Relocation and Resettlement in Ceará - Houston Advanced ...

Relocation and Resettlement in
Ceará
Final Report on Findings and Recommendations to
The Secretariat of Water Resources
State of Ceará
Austin, Texas
1 March, 1999
Sunil Tankha
Center for Global Studies
Houston Advanced Research Center
Jennifer Burtner
Department of Anthropology
The University of Texas at Austin
Eduardo Magalhães
The University of Texas at Austin
Dr. Jurgen Schmandt (PI)
Center for Global Studies
Houston Advanced Research Center

Table of Contents
Center for Global Studies, Houston Advanced Research Center
HARC Relocation and Resettlement Study Team
Acknowledgements
Introduction
I. Involuntary Displacement and Resettlement
A Report Card on Resettlement in Ceará
Landlessness
Joblessness
Homelessness
Morbidity
Food Insecurity
Loss of Access to Common Resources
Social Disarticulation
II. Policy Recommendations
III. Stakeholder Participation in Resettlement Planning and Implementation in Ceará
Improving Stakeholder Participation Processes
IV. Resources
Workshop on Resettlement
Water for Ceará web page
Citizens Guide to Involuntary Relocation and Resettlement.
Conclusions
Appendix I. Successful Strategies
Appendix II. Summary of Activities: HARC Team
Appendix III. Resources, Publications and Reports
Appendix IV. Contacts
2
FRC, PAGE 2

Center for Global Studies, Houston Advanced Research Center
The Center for Global Studies (CGS) at the Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC)
conducts research on human activities that affect the environment and develops strategies and
policies that move towards sustainability. This is accomplished by working with scientists, policy
makers, and community leaders to build consensus on our understanding of the issues and
approaches that work.
The Center was created in 1974 to explore connections between resource constraints, economic
growth, and environmental quality. In 1984, CGS became the policy research division of HARC, a
non-profit research corporation that fosters collaboration among researchers from universities,
industry, and government. Recent efforts include:
• Development strategies based on sustainability principles that conserve natural resources,
protect environmental quality, and provide for human development.
• International and regional environmental issues—particularly climate variability, global warming
and water resources.
• Training initiatives for developing countries that incorporate sustainable development practices.
• Regional analyses of relative environmental risks and new approaches to environmental
policy.
• Connections among energy, transportation and environmental policy—such as restructuring of
electric power industries and alternative transportation fuels.

HARC Relocation and Resettlement Study Team
Sunil Tankha
Project Manager
4
FRC, PAGE 4
Mr. Tankha is currently a Research Associate at the Center for Global Studies. He received his
graduate degree in Public Policy from the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the
University of Texas. His research has focused on participatory decision-making as it relates to
public infrastructure projects. Mr. Tankha has prepared case studies of the Narmada Valley
Project and papers on relocation issues related to dam projects and on private sector initiatives for
sustainable development.
Jennifer Burtner
Project Anthropologist
Ms. Burtner is a doctoral candidate in Social Anthropology at the University of Texas at Austin.
From 1986-1994, she conducted fieldwork in Latin America, participating in the planning,
implementation, and evaluation of local, regional, and national development programs. Her work
focuses on the relationships between local project-affected-populations, non-governmental
organisations, and the state, particularly in conflict and post-conflict areas. Her research includes
use of qualitative measures of sustainable development initiatives, the impact of social movements
on stakeholder advocacy, and the role of institutions in the creation of social and cultural capital.
She worked in preparing a report on the ARIDAS regional development model for Northeast Brazil
for the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Policy.
Eduardo Magalhães
Research Assistant and Translator
Eduardo Magalhães studies economics and public policy at The University of Texas
at Austin. He has focused his studies partly on environmental economics and
water resources policies. After graduation in December 1999 in Texas, he will return
to Brazil.
Jurgen Schmandt
Principal Investigator
CGS Director Dr. Jurgen Schmandt has been closely involved in sustainable development
planning in the Brazilian Northeast. His association with the area developed out of collaboration
with Antonio Magalhães to adapt and extend the MINK model for climate change to applications in
developing countries. Over the past six years, Dr. Schmandt has collaborated with FGEB and Dr.
Magalhães in developing the methodology for the ARIDAS regional development model for the
Brazilian Northeast. This effort, pursued in parallel with sustainable development planning in the
Rio Grande Basin, is focused on creating models for sustainable development planning in semiarid
regions.

5
FRC, PAGE 5

Acknowledgements
6
FRC, PAGE 6
Our work in Ceará would not have been possible without the valuable assistance of the following
individuals and their organisations, who generously gave of their time and expertise:
Maria Valne Alves, PROURB, Secretaria dos Recursos Hídricos do Estado do Ceará
Luiz Gabriel Azevedo, The World Bank
Gertjan Beekman, Instituto Interamericano de Cooperacão para a Agricultura
Nizomar Falcão Bezerra, PROAGUA
Maria Elaine Bianchi, PROURB, Secretaria dos Recursos Hídricos do Estado do Ceará
Wilson Brandão Junior., Instituto de Desenvolvimento Agrário do Ceará
Jesus Jose Carneiro de Freitas, Asociação do Moradores de Jaguaribara
Edberto Carneiro Silva, Asociação do Moradores de Jaguaribara
Guimares Cavalcante, Barra Rio do Sangue, Jaguaribara
Danilo Coêhlo Monteiro, PROGERIRH, Secretaria dos Recursos Hídricos do Estado do Ceará
Benedito Ferreira de Oliveira, Secretaria dos Recursos Hídricos do Estado do Ceará
Francisco Ferreira Alves, Fundaçãao Instituto de Planejamento do Ceará
Toni Figueiredo, Secretaria dos Transportes, Energia, Comunicações e Obras
Paulo Furtado de Souza, PROURB, Secretaria dos Recursos Hídricos do Estado do Ceará
Ramon Flávio Gomes Rodrigues, PROURB, Secretaria dos Recursos Hídricos do Estado do
Ceará
Daniel Gross, The World Bank
Fernando Irineu Pessoa, Co-ordinator, PROGERIRH, Secretaria dos Recursos Hídricos do Estado
Antonio Rocha Magalhães, The World Bank
Irma Maria Bernadette Neves, Paroquia Santa Rosa de Lima, Jaguaribara
Stahis Panagides, Esquel Foundation
Francisco Pardaillan Farias Lima, Secretaria Executiva do Castanhão
Getúlio Peixoto Maia, Departamento Nacional de Obras Contra as Secas
Antonio Bezerro Peixoto, Instituto de Desenvolvimento Agrário do Ceará
Hyperides Pereira de Macêdo, Secretaria dos Recursos Hídricos do Estado do Ceará
Silvio Santana, Esquel Foundation
Edvaldo Almeida Silveira, Prefeito, Jaguaribara
Larry Simpson, The World Bank
Luiz Vidal Filho, Instituto Nacional de Colonização e Reforma Agrária
Vincente Vieira, Consultant, Secretaria dos Recursos Hídricos do Estado do Ceará
Luiza de Marilac Ximenes Cabral, Secretaria de Desenvolvimento Urbano
Irma Clistenes XX, Paroquia Santa Rosa de Lima, Jaguaribara
Fatima XX, PROGERIRH, Secretaria dos Recursos Hídricos do Estado do Ceará
Office holders and community members of the project affected communities of Castanhão,
Ubaldinho, Sitios Novos, and Porto Pecem.
The World Bank Resettlement Thematic Group

Authors’ Note
7
FRC, PAGE 7
The Final Report on Relocation and Resettlement in Ceará (FRC) follows two Interim Reports that
were prepared following the HARC team’s fieldwork in Ceará. The FRC is neither a summary of
the First and Second Interim Reports, nor a composite of the two. We strongly advise that the First
and Second Interim Reports be read separately because they contain detailed findings from the
fieldwork, including resettlement plans, policies, and outcomes for each of the five sites that were
studied—the Ubaldinho Dam, Sitios Novos dam, urban and rural areas affected by Castanhão,
and Porto Pecem. The Interim Reports identify specific problems related to resettlement as
conducted in each of these areas and make specific recommendations targeted individually at
alleviating the negative effects of these problems. The FRC is a broad overview of findings from
the study of resettlement in Ceará, and its recommendations are geared more towards improving
resettlement policy and practice in Ceará, rather than in addressing specific problems encountered
in each of the resettlement sites. Nevertheless, some critical information from the Interim Reports
is duplicated in the FRC. Finally, we would like to reiterate that these reports do not constitute a
formal evaluation of resettlement in Ceará. While the information provided by these reports will
greatly assist conduction of formal evaluations, we strongly recommend that these evaluations be
conducted both internally by resettlement agencies, and externally by independent experts.
Sunil Tankha
Jennifer Burtner
1 March, 1999

Introduction
8
FRC, PAGE 8
Involuntary displacement of communities and families is often an unavoidable consequence of
infrastructure development. Especially in the case of water resource infrastructure, where
reservoirs and canals are constructed, often along the most populated lands along riverbanks,
displacement of large numbers of people is common. In recent years, the State of Ceará has
embarked on a number of water resources development programmes to combat frequent droughts
and rural out-migration and promote economic development in the interior of the state. As part of
these efforts, one large dam—the Castanhão—and a series of medium earth-filled dams are
already being constructed. In addition to these, a number of other projects are under active
consideration, including a network of canals to link the various river basins in the State. To
promote industrial development in the State, a large port is being built at Pecem. All of these
projects will displace a number of people, ranging from 12,000 in the case of the Castanhão, to a
few families in the case of Angicos, one of the smaller earth-filled dams.
Recent well-publicised disputes relating to displacement and resettlement in large dam projects
such as the Sardar Sarovar Dam in India and the Itaparica Dam in Brazil have raised the
consciousness of planners and policy makers with regards to the socio-economic disputes arising
from involuntary displacement. There are two major issues that planners and policy makers need
to address when designing and implementing projects that cause displacement: (1) adequate
compensation for community and individual assets—both legally titled and traditionally
recognised—appropriated by the project, and (2) the rehabilitation of economic, social, cultural, and
familial ties broken/strained by the project.
To help ensure that displaced communities, families, and individuals in Ceará are economically
and socially rehabilitated, the Secretariat of Water Resources of the State of Ceará contracted the
Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC) to study current resettlement efforts in the state with
a view to (1) providing a field-based evaluation of the resettlement operations in the State, (2)
generating policy recommendations that highlight areas needing improvement, and (3) determining
the utility of initiatives and programmes established for stakeholder participation in the resettlement
process. An important component of this evaluation is to report on the efficiency and efficacy of the
innovative multi-participatory decision making forum pioneered at the Castanhão Dam site, called
the Multiparticipatory Working Group (GM).
HARC researchers conducted the field-based evaluation during June through August 1998.
During this period the HARC team visited communities affected by the Castanhão Dam, the
PROURB dams Ubaldinho and Sitios Novos, and Porto Pecem. Findings from these field visits
were written up in two Interim Reports that were presented to SRH in 1998. The First Interim
Report presented findings from field visits to the Ubaldinho Dam and to rural communities affected
by Castanhão, while the Second Interim Report focused on resettlement of urban areas affected
by Castanhão, the Sitios Novos Dam and Porto Pecem. The information provided in these reports
included:
Perceptions of the various resettled communities.
The methods and varying degrees of community participation in resettlement plans, design of
resettlement habitations, and consultation with women.
Available details of income restoration plans, including current and potential problems
hindering the restoration of pre-relocation income streams and levels.

Available details on training and capacity building initiatives and plans.
9
FRC, PAGE 9
Initiative, plans and strategies and the results of maintenance and creation of social capital.
A comparative analysis of rural and urban resettlement at Castanhão.
A comparative analysis of the GM at Castanhão and Porto Pecem.
An analysis of community leadership and organisation.
An analysis of communication—both between the communities and government agencies and
amongst different agencies charged with various resettlement activities.
An analysis of government commitment to community participation in R&R operations.
Interim policy and operational recommendations for improving resettlement performance
based on fieldwork findings.
This, the Final Report on Relocation and Resettlement in Ceará (FRC), highlights the main areas
where Relocation & Resettlement (R&R) policy and practice can be improved and the most
effective steps to achieve that improvement. The report has four parts. Part I presents a brief
overview of the potential socio-economic and socio-cultural problems faced by communities that
are involuntarily displaced. The report identifies those issues that were noted to be a problem in
the case of the resettlement sites that were investigated by HARC. Measures and actions initiated
by the resettlement agencies to tackle these problems and an analysis of their effectiveness are
also presented. Part II presents a brief summary of policy and operational recommendations,
including those iterated in the previous reports. Recommendations are categorised based on the
institution or agency most responsible for implementing them. Part III presents a brief analysis of
stakeholder participation in planning and implementing resettlement in Ceará, including the degree
of commitment of various state agencies to multi-participatory planning. Finally, Part IV documents
resources available to resettlement agencies and project-affected communities.
{Appendices are not included in this version, but to be added to the final version} To encourage
and ensure that good practices continue to be followed, in Appendix I, the report highlights some of
the successful strategies developed and implemented by planners in Ceará. These highlights are
excerpted from the First Interim Report in which they were presented in some detail. Appendix II
provides a summary of activities of the HARC study team. Appendix III lists useful resources,
publications, and reports that can assist Cearense planners in developing resettlement
programmes. Appendix IV provides useful contact points.
I. Involuntary Displacement and Resettlement
An average of 10 million people are involuntarily displaced every year from their homes,
communities, and traditional lands to make way for public infrastructure. Large dams alone
displace about 4 million people every year, while other development projects—roads, airports,
seaports, power plants—displace an additional 6 million people. Displacement is extremely
disruptive and often impacts the most vulnerable communities and individuals. The impacts are
economic, social, and environmental. Economic impacts include the dismantling of production
systems, loss of productive assets, loss of income sources, relocation of people to areas where
their skills are less applicable, and relocation of people where there is greater competition for

10
FRC, PAGE 10
resources. Labour markets and patterns are disrupted and links between producers and
customers are often severed. Formal and informal economic associations formed over long
periods also tend to disappear with changes in public spaces, work patterns and the dispersal of
their members. Social problems arising from involuntary displacement include weakening of
community structures and social networks, dispersal of family groups, loss of cultural identity,
diminution of traditional authority and the potential for mutual help. Links with the communities’
cultural identity—such as shrines and graves—are broken. Health care is adversely affected.
Environmental impacts include inundation of flora and fauna, loss of habitat, and eco-system
degradation.
Economically and socially, involuntary displacement and resettlement have been criticised
because they have often created chronic impoverishment in project affected communities rather
than contributed positively to their development. Resettlement was too often viewed as a task to
remove people from the project site as quickly and as cheaply as possible. The view that
resettlement provides an opportunity for community development and strengthening was rarely
pursued.
Today, the World Bank and many responsive governments have established safeguards on
involuntary displacement to ensure that, at a minimum, resettlement achieves the restoration of
PAPs’ prior economic levels. The World Bank has stressed, in addition, that those displaced
should be enabled to share in the benefits made possible through the development program that
caused their eviction. As a result, resettlement management has become more demanding, with
mandated procedural safeguards and benchmarks.
The process has been facilitated by a vast amount of research conducted over the last two
decades by the World Bank and independent researchers in developing and developed countries.
Social scientists have identified the following seven broad categories of impacts of involuntary
displacement:
1) Landlessness
2) Joblessness
3) Homelessness
4) Morbidity
5) Food insecurity
6) Loss of access to common property
7) Social disarticulation
A Report Card on Resettlement in Ceará
The HARC team analysed the vulnerability of project affected persons (PAPs) in Ceará with
respect to each of these impacts. Findings are summarised below.

Landlessness:
11
FRC, PAGE 11
Cearense planners and policy makers have been careful to ensure that rural agricultural
populations are not displaced from their traditional occupations and migrate to large urban centres.
For this reason, they have implemented a generous land grant scheme for project-affected people.
Displaced tenant farmers and small holders are provided a house in a resettlement agrovila, which
accommodates all the families displaced by the projects, and are provided a small agricultural plot,
usually 5 hectares. A brief summary of resettlement assistance is provided in Table 1. For details
on resettlement awards, please refer to the First Interim Report.
Table 1. Resettlement Policy and Awards in Ceará
PAP Levels of Asset s Resettlement Agency Resettlement Award Project
Landless tenant farmer SRH House in agrovila plus
agricultural plot
Small holder, total
assets

Homelessness:
Morbidity:
Food Insecurity:
12
FRC, PAGE 12
for either Ubaldinho or Sitios Novos PAPs. To assist the PAPs in making the transition from tenant
farmer to independent agriculturist, SRH and IDACE are providing some training courses. In
Pecem, some structural unemployment will result from moving those engaged in fishing away from
the coast into interior resettlement areas where they will be resettled as agriculturists. It will take
these PAPs longer to make the transition, and they will require more intensive training. In some
cases, employment opportunities for women in the form of household work with their patrons have
been eliminated after the patrons relocated following appropriation of their lands. On the other
hand, better education, infrastructure and transport may eventually increase job opportunities
outside the agrovilas.
Recommendations: Ensure provision of irrigation to resettled communities; continue and refine
training initiatives.
This is an extremely unlikely outcome of resettlement in Ceará. All tenant farmers and small
holders are provided houses in the resettlement agrovilas and agricolas. Larger holders get fair
market compensation, which is enough to enable them to purchase a replacement house if
necessary. In the case of Castanhão, all urban PAPs are provided a house in Nova Jaguaribara,
which is at least the size of their original dwelling. Urban PAPs who rent their homes are being
provided a 35 m² plot and building material to construct their own house. Homelessness could
result if the tenant farmers and small holders fail in their agricultural pursuits and be forced to sell
their house and move to the city. Agencies are taking precautions to ensure that PAPs do not
liquidate their resettlement awards. In the case of the Ubaldinho Dam, for example, project agency
personnel delayed providing titles to the PAPs resettled in the Ubaldinho agrovila so that they
would first get used to the idea of living in the agrovila and settle down rather than cash in their
awards immediately.
Recommendation: Monitor PAPs for a period of two to three years to determine whether there is
outmigration and liquidation of their assets.
There is no evidence to suggest increased morbidity resulting from the displacement in Ceará. In
most cases, health care infrastructure and standards have been significantly raised in the projectaffected
communities. In addition, better community infrastructure and living conditions, such as
the provision of running water and electricity, have translated into a greatly improved quality of life.
A few anecdotal claims were made to the HARC team that the anxiety provoked by the Castanhão
Dam and the impending displacement resulted in the death of older members of Jaguaribara.
Recommendation: Monitor PAPs for a period of two to three years to determine trends in health
care and morbidity.
Ceará is currently going through a very bad drought. This has severely curtailed most agricultural
activities and negatively affected peoples’ diets. However, the state government, as part of its
drought relief programme and the project agencies provide food baskets with the minimum
necessities. Satisfaction with the quality of the baskets is generally low. There are no indications
that the dam projects themselves have caused any food insecurity.

Recommendation: Consult with PAPs to make improvements in the food baskets.
Loss of Access to Common Property:
13
FRC, PAGE 13
Community spaces and common property is being satisfactorily replaced in the resettlement sites
in Ceará. Generally, the quality of public infrastructure and spaces is better in the postresettlement
areas.
Recommendation: Continue successful community planning efforts.
Social Disarticulation:
Social support networks play a critical role in providing essential services such as childcare and
short-term credit in economically challenged areas. Displacement often results in the dismantling
of these networks and a consequent loss of social capital. Once dismantled, these networks are
hard to rebuild. Social capital loss is therefore higher in projects that disperse communities rather
than resettling them within pre-existing groups and social units. In Ceará, resettlement has, in
most cases, preserved family and social units as the entire communities have been moved
together. Very few PAPs refused resettlement and this further maintained the integrity of the
community and preserved local social capital. Indeed, in the few cases where such good planning
was not followed—that is, in the case where PAPs were hurriedly relocated from the actual
construction site of the Castanhão Dam and family and social units were disrupted—resettlement
has been unsatisfactory (See First Interim Report for details).
Recommendation: Continue practise of preserving community structures and cohesiveness.
II. Policy Recommendations
Resettlement Agencies should develop comprehensive income restoration programmes
that are based upon increasing the capacity and capabilities of project-affected
persons.
Income restoration is the most important metric by which resettlement programmes are measured.
Project-affected populations must at least regain their pre-displacement levels of income for the
resettlement to be considered satisfactory. Income restoration plans must therefore be prepared
and refined even before the populations are relocated. Attempts to restore incomes through
government grants and make-work programmes should be strictly avoided because these tend to
perpetuate themselves and create dependency amongst the PAPs.
Income restoration is one of the weaker links in the Ceará resettlement programmes, because
comparatively greater attention is paid to the planning and construction of the physical
infrastructure of the resettlement areas rather than on the replacement of income-generating
assets, which are critical for restoring incomes. Greater attention should be paid to replacement
agricultural land for farmers and ranchers than their living accommodations and residential
arrangements. In the case of tenant farmers, land provided must be an adequate replacement for
the lands upon which they were working for their patrons.
According to many studies and evaluations performed by the World Bank, income restoration
efforts have been most successful when PAPs have been able to share in the immediate benefits

14
FRC, PAGE 14
created by the displacement-causing projects. In the case of Castanhão, therefore, those
displaced by the dam should be given priority in being resettled in areas that will be irrigated by the
project. Some PAPs could also be given training and support in establishing reservoir-based
fisheries. However, since reservoir based fisheries display strong cyclical trends, with high initial
output followed by a rapid drop in production, care should be taken to ensure their long-term
economic sustainability.
Training and capacity building is another important component of income restoration programmes.
Training should be conducted as part of a preparatory programme so that PAPs are ready to
commence income-generating activities shortly after their physical relocation. Another reason for
conducting training and capacity building exercises early is that most PAPs have little formal
education and a tradition of patron client relationships. When asked to make resettlement choices,
they are unprepared and have often made choices which they later regret. In addition, without
training and preparation, there is a great danger that after a bad year or two—a real threat in the
semi-arid Northeast—the PAPs will liquidate their assets and migrate to urban centres.
Resettlement Agencies need to improve communications channels amongst
themselves and between themselves and the project affected communities.
The focus of this project and HARC reports has been the inclusion of stakeholder opinions and
concerns. A number of studies have targeted stakeholder participation in resettlement planning
and management as one of the single most important factors that determines the success of
resettlement efforts. Stakeholder participation is first a matter of good communication.
Breakdowns in communication can make the stakeholders feel that they are not part of the process
and this leads to mistrust, resentment, and conflict. This was brought into stark evidence through
the problems created by SDU in not adequately communicating with the community regarding the
delay in the construction of Nova Jaguaribara. Other communications and co-ordination problems
include the uncertainty regarding the responsibility of retired rural PAPs who want to be resettled in
Nova Jaguaribara. The monthly GM meetings alone are not sufficient for inter-agency
collaboration on a project the magnitude of Castanhão. Regular meetings at shorter intervals,
should be conducted among the three agencies primarily responsible for resettlement at
Castanhão—SRH, SDU, and IDACE.
The State and resettlement agencies should pay more attention to developing
community organisation and leadership structures.
With the exception of the City of Jaguaribara, community organisation and leadership is largely
absent from the project affected communities in Ceará. This issue has been dealt with at length in
both the First and Second Interim Reports. Regular and frequent community consultations will be
more fruitful and the participation of communities in the resettlement process more substantial if
local communities are well organised and enjoy capable, effective, and articulate leadership. Once
communities are identified as likely to be displaced, teams from resettlement agencies should
commence work in organising the communities and training selected leaders. Over the long run,
this will enable the communities to better articulate their concerns and needs and thereby make the
task of the resettlement staff much easier.
The State should develop a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation schedule, both
internal and external.
At the time of the HARC team’s visit to Ceará, there were no established monitoring and evaluation
plans or schedules to determine the long-term effectiveness of resettlement efforts in Ceará.
Officials of all three agencies—SRH, SDU, and IDACE—are keenly aware of the need for follow up
in the project-affected communities. Monitoring and evaluation plans should therefore be drawn up
as soon as possible. Monitoring and evaluation should be done at two levels. First, an internal

15
FRC, PAGE 15
operational evaluation should be performed by the State agencies with their own staff. This
evaluation would focus on attainment of predefined metrics for the welfare of resettled populations
and identify and resolve internal operational problems. Second, an external evaluation should be
performed by an independent organisation or consultants to verify resettlement outcomes and
suggest areas of further improvement, if necessary. The project-affected communities themselves
should be a part of any external monitoring and evaluation task force. This will provide legitimacy
to the entire resettlement operation in the State.
III. Stakeholder Participation in Involuntary
Resettlement Planning and Implementation in
Ceará
Previous resettlement efforts have been criticised for rarely taking into account PAPs views,
perceptions, and opinions in the design and execution of relocation. Stakeholder participation in
resettlement decision making is valued because (1) PAPs are better placed to make decisions
about the future and know what will work for them, (2) involving them in the decision making
processes gains their confidence so that resettlement agencies are working with PAPs rather than
against them, (3) making PAPs part of the resettlement planning process reduces dependence:
once PAPs have a stake and qualitative input in the final design of the resettlement, they are far
more likely to make sure that the project succeeds, and (4) involving PAPs in project monitoring
vastly increases project accountability.
Involving stakeholders from the beginning has been a stated goal of Cearense planners. The
specific steps that they have taken to promote stakeholder participation are include:
Establishing CARPAs and ISCAs for the PROURB projects;
Establishing stakeholder-driven Multiparticipatory Working Groups for Castanhão and Porto
Pecem;
Conducting regular consultative meetings of resettlement agency staff with PAPs; and
Establishing local offices for resettlement staff at Jaguaribara and Pecem.
Details on these initiatives and forums are provided in the First and Second Interim Reports.
Improving Stakeholder Participation Processes
These initiatives have been generally very successful in motivating PAPs to take an active role in
the resettlement planning process. However, due to the relative inexperience of project agency
personnel and the PAPs themselves—both being more familiar with top-down planning—there
have been some shortcomings in execution. These should be addressed in both current and
future resettlement exercises.

16
FRC, PAGE 16
The communities were not adequately trained or prepared to take an active part in the
resettlement planning and implementation processes.
Levels of literacy and formal education are low in the project-affected areas. As such, PAPs do not
have the skills to become effective partners in the resettlement process. Often resettlement
options are presented to the community by the project agencies, but the PAPs are unable to make
effective decisions because of incomplete information or a lack of comprehension of the
ramifications of their choice.
Recommendation: Spend a greater amount of time training and organising the communities
before discussing and planning resettlement specifics.
In some cases, PAPs’ views are ignored or overruled.
For example, there appears to be a strong resistance to the idea of collectivisation among the
Castanhão PAPs that are being resettled by IDACE. Despite local opposition, collectivisation
continues to be the defining feature of IDACE dry land resettlements at Castanhão. It should be
noted here that PAPs at Pecem who are also being resettled in collective farms do not display an
aversion to collectivisation.
Recommendation: Build more flexibility into the resettlement plans and allow for more negotiation
on difficult issues, particularly those involving social organization and community management of
resources.
Communications tend to break down during moments of crisis.
While the process of resettlement is proceeding smoothly, there are regular and fruitful interactions
between the project agency personnel and the PAPs. However, when problems arise—such as
the delay in the construction of Nova Jaguaribara or when communities do not come to an
agreement with the project agencies on crucial aspects of their resettlement—there is disturbing
tendency for the project agency to withdraw and not respond to outside queries. It is at these
moments of conflict when greater communication and transparency is required that agencies
retreat to the historical modus operandi of top-down planning and stonewalling.
Recommendation: Pay special attention to communication on contentious issues. If necessary,
employ professional mediators and communications specialists.
Staff resources for community participation are being stretched thin and staff requires
more training in participatory methodologies.
Staffing resources are strained given the numbers of people being resettled, the dispersion of the
communities, and the number of different projects under which resettlement is being conducted.
Additional manpower is needed in order to maintain regularity, frequency, and quality in staff-PAP
interactions. In some cases, staff do not have sufficient formal knowledge of or training in
participatory methodologies. There is also a need for more exposure to international best practices
in resettlement. To rectify these gaps in knowledge, training sessions for staff members is
required.
Recommendation: Identify numbers and qualifications of staff members directly in charge of
resettlement and consult with World Bank and other officials on staffing resources. Provide a
period of intensive training for resettlement staff and, when required, contract consultants to
provide critical skills and additional manpower.

Women are not being adequately consulted.
17
FRC, PAGE 17
At the community level participation of women in negotiation and consultation over resettlement
issues is lower than desirable, especially in the case of the Castanhão resettlement. Women are
often unable to travel to meeting sites because of childcare and other domestic responsibilities.
When present, women often do not participate vocally in discussions over resettlement. Female
participation is much higher and qualitatively better in the case of the PROURB projects.
Recommendation: In addition to conducting community meetings, hold separate focus group
sessions with women at a time and location convenient for them to attend.
GM meetings are not universally accessible to PAPs.
While the GM is a critical and useful vehicle in involving the community in resettlement planning at
Castanhão and the movement of the meetings from Fortaleza to the project affected regions is a
great improvement, the meetings remain inaccessible to a large number of rural PAPs. There are
no regular or convenient means of transport available to rural PAPs to attend GM meetings in
Jaguaribara and other semi-urban locations. In addition, rural PAPs have not been adequately
informed of the GM meetings and their utility. As such the level of rural participation in the GM is
proportionately much smaller than the level of urban participation.
Recommendation: Provide transport to and from GM meetings for rural PAPs. Publicise GM
meetings more in the rural areas, especially through staff meetings with the PAPs.
IV. Resources
In an effort to continue the analysis and discussion of the issues raised in this research, HARC is in
the process of developing several new resources to facilitate future dialogue: A workshop on
resettlement; the Water for Ceará web page; and the Citizens Guide to Involuntary Relocation and
Resettlement. This section briefly outlines these initiatives.
Workshop on Resettlement
During the planning stages of this project, it was envisioned that following the submission of the
Final Report on Relocation and Resettlement in Ceará and based on its findings, a workshop on
planning and implementation of involuntary resettlement would be conducted in the State. Built
around interactive sessions with personnel of the various state agencies charged with resettlement
in Ceará, this proposed workshop will focus on the lessons learned and policy recommendations
generated by the HARC study of R&R in Ceará.
This workshop will assist in the goal of planning for and achieving more open and participatory
resettlement management. The workshop would enhance returns on the investment already made
in the HARC study on resettlement by providing an opportunity for in-depth discussions of the
findings of the HARC study and promoting their dissemination. Through the workshop, the level of
knowledge and understanding about the issues and problems related to involuntary resettlement
within the project agencies would be greatly increased. Bringing together the various state
agencies in the discussion forums at the workshop will facilitate inter-agency discussions of the
critical issues and thereby improve coordination and collaboration in planning and executing R&R
operations in the State. The workshop would also provide a forum for open and frank discussion of

difficult issues related to resettlement with participation from the project-affected community
representatives.
18
FRC, PAGE 18
The proposed workshop will be held in Fortaleza, Ceará. About 50 participants are expected.
HARC will manage the workshop agenda and programme, co-ordinate the participation of
international participants, collect and disseminate background material, and prepare workshop
proceedings.
The following institutions and agencies and their representatives will be invited to participate:
International: World Bank, Inter-American Institute for Agricultural Co-operation (IICA).
Brazil-Federal: DNOCS, INCRA, ELECTROBRAS, Department of Mines and Energy, and
PROAGUA.
Brazil-Ceará: SRH, SDU, IDACE, PROURB, PROGERIRH, Pecem, and Castanhão.
Brazil-Local: Association of residents of communities affected by the dams, Catholic
Church, other interested NGOs and CBOs.
Water for Ceará web page
The objective of the Ceará Water Management Web Page is to facilitate the exchange and
management of information and knowledge related to water issues in Ceará. While the web page
will initially focus on HARC work on resettlement in Ceará conducted in 1998, we foresee the page
expanding its scope and focus to include PROGERIRH community outreach and the Water User
and Basin Councils in Ceará. By providing basic and background information, analysis of policy
and operational issues, and a forum to discuss and raise specific questions regarding water
management and policy in Ceará, this page should serve four specific audiences.
• First, the page would facilitate dissemination of research performed by HARC and its partners.
Second, the page would facilitate easy access to and exchange of relevant information
amongst the state-level agencies and departments in charge of various aspects of water policy
and management in Ceará.
• Third, the page would permit the research community in general to access information and
documents on water management in Ceará.
• Finally, the page would permit stakeholder groups in Ceará both to access information and to
raise issues and queries.
Initially, the page will reside on the HARC server. INOVA (Fortaleza, Brazil) will develop the
content and formatting of the page based on information and material provided by HARC and its
partners. At the beginning, such material will consist of background statements and information
summaries, along with copies of project reports. Reports will be posted by INOVA in downloadable
formats. Wherever possible, information will be provided in both English and Portuguese. INOVA
will also establish links with other relevant sites identified by HARC and its partners. In addition,
INOVA will also structure the page in such a way as to ensure a high number of "hits" based on
relevant searches performed by researchers.
We anticipate a five-stage development of the content of the page. First, we will put up material
related to the resettlement study performed by HARC in 1998. This will include background
information on the project and various project reports. The page will also include links to sites of
interest with regards to resettlement. Second, we will establish a presence for the PROGERIRH
outreach program on the page by posting material and information as they become available. As
we establish the presence and utility of the page in this manner, we will increase its content by
inviting water basin and user councils in Ceará to provide information and issues for posting. This
will be stage three. At stage four, we will link up to and invite participation from the managers of the
various water program in Ceará such as PROGERIRH, PROURB, and PROAGUA. Finally, the

19
FRC, PAGE 19
page should present an integrated and comprehensive view of water management and policy in
Ceará.
There are two opportunities available for funding this project at the present time. Initial seed money
has already been provided through LBJ School funds. These funds should enable INOVA to begin
the construction of the page and put up the resettlement project material. Following this initial
stage, funds must be located from alternative sources.
One of the philosophical objectives of this project is to facilitate stakeholder participation in the
water management process. To this end, we feel that the end users themselves should also be
connected to the web and ultimately are able to provide direct input rather than through
intermediaries as is foreseen in the initial stages. Recognising that access to computers and
Internet connections is not widespread in the interior of Ceará, HARC and its partners will
investigate and pursue opportunities for fundraising and donation of computers, equipment, and
resources to connect to the Internet.
Citizen’s Handbook to Resettlement
The Center for Global Studies is taking the organizational lead in assembling and obtaining funding
for a team of Brazilian and Indian non-governmental and community organizations to prepare a
Citizens Guide to Involuntary Relocation and Resettlement. The Citizens Guide is being prepared
to assist community leaders and members to organize themselves and participate effectively in the
planning and implementation of their resettlement. The Citizens Guide will be a critical resource in
addressing a serious problem associated with development initiatives.
To address these twin issues—educating and training communities and providing them planning
and organizational resources—HARC and its partners in Brazil and India aim to create a
comprehensive, user-friendly resource that will guide community leaders and households through
the process of displacement and resettlement. Based on lessons drawn from the specific
experiences of organizations, groups, and families that have been relocated or that are in the
process of being relocated, the Citizens Guide will provide a first-hand look at problems,
challenges, and potential opportunities. The Citizens Guide will contain detailed descriptions and
recommended actions for all the typical aspects and phases of resettlement operations, from the
initial socio-economic survey performed by project agencies to the process of selecting sites to
resettle the people and from the methods and formulae used to determine compensation to the
creation and implementation of income rehabilitation schemes. The descriptions will be liberally
supplemented with anecdotes from a variety of experiences with resettlement to enliven the text
and crystallize the points being made. Recommendations will be made throughout on how the
community and their leaders can best affect the process at each stage, to ensure that community
needs and requirements are most effectively voiced and taken into consideration in the planning
process. The Citizens Guide will thus synthesise the lessons learned from previous and current
resettlement efforts in an accessible publication that will enable future generations of displaced the
opportunity, the ability, and the will to participate effectively in the planning of their futures.
In addition to lessons and guidelines, the Citizens Guide will also list resources and advisors that
project-affected communities can access for assistance. While initial versions will be published in
English and Portuguese, there will be an ongoing initiative to translate the Citizens Guide in other
languages, so that it may reach the widest possible audience. The Citizens Guide will be available
in hard copy versions as well as on the Water for Ceará web site.
While HARC will develop the skeletal framework of the Citizens Guide, it will be the local
institutions and the project-affected communities and their leaders who will write the principal
portions of the document. HARC staff will then assimilate the various pieces into coherent and

20
FRC, PAGE 20
flowing text and address subtleties stemming from cultural, political and contextual differences. As
the co-ordinating institution in this process, HARC will assume the organizational responsibilities of
the project, freeing the local partners to manage their roles as articulators and advocates for
project-affected persons and communities.
A three-tier sequence of events is planned to drive the preparation and compilation of the Citizens
Guide:
First, local partners—with HARC assistance—will organise and convene a series of local
workshops in their regions. These workshops will be used to orient the participants with the
objectives, design, and process of this project. At these orientation meetings, local partners and
HARC will attempt to create interest and buy-in amongst local stakeholders not formally part of the
project consortium, such as government officials, local development officers, project agency
personnel, etc. HARC and its partners will attempt to build channels of communication and
information sharing amongst these participants in order that the information contained in the
Citizens Guide addresses the inherent complexities of the process and reflects the viewpoints of all
stakeholders. By including the other side, (i.e., government and project agency personnel) the
workshop will open a dialogue on the issues where participants can educate each other on the
expectations, needs, and abilities of their respective positions.
Second, regional and national-level workshops will be convened in which the participants will
discuss their experiences and attempt to cull general principles and concepts from specific
experiences. At these regional workshops, we will organize brainstorming sessions on how to
address the particularly thorny issues of resettlement. Throughout these workshops, there will be
writing sessions where designated authors would jointly draft chapters with assistance from HARC
staff, its partners, and local stakeholders.
Third, an international conference will be held in which participants from Brazil and India can
discuss the critical issues and compare and contrast their experiences. This will enable further
refinement of general principles and lessons and at the same time create mutually supportive and
reinforcing links between non governmental and community organizations from each country.
We look upon this project as an experiential learning process from which:
1. A valuable and useful resource is created. The Citizens Handbook can be translated into
other languages at a fraction of the cost and be widely distributed. We believe that the product
will empower the communities, both in terms of making better decisions when they are
confronted with resettlement choices and in terms of facilitating a more co-operative,
consultative and collaborative relationship with project agencies.
2. Participants—community leaders, representatives, and members—greatly benefit from the
opportunity to discuss and debate their experiences with others in their situations and with
government and project personnel.
3. Networks are established among communities, planners and policy makers for shared
learning, consultation, and collaboration.
4. Participatory planning and decision-making is promoted.
The release of the initial version of the Citizens Guide does not, however, signal the end of the
process. HARC and its partners will preserve the momentum by creating an organizational core
that can undertake updates on the Citizens Guide, regularly on the internet, and at longer intervals
in hard copy versions. These updates will contain the latest information, knowledge, and policies
related to involuntary displacement. To do this, the project will sustain itself through small matching
grant programs, as well as financial support from local governments, donor institutions, and private
foundations. One important aspect of this project is that the examples of relocation and
resettlement profiled will not be restricted solely to communities affected by dams. Rather it will
include communities affected by projects such as roads, highways, energy supply lines, and
airports. This breadth and diversity is important. Because dams have received the most attention

21
FRC, PAGE 21
due to the size and scale of their impacts, few people are aware of how other forms of
infrastructure development and urban renewal impact area populations. By treating the
populations that have received relatively little attention from planners and activists, we will better
represent the spectrum of contemporary relocation and resettlement work and provide important
information on cases and scenarios rarely studied.
The project will initially be binational, located in two large countries active in dam construction and
other forms of large-scale infrastructure development—Brazil and India. Local offices will be
established in each country that will gather information and co-ordinate regional, national, and
international activities. As the lessons learned process advances, we expect to incrementally
include other countries facing similar demographic, policy and planning scenarios. The process
will become more streamlined as initial drafts of the Citizens Guide are prepared, enabling
participants who join the process later to be quickly updated on the critical issues of debate and,
drawing on their populations’ varied experiences, to build off of them.
Brazil and India have been selected as the initial sites for this innovative project because both
countries have similar infrastructure development requirements and plans. Brazil and India have
been two of the most prolific dam building nations in the developing world. Despite differences in
culture, language, and income levels, these two countries share much in terms of their economic
and political structures. Both countries have histories of strong labour and social movements and
highly developed NGO sectors. They also share similar socio-economic problems in the arenas of
literacy, health, and rural development. These similarities and differences represent a great
opportunity for synergistic learning and knowledge transfer that would benefit project-affected
communities, NGOs and civil society, as well as planners and policy-makers.
Even if the project were to be restricted to either Brazil or India, great benefits would accrue. The
knowledge and networks would continue to be formed, only they would be somewhat smaller in
scope. The relevance and importance of the Citizens Guide would remain the same. In either
country, promoting participatory planning and decision making through this project would have a
great and positive impact on thousands of individual who face involuntary displacement in the
coming years.
Conclusions
In general, the management and execution of resettlement in Ceará has been satisfactory. The
State Government and project agencies have made a commitment to good, participatory
resettlement planning and followed through in good faith on that commitment. Project affected
community reactions to resettlement and towards government agencies and their personnel has,
by and large, been positive and encouraging. Few complaints were noted regarding the
compensation of acquired assets and none were egregious. In addition, the policy and quality of
resettlement is generally similar across the various projects—PROURB, Castanhão, and Pecem—
and the various agencies in charge of resettlement—SRH, SDU, and IDACE. A welcome change
in resettlement management in Ceará is that it has to a large extent moved away from cash
compensation in favour of land-based resettlement. The only exception is in the case of rural
PAPs whose assets total over R$12,000. We would recommend that in the near future, these
PAPs too will be provided with other forms of resettlement assistance.
The highlights of the success enjoyed by Cearense planners and policymakers are the innovative
participatory forums that they have created—the CARPAs and ISCAs and the Multiparticipatory
Groups of Castanhão and Pecem. These forums have proved to be efficient and effective in
creating two-way communications channels between the project agencies and the project-affected
communities. With minor modifications, as suggested in the First and Second Interim Reports and

in the Final Report, these forums should be adequate in the future to successfully deal with
involuntary displacement and resettlement in Ceará.
22
FRC, PAGE 22
While the overall assessment is positive, there is one note of caution. Thus far, the project and
resettlement agencies have focused on and found success in the easier tangible infrastructure
component of resettlement. The more intangible element of income restoration has currently taken
the backseat. The current drought in the region, which has disrupted normal agricultural life, is
partly to blame. Nevertheless, discussions among project agencies and communities continue to
focus largely on buildings and infrastructure rather than on future income streams. This is
particularly true of resettlement in urban areas affected by Castanhão. While SDU planners are
well aware of the need for income restoration schemes and have made arrangements for training
and employment schemes, the current preoccupation with the construction of Nova Jaguaribara
has somewhat obfuscated this. We would therefore recommend a renewed emphasis on income
and job creation in the following months in all projects and more comprehensive plans for income
restoration at entry in the case of future resettlement.