E1187
v1
Livestock Waste Management in East Asia
Project Preparation under the PDF-B Grant

Public Disclosure Authorized
Environmental Impact Assessment

Prepared by:
Farzad Dadgari

Public Disclosure Authorized
September 2004
Public Disclosure Authorized
Public Disclosure Authorized

Table of Contents

1
Introduction..................................................................................................................... 15
1.1
Purpose and Basis of the Report ....................................................................... 15
1.2 EA
Methodology ............................................................................................... 16
1.3
Relationship to Project Feasibility Study .......................................................... 17
1.4
Assessment Categorization and Focus .............................................................. 18
1.5
Assessment Scope and Periods Covered ........................................................... 19
1.5.1 Assessment
Scope ..................................................................................... 19
1.5.2 Periods
Covered ........................................................................................ 19
1.6
Assessment Factors and Assessment Classification.......................................... 19
1.7 Assessment
Standards ....................................................................................... 20
1.8 Assessment
Procedures ..................................................................................... 21
2
Project Description ......................................................................................................... 23
2.1 Project
Background ........................................................................................... 23
2.2 Project
Goals ..................................................................................................... 23
2.3 Project
objectives .............................................................................................. 24
2.4 Project
Components .......................................................................................... 25
2.5
Project Time Frame ........................................................................................... 26
2.6 Project
Alternatives ........................................................................................... 27
3
Environmental Settings and Key Impacts....................................................................... 29
3.1
Key Impacts during Construction/Implementation Phase................................. 30
3.2
Key Impacts during Operation Phase................................................................ 30
3.2.1 Lagoon
Systems ........................................................................................ 31
3.2.2
Biogas Production System (covered lagoons/biogas tanks)...................... 31
3.2.3
Manure Recycling on Agricultural Land/Fish Ponds................................ 32
4
Alternative Analysis ....................................................................................................... 35
4.1 Without
Project
Scenario .................................................................................. 35
4.2
With Project Scenario........................................................................................ 36
4.3
COMPARISON OFALTERNATIVE SCENARIO.......................................... 36
5
Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan......................................................... 33
5.1
Monitoring Key Environmental Issues ............................................................. 34
5.2
Environmental Management and Monitoring Schedule.................................... 36
5.3 Environmental
Training
Requirements ............................................................. 43
5.4 Environmental
Capacity
Building ..................................................................... 43
5.4.1
Topics for Training.................................................................................... 43
5.4.2
The levels of training................................................................................. 43
5.4.3 Training
Structure, Components and Materials ........................................ 44
5.5 EMMP
Budget................................................................................................... 44
6
Other Significant Issues .................................................................................................. 43
7
Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................... 45
7.1 General
Conclusions ......................................................................................... 45
7.2
Selection of Project Areas ................................................................................. 45
7.3
Environmental Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures ............................... 45
7.4 Recommendations ............................................................................................. 46
7.5 Public
Participation ........................................................................................... 47

7.6
Further Suggestions and Environmental Requirements .................................... 47
8
List of References ........................................................................................................... 49
Environmental Assessment, and Safeguards, International Expert......................................... 53
Environmental Assessment, Local Consultant........................................................................ 59
ii

List of Tables
Table 2-1 Project Time table (assuming a mid-2005 starting date) .................................. 27
Table 4-1 Potential Environmental Impact Matrix (Without Project Scenario) ............... 27
Table 4-2 Potential Environmental Impact Matrix (With Project Scenario) .................... 29
Table 4-3 Score Difference, Alternative Scenarios........................................................... 31
Table 5.1 Monitoring Framework ..................................................................................... 35
Table 5-2 Surface Water Resources Monitoring............................................................... 37
Table 5.3 Groundwater Resources Monitoring ................................................................. 39
Table 5.4 Soil and Crop Monitoring ................................................................................. 41
Table 5.5 Total Cost Estimate of EMMP by country........................................................ 41

iii

List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Assessment Procedures for the EA of LWMEAP ........................................... 21

v

Annexes
Annex 1: Terms of References for International and National Consultants, Environmental
Assessment and Safeguards

Annex 2: List of Environmental and Safeguard National Consultants

Annex 3A: Environmental Impact Assessment, Guangdong Province, PRC (Separate
Document)

Annex 3B: Environmental Impact Assessment, Thailand (Separate Document)

Annex 3C: Environmental Impact Assessment, Vietnam (Separate Document)
vii

viii

Executive Summary
Governments of China (Guangdong Province), Thailand and Vietnam have applied for
the Global Environment Facility (GEF) grant for support to promote livestock waste
management in respective countries to address the regional pollution problems from
increased growth and intensification of livestock industry in the project countries.
Livestock Waste Management in East Asia (LWMEAP) is an environmental and social
development project. It is designed to reduce nutrient loading, mainly nitrogen and
phosphorus that is polluting the international waters and causing significant
environmental and social impact including increased eutrophication, fish kills, destruction
of natural mangrove and coral reefs ecosystems of the coastal zone of the Gulf of
Thailand and South China Sea and increase in incidents of water-borne and zoonotic
diseases, not only within the livestock raising communities, but also other water users
living downstream of the livestock raising areas. For these reasons, if the project is
implemented and the findings are disseminated throughout the project countries, the
overall impacts of the LWMEAP are expected to be both significant and positive.
Regional Environmental Settings: The details of regional characteristics are provided
in the attached national EA reports for Guangdong, China (Annex 3A), Thailand
(Appendix 3B) and Vietnam (Appendix 3C). In general the climatic condition in all three
countries is influenced by South-western monsoon. The average temperature varies from
about 19 oC in Northern Guangdong to more than 27 oC in Southern Vietnam. The
rainfall varies from around 1000mm in Northern Guangdong to over 2500 mm in
Southern Vietnam (Dingnai Province) representing different agro-ecological systems
within project countries.
Physiographic settings are also quite variable between different project regions with flat
river floodplain and deltaic settings in Northern Vietnam (Hatay Province) and
Guangdong (Boluo County) to hilly and mountainous in parts of Southern Vietnam and
Thailand (Dongnai Province, Vietnam, Chonburi Province, Thailand).
The project areas are located in the major river catchments of the Gulf of Thailand
(Maeklong River in Ratchaburi Province, and Bang Prakong River in Chonburi Province,
Thailand), and South China Sea (Dongjiang River in Bolouo County, Guangdong
Province, China, and Mekong river in Dongnai Province and Red River in Hatay
Province, Vietnam).
Livestock production is one of the major industries in the identified project demonstration
areas. The livestock management systems vary between regions and countries, being
dominated by small-scale production systems in Vietnam, medium-scale in Guangdong,
and large-scale in Thailand. This variation in production system distribution should
allow the project team to establish different manure management technologies to
represent different livestock production systems that are dominant within countries
bordering the South China Sea and should assist the project team in dissemination of
project findings within and between the projects countries and to other countries in the
region.
The total investment of project is US 21.45 million, of which US$ 9.2 million will be
from GEF grant. The proposed LWMEAP aims at improving the livelihood and health
ix

status of the livestock farmers in the project sites in the three countries and to
demonstrate the effectiveness of proposed manure treatment plans in reducing nutrient
loading of water resources and identifying best management practices for different agro-
ecological and livestock development systems. The project anticipates to be viewed as a
demonstration project by local governments and livestock farmers and hopes that the
findings of different project components would be disseminated throughout the region. It
is believed that through project interventions other interested parties in the region also use
project's findings with regards to sustainable development of livestock production in their
own development systems.
The proposed LWMEAP has won strong support form individuals, farmers, NGOs, and
every level of the government authorities at national, provincial and local level in all
project countries and there is a strong commitment from all levels to the successful
implementation of the proposed project.
This environmental assessment report is prepared to satisfy relevant environment
protection requirements of the countries involved in project implementation (China,
Thailand, and Vietnam), and the World Bank/GEF. The project is classified as World
Bank's Category B project, requiring discussion of significant environmental issues and
preparation of an environmental management and monitoring plan (EMMP).
The primary objective of the EA process is to obtain a framework to identify key
environmental issues related to the project both on environmental concerns related to
proposed project components and on the assessment of the environmental benefits of the
project. It was to serve as a valuable tool for addressing environmental issues that would
help influence project appraisal and design, execution, supervision, and monitoring of its
components success. In addition, the EA would serve as a set of environmental
guidelines to shape environmentally sustainable investment strategies in the project. The
main objectives, envisaged for the EA are:
ž To provide a framework for identification of key environmental issues related to the
project and to quantify its environmental impact;
ž To assess positive environmental contributions of manure management initiatives,
environmental concerns associated with various project components;
ž To suggest mitigation measures, outline monitoring and evaluation strategies
associated with the appropriate indicators to measure environmental benefits of the
project and outline an Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan (EMMP) to
be mainstreamed into the project cycle including their preparation, implementation
and operation;
ž To bring out recommendations that would keep constant involvement of the other
members of the implementation unit and would also lead to the design of
environmental awareness programs, the baseline, monitoring and evaluation strategies
as early in the project as possible;
ž To help in identifying the additional detailed studies that need to be conducted as part
of the project; and
x

ž To provide a screening/analysis tool for addressing the environmental issues that shall
help influence project appraisal and design, execution and supervision of its
components.
These objectives are to be achieved through the following scope of the EA:
ž Description of the environmental risks and impacts associated with various activities
under the major components of the project;
ž Recommendation of procedures and institutional arrangements to address
environmental concerns and ensuring safe guards, or any activity that would trigger a
more detailed EA or Environmental Monitoring;
ž Identifying training and capacity building needs of environmental institutions and
environmental monitoring team members to successfully implement the proposed
EMMPs; and
ž Recommendation of mechanisms and procedures to mainstream the EA work and
environmental concerns in general in the proposed LWMEAP.
In order to carry out the analysis of automotives, the first step was to identify impacts on
key environmental components in two broad categories: potential positive impacts and
potential negative impacts. The physical and temporal nature of the impact was
determined using three sub-sets, i.e., short-term and long-term, reversible and irreversible
and local and regional.
Based on the identification of impact attributes and prediction tools, the analysis of
alternatives was accomplished through the use of a set of matrix score. Each of these
matrix score again has been given a Project Importance Values (PIV) ranking by iterative
Delphi method. The values were distributed to different key environmental components
and sub-components depending upon their relevance and importance to the project. The
sub-components net score showed that the without the project scenario would have
negative impact in all components, while in with the project scenario all the
environmental sub components show positive impact environmental impacts of the
project on every category. The summary of the results of project alternative scoring
process is presented in the following Table 1. The cumulative assessment indicates that
there is a significant positive impact on the environmental features once the project
interventions are applied in the project areas. The highest positive impact is predicted to
be on water environment, followed by social and soil environments. The high positive
nature of the impact on the socio-economic environment is the clear indication of the
objectives of the proposed watershed project that would improve the quality of life
through reduction of water-borne and zoonotic disease incidents and odor problems
within project areas.

xi

Table 1 Summary of Score Difference, Alternative Scenarios
Key Environmental Components
Without Project
With Project
Increase
Water Environment
Surface Hydrology
-50
50
100
Groundwater -200
500
700
Water Quality
-900
1200
2100
Total
-1150
1750
2900
Soil/Land Environment
Soil Erosion
-30
30
60
Arable lands
0
80
80
Wetlands
-100
100
200
Soil Fertility & Productivity
-50
250
300
Soil Biota & Degradation
-40
80
120
Soil Moisture
0
40
40
Total
-220
580
800
Biological Environment
Flora and Micro Flora
-100
-50
50
Fauna and micro Fauna
0
50
50
Nature Reserves, National Parks
0
0
0
Biodiversity
-120
120
240
Total
-220
120
340
Air Environment
Ambient Air (Odor)
-180
240
420
Global Warming
-120
120
240
Total
-300
360
660
Socio-Economic Environment
Community Participation
0
160
160
Social Economy
+40
80
120
Public Health
-180
300
480
Gender Issues
-80
80
160
Employment 0
30
30
Downstream Water Users
-80
160
240
Total
-300
810
1110
The results of environmental impact assessment indicate that, in general, the proposed
LWMEAP will have minimal negative environmental impact. The implementation of
subcomponents of the project, if successfully implemented, is conducive to the
improvement of the environment, and the project impacts on social environment are
believed to be highly positive. If the recommended mitigation and control measures,
presented in respective national EA reports, are adopted (Appendices 3A, 3B, and 3C) the
impact of the project on the environment should be highly positive. It is recommended
that the World Bank, GEF and governments of China, Thailand and Vietnam and
respective provincial governments to support the implementation of this project and urge
the earliest start of the project.
However, if the project locations are improperly selected, and/or if the proposed
mitigation measures are not implemented, the project can have potential negative impact
on the natural and social environment, which might jeopardize sustainable development
xii

and effectiveness of the project in ultimately reducing nutrient loading to the South China
Sea through dissemination of project findings within the region. On the other hand, if
effective mitigation measures are implemented, the potential short and long term negative
environmental impacts of the project will not be significant.
The negative impacts on the environment during implementation/construction phase of
the project in all project area in the three countries are believed to be temporal and of low
magnitude with the exception of permanent loss of some land, agricultural or
"wasteland", for construction of large lagoons for aerobic/anaerobic ponds. The major
potential impacts on the environment include: impact to vegetation due to temporary land
occupation at the construction sites, pollution of waste of daily life at the construction site
and noise and dust of the construction machinery. If the mitigation measures proposed in
the EA report are implemented, the negative impact to the environment during
implementation/construction phase will be minimized.
During operational phase, potential environmental issues that are identified in the report
are mainly environmental risk/hazards that can happen only if poor construction, design
or operational management is followed and include: (1) potential impact (Nutrient
overload) on surface and groundwater resources, and soil, if wastewater from cleaning of
breeding facilities or from biogas/lagoon ponds applied intensively on cropland not
according to the soil character and nutrient condition, or discharged to the surface water
not reaching the discharge standard (2) potential soil pollution through applying waste
sludge from respective manure management facilities improperly on croplands, (3)
potential adverse impact on biodiversity, contagious animal diseases on wildlife, increase
in plant diseases and yield reduction if improper or intensive application of effluents on
soil, (4) potential air pollution (toxic gases and odor) as well as greenhouse effect (CO2,
CH4), in case biogas reactors gas collection systems are not working properly, and
fermentation of livestock manure, and (5)construction of a lagoon/central biogas/waste
water treatment facility in project site will occupy a relatively large area of farm land.
Water pollution can negatively impacts the quality of both surface and groundwater
resources within and downstream of the project area. Risk of spills, structure failure, and
purposeful discharges must be taken into account. If manure is not properly treated
through activities such as composting, potentially contagious animal diseases and caused
by dangerous pathogens, bacteria and viruses and exotic weeds can be spread out through
the application of untreated swine wastes and can cause proliferation of diseases and
weeds. In addition, nutrients pollution in the water bodies may occur through leaching of
nutrients accumulated in soil, when excessive amounts of solid and liquid manure were
applied.
For most parts, implementation of the project should not cause any significant negative
impact on the environment; on the contrary, it should generate positive impact on the
ecological and social environment during project operation. The development of code of
practice and conducive policies on livestock waste management (regulation on discharge
of effluent, collection of the manure guideline, etc.) and dissemination of knowledge on
cost effective preparation of organic manure, adaptive methodology on recycling
(quantity and timing) of organic (livestock) solid and liquid manure in agricultural
activities, etc are believed to assist the reduction of nutrient loading and environmental
pollution pressure due to livestock waste. The improvement of manure management
xiii

practices should have positive benefits and should better the quality of ecological
environment within project areas.
If the project is implemented as planned, project activities including capacity-building,
awareness-raising, development of Code of Practice (COP) and enforcement of realistic
environmental policies and standards, and development of national communication
programs should generate positive impact on both natural and social environment. The
introduction of improved manure management practices should be environmentally
beneficial and should provide an atmosphere conducive of bettering the ecological
environmental quality within project areas. Proper implementation of the project should
also improve health status of local communities and reduce incidence of zoonotic
diseases. The respiratory diseases and water borne diseases should also be reduced.
Since rational use of organic composting will reduce chemical fertilizer application, this
should also produce positive impact on environment by improving soil inherent fertility,
soil structure, and water holding capacity. In addition, the use of organic manure should
increase soil faunal communities (both in number and variety), helping soil improvement
and increased micro-faunal biodiversity.
In order to minimize potential negative environmental impacts and to enhance positive
impacts, the appended national EA report have proposed detailed prevention/mitigation
measures to minimize potential environmental impacts. In addition environment
management plans are prepared for each country and are detailed in Chapter 8 of the
respective appended reports, in which the responsibilities of the Project Management
organization and other related institutions, environment management training and
capacity building needs of the project and environment monitoring plan and their
respective costs have been clearly detailed. The summary of impact and mitigation
measures and the proposed EMPs are summarized in Chapters 3 and 5 of this report.
The total estimated EMMP cost for each country is USD 76,153, USD 115,720, and USD
95,007 for Guangdong, Thailand, and Vietnam, respectively. The details and breakdown
of costs are presented in the country specific EAs. The provided cost estimates are
preliminary in nature and will be updated as the specific location of manure treatment
activities, manure treatment methodology, and manure recycling fields are determined
and site specific environmental monitoring and number of sampling locations are
finalized.
The proposed EMPs should be strictly implemented by each country/province to ensure
that the proposed project would have neither significant nor irreversible adverse impact
on the natural environment of the project area.

xiv

xvi

Introduction
Governments of China (Guangdong Province), Thailand and Vietnam have applied for
the Global Environment Facility (GEF) grant for support to promote livestock waste
management in respective countries to address the regional pollution problems from
increased growth and intensification of livestock industry in the project countries. The
proposed project aims at demonstrating and promoting adaptive manure management and
recycling technologies to reducing the negative impact of animal manure on nutrient
loading of locally and globally significant Gulf of Thailand and the South China Sea. The
proposed project, if successfully implemented, should lead through replication within
project areas and dissemination of findings to other regions within and between countries
surrounding the South China Sea should lead to reduction of land-based pollution from
livestock production, and an environmentally sound geographic distribution of livestock
production. Further, other global benefits should happen in the areas of aquatic
biodiversity, land degradation, and environmental change. The desired outcome of the
project is to identify best adaptive manure management practices that are technically,
socially and environmentally acceptable and beneficial and disseminate the findings in
other parts of the country and within the region.
Purpose and Basis of the Report
The proposed Livestock Waste Management Project in East Asia Project (LWMEAP)
aims at (1) improving and supporting an integrated, demand driven, sustainable, and
comprehensive approach to managing and reducing livestock production waste load that
is currently polluting the local surface and ground waters and international water
resources including Gulf of Thailand and the South China Sea, and (2) to strengthen
institutional capacity and decision-making systems for livestock management at regional,
national, provincial, and local levels in project countries.
The achievement of these objectives should lead to reduction of liquid and soil manure
pollution, leading to improvement of public health and a more equitable distribution of
benefits generated from the rapidly growing livestock production. The project should
create greater economic and social stability in the project areas as well as enhancing
institutional capacity and development of relevant and implementable environmental
policies by involving decision makers and beneficiaries in the development of "Code of
Practice" for livestock development within the project-selected areas and the whole
country.
The aims of this EA report include:
(i)
Analysis and assess present natural environment and the socio-economic conditions
in the project area and to determine scope and extent of future positive and negative
impacts of the project during construction, implementation and operation.
(ii) To determine the potential environmental impacts and to disseminate the findings to
the project development and implementation teams; and
(iii) To prepare mitigation measures to reduce/eliminate the identified negative impacts
and prepare an environmental management plan (EMP) for pre-implementation,
implementation/construction and operation of the project.
15

The terms of reference (TOR) for compilation of the EA report between the Technical
Consultant Organization here called FAO and the International Consultant (IC) on EA is
presented in Annex A.
EA Methodology
This EA has been prepared to satisfy the requirements of GEF/World Bank and
environmental regulations of participating project countries on environmental impact
assessment of livestock development projects. Individual country EAs, appended to this
report, have been prepared by the local consultants (LCs) in each country under the
direction of the IC and the Bank Safeguard specialist. All LCs have been selected from
accredited institutions/individuals, approved to conduct EA studies in their respective
countries. The regional EA was then prepared by the IC, based on the findings of country
specific EA reports.
Each EA team ensured that the principles of sustainable development objective and
scientific evaluation are followed in the preparation of individual EAs and design of the
country/province specific environmental management and monitoring plans (EMMP).
The same attention was paid to both sustainable economic development and
environmental protection through the use of appropriate livestock waste treatment
technology, manure recycling in agricultural land/fish farming and environment
protection so that the "handling without harm" and agriculture growth can keep pace with
the environmental protection and does not cause significant negative environmental
impacts. Special attention is paid by the project to ensure that livestock wastes within
project areas are reduced as much as possible, and the produced wastes (liquid and solid
manure) is recycled in crop lands/fish farms to reduce to use of inorganic fertilizers and
imported feed in crop and fish production. Special attention is also made to ensure that
project is developed in a sustainable manner and detailed EMMPs are developed to
minimize/prevent any potential negative impact that project might cause on the natural
(bio-physical) or social environment and enhance the positive impacts. As soon as
specific project areas (treatment system and project farms) are identified within each
province/county, more detailed environmental baseline data will be collected and, if
necessary, site specific EAs will be conducted to ensure that potential negative impacts
on natural and social environment are kept to minimum. For activities that could
potentially cause environmental pollution (soil/water/air), more detailed and project
specific measures will be developed in order to provide basic documents of environment
protection to be used during project implementation. To prevent duplication of effort
and to reduce the project preparation time and cost, the EA team has made full use of the
available data and findings in preparation of this report.
Since the project is generally a livestock waste management project and does not include
any major land clearing or construction activities, it is classified as a Category B project
according to the World Bank Operational Policy (OP 4.01). Therefore, the EA is carried
out in a "simplified way" with main attention of the study being on the significant
environmental issues (SEI) likely to be caused by the project. This assessment was made
based on the consultations with the World Bank Environmental and Safeguard specialist,
Project countries' Environmental specialists and Environmental Protection Agencies
(EPB in Guangdong, PCD in Thailand, and MoNRE in Vietnam)..
16

An assessment method of environmental matrices is used for preparation of country
specific EAs. This method has been widely used in the environmental assessment of
various projects since proposed by Leopold, et al.1 (1971). The provided environmental
matrix in each country specific EA has employed a list of project activities and a list of
environmental parameters or impact indicators in order to identify causeeffect
relationships. Column headings list the project activities while the row headings show the
environmental parameters of the affected system. Entries in the resulting matrix cells
simply show whether an interaction takes place and the qualitative estimates of the
interaction.
Relationship to Project Feasibility Study
According to the Environmental Protection Regulations for Construction Projects in
Vietnam, and the provisions in Clause 9 and 17 of Environmental Protection Regulations
for Construction Projects in China, project construction unit in these two countries
should submit its EA report to the pertinent environmental protection agency with
authority to review and approve, and the approval should be obtained during the
feasibility study of the project. However there are no regulations in Thailand with regard
to the preparation of EA or preparation of feasibility studies for swine farms. In order to
have some uniformity between the three project countries and to satisfy the GEF/Bank
requirements, it was proposed that a specific chapter in the preliminary design report
should cover environmental protection, inclusive of related national environmental
standards, environmental impact mitigations and relevant design. In addition, it should
also cover the possible environmental impact from the project, mitigative or preventive
measures to reduce/prevent environmental impact and potential causes of environmental
pollution.
As required by the World Bank, the country specific EA reports were prepared
simultaneously with project preparation. Reports were prepared in close cooperation
with the local project implementing and line agencies, the social assessment (SA) teams,
other project teams working on different project components, review and consultation
with the local communities that might be impacted by the project, farmers and other
potential project beneficiaries. Each EA team has conducted extensive discussions with
the respective SA teams and provided input in preparation of questionnaires related to
environmental issues to be asked by the SA team during their field visits. This EA was
prepared in close association with the study teams and should be considered as an integral
part of the study. A section must be added in the final project report to cover all
environmental issues discussed in this report and the country specific EMMP costs
should also be included in the project budget.
In a bid to off-set or mitigate the potential impact to the environment at the design stage,
the EA team has already provided the project implementing agencies in each country with
the draft working guidelines to satisfy the needs for environmental protection, and
discussed with the feasibility teams as how to ensure coordination between environmental
protection and economic development. As was mentioned earlier, the EA teams have
1 Source: Leopold, L.B., Clarke, F.E., Manshaw, B.B. and Balsley, J.R. (1971), A Procedure for Evaluating
Environmental Impacts, U.S. Geological Survey Circular No. 645, Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C.
17

conducted extensive discussions with the social assessment (SA) teams and have held in-
depth discussions with the said teams as to define the questionnaire related to
environmental management, and submitted the questionnaire to the SA teams. The EA
teams have used the main findings of the SA teams in the respective country specific EA
reports. The project could impact farm sizes, waste management methods, fertilizer
application rates and sources on farmlands, and water use methods that are in use within
the project areas. The EA teams have discussed such issues in detail with the study teams
and their comments have been reviewed and have been incorporated in the final EA
reports. The potential significant environmental issues were analyzed and necessary
mitigation measures were considered and costed in the EMMP.
In summary, the EA teams in each country have prepared the EA reports, in close
collaboration with other technical teams involved in the preparation of the feasibility
study reports for the LWMEAP.
Assessment Categorization and Focus
Since the project is generally an environmental improvement project dealing with
livestock waste management improvement issues and focuses on institutional
strengthening, policy development, improvement of livestock waste management plans,
and regional information sharing, and does not include any major land clearing or
construction activities, it is classified as a Category B project according to the World
Bank Operational Policy (OP 4.01).
The assessment focuses on potentially significant project impact and risks of the project
on natural environment, especially air, soil, and water resources, public and animal
health, and social environment during construction, implementation and operation phases.
Furthermore, water quality, land use, soil erosion, solid and liquid manure as nutrient
source, reduction of inorganic fertilizer use and potential changes in agricultural practices
are identified as the main issues that should be reviewed in this EA report to determine
potential environmental impacts/risks.
The goals of this study are to ensure that the project will not cause any significant impact
or environmental risk/hazards on the physical, ecological and/or social environment of
project impacted areas and to propose measures to enhance the positive environmental
impacts. The study focuses on the potential impact of the project, especially on the
manure technology management demonstration sites and focuses on soil and water
environment, animal and public health, domesticated and wild animals in project areas,
and the biodiversity within the project areas of impact to ensure that the proposed project
will be environmentally sustainable based on viable economic growth principles.
The water quality assessment focuses on the impact of farmyard manure application as
fertilizer (solid and liquid) on surface and ground water and project impact on nutrient
migration (TN, TP) to Gulf of Thailand and the South China Sea, while land use
assessment focuses on the changes in land use practices through potential increase of
liquid and solid manure as nutrient source, reduction of inorganic fertilizer use and
potential changes in agricultural practices. In special cases where large numbers of
animals are confined in relatively small areas (intensive pig fattening, intensive poultry
18

farms) in peri-urban areas, land use assessment focuses on the changes in land use
practices through spatial analysis.
Assessment Scope and Periods Covered
Assessment Scope
The study area covers two countries (Thailand and Vietnam) and the Guangdong
Province of China.
In China (Guangdong Province) only one county, Buolo County has been identified for
the implementation of the project. The demonstration sites will be located in Yuanzhou
Town in Buolo County that is located to the northeast of the Guangzhou City, the capital
of the province.
In Thailand, The EA study focuses mainly on Pak Tor and Jorm Bung districts in
Ratchaburi Province with the highest pig population in the country (west of Bangkok),
and Map Pai sub-district, Ban Buang district in Chonburi province with the second
highest pig population in the country (east of Bangkok), located in central and eastern
regions of Thailand, respectively.
The study area in Vietnam covers two high pollution density zones, one province located
in the North (Ha Tay) and the other in the South (Dong Nai). The areas identified in Ha
Tay for implementation of the project are included in Thuong Tin District in Ha Tay
province. Within the Red River Delta and just north of Hanoi City and Bien Hoa City in
Dong Nai Province, located northeast of Ho Chi Minh City in a peri-urban environmental
setting.
Periods Covered
The environmental assessment covers different phases of project implementation
including:
1)
Design Stage
2)
Implementation/Construction period (Year 1 to Year 3: 2005-2007)
3)
Operation Period (Year 2 to Year 5: 2006-2009)
It is assumed that construction and implementation will be completed in phases and might
take up to three years to be completed in all project areas. However, project operation
should start from Year 2 after implementation of the first phase of construction and
project policy development activities.
Assessment Factors and Assessment Classification
The proposed LWMEAP is an integrated livestock waste management project comprising
institutional improvement, livestock industry environmental policy development and
enforcement, adaptive manure management technology demonstration, capacity building
and extension at the central and local levels, and manure market mechanism development
The potential manure management activities proposed by the project include removal by
treatment, recycling by crop/ fish uptake and removal by export to other regions to be
used as crop/fish nutrient source. Therefore, the environmental impacts and their
interactions should not be complex. The assessment factors are identified using an
19

environmental interactive matrix, mainly based on limited field visits, collection of
secondary data, consultation with the other study teams, the environmental sensitivities of
the project areas, and lessons learned from other similar livestock waste management
projects.
In order to assess the anticipate environmental impact from the LWMEAP, details of the
project and the secondary data obtained from involved teams and authorities in
accordance with the field data collected were considered. The study covered physical
resources, ecological resources, human use value, and quality of life issues. In addition,
the overall quantity and quality of potential impact that could be generated during
construction and operation phases of the project were assessed in comparison with
existing environment condition. The national and provincial government environmental
regulation and standards within each country was used as a reference point and were
applied in assessing the environmental impacts of the project.
Identified environmental factors include:
1) Social Environment: public health, socio-economy, employment, downstream water
users, and if present within project areas, the minorities and disadvantaged people;
2) Ecological Environment: Terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, including flora, fauna,
nature reserves, soil erosion and degradation, freshwater and seawater fisheries;
3) Physical (natural) Environment:
-
Water environment: water hydrology, water quality (Surface water including
pH, CODMn, BOD5, nutrients such as TN and TP, heavy metals, coliform. And
Ground water including pH, COD
-
Mn, NH3-N, NO2 , and NO3-);
-
Ambient Air: Odor, total suspended particulates (TSP);
-
Soil erosion and degradation;
-
Solid waste (feedlots, liquid and solid manure)
4) Human use Value such and Land use, Transportation, Water supply, Waste
management and Water drainage system
5) Quality of life such as Socio-economic, Public attitude to the project and public
health.
Assessment Standards
According to the environmental function of the environmental protection administrative
departments in project provinces, the relevant environmental standards, specific to each
country, will be adopted for this assessment. The details of the available environmental
standards in each country/province are presented in Chapter 1 of the country specific EA
report that are appended to this report. The assessment standards include quality
standards and discharge standards. For quality standards, those required for protection of
the functions in the recipient environment zone in view of pollution inflow will be
applied. If standards were not available, pertinent discharge standards were applied for
each special pollutant. Based on the geographical distribution and environmental features
in the project areas, the pertinent standards will be applied. For example, the discharge
20

standard of livestock wastewater effluent is not available in Vietnam at the moment; but
such standards are developed in China and Thailand. Therefore, in Vietnam the
corresponding discharge standards of domestic wastewater for the sector were applied.
Assessment Procedures
The procedure for this assessment is presented in Figure 1-1.
Assignment of EA Task
Field Studies
Identification of the Objectives of
Environmental Assessment
Selection of Environmental Impact Factors
Social Environment Ecological Environment Physical
Alternative Analysis
Environmental Impact
Social Environment Ecological Environment Physical Environment
Environmental Impact
Environmental Standard
Assessment
Compilation of
Mitigation Measures
Compilation of EA
Environmental Monitoring
Report
and Management Plan
Figure 1-1 Assessment Procedures for the EA of LWMEAP

21

Project Description
Project Background
The proposed project addresses one of the most significant and rapidly growing sources
of land-based pollution of the South China Sea intensive and geographically
concentrated livestock production generated by rapidly growing demand for meat
products in the East Asia region.
Livestock production is one of the major sources of land-based pollution of the South
China Sea because the East Asia region is the world's most important livestock
production area. Southeast Asia is particularly dominant in the pig and poultry sectors,
which are the two biggest livestock-based sources of water (and other) pollution. Today,
East Asia accounts for considerably more than half of the world's stock of pigs and more
than one third of the world's stock of poultry. China, Vietnam, and Thailand alone
accounted for 52 percent of all pigs and 28 percent of all chicken in the world in 2001.
Concentrated livestock production is causing significant local, regional and global
environmental damage, particularly to freshwater and marine aquatic systems, due to (1)
weak or non-existent enforcement of land use planning and environmental regulations,
industrial livestock enterprises bear few of the environmental costs they impose, so have
little incentive to reduce them; and (2) most industrial livestock producers are not aware
of the extent of the environmental problems they cause or of the most cost-effective
options to mitigate them, and affected communities are typically not well enough
informed or organized to bring pressure on commercial livestock producers to reduce the
pollution they cause.
Project Goals
The main goal of LWMEAP is to reduce land-based pollution of international waters of
the South China Seas and Gulf of Thailand from livestock production. The project plans
to demonstrate the effectiveness of better manure management technologies in reducing
the negative local and global environmental impacts of rapidly increasing livestock
production in selected sub-watersheds in the three project countries. Through monitoring
the impacts of project proposed interventions in:
ž Manure management activities;
ž Development and implementation of manure management related environmental
policies through development of "Code of Ethics"; and
ž Identification of best manure treatment and recycling practices.
ž Dissemination of project findings in other parts of the project countries and between
countries bordering the South China Sea.
The project aims at developing adaptive manure management technologies and modules
as well as adaptable environmental policies for dissemination in other parts of project
countries and in other countries bordering the South China Sea. The project replication
should lead to an improvement of water quality in the South China Sea and reduction in
manure related pollution levels in the coastal waters.
23

The proposed project, if successfully implemented, should lead to an environmentally
sound geographic distribution of livestock production in project countries. The following
global and regional environmental benefits are envisaged:
ž A consequent reduction of livestock production related waste load. It is estimated
that animal waste currently contributes more than half of the total organic waste loads
that is currently polluting South China Sea;
ž More effective conservation of freshwater and coastal marine aquatic biodiversity as a
result of reduced wastewater discharges into riverine and other wetland habitats;
ž A reduction of land degradation from excessive nutrient contents in areas surrounding
intensive livestock production systems;
ž A significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions (methane, nitrous oxides) and
gases of local importance (ammonia and organic volatiles) from livestock waste;
ž Reduction of public health hazards and zoonotic diseases and a more equitable
distribution of benefits generated from the rapidly growing livestock industry; and
ž Increase in knowledge and skills of farmers and line agencies through capacity
building to facilitate betterment of economic and environmental condition of
livestock production areas.
Project objectives
The project's objectives are to improve the living condition of the livestock farming
communities in the project areas through the establishment of sustainable livestock waste
management and reduction of nutrient loading of natural resources (soil and water).
Achieving project objectives should not only lead to reduction of water resource
pollution, but it should also ensure better public health and zoonotic disease prevention.
The main objectives of the project are:
ž To support sustainable development of livestock production in project countries by
reducing livestock waste induced environmental pollution within project area of
influence through institutional development, development of adaptive Code of
practice and policy enforcement, and raising public awareness of livestock waste
management related issues.
ž To enhance living standards of livestock farmers (especially pig farmers) through (1)
improvement of living conditions and sanitation environment, (2) through promoting
socio-economic development and environmental protection of project beneficiaries,
(3) through use of improved manure management technologies at the community
level and reuse of livestock manure based on its nutrient value, and (4) by using
biological energy through biological treatment of wastewater from the pig raising
farms.
ž To improve the regional cooperation through increased awareness of decision-makers
in the field of livestock waste management and the need for nutrient load reduction of
water resources.
24

ž To improve the surface water quality as well as to prevent soil degradation by
promoting proper livestock waste management technologies based on costbenefit
analysis and appropriate monitoring and evaluation of project activities.
Project Components
In order to reach the project objectives four main project components are identified; (1)
Development of Conducive Policy Framework; (2) Demonstration of Livestock Waste
Management; (3) Development of Decision Support Tools and Regional Evaluation and
Analysis Support; and (4) Project Management and Monitoring. In order to reach project
objectives, an integrated approach is followed by the project. Therefore, all project
components and activities to be financed under these components are interrelated with the
desired outcome of improved social and environmental condition within project areas
with the ultimate goal of reducing manure induced water pollution and incidents of
zoonotic diseases in the project areas with an ultimate goal of reducing nutrient loading in
the Gulf of Thailand and the South China Sea through dissemination and replication of
project findings within project countries and between countries surrounding the South
China Sea. As a consequence, most of the activities are closely linked together. The main
project components and activities of the Livestock waste management Project in Vietnam are:
Project Component 1: Conducive Policy Framework
(a) Development of "Code of Practice" and environmental policies;
(b) capacity-building, awareness-raising;
(c) Enforcement of code of practice, relevant environmental policies and regulations;
test of code of practice and adaptive policy measures at local level; and
(d) Communications and training programs.
Project Component 2: Demonstration of livestock waste management
(a) Demonstration of improved waste management techniques (including fund
management, public participation and technical assistance); and
(b) Capacity building of local officials, extension workers and farmers in manure and
nutrient management, animal health, and the impacts of water pollution on public
health
Project Component 3: Decision support tools (DSS) development and regional co-
ordination
(a) Preparation of relevant DSS tools for the three countries.
ž Common development of tools, adaptation to local contexts and translation into
national languages (e.g. decision support tool for the selection of manure
management strategies; standards, spatial planning for livestock development).
(b) Regional co-ordination
ž Exchange of experience and results among the three countries involved in the
project; and
ž Dissemination of results, guidelines, standards and tools to other countries
bordering the South China Sea.
25

Project Component 4: Project Management and Monitoring
(a) Project Management
ž PMO/PIU operation and regional co-ordination; and
ž Project Management Training.
(b) Project Monitoring
ž Implementation of Progress Monitoring;
ž Water pollution, nutrient-balances and other monitoring activities (e.g. rate of
compliance); and
ž Performance evaluation of project activities.
Component 1, accounting for about 35% of the project budget, should lead to the
development of "Code of Practice" that will be developed through interaction between
policy makers and local farmers and ultimately the development of more realistic and
implementable environmental policies for the livestock sector. Component 2 accounts
for some 50% of the total investment of the LWMEAP. This component will be
implemented based on the specifics of livestock industries in each project sub-watershed,
farm sizes, land use constraints, availability of agricultural land/fish farms within
manageable distance, etc. Implementation of components 3 (10% of the budget) and 4
(15% of the budget) will effectively follow the same approach in all project countries.
Component 3 will develop common decision support tools, conduct periodic evaluations
for policy makers and facilitate the exchange of information and lessons learned amongst
the three countries participating in the Project and with other countries bordering the
South China sea, while component 4 would provide for efficient project management and
effective evaluation and monitoring of the social, economic, environmental, system
efficiency and other changes brought about by the Project.
Project Time Frame
The proposed total time for implementation and operational review of project impact is
estimated to last five years from the project inception year. It is assumed that project
construction/implementation will be developed sequentially and new demonstration sites
will be phased in as the project develops. The baseline data collection for all project
components will be completed during the first year of the project. Project monitoring and
evaluation will commence from Year 2 and will continue until Year 5.of the project.
Assuming that project will be approved by the GEF by early 2005, the project activities
should commence by mid to late 2005 and should continue until mid to late 2009.
26

Table 2-1 Project Time table (assuming a mid-2005 starting date)
Major
Project
Activity
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Project
Preparation/Approval XX
XX

Baseline
Studies
XX
XX

Institutional
Analysis
XX
XX

Spatial
Analysis

XX
XXXX XXXX XXXX XX

Policy
Development
Component
XX
XXXX
XX

Policy Component Implementation &
XX
XXXX XXXX XXXX XX
Evaluation
Implementation of Wastes
XX
XXXX
XXXX
XX

Management Options
Regional Coordination and DSS
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX
Development
Implementation of Monitoring and
XX
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX
Evaluation Plans
Project Alternatives
In order to carry out the analysis of alternatives, the first step was to identify impacts on
key environmental components in two broad categories: potential positive impacts and
potential negative impacts. The physical and temporal nature of the impact was
determined using three sub-sets, i.e., short-term and long-term, reversible and irreversible
and local and regional.
Based on the practical experiences in livestock waste treatment in project countries, in
order to effectively manage the livestock waste, there is a need for pollution reduction at
the source. A number of end of the pipe treatment options are proposed including:
ž Solid waste treatment: Constructing manure storage and encouraging livestock
farmers to make compost at small farms, and construct composting holes at the
commune/large farm level (for those with available land and where manure market is
developed). Using locally available materials such as dry straw, straw ash and earth
worms to compost solid manure. Treat wastewater at commune/large farm level by
using sediment tank and available ponds.
ž Installation of small biogas digesters at household farms (small scale livestock farms);
Wastewater then will be treated at commune level by biological treatment: anaerobic,
aerobic, anoxic processes. Treated wastewater then can be used for ferrigation.
ž Centralized (public) livestock waste treatment plant, especially in North Vietnam,
consisting of sediment tank, anaerobic tank process, aerobic tank process and/or
biological ponds.
27

ž Construction of centralized Biogas plant for large scale farms and communal
treatment plants.
28

Environmental Settings and Key Impacts
Project provinces/counties are densely populated and also have high density of animal
population. The principal arable land utilization consists of paddy rice, perennial crops
and tree crops (mainly in South Vietnam), and upland rain-fed crops. Fish pond-pig
farming is practiced in a number of project areas and is the major agricultural practice in
Boluo County of Guangdong, China. Individual land holdings vary from as small as
0.02ha in Ha Tay province of Vietnam to as large as over 10 hectares in Thailand. As
individual land holdings at village/commune level are very small, owners are unable to
live on the farm produce. Therefore, many farm households, especially in Northern
Vietnam, raise small-scale pig/poultry farms within their residence. Due to large market
demand of city dwellers for livestock products, the numbers of livestock raising farms
within the peri-urban areas are on the rise in most project areas.
Key regional environmental issues related to livestock raising and manure management
that have been identified in the country EA reports from the natural and induced
biophysical degradation and socio-economic point of view. The key issues are:
ž Water quality;
ž Soil biota/decline in physical properties;
ž Loss of biodiversity;
ž Small land holdings;
ž Awareness and skill development
ž Community participation;
ž Lack of enforceable environmental policies; and
ž Role of women.
The different project components/activities can also lead to short-term and long-term
negative impacts on different environmental components, if sustainability aspects of the
project are not taken into consideration during project implementation and operation.
The negative issues can be reversible or of irreversible nature. Most of the short-term,
reversible and long-term, irreversible impacts occur during project construction and
implementation phase.
Since the proposed LWMEAP is basically an environmental improvement project, if
successfully implemented and operated, there should be little or no significant negative
impact on natural environment during operation phase of the project and most impacts
should be positive. The majority of identified potential negative impacts during operation
are of environmental hazard nature that could occur due to environmental mishaps or
poor construction or design of project components and activities.
Potential sources of effect are identified through review of available project documents
and field visits by the EA teams in to the project areas. The available information was
also analyzed to determine if any construction, implementation or operation activities of
the project can potentially cause any significant environmental impact. The main
29

identified issues are identified in the country specific EA reports and are summarized in
the following paragraphs.
Potential environmental impacts and risks that might occur during construction,
implementation, and operation of the project are summarized and presented in the
following sections based on project phases. The details of potential impacts and
mitigation measures from activities of the project are predicted and described in detail in
the appended country specific EA reports. The details of recommendations for
appropriate mitigation measures that should be adopted to minimize the potential
negative impacts and environmental risks are also presented in the appended report.
Key Impacts during Construction/Implementation Phase
The majority of potential impacts during project construction are of short-term and
reversible nature including temporary land occupancy, water pollution due to sediment
load increase of surface waters during construction of the facilities, minor noise and air
pollution, minor disturbance of natural vegetation within construction areas, and soil
disturbance.
The potential irreversible, long-term negative impact is mainly identified to be due to
cumulative and residual impact of medium to large-scale manure treatment plants
(aerobic/anaerobic ponds) and their need for permanent removal of land (land use
change) for construction of lagoons. This potential impact is identified in every country
specific EA report, especially where a communal or large-size facility development
option that requires large tract of land is proposed in areas with high population density
and land shortage.
Key Impacts during Operation Phase
As was mentioned before, since the main objective of the project is to improve general
environmental and social-economic condition of the project areas and to reduce nutrient
loading of soil and water resources by livestock waste, if the project is implemented
successfully, the negative environmental impacts of the project should be minimal.
However, due to the nature of the project, a number of activities are identified that, if not
handled in an environmentally sound manner, can potentially have significant adverse
effects on natural and/or social environment due to poor project implementation,
maintenance and/or management of the project activities.
This section discusses such issues and provides mitigation measures to prevent or
minimize the potential adverse environmental impacts. These potential impacts are
described separately based on three major potential manure management processes that
are identified by the project. The three groups corresponding to proposed livestock
manure treatment technologies include: (1) lagoon systems (aerobic and/or anaerobic),
(2) biogas production, and (3) application of treated liquid and solid manure (manure
recycling) on crop land/fish ponds.
If the project components and activities are implemented according the plans, it is
believed that the project will have mainly positive impact on natural and social
environment during project operation. The major potential negative environmental
impacts that are identified are environmental hazards/risks of the project and can only
30

occur due to poor construction, under-design, poor maintenance, and/or poor quality of
agricultural extension.
Lagoon Systems
Generally, if successfully implemented, lagoons manure treatment system should have
significant positive impact on natural environment and public health status compared to
without the project scenario. Microbial action in the lagoon should substantially reduce
chemical and biochemical oxygen demands (COD and BOD, respectively), total solids
(TS), volatile solids (VS), nitrogen (nitrate nitrogen, organic nitrogen) and phosphorous
component of livestock manure. The residency time should also allow for reduction of
pathogen count in the effluent.
However, lagoon systems could have potential environmental risks/hazards due to poor
construction (poorly compacted embankments, lack of lining in areas with coarse
texture/high permeability substrata), design (under-sizing, insufficient aeration
mechanism) or O&M activities (improper operation, inappropriate transport of manure
stocks by trucks, pipes, canals, etc). Examples of potential negative impacts stemming
from such mishaps include:
ž Water pollution due to breakage of the above-ground embankment, causing water and
soil pollution;
ž Illegal release of effluent with high nutrient load to surface waters due to poor system
operation or inadequate lagoon capacity;
ž Odor problems due to poor aeration;
ž Leakage/percolation from the side (through-flow) and bottom of the lagoons
(percolation), causing groundwater pollution; and
ž Water pollution due to overflow of lagoons as a result of small lagoon size (poor
design) and inadequate capacity for required manure residence time, and/or
inadequate allowance for incidents of repeated major storms (typhoons).
Biogas Production System (covered lagoons/biogas tanks)
As for lagoon treatment system, the main objective of biogas production system is to
reduce adverse impacts of livestock manure on the environment. However, unlike a
lagoon, enclosed anaerobic digestion systems for biogas production are not subject to the
influences of poor weather condition and high intensity rainfalls, making effluents from
digesters more stable and uniform than effluents from anaerobic lagoons.
Anaerobic digestion processes result in source strength reduction by converting incoming
organic matter to methane, carbon dioxide and small amounts of microbial biomass.
Most pathogens and weed seeds are destroyed, and odors are reduced. If successfully
implemented and as long as there are needs for the produced gases, environmental
benefits of biogas system are positive. If properly designed and constructed, odors are
controlled and there will be no gas leakage. Produced methane gases will be used by the
inhabitants, reducing their release into the atmosphere and greenhouse gases.
31

The potential negative environmental impacts of this system, as per aerobic lagoon
system are mainly might happen if there are mishaps. The major potential environmental
hazards of biogas system include:
ž Liquid in biogas pits have high nutrient load (nitrogen and phosphorous) and can be
potential source of water pollution if it is intentionally or mistakenly discharged to
water bodies, or leak to shallow groundwater (percolation from leaky gas tank.
Draining of biogas tank effluent to water bodies can happen as a result of poor system
operation, over use of water for animal/pen cleaning and/or under design of the
system, causing the collection of an excess amount of effluent in the pits before
termination of residence time;
ž Poor construction of biogas pits could also allow for leakage of nutrient rich effluent
to shallow groundwater resources and surface waters by percolation and through
flow; and
ž Risk of biogas pit explosion due to technical or operational problems, especially in
hot weather condition that can be a major environmental and social/public safety
concern.
Manure Recycling on Agricultural Land/Fish Ponds
When main purpose of using livestock manure is to apply nutrients to agricultural crops,
manure should first be treated to remove pathogens and weed seeds before being applied
to land. One of the potential pre-treatment processes that manure can go through before
land application is composting. The main potential impacts of composting process as
well as land application of manure on natural environment are briefly described:
ž During composting process, especially during fermentation phase significant amount
of wastewater is created. Farm maintenance activities related to manure collection
and composting including cleaning of floors, equipments, and machineries can also
add to volume of water and possibility of water pollution. Eutrophication is one of the
main impacts of release of wastewater from composting/manure collection activities
that is very rich in nutrients, especially nitrogen and phosphorous;
ž Land application of manure should also follow strict application timing and quantity
procedures to ensure that manure is applied at the right times during the growing
season and that the right quantities are applied so that crops receive appropriate
quantities of nutrient at the right stages of plant growth. Indiscriminate application of
manure on crops, especially annual crops, can potentially cause nutrient overloading
of the soil exchange sites and ultimately lead to leaching of nitrogen to the
groundwater and loss of phosphorus to surface waters by surface run off and soil
erosion processes. Over application of manure, especially liquid manure can also
cause significant salt injury and to the crops and reduce the crop yield and even burn
the crops in extreme circumstances. Application of manure, high in nitrogen content
at later stages of crop growth can also cause unwanted increase in vegetative growth
and yield reduction;
ž Fermentation of livestock manure is a notable source of air pollution since this
process potentially produces CO2, CH4, and other volatile organic compounds,
causing increase in nuisance odors. Odors can also be generated during other phases
32

of composting process, especially during collection and separation and before
fermentation;
ž Manure application on land, especially if it is not immediately incorporated into the
soil (ploughed in) can cause significant nitrogen loss to atmosphere due to
ammonification process, causing both atmospheric and odor pollution and in extreme
cases eye irritation; and
ž Livestock manure has long been regarded as beneficial material and has been used for
centuries as an effective nutrient source for higher crops. It provides an organic
matter to soil that improves its physical properties (improved soil structure). Manure
helps to stabilize soil aggregates and prevent soil erosion. However, if manure is
applied at excessive levels, it can cause soil toxicity due to nutrient overloading and
development of nutrient imbalance in the soil.
The majority of potential impacts identified, especially in the case of non-point source
pollution from farm application of manure should not occur if project is designed and
implemented successfully. Most of the identified environmental impacts are avoidable if
appropriate agricultural extension services are provided to the farmers within project area
and extra care is taken during project construction and implementation to ensure that
designs specifications are thoroughly followed by the contractors. It is crucial for the
success of the project and to prevent significant negative environmental impacts to
provide appropriate training to agricultural extension officers on use of liquid and solid
manure for crop production and provide funding for on farm trials to ensure appropriate
manure application rates and timing for different crops and cropping patterns are
established in different ecological zones before wide spread blanket application of liquid
and solid manure on land.
33

Alternative Analysis
Since the propose LWMEAP is mainly a rehabilitation and improvement project and
considers the improvement of natural environment involving water and soil resources,
public health, and living standards of farmers, project study teams only review the "with"
and "without" project scenarios and no other alternatives were considered. This chapter
will discuss the "with project" and "without project" alternatives.
Analysis of alternatives defines the issues and a clear basis for choice among alternatives
for the decision makers and public in EA analysis. In order to achieve systematic
decision, it is desirable to use the analysis which involves the comparison of a set of
alternatives relative to a series of decision factors. The approach that is followed in this
study to carry out the comparative analysis is based on assigning the scale value
depending on the characteristics of the impacts (marginal, significant, and major).
An environmental impact matrix on the principle of Delphi weighing method (Hakim, S.
and J. Weinblatt, 1993) has been developed by assigning numerical values to each impact
source of the environment with positive sign of the effect for beneficial and negative sign
for the effects that have adverse effects and quantifying the extent of impact as follows:
Marginal Impact: 1
Significant Impact: 2-3
Major Potential Impact: 4-5
The various identified key environmental components have been assigned project
importance values (PIV) out of a total of 1000 points depending up on the evaluation of
the environmental setup in the area and the objectives of the proposed watershed
development project. The values assigned to the key environmental components and
PIVs for each project key environmental component are based on the value judgment of
the consultants. Such methods are inherently subjective, but generally provide good
outputs. Such aggregation of numerical impacts through suitable transformation
functions results in the combination of inherently different items into a single number and
leads to the information about the various impacts from the numerous project actions.
Once the level of significance is decided, the parameters in each component are summed
to give the environmental impact of the project on the various environmental
components. Two different scenarios of the alternatives are given below:
Without Project Scenario
Table 4.1 shows the potential environmental impact matrix without project scenario
which means that in absence of project interventions, the impacts on different
environmental components will be of negative nature with long or short term nature. The
most significant impacts on environment will be in order on water environment, soil
environment, water environment, socio-economic environment, and biological
environment. These negative impact will directly or indirectly cause the continuing
degradation and nutrient loading of soil and water resources and hence the community.
For example, in absence of proper manure treatment measures, there will be a continuing
significant and major potential negative impact water resources and public health (water
35

and socio-economic environment), thereby enhancing the degradation of water and socio-
economic environment and quality of surface and groundwater resources.

Under the Baseline or Without-GEF Scenario, some technical assistance activities from
FAO/LEAD, as well as the ongoing, limited regulatory efforts of the local governments,
are expected to continue. However, they will address only some of the symptoms and in a
fragmented fashion at the individual farm level, and will not be able to tackle the problem
at a comprehensive, watershed level. As a result, the imbalance between the level of
nutrient inputs and absorptive capacity of the land will worsen.
With Project Scenario
Table 4.2 shows the potential environmental impact matrix with project scenario which
means that the proposed activities have to be designed in such a way so as to improve the
environment of the region on the sustainable basis.
In general, different manure
treatment and recycling techniques, and development of environmental policies through
development of participatory "code of practice" development and enforcement will have
significant and major potential positive impacts on key environmental components,
project components such as manure management and recycling techniques have to be
carefully applied and monitored to ensure positive impacts are warranted and adverse
impact on land and soil environment due to over application or untimely application of
manure is avoided.
COMPARISON OFALTERNATIVE SCENARIO
Environmental impacts of the project on each category are presented in Table 4.3 both
'with" and "without" the project. The cumulative assessment arrived at indicators that
demonstrate that there is a significant positive impact on the environmental features once
the project interventions are applied in the sub-watershed areas and further disseminated,
not only in the neighboring farming communities, but should also ensure that project
findings are disseminated to other areas within the project countries and between
countries bordering the South China Sea through regional development component. Table
4-3 indicates that environmental impacts of the project components are the highest on
water environment followed by socio-economic/public health and soil/land environment.
The high positive nature of the impact on the socio-economic environment is a clear
indication that the objectives of the proposed manure management project and proper
implementation of the proposed activities will improve the quality of life in the region.
Urbanization and population increase and improvement of living standards in project
countries has increased the demand for meat products and provided the favorable
economic condition for livestock development. Urbanization and increase in demand for
animal products have been accompanied with the specification and intensification in
animal production and disintegration of crop and animal producers.
"Do-Nothing" Alternative
The rapidly increasing livestock production in the coastal regions bordering the South
China Sea is leading to increasing environmental problem.
36

Table 4-1 Potential Environmental Impact Matrix (Without Project Scenario)
Key Environmental
PIV
Project Components
Score
Components
Conducive
Manure
Regional
Management
Policy
Management
Coordination
and M&E
Water Environment
300
Surface Hydrology
50
0
-1
0
0
-50
Groundwater
100
-1
-1
0
0
-200
Water Quality 150
-2
-3
-1
0
-900
Soil/Land Environment
250
Soil Erosion
30
0
-1
0
0
-30
Arable lands 40
0
0
0
0
0
Wetlands
50
0
-2
0
0
-100
Soil Fertility &
50
0
-1
0
0
-50
Productivity
Soil Biota & Degradation
40
0
-1
0
0
-40
Soil Moisture
40
0
0
0
0
0
Biological Environment
200
Flora and Micro Flora
50
-1
-1
0
0
-100
Fauna and micro Fauna
50
-1
+1
0
0
0
Nature Reserves, National
40
0
0
0
0
0
Parks
Biodiversity
60
-1
-1
0
0
-120
Air Environment
100
Ambient Air (Odor)
60
-1
-2
0
0
-180
Global Warming 40
-1
-1
-1
0
-120
Socio-Economic
250
Environment
Community Participation
40
0
0
0
0
0
Social Economy
40
0
+1
0
0
+40
Public Health
60
-1
-2
0
0
-180
Gender Issues
40
-1
-1
0
0
-80
Employment
30
0
0
0
0
0
Other Water Users
40
-1
-1
0
0
-80
27

Table 4-2 Potential Environmental Impact Matrix (With Project Scenario)
Key Environmental
PIV
Project Components
Score
Components
Conducive
Manure
Regional
Management
Policy
Management
Coordination
and M&E
Water Environment
300
Surface Hydrology
50
0
1
0
0
50
Groundwater
100
1
2
1
1
500
Water Quality
150
2
3
2
1
1200
Soil/Land Environment
250
Soil Erosion
30
0
1
0
0
30
Arable lands
40
0
1
0
1
80
Wetlands
50
0
1
1
0
100
Soil Fertility &
50
0
3
1
1
250
Productivity
Soil Biota & Degradation
40
0
2
0
0
80
Soil Moisture
40
0
1
0
0
40
Biological Environment
200
Flora and Micro Flora
50
0
-1
0
0
-50
Fauna and micro Fauna
50
0
1
0
0
50
Nature Reserves, National
40
0
0
0
0
0
Parks
Biodiversity
60
0
1
1
0
120
Air Environment
100
Ambient Air (Odor) 60
1
3
1
1
240
Global Warming
40
1
1
1
0
120
Socio-Economic
250
Environment
Community Participation
40
1
2
1
0
160
Social Economy
40
1
1
0
0
80
Public Health
60
1
3
1
0
300
Gender Issues
40
1
1
0
0
80
Employment
30
0
1
0
0
30
Other Water Users
40
1
2
1
0
160
29

Table 4-3 Score Difference, Alternative Scenarios
Key Environmental Components
Without Project
With Project
Increase
Water Environment
Surface Hydrology
-50
50
100
Groundwater -200
500
700
Water Quality
-900
1200
2100
Total
-1150
1750
2900
Soil/Land Environment
Soil Erosion
-30
30
60
Arable lands
0
80
80
Wetlands
-100
100
200
Soil Fertility & Productivity
-50
250
300
Soil Biota & Degradation
-40
80
120
Soil Moisture
0
40
40
Total
-220
580
800
Biological Environment
Flora and Micro Flora
-100
-50
50
Fauna and micro Fauna
0
50
50
Nature Reserves, National Parks
0
0
0
Biodiversity
-120
120
240
Total
-220
120
340
Air Environment
Ambient Air (Odor)
-180
240
420
Global Warming
-120
120
240
Total
-300
360
660
Socio-Economic Environment
Community Participation
0
160
160
Social Economy
+40
80
120
Public Health
-180
300
480
Gender Issues
-80
80
160
Employment 0
30
30
Downstream Water Users
-80
160
240
Total
-300
810
1110
31

Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan
Environmental Management Plans (EMP) are prepared to ensure that environmental
considerations are integrated into the project survey and design, contract documents and
project supervision and monitoring. These are tool for mitigating or offsetting the
potential adverse environmental impacts resulting from watershed development programs
in the region. The preparation of such implementation procedures are the outcome of a
regional environmental assessment (REA). The environmental management plans mainly
consist of integrating potential impacts (positive or negative), environmental mitigation
measures, principal environmental indicators & easily measurable field indicators
together with implementation schedule, monitoring plans and the estimated cost. Such
action plans are an important component of the REA process.
Moreover, it is very important to highlight here that such environmental mitigation
measures should be used in conjunction with good management practices and good
engineering design, construction and operation practices particularly for manure
treatment plans and related infrastructures.
Country specific environmental management and monitoring plans (EMMP) have been
developed as a part of country EA reports, prepared by the national environmental
consultants, supported by the international consultant. The EMMPs are developed to
reflect environmental monitoring requirements of the project during different phases of
project development: pre-implementation, construction, implementation, and operation.
Administrative Agencies: The project management offices (PMO) in Guangdong,
project implementation unit (PIU) in Thailand and project management unit (PMU) in
Vietnam are responsible for implementation EMP, while the local environmental
protection bureaus (EPB), pollution control department (PCD), and Vietnam
Environmental Protection Agency (VEPA) will supervise the plan enforcement through
monitoring systems in China, Thailand and Vietnam, respectively. PMO/PIU/PMU will
consist of officials from livestock and environmental ministries/departments.
Management group will invite experts including environment scientists, animal
husbandry experts, and public and animal health experts to establish Advisory Group for
the technical guiding and consultation.
The prepared EMMPs include:
(1) Establishment of environment protection sector's responsibilities for the monitoring
and management, and strengthening environmental management capability of the project
management office;
(2) Identifying, planning, and budgeting environment protection training needs and
workshop for environmental officers and professional staff;
(3) Plans for environmental monitoring at sub-watershed level, including details of
environmental monitoring needs during different phases of the project; and
(4) Detailed monitoring plans for surface water, groundwater and soils within sub-
watersheds, used as demonstration areas for different project activities.
33

Under environmental categories the end results expected for the proposed livestock waste
management project, as have been revealed from the examination of issues vis-a-vis the
project components/activities for the three project countries are the followings:
ž Development and implementation of conducive environmental policies through
participatory approach;
ž Restoring balanced land use plan/package
ž Conserving and upgrading soil fertility/productivity through manure recycling on
land;
ž Conserving and improving water quality;
ž Improving biodiversity, both macro and micro flora/fauna - Induced and Ex-situ
(outside project immediate area of influence) biodiversity in addition to In-situ
biodiversity (within project sub-watersheds);
ž Enhanced productivity and production of agricultural products through manure
recycling; and
ž Improved overall and composite Ecological and environmental status of the
project sub-watersheds and their sustainability.
Monitoring Key Environmental Issues
The proposed environmental monitoring programs are provided as the requirements of
country specific EMMPs and should provide the necessary data describing the major
trends in and impact on the environment. The obtained information should enable not
only the project environmental team to ensure project has minimal negative
environmental impacts, but the acquired data will also be used by project management
and monitoring unit in monitoring and evaluating rate of project achievements and
success with respect to the above expected goals and desired results.
There are fairly good range of tools, equipment, instrument, survey techniques to help
gather observations over selected time intervals. From these observations, values of
indicators could be computed. Some of the commonly used tools proposed for
environmental monitoring include:
ž GIS to determine land use shifts , monitoring land utilisation records and
environmental monitoring findings, especially during project operation;
ž Soil loss, nutrient loss, turbidity and some pollution/contamination using manual
run-off sampling at sediment observation stations (if any available) and/or at the
base of representative agricultural fields receiving liquid manure;
ž Surface water quality monitoring at established sampling points upstream, point
of discharge (immediately downstream of manure treatment areas), and
downstream;
ž Ground water quality measurement using battery of piezometer tubes (up-slope
and down-slope of representative treatment plans and manure recycling fields),
and using float & tape to record rise and fall of water table. Proposed
measurements include TKN, TP, pH, BOD5, CODMn, SS, E-coli, and fecal
34

coliforms. Additionally, NO3-N and NH4-N will be also be analyzed in
groundwater samples.
ž Organic matter, TKN, TP, Available P, soil reaction in manure recycling fields,
using sampled soil & laboratory analysis.
ž Plant population, crop yield, using crop surveys in manure recycling areas;
ž Community interaction (technical, social, ecological and economic) using
prepared questionnaires & using sampled respondents; and
ž Geographical Information System (GIS) to support and present the findings of
monitoring activities.
Table 5.1 gives the brief outline of the suggested methodology and monitoring tool
against each principal environmental indicators comprising of some of the techniques
mentioned above. For effective presentation and interpretation of environmental and
social management monitoring findings, GIS-facility will be used as an important tool.

Table 5.1 Monitoring Framework
Issue
Indicators to
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitor
Location
Frequency
Surface Water
TKN, TP, pH,
Representative
Quarterly (Mid-dry
Quality
BOD5, CODMn, SS,
water courses,
season, after first
E-coli, and fecal
upstream, below
major storm, mid
coliforms
point of entry (mid-
monsoon, End of
stream) and
Monsoon)
downstream
Groundwater
TKN, TP, NO3-N,
Upslope and down
Quarterly (Mid-dry
Quality
NH4-N, pH, BOD5,
slope of manure
season, after first
CODMn, E-coli, and
treatment and
major storm, mid
fecal coliforms
recycling systems,
monsoon, End of
using piezometers
Monsoon)
Soil Characteristics
TKN, TP, pH,
Soil/sediment
Before manure
Avail. P, OM
sampling upslope
application, after
and down slope of
four leaf stage, after
three of the major
harvest.
manure receiving
cropping systems.
Crop Characteristic
Yield, Physionomy
Same fields used for After harvest. Crop
soil sampling
physiognomy to be
checked at soil
sampling stages.
35

The experiences of the application of GIS for watershed surveys and planning in different
watershed development projects clearly define its merit. The project found GIS system to
function for not only information retrieval system, but also as a spatial analysis system.
The GIS system is proposed to be used for assessment of land resources using block wise
database. For each land block, a number of environmental and social parameters will be
selected to describe the natural and social attributes. Since, the main cause of water and
soil nutrient loading in the project areas is believed to be the livestock waste and
irrational land use, the natural attributes aspects included geography, climate, soil,
conditions of land-use, manure management practices (before and after project
implementation), environmental policy (code of practice) requirements, and obtained
measurement of soil, surface and groundwater characteristics.
Environmental Management and Monitoring Schedule
For effective environmental management and monitoring, the identification of
representative sampling sites along with the frequency of data collection is of utmost
importance. To understand the process inside sub-watershed areas, principal indicators
must be sampled according to how frequently changes may occur. Sample collection may
be monthly, seasonally or yearly. The changes of analyzed results would play an
important role in analyzing causes and effects inside sub-watershed areas. It would be
useful to have a coarse end monitoring for the entire project impacted area, mainly based
on the findings of social assessment teams and interviews with project beneficiaries and
non-beneficiary residents. More intense & detailed sampling and analysis according to
the requirements of the EMMP will be planned in selected "representative" micro & sub-
watersheds in each project area.
Tables 5.2 and 5.3, and 5.4 give the monitoring frequency for each type of principal
environmental indicators (surface water, groundwater and soils) along with the
implementing agencies.
36

Table 5-2 Surface Water Resources Monitoring
No. of sampling
Sampling points or
Frequency/
Parameters
locations within
Remarks
samples to be collected
Schedule
project site
Total Kjeldahl
One in the mid-dry
Upstream
Nitrogen (TKN)
period, one after
Definition of
One for the
first major storm,
heavy rain will
Surface
Mid stream
major drainage
one in the wettest
be dependent
water
channel
month (monsoon)
on local
Down stream
and one at the end
condition
of the wet period
One in the dry
Upstream
period, one during
Definition of
One for the
the first heavy rain,
heavy rain will
Surface
Total Phosphorus
Midstream
major drainage
one in the wettest
be dependent
Water
channel
month and one at
on local
the end of the wet
condition
Downstream
period
One in the dry
Upstream
period, one during
One for the
the first heavy rain,
Surface
CODMn, BOD5
Midstream
major drainage
one in the wettest

water
channel
month and one at
Downstream
the end of the wet
period
One in the dry

Upstream
period, one during
One for the
the first heavy rain,
Surface
pH
Midstream
major drainage
one in the wettest
water
channel
month and one at
Downstream
the end of the wet
period
One in the dry
Upstream
period, one during
One for the
the first heavy rain,
Total Suspended
Surface
Midstream
major drainage
one in the wettest

Solids (TSS)
water
channel
month and one at
Downstream
the end of the wet
period
One in the dry
Upstream
period, one during
One for the
the first heavy rain,
E-coli, Fecal
Surface
Midstream
major drainage
one in the wettest

Coliforms
water
channel
month and one at
Downstream
the end of the wet
period
37

Table 5.3 Groundwater Resources Monitoring
Sampling points or samples
No. of sampling locations in
Parameters
Frequency/ Schedule
to be collected
project site
Top of slope
One for each major type of cropping
Before manure application,
Farm
Bottom of slope
system, maximum 3 sites
at 4-leaf stage, after harvest
Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen (TKN)
One in the mid-dry period,
Top of slope

one after first major storm,
Treatment
Three for the whole sub-watershed
one in the wettest month
area
(monsoon) and one at the
Bottom of slope
end of the wet period
Top of slope
One for each major type of cropping
Before manure application,
Farm
system, maximum 3 sites
at 4-leaf stage, after harvest
Bottom of slope
NH +
--
One in the mid-dry period,
3 -N, NO3
N
Top of slope
one after first major storm,
Treatment
Three for the whole sub-watershed
one in the wettest month
area
Bottom of slope
(monsoon) and one at the
end of the wet period
Top of slope
One for each major type of cropping
Before manure application,
Farm
Bottom of slope
system, maximum 3 sites
at 4-leaf stage, after harvest
One in the mid-dry period,
Total Phosphorus
top of slope
one after first major storm,
Treatment
Three for the whole sub-watershed
one in the wettest month
area
(monsoon) and one at the
bottom of slope
end of the wet period
top of slope
One for each major type of cropping
Before manure application,
Farm
bottom of slope
system, maximum 3 sites
at 4-leaf stage, after harvest
One in the mid-dry period,
CODMn
top of slope
one after first major storm,
Treatment
Three for the whole sub-watershed
one in the wettest month
area
bottom of slope
(monsoon) and one at the
end of the wet period
top of slope
One for each major type of cropping
Before manure application,
Farm
bottom of slope
system, maximum 3 sites
at 4-leaf stage, after harvest
One in the mid-dry period,
BOD5
top of slope
one after first major storm,
Treatment
Three for the whole sub-watershed
one in the wettest month
area
bottom of slope
(monsoon) and one at the
end of the wet period
top of slope
Before manure application,
Farm
One for the major drainage channel
bottom of slope
at 4-leaf stage, after harvest
E-coli, Total
One in the mid-dry period,
Top of slope
Coliforms
one after first major storm,
Treatment
Three for the whole sub-watershed
one in the wettest month
area
(monsoon) and one at the
Bottom of slope
end of the wet period
39

Table 5.4 Soil and Crop Monitoring
Sampling points,
Sampling
Frequency/
Indicator
Manure Application Locations within
Remarks
Schedule
Farms
project sites
Top of slope
One for each

major cropping
Composite sample,
Organic Matter
system,
top 10 cm
Bottom of slope
maximum 3
Available P
Top of slope
One for each
Before initial
major cropping
Composite sample
manure
system,
(15-30 cm depth)
application, at
TKN
Bottom of slope
maximum 3.
four leaf stage,
after harvest, at
four leaf stage,
Top of slope
2nd crop, after
Composite sample,
pH, EC*103
harvest, 2nd
top 10 cm
One for each
crop
Bottom of slope
major cropping
system,
maximum 3
Composite sample,
Top of slope

top 10 cm and/or
Total Phosphorus
sediment in
collected field
Bottom of slope
runoff
41

Environmental Training Requirements
Environmental Capacity Building
In order to facilitate and ensure that the project outputs listed above define the continuing
utility of the project interventions or sustainability of the project, there must be activities
which will create and/or enhance the capacity of the project implementing
authority/department as well as individuals/households, communities to manage the area
developed and abate similar problems/issues in future. This would include utilization of
goods & services, upgrade skills and awareness, prevent new threats, assess impact
periodically and finally take new initiatives to upgrade and enhance capability of both
government officials and beneficiaries to meet project's aspirations.
Topics for Training
Training at all levels of officers, field functionaries, beneficiaries, NGO-personnel, etc.
should be made an integral part of not only EMMP, but should also be considered in all
project activities. In addition to usual components like planning through PRA & Micro
planning, interventions etc., it should be imparted to building understanding and
competence.
Key environmental issues that should be included in the training programs include:
The levels of training
The EMMP envisages to include at least two training sessions; one at early stages of
project initiation and one in workshop format at the end of Year 1 of project
implementation to review the lessons learned in different project areas and amend and
improve proposed EMMP activities to be implemented during project operation. The
proposed training camps, courses, and workshops are envisaged mainly for those officers
who will be assigned as the environmental officer by the PMO, PIU, and PMU in
Guangdong, Thailand, and Vietnam respectively. However, the training courses will also
be useful for:
ž Policy makers, administrators and managers (senior level personel from project
implementing/executing agencies;
ž Extension workers and field functionaries of the implementing agency, NGO, etc.;
ž Private Individuals, private large scale livestock farm personnel, and other
commercial organizations;
ž Farmers and other beneficiary; and
ž Training of Trainers.
Although attending the environmental training activities by NGOs, extension workers,
private large-scale livestock farmers, and other interested organizations is strongly
encouraged, however, the project will not bear the cost of travel, time, or lodging of such
individuals and their respective institutions will be responsible for the cost of attending
the training courses.
43

Training Structure, Components and Materials
Training activities could be structured in the form of classroom training, field training,
and workshops. The proposed training structure is as follows:

Training
Format

Duration
Days
Orientation
camps

1-2
Skill development modules

2-3
Exchange of experiences

1-2
On site interactions (Travelling workshop)
2-3
Audio-visual presentations, group discussions on prepared leaflets, manuals, video films
etc. to be used.
The preliminary list of proposed training courses includes:
ž Understanding and application of environmental laws, regulations, standards and
norms of the Vietnamese government concerning environmental protection;
ž Environmental management criteria utilized by the World Bank;
ž Key environmental issues and indicators thereof;
ž Use of available tools and appropriate methodologies to perform soil and water
sampling, sediment sampling in collected runoff, crop yield analysis, etc; and
ž Environmental technology and environmental monitoring techniques including:
(1) status of surface waters, principles of hydrogeology, and groundwater
distribution; (2) basic knowledge of environmental monitoring; (3) Pollution
control technologies; (5) basics of water sampling and sample treatment for
analysis of different elements identified in EMP; and (6) preparation of
environmental monitoring reports.
EMMP Budget
Table 5.5 presents the cost estimates for implementation of different activities of the
EMMP in the project countries. The total EMMP cost is estimated at USD 76,153, USD
115,720, and USD 95,007 for Guangdong, Thailand, and Vietnam, respectively. The
details and breakdown of costs are presented in the country specific EAs.

The provided cost estimates are preliminary in nature and will be updated as the specific
location of manure treatment activities, manure treatment methodology, and manure
recycling fields are determined and site specific environmental monitoring and number of
sampling locations are finalized.
44

Table 5.5 Total Cost Estimate of EMMP by country
Item
Guangdong
Thailand
Vietnam
Implementation
Operation
Subtotal2
Implementation
Operation
Subtotal
Implementation
Operation
Subtotal
Incremental staff cost
2,000
4,000
6,000
3,000
8,000
11,000
4,000
8,000
12,000
Training
15,140
15,140
14,700
14,700
20,400
0
20,400
EMP Analysis
10,098
37,992
48,090
20,100
62,400
79,500
11,754
42,216
53,970
Sub Total
27,238
41,992
69,230
34,800
70,400
105,200
36,154
50,216
86,370
Contingency, 10%
2,724
4,199
6,923
3,480
7,040
10,520
3,615
5,022
8,637
Total
29,962
46,191
76,153
38,280
77,440
115,720
39,769
55,238
95,007
2 It is important to understand that the above cost estimates for EMMP activities are based on the number of project demonstration provinces/counties that have
already been identified. Since the project will be developed sequentially, it is understood that the project might add new demonstration sites, project
provinces/counties in the coming years. Addition of new sites will increase the EMMP costs proportionally.
41

Other Significant Issues
Findings of EA reports indicate that the proposed project, if successfully implemented, will
have significant positive impact on the social and environmental well being of the project sub-
watersheds and downstream areas. To ensure successful implementation of the project, not
only from technical point of view, but to also have social and environmental acceptability and
sustainability, a number of issues is identified that needs to be included in the decision
making process including:
ž It is needless to mention that community participation and support is the key to success of
any development project. The proposed LWMEAP is not an exception. There is a need to
have extensive dialogue with the communities to ensure that technically sound manure
treatment and recycling proposals are acceptable to the local communities and are not
forced on a top-down approach to the local communities. The findings of social impact
assessment and questionnaires should be effectively used by the local and international
expert teams involved in deciding on technical approach to manure management in
different communities to ensure the sustainability, adaptability, and replicability of the
proposed manure treatment options. Therefore, use of participatory approaches such as
participatory rural appraisal (PRA) to watershed development is encouraged to help in
achieving the success of the project objectives. PRA is an excellent tool for building
rapport with the villagers and could be used to introduce technically sound interventions
and also monitoring their views with regard to the project success.
ž Similarly, institution building at the local level is also of crucial importance for sustaining
the people's interventions. The PRA method would need to be adopted in the project as
well and is expected to be conducted before any major project activity is initiated.
Different methods such as conducting workshops, exposure visits, street theatre, role
plays, puppet shows, film shows, slogans and posters can help to create awareness among
villagers in the project areas.
ž Since the proposed project is going to be developed sequentially, the exact location of
manure treatment plants, manure recycling fields, and methods to be implemented are not
yet finalized. It is important to have a site evaluation of all identified sites to ensure that
the location of manure treatment plant, if any, is environmentally and socially acceptable,
before initiation of construction activities.
ž Since the project available budget is finite, it is crucial for the success of the project
activities to ensure that no duplication of efforts occur between project components. It is
important to provide appropriate vehicles in the project management and design to ensure
that maximum use of data obtained by the EMMP, Social impact assessment (SIA) reports
are made by the teams involved in development of different project components. Especial
attention should be made on methodologies and sampling frequencies that are
recommended for different social and environmental indicators and try to optimize
sampling procedures/frequencies so that the same data can be used by different experts at
minimum cost to the project.
ž Environmental compliance monitoring programs should be designed into all project
components: to ensure compliance with commitments made through participatory manure
management plans in LWMEAP; to enforce develop "code of practice" in project
demonstration areas and enforce environmental standards and approved plans; and to
protect important environmental and natural resource values in all project areas.
Environmental condition monitoring will be more fully developed during project
implementation and will most likely additionally include GIS-based land use/land
43

condition mapping in the livestock management and manure recycling aspects of the
LWMEAP project component 1 and 2; and simple indicators of ecosystem and public
health in the project areas.
It is strongly believed that if the proposed recommendations are successfully incorporated into
the project design, the proposed LWMEAP findings will have a very high rate of success and
adaptability within and between project countries.
44

Conclusions and Recommendations
General Conclusions
The environmental and social analysis of the LWMEAP in all three project countries indicate
that, if successfully implemented, the project should not only have no major direct or indirect
negative impacts on the natural resources and values of the environment, but its overall social
and environmental impacts would also be highly positive. The project should (1) improve
surface water quality and reduce groundwater contamination due to inappropriate livestock
waste disposal within and downstream of the project areas, (2) reduce incidents of epidemic
zoonotic diseases in project areas, (3) improve sanitation and general health status in the
project areas, (4) improve crop yield and land agricultural productivity in areas that are
involved in manure recycling activity, and (5) increase farmer income and livestock
production. Therefore, well being of the general public in project areas should generally
improve due to improvement of general hygiene and environmental quality.
Selection of Project Areas
The selected project areas in the three countries cover small, medium and large scale pig
farms and different pig raising systems including pig-fish pond (Boluo County, Guangdong),
pig-agricultural and/or horticultural crops (Ratchaburi and Chonburi Provinces, Thailand;
Dong Nai Province, Vietnam), and concentrated pig development in peri-urban areas (Dong
Nai and Ha Tay Provinces, Vietnam). Farmers who have shown interest to participate in the
project implementation and join the livestock waste management project have shown
willingness to fully support the project and to be involved in its day-to-day management.
Further, the selected sites are some of the highest concentration of swine per hectare in the
respective countries/province and are considered best suited as demonstration sites for
improvement manure management and recycling technologies.
Environmental Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
The environmental impacts of the project during implementation/construction phase of the
project are mostly temporal, reversible, and limited in magnitude. There are, however, a
number of unavoidable aspects of project implementation, which, if not well handled, may
have potential adverse environmental impacts. The level of such impacts will depend on the
success of and the manner in which proposed project specific environmental mitigation plans
and programs as detailed in country specific EMMPs are implemented. The temporary
negative impacts, believed to be minor, include:
(1) Vegetation damage during lagoon, or constructed wetland development for the
establishment of treatment facilities;
(2) Temporary land occupation at the construction sites;
(3) Potential soil erosion and corresponding increase in sediment load during construction;
and
(4) Potential temporary noise, air, and water pollution. However, if the mitigation measures
proposed the EMMPs are successfully implemented, the degree of environmental impacts
during this phase of the project will be insignificant.
During the operation phase, potential environmental issues that are identified in country
specific EA reports include:
45

(1) Potential risk of impact on water resources (surface and groundwater) in case of
percolation from the bottom of lagoons, breakage of lagoon embankments (above ground
lagoons), overflow due to incidence of high intensity rainfall above lagoon capacity, etc.;
(2) Potential soil pollution through improper application of solid and liquid manure (over
application or untimely application);
(3) Potential risk of explosion of biogas tanks;
(4) Potential risk of overproduction of solid and liquid manure and lack of available land or
farmer willingness to apply the manure on agricultural land, forcing direct discharge of
partially treated manure to surface water bodies;
(5) Potential cumulative impact from large manure treatment system such as the large volume
of liquid waste, sludge and sediment on soil and water resources (eutrophication, increase
in COD, coliforms, etc.);
(6) Potential cumulative impacts of nutrients that may accumulate in the lauds, when the solid
and liquid manure were applied or transported to the water bodies by runoff and through
flow causing eutrophication and increase in BOD and COD; and
(7) Potential health effect from pathogen and parasite through the application of solid and
liquid manure to the agriculture area, if adequate residence time is not provided to destroy
the pathogens.
The majority of identified environmental impacts during operation phase is based on assumed
mistakes/mishaps and can be avoided if project designs are appropriate and project
management and maintenance is strictly applied within project areas. By implementing
appropriate watershed management and best management practices in livestock manure
treatment systems, control of point and non-point source pollution of water resources should
be accomplished within and downstream of project areas and negative environmental
impacts/hazards should be minimized. Through development of "code of practice" through
cooperation of farmers and line agencies and development and enforcement of enforceable
livestock waste management policy frameworks and decision support tools, the results from
the project demonstration sites should expanded widely throughout the project countries and
between the countries bordering the South China Sea. Effective implementation of the
proposed mitigation measures would be the responsibility of project implementing agencies in
each country. In order to cope with the complex environmental issues, environmental
management and monitoring plans (EMMP) that includes required institutional strengthening,
environmental training and environmental monitoring plan are developed for each project
country and are included as Chapter 8 of each of the appended country specific EAs. The
EMMP must be strictly implemented to ensure that the proposed project would have neither
significant nor irreversible adverse impact on the natural environment of the project areas.
Recommendations
In order to prevent potential negative impacts of the proposed project as well as to improve
project's positive environmental impacts, it is suggested to adopt a dynamic approach to the
environmental monitoring and management plan. EMMPs should be reviewed throughout the
project cycle, and if any unforeseen environmental impacts are identified during project
implementation and operation phases, appropriate modifications should be made to the
EMMPs to reflect the new findings.
A follow-up program is recommended to analyze the overall environmental impacts of the
project implementation and operation. Such program will be served to verify that predictions
of impact put forward in the planning stages are as expected, and if not, adequate and timely
46

corrective measures would be developed and implemented. Hence, corrective measures can
be undertaken before irrevocable impacts have occurred. Information gathered from these
programs is also used as input to refine future project designs.
The proposed follow-up program should incorporate the monitoring plan as presented in
respective EMMPs.
A number of interim reports should be prepared by the environmental officers to ensure that
findings of provided EMMP are incorporated in the project design and in future sub-projects
and a dynamic approach to EMMP is followed by the project. The main reports that should
be prepared include:
1. An interim report at the end of the pre-construction program, to provide input to the
implementation phase;
2. Annual reports on the completion of implementation and construction activities;
3. Annual reports during the monitoring of project operation; and
4. Final report, summarizing impacts and successes of mitigation measures.
If significant unforeseen negative impacts are detected at any stage, the proposed program and
schedule should allow for timely re-evaluation of the EMMP and provide sufficient time to
implement further measures. Reports should be submitted to senior project implementing and
management entity in respective country, the World Bank, and various regional line agencies,
if requested, for review and comments.
Public Participation
The community and public involvement process was initiated during the environmental and
socio-economic surveys when livestock farmers and village communities were contacted to
obtain baseline information. It is imperative that these processes should continue so that the
project participants feel that they are involved in the project and that their views and concerns
are being adequately considered in the project planning process.
In order for the beneficiaries to participate in the project design more actively, country
specific beneficiary participation plans (BPP) are developed for the project areas. These plans
detail participating activities in each stage of project implementation and participants
including small, home-based livestock farmers, large farms, NGOs and the disadvantaged
groups including women in the project areas. Since no specific sites are specified in these
plans, it is suggested that the project implementing agencies in each country to develop a
concrete schedule based on the prepared plans to guarantee a smooth implementation of the
plan during project implementation.
In general, the majority of livestock farmers support the implementation of the project. In
addition, all the cadres at grassroots units, staff of the provincial and central project offices,
staff of the livestock division at provincial, governmental levels and officers of the line
agencies, NGOs, and the environmentalists who were interviewed strongly support the
implementation of the project.
Further Suggestions and Environmental Requirements
Project beneficiaries should strictly follow the livestock management technology and plans
and provincial environmental management division should effectively supervise the
implementation of the LWMEAP to control/prevent contamination of water resources due to
accidental overflow of lagoons or over application of manure on land. Livestock producers in
the project areas should be encouraged to apply the manure treatment solutions proposed by
the project and respect the environmental laws with regard to quality of discharge. The animal
47

numbers should be controlled based on nutrient balance planning of available number of
animals and the land to be used for application of treated organic manure to prevent exceeding
soil nutrient balance and to promote sustainable development of livestock industry.
Prior to starting project implementation and as soon as the project is approved, detailed water
quality studies and data collection according to the EMMP recommendations must be carried
out to be used as the baseline for monitoring project's impact on surface and groundwater
resources and to ensure that the proposed project has the perceived positive impact on surface
and groundwater quality and nutrient loading. The proposed manure treatment technology
should encourage more efficient use of water resources in livestock farming operations to
improve solid-liquid ratio in the manure. Project operation is believed to have the backing of
local communities, provincial, and national level authorities. It is believed that local
government and communities are aware of negative impacts of poor livestock waste
management and are willing to participate in LWMEAP. Although the reasoning for their
involvement in the project varies from trying to reduce odor nuisance or improving health
conditions, but the project activities should ultimately reduce nutrient loading of water bodies,
improving human and animal health status, and bettering the quality of international water
bodies. Project should try to raise the awareness of the local communities with regard to
negative impacts of discharging untreated or partially treated manure into water bodies,
wetlands, and unused land and the potential impacts on water resources and public health.
Prior to finalizing the location of manure management facilities, it will be necessary to review
and prepare an environmental and social review of each proposed large- or medium-scale
treatment facility to determine whether the proposed locations are environmentally and
socially acceptable, and whether proposed corresponding pollution control measures are
adequate for the size of the proposed operations. Before final environmental approval of each
manure treatment facility, it is necessary for the design team to provide design reports of
proposed projects, exact location, sizing and type of treatment facilities and type and size of
manure collection/transportation/storage system to the environmental team for final approval
before commencement of construction.
48

List of References
Biswas, A. and Agarwala, S.B.C. (eds.). 1992. Environmental Impact Assessment for
Developing Countries. Oxford: Butterworth - Heinemann Ltd.
Cheremisinoff, P.M., and A.G. Morresi. 1977. Environmental Assessment & Impact
Statement Handbook. Ann Arbor Science Publishing Inc. 438 pp.
Hakim, S. and J. Weinblatt. 1993. "The Delphi Process As A Tool For Decision Making",
Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 16, pp. 25-38.
Leopold, L.B., Clarke, F.E., Hanshaw, B.B. and Ba1sley, J.R. 1977. A Procedure for
Evaluating Environmental Impact, Geological Survey Circular 645, Government Printing
Office, Washington.
Ross JM. 1976. The Numeric Weighting of Environmental Interactions. Occasional Paper No.
10, Ottawa Lands Directorate, Environment Canada.
World Bank. 2002. Safeguard Policies: Framework for Improving Development
Effectiveness. A discussion Note. Environmentally and Socially sustainable Development and
Operational Policy and Country Services. 31 pp.
World Bank. 1999. The World Bank Operational Manual, OP 4.01, Environmental
Assessment. 29 pp.
World Bank. 2002. The World Bank's Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies. 7 pp.
World Bank. 2002. The World Bank Policy on Public Disclosure of Information. 38 pp.
World Bank. 2002. The Disclosure Handbook. Operational Policy and Country Services. 34
pp.
49

Annex 1:
Terms of References
International and National Consultants
Environmental Assessment and Safeguards
51

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, AND SAFEGUARDS, INTERNATIONAL
EXPERT
The objective of the proposed GEF-financed Livestock Waste Management in East Asia
Project is to reduce the negative local and global environmental impacts of rapidly increasing
livestock production in selected watersheds in the coastal areas of China, Thailand, and
Vietnam. The implementing agency of the project is the World Bank; FAO is the executing
agency for the preparation grant of the project.
The Environmental Assessment of this project, as detailed in this TOR, will be prepared to
meet the requirements of the World Bank's environmental safeguard policy requirements as
defined in World Bank Operational Policy 4.01 and associated safeguards, project appraisal
process and applicable environmental assessment requirements of the participating country
governments. The EA will assess the environmental impact of the proposed project and
address the need for environmental mitigation and monitoring requirements.
Background Information
The proposed project and its replication would lead to a reduction of land-based pollution
from livestock production of the international water of the South China Sea. Other global
benefits would occur in the areas of biodiversity, land degradation, and climate change. This
will be achieved through the demonstration of sustainable livestock management approaches
to protect and improve the environment while enhancing livelihoods, especially in public
health. Desired outcomes are a conducive policy framework for livestock waste management,
improved livestock waste management with better nutrient balances, and effective project
management based upon information on livestock-induced environmental changes and their
underlying causes.
The Proposed Project consists of the following four components:
(1) Institutional Development Component. This component is proposed to have a sub-
component for the development of policies and decision-support tools that would
work on policy options, draft regulations, planning, guidelines, standards as well as on
surveys and GIS techniques on livestock pollution and environmental impact of
livestock farming. A second sub-component would work on capacity-building,
awareness-raising, and enforcement of policies and regulations through training of
central and local officials and farmers, institutional cooperation, and a communication
program. The component would be implemented under the close cooperation between
the environmental and the agricultural agencies in the countries; and would include
regional activities that will ensure the benefits from cross-country experiences and
other synergy-effects.
(2) Livestock Waste Environmental Impacts Mitigation Component. This component
would be implemented in one or two small watersheds in each country. It would
heavily rely on the guidance of the agricultural agencies and private sector
partnerships. Sub-components would include area-wide planning with GIS techniques,
surveys and registration procedures, and the actual physical demonstration sites of
improved waste management both, for a large number of small producers (`non-point
source pollution') and for selected large farms (`point source pollutions').
(3) Project Management and Monitoring Component. This component includes a Project
Management Sub-component with work done in the project management units and the
training and equipment needed for efficient project management. A second sub-
component includes the monitoring of the project, including implementation progress
53

monitoring, monitoring of water pollution and other environmental indicators (under
the leadership of the environmental agencies), nutrient-balances and of other project
aspects, e.g. rate of compliance with environmental regulations, and the monitoring
and evaluation of the specific demonstration sites.
(4) Regional Coordination and Support Component. This component would support
ensure efficient sharing of knowledge and experiences amongst all countries. The
component would include regional workshops, develop of mechanisms for informal
collaboration amongst countries, and the development of policy and decision tools.
Steering committees, composed of involved Ministries and technical experts, in each country
will guide implementation of the proposed project. Project management offices at the local
level, comprised of the appropriate provincial level bureaus/agencies, will carry out project
implementation. Each country will also have working groups which will include local level
farmers and experts. Each country delegates project responsibilities to specific
agencies/ministries. Regional integration is an important aspect of the Proposed Project; the
countries must be able to share expertise and experiences for region-wide mitigation of
livestock-based pollution of the South China Sea.
Objectives.
The consultant will be required to prepare a consolidated project environmental analysis. The
scope of the consolidated environmental analysis would encompass an assessment of potential
environmental risks and benefits associated with the project,, development of sub-project
environmental screening procedures to be implemented in each country, and formulation of
environmental mitigation and monitoring measures including overall institutional
responsibilities and resource requirements.
Scope of Work
The preparation of the consolidated environmental analysis will rely on complementary
analyses provided by local consultants in all three participating countries. The consolidated
analysis needs to be based on consultation with local consultants, involved government
entities, and national and international consultants working on the project preparation team.
The work would be prepared during project preparation activities that are to be implemented
by the FAO.
At a minimum, the consolidated environmental analysis would comprise the following tasks:
ˇ Task 1: The analysis should present a general overview of environmental risks and
benefits associated with livestock waste management strategies and alternative
technologies. The project focuses on reducing pollution loads so in aggregate terms
the overall impact is likely to be positive but some risks may be evident. This analysis
should be undertaken from both a region-wide and local perspective
ˇ Task 2: Summarize existing national strategies for livestock waste management and
summarize, where appropriate, national standards, regulations, and EIA requirements
for livestock waste.
ˇ Task 3: Evaluate the potential environmental benefits and risks associated with
specific project components in each participating country. For example, development
of livestock waste policies, land use regulations, zoning and better enforcement of
such rules under Component 1 may be locally controversial. Environmental
implications of proposed policy reforms should also be evaluated as part of the reform
process. Demonstration projects under Component 2 for improved waste
54

management technology may require environmental assessment or site management
plans depending on the options being demonstrated. The location of such
concentrated waste management options such as swine waste retention lagoons may
be locally controversial due to odor, and potential for local surface and groundwater
pollution. Likewise, initiatives involving on-farm manure applications should
undertake basic analysis to show that the potential nutrient run-off is not detrimental.
Development of on-site manure management and/or nutrient management plans may
be appropriate responses in lieu of EA.
ˇ Task 4: Depending on how demonstration waste management projects are identified
the project could require either an up-front EA for cases where project are known by
appraisal or a screening procedure if project are identified during implementation.
The consultant will develop and agree upon the environmental screening and EIA
procedures to be followed by each project implementing authority for evaluating the
environmental impacts of sub-project proposed for financing under the project. To the
extent projects are identified prior to appraisal site specific screening and EIA, if
needed, should be completed prior to appraisal along with appropriate mitigation,
management and monitoring measures. For projects to be identified after appraisal,
these procedures will need to be presented as a framework for future sub-project
evaluation. Among other important issues, site selection of demonstration projects
should be based on screening criteria undertaken to ensure that critical habitats are not
affected and watershed planning should identify key habitat areas to be protected
and/or managed.
ˇ Task 5: Evaluate alternative management and mitigation opportunities and strategies
which could be implemented under the project. For example, this may include the
identification of ways to promote waste minimization as a way to avoid or reduce
impacts associated with treatment or waste storage;
ˇ Task 6: Develop a comprehensive environmental monitoring strategy for the project as
a whole to be implemented during project implementation. Depending on the kind of
demonstration management schemes identified, water quality monitoring may be
required. Promotion of confined animal feeding operations would also normally
require some type of EA depending on the size of such operations. This would
involve the identification of appropriate environmental management objectives,
standards and performance indicators. This may also require development of an
environmental baseline against which future change can be evaluated. The monitoring
program and mitigation plan with a schedule, triggers, and cost estimates for action;
Study Area.
The study area should be within proposed demonstration sites of all three countries.
Consultant Qualifications
The consultant must have an advanced degree in relevant environmental science, agricultural
science or closely related field, 10 years of relevant experience, relevant experience carrying
about Bank EIAs The incumbent will be expected to work with in close collaboration with
local consultant teams in all three project countries. Familiarity with livestock waste
management issues in Southeast Asian context is preferable.
The GEF PDF-B grant will finance consultant fees, transportation costs, field allowances, and
costs of report preparation, as administered by FAO/LEAD. FAO will cooperate with the
55

consultant and will organize provision of relevant information and comments in due course to
ensure timely completion of the consultant's assignment.
Reporting and Documentation
The consolidated EA report for whole project should be concise and limited to significant
environmental issues. It should consist of an executive summary and a main text. The main
text should focus on findings, conclusions, and recommended actions, supported by
summaries of the data collected and citations for any references used in interpreting those
data. The draft EA report needs to be completed within one month of local project
preparation studies completion. The estimated time for completion of the EA is end of May
2004.
Detailed or un-interpreted data are not appropriate for the main text and should be presented
in appendices or a separate volume. The use of tables, graphs, photographs, maps, and other
visual aids is crucial to present the findings in a condensed but easily understandable way.
Unpublished documents used in the assessment that may not be readily available should be
assembled in an appendix. All information has to be well-referenced. A draft outline of the
report is provided in Attachment 1.
The consultant has to closely liaise with local consultant teams from China, Vietnam, and
Thailand, as well as an international consultants appointed by the FAO. The EA consultant
must support the local consultants to ensure the availability of country-specific material, on
which the EA for the entire project will be based. The consultant will be required to travel to
all three countries and attend international workshops to be held during the consultation
period.
ˇ Assist the local EA consultants review the information needs for EA preparation;
ˇ Review and provide detailed and specific comments on the EA reports for
demonstration components;
ˇ Review the EA reports and the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) to satisfy the
World Bank's safeguards requirements.
To the extent that lessons learned apply to East Asia, the EA can utilize experiences from two
projects in Eastern Europe that have livestock waste management components have been
carried out. The Agricultural Pollution Control Project for Romania includes components
with livestock waste management and institutional development aspects. A Rural
Environmental Protection Project in Poland also has similar aspects. Similarly the EA can
utilize regional projects from the EAP region that involve protection of environmental goods
that cross country borders.
An initiation report including detailed methodology, work plan and guidelines for local
consultants is expected by February 30, 2004. A draft report is expected by July 31, 2004,
i.e. 15 days after the completion of the national-level preparation work. The consultant must
submit the report in the manner requested by the FAO. The consultant is expected to fully
complete the reporting and documentation requirements by August 31, 2004, or as agreed to
with the FAO.
Background Material.
The FAO/LEAD preparation study team will provide the consultant with the following
background materials. Additional information may be available upon request.

GEF Project Concept for Pipeline Entry and PDF-B Request
56

Projected Concept Document for the proposed Livestock Waste Management in East Asia
Project

Aide-memoire of World Bank preparation mission

Local, national and World Bank regulations related to the preparation of an EA

Reports prepared by LEAD on livestock waste issues in the region

Relevant documents complied by national consultants.

57

Example Outline of an EA Report
Executive Summary

1. Introduction
1.1 Purpose and Basis of Report
1.2 EIA Methodology
1.3 Relationship to Project Feasibility Study
1.4 Assessment Categorization and Focus
1.5 Assessment Scope and Periods Covered
1.6 Assessment Factors and Assessment Classification
1.7 Assessment Standard
1.8 Assessment Procedures

2. Project
Description
2.1. Project Background
2.2. Project Components
2.3. Project Time Frame
2.4. Project Alternatives
2.5. Project Economics

3. Environmental Setting and key impacts
3.1 Natural Environment
3.2 Ecological Environment
3.3 Key Environmental Issues

4. Alternative
Analysis
4.1 `Do-nothing Alternative Analysis'
4.2 Alternative Analysis in Preliminary Feasibility Study
4.3 Basis for Selection of the Alternative Proposed for the Project Design

5. Environmental Monitoring and Management Framework
5.1 Monitoring Key Environmental Issues
5.2 Environmental Management and Training Requirements

6. Other Significant Issues

7. Summary and Conclusion

Annexes
Annex A: References
Annex B: TOR for EA
Annex C: List of EA Compilers

Others: Consultant details, References record of consultation meetings with preparation
team, background information, etc.

58

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, LOCAL CONSULTANT
The consultant will prepare a study that identifies the baseline environmental situation;
evaluates the project's potential environmental impacts in its area of influence; examines
project alternatives; identifies ways of improving project selection, siting, planning, design,
and implementation by preventing, minimizing, mitigating, or compensating for adverse
environmental impacts and enhancing positive impacts; and includes the process of mitigating
and managing adverse environmental impacts throughout project implementation.
For the preparation of EA, the national consultants are strongly encouraged to obtain detailed
information from the following World Bank documents: Operational Policies OP 4.01, Bank
Procedures BP 4.01, and the requirements stipulated in environmental regulations in
respective countries. The Bank's other safeguard requirements (Operational Policy/Bank
Procedure OP/BP) that might be triggered under this project are: OP/BP 4.04-Natural habitats,
OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary resettlement, OD 4.20 Indigenous People, and Information
Disclosure Policy.

Local consultants must ensure that EA preparation work should also take into account
procedures established by environmental authorities in respective countries.

The following EA documents should be prepared: EA for the entire project; and EA for each
component, including the EMP.

The EA for the overall project will be prepared by a international environmental consultant to
be contracted by FAO. The EA for the overall project will include all demonstration
components, with inputs provided by the local consultants. Local consultants will be
responsible for the EAs will be required for specific demonstration components in respective
countries. Depending on the kind of demonstration component schemes identified, water
quality monitoring may be required in the cause of EA preparation. Each EA will be reviewed
and commented on by the international consultant as part of the internal review process.

According to Bank's requirement of public consultation and information disclosure policy,
the local EA consultants should conduct consultation with local interested groups, specially
the project affected people and NGOs, at least two times in accordance with OP 4.01. EA
should be made available locally and through the Bank's Public Information Center for
review by interested parties.

The EA report will be prepared to include the following items:

1. Executive
summary
Concisely discusses significant findings and recommended actions.

2. Policy,
legal,
administrative
framework
Discusses the policy, legal and administrative framework, scope and standards of EA, EA
participants and organization.

3. Description
of
the
proposed
project
59

Concisely describes the proposed project components, and its geographic, ecologic, and
temporal context, including any offsite investments that may be required. Indicates the
need for any resettlement plan. Includes a map showing the project site and the project's
area of influence.

4. Environmental setting of the proposed project
Describes the physical, biological and socio-cultural environment, areas of special
designation.

5. Environmental impacts of the proposed project
Predicts and assesses the project's likely positive and negative impacts during the
construction as well as the operational phases, identifies mitigation measures and any
residual negative impacts that cannot be mitigated, explores opportunities for
environmental enhancement, identifies key data gaps and uncertainties, and specifies
topics that require further attention.

6. Analysis of alternatives
Systematically compares feasible alternatives (including the "without project" situation)
in terms of their potential environmental impacts, the feasibility of mitigating these
impacts, their capital and recurrent costs, their suitability under the local conditions, and
their institutional, training, and monitoring requirements. For each of the alternatives,
quantifies the environmental impacts to the extent possible and attaches economic values,
where feasible.

7. Environmental
management
plan
(EMP)
Includes mitigation and monitoring plans, plans for capacity development and training,
implementation schedule and cost estimates. The mitigation plan identifies and
summarizes anticipated significant adverse environmental impacts; describes each
mitigation measure and associated impacts, designs, and equipment requirements;
estimates any potential environmental impacts of these measures; and provides linkages
with other mitigation plans required for the project. The monitoring plan provides a
specific description and technical details of monitoring measures, including the
parameters to be measured, methods to be used, sampling locations, frequency of
measurements, detection limits (where appropriate); and monitoring and reporting
procedures.

8. Public
Consultation/Participation
A free standing chapter describing public consultation/participation in the preparation of
the EA.

An initiation report including detailed methodology and work plan is expected by February
30, 2004. A draft report is expected by April 31, 2004. The consultant must submit the report
in the manner requested by the FAO. The consultant is expected to fully complete the
reporting and documentation requirements by August 31, 2004, or as agreed to with the FAO.

9. Appendixes
a. List of contributors to EA report individuals and organizations;
60

b. References written materials used in EA preparation both, published and
unpublished;
c. Records of interagency and consultation meetings, including consultations for
obtaining the informed views of the affected people and local nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs). The record specifies any means other than consultations
(such as surveys) that were used to obtain the views of affected groups and local
NGOs.
d. Tables presenting the relevant data referred or summarized in the main text of the
EA.
e. List of associated reports (such as resettlement plans if prepared).
61

Annex 2
List of Environmental and Safeguard Consultants
63

EA Team Members, Guangdong, China
Team member
Specialty
Task
Title
Dr. Yinan Zhang
Water environment ,
Introduction and project
Team Leader,
environmental management background, analysis of
Lecturer
and monitoring
environmental impacts, EMMP
Mr. Renhai Wu
Environmental
Policy, Legislation &
Associate
management and planning,
Administration Framework, Project
Professor
engineer
Description
Mrs. Yunni Zhang
Soil Scientist
Description of Existing
Lecturer
Environment
Mr. Zhixiong Chen
Water, Air and Acoustic
Environmental Monitoring Plan
Engineer
Monitoring
Mr. Shugong Wang
Ecological environment
Description of Existing
Lecturer
Environment
Miss Lixuan Zhao
Data collection
Public Participation
Grad. student

65

EA Team Members, Thailand
Name
Responsibilities
Position
Qualification
Rowiwan Piyasilisilp
EA Review
Project Advisor
M.Sc (Environment)
Narintorn Suntornsatit
Ecological Resource
Environmental Scientist,
M.Sc (Environment)
Team Leader
Wasana Peethamnongsin
Air and Noise Quality
Environmental Scientist
M.Sc (Environment)
Kuntera Sailampor
Soil and land use
Environmental Scientist
M.Sc (Environment)
Nawarat Sarpchoreon
Water Quality
Environmental Scientist
M.Sc (Environment)
Nanapat Sarapok
Public health and Aesthetics
Environmental Scientist
B.Sc (Environment)
Oranuch Karong
Socio-Economic Environmental
Scientist
B.Sc
(Environment)
67

EA Team Members, Vietnam
Name
Organisation
Position
1
Dr. Ngo Kim Chi
CTC
Team leader
EMP elaboration, project site
description, public consultancy,
project description
2
Mr. Hoang Viet Yen
Hanoi Environmental Co.
Mitigation solution, Legal and
Policy aspect
3
Eng. Do Huu Kien
CTC
Information about project site
4
Mr. Le Van Anh
CTC
Analysis of impacts, alternative
solutions
5
Eng. Pham Tien Dat
CTC
Information on project site
6
Eng. Nguyen Phuong Loan
CTC
Analytical work, standards, water
quality
7
Eng. Trinh Hai Tuan
CTC
Collection of the data, pubic
disclosure
69