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:

• Environmental
• natural habitats
• forests
• 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.

Consultations

• 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

Schedule

• 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