republic of kenya - world bankdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/581631468271844648/... · web...

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES PLANNING FRAMEWORK

FOR THE

KENYA ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE

IN ARID AND SEMI ARID LANDS (KACCAL) PROJECT

AUGUST, 2009

Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework for the Kenya Adaptation to Climate Change in Arid and Semi-arid lands of Kenya

IPP377

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary 4

1. Introduction and description of KACCAL Project 5 1.1 Lending Instrument 51.2 Project Development Objective & Key Indicators 51.3 Project Components 51.4 Key Activities 6

2.0 The indigenous peoples in the operational areas and possible impacts 6 2.1 Indigenous peoples in the operational areas 6 Table 1.0: Indigenous peoples assisted by ALRMP II 72.2 Impacts 11

Table 2.0: Potential impacts of KACCAL on Indigenous peoples 11 3.0 Proposed Social Assessment 15 Table 3.0 Specific measures for the indigenous Peoples 16

3.1 Institutional Arrangements 17 4.0 Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms 17 Disclosure 18

Annex 1: Bibliography 19Annex 2: Screening tool for indigenous peoples 19 Photo 1: District Steering Group meeting with Watta Indigenous Peoples 22Representatives in Malindi Photo 2: District Steering Group meeting with Watta Indigenous Peoples 23 in Malindi


Abbreviations

ALRMP Arid Lands Resource Management projectCDC Community Development CommitteeCDD Community Driven Development DSG District Steering GroupGoK Government of KenyaIP Indigenous PeoplesIPP Indigenous Peoples PlanIPPF Indigenous Peoples Planning FrameworkIPR Indigenous Peoples RepresentativesKACCAL Kenya Adaptation to Climate Change In Arid and Semi-LandsKshs Kenya ShillingsM&E Monitoring and EvaluationMET Mobile Extension TeamsNGO Non-Governmental OrganizationsPMU Project Management UnitPICD Participatory Integrated Community Development PIM Participatory Impact MonitoringPRA Participatory Rural AppraisalUSD US Dollar


Executive Summary

The Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASALs) which cover more than 80 percent of the country’s land mass need special attention in order to achieve sustainable economic development in Kenya. The ASALs cut across 39 districts, mainly in the Rift Valley, Eastern, Northeastern and Coast Provinces. The striking spatial variation in incomes, poverty and human development in Kenya indicate the severe under-development and marginalization of the ASALs. This under-development arises from a range of reasons, including climatic and agro-ecological factors and socio-economic conditions, such as low levels of access to markets and services. Climate variability and change threaten to undermine poverty reduction and economic growth in the ASALs by exacerbating existing vulnerabilities.

The Kenya Adaptation to Climate Change in Arid and Semi-Arid lands (KACCAL) project is to be piloted in five districts namely, Garissa, Turkana, Marsabit, Malindi and Mwingi. These districts which are within the ALRMP II operation area cover a wide range of conditions relevant for adaptation. The selection is seeking to include a combination of districts that: (i) cover arid and semi arid areas; (ii) are exposed to multi-hazard climate risks (e.g. droughts and floods) and will likely experience continuing climate variability; (iii) include a range of livelihood types (pastoral, agro-pastoral, agricultural, natural resource based); (iv) have variation in implementation capacity; and (iv) are among the poorest and most-vulnerable areas.

During project preparation, it became clear that KACCAL might impact on indigenous peoples’ rights. To comply with the standards of the World Bank’s Operational Policy on Indigenous Peoples (OP 4.10), the Government of Kenya has prepared this Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF). The purpose of the IPPF is to ensure that the development process fully respects the dignity, rights, economies, and culture and that the project is able to gain the broad community support of affected indigenous peoples and other vulnerable and marginalized groups.

Therefore, the project will provide opportunities and mechanisms for indigenous peoples and other vulnerable and marginalized groups to:

Participate in all project activities in their areas and are involved in decision making organs of the project;

Receive project funds; Utilize and benefit from the resources of this project.

The KACCAL will carry out a Social Assessment in two stages: 1) initial screening (see screening tool in Annex 2) and 2) detailed social assessment. The objective of the initial screening is to identify all existing Hunters and Gatherers in the proposed KACCAL project operational area. This exercise will be undertaken with the assistance (or in close collaboration) with an indigenous person (or indigenous persons) from the operational area. This identification process will be informed by the following criteria: (i) self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition of this identity by others; (ii) collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the project area and to the natural resources in these habitats and territories; (iii) customary cultural, economic, social, or political institutions that are separate from those of the dominant society and


culture; and (iv) an indigenous language, often different from the official language of the country or region.The objective of the detailed social assessment is to help the project support the aspirations and the needs of the IPs. As such, in addition to providing the social, economic and other relevant information, it will come up with an elaborate action plan that will be developed in consultation with the IPs on how the KACCAL project will extent the benefits of the project to the IPs and also mitigate all the negative impacts to them. This action plan will be adopted by all the District Steering Groups as the modus operandi for all the project areas where these peoples are found.

This action plan will include arrangements for the free, prior, and informed consultations with the affected indigenous peoples’ communities, as well as arrangements for a participatory impact monitoring (PIM) at district level. This will be an important element to assist the various structures to fine-tune their interventions and aim at maximizing culturally appropriate benefits and provide space for the indigenous peoples’ communities to voice their concerns.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Lending instrumentThe proposed lending instrument is a SCCF grant in the amount of USD 5.5 million. The project will be implemented through the mechanisms and processes under an ongoing IDA supported Arid Lands Resource Management Program (ALRMP II) which is under implementation. Project activities will be piloted in four ASAL districts, Garissa, Turkana, Marsabit and Malindi, with the intention of scaling-up KACCAL climate change adaptation work in other districts of the baseline project. Related activities in a fifth district, Mwingi, will be supported by the proposed United Nations Development Program (UNDP) implemented SCCF grant.

1.2 Project development objective and key indicatorsThe goal of the overall WB-UNDP project is to enhance the resilience of communities and the sustainability of rural livelihoods threatened by climate change in the arid and semi-arid lands of Kenya. As a contribution to the achievement of the above goal, KACCAL’s development objective is to increase the capacity of selected districts and communities of the ASALs to adapt to climate variability and change.

1.3 Project componentsThe project components include (i) climate information products, policy and advocacy; (ii) climate risk management at district levels; and (iii) community driven initiatives for climate resilience. The latter two components will be implemented in four ASAL districts, with similar activities implemented in a fifth district with funding from an UNDP SCCF grant. All three components are contributing directly to the integration of climate actions into development processes in the ASALs, in particular through the ALRMP II.


1.4 Key activities

(i) Climate risk profiling and assessment of adaptive measures to strengthen the monitoring processes and capacity for climate risk management, climate proofing and assessing adaptive strategies and investments at the national level and in selected districts.

(ii) Integration of climate change information into early warning and information systems with emphasis on improving the integration of climate change information into existing bottom-up and top-down early warning systems (e.g. ALRMP, FEWSNET, LINKS, LEWS, ICPAC and FAO forecasts), and refining information formats and dissemination structures.

(iii) Knowledge and advisory service partnerships development between ALRMP and various key national and international institutions and programs (such as Kenya Meteorological Department (MET), the IGAD Climate Predictions and Applications Center (ICPAC), Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI), International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) and other CGIAR centers, including south-south learning partnerships).

(iv) Strengthening of technical capacities of ALRMP and other institutions on climate change.

(v) Project implementation support to the ALRMP Secretariat, including monitoring and evaluation of project processes and performance.

(vi) Structural interventions for land and water management through investments in a variety of land management and erosion control, small-scale water harvesting, storage and water management measures will be supported.

(vii) Sustainable agricultural land and livestock management by establishing micro-projects which will enhance the resilience of agricultural practices to climate risks, through promotion of sustainable land management methods and technologies (e.g. inter-cropping, integrated nutrient management, moisture and soil conservation techniques, agro forestry, drought resistant crops) and rangeland/livestock management (e.g. silvo-pastoralism and drought-tolerant pasture species).

(viii) Opportunities to enhance carbon sequestration by offering grants to undertake technical and financial feasibility assessment for potential ecosystem services such as carbon financing.

(ix) Livelihood enhancement and diversification through piloting tree species plantations such as Jathropha curcus, Acacia senegal or Acacia seyal, which are suited to semi-arid or arid climatic conditions, have economic value and provide important ecosystem services.

(x) Exploration of innovative Credit and micro-insurance schemes for ASAL communities and found financially viable and technically sound, grants will support up-scaling of successful mechanisms for community based credit and insurance to facilitate the adoption of improved agro-pastoral practices and other livelihood strategies to reduce vulnerability and risks.

(xi) Support Human and Livestock Health investments to reduce human exposure to vector and water-borne diseases and improve livestock health.


2.0 THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN THE OPERATIONAL AREAS AND POSSIBLE IMPACTS

During the preparation of the KACCAL, it became known that the project could impact on IPs. Taking into consideration the existence of the Wasanya, the Boni and others, who could be present in some parts of Malindi, Lamu and possibly other districts, the project team opted to prepare an Indigenous People Planning Framework (IPPF) that will guide the implementation of the micro-projects. The project will confine its definition of IPs as the known “Hunters and Gatherers” but will also broadly include vulnerable and marginalized groups as it is the sole objective of this project.

2.1 Indigenous peoples in operational areas

2.1.1. Watta Community

The Watta people are mostly found in the rural arid and semi arid lands of the country. A minority of them live in thick forests scattered all over the country. The people are traditionally hunters and gatherers. In Malindi district a Watta community is found in four divisions (i.e. Malindi, Langobaya, Marafa and Magarini). In Tana River district the Watta are found in Sombo and Laza divisions while in Mandera the Watta are found in Central division.

The population of Watta community in the districts is estimated at approximately 30,000 persons. This is only 2.7% of the entire Malindi, Mandera and Tana River district population. The Watta people are traditionally hunters and gatherers. However since the government abolished unlicensed hunting of game and wild animals, the Watta people now live in permanent settlements, some of them along the river and where there are forests, mainly in the mixed farming and livestock farming zones. The forests afford them an opportunity to practice bee keeping while those along the river practice crop production.

The land tenure system in the district is communal ownership. Most of the land in the three districts of Malindi, Tana River and Mandera are currently under trust land by the county councils. Few influential people in the district have however managed to acquire title deeds from the land offices in Nairobi. However, most of this trust lands are controlled by the majority tribes and becomes a point of conflict if the smaller tribes and outsiders get involved. This is what has pushed the small and marginalized tribes like Watta deep into the forests.

2.1.2 The Boni

The Boni are known for their unique tradition of whistling to birds that guide them to honey. They are found in Northeastern Kenya's district of Ijara and Lamu district. Their population is about 4,000, compared to 25,000 half a century ago (Source: Organization for the Development of Lamu Communities (ODLC).


They are nomadic hunter-gatherer tribe of mainly Cushitic origin with a unique characteristic. The community sources their subsistence from forest products such as honey, wild plants/fruits for consumption and medicinal purposes.

The Boni (Awer) are found in the North-Eastern part of Lamu district and Ijara District. They’re concentrated mainly in Witu, Hindi and Kiunga divisions of the district. The community is located in villages of Bargoni (Hindi Division), Milimani, Bodhei, Basuba, Mangai, Mararani, Kiangwe and Kiunga (Kiunga division), Pandanguo and Jima (Witu Division).

The Boni live in forested areas of the district i.e. within the Witu and Boni forests. They live deep into the forest and only come out to the periphery when there is hardship or hunger. They perceive the forest in the Boni inhabited areas as communally theirs. However, with the gazettement of all the forest by the government this has become a source of conflict.

The Watta and Boni have benefited from the ongoing ALRMP activities at a total cost of Kshs.10, 595,282.00 as detailed in the table below by the 25 interventions under different sectors.

Table 1.0: ALRMP assistance to Indigenous Peoples in Project areasDistrict Community Activities Cost (Kshs) Remarks

Malindi Watta Excavation Mogole water pan2,190,086

The pan is used for human and livestock water.

Construction of Muyu wa Kae shallow well

450,000 Complete and in use.

Water trucking to Chamari and Watalla Primary schools

225,000 During ongoing drought period

Tana River Watta Purchase of 10 donkeys and carts for 50 households to assist in transportation of water and household food supplies and other supplies and supported rehabilitation of abandoned irrigation scheme through purchase of genset spare parts, construction of canals, division boxes and supplied with banana suckers.

761,380 Community contributed Kshs 263,600 towards the completion of the project

Supply shelter materials to 12 households construction of 5 Toilets and one masonry tank

1,135,380 Community contribution Kshs 335,900

Lamu Boni PRA/PICD training for two community Boni groups

254,000 Community identified and trained


(Mangai and Basuba)Support to modern bee keeping for three communities (Pandanguo, Mangai and Basuba)

120,000 Community trained, 80 hives fitted with comb starters and honey centrifuge machine bought

Capacity building on health and nutrition

140,600 Community can now identify common ailments and its treatment

Provision of planting seeds and construction of one grain store constructed.

1,771,956 172 bales of both maize and cowpeas distributed to Bargoni, Milimani, Basuba, Mangai , Mararani

Community trained on crop production aspects.

1 grain storage facility constructed at Mangai

Poultry improvement support to Mangai and Basuba communities

315,000 Material for construction of poultry houses procured.

Water trucking to Bargoni and Basuba communities

100,000 Trekking of water done to the two villages during prolonged dry season

Rehabilitation and supply hand pump for Pandanguo

211,000 1 well rehabilitated and fitted with hand pump.

Ijara Boni Training on Participatory integrated community development for 100 households

253,400 Community identified and trained on various participatory tools.CDC elected and community action plan developed.120 participants attended the training 80 male and 20 female.

Support to shelter improvement for 100 households

200,000 Community contribution of Kshs 25,000

Ecotourism support 1,000,000 Community


contribution Kshs 250,000

Provision of modern bee hives 170,000 Community contribution Kshs 51,000

Support to ECD learning centres

120,000 Community contributed Kshs 36,000

Supply of farming tools to 76 households


Provision of dairy goats to 10 households


Mandera Watta Supported with two donkeys and two carts

63,000 Community raised Kshs.18,000

Eight women were supported in Income generating activities through matching grant.

40,800 Individual women saved Kshs each hence total of Kshs.8000

One youth group supported in income generating activities through limestone harvesting and block making.

119,090 The group contributed 35,720 from the group savings.

Six porters were supported with one wheel barrow each to ease the load on the head.

23,000 The individual porter raised 900 Kshs hence total contribution of 5,600 Kshs.

Two destitute Watta families were supported through restocking with 30 goats each

148,000 The communities mobilized 10 goats each for individual beneficiery.the 20 goats were valued at Kshs.37,000 Kshs.

One artisans (Jua Kali) group was supported through purchase of various equipments to assist in their trade.

121,450 The group mobilized Kshs 36,450 through both the cash and kind contribution.

Total Cost 10,595,282.00


2.2 Impacts

This IPPF is expected to provide the framework in which negative impacts to the IPs are mitigated and positive impacts are enhanced based on the free, prior and informed consultations with the affected indigenous peoples. An action plan will be developed within the scope of the proposed Social Assessment that will provide the project team with practical measures in which the IPs are enabled to benefit from the project activities.

Table 2: Potential impacts of KACCAL on indigenous peoples

Component Project Activity as outlined in the PAD

Possible impacts on the indigenous peoples

Mitigation measures

Component 1: Climate information products, policy and advocacy (SCCF Increment US$ 1.46 million

Climate risk profiling;

Refined and downscaled climate scenarios;

Assessment of adaptive measures;

Integration of climate change information into early warning and information systems;

Knowledge and advisory service partnerships;

Strengthening of technical capacities of ALRMP and other institutions on climate change;

Project implementation support to the ALRMP Secretariat, including monitoring and evaluation of project processes and performance;

Policy dialogue and

(+) Enhanced capacity of targeted communities to prioritize, develop and implement socially accountable investments at the community levelThe source of livelihood will change due to project interventions, easy access to social amenities such as schools, health facilities. They will also have sedentary lifestyle where they will be accessing these services.(+) The enhancement of policies and the studies could provide the ground for a better protection of IP’ rights, economies and might lead to their inclusion into the development process and the establishment of equal opportunities. The draft land policy approved by cabinet in June 2009 may lead to allocation of land hence individual land tenure system to the IPs. This will give them incentives to develop the land in terms of Agriculture and other related livelihoods.

(+) The capacity building

Capacity building of representatives of the IPs on climate information collection, policy formulation, advocacy and communication strategies.

IP to be involved in the DSGs capacity building and planning processes


awareness raising through targeted consultations and advisory products.

might also cover areas such as intercultural communication, which could lead to a better relation between governmental structures and the IPs and the development investments might provide benefits to the IPs (jobs, poverty alleviation, good governance, recognition of rights, land restitution etc.) The standard of living of the IPs is bound to change as a result of more attention by the government.

(-) The IPs marginalization in decision making process means, their needs, rights and interests are not reflected to the same extend as others in the policy formulation, planning and implementation of the studies . The lack of involvement of IPs in decision making will lead to further marginalization, disruption of their current livelihoods and mode of life. They might be pushed further to areas where they cannot access health and educational facilities..

. Component2: Climate risk management at district levels

Capacity building to ALRMP District Coordination Units (DCUs), District Steering Groups (DSGs), Mobile Extension Teams (METs), Local Government, Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs).

(-) As the IP are marginalized, there is a risk that they are not invited to participate in the capacity building and/or in the planning process and therefore their needs and interests are not included into the reform and development agenda. Hence due to this lack of capacity the IPs will not be able to make informed decisions on their lifestyle and

Involve the indigenous people representatives in capacity building activities and in DSGs


livelihoods.(-) As the IP are marginalized in society, there is a high risk that they are not included into the early warning system (employment or compensation for recording data). The IPs will not access EWS and this will lead to loss of livelihood in case of catastrophy/climate change.

Component 3: Community driven initiatives for climate resilience

Structural interventions for land and water management- investments in a variety of land management and erosion control, small-scale water harvesting, storage and water management measures;

Sustainable agricultural land and livestock management -promotion of sustainable land management methods and technologies and rangeland/livestock management ;

Opportunities to enhance carbon sequestration: technical and financial feasibility assessment for potential ecosystem services micro-projects ,

Livelihood enhancement and diversification: by giving support to

(+) Vulnerability of the local communities to climate risks reduced through viable long term economic and diversified investments. The IP livelihoods will be enhanced through support to their identified micro- projects. This will lead to improvement in their mode of life through increased incomes resulting from the micro-projects implemented.(+) CDD Projects can be a very useful instrument to empower indigenous communities, contribute to poverty reduction, better protection of indigenous rights and culture, and enhanced relations between all people living in a given area and sharing natural resources such as water, forests etc. The Livelihoods of the IPs will improve due to a variety of CDD micro-projects that are geared to poverty reduction and better standards of living. (+) The capacity building might enable the IP to search and find ways to participate more actively in the decision making process and the

Involve the IPs in all stages of micro-project development i.e. the whole value chain of the micro project

The 10% community contribution should be flexible enough to enable the IPs to contribute effectively.


increased adoption of livelihood diversification projects,

Credit and micro-insurance through support to financially viable and technically sound community based credit and insurance to facilitate the adoption of improved agro-pastoral practices and other livelihood strategies to reduce vulnerability and risks;

Human and Livestock Health Support investments that will reduce human exposure to vector and water-borne diseases and improving livestock health as appropriate.

inclusion of IPs in the group of beneficiaries of the project. (-)As the capacities of the IP are very low, there is a high risk that they are unable to elaborate project proposals, which fulfill the technical requirements of the CDD screening process and due to that not receive funding; thus they do not benefit from the CDD component. The IPs capacity will be enhanced to enable them to elaborate project proposals fulfill the technical requirements and hence receive funding. The funded proposals will improve the livelihoods of these IPs.

(-) As the income of indigenous peoples is three times lower than of other rural populations, they might not be able to contribute the requested 10% to all activities financed in the catchments. The IP may not benefit from the project if community contribution is the pre-condition for funding micro-projects. This affects their livelihoods as they will be forced to sell the little they have to make contributions.(-) As the IP are marginalized in the decision making process and their specific needs unknown to decision makers, there is a risk, that CDD-projects proposed by them do not receive funding.

(-) As the IP are marginalized, there is a high risk that they are


not invited to participate in the capacity building and or the M&E. The micro-projects implemented by the IPs might lead to loss of livelihood due to lack of sustainability, resulting from lack of M&E.

3.0 Proposed Social Assessment

Given the impacts anticipated in the above table, the project plans to undertake a detailed social assessment which will use a participatory/consultative approach and give voice to the IPs. This social assessment will be undertaken two stages – initial screening and then a detailed social assessment which will cover the cover the following:

Identification of IPs and other non – visible marginalized and vulnerable groups and elaborate on their vulnerability and demographic profile as well as all other social economic areas;

Identify potential effects of project activities;

Establish the appropriate institutional framework applicable through consultation with the IPs;

Map key stakeholders and existing local level IP institutions and how they must be engaged;

Recommend the best consultation mechanisms that will enable voice, access and participation of these groups;

Examine the PICD process currently used in the Arid Lands Project for its relevance to the IPs as an empowerment tool. Propose the most applicable participatory mechanism and approach that will empower the IPs to deal with issues identified, enable voice and feedback on areas that is important for their survival and development.

Outline performance monitoring and impact indicators.

Table 3: Specific Measures for the Indigenous People

Issue Activity Responsibility By When Cost USD*

Indicators

1.Training of key

Conduct sensitization seminars and Barazas for

PCU-ALRMP II

8/02/2010 22,500 Training Report,


stakeholders DSGs, IPRs and IP Communities

List of participants

2.Capacity building of the actors

Training the ALRMP District Coordination Units (DCUs), District Steering Groups (DSGs), Mobile Extension Teams (METs) and IPs

PCU-ALRMP II , MET

7/6/2010 115,000 List of participants

Training reports

3.Establish and Operationalize CDC

Carry out sensitization Barazas in all the IP operational areas and facilitate the election of the CDCs

Training and backstopping

PCU-ARMPII 6/9/2010 18,750 CDCs functional in all IP areas

4.Enable the IP communities to benefit from the CDD initiative funds

Sensitize and train project staff (METs) and relevant GOK Ministry staff.

Target the IP communities for PICD to identify their needs and implement projects identified in CAPs

Allow the IP communities to pay their contribution to subprojects in Kind or Cash

Provide training and backstopping

DSG,

PMU-ALRMP II, METs, GoK staff.

20/9/2010 62,500 Training report,

List of participants

5.Establish a participatory monitoring and evaluation team

Sensitize the IPs

Train them on the methodology

Carry out regular M&E to micro-projects

DSG,PCU-ALRMP II

1/12/2010 13,750 List of participants, training reports

Functional committee of PM&E in place


Carry out two external midterm and final evaluations of the project impact

* These costs are included in the costs for component 3.2 Support for Community-Based Micro-Projects.

3.1 Institutional Arrangements

The planned Social Assessment will be able to outline the existing and relevant institutions and how these can be strengthened. However, as the KAACAL project has a CDD component, the key institution used to implement this Component is the Community Development Committee (CDC) which is elected by the communities themselves. The IPs in the project will have their own CDCs whose capacities will be enhanced through the appropriate empowerment tool that will be recommended by the Social Assessment Report. The CDC will work hand in hand with the KACCAL secretariat to facilitate the development and implementation of the project activities. For subprojects which do not in the first instance gain broad support from the affected indigenous peoples, the District Steering Group (DSG) (which decides on the funding of subprojects) will agree with the CDC for mutually acceptable solutions.

4.0 Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.

After the Social Assessment and the drawing up of IPPs, this information will be factored in the overall M&E of the project. The implementation of the participatory impact monitoring (PIM) at district level will be an important element to assist the various structures to fine-tune their intervention with a view to maximize culturally appropriate benefits and provide space for the indigenous peoples’ communities to voice their concerns.

The PIM will be based on the data gathered by the screening process/social assessments. The PIM reports at district level should be produced before June 30th of the years and then be returned to all indigenous peoples’ communities for feedback before being handed over to the DSG before August 30th. In September of each year (from 2010 on) all IPRs will meet to discuss among other issues the PIM reports, elaborate an overall evaluation and prepare recommendations on how to fine-tune the IPPF further. The district PIM reports, the IPPF evaluation and the recommendation should be communicated to all stakeholders i.e. World Bank task team and the interested public before October 30th every year.

Benefits from this projects and how they will impact on the IPs will be outlined in the final project impact evaluation

DISCLOSURE


This IPPF will the disclosed at the World Bank Infoshop and in Kenya. Identified IPs will be consulted. The stakeholders for this consultation will be mapped through district communication mechanisms. Consultative meeting will be held at appropriate site and deliberations put on record. The Government of Kenya has established the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights which is mandated to address the grievances emanating from injustices. This IPPF and the subsequent plans will be shared with the Commission for information. The current address of this Commission is CVS Plaza, Kasuku Rd off Lenana Rd; P. O BOX 74359-00200; Tel: 020-2717900-08 / 282717256; Mobile: 721–207320; Fax: 020–2716160; Email: [email protected]


mailto:[email protected]

ANNEXES

Annex 1: Bibliography

ALRMP II (2004): Final Report of the Social Analysis Study for Arid Lands Resource Management Project II.

World Bank: Project Appraisal Document, Kenya: Adaptation to climate change in Arid and Semi-arid Lands of Kenya (KACCAL), 2009

Annex 2. Screening tool for the Indigenous peoples in the KACCAL operational area

Objective

The Objective of the exercise is to identify all existing Hunters and Gatherers in the proposed KACCAL project operational area.

The Process

The screening exercise will be undertaken with the assistance (or in close collaboration) with an indigenous person (or indigenous persons) from the operational area.

Expected Outcome

The expected result of this exercise is a Report which will provide the following information:-

Who are the indigenous peoples in the Turkana, Marsabit, Malindi and Garissa area? The information available so far needs to be verified from IPs themselves.

The following communities have identified themselves as indigenous peoples – Watta, Elmolo Munyu Yaya and Malakote, Boni and Ngikebootok. This needs to be double checked including what these communities and sub-communities call themselves.

What areas they now occupy (including acreage) as well as areas they occupied historically. The present areas occupied by the Boni are Gazetted government forests. Did these change over the years? Maps should be included if available.

Highlights of their history. Population numbers- including identity, Their language Social organization Socio-economic situation – livelihood systems and constraints experienced in relation to

displacement, evictions from ancestral lands, and the consequences of these to their economic wellbeing. The assumption is that most (or all) of these communities were Hunter/gatherers but have since taken up other economic activities such as livestock keeping and some small-scale agriculture. This needs to be verified and significance of these other economic activities in the livelihoods of the IPs established.


Politics – Political representation at various levels – and if none explain the consequences of this and how it impacts on access to resources , service delivery, education, health, infrastructure, markets for the resources they produce such as honey etc. Do the IPs have equal access to decision-making processes as other communities do?

Conflict and insecurity – among sub-communities and between IPs and others. Access to national security apparatus and outcome if any.

Cross-border issues – e.g. Boni in Ijara and Lamu Districts and Ngikebootok in Turkana. What is the relevance of this to them and for others?

Any other issues that might inform the situation of the IPs in the KACCAL project operational area.


Consultative Meeting with Watta Indigenous Peoples in Malindi


District Steering Group meeting with Watta Indigenous Peoples Representatives


republic of kenya - world bankdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/581631468271844648/... · web...

Documents