Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project

Environmental and Social Assessment

January, 2010

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The study Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project Environment and Social Assessment was undertaken by ESF Consultants Ltd. We wish to record our profound gratitude to Johannes Woelcke, NyamburaGithagui, Opara, Wilson Nyariwo, James Akelo, AmosWekesa of VI Agroforestry who took time out of their busy schedule to accompany us for the field visits. We would also like to extend our gratitude to Bo Lager, Fred Marani, Rachel Wangu, andTimmTennigkeitand the many institutions and individuals who contributed their knowledge and insight in making this study a success.

We are also indebted to the many community members in Sirisia, Bumula, Wangai and Kombewa who participated and contributed their local knowledge and experience to the study. We thank these together with others who have not been mentioned here.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report is an Environmental and Social Assessment (ESA) Report of the proposed Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project.

The report covers the environmental and social assessment, quantitative household survey, public consultation process and Environmental and Social Management Plan. It’s also worth noting that an Indigenous People Screening Survey (IPSS) was carried out within and around the project area to explore and determine possible impact of the project on Indigenous people. From the screening process, it was evident that there exist no IP within the project boundaries consequently they will not be affected by the project.

The objectives of this study were to ensure that environmental impacts by the project are explicitly addressed and incorporated into the development decision making, describe project components and activities anticipated during all project phases, analyze the alternatives for the project in terms of environmental and social impacts, anticipate and avoid, minimize or offset the adverse significant biophysical, social and other relevant negative effects of the programme, ensure that the most significant environmental impacts of the target group (the farmers and their organisations) are addressed in a satisfactory and adequate manner and ensure that the productivity and capacity of natural systems is protected and that ecosystems services are maintained by the methods used by project. Vi Agroforestry will be the lead agency in implementing theEnvironmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) and will cover the costs of its implementation and the monitoring activities through their project budget.

The tool uses a combination of methodologies and models to achieve effective impact identification. In the case of this project, the methods that were applied to assess, qualify and quantify impacts included the literature review, focus group meetings, participatory rural appraisal, quantitative household survey, participant observation and photographic records, semi-structured interviews and stakeholder identification and consultationand expert opinion. Through this means, impacts were identified in terms of their character, magnitude, extent, significance, disturbance and duration.

The impact assessment is in essence occasioned to examine the effect of implementing the carbon finance project. In order to achieve this, the study examined four districts that the project will be implemented and represents three agroecological zones in Kenya. This included Sirisia (UM1 & 2), Malakisi (UM3), Kombewa (LM1, UM2 and LM3)) and Wangai (LM1, UM1, UM2 LM3). It was therefore possible to examine the various activities of farmers and the potential impacts of the project in the different agro ecological zones.

Based on the assessment of this study, its anticipated that the project will achieve its objectives and at the same time have additional beneficial impacts including carbon sequestration, improved soil condition, water conservation, increase in biological diversity at the farm level, restoration of degraded areas, improvement to rural economy/micro economy, climate change adaptation by small scale farmers, increased food productivity in western Kenya, firewood supply, community capacity building and institutional development, community awareness on climate change, poverty alleviation, improved nutrition and gender mainstreaming in rural economy

Although the overall objective of the Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project (KACP) is to increase farm production, contribute to climate change mitigation, generate carbon revenues, enhance biodiversity and reduce vulnerability to climate change, there are adverse potential impacts that could emanate from the project activities. These are

Risk of invasive tree species
Spread of pest and diseases

Based on the findings of this study, an environmental and social management has been developed to avoid, minimize, mitigate potential project impacts as well as enhance the beneficial impacts. Some of the mitigations are given below:

The project beneficiaries should be trained in good farming husbandry and pest management especially in the area of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and fertilizer application. This training should be a hands-on that can be introduced through the farmer’s field school (FFS). KAPAP (Kenya Agricultural Productivity and Agribusiness Project) resources will be made available to KARI to train ViAgroforestry technical staff on Integrated Pest Management who in turn will train farmers.

In assisting borrowers or implementing agencies to manage pests that affect either agriculture or public health, the World Bank supports a strategy that promotes the use of biological or environmental control methods and reduces reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides. In Bank-supported projects, the borrower/project implementer addresses pest management issues in the context of the project's environmental assessment. This ESA includes a screening checklist that will be applied to screen project activities/sub-projects for potential pest management issues (procuring and usage of pesticides) and negative environmental impacts. When any project activity/sub-project with significant pest management issues are identified, the project implementer Swedish Cooperative Center-ViAgroforestry (SCC-ViA) will prepare a sub-project specific Pest Management Plan, obtain approval and disclose the document before implementation of the sub-project. The ESA includes the following: Annex D contains a pest management screening framework as a guide in relation to the Bank's pest management policy safeguard; and Annex E contains the questionnaire that will be used to screen sub-projects.

The KACP considered in this study is environmentally feasible due to the fact that it proposes measure to mitigate climate change among small scale farmers while at the same time improving farm productivity using sustainable technologies that not only safeguard the environment but also have incremental benefits of carbon revenue generation.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ABBREVIATIONS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1Project Proponent

1.2 Project Objectives

2.0 STUDY SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

2.1 Study Scope

2.2 Literature Review

2.3 Field Survey

2.3.1 Focus Group Meetings

2.3.2 Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)

2.3.3 Quantitative Household Survey

2.3.4 Participant observation and photographic records

2.3.5 Semi-structured interviews

2.3.6 Stakeholder Identification and Consultation

3.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVE

3.1 Alternative Project Site

3.2 Alternative Technology

3.3 No Project Option

4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

4.2 Project Activities

4.2.1 Crop Management

4.2.2 Restoration/ Rehabilitation of degraded lands

4.2.3 Livestock management

5.0 PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION

5.1 Agro-ecological Areas Characteristics

5.1.1 Climate

5.1.2 Topography and soils

5.1.3 Hydrology

5.2 Biological Environment

5.2.1 Fauna

5.2.2 Flora

5.3 Socio-Economic Environment

5.3.1 Population and Demography

5.3.2 Land Tenure and Land Uses

5.3.3 Livelihood

5.3.4 Ethnicity

5.3.5 Health

5.4 Sensitive Ecosystem

5.5 Environmental and Social Trends

5.6 Land Issue

6.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

6.1 National Legal Framework

6.1.1 Environment Management and Coordination Act 1999

6.1.2 The Agriculture Act

6.1.3 The Water Act 2002

6.1.4 The Forest Act of 2005

6.1.5 Public Health Act Cap 242

6.1.6 Irrigation Act Cap 347)

6.1.7 Pest Control Products Cap 346

6.1.8 Plant Protection Act Cap 324

6.1.9 Suppression of Noxious Weeds Cap 325

6.1.10 Seeds and Plants Variety Act Cap 326

6.2 International Regulations

6.2.1 World Bank Safeguard Policies

6.3.1.1 Environmental Assessment (OP4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01)

6.3.1.2 Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04)

6.3.1.3 Forest Operational Policy 4.36

6.3.1.4 Pest Management Operational Policy 4.09

6.3.1.5 Projects on International Waterways Operational Policy 7.50:

6.3.1.8 Safeguarding Cultural Property Operations Directive 11.03z

6.3.1.9 Involuntary Resettlement Operational Policy 4.12

6.4.2 International Conventions

6.4.2.1 Kyoto Protocol

6.4.2.2 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

6.4.2.1 United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity

6.4.2.2 Ramsar Convention on Wetlands

6.4.2.3 Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes

6.4.2.4 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species

6.4.2.5 EAC Protocol on Environment

7.0 PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY CONSULTATION

7.1 Stakeholder Mapping

7.2 Stakeholder Identification

7.3 Stakeholder Consultation

7.3.1 Focus Group Meetings

7.3.2 Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)

7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS OF CARBON FINANCE PROJECT

8.1 Positive Impacts

8.1.1 Physical Environment

8.1.1.1 Reducing Green House Gases / Carbon Sequestration

8.1.1.2 Improved Soil Condition

8.1.1.3 Water Conservation

8.1.2 Biological Environmental

8.1.2.1 Increase in Biological Diversity

8.1.2.2 Restoration of Degraded Areas

8.1.2.3 Establishment of Tree Nurseries

8.1.3 Socioeconomic Environment

8.1.3.1 Macro Economy

8.1.3.2 Micro Economy

8.1.3.3 Climate Change Adaptation

8.1.3.4 Increased Food Productivity

8.1.3.5 Firewood Supply

8.1.3.6 Community Capacity Building and Institutional Development

8.1.3.7 Community Awareness Creation on Climate Change

8.1.3.8 Poverty Alleviation

8.1.3.9 Improved Health/ Nutrition

8.1.3.10 Gender Mainstreaming in Rural Economy

8.1.3.11 Carbon Revenue

8.2 Potential Adverse Impacts

8.2.1 Physical Environment

8.2.1.1 Increased Use of Pesticides

8.2.2 Biological Environment

8.2.2.2 Emergence of Pest and Diseases

8.2.3 Socioeconomic Environment

8.2.3.1 Raised Expectations

8.3 Without-Project Scenario...... 47

9.0 PROJECT ENVIRONMETAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

9.1 Objectives

9.2 ESMP Implementation

9.2.1 Vi Agroforestry

9.2.2 Kenya Agriculture Research Institute

9.2.3.1 Training on IPM

9.2.3.2 Training in Fertilizer and Pesticides Application

9.3 Monitoring Plan

9.4 Monitoring Schedule

9.5 Environmental and Social Management Plan Budget

10.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

REFERENCE

annexes

Annex A. Agroforestry tree species to be promoted

Annex B. List of Stakeholders Consulted

Annex C. Quantitative Household Survey Questionnaire

Annex D. Pest Management Safegurads Policy Screening Framework...... 68

Annex E. Pest Management Questionnaire...... 71

Annex F. Pest Management Plan………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….72

Figures

Figure 1. Villages sampled

Figure 2. Project area agro ecological zones

Figure 3. Map of the two project areas in Western Kenya

Figure 4. Nyanza Province project areas location

Figure 5. Respondent’s feedback on rainfall reliability

Figure 6. Household sizes in the area

Figure 7. Land uses in the project areas

Figure 8. Land use estimation within one sample plot circle

Figure 9. Reason for land use and crop allocation

Figure 10. Livelihood means in the area

Figure 11. Crops grown in the project areas

Figure 12. Use of inorganic fertilizer in the project areas

Figure 13. Use of pesticides in project area

Figure 14. Mode of cultivation in the project areas

Figure 15. Summary of the operational policies that will be triggered by CFP projects

ABBREVIATIONS

UNFCCCUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

SALMSustainable Agricultural Land Management

GHGsGreenhouse Gases

AEZAgro-ecological Zone

UMUpper Middle Land

LMLower Middle Land

I&APsInterested and Affected Parties

NEMAEnvironment Management Authority

ESIAEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessment

PRAParticipatory Rural Appraisal

IKSIndigenous Knowledge Systems

WBWorld Bank

MoAMinistry of Agriculture

OPOperational Policy

BPBank Procedures

WHOWorld Health Organization

EMCAEnvironment Management and Coordination Act

FFSFarmer Field Schools

EIAEnvironmental Impact Assessment

ESIAEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessment

SCCSwedish Cooperative Centre

ViAViAgroforestry

GDPGross Domestic Product

KACPKenya Agricultural Carbon Project

Measures

CO2Carbondioxide

HaHectares

m3Cubic Metres

tons

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project is a World Bank supported project targeting small scale farmers to improve their yields and productivity while at the same time generating carbon assets through payment for environmental services. The overall goal of this project is to increase production of staple food by improving land productivity while at the same time sequestrating carbon through adoption of sustainable agricultural land management (SALM) practices in parts Nyanza and Western Kenya.

SALM practices to be promoted within the frame of this project will include cropland management, restoration of degraded lands, bioenergy and livestock management in order of importance.

1.1Project Proponent

The project proponent Swedish Cooperative Center-Vi Agroforestry (SCC-ViA) will promote the adoption of SALM practices on approximately 45,000 ha of land in parts of Nyanza and Western Provinces.

VI Agroforestry has been working in East Africa for the last 25 years in agroforestry advisory services to farmers. VI Agroforestry which was founded by the Swedish Consumers Cooperative Movement in 1983, started on a pilot basis in 1983 in West Pokot district in Kenya’s Rift Valley Province. Successful fundraising and positive evaluation resulted in the program being expanded. In 1992, the program became regional. The focus of activities has concentrated around the Lake Victoria Basin divided into seven projects: Kisumu and Kitale (Kenya), Mwanza, Mara and Bukoba (Tanzania), Masaka (Uganda) and Rwanda.

1.2 Project Objectives

With its mission being, “To integrate sustainable agricultural land management practices into smallholdings and make it an engine of economic growth and a means to reduce poverty”, the project has narrowed its objectives to:

Increasing & diversifying farmer’s food supply through application SALM practices and technologies.
Increasing & diversifying farmer’s production of marketable agricultural and agroforestry products.
Helping farmers adapting to climate change.
Improve farmer’s capacity in accessing markets, information & developing markets.
Strengthened democratic farmer based organizations
Help individual farm households earn carbon revenue
Increasing farm tree cover for firewood & wood products

SCC-ViA aims at selling emission reductions (ERs) generated through the project to the BioCarbon Fund of the World Bank. Regarding aggregation and selling of ERs to the World Bank, SCC-ViA will act as a third party intermediary on behalf of the farmers. The project developer also has to ensure that the carbon revenues are channeled back to the farmer group level. The farmer groups will decide on the usage of the carbon revenues received.This institutional structure is similar to the BioCarbon Fund project with the Green Belt Movement (GBM), where GBM acts as an aggregator of the ERs on behalf of participating communities.

2.0 STUDY SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

The purpose of this study is to assess the environmental and social assessment (ESA) of the Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project.

The overall objective of the study is to measure whether the project has any conceivable consequences on the environment, negative or positive. The study will help planning, monitoring and follow up of programmes performance.

Specific objectives of the study are to:

Ensure that environmental impacts by the project are explicitly addressed and incorporated into the development decision making,
Describe project components and activities anticipated during all project phases,
Analyze the alternatives for the project in terms of environmental and social impacts.
Anticipate and avoid, minimize or offset the adverse significant biophysical, social and other relevant negative effects of the programme,
Ensure that the most significant environmental impacts of the target group (the farmers and their organisations) are addressed in a satisfactory and adequate manner,
Ensure that the productivity and capacity of natural systems is protected and that ecosystems services are improved by the methods used by project

2.1 Study Scope

A scoping study was undertaken at the beginning of the study process. This exercise involved literature review of the project documents, consulting with the KACP in Nairobi and Kitale and consulting with the project staff, NEMA staff among others. Through the scoping study, which entailed an initial and broad assessment of the project, policies, regulations and baseline data, a scope for the study was generated including geographical coverage, stakeholders (interested and affected parties), significant impacts (areas of study) and the levels of detail in each particular impact study. The spatial scope of the project was determined largely by adopting agroecological approach which considered the project areas as part of agroecological zone. Therefore the spatial scope of the study sampled all the targeted agroecological zones of Upper Midland and Lower Midland in Bungoma, Siaya and Kisumu.

The following scoping techniques were used to determine the scope study of the environmental assessment and the public consultation

Literature review
Stakeholders’ consultative meetings.
Questionnaire.
Checklists.

The scope of the study was determined by the project location and the secondary data review of the project areas, the influence of the potential impacts and stakeholders input. The terms of reference also helped in shaping the scope as well as the methodology to be applied in assessing the impacts.

2.2 Literature Review

Before commencement of the study, a detailed literature and desk top review of the existing baseline information /materials and research undertaken in the project area was collected and reviewed. The review of available data helped to describe the environmental and social setup of the area.

The literature review included qualitative descriptions and quantitative indicators of development trends relevant to this project such as significant agro ecological zones, social-cultural set up, demography, livelihoods, economic activities, land tenure and land use, among other socioeconomic indicators.

As part of the literature review relevant to this study, a review of Kenya legislations and regulations, World Bank safeguard policies and International conventions that Kenya has ratified and those that are relevant to the project including the broader policy and reform framework context within which the project takes place was undertaken. During the review, particular attention was paid to the laws and regulations governing the project’s implementation as well as access by the poor and vulnerable groups to goods, services and opportunities provided by the project.

2.3 Field Survey

Upon the completion of a comprehensive literature review, a field survey was undertaken with the aim of conducting interviews with the communities and stakeholders identified and to undertake a ground truthing of the information collected from secondary literature.