023 Ipp 15

Indigenous People Planning Document
Due Diligence Report

Loan Number: 2796 and Grant Number: 0267 NEP
February 2012
Nepal: Decentralized Rural Infrastructure and

Livelihood Project- Additional Financing
Pakarbas-Galpa Road Subproject

Ramechhap
Prepared by the Government of Nepal
The Due Diligence Report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily
represent those of ADB’s Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature.
Government of Nepal
Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development
Office of District Development Committee, Ramechhap
District Technical Office, Ramechhap
District Project Office, Ramechhap
Decentralized Rural Infrastructure and Livelihood

Project-Additional Financing (DRILP-AF)
Detailed Project Report

Pakarbas-Galpa Road Sub Project
Section III: Safeguards

Volume 3: Impact Screening Report on Indigenous
Peoples
February 2013
TABLE OF CONTENT
Page No.
1. Project Background………………………………………………………………………. 1
2. Road Sub-project’s Background………………………………………………………. 1
3. Demographic information of ZOI……………………………………………………….. 2
4. Identification of IPs……………………………………………………………………….. 3
5. Sub-Project activity………………………………………………………………………. 4
6. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….........4
ANNEXES
Annex 1: Indigenous People Screening checklist

Annex 2: Meeting minute about consultation with stakeholders
Annex 3: Certified letters from VDCs
Detail project Report Pakarbas-Galpa Road Sub-project, Ramechhap
Section III, Volume 3 Impact Screening Report on Indigenous Peoples
1. PROJECT BACKGROUND
1. The Decentralized Rural Infrastructure and Livelihood Project-Additional Financing
(DRILP AF) is an extension of DRILP. DRILP was an initiative of GoN and an ADB, SDC funded
project to reduce rural poverty in 18 very poor remote hill and mountainous districts affected by
the conflict. The project is implemented over 5 years; the duration is from January 2012 to
December 2016. The project implementation is to achieve sustainable increased access to
socio-economic services and enhance social and financial capital of the people, particularly
poor and disadvantaged groups in previous conflict affected areas. The underpinning thrust of
the Project is labor based equipment supported (LBES) in construction techniques to promote
greater involvement of building groups (BGs) in construction activities which will boost local
jobs. DRILP AF aims to reduce the poverty level in 18 project districts from 41 percent to 20
percent by employment generation of 4.7 million person days. The project design provides
project districts select rural transport sub-projects that help to extend the district network of rural
roads, trails and pedestrian bridges. The project objectives are achieved through a series of
project activities that are broadly grouped into four components: (i) Community Development
and Rural Livelihood Restoration; (ii) Capacity Building and Decentralized Governance; (iii)
Rural Transport Infrastructure; and (iv) Project Management Services.
2. The Project Coordination Unit (PCU) of Department of Local Infrastructure Development

and Agricultural Roads (DoLIDAR) is the project Executing Agency (EA) responsible for the
overall project coordination, management and implementation. DDC/DTO/DPO is the
Implementing Agencies (IA) responsible for subproject planning, design, and implementation.
DDC is responsible not only for the implementation of the Project but it also to coordinate all
activities related to resettlement and Indigenous People’s (IP’s) issues.
2. ROAD SUB-PROJECT’S BACKGROUND
3. Ramechhap is one of the project districts from Central Development Region of Nepal.
The proposed Pakarbas - Galpa road is about 11.694 km in length. The section starts at
Makadum VDC and ends at Galpa bazaar of Khadadevi VDC. The alignment passes through
the Sahu tole, Budhathoki tole of Makadum VDC, Bohara tole and Chulthepani of Majhuwa VDC
and Patle, Moktan, Lispati, Choprang and Galpa tole of Khadadevi VDC. It is a strategic link for
northern and north-eastern parts of the Ramechhap connecting district head quarter, Manthali.
Similarly, it is also an important link to the Sindhuli district via branch road to Khurkot and
Nepalthok.
4. Local community has opportunity of direct employment generation from the road
construction works. Project has set the target of 40 percent women involvement and
proportionate representation from excluded groups in the BGs. This reflects the women and
excluded group participation in decision making and benefit sharing process of the sub-projects
(SPs). It further ensures their ownership of the SPs. Their participation and engagement in
livelihood related skills trainings and other livelihood improvement activities will have significant
impact on reducing poverty level in the SP areas. Project intends to provide benefits to 40
1
percent women and 60 percent poor and excluded groups of potential beneficiaries of impact
zone.
3. DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION OF ZOI
5. Makadum, Majhuwa and Khadadevi VDCs are situated along the road corridor.
Moreover, only some wards of these VDCs lie in ZOI area. According to information collected
from various sources, the population within ZOI along the road corridor is 6,465 (3,335 male and
3,130 female) and the total HHs are 955. The detail populations of VDCs along the SP ZOI
areas are as mentioned in Table 1.1.
Table 1.1: Demographic structure of ZOI VDCs in Pakarbas-Galpa SP, Ramechhap

Population breakdown by gender and Population
Population
caste wise by Gender
B/C Janajati Dalit wise
Wards
Name of of ZOI Total B/C Janajati Dalit M F
the VDC VDCs HH HH HH HH M F M F M F
670 590
Makadum 4,5,6,9 200 175 20 5 1260 555 505 95 55 20 30
380 385
Majhuwa 4,7 105 75 10 20 770 320 300 5 5 55 80
1775 1660
Khadadevi 1-3,7-9 520 50 435 35 3435 145 145 1525 1435 105 80
515 495
Dimipokhari 4,5 130 0 130 0 1010 0 0 515 495 0 0
Total 955 300 595 60 6465 1020 950 2135 1990 180 190 3335 3130
Source: Base Line Survey Report of Pakarbas-Galpa Road SP, July 2012
Table 1.2: HH of Janajati (breakdown by caste)

Caste Newar Tamang Magar Sunuwar Bhujel Thami Total HH
Total 95 360 120 5 5 10 595
6. Regarding the ethnicity of ZOI area, the main castes in three ZOI VDCs are found Janajati,
Brahmin/ Chhetri (B/C) and Dalit. However B/C and Dalit are absent in Dimipokhari VDC. The
majority of the population belongs to Janajati 4,125 followed by B/C 1,970 and then Dalit 370 in
ZOI SP area. Out of the total population of 6465, 48% consist of female and 52% consist of
male. The male female ratio of ZOI VDCs is 1:0.83. In this ZOI SP area, the ethnic population
as mentioned by National Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NFIN’s) – under the highly
marginalized groups does exist. The consultation meeting has stated that there won’t be
negative impacts from SP intervention in the IPs groups.
7. With reference to livelihood of local people, majority of the HHs primarily depend on
agriculture, business, services, foreign employment and wage labor. Some of HHs also
operates small retail shops. In addition, some people are engaged in service sectors-
Government and Private services. Some of the salient features of VDCs are: I) Primary
occupation is agriculture. II) Engagement in service sectors and business is secondary
occupation of people. III) Migration for foreign employment IV) the majority of people are found
unskilled and work as wage labor.
2
4. IDENTIFICATION OF IPs
8. The term indigenous people (IP) is refer to the Janajati or ethnic groups, indigenous
cultural communities which maintain cultural and social identities separate from the mainstream
societies or cultures in the context of Nepal.
9. The legal framework for this Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF) is based
on the ADB Safeguards Policy Statement (SPS) (2009); the Interim Constitution of Nepal, the
Three Year Interim Plan (2007-2010), sections of the National Foundation for Development of
Indigenous Nationalities (NFDIN) Act 2002, National Human Rights Action Plan 2005;
Environmental Act 1997; Forest Act 1993 and Community Forestry Guideline.
10. In ADB’s 2009 SPS, for operational purposes, the term ‘Indigenous Peoples’ (IPs) is
used in a generic sense to refer to a distinct, vulnerable, social and cultural group possessing
the following characteristics in varying degrees:
 Self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition

of this identity by others;
 Collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the
project area and to the natural resources in these habitats and territories;
 Customary cultural, economic, social, or political institutions that are separate from
those of the dominant society and culture; and
 A distinct language, often different from the official language of the country or region.
11. Based on the characteristics, the NFDIN, a Government founded institution, has
recognized 59 different nationalities as IPs/ethnic groups of Nepal. IPs in Nepal is a very
heterogeneous group. In the context of this project and framework it is important to distinguish
the vulnerable and poor IPs from the others. The NFDIN affiliated NFIN has classified IPs into
five different categories, these are - endangered, highly marginalized, marginalized,
disadvantaged and advantaged based on socio economic variables that include literacy,
housing, occupation, language, area of residence and population size. A majority of these
groups are integrated into the mainstream society/culture, whereas several of them (recognized
by NEFIN as highly marginalized/endangered) are still remains distinct.
12. The BLS reports, information from the VDC profile, IP screening checklist filled by DISC
team and consultation meeting with local authorities and stakeholders conducted under the
chairmanship of LDO and VDC certified letter have confirmed that there are presences of IPs
but they don't belong to endangered groups of IPs living in ZOI area of the SP.
5. SUB- PROJECT ACTIVITY

13. The IPPF is prepared to guide the preparation of SP under the DRILP AF project to
ensure better distribution of the SP benefits and promote development of the IPs along with
other disadvantaged social groups in the SP ZOI areas. The major objectives of the IPPF is to
3
ensure the participation of the affected IPs and other disadvantaged communities in the entire
process of preparation, implementation and monitoring of SP activities; ensure project benefits
will accrue to IPs and other disadvantaged communities; mitigate any adverse SP impacts;
define the institutional arrangement for screening, planning and implementation of IPs for SPs
and outline the IPP monitoring and evaluation process.
14. The project has followed the NEFIN categorization as mentioned above, distinguishing
the impacts on the different categories of IPs. The SP impact assessment on IPs has screened
out areas where impacts would be felt by IPs in the endangered and highly marginalized
category; as also defined by ADB’s 24 IP groups.
15. It was confirmed that IPs from highly marginalized category are living in ward number 9
of Khadadevi VDC in nominal number. The other IPs groups’ presence in this SP ZOI VDCs –
marginalized, disadvantaged and advantaged groups does not fall under 24 IP category of ADB
definition.
16. Hence, the SP will address barriers to their participation through extensive consultation
and participation as other poor and DAG people. In this connection, the DRILP AF IPPF
provides a framework for consultation with the affected IP communities during SP
implementation and specifies measures so that they will receive appropriate benefits and
actions for implementing planned measures. The district consultation meeting has
acknowledged that the IPs communities are gradually integrated into the mainstream of the
society but general tendency of their participation in the local organizations and decision making
structures is fairly low.
17. In Pakarbas-Galpa road SP ZOI area, there is presence of highly marginalized (Thami),
marginalized (Tamang, Sunuwar Bhujel), disadvantaged (Magar) and advantaged (Newar)
groups of IPs. However, the endangered groups of IPs (24 groups of IPs as defined by NEFIN)
are not living here.
6. CONCLUSION
18. Project has adopted the IPPF in compliance and special assistance measures for IPs.
DISC team with support of DPO has carried out VDC consultation, filling up ‘Checklist on
Screening of IPs’ and meeting with district stakeholders and meeting with IPs communities. With
reference to the survey report, VDC profile and consultation meetings with local communities,
there aren’t presences of endangered groups of IPs communities as categorized by NEFIN in
SP ZOI VDCs. Furthermore, the VDC has also acknowledged this very fact.
19. It was found that the highly marginalized IP groups (Thami) reside in Gundutole, ward 9 of
Khadadevi VDC in nominal population. However, the SP interventions have no adverse and
negative impacts on their customary rights of use and access to land and natural resources.
Similarly, project doesn’t have any negative impacts on their socio-economic and cultural
identity. Project doesn’t expect any impacts on these IPs groups differently than other groups -
Dalits, poor and vulnerable people.
4
20. As a matter of fact, these findings confirm that there are no indigenous populations
under endangered groups residing in the SP ZOI area. Hence, according to the project
approved framework no need of separate planning for these groups of IPs. Therefore, the sub-
project is category ‘C’ for IPs in accordance with the IPPF and no further action required for IP.
5
ANNEXES
ANNEX 1: SCREENING CHECKLIST
Indigenous People Screening Checklist
Key Concern Yes No Not Remarks

known
A. Identification of Indigenous Peoples
(IPs)
1. Are there socio-cultural groups present in Yes Highly marginalized group
(Thami), Marginalized group
or uses the project area who may be (Tamang, Bhujel, Sunuwar),
considered as ‘tribes’, minorities, or Disadvantaged group
Indigenous communities in the project (Magar), Advantaged group
(Newar) live in ZOI VDC.
area?
2. Are there national or local law or policies Yes
as well as Anthropological Research
consider these groups present in or using
the project areas as belonging to ethnic
minorities or IPs?
3. Do such groups self identify as being part Yes
of a distinct social and cultural group?
4. Do such groups maintain collective Yes
attachments to distinct habitats or ancestral
territories and/or to the natural resources in
these habitats and territories?
5. Do such groups maintain cultural, Yes
economic, social, and political institutions
distinct from the dominant society and
culture?
6. Do such groups speak a distinct Yes
language or dialect?
7. Has such groups been historically, Yes
socially, and economically marginalized,
disempowered, excluded and/or
discriminated against?
8. Are such groups represented as IPs or Yes
as ethnic minorities or scheduled tribes or
tribal populations in any formal decision
making bodies at the national or local level?
B. Identification of Potential Impacts
9. Will the project directly benefit or target Yes

IPs?
10. Will the project directly or indirectly No
affect IPs traditional, socio-cultural and
belief practices? (eg. Child-rearing, health,
education, arts, and governance)
11. Will the project affect the livelihood No
systems of IPs? (eg. Food production
system, natural resource management,
crafts and trade, employment status)

12. Will the project be in an area (land or No
territory) occupied, owned, or used by IPs,
and or claimed as ancestral domain?
C. Identification of Special Requirements
Will the project activities include :
13. Commercial development of the cultural No
resources and IPs?
14. Physical displacement from traditional No
or customary lands?
15. Commercial development of natural No
resources (such as minerals, hydrocarbons,
forests, water, hunting, or fishing grounds)
within customary lands under use that
would impact the livelihoods or the cultural,
ceremonial, spirituals uses that define the
identity and community of IPs?
16. Establishing legal recognition of rights No
to lands and territories that are traditionally
owned or customarily used, occupied or
claimed by IPs?
17. Acquisition of lands that are traditionally No
owned or customarily used occupied or
claimed by IPs?
D. Anticipated project impacts on IPs

Project component/ Anticipated positive Anticipated negative
activity/output effect effect
 Total road length : 11.694 km

SP component: Yes No
 Road construction
Activity: Yes No
 Awareness raising
 Job creation
 Livelihood training
 Community Infrastructure
 Road construction
Output: Yes No
 Capacity building
 Social development
 Livelihood improvement
 Market centre establishment
ANNEX 2: MEETING MINUTE
2.1 Meeting minute of consultation with local stakeholders about IPs living in ZOI area
Synopsis of the Meeting Minute
Date : 22 May 2012 (2069/2/9)

Venue : DDC Hall
Agenda of the Meeting:
 IPs living in SP ZOI VDCs
Participants:
 LDO, DTO and DDC representatives,
 DRCC members,
 VDC Secretary-Makadum and Majhuwa VDCs,
 Local stakeholders,
 Representatives from NGOs, CBOs,
 DPO,
 DISC team
The consultation meeting was organized by the DPO under the chairpersonship of the DDC
Chair / LDO Mr. Narayan Prasad Mainali in the presence of DRCC members and other
stakeholders.
Decision of the meeting:
With the consultation and discussion among the members, meeting has come to consensus
conclusion that the highly marginalized IP groups (Thami) reside in small population in
Gundutole, ward 9 of Khadadevi VDC among the ZOI VDCs - Makadum, Majhuwa, Khadadevi
and Dimipokhari. There are no land and physical properties that belong to Thami in the SP
areas. The SP interventions have no adverse and negative impacts on their customary rights of
use and access to land and natural resources. Similarly, project doesn’t have any negative
impacts directly or indirectly on their socio-economic and cultural identity.
In totality, there aren’t different impacts on these Thami IPs groups other than groups like poor
and excluded communities by the implementation of SP. Hence the meeting has decided that
there is no need to prepare a separate plan for these Thami IPs groups.
Page 1: Minute of the consultation Meeting about IPs

Page 2: Minute of the consultation Meeting about IPs

2.2 Meeting minute of consultation with Thami community about impacts of SP intervention to
them
Synopsis of the Meeting Minute
Date : 4 January 2013 (2069/9/20)
Agenda of the Meeting:

1. Impact of proposed sub-project (SP) on Thami community.
2. Support for livelihood improvement of Thami community.
Participants:
 Thami representatives
 DISC team
Decision of the meeting:
Agenda 1:
On the discussion of Agenda 1, meeting has decided and stated that there are no lands and
houses (physical properties) that belong to Thami community in the proposed road SP and this
SP don’t have direct and negative imacts on their traditional and cultural practices. It is expected
to have local level employment generation and improvement of their livelihood by the
implementation of this road SP.
Agenda 2:
On the the discussion of Agenda 2 meeting has decided to request DRILP to provide Mason
training to following participants in order to improve livelihood of Thami community.
Name of participants for training:

1. Dhanbir Thami, Khadadevi 9
2. Dhan Bahadur Thami, Khadadevi 9
3. Chyami Thami, Khadadevi 9
4. Jang Thami, Khadadevi 9
5. Mani Bahadur Thami, Khadadevi 9
Page 1: Minute of the consultation Meeting with Thami community

Page 2: Minute of the consultation Meeting with Thami community

ANNEX 3: VDC CERTIFIED LETTERS
The VDC secretaries of following VDCs in ZOI areas of Pakarbas-Galparoad Sub project have
forwarded letters stating IP communities living in ZOI VDCs:
 Majhuwa VDC
 Makaddum VDC
 Khadadevi VDC
 Dimipokhari VDC
Theme translation: Letter from Majhuwa VDC stating that IP communities from endangered
and highly marginalized groups are not resides in Majhuwa VDC ward number 4 and 7 of
Ramechhap.
Theme translation: Letter from Makadum VDC stating that IP communities from endangered
and highly marginalized groups are not resides in Makadum VDC of Ramechhap.
Theme translation: Letter from Khadadevi VDC stating presence of Thami IP community among
endangered and highly marginalized groups in ward number 6 and 9 of Khadadevi VDC,
Ramechhap.
Theme translation: Letter from Dimipokhari VDC stating that IP communities from endangered and
highly marginalized groups are not resides in Dimipokhari VDC of Ramechhap.

023 Ipp 15

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

023 Ipp 15

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indigenous People Planning Document

Due Diligence Report

Nepal: Decentralized Rural Infrastructure and

Pakarbas-Galpa Road Subproject

Prepared by the Government of Nepal

Decentralized Rural Infrastructure and Livelihood

Detailed Project Report

Section III: Safeguards

Annex 1: Indigenous People Screening checklist

2. The Project Coordination Unit (PCU) of Department of Local Infrastructure Development

2. ROAD SUB-PROJECT’S BACKGROUND

3. DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION OF ZOI

Table 1.1: Demographic structure of ZOI VDCs in Pakarbas-Galpa SP, Ramechhap

Table 1.2: HH of Janajati (breakdown by caste)

 Self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition

5. SUB- PROJECT ACTIVITY

ANNEX 1: SCREENING CHECKLIST

Indigenous People Screening Checklist

Key Concern Yes No Not Remarks

9. Will the project directly benefit or target Yes

crafts and trade, employment status)

D. Anticipated project impacts on IPs

 Total road length : 11.694 km

ANNEX 2: MEETING MINUTE

Synopsis of the Meeting Minute

Date : 22 May 2012 (2069/2/9)

Decision of the meeting:

Page 1: Minute of the consultation Meeting about IPs

Page 2: Minute of the consultation Meeting about IPs

Synopsis of the Meeting Minute

Date : 4 January 2013 (2069/9/20)

Agenda of the Meeting:

Decision of the meeting:

Name of participants for training:

Page 1: Minute of the consultation Meeting with Thami community

Page 2: Minute of the consultation Meeting with Thami community

ANNEX 3: VDC CERTIFIED LETTERS

You might also like