public disclosure authorized - world bankdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/...comprehensive...

Comprehensive Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) Completion Report for the OPRC Project Final

Report

i

Document Details

Document Name Final Report-RAP Completion Report for OPRC Project

Document Version Number 1

Document Owner Roads Department

Issue Date 7th February 2019

Prepared by Keamogetse Mogae

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized


Report

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Background to the Project ............................................................................................. 1

1.2 Description of the Project and Corridor of Impact ....................................................... 1

1.3 Nature, Rationale and Purpose of the study .................................................................. 3

1.3.1 Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................... 3

1.3.2 Rationale and nature of the assignment ............................................................ 3

1.4 Scope of services .......................................................................................................... 3

1.5 Summary of Approach and Method .............................................................................. 4

1.5.1 Desktop review ................................................................................................. 4

1.5.2 Sampling Method – Multi Stage Sampling Technique ..................................... 4

1.5.3 Interviews .......................................................................................................... 5

1.5.4 Field surveys ..................................................................................................... 5

2 COMPLIANCE WITH RAP ............................................................................................................ 6

2.1 Legal and Entitlement Policy Framework .................................................................... 6

2.1.1 Relevant Legislation ......................................................................................... 6

i. Tribal Land Act of 1968 ......................................................................................... 6

ii. Tribal Land (Amendment) Act (Cap.32:02 of 1993) ............................................. 6

iii. Environmental Assessment Act of (2011) ............................................................ 6

iv. Monuments and Relics Act 2001 ......................................................................... 7

2.1.2 Relevant Policies ............................................................................................... 7

v. Planning and Environmental Impact Assessment of Road

Infrastructure, Guideline No. 5 of September 2001 ..................................................... 7

vi. Ministry of Land Management, Water and Sanitation Services-Compensation

Guidelines ..................................................................................................................... 8

a. Land Rights and Entitlements ................................................................................ 8

b. Land Acquisition Procedures ............................................................................... 10

c. Eligibility Criteria for Entitlements ..................................................................... 13

d. Methods of Valuing, and Validating the Census of Affected Assets Section ...... 15

e. Organizational Procedures for Delivery of Entitlement ....................................... 16

vii. World Bank OP 4.12.......................................................................................... 17

2.2 Definition of PAPs and Eligibility Criteria ................................................................. 18


Report

iii

2.2.1 Definition of PAPs .......................................................................................... 18

2.2.2 Eligibility Criteria ........................................................................................... 19

2.3 Description and Results of Public Consultation ......................................................... 20

2.3.1 Review of Consultation Process ..................................................................... 20

2.3.2 Consultation with PAPs .................................................................................. 21

2.3.3 Plans for Continued Participation of PAPs ..................................................... 22

3 OUTCOMES OF RAP IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................... 23

3.1 Project Impacts and Need for Resettlement ................................................................ 23

3.1.1 Census and Survey Results ............................................................................. 23

3.2 Compensation and Remedial Measures ...................................................................... 30

3.2.1 Adequacy of Remedial Measures ................................................................... 31

3.2.2 Cut-off Date versus Compensation ................................................................. 32

3.3 Has RAP Implementation Accounted for Actual Livelihood Impact ......................... 33

3.3.1 Socio-economic conditions of PAPs before RAP implementation ................. 33

3.3.2 Socio-economic conditions of PAPs after RAP implementation .................... 35

3.3.3 Impact of the Project on the Poor and Vulnerable Groups ............................. 36

3.4 Grievance and Redress Mechanism ............................................................................ 37

3.4.1 Grievance Handling Processes ........................................................................ 37

3.4.2 Alternative Grievance Handling Mechanisms ................................................ 38

3.4.3 The Nature of Grievances ............................................................................... 39

3.5 RAP Implementation .................................................................................................. 40

3.5.1 Adequacy of RAP Implementation Budget .................................................... 40

3.5.2 Schedule, Monitoring and Responsibility of Tasks ........................................ 41

3.6 Institutional Arrangements.......................................................................................... 42

3.6.1 Capacity of Implementing Agency ................................................................. 42

3.6.2 Personnel for Delivering Entitlements ............................................................ 43

3.6.3 Plans to Build Institutional Capacity .............................................................. 43

3.7 Constraints, Issues and Delays encountered during the RAP Implementation ........... 43

4 MITIGATION PLAN FOR IDENTIFIED GAPS .......................................................................... 44

5 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................................. 45

5.1 Study Limitations and Challenges .............................................................................. 45


Report

iv

5.2 Overall assessment of Completion of Implementation ............................................... 45

5.2.1 Adequacy of Remedial Measures ................................................................... 45

5.2.2 Adequacy of Compensation ............................................................................ 46

5.2.3 Inclusion of Communities and PAPs in the Process ....................................... 46

5.2.4 Access to Grievance Redress Mechanism ...................................................... 46

5.2.5 Adequacy of Institutional Arrangements and Procedures ............................... 46

5.2.6 Issuance of amended certificates..................................................................... 47

NB: Some PAPs had registered more than one affected property. ............................. 47

5.2.7 Final Cost Versus Budget for RAP and Justification ...................................... 47

5.2.8 Change in PAPS and Justification .................................................................. 47

5.2.9 Estimate of Total Land Acquisition ................................................................ 48

5.2.10 Overall Assessment of Livelihood Impact .................................................... 48

5.2.11 Assessment of Temporary Impact Related to Construction .......................... 48

5.3 Overall conclusion ...................................................................................................... 49

6 LESSONS LEARNT ...................................................................................................................... 50

List of Tables

Table 1: Villages in the Study Area / Affected Villages ......................................................................... 5

Table 2: Comments on adherence of Land Acquisition Procedures ..................................................... 11

Table 3: Eligibility Criteria for Entitlements ........................................................................................ 13

Table 4: Information about Rights and Options .................................................................................... 22

Table 5: Awareness to Engage Valuation Professionals ....................................................................... 22

Table 6: Opportunity to Make Claim for Properties ............................................................................. 22

Table 7: Land use and Number of Affected Plots for Package 1 .......................................................... 23

Table 8: Land use and Number of Affected Plots for Package 2 .......................................................... 24

Table 9: Affected Archaeological Sites for Package 1 ......................................................................... 26

Table 10: Affected Sites of Social Significance for Package 1 ............................................................ 27

Table 11: Affected Archaeological Sites for Package 2 ....................................................................... 27

Table 12: Affected Sites of Social Significance ................................................................................... 27

Table 13: Status of PAPs with respect to road realignment .................................................................. 30


Report

v

Table 14: Main Sources of households'monthly income ...................................................................... 34

Table 15: Monthly household income in the study area, 2018 ............................................................. 34

Table 16: Summary of grievances and how they were addressed......................................................... 39

Table 17: Adequacy of Budget for Package 1 ...................................................................................... 40

Table 18: Adequacy of Budget for Package 2 ...................................................................................... 40

Table 19: Schedule of Tasks ................................................................................................................. 41

Table 20: Comments and Observations for Adherence to Schedule ..................................................... 41

Table 21: Constraints, Issues and delays encountered during RAP Implementation ............................ 43

Table 22: Mitigation Plan for Identified Gaps ...................................................................................... 44

Table 23: Status of Amended Certificates ............................................................................................ 47

Table 24: Status of PAPs with respect to road realignment .................................................................. 48

List of Figures

Figure 1: Road Sections for OPRC Package 1 ........................................................................................ 2

Figure 2: Road Sections for OPRC Package 2 ........................................................................................ 2

Figure 3: Road alignment in Selokolela ................................................................................................ 28

Figure 4: Road alignment in Sese ......................................................................................................... 28

Figure 5: Road alignment in Mmakgori ................................................................................................ 29

Figure 6: Road alignment in Tlhareseleele ........................................................................................... 29

Figure 7: Road alignment in Rakhuna .................................................................................................. 29

Figure 8: Adequacy of Compensation .................................................................................................. 31

Figure 9: Livelihood Impacts of RAP ................................................................................................... 35

Figure 10: Household Headship and Source of Income........................................................................ 36

Figure 11: Alternative Grievance Handling Mechanisms ..................................................................... 38


Report

vi

List of Appendices

Appendix 1: Frequencies of data collected

Appendix 2: Crosstabulations of data collected

Appendix 3: Project Affected Persons Written Consent Form

Appendix 4: Assessment Reports

Appendix 5: Form I-Notice to Treat

Appendix 6: Minutes of meetings with stakeholders

Appendix 7: Questionnaire for Project team

Appendix 8: Proof of Payment

Appendix 9: Inspection Report (Buildings)-Form 2

Appendix 9: Comments Response Sheets


Report

vii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

AIA Archaeological Impact Assessment

AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

DEA Department of Environmental Affairs

DLUPU District Land Use Planning Unit

EA Act Environmental Assessment Act

ESIA Environment and Social Impact Assessment

GoB Government of Botswana

HIV Human Immuno deficiency Virus

ITP Integrated Transport Project

km Kilometre

NDP National Development Plan

OPRC Output and Performance Based Road Contracting

PAP Project Affected Persons

RAP Resettlement Action Plan

RD Roads Department

RPF Resettlement Policy Framework

WB World Bank


Report

1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Project

The Government of Botswana (GoB) has implemented Integrated Transport Project (ITP) which

included, as one of the components, piloting of Output and Performance Based Road Contracting

(OPRC) on a 336 km road network. The co-funding agreement between GoB and the World Bank

(WB) envisaged implementing the project according to the Laws of Botswana and the WB guidelines

with respect to Project Affected Persons (PAPs).

Roads Department (RD) has implemented two Resettlement Action Plans (RAP) as per requirements

of the World Bank. The RAPs were required because the road rehabilitation works involved widening

of the road and upgrading some road sections from gravel to bitumen standard. This widening and

upgrading of the road required land-take from existing properties in order to meet the desired road

design width. These existing properties included: ploughing fields, residential properties, and other

assets in the right-of-way of the road within the road network. Owners of the properties were

consulted and following consultation, assessment of the properties was done by the Land Board in

conjunction with Roads Department upon which a comprehensive report was compiled by

Department of Lands, in the Ministry of Land Management, Water and Sanitation Services. Upon

agreement of assessed compensation, the owners were compensated either in cash or by providing

alternative land to an equal or higher value.

In accordance with the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), an independent evaluation of the

implementation of RAPs for Packages 1 and 2 is a requirement. Hence this RAP Completion report

for the OPRC Project. The RAPs, the addenda to the RAPs and the RAP completion report are

government reports adhering to World Bank OP.

1.2 Description of the Project and Corridor of Impact

The OPRC activities were organized in two packages:

1. The OPRC Package 1 constitutes: Road Works _Contract under (OPRC) (Asset Management

Contract) for Design Rehabilitation/Improvement, Routine and Periodic Maintenance Works. The

Main Road Sections (123.5km) are: Mmankgodi Junc – Kanye – Jwaneng, while Access Roads

(52.5 km) are: Kanye road, Moshana road, Selokolela road, Sesung road, Sese road, Lotlhakane

West road, Moshupa loop road and Moshupa Kgotla road as in Figure 1.


Report

2

Figure 1: Road Sections for OPRC Package 1

2. The OPRC Package 2 constituted: Road Works _Contract under (OPRC) (Asset Management

Contract) for Design Rehabilitation/Improvement, Routine and Periodic Maintenance Works. The

Main Road Sections (144 km) are: Rakhuna – Tlhareseleele - Pitsane – Phitshane Molopo –

Mabule while the Access Roads (15.9 km) are: Rakhuna Kgotla, Tlhareseleele Kgotla, Pitsane

Kgotla, Cwaanyaneng Kgotla, Tswagare Kgotla, Mokgomane Kgotla, Sedibeng Kgotla, Phitshane

Molopo Kgotla, Leporung Kgotla, Dikhukhung Kgotla, Mmakgori Kgotla, Tshidilamolomo

Kgotla and Mabule Kgotla as in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Road Sections for OPRC Package 2


Report

3

1.3 Nature, Rationale and Purpose of the study

1.3.1 Purpose of the Study

The overall purpose of the study is to undertake an independent evaluation of the Resettlement Action

Plans for Packages 1 and 2 in order to determine whether the efforts to restore the living standards of

the affected populations have been properly designed and executed. This independent evaluation is a

requirement under the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF). As per the RPF, the Roads Department

controls the implementation of the OPRC activities throughout the project life span.

1.3.2 Rationale and nature of the assignment

1. The Completion Report of the RAP is intended to document the benefits that the Project

Affected Persons (PAPs) and communities along this corridor have received to improve their

livelihoods as a direct result of the implementation of the RAP in particular, and the road

rehabilitation project in general.

2. The primary aim of this RAP Completion Report is to undertake an independent review of the

process and outputs of the resettlement compensation/rehabilitation activities under the

project. The completion report highlights the positive and negative impacts the RAP

implementation may have had on PAPs and communities along the OPRC road network. It

looks at the living condition of those PAPs and communities along the road network before

and after the project implementation with specific focus on demographic trends, livelihood

structure, pattern of social interaction and community organization, and the existence and

functioning of social networks and support systems.

1.4 Scope of services

The scope of the exercise is as follows:

i. Review RAP and associated implementation reports;

ii. Undertake site visits to consult PAPs, Grievance Committees and project team to fulfil the

requirements of the assignment;

iii. Determine that affected persons have been fully and fairly compensated in accordance with

Botswana laws and policies and in compliance with World Bank guidelines and standards,

which require that full replacement cost is paid for all assets taken by the project;

iv. Ascertain that documentary evidence exists in support of adequate compensation for Project

Affected Persons claims or entitlements to the land, structures and other assets

v. Review the RAP Grievance Redress Mechanism and how effective it has been during the

implementation;

vi. Indicators should include, but not be limited to the following: category of property

acquisitions, rate of rebuilding new structures, quality of homes, access to public and social

services including markets, health, water supply and education, and other economic

development opportunities in the RAP area; travel time along the corridor, social interaction


Report

4

and organization, and any other indicator pertaining to the individual and community social,

economic and physical status and well-being;

vii. Prepare partial action plans for redress should there be instances of inadequate compensations

or PAPs who were not compensated during RAP implementation and;

viii. Compile a consolidated report consisting of partial reports prepared earlier for some sections

of the roads.

ix. Draw out lessons and provide recommendations for improvements in the future resettlement

efforts.

1.5 Summary of Approach and Method

1.5.1 Desktop review

Amongst the documents reviewed to guide the study were the following;

• Resettlement Policy Framework

• Resettlement Action Plans for Packages 1 and 2

• World Bank Safeguard Policies OP 4.12

• Ministry of Lands and Housing Compensation Guidelines, 2010

• Tribal Land Act of 1968

• Tribal Land (Amendment) Act (Cap.32:02 of 1993)

• Environmental Assessment Act of (2011)

• Monuments and Relics Act, 2001

• Planning and Environmental Impact Assessment of Road Infrastructure, Guideline No. 5 of

September 2001

1.5.2 Sampling Method – Multi Stage Sampling Technique

Given the nature of the assignment, probability sampling method was considered appropriate. We

have adopted Multi Stage Sampling technique for this study whereby we combined clustering and

simple random sampling. The total number of PAPs (220) became the population for the study while

Packages 1 and 2 became the sampling frame. A total of 14 villages (from both packages) became

clusters from which the samples were selected. Within each cluster (village) we have selected a

simple random sample of 25%, giving each respondent an equal opportunity of being selected. Out of

the 5 villages for Package 1 and 9 villages for Package 2, a total of 60 PAPs were selected. A sample

of 25% is considered statistically significant and representative.


Report

5

1.5.3 Interviews

A questionnaire (containing both closed and open-ended questions) was designed to guide the

interviews with the PAPs. The interviews were conducted with the 60 PAPs that made up the sample.

Another questionnaire was designed to guide focus group discussions with the members of the

grievance committees. Where the grievance committees did not exist (though they were established at

the beginning of the project), the interviews were held with the chiefs as some community members

were said to have reported their grievances to the chief in the absence of functional grievance

committees. Lastly, face to face interviews with the project team and government institutions (Land

Boards, Department of Lands) were conducted.

1.5.4 Field surveys

Site visits to all project villages were undertaken first for reconnaissance and later for ground

truthing/verification of affected properties. The villages that were visited are as follows;

Table 1: Villages in the Study Area / Affected Villages

Package 1 Villages Package 2 Villages

Lotlhakane West Rakhuna

Moshupa Tlhareseleele

Moshana Pitsane

Selokolela Phitshane Molopo

Sesung Leporung

Sese Dikhukhung

Mmakgori

Tshidilamolomo

Mabule


Report

6

2 Compliance with RAP

2.1 Legal and Entitlement Policy Framework

2.1.1 Relevant Legislation

i. Tribal Land Act of 1968

Under this Act, the Land Board was established as an institution for managing all tribal/customary

land. The Land Board grants customary land rights to citizens of Botswana. The Land Board also

leases land under common law forms of tenure. Part V of the Act specifically addresses procedures

for dealing with the application of expropriation for tribal land required for public purposes. Section

32 of the Tribal Land Act provides that land may be granted to the state for public purposes only if the

president determines that the purpose for which it is acquired is in the interest of the public. The

President possesses power of the eminent domain for expropriation of land. The president may

acquire any real (immovable) property where the acquisition of such is necessary for public purposes.

Section 33 (2) of the Tribal Land Act (1968) provides that compensation is payable when land is

acquired for a project and the acquiring body is financially responsible for all aspects of the project;

this includes payment for compensation to claimants. The displaced person may be granted the right

to use other land if available and is entitled to adequate compensation.

In accordance with this Act, Roads Department approached Ngwaketse and Rolong Land Boards

through respective Sub Land Boards to seek servitudes for their proposed road alignments. The

respective land authorities (Sub Land Boards) consequently constituted compensation assessment

committees for purposes of assessment and valuation of affected properties. Following approval of the

valuation reports, PAPs were compensated in accordance with the compensation guidelines and

eligibility requirements.

ii. Tribal Land (Amendment) Act (Cap.32:02 of 1993)

The Act allows for determination of land use zones in tribal areas. According to the Act, a Land

Board shall after due consultation with the District Council determine and define land use

zones within a tribal area. The Land Board shall not make grants of land for any use which is in

conflict with the use for which land is zoned. Land Boards may determine management plans for use

and development of the zones.

In both Packages 1 and 2, all the affected properties were in conformity with the zoning requirements of

the land authorities (Sub Land Boards). Hence, there were no land use conflicts.

iii. Environmental Assessment Act of (2011)

The EA Act provides for Environmental Impact Assessments to be used to assess the potential effects

of planned development activities; to determine and to provide mitigation measures for effects of such

activities as may have a significant adverse impact on the environment; to put in place a monitoring

process and evaluation of the environmental impacts of implemented activities; and to provide for

matters incidental to the foregoing. Only after the competent authority, the DEA, has approved the

Environmental Impact Statement can the project proceed.


Report

7

For the undertaking of environmental studies in compliance with the EA Act (2011), the

Environmental Assessment Guidelines (2012) have been developed. These guidelines clearly outline

the activities to be undertaken during each of the assessment stages, as well as the information and

format to be submitted to the DEA for review.

In fulfilment of the EA Act, the Roads Department commissioned an EIA for the proposed project.

The EIA process considered the pre-construction, construction and post construction impacts and

mitigations. The EIA reports for the 2 packages were subsequently prepared and approved by the

competent authority (Department of Environmental Affairs) thus paving way for the project. The

Environmental Management Plan is currently being implemented through the road construction

contractor.

iv. Monuments and Relics Act 2001

All archaeological sites and to some extent historic sites are protected under the Monuments and

Relics Act (2001). This Act requires that Archaeological Impact Assessment (AIA) is undertaken for

all major development projects and that a Development Permit is obtained from the National Museum

before any construction can take place. Section 18 prohibits any alteration, damage or removal from

original site of any national monument, relic or recent artefacts. Section 19 of the Act provides for

pre-development archaeological impact assessments and mitigation where planned developments are

likely to disturb the earth s surface.

In adherence to the requirements of this Act, an AIA was undertaken and development permit issued

by the competent authority (Department of National Museum and Monuments) thus paving way for

construction.

2.1.2 Relevant Policies

v. Planning and Environmental Impact Assessment of Road

Infrastructure, Guideline No. 5 of September 2001

The guideline is used as a guide in the planning and EIA of linear developments, with particular

reference to roads. All road project impacts are included in the assessments, both monetary and non-

monetary. All significant impacts are described and discussed in order to optimize the benefits of the

roads and minimize the adverse effects. The planning and construction of roads is guided by a 5-year

National Development Plan (NDP), outlining projects that are to be undertaken during the period of

the plan. The guideline sees consultation as necessary for ensuring that the road network is planned

and implemented in an accountable and transparent manner.

The EIA process considered the requirements as outlined in this guideline and key amongst them

being consultations. Public meetings and invitations for public review were advertised in the print

media as required by the EA Act. Proceedings for such meetings are presented in the reports.


Report

8

vi. Ministry of Land Management, Water and Sanitation Services-

Compensation Guidelines

The compensation guidelines are in line with the Tribal Land Act of 1968 and deals with both

customary land rights and common law grants. The compensation guidelines were prepared by the

Department of Lands in 1977 and revised in 2010. There are three (3) main categories of land in

Botswana: customary, freehold and state land. Customary land is administered by the Land Boards

and covers over 70% of the total land area.

Freehold land is administered by the Department of Lands through the Attorney Generals Chambers

which is responsible for all land transactions. Freehold land entitles the landholder to perpetual and

exclusive rights to land and constitutes 5% of the total land area in the country. State land is

administered by the Department of Lands and makes up 25% of the land area and comprises National

Parks and Wildlife Management Areas (19.4%), Forest Reserves (1%) and all urban land (4.6%).

a. Land Rights and Entitlements

Compensation for tribal land is considered under two categories:

• Customary Land Rights

• Common Law Land Rights

Customary Land Rights Regarding customary land the displaced people are entitled to adequate

compensation for the following, where applicable:

• The value of any standing crops taken over by the state

• The value of any improvements effected to such land, including the value of any clearing or

preparation of land for agricultural or other purposes

• The costs of resettlement, and

• The loss of the right of user of such land

NB: The last bullet above refers to where no alternative land is identified or any portion of land

taken cannot be replaced. Compensation shall include the value equivalent to loss of right to use

that land.

From the valuation reports, it is evident that Roads Department adhered to the compensation

requirements under customary land rights. It is however noted that there were no standing crops

affected and no loss of right of user. Compensations in both Packages 1 and 2 were made to PAPs

for:

• Agricultural land and associated developments

• Developed and undeveloped residential plots

• Church land

• Grave yard land


Report

9

• Fenced kraal land

• Affected trees

• Infrastructures

Common Law Land Rights When dealing with leases, there may be complications arising due to the

following factors;

• The lease being registered

• The lease being mortgaged

• Subletting of one or more portions of leased property

• The disruption or closure of business operations

NB Where there are complications, such cases are referred to the Department of Lands.

Acquisition procedures in the case of leased properties are as follows:

• The Land Board acquires vacant possession and negotiates the best price. Where the occupier

agrees and there is no burden to personal interest, compensation would follow

• The Land Board may use its powers under the lease to permit construction of pipelines, power

lines, roads, drains etc. for public purposes. Compensation is paid only for direct damage to

improvements, nuisance and for any land taken for the above servitudes and cannot be

replaced

• The Land Board may exercise its right to terminate the lease as provided for in the lease

agreement in which case adequate compensation is payable.

Other Cases. Where fixed costs which are compensated can in fact be salvaged and transported to

the alternative site, then removal costs shall be payable based on the actual costs incurred or 10% of

the total compensation sum per affected household, taking the higher value.

In the case of existing business operations, the following situations are also covered:

• Loss of goodwill

• Injurious affection and severance where access or other conditions are changed

• The loss sustained by reason of moving to an alternative site (disturbance)

There is evidence that Roads Department adhered to the requirements as per common law rights. A

case in point is a brick yard business in Moshana where a portion of land was taken and the screen

wall destroyed. Another case is a general dealer at Tlhareseleele where only portion of land taken and

fence affected. As for both properties there was no loss of goodwill, no injurious and severance as

access and other conditions were not changed, the compensation only considered loss of land and

damage to the screen walls.


Report

10

b. Land Acquisition Procedures

When government or a statutory body undertakes a project, which is of national importance and the

only land suitable for that project is already occupied, the President shall determine in accordance

with Section 32 of the Tribal land Act that it is in the public interest that the land be acquired for the

project. When such land is taken, compensation is payable as per Section 32 (2) of the Tribal Land

Act. The Acquiring body is responsible for aspects of the project including payment of compensation

direct to the claimants. National projects include new airports, power stations, dams, schools, roads,

village expansions etc.

The compensation guidelines require that the acquiring body informs the relevant Land Board of its

intention at least six months prior to commencement of the project, both of which shall consult the

affected parties as appropriate and specified in the guidelines.

The required consultation shall involve the District Land Use Planning Unit (DLUPU), District

Council, as well as Department of Environmental Affairs (formerly National Conservation Strategy

Unit). In accordance with the guidelines, the Land Board shall in the case of big projects insist that an

Environmental Impact Study be commissioned to assess the project’s implications. The results of the

study are to be used as a factor in deciding the nature of the development and enable the Land Board

to state the appropriate conditions under which the application may be approved. The identification of

amelioration measures to overcome the suggested impacts should be included in a programme for

compensation.

In the event of acquisition of already occupied tribal land, Regulation 15 of the Tribal Land

Regulations of 1970 is invoked. The acquiring authority with the assistance of the Land Board, make

reasonable effort to identify and contact all occupiers within the zoned land. If deemed necessary, the

Land Board shall request for a kgotla (community) meeting to advise the people of the scheme and

their rights.

The views of the affected communities are documented to ensure that they are taken into

consideration when a decision to implement the project is made. Using an Environmental Impact

Study, DLUPU or the National Steering Committee should give an early recommendation, in

principle, to the Land Board, which then forms the basis of subsequent detailed recommendations.

Once it has been decided to proceed with the project the compensation assessment committee

conducts a physical inspection recording all the details of all improvements to the land and any other

fixed assets affected within the zoned area. The inspection report is the basis upon which

compensation is assessed. The assessment committee invites the various affected occupiers to submit

any additional or counter claims for their improvements if they so wish. Some claimants may engage

the services of professionals and should be given time to do so. The compensation assessment

committee then meets to discuss and agree on the appropriate rates of compensation.


Report

11

Compensation rates are reviewed yearly and for improvements they are based on depreciated

replacement value. Where only part of the land is required and the part remaining cannot be used by

itself because of size, access or negative impact of the project, the assessment report gives full details

as the acquiring authority may be required to take the whole land and pay compensation for

improvements.

The Land Board should consider the compensation assessment and submit its recommendations to the

Department of Lands for checking and adjustment where necessary. The Department of Lands then

advises the acquiring authority of the approved report. The acquiring authority then immediately

releases payment directly to claimants. In the case of emergencies, an order is issued by the Minister of

Lands and Housing to the effect that people should vacate their land before compensation is paid with

commitment by the acquiring authority for full compensation at a subsequent date with interest. In the

event of the applicants being dissatisfied with the compensation assessment, they are advised to appeal

to the Minister of Lands and Housing who may then appoint an arbitrator in accordance with section 25

(2) of the Tribal Land Act, Cap. 32:02. The claimants have the right to take the appeal to Court if they

so wish.

NB Section 40 of the Tribal Land (Amendment) Act of 1993 provides for the establishment of the

Land Tribunal to assume the responsibility of the Minister in adjudicating on these appeals.

Table 2: Comments on adherence of Land Acquisition Procedures

Summary of Land Acquisition Procedures Comments on adherence

RD to inform Land Board of intended project

within 6 months.

Land Boards have confirmed that they were

informed (see interaction with Mr. Morokotso of

Moshupa Sub Land Board). That was the

beginning of their involvement in the project and

indeed the entire compensation process was

handled by the respective Land Boards.

RD and Land Board to consult affected parties This was done even though in some villages there

was no representation from the Land Board (for

example; Moshupa, Sese, Sesung, Selokolela and

Lotlhakane West villages for Package 1). For

Package 2, there is no record of participation by

either Roads Department or Land Board. Only the

EIA consultant and the contractor’s representative

were involved.

Document views of communities The views of communities were documented for

both Packages 1 and 2 in all the affected villages

(Appendix 3 of the RAP reports).


Report

12


Constitute grievance redress committees This was done for both packages in all the

affected villages (Chapter 14 and Appendix 3 of

the RAP reports)

Land Board to request RD for an EIA EIA for both packages was prepared and

approved by DEA.

Constitute compensation assessment committee

and conduct physical inspection of affected

properties

The Land Board has a standing compensation

assessment committee. Physical inspection of

affected properties was undertaken by the

assessment committee led by a valuer.

Compensation assessment committee to advise

PAPs on their rights to submit additional or

counter claims

Interactions with Land Board and Department of

Lands revealed that the committee advised PAPs

of their rights verbally as they do not have a

formal notification instrument (see interactions

with Department of Lands and Land Board).

Advise PAPs of their right to engage valuation

professionals

Interactions with Land Board and Department of

Lands revealed that the committee advised PAPs

of their rights verbally as they do not have a

formal notification instrument (see interactions

with Department of Lands and Land Board). RD

also confirmed that communication of the right of

PAPs to engage valuation professionals was not

documented but those who were not satisfied by

Land Board valuations were verbally advised to

seek third party assistance (Question 13 of the

Project team questionnaire).

Submit valuation reports to Department of Lands

for verification

Even though there is no record of submission of

valuation reports from Land Board to Department

of Lands, savingrams from Department of Lands

to Land Board reveal that there was formal

communication from Department of Lands to

Land Board about approval of the compensation

reports as well as from the Land Board to Roads

Department for release of payments to claimants.


Report

13


Inform RD and Land Board of approved valuation

reports

Available documents (Savingrams) in the RAP

reports reveal that there was formal

communication from Department of Lands to

Land Board about approval of the compensation

reports as well as from the Land Board to Roads

Department for release of payments to claimants.

Release of payments directly to PAPs within 3

months of assessment

Release of payments to some of the PAPs within

3 months was not achieved hence the

compensation amounts were adjusted upwards by

5% in accordance with the guidelines (see

Appendix 4: Assessment reports).

Inform claimants of their rights to appeal to

Minister of Lands and Housing or Land Tribunal

if not satisfied with the valuation

Discussion with the Land Board revealed that this

was done verbally when payments were released

to claimants.

c. Eligibility Criteria for Entitlements

Table 3: Eligibility Criteria for Entitlements

Category of PAP Type of Loss Eligibility Entitlements

Business Owner

Loss of Land Holder of a Title, Lease holder

Compensation at

current Market Price

Compensation at full

replacement cost

value, mobility,

allowance and

disturbance

Loss of Structure

Building permit, structure

drawings, Three neighbor

witnesses and Photographs (of

informal properties)

Compensation for

missed profit

Loss of business

income

Audited accounts, Account

books, Legger Book

Compensation at

current market price

Loss of temporary

structures

Lease contract, rental receipts,

MOU


replacement cost

value, mobility,

allowance and

disturbance


Report

14

Category of PAP Type of Loss Eligibility Entitlements

Business tenant

No loss of land Lease contract, rental receipts,

MOU

Compensation for

advanced lease

Loss of rental

accommodation


MOU

Compensation for

equivalent lease and

lost

Loss of good will

Goodwill fee,

mobility allowance

and disturbance

Residence owners

Loss of land Holder of a title. Leaseholder Compensation for

equivalent lease

Loss of structure


drawings, Three neighbor

witnesses and Photographs (of

informal properties)


replacement cost

value

Residence Tenant Loss of rental

accommodation


MOU

Compensation for

advance rent


MOU

Compensation for

equivalent

accommodation or

three months lease,

mobility allowance

and disturbance

Vulnerable Groups Comfort and

security

Elderly, Physically challenged,

long –term sick

Supplementary

compensation to be

settled case by case

Squatters**/

encroachers Loss of use of Land Three neighbor witness

Assistance in getting

title for new land, and

or/ supplementary

assistance, mobility

allowance and

disturbance

Public amenities Relocation of

amenities

Amenities in Right of way

(ROW) Relocation Cost

Religious site

(Church) Loss of structure

Holder of a title, leaseholder Compensation for

equivalent lease


drawings


replacement cost

value

**In this project there were no squatters.


Report

15

All affected parties and assets are eligible for compensation, except the following categories:

• Improvement carried out after the cut-off-date

• Loss of rights when the use of the land is in conflict with the use for which the land is

zoned

• Loss of improvements when they are in conflict with the land use zoning, unless the affected

person can demonstrate that improvements were carried out with the authority of the Land

Board or prior to the zoning of the land in question.

From the RAP reports and interviews with PAPs, there were no business tenants, residence tenants

and squatters who were affected by the project hence there was no consideration for eligibility and

entitlements in this regard. However, the project affected business owners such as the hardware at

Moshana and general dealer at Tlhareseleele. Evidence from the valuation reports and discussions

with Department of Lands and land authorities indicates that these PAPs were compensated

appropriately in accordance with their eligibility and entitlement. Similarly, residence and ploughing

fileds owners were compensated in compliance with the compensation guidelines taking into

consideration the current market rates. This situation also applied to the religious sites which were

affected by the project. Furthermore, assistance was given to PAPs to acquire new certificates for their

properties by transporting them to the land authorities. Evidence from the list of PAPs who were

compensated shows that Botswana Telecommunications Corporation was duly compensated to

relocate their infrastructure in line with their entitlements. Lastly, whilst the World Bank provides for

supplementary compensation on a case by case basis to vulnerable groups, the compensation

guidelines do not have provision for such. Thus, the valuation reports do not have any indication of

supplementary compensation to these groups.

d. Methods of Valuing, and Validating the Census of Affected Assets Section

The census of the affected assets is based on Forms 2.\32 and 5 of the Compensation Guidelines.

Aerial photography of the project site, with proper referencing completes the census. The schedule 11

of Form 4 of the Guidelines provides an extensive compensation rates that are renewed on a yearly

basis. The rates are based on guides for the most common types of affected assets, but the Committee

also exerts its best judgment on a case by case basis, factoring in various other factors.

The result of the census is then read out to the affected parties, who are given the chance to add their

views to the results before signing the Form 2 (Inspection Report-Buildings) or Form 3 (Inspection

Report-Fields), indicating that they were present at the validation of the census or were represented.

After the census validation, the Assessment Committee meets to discuss and agree on appropriate

rates, which are entered on the assessment forms for each affected asset.

Discussions with the Land Board indicated that compensation assessment committee read out the

results of the census to affected parties before signing Form 2 or Form 3 as required by the

compensation guidelines. Even though interviews with PAPs showed contradictory responses to these

questions, what is clear is that PAPs or their representatives signed the requisite forms.


Report

16

e. Organizational Procedures for Delivery of Entitlement

Once the Compensation Report has been approved, the programme is then implemented by the

Department of Lands. Compensations are paid in cash or in kind whenever feasible. Compensation for

loss of all assets, displacement and relocation is payable immediately and directly to the Project

Affected Persons by the acquiring body. As per section 8.0 of the compensation guidelines, the

vacation of acquired land by the affected parties might happen either:

• After the payment of compensation package: this may occur immediately after such payment.

• Not after the payment of the compensation package: in this case, the occupiers will sign a

written agreement with the acquiring authority specifying the date by which occupiers must

vacate the acquired land (8.0)

• Before the payment of compensation package: in case of emergencies, an order should be

issued by the minister to the effect that people should vacate land before compensation is paid.

In such instances, a written undertaking must be given by the acquiring body guaranteeing

action as per section 6.0 and 7.0 of the compensation guidelines (census and preparation of a

compensation report), and the commitment that interest will be paid from the date of taking

possession of the land in cash or in kind whenever feasible.

Even though vacating the affected piece of land before compensation was not applicable because

there was no emergency in terms of the Tribal Land Act, interviewed PAPs indicated that they

vacated (made way) the land before compensation to avoid delaying the project commencement.

Furthermore, 21 of the interviewed PAPs indicated that the notice to realign the affected plot

boundaries was inadequate whilst 30 PAPs felt it was adequate. Only 9 PAPs did not know of the

notice. Some of the PAPs were given 5% interest on their compensation amounts because it took

longer than 3 months from date of assessment to actual payout period. Evidence from Roads

Department in the form of Compensation offer letters also shows that PAPs were given an option to

accept monetary compensation or in kind (see Project Affected Person Written Consent Form-

Appendix 3).

Consultations with the land authorities revealed that quite a number of affected ploughing fields did

not have land rights certificates. However, assessment of properties was undertaken after determining

the ownership status of such properties with the assistance of the local chiefs. After compensation,

realignment of boundaries of all affected properties was done resulting in issuance of amended land

rights certificates. Notwithstanding notifications to property owners about availability of certificates,

collection rates of the certificates remained low. The land authorities further embarked on an initiative

to deliver the certificates to respective villages with the hope that uptake would improve but still there

are some that are not collected (see minutes of meeting with Moshupa Sub Land Board-Appendix

6).


Report

17

vii. World Bank OP 4.12

The requirements for World Bank OP 4.12 are as follows:

Displaced persons-

Measures should ensure that the displaced persons are:

• Informed about their options and rights pertaining to resettlement

• Consulted on, offered choices among, and provided with technically and economically

feasible resettlement alternatives

• Provided prompt and effective compensation at full replacement cost for loss of assets

attributable directly to the project.

Remedial actions/measures

If the impacts include physical relocation, the World Bank requires that the displaced persons are:

• Provided assistance (such as moving allowances) during relocation

• 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

• Offered support after displacement, for a transition period, based on a reasonable estimate of

the time likely to be needed to restore their livelihood and standards of living

• Provided with development assistance (such as land preparation, credit facilities, training, or

job opportunities) in addition to compensation measures

Replacement costs

• For agricultural land – it is the pre-project 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 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, plus

the cost of transporting building materials to the construction site, plus the cost of any labour

and contractors’ fees, plus the cost of registration and transfer taxes.


Report

18

Valuation

• Valuation does not take into account depreciation of structures and assets

• For losses that cannot easily be valued or compensated for in monetary terms e.g. access to

public services, customers, and suppliers or to fishing, grazing or forest areas, attempts are

made to establish access to equivalent and culturally acceptable resources and earning

opportunities.

• Where domestic law does not meet the standard of compensation at full replacement cost,

compensation under domestic law is supplemented by additional measures necessary to meet

the replacement cost standard.

Vulnerable groups

• Special attention should be paid to vulnerable groups i.e.

✓ Below poverty datum line

✓ The landless

✓ The elderly

✓ Women and children

✓ Indigenous people

✓ Ethnic minorities

2.2 Definition of PAPs and Eligibility Criteria

2.2.1 Definition of PAPs

In line with the World Bank Safeguard Policy OP 4.12, any person who suffers loss of or damage to

an asset or loss of access to productive resources, as a consequence of the implementation of any of

the road projects under the OPRC would be considered a property affected person (PAP). The likely

impacted/affected parties can be classified into five groups namely:

Individual- an individual who suffers loss of assets or investments, land and property and/or access to

natural and/or economical resources as a result of the project activities and to whom compensation is

due.

Household - a household is affected if one or more of its member’s losses assets or investments, land

and property and/or access to natural and/or economical resources as a result of project activities.

Vulnerable households - includes those below poverty datum line, the landless on communal land,

the elderly, women, children, orphans, those afflicted by HIV/AIDS, and indigenous people. These

groups of people are identified through the socio-economic and baseline study. These groups of

people are normally marginalized and often do not have a voice.


Report

19

Identifying them ensures that special attention would be paid to them by identifying their needs and

ensuring that they are not left out in the participatory process of the project activities. Special attention

is paid to monitoring them to ensure that their pre-project livelihood is indeed improved and are given

technical and financial assistance if they wish to make use of the grievance mechanisms of the project.

Host communities - strain on existing infrastructure and services resulting from the increased

population resulting from the resettlers.

Communities - (when common goods such as schools, meeting places, place of worship are affected).

2.2.2 Eligibility Criteria

Any PAP is eligible for compensation and/or resettlement assistance, provided the damage or loss is

caused by the project and satisfies the conditions of the cut-off date. Thus, all project affected persons

irrespective of their status or whether they have formal titles, legal rights or not, squatters (in this

project there are no squatters) or otherwise are eligible for assistance if they occupied the land before

the cut-off date.

In accordance with the World Bank Safeguard Policy OP 4.12, displaced persons may be classified in

one of the following three groups:

a) Those that have formal legal rights to land (including customary and 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 provided that such claims are recognized under the laws of the

country or become recognized through a process identified in the resettlement plan.

c) Those who have no recognizable legal right or claim to the land they are occupying.

Those covered under a) and b) above are to be provided compensation for the land they lose, and

other assistance in accordance with the World Bank Policy. Persons covered under c) are to be

provided with resettlement assistance if they occupy the project area prior to a cut-off date.

As per the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) the following categories are not eligible for

compensation:



zoned

• Loss of improvements when they are in conflict with the land use zoning, unless the

affected person can demonstrate that improvements were carried out with the authority of

the land board or prior to the zoning of the land in question.


Report

20

2.3 Description and Results of Public Consultation

The Resettlement Action Plan Reports (Packages 1 and 2), contain information on stakeholder

engagement and public consultations for the road projects. The purpose of the engagement and

consultations were primarily to promote buy in and participation of all involved in the project, to give

all affected by the project opportunities to state their concerns and grievances as well as to find

common resolutions to emerging issues around the project. Internal and external stakeholders were

identified and engaged during the initial stages of the project as well as the ESIA Scoping stage. The

second level was the consultations with communities, PAPs, Government officials, VDCs, and NGOs.

In total 14 villages were identified as communities to be affected by the project. Public meetings were

arranged in identified affected villages as part of the Environment and Social Impact Assessment

exercise. Interviews were arranged with PAPs and focused group discussions were conducted with

poor household and female headed household representing vulnerable groups.

2.3.1 Review of Consultation Process

Stakeholder engagements and public consultations were done as required by law and policies of both

the Republic of Botswana and the World Bank Guidelines. The RAP Reports give a detailed account

of the content of public meetings at all project affected villages (Appendix 3 from the RAP report).

It is evident from the RAP reports that only one round of public meetings was held and this was at the

scoping stage of the ESIA study where amongst others, the project was introduced to the

communities. No further public meetings were held either to appraise the communities on project

progress or give feedback.

Nonetheless, the issues that were identified during consultations as per both the ESIA and RAP

Reports are as follows:

• Employment issues

• HIV/AIDS issues

• Influx of people and crime

• Economic development of the village and recognition

• Ground and surface water impacts

• Corporate social responsibility initiatives

• Borrow pit identification and permitting

• Relocation and compensation

• Air pollution

• Noise pollution

• Collision of vehicles with livestock

• Destruction of archaeological sites


Report

21

• Loss of land and/or relocations

• Destruction of property

The issues pertaining to loss of land and/or relocations have been addressed through implementation

of the Resettlement Action Plans for both Packages 1 and 2. Compensations have been accordingly

made for all land and properties that were affected. Issues relating to destruction of property are

mainly related to the construction phase and are therefore being addressed by the contractor. The rest

of the issues have been addressed by the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment study for this

project and the requisite approval has been given by the competent authority.

2.3.2 Consultation with PAPs

Land Acquisition Procedures clearly specify that, once it has been decided to proceed with the project

the compensation assessment committee conducts a physical inspection recording the details of all

improvements to the land and any other fixed assets affected within the zoned area. The inspection

report is the basis upon which compensation is assessed. The assessment committee invites the

various affected occupiers to submit any additional or counter claims for their improvements if they

so wish. Some claimants may engage the services of professionals and should be given time to do so.

The compensation assessment committee then meets to discuss and agree on the appropriate rates of

compensation.

According to the RAP reports (Chapter 11), affected households were interviewed and completed

questionnaires. Once the affected assets were identified, an interview with each household was

conducted in order to know, among other data, the number of people living in the household and the

condition or socio-economic status: Name, Relationship to Household Head, Sex, Age, Education,

Still in School, Current Employment Status, etc. Once plots were identified, consultations with PAPs

were conducted, both at individual and collective level. The method used in individual interviews was

that after meeting with the Chief in each village (who helped to identify the owners), the project team

would have a meeting with each of them, asking for data as per the questionnaire on Table 20 for

Package 1 and Table 21 for Package 2 of the RAP reports.

The survey conducted as part of this study has indicated that a majority of PAPs (43) felt adequately

consulted on the project. This reveals that a significant number of PAPs (14) felt that they have not

been adequately consulted. However, feedback from the project team shows that a total of 4 meetings

were held individually with PAPs. These were during assessment of properties, issuance of

compensation offers letters, collection of responses from PAPs on the offer letters and during the

issuance of cheques. A closer look at the survey data shows that though the PAPs have been

consulted, some detail about the process may either have been unclear or inadequate. When PAPs

were asked about whether or not they were informed about their rights and options, a majority (38)

answered in the negative (see Table 4 below).


Report

22

Table 4: Information about Rights and Options

Number of PAPs

% of PAPs

interviewed

Were you informed about your

options and rights pertaining to

compensation and/or resettlement?

No 38 63.3%

Yes 22 36.7%

An even greater number of PAPs (56) answered in the negative when they were asked if they were

informed about the option of engaging valuation professionals to help in determining the value of

their properties (see Table 5 below). The explanation given by the project team in this regard is that

this was communicated to PAPs verbally and further that those not satisfied with the Land Board

valuation were verbally advised to seek third party assistance. These are conflicting views from the

PAPs and the Roads Department and given that the views are verbal, it becomes difficult to ascertain

which view is correct.

Table 5: Awareness to Engage Valuation Professionals

Number of PAPs

% of PAPs

interviewed

Were you made aware of your right

to engage valuation professionals?

No 56 93.3%

Yes 4 6.7%

A similarly high percentage of PAPs (56) answered in the negative when asked if they were allowed

to make a claim for their properties (see Table 6 below). However, there is evidence that PAPs were

given an option in writing to choose between monetary compensation and in kind (see Project

Affected Person Written Consent Form-Appendix 3).

Table 6: Opportunity to Make Claim for Properties

Number of PAPs

% of PAPs

interviewed

Were you given an opportunity to

make a claim for your properties?

No 56 93.3%

Yes 4 6.7%

In conclusion, these responses are an indication that though PAPs were consulted, they were not given

regular updates on the process of compensation. In terms of the consultation process, RD followed a

five staged consultation process which is adequate. There was however a concern amongst some

PAPs who felt that they were asked to move their fences urgently but since then they have not heard

from Roads Department on the commencement date of the project. This is particularly common in

areas where road construction has not yet started.

2.3.3 Plans for Continued Participation of PAPs

The RAPs for both Package 1 and 2 refer to the importance of continuous and regular engagement

between communities, stakeholders and project stakeholders to ensure timeous response to emerging

issues.


Report

23

From the review of the RAPs for both Package 1 and Package 2, there is no clearly laid out

framework/plan for continued participation of the PAPs. Our interactions with the PAPs during

survey also revealed that gap as regards their engagements. Consultation took the form of information

dissemination in one-way fashion and it only happened at the initial stages of the project with no

updates on project progress. The PAPs were also informed when their money for compensation was

ready.

3 Outcomes of RAP Implementation

3.1 Project Impacts and Need for Resettlement

The process of acquisition was informed by the Land Acquisition Procedures which states that, In the

event of acquisition of already occupied tribal land, Regulation 15 of the Tribal Land Regulations of

1970 is invoked. The acquiring authority with the assistance of the Land Board, make reasonable

effort to identify and contact all occupiers within the zoned land. If deemed necessary, the Land

Board shall request for a kgotla (community) meeting to advise the people of the scheme and their

rights. The views of the affected communities are documented to ensure that they are taken into

consideration when a decision to implement the project is made. Using an Environmental Impact

Study, DLUPU or the National Steering Committee should give an early recommendation, in

principle, to the Land Board, which then forms the basis of subsequent detailed recommendations.

3.1.1 Census and Survey Results

3.1.1.1 Number Affected

Table 7: Land use and Number of Affected Plots for Package 1

Road Section/Village Land use of the Affected

Plots

Number of the Affected

Plots

AR10-1 AR2 B Lotlhakane West

Ploughing fields 14

Residential Plot 1

Developed Residential Plots 11

Total 26

AR2-5 AR1 Moshana

Ploughing fields 6

Residential plot 1

Total 7

A2-5 AR2 Selokolela

Ploughing fields 2

Total 2

A2-5 AR3 Sesung

Ploughing fields 2

Kgotla compound 1

Total 3


Report

24

Road Section/Village Land use of the Affected

Plots

Number of the Affected

Plots

A2-5 AR4 Sese

Ploughing fields 6

Residential 2

Total 8

A total number of 46 properties were affected in Package 1.

Table 8: Land use and Number of Affected Plots for Package 2

Road Section/Village Land use of the Affected Plots Number of the Affected

Plots

B101-1 Rakhuna

Commercial 1

Residential 24

Church1 1

Ploughing field 11

Piggery 1

Total 38

B101-1 Tlhareseleele

Commercial 3

Ploughing field 24

School 1

Church 2

Residential 4

Cemetery2 1

Total 35

B101-2 Tlhareseleele

Residential plot 3

Ploughing field 7

Total 10

B101-2 Pitsane

Residential 13

Ploughing field 2

Commercial 1

Cemetery 1

Total 17

B101-4 Phitshane Molopo Ploughing field 12

Total 12

1 Some churches were avoided

2 Some cemeteries were avoided


Report

25

Road Section/Village Land use of the Affected Plots Number of the Affected

Plots

B101-4 Leporung

Ploughing field 6

Residential Plot 16

Tower 1

Total 23

B101-4 Dikhukhung Ploughing field 3

Total 3

B101-4 Mmakgori

Residential 5

Ploughing field 1

Total 6

B101-4 Tshidilamolomo

Ploughing field 16

Residential 2

Cattle crush 1

Total 19

B101-4 Mabule

Ploughing field 4

Residential 5

School 1

Horticultural plot 1

Total 11

A total of 174 properties were affected in Package 2.

3.1.1.2 Impacts Experienced

The World Bank OP 4.12 and Botswana Compensation Guidelines encourage avoidance of

resettlement, and in cases where displacement or resettlement is inevitable, compensation should

amount to full replacement. In accordance with these instruments, the Department of Roads ensured

that no family dwelling, ploughing field or any other property was relocated.

This was achieved through road realignment that was mainly meant to reduce intensity of impacts.

From the field surveys, it is evident that the main impacts experienced included taking narrow strips

of land from either residential plots or ploughing fields. In the process, no serious impacts were

experienced in relation to destruction of property save for fences and toilets (Pit latrines). Even

though cracking of houses due to road construction works were also highlighted as noticeable

impacts, this does not belong to the RAP implementation phase. Other associated impacts, mainly

environmental in nature, are well articulated in the Environment and Social Impact Assessment

(ESIA) report.


Report

26

Furthermore, the ESIA report identified archaeological impacts. The mitigation of the identified

archaeological impacts is also articulated in the RAP reports for both Packages 1 and 2 as well as the

ESIA. Both the ESIA and the Archaeological Impact Assessment Reports have been accordingly

cleared by the competent authorities.

From the Archaeological Impact Assessment (AIA) reports for both Packages 1 and 2, 38

archaeological sites and 5 sites of social significance were revealed within the road reserve of Package

1. These sites included abandoned cattle posts and kraals, Early Iron age, Late Iron Age, Early Stone

Age, Middle Iron Age, historical cattle posts, fields and villages, Iron smelting dump, Middle Stone

Age and Probable grave. In Package 2, 6 archaeological sites and 33 sites of social significance were

identified within the road reserve. These included abandoned cattle posts and kraals, cemeteries,

abandoned houses, Middle Stone Age and historical buildings. Some of the surface artefacts identified

for both packages included ceramics, bone fragments, burned hut rubbles, pieces of glass and metals.

The ESIA reports recommended that for all the sites, an archaeological induction of the contractor

staff should be done and it was recommended that a watch brief and monitoring program be

implemented during construction due to possible occurrence of unidentified graves in the kraals and

houses. The archaeological sites which required mitigation were identified and their specific

mitigation measures for each site are documented in accordance with DNMM mitigation requirement

in the AIA reports. Some of the mitigation measures included systematic sampling of the artefacts,

test excavations to salvage a representative sample of the material record and investigation of dating

possibilities.

The affected sites for Package 1 are as outlined in Table 9 and Table 10.

Table 9: Affected Archaeological Sites for Package 1

Type of Archaeological Sites Number of Affected Sites

Late Iron Age 18

Early Iron Age 1

Middle Iron Age 4

Early Stone Age 4

Middle Stone Age 2

Historical Village 3

Historical Fields 1

Historical Settlement 3

Historical Cattle Post 1

Iron Smelting dump 1

Total 38


Report

27

Table 10: Affected Sites of Social Significance for Package 1

Sites of Social Significance Number of Affected Sites

Abandoned cattle post 2

Abandoned kraal 1

Probable grave 1

Traditional kraal and Kgotla 1

Total 5

The affected sites for Package 2 are as outlined in Table 11 and Table 12.

Table 11: Affected Archaeological Sites for Package 2

Type of Archaeological Sites Number of Affected Sites

Middle Stone Age 4

Historical buildings 2

Total 6

Table 12: Affected Sites of Social Significance

Sites of Social Significance Number of Affected Sites

Cemeteries 12

Abandoned cattle kraal 6

Abandoned watering well 1

Abandoned house 12

Grave & Abandoned cattle post 1

Abandoned cattle post 1

Total 33

3.1.1.3 Adjustments made during Implementation and Justification

The World Bank Operational Guidelines emphasize the need to avoid resettlement and relocation. The

feedback from the RAP team and team of engineers showed that the initial road alignment for both

Package 1 and Package 2 was going to directly affect many properties with long term impacts of

resettlement. Realignment was therefore justified to eliminate and minimise the impact of the road.

The road realignment decision was in accordance with the requirements of World Bank OP 4.12

guidelines. This was achieved through the following as outlined in the report:

1. Phase 1: Prior field tours along the initial layout to:

• Evaluate the degree of impact.

• Identify areas of greatest impact and hot spots.

2. Phase 2: Identify each property affected by the original layout using a GIS tool.


Report

28

3. Phase 3: Give recommendations to the engineers on how to avoid singular impacts and

improve the alignment in Package 1 and layout of bypasses in the Phitshane Molopo to

Mabule section.

4. Phase 4: Establish criteria for the OPRC packages 1 and 2 project with respect to the road

reserve and the cleared strip in accordance with the BRDM and identify built-up areas.

5. Phase 5: Field work and surveys on affected property once the layout has been improved.

6. Phase 6: Identify, evaluate and establish compensations on all property definitely

affected.

Figure 3: Road alignment in Selokolela

Initial alignment in green-white colour, final re-alignment to avoid impacts to two houses.

Figure 4: Road alignment in Sese

Initial alignment in orange-white colour, final re-alignment to avoid impacts to several houses.


Report

29

Figure 5: Road alignment in Mmakgori

Current road in white colour, initial alignment in red, final re-alignment to avoid impacts on

households in green

Figure 6: Road alignment in Tlhareseleele

Current road in white colour, initial alignment in red, final re-alignment to avoid impacts to the

Primary school in green.

Figure 7: Road alignment in Rakhuna

Current road in white colours, initial alignment in red, final re-alignment to avoid impacts in green.

The addenda to the RAP reports reveal that during the works done on site for the initial project phase,

some of the affected properties were undetected due to the absence of any indication of plot

ownership or occupancy, drawing or marker posts on site. In some cases, owners of such properties

did not present themselves at RAP kgotla meetings or at PAPs consultation meetings.


Report

30

After finalization of the main RAP reports, some additional affected properties were identified when

PAPs associated with these properties came to present themselves during the compensation exercise.

The addenda to the RAP reports indicates the following status with respect to realignment of roads

and identification of additional PAPs:

Table 13: Status of PAPs with respect to road realignment

Packages Original number of

affected properties

from RAP reports

Additional number of

affected properties

from the addenda

Total number of

affected properties

Number of

PAPs

compensated

Package 1 32 16 48 46

Package 2 127 65 192 174

3.2 Compensation and Remedial Measures

It ought to be noted that the World Bank Guidelines emphasize the need to avoid resettlement in

projects in which it is involved. As much as is feasible, designs should avoid moving people to give

way to projects. In this particular project, displacement was avoided. Evidence from the review of

records and ground truthing revealed that narrow strips of land were excised in respect of the affected

properties. This then would mean reducing the plot or land size as well as re-fencing of the newly

demarcated land area.

Interviews with the land authorities, PAPs, members of the grievance committees and chiefs did not

reveal any aggrieved person on account of not having been identified as a PAP. The RAP reports also

do not mention any person whose property may have been affected but excluded from the list of

PAPs. Thus, it can be concluded that all eligible PAPs were identified. The PAPs were categorised

taking into consideration the following:

a) Those that have formal legal rights to land (including customary and 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 provided that such claims are recognized under the laws of the country or become

recognized through a process identified in the resettlement plan.

c) Those who have no recognizable legal right or claim to the land they are occupying.

All compensations have been made. However, there are instances where owners of affected properties

could not be identified, thus not being issued with their compensation amount despite the assessment

and valuation having been done. There are 3 such cases; 2 at Rakhuna and 1 at Mmakgori.

The survey results indicate that 51 PAPs consider the compensation inadequate, only 7 PAPs consider

it to be adequate. Furthermore, some of the PAPs (2) were not sure of whether the compensation was

adequate or not as shown in Figure 8 below.

The PAPs generally felt that the compensation given to them was not commensurate with the land

taken from them. They stated that they accepted compensation for three reasons i) that they did not

want to be an obstacle to development ii) they were persuaded to accept compensation because the


Report

31

land was not theirs but were holding it in trust for the Government and iii) that even if they contested

the compensation, the Government would always prevail over them.

Figure 8: Adequacy of Compensation

Notwithstanding the views of the PAPs above, the valuation reports indicate that compensation

considered all elements outlined in the compensation guidelines. This is despite the guidelines having

been reviewed as far back as 2010. This disparity was compensated for by application of current rates

where applicable as affirmed by the competent authority (Department of Lands) and the Land

authorities (see minutes of consultations with these authorities-Appendix 6).

Regarding timely payment to PAPs, the schedule of works as outlined in the RAP reports shows that

assessment and inventory of affected properties was supposed to have been completed by the 31st

October 2015 (Executive summary of RAP report). However, this was not achieved as the last

assessments were done as late as 2017. There is also evidence that it took more than the stipulated 3

months period between actual assessment date and payment of compensation. Some of the PAPs had

their compensations adjusted upwards by 5% which shows that there was a delay as provided for

under the 2010 compensation guidelines.

3.2.1 Adequacy of Remedial Measures

As per the World Bank OP 4.12, if the impacts include physical relocation, it is required that the

displaced persons are:








Report

32



In the RAP implementation for both Packages 1 and 2, there was no physical relocation. Thus, in

terms of remedial measures as outlined by the World Bank guidelines, the above remedial actions

were generally not applicable. Since the impacts involved mainly acquiring of narrow strips of land,

relocation of fences, transport assistance was extended to the PAPs to assist them in transporting

materials. Transport assistance was further availed to PAPs whenever required. As most affected plots

had no land rights certificates, Roads Department project team assisted them to apply for and acquire

land rights certificates. The remedial measures extended to PAPs are therefore considered adequate

given that the impacts experienced were minimal to warrant any additional assistance over and above

the compensation as per the compensation guidelines. The interviews with PAPs revealed majority of

PAPs were compensated with money and efforts to acquire additional pieces of land to make up for

the lost part were generally honored save where there was no available land in proximity to affected

properties.

3.2.2 Cut-off Date versus Compensation

Eligibility criteria for entitlements stipulate that, all affected parties and assets are eligible for

compensation, except the following categories:



zoned

• Loss of improvements when they are in conflict with the land use zoning, unless the affected

person can demonstrate that improvements were carried out with the authority of the land

board or prior to the zoning of the land in question.

Documentation from the land authorities indicates that PAPs were given cut-off date that was tied to

assessment date of the property (See Form I-Notice to Treat-Appendix 5). This date varied from

PAP to PAP. After this date PAPs were not allowed to effect any development or improvement on

their property.

Discussions with both land authorities and PAPs did not reveal incidences of any

development/improvement carried out after the cut-off date. The survey did not yield anything in

relation to loss of rights when the use of the land is in conflict with the use for which the land is

zoned. Similarly, there were no cases of loss of improvements due to conflicting land uses. The

compensation guidelines stipulate a period of 3 months from assessment within which payment of

compensation should have been effected. There is evidence that it took more than the stipulated 3

months period between actual assessment date and payment of compensation. To compensate for the

delay, the compensation guidelines makes provision for 5% upward adjustment to the compensation

amount. From the review of valuation reports, there is evidence that compensation for some of the

PAPs was adjusted upwards by 5%.


Report

33

3.3 Has RAP Implementation Accounted for Actual Livelihood Impact

As per the World Bank OP 4.12, livelihood impacts in resettlement or relocation include among

others loss of access to the different public services such as schools, health facilities, sewage lines,

water reticulation points, loss of access to markets, loss of access to suppliers or even loss of access to

support networks. In the case of these road projects, there was no displacement or resettlement and

what that meant is that there were no significant livelihood impacts occasioned by the RAP

implementation.

3.3.1 Socio-economic conditions of PAPs before RAP implementation

3.3.1.1 Livelihood structures

Means of livelihood within the study area was defined by farming and non-farming activities

including small scale and large scale mechanized commercial farming operations as well as

subsistence farming. The mixture of farming households in the area was reflected in the range of

farming practices and strategies that farmers undertook. Farmers ploughed with both donkeys and

tractors and the principal crops grown were maize and sorghum with some beans and melons grown

by the smaller farmers. However, most households did not rely solely on farming for household

income. The semi subsistence farmers tended to supplement their income through piece work,

remittances and social welfare programmes while the more commercial oriented often have small

businesses in the settlement. Although this is a highly agrarian society it was observed that farmers in

the settlements have not ploughed for several years mainly because of lack of rain. It was also

observed among the small-scale farmers that farming is no longer paying and does not provide a

living.

The livelihood structures amongst the communities along the road network are such that there are no

substantial differences between households in respect of access to land and livestock, to wage

incomes and remittances, and to welfare payments. From the survey, two categories of households

were identifiable ranging from those with moderate income to those with no regular source of income.

The various sources of household incomes before the project are shown in Table 14. The table shows

that for 2002/03 cash earnings from employment accounted for most of household incomes. Cash

earnings contributed the highest amount to gross income, followed by gifts received and own produce

consumed. Overall, the gross income before the project in rural areas stood at P1 481.30. From the

surveys, the modal household income is in the range P100-P2 500 with the least being in the range

P2501-P5000 (Table 15). Generally, it is evident that the impacts from RAP implementation were not

significant to result in any changes to the household incomes as household income prior and after

RAP implementation fall within the same income range.


Report

34

Table 14: Main Sources of households'monthly income

Sources of Income (Pula) Rural Areas (2002/03)

Business profits 114.50

Cash earnings 650.40

Unearned cash income 132.50

Own produce consumed 162.10

Wages in kind 44.50

Gifts received 296.90

Aid 39.50

School meals 40.90

Gross income 1481.30

Source: CSO, 2004 household income and expenditure survey 2002/03

Table 15: Monthly household income in the study area, 2018

Household Income Bracket Frequency Percent

None 5 8.3

100-1000 Pula 36 60.0

1001-2500 Pula 10 16.7

2501-5000 Pula 2 3.3

5001-10000 Pula 3 5.0

Above 10000 Pula 3 5.0

Total 59 98.3

Missing Missing 1 1.7

Total 60 100.0

3.3.1.2 Patterns of social interaction, community organisation and social networks

Cooperation was discernible in these communities through pulling together of draught power where

donkeys were used, when farmers could not afford mechanised farming. Battering was also common

in the communities where livestock and farm harvests could be used as a mode of exchange. In terms

of conflicts resolution, mediation was done through the kgotla system where the parties would be

persuaded to reach a compromise for the sake of resolving the conflict.

Community organisation was evident through community mobilisation during both the social and

public events. In the case of these communities it is not multiplicity of institutions, interest groups or

set of activities which embodies community organisation. But the factors like interaction, integration

and coordinating of existing institutions (VDCs, Farmers committees, Bogosi), if necessary, to meet

the changing conditions and the needs of the community.


Report

35

The social networks within these communities were found to be still intact with serious support

systems. The network consists of mainly the formal organisation structure i.e. family and extended

family system that is bound together by the same identity, values and customs. The network was

found again to have informal organisational structure broader than the family and largely defined by

social interaction and social communication.

3.3.2 Socio-economic conditions of PAPs after RAP implementation

The nature of impacts experienced did not in any way alter the livelihood structure, as there were no

substantial differences introduced in terms of access to land, livestock or sources of income. There

was no alteration in terms of patterns of social interactions as there was no loss of sense of the

community and the way they do things. The community continues to works together in terms of

conflict resolutions using the existing structures. The project did not introduce any variation to

community organization in terms of mobilization or planning thus, the community remains highly

organized. Given that there were no resettlements, there was no impacts on the social networks hence

both the formal and informal organizational structure remains unbroken.

Furthermore, the RAP implementation did not have any livelihood impacts as there was no loss of

access to different public services such as schools, health facilities, sewage lines, water reticulation

points, loss of access to markets, loss of access to suppliers or even support networks.

The Figure 9 below drawn from the survey data bears testimony to the above.

1 2

9

59 59 59 59 58 59 59 59 59 59 57

50

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Yes No

Figure 9: Livelihood Impacts of RAP


Report

36

3.3.3 Impact of the Project on the Poor and Vulnerable Groups

World Bank Safeguard Policy OP 4.12 specifies that vulnerable groups includes those below poverty

datum line, the landless on communal land, the elderly, women, children, orphans, those afflicted by

HIV/AIDS, and indigenous people. These groups of people are identified through the socio-economic

and baseline study. These groups of people are normally marginalized and often do not have a voice.

Identifying them ensures that special attention would be paid to them by identifying their needs and

ensuring that they are not left out in the participatory process of the project activities. Special attention

is paid to monitoring them to ensure that their pre-project livelihood is indeed improved and are given

technical and financial assistance if they wish to make use of the grievance mechanisms of the project.

The World Bank makes special mention of the vulnerable and the need to put in place special

measures for them in terms of resettlement compensation.

The Resettlement Plan Report alludes to consultations with vulnerable groups, particularly the report

refers to the focused group discussions with poor households and female headed households. The

survey also engaged with the poor and vulnerable groups as discussed below.

The direct impact of the project on the poor and vulnerable has been evaluated focusing on marital

status, gender, age, level of income, disability and household head. Out of the PAPs who are over 65

years of age, 7 are males and 12 are females. In terms of marital status, 12 of the widowed PAPs are

females and 5 are males. In terms of household headship and source of income, the PAPs that do not

have a source of income (3 PAPs), those that depend on Government grant (2 PAPs) and those that

are formally employed (7 PAPs) are all household heads. For the 3 PAPs that depend on Ipelegeng, 2

are household heads while out of the 16 PAPs that depend on pension, 14 are household heads.

With regard to dependency on remittances, out of a total of 7 PAPs that depend on remittances, 3 are

household heads while amongst the 20 PAPs that depend on farming as a source of income, 15 of

them are household heads and 5 are not household heads, as shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10: Household Headship and Source of Income


Report

37

In terms of registration in Government welfare programmes, a total of nine PAPs indicated that they

are currently assisted through welfare programmes as follows; 3 in LIMID, 2 in Poverty Eradication,

3 in destitution programme and 1 in old age pension food ration. When cross tabulating the PAPs who

are registered under government welfare programmes and their family members who are also

registered under government programmes, 1 PAP who is registered under LIMID is residing with 1

family member who is also registered under LIMID, another PAP who is registered under Poverty

eradication programme is residing with a family member who is also registered under Poverty

eradication programme. Furthermore, 1 PAP who is a destitute is residing with a family member who

is disabled and assisted through disability cash allowance.

Even though the survey has identified that within the PAPs, there are vulnerable groups, the impacts

of the RAP implementation are insignificant to warrant any special treatment/ additional assistance for

these groups. The study has revealed that none of the vulnerable groups has been displaced or their

source of income affected.

3.4 Grievance and Redress Mechanism

3.4.1 Grievance Handling Processes

As part of the grievance handling mechanism, Grievance Committees were established in all affected

communities and/or villages. The mandate of such committees was to receive grievances from

affected persons and work with the relevant authorities to resolve such grievances. In all Packages 1

and 2 places covered by this exercise, Grievance Committees were selected at the Kgotla meetings at

the commencement of the consultation process for the project.

The expectation was that all grievances would be directed to these committees before they are

escalated to any other level. The committees were to work in close collaboration with the Roads

Department with the latter offering technical or other support to the committees as may be necessary.

It has emerged from the consultations with the Grievance Committees that all but one (Mabule)

committee never carried out the mandate for which they were elected. A majority of these committees

have not held a single meeting and they have never received a single grievance to deal with. The

Committee members indicated that their failure to meet was largely on account that the Roads

Department did not convene a meeting to explain their role/s. Their expectation was that once they

were elected, the Roads Department will meet with them and clarify their roles. When that did not

happen, they felt abandoned and never met. In actual fact Grievance Committee members in a

majority of areas consistently indicated that the grievances of affected persons were handled by the

chiefs. It then became critical that the chiefs be interviewed to find out how they handled grievances

of affected persons.

A discernible pattern emerged during this survey that the chiefs played a prominent role in handling

grievances of affected persons. The chiefs were mostly aware of the Grievance Committees but stated

that the committees never functioned. The Chiefs did not refer affected persons to the committees

whenever such cases were brought before them. Part of the reason the chiefs did not refer the


Report

38

grievances to the Grievance Committees was that they considered it their role as Chiefs to deal with

disputes, grievances and complaints coming from their communities.

In addressing grievances from affected persons, the chiefs used a variety of strategies depending on

the nature of the grievance. The common way of addressing grievances by the Chiefs was that of

persuading PAPs to accept compensation to facilitate the speedy roll out of development projects. In

this way PAPs will drop their grievances to avoid being viewed as obstacles to progress and

development in the village or community.

3.4.2 Alternative Grievance Handling Mechanisms

In the absence of functional grievance committees, the PAPs who had grievances pursued them

through other mechanisms such as Kgosi, Councillor, District Commissioner, Land Board, Roads

Department and Department of Lands. Out of the 47 grievances, 18 were not lodged and 29 were

lodged as follows:

• District Commissioner 2 (5%)

• Councillor 2 (5%)

• Grievance committee 2 (5%)

• Chief 4 (10%)

• Department of Roads 8 (21%)

• Land Board 9 (23%)

• Department of Lands 2 (5%)

Figure 11: Alternative Grievance Handling Mechanisms


Report

39

It was revealed during the interviews that some of the grievances were resolved to the satisfaction of

the PAPs who lodged them. Those that were not resolved were the ones abandoned by the concerned

PAPs.

3.4.3 The Nature of Grievances

Affected persons had a number of grievances. Some of the common grievances included:

1) Alteration or variation of initial compensation amounts: The affected persons complained that

the initial amounts they signed for as compensation for taking narrow strips of their ploughing

field was reduced. The revised compensation amounts were considered too little and the

affected PAPs indicated that variation was a breach of the initial agreement. Roads

Department has acknowledged that indeed this occurred and explained that there was a typo-

graphical error which led to miscalculations (Question 16 on the Questionnaire for project

team-Appendix 7).

2) Inadequate compensation amounts: The Chiefs interviewed indicated that people were

generally unhappy with the low compensation amounts but the chiefs persuaded them to

receive the money as what is important is not compensation but the developments that will

come to their communities

3) Disputes over ownership of affected land: These are cases where community members clash

over the ownership of affected areas. In these cases, the Land Board and the Chiefs worked

together to resolve the grievances.

Table 16 below summarizes the nature of grievances and how they were addressed.

Table 16: Summary of grievances and how they were addressed

Nature of Grievances How the Grievances were

addressed

Comment on how the

Grievances were addressed

Alteration or variation of

initial compensation amounts

PAPs were addressed by Land

Board at the Kgotla. Minister

also addressed the concerned

PAPs. Counselling provided to

the aggrieved PAPs.

The resolution of the matter

was adequate given that Roads

Department has acknowledged

that indeed this occurred and

explained that there was a

typo-graphical error which led

to miscalculations.

Inadequate Compensation

amounts

Persuasion to receive the

money by chiefs.

In terms of the Compensation

guidelines, the compensations

amounts were adequate.

Disputes over ownership of

affected land

The Land Board and the

Chiefs worked together to

The grievance was adequately

addressed as there are no

pending disputes over affected


Report

40

Nature of Grievances How the Grievances were

addressed

Comment on how the

Grievances were addressed

resolve the grievances. pieces of land. The types of

grievances that were to be

addressed by the grievance

committees were never

outlined. It is therefore

difficult to say whether the

grievances channeled to

Dikgosi were in line with the

mandate of dikgosi or

grievance committee.

3.5 RAP Implementation

3.5.1 Adequacy of RAP Implementation Budget

The RAP implementation budget as regards compensation of the PAP was as follows;

Table 17: Adequacy of Budget for Package 1

Year Budget Expenditure (BWP) Expenditure (US$) Comment on adequacy

2015/16

P1 800 976.60

- -

Surplus

2016/17 581 618.00 55 013.03

2017/18 45 145.00 4 371.60

Total P1 800 976.60 626 763.00 59 384.62

Table 18: Adequacy of Budget for Package 2

Year Budget Expenditure (BWP) Expenditure (US$) Comment on adequacy

2015/16

P1 916 102.19

- -

Surplus 2016/17 470 124.73 44 522.18

2017/18 649 293.65 62 795.68

Total P1 916 102.19 1 119 418.38 107 317.86

The budget was adequate with a surplus for both Package 1 and 2 for the years 2015/16, 2016/17 and

2017/18 as reflected by Tables 17 and 18. The source of funding was Government of Botswana.


Report

41

3.5.2 Schedule, Monitoring and Responsibility of Tasks

3.5.2.1 Schedule and Responsibilities

The RAP reports contain the Schedule, Monitoring and Responsibility of Tasks as follows;

Table 19: Schedule of Tasks

Major Activities

Period Period Period

Quarter Quarter Quarter

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Assessment and evaluation of

Compensation

X X

Formation & strengthening of

project implementation &

redress committees

X X

Education and awareness

Creation about RAP procedures

and compensation payment

X X

Stakeholder Consultation X X X X

Approval and payment for

compensation for both

permanent & temporary

properties as well as

supplemental assistance

X X X X X

Grievance redress measures X X X X X X X X

Monitoring and Evaluation X X X X X X X

Completion Report writing X

The schedule above indicates the tasks/activities and the expected duration. Comments and

observations for the schedule are as follows;

Table 20: Comments and Observations for Adherence to Schedule

Activities Comments and Observations

Assessment and evaluation of Compensation This activity was undertaken timely and

successfully.

Formation & strengthening of project

implementation & redress committees

The grievance committees were set up

accordingly as per the legal requirements.

However, there is no evidence to suggest any

strengthening of the committees for project

implementation.

Education and awareness Creation about RAP

procedures and compensation payment

There is no evidence to demonstrate that PAPs

and affected communities were educated on RAP

procedures and compensation payment.


Report

42

Activities Comments and Observations

Stakeholder Consultation

The stakeholder consultation procedures were in

place but it would appear that consultations were

partially done as the PAPs claimed that they were

not made aware of critical elements of the

compensation exercise such as their rights and

options.

Approval and payment for compensation for both

permanent & temporary properties as well as

supplemental assistance

Compensations adequately executed but no

supplemental assistance as no physical

displacement was occasioned.

Grievance redress measures

The time allocation for this was good but there is

no proof that any committee was ever convened

to address grievances. The committees were

never functional.

Monitoring and Evaluation See section 3.5.2.2 below

Completion Report writing See section 3.5.2.2 below

3.5.2.2 Monitoring and responsibilities

According to the Resettlement Action Plan, and in line with the World Bank’s OP 4.12 and the

MOT’s 2006 RPF, implementation of RAP activities was to be monitored regularly to ensure those

actions proceeded in accordance with provisions in the RAP.

The Roads Department was responsible for the internal monitoring of the day to day implementation

of the RAP. External monitoring was to be carried out periodically by the Works Department and the

DEA. Furthermore, external consultants or NGOs would be hired to evaluate and review the

implementation.

From our interactions with the Department of Roads officials both in Gaborone and Kanye and the

PAPs, it is evident that Department of Roads did carry out internal monitoring while Works

Department and DEA carried out the periodic external monitoring. The RAP further required that a

consultant be hired to evaluate and review the implementation. The current exercise (Preparation of

RAP implementation Completion Report done by individual consultant) thus satisfies this

requirement.

3.6 Institutional Arrangements

3.6.1 Capacity of Implementing Agency

The Resettlement Action Plan Reports (Package 1 and 2) outline the institutions involved in the

project. They are Ministry of Transport and Communications, Ministry of Land Management, Water

and Sanitation Services, Department of Roads, Department of Lands, Department of Environmental

Affairs, Land Board, Land Tribunal and Compensation Assessment Committee. The Roads

Department is the principal implementing agency responsible for the overall coordination and

delivery of the project. The other critical institutions that support the Roads Department are the

Department of Lands, Land Board and Compensation Assessment Committee. These three above

mentioned institutions are responsible for land matters as they relate to the project. The Land Board in

particular is responsible for acquisition, transfer and change of land use as it relates to the project.


Report

43

The Department of Lands works in conjunction with the Land Board and Compensation Assessment

Committee to award compensation as is necessary as per the Compensation Guidelines. The non-

revision of the Compensation Guidelines may point to institutional tardiness on the part of the

Department of Lands.

The assessment committee is of the view that they were made to work under tight schedule because of

insufficient project planning by Roads Department. This could have resulted in miscalculation of

compensation amounts which was raised by PAPs as one of the major concerns of RAP

implementation. There is also evidence to suggest that the institutional capacity on the part of Roads

Department to implement the RAP was inadequate as there are indications of lack of follow up action

as demonstrated by Grievance Committees which were non- functional.

3.6.2 Personnel for Delivering Entitlements

The delivery of entitlements was undertaken by Roads Department. On the positive side it is

commendable that they have compensated all the PAPs. However, discussions with PAPs indicated

that there were delays as regards payments to some PAPs who were paid very late. Indeed, some

payments were adjusted upwards by 5% which shows that they were paid outside stipulated 3 months

period.

3.6.3 Plans to Build Institutional Capacity

Our discussion with Roads Department has indicated that there are currently no plans to capacitate the

department in so far as implementation of RAP is concerned. Currently the department uses engineers

as jack of all trades resulting in inadequacy in terms of numerical strength and skills. It is clear that

the department has to either employ social scientists or outsource the work to relevant consultants

with expertise in dealing with psycho-social, socio economic and livelihoods impacts.

3.7 Constraints, Issues and Delays encountered during the RAP

Implementation

The following were experienced by the project team during implementation of the RAP:

Table 21: Constraints, Issues and delays encountered during RAP Implementation

Constraints, Issues and Delays Measures put in place

Absentee PAPs (some residing in South Africa) Scheduling meetings at weekends, month ends

and public holidays as these were the only times

such people could avail themselves.

Uncooperative PAPs Persuasion and revisits

Rejection of offers by PAPs Held meetings with the PAPs in the presence of

village leadership


Report

44

Constraints, Issues and Delays Measures put in place

Feud over inheritance of affected property by

siblings

Asked for assistance from family elders, chiefs

and District Commissioner

Land rights without certificates PAPs were assisted by Roads Department and

Land Board to apply and acquire land rights

certificates

Difficulty in bringing together siblings who co-

owned affected property for purposes of consent.

Coordinated effort

Dispute over land ownership Resolved with the assistance of village chiefs and

Land Board

4 Mitigation Plan for Identified Gaps

The impact that arose as a result of the RAP implementation was mainly annexation of narrow strips

of land from affected properties. As the portions of land excised were minimal to warrant any

resettlement, it was therefore necessary that plot boundaries be realigned hence the need for amended

certificates. Table 22 depicts low collection rate of amended land rights certificates as the main gap of

RAP implementation. It is thus, a requirement for the Land Board and Roads Department to expedite

production and issuance of the remaining land rights certificates. This will enable the PAPs to benefit

from government assistance programmes such as Integrated Support Programme for Arable

Agricultural Development (ISPAAD) as well as installation of any infrastructure in the yard.

Table 22: Mitigation Plan for Identified Gaps

Gap Mitigation

Objective

Mitigation/Enhancement

measure/ action

Resources

Required

Responsibility Time

frame

Low

collection

rate of

amended

land rights

certificates

To ensure all

PAPs are issued

with amended

certificates

Deliver certificates (plot to

plot) to respective villages.

Publicise meetings about

availability of amended

certificates

Personnel

Funds

Land Board

and Roads

Department

6 months


Report

45

5 Conclusions

5.1 Study Limitations and Challenges

The following are the challenges encountered during assessment and preparation of the completion

report:

• Data collection took more time than was budgeted resulting in extended study schedule. This

was as a result of absenteeism of the PAPs despite prior arrangements.

• Failure by PAPs to recall certain information about the project and process undertaken due to

the length of time that the entire RAP implementation took.

• The study duration was inadequate given amount of assessments required and the wide

expanse of the project area to be traversed, number of documents to be reviewed and people

to be consulted.

• PAPs could not make a distinction between RAP and its implementation and the actual road

construction as they tended to confuse the impacts of road construction with the impacts of

RAP implementation.

• In certain instances, there was no documented proof that certain regulatory requirements

have been adhered to. Hence, the study had to rely on word of mouth from both the PAPs and

the Project team at times giving contradictory account of what transpired. For instance,

responses to question on the rights of PAPs to engage valuation professionals elicited

different responses from PAPs and project team. In this instance, PAPs generally indicated

that they were not informed of their rights whilst the project team responded that PAPs were

verbally informed of this right.

5.2 Overall assessment of Completion of Implementation

5.2.1 Adequacy of Remedial Measures

Remedial measures as defined by the World Bank are mainly targeted to physical relocation and

outlined as follows:










Report

46

Since the impacts involved mainly acquiring of narrow strips of land from the residential plots and

ploughing fields and relocation of fences, the above remedial actions were generally not applicable.

That notwithstanding, transport assistance was extended to PAPs whenever appropriately required.

The PAPs who did not have land rights certificates were also assisted to apply for and acquire such

certificates. The remedial measures extended to PAPs are therefore considered adequate given that the

impacts experienced were minimal to warrant any additional assistance over and above the monetary

compensation.

5.2.2 Adequacy of Compensation

The compensation measures extended to the PAPs are considered adequate, notwithstanding the views

of the PAPs who deemed them inadequate. Despite the guidelines having been reviewed as far back as

2010, inflationary adjustments were made to make up for this time lag. Compensation considered all

elements outlined in the compensation guidelines. Current rates were used where applicable as

affirmed by the competent authority (Department of Lands) and the land authorities (Land Boards). In

cases where there were delays in making compensations (where the stipulated 3 months period was

exceeded), compensations were adjusted upwards by 5% as necessary.

5.2.3 Inclusion of Communities and PAPs in the Process

Consultation meetings were held with PAPs at different stages of the process. Despite these

commendable efforts, it appears that some detail about the process may either have been unclear or

inadequate. This could possibly explain why a significant number of interviewed PAPs strongly

believed that consultations were inadequate especially with regards to their rights and options in the

compensation assessment process. Despite the seemingly disparate positions by PAPs on one hand

and Roads Department on the other regarding disclosure of full details of the process to the PAPs, it

can reasonably be concluded that overall, communities and PAPs were meaningfully taken on board

in the whole process.

5.2.4 Access to Grievance Redress Mechanism

Grievance committees were publicly constituted in the respective villages. The expectation was that

aggrieved PAPs would forward grievances related to RAP implementation to these committees for

resolution and redress. The assumption was that Roads Department would have outlined the mandate

of the committee and procedures for grievance handling to both PAPs and the grievance committee

members. However, this was not done and as a result, PAPs forwarded their grievances to village

leadership for resolution. The main grievance emanated from perceived low compensation and lack of

transparency in the process. Even though PAPs were persuaded to accept compensation, they still

remained aggrieved.

5.2.5 Adequacy of Institutional Arrangements and Procedures

The execution of the RAP assignment took longer than originally scheduled because of

implementation bottlenecks. However, the implementing agency (Roads Department) in conjunction

with relevant institutions managed to complete the exercise without much hiccups. This could be

partly attributed to well laid out procedures and processes. Nevertheless, the process encountered a

few setbacks which had a negative effect on the overall appraisal of project delivery. This included

non-revision of the Compensation Guidelines, insufficient project planning which could be


Report

47

responsible for miscalculation of compensation amounts and delayed payment of compensations.

Furthermore, failure by grievance committees to be functional points to insufficient institutional

capacity to effect follow up action. On the whole, whilst the procedures and processes are clearly laid

out and fairly adequate, the institutional arrangements need to be capacitated.

5.2.6 Issuance of amended certificates

Consultations with the respective Land Boards have indicated that they will need at least 3 months for

preparation of the outstanding land rights certificates. Another 3 months will be required for issuance

of the amended certificates. Given that collection of finalized certificates has proven to be a challenge,

it will now be incumbent upon the project team that once the certificates are ready, the issuance to

PAPs is achieved within 3 months to finalise the entire RAP implementation process. The status

regarding issuance of amended certificates and the proposed plan for completion is as per Table 23.

Table 23: Status of Amended Certificates

Section

Total

number of

certificates

required

Certificates

done

Certificates

collected

Certificates

not

collected

Certificates

pending

compilation

(Land

Board)

Time required for

preparation of

certificates

Time required for

issuance of

certificates

Rakhuna-

Tlhareseleele-

Pitsane

Section 1&2 104 55 47 8 49

Jan-March 2019

3 months

April-June 2019

3 months

Phitshane

Molopo-

Mabule

Section 4 75 33 21 12 42 3 months 3 months Lotlhakane

West-Sese

Package 1 46 13 13 0 33 3 months 3 months

Total 225 101 81 20 124

NB: Some PAPs had registered more than one affected property.

5.2.7 Final Cost Versus Budget for RAP and Justification

Final cost was actually below the budgeted amount with a surplus. The project was over budgeted.

The reasons for these were that budgets were done prior to assessment of properties to be affected

mainly to ensure that money was secured in advance. This was important as compensations have to be

effected prior to project commencement hence funds must be ready. The budget was therefore

basically a thumb suck as opposed to the actual and informed budget.

5.2.8 Change in PAPS and Justification

The addenda to the RAP reports reveal that during the works done on site for the initial project phase,

some of the affected properties were undetected due to the absence of any indication of plot

ownership or occupancy, drawing or marker posts on site. In some cases, owners of such properties

did not present themselves at RAP kgotla meetings or at PAPs consultation meetings. After

finalization of the main RAP reports, some additional affected properties were identified when PAPs


Report

48

associated with these properties came to present themselves during the compensation exercise. The

addenda to the RAP reports indicates the following status with respect to realignment of roads and

identification of additional PAPs:

Table 24: Status of PAPs with respect to road realignment

Packages Original number of

affected properties

from RAP reports

Additional number of

affected properties

from the addenda

Total number of

affected properties

Number of

PAPs

compensated

Package 1 32 16 48 46

Package 2 127 65 192 174

From the addenda, the total number of affected properties was 240. Consultations with RD reduced

the number to 220. Initially affected properties were identified through the help of aerial photographs

but ground truthing led to changes in the actual number of PAPs. In addition, some of the PAPs were

wrongly captured hence more changes to number of PAPs.

5.2.9 Estimate of Total Land Acquisition

Total length for Package 1 is 4 928.81 metres and total area is 21 192.91 m2. For Package 2, total

length is 15 926.8 metres and total area is 275 724.53 m2. It is worth noting that replacement land

was made available where possible to affected properties (residential plot) by the RAP

implementation team. Where it was not possible, loss of land was compensated as per Land Board

standard procedures. Overall no affected persons were displaced save for the above-mentioned

residential plot and less than 10% of the productive assets were affected.

5.2.10 Overall Assessment of Livelihood Impact

In the case of the current road projects, there was no displacement or resettlement (save for one

residential plot) hence there were no livelihood impacts occasioned by the RAP implementation.

There was however perceived reduction in productive capacity of the ploughing fields due to the land

portions that were taken to make way for the road. Our observation however, was that the portions

that were taken were too negligible to result in reduction in productive capacity.

5.2.11 Assessment of Temporary Impact Related to Construction

The focus of the RAP preparation and implementation was not on the construction phase of the

project. Temporary impacts related to construction have been addressed through the ESIA. However,

the survey revealed there are indeed construction related impacts that are being experienced such as

cracking of houses and dust nuisance as well as road accidents. The Contractor should ensure that all

construction related impacts are addressed in accordance with the Environmental Management Plan.


Report

49

5.3 Overall conclusion

This study has assessed adherence by Roads Department to RAP. This was achieved through

assessment of compliance with domestic policies, legislations and procedures as well as World Bank

Safeguard Policy objectives. Generally, the implementation of the RAP has complied with the

foregoing requirements. However, with regard to the status of RAP implementation, the

implementation has not been completed. Notwithstanding the fact that all compensations and

entitlements have been delivered to PAPs, it cannot be said that RAP implementation has been

completed. Given that there are still 124 outstanding certificates pending preparation by the Land

Boards and 20 certificates awaiting collection, it suffices to say that RAP implementation has not

been completed. The process of preparation of certificates (compilation of certificates) and the actual

issuance of certificates to PAPs will require a period of 6 months to be finalised. RAP implementation

will only be completed once all the amended certificates have been issued to the respective PAPs.

With regards to the socio-economic status of the PAPs before and after RAP implementation, the

study has concluded that the impacts experienced did not change the livelihood structure. There were

no considerable differences in terms of access to land, livestock or sources of income. Similarly,

patterns of social interactions remained intact. RAP implementation did not have any livelihood

impacts as there was no loss of access to different public services such as schools, health facilities,

sewage lines, water reticulation points, loss of access to markets, loss of access to suppliers or even

support networks.


Report

50

6 Lessons Learnt 1. Dissatisfaction with the compensation process and outcomes

The surveys revealed some discomfort with the process of compensation guided by the compensation

guidelines from Ministry of Land Management, Water and Sanitation Services. Whist the ministry

had wished to review the guidelines on an annual basis, this has not happened in the past 8 years,

hence the project proponent relied on the guidelines revised in 2010. Even though the Department of

Lands and Land Board are confident that the rates still reflect the current market situation, the use of

the unrevised rates has contributed to some dissatisfaction with the compensation amounts received.

Furthermore, whilst the guidelines provide for full disclosure to PAPs on the rights and options they

have with regard to valuation of their affected properties, it does not appear that the assessment

committee lived by this intent. Hence, some PAPs were of the view that the process was not

transparent. This is not helped by failure to avail the compensation guidelines to PAPs.

The above could have been avoided through the following:

a) Timely review of compensation guidelines by the Ministry of Land Management, Water and

Sanitation Services.

b) PAPs could have been made aware of the valuation process and what goes into the actual

computation of compensation amounts.

c) Full disclosure to PAPs about their rights and options with regard to compensation assessment

and valuation by availing the compensation guidelines to the PAPs.

d) Documentation of all processes, rights and options as they pertain to compensation should

have been prepared in both official languages and availed to the PAPs.

2. Grievance redress mechanism ineffectual

It is evident from the surveys and the resettlement reports that the grievance handling mechanisms for

this project were not effective, hence some grievances were lodged with local chiefs despite the

existence of Grievance Committees. The World Bank prefers a dedicated, accessible and responsive

mechanism for grievance resolution. Thus, the design of the Grievance Redress Mechanism should

have incorporated existing traditional conflict resolution process in the project area.

3. Issuance of Amended Land Rights Certificates

Issuance of amended land rights certificates remains a stumbling block to RAP completion. This is

due to the fact that there is shortage of staff in Land Boards/ Sub Land Boards. Delays in issuance of

amended land rights certificates could have been avoided if the Land Boards prepares the certificates

immediately after compensation.

1

Frequencies

VILLAGE

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid

DIKHUKHUNG 1 1.6 1.6 1.6

LEPORUNG 6 9.7 9.7 11.3

LOTLHAKANE WEST 1 1.6 1.6 12.9

MABULE 4 6.5 6.5 19.4

MMAKGORI 2 3.2 3.2 22.6

MOSHANA 1 1.6 1.6 24.2

MOSHUPA 6 9.7 9.7 33.9

PHITSHANE MOLOPO 4 6.5 6.5 40.3

PITSANE 5 8.1 8.1 48.4

RAKHUNA 10 16.1 16.1 64.5

SELOKOLELA 3 4.8 4.8 69.4

SESE 2 3.2 3.2 72.6

SESUNG 1 1.6 1.6 74.2

TLHARESELEELE 12 19.4 19.4 93.5

TSHIDILAMOLOMO 4 6.5 6.5 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Age of Respondent


Valid

19-35 years 1 1.6 1.6 1.6

36-60 years 28 45.2 45.2 46.8

61-65 years 12 19.4 19.4 66.1

Over 65 years 21 33.9 33.9 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Sex of Respondent


Valid

Male 31 50.0 50.0 50.0

Female 31 50.0 50.0 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

2

Marital Status of Respondent


Valid

Married 25 40.3 40.3 40.3

Single 19 30.6 30.6 71.0

Widowed 18 29.0 29.0 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Household head


Valid

No 11 17.7 17.7 17.7

Yes 51 82.3 82.3 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Source of Income: Formal employment


Valid

No 55 88.7 88.7 88.7

Yes 7 11.3 11.3 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Source of Income: Self employed


Valid

No 55 88.7 88.7 88.7

Yes 7 11.3 11.3 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Source of Income: Farming


Valid

No 40 64.5 64.5 64.5

Yes 22 35.5 35.5 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

3

Source of Income: Remittances


Valid

No 54 87.1 87.1 87.1

Yes 8 12.9 12.9 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Source of Income: Pension


Valid

No 45 72.6 72.6 72.6

Yes 17 27.4 27.4 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Source of Income: Ipelegeng


Valid

No 59 95.2 95.2 95.2

Yes 3 4.8 4.8 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Source of Income: Government Grant


Valid

No 60 96.8 96.8 96.8

Yes 2 3.2 3.2 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Source of Income: None


Valid

No 59 95.2 95.2 95.2

Yes 3 4.8 4.8 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

4

Estimated individual monthly income/earnings


Valid

None 6 9.7 9.8 9.8

100-1000 Pula 42 67.7 68.9 78.7

1001-2500 Pula 6 9.7 9.8 88.5

2501-5000 Pula 1 1.6 1.6 90.2

5001-10000 Pula 3 4.8 4.9 95.1

Above 10000 Pula 3 4.8 4.9 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Estimated household monthly income/earnings


Valid

None 5 8.1 8.2 8.2

100-1000 Pula 38 61.3 62.3 70.5

1001-2500 Pula 10 16.1 16.4 86.9

2501-5000 Pula 2 3.2 3.3 90.2

5001-10000 Pula 3 4.8 4.9 95.1

Above 10000 Pula 3 4.8 4.9 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Are you registered in any government welfare programmes?


Valid

No 52 83.9 83.9 83.9

Yes 10 16.1 16.1 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

5

If yes on which welfare programmes?


Valid

LIMID 3 4.8 33.3 33.3

Poverty Eradication 2 3.2 22.2 55.6

Destitution Programme 3 4.8 33.3 88.9

Old age Pension Food Ration 1 1.6 11.1 100.0

Total 9 14.5 100.0

Missing

Missing 1 1.6

Not Applicable 52 83.9

Total 53 85.5

Total 62 100.0

Do you have any of your family members who is registered in any government welfare programmes?


Valid

No 54 87.1 88.5 88.5

Yes 7 11.3 11.5 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

If yes on which welfare programmes?


Valid

LIMID 1 1.6 14.3 14.3

Poverty Eradication 3 4.8 42.9 57.1

Health Ration 1 1.6 14.3 71.4

Disability Cash Allowance 1 1.6 14.3 85.7

Young Farmers Fund 1 1.6 14.3 100.0

Total 7 11.3 100.0

Missing Not Applicable 55 88.7

Total 62 100.0

Are you aware of road construction project in your area?


Valid Yes 62 100.0 100.0 100.0

6

Who informed you that your land or property might be affected by the project? Kgosi


Valid

No 39 62.9 62.9 62.9

Yes 23 37.1 37.1 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Who informed you that your land or property might be affected by the project? Department of Roads


Valid

No 16 25.8 25.8 25.8

Yes 46 74.2 74.2 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Who informed you that your land or property might be affected by the project? Land Board


Valid

No 21 33.9 33.9 33.9

Yes 41 66.1 66.1 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Who informed you that your land or property might be affected by the project? VDC


Valid

No 54 87.1 87.1 87.1

Yes 8 12.9 12.9 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Who informed you that your land or property might be affected by the project? Member of Parliament


Valid

No 55 88.7 88.7 88.7

Yes 7 11.3 11.3 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Who informed you that your land or property might be affected by the project? Councilors


Valid

No 53 85.5 85.5 85.5

Yes 9 14.5 14.5 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

7

Who informed you that your land or property might be affected by the project? Relative


Valid

No 61 98.4 98.4 98.4

Yes 1 1.6 1.6 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Who informed you that your land or property might be affected by the project? No One


Valid

No 61 98.4 98.4 98.4

Yes 1 1.6 1.6 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

How were you informed that your land or property might be affected by the project? Kgotla meeting


Valid

No 24 38.7 39.3 39.3

Yes 37 59.7 60.7 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

How were you informed that your land or property might be affected by the project? In person


Valid

No 28 45.2 45.9 45.9

Yes 33 53.2 54.1 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

How were you informed that your land or property might be affected by the project? Through some committee


Valid

No 60 96.8 98.4 98.4

Yes 1 1.6 1.6 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

8

How were you informed that your land or property might be affected by the project? Through a letter (Notice Form 1)


Valid

No 53 85.5 86.9 86.9

Yes 8 12.9 13.1 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

How were you informed that your land or property might be affected by the project? Through a phone call


Valid

No 57 91.9 93.4 93.4

Yes 4 6.5 6.6 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

How were you informed that your land or property might be affected by the project? Through a public notice at kgotla


Valid

No 58 93.5 95.1 95.1

Yes 3 4.8 4.9 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

When were you informed that your land or property might be affected by the project?


Valid

Before 31 October 2015 40 64.5 69.0 69.0

After 31 October 2015 9 14.5 15.5 84.5

Can't remember 8 12.9 13.8 98.3

Not notified 1 1.6 1.7 100.0

Total 58 93.5 100.0

Missing

Missing 3 4.8


Total 4 6.5

Total 62 100.0

9

In your opinion do you think that you have been adequately consulted?


Valid

No 16 25.8 27.1 27.1

Yes 43 69.4 72.9 100.0

Total 59 95.2 100.0


Total 62 100.0

How were you affected by the above project?


Valid

Partially displaced (ploughing field,

residence, other property) 60 96.8 96.8 96.8

Cracking house 2 3.2 3.2 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Were you informed about your options and rights pertaining to compensation and/or resettlement?


Valid

No 40 64.5 64.5 64.5

Yes 22 35.5 35.5 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Were you made aware of your right to engage valuation professionals?


Valid

No 58 93.5 93.5 93.5

Yes 4 6.5 6.5 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Were you given an opportunity to make a claim for your properties?


Valid

No 58 93.5 93.5 93.5

Yes 4 6.5 6.5 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

10

Were you present or represented at the validation of the assessment findings?


Valid

No 18 29.0 29.5 29.5

Yes 43 69.4 70.5 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Were you made aware of the results of the valuation before signing Form 2 and Form 3?


Valid

No 31 50.0 50.8 50.8

Yes 29 46.8 47.5 98.4

Can't remember 1 1.6 1.6 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Were you invited by the assessment committee to submit any additional or counter claims for your

properties?


Valid

No 58 93.5 93.5 93.5

Yes 4 6.5 6.5 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

How long did it take for you to be compensated?


Valid

Less than 6 months 21 33.9 34.4 34.4

6 to 12 months 20 32.3 32.8 67.2

12 to 24 months 17 27.4 27.9 95.1

Over 2 years 2 3.2 3.3 98.4

Not Yet Compensated 1 1.6 1.6 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

11

Do you consider the time it took for you to be compensated reasonable?


Valid

No 36 58.1 60.0 60.0

Yes 24 38.7 40.0 100.0

Total 60 96.8 100.0

Missing

Missing 1 1.6


Total 2 3.2

Total 62 100.0

Was the notice given to vacate the acquired land after compensation adequate?


Valid

No 21 33.9 35.0 35.0

Yes 30 48.4 50.0 85.0

Not notified 9 14.5 15.0 100.0

Total 60 96.8 100.0


Total 62 100.0

What did you receive as compensation for your affected properties?


Valid

MONEY 60 96.8 96.8 96.8

NOTHING 1 1.6 1.6 98.4

REPAIR OF CRACKS BUT PAINTING

INCOMPLETE 1 1.6 1.6 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Do you consider the compensation adequate?


Valid

No 52 83.9 85.2 85.2

Yes 7 11.3 11.5 96.7

Do Not Know 1 1.6 1.6 98.4

Not sure 1 1.6 1.6 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

12

Were you provided with residential housing or housing sites?


Valid No 1 1.6 100.0 100.0

Missing Not applicable 61 98.4

Total 62 100.0

Were you provided with agricultural sites with the similar productive potential and location advantage/ advantages

equivalent of the old site?


Valid No 8 12.9 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

What assistance were you provided with in addition to compensation? Transport or moving allowance


Valid No 62 100.0 100.0 100.0

What assistance were you provided with in addition to compensation? Land prepraration


Valid No 62 100.0 100.0 100.0

What assistance were you provided with in addition to compensation? Credit facilities


Valid No 62 100.0 100.0 100.0

What assistance were you provided with in addition to compensation? Training


Valid No 62 100.0 100.0 100.0

13

What assistance were you provided with in addition to compensation? Job opportunities


Valid No 62 100.0 100.0 100.0

What assistance were you provided with in addition to compensation? None of the above


Valid

No 5 8.1 8.1 8.1

Yes 57 91.9 91.9 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

What assistance were you provided with in addition to compensation? Not assisted


Valid

No 46 74.2 74.2 74.2

Yes 16 25.8 25.8 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the loss of access to public services?


Valid No 60 96.8 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the loss of customers/market?


Valid No 60 96.8 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the loss of suppliers?


Valid No 60 96.8 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

14

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the loss of fishing?


Valid No 60 96.8 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the loss of grazing?


Valid

No 59 95.2 98.3 98.3

Yes 1 1.6 1.7 100.0

Total 60 96.8 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the loss of forest areas?


Valid No 60 96.8 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the loss of weakening of community support networks?


Valid No 60 96.8 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the loss of erosion of cultural identity and traditional authority?


Valid No 60 96.8 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

15

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the loss of redundancy of productive skills in the new environment?


Valid No 60 96.8 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the loss of increased competition for resources?


Valid No 60 96.8 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the loss of income?


Valid

No 58 93.5 96.7 96.7

Yes 2 3.2 3.3 100.0

Total 60 96.8 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Do you feel the relocation has resulted in the reduced production?


Valid

No 51 82.3 85.0 85.0

Yes 9 14.5 15.0 100.0

Total 60 96.8 100.0


Total 62 100.0

16

Do you feel relocation/displacement has benefited you?


Valid

No 27 43.5 81.8 81.8

Yes 6 9.7 18.2 100.0

Total 33 53.2 100.0


Total 62 100.0

In your opinion, was effort made to establish access equivalent to what you have lost above?


Valid

No 25 40.3 92.6 92.6

Yes 2 3.2 7.4 100.0

Total 27 43.5 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Did you have any grievance regarding the project?


Valid

No 22 35.5 35.5 35.5

Yes 40 64.5 64.5 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Where did you lodge your complaint/grievance? Magistrate/High court


Valid No 41 66.1 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Where did you lodge your complaint/grievance? Minister of Lands and Housing


Valid No 41 66.1 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

17

Where did you lodge your complaint/grievance? Department of Lands


Valid

No 39 62.9 95.1 95.1

Yes 2 3.2 4.9 100.0

Total 41 66.1 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Where did you lodge your complaint/grievance? Land Board


Valid

No 32 51.6 78.0 78.0

Yes 9 14.5 22.0 100.0

Total 41 66.1 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Where did you lodge your complaint/grievance? Developer/Department of Roads


Valid

No 32 51.6 78.0 78.0

Yes 9 14.5 22.0 100.0

Total 41 66.1 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Where did you lodge your complaint/grievance? Chief


Valid

No 37 59.7 90.2 90.2

Yes 4 6.5 9.8 100.0

Total 41 66.1 100.0


Total 62 100.0

18

Where did you lodge your complaint/grievance? Grievance committee


Valid

No 39 62.9 95.1 95.1

Yes 2 3.2 4.9 100.0

Total 41 66.1 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Where did you lodge your complaint/grievance? Land Tribunal


Valid No 41 66.1 100.0 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Where did you lodge your complaint/grievance? Councillor


Valid

No 39 62.9 95.1 95.1

Yes 2 3.2 4.9 100.0

Total 41 66.1 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Where did you lodge your complaint/grievance? District Commissioner


Valid

No 39 62.9 95.1 95.1

Yes 2 3.2 4.9 100.0

Total 41 66.1 100.0


Total 62 100.0

19

Where did you lodge your complaint/grievance? Not lodged


Valid

No 22 35.5 53.7 53.7

Yes 19 30.6 46.3 100.0

Total 41 66.1 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Who ultimately resolved your complaint?


Valid

Land Board 2 3.2 10.0 10.0

Developer/Department of Roads 2 3.2 10.0 20.0

Chief 1 1.6 5.0 25.0

Councillor 1 1.6 5.0 30.0

District Commissioner 1 1.6 5.0 35.0

Not resolved 13 21.0 65.0 100.0

Total 20 32.3 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Were you satisfied with the process of addressing your complaint?


Valid

No 17 27.4 89.5 89.5

Yes 2 3.2 10.5 100.0

Total 19 30.6 100.0


Total 62 100.0

Were you satisfied with the outcome of your complaint?


Valid

No 18 29.0 94.7 94.7

Yes 1 1.6 5.3 100.0

Total 19 30.6 100.0


Total 62 100.0

20

Do you consider yourself better off after the relocation or compensation?


Valid

No 17 27.4 27.4 27.4

Yes 6 9.7 9.7 37.1

No change 39 62.9 62.9 100.0

Total 62 100.0 100.0

Do you consider yourself worse off after the relocation or compensation?


Valid

No 8 12.9 13.1 13.1

Yes 13 21.0 21.3 34.4

No change 40 64.5 65.6 100.0

Total 61 98.4 100.0


Total 62 100.0

1

CROSS TABULATION TABLES AND CHARTS

Age, Marital Status, household headship and gender of respondents

Male Female

Count % Count %

Age of

Respondent

0-18

years

0 0.0% 0 0.0%

19-35

years

1 100.0% 0 0.0%

36-60

years

14 50.0% 14 50.0%

61-65

years

9 75.0% 3 25.0%

Over 65

years

7 33.3% 14 66.7%

Marital Status

of Respondent

Married 17 68.0% 8 32.0%

Single 9 47.4% 10 52.6%

Divorced 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Widowed 5 27.8% 13 72.2%

Household head No 1 9.1% 10 90.9%

Yes 30 58.8% 21 41.2%

Age and Gender of Respondents

0%

100%

50%

75%

33%

0% 0%

50%

25%

67%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0-18 years 19-35 years 36-60 years 61-65 years Over 65 years

Males Females

2

Marital Status and Gender of Respondents

68%

47%

0%

28%32%

53%

0%

72%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Married Single Divorced Widowed

Males Females

Household Headship and Gender of Respondents

9%

59%

91%

41%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

No Yes

Males Females

3

Household Headship, Marital status, Source of Income, Household monthly earnings

and member registered in welfare programme

Household head

No Yes

No. of PAPS %

No. of PAPS %

Marital Status of Respondent Married 7 28% 18 72%

Single 2 11% 17 89%

Divorced 0 0% 0 0%

Widowed 2 11% 16 89%

Source of Income: Formal employment No 11 20% 44 80%

Yes 0 0% 7 100%

Source of Income: Self employed No 10 18% 45 82%

Yes 1 14% 6 86%

Source of Income: Farming No 6 15% 34 85%

Yes 5 23% 17 77%

Source of Income: Remittances No 7 13% 47 87%

Yes 4 50% 4 50%

Source of Income: Pension No 9 20% 36 80%

Yes 2 12% 15 88%

Source of Income: Ipelegeng No 10 17% 49 83%

Yes 1 33% 2 67%

Source of Income: Government Grant No 11 18% 49 82%

Yes 0 0% 2 100%

Source of Income: None No 11 19% 48 81%

Yes 0 0% 3 100%

Estimated household monthly income/earnings None 0 0% 5 100%

100-1000 Pula

8 21% 30 79%

1001-2500 Pula

1 10% 9 90%

2501-5000 Pula

1 50% 1 50%

5001-10000 Pula

1 33% 2 67%

Above 10000 Pula

0 0% 3 100%

Are you registered in any government welfare programmes? No 8 15% 44 85%

Yes 3 30% 7 70%

Do you have any of your family members who is registered in any government welfare programmes?

No 10 19% 44 81%

Yes 0 0% 7 100%

4

Household Headship and Marital Status

28%

11%

0%

11%

72%

89%

0%

89%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Married Single Divorced Widowed

No Yes

Household Headship and Source of income

100%

86%

77%

50%

88%

67%

100%

100%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Formal employment

Self employed

Farming

Remittances

Pension

Ipelegeng

Government Grant

None

Household head Yes Household head No

5

Household Headship and Household Monthly income

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

None 100-1000 Pula 1001-2500Pula

2501-5000Pula

5001-10000Pula

Above 10000Pula

No Yes

Household Headship and Registration on Government Welfare Programmes

15%

30%

85%

70%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

No Yes

Household head No Household head Yes

6

Household Headship and Family member registered in Government welfare

programme

19%

0%

81%

100%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

No Yes

Household head No Household head Yes

Source of income and Individual monthly income


None 100-1000

Pula 1001-2500

Pula 2501-5000

Pula 5001-10000 Pula Above 10000 Pula

Formal employment No 100% 100% 50% 0% 100% 0%

Yes 0% 0% 50% 100% 0% 100%

Self employed No 100% 88% 100% 100% 67% 100%

Yes 0% 12% 0% 0% 33% 0%

Farming No 67% 60% 67% 100% 67% 100%

Yes 33% 40% 33% 0% 33% 0%

Remittances No 100% 81% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Yes 0% 19% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Pension No 100% 64% 83% 100% 67% 100%

Yes 0% 36% 17% 0% 33% 0%

Ipelegeng No 100% 93% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Yes 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Government Grant No 83% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Yes 17% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0%

None No 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Yes 50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

7

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

None 100-1000 Pula 1001-2500 Pula 2501-5000 Pula 5001-10000 Pula Above 10000Pula

Formal employment Self employed Farming Remittances

Pension Ipelegeng Government Grant None

Source of income and Registration of Government welfare programme

Are you registered in any government welfare programmes?

No

Yes

Count % Count % Formal employment

No 45 86.5% 10 100.0%

Yes 7 13.5% 0 0.0%

Self employed

No 45 86.5% 10 100.0%

Yes 7 13.5% 0 0.0%

Farming No 32 61.5% 8 80.0%

Yes 20 38.5% 2 20.0%

Remittances No 49 94.2% 5 50.0%

Yes 3 5.8% 5 50.0%

Pension No 38 73.1% 7 70.0%

Yes 14 26.9% 3 30.0%

Ipelegeng No 50 96.2% 9 90.0%

Yes 2 3.8% 1 10.0%

Government

Grant

No 51 98.1% 9 90.0%

Yes 1 1.9% 1 10.0%

None No 50 96.2% 9 90.0%

Yes 2 3.8% 1 10.0%

8

Awareness to engage valuation professionals and claim for properties

Were you given an opportunity to make a claim for your properties?

No Yes

Count % Count % Were you made aware of your

right to engage valuation professionals?

No 55 95% 3 5%

Yes 3 75% 1 25%

Date of compensation and reasonableness of the time

Do you consider the time it took for you to be compensated reasonable?

No Yes Total How long did it take for you to be compensated?

Less than 6 months

Count 5 16 21

% 13.9% 66.7% 35.0%

6 to 12 months

Count 14 6 20

% 38.9% 25.0% 33.3%

12 to 24 months

Count 15 2 17

% 41.7% 8.3% 28.3%

Over 2 years

Count 2 0 2

% 5.6% 0.0% 3.3%

Total

Count 36 24 60

% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Gender and Source of Income

16.1%9.7%

35.5%

3.2%

22.6%

3.2% 3.2% 6.5%6.5%12.9%

35.5%

22.6%

32.3%

6.5% 3.2% 3.2%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Formal Employment Farming Pension Government grant

Male Female

9

Gender and Estimated individual monthly income/earnings

16.7%

56.7%

13.3%

3.3% 3.3%6.7%

3.2%

80.6%

6.5%

0.0%

6.5% 3.2%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

None 100-1000 Pula 1001-2500Pula

2501-5000Pula

5001-10000Pula

Above 10000Pula


Male Female

1

Proceedings of a meeting between Ms Mogae (Individual Consultant) and Mr. Mokope

(Department of Lands)

Date: 27th August 2018

Venue: Department of Lands

Introduction

The Individual Consultant, Ms. Mogae introduced herself and outlined the purpose of the visit to the

Principal Lands Officer, Mr. Mokope. She outlined that she was assigned by the Department of Roads

to conduct an audit of the OPRC road project which was financed by Botswana Government and the

World Bank. This was to assess compliance to World Bank guidelines and Botswana Government

requirements. For the Department, the purpose was to establish the role of the department or ministry

in compensation assessments as well as any performance standards in place.

Role of the Lands Department

Mr. Mokope, who is in charge of administering the Compensation Guidelines outlined the role of his

department as follows:

➢ The department’s role is to administer the compensation guidelines and ensure that they are

adhered to. This includes validating what the Land Board has prepared

➢ The actual assessments and computation of figures has been decentralised to Land Boards.

➢ Thus, the guidelines were prepared to guide the Land Board when undertaking assessments

and valuations.

➢ The guidelines are prepared by the Department of Lands and approved by Cabinet. They are

supposed to be revised annually. However, the guidelines in use currently are for 2010, thus

they are overdue for review.

➢ That notwithstanding, the assessment committees of the Land Board (which must have a

valuer as one of the members), are at liberty to adjust the rates where necessary especially

considering the prevailing market rates.

➢ The guidelines also include an adjustment for the distance from the nearest major centres.

➢ Once approved by the Land Board, the compensation assessment report is forwarded to the

Department of Lands for validation.

Discussion

Mr Mokope indicated that where disputes arise over the compensation amount, this should be

mutually discussed and resolved between the claimant and the Land Board, through the assessment

committee. Should there be need, the claimant is allowed to engage an independent valuer to do an

independent valuation which would form the basis of an arbitration process if necessary.

2

He further indicated that the standard adopted by the department is 1.5 months for validation of the

compensation assessment report from the Land Board. Once approved, the department forwards it to

the Land Board who in turn communicates with the acquiring authority to release payment to affected

persons. Should 3 months elapse between this period, then claimant is entitled to 5% adjustment.

1

Proceedings of a meeting between Ms Mogae (Individual Consultant) and Mr. Pilane (Moshupa

Subordinate Land Board)

Date: 5th September 2018

Venue: Moshupa Subordinate Land Board

Introduction

The Individual Consultant, Ms. Mogae introduced herself and outlined the purpose of the visit to the

Land Board. She told the Sub Land Board Secretary, Mr. Pilane that she was assigned by the

Department of Roads to conduct an audit of the OPRC road project which was financed by Botswana

Government and the World Bank. This was to assess compliance to World Bank guidelines and

Botswana Government requirements. For the Land Board, the purpose was to establish compliance

with Ministry of Lands Compensation Guidelines.

Compensation Procedure

Mr. Pilane outlined the procedure as follows:

➢ The acquiring authority approached the Land Board and explains the purpose of their project

and how it is likely to affect property owners.

➢ The acquiring authority presents a list of potentially affected persons (after initial

consultations with the community and those that are likely to be affected)

➢ The acquiring authority then outlines their schedule of activities such as compensation

assessments.

➢ The Land Board constitutes an assessment committee and on the agreed dates, starts the

physical assessment of properties in the presence of property owners or their representatives

➢ The committee explains the whole procedure to property owners, and this includes their rights

and entitlements. These rights include engaging independent valuers so that should there be

need for arbitration, then both parties would be ready with their valuation reports.

➢ Rates for valuation are adopted from the Compensation Guidelines with allowance for

upward adjustment where necessary

➢ The valuation considers the distance factor

➢ After compiling the valuation report, the committee presents t to the Land Board for

endorsement before forwarding to the Department of Lands for approval

➢ The Land Board sits weekly and if there are many properties to be assessed, the assessment is

done in batches so that whilst some of the properties are being assessed, others processes are

in motion.

➢ Generally, the Land Board takes two weeks to forward the report to Department of Lands.

2

➢ Once the Department of Lands has approved the valuation report, the Land Board forwards it

to the acquiring authority for payment

➢ After payment, the Land Board issues new certificates to affected persons

Discussion

During discussion, the following emerged:

➢ Most of the affected properties at Package 1 were ploughing fields, and these never had

certificates. So, in most of them, they were issued with new certificates. Property owners are

officially notified in writing of the availability of certificates. Even at Board meetings, they

are informed that certificates would be ready in 5 days.

➢ However, the rate of uptake of certificates is slow since it would appear that people were only

interested in the payment. But the Land Board makes efforts to take the certificates to

respective villages but still there is low uptake.

➢ The Land Board uses one-on-one notification to affected persons of their rights in the process;

no formal letters are written to them in this regard.

➢ We appreciate that the Compensation Guidelines were last revised in 2010, however, this did

not disadvantage the affected persons since the valuer is allowed to exercise professional

judgement to adjust the rates where necessary.

➢ The guidelines provide for upward adjustment of 5% if payment was delayed by 3 months.

This was done for this project

➢ There could have been delays in the whole process. This could be due to lack of prior

coordination between Roads Department and the Land Board leading to clash of schedules

especially that the Land Board is thin on personnel with regards to valuations.

1

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE PROJECT TEAM

1. Who is the owner of the report between Roads Department and World Bank?

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

2. Please clarify the role of Roads Department versus that of World Bank

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

3. What motivated the Completion Report/ What is the rationale and purpose of RAP Completion

report?

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

4. With a view to determining if compensations were achieved in a timely manner, please clarify

whether there was any cut-off date for payment of compensations (the time between assessment

and the actual payment/compensation)-Outline the process with regard to time frames.

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

5. What is the basis for the cut-off date for Land Board and that of Roads Department?

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

6. How were delays in compensation mitigated/How did you make up for delayed compensation?

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

2

7. Outline the constraints, issues and delays encountered during implementation and how they

were overcome.

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

8. Kindly provide:

a. Offer letters

b. Consent letters

c. Records of consultations

d. Minutes and frequency of meetings

9. How often did the PAP team meet with individual PAPs?

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

10. Compensation rates-Please clarify if compensation rates were reviewed post 2010, if rates were

adjusted to consider inflation and if indeed there is need for adjustments

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

11. Please clarify whether cut off date for freezing development was adequately announced to the

PAPs

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

12. Kindly verify whether all PAPs have received their amended certificates (Number of

Certificates issued and the number of pending certificates)

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

13. Please provide proof that due process was followed in informing PAPs of their rights to engage

Valuation Professionals

3

14. Please clarify if there were any “PAPs” who were affected by initial road alignment and were

later not affected by the re-alignment (Please clarify if this could be one of the reasons why

some PAPs feel compensation was inadequate)

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

15. Was there change of PAPs at any point in time? If yes why?

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

16. Please clarify how miscalculations occurred that resulted in PAPs feeling compensation was

inadequate and therefore felt cheated.

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

17. What measures did Roads Department take to explain to the PAPs as to what led to the reduction

of the compensation amounts.

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

18. Please provide the RAP implementation budget for the whole implementation of RAP

assignment and specify if the budget was adequate. If it was not adequate please give reasons

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

19. What supplementary assistance was provided to the PAPs by the Project Team?

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

THANK YOU.

1

Comments Response Sheet-World Bank Comments on the Draft final Completion Report-

Consultancy Services for the Preparation of a Comprehensive Resettlement Action Plan (RAP)

Completion Report for Output and Performance based Road Contracts (OPRC)

Chapter Page

number

Comments Response

1. The current draft has satisfactorily

addressed all the RSS comments

on the first draft, viz.;

(a) the report has been restructured as

suggested

(b) the nature, purpose and basis for the

study have been defined

(c) adherence to the RAP was assessed;

and,

(d) A conclusion section was provided.

In addition, the sampling method

was discussed.

Noted.

2. Need for further elaborations

and evidences to support key

conclusions of the study. The

report now provides categorical

conclusions on most of the study

questions. However, the following

assertions would need to be

further substantiated with facts

and discussions:

(a) There was no

displacement/resettlement impact

and hence there was no need for

remedial measures viz. (i)

residential; (ii) livelihood

development support; and, (iii)

moving assistance. (See section

3.3 Page 30; Page32.) These are

currently being presented as

findings of the study whereas

these should have been already

captured in RAP documents.

There is therefore a need to first

indicate what RAPs originally

planned or intend to provide, i.e.

whether there was initially a plan

to provide housing, livelihood

support or moving assistance.

And if so, then what happened or

why was it not provided? On the

other hand, if RAPs had originally

The RAP intended to

adhere to OP 4.12

guidelines as regards

remedial measures

applicable to resettlement

and displacement impacts.

However, the RAP reports

indicate that there were no

relocations of

PAPs/properties, there

were no impacts on means

of livelihood hence there

was no need for any

housing or moving

assistance nor livelihood

support.

Data supporting the study

conclusion that RAP

implementation did not

impact significantly on the

household incomes and

living conditions has been

provided (Item 3.3.1.1

paragraph 3).

The RAP and ESIA

reports have not made any

conclusion on the need for

additional assistance to

vulnerable PAPs except

for simply outlining World

2

indicated that there was no need

for such remedies, then the

discussions would be whether

such plan is consistent with the

intent of the OP 4.12.

Furthermore, regardless of

whether or not resettlement and/

livelihood support were required,

the study should be able to

present data on the incomes and

livelihood status of PAPs before

and after RAP implementation.

Data indicating that incomes and

living conditions of the PAPs

have not deteriorated should

support the conclusion that PAPs

were not affected. Otherwise, if

data indicate that lives have

deteriorated, the report should

provide explanations as to

possible cause of deterioration.

(b) There was no need for additional

assistance or special treatment to

vulnerable PAPs (Section 3.3.3).

There is a need to cite any

discussions from the RAPs or

findings from ESIA that support

these claims. The report

mentioned that consultations were

conducted with the vulnerable

PAPs but it did not mention what

came out of that consultation or

whether the RAPs categorically

ruled out extending any additional

supports to vulnerable PAPs.

(c) The cash compensation were

adequate- There is need to

substantiate the conclusion that

the compensations received by the

PAPs were adequate especially

given the opposite perception by

PAPs. The OP 4.12 provides that

valuation of losses must be based

on the “replacement cost”

principle. The report should show

that the rates were indeed

equivalent to replacement costs,

using data from current market

transactions or other primary or

Bank requirements for

such assistance in cases of

resettlement. The survey

consultations with PAPs

did not come out with any

opinion by vulnerable

groups as to whether or

not they needed additional

support because there was

no relocation that would

warrant consideration for

special assistance.

3

secondary sources.

3. Need to provide brief

background on the Amended

Land Certificates. The report has

determined that the

implementation of the RAPs is

still incomplete because of the

pending issuance of the Amended

Land Certificates. This will have

implications on the closure of the

project or at least the subprojects

(i.e. Package 1 and Package 2) as

normally projects cannot be

declared closed if RAPs are still

under implementation. There is

therefore a need to describe what

is required and what is the

significance of (or how critical

are) these certificates to the PAPs

and to the completion of the

RAPs.

Addressed under Section

4.

4. Lessons Learnt. There is a need

to recast the discussions in the

Lessons Learnt section. Lessons

learnt should reflect something

the project should have done or

not done; or, innovations that was

employed in response to certain

constraints that proved to be

effective. For example:

(a) The study has found that the

GRM arrangement was not

implemented or was not utilized

by the project. Should have the

design of the GRM considered the

existing or traditional conflict

resolution process in the project

area?

(b) If there is a perception among the

PAPs that the compensations they

received were inadequate, how

could such have been avoided?

(c) Could the delays in issuance of

Amended Land Certificates have

been avoided? How?

Addressed under Section

6.

4

5. Suggested edits:

(a) On P1, the following sentence

should be in the past tense as RD

has implemented the RAP- hence

the completion report: “ Roads

Department (RD) is currently

implementing two resettlement

Action Plans (RAP) as per

requirements of the World Bank.”

(b) Correct the word “issuing” to

“issuance” in the heading of

Section 5.26 to “Issuance of

amended certificates” and, in the

heading of section 5.26 as well

as in the text in Section 5.3.

(c) Change the heading in 3.2.2 from

“After RAP Implementation” to

“Socio-economic conditions of

PAPs after RAP implementation”.

Include a statement in the

conclusion about the current

socioeconomic status of the PAPs.

(d) The report clearly states that there

has been no displacement.

However, on p25, p30 and p32 an

undeveloped plot is referenced in

relation to property relocation. It

would appear that there can be no

relocation of property on an

undeveloped plot, thus please

correct the language (i.e. use a

word other than relocation to

describe the impact on the

undeveloped plot). p25: “ in

accordance with these

instruments, The Department of

Roads ensured that no family

dwelling, ploughing field or any

other property was relocated

except for only one undeveloped

residential plot in Package 2. “and

p30: “ In this particular project,

displacement has generally been

avoided save for one case where

displacement of one undeveloped

residential plot occurred.” P32 “

Addressed. The report has

been edited.

5

In the RAP implementation for

both Packages 1 and 2, there was

hardly any physical relocation

save for 1 PAP in

Tshidilamolomo whose

undeveloped plot was taken for

the purpose of the project.”

(e) Please note that figure 9 on p35 is

missing. Kindly insert the version

Figure 9 has always been

in the report.

public disclosure authorized - world bankdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/...comprehensive...

Documents