REPUBLIQUE RWANDAISE - World Bank
REPUBLIC OF RWANDA
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND ANIMAL RESOURCES
[pic]
Rural Sector Support Project (RSSP)
IDA Credit N 3483 RW
P.O. Box 6961, Kigali, Rwanda
Tel: 514447/514448/519523/87203; Fax 587226;
E-Mail: rssp_pscu@.rw
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR
SECOND RURAL SECTOR SUPPORT PROJECT
PROVISIONAL DRAFT
CLEARED FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
SUBJECT TO FINALIZATION
DURING PROJECT APPRAISAL
January 28, 2008
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The study Rural Sector Support Project phase II Environment and Social Assessment and Environmental Management Plan was undertaken by Duncan Oyaro. I wish to record my profound gratitude to Ms. Ignacie Tumushime who took time out of her busy schedule to accompany me in the site visits. I would also like to thank Geraldine Mukeshimana Project Coordinator Rural Sector Support Project (RSSP), Gaspard Niragira, Francis Ndekeh Stephen Bashaija all of RSSP National Office, Antoine Kapiteni of Integrated Management of Critical Ecosystem, Theobald Mashingha of REMA, Damascene Maniraguha of Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Florent Twahihirwa of German Agro Action, John Boyle of World Bank and the many institutions and individuals who contributed their knowledge and insight in making this study a success.
Am also indebted to the many people in Ngoma, Nyanza, Muhanga, Kirehe, Rulindo, Rulindo, Cyuagugu, Gatsabo and Kigali who participated and contributed their local knowledge and experience to the study. I thank these together with others who have not been mentioned here.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction and Study Objectives
This report is an Integrated Environmental Assessment and Environmental Management Plan for Rural Sector Support Project Phase II component on marshland and hillside development. The study covers civil works in the 13 sites across Rwanda marshlands. Each of the 13 subprojects has a standard alone Environmental Management Plan (annexed) that contributed in putting this report together. The report covers the Environmental Assessment of the subprojects, Public Consultation Process and Environmental Management Plan.
The objectives of this study are to support the building of institutional and technical capacities needed to support generation and adoption of efficient cropping and post-harvest technologies and more specifically, to ensure environmentally sound and sustainable development of agricultural production in the marshlands.
Methodology
A scoping study was undertaken at the beginning of the study. This process involved consultation with the client, and all the relevant key stakeholders who were identified through Stakeholder Identification Process. After the scoping process, a detailed in-depth literature and desk top review on the existing baseline information /materials and research undertaken in the subprojects area were collect the relevant baseline data. The review of available data sources helped in describing the environmental and social setup of the area. After the literature review, a field survey was undertaken in all the subproject sites. During the field visits, the consultant together with the RSSP Environmental Officer and RSSP engineers and agronomists consulted the local communities around the sites and the local administration.
Project Description
The proposed marshland and hillside development component of the RSSP involves construction of small dams in selected marshland sites, reclamation or rehabilitating of marshlands, construction and/or improvement of irrigation drainage networks infrastructure and irrigation farming of the reclaimed marshlands. The RSSP subproject areas are distributed all over Rwanda in 7 districts of Nyanza, Rulindo, Kirehe, Muhanga, Ngoma, Gatsibo and Gasabo.
The subprojects will involve rehabilitation and construction of water retention dams for irrigation, reclamation of marshlands totalling 2037 hectares. The cumulative retention capacity of the project reservoirs will be 3,713,000 m3 while an area of 187.1 hectares of marshland will be inundated as a result of the project.
Project Area Description
The subprojects will be undertaken in four regions/provinces of Rwanda namely Kigali, southern, eastern and northern covering a total of 13 marshland sites namely Rugeramigozi, Cyunuzi, Upper Kibaya, Sagatare-Nyamazi-Rwabutazi, Kinnyogo II located in Kirehe District, Eastern Province, Rugazi-Bisenga, Rwagitima (Ntende), Kajevuba, Nyarububa, and Nyarubogo and Kinyegenyege. These areas are marshlands that have traditionally been used for agriculture but the infrastructure are dilapidated over a long period of neglect and poor agricultural practices.
Cyunuzi, Upper Kibaya, Sagatare-Nyamazi-Rwabutazi and Kinnyogo marshlands are interrelated marshlands that confluence at Cyunuzi marshland before flowing into Kagera River. These marshlands are in the Nile basin and close to Kagera complex marshland or are part of the Kagera.
Project Alternatives
The study considered several projects alternatives including sites for dam construction, and marshland development, design and capacity, irrigation technology to be adopted for the various subprojects based on environmental suitability, and the project area characteristics, construction technique and project operation and maintenance. A comparative analysis of the technology alternatives was undertaken to identify the most cost effective and ecological sound technology for the subprojects.
Positive Project Impacts
The overall objective of this project is to revitalize Rwanda rural economy where majority (90%) of the population live and improving the quality of life of the rural poor through increased transfer of technical and financial resources for sustainable rural development.
Based on the assessment of this study, its anticipated that the project will achieve its objectives of poverty alleviation through raise in rural income, as rural areas have the highest number of population living below poverty line, improvement in agricultural infrastructure, improvement in food security both at the rural level and nationally, raise in rural income, promotion of gender mainstreaming in rural economy, capacity building of the rural manpower and reduction of mosquitoes breeding grounds, improvement in national economy through savings made from forgone costs of importing rice which costs the economy 305 Billion Rfws annually. The project has potential of saving more than 26 Billion Rfws worth of foreign exchange annually. The project will also create markets for not only agricultural produce but for agricultural input including fertilizer, pesticides and herbicides.
Hillside protection interventions will protect vulnerable land from erosion a situation that threatens to destroy agricultural land in Rwanda. This intervention will protect the hydrological systems from sedimentation, flooding and contamination. Reforestation in the hill side will also promote vegetation cover and improve the natural habitats in agricultural areas.
Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts
While RSSP overall objective is to benefit the rural agricultural population, there are adverse impacts that will emanate from the subproject activities. These subproject impacts include loss of marshland ecosystems and the functions, loss of avifauna habitat, agrochemical pollution of soil and water resources, reduced water flow downstream, water wastage through increased evaporation, loss of domestic water sources, loss of marshland services and products, increased incidences of water borne diseases especially malaria, greenhouse gas emission from the rice paddies, safety hazards posed by the reservoirs, flooding, emergence of pests and agricultural diseases, reduced production of subsistence crops and use of child labour in the rice paddies. It should be noted that all these impacts can be effectively be mitigated through a design, management, agronomic practices, policy, capacity building and proper planning.
Impact Mitigation Measures
The study proposes measures for mitigating the identified adverse impacts while promoting the benefits. These measures include adopting water saving technologies and management systems, construction of adequate drainage system in the farm, canalisation of the drains, training in efficient irrigation water management, training on precautionary measures required for the handling, labeling and application of agro-chemicals under field conditions, adopting IPM practices, conserving buffer zones to filter pollutant loads from upstream and those leaching from irrigated farms, regulating water abstraction for irrigation and other uses, catchment management especially upstream to control the intensity of the floods, need for a full inventory and assessment of Rwanda wetlands, provision of water points for domestic use, measures to control pathogens and vectors, incorporation of safety measures around the dams, among other measures as described in the Environmental Management Plans of the subprojects.
Environmental Management Plan Cost
The cost of implementing the EMP for the project has been kept to a minimal through using of already established structures, plans and programs as well as manpower. Most of the costs of the plan are in the monitoring activities which is a recurrent costs and introduction of fish in the dams which according to RSSP was already in their budget. Capacity building activities are also part of the RSSP budget and this will not add any additional cost to the project apart from environmental training for RSSP provincial staff, district environmental officers and Cooperative members. The estimated cost for implementing the EMP is estimated at US$ 490,000.00.
Recommendations
Based on the findings and measures proposed in the EMP, generic recommendations for the whole project are given below.
1. The project beneficiaries should be trained in good farming husbandry and pest management especially in the area of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and fertilizer application.
2. A training program that covers all the 13 sites on the amounts of fertilizer to be applied per hectare of land and during what conditions should be undertaken before commissioning of the project. The types and amounts of pesticides should also be part of this training. This training should be a hands-on that can be introduced through the farmer’s field school (FFS) model adopted by the project.
3. To prevent against waterlogging in the farms, the farmers should be trained in efficient irrigation water management.
4. At the project level, RSSP should be equipped to have capacity to undertake parameter sample as identified in the monitoring plan.
5. The project beneficiaries should be encouraged to undertake integrated catchment management and restoration especially in those areas that are deforested and affected by soil erosion through afforestation, soil and conservation measures including terracing and agroforestry practices on farms.
6. A catchment approach would best mitigate environmental problems facing some of these marshlands including Kibaya, Sagatare and Gisaya. The main elements of a catchment approach are to create buffer zones of natural vegetation created at intervals to control water flow, reduce downstream impact, help filter out effluents and provide marshland products; and revegetation of steep slopes and promoting soil and water conservation agriculture in the hillsides.
7. The marshland development should include creation of buffer zones upstream and downstream to protect the dam and also act as a filter of agrochemicals runoff from the farms.
8. The monitoring plan developed in this study should be implemented to monitor the indicators during and after the project lifecycle. Emphasis should be on water quality (nitrates, potassium, phosphates and pesticides residues).
9. During the implementation of the subprojects, a socio-economic survey of the areas should be undertaken to acquire baseline information against which monitoring and evaluation can be based. This activity should be coordinated by the rural sociologist.
10. A strategic environmental assessment of the marshland in Rwanda should be undertaken to assess the strategic effects of these ecosystems to the intricate relationship between marshland and the national and regional economy.
11. In case a catchment has multiple marshlands, there should be no continuous development of these ecosystems. RSSP with support from IMCE should define and categorise wetlands/marshlands in the country.
12. The dam location for Rwagitima irrigation is near a settlement site and could have health and safety impacts on the residents of the village. For this reason, the engineers should find alternative site upstream. Before an alternative site is found, it’s the recommendation of this study that the dam construction should not go ahead.
13.
Conclusion
The RSSP subprojects considered in this study are environmentally feasible due to the fact that it targets marshlands that have been traditional developed and degraded thus aims at rehabilitating these areas. However, sustainability of these activities will depend on operationalizing the measures proposed in the EMP. As for any natural marshland to be developed, biodiversity and hydrological status of these areas should be studied before any activity can be undertaken.
The impacts worth considering are water resource pollution from agrochemical application and impacts on the hydrology of the respective basins and most importantly the Nile.
Rwagitima-Ntende and Upper Kibaya dam sites should be sited elsewhere to prevent increase in malaria and flooding respectively.
Table of Content
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iii
Introduction and Study Objectives iii
Methodology iii
Project Description iii
Project Area Description iii
Project Alternatives iii
Positive Project Impacts iv
Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts iv
Impact Mitigation Measures iv
Environmental Management Plan Cost iv
Recommendations v
Conclusion vi
List of Figures xxi
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS xxii
1.1 Project Need 1
1.2 Historical Background/Existing Conditions 1
1.3 Study Objectives 2
2.0 STUDY SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 3
2.1 Study Scope 3
2.2 Methodology 5
2.2.1 Baseline Assessment 5
2.2.1.1 Water Quality 5
2.2.1.3 Ecological Surveys and Studies 5
2.2.2 Project Alternatives 5
2.2.3 Public Consultation 6
2.2.4 Impact Prediction and Evaluation 6
2.2.5 Environmental Management Plan 8
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 9
3.1 Specific Subprojects Activities 9
3.1.1 Marshland Development 9
3.1.2 Dam construction 9
3.1.3 Construction of Drainage and Networks 10
3.1.4 Irrigation Farming 10
3.1.5 Development of Rice Drying Areas 10
3.1.7 Construction of Access Roads 10
3.2 Project Design 10
3.3 Water Abstraction 11
3.4 Project Implementation and Management 11
4.0 PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION 13
4.1 Physical Environment 13
4.1.1 Subprojects Locations 13
4.1.2 Climate and Meteorology 15
4.1.3 Topography and soils 16
4.1.4 Hydrology 16
4.1.5 Land Uses 18
4.2 Biological Environment 19
4.2.1 Flora 19
4.2.2 Fauna 19
4.2.2.1 Avifuana 20
4.2.2.2 Fisheries 21
4.2.3 Sensitive Ecosystems 21
4.3 Socio-Economic Environment 21
4.3.1 Population and Demography 21
4.3.2 Livelihoods 22
4.3.3 Health 23
4.3.4 Water Access and Sanitation 24
4.5 Sensitive Ecosystem 25
4.5.1 Marshlands 25
4.5.2 Hills 26
4.4 Environmental and Social Trends 26
4.4.1 Poverty 26
4.4.2 Population Increase 26
4.4.3 Marshland Reclamation 26
4.4.4 Soil Erosion 27
4.4.5 Hillside Farming 27
4.4.6 Deforestation 27
5.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK 28
5.1 Legal Framework 28
5.1.1 Law on Environment Protection and Management 28
5.1.2 Law in the Use and Management of Land in Rwanda 29
5.2 Policy Framework 29
5.2.1 Health Sector Policy 29
5.2.2 Agriculture Policy 29
5.2.3 Land Policy 30
5.2.4 National Wetlands Conservation Program 30
5.2.5 Rwanda Environmental Policy 31
5.2.6 Marshlands Development Master Plan 31
5.2.7 Water and Sanitation Policy 32
5.2.8 National Water Resources Management Policy 32
5.2.9 Draft Forest Policy 32
5.2.10 National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 33
5.2.11 Poverty Reduction Strategy 33
5.3 International Regulations 33
5.3.1 World Bank Safeguard Policies 33
5.3.1.1 Environmental Assessment (OP4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01) 33
5.3.1.2 Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04) 34
5.3.1.3 Forest Operational Policy 4.36 35
5.3.1.4 Pest Management Operational Policy 4.09 35
5.3.1.5 Projects on International Waterways Operational Policy 7.50: 37
5.3.1.6 Involuntary Resettlement Operational Policy 4.12 37
5.3.1.7 Dam Safety Operational Policy 4.37 38
5.3.1.8 Safeguarding Cultural Property Operations Directive 11.03 39
5.4.2 International Conventions 39
5.4.2.1 United Nations Convention on Biological Convention 39
5.4.2.2 Ramsar Convention on Wetlands 39
5.4.2.3 Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes 40
5.4.2.4 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species 40
5.4.2.3 World Commission in Dams 40
5.4.2.4 Nile Treaties 40
5.4.2.5 EAC Protocol on Environment 41
5.5.1 Environmental Institutions 41
5.5.1.1 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 42
5.5.1.2 Ministry of Lands, Environment, Forestry, Water and Mines 42
5.5.1.3 Provincial, District and Lower level Environmental Committees 43
5.5.1.4 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources 43
5.5.1.5 Ministry of Infrastructure 43
5.5.1.6 Institute for Agricultural Science (ISAR) 43
5.5.1.7 Integrated Management of Critical Ecosystems 43
5.5.2 Relevant Organizations 44
5.5.2.1 German Agro Action 44
5.5.2.2 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 44
5.5.2.3 Adventist Development and Relief Agency 44
5.5.2.4 Nile Basin Initiative 44
5.5.3 Institutional Needs 47
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS OF THE SUBPROJECTS 48
6.1 Positive Impacts 48
6.1.1 Physical impacts 48
6.1.1.1 Water Resources Conservation 48
6.1.1.2 Soil Conservation 48
6.1.1.3 Catchment Rehabilitation and Management 48
6.1.1.4 Flood Control 48
6.1.2 Ecological Impacts 48
6.1.2.1 Revegetation 48
6.1.2.2 Environmental Protection 49
6.1.2.3 Create Birdlife Habitat 49
6.1.3 Socio-Economic Impacts 49
6.1.3.1 Poverty Alleviation 49
6.1.3.2 Food Security 49
6.1.3.3 Raise Rural Income 50
6.1.3.4 Market Creation 50
6.1.3.5 National Economy 50
6.1.3.6 Rural Employment 51
6.1.3.7 Capacity Building 51
6.1.3.8 Promotion of Gender Mainstreaming in Rural Economy 51
6.1.3.9 Reduced Malaria Cases 51
6.2 Adverse Impacts 52
6.2.1 Physical Environment 52
6.2.1.1 Water wastage 52
6.2.1.2 Changes in Hydrology 52
6.2.1.3 Soil Erosion 53
6.2.1.4 Waterlogging and salinization 53
6.2.1.5 Surface Water Resource Pollution 54
6.2.1.6 Sub surface Water Contamination 56
6.2.1.7 Reduced Water Flow 56
6.2.1.8 Flooding 57
6.2.1.9 Microclimate Modification 57
6.2.1.10 Topsoil Stock Piles 57
6.2.1.11 Land Use Change 58
6.2.1.12 Greenhouse Gas Emission 58
6.2.1.13 Reduced Groundwater Seepage 58
6.2.1.14 Siltation of Water Bodies/Reservoirs 59
6.3 1 Biological Environment 59
6.3.1.1 Loss of Aquatic Biodiversity 59
6.3.1.2 Loss of Habitat 59
6.3.1.3 Habitat Fragmentation 60
6.3.1.4 Water Weeds 60
6.3.1.5 Destruction of Fisheries Breeding Ground 60
6.3.1.6 Loss of Avifauna Habitat 61
6.3.2 Social Environment 61
6.3.2.1 Resource Use Conflict 61
6.3.2.2 Water-borne Diseases 61
6.3.2.3 Population Migration 63
6.3.2.4 Safety Hazards 63
6.3.2.5 Loss of Livelihoods 64
6.3.2.6 Emergence of Pests and Crop Diseases 64
6.3.2.7 Displacement 65
6.3.2.8 Food Security and Subsistence 65
6.3.2.9 Loss of Marshland Products and Services 65
6.3.2.10 Child Labour 66
6.3.2.11 Water and Sanitation Impacts 66
7.0 SUBPROJECT ALTERNATIVES 68
7.1 Alternative Technology 68
7.2 Alternative Project Site 68
7.3 Alternative Scale and Design 68
7.4 Alternative Project Phasing 69
7.5 Alternative Project Operating and Maintenance 69
7.6 No Project Alternative 69
8.0 SUBPROJECTS ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 70
8.1 Objectives 70
8.2 EMP Implementation 70
8.2.1 World Bank 70
8.2.2 Rural Sector Support Project 70
8.2.3 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI) 70
8.2.3.1 Training on IPM 71
8.2.3.2 Training in Fertilizer and Pesticides Application 71
8.2.3.3 Efficient Water Use 71
8.2.4 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 71
8.2.4.1 Catchment Management 71
8.2.5 Project Beneficiaries 71
8.2.6 Contractors 71
8.2.7 Ministry of Health 71
8.2.8 Local Authorities 72
8.2.9 Integrated Management of Critical Ecosystem 72
8.3 Monitoring Plan 84
8.4 Monitoring Schedule 85
8.5 EMP Budget 89
9.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 90
9.1 Stakeholder Mapping 90
9.2 Stakeholder Identification 90
9.3 Stakeholder Consultation 90
9.3.1 Focus Group Meetings 90
9.3.2 Stakeholder Consultative Workshop 90
9.3.2 Issues and Concerns 91
10.0 STUDY LIMITATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS 92
11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION 93
11.1 Recommendations 93
11.1.1 Management Systems 93
11.1.2 Water Abstraction Fees 93
11.1.2 Capacity Building 93
11.1.3 Catchment Management 94
11.1.4 Agrochemical Pollution Control 94
11.1.5 Monitoring Plan 95
11.1.6 Policy Formulation 95
11.1.7 Conservation Systems 95
11.1.8 Coordination 96
11.2 Conclusion 96
ANNEXES 98
ANNEX A. CYUNUZI SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 99
1.1 Objectives 99
1.2 Project Area Description 99
1.2.1 Location 99
1.2.2 Catchment and Hydrology 99
1.2.3 Marshland 99
1.3 Project Description 100
1.3.1 Dam Construction 100
1.3.2 Construction of Drainage and Networks 100
2.0 ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 101
2.1 Physical Environment 101
2.1.1 Water Pollution 101
2.1.2 Reduced Water Flow 101
2.1.3 Changes in hydrology 101
2.1.4 Land Use Loss and Change 101
2.2 Biological Environment 101
2.2.1 Loss of Marshland Vegetation 101
2.3 Socio-economic Environment 102
2.3.1 Water-borne Diseases 102
2.3.2 Loss of Domestic Water Source 102
2.3.3 Safety Hazards 102
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 103
3.1 World Bank 103
3.2 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINIAGRI) 103
3.2.1 Training on IPM 103
3.3 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 103
3.3.1 Catchment Management 103
3.4 Ministry of Health 103
3.5 Cyunuzi Association 103
3.6 Local Authority 103
3.7 Contractors 103
3.8 Environment Management Plan Schedule 104
3.9 Monitoring Plan 116
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 120
4.1 Recommendations 120
ANNEX B. GISAYA SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 121
1.1 Objectives 121
1.2 Project Area Description 121
1.2.1 Project Location 121
1.2.2 Project Catchment and Hydrology 121
1.2.3 Gisaya Marshland 121
1.2.4 Project Beneficiaries 122
1.3 Project Description 122
1.3.1 Dam construction 122
1.3.2 Construction of irrigation and drainage Networks 122
1.3.3 Development of 100 ha of marshland 122
1.3.4 Irrigation 122
2.0 ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 123
2.1 Physical Environment 123
2.1.1 Water Pollution 123
2.1.2 Reduced Water Flow 123
2.1.3 Changes in hydrology 123
2.1.4 Land Use Loss and Change 123
2.2 Biological Environment 123
2.2.1 Loss of Marshland Vegetation 123
2.3 Socio-economic Environment 124
2.3.1 Loss of Marshland Products and Services 124
2.3.2 Loss of water Source 124
3.2.3 Safety Hazards 124
3.2.4 Child Labour 124
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 126
3.1 World Bank 126
3.2 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINIAGRI) 126
3.2.1 Training on IPM 126
3.3 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 126
3.3.1 Catchment Management 126
3.4 Ministry of Health 126
3.5 Gisaya Association 126
3.6 Local Authority 126
3.7 Contractors 126
3.8 Environment Management Plan Schedule 127
3.9 Monitoring Plan 139
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 143
4.1 Recommendations 143
ANNEX C. KAJEVUBA SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 144
1.1 Objectives 144
1.2 Project Area Description 144
1.2.1 Project Location 144
1.2.2 Project Catchment and Hydrology 144
1.2.3 Kajevuba Marshland 144
1.2.4 Project Beneficiaries 145
1.3 Project Description 145
2.0 ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 146
2.1 Physical Environment 146
2.1.1 Water Pollution 146
2.1.2 Changes in hydrology 146
2.1.3 Flooding 146
2.2 Biological Environment 146
2.2.1 Change in Habitat 146
2.2.2 Loss of Natural Habitat 147
2.2.3 Loss of Biodiversity 147
2.3 Socio-economic Environment 147
2.3.1 Water-borne Diseases 147
2.3.2 Loss of Water Source 148
2.3.3 Loss of Crop Diversity 148
2.3.4 Food Insecurity 148
2.3.5 Safety Hazards 148
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 149
3.1 World Bank 149
3.2 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINIAGRI) 149
3.2.1 Training on IPM 149
3.2.2 Training in Fertilizer and Pesticides Application 149
3.2.3 Efficient Water Use 149
3.3 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 149
3.3.1 Catchment Management 149
3.4 Ministry of Health 149
3.5 ABAKUMBURWA Cooperative 149
3.6 Local Authority 150
3.7 Contractors 150
3.8 Environment Management Plan Schedule 151
3.9 Monitoring Plan 160
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 163
ANNEX D. KAMIRANZOVU SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 164
1.1 Objectives 164
1.2 Project Area Description 164
1.2.1 Location 164
1.2.2 Catchment and Hydrology 164
1.2.3 Marshland 164
1.3 Project Description 165
1.4 Project Beneficiaries 166
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 167
2.1 Physical Environment 167
2.1.1 Loss of Wetland Function 167
2.1.2 Pollution of Lake Kivu 167
2.1.3 Siltation of Lake Kivu 167
2.1.4 Increased Salinity 167
2.2 Biological Environment 167
2.2.1 Habitat Fragmentation 167
2.2.2 Loss of Avifauna Habitat 168
2.2.3 Destruction of Fishery 168
2.2.4 Biodiversity Loss 168
2.3 Socioeconomic Environment 168
2.3.1 Loss of Livelihood 168
2.3.2 Water-borne Diseases 169
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 170
3.1 World Bank 170
3.2 Rural Sector Support Project 170
3.3 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI) 170
3.3.1 Training on IPM 170
3.3.2 Training in Fertilizer and Pesticides Application 170
3.3.3 Efficient Water Use 170
3.4 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 170
3.4.1 Catchment Management 170
3.5 Project Beneficiaries 171
3.6 Contractors 171
3.7 Ministry of Health 171
3.8 Local Authorities 171
3.8 Environment Management Plan Schedule 172
3.9 Monitoring Plan 179
3.10 Monitoring Schedule 180
4.0 CONSCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 183
4.1 Conclusion 184
REFERENCE 185
ANNEX E. KINNYOGO SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 186
1.1 Objectives 186
1.2 Project Area Description 186
1.2.1 Location 186
1.2.2 Catchment and Hydrology 186
1.2.3 Marshland 186
1.2.4 Project Beneficiaries 186
1.3 Project Description 186
2.0 ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 187
2.1 Physical Environment 187
2.1.1 Water Pollution 187
2.1.2 Reduced Water Flow 187
2.1.3 Changes in Hydrology 187
2.1.4 Land Use Loss and Change 187
2.2 Biological Environment 187
2.2.1 Loss of Marshland Vegetation 187
2.3 Socio-economic Environment 188
2.3.1 Water-borne Diseases 188
2.3.2 Loss of Water Source 188
2.3.3 Safety Hazards 188
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 189
3.1 World Bank 189
3.2 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINIAGRI) 189
3.2.1 Training on IPM 189
3.3 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 189
3.2.2 Catchment Management 189
3.4 Community Group 189
3.5 Local Authority 189
3.6 Contractors 189
3.7 Environmental Management Schedule 190
3.8 Monitoring Plan 201
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 204
4.1 Recommendations 204
ANNEX F. NYARUBOGO & KINYEGENYEGE SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 205
1.1 Objectives 205
1.2 Project Area Description 205
1.2.1 Location 205
1.2.2 Catchment and Hydrology 205
1.2.3 Marshland 205
1.2.4 Project Beneficiaries 205
1.3 Project Description 206
2.0 ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 207
2.1 Physical Environment 207
2.1.1 Water Pollution 207
2.1.2 Reduced Water Flow 207
2.1.3 Changes in Hydrology 207
2.1.4 Land Use Loss and Change 207
2.1.5 Flooding 207
2.2 Biological Environment 208
2.2.1 Loss of Marshland Vegetation 208
2.3 Socio-economic Environment 208
2.3.1 Water-borne Diseases 208
2.3.2 Loss of Water Source 208
2.3.3 Safety Hazards 208
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 210
3.1 World Bank 210
3.2 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINIAGRI) 210
3.2.1 Training on IPM 210
3.3 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 210
3.3.1 Catchment Management 210
3.4 Ministry of Health 210
3.5 Community Association 210
3.6 Local Authority 210
3.7 Contractors 210
3.8 Environment Management Plan Schedule 211
3.9 Monitoring Plan 224
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 228
ANNEX G. NYARUBUBA SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 229
1.1 Objectives 229
1.2 Project Area Description 229
1.2.1 Project Location 229
1.2.2 Catchment and Hydrology 229
1.2.3 Marshland 229
1.3 Project Description 229
1.3.1 Marshland Development 230
1.3.2 Construction of Drainage and Networks 230
1.3.3 Irrigation Farming 230
2.0 ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 231
2.1 Physical Environment 231
2.1.1 Water Pollution 231
2.1.2 Reduced Water Downstream 231
2.2 Biological Environment 231
2.2.1 Loss of Farm diversity 231
2.2.2 Loss of Ex situ Conservation of Fisheries 231
2.2.3 Emergence of Pests and Crop Diseases 231
2.3 Socio-economic Environment 232
2.3.1 Displacement 232
2.3.2 Loss of Livelihoods 232
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 233
3.1 World Bank 233
3.2 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINIAGRI) 233
3.2.1 Training on IPM 233
3.3.2 Training in Fertilizer and Pesticides Application 233
3.3.3 Efficient Water Use 233
3.3 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 233
3.3.1 Catchment Management 233
3.4 Ministry of Health 233
3.5 Community Group 233
3.6 Local Authority 234
3.7 Contractors 234
3.8 Environment Management Plan Schedule 235
3.9 Monitoring Plan 245
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 249
ANNEX H. RUGAZI-BISENGA SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 250
1.1 Objectives 250
1.2 Project Area Description 250
1.2.1 Location 250
1.2.2 Catchment and Hydrology 250
1.2.3 Marshland 250
1.2.4 Project Beneficiaries 251
1.3 Project Description 251
1.3.1 Dam construction 251
1.3.2 Construction of Irrigation Network and Drainage Canal 251
1.3.3 Development of Marshland 251
1.3.4 Irrigation 251
2.0 ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 252
2.1 Physical Environment 252
2.1.1 Water Pollution 252
2.1.2 Reduced Water Flow Downstream 252
2.1.3 Changes in Hydrology 252
2.1.4 Land Use Loss and Change 252
2.2 Biological Environment 252
2.2.1 Change in Habitat 252
2.2.2 Destruction of Fisheries 253
2.3 Socio-economic Environment 253
2.3.1 Displacement 253
2.3.2 Safety Hazards 253
2.3.3 Loss of Crop Diversity 253
2.3.4 Health Impacts 254
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 255
3.1 World Bank 255
3.2 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINIAGRI) 255
3.2.1 Training on IPM 255
3.3 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 255
3.3.1 Catchment Management 255
3.4 Community Group 255
3.5 Local Authority 255
3.6 Contractors 255
3.7 Environment Management Plan Schedule 256
3.8 Monitoring Plan 272
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 277
4.1 Recommendations 277
ANNEX I. RUGERAMIGOZI SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 278
1.1 Objectives 278
1.2 Project Area Description 278
1.2.1 Location 278
1.2.2 Catchment and Hydrology 278
1.2.3 Marshland 278
1.2.4 Project Beneficiaries 278
1.3 Project Description 278
1.3.1 Dam Construction 278
2.0 ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 279
2.1 Physical Environment 279
2.1.1 Water Pollution 279
2.1.2 Reduced Water Flow 279
2.1.3 Changes in Hydrology 279
2.1.4 Land Use Loss and Change 279
2.2 Biological Environment 280
2.2.1 Loss of Marshland Vegetation 280
2.3 Socio-economic Environment 280
2.3.1 Water-borne Diseases 280
2.3.2 Loss of Water Source 280
2.3.3 Safety Hazards 280
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 281
3.1 World Bank 281
3.2 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINIAGRI) 281
3.2.1 Training on IPM 281
3.3 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 281
3.3.1 Catchment Management 281
3.4 Ministry of Health 281
3.5 Rugeramigozi Association 281
3.6 Local Authority 281
3.7 Contractors 281
3.8 Environment Management Plan Schedule 282
3.9 Monitoring Plan 291
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 293
Recommendations 293
ANNEX J. RWAGITIMA SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 294
1.1 Objectives 294
1.2 Project Area Description 294
1.2.1 Location 294
1.2.2 Catchment and Hydrology 294
1.2.3 Marshland 294
1.3 Project Description 295
1.3.1 Dam construction 295
1.3.2 Marshland Development 295
1.3.3 Irrigation Farming 295
1.4 Project Beneficiaries 295
2.0 ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 296
2.1 Physical Environment 296
2.1.1 Reduced water downstream 296
2.2 Biological Environment 296
2.2.1 Habitat Loss 296
2.3 Socio-economic Environment 296
2.3.1 Spread of Water borne Diseases 296
2.3.2 Safety Hazard 296
2.3.3 Displacement 297
2.3.4 Loss of Domestic Water Source 297
2.4 Community Concerns and Issues 297
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 298
3.1 World Bank 298
3.2 Rural Sector Support Project 298
3.3 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI) 298
3.3.1 Training on IPM 298
3.3.2 Training in Fertilizer and Pesticides Application 298
3.3.3 Efficient Water Use 298
3.4 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 298
3.4.1 Catchment Management 298
3.5 Project Beneficiaries 299
3.6 Contractors 299
3.7 Ministry of Infrastructure 299
3.8 Ministry of Health 299
3.9 Local Authorities 299
3.10 Environment Management Plan Schedule 300
Decommissioning Phase 312
3.11 Monitoring Plan 313
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 316
4.1 Recommendations 316
ANNEX K. SAGATARE-NYAMAZI-RWABUTAZI SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 317
1.1 Objectives 317
1.2 Project Area Description 317
1.2.1 Location 317
1.2.2 Catchment and Hydrology 317
1.2.3 Sagatare Marshland 317
1.3 Project Description 317
1.3.1 Dam Construction and Operation 317
1.3.2 Construction of Canals and Drainages 318
1.3.3 Reclamation of Marshland 318
2.0 ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 319
2.1 Physical Environment 319
2.1.1 Water Pollution 319
2.1.2 Soil Erosion 319
2.1.3 Reduced Water Flow 319
2.2 Biological Environment 319
2.2.1 Loss of Marshland Habitat 319
2.3 Socio-economic Environment 320
2.3.1 Loss of Investment 320
2.3.2 Displacement 320
2.3.3 Loss of Livelihoods 320
2.3.4 Water Borne Diseases 320
2.3.5 Safety Hazards 321
2.3.6 Land Use Loss 321
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 322
3.1 World Bank 322
3.2 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINIAGRI) 322
3.3 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 322
3.4 Community Group 322
3.5 Local Authority 322
3.6 Contractor 322
3.7 Environment Management Plan Schedule 323
3.8 Monitoring Plan 335
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 339
4.1 Recommendations 339
ANNEX L. UPPER KIBAYA SUBPROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 340
1.1 EMP Objectives 340
1.2 Project Area 340
1.2.1 Location 340
1.2.2 Catchment and Hydrology 340
1.2.3 Kibaya Marshland 340
1.3 Project Description 341
1.3.1 Dam Construction 341
1.3.2 Construction of Drainage and Networks 341
1.3.3 Project Beneficiaries 341
2.0 ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS 342
2.1 Physical Environment 342
2.1.1 Floods Upstream 342
2.1.2 Water Pollution 342
2.2 Biological Environment 342
2.2.1 Loss of Marshland Vegetation 342
2.3 Socio-economic Environment 342
2.3.1 Food Security 342
2.3.2 Loss of Domestic Water Source 342
2.3.3 Water-borne Diseases 343
3.0 EMP IMPLEMENTATION 344
3.1 World Bank 344
3.2 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINIAGRI) 344
3.2.1 Training on IPM 344
3.3 Rwanda Environment Management Authority 344
3.3.1 Catchment Management 344
3.4 Ministry of Health 344
3.5 Community Association 344
3.6 Local Authority 344
3.7 Contractors 344
3.8 Environment Management Plan Schedule 345
3.9 Monitoring Plan 358
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 362
4.1 Conclusion 362
REFERENCE 363
List of People Consulted 366
List of Figures
Figure 1. RSSP Environmental Impacts Network 7
Figure 2. Secondary growth in Bisenga marshland 9
Figure 3. Secondary growth vegetation in Rugazi 9
Figure 4. Subproject areas 14
Figure 5. Annual rainfall distribution 15
Figure 6. Papyrus in the background of Cyunuzi marshland 19
Figure 7. Secondary vegetation in Rugazi marshland 19
Figure 8. Birdlife in Sagatare marshland 20
Figure 9. Birdlife in Nyarubogo marshland 20
Figure 10. Coffee nursery in Cyunuzi marshland 22
Figure 11. Vegetables being grown in Cyunuzi marshland 22
Figure 12. Malaria cases trends in Kajebuba marshland area 23
Figure 13. Malaria cases trends in Kibaya-Cyunuzi marshland area 24
Figure 14. Villagers of Ngaju fetching water from the Ndente marshland 25
Figure 15. Kibaya marshland is a source of domestic water 25
Figure 16. Women collecting marshland products in Gisaya for mat making 26
Figure 17. Products of marshland used as a ceiling 26
Figure 18. Brick making in Sagatare marshland 27
Figure 19. Brick making in Nyarububa marshland 27
Figure 20. Trends in food crop production based on RSSP phase I 50
Figure 21. Formal meeting with COPRIKI President 91
Figure 22. Talking to cooperative members in Kinnyogo 91
List of Tables
Table 1. Dam specifications and estimated inundated area 10
Table 2. Climatic regions 15
Table 3. Water quality from major Rwanda Rivers related to these marshlands 17
Table 4. Environmental Characteristics of the subproject marshlands 21
Table 5. Demographic figures and poverty rates in the subproject areas 22
Table 6. Summary of the operational policies that will be triggered by RSSP subprojects 39
Table 7. Assessment of Key Environmental Institutions in Rwanda relevant to RSSP 45
Table 8. Selected project beneficiaries by gender 51
Table 9. Summary of adverse impacts characteristics 67
Table 10. Comparative Analysis of alternative subproject technologies 68
Table 11. EMP cost break down per year 89
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ACTS African Centre for Technological Studies
ADRA Adventist Development and Relief Agency
AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
BP Bank Procedure
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity
CH4 Methane
COPRIKI Coopérative du Riticulfens de Kibaya Cyunuzi
CPS Coefficient of Soil Permeability
DAP Diammonium Phosphate
EA Environmental Assessment
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EMP Environmental Management Plan
FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization
FFS Farmers Field Schools
GAA German Agro Action
HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus
IAPs Interested and Affected Parties
IDA International Development Association
IKS Indigenous Knowledge Systems
IPM Integrated Pest Management
IMCE Integrated Management of Critical Ecosystem
ISAR Institut des Sciences Agronomiques du Rwanda
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MINAGRI Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources
MINTERE Ministry of Lands Environment Forestry Water and Mines
NBI Nile Basin Initiative
NELSAP Nile Equatorial Lakes Subsidiary Action Plan
NGO Non Governmental Organization
NPK Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium
OP Operational Policy
PSCU Project Steering Coordinating Unit
RADA Rwanda Agriculture Development Authority
REMA Rwanda Environment Management Authority
RHSP Rwanda Health Sector Plan
RSSP Rural Sector Support Project
SLOs Specialized Local Organizations
SPATR Strategic Plan for Agricultural Transformation in Rwanda
UNAIDS United Nations on HIV/AIDS
USAID United Sates Agency for International Development
Weights and Measures
°C Centigrade
Km Kilometer
mm millimeter
m3 Cubic meter
Ha Hectare
Yr Year
% Percentage
Rwf Rwanda Francs
Ton Tonnes
INTRODUCTION
Rwanda Government through the Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI) has received credit from the International Development Association (IDA) here known as World Bank to finance Rural Sector Support Project (RSSP).
This report covers civil works activities under component 1 of the second phase (intermediate phase) of this 14 year three phased project that will run for a period of 5 years until 2011. The project Rural Sector Support was initiated in 2001 starting with the first phase which has come to an end this year (2007). The first phase of the project involved 7 components which included providing financial and technical opportunities to farmers to improve the efficiency of the cultivation of marshlands and hill-sides, strengthening the capacity of local communities to effectively manage critical ecosystems and those of export crop farmers and exporters to manage their commercial and technical activities and thereby raise the productivity and competitiveness in Rwanda’s export sectors, strengthening the capacities of lead public institutions, farmer associations, and Specialized Local Organizations (SLOs) to participate in the delivery of research and extension services, strengthening the capacities of local communities and private sector operators to construct and maintain transport and post-harvest equipment and infrastructure including construction of feeder roads, bridges, promoting higher levels of off-farm employment and incomes in the program areas through supporting the rehabilitation or construction of agro-processing units and finally program monitoring and evaluation in order to ensure effective monitoring and evaluation of program activities, a monitoring unit through the Program Support and Coordination Unit (PSCU).
Based on the lessons learnt in the first phase, the second phase of the project extends and deepens the institutional and technical support and raises the investment activities in order to accelerate the pace of intensification and commercialization of agricultural production through investment in irrigation infrastructure including civil works, marshland development and irrigation as well as hillside development and rehabilitation.
The study covered subprojects in Muhanga, Kirehe, Ngoma, Gatsibo, Gasabo, Rulindo and Nyanza districts in the republic of Rwanda. The works to be financed through this project will include dam construction, drainage and canals, rice drying areas, and marshland development and rehabilitation, irrigation and fertilizer and pesticide application. The project covers 13 marshland sites in the whole of Rwanda namely Rugeramigozi, Cyunuzi, Upper Kibaya, Sagatare-Nyamazi-Rwabutazi, Kinnyogo II, Rugazi-Bisenga, Rwagitima (Ntende), Kajevuba, Nyarububa, Kamiranzovu and Nyarubogo and Kinyegenyege. These sites were chosen as they are already in use by communities living around the marshlands.
1.1 Project Need
Rural Sector Support Project aims at revitalizing the rural economy and improving the quality of life of the rural poor through increased transfer of technical and financial resources for sustainable rural development in line with comprehensive Poverty Reduction Program supported by the Government of Rwanda. This will be achieved through increasing agricultural productivity and production in marshlands and hillsides targeted for development under the Project by assisting rural households to expand and intensify sustainable agricultural production systems and by accelerating development of market-oriented agriculture.
According to the poverty reduction strategy and the Vision 2020, agricultural is considered as the foundation to national economical growth, thus the need for the government to invest in the sector.
1.2 Historical Background/Existing Conditions
Marshlands in Rwanda have been brought under cultivation due to high population growth and low land productivity and most have been developed hazardly without proper infrastructure and management.
This has led to environmental degradation and low productivity per hectare. Currently, a conservative figure of 94,000 ha of marshland have been brought under agriculture, a large majority of this being spontaneous agriculture with maize, sweet potatoes and beans. These together with high demand for construction materials has led to exploitation of marshlands which contain large water reserves, have lower erosion risks and have natural fertility.
According to a study carried out in 1993, wetlands cover a total area of 165,000 ha, of which 95,000 were being cultivated. Only 5,000 ha benefited from water control works enabling both irrigation and drainage; of the latter, 4,000 were found to be in need of rehabilitation. According to results of the assessment conducted during the preparation of the baseline RSSP show that the performance of these farmed wetlands was unsatisfactory. The reasons for this poor performance included poor design of water control works, unclear property rights and access rights to wetlands, unavailability of adequate technical skills in rural engineering. One important finding of the assessment studies was that the conversion of the wetlands did not take into account the opportunity costs of developing these critical ecosystems. In other words, given the wide range of goods and services provided by some of the farmed wetlands, and their location, society would have been better off letting them undeveloped. The conversion of some wetlands seems to have resulted in ecological and environmental damage that outweigh the value the agricultural output involved.
1.3 Study Objectives
The objectives of this study are two fold:
a) Generally, to support the building of institutional and technical capacities needed to support generation and adoption of efficient cropping and post-harvest technologies; and
b) More specifically, to ensure environmentally sound and sustainable development of agricultural production in the marshlands.
2.0 STUDY SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the spatial and temporal scope of the study as well as the approach and methods that were applied in undertaking this study, developing the subprojects EMPs and involving the public.
2.1 Study Scope
A scoping study was undertaken at the beginning of the study process. This exercise involved consulting with the RSSP personnel in Kigali and the respective provincial offices, cooperative members, key stakeholders and the community. Through the scoping study, which entailed an initial and broad assessment of the project, policies, regulations and baseline data, a scope for the study was generated including geographical coverage, stakeholders (interested and affected parties), significant impacts (areas of study) and the levels of detail in each particular impact study. The spatial scope of the project was determined largely by adopting a catchment approach which considered the subproject areas as part of catchments.
The following scoping techniques were used to determine the scope study of the environmental assessment and the public consultation
• Stakeholders’ consultative meetings.
• Site visits.
• Questionnaire.
• Checklists.
• Literature review
The scope of the study was determined by the individual subprojects scattered all over Rwanda, the influence of the potential impacts and stakeholders input. The terms of reference also helped in shaping the scope as well as the methodology to be applied in assessing the impacts.
The scoping exercise also resulted in the formulation of an initial Environmental Impact Identification Matrix which was further refined as the study progressed. The matrix is presented in the table below.
| | |Environmental Impact Matrix | | |
| |Project Activities |
|Rugeramigozi Dam |The site is located in Muhanga District, Southern Province. The marshland is already developed by a NGO (German Agro Action), and there are an existing |
| |irrigation and drainage network, and hydraulic infrastructures. The works to be done: include construction of an irrigation dam with a capacity of 270.000 |
| |m3 |
|Cyunuzi Dam |The site is located in Kirehe District, Eastern Province. The marshland is already developed by RSSP; there are irrigation & drainage networks and hydraulic|
| |infrastructures. The project proposes to construct an irrigation dam and irrigating an area of 200 ha. |
|Upper Kibaya |The project is located in Ngoma District, Eastern Province. The marshland is already developed by rice farmers (with FAO funds). The subproject activities |
| |will include the construction of a dam, an irrigation & drainage networks (+ hydraulic infrastructures). The area to be developed is 100 ha with an area 250|
| |ha to be irrigated. |
|Sagatare-Nyamazi-Rwabutazi |The marshland is located in Kirehe District, Eastern Province. The area is already developed by rice farmers. Works to be done: construction of a dam, an |
| |irrigation & drainage networks (+ hydraulic infrastructures). The area to be developed is 270 ha while 270 ha will be irrigated |
|Kinnyogo II |The project marshland is located in Kirehe District, Eastern Province. The area is already developed by rice farmers. The project activities will include |
| |construction of an irrigation & drainage networks (hydraulic infrastructures). The area to be developed for irrigation is 150 ha. |
|Gisaya |The marshland is located in Kirehe District, Eastern Province. The area is already developed by rice farmers. Works to be done: construction of a dam and |
| |irrigation & drainage networks. The area to be developed for irrigation is 100 ha |
|Rugazi-Bisenga |The marshland is located in Ngoma District, Eastern Province. The area is already developed by farmers with support from FAO. The main crops grown in the |
| |marshland include sorghum, maize, sunflower and sweet potato. Civil works to be undertaken in this marshland include construction of two small dams, |
| |irrigation & drainage networks, and development of 200 ha of marshland and irrigating of 200 ha. |
|Rwagitima (Ntende) |The activities to be undertaken include construction of two dams (500, 000 m3), an irrigation & drainage networks (+ hydraulic infrastructures). Development|
| |of 525 ha and irrigation of 600 ha |
|Kajevuba |The marshland is located in Gasabo District. The project will involve rehabilitation of 95 ha of marshland area, and construction of irrigation and drainage|
| |network. |
|Nyarububa |The marshland is located in Rulindo Districts, in Northern province. The activities to be undertaken in this marshland include rehabilitation of 60 ha of |
| |marshland farm and irrigation and drainage network. The hillside is protected by radical terracing on 60ha. |
|Nyarubogo & Kinyegenyege |The marshlands are located in Nyanza District, in Southern province. The total area of the marshland to be developed is 320 ha. Civil works will include |
| |construction of two dams and irrigation drainages and networks |
|Kamiranzovu |Kamiranzovu marshland is located in Nyamasheke district. The total area to be developed is 100ha. RSSP will construct irrigation networks. |
4.0 PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION
This chapter describes and assess the existing project area environment to set the benchmark upon which the impacts can be measured and eventually monitored. It should be noted that this is a sub sector wide project that will be undertaken in different locations. The chapter gives an overview description of Rwanda then narrows to the specific subproject area describing the environmental setup in detail.
4.1 Physical Environment
4.1.1 Subprojects Locations
The subprojects areas are dispersed in Rwanda and are located in Kigali (central), southern, eastern and northern parts of the country covering a total of 13 marshlands as illustrated in figure 3. Cyunuzi, Sagatare, Kibaya, Rugazi, Rwagitima, Gisaya and Kinnyogo marshlands are all located in Eastern province. These marshlands can be classified as eastern plateau marshlands and form part of the Nile Basin. The marshlands of Kinyogo, Cyunuzi, Kibaya and Sagatare confluence in Kibaya-Cyunuzi marshland. These four marshlands drain into Kagera River as one. Other marshlands of this catchment are Rwagitima, Rugazi-Bisenga and Gisaya. All these marshlands flow their waters into Akagera River. These marshlands are part of the Nile River Basin whose area covers 67% of Rwanda and delivers 90% of the national waters. Waters of the Nile River Basin flow out of the catchment through the Akagera River, the main tributary to Lake Victoria, which bears the outlet of the White Nile. Akagera River contributed 9 to 10% of the total Nile Waters. Rulindo and Nyarubaba are located in Northern Province, Kajevuba in Kigali, Rugeramigozi in South, while Nyarububa is in the north.
Cyunuzi, Sagatare, Kibaya and Kinnyogo marshlands are all located in between latitudes 2° 12' and 2°51'S, and 225 km from west to east between longitudes 28°51' and 30°54'E. It stretches 185 km from north to south. All these marshlands are related in terms of hydrology and as you will see in the section on project area hydrology, they all drain in Akagera which flows towards Nile River through Lake Victoria.
The only marshland that is not part of the Nile river basin is the Kamirazovu which is located in Southern part of the country and drains into Congo basin through Lake Kivu. This marshland is downstream of Kamiranzovu wetland. The marshland is an ecotone of Lake Kivu and Kamiranzovu wetland and is separated by Cyangugu-Kibuye road and a strip of papyrus. Figure 4 below shows the spatial distribution of the subproject areas.
Figure 4. Subproject areas
[pic]
4.1.2 Climate and Meteorology
Rwanda has a mild climate and moderated by altitude despite the proximity to the equator. The high peaks experience almost permanently inclement weather, cool or cold and very rainy. The areas of eastern part of the Nile Basin (Kibaya, Cyunuzi, Sagatere, Gisaya, Kinnyogo and Rugazi-Bisenga) get an annual rainfall of between 700-1400mm.
The high plateau is temperate (Kamiranzovu), but still comparatively wet, while the eastern third of the country has a tropical rather than an equatorial climate. Mean annual rainfall may reach 2800 mm on the western faces of the highest peaks, but is probably no more that 2400 mm/yr over most of the western dorsale. It averages 1200 mm/yr in central districts but declines eastwards with loss of altitude to as little as 650 mm/yr. Refer to figure 5 for rainfall patterns.
Figure 5. Annual rainfall distribution
Source. Nile Basin Initiative
Subproject areas in the eastern parts of the country experiences average rainfall of 900mm, those in the south have an average of 1400mm while Kamirazonvu get between 1200-1800mm.
The mean annual temperature at is 19.5°C, with mean annual maxima and minima of 25.7 and 13.3°C. Rwanda has more or less constant annual temperatures ranging from 16 to 17°C for the high altitude region, 18 to 21°C for the Central Plateau and 20 to 24°C for the lowlands in the East and West. The eastern marshlands have temperature regimes of more or less constant with a temperature regime of 24°C. See table 2 below for summary of climatic conditions.
Table 2. Climatic regions
|Parameter |High altitude region |Plateau central |East Plateau and west low |
| | | |land |
|Rainfall (mm/year) |1300 – 2000 |1200 – 1400 |700 – 1 400 |
|Temperature (°C) |16 – 17 |18 – 21 |20 – 24 |
|Evapotranspiration (mm/year) |1000 – 1300 |1300 – 1400 |1000 – 1 750 |
|Runoff coefficient (%) |18 |22 |10 |
Source: AQUASTAT FAO
4.1.3 Topography and soils
Most of the subproject marshlands are in low altitude areas (1300 and 1400m). Kamiranzovu and Rugezi are the only major high altitude marshes ranging between 1800-2000 m. Kamiranzovu marshland soil is composed of schists silty clay from the formation of quartzitic. Upstream is a vast and thick deposit of alluvia and colluviums. These deposits are made primarily from argilo-muddy materials finely micaceous, laminate and in a less measurement of fine sand.
The surface area of each of the small marshlands of Rwanda varies widely, ranging from 20 ha to hundreds of hectares. These marshlands are generally separated from hills by small strips of land called transition soils. These transition soils have properties that are intermediary between upland soils and marshland soils, due to a low concentration of alluvial material, high concentration of colluvial material and better drainage than in the marshlands.
These marshlands trap silt from the catchments making them very productive for agricultural production with the presence of water whole year around. Poor farming methods on the hillsides and heavy rainfall have led to erosion of the top soil into the marshlands on the lower regions. In the east of the country where there is a hot, ustic climate, mineral soils (of alluvial/colluvial origin) of marshland are generally rich in exchangeable bases and are often vertisolic. Their PH is at least 5 or more, and their colour is dark. The salts can, after water evaporation, accumulate on the surface in the dry season. In general, the agricultural potential of these soils is very high but the vertic character found in some areas makes their development difficult. In most of the marshlands, the soil is clay, though in Kinnyogo the soil is a mixture of clay and black cotton soil. In Rwagitima-Ntende the upstream is composed of clays and sandy soils.
4.1.4 Hydrology
Rwanda is divided into two major drainage basins, the Nile to the east and the Congo to the west. The Congo River Basin covers 25 percent of Rwanda and receives 10 percent of the total national rainfall. The rainfall regime has a strong influence on the hydrological regime. The country experiences floods during the long rainy season (March – May) and floods subside during the long dry season (June – September). Low water levels are very marked.
The catchment/watershed of these marshlands are the many hills that catch rain water and drains slowly to the lower areas where the marshlands modify the movement of water in the channel network by lowering the peak flow and volume of flood discharges. Ground water in most of these marshlands areas is struck at a depth of 8m. The marshlands provide recharge of the ground water through percolation during water retention time in the area.
Gisaya river flow rates taken in January 2007 downstream of the proposed dam site was estimated at 20 l/s that is a specific flow of 2 l/s.km2. Ntende flows measured with the micro winch in May 2007 at the upstream of the site of the dam measured flows reaching 80 l/s for Kiliba River and 120 l/s for Ntende River. This is approximately a specific flow of 2.3 l/s.km2 for Kiliba River and 2.6 1/s/km2 for Ntende River. Rugazi marshland flows were 80 l/s for Gashubi River and 120 l/s for Giteme River approximately a specific flow of 2.3 l/s.km2 for the Gashubi Rive and 2.6 l/s/km2 for the Giteme River.
Kibaya flow rate was calculated by the spill way formula on the basis of water blade of 0.05m. The calculated flow rate in March was found to be 2 l/s.km2. Sagatare flows were estimated in March 2007 at the level of diversion channel dug for the works on the bridge of the trail Kirehe – Musaza that is at the outlet of the slope basin. The rate of flow calculated in March is 60 l/s that is a specific flow of 1.8 l/s.km2.
The measurements were taken only for one month while ideally the flow rate data should be throughout the year. This would enable to estimate the seasonally fluctuations of the flows.
Kinnyogo, Cyunuzi, Kibaya, Sagatare, Rwagitima-Ntende, Rugazi-Bisenga, Nyarububa, Nyarobogo, Rugeramigozi, Kajevuba, Kanyegenyege and Gisaya are marshlands of Nile Basin catchment and flow into Kagera River directly or through Nyabarongo River before draining into Kagera. Kamiranzovu is a marshland of Congo basin that flows into Lake Kivu before draining into Atlantic. Water quality of these marshland streams are as indicated in the table 3 below. Kinyogo, Kibaya and Sagatare marshlands are upstream of Cyunuzi where they meet at Cyunuzi-Kibaya marshland. The three marshlands share common catchments before joining Kagera River which drains to Lake Victoria. The Kamiranzovu marshland gets its source from Nyungwe forest at an altitude ranging between 2000 and 2500m. The water flows into Lake Kivu
The common source of water pollution in the subproject areas is pit latrines in areas where they are available and agricultural inputs. In areas where coffee is grown, coffee washing plants also introduce substantial quantities of pulp waste, and discharges washing and fermentation water into marshland riverine system. This was witnessed in Gisaya where a RSSP funded washing station drains its wastes into the marshland. Spraying of vegetables also contributes to the overall surface water pollution especially in Rugazi, Kajevuba, Nyarububa marshlands. The common contaminants from the spraying include compounds Sumicombi, Sumithion and karate and ridomil Dithane.
Table 3. Water quality from major Rwanda Rivers related to these marshlands
|Source |Cu2+ (mg/l) |Mn (mg/l) |Cr6+ μ/l |Fe (mg/l) |Na (mg/l) |K (mg/l) |C.P.S % Na |
|Akagera |0.020 |0.125 |0.275 |0.780 |9.85 |6.76 |59.30 |
|Ruvubu |0.050 |0.050 |0.250 |1.490 |12.68 |10.94 |72.23 |
|Akagera + Ruvubu |0.030 |0.150 |0.325 |0.090 |11.90 |10.85 |70.19 |
|Akagera |0.025 |0.150 |0.550 |0.660 |7.800 |7.24 |49.44 |
|Ngoma |0.100 |1.02 |0.700 |1.430 |8.60 |5.77 |51.52 |
|Muvumba |0.105 |0.135 |0.750 |1.950 |15.20 |4.59 |45.23 |
|Muvumba + Ngoma |0.101 |1.075 |0.700 |1.890 |10.32 |4.69 |44.29 |
|Kagitumba |0.101 |0.175 |0.250 |1.540 |9.02 |2.81 |45.37 |
|Akanyaru |0.090 |0.175 |0.300 |1.000 |2.73 |1.15 |44.29 |
|Agatobwe |0.025 |0.150 |0.250 |0.825 |6.34 |1.45 |58.05 |
|Akanyaru+Agatobwe |0.050 |0.175 |0.275 |0.900 |3.13 |1.23 |47.19 |
|Kabogobogo |0.050 |0.100 |0.275 |0.525 |13.50 |1.26 |72.88 |
|Akanyaru |0.060 |0.425 |0.500 |3.370 |2.56 |1.38 |44.67 |
|Migina |0.050 |0.050 |0.275 |0.600 |5.12 |0.93 |47.01 |
|Base |0.475 |0.130 |0.130 |2.300 |1.650 |0.50 |18.30 |
Source. Nile Basin Initiative
The Nile River Basin covers an area of 75 percent of the territory and receives 90 percent of the national rainfall. The waters of the Nile River basin flow out through the Akagera river system, which contributes between 8 and 10 percent to the Nile drainage system (FAO, 2000). Thus, run-off from Rwanda finds its way, either to the Atlantic Ocean via Lake Tanganyika and the Zaire River, or to the Mediterranean Sea via Lake Victoria and the Nile. Therefore any effect on these two major catchments affects either of the two drainages and the people who depend on them.
The four subprojects areas share the same catchment or confluence in the same marshland. These are Kibaya, Cyunuzi, Kinnyogo and Sagatare (refer to annexes). The four marshlands drain into Cyunuzi which is the biggest of all, after which Cyunuzi drains its waters into Kagera River that flows into Lake Victoria. Nyarubogo, Kanyegeye and Rugemigozi all flow into Akayaru River which confluence with the Ruvuvu River forming the Kagera River. Nyarububa and Kajevuba are part of the Nyabarongo tributaries. Kajevuba flows into Nyabugogo River which drains into Nyabarongo.
Irrigation is relatively common in these marshlands, especially as back-up in several marshlands, even in those with rudimentary works. There are no official statistics on water consumption on irrigated farms. Based on a consumption of 1 litre/s/ha over a 250-day crop period per year (two seasons), annual consumption would stand at 108 mm³ for 5 000 irrigated hectares in 2005 and projected at 432 mm³ for 20 000 ha in 2020. These figures exclude small fields with rudimentary technology as the once targeted by RSSP.
Given the annual water flow in the country's major catchment basins (nearly 5 billion m³ for the Nyabarongo, 1 billion m³ for Mwogo-Nyabarongo), the quantity of irrigation water needed in future is not a limiting factor to the development of irrigation in Rwanda nor for users located on these basins' downstream. However, for the smallest catchments and secondary rivers, limitations rapidly emerge with regard to developing existing marshlands. Even though the country has major quantities of water for irrigation purposes, there is a gap between the availability of water and the possibility of using it easily and at least cost.
There do not exist complete data on ground water of Rwanda. However with the available information from some projects, it is estimated that the discharge for the available resource is 66m3/s. In that discharge, there are 22,000 recognized sources which have a discharge of 9.0 m3/s, but the population is consuming only 0.9m3/s and the rest of the water is lost for the whole country (NBI, 2005).
4.1.5 Land Uses
Land use in the project areas can be classified into three types. These are; steep hill wooded areas and farms, foot hill settlement and farms and marshlands or low areas.
The steep hills are characterised by trees and shrubs as a result of government policy to rehabilitated degraded sloppy areas that were once cultivated. The second land use type is the mid hill or foot hill settlements and farms. Here crops grown include bananas which occupy more than 90% of the land, sorghum, coffee, cassava, and maize. The settlements are concentrated together into what is known as imidugudu or villages. Most households are small scale occupying less than 0.75 ha of land.
The third land use is marshlands that are cultivated as third season areas. These marshlands are used to grow rice, vegetables (tomatoes, cabbage, carrots, chillies, and eggplant.), maize and sweet potatoes. Tree and coffee nurseries are also located in the marshlands. Marshlands are also used for aquaculture especially in Nyarububa and Kibaya marshlands (refer to annex C& G).
In the subproject areas, the marshlands are used to grow rice and vegetables which are in some places rotated with maize and beans. These areas are also used to grow napier grass for cattle’s. Others crops like bananas and coffee, sorghum and cassava grown on the foothill. The settlements are located on the hillsides where the slopes are gentle. The steep slopes are wooded with trees. In Nyarububa area, the marshland also supports fish ponds and the lower areas are settled.
4.2 Biological Environment
4.2.1 Flora
The subproject areas are characterized by two types of natural environment i.e. the hillsides and marshland (low lands) vegetation surrounding area. The vegetation of marshlands is characterised by secondary succession growth due to human activities especially agriculture (figure 7). These cultivated marshlands have changed from natural ecosystems to agroecosystems. Papyrus species are only founded in isolated patches around the developed marshlands of Cyunuzi-Kibaya (see figure 6) and Cyunuzi. The dominant vegetation in all the marshlands is the sedge Cyperus latifolius and Polygonum strigosum Potamogeton sp, Nymphea nouchallii and Euphobia tilucali in areas that have not been cultivated. The rest of the areas have rice, sweet potatoes, nappier grass and vegetables. On the hillsides, the most common vegetation is eucalyptus and grevilia tree species which are found on the steep slopes of the hillsides. Lower parts of the hills are covered with crops mainly bananas.
To describe the floral types found in the marshland in Rwanda its necessary to classify the marshlands in according to the natural vegetation or hydrological characteristics. According to natural vegetation classifications one can distinguish four types of marshland. These are the: papyraie; this type of marshland is essentially swampy, with stagnant water on the surface. It is characterized by an abundant and nearly exclusive vegetation of Cyperus Papyrus, indicating that the valley contains an excess of water throughout the year; marshland with Cyperus Latifolius Water is less abundant than in the type, the level fluctuates by some centimeters below the soil surface. Contrary to the marshland with papyrus, it is almost completely cultivated in the dry season; spongy valley with free water never covers the surface of the soil, its level fluctuates below the surface according to the abundance of rains. Vegetation is shrub-like under which one finds ferns and tall grass. The river flows slowly out and is covered by thick grass and valley. Rivers meander through narrow valleys with small plains serving as farms in the dry season. Water does not cover the whole valley which therefore doesn't become flooded.
[pic]
Figure 6. Papyrus in the background of Cyunuzi marshland
[pic]
Figure 7. Secondary vegetation in Rugazi marshland
In the marshlands where the subprojects are to be undertaken, the vegetations are secondary growth due to agricultural production which has replaced the natural marshland vegetation over the years. Previously, according to the locals, the all the developed marshlands were covered with papyrus species. The developed marshlands undergo three major ecological phases: aquatic, semi-aquatic and terrestrial dry.
4.2.2 Fauna
Rwanda as a whole is known for its rich variety of flora is accompanied by an equal variety of fauna, including several species of birds and primates. The country has more than 275 species of birds, 24 of which are endemic to Albert Rift. Thirteen types of primates have been identified, representing fifth of Africa’s primate species among which is the most threatened. Most of these species are concentrated in large wetlands of (Kagera, Kamiranzovu Rugezi, and Rweru-Mugesera) and protected areas of Nyugwe and Akagera.
However in the subproject areas there are no evidence of large fauna of significant importance in all of the subproject areas. It is however reported that a hippopotamus was reported in downstream dams of Gisaya marshland. The hippopotamus is reported to have moved from Kagera Park to the dam through the marshland. The dominant fauna in these marshlands are micro, meso and macro invertebrates (especially arthropods) inhabiting the vegetation, water and soil sub-habitats of the agricultural fields, while vertebrates are also associated with fields. The aquatic phase of rice fields generally harbours a varied group of aquatic animals. Those that inhabit the vegetation are mainly the arthropod insects and spiders. In addition, many species of amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals visit the rice fields for feeding, from surrounding areas, and are generally considered as temporary or ephemeral inhabitants (Bambaradeniya et al., 1998). In relation to the rice crop, the fauna and flora in rice fields include pests, their natural enemies (predators and parasitoids) and neutral forms.
As the entire subproject areas are agricultural fields converted marshes, they have inherited the aquatic fauna of these marshes and also receive low level fauna seasonally via irrigation systems. Although the various agricultural practices disrupt the aquatic habitat in marshlands, they harbour a variety of organisms, well adapted to this temporary and highly manipulated ecosystem. Seasonal succession of aquatic biota occurs through the crops growing season as the system transforms from an open littoral environment to a vegetated littoral system along with the growth of the crop plants and other macrophytes.
4.2.2.1 Avifuana
Wetlands are known as habitats for endemic birds and as migratory paths for bird’s world over and Rwanda wetlands are no exception. Due to reclamation of most of the marshlands in the subproject areas, the birds habitats have been destroyed leading to migration of birds from these areas (figure 8 & 9). However there was sighting of common bird species (ibis) during the site visits and the locals provided further information of sighted birdlife in the subproject areas.
[pic]
Figure 8. Birdlife in Sagatare marshland
[pic]
Figure 9. Birdlife in Nyarubogo marshland
The larger wetland of Kamiranzovu supports many migratory birds. Grauer’s Swamp-warbler is found in the area and most of Albertine Rift and the species are restricted to highland Swamps in the Mountains around Lake Kivu. The species area of occupancy is probably 200-250 km (BirdLife International 2000). The population of the Grauer’s Swamp-warbler was earlier estimated to be 3000 pairs in Kamiranzovu, but only 100 pairs in the whole of Burundi (Vande wege, in Collar and Stuart 1985). The most important site for the Grauer’s Swamp-warbler is probably the threatened and unprotected Rugezi swamp in northern Rwanda, which covers 8,000 ha (Vande weghe 1983). The global population of the species is estimated to be less than 10,000 individuals (BirdLife International 2000, 2004).
4.2.2.2 Fisheries
In all the marshlands excluding Rwagitima-Ntende, the locals reported fish presence in the respective areas. The importance of the fish is low as the children are the ones who fish for fun. The role of these marshlands to fisheries resources and diversity in Akagera River and Lake Muhazi is not known. The common fish species in these marshlands as reported by the locals are Clarias carsonii.
Table 4. Environmental Characteristics of the subproject marshlands
|N° |Marshland |Soils |Altitude |Vegetation |Location |
| | | |(m) | | |
|1 |Kajevuba | |1436 | |Kigali |
|2 |Kamiranzovu | |1466 |Cyperus latifolius, Miscanthus, |Nyamasheke |
| | | | |Syzygium cordatum | |
|3 |Gisaya |clay or lime-clay|1145 | |Kirehe |
| | |soils | | | |
|4 |Kibaya | |1432 |Cyperus, papyrus, Polygonum, strigosum,|Ngoma |
| | | | |Polygonum pulchrum, Cyperus latifolius,| |
| | | | |Ludwigia leptocarpa, Spermacoce | |
| | | | |princae, Nymphea | |
|5 |Sagatare | |1402 | |Kirehe |
|6 |Kinnyogo | |1411 | |Kirehe |
|7 |Nyarubogo | | | |Nyanza |
|8 |Rugeramigozi |Mineralized soil | |Cyperus latifolius, |Muhanga |
| | |Sandy | | | |
|9 |Kinyegeyege | | | |Nyanza |
|10 |Rwagitima |Vertisol, | |Typha domingensis | |
| | | | |Polygonum pulchrum | |
|11 |Rugazi-Bisenga | |1439 | |Ngoma |
|12 |Cyunuzi | |1364 | |Ngoma |
|13 |Nyarububa | | | |Rulindo |
4.2.3 Sensitive Ecosystems
Sensitive ecosystems mean those natural areas that are sensitive to both natural and human influence and activities. Wetlands are considered sensitive due to their complex dynamics and role in biodiversity habitat among other functions.
4.3 Socio-Economic Environment
4.3.1 Population and Demography
Rwanda has a population of 8,128,553 (GoR, NCS 2002), and a population density of 321 persons per km2 and with one of the highest mean population density. In effect, of this total surface area, only 21,502 km2 are available or habitable, that is when the areas occupied by water and by forest reserves and parks have been excluded. Thus the density per habitable surface area becomes 378 inhabitants per km2. The annual population growth rate is 3.2 %.
Rwanda’s population is young. Out of the 8 million people living in Rwanda, more than 50% are under the age of 18 years old (Rwanda Country Profile, 2007).The country is largely a rural country with more than 83 % of the population living in rural areas while the rest of the population in urban areas. The demographic characteristics of the subproject areas are as shown on the table 5 below.
Table 5. Demographic figures and poverty rates in the subproject areas
|District |Population |Density |
|Kihere |149,643 |129 |
|Ngoma |43,582 |139 |
|Rulindo |71,715 |546 |
|Kigali | |1262 |
|Muhanga |79,811 |546 |
|Gasabo |90,534 |637 |
|Nyamasheke |74,496 |139 |
|Nyanza |55,699 |219 |
Source. NCS, 2005
4.3.2 Livelihoods
The Rwandan economy is predominantly agricultural featuring mainly subsistent agricultural production in small holdings using intensive traditional farming methods. Eight 8 out of every 10 economically active and employed persons are employed in the agricultural sector. The high rural population densities coupled with the tradition of sharing landed property among heirs has led to an excessive fragmentation of family plots to the extent that agricultural production itself is producing less returns.
Just like the rest of Rwanda, the subproject areas have three agricultural seasons due presence of ever wet marshlands and good climate. Farming for the third season, is carried out in the valleys and marshlands that always have some moisture even during the dry period of June-August. Planting for this season is dependent on the performance and timing of second season rainfall; if this rains end late, then planting for the third season starts later; if second season rains end early, third season begins early. Crops grown in the marshland are mostly vegetables, maize, beans, sweet potatoes and fodder.
The main crops grown in the project areas are bananas, beans, coffee, tobacco, sweet potatoes, rice and vegetables among other crops. Coffee is also grown in the hills of Cyunuzi and Gisaya by a small number of farmers. The marshland is also used to nurse coffee seedlings before transplanting on the hillsides. See figure 10.
[pic]
Figure 10. Coffee nursery in Cyunuzi marshland
[pic]
Figure 11. Vegetables being grown in Cyunuzi marshland
Rice and vegetables are grown in marshlands (figure 11). In all the project sites except Rwagitima upper, rice is grown Vegetables, particularly tomatoes, are the main crops grown in Rugazi-Bisenga marshland. Vegetables are grown during the third season as they flourish well in the marshlands where rice is cannot grow. Tomatoes grow within 3 months and are harvested throughout third season. However, other crops such as sweet potatoes are also planted during the months of April/May and harvested during this the third season in September/October. The third season harvests help to alleviate the severity of the October-November hunger period, and it is assumed that they normally contribute about 10-15 percent of annual food production.
Rice is a cereal with growing importance in Rwanda. In 2003 rice was grown on 6, 020 ha with a total production of 27, 866kg paddy rice, equivalent to 18, 112 kg of polished rice. Rice production is conducted in rice schemes in Cyangugu, Butare, Gitarama, Kigali-Ngali, Umutara and Kibungo. The marshland development master plan identifies 48.000ha of marshlands, which can be used for rice production. The national rice production covered 28 % of rice needs in 2001, 50 % of needs in 2002 and 60% of need in 2003. Importation of rice costs the country an average of 305 Billion Rwf annually, which can be greatly reduced if the national production capacity is increased (SPATR, 2004).
The Rwandan Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP, Rwanda, 2002) identifies agriculture and livestock as primary engines of socio-economic growth. This strategy is predicated on the assumption that agricultural growth will create a demand for non-agricultural goods and services. These goods and services will form an increasingly large share of expenditures as people’s incomes rise. The PRSP identifies agriculture and agro-processing (adding value to agricultural products before export thereof) as sectors with potential growth.
In all the subproject areas, rice is the most common crop grown in the developed marshlands, while other crops are grown on the hillsides. According to WFP Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis conducted in 2006, eastern curve and southern plateau are food insecure areas.
4.3.3 Health
Malaria is one of the main killer diseases in the subproject area as well as the whole of Rwanda representing 40%, followed by diarrhoea and respiratory infections. Both malaria and diarrhoea are water-related diseases whose prevalence is exacerbated by the modification of marshlands and prolonged periods of interaction between people and marshlands. Malaria is the leading cause of infant and child mortality (29 percent). As illustrated in the graphs 12 and 13 below, malaria is all year disease but is more reported during the months of May-June and between January-May. This trend is replicated in all the subproject areas.
Figure 12. Malaria cases trends in Kajebuba marshland area
[pic]
Source. MINSANTE
A high reported case of malaria is during and after the rains. The lag period in some areas could be the period between incubation of the parasite and the start of malaria spreading as well as the time lapse when patients visits health institutions for treatment. Its difficult to relate the increase in malaria cases with presence of a dam or irrigation activities without considering other environmental variables like temperature.
Figure 13. Malaria cases trends in Kibaya-Cyunuzi marshland area
[pic]
Source. MINSANTE
Another health issue that is relevant to this study due to its demographic characteristic of prevalence is AIDS/HIV. It is now estimated at AIDS affects 3% nationally, compared to a rate of 1.3% in rural areas in 1986. Malaria accounts for the great majority of episodes of illness. Diarrhoea also occurs frequently, especially among children. Cases of malaria and diarrhoea in the rural areas are associated marshlands. This shows significant increases in malaria cases, which is attributed in part to project activities at Kajevuba.
According to the 2004 UNAIDS Report on the Global AIDS epidemic, the adult HIV prevalence rate at the end of 2003 in Rwanda was 5.1% (between a low estimate of 3.4% and high estimate of 7.6%). The utilisation of health services is low. Although such services are often available, these are frequently perceived to be too expensive for the poor to use them. When services are consulted, the public hospitals are the most frequently used provider (33.6%), followed by pharmacies (29.1%), health centres (12%), and traditional healers (11.4%), the last being mainly in rural areas.
In the project area there were reported cases of malaria, typhoid, intestinal worms and diarhoea. Other diseases, such as schistosomiasis, onchocercosis and trypanosomiasis were not reported in all the subproject sites. Based on the communities living near the subproject areas, the most reported diseases are malaria and intestinal ailments. These diseases were reported in all the 13 subproject areas.
4.3.4 Water Access and Sanitation
Rural water supply in Rwanda is most often provided through simple piped water systems or protected spring catchments. It is estimated that only 44% of rural households are covered by water distribution points. Available information indicates that sanitation in terms of population with latrines suggests very high coverage at around 85% in rural areas. However, only 0.8% of these are hygiene and safe hygiene practices are not prevalent. Diarrhoea and other water and hygiene related disease conditions rank among the major causes of morbidity and mortality, and children below the age of five years are particularly adversely affected. In the RSSP subproject areas, 75% of the communities get their water from the marshland streams or protected springs in the marshlands as seen in the figures 14 and 15 below.
[pic]
Figure 14. Villagers of Ngaju fetching water from the Ndente marshland
[pic]
Figure 15. Kibaya marshland is a source of domestic water
In Kionnyogo, Cyunuzi and Sagatare the local population depend on the marshland for their domestic water supply. Due to the importance of the marshland for domestic water supply, farmers in Kinnyogo marshland have constructed a pit latrine next to the marshland to prevent water contamination.
4.5 Sensitive Ecosystem
4.5.1 Marshlands
According to Sam Kanyarukiga and Vincent Ngarambe, 1998 one can distinguish four categories of marshlands in Rwanda. First Stage No development. The marshland is covered by a vegetation of papyrus and other herbaceous plants, which is the case for the marshlands of Cyunuzi-Kibaya downstream in eastern Rwanda. In spite of the high demographic pressure, the utilization of these marshlands remains limited due to extremely difficult drainage conditions. Second stage there is a partial utilization of the marshland. The population only resorts to the marshlands during years of acute rain shortage, most farming being carried out on hillsides. Third Stage The marshland is exploited intensively, for crop production. Fourth Stage Intensive utilization of the marshland for agricultural production. At this stage the management of arable lands on the hills becomes a limiting factor. It is therefore necessary to invest in marshland development activities through construction of irrigation/drainage infrastructure as well as introduction of the application of mineral fertilizers. These marshlands include Kajevuba and Nyarububa.
These marshlands act as a buffer in flood or overflow plains, reducing maximal flow rates during the rainy season and maintaining relatively high flow rates during the dry season. They act as sinks for silt particles and soluble inorganic nutrients but are also sources for dissolved and particulate organic matter. They are in effect seasonal wetlands with the water table near or above the lowest ground surface during the wet season. In Gisaya, the marshland provides a source for livelihood to women who collect grass for weaving mats and curtains. Other uses of marshland are harvesting of clay for pottery and brick making especially in Sagatare and Nyarububa marshlands (see figure 16 & 17). Kamirazovu is a sensitive marshland as its waters flows directly to Lake Kivu. In general because all the project marshlands apart from one are in the Nile basin which is already degraded and facing environmental problems including water hyacinth. The marshlands of Kinnyogo, Rwagitima, Cyunuzi and Sagatare are a source of water for the local population.
[pic]
Figure 16. Women collecting marshland products in Gisaya for mat making
[pic]
Figure 17. Products of marshland used as a ceiling
At the confluence of the four marshlands of Kinnyogo, Cyunuzi, Kibaya and Sagatare in a Cyunuzi-Kibaya, a strip of natural marshland remains and this area divides the upstream of these marshlands with Akagera floodplain before it flows into Tanzania. This strip of papyrus filled area is of significant importance in filtering of all the agricultural pollutants from reaching Akagera and down to Lake Victoria.
4.5.2 Hills
Rwanda is characterized by a hilly terrain, with a physiographic pattern of steep hills. That’s why the term “Land of a Thousand Hills”, that briefly but vividly illustrates Rwanda’s high altitudes. Due to the sloppiness of the land in the country, the hills are very sensitive to agents of soil erosion and landslides.
4.4 Environmental and Social Trends
4.4.1 Poverty
The population living below poverty line in 2000 was 64 % and 60 % in 2002, estimates of household under the poverty line in rural areas is higher (68 %) than urban areas 23 %. The Rwanda poverty profile shows that 96 % of poor food insecure people live in rural areas and 4 % in towns. Poverty and living standards depend to a large extent on land and livestock property. These are the areas RSSP activities target to revitalize the economy and improving the quality of life of the rural poor through increased transfer of technical and financial resources for sustainable rural development
4.4.2 Population Increase
As described in section 4.3.1, Rwanda is more of a rural country with more than 80% of the population living in rural areas. Rapid population growth (3.2 %) and the structural constraints have resulted in a number of trends in both urban and rural areas. Firstly, farm holdings have become smaller due to constraints on land availability and holdings are more fragmented. Secondly, cultivation has pushed into valley-bottom lands and fragile, marginal lands on steep slopes previously used for pasture and/or wood lots. Thirdly, many households now rent land, particularly households owning little land or those with large families and finally fallow periods have become shorter and cultivation periods have grown longer, leading to a decline in soil fertility (ACTS, 2004).
4.4.3 Marshland Reclamation
Rehabilitating farmed marshlands is a major element of both GOR and donor activities to increase rural incomes, reduce poverty, and reinforce national stability, but even without development activities, many marshlands are threatened by silting and reduced water retention due to continued vegetation loss and erosion; the pressure of more people using unsustainable land use practices on nearby hillsides; and the downstream impacts of declining water quality. In Rwanda, intensification of the agricultural utilization of marshlands coincides with the growth of the population; indeed, it had been noted that marshlands are put completely under cultivation when all the upland is cultivated.
[pic]
Figure 18. Brick making in Sagatare marshland
[pic]
Figure 19. Brick making in Nyarububa marshland
The local communities have also reclaimed the marshland areas for agriculture and brick making as seen in figures figure 18 and 19 above.
4.4.4 Soil Erosion
According Rwanda Strategic Plan for Agricultural Transformation, the country is losing an estimated 1.4 Million tons of soil per year. This corresponds with a decline in the country’s capacity to feed 40.000 people per year. The annual loss is estimated to be for organic matter (945.200 tons), nitrogen (41.210 tons) phosphorus (280 tons) and potassium (3055 tons). In some areas it can go up to 557 tons/hectare. These losses affected all crops. The Nyabarongo river carries 51 Kg/second of soil at Nyabarongo-Kigali; 44 Kg/second at Nyabarongo-Kanzenze, and 26 Kg/second at Akagera-Rusumo.
The high rates of soil erosion in country could well be explained by the hilly landscape of the country and high population densities which has forced the rural population to cultivate hillsides. Another factor has been lack of investment in soil and water conservation measures by farmers.
Most of the subproject catchments did not show signs of extensive erosion. However the trend in Gisaya and Kibaya will cause erosion of the catchment
4.4.5 Hillside Farming
The catchment areas of Nyarububa and Kinyegenyege, and all other catchments of the marshlands proposed for development are farmed. These areas are susceptible to erosion as pressure continues grow due to high growth of population and shrinking fertile land. However the hillside farming is mostly concentrated in the gentle slopes of the hills while the steep areas have eucalyptus trees and in some places like Kajevuba terraces.
4.4.6 Deforestation
Deforestation in Rwanda relates land scarcity and generalised severe poverty of the local people, weak institutional framework and low investment in forest sector among other issues including the civil war of 1990. Rwanda forest cover is at 19% of the total land area of the country as compared to 26% in 1993. This trend was noticed in Gisaya hills where trees are being felled either for timber or for use as fuelwood. Most of the catchments of the subproject areas are vegetated with eucalyptus tree species and RSSP has in place a reforestation program for the hills.
5.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
This section of the report outlines and reviews the existing legislations, policies and institutions and identifies requirements as well as gaps and conflicts of the relevant legal and institutional arrangements that would hinder or guide the development of the project in line with the national and international laws applicable to RSSP. Rwanda being a signatory to various international conventions and laws, it’s important that national projects are in line with these laws and as such some of the relevant international conventions are reviewed in this chapter.
5.1 Legal Framework
Rwanda is just revising and enacting new institutional, policy and legislative framework in all its sectors and sub sectors after operating with colonial framework until after 1994. Most of the government ministries have already developed the respective sector policies and strategic plans most of which are based on poverty reduction strategy.
5.1.1 Law on Environment Protection and Management
The most relevant legislation for this study is the Organic Law on Environmental Protection, Conservation and Management. The legislation sets out the general legal framework for environment protection and management in Rwanda. The law centres on avoiding and reducing disastrous consequences on environment.
Ministry of Environment (MINITERRE) the ministry responsible for the environment under the article 65 og the legislation puts in place Rwanda Environment Management Authority (REMA) which is the institution charged with the responsibility of ensuring environmental protection by demanding for EIA studies to be undertaken before projects are executed. Chapter IV of the Organic Law Article 65 clearly calls for the need to subject projects to mandatory Environmental Impact Assessment.
Article 65: Further specifies that every project shall be subjected to environmental impact assessment prior to its commencement. It shall be the same for programs, plans and policies likely to affect the environment. Specific details of projects referred to in this Article shall be spelt out by the order of the Minister in charge of environment.
Article 67 States that the analysis and approval of environmental impact assessments is done by the Rwanda Environmental Protection Authority or any other person given a written authorisation. The project promoter shall pay a levy which shall be assessed from the amount invested or to be invested, excluding the amount of operating cost. The assessment of this levy shall be fixed by law establishing the National Fund for the Environment. The impact study shall be done at the expense and under the responsibility of the promoter.
The Organic Law also puts in place the National Fund of the Environment in Rwanda (FONERWA). The composition, the working and the assignments of these institutions will be determined by particular laws. Title IV of Article 67 of the Organic Law requires that the execution of Policies, Plans and Projects must be subject to mandatory EIA studies to identify the potential adverse impacts they could have on the environment.
Further to this through the Ministerial Decree, a list of all the project that must be subjected to mandatory EIA has been put in place under article 68 of the Organic Law. Article 30 further stipulates that works of public or private construction as roads, dams etc must be subjected to EIA studies. Article 69 of the Organic Law further specifies that the EIA studies undertaken must be submitted to REMA for approval and the studies must be undertaken at the proponent’s expense. These projects include dam construction and irrigation activities. However the law is silent on the scale of irrigation activities that require EIA.
Article 85 of the Environment Organic Law’s stipulates that with exception of activities related to protection and conservation of streams, rivers and lakes, and agricultural activities shall respect a distance of ten (10) metres away from the banks of streams and rivers and fifty (50) metres away from the banks of lakes. In such distances there shall be no agricultural activities permitted to be carried out.
5.1.2 Law in the Use and Management of Land in Rwanda
The law in the use and management of land determines how land should be used in Rwanda. It also institutes the principles that are respected on land legal rights accepted on any land in the country as well as all other appendages whether natural or artificial.
Chapter II of the law categorizes land according to its uses. Article 12 of the law gives the state ownership over land which makes up the public domain including lakes and rivers as listed by an order of the Minister having water in his or her attributions, shores of lakes and rivers up to the length determined land occupied by springs and wells determined in accordance with an order of the Minister having water in land reserved for environmental conservation composed of natural forests, national parks, reserved swamps, public gardens and tourist sites among others
Article 29 gives the state control over swamp. The state is the only authority over the use. The law calls for inventory of the all swamps and their boundaries the structure of the swamps, their use, how they can be organized.
According to article 29 of the Land Organic Law, swamp land belongs to the state and no person can use the reason that he or she has spent a long time with it to justify the definitive take over of the land. In order for the swamp land to be efficiently managed and exploited, a Minister must give an order having Environment in his or her attributions that shall determine a list of swamps and their boundaries. The law further requires that such a list shall clearly indicate the structure of the swamps, their use, how they can be organized so that they can be beneficial to Rwandan nationals on a sustainable basis. The ministerial order must also certify the modalities of how swampland shall be managed, organized and exploited.
5.2 Policy Framework
5.2.1 Health Sector Policy
One of the objectives of Rwanda Heath Sector Policy is to improve the quality of and demand for services in the control of disease. The policy identifies the most common illnesses in Rwanda and puts priority to addressing these diseases.
The policy calls for the strengthening of measures of prevention and the improvement of the management of cases building on the multi-sectoral approach. The approach consists of rapid diagnosis and treatment of cases, increase in the protection of individuals and communities using preventative methods (impregnated mosquito nets, intermittent presumptive chemo-prophylaxis treatment for pregnant mothers, management of the environment, including vector control), making decision based on evidence, monitoring, community sensitization and adapted interventions, targeted research and coordinated activities aimed at reinforcing existing health services.
Irrigation projects and marshlands having a role to play in malaria incidences, the policy in these subproject areas should emphases more on environmental control of the disease vector especially in marshy areas as opposed to curative services.
5.2.2 Agriculture Policy
The main objective of Rwanda agricultural policy is to intensify and the transform subsistence agriculture into a market oriented agriculture, and which requires the modern inputs, notably improved seeds and fertilizer. The policy puts emphasis on marshland development for increased food production.
The agricultural policy identifies critical areas in the sector that require improvement to achieve food security and export. These areas include intensification of fertilizer use which is at an average of 2kg/ha and pesticide use which is estimated an average of 1.6kg/ha (MINAGRI, 2005). However the country does not have pesticide use policy of legislation to guide the use and handling of these chemicals.
The policy promotes small scale irrigation infrastructure development in the country’s selected marshlands while preventing environmental degradation, prioritizes rice production among other crops and extension services. To achieve sustainable agricultural development, the policy emphasis the need to adopt Integrated Pest Management practices.
5.2.3 Land Policy
The most relevant chapter in the new land policy is chapter 5 on land policy guidelines. This chapter deals among others with the use and management of hill lands and marshlands in Rwanda. The policy calls for rational use and sound management of national land resources and be based on master plans. The policy also provides development of land use plans based on suitability of the areas/lands thus distinguishing the different categories of land and their purpose.
The policy gives strategic direction options including the need for hills be governed by the written law, and the obligation to develop that land should be imposed, specialization of agriculture in Rwanda taking into account the purpose of the land-use as shown in the various programmes, plans and soil maps, including water and soil conservation measures in demarcating land for agriculture sand incorporating agro-forestry as part of the agricultural landscape on the hills, given that it contributes to soil protection in particular and environmental protection in general, in the sense that it prevents desertification.
The policy also promotes irrigating areas that are more or less flat and semi-arid to support agricultural production while discouraging overgrazing and pasture burning. On the use and management of marshlands, the policy stipulates that marshlands meant for agriculture should not be cultivated except after adequate planning and environmental impact assessment.
To achieve the land policy objectives, the policy calls for the maintenance of marshlands in the state’s private land and establishment of clear regulations for their sustainable use in order to avoid any disorderly farming with negative environmental consequences, undertaking an inventory of marshlands and clarification of their location and purpose and promoting specialization of marshland farmers and introduction of measures to avoid the division of land in smaller units.
The policy recognizes the importance of land tenure in the investment in land management and provides for land concession. However the policy needs to be operationalised to establish minimum and maximum concession period for marshlands. The period will determine the rate of investment in these areas and provide for environmental management.
5.2.4 National Wetlands Conservation Program
Though not a policy as such, the wetland convention implementation office in Rwanda has formulated a National Wetland Conservation Program for 2002-2030 jointly working with the National Commission for Development and Reform, the Ministries of Finance, Education Scientific Research and Technology, Environment, Lands, Water and Natural Resources and Agriculture.
The program aim at engaging the various government ministries in wetland conservation and ensure a holistic approach to wetland management. All authorities concerned will have proper coordination of activities concerning wetland management, a factor which leads to efficiency implementation of policies.
To avoid further exploitation of the resources, Rwandan Government has established rules governing wetlands in the country. This is done by subjecting any acts concerned with water and its resources like watering plants, the use of swamps to prior environmental impact assessment which is submitted for approved to REMA or any person given a written authorization by REMA.
5.2.5 Rwanda Environmental Policy
The overall objective of the Environmental Policy is the improvement of man’s well-being, the judicious utilization of natural resources and the protection and rational management of ecosystems for a sustainable and fair development. The policy seeks to achieve this through improved health and quality of life for every citizen and promotion of sustainable socio-economic development through a rational management and utilization of resources and environment, integrating environmental aspects into all the development policies, planning and in all activities carried out at the national, provincial and local level, with the full participation of the population, conservation, preserve and restoration of ecosystems and maintenance of ecological and systems functions, which are life supports, particularly the conservation of national biological diversity, optimum utilization of resources to attain a sustainable level of resources consumption, awareness creation among the public to understand and appreciate the relationship between environment and development, ensuring participation of individuals and the community in the activities for the improvement of environment with special attention to women and the youth and ensuring the meeting of the basic needs of present population and those of future generations.
5.2.6 Marshlands Development Master Plan
Rwanda has formulated a master plan for marshlands development which among other things provides for the protection of water catchments and soil conservation based on hydrology, pedology, environment agro economic and sociology studies will targeting to develop 40 000 ha of marshland 2020.
The plan sets the criteria for identifying the marshlands to be developed. These include;
I. Size of the marshland
II. Status of the marshland in terms of agricultural activities. RSSP only invest in marshlands that have been traditionally been cultivated
III. Ownership, if its private or public
IV. Crops grown in the marshland. Rice is the preferred crop for the RSSP
V. Existence of papyrus in the marshland. papyrus presence is a sign of natural environment and thus its not developed
VI. Organization of the subproject beneficiaries.
VII. Flooding calendar of the marshland. if the area is permanently flooded or 4 months of floods, the area is not developed.
VIII. The hydrology of the stream/river feeding the marshland. This factor is used to determine if the marshland can sustain irrigation all year round
IX. Status of the catchment in terms of erosion.
X. Soil characteristic of the marshland. this factor is used to determine the suitability of the area for water retention
XI. Labour availability.
These criteria are what RSSP is using to identify areas for subprojects. The criteria combine those established by the marshland master plan and those developed by RSSP.
The choice of marshlands to development and to manage should take into account the orientations given by the master plan for marshlands development and for protection of catchments areas. In choosing marshland for development the strategy calls for taking into account the orientation of the master plan for management of swamps, protection of catchments areas, and conservation of soils.
According to the strategy, before any development, before any big marshland development feasibility studies and a detailed pre-project including an Environment impact Assessment will be an obligatory requirement. The plan also calls for development of a marshland to go hand in hand with the management of the catchment areas in which it lies.
Marshlands Development Master Plan recognizes that despite the development of 6000 ha, there is continuous reduction in yields yet the cultivated area has already reached its limits. However the master plan is narrow in the sense that it only gives a background of the marshlands that are considered important in Rwanda more so in terms of size, biodiversity and hydrology. This leaves a gap in those marshlands that might be small in size but play important role in stabilizing the bigger marshland.
The master plan recognises the role of environmental assessment in planning for economic development especially in the agricultural sector. Nevertheless, the master plan should undergo a Strategic Environmental Assessment to ensure compatibility with other land uses.
However the policy does not provide for water permitting and regulations of use as is the international practice to permit water use to ensure conservation and management.
5.2.7 Water and Sanitation Policy
The sectoral policy on water and sanitation is based on vision 2020, millennium development goals and poverty reduction strategy. The policy provides for decentralization in line with the national decentralization policy, institutional aspects, integrated watershed management, monitoring and assessment and participatory approach to water and sanitation among other sectoral reforms in Rwanda.
The policy identifies the sub sector constraints and proposes measures to achieve policy objectives of improving the living conditions of the population through optimal use of water resources and access of all to water and sanitation services.
One of the programs of this policy is on water supply and sanitation program in rural area In order to achieve the millennium goals and the 2020 Vision, the Government of Rwanda launched 15 years water and sanitation program in rural area. This program aims to improve the population rate with access to water, presently at 44%, and increase the sanitation rate, presently at 8%, to 66% in 2010, to 80% in 2015 and 100% in 2020. In some subproject areas, marshlands are a source of domestic water and development of these areas could have a bearing in water and sanitation of the communities.
5.2.8 National Water Resources Management Policy
The water policy aims at fair and sustainable access to water, improvement of the management of water resources, etc. through reforestation on hillsides and water catchments areas. This policy would seem in conflict with other sector policies including agriculture and marshland development. While the water policy calls for improvement of water resources including marshlands, the agricultural policy calls for development of these ecosystems for agricultural production.
The policy also needs adopt a holistic approach to the management of water resources and integrate other polices related to it including the forest, wetlands, agriculture and land.
This policy is relevant to RSSP subprojects as most of the project activities will be undertaken in areas with water resources and one of the key project input is water which is governed by the policy.
5.2.9 Draft Forest Policy
The forest policy is relevant to this project due to the role forests play in water regulation and soil conservation. The draft forest policy aims curbing the continuous wood shortage and but most important to this study the alarming deterioration of soil. The draft policy recognizes ecological and economic role of forest the policy also aims at linking forestry with rural development by establishing relationship between forestry and beneficiaries.
Forest management is linked intricately to marshlands existence, soil productivity, water quality and flooding. The draft policy provides strategies for reforestation for environmental protection.
The policy is relevant to the project as some of the activities of the project touch on afforestation and revegetation of degraded areas whether protected or non-protected. The agroforestry activities in the hills will also have positive impacts on the country’s forest stock if successful through supply of firewood and rejuvenating the soil productivity thus intensifying crop production as opposed to encroachment to forested areas.
5.2.10 National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
This strategy defines the objectives and priorities for the conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity. The plan includes hillsides and wetlands and protected areas as some of the areas that need to be conservation.
The strategy focuses on five major areas i.e. improved conservation of protected areas and wetlands; sustainable use of biodiversity in natural ecosystems and agro-ecosystems; rational use of biotechnology; development and strengthening of policy, institutional, legal and human resources frameworks; and equitable sharing of benefits derived from the use of biological resources. The Action Plan consists of urgent and priority actions which are attainable in a period of five years The strategy focuses on five major aims: improved conservation of protected areas and wetlands; sustainable use of biodiversity in natural ecosystems and agro-ecosystems; rational use of biotechnology; development and strengthening of policy, institutional, legal and human resources frameworks; and equitable sharing of benefits derived from the use of biological resources. The Action Plan consists of urgent and priority actions which are attainable in a period of five years.
However the plan is not based on the actual status quo of wetlands which is one of the most important ecosystems in Rwanda. There is need to undertake inventory of wetlands in the country which will allow planning of these ecosystems.
5.2.11 Poverty Reduction Strategy
The National Poverty Reduction Strategy identifies the transformation of the subsistence agriculture, into a modernized agriculture, which is market oriented as one of the priority sectors. Other priority areas include human development which covers the actions of improving living conditions of the poor, economic infrastructure, governance, development of the private sector and the institutional reinforcement.
5.3 International Regulations
Rwanda is a signatory to a number of conventions on sustainable development and is a member of various bilateral and multilateral organizations. Some of the relevant development partners in this project are the World Bank and a number of United Nations agencies.
5.3.1 World Bank Safeguard Policies
World Bank Operational Policies (OP) and Bank Procedures (BP) Environmental Assessment - BP4.01 and OP 4.01 (January 1999 all of which require environmental assessment of projects proposed that are deemed to have potential adverse impacts to help ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable.
Environmental Assessment is one of the 10 environmental, social, and legal Safeguard Policies of the World Bank. World Bank Environment and Social Safeguard Policy aims at improving decision making, to ensure that project options under consideration are sound and sustainable, and that potentially affected people have been properly consulted.
The World Bank's environmental assessment policy and recommended processing are described in Operational Policy (OP)/Bank Procedure (BP) 4.01.
5.3.1.1 Environmental Assessment (OP4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01)
This policy requires environmental assessment (EA) of projects proposed for Bank financing to help ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and thus to improve decision making. The EA is a process whose breadth, depth, and type of analysis depend on the nature, scale, and potential environmental impact of the proposed civil works under the RSSP. The EA process takes into account the natural environment (air, water, and land); human health and safety; social aspects (involuntary resettlement, indigenous peoples, and cultural property) and transboundary and global environmental aspects.
Operational Policy 4.01 further requires that the EA/EMP report must be disclosed as a separate and stand alone document by the Government of Rwanda and the World Bank as a condition for bank appraisal of the RSSP. The disclosure should be both in Rwanda where it can be accessed by the general public and local communities and at the Infoshop of the World Bank and the date for disclosure must precede the date for appraisal of the program. The World Bank system assigns a project to one of three project categories, as defined below:
Category “A” Projects
An EIA is always required for projects that are in this category. Impacts are expected to be ‘adverse, sensitive, irreversible and diverse with attributes such as pollutant discharges large enough to cause degradation of air, water, or soil; large-scale physical disturbance of the site or surroundings; extraction, consumption or conversion of substantial amounts of forests and other natural resources; measurable modification of hydrological cycles; use of hazardous materials in more than incidental quantities; and involuntary displacement of people and other significant social disturbances.
Category “B” Projects
Although an EIA is not always required, some environmental analysis is necessary. Category B projects have impacts that are ‘less significant, not as sensitive, numerous, major or diverse. Few, if any, impacts are irreversible, and remedial measures can be more easily designed. Typical projects include rehabilitation, maintenance, or upgrades, rather than new construction.
Category “C” Projects
No EIA or other analysis is required. Category C projects result in negligible or minimal direct disturbance of the physical environment. Typical projects include education, family planning, health, and human resource development.
The RSSP has thus been screened and assigned an EA Category B. This category of projects are defined as projects likely to have potential adverse environmental impacts on human populations or environmentally important areas including wetlands, forests, grasslands, and other natural habitats and are less adverse than those of category A projects. These impacts are site specific, few if any of them are irreversible, and in most cases mitigation measures can be designed more readily than for category A projects. The EA process for category B projects examines the potential negative and positive environmental impacts and recommends any measures needed to prevent, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse impacts and improve environmental performance.
5.3.1.2 Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04)
This policy aims at the conservation of natural habitats, like other measures that protect and enhance the environment. The policy is essential for long term sustainable development. The Bank therefore supports the protection, maintenance, and rehabilitation of natural habitats.
Natural Habitats are land and water areas where the ecosystems biological communities are formed largely by native plant and animal species, and human activity has not essentially modified the areas primary ecological functions. The policy recognises the important role of biological, social, economic, and existence value of natural habitats. Natural habitat policy covers habitats in the tropical humid, dry, and cloud forest; temperate and boreal forest; Mediterranean-type shrub lands; natural arid and semi-arid lands, mangrove swamps, coastal marshes, and other wetlands; estuaries, sea grass beds, coral reefs, freshwater lakes and rivers; alpine and sub alpine environments, including herb fields, grasslands, and paramos; and tropical and temperate grasslands.
Therefore, the Natural Habitats policy may be triggered in certain cases because the investments proposed under this project may have potential adverse impacts on Rwanda’s many lakes, rivers, and forests which are located within the project sites or the catchment of some of these sites and immensely contribute to the sustainability of critical ecosystems. The natural ecosystems of the wetlands, rivers and forests are known to support varying degrees of natural complexities of flora and fauna. Therefore, this OP requires that any activities funded under the RSSP that adversely impacts these ecosystems are successfully mitigated so that the balance of the ecosystems are enhanced or maintained. This would require RSSP to design appropriate conservation and mitigation measures to remove or reduce adverse impacts on these ecosystems or their functions, keeping such impacts within socially defined limits of acceptable change. Specific measures may depend on the ecological characteristics of the affected ecosystem. Such measures must include provision for monitoring and evaluation to provide feedback on conservation outcomes and to provide guidance for developing or refining appropriate corrective actions.
Marshlands are natural habitats, even though the policy of the RSSP is not to develop marshlands that have not been developed before. Even with this policy, taking into consideration the catchment approach, marshlands are related if they are in the same catchment. So the fact that a marshland is already developed does not mean that it’s not natural or was not natural in the first place and cumulative effects are worth considering.
5.3.1.3 Forest Operational Policy 4.36
This operational policy aims to reduce deforestation, enhance the environmental contribution of forested areas, promote afforestation, reduce poverty, and encourage economic development. The policy recognizes the role forests play in poverty alleviation, economic development, and for providing local as well as global environmental services. Success in establishing sustainable forest conservation and management practices depends not only on changing the behavior of all critical stakeholders, but also on a wide range of partnerships to accomplish what no country, government agency, donor, or interest group can do alone.
The forest strategy suggests three equally important and interdependent pillars to guide future Bank involvement with forests including harnessing the potential of forests to reduce poverty, integrating forests in sustainable economic development, and protecting vital local and global environmental services and forest values.
This policy applies to the World Bank-financed investment projects that have or may have impacts on the health and quality of forests, projects that affect the rights and welfare of people and their level of dependence upon or interaction with forests and projects that aim to bring about changes in the management, protection, or utilization of natural forests or plantations, whether they are publicly, privately, or communally owned.
There is a possibility of RSSP triggering this policy through interventions on catchment areas of some of these sites through reforestation, terracing among other soil and water conservation measures and promotion of agro forestry farm practices in selected hillsides.
5.3.1.4 Pest Management Operational Policy 4.09
The policy supports safe, affective, and environmentally sound pest management. It promotes the use of biological and environmental control methods. An assessment is made of the capacity of the country’s regulatory framework and institutions to promote and support safe, effective, and environmentally sound pest management. The RSSP subproject will trigger this policy especially those during the operational phase of the subprojects that will focus on agriculture related interventions in the marshland.
Rural development and health sector projects have to avoid using harmful pesticides. A preferred solution is to use Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques and encourage their use in the whole of the sectors concerned.
This policy aims at assisting borrowers to manage pests that affect either agriculture or public health. The Bank supports a strategy that promotes the use of biological or environmental control methods and reduces reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides.
In appraising a project that will involve pest management, the Bank assesses the capacity of the country’s regulatory framework and institutions to promote and support safe, effective, and environmentally sound pest management. As necessary, the Bank and the borrower incorporate in the project components to strengthen such capacity.
The Bank uses various means to assess pest management in the country and supports Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and the safe use of agricultural pesticides: economic and sector work, sectoral or project-specific environmental assessments, participatory IPM assessments, and investment projects and components aimed specifically at supporting the adoption and use of IPM.
For World Bank funded agriculture projects, pest populations are normally controlled through IPM approaches, such as biological control, cultural practices, and the development and use of crop varieties that are resistant or tolerant to the pest. The Bank may finance the purchase of pesticides when their use is justified under an IPM approach. The RSSP supported projects must therefore adopt IPM approaches and only use pesticides as a last resort.
The policy supports use of environmental methods for public health projects in controlling pests where environmental methods alone are not effective. The policy calls for assessment of the nature and degree of associated risks, taking into account the proposed use and the intended users for procurement of any pesticide in Bank-financed projects.
The policy sets criteria to apply for the selection and use of pesticides in Bank-financed projects including must have negligible adverse human health effects, must be shown to be effective against the target species, and must have minimal effect on non target species and the natural environment. The methods, timing, and frequency of pesticide application are aimed to minimize damage to natural enemies. Pesticides used in public health programs must be demonstrated to be safe for inhabitants and domestic animals in the treated areas, as well as for personnel applying them and the use must take into account the need to prevent the development of resistance in pests.
The policy requires that any pesticides it finances be manufactured, packaged, labeled, handled, stored, disposed of, and applied according to standards acceptable to the Bank. The Bank does not finance formulated products that fall in WHO classes IA and IB, or formulations of products in Class II[1], if the country lacks restrictions on their distribution and use; are likely to be used by, or be accessible to, lay personnel, farmers, or others without training, equipment, and facilities to handle, store, and apply these products properly.
This policy will be triggered by the subproject due to application of pesticides and herbicides in the irrigated areas.
5.3.1.5 Projects on International Waterways Operational Policy 7.50:
This policy recognizes the importance of cooperation and good will of riparians as essential for the efficient utilization and protection of international waterways and attaches great importance to riparians making appropriate agreements or arrangement for the entire waterway or any part thereof. Projects that trigger this policy include hydroelectric, irrigation, flood control, navigation, drainage, water and sewerage, industrial, and similar projects that involve the use or potential pollution of international waterways.
This policy relates to the relations between the riparian states. In the absence of such agreements or arrangements, the Bank requires, as a general rule, that the prospective borrower notifies the other riparian of the project. The policy lays down detailed procedures for the notification requirement, including the role of the Bank in affecting the notification, period of reply and the procedures in case there is an objection by one of the riparian to the project.
The policy applies to any river, canal, lake, or similar body of water that forms a boundary between, or any river or body of surface water that flows through, two or more states, whether World Bank members or not. It also includes any tributary or other body of surface water any bay, gulf, strait, or channel bounded by two or more states or, if within one state, recognized as a necessary channel of communication between the open sea and other states and any river flowing into such waters.
The policy recognizes prior riparian states agreements/arrangements such as the Nile Basin which the project falls under. The policy also calls for notification of riparian states by parties that proposes to undertake project that affects international waters.
5.3.1.6 Involuntary Resettlement Operational Policy 4.12
This policy covers direct economic and social impacts that both result from Bank-assisted investment projects, and are caused by; involuntary taking of land resulting in relocation or loss of shelter; loss of assets or access to assets, or loss of income sources or means of livelihood, whether or not the affected persons must move to another location; or the involuntary restriction of access to legally designated parks and protected areas resulting in adverse impacts on the livelihoods of the displaced persons. For project activities that impact people and livelihoods in this way, RSSP will have to comply with the requirements of the disclosed RPF to comply with this policy. The policy is triggered in situations involving involuntary taking of land and involuntary restrictions of access to legally designated parks and protected areas. The policy aims to avoid involuntary resettlement to the extent feasible, or to minimize and mitigate its adverse social and economic impacts.
The objective of this policy to avoid where feasible, or minimize, exploring all viable alternative project designs, to avoid resettlement. The policy calls for sustainable development programs, providing sufficient investment resources to enable the persons displaced by the project to share project benefits and to improve their livelihoods. The standards of living should be restored, in real terms, to pre-displacement levels or to levels prevailing prior to the beginning of project implementation, whichever is higher.
This policy covers direct economic and social impacts that both result from Bank-assisted investment projects, and are caused by the involuntary taking of land resulting in relocation or loss of shelter, lost of assets or access to assets, or loss of income sources or means of livelihood. This applies whether or not the affected persons must move to another location; or the involuntary restriction of access to legally designated parks and protected areas resulting in adverse impacts on the livelihoods of the displaced persons.
To address the impacts covered under this policy, a resettlement plan or a resettlement policy framework is needed to mitigate against effects of displacement. This framework should cover the development of a resettlement plan or resettlement policy framework which must include measures to ensure that the displaced persons are informed about their options and rights pertaining to resettlement. The displaced persons are consulted on, offered choices among, and provided with technically and economically feasible resettlement alternatives and provided prompt and effective compensation at full replacement cost for losses of assets attributable directly to the project.
If the impacts include physical relocation, the resettlement plan or resettlement policy framework includes:
• Measures to ensure that the displaced persons are provided assistance (such as moving allowances) during relocation;
• Provided with residential housing, or housing sites, or, as required, agricultural sites for which a combination of productive potential, locational advantages, and other factors is at least equivalent to the advantages of the old site.
Where necessary to achieve the objectives of the policy, the resettlement plan or resettlement policy framework should also include measures to ensure that displaced persons are offered support after displacement, for a transition period, based on a reasonable estimate of the time likely to be needed to restore their livelihood and standards of living and provided with development assistance in addition to compensation measures described in paragraph 6(a) (iii), such as land preparation, credit facilities, training, or job opportunities.
The World Bank Safeguard policy OP 4.12, in most cases, is not triggered because people are being affected by physical displacement. It is triggered because the project activity causes land acquisition.Some of the projects sites might involve land acquisition for small dams and reservoirs, borrow areas, roads, canals, etc. Therefore the policy will be triggered by implementation of these activities.
5.3.1.7 Dam Safety Operational Policy 4.37
Operational Policy dam safety requires that experienced and competent professionals design and supervise construction, and that the borrower adopts and implements dam safety measures through the project cycle. The policy also applies to existing dams where they influence the performance of a project. In this case, dam safety assessment should be carried out and necessary additional dam safety measures implemented.
The policy distinguishes between small and large dams by defining small dams as those normally less than 15 meters in height. This category includes, for example, farm ponds, local silt retention dams, and low embankment tanks. Large dams are 15 meters or more in height. Dams that are between 10 and 15 meters in height are treated as large dams if they present special design complexities. Dams under 10 meters in height are treated as large dams if they are expected to become large dams during the operation of the facility. For small dams, generic dam safety measures designed by qualified engineers are usually adequate[2]. According to the policy, large dams, the Bank requires;
a. reviews by an independent panel of experts (the Panel) of the investigation
b. design, and construction of the dam and the start of operations,
c. preparation and implementation of detailed plans: a plan for construction,
d. supervision and quality assurance, an instrumentation plan, an operation and maintenance plan, and an emergency preparedness plan,
e. prequalification of bidders during procurement and bid tendering, and
f. periodic safety inspections of the dam after completion.
All the dams to be constructed by RSSP are considered small as they fit the category of dams as defined by World Bank Operational Policy 4.37. None of the dams are more than 10m in height and there are not planned to become bigger during operations.
5.3.1.8 Safeguarding Cultural Property Operations Directive 11.03
The bank operational policy on safeguarding cultural properties aims protecting cultural assets and knowledge of communities in bank financed project areas. Safeguarding cultural property policy requires the determination of what is known about the cultural aspects of the proposed project site. The policy calls for consultation involving all parties including scientific institutions and NGOs as part of this process. The policy defines cultural property as sites having archaeological, palaeontological, historical, religious and unique natural value.
Rwanda still as many genocide sites that have not been discovered yet. These sites when stumbled upon, it requires that the authorities are informed and either the site is demarcated as a genocide site or the remains are removed and buried in established sites. The RSSP involves excavation of ground for dam construction and drainage as well as development of marshland. The excavation process could excavate unidentified remains of the victims of genocide and trigger the policy. A summary of safeguard operational policies to be triggered by the project are as described in the table 6 below
Table 6. Summary of the operational policies that will be triggered by RSSP subprojects
Operational Policy Trigger Comments
Natural Habitat X All the subproject areas are already developed some partly
Environmental Assessment ( RSSP subprojects fall under partial EA category
Forest Operational X None of the subprojects is in forested areas
Pest Management Operational ( Farming will involve application of pesticides
Projects on International Waterways X None of the project area is in international waters
Dam Safety X Dam construction is part of subprojects
Cultural Property X None of the subprojects is located in cultural sensitive area
Involuntary Resettlement ( Marshlands are already in use thus farmers will be
removed to pave way for dam and marshland development
5.4.2 International Conventions
Rwanda being a signatory to some of the international conventions that are relevant to the RSSP its imperative that we review some of the conventions within which the study and the project is carried out.
5.4.2.1 United Nations Convention on Biological Convention
The three goals of the CBD are to promote the conservation of biodiversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources.
Rwanda being a signatory of this convention it’s supposed to work towards the achievement of the three goals. Wetlands are known to be rich in biodiversity and the marshlands of Rwanda are no exception. And Rwanda being a signatory of this convention has to consider the implication its activities especially in the marshland on biological diversity.
The convention calls for the adoption of national strategies, plans and programmes for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity into their relevant sectoral and cross-sectional plans, programmes and policies. One of the tools that are prescribed for the management of biodiversity is environmental assessment. Article 14 of the convention deals with impact assessment and minimizing of adverse impacts of activities that are likely to cause significant adverse effects on biological diversity (Glowka, L, et al, 1992).
5.4.2.2 Ramsar Convention on Wetlands
The Convention on Wetlands is an intergovernmental treaty which provides the framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. There are presently 146 Contracting Parties to the Convention, with 1508 wetland sites. The Convention calls for governments to provide framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. Though none of the wetlands of Rwanda are designated Ramsar site, many could qualify as potential candidates. As such it is expected that the activities of the RSSP II will strictly adhere to the Ramsar Convention’s principles of wise use of wetlands in the project area even though the project is not part of the Ramsar site.
5.4.2.3 Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes
The Convention of the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Water Convention) is intended to strengthen national measures for the protection and ecologically sound management of transboundary surface waters and groundwaters. The Convention obliges Parties to prevent, control and reduce water pollution from point and non-point sources. The Convention also includes provisions for monitoring, research and development, consultations, warning and alarm systems, mutual assistance, institutional arrangements, and the exchange and protection of information, as well as public access to information.
This convention is important to the project due to Rwanda’s water contribution to international water bodies and course of Nile River and the Lake Victoria. More so because many of the project marshlands contribute or flow into the Nile river water course.
The Convention obliges Parties to prevent, control and reduce water pollution from point and non-point sources. The Convention also includes provisions for monitoring, research and development, consultations, warning and alarm systems, mutual assistance, institutional arrangements, and the exchange and protection of information, as well as public access to information. Article 3 of the convention calls for the application of environmental impact assessment and other means of assessment for the prevention, control and reduction of transboundary watercourses and international lakes.
5.4.2.4 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species
The convention on migratory species (CMS) was adopted to conserve migratory species of wild animals given that migratory species are seen as an international resource. Such species may be terrestrial or marine. The conventions agreement on the conservation of African-Eurasian migratory water birds is specific on the need to protect the feeding, breeding and wintering habitats, the main ones being wetlands and open water bodies. The convention is relevant due to presence of migratory bird species and other aquatic organisms within some of the subproject areas including Kamiranzovu which is home to Grauer’s Swamp-warbler.
5.4.2.3 World Commission in Dams
The World Commission on Dams (WCD) was set up in 1998 by the World Bank and the World Conservation Union (IUCN). The commission represented all stakeholders involved in the dams debate, including industry, governments, water resource managers and dams affected people.
The International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD) defines a large dam as being over 15 m high. The definition also includes dams between 5-15 m high with a reservoir exceeding 3 million cubic meters. The commission gives a clear guidelines and recommendations for decision makers aimed at safeguarding rights, reducing the risk of conflicts and lowering overall costs, including social and environmental ones. The report also proposed improved management of existing dams in order to minimise environmental and social impacts. Even though the commission is more on large dams or was created to address the issues of large dams, RSSP can use some of the best practice and guidelines to guide in the implementation of its subprojects activities in dam construction.
5.4.2.4 Nile Treaties
There are about eleven treaties dealing with the consumptive use of the waters of River Nile and Lake Victoria. The riparian countries are under limited obligations under general international law to permit the lower riparian States an equitable share of the water, but then the exact modalities would be subject to fresh negotiations. The Nile Basin Initiative is currently addressing the issue of equitable utilization of the common Nile Basin water resources.
The Nile Basin Initiative seeks to harness the tremendous potential of the Nile for the benefit of the people of the Basin, both for now and for generations to come. This becomes a major challenge because as economic development accelerates, population increases and demand for water grows.
Nile Basin Initiative’s Shared Vision puts economic development at its centre. The Shared Vision is: "To achieve sustainable socio-economic development through the equitable utilization of, and benefits from, the common Nile Basin water resources" or in short "Sustainable development of the River Nile for the benefit of all". Due to the location of the subproject marshland within the Nile Basin, the treaties concern the project.
5.4.2.5 EAC Protocol on Environment
The protocol was signed by the Partner States of the East African Community on 29th November 2003. It has relevant provisions for environmental and social management for the project;
Article 5: Paragraph 4 provides that Partners States should promote sustainable utilization of water resources while taking into consideration factors such as ecology, geographic, climatic, hydrologic factors among others; the social and economic needs of each Partner States; the population dependent on the water resources; existing & potential uses of the water resources.
Article 6: Paragraph 1 identifies the protection and conservation of the basin and its ecosystem with emphasis on improving water quality and quantity; preventing the introduction of invasive species; conservation of biological diversity and forest resources; protection and conservation of wetlands and fisheries resources conservation. Part 2 of the article provides for the harmonization of laws and policies for stakeholder participation in protection, conservation and rehabilitation.
Sustainable agriculture and land use practices to achieve food security and rational agricultural production is provided for in Article 9.
Article 12 of the Protocol urges Partner States to develop national laws and regulations requiring project proponents to undertake EIA and review of EIA reports to be done by all the Partner States if the potential impacts are likely to be trans-boundary and the same to apply for Environmental Audits in Article 13.
Partner states should ensure control of pollution from non-point sources through legal, economic and social measures. This is provided for in Article 20 which further states that pollution control measures should promote sustainable forestry practices, appropriate agricultural land use methods, sanitation and hygiene within the basin.
Public participation is provided for in Article 22 which should be enhanced to influence government decisions on project formulation and implementation.
Article 23 of the Protocol provides that Partner States should promote Community involvement and mainstreaming gender concerns at all levels of socio-economic development especially in decision making, policy formulation and implementation of projects and programmes.
5.5.1 Environmental Institutions
The main institutions with responsibility for the environment are the Ministry of Lands, Environment, Forestry, Water and Natural Resources (MINITERE) and Rwanda Environmental Management Authority (REMA), MINAGRI, MINFRA and MINSATE. Within the MINITERE is the Directorate of Environment which is broadly responsible for policy issues, the budget and for monitoring policy implementation, whereas REMA is the technical arm of the MINTERE responsible for implementing the environment policy. At local level, the District is an autonomous decentralized administrative structure with a legal status and financial autonomy, with two principal political bodies:
The overall institution is REMA which has the power to control, monitoring and evaluation of the integration of environmental concerns in all development projects or activities in Rwanda.
5.5.1.1 Rwanda Environment Management Authority
Rwanda Environment Management Authority is the agency responsible for management of the environment in Rwanda. The Authority has the mandate to control, monitor and evaluate integration of environmental concerns in all development projects or activities.
The functions of REMA include implementing Government environmental policy as prescribed by MINITERE, advising the Government on legislative and other measures for the management of the environment or the implementation of relevant international conventions, treaties and agreements in the field of environment, to take stock and conduct comprehensive environmental audits and investigations, to prepare and publish biannual reports on the state of natural resources in Rwanda, reviewing and approving environmental impact assessment reports of any field of socio-economic activities undertaken by any agency, research, investigations, surveys and such other relevant studies in the field of environment and disseminate the findings, monitoring and evaluation of development programs in order to control observance of proper safeguards in the planning and execution of all development projects, including those already in existence, that have or are likely to have significant impact on the environment, to render advice and technical support, where possible, to entities engaged in natural resource management and environmental protection and to publish and disseminate manuals, codes or guidelines relating to environmental management and prevention or abatement of environmental degradation among other functions.
REMA has its shortcomings as far as functionality and operations are concerned. Key among the challenges facing NEMA is lack of adequate technical staff, lack of control of district staff, lack of guidelines in environmental management among others.
5.5.1.2 Ministry of Lands, Environment, Forestry, Water and Mines
This ministry is the parent ministry of REMA. The Directorate of Environment within the MINITERE is responsible for policy issues, the budget and for monitoring policy implementation.
The ministry is responsible for developing land utilization policies (including surveying, land classification, land laws and land tenure); the development of environmental policies and procedures (including impact assessments), protection of natural resources (water, land, flora, and fauna), environmental legislation, biodiversity, and other environmental aspects.
The ministry is implementing IMCE project with the overall objective of rehabilitating and managing critical ecosystems in the country with emphasis on wetlands/watersheds, drylands ecosystems and protected areas. The project has identified four major wetlands in Rwanda (Akagera, Bugesera, Kamiranzovu and Rugezi wetland). However the criteria for establishing critical wetland ecosystem are not clear. The project uses status of biodiversity, species endemic, hydrology and for those wetlands stranding international borders as criteria for identifying critical wetland ecosystems. The definition of a wetland and marshland is also not clear as marshland means a small area submerged with water while wetlands are considered as big swamps of water.
5.5.1.3 Provincial, District and Lower level Environmental Committees
The Rwandan National Environment Policy of 2003 also proposed the establishment of provincial, district and lower level environmental committees beside the establishment of REMA responsible for environmental protection.
5.5.1.4 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources
Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI) has a primary mandate for the development, transformation and modernization of agricultural sector in Rwanda in its broadest sense (including forestry, fisheries and livestock). The Directorate of Rural Engineering (Genie Rural) and Soil Conservation (DGRCS) advises the Government on land management and is the technical agency responsible for the exploitation and management of the wetlands for agriculture. The Department of Forestry is responsible for management of the forest reserves and plantations.
5.5.1.5 Ministry of Infrastructure
The Ministry of Infrastructure (MININFRA) is responsible for all infrastructure projects in the country, including policy formulation and oversight of the water sub-sector. MININFRA through its Directorate of Water and Sanitation (DWS) is responsible for water resource management. Its main objective is to ensure protection and conservation of water resources, and ensure supply of water and sanitation systems.
Directorate of Water and Sanitation is comprised of four divisions:
• Division of Urban Water
• Division of Rural Water
• Sanitation
• Division of Hydrology and Water Resources Management.
The Division of Hydrology and Water Resources Management is responsible for the preparation of hydrological surveys, assessment of potential underground water resources, maintenance of a database on national water resources, water quality control, and monitoring water levels in lakes and river systems.
5.5.1.6 Institute for Agricultural Science (ISAR)
Institute for Agricultural Science ISAR’s mission is to promote the scientific and technological development of agriculture and stockbreeding; carry out research and experimental studies for the development of agriculture and stockbreeding; and publish and disseminate their findings. ISAR relevance to RSSP activities is through dissemination of good agronomy practices and varieties of seeds to the farmers who will benefit from this project.
5.5.1.7 Integrated Management of Critical Ecosystems
The Integrated Management of Critical Ecosystems (IMCE) project was a component of Rural Sector Support Program (RSSP). The objective of the project is to promote the adoption of integrated ecosystem management in agricultural landscapes, particularly, in the rehabilitation of farmed wetlands and hill-side areas. The IMCE project as funded by Global Environment facility (GEF) covers incremental costs through incentives (technical skills, financial support, and institutional support) to farmers and farmer organizations with the aim to induce a widespread adoption of soil and water conservation technologies, and other sustainable land and wetland management technologies on- and off-farm. By promoting these productivity-enhancing and environmentally friendly farming technologies, the IMCE aim to increase food production and rural income. In addition to improving the livelihood of farming communities, the project objective is to ensure a better protection of the natural resource base through the promotion of an integrated approach to land resource management that supports the rehabilitation of degraded wetlands, hill-sides, and catchment areas, and the formulation and implementation of community-based conservation plans for selected wetlands.
However after the component/project was hived from RSSP, there has been lack of coordination between the two projects and slow project implementation of activities. While RSSP is on its second phase, IMCE is yet to pick up resulting in some of the activities being undertaken by RSSP implemented without the relevant information that was to be provided by IMCE. Some of the activities that are relevant to sustainable implementation of RSSP that should be provided by IMCE include biodiversity and hydrological information of the marshlands.
5.5.2 Relevant Organizations
There are several agencies working with communities in marshland and hillside development and management. Some of these agencies are civil organizations while others are United Nations Agencies.
5.5.2.1 German Agro Action
German Agro Action (GAA) is a NGO working in Rwanda focusing promoting the development of marshland areas and protection of the surrounding hillsides for improved agriculture and food security. GAA started to develop marshlands in the Southern Province since 2000 and had already developed a total of 306 ha of marshlands through the former projects. Currently the organization is implementing a three year project ending 2007 which focuses on marshland development and adjacent hillsides conservation works in order to protect the marshlands from erosion and secure productive, as well as degraded soils on the hillsides.
5.5.2.2 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Food and Agriculture organization of the United Nation has been promoting marshland development in Rwanda for quite some time now. FAO works with the government of Rwanda in areas of agriculture and rural sector and forestry. Currently FAO is implementing rainwater for irrigation use project and Kagera agro ecosystem management project which have the same objective like RSSP. The two projects can synergise each other through experience especially on environmental impacts and monitoring. RSSP have also signed a cooperative agreement with FAO on IPM and environmental monitoring.
Rural Sector Support Project can use FAO capacity in monitoring seasonal food production through their seasonal crop assessments program.
5.5.2.3 Adventist Development and Relief Agency
The Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA) is an independent humanitarian agency working in Rwanda in food security, agricultural development, primary health, disaster preparedness and response, and basic education.
Adventist Development and Relief Agency has been implementing marshland development projects in many parts of Rwanda including Rwagitima (Ntende) which is a subproject site for RSSP.
5.5.2.4 Nile Basin Initiative
The Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) through Nile Equatorial Lakes Subsidiary Action Plan (NELSAP) is implementing Kagera River Basin Integrated Water Resources Management where some of the RSSP subprojects fall. The project is still in its preparation stages with studies on monograph underway. These studies and the project activities could complement the RSSP activities inn the areas of planning and monitoring as well as economic development.
Table 7. Assessment of Key Environmental Institutions in Rwanda relevant to RSSP
|Institution |Focus |Strengths |Comments |
|Government Agencies |
|Rwanda Environment Management |Implementing environment policy. |Political support |Inadequate manpower at the national and lack of |
|Authority (REMA) | |Autonomous |control in the districtsl |
| | | |Inadequate enforcement of policies and legislation |
|Ministry of Lands Environment |Policy direction on environmental management and protection |The ministry has a department of water with |Inadequate wetland Management capacity |
|Forestry Water and Mines | |fully equipped laboratory and technical staff|Inadequate manpower and resources |
|(MINITERE) | |which can be used for water quality | |
| | |monitoring | |
|Ministry of Agriculture and |Development, transformation and modernization of agricultural|Has specialized agencies under its arm |Inadequate local level extension workers |
|Animal Resources (MINAGRI) |including soil conservation and improvement activities and |including RADA and ISAR which could provide |Lack of pesticide policy |
| |the development of marshland |technical support to RSSP |Inadequate technical staff |
|Ministry of Health (MINISANTE) |To provide health services through the provision of | |Collaboration in the monitoring of RSSP health induced|
| |preventive, curative and rehabilitative health care thereby | |impacts indicators through the MUTUELLE project |
| |contributing to the reduction of poverty and enhancing the | | |
| |general well-being of the population. | | |
|Ministry of Infrastructure |Responsible for road and highways construction, public | |Lack of capacity and manpower to supervise |
|(MINIFRA) |buildings, town planning, land, air, lake and river | |infrastructure projects like dams and drainage |
| |transport, as well as the coordination of meteorological | | |
| |services and networks. | |Lack of guidelines in dam construction and associated |
| | | |infrastructure as well as dam safety |
|Rural Sector Support Project |Increase agricultural productivity and production in |Available financial resources for investing | |
|(RSSP) |marshlands and hillsides |in environmental management in marshlands |Lack of agronomist to train in IPM |
| | | | |
| | |Presence of a multidisciplinary team in the |The M&E framework is not comprehensive in inclusive of|
| | |project |environmental impacts indicators |
|Low Authorities |Represents government policy at the local level |Close to the project area |Inadequate capacity to provide services due to |
| | | |financial and material resources like means of |
| | | |transport |
| | | |Inadequate technical manpower |
|Non governmental Organizations |
|Food for Agriculture Organization|Agriculture and rural sector and forestry. |Capacity in monitoring seasonal food |The agency has technical capacity in agronomics, |
|of the United Nations | |production through their seasonal crop |marshland development and irrigation that can be used |
| | |assessments program. |by RSSP |
|Adventist Development and Relief |Food security, agricultural development, primary health, |Being an NGO, it has an autonomy and flexible|Collaborate in |
|Agency (ADRA) |disaster preparedness and response and basic education. |program in project execution | |
|Germany Agro Action (GAA) |Development of marshland areas and protection of adjacent | |Need to integrate the organization activities to RSSP.|
| |hillsides for food security | | |
|Institute for Agricultural |Promote the scientific and technological development of | |Collaboration through dissemination of good agronomy |
|Science (ISAR) |agriculture and stockbreeding; carry out research and | |practices and varieties of seeds to the farmers who |
| |experimental studies for the development of agriculture and | |will benefit from this project. |
| |stockbreeding; and publish and disseminate their findings. | | |
|Integrated Management of Critical|Promote the conservation and sustainable management of |More resources in wetland research |Harmonise the activities of RSSP and IMCE and close |
|Ecosystem (IMCE) |ecosystems that play a critical role in rural livelihoods, |Focuses on the catchment approach as opposed |collaboration in decision making and planning |
| |(protection of watershed and catchment areas of wetlands, |to case specific approach | |
| |protection of water resource base) | | |
|Rwanda Agricultural Development |Promote growth in agricultural production through the | |Inadequate technical staff. The unit has only one |
|Authority (RADA) Crop protection |development of appropriate technologies, providing advisory, | |staff |
|Unit |outreach and extension services to stakeholders in | |Lack of policy on pesticide |
| |agriculture | | |
|Nile Basin Initiative |Regional partnership of Nile basin countries united to |Strong research capacity and technical know |These studies and the project activities under NBI |
| |achieve sustainable socio-economic development through the |how. |could complement the RSSP activities inn the areas of |
| |equitable utilization of, and benefit from, the common Nile |Adoption of Basin wide approach |planning and monitoring as well as economic |
| |Basin water resources. |Project on Akagera catchment |development. |
5.5.3 Institutional Needs
Wetlands are under the custody of the ministry of agriculture which should not be the case. Having wetlands in this ministry sends a message that these ecosystems that for agricultural development. The same applies for water resources. Several ministries have responsibility for managing water resources, depending on how it is used, among them the Ministry of Infrastructure (hydroelectricity), MINAGRI (irrigation and drainage for agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing), and the MINITERE (environmental management). There is no law regulating management of water resources except one dating from January 7, 1974 on pollution and the contamination of springs, lakes, and rivers. This ordinance requires the territorial authority to determine the zones of protection of lakes, rivers, or parts of rivers used as, or having the potential to be used as, potable water sources.
Inadequacy of REMA is due to lack of technical personal at the district level. The available district environment officers are employed by the respective districts. REMA in this case has no mandate or control over the functions of the environmental officers. There is need for capacity building among the district environmental officers and strengthening of the relevant departments of environment in the district. Alternatively the environment officers at the district levels should be under REMA.
There is need for all the government ministries to form interministerial committees or environment desks within their offices to deal with crosscutting issues of environment and their areas of focus including the issue of marshlands.
The decentralization policy of the Rwanda government is an opportunity that can be used to implement the EMP as the government already has local level institutional framework in place. However the respective district ministries require capacity building and coordination with REMA to ensure effectiveness in environmental management at the local level.
The villagization policy (umudugudu) being promoted by the government through the recently formulated land policy could also provide an opportunity to address some of the cumulative impacts of these subprojects. The policy could be revised to include protection of marginal areas including marshlands, hillsides and water bodies.
Ministry of Infrastructure (MINIFRA) should develop guidelines for dam construction that is suitable for Rwanda as well as dam safety guidelines that can be used to monitor and guide the construction and operation of dams.
There is need to support MINAGRI to develop and operationalize legislation and policy on pesticide use and handling in Rwanda. While RADA crop protection unit has developed a draft policy on the same, the draft policy does not address the need to promote IPM as mechanism for crop protection as an option.
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS OF THE SUBPROJECTS
Irrigation projects are known to lead to a number of environmental interactions. As with most water development projects, general hydrological disturbance and the risk of diseases are there. This section of the report discusses the potential environmental and social impacts of the proposed RSSP subprojects and is based on international experience of marshland development and small scale irrigation projects. The impacts described are both positive and adverse occurring on physical, biological and socio-economic environment during construction and operational phase.
In undertaking this environmental impact identification for the proposed RSSP potential sources of risk to the ecological and social environment were first identified. Each source of risk identified was described and its potential environmental impact considered.
6.1 Positive Impacts
According to World Commission on Dams, have more often cause adverse impacts to local people including relocation of benefits from local riparian users to new groups of beneficiaries at national level. For RSSP subprojects the reverse is true. Rural Sector Support Project aims at building small dams for the benefit of poor local riparian communities to harness agricultural productivity. Rural Sector Support Project document identifies many of the positive impacts of the proposed activities. These include poverty reduction, food security, hillside restoration, rural development, irrigation efficiency among others.
6.1.1 Physical impacts
6.1.1.1 Water Resources Conservation
The project will invest in conservation of hills through reforestation and terracing. This will prevent soil erosion and protect the hydrological systems from sedimentation, flooding and contamination. This project positive impact will help curb the rate of irrigation in the country (see section 4.4.4). Poor irrigation methods experienced in all the marshlands will be improved to ensure efficient water usage through improved drainage and canals.
6.1.1.2 Soil Conservation
The component on marshland development and hill will contribute to soil conservation on the much tilled sloppy hills. Due to land scarcity and high population density in all the territories of Rwanda, communities are farming hillsides without incorporating soil conservation measures. This trend will lead to reduced marshland sedimentation. This will be a long term impact that will be realized after the rehabilitation interventions are achieved.
6.1.1.3 Catchment Rehabilitation and Management
Soil erosion has been indirectly caused by degradation of catchments through farming and deforestation. The project component on marshland and hillside development will include reforestation and terracing of the hillsides. This will protect the marshland catchments. This impact will help protect Sagatare marshland from the activities of brick making that is degrading the marshland.
6.1.1.4 Flood Control
The dams will control floods downstream by storing excess water during heavy rains. Flood control effects of the project will free more land for farming as well as prevent destruction of food crops for those farmers who cultivate floodplains during the dry season. This indirect impact will help achieve food security especially for rain depended crops. This is an immediate impact that will be realized during wet season when floods occur.
6.1.2 Ecological Impacts
6.1.2.1 Revegetation
The activities to develop the hillsides will improve the vegetation of these erosion susceptible areas. This activity will increase the forest cover in the erosion prone areas and create new habitats and ecosystems. Agroforestry trees take a shorter time to mature as compared to other trees which mature after 5-30 or even more years. This impact is therefore medium to long term depending on the tree species. But because many of the trees that were grown during the phase one were agroforestry tree species, a term of less than three years is expected for this impact.
The rehabilitation of farmed hill-sides areas would take place in connection with the rehabilitation of neighbouring marshlands. It is expected that 30 ha of hill-side areas would be rehabilitated for every 50 ha of marshlands, yielding a total of 12,000 ha of hill-side areas for the 20,000 ha of marshlands by the end of the 14-year program.
6.1.2.2 Environmental Protection
The project promotes intensification of agriculture as opposed to extension. This will protect marginal areas as more food will be produced in a smaller area. Sustainable agricultural intensification is not only important to increased employment and income, but also is critical to protecting the environment. The project will reduce the pressure on farmers to push onto more fragile lands or to rely on labour intensive gathering activities off-farm. The project will thus intensify farm production through the use of improved inputs that raise productivity.
This is an indirect impact that will protect marginal areas and sensitive ecosystems from agricultural encroachment. The paddy fields can also provide havens for migrating wetland birds. However, increased use of fertilizers and pesticides on the fields may pose a threat to the birdlife.
6.1.2.3 Create Birdlife Habitat
The rice paddies might attract birdlife in the otherwise degraded marshlands of the project area. Since the marshlands have been developed by the locals, growing of rice might attract birdlife back to these areas. This is a beneficial impact on the biological environment of the project area which will reintroduce the birds that were once thriving in the marshland.
6.1.3 Socio-Economic Impacts
The reasons forwarded by government for prioritizing rice production in Rwanda are that rice will;
• Offer an efficient utilization of the abundant natural resource (marshland).
• Increased employment of the abundant labor force
• Improve incomes to stakeholders in the rice sub sector
• Provide sustainable food security
• Improve the balance of trade position through exporting rather than importing rice.
6.1.3.1 Poverty Alleviation
The Rwandan Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP, Rwanda, 2002) identifies five potentially competitive crops that will be targeted for expansion in addition to the traditional cash crops of coffee and tea. These are rice, maize, potatoes, soya and beans. Based on the Rwanda EDPRS, the project is in line with the objective of tackling poverty through promotion of rice.
At the local level, the irrigation infrastructure project will promote increased agricultural productivity, diversification of agricultural crops and commercialization of agriculture from subsistence. Improvement in crop productivity will raise the income for the rural poor above the poverty line of less than a dollar a day. This is an indirect impact that will take a long process that will be felt after many years. Directly the project will benefit an estimated 18,000 people. Taking an average 4.5 persons per household (NCS, 2005), the project will benefit 81,000 people in the households indirectly.
6.1.3.2 Food Security
Although rice is not a staple food in Rwanda, the high rate of urbanization has increased rice consumption in urban areas. As more people are adapting to rice as a staple food, the project will play an important role on Rwanda food security situation especially in the south east areas where food insecurity is common occurrence.
Food security is seasonal and therefore but can be long term impact if the government develop a food security policy which among others creates a national reserve at the local and national level. This is can be an immediate direct impact depending on how much food is grown for local consumption. Based on the phase I of the project, crop yields have improved significantly contributing to food security at the local and national level cumulatively as indicated in the figure 20 below. With the up scaling of RSSP through the second phase, crop productivity is set to increase. However by how much will require impact assessment study to be commissioned to determine the actual increase in agricultural productivity.
Figure 20. Trends in food crop production based on RSSP phase I
[pic]
6.1.3.3 Raise Rural Income
The overall objective of RSSP is to revitalize rural economy and improving the quality of life of the rural poor through increased transfer of technical and financial resources for sustainable rural development Rwanda. Irrigation activities would contribute to rural economy where most of the poor populations live through provision of farming support infrastructure and rice production which according to ISAR is more profitable ranging from US$ 100 to US$ 500 per hectare[3] as compared other subsistence crops presently grown in the marshlands.
6.1.3.4 Market Creation
The project will create market for farm inputs including seeds, fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides. This is a direct beneficial impact that would be felt after the project is operational and crops are harvested from the fields. Rice is more of a cash flow crop in Rwanda than a food crop for many. Production of rice will therefore provide many rural communities with a cash commodity for local and regional markets. Rice is traded across Rwanda borders including Uganda and Democratic Republic of Congo.
6.1.3.5 National Economy
At the national level, the farming of rice in the developed marshland would save the government foreign currency spent on importing rice. Based on statistics, Rwanda imports an average of 305 Billion Rwf worth of rice annually (Rwanda Agricultural Strategic Plan, 2007), which can be greatly reduced if the national production capacity is increased. The agriculture strategic plan aims at filling this gap through increase rice production marshlands.
Based on 2003 production estimates of 27.866kg paddy rice, equivalent to 18.112 kg of polished rice on 6.020 ha, it costed the economy 305 Billion Rwf to import 40% national deficit. The project will save the country 26.26 Billion Rwf if the proposed 2,037 hectares of marshland will be fully developed. This is just a rough estimate as the project will have a multiplier effect on rice production from uptake of the project by other unintended beneficiaries while some of the areas to be developed will be used for alternative crops.
The savings made from rice importation due to producing enough rice, could be used in other areas of the economy including social investments like health, education, water and sanitation among others.
6.1.3.6 Rural Employment
About 99 % of the subprojects under consideration in this study will involve cultivation of rice in the developed marshlands. Rice growing is a labour intensive venture and for this reason the labour needed in the project areas will create much needed employment opportunity to the rural population.
A hectare of rice paddy requires 34.5 mandays labour force (Christine Padoch, 2005). Based on the total area (2307 ha.) earmarked for this project, a total of 79591.5 mandays job opportunities will be created by all the 13 subprojects seasonally. Some of the areas that will absorb the labour force will be in the areas of seed bed preparation, weeding, fertilizer application and drying.
This is a long term impact that will be realised during the operational phase of the project. The project will enable poor household’s better access to the local and national economies. Directly the project will create employment during construction of the subproject infrastructure including dam construction, leveling of the grounds and construction of drains and canals.
6.1.3.7 Capacity Building
One of the projects objectives is to build capacity of the stakeholders in soil and water conservation methods, agronomy, IPM among other areas of rural economy. The beneficiary cooperatives will also benefit in terms of training in irrigation operation and maintenance. This project impact will have effect on rural life especially in agricultural sector.
6.1.3.8 Promotion of Gender Mainstreaming in Rural Economy
The RSSP promotes involvement of marginalized women in its activities as beneficiaries. Before RSSP funds a subproject, it’s a requirement that the association or cooperative shows gender balance amongst its members. In all the subprojects, more or less of 50% of the beneficiaries are women as shown in table 8 below. This is also promoted by allocating rehabilitated marshland plots to households and not individuals. This ensures that all members of the households benefit from the project irrespective of gender imbalances or cultural orientation in property ownership.
Table 8. Selected project beneficiaries by gender
|Subproject Areas |Female |Male |
|Cyunuzi-Kibaya |2052 |2976 |
|Nyarubogo |682 |506 |
|Kajevuba |641 |422 |
|Ntende |480 |320 |
|Kinyegenyege |515 |835 |
|Rugeramigozi |700 |1200 |
6.1.3.9 Reduced Malaria Cases
Incidence of malaria is often correlated with presence of swamps. This undoubtedly is true and draining the swamps may improve living conditions for the local people living near the marshlands. It is, however, interesting to note that contrary to popular belief, swamps in their natural conditions are not necessarily a potent source of human disease. For example Beadle (1960) found that the two most important malaria carriers in Africa (Anopheles gambiae and A. funestus) do not breed in the interior of swamps though they are often found in open pools, footprints and other small hollows around the edges. An important factor which prevents some mosquitoes and not others from breeding in swamps is the low concentration of oxygen in the peaty water. Larvae of A. gambiae have difficulty in surviving under anaerobic conditions.
6.2 Adverse Impacts
6.2.1 Physical Environment
6.2.1.1 Water wastage
The retention of water in the paddy farms for rice growing and in the reservoir would lead to increase evaporation leading to surface water loss, ground seepage and spills. Loss of marshland vegetation will also contribute to increased evaporation as the water will be exposed to direct sun. However due to mild climate of the country no much loss of water through evaporation is anticipated. The only anticipated water loss will be through leaks and ground seepage. This impact will be more for the subprojects in eastern part of the country where evapotranspirtaion is high between 1000-1750mm/year as compared to those areas in the central plateau.
Considering abstraction of an average figure of 16,000m3 of water per hectare per season for rice irrigation, irrigating 2037ha of rice per season will result in cumulative withdrawal of 32,592,000 m3 per season. Talking into consideration an average efficiency coefficient of 60%, the irrigation system will lose 40% of 32,592,000 m3 with a possibility of recovering 25% of the loses. Vegetable cultivation will have lower water consumption as compared to rice.
The water loses will be through percolation, spills and leaks, evaporation among other factors. As the temperatures in certain subproject sites are mild, loss of water is not going to be a significant impact. But for subprojects sites in drier parts of eastern province the impact could be significant.
Mitigation
For losses through ground seepage, the transfer canals should be lined. This will prevent ground seepage of water in loose soil. This measure will only apply in areas where the soils are loose or sandy. The irrigation farmers can adopt water saving irrigation approach. The basic feature of water-saving irrigation is that there is no water layer on the fields throughout 75%-85% of the rice growing season when the air temperature is lower than 18°C during the early stage of tillage. This impact could be mitigated through adoption of these Chinese rice irrigation system where the paddies are drained during the day time and flooded in the evening. This method of irrigation has proved to be efficient in water usage. Under water-saving irrigation systems saves water loss up to 67.1%. This strategy can only be adopted by careful consideration and research which can be undertaken by ISAR.
Alternatively to reduce water wastage through seepage, the design should reduce the distance between reservoir and irrigation fields i.e. reducing the distance in water transfer. However this measure could be labour intensive and expensive to undertake.
6.2.1.2 Changes in Hydrology
The construction of drainage network in the marshland will affect the hydrological flow of the riverine system crating an environmental flow thus affecting the marshland habitat and boundary. The impact will affect the marshland boundary as water recedes, the marshland boundary will also reduce. This effect will be compounded by building of the reservoirs which will reduce the flow of water during the period its filling up to the capacity. Large changes to low flows (±20%) will alter micro-habitats of the wetlands. This is an operational impact that will be permanent in nature. Receding of the marshland due to the impact will deny the local women marshland products and deny them alternative sources of income.
Mitigation
To reduce the impact of the subprojects on the catchment hydrology, the reservoir and irrigation design should not divert more that 20% of the water flowing in the river. In case the design abstract more than 20% the return flow from the farms should compensate for this flow.
In cases where there are more than one catchment feeding the river, only one catchment should be used for irrigation while the other to continue flowing to ensure continuo’s water flow in the marshland and downstream. This measure can be applied in most subproject areas as they have more than one water catchment source including Gisaya, Sagatare, Rwagitima, Rugazi-Bisenga and Cyunuzi (see annex B, K, J, H, and A).
6.2.1.3 Soil Erosion
During the preparation of the land for irrigation, clearance of vegetation from the marshland will expose the soils to agents of erosion, mostly water. This impact will occur during project construction and operational phase. The magnitude of this impact will include reduction in soil productivity and siltation of reservoirs and water bodies downstream. This impact will be long term and will manifest after a long period.
This is a cumulative impact as it’s estimated that Rwanda loses 1.4 Million tons of soil per year (SPATR, 2004).This impact will correspond with a decline agricultural productivity that will lead to cultivating marginal areas that are prone to environmental degradation. The areas that are to be mostly affected include subprojects in Akagera-Rusumo catchments. The eroded soil will flow into Akagera River which is already highly silted.
Soil erosion could occur during the construction phase when lose soil is swept by waters and during the operational phase during irrigation and field preparation. This impact will be low in magnitude as the marshland areas experience low level of erosion as compared to hillsides that are steep in gradient.
Mitigation
Soil erosion can be avoided during the construction and operational phase of the projects. To avoid soil erosion a number of measures are proposed. These are;
1. Avoiding vegetation clearance that will expose soil to agents of erosion during construction phase.
2. Revegetating the cleared sites with local species of vegetation
3. only clear areas earmarked for construction and
4. Mitigation of soil erosion during cultivation will be through terracing of the sloppy areas of the land and plating of nappier grass along the canals.
6.2.1.4 Waterlogging and salinization
There are four main ways through which salinization can occur in irrigation practice. These ways are:
1. Salts carried in the irrigation water are liable to build up in the soil profile, as water is removed by plants and the atmosphere at a much faster rate than salts. The salt concentration of incoming flows may increase in time with development activities upstream and if rising demand leads to drain water reuse;
2. Solutes applied to the soil in the form of artificial and natural fertilizers as well as some pesticides will not all be utilized by the crop;
3. Salts which occur naturally in soil may move into solution or may already be in solution in the form of saline groundwater. This problem often occur in deserts or arid areas where natural flushing of salts (leaching) does not occur and where the groundwater level is both high and saline, water will rise by capillary action and then evaporate, leaving salts on the surface and in the upper layers of the soil; and
4. The transfer from rainfed to irrigation of a single crop, or the transfer from single to double irrigation may create a "humidity/salinity bridge" in the soil, between a deep saline groundwater and the (so far) salt-free surface layers of the soil. Careful soil monitoring is highly recommended whenever the irrigated regime is intensified, even though the saline layers might be far below the soil surface and the irrigation water applied is of high quality.
Based on the above means of salinization, there is very low probability of salt build up to occur in all the subproject areas. There are very low chances of water logging or salinization in the subproject areas as the soils are acidic, the minerals levels in the water are low and being marshlands, the natural drainage prevents salt accumulation. Therefore there is very low probability of salinization induced by irrigation activities in Rwanda marshlands.
Mitigation
This impact will be minimised by construction of adequate drainage system in the farm. Alternatively this impact will be reduced or minimized, in some cases, by adopting micro-irrigation technology which applies water more precisely and will limit quantities to no more than the crops needs.
Alternatively canalisation of the drains would help prevent seepage of water into the aquifer in areas which are not submerged. In order to effectively manage this impact, the farmers/ project beneficiaries should be trained in efficient irrigation water management.
6.2.1.5 Surface Water Resource Pollution
Water quality could deteriorate significantly due to reduced water recharge and balance leading to stagnation contributed by upstream use of fertilizers. Another source of water resources pollution will be through destruction of marshland vegetation and ecological processes that filter pollutants and introduction of agrochemicals into the riverine system that feeds the marshland through return flows which are likely to have significant quantities of pollutants. The reduction or removal of wetlands will also compromise the function of the wetland to filter pollutants from upstream. Though not evident at this stage, agrochemical pollution could become a major problem with intensification of monoculture and vegetables cultivation.
Water pollution in the developed marshland will occur through application of fertilizer and pesticides. The common chemicals to be applied will include nitrates, and phosphates compounds for fertilizers and dithane, Sumicombi, Sumithion and karate and ridomil Dithane for pesticides. Nitrates are highly soluble and therefore may quickly reach water bodies. Phosphates tend to be fixed to soil particles and therefore reach water courses when soil is eroded while phosphate saturated soils. This impact is compounded by the fact that nitrogen and phosphorous have low absorption rates of 30 and 15% respectively. There are high chances of nutrients leaching into water resources. These chemicals if applied in large amounts and at inappropriate time will pollute water resources of the marshlands and have cumulative effects in the basin and groundwater. Pesticides applied will bioaccumulate in the soaked soils of the marshlands upset the natural ecological balance and biodiversity of the wetlands downstream. Dithane is slightly toxic to birdlife and moderately to aquatic organisms. Therefore the use of dithane in marshlands will have adverse effects on marshland inhabitants. Fenitrothion is an insecticide belonging to the class of organophosphates. It is marketed and better known under the names of Sumithion and Sumicombi. The product is used to fight against pests, locusts and grasshoppers. The substance is highly toxic to aquatic organisms and might be hazardous to the environment; a particular attention must be given to shellfish and bees. Fenitrothion builds up in the food chain of humans, mainly in fish. This product is strictly banned in aquatic environments. In USA, this product is specially authorized for specific purposes. As far as toxicity is concerned, the “acceptable” daily level for man is on the order of 0,005mg/kg. This insecticide has potential for aquatic contamination through seepage (El Hadji Hamath and Papa Maïssa, 2006). However based on the average pesticide use of 0.1 kg per ha of cropland, the magnitude of the impact is not going to be high.
Based on the country strategy for the use of fertilizer[4], most of the crops proposed for the irrigation farming in the earmarked marshlands are more profitable when using fertilizer thus the strategic plan promotes the use of fertilizer. Nutrient enrichment in water bodies will increase biological activity and these could lead to eutrophication of the marshlands as already seen in Kagera. However inorganic fertilizer rarely causes environmental problems but poor agronomic practices could result in pollution of the water body[5]. This impact is not going to be severe taking into consideration the national consumption of fertilizers per hectare, is estimated at less than 4kg/year per ha (MINAGRI, Strategy for the Use of Fertilizers, 2007).
Water pollution through application of agrochemicals in the farms is an indirect and long term impact due to the nature of leaching of soils. This impact can be reversible if IPM approaches are undertaken or farmers are trained in techniques of agrochemical applications.
The eastern province subprojects i.e. Kinnyogo, Rwagitima, Cyunuzi, Gisaya, Sagatere and Kibaya all drain to Kagera river which a drains to Lake Victoria that flows to Nile. Due to the catchment relationship between these marshlands and Lake Victoria, the enrichment of nutrients into these marshlands will contribute cumulatively to eutrophication of Lake Victoria exacerbating the blooming of water hyacinth. Development of Kamiranzovu marshland and irrigation could result introduction of agrochemicals into Lake Kivu.
Mitigation
A training program should be developed for farmers on precautionary measures required for the handling, labeling and application of agro-chemicals under field conditions. The training should be incorporated in a farmer’s field school curriculum. Extension workers should also be able to deliver awareness program on the amounts and conditions for applying fertilizers and pesticides to prevent water pollution. Application of fertilizer during rainy season for example will lead to leaching. The same applies for pesticides and herbicides. Agrochemical application should only be done when it’s not rainy to allow the chemicals to soak and not leach.
Alternatively the project should adopt a more environmental sustainable approach of promoting Integrated Pest Management in the project. The alternative pest management methods to include a best mix of biological or cultural controls.
To mitigate against destroying the capacity of the marshlands to filter pollutants introduced into the water system through farm runoff, buffer zones (conservation areas) should be created downstream of the marshlands. These buffer zones will filter pollutant loads from upstream and those leaching from irrigated farms. In case the whole marshland is developed, a marshland downstream should be maintained to reduce the magnitude of this impact, the catchment around should be protected through revegetation and terracing of the slopes in the project catchments. For Kibaya, Sagatare, Gisaya, Kinnyogo and Cyunuzi, downstream where the four marshes confluence should be preserved as a buffer zone. While its is evident that Akagera National park acts as a buffer for the Kagera river, in terms of filtering pollutants from agricultural and industrial, emergence of water hyacinth in Kagera River provides clues of either the wetland capacity to clean nutrients is compromised or there is to much pollutants to be filtered i.e. the carrying capacity is reached. Therefore there is need for others natural and improvised means to be provided to back up the filtering functions of AKagera.
Introduction of water abstraction fee for the subproject beneficiaries will also discourage wastage and conserve water use. This measure should be considered by RSSP and the local authorities.
6.2.1.6 Sub surface Water Contamination
Infiltration of irrigation water in excess of available root zone storage will penetrate beyond the reach of roots and eventually recharge groundwater. Nitrates, salts, and other chemicals used in crop cultivation that dissolves in the soil water will move with the water. Crops with high water and N requirements (rice and vegetables) will increase the potential risk of nitrate pollution to groundwater. Because they do not evaporate, nitrates/nitrites are likely to remain in water until consumed by plants or other organisms. This impact will be felt more in areas with light-textured soils and intensive production of shallow-rooted crops that will contribute to considerable nitrate losses by leaching. In Rugeramigozi subproject area, application of agrochemicals will affect the quality of water used by Electrogaz for domestic supply. This will increase the cost of domestic water treatment by Electriogaz which might result in the cost passed to the consumers. This will be an external cost of the subproject on the population.
Mitigation
Mitigating against ground water contamination will require similar measures as used in preventing surface water pollution. Preventive measures will include practicing IPM and rational application of fertilizer only as a last results while use of organic manure.
6.2.1.7 Reduced Water Flow
Construction of the dam upstream will reduce water flow downstream. Due to this the downstream water users will experience a temporary shortfall (until the reservoirs fill) in the amount of water available therefore disrupting activities and sources of livelihood that depend on river waters. This is a short term impact that will happen when the water will be diverted to the dam. The impact will change flood plain, land use and ecology downstream for a short period depending on capacity of the dam. Is a short term impact that will be felt during the filing of the reservoirs and may be when the flow of the rivers is low during the dry planting season. Reductions in low flows and flood flows will alter the riverine morphology, reducing the capacity to transport sediment and thereby causing a build up of sediments in slower moving reaches and shrinking of the main channel. Increasing flows will have the reverse effect. It should be noted that this impact will not be significant because most of the projects areas have multiple catchments or source of water due to the hilly nature of the country. The damming of Rugeramigozi river will affect the quantity of water downstream which will affect domestic water supply in due to reduce water flow to the Electrogaz reservoir downstream. However due to presence of more than one catchment/watershed, the magnitude of the impact will not be high.
Mitigation
Regulate water abstraction for irrigation and other uses. The dam should only be filled during the wet season to enable other users downstream to continue to receive water all season and in adequate quantity. To achieve this measure, a river that’s feeds to the marshlands should only use quantities of water that will not compromise the flow of water downstream. Also due to presence of multiple catchments in the project marshlands, the reservoir should only tap on one stream leaving the rest to flow freely downstream. The marshlands with more than one catchment are Sagatare, Rwagitima, Rugazi, Kibaya and Nyarububa.
There is a need to install master meters as part of the infrastructure to be developed in the marshlands. The master meter will be used to control the amounts of water abstracted from the rivers thus allowing for management of water flow downstream.
6.2.1.8 Flooding
Constructed irrigation drainage and networks will increase the flow of water in the marshland. This effect compounded by reduced marshland will reduce holding capacities of the wetlands, thus increasing flooding potential downstream. This is cumulative impact as most of the marshlands are partly developed by communities. This impact will be more on Kibaya subproject site. The proposed Kibaya dam will create flood about 100m upstream. This impact will only occur during the rainy season.
Flooding will occur both upstream and downstream. Upstream due to reduction in stream flow brought about by the farms and dam and downstream due to reduced capacity of the marshland to retain water. Flooding due to the project will be a seasonal phenomenon during the wet season when rainfall increases and the marshlands are tilled. This impact will be cumulative in nature as most of the subproject areas flood during rainy season. Upstream of Nyarubogo river receives flush flood waters during rainy season. This annual phenomenon has eroded the stream banks creating a wide gulley that widens every year. Siting of the dam in this location will create flooding upstream of the dam (refer to annex F).
Mitigation
Most of the rivers and streams within the Nile River Basin catchment are prone to flooding. Some of the areas that would have floods include Kajevuba downstream and Nyarubogo upstream. Flooding can only be controlled through reforestation of marshland catchments, protection of river banks, and manmade structures such as dykes that will reduce the flow of water.
This is a cumulative impact as the marshlands normally flood during the rainy season. The component on catchment and hillside management should promote catchment management especially upstream to control the intensity of the floods. The river banks of the channels leading the marshlands should be protected to prevent water breaking the banks and flooding the fields.
6.2.1.9 Microclimate Modification
Loss of marshland vegetation cover in those areas that have started to rejuvenate will lead to modification of the microclimate in the subproject areas. The vegetation of papyrus and typha, for instance, favours water retention and regulates the temperature, thus creating a micro-climate favourable to the formation of organic soils. Therefore the loss of these vegetations will lead to loss of organic soils in the project areas. This impact is cumulative in nature as the subproject areas are already converted marshlands and are not directly related to activities of RSSP.
Mitigation
This impact is unavoidable and therefore a compensation strategy that enhances similar habitat is proposed. The part of the marshland downstream that will be remain after development of the marshland should be protected and conserved to provide the services. Also to recover the services of the microclimate, planting of trees should be undertaken to create that ambient climate similar to what wetland provide.
6.2.1.10 Topsoil Stock Piles
During the construction phase, excavation earth from the reservoir in addition canals and drainages will create a pile up of soil. These activities may result in the increased erosion in areas where vegetation has been stripped and stockpile. This could lead to increased suspended solids being deposited into the marshlands and the feeding rivers.
Mitigation
The stripped soil should be used to construct the dam walls and floor of the dams. An alternative preventive measure is to construct the subprojects during the dry season. This measure may delay the project implementation program, therefore protection and use of the stock pile is the alternative choice to prevent this impact.
6.2.1.11 Land Use Change
The subprojects will change land use from marshland and farming land to reservoir use. The reservoir will replace the farming land in Sagatere, Kibaya, Rwagitima and Ntende and Nyarububa. Cumulatively, a total of 187.1 hectares of marshland/farmland will be used for reservoir. This is a permanent impact that will reduce the area under agriculture and/or marshland land use. Marshland can revert back to its status after decommissioning of the project but it will take along period of time before the rejuvenation of the marshland habitat/vegetation. Already all these areas have shown changes in land use from marshland to dry land used for agriculture.
Mitigation
This impact is unavoidable and can only be compensated through allocating those who will be displaced from their farms and conservation of marshlands downstream. To enable sustainable land use in the project areas, an integrated land use plan should be developed within the catchments based on the three tier approach that considers hillsides, middle grounds and the lower areas/marshlands. This impact will be well understood and mitigated after the completion of the Resettlement Policy Framework and Resettlement Action Plan.
6.2.1.12 Greenhouse Gas Emission
Greenhouse gas emission (methane) will be emitted from the rice paddies through methanogenesis process. The cumulative effects of greenhouse gas effect on the climate results in global warming. This is a cumulative impact as the paddies will emit GHGs during anaerobic decomposition of organic matter in the paddies. Though some of the methane produced will be oxidized by methanotrophs in the shallow overlying water, the vast majority will be released into the atmosphere. It should be noted that methane emissions from the paddies will be affected by rice varieties, water level, fertilizer application and crop phenology. This is unavoidable impact that cannot be eliminated. The impact is also cumulative as marshlands produce methane under ideal condition and rice paddies account for 15–20% of the world’s total anthropogenic CH4 emission (Neue and Sass, 1998). This impact will be confined in the subproject areas that will have rice paddies. These are Kibaya, Cyunuzi, Sagatare, Kinnyogo, Gisaya, Rugazi-Bisenga, Kamiranzovu and Kinyegenyege. This is an already existing impact as these areas mainly cultivate rice. Methane emission from rice paddies is a worldwide phenomenon that has global effects on climate change and the impact is not localised. Of the wide variety of sources, wetland rice fields are considered to be an important source of atmospheric CH4.
Mitigation
Addition of compounds such as ammonium sulphate, which favour activity of other microbial groups over that of the methanogens, will reduce emission of methane from the paddies. However this measure has its own environmental impacts. Alternatively there are many rice varieties can be grown under much drier conditions than those traditionally employed, with big reductions on methane emission without any loss in yield. Additionally, there is the great potential for improved varieties of rice, able to produce a much larger crop per area of rice paddy and so allow for a cut in the area of rice paddies, without a cut in rice production. This measure is not very conducive for RSSP subprojects so would not be ideal. Alternatively is the removal of rice straws from the paddy fields after harvesting thus eliminating the organic matter from decomposing.
6.2.1.13 Reduced Groundwater Seepage
Due to channelling of water in the canals as opposed to natural dispersal in the marshland, there will be reduced ground water seepage. This impact will not be significant as still there will be percolation in the paddy fields as the method of marshland development avoids high drainage, but aims at retaining water in the marshlands. The impact will not be significant due to the fact that the water retention reservoirs will allow ground seepage in areas that have dams. Due to the dense hydrological network of Rwanda, the impact will not affect the ground water recharge of the aquifers.
Mitigation
To ensure there is still continuous recharge of groundwater, subproject areas should create conservation areas (buffer zones) that will allow ground water seepage. Another alternative measure is not to line the canals to allow seepage of water.
6.2.1.14 Siltation of Water Bodies/Reservoirs
The development of the marshland will destroy the silt trapping functions of these marshlands leading to increased silt transportation in the rivers downstream. The streams that drain to Kagera River will be more impacted as the river is already highly silted. As described in section 4.1.3 and 4.5.1, the marshlands of Nile Basin trap silt from the hillsides which are degraded and prone to soil erosion. This is a cumulative impact as Nyabarongo and Kagera are already experiencing high silt load. The impact will affect the proposed Rusumo multipurpose dam that will be built in Rusumo falls by reducing the retention capacity of the dam through siltation.
Mitigation
To prevent siltation of the rivers that are fed by the streams from the marshland, a catchment rehabilitation should be up scaled to protect the soil from water run off. This measure should be supported by creating buffer zones downstream of the marshlands to trap the silt. In subproject areas planned with reservoirs, the designs should incorporate silt traps.
6.3 1 Biological Environment
6.3.1.1 Loss of Aquatic Biodiversity
Wetlands are habitats for avifauna, fisheries sprawling, flora and fauna. Loss of these marshlands will destroy the habitats. However the fact the subprojects areas are not natural, the impact will be offsite. Loss of biodiversity will be felt downstream where the water feeds into other natural marshlands. For the RSSP subproject areas, the marshland vegetation was just rejuvenating in areas where is flooded and these areas show signs of secondary colonization while the rest of the areas are being used for agriculture. The children have also being fishing claries fish species that are found in most of these marshlands. Loss of aquatic habitat will be through the introduction of agrochemicals that will change water composition and hydrological flow of the aquatic habitats that support biodiversity.
This impact might not be site specific as the areas have already been reclaimed but the effect might be felt downstream where most of the aquatic biodiversity is found in the larger wetlands of Kagera.
Mitigation
The assessment has attempted to undertake a biological assessment of the marshlands under RSSP to enable a sustainable decision is made concerning maintenance of biodiversity. However as indicated in the project document, there is need for a full inventory and assessment of Rwanda wetlands. This study should have been undertaken in the early stages of the first phase of the RSSP. Based result of this survey, the project would have avoided those areas with rich biodiversity and significant functions in the ecological and socioeconomic of Rwanda.
Integrated Management of Critical Ecosystems project is in the process of commissioning a similar study and RSSP should corporate with them to have a joint and comprehensive study that will cover all the wetlands in the country.
6.3.1.2 Loss of Habitat
A total of 2307 hectares of marshland will be developed. This will reduce the marshland habitat by 3.12 % through increased development and cultivation. Taking into consideration the functions of marshland of filtering pollutants, water retention, biodiversity, flood buffering, among others (refer to section 4.5.1). This is a cumulative impact due to the fact that already 94,000 ha of marshland have been developed in Rwanda. This impact is not only site specific but will have effects in the Nile River catchment which is the biggest in Rwanda. It’s difficult to assess the significance of this impact without a comprehensive study on the functions of marshland in ecological and economic system of the marshland in Rwanda and the region as a whole. The impact is not going to be significant as the areas for the subprojects were already in use for agricultural production.
Mitigation
Loss of habitat in the areas to be developed is inevitable. However the areas to be reclaimed should be only those areas that already have been used before for farming. Reclaiming natural areas should be only after the two studies of hydrology and biodiversity have been undertaken.
6.3.1.3 Habitat Fragmentation
Habitat fragmentation is the division of natural flowing habitat into smaller areas separated by physical or other barriers. Marshlands in Rwanda follow a linear course along the rivers/stream. The development of these marshlands will therefore fragment these habitats. Access roads and other infrastructure works (reservoir) might cause these fragmentations. Habitat fragmentation will lead to declining in numbers of species dependent on large blocks of habitat, loss of genetic diversity, and other detrimental community- and population-level effects. Excavated earth during dam construction might also block the flow of water resulting in fragmentation. This impact is more significant in Kamiranzovu wetland. Although the proposed site is already in use, this has fragmented this important wetland that drains into Kivu (see annex D).
Mitigation
To avoid habitat fragmentation, the access roads should be bridges and not compacted roads on the marshland. This will allow flow of water and ensuring dispersal of vegetation growth. Civil works should also be located in areas where there are marshes. The overburden earth from dam excavation should be disposed immediately by ways of leveling the rice drying areas, building of embankment or road construction.
For Kamirazovu, there is need for consultation between RSSP and IMCE to develop a catchment management plan that will include area to be conserved as a buffer zone and the areas to be developed for agriculture. The project proposed site is close to Lake Kivu and farming in the area will introduce agrochemicals and silt into the lake thus increasing nutrients and reducing its depth through silt accumulation on the lake floor.
6.3.1.4 Water Weeds
There is a potential of water weeds infesting the reservoirs especially with increased use of fertilizers in the marshlands and in the catchments. Improper application and increased application of fertilizers in these areas will lead to leaching of the nutrients into the reservoir providing a good environment for weeds to grow in the reservoirs. In Kajevuba, already there is a water flower that has appeared in the reservoir. Based on the experience of water hyacinth in Kagera and Lake Victoria, and also the experience of Nairobi dam, there is a possibility of the subproject dams being infested by weeds if the waters will be polluted with nutrients from the catchments and the marshland farming.
Mitigation
Water weeds survive in water bodies due to supply of nutrients. To prevent infestation of weeds in the reservoir, nutrients should not be allowed to enter the reservoir. This should be achieved through practicing protection of the catchments and rational application of fertilizer in farms.
6.3.1.5 Destruction of Fisheries Breeding Ground
Though fisheries in the subproject marshlands are not significant, there is evidence that claries fish species are found in most of these marshlands and fished by children. This impact might not seem significant to the local people due to the culture of the Rwandese of not fish eating as much. The marshlands in Rwanda are breeding habitat for this fish species and they have undergone destruction long before the RSSP activities. In Nyarububa marshland, there are fishponds that use the marshland waters. Use of the marshland for intensive agricultural will impact on the fisheries both in situ and ex situ through destruction of the habitats and pollution of water.
Mitigation
The fishponds should be preserved and the inlet and out water infrastructure be improved as part of the marshland development. To conserve the fish species in the marshland, RSSP should introduce them in the reservoir as ex-situ conservation measure. Some of the species to be breed in the reservoir should include clarias and tilapia species.
6.3.1.6 Loss of Avifauna Habitat
Kamiranzovu wetland is an important avifauna migratory path and home to the Grauer’s Swamp-warbler whose population is said to be less than 10,000 (BirdLife International, 2004). The area therefore is an important habitat for this bird species that is only common in the highland marshes and the Albertine rift. Development of this marshland which forms part of the Kamiranzovu wetland will reduce the habitat of Grauer’s Swamp-warbler as the species is restricted to montane forest swamps at an altitude of 1950-2600m but also occurs in swamps outside the forest (refer to annex D for more details).
Mitigation
Before consideration of development of this marshland (Kamiranzovu), a hydrological and biodiversity assessment should be undertaken to understand the relationship of the marshland to some of the species that are endemic and inhabit the lager Kamiranzovu wetland.
6.3.2 Social Environment
6.3.2.1 Resource Use Conflict
Marshlands in Rwanda are used mostly for domestic water supply. The development of the marshlands therefore might trigger resource use conflict over dryland grazing ground and water supply. This impact is not going to be significant as the government has in place a zero grazing policy. But for water use conflict, this might be a problem in areas where communities depend on marshlands for domestic water.
Marshlands in these areas are a source of water for domestic water supply. The development of these marshlands will deny the people depending on them water for their domestic water supply. Loss of dry season grazing land and water for livestock through development of the marshlands will have cumulative impacts on the already effects of competition between land tillers and livestock keepers. Marshlands that are a source of domestic water supply include Kinnyogo, Sagatare, Cyunuzi, Rugazi, and Rugazi. Gisaya area has a borehole for domestic water supply but still supplement this with water from the marshland.
Mitigation
To prevent conflict over agricultural and domestic water uses, RSPP should have in the dam design, requirement for identify and developing domestic water sources. Its recomeded that the community water points are sited upstream of the mashland to prevfent water contamination. These facilities will act as a compensatory mitigation measures for the benefits forgone by the community in terms of water use loss.
6.3.2.2 Water-borne Diseases
Water retained in the rice paddies, canals and dams will create a conducive environment for mosquitoes and snails to breed. This situation will lead to increase in malaria cases and bilharzias. This is a cumulative impact as the area and the whole of Rwanda has high reported cases of malaria. Bilharzia is not a common problem in Rwanda according the ministry of health records. The snail Biomphalaria sudanica, which can carry Schistosoma mansoni, plays a major role in marshland. These snails have no difficulty in surviving under anaerobic conditions. They do not move very quickly nor spread far and the foci of infection are generally confined to small areas of water which people converge for washing and collecting water, or for fishing. The development these swamps may result in the snails spreading over large areas and the impact of drainage on a variety of other diseases should be carefully assessed prior to reclamation.
However based on National Health Sector Plan, the country is normally confronted with epidemics of cholera, meningitis, bacillary dysentery and typhus. Other diseases, such as schistosomiasis, onchocercosis and trypanosomiasis are subject to close monitoring (RHSP, 2005). Therefore, there is a possibility of these diseases spreading due to the subproject activities and operations and climate change. This impact could also be as a result of population migration thus transhumance of vectors to the project area or it could be brought through hygiene conditions at the farmland. Thus the disease most likely to relate to the impact of the subproject will mostly be malaria. This impact will also manifest in case of poor soil drainage, lack of drainage canals or badly designed and/or maintained, rice cultivation, night storage reservoirs are constructed, if borrow pits are left with stagnant water or canals are unlined and have unchecked vegetation growth. This impact will only occur in few of the subproject as many of the settlements are located on the hills far from the project sites.
Rwagitiama-Ntende dam location is one site that could result in drowning and spread of malaria as it near Rebero village. The dam proposed site is less than 20m from the village. The reservoir will provide a breeding ground for mosquitoes and children could drown (refer to annex J for more details).
Another impact of the project on health of the local people is through contamination of marshland waters which is consumed by the communities of Kinnyogo, Sagatare, Rwagitima and Cyunuzi. This impact is brought about by pollution of surface water and groundwater from agricultural biocides rendering the marshland water unfit for domestic consumption.
Mitigation
The control of the water-related diseases will be affected in a number of ways, some of which are mutually reinforcing. Three alternatives mitigation measures are proposed to mitigate this impact. These measures are:
1. Measures aimed at the pathogens: immunization, prophylactic or curative drugs;
2. Introduction of fish in the reservoirs to destroy vector larvae;
3. Undertaking health education, personal protection measures including mosquito nets and mosquito proofing of houses;
4. Management of the irrigation infrastructure;
To achieve the above conditions, the farmers should prevent or remove aquatic vegetation, lining canals with cement or plastic, regularly fluctuating water levels, periodic rapid drying of irrigation canals, preventing contamination of water bodies with faeces, supply of safe and clean drinking water, appropriate sitting of housing of the farmers etc.
For malaria prevention measures, introduction of fish in the reservoir would destroy the larvae in the reservoir which acts as the breeding ground. Fish species that can be introduced and which are commonly cultured include Tilapia melanopleura (it may be T. rendalli and not the true T. melanopleura) and T. macrochir. Tilapia nilotica. Clarias carsonii, C. mossambica and Serranochromis macrocephela. This measure will also serve as incentive for the reservoir through supply of rich source of protein.
For Rwagitima-Ntende dam, there are two alternatives, either the village is relocated from its present location or the dam is sited in an alternative site. Relocating the resettlement will be expensive as compared to siting the dam in an alternative site. Based on this study, an alternative site of the dam could be upstream far from settlments and not in natural habitats, but this will be confirmed by feasibility study findings.
To mitigate against contamination of domestic water quality in the marshland, RSSP should identify community watering points (springs) and protect these sources before construction works can begin.
Control of vectors in the irrigation channels will require frequent flushing of the canals during wet season when water volume is high. This can be best guaranteed during the rainy season when flushing is aided by excessive amounts of precipitation.
6.3.2.3 Population Migration
Rwanda as a country is still experiencing migration and resettlement of the displaced people caused by the genocide of 1994. This trend will shows a pattern of returnees and those already settled migrating towards those areas that show promise of employment and livelihood. With increased socioeconomic activities and increase income from the subprojects there set to be increase in population of people within the catchments. The operationlisation of the subprojects will attract people to those areas in search for employment and settlement. The effect of this impact will be felt in the health sector through increased rates of AIDs infection and other diseases that are spread through demographic changes and in environmental sector in terms of degradation.
This impact will put pressure on social facilities including heath care, water, energy, sanitation and land. The area to be mostly affected by migration will be those subproject sites that are in the eastern region i.e. Kibaya, Sagatare, Cyunuzi, Gisaya among others. This situation will be compounded by the present migratory dynamic of people towards the least populated provinces especially in the East (Umutara, Kibungo) and South East (Kigali Ngali) in search of a new land for agriculture and livestock (NCS, 2002).
This indirect impact could also lead to degradation of marginal areas including hill sides, wetlands and forested areas through cultivation and as sources of fuelwood. Water resources will also be degraded through contamination with faecal matter as the whole country lacks sewer system.
Managing Population Influx
There are no measures for preventing population influx into the subproject areas. However RSSP and the local government in these respective areas should control settlement in fragile areas including marshlands and steep hills. Another measure to manage influx is through provision of social infrastructure including water and sewer. During construction phase of the project, the contractors should have employment policy which gives preference to the local people. By employing the locals, this would discourage population influx to the area.
6.3.2.4 Safety Hazards
The subprojects poses safety hazards especially those that entail dam construction. Potential safety hazards include drowning in the reservoir during operation phase of the project. This impact could occur when community members fetch water or children playing around or swimming in the reservoirs. Kanyonyomba is a good example of safety hazards posed by reservoirs. Since its construction (a year) the dam has claimed more than three lives). These accidents occurred when swimming or fetching water for domestic use).
Another safety hazard posed by the subprojects with dams is safety of these dams. The dams might break the walls and destroy community’s properties including crops and other infrastructure and could also be fatal. This is a potential impact on most of the subproject areas that entail dam construction but more so in Nyarubogo where the banks show signs of high water velocity and in high quantities during rains. Dam safety hazards could also be posed by zones of high seismicity, or foundations that are complex and difficult to prepare especially in marshlands that compose of peat.
Mitigation
The area around the dams should be fenced to prevent uncontrolled access which could lead to drowning. Access to the dam should be through a centralised place that can be monitored. In case the dam will be used for multiple uses i.e. domestic water supply, additional infrastructure will be needed. This infrastructure will include constructing of cattle watering troughs which should be not less that 50m from the dam and should have a drainage channels for draining `cattle droppings away from the dam. Another provision for the dam should be watering points for domestic water users which should be separate with the one for cattle. To ensure the dam does not break the walls and cause damage, the contractors should commission supervisors ensure dam design and safety are considered during the dam planning and construction. The RSSP dam construction supervisors should among other things:
• Spillway discharge capacity is adequate;
• Dam and any necessary design or operational precautions are to specification; and,
• That river diversion structures used during construction are more than adequate to meet the flow.
• The foundations of the dam are well grounded and not placed on peat.
To prevent drowning of children, community watering points should be designed as part of the dam infrastructure. These areas should be sited away from the reservoir. The domestic fetching points should be sited near the water outlet points. Another alternative is to fence the dam and posting of guards to prevent people from fetching water from the reservoir. In Kanyonyomba, RSSP has posted a warning sign at the dam warning the locals against fetching water from the reservoir. The cooperative has employed a guard to prevent locals from fetching water from the dam.
6.3.2.5 Loss of Livelihoods
As state earlier, marshlands are used as third season farming areas or during dry period for cultivation of vegetables and other crops (Golder & ESF, 2007). Some of the crops grown in these marshlands include sweet potatoes, tomatoes, cabbages, bananas, among other food crops that don’t grow favourably on the hillsides. The development of these marshlands will therefore displace the people who depend on them for livelihoods especially the landless. Even though marshlands are state owned, the plight of these people has to be addressed during the implementation of the subprojects according to World Bank operational policy on involuntary displacement.
In Sagatare (annex K), the marshland is used as a source for brick making clay by the local young men. The development of this marshland will therefore displace these young men and deprive them of income derived from selling of the bricks. In Gisaya marshland (annex B), a group of about five women also supplement their agricultural income with mat weaving with marshland vegetation products. The development of these marshland will deny these women alternative source of income and livelihood which is estimated at fws 8,000 per month per person (pers. Comm.).
Mitigation
The displaced people should be compensated (refer to section 6.3.1.15) and given alternative areas for cultivation to cushion them against shocks such as hunger. The new areas should be developed for them or they should be integrated into the subprojects associations as they become subprojects beneficiaries and not losers.
6.3.2.6 Emergence of Pests and Crop Diseases
Reduction of marshland and increased acreage of irrigated land will create a more humid environment that may result in an increase of agricultural pests and plant diseases. Change to a more uniform environment on the subproject areas will favour vigorous species adapted to a wide variety of conditions. Diseases and weeds will spread quickly via the re-use of waste-water and drainage water. Some of the agricultural pests that will increase will be stalked-eyed fly (Diopsis thoracica) and rice blast caused by P. Oyzae, Sheath brown rot caused by Pseudomonas fuscovaginae and fungal disease caused by Sarocladium oryzae due to humidity caused by increase evaporation in the paddies and dams. Increase pests and plant diseases will affect farm harvest and lead to food insecurity and malnutrition in areas of south east part of the country. Increased pests and crop diseases will trigger increased use of pesticides leading to water contamination.
Mitigation
To mitigate against emergence of pests and diseases an incorporation of IPM approaches are proposed. These measures should involve rotational/mixed cropping practices which preserve greater diversity in habitat thus reducing impact of pest and diseases. At the farm level, the agronomist should discourage monocropping. Rice varieties used in this project should be selected from the ones already introduced in Rwanda in order to avoid new diseases and pests.
6.3.2.7 Displacement
Displacement is defined here as referring to both ‘physical displacement’ and ‘livelihood’ displacement (or deprivation). Displacement of livelihoods is discussed in another section. Acquisition of land for dam, drainage and roads to the project sites will lead to displacement of the services that’s provided by the marshlands i.e. for growing fodder, source of water and brick making. Even though, marshlands in Rwanda are state land, people have cultivated these areas for sometime and depend on these areas for their livelihood and food security. The areas to be most affected include Nyarububa which is highly settled and farmed and Rwagitima-Ntende where the site identified for Ntende dam is settled and farmed.
Mitigation
The RSSP should develop a resettlement policy framework and action plan for compensating those who are displaced from the areas earmarked for development and construction of water reservoir. The policy should take into consideration the investment undertaken in the sites and alternative areas be identified for these people. Alternatively, the people who traditionally farmed the marshlands should be integrated into the project beneficiaries associations.
The RPF and RAP should consider resettling the displaced by providing land and investment and not just providing cash to the affected as this will create a squatter problem if the displaced misappropriate the money given as settlement for their land.
6.3.2.8 Food Security and Subsistence
All the subprojects are targeting rice irrigation or are in areas where rice production is a major activity. With higher income as compared to other subsistence crops, subsistence farming might be abandoned in favour for cash flow rice. This trend might affect the production of food crops leading to food insecurity in the subproject areas. While the country agricultural strategy and poverty reduction strategy promote high value crops, subsistence crops still play important role in ensuring food security for the majority of the rural poor. This is an indirect impact that might affect the whole country food security situation, more so because rice is not considered a staple food in Rwanda.
Mitigation
This impact can be mitigated by good land use planning that incorporates rice production and other food crops. Agricultural extension officers should be mobilized to advice farmers on the importance of diversifying crop production and good farm practices such as intercropping, rotational cropping and agro forestry. The project proponents should also embark on encouraging communities to diversify their staple diet so that they do not only rely on traditional food crops as their most important crop even when it has little economic returns.
6.3.2.9 Loss of Marshland Products and Services
Gisaya marshland is not only used for agriculture but it’s also a source of products for weaving. Women harvest urukangaga for mat weaving and they sell the mats to supplement their agricultural income. Development of the marshland will destroy the source of materials for this weaving women resulting in loss of alternative livelihoods which is a safety net for failure in agriculture crops. This impact will not only deny the women of income but also the local knowledge of mat weaving will be lost if they don’t practice and pass this knowledge to the next generation.
Mitigation
Before development of the marshland is undertaken, RSSP environmental officer should undertake a mapping exercise together with the local women to identify where areas where this product is found and based on the map, the urukangaga should be conserved. If possible the plant can be conserved ex-situ in private lands.
6.3.2.10 Child Labour
Rice cultivation is a labour intensive activity and in areas of the north where they are have been cultivating rice before, most of the members of the households engage in rice cultivation and this could result in drop in school attendance as children provide labour in the paddies. This impact will be more so in poor households that cannot afford to employ additional labour. This impact will not be significant as the government policy on free primary education is compulsory and is punishable. However even with the free primary policy, in interiors of the country where close supervision is not strict, children will forgo school to work in the rice paddies. This trend was witnessed in Gisaya where children were working in the fields even though they were to attend school in the evening.
Mitigation
Application and strict enforcement of the compulsory free primary education will help to reduce the impact. Also through creating awareness of the importance of education, the beneficiaries should help prevent the impact from occurring. RSSP should educate the cooperatives to avoid use of children labour during school days.
6.3.2.11 Water and Sanitation Impacts
The return flow from the irrigation paddies will have impact on human health for those villages downstream that use the marshland water for domestic uses. This is because the return flows will likely to have significant quantities of pollutants from agrochemicals. Some the areas that will be affected will include Ntende, Kinnyogo, Nyarububa, Kajevuba, among others. This is a cumulative impact as the water from the marshland is already not good for human consumption. The primary health concern is regarding nitrate and nitrite is the formation of methaemoglobinaemia, so-called “blue-baby syndrome.” Nitrate is reduced to nitrite in the stomach of infants, and nitrite is able to oxidize haemoglobin (Hb) to methaemoglobin (metHb), which is unable to transport oxygen around the body. The reduced oxygen transport becomes clinically manifest when metHb concentrations reach 10% or more of normal Hb concentrations; the condition, called methaemoglobinaemia, causes cyanosis and, at higher concentrations, asphyxia. The normal metHb level in infants under 3 months of age is less than 3%.
Mitigation
RSSP in consultation with the local community should identify and protect domestic sources of water during the planning phase of the project. The return water flow should pass through buffer zones to enable filtration of agrochemical pollutants to a degree that is fit for domestic use or near the level as required by World Health Organization standards[6].
Impacts Summary
The table 9 below summaries the project impacts and mitigation measures proposed to reduce, prevent or avoid impacts.
Table 9. Summary of adverse impacts characteristics
|Impact |Extent |Occurrence |Significance |Nature |Mitigation |
|Hydrological Change |Basin wide (Nile basin) |Potential |Medium |Cumulative |Control and management of abstraction |
| |Domestic water | | | | |
|Soil erosion |Site specific |Potential |Low |Cumulative |Soil conservation measures |
|Soil salinity |Site specific |Potential |Medium |Cumulative |Create adequate drainage/frequent flushing |
|Reduced water flow downstream |Downstream |Potential |Low |Cumulative |Regulate water abstraction |
|Flooding |Basin wide |Potential |High |Cumulative |Creation of buffer areas and regulating of reservoirs |
|Loss of biodiversity |Site specific |Certain |Low |Cumulative |Create conservation areas which also serve as buffer zones |
|Habitat loss |Site specific |Certain |Low |Cumulative |Create conservation areas which also serve as buffer zones |
|Habitat fragmentation |Localised-Kamiranzovu |Certain |Medium |Cumulative |Establish conservation areas |
|Water weeds infestation |Basin |Potential |Low | |Proper use of agrochemicals |
|Fisheries destruction |Basin |Potential |Low |Cumulative |Promote and ex-situ conservation of clarias and other species |
|Water borne diseases |Localised |Potential |Low |Cumulative |Introduction of fish in the reservoir and awareness creation |
| | | | | |Provide safe drinking water sources |
|Safety hazards |Dams |Potential |Medium |Indirect |Provision of community watering points and post guard in the |
| | | | | |reservoir |
|Loss of livelihoods |Localised | |Low |Indirect |Provision of watering points, posting of a guard and fencing of |
| | | | | |the dam |
|Emergence of diseases and pets |Basin wide |Potential |Low |Indirect |Intercropping and rotational cropping |
|Loss of marshland products and |Localised |Certain |Low |Cumulative |Buffer zone conservation areas |
|services | | | | | |
|Food security and subsistence | |Potential |Low |Indirect |Promote intercropping and rotational farming |
|Displacement |Localised |Certain |Low |Direct |Use of 50m wetland allowance for access and compensate the |
| | | | | |displaced |
|Loss of marshland products |Localised |Certain |Low |Cumulative |Create conservation areas which also serve as buffer zone |
|Loss of livelihood |Localised |Potential |Low |Direct |Compensate as per RPF/RAP |
7.0 SUBPROJECT ALTERNATIVES
This chapter describe and examine the various alternatives available for the project. Alternatives examined during the study included alternative irrigation technology including drip irrigation, site alternatives in project location particularly with regards to location based impacts, biodiversity loss, wetland functions loss and land use conflicts was assessed. Finally a No Project alternative was also assessed to determine the impact of this No Project Scenario.
7.1 Alternative Technology
The irrigation technology adopted for the RSSP is open surface canal irrigation which consists of gravity-fed systems, where water is transported from surface sources via small channels and used to flood or furrow-feed agricultural land (paddies). This system is cheap in terms of capital investment in infrastructure and maintenance. However the environmental impacts of the systems are considered to be many as compared to other systems. The technology has low efficiency rates depending on environmental factors including loss of water, health impacts among others. See table 10 for comparative analysis of alternative project technology.
Table 10. Comparative Analysis of alternative subproject technologies
|Technology |Advantages |Disadvantages |
|Open surface canal irrigation |Low capital investments and maintenance |Low water efficiency (high rates of water |
| | |loss) |
| |Gravity-fed system | |
| | Good for marshland conditions where water is|Associated with health impacts (malaria and|
| |readily available |bilharzia breeding) |
| |Technology is easy to be adopt by communities| |
|Stream flow irrigation (without |No stagnant water body to attract waterborne |Whole year round irrigation cannot be |
|reservoir) |diseases |sustained due to flow fluctuation |
| |Low capital investment | |
| | | |
Based on the comparative analysis in table 8 above, open surface canal irrigation adopted by RSSP is considered to be the best in terms of all year round water availability. However the socioeconomic and ecological characteristics are not very favourable. The choice of technology is not only linked to costs and environmental aspect of the project but there are two other factors to consider when assessing the subprojects. The need for this project is due to dependency of rural areas on agriculture and the lack of available land to expand and secondly the need for the rural poor to be able to produce whole year round. Due to the fluctuating water flows during the dry season, the use of water for irrigation without reservoir will not make a difference in terms of increasing productivity.
7.2 Alternative Project Site
Gravity fed or dependent irrigation projects many a times are site specific due to land topography, sitting of dams and farm land should be concurrent with the gravitation flow of water in order to achieve water flow into the area target for irrigation.
All the sites for dam construction were based on topographical, hydrological and geological survey which identified the best location. This is to ensure easy flow of water into the reservoir and from the reservoir into the fields without mechanical support.
7.3 Alternative Scale and Design
Irrigation without a water reservoir infrastructure is an alternative to this project, in this case water from the natural stream is channelled to the rice fields without storing. This design however, has some draw backs in terms of continuous agricultural production. By removal of water retention infrastructure in the project design will mean that agricultural production can only be undertaken during wet season when the flow of water is enough to sustain production.
The project is using small dams instead of large dams as considered in the World Bank operational policy on dam safety and World Commission on Dams. None of the subproject dams are higher than 10m. In areas like Rugazi, Rwagitima and Nyarubogo, instead of construction one large dam, two small dams have been proposed. For the case of Rugazi, the project will use the already dammed rivers instead of constructing new ones.
7.4 Alternative Project Phasing
The RSSP is a three phased project that is now entering its second phase. The activities under consideration in this study are on the second phase. The studies on wetland biodiversity and hydrological assessment should have been undertaken during the first phase of the project to set the benchmark for the second phase of marshland development.
7.5 Alternative Project Operating and Maintenance
To minimise water losses and downstream impacts, the project can adapt water saving irrigation which water is drained from the paddies periodically when temperatures are low i.e. below 18°C during the early stage of tillering. The alternative is the traditional irrigation method where shallow water layer is kept on the soil surface of rice fields throughout 70-80% of the whole growing season. The basic feature of water-saving irrigation is that there is no water layer on the fields throughout 75%-85% of the rice growing season. But this can only happen in areas where the low temperatures subproject sites. This alternative can only be considered after studies have been undertaken and experience of China where this technique has been successfully been undertaken sort.
7.6 No Project Alternative
A No project option will mean that the anticipated positive and adverse impacts do not occur and the status quo remains. However in terms of costs and benefits analysis this option would lead to economic loss of 26 Billion Rwfs annually based of the cost of rice importation.
Without RSSP, the state of marshland will continue to change towards further degradation. With inappropriate farming technology, soils will continue to erode even at a much higher volume yearly because more areas will be brought to production as the population on the hills continue to increase. As soil erosion accelerates so is the sedimentation/siltation rate in the wetlands will continue.
Without the project, opportunity would be lost for 79,591.5 mandays job opportunities to be created during the first phase of the project, and indirect jobs and business opportunities that the project would create. The substantial increase in local taxes and revenues, including the direct and indirect local benefits expected to accrue as a result of the project, would be foregone.
Based on the area earmarked for development (2307 ha) and average profitability of rice per hectare (US$ 300), a no project option would mean an average forgone profits of US$ 692,100 seasonally. A No Project option will also mean lead to the loss of the indirect investment to Rwanda economy worth more than US$ 15 million in the agricultural sector and the direct and indirect project benefits based on internal rate of return.
Based on the direct and indirect project benefits, A No project option is not a viable alternative for this project. Considering the fact the potential project impacts can be avoided or mitigate effectively, the project benefits out weigh the costs in terms of adverse impacts.
Based on the above considered factors, a “no-project scenario” is not an attractive alternative.
8.0 SUBPROJECTS ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
This EMP is a detailed program of work which defines what mitigation measures and monitoring activities will take place, when and by whom. The plan includes estimates of costs of implementation. The persons and institutions responsible for implementing the plan will include cooperative/assocaition members, RSSP, MINAGRI, MINIFRA, World Bank, REMA and contractors building the dams and drainage network.
Potential mitigation measures considered in the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) include:
• Environmental management plans and programmes;
• Social and economic investment programmes;
• Engineering design solutions;
• Alternative approaches and methods to achieving an activity’s objective;
• Operational control procedures; and
• Management systems approach.
8.1 Objectives
The objectives of the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) are:
1. To bring the project into compliance with applicable national environmental and social legal requirements and the World Bank’s environmental and social policies as stipulated under the various safeguard operational policies and Bank procedures;
2. To outline the mitigating/enhancing, monitoring, consultative and institutional measures required to prevent, minimize, mitigate or compensate for adverse environmental and social impacts and/or to enhance the subproject beneficial impacts;
3. To address capacity building requirements to strengthen the Borrower’s environmental and social capacities if necessary.
8.2 EMP Implementation
This EMP will be implemented by several institutions which are directly or indirectly involved in this subproject. These institutions are the World Bank as the lender, MINAGRI as the project implementer or borrower, sub contractors who will commissioned to construct the irrigation infrastructure and the subproject beneficiaries (Cooperatives).
8.2.1 World Bank
World Bank will finance the implementation of the EMP and oversee the implementation of the EMP. The Bank will also provide technical advisory role to the project.
8.2.2 Rural Sector Support Project
Rural Sector Support Project is the lead agency in the implementation of this EMP and the project. The role of the RSSP will be to implement mitigation measures, coordination of monitoring activities maintenance of monitoring information, building the capacity of other stakeholders in collection and analysis of monitoring data.
The environmental officer of RSSP will be the focal point for the EMP and will liaise with other stakeholders to executive the plan.
8.2.3 Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI)
The ministry of agriculture will train farmers in IPM, fertilizer and pesticide management and efficient utilization of irrigation water.
The RSSP agronomist will be the focal point for training in IMP and agrochemical application and will liaise with the ministry of agriculture for technical support. It should be noted that all the capacity building activities should be hands-on through the FFS approach. The project should establish one farm in one of the project areas which will act as the field school.
The ministry through RSSP will also supervise infrastructure design and construction including dams and drainage. The role of MINIAGRI will to ensure that the dams and drainages are constructed according to the specifications international technical and safety standards.
8.2.3.1 Training on IPM
The training program will cover amounts of fertilizer to be applied per hectare of land and during what conditions should be undertaken before commissioning of the project. The types and amounts of pesticides should also be part of this training. This training should be a hands-on that can be introduced in the Farmer’s Field School (FFS) model adopted by the project. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and ISAR have the capacity to undertake this activity and could be partners with RSSP.
8.2.3.2 Training in Fertilizer and Pesticides Application
The training objective is to ensure beneficiary farmers in the project area do not pollute water resources through unsustainable application of inorganic fertilizers. This capacity building activity can undertake by MINAGRI with technical support from Institut des Sciences Agronomiques du Rwanda.
8.2.3.3 Efficient Water Use
Inefficient use of water in the farmland could cause water logging, health impacts and loss of water downstream. The project irrigation engineer will coordinate training in irrigation water use including when to flood the paddies and when to drain.
8.2.4 Rwanda Environment Management Authority
Rwanda Environment Management Authority being the oversight authority over the environment in Rwanda, its role will be of reviewing the EMP, approval, monitoring environment indicators as identified in this monitoring plan, training in environmental management and advising on environmental issues related to this EMP
8.2.4.1 Catchment Management
Rwanda Environment Management Authority in consultation with MINIARI will develop an integrated catchment management plan for subproject areas. The integrated catchment management and restoration will involve soil erosion through afforestation, soil and conservation measures including terracing and agroforestry on the sloppy areas.
A catchment approach would best mitigate environmental problems. The main elements of a catchment approach are to (i) buffer zones of natural vegetation created at intervals to control water flow, reduce downstream impact, help filter out effluents from other activities, and provide fodder for livestock and materials for thatch; and (ii) zoning of marshland areas and restricting cultivation of habitats that are critical for water storage or breeding habitats for wild animals.
8.2.5 Project Beneficiaries
The project beneficiaries being the people on the ground will have the role of execute some of the mitigation measures, collecting and monitoring the identified indicators and practicing sustainable farming as well as catchment rehabilitation and management. The project beneficiaries are organized in cooperatives which have management committees for water, production and maintenance.
8.2.6 Contractors
The contractor will be in charge of designing and constructing the infrastructure according to the World Bank operation policy on dam safety, restoring the burrow pits and degraded areas, ensuring the safety of the users and others.
8.2.7 Ministry of Health
Due to possible health impacts especially malaria and bilharzia in the subproject areas, the ministry of heath comes into the picture of this project. The role of the ministry of health will be to promote environmental health, health prevention methods including sleeping in treated nets and monitoring incidences of malaria and bilharzia.
8.2.8 Local Authorities
The RSSP subprojects will be implemented in seven districts which are administered by the respective district authorities. These local authorities have jurisdiction over the subproject areas and control the marshlands including use and conservation. The marshland farmers pay taxes to the respective authorities for use of these areas. The department of agriculture and animal husbandry would be the focal point in the respective local authorities.
The role of the local authorities will be to monitor and ensure sustainable utilization of the marshlands after the project period. They will be the agency close to the project and will ensure the EMP is implemented by the different stakeholders as indicated.
8.2.9 Integrated Management of Critical Ecosystem
The project on integrated management of critical ecosystem (IMCE) was an important component of RSSP phase one and this was not by default but the role the project can play in ensuring sustainable agricultural development in Rwanda. Through the studies to be undertaken by IMCE, RSSP can plan which marshland subprojects to fund. RSSP can also use the technical capacity of IMCE in deciding on best practices in marshland development and catchment management and protection.
PLANNING AND DESIGN PHASE
|Activity |
|Water pollution |
|Habitat loss |
|Emergence of pests and crop diseases |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Earth movement and farming |
|Clearing of vegetation for agriculture |
|Dam construction |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Water pollution |
|Habitat loss |
|Emergence of pests and crop diseases |
|Pesticide, fertilizer and herbicide application |
|Clearing of vegetation for agriculture |
|Dam construction |
|Water pollution |
|Habitat loss |
|Emergence of pests and crop diseases |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Pesticide, fertilizer and herbicide application |
|Clearing of vegetation for agriculture |
|Irrigation |
|Water pollution |
|Habitat loss |
|Emergence of pests and crop diseases |
|Water pollution |
|Habitat loss |
|Emergence of pests and crop diseases |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Water pollution |
|Habitat loss |
|Emergence of pests and crop diseases |
|Dam construction |
|Inundation |
|Dam construction |
|Pesticide, fertilizer and herbicide application |
|Clearing of vegetation for agriculture |
|Dam construction |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Activity |
|Water pollution |
|Habitat loss |
|Emergence of pests and crop diseases |
|Water pollution |
|Habitat loss |
Emergence of pests and crop diseases | |Signs of pests and diseases in crops/ Incidence and spread of pests and diseases |Incidence and spread of pests and diseases through Crop field assessment |Seasonally |RSSP (agronomist) & MINIAGRI |Part of the project M&E budget | |Population influx |Population |Change in total human population within the 5 km radius of project area | |Continuous |Local authorities |Part of the project M&E budget | |Water-borne Diseases |diseases |Increased cases of malaria and bilharzias among other waterborne diseases |Review of health records |Quarterly |RSSP (Environmental Officer) and Ministry of Health |Part of the project M&E budget | |Water Resource use conflict |persons |Complaints and reported cases of conflict |Conflict reports |Continuous |RSSP & Community Cooperative |None | |Safety Hazard |Safety |Incidences and accidents |Review and evaluation of incidents and accidents register | |RSSP (environmental officer and engineer) Cooperatives & MINFRA |Part of the project M&E budget | |Displacement |persons |Number of people displaced |Resettlement Action Plan |Continuous |RSSP |Resettlement Action Plan | |Food insecurity | |Food crop production |Crop assessment reports |Seasonally |MINAGRI (can use FAO seasonal crop assessment data) |Part of the food security monitoring budget | | | | | | | | | |
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
To protect the dam from siltation and to protect the soil on the catchment, the Rukumba hills should be protected through afforestation and no human activities should be undertaken in this part of the hills. RSSP should establish a green zone on the hill as the stability of the hill also ensures the stability of the Ngoma-Kirehe road.
The banks of the marshland also need soil conservation measures. The sides of the marshland are eroded
The dam should have been sited upstream before the area that floods or where the two streams meet. This way the dam would control floods at the stream convergence area.
To prevent pollution of Kagera River and other marshlands of the river, an already existing natural marshland downstream in Cyunuzi where the four marshlands of Kinnyogo, Sagatare, Cyunuzi and Kibaya meet should protected to act as natural filter of the agrochemicals upstream.
4.1 Conclusion
Upper Kibaya marshland is upstream of Kibaya-Cyunuzi marshland which is considered a complex marshland that drains into Kagera. Reduction of the capacity of the marshland to filter agrochemicals and silt from spstream agronomic activities might impact on the Kagera ecosystem negatively. To prevent this from happening, it’s recommended that, buffer zones (conservation areas) should be created downstream of the marshlands. These buffer zones will filter pollutant loads from upstream and those leaching from irrigated farms. The areas where Kibaya-Cyunuzi confluence should be preserved as a buffer zone and protected from any anthropogenic activities.
REFERENCE
Bikwemu, G., 2006. Environmental Review of Rural Sector Support Project. Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources, Republic of Rwanda.
Byaruhanga, A., Sande, E., Plumptre, A., Owiunji, I. and Kahindo, C. (eds) (2006). International Species Action Plan for the Grauer’s Swamp-warbler Bradypterus graueri. BirdLife International, Nairobi, Kenya and Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Sandy, Bedfordshire, UK.
Chemonics Inc, 2003. Rwanda Environmental Threats and Opportunities Analysis (ETOA). United States Agency for International Development International.
Chris Huggins and Herman Musahara, 2004. Land Reform, Governance and the Environment: The Case of Rwanda Paper Prepared for 4th Regional Session of the Global Biodiversity Forum for Africa, African Centre for Technology Studies.
Christine Padoch, 2005. Labour efficiency and intensity of land use in rice production: An example from Kalimantan Institute of Economic Botany, New York Botanical Garden, 10458 Bronx, New York.
El Hadji H. and Maïssa P. 2006. Pesticide use in the processing and conservation of sea products. International POPs Elimination Project. Senegal
FAO, 2001. Smallholder Irrigation Technology: Prospects for Sub-Saharan Africa International Programme For Technology And Research in Irrigation and Drainage Knowledge Synthesis Report No. 3 Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations Rome.
FAO, Rwanda country paper. The agricultural characterization and the classification of wetlands of Eastern and Southern Africa, in Wetland Characterization and Classification for Sustainable Agricultural.
Galbraith, H.; Amerasinghe, P.; Huber-Lee, A. 2005. The effects of agricultural irrigation on wetland ecosystems in developing countries: A literature review. CA Discussion Paper 1 Colombo, Sri Lanka: Comprehensive Assessment Secretariat.
Golder and ESF, 2007. Rapid Baseline Social Analysis of the Rusumo Falls Regional Power Project Area. 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C 20433 USA.
GoR, 2002. The Government of Rwanda: Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. National Poverty Reduction Programme: Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning.
GoR, 2002. Third Census of Population and Housing of Rwanda, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, National Census Service.
GoR, 2003. National Strategy and Action Plan for the Conservation of Biodiversity in Rwanda. Ministry of Environment, Forestry, Water and Mines.
GoR, 2004. National Forestry Policy Ministry of Lands, Environment, Forestry, Water and Mines.
GoR, 2004. National Land Policy. Ministry of Lands, Environment, Forests, Water and Mines.
GoR, 2004. Strategic Plan for Agricultural Transformation in Rwanda, Ministry Of Agriculture and Animal Resources.
GoR, 2005. Rwanda Health Sector Policy. Ministry Health.
GoR, 2006. Feasibility Studies for Nyarubogo-Kinyegenye irrigation project. Hydroplan Ingenieur-Geselischaft mbH.
GoR, 2006. Rural Sector Support Program: Project Implementation Manual. Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Resources and Forestry.
GoR, 2007. Rwanda Agricultural Survey. National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning and Unit of Planning, Policy and Capacity Building Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources.
GoR, 2007. Strategy for the Use of Fertilizers. Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources.
Government of Rwanda, 2002. Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. National Poverty Reduction Programme: Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning.
Herman Musahara and C. Huggins, 2004. Land Reform, Land Scarcity and Post Conflict Reconstruction: A Case Study of Rwanda, African Centre for Technology Studies, Eco-Conflicts Volume 3.
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, 1991. Environmental Assessment Sourcebook. 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington D.C 20433 U.S.A.
Jagwe J. N and Hakizimana, P et al, 2003. Marketing Survey of the Rice sub-sector in Rwanda. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA-FOODNET) and Institut des Sciences Agronomiques du Rwanda.
Mushinzimana, G., 2006. Analysis of the Implementation of Governmental Programs for the Development of Marshlands and Valley Lowlands in Southern Rwanda. University of Bonn, Department for Economic Sociology, Germany
NBI, 2005. National Nile Basin Water Quality Monitoring Baseline Report for Rwanda.
Ousmane B, 2000. Rural Sector Support Project: Environmental Assessment Report. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
R.H. Hughes and J.S. Hughes 1992. A Directory of African Wetlands, Wetlands & Water Resources. World Conservation Union.
Wallace M, B. and Knausenberger W.I, 1997. Inorganic Fertilizer Use in Africa: Environmental and Economic Dimensions. Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Training (EPAT) Project Applied Research, Technical Assistance and Training Winrock International Environmental Alliance Arlington, Virginia, U.S.A.
World Bank, 1998. Guidelines for Monitoring and Evaluation for Biodiversity Projects. Environment Department, The World Bank 1818 H Street, N.W, Washington, D.C.
World Bank, 2001. Rural Sector Support Project: Project Appraisal Document. World Bank Africa Regional Office.
Dubey, S.K, 2001. Methane Emission and Rice Agriculture: In Scientific Correspondence. VOL. 81, NO. 4, Ecosystems Analysis Laboratory, Department of Botany, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221 005, India.
List of People Consulted
Name Institution Contacts
1. Gerardine Mukeshimana RSSP Project Coordinator 08301751
2. Antoine Kapeteni Integrated Management of Critical Ecosystems Project Coordinator 08625815
3. Paul Ouedraogo Integrated Management of Critical Ecosystems Project Technical Assistant
4. Ndekez Francis Xavier Rural Sector Support Project, Rural Engineer 08610295
5. Ignacie Tumushime Rural Sector Support Project, Environmental Officer 08400348
6. Stephen Bashaija Rural Sector Support Project, M&E Coordinator
7. Emmanuel Mbitezimana RSSP, Rusizi-Nyamasheke M&E
8. Reverien Lindiro RSSP Rusizi-Nyamasheke Coordinator
9. Joas Tugirimana Director of Environment, Urbanization and Land Nyamasheke District
10. Gespard Bikwemu Kagera River Basin Integrated Water Resources Management Project, Manager
11. Mashinga Rwanda Environment Management Authority
12. John Boyle World Bank Regional Safeguard Specialist
13. Damascene Maniraguha Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations National Coordinator, RWIP
14. Gaston Ndayisaba Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
15. Juvenal Kabiligi Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
16. Leon Hakizimungu Head of Crop Protection Unit RADA
17. Cyprian Ngamije Cooperative du Riticuleans de Kibaya and Cyunuzi 08416490
18. Florent Twahirwa German Agro Action 08428784
19. Sibomana Juvenal German Agro Action 08490256
20. Esther Nyirankwavu Kinnyogo II Farmer
21. Faida Olivier PAPSTA 08493158
22. Faustin Muhire Farmer, Kinnyogo
23. Moise Habimana Abishyizehamwe Marshland Farmers Association, Kinnyogo
24. John Barabwiriza Farmer Gisaya
25. Speciose Muterampundu Farmer/ Mat Maker Gisaya
26. Dorothee Nyirahabimana Farm Leader SOPROCOKI, Rugazi-Bisenga
27. Silas Murekezi Farmer Rugazi-Bisenga
28. Jean Bizimana Abatiganda Association, Upper Kibaya
29. Ramazan Bizimana RSSP Eastern Province
30. Nzaramba Augustin RSSP Eastern Province
31. Jean Rwamwaga Damascene Farm Leader of Rebero 08829641)
32. Felicien Nyakanimba Guard Kanyonyomba dam
33. Anthony Businge RSSP Rural Sociologist
34. Emmanuel RSSP, Provincial Coordinator
35. Benjamin BUCYANA RSSP, Provincial M&E Officer
36. Damascene Kanyeshyamba Member COREMKANYA cooperative
37. Damien Migerero Nyamasheke Director Economic Development 08851193
38. Ntirushwamaboko Chrisostome Member of CODERIKA.
39. Ndagijimana Emmanuel Member of CODERIKA.
40. Rudahunga Faustin President of COPRORI 08679719
41. Ntacyobita John Member of COREMAKKANYA Cooperative
42. Cyemayire Leotaire Member of COREMAKKANYA Cooperative
43. Muhayineza Norbert Member of Abakumburwa Cooperative
44. Mukakarara Thacienne Abakumburwa cooperative’s secretary).
45. Munyaneza Innocent Secretary and Accountant of Rukozo Sector 08416666
-----------------------
[1] Copies of the classification, which is updated annually, are available in the Sectoral Library. A draft Standard Bidding Document for Procurement of Pesticides is available from OPCPR.
[2] However the OP does not specify some of these safety measures to be incorporated into construction of small dams.
[3] Depending on the variety grown, the yield obtained and the farm gate price offered.
[4] The following crops have been identified as economically profitable to the application of fertilizers:
• Potatoes, sugar cane, voluble beans and some vegetables.
• Rice that is grown in low lands
[5] Free Ammonia (NH3): Less than 0.2 mg/l: The lethal concentration for a variety of fish species is in the range 0.2 to 2.0 mg/l NH 3.
Nitrates (N): Less than 10 mg/l: Nitrates cause eutrophication of fresh waters
Phosphates (P): Phosphates enrich fresh water environment with plant nutrients resulting in rapid algae growth which affect municipal, industrial and recreational uses.
[6] World Health Organizations drinking water standards are 0.2 mg/litre for nitrate ion, 1500 mg/litre for potassium or other TDS as a maximum allowable or permissible concentration, optimum pH ranging between 6.5–9.5.
[7] Free Ammonia (NH3): Less than 0.2 mg/l: The lethal concentration for a variety of fish species is in the range 0.2 to 2.0 mg/l NH 3
[8] Biochemical Oxygen Demand (5-day at 20 °C): BOD is not a pollutant itself, but is a measure of organic pollution. Waters with BOD levels less than 4 mg/l are deemed clean while those with BOD more than 10 are considered polluted. High BOD concentrations may limit water use for public consumption, fisheries and irrigation.
[9] MINITERE department of water laboratory
[10] MINITERE department of water laboratory
[11] MINITERE department of water laboratory
[12][pic]BCD˜›œ?Á) * T U V k l m îá˵¢“¢“?odUdCU6UdhŒ{hx+0JmH sH #[13]?jG²[pic]hŒ{hx+U[pic]mH sH jhŒ{hx+U[pic]mH sH hŒ{hx+mH sH "h«3[pic]hx+5?CJ\?aJ MINITERE department of water laboratory
[14] MINITERE department of water laboratory
[15] MINITERE department of water laboratory
[16] MINITERE department of water laboratory
[17] MINITERE department of water laboratory
-----------------------
Physical Environment
Global Warming
Socioeconomic Environment
Biological Environment
Drowning hazard/domestic water contamination/Loss of domestic water supply/waterborne diseases
Siltation of proposed Rusumo dam
Reduced generation capacity
Marshland draining
Dam construction
Agrochemical Application
Hydro-regime change
Contamination of aquatic food web/chain
Water pollution
Reduced water flow
Destruction of aquatic habitat
Crop Irrigation
Biodiversity Loss
GHGs emissions
Thermal generation
[pic]
N
E1795
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- world bank unesco education
- world bank financial inclusion
- world bank poverty line 2019
- world bank financial inclusion 2020
- world bank business environment index
- world bank doing business 2020
- world bank ease of doing business 2019
- world bank doing business rankings
- world bank retiree portal
- world bank pension log in
- world bank retiree website
- world bank staff retirement plan