Catalog

	Table of Contents
p. 23 of 79 BACK | NEXT Foreword Abbreviations Glossary 1. Introduction 2. The Resettlement Plan in the Project Cycle 3. Resettlement: Key Planning Concepts 3.1 Avoiding or Minimizing Resettlement 3.2 Policy Framework 3.3 Developing a Resettlement Policy 3.4 Defining Entitlement and Eligibility 3.5 Resettlement Planning for Vulnerable Groups 3.6 The Entitlement Matrix 3.7 Resettlement Budget and Financing 3.8 Land Acquisition and Resettlement Time Line 3.9 Checklist: Key Planning Concepts 4. Consultation and Participation 5. Socioeconomic Information 6. Relocation 7. Income Restoration 8. Institutional Framework 9. Monitoring and Evaluation Selected Reading List Appendix 1: The Bank's Policy on Involuntary Resettlement Appendix 2: Sample Terms of Reference for Full Resettlement Plan Appendix 3: Resettlement Policies in Selected DMCs Appendix 4: Resettlement Monitoring: Sample Formats for Monthly Progress Reports

Handbook on Resettlement: A Guide to Good Practice : 3. Resettlement: Key Planning Concepts

---

3.5. Resettlement Planning for Vulnerable Groups

Bank policy specifies that vulnerable groups merit special attention in planning and implementing resettlement, and that resettlement represents an opportunity to help them improve their status. Vulnerable groups are those likely to be particularly disadvantaged as a consequence of resettlement. The policy defines as vulnerable groups the poorest, those without legal title to assets, households headed by women, indigenous peoples, ethnic minorities, and pastoralists. There may be other groups, such as isolated communities, the disabled or those unable to work, or those left behind when the majority of their community becomes eligible for relocation. Bank policy specifies that, where "adversely affected people are particularly vulnerable, resettlement and compensation decisions should be preceded by a social preparation phase to build up the capacity of the vulnerable people to deal with the issues".

Recognizing customary and common rights to assets and resources is important for compensating indigenous peoples. Similarly, recognizing the ownership or use rights of women is important in calculating compensation. Preparation of measures to restore livelihoods and living standards requires careful assessment of social and economic practices, and close consultation with indigenous or otherwise vulnerable groups. This is especially so where their social organization, settlement and resource use patterns, subsistence activities, cultural beliefs and practices, or patterns of economic behavior differ from the mainstream. Bank policy specifies that existing social and cultural institutions of those affected should be supported. Women's economically productive activities, especially those which are non-waged, must be calculated in household income assessments. Where assets are owned or controlled by women, then women should receive compensation or rehabilitation. These issues reinforce the need for sensitive survey and census work, and of close consultation with all categories of people affected.

Customary Land Users without Formal Title
Bank policy specifically mentions "indigenous groups, ethnic minorities and pastoralists who may have usufruct or customary rights to the land and other resources taken for the project". Moreover, "the absence of formal legal title to land by some affected groups should not be a bar to compensation". Some communities, often of indigenous peoples, have ancestral customary rights to regulate collective common property. Many such households depend on open access to common grazing lands, fishing areas, or forest resources for subsistence and cash incomes. The survey and census work will take full account of these patterns of resource use, including the systems of land use and land transfer that operate under customary law and usufruct. The project may provide an opportunity to regularize traditional land tenure and provide formal title. Resettlement planners would work in close consultation with all of the people affected, to ensure that this process continues to provide access to all traditional users, including women. Land for land is the preferred option, with ownership of the land remaining with the community group. Similarly, replacements in kind would, if possible, compensate for loss of marine, river, lake or forest resources. It may be possible to improve on the original loss. For example, safe water supplies might replace lost water sources. A fish processing, credit and marketing scheme could generate additional income to replace other incomes lost due to a reservoir or irrigation project. Partnerships with local people might be established to help manage parks and reserves on a sustainable basis, so that local people do not lose all of their traditional resource base.

Women
The needs and problems of women affected by relocation are likely to be different from those of men, particularly in terms of social support, services, employment, and means of subsistence for survival. For example, relocated women might face greater difficulty than relocated men in re-establishing markets for home industry produce or small trade items if they are constrained by lack of mobility or illiteracy. Female heads of household are eligible for the same benefits as their male counterparts, but they would need special attention if they lack resources, educational qualifications, skills, or work experience compared to men. The resettlement process must provide opportunities for women's participation. Women could participate in the design and layout of housing. Infrastructure development within the site must ensure that women have easy access to basic social amenities like water and household energy sources. Women in subsistence communities often depend on forest resources for basic needs such as food, fuel, or animal forage. These would need replacement. The Bank-financed Red River Delta Water Resources Project provides an example on gender planning in resettlement.

Measures to safeguard the interests of women in the relocation process are listed below.

Squatters and Encroachers
Squatters (in urban or rural areas) and encroachers (into forest or farmland) may be relatively recent arrivals on unused or under-used land. If such people arrived before the entitlements cut-off date they are eligible for compensation for any structures, crops or land improvements that they will lose. The project could pay this as an equivalent amount of rehabilitation assistance if there are problems in paying compensation to those without legal title. Rehabilitation assistance would include replacement housing and replacement land, with title, for squatters and encroachers who depend on agricultural production for their livelihood. For those who do not depend on agriculture, planners can identify alternative income restoration options in close consultation with the squatters themselves. Squatters occupying public safety zones can be provided with housing, land, or income-earning opportunities elsewhere. Since the rationale is to protect vulnerable groups, the project would not compensate landlords building structures illegally in public safety zones. The project might provide an opportunity to develop safer, more permanent sites for street vendors or pavement dwellers. Planners should pay close attention to the needs and priorities of the squatters themselves. Their social and economic networks, their systems for mutual help and support, and special cultural features, can provide the basic parameters for resettlement strategies.

Indigenous Peoples
Indigenous peoples and minority nationalities may be outside mainstream development opportunities, lacking legal recognition and formal representation. Recognition of customary land usage is crucial. Social survey and census work pays particular attention to patterns of social and economic organization, and distinctive cultural features, which will determine acceptable resettlement measures. Consultation with the groups affected is essential in selecting acceptable resettlement options. Minimizing or avoiding resettlement becomes particularly important if unique social and cultural features are at risk. The Bank's policy on Indigenous Peoples may apply. There may be a need for a separate indigenous peoples development plan, prepared in coordination with the RP.

The Very Poor
Bank policy requires restoration of the economic and social base, and assistance to vulnerable groups to improve their status. The challenge for the very poor may be to identify sustainable living and income-generating options that are acceptable and workable for them. The very poor might not have assets for compensation or income for restoration. Close consultation and careful data collection are necessary prerequisites for resettlement planning. For example, households with very small landholdings may lose their viability after land acquisition and require full income restoration, whereas a household with medium to large land holdings may require compensation only. Replacement housing should meet minimum housing standards. Wages should meet or better the minimum wage levels. A special fund might be established to help the very poor. A social preparation phase can help to build the capacity of the very poor over a period of time, to help them to identify problems, constraints, and possible solutions.

Back 3.4 Defining Entitlement and Eligibility	Next 3.6 The Entitlement Matrix