Tag Archive for: Social and Environmental Standards

,

The Asian Bank approved its first infrastructure project in Argentina

From September 25 to 26, in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, the eighth Annual Assembly of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) was held, an event that brings together its members, business representatives and civil organizations to discuss the direction strategy and initiatives of the organization. At this meeting, the AIIB announced the approval of the first loan in Argentina, intended to finance a wind farm in Tierra del Fuego.

“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 main objective of the Annual Assembly is to share the Bank’s progress and receive suggestions regarding its strategic direction and operations. It also provides information and encourages exchanges on policies and projects financed by the AIIB in terms of social and environmental impact.

The central theme of the 8th Assembly was “sustainable growth in a challenging world” and highlighted the importance of addressing the global climate agenda and supporting key infrastructure demands for AIIB member countries. The meeting program covered a variety of Thematic topics that include the latest trends and priorities of the Bank. The public sessions were grouped into three thematic streams: sustainability, connectivity and multilateral cooperation. They addressed issues related to the development and implementation of sustainable environmental infrastructure, as well as the promotion and strengthening alliances that improve infrastructure connectivity both in Asia and in other regions.

First AIIB project in Argentina

A particularly relevant event for Argentina was the announcement, during the event, of the approval of the project called “Energy transition of the province of Tierra del Fuego” for an amount of 65 million dollars. This project marks a milestone, as it represents the first financing granted to Argentina as a member of the Bank, which it officially joined in March 2021. The funds will be used for the construction of a wind farm near the city of Río Grande. . According to the AIIB, the main objective of the project is to establish the wind energy generation capacity in the province of Tierra del Fuego and it “is aligned with the objectives of the Paris Agreement and the Nationally Determined Contributions of Argentina, for which will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase the adoption of renewable energy.” This initiative arises from the need to take advantage of the wind resources that the province has and the lack of interconnection in local networks for the materialization of projects of such magnitude.

However, it is important to highlight that given the scarcity of information about the project, it is essential to analyze in depth how the project will be carried out, and what the true implications could be in terms of socio-environmental impacts. For this reason, at Fundeps we are monitoring this project and have made a request for information to the AIIB about details that are not yet clear. For example, although an Environmental and Social Management Plan (PMAS) and a Stakeholder Participation Plan (PPPI) have been published on the Bank’s website, the documentation related to the Environmental Impact Assessment is not yet available. and Social, the Environmental and Social Due Diligence Report or information related to the public hearings planned for the project, among other relevant documentation.

This information is key to identifying the real impacts of the project and verifying whether access to information about the project and the participation of the local population is effectively ensured. In turn, another aspect that raises doubts is the role that the CAF (current Development Bank of Latin America) will have in relation to the project, since it has been presented as a co-financed project between both multilateral institutions.

Author

Candela Jauregui

Contact

Gonzalo Roza, gon.roza@fundeps.org

,

We participated in a workshop: Beneficiaries of the extractive sector in Argentina

On March 3 and 4, we participated in the workshop on Final Beneficiaries of Companies in the extractive and energy sector of Argentina, held in the City of Buenos Aires. The event was organized by Opening Extractives (a program co-implemented by EITI and Open Ownership) and the Argentine Journalism Forum (FOPEA).

“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 workshop had among its objectives to raise awareness about the importance of public information of the final beneficiaries, and at the same time, provide resources and materials to increase research, projects and analysis within this field.

In this sense, the training was divided into three modules: first, content and information on final beneficiaries was presented, from the theoretical to the legal and also practical, both nationally and internationally. Those who spoke in this first module were: Andrés Knobel from the Tax Justice Network; María Eugenia Marano, specialist in corporate law; Pamela Morales, Undersecretary of Mining Development of the Government of the Nation; Gonzalo Fernández of the Ministry of Mining Development of the Nation; and Lucía Cirimello from the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).

Secondly, civil society organizations had the opportunity to present their projects related to the theme. In this way, Edgardo Livitnoff (Red Ruido Coordinator) presented progress on the report “Lithium and transparency in Argentina” that we prepared together. For her part, Eugenia Rodríguez (Centro de Economía Política Argentina) shared details about the work of her organization: “The rich of Argentina”.

Finally, the third module consisted of a practical workshop given by Mariel Fitz Patricks, in which tools and resources were provided for approaching final beneficiaries. The journalist helped us, mainly, to access information and how, in this way, to enrich work carried out and to carry out on the subject.
This instance was very fruitful, not only in terms of knowledge and learning, but also in terms of the possibility of meeting peers from other civil society organizations, with whom one could work together in the near future.

 

 

More information:

 

Author

Maitén de los Milagros Fuma

Contact

Maria Victoria Sibilla, ninasibilla@fundeps.org

,

Socio-environmental impacts of projects with Chinese investment in Latin America

This interactive map presents 9 cases of projects that have the participation and financing of Chinese companies, which are monitored by the Regional Group on Financing and Infrastructure (GREFI) and the Regional Coalition for Transparency and Participation in Peru, Argentina, Colombia and Brazil.

The objective is to make known the basic information of the projects, the location, the current situation and the socio-environmental impacts that have generated or that could be generated if they are implemented.

Descargar Documento / Download File
,

Follow-up of relations between China and Latin America: exchange of experiences

From the Regional Group on Financing and Infrastructure (GREFI) we held the workshop in 2021: “Follow-up on relations between China and America America: exchange of experiences”. This space brought together different civil society organizations, academia, indigenous leaders and journalists from the region who monitor the relationship between China and Latin America, or have been impacted by investments from the Asian country.

The objective of the space was to identify common issues and key elements of discussion, based on the work and the experience of monitoring and advocacy that serves to promote greater articulation between the actors, identify the differences, limitations and opportunities for joint work.

Descargar Documento / Download File
,

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

 

,

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

,

Shortcomings in the Access to Information Policy of the Inter-American Development Bank

The Access to Information Policy (PAI) of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) has become outdated. At the end of 2019, the IDB began a review process of its PAI that was suspended months later and has not yet been reactivated. In this process, the Bank submitted to the consideration of civil society and other interested parties the intended profile for its new policy, which highlights 22 gaps to be improved in terms of access to information.

The purpose of this document is to analyze the regulatory aspects contained in the current PAI, the review process initiated and suspended, and the intended policy profile. Its shortcomings are identified and analyzed with a critical eye in order to make recommendations for the strengthening of the PAI, with the ultimate goal that it guarantees the right of access to information.

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