Environmental protection | Studies, essays, thesises » Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania

Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) Template Fauna & Flora International Blue Action ESMP Template Version 1, May 2021 Date of first draft: 18.032022 Last updated: 18.032022 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Version Control Project title Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania Document title Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) Version 1.0 Status Working draft Date of first draft 18.032022 Date last updated 18.032022 Once a final version of the ESMP has been approved by Blue Action Fund, Requirement for please make all further modifications to the ESMP visible by either tracking tracking changes

changes or putting the modifications in a different colour in order to aid any subsequent review. 2 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table of contents Table of contents . 3 List of Acronyms and Abbreviations. 4 1 Introduction. 6 1.1 2 Project Description and Social Context . 7 2.1 Brief project description . 7 2.11 Project location . 7 2.12 Project objective, proposed outcomes and key components . 10 2.13 Project timeframe and budget . 11 2.14 Project partners and responsibilities . 11 2.2 3 Purpose of the ESMP . 6 Social context . 16 2.21 Stakeholders and Project Affected People . 16 2.22 Disadvantaged or Vulnerable Groups . 20 National and International Requirements . 22 3.1 Project’s host country requirements . 22 Institutional arrangements for the management of marine and coastal environment . 22 Institutional

arrangements and governance of MPAs . 24 Institutional and legal framework for Environment and Social Impact management . 26 3.2 International requirements. 27 3.21 Gap analysis . 28 4 Risk Management Strategy . 30 5 ESMP Monitoring and Supervision . 45 5.1 Organisational structure . 45 5.2 Roles and responsibilities . 45 5.3 Training and awareness . 46 5.4 Monitoring, evaluation and reporting . 46 5.5 Change management . 47 List of ANNEXES . 48 3 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan List of Acronyms and Abbreviations BMU Beach Management Unit – community institution in Tanzania mainland (TangaMkinga) managing local fisheries CFMA Collaborative Fisheries Management Area (area covered for management by a group of BMUs at district-level – will also include VNRCs at the end of the project), in Tanga-Mkinga CMG Collaborative

Management Group (group including SFCs and SCCs working together) equivalent to CFMAs in PECCA EACOP East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline E&S Environmental and Social EbA Ecosystem-based Adaptation EHSGs Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ERP Emergency Response Plan ESA Environmental and Social Assessment ESCOP Environmental and Social Code of Conduct ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan ESMS Environmental and Social Management System FFI Fauna & Flora International FPIC Free, Prior and Informed Consent H&S Health and Safety HR Human Resources ICP Informed Consultation and Participation IPs Indigenous Peoples IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature ILO International Labour Organisation LMMAs Locally-Managed Marine Areas MCCC Marine and Coastal Community Conservation, Mwambao’s entity registered in Zanzibar MKUBA Mfuko

wa KUtunza BAhari (“Fund to care for the sea”): eco-credit scheme developed between FFI, Mwambao-MCCC and Grenfi since 2018, that will be expanded during the project MPAs Marine Protected Areas NGO Non-Governmental Organisation PAPs Project Affected People PECCA Pemba Channel Conservation Area 4 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan SEP Stakeholder Engagement Plan SCC Shehia (“ward”) Conservation Community – community institution in Pemba managing forests (including mangroves) SFC Shehia (“ward”) Fisheries Community – community institution in Pemba managing local fisheries SOPs Standard Operating Procedures TMRs Tanga Marine Reserves system ToR Terms of Reference UNDRIP United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples VNRC Village Natural Resources Committee – community institution in Tanzania

mainland (Tanga-Mkinga) managing forests (including mangroves) WB ESF World Bank Environmental and Social Framework WB ESS World Bank Environmental and Social Standard 5 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan 1 Introduction This document is the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) for the Increasing socioecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania (hereafter referred to as “the Project”), and outlines the environmental and social management commitments that Fauna & Flora International (FFI) will implement to manage potential negative impacts and enhance potential positive impacts of the project. The ESMP will also introduce the other Safeguard Instruments to be applied in this project (e.g, the stakeholder engagement plan, grievance mechanism, etc.), which are

included as Annexes to this document As such, this introductory section as well as the project description (Section 2) and legal framework (Section 3) serve as a background for all of the Safeguard Instruments1. At the project proposal stage, the ESMP and other Safeguard Instruments will be provisional in nature and will take on the form of a Framework. However, the management measures identified in the frameworks will have been integrated into the project design (logframe) and resourced appropriately. The ESMP will then be updated and finalised within the project inception phase (the first six months of project implementation), as illustrated in Table 1 below. The ESMP acts as the umbrella Safeguard Instrument, and is referred to throughout the Blue Action Fund safeguarding principles and requirements (see Blue Action Fund ESMS Requirements, 2021). Importantly, the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Section of this ESMP (Section 5), will be used on an annual basis to report on

relevant monitoring across all of the Safeguard Instruments. Table 1: Blue Action Fund requirements for environmental and social assessment and risk management, including the development of the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) through the project design and implementation process (Blue Action Fund E&S Safeguarding Principles and Requirements, ESMS Manual Annex B). Project design Blue Action Fund requirements E&S screening [Criterion 1.1] E&S assessment [Criterion 1.2] Risk management measures and plans (ESMP) [Criterion 1.3] E&S Capacity [Criterion 1.4] Monitoring and reporting [Criterion 1.5] 1.1 Concept note stage Project implementation Proposal stage Inception Phase Annually (or end of Year 1) Project closing phase Na. Na. Required. Required. Na. Framework level2 ESMP Plan level ESMP Purpose of the ESMP This ESMP has been developed to outline the project’s overall environmental and social risk management strategy. It is intended as a

‘living document’ that will be regularly reviewed and updated by FFI in response to changes to the project description, changes in the FFI organisational structure, changes in legislation and any other guidelines and practices subscribed to, as well as changes in project design and local context. 1 Note, however, that if the project develops a Process Framework, the Process Framework will need to act as a standalone document that can be read in isolation to the ESMP or other Safeguard Instruments. 2 “Framework-level” includes the broad structure and approach, and to some degree remains conceptual. “Plan -level” has had substantial input from Project Affected Peoples (PAP) and other stakeholders and is what will actually be implemented in practice. These plans are often integrated into existing management plans, such as community or district development plans, fisheries management of MPA management plans. 6 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led

management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan The ESMP and appended Safeguard Instruments will be publicly disclosed documents and demonstrate FFI commitment to being transparent, accountable and accepting responsibility for the potential project impacts (both positive and negative). No personal information/ data3 should be included in these publicly disclosed documents, and any personal data collected for the purpose of the Project, this ESMP and appended Safeguard Instruments, and maintained by FFI, will be done so in a secure manner in line with Blue Action Fund’s GDPR Policy. The objectives of the ESMP are to: • Ensure that the Project operates in compliance with Tanzania mainland and Zanzibar legal requirements, Blue Action Fund’s Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) standards, policy and procedures, and international good practice, notably the World Bank Environmental and Social Framework (WB ESF

2017, ESS1-10)4, the World Bank Group Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines (EHSGs), and all of those Standards and Guidelines referred to in Annex A of the Blue Action Fund ESMS Manual. • Ensure that the potential negative environmental and social impacts of the Project are managed appropriately, for example: o Favouring avoidance and prevention over minimisation, mitigation or compensation when dealing with negative impacts; and o Where avoidance is not possible, reducing, restoring, compensating/ mitigating the negative impact. - Ensure that the potential positive environmental and social impacts of the Project are enhanced; - Ensure that the principles of environmental and social sustainability are taken into account; and - Provide a reference against which future monitoring and evaluation can be undertaken. The ESMP serves as an umbrella Safeguard Instrument covering all of the identified environmental and social risks and impacts and allowing for the management and

monitoring of these and any new risks adaptively. The ESMP therefore integrates the findings of: • • All environmental and social screening and assessment carried out during the design phase of the project; and The Safeguard Instruments (and specific mitigation measures) and other provisions identified for complying with the requirements of national legislation, the Blue Action Fund requirements and associated Standards, national legislation, as well as country and site-specific information relevant for the project’s risk management strategy. The Safeguard Instruments appended to this ESMP can include the frameworks, plans and protocols to be used in the Project, and include: o o o Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP); Grievance Mechanism; Process Framework for Access Restrictions; 2 Project Description and Social Context5 2.1 Brief project description 2.11 Project location The Project is located in Tanzania in 2 coastal sites bordering the Pemba Channel, as illustrated in

Figure 1 below: - (1) in Mkoani and Wete districts, Pemba Island, Zanzibar, and - (2) in Tanga city and Mkinga districts in Tanga region, Tanzania, mainland 3 Personal data includes any identifier like: name of individuals, identification numbers, location data (e.g home address or mobile phone GPS data), or online identifiers such as IP or email addresses. 4 Note that references to ‘borrower’ in the World Bank Environmental and Social Framework refer in this case to the lead NGO. 5 This section can be based on the project description and social context section s which are commonly included in an Environmental and Social Assessment Report. 7 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan The project area covers 1,406 km2 in total, covering in (1) 17 Shehias (wards) targeted on the West coast of Pemba island and includes Pemba Channel Conservation Area

(PECCA), the largest Marine Conservation Area of Zanzibar. In (2) within Tanga region located on the North of coastal mainland Tanzania, the project covers 12 villages targeted stretching between Tanga city and Boma Subutuni, involved in two Collaborative Fisheries Management Areas (CFMAs – named Mchomapunda and Tawalani-Kizingani) as well as two islands (Kwale and Ulenge) forming a part of Tanga Marine Reserves System (TMRs, comprised of four islands in total). Pemba Channel The Pemba Channel is part of an Ecologically and Biologically Significant Marine Area supporting a high diversity of marine life, including corals, reef fish and sea Turtles and is important for the vulnerable coconut Crab; more specifically the area is categorised as an Important Marine Mammal Area (IUCN). Separating mainland Tanzania and Pemba Island with a depth of more than 600m, Pemba Channel comprises underwater currents providing unique living conditions harbouring a vast array of ocean life. A recent

study (McClanahan, 2020) has uncovered a highly diverse reef complex located in this unique ocean cool spot on the East African coast, that is helping to protect large populations of corals and marine mammals from the devastating impacts of climate change.The coral refuge, which stretches from Shimoni, 50 miles south of Mombasa, in Kenya to Dar es Salaam in Tanzania, is fed by cool water from deep channels formed thousands of years ago by glacial runoff from Kilimanjaro and the Usambara mountains. The region is a hotspot for conservation but has historically suffered from harmful fishing practices that have destroyed vast areas of reefs. Sustained efforts have contributed to reduce the most destructive practices (specifically blast fishing) in recent years. The study shows that while warming waters may severely impact surrounding reefs, this area could become an increasingly incredibly important sanctuary where marine species will find refuge from climate change. The depth of the Pemba

Channel which is fed by the above mentioned cool deep-water channels and the north-bound East African Coastal Current helps to provide thermal stability to the marine ecosystems, shielding them from the worst of global warming in a pocket of cool water. As waters in the Indian Ocean continue to experience more frequent and intense heat spells, this refuge could prove increasingly important as a habitat for East Africa’s unique marine fauna. Pemba Island In 2005, the Zanzibar Revolutionary Government declared the Pemba Channel Conservation Area (PECCA) under the Fisheries Act. PECCA is located to the west of Pemba Island and is notable for its numerous bays, tidally exposed sandbanks, deep channels, seagrass beds, mangrove forest, islands, and deep and shallow water coral reefs. Furthermore, as an oceanic island, Pemba is surrounded by deep waters that descend to about 700m between PECCA’s western boundary and mainland Tanzania. According to its General Management Plan, the majority

of the area’s islands are “protected by fringing coral reefs and are covered mostly by coral rag bush and surrounded by extensive seagrass beds.” Further the GMP states, “Coral reefs have been predominantly recorded to the west of Misali Island with some coral outcrops to the east and small reef areas to the north and south. Studies recorded that coral cover within the reef areas was intermittent and ranged from small outcrops and patchy reefs to physically complex coral walls.” In addition to the high level of biodiversity, the area is home to IUCN red-listed species, including four species of sea turtles, Indian Ocean humpback dolphins, hump head wrasse, bump head parrotfish, and a number of species of sharks and rays that are Endangered and Critically Endangered. Of note, PECCA serves as a nesting site for the critically endangered Hawksbill and endangered Green turtles. Data collected on sharks and rays landed in Pemba since 2018 indicate it also supports important

fisheries of these, several of which are internationally listed as threatened species (on IUCN red list and in CITES annexes). PECCA’s marine resources are vital for artisanal fishing, supporting livelihoods and food security for 191,588 people in 34 coastal communities (Shehias -wards) of whom 45% are classified as poor and >80% are fishers, as well as fishers from mainland Tanzania. The economy of Pemba Island relies strongly on agricultural activities, the island is a major producer/exporter of cloves and consequently, 8 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Zanzibar as a whole is often known as the “Spice Islands”. Seaweed farming (on both islands) is also a key income generating activity, representing the 3 rd largest export of the archipelago, contributing to nearly 8% of the GDP, employing directly about 25,000 people and rendering

benefits to about 150,000 in Zanzibar. Coast of mainland Tanzania in Tanga and Mkinga Districts. The coastline of Tanga region, the northernmost part of the coast of mainland Tanzania, if measured in a straight line is about 180km from the Kenyan border in the north to the border with Coast Region in the south, or over 400km if bays and estuaries are included. The coastal plain extends inwards for 20-30km and in the north-west is bordered by the Usambara Mountains which rise to over 2000m. The continental shelf (with a depth up to 100m) off the coast in Tanga and Mkinga Districts in Tanga region has a width of up to 15km in the project area. The inshore waters are characterised by fringing and patch coral reefs, sea grass beds, mangrove forests, and several estuaries and bays. The largest river in Tanga Region (and one of the largest in Tanzania) is the Pangani, which flows south-east through the Usambaras from Kilimanjaro, and reaches the Indian Ocean at Pangani Town, providing a link

between the coast and the highest Kilimanjaro mountain in Africa. Beyond coral reefs, the vast areas of the near-shore in Tanga region are covered by extensive mangrove forests (which are the main ecosystem feature of Kwale and Ulenge Islands, which form part of Tanga Marine Reserves) and seagrass beds. Tanga is the main City and the third largest coastal city in Tanzania (after Dar es Salaam and Zanzibar city) with has about 300,000 inhabitants (273,332 in 2012 census). The majority of coastal community members in the Tanga region rely either directly or indirectly on marine resources as a source of livelihoods (Harrison, 2010). It can be noted that coastal/marine ecosystems within the Tanga region are incredibly rich in biodiversity, and are also home to key endangered species, such as Sea Turtles and Coelacanths. However, biodiversity levels have been sorely depleted over the last five years due to the widespread destruction of the coral reefs which contribute a very high proportion

of this biodiversity. Figure 1: Map showing the location of the Project 9 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 2: Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) included in the project MPAs/ other management area Country Pemba Channel Conservation Area (PECCA) 2 Islands, part of Tanga Marine Reserves System: Ulenge and Kwale Islands 2 Collaborative Fisheries Management Areas (CFMAs) – Locally Managed Marine Areas (LMMAs): - Mchomapunda in Tanga district Tawalani-Kizingani in Mkinga district Total 2.12 Core area km2 Buffer zone km2 Tanzania (Zanzibar) Improved management/ new/ expansion? Improved management 826 n/a Tanzania (mainland) Improved management 156 n/a Tanzania (mainland) Improved management c. 580 n/a 1,406 Project objective, proposed outcomes and key components The overall objective for the Project is to increase

socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania. It is envisaged that the proposed project outcomes will include (1) improved resilience of climate-relevant ecosystems through increased protection and management and (2) improved resilience and enhanced livelihoods of the most vulnerable communities of PECCA and Tanga-Mkinga. In order to achieve this objective, the proposed outcomes will focus on: (1) Improving resources, instruments and capacities for MPAs (PECCA and TMRs) and CFMAs (Tawalani-Kizingani and Mchomapunda) management and sustainable use; (2) restoring degraded coastal ecosystems, which are particularly relevant for climate change adaptation; (3) promoting climate resilient and sustainable livelihoods in PECCA and Tanga-Mkinga; and (4) enhancing knowledge, expertise and capacity of relevant national agencies to use Ecosystem-based Adaptation approaches for climate resilient coastal zone management in

Tanzania. The Project includes the following activities: • Outcome 1: Improved resilience of climate-relevant ecosystems in Tanzania through increased protection and management o Output 1: Improved resources, instruments and capacities for MPA management and sustainable use ▪ Main activities - New and enhanced co-management plans for CFMAs (Tanga-Mkinga) and CMGs (PECCA) that integrate marine and coastal ecosystems, and climate change mitigation and adaptation - Management measures from the newly elaborated integrated co-management plans in PECCA (3) and Tanga-Mkinga coast (2) have started implementation - The demarcation of existing marine and coastal managed areas established/implemented in target areas is documented/formalised in relevant/appropriate legal form(s) - Cost-effective monitoring, control and enforcement techniques to prevent illegal fishing / use of unsustainable practices are successfully established at community level, across collaborating communities, with

support from the relevant authorities - Increase number and proportion of women: a) in leadership positions in community-level and collaborative-level institutions; b) participating in coordination and co-management committee meetings. o Output 2: Degraded coastal ecosystems, which are particularly relevant for climate change 6 Ulenge and Kwale islands are included in the areas covered by Mchomapunda and Tawalani-Kizingani 10 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan adaptation, are restored ▪ Main activities - Mangrove habitat rehabilitated/restored in PECCA and Tanga-Mkinga, using CBEMR (Community-based ecological mangrove restoration) method - Reef balls installed to restore physical reef structure • Outcome 2: Improved resilience and enhanced livelihoods of the most vulnerable communities in PECCA and Tanga-Mkinga, Tanzania o Output 3: Climate

resilient and sustainable livelihoods promoted in PECCA and Tanga-Mkinga, Tanzania ▪ Main activities - Eco-credit “MKUBA” groups are established, monitored and supported in 13 communities throughout Tanga-Mkinga and PECCA - Initiatives facilitating practices that favourably impact natural resource management, through: Sustainable value chains approaches (Participatory Market Systems Development – PMSD) and Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) incubation and development - Increase the number of women from the communities targeted by the project benefiting from economic empowerment through participation in eco-credit groups and through PMSD approaches - Increase the number of women from the communities targeted by the project benefiting from economic empowerment through participation in: Eco-credit groups and PMSD approaches o Output 4: Enhanced knowledge, expertise and capacity of relevant national agencies to use Ecosystem-based Adaptation (EbA) approaches for climate

resilient coastal zone management in Tanzania ▪ Main activities - Local, national and international institutions are disseminated lessons learned (through workshops, facilitation of co-management meetings involving relevant institutions, adapted Best Practices guidelines for national and regional audiences) - Learning exchanges and sharing events facilitated by the project to promote integrated co-management approaches between coastal communities and their respective relevant administrations, from PECCA and Tanga-Mkinga areas - Two districts in project sites are piloting Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) approach, incorporating EbA concepts - Engage with inter-ministerial cooperation and with the Department of Environment on both jurisdictions (Zanzibar and mainland Tanzania) to communicate findings and recommendations - Increase understanding amongst district and regional authorities about how EbA concepts piloted through the projects work in articulation with ICZM policies

and about the advantages they provide 2.13 Project timeframe and budget The timeframe for the project is 60 months (5 years), with a proposed start date on 1st July 2022 and end date of 30th June 2027. The proposed budget total for the project is anticipated to be between EUR 6,000,000 and 7,000,000 (including match funding – the budget is being revised at the time of publication of this provisional ESMP). 2.14 Project partners and responsibilities FFI is the lead implementing partner for this project, and will report directly to the Blue Action Fund, the funding agency. Other implementing partners7 for this project include - Mwambao-MCCC (established as Mwambao Coastal Community Network in Tanzania mainland and MCCC Ltd in Zanzibar). 7 Implementing partners include organisations such as non-government agencies or community-based organisations who have a distinct role in the implementation of the project and who receive funds for delivering outputs as identified in the

project document. 11 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan - CORDIO East Africa. The following subgrantees or service providers8 are to be engaged in the project: - Mwambao-MCCC (Main implementing partner in the project area) - CORDIO East Africa. Anticipated contractors - UNEP-WCMC (www.unep-wcmcorg) - GreenFi (www.greenfiio) - Individual consultants with experience of engaging with key collaborating government institutions and positions Key collaborating partners9 include. - Other NGOs active in or in the vicinity of the selected sites (including WCS, The Nature Conservancy, Blue Ventures, Community Forest Pemba) - Oil and Gas prospecting companies and Infrastructure development (in particular Tanga port develop under the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project and Zanzibar Petroleum Regulatory Authority (ZPRA), under Zanzibar’s

Ministry of Blue Economy and Fisheries. - Tourism investors/operators in Pemba and Tanga - CBOs, including: o JSEUMA is a small NGO in Pemba South based in Environmental preservation and social issues awareness raising including HIV Aids prevention. JSEUMA was established in 1990 and have collaborated with various local and international organisation (e.g CARE international in implementing Natural resources conservation and livelihoods projects focussed on forestry). Mwambao sub-granted some funds to JSEUMA to support in consultation and community capacity building during an EUfunded project in 2018-2019. o JUMIJAZA is an umbrella organisation of Community forest organisations established in 2013 during the implementation of CARE intl’s HIMA project with the aim of linking Forest conservation committees of Zanzibar in implementing a REDD+ project across the archipelago. JUMIZA has successfully managed to work together with other small NGOs dealing with forestry and natural resources

conservation including Jizani Chwaka Bay Conservation Association and JECA, and in Pemba, Ngezi Natural resources conservation organisation (NGANRECO), which also works with CoFMAs (Community Forest Management Areas, supported by management agreements) in both islands of Zanzibar. - Relevant authorities (district-level and ministerial) in Pemba and in Tanga region. The main ones are detailed below. Two district councils in mainland Tanzania (Mkinga and Tanga City) and three in Pemba Island (Mkoani, Wete, Chake chake) These five District Councils are the centres of project planning and implementation in their respective district areas. Close coordination and cooperation at district level will be ensured by regular meetings Key collaborating instituions Mainland Tanzania (for Tanga Region sites) On Mainland Tanzania, the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development has overall responsibility for managing fisheries in Mainland Tanzania coastal zones. The Ministry has several divisions

which are involved in fisheries management: Fisheries Development Division, the Aquaculture Division, the Policy and Planning Division, and the Research training and Extension Division. The Fisheries Development Division includes sections for Fisheries Marketing and Quality Control, Monitoring Control and Surveillance and Fisheries Development. The Aquaculture Department includes a section focused on marine aquaculture. The Research, Training and Extension Division has a section devoted to Fisheries Research and Training, while the Policy and Planning Division addresses fisheries policy and planning issues along with those of livestock development. There are several other fisheries-related 9 Collaborating partners include organizations or individuals with whom the project is collaborating with and who might contribute to a project’s outputs but without receiving funds. 12 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba

Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan units affiliated with the Ministry, including the following institution: Marine Parks and Reserves Unit (MPRU), which has oversight over the country’s Marine Parks and Marine Reserves, and the Tanzania Fisheries Research Institute (TAFIRI), as well as the Fisheries Education and Training Agency (FETA). The primary institutional player in Mainland Tanzania with responsibility for environmental matters is the National Environmental Management Council (NEMC). It is responsible for reviewing and approving environmental impact statements for projects, and ensuring compliance with all the countries environmental laws, regulations and standards. Local government authorities that may play a role in fisheries and environmental management relevant to SWIOFish include Regional and local District governments. District government offices have District Fisheries Officers and District Environmental Officers, who are employees of the

Ministry of Regional Administration and Local Government Authority (under the Prime Minister’s Office) These are expert/advisers to Regional and/ District Executives on the matters pertaining to their respective ministries. Fisheries Development Division: is the key partner at sector and Ministry level. It is the main fisheries governing institution in Tanzania. Its main role is to provide national-level fisheries policies, guidelines, strategic and technical support on fisheries related activities (fisheries data, legislations etc). Fisheries Division, Fisheries Research Institute (TAFIRI) and Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association (WIOMSA) have prepared the second National State of the Coast Report which will be very useful for this particular project. The Marine Parks and Reserves Unit (MPRU) was established under the Marine Parks and Reserves (MPR) Act 29 of 1994. The MPRU sits under the Department of Fisheries and is managed by the Board of Trustees whose role among

other things is to oversee management of marine parks and reserves operating under auspice of MPRU, formulating policies on Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and related facilities, and advise the responsible Minister (currently the Minister of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries) on approval, revision and amendment of general management plan of any Marine Parks including other legislative matters pertaining to the conservation and Management of Coastal and Marine resources. Beach Management Units (BMUs) in Tanzania are established under the Fisheries Act, 2003 and Fisheries Regulations, 2009, the latter defining their role and functions. A BMU is a community-level organisation of fishers, fish traders, boat owners, fish processors and other stakeholders who traditionally depend on fisheries activities for their livelihoods. A BMU executive committee is elected by its assembly of members; membership is voluntary. The primary functions of a BMU are to develop fisheries management plans at

the level of fish landing sites within their village; collaborate in catch data collection; engage in monitoring, control and surveillance; and support district authorities in issuing fishing vessel licenses including ensuring payment of fees; and to settle fisheries-related disputes. As the primary community fisheries management body BMUs participate actively in the co-management activities under the project and benefit from training aimed at capacity building and supporting their implementation of management plans in their areas of jurisdiction. Village Natural Resources Committees (VNRCs): Rooted in the Forest Act, 2002, a VNRC is a group of people elected by the village assembly to be responsible for managing terrestrial natural resources available in the village, on behalf of the entire village. Specific responsibilities of VNRCs include: coordinating forest-related activities such as tree planting, harvesting forest resources and recordkeeping; issuing permits for harvesting of

forest resources; preventing agricultural or livestock encroachment in forests; preventing forest fires; patrolling against illegal harvesting and forest degradation; boundary clearance; and keeping the whole village informed of events related to forest management, and of their [community] rights and responsibilities, and of any changes on forest management guidelines or laws. The VNRCs play an active role in work package 4 whose focus is improved mangrove management. Key collaborating institutions in Zanzibar (for Pemba Island sites) In Zanzibar fisheries management is handled by the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock Development. The Ministry includes departments responsible for Fisheries Development and Marine Resources, and is also responsible for a number of Marine Conservation Areas (MCAs) as noted earlier. Administration of Zanzibar Environmental Policies and Regulations, including review and approval of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) is handled through the Department

of Environment, which is attached to the Vice President’s office. Department of Fisheries’ Development (DFD) 13 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan The DFD is responsible for fisheries management and marine biodiversity conservation across Zanzibar. Its Marine Conservation Unit (MCU) manages Marine Conservation Areas (MCAs), such as PECCA (the only MCA in Pemba Island). The MCU regulations include provision for community-based co-management institutions, the Shehia Fishers’ Committees (SFCs), to establish and enforce by-laws for managing local fishing grounds. In PECCA, a Management Committee of SFC members and DFD staff is mandated to enforce regulations, guided by an Advisory Committee of local and national government stakeholders. The project proponent has been collaborating with DFD in Pemba (DFD-Pemba) since 2015. DFDPemba’s

effectiveness has been constrained by a limited skills base, insufficient staff numbers (with only a Manager, five rangers, and five support staff in PECCA), inadequate resources (e.g fuel for patrols), and ineffective interaction with key government stakeholders. We seek to begin addressing these limitations through our project. DFD has also implemented the World Bank’s SWIOFish (South West Indian Ocean Fisheries) programme between 2015 and 2020. One of the components of SWIOFish aimed to further detail and facilitate the development of effective co-management, thus supporting SFCs in several MCAs (including PECCA). Marine Conservation Unit (MCU) The MCU is the unit in Zanzibar responsible of all Marine Conservation Areas (MCAs) including Pemba Channel Conservation Area (PECCA), the only MCA in Pemba, and another three in Unguja (MBCA, MIMCA and TUMCA). The MCU currently sits under the Department of Fisheries (DFD), itself within the Ministry of Blue Economy and Fisheries (MBEF),

recently created following the presidential elections of October 2020. The MCU, established under the Fisheries Act (2013) is responsible for the management of all the MCAs in ways that conserve ecosystem and benefit local communities and facilitate their active participation in the management. Shehia Fishers Committees (SFCs) Created by the MCU (Marine Conservation Unit) regulations, the SFC is the community institution mandated to locally manage fisheries and near-shore marine areas, at the Shehia (a ward in Zanzibar) level. An SFC normally comprises 10 members elected by their community (inhabitants of the Shehia) SFCs have the power to design, establish and enforce local by-laws, that have to be approved by the Department of Fisheries (DFD). The project proponent has worked since 2014 building the capacities of several SFCs, providing guidance in the establishment of local management actions and also collaborated with DFD and SWIOFish to define Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)

for SFCs’ routine activities. Community Forestry Management Agreements (CoFMAs) As a response to diminishing forest resources, the Zanzibar Islands have followed the mainland Tanzania example and enacted legislation and policy for forest sector decentralization through the development of Community Forest Management Agreements (CoFMA). Communities signing such an agreement (with the Department of Forestry, government of Zanzibar) are given a mandate on community forest management areas. Without specification the acronym tends to refer to both the agreement, area and is also often used to refer to the community institution in charge of this local management. Several coastal communities include mangrove forests in their CoFMA in Unguja and Pemba islands. Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) committees The 2015 Environment Act allowed for the introduction of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM), led by the Department of Environment (DoE). One of the initiatives under the recent

ICZM push is the formation of ICZM committees at the community level, drawing on members of the other committees, including forest conservation, fisheries and environment. However, the formation of ICZM committees has been slow and inconsistent, due to unpredictable financial resources from donorfunded projects. While these could have provided an opportunity for information sharing and joint working across the sector-based groups, the persistent fragmentation at the higher departmental level threatens the local level opportunities for collaboration (Nchimbi 2018). The project will engage with them where they are present in Zanzibar villages. In Tanga there were ICZM committees but they are currently not functional – there is an aim to revitalise them in both locations, which will be explored and facilitated through project activities where relevant. 14 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania –

Environmental and Social Management Plan 2.141 ESMS responsibilities The lead NGO (FFI) and Blue Action Fund responsibilities for the application of the Blue Action Fund ESMS include: FFI - Diligently follow the Blue Action Fund ESMS procedures and communicate Blue Action Fund’s E&S principles to external stakeholders; - Implement and maintain the approved Project ESMP and associated Safeguard Instruments throughout project implementation, aiming at reducing the negative impacts of the project to acceptable levels and enhancing any positive impacts; - Ensure compliance with all relevant national legislation and alignment with international good practice; - Implement the monitoring programmes required to verify that the management measures outlined in the Project ESMP and associated Safeguard Instruments are achieving their expected results; - Monitor the E&S performance of its contractors and sub-contractors used for providing workforce, supplies and services; - Plan,

implement and document stakeholder engagement activities as an ongoing process and conduct public consultation activities necessary to support the implementation of any Safeguard Instruments and to disclose relevant project information to different stakeholders, taking into account data protection regulations; - Implement a formalised process to capture and manage project-related complaints from communities, workers and other stakeholders (i.e a Grievance Mechanism and Grievance Register); - Work closely with the Tanzanian government and third-party organisations to initiate necessary capacity building and community development actions; - Mobilize the expertise and resources needed for the application of the Blue Action Fund Safeguarding Principles and Requirements practice; - Communicate Blue Action Fund’s E&S principles to external stakeholders - Report to Blue Action as per the Blue Action Fund annual reporting on all relevant E&S topics, including serious incidents; -

Report to Blue Action on grievances and complaints issued by the public or other relevant stakeholders of the respective project; - Report to Blue Action in case a project or an activity within a project has been stopped due to security risks of the workers, the beneficiaries or other stakeholder or due to reputational risk to Blue Action; - Appoint at least one person for E&S monitoring who is closely familiar with Blue Action Fund’s ESMS requirements; Blue Action Fund: - Set the Standards and Guidelines that the grantee and its partners must comply with in funded projects; - Working together with FFI via individual follow-ups to ensure FFI can apply the requirements of the Blue Action Fund ESMS and that project related E&S management risks are adequately addressed during the life cycle of the project; - Monitor to what extent E&S risks and impacts are correctly assessed by FFI and that subsequent E&S management activities are implemented per this ESMS; - Monitor the

Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) implementation during all stages of the projects; - Consolidate reporting on ESMS implementation; - Collect project lessons learnt to adapt the requirements of this ESMS and its performance in light of the field experiences. 15 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan 2.2 Social context PECCA and Tanga-Mkinga coastal communities commonly engage in fisheries, rain-fed agriculture, and seaweed (mwani) farming as their primary subsistence livelihood and/or income generating strategies. Decades of steady population growth have outpaced growth in food production, which has only served to intensify pressure on coastal resources. Meanwhile coastal fisheries resources on which these communities depend are vulnerable to sedimentation, sea level rise, and warming ocean temperatures. According to government data,

the poverty rate in Pemba increased from 48% to 55% between 2010 and 2015, while more than a third of Tanga’s residents have lived in poverty within the last generation (World Bank assessment of data from the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar’s Household Budget Survey (HBS) and Integrated Labour Force Survey (ILFS)). Zooming in to the project’s targeted communities, FFI and Mwambao carried out a socio-economic survey of 528 households in nine PECCA communities in March 2021; the results clearly illustrate the localized needs and challenges that communities reliant on marine and coastal resources face with regard to their livelihoods and income. 94% of surveyed households indicated that their current livelihood activities do not generate enough income to meet their basic needs. Nearly 42% of those surveyed experienced income decline in the previous year, while the income of half was unchanged, despite +3% inflation on average in recent years (with food inflation rising as high

as 4.9% in the same period). Over 80% of households reported that they did not have enough food to provide everyone in their household a nightly meal every day of the year. Of the households surveyed, 59% listed a fishing-related activity as their first or second main source of income, with other common sources of income including agriculture and petty trading/shop keeping. Respondents indicated that reef fish, pelagic fish, shellfish and octopus were their most important marine resources. When asked about the state of these resources, 58% of households answered “poor,” and 68% described the marine resources they relied upon as being in decline. The lack of sufficient income and food has a demonstrable impact on the current wellbeing of PECCA communities. When asked about their daily life, less than 2% of respondents answered “good,” while 28% chose either “bad” or “very bad.” 92% of people surveyed stated their wellbeing had either remained the same or worsened over

the past year. The most common reason for a change in wellbeing was a lack of economic or food resources, further demonstrating that livelihood activities, and income generated from them, as an area where PECCA households commonly need support. Several factors hinder target communities from taking up alternative livelihood options, including a lack of access to extension services, technical assistance, affordable inputs, and credit, and low capacity, with for example, over a quarter to one-third of Pemba’s residents over 15 years of age in PECCA lacking literacy. As the human population continues to grow and food and marine resources decline, the need for intervention and support grow increasingly urgent for households that are already unable to meet their needs through current livelihood activities. 2.21 Stakeholders and Project Affected People The list below summarises the key stakeholders in the project area. This includes Indigenous Peoples/ Sub-Saharan African Historically

Underserved Traditional Local Communities, local communities, private sector actors, civil society organisations and NGOs, and government departments and agencies. The Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) is annexed (see List of Annexes at the end) The list below summarises the key stakeholders in the project area. This includes local communities, private sector actors, civil society organisations and NGOs, and government departments and agencies. 1. Owners and users of land and marine area 1.1 Registered individual small-scale / artisanal fishers • Long line / gill nets / ring-net (purse seine) fishers 16 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan • Boat owners • Hook and line fishers / shallow-waters net fishers / Beach seine fishers / trap fishers • Foot fishers (octopus, seashells, crabs) 1.2 Unregistered individual small-scale (migrant or not)

fishers • All authorised fishing activities • Free-diving / scuba spear-fishers and other illegal fishing activities 1.3 Marine products traders and middlemen intermediaries of various levels • Landing sites managers (BMU or individuals/businessmen) 1.4 Fishers and mariculture associations • Seaweed, sea cucumber, fish or prawn farmers 1.5 Marine products processors men/women 1.6 Marine products exporters 1.7 Tourism stakeholders who own/use the areas (eg marina development; snorkelling or divesites) 1.8 Infrastructure and extractive developments • Oil and Gas prospecting companies • Infrastructure developments, in particular Tanga port development under the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project 2. Local population 2.1 Inhabitants of the project-affected areas • Pemba and Tanga targeted communities Pemba and Tanga households from targeted communities Eco-credit groups in targeted communities of Pemba and Tanga 2.2 Pemba and Tanga non-targeted communities

(neighbouring those targeted) 2.3 Residents of temporary migrant fisher settlements (coming from Pemba, Unguja or mainland Tanzania) 3. Administrative bodies and authorities 3.1 Specific government departments and representatives • Central DFD, under the Ministry of Blue Economy and Fisheries (Zanzibar), Fisheries Divison in the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development (mainland Tanzania) • MCU (under DFD, Zanzibar) and MPRU (mainland Tanzania) • Zanzibar Petroleum Regulatory Authority (ZPRA), under the Ministry of Blue Economy and Fisheries • Zanzibar’s Climate Change Strategy Secretariat (Ministry of Land, Water, Energy and Environment) • Mainland and Zanzibar VP office (climate change-related issues and national strategy/reporting) 3.2 Regional and district level authorities • DFD-Pemba, Fisheries Divison in Tanga region • Districts commission and council of Wete, Chake chake and Mkoani in Pemba; and of Tanga and Mkinga for mainland Tanzania • ICZM

committees (Integrated Coastal-Zone Management) where they are established 3.3 Local authorities (at ward level: Shehia for Zanzibar, Kata for mainland Tanzania) • SFCs and BMUs for fisheries and other marine resource management • CoFMAs and VNRCs for mangroves management • Collaborative Fisheries Management Areas (CFMAs – gathering several BMUs in a district, mainland Tanzania) and Collaborative Management Groups (CMG – clusters of neighbouring SFCs, Pemba Island) • Shehas (head of Shehia, Pemba) and head of Kata (mainland Tanzania) 4. Research, NGOs and independent experts 4.1 Scientific and research organisations • National research/academia, e.g State University of Zanzibar (SUZA), University of Dar es Salaam, Institute of Marine Science (IMS) • Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association (WIOMSA) and other regional research-oriented organisations • Other international research initiatives or individuals engaged in coastal/marine/climate change topics 4.2 NGOs

17 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan • CBOs JSEUMA, JUMIJAZA, Tanzania Coastal Environmental Conservation Network (TACOECONT), etc. • National and International NGOs active in/near the project areas SeaSense, Community Forests International-Pemba, Pemba Foundation, Milele Foundation WCS, WildAid, Blue Ventures, TNC, CARE International 4.3 National and international experts/consultants with ongoing or recent work • SWIOFish (Zanzibar and mainland) lead consultants • Regional experts/consultants (on MPA governance, marine policies, marine ecology) working in non-partner organisations 5. Media 5.1 TV media • TVZ (Television Zanzibar), TBC (Tanzanian Broadcasting Corporation) 5.2 Radio stations • Radio Jamii (Pemba), Radio Nuur, Radio Maarifa (Tanga) 5.3 Internet sources • Social media/Facebook groups focussed on environment initiatives

in Zanzibar/Tanzania - The list below indicates the principle Affected Communities identified, including (i) persons who have formal legal rights to land or assets; (ii) persons who do not have formal legal rights to land or assets, but have a claim to land or assets that is recognized or recognizable under national law; (iii) persons who have no recognisable legal right or claim to the land or assets they occupy or use. The term Project Affected People (PAP), Project Affected Parties, Project Affected Person or Affected People includes those likely to be affected by the project because of the actual impacts or potential risks to their physical environment, health, security, well-being or livelihoods. These stakeholders may include individuals or groups, including local communities. Stakeholders, defined below, are sometimes referred to separately from Protect Affected People, to make a distinction between the broad set of stakeholders who might have an interest in the project

(interested parties), and those who might be affected (positively or negatively) by the project (Protect Affected People or Project Affected Parties). The settlements in the project area are listed in Table 3 and shown in Figure 2. Those communities affected by the Project (Affected Communities), totalling 29 communities (12 “villages” in Tanga-Mkinga area of Tanzania mainland and 17 “Shehia” of PECCA, in Pemba-Zanzibar), and 19,430 households, are also illustrated on the map (Figure 2). Table 3 provides a breakdown of the affected villages Table 3: Villages and communities affected by the Project District Mkinga Tanga city Ward or village name Approx. no of households Approx. number of inhabitants Male Female TOTAL Estimated of the degree of affectedness Boma 404 1,192 1,395 2,587 High Manza Mkinga Doda 565 756 417 1,723 2,325 1,357 1,890 2,514 1,313 3,613 4,839 2,670 High Low Medium Mtimbwani Kwale Chongoleani 485 380 740 1,439 1,137 2,315 1,664 1,293

2,422 3,103 2,430 4,737 Low High High Mabokweni Mzizima Chumbageni Central 849 1,808 2,845 1,148 2,667 5,830 6,652 2,830 2,766 5,740 7,573 2,909 5,433 11,570 14,225 5,739 Medium Low Low Low 18 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Sub Total Tanga-Mkinga 10,397 29,467 31,479 60,946 Fundo Gando Junguni 262 356 411 816 1,111 1,257 809 1,099 1,290 1,625 2,210 2,547 High High High Ukunjwi Selem Kipangani 447 521 848 1,379 1,196 2,053 1,390 1,407 2,188 2,769 2,603 4,241 High Low Low 1,239 874 611 343 644 732 2,922 2,638 1,901 1,029 1,911 2,221 3,271 2,779 1,890 1,097 2,084 2,318 6,193 5,417 3,791 2,126 3,995 4,539 Low High High High High High Kisiwa Panza 498 1,534 1,553 3,087 High Stahabu Michenzani 382 473 1,132 1,393 1,237 1,539 2,369 2,932 High High Shidi Makoongwe Sub Total PECCA 158 234 9,033 481 705 25,679

501 748 27,200 982 1,453 52,879 High High TOTAL PROJECT 19,430 55,146 58,679 113,825 Wete Jadida Mtambwe Kaskazini Mtambwe Kusini Kukuu Kangani Chokocho Mkoani The project will work with the following 6,280 targeted individuals: - 3,750 community members benefitting from of sustainably managing their fisheries, mangroves, etc. (incl. fishers and their supply chains, such as traders or shipbuilders in the project area) - 580 community representatives (from SFCs, SCCs, BMUs and VNRCs), staff from local, district and national authorities who will be trained in sustainable management of fisheries and mangroves at a local level and district-level - 1,950 people who will be receiving support from community 65 eco-credits groups to be established in 13 communities, from micro-entrepreneurs mentoring and dedicated business literacy trainings 19 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania –

Environmental and Social Management Plan Figure 2: Map showing the location of the Project Over the last seven years (since end of 2014), FFI and Mwambao-MCCC have partnered to build effective co-management in PECCA – the largest MCA of Zanzibar, Tanzania –strengthening the capacity of fisheries’ community institutions to pilot LMMAs (such as temporary or permanent reef closures) and offering government institutions articulated mechanism to operationalise and render more effective co-management. To this end, we also jointly launched several livelihoods support initiatives as incentives and enablers for communities to participate and actively engage into conservation activities. Those included for instance improving the octopus value chain to deliver more sustainable fishing practices and enhanced revenues, and piloting a community eco-credit scheme as an economic incentive for community members to diversify their livelihood activities in compatibility with their local management

initiatives. On their end (outside of the scope of our partnership to date), Mwambao-MCCC have also started supporting coastal communities in Tanga-Mkinga with a similar approach but with a less comprehensive set of tools implemented yet. Owing to the more advanced co-management framework in Tanzania mainland, Mwambao-MCCC have also support CFMA management planning and related training at this collaborative level (i.e gathering neighbouring BMUs) 2.22 Disadvantaged or Vulnerable Groups Disadvantaged or vulnerable groups 10 are individuals or groups of individuals who risk being disproportionately affected by project related risks and adverse impacts and who may be more limited than others in their ability to take advantage of project benefits. These social groups can suffer from discrimination, unequal access to rights, unequal access to and control over resources or unequal 10 See Blue Action Fund ESMS Glossary of Terms for the definition of Disadvantaged or Vulnerable Groups. 20

Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan access to development opportunities. As a result, they may be poorly integrated into the formal economy, may suffer from inadequate access to basic public goods and services, and may be excluded from political decision-making. Such groups may include ethnic, religious, cultural, linguistic minorities, indigenous groups, female-headed households, children and youngsters, the elderly, persons with disabilities, and the poor. Disadvantaged or vulnerable individuals/ groups are also more likely to be excluded from/ unable to participate fully in the mainstream consultation process and as such may require specific measures and/or assistance to do so. Vulnerability in this context refers to people who are: • Likely to be affected by the project (i.e, they are exposed to project activities, eg, because they fish or use

areas where law enforcement will occur); • Sensitive to these effects (e.g, because they are highly dependent on natural resources with no other livelihood options); and • Have got low adaptive capacity (e.g, because they don’t have family or relatives who can support them, or no other skills or assets to rely on). In the case of vulnerable groups, FFI and Mwambao-MCCC ensure that vulnerable individuals and groups are duly and timely consulted and encouraged to directly participate, making sure that their concerns are heard, taking into account individuals’ and communities’ specificities, and delivered in an appropriate form, manner and language. This is done in the form of focus group discussions, key informant surveys, small group and one-on-one interactions, gender assessments as well as ensuring materials are in local languages. Based on the results of the field work performed since 2015 and on the experience in the area, women, children, elderly, poor households,

itinerant fisher groups, are likely to be the most vulnerable groups and affected by access restrictions, as their customary access rights are less commonly recognised and formalised. These groups typically have low access to alternative livelihood opportunities. It is for these reasons that in the SEP it is planned to actively engage these groups in the resource management process, so their needs are fully recognised and incorporated into decision-making processes and activities associated with this project. This engagement will also lay the groundwork for engaging these same groups in the access restriction mitigation processes used once it is clear what restrictions may be forthcoming and who will be impacted by those restrictions. 21 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan 3 National and International Requirements FFI is committed to full

compliance with Tanzania and Zanzibar legal requirements, Blue Action Fund’s ESMS standards, policy and procedures, and international good practice, notably the World Bank Environmental and Social Framework (2017). 3.1 Project’s host country requirements Institutional arrangements for the management of marine and coastal environment Key institutions in Tanzania mainland (for Tanga-Mkinga) On Mainland Tanzania, the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development has overall responsibility for managing fisheries in Mainland Tanzania coastal zones. The Ministry has several divisions which are involved in fisheries management: Fisheries Development Division, the Aquaculture Division, the Policy and Planning Division, and the Research training and Extension Division. The Fisheries Development Division includes sections for Fisheries Marketing and Quality Control, Monitoring Control and Surveillance and Fisheries Development. The Aquaculture Department includes a section focuses on

marine aquaculture. The Research, Training and Extension Division has a section devoted to Fisheries Research and Training, while the Policy and Planning Division addresses fisheries policy and planning issues along with those of livestock development. There are several other fisheries-related units affiliated with the Ministry, including the institutions; the Marine Parks and Reserves Unit (MPRU), which has oversight over the country’s Marine Parks and Marine Reserves, and the Tanzania Fisheries Research Institute (TAFIRI), as well as the Fisheries Education and Training Agency (FET A). The primary institutional player in Mainland Tanzania with responsibility for environmental matters is the National Environmental Management Council (NEMC). It is responsible for reviewing and approving environmental impact statements for projects, and ensuring compliance with all the countries environmental laws, regulations and standards. Local government authorities that may play a role in

fisheries and environmental management relevant to SWIOFish include Regional and local District governments. District government offices have District Fisheries Officers and District Environmental Officers, who are employees of the Ministry of Regional Administration and Local Government Authority (under the Prime Minister’s Office) These are expert/advisers to Regional and/ District Executives on the matters pertaining to their respective ministries. Fisheries Development Division: is the key partner at sector and Ministry level. It is the main fisheries governing institution in Tanzania. Its main role is to provide national-level fisheries policies, guidelines, strategic and technical support on fisheries related activities (fisheries data, legislations etc). Fisheries Division, Fisheries Research Institute (TAFIRI) and Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association (WIOMSA) have prepared the second National State of the Coast Report which will be very useful for this particular

project. Tanzania Forest Service (TFS), Tanga office. Tanzania Forest Service is a semi-autonomous government Executive Agency whose establishment is supported by the Executive Agency Act (Cap. 245 Revised Edition 2009), the National Forest and Beekeeping Policies adopted in March 1998 and administered through The Forest Act (No. 14 of 2002) and Beekeeping Act (No 15 of 2002) which provides legal framework for the management of forests and bee resources. TFS develops and manages forest and bee resources sustainably in collaboration with stakeholders in order to deliver sufficient and quality goods and services to meet local and international socio-economic and environmental needs. The Marine Parks and Reserves Unit (MPRU) was established under the Marine Parks and Reserves (MPR) Act 29 of 1994. The MPRU sits under the Department of Fisheries and is managed by the Board of Trustees whose role among other things is to oversee management of marine parks and reserves operating under

auspice of MPRU, formulating policies on Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and related facilities, and advise the responsible Minister (currently the Minister of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries) on approval, revision and amendment of general management plan of any Marine Parks including other legislative matters pertaining to the conservation and Management of Coastal and Marine resources. 22 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Beach Management Units (BMUs) in Tanzania are established under the Fisheries Act, 2003 and Fisheries Regulations, 2009, the latter defining their role and functions. A BMU is a community-level organisation of fishers, fish traders, boat owners, fish processors and other stakeholders who traditionally depend on fisheries activities for their livelihoods. A BMU executive committee is elected by its assembly of members;

membership is voluntary. The primary functions of a BMU are to develop fisheries management plans at the level of fish landing sites within their village; collaborate in catch data collection; engage in monitoring, control and surveillance; and support district authorities in issuing fishing vessel licenses including ensuring payment of fees; and to settle fisheries-related disputes. As the primary community fisheries management body BMUs participate actively in the co-management activities under the project and benefit from training aimed at capacity building and supporting their implementation of management plans in their areas of jurisdiction. Village Natural Resources Committees (VNRCs): Rooted in the Forest Act, 2002, a VNRC is a group of people elected by the village assembly to be responsible for managing terrestrial natural resources available in the village, on behalf of the entire village. Specific responsibilities of VNRCs include: coordinating forest-related activities such

as tree planting, harvesting forest resources and recordkeeping; issuing permits for harvesting of forest resources; preventing agricultural or livestock encroachment in forests; preventing forest fires; patrolling against illegal harvesting and forest degradation; boundary clearance; and keeping the whole village informed of events related to forest management, and of their [community] rights and responsibilities, and of any changes on forest management guidelines or laws. The VNRCs play an active role in work package 4 whose focus is improved mangrove management and are under the oversight of TFS. Key institutions in Zanzibar (for PECCA) In Zanzibar fisheries management is handled by the Ministry of Blue Economy and Fisheries, created at the end of 2020, immediately after the national elections (October 2020); Fisheries and Marine conservation were previously under the Department of Fisheries Development, itself under the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Forestry. The Ministry

includes departments responsible for Fisheries Development and Marine Resources, and is also responsible for a number of Marine Conservation Areas (MCAs) as noted earlier in this report. Administration of Zanzibar Environmental Policies and Regulations, including review and approval of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) is handled through the Department of Environment, which is attached to the Vice President’s office. Department of Fisheries’ Development (DFD) The DFD is responsible for fisheries management and marine biodiversity conservation across Zanzibar. Its Marine Conservation Unit (MCU) manages Marine Conservation Areas (MCAs), such as PECCA (the only MCA in Pemba Island). The MCU regulations include provision for community-based co-management institutions, the Shehia Fishers’ Committees (SFCs), to establish and enforce by-laws for managing local fishing grounds. In PECCA, a Management Committee of SFC members and DFD staff is mandated to enforce regulations, guided by

an Advisory Committee of local and national government stakeholders. The project proponent has been collaborating with DFD in Pemba (DFD-Pemba) since 2015. DFDPemba’s effectiveness has been constrained by a limited skills base, insufficient staff numbers (with only a Manager, five rangers, and five support staff in PECCA), inadequate resources (e.g fuel for patrols), and ineffective interaction with key government stakeholders. We seek to begin addressing these limitations through our project. DFD has also implemented the World Bank’s SWIOFish (South West Indian Ocean Fisheries) programme between 2015 and 2020. One of the components of SWIOFish aimed to further detail and facilitate the development of effective co-management, thus supporting SFCs in several MCAs (including PECCA). Marine Conservation Unit (MCU) The MCU is the unit in Zanzibar responsible of all Marine Conservation Areas (MCAs) including Pemba Channel Conservation Area (PECCA), the only MCA in Pemba, and other 3 in

Unguja (MBCA, MIMCA and TUMCA). The MCU currently sits under the Department of Fisheries (DFD), itself within the Ministry of Blue Economy and Fisheries (MBEF), recently created following the presidential elections of October 2020. The MCU, established under the Fisheries Act (2013) is responsible for the management of all the MCAs in ways that conserve ecosystem and benefit local communities and facilitate their active participation in the management. Shehia Fishers Committees (SFCs) 23 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Created by the MCU (Marine Conservation Unit) regulations, the SFC is the community institution mandated to locally manage fisheries and near-shore marine areas, at the Shehia (a ward in Zanzibar) level. An SFC normally comprises 10 members elected by their community (inhabitants of the Shehia) SFCs have the power to design,

establish and enforce local by-laws, that have to be approved by the Department of Fisheries (DFD). The project proponent has worked since 2014 building the capacities of several SFCs, providing guidance in the establishment of local management actions and also collaborated with DFD and SWIOFish to define Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for SFCs’ routine activities. Community Forestry Management Agreements (CoFMAs) As a response to diminishing forest resources, the Zanzibar Islands, has followed the mainland Tanzania example and enacted legislation and policy for forest sector decentralization through the development of Community Forest Management Agreements (CoFMA). Communities signing such agreement (with the Department of Forestry, government of Zanzibar) are given a mandate on community forest management areas. Without specification the acronym tend to refer to both the agreement, area and is also often used to refer to the community institution in charge of this local

management. Several coastal communities include mangrove forests in their CoFMA in Unguja and Pemba islands. Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) committees The 2015 Environment Act allowed for the introduction of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM), led by the Department of Environment (DoE). One of the initiatives under the recent ICZM push is the formation of ICZM committees at the community level, drawing on members of the other committees, including forest conservation, fisheries and environment. However, the formation of ICZM committees has been slow and inconsistent, due to unpredictable financial resources from donorfunded projects. While these could have provided an opportunity for information sharing and joint working across the sector-based groups, the persistent fragmentation at the higher departmental level threatens the local level opportunities for collaboration (Nchimbi 2018). The project will engage with them where they are present in Zanzibar villages. In

Tanga there were ICZM committees but they are currently not functional – there is an aim to revitalise them in both locations, which will be explored and facilitated through project activities where relevant. Institutional arrangements and governance of MPAs Zanzibar In Zanzibar, Fisheries management is governed by the Fisheries Act of 2010, plus a number of acts relating to management of the MCAs, including the Menai Bay Conservation Area (Establishment) Order of 1997, the Mnemba Island Marine Conservation Area Order of 2002, the Pemba Channel Conservation Area (PECCA) Order of 2005, and draft Marine Conservation Unit Regulations that were under development. Environmental legislation and policy instruments in Zanzibar include the Environmental Management for Sustainable Development Act (1996) and Regulations, the National Environmental Policy for Zanzibar (1992), and the Establishment of Zanzibar Nature Conservation Areas Management Unit Act (1999), as well as the Forest Resource

Management and Conservation Act (1996), and the National Forest Policy for Zanzibar (1995) Other legislation and policy instruments that can affect activities in coastal areas include the Zanzibar Tourism Policy (2004), and the Land Tenure Act (1992) and Land Tenure (Amendment) Act (2003). Co-management The fundamental community-based co-management unit is the SFC which are elected communitybased organisations that have been given roles and powers through the Marine Conservation Unit (MCU) Regulations (2014). The MCU regulations also establish the marine conservation areas (MCAs), the Marine Conservation Unit and the Fisheries Executive Committee (FEC). The latter is made up from the chairs of all the SFCs within a marine conservation area. The regulations also establish multi-sector technical committees to advise MCA management. Although this system has been established for some time, it is widely accepted that it has not delivered effective co-management. A recent rapid assessment

indicated that the great majority (>85%) of SFCs do execute their functions as stipulated by the MCU regulations. Those that are performing are invariably being supported by NGOs or the private sector. The SWIOFish project co-management preparation report (Shalli & Anderson, 2013) identified a number of areas that fisheries co-management could be strengthened. 24 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Given the identified issues with the current (pre-project) co-management system and the project’s objective, the co-management component of the SWIOFish project has worked with DFD and District staff, NGOs and communities as represented by the Fisheries Executive Committees to review and modify the current co-management system. Mainland Tanzania The development of Marine Parks and Reserves in mainland Tanzania dates back to the 1960’s when

surveys of marine habitats mainly reefs were conducted and several sites legislated as marine reserves in the mid-1970s. However, no specific management and institutional mechanisms were put in place to effectively manage the reserves apart from allocating the authority to the Department of Fisheries. The principal legislation for MPAs establishment is the Marine Parks and Reserve Act 1994 that was enacted by the Parliament. The Act allows for the establishment two type of MPAs: i. Marine Parks (that are specialized areas with multiple use where various community users and habitation is encouraged through a strict zonation scheme); and ii. Marine Reserves (that are no-take areas for fishing and other extractive activities) but permit tourism, research and educational activities. Until 2021 there are three (3) Marine Parks (namely Mafia Island Marine Park – MIMP in Mafia District, Coast Region, Mnazi Bay Ruvuma Estuary Marine Park – MBREMP in Mtwara Region and Tanga Coelacanth

Marine Park – TACMP in Tanga Region). There are fifteen (15) Marine Reserves that comprise Islands of Shungimbili, Nyororo, Mbarakuni (withing Mafia District), Sinda-Inner, Sinda-Outer, Makatube, Kendwa, Bongoyo, Pangavini, Fungusasini (that form Dar es Salaam Marine Reserves System – DMRS), Maziwe, Mbarakuni, Kirui, Ulenge, Kwale, Mwewe (within Tanga Region). The management authorities for Marine Parks and Reserves include: i. The Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries; ii. The Board of Trustees, Marine Parks and Reserves; iii. The Marine Parks and Reserves Unity, under the Manager; iv. Advisory Committees of individual marine parks; and v. The park management of individual marine parks under Warden In-Charge. Trigger/ Designation MPA Management Proposal Process Management Plan Park Management Team (warden appointed by MPRU) Board of Trustees of the Marine Park and Reserves Unit, MPA Advisory Committee, Village Councils. Individual, Government any other Organization MPRU

(Marine Parks and Reserves Unit) Parliament resolution Figure: MPA designation process in mainland Tanzania. Co-management Tanzania lacks explicit legal provisions for co-management arrangements. Instead, at the local authority level, the Local Government Authorities (LGA) Act governs the declaration-designated by-laws, whereby local authorities may decide on their own initiative or through request from some other entity such as NGOs or individuals, to declare MPAs in their area of jurisdiction. In such cases, the local authority designates and provides for management of such community-based MPAs under the LGA Act. By-laws are prepared to give legal backing to the designation and management of the MPAs These are in turn approved at different levels and become legally binding. Depending on the purpose, these by-laws, provided they don’t override the national legislation, may provide for the licensing mechanisms and fees schedules for fisheries and other resource extractive uses.

Other arrangements that can be addressed under LGAs by-laws include the zoning of marine areas for management purposes (e.g closed reefs) or the roles and responsibilities of villages in managing their 25 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan coastal resource204. The success of the establishment of an MPA largely depends on the rationales behind the designation of these conservation areas. LGAs in Tanzania have substantive formal and informal functions. Institutional and legal framework for Environment and Social Impact management The primary institutional player in Mainland Tanzania with responsibility for environmental matters is the National Environmental Management Council (NEMC). It is responsible for reviewing and approving environmental impact statements for projects, and ensuring compliance with all the countries environmental laws,

regulations and standards. Administration of Zanzibar Environmental Policies and Regulations, including review and approval of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) is handled through Zanzibar Environment Management Authority (ZEMA), an agency affiliated to the Department of Environment, which is attached to the Vice President’s office. Mainland Tanzania identifies certain projects that require an EIA, and others that may or may not require an EIA, while Zanzibar identifies types of projects for which an EIA certificate is or is not required and which types of projects require an EIS. The procedure in Mainland Tanzania with regards to Marine Parks and Reserves involves the following steps: The Marine Parks and Reserves Act, No.29 of 1994 requires that some form of assessment of environmental impact be conducted for all activities within a Marine Park or reserve: EIA requirement for activities within a marine park or reserve Section 13 (3) of the Marine Parks and Reserves Act, No.29

of 1994 states that: “No construction or other activities within the marine park or reserve, including the activities authorised under section 13 shall be undertaken without conducting an assessment of the environmental impact of such activities pursuant to legal, policy or practical requirements or pursuant to the general management plan or regulations under this Act or any general management plan for the area of the marine park or reserve.” The requirement to conduct an EIA for all activities clearly presents a broad challenge. Many activities, particularly subsistence level or small-scale commercial activities by local communities cannot realistically be subjected to detailed, individual impact assessment. Moreover, they are too numerous even to receive individual scrutiny to determine if EIA is required. Many such activities will instead fall under the umbrella of broader land use and will be subsidiary components of general management plans developed for individual marine

parks, and possibly reserves. These subsidiary plans will themselves be subjected to impact assessment, thus extending the provision of impact assessment to all the small activities conducted under the auspices of the subsidiary plan. More substantial commercial projects on the other hand may be considered on an individual basis to determine if they need to be submitted to environmental impact assessment. The process to determine whether a given project must undergo impact assessment (and indeed the level of assessment) is known as screening and the body designated nationally to undertake EIA screening is the National Environment Management Council (NEMC). Therefore, all commercial projects proposed for implementation in marine parks and reserves are required to register with NEMC and undergo the screening process. The screening process and its possible outcomes are described in detail in the NEMC EIA Guidelines. Briefly there are 3 possible outcomes to the NEMC screening process: o

Requirement for full EIA required o Requirement for preliminary assessment required o No EIA requirement Notwithstanding the above process, the final decision as to the kind of impact assessment required for an activity within a marine park or reserve lies with the relevant marine parks & reserves authority. Generally, the marine parks & reserves unit will be guided by NEMC, who will themselves take account of the special nature of the marine park or reserve during the screening. However, in cases (likely to be few) where the NEMC screening process determines that an activity is not required to undertake either a full EIA or a preliminary assessment, and yet the activity cannot be deemed to fall under a subsidiary development plan, the MPA authority will indicate to the Project Proponent what type of impact assessment is required. In such cases the marine parks & reserves authority is likely to demand for a preliminary assessment. In the case of this project, at the time of

writing this provisional ESMP, the ESA consultants hired have submitted documents for NEMC to conduct their screening process and NEMC has not yet given their 26 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan conclusion on the latter. It is plausible that no EIA will be required as the project proposed seeks to conserve and manage natural resources (therefore improving the natural environment) and does not include any substantial construction that would lead to substantial environmental impacts to the 2 islands of TMRs included on the Tanzania mainland sites, nor to areas not covered by gazetted protected areas. However, the process is still ongoing as of March 2022 This ESMP will be amended to reflect the final results once confirmed. These information is available in the Guidelines & Procedures Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines & Procedures

for Undertaking Environmental Impact Assessment in Marine Parks and Reserves in Tanzania (2001, Marine Parks and Reserves Unit) The main steps of EIA procedure in Zanzibar are as follows: • Registration – the proponent is required to register his/her activity by submitting dully filled in EIA application form to the Institutional Responsible for Environment. • Initial Environmental Report - This will be prepared by proponent or consultant to address nature and characteristics of project to facilitate screening process. This report will be prepared as per stipulated guidelines. • Screening – this is the classification stage to determine either EIA is needed or not. • Scoping – if the screening indicates that an EIA is required, scoping will be done to develop Term of Reference to guide the EIA. • Impact Assessment – The preparation of EIA follows after approval of ToR. Impact assessment aims to identify likely impacts, assess and evaluate their severity and magnitude

and proposed mitigation measures to minimise potential negative impacts and enhance positive benefits. An EIA report includes an environmental management plan as well as a monitoring plan that outlines monitoring and management of anticipated impacts, especially those, which affect local communities. Public consultation is mandatory when conducting an EIA and at a minimum the proponent must meet key stakeholders to solicit their views. • Review – Once the proponent has submitted an EIA report (EIS), the Institution Responsible for Environment will call for review of EIS. • Environmental decision-making – The outcome of the review could be “EIS approval, disapproval or request for further information”. In case of acceptance the EIA certificate will be issued with conditions. • Appeals – If there is dissatisfaction of the decision reached, the proponent or licensing institution has the right to appeal to the Minister Responsible for Environment. • Monitoring and

auditing – Monitoring include the verification of impacts, adherence to approve plans, mitigation measures and general compliance of terms and conditions. Environmental audits should be undertaken to provide feedback on the EIA process and effectiveness of the management plan. • Decommissioning – this is end of the project life. The decommissioning report shall be prepared by the proponent at the project phasing period and submitted to the Institution Responsible for Environment It has been indicated by ZEMA that no EIA appear required for the project proposed, as it seeks to conserve and manage natural resources (therefore improving the natural environment) and does not include any substantial construction that would lead to substantial environmental impacts within PECCA. However, the process is still to be completed by the ESA consultants hired This ESMP will be amended to reflect the final results once confirmed. This information is available is the Environmental Impact

Assessment. Guidelines and ProcedureDraft (2009, Department of Environment) 3.2 International requirements The Blue Action Fund requires all of its projects to be compliant with the World Bank Environmental and Social Framework (WB ESF 2017), including the Environmental and Social Standards (ESS) 1-10, the World Bank Group Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines (EHSGs), and the other Standards 27 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan and Guidelines listed in Annex A of the Blue Action Fund ESMS Manual. These Standards are aimed at providing guidance on how to identify risks and impacts, and are designed to help to help avoid, mitigate and manage risks and impacts as a way of doing projects in a sustainable way. To make these Standards relevant and practical for conservation projects, Blue Action Fund has developed safeguarding Principles and

Requirements based on the WB ESF (Annex B of the ESMS Manual), which include: • Principle 1: Environmental and social assessment and risk management • Principle 2: Stakeholder engagement • Principle 3: Health, safety and security of communities and project personnel • Principle 4: Protection, conservation and sustainable management of the environment, biodiversity and natural resources • Principle 5: Livelihoods and access restrictions • Principle 6: Gender equity and vulnerable groups • Principle 7: Cultural heritage • Principle 8: Indigenous Peoples • Principle 9: Grievance management • Principle 10: Human rights Adherence to these Principles and Requirements places an emphasis on ensuring adequate public consultation and disclosure is carried out so that Affected Communities are fully informed about the project and their views and concerns are taken into account. The Blue Action Fund and all of its projects are committed to this. Stakeholder

engagement shall be conducted on the basis of timely, relevant, understandable and accessible information, provided in a culturally appropriate format, as described in the Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) appended to this document. 3.21 Gap analysis Table 7 contains a summary analysis of the gaps between the Blue Action Fund requirements and national legislation. Where there are gaps identified (eg, Blue Action Fund requirements goes beyond national legislation), the proposed strategy to fill it is identified. Table 4: Gap Analysis Blue Action Fund requirements Principle 1: E&S assessment and risk management (relates to WB ESS 1) Principle 2: Stakeholder engagement (relates to WB ESS 10) National Legislative Requirements Zanzibar – General Terms of Reference (TOR) for conducting Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)/Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) in Zanzibar 2021 TZ mainland – Environmental Management Act No. 20 of 2004 TZ mainland – National

Integrated Coastal Environment Management Strategy; Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, Tanzania Coastal Management Partnership, 2003 Gap Strategy None identified Follow BAF Principles and Criteria No specific recommendation or requirement in terms of stakeholder engagement for fisheries and forestry matters Follow BAF Principles and Criteria 28 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Procedural and distributive justice in a communitybased managed of Marine Protected Area in Zanzibar, Tanzania (Guide, 2014) TZ mainland – The EIA and Audit Regulations (2005) (in terms of community institutions to engage) but the EIA and Audit Regulations (2005) is “defining the process of stakeholder engagement when undertaking a project”. The institutional stakeholders are specified in the National Integrated Coastal Environment Management Strategry Principle 3:

Health, safety and security of communities and project personnel (relates to WB ESS 2 and 4) Zanzibar – Policy Guidelines for Occupational Health, Safety and Wellbeing of Workers in the Health System Zanzibar – Health and Safety Plan TZ mainland – The National Health Policy 2017 TZ mainland – National Health Policy (2003) Do not consider particular and regulations measures for community workers Follow BAF Principles and Criteria Do not include specific standards for energy efficiency. Follow BAF Principles and Criteria No particular requirement nor recommendations in national legislation on baseline surveys; cut-off dates and livelihood restoration entitlements. Follow BAF Principles and Criteria TZ mainland – Employment and Labour Relation Act, 2004 Principle 4: Resource efficiency and biodiversity (relates to WB ESS 3 and 6) Zanzibar Forest Policy (1996) TZ mainland – Environmental Management Act No. 20 of 2004 TZ mainland – National Water Policy (2002)

National environmental policy for Zanzibar (1992) Principle 5: Livelihoods and access restrictions (relates to WB ESS 5) TZ mainland – National Poverty Reduction Strategy (2018) Zanzibar – Local Government Act No 7 and 8 of 1982 29 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Principle 6: Gender equity and vulnerable groups (all of the WB ESF) Principle 7: Cultural Heritage (relates to WB ESS 8) TZ mainland – The National Women and Gender Development Policy (2000) TZ mainland – Policy on the protection of children and vulnerable people in Tanzania (Safeguard) TZ mainland – Antiquities Act of 1964 (as amended in 1979) and the Antiquities Rules of 1991 Principle 8: Indigenous Peoples (relates to WB ESS 7) Principle 9: Grievance Management (relates to WB ESS 10) Principle 10: Human Rights (relates to BMZ guidelines on Human Rights) None

identified Follow BAF Principles and Criteria None identified Follow BAF Principles and Criteria N/A Procedural and distributive justice in a communitybased managed of Marine Protected Area in Zanzibar, Tanzania (Guide, 2014) TZ mainland – Grievance Procedure as per the Tanzania Employment and Labour Relations and the Labour Institutions Act of 2004 United Republic of Tanzania; National Human Rights Action Plan (Guide), 2015 No requirement for a grievance management in conservation projects (e.g Marine Protected Areas) Follow BAF Principles and Criteria None identified Follow BAF Principles and Criteria 4 Risk Management Strategy Owing to the provisional nature of this ESMP, the plan will be further updated within the first six months of project implementation in line with an update of the other Safeguard Instruments (e.g, Stakeholder Engagement Plan, Grievance Mechanism, etc.) Further major updates to the ESMP will be made on an annual basis, in parallel with project annual

reporting described in Section 5 below. 30 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 5: Key social and environmental risk and impacts Principles and requirements Principle 1: E&S assessment and risk management (relates to WB ESS 1) Principle 2: Stakeholder engagement (relates to WB ESS 10) Applicable to project? Significance of risk? Main risks and impacts and how they will be addressed, including any Safeguard Instruments ☒ yes The project has identified several potential environmental and social risks and impacts on a high-level (landscape/seascape level). These risks and impacts were related to stakeholder consultation and engagement (considering the quite complex stakeholder environment), the potential for access restrictions and social impacts on coastal communities and other marine and coastal resource users, and the potential for

conflicts in relation to law enforcement in this context. Main social risks identified to date: - concentrating fishing pressures in some areas while developing and implementing management measures in others - disproportionately impacting vulnerable community groups’ livelihoods if they do not meaningfully participate or are not effectively engaged by the project team - rising tensions within and across coastal communities as a result of enforcing area/access restrictions, which could lead to resistance/negative engagement with the project - missing some vulnerable groups or community stakeholders who are challenging to identify and/or engage with (e.g itinerant fishers settling in more remote fishing camps, individuals forming minority groups conducting less visible livelihood activities such as gathering different products in the mangrove or seagrasses) leading to potential exclusion from management planning consultations and disproportionate negative social impacts - lack of

preparation ahead of any new activity/approach resulting in unrealistic expectations of communities/beneficiaries in relation to what the project proposes Main environmental risks identified to date: - Potential for pollutant leaks related to project activities (this is expected to be limited to fuel from boat usage, as the project is not anticipating the use of other polluting fluids) - Minor environmental degradation in relation to some project activities (e.g boat anchoring on sensitive benthic habitats, trampling on corals or seagrasses during in-water biodiversity surveys, introduction of manmade materials during mangrove/coral restorations steps, etc.) ☒ yes Low - Potential for overlaps or conflicting plans with other projects operating/being developed in the Pemba Channel: WCS, TBCA, SAPPHRE (Nairobi Convention Secretariat, IUCN ("Towards a blue future for Tanga-Pemba seascape", USAID (expected upcoming funding facility), and neighbouring areas. This is addressed

by already established communication with each of these project’s contacts, from both FFI and Mwambao-MCCC. - Oil Terminal construction in EACOP project near Tanga city (Chongoleani/Putini): risks that (1) the EACOP livelihood restoration plans and activities (coastal communities near Tanga city) are not aligned with those in the proposed BAF project, and (2) environmental impacts (restricted areas during construction or later operations, or pollutions) prevent/limit EbA activities planned in the project. A dedicated communication with the project promoters (TotalEnergies) is already established, and FFI/Mwambao-MCCC is engaging with the companies and consultant contracted by TotalEnergies to implement their environmental and livelihoods mitigation/restoration programmes. It is expected that some alignment with our project might happen during our project 31 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel,

Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 5: Key social and environmental risk and impacts Principles and requirements Applicable to project? Significance of risk? Main risks and impacts and how they will be addressed, including any Safeguard Instruments - A potential mistrust of the leader of community institutions (SFC, BMU, SCC and VNRC), could lead to noncompliance and collapse of local management, or difficulties building consensus for LMMAs. Regular governance performance assessments will help the project anticipate such risks and address them through facilitating targeted trainings or elections to replace problematic members (as has happened in the past with support from the relevant institutions) - The limited engagement with academic/research institutions to date, in Tanzania mainland in particular, is being addressed by proactive individual contacts and presentations of the project to research institutions (such as TAFIRI, ZAFIRI, UDSM, IMS, SUZA),

initiated during the ESA phase, by the ESMS consultants hired and by Mwambao-MCCC. The Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) drafted in previous phases has been updated and will remain regularly reviewed and completed by the ESMS staff employed in the project. Its implementation will be ensured by these ESMS roles and through training the wider project team’s staff on the ESMS principles and processes. The comprehensive list of stakeholders/beneficiaries will help ensure broad participation in the project activities and avoid overlooking any community groups. Principle 3: Health, safety and security of communities and project personnel (relates to WB ESS 2 and 4) Principle 4: Resource efficiency and biodiversity (relates to WB ESS 3 and 6) ☒ yes ☐ no Low ☒ yes ☐ no Low - Risks associated with boat patrols: safety at sea, confrontation of peoples engaged in illegal activities during controls/arrests will be addressed within H&S measures in project activities for staff and

communities and monitored by project field staff. - H&S risks during in-water and mangrove monitoring: snorkelling and dive surveys of coral reefs and seagrass beds, mangrove (safety measures related to working in natural environment: e.g diving and snorkelling safety procedures, some poisonous species, impact of long hours working under heat/sun, etc.) will be addressed within H&S measures in project activities for staff and communities and by providing adequate equipment. - There is potential for unfair/unbalanced reward/compensation of field activities, related to HR policy for project’s and contractors’ personnel or to fieldwork allowances for community members involved. This will be mitigated by regularly reviewing the compensations (including rates for fieldwork allowances) internally. - Risks related to general transports: safety at sea (when movement on boats), domestic flights (safety record of companies operating small airplanes between Unguja, Pemba and Tanga),

ferries (some incidents of capsizing occurred in the past), use of collective road transport and taxis, will be avoided by informed use of transportation means (e.g selection of trustworthy companies and vehicles, regular maintenance of project vehicles, monitoring of weather forecast) - The infections risks related to Covid and other transmissible diseases will be addressed by following national and international guidelines. As per the risk significance scoring, these risks do not require the development of a specific safeguard instrument. - Potential risk of minor and localised environmental physical damage/degradation as a result of or induced by project activities: e.g increased coral reef/seagrass meadows trampling during opening days gleaning activities (temporary closures for octopus), unregulated/uncontrolled collection of mangrove propagules for mangrove restoration activities, damage on corals and seagrasses due to patrol or monitoring vessel anchoring, etc. 32

Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 5: Key social and environmental risk and impacts Principles and requirements Principle 5: Livelihoods and access restrictions (relates to WB ESS 5) Applicable to project? Significance of risk? ☒ yes ☐ no Moderate Main risks and impacts and how they will be addressed, including any Safeguard Instruments - Leakage of fuel or other similar liquid pollutant at sea during use of outboard engines (patrols, monitoring activities, other project transports) - Potential risk of enabling/facilitating activities/fishing practices that would increase destruction on natural habitat or significantly lead to increased pressure on natural resources (e.g purchase of more fishing nets, fishing with beach seines, spear guns), which will be mitigated by ensuring clear and monitored conditions to access microloans from the

“MKUBA” eco-credit scheme. - No risk of introduction of Invasive alien species related to the project has been identified: restoration activities will use local material (e.g locally collected mangrove propagules, products from nurseries using local species only) that do not carry any biological risk for the environment. As per the risk significance scoring, these risks do not require the development of a specific safeguard instrument. The project will not involve physically displacing peoples or communities. - Risk of disproportionate loss of, or decrease in means of livelihoods due to new or newly enforced restrictions of access to fishing grounds or mangrove areas (e.g temporary or permanent closure of fishing grounds, ban of some fishing practices or some forms of mangrove exploitation, etc.) This risk will be mitigated by ongoing and transparent engagement with community groups (via their representatives in community institutions but also proactive internal communications and

broad outreach within each community) during the bylaws and local management targets’ definition phases. This will ensure social acceptability of the measures designed through taking into account the values and uses of different community groups and individuals (taking account of gender, age, wealth class, livelihood type etc.) - The risk of increased and/or displacement of fishing pressure to the neighbouring areas (i.e outside of areas targeted by access restrictions) and of resource use (fisheries, ecosystems) remaining out of targeted management will be addressed through conducting participatory resource mapping to anticipate impact areas of potential displacement for exploitation efforts, by consultation with neighbouring communities which could be impacted by access restrictions in project communities, and by working with groups of neighbouring communities to design integrated management planning in wider areas (as opposed to just community by community) to manage these

displacement risks. - The potential for inappropriate community-led management measures (e.g temporary closures too short to be effective, targeted on inadequate areas, etc.) leading to limited positive impacts on livelihoods contrary to the ambitions set, will be limited by applying science-based ecosystem management expertise from the project partners and informed by baseline data collected at inception and past experience on sites. Some maxima of local closures will be advised to avoid having community institutions overestimating their capacity to manage too large parts of their ecosystems/fishing grounds, and to avoid and minimse the risks of unsupportive community populations. - The ongoing participation of and communication with diverse user groups facilitated by the project teams will mitigate the risk of increased tensions/polarisation about management choices in and across the targeted communities. - The lack of accessible sustainable livelihood options (to compensate for the

loss of access to some natural resources as a result of local management choices) will be reduced through the livelihoods support approaches 33 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 5: Key social and environmental risk and impacts Principles and requirements Applicable to project? Significance of risk? Main risks and impacts and how they will be addressed, including any Safeguard Instruments promoted by the project (e.g coastal value chains improvements, “MKUBA” eco-credit facility proposed, support to entrepreneurs with a strong emphasis on women) Each of these listed risks will be addressed by the implementation of the Process Framework developed by the project describing the processes that will be followed for key activities and approaches to be used in the project. ☒ yes ☐ no Moderate - There is a potential for disproportionate

adverse impacts on women and marginalised groups as a result of the new resource access restrictions agreed (e.g LMMAs, by-laws on specific activities and practices) or newly enforced restrictions. - Women are not prevented from holding leadership positions in community institutions, but face barriers to participation as a result of gender norms regarding gender roles and responsibilities which can result in women having limited confidence to engage in community decision-making processes. - Potential for women and other marginalised groups (e.g itinerant fishers, poor or young people) to be excluded from engagement in design, implementation of, and benefits from the LMMAs and other management measures, and from project activities and benefits more broadly). Several aspects will contribute to mitigate gender-related risks: Gender assessment/analysis and action planning (in Y1), a set of planned activities throughout the project (including systematically collecting sex-disaggregated

data, targeted consultations/engagement, training sessions and dedicated activities to facilitate improved roles for women in economic and natural resource management decision-making). The project will follow FFI’s Position on Gender in Conservation and best practice guidelines regarding gender mainstreaming, which has contributed to define BlueAction’s gender action plan. Regarding other vulnerable groups, dedicated consultations/engagement will be conducted with vulnerable groups already identified during the project design stage (e.g beach seine fishers, itinerant fishers, foot fishers, mangrove harvesters, etc.), as well as further vulnerable groups identified during the project inception/baseline assessment stage, and throughout the implementation stage of the project. Principle 7: Cultural Heritage (relates to WB ESS 8) ☒ yes ☐ no Low - Some sites of historical and religious/spiritual importance exist on the West coast of Pemba Island and some parts of the Tanga region

coast, but the project is not planning to have any impact on those: neither physical damage, restricting access, nor promoting the development and use of economic activities from or on these. - There is a limited potential for EbA measures to affect natural areas of cultural importance and for some project approaches (e.g sustainable livelihood projects, performance-based payments, access to eco-credit) to have an impact on community traditions, community dynamics, values and norms. As per the risk significance scoring, these risks do not require the development of a specific safeguard instrument. The project will rely on extensive communication and cross-checks across the different individuals engaged in project activities (communities supported and trained, local staff who are very familiar with the areas of cultural importance and local traditions, to avoid any of the above risks from happening. Principle 8: Indigenous Peoples (relates to WB ESS 7) ☐ yes ☒ no Not applicable.

The project does not consider that the coastal communities in Tanga-Mkinga, Tanzania mainland and Pemba Island (Swahili people) meet the international definition of Indigenous Peoples, nor historically underserved people. Principle 6: Gender equity and vulnerable groups (all of the WB ESF) 34 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 5: Key social and environmental risk and impacts Principles and requirements Applicable to project? Significance of risk? Principle 9: Grievance Management (relates to WB ESS 10) ☒ yes ☐ no Moderate Principle 10: Human Rights (relates to BMZ guidelines on Human Rights) ☒ yes ☐ no Low Others: Climate change impacts Legacy issues Moderate Main risks and impacts and how they will be addressed, including any Safeguard Instruments However, the Project will be designed, implemented and monitored through a

transparent process that follows international best practice of Informed Consent and Participation (ICP). - No particular past grievances related to past project activities have been identified (e.g on establishing LMMAs, by-laws, on livelihood diversification approaches, etc.) - Conflicts on fishing grounds and between different communities or practices exist but do not result from the establishment nor implementation of MPAs (PECCA and TMRs) in project sites, as this implementation and related enforcement from government authorities has remained very limited. As detailed elsewhere in this table, ongoing communication will be held with and between different communities in order to identify any potential risks of conflicts about fishing grounds or other resource use/access as a result of management planning (e.g closure, by-laws etc.) - As zoning for new LMMAs is replicated and scaled-up by the project, and enforcement takes place, there is a risk to increase conflicts and grievances

within and across communities. - Some PAPs might disagree with the targeted beneficiaries of the project activities. These risks will be addressed through the use of a culturally appropriate and accessible Grievance Mechanism developed by the project, and timely responses will be provided by the project team to ensure that any grievances will be addressed/managed/mitigated immediately. - No cases of human rights abuses have been identified as a result of past project activities related to coastal resource management in the project areas. - Disproportionate punishments (penalties), and physical and psychological abuse to violators could happen from police forces, and possibly even community-led enforcement in the absence of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), fair enforcement practices trainings (including respect and commitment to human rights), clear protocols and agreements of support with enforcement authorities. However, none of the above has happened to date in relation to the

past project activities of FFI and Mwambao-MCCC, and the proposed project will further strengthen the existing SOPs, conduct further enforcement best practice trainings, and ensure clear enforcement protocols with the enforcement authorities are planned ahead of project activities. As per the risk significance scoring, these risks do not require the development of a specific safeguard instrument. - Climate change-related risks and impacts in the project area include: storms, in particular during the rainy season, which can make access to Pemba Island (from mainland or Unguja) more complicated and delayed for multiple days. Farming can suffer from erratic rainfalls and lead to increased reliance on fishing, leading to intermittent increases in resource pressure. However, the project isn’t in a cyclone-prone zone - Historical local political tensions and sensitivities within and between several neighbouring communities (e.g Kwale Village in Mkinga, Monga Vyeru villages in Tanga, and

between Kisiwa Panza and neighbouring Shehia (wards) in PECCA), can in some cases result in difficulties with collaboration on project activities. However, FFI and Mwambao-MCCC have experience with addressing and resolving the limited instances in which this has occurred during previous project activities. 35 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 6: Risk and impact management measures Social and environmental risks and impacts11 Management measures12 Risks from failing to identify/assess the E&S risks and impacts of the project - Regular re-screening of risks and impacts using the BAF E&S tool [ESMS function] Principle 1 - Climate Vulnerability Assessments (CVA) at community-level - Project socioeconomic baseline - Monitoring and Evaluation of the project ESMP; [ESMS function] - General implementation of the M&E plan - Maintain

regular "horizon scanning" on the other projects implemented or being designed in the seascape Feasibility, effectiveness and sustainability13 - Overseen by the ESMS roles - Will be feasible and conducted in Y1 using proven methodologies √ Location - Project - Village-level - Feasible, effective, scheduled in the project and pre-existing experience of the project team - Household level - overseen by the ESMS roles - Landscape/ region - Feasible, effective, scheduled in the project and pre-existing experience of the project team - Project - Project Principle 3 - H&S measures written and provision of equipment for project and contractor’s staff and community members for different activities - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project. - ESMS roles’ time Implementatio n responsibility FFI and MwambaoMCCC - Baseline collection budget for CVA and socio-economic surveys (including

community allowances) Schedule - Annual - Y1 - Inception phase (first six months of the project) - Ongoing - Ongoing - Ongoing - Climate-Change specialist time - Steering group meetings budget (e.g venue, travel, subsistence, etc.) - Ongoing tasks shared between project partners and facilitated by semesterly Steering group meetings. Risks of Health, safety and security of communities and project personnel. Costs - Project areas - Project areas - Project areas - Time for ESMS roles and inclusion into activities FFI and MwambaoMCCC - Project areas - Project areas - Project areas 11 Each row has a different social and environmental risks and impact (e.g, one row includes potential social impacts due to access restrictions from no-take zones, while another row could include risks to project staff due to boat operations in hazardous conditions. If management measures are not to be included in a stand-alone plan (eg a Process Framework), the management measures need to be

described in this table. If a stand-alone plan is to be used, this can simply be referred to 12 Management measures should be conceptualised as project activities: this needs to be specified and cross referenced to the Logframe (e.g “see Activity 123”) to ensure that the Project has included and budgeted these activities. 13 The ESMP must confirm that proposed management measures are feasible, that they are effective in providing management/ mitigation for all affected groups and that they are sustainable. In cases where this is not the case (e.g when a management measure is being trialled), this should be noted 36 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 6: Risk and impact management measures Social and environmental risks and impacts11 Management measures12 - Assessing correct compensation balance for loss of time/daily income participating

into project activities. - Transportation means safety check - Covid and international travel health & hygiene: monitoring and complying with national/int’l recommendations. - SOPs, code of conduct and associated trainings for joint-patrols involving the authorities in each site, emphasising accountability, integrity, graduated sanction, transparency, confidentiality, honesty, respect, loyalty, leadership, and safety. Risks of Resource efficiency and biodiversity. Principle 4. - Elaboration of "environmental best practice guidelines" to use for project activities, including safe handling of boat fuel, of anchors dropping (not on corals, nor on seagrass) - Environmental good practices are integrated within Eco-credit/Mkuba "eco-compliance" requirements, for use by Mkuba group members Risks of Livelihoods and access restrictions. Feasibility, effectiveness and sustainability13 Proven experience from project partners - Feasible, effective, to be applied

during the project. Proven experience from project partners Location Costs - Project areas, national and international Implementatio n responsibility Schedule Implementation by all partners and contractors - Project areas, national and international FFI and Mwambao MCCC - Inception phase (first six months) - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project. Proven experience from project partners - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project. - Feasible, effective, to be applied during and beyond the project. Proven experience from project partners - Ecological/fisheries monitoring to measure impact of LMMAs established on surrounding areas and inside the LMMAs to inform measures and control adverse impacts - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with potential for continuation after as well (communities trained, equipment handed over). Proven experience from project partners - Transparent engagement within communities (e.g between

BMUVNRC/SFC-SCC leaders and the - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of - Project areas - Project areas at village-level with potential for wider replication where other eco-credit funds are in place - ESMS roles’ time (development of formal guidance and trainings, implementation of trainings) Mkuba group members - Project areas, at village-level - Training costs including practice (during field surveys, patrols) PECCA/TMRs rangers along with community rangers during (joint-) patrols - At community level (village, Shehia) and - Project team time, community fieldwork training, PECCA and Tanga-Mkinga community - Ongoing once eco-credit group (monitoring quarterly or semesterly) - Regular (annual for community-led surveys) - At community level (village, Shehia) and 37 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social

Management Plan Table 6: Risk and impact management measures Social and environmental risks and impacts11 Principle 5. Management measures12 community groups they represent) and across communities (incl. via CFMA and CMG networks) to ensure fair consultation and accountability of these community institutions - Involving diverse community groups (accounting for age, gender, wealth class, livelihood type, etc.) into the participatory design of local management measures (LMMAs) ensuring broad social acceptability and equitable distribution of impact - Internal (intra-community) and external (in neighbouring communities and relevant authorities) communications to disseminate info regarding by-laws and related sanctions - Include participatory design and safeguards principles into training modules developed for authorities, as/when they would engage in replicating the project’s communitycentred approach - Managing the feasibility (expected outcomes) of LMMAs per habitat types (coral

reefs, mangroves, seagrasses) and diverse use areas - Suggested best practice models for equitable and socially acceptable benefit sharing mechanisms (e.g based on existing examples from ongoing/past project activities) Feasibility, effectiveness and sustainability13 project partners and strong potential for continuation after the end of the project (mechanisms in place) - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners and strong potential for continuation after the end of the project (mechanisms in place) - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with strong potential for continuation after the end of the project (mechanisms in place) - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project, will be included in comanagement mechanisms developed (SOPs, etc.) - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners and strong potential for continuation after the end of the project

(mechanisms in place) - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners and strong potential for continuation Location Costs collaborative level (CFMA, CMG) consultation, regular mentoring; Liaising with authorities, regular jointpatrols, community communications. - At community level (village, Shehia) - At community level (village, Shehia), at collaboratiVe level (CFMA, CMG) and sitelevel (PECCA and TangaMkinga) - At community level (village, Shehia) and collaborative level (CFMA, CMG) - At community level (village, Shehia) and collaborative level (CFMA, CMG) - At community level (village, Shehia) and collaborative level (CFMA, CMG) Implementatio n responsibility institutions (respectively BMU/VNRC and SFCC/SCC at community level and CFMA/CMG at collaborative level), with mentoring from project team FFI and Mwambao MCCC Local authorities for fourth point (at least district level) and enforcement authorities (PECCA and TMRs

rangers) Schedule collaborative level (CFMA, CMG) - At community level (village, Shehia) - At community level (village, Shehia), at collaborative level (CFMA, CMG) and site-level (PECCA and TangaMkinga) - At community level (village, Shehia) and collaborative level (CFMA, CMG) - At community level (village, Shehia) and collaborative level (CFMA, CMG) - At community level (village, Shehia) and collaborative level (CFMA, CMG) 38 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 6: Risk and impact management measures Social and environmental risks and impacts11 Risks related to Cultural heritage. Principle 7. Management measures12 Feasibility, effectiveness and sustainability13 - When new local management actions (LMMAs or the equivalent for mangroves) are decided, i.e either at community- (with SFC/SCC or BMU/VNRC) or join-community-level (with CMG or

CFMA), the project team will consider and estimate those in the communities targeted in neighbouring resource users who will be most negatively impacted by the agreed action. The way they will be impacted will be described and the nature and, where possible, some quantification of the losses (e.g in terms of % of their income or equivalent) will be estimated. Some form of prioritisation to benefit from other project's livelihoods supporting activities (e.g joining Mkuba groups, benefitting from tailored support to diversify their sources of income, etc.) will then be agreed between the project team and the relevant community institution, to provide some form of compensation. after the end of the project (mechanisms in place) - Consultation of Sheha/village chief, of elders, of imam or other respected/influential people in the community, to ensure appropriate approaches that take account of, respect, and integrate cultural and religious beliefs and practices Feasible, effective,

to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners and strong potential for continuation after the end of the project (where mechanisms are in place and will be continued) √ - Discussions within the team members (which includes an expert on Islamic Environmental Ethics), who are from the area, to ensure approaches are Location Costs At community level (village, Shehia) and collaborative level (CFMA, CMG) and wider project area Project team time (sufficient time for considerate design of new activities/approac hes to allow for comments/input regarding cultural appropriateness) Implementatio n responsibility FFI and Mwambao MCCC Schedule Inception period and throughout the project's implementation 39 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 6: Risk and impact management measures Social and environmental risks

and impacts11 Management measures12 Feasibility, effectiveness and sustainability13 Location Costs Implementatio n responsibility At community level (village, Shehia) and collaborative level (CFMA, CMG) and wider project area Time of the project team (development of SOPs and training, mentoring of community representatives). and of ESMS roles and operational costs. FFI and Mwambao MCCC, community institutions and local authorities (in particular for enforcement support such as joint-patrols) Schedule appropriate to the socio-cultural context. Risks related to abused/violation of Human rights. Principle 10 - SEP and Process Framework continually implemented, reviewed, updated and monitored to ensure that resource use access rights are maintained wherever feasible (e.g accessing and using resources for livelihoods, subsistence, shelter etc.), and appropriate mitigation measures are implemented when unavoidable. See Principle 5 for more details. - Project activities to be

iteratively developed through participatory design process with SFC and local communities. This will ensure procedural rights are maintained and avoid discrimination of specific groups (e.g through ensuring that the rights, values, perspectives, concerns, and interests of diverse stakeholder groups are reflected in project activities). See Stakeholder Engagement and disclosure for more details. - SOPs, code of conduct and associated trainings for SFC community patrollers to be developed/enhanced through the project, emphasising accountability, integrity, transparency, confidentiality, honesty, respect, loyalty, leadership, and safety. - Implementation of ESMS safeguard instruments - As planned for the project implementation therefore feasible and effective (with dedicated budget for implementation and monitoring and dedicated roles in FFI and MwambaoMCCC) Inception period and throughout the project's duration - SFC SOPs have already been developed and tested with PECCA

communities and approved by PECCA authorities (DFD under MBEF) during World Bank's SWIOFish programme. Having led their initial development, FFI and Mwambao-MCCC have the experience of developing similar ones for SCC (PECCA), and BMU/VNRC if none are existing yet. FFI and Mwambao-MCCC have the experience to also train community representatives on using and implementing those, for best practice guidance. These SOPs have been developed to become the reference point for 40 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 6: Risk and impact management measures Social and environmental risks and impacts11 Management measures12 Feasibility, effectiveness and sustainability13 Location Costs - At individual beneficiary level, at Mkuba group level, at community level and value chain level Time of the project team for 1 and 2, of Greenfi facilitator for

2, and of ESMS roles and operational costs for both 1 and 2. Implementatio n responsibility Schedule community institution operations and governance, therefore for sustainable use beyond the BlueAction project's end. Additional risks related to Climate change and to Legacy issues from the project area. - Climate Change – MKUBA and valueimprovement’s livelihood development activities will need to be climate smart and compatible with the findings from the climate vulnerability assessment's results - Climate Change – Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners, included in project activities - Legacy – the project team will dedicate extra attention in the preparation of consultations involving neighbouring communities where history of tensions exists. For instance, with participatory mapping of uses for natural resources, and involving and gathering community leaders in discussions. Specific engagement will be

had with these neighbours when new by-laws are implemented and put into force. - Legacy (both management measures listed to the left) – Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners - At community and collaborative levels, at sitelevel when engaging authorities (e.g PECCA or TMRs staff) FFI and Mwambao MCCC, community institutions and local authorities (in particular for enforcement support such as joint-patrols), leaders of ecocredit groups Throughout the project's duration and at inception of new eco-credit groups (and regular refresher trainings) - Legacy – Issues related to illegal fishing activities (e.g scuba fishing, beach seines, blast fishing) impacting neighbouring communities' relations will require specific addressing through communication with the relevant level of authorities. ESMS Provisions 41 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in

Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 6: Risk and impact management measures Social and environmental risks and impacts11 Stakeholder engagement and disclosure Management measures12 - Ongoing development and refinement of project activities through participatory design and implementation - In-depth and broad consultation of different stakeholder groups within the community before defining by-laws. Provision of enough time and a suitable environment to let community members freely express their aspirations and worries related to potential project impacts such as access restrictions. - Involvement of all community groups in the free and democratic election of SFC/BMU leaders - Semesterly convened project Steering Group meetings to keep relevant actors updated about progress, and adapting activities if needed - Participatory M&E (catch landing recording; in-water biodiversity surveys; socio-economic/wellbeing, governance, and management

effectiveness assessments), including participatory analysis/feedback/presentation of data gathered at all levels - Ethical practices applied when collecting socio-economic data (e.g anonymisation/confidentiality, informed consent, secure storage of data etc. in accordance with FFI's Socio-economic Research Ethics Principles) - Ensuring protection/inclusion of vulnerable people, ensuring equity, Feasibility, effectiveness and sustainability13 Location Costs - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners - At project level and community/colla borative level - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners - At community and collaborative levels - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners facilitating local authorities’ process - At community level Specific activities budget (e.g trainings, facilitation of

LMMAs/by-laws design, community-led surveys, etc.), including Community fieldwork (e.g allowances, meetings costs transport, etc.) Meeting costs and transport for some attendees for project steering group meetings Staff time, potential conference attendance budget - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners - At project sites level (one steering group for PECCA, one for TangaMkinga) - At community level, local and sites authority’s level, national and regional level (Nairobi Convention or WIOMSA networks feedback from the project) Implementatio n responsibility FFI and Mwambao MCCC for all except no. 3) for which the responsibility to

organise the elections is with the authorities (the project teams can facilitate some steps and promote good practice subject to agreements with authorities) Some occasional specific activities will be conducted by CORDIO, UNEP-WCMC or consultants, but the responsibility rests with FFI and MwambaoMCCC Schedule - Ongoing after inception - Ongoing after inception - At community institutions’ elections times (very occasional, in accordance with local authorities) - Semesterly of inception phase - Ongoing (usually annually or less frequent, depending on surveys) - Ongoing - Ongoing - Ongoing and at specific occasions/events (e.g WIOMSA symposium or other conferences) - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project 42 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 6: Risk and impact management measures Social and environmental risks and

impacts11 Management measures12 role/inclusion/ respect for local and traditional ecological knowledge (TEK). Careful management of questions around ownership of data, IP rights through the application of informed consent at multiple stages, using clear and simple language. Feasibility, effectiveness and sustainability13 Location Costs At community level, local and sites authority’s level Project team time, community fieldwork training, consultation, regular mentoring; budget and time for group-specific meetings (e.g women meetings, itinerant fishers’ meetings at their distinct fishing camps, foot fishers meetings, etc.) Implementatio n responsibility Schedule with proven experience of project partners - Maintain regular contacts with other projects and government processes in relation to this project's activities (e.g Dept. of Fisheries, TFS, WCS, Blue Ventures, etc.) to anticipate possible overlaps and seek synergies to avoid creating confusion Gender

mainstreaming - Several project activities are planned to ensure improved and good gender engagement following BAF's Gender Action Plan, including for instance: gender assessment & analysis (to delve into the specific structural constraints faced by women), women-targeted trainings for technical and leadership capacity building, women entrepreneurs support and mentoring, and fisherwomen peer-learning network. The project consortium will build on the experience gained in the last 7 years of working together to implement these activities. The risks management measures listed here will therefore be feasible and effective. - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project with proven experience of project partners FFI and Mwambao MCCC Community institutions (SFC, BMU, SCC, VNRC, CMG, CFMA) Throughout all project life, from inception and ongoing through all community-led

management stages, as well as co-management. With particular attention/emphasis at the beginning of new community engagement (e.g first LMMA zoning, first by-law design) - Attention will be put on community participatory design processes (e.g zoning of LMMAs, by-laws definition, 43 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan Table 6: Risk and impact management measures Social and environmental risks and impacts11 Management measures12 Feasibility, effectiveness and sustainability13 Location Costs - Project level and community/colla borative level Time of the project team, including development and dissemination of the Grievance Mechanism and addressing grievances should they arise. Implementatio n responsibility Schedule eco-credit groups constitution) to ensure all vulnerable groups (including gender, but also different age groups, resource user

groups, itinerant fishers and wealth groups) will be engaged, given a voice and their priorities included, notably into decision-making positions (e.g SFC/BMU, CMG/CFMA) Grievance mechanism - Grievance mechanism developed in collaboration with project affected peoples to ensure it is practical and suited to local context (e.g culture, language, accessibility) - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project - Regular/ongoing communication towards project affected people about access, use and right to Grievance Mechanism. - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project - Ongoing SEP, MEL informing engagement to avoid and mitigate grievances before they arise. - A culture of trust and respect is built between the project implementation teams and the project stakeholders to foster a relationship of transparency and inclusivity which can help address concerns and issues before they become grievances - Feasible, effective, to be applied during the project - Feasible,

effective, to be applied during the project, with proven past experience of project teams √ - Project level and community/colla borative level - Project level and community/colla borative level FFI and Mwambao MCCC, with messages relayed by community institutions where possible Inception period and throughout the project's duration - At all levels of the project 44 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan 5 ESMP Monitoring and Supervision 5.1 Organisational structure FFI & Mwambao-MCCC’s organisational structure for the Project during implementation is presented in Figure 3 below, including all implementing partners and collaborating partners. At this stage of project design and development, the organisational structure and organogram are still preliminary in nature. They will be updated and finalised during the first six months of

project implementation. Furthermore, this section will continually be updated as changes to the organisational structure are made. Figure 3: Organisational structure of the project 5.2 Roles and responsibilities FFI will manage the implementation of the Blue Action Fund ESMS, Project ESMP and associated Safeguard Instruments throughout the project. In addition, FFI will have direct responsibility for the implementation of all management measures and mitigation activities aimed at reducing the negative impacts of the project to acceptable levels and enhancing any positive impacts. FFI will be responsible for the monitoring programmes required to verify that the management measures are achieving their expected results. The programme will be implemented by FFI in partnership with Mwambao, with FFI’s Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning team supporting the Monitoring and Evaluation Officers to be recruited by Mwambao. FFI will be responsible for conducting public consultation

activities necessary to support the implementation of any Safeguard Instruments and to disclose relevant project information16 to different stakeholders. Finally, FFI will work closely with the Tanzania and Zanzibar governments and third-party organisations to initiate necessary capacity building and community development actions. Mwambao Coastal Community Network (Mwambao) will serve as lead implementer for most field activities in PECCA and the Tanga-Mkinga coast. They will take the lead on stakeholder engagement 45 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan and oversee the planning and delivery of support to community institutions, district-level coordination platforms, and community-based monitors; support the establishment and mentoring of community patrols; facilitate information-sharing and collaboration across communities, community groups, and

relevant authorities; oversee community-led management of eco-credit groups; and lead outreach. Mwambao’s sister organisation, Marine and Coastal Community Conservation Ltd (MCCC) will offer support in the implementation of this project. Mwambao will also facilitate implementation of activities by FFI and other project partners where another organisation takes a thematic or technical lead. Responsibility for the implementation of the ESMP, Safeguard Instruments and Blue Action Fund’s ESMS falls under FFI. A technical specialist (FFI) is being recruited for this role to work with the ESMS Officer (Mwambao-MCCC) based in Zanzibar. These roles will work alongside existing FFI staff who work on social equity, governance and safeguards. 5.3 Training and awareness FFI is developing trainings with Mwambao-MCCC’s input, capacity building and awareness programme for all employees and contractors on how to implement the Blue Action Fund ESMS, project ESMP and other Safeguard Instruments

appended to this ESMP. We expect all staff involved in the project will attend a similar training tailor to the context of both Tanzania mainland and Zanzibar, this may be an in-person training or an on-line training over multiple weeks (in case of Covid-19 restrictions limiting gatherings), depending on the situation when the project begins. The topics will include conceptual modelling of the project, stakeholder identification, assessment (including distinction between rightsholders and duty bearers) and engagement, facilitation training, application of Informed Consent, Grievance Mechanism, public notices and record keeping system, and access restriction mitigations even for community-led decisions. We expect such training will provide capacity building among staff to take responsibility on ESMS obligations, will clarify stakeholder lists and terms of engagement, and finalize processes for Informed Consent (recognizing that FFI and Mwambao-MCCC are using Consent processes with all

communities), Grievance Redress Mechanisms, and Access Restrictions Mitigations. In addition, all new employees and contractors will attend a compulsory induction session that will include health and safety, environmental and community awareness, among other topics. Written (newsletter/ posters) and verbal (as part of routine briefings) communication methods will also be used to raise awareness on a range of occupational and community health, safety and security issues. As warranted, the team will receive additional training and support on topics salient to the project goals, objectives and those of the project partners. 5.4 Monitoring, evaluation and reporting To determine the effectiveness of the ESMP and to ensure that the management measures contained therein are being implemented, internal and external monitoring and evaluation exercises will be carried out. Internal evaluations will be carried out by FFI on an annual basis and will be based on the Table 6 template. This table

will be completed in conjunction with the project team, including staff mainly from FFI and Mwambao-MCCC, but also more occasionally from CORDIO. ESMS reporting will be done as part of the Annual Reporting. The Annual Report Template contains a section specifically for this purpose. For each management measure, it will be signalled whether implementation is on schedule (or ahead of schedule or completed), slightly delayed or delayed - using the suggested colour coding. Where delays are encountered, the reasons will be explained, and solutions suggested. Aside from progress, the effectiveness of the management measures will also be monitored and reported in Table 6. The Table 6 template can also be used for external evaluations of the ESMP. Annual monitoring will help identify any additional environmental or social risks that may have emerged since the Project started and help establish appropriate mitigation measures for any significant new risks. FFI will add these additional risks

and their mitigating measures to the ESMP (Tables 4 and 5) and will report on them as part of future annual monitoring (Table 6). 46 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan FFI will use observations and stakeholder consultations (in particular with PAPs) in order to judge the measures’ effectiveness. They will also seek synergies with the Project’s monitoring and evaluation (M&E) plan which might include indicators that can be used for judging the effectiveness of management measures (e.g, livelihood indicators of PAPs) 5.5 Change management The ESMP will be routinely updated as the project progresses, including an annual review of progress and reporting to Blue Action Fund. In the case of any unforeseen circumstances or planned changes to the scope, design, implementation or operation of the project that are likely to cause an adverse change

in the environmental or social risks or impacts of the project, the ESMP will be put under immediate review. This can include in the case of changes in project partners, activities, scope and context. The review and process will include the following steps: • • • • • • • Project M&E / ESMS Manager relay changes to FFI’s ESMS coordinator (to be recruited and be based in FFI’s HQ, in UK) and/or Project Lead (“Programme manager” in the organisational structure in 5.1) ESMS coordinator reviews possible implications of the changes, including consulting with internal staff and what they are learning from Project Affected People and any other relevant stakeholders; FFI will conduct any necessary additional E&S assessment(s) and stakeholder engagement and update on the risk management strategy above; Update/ changes to any other relevant Safeguard Instruments associated with this ESMP; Project Team and ESMS coordinator conduct an internal review and approval; FFI

submits modified changed to Blue Action Fund for approval; Upon approval, disclose, implement and monitor the revised ESMP. 47 Increasing socio-ecological resilience through community-led management of key coastal ecosystems in Pemba Channel, Tanzania – Environmental and Social Management Plan List of ANNEXES • Stakeholder Engagement Plan • Grievance Mechanism • Process Framework 48