public disclosure authorized - world...

32966P

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

edP

ublic

Dis

clos

ure

Aut

horiz

ed

The Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development NetworkThe World Bank1818 H Street, NWWashington, D.C., [email protected]

The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of theauthors and editors and should not be attributed in any manner to the World Bank, its affiliatedorganizations or to the members of its Board of Executive Directors or the countries they represent.The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication andaccepts no responsibility whatsoever for any consequence of their use.

First printing April 2005

Photos provided by Reidar Kvam.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword

Acknowledgements

Overview

Introduction

Objectives

Participants

Format

Main Findings

Challenges and Opportunities

Workshop Proceedings

Inaugural Session and Participants’ Expectations

Technical Sessions

Fieldwork

Closing Session

Conclusions and Recommendations

Endnotes

Annex 1: List of Participants

Annex 2: Workshop Agenda

Annex 3: Sample Rapid Social Assessment (RSA): Fieldwork Summary from Chand Village, Khijri Block, Ranchi District

Annex 4: Evaluation of Outcomes

iii

v

3

3

4

5

5

6

7

9

9

9

27

27

28

34

36

40

44

47

The Jharkhand Participatory Forest Management Project

ii

Social Assessment for Inclusion, Equity, and Accountability

iii

The World Bank’s involvement in the Indiaforestry sector dates back to the early 1950s andhas passed through a series of distinct stages, withearly support to state-managed forest plantationsprimarily for industrial raw material, followed bya decade of support to social forestry on privateland holdings, and more recently to Joint ForestManagement (JFM).

When the Bank reviewed and carefully consideredthe outcome of its support to JFM in the late1990s and early 2000s, many independentobservers (including the Bank’s OperationsEvaluation Department, the Indian Institute ofForest Management, and others) concluded thatJFM had been very good for forests, producingdramatic improvements in forest protection butless clear benefits for forest-dependent peoples,including many tribal groups who live in andaround forests. The “care and share” approachof JFM was found to be placing moreresponsibilities on communities to protect forest,but there was limited evidence of the program’sability to enhance material and economic well-being at the local level, at least in the short term.

The Jharkhand Participatory Forest Managementproject was conceived as a “next generation”engagement in the forestry sector in India.Jharkhand State government officials and theircounterparts in the Bank recognized that forestfringe dwellers could and should play a moreactive role in management decision-making andforest product marketing. To achieve thisobjective, project preparation has focused ondeveloping a direct dialogue with local triballeaders to pursue a mutual understanding of

Peter JippSr. Forestry Specialist

South Asia Agriculture &Rural Development Unit and

Task Team LeaderJharkhand Participatory

Forest Management Project

obstacles to and opportunities for movingforward. Technical assistance, including the SocialAssessment training workshop outlined in thisreport, has served to establish a common set ofgoals and to define priorities for evaluating social,legal, marketing, and management planningaspects of the forest sector in Jharkhand.

Social Assessment in a World Bank investmentproject is a process for obtaining the views andpreferences of key stakeholders in order toimprove project design and encourage stakeholderparticipation in project implementation andmonitoring. It is primarily the responsibility ofthe Borrower (in this case, the Jharkhand Stategovernment), and is oriented to ensuring that theproject achieves its social development objectivesand contributes to equitable, sustainabledevelopment.

My collaborators and I look forward to taking theprinciples and priority issues identified throughthe Social Assessment training workshop into thefield, to develop concrete proposals to addressthese issues as the Social Assessment itself iscarried out. The active participation and genuineefforts made by all who attended the trainingcontributed immeasurably to the value andinsights contained in this document.

FOREWORD


iv


v

The workshop described in this report wasorganized and financed by the Government ofJharkhand State, India, with support andassistance from the World Bank. TheGovernment officials who provided guidancefor the workshop were A. K. Singh,Department of Forests; J. L. Srivastava,Principal Chief Conservator of Forests; andMukhtiar Singh, Forest Secretary. Support wasalso provided by government members of theproject team: A. K. Singh, R. K. Zutshi, andAshish Rawat.

The assistance from the World Bank wasorganized jointly by the central SocialDevelopment Department (SDV) and theSocial Development Unit of the South AsiaRegion’s Environment and Social DevelopmentDepartment (SASES), with inputs andcontributions from several other units. Theworkshop was also supported by the WorldBank Institute (WBI).

The World Bank team responsible for workshoporganization and coordination consisted of thefollowing individuals: Avik Ghosh, Sumir Lal,R. R. Mohan and Varalakshmi Vemuru from theNew Delhi office, and Reidar Kvam, ZlatinaLoudjeva, Hakon Nordang, and Barbara Verardofrom World Bank Headquarters in Washington.

Other Bank staff who were not present at theworkshop, but who have provided vital supportto its implementation and follow up, include:Peter Jipp, Task Team Leader of the JharkhandParticipatory Forest Management project;Adolfo Brizzi, Sector Director of the South AsiaAgriculture & Rural Development Unit(SASAR); Connie Bernard, Sector Director ofSASAR; and Warren Waters, then Acting SectorManager in SASES.

Thanks are due to Neeru Johri for all her helpwith organizing the workshop; she was a keyresource person. Thanks are also due to Dr.Alex Ekka, Mr. William Norman, and Mr. AjitTirkey from the Xavier Institute of SocialService (XISS) in Ranchi, Jharkhand, whowere instrumental in faci l i tat ing thefieldwork, selecting fieldwork sites, anddrafting a summary report of the workshopthat served as an input into theseproceedings.

The final workshop proceedings report waswritten by Hakon Nordang and Reidar Kvam,edited by Kenn Rapp, and prepared for desktoppublishing by Danielle Christophe. Helpfulcomments and corrections were provided byBarbara Verardo. Photographs, charts, andfigures were provided by Reidar Kvam.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


2


3

In early 2004, the Government of JharkhandState (“the Government”), India, incollaboration with central and regional SocialDevelopment units of the World Bank,organized a one-week workshop and trainingprogram on social analysis and socialassessment in the forestry sector. The workshop took place in Ranchi, Jharkhand,from February 3rd to 9th, 2004. It wasconducted as an input to the preparation ofthe proposed Jharkhand Participatory ForestManagement (PFM) project. The World Bankis supporting the development of this project,which will promote a broad, multi-sectoralapproach to poverty reduction in forest fringecommunities through a series of culturallyappropriate, community-driven activities. Boththe Government of Jharkhand and the WorldBank have emphasized the need to ensureaccess to services and benefits for poor andvulnerable groups as a result of the project.

To be successful, the proposed project willrequire active participation by all concernedstakeholders, and the workshop was envisionedas an important first opportunity to set theparticipatory process in motion.

A participatory and transparent process isparticularly important when dealing withnatural resources management in India.Historically, the relationship between the ForestDepartment and local communities has beencharacterized by mutual distrust and at timesopen conflict. The role of the ForestDepartment traditionally has been orientedtowards conservation of forest resources, andthere have been severe restrictions on how localcommunities can utilize the forest. Large partsof the forest belt of India have also beendeclared reserved and protected areas, leadingmany forest-dwelling people to be labeled asillegal encroachers. Because of its past supportfor projects in the forestry sector, the World

OVERVIEW

Introduction


4

Bank has been criticized for contributing toconservation but insufficiently to povertyreduction. However, the Indian Governmentis now attempting to balance the protection ofnatural resources with greater opportunity forparticipation and involvement by localcommunities, in particular through Joint ForestManagement (JFM) initiatives. The Jharkhandworkshop was important in that it explicitlydiscussed the rights and needs of localcommunities, and involved multiplestakeholders to address areas of actual andpotential conflict.

The social assessment process described hereshould not be seen in isolation. It is intendedto be fully coordinated, and where possibleintegrated, with other analyses and studiesundertaken for the project, includingenvironmental assessment and economicappraisal.

It is also relevant to note that the discussions andrecommendations related to the social assessmentprocess in this case are detailed andcomprehensive in part because of the complexand controversial nature of the proposed project.In other simpler settings, a much “lighter” versionof a social assessment may be more appropriate.The project-level social assessment is also likelyto be reduced in scope, complexity, and cost asmore macro-level social analysis is done onpolicies, reforms, institutions, and risks.i

The objectives of the workshop were:

1 To agree on a common framework for asocial assessment, which will be undertakenas part of project preparation.

2 To strengthen skills and capacity amongparticipants to contribute to the socialassessment.

3 To promote understanding and buildconsensus in a setting historicallycharacterized by tension and lack of trustamong different stakeholder groups,particularly between the Jharkhand ForestDepartment and tribal communities.

The social assessment for the proposed project isintended to help guide the design processes,implementation arrangements, and monitoringand evaluation mechanisms for the proposedproject. A high quality social assessment is animportant input to the World Bank’s appraisal ofthe project proposal.

The World Bank has recently developed a moreholistic and integrative approach to socialassessment. Earlier approaches tended to focusprimarily on potential negative project impacts

Objectives


5

related to involuntary resettlement and thepresence of tribal peoples, which are covered bythe World Bank’s social safeguard policies. Theemphasis is now on quality enhancement morebroadly, using social analysis to improveunderstanding of the socio-cultural, institutional,political, and historical contexts of a project. This,in turn, strengthens the likelihood that the projectwill be socially and environmentally sustainable,and contributes to the development priorities andobjectives of the Bank’s clients. The currentapproach is described in the Social AnalysisSourcebookii, which was made available to allworkshop participants in both English and Hindi.

The participants in the workshop includedsenior Government officials from the ForestDepartment and other departments; ForestDepartment staff at different levels; WorldBank staff; NGO staff; activists; tribal leadersand community members; academics; andmedia representatives. In total, nearly ninetyparticipants took part throughout the week.

A complete list of workshop participants isincluded in Annex 1.

The workshop consisted of alternatingpresentations, plenary discussions, group work(including a full day’s fieldwork), and practicalexercises. On the first day, participants weredivided into eight separate groups having tento twelve participants each. Each groupcontained a mix of government and non-government participants, including academics,NGO representatives, and community

members. Maintaining the same groupsthroughout the workshop helped improvecommunications and build a degree of trustamong people of different backgrounds andperspectives, providing the basis for futurecollaboration. The Workshop Agenda isincluded in Annex 2. While most of the participants understoodEnglish, some did not. Therefore, all sessionswere conducted in both English and Hindi,with translations provided by variousresource persons. The translation process

Participants

Format


6

had an unexpected, positive effect, in that itmade the sessions more interactive and hadmany of the participants discussing amongthemselves what the correct term or phrasefor translating various concepts would be.

Except for the fieldwork, all sessions wereconducted in a large conference room at theRanchi Ashoka Hotel. Meals, coffee and teafor breaks, and logistical support were allprovided by the hotel, where many of theparticipants and all of the resource personsstayed.

A one-day field visit to nearby villages wasorganized for the fifth day of the workshop,after the participants had discussed basicconcepts of social analysis and practical toolsand techniques for fieldwork. As with theother sessions and activities, the fieldworkwas carried out by the various groups thathad formed at the beginning of the workshop.

The workshop was organized with support fromthe World Bank Institute, which coordinatesthe World Bank’s learning and capacity buildingprograms. All participants received diplomasfrom the Institute after having completed thetraining.

As hinted earl ier, the workshop wasstructured around a series of trainingpresentations that aimed to exposeparticipants to the principles and practicesof social assessment, within the specificcontext of the Jharkhand PFM project. Butinsofar as it was meant to involverepresentatives of stakeholder groups havingdifferent needs and interests, it also provided

numerous opportunities for workshopparticipants to comment on and respond tothe information being presented. Thisincluded a f ield-based data gatheringexperience, which allowed participants toapply what they were learning about socialassessment in a real-life setting.

The various comments, questions, andrecommendations that emerged in the courseof the week can be grouped under sevengeneral headings. These are provided below,together with a summary of the findingsassociated with each of them:

n Legal and institutional issues: While theproject is taking JFM as a starting point, itneeds to incorporate a more inclusive legal andinstitutional framework, one that allows forest-dependent communities to gain managementcontrol over their natural resources. This willrequire project authorities to coordinateeffectively among institutions operating atvarious levels, and clarify the duties andaccountabilities of more traditionally powerfulstakeholders—such as the Jharkhand ForestDepartment—in relation to poor andvulnerable groups.

n Involving tribal groups: Several participantsspoke of the need to ensure the participationof tribal people (also known as adivasis) in away that both responds to their livelihood needsand respects their traditional culture andknowledge.

n Balancing conservation and livelihoods:There was general agreement that, whiledifficult, this is the impetus for most all projectactivities. Some participants suggested severalways of alleviating poverty through moreeffective forest asset management and

Main Findings


7

generation, including the exploitation of non-timber forest products such as medicinal plants;common species such as sal trees; and activitiessuch as dairying, piggery, and poultry breeding.Other participants put more emphasis on thephysical and social infrastructure needed forlocal development.

n Capacity building needs: There was agreementthat the proposed project cannot succeedunless stakeholder capacity is enhancedthrough sensitivity training for ForestDepartment members, and village-levelcapacity building in such areas as naturalresources management micro-planning,communications and consensus-building skills,and community organizing.

n Information dissemination needs: Participantscalled for communications founded ontransparency and open access to informationrelating both to the Bank-sponsored project andto Government-sponsored opportunities forlocal development generally.

n Pilot activities: Participants agreed that pilotscan be a good way to test out innovativeapproaches before they are officiallyincorporated into the project, provided suchpilots are planned with community inputs andcarried out in a participatory fashion.

n Overall design issues, including for socialassessment: Many participants argued for aproject design that was beneficiary-oriented inthe dual sense—generating clear benefits forpoor and vulnerable groups, while at the sametime avoiding adverse impacts on localpopulations. Otherwise, participants favoreda social assessment process founded on a clearbaseline, local knowledge by the selectedresearchers, and continued dialogue.

The Jharkhand workshop should not be seenas a substitute for systematic consultationprocesses. It did not involve the full range ofactors in the public, private, and civil sectorsthat are likely to be involved in the JharkhandPFM project. But it did provide a goodunderstanding of who the main stakeholdersare, and what concerns and priorities they have.It also served to build a platform for addressingissues such as social diversity and gender,livelihoods, and social risk.

The challenges in the case of Jharkhand aresubstantial. Many NGOs and activists remaindeeply skeptical of the development agendapromoted by the World Bank. In April 2004, anumber of them met in the village of Chalkhad,Jharkhand to discuss the theme “Oppose WorldBank and Save Forests.” Local groups and triballeaders have stated that “the World Bankprogramme, rather than empowering the forestcommunities with ownership and managementrights, aims to deprive them and economically,

Challenges and Opportunities


8

socially and culturally alienate them from theforests.”iii This perception is not uncommon,and while participants in the Bank workshop—including tribal leaders and NGO activists—expressed great support for the approach taken,they also stressed the need for conscientiousfollow up, in order to turn the opinions andideas discussed at the workshop into concreteactions for the benefit of local communities.

Provided this follow up happens, and the projectstays on the right track, it is expected that theJharkhand workshop and the activities thatfollow from it will serve to guide the WorldBank and the Government of India indeveloping other projects in the forestry sectorwhich combine attention to sustainable naturalresources management and livelihoodsenhancement for poor and vulnerable groups.


9

The inaugural session was opened by the thenMinister of Forestry for Jharkhand, withparticipation from several other Governmentofficials and dignitaries. It got broad and positivepress coverage, and served to demonstrate theGovernment’s commitment to a developmentprocess that will address the needs of poor andvulnerable people in the context of sustainablenatural resources management.

After introductory remarks by workshoporganizers, participants gathered in groups anddiscussed their expectations for the workshop. Each participant then took pen to colored cardsand wrote in either English or Hindi the topicss/he felt were most important to cover. Thecomments that came out of this exercise can begrouped as follows, with topics listed from highestto lowest importance based on the number ofmentions:

n How to ensure sustainable livelihoods usinglocal resources, addressing issues of povertyreduction.

n How forests can benefit people, and howdisadvantaged groups can get better access toresources and opportunities.

n How to understand and agree on concepts andprocesses such as participation, NGOinvolvement, transparency, focusing onpeople’s needs, and targeting.

n How the social assessment process works.

n How to address social diversity and conflict.

WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGSInaugural Session andParticipants’ Expectations

n How to reconcile tribal rights, culturallyappropriate development, and sustainableresource use and conservation.

n How to understand better the motives and roleof the World Bank.

The main technical sessions were led by R. R.Mohan, Social Development Specialist, SASESand Reidar Kvam, Coordinator of the SocialAnalysis Unit, SDV of the World Bank. Inputsand facilitation support were provided by BarbaraVerardo, SASRD, Sumir Lal, SAREX,Varalakshmi Vemuru, SASES, and HakonNordang and Zlatina Loudjeva, SDV, also of theWorld Bank.

1. Introduction to Social AssessmentThe introduction to social assessment on the firstday of the workshop went over the conceptual

Technical Sessions


10

This represents a more holistic and integrativeapproach to social assessment than that appliedin the past. While the standards andrequirements in the Bank’s social safeguardsremain essential and mandatory in Bank-supported projects, the broader approachfollowed here ensures not only that the focusis on adverse impacts and mitigation, but thatthe “do no harm” policies fit within a largerconcern for producing opportunities andbenefits for targeted populations.

The social assessment process for the JharkhandPFM project is of particular importance giventhe proposed project’s dual purpose ofcontributing positively to sustainable forestmanagement and reducing poverty in a way thatshares benefits with local communities. Therehas so far been little consensus in Jharkhand, orin India more generally, on how to balanceconservation needs with rights to land andresources for adivasis and other poor people. Indeed, forest management in Jharkhand hasbeen historically characterized by tension andconflict between the Forest Department andtribal communities. Against such a backdrop, asocial assessment process that can provide thespaces and places for consensus-building,collaboration, and participation is key for theequitable sharing of benefits via the proposedproject. This in turn can help ensure the project’ssocial and environmental sustainability, andcreate new models for forest management inJharkhand and other Indian states.

The World Bank’s framework for social analysisgrounds the social assessment process in:

n A detailed analysis of the broader socialcontext, focusing on social diversity andgender dynamics and on socio-cultural,political, and historical factors

framework and approach which the rest of theworkshop addressed in greater detail, with anemphasis on the specifics of forest managementin Jharkhand.

PresentationSocial assessment is the instrument which theBorrower uses to mainstream socialdevelopment objectives—inclusion, cohesion,and accountability iv—into World Bank-supported investment projects, by (i) analyzingsocial opportunities, constraints, likely impacts,and social risks relevant to a project, and (ii)soliciting stakeholder views and participationin the design, implementation, and monitoringand evaluation of projects. A social assessmentis used to channel project benefits to the poorand vulnerable in ways which: ensure accessof the poor to markets and public services;increase the social and economic assets andcapabilities of people, especially the poor andvulnerable; enhance the accountability ofinstitutions to the poor; address social tensionsand conflict; mitigate potential adverse impactswhich the project may cause; and build aframework for dialogue and consensus-buildingamong stakeholders on development priorities.


11

n An analysis of relevant institutions, rules,and behavior, which consists of lookingat formal and informal institutions that arelikely to affect the project and at informalrules and behaviors

n An analysis of relevant stakeholders, whichinvolves identifying and describing thecharacteristics of people and groups whoaffect or are affected by the project, and whotherefore have an interest in and some degreeof influence over the project’s outcome

n A framework for participation, providing themechanisms for the various stakeholders toparticipate in the project, both during thedesign and implementation stages. Theparticipation process should particularly enablelikely beneficiaries and directly affectedpopulations to become actively involved, andmake the necessary arrangements so that poorand vulnerable groups are able to participatein a meaningful way

n An analysis of issues related to social risksand vulnerability, to ensure that the projectdoes not affect people negatively, and thatpotential social risks of weak governancestructures, elite domination, or other risksto successful outcomes are addressed(including via the Bank’s social safeguardpolicies)

Ultimately, the social assessment processintends to improve project design, involve theconcerned stakeholders, help build consensusand mutual understanding on developmentpriorities, and strengthen equity in theallocation of benefits to the poor andmarginalized. The process also aims to providesocially relevant benchmarks and indicators forcomparison, monitoring, and evaluation.

Comments and SuggestionsIn a general discussion, it was suggested thatthe Jharkhand project’s social assessment—and,by extension, the workshop itself—would needto address a range of social issues, including:

n How best to balance natural resourcesmanagement concerns with povertyreduction and improved livelihoods

n How to enhance livelihood opportunities in asustainable manner, through the exploitationof forest products and other means

n Limited physical and organizationalinfrastructure for making schemes andservices work well for the poor

n Weak traditions and capacity among stateinstitutions, as well as among communities,for participatory forestry management

n Issues of rights and entitlements, access,and encroachments for local communitiesand especially for tribal groups

n Conflicting interests and a lack of cohesionamong concerned stakeholders


12

2. Social Diversity and GenderThis session introduced concepts andframeworks for understanding the underlyingsocial reality and context within whichinvestment projects and other developmentinterventions take place.

PresentationAll societies are composed of diverse socialgroups that may be distinguished and understoodaccording to gender, ethnicity, religion, class, age,and culture, as well as to “spatial” (geographic)and economic characteristics. These socialcategories are important to social analysts for thesimple reason that they are important to the peoplewho use them to define themselves and theirneighbors. They also frequently form the basisof vested interests, provoke or restrain action,and determine access to opportunity. As such,they are inherently contestable and reflect thepower relations that constitute political life.

It is especially important to consider the role oftribal groups. Adivasis comprise an

overwhelmingly large proportion of the forest-dependent population in Jharkhand.v They havea very strong cultural and economic affinity withforests, claiming the forests to be “the sourcesof [their] life and livelihood—the base of [their]society and culture.”vi Despite this, however,tribals have in the past often been marginalizedand excluded from access to forest resources anddecision-making processes related to forestmanagement. Indeed, they have often beendisplaced from their traditional territories andforest resource bases.

Gender is a frequently neglected dimension ofsocial diversity that is also of great importanceto natural resources and forest management. The World Bank’s framework for social analysisinvolves gender analysis as an explicit elementin the overall inquiry. Gender refers to thesocially constructed identities, roles, rights, andresponsibilities of women and men. It has tobe seen as part of the broader social context, aset of relations between women and men thatcross-cuts as well as interacts with other socialidentities. Gender matters because it relatesto the social relations and power balancebetween women and men, with greatimplications for how access and benefits relatedto forest resources and products aredistributed. Women and men tend to relate toforests, forest resources, and forestmanagement in different ways. Women’s workand economic roles are often less valued thanmen’s, and often less public. Women are alsofrequently under-represented in governance anddecision-making processes. And in terms ofland and property rights, women are oftenlegally discriminated against. These are issuesthat should be addressed in ensuring thatwomen participate fully in forest management,alongside men, and have proper access toproject benefits and opportunities.

BOX 1: Tribal Groups in Jharkhand: Questions for Consideration

n What are the characteristics of tribalgroups?

n How do they relate to non-tribals?

n How do they traditionally use forest resources?

n How are land rights and access toresources organized?

n How do tribals organize themselveslocally?

- Who makes decisions?

- How are different groups represented?


13

Comments and SuggestionsA facilitated discussion took place on the socialcontext within which forestry managementcurrently takes place in Jharkhand, and how socialdiversity and gender dimensions often determineaccess to resources, particularly forest resources,service delivery, and development schemes.

Many adivasi areas have their own traditional tribalgovernance structures, based on a two-tieredsystem that encourages decision-making throughconsensus. The system functions well in manyparts of Jharkhand, especially in traditionalkhuntkatti villages, although in other less“homogenous” areas, the system has brokendown.vii Where it works, people are activelyinvolved in local forest protection andmanagement. Many participants highlighted theimportance for the project to try to strengthenthese institutions, or at a minimum not toundermine them.

In spite of the importance of building on existinglocal institutions, it is important not toromanticize them or assume that they are fullyegalitarian. Indeed, some participants noted thattraditional tribal institutions do not always accordadequate rights to participation and decision-making by women.

It was noted that the social assessment shouldanalyze the potential impact of the project onother stakeholders, including head loaders,cultivators, people dependent on grazing lands,and other forest-dependent people, andrecommend ways in which they too can benefitfrom the project. Particular attention should befocused on viable livelihood strategies for poorand marginalized groups living in forest fringeareas. For many landless people and marginalfarmers, migration often becomes a livelihoodstrategy. Migration, however, poses particular

BOX 2: Gender and Forestry: Questions for Consideration

n What are the development needs of menand women?

n Activities

- Who carries out what tasks in thehousehold?

- What is the gender division of labor?

n Resources and constraints

- Who has access to and control ofproductive resources?

n Access and opportunity

- How does access to extension servicesand other benefits differ between men andwomen?

- What needs and opportunities exist forincreasing women’s access to and controlof benefits?

- What are the appropriate types ofintervention?

- How can we monitor activities and resultsfrom a gender perspective?


14

challenges which the social assessment shouldtake into consideration by examining opportunitiesfor enhancing livelihood opportunities for migrantlaborers; the effects of migration on women andfamilies in the villages; and the implications ofmigration for the delivery of services such ashealth and education.

Some suggested that attention should also begiven to the nature of so-called “encroachments”in the project context, and particularly to howsuch encroachments tend to differ depending onsocio-economic status (i.e. poor and vulnerablegroups vs. opportunistic encroachments bywealthier, more powerful groups), traditionaltenure rights, and other issues. Another thing thatwas mentioned in this regard is the importance

of shifting cultivation among poor forest dwellersand people in forest fringe areas. 3. Institutions and StakeholdersThis session focused on the ways in which thesocial context, described in the previoussession, interacts with the institutional settingof a project. It also allowed for a clearerdefinition of the individuals and groups thathave “something at stake” in the way theproposed project is designed and implemented.

PresentationInstitutional analysis is used to understand therelationship between organizations andinstitutions, that is, between the formal andinformal structures that people belong to, andthe formal and informal rules that govern theirinteractions. Many development interventions,including projects, depend for theirimplementation on institutional and behavioralchange. Understanding how institutions, rules,and behaviors relevant to forest managementin Jharkhand function is therefore of criticalimportance for the success of the proposedproject.

The session continued with a lecture on theconcept of stakeholders and the tools ofstakeholder mapping and analysis. Stakeholderscan be defined as organizations, groups, orindividuals who have interests—something atstake—in a project’s outcome. They may alsohave some degree of influence over theproject. Stakeholders thus include both thosewho can affect and those who are affected by aproject (i.e. the project’s “winners and losers”).

In mapping and analyzing the differentstakeholder groups relevant to a project, it isuseful to focus on three dimensions of eachstakeholder:

n Defining characteristics, including socialdimensions, organizational strength andcapacity, formal or informal power andauthority, etc.

n An assessment of the stakes or interests inthe project, and the stakeholder’s potentialsupport or opposition to the project. Thismay include degree of commitment to thestatus quo; openness to change; and anassessment of whether the proposed project


15

is aligned with the interests of the concernedstakeholders

n An assessment of the degree of influence thestakeholder group has, and whether potentialopposition from the stakeholder (individuallyor in concert with other stakeholder groups)constitutes a high, substantial, medium, orlow risk to expected project outcomes

To emphasize the value of understanding thedifferent needs, concerns, and potentialinfluence of different stakeholders, as well asto provide an example of a stakeholder mappingand analysis, a case study on a stakeholderanalysis of land reform in Zambia waspresented.viii

Comments and SuggestionsThe discussion on institutions, rules, andbehaviors raised a number of questions thatcommentators felt the social assessmentprocess needs to address:

n Do current reporting and incentive structureswithin the different levels of the JharkhandForest Department (policy makers;implementing agency staff; forest guards)provide opportunities for moving away from atop-down “policing” mode and towards acollaboration and facilitation mode thatpromotes community participation and localaccess to, and shared ownership of, forestresources?

n Do current inter-departmental coordinationmechanisms and incentive structures provideopportunities for collaboration between theForest Department and other relevantDepartments or agencies in providing economicalternatives and livelihoods opportunities toforest-dependent communities?

n Are there formal Joint Forest Managementcommittees in place in certain communitieswhich ensure environmentally and sociallysustainable use of forest resources? Are thereany other formal organizations in place, suchas local panchayats, which perform a similarfunction? Are there in other communities othertribal, “traditional,” or informal systems ofgovernance, decision-making, and conflictresolution in place which facilitateenvironmentally and socially sustainable use offorest resources? How do these differentinstitutional mechanisms and structurescurrently interrelate with one another? Whatopportunities are there for the project to drawon and integrate these different institutional andorganizational approaches to managing forests?

n What is the likelihood that encroachmentswill continue through collusion betweenGovernment officials and the encroachers?

n What are the opportunities for poor peopleto access markets for their various produceand products, including non-timber forestproducts (NTFPs)? How should the projectprovide marketing and infrastructureassistance to help the poor sell theirproducts?


16

BOX 3: Different Levels of Participation

1. None- Decisions are taken at upper levels;

people at lower levels are not informed

2. Information sharing- One-way communication: people are told

about what is going to happen

3. Consultation- Two-way communication: people’s views

are listened to, but not necessarily takeninto consideration

4. Participation- People participate in different ways, and

their views are taken into consideration

5. Empowerment- Decision-making authority is transferred

or shared

n What roles do NGOs or CBOs currently playin different forest-dependent communities inJharkhand?

n The proposed project is supposed to includepreparation and implementation of locallydeveloped micro-plans. How realistic is this?What is the local capacity to develop suchplans? Who would provide inputs to theseplans, and who would make the approvaldecisions? How transparent is such decision-making likely to be?

n How do social identities and roles interact withthese institutions, rules, and behaviors? How dosuch institutions and rules function in, from a tribalperspective, more homogenous as opposed tomore heterogeneous communities? Are the needs,concerns, and participation of women and othermarginalized groups, such as Scheduled Castes andScheduled Tribes, ensured? What is the risk ofpoor and marginalized people being pressured bymore powerful groups in the community, or byoutsiders, to relinquish their access to forestlandsor other resources?

Workshop participants then engaged in a seriesof group-work exercises. In one of these, theyused a stakeholder analysis matrix to identify thekey stakeholders in the proposed project, theirrespective interests or stakes in the project, andthe level of their influence. A summary of theinitial stakeholder analysis conducted by theworkshop participants is included in Table 1.

4. Consultation and ParticipationThis session discussed the role and importanceof providing meaningful spaces and places forkey stakeholders to participate in project designand planning, implementation, and monitoring andevaluation, in order to take full advantage of theopportunities created by the project.

PresentationBased on the stakeholder analysis, a consultationand participation framework should be developedas part of the social assessment process. In Box3, different levels of participation are set out,ranging from cases where people are neitherinformed about nor have a say in decisions thataffect them, to cases where the people are agentsof their own development, empowered to takeor share authority over decision-making.

While certain projects, or different stages in aproject, lend themselves to greater participationthan others, to ensure equity and socialsustainability in projects, the emphasis should beon higher rather than lower levels of participation.This tends particularly to be the case in projectswith high risk and high complexity, such asJharkhand PFM. Indeed, given the history oftensions among the different stakeholders inJharkhand, effective strategies for creating a moretrusting, participatory project setting, in which


17

adivasis and other forest-dependent people feelthey have a full stake in the outcomes of theproject, are necessary for its success.

When looking at participation as a dimension ofa social assessment, one should first examine thedegree to which social groups affected by a projectcan participate in the opportunities created by theproject. This will include an assessment of theequity of opportunity of different groups, in termsof their assets and capabilities, to share in projectbenefits. Drawing on this, the social assessment

should outline strategies for involvingstakeholders as participants, building on existingmodes and structures of participation whereappropriate, and suggesting new incentives andmechanisms to include stakeholders excludedfrom existing frameworks. In designing theseincentives and mechanisms, several basicquestions need to be addressed:

n Which stakeholders will be hired to work in theproject as employees, contractors, laborers,managers, quality control inspectors, and so on?

TABLE 1: Stakeholders Summary, Jharkhand Participatory Forest Management Project


18

n Who among the stakeholders will control anddistribute the goods, services, and work thatthe project offers?

n How are those controlling the flow ofresources held accountable? If theyundermine the project objectives or fail intheir responsibilities, can they be removed?If so, through what grievance mechanisms?

n Who will control and disseminateinformation, measure performance, monitorcompliance, and determine success?

n Can training and capacity-building enhancethe performance of stakeholders in any ofthe above areas?

Finally, the social assessment needs to accountand plan for the costs of participation. Projectparticipation has various costs: in time away fromwork; in money for transportation, lodging, andfood; in the energy participants expend in training,studying, and negotiating to reach agreements. There are “social” costs to participation as well. Women may not feel free to talk in the presenceof men; less educated people may be intimidated

by the presence of more educated people; citizensmay fear criticizing or even disagreeing openlywith authorities. In some cultural contexts it isnot appropriate for young people to speak whenin the presence of older people, or for junior staffto speak when their superiors are present.

This analysis should provide the basis for thedevelopment of an overall consultation andparticipation framework, which sets out theapproach and process used to integrate keystakeholder groups. Consultation andparticipation would not be one-off event in theproposed project, but a process that continuesthroughout its life span. And the consultationand participation framework developed for thisproject would find applications beyond it, in otherforest management processes in India.

5. Empowerment and Social AccountabilityThe previous sessions focused mainly onanalytical concepts of use in mapping out anddescribing the social context, stakeholders, andinstitutions relevant to the project. Followingon these discussions, this session explored thedynamic interplay among the various actorsand structures associated with forestrymanagement in Jharkhand. It did so, however,in light of the role of social accountability andempowerment in the “service deliveryproblem,” which boils down to how to makepublic services work for poor people.ix

PresentationIndia has a policy and legal framework, enshrinedin its Constitution, which is strongly pro-poor. Itrecognizes the rights of marginal and vulnerablegroups and provides guaranteed representationof women in local legislative bodies. Both thecentral government and the states have developednumerous schemes and development programsbenefiting poor groups. Yet much can still be done


19

to make these policies, programs, and servicespolicies more effective. Challenges remain whenit comes to ensuring quality, reliability,effectiveness, and equity in public service delivery.

Accountability, as defined in this workshop, is theability to call public officials, private employers,or service providers to account, requiring thatthey be answerable for their policies, actions, anduse of funds.x Accountability is social when itdeals with the accountability of agents towardssociety as a whole, and is exacted by multiplestakeholders. Accountability is public wheninstead of being an internal process, it istransparent and in the public domain. Social andpublic accountability mechanisms, then, refer tothe range of methods, tools, and choices thatensure greater accounting to citizens and societyas a whole for public actions and outcomes. Inthe case of local communities, social groups, andrelationships, the focus is on inclusive and pro-poor institutions developed through partnershipsand mutual accountability, as well as on equity inaccess to services and development opportunities.

Closely related to social and public accountabilityis the concept of empowerment. This may bedefined as the process of enhancing the capacityof individuals or groups to make choices and totransform those choices into desired actions andoutcomes. Central to this process are actionswhich both build individual and collective assets,and improve the efficiency and fairness of theorganizational and institutional context whichgoverns the use of these assets.xi Strategies forempowering poor and marginalized peopleinclude information sharing, inclusion andparticipation, accountability, and organizationalcapacity building. Empowerment is as muchabout institutional reform as it is about individualbenefits—as much about providing an enablingframework at the macro and meso levels as it is

about investing in the assets and capabilities ofpoor people at the micro level.

To help contextualize the presentation, the sessioncontinued with two case studies from the RuralWomen’s Development and Empowerment(“Swa-Shakti”) project in India, presented in thecase of Jharkhand by Himani Pande, ProjectDirector, and in the case of Bihar by Irina Sinha,Project Director. A general overview of theproject was given by Varalakshmi Vemuru,project Task Team Leader from the World Bank. Both social accountability and empowerment arekey to making services work for poor people. Thisinterplay is also at the very heart of participatoryforest management. Moving from a policingapproach to forest management towards aregulation and coordination approach that enablescommunity participation would represent anadvance in terms of providing more transparentmechanisms for managerial decision-making. Inaddition to creating spaces for the poor toparticipate, empowerment depends on theexpansion of livelihood opportunities through,among other things, the removal of market


20

distortions, as well as the provision of access toeconomic opportunities outside those offered byforests and the Forest Department—includingrational use of NTFPs, marketing of herbal/traditional medicines, employment, micro-finance, etc.

Comments and SuggestionsThe discussion that followed focused on waysin which both communities and institutionsresponsible for service delivery in the case ofthe Jharkhand PFM project can be assisted inworking together more effectively. To enhanceresponsiveness of policymakers and service-providers to the poor, through both “voice” and“service” relationships, respectively, a two-pronged approach was discussed: from thesupply side, social and public accountabilityneeds to be raised and incorporated intogovernment policies and practices; and from thedemand side, there is a need to empower thepoor and marginalized to enable them to holdpolicymakers and service providers to account.

To conclude the session, each group ofparticipants was asked to pick two importantstakeholder groups for the proposed project whohave a relationship (e.g. based on citizens’ voice,service delivery, bureaucratic functions, etc). Through role-playing excercises each grouppresented the service-based or other relationshipsbetween the two stakeholder groups, their mainmeans of interaction, and the potential forimproved relations of public and socialaccountability between them. This role play wasparticularly popular with the participants, anddemonstrated vividly how roles and actions ofdifferent stakeholders were perceived.

6. Social Risks and SafeguardsAs noted previously during the workshop, theproposed project is considered controversial,and involves substantial or high risks. Thesocial assessment process, therefore, has toexplicitly address these risks, and provideguidance for how they can be mitigated throughproper project management and consensus-building mechanisms. That was the focus ofthis session.

PresentationThe session began with a presentation by SimonOraon, a tribal leader from Bero, Jharkhand. Hedescribed how his village had managed topreserve its forests while providing livelihoodopportunities for its inhabitants through atraditional system of cooperation, governance,and dispute resolution. Against the odds, a large,well-preserved tract of forest still exists in thevillage, one that has been subject to sustainableuse by the people.

The presentation shed light on a case where notonly had environmental and social risks beenmitigated, but social and economic opportunitieshad been created through appropriate forest and


21

risk management mechanisms that took intoaccount the concerns of the poor. As such, itintroduced the main topics of discussion of thesession: social risk analysis, risk management, andconsensus-building. The social assessment for the Jharkhand PFMproject needs to focus on two kinds of risks: (i)potential risks to the project’s achieving itsdevelopment objectives, i.e. through stakeholderopposition, or inadequate incentives or

institutional mechanisms;xii and (ii) risks emanatingfrom the project, in terms of possible adverseimpacts on poor and vulnerable groups, includingtribal populations. The risks covered by the WorldBank’s social safeguard policies on involuntaryresettlement and indigenous and tribal peoples(see below) fall into this second category. Foreach type of risk, the risk analysis should aim toidentify:

n Who are the “winners” and “losers”?

FIGURE 1: Social Risk Analysis


22

n How do poor and vulnerable people cope withrisk?

n What actions can be taken to avoid, reduce, ormitigate risks?

Once the risks have been identified, the analysisshould also assess both the probability andimportance of all of the risks using the matrixin Figure 1(previous page).

An assessment of vulnerability and social risks,especially in view of the complexity of theproject’s social context, should also concludewith a consideration of alternative projectdesigns or approaches. If the social risks aredeemed to be too high, this should also includethe option of postponing the proposed projectuntil appropriate risk management mechanismshave been identified, or the risks have otherwisebeen mitigated. An important dimension ofsuch an assessment, however, is also to considerthe social risks related to not pursuing the project.

The presentation went on to focus on twoparticular operational policies that the World Bankhas in place to safeguard individuals or groupsthat may be negatively affected by a project:

n Operational Policy 4.12 on InvoluntaryResettlement

n Operational Directive 4.20 on IndigenousPeoples

The Jharkhand PFM project triggers both ofthese safeguard policies. This implies a seriesof considerations that need to be taken intoaccount both the Government of Jharkhandand its World Bank counterparts (see Box 4).The project involves poor adivasi groups thatin the past have been displaced from their

traditional territory and resource base. Thesocial assessment process needs to properlyaddress this fact, and provide guidance for howthe project can benefit the local communitiesin a manner that is not only oriented towardslivelihoods improvement and environmentallysustainable development, but also culturallyappropriate and built on informed participationby the tribal communities affected.

At the end of a general discussion of potentialrisks to the project, Sumir Lal of SAREX, WorldBank presented a case study on the politicaleconomy of power sector restructuring in India. Though focused on a sector other than forestry,

BOX 4: Safeguard Policies andForestry Projects

OD 4.20: Indigenous Peoplesn Objectives: Indigenous peoples

- Are afforded respect for their culturaluniqueness in the development process

- Do not suffer adverse impacts- Receive culturally compatible social and

economic benefitsn Triggers:

- Do indigenous peoples live in the projectarea?

- Are they project beneficiaries?- Could the project adversely affect them?

n Problem issues- Identification of indigenous peoples- Adequacy of consultations- “Prior, informed consent”- Incorporating IP issues in project design

OP 4.12: Involuntary Resettlementn Largely community impactsn Focus on restriction of accessn Avoid direct displacement where possiblen Consider wider impacts

- Access roads- Schools- Health services

n Identify unit of impact, consultation, benefits- Households- Community

n Identify and document livelihood opportunities


23

the case study called due attention to theimportance of understanding the interests,concerns, and potential influence of the “winnersand losers” of a project. So-called potential“losers” are very likely to attempt to stall areform process or project implementation, or tootherwise capture project benefits, unless theirconcerns and interests are addressed in thecourse of project design and implementation.

Comments and SuggestionsThe presentation on the potential risks to theproject raised a number of issues of greatrelevance to forest management in Jharkhand, andled to a structured discussion around the needfor the social assessment to carefully designmechanisms for risk management, consensusbuilding, and dialogue promotion among thedifferent stakeholders involved in the project. Balancing Conflicting Views and Interests: Thesocial context of the proposed project consistsof groups having very different concerns andinterests, particularly with regards to the dualgoals of forestry conservation and povertyreduction. Historically, these divergent viewshave resulted in tension and mutual distrustamong different stakeholder groups—andparticularly between the Forest Departmentand tribal communities. The presence ofmilitant “Naxalite” groups (the People’s WarGroup and the Maoist Communist Centre) inseveral adivasi areas further complicatesmatters. xiii These conflicting views andinterests therefore constitute a very high riskto the project.

It is crucial to find ways to channel the divergentinterests of the different stakeholders through theconsultation and participation framework. Thisshould build consensus around the objectives ofthe project, and enable support for and ownership

of its outcomes. However, it is unlikely that thisprocess will come out to the satisfaction of allinterest groups. Particular emphasis shouldtherefore be put on demonstrating transparencyin decision-making processes, and on providingregular feedback from the consultations anddiscussions held. Dispute-resolution andgrievance-redress mechanisms at different levelsshould also be considered, to ensure that adequateinstitutional elements are in place to allow peopleto express disagreements and opinions, voiceconcerns or complaints, and, generally, be heard. Protecting the Rights of the Poor and Marginalized:While it is important to account for the risksresulting from stakeholders’ divergent interestsand concerns, the social assessment processshould also look at the need to protect the rightsof the poor and marginalized. That is, theprocess should address the risk that the securityand well-being of the poor are compromisedwhen the project attends to the interests ofother, more powerful stakeholder groups. Thisapplies to a range of actions and situations,


24

from safeguarding the poor from the adverseeffects of involuntary displacement to ensuringthe well-being of tribal groups.

Institutional Capacity and Incentives: The questionof institutional capacity and incentives raisedin a previous discussion was also found to berelevant to the discussion of risks to the project.The focus here was on the Forest Department,which has languished under a hiring freeze foralmost 20 years, and has had a modus operandiof a top-down policing organization. Yet forthe purposes of the proposed project, ForestDepartment staff will be expected to facilitatecommunity participation and local access toresources. While in many areas collaborationis taking place between the Department andvillage communities, with many positivechanges reported, the social assessment processneeds to make a realistic assessment of thepotential risks to the project of an institutionalsetup in which the Forest Department will playa leading role.

The rest of the risks discussion focused on thepotential risks from the project, including theavoidance or mitigation of adverse impacts. The

proposed project is expected to bring benefits tolocal communities and individuals, as mentionedearlier. However, there is still a possibility thatproject activities will adversely affect someindividuals or groups. Working in their groups,the participants were asked to identify potentialrisks caused by the project, and to suggest waysto manage these risks.

7. Methods and Tools for Social AssessmentSocial scientists use a broad array of data-gatheringand analytical tools and methods, both qualitativeand quantitative, during the social assessmentprocess. This session briefly described keymethodological principles, qualitative andquantitative tools, and participatory techniquesthat are at the disposal of the analyst wishing toput an investment project on the path to socialsustainability.

PresentationThere are a number of field-based methods fordata collection and analysis that are likely to beused in preparing the Jharkhand PFM project.These include the following:

n Review of secondary material

n Key informant interviews

n Direct observation of processes and behavior

n Participant observation of processes andbehavior

n Diagramming

n Community mapping

n Production / livelihood diagramming

n Gender analysis


25

n Socio-economic surveys

n Full census

n Community information and consensus-building

n Project design techniques: Needs assessmentand identification of risks

Given the emphasis on social assessment as aprocess in which data on stakeholder views isgathered in a participatory manner, it is littlesurprise that it should have a more qualitativebent than many other assessments and analysesconducted during the preparation of a forestrysector project. Box 5 (see next page)

FIGURE 2: Social Assessment in the Project Cycle

summarizes some of the core principlesinvolved in doing this kind of research.

8. Social Assessment and the Project CycleThe last of the technical sessions focused onthe operational entry points for socialassessment in the World Bank project cycle (seethe diagram in Figure 2), providing insights onhow to operationalize the concepts andanalytical tools and methods discussed duringthe previous days. Specific attention was givento explaining the roles and responsibilities ofthe Borrower at the various stages of the cycle,the entry points for meaningful consultationsand stakeholder participation, the importanceof developing a suitable implementation plan(one containing appropriate action plans,


26

budgets, implementation arrangements andresponsibilities, monitoring and evaluationsystems, etc.), and outlining a generic terms ofreference for social assessment.

PresentationA two-stage approach to conducting socialassessment for this project was recommended. An initial process, a rapid social assessment(RSA), should take stock of existinginformation and provide a summary reportsetting out a preliminary problem analysis,stakeholder analysis, proposed participationframework and communication strategy, andrisk analysis, including a proposal fortransparent consensus-building and dispute-resolution procedures. The RSA should alsoprovide information for identifying gaps anddrawing up a more detailed terms of referenceand a refined methodology for the secondphase. This should be informed by feedbackreceived at a stakeholder workshop organizedto share the findings of the RSA summaryreport.

Following the RSA there would be a detaileddesign phase, when the necessary studies anddata collection should be undertaken, throughongoing consultations and the participation ofkey stakeholders. The detailed design of thissecond stage should be informed by thelearning from the RSA. Specific action plansshould be drawn up, including a framework forpreparing Indigenous Peoples DevelopmentPlans (if required), and specific inputs toimplementation mechanisms should beproduced. This should include establishingmonitoring and evaluation arrangements toprovide ongoing documentation, learning, andthe necessary adjustments during projectimplementation. The findings of this secondstage should also be shared at a stakeholder

BOX 5: Key Principles ofQualitative Research

n Reliability: The need for careful design- Reduction of bias, improved trustworthiness

of data- Consistency; the same questions are asked

in the same way of all respondents

n Validity: Asking the right questions- Measures and indicators reflect and inform

relevant issues and hypotheses

n Triangulation: Studying the issue from differentperspectives and data sources- Different methods and tools- Cross-checking of information

n Multiple indicators: Studying complex issues- The need for multiple indicators in defining

empowerment, for example


27

workshop, and the workshop outcomesincorporated into the final recommendationsfor project design.

Days five and six of the workshop were dedicatedto fieldwork and post-fieldwork analysis andpresentations. Here the eight participant groupswere given the opportunity to apply the concepts,tools, and methods of social assessment in a realsetting. Each group visited one of the followingeight villages situated in the vicinity of Ranchi,Jharkhand: Chand, Dundun, Kutchu, Ramdaga,Sadma, Semra, Siladon, and Tilaksuti.

Each group was asked to conduct a village-specific rapid social assessment, preparing (a)a summary of the key social issues (socialdiversity and gender, social organization andinstitutional structures, stakeholders andparticipation processes, potential risks and howto avoid them); (b) recommendations for aproject participation framework; (c)recommendations for pilots and operationalapproaches (based on community needs); and(d) a summary of suggested priorities and nextsteps. The groups were then asked to presenton the results of their RSAs once they wereback together in the workshop.

The post-fieldwork analysis and presentationsprovided a wealth of relevant information,most of which has been integrated into therecommendations from the workshop set outbelow. The fieldwork summaries of one group,which had visited the village of Chand in theKhijri Block, Ranchi District, is included in thisreport as an example of the rapid socialassessments produced by the participants (seeAnnex 3).

The closing session of the workshop began withstatements by representatives of three of the mainstakeholder groups present: CBOs and tribalpeoples’ organizations; NGOs and academics; andthe Jharkhand Forest Department. Thesestatements are paraphrased below. CBOs and Tribal Peoples’ OrganizationsPrabhakar Tirkey spoke on behalf of the CBOsand tribal peoples in attendance. He said thatit was a special experience for the tribals to beable to participate in a workshop where theywere heard. There was also time for mutualconsultation on tribal issues. And yet someconcepts were not clear, though a start atunderstanding had been made. Also a lot ofinformation had been gained about the tribalsin the last 50 years, without proper action intheir favor. On the contrary, tribal rights hadbeen violated. In the workshop there wasgenuine attention to tribal needs and problems.

Fieldwork

Closing Session


28

It was necessary to understand the psychologyof adivasis, who saw much and analyzedsituations according to their views, even as theymaintained the culture of silence. If theyseemed slow, it was because they had not putthemselves completely in the moderndevelopment fray. Their understanding ofdevelopment was different, in that they saw itas integral and symbiotic with nature andnatural resources. In agriculture they preferrednatural farming methods. So also in questionsof health, they went for herbal medicine. Themodern world was going the tribal way ofunderstanding the value of nature and naturalresources, which were not only the means ofproduction but also a means of livelihood andthe foundation of cultural and religious beliefs.There was an urgent need for coordinationbetween the World Bank, the Government ofJharkhand, and the Government of India fortribal development. NGOs and AcademicsHeera Lal Gupta spoke on behalf of theacademics and the NGO sector. He said thatthe workshop gave an understanding of socialassessment and the relevant stakeholders.Many ideas and views had been presented forreaching down to the people and engaging them.Now there was a need for networking amongall the stakeholders. There was also a need forregional dialogue and broader consultations,especially with potential participants in theproject. However, there were different rolesfor different stakeholders. They all needed toget involved in the various tasks related tobuilding grassroots organizations, carrying outsocial assessment at different levels,disseminating information, conducting actionresearch, building capacity, making linkages inthe marketing of village produce, anddocumenting progress.

Jharkhand Forest DepartmentThe representative of the Forest Department saidthat in every seminar there were different inputsand responses. But being together with otherstakeholders was very fruitful, as that led to afuller understanding of everyone’s views. Nowthere was a need for continued coordination anddialogue. The resources created in the workshophad to be used. Additionally, frontline staff hadto be adequately prepared. Their mindset neededto change. Through capacity training the rightattitudinal changes could come about. There wereabout 14,000 Forest Protection Committees,which needed a lot of inputs and training. TheForest Training School could also train self-helpgroups. Project financing during the preparationperiod could be used for this purpose.

Over the six days of the workshop, a large numberof views and concerns were expressed by all theparticipants. One overarching conclusion was thatit is necessary to allow for enough time andflexibility to design a project that truly respondsto the needs and aspirations of Jharkhand’s forestfringe communities. Another was that continueddialogue between the various stakeholders is goingto be critical to keeping project activities on track.

Many of the participants’ concerns andrecommendations focused on legal andinstitutional issues. In particular, the workshopparticipants made the following points:

n Conditions in Jharkhand are not uniform, soa “one-size-fits-all” approach will not work. Taking JFM as a starting point, a process ofconsultation, participation, and piloting canimprove the impact of forest managementon poverty reduction and development.

Conclusions and Recommendations


29

n Instead of limiting forest management to JFMcommittees, partnerships should be built toenable forest-based village communities tohave ownership of and management controlover their natural resources.

n In Jharkhand traditional institutions andauthorities in tribal communities play animportant role. At the same time, the legalstatus of traditional local institutions needs tobe clarified. For example, can they be eligibleto receive direct funding for developmentpurposes?

n It is necessary to clarify and agree on the roleof Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs), i.e.panchayats and gram sabhas.xiv Similarly,greater clarity is needed on the relationshipbetween these and other local institutions suchas village blocks, self-help groups, NGOs, etc.

n The current JFM resolution retains the authorityof the Forest Department. Greater clarity isneeded on the status of the JFM committees,their control over forest resources in scheduledand non-scheduled areas, and the delegationof authority from the Forest Department toJFM committees and local communities. Theprovisions of the JFM resolution should becarefully examined, and variances orcontradictions with various legal or institutionalrequirements should be resolved.

n More coordination among different Governmentdepartments is needed as they often havedifferent and contradictory rules andprocedures.

n Local communities are potentially eligible for alarge number of development schemes andopportunities, but these are provided bydifferent agencies and are not always well

coordinated. Where viable, JFM committeesshould also be allowed to access such schemes.

n Particularly in the context of the proposedproject, the role of NGOs should be clarified. A number of different functions can beconsidered: direct implementation; assistancein consultation and community mobilization;monitoring and evaluation; etc. Agreementshould be reached on how they can contribute,and on suitable mechanisms for transparencyand accountability.

n Finding the right mechanisms for dispute andconflict resolution is critical, especially whenit comes to dealing with land rights in the

villages. It is necessary to find workable waysto resolve disagreements or conflicts betweenthe Forest Department and adivasis; withincommunities; and between communities andoutsiders. In doing so, it is necessary to assesswho controls what resources and with whatauthority.

n The traditional rights and functions of thetribal gram sabhas should be respected bythe Forest Department and other agencies.


30

n The project needs to concern itself withadequate rules, regulations, andcompliance mechanisms for protecting theenvironment, not just with social issuesand poverty reduction.

n Significant parts of Jharkhand are under Naxalcontrol or influence, making it necessary todevelop institutional mechanisms forworking in these areas.

Having tribal representatives at the workshopprovided valuable opportunities for consideringthe particular needs and interests of tribal peoples. Among the points made were:

n Tribal and other village communities need morealternative livelihood opportunities, in orderto maintain the sustainability of forestresources.

n Addressing the fundamental issue of culturalalienation is key to ensuring the support of tribalstakeholders. Traditional culture andknowledge, especially as they relate to themanagement of forests and other naturalresources, need to be respected, protected, andrevitalized by the proposed project.

n In designing the proposed project or otherinterventions, it is important to ensure thattribals are on an equal footing with the rest ofsociety, yet are able to retain their uniqueidentities and belief systems.

n Tribals need to be able to participate in everystage of the project.

The Jharkhand PFM project faces the challengeof balancing conservation of natural resourceswith creation of livelihood opportunities forforest fringe communities. While much

additional work and thinking are required todesign appropriate strategies for reducingpoverty and creating economic opportunities,the workshop participants offered severalthoughts and suggestions in this regard:

n Arrangements should be put in place to generateand provide access to market opportunities andinformation, to optimize returns for the villagecommunities. This would allow for the sellingof forest produce and other products theproject can help develop. Marketingopportunities should be developed for herbaland medicinal plants and products.

n Several activities could help in incomegeneration, such as improved forestry practices,plantations, and food processing. But assetgeneration is also needed; activities that couldhelp with this include lift irrigation andcultivation of community gobargas plants.Individual activities could include dairying,piggery, and poultry breeding.

n Because of the potential restraints on grazing,dairying may constitute a risk.

n The project should focus on the sustainabilityof various species, such as sal trees.

n There is a need for preservation of small veg-etable produce in village blocks.

n Support should be provided for electrification,water supply including for irrigation, etc.

n There is a need to counter migration pressuresand livelihood dependence on the cities.

n Any surplus or profit generated through the ac-tivities of the JFM committees should be sharedadequately among their members.


31

n Benefits from JFM-type projects tend toaccrue to villagers only in the mid to longterm. It is essential to ensure that such aproject also provides quick benefits toparticipants; otherwise support for it isunlikely to be sustained.

n Community health should be improvedthrough a system of health volunteers fromthe villages. Also, basic health kits and firstaid boxes financed through recurrentexpenditures on medicines could beprovided.

n Education improvement should includestrengthening of both formal and non-formaleducation, based on local needs andresources. Services should be provided forprimary and secondary education, and forvocational training centers.

As in most projects of this type, the issue ofexisting capacity of the project agents and theconcomitant need for capacity building came up.Among the points made were:

n Capacity building activities should be basedon a needs assessment of all concernedstakeholders: village communities, JFMcommittee members, Forest Departmentofficials, and field staff. Needs-basedcapacity building is particularly important forwomen and other marginalized groups.

n Capacity building needs to take place inthe Forest Department at all levels, or theproject will be at risk of not succeeding.Imparting a new orientation is necessary,particularly for front-line workers, as theywill be expected to move away fromenforcement and policing towardsregulatory and facilitation roles.

n Capacity building and attitudinal change arealso needed for staff in other agencies andfor district- and block-level officials.

n Training and capacity building would beespecial ly useful in relation to thefollowing:- Micro-planning and natural resources

management (including on traditionalmethods of forest protection andregeneration)

- Accounting- Marketing- Legal and administrative skills- Communication and consensus-building

skills- Conflict management- Community organizing

n Given that many staff in the ForestDepartment are demoralized, it is necessaryto provide all of them (but particularly thefront-line workers) with better incentives todo a good job.

n The Forest Department is understaffed, sothe project would do well to contribute toproviding better employment. At the veryleast, vacant posts should be filled.

n There is a perception that representatives ofthe Government and the Forest Departmentare “anti-tribal.” Sensitivity training for aheightened awareness of tribal concerns isvery important.

n There is a need to upgrade the state’s trainingfacilities, including the State Forest Academyat Mahilong. Similarly, there is a need toaddress the lack of basic infrastructure, e.g.vehicles, communications equipment, andother facilities.


32

n Unless people are better educated, they cannotparticipate fully, nor can they guard againstvarious forms of “elite capture” of projectbenefits.

n Targeted training is required for people to beable to participate fully in participatorymonitoring and evaluation.

Several participants additionally pointed to theneed for fluid communications and effectiveinformation dissemination. They offeredseveral comments and suggestions in thisregard:

n Information about the proposed project andthe social assessment process should be madeavailable in all local languages, not justHindi. The information should bedisseminated widely, using print, electronic,and popular folk media. The writteninformation should be supplemented withoral information. This access to informationis particularly crucial during the planning anddesign stage of the project.

n Regional Information Centers should beorganized in different areas (even in thosecontrolled by Naxalites).

n Greater transparency and access to informationis the best way to reduce suspicion of theproposed project, and of agencies such as theForest Department and the World Bank.

n Information about government outreachprograms and schemes, particularly at thevillage and block levels, should bedisseminated better.

n Rights-awareness campaigns should beorganized.

n The JFM resolution and its modificationsare not well known. They should bewidely disseminated, for people to knowabout their rights and duties, especiallywith regard to terms of engagement andprofit sharing.

n Local and tribal institutions could help withinformation dissemination and consultationsaround the proposed project.

At the time of the workshop, the thinkingof project authorities was that rather thanlaunching a large-scale project all at once,ideas and approaches could be tested outthrough a series of pilot activities. Theparticipants had several suggestionsregarding this:

n There are good opportunities for promotingtraditional tribal culture and building on localcommunities’ knowledge of forests, forestproducts, and other natural resources. Pilotscould take up related themes such ascultivation of herbal/medicinal plants forprocessing and marketing, revival oftraditional healthcare systems, etc.

n Pilots could also address such disparate areasas irrigation, watershed development,drinking water, tourism, etc.

n The planning and implementation of pilotactivities should be done in participatoryfashion.

n Pilots should be designed to allow forvariations in community needs, institutionalarrangements (JFM-style; gram sabhas; tribalinstitutions), social diversity (both tribal andnon-tribal areas), and geography (both forestand non-forest areas).


33

In general, the discussions in the workshopfocused more developing an approach fortaking social issues into consideration, thanon hashing out concrete project design issues.The participants nevertheless made severalcomments and recommendations regardingoverall design:

n Social and economic equity has to be at thecore of the project. Project benefits mustnot go to a few elite groups or individuals.Land reform may be needed to ensure a moreequitable distribution of benefits.

n Project activities should be designed to benefitwomen and other vulnerable groups.

Gender considerations need to be taken intoaccount when addressing economicopportunities, given the strong relationshipbetween gender roles and economicactivities. Women also tend to depend moreon the environment, so it is crucial toensure that the environment does notdeteriorate further.

n Project planning should be based on a holistic,long-term shared vision of forestconservation and poverty reduction.

n Project planning should be needs-based.

n The project should not be based on charityor handouts, as these create dependency.It should focus on sustainable schemes thatprovide secure opportunities for thepoorest and excluded.

n While partnerships are essential in preparingand implementing a project, it is necessary toclarify who will partner with whom. Will theForest Department be ready to accept a realpartnership in terms of sharing rights,responsibilities, resources, and power?

n Project evaluation needs to be done byindependent, external bodies (i.e. not the ForestDepartment, NGOs involved, or the WorldBank). But evaluation also needs to be drawon the actual experiences and voices of theparticipants.

n In preparing the proposed project, the role oflocal communities should be clarified in areassuch as design and planning; implementation;and monitoring and evaluation.

n In designing the project, care should be takento avoid any negative impacts on localpopulations. In particular, local cultural rightsneed to be respected and protected.

Finally, workshop participants had somecomments and suggestions with regard to thesocial assessment process:

n A baseline study should be completed.

n At least some of the researchers and facilitatorscontracted to do the social assessment shouldknow the applicable local languages.

n The social assessment should promote continueddialogue among different stakeholders; otherwise,its outputs won’t be sustained.


34

i See the approach developed for Poverty andSocial Impact Analysis (PSIA) of reforms, aswell as recent work and frameworks beingpiloted for country-level social analysis.

ii World Bank 2003. For more informationrefer to http://www.worldbank.org/socialanalysissourcebook/

iii WRM Bulletin No. 81, April 2004. Seehttp://www.wrm.org.uy/bulletin/81/viewpoint.html

iv As described in the World Bank strategic paperon Social Development, Empowering People byTransforming Institutions: Social Development in WorldBank Operations (Social DevelopmentDepartment, January 12, 2005), inclusiveinstitutions promote equal access to developmentopportunities. To move towards this goal,institutional barriers must be removed so as toencourage the participation of diverse individualsand groups in development activities. Cohesivesocieties enable women and men to work togetherto address common needs, overcome constraints,and consider diverse interests. Accountableinstitutions are transparent and responsive topeople’s needs, and serve the public interest inan effective, efficient, and fair way. Accountabilityis linked to empowerment, participation, and civicengagement in that these processes enhance theassets and capabilities of individuals and groupsto engage, influence, and hold accountable theinstitutions that affect them.

v Based on an extrapolation of the 1991 census,the newly created State of Jharkhand has a total

of about 6.5 million tribal people, whichconstitutes about 30% of the State’s population.Heavily concentrated along the forested belt, thetribal population comprises an overwhelmingmajority of Jharkhand’s forest fringe communities.These data are taken from The Scheduled Tribes andScheduled Castes in the Forests of Bihar: Facts andFigures, Forest Department, Bihar, 1996.

vi Statement 1, the Khunti Declaration 2003adopted by the Jharkhand Forest ProtectionMovement (Jharkhand Jangal Bachao Andolan)at their 3rd Annual Convention, November 27-29, 2003, Khunti, Jharkhand (unofficiallytranslated from the original Hindi version).

vii Khuntkatti refers to a system of communalforest ownership that has underlain forestmanagement practices in tribal areas ofJharkhand, Bihar, and other states.

viii Jorgensen, S. L. and Loudjeva, Z., Povertyand Social Impact Analysis of Three Reforms inZambia: Land, Fertilizer, and Infrastructure. SocialDevelopment Paper No. 49. SocialDevelopment Department (World Bank 2005).

ix World Development Report 2004: MakingServices Work for Poor People (World Bank 2003).

x Drawing on the definition set out inEmpowerment and Poverty Reduction: A Sourcebook,(World Bank 2002), p. 20.

xii The Swa-Shakti project has helped formmore than 17,000 Self-Help Groups (SHGs)benefiting more than 240,000 people

ENDNOTES


35

throughout India. It works in innovativepartnership arrangements with more than 700local NGOs. With the exception of someminor assistance towards developingcommunity assets, the project does not providedirect financial support to the members.Instead, it focuses on strengthening women’scapacity to leverage resources from existinginstitutions: financial institutions for access tocredit; government departments for improvedservices, particularly in health and education;and the private sector for better access toinformation and markets for locally producedproducts.

xiii These risks to the project can be furthersubdivided into four distinct risk types: countryrisks: conflict and violence, political instability,ethnic and religious tensions; political economyrisks: capture of benefits, opposition to ordistortion of project objectives by influentialstakeholders; institutional risks: poorgovernance, limited technical and

administrative capacity, design complexity; andexogenous risks: terms of trade, regionalconflict, climate effects.

xiv The Naxalites, also sometimes called theNaxals, are a loose association of self-styledinsurgent groups waging a violent struggle onbehalf of landless laborers and adivasis againstlandlords and others. In recent years, Jharkhandhas been severely affected by Naxal violence,with 156 deaths recorded in 2002, accordingto the New Delhi-based Institute of Peace &Conflict Studies.

xv Gram sabhas are village-based assembliesor committees. They normally act asconduits for the views of the rural poor,women, and other marginalized groups indeliberations by more formal bodies such asthe panchayats (village councils). Both ofthese PRIs have been vested with decision-making authority over local natural resourcesby the Constitution Act of 1992.


36

ANNEX 1: List of Participants

PUBLIC SECTOR

A.K. Malhotra (Dr) CCF (WFP) Jharkhand Department of Forests and Environment

A.K. Mishra C.F.Hazaribagh Department of Forests and Environment

A.K. Prabhakar C.F. Territorial Circle, Ranchi Department of Forests and Environment

A.K. Rastogi DFO Research & Eval, Ranchi Department of Forests and Environment

A.K. Singh Regional Chief Conservator of Forests, Department of Forests and Environment

Singhbum, Jamshedpur

Amarnath Singh ACF, Khunti Forest Division, Ranchi Department of Forests and Environment

Arun Kumar Range Officer of Forest, Department of Forests and Environment

Dumka Forest Div (Simra Range)Ashish Rawat Dy Conservator of Forest, Social Department of Forests and Environment

Forestry Monitoring & Evaluation, Ranchi

Awadhesh Pal Singh Forester, Garhwa South Div Department of Forests and Environment

Balbhadra Sahu Forester, Forest Div, Simdaga (Gumla) Department of Forests and Environment

Brijnandan Sah Forester, Daltonganj Western Circle, Department of Forests and Environment

Latehar Div

C.R. Sahay C.C.F. Development Department of Forests and Environment

Chaturgun Ram Forest Guard Department of Forests and Environment

D.J. Mitra C.F Hq. Ranchi Department of Forests and Environment

D.K. Srivastava (Dr) C.F. Wild Life, Ranchi Department of Forests and Environment

Daya Shankar Tiwary Forester, Ajay Soil Cons Div, Deoghar Department of Forests and Environment

Dhirendra Kumar Conservator of Forests Department of Forests and Environment

Diksha Prasad DFO, Information and Extension, Ranchi Department of Forests and Environment

Ganesh Lal Bhagat Range Officer of Forest, Ranchi Department of Forests and Environment

H.S. Gupta DFO, Saranda, Chaibasa Department of Forests and Environment

Harendra Kumar Forest Guard, Ranchi East Forest Div Department of Forests and Environment

J.B. Jauher CCF-cum-M.D. Jharkhand State Department of Forests and Environment

Forest Dev. Corp, Ranchi

J.L. Srivastava P.C.C.F. Jharkhand Department of Forests and Environment

Jabber Singh DFO, Ranchi (W) Department of Forests and Environment

John Kerketta Range Officer of Forest, Kolhan Department of Forests and Environment

K.K. Pandey Range Officer of Forest, Department of Forests and Environment

Ranchi West Lohardaga Div

NAME DESIGNATION/TITLE INSTITUTION/AGENCY


37

Kalyan Kumar Chatterjee Conservator of Forests, Department of Forests and Environment

Southern Circle, Chaibasa

Kuldip Chaube Forest Guard Department of Forests and Environment

L.N. Damor G.M. M.F.P. Project, Ranchi, Department of Forests and Environment

Forest Dev Corpn

Mahendra Kardam C.F. State Trading, Ranchi Department of Forests and Environment

Mangal Bara Range Officer Department of Forests and Environment

Manoj Singh DFO Ranchi East Department of Forests and Environment

Manraj CF Ranchi Department of Forests and Environment

Mukti Prakash Panna Range Officer of Forests, Balumath Department of Forests and Environment

P.K. Sinha D.F.O. Simdega Forest Div. Department of Forests and Environment

P.P. Singh ACF South Div., Garhwad Department of Forests and Environment

Paritosh Upadhyay D.F.O. Chaibara North Div Department of Forests and Environment

Probindra Kr Sharma Forest Guard, Mango Range, JSR, Department of Forests and Environment

Dhalbhujm Forest Div

R. Bharat DFO, WFP, Dumka Forest Division Department of Forests and Environment

R.R. Hembrom CF Dumka Circle Department of Forests and Environment

Raj Kumar Singh Forester, Ranchi Forest East Division Department of Forests and Environment

Rajiv Ranjan Deputy Conservator of Forests, Planning, Department of Forests and Environment

Monitoring and Evaluation Cell, Ranchi

Rajiv Ranjan Asst. Conservator of Forests, Department of Forests and Environment

Deoghar Social Forestry Division

Ram Sewak Tiwary Forest Guard, Ranchi West Lohardaga Div Department of Forests and Environment

Rama Shish Singh Forester, Ranchi West Lohardaga Div Department of Forests and Environment

Ravi Ranjan D.F.O.South Div. Garhwa Department of Forests and Environment

S.K. Adhikari Range office of Forest, Musaboni, Department of Forests and Environment

Dhalbhujm Forest Div

S.N. Trivedi (Dr) Regional Chief Conservator of Forests, Department of Forests and Environment

Ranchi

Shambhu Prasad Astt. Conservator of Forest, Department of Forests and Environment

Simdege Forest Div, Simdega

Shashi Nandkeolyar D.F.O. Pakur Department of Forests and Environment

Shivashish Ram Divisional Forest Officer, Latehar Department of Forests and Environment

Shyam Bihari Prasad Asst. Conservator of Forest Department of Forests and Environment

Sukh Ram Puran Forester, Kolhan Div, Chaibasa Department of Forests and Environment

Suresh Kumar Sinha Asst. Conservator of Forest, Department of Forests and Environment

Ranchi East Forest Div

U.R. Biswas CCF-cum-Chief Wildlife Warden, Jharkhand Department of Forests and Environment



38

Umesh Ch Choudhary Forest Guard, Dumka Division Department of Forests and Environment

CIVIL SECTOR &VILLAGESA. Ahmad Snr Proj. Officer Xavier Inst of Social Service (XISS)

A. Dean Member Jharkhand Org for Human Rights

A.K. Jha Dty Director, Animal Husbandry Nepal House

Ajit Tirkey Snr Proj. Officer Xavier Inst of Social Service (XISS)

Alex Ekka (Dr) Director Research Xavier Inst of Social Service (XISS)

Anupama Sinha Project Planner Alternative for Indian Development

Arun Kumar Singh Coordinator Lok Prerna

B.K. Sinha Dy Secretary Revenue & Land Reforms, Jharkhand

Bandhu Oraon Bikas Bharti

Barkha Communication Officer Jharkhand Women Dev Society,

SWA-Shakti Proj

Bhikhari Bhagat Joint Secy Vikas Bharti Bishunpur, Gumla

Brahmachari Farm incharge, Divya KVK Ramakrishna Mission Ashram,

Nirliptachaitanya Morabadi, Ranchi

Chami Murmu Secy Sahayogi Mahila Baghraiensai

D.P. Sinha Secy Ranchi Consortium for Comm Forestry

Diptiman Bose Prog. Coordinator Nagrik Manch, Ranchi

Haldhar Mahto Proj Dir Nav Bharat Jagriti Kendra

Harishwar Dayal Lecturer St. Xaviers College

Heera Lal Gupta Secretary Trust for Comm Dev. & Research

Indrajeet Prasad Proj. Incharge ERC Group

Indu Kumari Member Peasure Globe (PG), Kanke, Ranchi

Jawahar Mahato Field Officer Sahayogi Mahila Baghraisai

Jigisha Srivastava Lecturer St. Xaviers College

Kunal Shekhar Project Coordinator Krishi Gram Vikas Kendra

Malancha Ghosh (Ms) Reader in Dept of Zoology, Ranchi Women’s College

RWC & President, M.U.V&V.S.

Manoranjan Kr Jamuar Regl. Dir ADRI

Neeru Johri (Dr) Consultant (Freelancer)

O.N. Panday (Dr) Dean, Faculty of Forestry Birsa Agril Univ, Kanke, Ranchi, 834006

Prabhakar Tirkey President Patra

Pradeep Kr Sarkar Proj. Incharge ERC Group

Prafulla Kr Mallik (Dr) Training Coordinator Jharkhand Women Dev Society,

SWA-Shakti Proj



39

Pramod Kr Singh Fieldworker Indian Rural Association

Praveen Kumar Singh Forestry Incharge/PPFT Gramin Vikas Trust, Ranchi

R.B. Singh

R. Bhengra Member Jharkhand Tourism Coordination

Comm (JTTC)

Rajeev Ranjan Proj. Incharge Environmental Research & Consulting Gp

Ravi Sinha Consultant SRI Ranchi

Rini Sinha Project Officer Society for Rural Industrialization (SRI)

Rohini Singh Student SCMHRD, Pune

S.S.K. Biswas Member Ranchi Consortium for Comm Forestry

Shamim Akhtar Proj. Coord Karra Society for Rural Action

Shashi Kumari Field Specialist Gramin Vikas Trust

Shiukar Purty Genl Secy Society for Reformation &

Advancement of Adivasis

Shiv Kumar Sharma Advocate High Court

Simon Oraon

Sr. Celia Branganza Director Centre for Womens Development, Torpa

Sr. Maria Elena Asst. Director Centre for Womens Development, Torpa

V.K. Munjani Under Secretary Rural Development, Jharkhand

Vasavi Bhagat Journalist Ranchi

William Norman Research Asst. Xavier Inst of Social Service (XISS)

WORLD BANKLorraine Ghosh World Bank, New Delhi

R.R. Mohan World Bank, New Delhi

Sumir Lal World Bank, New Delhi

Varalakshmi Vemuru World Bank, New Delhi

Barbara Verardo World Bank, Washington

Hakon Nordang World Bank, Washington

Reider Kvam World Bank, Washington

Zlatina Loudjva World Bank, Washington



40

ANNEX 2: Workshop Agenda

Day 1, Tuesday, February 3, 2004

09:00 – 12:30 Morning session(with coffee/tea break)

Registration

Opening and welcomeOpening Remarks by Govt. of Jharkhand& World Bank

Introduction to project

Workshop objectives

Social Assessment: a brief introductionConceptual framework, project cycle anddiscussion of key concepts.

Social diversity and gender issuesPresentation and discussion of relevantsocial groups and categories, and theimportance of gender, ethnicity, religion,age, culture, caste, or other criteria whichare used to define and organize socialinteraction. Discussion of relevance to theproposed project.

Introductions

Workshop expectations

12:30 – 13:30 Lunch

13.30 – 18:00 Afternoon session: Elementsof Social Assessment(with coffee/tea break)

Discussion of presentationsPresentation of participants’ feedback.

Stakeholder mapping and analysis· Plenary presentation· Group work on stakeholder matrices· Group presentations and discussions in

plenary

Discussion of groups and individuals whohave an interest or a stake in the proposedproject, in the sense that they are likely tobenefit or be affected by it, or they caninfluence its outcomes and success. Thepurpose is to identify winners and losers,and develop a systematic and explicitgrounding for further analysis, participationand consultation, identification of risks andopportunities, and likely capacity buildingneeds. The group work will include anexercise where different stakeholder groupsare identified in terms of their relativeinterest in and influence over the project.

Jharkhand Participatory Forestry: Social Assessment WorkshopFebruary 3-9, 2003 Ashoka Hotel

Ranchi, Jharkhand


41

Logistics and practical informationDiscussion of next days and the field trips.Handout of binders, materials to read.Informal discussions and time forparticipants to get to know each other.

Reception and welcome dinnerHosted by the World Bank.

Day 2: Elements of Social Assessment(continued)


Prioritizing and working together· Group work: What are the expectations

of, and the key issues to be addressedby, the social assessment and theproject?

· Group presentations and discussions inplenary: Deciding on priorities

Formal Inaugural session· Chief Guest: His Excellency, the Chief

Minister

12.30-13.30 Lunch

13.30 – 18:00 Afternoon session (with coffee/tea break)

Case study: Stakeholder analysis andhow the five core elements interact

Empowerment and social accountability

· Plenary presentation· Case study: The Rural Women’s

Development and EmpowermentProject (Swa-Shakti)

· Group work· Group presentations and discussions in

plenary

This session focuses particularly onproposed beneficiaries and othercommunity members; their ability to accessimproved services, livelihoods, or otheropportunities, and the potential forimproving “downward” accountabilitythrough more efficiency, transparency, anddecentralized methods of operation inresponsible agencies such as the ForestDepartment.

Day 3: Risks and Consensus Building

The full day will be dedicated topresentation and discussion of acomprehensive risk managementframework from a social perspective,focusing on both risks of adverse impacts,vulnerability or unevenly distributedbenefits from the project. This will belinked with the previous day’s stakeholderanalysis, to determine risks and riskmitigation strategies for differentstakeholder groups. Mechanisms fordealing with dissent and building consensuswill be presented and discussed.


Risk analysis frameworkIntroduction to the framework and adiscussion of “winners” and “losers”.

Risks from the project: vulnerabilityissues and social safeguards


42

i. Social safeguardsii. Other risks

12.30-13.30 Lunch


Risks to the project: Capacity, governance,political economy

· Plenary presentation and discussion· Group work: How to deal with dissent

and build consensus?· Group presentations and discussions in

plenary

Day 4: Methodology and FieldworkPreparation


Project cycleA brief introduction to the standard cycleof events of World Bank projects. Specificattention is paid to the role of socialassessments during the project cycle: Whento do it, who does it, and how the findingstranslate into project relevant designoptions, implementation mechanisms, andmonitoring and evaluation systems withappropriate indicators.

Consultation and ParticipationBuilding on the previous discussions onparticipation, emphasizing the role,importance and opportunities for popularparticipation during social assessment aswell as during the project cycle.

Methods and toolsOverview and discussion of principles ofquantitative and qualitative data collectionfor a social assessment process. Discussionof methods such as participant observation,structured and unstructured interviews,focus group discussions, and social surveys.

12.30-13.30 Lunch

13.30 – 18:00 Afternoon session(with coffee/tea break)

Preparation for fieldwork: SampleTerms of Reference, implementationplan, Rapid Context Assessment· Plenary presentation and discussion· Group work: The groups prepare for the

next day’s fieldwork, work on the Termsof Reference and plan for a RapidContext Assessment

Overview of the objectives of thefieldwork, as well as the focus of thedifferent groups. Brief introduction andbackground to the context of the fieldworkwill also be provided.

Day 5: Fieldwork

Field work will be done in small groups, atsites which have been selected purposefullyto address the main issues and possibly thepilot areas for proposed projectcomponents. It will be organized by localorganizations or resource persons (NGOsor others), using an informal approach.Each group will be accompanied by aresource person, and will be made up of amix of the different participants in thelearning program.


43

Day 6: Fieldwork Analysis

09:00 – 12:30 Morning session (with coffee/tea break)

Fieldwork analysis and presentations· Group work: The groups prepare their

presentations and discussion-pointsbased on the field work

· Group presentations and discussions inplenary

12.30-13.30 Lunch


Feedback on presentations and casestudies

Discussion of priorities and follow upWorkshop facilitators will comment on thefield studies, and discuss implications forthe project, data gaps and implications forthe social assessment process, and likelycapacity building needs.

Workshop evaluation

Day 7: The Way Ahead

09:00 – 12:30 Morning session (with coffee/tea break)

Pilots and approaches

Participation framework

Expected output: An agreed-uponframework for participation andconsultations with key stakeholder groupsduring project preparation, implementation,and monitoring and evaluation.

12.30-13.30 Lunch


Participant feedback

Summary of key issues

Next steps and closing remarks

Closing DinnerHosted by the Government of Jharkhand.


44

I) KEY ISSUESA) Social Diversity 1) Social and Demographic Profile

a) Social composition: Tribal = 80%,Munda = 50%Uraons = 30%Mahtos = 10%Others = 10%

b) Households = 82,total population = 500

c) Religious groups: Traditional Sarna =80% Hindu = 10%, Christianity = 10%

d) Male-Female Ratio 1000:990

2) Educational Profile:Majority is illiterateFew literate persons, including some womenSome children go the Hulhundu schoolMost of the children don’t go to school

- No school in the village- Muslim school in the neighboring village is hostile to the tribal children

3) Economic Profile:Agriculture is the main occupation – monocroppingCasual labor during lean season – coolie,rickshaw pulling, working at stone quarriesand crushers, selling of rice beer. Exceptfor a few, majority is poor. Many of themare marginal farmers. Most people don’thave irrigation facilities. Sources of creditare bank and relatives. No incomegenerating activities in the village except fora few growing cash crops & vegetables. Noself-help groups (SHGs), no schools, noelectricity in the village

4) Health Profile:General good healthMinor illness taken care by the traditionalmethodSome also take allopathic medicines

B) Gender Relations and Issues1) Equal love and care for boy child and

girl child2) No dowry practiced, only bride price is

given (boy’s party to girl’s party)3) Though husbands consult their

wives, the decision is ultimately ofhusbands

4) Women do mostly the householdwork, including the agriculturalwork except for plowing and otherhard labor

5) Women are paid lower wages6) Migration of women for domestic

works to cities

C) Organizational Structure1) Traditional leadership exists – but

weakened2) No Gram Panchayat, no Gram

Sabha3) No PDS, No Red card (for people

below poverty line)4) Weak Mahlia Mandal5) One Anganwadi – not very effective

D) Institutional Structure1) Communal harmony2) Sometimes practice of superstition

and witchcraft3) Lack of self-esteem

ANNEX 3: Sample Rapid Social Assessment (RSA)Fieldwork Summary from Chand village, Khijri Block, Ranchi District


45

E) Stakeholders1) All the men and women of the village2) But greater dependence on Government3) Not much enterprising as a community4) Not mobilizing their human resources:

educated youth, retired military men

F) Participation Process1) No bargaining power: i.e. can’t insist

that the Block Development Officergive them a check dam

2) Lack of awareness of developmentschemes, lack of self-confidence

3) Conflict between the younger and theolder generations

G) Potential Risks1) Increasing alcoholism2) Cattle let loose, which eats up the

standing crops in summer3) Increasing dependency on Government4) Fatalistic attitude5) Outsiders grabbing land of the villagers

H) Avoiding Risks1) Strict control over alcoholic beverages

and alternative occupation to rice beerselling

2) Mutual agreement to keep the cattletended by cowherds, etc.

3) Schools through the local youth4) NGO presence or contact needed5) Awareness of land rights6) Team building7) Training of youth for hand-pump repairs8) Regeneration of forests

II) Recommendation for Project Participation Framework

1) Baseline survey2) Formation of core committee, under

the leadership of the Pahan,consisting of the followingstakeholders: People, NGOs, ForestDept., Other departments

3) Training of these stakeholders4) Exposure program5) Allocation of responsibilities

a) NGOs = Establishing linkages with other stakeholders

= Giving ongoing training and capacity building to stakeholders

b) Forest Dept.= Frontline staff more active with

necessary skills and facilities = Vertical and

horizontal communication and relationship

= Benefiting people through their know-how and

schemesc) Other Depts. = Keep up the

contact with people = Give need-based schemes to people = Vertical and horizontal

communication and relationship

III) Recommendation for Pilot andProposed approaches

1) Proper information and awarenessbuilding

2) Baseline survey3) Formation of the stakeholders

committee


46

4) Training at all levels of the stakeholders5) Making of check dam6) Social forestry: on Government land

and people’s land7) Primary education in the village8) Health and hygiene to be attended to9) Herbal medicines to be propagated:

people’s efforts and Forest Dept.’s efforts10) Hand pump repairing11) Improved seeds and agriculture12) Marketing of produce13) Constant monitoring and evaluation

IV) Suggest Priorities1) Awareness building and motivation

of stakeholders2) Repair of hand pumps3) Making of check dam4) Primary education, adult

education, SHGs, Mahila Mandalsfostered

5) Health through traditional system tobe fostered

6) Improved agriculture7) Marketing of produce


47

ANNEX 4: Evaluation of Outcomes

Workshop participants “voted” at the end ofeach day to register how they felt about thatday’s presentations and discussions. The resultsof these informal daily polls were very positiveoverall.

At the end of the workshop, the generallypositive impressions of the proceedings werereconfirmed via a formal evaluation process.All participants were asked to fill out a two-sided evaluation form, and 81 did so. Onthe front side of the form, respondents hadto rate a number of positive statements from1 (“strongly disagree”) to 6 (“strongly agree”).In a tabulation of the results, the meanresponse to all the questions came out at5.08. The statement that rated highest (witha mean of 5.31 for all respondents) was “Thetraining was relevant to my work.”; the onethat rated lowest (with a mean of 4.69) was“The pace of the presentations wasadequate.” The evidently small amount ofvariance would indicate considerableunanimity, across gender and sectoraldifferences, on the high value of workshopinputs, and on the perceived high likelihoodthat workshop outputs will contribute tobetter project design.

On the back side of the form, participants wereasked to provide open-ended responses to fourquestions. A sample of responses is givenbelow:

What part of the workshop did you enjoymost?n “The bilingual explanation on all issues

and deliberations and full participation“[female NGO representative]

n “Background materials (especially ODs/OPs)” [male CBO representative]

n “The fieldwork exercise—i.e. socialanalysis in the village—sharingexperiences with people coming fromvarious [sectors]” [male NGOrepresentative]

What part of the workshop was mostuseful?n “The most useful part in the workshop

was [the] ‘role play’ as it broke the icebetween participants in the group”[female academic sector representative]

n “The presentations of the fieldworkwhich leads to concrete answers to many


48

complex questions” [male NGOrepresentative]

n “The discussion on the 6th day wasquite useful as some problems andsolutions related to village developmentcould be addressed” [male ForestDepartment official]

n “Risk factor analysis” [female ForestDepartment official]

What would you have liked to have donedifferently?n “Additional technical inputs should [have

been] provided in the training while doingsocial impact assessment” [maleconsulting company representative]

n “To stay in the field for a few days formore close interaction with differentgroups and communities” [femaleNGO representative]

n “More Jharkhand based social andanthropological inputs in terms ofliterature, history, and analysis” [maleForest Department official]

n “Number of participants should beless” [male NGO representative]

n “There were some people who were lessexperienced, especially from NGOs,which made difference in sharing/learning” [male CBO representative]

n “More representation from traditionalpeople in the workshop, so that wecould learn from their experiences”[male Forest Department official]

How are you likely to make use of whatyou have learned during this week?n “Motivate the people for making forest

management for environment and self-reliance” [female Forest Departmentofficial]

n “It will help me in understanding socialissues more clearly” [male ForestDepartment official]

n “This outlook can be used in futureinteraction with different stakeholders”[male Forest Department official]


49

public disclosure authorized - world...

Documents