Moderator:

• Aubrey Manahan, Center for International Environmental Law

Panelists:

• Jason Weiner, Bank Climate Advocates
• Gregory Berry, Accountability Counsel
• Souzan Nada, MENAFem Movement
• Aaron Pedrosa, Philippine Movement for Climate Justice
• Hapsari Damayanti, Senik Centre Asia
• Janine Ferretti, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman

Video of the event is available on the World Bank’s website.

Hapsari: The WBG is committed to aligning its financial flows with the Paris Agreement – the organisation has ceased financing for upstream oil and gas since 2019, aiming for 85% alignment by 2023 and 100% by 2025. However, there is an implementation gap. Limited public sources are available that disclose project details. When public consultations occur – adequate follow-up procedures are lacking. The IFC needs to increase transparency for Paris Alignment. It is essential to disclose IFC project information, including the Paris Agreement methodology, and consult with communities. Additionally, the IFC needs to engage with equity clients to address past harms and close loopholes that allow IFIs to invest in coal-dependent and damaging nickel industries.

Souzan: In Egypt, investments have adversely affected both the health of residents and government operations. A complaint filed in 2015 highlighted the misstep of an €80 million investment in a cement-producing company called EgyptSuk, which violated environmental standards and encroached on large swaths of land. As a result, legislation was passed to dismantle the company’s walls, which had infringed upon public space. The company faced criticism for its environmental damage and impact on children’s health.

Another report identified violations by a table salt exporter, a staple consumed by all Egyptians. This company failed to meet emission standards, putting nearby residents in danger and violating human rights. Additionally, its operations caused significant noise pollution, resulting in structural damage to neighboring homes. The company responded by threatening legal action against complainants.

Local authorities conducted inspections and documented the company’s violations, but the World Bank’s interventions in 2019 regarding unpaid dues were ineffective. It is crucial for all stakeholders to participate in transparent and inclusive consultations before any project begins, and clear timelines for addressing complaints must be established and followed.

Aaron: Philippines experience: In 2017, a case was filed against the IFC through CAO for non-disclosure and access to meaningful information – because public scoping and hearings lacked essential information on the project’s impact. Non-disclosure became common, leaving communities unaware of project details and its potential effects.

Ten eligible coal plants all lacked disclosure: For example, in Luzon, people were told that a plant would be built but did not know which type of plant, or in Mindanao, the project’s approval was approved during government cash transfer distribution, bypassing prior consent and highlighting the lack of disclosure. These, and many other examples, are symptomatic of a lack of disclosure.

RCBC – the financial intermediary, one of five biggest commercial banks in the Philippines – should have been required to establish an environmental and social system with community input mechanisms, including an ESMS before project initiation. No such mechanism was set up prior to the financing of the project, despite recommendations of performance standards of the IFC. In 2021: CAO decided in favor of the complaint, 2022: management action plan approved by the Board, and now being implemented. But there are concerns beyond the remedies, but also how the map will be explained to the communities – we did not cause the problem in the first place, but we are now a part of the solution. Non-disclosure agreement: albeit we agreed, this limits the disclosure needed for advocacy work both for sub-projects and authorities. Crucial plans of projects remain inaccessible.

Bigger and better Bank: Should treat communities as partners. They should have as much or not more stake and a seat at the table. For coal-affected communities, ignorance kills.

Jason: Disclosure is crucial in preventing harm because it allows for informed decision-making and accountability. Incomplete information, such as IFC’s lack of transparency on GHG emissions, impedes the ability of stakeholders to assess environmental and social impacts adequately. Even the IFC acknowledges the importance of public review in ensuring sufficient disclosure, as highlighted in its access to information disclosure policy.

Reports like the UNEP assessment emphasize the global trend towards providing opportunities for public review of projects. However, the IFC falls short of its own obligations, such as releasing Environmental and Social Frameworks well before financing decisions are made. This lack of transparency undermines efforts to prevent harm and violates international legal obligations related to human rights. They hide behind their client sensitivity clause – there is a deliberative information disclosure exception – but this is not deliberative information; this is the outcome and analyses of such – and should be made public. They also need to post impact environment and social assessments online and require their financial intermediaries upfront to disclose projects to the public.

Gregory: Responsible entry into projects is as important as responsible exit. For example, communities affected by World Bank-funded projects in Uganda – with the Lubigi drainage project financed by the WBG, which had a risk level of B – to address flooding issues due to inadequate planning – communities were evicted, with mismanaged resettlement projects. Communities filed a complaint through the dispute resolution process – management response was to deny that the evictions had anything to do with the project. Consultations before project implementation are essential to avoid negative impacts and ensure sustainability. Despite efforts to evolve and address life-changing initiatives, ongoing cases demonstrate the need for improved responsiveness to complaints and greater investment in critical infrastructure and project development processes. Forty-five percent of all eligible complaints to WBG raise issues of disclosure and non-access to information.

Janine: The systemic nature of the issue is evident in the lengthy process, taking up to five and a half years to reach the board, with half of that time spent in the compliance process. Despite this, early exits are still occurring. Consultation and disclosure have been discussed since the 1980s, highlighting their critical role in improving projects. In the past, there were significant global challenges, such as the transition in energy and culture, which required uncomfortable but necessary changes. Similarly, today, consultations are crucial for facilitating a just transition and ensuring that projects align with the needs and values of affected communities.

Questions and answers

Scott (WBG dispute resolution service): I want to extend an offer: For Uganda, the dispute resolution report will be made public – if we can collaborate, that would be great. We want to engage with you further on this matter. We’ve heard a lot about information disclosure, but it’s just the beginning. The availability of this information is crucial. These are technical reports, and there’s also the issue of language barriers. Are there examples of good community engagement processes that could be utilized to help educate and influence others to improve and raise the standard?

Development specialist working with WBG as a consultant: I want to take the other side: We have faced division between communities and conflicts which adds an additional layer of complexity to the team – how do we deal with these?

Anonymous: Project in Georgia, 6000 consultations were done – what does meaningful consultation mean? Social teams of the Bank did not speak to the environmental team – internally the information was not disclosed. It’s not just about disclosing but consultation helps you design the project well.

Gregory: Accessibility to documents and inclusive design are critical for successful project outcomes. What is needed for Loss and Damage funding – the Bank is focused on the flow of money – but it’s essential to understand that there will be resistance to projects. We need an inclusive development model. What are positive examples in other places? There are projects that have undergone ESF impacts. Rachel is here, and I am curious as to where the citizen engagement in the social accountability framework is heading and how that feeds into all of that.

Aaron: Every project implementation should require due diligence process. But it was done after the project was done – if only it was done before the project then this would not have happened.

Hapsari: In Indonesian case, there is no perfect case or example that I can show around public consultations. Local language that is used — it’s not only about the technicalities of projects.

Rachel (Accountability research centre): Share a couple of things: 1) Incentive structures are not aligned with these goals; they’re geared towards getting money out the door regardless of policy directives. 2) Lack of skill sets and divergent interests often hinder community agreement, and there’s often insufficient time to address these issues. This requires institutional change. There’s a 10-year citizen engagement agenda document that served as the foundation for a revamp of citizen engagement processes, but it hasn’t been made available. The Bank is currently ill-prepared to address these challenges.

Janine: Two things: 1) knowledge Bank, 2) and fragile conflict states – if we do not have the knowledge to deal with increasing conflicts we won’t move forward – what can knowledge offer to deal with these problems?

Gregory: There needs to be infrastructure for power, it can’t be pursued at the disempowerment of the people that you want to help. We need accountability channels and disclosure channels.

Jason: Full-disclosure, opportunity for public review, and consultation prior to project financing — it’s easy to do to prevent harms that are avoidable that are required by IFC under its due diligence requirement.

Aaron: information disclosure that becomes knowledge for community. Knowledge is power – if we want a bigger and better Bank that evolves to current crises it must allow communities to have a seat at the table.

Hapsari: Meaningful community participation – and no coal commitments – including for industrial purposes.