GEF Focal Area: Sector:

Public Disclosure Authorized o INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET RESTRUCTURING STAGE te: This ISDS will be considered effective only upon approval of the project restructuring Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 28-Jan-2016 Date ISDS Approved/Disclosed: 06-Feb-2016 Report.: ISDSR16078 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized I. BASIC INFRMATIN 1. Basic Project Data Country: Africa Project ID: P108879 Project Name: Task Team Leader(s): AFCC2/RI-Nyika Transfrontier Conservation Area Project (P108879) Douglas J. Graham Estimated 13-Dec-2010 Estimated 21-Apr-20 11 Appraisal Date: Board Date: Managing Unit: GEN01 Lending Specific Investment Loan Instrument: GEF Focal Area: Sector: Biodiversity Public administration- Agriculture, fishing and forestry (39%), General agriculture, fishing and forestry sector (35%), ther social services (22%), ther industry (2%), General industry and trade sector (2%) Theme: Biodiversity (44%), Environmental policies and institutions (28%), Rural nonfarm income generation (13%), Income Support for ld Ag e, Disability & U Survivorship (11%), ther Private Sector Development (4%) Is this project processed under P 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or P 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)? Financing (in USD Million) Total Project Cost: 11.09 Total Bank Financing: 0.00 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount Borrower 1.85 Global Environment Facility (GEF) 4.82 NRWAY Ministry of Foreign Affairs 4.20 Foundation/s (identified) 0.23 Total 11.09 Environmental B - Partial Assessment Category: Page 1 of 8

0 Is this a Repeater project? 2. Current Global Environmental bjective(s) The combined Project#s Development bjective (PD) and Global Environmental bjective (GE) of the Project is to establish more effective transfrontier manageme nt of biodiversity in the Nyika Transfrontier Conservation Area. Proposed New GE (from Restructuring Paper) The combined Project#s Development bjective (PD) and Global Environmental bjective (GE) of the Project is to establish more effective transfrontier manageme nt of biodiversity in the Nyika Transfrontier Conservation Area. 3. Project Description The project was restructured in ctober 2013; at that time no major changes were made in the ISDS - only minor changes in project description. Because of issues with the Portal at that time the ISDS could not be processed through the Portal. In vember 2015 it was archived in WBDocs. it is now being revised slightly for the January 2016 restructuring. This Project supports transboundary biodiversity conservation through planning, institution building, fund raising and capacity building for protected area management. It is implemented with the following 3 components: Component 1: Institutional and Planning Framework Component 2: Sustainable Financing Component 3: Protected Areas Management To implement these components within the Project area the Project will receive parallel co-financing from the GEF, rway Embassy in Malawi and Peace Park Foundation as well as the Government of Zambia (GoZ) and the Government of Malawi (GoM). All above financiers have agreed to comply with World Bank safeguards. Component 1: Institutional and Planning Framework (Total US$1.90m - GEF Zambia US$0.63m, GEF Malawi US$0.71m, rway US$ 0.30m, PPF $0.23m, GoM US$5,000) The objective of this component is to establish and operationalize the governance and planning functions for the Nyika Transfrontier Conservation Area (TFCA) by financing the design of TFCAwide planning instruments and assisting with the establishment and capacity building of the implementation agencies. The component has two subcomponents: (A) Project management & (B) Strategic planning. The activities proposed under Subcomponent A include: (1) The procurement and financial management technical assistants as well as short technical assistance (TA) on planning, monitoring and evaluation to support teams of the implementation agencies, (2) the vehicles, office and field equipment of the implementation teams in both countries, (3) the capacity building for the implementation teams in both countries through hiring of trainers, training courses, planning and consultation workshops, and (4) the annual external audits of all funds. The activities proposed under Subcomponent B include: (1) the feasibility study of the Nyika Implementing Agency (this activity is no longer included in the Page 2 of 8

o project as of 2016), (2) the transboundary integrated district planning for the Chama District in Zambia and the Rumphi District in Malawi, (3) the review and up-date of the Nyika TFCA Management and Tourism Plans, and (4) the diagnostic of national legal barriers for full TFCA operationalization. Component 2: Sustainable Financing (Total US$0.27m - GEF Zambia US$0.10m, GEF Malawi US$0.17m) The objective of this component is to develop mechanisms for financial sustainability of TFCA management through the institutions responsible for the long term management and financing of the Nyika TFCA. The activities under component 2 include: (1) a feasibility study for the Nyika Implementation Agency (NIA) including a business plan, fund raising strategy, and an investment strategy (the NIA is no longer being constituted but the studies are being done by the two governments) (2) a broker tasked with advertising concessions to attract private investors for tourism, logging or hunting concessions, and (3) promotion material for fund raising, investment promotion, partnership seeking as well as events, trips, workshops, etc. Component 3: Protected Areas Management (Total US$8.93m - GEF Zambia US1.81m, GEF Malawi US$1.40m, rway US$ 3.88m, GoM US $ 1.37m, GoZ US$ 0.47m) a The objective is to improve management effectiveness of the agglomerated three Nyika TFCA management blocks: the Nyika, the Vwaza and the Chama blocks (the location of the latter was redefined in the 2013 restructuring). As well as assure that the Project, by increasing the protection of the block does not generate poverty but rather provides alternative livelihoods to poachers and other illegal resource usersthe management of the Nyika and Vwaza blocks will be done jointly by Zambia#s ZAWA and/or Malawi's Department of National Parks and Wildlife (DNPW). The management of the third block, the proposed Chama Nature Park in Zambia, will be supported by a joint venture ZAWA/Zambian Forestry Department (ZFD)/NG Partner/Community association. The activities proposed in each block include: (1) Capacity building for planning, management and reporting, (2) infrastructure development and maintenance such as staff houses, offices, workshops, airstrips, water crossing structures, tracks, fences and firebreaks, (3) Habitat management and resource protection and monitoring including patrol operations, and (4) research and monitoring such as data collection, aerial surveys and research programs, (5) implementation of an action plan to be designed on a case by case basis using the Process Framework to ensure that the Project provides livelihood alternative to poachers and other illegal users of resources, and (6) establishment of two tourism camps in Chama Nature Park as well as training and mentoring of its employees issued from the community including illegal users of resources. 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) The Nyika TFCA is one of two Malawi-Zambia TFCAs. It spans over a total area of 19,280 km2 and consists of different types of interconnected protected areas under various management and conservation regimes. However, not all the TFCA is included in this Project. Three Nyika TFCA ecosystem-management blocks have been identified for the Project: (i) Nyika block comprising of Malawi Nyika National Park, Zambia Nyika National Park and Zambia Mitenge Forest Reserve (over 4,500 km2), (ii) Vwaza block comprising of Malawi Vwaza Marsh Wildlife Page 3 of 8

Q U Reserve and transboundary Bambanda-Zaro Sanctuary (part of the Lundazi Forest Reserve (over 1,500 km2), and (iii) the proposed Zambia Chama Nature Park (part of the current Lundazi Forest Reserve) (about 1,000 km2). 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Kristine Schwebach (GSU07) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (ptional) Environmental Yes An ESMF has been prepared and was updated in 2015. Assessment P/BP 4.01 Natural Habitats P/BP Yes An ESMF has been prepared and was updated in 2015; it 4.04 covers natural habitats issues. Forests P/BP 4.36 Yes An ESMF has been prepared and was updated in 2015; it covers forests issues. Pest Management P 4.09 Physical Cultural Resources P/BP 4.11 Indigenous Peoples P/ BP 4.10 Involuntary Resettlement Yes A resettlement policy and a process framework have been P/BP 4.12 prepared and were updated in 2015. Safety of Dams P/BP 4.37 Projects on International Waterways P/BP 7.50 Projects in Disputed Areas P/BP 7.60 II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the Restructured project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: This is a conservation operation that seeks to improve the status of biodiversity in the Nyika TFCA. The Project is classified as category B as there will be site-specific investments such as small infrastructures (houses, gravel roads, culverts) that can affectlocally the environment and wildlife as well as the local communities of the TFCA. The activities and investment funded by the project will have no large scale and no irreversible environmental or social impacts. P 4.01 on Environmental Assessment is triggered but no significant adverse impact on the environment was identified for the type of project activities being considered. Rather, anticipated impacts will be positive. Small infrastructure investments and activities such as anti-poaching or support to conservation farming can affect locally the environment as well as the local communities. The impacts of specific investments could not be identified during preparation but may materialize only during implementation. As a consequence, the client prepared an Page 4 of 8

Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) to detect and mitigate environment and social impacts when small infrastructures are designed. In September 2015 the ESMF and all the other safeguard instruments were revised and updated. P 4.04 on Natural Habitats is triggered as most of the TFCA is natural habitat such as miombos, mopane and grassland. The Project aims to enhance its conservation but there is a possibility that new tracks through sensitive areas locally increase the ecosystem disturbance. P 4.36 on Forests is triggered since a concession for logging of a non-native pine forest is planned in the Nyika National Park as part of eradication of a species that has now become invasive. P 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement is triggered since as in most conservation projects, since there is an element of improved resource protection and law enforcement which will restrict access to wildlife from people who were using it before, albeit illegally. A process framework has been prepared to assist communities living adjacent to the parks and which may be impacted by the project. In the Lundazi Forest Reserve on the Zambian side, the Project will facilitate the creation of a new protected area of higher conservation status (Chama Nature Park). This, however, does have the support of the local communities who want to promote conservation and hope to benefit from tourism. The project will enlist assistance from local NGs in Zambia and Malawi who have experience in working with communities to identify ways in which they can benefit from conservation. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: Social and environmental impacts within the Nyika TFCA area are expected to be positive, providing for enhanced natural resource conservation, sustainable resource use and improved livelihoods of fringe communities. There is no envisioned long-term negative environment and social impact that could be generated by the project. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. N/A 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. The project will be implemented by the Department of National Parks and Wildlife (DNPW) in Malawi and by the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) in Zambia (replaced by the Department of National Parks and Wildlife in January 2016). For this project, the environmental and social safeguards issues will be addressed in the usual manner for World Bank-supported projects, not through the Use of Country Systems. Thus, P 4.00 is not applicable. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. Both countries have adequate legislation and reasonable capacity to review EAs but not the full range of Bank safeguards. The preparation of the safeguard documents (ESMF, PF, RPF) has been outsourced to consultants under supervision of the Peace Park Foundation (project preparation grant executing agency). The Implementation agencies (now DNPW in both countries) will oversee compliance with these instruments in cooperation with the national and local stakeholders Page 5 of 8

involved and the district authorities. The ESMF is a framework document which will be activated to detect and mitigate environment and social impacts in the development of the greater TFCA. The Project will apply the guidelines contained in this framework to promote a participatory process of community involvement to support an accurate assessment of such impact before the project activities commence. The ESMF provides a management framework for how the Project will ensure compliance with defined national and World Bank safeguard policies to avoid undesirable project impact as well as a required process for monitoring the effectiveness of these safeguards. te that the ESMF does not require detailed assessments, action plans, resettlement plans and procedures, but rather a framework within which such plans and procedures can be developed. This ESMF therefore involves a methodology designed to identify potentially negative environment and social impacts, streamline appropriate steps that enhance environmental and social assessment and impacts mitigation through environment and/or social management plans. To achieve this aim while also complying with WB safeguards, the ESMF proposes planning tools, administrative procedures and a consultation plan that are appropriate for a wide range of environmental and social management applications. ther ongoing projects that are not implemented within the Project boundary, but with communities that live outside of the Project area may find themselves complementary to the Nyika Project. Because they operate outside the Project boundary and because they have been initiated before the Project, they are not compelled, and have not committed to comply with World Bank safeguards. Two such projects need to be cited: the Community Market for Conservation (CMAC in Zambia) and the Kulera Biodiversity Project (in Malawi). They are mentioned because (1) they assist communities from which possibly originate community members who enter the Project areas to illegally collect natural resources and, who, as a result of the Project, may lose access to such resources and thus become a Person Affected by the Project (PAP). Because such PAP reside outside the Project area where these two projects operate, it may be that one of them is already providing such PAPs supports toward alternative livelihoods. If and when, this is the case, the Project would assess whether or not the PAP requires livelihood support from the Project. B. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/ther Date of receipt by the Bank 24-Dec-20 10 Date of submission to InfoShop & ~For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive // Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors "In country" Disclosure 19-Jan-2011 Comments: Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process Date of receipt by the Bank 24-Dec-20 10 Date of submission to InfoShop 19-Jan-2011 "In country" Disclosure Comments: If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the Page 6 of 8

respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/ Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level P/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) Yes [ X] [ ] NA [ ] report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Practice Yes [X] [ ] NA [ ] Manager (PM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated Yes [ X] [ ] NA [ ] in the credit/loan? P/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or Yes [ ] [X] NA [ ] degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ X ] degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? P/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/ Yes [ X] [ ] NA [ ] process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Yes [X] [ ] NA [ ] Practice Manager review the plan? Is physical displacement/relocation expected? Yes [ ] [X] TBD [ ] Provided estimated number of people to be affected Is economic displacement expected? (loss of assets or access to Yes [ ] [X] TBD [ ] assets that leads to loss of income sources or other means of livelihoods) Provided estimated number of people to be affected P/BP 4.36 - Forests Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional issues Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ X ] and constraints been carried out? Does the project design include satisfactory measures to Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ X ] overcome these constraints? Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, Yes [ ] [X] NA [ ] does it include provisions for certification system? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the Yes[X] [ ] NA[ ] World Bank's Infoshop? Page 7 of 8

Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public Yes [ X] NA place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes[X] [ NA responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? o Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included Yes[X] [ NA in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project Yes[X] [ NA[ include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed Yes [X] [ ] NA [ ] with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? III. APPRVALS Task Team Leader(s): Name: Douglas J. Graham Approved By Practice Manager/ Name: Magda Lovei (PMGR) Date: 06-Feb-2016 Manager: Page 8 of 8