Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Date prepared/updated: 09/10/2013 / 10/05/2013 I. Basic Information 1. Basic Project Data Country: India Project ID: P145058 Additional Project ID (if any): Project Name: : Improving Development Programs in Tribal Areas: Capacity Enhancements to Strengthen Service Delivery of Tribal Development Programs in India Task Team Leaders: Varun Singh/ Simon Carl O Meally Estimated Appraisal Date: Managing Unit: SASDS Estimated Board Date: Lending Instrument: Small Grant (Technical Assistance) Sector: Social Development/PREM Governance Theme: Indigenous People IBRD Amount (US$m.): IDA Amount (US$m.): GEF Amount (US$m.): PCF Amount (US$m.): Other financing amounts by source: -- DFID TF III (India): US$ 500,000 Environmental Category: C Is this a transferred project Yes [ ] No [] Simplified Processing Simple [ ] Repeater [ ] Is this project processed under OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies) 2. Project Objectives: Yes [ ] No [] The Development Objective of this Non-Lending Technical Assistance (NLTA) is to strengthen Government of India s Ministry of Tribal Affair (MoTA) capacity to promote and enable more effective delivery of programs for tribal welfare and development in low-income areas of India. This includes the objectives of: (1) enhancing the effectiveness of MoTA s support to state-level Tribal Sub Program (TSP) governance and allocation to meet ST needs; and, (2) increasing the effectiveness of MOTA to enhance tribal development through the assessment of selected flagship programs. NLTA objectives are expected to be achieved through four intermediate outcomes: Improved Client knowledge of subnational and international good practices in tribal development programs. Enhanced client understanding of the key issues and constraints in improving the performance and impact of the TSP and flagship programs in three/four states. Increased MOTA focus on results.
Strengthened client capacity in supporting the effective design, administration and monitoring of programs to achieve tribal development objectives 3. Project Description: India has made considerable progress in fostering economic growth and reducing absolute poverty. For example, it has already achieved the first Millennium Development Goal (MDG 1) by halving the proportion of people living on less than $1.25 a day and rural poverty has decreased by 14.5 percentage points in the last two decades. 1 Despite progress, India still has more than 400 million poor people and is home to around one third of the global poor. 2 Given that India is predominantly rural, a huge concentration of the nation s poor people (four out of every five) still live in rural areas. Moreover, the benefits of the country s economic growth and development have not been shared equitably - inequalities vis-à-vis disadvantaged and socially excluded groups persist. 3 One notable group on the periphery of economic and social progress are the tribal groups (or Adivasis ). These people have been identified by the constitution as scheduled tribes (ST). 4 There are an estimated 84 million tribal persons, which accounts for around eight percent of India s population of 1.2 billion. The tribal situation in the country presents a varied picture: some areas have high tribal concentration while in others they form only a small portion of the total population. While the statistics vary across and among STs, the best-available data reveal the following. Overall, in a review of poverty and development progress in India, STs show the slowest pace of improvements in a range of areas. 5 In response to the unique challenges faced by the STs, the Government of India (GoI) has undertaken a number of measures over the years. The Constitution of India recognizes the diversity of STs across India as well as other complex problems in terms of geographical isolation, socio-economic backwardness, distinctive culture, poor infrastructure facilities, language and religion, exploitation by various groups, and so on. The GoI has also introduced the Tribal Sub Plan (TSP), which is a framework for socioeconomic development of the tribals. It covers almost the entire tribal-inhabited areas and the nature and extent of intervention depends upon the demographic concentration. The GoI also has a nodal ministry the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) which implements a number of 1 World Bank, (2013), Country Partnership Strategy for India for the Period FY 2013-2017, March 21, Report No. 76176-IN 2 World Bank, (2013), Country Partnership Strategy for India for the Period FY 2013-2017. 3 World Bank, (2011), Poverty and Social Exclusion in India, (The World Bank: Washington DC). http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/wdscontentserver/wdsp/ib/2011/04/25/000333037_20110425011808/rend ered/pdf/613140pub0pove158344b09780821386903.pdf 4 There are 645 distinct tribal groups recognized as STs in India. More than half the population are concentrated in the states of Madhya Pradesh, Chattisgarh, Maharashtra, Jharkhand, and Gujarat (the central belt of India). A second belt starts from the north, and comprises Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand to the seven states in the north eastern region. The third is the southern belt with some STs in the south Indian states, as well as islands of Andaman & Nicobar and Lakshadweep. 5 Das, M. Poverty and Social Exclusion in India, Presentation at the TFESSD Seminar, Oslo: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/intunitfessd/resources/1633731-1307643226089/olso-tfessd- SocialExclusion-Das.pdf
schemes designed to promote ST development. 6 In the context of the 12 th Five Year Plan the GoI and the MoTA have supported various initiatives to support the tribal populations, and have implemented a number of centrally sponsored schemes for the development of STs. The funds allocated for tribal development, for the country as a whole, is around US$ 4 billion per annum. Budget allocation for various schemes/programs of the Ministry of Tribal Affairs for 2012-13 was Rs.4090/- Crores (US$ 800 million). In spite of the above initiatives, interventions have failed to fully achieve their key objective of significantly narrowing the gap between the STs and the rest of the population. It is in this background that this NLTA is proposed to enhance the capacity of the state/ central government agencies towards increasing effectiveness of the service delivery of the tribal development programs. There are no physical investments. Essentially, the intervention finances 5 consultancies and one international observation study tour. These are expected to result in targeted knowledgegeneration and sharing across the tribal development professionals in the country. It may also result in the provision of technical advice and the facilitation of action planning at the national and state level. Given these expectations, the consultancies will involve: (i) analyzing the implementation and performance of tribal development activities in two to five tribal states (Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand, and West Bengal); (ii) identifying relevant domestic and international experiences and lessons learnt in addressing tribal peoples programming; (iii) carrying out consultation workshops at the national and state level; and, (v) preparing forward-looking action plans. Interventions are envisaged in terms of the following four components: Component 1. National-Level Learning and Knowledge-Sharing on Tribal Issues. This component consists chiefly of the following national-level knowledge-generation and knowledge-sharing activities. This comprises: (i) Establishment of an Expert Advisory Group to discuss, guide and steer the NLTA: (ii) Scoping on Tribal and Institutional Issues desk based research; and (iii) Learning from Global Experiences. Component 2. Functioning and Performance of the Tribal Development Programs in 3-4 states. This component aims to assess the functioning and performance of tribal development planning and programs in the selected states. It consists of two interrelated aspects: (i) a governance analysis of state-level planning and allocation for tribal issues through the SCA/TSP (and other relevant mechanisms), so as to unearth options for improving effectiveness and to identify the major schemes to address in the next point; and, (ii) performance assessment of 1 2 critical schemes/programs in terms of them furthering tribal welfare and development. 7 6 MOTA finances the following activities: (i) Special Central Assistance to TSP, for family oriented income generating schemes; (ii) grants under Article 275 (1) of the constitution, grant in aid to TSP and tribal majority states including Residential Schools; (iii) Girls/ Boys hostels; (iv) Ashram Schools in TSP areas; (v) Vocational Training Centres; (vi) strengthening education among tribal girls; (vii) grant in aid to state tribal development cooperative corporations; (viii) grant in aid to voluntary organizations to enhance the reach of the welfare schemes; (ix) research and training; and (x) development of PTGs. 7 The NLTA will restrict its scope to schemes within the boundary of the funding strategies of TSP, SCA to TSP and Grants under Article 275 (1) of the Constitution.
Component 3. Synthesis and Action Planning for Service Delivery Improvements This component will seek to synthesize the findings from components 1 and 2. It will facilitate the development of forward-looking action plans with measures to improve service delivery, as follows: first, the main results from across the two components will be synthesized in a paper and PowerPoint presentations, which will include the main operational recommendations and remedies; and, second, the findings will be used to develop action plans through Development Solutions workshops one workshop at central level and one in each state. This model of reflection, assessment and action planning may then be scaled up by MOTA in other states. Component 4. Project Administration and Monitoring for Results This component will essentially comprise a review of the MOTA s development and implementation of a Results Framework Document (RFD). This component would also cover financing the project administration costs. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis: The proposed analysis would be conducted in at least two of the following states Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand, and West Bengal. Note that the selection of the states will be decided by MOTA in consultation with the states and the Bank s task team. The long list has been arrived at on the basis (high) concentration of Tribal population. Barring West Bengal, all states have Fifth Schedule Areas. The interventions are merely analytical activities involving consultations, data generation, analysis and bringing to the fore issues that merit significance in the context of better managing the tribal development programs. As no physical investments are planned, physical characteristics and safeguard analysis are not relevant. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists on the Team: The following environmental and social safeguard specialists are involved as members of the Task Team : 1. Suryanarayan Satish, Senior Social Development Specialist 2. Pyush Dogra, Senior Environmental Specialist 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered (please explain why) Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) Forests (OP/BP 4.36) Pest Management (OP 4.09) Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60)
II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: There are no potential large scales, significant irreversible impacts likely to occur. However, as the project interventions are meant to improve the livelihood of tribals, OP 4.10 is triggered. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: Not Applicable 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts: Not Relevant 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described: This is an analytical study. Results are expected to result in targeted knowledge-generation and sharing across the tribal development professionals in the country. It may also result in the provision of technical advice and the facilitation in preparing Action Plans (details in Component-3) at the national and state levels. The resultant actions are likely to result in positive impacts in improving the livelihoods of the tribals. Towards making this happen, it will be ensured that the terms of reference for any consultancies related to studies, technical assistance and/or capacity building activities duly incorporate the requirements of the World Bank s Safeguard Policies. Further safeguard compliance will be adhered to as regards advice conveyed through such studies, action plans. Further, Information gathering and consultation will be done in line with the World Bank's safeguard policy, OP 4.10, under the different consultancies proposed under the project. Finally the interventions will be underscored by a process of informed consultation and participation, involve concerned Tribal Peoples to ensure that the benefits expected to accrue as a result of Project are in harmony with their economic, social and cultural preferences and protect their customary user rights. A separate note on how safeguard compliance will be met with during implementation (as and when occurs) will be made explicit in the action plans. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people: The approach/ methodology will be participatory involving in-depth consultations with a variety of stakeholders identified as appropriate- at different levels village, block, district, state and national. Special efforts will be made to involve the poor and vulnerable sections such as women, landless, Primitive Tribal Groups. During the enquiry, efforts will be made to ensure that the Terms of Reference for the consultancies reflect duly the expectations as consistent with
OP 4.10) and subsequently seek consultant proposals which would make explicit the detailed approach and methodology for conducting such enquiries. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: A project plan detailing the context, components, approach and expected outputs as well as social and environmental issues (as appropriate) has been prepared by the MOTA and disclosed in-country through its website. Date of disclosure recorded hereunder. Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 5 th October 2013 Date of "in-country" disclosure 15 th October 2013 Date of submission to InfoShop 8 th November 2013 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Not Applicable Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Not Applicable Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Pest Management Plan: Not Applicable Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) review and approve the EA report? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ]
Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? OP/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? OP 4.09 - Pest Management Does the EA adequately address the pest management Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ] issues? Is a separate PMP required? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ] If yes, has the PMP been reviewed and approved by a safeguards specialist or Sector Manager? Are PMP requirements included in project design? If yes, does the project team include a Pest Management Specialist? OP/BP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to cultural property? Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the potential adverse impacts on physical cultural resources? OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been reviewed and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review and approve the plan/policy framework/process framework? OP/BP 4.36 Forests Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional issues and constraints been carried out? Does the project design include satisfactory measures to overcome these constraints? Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, does it include provisions for certification system? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ]
OP/BP 4.37 - Safety of Dams Have dam safety plans been prepared? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ] Have the TORs as well as composition for the independent Panel of Experts (POE) been reviewed and approved by the Bank? Has an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) been prepared and arrangements been made for public awareness and training? OP/BP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways Have the other riparians been notified of the project? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ] If the project falls under one of the exceptions to the notification requirement, has this been cleared with the Legal Department, and the memo to the RVP prepared and sent? What are the reasons for the exception? Please explain: Has the RVP approved such an exception? OP/BP 7.60 - Projects in Disputed Areas Has the memo conveying all pertinent information on the international aspects of the project, including the procedures to be followed, and the recommendations for dealing with the issue, been prepared Does the PAD/MOP include the standard disclaimer referred to in the OP? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ ]
D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Varun Singh/ Simon Carl O Meally 10/28/2013 Environmental Specialist: Pyush Dogra 10/28/2013 Social Development Specialist Suryanarayana Satish 10/28/2013 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Francis Fragano 10/29/2013 Comments: Sector Manager: Maria Correia 10/28/2013 Comments: