GRIEVANCES

Mafisa 2024 and 2025 Grievances and Resolutions Report

Verra Verified Carbon Standard (VCS), version 4.7, section 3.18.4 (Stakeholder Engagement — Grievance Redress Procedure) requires project proponents to establish procedures for receiving, responding to and attempting to resolve grievances.

The standard states: “The procedure and documentation of disputes resolved through the procedure shall be made publicly available.”

Mafisa is committed to transparency, accountability and respectful engagement with the communities and stakeholders affected by its activities. This report makes public the 6 grievances received and resolved in 2024 and 2025, and it will be updated annually.

Grievance: A community representative complained that Mafisa had recruited 6 unskilled casual workers from another village for the construction of spray races. The host community members were of the view that they should be considered first in every Mafisa recruitment, as they are the host community for the Mafisa water team.

Resolution: Following receipt of the grievance, an investigation was conducted. It was found that Mafisa had recruited 4 workers from another village, rather than the 6 reported, and that these workers were skilled since they had been trained in construction of spray races by the third party contractor as part of the construction of the buying centre in that village. Further, some other workers from the host community had been recruited and trained at the same time and were already part of the spray race team. As the spray race construction programme was getting underway, Mafisa management decided to maintain the team of workers that they were working with during construction, comprising recruited workers from both villages. The situation was explained to the community representative who accepted the explanation and undertook to explain the situation to the community’s residents.

Grievance: A grievance was made by one community. The community wanted Mafisa to rotate the people who were employed by the project from the community at the Mafisa site adjacent to the community.

Resolution: It was agreed that this could be the case for casual labour, provided the people nominated were suitable for the available work. It was explained that where training had been provided and skills had been built, rotation was not advisable. The community accepted the explanation.

Grievance: A community representative expressed a view that the workers who had been employed by Mafisa to work at the farm had become arrogant and were showing off that they had money.

Resolution: The grievance was resolved at a meeting held with the community representative and the employees. The employees were told that they represent the organisation at all times and that they must be respectful within their community. They were advised that further complaints would lead to a disciplinary process in line with the HR procedures. The community representative accepted their apology, and the workers have since amended their behaviour. The teaching/learning point from this is to realise the power dynamics within a community can change considerably when a few people get employed. It is very important to ensure that relations between the community and their own neighbours remain positive, which requires a clear verbal briefing in vernacular language. This issue will be integrated into the planned audio briefing for local / casual workers.

Grievance: A grievance was submitted by a community representative against Mafisa. The representative expressed two concerns: firstly, inadequate communication from Mafisa’s agents with the representative, stating that the representative is often not informed or involved in community meetings or activities within the community; secondly, that the representative hasn’t received any direct benefits from Mafisa’s projects or activities personally since the project started implementing activities in the community.

Resolution: Mafisa held a meeting with the community representative, Rangeland and fire management committee members, project staff and monitors to discuss the representative’s grievances. The following outcomes were agreed upon: Mafisa will communicate with and include the community representative in all Mafisa meetings and activities within the community; Mafisa will pay a courtesy call to the representative before resuming any community engagement; Mafisa will provide administrative support to the representative; and Mafisa will regularly report on all activities conducted in the representative’s community.

Grievance: A community member submitted a grievance pertaining to certain individuals within the community who were advocating for the relocation of water points to the land the community allocated to another purpose.

Resolution: Mafisa and the community convened a meeting to address and resolve the grievances. Mafisa clarified that traditional leaders and community members should identify suitable land that can be utilised by all and remain accessible to the entire community, aligned with the requirements of the grazing plan; water points must not be drilled on land owned by or allocated to another organisation or individuals; and Mafisa can only drill water points in areas authorised by traditional leaders and the community members. The meeting agreed that the community would relocate the water point to an alternative location. Community members accompanied Mafisa staff to an alternative site that had received community consensus.

Grievance. A grievance was raised by a community member, concerning the location of the crush pen. The community and the ministry of Livestock had agreed a central location, whereas the complainant wanted the crush pen to be at his homestead. The complainant argued that the community had relied on his personal crush pen for animal health services, including vaccination, prior to Mafisa’s arrival in the community, and argued that his generosity should be rewarded via locating the new crush pen in the same place.

Resolution: Mafisa met the community to discuss the issue. The community explained that they wanted the crush pen relocated to a central location to avoid its personalisation by the complainant. Although the community had been using the complainant’s crush pen, they used to contribute towards vaccines and other animal health services at the said location. Now that Mafisa had come in, the community understood the project to be long-term and did not want to risk having the crush pen situated on someone’s personal land to avoid future conflict. Moving it to a central location would also make the crush pen more accessible to the entire community and foster shared responsibility and ownership. Mafisa told the meeting the community was responsible for agreeing on site selection. The community resolved to select a central location for the facility, closing and resolving the matter.