1

Rapid Environmental Impact Assessment, of the Zaatari camp, Jordan Towards a green response Prepared for UNHCR, Amman, Jordan Final draft (corrected 1) 20/01/2014 (Thomas Palo)

Picture 1. View of the Zaatari camp from the south, photo UNHCR, July 2013 The views expressed in this report represent those of the author. This is what I saw, what I learned and what I suggest. For information on the assessment report contact: R. Thomas Palo, UNHCR, Amman, Jordan, palo@unhcr.org

Content 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Acknowledgement Prologue Acronyms Executive summary Background of the Zaatari camp in relation to Jordan environmental situation 5.1 Jordan environment 5.2 Zaatari camp 6. Mission purpose 7. REA, EIA, FRAME and RIAM methodology 8. Baseline analysis and mitigation actions by sector 8.1 Baseline for coordination, management and environmental planning 8.1.1. Mitigation activities 8.2 Baseline for site selection and ecosystem 8.2.1 Mitigation activities 8.3 Water and hydrological conditions 8.3.1 Mitigation activities 8.4 Baseline for energy provision 8.4.1 Mitigation activities 8.5 Baseline for solid waste 8.5.1 Mitigation activities 8.6 Baseline for waste water 8.6.1 Mitigation activities 8.7 Baseline for environmental health 8.7.1 Mitigation activities 9. Conclusions 10. References Annex 1. ToR Annex 2. Technical description of RIAM score Annex 3. List of Actors Annex 4. Key contacts

1. Acknowledgement The author wants to express his thanks to the many individuals and organizations that provided input to this environmental assessment. UNICEF, ACTED, and OPEN HANDS were among those giving extra assistance. Substantial support was given from UNHCR staff in Amman office and in Zaatari refugee camp. MSB provided support and suggestions during the mission. All the Syrian people, who suffered from the war fleeing their homes and livelihood, seeking safety, dignity and relief in the Zaatari camp. 2. Acronyms ACTED= Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development CARE= Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere CCCM= Camp Coordination and Camp Management CSM= Conceptual Site Model EIA= Environmental Impact Assessment EPI= Environmental Performance Index FAO= Food and Agricultural Organization FRAME= Frame work for Assessing, Monitoring and Evaluating the Environment in refugee-related operations HFDJB= Hashemite Fund for the Development of the Jordan Badia ICARDA= International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas JEN= Japan Emergency NGO JNECE= Jordan Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement MoE = Ministry of the Environment MSB -=Swedish Contingencies Agency MWI= Ministry of Water and Irrigation NCARE= National Center for Agriculture, Research and Extension REA - Rapid Environmental Assessment OXFAM= Humanitarian NGO RIAM= Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix RSCN= Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature RSS= Royal Scientific Society UNICEF = United Nations Childrens Fund UNDP = United Nations Development Program UNEP = United Nations Environmental Program UNHCR = United Nations High Commission for Refugees USAID = United States Agency for International Development ToR= Terms of Reference WASH= Water, Sanitation and Hygiene WFP= World Food Program WHO= World Health Organization WV= World Vision

3. Prologue Why environmental concerns in emergency and humanitarian operations? The question is not trivial, in crisis many concerns need to be considered and rapid decisions to be taken. Camp management have many priorities and day to day activities that occupy the time and that need attention. In the crisis and emergency situations environmental issues are not traditionally premier activities in the operations. Decisions on actions are therefore not always based on the best information and may lead to further degradation of the environment and increased vulnerability for displaced persons, more work and pressure on humanitarian staff and higher costs for management. Environmental concerns is not only about direct effects by the refugee situation, it reflects and are based on good operating procedures and management skills in the humanitarian organizations, partners and contractors, it thus reflects the efficiency and quality of the intervention. Thus, environmental assessment should be considered as an integral part of the wider situation analysis. There are accumulating knowledge and experiences that, if not the environmental dimension is taken into consideration, both short term and long term complications will rise. UNHCR has taken a step forward by initiating this assessment and the suggestions presented here may serve as a baseline and a background for the future implementation of environmental dimensions in the organization. Reasons to implement an environmental program in the camp are summarized in figure 1.

Figure 1. Benefit from an environmental program in refugee camp interventions.

4. Executive Summary This assessment points out major environmental sectors of concern in the management of the Zaatari camp and at UNHCR. The assessment gives a baseline of the environmental situation in the camp from which mitigation action could be planned and implemented. It is inevitably so that a refugee camp of the size of Zaatari has impacts that are important for the environmental conditions. The magnitude of change of the environment could be classified as negatively significant compared to before the establishment of the camp. On a national scale the influx of refugees has caused a

heavy burden as comes to energy, water and food resources, especially in the northern directorates (Schaffer 2013). Even though UNHCR shows the will for a greater environmental commitment, there is no natural place for environmental issues in the organization and no clear chain of command or focal point for these questions. It shows the need of an implementation plan of environmental guidelines, monitoring programs, reporting, plan of action and responsibility within UNHCR and its operations. This report highlights some specific sectors where the environmental impact is particularly important and how these are interrelated between sectors and partners. It also suggests that coordination and advocacy of environmental standards need to be a UNHCR responsibility with implementation to partners and contractors involved in the operation. A suggestion is to set up a special environmental coordination function with the task to oversee planning and sector wise activities from an environmental perspective. This focal function should have responsibility for monitoring programs with partners, reporting duty at coordination meetings at camp level and at cluster coordination meetings. The following sector wise recommendations are put forward for mitigation and indicators of change. 1. UNHCR environmental management is regarded to have slight negative to negative impacts on the environment (Figure 2). This is due to lack of an environmental program and coordination function for environmental issues that monitor changes and suggests mitigation activities. For camp management and for UNHCR it is suggested to foster an organizational culture that takes environmental concerns into consideration in all interventions. The environmental sector should have a position within the organization and a role to ensure minimum standard of environmental concern. This could be accomplished with a program for capacity building, for instance that staff take the basic training offered by UNDP. Partnership with Jordanian organizations such as JNECE and RSCN should be established to give national and local benefits to the intervention. 2. The camp site location is judged to have moderate negative effect since it is in a degraded agricultural land and with small ecological values. The aquifer is one concern but the risk for contamination of ground water regarded as small. However, mitigation activities to protect the aquifer by control of waste water release are envisaged. The camp location in an agricultural area and the sheer size of the camp creates tensions and complaints among residence and from the society. This could be mitigated by ensuring that the size of the camp is not extended and that effects by litter, pollution and waste water are not accumulated in the catchment

The Environment The environment is understood as the physical, chemical and biological surroundings in which disaster affected and local communities live and develop their livelihoods. It provides the natural resources that sustain individuals, and determines the quality of the surroundings in which they live. It needs protection if these essential functions are to be maintained. The Minimum Standards address the need to prevent over exploitation, pollution and degradation of environmental conditions. Their proposed minimal preventive actions aim to secure the life-supporting functions of the environment, and seek to introduce mechanisms that foster the adaptability of natural systems for self-recovery. From The Sphere Project, Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standard for Humanitarian Response, page 13)

area and in the camp.

3. Water is provided from bore holes and trucked to storage tanks. Water use in general is regarded as having significant negative impact from an environmental perspective. The limited water resources, transports, spill, leakage and drainage contribute to this judgement. Mitigation measures to minimize spill and leakage from tanks should be implemented. Even though this is a continuing effort from camp management, the WASH refugee community may not take full responsibility to achieve this and to save water. Clear instructions and capacity building of the refugee community members in maintenance of the water facilities and conservation are actions to be up held and sustained. 4. Privatisation of water and sanitation facilities is ongoing activities among the refugees and causes problem with leakage into open pits. Apart from continuous desludging of the pits an implementation of an awareness program in the camp to prevent unhygienic situation and spread of wild sanitation solutions is encouraged. A sewage facility is under planning and will improve waste water situation. The waste water management is scored to have significant negative impact on the environment. This is due to open pits, transports and risk for the health situation. Technical solutions for waste water reuse should be investigated. For this FAO could be a useful partner. 5. Waste handling is causing large flows of unsorted material, a lot of transports and wind dispersed waste at collection points. Measurement of the waste composition should be undertaken to estimate how recycling could be achieved. From this decision could be taken if composting is a feasible solution for organic waste and the attitudes towards this practice among the refugees. Incineration is also an option for solid waste after recovery and recycling of fractions to reduce volume and transports. A discussion with ME to approve such a facility should be initiated. 6. Electricity is supplied to camp from the Jordanian electricity grid. Gas is used for cooking and heating. A lot of transports cause heavy fuel use. The use of fossil resources results in a large carbon footprint for the camp. It is recommended that any alternative sources of energy should be considered and that energy saving measures especially for transports should be implemented. This could be achieved by more efficient transport planning in the camp. 7. Environmental health is closely linked to mitigation activities in other sectors particularly in WASH. The provision of adequate sanitation facilities, proper disposal of all waste as well as control of the carriers of communicable diseases, mosquitoes, rats, mice and flies, is crucial to mitigate health risks and prevent epidemics. A rat control campaign started in January as a part of mitigation of health risks. A scoring exercise using the RIAM methodology summarizes the relative importance of the sectors from an environmental point of view (see annex 2). The score is shown in figure 2 and shows negative impact.

Water resources

Environmental health

Waste water

Solid waste

Energy source

Site selection

Env Management

Environmental Impact score

-10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60

Figure 2. Environmental impact scores for different sectors. Score 0 to-9= No or slight impact, -10 to -18= Negative impact, -19 to -35= Moderate negative impact, -36 to 71= Significant negative impact, -72 to -108= Major negative impact.

5. Background of the Zaatari camp in relation to Jordan environmental situation 5.1 Jordan environment Jordan has been ranked 70th among 149 countries in the 2008 Environment Performance Index (EPI), a position described by the Ministry of Environment (MoE)as "notable progress" that needs to be built on in the future. Jordan has given high priority to conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity components. Jordan government put 0.8% of its GDP or 2.3% of government spending on environmental protection (Sweepnet 2010). In view of its position in a region of uncertain political condition, the climatic conditions, refugee influx, the countrys rapid development and urbanization, environmental situation is under concern. Long term over exploitation has led to habitat fragmentation and ecosystem degradation in many parts of the country. This situation is also manifested in financial constraints, which have impeded adequate progress in implementing conservation programs. One critical issue is water resources and supply and the Jordan government has decided on ambitious programs to secure water provision and to bring down excess water use with the aim to restore aquifers (Jordan water strategy 2008-2022). The Mafraq region, where Zaatari is located is characterized by a very sparse vegetation cover and an annual rainfall of less than 200 mm ( Al Ayyash et al. 2012) In the past it was only used for grazing. In the last two decades irrigation using underground water, to grow vegetables, especially tomatoes, water melon and potatoes plus fruit trees and cereals, especially wheat are the major agricultural products (FAO 2013).The major user of pumped water is agriculture using 72% of the water. In addition Jordan shows a rapid population growth about 2.2% annually estimated from the birth statistics resulting in

a doubling of the population in only 35 years (Ref) . Influx of refugees adds to this figure but numbers are highly dynamic. The water situation is and will continue to be a pressing issue for Jordan. At present the ground water aquifer in the Al Zarqa basin, where the Zaatari camp is located, is over pumped with 270% to cover the need for Jordan society. This is of course not sustainable in the long term and according to model calculation the major ground water reservoirs will dry out in just 10-15 years (Comair et al.2012). This background situation is also giving the frame for the camp setting in Zaatari and the environmental concerns. 5.2 Zaatari camp Living in a camp as a refugee is not easy; it is a completely new environment that put extraordinary pressures on sustaining in a situation with insufficient resources for daily needs, for livelihood, health and leisure. The continuing war in Syria has caused massive movement of refugees fleeing the situation who migrate to neighbouring countries, leading to the displacement of tens of thousands of civilians. As of September 2013, more than 2 million people is estimated to have fled from Syria to neighbouring Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt and Iraq, putting an increasing strain on the governments and host communities (UNHCR RRP 6). Jordan host 576354 registered refugees as of 31 December 2013 and total refugee numbers are steadily increasing at the time of writing this REA during September-December 2013. However, the total number of refugees in the country is assumed to be much higher and estimates to be around a million people displaced. In order to handle this humanitarian catastrophe and to meet the need of displaced persons several refugee camps have been established by UNHCR in northern Jordan. Zaatari is the largest camp and was near full capacity by May 2013 and the REACH report for November 2013 gives the total number of individuals in the camp as 74447, the number of families as 16110and the number of households as 13352 (REACH Shelter Report, 2013). In the camp there are 23334 shelters (tents+caravans), about 3000 shops and 850 food outlets, all facilities characteristic for a major city. This makes Zaatari a densely populated camp in comparison with major cities in Jordan and refugee camps in the world. The figure of number of refugees in the camp is highly dynamic and changes occur fast and on short notice. The camp population has decreased by 35% since May to December, 2013.

Figure 3. Geographical location of the Zaatari cami in Jordan. (From Alraggad 2013) The area for the camp was selected by the Jordanian government and located in an area with rangeland and some agriculture in the surroundings (Figure 3). It has been a traditionally used for grazing by sheep and for cultivation of olives. It covers in total about 9 km2 and is located about 10 km east of the Mafraq city and about 14 km south of the Syrian border. The Zaatari camp lies in the northern part of the Badia desert. The pressure on the land has increased due to the population increase in Jordan and increased demand of agricultural products. The wadi in the west of the camp is used for cultivation of tomatoes and vegetables. The agricultural sector is totally dependent on irrigation and pumping of water from wells. Some fast growing crops after rain is also cultivated in the area. The surface of the camp has been levelled out when constructed rendering a rather flat ground with a base course to improve drainage. The camp has existed for a year and a half as in December 2013 and could at present be regarded as a semi-permanent city. The emergency phase is over and the current planning more directed towards management and longer term operation of the camp. This includes maintenance of superstructures and development of new infrastructures that increase the service level to refugees. The camp is also reorganized to improve living conditions for the refugees. In Al Zaatari camp the infrastructure is in continuous change but the current master plan organises the camp into 12 districts. The initial high influx of refugees in the spring of 2013 made the situation emergent and the camp layout was not systematically organized, refugees settled as they arrived in a more or less random distribution. The area occupied by the camp at present is about half that provided by

10

the government. There is a possibility to extend the camp towards the south if needed. The camp area is filling up and the free space available for a couple of months ago the eastern part of the camp is now occupied. The population density in the camp is about 14000 persons/km2 in the most densely populated districts 1, 2 and 3 (REACH, December 2013), which is high in comparison to the worlds most densely populated cities, for instance Mumbai (30000 persons/km2), Shanghai (14000/km2). This situation makes the general internal environment in the camp complicated and environmental actions challenging. The camp population has declined by 35% by December 2013 compared to May 2013 (REACH, December 2013) making it more manageable and with higher service level.The camp is divided by a main road stretching in south north direction, with the oldest part of the camp west of the road and the newer setting east of the road. This road have shops of different kinds with a lot of business going on, it is the pulse vein of activities within the camp. The material flow through private enterprises is not known but it is estimated that the monthly turnover corresponds to 6 million JD per year (Kleinschmidt pers. com.). UNHCR provide 24.5 tons of bread per month and 4873 meals per month (UNHCR November, 2013). In District 1, the oldest part of the camp, initiatives with private sanitation is common and several different solutions are found. Some are open pits and with drainage of mostly grey water directly from the shelter to the surrounding ground. An estimate is that 40% of the household have constructed their own sanitation facility. These private pits with water sipping out possess a health risk and measures are underway from the camp management to address this issue. A improved drainage is under construction and a pipe system connected to the drainage leading to a collection tank is planned (THW, OXFAM).

The basic needs for the displaced are provided with provision of water, sanitation and hygiene facilities. Shelters are provided as tents and a change to pre-fabricated caravans is on its way for winterization. Currently 27101 shelters, 412 holding tanks, around 400 WASH blocks, 2500 toilets and about 1300 water tanks are providing basic support (ACTED, November 22, 2013). For solid waste about 700, 1 m3 bins are distributed within the camp. 12 small trucks, 2 lorries and 6 compaction trucks provide transport of solid waste (ACTED, November 22, 2013). The maintenance of these facilities requires a lot of transports and 255 round trips per day by 88 trucks is done for water provision, on average 12.8 km drive within the camp for each truck per day. For desludging, 22 trucks of different sizes are working three times a day using 4000 l of fuel per day, in total 66 trips a day (Open hands, December 08, 2013). The sludge is transported to Al-Akeider sewage plant in Irbid. UNHCR staff and partners commute daily from Amman to the camp. For UNHCR, 49 vehicles provide transportation using about 700 litre of fuel per day.

11

The base course which is put to provide drainage and protection from the soil is not covering the soil everywhere. Where the soil is exposed in the camp its fine clay like structure gives very low infiltration rate which makes water standing in low areas of the camp. This together with spill from private sanitation increases the risk for diseases such as diarrhea and gives an unpleasant muddy ground during rains.

Picture 2. Water sipping out from tanks and private pits with risk of bacterial contamination and an unpleasant ground. Photo Thomas Palo 6. Mission purpose

MSB partnership with UNHCR has identified the environment as a prioritized area for investigation. An environmental scoping mission was conducted by MSB in September 2012 in the Zaatari camp and a technical assessment done on the WASH sector in January 2013 (Mellgren 2013). The scoping mission identified some key issues and suggested a Rapid Environmental Impact Assessment (REA) to be carried out for this camp. The aim of the current mission is to collect and analyze base line data and to suggest appropriate monitoring of the environmental situation in the camp. The baseline serves as a situation analysis that could be followed up at some future time. In the following impressions from the camp are summarized according to sectors and some suggestions put forward when appropriate. Not all sectors are covered in detail due to lack of information or that the sector is considered as of minor importance

12

compared to others from an environmental perspective. Focus in this report is mainly on camp management, water situation, waste water, solid waste, and the energy sector. Limitations in this assessment are that data is not always available and the mission is larger and more complex than anticipated. At time being the Zaatari camp has been in use for over a year and has been in full operation since May 2013. The environmental baseline is thus set by current conditions but with reference to major changes and impacts relative population changes with more refugees leaving the camp than is entering the camp. TOR for the mission isfound in annex 1. The detailed technical analysis with scores and descriptions are presented in Annex 2. Actors within the camp are presented in Annex 3 and key contacts in Annex 4. 7. REA, EIA, FRAME and RIAM methodology REA and EIA are common tools in some form or another for planning and decision making in large scale projects. EIA is mandatory in most countries and should be conducted whenever development projects and strategies are considered. It has not been widely used in refugee camp situations, but a few have been conducted in Guinea and Haiti (http://www.grid.unep.ch/guinea. Kelly 2010, Palo 2010). The UNHCR/CARE FRAME toolkit gives guidelines how to conduct an REA and EIA. (http://www.unhcr.org/4a97aa739.html ). REA is a focused environmental study of the likely impacts of projects/activities that do not require the more formalised and detailed approach of an environmental assessment to be undertaken. The aim is to give a baseline that could serve as a background for an EIA or future changes of the operations. Although seen as a useful tool in improving planning decisions, REA and EIA suffer from subjective assessments that it is neither reproducible nor transparent. The FRAME guidelines and score card is a long and complex method and for this assessment the toolkit is not adapted to desert conditions but covers most sectors. An alternative is the RIAM software that is an environmental system of scoring within a matrix that has been designed to allow subjective judgments to be quantitatively recorded. This makes the assessment possible to be re-assessed by other investigators. Thus the RIAM method is selected over the FRAME methodology, but this REA follow to large extent FRAME guidelines but is modified to suit the situation relevant for the Zaatari camp and in a desert environment. The technical part of the RIAM is shown in Annex 2.

13

Key Environmental Guidances; Handbook of Selected Lessons Learned from the Field: Refugee Operations and Environmental Management (UNHCR) Refugee Operations and Environmental Management Key Principles for Decision Makers (UNHCR) Environmental Guidelines for Small-Scale Activities in Africa; Chapter 10: Humanitarian Response and Natural Disasters. 2nd Edition (USAID) FRAME Toolkit: Framework for Assessing, Monitoring and Evaluating the environment in refugee-related operations (UNHCR and CARE International) Environmental Needs Assessment in Post-Disaster Situations. A Practical Guide for Implementation (UNEP) Transitional Settlement: Displaced Populations. University of Cambridge/ Shelterproject and Oxfam UK (The Max Lock Centre, Corsellis, T. and Vitale, A). Checklist-Based Guide to Identifying Critical Environmental Considerations in Emergency Shelter Site Selection, Construction, Management and Decommissioning (ProAct/Shelter Cluster) Ecological Sanitation (Stockholm Environment Institute) RIAM, http://www.dhigroup.com/MIK ECUSTOMISEDbyDHI/RIAM.

Here an outline is presented to guide the work and activities according to ToR (Annex 1). The work has proceeded in different steps according to the REA process and includes the following activities; Step 1. Understanding of the camp system by development of a Conceptual Site Model (CSM) and baseline data that address the specific characteristics of the camp. The following basic questions could be asked; a) What is known about the site , data availability, maps b) What is not known about the site , gap analysis of missing facts c) What questions need to be answered, related to environmental issues d) What kind of approval/decisions need to be made in planning from a legislative and policy context e) Investigation of environmental activities and resources These questions form the initial phase of the REA. Step 2. Critical environmental considerations and key influencing factors a) Analyze and identify root causes of problems with current set up b) Identify and understand how problems are linked c) Identify key areas of further analysis Step 3. Integrated environmental impact of the relief action a) Find relevant indicators related to sectors b) Integration and system analysis From the mission by MSB conducted in January 2013 a ToR was formulated with broad goals including and extending the above mentioned issues (see annex 1).

8. Baseline analysis and mitigation actions by sector 8.1 Baseline for coordination, management and environmental planning

The UNHCR takes the overall responsibility for the management of refugees and for the establishment, the

14

operation and the development of camps. The WASH Sector is led by UNICEF in coordination with UNHCR as Camp Managers. UNICEF, coordinates the provision of all works and services in respects of water supply and sanitation. Various other organizations and numerous NGOs are implementing partners of UNICEF and UNHCR and take responsibility for certain tasks, such as waste handling and water provision. A schematic picture of the organization is shown below (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Organizational scheme of the Zaatari camp management with partners. Numbers refers to districts in the camp.

The need for an environmentally sound response is generally accepted for UNHCR operations in Jordan, but the implementation of an environmental dimension as a cross sectorial operation is not in place in the organization, leading to a weak focus on environmental issues in relation to emergency response. There are many offices, NGOs and contractors involved making information and management a challenge and when it comes to common guidelines of environmental concern the standards differs between partners. Two examples from major partners, OXFAM has a comprehensive environmental policy while ACTED does not have a written policy (http://www.oxfam.org.uk/, http://www.acted.org ). The lead agency for environmental responsibility is somewhat unclear and how responsibility is taken/divided among actors not obvious. The lack of environmental staff in UNHCR organization put these issues in the marginal. The size of the camp in relation to surrounding population makes management, coordination of environmental issues difficult and a challenge. UNHCR (1996) key environmental principles are ; - preventing environmental degradation from happening, in the first instance is the most effective strategy

15

attaching a monetary value to natural resources can reduce the level of those resources consumed environmental projects need not be complex or costly influencing policies can be as important as defining practice the roles and responsibilities of actors and stakeholders need to be clearly defined.

At present many environmental actions are donor driven and started ad hoc, for instance the implementation of solar driven streets lights are dependent on funds earmarked for this purpose. In the table 1 below an environmental benchmark is provided based on the impressions of UNHCR environmental work during the mission. The rank is as follows; high = Policy, guidelines, strategy and plan of action exist and in operation, Medium = Policy exist and guidelines but lack implementation and plan of action, Low = Policy exist but lack guidelines, implementation program and plan of action. This ranking is judged from the following premises; Awareness of environmental issues, capacity for handling the issues, implementation program within the intervention, and position of environmental issues in the organization (Table 1). Table 1. Benchmarking of environmental sector within UNHCR Environmental benchmarks Will within UNHCR Environmental strategy Implementation of strategy Environmental culture/awareness Complexity of partnership Capacity building Characteristics High High Medium/low Medium High Medium/low

For environmental relevant information there is a lack of a structural and coordinated monitoring program that provides data to be used for improvements. One example on this is the waste sector (see below). The environmental score is -14 that is a negative impact (see annex 2). This judgement is based on the criteria that the management is important to areas immediately outside the local condition and contribute to a negative change from status quo.

8.1.1 Mitigation activities The environmental principles adopted by UNHCR are basically sound (see above)but need to be refined and the goal more clearly stated, it should give higher priority to environmental issues early in operations and be a cross cutting issue in all sectors. Both normative and operational activities should be viewed from an environmental perspective. Costs for environmental actions and concerns should be internalized into operation costs for the different sectors. A good environmental approach is beneficial to the beneficiaries and for the camp management. In general it is found that environmental considerations do not have a natural place within the operation. Although, this assessment shows that the will for incorporation of environmental guidelines and procedures are high. UNHCR have guidelines how to

16

perform assessment and monitoring through the FRAME package but these need to be used and mainstreamed. Many partners monitor, collect data and measure performance on their activities. For instance REACH makes sweeps in the camp for collection of specific data and information, each partner has information on contractors etc. This capacity could be further used for environmental monitoring. The following general recommendations are put forward: Building a culture within UNHCR with a defined position and role for environmental coordination, monitoring and evaluation. Establish collaboration with partners/NGOs in the Jordanian society i.e JNECE, RSS or/and RSCN with experience from Jordans conditions. Ensure and secure that environmental guidelines i.e FRAME, are implemented and followed by all actors and partners involved in the operation and in management of camp interventions. set up a special environmental coordination function to ensure that environmental impacts in the sectors are monitored and evaluated.

8.2 Baseline for site selection and ecosystem The process of site selection encompasses many steps from planning to construction, including initial inventory, assessment, alternative analysis, detailed design, and construction procedures and services. The Zaatari camp lies in a desert environment with very limited natural resources available. Most resources need to be provided externally except for provision of water from a bore hole in the camp and outside. The base ground in the camp is compacted and covered with gravel with the purpose to improve drainage; this gives a good surface for placing tents and caravans. The area for the camp was selected by the Jordanian government and located in a region with rangeland and some agriculture in the surroundings. In the vicinity of the camp area, in the north of the camp is an olive plantation. This plantation is dried out and most of the olive trees have died. In the west of the camp an irrigated agricultural setting is located with cultivation of tomatoes and vegetables. The area around the camp is extensively used for sheep grazing. The camp is surrounded by a soil bund several meters high that prevent unauthorized vehicles to enter the camp. The bund diverts drainage water and but does not prevent water to enter into the wadi. Zaatari camp is located on the top of the major water aquifer, the Amman/Zarqa aquifer, that provides the metropolitan Amman with water. Thus the location of the camp is a major concern in relation to the safety of the aquifer (see below). Most of the biodiversity is found in the wadi and surrounding grazing land. However, high grazing pressure has deteriorated vegetation cover, started desertification processes, caused erosion and the system has lost its complexity. These processes have been going on for long and well before the establishment of the camp. The camp itself does not contain any biological value and the risk on the surrounding ecosystem gives a score of 24 and is regarded as moderate compared to the overall risk already imposed by overgrazing and water shortage. This score and major environmental criterion is that the site is important to regional/national interest with a slight negative impact from status quo (see technical annex 2). The camp site is judged as permanent

17

even though it may one day be abandoned and the land restored. The control of the site makes the situation reversible with proper mitigation measures. However the effect is judged as cumulative since the site has synergetic effects with other sectors.

8.2.1 Mitigation activities The camp should not be extended from its current size due to the magnifying effects by increased population in the camp. The site selection is in an agricultural area with mainly sheep grazing and olive plantations. Due to the overgrazing it would be desirable to find a way how to reuse grey water for irrigation and restoration of rangelands. This technique of restoration has been developed by for instance ICARDA and in FAO. See also waste water reuse below.

8.3 Baseline for water and hydrological conditions Rainfall is the only source of recharge for the Amman/Zarqa groundwater aquifers so its potential decline with climate change could pose a significant problem for Jordan. Only about 1% of Jordan receives more than 500 mm of rain yearly and 92% receives less than 100 mm per year. The average water use per capita in Jordan is 145 cu/year and the total water use have increased from 295 Mcu in 2007 to expected 365Mcu in 2020, but the per capita provision has declined. The agricultural sector is using 64% of the pumped water and additional 100 Mcu are reused wastewater in agriculture in total 72%. A new aquifer was opened in August 2013 located in the south east Jordan. The heavy use of water resources has caused serious effects on ecosystems, causing salinization and affected water quality. Surface waters in Jordan supply roughly 37% of the total water supply (Altz-Stamm 2012) the rest coming from deep wells. The supply and management of fresh water to the camps, as well as the collection and management of the sewage from the camp is ultimately the responsibility of MWI. However, a number of other international and local organizations are involved in the matter at different levels and in coordination with MWI, UNICEF and UNHCR. According to estimations by MWI the cost on the water sector by the refugee situation for 570000 refugees is 128 million JD per year. A comprehensive water vulnerability study has been done for the Zaatari camp and results confirm the over pumping of deep wells in the area (Alraggad 2013). Further, the report identifies parts of the area outside the camp with water vulnerability. This is the situation framework in which the Zaatari camp is located, a region with limited water resources and few opportunities for cultivation and gardening within the camp area (Ali El-Naya 2010). The absence of a sewage system in the area and the widespread private pits and sanitation solutions adds a new stress factor to the vulnerability of the aquifer system. In partnership with UNICEF, ACTED is responsible for supplying water to all in the Zaatari camp, with 35 liter provided per person per day. Boreholes have been drilled in the camp and reduce distance for water transports and trucking water supplies into the camp. The total volume of water delivered during October 2013 was about 4300 m3.per day. This is equivalent to 1.3 MCu per year provided to the camp, which roughly correspond to 2% of the safe water pumping from the aquifer. The water is

18

taken from several bore holes in the surrounding area and from two bore holes in the camp and trucked to water tanks in the districts. 1300 water tanks needs to be refilled daily to ensure water for the camp population. Thus, 255 truck journeys with water move in the camp daily. The transport of water in the camp and subsequent transport of waste water and solid waste takes a lot of vehicles for the operation. The water quality is checked regularly for measures of chlorine concentrations, salinity and microbial content. Many water tanks are damaged and the cover removed, it posseses high water losses and health risks. Since about 40% of the water storage tanks are leaking a considerable loss of water is apparent. Roughly, since 1700 m3 of waste water is transported out of the camp, the leakage is about 60% that seeps into the ground in the camp and when mixed with septic water creates an additional health risk as well loss of precious water. Due to the slow infiltration rate water is standing until it evaporates. Even during heavy rains only about 10% of surface water is run-off the rest is soaked into the fine clay like soil (Alraggad 2013). The water situation in the camp is sensitive to changes in population size in the camp as an increase in number of individuals has a magnifying effect on water use. A diminishing population size is not necessarily giving a rapid decline in water consumption since excess water is utilized by remaining residents. Leakage and spill of water from water tanks and use in the household is another factor that affects the water provision since more refill trips are needed to compensate for losses. The effect of the water leakage on the provision system is measured as the number of trucks needed to transport water for refill and that can serve as an indicator of the efficiency of mitigation to save water and energy. Risk of contamination of the aquifer The key factor that affects the removal and elimination of bacteria and viruses from groundwater is the effluent residence time between the source of contamination and the point of water abstraction. Because of the very low velocities of unsaturated flow, the unsaturated zone is the most important line of defence against faecal pollution of aquifers (Cave and Kolsky 1999). The soil in the camp has a low permeability and reduces the transfer of pollutant to deeper soils and to the aquifer. However, the properties of the soil and rock formation vary in the area but the most vulnerable sites are outside the camp boundary. The ground water table is found between 100- 200 m from ground surface (MWI, August 2013). The risk is therefore regarded as low for contamination of the aquifer at the point of the camp. With the privatization of sanitation systems in the camp waste water are directed through the stormwater drainage culvert to a point at the end of it. Since no leakage or release into the wadi is permitted the culvert is desludged regularly depending on discharge (Picture 2). If waste water including latrine is continuously discharged into the wadi it may reach the saturated zone within 10 years according to MWI estimations.

19

Picture 2: Pumping of the drainage culvert coming from the camp that contains waste water from private connections from camp households. About 300 m3 is removed daily. Photo Thomas Palo A comprehensive investigation of the risk for the aquifer by the camp has been done (Alraggad 2013). It shows that the risk for deep contamination is small and that surface contamination of the surrounding ecosystem also is minor due to limited run off and infrequent flooding events (Figure 4). It is estimated that 10% of the rain fall is run off in to the wadi catchment. The use of holding tanks minimizes the risk for waste water entering the wadi and the aquifer. However, a large concern for soil contamination is the mix of black, grey and rain water in situations of flooding. This may give raise to increase cases of diarrheal diseases. During heavy rains which happens during some weeks yearly, the drainage system is overflowing and water pour into the wadi. The wadi is also receiving waste water from the surrounding communities during rains. Standing water in pools might possess a safety risk for children and potentially a health risk if contaminated with latrine water.

20

Figure 4. Soil permeability in Zaatari with continuous flow of water in cm/day (From Alraggad 2013). The water sector in general scores the most negative impact (-56) of the sectors considered since water is of national and international interest. The magnitude of impact is significantly negative and of dis-benefit. The situation is temporary since water use will end when the camp is closed and the situation is reversible since water resources can be restored and controlled (see annex 2).

8.3.1 Mitigation activities The Zaatri camp water distribution network is currently being designed including: design capacity (daily and peak flows), storage capacity, geographic layout of the

21

system, and should ensure that all water points are also included in the design for collection of spilt/wastewater (Zaatari ToR waste water tender, 2014). Since the camp water system is sensitive to spill and leakage, efforts should be put to ensure that spill and leakage are minimized by proper control of tanks and tap stands. UNICEF and partner organizations strive to be in pace with maintenance and service but in many cases private solution happens faster than could be coped with. Reduction of spill and leakage will reduce both the risk for unhealthy situation in the camp and amount of transports. Control of leakage is crucial since it has direct effects on amount of fuel used and the frequency of refill of water tanks as well as contamination risk. Although, with all respect for the hard work done by UNICEF, UNHCR and partner organizations several measures need to be taken to improve water security. Awareness campaigns are performed at some interval but need to be continuous over time and as a part of capacity building involving the camp refugee wash committees. This will foster responsibility and ownership of the facilities and reduce the likelihood of theft and vandalism. In the capacity and awareness activities maintenance skills and proper handling are instructions to WASH committees to prevent leakage from water tanks. This could preferably be a part of water handling, hygiene and water saving procedures. Establish an ownership culture among residents to prevent vandalism of water facilities and to prevent wild sanitation solutions. Ensure that latrine and hazardous material are not washed into the wadi or accumulated in the camp.

8.4 Baseline for energy sector Electricity is used for the operation of hospitals, schools, water supply, food distribution centres, and operation of the base camp for UN agencies and NGOs, security lighting and telecommunications as well as for the benefit for the refugees themselves. Energy in the camp comes in several different forms; as electricity from the national grid, gas, diesel generators and solar energy. The camp residents have the knowledge and the technical ability to tap into cables and provide themselves with a working electrical supply. Now about 75% of the households in the camp have electricity (REACH, December 2013). Electricity is unevenly distributed within the camp. In some districts 53% lack electricity connection while in other districts only 67% is not having electricity connection. Of the households that do not have an electricity connection, 54% solely lived in a tent, 33% were living in a caravan, 12% possessed both shelter types and less than 1% is living in kitchens. These unregulated connections present significant risk to both the refugee population and the electrical equipment making up the electrical system. The numerous connections have caused a heavy burden on the existing electrical network and come at a significant cost to UNHCR (Table 2). The electricity is taken from the Jordan grid and the Jordan energy production relies to 99% on fossil fuel (CIA world fact book, 2013). Conversion of oil to electricity is only 38-44% effective (EURELECTRIC, 2003). Jordan has almost doubled its energy consumption since year 2000 and now consumes 11.3 billion KWh per year. The camp uses 6.9 million KWh per month

22

corresponding to roughly 83 million KWh per year. 1 ton of oil produces approximately 12000 KWh and the camp uses 7155 tons of crude oil per year for its electricity use. In table 2 is energy use presented for individual, family and household levels. The use proved for basic use as lighting and a TV.

Table 2. Energy Usage and Cost per Individual, Family and Household based on June 2013 Data (courtesy of John Simpson, UNHCR) Energy usage per month (kWh) Individual Family Household 10.9 51.6 72.3 Cost (JD) 2.55 12.13 16.99

In the winterization process in the camp refugees install electric heathers that overload the system causing frequent stops in the electric system. In October a total of 91% of households reported not to have a room heater (REACH, 2013). About 25% of the households have a least one cooking stove and a few have electric stoves (<1%). Camp management is providing each household with gasheathers and voucher for purchase of gas every second week as a part of the winterization project. Due to the large need of gas for heating and cooking in the camp, gas tubes is in short supply in Jordan and creates problem for the winterization in the camp. It is also a potential competition situation between supply to the camp and to the Jordanian society. A lot of truck and car transports occur in the camp for water provision, waste removal and waste water desludging. Daily transports of staff back and forth to Amman and the camp consumes fuel. The number of trips and trucks are shown in table3. Table 3. Overview of number of trucks, trips per day and volume transported daily as a part of the management of the camp. Sector Water Desludging Solid waste Staff Trucks/cars 120 22 20 49 Total trips per day 340 66 5 100 Transported/used volume /day 4300 cu 1562 cu 1300 cu 700 l

23

8.4.1 Mitigation activities Any alternative energy sources wind, solar, biogas should be strongly encouraged and considered when appropriate (Lyytinen 2009). Energy saving should be a priority to reduce fossil energy use. This could be achieved by control of sectors that require a lot of transports and by regulation of electricity use at the household. Biogas is one option to be investigated in relation to and in cooperation with the region, possibly also with additional organic waste from the surrounding nearby villages and from dry sanitation solutions, thus a common biogas facility for the camp and the region could be an option. The volume of organic waste in the camp is not known and its contribution to a biogas facility should be estimated. Transports should be reduced both for commuting staff and for transports in the camp. Reduce transports by providing overnight sleeping facility for staff at the camp or nearby towns. Considering improved systems for solid waste, waste water and water provision to reduce truck transports.

8.5 Baseline for solid waste Solid waste collection is a general problem in Jordan with mostly ineffective separation and waste disposed at landfills. A catastrophic event will have severe impacts on waste collection systems. If these were weak to begin with it may completely overwhelm or decimate them. A recent assessment in northern governorates found that 80 per cent of communal waste bins were overflowing or halffull with 15 per cent of excess waste not collected. People in the affected area or in a settlement however, will continue to live and produce waste. If this is not collected it will produce significant public and environmental health concerns. Non-food items (NFI), will not decompose in a landfill, rather will take up space and potentially create tensions with neighbouring communities also depending on those facilities. No specific legal framework for solid waste management is in place in Jordan. Waste management falls under several different regulations; the environmental protection law deals with environmental issues in general but not explicitly with solid waste. Regulations and responsibilities for managing landfills as well as regulations for medical waste are generally weak. The total estimated solid waste generation in the country is about 3,800 tons/day (Daradki 2008), of which 780, 2,620 and 400 tons/day are the contributions of the northern, central and southern regions respectively (Aljaradin et al. 2011). The major fractions of waste generated in Jordan are shown in table 4. Table 4. Waste composition in Jordan society (Sweepnet 2010) Waste production in Jordan Metal Glass Plastics Paper/cardboard Organic % 1 3 17 13 52

24

Other

14

Recycling is not done in a systematic way and is estimated to be around 5% in Jordan (Jordan times, May 16, 2013) . This recycling is mainly done by informal scavengers but in some instances at the landfill a contractor recovers fractions that are recyclable before landfilling. However, there is no national strategy in place for recycling and waste reduction. There are few companies dealing with recycling but at least one company is recycling paper for the market. In general, the attitudes toward source separation among Jordanians at the point of generation are negative and it will be difficult to achieve it in the immediate future (Aljaradin et al. 2011). For the Zaatari camp waste management the system is basic and not different from the Jordan practice. The camp produces about 500 kg of solid waste per day or 15 tons per month compressed waste and thus has a significant effect on waste disposal in the region. Most solid wastes from the camp and surrounding municipalities are disposed at a landfill some 7 km away from the camp. The Zaatari camp contributes to about 23% of the waste production in the northern regions of Jordan. The waste system in the camp constitutes of household disposal in buckets that are emptied in communal waste bins. Collection of waste from the bins is done manually after emptying the waste from the bin on the ground and then lifted into small trucks; the waste is transported to a transit area and emptied into larger garbage trucks and subsequent transport to the dump site. It requires about 10-12 small trucks to fill a larger garbage truck. In the camp 700 bins are distributed in the different districts, 12 small trucks and 2 lorries regularly empty the bins and 6 larger trucks at transit area take waste to the land fill twice a day. In total on average, 1500 m3 of solid waste is transported to the land fill each day (Picture 3). Scavenging for useable and valuable fractions of the waste are reported to be a part of the refugee livelihood, but the extent of this activity is not known. Organic waste such as old bread is told to be sold as fodder for sheep in the surrounding agricultural area. This sorting practice is done in a primitive way by refugees and waste workers without protection and with high risk of infection and disease problem. A separation system with coloured bins was initially introduced in the camp, but bins were stolen and taken outside the camp and could not be replaced (Pers.com. Oxfam, November, 2013). This led to that the separation program in the camp closed. A pilot of waste sorting is to be initiated by OXFAM in a part of the camp. According to ACTED 250 waste bins were stolen out of the 700 distributed in the camp during 2013, but the stolen bins were replaced, but still some thefts occurs . 70 teams with 617 cleaners are collecting waste regularly through cash for work programme. This keeps the camp in a reasonable state of cleanliness from garbage pollution but plastics bags are distributed around the camp, mainly spread from collection sites and the transit site due to lack of wind protection during reloading of trucks. Informal burning of waste also occurs here and there in the camp. The waste is transported to land fill, but there is no follow up if the contractor actually takes the waste to the fill, since there is a fee for waste disposal at the dump. The contractor is paid by volume and 6 container trucks per day leave the camp with solid waste

25

Picture 3. Small trucks empty their load of solid waste into a container truck. About 10 small trucks are required to fill the larger container truck. (Photo Thomas Palo) The waste is composed of paper, wrapping materials, plastics, cans and organic waste (Picture 4). According to inspection at the transfer site the organic content of the waste seems to be low. ACTED did a sorting investigation and a calculation of the economic benefit with recycling and found that the cost for implementation was too high. However this calculation did not take into account the saving of less transports, only the working cost for separation and the value of the fractions.

Picture 4. Solid waste fractions at the transfer site in Zaatari camp. Photos: Thomas Palo,Sharuh Ibragimov

Model simulations shows that combinations of recycling and composting are the best solution for minimizing residual waste (Laytani and Banguil 2012). The recycling of waste in a controlled manner can give revenue from recycled material and gardening using high-quality vermicomposting can be one additional livelihood in the camp. The compost may be also sold to surrounding agricultural sectors with decreased

26

production cost due to application of as cheaper alternative to inorganic fertilizers. Further, less need for truck transports save both energy and reduces costs. Certain waste fractions produced at hospitals and clinics are classified as medical wastes, hazardous waste and packaging waste; these should be separated without mixing at the source, medical and hazardous waste collected in special bags and boxes. The bags and boxes should be marked with appropriate labels. According to Sphere standards (2013), medical waste such as glasses, needles, cloth and drugs should be incinerated in a correctly designed incinerator within the boundary of the health facilities. In the Zaatari camp 3 hospitals, 4 primary health clinics, 2 mental clinics and 2 handicap clinics exists and are working in full capacity. The camp has 40 -60 deliverable per week with a capacity in the hospitals of about 25 deliveries per week, other deliveries are outside the camp in nearby hospitals. Abu Qdais et al. (2007) estimated that the daily amount of the medical waste generated by all Jordanian hospitals is about 6 tons/day, in Zaatari about 30 kg of medical items, needle etc. are produced per day in the camp. Poor management of healthcare waste exposes the population, healthcare workers and waste handlers to risk for infections and diseases. Further, if medical waste ends up with general waste at landfills it may attract disease vectors and cause spread of diseases and pathogens in the area. The medical waste is reported to appear in the general waste, the frequency and amount of this is not known but clearly not acceptable. During field visits to the health clinics and one hospital the medical waste handling procedures were investigated. The procedures and guidelines are followed by the health facilities as far as it was recognised. The waste is collected by an approved contractor and taken for incineration at a nearby hospital. There are several checkpoints that the waste is delivered and handled at the final destination. Collection of medical waste by the contractor is planned to be regular and follows guidelines but it is reported that it is too long time between collections which might be the root to the report that medical waste is ending up at the land fill. Incineration must be done for medical waste at an approved facility and checked for all clinics and hospitals in the camp. An incineration facility is in place in the IFRC hospital in the new camp in Azraq with a capacity of 40 kg per load; however, incineration in the camp is not approved at present by the Jordan authorities. 8.5.1 Mitigation activities Prevention of extensive littering by solid waste should be done. One minimum measure is to build a fence around the transit site for waste handling to prevent wind dispersal of waste, especially plastic bags. In order to reduce the number of vehicles and transports it is suggested that bins is emptied by the compacting trucks and thus the transit area is not needed as well as the small trucks. Other solutions such as incineration of solid waste could be an alternative to minimize distribution of solid waste and the volume of waste. This option is at present not approved by the Jordanian legislation. More important is to implement a recycling program. Too much packaging takes up valuable space and decreases the number of units of material that

27

can be transported in one vehicle. Unnecessary packaging that cannot be recycled is a waste of resources through its entire life cycle from manufacturing to transport, to disposal, wasting precious fuel, materials and water. Thus, reducing waste volume is a premier measure. Use of covered bins to prevent access of animals to the waste and to prevent dispersal of waste in the camp. Perform an analysis of the waste transport chain how it could be more efficient to minimize transports. Waste sorting should be investigated as an option and divided into fractions, such as metal, paper and plastics, and organic material. The full cost analysis has not been performed even though ACTED did one brief survey of waste fractions and the economic feasibility. The reduction of cost for transport of waste by recycling could be reallocated to livelihood activities and systematic collection. Organic material should be composted and reused for gardening in the camp if culturally accepted. When recyclable waste streams are properly managed, they can provide valuable income-generation for the affected population and recovered material for programmes. When planning recycling activities the following should be taken into account:

waste type and quantity, need to be estimated in the camp; potential capital to be regained from waste streams, such as metals, plastics, etc; started by ACTED but need follow up. recycling process and employment opportunities; and incentives for affected population to partake in a recycling scheme. When dealing with organic waste, the following should be taken into account: Assessment of the amount of organic material that is likely to be produced; Sustainable methods of disposing of organic waste; Methods for biological decomposition of waste; and Strategies for turning organic waste into useful products (e.g. energy, compost). Sensitation and awareness actions should be undertaken involving scavengers in recycling programs as well as schools and the young population in the camp. An awareness/ update of medical waste treatment program should be started for health staff and contractors. Although, the medical waste volume is not alarming and with proper handling the current practice will do. An alternative, if medical waste fractions increases is an incineration facility. Incineration is also an option for solid waste after recovery and recycling of fractions to reduce volume and transports. Incineration is, even with the drawbacks of air pollution and problematic ash residues, a feasible solution for the camp if approved by the Jordanian authorities.

8.6 Baseline for waste water The camp has designated places for communal water and sanitation facilities in each of the districts. The WASH unit consists of a sanitation part with toilets and a part for personal hygiene with showers. All waste water and latrines are collected in holding tanks for each WASH unit which are desludged by trucks regularly. A review of the WASH situation was done in January, 2013 (Mellgren 2013), as the camp has increased the situation with waste water has been exenterated and with continuing and

28

magnified maintenance problems. There are 362 WASH centers in the camp (REACH, September 29, 2013). Disposal of wastewater is becoming a critical issue since in generally no waste treatment is being done at the camp site. Communal water and sanitation facilities produce 1,700 m3 /day of wastewater that is desludged and transported by trucks to Al-Akeidar wastewater treatment plant some 35 km away from the camp. This volume of wastewater has already exceeded the designed capacity for the plant, impairing the functions in its different treatment steps, this will cause poor function of the plant and cause effluent into the recipient. As there is significant health, environmental and cost impacts of the current sanitation systems in the camp and the system of desludging waste water collection tanks or pits, it is proposed to establish a wastewater collection network throughout the camp. Tender submissions for containerised, compact wastewater treatment units were recently evaluated through the MWI and Water Authority Jordan tender process. The tender requested submissions for containerized, compact trickling filter and membrane bioreactor wastewater treatment plants to treat the wastewater for Zaatri. More than 40% of refugees in Zaatari camp have their own private pits and increasing (REACH, December 2013, Picture 5). The waste water in the holding tanks is a mix of grey water and latrine, this make it not useable for reuse. However, water is also used in the household and is discarded through a small dyke from the tent to a pit. About 8600 unofficial waste water storages and 4184 household with private toilets are found in the camp (REACH, December, 2013).Wastewater production and disposal at the household level are unauthorized and unregulated, but 5137 unofficial pits contains black water.

Picture 5. Private unauthorized waste water pit in the camp. (From REACHDecember 2013).

29

With increasing water saturation in the soil due to water leakeage,poor drainage, and leaking pits it is possible that the run off is targeted to the wadi. This may rise some concern about surface contamination and spread of waste water in the surrounding environment, but it is not likely that faecal contamination will reach ground water since the aquifer is deep and within safety depth. The German organization (THW) has installed surface water drainage pipes at the low-lying parts of the camps due to problems with flooding during rains. This storm water system consists of five main collector pipes which were designed to collect the water and convey it to a concrete chamber at the lowest point of the camp (eastern side) from where it was designed to discharge into the adjacent Wadi for ground-infiltration. However, due to the misuse of this system by the refugee community as a sewer the outlet of the pipeline has been blocked and the collected sewage is regularly removed by suction trucks (Picture 2). Development of any new concepts and elaboration of further options for wastewater treatment in the context of the Syrian refugees is however as a principle subject to coordination with and approval by the MWI. Thus, a possible construction of a containerised sewage treatment plant in the camp is a decision for MWI, UNICEF and UNHCR in a joint agreement. There is a tender for construction of a WWTP in Zaatari released in September (Tender No: (82/supply/2013). There is a potential for waste water reuse for surrounding agricultural land. Waste water is in continuous supply and is potentially a valuable resource. Jordan has worked to manage irrigation with wastewater for several decades. Since the early 1980s the general approach has been to treat the wastewater and either discharge it to the environment where it mixes with freshwater flows and is indirectly reused downstream, or to use the resulting effluent to irrigate restricted, relatively low-value Crops. A reliable way to secure the required water for irrigation is by collecting and reclaiming each drop of water used in the camp to be reused. To guarantee and safeguard hygienic standards and have no adverse effects on the environment must be given the highest priority. The planned WWTP fulfil these criterias and opens for reuse projects. However, the sludge is already a part of the resuse system in Jordan since the waste water from the holding tanks is transported to a sewage plant in AlAkeider and after processing in the plant used for irrigation. 8.6.1 Mitigation activities One priority is to install a sewage plant for the service and treatment of waste water for Zaatari camp and the surrounding Jordan community. The tender for this is in progress and will be started under 2014. This will open for the reuse of waste water in the nearby agricultural area. Other options are not feasible under current conditions but to be mentioned EcoSan is a sanitation system that wold be ideal in Jordan climatic conditions. It is a system that builds on the premises that human faecal and urine remains are valued resources. It has the potential to recycle important and scarce nutrients into soil for improvement of organic content and for fertilization in agriculture and gardening. It is also a good system in areas with scarcity of water since it is a dry closet that does not require water for flushing.

30

Picture 6. Gardening in the Zaatari camp, showing the potential for recycling of organic waste, composting and use of grey water. Photo: Thomas Palo The idea with the EcoSan system is to foster sustainability thinking by implementing recycling of important nutrients and hygienic handling of excreta. The final product, fertilizer from human waste, is to be used in gardening/cultivation in the household/agriculture (see picture 6). It also has a potential for livelihood since it may offer a market for recycled/ecological produced human fertilizers. A trade is already in place with organic residues sold to sheep farmers in the neighbourhood of the Zaatari camp. Even though the system promises simple collection and handling, the acceptance of this system is not always straight forward. Social norms and beliefs may hinder the implementation and use of the EcoSan system. In the Zaatari camp people may have a cultural resistance towards this practice. Biogas is considered an option for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels. Biogas systems are functioning under a variety of climatic conditions and in right situation they provide the energy needs in poor rural populations and urban communities. However, there are a number of conditions that need to be fulfilled in order to get the system to work according to expectations. Biogas could not at present be a feasible solution in the camp situation because the organic waste production from the camp is not large enough to support a biogas digester. Possibly with the join collection in the Mafraq region it might be a feasible solution. Grey water is all wastewater generated in the household excluding toilet wastes. Its sources in homes include sinks, showers and general household use of water, Individual households can effectively save and reuse their grey water for irrigating gardens. Further, in a cultural context, grey water coming from water used for ritual ablutions for the Muslim prayers is a source since it contains no soap, it is thus a very high quality water source for reuse. With the planned construction of a sewage plant in the camp the option for waste water reuse is realistic and feasible. It is suggested to investigate waste water resuse

31

systems for different applications; wet land, forest plantations, restoration of rangeland and reedbeds. These measures could preferably be as joint projects with FAO, ICARDA and Jordan NGOs.

8.7 Baseline of environmental health The definition of environmental health is broad but encompasses that the biological and physical environment should not impose illness, injury or pain to persons, communities and the public. This includes both mental and physiological balance and stability for the individual and for the population. In camp situations the environment possesses an increased health risk. Water and sanitation, climate factors, nutrition, crowded sites, pest animals to mention some contribute as single factors and in combinations to elevate the risk for an unhealthy situation. Experience has shown that deteriorated environmental conditions results in severe security situations for humanitarian staff and camp infrastructure and that as such change need to be made to maintain healthy conditions. Environmentally induced health problems place heavy loads on clinics and hospitals, and to the refugee community. Many diseases are strongly linked to environmental change either through soil, water, or animals. (Patz et al. 2004, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1247383/#!po=10.0000). In Zaatari camp several of the sectors above potentially contribute to environmental health. Water in tanks may be contaminated if open for entry by dust, insects, bird feces etc that may cause diarrheal diseases. Several tanks in the camp are not covered and thus possess a potential risk; flooding during rain mix latrines and drainage water giving contaminated soils with subsequent inhalation of disease agents; sanitation situation may be low due to lack of facilities or knowledge. All these factors contribute to the environmental health situation in the camp. According to the statistics for the camp respiratory illness constitute the major part of incidences. This illness is higher during dusty and dry conditions while diarrhoeas are more common during rainy periods in winter (Disease Surveillance Report, nov 2013).On average about 8% of the Zaatari population shows some form of illness at any one time. Much of the issues contributing to unhealthy situation is covered under the different sectors above and will not be repeated here. The score for environmental health is negative and indicating significant environmental effects. It has high importance and magnitude of effects. If not considered, it leads to more or less permanent deprived health conditions for the population and risk of spread of diseases into surrounding community. 8.7.1 Mitigation activities Environmental health is closely linked to mitigation activities in other sectors particularly in WASH. The provision of adequate sanitation facilities, proper disposal of all waste as well as control of the carriers of communicable diseases, mosquitoes, rats, mice and flies, is crucial to mitigate health risks and prevent epidemics. The health situation is also a function of the climatic situation and hash conditions during hot and cold periods. Environmental health sector is a good indicator on how well a program and sector wise programs are working. But the optimum benefit from sector wise mitigation activities can only be achieved if communities and individuals are made aware of the links between hygiene practices, poor sanitation, polluted water

32

sources and disease. A rat controlling activity started in early January that will bring down the rat problem. Effects by hash winter temperatures are mitigated by provision of heaters and NFI. An improved drainage system is under construction. All these measures mitigate the pressure on the population and improves the health situation. 9.Conclusions The environmental impact of the Zaatari refugee camp as assessed in this EIA could be regarded as significantly negative. This judgement is based on several sector wise indicators and reveals that major impacts are in water, waste, energy and environmental health sectors. A significant impact means that the score shows both local and outside local boundaries effects. The effect is of major importance, yet it is temporary and in some instances cumulative. Most of the sector wise indicators are reversible conditions and with proper mitigation actions could be improved. 10. References

Abu Qdais and Al Khashashneh. 2010. Country report on the solid waste management in Jordan. Sweepnet, Abu-Hammatteh, Z.S.H., et al.2010. Biogas energy: unexplored source of a renewable energy in Jordan. Proceedings from the International conference on renewable energies and power quality, Granada, Spain. Abu Sharar, T. M. 2006. The challenges of land and water resources degradation in Jordan: diagnosis and solutions. Desertification in the Mediterranean 2006 Springer. Printed in the Netherlands. Region : a Security Issue,201226. Eds. Kebner W.G. et al. Al-Bakri, J. T. et al. 2013. Impact of Climate and Land Use Changes on Water and Food Security in Jordan: Implications for Transcending The Tragedy of the Commons. Sustainability 2013, 5, 724-748; doi:10.3390/su5020724 Aljaradin, M., Persson, K.M. and Hossam Al-Itawi. 2011. Public awareness and willingness for recycling in Jordan. International Journal of Academic Research 3, part II.t Alrababah, M. A. et al. 2007.Biodiversity of Semi-arid Mediterranian grasslands: Impact of grazing and afforestation. Applied Vegetation Science 10:257-264. Alraggad,M. 2013. Groundwater aquifer risk assessment in Zaatari camp north of Jordan (unpubl.) Al Ayyash et al. 2012. Runoff Estimation for Suggested Water Harvesting Sites in the Northern Jordanian Badia. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 2012, 4, 127132. Altz-Stamm, A. 2012. Jordans Water Resource Challenges and the Prospects for Sustainability. (Unpubl.) Cave and Kolsky 1999. CIA world fact book, 2013 Comair, G. F. et. al. 2012. Water resources management in the Jordan River Basin. Water and Environment Journal, doi:10.1111/j.1747-6593.2012.00368.x Denny, E. et al. 2008. Sustainable Water Strategies for Jordan. International Economic Development Program Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, April 2008

33

El-Naya, A. .2010. Study of the salt water intrusion in the upper aquifer in Azraq basin. IUCN. Garfi, M., Tondelli, S. and Bonoli, A. 2009. Multi-criteria decision analysis for waste management in Saharawi refugee camps. Waste Management 29:2729-2739. Jordan Water Strategy 2008-2022. Published 2009. Kelly C. 2010. Rapid Environmental Impact Assessment: Haiti Earthquake, USAID. Laytani R. B. and Banguil B. B. 2012. Development of Solid Waste Recovery Model for a University using System Dynamics. JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research 10: doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7719/jpair.v10i1.187 Lyytinen, E. 2009. Household energy in refugee and IDP camps: challenges and solutions for UNHCR. New issues in refugee research. Research paper no. 172. ISSN 1020-7473. Mellgren, Y. 2013. Wastewater management at Al-Zaatari refugee camp, Jordan. UNICEF. Morris, P. and Briggs, J. 1995. Methods of environmental impact assessment. UCL Press, UK. Palo, R. T. 2010. Haiti Recovery Assessment: Environment Report. In: Zeleke, M et al. Recovery Assessment Haiti. IFRC, Geneva. Patz et al. 2004, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pmc/articles/ PMC1247383/#! po=10.0000 Pastakia, C. M. R. 1998. The Rapid Impact Assessment matrix (RIAM). A new tool for environmental impact assessment using the rapid impact assessment matrix. Olsen &Olsen, Fredensborg, Denmark. Schaffer, J. 2013. The impact of Syrian refugees on food security in the northern badia. Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection. Paper 1633. http://digitalcollections.sit.edu/isp_collection/1633 SIDA .2002. Sustainable development. Guidelines for the review of environmental impact assessments. ISBN 91-586-8612-6 Tender No: (82/supply/2013. Supply and Installation of Containerized/Packaged Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs). Ministry of Water and Irrigation Water Authority of Jordan. September 2013. UNHCR, Refugee operations and environmental management key principles. UNHCR, Refugee operations and environmental management: a handbook of selected lessons learned from the field. UNHCR, RRP 6. 2013. SYRIA REGIONAL RESPONSE PLAN Zanjani, A.J, Saeedi, M., Kiani, B. and Voosogh, A. 2012. The effect of waste separation policy in municipal solid waste management using the system dynamic approach. International Journal of Environmental Health Engineering 1:24-29.

Annex 1 ToR ToR for Environmental Specialist for UNHCR Jordan Background Unrest in the Syrian Arab Republic has been mounting since March 2011, leading to the displacement of tens of thousands of civilians. As of March 2013, more than

34

1,000,000 people are estimated to have fled to neighbouring Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq, putting an increasing strain on the governments and host communities. Jordan is the fourth water scarce country in the world, making water conservation and water protection issues paramount for the sustainable development of the country. UNHCR has registered 370,000 refugees and the Government of Jordan estimates the total Syrian population in Jordan at 450,000 persons. Approximately 20% of the refugees live in camps; in Zaatari, King Abdullah Park and Cyber City and Emirates Jordan Camp. A second large-scale site, Azraq, is being prepared at present with intentions to open at the beginning of July. The refugee influx puts additional strain on the already fragile environmental conditions, in particular the limited water resources which needs to be addressed. The underlying environmental conditions and living conditions in Zaatari are not optimal. WASH facilities are not adapted due to a fast increase in refugee numbers, but also due to vandalism in the camp, showing a lack of ownership of the refugees of collective infrastructures. This has led to the development of private facilities making it more difficult to implement an appropriate waste water and solid waste collection and disposal system. A Rapid Environmental Assessment (REA) of circumstances in this existing camp would enable deeper understanding of current problems and creation of an Action Plan for mitigation. In the new camp, environmental issues should be addressed right from the beginning through undertaking an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). An Environmental Impact Assessment and corresponding action plan are tools to predict and evaluate the impacts of a proposed site, before they become problematic. Such early planning will enable prevention of negative environmental impacts, rather than reactive rehabilitation. This will have a positive impact on working cooperation with the Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Water and Irrigation, and will underline that the preservation of the environment and protection of water resources is of concern to the international community, even in a refugee situation. Furthermore, addressing environmental issues can ameliorate the often dire conditions that refugees and IDPs face while residing in camps and host communities, and also lead to a better protection framework.

Aim Establish a comprehensive environmental impact assessment of the arrival of refugees and prepare an intervention plan for the new camp(s) as well as propose mitigation measures to reduce the overall impact of the existing Zaatari camp on the environment.

Directly supervised by the Assistant Representative (Ops), and in close collaboration with colleagues from the Programme as well as other technical experts within

35

UNHCR, particularly WASH, Environment Unit at UNHCR and in Line Ministries and partner organisations, the incumbent will carry out following tasks:

Main Duties and Responsibilities

a) For the new camp a) Conduct an initial situational assessment and analysis on factors influencing the environment including details on land, water, air quality, flora, fauna, and points of interest and concern; b) Use this baseline research to compile a State of the Environment report; c) Coordinate and undertake a comprehensive environmental impact assessment (EIA) for the site of the future camp, taking into consideration the UNHCR FRAME Toolkit as well as the local legislation and guidelines; d) On the basis of this assessment and in consultation with relevant stakeholders, develop guidelines, recommendation and an action plan for: 1) Environment and natural resource protection 2) Prevent degradation to existing ecosystem, particularly nearby wetlands which are part of the RAMSAR Convention; 3) Sustainable water supply and usage; 4) Integrated waste water and solid waste management, including collection, treatment and/or reuse considering not only infiltration opportunities/risks but also sustainability of the total water cycle. e) Establish an effective coordination, monitoring and evaluation system, for all sectors undertaking activities or operating in the camp including information sharing mechanisms together with the stakeholders concerned. f) Establish a liaison mechanism with all governmental entities relevant for evaluating the impact of specific activities against the baseline State of the Environment report indicators, as well as formulating the action plan and later coordinate the implementation of the required interventions; g) Ensure that environmental perspectives such as long term sustainability are integrated into all fields of action related to the camps operations and management. b) For the existing Camps h) Conduct a situational assessment and analysis on factors influencing the environment, to establish understanding environment prior to establishment of the camps i.e. establish baseline of all environmental factors; i) Undertake a Rapid Environmental Assessment (REA) for the existing camps current status and impact of the existing camps on the initial baseline indicators; j) As part of the REA, in collaboration with relevant Line Ministries and academia, assess the critical factors affecting environmental indicators,

36

for all sectors and their activities in camp operation, including Site Planning/Shelter, WASH (water/wastewater management including risk of pollution due to soil infiltration, slope, drainage, spillage from soak pits, household sanitation/bathing facilities), electricity/energy provision, by nominating and measuring environmental indicators and evaluating the effects; k) Provide mitigation measures and technical options to mitigate the environmental impacts of all sectors operating and undertaking activities in the camp; l) Suggested potential mitigating solutions should aim to rehabilitate the environment but also consider the socio-political, financial/economic and cultural impacts to maximise opportunities. For example; reuse of storm/grey/spilled water, soil amelioration and agricultural benefits from composted waste, etc. m) Review, update and ensure dissemination of internationally and nationally accepted standards and guidelines related to environmental management

Expected Outputs Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report (including REA for existing camps) and an Environmental Action Plan for new camps and existing camps, following FRAME Toolkit. Coordination, monitoring and evaluation system implemented, with the active participation of all stakeholders and partners operating in camps, within and outside UNHCR. Compare the effect of various sectors' activities against the baseline using the indicators (with due reference to specific EIAs undertaken by sectors on specific activities). Environmental standards and perspectives are mainstreamed into camp management, and assistance provided for sectors who have not undertaken impact assessments to formulate EIA processes. A professional and respectful dialogue has been established with the relevant stakeholders including Line Ministries.

Length and start of deployment July 2013 for 6 months with possibility of extension.

Duty station The holder of this post will be based in Amman, Jordan, with frequent travels to the refugee camps and host communities.

37

Required Qualifications and Professional Experience

University degree in Environmental Science, Sustainable Development, Renewable Energy, Agricultural Science, Forestry, Hydrogeology or related field Minimum 8 to 10 years of relevant working experience in environmental management at professional level and minimum of 2 years in an international capacity, preferably in an emergency operation in field situations Awareness of and practical experience with refugee-related environmental problems Experience in environmental assessment, planning, monitoring, and evaluation of integrated environmental programmes. Familiarity with emerging environmentally sustainable and appropriate technologies; Proven record of conducting multidisciplinary Environmental Impact Assessment, including quantitative and qualitative evaluation of changes in the natural water cycle Solid skills in analysis, using and presenting quantitative and qualitative data, and report writing Familiarity with community-based and participatory approaches Highly developed writing, editorial and presentation skills Knowledge of Arabic is an asset, solid command of English Basic computer skills (Word, PowerPoint, Excel) and acquaintance with a statistical programme and ideally with Geographical Information Systems (GIS)

Annex 2. Technical description of the RIAM score matrix The Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix (RIAM) is a tool to convert subjective judgements into quantitatively recorded scores (Pastakia 1998). It allows data from different components to be analysed against common important criterias within a matrix providing repeatable and transparent results (Morris and Briggs 1995). The important assessment criteria fall into two groups; a) Criteria that are important to the condition, and which can individually change the score obtained. b) Criteria that are of value to the situation, but individually should not be capable of changing the score obtained. The scoring system requires multiplication of the scores given to each of the criteria under (a). This ensures that the weight of each score is expressed differently. Scores for the values in group (b) are added together to provide a sum, this ensure that the individual value score cannot influence the overall score but that takes the collective importance of values in (b) into account.

38

The sum of the group (b) multiplied by the result in group (a) gives the final assessment score (ES) for the condition. Here the criterias provided by DHI is used. These criterias together with their judgement scores are defined as; A1. Importance of condition 4= important to national/international interest 3= important to regional/national interest 2= impotant to areas immediately outside the local condition 1= important only to the local condition 0= no importance A2. Magnitude of impact +3= Major positive benefit +2= Significant improvement +1= Improvement in status quo 0= no impact -1= Negative change to status quo -2= Significant negative dis-benefit -3= Major dis-benefit B1. Permanence 1= no impact 2= temporary 3= permanent B2. Reversibility 1= no impact 2= reversible 3= irreversible B3. Cumulative 1= no impact 2= non-cumulative/single 3= cumulative/synergistic The individual ES scores are banded together into ranges where they can be compared and are shown in table 1. Table 1. ES scores ranges with description of impact. ES 72 to 108 36 to 71 19 to 35 Description Major positive impact Significant positive impact Moderate positive impact

39

10 to 18 0 to 9 0 -1 to -9 -10 to -18 -19 to -35 -36 to 71 -72 to -108

Positive impact Slight positive impact No impact Slight negative impact Negative impact Moderate negative impact Significant negative impact Major negative impact

The judgement of scores of the sectors defined as environmental components in Zaatari is shown in table 2. Table 2. Environmental scores within sectors for Zaatari camp. Sector Water resources Environmental health Waste water Solid waste Energy Site Env. mgmt Chemicals A1 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 1 A2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -1 -1 -1 B1 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 B2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 B3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 ES -56 -56 -42 -42 -36 -24 -14 -6 Description Significant negative impact Significant negative impact Significant negative impact Significant negative impact Significant negative impact Moderate negative impact Negative impact Slight negative impact

The overall impact of the zaatari camp over all sectors is regarded as moderate to significant negative impact on the environment. Annex 3. List of actors in the Zaatari camp as of September 2013 ACTED Government of Japan Handicap International ICRC IMC Intersos IOM IRC IRD JEN JHAS JHCO Medecins du Monde

40

Medecins sans Frontiers Mercy Corps MoH/WHO NRC Oxfam RC-Jordan RI Save the Children THW UNFPA UNHCR UNICEF WFP

Annex 4 Key contacts Ahmad Ibrahim, Open hands, Zaatari Alberto di Lungo, FAO, Rome Aleena Farishta, Master student, Columbia University, NY Al-Sharifeh Nawzat Bint Ali, Head of JNECE steering committee Amin Bhai, Wash officer, UNHCR, Amman Amra Nuhbegovitz, Program officer, UNHCR, Amman Brendan Dineen, Health officer, UNHCR, Amman Catherine Sherwood, WASH officer, UNHCR, Zaatari David Weatherill, WASH coordinator, Oxfam, Zaatari Defrey Aubrey, Senior Human Settlement Officer, UNHABITAT, Cairo Dina Jardaneh, Health clinic field officer, UNHCR, Zaatari, Hazem Khreiza, Manager Azraq reserve, RSCN Hermann Koller, ISWA, Vienna Irene Omondi, UNHCR, Zaatari Jean-Marc Faures, FAO, Rome Jo Langkamp, Field officer, UNHCR, Zaatari John Simpson, electrical engineer, UNHCR, Zaatari

41

Juan Frichilla, Emergency specialist, UNICEF, Zaatari Katarina Runeberg, MSB, Stockholm Killian Kleinschmidt, Senior field coordinator, UNHCR, Zaatari Liv Framgaard, Master student, Copenhagen University Murad Alshishani, WASH associate, UNHCR, Zaatari Nicole Hahn, Field officer, UNHCR, Zaatari Paul Stromberg, deputy executive director, UNHCR, Amman Rafat Assi, Executive director, energy, water and environmental cluster, RSS Rikke Hasse, WFP, Amman Robert Trigwell, DB/GIS officer, ACTED, Amman Sharuh Ibragimov, ACTED, Zaatari Suranga Mallawa, Deputy Area Coordinator, ACTED, Zaatari Tabata Fioretto, ACTED, Zaatari Werner Schellenberg, Senior planning officer, UNHCR, Amman Yamal Nasa, ACTED, Zaatari