The World Bank has released the first-ever framework to address environmental and social harms caused by projects the bank financed through its private sector branches, including the International Finance Corporation (IFC).
“This is historic. It’s the first actual directive mandate for the IFC that says when one of the projects they finance causes harm, they have to provide remedy,” Carla García Zendejas, director of the people, land and resources program at the Center for International Environmental Law, told Mongabay.
The IFC and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) are both part of the World Bank Group that finances projects that can cause harm to local communities. The IFC/MIGA Remedial Action Framework, published in April, aims to provide community access to remedy if they were harmed by such projects.
The World Bank has long been criticized for leaving behind a wake of social and environmental damages from the projects it finances as well as being slow to respond to problems. “You file a complaint and you are going to wait for almost a decade until they respond,” Francis Colee, head of programs at the Liberian civil society organization Green Advocates, told Mongabay.
The IFC has repeatedly been found negligent by its independent accountability mechanism, the compliance adviser ombudsman (CAO).
For example, Mongabay has reported on human rights abuses against communities living near the IFC-financed Salala Rubber Corporation’s plantation in Liberia. CAO investigations of the company confirmed most accusations by locals, including irregular land acquisition, gender-based violence, water pollution and desecration of graves.
The CAO found the IFC didn’t adequately consult with communities or assess the risks associated with the investment. They recommended actions to remedy the grievances. However, in the absence of a remedy framework, the IFC has done little to address the problems.
The recent policy directive won’t likely help that situation either; it only applies to new grievances.
In an email to Mongabay, an IFC spokesperson, who asked not to be named, said the Remedy Action Framework applies only to “future Management Action Plans submitted to the Board in the context of Compliance Advisor Ombudsman cases.”
“The complaint mechanisms have been a big disappointment,” Juan Pablo Orrego, the president of the Chilean environmental organization Ecosistemas, told Mongbay in a phone call. “Remedy should not be reactive but proactive,” he said.
Implementation of the framework will depend on new cases entering the accountability system. “Implementation will show whether this is working or not, and if it’s not working and it should be adjusted accordingly and in a transparent manner,” said Stephanie Amoako from the Accountability Counsel, one of the organizations involved in the framework’s consultation process.
Nonetheless, Amoako said she believes it’s a step in the right direction. “It recognizes that the IFC has a role in ensuring that communities are made whole from harms caused by its projects,” she said.
Banner photo: Works for the Alto Maipo hydroelectric plant at the Camino Aucayes, Chile. Credit: Pablo Melo A.JPG
This story first appeared on Mongabay
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
You may republish this article, so long as you credit the authors and Mongabay, and do not change the text. Please include a link back to the original article.
