READVERTISING – CONSULTANCY – Environmental and Social and Environmental Impact Assessment and Mitigation Framework (ESMF)

  • Consultancy
  • Full Time
  • Zambia
  • December 12, 2022

WWF Zambia Country Office

For the preparation of a targeted Environmental and Social and Environmental Impact Assessment and Mitigation Framework (ESMF) for the Barotse landscape

To ensure conservation programmes deliver better outcomes for communities and nature, WWF is rolling-out Social and Environmental Safeguards in all its priority landscapes including Barotse Floodplain.

Overall, WWF interventions are designed to yield positive environmental and social benefits. However, there is the potential for the implementation of some activities to result in adverse impacts on the environment and the communities.

OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF THE ASSIGNMENT

The objective of this assignment is the preparation of a targeted Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) for the entire  landscape to ensure that all WWF activities in the landscape, in particular those related to the inscription of Barotse Floodplains, Liuwa Plains National Park and surrounding areas  as a UNESCO World Heritage Cultural Landscape, are aligned with WWF’s Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework (ESSF).

More specifically, the ESIA should identify the gaps that may exist in the current assessment of potential negative social, human rights or environmental impacts of all WWF activities in the landscape, and in particular those related to the inscription of BPCL as a UNESCO World Heritage Cultural Landscape. On the basis of the existing mitigation activities, the proposed ESMF should identify the gaps and recommend additional measures that would need to be taken to avoid and/or mitigate negative impacts, while striving to enhance benefits for local communities and the environment.

 

TASKS

It is anticipated that the assignment will be undertaken through the following tasks conducted separately:

  • Task 1: Development of a detailed work plan, virtual kick-off meeting and review of available documents.
  • Task 2: Improvement of the current stakeholder analysis and stakeholder engagement plan
  • Task 3: Field visit(s) and engagement with stakeholders.
  • Task 4: Development of the targeted Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA)
  • Task 5: Development of the Environment and Social Management Framework (ESMF),
  • Task 6. Development of a landscape level Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) in line with the broader Upper Zambezi Landscape

TOTAL DURATION OF THE ASSIGNMENT

The consultant/firm is required to provide a projected project programme (Gantt Chart) The final due date for the assignment will be agreed upon with the selected consultant in the inception phase.

STAFF AND QUALIFICATIONS

The project team proposed by the Consultant or firm and their qualifications have to reflect the scope of services and show excellent technical and professional qualifications. The Consultant shall provide a description of tasks to be performed by each team member as well as details on the selection and experience of the proposed members with regard to their tasks. WWF anticipates that proposed team members will include local experts who are nationals from Zambia with (1) sound expertise of the country context and (2) expert knowledge of the Barotse landscape and the communities that reside within it.

The Consultant shall provide updated curricula vitae (CV) of the proposed international and local/ regional staff. Key staff should have adequate education, professional experience, language skills and experience in the region. Please note that key staff presented in the Consultant’s proposal may not be replaced without the prior approval of WWF.

BUDGET

The Consultant shall estimate the human and other resources that will be required to complete Tasks 1-6. The financial offer(s) shall include all costs for elaboration of works, as described above, including travel costs.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

On the basis of the full ToRs attached, the Consultant should prepare a proposal that covers:

  • Proposed tasks and outputs (methodology);
  • Team composition, including summary of expertise and experience
  • Tentative work schedule (activities and milestones);
  • Estimated level of effort;
  • Estimated travel cost estimate (Flights + per diem).
  • The availability to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement.

The proposal will have to be submitted by 17:00, 12 December 2022 to the following email:

with copies to [email protected]

NOTE : THOSE WHO APPLIED IN THE FIRST ADVERT SHOULD NOT APPLY. THEIR PROPOSALS WILL BE CONSIDERED TOGETHER WITH NEW APPLICATIONS.

PROPOSAL EVALUATION

The proposal will be evaluated by WWF against the following criteria:

  • Level of expertise and experience in implementing safeguards systems (e.g. GEF, IUCN, WB, IFC, others), including carrying out ESIA/SIAs and developing ESMFs/ESMPs.
  • Level of expertise and experience in the country and in the given landscape.
  • Any other relevant expertise and experience (e.g. Expertise on cultural heritage sites, law enforcement, livelihoods, stakeholder engagement, participatory approaches, etc.).
  • Language skills (including local languages)
  • Overall quality of the proposal (incl. quality of the proposed methodology for stakeholder engagement).
  • Cost – i.e. value for money 

FULL TERMS OF REFERENCE

For the preparation of a targeted Environmental and Social and Environmental Impact Assessment and Mitigation Framework (ESMF) for the Barotse landscape

 

INTRODUCTION

World Wide Fund (WWF) for Nature Country Office in Zambia was established in 1962 to support conservation of natural resources. In 1990, WWF signed an Agreement with the Government of the Republic of Zambia recognising WWF’s dedication to world-wide conservation of the natural environment.

To ensure conservation programmes deliver better outcomes for communities and nature, WWF is rolling-out Social and Environmental Safeguards in all its priority landscapes including Barotse.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE LANDSCAPE

The Barotse and Liuwa is a landscape of approximately 1 million hectares covering the Barotse Floodplain, the Liuwa Plains National Park and the surrounding Game Management Area (GMA). WWF supports various activities in the landscape, in collaboration with several stakeholders. These include providing technical support for management plans, training and capacity building of local civil society organizations in environmental impact assessment, capacity building for law enforcement, capacity building for community resource boards, support to community enterprises, and socio-ecological monitoring. Notably, WWF collaborates with its partners in supporting the inscription of the Barotse Plains Cultural Landscape (BPCL) as a UNESCO World Heritage Cultural Landscape.

OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF THE ASSIGNMENT

 

Overall, the landscape interventions are designed to yield positive environmental and social benefits. However, there is the potential for the implementation of some activities to result in adverse impacts on the environment and the communities.

The objective of this assignment is the preparation of a targeted Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) for the   Barotse focal area to ensure that all WWF activities in the Upper Zambezi landscape, in particular those related to the inscription of BPCL as a UNESCO World Heritage Cultural Landscape, are aligned with WWF’s Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework (ESSF).

More specifically, the ESIA should identify the gaps that may exist in the current assessment of potential negative social, human rights or environmental impacts of all WWF activities in the landscape, and in particular those related to the inscription of BPCL as a UNESCO World Heritage Cultural Landscape. On the basis of the existing mitigation activities, the proposed ESMF should identify the gaps and recommend additional measures that would need to be taken to avoid and/or mitigate negative impacts, while striving to enhance benefits for local communities and the environment.

The assessment should pay particular attention to:

  • The rights, needs and potential impacts on women and children.
  • The potential impacts on access restrictions, community safety and security
  • The rights of the local people, including the rights over resources, cultural rights and equitable benefit sharing.

TASKS

It is anticipated that the assignment will be undertaken through the following tasks conducted separately:

  • Task 1: Development of a detailed work plan, virtual kick-off meeting and review of available documents.
  • Task 2: Improvement and validation of the current stakeholder analysis and stakeholder engagement plan
  • Task 3: Field visit(s) and engagement with stakeholders.
  • Task 4: Development of the targeted Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA)
  • Task 5: Development of the Environment and Social Management Framework (ESMF), including concrete suggestions to operationalize a grievance mechanism in the landscape.
  • Task 6: Development of a landscape Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM)

Further details of the required tasks, the scope and guidance on content and proposed methodologies are provided in the sub-sections below.

Task 1: Development of a work plan, virtual kick-off meeting and review of available documents

 

Prior to commencing the assignment, the Consultant shall develop a detailed work plan for the assignment. The work plan shall refer to the tasks as described in these ToR and shall include any additional tasks as identified by the Consultant during the preparation phase. This work plan will form the basis of the detailed terms of the assignment and shall be approved by WWF prior to starting the work. The work plan will be routinely reviewed with WWF during the assignment and adapted to reflect any change of circumstance.

Following this, the Consultant shall participate in a virtual kick-off meeting with relevant WWF staff members. This meeting will enable WWF to provide to the Consultant with additional context information for the tasks and the list of WWF documentation to be reviewed. WWF will provide available background documentation regarding the environmental and social aspects of the landscape, including its initial safeguards risk screening and categorization memo performed by WWF staff, any previous impact assessments, any baseline studies developed for WWF activities in the landscape, and any mitigation measures already being adopted and under implementation. The Consultant shall get familiar with the available documents and with the relevant WWF ESSF Standards. In addition to the documentation provided by WWF, the Consultant is also expected to explore any relevant external research/literature to inform the gap analysis.

Based on the preparatory information analysis, the Consultant shall identify any gaps in the existing documentation, highlight the need for any additional assessments and adjust the work plan for the assignment accordingly if needed. The gap analysis is not intended to validate assumptions in the risk screening but instead it is expected that the gap analysis will focus on uncovering any additional gaps that were not captured in the initial risk assessment and subsequent safeguards categorization memo.

 

Task 2:Improving and validating the stakeholder analysis and a stakeholder engagement plan

 

Based on the information provided by WWF during the first task, the Consultant will improve the existing stakeholder analysis and will develop a subsequent draft stakeholder engagement plan to be used during the ESIA. It is important to note that there have already been multiple efforts by WWF and other partners towards stakeholder analysis and engagement within the landscape. The Consultant is then expected to carry out a gap assessment about these previous analyses and based on this, update the previous stakeholder analysis. The draft stakeholder engagement used during the ESIA will serve as a basis to develop a comprehensive final plan for future stakeholder engagement in the landscape. This plan is meant to provide a better understanding of the mechanisms and nature of engagement with the different rights-holder groups, including their participation and representation in decision-making.

Further technical guidance about the development of the stakeholder analysis and stakeholder engagement plan is outlined in the annex. WWF will provide a template to facilitate the work, and the consultant is encouraged to use it.

 

Task 3: Carry out field visit(s) and consult with stakeholders, based on the draft stakeholder engagement plan

 

Data collection and consultation processes in the framework of this assignment will include at least a couple of field visits to the landscape sites (to be agreed in consultation with WWF) that are representative for informing the development of the ESIA and ESMF. Once both the ESIA and ESMF are completed, the consultant is expected to present their main outcomes to local stakeholders during a national workshop. The selection of field visit sites/communities will be evaluated and jointly established by the Consultant and the WWF landscape team, based on the following criteria:

  • Area of influence: the specific areas within landscape where WWF has activities or exerts influence.
  • Accessibility: Access the impacted villages by road and possible mobility of impacted villagers to travel to the location where the consultation will take place;
  • Community groups: Differences in culture and community groups identity;
  • Livelihoods: Differences in the main livelihood strategies – agriculture, NTFP collection, fishing, etc.;
  • Dependency: Dependency of household livelihoods on resources or more generally on the areas impacted by WWF’s work;
  • Impact: Difference in types of project-related positive and negative impacts and their spatial distribution;
  • Historical conflicts: Areas where conflicts resulting from WWF work have happened in the past with local communities.

A particular attention will be paid to different sub-groups inside communities, e.g. women, youth, elders, and different community groups (if a community is diverse). Especially in the social context, consultations with IPs and local communities shall be made using, to the extent possible in the scope of the mission, participatory rural appraisal methods based on a mix of qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques, including focus group discussions. The consultations shall be made in a manner that is culturally acceptable and accessible to the community groups. Local interpreters will be used, where appropriate and to the extent possible. Institutional stakeholders relevant in the context of the environmental and social aspects of WWF activities (as applicable), including but not limited to environmental agencies/administrations, institutions related to water resources management, institutions related to forestry and agriculture, protected area management as appropriate as well as relevant social institutions shall be consulted during the mission, for example through key informant interviews and multi-stakeholder workshops.

Task 4: Development of the targeted Environmental and Social Impact Assessment  

The process of developing the ESIA is to generate a supplementary analysis of the environmental and social risks of WWF activities in the landscape and not to validate already known risks identified during the screening phase. The ESIA is also meant to help to fill the gaps in information identified in the inception report and integrate the views and feedback provided by stakeholders in relation to the potential negative social and environmental impacts, as well as the preliminary mitigation measures. The ESIA will also assess alternatives to inform program design. See additional technical guidance about the ESIA in the Annex.

The impact assessment shall be undertaken by the Consultant in a structured manner, along the relevant national legislation and the requirements of the relevant WWF E&S Safeguard Standards (ESSS), with a special focus on, but not limited to:

Current potential known risks of WWF activities in the Barotse landscape include:

Restriction of Access

Some of the activities that WWF supports in this landscape have an influence in decisions over restrictions of access. These include the support, through partner organizations, to develop a fisheries management plan, a predator management plan, a fish sanctuary pilot as well as supporting the inscription of the Barotse Plains Cultural Landscape (BPCL) as a UNESCO World Heritage Cultural Landscape.

Community Health, Safety and Security

WWF provides support to a partner organisation and the Government to strengthen law enforcement. There is a risk that law enforcement activities could lead to community safety issues.

Indigenous Peoples

This standard is triggered as a precautionary approach in order to provide a stakeholder engagement process that promotes consultation, collaboration and empowerment, especially in light of the inscription of the BPCL as a World Heritage Cultural Landscape.

Physical and cultural resources

WWF supports partners with research and documentation for the inscription of the PBCL as a World Heritage Cultural Landscape.

Some guiding questions to be developed in the ESIA:

  • To what extent do the activities funded or implemented by WWF, including those related to the inscription of the PBCL as World Heritage Cultural Landscape, could (negatively or positively) impact directly or indirectly the human rights of local communities in the Barotse landscape, including in particular those of vulnerable groups? (This includes the rights over resources, participation and information rights, rights to safety and security, cultural rights, among others).
  • What is the perception or the different perceptions of local communities’ groups about WWF’s role, the impacts on their rights, and the measures in place including consultation processes?
  • How are the potential impacts of WWF activities being addressed currently? Are these measures sufficient? What are the gaps?

Task 5: Development of the Environment and Social Management Framework (ESMF)

 

The ESMF serves as a framework for managing and mitigating the environmental and social risks and impacts associated with implementing WWF activities in the landscape. Its content will depend on the extent to which issues have been identified during the documentation review, the field visit and the engagement with stakeholders. The ESMF should clarify where the existing mitigation measure is already in place and where there is a need to change it or improve or add new mitigation measures.

To prepare the ESMF, the Consultant will:

  • identify the mitigation measures currently supported by WWF, including the funding, capacity and timelines
  • propose if needed changes or additional mitigating actions that address potential adverse impacts of WWFs interventions highlighted by the earlier steps;
  • assess the potential for locally sourced and managed mitigation actions including the required support for their sustainability
  • determine requirements (e.g. in terms of capacity, partners, resources, etc. that need to be in place) for ensuring that those responses are made effectively and in a timely manner; and
  • describe the means for meeting those requirements (including an indicative budget, timeline and clear responsibilities)
  • an estimate of the time period required for the mitigating action to become effective and a recommendation for the frequency of status monitoring and review

The ESMF shall be developed in close cooperation with the WWF landscape staff. WWF will share a template of ESMF to facilitate the work and the consultant is encouraged to use it.

More information on the components of the ESMF can be found in the Annex.

Task 6: Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM)

 

The landscape level Grievance Redress Mechanism is a procedure to enable individuals or groups to raise and seek resolution to concerns and grievances about activities supported by WWF in that landscape.

Building on the existing draft GRM and based on the consultations with local communities and relevant partners, the consultant should provide concrete recommendations for the operationalization of the GRM in the landscape including:

  1. a definition of the scope
  2. accessible entry points for communities to raise their concerns in the Barotse landscape
  3. effective and impartial procedure of reception, investigation and resolution of complaints
  4. linkages with the GRM of relevant WWF partners in the landscape
  5. linkages to traditional forms of resolution of differences, if applicable
  6. clear escalation process to the national and international WWF offices

a summary of requirements for the implementation of the GRM, including staff, costs, communication materials, etc.

DELIVERABLES & TIMEFRAME

Task 1 will be desk based and result in the following outcomes:

  • A scoping report (1) identifying and detailing gaps resulting from the review of the available documents (including the screening tool, landscape categorization information, previous impact assessments and mitigation measures already being adopted) and (2) specifying a) any gaps to mitigate environmental and social risks, identified in the screening tool or uncovered through this document analysis, that need to be addressed and b) any additional assessments required to develop the ESMF;
  • Preparation, participation and documentation of a virtual kick-off meeting, including any changes to the work outlined in these ToR.

Task 2 and 3 will result in the following outcomes:

  • A draft stakeholder analysis and list of stakeholders to be met and consulted during site visit (including checklists, questionnaires/interview guides/guiding questions for assessing potential risks and impacts and identifying preliminary mitigation measures)
  • A final stakeholder analysis and engagement plan for the landscape
  • A visit to the field in line with the methodology agreed,
  • A summary report of stakeholder engagement activities and how their views influenced the ESIA and ESMF (included as an annex to the ESMF)

Task 4  will result in the following outcomes:

  • A draft and final ESIA for the landscape in English, including annexes and a non-technical summary in the relevant format for local communities

Task 5 will result in the following outcomes:

  • A draft and final ESMF for the landscape in English, including annexes and a non-technical summary in the relevant format for local communities

Task 6 will result in the following outcome:

  • A draft GRM process for the landscape in English, including a non -technical summary in the relevant format for local communities, and summary of the operational requirements/costs.

Further details of the required tasks, the scope and guidance on content and proposed methodologies are provided in the Annex below. Non-technical summary of the findings from both the ESIA and ESMF will be disclosed to key local stakeholders including communities. The Consultant will support WWF in disclosing a summary of the ESMF (in the relevant form and language) at least 45 days prior for the ESMF to be finalised. All draft versions of the developed documents will also be reviewed by the WWF Zambia team, the safeguards team at WWF NL and WWF International. Based on the provided feedback and review from the local stakeholders and WWF, the final versions will be developed. Requested changes shall be duly considered by the Consultant. After approval of final documents, the Consultant shall submit the final versions in PDF and Word format.

TOTAL DURATION OF THE ASSIGNMENT

The consultant/firm is required to provide a projected project programme (Gantt Chart) The final due date for the assignment will be agreed upon with the selected consultant in the inception phase.

PROJECT MANAGEMENT 

The Consultant shall manage the assignment to ensure that the tasks are delivered to the agreed schedule and that these meet the standards set out for the Assignment.

Core project management include:

  1. Management of the Consultant’s team;
  2. Communication activities with the WWF key contacts, and other parties as required;
  3. Regular reporting on schedule, budget and progress of the Assignment;
  4. Health and Safety (H&S) and logistical planning for the Assignment.

 

STAFF AND QUALIFICATIONS

 

The project team proposed by the Consultant or firm and their qualifications have to reflect the scope of services and show excellent technical and professional qualifications. The Consultant shall provide a description of tasks to be performed by each team member as well as details on the selection and experience of the proposed members with regard to their tasks. WWF anticipates that proposed team members will include local experts who are nationals from Zambia with (1) sound expertise of the country context and (2) expert knowledge of the Barotse landscape and the communities that reside within it.

The Consultant shall provide updated curricula vitae (CV) of the proposed international and local/ regional staff. Key staff should have adequate education, professional experience, language skills and experience in the region. Please note that key staff presented in the Consultant’s proposal may not be replaced without the prior approval of WWF.

BUDGET

The Consultant shall estimate the human and other resources that will be required to complete Tasks 1-6. The financial offer(s) shall include all costs for elaboration of works, as described above, including travel costs.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

 

On the basis of these ToRs, the Consultant should prepare a proposal that covers:

  • Proposed tasks and outputs (methodology);
  • Team composition, including summary of expertise and experience
  • Tentative work schedule (activities and milestones);
  • Estimated level of effort;
  • Estimated travel cost estimate (Flights + per diem).
  • The availability to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement.

The proposal will have to be submitted by 17:00, 12th  of December 2022 to the following email:

[email protected]

 

PROPOSAL EVALUATION

 

The proposal will be evaluated by WWF against the following criteria:

  • Level of expertise and experience in implementing safeguards systems (e.g. GEF, IUCN, WB, IFC, others), including carrying out ESIA/SIAs and developing ESMFs/ESMPs.
  • Level of expertise and experience in the countries and in the given landscapes.
  • Any other relevant expertise and experience (e.g. cultural heritage sites, law enforcement, livelihoods, stakeholder engagement, participatory approaches, etc.).
  • Language skills (including local languages)
  • Overall quality of the proposal (incl. quality of the proposed methodology for stakeholder engagement).
  • Cost – i.e. value for money.

COVID-19

It is recognized that the current COVID-19 pandemic limits the ability to undertake any field-based tasks until travel/health restrictions are lifted or other permissions secured. The Consultant and WWF will regularly review the COVID-19 situation and will jointly agree when it is safe for any field-based work to take place. This decision will be based on adequate assurance that the risk of COVID-19 transmission has been minimized for any communities or other stakeholders, the Consultant team and WWF staff.

Since Task 1 is heavily desk-based, it can be started immediately. It is also expected that preparatory work for Task 2 could be carried out remotely.

NDA/CONFIDENTIALITY

In order for the Consultant to fulfil this ToR, confidential documents will be made available for review. The Consultant will therefore be required to sign and abide by a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) that will be included with the formal contract.

On WWF’s E&S safeguards, and for avoidance of doubt, the Framework document and its nine draft standards have been publicly disclosed, but these are currently subject to review .

ANNEX

INTRODUCTION TO THE WWF Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework

 

WWF’s Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework (ESSF) provides an institutional mechanism to manage the environmental and social risks of WWF’s work, helps deliver better conservation outcomes, and aims to enhance the social well-being of local communities in the places where WWF operates. The ESSF is designed to shape project design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation to secure better conservation by identifying and addressing environmental and social risks, mindful of the different challenges and needs in different parts of the world. It supports the systematisation of good governance practices to achieve respect of human rights, transparency, non-discrimination, public participation, and accountability, in the context of conservation work implemented or supported by WWF, among other goals. WWF’s ESSF has been designed to meet the specific needs of WWF, which is a global network of independent NGOs that operate under a common licensing agreement and brand, and that pool funds to advance common conservation objectives.

The ESSF was adopted by the Board of WWF International and the WWF Network Executive Team (NET) in June 2019, to ensure consistent, comprehensive application of safeguards across the entire WWF Network.

 

SCOPE OF APPLICATION OF THE WWF ESSF

Safeguards play a vital role in achieving WWF’s vision. They guide how we engage local communities to plan and manage our work to improve and protect their lives, rights and livelihoods while conserving nature and wildlife. WWF interventions in the landscape/seascape are expected to yield positive environmental and social outcomes. The implementation of some conservation activities have the potential to result in unintended negative impacts, which makes it crucial to effectively apply safeguards to identify, avoid and mitigate these impacts. Assessment of environmental and social impacts and the subsequent preparation of appropriate mitigation plans in a participatory manner, is an essential part of this. WWF uses the Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework (ESSF) to identify, avoid and mitigate these risks, uphold human rights, and ensure conservation projects deliver better outcomes for communities and nature. We apply safeguards in the design, implementation, and monitoring of all of our activities.

 

STRUCTURE OF THE WWF ESSF

 

The ESSF is composed of 3 Process Standards and 6 Substantive Standards.

The Process Standards are applied in all mitigation planning. They are:

The Substantive Standards include:

In practical terms, each ESSF is built by following several structured processes that, implemented together, ensure compliance with the ESSF Substantive Standards. This means:

  • A process is implemented to identify and manage negative environmental and social impacts (the objective of the present consultancy)
  • A process is implemented to engage stakeholders on a continuous basis, document and integrate their feedback into project design and implementation
  • A process is implemented to set up an accountability and grievance redress mechanism
  • A process is implemented to ensure regular disclosure of information to stakeholders

 

STEPS OF THE ESSF

The first step in the development of an ESSF is the Risk Screening and categorisation. These are carried out by the WWF teams prior to the Impact Assessment process, usually at the design stage. Its aim is to screen all relevant WWF activities in the landscape/seascape for potential negative social or environmental impacts and to categorise the landscape/seascape according to level of risk.[1]

For High Risk Category A or Special Consideration activities, independent specialist(s) must be hired to carry out an impact assessment (e.g. Social and Environmental Impact Assessment or Social Impact Assessment) and develop an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF). This is where the present consultancy fits within the project cycle.

In terms of process, the development of the ESIA/SIA will likely generate valuable material for the subsequent ESMF, particularly in terms of mitigation measures as stakeholder feedback should be gathered not just on the potential negative impacts, but also mitigation measures.

 

STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS FOR THE ESIA and ESMF DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

 

As part of the documentary/desk review, building as much as possible on information provided by WWF (risk screenings, situation analysis, records of past stakeholder analysis and engagement, socio-economic assessments etc.) and complementing with additional research (academic studies of the area, work carried out by development institutions/NGOs etc.) a stakeholder analysis document provides the baseline for developing a stakeholder engagement plan.

The stakeholder analysis should identify the key stakeholder groups in the project area that are likely to be directly or indirectly affected by a project, as well as those who have an interest in a project and/or the ability to influence its outcome, either positively or negatively. This is likely to include potentially affected communities, including Indigenous Peoples, civil society groups, the national government’s relevant agencies, the private sector if locally active (ex: logging companies). The consultants should distinguish between potentially affected stakeholders and others, and make use of any stakeholder analysis and engagement done previously by the WWF team to avoid duplication of efforts.

The stakeholder analysis should include:

  • At a minimum
    • the number and location of relevant communities/villages settlements (identified on landscape/seascape map) potentially affected by the project
    • Indigenous Peoples and/or other vulnerable groups (such as ethnic minorities not self-identifying as IPs) should be identified
    • Where an ethnic or religious group/minority has history been or is currently being discriminated against by a dominant ethnic or religious group, this information should be considered as it is relevant to the development of the stakeholder engagement plan (to be consulted separately) and to the development of appropriate mitigation measures
    • the relevant governmental stakeholders (relevant ministry/agency(ies), local government
    • major private sector stakeholders (this could include logging/mining companies, agricultural producers or other representative bodies, cooperatives etc.)
    • Local NGOs active in the area or thematic issue
  • To the extent possible
    • Demographic information on relevant stakeholders (gender, age, ethnicity).
    • Relevant stakeholder decision-making, conflict resolution mechanisms and other local institutions (customary and other).
    • Relevant religious and cultural elements as they are likely to affect and be affected by the proposed interventions (cultural resources/sites)
    • Unless prior studies have been carried out, this information may need to be gathered during the stakeholder engagement process itself and a degree of flexibility will be required to adapt the stakeholder engagement activities so as to include the views of a diverse range of stakeholders.

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE ESIA and ESMF DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

As a result of the stakeholder analysis, a stakeholder engagement plan for the consultancy must be developed (both should be included in the Annex to the ESMF). Implementing the stakeholder engagement plan will ensure a better understanding of stakeholders’ concerns and needs and is the primary means to identify measures to mitigate negative impacts in a participatory manner. The Consultants should draw from programme/project stakeholder engagement plans already developed by the WWF team to avoid duplication of efforts.

General guidance/considerations for the stakeholder engagement plans:

  • At minimum 1-2 field visits should be carried out, the first, to:
    • Fill any gaps in stakeholder information identified during the stakeholder analysis stage
    • Gather feedback and discuss perceived/anticipated impacts of the project and potential ways to mitigate these impacts
    • A second round of field consultations should take place to share results of the ESIA and further discuss mitigation measures, institutional arrangements for implementation of the ESMF (including grievance mechanism), capacity building needs and possible M&E (community feedback on project implementation, which includes implementation of mitigation measures specified in the ESMF). As stated above, this could be led by WWF staff.
  • To the extent possible, stakeholder engagement should be tailored to individual groups (non-discriminatory and gender inclusive), taking into account potential barriers to participation and preferred/most appropriate ways of communication
  • Communication materials should be accessible and culturally appropriate, and delivered by persons who can effectively engage with the respective group(s) (i.e. by working with WWF field staff)
  • The stakeholder engagement plan should also include the planned provisions on information disclosure (what information provided, frequency, format etc.)

 

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The Safeguard Screening Tool (SST) describes the risk category of the landscape/seascape and identifies the main/most significant potential negative social and/or environmental impacts that could arise as a result of implementation of the planned activities. The SST will be the starting point for the consultant team tasked with the ESIA (and subsequent ESMF) and can help determine whether an ESIA is required or a SIA.

The level of detail of the assessments will need to be discussed with the WWF contracting office. In order to effectively use resources, the consultants should build on information gathered and studies already completed by WWF teams (socio-economic assessments, biodiversity monitoring reports, situation analysis) complementing these with field work as needed.

 

Structure of the ESIA

At minimum, the ESIA/SIA should contain:

  1. A non-technical summary, which summarises significant issues in a way that can be easily understood by a non-technical audience, in particular local stakeholders.
  1. Landscape/seascape context
  • This section will be developed using documentation provided by WWF
  • Include map(s) (sub-region, country, landscape)

 

  1. Methodology

While the consultants are required to propose a methodology for the ESIA, as a matter of guidance:

  • The ESIA should be developed through a combination of desk-based study and stakeholder consultation (identification of impacts and mitigation measures). See section on references/resources to refer t
  • The availability of existing information will determine the additional assessments that need to be carried out by the consultants, in discussion with WWF.

 

  1. WWF landscape governance structure

 

Depending on the gaps identified in the SST. This section should explain in detail the governance/institutional arrangements in the landscape relevant to WWF’s activities. This includes:

  • To the extent possible, explain the overarching programmatic structure (or lack thereof). This means explaining whether all activities are implemented as part of a coordinated programme or several uncoordinated projects (multiple donors)
  • Roles and responsibilities of the various partners WWF is working with in the landscape (provide details of contractual agreements that may exist)
  • Financial organisation of the programme(s) in the landscape (if not 100% done by WWF, who has the authority to hire and fire staff, validate budgets and expenditure)
  1. Socio-cultural, economic, historical and political context

 

While some broader contextual information is necessary, the main analysis should focus on the immediate context of the landscape/seascape and be relevant to decisions about project design, operation, or mitigation measures. To the extent possible consultants should rely on secondary data and existing analyses carried out by the WWF team as a project design step. This contextual information should ideally include:

  • Historical context relevant to the landscape and potential impacts, including:
    • evolution of natural resource management regime in the country/landscape
    • property rights/tenure regime and degree of recognition of customary/communal rights
    • traditional organisational and decision-making structures
  • Main economic activities and livelihood patterns such as:
    • subsistence and commercial agriculture/hunting/fishing,
    • degree of isolation from or integration in the market economy,
    • degree of dependence on natural resources or on illegal activities such as poaching or illegal trade.
    • Where possible this should be detailed to the village level and be gender disaggregated, as well as distinguished between ethnic groups
  • An overview of the social issues and risks faced by social groups, including
    • issues related to access to infrastructure and social services as well as to capabilities and development opportunities.
    • This doesn’t have to be detailed to the household or village level, but should enable the identification of the key socio-economic challenges faced by the local population and different social groups within (lacking health clinics, lack of schools, no access to markets for agricultural goods they produce etc.).
    • Where one ethnic group has historically been discriminated against by the dominant group, describe this situation here.
  • Interests and developmental aspirations of the different identified stakeholder groups and their attitudes toward sustainable natural resource management (can help with defining mitigation measures and could be discussed during stakeholder engagement);
  • Description of existing physical cultural resources or sites where they may be present;
  • Existing or potential emerging conflicts between or among social (ethnic) groups or other stakeholders that are relevant to the project, including:
    • Between different ethnic/religious groups
    • Between the government and local communities
    • Between local communities and the private sector (i.e. concession holders)

 

  1. Legal/institutional context, including:
  • Relevant environmental legislation that applies to the landscape/seascape and planned interventions (national, sub-national and international, if applicable). This can include
    • those regulating natural resource management and conservation
    • procedures for obtaining management rights to protected areas,
    • rules regulating the activities in the relevant sector (forestry, fisheries, commercial hunting, REDD+ etc.)
    • national legislation regulating ESIA
  • Relevant laws and regulations that pertain to social matters, including:
    • land ownership and tenure (access and use)
    • Indigenous Peoples’ (degree of recognition and rights),
    • Consultation, participation and/or Free, Prior and Informed Consent (primary and secondary legislation)
    • gender
  • Administrative distribution within the landscape/seascape (relevant government institutions with jurisdiction over the landscape/seascape or activities in question) including:
    • ministries,
    • their agencies and local offices,
    • relevant local/municipal government institutions, if applicable
  • Applicable social/environmental requirements/safeguards of any co-financing partners, especially where they go beyond the standards of national legislation.
  • Capacities and capacity issues of institutions relevant to the project and to impacts, including:
    • land-use planning, availability of maps/data for policy-making and enforcement, in general and locally.
    • Issues and constraints within existing institutions and in their relationships with each other that might present barriers for the project (such as lack of inter-institutional coordination among government ministries)
    • This will help identify where some of the main governance gaps are and help determine mitigation measures.

 

  1. Summary of WWF activities (implemented and supported) in the landscape

 

  • Describe the activities that WWF supports and implements in the landscape (based on the information included in the SST and gaps identified during the review). For each activity describe:
    • Who is the main implementing actor (WWF staff, consultants, eco-guards, sub-contracted NGO etc.)
    • the nature of the activity (law enforcement, biomonitoring, drafting land-use plans etc.)

 

  1. Potential negative social and environmental impacts

 

This section of the ESIA should provide a clear explanation of each identified potential negative social and (where relevant) environmental impacts that may arise as a result of implementation of the planned interventions. The impacts should be organised by activity (which should be spelled out) according to the relevant triggered ESSF Substantive Standards (listed above).

This section should also specify who and/or what would be negatively impacted (stakeholder group, species, habitat etc.) by the proposed intervention, as well as the severity of impact and likelihood of occurrence. The potential impacts should also be ranked according to the severity of impact and likelihood of occurrence (this can be done through a traffic light approach with definitions of how each level has been defined).

The findings of this section will be a result of desk-based research by the consultants COMBINED WITH inputs from stakeholder engagement. The ESIA report should document the results of the consultations carried out with stakeholders and provide an explanation of how these results have been taken into account in identification and prioritisation of impacts. The description should specify how women and vulnerable minorities, including Indigenous Peoples have been included in the consultation.

This section should address the questions and gaps identified in the SST in relation to potential impacts.

 

  1. Possible mitigation measures

 

In addition to the identification of potential negative impacts, the consultants should identify preliminary mitigation measures. As with the impacts, these suggestions should be the result of desk-based research by the consultants COMBINED WITH inputs from stakeholder engagement. These will be further developed in the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMF) as well as implementing arrangements (cost, timeline, capacity building, institutional arrangements etc.)

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK (ESMF)

For each significant impact identified in the ESIA an appropriate mitigation strategy must be developed. First, all available options should be sought to avoid impacts (e.g., through adjustment of project design, modification of protected area boundaries). If avoidance is not possible, appropriate measures to minimise the impact should be identified.

At minimum, the ESMF should contain:

  1. A non-technical summary, which summarises significant issues in a way that can be easily understood by a non-technical audience, in particular local stakeholders.
  1. Methodology
  1. Analysis of the potential environmental and social impacts

This section should summarise the conclusions of the ESIA, identifying the main negative impacts that need to be mitigated. The Consultants should aim to identify the ESSF Standards that relate to the identified impacts (Indigenous Peoples, Access Restriction etc.)

  1. Proposed avoidance/mitigation measures (including procedures) for each identified impact

Mitigation measures should be technically and operationally feasible and culturally adequate and specify the type of impact(s) it will address.

  1. Implementation arrangements (roles and responsibilities)

 

The ESMF should provide a specific description of institutional arrangements and who is responsible for carrying out mitigation and monitoring measures.

 

  1. Grievance mechanism

 

Each WWF office is responsible for developing and maintaining procedures to enable individuals or groups impacted by WWF supported activities to raise and seek resolution to concerns and grievances about activities supported by WWF in that country.

In accordance with the WWF Standard on Grievance Mechanisms, high risk landscapes/seascapes require the establishment of landscape/seascape-level grievance mechanisms.  Complaints received at this level must be escalated to the Country level grievance mechanism.

In general, the grievance mechanism should ensure the following principles:

  • Accessible: Mechanism is fully accessible to all parties that might be affected by the office’s activities.
  •  Practical:  Mechanism is cost-effective and practical in its implementation and doesn’t create a burden for project implementation
  •  Effective: The provisions and steps for responding to complaints and seeking solution are effective and timely
  •  Transparent: Decisions are taken in a transparent way, and complainants are kept abreast of progress with cases brought forward
  •  Independent: Oversight body and designated investigator is independent from project management
  • Maintenance of records: Diligent documentation of negotiations and agreements and good maintenance of records on all cases and issues brought forward for review

Resolution of complaints should be resolved at the lowest possible level: The first approach involves project management and the affected party reviewing the conflict and deciding together on a way forward that advances their mutual interests. If a localized resolution is unsuccessful, then resolution should be sought with the office management.

The WWF Complaints Management Framework and Standard on Grievance Mechanism provide more details on the above and will be shared with the consultants. See references/resources section below for further resources on designing accountability and grievance mechanisms

 

  1. Capacity building needs/measures

 

To support timely and effective implementation of project components, the ESMF should identify gaps in this capacity, and outline actions for appropriate training/capacity-building of staff, to allow implementation of the recommendations.

 

  1. Disclosure, monitoring, evaluation and adaptive management provisions

 

The monitoring section of the ESMF should provide a description of monitoring measures including:

  • the parameters to be measured (implementation of mitigation measures, linkages to identified negative impacts)
  • institutional arrangements (who monitors and to whom the reports are sent)
  • methods to be used
  • frequency of measurements
  1. Expected timeline and costs for implementation

For all four aspects (avoidance/mitigation, monitoring, and capacity development), the ESMF should provide:

  • an implementation schedule for measures that must be carried out; and
  • estimated costs (capital and recurrent cost) and, in collaboration with the WWF team identify potential sources of funds for implementing the ESMF.
  • Where feasible, the ESMF should try to assess whether proposed measures will continue to be effective after project funding ceases.

 

  1. Annexes (stakeholder consultation plan, summary of consultations etc.)

References/resources

IAIA

https://www.iaia.org/best-practice.php

IFC

https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/Topics_Ext_Content/IFC_External_Corporate_Site/Sustainability-At-IFC/Policies-Standards/Performance-Standards

http://www.cao-ombudsman.org/

IUCN

https://www.iucn.org/resources/project-management-tools/environmental-and-social-management-system

UNDP

https://info.undp.org/sites/bpps/SES_Toolkit/SitePages/Guidance%20and%20Templates.aspx

World Bank

https://www.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/environmental-and-social-framework

http://www.iaia.org/uploads/pdf/SIA_Guidance_Document_IAIA.pdf

[1] The risk categorisation is and can result in the following labels: High Risk (Category A) – Likely to have significant and irreversible adverse social or environmental impacts at a large scale (such as the construction of major infrastructure). It is unlikely that WWF would implement such projects. High Risk (Special Consideration) – If proposed/implemented in a Fragile, Conflict-, Violence-affected State, or if there is potential for human rights abuses in addition to potential adverse social and/or environmental impacts which can be mitigated through WWF activities. Medium risk (Category B)  – Potential adverse social and/or environmental impacts which can be mitigated through WWF activities. Low risk (Category C) – Likely to have minimal to no adverse social and environmental impacts, or outside of the scope of application of the Environmental & Social Safeguards Framework, the activities cannot be implemented, and the Landscape/Seascape team may be asked to stop (in the case of activities under implementation) or redesign the proposed activities.

To apply for this job email your details to wwfcareers@wwfzam.org


  • Legitimate employers should never ask for a fee during the recruitment process.
  • If you are asked for money do not proceed. Find out how to conduct a safe job search here.