New papers show how the World Bank safeguards work with local laws.
Though they are essential in order to preserve the well-being of people around the world, the way the safeguards fit in with local laws and pre-existing policies can be messy and complex. In order to help our allies to better understand how the safeguards work in their countries, the World Resources Institute has commissioned a series of papers with support from the C.S. Mott Foundation, highlighting the current difficulties of navigating a complex web of domestic legislation, international agreements, voluntary standards, and Bank policies.
REDD+ Safeguards in Indonesia
By Bernadinus Steni, HuMa and Nadia Hadad, Bank Information Center
The current maze of laws is “ruled by a bureaucratic mentality”, and there’s been little progress over the past five years. Conflict continues in and around forest areas, and deforestation rates have remained high. With more than 40 REDD+ pilot projects and demonstration activities happening in Indonesia and the acceleration of setting up national REDD+ policies, safeguards cannot be ignored.
Read the executive summary in Portuguese
By Roland Widmer, OneAdvisory
Brazil is one example of a country that is presumed to have a strong safeguard regime. In principle, major infrastructure projects in Brazil must meet several human rights, environmental, and social safeguards to be viable. The difficulties with the Rio Madeira and the Belo Monte dams are examples of both how difficult and how necessary it is for these laws to be enforced.
Read this document in Khmer
By Mark Grimsditch
Cambodia’s power grid is extremely patchy, with generating and transmission capacity way below demand. High costs and poor coverage disproportionately affect rural areas, although those living in cities also experience frequent power cuts. China’s backing for a new hydropower dam seems like a potential godsend, and is predicted to both lower costs and improve Cambodia’s energy self-reliance. However, during the project’s implementations a number of serious issues emerged, most seriously the poor Environmental Impact Assessment process, and reduced access of local people to forest products. As such, the case provides an excellent illustration of the need for developers and financiers of infrastructure projects such as this to develop and implement more stringent environmental and social safeguards.
By Henry Mugisha Bazira, Water Governance Institute
Uganda has received and continues to receive significant amounts of financing from donors/ development partners and International Finance Institutions (IFIs) for development and large infrastructure projects. Some of the largest IFI investments were dedicated to the Owen Falls rehabilitation, construction of Owen Falls Extension (Kiira) and Bujagali hydropower projects. As part of project appraisal and approval, these power projects were subjected to an evaluation of their compliance with Bank safeguard policies and procedures as a means of ensuring that they did not harm the people, the economy and the environment of the country. Despite this, the projects were found to have only partially complied with the Bank safeguards.
International institutions are also changing the way they channel public funds to developing countries, which is changing the way that safeguards are being applied. More information can be found in the June 2012 report from International Rivers, “Will Safeguards Survive the Next Generation of Development Finance?”
“Will Safeguards Survive the Next Generation of Development Finance?”, Kirk Herbertson, International Rivers, June 2012