Stephen Lintner, OPCS Senior technical advisor, World Bank
- Very early stages of the process – will run through 2011 and 2012 – no decisions made in the short term
- Safeguards should be seen as instruments that integrate social and environmental aspects into decision-making process.
- Provide a mechanism for integreation of concerns into design, implementation and operatino of an investment.
- Key factor – identify and manage impacts and risks (or decide to back down if the risks are too high)
- Since 1999 Bank has had mandatory requirement for consultation and disclosure of environmental and social assessments
- Safeguards do improve effectiveness of projects – set up to facilitate looking at environmental and soial aspects of a project.
- Over past 20 years most countries have adopted mandatory environmental assessments and safeguards. Need to recognise that there are countries where this is not effectively enforced.
- Board has mandated updating and consolidation of safeguards
- Will allow for evolution of system – to better address environmental and social impacts
- Want to make system more effective and efficient
9 policies covered in update process:
- natural habitats
- pest management
- physical and cultural resources
- indigenous peoples
- dam safety
- involuntary resettlement
- piloting use of country systems
Idea is to develop a single policy framework which includes robust coverage of the issues, but in a way that is easier to access, understand and to use.
Need to have a good balance of focus on different impacts – environmental, social ,economic etc
Legal safeguard policies not included in this process – international waterways and projects in disputed areas will remain.
SO there will be three policies at the end of the process.
- Needs to be a robust process, building on best practices
- Notified well in advance – website will exist
- Also proposal to have a unified website for all consultations
- Important to note that only one section in Bank is dealing with a lot of these, will help coordination.
- Consultations with governments at national and subnational level.
- Also private sector, academics, professional organisations, indigenous peoples leadser, CSOs, NGOs, development partners.
- Also want to have forums with new donors about this.
- Private sector is important given that we work with IFC and MIGA and beacuse of large and heavy commitment from private sector organisations particularly the equator banks.
- Anticipating that bulk of consultations will start in late fall of 2011 and run through to fall 2012 – they will not be rushed.
- Will have materials in Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish – the main United nations languages.
- Consultations will be documented
- Oct 2011 – initial draft of OP/BP to CODE
- Nov2011 – Mar 2012 – 1st stage of consultations
- Apr 2012 – revised draft to CODE + record of consultations
- May – Sep 2012 – 2nd phase of consultations
- Oct-Nov 2012 – final draft to CODE
- Nov-Dec – Board presentation and potential approval.
Testing some frameworks that will show how the new policy is changing the old one. www.worldbank.org/Safeguards
Vince McKillhenny, Bank Information Center
- IEG review of safeguards last year – did an analysis of perception that costs outweigh benefits: found no empirical evidence of this, in fact found that development benefits do outweigh the costs.
- IEG looked at rationale for how safeguards were designed – to prevent harm. Over time, evolution has gone beyond this to a more postive agenda – to promote positive impacts. reflect on whether we can codify this.
- Struggling to understand convergence between investment lending reform, P4R and safeguards. Expect that this will mean for example, revision of supervision policy, appraisal of project methodologies
- Policies are important, but systems and incentives have as much or more impact – would like these to be included. For example impact of who controls the budget
- Challenges that Bank faces in terms of monitoring results – very little incentive to even collect information to monitor social and environmental results.
Paul, WOrld Bank
- Evolution – cross cutting theme across all policies.
- Safeguards were often seen as compliance tasks – important dimension is how to make them part of results.
- Are our other policies as supportive of Bank safeguard policies – willing to hear examples where they aren’t
Comments and questions
- P4R is on fast track – but threatens to be most important. Only thing off the table for P4R is category A. These safeguards will not apply to P4R. If a country has robust system, don’t need P4R – can give DPLs. Countries won’t need country systems if they can get P4R
- What about missing policies, such as core labour standards?
- There should be two rounds of face to face consultation
- Hope you won’t follow the IFC’s example of putting responsibility for due diligence onto the client
- How will you address financial intermediaries?
- What about human rights?
- Will this result in an expansion of safeguards or a shrinking?
- Affected communities should be included in the list of stakeholders
- Translation into languages where the consultations happen, and where World Bank has large programmes
- Documents needed 30 days before consultations and participants lists should be made public, with notes posted
World Bank response
- IEG evaluation identified strengths and weaknesses
- Agree should do more to muster evidence of the value of safeguards
- Capacity building should be done in parallel
- Needs to be cleare about links with other processes and why Bank can’t use country systems instead of P4R
- Policies do create incentives
- Do need to come up with better results indicators for environmental and social impacts
- IFC has a comparative advantage on labour standards – keen to hear ideas on this.Will be having discussions with public and private clients.
- Agree on need for face to face consultation in the second round – often complex questions during round two
- Will look into consulting with affected people
- Investment lending will remain dominant lending instrument for a long time to come. P4R will not become default for non category A projects
- Can’t have divergent policies across instruments – need convergence
- Currently borrower needs to be in compliance with international treaties – not in IFIs charters to determine compliance
Comments and Questions
- Important to have track changed versions
- ADB and OPIC have stronger policies – ADB took a 5 year process to develop them
- You should include spring or annual meeting consultations
- G20 high level panel looking at all safeguards – final report due in November 2011 – needs to be made public
- Difference between safeguards which are binding and the principles that underpin P4R and DPL, which are non-binding
- Chance to take a human rights- based approach
- Should be no policy dilution
- Clearer policy for relations with CSOs needed
World Bank response
- Will pass on concerns over lending mix of Bank
- need to be clear on what will apply to what and on oversight and control
- Objective is not to dilute policy
- Language translations will be considered on a case by case basis