THE GOVERNMENT OF SIERRA LEONE

RURAL and PRIVATE SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

resettlement policy framework report

Prepared By:

Prof. C. dorm-adzobu

(consultant)

P. o. box lg 185, legon-accra

December 2006

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0INTRODUCTION

1.1Background

1.2Principles and Objectives Governing Resettlement

1.3Project Benefits and Impacts

1.3.1Benefits

1.3.2Impacts

2.0Legal Framework

2.1World Bank Operational Policy (OP 4.12)

3.0Land Acquisition and Compensation Laws in Sierra Leone

3.1Public Lands Ordinance, 1898

3.2Unoccupied Lands Ordinance, 1911

3.3The Concessions Ordinance, 1931

3.4Land Tenure and System of Land Holding

3.5System of Land Holding in the Republic of Sierra Leone

3.6Differences between GOSL Laws and Operational Policy (OP 4:12)

4.0PROJECT DESCRIPTION

4.1Project Components

5.0 CATEGORY OF AFFECTED PERSONS

5.1Eligibility Criteria

5.2Valuation of Properties

5.3Assessment of Compensation

6.0 CONSULTATION, PARTICIPATION AND CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

7.0RESETTLEMENT/COMPENSATION PROCEDURES

8.0INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

9.0IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

10.0MONITORING AND EVALUATION ARRANGEMENTS

10.1Monitoring Objectives

10.2Internal Monitoring and Supervision

10.3Resettlement Monitoring Committee (RMC)

10.4Monitoring Indicators

10.5Ex-post Evaluation

1

1.0INTRODUCTION

Sierra Leone is emerging from a period of post-conflict reconstruction. The conflict which begun in 1991, was largely a response to an environment where poor economic policies and inappropriate governance dominated the political scene. After a decade of civil war, the country was faced with nearly 2 million displaced people, nearly a third of the total population, and the death toll of approximately 20,000. Moreover, the conflict caused the widespread disruption of agriculture and mining activities, in addition to collapse of public services such as health and education.

The Lomé Peace accord of July 1999 brought an era of post conflict reconstruction, where a newly empowered Government spearheaded activities revolving around disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of the country’s ex-combatants. By 2004 the Government had managed to resettle 150,000 internally displaced persons and refugees, disarm 72,000 ex-combatants of which 56,000 were involved in reintegration activities. Perhaps most importantly, the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL), in addressing the country’s security situation deployed an armed force as part of its military component. Such a force, through it’s mandated activities, improved the capacity of both the Sierra Leone Police Forces (SLP) and the Republic of Sierra Leone Armed Forces (RSLAF) that resulted in the stabilization of security throughout the country.

Despite the improved security situation the country still faces significant challenges that could result in a deterioration of the progress made thus far. The high levels of extreme poverty combined with youth unemployment have been highlighted by the United Nations as potential sources of risk. In addition, UNAMSIL’s reduction of its operational forces in 2005 has left the government and its partners in search for security solutions. Addressing food security through the rehabilitation of the country agricultural sector has emerged as a clear objective of the GoSL. The President, Alhaji Dr. Ahmad Tejan-Kabbah declared in May 2002 his pledge to ‘work even harder and with greater resolve, to do everything in [his] power, to ensure that within the next five years, no Sierra Leonean should go to bed hungry.’

The Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL) jointly with International Development Association (IDA) of the World Bank is preparing a Rural and Private Sector Development Project (RPSDP) which is expected to be implemented with funds contributed by GoSL, the IDA and other donors. The proposed outlay is tentatively placed at US$28 million with a five year period of implementation. The objective of the project is to raise rural incomes through improved agricultural exports and farm revenues for project beneficiaries. The project beneficiaries will include the producers, private sector entrepreneurs engaged in trade for domestic and export markets, transporters, agro-processors and other stakeholders connected with the forward and backward linkages of the value chain. Results indicators to be achieved at the end of the five-year project period are an increase in exports (with a target increase of 40%) and an increase in incomes of producers and traders. (50%)

1.1Background

Agro-processing assets were destroyed during the war, it is reported that over 300 rice mills and several oil palm processors were functioning prior to the conflict. Slowly, some processing has been restored though at a fraction of its pre-war capacity while some new processing facilities are gradually emerging. Some of the restored capacity include one small and one medium scale oil palm processing plant, a wheat mill in Freetown, coca bean drying by exporters, large volume “gari” (dehydrated cassava) in small individual processing units, often with rural households, animal feed for poultry and an infant weaning formula. It is envisaged that identifying opportunities for value addition will be an important component of the project design, and that where justified, this will be followed through into project implementation. It is expected that the focus of subsequent investments will be small and medium-sized agro-processing facilities in the core group of products.

The private sector dominates agro-processing in Sierra Leone, although there are two distinct models at present: the medium-sized industry has generally been operated by private sector enterprises such as palm oil processing units with relatively higher capacity machines which usually give better quality product, the small-scale industry is characterized by rural home-based processing e.g. oil extraction with individual extractors, cocoa fermentation and drying by households, and gari production by the farmers in villages with small individual processing units. However in all these individual units, which are highly labor intensive the process is inefficient, potential economies of scale are not realized and quality of products is lower. There is also wastage as, for example palm oil extraction rates are far lower than achieved with machines and automatic presses.

The project intends to support both categories of processors but would pay particular attention to small-scale industry on the presumption that the scale and scope of benefits is broader and/or that there are fewer alternative sources of support compared to enterprise-based processing. Institutional arrangements will receive particular attention. There are lessons in several African countries like Ghana where these individual units have been upgraded under a group of producers who join together to form a processing Farmer Based Organization and buy better machines giving better results and improved returns.

1.2Principles and Objectives Governing Resettlement

The proposed project may result in involuntary movement of people from their present locations. In such an event, the principles and objectives to be observed by the Government of Sierra Leone are as follows:

  1. Involuntary resettlement should be avoided where feasible or minimized, exploring all viable alternative project designs.
  1. Where it is not feasible to avoid resettlement, resettlement activities should be conceived and executed as sustainable development programs, providing sufficient investment resources to enable the persons displaced by the project to share in project benefits. Displaced persons should be meaningfully consulted and should have opportunities to participate in planning and implementing resettlement programs.
  1. 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 beginning of project implementation, whichever is higher.
  1. A resettlement policy framework is required for operations that may entail involuntary resettlement, unless otherwise specified. The framework must estimate, to an extent feasible, the total population to be displaced and the overall resettlement cost.
  1. The borrower is responsible for preparing, implementing and monitoring a resettlement policy framework as appropriate. (OP 4.12)

Since GoSL will use funds from IDA to fund RPSDP it is required by OP4.12 to screen subprojects to ensure their consistency with OP4.12 and submit, prior to appraisal, a resettlement policy framework.

A small amount of resettlement may be involved where the project by itself supports new infrastructure such as key road links not covered by other donors/GoSL. Construction of storages and cold chain, facilitating transportation and marketing shed and other infrastructure at transaction centers may also be required. There may also be innovative small-scale irrigation.

1.3Project Benefits and Impacts

1.3.1Benefits

Benefits for Farmers/Farm Households

  1. Farmers can sell produce at better prices or sell large quantities and improve the overall incomes of the farm households.

2.As access to market information increases farmers’ability to better exploit this knowledge to their benefit. They then become players in a wider market (perhaps the international market), they do not remain the insignificant cog in the wheel exploited by those who have access to the wider markets.

3.As their technical knowledge base improves, they will be able to produce better quality produce, all year round; this will guarantee them a steady income.

4.Information required for farmers and other stakeholders to improve their activities and businesses will be available at district level. This improves quality of life for farmers at all levels of the strata.

5.Information required to support production, processing, marketing will be available to farmers.

6.Access to credit for agriculture will improve.

Benefits for Consumers

1.Variety of choice available to consumers will be wider.

2.Higher production levels will make selected crops more available to consumers, this will ultimately result in cheaper food and better nutrition.

Benefits to the Wider Society

1.Collaboration between key ministries will improve quality of data available for project design, planning, monitoring and evaluation in those ministries and the economy at large

2.The project will give an opportunity for capacity building of officers in these key ministries and other agencies involved in the project planning, design and implementation.

1.3.2Impacts

Impact on Health and Safety

  • Increased traffic could result in increased pollution from exhaust fumes.
  • Increase in exhaust fumes, noise and dust could result in related diseases. (e.g. increase in respiratory conditions like asthma and upper respiratory infections) Increased noise is known to cause physiological problems that result in sleeplessness, irritability, levels of deafness and headaches.
  • Possible increase in vehicular accidents could be the result of increased traffic.
  • The location of a market in a given area could also increase pressure on existing sanitary facilities or result in pollution of environmentally sensitive areas like wetlands with refuse or human waste, and poor management of waste is known to increase the incidence of diseases like typhoid, diarrhoea, and malaria.
  • Poor management of waste could also result in foul smells and increase in pest infestation like rodents, cockroaches and houseflies which are a nuisance.

Impact on landuse

  • Rehabilitation of old markets and development of new ones could result in land take and change in adjacent land use as transport terminals and refuse dumps develop close to markets

Impact on the Biophysical

  • Use of unsuitable refrigerants could result in green house gases that would aggravate global warming.
  • Poor wastewater management could result in pollution of streams, rivers and other surface water bodies that most rural communities depend on for drinking water.
  • Introduction of new crops and improved seeds and varieties could result in infestation of new crop pests and diseases.
  • Development of irrigation systems may result in water borne diseases (e.g. shistomiasis) in places where they did not originally exist.
  • Irrigation is known to result in increased levels of salinity in soils, which could lead to low levels of crop production.

Impact on Communities in Project Area

  • Influx of migrant labour into areas where agriculture has been boosted can result in social problems among migrant labour and local people. Experience has shown that strangers who move into communities to which they do not belong can create problems because they do not feel inclined to live according to the ways of the communities that receive them. They may also introduce practices that are alien to the recipient community.
  • A higher per centage of men migrate away from home in search of jobs, so it is likely that most migrant labor will be made up of single men who will need sexual partners. Since in Africa most HIV/AIDS is spread through heterosexual sex, there could be an increase in the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and HIV/AIDS.

Impact of Involuntary resettlement

  • If land has to be acquired for construction of roads, markets, cold storage and other infrastructure, persons who originally lived, used or depended on those lands for their livelihood may be displaced and may have to be resettled.

2.0Legal Framework

2.1World Bank Operational Policy (OP 4.12)

This OP is on involuntary resettlement and applies to all projects for which a Project concept review takes place on or after January 1, 2002.

The OP acknowledges that:

‘’……….. 2. Development projects that displace people involuntarily generally give rise to severe economic, social, and environmental problems: production systems are dismantled; productive assets and income sources are lost; people are relocated to environments where their productive skills may be less applicable and the competition for resources greater; community structures and social networks are weakened; kin groups are dispersed; and cultural identity, traditional authority, and the potential for mutual help are diminished. Involuntary resettlement may cause severe long-term hardship, impoverishment, and environment damage unless appropriate measures are carefully planned and carried out”.

Policy Objectives

3.The objective of the Bank’s resettlement policy is to ensure that population displaced by a project receives benefits from it. Involuntary resettlement is an integral part of project design and should be dealt with from the earliest stages of project preparation (Para. 28), taking into account the following policy considerations:

(a) Involuntary resettlement should be avoided or minimized where feasible, exploring all viable alternative project designs. For example, realignment of roads or reductions in dam height may significantly reduce resettlement needs.

(b) Where displacement is unavoidable, resettlement plans should be developed. All involuntary resettlement should be conceived and executed as development programs, with resettlers provided sufficient investment resources and opportunities to share in project benefits. Displaced persons should be (i) compensated for their losses at full replacement cost prior to the actual move; (ii) assisted with the move and supported during the transition period in the resettlement site, and (iii) assisted in their efforts to improve their former living standards, income earning capacity, and production levels, or at least to restore them. Particular attention should be paid to the needs of the poorest groups to be resettled.

(c) Community participation in planning and implementing resettlement should be encouraged. Appropriate patterns of social organization should be established, and existing social and cultural institutions of resettlers and their hosts should be supported and used to the greatest extent possible.

(d) Resettlers should be integrated socially and economically into host communities so that adverse impacts on host communities are minimized. The best way of achieving this integration is for resettlement to be planned in areas benefiting from the project and through consultation with the future hosts.

(e) Land, housing, infrastructure, and other compensation should be provided to the adversely affected population, indigenous groups,ethnic minorities, and pastoralists who may have usufruct or customary rights to the land or other resources taken for the project. The absence of legal title of land by such groups should not be a bar to compensation.

Resettlement Planning

4.Where large-scalepopulation displacement is unavoidable, a detailed resettlement plan, timetable, and budget are required. Resettlement plans should be built around a development strategy and package aimed at improving or at least restoring the economic base for those relocated. Experience indicates that cash compensation alone is normally inadequate. Voluntary settlement may form part of a resettlement plan, provided measures to address the special circumstances of involuntary resettlers are included. Preference should be given to land-based resettlement strategies for people dislocated from agricultural settings. If suitable land is unavailable, non land-based strategies built around opportunities for employment or self-employment may be used ‘’.

  • The revision of Engineering study and design that determined the extent and alignment of road ;
  • Executive instrument that acquired additional land for the road expansion that has affected the various properties in the corridor;
  • The EIA and SIA studies ;
  • The property impact survey that identified affected properties.

Thereis also the need to identify the agency responsible for the disbursement of supplemental assistance and compensation to those who need to relocate,since it is on its account that the “Land Valuation Board” or the relevant institution would assess and process properties for payment.

The Sierra Leone Raod Authority (SLRA) would therefore be directly responsible for ensuring that everyone entitled to supplemental assistance is paid and every property affected is assessed and paid for.

The SLRA will work in collaboration with the utility companies through a sub-committee set up under the auspices of the SLRA.

To ensure that project-affected-persons (PAP) properties are reconnected, the SLRA through the committee will liaise with utility companies on behalf of property owners to ensure that electricity, water supply or telephone is not denied those who had access before. Only persons working in the project areas need to be catered for.

As part of project implementation, the Project Implementation Unit (PIU) will set up a desk that will receive and respond to complaints concerning resettlement compensation and construction.

3.0Land Acquisition and Compensation Laws in Sierra Leone

3.1Public Lands Ordinance, 1898

Under the Public Lands Ordinance Law the Government of Sierra Leone can acquire any land in the public interest simply by publishing a declaration in the Gazette and informing the owners of the land accordingly. The Ordinance also provides for payment of compensation to the affected by the declaration. The provision of the Ordinance does not apply to the Provinces where most of the project activities are likely to be located.