Tag Archive for: IFIs

,

The Brazilian Ilan Goldfajn is the new president of the IDB

On November 20, the Board of Governors of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) appointed Brazilian candidate Ilan Goldfajn, former president of the Central Bank of Brazil and current director for the Western Hemisphere of the IMF, as its new president. After withdrawing the candidacy of Cecilia Todesca, the government of Alberto Fernández supported the candidate promoted by Brazil.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

On September 26, following the recommendations of the Board of Executive Directors, the Board of Governors of the IDB announced the termination of the executive functions of Mauricio Claver-Carone. After the announcement, and through an official statement, the selection process of the person in charge of the next presidency of the institution began.

The Board of Governors, the IDB’s highest authority, is made up of representatives of the 48 member countries, whose voting power varies according to the capital that the country subscribes to the institution. According to the organization’s press release, “to be elected, the candidate must obtain a majority of the voting power of the IDB member countries, as well as the support of at least 15 of the 28 regional member countries.”

In this way, the candidate must consecrate himself with the majority of the voting power of the member countries to be elected. Voting power fluctuates according to the number of shares owned by each state. The largest investor is the United States, which with 30% of the total funds has a key role in the election. They are followed by Argentina and Brazil, with 11.3% each. Mexico accounts for almost 7.3%, Japan 5%, Canada 4%, Venezuela 3.4% and Chile and Colombia 3.1%. The rest is divided into small percentages from different countries.

The new president of the Bank will assume his functions for a period of five years with the possibility of being re-elected only once, and will be responsible for managing the daily affairs of the Bank, as well as managing its operations together with the Presidential Office. The president also formulates proposals on the Bank’s general policy and presides over the meetings of the Board of Directors, being able to vote only in case of a tie.

The alliances behind the election

The new president-elect was consecrated with 80.8% of the votes, and was proposed by the government of Jair Bolsonaro in view of a candidate who would bring consensus to the region after turbulent periods for the Bank, following the dismissal of the former president Mauricio Claver-Carone for violations of the code of ethics. In this way, and thanks to the support of the United States, Canada, and at the last minute from Argentina, Ilan Goldfajn managed to position himself as the new president of the IDB.

It is worth noting the late support of Alberto Fernandez to back the candidacy of the Brazilian; despite his intention to position Cecilia Todesca Bocco as the first woman and the first Argentine to preside over the IDB. However, as a result of the change in its position and the support for Goldfajn, Argentina managed to keep three positions: the Vice Presidency of Sectors, the Infrastructure Management, and a new Institute of Gender and Equality, which will be part of the new management of the IDB.

With annual loans of around 14,000 million dollars, the IDB is the largest source of financing in the region and the change of leadership is essential for the institution to refocus its attention on Latin America after two years of a US presidency.

Prior to the appointment of Goldfajn, from Fundeps and together with a group of civil society organizations in the region, we present an open letter in which we urge those who make up the Board of Governors of the IDB to ensure a transparent selection process and urge the Bank to ensure that the designated person has:

  • Knowledge of the region and experience working with its institutions and communities.
  • Commitment to human rights, sustainable development and the work of human rights defenders.
  • Comprehensive experience and vision on sustainability and environmental protection.
  • Commitment and openness to include civil society and communities affected by the projects.
  • That it prioritize the discussion for the development of a framework for reparation to the affected communities.
  • Lead by example and act in accordance with the highest ethical standards.
  • Commitment to regional and international agreements and treaties that address climate change, the protection of biodiversity, the defense of human rights and sustainable development.

It remains to be seen if Goldfajn, in the course of his tenure, manages to live up to and meet at least part of these requirements. In any case, we believe that a historic opportunity has been wasted to finally position a woman in the presidency of the Bank, a pending account of this type of multilateral institutions. Beyond the progress made by the IDB in generating job opportunities for women and their number in management positions, it is estimated that 3 out of 14 seats on the executive boards are occupied by women; in the alternate executive directorates, out of 12 chairs, only one is occupied by a woman. What gives rise to the claim to this type of organizations to promote specific spaces for participation for women and dissidence in the most hierarchical positions, which allow breaking the glass ceiling.

More information:

Authors:

Candela Jauregui

Clara Labat

 

Contact:

Gonzalo Roza, gon.roza@fundeps.org

 

,

Open letter to the IDB for the election of a new presidency

Given the opening of a new election process for the presidency of the IDB group, civil society organizations in the region and communities affected by projects, we sent an open letter with recommendations on the profile of who will preside over the Bank.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

In the letter we urge those who make up the Board of Governors of the IDB to take advantage of this opportunity so that the person who is selected is someone with probity, capable of leading the transformations that the institution requires today and of effectively facing the emergencies and environmental and social challenges in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Likewise, we consider that the job description must be clear, the selection process transparent, and we urge the Bank that the person who is selected have:

  • Knowledge of the region and experience working with its institutions and communities. Commitment to human rights, sustainable development and the work of human rights defenders.
  • Comprehensive experience and vision on sustainability and environmental protection. Commitment and openness to include civil society and communities affected by the projects.
  • That it prioritize the discussion for the development of a framework for reparation to the affected communities. Lead by example and act in accordance with the highest ethical standards.
  • Commitment to regional and international agreements and treaties that address climate change, the protection of biodiversity, the defense of human rights and sustainable development.

The election is scheduled for November 20, with voting power varying according to the number of shares held by each member country. The person who is finally appointed to the presidency of the IDB Group has the opportunity to lead a Bank that is stronger, more responsible, more effective and, above all, closer to the peoples of the region, leading the way towards truly sustainable and inclusive development.

Contact

Gonzalo Roza – gon.roza@fundeps.org

,

IDB began public consultation for the new Access to Information Policy

The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) announced in August the opening of the public consultation process to receive input on the proposal for the new Access to Information Policy (PAI). This process will last 150 days and will include asynchronous queries and direct exchanges.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

The Inter-American Development Bank is one of the main multilateral institutions that finances projects in a large part of the Latin American countries. In the IDB’s field of work, transparency and integrity are essential. It is in this area where reforms are promoted that seek to improve the quality of regulations and institutions, as well as expand access to information.

In this sense, the IDB announced a new Access to Information Policy Proposal, which will replace the Bank’s current Access to Information Policy, in force since 2011. It is around this new draft that the public consultation is carried out. , which was launched on August 29 of the current year and will last 150 days.
The objective of the public consultation lies in the possibility of receiving, either in written or verbal form, opinions and inputs from those parties that want to contribute to enriching the quality of the document and the organization’s understanding of the perspectives and perceptions of the various civil society actors regarding access to information on Bank activities in the region.

The period of time stipulated by the procedure is divided into three phases. Initially, in September, three virtual synchronous dialogues were established (in English, Spanish and Portuguese), which will allow the Bank to collect opinions and identify new references that can enrich the new PAI. As of October, the second part of the procedure began, we are talking about the asynchronous consultation phase, which will be available for a period of 90 days, where the final version of the new PAI document will be strengthened. Face-to-face meetings will also be held in Costa Rica (October 25), Uruguay (November 15) and in a Caribbean country not yet defined (November 3). In principle, to participate in the virtual consultation instances, it will be necessary to register in advance on the Virtual Platform for Public Consultation Processes and request access to the consultation. Finally, regarding the third phase, it has a stipulated duration of 30 days throughout the month of March and seeks to inform the participants about the closure of the consultation process and the inputs received and considered, both those that were included as those that were not included in the final version of the policy approved by the Board of Executive Directors.

Since one of our main pillars of work is based on transparency, we have sent a letter, along with other regional civil society organizations, detailing our concerns and recommendations to strengthen and improve the consultation process. They are structured in seven main pillars, among which we can mention: update and organize the information regarding the consultation process in a single place on the IDB website to ensure that all interested parties and affected communities are effectively informed ; incorporate a 30-day public period to submit comments and recommendations to a second draft of the IAP; proactively solicit input from stakeholders to facilitate their participation in consultation processes, so that civil society has the opportunity to shape the debate; eliminate the barriers that exist in the consultation plan to guarantee effective participation, barriers that revolve around, above all, the electronic platform, which is a condition to be able to participate in this instance; confirm and disseminate in advance the calendar with the dates and places of the face-to-face consultations planned for the second phase; open a public comment instance for the implementation guidelines of the future PAI; and, finally, meeting with civil society at the Annual Meeting of the IDB Group in Panama 2023.

In this way, we hope to be able to collaborate with the IDB’s management to ensure that the consultation process is truly fruitful and participatory and that it enables the Bank’s new Access to Information Policy to be strengthened and perfected.

To access the draft of the new policy that is being submitted for public consultation, click here. Comments and suggestions on the draft can be sent to the following email: consultapai@iadb.org

More information:

Author
Valentina Raso

Contact
Gonzalo Roza – gon.roza@fundeps.org

,

We participated in a webinar on the IDB Information Access Policy

Within the framework of the current review process of the IDB Access to Information Policy, Fundeps, the Environment and Natural Resources Foundation (FARN) and the CAUCE Foundation: Environmental Culture – Ecological Cause held, on September 29, the webinar “Review of the IDB Access to Information Policy. An opportunity to improve the transparency of the Bank”. The event discussed the shortcomings of the current policy under review, the difficulties in its implementation and the priorities regarding the ongoing public consultation process.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

The Access to Information Policy (PAI) of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) has become outdated. It dates from 2010 and its entry into force is dated 2011. So far it has not been modified, despite the fact that the current context is far from the rights acquired by people from the regulatory advances in terms of citizen participation and access to information and justice. At the end of 2019, the IDB began a review process of its Access to Information Policy that was suspended months later and has recently been reactivated.

In this context, it is necessary to underline that the right to information is a fundamental human right, as a necessary condition for people, communities and organizations to be informed and actively participate in decision-making processes, as well as being a pillar of transparency and accountability.

Based on the above, the webinar was structured in 3 main moments: to begin, the report “Flaws in the Inter-American Development Bank’s Access to Information Policy” was presented, prepared jointly by the 3 organizations mentioned above, which Its objective is to analyze the normative aspects contained in the current PAI and the difficulties in its implementation, the review process initiated and the intended policy profile. Likewise, its shortcomings and recommendations for strengthening the PAI were identified, with the ultimate goal of effectively guaranteeing the right of access to information. Second, the current status of the PAI review process was emphasized. Finally, from the Chilean organization Sustentarse, they commented on experiences and practical cases in Latin America in which it is possible to perceive the shortcomings that the IDB still has in terms of access to information. The webinar ended with questions and reflections from the people who spoke and attended the event.

To view the recorded webinar, click here

More information

Author

Camila Victoria Bocco

Contact

Gonzalo Roza, gon.roza@fundeps.org

 

,

IDB: the president was dismissed and the possibility opens for a Latin American woman

On Monday, September 26, following the recommendations of the IDB’s Board of Executive Directors, the Board of Governors decreed the termination of Claver-Carone’s functions as President of the Bank after the violation of various ethical standards of the institution, which marked the opening of a period of 45 days for the countries to propose their candidatures. During this period, the executive vice president, Reina Irene Mejía Chacón, will act as president under the direction of the Executive Board.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

Two years ago, in October 2020, Donald Trump promoted the American Mauricio Claver-Carone to the presidency of the IDB. The context was advantageous for Washington as it was the first American presidency since the organization’s creation.

It should be remembered that although the IDB Constitutive Agreement does not establish any conditions in relation to the nationality of the person who should hold the presidency, there is an unwritten rule since its very creation by which the organization must be directed by a person from the region. It was even one of the conditions for which it was finally accepted that the Bank’s headquarters be in Washington DC.

In terms of geopolitics, this strategy constituted the IDB as a vehicle through which the United States could increase its influence in the Latin American region and achieve a balance of institutional power: it could discern regarding the granting and destination of credits by the institution and thus dissipate the presence of other powers in the region, as is the case of the Chinese giant.

The origins of the Claver-Carone impeachment

The Board of Governors’ decision dates back to an anonymous misconduct complaint filed against Claver-Carone. From this, the board hired the legal firm Davis Polk to investigate the facts. As a result of the results of the investigation, the decision was made to dismiss the leader of the institution. Claver-Carone is accused of having maintained a romantic relationship with an employee and of having benefited her financially, which implies the violation of several internal ethical standards of the agency, while the IDB prohibits intimate relationships of superior personnel with direct dependents. The complaint was aggravated by Claver-Carone’s refusal to cooperate fully with the investigation and by creating a climate of fear of retaliation among Bank staff.

In this way, the deficit of legitimacy that accompanied the origins of the Claver-Carone presidency, was combined with a deficit of legitimacy, and today they lead to a crisis of leadership.

In this context, while waiting for the candidacy proposals for the presidency of the IDB, it is worth asking what are the alternatives at the regional and institutional level?

In terms of regionalism, this is an excellent opportunity to renew the (deteriorated) intra-regional dialogue in Latin America and the Caribbean and deepen consensus-building practices. In order for the region to obtain an advantage in the presidential elections of the international organization, it should achieve consensus and convergence when choosing candidates. In this way, it would prevent a repetition of the 2020 scenario where having offered several candidacies eroded the chances of winning the elections.

In particular, Brazil could take advantage of this scenario to renew its regional leadership role, as it is one of the Bank’s largest shareholders along with Argentina and the United States, together with almost 53% of the voting power. In any case, the country is currently immersed in the campaign for the presidential elections, the result of which may influence the position it adopts regarding the transition in the IDB.

In institutional terms, it is an opportunity to renew the strategies through which the institution promotes its main objective: to achieve the development of Latin America and the Caribbean by improving the quality of life, reducing poverty and inequality. In this sense, participation in the IDB should encourage regional integration in Latin America and the Caribbean and allow the development of the Bank as a bridge between the region and the world. Increasing regionalism and the participation of the countries that make up the region would strengthen the development paths and the insertion of Latin America and the Caribbean in the international context. In addition, it would allow the IDB to stand out as a Bank, not pro-American or pro-Chinese, but pro-Latin American, allowing a convergence between globalization and regionalization when it comes to pursuing development.

Finally, in terms of the qualities that the person designated for the presidency of the IDB should have, this is a great opportunity for a Latin American woman to take charge of the leadership of the institution.

In fact, the names of three Latin American women are beginning to resonate as potential candidates. Among them: Michelle Bachelet, former president of Chile, Laura Chinchilla, former president of Costa Rica; and Alicia Bárcena, head of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC).

In this sense, some aspects are key: 1) that the person has outstanding training and experience and an effective modernization proposal for the Bank with an emphasis on social and environmental issues; 2) to adopt a clear and express commitment to multilateralism and the vindication of the legitimacy of the presidential position; and 3) that it complies with transparency, accountability and the participation of civil society in the actions of the Institution.

More information

Author

Victoria Marquez

Contact

Gonzalo Roza – gon.roza@fundeps.org

 

,

Argentina getting closer to the BRICS?

After receiving the support of the Chinese and Indian foreign ministers, Argentina is getting closer to becoming a member of the BRICS group – made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. For Argentina it could represent an opportunity taking into account the current situation in which our country finds itself in terms of external restrictions and financing deficit. However, it is also worth questioning what other implications this union could bring about.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

On July 8, Argentina took another step towards its rapprochement as a full member of the BRICS group; The event took place after Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi confirmed China’s support for Argentina to join the bloc. The meeting between the representatives of both countries took place in Bali, Indonesia, where the G20 Foreign Ministers meeting took place. In it, Foreign Minister Santiago Cafiero showed his interest in approaching the BRICS, highlighting the need to deepen multilateralism to accelerate the conclusion of agreements that are beneficial both for the region and for our country. Currently, the rotating presidency of the group is in charge of China, so its support and commitment to those countries that intend to join the bloc is essential. More recently, during his visit to Argentina, the Indian foreign minister, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, ratified his support for Argentina’s advance towards the bloc. For Argentina, the incorporation into a group of such magnitudes represents a very tempting opportunity in view of the search for new commercial partners. But, what are the BRICS, and what would joining them mean for Argentina?

The term refers to the block made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Headquartered in Brasilia, these countries have been advocating common development for eighteen years, consolidating themselves as a relevant multilateral and strategic space that represents approximately half of the planet’s population and almost a quarter of the global economy. With a prominent role on the world stage, they seek to promote a new financial, economic and commercial architecture through different instruments such as, for example, international investment banks, among which we can highlight the New Development Bank (BDN) and the Contingency Reserves Agreement (ARC).

As an alternative to the conditionalities imposed by the Bretton Woods institutions, the New Development Bank offers better financing conditions for key infrastructure projects based on the principles of non-interference. In this sense, the BRICS countries reflect the growing influence of emerging economies worldwide, proposing themselves as an increasingly influential and alternative space to Western forces. However, we cannot fail to point out that each alternative and form of financing has its own advantages and complications. While the traditional Western proposals have greater restrictions, they are also characterized by being relatively more transparent and having relatively more robust regulatory and accountability frameworks. On the contrary, new alternatives can represent good sources of financing with fewer restrictions but with a great lack of transparency and accountability. As a consequence, the options should not be conceived as mutually exclusive, but rather as complementary.

Argentina sees the possibility of joining the BRICS as an opportunity to promote development and well-being, in addition to functioning as a channel for growing multilateralism and the reconfiguration of the world order. As it is a South-South cooperation platform made up of emerging economies, it could mean for our country a more equitable space for cooperation with greater margins of autonomy.

It is also important to highlight the role played by Argentina’s main trading partners: China and Brazil. During the last twenty years, China has gained an economic presence in the region, showing increasing interest in establishing new strategic associations with countries such as Brazil, Peru or Venezuela. Although it is not the first time that our country has turned its gaze towards new alternatives, it is essential to consider the consequences that could be triggered by such an association. They could be of an economic nature, since a reprimarization of the Argentine economy would be encouraged, or else, of a geopolitical nature, by generating greater tensions with Western partners such as the United States. For its part, the bloc is willing to work to open a path towards an international community characterized by dialogue, for which systemic rupture would be kept away.

In terms of foreign trade, the BRICS bring together 30% of Argentine exports, and provide 45% of our imports, so if the incorporation materializes, it would mean the possibility of obtaining financing and assistance for key projects. On the other hand, the transfer of knowledge in technology and innovation could also be encouraged, which would guarantee a shared cooperation that guarantees inclusion and similar visions.

In this way, it can be argued that being parte of the BRICS could represent a great opportunity for Argentina to strengthen ties with one of the blocks that has been gaining relevance at the international level and that, in addition, brings together two of the greatest powers in the world and with whom it maintains a bond of strategic character. However, the possible implications of such an association should not be overlooked, as well as the consideration that Argentina’s accession process to the BRICS must have the approval of all its member states, for which it may give rise to a procedure slow and extensive. In short, will Argentina be able to consolidate its entry into one of the groups with the greatest economic and geopolitical weight? And in that case, what will be in store for the country to be part of said bloc?

 

More information

Authors

Camila Busso

Candela Jauregui

Contact

Gonzalo Roza, gon.roza@fundeps.org

,

Projects financed by the IDB during the pandemic in Latin America: risks and benefits for whom?

On June 16, we participated in the WEBINAR in which the document was presented: “Investments of the Inter-American Development Bank for the response and recovery to COVID-19 in Latin America. Risks and benefits for whom?”, created in collaboration with more than 10 civil society organizations, including Fundeps.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

It is widely known that the Multilateral Development Banks have a fundamental role in the response and recovery to COVID – 19, this is due to their ability to rapidly mobilize financing to support and help countries respond to the impacts it has generated. this unforeseen situation. Within Latin America, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) plays a key role in this regard, since, in 2020, it approved 7.9 billion dollars and, as of June 2021, it had approved 597.6 billion dollars.

There is a tendency on the part of the Multilateral Development Banks to consider projects related to health issues, as having a lower risk of environmental and social damage, so the application of safeguards to these projects tends to be less rigorous. Added to this is the fact that many of the projects were approved with a rapid disbursement or fast track modality, that is, with shorter preparation times and environmental and social due diligence.

However, the findings of the presented report show that the implementation of this type of health projects and others in the context of the pandemic, have a significant risk of harm, especially when the groups most susceptible to contracting COVID-19 are excluded. of access to the benefits of the project. The context of crisis is worrying due to the tendency of the Multilateral Development Banks to make environmental and social parameters more flexible in pursuit of rapid responses.

The document presents six recommendations resulting from the analysis of the post-pandemic Latin American situation. They emphasize the importance of taking into account marginalized groups, such as those most likely to be affected and relegated in a crisis situation, and highlight the need for transparency and risk assessment to prevent extraordinary measures that restrict space from being perpetuated. public.

Within this framework, the webinar aimed to generate a space for discussion on the main findings in relation to the social and environmental due diligence processes of IDB investments, approved during the COVID-19 pandemic.

At Fundeps we promote the application of socio-environmental regulatory frameworks, accountability mechanisms and access to information in projects linked to financing for development, even (and even more so) when they occur in an extraordinary context of pandemic.

 

View Report

More Information

Authors

  • Lourdes Alvarez Romagnoli
  • Valentina Rasso

Contact

Gonzalo Roza – gon.roza@fundeps.org

,

Agua Negra International Tunnel: Benefits and concerns of a strategic work in the integration between Argentina and Chile

This report aims to carry out a comprehensive and in-depth approach to the Agua Negra International Tunnel (TIAN) project between Argentina and Chile, including its technical, strategic, political, economic, social and environmental dimensions.

Descargar Documento / Download File
,

What does joining the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank imply for Argentina?

Since 2021, Argentina officially integrates the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. For our country, the AIIB represents a new multilateral source of financing for strategic sectors such as infrastructure, energy, telecommunications and transportation, among others. However, the AIIB is a little-known bank. How does it work and what are the implications for the country of joining this institution promoted mainly by China? We present a new report with the analysis.

Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic.

On March 30, 2021, Argentina’s membership of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) was made official. The AIIB officially began its activity in October 2014. It is a new multilateral development bank promoted mainly by China with a focus on investments in infrastructure, especially aimed at emerging countries. Its Asian origin does not limit its actions to a single region, since the Bank has a large number of member countries in other continents and projects financed in South America, Africa and Europe.

The model proposed by China has distinctive features. The dominant feature is that the investments are focused on infrastructure, connectivity and industrialization, marking an important difference with Western development financing entities that, in recent times, have oriented their loans mainly to institutional reforms, health projects, education or fighting against poverty, among others.
In this way, it postulates an interesting alternative for the financing of an infrastructure that is largely in deficit in Latin America and, particularly, in Argentina. For our country, the AIIB represents a new multilateral source of financing for strategic sectors and opens an opportunity to help solve its historical deficits in terms of infrastructure and connectivity. For its part, with still little participation from Latin America, the Asian Bank is consolidating itself as a viable option for the region in light of development goals. To date, five effective Latin American members are reported: Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Ecuador and Chile.

From its origins, the AIIB was presented as a different option to the historical Western multilateral development institutions such as the World Bank, the IDB or the International Finance Corporation (IFC). However, the AIIB has implemented a regulatory and operational framework very similar to that of those institutions, including policies for access to information, accountability, and environmental and social regulation to authorize disbursements. In turn, it contemplates cooperation and co-financing with other multilateral banks, such as the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, adhering to their regulatory frameworks.

Despite this, since its entry into operations the Bank has received criticism from various sectors of civil society and affected communities that have questioned its actions in different development projects and even certain weaknesses in its regulatory framework.

In this sense, the implications that admission to the AIIB may have for Argentina depend largely on the type of relationship that the country establishes with the institution and the way in which it manages to take advantage of the potential financing resources for infrastructure that the Bank can provide. . Likewise, it is necessary to avoid repeating the problems related to public participation, access to information and socio-environmental impacts that have historically been associated with development projects financed by multilateral banks.

Given the general ignorance that exists in the country about this institution, it is important to analyze in depth what the Bank consists of, how it works and what the true implications of Argentine membership may be. To contribute to this objective, from Fundeps we present a report that analyzes part of these questions.

Read full review

 

More information

The incorporation of Argentina to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank – Fundeps was approved
Argentina, one step away from becoming a member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank – Fundeps
Are the brothers united? Profiling of the Sino-Argentine relationship in the government of Alberto Fernández – Fundeps
The role of the AIIB in the New Green Silk Road – Fundeps

Author

Camila Victoria Bocco

Contact

Gonzalo Roza, gon.roza@fundeps.org

,

We send observations to the IDB to strengthen its link with civil society

In the framework of the review process of the second Action Plan of the IDB Group-Civil Society (2022-2024), more than 20 civil society organizations sent a letter to the President of the IDB, Claver-Carone, with observations and recommendations to strengthen the IDB’s relationship with civil society and affected communities.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

While we welcome the fact that the IDB is reviewing the Action Plan to strengthen the relationship with civil society and affected communities, we believe that the way the review is being structured inhibits civil society participation in the process. For this reason, the recommendations sent to the President and his Executive Secretary are oriented in two ways:

  • On the one hand, the Bank is asked to provide specific spaces and complete and accessible information so that civil society, including indigenous peoples, local communities, people affected by IDB Group projects (including MICI applicants), and organizations critical to the IDB can participate and get involved effectively. In this sense, it is essential that agendas begin to be built in a participatory way, that invitations to consultations are at least 30 days in advance and that they include a wide range of stakeholders. The optimization and adjustment of public consultation processes is also necessary, since they are currently excessively rigid and do not promote a meaningful or direct discussion between the parties, ultimately generating low-productive inputs that continue to weaken transparency and accountability in the Bank.
  • On the other hand, it is emphasized that after the consultation or dialogue, the IDB must guarantee continuous communication that keeps the interested parties informed and provide information on how their contributions influenced the decisions taken.

We believe that the IDB Group’s commitment to civil society and communities affected has been and continues to be worryingly weak compared to other peer institutions. The IDB president has the opportunity to lead the change towards a more responsible bank and must foster an institutional culture in which it is accepted that the Bank makes mistakes and is more responsive not only to interactions and constructive criticism from external actors, including civil society and affected communities, but also to their internal accountability mechanisms.

To access the complete letter sent to the IDB, access here.

More information

How can the IDB Group strenghthen engagement with civil society and projects affected communities? – Bank Information Center (BIC)

Carta Grupo BID-Relacionamiento con Sociedad Civil

Recommendations to strengthen the IDB Group’s relationship with civil society and affected communities – Coalición para los Derechos Humanos en el Desarrollo

Author

Camila Victoria Bocco

Contact

Gonzalo Roza – gon.roza@fundeps.org

,

Civil society responds to the MICI evaluation

Last April 2021, the Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB Group) published the Evaluation of the Independent Consultation and Investigation Mechanism (MICI). After the evaluation, the MICI has modified its policy, excluding the clause that prevents the registration of complaints that are part of open national judicial processes.

The evaluation carried out tried to determine if the MICI is effective and efficient in three areas: (1) the resolution of complaints, (2) the promotion of institutional learning, (3) accessibility, objective independence, impartiality and transparency. Finally, OVE made 5 general recommendations on how the Board, the Bank, and the MICI can improve the application of the IDB’s social and environmental safeguards.

In general, the document identified elements that impede the effective functioning of the MICI, including accessibility barriers, unnecessary limitations to its independence, and a systemic lack of remediation by the IDB Group when projects do not comply with safeguards. Fundeps, together with other civil society organizations, decided to publish a response and send recommendations / comments to the MICI.

Below, we summarize our points of discussion and concern for each of the recommendations made by OVE:

Recommendation # 1 – Implement and improve the Bank’s management system for environmental and social claims: We agree with OVE’s findings that show that the requirement for communities to make prior contact efforts with the Administration is a problematic barrier for access to the MICI. Affected persons who present complaints to the MICI have experienced first-hand the ineffectiveness of presenting certain complaints to the Administration. However, OVE’s proposal to establish a Bank’s own management mechanism is a measure that we consider incomplete. To ensure the effectiveness of the mechanism and the Bank, it would be best to remove the requirement that the communities first contact the Administration.

Recommendation # 2 – Repeal the legal exclusion: The report’s findings on the impropriety of the legal exclusion, and its severe restriction on accessibility, are clear. We applaud the report for mentioning that the legal exclusion should be removed. The role of an accountability mechanism within an institution is unique and different from judicial procedures. A mechanism should examine compliance with the institution’s own standards, a mandate that does not overlap with the courts or tribunals. With the approval of the OVE Evaluation by the Board, the decision to remove the legal exclusion becomes effective as of July 1, 2021. However, the resolution approving the removal of the legal exclusion should be publicized or published. to ensure that the decision to remove this requirement is widely known.

Recommendation # 3 – Strengthen the independence of the MICI: The importance of the independence of the MICI, as well as other accountability mechanisms, cannot be stressed enough. Independence is an essential condition for other attributes such as objectivity, impartiality, and transparency. The report finds the need for the MICI to ensure the approval of the Bank’s Board of Directors before starting the investigations, as a major problem that has generated “situations that compromise the independence of the mechanism.” From civil society we believe that to ensure its independence, the MICI should have the authority to determine when to initiate an investigation without approval from the Board. This is a good practice that, as noted by the report, is adhered to by many other mechanisms. As an alternative to the current policy, to mitigate the detrimental effect on the independence of the MICI, the policy should be updated by specifically and closely outlining the technical reasons for the Board to review the MICI’s decision to initiate an investigation.

Recommendation # 4 – Ensure corrective action when there are findings of non-compliance and associated damage: The Evaluation clearly stated the lack of remedy for cases of verification of compliance being that “they have not had concrete results for the applicants, despite the findings of non-compliance and related damages established by the MICI ”. We have seen this in our case work. The recommendation of the Evaluation so that all the actors – the Board of Directors, the Administration and the MICI – adhere to the practice of consistently providing corrective actions, is a step in the right direction. However, this result would be best achieved with a clear change in the policy that includes points such as: (a) Consultations during the development of corrective action plans, (b) approval of action plans based on their sufficiency, (c) monitoring compliance with action plans, and (d) alerting the Board of Directors in cases of non-compliance with the plans. Finally, while OVE’s assessment documents multiple instances in which communities have been left without remedy, despite compliance verification reports finding a cause of harm in the Bank’s non-compliance, unfortunately no recommendation is provided for these communities.

Recommendation # 5 – Strengthen the internal capacity of the MICI: One of the focuses of the MICI Evaluation of its internal functioning is the dependence on the model of consultants for the staff. The importance of MICI staff in relation to their effectiveness in resolving complaints is evident. The Bank should commit to providing the human and financial resources necessary to implement this change and avoid that the lack of human resources translates into delays during the complaint processes. The Bank should also ensure the increase of its capacity in terms of resources as necessary.

Now, from civil society we consider that public and inclusive consultations are required for the implementation of all the recommendations. Likewise, we believe that the implementation of these recommendations will require changes to the MICI policy. The steps taken to ensure compliance with social and environmental safeguards and accountability in cases of non-compliance should be reported by those affected by the projects (who live and work in the implementation sites). To hear from those affected and their representatives, the IDB and the MICI should consult publicly about their plans to implement the
OVE recommendations.

The MICI plays a fundamental role within the IDB, providing a channel for the people affected by the projects, beneficiaries of the Bank’s work, to file their claims in search of remediation. However, as OVE’s Evaluation makes clear, there are gaps in the current practices of the MICI – and related practices of the Board and Management – that prevent the effectiveness of the mechanism. To ensure the legitimacy of the MICI, the Bank has to act to address these issues fully.

More information:

Internal IDB evaluation raises the need for reforms in the operation of the MICI

Autora: 

Agustina Palencia

Contacto:

Gonzalo Roza – gon.roza@fundeps.org

,

Sergio Díaz-Granados was elected the new Executive President of CAF

On July 5, the Board of Directors of CAF – Development Bank of Latin America – elected Sergio Díaz-Granados as the new Executive President of the institution by majority, in a blended meeting held at the National Palace of Mexico. Colombian Díaz-Granados will take office on September 1, 2021 for a period of 5 years.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”

The Development Bank of Latin America, formerly known as Corporación Andina de Fomento (CAF), is a leading multilateral financial institution in Latin America whose mission, according to its website, is to support the sustainable development of shareholder countries and integration regional. Since 1970, the institution has served the public and private sectors, supplying multiple financial products and services to a wide portfolio of clients, made up of the governments of the shareholder states, financial institutions, and public and private companies.

CAF’s Board of Directors appointed Sergio Díaz-Granados as the institution’s new Executive President on July 5 at a blended meeting that took place at the National Palace of Mexico. In the election, the Colombian Díaz-Granados surpassed the Argentine candidate Christian Asinelli, current undersecretary of International Financial Relations for Development of the Secretariat of Strategic Affairs of the Presidency, who will occupy one of the vice-presidencies of the entity.

The election of the new president comes after the resignation of the previous Executive President, the Peruvian Luis Carranza, who retired from the entity a year before the end of his term amid allegations of abuse of power, forced resignations and strong internal in the multilateral credit organization.

Sergio Díaz-Granados, is a prominent lawyer who currently serves as Executive Director for Colombia in the IDB Group. He has an extensive career in public and private service, both nationally and internationally, with special emphasis on issues of development and regional integration. Throughout his career, Diaz-Granados has served as Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism of Colombia, Vice Minister of Business Development and President of the Boards of Directors of Bancóldex and ProColombia. He has also been a congressman and chairman of the Economic Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives.

More information:

Author:
Juliet Boretti

Contact:
Gonzalo Roza – Coordinator of the Global Governance Area
gon.roza@fundeps.org