g. On-going E&S monitoring, by capitalizing on the existing SIS REDD+ will be enhanced. SIS- REDD+ requires REDD+ implementers to independently assess and report on safeguards implementation. The system is intended to promote transparency and accountability from the site level. For this purpose, the MoEF has formulated APPS (Alat Penilai Pelaksanaan Safeguards or Safeguards Implementation Appraisal Tool). The tool was developed based on the principles of simplicity, transparency, accountability, completeness, and comparability.
APPS provides a checklist of supporting documents required as evidence of REDD+
safeguards implementation as guided by ESMF and its annexes. It is provided along with the complete PCI under SIS-REDD+ in the Annex and can be downloaded on the SIS-REDD+
website (http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/sisredd/).
By ensuring that the above processes at the Program level are in place and adequately resourced, E&S risks and subsequent impacts resulting from J-SLMP individual activities are expected to be minimized and contained to a lower risk level over the life of the project. A critical objective of the Program, as strengthened in the measures set out in this ESMF, is to prevent and reduce existing conflicts and disputes. To do so, the ESMF has been strengthened with:
a. A FGRM for J-SLMP implementation, which is presented as a separate annex to the ESMF (Annex 8). The FGRM proposed under the program seeks to set out relevant measures to address grievances and emerging disputes and incorporate additional steps to strengthen the existing Grievance Redress Mechanisms across project and sub-project levels. The FGRM will be tested during the initial years of J-SLMP implementation and evaluated to assess its effectiveness prior to ERPA appraisal. FGRM strengthening measures may be introduced under the ERP operation.
b. Addressing risks and impacts on Indigenous Peoples, and customary communities through an IPPF which form part of this ESMF. The IPPF is provided as Annex 9;
c. In addressing potential access restrictions and livelihoods displacement, an RPF which includes a Process Framework (PF), has been developed as part of this ESMF as a precautionary measure. These frameworks establish screening processes to identify and respond to such risks, define roles and responsibilities, establish risk avoidance and if not feasible, set out mitigation measures associated with access restrictions and livelihoods displacement in accordance with OP 4.12.
The environmental and social management procedure for the J-SLMP key activities is illustrated in the following flowchart (Figure 3). The responsible parties for undertaking the procedure for each step is defined in the flowchart. The following tables describe institutional arrangements at the project and activity levels (refer sections 5.4.1 and 5.4.2). The preliminary overview of the institutional chart outlining the institutions in charge and their responsibilities in implementing the safeguards tools of the ESMF is also provided in Figure 4. The institutional chart will be further refined following formal assignment of project personnel through the Jambi Governor’s Decree.
Figure 3 ESMF implementation flowchart.
Figure 4 Institutional chart for implementing the safeguards tools of the ESMF.
5.1.1 Negative List Screening
J-SLMP sub-project activities will be screened against a negative list (see Annex 1) by the implementing agencies (Organisasi Perangkat Daerah or OPDs) at the national and provincial levels. Key activities that trigger one or more of the negative list will not be financed under the project.
5.1.2 Screening of Environmental and Social Risks
J-SLMP activities that pass the negative list screening will then be further screened for potential environmental and social risks by the implementing agency (OPDs, KPH and TN) at the national and provincial levels with technical support and oversight from the provincial E&S specialists. Activities will be screened and assessed on the basis of their potential risks and impacts (refer Table 4). Such screening will preliminary define the required safeguards management and recommendations to
address the identified risks and impacts (preventive measures, capacity building, technical assistance and oversight to strengthen risk management).
Table 4: E&S Risk Classification
Risk
Classification
Description Instrument(s)
High* Wide range of significant adverse risks and impacts on human
populations or the environment including i) long term, permanent and/or irreversible and impossible to avoid entirely due to the nature of the project; ii) high in magnitude and/or in spatial extent; iii) significant adverse cumulative impacts or transboundary impacts; and iv) a high probability of serious adverse effects to human health and/or the environment (e.g., due to accidents, toxic waste disposal, etc.)
Some of the significant adverse ES risk and impacts of the Project cannot be mitigated or specific mitigation measures require complex and/or unproven mitigation, compensatory measures or technology, or sophisticated social analysis and implementation.
Not applicable Note: High risk sub- projects will not be permitted under J- SLMP (refer Negative List).
Substantial The Project may not be as complex as High-Risk Projects, its E&S scale and impact may be smaller (large to medium) and the location may not be in such a highly sensitive area, and some risks and impacts may be significant. This would take into account whether the potential risks and impacts have the majority or all of the following characteristics: i) mostly temporary, predictable and/or reversible and the nature of the project does not preclude the possibility of avoiding or reversing them; ii) adverse social impacts may give rise to a limited degree of social conflict, harm or risk to human security; iii) medium in magnitude and/or spatial extent; iv) there is medium to low probability of serious adverse effects to human health and/or the environment (e.g., due to accidents, toxic waste disposal, etc.), and there are known and reliable
mechanisms available to prevent or minimize such incidents.
Mitigatory and/or compensatory measures may be designed more readily and be more reliable than those of High-Risk Projects.
Environmental and Social Assessment (ESA) and
Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) Equal to AMDAL and UKL-UPL in Indonesia regulation system (Minister of Environment Regulation No 5/2012)
Moderate Potential adverse risks and impacts on human populations and/or the environment are not likely to be significant. This is because the Project is not complex and/or large, does not involve activities that have a high potential for harming people or the environment, and is located away from environmentally or socially sensitive areas. As such, the potential risks and impacts and issues are likely to have the following characteristics: i) predictable and expected to be temporary and/or reversible; ii) low in magnitude; iii) site-specific, without likelihood of impacts beyond the actual footprint of the Project; and iv) low probability of serious adverse effects to human health and/or the environment (e.g., do not involve use or disposal of toxic materials, routine safety precautions are expected to be sufficient to prevent accidents, etc.).
The Project’s risks and impacts can be easily mitigated in a predictable manner.
Environmental and Social Assessment (ESA) and
Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) Equal to UKL-UPL in Indonesia regulation system (Minister of Environment Regulation No 5/2012)
Low Potential adverse risks to and impacts on human populations and/or the environment are likely to be minimal or negligible. These Projects, with few or no adverse risks and impacts and issues, do not require further
Code of
Environmental and Social Practice
Equal to SPPL in Indonesia regulation system (Minister of Environment Regulation No 5/2012)
Specifically, the screening will identify the safeguards instruments that are required to be applied for the activity, as follows:
▪ the relevant environmental codes of practices to be applied for the activity (refer Annex 3);
▪ requirement for integrated pest management (refer Annex 4);
▪ requirement for conducting HCV to preliminary identify potential impacts to indigenous peoples and physical cultural resources (refer Annex 5);
▪ requirement for developing environmental and social management plans (i.e. UKL-UPL or SPPL as relevant (Annex 6).
▪ FGRM (refer Annex 7)
▪ IPPF to address risks and impacts on Indigenous Peoples (Annex 8);
▪ RPF, covering a PF to address resettlement risks and access restrictions (Annex 9);
▪ Chance Finds Procedures (Annex 10); and
Stakeholder consultations and community engagement will precede any activities under J-SLMP. If the project will be implemented in areas where there is presence of Adat communities and/or other community groups who meet the criteria of OP 4.10, Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) will need to be obtained prior to any activity with potential impacts. These consultations and engagement will be carried over during J-SLMP and future ERP implementation.
5.1.3 Preparation of Environmental and Social Management Plans
Following the screening and identification of required safeguard tools, the implementing agencies (OPDs, KPH and TN) at the provincial and/or district levels will prepare the specific environmental and social plan (ESMP), including environmental permits as relevant. Low risk sub-project activities may adopt ECOPs. The implementing agency may obtain assistance from third party consultants in preparing the required plans and/or permits to meet the safeguard requirements (refer Table 10).
5.1.4 Review and Approval
The safeguard committee at the district level will review the preparation of safeguards instruments as proposed by field level project implementor (OPDs, FMUs, National Park Authority). Verification on the quality of the environmental and social plans and permits will be made by the appointed E&S specialists at the provincial level. J-SLMP will not entertaint project with high risk (see Table 4). For substantial risk sub-projects as elaborated in Table 4 will need to be approved by the Provincial Environmental Service/Provincial Safeguards Committe and, if needed DGCC. Whereas for moderate risk sub- projects, approval will be obtained from respective District Environmental Services. ECOPs will be adopted for low risk sub-projects and hence no separate ESMPs required. Instruments which have
been approved by these responsible agencies will be provided to the World Bank for review and no objection.
5.1.5 Implementation of Safeguards and Verification
The safeguards will be implemented for the J-SLMP activities by the implementing agencies (OPDs) following the endorsement of the environmental and social plans and permits. High-risk activities which involve major physical construction or construction in environmentally sensitive areas will only be commenced once relevant environmental permits and the environmental and social plan (ESMP) have been completed and endorsed by the Executing Agency (DGCC and/or Provincial SEKDA/BAPPEDA).
Low risk activities must follow relevant ECOPs with technical support and supervision from the Provincial E&S specialists.
5.1.6 Monitoring and Reporting
The DGCC, Provincial Sekda, and Provincial Taskforce and especially Provincial Safeguard Committee will oversee the application of the ESMF (safeguards instruments) by the implementing agencies (OPDs). The implementation reports will be communicated by the DGCC to the Bank (refer section 4.8).