WWF recherche un(e) consultant pour la préparation d’une étude d’impact environnemental et social (ESIA) et d’un cadre d’atténuation environnemental et social (ESMF) pour le paysage de Boumba Bek-Nki-Ngoyla-Mintom.
TERMS OF REFERENCE
For the preparation of an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and Environmental and
Social Mitigation Framework (ESMF) for Boumba Bek-Nki-Ngoyla-Mintom Landscape
BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE LANDSCAPE
The Boumba Bek-Nki-Ngoyla-Mintom landscape is a complex of protected areas that are part of the
Tri-National Dja-Odzala-Minkebe (TRIDOM) umbrella landscape, which spans across Cameroon, the
Republic of Congo and Gabon. The specific landscape covered by this assignment includes the
Boumba Bek and Nki National Parks and the Ngoyla wildlife reserve. It covers over 2,000,000
hectares across the Southern and Eastern regions of Cameroon. The landscape is sparsely populated
but is home to more than 120,000 inhabitants including various Bantu local community groups and
Baka indigenous peoples. Both community groups strongly rely on forest resources for their
livelihoods and their cultural ceremonies. Bantu are traditionally known for carrying out small-scale
agriculture farming while the Baka IPs are considered as hunter-gatherers and have a semi-nomadic
lifestyle in the forests of the landscape. The landscape is also home to an exceptionally rich
biodiversity, with a considerable amount of mammal species and several endemic wildlife species.
However, the biodiversity of the landscape is facing pressure from not only existential threats such as
poaching, illegal mining and logging but also increasing pressure from emerging threats such large
scale extractive investments and infrastructure development.
WWF has an overarching Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Ministry of Forest and
Wildlife (MINFOF), which defines the roles and responsibilities of each party regarding the
management of key protected areas in the country. WWF started its engagement in the landscape in
the mid-1990s to support the Cameroon government in its endeavor to establish an integrated
development and conservation area based on the CAMPFIRE model implemented in Zimbabwe.
However, MINFOF through its decentralized services (regional delegation, conservation unit), has the
ultimate decision-making voice regarding the management of the three protected areas within the
landscape. WWF’s role is to provide technical advice and financial support to the government to
implement its policy on biodiversity conservation and natural resource management;
Currently, WWF implements a variety of activities in the landscape which include: support to the
integrated land-use planning process; strengthen the effective management of protected area;
technical and financial support to law enforcement activities; strengthen local communities and IPs
access to forest resources; support implementation of livelihood activities for local communities and
IPs; implementation of bio-monitoring activities.
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 an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) for tentire landscape. In order to ensure that WWF activities within the landscape are aligned with WWF’s Environmental and Social Safeguards Framework (ESSF), potential negative environmental and social risks and related impacts linked to WWF activities should be identified, avoided and/or mitigated, while striving to enhance benefits for local communities and the environment. The focus of the assignment will be a review of all WWF supported interventions and activities within the landscape (current and planned). The consultant will be asked to focus on the entire landscape (hereafter collectively referred to as the “assignment”) that covers the three protected areas and their peripheral zones in southern and eastern Cameroon. However, given the connectivity of the protected areas and frequent interactions of people and wildlife in the larger TRIDOM landscape, it is also expected that the consultant will assess the impacts of any transboundary activities implemented by WWF.
The ToR aims to outline the tasks in as much detail as possible. Nevertheless, the Consultant shall
critically verify the scope of services indicated and may extend, reduce or amend those services
wherever such is deemed necessary according to his/her own professional judgement and
knowledge. Any suggested amendments to the ToR should be clearly documented within the
Consultant’s submission, including accompanying justification for the proposed amendments, and
must be approved by the contracting party at WWF.
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 .
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: Development of the stakeholder analysis and stakeholder engagement plan
● Task 3: Field visit(s) and engagement with stakeholders.
● Task 4: Development of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA)
● Task 5: Development of the Environment and Social Management Framework (ESMF)
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: Carry out a stakeholder analysis and a stakeholder engagement plan
Based on the information provided by WWF during the first task, the Consultant will carry out a
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 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 and also assess where applicable the form and processes of the consent
obtained from communities under past FPIC processes. 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.
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 , ESMF and any subsequent plans such as
the Indigenous Peoples Plan. 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 field
trips will be scheduled depending on the evolution related to travel restrictions in the country. 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 the Nki-Boumba Bek-Ngoyla-Mintom forest block
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 forest products 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 and indigenous peoples.
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 3: Development of an 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:
● ESSS 2 on Stakeholder Engagement
● ESSS 3 on Grievance Mechanism
● ESSS 4 on Restriction of Access and Resettlement
● ESSS 5 on Indigenous Peoples
● ESSS 6 on Community Health, Safety and Security
● ESSS 7 on Protection of Natural Habitats
● ESSS 8 on Pest Management
● ESSS 9 on Cultural Resources
Currently, known risks and/or issues in both the Nki-Boumba Bek-Ngoyla landscape include:
● Social risks related to anticipated impacts from restriction of access to and use of natural
resources, social exclusion, distributional justice, human-wildlife conflicts, any conflicts over
resources between different groups of the population etc;
● Vulnerable groups, especially those below the poverty line, indigenous peoples, women and
children as well as the elderly;
● Law Enforcement (LE) activities – aimed at reducing poaching particularly in and around
protected areas (PAs) – in connection to issues on government ranger performance; the
rights of community and indigenous peoples; the quality, accountability and oversight of law
enforcement activities and within that, WWF’s support to governmental management
authorities and ranger forces; community health, safety and security.
● Natural habitat conversion in relation to the support to the development of cash crops such as
cocoa and other agricultural commodities.
● Use of chemical pesticides in projects that support the development of cash crops such as
cocoa and other agricultural commodities
During the site visits particular attention should be paid to the local public views on environmental,
cultural heritage and social effects that could be imposed by WWF activities or shall be considered if
they are already observable on the ground.
Task 4: 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.
To prepare the ESMF, the Consultant will:
(a) propose a set of mitigating actions to address potential adverse impacts of WWFs
interventions highlighted by the earlier steps;
(b) assess the potential for locally sourced and managed mitigation actions including the required
support for their sustainability
(c) 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
(d) describe the means for meeting those requirements (including an indicative budget, timeline
and clear responsibilities)
(e) 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.
More information on the components of the ESMF can be found in the Annex.
DELIVERABLES
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 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 and French, including annexes and a
non-technical summary in the relevant format for local communities and indigenous
peoples.
Task 5 will result in the following outcomes:
● A draft and final ESMF for the landscape in both English and French, including annexes
and a non-technical summary in the relevant format for local communities and
indigenous peoples.
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. Since the landscape is home
to Baka indigenous peoples, 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 finalized. All draft
versions of the developed documents will also be reviewed by the safeguards team at 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.
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:
a) Management of the Consultant’s team;
b) Communication activities with the WWF key contacts, and other parties as required;
c) Regular reporting on schedule, budget and progress of the Assignment;
d) 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 Cameroon with (1) sound expertise of the
country context and (2) expert knowledge of the Nki-Boumba Bek-Ngoyla 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
1-5. Due to the ongoing COVID-19 situation, the budget estimate for Tasks 1-2 can be assessed and
submitted as a distinct sub-budget (for desk-based work). 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, Wednesday June 30
th to:
Gilles Etoga
Senior Policy and Conservation Coordinator,
WWF Cameroon
M +237 699 98 03 37
getoga@wwfcam.org
Eric Parfait Essomba
Regional Head, E&S Safeguards, Africa
WWF International
Tel: +254 0746 129 858
eessomba@wwfint.org
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. FPIC, 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.
● Availability.
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:
● Environmental and Social Risk Management
● Stakeholder Engagement
● Grievance Mechanism
The Substantive Standards include:
● Restriction of Access and Resettlement
● Indigenous Peoples
● Community Health, Safety and Security
● Protection of Natural Habitats
● Pest Management
● Cultural Resources
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.
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.
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
o the number and location of relevant communities/villages settlements (identified on
landscape/seascape map) potentially affected by the project
o Indigenous Peoples and/or other vulnerable groups (such as ethnic minorities not
self-identifying as IPs) should be identified
o 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
o the relevant governmental stakeholders (relevant ministry/agency(ies), local
government
o major private sector stakeholders (this could include logging/mining companies,
agricultural producers or other representative bodies, cooperatives etc.)
o Local NGOs active in the area or thematic issue
● To the extent possible
o Demographic information on relevant stakeholders (gender, age, ethnicity).
o Relevant stakeholder decision-making, conflict resolution mechanisms and other local
institutions (customary and other).
o Relevant religious and cultural elements as they are likely to affect and be affected by
the proposed interventions (cultural resources/sites)
o 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:
- 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. - Landscape/seascape context
● This section will be developed using documentation provided by WWF
● Include map(s) (sub-region, country, landscape) - 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 to.
● The availability of existing information will determine the additional assessments that need to
be carried out by the consultants, in discussion with WWF. - 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) - 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) - 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. - 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.) - 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. - 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: - 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. - Methodology
- 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.) - 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. - 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. - 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 - 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. - 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 - Expected timeline and costs for implementation
For all four aspects (avoidance/mitigation, monitoring, and capacity development), the ESMF should
provide:
(a) an implementation schedule for measures that must be carried out; and
(b) estimated costs (capital and recurrent cost) and, in collaboration with the WWF team identify
potential sources of funds for implementing the ESMF.
(c) Where feasible, the ESMF should try to assess whether proposed measures will continue to
be effective after project funding ceases. - 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-sys
tem
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
