final draft process framework...2019/06/23 · final draft process framework kenya marine fisheries...

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, LIVESTOCK, FISHERIES &

IRRIGATION (MoALFI)

STATE DEPARTMENT FOR FISHERIES, AQUACULTURE & BLUE

ECONOMY (SDFA-BE)

FINAL DRAFT PROCESS FRAMEWORK

KENYA MARINE FISHERIES SOCIO-ECONMIC DEVELOPMENT

PROJECT (KEMFSED)

JUNE 2019

PROCESS FRAMEWORK

KENYA MARINE FISHERIES SOCIO-ECONMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (KEMFSED)

Prepared by

IN JOINT VENTURE WITH

<< PROCESS FRAMEWORK (PF) >>

Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project iii

Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................ i

Definitions.................................................................................................................................................... iii

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project ..................... 1

1.2 Project Components ...................................................................................................................... 3

1.3 Project Activities ........................................................................................................................... 7

1.4 Objectives ..................................................................................................................................... 7

1.5 Justification for the PF .................................................................................................................. 9

1.5.1 Elements of a PF ........................................................................................................................... 9

1.6 World Bank Operational Policies Triggered ............................................................................... 11

1.7 Policy Application and Implementation ..................................................................................... 13

2. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ......................................... 14

2.1 Plan of Action ............................................................................................................................. 14

2.2 Approach to Community Engagement ........................................................................................ 15

2.3 Building Community Awareness ................................................................................................ 16

2.4 Implementation Sequence of Project Activities .......................................................................... 17

2.5 Representation of Affected Communities ................................................................................... 18

3. IDENTIFICATION AND ELIGIBILITY OF DISPLACED PERSONS ........................................... 19

3.1 Establishing Impacts on Local Communities .............................................................................. 19

3.1.1 Community Consultations ................................................................................................... 20

3.1.2 Collaboration with Representative Organizations .............................................................. 20

3.2 Establishing Criteria for Eligibility ............................................................................................. 21

3.3 Considerations for Vulnerable Groups ....................................................................................... 22

4. LIVELIHOODS RESTORATION AND FACILITATION ............................................................... 23

4.1 Community Mobilization and Livelihood Restoration ............................................................... 23

4.2 Skills Training to Facilitate Transition to Alternative Livelihoods ............................................ 25

4.3 Community Financing Procedures .............................................................................................. 25

4.3.1 Eligible Applicants .............................................................................................................. 26

4.3.2 Sub-projects Approval Process ........................................................................................... 26

4.3.3 Eligibility Criteria ............................................................................................................... 27

4.4 Employment in Project Activities ............................................................................................... 28


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project iv

4.4.3 Employment Opportunities ................................................................................................. 28

6.3.4 Notice of Vacancies ............................................................................................................. 28

6.3.5 Hiring Process .................................................................................................................... 28

6.4 Gender and other Social Factors ................................................................................................. 28

6.4.1 Gender-sensitive Participation ........................................................................................... 28

4.3.3 Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups (VMGs) ................................................................... 29

4.4.4 Civil Society Organizations ................................................................................................ 29

5 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS ....................................................................................... 31

5.3 Process Framework Implementation Responsibilities ................................................................ 31

5.4 Technical Coordination ............................................................................................................... 31

5.5 Grants Coordination for Alternative Livelihoods ....................................................................... 32

5.6 Key Implementation Partners ...................................................................................................... 32

6 GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM .......................................................................................... 33

6.3 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................ 33

6.4 Principles of GRM ...................................................................................................................... 34

6.5 Definition and Types of Grievance ............................................................................................. 35

6.6 Grievance Redress Guidelines .................................................................................................... 36

6.7 Grievance Procedures ................................................................................................................. 37

6.8 Implementing the GRM .............................................................................................................. 39

7 MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF PROCESS FRAMEWORK ........................................... 40

7.3 Purpose and Scope of Process M & E ......................................................................................... 40

7.4 Approach and Data Sources ........................................................................................................ 40

7.5 Information Management ............................................................................................................ 40

7.6 Information Management ............................................................................................................ 41

7.7 Reporting and Information Dissemination .................................................................................. 42

8 PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE ........................................................................... 43

8.3 Stakeholder Consultations and Disclosure .................................................................................. 43

ANNEXES .................................................................................................................................................. 44

Annex 1: List of Participants at consultation sessions ............................................................................ 44

Annex 2: Map of KEMFSED Project area in Kilifi ................................................................................ 54

Annex 3: Map of KEMFSED Project area in Mombasa ......................................................................... 55

Annex 4: Map of KEMFSED Project area in Tana River ....................................................................... 56


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project v

Annex 5: Map of KEMFSED Project area in Lamu ............................................................................... 57

Annex 6: Map of KEMFSED Project area in Kwale .............................................................................. 58

Annex 7: Minutes of Disclosure Workshop ................................................................................................ 59

List of Tables

Table 1: WB Policies Triggered.................................................................................................................. 11

List of Figures

Figure 1: Project Beneficiary Counties ......................................................................................................... 2

Figure 2: KEMFSED Project Theory of Change .......................................................................................... 3

Figure 3: GRM Framework ........................................................................................................................ 37


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project i

Acronyms and Abbreviations AIGAs Alternative Income Generating Activities

AFIPEK Association of Fish Processors and Exporters in Kenya

BMU Beach Managements Units

CBOs Community-Based Organizations

CDF Constituency Development Fund

CDDO Community-Driven Development Organizations

CPSC County Project Steering Committee

CPCU County Project Coordinating Unit

CMA Co-Management Area

CoK Constitution of Kenya

CTAC County Technical Advisory Committee

DS Development Service

DPs Displaced Persons

EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone

ESIA Environmental Social Impact Assessment

ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FIPs Fishery Improvements Plans

FIMS Fishery Information and Monitoring System

FMPs Fishery Management Plans

GoK Government of Kenya

IDA International Development Association

ILF Inter-community Learning Forum

IPF Investment Project Financing

IUU Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated

JCMAs Joint Co-Management Areas

KAPAP Kenya Agricultural Productivity and Agribusiness Project

KCDP Kenya Coastal Development Project

KCSAP Kenya Climate Smart Agriculture Project

KeFS Kenya Fisheries Service

KEMSFED Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development

KMFRI Kenya Marine Fisheries Research Institute

MoALFI Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Irrigation

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MPA Marine Protected Areas

MMAs Marine Management Areas

NGO Non-government Organization

GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism

NCBMU Network of Coastal Beach Management Unit

NPSC National Project Steering Committee

NPCU National Project Coordinating Unit


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project ii

NPIU National Project Implementation Unit

OP Operational Policy

PCU Project Coordination Unit

PF Process Framework

PDO Project Development Objectives

PIU Project Implementation Units

PTAC Project Technical Advisory Committee

SDFA-ABE State Department for Fisheries, Aquaculture &Blue Economy

SEC Small Ethnic Communities

SMEs Small- and Medium-sized Enterprises

SME-DS Small- and Medium-sized Enterprises Development Service

SDEF State Department for Environment and Forestry

TA Technical Assistance

TVET Technical and Vocational Education

US$ United States of America Dollars

VMGs Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups

VSL Village Savings and Loans

WB World Bank


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project iii

Definitions

Affected

Individual:

An individual who suffers loss of assets or investments, land and

property and/or access to natural or economical resources as a result of

the Project.

Affected

Household:

A household, which is affected when one, or more of its members are

affected by the Project or sub-project activities, either by loss of assets or

investments, land or denial of access to resources.

Affected

Community:

A community, which is affected by Project activities in terms of socio-

economic and/or social-cultural relationships or cohesion.

Community

Mitigation Action

Plans:

Community Mitigation Action Plans are developed by affected

communities in order to mitigate adverse impacts resulting from the

implementation of MPAs, CMAs or MMAs. These plans are prepared

further to a consultation process with communities and are focused on

generating alternative livelihood activities.

Marine Protected

Area:

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are areas of the marine environment that

are reserved under national, tribal, or local laws or regulations to provide

long-term protection for part or all of the natural and cultural resources

therein. In relation to the Process Framework, the reference to MPAs

includes Marine Management Areas (MMA) and Community

Management Areas (CMAs).

Participation: A process through which stakeholders influence and share control over

development initiatives, decisions and the management of resources

which affect them. Participation can take different forms, ranging from

information-sharing and consultation methods, to mechanisms for

collaboration and empowerment that give stakeholders more influence

and control.

Process

Framework:

The Process Framework is an instrument of the Kenyan Government

prepared in compliance with the World Bank Safeguard Policy on

Involuntary Resettlement (OP4.12). The purpose of the Process

Framework is to clarify operating principles, organizational

arrangements and design criteria to be applied to the implementation of

MPAs, CMAs or MMAs as supported by KEMFSED.

Public

Consultation:

The process of engaging affected people and other interested parties in

open dialogue through which a range of views and concerns can be

expressed in order to inform decision-making and help build consensus.

Replacement

cost:

For agricultural land - it is the pre-project or pre-displacement,

whichever is higher, market value of land of equal productive potential

or use located in the vicinity of the affected land, plus the cost of


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project iv

preparing the land to levels similar to those of the affected land, plus the

cost of any registration and transfer taxes.

For land in urban areas - it is the pre-displacement market value of land

of equal size and use, with similar or improved public infrastructure

facilities and services and located in the vicinity of the affected land, plus

the cost of any registration and transfer taxes.

For houses and other structures, it is the market cost of the materials to

build a replacement structure with an area and quality similar to or better

than those of the affected structure, or to repair a partially affected

structure, plus the cost of transporting building materials to the

construction site, plus the cost of any labor and contractors‘ fees, plus the

cost of any registration and transfer taxes. In determining the

replacement cost - depreciation of the asset and the value of salvage

materials are not considered, nor is the value of benefits to be derived

from the project deducted from the valuation of an affected asset. Where

the national law does not meet the standard of compensation at full

replacement cost, compensation under domestic law is supplemented by

additional measures to meet the replacement cost standard. Such

additional assistance is distinct from resettlement measures provided

under other clauses in OP 4.12, para. 6.

Stakeholders: Stakeholders are those affected by the outcomes (negatively or

positively) or those who can affect the outcome of a proposed

intervention (primary and secondary stakeholders – direct and indirect

respectively). Stakeholders can include borrowers; directly affected

groups including the poor and disadvantaged; indirectly affected groups

such as NGOs and private sector organizations; and the World Bank

management staff, and shareholders.

Sub-Projects: Sub-projects are initiatives undertaken as supported by the Component 2:

(Enable Sustainable Investment in Marine Fisheries and Mariculture) of

KEMFSED, as implemented through State Department for Fisheries.

Sub-projects are aimed at supporting income generation within coastal

communities. Initiatives may include the demand of technical, physical

or social services, including alternative income generating activities

(AIGAs). Sub-projects are important in relation to the Process

Framework because they are an important means to mitigate negative

impacts on affected individuals due to the implementation of MPAs,

CMAs or MMAs.

Vulnerable

Persons:

Vulnerable persons are those characterized by higher risk and reduced

ability to cope with change or negative impacts. This may be based on

socio-economic condition, gender, age, disability, ethnicity, or criteria

that influence people‘s ability to access resources and development

opportunities. Vulnerable persons in relation to the Process Framework


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project v

will include the elderly, orphans, people with disabilities, HIV/AIDS

affected or infected, widows, widowers, people suffering from serious

illness, and women and children at risk of being dispossessed of their

productive assets, land, or access to resources.


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project vi

Background

1. Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development Project (KEMFSED) aims to

attain economic benefits from the coastal and marine resource. The Project Development

Objective is to improve management and increase value addition of priority fisheries and

aquaculture, and to strengthen access to livelihoods for coastal communities in Kenya. The

project will be implemented by the Government of Kenya (GoK) through the State

Department for Fisheries, Aquaculture and the Blue Economy (SDFA&BE) in support by the

World Bank. The coastal and marine space on which a blue economy is potentially founded

contains a myriad of different uses, some currently destructive or unsustainable, while others

are renewable, some mutually exclusive and others compatible.

Project Geographic Scope

2. The KEMFSED Project will cover five (5) counties along the Coast that touch the shores of

Indian Ocean. These counties have been selected to be beneficiaries for the project namely

Kwale, Mombasa, Kilifi, Tana River and Lamu.

Objectives of Process Framework

3. The PF will serve as a guide through which activities and procedures related to KEMFSED

can be enhanced to incorporate the interests and needs of coastal community members and

affected stakeholders. It addresses the integral participation of people who may be affected

when decisions are taken to restrict access to natural resources in coastal areas along the

Kenyan coast in the project area. The purpose of the PF is to ensure that coastal areas are

both effectively managed for conservation of natural and cultural resources and, at the same

time, to ensure that affected people have a meaningful role in those decisions and in deciding

on and implementing alternatives to restore or improve livelihoods and incomes affected by

those decisions. The goal is to ensure that no one is worse off as a result of the Project.

4. According to OP 4.12, the purpose of the process framework is to establish a process by

which members of potentially affected communities participate in design of project

components, determination of measures necessary to achieve resettlement policy objectives,

and implementation and monitoring of relevant project activities (see OP 4.12, paras. 7 and

31). Specifically, the process framework describes participatory processes by which the

project activities will be accomplished.

Justification for the PF

5. This PF is prepared because KEMFSED may cause restrictions in access to natural resources

in legally designated parks and protected areas.

6. World Bank funding for KEMFSED requires that the Project comply with World Bank

Safeguard Policies to ensure that no undue harm is experienced by people and their


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project vii

environment as a result of the Project. KEMFSED has been identified as triggering the

World Bank‘s Safeguard Policy on Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) as a result of

activities under Component 1,2 &3.

7. These components will involve support for the implementation of KEMFSED project that

will, in turn, affect coastal resource use, Marine Protected Areas and may lead to a ―loss of

assets or access to assets‖ for local households. In this case, triggering the Safeguard Policy

on Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) requires the development of a PF, which will

serve as a guide to help ensure participation of affected people in the design of project

activities and to ensure affected communities have an opportunity to improve or at least

restore their incomes and standards of living after displacement.

8. Given that involuntary resettlement and restriction of traditional access to resources in legally

designated parks and protected areas can result in severe social and economic challenges for

local communities, the WB (OP) 4.12 ensures provision of safeguards where the state

restricts access to resources in legally designated parks and protected areas.

community participation in project implementation

9. The overall objective of the KEMFSED is to enhance economic benefits and coastal

livelihoods from marine fisheries and coastal aquaculture while safeguarding associated

ecosystems integrity. In order to achieve this it is necessary to ensure that the activities of the

project are environmentally and socially sound and sustainable, the rights and interests of the

Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups occupying the project area are safeguarded and that the

project activities are in compliance with the various World Bank Safeguard Policies such as

OP 4.01, 4.10, 4.12 and other World Bank Operational Policies that are likely to be triggered

by the implementation of the various project activities. Active support by communities is

therefore vital to achieving more sustainable patterns of resource use and minimizing and

mitigate adverse effects that may result from project activities. To achieve this, engaging

communities and facilitating their participation is therefore a necessary part of the process.

The participation and consultation of local communities that will be affected by the

KEMFSED project will be facilitated throughout the implementation of the project.

Approach to Community Engagement

10. When engaging communities, the following will be adhered to:

a) The VMGs and the other dominant communities with which they co-exist are regarded as

equal beneficiaries of the project and efforts must be made to address the discriminative

nature of their relationship with the neighbouring dominant communities during

KEMFSED project implementation. The views of all the project affected communities

will be equally considered and respected.


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project viii

b) Fishers and fishing communities are regarded as equal partners and stakeholders in the

implementation of KEMFSED project activities. Their views will be considered and

respected.

c) It is important not to raise community expectations beyond that which the project is able

to deliver. The project will ensure that the scope of the implementation of the various

project activities and expected outcomes are properly communicated to the communities.

d) The coastal communities are a diverse group with different cultural beliefs and practices,

different levels of attachment to natural resources, different levels of education and

engage in different income generating activities. They also have different gender roles

which may variably affect their participation in the project.

e) The community members must be appropriately consulted during the design, planning,

implementation and monitoring and evaluation of the project activities. Although they

may not have the technical capacity to participate in the project activities, their traditional

knowledge will be incorporated in the overall design.

f) It is recognized that engaging local communities is a time-consuming process and that it

requires persistence and consistency.

Representation of Affected Communities

11. While consultations will take place to ensure community participation in developing

management and establishing new boundaries for the fisheries activities, it equally important

to ensure that community members have continuous engagement with the project at the

leadership level. Community members will be asked to become involved as members of

advisory committees for each of the targeted fishing landing sites and ports. Where these

already exist, they will be strengthened by ensuring that community members are equally

represented and that those committees‘ function according to their terms of references. This

platform will provide a space for communities depending on marine and fisheries resources

specially to engage with other stakeholders to advise the planning process but also space for

the implementation of other project activities and even longer-term engagement in the

sustainable utilization and conservation of the marine resources and maintenance of coastal

ecosystem integrity. Additionally, elected representatives of the local communities including

the VMGs will be proportionately represented in the project steering committee which will

have oversight responsibility for the project at the county and community level.

Identification and Eligibility of Displaced Persons

12. Defining Displaced Persons as per the World Bank‘s OP 4.12, the term ―displaced persons‖

is synonymous with ―project-affected persons‖ and is not limited to those subjected to

physical displacement. It must be noted however that project activities will not result in

physical relocation of persons or communities. Displaced persons are therefore defined as

those persons who are affected in any of the ways described in paragraph 3b of OP 4.12. The

term connotes all those persons who lose ―access to legally designated parks and protected

areas resulting in adverse impacts on their livelihoods.‖ It is important to note that not every


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project ix

fisher will automatically be eligible for livelihood support under the project as loss of access

as a result of restrictions carried out under the project must be demonstrated.

Establishing Impacts on Local Communities

13. While the project is expected to affect the livelihoods of local community members through

restrictions to resources for instance controlled illegal, over-fishing, or unreported fishing as

well displacements during the expansion of the fish landing sites and fishing ports, the

introduction of new rules and regulations in beach managements or reinforcing of existing

rules and regulations, specific impacts to different segments of the population such as

women, VMGs, among others will not necessarily be fully known until the implementation

of project activities begin. In order to adequately determine those impacts, it will be

necessary to collaborate with community members, fishers and their representative

organizations to identify those who are being directly affected and determine the ways in

which the effects are being experienced and mechanisms of mitigation. This will be done by

engaging communities through various means. For instance, modernization of the Shimoni

fishing port could cause restrictions on movements from the Wasini and Mukwiro Islands to

the mainland in Kwale county and small boat operators are likely to lose income due to the

expansion of the fishing port and the new rules and regulations including the introduction of

modern boats both for tourism activities and the movements of locals. Furthermore, the

expansion and modernization of the fishing ports is expected to lead to introduction of new

sanitation rules and perhaps new levies that might make it difficult for the mama karanga to

continue operating in such expanded fishing ports leading to a loss of livelihood. In addition,

as identified in the social assessment, controversies could arise where the project activities

encroach on the Mijikenda kaya forests and the sacred sites for the VMGs, leading to delay

or withdrawal of project activities hence negatively affecting the populations that were

initially intended to improve their livelihoods in both Kilifi and Kwale counties. In Lamu, the

insecurity situation and the relationship between the local communities and the Kenya

Defence Forces (KDF) would lead to a negative impact of the project activities to the

communities living in Lamu. Consequently, the Saanye and Aweer are likely to be affected

because of restrictions on their movements and accusations of collaborating or sympathising

with the Al Shabaab terrorists in the Boni and Witu forests.

Community Consultations

14. The foremost space which will allow community members to engage with the project to

identify and assess the significance of adverse impacts will be through the consultations.

These consultations will be carried out to design, plan and implement the various

components of KEMFSED project and to identify the impact of the project both negative and

positive in a community-driven participatory approach. It is very important that

representation of the various segments of the communities and fishers especially, recognize


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project x

the importance of participating in the process. They will be provided with opportunities to be

part of the deliberations regarding how the management and implementation of the various

project activities and sub-activities will be set up. Community consultations will be the most

direct way for community members to participate and provide input into the implementation

of various project activities. During these consultations, communities can begin to identify

those who are likely to be affected based on the implementation of the various project

activities and those who are likely to miss out in the implementation of the project activities

so that the design of the project is reviewed to include all community members of different

ages, sex, disability and other vulnerabilities identified in the communities during these

consultations. There will be ongoing engagement with community members and fishers to

discuss their experience with the new restrictions in order to specifically identify affected

users.

Collaboration with Representative Organizations

15. There is a newly registered fishing cooperative society in Mombasa known as the Indian

Ocean Water body for all the coastal fishing communities. The body coordinates the

activities of a network of Beach Management Units (BMUs) for the Coastal region with an

overall chairman and county network chairmen. There is also a network of Vulnerable and

Marginalized Groups (VMGs) communities in Kilifi for the entire coastal region with county

chairmen and a leadership that extends to village level. The registration of the network of

VMGs at the Kenyan Coast was facilitated by the KCDP. KCDP used this network to prepare

and implement the VMG projects at the Kenyan coast. These representative organizations

will be engaged with a clear gender-based representation for them to assist in identifying the

impacts of the project on their members.

16. When assessing the impacts, the focus primarily will be on individuals, households and

social relations as well as gender differentiated impact, particularly how the implementation

of the project activities is influencing the relationship between men and women. During these

consultations, the project coordinating units will discuss the various ways in which those who

are affected can engage with the project in order to avoid, minimize or mitigate the impacts

being experienced as a result of the project.

Establishing Criteria for Eligibility

17. The National Project Implementation Unit (NPIU) will work primarily with the County

Project Coordination Unit (CPCU) and the identified Community-Driven Development

Organizations, network of Beach Management Units (BMUs) and environmental

conservationists to facilitate the participation of established stakeholder fishing communities

in determining the criteria for assistance eligibility. A working committee with representation

from network of BMUs, VMGs through their respective association or cooperatives and

KEMFSED project implementation units at the national and county levels will be established


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project xi

to develop the eligibility criteria for assistance. The criteria developed must be approved by

the National and County Project Steering Committee which also includes various

stakeholders. Those eligible for assistance must be directly affected by the project activities

based on their use and access of the respective fish landing sites and fishing ports.

18. Long standing traditional use of specific areas within the fish landing sites and fishing ports

will be considered when developing the criteria for eligibility.

LIVELIHOODS RESTORATION AND FACILITATION

19. The overall aim of the restorative and mitigation measures is to compensate for and diversify

the livelihoods of the affected users of the marine and fisheries resources who will be

affected by the implementation of KEMFSED project. The Project will support the

development of community-based business ventures (SMEs) under its components 3

activities that can leverage the opportunity cost of fishing and provide an alternative

livelihood opportunity for affected community members. The process of developing SMEs

and alternative livelihood strategies will be participatory and will be underlined by equity

and community driven decision-making.

Community Mobilization and Livelihood Restoration

20. Affected community members will be supported to mobilize themselves in order to identify

viable livelihoods activities in a participatory manner. The approach will help to ensure that

there is equity in the process and that all affected users including vulnerable groups, such as

women, elderly and VMGs, have the opportunity to become involved in and benefit from

alternative livelihoods assistance being provided by the project. Taking this approach will

acknowledge culturally appropriate decision-making patterns while supporting small fishing

communities to develop their capacity to assess their own needs, and design community level

actions and solutions in the future.

Community Financing Procedures

21. Sustainable community-based business ventures designed under the project will be supported

by a sub-grant‘s mechanism. This mechanism will provide financial resources as initial

capital investment to support the start-up of the identified business ventures. The operation of

the sub-grant‘s mechanism will be according to an established process. Given the fact that

livelihoods and displacement support is a restorative and mitigating measure, the grants will

not be competitive but rather targeted to those adversely affected by the implementation of

various project activities under KEMFSED. In the event there are left-over funds, then such

funds will be used to support other community-based projects such as water projects,

conservation of mangrove efforts and protection of identified cultural/sacred sites but the

same process must be followed. The following section outlines the structure of the

mechanism and how it is expected to operate


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project xii

Employment Opportunities

22. There will be employment opportunities during the implementation of the project that will be

used to absorb some of the displaced members of the fishing communities especially where

their skills meet the job requirements. Interested and skilled members of the community will

be competitively hired to provide their services during the implementation of the various

project activities. The specific skills required will be determined after the project activities

have been designed and approved.

Gender and other Social Factors

23. Specific emphasis will be placed on gender equity, the participation of indigenous peoples

and civil-society organizations in the design and implementation of the alternative livelihood

activities. During the preparation of the KEMFSED, local communities were consulted to

determine specific activities and target communities to be supported. Women were found to

play an integral role in harvesting marine resources both through their direct productive

involvement (seaweed farming) and social reproductive roles. Women are involved in

extraction as well as in the marketing of fish products (mama karanga). Consequently, the

project will ensure that women have an opportunity to participate and express their own

aspirations during the identification and development of subprojects for funding. Gender

related issues that affect the well-being of fishing families or inhibit the participation of

women will be looked at.

Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups (VMGs)

24. Affected indigenous VMG communities (Watha, Saanye, Aweer/Boni, Washiratzi,

Watschwaka, Wakifundi and Wakifundi) will also be fully engaged to promote their

participation in KEMFSED project activities and in the development of alternative

livelihoods that are culturally appropriate. Sub-projects that promote or preserve the Culture

of VMGs will be considered for funding where the economic viability of the actions can be

established. Some of the suggestions from indigenous communities include strengthening

eco-cultural tourism including aspects of Watha culture, Saanye language, traditional dress,

cultural foods or the creation of cultural entertainment groups that support the economic

diversification in local communities. Preservations of Kaya Forests and other sacred sites

among the VMGs will be identified and preserved to help to community to promote their

heritage and eco-tourism activities. These opportunities provide win-win situations for

indigenous communities where their culture is highlighted and maintained while enhancing

their household income.

Civil Society Organizations

25. The role and engagement of civil society organizations including fisher‘s associations and

conservation NGOs will be a key feature of this project both in the promotion of KEMFSED


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project xiii

project as well as in the development of alternative livelihoods strategies for local

communities. There are local conservation organizations and Beach Management Units that

have continuously engaged the targeted communities therefore the project will build on those

existing relationships and will avoid creating any new organizational structures within the

communities unless absolutely necessary.

Process Framework Implementation Responsibilities

26. The National Project Coordinating Unit (NPCU) and the National Project Steering

Committee (NPSC) will ensure the process framework measures are implemented and

complied with. The NPCU will oversee the implementation of KEMFSED project activities

and is responsible for the development and implementation of the project work plan,

implementation manual and budget and also in managing project resources and support staff.

The Project Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC) at the national level will oversee the

implementation of the policies, regulations, and procedures approved by the NPSC for the

project. The PTAC will liaise with the State Department of Fisheries and Blue Economy for

financial and fiduciary management matters, and with the Directorate of Fisheries and the

Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute (KMFRI) for technical matters, as well as

with other KEMFSED implementation partners. The NPCU reports to and provides regular

reports to the NPSC on all aspects of project activities. The PTAC social safeguard technical

focal persons are responsible for providing technical guidance to approved sub-projects

under all the components including grants under the livelihoods support component of the

project. Three social safeguard specialists will be engaged to oversee the implementation of

the recommendations of the PF and RPF in Kwale, Kilifi/Tana Delta and Lamu counties.

This will include overseeing and providing technical guidance to the grant‘s application and

approval process for alternative livelihood projects.

27. The NPCU is furthermore responsible for the monitoring and evaluation of the process

framework. The NPCU will report to the Project Steering Committee on activities being

carried out under the framework along with other aspects of project implementation. The

NPSC will provide general oversight to the overall implementation of all components of the

KEMFSED project. Where required, the NPCU in consultation with the World Bank social

safeguards team will engage technical consultants to carry out project activities where such

technical expertise is required, and approval is obtained from the NPSC and the World Bank

provides no objection. Consultants will also be engaged to assist communities to mobilize

and engage in participatory planning. In all such instances, the NPCU will provide guidance

and oversight to the work of third-party consultants as it relates to the process framework.

The NPCU will also work in close collaboration with the Fisheries Department, the World

Bank social safeguards technical team and PTAC for the technical aspects of the project.

This is further described below.


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project xiv

Technical Coordination

28. The Project Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC) and the Directorate of Fisheries will

provide technical coordination of all activities regarding the implementation of KEMFSED

activities, enforcement of fishing regulations and establishment of replenishment zones.

These two implementing partners will engage with network of Beach Management Units,

relevant county government departments in the participating counties, fishing communities

and stakeholders in the consultation process. The NPCU will provide all material support

necessary for the participation of stakeholder communities and will ensure that the process

framework is followed and that social and environmental safeguards are complied with.

Grants Coordination for Alternative Livelihoods

29. The NPCU will collaborate with County Project Coordination Unit (CPCU) and the County

Technical Advisory Committee (CTAC) on the implementation of the sub-grants mechanism

to support alternative livelihoods for project-affected community members. The County

Project Steering Committee (CPSC) will oversee the activities of the CPCU and the CTAC to

ensure that the PF is followed. The main reason for this is because the three county

implementation structures are based at the grassroots level and can easily support the

implementation of the project activities. They can then report to the NPCU which will

eventually report to the NPSC. The County Project Coordination Unit (CPCU) and the

County Project Steering Committee (CPSC) will be responsible for overseeing the processes

involved in assisting communities plan, develop and implement subprojects.

Key Implementation Partners

30. The KEMFSED project will be implemented by the State Department of Fisheries and Blue

Economy as the lead agency in partnership with several government departments such as

crops, Livestock, directorate of fisheries, the National Treasury, State Department for

Environment and Forestry (SDEF), the Co-ordinator of Inter-governmental secretariat for

Agricultural Sector, Network of Coastal Beach Management Unit (NCBMU), Coastal Fish

Farmers‘ Organization and the Association of Fish Processors and Exporters in Kenya

(AFIPEK) at the national level; The participating county governments in the coastal shoreline

will be implementing agencies at the county government level. They will provide

implementation and oversight structures at the county level. Below the county level

implementation and coordination level will be community level implementation structures

mainly comprised of Community-Driven Development Organizations (CDDO). Community

level implementation structures will have sub-committees.

Grievance Redress Mechanism

31. Grievances and disputes may arise at several stages of the Project‘s planning and

implementation and may be related to project administration or may be a result of conflicts


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project xv

between groups affected by the Project. Affected groups or individuals identified under the

Project should be made aware at every stage that grievance procedures are in place and be

advised on how they can access this mechanism.

32. For the purpose of the project‘s GRM, grievance is defined as an issue, concern, problem,

claim (perceived or actual) or complaint that an individual or group wants the project to

address and resolve. It is understood that when community members present a grievance,

they generally expect to receive one or more of the following:

a) Acknowledgment of their problem

b) An honest response to questions about project activities

c) An apology

d) Compensation

e) Modification of the conduct that caused the grievance

f) Some other fair remedy.

33. The GRM will be designed to respond to four types of complaints that are likely to arise:

a) Comments, suggestions, or queries;

b) Complaints relating to non-performance of project obligations;

c) Complaints referring to violations of law and/or corruption; and

d) d) Complaints against project staff or community members involved in project

management.

Purpose and Scope of Process M & E

34. The purpose of the process framework M&E system is to monitor the extent and the

significance of adverse impacts and the effectiveness of measures designed to assist

displaced person to improve or restore incomes and livelihoods. It is expected that

stakeholders especially fishing community who are likely to be affected by the

implementation of KEMFSED project activities partly due to introduction of new regulations

or reinforcing existing regulations due to implementation of new governance structures,

controlling of over-fishing, maintenance of fish stock levels and modernizing of fish landing

sites and fishing ports will actively participate in the M&E process. Those who benefit from

livelihoods restoration and mitigation assistance will also be expected to monitor and

evaluate the effectiveness of the alternative livelihood measures being undertaken by the

project.


Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project 1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socio-Economic Development (KEMFSED) Project

1. The Government of Kenya through an Executive Order No. 1/2016, made a clear

commitment towards a new approach, the blue economy, and taking into cognizance the

importance of the sector to fuel the country‘s economic growth, created the State Department

for Fisheries and the Blue Economy. The coastal and marine space on which a blue economy

is potentially founded contains a myriad of different uses, some currently destructive or

unsustainable, while others are renewable, some mutually exclusive and others compatible.

In a wider context, a blue economy approach is more proactive and embodies the need to

focus on longer term sustainability despite it being understood as encompassing a better

integrated approach to these sometimes-conflicting uses of marine resources, living and non-

living (including shipping, fossil energy and mining), and renewable or exhaustive. Blue

economy comprises many sectors, however focus will be on fisheries and aquaculture; and

maritime shipping and logistic services as priority sectors that would deliver fast socio-

economic benefits to the communities in the coastal areas. To strengthen fisheries

governance for sustainable utilization and enhanced revenues for the government and

employment creation, the government enacted the Fisheries Management and Development

Act 2016 in September 2016. The Act established institutions that would strengthen the

governance of the fishing industry and aquaculture and enable investments along the fisheries

value chains for socio-economic benefits. The institutions established include; the Kenya

Fisheries Service, Kenya Fish Marketing Authority and the Fish Levy Trust Fund.

2. To attain economic benefits from the coastal and marine resources, the Government of Kenya

(GoK) through the State Department for Fisheries, Aquaculture and the Blue Economy

(SDFA&BE) requested the World Bank to support the proposed Kenya Marine Fisheries and

Socio-Economic Development Project (KEMFSED).

3. The Government of Kenya has received Project Preparation Advance from the World Bank

towards the Kenya Marine Fisheries and Socioeconomic Development Project (KEMFSED).

The KEMFSED project covers a period of 5 years. The development project overall goal is to

enhance economic benefits and coastal livelihoods from marine fisheries and coastal

aquaculture while safeguarding associated ecosystems‘ integrity. The implementing agency

will be the State Department for Fisheries Aquaculture & the Blue Economy (SDFA-BE) on

behalf of the Government of Kenya. In Kenya, 5 counties along the Coast have been selected

to be beneficiaries for the project namely Kwale, Mombasa, Kilifi, Tana River and Lamu as

represented in the below figure.



Figure 1: Project Beneficiary Counties

4. The project will be implemented through the State Department of Fisheries, Aquaculture and

The Blue Economy, with funds made available by a credit of USD 100 million from the

International Development Association (IDA) of the World Bank, USD 13 million from the



Government of Kenya (GoK) and community contributions. The IDA credit will be

structured as an Investment Project Financing (IPF).

5. KEMFSED Project seeks to empower coastal communities to improve management and

value-addition of priority fisheries and Mariculture and strengthen access to complementary

livelihood activities.

1.2 Project Components

6. The Project components have been designed to fit within Kenya‘s broader Blue Economy

Framework and the on-going devolution process. The components and sub-components were

refined and regrouped to improve focus, flow, integration and better balancing of

hard/infrastructure aspects with soft/technical assistance, training and capacity building

aspects.

Figure 2: KEMFSED Project Theory of Change

Component 1 – Improve Governance and Management of Marine Fisheries.

7. This will focus on improving the management of marine fisheries in Kenyan waters.

a) Sub-component 1.1: Enhanced governance of marine fisheries and blue economy. This

sub-component aims to optimize the use of and increase the benefits derived from

Kenya‘s marine fisheries within the broader blue economy, while simultaneously not



compromising the long-term sustainability of these resources. This will be achieved

through: i) strengthening fisheries policy and regulation; ii) carrying out spatial marine

planning; iii) strengthening the management of priority fisheries; iv) strengthening the

monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) of fisheries in both the nearshore and EEZ;

and v) facilitating research.

b) Sub-component 1.2: Under this sub-component the management of nearshore fisheries

will be strengthened, in synergy with related priority fisheries stock assessments, FIPs,

MSP and fisheries management, and FIMS developed under sub-component 1.1.

Specifically, this sub-component will support formulating a standardized national

governance framework for nearshore fisheries co-management and implementing and

strengthening co-management on the ground in approximately a third of Kenya's

nearshore waters, through direct engagement with approximately 35 of the 85 coastal

fishing communities.

c) Sub-component 1.3: This sub-component will support the construction of key fisheries-

related infrastructure including: i) fisheries headquarters building in Nairobi, ―Uvuvi

House‖ or fisheries house, to house key entities undertaking and providing fisheries-

related functions and services, including the State Department of Fisheries, Aquaculture

and the Blue Economy (SDFA&BE), Kenya Fisheries Service (KeFS), Kenya Fish

Marketing Authority (KFMA), Fish Levy Trust Fund and Kenya Fisheries Advisory

Council; ii) with a devolved fisheries sector and coastal counties playing a key role in the

implementation of activities at the coastal and community level, the sub-component will

upgrade select county fisheries department offices as needed. All new construction or

rehabilitation/upgrading related works will ensure that climate change related impacts

will be considered, and the infrastructure will be climate-resilient; and iii) recognizing the

need to strengthen the technological and skills capacity in Mariculture in Kenya, the sub-

component will support construction of a national Mariculture resource and training

center (NAMARET) including a laboratory and a research and training center. This

facility will be in Kwale county and managed by the scientific and research parastatal

agency, Kenya Marine Fisheries Research Institute (KMFRI). This new facility will

undertake the much-required research in fish breeding toward supplying commercial

hatcheries with improved broodstock for fast and efficient production. The laboratory

will support the scientific, experimental and technological requirements for a state-of-the-

art system, and the training center will be used for capacity development and training of

skills in Mariculture.

Component 2 – Enable Sustainable Investment in Marine Fisheries and Aquaculture.

8. The four main barriers that prevent responsible investment from contributing to sustainable

fisheries: lack of reliable data for decision-making, ineffective fisheries management,



unreliable infrastructure systems, and a paucity of investment-ready enterprises.1 Component

2 will complement components 1 and 3 in addressing these barriers, particularly with regard

to a lack of investment-ready SMEs linked to fisheries and Mariculture, and in establishing

an enabling environment for sustainable investment in these sub-sectors. The component will

also work to build demand for responsibly produced Kenyan seafood by strengthening the

newly-established KFMA and support the establishment of science-based management of

fish stocks that may not be overexploited by conducing experimental fisheries in partnership

with the private sector. It also addresses gaps in public infrastructure to enable fish landing

sites to be more attractive to fishers and buyers and reduce start-up or expansion costs of

Mariculture ventures. Achievements under this component will be measured by SMEs with

access to TA, infrastructure in fish handling established and operational and access by people

in coastal communities to the infrastructure.

a) Sub-Component 2.1: SME-DS in Coastal Communities. An SME-DS will be contracted,

made up of a team of SME development-related experts, available to fishing communities

along the Kenyan coast. These experts will promote their services to Beach Management

Units (BMUs) and coastal residents seeking to develop or expand a fisheries-related

enterprise, and offer demand-driven technical assistance, analytical services, capacity

building, and knowledge sharing services. The SME-DS will also identify systemic risks

or issues that prevent potential projects from being investment ready and will recommend

remediation steps required to remove or mitigate such risks. Training and guidance on

accessing existing and emerging sources of credit will also be included. This sub-

component will also support SMEs that wish to develop services to add value and make

more transparent seafood value chains. In addition, the project will provide technical

assistance to guide the establishment and operation of Kenya Fish Marketing Authority.

b) Sub-Component 2.2: Improve Fisheries and Mariculture Related Infrastructure for

Value Chain development. This sub-component will target county-identified gaps in

basic public infrastructure (water, electricity, transport) that are inhibiting private

investment opportunities in marine fisheries and Mariculture. To ensure that all

investments will be clearly justified, support complementary private investment, and

minimize the potential to stimulate excessive fishing effort, all value-chain related public

infrastructure proposed by counties will be based on a county fishery and Mariculture

infrastructure development map and plan. Climate change related risks will be

internalized in the development of all infrastructure investments.

Component 3 – Coastal Community Empowerment and Livelihoods.

9. This component will focus on strengthening the livelihoods of poor households in coastal

communities, both as an end, and to facilitate fishers to comply with fisheries management

1 Inamdar N, Larry B, Jorge M.A., Anderson J.T, and Vakil R (2016). Developing Impact Investment Opportunities for Return-

Seeking Capital in Sustainable Marine Capture Fisheries. Washington, DC: World Bank



measures. A holistic approach, targeting complementary livelihood development, will be

pursued, in part through the development of strategic partnerships with new or existing

commercial enterprises applying agriculture or aquaculture contract farming schemes

benefiting smallholder producers. More broadly, small-scale livelihood sub-projects,

implemented by individual (micro) or small enterprise groups, will be supported through a

combination of grant provision, technical assistance, and enterprise and skills training.

a) Sub-Component 3.1: Enhance Coastal Community Livelihoods. This sub-component

includes a grant fund providing financial support to eligible beneficiaries through three

distinct channels: i) Livelihood grants for subprojects by eligible small-scale coastal

producers; ii) Grants for social and environmental (natural capital) community sub-

projects; and iii) Capital injection grants to village savings and loans (VSL) groups.

b) Sub-Component 3.2: Support Services for Livelihood Enhancement and Capacity

Development. Implemented by the individual counties, this sub-component will provide

a package of support services and capacity-building to beneficiary groups needed to

deliver, and complement, the activities implemented under sub-component 3.1 including:

i) Service and Technical Assistance (TA) provision to identify grant recipients and

support preparation, management and oversight of sub-projects; ii) Provision of

enterprise & skills training to grant recipients and other micro-enterprises; iii) Village

Savings and Loans (VSL) program; and iv) Scholarships for formal skills, vocational

training, and academic education.

Component 4 – Project Management.

10. This Component 4 will finance supplemental support for project management at both

national and county levels to ensure coordinated and timely execution of project activities.

Specifically, it will support project oversight and coordination including facilitation of a

National Project Steering Committee (NPSC) and Project Technical Advisory Committee

(PTAC); establishment and operation of a Project Coordination Unit (PCU) at the national

level, and Project Implementation Units (PIUs) at the county-level, including the provision of

equipment; fiduciary management, including external/internal audits and accounting; quality

control and assurance systems; environmental and social safeguards management; and

technical audits as needed. The component will also finance the preparation and

implementation of a communications strategy, and the implementation of a Monitoring and

Evaluation. (M&E) system, which will need to be implemented to capture data on physical

and financial progress, performance of the implementing agency and other entities/service

providers, and the results achieved in terms of outputs and outcomes. In addition, it will

support the creation of a Grievance Redress Mechanism and ensure citizens engagement.



1.3 Project Activities

11. The sub-projects that are likely to be proposed for financing under the component 1 and its

sub-components include; Enhanced Governance of Marine Fisheries and Blue Economy,

Improve Management of Nearshore Fisheries, Infrastructure Development for Fisheries

Management under component one. Likely sub-projects under this component will aim at

controlling over fishing, illegal fishing and unreported fishing activities in the Coastal

shoreline of Indian Ocean.

12. Some of the sub-project activities which would be proposed under this sub-component would

include; controlling over fishing, maintain stock productivity and enhancing associated

ecosystem. Furthermore, other sub-project activities under this component would involve

enhancing governance for sustainable fishing and use of marine resources and may include

among others strengthening governance institutions and introducing new or reinforcing

existing rules for fisheries activities which may not only affect the livelihoods of the private

individuals who are using trawlers, ring nets or spear guns but also the general community

that primarily depend on fishing. This will include the activities of mama karanga whose

business along the fish landing sites depend on the amount of the fish harvested. It is likely

that sub-project activities will include improving/expanding infrastructure for enhanced

fisheries management along the fish landing sites, fishing ports such as in Shimoni,

expansion and equipping BMUs for improved fisheries management.

13. Some of the sub-projects in under component 2 would include; promotion of aquaculture and

Mariculture activities through enhanced infrastructure, promotion of Small and medium sized

enterprises (SMEs) through provision of credit facilities, mentoring or building the capacity

of the beneficiaries of the credit facilities.

14. Component 3 of KEMFSED aims at empowering coastal communities and sustainable

livelihoods through enhancing Coastal Community livelihoods and support services for

livelihood enhancement and capacity development. Some of the likely sub-project activities

under this component include; provision of educational scholarships, provision of technical

and financial incentives for complementary livelihoods and diversification of income sources

and promotion of Coastal and Marine tourism. These could include promoting farming

activities, building the capacity of youths to enhance their livelihoods through tourist

activities and reviving some of the collapsed industries such as cashew nuts and enhance

income generated from harvesting of coconut as well supporting community-based groups to

plant trees as alternatives to harvesting mangrove trees.

1.4 Objectives

15. The PF will serve as a guide through which activities and procedures related to KEMFSED

can be enhanced to incorporate the interests and needs of coastal community members and



affected stakeholders. It addresses the integral participation of people who may be affected

when decisions are taken to restrict access to natural resources in coastal areas along the

Kenyan coast in the project area. The purpose of the PF is to ensure that coastal areas are

both effectively managed for conservation of natural and cultural resources and, at the same

time, to ensure that affected people have a meaningful role in those decisions and in deciding

on and implementing alternatives to restore or improve livelihoods and incomes affected by

those decisions. The goal is to ensure that no one is worse off as a result of the Project.

16. According to OP 4.12, the purpose of the process framework is to establish a process by

which members of potentially affected communities participate in design of project


and implementation and monitoring of relevant project activities (see OP 4.12, paras. 7 and

31). Specifically, the process framework describes participatory processes by which the

project activities will be accomplished.

17. The specific objectives for the PF are three-fold:

a) Establish a Communication and Participation Framework. Suggestions are provided

regarding the operating principles, rules of associations, and organizational incentive

structures for community participation to ensure that Marine Protected Areas (MPA)

decision-making authorities address, consult and substantively involve the broader

community when making decisions that have potential direct or indirect impacts on the

livelihoods of households or sub-groups in the community.

b) Identifying Target Groups. A targeting strategy is developed to ensure that affected

households or sub-groups are identified for income generating sub-projects financed by

KEMFSED/SDFA&BE or other potential windows. This includes the specification of

criteria that can be used, as well as input regarding the types of sub-projects that may best

target the groups at risk. Other strategies were also explored that increase the risk

threshold of the identified households or sub-groups. A communication strategy is

suggested to provide affected communities with information on the process and content

of sub-projects associated with KEMFSED/ SDFA&BE, which could assist with the

diversification of livelihoods. This includes suggestions on innovative, but effective,

communication methods, including working in collaboration with key resource persons in

the community.

c) Monitoring and Evaluation. Indicators are developed for incorporation into a monitoring

and evaluation (M&E) system to ensure that no one is worse off as a result of the

Project‘s support for the implementation of a network of MPAs. The indicators focus on

specific sub-groups at risk, are informed by M&E systems developed for SDFA&BE and

consider community-level and local government resources and existing monitoring

mechanisms. To measure social development objectives of the Project, key performance

indicators are recommended.



1.5 Justification for the PF

18. This PF is prepared because KEMFSED may cause restrictions in access to natural resources

in legally designated parks and protected areas.

1.5.1 Elements of a PF

19. The key elements of a process framework (OP 4.12, paras. 7, 31) describe the participatory

process by which:

i. Specific components of KEMFSED will be prepared and implemented. This section of

the process framework describes how, and to what extent, potentially affected groups or

communities are to participate in defining and determining restrictions. It also describes

how measures to assist potential displaced persons (DPs) will be identified and selected.

This section mentions which methods of participation and decision-making (for example,

open meetings, selection of leaders or councils) will be used.

Essentially, the KEMFSED process framework codifies a participatory approach, which

is considered best practice for conservation activities in officially designated parks and

protected areas. Experience has consistently shown that externally imposed regulations or

restrictions tend to fail for a variety of reasons.

In some cases, local resource users simply do not know about or understand the

regulations. In others, local resource users (or users coming from more distant locations)

choose to ignore or circumvent them. In yet other cases, the regulators may impose

restrictions on resource use without fully realizing the important role such resources play

in the subsistence or livelihoods of the affected people. Because parks and protected areas

are usually situated in remote areas and their boundaries are porous, governments acting

without community support find it costly, if not impossible, to regulate resource use

through legal instruments.

Community participation in the design and enforcement of conservation activities helps

to ensure active support. The community identifies acceptable alternatives to current

patterns of resource use and identifies distribution patterns it deems to be equitable. In

other words, if conservation activities are to succeed, the people affected must be

convinced that the arrangements are reasonable. If sustainability requires local residents

to stop or reduce hunting or the felling of trees, for example, then those residents must be

confident that they can obtain alternative sources of food or building materials.

Mitigation, however, need not be one for one. For instance, local communities are often

those who register decline in availability of resources (or decline in resource base), and

they are often concerned for the future sustainability of those resources. Therefore,

experience shows that local, especial indigenous communities are often willing to reduce

resource use, if they are supported by protected area management and they perceive that

they can sustain their livelihood in the future. The key to the process framework approach

is establishing an appropriate degree and quality of community participation in



conservation activities which was achieved under KEMFSED. The process framework

must thus address the quality of the process of consultation and participation (for

example, issues of leadership and representation, distributional equity, and special

treatment for people vulnerable to specific hardship), with participatory arrangements

that can adequately be monitored to ensure that the agreements reached are executed. The

process framework approach offers an alternative to traditional resettlement planning.

And it is more appropriate where the active support of communities is vital to achieving

more sustainable patterns of resource use. Under this approach, communities have a right

to participate in deciding on the nature of the resource restrictions and the measures

necessary to mitigate adverse impacts arising consequently.

ii. The criteria for eligibility of displaced persons [for any form of assistance] is determined.

A clarification of OP 4.12 is that eligibility criteria for resettlement assistance related to

impacts of involuntary restriction of access to parks or protected areas (endnote 18) are

handled differently. This difference in treatment allows the flexibility to exclude from

resettlement assistance anyone involved in clearly illegal, unsustainable, and destructive

activities (such as wildlife poachers or dynamite fishers) under KEMFSED, if including

these people would undermine the objective of the project or the sustainability of the park

or protected area; then potentially affected groups or communities will be involved in

identifying and assessing the significance of adverse impacts. It also describes how the

local population will be Resettled in Natural Resources Management and Biodiversity

Projects if involved in establishing criteria for eligibility for assistance. Although the

process framework approach allows the local population to participate in decision making

on eligibility criteria, ensuring the framework will enjoy the support of government

agencies involved in the program is also important.

This framework identifies groups that may be particularly vulnerable to hardship as a

result of new or strengthened restrictions on access to natural resources, such as those

segments of the community who are more heavily dependent on protected area resources

for their livelihood (for example, harvesting wild fruits as food for some communities.

Two other issues warrant careful consideration in some cases: First, the framework

considers how the interests of non-residents, who also may use the resources, are to be

accounted for. Second, the framework shows justification for the exclusion of people

engaging in some forms of resource use (for example, poaching of protected wildlife or

opportunistic squatting into areas already subject to customary resource management) as

illicit or inappropriate for sustainable resource management. The challenge faced by

communities and other stakeholders is how to establish appropriate criteria to determine

what is poaching and opportunistic, as opposed to genuine livelihood activities.

iii. Measures to assist the displaced persons in their efforts to improve their livelihoods, or at

least to restore them, in real terms, while maintaining the sustainability of the park or

protected area, will be identified.‖ The framework describes how groups or communities

will be involved in determining the most equitable and just sharing of access to resources



under restricted use and for identifying possible alternative resources available for use

and opportunities to offset losses. This section describes also the method for adversely

affected community members to make collective decisions and decide on options

available to them as eligible individuals or households. The framework also describes

enforcement provisions, clearly delineating the responsibilities of the community and

those of government agencies in enforcing restrictions on the use of these resources.

In general, affected communities are likely to use one or more of four strategies:

Devising transparent, equitable, and fair ways of more sustainably sharing the

resources—Recognition of rights to resources and more transparent resource

management practices may significantly reduce pressure on forest products, for

example. Obtaining access to alternative resources or functional substitutes—

Access to electricity or biomass energy may eliminate overuse of timber for

firewood, for example.

Obtaining public or private employment (or financial subsidies)—Local residents

may need alternative livelihoods or the means to purchase resource substitutes.

Providing access to resources outside the park or protected area—of course, a

framework promoting this strategy also considers impacts on the people and the

sustainability of the resources in these other areas. Once identified in the process

framework, measures to assist Displaced Persons are articulated in the plan of

action and implemented in accordance with this plan, as part of the project (OP

4.12, paras. 10, 31).

Potential conflicts or grievances involving affected persons will be resolved. The

framework describes community processes for addressing the disputes or

complaints of affected groups or communities. A key aspect is the role of

government in mediation and in the enforcement of agreements. The framework

should also describe processes for addressing the grievances of the individuals or

households in the affected communities that are dissatisfied with eligibility

criteria, the design of mitigation measures, or patterns of actual implementation.

iv. The framework describes the distribution of responsibilities between government

agencies and the communities themselves in the event of unanticipated problems or

impacts or the failure of mitigation measures. Implementation and monitoring

arrangements will be made.

v. In addition, the framework defines in the action plan how measures to assist the DPs

following the imposition of restrictions and to improve and restore their livelihoods will

be monitored and how impacts will be carefully recorded while the project is in progress.

1.6 World Bank Operational Policies Triggered

Table 1: WB Policies Triggered

Safeguard Policies

Triggered by the Project

Reasons For Triggers



Environmental

Assessment (OP/BP 4.01)

Sub projects are likely to have potential significant environmental

impacts. The objective of OP 4.01 is to ensure that Bank-financed

projects are environmentally sound and sustainable, and that decision-

making is improved through appropriate environmental screening,

analysis of actions and mitigation of their likely environmental impacts

and monitoring. Therefore, OP 4.01 is likely to be triggered, and in line

with this operational policy, the environmental and social screening

process for the distribution component of the investment in marine

fisheries and coastal aquaculture.

Natural Habitats (OP/BP

4.04)

Sub projects may be located in or close to areas with natural unique flora

mainly mangrove forest and fauna though the component is unlikely to

have significant negative impacts on natural habitat works in all the

counties shore and islands that may be home to diverse flora, fauna, and

avifauna.

Involuntary Resettlement

(OP/BP 4.12)

Sub projects may involve land take for construction purposes including,

landing sites, markets, cooling plants, water infrastructure, waste

collection points, sewer systems, electricity power supply lines and

sanitary facilities etc

Indigenous Peoples

(OP/BP 4.10)

Sub projects may be located in areas with vulnerable and marginalized

groups/people especially in islands such as Lamu, Kipini in Tana River

and Shimoni in Kwale.

Physical Cultural

Resources (OP/BP 4.11)

Given that the works will take place in areas of archaeological

importance, OP 4.11 has been triggered as a precaution. Therefore, the

ESMF includes guidance in the event chance finds are made especially in

Islands in Lamu and Kwale counties.

Projects in Disputed

Areas (OP/BP 7.60)

The Project is proposed to finance activities in Kenya's coastal areas

including the country's territorial waters and Exclusive Economic Zone

(EEZ). The Northern part of Kenya's territorial waters and the EEZ fall

within an area that is claimed by Somalia. The Project TTL sought

approval on this issue vide Memo Dated March 1, 2019

20. World Bank funding for KEMFSED requires that the Project comply with World Bank

Safeguard Policies to ensure that no undue harm is experienced by people and their

environment as a result of the Project. KEMFSED has been identified as triggering the

World Bank‘s Safeguard Policy on Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) as a result of

activities under Component 1,2 &3.

21. These components will involve support for the implementation of KEMFSED project that

will, in turn, affect coastal resource use, Marine Protected Areas and may lead to a ―loss of

assets or access to assets‖ for local households. In this case, triggering the Safeguard Policy

on Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) requires the development of a PF, which will

serve as a guide to help ensure participation of affected people in the design of project

activities and to ensure affected communities have an opportunity to improve or at least

restore their incomes and standards of living after displacement.



22. Given that involuntary resettlement and restriction of traditional access to resources in legally

designated parks and protected areas can result in severe social and economic challenges for

local communities, the WB (OP) 4.12 ensures provision of safeguards where the state

restricts access to resources in legally designated parks and protected areas. While

conservation schemes may not always acquire land through eminent domain the declaration

of nature reserves, the upgrading of protected area status, or the enforcement of earlier

directives limits access to resources in the protected areas and directly affects livelihoods and

incomes. These types of conservation projects fall within the purview of OP 4.12 because the

new restrictions on resource use affect the livelihoods and well-being of the people who were

using the newly restricted areas. In these instances, KEMFSED has instituted a process

framework to promote a participatory approach to conservation activities in legally

designated parks and protected areas. Encouraging community participation in the design and

enforcement of conservation activities under the process framework helps identify acceptable

alternatives to unsustainable patterns of resource use and promotes community support for

such alternatives. If sustainability requires that local residents stop or reduce their activities,

these residents must be confident that they can find alternative sources of food or livelihoods.

1.7 Policy Application and Implementation

23. Specifically, OP 4.12 covers adverse impacts on livelihoods that result from Bank assisted

investment projects and are caused by the involuntary restriction of access to legally

designated parks or protected areas. It is anticipated that the implementation of project

activities will likely result in involuntary restrictions to sections of Marine Protected Areas

(MPAs) that are currently used by local communities. There will be no physical relocation of

communities and settlements under the KEMFSED. It is not practical to presume that all

livelihood impacts of proposed restrictions can be predefined. The nature of the restrictions

and the specific interventions needed to restore people‘s livelihoods also cannot necessarily

be known fully in advance. As such a process framework is required by OP 4.12 with a view

to establishing a participatory process to be used in formulating and implementing

restrictions on resource use. The process framework describes the participatory process by

which communities and the project‘s authorities, or other relevant agencies will jointly

recommend resource-use restrictions and decide on measures to mitigate any significant

adverse impacts of these restrictions. A restorative and mitigation plan of action, which

describes specific measures to assist people adversely affected by the proposed restrictions, is

part of the framework.

24. The Government of Kenya through the MoALFI and the SDFA-BE will ensure

implementation and compliance with the measures presented here in the Process Framework.



2. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

25. The overall objective of the KEMFSED is to enhance economic benefits and coastal

livelihoods from marine fisheries and coastal aquaculture while safeguarding associated

ecosystems integrity. In order to achieve this it is necessary to ensure that the activities of the

project are environmentally and socially sound and sustainable, the rights and interests of the

Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups occupying the project area are safeguarded and that the

project activities are in compliance with the various World Bank Safeguard Policies such as

OP 4.01, 4.10, 4.12 and other World Bank Operational Policies that are likely to be triggered

by the implementation of the various project activities. Active support by communities is

therefore vital to achieving more sustainable patterns of resource use and minimizing and

mitigate adverse effects that may result from project activities. To achieve this, engaging

communities and facilitating their participation is therefore a necessary part of the process.

The participation and consultation of local communities that will be affected by the

KEMFSED project will be facilitated throughout the implementation of the project.

2.1 Plan of Action

26. A plan of action describes the nature and scope of any restrictions, their anticipated social

and economic impacts, the eligible people for assistance, and the specific measures to assist

these people. The plan of action is to be submitted for Bank approval during project

implementation and before any enforcement of restrictions. The plan specifies the timing of

the imposition of restrictions and describes the scope of and methods for monitoring the

extent and the significance of adverse impacts and the effectiveness of measures designed to

assist DPs and maintain the sustainability of the park or protected area. As a general

principle, these arrangements will include opportunities for the affected population to

participate in monitoring activities. A protected area management plan can serve as the plan

of action, provided it adequately covers the appropriate topics.

27. The government of Kenya will disclose the plan of action in the project area in a form and

language understandable to the affected communities; the task team places the plan of action

in the WB External Website to ensure public access to it.

28. Through regular project supervision, the task team will:

Ensures that potential DPs have opportunities to participate in developing the specific plan of

action, described in the process framework;

Reviews and approves the plan of action before the borrower begins to enforce access

restrictions; and

Assesses, through field inspection and review of monitoring reports, whether agreed measures

have been effectively implemented, as planned, or alternative measures are necessary.



29. As with all projects involving involuntary resettlement, responsibility for supervision

continues until all agreed measures have been implemented. The project is not considered

complete until the borrower has implemented all the measures described in the plan of action.

If, at project completion, resettlement measures have not led to satisfactory results (in both

livelihoods and resource sustainability), the task team will work with the borrower to decide

on appropriate follow-up measures.

30. For each subproject included in a project that may involve resettlement, the Bank requires

that a satisfactory resettlement plan or an abbreviated resettlement plan that is consistent with

the provisions of the policy framework be submitted to the Bank for approval before the

subproject is accepted for Bank financing.

31. The Bank may agree, in writing that subproject resettlement plans may be approved by the

project implementing agency –State Department of Fisheries without prior Bank review; if

the State Department of Fisheries demonstrates adequate institutional capacity to review

resettlement plans and ensure their consistency with this policy. In all such cases,

implementation of the resettlement plans is subject to ex post review by the Bank.

2.2 Approach to Community Engagement

32. Coastal communities have long standing use of the sea and marine resources and as such

their relationship to those resources is both economic and social in nature. Families depend

on marines‘ resources as a source of income, employment and food. For the Vulnerable and

Marginalized Groups (VMGs), their culture and history are connected to the marine and

natural resources within the sea-line. It is therefore critically important to engage all the

communities in an integrated approach during the implementation of KEMFSED project

activities. When engaging communities, the following will be adhered to:

g) The VMGs and the other dominant communities with which they co-exist are regarded as

equal beneficiaries of the project and efforts must be made to address the discriminative

nature of their relationship with the neighbouring dominant communities during

KEMFSED project implementation. The views of all the project affected communities

will be equally considered and respected.

h) Fishers and fishing communities are regarded as equal partners and stakeholders in the

implementation of KEMFSED project activities. Their views will be considered and

respected.

i) It is important not to raise community expectations beyond that which the project is able

to deliver. The project will ensure that the scope of the implementation of the various

project activities and expected outcomes are properly communicated to the communities.

j) The coastal communities are a diverse group with different cultural beliefs and practices,

different levels of attachment to natural resources, different levels of education and

engage in different income generating activities. They also have different gender roles

which may variably affect their participation in the project.



k) The community members must be appropriately consulted during the design, planning,

implementation and monitoring and evaluation of the project activities. Although they

may not have the technical capacity to participate in the project activities, their traditional

knowledge will be incorporated in the overall design.

l) It is recognized that engaging local communities is a time-consuming process and that it

requires persistence and consistency.

2.3 Building Community Awareness

33. Not all stakeholders and community members who are targeted by KEMFSED project are

accustomed to dealing with management, technical issues or planning processes and so will

require some guidance to facilitate their participation. Similarly, not all communities may be

fully aware of consequences of the implementation of various activities for various sub-

projects within their communities and particularly how such project will affect their daily

lives despite the fact that the overall objective of the project is to enhance the wellbeing of

the coastal communities living in the riparian counties of Indian Ocean. Awareness-raising

through information sessions before starting formal consultation will be therefore be

undertaken.

34. At this stage it is important to build consensus within and among communities regarding a

realistic vision for sustainably utilizing marine and fisheries resources in the sea. During the

stage of building consensus, the details of the project components and activities should be

shared with the community for them to become familiar with the various roles they will be

expected to play. Awareness-raising activities will take the form of community meetings,

informational presentations and dissemination of informational materials among others.

Where there may be a level of distrust about the process or concerns about government

interventions or the influence of local elites, efforts to engender enough trust and

commitment will be undertaken through team building activities that involve all the

stakeholders.

35. While the awareness building process will be initiated at the start of the project it will also be

an ongoing process. As subprojects are developed to support the achievement of the four

KEMFSED project components within the communities, an Inter-community Learning

Forum (ILF) will be established under the project. Inter-community dialogues and learning

events among the participating fishing communities who face similar challenges to adapt to

climate impacts will be supported as part of the project. The communities will learn from

each other‘s experience in implementing the various sub-projects. Leadership development

training sessions will also be provided to focus on inclusive and integrated project

implementation that jointly benefit the Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups (VMGs) and the

general coastal communities in a culturally appropriate manner. This awareness will entail

collaboration among different communities and dialogue and mediation skills, mentoring of



community leaders, as well as training in advocacy at the community level. The ILF will be

convened by the National Project Coordinating Unit (NPCU) based on the advice from the

Project Technical Advisory Committee in collaboration with the County Project Steering

Committee (CPSC) and the County Project Coordinating Unit (CPCU).

36. General awareness sessions should be organized through the County Project Coordinating

Unit (CPCU) at the community level with a target of covering all the wards in which

KEMFSED project activities will be implemented. Education on the Project, the

implementation arrangements and processes, and the expected outcomes should be part of the

awareness sessions. Information for the sessions should come from the National Project

Coordinating Unit (NPCU) through the County Project Steering Committee (CPSC) located

in each of the participating counties to ensure consistency in messaging. Training or targeted

sessions for the local project stakeholders involved in the Project should be implemented.

37. The awareness building process should begin in the first year of the project and be sustained

throughout the project cycle.

2.4 Implementation Sequence of Project Activities

38. Members of potentially affected communities participate in the design of project


and implementation and monitoring of relevant project activities. Implementation of project

activities that will effectively restrict the livelihood activities of the local fishermen, those

who derive their livelihood either directly or indirectly from fish products and other marine

resources will be done in such a way as to be minimally disruptive and will allow the

affected community members ample notice and lead time for them to make adjustments as

necessary. Restrictive activities or activities that have the potential to disrupt the livelihoods

of the local communities will be phased-in and properly sequenced to minimize adverse

effects these may have on local livelihoods. These will be specifically undertaken as follows:

a) Identification of fish landing sites and fishing ports for infrastructural upgrading –

This sub-activity will include community participation in the identification of fish

landing sites and fishing ports to be expanded. The infrastructural expansion will involve

the existing land use patterns and identification of assets both movable and permanent

assets, the type of investments both private and communal in such fishing landing sites

and ports, land ownership and compensation levels. Concerns from the stakeholders and

other affected individuals or communities will be obtained through consultation process

until there is agreement and adherence to new land use for the project is achieved. The

local community and stakeholders will be made part of the process in delineating the

expanded or realigned boundaries for the fish landing sites and fishing ports. It is noted

that not every person affected will agree with the new boundaries of the fish landing sites

and fishing ports and the new regulations, nonetheless, the positive result of an open



consultation process provides enough basis on which to make a decision and implement

the zoning schemes.

b) Phase in of Zoning Schemes - The implementation of the zoning schemes will be phased

in over the first year of the project, with patrol activities and consultations relating to

incursions being targeted at increasing awareness in the year leading up to the start of

expansion of the infrastructural expansion in the identified boundaries of the fish landing

sites and ports in the second year. This is to allow community members, fishers and local

stakeholders, particularly those affected, time to adjust their fishing and livelihood

activities within the targeted boundaries.

c) Sequencing of Project Components – The activities and sub-activities of component 3

of the KEMFSED project will be initiated prior to the implementation of the component 2

activities that aim at modernizing fisheries infrastructure to enhance value addition in

fisheries and aquaculture sector. This will support a smooth transition of livelihoods and

provide adequate time for the affected households to acquaint themselves with new

regulations and restrictions on access to resources within the existing fish landing sites

and ports. After the planned zoning schemes have been completed, the restoration and

mitigation activities will begin implementation immediately. This means that the

planning for the development of alternative livelihood activities will be initiated as soon

as planning for the establishment of the zoning schemes gets underway. Once it is

determined where the restrictions will be and who will be affected, the project should

move ahead with developing and designing subproject aimed at addressing the livelihood

needs of those that will be affected. The activities of component I can be undertaken

simultaneously with those of component 2 since they may not have direct impact on the

communities in terms of immediate loss of livelihoods.

2.5 Representation of Affected Communities

39. While consultations will take place to ensure community participation in developing

management and establishing new boundaries for the fisheries activities, it equally important

to ensure that community members have continuous engagement with the project at the

leadership level. Community members will be asked to become involved as members of

advisory committees for each of the targeted fishing landing sites and ports. Where these

already exist, they will be strengthened by ensuring that community members are equally

represented and that those committees function according to their terms of references. This

platform will provide a space for communities depending on marine and fisheries resources

specially to engage with other stakeholders to advise the planning process but also space for

the implementation of other project activities and even longer-term engagement in the

sustainable utilization and conservation of the marine resources and maintenance of coastal

ecosystem integrity. Additionally, elected representatives of the local communities including

the VMGs will be proportionately represented in the project steering committee which will

have oversight responsibility for the project at the county and community level.



3. IDENTIFICATION AND ELIGIBILITY OF DISPLACED PERSONS

40. Defining Displaced Persons as per the World Bank‘s OP 4.12, the term ―displaced persons‖

is synonymous with ―project-affected persons‖ and is not limited to those subjected to

physical displacement. It must be noted however that project activities will not result in

physical relocation of persons or communities. Displaced persons are therefore defined as

those persons who are affected in any of the ways described in paragraph 3b of OP 4.12. The

term connotes all those persons who lose ―access to legally designated parks and protected

areas resulting in adverse impacts on their livelihoods.‖ It is important to note that not every

fisher will automatically be eligible for livelihood support under the project as loss of access

as a result of restrictions carried out under the project must be demonstrated.

Ineligible Persons

41. Allowance is made for the flexibility to exclude from displacement assistance anyone who is

involved in clearly illegal, unsustainable, and destructive activities after the refinement of the

new boundaries and zoning schemes of the fish landing sites and ports have been fully

consulted and properly enacted, if including these persons would undermine the objective of

the project or the sustainability of the protected area. This is to be clearly communicated to

community members and fishers during initial consultations.

3.1 Establishing Impacts on Local Communities

42. While the project is expected to affect the livelihoods of local community members through

restrictions to resources for instance controlled illegal, over-fishing, or unreported fishing as

well displacements during the expansion of the fish landing sites and fishing ports, the

introduction of new rules and regulations in beach managements or reinforcing of existing

rules and regulations, specific impacts to different segments of the population such as

women, VMGs, among others will not necessarily be fully known until the implementation

of project activities begin. In order to adequately determine those impacts, it will be

necessary to collaborate with community members, fishers and their representative

organizations to identify those who are being directly affected and determine the ways in

which the effects are being experienced and mechanisms of mitigation. This will be done by

engaging communities through various means. For instance, modernization of the Shimoni

fishing port could cause restrictions on movements from the Wasini and Mukwiro Islands to

the mainland in Kwale county and small boat operators are likely to lose income due to the

expansion of the fishing port and the new rules and regulations including the introduction of

modern boats both for tourism activities and the movements of locals. Furthermore, the

expansion and modernization of the fishing ports is expected to lead to introduction of new

sanitation rules and perhaps new levies that might make it difficult for the mama karanga to

continue operating in such expanded fishing ports leading to a loss of livelihood. In addition,

as identified in the social assessment, controversies could arise where the project activities



encroach on the Mijikenda kaya forests and the sacred sites for the VMGs, leading to delay

or withdrawal of project activities hence negatively affecting the populations that were

initially intended to improve their livelihoods in both Kilifi and Kwale counties. In Lamu, the

insecurity situation and the relationship between the local communities and the Kenya

Defence Forces (KDF) would lead to a negative impact of the project activities to the

communities living in Lamu. Consequently, the Saanye and Aweer are likely to be affected

because of restrictions on their movements and accusations of collaborating or sympathising

with the Al Shabaab terrorists in the Boni and Witu forests.

3.1.1 Community Consultations

43. The foremost space which will allow community members to engage with the project to

identify and assess the significance of adverse impacts will be through the consultations.

These consultations will be carried out to design, plan and implement the various

components of KEMFSED project and to identify the impact of the project both negative and

positive in a community-driven participatory approach. It is very important that

representation of the various segments of the communities and fishers especially, recognize

the importance of participating in the process. They will be provided with opportunities to be

part of the deliberations regarding how the management and implementation of the various

project activities and sub-activities will be set up. Community consultations will be the most

direct way for community members to participate and provide input into the implementation

of various project activities. During these consultations, communities can begin to identify

those who are likely to be affected based on the implementation of the various project

activities and those who are likely to miss out in the implementation of the project activities

so that the design of the project is reviewed to include all community members of different

ages, sex, disability and other vulnerabilities identified in the communities during these

consultations. There will be ongoing engagement with community members and fishers to

discuss their experience with the new restrictions in order to specifically identify affected

users.

3.1.2 Collaboration with Representative Organizations

44. There is a newly registered fishing cooperative society in Mombasa known as the Indian

Ocean Water body for all the coastal fishing communities. The body coordinates the

activities of a network of Beach Management Units (BMUs) for the Coastal region with an

overall chairman and county network chairmen. There is also a network of Vulnerable and

Marginalized Groups (VMGs) communities in Kilifi for the entire coastal region with county

chairmen and a leadership that extends to village level. The registration of the network of

VMGs at the Kenyan Coast was facilitated by the KCDP. KCDP used this network to prepare

and implement the VMG projects at the Kenyan coast. These representative organizations

will be engaged with a clear gender-based representation for them to assist in identifying the



impacts of the project on their members. This will allow those who do not participate in the

consultations for one reason or another to still be able to articulate their interests or report

any adverse experiences. Representative organizations will be expected to establish basic

facts regarding the members claiming to be affected before passing on the information to the

Project Implementation Unit (PIU) at the county and the national level. Not all members will

be affected by the project activities and so it must be established that members making

claims are indeed being directly affected.

45. When assessing the impacts, the focus primarily will be on individuals, households and

social relations as well as gender differentiated impact, particularly how the implementation

of the project activities is influencing the relationship between men and women. During these

consultations, the project coordinating units will discuss the various ways in which those who

are affected can engage with the project in order to avoid, minimize or mitigate the impacts

being experienced as a result of the project.

3.2 Establishing Criteria for Eligibility

46. The National Project Implementation Unit (NPIU) will work primarily with the County

Project Coordination Unit (CPCU) and the identified Community-Driven Development

Organizations, network of Beach Management Units (BMUs) and environmental

conservationists to facilitate the participation of established stakeholder fishing communities

in determining the criteria for assistance eligibility. A working committee with representation

from network of BMUs, VMGs through their respective association or cooperatives and

KEMFSED project implementation units at the national and county levels will be established

to develop the eligibility criteria for assistance. The criteria developed must be approved by

the National and County Project Steering Committee which also includes various

stakeholders. Those eligible for assistance must be directly affected by the project activities

based on their use and access of the respective fish landing sites and fishing ports.

47. Long standing traditional use of specific areas within the fish landing sites and fishing ports

will be considered when developing the criteria for eligibility. This can be verified by the

BMUs or the Fisheries Department. Both the BMUs and Fisheries Department through their

continuous oversight of fish landing sites and ports can determine the affected community

members who are able to make claims of longstanding use of specific areas.

48. Once the eligibility criteria is developed, these will be used in the open call for proposals

from those who are indeed affected by the project. A call for proposals will be done to ensure

that the process is transparent and that those eligible to apply for assistance are fully aware of

the requirements, opportunity and support being provided by the project. Assistance will be

provided to local communities under the project to ensure that proposals meet the technical

requirements.



3.3 Considerations for Vulnerable Groups

49. The World Bank OP 4.10 and the Constitution of Kenya (CoK, 2010) identifies the

Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups (VMGs) in Kenya. These Vulnerable groups may

require specific assistance during consultation and communication processes. Efforts such as

holding individual group consultation meetings related to mitigation activities are one way in

which vulnerable individuals may be integrated into the consultation process. In particular,

such an approach is useful for consulting with women in coastal communities where women

might not have a traditional role in decision-making or in voicing opinions in public sessions.

In trying to identify representatives of vulnerable groups in a community, it may also be

useful to engage a community representative to identify vulnerable persons for participation.

Processes should seek to engage vulnerable persons at all stages of activity planning, and

ensure monitoring systems are in place to demonstrate involvement.

50. There are other vulnerable and marginalized groups apart from the VMGs recognized in the

Kenyan Constitution 2010 and the World Bank Operational Policy 2010. The elderly in local

fishing communities are likely to be particularly vulnerable as they are often more heavily

dependent on fishing and have less diversified income sources. They are also less able to take

up other livelihood activities as they are not likely to have the requisite skill sets.

Similarly, there are poorer fishermen who depend on larger fishers for access to the sea on

their boats. If these larger fishermen experience a decline in income as consequence of the

management regimes brought on the project, they may demand more payment from the

poorer fishers or not permit them on fishing expeditions all together.

Also, there are many fishers who fish mainly for subsistence purposes and limitations

imposed on their access to fish for food may have severe consequences.

Though limited, there are female fishers who may also be negatively affected. Besides active

fishing, women from local communities are often involved in processing and selling fish

locally and managing their household finances. Their dependence on fishing and fishing

income makes the very vulnerable if they experience reduction in available marine products

resulting from restrictions imposed by the management regimes.

51. In order to ensure that the effects on vulnerable groups are minimized if not avoided, the

project will firstly ensure they have access to project related information including

livelihoods assistance and secondly, alternative livelihood activities carried out in

communities will ensure the inclusion and participation of vulnerable groups. To ensure

women participate in the project, livelihoods support will be directed towards the affected

household rather than just the affected fisher. Women will be able to apply for alternative

livelihood assistance that they lead and manage.



4. LIVELIHOODS RESTORATION AND FACILITATION

52. The overall aim of the restorative and mitigation measures is to compensate for and diversify

the livelihoods of the affected users of the marine and fisheries resources who will be

affected by the implementation of KEMFSED project. The Project will support the

development of community-based business ventures (SMEs) under its components 3

activities that can leverage the opportunity cost of fishing and provide an alternative

livelihood opportunity for affected community members. The process of developing SMEs

and alternative livelihood strategies will be participatory and will be underlined by equity

and community driven decision-making. The business ventures will be developed through a

guided process as each venture will have a business plan to support the development of

products and services all the way through to distribution and service delivery. The process to

achieve this will naturally be starting with mobilizing affected community members to ensure

that they have the space and opportunity to consider the options available to them. Mitigation

measures being taken to address the livelihoods of both indigenous and non-indigenous

communities must be for the long term in order for them to have a restorative effect. This

section describes the process for achieving this.

4.1 Community Mobilization and Livelihood Restoration

53. Affected community members will be supported to mobilize themselves in order to identify

viable livelihoods activities in a participatory manner. The approach will help to ensure that

there is equity in the process and that all affected users including vulnerable groups, such as

women, elderly and VMGs, have the opportunity to become involved in and benefit from

alternative livelihoods assistance being provided by the project. Taking this approach will

acknowledge culturally appropriate decision-making patterns while supporting small fishing

communities to develop their capacity to assess their own needs, and design community level

actions and solutions in the future. This process will be facilitated by a community

development expert engaged by the project. The project will assist community members to

mobilize themselves through:

a) Community Needs Assessments - Initial meetings will be held to create an awareness of

the goals of the project in terms of its three components and the activities under the sub-

components and to discuss the opportunities for the development of alternative

livelihoods for affected users. This will be followed by needs assessment workshops to

facilitate the direct engagement of community members, including women, in devising

and developing ideas for potential alternative livelihoods activities. This process will

assist community members to map out their own resources and assets, identify and

diagnose constraints to local social and economic development from household to

community level, challenges to an integrated community project development approach

with a view to discuss and agree on the modalities of integrating the interests and

concerns of VMGs with those of dominant communities and identify required



management and technical skills. This should include an assessment of how the project is

likely to affect mama karanga, the small boat operators, which forests and sacred sites

are likely to be affected and how the Lamu security situation is likely to impact on the

participation of the local communities and their beneficence. The main outputs of this

process will be the: a) establishment of a common vision and integrated approach on how

to pursue alternative livelihood strategies, b) active engagement of community members

to ensure buy-in for the sub-projects, c) gender empowerment by ensuring a process that

seeks the input of both men and women and d) the identification of potential business

ventures and investment opportunities. These will then be prioritized based on viability

and other collectively established criteria.

b) Participatory Subproject Planning Workshops - The second step in the participatory

planning process will be the further development of the prioritized subproject ideas and

potential opportunities and the completion and submission of the sub-project proposal to

the PIU. This process will establish subproject goals and objectives, identify the main

activities and inputs, identify the target beneficiaries and develop a preliminary budget.

In-kind contribution will be required from sub-project beneficiaries to ensure

commitment. The sub-project proposal will then be submitted to the Project

Implementation Unit for consideration and approval through an established process.

c) Development of Business Plans – Business plans will be developed by community

members with the support of a specialist once a technical evaluation of the subproject

proposal submitted has been done by the PIU. Development of business plans involves

providing technical assistance to subproject proponents in order to get their alternative

livelihoods ventures off the ground. Included in this process will be identification of

information on resources and raw materials to be used as inputs, organizational plan,

operating plan, financial plan, and marketing plan. The business plan is essential in

various aspects: a) to commercialize the production; b) to rationalize the management

structure; c) to develop an efficient operation; d) establish roles and responsibilities for

participating members; e) to understand the risks and have a plan to deal with them; f) to

identify their niche and explore new markets; and g) to inform potential investors and

attract additional investment into the production.

d) Business and Marketing Support - The project will emphasize on assistance in

marketing for each approved business plan. A marketing expert will assist in the

identification and development of the potential niche markets, development of marketing

materials, advising on packing and product and service quality, and identification of

potential business partners/distributors where possible. Alternative livelihoods activities

will be undertaken at scale in order to ensure maximum returns and benefits for the

communities and the environment. The marketing expert will also ensure that each

business venture is registered with relevant Kenyan government authorities in order to

ensure continuous business support over the long term.



4.2 Skills Training to Facilitate Transition to Alternative Livelihoods

54. In addition to supporting the development of business ventures, the project will provide

individual training necessary to build the skills of members of affected households including

fishers, their spouses and dependents. This is to assist community members to transition to

alternative livelihoods, based on training needs identified during the community mobilization

phase. This will be done by focusing on skill sets that supports small business development

and individual marketable skills. The types of training to be provided include:

a) Training in business development - A training program will be established for

beneficiaries under the project. This is to ensure that such participants develop the skills

necessary to sustain and maintain the development of business ventures and transition to

alternative livelihoods. This includes training in financial literacy, business management,

production, marketing, quality control and financial management. Beneficiaries whose

subprojects are already under implementation or have an approved sub-project are

eligible to participate in the training activities. These training activities will be

coordinated by the PIU at the County level and supervised.

b) Training in marketable skills - Training support for the attainment of marketable and

employable skills for individuals will be done in order to support those who wish to

transition to full time employment in other sectors or self-employment. Training in

marketable individual skills sets will be mainly in the areas of a) Mariculture; b)

aquaculture c) eco-tourism, d) agriculture and e) vocational education. These five areas

were selected to complement the current social, human and physical assets of the local

communities. Many are already engaged in livelihood strategies in these areas as they

attempt to diversify their own livelihoods and as such the project will be building on

existing knowledge and experience and will not necessarily have to recreate existing

social capital. The training under this section is aimed at supporting a) independently-

operated profitable enterprises, and b) employment or self-employment for individuals.

For training in Mariculture and aquaculture, the project will collaborate directly with the

Fisheries Department. Some of the training under eco-tourism in areas such as tour

guiding, and Coxswain and sea safety will be carried out in collaboration with the

relevant training institutions accredited by the Kenya Maritime authority and the Kenya

Tourist Board. Local vocational training centres under the Technical and Vocational

Education (TVET) will be asked to assist in providing training for vocational activities

and also assist in job placements/linkages for trainees as they are capable of providing

customized training programs.

4.3 Community Financing Procedures

55. Sustainable community-based business ventures designed under the project will be supported

by a sub-grant‘s mechanism. This mechanism will provide financial resources as initial

capital investment to support the start-up of the identified business ventures. The operation of

the sub-grant‘s mechanism will be according to an established process. Given the fact that



livelihoods and displacement support is a restorative and mitigating measure, the grants will

not be competitive but rather targeted to those adversely affected by the implementation of

various project activities under KEMFSED. In the event there are left-over funds, then such

funds will be used to support other community-based projects such as water projects,

conservation of mangrove efforts and protection of identified cultural/sacred sites but the

same process must be followed. The following section outlines the structure of the

mechanism and how it is expected to operate

4.3.1 Eligible Applicants

56. Affected users (including their households) through their representative organizations such as

fishing cooperatives, Beach Management Units (BMUs) and network of VMGs will be

eligible to submit subproject proposals for funding. Consequently, the provision of funding

will not be competitive but based on the eligibility of the beneficiaries. Non-governmental

organizations (NGOs) and community-based organizations (CBOs) such as Village Savings

and Lending (VSL) schemes currently deriving their activities and livelihoods from marine

and fisheries resources in the project area are also eligible to apply on behalf of affected

users. These NGOs and CBOs are expected to be involved in assisting the communities in the

targeted areas to plan and carry out alternative livelihoods and diversification activities. This

type of engagement will provide an efficient, multi-sectoral delivery mechanism for

community-based interventions in the mitigation of the impact of the project in the lives of

the affected coastal communities while at the same time support the KEMFSED project in

realizing its goals. The legal status of the project proponents will also help to ensure

accountability and transparency in the management of the sub-grants.

4.3.2 Sub-projects Approval Process

57. Even though the process of selection of sub-projects is non-competitive, the process of

approval is still expected to be rigorous as follows:

58. Submission of Concept Paper – A completed concept paper will be submitted by project

proponents on alternative livelihoods for affected users of the reef and coastal marine and

fisheries resources. Project staff in partnership with local organizations will assist fisher

groups to complete project concept form.

a) Screening – The concept paper will be screened by the county project coordinating units

based on the eligibility criteria established and final approval will be done by the

National Project Steering Committee after due diligence is followed to ensure that all the

sub groups (VMGs, women, youths, disabled) have been included and that the process of

screening was transparent.

b) Community Mobilization and Planning - Once the project concept is cleared and

considered eligible, participatory consultations and planning will be held and will be

overseen by project technical staff.



c) Technical Evaluation – Once full proposal has been received, a technical review

committee which includes business experts will review the application and recommend

the development of business plans, required for all grants. Business plans for small grants

will be at the discretion of the technical review committee.

d) e) Development of Business Plan – A business plan will be developed for regular sub-

projects and will act as a sort of feasibility study aside from being an investment plan.

Development of a business plan does not guarantee approval by the National Project

Steering Committee (NPSC).

e) f) Approval – The completed application and business plan will then be forwarded to the

Project Steering Committee for approval. The NPSC may approve, reject or request for

more information from sub-project proponents. The decision of the NPSC is final.

f) g) Notification of Decision – Applicants will be officially notified by the PIU on the

decision of the PSC. Successful applicants will then be advanced to the implementation

stage.

g) h) Implementation – The sub-project will be implemented directly by proponents under

the direction of the County Project coordinating Unit. A built-in feature of the project is

marketing support from the County Project coordinating Unit. This may be from

technical project staff or from external consultants hired to provide specialized marketing

support. Procurement of goods and services will be according to established guidelines.

h) i) Monitoring and Reporting – County Project coordinating Unit staff will conduct field

visits to sub-project sites and proponents will be required to submit periodic reports and a

final report on their project.

59. The sub-grants mechanism will be managed by the County Project coordinating Unit. Sub-

project proposals will be submitted to the County Project coordinating Unit and the National

Project Steering Committee (NPSC), made up of staff in the directorate of fisheries, and

social development stakeholders from various sectors will approve all subprojects. All

recipients of sub-grants must be legally established entities.

4.3.3 Eligibility Criteria

60. All projects regardless of type must adhere to the eligibility criteria, which include:

a. Target beneficiaries are affected users of the marine and fisheries resources in the

project targeted areas (county, sub-county and wards).

b. Applicant/proponent is a representative organization and is a legal entity (Fishing

association, cooperative, BMU, Network of VMGs, VSLs).

c. Proposed activities fall under one of the following:

i. Fisheries diversification initiatives that capitalize on eco-friendly fishing

activities such as sport fishing;

ii. Value-adding to final fishery products through processing, introduction of

standards, eco-labelling, utilizing fish parts that are currently discarded as waste;

iii. Poly-culture of marine products; and

iv. Community-based sustainable aquaculture, agriculture and tourism-related

activities. (Sub-projects with activities having to do with fishery must



demonstrate environmental sustainability, social responsibility and economic

viability.)

d. Preliminary community consultation has been held.

e. Concept Paper submitted is complete.

61. As noted above, the scope of eligible activities recognizes that many fishermen do not wish

to simply give up their livelihoods and way of life that connected to fishing. Similarly, they

are likely to face greater challenges if the alternative taken up is completely different and

unrelated to existing individual and community assets and resources. Also, given the

importance of the economic viability of alternative livelihoods, it is strategic for them to be

connected to the stronger sectors of the local economy.

4.4 Employment in Project Activities

4.4.3 Employment Opportunities

62. There will be employment opportunities during the implementation of the project that will be

used to absorb some of the displaced members of the fishing communities especially where

their skills meet the job requirements. Interested and skilled members of the community will

be competitively hired to provide their services during the implementation of the various

project activities. The specific skills required will be determined after the project activities

have been designed and approved.

6.3.4 Notice of Vacancies

63. The NPCU will ensure that members of the fishing communities have the opportunity to

apply for open positions for which they qualify within the project. To ensure that they are

aware of such opportunities notice for open positions will be sent to the relevant fishing

associations, cooperative, Beach Management Units (BMUs), network of VMGs, local

administration offices, county department of fisheries, gender and social developments for

them to disseminate to their membership. The same notice will also be sent to out to other

partners and stakeholders in the fishing sector and will be distributed as widely as possible.

6.3.5 Hiring Process

64. Applications from fishers and community members from project affected communities will

automatically be considered. This however does not mean they will automatically be hired.

The actual hiring will be according to specific procurement guidelines established for the

project. The guidance here is simply to ensure that members of fisher‘s households and local

community members are given due consideration.

6.4 Gender and other Social Factors

6.4.1 Gender-sensitive Participation

65. Specific emphasis will be placed on gender equity, the participation of indigenous peoples

and civil-society organizations in the design and implementation of the alternative livelihood



activities. During the preparation of the KEMFSED, local communities were consulted to

determine specific activities and target communities to be supported. Women were found to

play an integral role in harvesting marine resources both through their direct productive

involvement (seaweed farming) and social reproductive roles. Women are involved in

extraction as well as in the marketing of fish products (mama karanga). They are also

involved in a supporting role where they prepare materials and supplies for fishing

expeditions and manage the household‘s fishing income. Consequently, the project will

ensure that women have an opportunity to participate and express their own aspirations

during the identification and development of subprojects for funding. Gender related issues

that affect the well-being of fishing families or inhibit the participation of women will be

looked at. This is to ensure that they not only have effective participation but also gain

meaningful benefits. Further recognizing the role of women, the project will encourage the

spouses of fishermen to develop sub-projects and submit them for financing. Women will

also be given the opportunity to participate in all training activities carried out under the

project. Beyond being gender sensitive, the project will ensure that women have a role in

decision-making in order to benefit directly from project resources and strengthen their

structural position in a culturally sensitive manner.

4.3.3 Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups (VMGs)

66. Affected indigenous VMG communities (Watha, Saanye, Aweer/Boni, Washiratzi,

Watschwaka, Wakifundi and Wakifundi) will also be fully engaged to promote their

participation in KEMFSED project activities and in the development of alternative

livelihoods that are culturally appropriate. Sub-projects that promote or preserve the Culture

of VMGs will be considered for funding where the economic viability of the actions can be

established. Some of the suggestions from indigenous communities include strengthening

eco-cultural tourism including aspects of Watha culture, Saanye language, traditional dress,

cultural foods or the creation of cultural entertainment groups that support the economic

diversification in local communities. Preservations of Kaya Forests and other sacred sites

among the VMGs will be identified and preserved to help to community to promote their

heritage and eco-tourism activities. These opportunities provide win-win situations for

indigenous communities where their culture is highlighted and maintained while enhancing

their household income. Lastly, the Fisheries Department will consider formal agreements

entered into between the representative organizations of the VMGs, the participating county

governments and the Government of Kenya.

4.4.4 Civil Society Organizations

67. The role and engagement of civil society organizations including fisher‘s associations and

conservation NGOs will be a key feature of this project both in the promotion of KEMFSED

project as well as in the development of alternative livelihoods strategies for local

communities. There are local conservation organizations and Beach Management Units that



have continuously engaged the targeted communities therefore the project will build on those

existing relationships and will avoid creating any new organizational structures within the

communities unless absolutely necessary.



5 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS

5.3 Process Framework Implementation Responsibilities

68. The National Project Coordinating Unit (NPCU) and the National Project Steering

Committee (NPSC) will ensure the process framework measures are implemented and

complied with. The NPCU will oversee the implementation of KEMFSED project activities

and is responsible for the development and implementation of the project work plan,

implementation manual and budget and also in managing project resources and support staff.

The Project Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC) at the national level will oversee the

implementation of the policies, regulations, and procedures approved by the NPSC for the

project. The PTAC will liaise with the State Department of Fisheries and Blue Economy for

financial and fiduciary management matters, and with the Directorate of Fisheries and the

Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute (KMFRI) for technical matters, as well as

with other KEMFSED implementation partners. The NPCU reports to and provides regular

reports to the NPSC on all aspects of project activities. The PTAC social safeguard technical

focal persons are responsible for providing technical guidance to approved sub-projects

under all the components including grants under the livelihoods support component of the

project. Three social safeguard specialists will be engaged to oversee the implementation of

the recommendations of the PF and RPF in Kwale, Kilifi/Tana Delta and Lamu counties.

This will include overseeing and providing technical guidance to the grant‘s application and

approval process for alternative livelihood projects.

69. The NPCU is furthermore responsible for the monitoring and evaluation of the process

framework. The NPCU will report to the Project Steering Committee on activities being

carried out under the framework along with other aspects of project implementation. The

NPSC will provide general oversight to the overall implementation of all components of the

KEMFSED project. Where required, the NPCU in consultation with the World Bank social

safeguards team will engage technical consultants to carry out project activities where such

technical expertise is required, and approval is obtained from the NPSC and the World Bank

provides no objection. Consultants will also be engaged to assist communities to mobilize

and engage in participatory planning. In all such instances, the NPCU will provide guidance

and oversight to the work of third-party consultants as it relates to the process framework.

The NPCU will also work in close collaboration with the Fisheries Department, the World

Bank social safeguards technical team and PTAC for the technical aspects of the project.

This is further described below.

5.4 Technical Coordination

70. The Project Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC) and the Directorate of Fisheries will

provide technical coordination of all activities regarding the implementation of KEMFSED



activities, enforcement of fishing regulations and establishment of replenishment zones.

These two implementing partners will engage with network of Beach Management Units,

relevant county government departments in the participating counties, fishing communities

and stakeholders in the consultation process. The NPCU will provide all material support

necessary for the participation of stakeholder communities and will ensure that the process

framework is followed and that social and environmental safeguards are complied with. This

includes ensuring that there is full and proper consultation of communities regarding the

upgrading of the infrastructure at the fish landing sites and ports, and other KEMFSED

activities that can cause restrictions on livelihoods.

5.5 Grants Coordination for Alternative Livelihoods

71. The NPCU will collaborate with County Project Coordination Unit (CPCU) and the County

Technical Advisory Committee (CTAC) on the implementation of the sub-grants mechanism

to support alternative livelihoods for project-affected community members. The County

Project Steering Committee (CPSC) will oversee the activities of the CPCU and the CTAC to

ensure that the PF is followed. The main reason for this is because the three county

implementation structures are based at the grassroots level and can easily support the

implementation of the project activities. They can then report to the NPCU which will

eventually report to the NPSC. The County Project Coordination Unit (CPCU) and the

County Project Steering Committee (CPSC) will be responsible for overseeing the processes

involved in assisting communities plan, develop and implement subprojects.

5.6 Key Implementation Partners

72. The KEMFSED project will be implemented by the State Department of Fisheries and Blue

Economy as the lead agency in partnership with several government departments such as

crops, Livestock, directorate of fisheries, the National Treasury, State Department for

Environment and Forestry (SDEF), the Co-ordinator of Inter-governmental secretariat for

Agricultural Sector, Network of Coastal Beach Management Unit (NCBMU), Coastal Fish

Farmers‘ Organization and the Association of Fish Processors and Exporters in Kenya

(AFIPEK) at the national level; The participating county governments in the coastal shoreline

will be implementing agencies at the county government level. They will provide

implementation and oversight structures at the county level. Below the county level

implementation and coordination level will be community level implementation structures

mainly comprised of Community-Driven Development Organizations (CDDO). Community

level implementation structures will have sub-committees.



6 GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM

73. Grievances and disputes may arise at several stages of the Project‘s planning and

implementation and may be related to project administration or may be a result of conflicts

between groups affected by the Project. Affected groups or individuals identified under the

Project should be made aware at every stage that grievance procedures are in place and be

advised on how they can access this mechanism.

6.3 Purpose

74. A Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) is required by the World Bank‘s OP 4.12 in order

to identify procedures to effectively address grievances arising from project implementation.

Persons affected by the project must have an avenue where they can formally lodge their

complaints and grievances and have them properly considered and addressed. A GRM can

help project management significantly enhance operational efficiency in a variety of ways,

including generating public awareness about the project and its objectives; deterring fraud

and corruption; mitigating risk; providing project staff with practical suggestions/feedback

that allows them to be more accountable, transparent, and responsive to beneficiaries;

assessing the effectiveness of internal organizational processes; and increasing stakeholder

involvement in the project.

75. It is very important that the project‘s management and staff recognize and value the

grievance process as a means of strengthening public administration, improving public

relations, and enhancing accountability and transparency. Consequently, grievance redress

will be integrated into the project‘s core activities. This will be done by integrating grievance

redress functions into project staffs‘ job descriptions and regularly review grievances data

and trends at project management meetings.

Sources of Grievances

76. Potential sources of grievances and conflicts as a result of administration of the Project

include:

Poor communication and facilitation;

Inadequate or lack of consultation;

Concern over exclusion in decision-making;

Dissatisfaction with levels of representation in the various project committees.

Discontentment regarding performance of mitigation measures (e.g., support from

alternative livelihoods);

Lack of transparency and accountability through the citizen engagement and

Sources of Conflicts



77. Potential conflicts, which may arise between affected groups as a result of the Project may

include:

Competition for use of resources or disputes over access to a resource use area as a result of the

Project;

The identification and disagreement on boundaries; and

Competition over the sale or marketing of products.

78. For example, in the coastal areas, conflicts have arisen between villages over rights to fish

specific coral reefs that are known to be particularly productive. Migratory fishermen, who

may not seek permission to fish local waters from appropriate village authorities or who may

use destructive fishing practices, have come into conflict with local fishermen. Conflicts have

also arisen between tourism operators, and local villages, BMUs on landing sites primarily

associated with access and use of the foreshore and beach areas. There has also been conflict

between fishermen and dive operators over preferred coral reef sites. The development of an

MPA network has the potential to exacerbate such conflicts, as certain marine-based

livelihood activities are displaced and move to new areas. A redress mechanism is required in

the event that the previously-described provisions of the PF are not effective.

6.4 Principles of GRM

79. The KEMFSED GRM will adopt the following principles to enhance its effectiveness:

Equity No complaint is too big or small. All complaints received shall be treated

with the urgency and the attention they deserve. All Aggrieved Parties

regardless of their social standing, gender, political affiliation, religious

affiliation shall be given opportunity to be heard by the responsible

officers without prejudice.

Accountability The project outcomes should benefit the people in the targeted communities

and as such the Project Management is accountable to the people in the

communities, they operate in. The project should be responsive to the needs of

the community including their complaints and grievances.

Transparency Members of the community or aggrieved parties have the right to information

on the grievance mechanism, how to access it, who is responsible for handling

their complaints and the potential outcome of the processes.

Accessibility

All people in the target communities must have unrestricted and free access to

the GRM. The project shall publicize the GRM to all those who may wish to

access it and provide adequate assistance for aggrieved parties who may face

barriers of access, including language, literacy, awareness, finance, distance,

or fear of reprisal. The Aggrieved Party shall be kept informed at each stage of

the process.



Anonymity The GRM will not disclose the identity(s) of the AP by name or otherwise to

maintain confidentiality

Timely

Response

This GRM should function promptly and speedily. Prompt action is not only

desirable from the complaint‘s point of view, but also from the management‘s

point of view. Since delay causes frustration and tempers may rise, it is

necessary that grievances should be dealt with speedily.

It is a common saying that justice delayed is justice denied. However, any

‗unnecessary delay constitutes another grievance. Settlement of grievances ―in

the shortest possible time and at the lowest level possible,‖ is the ideal one.

Some of these cases and incidences might require reporting to the WB Task

Team immediately.

Confidentiality Grievances will be treated confidentially. Complainant‘s names and personally

identifiable information will be kept in the strictest confidence.

Participatory

and socially

inclusive:

All project-affected persons – fishers, community members, members of

vulnerable groups, project implementers, civil society, and the media - are

encouraged to bring grievances and comments to the attention of project

authorities. Special attention is given to ensure that poor and marginalized

groups, including those with special needs, are able to access the GRM.

Building on

existing

informal and

formal dispute

resolution

flows

The GRM will build on existing structures of informal and formal dispute

resolution to enhance cost effectiveness. The GRM will rely on two existing

systems: informal dispute resolution practices (through the existing traditional

conflict resolution flows) and formal resolution practices (through existing

administrative and judicial flows by arbitration and courts of law). By doing

this, the mechanism can easily become acceptable as the majority of

stakeholders are already familiar with it.

6.5 Definition and Types of Grievance

80. For the purpose of the project‘s GRM, grievance is defined as an issue, concern, problem,

claim (perceived or actual) or complaint that an individual or group wants the project to

address and resolve. It is understood that when community members present a grievance,

they generally expect to receive one or more of the following:

g) Acknowledgment of their problem

h) An honest response to questions about project activities

i) An apology

j) Compensation

k) Modification of the conduct that caused the grievance



l) Some other fair remedy.

81. The GRM will be designed to respond to four types of complaints that are likely to arise:

e) Comments, suggestions, or queries;

f) Complaints relating to non-performance of project obligations;

g) Complaints referring to violations of law and/or corruption; and

h) d) Complaints against project staff or community members involved in project

management.

6.6 Grievance Redress Guidelines

82. The GRM is being established at the field level for the KEMFSED project where matters can

be addressed immediately within the scope of the project‘s authority and activities. Given

that the project implementation partners are under the State department of Fisheries and Blue

Economy, it is expected that the department and the directorate of Fisheries and other

implementing partners will provide support to the National structures responsible for the

implementation and management of the project in the implementation of the GRM. The other

level of the GRM is at the national level. This includes the judicial levels where the process

is more formalized and complex and includes formal litigation. Also, at the national level is

the Office of the Ombudsman who is able to take up issues directly related to the project.

83. At the field level, the County Project Coordinating Unit (CPCU) will be appointed to

officially respond to grievances raised by individuals and groups of community members. A

GRM Committee made up of members of County Project Steering Committee (CPSC) and

County Technical Advisory Committee (CTAC). Other members of GRM will be

incorporated on ad hoc basis depending on the nature of the grievance to strengthen the

objectivity of the mechanism.

84. Grievances can be presented orally or in writing in person or by using information and

communication technology (telephone or email). Where presented orally, the CPCU must

ensure that the grievance is documented in writing.



Figure 3: GRM Framework

Source: World Bank (2012a, 2012b)

6.7 Grievance Procedures

a) Registration - Community members can inform the PIU about concerns directly and if

necessary, through third parties. Once a complaint has been received, it will be recorded

in a complaints log or data system. The log will be kept in hardcopy or electronic form.

All reported grievances will be categorized, assigned priority, and routed as appropriate.

b) Sorting and Processing - This step determines whether a complaint is eligible for the

grievance mechanism and its seriousness and complexity. The complaint will be screened

however this will not involve judging the substantive merit of the complaint. The

following guide will be used to determine whether a complaint is eligible or not:

Eligible complaints may include those where:

The complaint pertains to the project.

The issues raised in the complaint fall within the scope of issues the grievance

mechanism is authorized to address.

The complainant has standing to file.

Ineligible complaints may include those where:

The complaint is clearly not project-related.

The nature of the issue is outside the mandate of the grievance mechanism.



The complainant has no standing to file.

Other project or organizational procedures are more appropriate to address the issue.

85. If the complaint is rejected at this stage, the complainant will be informed of the decision and

the reasons for the rejection. The complainant will be given the benefit of the doubt and

engaged in a conversation before a decision to reject the complaint is made as complainants

often provide incomplete information. The PIU will try to truly understand the grievance

before responding. All complaints whether eligible or not, will be logged for reference.

86. When evaluating and investigating complaints the parties, issues, views, and options will be

clarified:

The parties involved will be fully identified;

The issues and concerns raised by the complaint will be clarified;

The views of other stakeholders, including those of project staff will be gathered;

The complaint in terms of its seriousness (high, medium, or low) will be classified.

87. Seriousness includes the potential to impact both the project and the community. Issues that

will be considered include the gravity of the allegation, the potential impact on an

individual‘s or a group‘s welfare and safety, or the public profile of the issue. A complaint‘s

seriousness is linked to who in the project‘s management needs to know about it and whether

the Project Steering Committee is advised immediately.

c) Acknowledgment and Follow Up - When a complaint is registered, the County Project

Implementation/coordination Unit (CPCU) through appropriate staff will acknowledge its

receipt in a correspondence that outlines the grievance process; provides contact details and,

if possible, the name of the contact person who is responsible for handling the grievance. The

CPCU will respond acknowledging the issue within 7 working days. In responding to the

complaint, the CPCU may seek and hold a meeting with the aggrieved party(ies).

Complainants will then receive periodic updates on the status of their grievances.

d) Evaluating, Investigating and Taking Action - This step involves gathering information

about the grievance to determine its validity, and resolving the grievance. The merit of

grievances will be judged objectively against clearly defined standards such as the

Environmental and Social Safeguards, Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Framework

(VMGF), Resettlement Process Framework and other legal requirements and the Project

Operations Manual. For grievances that are straightforward (such as queries and suggestions)

these will be resolved quickly by contacting the complainant and providing an appropriate

response. Grievances that cannot be resolved at the project level will be referred to the most

competent authority.

88. In general, four basic approaches will be considered when evaluating what array of resolution

approaches to offer. These include:



The GRM Committee proposes a solution.

The GRM Committee and the community decide together how best to address the

issue.

The GRM Committee and community defer to a third party to decide.

The GRM Committee and community utilize traditional or customary practices where

appropriate.

6.8 Implementing the GRM

89. The following measures will be taken to ensure that the GRM is effectively implemented.

a) Build Awareness of GRM – The GRM will be presented by project staff to community

members during the project inception workshop and during community consultations when

planning MPA zoning restrictions. Other ways to engaged community members in

implementing the GRM include the following:

Simple, visually engaging marketing materials will be developed. These will describe

the process for handling people‘s concerns and the benefits that can result. The

materials will also inform the local communities about where to go and who to

contact if they have a complaint.

Formal and informal meetings in local communities will be used as the main method

for building awareness about the GRM.

Communities will be consulted about any risks or fears they have associated with

using the system. Information about what else they might need to voice a complaint

and participate effectively in the mechanism will be elicited and used to update the

GRM.

b) Train Staff on GRM – Project staff will be educated about the GRM and its procedures.

This is to ensure that staff members are able to accept complaints, or to participate in on-the-

spot resolution of minor problems. The following will be considered when developing

training sessions for project staff:

Sessions will focus on why the grievance mechanism is in place, its goals, benefits,

and how it operates.

Roles and expectations of project staff (what to do if a member of the community

approaches them with a grievance, how best to respond to aggrieved stakeholders and

the importance of listening, remaining objective, and taking stakeholder concerns

seriously).

The constructive role of community dissent in project operations, by encouraging the

view that complaints and opposition are a source of valuable information that can

lead to improved operations, reduce risk, and develop a supportive relationship with

the community.

Emphasize that there will be absolutely no reprisals and the participation of

community members in the GRM does not diminish their rights or entitlements to

benefits from the project in any way. This same information will be shared with local

communities.



7 MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF PROCESS FRAMEWORK

7.3 Purpose and Scope of Process M & E

90. The purpose of the process framework M&E system is to monitor the extent and the

significance of adverse impacts and the effectiveness of measures designed to assist

displaced person to improve or restore incomes and livelihoods. It is expected that

stakeholders especially fishing community who are likely to be affected by the

implementation of KEMFSED project activities partly due to introduction of new regulations

or reinforcing existing regulations due to implementation of new governance structures,

controlling of over-fishing, maintenance of fish stock levels and modernizing of fish landing

sites and fishing ports will actively participate in the M&E process. Those who benefit from

livelihoods restoration and mitigation assistance will also be expected to monitor and

evaluate the effectiveness of the alternative livelihood measures being undertaken by the

project.

7.4 Approach and Data Sources

91. Stakeholders will be involved in monitoring and evaluating project measures at different

stages and at different times. Their participation in discussing restrictions and upgrading of

port facilities will be from the outset of the project. They will assist with developing

equitable criteria for obtaining development assistance and will also assist in determining and

validating the effects of the new regulations and infrastructural upgrade in the fishing ports

and landing sites being put in place. Stakeholder participation will follow both the project

and subproject cycle starting from planning to implementation and evaluation. Sources of

routine and non-routine data to ensure proper monitoring and evaluation include the

following.

7.5 Information Management

92. Staff Field Reports – Staff will be required to document and report their activities engaging

with community members for every session or event. Reports will capture date and time of

events, attendance, summary of proceedings, agreements made and observations.

93. Consultant Reports – Consultants hired to work on project activities will be required to

submit consultancy reports on their activities and engagement with community members.

Data specific to participation in discussions on restrictive aspects of the implementation of

KEMFSED project activities and participatory planning for alternative livelihoods must be

part of the reports.

94. Sub-project Evaluation – Each alternative livelihood subproject will have an end-of-project

evaluation that is carried out using participatory methodologies. The evaluation will address



the relevance, effectiveness and efficiency of the livelihood assistance being provided by the

project from the beneficiaries‘ perspective.

Non-routine

95. Project Mid-Term Evaluation – A mid-term evaluation will be carried out between year 2

and 3 of the project life cycle. This evaluation will address the relevance and efficiency of

project implementation to data and will integrated the results of the overall project M&E

system. A part of the overall evaluation will address the participation of affected persons and

communities in the identification and mitigation of negative impacts and livelihoods

assistance provided under the project.

96. Final Project Evaluation - A Final Evaluation will be carried out at the end of the final year

of the project. This will be the basis of the Government of Kenya‘s Completion Report on the

project. Both evaluations will integrate findings from the previous evaluation and will also

conduct overall assessments of project implementation to determine if the intended project

outcomes and results are being achieved. It will also address the issue of sustainability,

integration and other necessary follow up activities. As with the mid-term evaluation, the

final evaluation will include the implementation of the process framework within the overall

assessment and conclusions. The Mid-term and Final Project Evaluation will be used to

corroborate the appropriate consultation of communities, grievance redress and the

mitigation of adverse impacts.

7.6 Information Management

97. The National Project Implementation Unit (NPIU) will be responsible for implementing the

data collection system which will comprise of formative and summative data. Data will be

collected and processed by project staff during the implementation of the project and sub-

projects using various methods. Both quantitative and qualitative data which shows the

degree and quality of participation will be collected. Aside from standard tools to be used,

participatory methods will also be used especially to gather data on the effectiveness of the

livelihoods restoration and mitigation component of the project.

98. The National Project Coordinating Unit (NPCU) is responsible for the implementation of the

M&E for the process framework. The officer will be responsible for: (i) maintaining the

overall framework including implementation procedures, tools, and data flow; (ii)

strengthening the monitoring system to ensure sound output, process and outcome

monitoring; (iii) validating data; and (iv) promoting and encouraging use of data collected for

project management.



7.7 Reporting and Information Dissemination

99. The NPIU and County Project Coordinating Unit is responsible for gathering, analyzing,

reporting and disseminating the information obtained from the M&E system. The NPIU will

report to the National Project Steering Committee on the results of all reports that covers any

and all aspects of the process framework. The NPSC will then use the information to make

decisions regarding project implementation to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of

project restorative measures. Aside from the NPSC, the reports will be presented to the State

Department of Fisheries and Blue Economy as the fiduciary agency who will then submit

reports to The World Bank and the Adaptation Fund.

100. The NPCU will provide the information to community groups and representative

organization of fishing communities for their feedback and incorporation into their activities

as it relates to project implementation. Community members and stakeholders will have an

opportunity to review reported information and provide feedback.



8 PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE

8.3 Stakeholder Consultations and Disclosure

101. A stakeholder consultation and disclosure workshops on the draft Final Process

Framework (PF) was held on 19th and 20th June 2019 at KEMFRI headquarters in

Mombasa. It was attended by several stakeholders who participated with representatives of

different organizations. They included: World Bank representative; Staff of the State

Department of Fisheries, Blue Economy and Aquaculture within the Ministry of Agriculture,

Livestock and Fisheries; KEMFSED Technical Project Preparation Team; County

Government staff who included; Chief Officers of Fisheries, County Director of Fisheries,

County Project Coordinator and Social Safeguards Officer/Social officer; representatives

from Central Government such as NEMA; several envisaged project implementing agencies;

members of fisheries Value Chain Common Interest Groups; Representatives of VMGs/IPs,

various representatives of special interest groups such as women, youth, the disabled,

Development Partners, Non-State actors and NGOs undertaking community-based value

chain activities. The list of participants and summary of issues discussed during this

stakeholder consultations and disclosure are appended on this safeguard instruments as annex

7.

102. Disclosure: After the stakeholders‘ consultation workshop and having incorporated all

comments by the participants; the PF will be disclosed by the client on the website of the

Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (MOALF) website and the link shared with

the World Bank. A summary of the framework will also be advertised in the main local daily

newspapers. Subsequently, the framework will be disclosed in the World Bank external

website and all project documents updated accordingly.



ANNEXES

Annex 1: List of Participants at consultation sessions



-



Annex 2: Map of KEMFSED Project area in Kilifi



Annex 3: Map of KEMFSED Project area in Mombasa



Annex 4: Map of KEMFSED Project area in Tana River



Annex 5: Map of KEMFSED Project area in Lamu



Annex 6: Map of KEMFSED Project area in Kwale



Annex 7: Minutes of Disclosure Workshop

MINUTES OF A DISCLOSURE WORKSHOP MEETING OF THE STAKEHOLDERS

AND CONSULTANTS HELD IN MOMBASA, AT KEMFI HEADQUARTERS ON 19TH

JUNE 2019

The meeting was called to order at 9:35 am, on June 19, 2019, at KEMFRI‘s meeting boardroom.

The meeting began with prayers followed with Individuals introducing themselves – by name

and the interests they represent. Even though most participants speak English, Swahili language

was recommended so that the message communicated reached in their native tongue. See

participants list attached as Annex.

1. Agenda

Validation of KEMFSED frameworks (ESMF, VMGF, SA, RPF and PF)

Presentation of individual frameworks by lead experts

Reactions by the stakeholders to the frameworks through comments, questions.

Consultants and technocrats‘ responses to the comments and questions raised by

stakeholders.

2. Introduction and Briefing on the project



Technocrats, from KEMFRI, KEFIS and the ministry, Dr Jacob Ochiewo, Jared Agano, and Mrs.

Rose Koboge, Project‘s Technical Director then gave their opening remarks and briefs about the

project.

3. Presentations of frameworks

Prof Nyambedha, the head of MRDC, the research consultancy for KEMFSED, made a general,

high level introduction of the project area, scope - the counties and sub-counties targeted, the

methodology used – key informants, BMUs, fisheries officers, etc. He introduced the various

frameworks and the lead experts who would later present them to the stakeholders.

Presentation of ESMF by Dr Kurauka

Dr Joseph Kurauka, the lead expert on environment, made his presentation on ESMF. He

highlighted the focus areas, legal frameworks used in preparing it (NEMA Act, Vision 2030,

Constitution, etc), the methodology and literature review. He talked about the level of

consultations, mentioning some of the communities and institutions consulted. He talked about

free prior and informed consultation, interviews, FGDs and KIIs with county officials. He

showed images of group meetings as evidence of extensive community consultations. He also

showed maps of county boundaries with GPS coordinates on where the research team visited.

The maps also showed the targeted landing sites. He discussed in detail the effects (positive and

negative) of the proposed project on livelihoods, fish species, mangroves, coral reefs, water

pollution (oil spills in Lamu), hydrological changes, etc. He showed slides of areas which require

urgent intervention, including damaged and endangered mangrove forests, damaged bridges, salt

mines in Kilifi, water pollution (no toilets, etc, waste from Lamu and other continents), dust at

road construction. He also highlights mitigation measures.

Question / Comment / Feedback on ESMF:

Salim Ali Mohammed of Tuna Fisheries Alliance, Indian Ocean Network observed that the

impact of siltation on River Sabaki during South East Monsoon winds kills corals, rare species

such as turtles, and destroys their breeding nests. He also noted salt mining as a major challenge

in Kilifi County. He said that these issues have to be captured and asked how the project intends

to address them.

Kahindi Heri, Environment Officer, NEMA, Lamu County said that a strategic environmental

assessment must be done because the project is too big. According to him, the specific projects

under the main KEMFSED project will then require EIA to be conducted. He went further to

clarify the environmental laws. He asked Dr Kurauka to quote EMCA Cap 387 correctly. He

urged that since NEMA has done a lot of work on these regulations, the framework should speak

about EMCA regulations that are affected such as water quality regulations, noise regulation.

Responses to comments / questions on ESMF:

Dr Kurauka acknowledged that salt mining and siltation are major challenges, especially in Kilifi

County. He confirmed that these issues have been captured in the frameworks. He gave examples



of conservation groups and organizations they spoke with, such as Kiunga Sea Turtle, those

protecting the red macabre, and various tree/plant species. He reiterated that resources must be

given to protect them. As for turtles, he said that there is need for more resources to motivate

fishermen. Whenever a fisherman catches a turtle, they should be able to capture the GPS

location, release the turtle and be paid for it. Otherwise turtles will be endangered and extinct in

a few years.

He noted that siltation poses both negative and positive effects. He gave the example of the Tana

River at the mouth meeting the Indian Ocean having a lot more mangroves than any other place

along the Kenyan coast as an advantage of a combination of siltation and salty waters.

About the pollution on Sabaki River, he traced the source to Nairobi and Athi River, which is

polluted mainly in Nairobi‘s Industrial Area, before it faces more pollution in other towns such

as Thika and Machakos. He talked of presence of heavy metals and industrial waste all polluting

the ocean. He advised that it is important to apply an ecosystem approach to manage these

challenges.

Dr Kurauka agreed with comment that strategic environmental assessment is important for huge

projects. He clarified, however, that this is a framework. He pointed out that if there was time, he

would have shown samples of EIAs for small projects e.g. for construction of landing sites. For a

sewer system in Lamu, a strategic environmental assessment will be necessary. About Cap 387,

he said that changes will be made as suggested. He further pointed out that reference to the

regulations/guidelines have been made in the detailed reports.

Prof Nyambedha explained that the project has not begun, that this is a framework, a guideline.

Specific project plans and assessments will be conducted once the projects begin.

Jared Agano – KEFIS also clarified that, laws and regulations and measures put in place are

sufficient to safeguard various risks. He assures participants that the project hasn‘t begun, but

that there is a framework that will guide the project once it starts to guard potential effects.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:20 am to enable participants have a tea-break.

The meeting was reconvened at 11:40 am.

Before the session began proper, Prof Nyambedha once again clarified that these are specific

frameworks which will guide the project implementation on key areas such as social,

environmental, VMGs, and not a concrete project plan. This was to dispel the misconceptions

about frameworks being the project plan.

Due to time constraints, the moderators asked that participants note down their observations,

comments or questions and would then be given time to engage / ask after all experts have

presented, rather than after each presentation.

Presentation of Social Assessment by Dr Peter Shimon



Dr Shimon discussed observations made by researchers on the social and cultural dynamics. He

talked about the VMGs and the institutions - social and government - that work closely with

them. He discussed other thematic issues such as unemployment, youth, women, politics,

changing environmental and social landscape vs traditional methods of livelihood

(hunting/gathering), education, water access (salty water even upon drilling boreholes), main

source of livelihood (fishing), how communities may benefit optimally from the project –

through community consultations (local leaders – chief, village elders). He noted that it is

important for the agenda for meetings to be clarified ahead of meetings, and meeting venues be

made accessible (not too far from stakeholders). He also observed that meeting composition by

gender is crucial as women need to be spared from men so that their voices are not drowned.

Experts from outside need to consult closely with local communities. He highlighted the

importance for capacity building before projects start is due to high illiteracy level. He noted that

the project will raise capacity to fish. He cautioned against elite capture and advocated for co-

management. He observed that local communities would like to experience tangible project

benefits, and that it is important to compose committees that are inclusive.

Presentation of RPF by Prof Syaga

Prof Syaga talked about RPF, explained what RPF all is about, provided overview on WB

involvement. He gave the example of Ndakaini Dam project in which people were compensated

but there was no follow up as to what they did with their money, thus having many misusing the

funds. He noted that the WB tries as much as possible to avoid displacement of the people. Since

projects must be there and, in the event, government doesn‘t have land, private property will be

used. However, people must not be punished. They must be compensated for the property. Their

livelihoods must be restored so as to continue living as before. It must not be destroyed. He used

a matrix on his slides presentation to educate participants on guidelines on compensation.

Presentation of VMGF by Prof Nyambedha

Prof Nyambedha clarified the value of social networks, in part as an explanation to Prof Syaga‘s

presentation on the difficulty of placing valuation on non-tangible benefits. He noted that all the

counties targeted, except Mombasa, have VMGs. He highlights that the project targets all

communities along the coastline, without discrimination or favoritism of any specific group(s).

He assured them that all community members will be involved.

The session was adjourned at 1:40 pm to allow participants have a lunch break.

The session resumed at 2:30 pm.

Presentation of PF by M/s Pauline Ikumi

Dr Ikumi explained to the plenary that the Process Framework firstly, this PF is prepared because

KEMFSED may cause restrictions in accessing natural resources in legally designated parks and

protected areas. It also looks at the procedures and activities, interests and needs of stakeholders.



She posited that the PF follows participatory framework and should be seen as a people‘s project

in which all key stakeholders take a role / are involved in deciding.

Questions, Comments Responses on various presentations of frameworks

Jane Njona, Kilifi Sub County

noted that albinos, though

physically disabled, are not

considered by this project and

should be brought on board / to

participate in consultations.

Mwalimu Ali, PWDs, Kwale

(VMGF, PF, and SA) was

concerned that he hasn‘t heard

much about persons with

disabilities and noted that VMGF

presentation had been specific

about ethnic communities. He

asked how PWDs can benefit. He

said that inclusion must also

consider PWDs, noting that

disability act allocates them 5% of

resources/representation.

Prof Nyambedha responded that although it may not have

come out strongly in the presentation, this is in the report,

and that if one looks carefully, they will find it well

covered.

Benjamin Kilaka, World Bank explained that the VMGs

were lumped together in the design of this project

(KEMFSED). He talked about the indigenous people not

being assimilated, and whose livelihoods are mostly in

the forests (hunter-gatherer), political representation –

none, education – low, socio-economically down, even

population is low. They cannot elect their leaders due to

low numbers. He pointed out that the Kenya government

argues that all Kenyans are indigenous, that the WB has

to go to the constitution: Article 43. GoK and WB agreed

on this definition. Goals of WB to eradicate poverty by

2030, and shared equality. He said that the physically

challenged are covered in that framework. He said that

the reason leaders are here is to engage with PIU to

sensitize communities.

Naima Twahi, Entrepreneur

asked, who indigenous people are.

She gave an example of her

parents having been born in

Lamu, moving to and settling in

Mombasa. Assuming they are

chased from Mombasa, where do

they go, since they have no place

in Lamu anymore?

Prof Nyambedha in response said that there is a

difference between indigenous and minority. Indigenous

doesn‘t have to be minority. The Kenyan Government

recognizes 22 communities as being VMGs. The World

Bank defines VMGs as people whose culture and

livelihood depend on natural resources such as forests.

Their language and culture haven‘t enabled them to

integrate well with other communities. Wakifundi,

Wachwaka, Waboni/Awer, Waelwana, Watta. Many

groups may be minority but not indigenous.

Naima Twahi, also pointed out

that the experts spoke of

representation. She asked which

one it should be, between

representation and decision

making?

On the issue of representation, Prof Nyambedha

responded that representation should not be just for

affirmative action. He said that the PF and VMGF have

M&E. M&E will interrogate and show if project is being

run in the required way. They must be seen to benefit, not

just to be seen to be represented.

To the question of representation, Benjamin Kilaka, WB

said that leadership is about popularity, yet the minority

do not have the numbers. Therefore, as leaders, the

stakeholders have to decide to apply affirmative action to

give seats. This, he said, it is within the constitution and

ensures inclusion.



Athmani Mwambire, Watamu (on

Social Assessment) asked about

the enforcement of NEMA laws.

He singles out the issue of

monofilament fishing nets

(plastic, transparent, fish cannot

see), which is outlawed, but is still

widely used. He said that

fishermen are not involved in

making laws that regulate their

trade. These laws hurt fishermen,

why are the laws made that hurt

fishermen? Why were they not

involved?

Kahindi Kheri, NEMA (Lamu) said, in NEMA‘s defense,

that the NEMA has bi-laws, EMCA 387, and that

enforcement issues are due to NEMA‘s limited resources.

People want a good environment but do not wish to take

responsibility. Communities are hesitant to say who are

responsible for breaking environmental laws, making

enforcement difficult. He said that NEMA has safeguards

in the event of collusion or corruption – environmental

complaints committee, tribunals to investigate.

Mtengo, BMU chairman, said that BMUs can arrest and

seize illegal fishing equipment, but cannot enforce the

law alone. They do not have necessary support from

stakeholders. Sometimes culprits are armed at the time of

crime.

Salim Ali refuted the notion that monofilament fishing is

the problem. He questions why it is legal to manufacture

and sell monofilament, yet fishermen are outlawed to use

it?

Somo Somo, in a rejoinder said that the danger isn‘t in

their (monofilament) transparency, but in their destruction

of corals – once they have been dumped, they do not

decay like the fabric fishing nets.

Somo Somo, observed that

KEMFSED is an extension of

KCDP. They did not benefit from

KCDP. Only officers in charge,

women, youth, and few interest

groups benefited. He quotes the

disproportionate ownership of

boats by women who are also

dealers. Women also own other

resources. How about the men?

Jared Agano, KEFIS responded that the project aims to

build further upon the gains and capacity building of

KCDP. But it is not KCDP‘s continuation.

Somo Somo, also noted (on RPF)

that resettlement / compensation

should consider further effects

such as relocation and separation

of spouses over lengthier period

of time.

Prof Syaga noted that all his reports (RPF) incorporate the

human rights element.

Said Ali Chufu (on VMGF)

observed that tribes are an ageless

concept that did not start today.

Those which alienated themselves

from the rest of the societies still

have the same issues which drove

Jared Agano said that a team has been constituted to look

into issue of all grabbed public landing sites, came to the

ground, report ready, at the national office of the land

commission.



them away. They should be

consulted on why they keep

alienating themselves / what

drove them away.

Said Ali Chufu said that chiefs are

involved in all government land

compensations and that all

grabbed landing sites should be

returned and non-gazetted ones be

gazetted.

On Land Policy, Prof Syaga said that the NLC was to

recover all irregularly allocated land. They would not

know without communities showing them.

Mohamad Athman, Lamu County,

Project Coordinator – KEMFSED,

asked Dr Kurauka to adjust

components to be consistent with

KEMFSED (3 vs 4 – 1.2 was

removed).

Rose Koboge clarified that there have been revisions on

the WB components. Component 3 was too complex and

there was no money to implement.

One participant asked that they be

furnished with necessary

information and tools since

officers will need documents

ahead of implementation.

(on ESMF) Salim Ali

Mohammed, Indian Ocean Body

Network - noted that there are

plain historical sites - without any

structures (e‘g‘ Sadaka ya Pwani)

– how shall these be handled?

(on RPF) - Salim Ali Mohammed,

Indian Ocean Body Network (on

ESMF) also asked that with gaps

existing between EACC or NLC

valuations, which ones will be

used?

(on PF) Salim Ali Mohammed,

Indian Ocean Body Network (on

ESMF) said that local

communities should be given

priority in allocation of job

opportunities before others are

considered.

It was agreed that all the summary reports will be availed

to them.

Prof Syaga asked, how the ocean resources can be

quantified to the extent that we can put a price to them,

say when there‘s destruction.

Isak Aboubakar, appealed to

people who use VMGs for their

own personal gains to stop

Prof Nyambedha on representation of fishermen in

decision / law making. He said that fishermen gave

feedback that corruption is rampant. BMU should be



immediately. He said that the

practice is rampant even in county

government tendering processes.

He asked officers to desist from

trading with government through

their companies or proxies. He

also cautions that stakeholders

must be vigilant to ensure that the

project doesn‘t go the KCDP way.

All recommendations by

consultants should be

implemented to the letter.

Charles Janji Nyadhe, BMU

Network said that the government

institutions are not pulling

together, which is a problem to

stakeholders. He said that

harmonization is necessary for

report‘s implementation to be

successful. All (NEMA, KWS,

Police, etc) should be involved in

consultations / meetings.

empowered to arrest.

Jared Agano, DG, KEFIS said that the creation of the

laws involved everyone from grassroots through to Senate

and national assembly, before amendments and then

signing into law by president. Involvement may be done

through representation. He said that the BMUs are

empowered to arrest or confiscate equipment of

fishermen breaking laws, and hand over to the police. He

pointed out that women have been given 30%

representation. He adds that the laws, made in 2007, are

currently being revised.

Tom Ng‘ar, Coast Development,

asked in what ways it is possible

that compensation may not benefit

the women.

Tom Ng‘ar also asked Prof Syaga

(on RAP) why he could not learn

from other areas (even outside

Kenya). He asked if Prof Syaga

has looked at other Kenyans who

are satisfied? He noted that many

are still languishing in poverty

despite compensation.

Tom Ng‘ar also noted that he was

not seeing where private

partnership is involved in the

project.

Prof Syaga said that valuation is never done without

benchmarking. He clarified that valuation is not

theoretical but must be practical. He gave examples of

various countries he has travelled to for benchmarking

purposes. He informed participants that before a report is

accepted, it must demonstrate where benchmarking has

been done. He noted that the challenge is to cover every

interest and how do to implement. He also noted that

human rights demand for adequate and prompt

compensation, but how does one know that it is adequate?

This, he said, is why/where we call all experts –

sociologists, anthropologists, environmentalists,

economists, etc. He asked how to bring in social networks

and human rights into compensation. He questioned if

they can be converted into money. He advised that

compensation does not end with money. As a first step,

one has to see how affected people continue with their

livelihoods. The second step will be the person doing

RAP physically going door to door, with government

representatives present, and the property owner and land

valuers present. All have to sign. He warned that at the



moment, we do not yet even know what will be approved.

That time will come. He said that what we are giving

them is a framework on what to look for while preparing

that RAP.

Kokota Tchavati Mduze, on

mariculture, he said that he hasn‘t

`seen clauses that will help

improve mariculture projects.

―We do not have hatchery set ups.

What are the measures you have

put in place? On environment &

mangroves, he said that they have

nurseries. But they now have

challenges, such as bags used

being banned by NEMA. What

measures are there to improve the

situation?

Jared Agano, informs participants that mariculture and

hatcheries have been extensively covered in the project.

Adero, Nature Kenya said that

they have documents that are

important for the protection of the

ecosystem. She encouraged

stakeholders / experts to make use

of these documents.

AOB: With the comments, questions and responses session over, the moderators shared a

few closing remarks.

Madam Waka noted that this meeting is just the beginning. She urged stakeholders to keep

talking, discussing, and engaging, for the better implementation and benefit of the communities.

She said that their offices are open for questions, comments, so anyone can pop in.

Benjamin Kilaka, WB thanks participants for their participation, and for taking time to discuss.

He noted that this is a milestone in the KEMFSED project. He said that from here, the project

will go to the appraisal level after tomorrow. He observed that he realized that many

representatives were civil societies and urged them to keep government on its toes. He

challenged leaders to integrity test following Prof Syaga‘s appeal to the same. He also

challenged participants to tap into the positive energy and talent they had demonstrated towards

the improvement / betterment of our people. He cautioned that this was a loan, not a grant. He

said that after the meeting with the VMGs, consultants will update all the instruments. He

reminded stakeholders to do the work. He said that their office is open and he can be called or

texted. He will listen.



Gomu, County Government of Mombasa, gave a vote of thanks. He thanked everyone for

coming, consultants for their work/input. He said that the purpose of the project was to uplift the

livelihoods of Coastal people. He noted that is their project. It was about creating alternative

livelihoods. He said that counties are actively involved in the implementation of project.

Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 pm after a prayer. The next meeting will be held on 20th

June

2019 with VMG representatives.



MINUTES OF A DISCLOSURE WORKSHOP MEETING OF THE STAKEHOLDERS

AND CONSULTANTS HELD IN MOMBASA, AT KEMFI HEADQUARTERS ON 20TH

JUNE 2019 WITH VMGs & OTHER INTEREST GROUPS REPRESENTATIVES

The meeting was called to order at 10:00 am, on June 20, 2019, at KEMFRI‘s boardroom.

The meeting began with prayers followed with Individuals introducing themselves – by name

and the interests they represent. It was agreed that due to the composition of workshop

participants, Swahili language be used to make presentations and deliberations. Moderators

inform participants that all presentations by experts will be done first before they make

comments and ask questions.

See participants list attached.

1. Agenda

Validation of KEMFSED frameworks (ESMF, VMGF, SA, RPF and PF)

Presentation of individual frameworks by lead experts

Reactions by the stakeholders to the frameworks through comments, questions.

Consultants and technocrats‘ responses to the comments and questions raised by

stakeholders.

2. The lead consultants present the various frameworks in this order: SA, VMGF, RPF,

ESMF then PF.



Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned briefly to allow for tea-break.

3. Question / Comment / Feedback / Response Time:

Jared Agano, KEFIS went over the comments and questions from the previous day so as to

ensure participants are aware some of the issues addressed, and to avoid redundancy.

He mentioned that there is a misperception that the target of KEMFSED is to build Shimoni port.

He clarified that this is not KEMFSED‘s goal. In case of such a plan, consultations similar to

these shall be undertaken.

After brief deliberation, it was agreed that all participants be allowed to ask their

questions, regardless of repetitiveness / redundancy with the ones from the day before.

Questions and Comments Responses on various presentations of

frameworks

Bajina, Kipini East Ward, Tana River County

commented that there are factors considered

in different groups (women, youth). He asked

about PWDs who equally stay within the

project target area and even use sea resources.

He asked about epileptic people who die at

sea in the event of attacks. He urged that the

project plan should incorporate them since

they can‘t go into boats to go fish so

alternatives should be sought for them.

On Land, Bajina, Kipini East Ward, Tana

River County said that land is an unavoidable

debate. He cautioned that bad politics may

creep onto the project. He urged communities

to watch out against peddlers and inciters who

will be out to derail the implementation of the

projects. He appealed to them to ensure local

leaders (chiefs, ward admins) in the event

issues come up – such as land disputes on

public land. He pointed out that there are

grievance mechanisms, but such may delay

the process of bringing development to the

grounds. He urged communities to find

solutions locally as courts take long and

projects stall due to litigation.

Bajina, Kipini East Ward, Tana River County

Jared Agano, KEFIS, on access to reports

informed the participants that the reports are

public domain, if they need them. They are

available on WB websites, but they can also

pass by their representatives and they will be

able to get them.



asked that leaders be furnished with the info

presented so that they too are equipped to

share the same with their people on the

ground. In the event they are not able to

answer, they would refer to the right experts.

Mchambi, Jimbo, Vanga, Kwale said that just

as they were on the ground, gave their views

on the project, so should the project follow a

same approach. A work plan should be made

in which the team goes back to the ground to

help avoid many questions and suspicions.

On market access, Mchambi, Jimbo, Vanga,

Kwale said there is no market. He wondered

where the improved catch would be.

On greed, Mchambi, Jimbo, Vanga, Kwale

said that some professionals working on the

ground are corrupt. He accused them of lack

of accountability, with projects ending

without tangible, visible results, and no one to

ask.

On discrimination and division, Mchambi,

Jimbo, Vanga, Kwale advised that first

priority be given to people on the ground.

Leadership be given to local people without

discrimination, without consideration of

disability or else. It is divisive. He said that

design, procurement, costing of equipment

should be transparent. He also asked that

evaluation be done at least every 6 months.

Don‘t wait for too long, then drive in in big

cars to show off.

He also said that the project design is good,

but discriminatory in some respects. He

decried the splitting of people into groups as

it isn‘t healthy. He noted that even BMU

leadership composition takes care of diversity

/ interests.

Shikami pointed that prioritization would

follow the PICD process. Leaders, chiefs,

county reps will be involved. All consulted /

involved.

A participant asked Rose Koboge why the

project is targeting the ocean yet Rivers (Tana

etc) have fish too. Fishermen have equipment

and catch fish as well.

Shikami, on focus on ocean and not rivers,

remarked that all projects have limits. He said

that KCDP targeted all communities at the

coast, but that it didn‘t benefit all. KEMFSED

focus is channeled to Ocean fishing due to the



potential of exploiting the unreached high

seas. The whole world is focusing Blue

Economy. The ocean is the epicenter of the

blue economy, not rivers and lakes. If Tana

River is taken, even other rivers will have to

be considered. Lake Victoria exploits more

than the Indian Ocean.

Kami, VMG chairman, Tana River asked

Peter Shimon to change Waata & Waatha to

WATTA and Abagaaza to Abagaasa on the

SA documents.

Comment was received and changes made

accordingly.

Kami, VMG chairman, Tana River also asked

Dr Kurauka how harvesting / spraying destroy

the environment. He also questioned why

Taita Taveta is on the map, yet there is no sea

or river.

Dr Kurauka clarified that Tana River County

appeared on the map only by virtue of being a

neighboring county to Kwale County.

On representation, Kami, VMG chairman,

Tana River asked Dr Ikumi what criteria will

be used to involve them in the project.

Dr Ikumi on composition / involvement noted

that everyone will be involved. She assured

the participants that this is just a framework.

They will have to prepare the criteria to guide

the process to ensure all are on board.

Kami, VMG chairman, Tana River also

questioned if farming activities such as

growing maize, keeping livestock, rearing

chicken will also be considered in the project.

Dr Ikumi on the question about maize and

chicken farmers, said that we can‘t specify

individual projects in a framework. She said

that we didn‘t go into that level of detail and

that it will be for the communities to decide.

Jared Agano, KEFIS DG observed that the

maize and chicken farmers have been listed as

alternative sources of livelihood.

Kami, VMG chairman, Tana River wanted to

know when they shall plan for the project –

prioritization and budget planning.

Jared Agano, KEFIS said that even this

meeting was part of planning. He noted that

the planning started in earnest around Jan

2008. He said that counties had already given

their budgets and that the team was working

on costing. He assured participants that the

plan and budget were being refined.

Shikami added that money had been set aside

in blocks, not the complete amount. There

was no need to panic as they would be

involved at the right time before project starts,

especially community projects.

Kami, VMG chairman, Tana River asked how

it shall work out with VMGs, yet they have



integration of all. He questioned how it will

be ensured that the minorities / VMGs

benefit, for example in the BMUs.

Hassan, Watta (to the WB) expressed their

gratitude for previous projects. He asked why

projects are ended prematurely before they

get to their fruition. He also asked the WB

how they will ensure that money for the

project shall not delay. He gave the example

of a 5 year project funded in the last 2.5 years.

Benjamin Kilaka, WB in response to

Hassan‘s / Kombo‘s questions on Watta and

premature end of project said that whenever

the government of Kenya wishes to borrow

money, they send a concept to the WB, if

approved, they are asked to write a proposal.

This includes the estimates. Then frameworks

are written – ESMF, RPF, VMGF, etc. The

frameworks give a guideline on what to do in

case there are certain negative effects on the

society, environment. Also highlights how to

safeguard VMGs to ensure they too benefit.

These are requirements of the WB, before the

release of money. What we are doing is to

ensure all issues are looked at and ironed out

before money is released. WB is a business

entity; its money does not delay. From the

WB to the government accounts……. up to

fisheries accounts, project accounts and

county accounts. If communities are asked

what projects they wish to do, by the time

they start to write proposals (takes 6 months

to approve), sometimes government financial

year closed, and then say there is a 3-month

delay ……. They easily have a one-year

delay. He observed that KCDP had similar

challenges of delay. He advised them to be

prompt to ensure things move, support groups

to have all requirements in place

(composition, registration, accounts).

Mr Kilaka urged participants to ensure they

propose projects in good time to avoid delays.

Hassan, Watta, (on communication), asked

how they shall do the reporting. He asked if

they shall be facilitated with communications

experts, how it will get to the communities

and if the information will be published.

Mr Kilaka, WB, on reporting, said that it shall

be done through PIU (project implementation

unit) where all officers involved will have to

furnish their names and qualifications before

appointment.

On communication, Mr Kilaka urged

participants to make constructive noise, to

engage them constructively. He cautioned that

the WB can only professionally advise and

guide, not interfere with the sovereignty of



Kenya and its people.

Jared Agano, KEFIS on communication

strategy noted that there is a structure in

place. He said there is a project

implementation manual – at the draft stage.

He promised that it would be availed at

county and national government offices where

anyone can access it. It spells out how project

will be run / handled.

Riziki Bwanake, Tana River gave an example

of a community that were once relocated,

taken to Kipini Division. Now the project was

completed but they haven‘t been resettled.

They are not sure if to go back or stay. How

will KEMFSED project ensure clarity?

Benjamin Kilaka, WB said that it is

unfortunate if there are people who were

moved and that they haven‘t been resettled.

He asked that it is best to share (on the side)

details of the affected community.

Ibrahim, questioned (the WB) why VMGs are

empowered groups. He noted that KCDP had

similar approach focusing on community

service and livelihoods. He said that

KEMFSED is focusing so much on VMGs.

He asked how communities are benefiting.

Also, he noted that not all VMGs are

registered.

Mr Kilaka pointed that no one is forced to

join a project (proposed by the majority

groups). He appealed to them to not propose

projects which require cost sharing, knowing

full well that the VMGs will not be able to

afford, thus locking them out, benefitting only

the financially able majority. He noted that

the focus on VMGs was due to the WB‘s

mission of eradicating poverty by 2030, to

ensure shared resources, and to ensure

equality. He highlighted that the VMGs

framework was based on OP 4.10 and

Constitution of Kenya Article 56. He assured

participants that they will update their

documents to include albinos in physically

challenged group.

Hassan, Watta referred to their experience

with KCDP showing that some components

were not implemented, yet they were in the

project and they are very vital. He wanted to

know how they shall ensure this is done this

time to help get communities out of poverty.

He also sought to find out how this project

shall be ensure that the local fisherman feels

that it uplifts his standard of living – socially

and economically.

Shikami clarified that KEMFSED will be a

bigger project that KCDP. There will be

better planning and more empowerment on

the local communities.



Rose Koboge clarified that KEMFSFED isn‘t

like KCDP. It has components that will

incorporate all regulations relating to marine

and fisheries. Component 1 – infrastructure:

1.1 – Policy & Management. 1.2 BMU. 1.3

Fisheries – all headquarters to be placed under

one roof. Hatcheries to be catered for,

research centre to be based at Shimoni, Kwale

County. Fish preservation / value add.

2nd

component: Improving livelihoods of

coastal communities. Be it maize farming or

rearing chicken. Nobody will impose a project

on you. It is you to decide. There will be civic

education and capacity building. They will

then be empowered to consult you on your

priorities and wishes. You will be given

proformers to list the projects and ask for

support. KEMFSED will not discriminate or

favour VMGs. They must be part of the

community projects. Whatever you decide to

do, if you don‘t have the skills, you will be

trained and equipped to do so. Today was

only to explain about safeguards.

Communities will be engaged at the

appropriate time later.

3rd

component: Planning, budgeting, costing

She went in detail to describe the various

components to the participants.

Jacob Kokan, commended the WB for its

policies and recognition of VMGs and

minority groups. He asked whom they should

reach out to in the event of grievances, as they

often get victimized / drowned by the

majority groups. He asked if they will have a

channel to air, otherwise we will be overrun.

Benjamin Kilaka, WB, assured the VMGs

that in case of need to reach out to him / to

escalate, he gave them the go ahead to take

his number from the attendants list, to call or

text him and he will respond.

Jacob Kokan asked Jared Agano, the DG,

KEFIS what measures had been put in place

to ensure top leadership have VMG

representatives.

Jacob Kokan also questioned how

accountability / transparency will be ensured

in procurement.

Benjamin Kilaka, WB noted that KEMFSED

Project is not for VMGs or any specific

group. That it is for everyone, but with a

focus on ensuring VMGs are not left out.

Mr Kilaka reassured participants that the

frameworks have been prepared with M&E to

ensure all frameworks are adhered to. If not,

the WB can take drastic measures, even

withdraw funds. He noted that indigenous



people have rights too, and this is why there is

a focus on them.

Benjamin Kilaka, WB on project visibility,

noted that the project will have pictures and

videos taken throughout and shared with

stakeholders. He urged them to ensure no

undeserving sub project were covered.

Benjamin Kilaka, WB also said that the WB

follows up with the government to ensure

money is used in the right way.

On compensation, he asked Prof Syaga where

it is coming from, who is this who will decide

to relocate and compensate them, yet they are

the ones to decide on projects.

Prof Syaga noted that if personal property is

affected, one will have to be compensated for

displacement for the benefit of all. One will

have to be given ample notice. Information

will be given about how long livelihoods /

social benefits will be interfered with before

project completion. Prof Syaga also remarked

that compensation isn‘t only monetary. There

are other benefits such as training,

scholarship, loans to start businesses.

Prof Syaga noted that a framework is like a

policy / constitution. During implementation,

reference shall be made to the framework. It

will specify the shares for each interest

groups. He said that further consultations in

the next phase will be at the local level

(chief‘s / assist‘s office) and that this is still a

top level awareness phase.

One participant‘s noted that according to

fisheries laws, one has to pay to be a member

of a BMU. He also noted that a fisherman has

to have a license. He faulted fishermen for not

following the law.

Saida Azwad, Kipini on vetting process,

commented that they can‘t register a

fishermen in a BMU without background

checks. She said that this is important for

enhancement of security.

Kombo on BMU representation / leadership

recommended that the remaining 30%, 1/3 be

set aside for VMGs. BMU elections takes

place every 4 years. How will VMGs be

incorporated for those who have already held

elections?

Jared Agano, KEFIS on non rep of VMGs on

BMUs pointed that BMU guidelines explain

how different groups are supposed to be

involved / represented. Boat owners are

entitled to 30%, fishermen without boats to

30%, fish mongers to 10% (proposal on to

increase to 30%), others 10%. He hoped that



even VMGs will find representation in the

revised law since they don‘t have numbers to

vote them in.

Kombo on civic education / capacity building,

suggested that VMGs be educated on what

opportunities exist for them.

Kombo on valuation, also remarked that one

cannot contribute on compensation debate if

they don‘t know their rights.

Ibrahim also noted that they (VMGs) don‘t

know their rights, there is no civic education,

yet there were clauses quoted about land,

compensation and resettlement. He

questioned how an illiterate person can

bargain for fair compensation.

Benjamin Kilaka, WB said that civic

education will be done, but he couldn‘t

guarantee capacity building from their side as

it was the responsibility of the government.

Prof Syaga, on valuation/compensation,

clarified that valuation happens live, on site. It

starts with surveyor, beacons are placed.

Where there is no registration, it‘s called

community land. They may not have

boundaries. In that case, the surveyors go

back to the law. In the event community land

is taken, compensation goes to the county

government (the trustee until it‘s registered).

Otherwise registered community gets

compensated. Without that, county

government is their representative. Regardless

of ownership, surveyors go to the ground

physically with the chief who knows the

owners. Everyone appends their signature on

the inventory.

Prof Syaga advised participants to ensure

community land is registered when they go

back home. He assured them that they don‘t

have to understand the law for them to receive

fair compensation because there are

guidelines and market rates.

Adjournment

The session came to an end at 5:30 pm. A participant led the gathering in a word of prayer.

final draft process framework...2019/06/23 · final draft process framework kenya marine fisheries...

Documents