iSimangaliso Resettlement Policy Framework and Process Framework – April 2009

Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) and Process Framework (PF) for the iSimangaliso GEF Project:

Development, Empowerment and Conservation in the iSimangaliso WetlandPark and Surrounding Region

30 April 2009

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

1.1Contents of this document

1.2Project description

2. Legal framework - World Bank Involuntary Resettlement Policy and South African policy and law relating to resettlement

2.1 World Bank Involuntary Resettlement Policy requirements

2.1.1 Definition of involuntary resettlement

2.1.2Policy objectives of OP 4.12

2.1.3 Whom the resettlement policy covers

2.1.4 The difference between a RPF and PF

2.1.5Resettlement Policy Framework and Resettlement Action Plan (RAP)

2.1.6 Process Framework and Plan of Action (PoA)

2.1.7Why RAPs and PoA cannot be prepared now

2.2 South Africa laws and policies affecting resettlement and rights of access to natural resources

2.2.1Summary of relevant South African laws and policies

2.2.2 Summary analysis of the adequacy of the South African legislation to achieve compliance

3. Possible impacts of the iSimangaliso GEF project in relation to Safeguard Policy OP 4.12

3.1 Social and economic context

3.2 Potential impact from the iSimangaliso GEF Project

3.2.1Eligibility Criteria: Categories of people possibly affected by resettlement and/or restriction of access

3.2.2Estimated area/population that might be affected

3.3 Options for potentially affected people

4. RPF and PF

4.1 Principles and approach of the RPF and PF. The primary objective of this RPF and PF is to provide the principles and standards that would guide any possible future resettlement (should it become necessary) under the iSimangaliso Wetland Park Project, to ensure that any eligible persons who might possibly be displaced as a result of the Project receive the appropriate resettlement, compensation, or other assistance needed in their efforts to improve, or at least restore, their livelihoods and standards of living.

4.1.1 Developing to conserve approach

4.1.2 Policy Principles

4.2 Methods of valuing affected assets in case of an RPF – developing options

4.3 Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) preparation

4.3.1 Preparation of RAPs and planning processes

4.3.2 Consultation with affected people during RAP process

4.4 Plan of Action (PoA) preparation

4.5 Grievance redress mechanism for RPF and PF

4.6 Organisational elements, institutional capacity and commitment for RPF and PF

4.7 Monitoring and reporting

4.8 Funding arrangements for the RPF and PF

5. Process for implementation of this safeguard policy

6. Public consultation and disclosure of this RPF and PF

Annexure A – Summary of relevant South Africa laws

Annexure B – Explanation of the Dukuduku situation

Annexure C - Extract from Minutes of November Consultation Workshop

Annexure D - References......

1. Introduction

This document presents the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) and Process Framework (PF) for the World Bank- and GEF-supported iSimangaliso Wetland Park Project (Project). This RPF and PF has been prepared to ensure this Project’s consistency with the World Bank’s safeguard policy on Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12), as well as applicable South African laws and regulations. OP 4.12 applies to any projects that might involve (i) the involuntary taking of land for project purposes, resulting in loss of shelter or the need to relocate (physical resettlement), loss of assets or access to assets, or loss of income sources or means of livelihood or (ii) the involuntary restriction of previously existing access to natural resources within protected areas, when this adversely affects people’s livelihoods.

Presently it is not possible to determine whether resettlement (broadly defined, as per OP 4.12) will occur as a result of the iSimangaliso Wetland Park Project, and this RPF and PF has been developed as a precautionary measure. Component 1 of the Project will focus on selecting the most appropriate option to bring fresh, low-sediment water into the LakeSt Lucia estuary system. If any resettlement or other involuntary displacement (including loss of existing livelihoods) were to occur as a result of the Project, it would be only if (i) the studies for improving the functioning of the Lake St. Lucia System, to be carried out during Project implementation under Component 1, recommend the re-conversion of some existing farmland within the Umfolozi-Umsunduze floodplain back to natural wetland habitats and (ii) after extensive stakeholder consultation, Government selects this option, in lieu of various alternative options that would not require any resettlement. Moreover, if any such resettlement were to take place under this project, it could only be after Government prepares a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) and/or Plan of Action (PoA) that is agreed with the World Bank. The RAP and/or PoA would include an implementation schedule, specific responsibilities of the iSimangaliso Authority and other institutions, complete budget, and earmarked source of Government funds for its implementation.

A RAP or PoA itself cannot be prepared at this time because it will not be known until well into Project implementation (following the completion of key Component 1 studies) whether any resettlement or other displacement could take place at all, and (if so) how many people might be affected, and in which part(s) of the Umfolozi-Umsunduze floodplain. This RPF and PF outlines some likely alternative livelihood options for people who might conceivably be displaced under the iSimangaliso Project. However, this RPF and PF does not prescribe the exact solutions for each conceivable case of resettlement or related displacement--that is the function of the future RAP and/or PoA(if needed).

1.1Contents of this document

This document contains:

a)A brief description of the iSimangaliso Wetland Park Project and components providing the context

b)A summary description of the Bank’s Involuntary Resettlement Policy (OP4.12) and of relevant South African (SA) laws and policies; and an analysis of the adequacy of SA legislation to ensure compliance with OP 4.12.

c)Assessment of potential impact, and eligibility criteria

d)The RFP and PF policy approach and principles

e)Methods of valuing affected assets

f)Organisational elements, grievance redress mechanisms, funding and monitoring

g)Implementation of the policy

h)Consultation and disclosure

1.2Project description

The project development objective (PDO) is to improve access to information that addressesthe availability of fresh water of adequate quality to the Lake St Lucia System[1], a wetland of global biodiversity importance, and to increase access among local communities to conservation- compatible economic opportunities. The Project area for Component 1 is the Lake St. Lucia System, defined as LakeSt. Lucia and its estuary, along with the UmfoloziRiver mouth and the Umfolozi-Umsunduze floodplain (the UmsunduzeRiver is a tributary of the UmfoloziRiver). The portion of the Umfolozi-Umsunduze floodplain that is closest to the coast lies within the iSimangaliso WetlandPark, while the up-river portions of the floodplain are outside the Park. The Project area for Components 2 and 3 is the entire iSimangaliso WetlandPark. However, only the Project activities being considered under Component 1could lead to any resettlement.

This PDO will contribute to a long term goal of improving the ecosystem functioning of the Lake St Lucia System to conserve wetland habitats of global importance.Through its components, GEF funding will lead to global biodiversity conservation benefits by reducing the main threats (changes in the hydrological regime and incompatible future land uses) to the long-term survival and ecological integrity of the Park.

The progress toward achieving the PDO will be measured through the following key outcome indicators:

(i)Evidence of implementation of follow up actions and investments contributing to the agreed hydrological solutions (indicator to be defined upon agreement on the specific solutions by Mid Term Review)

(ii)Protected Area management effectiveness as measured by the GEF Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT)

(iii)Percentage of targeted conservation compatible SMMEs that achieve commercial viability over the project period

Component 1: Hydrology and Ecosystem functioning of the LakeSt Lucia System for biodiversity conservation. (Total US$ 10.8 million, of which GEF is US$ 2.8 million)

Support for the key studies and initial investment follow-up actions needed to restore the St. Lucia wetlands to a state of improved ecological functioning through technical assistance, works, goods, training and operational costs to implement:

Subcomponent 1.1: Analysis of Alternatives (Total US$1.4million, 100% GEF funded): Analysis of alternatives including a comprehensive feasibility study that will include an environmental and social impact assessment and analyze sediment load, hydrology, ecological systems, socio-economics and resource economics to select the best ecologically feasible solution taking into consideration the social, financial and economic considerations. Such study to include analysis of the wetland’s ecosystem services value such as fisheries, carbon sequestration and water regulation, among others that might facilitate leveraging additional funds to implement the selected solution.

Subcomponent 1.2: Implementation of Selected Solutions (Total US$1.4million, 100% GEF funded): support to follow up actions and investments to implement the selected alternative referred in Part A.1 above through consultant’ services, goods and works.

Subcomponent 1.3: Support for Park Operations, including Conservation Management (Total US$8 million, 100% Government funded): Support for the iSimangaliso Wetland Park operations related to this Part A.1 and A.2 above through, goods, works, services and operational costs to manage the iSimangaliso Wetland Park’s physical assets, including compliance and enforcement, environmental management, rehabilitation, infrastructure development and maintenance, and community based natural resource management.

The expected outcomes of interventions implemented under this component are (i) knowledge of ecosystem functioning is improved and a long-term solution is agreed for the hydrological problems of the Lake St Lucia system; (ii) stakeholder concerns and involvement are reflected in the Feasibility study and EIA process; and (iii) a management-oriented monitoring system is designed and implemented.

The key outputs will be: (i) a Feasibility Study completed that details the preferred option; (ii) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) completed of the preferred option; and (iii) follow- up actions implemented.

Component 2: Promoting conservation-compatible local economic and cultural development. (Total US$ 7.1 million, of which GEF US$ 4.7 million)

Improvement of employment and livelihood opportunities consistent with conservation of the Park's rich biodiversity and other important natural values, including diversification and scaling up of environmentally sustainable economic activities, through Sub-grants, training workshops, operational costs and technical assistance . This Component shall include:

Subcomponent 2.1: Implementation of a Conservation-Compatible Small, Medium and Micro Enterprise Program (Total US$ 2.7 million, 100% GEF funded): Implementation of a Conservation-compatible Small, Medium and Micro Enterprise Program to promote the participation by local residents in eco-tourism and other conservation-compatible local enterprises through the provision of support and capacity building in (i) identification of viable enterprises; (ii) business management; (iii) financial management; (iv) production and quality control; and (v) marketing and other relevant skills.

Subcomponent 2.2: Development of an Education and Academic Support Program (Total 1.4 million, 100% GEF funded): Development of an Education and Academic Support Program as part of the overall training program of the iSimangaliso Wetland Park Authority, targeted at local youth on conservation, eco-tourism and natural resources-related curricula, which will enable local youth to access formal tertiary education and employment in eco-tourism enterprises and conservation organizations.

Subcomponent 2.3: Establishment of a Capacity Building Program for nearby communities (Total US$ 0.6 million, 100% GEF funded): Establishment of a Capacity Building Program for the iSimangaliso Wetland Park neighboring communities to build the skills and capacity of neighboring communities including land restitution beneficiaries to participate in the Park’s co-management processes. Through training; mentoring, and study tours.

Subcomponent 2.4: SEED Program (Total US$ 2.4 million, 100% Government funded): Support for the iSimangaliso Wetland Park SEED Program that complements subcomponents 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 above through services, training, capacity building and operational costs for local economic development and sustainable natural resource use including but not limited to: (1) community consultation, (2) craft development, (3) Park infrastructure improvement and land care (such as non-native plant removal) programmes within the boundaries of the iSimangaliso Wetland Park (involving no resettlement or involuntary taking of land),(4) iSimangaliso Art Programme, which works with artists from the region to improve their technical skills and find markets for their work, and (5) environmental education awareness programme.

The expected outcomes of interventions implemented under this component are: (i) Improved access to knowledge in conservation and tourism for local youth, in nearby communities and land restitution beneficiaries; (ii) improved access to business development services for conservation-compatible SMMEs; and (iii) improved capacity of local/community leaders in effective implementation of co-management agreements.

The key outputs will be: (i) SMME Program developed; (ii) Youth Educational Program operational; and (iii) Capacity building program for beneficiary communities implemented.

Component 3: Institutional capacity building for biodiversity conservation (Total US$ 3.8 million, of which GEF is US$1.5 million) through technical assistance, goods, works, workshops, training, study tours and operational costs to support the following components:

Subcomponent 3.1: Management and TechnicalCapacityBuilding (Total US$1.5 million, 100% GEF funded): Management and Technical Capacity building including:

  1. Enhancement of the iSimangaliso Wetland Park Authority’s capacity to manage the Project, including technical training and mentoring, recruitment of staff and the procurement of service providers.
  2. Support for the development of an information base including: mapping and survey data collection; databases and Geographical Information System.
  3. Establishment of a monitoring and evaluation system to: (i) monitor Project performance and outcomes, and (ii) adapt Project activities to enhance results.
  4. Exchange visits with relevant programs and participation in international seminars and conferences related to World Heritage management and conservation, land restitution, sustainable livelihoods, resource utilization and poverty issues, payment for environmental services, wetland management and territorial approach..
  5. Implementation of a Project communication strategy and website development for the iSimangaliso Authority.

Subcomponent 3.2: Support for Core Operations of Wetland Authority (Total US$2.3 million, 100% Government funded): Implementation of the Project including strategic oversight, consultation and facilitation activities, financial management and procurement, and monitoring and evaluation through salaries and operational costs.

2. Legal framework - World Bank Involuntary Resettlement Policy and South African policy and law relating to resettlement

2.1 World Bank Involuntary Resettlement Policy requirements

The World Bank’s Involuntary Resettlement Policy (known as OP4.12) seeks to safeguard against the impoverishment risks of involuntary resettlement in development projects. This safeguard policy is in place because the Bank’s experience has shown that involuntary resettlement under development projects, if unmitigated, often leads to severe economic, social and even environmental risks.

2.1.1 Definition of involuntary resettlement

The World Bank definition of involuntary resettlement is:

“Involuntary resettlement refers to any project which displaces people from land or productive resources, and which results in relocation, the loss of shelter, the loss of assets or access to assets important to production, the loss of income sources or means of livelihoods, or the loss of access to locations that provide higher incomes or lower expenditure to businesses or persons, whether or not the affected people must move to another location[2].”

“Involuntary” means actions that may be taken without the displaced person’s informed consent or power of choice. Resettlement is only voluntary when the affected people have the option to refuse resettlement, and they nevertheless resettle based on informed consent. This free choice needs to be determined by a process of independent verification, and when it cannot be confirmed, resettlement would be treated as involuntary[3].

2.1.2Policy objectives of OP 4.12

The policy objectives of OP4.12 are to:

a)Avoid involuntary resettlement where feasible, exploring all viable alternatives

b)Where not feasible, resettlement must be a sustainable development program, providing investment resources that allow the displaced to benefit

c)The displaced should be meaningfully consulted and have opportunities to plan and implement the resettlement

d)Those displaced should be assisted to improve their standards of living or at least restore them to the levels that existed prior to displacement

Restoration of incomes, the standards of living and the productivity levels of the affected persons constitute the core of the Bank's resettlement policy. Although resettlement programs should be designed to help improve the standards of living and income levels of the affected population, efforts must at least be made to restore them to previous levels. Resettlement planning is one of the main mechanisms through which the World Bank and the partner country work towards ensuring that the incomes of all categories of affected persons are restored after resettlement.

2.1.3 Whom the resettlement policy covers

The policy covers all persons losing land or other assets, use of land, or access to natural resources as a direct result of the project. The policy covers people whose access to resources in adjacent areas is restricted by the establishment of parks or protected areas, where this restriction of access has an adverse affect on their livelihoods.

With regard to land, the policy covers those with secure title and those without. It thus includes landowners, farm workers and occupiers, and people with communal/traditional rights such as people with established occupation and use rights in terms of the Ingonyama Trust Act and the Interim Protection of Informal Rights to Land Act. It does not include persons invading or encroaching upon a site after a determined cut-off date for the Project. [4]

The World Bank’s Involuntary Resettlement Policy emphasises particular attention to the needs of vulnerable groups among those displaced - especially those below the poverty line; the landless, the elderly, women and children, indigenous groups and ethnic minorities.

The Bank Safeguard Policy OP 4.12 applies to all components under the project, whether or not the Bank directly funds them in whole or in part.

2.1.4 The difference between a RPF and PF

OP4.12 differentiates between situations which involve the “involuntary taking of land” (section 3[a]) and the “involuntary restriction of access to legally designated parks and protected areas resulting in adverse impacts on the livelihoods of the displaced persons” (section 3[b]). In situations where section 3(a) occurs, i.e. involuntary physical relocation, and possibly restriction of access linked to such relocation, is involved, a Resettlement Policy Framework is required. Where 3(b) occurs, i.e. involuntary restriction of access without physical relocation, a Process Framework is required.