bank with a draft process framework that conforms to the relevant provisions of this policy as a condition of appraisal. In addition, during project implementation and before to enforcing of the restriction, the borrower prepares a plan of action, acceptable to the Bank, describing the spec ific measures to be undertaken to assist the displaced persons and the arrangements for their implem entation. The plan of action could take the form of a natural resources ma nagement plan prepared for the project. Assistance to the Borrower 32. In furtherance of the objectives of this policy, the Bank may at a borrower's request support the borrower and other co ncerned entities by providing (a) assistance to assess and strengthen resett lement policies, strate gies, legal frameworks, and specific plans at a country, re gional, or sect oral level; (b) financing of technical assistance to stre ngthen the capacities of agencies responsible for resettlement, or of affected people to participate more effectively in resettlement operations; (c) financing of technical assistance for deve loping resettlement polic ies, strategies, and specific plans, and for implementation, m onitoring, and evaluation of resettlement activities; and (d) financing of the investme nt costs of resettlement. 33. The Bank may finance either a compone nt of the main investment causing displacement and requiring resettlement, or a free-standing resett lement project with appropriate cross-conditionalities, processe d and implemented in parallel with the Page 46 46 investment that causes the displacement. Th e Bank may finance resettlement even though it is not financing the main investment that makes resettlement necessary. ___________________________________________________________________________ 1. "Bank" includes IDA; "loans" includes credits, gua rantees, Project Preparatio n Facility (PPF) advances and grants; and "projects" includes projects under (a) adaptable program lending; (b) learning and innovation loans; (c) PPFs and Ins titutional Development Funds (IDFs) , if they include investment activities; (d) grants under the Global Environment Facility and Montreal Protocol, for which the Bank is the implementing/executing agency; and (e) grants or loans provided by other donors that are administered by the Bank. The term "project" does not include programs under adjustment operations. "Borrower" also includes, wherever the context requires, the guarantor or the project implementing agency. 2. In devising approaches to resettlement in Bank-assisted projects, other Bank policies should be taken into account, as relevant. These policies include OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment , OP 4.04 Natural Habitats, OP 4.11 Safeguarding Cultural Property in Bank-Assisted Projects , and OD 4.20 Indigenous Peoples . 3. The term "displaced persons" refers to persons who are affected in an y of the ways described in para. 3 of this OP. 4. Displaced persons under para. 3(b) should be assisted in their efforts to improve or restore their livelihoods in a manner that maintains the sustainability of the parks and protected areas. 5. Where there are adverse indirect social or economic impacts, it is good practice for the borrower to undertake a social assessment and implement measures to minimize an d mitigate adverse economic and social impacts, particularly upon poor and vulnerable groups. Other environmental, social, and economic impacts that do not result from land taking may be identified and addressed through environmental assessments and other project reports and instruments. 6. This policy does not apply to restrictions of access to natural resources under community-based projects, i.e. where the community using the resources decides to restrict access to these resources, provided that an assessment satisfactory to the Bank establishes that the community decision-making process is adequate, and that it provides for identification of appropriate m easures to mitigate adverse impacts, if any, on the vulnerable members of the community. This policy also does not cover refugees from natural disasters, war, or civil strife (see OP / BP 8.50 , Emergency Recovery Assistance ). 7. For purposes of this policy, "involuntary" means actions that may be taken without the displaced person's informed consent or power of choice. 8. "Land" includes anything growing on or permanently affixed to land, such as buildings and crops. This policy does not apply to regulations of natural resources on a national or regional level to promote their sustainability, such as watershed management, groundwater management, fisheries management, etc. The policy also does not apply to disputes between private parties in land titling projects, although it is good practice for the borrower to undertake a social assessment and implement measures to minimize and mitigate adverse social impacts, especially those affecting poor and vulnerable groups. 9. For the purposes of this policy, involuntary rest riction of access covers restrictions on the use of resources imposed on people living outside the park or protected area, or on those who continue living inside the park or protected area during and after project implementa tion. In cases where new parks and protected areas are created as part of the project, persons who lose shelter, land, or other assets are covered under para. 3(a). Persons who lose shelter in existing parks and protected areas are also covered under para. 3(a). 10. The Resettlement Sourcebook (forthcoming) provides good practice guidance to staff on the policy. 11. "Replacement cost" is the method of valuation of assets that helps de termine the amount sufficient to replace lost assets and cover transaction costs. In applying this method of va luation, depreciation of structures and assets should not be taken into account (for a detailed definition of replacement cost, see Annex A , http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/Institutiona l/Manuals/OpManual .nsf/58AA50B14B6BC 071852565A30061BEB6/46FC304892280AB785256B19008197F8?OpenDocumenthttp: //wbln0018.worldbank.org/Institu tional/Manuals/OpManual. nsf/whatnewvirt/CA2D01A4 D1BDF58085256B19008197F6?OpenDocument footnote 1). For losses that cannot easily be valued or compensated for in moneta ry terms (e.g., access to public serv ices, customers, and suppliers; or to fishing, grazing, or forest areas), attempts ar e made to establish access to equivalent and culturally acceptable resources and earning opp ortunities. Where domestic law do es not meet the standard of Page 47 47 compensation at full replacement cost, compensation under domestic law is supplemented by additional measures necessary to meet the replacement cost sta ndard. Such additional assistance is distinct from resettlement assistance to be provided under other clauses of para. 6. 12. If the residual of the asset being taken is not ec onomically viable, compensation and other resettlement assistance are provided as if the entire asset had been taken. 13. The alternative assets are provided with adequa te tenure arrangements. The cost of alternative residential housing, housing sites, business premises, and agricultural sites to be provided can be set off against all or part of the compensation payable for the corresponding asset lost. 14. Such support could take the form of short-term jobs, subsistence support, salary maintenance or similar arrangements 15. See OD 4.20 , Indigenous Peoples. 16. See OP 4.04 , Natural Habitats. 17. As a general principle, this applies if the land taken constitutes less than 20% of the total productive area. 18. Paras. 13-15 do not apply to impacts covered under para. 3(b) of this policy. The eligibility criteria for displaced persons under 3 (b) are covered under the process framework (see paras. 7 and 30). 19. Such claims could be derived from adverse possession, from continued possession of public lands without government action for eviction (that is, with the implicit leave of the government), or from customary and traditional la w and usage, and so on. 20. Resettlement assistance may consist of land, other assets, cash, employment, and so on, as appropriate. 21. Normally, this cut-off date is the date the census begins. The cut-off date could also be the date the project area was delineated, prior to the census, pr ovided that there has been an effective public dissemination of information on the area delineated, and systematic and continuous dissemination subsequent to the delineation to prevent further population influx. 22. For projects that are highly risky or contentious, or that involve significant and complex resettlement activities, the borrower should normally engage an advisory panel of independent, internationally recognized resettlement specialists to advise on all aspects of the project relevant to the resettlement activities. The size, role, and frequency of meeting depend on the complexity of the resettlement. If independent technical advisory panels are established under OP 4.01 , Environmental Assessment , the resettlement panel may form part of the environmental panel of experts. See BP 17.50 , Disclosure of Operational Information (forthcoming) for detailed disclosure procedures. 24. An exception to this requirement may be made in highly unusual circumstances (such as emergency recovery operations) with the approval of Bank Management (see BP 4.12, para. 8). In such cases, the Management's approval stipulates a timetable and budget for developing the resettlement plan. 25. Impacts are considered "minor" if the affected people are not physi cally displaced and less than 10% of their productive assets are lost. 26. For purpose of this paragraph, the term "subprojects" includes components and subcomponents. ........................... Page 48 48 Operational Manual - OP 4.12 Annex A (December 2001) These policies were prepared for use by World Bank staff and are not necessarily a complete treatment of the subject. Involuntary Resettlement Instruments 1. This annex describes the elements of a resettlement plan, an abbreviated resettlement plan, a resettlement policy framework, and a resettlement process framework, as discussed in OP 4.12, paras. 17-31. Resettlement Plan 2. The scope and level of detail of the resettlement plan vary with the magnitude and complexity of resettlement. The plan is based on up-to-date and reliable information about (a) the proposed resettlement and its impacts on the displaced persons and other adversely affected groups, and (b) the legal issues involved in resettlement. The resettlement plan covers the elements below, as relevant. When any element is not relevant to project circumstances, it should be noted in the resettlement plan. 3. Description of the project. General description of the project and identification of the project area. 4. Potential impacts. Identification of (a) the project component or activities that give rise to resettlement; (b) the zone of impact of such component or activities; (c) the alternatives considered to avoid or minimize resettlement; and (d) the mechanisms established to minimize resettlement, to the extent possible, during project implementation. 5. Objectives. The main objectives of the resettlement program. 6. Socioeconomic studies. The findings of socioeconomic studies to be conducted in the early stages of project preparation and with the involvement of potentially displaced people, including (a) the results of a census survey covering (i) current occupants of the affected area to establish a basis for the design of the resettlement program and to exclude subsequent inflows of people from eligibility for compensation and resettlement assistance; (ii) standard characteristics of displaced households, including a description of production systems, labor, and household organization; and baseline information on livelihoods (including, as relevant, production levels and income derived from both formal and informal economic activities) and standards of living (including health status) of the displaced population; (iii) the magnitude of the expected loss—total or partial—of assets, and the extent of displacement, physical or economic; (iv) information on vulnerable groups or persons as provided for in OP 4.12, para. 8, for whom special provisions may have to be made; and (v) provisions to update inform ation on the displaced people's livelihoods and standards of living at regular intervals so that the latest information is available at the time of their displacement. Page 49 49 (b) Other studies describing the following (i) land tenure and transfer systems, including an inventory of common property natural resources fr om which people derive their livelihoods and sustenance, non-title-based usufruct systems (including fishing, grazing, or use of forest areas) governed by local recognized land allocation mechanisms, and any issues rais ed by different tenure systems in the project area; (ii) the patterns of social interaction in the affected communities, including social networks and social support systems, and how they will be affected by the project; (iii) public infrastructure and social services that will be affected; and (iv) social and cultural characteristics of displaced communities, including a description of formal and informal institutions (e.g., community organizations, ritual groups, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)) that may be relevant to the consultation strategy and to designing and implementing the resettlement activities. 7. Legal framework. The findings of an analysis of the legal framework, covering (a) the scope of the power of eminent domain and the nature of compensation associated with it, in terms of both the valuation methodology and the timing of payment; (b) the applicable legal and administrative procedures, including a description of the remedies available to displaced persons in the judicial process and the normal timeframe for such procedures, and any available alternative dispute resolution mechanisms that may be relevant to resettlement under the project; (c) relevant law (including customary and traditional law) governing land tenure, valuation of assets and losses, compensation, and natural resource usage rights; customary personal law related to displacement; and environmental laws and social welfare legislation; (d) laws and regulations relating to the agencies responsible for implementing resettlement activities; (e) gaps, if any, between local laws covering eminent domain and resettlement and the Bank's resettlement policy, and the mechanisms to bridge such gaps; and (f) any legal steps necessary to ensure the effective implementation of resettlement activities under the project, including, as appropriate, a process for recognizing claims to legal rights to land—including claims that derive from customary law and traditional usage (see OP 4.12, para.15 b). 8. Institutional Framework. The findings of an analysis of the institutional framework covering (a) the identification of agencies responsible for resettlement activities and NGOs that may have a role in project implementation; (b) an assessment of the institutional capacity of such agencies and NGOs; and (c) any steps that are proposed to enhance the institutional capacity of agencies and NGOs responsible for resettlement implementation. 9. Eligibility. Definition of displaced persons and criteria for determining their eligibility for compensation and other resettlement assistance, including relevant cut-off dates. 10. Valuation of and compensation for losses. The methodology to be used in Page 50 50 valuing losses to determine their replacement cost; and a description of the proposed types and levels of compensation under local law and such supplementary measures as are necessary to achieve replacement cost for lost assets.1 11. Resettlement measures. A description of the packages of compensation and other resettlement measures that will assist each category of eligible displaced persons to achieve the objectives of the policy (see OP 4.12, para. 6). In addition to being technically and economically feasible, the resettlement packages should be compatible with the cultural preferences of the displaced persons, and prepared in consultation with them. 12. Site selection, site preparation, and relocation. Alternative relocation sites considered and explanation of those selected, covering (a) institutional and technical arrangements for identifying and preparing relocation sites, whether rural or urban, for which a combination of productive potential, locational advantages, and other factors is at least comparable to the advantages of the old sites, with an estimate of the time needed to acquire and transfer land and ancillary resources; (b) any measures necessary to prevent land speculation or influx of ineligible persons at the selected sites; (c) procedures for physical relocation under the project, including timetables for site preparation and transfer; and (d) legal arrangements for regularizing tenure and transferring titles to resettlers. 13. Housing, infrastructure, and social services. Plans to provide (or to finance resettlers' provision of) housing, infrastructure (e.g., water supply, feeder roads), and social services (e.g., schools, health services);2 plans to ensure comparable services to host populat ions; any necessary site development, engineering, and architectural designs for these facilities. 14. Environmental protection and management. A description of the boundaries of the relocation area; and an assessment of the environmental impacts of the proposed resettlement3 and measures to mitigate and manage these impacts (coordinated as appropriate with the environmental assessment of the main investment requiring the resettlement). 15. Community participation. Involvement of resettlers and host communities,4 including (a) a description of the strategy for consultation with and participation of resettlers and hosts in the design and implementation of the resettlement activities; (b) a summary of the views expressed and how these views were taken into account in preparing the resettlement plan; (c) a review of the resettlement alternatives presented and the choices made by displaced persons regarding options available to them, including choices related to forms of compensation and resettlement assistance, to relocating as individuals families or as parts of preexisting communities or kinship groups, to sustaining existing patterns of group organization, and to retaining access to cultural property (e.g. places of worship, pilgrimage centers, cemeteries);5 and (d) institutionalized arrangements by which displaced people can communicate their concerns to project authorities throughout planning and implementation, and measures to ensure that such vulnerable groups as indigenous people, ethnic minorities, the landless, and women are adequately represented. Page 51 51 16. Integration with host populations. Measures to mitigate the impact of resettlement on any host communities, including (a) consultations with host communities and local governments; (b) arrangements for prompt tendering of any payment due the hosts for land or other assets provided to resettlers; (c) arrangements for addressing any conflict that may arise between resettlers and host communities; and (d) any measures necessary to augment services (e.g., education, water, health, and production services) in host communities to make them at least comparable to services available to resettlers. 17. Grievance procedures. Affordable and accessible procedures for third-party settlement of disputes arising from resettlement; such grievance mechanisms should take into account the availability of judicial recourse and community and traditional dispute settlement mechanisms. 18. Organizational responsibilities. The organizational framework for implementing resettlement, including identification of agencies responsible for delivery of resettlement measures and pr ovision of services; arrangements to ensure appropriate coordination between agencies and jurisdictions involved in implementation; and any measures (incl uding technical assistance) needed to strengthen the implementing agencies' capacity to design and carry out resettlement activities; provisions for the transfer to local authorities or resettlers themselves of responsibility for managing facilities and services provided under the project and for transferri ng other such responsibilities from the resettlement implementing agencies, when appropriate. 19. Implementation schedule. An implementation schedule covering all resettlement activities from preparation through implementation, including target dates for the achievement of expected benefits to resettlers and hosts and terminating the various forms of assistance. The schedule should indicate how the resettlement activities are linked to the implementation of the overall project. 20. Costs and budget. Tables showing itemized cost estimates for all resettlement activities, including allowances for inflation, population growth, and other contingencies; timetables for expenditures; sources of funds; and arrangements for timely flow of funds, and funding for resettlement, if any, in areas outside the jurisdiction of the implementing agencies. 21. Monitoring and evaluation. Arrangements for monitoring of resettlement activities by the implementing agency, supplemented by independent monitors as considered appropriate by the Bank, to ensure complete and objective information; performance monitoring indicators to measure inputs, outputs, and outcomes for resettlement activities; involvement of the displaced persons in the monitoring process; evaluation of the impact of resettlement for a reasonable period after all resettlement and related development activities have been completed; using the results of resettlement monitoring to guide subsequent implementation. Abbreviated Resettlement Plan 22. An abbreviated plan covers the following minimum elements:6 (a) a census survey of displaced persons and valuation of assets; (b) description of compensation and other resettlement assistance to be provided; (c) consultations with displaced people about acceptable alternatives; Page 52 52 (d) institutional responsibility for implementation and procedures for grievance redress; (e) arrangements for monitoring and implementation; and (f) a timetable and budget. Resettlement Policy Framework 23. The purpose of the policy framework is to clarify resettlement principles, organizational arrangements, and design criteria to be applied to subprojects to be prepared during project implementation (see OP 4.12, paras. 26-28). Subproject resettlement plans consistent with the policy framework subsequently are submitted to the Bank for approval after specific planning information becomes available (see OP 4.12, para. 29). 24. The resettlement policy framework covers the following elements, consistent with the provisions described in OP 4.12, paras. 2 and 4: (a) a brief description of the project and components for which land acquisition and resettlement are required, and an explanation of why a resettlement plan as described in paras. 2-21 or an abbreviated plan as described in para. 22 cannot be prepared by project appraisal; (b) principles and objectives governing resettlement preparation and implementation; (c) a description of the process for preparing and approving resettlement plans; (d) estimated population displacement and likely categories of displaced persons, to the extent feasible; (e) eligibility criteria for defining various categories of displaced persons; (f) a legal framework reviewing the fit between borrower laws and regulations and Bank policy requirements and measures proposed to bridge any gaps between them; (g) methods of valuing affected assets; (h) organizational procedures for delivery of entitlements, including, for projects involving private sector intermediaries, the responsibilities of the financial intermediary, the government, and the private developer; (i) a description of the implementation process, linking resettlement implementation to civil works; (j) a description of grievance redress mechanisms; (k) a description of the arrangements for funding resettlement, including the preparation and review of cost estimates, the flow of funds, and contingency arrangements; (l) a description of mechanisms for consultations with, and participation of, displaced persons in planning, implementation, and monitoring; and (m) arrangements for monitoring by t he implementing agency and, if required, by independent monitors. 25. When a resettlement policy framework is the only document that needs to be submitted as a condition of the loan, the resettlement plan to be submitted as a condition of subproject financing need not include the policy principles, entitlements, and eligibility criteria, organizational arrangements, arrangements for monitoring and evaluation, the framework for participation, and mechanisms for grievance redress set forth in the resettlement policy framework. The subproject-specific resettlement plan needs to include baseline census and socioeconomic survey information; specific compensation rates and standards; policy entitlements related to any additional impacts identified through the Page 53 53 census or survey; description of resettlem ent sites and programs for improvement or restoration of livelihoods and standar ds of living; implementation schedule for resettlement activities; and detailed cost estimate. Process Framework 26. A process framework is prepared when Bank-supported projects may cause restrictions in access to natural resources in legally designated parks and protected areas. The purpose of the process framework is to establish a process by which members of potentially affected communities participate in design of project components, determination of measur es necessary to achieve resettlement policy objectives, and implementation and monitoring of relevant project activities (see OP 4.12, paras. 7 and 31). 27. Specifically, the process framework describes participatory processes by which the following activities will be accomplished (a) Project components will be prepared and implemented. The document should briefly describe the project and components or activities that may involve new or more stringent restrictions on natural resource use. It should also describe the process by which potentially displaced persons participate in project design. (b) Criteria for eligibility of affected persons will be determined. The document should establish that potentially affected communities will be involved in identifying any adverse impacts, assessing of the significance of impacts, and establishing of the criteria for eligibility for any mitigating or compensating measures necessary. (c) Measures to assist affected persons in their efforts to improve their livelihoods or restore them, in real terms, to pre-displacement levels, while maintaining the sustainability of the park or protected area will be identified. The document should describe methods and procedures by which communities will identify and choose potential mitigating or compensating measures to be provided to those adversely affected, and procedures by which adversely affected community members will decide among the options available to them. (d) Potential conflicts or grievances within or between affected communities will be resolved. The document should describe the process for resolving disputes relating to resource use restrictions that may arise between or among affected communities, and grievances that may arise from members of communities who are dissatisfied with the eligibility criteria, community planning measures, or actual implementation. Additionally, the process framework should describe arrangements relating to the following (e) Administrative and legal procedures. The document should review agreements reached regarding the process approach with relevant administrative jurisdictions and line ministries (including clear delineation for administrative and financial responsibilities under the project). (f) Monitoring arrangements. The document should review arrangements for participatory monitoring of project activities as they relate to (beneficial and adverse) impacts on persons within the project impact area, and for monitoring the effectiveness of measures taken to improve (or at minimum restore) incomes and living standards. Page 54 54 ______________________________________________________________________ 1. With regard to land and structures, "replacement cost" is defined as follows: For agricultural land, it is the pre-proj ect or pre-displacement, whichever is higher, market value of land of equal productive potential or use located in the vicinity of the affected land, plus the cost of preparing the land to levels similar to those of the affected land, plus the cost of any registration and transfer taxes. For land in urban areas, it is the pre-displacement market value of land of equal size and use, with similar or improved public infrastructure facilities and services and located in the vicinity of the affected land, plus the cost of any registration and transfer taxes. For houses and other structures, it is the market cost of the materials to build a replacement structure with an area and quality similar to or better than those of the affected structure, or to repair a partially affected structure, plus the cost of transporting building materials to the construction site, plus the cost of any labor and contractors' fees, plus the cost of any registration and transfer taxes. In determining the replacement cost, depreciation of the asset and the value of salvage materials are not taken into account, nor is the value of benefits to be derived from the project deducted from the valuation of an affected asset. Where domestic law does not meet the standard of compensation at full replacement cost, compensation under domestic law is supplemented by additional measures so as to meet the replacement cost standard. Such additional assistance is distinct from resettlement measures to be provided under other clauses in OP 4.12, para. 6. 2. Provision of health care services, particularly for pregnant women, infants, and the elderly, may be important during and after relocation to prevent increases in morbidity and mortality due to malnutrition, the psychological stress of being uprooted, and the increased risk of disease. 3. Negative impacts that should be anticipated and mitigated include, for rural resettlement, deforestation, overgrazing, soil erosion, sanitation, and pollution; for urban resettlement, projects should address such density-related issues as transportation capacity and access to potable water, sanitation systems, and health facilities. 4. Experience has shown that local NGOs often provide valuable assistance and ensure viable community participation. 5. OPN 11.03, Management of Cultural Property in Bank-Financed Projects. 6. In case some of the displaced persons lose more than 10% of their productive assets or require physical relocation, the plan also covers a socioeconomic survey and income restoration measures. wb12009 C:\Documents and Settings\WB12009\My Documents\E339 v2 Uganda rail RAP.doc 07/29/2005 3:45:00 PM